ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL 23 FEBRUARY, 2016
Impact on losing South of M2 to Parramatta
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL 23 FEBRUARY, 2016
(b) The community of interest and geographic cohesion in the existing areas and in any proposed new area.
This merger proposal fragments every Council it involves, ie Parramatta, Holroyd, The Hills, Hornsby, Ryde and Auburn. It ignores historical linkages and results in suburbs being divided. Parramatta was one of the first Councils established in the mid 1830’s and was proclaimed a City in 1938 but not as it is currently constituted. The current boundaries of Parramatta were formed in 1948 through an amalgamation of Parramatta, Granville, Ermington, Dundas and Rydalmere Councils. It would appear from the evidence that the “Greater Parramatta” Council did not form through part boundary adjustment and hence contained the communities of interest and historical linkages wholly.
The Hills Shire Council (formerly known as Baulkham Hills Shire Council) was constituted in 1906 at the time when local government was mandated across NSW. Up until that time the formation of a Council was voluntary and, while there were almost 200 Councils in NSW at that time, it represented only a small part of the State’s land mass. The Hills Shire boundaries have remained unchanged since but its population has grown substantially. The urbanisation of the Shire began with the suburbs of Oatlands, Carlingford, Northmead, North Rocks, Baulkham Hills, Kellyville and Winston Hills. This merger proposal will separate these historical linkages and, instead, rely on a superficial modern geographical feature (The M2 motorway).
The M2 motorway is not a substantive local government boundary with historical credibility. The motorway has been “retro fitted” with the community able to either transverse under or over the road. Many communities, sporting groups, school catchments and religious groups permeate through this boundary. Arguably the only part of the M2 that has any relevance is along the Junction Road corridor at Winston Hills, Baulkham Hills and Northmead. Beyond that, the M2 is not a significant barrier and would, in fact, fracture long established local communities that have deep historical, business, religious and other cultural linkages to The Hills.
In Council’s “Fit for the Future” proposal, it suggested the most appropriate boundary is Old Windsor Road to Pennant Hills Road. These are long established substantive road corridors that have effectively divided and contained communities. Council’s submission did suggest that the suburb of Oatlands could be transferred to Parramatta as it has been isolated by Pennant Hills Road and the community of Oatlands does read and is completely linked with Parramatta. While Council’s preference was to unite the suburbs of Winston Hills and Northmead into The Hills Shire, it is clear that Parramatta requires its existing rate base.
This merger proposal is principally about giving the Parramatta local government area a bigger geographical land mass and population base. The criteria identified for establishing Local Government boundaries outlined earlier in this report suggests that size has been a factor in Parramatta not reaching its potential role as a CBD. A lot has been made of the failure over 40 years for Parramatta to establish itself as Sydney’s second CBD. The failure is attributed to the State Government’s failure over successive decades and a larger geographical area would have done little to change the result. By comparison, Sydney City has only a marginally higher population base than Parramatta and that Council also has a very small geographical footprint and is not the subject of any of the 35 merger proposals.
Regionally, Parramatta will fulfil a role as Sydney’s second CBD by virtue of its function.
It serves as a significant hub for transport and CBD services. If successive State Governments had put more effort and resources to fulfilling this objective, it would have achieved it already. There is a failure of the State to support metropolitan plans with
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL 23 FEBRUARY, 2016
robust sub regional plans. There is a failure of the State to align the metropolitan plan with the State Plan. In short, to fulfil the objective of strengthening Parramatta as Sydney’s second CBD, it requires the State to provide adequate resources and alignment of priorities. To suggest that Council’s rate base has to fund it is fundamentally wrong.
The rate base funds its local services and needs, not a wider geographical region nor globalisation. Making Parramatta bigger geographically will only fragment its effort while, at the same time, fragmenting existing communities.
This merger proposal is completely new. The ILGRP didn’t identify it nor did it assess it.
The IPART review didn’t identify it and nor has this merger proposal been assessed by it.
By its very nature, the proposal represents a complex boundary adjustment which has a high cost in any way you measure it and will result in very little benefit. Arguably the State Government’s new Parramatta will not be “fit” and will only result in a population of 215,725 which is about 120,000 less people than The Hills Shire Council’s suggested whole merger of Holroyd, Parramatta and Auburn. A whole merger with these three Councils makes more sense in terms of all of the factors of community cohesion, less disruption of staff, less complexities with existing contracts (like garbage services) and preserves historical linkages.
Removing those parts of The Hills Shire south of the M2 does not support this. A boundary adjustment with Parramatta City to hand over parts of North Rocks, Northmead, Winston Hills, Carlingford and Oatlands south of the M2 will remove a significant population base from The Hills Shire that will affect its financial capacity.
These suburbs are also identified as areas that can help accommodate projected population growth.
In terms of cementing Parramatta’s future role, the suggestion of an amalgamation with the whole municipalities of Auburn and Holroyd does seem compatible with the Panel’s criteria and would certainly combine a significant community of interest in terms of diversity, trade and population. Parramatta should also be encouraged to grow vertically. One of the disincentives for greater building heights is the current rate system, and the Independent Local Government Review Panel is rightly recommending changes to how Councils are financed. A rate model that does not have a bias against high rise should be developed. There is no doubt Parramatta will be an important CBD for several surrounding regions including The Hills Shire, Blacktown City, Penrith City and the surrounding South-Western Sydney LGAs.
(c) The existing historical and traditional values in the existing areas and the impact of change on them
The suburbs of Oatlands, Carlingford, North Rocks and Northmead have strong links to The Hills Shire from the beginning. Given the close proximity to Parramatta there is a connection as a regional centre, but these suburbs were the original urban base of the Shire and are an integral part of it. Almost 70% of The Hills Shire footprint is rural and its urban footprint is contained with the remaining 30% in the southern portion of the Shire. Losing a significant portion of the urban area will have a detrimental effect on the traditional values of these communities. The merger proposal will sever parts of North Rocks and Baulkham Hills, both traditional Hills Shire suburb communities. It is of note that none of the benefits of the merger proposal contained within the exhibited material relate to these suburbs and it is highly likely that these communities will express a desire to remain part of The Hills Shire.
Even development standards between The Hills and Parramatta show small nuances that help define the differences in values. The following comparison focusses on controls relating to dwelling houses and dual occupancies under the planning framework for each Local Government Area.
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL 23 FEBRUARY, 2016
• Local Environmental Plans
Additional land uses permitted in the R2 Low Density Residential zone in Parramatta include hostels, neighbourhood shops, water recycling facilities, hospitals, public administration buildings, environmental facilities, recreation facilities (indoor) and recreation facilities (outdoor). Subdivision of Dual Occupancies is permitted in Parramatta but not in The Hills.
The minimum lot size for land zoned R2 Low Density Residential in Parramatta is 550m2 as opposed to 700m2 for land south of the M2 in The Hills. The minimum lot size requirement for detached dual occupancies is 600m2 in Parramatta rather than 700m2 in The Hills. These minimum lots sizes have produces an urban pattern that is different between the communities.
Development Control Plans
The maximum site coverage for residential zones is 60% in The Hills whereas there is no equivalent control in Parramatta. This is reflects the “garden Shire” values that has set these suburbs apart and made them identifiable and linked with The Hills Shire.
The minimum site frontage for dwellings is 15m in Parramatta as opposed to 18m for non-classified roads and 27m for classified roads in The Hills. The minimum site frontage for dual occupancies in Parramatta is 15m or 12m where a lot has two frontages as opposed to 18m for non-classified roads and 27m for classified roads in The Hills (Note: lot frontage determined at subdivision stage as no specific frontage control for dual occupancies).
Front setbacks for dwellings and dual occupancies are between 5-9m (consistent with the prevailing street setback) in Parramatta as opposed to 10m in The Hills. The secondary street frontage setback for dwellings and dual occupancies in Parramatta is 3m whereas there is no specific secondary street setback in The Hills.
These development standards over decades have shaped the look and feel of these suburbs and reflect the traditional values and attitudes of residents over successive generations.
(d) The attitude of the residents and ratepayers of the areas concerned Much of the attitude and views of residents and ratepayers will be provided in public inquiries, other meetings and submissions. Most of the concern expressed to date is about the impact of merger proposal 2. While bearing in mind the context, the loss of suburbs below the M2 is causing concerns to those residents and it is clearly affecting their sense of well-being. There is a strong attachment to The Hills and they want to maintain it. In terms of this merger proposal, most residents are supportive on the basis of a whole merger of the two organisations. Some are now expressing a view that if the Parramatta proposal succeeds then the Hawkesbury proposal should not. The Hills Shire Council supports this view.
Public Meeting
On Wednesday 17 February, Mayor Clr Dr Michelle Byrne hosted a public meeting at the Council Chambers to discuss the boundary review process. Residents were offered the opportunity to express their views on the two proposals affecting The Hills, to ask
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL 23 FEBRUARY, 2016
questions, sign petitions and shown how to make a submission to the delegates appointed by the Office of Local Government to assess the proposals.
The meeting was attended by 110 of which 21 addressed the Chamber and expressed their concerns about the review. All of the speakers were opposed to the proposals affecting The Hills, particularly concerning suburbs south of the M2 becoming part of a greater Parramatta City Council. Many of the speakers were so affected by this proposal that they felt the need to publically express their views even though some have never spoke publically before.
Many of the residents from suburbs south of the M2 spoke of the longstanding communities of interest shared with The Hills, including where they shop, send their children to school, go to church, play sport and socialise. Many expressed passionately and emotionally of their disillusionment with the decision to become part of a council area which governed suburbs of which they shared little association.
One of the speakers was North Rocks Soccer Club President Robert Younie, who spoke of the 51-year-old club’s recent decision to sever ties with the Granville District Soccer Football Association and join the newly formed Sydney Hills Football Association. Mr Younie said that the decision was based on the fact that North Rocks club members want to play against local teams and that they do not consider clubs from Parramatta, Holroyd and Auburn council areas as local to them. Mr Younie said that if the NSW Government’s proposal went ahead, it would put the 900-member Soccer Club in an awkward position of either being forced to play in a league it does not want to be associated with, or sticking with the Sydney Hills Football Association and potentially losing its three sporting fields. Mr Younie said that the club’s members identified strongly with The Hills and not with the suburbs that could become part of the greater Parramatta City Council area.
Some residents also cited the fact that they had spent many years actively involved in Hills community initiatives such as volunteering and that they were seriously concerned about losing that association as a result of the new Council boundaries.
Another issue raised was the fact that the M2, which is the proposed new boundary, was only built 20 years ago when the community ties that stand to be severed were already long established.
Most residents expressed a view that they really are not wanted by Parramatta and that they will be the forgotten suburbs in that new Council. There is a general expression of dismay at how the Parramatta proposal is constructed.
COMMUNITY SURVEYS
It is widely understood that Council amalgamations are a difficult issue for the community to become engaged. At this time of year it is even more difficult as, inevitably, the community is rightfully distracted by the Christmas/New Year season. It is generally accepted that Australians are relatively apathetic to Government and, when asked, it is not unusual for responses about being over governed and that we should
“loose the State” to be expressed. It is also very difficult for members of the community to understand an accurate picture of what the differences between levels of service at one Council are against another. Those differences will only be tangible after the event but, for example, there is a very clear distinction between rural road standards in Hawkesbury Local Government area when compared with those in the Hills reflecting a completely different attitude to budget and service priorities. Also, as seen in the original light rail proposals Parramatta, in all of their proposed routes, ignored
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL 23 FEBRUARY, 2016
Carlingford. It was the work of The Hills Shire Council including Council’s former Mayor, Councillor Jefferies, which led to a change that included the route via Carlingford.
In 2015, Council conducted an online survey to gauge the community’s attitudes towards the various options that were seemingly on the table for The Hills and surrounding suburbs. In the survey, Council asked respondents to select one of three possible boundary options.
Of the 1,573 respondents, 17.2% selected Option One, which was a new local government area consisting of the current Hills Shire suburbs except for the area south of the M2, which were to become part of Parramatta City Council.
Option Two, which is the current Hills Shire suburbs minus the south of the M2 with a future merger with Hawkesbury. This was recommended by the Independent Local Government Review Panel and is the proposal that has been put forward by the NSW Government, received the least support from the 1573 respondents, with only 10.1%
supporting this option.
The overwhelming majority of respondents supported Option Three, which was Council’s unanimously supported proposal for all current Hills suburbs as well as some additional suburbs from Hawkesbury, Hornsby and Parramatta that all have strong communities of interest with The Hills. This option was favoured by 72.6% of respondents.
On 3 February 2016, in response to the release of the Merger Proposals, the Hills Shire council resolved;
3. Council creates two petitions to be distributed by Councillors at local shopping centres and events – with one asking residents to sign if they’re in favour of the NSW Government’s proposal for suburbs south of the M2 and the other asking if they prefer to remain in The Hills.
4. Council embark on an extensive awareness campaign including advertising in traditional and online media, information kiosks at local shopping centres and events as well as other merger-related communications in the lead-up to the February 28 submission deadline. To be funded from existing Advertising Budgets.
Of key concern is the proposed amendment of the southern boundary of The Hills Shire north to the M2 motorway. Accordingly two petitions were produced to gauge community opinion. As at the printing of this report, no residents had signed the petition supporting the Parramatta merger proposal with over 500 signing the petition to remain with the Hills. This petition will run beyond the February 28 submission date.
The Hills Shire Council has not conducted a poll on a merger with Hawkesbury Council.
It is apparent that the current exhibition of the merger proposals, especially during February 2016, will provide a greater opportunity for residents to have a say and it is expected a better understanding of the attitudes of residents and ratepayers will emerge.
(e) The requirements of the area concerned in relation to elected representation for residents and ratepayers at the local level, the desirable and appropriate relationship between elected
representatives and ratepayers and residents and such other matters as it considers relevant in relation to the past and future patterns of elected representation for that area.
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL 23 FEBRUARY, 2016
The Hills Shire Council is one of the best performing Councils and has operated with twelve (12) Councillors. It is important that the Local Government Reforms establish a benchmark population to Councillor ratio in a similar way that occurs for State and Federal seats. Perhaps an appropriate balance is for local government areas up to 240,000 people to have a maximum of 12 Councillors and for population exceeding 240,000 it is open for the Council to determine its number up to a maximum of 15 Councillors.
(e1) the impact of any relevant proposal on the ability of the councils of the areas concerned to provide adequate, equitable and appropriate services and facilities
The Hills Shire Council is one of the best performing Councils in the State and, by any measure, would be regarded as a benchmark Council. It has appropriate delegations and appropriate elected oversight. It has attracted and maintained a competitive, skilled and innovative workforce and has been able to manage sustained population and economic growth. The Council has been a strong advocate for the area and has formed successful working partnerships with successive State and Federal agencies.
One of the services affected will be Library Services and there are community implications of moving Carlingford Library into Parramatta. Looking at the distribution of Library members at Carlingford, the vast majority come from the suburbs that would move to the new Parramatta Council. Assuming Parramatta keeps the Library open, and that would be far from certain given the proximity of Dundas and Epping, the only difference for customers would be the level of service they would receive and they won’t be aware of that until it’s too late.
Carlingford Library is at capacity with aging infrastructure and The Hills Shire Council was moving forward with a new state of the art facility at Don Moore so residents will most likely lose out on that. Unless Parramatta decides to build it, it will be too close to the new border and the temptation to use Parramatta libraries will be too great.
Boundaries actually don’t mean a great deal to Library users as there is reciprocal membership between Councils which effectively means you can use Libraries anywhere in NSW. If Carlingford residents don’t like the service Parramatta provides they will probably migrate to Baulkham Hills or Castle Hill which are both at capacity. So that presents a whole new issue – we lose Carlingford and then have to continue to accommodate those residents.
An analysis on the possible impacts on community services and volunteers has also occurred. Currently, there are some Sporting Clubs in The Hills Shire that will need to work with Parramatta for their current fields in the merger proposal. The Hills will lose 2 clubs that are definitely located south of the M2 that do not use other fields, one of which is not impacted should the border change, the other is a large club under the new Sydney Hills Football Association that may have issues in gaining access to fields in Parramatta.
Impact on sports fields - the percentage of residents south of the M2 that are members of clubs that play on fields north of the M2 are undefinable but indications would say an increased number of Winston Hills Football Club members would be in the area being lost but still require use of Masonic fields at Balcombe Heights under current allocations.
That would mean the balance of The Hills will be paying for fields that another community uses and that has significant cost implications. User fee recovery on sporting fields represents at most, 10% of annual costs.