Orica

At Council tonight I stood up for the people of Stockton with an urgenct motion which wasn't supported...

ITEM-34 NOM 20/12/11 - ORICA
MOTION: (COUNCILLOR M OSBORNE/THE LORD MAYOR)
Council condemn the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) for lifting the prevention notice on the Orica plant and thus allowing the plant to open pat of its factory before appropriate air monitoring stations are installed in the Newcastle suburbs around the Port.

Councillors King, Jackson and Luke expressed concerns that the motion condemned a regulatory authority.

Councillor Claydon gave notice of a foreshadowed a motion.

Following a request from the seconder of the motion, the mover agreed to withdraw the motion.

Councilor Claydon brought forward her foreshadowed motion.

MOTION: (COUNCILLORS S CLAYDON/N NELMES)
Council receives a briefing from the EPA and the Newcastle Community Consultative Committee on the environment on the existing environmental monitoring arrangements in the Newcastle LGA and the NSW Government's committee to "urgently establish an industry funded network of environmental monitors for communities adjacent to the heavy industrial precinct of the Lower Hunter." (Media release, Premier of NSW the Hon Barry O'Farrell MO dated 5 October 2011)

Councillor Claydon spoke to the motion.

Councillor King requested the mover change the word 'receives' to 'requests'.

The mover accepted the change to the motion.

The Lord Mayor advised Councillors that the Consultative Committee had met on four occasions and Committee meetings were open to the public. The Lord Mayor said he had spoken to the General Manager regarding the Committee briefing Council early in 2012.

The Lord Mayor put the motion to the meeting and declared the motion carried unanimously.

Newcastle Port

The following Motion that I submitted was adopted unanimously by Council... (though the second part was withdrawn following an objection from Councillor Nelmes and others)

NOTICE OF MOTION: MAYFIELD SITE PORT RELATED ACTIVITIES CONCEPT PLAN

COUNCILLOR: M OSBORNE

MOTION

That Newcastle Council
1. As a matter of urgency, write to the Hon Brad Hazzard, Minister for Planning and the Hon Duncan Gay, Minister for Ports, stating that no decisions should be made regarding the Mayfield site Port-related activities Concept Plan until
a. Newcastle Council and the local community are fully briefed on the proposal,
b. The concerns of Newcastle Council and the local community are properly addressed,
c. A proper community consultative process regarding the former BHP Steelworks site at Mayfield has been carried out, and
d. The Newcastle Port Corporation’s overall Strategic Development Plan for the entire Port of Newcastle is released for public comment.
2. Writes to the Premier and all local State and Federal MPs to protest the way in which Newcastle Port Corporation has conducted consultative processes regarding the redevelopment of the former BHP Steelworks site at Mayfield and the planning for the Port of Newcastle.

BACKGROUND

The situation that Council has been left in a position where it is unable to comment on the Department of Planning and Infrastructure’s draft conditions of approval for the Concept Plan for the former BHP Steelworks site at Mayfield is untenable.

Newcastle City Council represents the residents and ratepayers who live in the suburbs around the Newcastle Port and their concerns must be taken into account with the overall planning for the Port and individual development proposals.

A brief timeline of events follows.

A. 3 March 2011 – Council submission to the Department of Planning (Mayfield site Port related activities Concept Plan MP09/0096) seeking particular commitments from both the State Government and Newcastle Port Corporation regarding

1. Traffic and Transport Infrastructure including –
1.1 Traffic Impact
1.2 Future Transport Infrastructure
1.3 Local Area Traffic Management (LATM)
1.4 Upgrading Freight Rail Network and Level Crossings

2. Flooding, Stormwater and Water Quality Management

3. Contaminated Land including
3.1 Potential dedication of contaminated assets to Council
3.2 Environmental Commitments and Performance

4. Provision of Services

5. Section 94A – requesting that the proponent commit to funding and delivery of all new infrastructure, required upgrades to existing infrastructure and delivery of all identified mitigation measures in association with their proposed Concept Plan and noting that the Newcastle Port Corporation Concept Plan is not exempt from payment of s94A contributions.

B. 7 June 2011 – Councillors unanimously endorse a resolution ‘Newcastle Port Development’:

1. Newcastle Council:
(i) Calls on the State Government to work with the Federal Government to build a Mayfield portside rail line from the Sandgate junction to service the former BHP site before any proposed redevelopment occurs.
(ii) Calls on the State Government to work with the Federal Government to build the Tourle St Bridge, and Kooragang road network duplication, to service Kooragang Island, Stockton and Newcastle Airport.
(iii) Calls on the State Government to release to the public its Master Port Plan and to expedite an Integrated Port Planning Strategy for the port that would include proper consideration of the cumulative impacts of all the proposed port redevelopment on nearby residents, strategies to reduce this impact and proper consultation with residents
(iv) Calls on the State Government to install dust monitoring equipment to measure fine particulates (PM 2.5) in all suburbs in the Newcastle area that surround the Port and to make this monitoring data available to the Newcastle community.
2. Newcastle Council write to all relevant State and Federal MPs to enlist their support for these proposals.
3. Newcastle Council reiterates its support for the Newcastle freight bypass rail line to improve the efficiency of freight movements on the rail network and to improve passenger train movements in the Newcastle area. The Newcastle freight bypass rail line would stop the excessive delays at the Adamstown gates for example.
4. Newcastle Council invites the Newcastle Port Corporation, the Port Waratah Coal Service, Buildev and the Tinkler Hunter Ports group to address Council on their proposed plans for the redevelopment of the Newcastle Port.

C. 15 November 2011 – Submission from Newcastle City Council to the Department of Planning and Infrastructure (15 Nov 2011 Development Assessment Team) which notes:

“As Council has not had the opportunity to review any documentation associated with this revised development scope it is not possible to ascertain if the proposed draft conditions are reasonable or adequate as Council has no way of understanding what the anticipated environmental impacts of the modified proposal may now be.

Accordingly, Council does not propose to offer any comment on the draft conditions”.

Webcasting

Finally Newcastle Council will move into the 21st Century.

The following Motion that I submitted was adopted by Council...

NOTICE OF MOTION: WEBCASTING OF COUNCIL MEETINGS

COUNCILLOR: M OSBORNE

MOTION

That Newcastle Council
(i) Install the appropriate infrastructure to allow for the broadcasting of meetings via the internet.
(ii) Allocate the necessary funds in the December 2011 Quarterly review for the installation of the equipment
(iii) Allocate the necessary funds in Council’s Management Plan for ongoing costs

BACKGROUND

Newcastle Council has adopted The Newcastle Community Strategic Plan which reflects the community’s vision for the city and is a guide for action by Council.

One of the seven strategic directions outlined in the Strategic Plan is Open and Collaborative Leadership.

Council’s vision in this area is that we will have a strong local democracy with an actively engaged community and effective partnerships.

Through the development of the Council’s Strategic Plan, the community clearly told Council that they wanted decision-making in our City based on collaborative, transparent and accountable leadership and that this must be transparent, open, inclusive, accountable, fair and democratic. (see http://www.newcastle.nsw.gov.au/about_newcastle/Newcastle2030/our_strategic_directions/open_and_collaborative_leadership)

Novocastrians want to be an informed and empowered community with the opportunity to make both individual and broader choices towards being a resilient, adaptable and civil society.

This motion fits neatly into this strategic direction.

A range of Councils across the state are already broadcasting their meetings over the internet. These include:
• Shellharbour City Council
• City of Botany Bay
• Lane Cove Council
• Warringah Council
• Port Macquarie-Hastings Council

In addition, Port Stephens recently resolved to webcast their meetings for an estimated upfront equipment cost of less than $20,000 and an ongoing cost of less than $10,000 per year.

Local Government Conference 2011

This is my report from the conference...

ITEM-1 CR 20/12/11 - COUNCILLORS' CONFERENCE REPORT - LOCAL GOVERNMENT ASSOCIATION OF NSW 2011 CONFERENCE


REPORT BY: COUNCILLOR M OSBORNE

PURPOSE

To report on the 2011 Conference of the Local Government Association (the peak industry body for Local Government in NSW) by Councillor Osborne

RECOMMENDATION

The report be noted.

WHO ATTENDED

Due to the population within the Newcastle LGA, Newcastle City Council is entitled to 7 voting delegates at the Conference. In addition to their quota for voting delegates, many councils send non-voting delegates as well as their Council’s GM and Senior staff.

Newcastle City Council resolved to have only one delegate (Councillor Osborne) for the Conference, which ran from 23rd to 26th October 2011 in Nowra.

DESCRIPTION

As the annual conference for the peak industry lobby group for local government in NSW, the key purpose of the conference is to decide on the policies and focus for the LGA for the coming year.

The agenda is set by the member councils by way of submitting motions for consideration by the conference.

The conference is an opportunity to ensure that motions relevant to Newcastle are adopted by the LGA and become a platform for their lobbying the State and Federal governments.

This year the conference also included electing the Executive who are to ensure the policies of the LGA are implemented. For the purposes of the Executive election, Newcastle is considered a country council.

The election of the Executive was carried out by the Australian Electoral Commission and included election for President, Vice President (from a country council), Vice President (from a metropolitan council), Treasurer, Vice President General (if required), Ten Executive Committee Members (10) (from country councils) and Ten Executive Committee Members (10) (from metropolitan councils).

POLICY

Councils from across the state submitted 226 motions for consideration by the 2011 conference delegates. Unfortunately the conference was marred by Council delegates not turning up and several times the proceedings had to be halted due to a lack of quorum. Motions that were not considered in the conference forum were referred to the newly-elected Executive for action in line with existing policy.

The Conference 2011 Business Paper, Updated Policy Statement, 2011 Late Motions, Record of Decisions and 2010 Action Report can be found on the LGA website (see http://www.lgsa-plus.net.au/www/html/3721-motions-and-business-papers.asp).

Examples of the adopted LGA policies relevant to Newcastle’s adopted Community Strategic Plan are given below.

A PROTECTED AND ENHANCED ENVIRONMENT

That the Local Government Association call on the NSW Government to place a moratorium on coal seam gas exploration until:

• adequate environmental protection and community engagement frameworks are in place that allow Local Government to respond to community and environmental concerns, and

• there is adequate scientific evidence to be certain that there will be no short or long term adverse impacts with regards to:

o ground and surface water systems

o drinking water

o agricultural and urban soils

o land health and value

o heritage

o metropolitan areas

o threatened species and endangered ecological communities.

That the Local Government Association of NSW calls upon the State Government to provide an effective and strategic policy response and funding stimulus in meeting the challenges of waste management and resource recovery, in order to address the current lack of consistency in policy and regulatory approaches and complete reliance on market forces.

That the NSW Government:

a) implements measures to avoid the creation of waste, such as legislation like extended produces responsibility (EPR) in particular container deposit legislation (CDL) to reduce waste production.

b) implements further measures to further reduce waste going to landfill by recovering more recyclable materials and by using waste levy funds to built and operate alternative waste technologies AWTs.

That representation be made to the NSW Government seeking that Councils should not have to pay the Section 88 Waste Levy (tax) on clean dirt and soil used for daily cover of garbage at landfills.

That the Local Government Association call on the Federal Government to:

• hasten the rollout of the National Television and Computer recycling scheme that requires importers or manufacturers to collect and recycle end of life televisions and computers;

• acknowledge the role councils are currently playing as interim collection points for E Waste and the costs associated with this role; and

• provide compensation for the cost shifting implications of providing this interim service from the date of the legislation (22 June 2011) until the National Television and Computer Product Stewardship scheme is in place.

A CARING AND INCLUSIVE COMMUNITY

That the Local Government Association calls upon the NSW Government to establish a sustainably-funded collaborative network which will enable Local Government to deliver quality programs which support social inclusion and community well-being. The detail of the Collaborative Network and the program objectives and initiatives needs to be determined through further discussion with councils by the Local Government Association. The Programs may include:

• early literacy programs

• literacy programs, both print and information technology, for Aboriginal Australians

• community health programs such as immunisation

• access to welfare agencies through the provision of technologies such as email or facsimile in rural communities which enable clients to access those agencies

• access to other e-business and e-government portals

• youth development programs

• legal information access

• drug and alcohol information access

• access to health services information

• support for Broadband for Seniors and U3A

• support for other lifelong learning programs

• support for jobseekers who lack the access to home technology to complete online job applications

• access for learner drivers to practice for online driver assessment tests

That the Local Government Association make representations to the NSW Government for special funding for Local Government in order to make local buildings and public spaces more accessible for people with a disability to meet the new standards for access to premises.

That the Local Government Association of NSW calls upon the NSW Government to undertake a review of the Companion Animals Act 1998 and to amend the Act to provide for simultaneous micro-chipping and lifetime registration of pets. In the absence of this, Councils are required to utilise considerable resources to enforce and issue notices to owners of pets which are microchipped but not registered. The current situation has the potential for imposition of penalty for many pet owners as they are often under the impression that micro-chipping is also registration.

OUR SHARED VISION FOR NEWCASTLE IS FOR A SMART, LIVEABLE AND SUSTAINABLE CITY

Examples of the LGA policies adopted at last year’s conference and the follow up actions relevant to Newcastle’s adopted Community Strategic Plan are given below.

EXAMINING NEW FUNDING OPTIONS FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT INFRASTRUCTURE

That the Local Government Association create a Taskforce to investigate new funding options for Local Government infrastructure including, but not limited to:

1. The creation of a municipal bond market for the purpose of financing Local Government infrastructure

2. Securing direct access to Federal infrastructure funding

3. The creation of a range of environmental taxes based on such principles as price rationing, quantity rationing and liability rules

4. Securing a guaranteed share of Income Tax and GST revenue.

ACTION

The resolution was sent to the Minister for Regional Development and Local Government, the Hon Simon Crean, the Australian and NSW Treasurers, the Hon Wayne Swan and the Hon. Eric Roozendaal for consideration. It was subsequently sent to the present Treasurer, Hon Mike Baird

Response from the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister and Treasurer 24 February 2011

The Australian Government recognises the important role local government plays in providing essential local services and responding to the needs and priorities of local communities. The Government will provide local government with $1.5 billion in Financial Assistance Grants in 2010-11, growing to $2.2 billion in 2.110-12. The Government provides these grants to enhance local government’s capacity to provide services to the community. The Commonwealth has provided general purpose assistance to local governments since 1974-75. The funding is untied and can be spent according to each local government’s own priorities.

In regards to your concern relating to local government shares of GST revenue, under the Intergovernmental Agreement on Federal Financial Relations, the Commonwealth and the States have agreed that the Commonwealth will make GST payments to the States equivalent to the total revenue received from the GST. On this basis, any proposals to provide a guaranteed share of GST revenue to local government would require a departure from the current agreement between the Commonwealth and the States. GST payments to the States can be allocated toward each State’s own priorities, which can include local government.

Response from the Hon Mike Baird, Treasurer 9 June 2011

I note the resolution that the Local Government Association will be creating a Taskforce to investigate new funding options for local government infrastructure. I welcome the Taskforce and look forward to the results of the review.

As you will be aware, the Government is committed to establishing a Local Infrastructure Renewal Scheme to assist local government address its infrastructure needs. I will be working with the Minister for Local Government on this initiative and look forward to engaging with the Association on this matter in the future.

REGULATION OF STREET LIGHTING PRICES

That the Local Government Association of NSW calls upon the Australian Government to undertake an independent review of the Australian Energy Regulator (AER)'s current approach to policy, regulatory and pricing determination of street lighting across Australia, in order to effectively protect councils and their communities from monopoly service providers, and to promote energy efficient and renewable lighting options as part of uniform mandated street lighting standards and pricing principles across Australia.

ACTION

The resolution has been sent to the Treasurer, the Hon Wayne Swan for consideration.

Response from the office of the Deputy Prime Minister and Treasurer – 24 February 2011

Regarding your concern about the regulation of street lighting, the Australian Energy Regulator (AER) is responsible for the economic regulation of electricity distributors in the National Electricity Market under Chapter 6 of the National Electricity Rules. These rules are made by the Australian Energy Market Commission which is able to receive and review applications from interested parties requesting rule changes.

Prior to making a distribution determination, the AER is required to publish a framework and approach paper, which among other things, requires it to classify distribution services and the mechanism by which prices and /or revenues for these services will be determined. The AER considers public lighting services to be distribution services and has generally classified them as ‘direct control services’ on the basis that the distribution network service providers are currently monopoly providers of public lighting services and control over the prices for these services are therefore required. Once the AER has made a classification decision in relation to a service, it must then decide on mechanism by which revenues or prices are to be controlled and on what basis. In applying these criteria to public lighting services the AER has generally chosen to apply a price cap for the first year of the period and a price path for the remaining years of the period.

In regards to the promotion of energy efficient and renewable lighting options as part of the uniform mandated street lighting standards across Australia, the AER’s role is limited to considering how the distribution services should be classified, the control mechanism that is to apply to each service and to determine the charges that will apply to each service. The AER is unable to compel distributors the way in which they provide public lighting services, for example, the provision of energy efficient lighting.

HIGH SPEED RAIL

That the Local Government Association acknowledge the Prime Minister’s announcement of Sydney to Newcastle high speed rail study.

That the Local Government Association make a submission to the Federal Government urging it to undertake preliminary feasibility studies into the staged construction of a high speed passenger rail network on the east coast of Australia between Brisbane, Newcastle, Sydney, Wollongong, Canberra and Melbourne.

These feasibility studies should be address:

• Current and future service demand, preservation of corridors and location and number of stations;

• Environmental, social and economic costs and benefits of the range of route and train technology configurations;

• An examination of existing major highway routes;

• Comparisons to alternative options, including new and expanded airports and road networks;

• Options for the financing, governance and public ownership of the rail network;

• Options for providing a carbon neutral energy source to meet the trains electricity requirements;

• Previous studies including the 2010 joint AECOM / Infrastracture Partnerships (IPA) study

ACTION

The resolution was sent to the Prime Minister, the Hon Julia Gillard and the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport, the Hon Anthony Albanese for consideration.

Response from Senator the Hon Kate Lundy, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister – 11 January 2011

Thank you for your letter of 13 December 2010 to the Prime Minister regarding the resolutions passed at the recent 2010 Local Government Association annual conference. The Prime Minister has asked me to reply on her behalf.

…

Your comments on the High Speed Rail Study have been noted and referred to the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport, the Hon Anthony Albanese MP, who has portfolio responsibility for this matter.

Response from the Hon Anthony Albanese, Minister for Infrastructure and Transport – 4 February 2011

On 13 October 2010 I announced the Terms of Reference for the initial phase of a $20million high speed rail implementation study for the east coast of Australia (Attachment A). The first phase of this study, to be completed by July 2011, will indentify the requirements for the LGA Conference 2010 Page 21 Action Report implementation of a viable high speed rail network and identify strategic route and station options, including high-level costing. More detailed work including specific corridor alignment and patronage and revenue forecasts, will be completed for the final report which is due in mid 2012.

Late last year the Department of Infrastructure and Transport (my Department) invited tenders for the initial phase of the study, and I will shortly be in a position to announce the successful tenderer.

My Department is also establishing a reference group for the first phase of the study to enable key stakeholders to contribute and share information of relevance to this part of the study. The Australian Local Government Association has accepted an invitation to participate in the reference group.

Staff voting on Working Parties

The following Motion that I submitted was adopted by Council...

NOTICE OF MOTION: ADVISORY COMMITTEE CONSTITUTIONS AND WORKING PARTY OPERATING PROCEDURES

COUNCILLOR: M OSBORNE

MOTION

That Council amend the Constitutions of all Advisory Committees and the Working Party Operating Procedures to ensure that
(i) the voting members of the committees and working parties do not include staff
(ii) the Coordinator (“chair”) of the Working Party be a Councillor

BACKGROUND

Council staff are technical, qualified people and their role is to advise the elected body.

As the former Acting General Manager recently said in a Laman St Working Party meeting it is an inappropriate governance model where the people giving the advice are then asked to vote on that advice and to possibly vote against councillors and/or the community.

The role of council staff (as public servants) is to provide “advice” on relevant policy matters, and then to “implement” policy decisions, not to “make” such policy decisions.

It is inappropriate for staff to be put in the role of “making” policy decisions.

Newcastle Greens say more than $6 billion should go to households

Newcastle Greens

MEDIA RELEASE
24 June 2011

Cr Osborne has backed the concerns of Australia’s chief scientist, Professor Chubb, that the climate debate in Australia “borders on the appalling” (SMH, 22 June 2011).

“The science backing climate change and pointing the finger at carbon pollution has been established for years”, Cr Osborne said

“It is only fair that the polluters should pay for their pollution.

“Experts such as Professor Chubb and Professor Garnaut agree that a price on pollution needs to work together with well-designed policies to bring on renewable energy, energy efficiency and clean transport.

“Around the world, pollution prices are in place in Europe, parts of the USA, India and New Zealand,” he said

Cr Osborne has called for households to get more than a half of the funds raised by a price on carbon pollution or more than $6 billion in the year 2012-13.

“I fully back calls by Greens Senator Christine Milne that households should be adequately compensated. This is particularly important for Newcastle, which according to the latest Australian Bureau of Statistics figures, has almost 34,000 pensioners and almost 4,000 unemployed.

“These families need to be fully compensated for the effects of putting a price on carbon pollution”, Cr Osborne said.

Cr Osborne said that the Newcastle Greens will be distributing a pamphlet over the next week to give residents more information about the proposed package.

NOTES
Senator Christine Milne is leading the Greens negotiations with the Federal government.

ABS data can be found here

Professor Garnaut has estimated that with a carbon price of $26 per tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent would generate around $11.5 billion in potential revenue from the value of permits in 2012–13. (see Summary Report p18)

Infrastructure need upfront

My opinion piece published in The Herald today...

Many Newcastle residents feel short-changed by the State Government when they approve development without investing upfront in the necessary infrastructure to mitigate the development impacts.

With the State Government continuing to approve industrial development on Kooragang Island, it was surprising a few years ago that they chose to replace the old two-lane Tourle Street Bridge with a new two-lane Bridge, when for an extra $15 million they could have constructed a four-lane bridge.

Now, the already busy Cormorant Road is getting busier and a duplication of the Tourle Street Bridge and Cormorant Road is necessary. The price tag now is likely to be in excess of $50 million.

This infrastructure not only services Kooragang Island but also residents from Stockton and Port Stephens coming to the City and Newcastle residents going to the airport.

Where is the investment to beautify this important gateway to the City?

Newcastle residents will be severely impacted by the expansion of our Port unless the State Government invests upfront in the necessary infrastructure.

Newcastle Port Corporation has developed a Concept Plan for the redevelopment of a 90-hectare portion of the former BHP site.

This proposal includes seven new wharfs to support several cargo precincts. These include a dry bulk precinct; a general purpose precinct; a major container terminal with a trade volume of 1 million containers every year; and, a bulk liquid precinct for fuels and biofuels.

The Port Corporation’s plans as they currently stand would choke our roads.

The Port Corporation predicts that a significant amount of the goods to and from the Port would be by road - this will include 800,000 containers each year, 1,010 million litres of fuel and 3.1 million tonnes of other products.

Yet the Port Corporation seems to have ignored how this road freight will move through Newcastle (other than to specify that 60% of the cargo will travel to and from Sydney).

Will the freight traffic use the F3 freeway to Beresfield and the already busy New England highway and Industrial Drive? Or the shorter route down the Link Road and through the suburbs from Wallsend to Sandgate and then to Industrial Drive?

Either way, Industrial Drive will become grid locked under the Port Corporation’s proposal.

And there is nothing to stop the freight trucks travelling down our suburban roads through ‘rat-runs’. In fact the Port Corporation has not even looked at this possibility or made any commitment to fund the necessary Local Area Traffic Management controls to stop this from happening.

Once again Newcastle is being short-changed by State Government entities pushing development without providing the necessary infrastructure upfront to mitigate the impact on local residents.

When the Federal Government released its draft National Ports Strategy last year it recognised that local residents living near our ports would be impacted by future development unless investment in infrastructure occurred upfront.

One approach highlighted was the “early identification and land-use reservation of lands for major freight corridors”.

A regional freight rail bypass between Fassifern and Hexham and a freight hub in the vicinity of Beresfield has been on the drawing books for years. It was highlighted five years ago in the Lower Hunter Regional Strategy.

But the State Government has not dedicated the route, let alone invested in the infrastructure.

Removing freights trains from our residential areas would not only improve the way freight gets to and from our Port, but improve the amenity for all residents along the line from Fassifern to Islington and provide the opportunity for faster and better passenger services as well as bringing to an end the excessive delays at the Adamstown gates.

A dedicated rail freight line direct to the former BHP site is also required.

This Mayfield Portside rail line would connect from the Kooragang spur line at Sandgate to the former BHP site and onto the Carrington rail facilities.

This would allow most imports and exports to our Port to be by rail and remove the significant impact that the Port Corporation’s current proposal would have on local residents.

Most of the freight (including all the coal to the Carrington terminal) would use this new Mayfield Portside rail line. This would significantly reduce freight movements past all our suburbs from Warabrook to Tighes Hill and improve their amenity.

Our local residents are impacted already by the operations at the Port, and they deserve better.

The Port Corporation has been sending millions of dollars each year to Sydney. Now it’s time for the State Government to invest upfront in this necessary infrastructure before any further development is approved.

Newcastle council pushes portside rail link

From The Herald...

BY BEN SMEE

INDUSTRIAL Drive would be choked by traffic if a container terminal was approved at the former BHP site without new road and rail infrastructure, Newcastle councillor Michael Osborne said last night.

The council unanimously supported a notice of motion by Cr Osborne, which called for the establishment of a portside rail link from Sandgate junction to the BHP site.

The motion also called on the state government to release its masterplan for the port of Newcastle.

Cr Osborne told the council meeting that a council submission on the proposed container terminal had said that "Industrial Highway would fail" because of the extra traffic.

"We're calling for infrastructure to be put in up-front for a problem that we know is going to happen," Cr Osborne said. "What needs to happen is they need to look at the port as a whole.

"I think it's a dumb idea for this city that we have this skew towards coal when we could be doing a whole lot of other things with our port and diversifying it."

Cr Aaron Buman said many concerns about traffic were unfounded because he did not believe the proposed contained terminal would be needed for 20 to 25 years.

Cr Buman said he had never seen "propaganda" like the brochures distributed in Mayfield before the March state election, which warned of thousands of daily truck movements through the suburb.

"I'd stand on my grandmother's grave to say there would be no traffic through suburban streets of Mayfield," Cr Buman said.

Councillors also backed a push for a duplication of the Tourle Street bridge and road upgrades on Kooragang Island.

"The Tourle Street duplication needs to happen before the port on Kooragang Island develops," Cr Osborne said.

Lord mayor John Tate labelled the Tourle Street bridge "an abomination".

The motion also calls for dust monitoring in suburbs around the port.

Newcastle Port Redevelopment

The following motion was adopted by Council tonight.

NOTICE OF MOTION: NEWCASTLE PORT REDEVELOPMENT
COUNCILLOR: M OSBORNE
MOTION
1. That Newcastle Council:

(i) Calls on the State Government to work with the Federal Government to build a Mayfield portside rail line from the Sandgate junction to service the former BHP site before any proposed redevelopment occurs.

(ii) Calls on the State Government to work with the Federal Government to build the Tourle St Bridge and Kooragang road network duplication to service Kooragang Island, Stockton and Newcastle Airport.

(iii) Calls on the State Government to release to the public its Master Port Plan and to expedite an Integrated Port Planning Strategy for the port that would include proper consideration of the cumulative impacts of all the proposed port redevelopment on nearby residents, strategies to reduce this impact and proper consultation with residents.

(iv) Calls on the State Government to install dust monitoring equipment to measure fine particulates in all suburbs in the Newcastle area that surround the Port and to make this monitoring data available to the Newcastle community.

2. That Newcastle Council write to all relevant State and Federal MPs to enlist their support for these proposals.

3. That Newcastle Council reiterates its support for the Newcastle freight bypass rail line to improve the efficiency of freight movements on the rail network and to improve passenger train movements in the Newcastle area. The Newcastle freight bypass rail line would stop the excessive delays at the Adamstown gates for example.

4. That Newcastle Council invites the Newcastle Port Corporation, the Port Waratah Coal Service, Buildev and the Tinkler Hunter Ports group to address Council on their proposed plans for the redevelopment of the Newcastle Port.

BACKGROUND

Newcastle Port Corporation has developed a Concept Plan for the proposed redevelopment of a 90-hectare portside portion of the former BHP Steelworks site which includes seven new wharfs to support several cargo precincts. These precincts include:

• Bulk and General Precinct capable of handling non hazardous dry bulk products including grain, briquettes, and coke cargoes.

• General Purpose Precinct a flexible facility to handle and store cargo containers, heavy machinery, Roll On Roll Off and break bulk cargo.

• Container Terminal Precinct with a trade volume of 1 million twenty foot equivalent units per annum at final development.

• Bulk Liquid Precinct used for storage, blending and distribution of high quality fuels and biofuels.

Newcastle Port Corporation is predicting a significant amount of these exports will be arriving through Newcastle to the Port by road (see Attachment 1). Newcastle Port Corporation have predicted, that when the precincts are fully developed, each year 800,000 containers, 1,010 million litres of fuel and 3.1 million tonnes of other products will be transported through Newcastle by road

A significant amount of this material (including all the containers) would be kept off the roads if the State Government invested in a rail line on the Mayfield side of the Hunter River South Arm.

Buildev is developing plans for the other 60-hectare portion of the former BHP site, known as the Intertrade Industrial Park. The proposed developments for this site have not been released yet.

This Mayfield Portside rail line would connect from the Kooragang spur line at Sandgate to the former BHP site and onto the Carrington Coal terminal rail facilities, the grain terminal and the general wharf freight lines in the area (see Attachment 2).

The exact route would need to be determined by detailed investigation but it is important to note that much of the required corridor is currently vacant.

Most of the freight (including all the coal to the Carrington terminal) would use the new Mayfield Portside rail line. This would significantly reduce freight movements (including coal) past Warabrook, Mayfield, Waratah, Georgetown, Islington and Tighes Hill and allow for the revitalisation of these suburbs.

This rail line would also provide options for Steel River businesses and other commercial operators like One Steel and Koppers.

This proposal would mesh perfectly with the proposed freight rail bypass for the Region and the proposed rail freight hub in the vicinity of Beresfield.

Council should reiterate its support for the Newcastle freight bypass rail line because it will improve passenger train movements in the Newcastle area and stop the excessive delays at the Adamstown gates for example.

ATTACHMENT 1: NEWCASTLE PORT CORPORATION’S PROPOSED OPERATIONS HIGHLIGHTING SIGNIFICANT ROAD FREIGHT MOVEMENTS


ATTACHMENT 2: POSSIBLE ROUTE OF THE MAYFIELD PORTSIDE RAIL LINE

Show us port masterplan: councillor

From The Herald...

BY BEN SMEE CIVIC REPORTER

GREENS councillor Michael Osborne is calling for the release of a state government masterplan for the port of Newcastle as part of a push to establish a freight rail link to the former BHP site.

Cr Osborne has tabled a notice of motion for tonight’s Newcastle City Council meeting, calling on the state and federal governments to link the BHP site to Sandgate junction by rail before any proposed redevelopment occurs.

The contents of the masterplan, which is expected to be placed on public exhibition later this year, have been a tightly kept secret.

Cr Osborne said a comprehensive planning strategy would be needed to help guide the development of the BHP site, Steel River, the proposed terminal 4 coal-loader, and other sites.

The Newcastle Port Corporation has concept plans for a container terminal at the former BHP steelworks site, while Nathan Tinkler-backed developer Buildev has flagged an application for a coal-loader there.

Cr Osborne said the plans also required a rail link.

"Newcastle Port Corporation have predicted that when the precincts are fully developed, each year 800,000 containers, 1010million litres of fuel and 3.1million tonnes of other products will be transported through Newcastle by road," Cr Osborne said.

"They need to put in infrastructure up front."

Cr Osborne’s said the portside rail plan would mesh perfectly with a proposed freight rail bypass, and a freight hub planned at Beresfield.

His motion also calls on the state government to duplicate the Tourle Street Bridge and to monitor dust in suburbs surrounding the port.

Cr Osborne also wants to invite the Newcastle Port Corporation, Port Waratah Coal Services and Buildev to address the council about their port plans.

A spokesman for Ports Minister Duncan Gay had not responded to requests for comment about the masterplan or the rail plan by the close of business yesterday.

Change on the books for Newcastle libraries

From The Herald...

BY BEN SMEE

LOCAL libraries could be closed and sold under Newcastle City Council's 10-year financial plan, which proposes spending $43 million to build three new multi-purpose libraries.

Under the council's 10-year-plan, which is on public exhibition, libraries at New Lambton, Stockton and Beresfield would be rebuilt or relocated with money raised from land rates increases.

The central Newcastle library in Laman Street would also be expanded.

But concerns have been raised that building the new multi-purpose facilities would likely lead to the closure of several of the city's smaller libraries.

The closures of Adamstown, Hamilton and Lambton libraries have been discussed internally, and a briefing document suggests the council expects to ultimately make $2 million from the sale of old library assets.

Newcastle councillor Michael Osborne described the plans as "crude and simplistic" and said he opposed the closure of any local libraries.

"It totally ignores the community that [attends] these libraries. A lot of people use Adamstown and Hamilton [libraries]."

The council emphasised yesterday that specific proposals for the city's libraries had not been finalised.

Future city director Judy Jaeger said the council wanted to build on the success of the Wallsend library, which moved to a new and larger building in 2006.

Ms Jaeger said book loans were up 166 per cent after the move.

"When you have a multi-purpose facility that has a meeting space, an exhibition space, people will use it," she said.

She said any decisions about libraries would be a matter for councillors.

Cr Osborne said the council should be looking at options such as working with the private sector or other council departments to revitalise the existing libraries.

Another Laman St development

Interesting letter recently received from a Council consultant...