NEWCASTLE PEOPLE HAVE A RIGHT TO KNOW WHAT THEIR COUNCIL IS DOING AND A RIGHT TO HAVE A SAY IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN

Greg Ray’s article ‘Yes, I still give a fig’ (NH H2 11/2/2012) will echo the feelings of many Novocastrians. The Laman Street landscape was a significant public landscape that should never have been destroyed without public exhibition and examination of the statutory Plan of Management of which it was an integral part.

Perhaps, now that the Newcastle Council has felled the Laman Street figs identified in the Civic Precinct, Judy Jaeger the Future City Manager will acknowledge the proposal she submitted to the Anzac Centenary Commission on behalf of the ‘City of Newcastle Local Government’ early September 2010.

Interestingly Ms Jaeger wrote in the 2010 submission, “Recent community consultation has endorsed the idea that Laman Street should be upgraded to become a mezzanine to Civic Park a cultural gathering place beyond its present function as a roadway”. Later in the 2010 submission she adds, “Fig trees in Laman Street, which fronts the park and is the address of the Library and the Art Gallery, are presently being removed due to the risk they pose to the public”.

The Mezzanine proposal had never been discussed in the community or in the Newcastle Council or at the two Day Workshop held March 2010 especially to consider the whole Civic Precinct including Laman Street. More distressingly, the proposal was surreptitiously sent to the Commonwealth Commission but not disclosed openly in Newcastle or in the Land and Environment Court which was reviewing Council’s action in invoking Sec 88 of the Roads Act to remove the fig trees without public consideration or environmental assessment.

I raised this development matter at a meeting with Council managers and the Acting General Manager Mr Noble on the 29th of June 2011. Ms Jill Gaynor (Strategic Planning Services) when questioned assured the Acting General Manager that there was no development proposed.

This is confusing because the development was one of the proposals in the Framework Design Principles displayed by Council over Christmas 2010 which was after the court case. On Monday 13th September 2010 the Movement wrote to the General Manager and all Councillors appealing to them to formally exhibit their proposal for the Precinct including Civic Park and Laman Street. The reply was to invoke the Roads Act and notify their intention to start removing the trees. Reluctantly we sought and were granted an injunction to restrain the Council. The Council fought the case with extraordinary belligerence and we were not allowed to use our expert evidence question the merit of the Council’s action.

Citizens and Ratepayers have a moral and legal right to know the truth and the belligerent seven Councillors may have succeeded in felling the trees but by denying the truth they have lost the confidence of the people.

Doug Lithgow President
Parks and Playgrounds Movement Inc

Copies of five significant items of Correspondence sent by Parks and Playgrounds Movement to the
Newcastle City Council about the Laman Street Landscape.

Letters Dated:
1. 21st November 2002
2. 13th September 2010
3. 1st May 2011
4. 17th December 2011
5. 27th January 2012

Letter No. 1
Thursday, 21 November 2002
Janice Walsh

Janice Walsh
Group Manager (City Services & Presentation)
Newcastle City Council
Box 489 NEWCASTLE 2300

Port Jackson Fig (Ficus rubiginosa) – Laman St., Newcastle

Reference is made to your communication EDMS 552039 dated 11 Nov 2002.

Parks and Playgrounds Movement appreciate your letter but point out that it was subsequently revealed that the tree did not pose the hazard first thought. The progressive cutting of the tree revealed sound wood and no obvious decay.

We were very disappointed when Council determined to cut the tree down rather than prune the tree as discussed on our inspection or allow the tree to respond to arboricultural management and care.

We are particularly disturbed because this is the second subjective destruction of an important Civic Park tree, which is without parallel and is certainly contrary to the statutory responsibility of Council to implement the official Plan of Management for the Park.

Of course it is Council’s responsibility also to protect the public when there is danger or the likelihood of danger. In this case Council did barricade the area it thought was hazardous.

However it was ultimately demonstrated that the tree was sound and not dangerous.

Parks and Playgrounds Movement suggested that the tree should be given the chance to respond by watering of the root system and given a fine mist spraying to create humidity within the canopy.

Council did not have to pre-empt proper arboriculture and testing by cutting the tree down.

The Movement acknowledged that the tree was debilitated in our letter of the 1st November but not dead and that the main limb and trunk made a distinctive ring that was different to that heard when the Ficus Hillii was struck with a soft faced hammer. We now know by testing other Port Jackson Figs in Newcastle and at Centennial Park in Sydney that the Ficus rubignosia naturally has a distinctive ring, which doesn’t indicate that the tree is hollow, or diseased. The possibility of reducing the spread of the tree crown was discussed during the inspection with the Lord Mayor yourself and the Arborist.

The Laman Street concourse of trees is the most valuable arbour feature in the Civic/Cultural Precinct.

Council gardening staff has especially nurtured these splendid trees over the last forty years. Each tree is identified in the Civic Park Plan of Management which states that Council will: Carry out appropriate arboricultural management practices to ensure the health and longevity of the trees.

Parks and Playgrounds Movement affirm that Council is required to exercise its responsibility as stated in the Plan of Management. The subjective considerations of hazard should not be used to arbitrarily destroy Newcastle’s significant and widely appreciated Civic Cultural Precinct landscape.

Yours sincerely,

Doug Lithgow
Parks and Playgrounds Movement

Letter No. 2
Monday, 13 September 2010

Lord Mayor John Tate,

Ms Lindy Hyam General Manager and Councillors

Newcastle City Council
King Street, Newcastle 2300

Dear John, Lindy and Councillors,

Laman Street trees feature of the Cultural Precinct

Parks and Playgrounds Movement appeal to Newcastle City Councillors to formally exhibit their proposals for the iconic Tree Lined Streetscape in front of the Cultural Centre and Art Gallery in Laman Street Newcastle together with the plan of management for the future of Civic Park.

The Laman Street group of trees at the Art Gallery and Cultural Centre is an integral feature of the Newcastle Cultural Precinct and have been identified as of great significance to the City of Newcastle in all official plans of management for Civic Park.

We make this request so that the Landscape of the Cultural Precinct can be conserved and developed in a professional way through the established legal planning framework.

 

These trees have survived all recent storms and their cathedral arch form is greatly loved by Newcastle citizens and is not in danger of immanent collapse.

The Lord Mayor will remember the inspection of the Port Jackson Fig near the pedestrian crossing in Nov. 2002. We were in the company of the former GM and Engineer in the group. Council’s Arborist struck the trees with a rubber hammer and because of the different sound announced that the tree was hollow and had to be cut down. I have photos of every stage of the felling of that tree and there were no hollows anywhere in the tree. The Arborist was wrong. I have since tested trees of that species in Newcastle and Centennial Park in Sydney and found they all have that same distinctive ring.

The real threat to these trees is the location of the Laman Street water main underneath the trees on the south side of the street. This can easily be remedied by the relocation of the water main to the centre of the street when the new layout of the pavement is determined. You will note in the Water Corp plan below that the water main is already in the centre of Auckland Street and in Laman Street in the front of the Presbyterian Church.

 

I represented the Parks and Playgrounds Movement at Council’s recent two day charrette considering this whole matter and it was generally decided that the consultant prepare a design that would provide for the staged development so that the arch structure of the feature would not be lost or destroyed.

It is distressing to see council acting in ba d faith by moving arbitrarily to remove this unique landscape feature from the City.

We appeal to you to publicly exhibit the overall plan of management for Civic Park and Laman Street so the general public will have the opportunity comment on the proposals before Council continues with this destruction.

Yours Sincerely

Doug Lithgow
Parks and Playgrounds Movement

Letter No. 3
1st May 2011
Mr Rob Noble Acting General Manager

Newcastle City Council

PO Box 489 Newcastle 2300

Dear Mr Noble,

Request to address Laman Street Working Party re Civic Design Framework and Trees Parks and Playgrounds Movement wrote on the 28th February 2011 enclosing our response to the Draft Framework and said that we were pleased that Council had decided to publicly exhibit the Design Framework for the Civic Precinct. You may recall that the Movement was forced to begin litigation in the public interest because of the precipitous action of the City Council starting the removal of the Laman Street trees before first determining the Design Framework.

These trees are much loved by the people of Newcastle and are the principal landscape feature in the Civic Precinct.

We wrote that Council has on a number of occasions prepared proposals for the Civic Precinct (Cultural Precinct) and all of the proposals had identified the importance the Ficus trees provid ing a landscape structure. The Draft Laman Street Civic Design Framework is the first proposal that had suggested the removal of this important landscape feature. The argument of Risk Management has been used to give credence to tree removal but had been poorly assessed. We now know that Council had a clandestine reason which should have been made public before the costly and unnecessary litigation.

In our letter of the 28th of Feb 2011 we drew your attention to the ‘Internal Memo’ sent to all Councillors from the Executive Leadership Team on the 23 Sep 2010 signed by Judy Jaeger with the Subject Title ‘Commemorating the Anzac Centenary’.

As a community group working in the public interest for this city we feel that Council had been insincere in holding the Civic Charrette when it had already clandestinely prepared this centenary proposal but not brought it to the charrette. However as a member of the Charrette I was concerned that we were going over the ground that many councils had previously identified.

There was one vaguely expressed proposal that really alarmed me concerning the building of an underground entrance into the Library. It was put to the Charrette by the Facilitator and glossed over by Judy Jaeger. I rejected the idea outright at the Charrette because even though I was not privy to the proposal that the Leadership Team was obvio usly preparing, I could see all the aesthetic and engineering imponderables hidden in the idea. Not to mention the problems with the Civic Park Fountain, the removal of the Memorial Grove and cutting the established Civic Axis and the destruction of the principal landscape feature the Laman Street Trees.

Of course the Parks and Playgrounds Movement want to see a high standard of Landscape maintenance and a unified scheme prepared for the precinct. Our actions since 1968 when we prepared the first concept for the Civic Area are clear public evidence of our bona- fides. We have positively commented on every proposal for the area that Council was brought to the public and have been disappointed that no real progress was made on implementation by the Council.

The Movement is conscious that the elected Councillors are the current trustees of Civic Park for the general public and we made our submission a copy of which I have again enclosed for your convenience. It is in a pdf format titled Civic Park – Civic Precinct Design Framework 24/2/2011.

Parks and Playgrounds Movement formally request that we be allowed address the current Council Laman Street Working Party at a suitable date because Laman Street must be regarded visually and physically as an integral part of the Civic Park Precinct.

We trust that this can be arranged.

Yours sincerely,

Doug Lithgow
Parks and Playgrounds Movement Inc.

Letter No. 4
17th December 2011
Mr Ross Woodward Chief Executive

Mr Ross Woodward Chief Executive

Local Government Division,
NSW Premier’s Department
50 Keefe Ave
Locked Bag 3015
NOWRA NSW 2541

Dear Mr Woodward

Newcastle’s Civic Precinct Planning untruthfulness & Council’s Fig fiasco.

This is a very serious matter requiring your attention. A bizarre situation has developed in Newcastle due to Newcastle Council’s public half- truths about the Newcastle Civic Precinct future development. This situation has been exacerbated by Council’s misinformation, inappropriate procedure and Councillor Intransigence. A breakdown of public confidence in the elected Council has occurred and requires appropriate investigation by the NSW Division of Local Government and possible intervention to correct the situation.

Newcastle citizens wonder why Newcastle Council has persisted in bullying their way into the Laman Street Fig fiasco. Council’s behaviour has caused heartache and inconvenience to the lives of those who care about the city and its amenity. There is also the unreasonable cost, inconvenience and waste that Councillors have unreasonably foisted on to the city ratepayers. As you know the Parks and Playgrounds Movement has given more than fifty years of service in the public interest to the Hunter Region, especially to the City of Newcastle and we are distressed by this bizarre situation that has been allowed to persist.

This unsatisfactory situation cannot be resolved if this important cultural precinct is to be stripped of its attractive mature trees without the a proper review of the exaggerated risk assessment that certain Councillors rely on to form an opinion that the trees need to be felled for the purpose of removing a traffic hazard.

General Background

By apparently not wanting to amend the official Civic Precinct Plan of Management (POM) in a transparent way and by their clandestine development proposal the Newcastle City Councillors have created a fig fiasco. All Public Parks are required to have Plans of Management and Council is required to implement them. The 1993 Local Government Act introduced Plans of Management in an effort to provide better management of parks and public lands in NSW and to allow the community to have a say. In the year 2000 Council adopted an official Civic Precinct plan which included Council owned land at Civic Park, Laman Street, Christie Place and Church Walk Park. Council may amend the plan but certain rules are expected to be followed for public exhibition, public submissions and a public hearing.

Council’s proposals that required the removal of 14 fig tress from Laman Street should have triggered the Plan of Management provisions of the Local Government Act and been lawfully exhibited to the citizens of Newcastle for their consideration.

The situation as it developed.

The exhibition of Council’s plans was not going to happen in the Civic Precinct because Council, as we now know, was secretly developing proposals for an under Laman Street building and major engineering works to level and extend Laman Street into Civic Park to create a wide mezzanine plaza that was to be called ‘Anzac Centennial Place’. The proposal was predicated on the removal of 14 trees in Laman Street and the obliteration of the existing Memorial Grove and changes to Civic Park Fountain. The proposal should have been exhibited as an amendment to the Civic Plan of Management but was not. Nor was it honestly introduced to Council’s two day workshop in May last year that was supposed to be cons idering the future of the Civic Precinct. The time and energy of the seventy participants that had given up their weekend in good faith to consider the issues was misused and wasted. Unfortunately there are other recent examples of the disregard of transparency in parkland planning at Nobbys, Merewether and King Edward Headland Reserve with Newcastle City Council and it may have become a systemic problem.

The proposal for an Anzac Centennial Place in Laman Street was registered with the Commonwealth Anzac Centenary Commission on the 17th of September 2010 in the name of the City of Newcastle,

Submission Number 290 Commonwealth Anzac Centenary Commission from Website
Name/Organisation: City of Newcastle
Submission Summary: The creation of a new public space called Anzac Centennial Place at Laman Street, in the cultural and commemorative heart of Newcastle. The project consolidates and reinforces the commemorative efforts of a previous generation, thereby giving continuity to the community's acts of remembrance.
Date received: 17/09/2010
 
Council did not resolve and Exhibit their proposals & we had to commence Legal action.

Parks and Playgrounds Movement Inc. made an application to the Land and Environment Court in the public interest for an injunction to restrain the Council from their precipitous intention to remove the trees without first resolving and exhibiting their Plan of Management for the precinct.

We obtained the injunction but were unsuccessful on the wider issue because we were prevented from considering matters of merit. Furthermore Council did not disclose to the court evidence of their Centennial Place development proposal. Newcastle Council had not made this proposal public even though they had registered it with the Commonwealth Centenary Commission prior to the court hearing.

In that court case Council, in their Respondent’s Submissions lodged with the Court 5/11/2010 claimed that there was no broader activity proposed other than tree removal. (Paragraphs: 76, 77, 78, page15 see attached Respondent’s Submission L&E Court 05 Oct 2010).

They repeat this claim in the following paragraph (77) that no works beyond the removal of the trees has been sanctioned, or were presently proposed. They further claimed that to the extent that any works were envisaged to be undertaken beyond the removal of the trees, those works would be in consequence of the removal of the trees.

Paragraph 78 goes on to maintain that it is the tree removal that has necessitated further works in the future.

The future works proposed but not made open and clear in public arena were for the building of an under-Laman Street Library building and the extension of Laman Street into Civic Park to create a wide plaza. Normal Council transparency would require that such proposals affecting public land need to be exhibited to the public for consideration as provided for in the Local Government Act.

Far from being transparent, Council has insisted that these fourteen trees are a traffic hazard and must be removed as a matter of public safety.

The Council’s Exaggerated Risk Assessment requires independent review

Why are Councillors reluctant to review the risk analysis for the fig trees when they know their analysis has been fairly challenged as being exaggerated and unscientific? They have been offered help or funding for an independent assessment by the Insurance Coy, a citizen donor and by the Premier of NSW but certain Councillors have frustrated Council by resorting to technicalities of meeting procedure to evade this logical resolution. In this way they have caused a deep rift to develop between the community and council and caused much inconvenience and extraordinary costs by their intransigence.

The Newcastle’s fig fiasco is no doubt the result of a mixture of public misinformation, inappropriate procedure and Councillor Intransigence. We request that the Local Government division of the Premiers Department intervene as a matter of urgency to defuse the confrontation and institute a clear open process for the planning of the Newcastle Civic Precinct.

Yours sincerely
Doug Lithgow
President Parks and Playgrounds Movement

Copy to:
The Premier of NSW the Hon Barry O’Farrell MP
General Manager & Lord Mayor Newcastle City Council
Mr Tim Owens MP Member for Newcastle

Letter No. 5
27 January 2012
Mr Phil Pearce

Phil Pearce
General Manager
Newcastle City Council
27 January 2012

Urgent and Confidential

I note a full page letter from you to the Community in the Newcastle Herald 25/1/2012.

The Artists impression in your letter purports to illustrate what Laman Street will look like in 15 years. An ordinary person looking at the illustration will see a paved plaza that has been created level with the existing ground floor of the Library. In this plaza can be seen trees, motorcars, pedestrians, a skateboard rider and a bicycle with the plaza extending into Civic Park.

It clearly illustrates a development that widens Laman Street into Civic Park and this is not provided for in the Civic Park Plan of Management.

It is a development that will require massive engineering work, new levels and new pavements and the expenditure of Council funds. The exhib ited design framework even shows a under Laman St Library building.

I raised this matter of development at a meeting on the 29th of June 2011with the Acting General Manager, Rob Noble, Jill Gaynor - Manager Strategic Planning Services, Ian Rhodes - Community Planning Coordinator and Deborah Alterator - Manager Place Management Services. Ms Jill Gaynor when questioned by Mr Noble assured Mr Noble that there was no development proposed.

I have since reviewed the evidence placed before the court by the Counc il in the case P&PM V Newcastle Council which raises further matters of untruthfulness. There is also the perceived immorality of Council using the Roads Act to escape the duty of formally exhibiting the proposed development.

These problems should be corrected at your administration level or they will have to be ultimately dealt with by the Department Local Government.

I would like to discuss these matters with you as a matter of urgency.

Yours sincerely
Doug Lithgow

TO ALL WHO HAVE AN INTEREST IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN?

A statement from Doug Lithgow President of the Parks and Playgrounds Movement.

In the early hours of the morning (Tues 31 Jan 2012) a large contingent of NSW Police were unleashed on the embattled citizens of Newcastle and their most significant landscape feature in the cultural heart of the city. (14 healthy innocent fig trees that have been quietly providing the Cultural Precinct in Laman Street with shade shelter and beauty for 50 years)

Newcastle people who love their city and appreciate the fine cathedral arch of trees in front of their Cultural Centre are perplexed that their new General; Manager and local Member of Parliament have called in a small army of police to subjugate the locals and ensure that they were not going to be given a lawful and formal chance to have say in the planning of their cultural precinct.

We had hoped that the Premier of NSW and the Minister for Local Government would have intervened long ago to bring good governance to the Council of the City of Newcastle rather than take it out on our notable trees and their noble defenders today.

Sadly for our City there are no minds being ennobled in this pointless and unnecessary exercise of brute force.

The Parks and Playgrounds Movement had asked the Newcastle Council to decide on a plan for the Cultural precinct as long ago as Aug/Sept 2010 and place their plan on public exhibition to allow public scrutiny. At this date Feb. 2012 the Council still hasn’t formally decided on a plan or placed it on exhibition for public examination. The people of NSW have a perfect right to have a say when a community land plan of management is affected but not in Newcastle!

Doug Lithgow
President of the Parks and Playgrounds Movement
For further Comment Ring 041922 6897 or 49431781

Points of Contention in the Fig Debate

Dear Colleagues,

Re the contribution to the Fig Debate from Council’s web site:
http://www.newcastle.nsw.gov.au/about_newcastle/news_and_events/media_releases/media_releases/fig_forum_light_on_facts/_nocache

These issues are in contention from the Council’s point of view and can be answered formally.

The issues will not go away (trees or no trees) and the Council should show “Reasonable Cause” for their resolution to remove the trees under section 88 of the Roads Act 1993. (The question is: 'If a Councillor has' can mean 'If a Councillor thinks he has'. I believe that Council cannot now have a reasonable cause for the opinion that the trees are a hazard to traffic.

In the case Parks and Playgrounds Movement Vs Newcastle Council September 2010 it was presumed that General Manager Lindy Hyam had the opinion that the trees were a hazard to traffic.
However this week’s Forum demolished the basis for such an opinion to be held by the Council. Elected Councillors should show “reasonable cause” for their action in forming the opinion that the trees are a Hazard to traffic.

I have listed the issues in dot points below:

If you wish to understand the proposal for the widened Laman Street Plaza,  Called Anzac Place in Council’s submission to the Commonwealth Commission, it is attached below. The proposal was exhibited euphemistically as a Design Framework and has Council’s Logo on the front page. It claims to be from the two day workshop in March 2010 but was not.

Council states on its web: Last night’s fig fact forum included a number of statements that were false. These are addressed below. (I have paraphrased the 14 points. Full text on Council’s web site)

§         Council is a public body proud of its openness and transparency- it has conducted public forums, voice etc and provided information on Council Website.
§         Offensive to claim Council withheld Radar reports- request processed under Government Information (public access) Act.
§         Council has obtained 4 independent Arborist Assessments.
§         Council’s insurer will not cover risk beyond 31st Jan 2012.
§         Irresponsible statements that trees safe- 35 out of 135 removed failed and removed from the inner city.
§         Anzac Plaza is not reason for removing figs it is an idea sent to Commission –not funds application.
§         No tree reports have anything to do with Anzac Plaza.
§         Not the first time the Roads Act has been used to remove hazards - decision upheld by Court.
§         Behaviour of SOF people has required the Police.
§         A detailed response to Prof Stewart is on the Council Web.
§         SOF refers to arborist reports that contradict Council’s advice- they are not legally accountable Council’s advice based on knowledge of the site.
§         No ulterior motives and Council will replant 4 metre high trees in vaults to prevent root problems.
§         Council acknowledges that Trees have become contentious but acts for whole community.
§         Council desires to concentrate on Core Duties.

Cheers to all,
Doug Lithgow

Who is responsible for Council expenditure?

The Letter below was published by the Newcastle Herald 9th December. It should be made clear to everyone that Local Government Councillors can delegate some functions to their administration but they cannot delegate responsibility and they are barred especially from delegating financial responsibility. They cannot escape their legal responsibility although many do try to hide their responsibility by loudly claiming it is someone else’s fault. See Section 377 of the Local Government Act for matters that Council cannot delegate. DL.

Doug Lithgow


Wednesday, 7 December 2011


Letters Editor
The Herald
Bolton Street
NEWCASTLE 2300

Dear Sir

Who is responsible for Council expenditure?

Letters (Newcastle Herald 7/12 The other belligerents ) suggests that the community is responsible for expenditures of the Newcastle Council. This is wrong.

The Local Government Act 1993 makes it mandatory that only Councillors have the power to vote for expenditure of moneys or set Council Rates. It is only Councillors that can be responsible and must be held responsible.

For instance, certain councillors consistently vote that the trees in Laman Street be felled knowing full well that the risk analysis has been challenged as being exaggerated and should be reviewed. Furthermore councillors know that the cost of removing the trees is in excess of one million dollars plus the further costs of unpublished and un-costed proposals for refurbishing the street.

Some councillors have clearly not acted responsibly.

Doug Lithgow
See Section 377 of the Local Government Act for matters that Council cannot delegate.


BACKGROUND

Some background to the Laman Street Trees Issue.

These documents provide information to show how Newcastle got into the 'Fig Fiasco'.

The aim now should be to close Laman Street, have it Classified 'Community Land' and save the trees within a Civic Park Plan of Management. But by the article in the Newcastle Herald it appears that Labor has pulled out of the Laman Street Issue.

Dear Colleagues,

Some points from history of council strategy to destroy the old trees at Civic.

The removal of older trees from the City began with General Manager Janet Dore. It was her policy and she employed a specialist to carry it out.

His name was Phil Hewett (just retired and kept on as a consultant I believe). The only thing that put a brake on the destructive tendencies was the Community Land provisions of the Local Government Act especially the Civic PoM that included Laman Street (Council owned Land) Civic Park Christie place and Church Walk Park as a unit. (Adopted by Council April 2000)

Janet’s policy is set out in general terms in her article in the Herald 26th Jul 2002. (See below)

The Parks and Playgrounds Movement have been involved in promoting conservation and protection of parks and landscape going back to the 1930’s.

Parks and Playgrounds voiced our objection to the Civic Framework Exhibition that included the Laman Street Plaza plan and the Under Laman Street Library building proposals that immediately threatened destruction of the Laman Street Figs and initiated the current crisis. It is all in the Design Framework documents the Council exhibited at the start of the year.

Great efforts have been made but the Newcastle Council remains intransigent and new directions are needed.

The last Council had all the opportunities to set clear goals to guide the next Council. It had 4 Greens and a strong ALP group.

When Newcastle got a New Council and a new Gen Manager, most Councillors were new and had never been to a Council Meeting. The new General Manager had been planted in the job also with no experience in Local Government. Somewhere there is the backing of the ALP right wing in the last days of a corrupt Government. The right wing undermined and felled Bryce Gaudry and planted Jodie also with no experience.

With all new directors in the Council and the right wing hatchet men in control what can happen?

The Truth, Transparency and fiscal intelligence have been the first casualties in this bazaar political melee.

I look forward to a shake up and I hope SOF continues to claim the high Ground. Out of his will come a few decent Councillors?

Cheers
Doug.


If you want a stating point re: removal of old trees including the Laman St Figs see the article below which was published in the Herald. It involves the newly appointed Arborist Mr Hewett.

It is nicely written but cannot disguise the intent to get rid of the veteran trees. Janet wrote the article after we challenged the Council for cutting down the first Fig in Civic Park. The Fig tree root in the electric cable trench that features on Council’s web site is from that first tree felled on the corner of Auckland and King Street. No doubt Council could claim to be using the Roads Act. However the real reason for that removal was for a new widened cement foot path around Civic Park which was part of the 2000 POM).

Old trees pay for past malpractice - Janet Dore  Newcastle Herald  Published: 26-Jul-2002


Newcastle City Council now faces difficult decisions about the management of old trees in a changing urban environment

While the city plans for future urban forests, Janet Dore explains why old plantings and old practices continue to cause problems.



As a city that prides itself on policies based on sustainability, heritage and culture, the removal of Civic Park's ageing fig was a difficult and sad task.



Newcastle City Council planted 4500 trees last year.



We are committed to providing urban forests that beautify our city, promote sustainability and protect public spaces for future generations.



Those thousands of trees planted last year will one day shade our grandchildren and their children.



Removing the fig in Civic Park has raised issues that as a community we all need to consider. Our city has changed and will continue to grow around trees planted many years ago.



So how should we manage veteran trees in an urban environment that has changed dramatically over their lifetime?



Newcastle has many hundreds of large mature fig trees on public and private land, most of which were planted between 60 and 80 years ago.



If we reflect on past tree maintenance practices, we will discover that most are no longer in vogue today.



For instance, it was common to cut the tops off trees, almost as if they were rose bushes, and then to continue lopping as a routine practice. At the time, lopping seemed to solve the problems of growing large trees in confined spaces.



What we have found today is that lopping exposes the inner wood of trees to the elements and the bigger the exposed area of wood, the greater the risk that decay will severely weaken the tree at maturity.



At the same time, branches that grow to replace lopped branches are poorly attached and prone to falling.



It was also common in the past to install infrastructure and other civil works by open trench excavation, regardless of the presence of tree roots.

Technology today allows us to bore underneath tree roots and to repair infrastructure such as cables and pipes without open trenching.



However, since trees may take many years to decay, past work damaging the tree is often forgotten.

It has been suggested that we look to the issue of figs in Hyde Park, Sydney, and adopt a similar approach. However, this is comparing apples to pears.



The figs in Hyde Park have enormous space for root stability and have grown on a sandstone soil base. Their stabilising roots have found support in rock sandstone fissures.



By comparison, the figs in Newcastle have to contend with soils built of industrial waste with considerably less space to develop stable root systems.



This is not an issue unique to Newcastle. The management of veteran trees has become problematic for communities in Sydney and Melbourne and internationally. For this reason, a focus on urban tree management has become critical for future sustainability.



Unfortunately, urban living puts stress on our trees. A tree that may live many hundreds of years in natural conditions can reach its aged life after a mere 80 years in urban conditions.

The tree removed from Civic Park last weekend illustrates the problems we have in dealing with our past practices.



So, how should we be treating our trees in the future?



Newcastle City Council has introduced a pro-active approach to selection, maintenance and replacement of our urban trees.



We have surveyed 53,000 street trees and recorded their statistics on a database. We are currently auditing these trees, identifying their maintenance needs and setting an inspection regime for each tree.



We are also investigating the benefits of looking at the trees of Newcastle as an urban forest. An urban forest is simply the total of trees and large shrubs that grow on public and private land in any urban area.



Urban forests contribute significantly to quality of life for urban residents, by capturing stormwater, shading bitumen and buildings, reducing the risk of skin cancer and absorbing fine pollution particles that affect asthmatics.



Newcastle City Council is presently working with the Local Government Association to review software for calculating the benefits of urban forests. We are also developing a more integrated approach to design of new infrastructure so that civil works and trees do not come into conflict in the future.



Newcastle City Council will continue to plant trees in the city and manage these responsibly. Our tree selections have been made with due regard for the future and we do not anticipate the next generation of Novocastrians will have to experience the unexpected and heartbreaking loss of its veteran trees.

Janet Dore is general manager of Newcastle City Council.

Open Letter to the Honorable Barry O'Farrell MP

Open Letter to the Honorable Barry O' Farrell MP,
Premier of NSW

Dear Premier

Plan of Management identified Trees: Civic Cultural Precinct - Newcastle

The State must intervene at Civic Newcastle because of the Council's wrong conduct in inappropriately using Sec.88 of the Roads Act to clear Laman Street for widening into Civic Park to progress an unortherised development.

Every park in Newcastle is governed by a Plan of Management (PoM) indeed every public park in NSW has a PoM. This is a statutory requirement under the Local Government Act 1993. Crown Reserves in Newcastle like King Edward Headland Reserve have a PoM under the requirements of the Crown Lands Act.

Newcastle Council is morally and legally bound to respect the official plans of management and only approve complying developments. If a Council wishes to carry out other developments they must lawfully amend the PoM.

This machinery is there to bring a transparent and open approach to the management of public lands and parks and to give citizens a chance to make formal input with an independent public hearing.

The PoM for the Civic Cultural Precinct identified the Fig Trees in Laman street as a principal landscape feature and to be only subjected to minor pruning to maintain the vista.

By invoking the Roads Act to circumvent the provisions of the PoM and remove these significant trees is wrong conduct as there are no road works being done and there is no credible traffic hazard.

Newcastle Council should be caring for the trees and carrying out minor pruning as required by the Plan of Management.

Newcastle needs help to provide an independent risk assessment of the trees because the Council's risk reports are extravagantly exaggerated to justify a basis for invoking the Roads Act S88.

The people of Newcastle are outraged and need honest help.

Yours Sincerely

Doug Lithgow Freeman of the City of Newcastle
President Parks and Playgrounds Movement Inc.

Doug Lithgow at the Laman St Figs Protest 07 October 2011

OPEN LETTER TO NEWCASTLE COUNCILLOR BOB COOK

Councillor Bob Cook

Newcastle City Council

16/09/2011

Dear Bob,

Open Letter in the public interest to Councillor Bob Cook

You have placed yourself in the position of chief advocate for the destruction of the Laman Street Landscape and Architect and engineer of a scheme to level Laman Street. It would be much better if you were to honour and respect your elected role as an unbiased Councillor prepared to impartially review the evidence the citizens of Newcastle wish to place before you. You so openly show your bias even to the extent of arguing against independent assessment to protect certain staff and other experts from 'potential reputational damage'.

I note in the press you seem to be considering litigation. The Law is a blunt instrument Bob, as we found out last year. The court would not allow us to place before it, the professional evidence regarding the exaggerated risk reports Council was using. No matters of merit were allowed to be argued. Council won their case by arguing that the S88 of the Roads Act was a stand alone law and the General Manager by using S88 in this instance was not required to consider the provisions of any other Act. She only had to form the opinion that the trees were a Hazard to traffic in Laman St..

The situation is entirely different now and S88 of the Roads Act is an inappropriate instrument to use in designing a landscape future for Civic Park and Laman Street. You can't realistically claim a hazard to traffic now.

The 3 trees cut down after the Pasha Bulker Storm had not been blown over as claimed and the 14 trees currently being considered have not fallen over in the last twelve months.

Too many citizens now know that Council cannot in good faith rely on the earlier unscientific and exaggerated risk claims of the past and must obtain an independent assessment.

I do also wish to remind you that you, no doubt unwittingly, caused  confusion in the first instance by bundling risk assessment with your advocacy of your own development proposal for the levelling of Laman Street and extending it into Civic Park.

With development proposals there is a simple rule that should be followed: Developments require an approved Development Application and Assessment. Council's own Developments of course require an independent assessment. Furthermore if you wish to develop Community Land you are required to ensure that your development complies with the official Plan of Management and if it doesn't you must seek to change the Plan of Management in a lawful way.

The Parks and Playgrounds Movement is a pubic interest body and we would suggest that you take a step back from this issue and allow independent assessment. You are going to have to ultimately submit your Development Proposal if it is brought the Council to public scrutiny and independent assessment.

Yours sincerely

Doug Lithgow President Parks and Playgrounds Movement

FOUR SIMPLE QUESTIONS

From Doug Lithgow to Newcastle City Councillors and News Editors

You are no doubt aware that Newcastle has hot summer days and that the people of Newcastle appreciate the shade and beauty of the cathedral arch of the Laman Street Trees.

To understand the Laman Street issue

You must first ask yourself:

1. Do you want to develop Laman Street?

2. Do you have an idea of the way you would like it developed?

3. Do you need to remove trees to develop the area in the way you wish?

4. Does the development you propose require the alteration of Council’s Plan of Management: Civic Precinct “Heritage Places Strategic Plan published by Council 1/6/2000?

Were you able to answer ‘yes’ to any of the four questions?

If you were able to answer ‘Yes’ to any of the questions then a Development Application (DA) and an Assessment of your proposal is required by law.

Why is Council able to disregard the law?

Only by pretending that there is no development proposed and by claiming that the trees are a hazard to traffic and have to be summarily removed.

If Council told the people of Newcastle officially about a specific development that was adopted they would have to prepare a Development Application and have a transparent assessment. Council would then not be able to use s.88 of Roads Act to escape lawful Public Exhibition and Assessment.

Public probity demands that an independent assessment of the risk factors is needed to assess the unscientific inflated risk reports relied on by Council. Any development proposed will offcourse require a lawful DA.

All Councillors should be demanding a transparent independent reassessment of the Hazzard or risk?

From Doug Lithgow President Parks and Playgrounds Movement Inc.
Phone 49431781 Mobile 041922 6897

Where is the DA for Laman Street?

Dear Colleagues,

I would like to request our supporting Councillors to move in council as a matter of urgency that a Development Application be prepared for the proposed redevelopment of Laman Street which may involve the removal of the trees and the planting of new trees in different locations together with ancillary works new pavements and new grades? It is important that the new developments proposed do not affect the Civic Park Community Land or the curtilage of the famous Civic Park Fountain designed by Margel Hinder. With all the Council spam over the past 18 months there has never been a detailed plan or DA that could be professionally assessed. Just vague proposals and lies about trees falling over in Laman Street and exaggerated danger claims.

This would mean that a proper plan showing what is actually proposed would have to be made and open for public display. The 'Cook' Plan recently published illustrated massive reshaping of the streetscape to make a flat surface at the floor level of the Cultural Centre and widening into the Civic Park which would have a major effect on the Fountain and its curtilage and the Memorial Grove.

Proper plans showing finished levels pavement treatment and planting positions for new trees are essential. Any effect on Community Land would automatically trigger the Community Land provisions of the Local Government act: which incidentally Council has been trying to get around with the unreal danger argument and undocumented proposals since day one. 

Cheers,

Doug Lithgow

Draft Laman Street Civic Precinct Design Framework. Objection

Mr Rob Noble General Manager
Newcastle Council PO Box 489 Newcastle 2300

Attention Mr Ian Rhodes.

Dear Mr Rodes,

Draft Laman Street Civic Precinct Design Framework. Objection

The movement is pleased that Council has exhibited the Draft Design Framework that Council had developed last year. As you know we believed that the Draft Framework should have been exhibited before precipitous action was taken to remove the Laman Street group of trees.

These trees are much loved by the people of Newcastle and are the principal landscape feature in the Civic Precinct.  Council has on a number of occasions been preparing proposals for the Civic Precinct (Cultural Precinct) and all of the proposals have identified the importance of the landscape structure the Ficus trees provide. The Draft Laman Street Civic Design Framework is the first proposal that has focused on the removal of this important landscape feature. The argument of Risk Management has been poorly assessed and there has emerged another reason subsequent to the recent costly and unnecessary litigation in the Land and Environment Court.

Your attention is drawn to the ‘Internal Memo’ sent to all Councillors from the Executive Leadership Team 23 Sep 2010 signed by Judy Jaeger with the Subject Title ‘Commemorating the Anzac Centenary’.

It is rather disconcerting for a community group that has positively worked in the public interest for this city since 1952 to feel that the Civic Charrette was a charade and that Council had the proposals already formed which were not stated openly. As a member of the Charrette I was at the time concerned that we were going over the ground that many councils had previously identified. However there was one vaguely expressed proposal that really alarmed me concerning the building of an underground entrance into the Library.

It was put by the Facilitator and glossed over Judy Jaeger. I rejected the idea outright at the Charrette because even though I was not privy to the proposal that the Leadership Team was obviously preparing, I could see all the aesthetic and engineering imponderables hidden in the idea. Not to mention the problems with the Civic Park Fountain, the removal of the Memorial Grove and cutting the established Civic Axis and the destruction of the principal landscape feature the Laman Street Trees.

Of course the Parks and Playgrounds Movement want to see a high standard of Landscape and a unified scheme for the precinct. Our actions since 1968 when we prepared the first concept for the Civic Area are clear public evidence of our bona-fides. We have positively commented on every proposal for the area that Council has brought to the public.

The Parks and Playgrounds Movement is conscious that the elected Councillors are the current trustees of Civic Park for the general public and we are pleased to submit the document Civic Park – Civic Precinct Design Framework 24/2/2011 as a contribution to help advise their guardianship. We would be pleased to make further submissions as required.


Yours sincerely,


Doug Lithgow
Parks and Playgrounds Movement Inc.

Laman Street Trees and the Civic and Cultural Precinct Newcastle.

Letters Editor
Newcastle Herald
Bolton Street
NEWCASTLE

Dear Sir,

Laman Street Trees and the Civic and Cultural Precinct Newcastle.

Parks and Playgrounds Movement were recently involved in litigation against the Newcastle City Council. Our action was taken in the public interest because it was manifestly unreasonable for Council to remove the Laman Street landscape without planning consent. Justice Biscoe however in his 36 page Judgment found that Council has power to remove the trees without planning consent. The case was a Judicial Review of Council’s decisions and did not consider the merit or otherwise of the removal.

The importance of the trees was identified at a design workshop earlier this year but a detailed plan for public exhibition was never prepared.  A more experienced Council may have proceed in this instance with the planning of the precinct rather than remove the iconic trees before a plan acceptable to the community could be adopted.

It is now clear that there is no officially acceptable plan and that the risk factor for the trees was distorted by the belief that certain trees were “wind thrown” in the 2007 storm which was not the case.

Doug Lithgow

Laman Street Civic Precinct Design Framework

Parks and Playgrounds Movement calls upon Newcastle City Council to officially exhibit the Draft ‘Laman Street and Civic Park Precinct Design Framework’ and resolve the design framework before contracts are entered into for implementation of the Laman Street section.

TO DOWNLOAD THE REPORTS CLICK HERE:
http://www.newcastle.nsw.gov.au/news__and__events/laman_street_-_civic_precint

Please see the information provided below which sets out the history of Council’s action on the Precinct and explains the importance of resolving this design matter so that the design can be transparently determined and professionally implemented.

This is a very important matter in the heart of Newcastle and must be implemented in an open and transparent way and not by the clandestine techniques being used currently by the Newcastle Council which denies the people of Newcastle a voice in the determination of the design process.

The Civic Precinct is another project started by the Parks and Playgrounds Movement so many years ago and we have had to watch Councils over the years not really know what was important in the project and now move in a ham-fisted way to widen Laman Street into the Civic Park and cut the trees down before finalising a workable design acceptable to the community.

We are adamant that the design be properly and professionally determined implemented in a transparent way now.

We have had to urgently seek a remedy in the Land and Environment Court to prevent the Council misusing the Roads Act to widen Laman Street into the Civic Park and cut down trees.

I would appreciate your help in reading the statement attached and making representations to your member of Parliament and the Minister for Local Government and the Minister for the Hunter and the Minister for Planning and shadow Ministers too.

This is a very urgent matter.

Please Help.

If you would like to kindly make a donation to help defray court cost we would be very appreciative.

Thanks

Yours Sincerely
Doug Lithgow.


Laman Street Civic Precinct Design Framework

Parks and Playgrounds Movement calls upon Newcastle City Council to officially Exhibit the Draft ‘Laman Street and Civic Park Precinct Design Framework’ and resolve the design framework before contracts are entered into for implementation of the Laman Street section.

Parks and Playgrounds Movement have a long term interest in the Civic Precinct. We first placed a concept for the Civic Precinct before the Newcastle City Council which was received at the Works Committee Meeting of the 16/4/1968. Council did not have a professional Town Planner at that time and the concept languished. We had to lobby over many years to get Council to appoint a Planner. However Council began acquiring property around Civic Park and implemented projects such as the Administration Centre and Wheeler Place Plaza.

In the past decade and a half we have seen Council involved in proposals for the precinct:

1. the Allen Jack and Cottier Civic Design 1995,
2. Council’s Plan of Management for Civic Park and Laman Street 2000,
3. The Government Architect Newcastle Civic Cultural Centre Master Plan 2003.
4. The Civic Precincts Park Plan of Management Review and Public Domain Plan 2005,

The Civic Park Plan of Management (Point 2. above) was the only plan officially exhibited and formally adopted. (A requirement under the Community Land provisions LG Act 1993)
The professional development of the latest Precinct Design Framework and its implementation following official exhibition has been hijacked by the Council’s Asset Management Group with its exaggerated tree risk analysis and what appears to be the General Manager’s ambulatory powers under delegation to remove trees and widen the Laman Street into Civic Park.

This has prevented the proper resolution of the Precinct Design Framework in a transparent way with public scrutiny and ownership of the ultimate overall scheme and is to be deplored. Council’s own report of the 18th May 2010 recommended public exhibition of the Precinct Design Framework. This transparent process is absolutely essential in order for the Design Framework to be professionally resolved and transparently adopted for implementation.

The public may remember the way the Newcastle Council closed the unique Fernleigh Tunnel in 1996 on exaggerated risk grounds. This delayed the implementation of the Fernleigh Track for many years. The Track with its distinctive historic tunnel is now open and well used and is a much appreciated part of Newcastle’s public infrastructure.

Parks and Playgrounds Movement calls for the Public Exhibition of the Draft Design Framework for the Civic Park Precinct and its transparent resolution.

Does Civic Park Really Need Fixing?

Dear Colleagues and citizens of the planet,

Please have a look at this Youtube clip:.

http://il.youtube.com/watch?v=0ahYGhHlP3w

This short Video puts the finger on the Newcastle pulse and is clearly critical of the negative myopia of the Newcastle Councillor’s who on the 17th August 2010 decided:

“ The Hills fig trees in Laman Street Newcastle between Darby Street and Dawson Street be removed as soon as possible and replaced with a central line of Hills Figs as soon as suitable trees can be provided"

Such an action would put our Cultural Precinct back in the fifties.

It will take thirty years for the replacement trees to reach a mature form and a row of trees in not the cathedral quality we enjoy in Laman Street now.

Hardly the action of mature men and women with the city at heart.

Look about you see and acknowledge what is good and work to protect it for all to enjoy.

Doug Lithgow

Other videos:


Save the Figs: The 8 Stupid Reasons to Cut Down Nice Trees">Save the Figs: The 8 Stupid Reasons to Cut Down Nice Trees
http://il.youtube.com/watch?v=uuDGEQn4wrw

The Perilous Figs of Laman St
http://il.youtube.com/watch?v=Wtlqyd3cojY

"HONK to save Laman Street Figs" , Newcastle.
http://il.youtube.com/watch?v=kD6Paljl0sU