This email is going to the people who made submissions to Hunters Hill Council in support of the reinstatement of a setback (of 4m) for GSV along Flagstaff Street, with deep soil plantings – assisted by our online tool. Thank you for having taken the time to do so.
We attach the paper prepared by Council Staff, for Councillors to consider at tomorrow (Monday) night’s meeting. We are disappointed with the recommendation, and hope that Councillors will support a numerical control for the setback in the DCP.
We were also disappointed to see that one submission was printed but the remaining 31 submissions were only tallied, and the people who made the effort to send a submission were not credited for having done so. All but 1 of us is unrecognised, other than knowing we are part of the 32 submissions of this type.
Also attached is a letter which was submitted to Council by the developer, with which we strongly disagree.
Tomorrow night’s meeting will be interesting. As well as this setback issue, Councillor Gary Bird has submitted a Motion that an Interim Heritage Order be placed on the cottage at 10 Cowell Street, and two other motions that go to accountability, and transparency.
If you have time to come to the meeting tomorrow night, I’m sure Councillor Bird will appreciate your support.
– team at Gladesville Community Group
– From the team at Gladesville Community Group
Good morning everyone,
Please see below a link to the results and summary of our survey into the community’s satisfaction with the Councils’ management of Gladesville. 140 responses have been accepted.
Thank you to everyone who participated.
83% of respondents rated the Council’s performance in managing Gladesville as being either “poor” or “below expectations”, dragged down largely by performance in the management of Planning and Development, with 88% of respondents rating their Council’s performance in that area as being either “poor” or “below expectations” (Q3).
89% of respondents believe Gladesville does not benefit from being managed by 2 separate Councils (Q4).
90% of respondents believe there is inadequate coordination between Ryde and Hunters Hill Councils in the management of Gladesville (Q5).
Although 51% of respondents were aware of Fit for the Future, 92% believe there has been inadequate public consultation from their Council (Q6 and Q7).
83% of respondents are against (“against” or “strongly against”) a model of managing Gladesville in the current arrangement. 71% of respondents are in favour (“in favour” or “strongly in favour”) of Fit for the Future ‘in principle’ (Q8)
Respondents ranged in their connection to Gladesville (Q1), the Council with which they most identify (Q2) and ages (Q9).
General Comments and Feedback (Q10) were received and are being filtered to remove a number of accusations and comments which are likely to cause offence or harm to individuals. Although this survey was intended to give members of the community of Gladesville a voice, we must ensure that we are fair to people’s reputations. These comments will be provided when we can do so.