At the Council meeting held Monday December 7, the decision to proceed with going to tender (next week) for the construction of additional parking infrastructure including the road re-alignment, new walkway was approved.

What was also discussed:

a)      the budget for the project , and

b)      changes to parking arrangements in the Church Point area (including Eastview, Quarter Sessions, Baroona and above Botham’s Beach – old Bus Turning Circle).

Following discussions prior to the meeting and presentations during the meeting, aspects of the proposed recommendations in relation to point (a) and (b) above were amended in the final motion. These are set out below.

The position put to Council by the Offshore community representatives was support for proceeding with the plan, but importantly requested several key changes to the recommendation in the Council Report.  Without these changes, the project would not produce the intended outcomes. Our proposals:

Local Residents First:

  1. All spaces in the Church Point Parking Precinct (including Eastview, Quarter Sessions, Baroona and above Botham’s Beach – old Bus Turning Circle), except Disability Parking spaces, should be CP Permit Exempt
  2. All non-private parking spaces in the new infrastructure and 50% of the existing carpark must be “Church Point Permit Parking ONLY 6pm to 6am.

Keep Fees Fair:

  1. We need an agreement that “The purpose of the fees is ONLY as a contribution to financing the construction of the new infrastructure and ongoing maintenance of the parking structure only.”
  2. As soon as the project is nearing completion, we require a Review of Fees be scheduled and that we are party to this review.

Privately Leased Spaces:

  1. We need time to consult with our communities to determine the level of support for accepting higher fees for fewer privately leased spaces
  2. First preference for privately leased spaces should go to those who already park at Church Point
  3. Once the loan is paid off these spaces must return to the public pool

Without these proposals not only would the outcomes intended for the project fail, but  in a worst case scenario the changes proposed by Council, particularly in relation to parking arrangements in local streets, would result in a net loss of usable spaces.

We did receive significant support from Councillors and several changes were made to the proposed recommendations in the Council Report.  These changes are highlighted in Point 5 and 6 of the Council Decision.

IMPORTANT: These new proposals in the Council Decision do not yet deliver the key requirements that the Offshore Communities have requested.  At best they provide a pathway through which we still have an opportunity to make our case. We have more work to do!


  1. That Councilnote:

a)     The success of Council’s Local Infrastructure Renewal Scheme funding application for the project, in particular the specific requirements for commencement and completiondates.

b)     The findings and recommendations of the Church Point Parking Demand Management Review prepared by GTAConsultants.

c)     The legal advice in relation to the current Native TitleClaim.

d)     The Environmental Impact Assessment undertaken by Pittwater Council under Part 5 of theEP&AActbasedontheReviewofEnvironmentalFactors(REF)preparedbyArcadis.

e)     The conditions identified in the Environmental Impact Assessment that are to be incorporatedintothetenderdocumentationfortheproject.

f)      The revised cost estimate and the funding model proposed to finance the McCarrs Creek Road realignment, seawall and new car parkproject.

  1. That Council support the commencement of the McCarrs Creek Road realignment and new car park project based on the proposed financing model recommended in thisreport.
  2. That design and construct tenders be invited for the McCarrs Creek Road realignment, seawall and new car park project.
  3. That prior to completion of the project, Council call for Expressions of Interest for the annual licence of up to 60 individual spaces within the new car park based on the annual fees outlined in Section 4.6.3 of this report.

a).     That recommendation 1, 3, 4, 7, 12, 14 and 15 outlined in Attachment 6 of the report in relation to parking configuration, restrictions and signage be supported in principle and opened to the community for comment before returning to Council for review and referred back to the TrafficCommittee.

b).     That the review seek to optimise the Church Point parking permit through availability of overnight parking within the 2 main car parkareas.

  1. That a report be brought to Council in April 2016 in relation to the Schedule of Fees and Charges proposed for the draft delivery program and budget 2016/2017 and the potential for a memorandum of understanding in relation to Church Point car parking fees.
  2. That Council progress discussions with the Crown in relation to the land ownership arrangements related to the future realignment of McCarrs Creek Road and new car park.
  3. That Council commence the formal road opening/closure processes under Roads Act 1993 related to the future realigned McCarrs Creek Road and new car park.

(Cr Griffith / CrWhite)


Next Steps:

1)      We need everybody’s support and continued communication with Council and stakeholders to help make our proposals a reality.

2)      We need to think about, and make some contribution to, the details of the project, including:

a)      The changes around Cargo Wharf:

i)        Loss of some parking spaces

ii)       Potential loss of the storage space for Wharf piles

iii)     How the rise in the road will affect the entrance to Cargo Wharf

b)      The design of the new infrastructure:

i)        Maximizing natural light in the bottom floor

ii)       The night lighting on the top floor

iii)     Façade and appearance details

c)       Entrance to the Commuter Wharf:

i)        Maximizing safety regarding road crossing

ii)       Design details for short term parking and wet weather area at the new unloading bay

iii)     Ramp leading to Wharf with the need for the road to be 1M higher.

d)      Place making principals and detail design of the public domain for the precinct.

The above are just some of the issues and we will need the involvement of those with skills on this area to help ensure that the final outcomes of this project are optimal for all future users.

0 replies

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *