You need to be signed in to add your comment.

What current and future issues with community assets are you aware of?

by Willoughby Admin, almost 7 years ago

Council assesses the quality of, and need for, all community assets, and is building up information about a number of different factors. The sorts of things we consider are the physical condition of assets, whether we have the rights kinds of assets in the right places, whether their capacity is enough to meet demand and whether they comply with safety and accessibility standards. You may have experience with some of these factors from your own use of community assets. 

Keeping these factors in mind, what current and future issues do you believe Council faces  with regards to community assets?

This consultation has concluded. If you wish to ask a question or make a submission on the Special Rate Variation please visit the Special Rate Variation Consultation page which you can find on the main page of Have Your Say Willoughby.

  • Derek almost 7 years ago
    This a nebulous and abstract question. What sort of responses are you expecting? Don't you have measures of demand for each "asset" under your control? This seems like gratuitous consultation :-)
  • joeg over 6 years ago
    Playgrounds. If we get in our car and drive into any neighbouring municipality it seems there are better quality / more interesting / better maintained playgrounds than we can find around most of Willoughby.It would be lovely to have something a little more unusual, possibly near the Chatswood Public School / Chatswood High School area where many families with children are concentrated. Maybe a run-through two-level adventure maze (wooden structures) or some such ie something to provide a little variety from the usual swings/slide/ropes arrangements that Willoughby repeatedly use. There are some parks eg in Melbourne in particular that attract families from all over the district.
  • Monique over 6 years ago
    People / Human resources / Community. I find, being a young (36) person living in the higher density part of Artarmon that there is a sever lack of community and hence a lack of pride or respect for the area. People treat the area as a dumping ground. I think it's a combination of several things. 1) High property prices in the North Shore aren't conducive for younger people to invest in where they live - they either live with their parents and then leave, or they rent and don't take any responsibility for the communal aspects of the spaces; 2) The North Shore in by nature a Liberal area and people (particularly my age) generally would rather pay someone else / expect the government/council/businesses to do everything for them than get involved and commit and contribute to making it better themselves; There are other factors as well, but they're probably the big two. I spend a lot of time volunteering with a community organisation and on the lower North Shore (Willoughby, Lane Cove, North Sydney, Ku-ring-gai), very much UNLIKE the orgnaisation's counterparts in Bondi, Randwick, Northern Beaches, Ryde, and Hornsby, people want everything provided for them without actually contributing back / participating. There's just no community in this area.
  • Nick over 6 years ago
    Car parking - I am bewildered at the council repeatedly selling off council owned public car parking lots around Chatswood and not requiring as a condition attached to the development of that space that the deveolper provide at least as many public car parking spaces as were previoulsy on the lot. Parking in Chatswood has become increasingly difficult and part of the reason is that the council keeps selling off car parking lots. Two recent examples are the Archer St/ Albert Ave site and the Albert Ave/Thomas St site. If Chatswood is to remain a place to shop and meet friends, people need to be able to park otherwise they will go elsewhere.
  • Unit Owner about 6 years ago
    Willoughby council should be offering extended free car parking for residents living inside the LGA and charge no less than $8 an hour for outsiders. This is what beach side councils getaway with so let's do the same. Yes I hear some shop keepers whining already but they will still pay or locals will buy more. In terms of future issues, traffic and lack of recreation facilities is an issue as well as harbourside mansions paying too low rates.I am a strong believer in user pays. Let's see some cutting of non essential services and have users pay for them. Charge dog owners entry fees for parks.
    • Melrose about 6 years ago
      You obviously have a problem with dog owners. Can we charge parents with children who ride scooters at speed towards people walking in parks a fee for them to use the park? Locals will not spend more in their area just because they can park their car and areas such as Chatswood and Artarmon create business from people in surrounding areas such as Ku-Ring-Gai and North Sydney. Also, how do you know what the rates are in 'harbourside mansions'? There are very few of them in Willoughby.
      • Unit Owner about 6 years ago
        Dear Melrose, Northbridge, Castlecrag, Middle Cove, Castle Cove... all harbourside suburbs with properties valued in excess of $4-5m and plenty of them. However their rates were reduced last June when willoughby council applied to IPART to raise the minimum rates 20% but reduced the upper end rates proportionately so that they do not breach the cap on rates income. Willoughby Council has been deceptive and deceitful in charging their rates. Their is expected to be an extra 2000 units being charged minimum rates thus they will receive more. Their argument is that they provide a lot of services to unit occupiers. Units are a more efficient use of land. and it is truly disgraceful that IPART let this through. Compare your rate notice in 2012 and 2011 to 2013 and 2014. If you occupy a house, congrats a discount, a unit or strata on minimum rates =+20%. In regards to the dog owner issue, I have an issue with people not cleaning up after themselves in public spaces whether it be users of sportsgrounds or dog owners. Such selfish disrespect is a mirror on the modern me me me society. It is truly disgraceful and unfortunately a minority of a certain interest group tars the whole group therefore one has to call for action and ensure socially acceptable behaviours are observed and if not, then enforced upon offenders. It should be user pay, just like I pay to use toll roads o the bridge, those that use facilities pay for it not those that have no interest or need for such services or facilities. As for those choosing to own a dog, well you pay for the privilege and don't burden the broader society with your lifestyle choice. If the dog is essential in the case of seeing eye dogs or guide dogs, they get an exemption.