REPORT OF OUTCOMES

o o o

`

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL

MINUTES

23 NOVEMBER 2010

COUNCIL MINUTES 23 NOVEMBER 2010

129

CI044 MERRY GO ROUND AGENDA REFERENCE: 10/049233 AUTHOR: N Els, Manager Major Projects

S Jerram, Director Community Infrastructure

EXECUTIVE: S Jerram, Director Community infrastructure

DATE OF REPORT: 8 November 2010 FILE REFERENCE: LP/0116 APPLICANT / PROPONENT: City of Geraldton -Greenough ATTACHMENTS: Yes

SUMMARY: This report considers four separate options for the development of the Merry Go Round (MGR) and seeks Council resolution on a preferred option to take forward to community consultation. PROPONENT: The proponent is the City of Geraldton-Greenough. BACKGROUND: A petition of 353 people was received calling for a Special Electors Meeting to address the following matters:

UNDER SECTION 5.28 OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1995, DISCUSS THE FOLLOWING ISSUES: The “bolting” of the Merry Go Round by the Sea. The lack of Public consultation over the treatment of the iconic Merry Go Round. That the electors request that the City of Geraldton-Greenough to rectify the safety issues of the existing swing and return it to full mobility with appropriate signage and insurance disclaimers. That the electors request that the City of Geraldton-Greenough to form a Merry Go Round by the Sea preservation Committee and that committee be consulted (in conjunction with the community) prior to any future action to be taken on the Merry Go Round.

In accordance with the Provisions of Section 5 of the Local Government Act (1995) as amended a Special Electors Meeting was called and set for 11 October 2010. At the Special Meeting of Electors at which 36 members of public and 19 Councillors and staff attended the following Electors motions were passed: MOTION

MOVED MR G EATON, SECONDED MS H EXTEN 1. That the electors request that the City of Geraldton-Greenough to rectify the

safety issues of the existing swing and return it to full mobility with appropriate signage and insurance disclaimers; and


130

2. That the electors request that the City of Geraldton-Greenough to form a Merry Go Round by the Sea preservation Committee and that committee be consulted (in conjunction with the community) prior to any future action to be taken on the Merry Go Round.

CARRIED

MOTION

MOVED CR PETERSEN, SECONDED MS L MILLMAN That Council investigate the instigation of a Register of Iconic Structures within the City of Geraldton-Greenough, which would include both old and new icons.

CARRIED

In accordance with the provisions of the Act 5.33 (1): Decisions made at electors’ meetings

(1) All decisions made at an electors’ meeting are to be considered at the next

ordinary council meeting or, if that is not practicable –

a) at the first ordinary council meeting after that meeting; or

b) at a special meeting called for that purpose,

whichever happens first

The Current Merry Go Round is the fourth incarnation of a merry go round style of children's play equipment at or close to this location covering a period of 89 years.

The first Merry-Go-Rounds Erected 1921, Removed: date unknown. The first merry-go-rounds (ocean wave swings) in Geraldton were constructed and donated by local foundry operator Daniel Marsh. The Geraldton Guardian of 17 December 1921 reported that “At the meeting of the Municipal Council on Wednesday night, permission was granted to Mr D. Marsh to place the ‘ocean waves’ he is constructing either near the men’s bathing shed or alongside the Esplanade.” The second Merry-Go-Round Erected 1929, Removed 1929 Eight years later, on 26 January 1929, as part of “Beach attractions for kiddies” for Geraldton Week, an ocean wave swing was erected on the Esplanade. The Guardian & Express reported that four or five children were injured that day, one seriously, “when the centre pole of a merry go round snapped ...” The third Merry-Go-Round Erected c1929/30, Removed 1950s Interviews conducted by Ron Bertelsen in 1998 indicate that the swing was re-erected following the 1929 incident in a new position adjacent to the library (first railway station). A 1931 photograph of the foreshore shows a merry-go-round in a playground near the Esplanade jetty. Photographs


131

taken in 1935 and 1937 of groups sitting on the swing show the library in the background. Anecdotal evidence indicates the swing’s condition deteriorated over time. According to Stan Gratte it was removed in 1950s. The fourth Merry-Go-Round Erected 1988. Fixed to prevent movement 2010 Built by Max Cramer and erected within 20 feet of the original, the merry-go-round was unveiled by Mrs Mary Stow in a ceremony on 30 June 1988.

Following concerns expressed as to the safety of the merry go round due to its design and potential to cause severe injury to users, a safety audit was requested and undertaken by the Local Government Insurance Service. The recommendations of which were:

1. Modification to remove the pendulum swing action of the Merry Go

Round; or 2. Modification to create a static display.

On receiving this report it was deemed responsible for personal safety and to reduce Council's exposure to risk and liability, to fasten the MGR down pending further review and assessment. (This report is attached.)

During an audit of internal records to identify the MGR's history it was discovered that a further 3 safety audits were also undertaken between 1996 and 2006. Each of which indicated similar findings and recommendations as the 2010 audit. (Attached) The actions taken by the City triggered a strong emotional response from the community. This response was formalised in the form of a petition instigated by Lewis Freer which called for public consultation regarding the unbolting of the swing. A special meeting of Electors was called on October 11 2010 allowing the public to question the decision process behind the bolting down of the Merry Go Round and voice their opinions on the City’s future operational intentions of the swing. This report identifies four options and categorises each one according to related risks and provides a brief synopsis on each. In relation to the motion “That Council investigate the instigation of a Register of Iconic Structures within the City of Geraldton-Greenough, which would include both old and new icons”, the following comment is offered: This motion put forward at the Special Electors meeting requires that Council investigate the potential instigation of a register of iconic structures. The City currently has a Municipal (Heritage) Inventory whose head of power sits within the City’s Town Planning Scheme. The significance of the place is categorized with those of the highest value to the Community having a No.1 ranking. However, the Municipal Inventory relates to places (in a land/


132

property sense) not specifically structures or necessarily cultural icons that could be within a place. In terms of the Merry Go Round, the Municipal Inventory lists the place as a Management Category 3 (which is in the middle range of importance) and references the cultural significance of the place. Therefore to consider a Register of Iconic Structures, thought needs to be given to define what “structures” are included and whether they are already addressed in existing registers or lists. If it is the intention to include say the Batavia canon or a piece of iconic artwork that could be located within a building this is quite different to the Municipal (Heritage) Inventory. It would be necessary to determine a criteria and a methodology to deal with how such an icon is protected. Further investigations could be undertaken to determine what criteria/ mechanisms are available to facilitate a Register of Iconic Structures. COMMUNITY CONSULTATION: Following determination by Council and a recommendation to proceed with one of the four options or other alternatives as resolved by Council. The City will then engage with the community on the preferred option. COUNCILLOR/OFFICER CONSULTATION: The current and previous Councils' have been advised of the status of the MGR and the findings and recommendations of the safety audits. STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS: There is a requirement to meet the safety guidelines on playground safety standards , namely:

• AS 4685 - 2004. Playground Equipment (Parts 1-6); • AS/NZS 4486.1:1997 Playground and playground equipment;

and • AS/NZS 4422:1996 Playground surfacing.

Local Government Act 1995 (as amended) PART 5 -- Administration Subdivision 4 -- Electors’ meetings 5.26. Term used: electors 5.27. Electors’ general meetings 5.28. Electors’ special meetings 5.29. Convening electors’ meetings 5.30. Who presides at electors’ meetings 5.31. Procedure for electors’ meetings 5.32. Minutes of electors’ meetings 5.33. Decisions made at electors’ meetings


133

POLICY IMPLICATIONS: There is a duty of care on the City to ensure the operational safety of equipment on its reserves and under its control. FINANCIAL AND BUDGET IMPLICATIONS: Option 2 is considered very high risk and any injury may expose Council to serious legal and insurance liability issues which may have significant financial ramifications.

In regards to Option 3, any modifications made to the existing MGR would require an engineering design and safety certification to meet with all compliance safety standards. Once a detailed design has been done only then can it be costed together with the remediation cost of the site. This option is considered high risk and may result in high costs with no guarantee that a solution would be forthcoming. Options 1 and 4. Both these options are considered low risk and following more detailed concept designs a more deterministic cost figure will allow greater certainty in financial decision making. There is currently $80,000 (code 82019) in the current financial year's capital budget for design and implementation of solution to the MGR project. STRATEGIC & REGIONAL OUTCOMES: Strategic & Plan for the Future Outcomes: There are no strategic or Plan for the Future outcomes. Regional Outcomes: There are no regional outcomes.

ECONOMIC, SOCIAL, ENVIRONMENTAL & CULTURAL ISSUES: Economic: There are no economic issues Social: The MGR is an iconic structure that has strong links with and celebrates the author Randolph Stow and has strong sentiment within the community. Environmental: There are no environmental issues. Cultural & Heritage: As with the social outcomes, there is an iconic outcome that celebrates the author, Geraldton born, Randolph Stow. In this light it is an important feature to be celebrated and should at the very least be turned into an iconic memorial celebrating the author.


134

RELEVANT PRECEDENTS: There are no precedents. DELEGATED AUTHORITY: As this was the subject of a Petition, Council resolution is required. VOTING REQUIREMENTS: This falls under article 2.4 Petition under the Standing Orders and Subdivision 4 – Elector’s meetings. As no special voting requirement is noted, a simple majority would be required (Regulation 17 (2) of the Local Government (Administration) Regulations 1996 with reference to s 5.31 of the Local Government Act 1995). BACKGROUND TO THE OPTIONS FACING THE CITY: The City has identified four options based on numerous reports, compliance issues relating to safety standards, risk and public liability issues.

Option

Comments

1. Maintain the existing Merry Go Round in its current location as a fixed iconic structure.

Install one or two new Australian Safety Standard approved design Merry Go Rounds at more accessible locations on the Foreshore.

Low Risk. Improve the urban design around the existing Merry Go Round to include additional seating, pathways, landscaping and lighting. Install interpretive signage with information on the history of Randolph Stow and the Merry Go Round.

2. Unbolt Merry Go Round as is

Extremely High Risk. The central column that provides all the ground loadings of the structure is corroded with a number of cracks evident. The safety auditor who undertook the audit in 2006 indicated that there is a potential for catastrophic failure of the pole with the risk of serious or fatal injury. Also this option does not deal with the two major safety risk problems of the swinging of the heavy seat crushing people against the central pole nor the free rotation movement that allows high centrifugal forces to be generated.

3. Modify Existing Merry Go Round to meet Australian Safety Standards

High Risk. Most structural elements will need to be replaced with new materials and new safety mechanisms to limit rotation and swing. Would require significant design and engineering to meet safety standards and may not be achievable. Could involve high design costs, construction testing and mock ups with possibility of no outcome.

4. Replace existing Merry Go Low Risk.


135

Round in its current location with Australian Safety Standard approved design.

Would maintain the historical trend of replacing the Merry Go Round at the end of the previous play equipment’s asset life. This would be the fifth incarnation of a Merry Go Round

OPTIONS: Option 1: As per Executive Recommendation in this report Option 2: That Council by Simple Majority RESOLVES to:

1. Pursuant to Section 5.33 of the Local Government Act 1995 (as amended) RECEIVE the recommendations of the Special Electors Meeting held on the 11 October 2010;

2. UNBOLT the Merry Go Round as is; 3. MAKES this determination and acknowledges:

a. the four independent safety audits and risk assessments and advice provided in these;

b. the probability of the risk of litigation should an injury occur to users of the Merry Go Round;

c. that professional officers of the City are unable to support or recommend this option;

4. REQUEST the Chief Executive Officer investigate existing (and potential options for) policy, local law and Town Planning provisions with regard to a potential Register of Iconic Structures and provide a report back to Council; and

5. GIVE Public Notice to the decision and advise all attendees of the Special Electors meeting held on the 11 October 2010 of the outcome.

Option 3: That Council by Simple Majority RESOLVES to:

1. Pursuant to Section 5.33 of the Local Government Act 1995 (as amended) to RECEIVE the recommendations of the Special Electors Meeting held on the 11 October 2010;

2. MODIFY the existing Merry Go Round to meet Australian Safety Standards;

3. MAKES this determination and acknowledges: a. that this option may incur significant design and engineering

costs to achieve a modified and retrofitted Merry Go Round with the possibility that no reasonable outcome is achieved that meets Australian Safety Standards with the subsequent loss to Council of considerable design and engineering fees;

b. that the final version of a modified Merry Go Round may differ so significantly in appearance to the current Merry Go Round to meet Australian Safety Standards that it will effectively be a replacement structure;


136



Option 4: That Council by Simple Majority RESOLVES to:


2. REPLACE the existing Merry Go Round in its current location with an Australian Safety Standard approved design;



CONCLUSION: In its current form the MGR is an extremely high risk hazard and presents safety concerns to its users and would expose the City to risk of litigation should an accident occur.

In the event that Council decide to reopen the swing in any form or with further modifications, it would be advisable, before this is entertained; to obtain from the City’s insurers an unconditional guarantee that the Public Liability Insurance would cover any incident that may occur in the future. This is most unlikely to occur as they have identified that the swing is a risk hazard.

It would be advisable as well, to receive from a suitably qualified litigation solicitor a clear understanding of the Councillor, and City employee’s personal liability in the case of any accident occurring, bearing in mind that the MGR has been identified as non-compliant to current safety standards and a risk hazard.

Any legal challenge for injury received through an accident would cost the City not only in legal fees, but personal damages and subsequent increase in insurance premiums. There may be personal liability issues arising out of the negligent non-compliance to safety standards.

In recommending the fourth option as listed above in ‘OPTIONS’, part (1) promotes the concept of turning the swing in to a visitors iconic featured site. This would add to the rich and cultural diverse footprint and be a further enhancing feature at the foreshore.


137

Part (2) takes forward the legacy of Randolph Stow, in creating a Merry Go Round, by the sea, providing further interpretation of the authors work. EXECUTIVE RECOMMENDATION: That Council by Simple Majority RESOLVES to:


2. MAINTAIN the existing Merry Go Round in its existing location as a fixed iconic structure with modifications as necessary to meet structural safety requirements;

3. UNDERTAKE an extensive community consultation and engagement process in order to develop a landscaped precinct which addresses:

a. an extensive interpretive review of related history and context including:

i. The history of Randolph Stow; ii. The history of the Merry Go Round; iii. Provision of one or two high quality Merry Go Rounds

constructed to Australian Safety Standards for playground equipment;

iv. Provision of interpretive signage detailing the history and context of points i and ii;

b. following completion of the community consultation and engagement process a report will be provided to Council identifying consultation outcomes and the recommended solution;



COUNCIL DECISION MOVED CR BRICK, SECONDED CR O’TOOLE That Council by Simple Majority RESOLVES to:


2. MAINTAIN the existing Merry Go Round in its exis ting location as a fixed iconic structure with modifications as nece ssary to meet structural safety requirements;

3. UNDERTAKE an extensive community consultation an d engagement process in order to develop a landscaped precinct which addresses:

a. an extensive interpretive review of related hist ory and context including:

i. The history of Randolph Stow;


138

ii. The history of the Merry Go Round; iii. Provision of one or two high quality Merry Go Rounds

constructed to Australian Safety Standards for playground equipment;

iv. Provision of interpretive signage detailing the history and context of points i and ii;

b. following completion of the community consultati on and engagement process a report will be provided to Cou ncil identifying consultation outcomes and the recommend ed solution;

4. REQUEST the Chief Executive Officer investigate existing (and potential options for) policy, local law and Town P lanning provisions with regard to a potential Register of I conic Structures and provide a report back to Council; and

5. GIVE Public Notice to the decision and advise al l attendees of the Special Electors meeting held on the 11 October 201 0 of the outcome.

CARRIED 7/1

SPECIAL MEETING OF ELECTORS

MINUTES

11 OCTOBER 2010

SPECIAL MEETING OF ELECTORS - MINUTES 11 OCTOBER 2010

2 Unconfirmed Minutes

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY .............................................................................. 3

2 DECLARATION OF OPENING ............................................................................................... 3

3 ATTENDANCE ........................................................................................................................... 3

4 PUBLIC QUESTIONS ............................................................................................................... 5

5 UNDER SECTION 5.28 OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1995 , DISCUSS THE FOLLOWING ISSUES : .......................................................................................................... 16

5.1. THE “BOLTING” OF THE MERRY GO ROUND BY THE SEA. .................................................... 16 5.2. THE LACK OF PUBLIC CONSULTATION OVER THE TREATMENT OF THE ICONIC MERRY GO

ROUND. ............................................................................................................................... 16 5.3. THAT THE ELECTORS REQUEST THAT THE CITY OF GERALDTON-GREENOUGH TO RECTIFY

THE SAFETY ISSUES OF THE EXISTING SWING AND RETURN IT TO FULL MOBILITY WITH

APPROPRIATE SIGNAGE AND INSURANCE DISCLAIMERS. ...................................................... 16 5.4. THAT THE ELECTORS REQUEST THAT THE CITY OF GERALDTON-GREENOUGH TO FORM A

MERRY GO ROUND BY THE SEA PRESERVATION COMMITTEE AND THAT COMMITTEE BE

CONSULTED (IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE COMMUNITY) PRIOR TO ANY FUTURE ACTION TO BE

TAKEN ON THE MERRY GO ROUND. ..................................................................................... 16

6 CLOSURE ................................................................................................................................. 16

APPENDIX 1 – ATTACHMENTS AND REPORTS TO BE RECEIVED ..................................... 17



CITY OF GERALDTON-GREENOUGH

SPECIAL MEETING OF ELECTORS HELD ON MONDAY, 11 OCTOBER 2010 AT 5.30PM

AT CHAMBERS, EDWARD ROAD

M I N U T E S DISCLAIMER: The City of Geraldton-Greenough advises that persons interested in any topics raised in these Minutes should wait for formal written advice from the City before taking any action on an application that is listed for consideration.

1 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY I would like to acknowledge the traditional owners of the land on which we meet (Amangu, Naaguja, Wilunyu and Nhanagardi people of Yamaji Country) and pay respect to the knowledge embedded forever within the Aboriginal Custodianship of Country.

2 DECLARATION OF OPENING The Presiding Member declared the meeting open at 5.30pm.

3 ATTENDANCE

Present: Mayor Cr I W Carpenter Deputy Mayor Cr N McIlwaine Cr E J Sewell Cr C Gabelish Cr R D Hall Cr G Martin Cr G L Bylund Cr V Petersen Cr G Greenaway Officers: A Brun, Chief Executive Officer M Chadwick, Acting Director of Sustainable Communities B Davis, Director of Commercial Enterprises A Selvey, Director of Creative Communities S Jerram, Director of Community Infrastructure C Wood, Director of Corporate Services M Chadwick, Manager Environmental Health & Sustainability Y Lovedee, Community Development Officer S Moulds, PA to the Chief Executive Officer K Francheschi, Administration Assistant



Others: Members of Public: 36 Members of Press: 4 Apologies: Mr Ian Blayney MLA Cr R L Ashplant Leave of Absence: Cr D J Brick Cr T W O’Toole



4 PUBLIC QUESTIONS

Ms Fiona Della-Sale, 170 Durlacher Street, Geraldto n WA 6530 Question A letter has been received from Ms Della-Sale regarding the Merry Go Round. The letter does not pose any direct question, however seeks the City to make the Merry Go Round safe so that it can be used again. The following suggestions were made: I feel we have the opportunity to explore safer swing movement (ie. rotating or swinging, not both) by and independent safety auditor (some auditors have conflict of interest as they are also playground company proprietors) If the above option is finally deemed unsafe and must remain static, then consider developing a new, dynamic and beautiful space dedicated to the Randolph Stow and the swing, incorporating a new structure! sculpture, landscaped and in keeping with the natural foreshore (not a generic plastic merry-go-round replica that really would prove an insult to children and Stow!). We certainly have local professionals who could effectively plan such a space with community consultation. Response In reviewing all available records associated with the Merry Go Round it is clear that a number of independent safety audits have been undertaken in 1996, 2003, 2006 and 2010. On each occasion recommendations were consistent which identified the Merry Go Round as a hazard to users and inconsistent with safety standards. Following the 2010 report it was deemed appropriate to close down the Merry Go Round due to the high safety risk to users as recommended by the Local Government Insurance Association Auditor. The closure of the Merry Go Round was purely an operational matter and deemed necessary for public safety. It is perhaps fortuitous that no one has been seriously injured on this play equipment given that so many safety audits have identified significant hazards to user safety. At the same time of the closure of the Merry Go Round a plan was prepared which included developing the existing Merry Go Round as a static piece of public art within a newly landscaped area and replacing the play facility with two new high quality (Merry Go Round) pieces of playground equipment on the Foreshore that meet or exceed current Australian Safety Standards. This proposal is subject to further concept design and community consultation.



Further review of available records has identified that no formal design review has previously been undertaken from a certified playground design engineer to determine whether the existing Merry Go Round could be modified and retrofitted to meet current Australian Safety Standards. However, an independent safety auditor’s findings in 2006 listed significant design hazards and deficiencies and the auditor indicated that: “With regard to modifications to upgrade the old unit to meet current Standards I cannot see any way to add 'speed control, braking' mechanism, etc. without major reconstruction of the whole unit. Further I strongly believe that to do any upgrading would be foolish in that the aged main spine (column) of the unit is more than suspect in its safe structural stability. As mentioned in my report, columns such as this when used as "Maypoles" have killed children when unseen rust corrosion (both internal & external) has weakened the pole to the point that it has fallen onto a child who has merely taken hold of a handle ring. This action has then pulled the whole "Maypole" onto the child with a resulting crushing death. If the old Merry Go Round unit were to collapse the ring seat can crush as it contacts the ground and the column can still crush as it is also able to fall to the ground.” On this professional advice it is considered that the existing Merry Go Round has exceeded it useful life as an asset and should be replaced with a modern high quality playground facility. This is in keeping with the historical development of the play facility which has been regularly replaced with a more appropriate piece of equipment over a number of decades. It is understood that the current Merry Go Round is the third iteration of a play facility at this location. Georgia Pye, Shanaya Fullgrabe, Courtnee King, Bail ey Day and Madelyne Graham, Rangeway Primary School, Cassia St reet, Geraldton WA 6530 Question A letter has been received from students of Rangeway Primary School regarding the Merry Go Round. The letter does not pose any direct question, however seeks the City to make the Merry Go Round safe so that it can be used again. The following suggestions were made:

• the 50c Swing should only go around in circles and not swing in

and out, • warning displayed clearly; • better padding on the ground in case you fall; • put lights near the swing so you can see the swing at night; • remove the tyres; and • replace them with padding.



Response These suggestions will be considered as part of this process. No formal design review has previously been undertaken to determine whether the existing Merry Go Round could be modified and retrofitted to meet current Australian Safety Standards. Mr Louis Freer, 17 Bosley Street, Geraldton Question People expect to see an iconic structure in operation, it is valued in the community. Risk assessment stated in the Merry Go Round by the Sea: No lighting round the swing – lighting can be put in place. Warning signs not clear – sign can be placed. Risks to bystanders – perimeter fence can be placed. Small children getting injured – advice note for under age 3 and is the responsibility of parent. Bolts and nuts can be covered. None of the recommendation be considered? What started the risk assessment on the swing? Response S Jerram, Director of Community Infrastructure responded that the issues regarding the safety of the Merry Go Round has been raised a number of times. A risk assessment and safety audit was undertaken. There are some serious concerns about the design and the safety to users. One of the recommendations was to be bolted in place as a static structure. There is a high risk of injury and claims to council and if the City didn’t act on it now then Council would be failing in its duty of care. The operational assessment was to have it bolted down and once the immediate risk was taken away then we can determine an alternative strategy to deal with. Previous records have shown that this was not the first safety audit. There have been 4 since 1996. Each one recommended that the Merry Go Round be closed down as a working playground facility. Based on that information it was assessed whether it could be modified to meet current Australian standards. In 1996 the current structure could be not be modified to be made safe. We had to, therefore, look at alternative strategies. One most appropriate was to move forward with leaving the current Merry Go Round as an iconic structure – making urban design aesthetics, and build two new high quality Merry Go Rounds of Australian Standard, which has gone out for public consultation.



The new actual lighting was poorly lit and could be rectified easily, but if fixed in placed as a memorial structure, we could incorporate as part of the urban design improvements – lighting. C Wood, Director of Corporate Services added that in relation to any legal ramifications this mainly relates to the Council public liability insurance – Council liability insurance would still cover the structure, but because of the state of the structure the premiums would increase and any injuries the liabilities would be large. Question Why was no structural report done on the swing. Response S Jerram, Director of Community Infrastructure responded that the Structural report was undertaken in 1996 by a Certified Playground Auditor, which was quite damming in the case of the structure. Question Risk assessment by LGIS and insures the swing is not independent. Response S Jerram, Director of Community Infrastructure responded that the LGIS did an independent audit facility and safety audit service and are considered to be independent. There have been three undertaken since 1996 to 2010 Question Consultation on what is happening to the swing with signs, public notice, going to the schools. Response S Jerram, Director of Community Infrastructure responded that the signage doesn’t contract you out of your common law liability. It does not prevent people suing you if you are negligent. Question I would like a Register of places of iconic status in the City and public consultation be held before they are changed. Response The Chief Executive Officer responded that generally we have under heritage places where notice of action where changes are made. We have clear reports provided which indicated the level of danger and by going to the public would mean deferral of the action to be taken. Knowing the high risk we could not consult with the public, as we had to take immediate action. Generally we like to consult on any changes but in this case we had to act as we had a clear report.



Once the structure was made safe we could come up with a concept and update of the area. The Statement of intent is being a big part of the way forward. Questions Would like to rectify the safety issues and place that as formal recommendation. Response Noted. Mr Harry Moorehead, 24 Norman Street Statement Congratulate Luis is bringing everyone here.

The City council has everyone’s safety at heart. But it is getting a bit too technical. If everything was bolted down Captain Cook would have not made it to Australia. Children have to have a sense of adventure. Think about the girl on True Spirit that sailed around the world. The swing could be made safe with bumpers around it, and it is a wonderful attraction for the town. A General sense of adventure for children. I am pleased that Ian Blayney is looking after his family. Parents should be looking after their children. Jazz the swing up a bit. I believe that if everything should be done – the building next door should be lifted and brought up to date. Response The Mayor responded that repairs have been delayed to the old railways station and that this is a different subject to what we are here for tonight. Helen Exten, 20 Holland Street, Geraldton Question Why has it taken Council since 1996 to come up with this unsafe swing. How many people have been injured and has Council had any legal action in the past. Response The Chief Executive Officer responded that he could not answer why previous Council did not act on the swing. Question Was there is no evidence of that. No Minutes or records to indicate receipt of the reports?



Response The Chief Executive Officer responded that we receive those reports and act on them. The current report told us that we needed to do action now. Question Why hasn’t Council mitigated the swing previously? Response The Chief Executive Officer responded that he could not answer why previous Council did not modify or act on issues with the swing. Question One organisation made this decision? Response The Chief Executive Officer responded that four independent auditors provided consistent and repeated advice. Question Is there any data on past Injuries resulting from the swing? Response The Chief Executive Officer responded that there was no data. Question If there is no specific injury data then why is this a risk? Response The Chief Executive Officer responded that the unfortunate reality is that an assessment has been made. Question We don’t know have data on injuries? Response The Chief Executive Officer informed that the City does not collect data on injuries Question It is OK to have a risk assessment, but no data to mitigate this risk. No prosecutions, no injuries, but because there might be a risk. Response A Selvey, Director of Creative Communities informed T Brun that historically there have been injuries. The City, as any other responsible authority, does not wait until an injury before acting on a determined risk.



Question The disable swing is well lit – Easy option? Response The Chief Executive Officer informed that if the easy option was to fix it the City would have fixed it. The issue is that if it was a simple matter of a simple fix it would have been done. There is a significant structure and design flaw that there was a need to bolt it down. The City would not have gone through the pain if a simple (or any) modification was available. S Jerram, Director of Community Infrastructure commented that for any structural element there is a safety audit and there is a risk you undertake to lock in place of modify it. The structure is in such a state of disrepair it is not possible to modify to meet alternative strategies. Question If the first report was in 1996 why has it taken Council long to take action? Response S Jerram, Director of Community Infrastructure stated that if he was in Council in 1996 he would have taken the same action. Name provided inaudible Question The City has bolted the swing what is risk for the tree and the toilet block as they climb the toilet block and tree. Response The Chief Executive Officer informed that the City has to assess the risk in terms of parks in general, roads and bridges. The City takes reasonable steps to mitigate risk. There is a fence on the block which is deemed sufficient prevention for them going there. The Tree has had pruning. An audit deemed it not to be a problem. The City effectively encourages people to go to the swing which was open, ready and in a position for people to use it. The assessment was that there was a significant risk in the current form. As with anything around the City an assessment is undertaken to and mitigate the risks. Rett Millman, 214 Chapman Road, Geraldton Question Has there been a risk assessment on the tree?



Response The Chief Executive Officer informed the meeting that the City’s Parks are actively pruned and remove that deemed to be dangerous. The overhanging branches of the Fig tree over the swing have been removed to make safe and keep it safe. There is no specific report –but the City actively reviews the safety of the tree. Question from the floor You have not addressed the climbing on the roof at the toilet block. It is not fenced off. Response T Brun, Chief Executive Officer was discussing the old toilet block by the railway. With regard to the other toilet block we shall review this. The City is not aware of any issues. The old building was our concern, hence the fence, to stop people getting into the old railway building. Mr Graham Eaton, 11 Conway Street, Geraldton

Statement Firstly, I would like to congratulate Lewis Freer on his energy and commitment to his position on the Merry Go Round by the Sea. Administratively, I feel the Council is doing well, but in the area of community relations there appears to be a shortage of connectivity. Having experienced the highs and lows of business management at the pointy end, two things I know are crucial to corporate success are timing and perception. In the case of the Merry Go Round by the Sea, I feel there has been a lacking in both. The Merry Go Round by the Sea has past and current importance to many people who have grown up in Geraldton; it has been a part of their lives in a variety of ways. Like the yellow submarine the MGT has developed a local icon status. Added to this is the prominence given to and grown out of Randolph Stow’s best selling novel, Merry Go Round by the Sea. Council has not managed the protection and future of the Merry Go Round at all well in terms of perception, timing and community relations. Council’s role is to represent the needs, views and values of the community and in the case of the Merry Go Round this does not appear to have occurred. Who do I hold this point of view? In 2008, during the week of the Randolph Stow Young Writers Awards, established in 1989, the Geraldton Guardian reported Council



proposed actually doing away with the Merry Go Round as is where is with a new structure at another location. In 2010, Council made the comment that dealing with the Merry Go Round issue (by making it a permanent structure), was similar to that of fixing a pot hole. To make matters worse, Council sent their troops in to fix the structure in place only days after the death of Randolph Stow, one of Geraldton’s favourite sons and academics, a man who has featured on the Geraldton landscape for over half a century. The Merry Go Round by the Sea is much more that a pot hole. Take a moment to reflect on the Merry Go Round by the Sea and Randolph Stow. Randolph Stow is acknowledged as one of Australia’s finest writers, Julian Randolph Stow (known as Mick to his friends), was both on 28 November 1935 in Geraldton, Western Australia. He was educated at Geraldton Primary School, Guildford Grammar School and the University of Western Australia in Perth. Stow’s first book, A Haunted Land, written when he was eighteen, utilised the Ellendale-Sand Springs area as its setting. A quick look at Randolph Stow chronology:

1935 – Nov 28 – Born in Geraldton, WA 1958 – Miles Franklin Award 1962 – Lecturer of English Literature, University of Leeds, England 1963 – 1964 – Lecturer of English Literature, University of Western Australia 1964 – 1966 – Harkness Fellowship, United States of America 1966 – Britannica Australia Award 1968 – 1969 – Lecturer of English and Commonwealth Literature – University of Leeds, England 1979 – Patrick White Award

Tony Hassall, Emeritus Professor of English Literature at James Cook University, said today that Stow “was certainly one of the finest writers Australia has produced”. Prof Hassall said Stow’s The Merry Go



Round in the Sea “is one of the most brilliant evocations of an Australian childhood that anyone is ever going to read.” TMGR in the Sea is considered to be one of Randolph Stow finest works. Public liability and risks, thought by some to exist if the Merry Go Round is not fixed in place probably has some merit, but by shaping decisions on this basis puts many foreshore activities at risk including, the water playground where children play and run around, fishing from the rock groynes and breakwater structures, the newly installed health equipment pods, using public bbq’s and the raised winding pathway used by young children on skate boards. If there is concern, public liability insurance should exist. If a risk assessment is or has been undertaken, most foreshore activities are in trouble and possible more so than the Merry Go Round, especially if one takes into account history and potential for injury. It is probably fair to say more people have stubbed toes, twisted ankles, grazed knees and or fallen over on City pathways than is the case with the Merry Go Round. Maybe the level of anger and disappointment regarding the bolting in place of the Merry Go Round could have been avoided if in the first place the decision was put forward as a total package including, location, maintenance, lights, artificial lawn and a testimonial relating to the Merry Go Round and Randolph Stow. The home of the Merry Go Round should receive at least the same level of care and importance as that given to the yellow submarine. Geraldton is transforming into a modern regional City and with this comes the need to embrace culture, history and our heroes including academics and pioneers, such as Randolph Stow, Monsignor Hawes and others. We have a sculpture of Wiebbe Hayes maybe it would be appropriate to do the same for a local champion who holds national and international prominence in the literary field, an area held in high regard by book lovers, historians and academics. The Merry Go Round is much more than a pot hole. It and Randolph Stow are part of our social fabric in the same way as agriculture, sport, fishing, the story of the Batavia and port operations have been to the region and city. I would like to recommend, start again and explore the options and invite community input. Promote, through the two local papers and the ‘your view’ website. Pat Johnson, PO Box 162, Geraldton



Statement We have been taking our grandchildren to the Merry Go Round for the last four years. There have been a few minor injuries. What would help solve this is supervision by parents, and for the public to intervene when someone is dong something wrong. The biggest obstacle is not the going around, but the cement structure of the base of the pole – and on top of that rubber tyres. The children spend more time on the tyre in the middle and they throw it against the middle and the injuries occur against the pole and hitting the cement. It should be a long smooth pole. If the tyres were not there then the Merry Go Round would not hit the pole. John Thompson, 18 Marsh Place, Geraldton Question I Support the motion to investigate that the Merry Go Round be reinstated, with fencing around it so small children can’t go on it. Challenge to go on to the tyres. There is a lot of other swings and we will not close off those swings. Response The other ones are to Australian standards. Statement Can you look at the people that build these swings that they can make to Australian standard. More consultation is needed before the swing is taken away, the people of Geraldton want to see the consultation. The youth should be acknowledge for all the work they are putting into this. Matt Wallace, Geraldton Statement If risk assessment were done on everything all would be closed down. The Structure by Skeeters that children climb on. The water park is slippery and children can fall over and break their leg, plastic and pretty. The Spider web children can falls out of there. The City Workers have to be 3m high, what is the risk there? The Swing goes round and round. Kids get hurt kicking a ball. Want to think about it what are you turning the world around. Think about the kids.



5 UNDER SECTION 5.28 OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1995, DISCUSS THE FOLLOWING ISSUES :

5.1. The “bolting” of the Merry Go Round by the Sea .

5.2. The lack of Public consultation over the treat ment of the iconic Merry Go Round.

5.3. That the electors request that the City of Ger aldton-Greenough to rectify the safety issues of the exist ing swing and return it to full mobility with appropria te signage and insurance disclaimers.

5.4. That the electors request that the City of Ger aldton-Greenough to form a Merry Go Round by the Sea preservation Committee and that committee be consulted (in conjunction with the community) prior to any future action to be taken on the Merry Go Round .

MOTION

MOVED MR G EATON, SECONDED MS H EXTEN 1. That the electors request that the City of Geral dton-

Greenough to rectify the safety issues of the exist ing swing and return it to full mobility with appropriate sig nage and insurance disclaimers; and

2. That the electors request that the City of Geral dton-Greenough to form a Merry Go Round by the Sea preservation Committee and that committee be consul ted (in conjunction with the community) prior to any fu ture action to be taken on the Merry Go Round.

CARRIED

MOTION

MOVED CR PETERSEN, SECONDED MS L MILLMAN That Council investigate the instigation of a Regis ter of Iconic Structures within the City of Geraldton-Greenough, which would include both old and new icons.

CARRIED

6 CLOSURE There being no further business the Chairman closed the Council meeting at 6.20pm.



APPENDIX 1 – ATTACHMENTS AND REPORTS TO BE RECEIVED Attachments are available on the City of Geraldton-Greenough website at: http://www.cgg.wa.gov.au/attachment/meeting/497

Facilitated by

Vision Workshop – Merry Go Round Precinct

17th August 2011, 5.00 pm

Time Activity Who

5:00pm Welcome and Introduction Andrea Selvey (CGG – Director Creative Communities)

5:10pm Workshop Outcomes Matt Young (Greg Rowe & Associates – Regional Manager )

5:20pm Merry-Go-Round History Hayley Wass (Greg Rowe & Associates)

5:35pm Group Discussion: Your Experience –

A Contribution to History All

5:50pm Sharing Experiences All

6:05pm Looking to the Future – Inclusive Play Vanessa Giltrow (Variety Mid West Branch)

6:15pm Group Discussion: What Values Should Future Experiences

Reflect? All

6:30pm Sharing Values All

6:45pm Next Steps – Design Workshop Matt Young (Greg Rowe & Associates – Regional Manager)

Attendance -1-

Attendance

Lesley Adrian

Ron Bertelsen

Nicole Wallace

Gary Martin

Vanessa Giltrow

James Thompson

Yvonne Lovedee

Lewis Freer

Ben & Victoria Freer

Mark Canny

Kellie Rodden

Henri Thuijs

Karen Swain

Kim Logue

David Pratt

Jodie Phillips

Laurel Walker

Facilitated by

Vision Workshop – Mer ry Go Round Precinct

1st September 2011, 5:30 pm

Time Activity Who

5:50pm Welcome and Introduction Matt Young (Greg Rowe & Associates – Regional Manager )

5:55pm Merry-Go-Round History Elements Hayley Wass (Greg Rowe & Associates)

6:00pm Group Designing:

“Shopping Basket” Translating- Values, Experiences and History into Design Elements

All

6:25pm Landscape Architect- Basic Guidelines Stuart Pullyblank (Pullyblank- Director/Owner)

6:30pm Group Designing: Bringing All the Elements Together in Precinct Area All

7:05pm Sharing Group Plans All

7:25pm Next Steps – Final Workshop Matt Young (Greg Rowe & Associates – Regional Manager)

7067_11sep01R_hw -1-

Attendance

Henri Thuijs

Lesley Adrian

James Thompson

Yvonne Lovedee

Jody Beven

Kate Wheat

Howard Gray

Aaron Willcot

Kim Logue

Geoff and Kerry Wheat

Rose Holdaway

Ben Freer

Lewis Freer

Stefanie Muller

Vanessa- Variety

Source: Timber play

Source: Kompan

Source: Kompan

Source: SonArc from Urban Play

GERALDTON MERRY GO-ROUND OPTION 1

flying fox

deck around

merry go-round

slide

Section B

Section A mounds of earth shaping

path

lookout tower

beach shelters

bbq area

Araucaria hetrophyllaNorfolk Island Pine

chess board

ficus macrophylla - morton bay fig


SECTION A

slide

SECTION B


shelter

shelter

open space

youth bandstandand bbq area

Melaleuca lanceolataRottnest tea tree

new merry go-round



Section C

merry go-round


SECTION C



stepped sculpture park around merry go-round

soft-fall groundsurface

adventure climbing walls

mini MCG

beach access

bbq and shelters


bocci ball sport area

Section D

merry go-round


SECTION D

Documents

REPORT OF OUTCOMES