28/05/2025
Hello Lugarno,
We are continuing the battle for the long-awaited amenities at Chivers Hill.
It was an item on Council's Monday night agenda and to be refused. I wrote a submission against it being refused and Clr Elaina Anzellotti called for an amendment calling on council to further investigate the feasibility of locating the amenities elsewhere in the nature strip. I'm including my submission and an article which the Leader's Jim Gainsford ran on Tuesday. We need your support to force Council to do the right thing. I apologise for the length if these but they ARE worth a read
"Item CCL045-25 Chivers Hill Shopping Centre Lugarno - Public Amenities Feasibility Report
I’m again disappointed at having to provide this submission for something that is needed and a BASIC HUMAN RIGHT.
Why this reluctance, by Council, to DO THE RIGHT thing and provide the amenities at the Chivers Hill Shopping Village is unacceptable and perplexing to say the least.
Item 4 of the feasibility report states that the General Manager consulted the Lugarno Progress Association (LPA), local business owners and residents.
Why is the LPA involved? They only have 70 members approximately and DO NOT represent nor speak for the 5,873(approx.) Lugarno residents. This equates to 1.2% of the Lugarno Population. Not even close to representing the majority of the population.
Who of the local business owners has the General Manager consulted with? I will answer that question, NONE. I am in constant contact with all of them and NONE have been consulted by him or anyone else from Council for that matter
We are flabbergasted that the Council has the temerity to DISMISS the 500+ petition in favour of the amenities as it was not done as an official Council process. Council MAY NOT simply dismiss the ‘word of the people’. This is UNDEMOCRATIC.
Our petition is REAL and would’ve had many more signatures had I not stopped it so that it could be sent to Council. The definition of a petition is:
‘a formal written request, typically one signed by many people, appealing to authority in respect of a particular cause’
We have NO confidence in Council’s statistics regarding the support or not of the amenities. These statistics are ‘Self Selecting’ and ‘Sample Bias’ The online process IS NOT a real representation as very few want to or can engage in that way. This is a poor strategy to assess the rate payers’ interest in a particular issue. It simply DOESN’T reach an acceptable number of people. It does NOT pass the ‘Pub Test’
Council’s statistics state that there were 82 engaged participants online. Of these, 52% opposed and 48% supported the provision of the amenities. This represents the following:
Lugarno’s population 5,873 approximately
Engaged participants 82 which equates to 82/ 5,873 = 0.014 = 1.4% of the population
Those opposing 52% 42.64 which equates to 42.64/ 5,873 = 0.007 = 0.7% of the population
Our simple petition 500 / 5,873 = 0.085 = 8.5 % of the population
Our simple, real petition is 12.143 times that of Council’s participants who are opposed.
Also, there is NO NEED to remove any car parking if the amenities are sited appropriately.
The nature strip location with a prefabricated structure is the most appropriate and is supported by the business owners.
All of the challenges relating to public facilities will be experienced here but that shouldn’t stop this from happening.
Riverwood, Mortdale, Oatley, Penshurst all have public amenities, why doesn’t Lugarno deserve what is needed?
GRC, PLEASE DO THIS RIGHT THING AND PROVIDE THE MUCH-NEEDED AMENITIES"
Residents have small win in battle for Chivers Hill toilet
Lugarno residents and businesses have had a minor win in their long battle for a toilet block at the Chivers Hills Shopping Village.
Last year Councillor Peter Mahoney called for a feasibility study and approximate cost of constructing a public toilet facility at, or adjacent to, the Chivers Hill Shopping Centre
The feasibility study, received at last night's (May 26) council meeting, recommended that the council not proceed with the project.
But Labor Councillor Elaina Anzellotti called on the council to further investigate the feasibility of locating the toilet towards Chivers Avenue, near the exit to the carpark and conduct more community consultation on this proposed location.
"The council recommendation to do nothing is actually not an option," Cr Anzellotti said.
"In 2024 over 500 signatures were signed on a petition demanding a toilet at Chivers HIll - that's nearly 10 per cent of Lugarno's population," she said.
"Business owners have told me that they have witnessed delivery drivers and patrons defecating behind the shops. People are relieving themselves in public behind local businesses in 2025 because there is no public toilet there.
"This is a public health hazard. It's just an embarrassment. To respond with a sign directing people to a toilet which is probably a 20-minute walk way is absurd. It's patronizing and deeply disrespectful for the elderly, for people with mobility issues and for parents with toddlers.
"It's been argued that Chivers Hill is classified as a small village under the council's Commercial Centres Strategy. People point out that other small villages lack council-owned public toilets.
"Chivers Hill is unlike any other small village in our LGA. It serves a really tight-knit community. It's geographically isolated with limited nearby amenities. It has a significant older population with greater accessibility needs. It experiences considerable high foot traffic. The IGA supermarket makes Chievers Hill a core daily stop.
"This is about equity, dignity and economic logic. The absence of a public amenity excludes the elderly families with young children and people with disability and it punishes business owners who are tired of managing the fallout. A toilet facility will increase foot traffic. It encourages longer visits and improved customer satisfaction," Cr Anzellotti said.
The council's report stated that its community consultation did not show strong support for a public toilet at Chivers Hill. Instead the council could consider increased wayfinding signage to promote nearest public facilities.
The council's online survey on support for a toilet block at Chivers Hill received 82 responses, with 52 per cent opposed and 48 per cent in favour.
Cr Anzellotti asked how the council could ignore a petition with 500 signatures in favour of 42 online clicks.
Resident Nicholas Christo described the need for a toilet at the shopping centre as a basic human right.
He said the reluctance by the council, to do the right thing and provide the amenities at the Chivers Hill Shopping Village is unacceptable and perplexing
"We are flabbergasted that the Council has the temerity to dismiss the 500-plus petition in favour of the amenities as it was not done as an official Council process. Council may not simply dismiss the 'word of the people'. This is undemocratic," he said.
Oatley MP, Mark Coure said, "The need for a public toilet at Chivers Hill has been raised with me time and time again by local residents, families, and elderly community members - and they're absolutely right.
"This is a busy shopping strip, a true community hub, and yet it has no accessible amenities. That simply isn't good enough," Mr Coure said.
"The fact that the nearest public toilet is over a kilometre away makes it especially difficult for parents with young children, older residents, and people with mobility issues.
"I've written to Georges River Council again urging them to act on this issue, and I've launched last year a petition to demonstrate the strength of community support.
"This is about dignity, accessibility, and supporting a vibrant local precinct. The Council must stop stalling and deliver a long-overdue public toilet for Chivers Hill," he said.
Councillors voted unanimously in support of Cr Anzellotti's amendment to investigate the feasibility of locating the toilet further towards Chivers Avenue and conduct further community consultation on this proposed location.
