22 June 2026
Councillors James Spenceley and Jessica Keen will make a second attempt to force North Sydney Council to examine using developer contributions to relocate Kelly’s Place Children’s Centre, although council officers appear to have pre-empted the move with a detailed report defending the council’s actions to date.
The pair have lodged a notice of motion for Monday’s council meeting calling for a report on whether up to $2.5 million in childcare and community facilities contributions could be used to secure, construct, adapt or fit out council-controlled premises for the not-for-profit centre. An attempt at the last meeting to move an urgency motion on the issue was defeated by the majority bloc on the grounds they did not consider it an urgent issue.
Kelly’s Place must leave its council-owned site in Hume Street, Crows Nest, by 31 December to allow the second stage of the Hume Street Park expansion to proceed. Without a replacement facility, its existing childcare places are expected to be lost.
Spenceley and Keen want the council to disclose how much of the approximately $8.23 million listed for childcare and community facilities in its Local Infrastructure Contributions Plan 2020 has been spent or contractually committed.
Their motion says the council holds more than $100 million in externally restricted funds, arguing: “Restricted does not mean untouchable; it means purpose limited.”
It asks officers to confirm that Kelly’s Place qualifies under the plan’s C1 Childcare or C2 Community Facilities categories and to outline a method for allocating up to $2.5 million for one-off capital works.
If officers disagree, the councillors want the council to identify “the specific legal basis for that contrary view” and explain whether the relevant money has already been spent, contractually committed, internally borrowed, not received or is legally unavailable.
However, a council staff report prepared for the same meeting addresses many of those questions and argues that the council and Kelly’s Place have spent years unsuccessfully examining alternative locations.
The report says “Council-owned facilities have not been identified as viable options” and that commercial and other sites considered since 2019 have failed because of location, cost, planning, licensing, access or operational constraints.
“Despite considerable efforts by both Council and Kelly’s Place over many years, no alternative site has been identified that satisfies the operational, regulatory and locational requirements of the service,” it says.
The report concludes that identifying a replacement within the required timeframe is unlikely.
“Given the limited supply of appropriately sized sites, high land values, and competing demands for land within the precinct, there is little evidence to suggest that a suitable relocation opportunity is likely to emerge within a timeframe that would justify further delaying the Hume Street Park expansion project,” it says.
It adds that continued deferral would “likely introduce more significant uncertainty, while providing no realistic assurance that a viable relocation outcome can be achieved”.
Officers also reject retaining Kelly’s Place within the expanded park, saying the park project “cannot be delivered while a childcare centre remains operational on the site during construction”.
They argue that keeping the centre within the project area “would substantially constrain the ability to deliver the intended open space outcomes” and significantly reduce publicly accessible parkland.
The report nevertheless confirms that the C1 Childcare contribution category could potentially fund a replacement centre.
It says the plan provides $2.55 million for 60 new childcare places and that, while originally intended for new council facilities, “this could include a new childcare centre for a childcare such as Kelly’s Place”.
To proceed, the council would need to allocate a $255,000 council co-contribution and formally resolve to prioritise $2.5 million in developer contributions for a new childcare centre.
However, officers say the identification of a suitable site would need to come first.
“The identification of a suitable site would require a number of steps, including, but not limited to, identification of a site, design and costing, development application, etc,” the report says.
It takes a more restrictive view of the C2 Community Facilities allocation, saying its purpose “is not childcare” and that the funds are intended for community centres, halls and meeting spaces.
The report says council held $5.343 million in restricted community facilities contributions at 31 March, but stresses that developer contributions may only be spent on infrastructure identified in the plan and cannot meet recurrent expenses such as maintenance, staffing, utilities or general operating costs.
It also seeks to rebut suggestions that the council has only recently begun considering Kelly’s Place’s future, saying the need to relocate “does not arise from a recent decision or change in direction by Council”.
“Rather, it reflects the culmination of a long-standing planning process, during which multiple lease extensions and relocation investigations have been undertaken,” it says.
The report also details significant problems with the existing Kelly’s Place building, including widespread dampness, water staining, mould and likely failure of its waterproofing membrane.
It estimates full remediation would cost between $800,000 and $1 million and says the building is “likely failing”.
Spenceley and Keen’s motion would also require the council to urgently investigate existing premises and seek formal advice from the NSW government on whether there is flexibility in the timing or sequencing of the park project without placing state funding at risk.
The motion states “for avoidance of doubt” that it would not approve expenditure, extend the Kelly’s Place lease, delay the Hume Street Park project or endorse any specific relocation site.
The staff recommendation is that councillors note the report and authorise chief executive Therese Cole to work with Kelly’s Place on transitional arrangements and support before the lease expires.