Order of Business

PAGE TAB

Opening

Prayer

Apologies

Condolences

Confirmation of Minutes

ExtraordinaryCouncil Meeting held on 01 April 2015............................................................... 7

Extraordinary Council Meeting held on 24 March 2015........................................................ 13

Declarations of Interest

Public Forum

Mayoral Report

NIL

Notices of Motion Of Rescission

NIL

Notices of Motion

NOM 01 Responses to Councillors .............................................................................. 75......... 1

NOM 02 War Memorial and Children's Fountain Heritage pieces in the Mall .............. 77......... 2

NOM 03 Slow Down Speed Stickers ........................................................................... 79......... 3

NOM 04 Clean up Liverpool ......................................................................................... 81......... 4

NOM 05 Report on Outdoor Signage and Outdoor Product Displays ........................ 90......... 5

NOM 06 Sustainable Schools Grants ........................................................................... 93......... 6

Motions of Urgency

NIL

Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel Report

IHAP 01 DA-364/2014 - Torrens title subdivision of Lot 32 DP 866117 into 16 lots, associated road and footpath construction, landscaping and tree removal.............................. 96......... 7

IHAP 02 DA-48/2014 - Construction and operation of a motel development with associated at-grade and basement car parking and signage............................................. 104......... 8

IHAP 03 DA-85/2011/B - Modification pursuant to s96(2) of Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 to increase the hours of operation of an existing service station from 6am to 12am midnight (7 days a week) to 24 hours (7 days a week) 116......... 9

Development Application Determination Report

NIL

Chief Executive Officer Report

NIL

Business Improvement Report

NIL

Chief Financial Officer

CFO 01 Investment Report March 2015.................................................................... 123....... 10

CFO 02 Civic Awards Policy...................................................................................... 134....... 11

CFO 03 2015-16 Operational Plan and Budget - Proposed new fees and charges. 137....... 12

City Presentation Report

NIL

Community and Culture Report

DCC 01 Donations, Grants and Sponsorships........................................................... 141....... 13

DCC 02 Re-Establishment of Alcohol Free Zones .................................................... 156....... 14

DCC 03 Draft Multicultural Strategy and Action Plan 2015-2017.............................. 161....... 15

Economy and Engagement Report

NIL

Infrastructure and Environment Report

NIL

Planning and Growth Report

DPG 01 Planning and Development Committee........................................................ 184....... 16

DPG 02 Bigge Park Draft Conservation Management Plan...................................... 199....... 17

DPG 03 Intersections of Fifteenth Avenue with Twenty Seventh and Twenty Eight Avenue – Update on Interim Road Safety Improvements........................................... 202....... 18

DPG 04 Liverpool City Centre LEP Review............................................................... 207....... 19

Property and Commercial Development Report

DPC 01 Proposed road closure and rezoning of part Copeland Street, Liverpool .... 229....... 20

Committee Reports

CTTE 01 Minutes of the extraordinary Budget and Finance Committee held on 5 March 2015 232 21

CTTE 02 Minutes of the Budget and Finance Committee held on 1 April 2015.......... 236....... 22

CTTE 03 Local Traffic Committee Minutes of Meeting held on 18 March 2015......... 241....... 23

CTTE 04 Minutes of the Street Naming Committee meeting held on 7 April 2015..... 245....... 24

CTTE 05 Minutes of Building Our New City Committee meeting held 1 April 2015... 259....... 25

CTTE 06 Minutes of Economic Development and Events Committee meeting held 1 April 2015 266 26

CTTE 07 Minutes of the Civic Advisory Committee meeting held 31 March 2015..... 275....... 27

CTTE 08 Minutes of Committee for Liverpool Meeting held 11 March 2015.............. 283....... 28

CTTE 09 Minutes of Heritage Advisory Committee meeting held on 13 April 2015... 307....... 29

CTTE 10 Minutes for the No Intermodal Committee meeting held on 7 April 2015.... 334....... 30

Questions with Notice

QWN 01 Question with Notice - Clr Stanley................................................................ 340....... 31

Questions Taken on Notice

Presentations by Councillors

Council in Closed Session

The following items are listed for consideration by Council in Closed Session with the public excluded, in accordance with the provisions of the Local Government Act 1993 as listed below:

CONF 01 Tender WT2421 - Supply, Delivery and Installation of Bus Shelters

Reason: Item CONF 01 is confidential pursuant to the provisions of s10(A)(2)(d i) of the Local Government Act because it contains commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it.

CONF 02 Key Sites Master Planning Steering Committee Minutes from Meeting held 7 April 2015

Reason: Item CONF 02 is confidential pursuant to the provisions of s10(A)(2)(c) of the Local Government Act because it contains information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business.

CONF 03 Tender ST2437 - Design, Supply and Delivery of GPT units for various locations

Reason: Item CONF 03 is confidential pursuant to the provisions of s10(A)(2)(d i) of the Local Government Act because it contains commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it.

CONF 04 Compulsory acquisition of Lot 13 and 14 DP 1200373, Camden Valley Way, Leppington, Lot 11 DP 1199760 Campbelltown Road, Edmondson Park and Lot 11 DP 1199577, Cowpasture Road, Leppington by Transport for NSW

Reason: Item CONF 04 is confidential pursuant to the provisions of s10(A)(2)(c) of the Local Government Act because it contains information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business.

CONF 05 Panel Representation - Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel

Reason: Item CONF 05 is confidential pursuant to the provisions of s10(A)(2)(c) of the Local Government Act because it contains information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business.

CONF 06 Tender WT2435 - Whitlam Leisure Centre Air Conditioning Renewal

Reason: Item CONF 06 is confidential pursuant to the provisions of s10(A)(2)(d i) of the Local Government Act because it contains commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it.

CONF 07 Compulsory acquisition of part Lot 1 DP 1201516, 352-362 Macquarie Street, Liverpool for road purposes

Reason: Item CONF 07 is confidential pursuant to the provisions of s10(A)(2)(c) of the Local Government Act because it contains information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business.

Close

MINUTES OF THE Extraordinary Meeting

HELD ON 1 April 2015

PRESENT:

Mayor Ned Mannoun

Councillor Hadchiti

Councillor Hadid

Councillor Karnib

Councillor Mamone

Councillor Ristevski

Councillor Shelton

Councillor Stanley

Councillor Waller

Mr Carl Wulff Chief Executive Officer

Mr Gary Grantham, Chief Financial Officer

Ms Kiersten Fishburn, Director Community and Culture

Mr Gino Belsito, Director City Presentation

Ms Carole Todd, Director Business Improvement

OPENING 1.05pm

PRAYER The prayer of the Council was read by Alyson Infanti, Civic Officer Liverpool City Council.

APOLOGIES Councillors Balloot and Harle

Motion: Moved: Clr Hadchiti Seconded: Clr Mamone

On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

Declarations of Interest

The Chief Executive Officer, Mr Carl Wulff declared a non-pecuniary conflict of interest in the following item:

Item NOMR 01: Rescission of CONF 08 - Stage Two Liverpool Strategic Service Delivery Partnership

Reason: The CEO declared a non-pecuniary conflict of interest regarding this item on the basis that in a previous role he had a 7 year relationship with the company who had tendered.

PUBLIC FORUM

Presentation – Items not on agenda

Nil

Representation – Items on agenda

1. Ms Melissa Coros addressed Council on the following Item:

Item NOMR 01 – Rescission of CONF 08 - Stage Two Liverpool Strategic Service Delivery Partnership

Motion: Moved: Mayor Mannoun Seconded: Clr Hadchiti

That a two minute extension of time be given to Ms Melissa Coros.

On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

Notices of Motion Of Rescission

ITEM NO: NOMR 01

FILE NO: 072477.2015

SUBJECT: Rescission of CONF 08 - Stage Two Liverpool Strategic Service Delivery Partnership

NOTICE OF MOTION OF RESCISSION

That Council rescinds the resolution relating to CONF 08 – Stage Two Liverpool Strategic Service Delivery Partnership from the Extraordinary Council Meeting 24 March 2015 as shown below;

“That Council:

1. Accept the Tender from Queensland Partnership Group (LG Shared Services) Pty Ltd trading as Propel Partnerships (ABN 45 560 909 108) for ST2416 – Strategic Services Delivery Partnership for a period of 10 years, with the option of extending for a further 5 years.

2. Directs the Chief Executive Officer to undertake consultation with staff in accordance with Clause 39 of the (308) LOCAL GOVERNMENT (STATE) AWARD 2014 for a period of 28 days, to end on 21 April 2015 before any formal contract is signed.

3. Delegates authority to sign the Letter of Acceptance to the Chief Executive Officer in accordance with the above.

4. Delegates to the Chief Executive Officer all further powers necessary to give effect to this resolution.

5. Delegates to the Chief Executive Officer all further powers necessary to give effect to the Alliance Framework Contract to develop a shared services hub enabling any future Trade Services opportunities.

6. Notes the undertaking given by the Chief Executive Officer to staff who will be working within the Liverpool Services Alliance framework, regarding no forced redundancies or forced redeployment and no diminution in pay and terms and conditions of service.

7. Keeps confidential the specific details supplied in this report containing information on the submissions received, pursuant to the provisions of Section 10A(2)(d)(i) of the Local Government Act 1993 as it contains commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed, prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it.

8. Not permit any forced or voluntary redundancies for the life of the contract.

9. Transcribe the questions and answers from the recording of the meeting and include the transcript in the minutes.

10. Be the direct employer for any person employed to fill any vacant position that needs to be filled and that these employees have the same conditions as other Council staff.

11. Engage an independent auditor to investigate the tender process and report back to the Mayor.”

Signed:

Clr Ali Karnib

Clr Geoff Shelton

Clr Anne Stanley

Clr Wendy Waller

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion: Moved: Clr Stanley Seconded: Clr Waller

That Council rescinds the resolution (as shown on pages 3 and 4 of these minutes) relating to CONF 08 – Liverpool Strategic Service Delivery Partnership from the Extraordinary Council meeting 24 March 2015.

On being put to the meeting the motion was declared LOST.

Vote for: Clr Karnib

Clr Shelton

Clr Stanley

Clr Waller

Vote against: Mayor Mannoun

Clr Hadchiti

Clr Hadid

Clr Mamone

Clr Ristevski

Notices of Motion

ITEM NO: NOM 01

FILE NO: 073071.2015

SUBJECT: Amendment to Code of Meeting Practice

NOTICE OF MOTION

A motion will be moved to propose a change to Council’s Code of Meeting Practice, to extend the closure time of a Council meeting and other (Code of Meeting Practice adjustments) which if adopted will require public exhibition and report back to Council.

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion: Moved: Mayor Mannoun Seconded: Clr Ristevski

That:

1. Council amend Clause 5.2 of Council’s Code of Meeting practice to read as follows:

“Ordinary meetings of Council shall be held according to a schedule approved by the Council from time to time. Meetings will commence at 6.00pm and conclude by 11.00pm, without an extension.”

2. The proposed amendment be placed on public exhibition and a report be brought back to Council.

On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

Clr Karnib, Clr Shelton, Clr Stanley and Clr Waller asked that they be recorded as voting against the motion.

THE MEETING CLOSED AT 1.38PM.

Name: Ned Mannoun

Title: Mayor

Date: 29 April 2015

I have authorised a stamp bearing my signature to be affixed to the pages of the Minutes of the Council Meeting held on 1 April 2015. I confirm that Council has adopted these Minutes as a true and accurate record of the meeting.

MINUTES OF THE EXTRAOrdinary Meeting

HELD ON 24 March 2015

(INCLUDING ITEMS LISTED FOR THE ORDINARY MEETING 25 MARCH 2015)

PRESENT:

Mayor Ned Mannoun

Councillor Balloot

Councillor Hadchiti

Councillor Hadid

Councillor Harle

Councillor Karnib

Councillor Mamone

Councillor Ristevski

Councillor Shelton

Councillor Stanley

Councillor Waller

Mr Carl Wulff Chief Executive Officer

Mr Gary Grantham, Chief Financial Officer / Director Corporate Services

Ms Toni Averay, Director Planning and Growth

Ms Kiersten Fishburn, Director Community and Culture

Mr Gino Belsito, Director City Presentation

Mr Michael Cullen, Director Economy and Engagement

Mr Raj Autar, Director Infrastructure and Environment

Ms Carole Todd, Director Business Improvement

Mr John Morgan, Director Property and Commercial Development

OPENING 6.02pm

PRAYER The prayer of the Council was read by Minister Bruce Hammonds from Liverpool Presbyterian Church.

APOLOGIES Nil

CONDOLENCES Nil

ITEM NO: NOM 01

FILE NO: 060592.2015

SUBJECT: Council agenda items for 25 March 2015 meeting

NOTICE OF MOTION

That Council transact the following Council business at this meeting:

· Council agenda items for 25 March 2015 meeting.

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion: Moved: Clr Hadchiti Seconded: Clr Harle

That the recommendation be adopted.

On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

Clr Karnib, Clr Shelton, Clr Stanley and Clr Waller asked that they be recorded as voting against the motion.

ITEM NO: NOM 02

FILE NO: 062168.2015

SUBJECT: Cancel the Ordinary Council meeting scheduled for 25 March 2015

RECOMMENDATION

That should Item NOM 01 of this agenda be carried to transact the Council business scheduled for the 25 March 2015 meeting to this Extraordinary meeting, then Council cancel the Ordinary Council meeting scheduled for 25 March 2015.

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion: Moved: Clr Hadchiti Seconded: Clr Ristevski

That the recommendation be adopted.

On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

Clr Karnib, Clr Shelton, Clr Stanley and Clr Waller asked that they be recorded as voting against the motion.

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

Motion: Moved: Clr Shelton Seconded: Clr Harle

That the minutes of the Ordinary Meeting held on 25 February 2015 be confirmed as a true record of that meeting.

On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

Declarations of Interest

Clr Hadchiti declared a pecuniary interest in the following item:

Item CONF 07: Compulsory acquisition of part Lot 1 DP 1201516, 352-362 Macquarie Street, Liverpool for road purposes

Reason: Clr Hadchiti has a business relationship with the owner of the land.

Clr Hadchiti left the Chambers for the duration of this item.

Clr Mamone declared a pecuniary interest in the following item:

Item IHAP 02: DA-597/2014 - Staged subdivision to create a total of 20 Torrens title lots over two stages at 5 Angelina Court, Green Valley

Reason: The applicant is well known to Clr Mamone’s family on a personal level.

Clr Mamone left the Chambers for the duration of this item.

The Chief Executive Officer, Mr Carl Wulff declared a conflict of interest in the following item:

Item CONF 08: Stage Two Liverpool Strategic Service Delivery Partnership

Reason: The CEO declared a conflict of interest regarding this item and advised that he had excluded himself from the evaluation of the tender process on the basis that in a previous role he had a 7 year relationship with a company that has tendered. He advised that any questions relating to this item will be responded to by Council’s Chief Financial Officer and Council’s Director Business Improvement.

The Chief Executive Officer will remain in the Chambers for the duration of this item.

public forum

Presentation – Items not on agenda

1. Mr Tony Hoang from Potter’s House addressed the Council on a request for a reduction in fees for Green Valley District Centre.

Representation – Items on agenda

2. Ms Melissa Coros addressed Council on the following Item:

Item CONF 08 – Stage Two Liverpool Strategic Service Delivery Partnership.

Motion: Moved: Clr Hadchiti Seconded: Clr Shelton

That a two minute extension of time be given to Ms Melissa Coros.

On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

3. Mr Raymond Mifsud addressed Council on the following Item:

Item CONF 08 – Stage Two Liverpool Strategic Service Delivery Partnership.

4. Mr Raffaele Catanzariti addressed Council on the following Item:

Item CONF 08 – Stage Two Liverpool Strategic Service Delivery Partnership.

Motion: Moved: Mayor Mannoun Seconded: Clr Shelton

That a two minute extension of time be given to Mr Raffaele Catanzariti.

On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

Mayoral Minute

SUBJECT: Big Heart Big Vision - The Potters House Liverpool

Last week I met with Mr Tony Hoang, who provides through Green Valley Community Centre important outreach and diversionary services for young people in Liverpool.

Many of you may be aware of Mr Hoang’s story – it’s a compelling story about the dangers that our young can fall into and the need to find positive direction and guidance. Tony grew up in Cabramatta and at the heights of its issues with drugs found himself as a gang member and drug dealer. Now that he has walked his journey of reform and rehabilitation, he connects with at risk youth about the story of his life.

Tony’s unique path of redemption through social outreach allows him to present his story in a program that provides guidance and diversion. It has seen people put their lives back on the right track, engaging people through dramatic representation of his story. This story has been represented in programs such as Channel 7’s “Gangs of Oz” and SBS “Once Upon a Time in Cabramatta”.

Tony Huang’s program “Big Heart Big Vision” from The Potters House Liverpool, due to having a religious aspect to it whilst providing similar services to his other outreach work, has a higher cost of use of our community facilities. It falls into Category C as opposed to Category D to conduct their program each Sunday in two sessions at Green Valley Community Centre. This means that the program is unsustainable, and it would be great shames to not have this program continue to operate. I have heard the stories of lives changed, and think it is worth the minimal cost in forgone revenue.

I have been informed by staff that this organization meets the eligibility criteria of the Donations Policy and the Social Justice Policy. The organisation’s programs are meeting an identified need in accordance with Growing Liverpool 2023 Community Strategic Plan. Therefore I suggest that we provide certainty to Mr Hoang to allow him to continue to provide the greatest assistance to our youth.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council classify The Potters House Liverpool as Category D from 29 March 2015 until December 2016.

Motion: Moved: Mayor Mannoun

That the recommendation be adopted.

On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

Mayoral Minute

SUBJECT: Determination of Subdivision Applications

The purpose of the Mayoral Minute is to clarify Council’s intentions or position regarding the determination of subdivision applications following resolutions adopted by Council on 4 February 2015 and 25 February 2015.

For these applications, Council sought to introduce a mechanism to appropriately review and provide input into subdivisions outside the growth areas. This Mayoral minute replaces the earlier motion to align it better with the practice of delegations under the Local Government Act 1993, and ensure it more effectively addresses the aims of the original motion.

Delegations are normally made to the Chief Executive Officer in accordance with section 377 of the Local Government Act 1993. The Chief Executive Officer then can sub-delegate functions to Council staff in accordance with section 378 of the Local Government Act 1993.

RECOMMENDATION:

That Council delegates to the Chief Executive Officer the determination of all subdivision applications including those covered by NOM 03 of 04/02/2015 relating to subdivisions greater than 5 lots that fall outside the growth areas of Austral, Leppington North, Edmondson Park, and Middleton Grange, unless three or more Councillors inform the Chief Executive Officer that a particular subdivision application is to be referred to the elected Council for determination.

Motion: Moved: Mayor Mannoun

That the recommendation be adopted.

On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

Clr Stanley asked that she be recorded as voting against the motion.

Motion Moved: Mayor Mannoun Seconded: Clr Stanley

That CONF 08 – “Stage Two Liverpool Strategic Service Delivery Partnership” be brought forward and dealt with now.

On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

ITEM NO:	CONF 08
FILE NO:	063499.2015
SUBJECT:	Stage Two Liverpool Strategic Service Delivery Partnership
RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1. Accept the Tender from Queensland Partnership Group (LG Shared Services) Pty Ltd trading as Propel Partnerships (ABN 45 560 909 108) for ST2416 – Strategic Services Delivery Partnership for a period of 10 years, with the option of extending for a further 5 years. 2. Directs the Chief Executive Officer to undertake consultation with staff in accordance with Clause 39 of the (308) LOCAL GOVERNMENT (STATE) AWARD 2014 for a period of 28 days, to end on 21 April 2015 before any formal contract is signed. 3. Delegates authority to sign the Letter of Acceptance to the Chief Executive Officer in accordance with the above. 4. Delegates to the Chief Executive Officer all further powers necessary to give effect to this resolution. 5. Delegates to the Chief Executive Officer all further powers necessary to give effect to the Alliance Framework Contract to develop a shared services hub enabling any future Trade Services opportunities. 6. Notes the undertaking given by the Chief Executive Officer to staff who will be working within the Liverpool Services Alliance framework, regarding no forced redundancies or forced redeployment and no diminution in pay and terms and conditions of service. 7. Keeps confidential the specific details supplied in this report containing information on the submissions received, pursuant to the provisions of Section 10A(2)(d)(i) of the Local Government Act 1993 as it contains commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed, prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it.
COUNCIL DECISION Motion: Moved: Clr Waller Seconded: Clr Stanley That Council: 1. Directs the Chief Executive Officer to undertake consultation with staff in accordance with Clause 39 of the (308) LOCAL GOVERNMENT (STATE) AWARD 2014 for a period of 28 days, to end on 21 April 2015 before any formal contract is signed. 2. Keeps confidential the specific details supplied in this report containing information on the submissions received, pursuant to the provisions of Section 10A(2)(d)(i) of the Local Government Act 1993 as it contains commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed, prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it. 3. Defer this matter until the results of the consultations take place and alternatives as outlined this evening are explored. Note: The CEO confirmed that his employment will be dependent on the outcome of the Strategic Service Delivery Partnership. Foreshadowed motion: Moved: Clr Hadchiti Seconded: Clr Mamone That Council: 1. Accept the Tender from Queensland Partnership Group (LG Shared Services) Pty Ltd trading as Propel Partnerships (ABN 45 560 909 108) for ST2416 – Strategic Services Delivery Partnership for a period of 10 years, with the option of extending for a further 5 years. 2. Directs the Chief Executive Officer to undertake consultation with staff in accordance with Clause 39 of the (308) LOCAL GOVERNMENT (STATE) AWARD 2014 for a period of 28 days, to end on 21 April 2015 before any formal contract is signed. 3. Delegates authority to sign the Letter of Acceptance to the Chief Executive Officer in accordance with the above. 4. Delegates to the Chief Executive Officer all further powers necessary to give effect to this resolution. 5. Delegates to the Chief Executive Officer all further powers necessary to give effect to the Alliance Framework Contract to develop a shared services hub enabling any future Trade Services opportunities. 6. Notes the undertaking given by the Chief Executive Officer to staff who will be working within the Liverpool Services Alliance framework, regarding no forced redundancies or forced redeployment and no diminution in pay and terms and conditions of service. 7. Keeps confidential the specific details supplied in this report containing information on the submissions received, pursuant to the provisions of Section 10A(2)(d)(i) of the Local Government Act 1993 as it contains commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed, prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it. 8. Not permit any forced or voluntary redundancies for the life of the contract. 9. Transcribe the questions and answers from the recording of the meeting and include the transcript in the minutes. 10. Be the direct employer for any person employed to fill any vacant position that needs to be filled and that these employees have the same conditions as other Council staff. 11. Engage an independent auditor to investigate the tender process and report back to the Mayor. Note: The CEO confirmed that his employment will be dependent on the outcome of the Strategic Service Delivery Partnership. On being put to the meeting the motion (moved by Clr Waller) was declared LOST. Vote for: Clr Karnib Clr Shelton Clr Stanley Clr Waller Vote against: Mayor Mannoun Clr Balloot Clr Hadchiti Clr Hadid Clr Harle Clr Mamone Clr Ristevski The Foreshadowed motion (moved by Clr Hadchiti) then became the motion and on being put to the meeting was declared CARRIED. Vote for: Mayor Mannoun Clr Balloot Clr Hadchiti Clr Hadid Clr Harle Clr Mamone Clr Ristevski Vote against: Clr Karnib Clr Shelton Clr Stanley Clr Waller

Note: Below is a list of questions asked by Councillors during consideration of this item and the responses provided by Council Staff:

1. The report states that 61.76 staff will be included in the Liverpool Services “Alliance” – does that mean those staff will now work for Propel and they will no longer be working for Council?

The staff that are included in these arrangements with remain employed by Liverpool City Council for the duration of this contract. There will be no change to their terms and conditions and they will have the same benefits for the lifetime of the contract. (CAROLE TODD – Director Business Improvement)

2. Does this ‘Alliance’ mean that we can expect redundancies, is that where the savings come from?

No, quite the contrary, there are to be no forced redundancies or redeployments, the Council report contains an undertaking by the CEO to that effect. We do not envisage any forced or voluntary redundancies. The cost of redundancies would be counter productive to making any efficiencies or savings. (CAROLE TODD – Director Business Improvement)

3. In terms of rate payers, what difference will these new arrangements make?

There is no change as such. These new arrangements will not result in an increase in rates or charges. There will be an increase in the quality of service provided to ratepayers however the investment made up front to provide the transition to the new arrangements will not be made by Council, that investment comes from Propel. The savings that will be made from this contract will be invested back into Council, so the ratepayers will actually benefit from those savings. (CAROLE TODD – Director Business Improvement)

4. Why haven’t we consulted with the community?

This is a procurement matter and Council does not consult with the community when procuring. (CAROLE TODD – Director Business Improvement)

5. Why is the contract for 10 years, seems like a very long term commitment.

There is a restriction relating to commercial in confidence; however I can say that the pay back for Propel is several years into the contract. As such 10 years is appropriate. (GARY GRANTHAM – Chief Financial Officer/Director Corporate Services)

6. What is the risk to Council of entering into this ‘Alliance’?

There will be different cultures and we need to align the different cultures of the organisations. KPI’s may not be achieved. If so, we will go through the dispute resolution process. (GARY GRANTHAM – Chief Financial Officer/Director Corporate Services)

7. If a staff member leaves, will Council have the ability to replace that staff member?

Ultimately, Council has the right to replace the employee if desired. (GARY GRANTHAM – Chief Financial Officer/Director Corporate Services)

8. Who will Council employees within the partnership report to, Council or Propel?

They report to Propel and Propel report to a governance committee made up of two representatives from Council – the CEO & CFO and two Senior people from Propel. There are governance rules written into the contract to that effect. (CAROLE TODD – Director Business Improvement)

9. Will employees still have the opportunity to access Union representation?

There are no changes to the protection that the In scope employees will have in relation to HR, performance or disciplinary matters. In fact quite the contrary, the recommendations in this report note include the undertaking from the CEO that there will be no forced redundancies or redeployment for In Scope employees. Which is actually a higher level of protection than afforded to remaining LCC staff. (GARY GRANTHAM – Chief Financial Officer/Director Corporate Services)

10. Will the partnership result in a loss of jobs?

As a result of Fit for the Future, Council has to make changes rather than reducing head count, Council is looking to increase revenue opportunities.

The model is innovative and uncommon in Australia hence the reason Propel was successful. In addition to Propel providing Council services, additional business opportunities can be pursued with Propel according to Council’s risk appetite – for example Council could share commercial returns with propel according to the risk appetite the Council will pursue, for example Propel could have 90% of the risk and return, and Council 10%, risk or return or this could vary to 80:20, 70:30, 50:50 etc. This will ultimately bring jobs to Liverpool, for example in Ipswich the Council performs services for 20+ Councils. (GARY GRANTHAM – Chief Financial Officer/Director Corporate Services)

11. How many tenders were received and if a tender was withheld what would happen with that employee.

Firstly, this may be a ‘commercial in confidence matter. After receiving advice, Mr Grantham advised that only one tender was received. If an employee withheld the tender this would be a serious matter. (GARY GRANTHAM – Chief Financial Officer/Director Corporate Services)

12. Would they be sacked? Is this a sackable offence?

Yes (GARY GRANTHAM – Chief Financial Officer/Director Corporate Services)

13. Can we include into the contract that there will be no redundancies?

This cannot be written into the contract as it’s not relevant to Propel, it is a Council issue. As stated there will be no compulsory or voluntary redundancies. Council has the right to determine whether a position is to be filled as vacancies arise, no employees will lose their jobs as a result of these arrangements. (GARY GRANTHAM – Chief Financial Officer/Director Corporate Services)

14. Will Council’s existing Dispute Resolution processes remain?

Yes, in addition the model has a further dispute resolution in that the Governance committee (made up of Propel’s Managing Director, Senior Propel person) and Council’s (CEO and CFO) will address disputes. (GARY GRANTHAM – Chief Financial Officer/Director Corporate Services)

15. If Council amalgamated during the term of the contract, what would happen?

If amalgamation happens, the additional employees at Council’s option could be included in the partnership. (GARY GRANTHAM – Chief Financial Officer/Director Corporate Services)

16. Carl, do you agree with the answer provided and will you be willing to put your job on the line.

The answer is simple, yes. (CARL WULFF – CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Notices of Motion

ITEM NO: NOM 01

FILE NO: 060191.2015

SUBJECT: Committee meetings

NOTICE OF MOTION

That the CEO takes adequate steps to ensure all future committee minutes of each Committee of Council:

1. record all motions formally moved,

2. record the identity of the mover and seconder of each such motion together with the voting outcome, and such other information as may be referred to under the Local Government (General) Regulation, 2005

3. no longer record 'action items' (where it is not possible to identify the promoters (and dissenters) with respect to such items), and

4. record that declarations of conflicts of interest were called for at the commencement of each committee meeting and the result of such call (even where no conflicts of interest were disclosed).

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion: Moved: Clr Shelton Seconded: Clr Stanley

That the recommendation be adopted.

Amendment: Moved: Clr Ristevski Seconded: Clr Hadchiti

That the CEO takes adequate steps to ensures all future Committee minutes of each Committee of Council:

1. record all motions formally moved,

3. no longer record 'action items' (where it is not possible to identify the promoters (and dissenters) with respect to such items), and

4. record that declarations of conflicts of interest were called for at the commencement of each committee meeting and the result of such call (even where no conflicts of interest were disclosed).

5. Ensure the minutes of all committee meetings are consistent with the format of Council meetings.

6. Notes that committee meetings have been successful in progressing significant reforms in an environment of open dialogue, collaboration, and with significant stakeholder input.

On being put to the meeting the Amendment (moved by Clr Ristevski) was declared CARRIED.

Questions with Notice

ITEM NO: QWN 01

FILE NO: 050209.2015

SUBJECT: Question with Notice - Clr Stanley

Please address the following:

1. Can I be advised if a report has been prepared for Council on the outcomes of the attached Liverpool Heritage Strategy 2011-2014? If this has been presented can I be provided with a copy? If not when will such a report be ready?

A review of the 2011-2014 Heritage Strategy will be one of the key inputs into the new LEP. In the interim, a review of properties having potential heritage value is being conducted to identify any priority action items. A report on the proposed timeline for the preparation of the new LEP will be prepared for the April Council meeting.

2. Can I be advised the progress of the review regarding the Heritage Conservation Management Plan as described on Liverpool Council website http://www.liverpool.nsw.gov.au/council/policies-and-forms/forms-publications-and-policies

The review of existing conservation management plans will be a matter considered as part of the new Heritage Strategy. The list of conservation management plans on Council’s website is to be updated soon.

3. Does Council require in its DA process an archaeological report for areas especially in the CBD that are likely because of their uses of the last two hundred years to contain items of interest?

The majority of the CBD is covered by the heritage listing known as the Plan of Town of Liverpool (Item No. 89) pursuant to the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan, which relates not only to the Colonial period grid layout of Liverpool but more importantly the archaeology it contains (heritage inventory attached). To enable the appropriate management of this heritage item a study was undertaken in 1996 by Casey & Lowe Associates for Liverpool City Council. This study, titled ‘Liverpool Archaeological Zoning and Management Plan’ identifies lots in the CBD that have archaeological potential. If development is proposed in the CBD on one of the sites identified as having archaeological potential then an archaeological assessment is required to be submitted with the DA.

4. What requirements must be met if items of significance are found?

If development is proposed in the CBD on one of the sites identified as having archaeological potential then an archaeological assessment is required to be submitted with the DA.

5. Is there a process to determine areas of Aboriginal significance and how these areas are dealt with in any potential Development Application?

For all Pre-DA meetings the Heritage Officer researches the location to determine if an Aboriginal heritage study covers the area. If so, the study is reviewed to decide if the site is identified as having archaeological sensitivity and takes into consideration the recommendations of this report. If the site is noted as having archaeological sensitivity then an Aboriginal heritage assessment is required as part of the DA. If no study is available, a basic assessment of the site is undertaken including: an Aboriginal Heritage Information Management System (AHIMS) search to determine if Aboriginal sites are known on the site or in the vicinity; and basic site prediction modelling to identify potential sites (i.e. large areas of uncleared land in close proximity to a watercourse). If the site is considered to have potential for Aboriginal cultural heritage based on this assessment, then a due diligence assessment or a full archaeological assessment may be required as part of the DA documentation. All archaeological assessments must be undertaken in accordance with OEH guidelines.

ITEM NO: QWN 02

FILE NO: 050281.2015

SUBJECT: Question with Notice - Clr Stanley

Please address the following:

Can I be advised if a decision has been made as to where and when the Cenotaph in the Mall will be relocated and the projected cost?

The Cenotaph located in Macquarie Mall was commissioned by Liverpool City Council in 1994 to coincide with the upgrade of the Mall. Lisa Anderson, the artist collaborated with the local community in the design development phase. The design of this sculpture uses columns as the classical representations of the body, these figures surround the fallen figure, resting on the grass. The garden is constructed in the shape of the demi-glory of bayonets, commonly known as the rising sun badge. The bottom part of the broken stem acts as a sundial at the 11th hour on the 11th month, casting a shadow into the top part of the broken stem and reuniting the figure on Remembrance Day. The impressions in the camouflaged sentry columns represent objects of war and peace brought forward by the Liverpool community and Defence Forces archives. The story on the fallen stem represents loss, that emotion most keenly felt in a community touched by war. The Cenotaph was dedicated by His Excellency Rear Admiral Peter Sinclair AC, Governor of NSW in December 1994.

The planned upgrade to Macquarie Mall means that the Cenotaph will have to be removed. Kiersten Fishburn, Director Community and Culture, and Albert Galetta, Manager Buildings and Open Space Construction, have spoken with the artist, Lisa Anderson, to inform her of this. Considering the significance of the piece, it is planned to reinstall it in a new location – a number of sites are currently under consideration. It is the wish of the artist that it is reinstalled and not decommissioned. The artist has also expressed a wish to be involved in this process and sees the possibility of bringing together the local community again. This would seem fitting at a time when we are commemorating 100 years since World War 1. As the final site has not yet been determined, the costs of removal and re-installation are not clear but a likely indicative figure is approx. $100,000.

The RSL have also been consulted and are happy to have the work re-installed in an alternative site.

Pip Playford, the artist of the fountain (also located in the mall), has also been informed and is understanding of the plans and the desire to rejuvenate the Mall. CPAC staff are looking at the possibility of providing some of the fountain sculptures as artworks for the community – for example, in local schools. The artist would be appreciative if this could be done.

Clr Hadchiti left the Chambers at 9.42pm.

Clr Hadchiti returned to the Chambers at 9.43 pm.

Motion Moved: Mayor Mannoun Seconded: Clr Hadid

That Items CONF 06 and CONF 07 be brought forward and dealt with now.

On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

ITEM NO:	CONF 06
FILE NO:	063260.2015
SUBJECT:	Compulsory acquisition of Lot 1 DP 514817, 64 Scott Street, Liverpool
RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1. Proceeds with the compulsory acquisition of Lot 1 DP 514817, 64 Scott Street, Liverpool, for a public purpose; 2. Proceeds with making the necessary application to the Minister for Local Government and the Governor in accordance with Section 187(2) of the Local Government Act 1993 to obtain approval to give an acquisition notice for Lot 1 DP 514817 to the owner of 64 Scott Street, Liverpool and commence compulsory acquisition under the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991; 3. Authorises the Director Property & Commercial Development to continue negotiations with the owner for the acquisition of Lot 1 DP 514817, 64 Scott Street, Liverpool, up to the amount contained in this confidential attachment without having to submit a further report to Council for approval; 4. Upon settlement of the acquisition, classifies Lot 1 DP 514817, 64 Scott Street, Liverpool as ‘Operational' land; 5. Keeps confidential the attachment supplied under separate cover containing the acquisition price pursuant to the provisions of Section 10A(2)(c) of the Local Government Act 1993 as this information would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business; and 6. Authorises its delegated officer to execute any document, under Power of Attorney necessary to give effect to this decision.
COUNCIL DECISION Motion: Moved: Mayor Mannoun Seconded: Clr Hadchiti That the recommendation be adopted. On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

Clr Hadchiti left the Chambers at 9.46pm.

ITEM NO:	CONF 07
FILE NO:	063520.2015
SUBJECT:	Compulsory acquisition of part Lot 1 DP 1201516, 352-362 Macquarie Street, Liverpool for road purposes
RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1. Proceeds with the compulsory acquisition of part Lot 1 DP 1201516, 352-362 Macquarie Street, Liverpool, for road purposes; 2. Proceeds with making the necessary application to the Minister for Local Government and the Governor in accordance with Section 187(2) of the Local Government Act 1993 to obtain approval to give an acquisition notice for part Lot 1 DP 1201516 to the owners of 352-362 Macquarie Street, Liverpool and commence compulsory acquisition under the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991; 3. Keeps confidential the attachment supplied under separate cover containing the acquisition price pursuant to the provisions of Section 10A(2)(c) of the Local Government Act 1993 as this information would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business; 4. Upon settlement of the acquisition, classifies part of Lot 1 DP 1201516, 352-362 Macquarie Street, Liverpool, as ‘Operational’ land; and 5. Authorises its delegated officer to execute any document, under Power of Attorney necessary to give effect to this decision. 6. Authorises the CEO or his nominee to negotiate and enter into a contract to acquire part of lot 1 DP 1201516, 352 – 362 Macquarie Street Liverpool for an amount no greater than 10% of the independent valuation.
COUNCIL DECISION Motion: Moved: Clr Mamone Seconded: Clr Balloot That the recommendation be adopted. On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED. Clr Karnib, Clr Stanley and Clr Waller asked that they be recorded as voting against the motion.

Clr Hadchiti returned to the Chambers at 9.49pm.

Clr Waller left the Chambers at 9.49pm.

ITEM NO:	CONF 01
FILE NO:	052126.2015
SUBJECT:	Proposed rezoning of part Lot 10 DP 1162812, Heathcote Road, Hammondville, 'Hammondville Park'
RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1. Agrees to commence the process to rezone part Lot 10 DP 1162812, Heathcote Road, Hammondville, to ‘RE2 Private Recreation’ and ‘B6 Enterprise Corridor’ as outlined in the confidential attachment, through an amendment to the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008; and 2. Receives a further report following the public exhibition process with a recommendation as to proceeding with the rezoning.
COUNCIL DECISION Motion: Moved: Mayor Mannoun Seconded: Clr Balloot That the recommendation be adopted. On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

ITEM NO:	CONF 02
FILE NO:	052439.2015
SUBJECT:	Key Sites Master Planning Steering Committee Minutes from Meeting held 3 March 2015
RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1. Receives and notes the Minutes of the Key Sites Master Planning Steering Committee Meeting held on 3 March 2015; 2. Adopts the recommendation put forward in this report; and 3. Keeps confidential the minutes supplied in this report containing information pursuant to the provisions of Section 10A(2)(c) of the Local Government Act 1993 as it contains information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business.
COUNCIL DECISION Motion: Moved: Clr Balloot Seconded: Clr Ristevski That the recommendation be adopted. On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

ITEM NO:	CONF 03
FILE NO:	052757.2015
SUBJECT:	Appointment of Community Representatives on Civic Advisory Committee
RECOMMENDATION That Council appoints the two recommended applicants as identified in the confidential report.
COUNCIL DECISION Motion: Moved: Mayor Mannoun Seconded: Clr Hadchiti That Council appoints June Young and Munya Gwede as the community representatives on the Civic Advisory Committee. On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

Clr Waller returned to the Chambers at 9.51pm.

ITEM NO:	CONF 04
FILE NO:	051829.2015
SUBJECT:	Legal Affairs Report
RECOMMENDATION That Council receive and note the report concerning the Legal Affairs of Council.
COUNCIL DECISION Motion: Moved: Clr Balloot Seconded: Clr Ristevski That the recommendation be adopted. On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

ITEM NO:	CONF 05
FILE NO:	163041.2014
SUBJECT:	Liverpool City Centre LEP Review
RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1. Endorses in principle the proposal to rezone all existing land zoned B3 Commercial Core in the city centre to B4 Mixed Use. 2. Endorses in principle the proposal to revise the development standards as detailed in this report. 3. Delegates to the CEO the authority to approve the final Planning Proposal for submission to the Department of Planning and Environment for Gateway Review.
COUNCIL DECISION Motion: Moved: Mayor Mannoun Seconded: Clr Hadchiti That this matter be deferred to the next Council meeting. On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

The meeting closed at 9.52pm.

Name: Ned Mannoun

Title: Mayor

Date: 26 May 2015

I have authorised a stamp bearing my signature to be affixed to the pages of the Minutes of the Council Meeting held on 29 April 2015. I confirm that Council has adopted these Minutes as a true and accurate record of the meeting.

Ordinary Meeting 29 April 2015

Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel Report

IHAP 01

DA-364/2014 - Torrens title subdivision of Lot 32 DP 866117 into 16 lots, associated road and footpath construction, landscaping and tree removal

Strategic Direction	Liveable Safe City Deliver an efficient planning system which embraces sustainable urban renewal and development
Key Policy	Urban Development Plans
File Ref	072640.2015
Report By	Nabila Samadie - Senior Development Planner
Approved By	Toni Averay - Director Planning & Growth

Property

Lot 32 DP 866117

761 Cowpasture Road, Green Valley

Owner

NT Satar Management Pty Ltd

Applicant

Vesta Homes Pty Ltd

Executive Summary

Council has received and considered a development application DA-364/2014, proposing a Torrens title subdivision of Lot 32 DP 866117 into 16 residential lots, associated road and footpath construction, landscaping and tree removal at 761 Cowpasture Road, Green Valley. The application was lodged on 2 May 2014.

This application was referred to the 23 March 2015 meeting of the Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel (IHAP) as the development seeks to vary Clause 7.13 of the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan (LLEP) 2008 which requires a 10 metre minimum lot width. The proposed lot width at its narrowest point is 4.05 metres, representing a variation of 59%.

The IHAP recommendation was to approve the development application subject to conditions of consent.

It is noted that amended conditions of consent are attached which include additional conditions of consent relating to the management of contamination on the subject site, following the receipt of a Stage 2 contamination report. The Stage 2 report was lodged prior to the IHAP meeting, however was not able to be included in the IHAP report as it was received subsequent to the final IHAP report deadline. On this basis, the Council officer’s IHAP report made the following recommendation:

That Council approves DA-364/2014 subject to the recommended conditions of consent and the submission of a Stage 2 contamination report and any further conditions as a result.

The Stage 2 contamination report was reviewed by Council’s Environmental Health officer who raised no objection to the proposal subject to conditions of consent. Accordingly, amended recommended conditions of consent are attached.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council approves Development Application DA-364/2014, subject to the amended recommended conditions of consent attached.

Background

Council has received and considered a development application DA-364/2014 proposing a Torrens title subdivision of Lot 32 DP 866117 into 16 residential lots, associated road and footpath construction, landscaping and tree removal at 761 Cowpasture Road, Green Valley.

Pursuant to the requirements of the endorsed IHAP Charter and Procedure, the proposal was referred to the IHAP for consideration as the proposed development includes a request to vary a development standard in excess of 10%, pursuant to Clause 4.6 of the LLEP 2008.

The application is accompanied by a written request to vary Clause 7.13 of the LLEP 2008 which prescribes the minimum lot width for subdivision in Zones R1, R2, R3 and R4. A minimum lot width of 10m for each proposed lot applies to the site. The application proposes a minimum lot width of 4.05m for Lots 11 and 12.

The Site

The subject site is described as Lot 32 DP 866117 and is located at 761 Cowpasture Road, Green Valley. The subject site is 8,332m2 in size and is currently vacant. The remaining boundaries to the east and west are bordered by existing residential dwellings.

An aerial map of the site is provided in Figure 1 below.

Subject Site

Figure 1: Aerial image of the subject site.

The subject site is located in an established residential area within Green Valley which is characterised by low density residential development.

Figure 2: Aerial image of the subject site and wider locality.

details of the proposal

The development application proposes a Torrens title subdivision of Lot 32 DP 866117 into 16 residential lots, associated road and footpath construction, landscaping and tree removal.

The application is accompanied by a written request, pursuant to Clause 4.6 of the LLEP 2008, to vary Clause 7.13 of the LLEP 2008, which prescribes the minimum lot width in Zones R1, R2, R3 and R4.

An extract of the proposed subdivision plan is provided in Figure 3 below.

Figure 3: Proposed subdivision layout

the issues

The key issue identified with respect to the proposal relates to the variation to the minimum lot width required by Clause 7.13 of the LLEP.

Proposed Lots 11 and 12 fails to comply with Clause 7.13, which states that the width of any lot, resulting from a subdivision of land, that is not subject of a development application for residential development, must not be less than 10 meters except in the instance where the lot resulting from a subdivision of land is a battle-axe.

The application is not subject to residential development. Proposed Lots 11 and 12 propose a minimum lot width of 4.05m, representing a variation of 59%.

Consequently, the applicant has submitted a written request seeking a variation to the minimum lot width control as prescribed by Clause 7.13(3) LLEP.

The objectives of Clause 4.6 of the LLEP are as follows:

(a) “to provide an appropriate degree of flexibility in applying certain development standards to particular development,

(b) to achieve better outcomes for and from development by allowing flexibility in particular circumstances.”

Clause 4.6 (3) prescribes:

Development consent must not be granted for development that contravenes a development standard unless the consent authority has considered a written request from the applicant that seeks to justify the contravention of the development standard by demonstrating:

(a) that compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case, and

(b) that there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the development standard.”

The applicant has provided justification for the departure to the development standard as follows:

· Clause 7.13(3) of the LEP contains a minimum lot width of 10m for allotments with a street frontage. Lots 11 and 12 of the plan of subdivision adjoin the cul-de-sac and have a total (arc) frontage of 13.9m – 16.15m to the cul-de-sac with a width of 12m for the majority of the lot, narrowing to 4.5m to accommodate the cul-de-sac.

· The proposal does not detract from the stated objectives, noting the proposed allotments remain of a size and shape accommodating residential development without unreasonably affecting residential amenity- including the irregular allotments. The allotments are all appropriately sized and dimensioned to permit residential dwellings consistent with the planning controls in the Liverpool LEP 2008 and Liverpool DCP.

· The technical variation to the minimum lot width development standard for Lots 11 and 12 is acceptable in the circumstances of this case and compliance with the development standard is considered unreasonable and unnecessary based on the following:

· The variation to the 10m allotment width is at the front portion of the allotments adjoining the cul-de-sac, noting the majority of the allotment and portion accommodating the built form is 12m in width.

· The lots (Lot 11 and 12) are 367.8m2 – 386.8m2 meeting the minimum site area requirement of 300m2 contained in clause 4.1 of the LEP.

· The majority of the Lots 11 and 12 including the area accommodating the built form is 12m in width.

· The concept plan for Lot 11 confirms that a residential development on the allotments can be accommodated to meet the development controls contained in Part 3.5 of the Liverpool DCP including setbacks, landscape area and open space, and parking.

The applicant in their submission has requested that Council give consideration to the variation to the minimum lot width by demonstrating that in the circumstances of this case, a suitable development is still achieved despite the variation. The submission demonstrates that on the basis of environmental planning grounds, strict compliance is unnecessary given the circumstance of this case.

Although the proposed development does not adhere to strict compliance with the minimum lot width, it satisfies the objectives of the clause.

The following comments are provided in relation to how the proposed development satisfies the objectives of Clause 7.13:

(1) The objective of this clause is to ensure that lot dimensions are able to accommodate residential development that is suitable for its purpose and is consistent with relevant development controls.

It is considered that the proposed 4.05 metre frontage to lots 11 and 12 is still able to accommodate a residential development with adequate open space and access to the street; while maintaining compliance with relevant controls given the size of the lots and the majority of the lot width measuring in excess of 10 metres.

Having regard to the above, it is considered that strict compliance with Clause 7.13 (3) is unreasonable and unnecessary in this instance.

Independent Hearing and assessment panel

At their meeting on 23 March 2015 IHAP made the following recommendation:

The Panel recommends that DA-364/2014 for a a Torrens title subdivision of Lot 32 DP 866117 into 16 residential lots, associated road and footpath construction, landscaping and tree removal at Lot 32 DP 866117 761 Cowpasture Road, Green Valley be approved subject to conditions attached to the Council officer’s report.

Conclusion

The application has been assessed against the relevant considerations prescribed by Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and is worthy of support. On this basis, the application is recommended for approval, subject to conditions.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic and Financial	Enhance the environmental performance of buildings and homes.
Environmental and Sustainability	Enhance the environmental performance of buildings and homes.
Social and Cultural	Regulate for a mix of housing types that responds to different population groups such as young families and older people.
Civic Leadership and Governance	There are no civic leadership and governance considerations.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Applicant and Land Owner Details View (Under separate cover)

2. IHAP report View (Under separate cover)

3. IHAP recommendation View (Under separate cover)

4. Amended recommended conditions of consent View (Under separate cover)

107

Ordinary Meeting 29 April 2015

Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel Report

IHAP 02

DA-48/2014 - Construction and operation of a motel development with associated at-grade and basement car parking and signage

Strategic Direction	Liveable Safe City Deliver an efficient planning system which embraces sustainable urban renewal and development
Key Policy	Urban Development Plans
File Ref	072862.2015
Report By	George Nehme - Senior Development Planner
Approved By	Toni Averay - Director Planning & Growth

Property	654A and 654B Hume Highway Casula (Lots 1 and 2 DP 1122900)
Owner	Destiny (NSW) Pty Ltd
Applicant	Mr F AL Hazzouri

Executive Summary

Council has received and considered a development application DA-48/2014, proposing the construction and operation of a motel development with associated at-grade and basement car parking and signage at 654A and 654B Hume Highway, Casula (Lots 1 and 2 DP 1122900). The application was lodged on 30 January 2014.

This application was referred to the 23 March 2015 meeting of the Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel (IHAP) as the development seeks to vary Clause 7.15 of the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan (LLEP) 2008 which requires a minimum 90 metre building street frontage in a B6 Enterprise Corridor Zone. The existing development site frontage is 18.3m, representing a variation of 79.6% to the development standard.

The application was also referred to the 23 March 2015 IHAP meeting as Council has received five unresolved submissions objecting to the application. The key issues raised in the submissions relate to, privacy, emissions and noise from the carpark, bin location, overshadowing, noise during construction, excessive height, excessive density and insufficient open space.

The IHAP recommendation was to approve the development application subject to an amendment to Condition 1a and the addition of Condition 1e to the recommended conditions of consent as contained within the Council Officer’s IHAP report attached.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council that Council approves Development Application DA-48/2014 subject to the recommended amended conditions of consent attached.

Background

Council has received and considered a development application DA-48/2014 proposing the construction and operation of a motel development with associated at-grade and basement car parking and signage at 654A and 654B Hume Highway, Casula (Lots 1 and 2 DP 1122900)

Pursuant to the requirements of the endorsed Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel (IHAP) Charter and Procedure, the proposal was referred to the IHAP for consideration as the proposed development includes a request to vary a development standard in excess of 10% pursuant to Clause 4.6 of the LLEP 2008.

The application is accompanied by a written request to vary Clause 7.15 of the LLEP 2008 which requires a minimum 90 metre building street frontage in a B6 Enterprise Corridor Zone. The subject site frontage has a site frontage of 18.3m, representing a variation of 79.6%.

The application has received five unresolved objections. The key issues raised in the submissions relate to, privacy, emissions and noise from the carpark, bin location, overshadowing, noise during construction, excessive height, excessive density and insufficient open space.

The Site

The site is identified as 654A and 654B Hume Highway, Casula, with a legal description of Lots 1 and 2 in DP 1122900. The site is a regular shaped allotment located on the southern side of the Hume Highway. The subject site has a frontage of 18.3m fronting the Hume Highway. The total site area equates to 919.6m². The site also has a significant slope from north to south of approximately 6m. Currently the subject site is vacant.

An aerial map of the site is provided in Figure 1 below.

Figure 1: Aerial Photograph

The context of the area is characterised by a mixture of commercial, and low to medium scale residential development.

· Directly to the east of the development is an existing multi-dwelling housing development. Located further east from the development site is an existing service station.

· Directly to the west of the site is a detached two storey dwelling house. Located further west of the subject site is an existing commercial premises used for the purpose of hiring out construction vehicles and equipment.

· Located north of the development site across the Hume Highway is a large commercial complex containing a variety of large scale commercial premises, bulky goods premises and food and drink premises.

· Located south of the development site are a variety of low density detached single and two storey dwellings.

A locality map is provided in Figure 2 below.

Figure 2: Locality Map

details of the proposal

The application seeks consent for the construction and operation of a 26 room motel development over three storeys with associated at-grade and 2 levels of basement car parking and signage.

Specific details of the proposal are as follows:

1) The ground floor includes the motel reception area and lounge at the front of the building along with staff facilities, office and storage room. There are 9 rooms at the ground floor and rooms 1-7 have balconies. There are 3 parking spaces forward of the building line at grade fronting the Hume Highway.

2) The first and second floors of the Motel contain a total of 17 rooms and there are communal lounge areas at the front of the building at each level.

3) The proposal contains 2 levels of basement car parking with a total of 29 parking spaces including 3 accessible parking spaces with a shared zone. The upper level basement contains a garbage storage area and a loading space at the lower basement level. The basement is accessed via a proposed 6m driveway off the Hume Highway.

4) The motel operations are detailed as follows;

a) There will be 2 full-time staff members including a Motel Manager and reception/administration staff.

b) The standard office hours of operation will be 7am – 7pm seven days per week. On-line bookings may be made outside these times and the Manager will be available for emergencies by telephone.

c) The cleaning of the Motel rooms and common areas will be undertaken by a cleaning contractor. The washing of bed linen and towels will also be contracted to a commercial contactor. The rooms will be cleaned on a daily basis, together with the collection/return of linen and towels. The linen and towels will be collected with a small rigid vehicle using the allocated loading area at the lower level basement. Other than the loading area, the applicant has proposed an extra 2 car spaces within the basement that could cater for the cleaning staff.

An extract of the proposed site/ground floor plan is provided in Figure 3 below.

Figure 3: Ground Floor/Site Plan

the issues

Variation to Clause 7.15 – Minimum Building Street Frontage in Zone B6

The key issues identified with respect to the application relate to the Clause 4.6 variation to the minimum building street frontage control under Clause 7.15 of the LLEP 2008. The extent of the variation proposed equates to 79.6%.

Clause 7.15(2) of the LLEP 2008 states;

Development consent must not be granted to the erection of a new building or to an addition to an existing building on land in Zone B6 Enterprise Corridor unless any frontage of the site to a classified road is at least:

(a) 90 metres, or

(b) if the site also fronts a road other than the classified road, 30 metres.

The subject allotment has an existing frontage to the Hume Highway of 18.3m and therefore fails to comply with the requirements of Clause 7.15(2). The extent of the variation is 79.6%

Consequently, pursuant to Clause 4.6 of the LLEP 2008 the applicant has submitted a written request seeking a variation to the minimum building street frontage, as prescribed by clause 7.15(2).

The objectives of Clause 4.6 are as follows:

(a) “to provide an appropriate degree of flexibility in applying certain development standards to particular development,

(b) to achieve better outcomes for and from development by allowing flexibility in particular circumstances.”

Clause 4.6(3) prescribes:

“Development consent must not be granted for development that contravenes a development standard unless the consent authority has considered a written request from the applicant that seeks to justify the contravention of the development standard by demonstrating:

(a) that compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case, and

(b) that there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the development standard.”

The applicant has provided justification for the departure to the development standard which is summarised as follows:

The proposed development meets the objectives of the street frontage development standard based on the following assessment:

· The development proposal has been designed with a two-way driveway access at the front boundary to ensure vehicles do not unreasonably impact on traffic flows on the Hume Highway.

· The driveway has adequate separation to the driveway to 650-652 Hume Highway (multi-dwelling housing development) and adjoins the driveway for the dwelling house at 656 Hume Highway. The proposed driveway will not conflict with vehicle movements from the dwelling house with good sight lines maintained.

· The Motel development has been designed to be compatible with the residential land use of the adjoining properties with a commercial presence consistent with the objectives of the B6 – Enterprise Corridor zone.

· The subject site is an existing vacant parcel of land adjoining a multi-dwelling housing development and new dwelling house. Formal correspondence was made with 656 Hume Highway by registered mail seeking confirmation of amalgamation with the adjoining property. There has been no response to consolidate the sites for development and the development application is made for the existing vacant parcels of land.

· The consolidation with 656 Hume Highway would not achieve 90m frontage and the development of the existing vacant parcel of land is an orderly and economic development of the land.

· The development proposal has been designed with a 6m wide driveway allowing for two-way traffic movements from the site to the Hume Highway. The driveway design is supported in the Traffic and Parking Statement prepared by Hemanote Consulting.

· The form and scale of development on the vacant parcel of land is compatible with the adjoining land uses and has been designed to ensure there is minimal impact on the adjoining properties in the B6 – Enterprise Corridor Zone.

· The development proposal has been designed to meet the height, floor space ratio, setback (minor variation front setback) and parking controls contained in the Liverpool LEP 2008 and DCP confirming the site can accommodate a Motel development.

· The proposed Motel development ensures the site has a commercial frontage to the Hume Highway consistent with the objectives of the B6 – Enterprise Corridor Zone.

The following comments are offered in response to the variation sought to Clause 7.15:

1) The development site is bordered by an existing multi-dwelling development to the east and a two storey dwelling house to the west. Refer to figure 10 below. Both these developments are in fairly good condition and requesting demolition of these development and enforcing consolidation to achieve the required 90m frontage as stipulated by Clause 7.15 would be unreasonable and counter-productive in this instance.

2) If consolidation with the adjoining sites to the east and west (i.e. 656 Hume Highway and 652 Hume Highway) was proposed the required 90m frontage would still not be achieved.

3) The proposed development has demonstrated compliance with all other relevant LLEP 2008 development standards (i.e. FSR and Height).

4) The proposed development is of an appropriate bulk and scale and has been designed to alleviate privacy impacts through the use of privacy screens and appropriate design methods.

5) The proposed development is consistent with the intended and desired future character of the B6 Enterprise Corridor Zone.

6) There are existing commercial developments on surrounding sites fronting the Hume Highway in a B6 zone that do not achieve the required 90m frontage.

7) The development has been designed to achieve safe and efficient vehicular access and egress from the site.

8) Councils Traffic Engineers and the Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) have reviewed the proposal and have considered it satisfactory.

Having regards to the above, the subject site is effectively land-locked and any development on this site would not be possible unless flexibility is shown to the 90m frontage control. The proposed development has demonstrated compliance with FSR and height controls and is considered to be of an appropriate bulk and scale in the locality. The development has been designed to alleviate potential privacy and shadowing impacts on adjoining properties. The proposed Motel is considered to be a suitable form of development having regards to the B6 zoning and is considered a form of development that is consistent with the intended and desired future character of the area. Consequently it is considered that strict compliance with Clause 7.15 Minimum Building Street Frontage in Zone B6 is unreasonable and unnecessary in this instance.

Unresolved Objections

The other key issues identified with respect to the proposal relate to unresolved objections received to the application. The concerns raised in the submissions relate to, privacy, emissions and noise from the carpark, bin location, overshadowing, noise during construction, excessive height, excessive density and insufficient open space.

The proposal was placed on advertising between 5 March 2014 to the 19 March 2014. During the advertising period five submissions were received objecting to the proposal. The key issues raised in the submissions relate to privacy, emissions and noise from the carpark, bin location, overshadowing, noise during construction, excessive height, excessive density and insufficient open space. Each of the issues are discussed below.

ISSUE 1: Privacy

Comment: The proposal has provided louvered privacy screens along the majority of balconies to alleviate any detrimental privacy concerns.

Moreover, in consideration of the IHAP’s recommendation, a condition of consent has been imposed requiring the following;

· All balustrades are to be of an opaque material for example, colour backed glass.

· Sliding screens on balconies should be provided to fully enclose the balconies when extended. Nominally there will be three sliding screens per balcony.

· The corridor window on the south west elevation is to be frosted glass.

· The window on the northern elevation to the common lounge rooms on the first and second level should have a sill height of 1.5 metres.

These conditions will alleviate any detrimental privacy impacts on the adjoining properties.

ISSUE 2: Emissions and noise from the car park

Comment: The majority of car parking spaces would be located within a basement with only three car parking spaces located at ground level fronting the Hume Highway. The three parking spaces at ground level are for customers making enquiries. The majority of vehicle movements will be screened by the basement walls from the adjoining properties. The expected level of noise to be generated from the site from normal vehicle movements is considered to acceptable in this instance.

Garbage storage areas located within the basement are ventilated in accordance with the relevant Australian Standards. Conditions of consent are included to ensure that rubbish would be collected from the site on a regular basis at a minimum of once per week and not cause a nuisance to adjoining properties.

ISSUE 3: Bin Location

Comment: The garbage area is located within the basement and is screened by walls of the basement.

The bins for the above proposal will be collected by a commercial contractor. A condition of consent is recommended to ensure that the garbage is collected at regular intervals to prevent the building up of garbage and any detrimental odour impacts on the adjoining properties.

ISSUE 4: Overshadowing

Comment: Given the orientation of the site is predominately a north-south orientation, the proposed Motel will still allow for sufficient solar access to the adjoining properties living areas and private open space. The shadow diagrams provided with the application as shown in Figures 4-6 below demonstrate that the adjoining properties to the east, west and south receive a minimum 3 hours of solar access between 9am and 5pm. Therefore it is considered that sufficient solar access will be maintained to adjoining properties when the development is constructed.

Figure 4: Shadows at 9am

Figure 5: Shadows at 12 noon

Figure 6: Shadows at 3pm

ISSUE 5: Noise during Construction

Comment: A standard condition of consent will be imposed to limit the hours of construction to between 7:00am and 5:00pm Monday to Saturday with no work permitted on Sundays and public holidays. These hours of construction are considered acceptable and are within normal business hours.

ISSUE 6: Excessive Height

Comment: The proposed development complies with the maximum 15m height limit that applies to this site under the LLEP 2008.

ISSUE 7: Excessive Density

Comment: There is no limit to the number of rooms in a Motel development provided the proposal is compliant with the maximum floor space ratio (FSR) control that applies to the site. The proposed motel complies with the maximum floor space ratio that applies to the site, which in this instance is 0.75:1.

ISSUE 8: Insufficient Open Space

Comment: There is no requirement for a motel development to provide open space under the LLEP 2008 or the LDCP 2008.

Independent Hearing and assessment panel

At their meeting on 23 March 2015, IHAP made the following recommendation:

The Panel recommends that subject to the amendment of Condition 1a and the addition of Condition 1e, DA-48/2014 for a construction and operation of a motel development with associated at-grade and basement car parking and signage at 654A and 654B Hume Highway, Casula be approved subject to the amended recommended conditions attached to this report.

IHAP Recommendations

As discussed above the IHAP panel resolved to amend Condition 1a. The amended Condition 1a reads as follows;

· All balustrades are to be of an opaque material for example, colour backed glass.

· Sliding screens on balconies should be provided to fully enclose the balconies when extended. Nominally there will be three sliding screens per balcony.

· The corridor window on the south west elevation is to be frosted glass.

· The window on the northern elevation to the common lounge rooms on the first and second level should have a sill height of 1.5 metres.

The intent of the amended condition is to address overlooking of neighbouring properties and to alleviate any privacy concerns

Comment: Council has reviewed the above recommendation and considers it satisfactory. As such Condition 1a has been amended accordingly.

The IHAP panel has also recommended the addition of Condition 1e. Condition 1e reads as follows;

“An 800mm wide garden be provided along the rear boundary of the property with screening plants such as Acmena Smithii ‘goodbye neigbours”.

The intent of the condition is to alleviate privacy concerns on adjoining properties.

Comment: Council has reviewed this recommendation and cannot support it as it has been advised by Councils Development Engineers that as the entire rear yard of the proposal is to act as an on-site detention basin (OSD) and it is requested that only grass be permitted in this area to allow for the OSD system to operate effectively. Given the above Council cannot support this recommendation.

Conclusion

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic and Financial	Enhance the environmental performance of buildings and homes.
Environmental and Sustainability	Enhance the environmental performance of buildings and homes.
Social and Cultural	Regulate for a mix of housing types that responds to different population groups such as young families and older people.
Civic Leadership and Governance	There are no civic leadership and governance considerations.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Land Owner details View (Under separate cover)

2. IHAP report View (Under separate cover)

3. IHAP Recommendation View (Under separate cover)

4. Revised Conditions of Consent View (Under separate cover)

119

Ordinary Meeting 29 April 2015

Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel Report

IHAP 03

DA-85/2011/B - Modification pursuant to s96(2) of Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 to increase the hours of operation of an existing service station from 6am to 12am midnight (7 days a week) to 24 hours (7 days a week)

Strategic Direction	Vibrant Prosperous City Assist exiting businesses to grow, innovate and become more competitive
Key Policy	Economic Development Strategy
File Ref	077503.2015
Report By	Shannon Rickersey - Team Leader Development Assessment
Approved By	Toni Averay - Director Planning & Growth

Property

Cnr Lot 1, DP 509905

124 Hoxton Park Road, Lurnea

Owner

CH Shop N Save Pty Ltd

Applicant

Mr B Young

Executive Summary

Council has received and considered a modification application DA-85/2011/B seeking approval for an extension of operating hours to an existing service station (7 Eleven) located at 124 Hoxton Park Road, Lurnea (Cnr Lot 1, DP 509905). The proposal would amend Consent Condition No. 13 of DA-85/2011, which would change the existing operating hours from 6:00am to 12:00am, 7 days a week, to 24 hour 7 day operation. The subject application does not propose any other operational changes or any building works. The application was lodged on 17 July 2014.

This application was referred to the 23 March 2015 meeting of the Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel (IHAP) as the development has attracted more than five unresolved submissions objecting to the proposed development.

The Council officer’s recommendation was to approve the development for a twelve month trial period. The IHAP recommendation was to approve the development as recommended within the attached IHAP report, subject to modifying conditions in relation to acoustic impact.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council approve the modification application DA-85/2011/B for a trial period of 12 months as outlined in the recommended conditions of consent attached.

Background

Council has received and considered a modification application DA-85/2011/B seeking approval for an extension of operating hours at an existing service station (7 Eleven) located at 124 Hoxton Park Road, Lurnea (Cnr Lot 1, DP 509905). The proposal would amend Consent Condition No. 13 of DA-85/2011, which would change the existing operating hours from 6:00am to 12:00am, 7 days a week, to 24 hour 7 day operation. The subject application does not propose any other operational changes or any building works.

Pursuant to the requirements of the endorsed Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel (IHAP) Charter and Procedure, the proposal was referred to the IHAP for consideration as the proposed development attracted more than five unresolved submissions objecting to the proposed development.

The Site

The site is identified as Cnr Lot 1, DP 509905 and is located at 124 Hoxton Park Road, Lurnea. The site is a regularly shaped allotment with a primary frontage to Hoxton Park Road and a secondary frontage to Webster Road.

The site has a total site area of 1271m², and contains a service station that was approved by Development Application No. DA-85/2011 on 4 November 2010. The approved development included three covered and double-sided petrol pumps, air and water facilities, a shop with an attached internal storage facility, signage and 12 car parking spaces.

An Aerial map of the site is provided in Figure 1 below:

Figure 1: Aerial image of the subject site.

The subject site is located in an established residential area within Lurnea which is characterised by a mixture of low and medium residential development. Sites adjoining the

subject site are zoned R4 High Density Residential Zone.

Figure 2: The site and surrounding locality.

details of the proposal

The proposed modification seeks to amend Consent Condition No. 13 of DA-85/2011, by changing the existing operating hours from 6:00am to 12:00am, 7 days a week, to 24 hour, 7 day operation.

Consent Condition No.13 of DA-85/2011, currently reads as follows:

13. The hours of operation including service vehicle movements are limited to 6.00am to 12.00 midnight seven days a week.

The modification seeks changes to this condition such that the service station would have 24 hour, 7 day operations.

The subject application does not propose any addition building works nor does it seek to amend any other operational changes.

the issues

The key issues identified with respect to the proposal relate to the submissions received objecting to the proposal.

The impacts of the proposal identified for consideration in terms of the merits of the assessment undertaken include:

· Acoustic impacts.

· Safety, including potential impacts of robberies and criminal activity.

· Parking and traffic impacts.

· Light spillage.

These matters are addressed in the report as follows:

Acoustic Impacts

The applicant has submitted a supplementary acoustic report to the original report which was provided with DA-85/2011. The supplementary report confirms that the service station has been constructed with acoustic measures as recommended in the original report. The report also describes that the predominant noise source is traffic on Hoxton Park Road.

The report concludes that the service station would be able to operate 24 hours a day, 7 days a week and meet the acceptable noise criteria derived from the NSW Environmental Protection Authority Industrial Noise Policy.

The acoustic consultant also describes noise measurements that were taken during the operation of the service station from 11:00pm – 12:00am (midnight) on the evening of Monday 15 December 201. The report concludes that the noise emission from the service station meets the acceptable noise criteria.

The service station has been operating for a short period of time, and there are no recorded noise complaints at this property. However, the properties within the vicinity of the subject site that front Hoxton Park Road, including adjoining properties to the south and west are within the R4 Zone, whereby residential flat buildings, up to a height of 12m may be constructed, thus the existing acoustic wall may not be sufficient to address acoustic impacts to dwellings above the height of the acoustic wall. This is particularly pertinent given that both the original and supplementary acoustic reports were informed by measurements undertaken at No.3 Webster Road, which is currently single storey only. It is likely that measurements were taken at a height lower than the top of the acoustic wall.

Notwithstanding, it is also relevant that the properties fronting Hoxton Park Road will be subject to Clause 102 of State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007, which requires the consent authority to consider acoustic impacts to bedrooms between 10pm and 7am on roads with traffic volumes such as that provided at this section of Hoxton Park Road. Any acoustic treatment provided to apartments that seek to meet the aims of this requirement, will also likely ensure that that the acoustic impacts from the service station are acceptable, particularly as the acoustic report has noted that the primary noise source in the locality is traffic on Hoxton Park Road.

Safety/crime impacts

This application was referred to the NSW Police who indicated that the proposal was satisfactory. Condition 69 of the original Development Consent requires various security and crime prevention measures to be implemented on the site. In addition the applicant has provided a Plan of Management (POM) which seeks to address any Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) and security impacts from the proposal. The Development Consent has been amended to require compliance with this POM.

Parking and traffic impacts on Webster Road and Hoxton Park Road (turning left on to Webster Road).

There is unlikely to be any significant parking and traffic impacts arising from the existing operations being carried out from the proposed additional operating hours of 12:00am to 6:00am. These concerns most likely relate to the existing operations during morning and afternoon peaks, and the proposed extended operating hours are unlikely to further increase the impact on traffic during peak periods.

Lighting

Condition 64 and 127 of the original consent requires the following:

64. Details of all lighting are to be provided to the PCA prior to issue of a Construction Certificate. Lighting is to be provided and positioned to avoid light spill onto adjoining properties and incorporate full cut-off shielding and is to be mounted so as to not cause any glare or spill over light nuisance within the development or to neighbouring properties or road users. Any lighting within the car parking area is to be provided at the minimum level of illumination necessary for safe operation in accordance with AS4282 “control of obtrusive effects of outdoor lighting”.

127. The outdoor lighting system across the car parking area is to be installed in accordance with AS4282 “control of obtrusive effects of outdoor lighting” and is to be the minimum level of illumination necessary for safe operation. A compliance certificate or equivalent is to be issued by an appropriately qualified person to certify that the lighting system has been designed and installed in accordance with AS4282.

These conditions are satisfactory to address the 24 hour operation of the premises.

Submissions

In accordance with the LDCP 2008, the application was advertised for 16 days from 1 October 2014 to 17 October 2014. During the advertising period, eight submissions were received objecting to the proposal. In addition to the issues addressed above, the following additional matters were raised in the submissions:

· Pollution and dust.

· Impact to property values.

These issues were addressed within the report as follows:

Pollution and dust.

There is no evidence to suggest that the proposed extended operating hours will present undue adverse impact on pollution or dust, particularly as the property currently fronts an arterial road with high traffic volumes.

Impact to property values.

There is no evidence to suggest that the proposed extended operating hours will impact on neighbouring property values. The most likely impacts would be those related to the other issues raised within the submissions, i.e. noise, traffic and pollution.

Upon consideration of the issues raised in the assessment of the proposal and the submissions raised objecting to the proposal, it is considered a that a 12 month trial period of 24 hour trading be imposed to enable the applicant to demonstrate that the proposal is acceptable on a permanent basis. This will require a modification to be lodged in the future, either seeking 24 hour operations on a permanent basis, or an extended trial period. It is also recommended that a supplementary acoustic report be submitted with a future modification which provides more comprehensive acoustic testing, and outlines the impacts to permissible residential flat buildings on neighbouring properties.

This condition is recommended to recognise that residential uses are in close proximity to the approved service station. The trial period will also enable the operation and the PoM to be monitored and amended if required. The imposition of a trial period as a condition of consent is consistent with the Section 80A(10B) of the Act.

Independent Hearing and assessment panel

At their meeting on 23 March 2015, IHAP made the following recommendation:

The Panel supported the recommendations in the Council officer’s (report), subject to modifying conditions in relation to acoustic impact.

It would appear that the panel requests an additional acoustic report be prepared assessing the potential impact of the proposal on permissible development on adjoining land to a height of 12 metres for residential use prior to consent being issued for the application.

As stated above, it is preferred that a trial period of consent be issued to enable further acoustic modelling be prepared and for the other impacts of the proposal to be assessed on a trial basis, rather than issuing a final consent for 24 hour trading. On this basis, the recommendation for a trial period of consent is still maintained.

Conclusion

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic and Financial	Facilitate economic development.
Environmental and Sustainability	Manage air, water, noise and chemical pollution.
Social and Cultural	There are no social and cultural considerations.
Civic Leadership and Governance	There are no civic leadership and governance considerations.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Land Owner Details View (Under separate cover)

2. IHAP Report View (Under separate cover)

3. IHAP Recommendation View (Under separate cover)

126

Ordinary Meeting 29 April 2015

Chief Financial Officer

CFO 01

Investment Report March 2015

Strategic Direction	Leading Proactive Council Provide business excellence and financial sustainability to deliver services that meet community expectations
Key Policy	Long-Term Financial Plan
File Ref	078830.2015
Report By	Christian Hope - Senior Financial Accountant
Approved By	Gary Grantham - Chief Financial Officer

Executive Summary

This report details the Council’s Investment portfolio.

At 31^st March 2015, Council held investments with a market value of $166.2 million. The portfolio yield for twelve months ended was 3.94 per cent exceeding the benchmark of 2.72 per cent by 122 basis points for the same period.

Council’s investments and reporting obligations fully comply with the requirements of Section 625 of the Local Government Act 1993, Clause 212 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 and Council's Investment Policy

RECOMMENDATION

That Council receives and notes this report.

REPORT

Clause 212 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 requires that the Responsible Accounting Officer must provide Council with a written report setting out details of all money that Council has invested under section 625 of the Local Government Act 1993.

Council’s Portfolio

At 31 March 2015, Council held investments with a market value of $166.2 million. Council’s investment register detailing all its investments is provided as an attachment to this report.

In summary, Council’s portfolio consisted of investments in:

Term deposits	$120.0 million
Cash at Call & in Bank	$18.1 million
31 Days’ Notice account	$5.0 million
Debt securities, Bonds & FRN’s	$23.1 million
Total	$166.2 million

As at the end of March 2015, the ratio of market value compared to face value of various debt securities is shown in the table below.

Asset Class	Mar-15	Jun-14
Senior Debts (FRN's)	100.4 %	101.48%
MBS (Reverse Mortgage Backed Securities)	65.41 %	60.14%
Total	96.06%	91.64%

Council is fully compliant with the requirements of the Ministerial Investment Order including the grand fathering provision in regards to its investment portfolio holdings. The grand fathering provision states that Council continues to hold to maturity, redeem or sell investments that comply with previous Ministerial Investment Orders. Any new investments must comply with the most recent Order. Council continues to closely monitor the investments in its portfolio to ensure continued compliance and minimal exposure to risk.

The following tables breaks down Council’s investment by issuer and provides an analysis on their credit ratings.

Market Value of Investment by Issuer

Issuer	Market Value	% Total Value	Credit Rating	Institutional Policy Limit
AMP Bank Ltd	9,909,275	5.96%	A-1	35%
Bananacoast Community Credit Union Ltd	4,000,000	2.41%	Unrated	5%
Bank of Queensland Ltd	32,010,080	19.26%	A-2	25%
Bank of Sydney Ltd	3,000,000	1.81%	Unrated	5%
Issuer	Market Value	% Total Value	Credit Rating	Institutional Policy Limit
Bendigo & Adelaide Bank Ltd	3,021,230	1.82%	AA	35%
Commonwealth Bank of Australia Ltd	17,194,318	10.35%	AA	35%
Credit Union Australia Ltd	4,009,200	2.41%	BBB	15%
Emerald Reverse Mortgage Trust - Class A	1,189,794	0.72%	AAA	45%
Emerald Reverse Mortgage Trust - Class C	779,435	0.47%	A	25%
Members Equity Bank Ltd	6,017,350	3.62%	BBB	15%
MyState Bank Ltd	2,000,000	1.20%	A-2	25%
National Australia Bank Ltd	39,000,000	23.47%	AA	35%
Newcastle Permanent Building Society Ltd	6,018,900	3.62%	BBB	15%
P&N Bank Ltd	11,000,000	6.62%	A-2	25%
Police Bank Ltd	3,003,490	1.81%	A-2	25%
Rabobank Australia Ltd	9,000,000	5.42%	A-1	35%
SGE Mutual Ltd trading as G&C Mutual Bank	1,000,000	0.60%	Unrated	5%
St George Bank Limited	2,000,000	1.20%	AA	35%
Suncorp-Metway Ltd	2,010,520	1.21%	A-1	35%
Teachers Mutual Bank Ltd	2,005,940	1.21%	BBB	15%
Westpac Banking Corporation Ltd	8,000,000	4.81%	AA	35%
Portfolio Total	166,169,532	100.00%

Market Value of Investment by Credit Rating Category

Short Term Security Rating Group	Market Value	% Value	Policy Limit
A1+	46,194,318	27.80%	100%
A1	18,909,275	11.38%	100%
A2	50,000,000	30.09%	60%
N/R	8,000,000	4.81%	25%
Portfolio Total	123,103,593	74.08%
Long Term Security Rating Group	Market Value	% Value	Policy Limit
AAA	1,189,794	0.72%	100%
AA+ to AA-	22,002,860	13.24%	100%
A+ to A-	5,818,405	3.50%	60%
BBB+ to BBB-	14,054,880	8.46%	50%
Portfolio Total	43,065,939	25.92%
Total Investment Portfolio	166,169,532	100.00%

Portfolio Maturity Profile

The chart below shows the market value of funds invested at different durations to maturity.

Portfolio Performance

Council’s investment portfolio yield for the 12 months ended 31 March 2015 was 3.94 per cent which exceeded benchmark of 2.72 per cent by 122 basis points for the same period. Return on investments is expected to gradually decrease as old investments in Council’s portfolio mature and replaced with investments yielding lower returns. Comparative yields for the previous months are charted below:

During the month, Council sold its Westpac senior fixed bond before maturity date in February 2017 realising a capital gain of $66,703. The details of this transaction are shown below.

The year to date realised capital gains from trading debt securities is $134k. Council is in continuous discussion with its investment Adviser, CPG Research & Advisory, to evaluate capital gains and other opportunities as they occur.

Council replaced the fixed bond sold this month with the purchase of a $1 million Floating Rate Note issued by Bank of China ,paying a margin of 125 basis points over 90 days Bank Bill Swap rate. Bank of China is a foreign subsidiary “A” rated bank listed as an Authorised Deposit Institution by the banking regulator APRA.

Foreign banks subsidiaries are incorporated in Australia must hold capital locally and are subject to the same prudential standards and supervision as Australian-owned banks.

Investment Portfolio at a Glance

Portfolio Performance vs. 90 day Bank Bill index over the 12 month period.		The portfolio yield for 12 month ended is 122 basis points above the benchmark for the same period (3.94% against 2.72%).
Annual Income vs. Budget		Council’s investment interest income is $211k above the revised year to date budget. This result is made up of $79k for the General Fund and $132k for the Externally Restricted Funds and excludes $134k realized capital gains.

Investment Policy Compliance

Legislative Requirements		Fully Compliant.
Portfolio Credit Rating Limit		Fully Compliant.
Institutional Exposure Limits		Fully Compliant.
Term to Maturity Limits		Fully Compliant.

Economic Outlook – Reserve Bank of Australia

At its April 2015 meeting, the Board of the Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) decided to leave the cash rate unchanged at 2.25 per cent. A statement released on 7 April 2015 by Glenn Stevens, Governor of the RBA commenting on the central bank decision is attached to this report.

Returns on Term Deposits have significantly dropped in anticipation of future RBA rate cuts. The return on longer term deposits (> 3years) is currently at 3.1 to 3.3 percent per annum ; over medium term (2 to 3 years to maturity) 2.9 to 3.1 per cent per annum and short term deposits rate (less than one year to maturity) is ranging from 2.25 percent for 30 days to 2.9 percent for one year.

To maintain short term liquidity buffer whilst maximising returns, Council invested $5 million in a 31 days’ notice account with AMP Bank paying 2.95%. As the name of the account implies, funds deposited can be withdrawn in 31 days from notice date.

Certificate of Responsible Accounting Officer

The Chief Financial Officer, as Responsible Accounting Officer certifies that the investments listed in the attached report have been made in accordance with Section 625 of the Local Government Act 1993, Clause 212 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 and Councils Investment Policies at the time of their placement. The previous investments are covered by the “grandfather” clauses of the current investment guidelines issued by the Minister for Local Government.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic and Financial	Council’s investment interest income is $211k above the revised year to date budget. This result is made up of $79k for the General Fund and $132k for the Externally Restricted Funds and excludes $134k realised capital gains.
Environmental and Sustainability	There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.
Social and Cultural	There are no social and cultural considerations.
Civic Leadership and Governance	There are no civic leadership and governance considerations.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Media Release Reserve Bank of Australia April 2015 View

2. Investment Detail Report March 2015 View

3. Performance Graphs Actual to Budget Ytd March 2015 View

144

Ordinary Meeting 29 April 2015

Community and Culture Report

DCC 01

Donations, Grants and Sponsorships

Strategic Direction	Healthy Inclusive City Foster social inclusion, strengthen the local community and increase opportunities for people who may experience barriers
Key Policy	Donations Policy
File Ref	003970.2015
Report By	Sarah Rees - Coordinator Community Development
Approved By	Kiersten Fishburn - Director Community & Culture

Executive Summary

Council provides financial assistance to the community under three categories: Community Donations (including Community Grants, Small Grants, Men’s Shed One-off Grants, School and Youth Donations), Sporting Donations and Corporate Sponsorship.

The Financial Contributions Panel (FCP) recently considered a number of applications from local residents for the Sporting Donations Program and local community organisations for the Community Grants and Corporate Sponsorship.

This report presents the funding recommendations made by the FCP for Council's consideration.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Endorses the Financial Contribution Panel's recommendations for the provision of $5,200 under the Sporting Donations Program as summarised in the table below:

Applicant Name	Amount
LeTeine Tikeri	$200
Thea Hayday-King	$200
Darcy Claveria	$500
Tianna Elaya	$300
Alex Brook	$200
Ellesse Carini	$500
Jordan Richardson	$500
Tessa Wong-King	$200
Ash Eastwood	$200
Maverick Maiava	$500
PCYC Liverpool	$1,000
Jonas Dowson	$200
Ali Azhar	$500
Ryan Watson	$500

2. Endorses the Financial Contribution Panel's recommendations for the provision of $10,250 under the Community Donations Program as summarised in the table below:

Applicant Name	Project Name	Amount
The Junction Works Ltd.	SPARKS Experience: Youth Engagement	$5,000
Inspire Community Services Inc.	Engaging Schools and Community Forum	$1,500
City of Liverpool Meals On Wheels Inc.	Christmas Hamper Project for Meals On Wheels clients	$3,750

3. Endorses the Financial Contributions Panel's recommendations for the provision of $31,900 under the Corporate Sponsorship Program as summarised in the table below. If the recommended amount of $31,900 is endorsed, supplementary funds of $14,336 will need to be allocated from the Council Reserve.

Applicant name	Amount
Vedic Festival Inc	$5,000
Shree Sanatan Dharm Pratinidhi Sabha of Australia	$11,400
Liverpool Domestic Violence Committee – South West Sydney Legal Centre	$5,000
Lau Samoa Council	$5,000
Precedent Productions	$2,500
Pakistani Multicultural Services of Australia	$3,000

REPORT

The Donations program has three categories:

· Community Donations (including Community Grants, Small Grants, Men’s Shed One-off Grants School and Youth Donations);

· Sporting Donations; and

· Corporate Sponsorship.

Applications for Sporting Donations, Community Grants and Corporate Sponsorship are accepted on an ongoing basis. Applications are then reviewed by the Financial Contributions Panel (FCP) comprised of the Mayor, Deputy Mayor, Chief Executive Officer and delegated staff.

This report contains the most recent recommendations by the FCP for Sporting Donations, Community Donations and Corporate Sponsorship.

Sporting Donations

Council's Sporting Donations Program is available to individuals and sporting teams who live in Liverpool City. Fifteen applications for sporting donations were received by Council. Fourteen applications met the program criteria and were recommended for funding by the Liverpool Sports Committee. The program criteria can be found as an attachment to this report for the reference of Councillors. A summary of the request received and the FCP recommendations are shown in the table below.

Applicant Details	Eligibility	Representation	FCP Recommendation
LeTeine Tikeri	Local resident – Green Valley	Representing NSW PSSA U12’s Athletic Team at the 2014 Trans-Tasman Championships held in Sydney 18 January 2015.	$200
Thea Hayday-King	Local resident – Hoxton Park 2015	Representing NSW Country U15’s Baseball Team at the 2015 National Championships held in Canberra 12 to 15 January	$200
Darcy Claveria	Local resident – Heckenberg	Representing Australia ISKA Karate Team at the 2015 US Open Martial Arts Championships held in Florida 3 and 4 July 2015.	$500
Tianna Elaya	Local resident – Ashcroft	Representing National Women’s U18’s Ice Hockey Team at the International Series held in Melbourne 11 to 19 December 2014	$300
Alex Brook	Local resident – Wattle Grove	Representing NSW U16 Baseball Team at the 2015 National Youth Championships held in Blacktown International Sports Park January 2015	$200
Ellesse Carini	Local resident – Wattle Grove	Representing Australia National Youth Ice Hockey Team at the 2015 IIB World Championships held in Serbia 16 to 22 March 2015.	$500
Jordan Richardson	Local resident – Wattle Grove	Representing Australia 2015 Women’s Baseball Team at the 2015 Asia Insurance Phoenix Cup held in Hong Kong 16 to 22 March 2015.	$500
Tessa Wong-King	Local resident – Cartwright	Representing NSW Ladies Indoor Netball Team at the Indoor Netball Federation of Australia Super nationals 2015 held in Silver Water NSW 2 to 9 May 2015.	$200
Ash Eastwood	Local resident – West Hoxton	Representing NSW Ladies Indoor Netball Team at the Indoor Netball Federation of Australia Super nationals 2015 held in Silver Water NSW 2 to 9 May 2015.	$200
Maverick Maiava	Local resident – Prestons	Representing Australia ISKA Team at the 2015 ISKA International Tournament held in Orlando 3 and 4 July 2015.	$500
PCYC Liverpool	Local resident – Liverpool Representing PCYC	Liverpool Gandangara Goanna’s Rugby Team at the Nations of Origin 2015 Tournament held in Raymond Terrace July 2015.	$1,000
Jonas Dowson	Local resident – West Hoxton	Local resident – West Hoxton Representing NSW U15’s Fencing Team at the Australian National Fencing Championships 2015 held in Sydney 4 to 8 July 2015.	$200
Shiu Sharma	Local Resident – Horningsea Park	Representing Australian Sanatan Sports at the Sanatan Soccer Championship to be held in Fiji April 2 to April 6, 2015.	Nil (This is a religious based sporting event and therefore is not fully inclusive or competitive. The Committee did not accept this as an Australian representative team event).
Ali Azhar	Local Resident – Prestons	Representing the Australia International Sport Karate Association at the US Open Martial Arts Championships being held in Florida July 3 and 4, 2015.	$500
Ryan Watson	Local Resident – Horningsea Park	Representing the NSW Indoor Sports NSW U15’s boys Indoor Cricket team at the National Championships to be held in Brisbane. July 4 to July 11, 2015.	$200

Community Grants

Council's Community Grants Program is available to community groups who provide programs or services to the residents of Liverpool. Four applications for community grants were received by Council. Three applications met the program criteria and are recommended for funding. The program criteria can be found as an attachment to this report for the reference of Councillors. A summary of the requests are outlined in the table below.

Applicant Details	Event Name and Description	Amount Requested	FCP Recommendation
The Junction Works Ltd.	SPARKS Experience: Youth Engagement To provide a unique service learning opportunity that supports young people in year 10 who are attending Holsworthy High School to remain engaged in education and to develop pathways to employment within the disability service sector through participating in the 2015 SPARK Creative Arts Festival. Community Benefits: · Raises community awareness of people with a disability; and · Create opportunities for young people to consider a career in the disability service sector.	$5,000	$5,000
Inspire Community Services Inc.	Engaging Schools and Community Forum The Inspire Community Services Inc. is the lead and auspice agency on behalf of over 30 service providers and schools working together to host the annual Engaging School and Community Forum. The Forum will be held at Hoxton Park High School and provide students, parents and carers with information, advice and educational referral pathways Community Benefits: · Promote awareness and access to educational referral pathways; and · Enhanced partnerships and networks between schools and service providers in a coordinated approach to engage young people in education and training.	$1,500	$1,500
Australian Ethiopian Community Good Family Welfare Inc.	Amharic language School To conduct Amharic language classes for Ethiopian children as part of their cultural education by employing 4 part-time teachers plus other program costs. Classes to be held in Auburn. Reasons for decline: Education including teaching languages is the responsibility of State Government. Furthermore, the project is located in Auburn outside Liverpool LGA.	$45,000	Nil
City of Liverpool Meals On Wheels Inc.	Christmas Hamper Project To purchase food items to supplement all other donated items, including Christmas cakes, puddings and hams from Service Clubs and suppliers. The hampers will be delivered by volunteers to all their Meals On Wheels clients during Christmas. Community Benefits: · Reduced marginalisation of isolated community members; and · Fosters volunteering opportunities and social cohesion.	$3,750	$3,750

Corporate Sponsorship

Council delivers a Corporate Sponsorship Program for local organisations seeking financial support to deliver events that benefit Liverpool. Six applications for corporate sponsorship were received by Council. Five applications met the program criteria and are recommended for funding. The program criteria can be found as an attachment to this report for the reference of Councillors. A summary of the request received and the FCP recommendation are shown in the table below.

Applicant Details	Project Name and Description	Amount Requested	FCP Recommend-ation
Vedic Festival Inc	Festival of Chariots – Bigge Park, 18 July 2015 Indian community festival comprising of street parade through the CBD and fair in Bigge Park. It is a community festival to promote the celebration and respect of Indian art, cultural heritage and unity amongst communities. Free event. Not for profit activity. Anticipated attendances 2-5,000 Benefits Logo inclusion on all promotional material. Speaking opportunity at the event. Aligns with program criteria as it activates the CBD and strengthens community ties. Recommended for funding in line with previous support.	$8,000 ex GST	$5,000 ex GST
Shree Sanatan Dharm Pratinidhi Sabha of Australia	Deepawali Mela , Northumberland Street Car Park, 7- 8 November 2015 Diwali is known as the festival of lights and is a Hindu based community festival. Not for profit activity. Free event. Benefits Logo inclusion on event signage, opportunity to display council signage at the event, logo inclusion on advertising and recognition in media releases. Opportunity to present a speech at the event. Strong Alignment with program criteria. The event will activate the CBD on the weekend bringing attendances in excess of 20,000.	$20,000 ex GST	$11,400 ex GST
Liverpool Domestic Violence Committee – South West Sydney Legal Centre	White Ribbon Day March –Bigge Park, 25 November 2015 Awareness raising event about services available for victims of domestic violence which includes a march through the city centre followed by entertainment and information stalls in Bigge Park. Not for profit free event. Anticipated attendances 200. Benefits Logo inclusion on event signage, opportunity to display council signage at the event, logo inclusion on advertising and recognition in media releases. Opportunity to present a speech and to distribute publications at the event. Aligns with program criteria. The march will activate the city centre and raise awareness about an important issue in the community. Recommended for funding at the $5,000 level in line with previous support.	$10,000 ex GST	$5,000 ex GST
Lau Samoa Council	Samoan Independence Day - Whitlam Centre , 8 June 2015 Annual community celebration for the Samoan and broader community. Cultural items, entertainment, food and market stalls. Not for profit, free event. Anticipated attendances 7,000 people. Benefits Branding on all promotional material and at the event. Speaking opportunity. Aligns with the program criteria Whilst the activity is not being held in the city centre it will draw significant crowds to the Liverpool area and fosters inclusiveness. Recommended for funding at the $5,000 level in line with support of similar scale events.	$10,000 ex GST	$5,000 ex GST
Precedent Productions	Liverpool city Local Business Awards – Roma Function Centre, 21 July 2015 An annual event, the program rewards local businesses for excellence. The local business awards have been operating for 30 years. Benefits Major sponsor Acknowledgement on all promotional materials, pre-program teaser advertisements, presentation of 3-6 categories, 6 complimentary tickets, logo on Award trophies, sponsor logo on winner’s poster. Support sponsor Acknowledgement on all promotional materials, presentation of 1-3 categories, 2 complimentary tickets. Strong alignment with program criteria as it supports local businesses and economic activity whilst stimulating activity within the city centre. Recommended for funding in line with previous level of support as support sponsor.	$2,500 ex GST	$2,500 ex GST
Sanatan Satsang Sabha of NSW	Diwali Festival of Lights– Bulldog Park, 24-25 October 2015 Diwali is known as the festival of lights and is a Hindu based community festival. Not for profit activity. Anticipated attendances 300. Benefits Logo inclusion on event signage, opportunity to display council signage at the event, logo inclusion on advertising and recognition in media releases. Opportunity to present a speech. Not recommended for funding. Whilst the event does align with some program criteria the policy states that support will not be provided to two events celebrating the same event/activity within close proximity. Another Diwali event is planned for the following weekend in the city centre and has a track record of attracting significantly larger audiences of approximately 20,000 people.	$10,000 ex GST	Nil
Pakistan Multicultural Services of Australia	Girmit Diwas Festival – Whitlam Centre, May 9 The Girmit Diwas Festival is organised to remember the sacrifices of Fiji girmitiays (those under the indenture system)and celebrate the enduring legacy that they have left behind for all Fijians. New event. Not for profit. Anticipated attendances 5000. Benefits Logo inclusion on event signage, opportunity to display council signage at the event, logo inclusion on advertising and recognition in media releases. Opportunity to present a speech and to distribute publications at the event. Aligns with the program criteria .Whilst the activity is not being held in the city centre it will draw significant crowds to the Liverpool area. Recommended for funding at the $3,000 level in line with support of similar scale new events.	$5,000 ex GST	$3,000 ex GST

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic and Financial	A budget allocation of $15,000 for the Sporting Donations Program was adopted by Council in its 2014/2015 Operational Plan. If the recommended amount of $5,200 is endorsed the remaining balance will be $4,200. The recommendations within this report for sporting donations will be funded from the Sporting Donations Program. A budget allocation of $80,000 for the Community Grants Program was adopted by Council in its 2014/2015 Operational Plan as part of the Community Donations Program. If the recommended amount of $10,250 is endorsed the remaining balance will be $33,094.50. The recommendations within this report for Community Grants will be funded from the Community Donations Program. A supplementary budgetary allocation of $50,000 for the Corporate Sponsorship Program was adopted by Council at first Quarter Review. If the recommended amount of $31,900 is endorsed there will be a deficit of $14,336 which will need to be supplemented from the Council Reserve.
Environmental and Sustainability	There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.
Social and Cultural	Raise awareness in the community about the available services and facilities. Support community organisations, groups and volunteers to deliver coordinated services to the community.
Civic Leadership and Governance	There are no civic leadership and governance considerations.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Criteria for Sporting Donations View

2. Criteria for Community Grants View

3. Criteria for Corporate Sponsorship

186

Ordinary Meeting 29 April 2015

Planning and Growth Report

DPG 01

Planning and Development Committee

Strategic Direction	Vibrant Prosperous City Assist exiting businesses to grow, innovate and become more competitive
Key Policy	Economic Development Strategy
File Ref	052991.2015
Report By	Toni Averay - Director Planning & Growth
Approved By	Toni Averay - Director Planning & Growth

Executive Summary

The purpose of this report is to present options for the establishment of a Planning and Development Committee.

Council resolved as follows at the meeting of 25 February 2015:

That Council staff prepare a report to the March Council meeting that contains options for a Planning and Development Committee consisting of all Councillors, similar to the City of Sydney Council.

Given agenda deadlines, it was not possible to provide the report to the March meeting.

This report recommends Council establish a new Planning and Development Committee consisting of all Councillors meeting monthly, with the first meeting to be held in June 2015.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Establishes a new Planning and Development Committee as a Committee of the whole to meet monthly.

2. Endorses the proposed Planning and Development Committee Charter attached to this report.

3. Rearrange the monthly Wednesday Committee meeting timetable to include this new Committee.

REPORT

City of Sydney Planning Committee

The City of Sydney Planning Committee and the Central Sydney Traffic and Transport Committee involve City of Sydney representatives but are separate decision making bodies to Sydney Council.

Section 40 of The City of Sydney Act 1988 specifies the City of Sydney Planning Committee’s role in the determination of major development applications and consideration of planning proposals.

The Central Sydney Planning Committee determines applications for major developments with an estimated cost of more than $50m. The Committee has 7 members consisting of the Lord Mayor, two City of Sydney Councillors, and four people appointed by the Minister for Planning.

The Planning and Development Committee deals with matters not dealt with by the Central Sydney Planning Committee and defers matters to its sub-committees as follows:

· Transport, Heritage and Planning

· Development Assessment

· Major Development Assessment

The Planning and Development Committee members are all City of Sydney Councillors. The Committee deals with matter relating to:

· Development applications not dealt with by the Central Sydney Planning Committee and other applications for approval under the EP&A

· Planning instruments such as LEPs, DCPs, Policies

· Transport and access initiative and issues

· Parking policy

· Local pedestrian, cycling and Traffic Calming Committee

· Referrals from other authorities for comment on any of the above

· Grants and sponsorships

· Applications for footway usage approvals.

The Planning and Development Committee, Development Assessment Sub-Committee and Major Development Assessment Sub-Committee have delegated authority to determine development applications on behalf of Council.

A Quorum for the Committees is a majority of members.

Council Committees under the NSW Local Government Act 1993

Councils can form committees and can determine their functions, powers, membership and voting rights under the Local Government Act 1993.

There can be three types of Council Committees:

• Committees of Council, whose membership is made up entirely of Councillors;

• Advisory committees, whose membership may include experts, professionals, government representatives, community representatives and Council staff as well as Councillors; and

• Section 377 Committees, which are delegated by the Council to perform certain functions of the Council (such as managing a public hall or other property) and have no Councillors or Council staff as members.

A Council committee can either be advisory or it can have decision-making powers delegated by Council. All of Council’s current committees are advisory committees.

A committee can only be delegated to exercise Council’s regulatory functions under Chapter 7 of the Local Government Act 1993 if all of its members are either Councillors or Council staff members.

Advisory committees usually have the power to make recommendations but not decisions.

The term “committees of council”, or committees of the whole, (used in the Local Government Act 1993 and in the Local Government Regulation 2005) refers to a committee in which all the members are Councillors. The Mayor is automatically a member of each Council committee made up of Councillors only but the Mayor can exercise his discretion as to whether he attend these meetings or not (clause 268(1) of the Local Government Regulation 2005). Also, the Mayor is automatically the chairperson of each of these committees unless the Mayor does not wish to exercise that role (clause 267(1)).

The provisions of the Regulation relating to meetings of a Council extend to committees of the whole, except the provision limiting the number and duration of speeches.

The need for a Liverpool Council Planning and Development Committee

Over the last 12 months Liverpool has seen a significant increase in development interest across the LGA, particularly in and around the city centre. The announcement in April 2013 of the Federal Government’s decision to proceed with the Sydney’s second airport at Badgerys Creek has generated strong local, national and international interest in development opportunities in Liverpool. Liverpool is the regional city for South West Sydney – a region which is young, diverse and growing rapidly. The Liverpool local government area‘s population is growing much faster than the Sydney average and serves a region which is experiencing a similarly rapid rate of growth. The area’s population is currently growing at 2.3 % per annum which is almost twice the NSW average. As the third regional cities in the NSW Government’s Metropolitan Strategy the Liverpool City Centre serves the broader South West Sydney region which is also experiencing rapid population growth.

The Liverpool city centre sits strategically in the corridor between Sydney’s two international airports with the new Badgerys Creek Airport to be built entirely within the Liverpool local government area.

It is important for Council to take a strong strategic approach to land use planning for Liverpool LGA, and in particular, planning for growth within the city and on the river. Council is currently reviewing the LEP controls for the city centre and has also resolved that a review of the broader LEP be undertaken. There is an urgent need for comprehensive precinct planning in a number of key growth areas across the city. Council needs to take the lead in planning for the redevelopment of the river to deliver the Council’s vision as a true river city. This requires an integrated approach to planning, traffic, environmental, heritage, employment and community issues. The delivery of linkages across the river and improved accessibility and lifestyle outcomes are important for the city and its future residents.

An additional 1.6million people will call Sydney home by 2030. Liverpool’s population will grow to 325,000 during that time. Council needs to do the planning now to ensure this growth is sustainable and to ensure that Liverpool is a great place to live and work for our future communities. The south west growth corridor is already seeing significant new housing development together with renewed interest in retail and commercial development along the main transport routes. The opening of the new rail stations at Edmondson Park and Leppington and the significant infrastructure investment by the State and Federal Governments associated with the Badgerys Creek airport require existing planning instruments to be revised in partnership with the State Department of Planning. Council will be positioned to play a stronger and more effective advocacy and leadership role in strategic land use and infrastructure planning through the work of the proposed new Committee.

The announcement by the Commonwealth Government of Badgerys Creek as the site of Sydney’s new international airport will underpin Liverpool City’s future growth. Liverpool’s status as the regional city equidistant between Sydney’s two international airports will be attractive to a range of industries requiring access to these international gateways.

Liverpool is already strategically well located to access key freight and commuter transport corridors positioned as it is at the junctions of the M7, M5 and Hume Highway, T-Way from Liverpool to Parramatta and major Rail / Bus interchange adjacent to Liverpool station. The $3.6b allocated by the Commonwealth and NSW Governments to provide modern connecting land infrastructure to the new Airport site will further enhance Liverpool’s accessibility.

The current growth in Liverpool is across a range of dwelling types. A strong market exists for apartments in the city centre, increasing urban density. Rapid greenfield housing development is also occurring in the middle portion of the local government area in estates such as Edmondson Park and Middleton Grange. Future development in areas which are currently predominantly rural in nature will be driven by the progressive roll out of the South West Growth Centre.

$Description: G:\Economy & Engagement\Maps\Liverpool LGA Map 2015.jpg$

Liverpool is one of the fastest growing local government areas, outperforming Parramatta and Greater Sydney. The affordability of housing in Liverpool compared to Greater Sydney attracts younger families to the area. The projected growth and available development opportunities within Liverpool’s new release areas and City Centre will further drive housing values. As people look for greater quality of life, combining housing affordability and stable employment opportunities, this is likely to result in a more highly valued housing market as more people are attracted to the area.

As of December 2014, more 800 apartments were being constructed in the Liverpool city centre which will see up to 3000 new residents living in the city in the next 12-18 months. In addition a strong pipeline of development exists with over 1200 apartments currently either under assessment or approved which will see significantly more residential stock added to the city centre over the next 5 years. The nature of residential stock being developed is also at a substantially higher quality and better price point.

Greenfield residential areas such as Edmondson Park and Middleton Grange continue to see strong growth with over 600 residences and over 300 residences respectively currently being constructed as at the end of December 2014. Another 1700 dwellings are being assessed or have been approved at Edmondson Park and over 200 dwellings at Middleton Grange.

A unique feature of Liverpool is the concentration of the health and education sectors in the city centre with a cumulative workforce of over 5000 employees. The platform for this sector is the upgraded Liverpool Hospital ($390m upgrade completed in 2011). This sector provides strong indirect and direct growth opportunities for the city centre spanning areas as broad as professional services support, accommodation, consulting rooms and food and beverages supply.

It is time for Liverpool Council to establish a Planning and Development Committee to guide the strategic direction of the city. The Committee will also provide a formal forum for robust discussion and detailed consideration of planning matters associated with the high growth and strong development interest being experienced in Liverpool. The creation of the new Committee will ensure Councillors are fully informed about major development proposals and applications within the city and will provide for early discussion about significant proposals. As the capital of the great south west and home to Sydney’s second airport, the establishment of the Planning and Development Committee supports Council’s leadership and advocacy objectives for the city.

Proposed Planning and Development Committee

It is proposed that the Committee will be established as an advisory committee and as a forum for debate and discussion regarding development applications, planning proposals and other development related matters. Planning and Growth agenda items for Council meetings will be discussed at Committee meetings rather than Councillor briefing sessions.

The Committee will consider agenda items and make recommendations to Council related to but not limited to the following matters:

· Major development applications and those attracting significant public interest or requiring social impact assessment;

· IHAP reports;

· JRPP updates;

· Planning proposals – LEP amendments, precinct and master plans, rezoning applications;

· DCP amendments and policy issues;

· Traffic and transport matters related to development assessment and the city centre;

· Development related infrastructure and Section 94 planning matters;

· Heritage, environment, flooding matters relating to development;

· State planning and legislative reviews and changes;

· Updates on appeals and other legal matters relating to development;

· Significant compliance and enforcement matters;

· Planning reform and eplanning; and

· Matters requested by Councillors.

Attached to this report is a draft Charter for Council’s approval.

It is proposed that the Planning and Development Committee will meet monthly on the first Wednesday of the month, subject to rearranging the current Committee meeting timetable.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic and Financial	There are no economic and financial considerations.
Environmental and Sustainability	There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.
Social and Cultural	There are no social and cultural considerations.
Civic Leadership and Governance	Provide information about Council’s services, roles and decision making processes. Deliver services that are customer focused. Operate a well developed governance system that demonstrates accountability, transparency and ethical conduct.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Planning and Development Committee Charter

209

Ordinary Meeting 29 April 2015

Planning and Growth Report

DPG 04

Liverpool City Centre LEP Review

Strategic Direction	Vibrant Prosperous City Activate the city centre and develop vibrant places that attract people to Liverpool
Key Policy	City Centre Strategy
File Ref	088913.2015
Report By	Jan McCredie - Acting Manager Strategic Planning
Approved By	Toni Averay - Director Planning & Growth

Executive Summary

Council has undertaken an assessment of the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan (LLEP 2008) and commenced the preparation of a Planning Proposal to review the planning controls for the Liverpool City Centre. The proposal seeks to:

· rezone B3 Commercial Core zoned lands to B4 Mixed Use

· increase the development potential in parts of the existing B4 Mixed Use zone

· change development standards to correspond to the proposed changes in land use to be principally controlled through built form.

· allow for greater development potential and increased heights on larger sites, ‘key sites’, that satisfy a range of criteria and are able to contribute to the public domain, facilities or amenity

The proposal also aims to respond to, and incorporate a range of ideas that have emerged or been reinforced in the ‘Building Our New City’ process including:

· the importance of the amenity of the public domain in Macquarie Street along its entire length including solar access and openness to the sky

· the amenity that will be provided by improvements to Bigge Park

· the need and desirability of increasing the density, and patronage that is possible in the southern part of the city.

Council officers are in the process of finalising the Planning Proposal which details the changes that will be sought to the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 (LLEP 2008). To ensure this proposal is not delayed for another month, in principle endorsement for the proposed changes is sought from Council.

It is recommended that the CEO be delegated authority to approve the final planning proposal for submission to the NSW Department of Planning and Environment for Gateway determination by 29^th May 2015.

It is anticipated that the rezoning will be finalised in late 2015.

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO LLEP 2008

Zoning

The planning proposal will seek to rezone the existing B3 Commercial Core to Mixed Use B4 to facilitate a wider range of development potential in Liverpool City Centre.

Building Envelopes

The planning proposal will seek to vary the building height controls applying to each site in relation to the desired built form across the CBD. In the mid-rise and fine-grain sites the height will be determined by the building envelope, the street wall height and the related FSR for the site. Where sites meet the criteria for key sites, the height will be determined through a master planning process

One of the purposes of the change to the LEP is to promote rejuvenation of the smaller sites in the CBD by removing the requirement for amalgamations. Built form controls including the definition of envelopes, street wall heights and setbacks for upper levels will be the primary controls for height.

These building profiles are designed to promote residential development; address overshadowing, car parking and interface with other buildings; and stimulate street life.

‘Fine Grain’ and ‘Mid-rise’ Sites

· In general, the fine grain sites would be characterised as follows:

o 4 storey height at street frontage;

o 4 storey height at lane frontage.

· In general, the mid rise sites would be characterised as follows:

o 6 storey height at street frontage; except where the adjoining street is to the south and the building would overshadow the southern side of the street

o 4 storey height at lane frontage, except where the lane is to the north and 6 storeys would have no adverse impact

It should be noted that the proposed new B4 Mixed Use zoning provides real development potential by allowing residential uses where currently only commercial uses are permissible. It also ensures that the development standards relate to the subdivision pattern. The heights in the current LEP cannot be achieved on many of the sites without amalgamation or because the lot depth is too shallow. Mid rise sites also have the possibility being categorized as a ‘key site’. Key Sites can have greater height and floor space. The proposed standards increase the overall capacity of the CBD but ensure that the built form relates to the street pattern, site characteristics and amenity .The planning proposal will seek the insertion of a corresponding Building Frontage Profile Map

Key Sites

Sites greater than 1500sqm in the ‘mid rise’ precincts may apply to be classified as ‘key sites’ that would allow increased height and floor space.

A Clause will be included in the LLEP to enable key sites to exceed the overall height but not the street wall height subject to a master plan being provided for the site in accordance with Council’s DCP.

Variations to the built form controls in the ‘mid rise precinct’ may be permitted if a larger site meets a number of the following criteria as follows:.

· minimum area of the consolidated sites 1500sqm (mandatory)

· multiple street or lane/serviceway frontages;

· a site shape that can accommodate taller buildings that can be designed to not impact negatively on the adjacent public domain, heritage buildings or neighbouring sites;

· a site shape that can accommodate tower footprints of up to 750 sq metres GFA with the appropriate set backs and separation distances between towers; and / or

· offer the potential to provide some additional car parking located in key locations in the CBD.

Long Term Civic Sites

A Clause will be included in the LLEP to enable the long term civic sites to be developed subject to a master plan being provided for the site in accordance with Council’s DCP.

Both long term civic sites are in Government ownership and both contain heritage buildings. The Liverpool Court House is located on the south west corner of Bigge Street and Moore Street and is currently under consideration for nomination on the State Heritage Register Both sites offer the possibility of maintaining and enhancing their history and heritage context as well as introducing sympathetic development that contributes to the cultural and commercial life of Liverpool CBD

Floor Space Ratio

Fine Grain and Mid-rise Sites

The planning proposal will seek to amend the Floor Space Ratio (FSR) across the CBD to enable the overall FSR to be calculated as separate formulae for fine grain sites and medium grain sites related to the building envelopes. The base FSR for the fine grain sites will be 2.5:1 and for mid-rise sites 3.0:1.

A Clause will be included in the LLEP to enable fine grain and mid-rise sites to exceed the base floor space subject to the building envelopes proposed in accordance with Council’s DCP

Key Sites

The planning proposal will seek to amend the Floor Space Ratio (FSR) across the CBD to enable the overall FSR to be calculated as separate formulae for key sites as related to the building envelopes. The base FSR for the key sites will be the mid-rise FSR of 3.0:1. However these sites will qualify for bonuses associated with key sites provisions up to a maximum of 10:1.

A Clause will be included in the LLEP to enable key sites to exceed the base floor space subject to a master plan being provided for the site in accordance with Council’s DCP.

Long Term Civic Sites

The planning proposal will seek to amend the Floor Space Ratio (FSR) to enable the overall FSR to be calculated as separate formulae for civic sites as related to the building envelopes and uses. The base FSR for the civic sites will be the fine grain FSR of 2.5:1. However these sites will qualify for bonuses.

A Clause will be included in the LLEP to enable the civic sites to exceed the base floor space subject to a master plan being provided for the site in accordance with Council’s DCP

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN

Part 4 of the Liverpool Development Control Plan 2008 [LDCP2008] is to be amended to accommodate principles related to the desired built form outcomes for the Fine grain and Mid-rise sites and specific principles related to the Key sites.

The LEP will be supported by the DCP maps that will show:

· Building frontage heights and profiles

· Building set backs (including street widening)

· Lane extensions, setbacks, and through site links

· Active street frontages

· Awnings

· Preferred public car park locations with (indicative numbers)

· Site access (restrictions on additional kerb crossings)

The planning proposal will seek to insert a Clause under ‘Division 1 of the Liverpool LEP 2008 in relation to the city centre to ensure that development on identified key sites is only considered after a master plan has been prepared and adopted for that site.

Building Set Backs (including street widening)

The planning proposal will seek to insert a Clause ‘Building Set Backs’ of the LLEP 2008 to ensure that the street and pavement width relates to the proposed built form and that there is sufficient separation between buildings to enable residential uses .The planning proposal will also seek the insertion of corresponding Building Set Backs Map

Lane extensions, setbacks, and through site links [ See Attachment ]

Active Street Frontages

The planning proposal will seek to insert a Clause ‘Active street frontage’ of the LLEP 2008 to promote uses that attract pedestrian traffic along certain ground floor street frontages in the B4 Mixed Use zone. The planning proposal will seek the insertion of corresponding Active Street Frontages Map

Active Frontage means street frontages where there is an active visual engagement between those in the street and those on the ground floors of buildings. Frequent building entries that face and open towards the street, transparent street frontages, quality materials and refined details, and mixed land uses will make streets more diverse and attractive for pedestrians and increase the perception of safety and encourage higher levels of pedestrian activity

Awnings

The planning proposal will seek to insert a Clause ‘Awnings’ in the LLEP 2008 to promote continuous awnings in retail precincts in the B4 Mixed Use zone.

Design Excellence

The existing Clause 7.5 Design Excellence in Liverpool City Centre of the LLEP is to be replaced with a clause that removes the requirement for a design competition on key sites but requires all major planning proposals and master plans, to be referred to the Liverpool Design Excellence Panel (LDEP) in accordance with (SEPP 65) legislation.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Endorses in principle the proposal to rezone all existing land zoned B3 Commercial Core in the city centre to B4 Mixed Use.

2. Endorses in principle the proposal to revise the development standards as detailed in this report.

3. Delegates to the CEO the authority to approve the final Planning Proposal for submission to the Department of Planning and Environment for Gateway Review.

REPORT

Background

Council held a workshop on 29 November 2015. At the workshop, Councillors outlined their vision for the Liverpool CBD as follows:

· The Capital of the great South West.

· A city defined by interesting architecture which is diverse and distinctive.

· A place where people want to work, live and enjoy.

· An 18 hour city characterised by activity and intensity both day and night.

· A true river city.

· A well connected, workable, walkable city.

The workshop agreed this would be delivered by:

· LEP changes;

· Traffic and transport changes (traffic and parking studies);

· Quality architecture and urban design and

· Urban amenity (streetscape, parks etc.)

It was also agreed that there is a need to document a strategy to become Sydney’s third capital and an action plan to deliver the infrastructure.

A Councillor briefing was held on 19 February 2015. At this briefing it was agreed that Council officers would report back to Council in March with the proposed changes to the LLEP 2008 based on the presentation at the workshop. These changes include:

· Rezoning the Commercial Core from B3 to B4 Mixed Use,

· Identifying planning precincts,

· Relating planning controls to the precincts, and

· Improving connectivity.

The Planning Proposal will seek to rezone the Liverpool CBD B3 Commercial Core lands to B4 Mixed Use; and vary the development standards in the LLEP 2008 to suit the precincts and building typologies. It is also proposed to make other amendments as necessary to the Development Control Plans [DCP] as detailed below.

The objectives for Liverpool CBD are to:

· Create:

o a mixed use vibrant 18 hour city centre;

o a walkable city that offers both living, recreation and work opportunities; and

o a city focused along the river.

· Define legible character precincts based on ownership pattern; subdivision pattern; street block patterns; and the role of the street and public domain.

· Create an urban form that:

o responds to the character of the precinct;,

o has different building typologies; and

o offers different economic opportunities.

· Enable individual owners to develop sites without amalgamation.

· Improve connectivity into and within the CBD.

· De-couple car parking from development where appropriate.

· Develop form based codes within the constraints of the standard LEP instrument.

PROPOSED CHANGES TO ZONING

The area to be rezoned is the existing B3 Commercial Core zone within the Liverpool City Centre. Specifically, this applies to the area shown in Figure 1 below. The CBD B3 zone is generally bounded by Campbell Street to the north, Bathurst Street to the west, Charles Street & Pirie Street to the South, and George Street, Bigge Street & the rail line to the west. The extended CBD site includes the land to the south already zoned B4.

$Description: C:\Users\fabianm\Desktop\cbd zones.png$ Description: http://adm-m-gis1/output/Buffer_ims_adm-m-gis110721008474864.jpg

Figure 1| The CBD showing the existing B3 Commercial Core

PROPOSED CHANGES TO DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS

Characteristics

Two main ‘precincts’ have been identified that reflect existing site characteristics, ownership patterns and subdivision patterns. The precincts are identified as ‘Fine grain’ areas and ‘Mid-rise’ areas.

In general a ‘block edge’ typology, that will define a coherent and continuous street edge, and allow development across the full width of lots is proposed for both the ‘fine grain’ and ‘mid rise’ areas. This will optimise development potential without the need to amalgamate, in either the short or medium term.

The existing height controls recognise the importance of maintaining solar access to Macquarie Street north of Scott Street. It is proposed that the current maximum ‘street frontage height’ be increased to 14m from 12m and that the overall building envelope allow for 6 storeys but with a more generous floor to ceiling height appropriate for retail and office uses.

Conversely, the existing height controls do not recognize the importance of solar access to the south side of Scott Street and Memorial Avenue, nor to the part of Macquarie Street south of Scott. It is proposed that the southern side of Scott Street be widened by setting back buildings to allow for increased pedestrian flows and activation. Similarly, the southern section of Macquarie Street has been identified as an ‘eat street’ that should also have good solar access. For these reasons, four storey (14metre) street frontage heights are proposed on the northern sides of these streets, not withstanding that these are classified as ‘mid rise’ and may have sites that could be categorized as ‘key sites’. In this case the built form would need to demonstrate how solar access is to be maintained.

The building envelopes for the development are derived from the subdivision pattern. The building envelopes enable buildings constructed to these profiles to relate to each other and the street and lane network. They also enable a diverse range of uses to occur within the buildings.

Key Sites

Once identified and agreed, key sites may use a ‘podium + tower’ typology. The podium will ensure the continuity of the street wall, while a greater setback from the street, and setbacks from side boundaries will minimize impacts on adjoining sites. There may be some key sites on which a tower typology without a podium may be the preferred form but this would be derived from the master plan. The Key sites require a master plan. The building envelope and floor space will be derived from the master plan.

Figure 2: Indicative Development Precincts

FINE GRAIN SITES

Characteristics

Fine grain sites are identified on the precinct plan. They are small sites that have a very important role for the pedestrian interface along streets. They are important because of their short frontages to streets, diverse functions but also because the different ownerships provide a diversity of character, uses, shop opening hours and price point for residential.

Fine grain means a small scale, generally lower cost spaces providing for a diverse range of activities and users. The fine grain spaces include small retail tenancies with street access including basement and first floor levels, as well as offices, studio spaces or other activities with access inside arcades, underground connections, through office foyers or other buildings. Fine grain spaces often front or are accessed from smaller streets or lanes, and are within lower grade office or mixed use buildings, generally in the less expensive precincts. The fine grain spaces with their mixed ownership and leasing patterns enable more organic changes to occur throughout the City and support lower cost and start up businesses that contribute to a vibrant and active City.

Objectives

The objectives for the development of the fine grain sites are to:

· Provide active street and lane frontages;

· Enable development without amalgamation;

· Form a cohesive related urban form even though sites are developed independently;

· Address solar access/privacy and light within the envelope so that separate studies are not required;

· Allow flexibility of uses within the building envelope [ long life / loose fit] that can change over time;

· Enable existing businesses to remain while development takes place; and

· Permit development without car parking on site if desired. Parking is to be located in basements or a maximum of two levels above ground on Levels 1 and 2. Car parks are to be hidden from the public areas by ‘sleeving’ with other uses or by screening. The solution will depend on the location of the site.

Outcomes

The desired outcome will be achieved by:

· Defining a building envelope [height, footprint and profile] that relates to the existing subdivision and street block pattern; and

· Allowing a range of activities within the building envelope.

Building Envelopes

The objectives for the building envelope controls are to:

· enable buildings to relate to each other along the street, lanes and the party walls;

· relate building heights to the streets and lanes creating a street wall; and

· take account of solar access to the public domain and neighbouring sites.

The fine grain sites have:

· a street wall of four storeys; and

· a street wall to the lane of four storeys.

The height across the lot will vary depending on the proposed uses and the depth of the lot.

Floor Space Ratio

The objectives for the proposed FSR are to:

· facilitate a wider range of development potential; and

· encourage better built form outcomes by relating the floor space ratio to building typology.

The FSR for the fine grain sites will be derived from the building envelope. It will be based on the standard instrument definition but include above ground car parking if provided. Non -permanent enclosure or screening of balconies is permitted where it aids the amenity of the apartments. The FSR will be calculated at 80% of the building envelope for retail commercial and 75% of the building envelope for residential This enables all building envelopes to be built to their capacity as established by the subdivision plan. On the fine grain sites tested, the FSR varied from 2.4:1 to 3.3:1 depending on uses. The FSR of an all retail/commercial building was 3.6:1.

Uses

As a minimum the ground floor must be used for retail purposes.

MID RISE SITES

Characteristics

Mid Rise sites are identified on the precinct plan. They are those sites that are capable of taking more development than the fine grain. They also have a role for the pedestrian interface. They are important because of their short frontages to streets, and diverse range of uses .The different ownerships also provide a diversity that a single ownership of city buildings does not achieve.

Objectives

The objectives for the development of the mid-rise sites are to:

· Provide active street and lane frontages;

· Enable development without amalgamation;

· Form a cohesive related urban form even though sites are developed independently;

· Address solar access/privacy and light within the envelope so that separate studies are not required;

· Allow flexibility of uses within the building envelope [long life/loose fit] that can change over time; and

· Provide parking for the development on the site. Car parking is permitted in basements and a maximum of two levels above ground on Levels 1 and 2. Car parks are to be hidden from the public areas by ‘sleeving’ with other uses or by screening. The solution will depend on the location of the site.

Outcomes

The desired outcome will be achieved by:

· Defining a building envelope [height, footprint and profile] that relates to the existing subdivision and street block pattern; and

· Allowing a range of activities within the building envelope

Building Envelopes

The objectives for the building envelope controls are similar to the fine grain sites as follows:

· enable buildings to relate to each other along the street, lanes and the party walls;

· relate building heights to the streets and lanes creating a street wall; and

· take account of solar access to the public domain and neighbouring sites.

The mid-rise sites have a:

· 6 storey height at street frontage; except where the adjoining street is to the south and the building would overshadow the southern side of the street

· 4 storey height is on the north side of a street that is a principal pedestrian street (Scott Street / Memorial Avenue)

· 4 storey height at lane frontage,

The building envelope across the lot will vary depending on the proposed uses and the depth of the lot.

Figure 3| Indicative Street Wall profiles

Floor Space Ratio

The FSR for the mid-rise sites will be derived from the building envelope. It will be based on the standard instrument definition but include above ground car parking if provided. Non-permanent enclosure or screening of balconies is permitted where it aids the amenity of the apartments. The FSR will be calculated at 80% of the building envelope for retail commercial and 75% of the building envelope for residential This enables all building envelopes to be built to their capacity as established by the subdivision plan. On the mid-rise sites tested the FSR varied from 2.5:1 to 4.0:1 depending on uses. The FSR of an all retail/commercial site was 5.0:1.

Uses

As a minimum the ground floor must be used for retail and first storey for commercial purposes.

KEY SITES

Characteristics

Key sites are those that can accommodate tower development. Towers may or may not have a podium depending on the site characteristics.

Key sites are those that have:

· a large site area (minimum 1500 sqm) in one ownership or the potential to amalgamate;

· multiple street frontages;

· a site shape that can accommodate taller buildings that can be designed to not impact negatively on the adjacent public domain, heritage buildings or neighbouring sites;

· a site shape that can accommodate tower footprints of up to 750 sq metres GFA with the appropriate set backs and separation distances between towers; and / or

· offer the potential to provide some additional car parking located in key locations in the CBD and/ or

· the potential to improve the public domain, extend lanes, provide through-site links

Objectives

The objectives for the development of the key sites are to:

· provide active street and lane frontages;

· enable development with or without amalgamation;

· form a cohesive related urban form even though sites are developed independently;

· allow flexibility of uses within the building envelope [long life/loose fit] that can change over time;

· create a skyline;

· define entrances and edges; and

· provide parking for the development on the site and to allow for public car parking to be dedicated to Council. The amount of additional car parking will be determined by the site characteristics and location. Car parking is permitted in basements and a maximum of two levels above ground on Levels 1and 2. Car parks are to be hidden from the public areas by ‘sleeving’ with other uses or by screening .The solution will depend on the location of the site.

Outcomes

The method of achieving the desired outcome is to develop a master plan. This is to ensure an optimum outcome for these large complex sites and the need to ensure that these sites contribute to the overall function of the city. The matters that need to be considered in formulating the master plan are:

· The position of the site in the CBD,

· The existing development on the neighbouring sites,

· The potential development on the neighbouring sites,

· Overshadowing of both the public domain and private lands,

· Heritage,

· The size, shape and area of the site,

· Street width and pavement width,

· The number of street frontages, and

· Parking availability and vehicle entrance.

The master plan will show in plan and section the massing and built form including:

· FSR, shadowing, podium, building alignment, set-backs, building footprint, awnings and general layout.

· Pedestrian and car entrances, parking, waste collection and indicative uses.

Building Envelope

The objectives for the building envelope controls are to:

· enable buildings to relate to each other along the street, lanes and the party walls;

· relate building heights to the streets and lanes creating a podium street wall;

· take account of solar access to the public domain and neighbouring sites;

· create a skyline for the CBD;

· define prominent entrances and edges within the city; and

· enable the appropriate separation distances between residential buildings.

The building envelopes for the key sites will vary. They will be derived from the master plan. The maximum height of podiums is 4-6 storeys. The maximum height of party walls is 4-6 storeys.

FSR

The objectives for the proposed FSR are to:

· facilitate a wider range of development potential; and

· encourage better built form outcomes by relating floor space ratio to building typology and public domain outcomes.

The FSR for the key sites will be derived from the building envelope/s as agreed in the masterplan. It will be based on the standard instrument definition and will include above ground car parking if provided. Non-permanent enclosure or screening of balconies is permitted where it aids the amenity of the apartments. The area balconies treated in this way will not be included in the FSR. The FSR will be calculated at 80% of the building envelope for retail commercial and 75% of the building envelope for residential.

The floor space ratios are determined by a formula as a percentage of the building envelope and related to the proposed uses as defined by the master plan. This enables all master planned sites to be built to their capacity having considered all issues associated with the site. On the key sites tested the FSR varied from 5.0:1 - 10.0:1 depending on uses and site conditions.

Uses

As a minimum the ground floor must be used for retail and the first storey for commercial purposes.

Long Term Civic Sites

Characteristics

Two long term civic sites are identified They are the Liverpool Public School and Court House Site in the block bounded by Moore Street, Bigge Street, Railway Street and Crawford Serviceway and the Bus Interchange and Rail Station site bounded by Moore Street, the heavy rail line and Bigge Street

Objectives

The objectives for the development of the civic sites are to:

· provide opportunities for cultural, education ,civic ,transport , commercial and residential places and uses

· integrate the current civic uses , heritage buildings and places into the CBD

· integrate transport infrastructure into the CBD

· link the CBD to the Georges River and Light Horse Park

· link Bigge Park to the Rail Station

· define the edge of the CBD to the river

· create and / enhance the heritage forecourts and places

· and

· provide for public car parking as required by Council

Outcomes

The method of achieving the desired outcome is to develop a master plan. This is to ensure that these sites contribute to the overall function of the city. The matters that need to be considered in formulating the master plan are:

· introducing new circulation networks on the Bus Interchange site to reconnect the site to the CBD

· reinforcing the heritage ,civic and transport role of the sites in the CBD

· enhancing the Court House and the Railway Station and its entrance plaza

· improving connections within the CBD and to the river

· the impact on existing and potential development on the neighbouring sites,,

· overshadowing of both the public domain and private lands,

· the size, shape, topography and area of the site relative to new building typologies ,

· street and pavement widths,,

· the views across the river to the CBD . and

· parking availability and vehicle entrance.

The master plan will show in plan and section the massing and built form including:

· circulation and movement patterns

· FSR, shadowing, building alignment, building envelopes, set-backs, building footprint, awnings levels and general layout.

· pedestrian and car entrances, parking, waste collection and indicative uses.

Building Envelopes

The building envelopes will be derived from the master plan. The objectives for the building form in the long term civic sites are to:

· enable new buildings and proposed street networks to relate to and enhance the heritage buildings

· enable new buildings and proposed street networks to relate to the existing buildings, streets and open space

· take account of solar access to the public domain and neighbouring sites;

· define the site edges related to the river and the streets network

· and

· enable the appropriate separation distances between buildings.

FSR

The objectives for the FSR are to:

· facilitate a wide range of development potential; and

· encourage better built form outcomes by relating floor space ratio to building typology and public domain outcomes.

The FSR for the civic sites will be derived from the building envelope/s as agreed in the masterplan and they will be determined by a formula as a percentage of the building envelope and related to the proposed uses.

Uses

These will be determined in the Masterplan

Connectivity and Active Street Frontages

Objectives

The objectives to assist in creating a vibrant city centre are to:

· improve connectivity;

· activate the lanes and so create a different spatial and economic experience;

· create generous pavements between key destinations;

· facilitate passive surveillance of the streets and lanes; and

· create the opportunity for spill out uses on the pavement eg outdoor dining etc.

Characteristics

Vibrant urban centres have a spatial hierarchy of interconnected streets. In Liverpool the spatial hierarchy comprises the Macquarie Street Mall, the gridded street pattern and the serviceways, the forecourts and some wide footpaths.

Outcomes

The method of achieving the desired outcome is to:

· Extend laneways through to streets so that there are clear sight lines;

· Create arcades and cross block links;

· Promote active uses at ground floor on the lanes and serviceways;

· Create setbacks on the long lanes / service ways parallel to George Street, Bathurst Street Macquarie Street to ensure that there is adequate separation between buildings to allow for residential on the upper levels on both sides of the lane; and

· Set back buildings on the south side of Elizabeth Street and Scott Street to maintain and/or create wide footpaths.

Figure 4|Indicative Serviceways and Arcades

Figure 5 | Indicative Building Set Backs

Design Excellence

Liverpool City Council Design Excellence Panel

A Liverpool City Council Design Excellence Panel was endorsed by Council at its meeting of 24^th March 2015. The Panel would be convened by the Minister under SEPP 65 legislation.

Objectives

The objectives for creating the Liverpool Design Excellence Panel (LDEP) are to:

· Improve the design quality of development in Liverpool;

· Facilitate independent design input from highly skilled designers and architects; and

· Provide advice to applicants and their consultants on options to improve the quality of their designs.

Outcomes

The LDEP will provide design advice for major development in the Liverpool CBD as set out under the Liverpool Design Excellence Panel Charter.

OVERVIEW OF THE ASSESSMENT OF THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE LLEP 2008

An initial assessment of the proposed changes to the LLEP was undertaken by Council officers .This was informed by a number of studies and work done as part of the Building Our New City initiative.

Following this review, a planning proposal detailing the changes sought to the Liverpool LEP 2008 is being prepared by Council officers for submission to the Department of Planning and Environment (DP&E) for Gateway Review.

The proposed rezoning from B3 Commercial Core and B4 Mixed Use is considered appropriate for the Liverpool CBD. This zoning change would provide for a more flexible range of uses, including residential accommodation in the form of shop top housing as part of mixed use development. This will facilitate an increased population in the city centre and contribute toward Council’s vision to increase activity and vibrancy within the CBD.

To address the potential loss of commercial floor space which may arise from permitting residential on the currently zoned B3 land, Council officers note that B4 Mixed Use still facilitates commercial uses without compromising the high yields and demand associated with residential uses. This zoning provides a more flexible approach to revitalise the city centre and has been done successfully in other areas, such as Burwood.

Ministerial Directions

Subject to Council’s approval of this report, Council officers will finalise the CBD planning proposal for approval by the CEO before 30 April. The planning proposal will then be submitted to the DP&E for Gateway Review.

The planning proposal must address S117 Ministerial Directions. Ministerial Direction 7 (4) requires that, “Planning Proposals shall be consistent with:

“(a) the NSW Government’s A Plan for Growing Sydney published in December 2014.”

It is to be noted that the Sydney’s South West Subregion chapter of the Plan for Sydney states with regard to Liverpool:

“Work with council to retain a commercial core in Liverpool, as required, for long term employment growth”.

The rezoning of all land zoned B3 Commercial Core located within the Liverpool City Centre to B4 Mixed Use would appear to be inconsistent with the Sydney’s South West Subregion chapter, and therefore inconsistent with the Ministerial Direction 7 Metropolitan Planning. However as detailed in this report and as discussed in the Councillor workshop in November and the February briefing session, the existing B3 zoning has not generated the employment outcomes envisaged. It is clear that a new approach is required. One of the objectives of this planning proposal is to general the residential density in the city centre to create demand for new business opportunities and jobs. The proposal will incentivise commercial development and activate the CBD centre vibrancy to assist in the further investment interest.

Council’s planning proposal will also address the drift of knowledge jobs to the Sydney CBD and the need for Liverpool to reinvent itself as a mixed use urban centre focused along the Georges River. The planning proposal will also acknowledge the potential long term changes to the area given the development of Badgerys Creek airport and changed transport systems. These changes provide the opportunity for commercial and mixed use development across the river on the land currently zoned industrial but where already there are proposals for a mix of uses.

Next Steps

Subject to Council’s approval, the planning proposal will be finalised for the CEO’s delegated approval before 29th May 2015 for submission to the Department of Planning and Environment for Gateway Review. It is anticipated that the rezoning process will be complete by late 2015.

As Councillors would be aware, following a Gateway Determination for a planning proposal there is a process of State agency consultation, public exhibition, and a further report to Council before proceeding with the making of any changes to the LEP. An estimated timeframe for the amendment process is attached to this report.

Conclusion

It is recommended that Council endorse in principle the proposal to rezone the Liverpool City Centre from B3 Commercial Core to B4 Mixed Use and make associated amendments to the LLEP, as detailed in this report; and that the CEO be delegated to approve the planning proposal prior to submission to the NSW Department of Planning and Environment for Gateway determination.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic and Financial	Facilitate economic development. Further develop a commercial centre that accommodates a variety of employment opportunities (in the City Centre).
Environmental and Sustainability	There are no environmental and sustainability considerations. Improve sustainability by strengthening a walkable centre and minimising car journeys
Social and Cultural	Preserve and maintain heritage, both landscape and cultural as urban development takes place. Regulate for a mix of housing types that responds to different population groups such as young families and older people.
Civic Leadership and Governance	There are no civic leadership and governance considerations.

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

Strategic Direction	Healthy Inclusive City Plan, support and deliver high quality and accessible services, program and facilities
Key Policy	Waste Management Policy
File Ref	089000.2015
Author	Anne Stanley - Councillor

Strategic Direction	Healthy Inclusive City Plan, support and deliver high quality and accessible services, program and facilities
Key Policy	Children’s Services Strategy
File Ref	089034.2015
Author	Peter Ristevski - Councillor

Item	Proposed Fee
Minor planning proposals (simple proposals)	First meeting - $600 Second and subsequent meetings - $250
Major planning proposals (proposals involving complex issues)	First meeting - $1,100 Second and subsequent meetings - $450
Heavy Vehicles Local Roads Permit	$70.00 per vehicle
Whitlam Leisure Centre - PrYme Membership (Over 50’s)”	$10.00 per week for holders of a Seniors or DVA card

Item	Proposed Fee
Whitlam Leisure Centre - PrYme Membership (Over 50’s)”	$10.00 per week for holders of a Seniors or DVA card

Clr Mamone left the Chambers at 7.33pm.

Clr Mamone returned to the Chambers at 7.34pm.

Clr Balloot left the Chambers at 7.42pm.

Clr Hadchiti left the Chambers at 8.54pm.

Clr Hadchiti returned to the Chambers at 9.49pm.

Clr Waller returned to the Chambers at 9.51pm.

Strategic Direction	Proud Engaged City Strengthen and celebrate Liverpool’s unique community identity
Key Policy	Heritage Strategy
File Ref	088932.2015
Author	Anne Stanley - Councillor

Strategic Direction	Liveable Safe City Improve the community’s sense of safety in Liverpool
Key Policy	NA
File Ref	088960.2015
Author	Anne Stanley - Councillor

Economic and Financial	Deliver a high quality local road system including provision and maintenance of infrastructure and management of traffic issues.
Environmental and Sustainability	There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.
Social and Cultural	Support policies and plans that prevent crime.
Civic Leadership and Governance	Undertake communication practices with the community and stakeholders across a range of media. Foster neighbourhood pride and a sense of responsibility. Encourage the community to engage in Council initiatives and actions. Deliver services that are customer focused.

85
NOM 04	Clean up Liverpool
Attachment 1	Keeping Our City Clean - Illegal Dumping Brochure

87
NOM 04	Clean up Liverpool
Attachment 2	Issue 8 Liverpool Life

89
NOM 04	Clean up Liverpool
Attachment 3	Issue 9 Liverpool Life

Strategic Direction	Liveable Safe City Create clean and attractive public places for people to engage and connect
Key Policy	Urban Development Plans
File Ref	089008.2015
Author	Mazhar Hadid - Councillor

Economic and Financial	Facilitate the development of new tourism based on local attractions, culture and creative industries.
Environmental and Sustainability	There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.
Social and Cultural	Raise awareness in the community about the available services and facilities.
Civic Leadership and Governance	Foster neighbourhood pride and a sense of responsibility. Encourage the community to engage in Council initiatives and actions. Provide information about Council’s services, roles and decision making processes. Deliver services that are customer focused. Operate a well developed governance system that demonstrates accountability, transparency and ethical conduct.

Strategic Direction	Leading Proactive Council Position Council as an industry leader, delivering best practice and innovation
Key Policy	Long-Term Financial Plan
File Ref	086684.2015
Report By	Miles Carter - Project Officer - Strategy and Performance
Approved By	Gary Grantham - Chief Financial Officer

Economic and Financial	The financial implications for each of the fees and charges have been outlined in the body of this report.
Environmental and Sustainability	There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.
Social and Cultural	The proposed Seniors fee is in line with Council’s strategy to support health and wellbeing outcomes in older communities.
Civic Leadership and Governance	Encourage the community to engage in Council initiatives and actions. Provide information about Council’s services, roles and decision making processes. Ensure Fees and Charges are equitable.

161
DCC 02	Re-Establishment of Alcohol Free Zones
Attachment 1	Master List of Alcohol Free Zones

Strategic Direction	Healthy Inclusive City Celebrate and respect Liverpool’s rich cultural and social diversity and embrace the opportunities it provides
Key Policy	Multicultural Action Plan
File Ref	087031.2015
Report By	Sarah Rees - Coordinator Community Development
Approved By	Kiersten Fishburn - Director Community & Culture

Economic and Financial	Most of the projects/activities identified in the Strategy are resourced through either external grants or have been included in operational budgets. An additional $17,000 will be required to deliver on all projects in the Strategy.
Environmental and Sustainability	There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.
Social and Cultural	Raise awareness in the community about the available services and facilities. Support community organisations, groups and volunteers to deliver coordinated services to the community. Promote community harmony and address discrimination. Support access and services for people with a disability.
Civic Leadership and Governance	There are no civic leadership and governance considerations.

181
DCC 03	Draft Multicultural Strategy and Action Plan 2015-2017
Attachment 1	Multicultural Strategy and Action Plan 2015-2017

Strategic Direction	Proud Engaged City Protect and preserve Liverpool’s heritage, including its rural landscape and cultural history
Key Policy	Heritage Strategy
File Ref	073207.2015
Report By	Kate Higgins - Heritage Officer
Approved By	Toni Averay - Director Planning & Growth

Strategic Direction	Accessible Connected City Provide safe and easy travel with a high quality road and traffic management network
Key Policy	Traffic and Transport Plan
File Ref	082868.2015
Report By	Charles Wiafe - Manager Traffic and Transport
Approved By	Toni Averay - Director Planning & Growth

205
DPG 03	Intersections of Fifteenth Avenue with Twenty Seventh and Twenty Eight Avenue – Update on Interim Road Safety Improvements
Attachment 1	Fifteenth and Twenty Seventh Avenues Intersection Layout

Economic and Financial	This report recommends that the cost of the road closure application be funded from the General Property Reserve.
Environmental and Sustainability	Support the delivery of a range of transport options.
Social and Cultural	There are no social and cultural considerations.
Civic Leadership and Governance	Encourage the community to engage in Council initiatives and actions.

235
CTTE 01	Minutes of the extraordinary Budget and Finance Committee held on 5 March 2015
Attachment 1	Extraordinary Budget and Finance Committee Meeting Minutes - 5 March 2015

239
CTTE 02	Minutes of the Budget and Finance Committee held on 1 April 2015
Attachment 1	Minutes of the Budget and Finance Committee held on 1 April 2015

Item	Description	Funding Arrangement
1	Edmondson Park Station Precinct, Edmondson Park, Proposed Regulatory Signs and Marking	The regulatory signs and line markings are being funded by Transport for NSW (part of the South West Rail Link works).
2	Christiansen Boulevarde, Moorebank – Proposed Pedestrian Refuge	The pedestrian refuge regulatory will be funded by the next financial year’s minor traffic facilities program.
3	Delfin Drive, Wattle Grove – Proposed Pedestrian Refuge	The pedestrian refuge regulatory will be funded by the next financial year’s minor traffic facilities program.
4	Crawford Serviceway, Liverpool –Proposed Regulatory Signs and Line marking	The regulatory signs and line marking will be funded as part of the Crawford Serviceway reconstruction.
5	Dalmeny Drive, Prestons (Dalmeny Public School) – Proposed Marked Pedestrian Crossing	The marked pedestrian crossing will be funded byr the RMS’ grant for minor traffic facilities.
6	George Street and Lachlan Street Intersection, Liverpool – Proposed Pedestrian Refuges	The proposed pedestrian refuges are to be funded by the developer of an adjoining residential apartments development
7	Fourth Avenue and Gurner Avenue Intersection, Austral – Proposed signs and line marking at Al-Faisal College	The proposed traffic facilities including the pedestrian refuges are to be funded by the developer of the adjoining Al-Faisal College.
8	Hume Highway and Ingham Drive Intersection, Casula – Proposed signs and line marking at proposed traffic signals	The proposed traffic signals and associated regulatory signs and line markings are to be funded by the developer of the adjoining supermarket.

253
CTTE 04	Minutes of the Street Naming Committee meeting held on 7 April 2015
Attachment 1	Minutes of Meeting of 7 April 2015.

Strategic Direction	Vibrant Prosperous City Position Liverpool as the destination of choice to attract business and investment in South Western Sydney
Key Policy	Economic Development Strategy
File Ref	082612.2015
Report By	Nicole Voorhout - Personal Assistant to the Director Economy and Engagement
Approved By	Michael Cullen – Director Economy & Engagement

Economic and Financial	The activities of the Committee support Council’s efforts to further develop a commercial centre that accommodates a variety of employment opportunities.
Environmental and Sustainability	Environmental and sustainability considerations will be factored into urban design for key City Centre precincts.
Social and Cultural	Revitalisation of the City Centre will embrace a range of arts and space activation opportunities.
Civic Leadership and Governance	The Committee provides guidance for Council’s Building Our New City Projects.

265
CTTE 05	Minutes of Building Our New City Committee meeting held 1 April 2015
Attachment 1	MINUTES Building Our New City Committee meeting 1 April 2015 FINAL

269
CTTE 06	Minutes of Economic Development and Events Committee meeting held 1 April 2015
Attachment 1	MINUTES Economic Development and Events Committee meeting 1 April FINAL

Strategic Direction	Proud Engaged City Engage and consult with the community to enhance opportunities for communication and involvement
Key Policy	Events Strategy
File Ref	081275.2015
Report By	George Georgakis - Manager Council and Executive Services
Approved By	Gary Grantham – Chief Financial Officer

281
CTTE 07	Minutes of the Civic Advisory Committee meeting held 31 March 2015
Attachment 1	Civic Advisory Committee Minutes from 31 March 2015

Economic and Financial	The Committee for Liverpool will provide important external perspectives to Council in pursuing its economic development and marketing activities. Costs will be incurred in using the services of Taylor Advisory Services to support the Committee as well as minor meeting costs
Environmental and Sustainability	There are no specific environmental and sustainability considerations.
Social and Cultural	The group will if and as required be able to provide external perspectives on relevant social and cultural matters.
Civic Leadership and Governance	The Committee for Liverpool is an important leadership initiative for Liverpool Council.

287
CTTE 08	Minutes of Committee for Liverpool Meeting held 11 March 2015
Attachment 1	MINUTES Committee for Liverpool 11 March 2015 FINAL