Agenda of Ordinary Meeting

Order of Business

PAGE TAB

Opening

Prayer

Apologies

Condolences

Confirmation of Minutes

Ordinary Council Meeting held on 29 April 2015..................................................................... 7

Declarations of Interest

Public Forum

Mayoral Report

NIL

Notices of Motion Of Rescission

NIL

Notices of Motion

NOM 01 Commencement time for June Council Meeting........................................... 66......... 1

NOM 02 ALGWA (NSW) Annual Conference.............................................................. 68......... 2

NOM 03 Recommendation for Approval by the Department of Planning - Moorebank Recyclers 70......... 3

Motions of Urgency

NIL

Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel Report

NIL

Development Application Determination Report

NIL

Chief Executive Officer Report

NIL

Business Improvement Report

NIL

Chief Financial Officer

CFO 01 Investment Report April 2015......................................................................... 74......... 4

CFO 02 March Community Performance Report....................................................... 92......... 5

CFO 03 March 2015 Budget Review......................................................................... 159......... 6

CFO 04 Annual Review of Civic Expenses and Facilities Policy.............................. 187......... 7

CFO 05 Review of the Code of Meeting Practice..................................................... 208......... 8

CFO 06 Endorsement of the Delivery Program 2013-17 and Operational Plan 2015-16 including Revenue Policy (to be provided in Addendum Booklet)

City Presentation Report

NIL

Community and Culture Report

DCC 01 Donations, Grants and Sponsorships........................................................... 210......... 9

DCC 02 Liverpool City Council Sporting Grants Program 2014/2015....................... 218....... 10

DCC 03 Toilet facilities at Wattle Grove Lake............................................................ 222....... 11

DCC 04 Combatting Childhood Obesity with Sport.................................................... 226....... 12

Economy and Engagement Report

DEE 01 Flag and Banner Program............................................................................ 233....... 13

DEE 02 Media Representation Policy........................................................................ 276....... 14

DEE 03 Corporate Sponsorship (Incoming) Policy.................................................... 283....... 15

DEE 04 Review of Town Improvement Fund Policy................................................. 298....... 16

Infrastructure and Environment Report

NIL

Planning and Growth Report

DPG 01 Draft LLEP 2008 (Amendment No. 49) - Removal of Flood Prone Land Area mapping from LLEP 2008 & Draft LDCP 2008 (Amendment No. 20)........................ 322....... 17

DPG 02 East Leppington Contributions Plan.............................................................. 328....... 18

DPG 03 Austral Leppington North Contributions Plan................................................ 333....... 19

DPG 04 Actions Taken and Progress in Northumberland Serviceway..................... 336....... 20

DPG 05 Draft Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 (Amendment No. 46) - Rezoning and Reclassification of Macleod Park, Prestons................................................. 338....... 21

DPG 06 Liverpool City Centre Traffic Study - Update on Design Investigations and Implementation of Three Projects................................................................ 346....... 22

Property and Commercial Development Report

DPC 01 Classification of Lot 300 DP1205231, Moondarra Drive, West Hoxton as 'Operational' Land.............................................................................................................. 357....... 23

DPC 02 Proposed road closure of part Speed Street car park, previously known as Lot 82 DP 790072.......................................................................................................... 360....... 24

Committee Reports

CTTE 01 Minutes of the Warwick Farm Steering Committee held on 3 March 2015. 363....... 25

CTTE 02 Liverpool Sports Committee minutes of meeting 26 March 2015................ 369....... 26

CTTE 03 Minutes of the Liverpool Access Committee 9 April 2015........................... 381....... 27

CTTE 04 Minutes of the Budget and Finance Committee held on 6 May 2015.......... 400....... 28

CTTE 05 Minutes of Building Our New City Committee meeting held 6 May 2015... 405....... 29

CTTE 06 Minutes of Economic Development and Events Committee meeting held 6 May 2015 411 30

CTTE 07 Liverpool Youth Council Meeting Minutes 7 April 2015 and Meeting Notes 5 May 2015 420....... 31

CTTE 08 Minutes of Badgerys Creek Airport Taskforce meeting held 6 May 2015... 442....... 32

CTTE 09 Minutes of Aboriginal Consultative Committee Meetings held on the 1 April 2015 and 6 May 2015 ..................................................................................................... 447....... 33

Questions with Notice

QWN 01 Question with Notice - Clr Stanley................................................................ 465....... 34

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 Key Sites Master Planning Steering Committee Minutes from Meeting held 5 May 2015

Reason: Item CONF 01 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 02 Proposed disposal of Lot 1 DP 1200837 and Lot 850 DP 803527, Robin Street, Hinchinbrook

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 RCL2439 Provision of Trade Services - Electrical, Carpentry, Plumbing, Air Conditioning

Reason: Item CONF 03 is confidential pursuant to the provisions of s10(A)(2)(d ii) of the Local Government Act because it contains commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council.

CONF 04 Bernera Road Widening - Approval Of Delay Costs With Contractor

Reason: Item CONF 04 is confidential pursuant to the provisions of s10(A)(2)(c) (g) 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; AND advice concerning litigation, or advice that would otherwise be privileged from production in legal proceedings on the ground of legal professional privilege.

CONF 05 Tender for DA-610/2012, DA-740/2012,DA-1055/2013

Reason: Item CONF 05 is confidential pursuant to the provisions of s10(A)(2)(c) (d i) 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; AND commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it.

CONF 06 Financial Dispute With Former Staff Member

Reason: Item CONF 06 is confidential pursuant to the provisions of s10(A)(2)(a) of the Local Government Act because it contains personal matters concerning particular individuals (other than councillors).

CONF 07 WT2464 Whitlam Leisure Centre A/C Renewal Project (report to be provided in Addendum Confidential Booklet)

Reason: Item CONF 07 is confidential pursuant to the provisions of s10(A)(2)(d ii) of the Local Government Act because it contains commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council.

Close

MINUTES OF THE Ordinary Meeting

HELD ON 29 April 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

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

Mr John Morgan, Director Property and Commercial Development

The meeting commenced at 6.04pm.

OPENING 6.04pm

PRAYER The prayer of the Council was read by Pastor Henry Jacotine from Inspire Church.

APOLOGIES Nil

CONDOLENCES

SUBJECT: Executions of Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran

Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran were executed in Indonesia at 3 am AEST this morning.

Mr Chan and Mr Sukumaran were arrested in 2005 in Bali and were both subsequently sentenced to death. The pair languished in the Bali prisons system for ten years before the execution was carried out.

Mr Chan and Mr Sukumaran were due to have applications, filed on their behalf, heard in Indonesia’s Constitutional Court on 12 May 2015, but despite that process still on foot the executions were nevertheless carried out.

Two lives were taken unnecessarily by the Indonesian Government and by a barbaric method, despite evidence that the pair had reached a level of rehabilitation.

Condolences and well wishes should be extended to the families and loved ones of Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran.

RECOMMENDATION:

That Council:

Express condolences and well wishes to the family and loved ones of Andrew Chan.

Express condolences and well wishes to the family and loved ones of Myuran Sukumaran.

Motion: Moved: Clr Hadchiti Seconded: Clr Waller

That the recommendation be adopted.

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

CONDOLENCE

SUBJECT: The Hon. John Malcolm Fraser AC, CH, CGL

The Hon. John Malcolm Fraser AC, CH, CGL sadly passed away on 20 March 2015. Mr Fraser was the 22^nd Prime Minister of Australia from 1975 to 1983.

Mr Fraser was born on 21 May 1930 in Toorak, Victoria and born into a family with a history of involvement in politics and the pastoral industry. Mr Fraser was educated at Oxford University where he majored in Philosophy, Politics and Economics and graduated in 1952.

On 10 December 1955, Mr Fraser won the seat of Wannon in a House of Representatives comprising of 57 seats at the time. On 11 November 1975, Mr Fraser was sworn in as caretaker Prime Minister and a month later after electoral success officially became the 22^nd Prime Minister of Australia.

Prime Minister Fraser was known as an influence in Australian relations overseas both within the Commonwealth and with the countries of East and Southeast Asia. An adamant opponent of the apartheid regime, Prime Minister Fraser was a strong supporter for reform in South Africa.

The Fraser government revitalised Australia’s immigration program. The immigration program focused on resettlement and multiculturalism with the Institute of Multiculturalism Affairs being set up in 1978.

Mr Fraser resigned from parliament on 31 March 1983 and, within two years, had become a key figure in Australia’s international and diplomatic relations.

After politics Mr Fraser continued his service to the community. In 1987 Mr Fraser formed CARE Australia as part of the international CARE network on humanitarian aid organisations.

In 2000, Mr Fraser was awarded Australia’s Human Rights Medal for his contribution to the advancement of human rights in Australia and internationally. The Award was also in recognition of his Government’s legislative record in indigenous land rights, as well as his personal commitment for all of his public and private life to anti-racism and minority rights.

Mr Fraser is survived by his wife Tamara “Tamie” Fraser, AO and his four children Mark, Angela, Hugh and Phoebe.

RECOMMENDATION:

That Council:

Records its deep regret at the passing of the Honourable John Malcolm Fraser, AC, CH, CGL on 20 March 2015.

Expresses its condolences and well wishes to Mrs Tamara Margaret Fraser, AO.

Motion: Moved: Clr Hadchiti Seconded: Clr Mamone

That the recommendation be adopted.

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

Confirmation of Minutes

Motion: Moved: Clr Mamone Seconded: Clr Balloot

That the minutes of the Extraordinary Meeting held on 24 March 2015 and the Extraordinary Meeting held on 1 April 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 items:

Item CONF 02: Key Sites Master Planning Steering Committee Minutes from meeting held 7 April 2015.

and

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 referred to in CONF 07 and also in the minutes in CONF 02.

Clr Hadchiti left the Chambers for the duration of these two items.

Clr Waller declared a non pecuniary, less than significant interest in the following item:

Item DCC 01: Donations, Grants and Sponsorships

Reason: Clr Waller is a member of the board of Meals on Wheels which is a not for profit community organisation.

Clr Waller did not leave the Chambers for the duration of this item.

Public Forum

(Presentation – Items not on agenda)

Nil

(Representation – Items on agenda)

Nil

Mayoral Minute

Subject: Moorebank Georges River Precinct Master Plan

Moorebank is a unique precinct within Liverpool. Set along the Georges River and Lake Moore, Moorebank possess prime waterfront potential. Its strategic location is enhanced by virtue of its closeness to Liverpool’s business hub and Liverpool Station, a key piece of public transport infrastructure, and also its connectivity to the South-Western Region and Greater Western Sydney through major road connections which include the M5 Motorway, Hume Highway, Newbridge Road, and Heathcote Road.

The redevelopment of the Moorebank Georges River precinct provides an opportunity to transform an old and degraded industrial area into a revitalised mixed use urban waterfront precinct in close proximity to Liverpool CBD. Council should investigate the Moorebank Georges River precinct for its urban renewal potential. The redevelopment of this precinct will benefit from a high level of public transport accessibility provided by its proximity to Liverpool Station, and with upgrades to local bus routes, potential realignment of local roads and improvements for active transport options, including pedestrian and cycle routes.

This area also provides a unique opportunity for Liverpool to help meet Sydney’s future housing needs and make a major contribution to providing for the additional 1.6 million people who will live in Sydney over the next 20 years. The area has the potential to be developed as a premium mixed use riverside lifestyle precinct with quality housing and local employment opportunities. Redevelopment will deliver substantial environmental, recreational and community benefits to support the achievement of Liverpool’s potential as the third regional city.

A number of major landowners in this area are currently progressing individual planning proposals and have been in discussion with Council officers about the technical requirements associated with their proposals. It is clear that this important strategic area requires a comprehensive and integrated approach to land use planning and infrastructure demands.

It is proposed the investigation of the Moorebank Georges River Precinct will examine:

The precinct’s potential to support higher levels of density, incorporating a mix of housing and employment options,
The unique characteristics of the precinct, including heritage, waterfront access, public open spaces, and walkability to support redevelopment,
The urban design principles to support building typologies, public domain improvements, and built form outcomes to support sustainable precinct redevelopment,
The level of connectivity of the precinct to the regional road network, and the potential infrastructure upgrades required to support precinct redevelopment,
The level connectivity of the precinct to the regional public transport network, including bus and rail, and the potential infrastructure upgrades required to support precinct redevelopment, and
Potential key sites which are feasible to facilitate for redevelopment of the precinct in line with the aforementioned.

It is appropriate that landowners contribute to the cost of this investigation.

Attached to this Mayoral Minute are a map of the proposed precinct area and an aerial image.

$Description: C:\Users\stewartma\Desktop\Moorebank Precinct LZN Map.png$

Moorebank Precinct LZN Map

$Description: C:\Users\stewartma\Desktop\Moorebank Precinct Aerial.png$

Moorebank Precinct Aerial Photo

RECOMMENDATION:

That Council:

Investigate the Moorebank Georges River area as an urban renewal precinct.
Develop a Master Plan for the Moorebank Georges River mixed use precinct to provide opportunities for housing and employment, with access to transport and infrastructure.
Explore options with current landowners and associated developers to fund the costs of this investigation.

The study also include land on the west side of the Georges River.

Motion: Moved: Mayor Mannoun

That the recommendation be adopted.

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

Mayor Mannoun asked that he be recorded as voting for the Mayoral Minute.

Mayoral Minute

Subject: 'Luke Stono's Never Give Up' Charity Bike Ride

On 22 April 2015, Luke Stono departed Nowra Private Hospital on an organised fund raising bike ride to Liverpool Hospital, known as the ‘Luke Stono’s Never Give Up Charity Bike Ride’. Mr Stono is expected to arrive at Liverpool Hospital on 1 May 2015. Mr Stono is riding a special recumbent push bike on the 180km ride. Mr Stono has committed to donating the money raised to the Liverpool Hospital Brain Gym.

On 20 June 2012, Mr Stono suffered a serious brain injury whilst training at a motocross compound in Lockhart NSW in a tragic motorbike accident. He was rushed to Wagga Base Hospital and later airlifted to Canberra Hospital where he was assessed and found to have suffered a severe brain injury. He was in a coma. Mr Stono’s parents were informed that he had only a 20 per cent chance of surviving and only a 4 per cent chance of minimal recovery if he did survive. Mr Stono eventually showed signs of waking from his coma and was eventually transferred to the Liverpool Hospital Brain Injury Unit and spent 9 months there in rehabilitation.

Mr Stono displayed a “never give up” attitude throughout his recovery to date and has moved from only a 20 per cent chance of survival to a man who put plans in place to ride his bike for 180km. Mr Stono attributes a great deal of his recovery to the staff in the Liverpool Brain Injury Unit for their care and has stated that he wouldn’t be where he is today without their help, however he has indicated that the Unit is need of equipment upgrades. Mr Stono hopes that the money raised throughout his bicycle journey will help towards those much needed upgrades.

Mr Stono is expected to arrive at Liverpool Hospital on Friday 1 May 2015 at 11am. I will be in attendance to greet Mr Stono. I propose that Council donate $5,000 to Mr Stono’s cause which in turn will benefit the Liverpool Hospital Brain Gym.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

Extend well wishes to Luke Stono on the completion of his bike ride from Nowra to Liverpool Hospital.

Commend Luke Stono for his hard work efforts to raise money for the Liverpool Hospital Brain Gym.

Donate $5,000 to the Luke Stono’s Never Give Up Charity Bike Ride.

Motion: Moved: Mayor Mannoun

That the recommendation be adopted.

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

Mayoral Minute

Subject: Opening of Ingham House on 27 April 2015

On 27 April 2015, I was honoured to officially open Ingham House at 18 Pioneer Dr, Carnes Hill, which was the result of a four year project between Anowah Community Living Inc, Ingham Australia and Fowler Homes.

Ingham House will be operated by Anowah Community Living Inc and provides services for people with disabilities. Current residents of Anowah are aged from their mid 20’s to over 60 years of age. All of the residents have an intellectual disability and some with physical or sensory impairments. The aim of the services is to provide an increase in each person’s independence and quality of life.

The Ingham family donated the land located on 18 Pioneer Dr and Fowler Homes constructed the premises for use by Anowah in order to provide the important services to those members of our community who are in need.

Moving forward, Anowah now needs to raise necessary funds to provide a high standard of training, accommodation and service options for their residents, which includes the provision of housing, furniture, equipment, aids and training programs. As part of the fundraising efforts, Anowah will be hosting its Annual Fund Raising dinner on Friday 22 May 2015.

RECOMMENDATION:

That Council:

Provide a donation of $2,500 towards Anowah Community Living Inc’s Annual Fundraising dinner on Friday 22 May 2015.

Congratulate Ingham Australia, Fowler Homes and Anowah Community Living Inc on the completion of the four year project towards the completion of Ingham House.

Recognise the important work that Anowah Community Living Inc undertakes to help disadvantaged members of the community.

Motion: Moved: Mayor Mannoun

That the recommendation be adopted.

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

Mayoral Minute

Subject: Trip to Gallipoli ("The Journey to the Quilt") - June Young OAM, JP and Ken Young OAM

Local residents within the Liverpool Municipality, Mrs June Young OAM, JP and Mr Ken Young OAM, left Australia last week to embark on a journey to Gallipoli in remembrance of those soldiers who lost their lives during World War One.

Their official farewell happened in Albany, Western Australia, where they set sail to the site of the sinking of HMAS Sydney for a Memorial Service before retracing the journey through Cocos Island, Colombo, Suez Canal, Egypt, Greece, Turkey, Gallipoli, Crete and Italy.

Throughout their journey, Mr and Mrs Young will be carrying a handmade quilt, made by members of the RSL Women’s Auxiliaries from all over NSW in remembrance of those who died in the First World War. Each square contained on the quilt has its own personal story. The quilt is one of seven quilts made by women of the Auxiliaries and the first was raffled last year and made $37,200 for RSL Defence Care (the welfare and benevolent arm of the RSL movement). Upon Mr and Mrs Young’s return to Australia, their quilt will hang at the Cenotaph in Hyde Park, Sydney.

Mrs Young will be writing a daily journal of the Quilt’s journey, conducting interviews with veterans on the ship, entertainers and historians. Mrs Young will also be photographing the quilt at many historical sites along the journey.

RECOMMENDATION:

That Council:

Wishes Mr and Mrs Young a continued safe passage on their “Journey to the Quilt” journey as they remember those who served in Gallipoli, World War Two, Borneo, Vietnam and on peacekeeping missions.

Commend the Women’s Auxiliaries for their great work in the Quilt project which has raised significant money for the RSL Defence Care.

Meet with Mr and Mrs Young upon their return to discuss an opportunity to display the photos of their journey in public for interested members of the community to view.

Motion: Moved: Mayor Mannoun

That the recommendation be adopted.

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

Mayoral Minute

Subject: Local Government Awards

On 23 April 2015, Liverpool Council won two award categories at the Local Government Awards evening held at the Westin Hotel in Martin Place Sydney.

In the first category, Liverpool won the ‘Excellence in Environmental Leadership and Sustainability’ category for the Council’s work in establishing a leading edge Community Recycling Centre. The Community Recycling Centre development programme was led by Gino Belsito, Director of City Presentation and his team.

In the second category, Liverpool won the ‘Excellence in Local and Economic Contribution’ category for the Council’s work on the ‘Building our New City’ initiative. The ‘Building our New City’ initiative will trigger business investment opportunities and jobs growth for Liverpool. This initiative is being led by Michael Cullen, Director of Economic and Engagement and his team.

The success of winning the two award categories are a result of dedication and hard work and a great result for Liverpool to have some of the Council’s innovative and leading projects recognised by the Local Government sector.

RECOMMENDATION:

That Council:

Congratulate Gino Belsito, Director of City Presentation and his team for winning the ‘Excellence in Environmental Leadership’ award category at the Local Government Awards evening in recognition of the Community Recycling Centre.

Congratulate Michael Cullen, Director of Economic and Engagement and his team for winning the ‘Excellence in Local and Economic Contribution’ award category at the Local Government Awards evening in recognition of the ‘Building our New City’ initiative.

Commend the City Presentation and the Economic and Engagement teams for their hard work and dedication.

Motion: Moved: Mayor Mannoun

That the recommendation be adopted.

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

Mayoral Minute

Subject: Relay for Life: Cancer Council

The Cancer Council of Australia facilitates the Relay for Life event organised by local volunteer committees on behalf of the Cancer Council.

Relay for Life gives local communities a chance to recognise and celebrate those who have overcome cancer or are undergoing treatment, as well as carers of people who suffer from cancer.

Relay for Life first started in Australia back in 1999 when the Victorian community of Murrumbeena raised over $75,000 for the Cancer Council. Sixteen years later, Relays are now held in every State and Territory, with more than 134,000 participants raising over $24 million each year. Every dollar raised from participation in Relay for Life goes towards the Cancer Council’s research, prevention and support programs.

The Liverpool community will be participating in the Relay for Life event commencing on Saturday 23 May 2015 concluding on Sunday 24 May 2015. In the planned Liverpool relay to date, 16 teams comprising of 74 participants have registered with a total of $6,217.39 raised so far with a goal of raising $55,000 in total.

Teams participate in a relay-style walk or run, with a challenge of staying on track overnight. Each event is unique and participants can stay for the entirety of the event which includes camping overnight and enjoy the fun activities.

I plan on registering as a participant in the Liverpool Relay for Life event and would implore my fellow Councillors, Council employees and their families and members of the Liverpool community to also register and participate for such an important and worthy cause.

I also move that the Council donate $2,500 towards the Liverpool Relay for Life event.

RECOMMENDATION:

That Council:

Call for all Councillors, Council employees and their family and members of the Liverpool Community register and participate in the local Liverpool Relay for Life event held on 23 & 24 May 2015

Donate $2,500 to the local Liverpool Relay for Life event.

Motion: Moved: Mayor Mannoun

That the recommendation be adopted.

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

Community and Culture Report

ITEM NO: DCC 01

FILE NO: 003970.2015

SUBJECT: Donations, Grants and Sponsorships

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

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion: Moved: Clr Hadchiti Seconded: Clr Ristevski

That Council:

1. Endorses the Financial Contribution Panel's recommendations for the provision of $6,200 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
The Australian Sanatan Sports at the Sanatanian Soccer Championship	$1,000

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 $36,900 under the Corporate Sponsorship Program as summarised in the table below. If the recommended amount of $36,900 is endorsed, supplementary funds of $20,336 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
Sanatan Satsang Sabha of NSW	$5,000

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

Ordinary Meeting 26 May 2015

Chief Financial Officer

CFO 01

Investment Report April 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	103129.2015
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 30^th April 2015, Council held investments with a market value of $155 million. The portfolio yield for twelve months ended was 3.93 per cent exceeding the benchmark of 2.67 per cent by 126 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. A minor non-compliance to Council's Investment Policy was identified and a recommendation to address this is included in a separate report to the Council.

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 30 April 2015, Council held investments with a market value of $155 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:

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

Asset Class	APR-15	Jun-14
Senior Debts (FRN’s & *TCD’s)	100.61 %	101.48%
MBS (Reverse Mortgage Backed Securities)	65.27 %	60.14%
Total	97.16%	91.64%

* A TCD stands for Transferrable Certificate of Deposit; it is a security issued with the same characteristics as a Term Deposit however it can be sold back (transferred) in to the market prior to maturity. A floating TCD pays a coupon linked to a variable benchmark (90 days BBSW).

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
Bank of China/Sydney	1,006,780	0.65%	A	25.00%
Emerald Reverse Mortgage Trust	801,755	0.52%	A	25.00%
Bank of Queensland Ltd FRN	2,018,080	1.30%	A-	25.00%
Bendigo & Adelaide Bank Ltd	3,033,970	1.96%	A-	25.00%
Suncorp-Metway Ltd	2,017,240	1.30%	A+	25.00%
AMP Bank Ltd	9,931,874	6.41%	A-1	35.00%
Rabobank Australia Ltd	9,000,000	5.81%	A-1	35.00%
Commonwealth Bank of Australia Ltd	2,168,782	1.40%	A1+	45.00%
National Australia Bank Ltd	29,000,000	18.71%	A1+	45.00%
Bank of Queensland Ltd	30,000,000	19.36%	A-2	25.00%
Members Equity Bank Ltd	5,000,000	3.23%	A-2	25.00%
MyState Bank Ltd	2,000,000	1.29%	A-2	25.00%
P&N Bank Ltd	11,000,000	7.10%	A-2	25.00%
Police Bank Ltd	2,000,000	1.29%	A-2	25.00%
ANZ Banking Group Ltd	703,031	0.45%	AA-	35.00%
National Australia Bank Ltd	10,000,000	6.45%	AA-	35.00%
St George Bank Limited	2,000,000	1.29%	AA-	35.00%
Westpac Banking Corporation Ltd	6,000,000	3.87%	AA-	35.00%
Emerald Reverse Mortgage Trust	1,193,223	0.77%	AAA	45.00%
Credit Union Australia Ltd	4,020,300	2.59%	BBB	15.00%
Members Equity Bank Ltd FRN	1,010,600	0.65%	BBB	15.00%
Newcastle Permanent Building Society Ltd	10,044,980	6.48%	BBB	15.00%
Police Bank Ltd FRN	1,006,220	0.65%	BBB	15.00%
Teachers Mutual Bank Ltd	2,011,300	1.30%	BBB	15.00%
Bananacoast Community Credit Union Ltd	4,000,000	2.58%	Unrated	5.00%
Bank of Sydney Ltd	3,000,000	1.94%	Unrated	5.00%
SGE Mutual Ltd trading as G&C Mutual Bank	1,000,000	0.65%	Unrated	5.00%
Portfolio Total	154,968,135	100.00%

Market Value of Investment by Credit Rating Category

Short Term Security Rating Group	Market Value	% Value	Policy Limit
A1+	31,168,782	20.11%	100%
A1	18,931,874	12.22%	100%
A2	50,000,000	32.26%	60%
N/R	8,000,000	5.16%	25%
Portfolio Total - Short Term Rating Group	108,100,656	69.75%
Long Term Security Rating Group	Market Value	% Value	Policy Limit
AAA	1,193,223	0.77%	100%
AA+ to AA-	18,703,031	12.07%	100%
A+ to A-	8,877,825	5.73%	60%
BBB+ to BBB-	18,093,400	11.68%	50%
Portfolio Total - Long Term Rating Group	46,867,479	30.25%
Total Investment Portfolio	154,968,135	100.00%

Portfolio Maturity Profile

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

Portfolio Performance

Council’s investment portfolio yield for the 12 months ended 30 April 2015 was 3.93 per cent which exceeded benchmark of 2.67 per cent by 126 basis points for the same period. This is a solid outcome given ongoing margin contraction and significantly lower deposit yields on offer. Council’s ongoing outperformance has been boosted by a handful of longer term investments yielding above 4% and maturing out to 2019. Return on investments is expected to slowly 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 purchased $5.7 million securities in Floating Rate Notes and Floating Transferable Certificate of Deposits (TCD) as follows:

Issuer	Security Type/ margin above BBSW	Credit Rating	Term	Amount
Newcastle Permanent	FRN paying 135 basis points above BBSW	BBB+	5 years	$4m
Bank of China	TCD paying 125 basis points above BBSW	A	3 years	$1m
ANZ Bank	TCD paying 85 basis points above BBSW	AA	5 years	$0.7m

All purchases for the month comply with Council’s Investment policy. 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 126 basis points above the benchmark for the same period (3.93% against 2.67%).
Annual Income vs. Budget		Council’s investment interest income is $128k above the revised year to date budget. This result is made up of $51k for the General Fund and $77k for the Externally Restricted Funds and excludes $134k realised capital gains for the year.

Investment Policy Compliance

Legislative Requirements		Fully Compliant.
Portfolio Credit Rating Limit		Fully Compliant.
Institutional Exposure Limits		Fully Compliant.
Term to Maturity Limits	X	At 28%, maturity profile > 3 years exceeds 25% policy limit (see commentary below)

The term to maturity limit for investments greater than 3 years was 3% above the investment policy (excluding grandfathered investments) mainly due to investment portfolio shrinkage in April ($11.3m less than the previous period).

The objective for establishing a term to maturity limit is to ensure adequate liquidity in Council’s investment portfolio. A strict application of this policy includes liquid assets such as Floating Rate Notes and Senior Bonds that can be traded in an active market with the proceeds of sale received within three days. It has been identified that inclusion of liquid assets such as these and applying the term of maturity limit of 25% actually restricts Council to optimise its investment return. Current market deals on offer has significantly lower deposit yields for short-term deposits and comparatively better yield for longer term liquid investments.

In its recently updated investment policy Council did not change the maximum term to maturity limits for medium-longer term investments (greater than 3 years). Council has sought and received advice from its investment adviser CGP Research & Advisory on this issue (see attached CPG report) and will be recommending an amendment to the investment policy in a separate report at this month Council meeting to exclude liquid assets (Cash, FRN’s and TCD’s) from the Term to Maturity Limit.

Economic Outlook – Reserve Bank of Australia

At its May 2015 meeting, the Board of the Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) decided to lower the cash rate by 25 basis points to 2.0 per cent, effective 6 May 2015. A statement released on 5 May 2015 by Glenn Stevens, Governor of the RBA commenting on the central bank decision is attached to this report. The cash rate is at historically low level and adversely impacting returns on investment. Returns on Term Deposits have significantly dropped since the last twelve months. The average market returns on term deposits are:

· Longer term deposits (> 3years maturity) - 3.1% to 3.3% p.a

· Medium term (2 to 3 years to maturity) - 2.9% to 3.1% p.a.

· Short term deposits rate (less than one year to maturity) – ranges from 2.25% for 30 days to 2.9% p.a.

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 $128k above the revised year to date budget. This result is made up of $51k for General Fund and $77k for the Externally Restricted Funds and excludes $134k realised capital gains for the year.
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 May 2015 View

2. Investment Detail Report April 2015 View

3. Performance Graphs Actual to Budget Ytd April 2015 View

4. CPG Report

Ordinary Meeting 26 May 2015

Chief Financial Officer

CFO 02

March Community Performance Report

Strategic Direction	Leading Proactive Council Position Council as an industry leader, delivering best practice and innovation
Key Policy	Long-Term Financial Plan
File Ref	104240.2015
Report By	Miles Carter - Project Officer - Strategy and Performance
Approved By	Gary Grantham - Chief Financial Officer

Executive Summary

The quarterly Community Performance Report provides an overview of Council’s quarterly performance for the January to March period against the 4-year Delivery Program and Operational Plan and Budget 2014-15. It demonstrates operational achievements and provides information and statistics for key areas of Council’s operations during the quarter.

Council has committed to delivering 137 ongoing activities, 75 short term actions and 16 strategic projects for the 2014-15 year. By the end of the March quarter, 96% of short term actions in the Delivery Program and Operational Plan were on track for completion or completed. Of the 4% of actions experiencing delays, 2% required attention and 2% were on hold.

Explanations for all delayed or on hold actions have been provided in the report.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council receives and notes the March Community Performance Report which outlines the progress of all principal activities contained in the 4-year Delivery Program and Operational Plan 14/15.

REPORT

On 26 June 2013, Council adopted the Growing Liverpool 2023 Community Strategic Plan.

Growing Liverpool 2023 outlines the community’s vision and priorities for the Liverpool area and contains 7 directions and corresponding strategies for Liverpool. It was developed following an extensive community consultation and engagement process. The Plan sets the direction for Council's operations and services for the next ten years.

Section 404(5) of the Local Government Act (1993) requires the Chief Executive Officer to ensure that regular progress reports are provided to the Council at least every six months with respect to the principal activities detailed in its four year Delivery Program. This is an important mechanism that enables Council and the public to monitor progress. To comply with the requirement to provide regular progress reports at least every six months, Council receives quarterly performance reports.

The 4-year Delivery Program and Operational Plan 2014-15 is Council’s commitment to the community. It details the principal activities that Council will deliver towards achieving the community vision and directions outlined in Growing Liverpool 2023. Each principal activity has several actions for the 2014-15 year, these actions make up Council’s annual Operational Plan.

This report provides details of a comprehensive review of the January to March quarter, which was undertaken to determine Council's progress against the principal activities outlined in the Delivery Program.

March 2015 Performance Report

Council determined to deliver 27 principal activities as part of its 4-year Delivery Program, with 212 specific actions for the 2014-15 year. Of this 137 were ongoing activities and 75 were short term actions.

The March 2015 Community Performance Report contains details on the progress of all the principal activities. It is attached under separate cover. It showcases highlights during this period, provides a progress update for all of Council’s strategic projects and includes statistics on several areas of Council’s operations.

By the end of the March quarter, 96% of short term actions in the Delivery Program and Operational Plan were on track for completion or completed. Of the 4% of actions experiencing delays, 2% required attention and 2% were on hold. Explanations for all delayed or on hold actions have been provided in the report.

It is recommended that Council receives and notes the March 2015 Community Performance Report.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic and Financial	There are no economic and financial considerations.
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	Ensures Council operates effectively and demonstrates accountability and transparency in its business operations.

ATTACHMENTS

1. March Quarterly Performance Report View

155

Ordinary Meeting 26 May 2015

Chief Financial Officer

CFO 03

March 2015 Budget Review

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	116361.2015
Report By	Vishwa Nadan - Manager Financial Management
Approved By	Gary Grantham - Chief Financial Officer

Executive Summary

On 20 June 2014 Council adopted a balanced funded budget for the 2014/2015 financial year. In terms of the net operating result before grants and contributions provided for capital purposes, the Council budgeted for a deficit of $8.393m. Whilst the Council can afford this budget from a funding perspective, it will impact the Net Operating Result before grants and contribution provided for capital purposes which is a critical “Fit For the Future” performance measure.

The Council has since approved budget variations by resolutions, endorsed carryovers from 2013/14 and through September and December 2014 budget reviews process, resulting in an additional $5.847m operating deficit and an overall $9.985m decrease in capital expenditure program.

The review of Council's budget at 31 March 2015 has resulted in a $0.224m reduction in the budget operating deficit and a further $8.466m reduction in capital expenditure program.

The Net Operating Result before grants and contribution provided for capital purposes at 30 June 2015 is currently forecasted at $0.491m surplus. This is a significant improvement on the current approved budget.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Receives and notes the report;

2. Approves the identified budget variations in accordance with this report.

REPORT

Legislative Requirements

Clause 203(1) of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 requires the Responsible Accounting Officer to provide a quarterly budget review not later than two months after each quarter's end. This report provides an overview of the results on the financial review for the quarter ended 31 March 2015.

Budget Commentary

In June 2014 Council adopted a budget with balanced funding result for the 2014/15 financial year, summarized in the table below. In terms of the net operating result before grants and contributions provided for capital purposes, the Council budgeted for a deficit of $8.393m. Whilst the Council can afford this budget from funding perspective, it will impact the Net Operating Result before grants and contribution provided for capital purposes, which is a critical “Fit For the Future” performance measure. The Council has since approved budget variations by resolutions, endorsed carryovers from 2013/14 and through September and December budget reviews, resulting in an additional $5.847m operating deficit and an overall $9.985m decrease in capital expenditure program. See table below.

The review of Council's budget at 31 March 2015 has resulted in a $0.224m reduction in the budget operating deficit and a further $8.466m reduction in capital expenditure program. As part of the Budget Review, managers have conducted a review of their programs with a view to providing a revised forecast for the financial year ended 30 June 2015. Managers take into consideration events that have occurred to date and/or information that has become available since the adoption of the original budget and the impact of which provides the basis for any revised forecasts.

From funding perspective, the budget variations approved by Council to 31 December 2014 including resolutions resulted in a surplus of $662k. The third Quarter (March 15) budget review has nil impact in funding.

The budgeted results are subject to delivery of planned programs. Based on actual performance to-date, Council’s year end Net Operating Result before grants & contributions position is currently forecast at $0.491m surplus. This is a significant improvement on the current approved budget.

Details of the proposed budget changes are provided in the attachments.

Attachment 1 – Variation to general fund works: Highlights in detail the general fund movements for the quarter. Key movements include:

· $96k – Budget savings from various floodplain and drainage projects to be delivered in FY 15/16 due to delayed grant approvals.

· $700k – Additional contractor’s budget required to undertake waste reclassification and removal as per EPA notice.

· $200k – Supplementary budget towards pavement maintenance to improve motorist safety and preserve pavement and wearing surface.

· $100k – Additional consultancy costs to carryout environmental audit of Council's waste management practices.

The $1.6m from Road Pavement Works Program (expenditure capitalised and funded from capital works program) that was kept as contingency in CEO’s Office will be used to fund these additional budget requests.

Attachment 2 – Variations to grant and contributions funded works: Highlights movements in works and/or operations that are funded via grants or contributions. Any variation to expenditure is offset by an increase or decrease in funding from these sources resulting in a nil impact on unrestricted general funds.

Attachment 3 – Variations to S94 works: Highlights all budget movements in S94 funded works. Variations in S94 works do not impact on general funds as all works are funded from

S94 developer contributions. Any surplus funds on budgeted works remain restricted for future works in accordance with legislative requirements.

Attachment 4 – Variations to Reserves: Highlights movements in works and/or operations

that are funded from reserves (internal and/or external). Any variation to expenditure is

offset by an increase or decrease in funding from the respective reserve resulting in a nil

impact on unrestricted general funds.

Attachments 5 & 6 – Grants Status Report: Has two components, first listing all annual grant submissions and second, listing all grants that have been applied for during the quarter detailing the project title, amount sought, funding body and status of the application. Council officers are continually seeking alternate sources of funding as opportunities arise.

Attachments 7 - 11 - Quarter 3 Budget Review Summary (QBRS): This report presents a summary of Council's budgeted financial position at the end of each quarter. It has five components:

1. A consolidated Operating Income and Expenses Statement showing the revised budgeted income and expenditure for the year against the original estimate of annual income and expenditure as show in Council’s Operational Plan.

2. Capital Budget Statement: This report breaks the capital expenditure into new and renewal assets and respective reserve funding.

3. Cash and Investments Statement providing a reconciliation of restricted and unrestricted funds to the level of Cash and Investments held as at 31 March 2015

4. Key Performance Indicators

5. Contracts and Other Expenses Statement.

As the Responsible Accounting Officer, it is the Chief Financial Officer’s opinion that the short term financial position of Council is considered satisfactory.

This Report recommends that Council receives and notes the report and votes the budget variations in accordance with this report.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic and Financial	Based on actual performance to-date, Council’s year ending Net Operating Result before grants and contributions position is estimated at $491k surplus. From funding perspective, the budget changes following quarterly reviews and Council resolutions to March 2015 has resulted in a surplus of $662k.
Environmental and Sustainability	There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.
Social and Cultural	There are no social and cultural considerations.
Civic Leadership and Governance	Deliver services that are customer focused. Operate a well-developed governance system that demonstrates accountability, transparency and ethical conduct.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Variations to General Fund works View

2. Variation to Grant & Contributions funded works View

3. Variations to S94 funded works View

4. Variation to works funded by Reserves View

5. Grants Status Report - Applications View

6. Grant Status Report - Received View

7. Quarter 3 - Budget Review Summary View

8. Cash and Investment Report View

9. Key Performance Indicators View

10. Consultancy & Legal Expenses Budget Report View

11. Contracts & Other Expenses Statement

183

Ordinary Meeting 26 May 2015

Chief Financial Officer

CFO 04

Annual Review of Civic Expenses and Facilities Policy

Strategic Direction	Leading Proactive Council Provide business excellence and financial sustainability to deliver services that meet community expectations
Key Policy	Council Governance
File Ref	116809.2015
Report By	David Maguire - Governance Coordinator
Approved By	Gary Grantham - Chief Financial Officer

Executive Summary

Section 252 of the Local Government Act 1993 (the Act) requires that Council adopt or amend a policy annually for the payment of expenses and provision of facilities to the Mayor and Councillors. The Mayor and Councillors can only receive reimbursement for expenses and be provided with facilities in accordance with this policy. The current Civic Expenses and Facilities Policy was adopted by Council on 25 June 2014.

Apart from minor amendments, including a change to the way in which a Council vehicle is provided to the Mayor, the only other change to the current policy is the inclusion of a proposed clause 4.17, which provides for voluntary contributions from the fees payable to the Mayor and Councillors to complying superannuation funds, a procedure allowable in accordance with the Australian Taxation Office Interpretative Decision 2007/205.

If Council decides to amend the Civic Expenses and Facilities Policy to include the proposed clause 4.17, then the draft policy will have to be placed on public exhibition in accordance with section 253(1) of the Act.

It is recommended that Council receive and note this report, provide public notice of 28 days for the making of public submissions of Council's intention to amend the policy ,as attached to this report, and be provided with a further report at its meeting on 29 July 2015, following the receipt and review of any public submissions.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Receive and note this report:

2. Provide public notice of 28 days for the making of public submissions of Council's intention to amend the Civic Expenses and Facilities Policy ,as attached to this report; and

3. Be provided with a further report at its meeting on 29 July 2015, following the receipt and review of any public submissions.

REPORT

Section 252 of the Local Government Act 1993 (the Act) requires that Council adopt or amend a policy annually for the payment of expenses and provision of facilities to the Mayor and Councillors. The Mayor and Councillors are only entitled to receive reimbursement for expenses and to be provided with facilities in accordance with this policy.

The LGRT, an independent tribunal, makes an annual determination of fees paid to mayors and councillors throughout NSW, based on the size of particular councils. This year’s determination was issued on 13 April 2015. The LGRT recommended an increase in fees of 2.5% for the 2015/16 financial year. The fee range determined for the category in which Liverpool is placed (Metropolitan Centre), has the following minimum and maximum range, as determined by the Tribunal on 13 April 2015:

Councillor

Mayor

Minimum

Maximum

Minimum

Maximum

$12,520

$23,270

$26,600

$62,090

The above fee range is payable for the 2015-2016 financial year.

Clause 4.1.3 of Council’s current Civic Expenses and Facilities Policy states:

“As a policy objective, the annual fee paid for Councillors and the Mayor will be equivalent to the maximum fee as recommended by the Tribunal. This objective recognises that Liverpool is a rapidly growing Council, requiring enormous effort in managing this growth while simultaneously ensuring that the existing population is supported and well served.”

Given the above policy objective, it is recommended that the fees payable to the Mayor and Councillors should be consistent with the maximum amount for the Metropolitan Centre category, as determined by the LGRT on 13 April 2015. The fees for the Mayor and Councillors of our Council are set out in clause 4.1.2 of the attached policy and are in accordance with the recent LGRT determination.

Apart from minor amendments, reflecting organisational and formatting changes (highlighted in red type) and the way in which a Council vehicle is provided to the Mayor ( by leasing rather than capital outlay), the only other change to the policy is the inclusion of a proposed clause 4.17, relating to a provision for the voluntary contributions from the fees payable to the Mayor and Councillors to complying superannuation funds, a procedure which is allowable in accordance with the Australian Taxation Office Interpretative Decision 2007/205 (Income Tax: Assessability of superannuation contributions made in favour of local government councillors). This decision clearly provides that a council can enter into an arrangement with its councillors under which its councillors can agree to forego part of their remuneration in exchange for the local government council making contributions to a complying superannuation fund. The effect of the arrangement is that the amounts paid by a council to the complying fund are assessable to the fund as “superannuation benefits for someone else”, as set out in section 295-160 of the Income Tax Assessment Act (Cth) 1997.

If Council seeks to adopt clause 4.17 in the attached draft policy, then section 253(1) of the Act requires that Council must give public notice of 28 days of its intention to adopt or amend the current Civic Expenses and Facilities Policy to allow for public submissions. Under section 253(4) of the Act, within 28 days after adopting its policy, or making an amendment to its policy, Council must forward to the Chief Executive Officer of the OLG:

a) A copy of the policy or amendment together with details of all submissions received;

b) A statement setting out for each submission, Council's response to each submission and the reasons for Council's response; and

c) A copy of the public notice.

It is recommended that, in accordance with section 253 of the Act, Council provide public notice of 28 days for the making of public submissions of Council's intention to amend the Civic Expenses and Facilities Policy, as attached to this report.

A further report, following the receipt and review of any public submissions, will be presented at Council's meeting on 29 July 2015.

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. Operate a well developed governance system that demonstrates accountability, transparency and ethical conduct.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Draft Civic Expenses and Facilities Policy 2015 View

206

Ordinary Meeting 26 May 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	003971.2015
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, School and Youth Donations), Sporting Donations and Corporate Sponsorship.

The Financial Contributions Panel (FCP) recently considered a number of applications from 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 $7,100 under the Community Donations Program as summarised in the table below:

Applicant Name	Project Name	Amount
Urban Theatre Projects	FAITH	$5,000
Greek Orthodox Community of NSW	Senior Art Class	$2,100

2. Endorses the Financial Contributions Panel's recommendations for the provision of $12,609 under the Corporate Sponsorship Program as summarised in the table below. If the recommended amount of $12,609 is endorsed, funds will need to be allocated from the Council Reserve.

Applicant name	Amount
Share Care Inc.	$5,000
NSW Organ and Tissue Donation Service	$7,609

REPORT

The Donations program has three categories:

· Community Donations (including Community Grants, Small 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 Community Donations and Corporate Sponsorship. The Sports Committee meets bi-monthly to assess Sporting Donation applications. As there was no meeting in April 2015, no recommendations are presented within this report.

Community Grants

Council's Community Grants Program is available to community groups who provide programs or services to the residents of Liverpool. Two applications for Community Grants were received by Council. Two 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

Urban Theatre Projects

Project name: FAITH

FAITH is a project in collaboration with 100 religious leaders and young people to create seven 27 minute visual episodes that will be presented simultaneously in 7 suburbs in Western Sydney over 30 days in September 2015. The episodes will be projected in public places with high pedestrian traffic. The purpose of the project is to raise awareness and address social issues relevant to the region.

Community Benefits:

· Increased awareness and understanding of different faiths; and

· Enhanced social cohesion and community harmony.

$5,000

Greek Orthodox Community of NSW

Project name: Senior Art Class

A culturally and linguistically tailored program that provides an understanding of key emotional, social and physical wellbeing issues impacting the Greek community through art classes.

Community Benefits:

· Reduced isolation of Greek seniors who are unable to access mainstream services because of language and cultural barriers; and

· Fosters community participation through activities that are linguistically and culturally appropriate to Greek seniors.

Corporate Sponsorship

Council delivers a Corporate Sponsorship Program for local organisations seeking financial support to deliver events that benefit Liverpool. Two applications for Corporate Sponsorship were received by Council. Two 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

Share Care Inc

Share Care Twilight Charity Ball – Campbelltown, 30 October 2015

Annual fundraising ball for the Liverpool based organisation that provide services for children and young adults with a disability and their families. Tickets are $120 each or $1,000 for a table of ten. Not for profit activity. Anticipated attendances 500-600 people.

Benefits:

Logo inclusion on all promotional material. Speaking opportunity at the event. 10 tickets. Opportunity to distribute publications or merchandise at the event. Opportunity to draw lucky door prize on the night.

Whilst the event will not be held in Liverpool the organisation is based in Liverpool and services the Liverpool community.

Aligns with program criteria.

Recommended for funding in line with previous support.

$5,000 ex GST

$5,000

NSW Organ and Tissue Donation Service

DonateLife Week–Displaying banners in the city centre 2-9 August 2015

DonateLife week are seeking to raise awareness of the importance of organ and tissue donation and is specifically targeting CALD communities. They are seeking financial support to cover the printing and installation costs of banners in the city centre during their National Awareness Week. Not for profit activity.

Support request includes:

- $2,128 for installation of banners in the mall (banners have already been printed for this location); and

- $5,552.60 for printing and installation costs of banners for additional city centre zones 2,3,4 and 5.

Benefits:

Acknowledgement on new banners produced and acknowledgement in media associated with the campaign.

Organ and tissue donation is an important issue and the NSW Organ and Tissue service are aiming to increase rates of donation and awareness amongst CALD communities which correlates with the Liverpool population. The banners will activate the city centre and raise awareness of an important health issue. Aligns with program criteria. Recommended for funding.

$7,609 ex GST

$7,609

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic and Financial	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 $7,100 is endorsed the remaining balance will be $25,994.50. The recommendations within this report for Community Grants will be funded from the Community Donations Program. The 2014/15 Corporate Sponsorship Program has a budget of $80,000 and these funds have now been fully committed. If the recommended amount of $12,609 is endorsed, the funds would need to be provided 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 Community Grants Program View

2. Criteria for Corporate Sponsorship

214

Ordinary Meeting 26 May 2015

Community and Culture Report

DCC 02

Liverpool City Council Sporting Grants Program 2014/2015

Strategic Direction	Healthy Inclusive City Improve health and wellbeing and encourage a happy, active community
Key Policy	Recreation Strategy
File Ref	099266.2015
Report By	Mark Westley - Sports Development Officer
Approved By	Kiersten Fishburn - Director Community & Culture

Executive Summary

At its meeting held on 15 February 2010, Council approved funding which established the Liverpool City Council Sporting Grants Program to provide sporting grants to the sporting clubs of Liverpool.

The total amount of available grant funds for the 2014/2015 financial year is $30,000 with $5,000 of this total targeted at applications that support sports participation by people with a disability.

This report recommends the allocation of sporting grants as per the recommendations of the Liverpool Sports Committee grants assessment panel.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Adopts the following recommendations for the allocation of the $25,000 sporting grants funding, as determined by the Liverpool Sports Committee grants assessment panel:

Club	Project Description	Recommended Grant Amount
NSW Remote Control Racing Car Club	Construction of a Covered Training Area	$4,500
Moorebank Rugby League Club	Purchase of Sporting Equipment	$2,000
Kemps Creek United Soccer Club	Safety Fencing Construction	$5,000
Casula Lakers Baseball Club	Purchase of Sporting Equipment, Coaching, Umpire and First Aid Training (consisting of 3 separate grants)	$3,625
Liverpool Olympic Sports and Social Club	Purchase of Line Marking Equipment and Sporting Equipment	$3,200
Liverpool City Archers	Purchase of Sporting Equipment	$3,500
Moorebank Baseball Softball Club	Purchase of Sporting Equipment	$3,175
	Total	$25,000

2. Adopts the following recommendation for the allocation of $5,000 due to the lack of applications under the criteria allocated for sports for people with a disability:

Club	Project Description	Recommended Grant Amount
Liverpool City Robins Football Club	Mower Purchase	$5,000

REPORT

A total of $30,000 has been allocated within Council’s 2014/2015 budget for distribution to sporting clubs through the Liverpool City Council Sporting Grants program, with $5,000 of this total allocated to applications supporting people with a disability. The maximum grant is limited to $5,000 per applicant.

Applications are assessed against the following criteria:

a) Clubs must be located in Liverpool City Council Local Government Area and provide activities for Liverpool residents.

b) Grants must be spent within 12 months of receiving funds.

c) Proof of costs must be provided.

d) Applications must be received before the closing date.

e) Applications must be signed by Club Office bearers.

f) Clubs must not have received funding under the previous year’s grants program.

g) Projects must meet Council’s construction and safety standards.

h) Projects must address one of the following six categories:

- Sports Development - (eg. Coaching clinics, sports camps, training and development)

- Ground Development - (eg. Minor capital improvements)

- Maintenance Equipment - (eg. Line marking and ground maintenance equipment)

- Sporting Equipment - (Kits, bags, balls etc., first aid and safety equipment. *Note* Equipment must remain the property of the club to be eligible)

- Education - (First aid training, coaching education programs, safe play)

- Club diversity - (Introduction of additional sports, expansion of club to include
greater community involvement)

Council received 17 applications from 11 sporting organisations requesting a total of $56,417 in grants assistance. Applications were assessed by a panel of representatives from the Liverpool Sports Committee who have recommended the following allocation of grants:

Club	Project Description	Proposed Grant Amount
NSW Remote Control Racing Car Club	Construction of a Covered Training Area	$4,500
Moorebank Rugby League Club	Purchase of Sporting Equipment	$2,000
Kemps Creek United Soccer Club	Safety Fencing Construction	$5,000
Casula Lakers Baseball Club	Purchase of Sporting Equipment, Coaching, Umpire and First Aid Training	$3,625
Liverpool Olympic Sports and Social Club	Purchase of Line Marking Equipment and Sporting Equipment	$3,200
Liverpool City Archers	Purchase of Sporting Equipment	$3,500
Moorebank Baseball Softball Club	Purchase of Sporting Equipment	$3,175
Liverpool City Robins Football Club	Mower Purchase	$5,000
	Total	$30,000

The applications that were not recommended for funding by the assessment panel are as follows:

Club	Project Description	Requested Grant Amount	Panel Assessment
NSW Remote Control Racing Car Club	Toilet Block Construction	$5,000	The Assessment panel recommended not funding this application. The proof of costs indicated the project would cost over $16,000, there was no guarantee the project would be able to proceed given this cost was over $6,000 more than indicated in their application. In addition the viability of their project proposal needs further investigation. This applicant also received a grant for a different project.
Moorebank Cricket Club	Cricket Pitch Construction	Not Identified	The Assessment panel recommended not funding this application due to the lack of supporting documentation for costs.
Casula Lakers Baseball Club	Purchase of Line Marking Machine	$1,669	The Assessment panel recommended not funding this application as the applicant had received funding for other projects.
Casula Lakers Baseball Club	Come & Try Event	$1,000	The Assessment panel recommended not funding this application as the applicant had received funding for other projects.
All Saints Liverpool JRLFC	Purchase of Sporting Equipment	$5,000	The Assessment panel recommended not funding this application due to the lack of supporting documentation for costs.
Moorebank Rugby League Club	Development of Coaching Material	$2,050	The Assessment panel recommended not funding this application as they felt that coaching materials already exist and the project was considered a lower worthiness compared to others. This applicant received a grant for a different project.
Hinchinbrook Sports Club	Coaching Academy Participation	$5,000	The Assessment panel recommended not funding this application. This application proposed hiring a private football academy to train 80 children over a 10 week period.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic and Financial	There are no economic and financial considerations.
Environmental and Sustainability	There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.
Social and Cultural	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

Nil

218

Ordinary Meeting 26 May 2015

Community and Culture Report

DCC 03

Toilet facilities at Wattle Grove Lake

Strategic Direction	Healthy Inclusive City Plan, support and deliver high quality and accessible services, program and facilities
Key Policy	Recreation Strategy
File Ref	102356.2015
Report By	James Flinn - Community Planning Policy Officer (Recreation)
Approved By	Kiersten Fishburn - Director Community & Culture

Executive Summary

At the 16 December 2014 Council Meeting, a Notice of Motion (NOM 3) was moved to investigate the installation of toilet facilities at Wattle Grove Lake.

Lakeside Park, Wattle Grove is a district level park which has recently been upgraded. Lakeside offers almost entirely ‘optional’ and ‘social’ recreational activities such as walking, meeting friends or spending time with family, playing, picnicing, people watching, feeding wildlife, sitting, sunbathing and getting fit.

Provision of public toilets creates an environment whereby visitors are encouraged to stay longer, activating the park and improving recreation outcomes for all residents visiting the park.

This report recommends that a single fully automated toilet should be installed at Lakeside Park. This is consistent with the forthcoming Recreation Strategy which will recommend investigation of public toilets in district level parks.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Installs a single fully automated toilet in Lakeside Park;

2. Allocates up to $188,000 in the 2015/16 Capital Works budget to deliver; and

3. Considers a further report to Council identifying other district level parks where fully automated toilets could be installed.

REPORT

At the 16 December 2014 Council Meeting, a Notice of Motion (NOM 3) was moved to investigate the installation of toilet facilities at Wattle Grove Lake.

Park activation theory and Lakeside Park

People are attracted to public spaces that are well connected, have high amenity and have people already using them. The overall success of a park, however, is the amount of time people spend in any one place.

Activities in parks can be divided into three broad categories:

· Necessary – more or less compulsory eg. walking through park to go to school/work;

· Optional – where time, weather, and place make it possible; and

· Social – all activities that depend on the presence of others eg. where people go to meet.

Lakeside Park offers unstructured recreation opportunity that is almost entirely ‘optional’ and ‘social’. Common activities include walking, meeting friends, spending time with family, playing, picnicing, watching, feeding wildlife, sitting, sunbathing and getting fit. Other potential uses include markets.

To support these unstructured activities, Council has invested heavily in Lakeside Park building pathways, grassed areas, seats, children’s play areas (with artificial shading), landscaping, signage, lighting, and bins. Despite this improved amenity and significant investment, people are largely limited to an hour of usage time due to the absence of toilets. Provision of toilets in the park has the potential to extend utilisation of the park, increasing activation of the park and improving recreation outcomes for all patrons of the park.

Siting of facilities

Best practice recommends that toilets be situated in well utilised and highly visible locations that are adjacent to existing social infrastructure. Equally importantly is consideration of the interface with sewerage, water, and electricity connection points required for necessary servicing.

Investigations revealed that due to the design of the lake and surrounding parkland, the siting of toilets is restricted to the higher areas close to Delfin Avenue and will likely require additional landscaping and importation of soil to provide the necessary height required to meet sewer connection requirements.

Development options

There are three development options to consider when installing public toilets in Lakeside Park:

· Traditional ‘brick and mortar’ – separate male and female block model with individual cubicles, troughs, and shared areas for basins etc;

· Pre-fabricated and automated toilets – individual use only, sliding doors, concealed services, remote locking and monitoring, self-cleansing technology; and

· Internalisation of toilets in larger facility eg. café/restaurant.

Unless a greater structure eg. café/restaurant is considered, only automated toilets are recommended in Lakeside Park. Automated toilets have a broad range of benefits over the traditional brick and mortar approach including:

· Comparable installation cost for basic models and lower ongoing maintenance costs;

· Quicker installation as 85% of product is pre-fabricated offsite;

· After a certain amount of uses the unit will automatically close itself for public use and run through a wash cycle reducing maintenance cost;

· The cavity slider doors ensure that the toilet units are much safer and the doors easier to use than conventional swing doors;

· Restricts loitering and anti-social behaviour by internal configuration of toilet and basin in cubicle;

· Remote locking negates the need for Council staff to open and lock facility each day;

· Concealed services and use of stainless steel fittings reduce vandalism;

· Recessed sensor operated basin limits water use and improves sanitation;

· Are able to be relocated; and

· Customisable finishes with potential ‘skins’ that can include Council’s branding or public art initiatives.

Other Similar Councils

Research undertaken revealed that both Campbelltown and Fairfield Councils are replacing their older style bricks and mortar toilet blocks in key locations with modern fully automated toilets due to the reasons above. Campbelltown Council has budgeted over $750,000 in 2015/16 to replace older style toilet blocks with new fully automated toilets in key locations.

Description: http://www.exeloo.com/tmp/gallery/resized/1458_Mawson_Park_1458_Mawson_Park_Final_Photos_6-0006-0006.jpg

Photo: Three fully-automated toilets located in Mawson Park, Campbelltown.

Costs and availability of funds

The purchase costs (including GST) for fully automated toilets are:

· Single - $128,000

· Double - $184,000

Due to the services connection costs and engineering requirements, a budget of up to $60,000 for installation and servicing costs is also required.

In total, a budget of up to $188,000 is required to install a single fully automated toilet.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic and Financial	Approximately $188,000 is required to provide a single toilet in Lakeside Park.
Environmental and Sustainability	There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.
Social and Cultural	Provide places of high amenity and distinction. Provide social infrastructure that meets the needs of the community
Civic Leadership and Governance	Deliver services that are customer focused.

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

222

Ordinary Meeting 26 May 2015

Community and Culture Report

DCC 04

Combatting Childhood Obesity with Sport

Strategic Direction	Healthy Inclusive City Improve health and wellbeing and encourage a happy, active community
Key Policy	Recreation Strategy
File Ref	108567.2015
Report By	Mark Egan - Coordinator Community Planning
Approved By	Kiersten Fishburn - Director Community & Culture

Executive Summary

A Notice of Motion in relation to combatting childhood obesity using sport was presented to Council’s December 2014 meeting. Council resolved to undertake research into this matter and return with a report that detailed the most appropriate means of encouraging and supporting children’s participation in formal ‘Saturday’ team sport. This report summarises the findings of available research into team-based sports participation and provides a broad overview of two approaches that could be used to increase participation in Liverpool to help address childhood obesity.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Receives and notes this report.

2. Allocates $50,000 in the 2015-16 budget to administer a subsidy program to commence in September 2015 for the summer sports season.

REPORT

At its December 2014 meeting Council resolved to:

1. Undertake an investigation of the most appropriate means of encouraging and supporting children’s participation in formal ‘Saturday’ team sport across the Liverpool Local Government Area including research on subsidising the cost of children’s registration to a relevant sporting organisation.

2. Provide a report to Council with information on the above, together with the financial cost to Council.

Recreation Strategy

Work has commenced to develop a new Recreation Strategy for Liverpool City Council. This process involves intensive work to analyse Council’s current status (existing open space and assets, current delivery model, current level of demand and how effectively we deliver outcomes, current spend and cost recovery), detailed policy and literature reviews focused around best practice in recreation planning, operation and maintenance, a review of Council’s internal processes, and the development of specific action plans based around the key needs of our local government area.

Council has utilised Liverpool Listens to undertake community engagement to inform the Recreation Strategy during March-April 2015 and has also undertaken desktop research on this issue as outlined in the resolution. Consultation via Liverpool Listens is still under way and no results are available at this stage. The current consultation is targeting sporting clubs. Desktop research on the issue of participation in organised sport has been undertaken.

Current subsidy programs

Council’s direct sporting subsidies via the Sporting Donation Program provide small amounts of funding to individual players to achieve excellence at the sporting representative level. Indirectly, it should be noted that Council heavily subsidies the actual cost of providing sports fields for use by clubs. While the Recreation Strategy will provide a more accurate analysis of the breakdown, it is estimated that Council only recoups around 15 percent of its costs through hire charges.

Benefits of organised sport

There are a range of benefits to be gained from participating in organised sport. Beyond the obvious physical health benefits there are mental health benefits, development of teamwork and negotiation skills, self-discipline, learning the etiquette of a social system, decision-making skills and confidence building.

It is important to note that organised sport is one means among many of addressing childhood obesity. Unstructured recreational opportunities are just as important, if not more so, in providing an effective means of increasing the health and wellbeing of our community. Current research indicates that:

1. Participation trends show a shift away from organised team sports and towards more unstructured recreational pursuits (Clearinghouse for Sport);

2. Only participating in team sports on a Saturday is not adequate in keeping children healthy (Active Kids Australia Report); and

3. Girls in particular are far less motivated by competitive sports then boys are (VicHealth Report).

Participation in Liverpool

According to research conducted in 2013, about 15,000 people across all age groups play organised sport in Liverpool. The most popular sport is soccer, followed by cricket and netball. However, men and women participate very differently. Netball is the most popular sport for women with 100 percent of participants being female. Comparatively, only 10 percent of soccer players are female. Available national data indicates that around two thirds of the participants in organised sport are likely to be under the age of 18 years; therefore around 10,000 young people participate in organised sport in Liverpool. Given that Liverpool’s estimated residential population figures indicate that there are 36,486 children aged 5-17 years, this means around 30 percent of Liverpool’s young people are involved in organised sport.

Research findings

The Australian Sports Commission (ASC) undertook research into the factors that influence participation of young people in sport. With children under 18 years of age, participation is influenced primarily by parents. The key barriers to participation identified in the research can be summarised as follows:

· Time: perception (or reality) that parents did not have the time to commit their support to their children’s participation.

· Cost: a barrier identified particularly by lower income families.

· Cultural background: trends show that Australian-born children, and children with both parents born in Australia, are statistically more likely to participate in sport. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders and CALD background children have much lower participation rates.

· Parental attitudes: The most important indicator of a child’s sports participation is parental attitude towards the benefits of recreation. In relation to cultural background, the tacit conclusion is that parents from countries that are not as sports-centric as Australia are likely to pass these attitudes onto their children.

In the local context, Council must be mindful of Liverpool’s population demographics:

· 40 percent born overseas;

· 50 percent speak a language other than English at home;

· Liverpool is in the top five locations for numbers of humanitarian visa settlements in Australia;

· Lower average income levels than the Sydney average; and

· SEIFA shows high levels of disadvantage in 2168 postcode area and Warwick Farm.

In summary, Liverpool City has pockets of significant socio-economic disadvantage as well as a significant proportion of people who are culturally and linguistically diverse. Both these factors create barriers to participation in organised sport.

Preliminary discussions with the Liverpool Migrant Resource Centre (LMRC) have confirmed the above research findings. It was noted by the LMRC that cost is the greatest barrier to participation in organised sport for young people they work with and it was also confirmed that the vast majority of boys they work with are interested in playing soccer. The CEO of the LMRC has also indicated that they would be willing to partner with Council to assist with a program that aimed to increase the health and wellbeing of young people.

Proposed approaches

There are two primary mechanisms suggested for increasing participation in organised sport:

1. A subsidy program that is based on a referral mechanism through non-government organisations working with CALD, ATSI or disadvantaged young people.

2. A bridging sports program that engages young people in a team sport, together with other nutrition and health-related activities, and that culminates in an offer of subsidy to a mainstream sports club.

Preliminary details of what each of these approaches would involve is provided below:

Subsidy program

Most other councils offer sports grants that are similar to those currently offered by Council; i.e. grants for young people who are representing their community at regional, state or national level. An existing council-operated grants program that targets entry-level participation in organised sport has not been identified. A program similar in nature is currently being delivered by the Community Relations Commission: it makes grants of up to $500 available to refugees to help cover costs of participating in organised sport, including registration. However, the grants are available only to Clubs or established teams who must apply on behalf of individual players. Anecdotal information suggests that some sporting codes and clubs are better informed of this opportunity than others, meaning that many young people may be completely unaware of such an opportunity. The grant is also only available to newly arrived young people.

Nevertheless, there is a good argument for a subsidy approach to increasing participation. A general sports registration fee subsidy program would be available equally to boys and girls, and could be made available for a wide variety of organised sport. The program would need to involve information about what sports clubs were available and when seasons commenced for each sport.

If Council was to initiate such a program we would need to be diligent in setting appropriate parameters around such a scheme to ensure that it reached the anticipated target group and was adequately funded. Council would need to undertake the following:

· Develop eligibility criteria for parents to apply on behalf of their children (5-17 years);

· Engage key NGOs to promote the program to community members who are not currently well-engaged by Council or existing sports clubs;

· Develop a referral mechanism whereby applications are made via an NGO who has the capacity to identify those community members who are most at need. In the case of CALD young people, the LMRC would be the referral agency; in the case of ATSI young people, Kari could be the referral agency, etc;

· Develop an application form and an information portal on Council’s website;

· Design information sessions to be jointly delivered by Council and NGO representatives to outline the benefits of sport to parents and explain how to get their children involved in organised sport through the subsidy program;

· Allocate an amount of funding to this subsidy program: the recommended starting budget is $50,000. This allows Council to subsidise anywhere between 200-600 children, based on the assumption that club registration fees range from $100-300 per player with parents making a nominal 15% contribution to the total cost; and

· Create an evaluation process to track the success of the subsidy program.

Sports programs

Council could fund a project that engaged young people in sport with a view to transitioning them to mainstream team sport. Such a program would be best delivered through partnership with a grass roots organisation such as Sports Without Borders (operating in Victoria), Football United (NSW-based but unable to elicit a response from at this stage) or another similar organisation or NGO.

This approach may be more appealing to newly-arrived young people who have never participated in organised sport before, and for whom the prospect of participating in mainstream sport may seem daunting. It may also appeal to parents from CALD backgrounds. At the completion of the program, the participants could then be linked with mainstream sports teams via a subsidy.

Depending on the partner organisations that are willing to collaborate, a pilot program could be designed to deliver a number of benefits in similar style to midnight basketball but with some key differences:

· Entry-level free program where young people sign up to participate in a tournament spanning a school term;

· Soccer would be the ideal sport to base such a program around given trend data;

· Run after school on a weekly basis at a Council-owned soccer field or school grounds;

· Incorporating a nutrition component which would add to the objective of reducing childhood obesity and has been identified as a key issue in CALD communities;

· Funding requirement to resource the planning, administration and delivery of this program (coaches, referees, sports equipment, field/venue hire, processing, etc.); and

· Early stage advice provided by one potential project partner estimated a cost of approximately $15,000 for a pilot program as outlined above.

Below is a table that compares the advantages and disadvantages of the two proposed approaches. Both require significant resources and require further work to plan and deliver.

Approach

Advantages

Disadvantages

Funding subsidy program

· Benefit is easily measurable – e.g. $X = Y# of young people registered in sporting teams

· Could lead to increased participation in a range of sports

· Would appeal to both boys and girls

· Direct impact – funding leads immediately to desired outcome of increased participation in sports

· Potential to benefit around 200 young people (based on $50,000 allocation)

· Unknown cost – depends on demand which is unknown

· Potentially resource intensive: $50,000

· Administratively intensive – assessment of applications and forwarding payments

· Relies on NGOs to effectively communicate program with target communities

· Without co-commitment from parents, may lead to non-use/abuse of subsidy

· Hard to guarantee a long-term outcome, i.e. once subsidy is used, how will low-income parents continue their children’s involvement in sport?

· Without referral mechanism, subsidies may not increase participation rates

Sports program – pilot for one school term

· Direct benefit provided to young people who participate in the program

· Administratively efficient

· Engages partners in addressing participation rates

· A visible sports program is better avenue to promote the issue of sports participation to the public: e.g. media coverage, resident newsletter

· Dependent on effectiveness of partner organisation

· Limited to a single team sport - limited focus and impact

· Limited reach – will benefit 20-40 young people

· Difficult to guarantee that the program will lead to young people joining mainstream weekend sports teams

· More difficult to measure results

Recommendation

Based on the above assessment, it is considered more beneficial to operate a funding subsidy that will coincide with the registration period for the next sports season (summer, with registration commencing in September). If approved, detail of the subsidy program would be reported back to Council prior to the commencement of the program.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic and Financial	The recommendation requires a budget allocation of $50,000.
Environmental and Sustainability	There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.
Social and Cultural	Raise awareness in the community about the available services and facilities. Deliver high quality services for children and their families. Help to increase the health and wellbeing of Liverpool residents.
Civic Leadership and Governance	There are no civic leadership and governance considerations.

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

279

Ordinary Meeting 26 May 2015

Economy and Engagement Report

DEE 03

Corporate Sponsorship (Incoming) Policy

Strategic Direction	Vibrant Prosperous City Activate the city centre and develop vibrant places that attract people to Liverpool
Key Policy	Economic Development Strategy
File Ref	271932.2014
Report By	Julie Scott - Manager Economic Development
Approved By	Michael Cullen - Director Economy and Engagement

Executive Summary

Council’s current Corporate Sponsorship (Incoming) Policy was adopted in December 2003 and was appropriate at the time given the lower level of activities run by Council suitable for sponsorship. The 2003 policy is inadequate for current operational requirements given the growth in activities (particularly events) run by Council for which external sponsorship could potentially be attracted.

The new corporate sponsorship policy aims to establish a single, coordinated and transparent approach to the way in which Council seeks, obtains and manages sponsorships from organisations and the business sector. The policy aims to streamline the process for sponsorship in line with Council’s objectives to reduce red tape.

The proposed sponsorship approach has also been compared with those operated by a number of other Councils. Advice on any sponsorships entered in to under delegation will be advised to the Mayor and Councillors in a timely fashion.

The policy was placed on the Councillor intranet for comment. No comments were received.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council approves the proposed new Corporate Sponsorship (Incoming) Policy.

REPORT

Council is responsible for delivering activities, programs and services under a wide range of legislation. Council also produces activities and events which contribute to the vibrant cultural life of the City of Liverpool that are normally free to the public. By seeking and receiving sponsorships, Council can provide additional resources with which to extend the reach or impact of specific activities or programs.

Through sponsorships, Council can enhance or extend current activities or programs, or develop new ones. This is in accordance with the following Directions in Council’s Community Strategic Plan, Growing Liverpool 2023:

· Direction 1: Vibrant Prosperous City

· Direction 3: Healthy, Inclusive City

· Direction 4: Proud Engaged City

· Direction 7: Healthy Proactive City.

To ensure consistency and probity, the policy was reviewed with Council’s Governance Unit, and the process of reviewing the existing policy included consultation with a number of internal departments within Council that may be affected by changes to the policy. A best practice analysis was also undertaken with a comparative analysis with Camden Council, the City of Sydney, Wollongong Council and Leichardt Council. The policy is in line with the attached guidelines provided by the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC).

This policy will apply to all incoming sponsorships received by Council and will be managed by Council’s Director, Economy and Engagement, and will be monitored by Council’s Governance unit.

A draft version of the policy was placed on the Councillor Intranet for comment on March 23, 2015.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic and Financial	An effective corporate sponsorship (incoming) policy will allow Council to enhance the reach and impact of its projects and services.
Environmental and Sustainability	There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.
Social and Cultural	Corporate sponsorship considerations will take into account Council’s social and cultural inclusion objectives.
Civic Leadership and Governance	The corporate sponsorship (incoming) policy puts in place a strong governance framework to appropriately seek, assess and manage sponsorship proposals.

ATTACHMENTS

1. DRAFT Corporate Sponsorship Incoming Policy April 2015 View

2. ICAC guidelines - Sponsorship in the Public Sector View (Under separate cover)

3. Incoming Corporate Sponsorship Policy 2003 View

294

Ordinary Meeting 26 May 2015

Economy and Engagement Report

DEE 04

Review of Town Improvement Fund Policy

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	116238.2015
Report By	Michael Cullen - Director Economy and Engagement
Approved By	Michael Cullen - Director Economy and Engagement

Executive Summary

Council’s Town Improvement Fund Policy adopted in September 2010 is due for review.

The Town Improvement Fund (TIF) is a special rate levied on all commercial use properties within Liverpool’s specified Town Improvement District boundaries (see attached map). Revenue raised is to be spent on projects which meet a range of Council objectives related to improved amenity, urban design and economic development for the Liverpool city centre.

Section 495 of the local Government Act 1993 provides the instrument through which Council can levy this special rate.

Following review of the TIF policy a number of changes are proposed with respect to the name, management and review cycle for the fund.

The draft policy was placed on the Councillor intranet for comment. No comments have been received.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Changes the name of the Town Improvement Fund to the City Development Fund.

2. Approves the revised Charter for the Building Our New City Committee and notes the Committee has responsibility for management, all boundaries, expenditure recommendations and strategies and other elements of the City Development Fund.

3. Agree that a regular review of the City Development Fund be undertaken every 2 years with respect to its scope, boundaries and rate.

4. Notes that current Building Our New City priority improvement projects approved by Council will be funded via the City Development Fund and loan arrangements secured against revenue raised through the City Development Fund.

5. Exhibits the draft City Development Fund policy for public comment for 28 days.

6. Notes the attached program of works identified in the draft 2015/16 budget to be funded from the City Development Fund.

7. Notes that the annual City Development Fund work program will be managed through overall Council budget management process.

REPORT

Context

A Town Improvement Fund (TIF) special rate has been in place in Liverpool in addition to the general rate since the 1950s. The TIF rate is levied on rateable land property values within the Town Improvement District (map included in the policy attachments) covering the Liverpool City Centre.

Section 495 of the Local Government Act 1993 is the enabling legislation that allows the TIF to be levied, and states:

(1) A council may make a special rate for or towards meeting the cost of any works, services, facilities or activities provided or undertaken, or proposed to be provided or undertaken, by the council within the whole or any part of the council’s area , other than domestic waste management services

(2) The special rate is to be levied on such rateable land in the council’s areas, in the council’s opinion:

(a) benefits or will benefit from the works, services, facilities or activities, or

(b) contributes or will contribute to the need for the works, services, facilities, or activities, or

Current Position

The use of the Town Improvement Fund for city works was suspended by Council in December 2012 while plans for revitalisation of the city were being formulated. Individual projects such as engagement of urban design expertise, implementation planning for priority precincts within the city centre, operation of the Shop Front Façade Program and activation programs have been approved on a case by case basis by Council on the recommendations of the Building Our New City Committee.

With the construction implementation phase of the Building Our New City program now being reached it is timely for the Town Improvement Fund policy to be reviewed to ensure alignment with Council directions and priorities for the city centre. Matters that need to be taken into account are:

1. The appropriate name for the Fund

Council has undertaken extensive consultation with business and the community under the “Building Our New City” banner and residents and businesses are more likely to recognise the improvements to the city centre and the source of funds for those improvements with a name related to “city development”. “City Development” also represents a more plain english and contemporary description than “town improvement”.

More importantly Liverpool as a regional city needs the name of its special rate to reflect its “city” status.

2. Management oversight

The Building Our New City Committee Charter assigns responsibility for management of the Town Improvement Fund to the Building Our New City Committee. The current TIF policy needs to be updated to reflect those arrangements. The need for an internal operational TIF Management Steering Committee was superseded by the creation of the Building Our New City Committee in 2014.

Budget oversight of the use of TIF funds is also better integrated into overall Council budget management systems to ensure consistency and alignment of processes.

3. Regular cycle of review of Fund boundaries and rates

There is no routine process in place to examine whether the boundaries for the Fund reflect an up to date assessment of the growth and spread of commercial property in and in close proximity to the current Liverpool city centre. There is also no routine process to assess the level of the special rate applied and the linkages to the needs of the city centre or benefits to relevant ratepayers with respect to works, services, facilities or activities undertaken by Council.

These issues have been taken in to account and reflected in the attached draft revised City Development Fund Policy.

No changes to the boundary or level of special rate for the City Development Fund are proposed currently. The use of the City Development Fund to support a loan to fast track priority civic improvements in the city centre has previously been approved by Council. Council will also have the benefit of a NSW Government Local infrastructure Support Fund interest rate subsidy that will lower the cost of the loan significantly.

There is also value in the draft City Development policy being exhibited for public comment for a period of 28 days in order to allow feedback on the process for levying and spending City Development Fund revenues.

The NSW Government Rates Manual (2007) requires Council “to define with some precision the work, service, facility or activity in question which will benefit the area where a special rate is levied”. A program of works and activities for the City Development area has previously been determined and is reflected in Council’s draft budget (see attached).

The proposed City development policy was placed on the Councillor intranet on April 30. No comments were received.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic and Financial	The City Development Fund will play a significant role in facilitating economic development in the city centre through strategic civic improvements The Town Improvement Fund currently raises approximately $1.6 m per annum in revenue for Council.
Environmental and Sustainability	Improvements to the city centre are also aimed at improving both environmental and economic sustainability within the Liverpool city centre.
Social and Cultural	Improvements to the city centre will be sensitive to the cultural and social inclusion needs of Liverpool
Civic Leadership and Governance	The Building Our New City program is a key Council leadership initiative in attracting new public and private sector investment to Liverpool and will be supported by revenue raised from the City Development Fund.

ATTACHMENTS

1. POLICY Proposed City Development Fund 2015 (previously Town Improvement Fund)View

2. City Development Fund 2015_16 Program View

3. DRAFT CHARTER Building our New City Committee revision April 2015 View

4. Town Improvement Fund Policy adopted 20 September 2010 View

318

Ordinary Meeting 26 May 2015

Planning and Growth Report

DPG 01

Draft LLEP 2008 (Amendment No. 49) - Removal of Flood Prone Land Area mapping from LLEP 2008 & Draft LDCP 2008 (Amendment No. 20)

Strategic Direction	Liveable Safe City Deliver an efficient planning system which embraces sustainable urban renewal and development
Key Policy	Urban Development Plans
File Ref	096578.2015
Report By	Benny Horn - Strategic Planner
Approved By	Toni Averay - Director Planning & Growth

Executive Summary

Council has prepared and exhibited draft Liverpool Local Environmental Plan (LLEP) 2008 (Amendment No. 49) and draft Liverpool Development Control Plan (LDCP) 2008 (Amendment No. 20), in accordance with Council’s resolution at its meeting on 27 August 2014. The draft documents will eliminate inconsistencies in flood mapping by removing the LLEP 2008 Flood Prone Land Area maps to rely solely on Council’s more accurate flood maps for assessment of flood planning and development risks.

Following Gateway Determination of the Planning Proposal by the Department of Planning and Environment, public authority consultation of the draft planning controls was undertaken in February 2015. Pursuant to the Gateway requirements, the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) and the NSW Office of Water were consulted.

OEH expressed support for the proposal, and requested consideration of changes to draft LLEP 2008 (Amendment No. 49) to make it more effective for managing future flood issues for all flood prone land. The changes were made prior to public exhibition of the draft amendment and resulted in the inclusion of an additional draft clause (Clause 7A) pertaining to Floodplain Risk Management to provide greater consistency in Council’s planning documents. The NSW Office of Water did not make a submission on the proposed amendment.

Public exhibition was undertaken between 18 March 2015 and 16 April 2015, with one submission received by Council. As a result of public exhibition and internal feedback, two additional minor changes were made to the draft LLEP 2008 (Amendment No. 49) to improve the consistency and clarity of the draft planning controls.

It is recommended that Council adopt the draft amendments to LLEP 2008 and LDCP 2008. Council is authorised to exercise delegation in making the attached draft LLEP 2008 (Amendment No. 49).

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Adopt the Draft Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 (Amendment No. 49) and forward the plan to the NSW Department of Planning and Environment requesting notification (gazettal) of the amendment.

2. Adopt the Draft Liverpool Development Control Plan 2008 (Amendment No. 20), to come into effect on the publication of the required notice in the local newspaper.

REPORT

Background

Land affected by flooding in Liverpool LGA is identified via two mechanisms – Council’s flood maps based on Council’s Floodplain Risk Management Studies and Plans, and LLEP 2008 Flood Prone Land Area maps. As with many other metropolitan Sydney councils, Liverpool is experiencing significant growth and development which results in the flood liability of land changing regularly. Inconsistency and confusion occur because Council’s flood studies and maps are able to be amended when cut and fill works are carried out, whereas LLEP maps can only be updated through an LEP amendment process. This can take up to 12 months to complete and during this time properties which are no longer flood affected are still subject to flood planning provisions and denoted as flood affected on section 149 certificates.

A joint review, by Council’s Planning and Engineering officers, explored ways to improve the internal processes for updating flood data and communicating the information to the community. The review considered relevant policies, regional strategies and best practice guidelines, in particular investigating the best mechanism to map or identify flood liable land.

Following the joint review, Council officers prepared a Planning Proposal (Attachment 1) outlining proposed changes to LLEP 2008. The proposal sought to eliminate inconsistencies in flood mapping by removing the LLEP 2008 Flood Prone Land Area maps and relying solely on Council’s more accurate flood mapping. The proposal also sought to amend LLEP 2008 Clause 7.8 pertaining to Flood Planning to reflect the reliance on the flood mapping based on Council’s Floodplain Risk Management Studies and Plans. This approach is in line with the approach taken by many other metropolitan Sydney councils, particularly those which, like Liverpool LGA, experience regular changes in flood mapping information.

In conjunction with the proposed LLEP 2008 amendment, Council officers also prepared a draft amendment to LDCP 2008. The draft DCP amendment modifies LDCP 2008 Section 9 – Flooding Risk to delete reference to the LLEP Flood Prone Land Area maps, and to instead refer to land “at or below the flood planning area”.

At its meeting on 27 August 2014, Council endorsed the draft Planning Proposal and resolved that it be forwarded to the Department of Planning and Environment requesting a Gateway determination. Council also endorsed the draft LDCP 2008 amendment.

The Gateway determination, dated 21 January 2015, stated that the proposed amendment to LLEP 2008 should proceed, subject to conditions requiring the Planning Proposal to be publicly exhibited and relevant public authorities to be consulted. The Gateway determination is at Attachment 2.

Public Authority Consultation

In February 2015, the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) and the NSW Office of Water were consulted pursuant to the Gateway requirements.

OEH expressed support for the proposal, while recommending changes to the LLEP 2008 to make it more effective for managing future flood issues for flood prone land up to the level of the Probable Maximum Flood (PMF). OEH proposed including: provisions that address flood risks linked with critical infrastructure and development whose occupants are vulnerable in emergency response; the potential for changes to flood conditions in the future due to climate change including sea level rise and rainfall intensity; and community safety on all flood prone land up to the PMF.

Based on OEH comments (in Attachment 3), proposed LLEP 2008 Clause 7.8 has been amended to refer specifically to Council’s adopted Floodplain Risk Management Studies and Plans. Minor changes have also been made to Clause 7.8. The changes: clarify that consideration of climate change impacts should include projected sea level rise and rainfall intensity; change the defined term ‘flood planning area’ to ‘flood planning level’, consistent with current terminology used elsewhere; and amend the term ‘flood planning level’ to include ‘or other freeboard as determined in relevant studies and plans’ to account for potential variations in freeboard.

An additional clause (Clause 7.8A) has been added to the proposed amendment, pertaining specifically to Floodplain Risk Management. The additional clause incorporates OEH’s suggested provisions regarding emergency response facilities, critical infrastructure and the evacuation of vulnerable occupants on land above the ‘flood planning level’ up to the level of the PMF. This approach is consistent with that taken by other councils in their changes to flood planning controls since 2013.

The above changes were made prior to public exhibition of the planning proposal, and an explanatory note setting out the changes was provided to the Department of Planning and Environment on 6 March 2015.

The NSW Office of Water did not provide a submission to the proposed amendment.

Public Exhibition

Draft LLEP 2008 (Amendment No. 49) and Draft LDCP 2008 (Amendment No. 20) were jointly publicly exhibited for 28 days (excluding public holidays) between Wednesday 18 March 2015 and Thursday 16 April 2015. Public exhibition was carried out in accordance with clauses 56(2)(c) and 57 of the EP&A Act 1979.

One submission was received, which made a number of comments about the proposed LLEP 2008 amendment. The issues raised in the submission, and the response of Council officers, are set out in the Attachment 4.

Based on consideration of the submission received, a minor alteration to draft LLEP 2008 Clause 7.8A(3) has been made placing restrictions on two additional uses (child care centres and respite day care centres). This is consistent with the objectives of the proposed clause.

In addition, further minor changes have been made as a result of internal consultation:

- The reference to ‘flood planning land’ in draft LLEP 2008 Clause 3.2 – Complying Development has been altered to refer to ‘at or below the flood planning level’. This does not change the land to which this clause applies, but simply uses common flood planning terminology applied to proposed LLEP 2008 clauses 7.8 and 7.8A to ensure consistent and clear flood planning language is applied in the LLEP 2008 controls;

- In draft Clause 7.8(1)(c) – Flood Planning, reference to avoiding significant adverse impacts of flood behaviour has been altered to include reference to cumulative impacts of flood behaviour, in line with OEH comments in its February 2015 submission;

- Clause 7.8 – Flood Planning and Clause 7.8A – Floodplain Risk Management have both been altered to explicitly require consistency “with any relevant Floodplain Risk Management Plan adopted by Council in accordance with the NSW Government’s Floodplain Development Manual”. This change unambiguously incorporates a recommendation made by OEH in its February 2015 submission, without altering the intent and application of the proposed clauses.

The revised Draft LLEP 2008 (Amendment No. 49) is at Attachment 5. Following Council’s consideration of the minor changes to the draft LLEP 2008 amendment made following public exhibition, Council officers will notify the Department of Planning and Environment of the changes in accordance with Section 58(2) of the EP&A Act 1979.

Amendments to Draft LDCP 2008 Controls

Prior to public exhibition, reference in the proposed LDCP 2008 amendment to land “at or below the flood planning area” was changed to instead refer to land “at or below the flood planning level”. This change is very minor as is does not change the land to which this clause applies, but simply ensures flood planning terminology used in the draft LDCP 2008 amendment is consistent with that in the related draft LLEP 2008 amendment. Attachment 6 illustrates the minor change to draft LDCP 2008 (Amendment No. 20).

Parliamentary Counsel Opinion

In line with the LEP Plan Making Delegation requirements, Council officers sought Parliamentary Counsel (PC) opinion on the legal drafting of the amendment to LLEP 2008. PC provided an opinion on 21 May 2015 which does not change the proposed amendment.

Conclusion

The attached Planning Proposal and draft DCP amendment have been prepared and exhibited in accordance with the resolution of Council on 27 August 2014. The intent of these changes is to eliminate inconsistencies in flood mapping by removing the LLEP 2008 Flood Prone Land Area maps to rely solely on Council’s more accurate flood maps.

In line with the requirements of the Gateway determination, relevant public authorities were consulted for 21 days. Feedback obtained during public authority consultation resulted in a number of changes to the proposal being incorporated, and the amended proposal and draft DCP amendment were publicly exhibited for 28 days (excluding public holidays) from 18 March 2015 to 16 April 2015. One public submission was received, which made a number of comments about the proposed changes. Subsequently, further minor changes were made to the proposal as a result of the public submission and internal consultation. Other comments provided in the public submission have been addressed in this report.

It is recommended that the proposed amendments to the LLEP 2008 and LDCP 2008 be adopted. Council has been granted delegation with regard to making this amendment. As such, if endorsed by Council, the required documentation can be submitted to the NSW Department of Planning and Environment for notification (gazettal). With regard to the LDCP 2008 amendment, it is recommended that, if endorsed, a notice be placed in the local newspaper notifying of the adoption of the LDCP amendment.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic and Financial	Enhance the environmental performance of buildings and homes.
Environmental and Sustainability	Manage the environmental health of waterways. Enhance the environmental performance of buildings and homes.
Social and Cultural	There are no social and cultural considerations.
Civic Leadership and Governance	There are no civic leadership and governance considerations.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Planning Proposal View (Under separate cover)

2. Gateway determination View (Under separate cover)

3. NSW Office of Environment and Heritage submission View (Under separate cover)

4. Table of issues raised in public consultation View (Under separate cover)

5. Draft LLEP 2008 (Amendment No. 49)View (Under separate cover)

6. Draft LDCP 2008 (Amendment No. 20)View (Under separate cover)

324

Ordinary Meeting 26 May 2015

Planning and Growth Report

DPG 02

East Leppington Contributions Plan

Strategic Direction	Liveable Safe City Deliver an efficient planning system which embraces sustainable urban renewal and development
Key Policy	Urban Development Plans
File Ref	097083.2015
Report By	Barry Millwood - Executive Planner
Approved By	Toni Averay - Director Planning & Growth

Executive Summary

The State Government rezoned the East Leppington Precinct in August 2014 to permit urban development. A draft contributions plan has now been exhibited. No submissions were received.

One amendment involving the addition of works on Camden Valley Way to provide access to the precinct is recommended.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council adopts the Liverpool Contributions Plan 2015 (East Leppington Precinct)

REPORT

Background

The East Leppington Precinct was released for detailed master planning by the then Minister for Planning on 11 November 2011. It was rezoned by the State Government in August 2014. The East Leppington Precinct has capacity for about 1,150 dwellings.

The location of the precinct in relation to the South West Growth Centre is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1

Exhibition of draft contributions plan

Council at its meeting of 25 February 2015 resolved to exhibit the draft contributions plan for the East Leppington Precinct. The draft plan was exhibited from 18 March 2015 until 15 April 2015.

No submissions were received.

Proposed amendment

The Indicative Layout Plan for the precinct includes a link from the precinct onto Camden Valley Way at its intersection with Old Cowpasture Road. The provision of this link has not been incorporated into the works currently being undertaken to widen Camden Valley Way.

A verbal submission suggested that the cost of adjusting the intersection of Camden Valley Way and Old Cowpasture Road be included in the contributions plan. This is supported as it will spread the cost across the entire precinct rather than imposing on a single land owner whose land includes this link road.

Accordingly the estimated cost of this link road has been added to the schedule of works. This will raise the value of land and works from $40.8M to $41.8M. This will raise the contribution for a conventional lot to $40,050. As this will be subject to the cap the contribution will still only be $30,000 per conventional lot.

Figure 2 shows the Indicative Layout Plan (ILP) for the East Leppington Precinct.

Figure 2

Next Steps

Council Contributions Review

A review of Council’s Section 94 scheme is currently underway. However, that the East Leppington precinct has already been rezoned by the State Government there is a need to have the contributions plan in place as soon as possible. Deferral of exhibition of the draft contributions plan until the findings of the review can be implemented may involve a considerable delay and expose Council to a financial risk if the contributions plan is not in place. It is considered that any changes as a result of the review can subsequently be incorporated in the contributions plan.

Accordingly it is recommended to proceed with the adoption of the contributions plan.

Contributions Cap

The contributions plan will be subject to a Ministerial Direction imposing a cap of $30,000. This will result in a shortfall of about $10,000 per conventional lot approx $11.8m in total. It is this amount that Council will seek for Gap Funding.

Gap Funding

The NSW Government in 2013 established the Local Infrastructure Growth Scheme, which funds the gap between the maximum levy amount that councils can charge developers and what it actually costs councils to deliver the infrastructure. To be eligible for funding, Council must have a development contributions plan reviewed and approved by the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal (IPART). The IPART review must conclude that the council cannot fund essential infrastructure works and stay within the developer levy cap ($20,000 per dwelling in existing areas and $30,000 in new release areas).

IPART

The timing for completion of the assessment by IPART is uncertain and there is a likelihood of receiving a substantial number of applications for subdivision in the East Leppington precinct in the immediate future. There is a need to have the contributions plan in place so that Council can at least levy up to the $30,000 cap.

In the meantime the contributions plan will be assessed by IPART and a report submitted to the Department of Planning on the merits of its providing gap funding to Council for the portion of the contribution above $30,000. Council will still be able to recover the gap funding from applications determined in the meantime.

Bringing the contributions plan in force

In order to bring the contributions plan into force Council is required to adopt the plan and put a public notice in the local newspapers within 28 days.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic and Financial	Deliver and maintain a range of transport related infrastructure such as footpaths, bus shelters and bikeways. Encourage and promote businesses to develop in the hospital, health and medical precinct (of the City Centre). Deliver a high quality local road system including provision and maintenance of infrastructure and management of traffic issues. Facilitate economic development.
Environmental and Sustainability	Manage the environmental health of waterways. Protect, enhance and maintain areas of endangered ecological communities and high quality bushland as part of an attractive mix of land uses. Promote an integrated and user friendly public transport service. Support the delivery of a range of transport options.
Social and Cultural	Preserve and maintain heritage, both landscape and cultural as urban development takes place.
Civic Leadership and Governance	Actively advocate for federal and state government support, funding and services.

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

329

Ordinary Meeting 26 May 2015

Planning and Growth Report

DPG 03

Austral Leppington North Contributions Plan

Strategic Direction	Liveable Safe City Deliver an efficient planning system which embraces sustainable urban renewal and development
Key Policy	Urban Development Plans
File Ref	097096.2015
Report By	Barry Millwood - Executive Planner
Approved By	Toni Averay - Director Planning & Growth

Executive Summary

Council at its meeting of 26 November 2014 resolved as follows:

1. Approves the Liverpool Contributions Plan 2014 (Austral and Leppington North Precincts) for submission to the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal.

2. Submit the contributions plan to the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal to facilitate a submission to the Department of Planning and Environment to obtain “Gap” funding.

Work has progressed on the IPART submission and a draft was submitted for comment. Initial comments from IPART staff have now been received and Council’s formal submission will soon be submitted. However, the assessment by IPART is likely to take several months. Given the likelihood of substantial number of development applications for subdivision in the Austral and Leppington North Precincts before the IPART determination can be made, it is proposed to bring the contributions plan into force now. Council will still be able to recover gap funding from applications determined in the meantime if the future IPART determination is to support Council’s submission.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council adopts the Liverpool Contributions Plan 2014 (Austral and Leppington North Precincts).

REPORT

Background

Council at its meeting of 26 November 2014 considered a report on the contributions plan for the Austral and Leppington North Precincts. Council resolved to adopt the plan subject to amendments referred to in the report.

The report identified the next step being a submission to IPART. It was preferred that IPART assess the draft contributions plan before it was finally adopted and brought into force in case there were changes to the plan by IPART.

A draft submission has been provided to IPART this year. This is the first such submission that has been prepared for IPART by Council. This was suggested by IPART due to the very large size of the Austral and Leppington North Precincts.

Council has now received positive feedback from IPART. The IPART comments are being considered in finalising the formal submission, which will shortly be submitted to IPART.

IPART

The timing for completion of the assessment by IPART is uncertain and there is a likelihood of receiving a substantial number of applications for subdivision in the Austral and Leppington North precincts in the immediate future. There is a need to have the draft contributions plan in place so that Council can at least levy up to the $30,000 cap.

In the meantime the contributions plan will be assessed by IPART and a report submitted to the Department of Planning and Environment on the merits of its providing gap funding to Council for the portion of the contribution above $30,000. Council will still be able to recover the gap funding from applications determined in the meantime.

Bringing the contributions plan in force

In order to bring the contributions plan into force Council is required to adopt the plan and put a public notice in the local newspapers within 28 days. As more than 28 days have passed since Council last resolved to adopt the plan, it is necessary that it resolves to adopt the plan as reported to Council on 26 November 2014 without change. A notice can then be put in the local newspaper as soon as possible in order to bring the plan into force.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic and Financial	Deliver and maintain a range of transport related infrastructure such as footpaths, bus shelters and bikeways. Enhance the environmental performance of buildings and homes. Deliver a high quality local road system including provision and maintenance of infrastructure and management of traffic issues. Facilitate economic development.
Environmental and Sustainability	Manage the environmental health of waterways. Protect, enhance and maintain areas of endangered ecological communities and high quality bushland as part of an attractive mix of land uses. Promote an integrated and user friendly public transport service. Support the delivery of a range of transport options.
Social and Cultural	Preserve and maintain heritage, both landscape and cultural as urban development takes place.
Civic Leadership and Governance	Actively advocate for federal and state government support, funding and services.

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

334

Ordinary Meeting 26 May 2015

Planning and Growth Report

DPG 05

Draft Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 (Amendment No. 46) - Rezoning and Reclassification of Macleod Park, Prestons

Strategic Direction	Healthy Inclusive City Plan, support and deliver high quality and accessible services, program and facilities
Key Policy	Recreation Strategy
File Ref	113873.2015
Report By	Taylar Vernon - Strategic Planner
Approved By	Toni Averay - Director Planning & Growth

Executive Summary

Draft Amendment No.46 to the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan (LLEP) 2008 proposes to rezone and reclassify part of Lot 3 DP 855930, Macleod Park, Prestons, in order to contribute to the funding required to deliver the Macleod Park master plan. This report outlines the community consultation process which was undertaken and the issues which were raised during the public exhibition and the public hearing.

The planning proposal was publically exhibited for a period of 28 days between 2 July 2014 and 30 July 2014 and a public hearing was held on the 19 August 2014.

The proposed rezoning and reclassification of a small area of the park will facilitate funding for the stage 2 works which will include the provision of additional shared paths, bush regeneration activities and improvements to the existing water body to further enhance the natural environment within the park.

It is recommended that Council forward the attached planning proposal to the Department of Planning for finalisation and contact those who provided written submissions and attended the public hearing to advise them of Council’s decision.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Adopts Draft Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 (Amendment No. 46) and forwards a copy of the attached planning proposal and supporting documentation to the Department of Planning for finalisation.

2. Notifies to those who provided written submissions and attended the public hearing advising of Council’s decision.

REPORT

Background

At its meeting dated 26 March 2014, Council considered a report which outlined the proposed amendment and made the following resolutions;

That Council:

1. Forwards a planning proposal to Planning and Infrastructure seeking a Gateway determination to rezone and reclassify a portion of Lot 3 DP 855930, being 290 Braidwood Drive, Prestons.

2. Proceeds with public authority consultation and public exhibition in accordance with the determination, subject to Gateway approval.

3. Receives a future report discussing development options for the portion of the park proposed to be rezoned and reclassified.

4. Notes that the outcomes of public authority consultation and public exhibition will be reported to Council in the future.

Council considered a report on this matter at its meeting dated 25 February 2015, when it was resolved to defer a decision on the matter to allow for further discussion at a Councillor briefing session. In accordance with this resolution, such discussions have since been held and the matter is now referred back to Council for a decision.

This report outlines the community consultation process which was undertaken and the issues which were raised during the public exhibition and the public hearing.

Figure 1: LLEP 2008 Zoning Extract Figure 2: Aerial Photograph of Subject Site

Strategy to Fund the Macleod Park Master Plan

The Section 94 Contribution Plan identifies $1,400,000 in the 2013-2014 financial year for the embellishment of Macleod Park. Further funds are proposed to be attained through sale of a portion of the park. The area proposed for future sale is approximately 3,800sqm of the 99,000sqm parkland or 3.8% of the area. This requires a planning proposal be forwarded to Planning and Infrastructure for the rezoning and reclassification of the subject site.

Planning Proposal

In order to rezone part of Lot 3 DP 855930 (Macleod Park), Braidwood Drive, Prestons, from RE1 Public Recreation to R2 Low Density Residential a number of amendments must be made to the associated LLEP 2008 maps including;

*Planning Provision*	*LEP Map No.*	*Change*
Zoning	LZN_008	R2 Low Density Residential
Floor Space Ratio	FSR_008	0.6:1 Floor Space Ratio
Height of Building	HOB_008	8.5m Height of Building
Minimum Lot Size	LSZ_008	300sqm Minimum Lot Size
Land Reclassification	RPL_008	subject site must be bounded by red line identified as Operational Land (Land Reclassification- Part Lots)

Additionally, the site must be added to Schedule 4 Classification and Reclassification of Public Land – Part 2 Reclassification, to denote the change in classification and intent of part of Lot 3 DP 855930 from Community Land to Operational Land.

Community Consultation

In accordance with the above resolution and the Gateway determination dated 20 June 2014, the proposed LLEP 2008 amendment was publically exhibited for a period of 28 days between 2 July 2014 and 30 July 2014. Two written submissions were received during the exhibition period.

As community land is proposed to be reclassified to operational land, a public hearing was also required to be held in accordance to section 68 of the EP&A Act 1979 (s.29), LEP Practice Note: PN09C03 ‘Classification and reclassification of public land through a local environmental plan’ and the requirements of the Local Government Act 1993.

The hearing was held to discuss the reclassification of part of Lot 3 DP 855930, Macleod Park, Prestons, on 19 August 2014 from 6:00pm to 7:15pm at the Hilda M Davis Community Centre (185 Bigge Street, Liverpool). The hearing also discussed the proposed reclassification of another site which does not relate to this planning proposal. The public hearing was attended by eight community members, of which six made verbal submissions that related to Macleod Park.

A summary of the matters raised in the verbal and written submissions is provided in the attached submissions table. Several residents stated that the intent to reclassify and sell part of the park was not clearly expressed during the exhibition of the master plan. The final master plan which was publically exhibited (see Figure 3) clearly identifies the part of the park to which this report and planning proposal relate as ‘potential land subdivision and sale’. It is therefore felt that Council has been clear in its intent and given the community multiple opportunities to comment on the proposal, both during the master planning of the park and also during the public exhibition of the planning proposal.

Figure 3: Macleod Park Master Plan

Conclusion

The finalisation of the Macleod Park Master Plan in January 2014 followed months of extensive community consultation and collaboration. Council is committed to delivering the planned improvement works and the reclassification and sale of part of Macleod Park will contribute to the funding required to deliver these works.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic and Financial	Funds raised by the sale of part of Macleod Park will be utilised in the planned improvement works
Environmental and Sustainability	Protect, enhance and maintain areas of endangered ecological communities and high quality bushland as part of an attractive mix of land uses.
Social and Cultural	Preserve and maintain heritage, both landscape and cultural as urban development takes place. Deliver high quality facilities for children and their families.
Civic Leadership and Governance	Act as an environmental leader in the community. Undertake communication practices with the community and stakeholders across a range of media. Foster neighbourhood pride and a sense of responsibility.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Planning Proposal LLEP 2008 Amendment No.46 - Post Exhibition View (Under separate cover)

2. Draft Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 (Amendment No.46) - Public Exhibition Submissions Table

342

Ordinary Meeting 26 May 2015

Planning and Growth Report

DPG 06

Liverpool City Centre Traffic Study - Update on Design Investigations and Implementation of Three Projects

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	114037.2015
Report By	Charles Wiafe - Manager Traffic and Transport
Approved By	Toni Averay - Director Planning & Growth

Executive Summary

At its meeting on 26 November 2014, Council considered a status report on the implementation of recommended key projects on the local network from the 2014 Liverpool City Centre Traffic Study and resolved to receive a further report on the design investigations of the projects.

This report provides a further update on the following three high priority traffic management changes in the Liverpool City Centre:

· Conversion of Northumberland and George Streets from one-way to two-way traffic flow.

· Extension of Dewsbury Serviceway to George Street; and

· Bigge Street and Speed Street – Proposed Traffic Signals.

Design investigations have been completed for the three projects, including a detailed design of the Bigge Street and Speed Street traffic signals.

Community consultation is planned for the first two projects, June/July 2015 and a further report will be provided to Council in August 2015 on the outcome of the consultation.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Notes the information contained in this report.

2. Endorses the proposed community consultations planned for June/July 2015 and notes that a further report on the outcome of the community consultation will be provided in August 2015.

3. Notes the Northumberland and George Streets two-way conversion, and Dewsbury Serviceway extension into George Street project have been included in the Draft 2015/16 Budget.

REPORT

This report provides an update on design investigations and implementation of the following three high priority traffic management changes in the Liverpool City Centre:

· Conversion of Northumberland and George Streets from one-way to two-way traffic flow

· Extension of Dewsbury Serviceway to George Street

· Bigge Street and Speed Street – Proposed Traffic Signals

An update on each of these projects is provided below:

Conversion of Northumberland and George Streets from one-way to two-way traffic flow.

The changes in traffic flow involve linemarking and signposting to accommodate single traffic lanes in each direction, while maintaining the existing kerb side parking bays along sections of Northumberland Street, between Memorial Avenue and Elizabeth Street, and George Street, between Scott Street and Elizabeth Street.

These road sections have carriageways of approximately 11.5m wide, which can maintain the existing kerb side parking lane and accommodate the opposing single traffic lanes separated by double barrier line marking, as shown in Attachments 1.1 to 1.4.

The traffic flow changes require the following:

· Modification of the existing seven signalised intersections (three intersections along Northumberland Street and four intersections along George Street)

· Traffic flow to/from Liverpool Plaza and Northumberland Street car parks

· Definition of priority traffic movements for the side laneways and serviceways

· Line marking and signposting

· Civil works including removal of kerb blisters along Northumberland Street

The project will improve north-south traffic circulation in the city centre, access to commercial and retail precincts and easy access to City Centre car parks. It will also reduce traffic flow along sections of Bigge Street and Bathurst Street. However, increased traffic volume along George Street could affect the performance of George Street and Scott Street intersection.

Council has carried out site inspections with Roads and Maritime Service (RMS) representatives and submitted preliminary traffic signal design changes. The RMS has provided comments and these have been incorporated in concept designs. Traffic signal plan approvals will be sought from the RMS once the civil design is completed in June 2015.

The traffic signal changes require regulatory ‘No Stopping’ signs which will result in the loss of approximately 20 car parking spaces. To offset the on-street car parking reduction, options are being explored to provide additional on street car parking elsewhere in the City Centre. The outcome of this review will be presented to the next scheduled Local Traffic Committee meeting for approval.

To minimise the traffic impact of the proposed two way traffic flow, right turn movements are proposed to be restricted at Moore Street/George Street and Elizabeth Street/ Northumberland Street intersections.

Council does not have delegated authority to approve the two-way street conversion. A Traffic Management Plan (TMP) addressing traffic impacts of the proposed one-way changes and the outcome of community consultation is required for RMS approval.

The required community consultation is planned for June/July 2015. A report on the community consultation will be presented to Council in August 2015.

Preliminary cost of the project is estimated at $960,000 plus Liverpool Plaza car park access changes and RMS project management charges. The cost estimate will be finalised after the community consultation.

The project is listed for funding in the draft 2015/16 budget and subject to the budget allocation and outcome of the community consultation the project could be constructed in February/March 2016.

Extension of Dewsbury Serviceway to George Street

Design investigation has been completed for a one-way left turn only access road into George Street. The extension is proposed to reduce extensive delays at the Bigge Street and Warren Serviceway intersection, particularly during afternoon peak traffic periods.

The extension consists of a 3.5m wide carriageway road with a 2.5m footpath separated by a barrier wall. The extension road layout is as shown in Attachment 2. A separate item will be tabled at Local Traffic Committee meeting seeking approval of the associated signs and linemarking.

Community consultation is planned for June 2015 and a report on the outcome will be presented to Council in August 2015.

Preliminary cost of the project is estimated at $150,000. The project is listed for funding in the draft 2015/16 budget and subject to budget allocation and outcome of the community consultation it could be constructed in early next financial year.

Bigge Street and Speed Street – Proposed Traffic Signals.

Council has secured funding of $325,000 from the State Government under the NSW Active Transport Program to install traffic signals at this intersection this financial year.

Civil design has been completed. Traffic signal phasing design has also been completed and submitted to the RMS for approval. The layout is as shown in Attachment 3.

Procurement for the installation of the traffic signals has commenced, the civil works are underway and installation of the electrical works will start as soon the RMS approval is obtained.

Budget Impact

Item	Description	Proposed Budget Arrangement
1	Conversion of Northumberland and George Streets from one-way to two-way traffic flow Preliminary cost estimate is $960,000 plus Liverpool Plaza car park access changes and RMS project management charges.	The project is listed for funding in the draft 2015/16 budget and could be funded subject to the budget allocation.
2	Extension of Dewsbury Serviceway to George Street Project cost estimate is $150,000.	The project is listed for funding in the draft 2015/16 budget and could be funded subject to the budget allocation.
3	Bigge Street and Speed Street Proposed Traffic Signals	The project is being funded with the $325,000 grant from the RMS.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic and Financial	Two projects are listed for funding in the draft 2015/16 budget and the third project is being funded by RMS.
Environmental and Sustainability	There are no unacceptable environmental and sustainability implications.
Social and Cultural	Improve accessibility
Civic Leadership and Governance	The recommendation provides opportunity to advocate for the local community. The recommendation is required in accordance with the Local Government Act 1993.

ATTACHMENTS

1. 1-1.4 - Northumberland and George Streets - Proposed Typical Treatments. View

2. Dewsbury Serviceway Proposed Extension to George Street. View

3. Traffic Signals at the Intersection of Speed Street, Pirie Street and Bigge Street. View

461

Ordinary Meeting 26 May 2015

Questions with Notice

QWN 01

Question with Notice - Clr Stanley

Strategic Direction

Liveable Safe City

Facilitate diverse and more affordable housing options

Key Policy

Urban Development Plans

File Ref

087340.2015

QUESTION WITH NOTICE

Please address the following:

1. I note that Newcastle City Council are supporting an initiative for affordable housing. Can I be advised what strategies Liverpool Council has in place to encourage affordable housing in:

a) CBD of Liverpool

b) Edmondson Park

c) other suburbs

Council’s Growing Liverpool 2023 strategic plan incorporates affordable housing. The plan establishes a goal of facilitating “diverse and more affordable housing options” and sets a 10-year target of an “increase in diverse housing options”.

In working towards this goal, the provisions of the State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 apply to residential development across Liverpool LGA. The Affordable Rental Housing SEPP enables Council to offer developers a range of incentives in exchange for providing affordable housing, such as:

- floor space ratio bonuses;

- reduced minimum open space and solar access requirements;

- reduced minimum car parking provision requirements; and

- reduced minimum dwelling size requirements.

The Affordable Rental Housing SEPP applies to all land in New South Wales, and provides Council with development controls to encourage the provision of new affordable rental housing (in-fill affordable housing, secondary dwellings, boarding houses, group homes and social housing) and the retention of existing affordable rental housing.

2. What plans are in place to address the additional infrastructure needs of residents in suburbs with increasing instances of higher density developments taking the place of single dwellings. Suburbs are already seeing increased competition for on street parking. How will additional traffic and parking be accommodated? Has Council investigated and made projections of requirements for the future?

Council uses a variety of mechanisms to address additional infrastructure needs and to guide development to achieve positive economic, social and environmental outcomes.

The Liverpool Development Control Plan (LDCP) 2008 sets provisions to ensure that development protects and improves the amenity of Liverpool. For example, LDCP 2008 sets minimum off-street car parking requirements for new development to address the car parking needs of higher density developments and ensure that “car parking does not interfere unreasonably with the amenity of the neighbourhood”.

Council’s Contributions Plans are used to levy contributions from developers in both established and greenfield areas for public infrastructure required as a consequence of the development. When formulating its contributions plans, Council reviews the capacity of existing facilities to determine when expansion of existing facilities or provision of new facilities are required to meet the demands of increasing population and density. The contributions are then used to fund a number of public services and infrastructure, including:

- Community facilities, such as community centres, libraries and cultural facilities;

- Recreation facilities, such as reserves and indoor and outdoor sporting facilities;

- Transport, such as footpaths, bike paths, public transport and traffic facilities, and

- Drainage, such as pipes, water treatment and detention basins.

The NSW Government is responsible for the provision of public transport and major road infrastructure. Council works with the NSW Government to ensure that the transport network needs of Liverpool residents are recognised and that improvements in Liverpool LGA are prioritised. The opening of Edmondson Park train station earlier this year, ahead of development of the adjacent town centre, is an example of major transport infrastructure provision addressing the additional needs of Liverpool’s growing population.

3. Lyn Parade extension was approved last year by Council, can I please be provided with an update and expected completion date for these works? Will they be completed by the 12 months deadline in the original recommendation adopted by Council?

On 30 July 2014, Council resolved to enter into a Deed of Agreement to facilitate the acquisition of part Lot 1 DP 1175057 for drainage purposes and the construction of the Lyn Parade, Prestons extension. As per the Council report, the Deed of Agreement entered into was as follows:

1. Maraya Holdings Pty Ltd will complete the construction of Lyn Parade at their cost;

2. The timeline for the construction of Lyn Parade is as follows:

· Maraya Holdings Pty Ltd to lodge a development application with Council for the construction of the Lyn Parade extension within 90 days of signing the Deed of Agreement;

· Maraya Holdings Pty Ltd to apply for a Construction Certificate within 90 days of receiving Development Consent; and

· Construction of the Lyn Parade extension to be completed 12 months from the date of Construction Certificate being issued.

It should be noted that the Construction Certificate was issued on 5 March 2015. Maraya Holdings therefore have until 4 March 2016 to complete the Lyn Parade extension.

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

Strategic Direction	Leading Proactive Council Lead partnerships and collaboration with community, business and governments
Key Policy	Workforce Management Plan
File Ref	119040.2015
Author	Anne Stanley - Councillor

79
CFO 01	Investment Report April 2015
Attachment 1	Media Release Reserve Bank of Australia May 2015

79
CFO 01	Investment Report April 2015
Attachment 2	Investment Detail Report April 2015

83
CFO 01	Investment Report April 2015
Attachment 3	Performance Graphs Actual to Budget Ytd April 2015

83
CFO 01	Investment Report April 2015
Attachment 4	CPG Report

169
CFO 03	March 2015 Budget Review
Attachment 5	Grants Status Report - Applications

171
CFO 03	March 2015 Budget Review
Attachment 6	Grant Status Report - Received

175
CFO 03	March 2015 Budget Review
Attachment 7	Quarter 3 - Budget Review Summary

177
CFO 03	March 2015 Budget Review
Attachment 8	Cash and Investment Report

179
CFO 03	March 2015 Budget Review
Attachment 9	Key Performance Indicators

181
CFO 03	March 2015 Budget Review
Attachment 10	Consultancy & Legal Expenses Budget Report

183
CFO 03	March 2015 Budget Review
Attachment 11	Contracts & Other Expenses Statement

Economic and Financial	Facilitate economic development. Create an active and vibrant city
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	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.

231
DEE 01	Flag and Banner Program
Attachment 1	Draft Flag and Banner Policy March 2015

279
DEE 02	Media Representation Policy
Attachment 1	DRAFT Media Representation Policy

Strategic Direction	Liveable Safe City Create clean and attractive public places for people to engage and connect
Key Policy	Strategic Maintenance Plan
File Ref	105944.2015
Report By	Nada Mardini - Manager Community Standards
Approved By	Toni Averay - Director Planning & Growth

Comments	Council Officer’s Response
Concerned the reclassification and sale of the land would not consider the long term needs of the local community. Emphasised that Council should “have regard to the long term and cumulative effects of its decisions“ (Local Government Act 1993 section 8(1)). Council should retain the property for future use and fund the play equipment from current reserves	The reclassification and sale of the land is required to fund upgrades to Macleod Park as there is currently insufficient funds available within the Section 94 contributions fund. The land proposed for sale represents 3.8% of the parkland and therefore will not result in any significant reduction in access to open space for existing and future residents, especially given the area is largely developed and any significant increase in population in the catchment of the park in the future is unlikely.
Concerned that Council has no ability to assess the extent of the use of the parks. Concerned the reclassification and sale of this land would disadvantage children and their families and so Council would not be adhering to its charter to promote and to provide and plan for the needs of children (Local Government Act 1993 section 8(1))	Reclassification and sale of the land will fund the embellishment of Macleod Park and therefore better meet the needs of the community. The Macleod Park Masterplan identified the land as being potentially rezoned and subdivided, as well as proposing upgrades to the remainder of the park. The land which is proposed to be rezoned and reclassified accounts for 3.8% of the parkland and is therefore unlikely to reduce the usability of the park.
Concerned the sale of this parcel would reduce the open space for sport and would have a significant impact on school children who use the parks as part of their physical exercise. Instead Council should be investing in sporting facilities such as full basketball courts, to encourage participation in sport and recreation. Concerned that Liverpool city has very few facilities to offer young people when compared to other councils. Cited that Local Government Act 1993 s8(1) which states the council has “to bear in mind that it is the custodian and trustee of public assets and to effectively plan for, account for and manage the assets for which it is responsible”	The Macleod Park Masterplan, including the land which is proposed to be rezoned and sold is seen as an appropriate use of Council’s assets and will allow for significant upgrades of the park as a whole. The planned embellishment to Macleod Park will result in a much more useable space and is like to increase patronage to the park. Sufficient land remains within Macleod Park for sporting activities and future upgrades of the kind discussed in this submission may be possible at some point, should sufficient demand exist. Limited resources are available to Council to satisfy the needs of the community and the proposed sale is seen as a rational and responsible use of Council’s resources.
Request that the estimated cost to build facilities at this park be provided	The total cost of the project is $2.9 million. $1.4 million is currently available within the Section 94 Contribution fund and approximately $1.5 million to be raised through proposed land sale. Funds will also be attributed to the ongoing maintenance of the park.
Concerned that the playground is already funded and funds from the sale will be held in reserve by Council and not used for community parks. Concerned that the sale is unnecessary as there is no estimated costs by Council in the proposal	As above.
Concerned that the proposal does not outline the unusable open space (the power lines that hinder the use as a community park). The power line easement should be excluded from the size of the park which should only consider usable open space. This lot should not be sold as the park is small on usable space.	While it is acknowledged that the easement reduces the usability of a proportion of the park for certain purposes, it does not however reduce its capacity to function as passive open space. Council does not support the claim that Macleod Park is low on usable space, given that excluding the land which is proposed to be rezoned and the electrical easement, the park will still provide approximately 7.5 hectares of open space, much of which is suitable for a range of uses.

355
DPC 01	Classification of Lot 300 DP1205231, Moondarra Drive, West Hoxton as 'Operational' Land
Attachment 1	Location Map

Economic and Financial	The road closure of part Speed Street car park has not been budgeted for in this financial years’ budget. It is recommended that expenses relating to the road closure be sourced from the General Property Reserve.
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.

Strategic Direction	Proud Engaged City Engage and consult with the community to enhance opportunities for communication and involvement
Key Policy	Community Engagement Policy
File Ref	098366.2015
Report By	Murray Wilson - Senior Strategic Planner
Approved By	Toni Averay – Director Planning and Growth

365
CTTE 01	Minutes of the Warwick Farm Steering Committee held on 3 March 2015
Attachment 1	Draft Minutes Warwick Farm Racing Precinct Steering Committee 3 March 2015

375
CTTE 02	Liverpool Sports Committee minutes of meeting 26 March 2015
Attachment 1	Liverpool Sports Committee Minutes 26 March 2015

Economic and Financial	All recommendations are accommodated within existing budgets.
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 access and services for people with a disability.
Civic Leadership and Governance	Facilitate the development of community leaders. Encourage the community to engage in Council initiatives and actions.

379
CTTE 03	Minutes of the Liverpool Access Committee 9 April 2015
Attachment 1	Minutes Liverpool Access Committee Meeting 9 April 2015

399
CTTE 04	Minutes of the Budget and Finance Committee held on 6 May 2015
Attachment 1	Minutes of the Budget and Finance Committee meeting - 6 May 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	109629.2015
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. Additional funds of $100,000 will be drawn from the Town Improvement Fund (TIF) to support the Shopfront Façade Upgrade Program, if the recommendation is approved by Council. Funds are available in the TIF.
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.

403
CTTE 05	Minutes of Building Our New City Committee meeting held 6 May 2015
Attachment 1	MINUTES Building Our New City Committee 6 May 2015 FINAL

409
CTTE 06	Minutes of Economic Development and Events Committee meeting held 6 May 2015
Attachment 1	MINUTES Economic Development and Events Committee 6 May 2015 FINAL

423
CTTE 07	Liverpool Youth Council Meeting Minutes 7 April 2015 and Meeting Notes 5 May 2015
Attachment 1	Meeting Notes of the Liverpool Youth Council May 2015

Economic and Financial	The activities of the Taskforce will support Council’s efforts to advocate to the Commonwealth and NSW Governments for the necessary infrastructure and planning investments to support the Airport and its ability to generate new economic development opportunities for the Liverpool local government area
Environmental and Sustainability	Environmental and sustainability factors will be important aspects that need to be considered in development of the Airport at Badgerys Creek.
Social and Cultural	The availability of supporting social and cultural facilities will be important considerations in development of the Airport site at Badgerys Creek.
Civic Leadership and Governance	The Taskforce will assist Council in its advocacy efforts to influence the Commonwealth and NSW Governments decision concerning development of the Airport and its connecting infrastructure.