COUNCIL AGENDA

 

Ordinary Council Meeting

30 March 2016

 

BRINGELLY COMMUNITY CENTRE

LOT 1 GREENDALE ROAD

BRINGELLY


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You are hereby notified that an Ordinary Council Meeting of Liverpool City Council will be held at the Bringelly Community Centre, Lot 1 Greendale Road, Bringelly on Wednesday, 30 March 2016 commencing at 6.00pm. Doors will open at 5.50pm.

 

Liverpool City Council Meetings are taped for the purposes of minute taking and record keeping.  If you have any enquiries please contact Council and Executive Services on 9821 9237.

 

 

 

 


Carl Wulff

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

 

 

 

 


 

 

 


Order of Business

 

                                                                                                              PAGE     TAB

Opening

Prayer

Apologies 

Condolences

Confirmation of Minutes

Ordinary Council Meeting held on 24 February 2016.............................................................. 9

ExtraordinaryCouncil Meeting held on 21 March 2016......................................................... 67

Declarations of Interest

Public Forum

Mayoral Report

NIL

Notices of Motion Of Rescission

NOMR 01       Rescission of CONF 03 - Proposed disposal of Lot 8 DP 246745, 150 Heathcote Road, Hammondville from Council meeting 3 February 2016................................. 72......... 1

Notices of Motion

NOM 01          WSROC Delegates......................................................................................... 74......... 2

NOM 02          Delegations Of The Mayor  ........................................................................... 76......... 3

Motions of Urgency

NIL

Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel Report

IHAP 01          DA-713/2015 - Demolition of existing structures, subdivision to create (33) Torrens title lots and associated road and landscaping works at 25-45 Jardine Drive Edmondson Park                                                                                                                         79......... 4

IHAP 02          1166/2014 - Demolition of existing dwellings and outbuildings; removal of trees on site; erection of two residential flat buildings containing a total of 61 units; associated basement parking; Torrens title subdivision to create three lots; road construction; and dedication of road at 240 Croatia Avenue, Edmondson Park. ............................................ 88......... 5

IHAP 03          DA-698/2015 - Demolition of existing structures, construction of a new service station, food & drinks premises, commercial premises & signage at 629-631 Hume Highway, Casula............................................................................................................. 98......... 6

IHAP 04          DA-192/2015 - Demolition of existing structures and construction of a two storey commercial building and associated carparking, use as a health services facility, and business identification signage at No. 25 Bathurst Street, Liverpool............ 108......... 7

Development Application Determination Report

NIL

Chief Executive Officer Report

CEO 01          Corporate Sponsorships............................................................................... 116......... 8

Business Improvement Report

DBI 01            Growing Liverpool 2023 - Six-monthly Progress Report ............................. 120......... 9

Chief Financial Officer

CFO 01           Investment Report February 2016................................................................ 123....... 10

CFO 02           2016 National General Assembly of Local Government.............................. 131....... 11

CFO 03           Councillor representation on Audit and Risk Committee.............................. 162....... 12

City Presentation Report

NIL

Community and Culture Report

DCC 01          Draft Graffiti Management Strategy 2016-2018.......................................... 176....... 13

DCC 02          Liverpool Listens Evaluation 1 January 2015 to 31 December 2015........... 179....... 14

DCC 03          Liverpool Youth Council Annual Report 2014-2015..................................... 183....... 15

Economic Development Report

DEE 01           Future Cities Collaborative/United States Studies Centre invitation to participate in Australian City Exchange on Innovation Ecosystems (to be provided in Addendum Booklet)

Infrastructure and Environment Report

DIEN 01          Review of Tree Management Policy............................................................ 185....... 16

DIEN 02          Austral and North Leppington - Management of Stormwater...................... 210....... 17

Planning and Growth Report

DPG 01          Collimore Car Park - Truck Parking............................................................. 213....... 18

DPG 02          Draft LLEP 2008 (Amendment 57)  & LDCP 2008 (Draft Amendment 22) - Rezoning of Part of Ardennes Avenue, Edmondson Park............................................... 216....... 19

DPG 03          Kurrajong Road and Old Kurrajong Road, Casula - Upgrade of Intersection Control 259                                                                                                                         20

Property and Commercial Development Report

NIL

Committee Reports

CTTE 01         Minutes of the Economic Development and Events Committee meeting held 2 March 2016.............................................................................................................. 273....... 21

CTTE 02         Minutes of the Civic Advisory Committee Meeting held 8 March 2016....... 283....... 22

CTTE 03         Minutes of Liverpool Aboriginal Consultative Committee 4 February 2016 292....... 23

CTTE 04         Minutes of Liverpool Access Committee Meeting held on 11 Februrary 2016 300     24

CTTE 05         Minutes of the Liverpool Youth Council Committee held on Tuesday 1 March, 2016 306                                                                                                                         25

CTTE 06         Minutes of Building Our New City Committee meeting held 2 March 2016 313....... 26

CTTE 07         Minutes of the Warwick Farm Steering Committee meeting held on 1 March 2016 319                                                                                                                         27

CTTE 08         Casula Powerhouse Arts Centre Board Minutes from Meeting 25 February 2016  321 28

CTTE 09         Minutes of the Budget and Finance Committee held on 4 February 2016.. 337....... 29

CTTE 10         Planning and Development Committee Meeting Minutes of 2 March 2016 342....... 30

Questions with Notice

QWN 01         Question with Notice - Clr Stanley................................................................ 348....... 31

QWN 02         Question with Notice - Clr Hadchiti............................................................... 350....... 32

QWN 03         Question with Notice - Clr Shelton................................................................ 352....... 33

QWN 04         Question with Notice - Clr Harle................................................................... 353....... 34  

 

Council in Closed Session

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

 

CONF 01   Tender WT2501 - Davy Robinson Seawall and Carpark Upgrade

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

 

CONF 02   Acquisition of part Lot 110 DP 1150684, Progress Circuit, Prestons, for drainage purposes

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   Proposed easement for underground electricity cables over Lot 515 DP 235072, 104 Lawrence Hargrave Road, Warwick Farm, known as 'Hargrave Park'

Reason:     Item CONF 03 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 04   Proposed disposal of part Copeland Street, Liverpool

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

 

CONF 05   Procurement of Waste Investigation Services

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

 

CONF 06   Legal Affairs Report

Reason:     Item CONF 06 is confidential pursuant to the provisions of s10(A)(2)(c) (d ii) (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 commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council; AND advice concerning litigation, or advice that would otherwise be privileged from production in legal proceedings on the ground of legal professional privilege.

 

CONF 07   Endorsement of Liverpool Access Committee 2016

Reason:     Item CONF 07 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 08   Tender WT2534 – Whitlam Leisure Centre Spa Renewal

Reason:     Item CONF 08 is confidential pursuant to the provisions of s10(A)(2)(d i) of the Local Government Act because it contains commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it.

 

CONF 09   Tender WT2516 - Middleton Grange Rural Fire Station, West Hoxton

Reason:     Item CONF 09 is confidential pursuant to the provisions of s10(A)(2)(d i) of the Local Government Act because it contains commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it.

 

CONF 10   Tender WT2538 - Design, Supply and Installation of Gross Pollutant Trap at Blamfields Oval, Ashcroft

Reason:     Item CONF 10 is confidential pursuant to the provisions of s10(A)(2)(d i) of the Local Government Act because it contains commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it. 

 

 

 


CONF 11   Macquarie Mall Revitalisation (to be provided in Confidential Addendum Booklet)

Reason:     Item CONF 11 is confidential pursuant to the provisions of s10(A)(2)(d i) of the Local Government Act because it contains commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it

Close

 


 

THIS PAGE IS BLANK


 

 

 

 

 

 


MINUTES OF THE Ordinary Meeting

HELD ON 24 February 2016 and reconvened on 14 March 2016

 

 

PRESENT:

Mayor Ned Mannoun

Councillor Balloot

Councillor Hadchiti

Councillor Hadid

Councillor Harle

Councillor Karnib

Councillor Mamone

Councillor Ristevski

Councillor Shelton

Councillor Stanley

Councillor Waller

Mr Carl Wulff, Chief Executive Officer

Mr Gary Grantham, Chief Financial Officer / Director Corporate Services

Ms Toni Averay, Director Planning and Growth

Ms Kiersten Fishburn, Director Community and Culture

Mr Gino Belsito, Director City Presentation

Mr Michael Cullen, Director Economic Development

Mr Raj Autar, Director Infrastructure and Environment

Ms Carole Todd, Director Business Improvement

Mr John Morgan, Director Property and Commercial Development

 

 

 

The meeting commenced at 6.06pm

 

 

OPENING                               6.06pm

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

APOLOGIES                          Nil

CONDOLENCES                   Nil

Confirmation of Minutes

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Stanley              Seconded: Clr Mamone

 

That the minutes of the Ordinary Meeting held on 3 February 2016 be confirmed as a true
record of that meeting.

 

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

 

 Declarations of Interest

 

Clr Hadchiti declared a pecuniary interest in the following item

 

Item DEE 04: Outdoor Dining Policy

Reason:         Clr Hadchiti’s sister operates a café in the Liverpool CBD.

Clr Hadchiti will leave the Chambers for the duration of the item.

Public Forum

 

Presentation – items not on agenda                     

 

1.      Ms Doris Puccio addressed Council on the following matter:

 

Construction of roundabout at intersection of Kurrajong Road and Old Kurrajong Road.

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Hadid                 Seconded: Clr Harle

 

That a two minute extension of time be given to Ms Doris Puccio.

 

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

 

Representation – items on agenda

 

1.    Mr Yogesh Punja (Fiji High Commissioner) addressed Council on the following item:

 

Item MAYOR 03:       Cyclone Winston in Fiji

 

  1. Mr James Young addressed Council on the following item:

 

Item DPG 01: ........... Request to reconsider Draft Amendment 31 to Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 - Proposal to rezone 1975-1985 Camden Valley Way, Prestons from B6 - Enterprise Corridor to B2 - Local Centre

 

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Hadchiti             Seconded: Clr Harle

 

That a two minute extension of time be given to Mr James Young.

 

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

 

 

MOTION TO BRING ITEM FORWARD

 

Mayor Mannoun ruled that Mayoral Minute 03 be moved forward and dealt with now.

 

Clr Hadid left the Chambers at 6.28pm.

 

Clr Hadid returned to the Chambers at 6.30pm.

 

ITEM NO:       Mayor 03

SUBJECT:     Cyclone Winston in Fiji

 

Liverpool Council extends its deepest sympathy to the people of Fiji for the heartbreak and devastation they suffered when a cyclone killed at least 29 people and destroyed  houses and villages last Saturday night.

 

Authorities say the winds from Tropical Cyclone Winston reached 296 kilometres an hour, uprooting trees, knocking out power and causing heavy flooding.

 

It would have been agonising for anyone trapped in such devastating circumstances.

 

Liverpool has a large Fijian population which makes the tragedy even sadder for us all.

 

People who are our neighbours and friends in Liverpool will have lost loved ones in the catastrophe or they will know someone whose house was swept away.

 

It is a time for us to come together as a community and offer whatever practical and compassionate assistance we can to those who have suffered so much.

 

Tropical Cyclone Winston is said to be the most powerful cyclone on record in the southern hemisphere.

 

Our thoughts and prayers are for the country and the population to make a quick recovery.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

 

1.      Expresses its deep condolences for the devastation and loss of life that has occurred in Fiji.

 

2.      Donates $5000 to the Red Cross Fijian cyclone appeal.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Mayor Mannoun                       

 

That the recommendation be adopted.

 

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

 

One minutes silence was then observed for the people that lost their lives as a result of the cyclone in Fiji.

 

3.    Mr Gill Sukhpreet addressed Council on the following item:

 

Item DPG 01: ............. Request to reconsider Draft Amendment 31 to Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 - Proposal to rezone 1975-1985 Camden Valley Way, Prestons from B6 - Enterprise Corridor to B2 - Local Centre

 

4.    Mr Bhim Chouham addressed Council on the following item:

 

Item DPG 01: ............. Request to reconsider Draft Amendment 31 to Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 - Proposal to rezone 1975-1985 Camden Valley Way, Prestons from B6 - Enterprise Corridor to B2 - Local Centre

 

5.    Ms Donna Savage from Urban Growth addressed Council on the following item:

 

Item DPG 01: ............. Request to reconsider Draft Amendment 31 to Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 - Proposal to rezone 1975-1985 Camden Valley Way, Prestons from B6 - Enterprise Corridor to B2 - Local Centre

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Hadchiti             Seconded: Clr Harle

 

That a two minute extension of time be given to Ms Donna Savage.

 

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

 

6.    Mr Peter Leyshon from Leyshon Consulting addressed Council on the following item:

 

Item DPG 01: ............. Request to reconsider Draft Amendment 31 to Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 - Proposal to rezone 1975-1985 Camden Valley Way, Prestons from B6 - Enterprise Corridor to B2 - Local Centre

 

7.    Mr Tony Pratt from Woolworths addressed Council on the following item:

 

Item DPG 01: ............. Request to reconsider Draft Amendment 31 to Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 - Proposal to rezone 1975-1985 Camden Valley Way, Prestons from B6 - Enterprise Corridor to B2 - Local Centre

 

Clr Waller left the Chambers at 6.47pm.

 

8.    Ms Rebekah Foxe addressed Council on the following items:

 

Item QWN 01:............. Questions With Notice Clr Ristevski

Item NOM 04:............. Balloon and Flag Advertising

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Hadchiti             Seconded: Clr Balloot

 

That a two minute extension of time be given to Ms Rebekah Foxe.

 

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

 

 

MOTION OF URGENCY

 

Motion                                   Moved: Clr Ristevski           Seconded: Clr Stanley

  1. That Council move into a Confidential Session to discuss an urgent staff matter.

 

  1. That the public, all staff including the CEO leave the Chambers.

 

  1. Councillors remain in the Chamber with the Mayor and Clr Mamone to take the minutes to ensure consistency.

 

Mayor Mannoun advised that due notice had not been provided as required by Clause 16.1.1 of Council’s Code of Meeting Practice.

 

Clr Ristevski asked that it be dealt with as a matter of urgency and moved the following:

 

Motion                                   Moved: Clr Ristevski           Seconded: Clr Stanley

 

  1. That the CEO’s contract of employment and the CEO’s employment be terminated under Clause 10.3.5 and 11.3 of the contract of employment.

 

  1. That an appointment of a temporary CEO be made by Council.

 

  1. Recruitment of a new CEO begins immediately with a panel to include all Councillors.

 

  1. That the delegation of the Mayor as spokesman of Council to be removed due to no confidence in the Mayor. The Acting CEO will be the spokesman for Council but no major media announcements can be made without a resolution of Council to enable Councillors to be briefed.

 

  1. The Mayoral Column in the newspaper to be replaced with a Councillors column for Council and community events with each Councillor providing a column on a rotational basis.

 

  1. Mayoral Mobile Offices be referred to as Councillor mobile offices with any community announcements to come from the CEO.

 

Mayor Mannoun ruled that the motion was not lawful as Council must have a CEO under section 334(1) of the Local Government Act 1993. If the motion was to be moved, Mayor Mannoun advised Clr Ristevski that he would need to nominate an Acting CEO in his motion.

 

Clr Ristevski then nominated Michael Cullen be temporary CEO.

 

Michael Cullen declined his nomination.

 

As an Acting CEO was not nominated and accepted, Mayor Mannoun advised that the motion was unlawful.

 

Before a ruling was made on whether the motion was considered urgent, Mayor Mannoun advised that the motion would need to be lawful. At that point, the motion was not lawful and Mayor Mannoun asked Clr Ristevski if he would like to nominate another person.

 

Clr Ristevski nominated Peter Maatouk as Acting CEO.

 

Mayor Mannoun asked Clr Ristevski to explain why he considered this to be an urgency motion.

 

Clr Ristevski preferred to give his reason in Confidential Session.

 

Mayor Mannoun asked why the motion wasn’t included in the Agenda with due notice given so that it could be dealt with in the proper process.

 

Clr Ristevski advised that he would rather discuss it in Confidential Session.

 

In accordance with Clauses 16.6 and 16.6.2 of Council’s Code of Meeting Practice, and Clause 241(3)(a) and (b) of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005, Mayor Mannoun ruled that the motion was not urgent and would not be dealt with at this meeting.

 

Clr Ristevski moved a motion to go into Closed Session.

 

Mayor Mannoun invited Ms Fiona Macnaught to address Council in relation to Item QWN 01.

Clr Ristevski requested that his motion be dealt with.

 

Mayor Mannoun ruled that it would not be dealt with as it was not urgent.

 

Clr Ristevski then moved a Motion of Dissent against the Mayor’s ruling which Clr Waller seconded.

 

Mayor Mannoun advised that a motion of dissent cannot be moved on the Mayor’s ruling on an urgency motion.

 

Mayor Mannoun asked Clr Ristevski to leave the Chamber. Clr Ristevski advised that the Mayor does not have the authority to remove him and requested that Council vote on the urgency motion.

 

Mayor Mannoun asked Clr Ristevski to leave the Chambers.

 

Mayor Mannoun then called for a recess at 7.11pm.

 

The meeting was adjourned at 7.11pm

 

Mayor Mannoun reopened the meeting at 7.36pm.

 

Mayor Mannoun advised that Clr Ristevski had conducted numerous acts of disorder and asked him to apologise.

 

Clr Ristevski refused to apologise and was willing to apologise if Mayor Mannoun apologised for what he had called him at the previous Council meeting.

 

Mayor Mannoun then asked Clr Ristevski to leave the Chambers and asked security to assist in removing Clr Ristevski from the meeting.

 

Clr Ristevski left the Chamber at 7.40pm.

 

Clrs Waller, Shelton, Mamone, Stanley, Harle and Karnib left the Chambers at 7.40pm.

 

Mayor Mannoun advised that as quorum was lost, the meeting would go into 30 minute recess to allow quorum to be restored.

 

A quorum was not re-established and at 8.33pm Mayor Mannoun advised that the meeting would be adjourned to 14 March 2016 at 6.00pm in the Francis Greenway Centre, Council Chambers.

 


 

Mayor Mannoun reconvened the meeting at 6.03pm on Monday, 14 March 2016 with the following people present:

 

Mayor Ned Mannoun

Councillor Balloot

Councillor Hadchiti

Councillor Hadid

Councillor Harle

Councillor Karnib

Councillor Mamone

Councillor Ristevski

Councillor Shelton

Councillor Stanley

Mr Carl Wulff, Chief Executive Officer

Mr Gary Grantham, Chief Financial Officer / Director Corporate Services

Ms Toni Averay, Director Planning and Growth

Mr Eddie Jackson, Acting Director Community and Culture

Mr Wayne Carter, Director City Presentation

Mr Michael Cullen, Director Economy and Engagement

Mr Raj Autar, Director Infrastructure and Environment

Ms Carole Todd, Director Business Improvement

Mr John Morgan, Director Property and Commercial Development

 

 

PUBLIC FORUM (Continued from page 5 of these minutes)

 

Representation – items on agenda

 

1.    Ms Fiona Macnaught addressed Council on the following item:

 

Item QWN 01: .......... Questions With Notice Clr Ristevski

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Hadid                 Seconded: Clr Balloot

 

That a two minute extension of time be given to Ms Fiona Macnaught.

 

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

 

 

2.    Mr Rached Ammoun addressed Council on the following item:

 

Item QWN 01: .......... Questions With Notice Clr Ristevski

 

 

3.    Ms Karress Rhodes addressed Council on the following item:

 

Item CTTE 05: ......... Minutes of the Economic Development and Events Committee meeting held 4 February 2016

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Shelton              Seconded: Clr Harle

 

That a two minute extension of time be given to Ms Karress Rhodes.

 

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

 

 

  1. Mr Gerard Turrisi addressed Council on the following item:

 

Item DPG 01: ........... Request to reconsider Draft Amendment 31 to Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 - Proposal to rezone 1975-1985 Camden Valley Way, Prestons from B6 - Enterprise Corridor to B2 - Local Centre

 

 

Clr Ristevski left the Chambers at 6.21pm.

 

Clr Ristevski returned to the Chambers at 6.23pm.

 

 

5.    Mr David Milovanovic addressed Council on the following item:

 

Item NOM 10:........... Asbestos and Staffing Issues

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Hadchiti             Seconded: Clr Hadid

 

That a two minute extension of time be given to Mr David Milovanovic.

 

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

 


 

Mayoral Minutes

 

 

ITEM NO:       Mayor 01

SUBJECT:     125 Years of the Luddenham Society

 

On the February 4th 1891 the first ever meeting of the Luddenham AH & I Society was convened and created our much beloved Luddenham Show later that year. The Show demonstrates all the best of our agricultural heartland in the lead up to the Royal Sydney Easter Show with rodeo’s, produce and art displays and this year a jet car spectacle. It has come a long way from the original show heralded as the best inaugural show ever held in the then colony of New South Wales but none of the delights have suffered for its age.

 

The Luddenham Show has persisted through 112 of the society’s 125 years of existence, only halted by war and drought, to bring us grand displays of our country heritage. It is truly remarkable to still see the descendants of the pioneering families 125 years on taking an active role in the society and the organisation of the show. A special thanks is extended to the Adams, Roots and Willmington Families for their continued assistance over the years and in bringing together such a fantastic Luddenham Show enjoyed by all who attended.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

 

1.    Congratulates the Luddenham Agricultural, Horticultural & Industrial Society for their 125 years of serving the rural community of Liverpool and producing the Luddenham show.

 

  1. Writes to the Luddenham Society providing a copy of this minute in honour of their achievement.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Mayor Mannoun

 

That the recommendation be adopted.                                

 

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

 

 


 

ITEM NO:       Mayor 02

SUBJECT:     World’s Greatest Shave

 

 

On Sunday 13th of March local resident Buffy McDonald shaved her head for The World’s Greatest Shave; an icon of solidarity and support for those we know and love who suffer from leukaemia. Every day 34 Australians are diagnosed with Blood Cancer, news that can be heart wrenching not only for the patient but for their friends and family who stand by them.

 

Buffy’s father John Eastwood was diagnosed with the blood disorder MDS, a leukaemia that inhibits the production of normal blood cells and it is to him that Buffy will dedicate her shave. Buffy and John work together at the local charity Young Adults Disabled Association (YADA) which John co-founded over 30 years ago. Despite his on-going condition he has pushed through and continued his work for the charity.

 

Buffy aims to raise $10 000 for the Leukaemia Foundation through her shave and has asked people to donate cakes for a sale on the day at the YADA offices in Liverpool. With council’s generosity we can help her reach that goal and help provide hope to those afflicted by a terrible disease.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

 

1.    Donates $1000 to Buffy McDonald’s World’s Greatest Shave event at 2pm, 13 March 2016 at the YADA office on 10 Anderson Ave Liverpool.

 

2.    Promotes the day on social media.

 

3.    Encourages the public to get involved in the World’s Greatest Shave through donations or shaving their hair.

 

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Mayor Mannoun

 

That the recommendation be adopted.                       

 

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

                       

 


19

 

Notices of Motion

 

ITEM NO:      NOM 01

FILE NO:        034086.2016

SUBJECT:     Traffic Study Southern end of Liverpool

 

NOTICE OF MOTION

 

That Council:

 

1.   Instigate a traffic study to assess the impact of approved and forecast developments in the Southern part of Liverpool for the streets and incidental traffic interactions of the streets.

 

2.   Identify a source of funds for the study.

 

3.   Present the results to the June 2016 Council meeting.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Stanley                        Seconded: Clr Hadchiti

 

That Council:

 

  1. Ensures that streets listed in the background (included below) of this Notice of Motion are included in the current study being undertaken to ensure that all traffic impacts are taken into account.

 

  1. Bring the traffic report to council when completed.

 

  1. Work with the state government to ensure the traffic study relating to the Intermodal is included in the study.

 

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

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

There have been several high rise developments approved at the southern end of Liverpool which have the potential to increase traffic and cause further issues for CBD traffic. To further press Council case for funding for a grade separation at Hoxton Park road it is vital that we have updated modelling and information about traffic flows around Hoxton Park Road, Macquarie Street, Speed Street, Carey St, Hay St, Olive Street, Mill Road, Charles Street, Nagle Street Shepherd Street, Atkinson St, and River Park Drive and other associated streets in that area.


21

 

ITEM NO:      NOM 02

FILE NO:        037054.2016

SUBJECT:     Tree Preservation

 

NOTICE OF MOTION

 

That Council:

 

1.   During the current LLEP revision that policy and process with targets are considered to protect trees when developing particularly large parcels of land.

 

2.   Provide Council with a report for the May 2016 Council meeting.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Stanley              Seconded: Clr Hadchiti

 

That Council:

 

  1. During the current LLEP revision that policy and process with targets are considered to protect trees when developing particularly large parcels of land.

 

  1. Provide Council at the appropriate time in the LLEP review, a report as to how (1) can be achieved.

 

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

 


21

 

ITEM NO:      NOM 03

FILE NO:        037074.2016

SUBJECT:     Storm Removal Policy (trees on the Nature Strips)

 

NOTICE OF MOTION

 

That Council development a policy that makes Council the one point of contact for residents when street trees are brought down in storms.

 

a)   Negotiate with our services providers to find a quick and efficient way to provide information to them.

 

b)   Provide a report to Council detailing changes to the policy for the May 2016 Council meeting

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Stanley              Seconded: Clr Karnib

 

That the recommendation be adopted.

 

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

 


23

 

ITEM NO:      NOM 04

FILE NO:        038895.2016

SUBJECT:     Balloon and Flag Advertising

 

NOTICE OF MOTION

 

That:

 

1.   Council develop a formal policy to regulate the advertising via balloon and flag throughout the LGA to be tabled at the next council meeting.

 

2.   All enforcement action against Mr Maatouk cease as it is premature given that there is no balloon advertising policy in place.

 

3.   Council staff advise of which other businesses have been subjected to formal enforcement action besides Mr Maatouk.

 

4.   Council staff advise of the legal costs to date in enforcing action against Mr Maatouk.

 

5.   Council staff advise of the total man hours which have been allocated to enforcement action against Mr Maatouk.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Stanley              Seconded: Clr Hadid

 

That Council note the comments of the CEO (included below) with a further confidential report to be brought back to the next Council meeting or the most appropriate time.

 

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

 

 

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER COMMENTS

 

CEO Comments to each point of the motion are found below:

 

  1. Council develop a formal policy to regulate the advertising via balloon and flag throughout the LGA to be tabled at the next council meeting.

 

There is no need to develop a policy as the installation of advertising structures (balloons, flags etc) is controlled under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act . A council policy cannot override the Act.

 

  1. All enforcement action against Mr Maatouk cease as it is premature given that there is no balloon advertising policy in place.

 

 

 

Enforcement action was taken for non-compliance with the Environment Planning and Assessment Act as such Council policy is irrelevant (refer to comments above). At any rate the matter is before the courts and both respondents have already indicated that they do not dispute that the Complying Development Certificate is invalid. Therefore making the signage and balloon unauthorised.

 

  1. Council staff advise of which other businesses have been subjected to formal enforcement action besides Mr Maatouk.

 

There are seven other businesses given notices for similar offences.

 

  1. Council staff advise of the legal costs to date in enforcing action against Mr Maatouk.

 

$8871.77, however Council is pressing for an order that the respondents pay Council’s legal costs.

 

  1. Council staff advise of the total man hours which have been allocated to enforcement action against Mr Maatouk.

 

Compliance Officers have spent a total of 3 days.

 


25

 

ITEM NO:      NOM 05

FILE NO:        039460.2016

SUBJECT:     Maintenance of Nature Strips

 

NOTICE OF MOTION

 

That Council direct the Chief Executive Officer, on behalf of the Council, to write to the Premier of NSW, the Minister for Roads, Maritime and Freight, and the Minister for Local Government, outlining the issues associated with residents who do not maintain road verges, and seeking a statutory solution through suitable amendments to the Roads Act 1993 and/or the Local Government Act 1993.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Harle                  Seconded: Clr Stanley

 

That Council:

 

  1. Direct the Chief Executive Officer, on behalf of the Council, to write to the Premier of NSW, the Minister for Roads, Maritime and Freight, and the Minister for Local Government, outlining the issues associated with residents who do not maintain road verges, and seeking a statutory solution through suitable amendments to the Roads Act 1993 and/or the Local Government Act 1993.

 

2.    Submit a motion regarding this matter to the LGNSW Association Conference.

 

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


25

 

ITEM NO:      NOM 06

FILE NO:        039486.2016

SUBJECT:     Sister City Relationship with Calabria

 

NOTICE OF MOTION

 

That Council:

 

1.   Officers will reconnect with our sister city in Calabria to explore opportunities to develop and enhance the cultural relationship between the two cities in ways that are mutually beneficial, include arranging a delegation from Council to attend Calabria 

 

2.   Nominate four Councillor to visit the sister city in June.

 

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Mamone            Seconded: Clr Ristevski

 

That:

 

1.    Council officers will reconnect with our sister city in Calabria to explore opportunities to develop and enhance the cultural relationship between the two cities in ways that are mutually beneficial, include arranging a delegation from Council to attend Calabria. 

 

2.      Airfare expenses for the Calabria Trip and the Toda trip (approved at the 3 February 2016 Council meeting) are to be paid by the Councillors attending.

 

3.      Any Councillor can nominate themselves to attend if they are willing to cover airfare expenses.

 

Foreshadowed motion:       Moved: Clr Hadchiti             Seconded: Mayor Mannoun 

 

That this item be deferred until the next Council meeting.

 

On being put to the meeting the motion (moved by Clr Mamone) was declared CARRIED and the Foreshadowed motion (moved by Clr Hadchiti) lapsed.

 


27

Clr Karnib left the Chambers at 7.07pm.

 

Clr Karnib returned to the Chambers at 7.11pm.

 

Clr Mamone left the Chambers at 7.20pm.

 

Clr Mamone returned to the Chambers at 7.25pm.

 

 

MOTION TO BRING ITEM FORWARD

 

Motion                                   Moved: Clr Stanley              Seconded: Clr Hadchiti

 

That Council:

 

That item DPG 01 be brought forward and dealt with now.

 

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

 

 

ITEM NO:      DPG 01

FILE NO:        001723.2016

SUBJECT:     Request to reconsider Draft Amendment 31 to Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 - Proposal to rezone 1975-1985 Camden Valley Way, Prestons from B6 - Enterprise Corridor to B2 - Local Centre

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

 

1.       Reaffirms its opposition to the proposed rezoning of 1975-1985 Camden Valley Way from B6 – Enterprise Corridor to B2 – Local Centre, for the reasons outlined in its resolution on the matter adopted at its ordinary meeting of 17 June 2015.

 

2.       Writes to the Minister of Planning pursuant to Section 58(4) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 requesting that the Minister determine that the matter not proceed.

 

3.       Provides a copy of the final planning proposal for the proposed rezoning to the Department of Planning and Environment for their review as requested.

 

4.       Delegates to the CEO the authority to negotiate with the Department of Planning and Environment to amend the proposal as described in this report, should the Minister decide to proceed with the rezoning.

 

 

 

 

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Stanley              Seconded: Clr Shelton

 

That Council:

 

1.      Reaffirms its opposition to the proposed rezoning of 1975-1985 Camden Valley Way from B6 – Enterprise Corridor to B2 – Local Centre, for the reasons outlined in its resolution on the matter adopted at its ordinary meeting of 17 June 2015. The decision is based on Council’s Independent consult, Hill PDA and other matters, who in December 2014 undertook a peer review of the proposal and recommended that the planning proposal should be refused as it was contrary to Council’s adopted Retail Hierarchy Strategy. The proposal is not specifically included in any identified State or Regional strategic direction. The proposal is also contrary to the Draft Centres Policy that favours the strengthening and expansion of existing centres to accommodate market demand before creating a new centre or supporting out of centre retailing activity.

 

2.    Writes to the Minister of Planning pursuant to Section 58(4) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 requesting that the Minister determine that the matter not proceed.

 

3.      Provides a copy of the final planning proposal for the proposed rezoning to the Department of Planning and Environment for their review as requested.

 

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

 

Councillors voted unanimously for this motion.


29

 

 

ITEM NO:      NOM 07

FILE NO:        039489.2016

SUBJECT:     Express rail service between Liverpool and City

 

NOTICE OF MOTION

 

That Council writes to the responsible member of the state government objecting on behalf of Liverpool residents to the proposed increase in OPAL fares which have been described in many quarters as discriminatory, and points out the economic harm as much causes to residents individually and attempts generally to promote Liverpool and its surrounds as a destination of preference for work, lifestyle and recreation.       

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Shelton              Seconded: Clr Stanley

 

That Council:

 

1.    Writes to the responsible member of the state government objecting on behalf of Liverpool residents to the proposed increase in OPAL fares, as recommended by IPART which have been described in many quarters as discriminatory, and points out the economic harm as much causes to residents individually and attempts generally to promote Liverpool and its surrounds as a destination of preference for work, lifestyle and recreation.       

 

2.    Notes the comments of the CEO (included below).

 

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

 

 

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER COMMENTS

 

Liverpool is experiencing rapid growth and public transport plays a very important role is this expansion. Residents in the south-west currently endure traffic congestion in peak times on major roads in the area. Enhanced public transport options would encourage more people out of single vehicles journeys and onto public transport.

 

As an example, using the current Transport for NSW timetable and Opal fare calculator it takes at least 1 hour and 10 minutes to travel from Liverpool to Town Hall at approximately 8am for a cost of $6.46. Bus travel to the city is not a feasible option as this would take 2 or 3 buses and nearly 2 ½ hours. Liverpool residents are not getting decent services or value for money.

 

The IPART report into OPAL and public transport fares says they want ‘to create a fairer, more efficient and more integrated system for Opal card users.

 

 

In summary, the report proposes the following:

 

to increase fares over the next 3 years by the average annual before inflation of 1.8% for rail, to 3.3% for bus and light rail and 3.5% for ferries. Fares to come into effect on 1 July 2016.

 

An integrated fare structure for passengers needing to switch between trains, buses, ferries or light rail on the same journey. Instead of being charged twice or more when switching from one mode to another, the fare would be charged based on the distance from origin to final destination, so that most multi-mode passengers would pay 20% to 50% less for each journey.

 

·         To reduce the number of free trips enjoyed by some (users of more than 8 trips per week), so more passengers can access lower fares without further increasing the burden on taxpayers.

 

·         Increasing the off-peak discount on trains from 30% to 40%, meaning lower fares for more than 97% of off-peak rail customers. Currently 56% of all rail journeys are made in off-peak periods. Increasing the discount on off-peak fares would better reflect the lower costs of providing off-peak rail services and promote better use of spare capacity on the rail network.

 

·         Changing fare bands so that they are based on the straight-line distance from origin to destination for all modes, removing the anomaly that while bus and ferry passengers currently pay for distance travelled based on a straight line, train passengers pay according to track distance. This would lead to significant savings for some rail passengers.

 

·         Increasing the per kilometre rate so that fares for longer distance journeys would increase relative to those for shorter distance journeys. This would affect those travelling longer distances (bus fares more than 15km, and rail fare more than 65km), but IPART says long distance fares would still be lower than in 2009.

 

·         Setting the Gold Opal Card (pensioners or war widow card holders) cap at 40% of the concession fare ($3.60) in place of the current daily cap of $2.50, this has not increased since 2005. Seniors without a Pensioner or War Widow/ers Card would have an Opal Concession Card ($9 daily cap) rather than a Gold Opal Card.

 

·         Increasing the daily cap from $15 (Monday to Saturday) to $18 Monday to Friday, with the proposed lower $7.20 daily cap to apply on Saturdays and Sundays.

 

·         Pricing paper tickets at 40% more than Opal fares to reflect the costs involving two ticketing systems.


31

 

ITEM NO:      NOM 08

FILE NO:        039527.2016

SUBJECT:     ANZAC Day Commemorations 2016-2018

 

NOTICE OF MOTION

 

That Council liaises with stakeholders with a view toward identifying any linkages and themes which might be emphasized to connect and perhaps unify the next three ANZAC day commemorations, having regard to their historical significance, and further Council looks into identifying how it can contribute to as much.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Shelton              Seconded: Clr Mamone

 

That council notes the comments of the CEO (included below).

 

 

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFICER COMMENTS

 

The ANZAC 2015 commemoration was extremely successful with very positive responses from the community and from many stakeholders including the Australian War Memorial, the RSL and the military communities in Liverpool.

 

Annually, Council will continue to support financially and logistically the ANZAC Day Dawn Service held in Bigge Park. This is a moving and significant commemoration that is increasingly attended by our local community.

 

The Library and Museum have a range of exhibitions and activities proposed over the next few years to commemorate one hundred years of World War 1. These include:

 

·         Interactive talks by a re-enactment group on the equipment the soldiers had.

 

·         Performance by Jim Hayes, readings from letters, diaries etc.

 

·         Sydney Living Museums 'Gallipoli' exhibition - basically descendants stories, effects on families etc.

 

·         Photographic display of Liverpool during the war with an emphasis on the home front.

 

We will also look for other opportunities to draw attention to the many stories and experiences of World War 1. In particular, the story of our nurses remains extremely relevant and has not been explored in the depth of the stories of the soldiers.

 

The next most significant date that council should seriously consider commemorating is of course the hundred anniversary of Armistice Day in 2018. The Producer of those events and activities has proposed a range of possible commemorations that could be considered, including:

 

·         The staging of small, intimate programs and events for WWI commemorations at historically significant/heritage sites.

 

o   Storytelling Outdoor performances, eg. A re-staging of Last Post performance that Busby Public School students presented at the Home Front event at CPAC in 2015, or Through These Lines performance at Anzac Day event.

 

o   The finale to the ANZAC Day 2015 event which got washed out – horses in full dress, students from Amity College (Turkish) and the Last Post on the bugle.

 

·         Public displays

 

o   Paste-ups on walls throughout CBD – portraits and stories of local soldiers.

 

o   Large-scale mural on the wall of John Edmondson Memorial Club, the side wall facing Moore St

 

o   Re-staging of Anzac Projections for seven days, in the same location

 

o   Street banners

 

·         Large-scale Armistice Day event

 

A budget of approximately $120,000 would be required to deliver all of the above. It would also require a dedicated contract position as was done for the 2015 commemorations. Funding would need to be allocated in the 2017/18 and 2018/19 budgets; as these budgets are developed these ideas will be further considered internally and then provided to Councillors for consideration.


33

 

ITEM NO:      NOM 09

FILE NO:        039577.2016

SUBJECT:     Liverpool LGA events calendar

 

NOTICE OF MOTION

 

That Council investigates the feasibility of creating and promoting a space, presumably electronic, for the listing of events in the Liverpool LGA area whether they be council events, council sponsored events, or simply events taking place in the Liverpool LGA area.       

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Shelton              Seconded: Clr Stanley

 

That Council notes the comments of the CEO (included below).

 

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

 

 

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER COMMENTS

 

Council will review current practices and opportunities for a city wide calendar of events and provide a report back to Council in April 2016.


35

Clr Hadid left the Chambers at 7.46pm.

 

Clr Hadid returned to the Chambers at 7.48pm.

 

ITEM NO:      NOM 10

FILE NO:        039656.2016

SUBJECT:     Asbestos and Staffing Issues

 

NOTICE OF MOTION

 

That Council receive a verbal update relating to the ongoing asbestos issue.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Ristevski           Seconded: Clr Mamone

 

1.      That Council as a matter of urgency conducts soil tests on the land owned by Council surrounding the Club as well as the Club’s vacant land adjoining the Council land where asbestos has been found and contaminated.

 

2.      That Councillors be advised as a matter of urgency what programs have been put into place to test and monitor rate payers and the Serbian Club staff.

 

3.      That Council donate $5,000 to the Serbian Saint Sava festival to be held at the Serbian Club at Hoxton Park next month to assist the Club with additional advertising.

 

4.      That Council move into Closed Session at the end of the Council meeting to receive a full update from the CEO.

 

Amendment:                         Moved: Clr Hadchiti             Seconded: Clr Balloot

 

1.      That Council as a matter of urgency conducts soil tests on the land owned by Council surrounding the Club.

 

2.      That Councillors be advised as a matter of urgency what programs have been put into place to test and monitor rate payers and the Serbian Club staff.

 

3.      That Council donate $5,000 to the Serbian Saint Sava festival to be held at the Serbian Club at Hoxton Park next month to assist the Club with additional advertising.

 

4.      That Council move into Closed Session at the end of the Council meeting to receive a full update from the CEO.

 

5.      That Council receives a report regarding illegal dumping and asbestos in the LGA.

 

6.      That Council receive a verbal update relating to the ongoing asbestos issue.

 

On being put to the meeting the Amendment (moved by Clr Hadchiti) was declared LOST.

 

The motion (moved by Clr Ristevski) was then voted on and on being put to the meeting was declared LOST.

 

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

 

 

Mayor Mannoun called a recess of Council at 7.56pm.

 

Mayor Mannoun reopened the meeting at 8.21pm.


35

 

Chief Executive Officer Report

 

ITEM NO:      CEO 01

FILE NO:        008207.2016

SUBJECT:     Corporate Sponsorships

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council endorses the Financial Contributions Panel’s recommendations for the provision of $11,150 (GST exclusive) under the Corporate Sponsorship Program as summarised in the table below. If the recommended amount of $11,150 is endorsed, the remaining balance will be $NIL.

 

Applicant name

Amount

Hockey NSW

$1,650 ex gst

Trooper Lu’s Garage

$5,000 ex gst

Australian Paranormal Phenomomen Investigators

$3,000 ex gst

Liverpool City Robins Sports Club

$1,500 ex gst

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Mayor Mannoun     Seconded: Clr Hadchiti

 

That Council

 

1.      Approves the provision of $16,150 (GST exclusive) under the Corporate Sponsorship Program as summarised in the table below. If the recommended amount of $16,150 is endorsed, the remaining balance will be $NIL.

 

Applicant name

Amount

Hockey NSW

$1,650 ex gst

Trooper Lu’s Garage

$5,000 ex gst

Australian Paranormal Phenomenon Investigators

$3,000 ex gst

Liverpool City Robins Sports Club

$1,500 ex gst

Serbian Saint Sava festival

$5,000 ex gst

 

2.      Discuss with the Australian Turf Club their plans for the Chipping Norton Stakes.

 

3.      Remove the program criteria that requires an event to be in the City Centre.

 

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

 


37

 

Chief Financial Officer

 

ITEM NO:      CFO 01

FILE NO:        029400.2016

SUBJECT:     Investment Report January 2016

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council receives and notes this report.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Shelton              Seconded: Clr Stanley

 

That the recommendation be adopted.

 

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

 


37

 

ITEM NO:      CFO 02

FILE NO:        032579.2016

SUBJECT:     Appointment of External Auditors

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

 

1.   Note the provisions under the Local Government Act 1993.

 

2.   Approves appointment of the Audit Office of NSW to perform the audit of Council’s 2015/16 and forward year’s financial statements.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Stanley              Seconded: Clr Hadchiti

 

That the recommendation be adopted.

 

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

 


39

 

ITEM NO:      CFO 03

FILE NO:        033907.2016

SUBJECT:     Budget Review - December 2015

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

 

1.   Receives and notes the report;

 

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

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Ristevski           Seconded: Clr Stanley

 

That Council:

 

1.   Receives and notes the report;

 

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

 

3.    Staff prepare a report to come back to the next Council meeting on the budget allocation for the 2015/16 and 2016/17 financial years for the Council Media, Communications and Research department. The report to exclude allocations to CPAC and to include staff salaries.

 

Amendment:                         Moved: Clr Hadchiti             Seconded: Clr Balloot 

 

That Council:

 

1.    Receives and notes the report;

 

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

 

3.    The following report come back to a budget session for Councillors consideration:

 

The budget allocation for the 2015/16 and 2016/17 financial years for the Council Media, Communications and Research department. The report to exclude allocations to CPAC and to include staff salaries.

 

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

 


39

 

Community and Culture Report

 

ITEM NO:      DCC 01

FILE NO:        013109.2016

SUBJECT:     Midnight Basketball Report at end of Contract between Council and Midnight Basketball Australia

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council receive and notes this report.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Shelton              Seconded: Clr Hadchiti

 

That:

 

1.    Council receives and notes this report

 

2.    Council staff be thanked for their hard work on the program, especially Derek Tweed.

 

3.    Councillors express their support for this program to continue in the next two years.

 

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

 


41

 

ITEM NO:      DCC 02

FILE NO:        029645.2016

SUBJECT:     Combatting Childhood Obesity with Sport - Updated Report

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council receives and notes this report.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Shelton              Seconded: Clr Mamone

 

That the recommendation be adopted.

 

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

 


41

 

ITEM NO:      DCC 03

FILE NO:        030401.2016

SUBJECT:     Jobskills Workshops for Baby Boomers

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council receives and notes this report.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Hadchiti             Seconded: Clr Balloot

 

That the recommendation be adopted.

 

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

 


43

 

ITEM NO:      DCC 04

FILE NO:        031327.2016

SUBJECT:     Homelessness and Employment

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council receives and notes this report.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Mamone            Seconded: Clr Shelton

 

That the recommendation be adopted.

 

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

 

 


43

 

Economy and Engagement Report

 

ITEM NO:      DEE 01

FILE NO:        039023.2016

SUBJECT:     Outgoing Corporate Sponsorship Policy

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

 

1.   Note this report;

 

2.   Adopt the Outgoing Corporate Sponsorship Policy (including Guidelines and Form), for introduction from 1 July 2016, as attached to this report; and

 

3.   Provide a copy of the attached policy and the related public notice to the Chief Executive of the Office of Local Government within 28 days of the date of this Council resolution.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Stanley              Seconded: Clr Shelton

 

That Council:

 

  1. Note this report

 

  1. Adopt the Outgoing Corporate Sponsorship Policy (including Guidelines and Form), for introduction from 1 July 2016, as attached to this report with the following changes:

 

·         Remove point 4.2e) of the Policy, which states:

 

“Activates the city centre, particularly on weekends and evenings”

 

·         The application form be amended so that submissions be made through a generic email address.

 

  1. Provide a copy of the attached policy and the related public notice to the Chief Executive of the Office of Local Government within 28 days of the date of this Council resolution.

 

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

 


45

 

ITEM NO:      DEE 02

FILE NO:        011737.2016

SUBJECT:     Youth Unemployment in Liverpool

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council note this report.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Shelton              Seconded: Clr Karnib

 

That the recommendation be adopted.

 

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

 


45

 

ITEM NO:      DEE 03

FILE NO:        027455.2016

SUBJECT:     Visiting International Delegations Policy

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council adopts the attached proposed visiting delegations policy.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Shelton              Seconded: Clr Stanley

 

That Council adopts the attached proposed visiting delegations policy with the following amendments:

 

·           Add the following sentence to clause 4.2.4 of the Policy, “The CEO will ordinarily consult with Councillors when making a determination under this policy.” So that the clause reads:

 

“Council, through the CEO’s office will assess the request with respect to the benefits to Liverpool Council or the Liverpool area, including protocol checks with the Commonwealth and NSW Governments. The CEO will ordinarily consult with Councillors when making a determination under this policy.”

 

·           Add the following words to clause 4.3.1 of the Policy, “Subject to the terms of this policy.” So that the clause reads:

 

“Subject to the terms of this policy, the CEO will approve or decline a request from a visiting delegation.”

 

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


47

Clr Hadchiti left the Chambers at 8.53pm.

 

ITEM NO:      DEE 04

FILE NO:        028815.2016

SUBJECT:     Outdoor Dining Policy

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

 

1.   Note this report

 

2.   Adopt the Outdoor Dining Policy, as attached to this report; and

 

3.   Provide a copy of the attached policy and the related public notice to the Chief Executive of the Office of Local Government within 28 days of the date of this Council resolution.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Shelton              Seconded: Clr Hadid

 

That the recommendation be adopted. 

 

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

 

 


47

Clr Hadchiti returned to the Chambers at 8.54pm.

 

Planning and Growth Report

 

 

ITEM NO:      DPG 02

FILE NO:        003187.2016

SUBJECT:     Enforcement Policy Report

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

 

1.       Approves the attached reviewed Enforcement Policy.

 

2.       Revokes the Penalty Infringement Notice Policy.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Stanley              Seconded: Clr Hadid

 

That the recommendation be adopted.

 

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

 


49

 

ITEM NO:      DPG 03

FILE NO:        031645.2016

SUBJECT:     Development Engineering Bonds Policy

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

 

1.   Notes this report.

 

2.   Adopts the Development Engineering Bonds Policy attached to this report

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Hadid                  Seconded: Clr Mamone

 

That Council:

 

1.      Notes this report.

 

2.      Adopts the Development Engineering Bonds Policy attached to this report.

 

3.      Ensure that the bond must be returned to the entity who lodged the bond.

 

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

 

 


49

 

Committee Reports

 

ITEM NO:      CTTE 01

FILE NO:        024235.2016

SUBJECT:     Minutes of the Local Traffic Committee Meeting held on 20 January 2016

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

 

1.       Receives and adopts the Minutes of the Local Traffic Committee Meeting held on 20 January 2016.

 

2.       Adopts the Local Traffic Committee recommendations as noted in the report below.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Harle                  Seconded: Clr Shelton

 

That Council:

 

1.      Receives and notes the Minutes of the Local Traffic Committee Meeting held on 20 January 2016.

 

2.    Adopts the Local Traffic Committee recommendations as noted in the report with the following amendment:

 

·         Point 1 of the recommendation for Item 5, of the LTC Minutes be amended to state:

 

“The Committee defers the decision to install interim rubber cushions along the existing east-west section of Bird Walton Avenue, Middleton Grange for further discussion at the next Liverpool Traffic Committee meeting.”

 

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

 


51

 

ITEM NO:      CTTE 02

FILE NO:        031695.2016

SUBJECT:     Minutes of the Liverpool Youth Council Meeting held 2 February, 2016

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council receives and adopts the Minutes of the Liverpool Youth Council Meeting held on 2 February, 2016.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Mamone            Seconded: Clr Stanley

 

That the recommendation be adopted.

 

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

 


51

 

ITEM NO:      CTTE 03

FILE NO:        035373.2016

SUBJECT:     Minutes of Building Our New City Committee meeting held 4 February 2016

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

 

1.   Receives and notes the Minutes of the Building our New City Committee Meeting held on 4 February 2016.

 

2.   Notes that a report identifying options for the development of an activation program in the Mall will be provided to a future Building Our New City Committee meeting.

 

3.   Notes that a short paper on the City Development Fund boundaries will be provided to a future Building Our New City Committee meeting for consideration.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Mamone            Seconded: Clr Balloot

 

That the recommendation be adopted.

 

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

 


53

 

ITEM NO:      CTTE 04

FILE NO:        038575.2016

SUBJECT:     Planning and Development Committee Minutes of 4 February 2016

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

 

1.       Receives and adopts the Minutes of the Planning and Development Committee Meeting held on 4 February 2016.

 

2.       Adopts the Committee’s recommendations

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Balloot               Seconded: Clr Harle

 

That the recommendation be adopted.

 

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

 


53

 

ITEM NO:      CTTE 05

FILE NO:        039153.2016

SUBJECT:     Minutes of the Economic Development and Events Committee meeting held 4 February 2016

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

1.   Receives and notes the Minutes of the Economic Development and Events Committee held on 4 February 2016.

 

2.   Considers funding implementation of the Liverpool Destination Management Plan in its forward budget program.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Harle                  Seconded: Clr Hadchiti

 

That:

 

  1. Council adopt the minutes and refer back to future Economic Development and Events Committee, all motions and decisions made on the Destination Management Plan as presented on the 4th of February.

 

  1. The Community is given the opportunity to present its own Destination Management Plan additions and adjustments for consideration at an accreditation level above that proposed by this Destination Management Plan.

 

  1. Council support collaboration and form related partnerships between Liverpool public and private sectors and Community Groups to advance specific agendas that may further establish new tourism opportunities for Liverpool.

 

  1. Council promote broad and inclusive Community consultation as an integral component of the Destination Management process that will ensure the support of, the local economy, community values and local employment and business opportunities for Liverpool.

 

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

 

 


55

 

Questions with Notice

 

ITEM NO:      QWN 01

FILE NO:        037678.2016

SUBJECT:     Question with Notice - Clr Ristevski

 

Please address the following:

 

Kurrajong Road Opening Community BBQ

 

1.      Why were halal sausages cooked before the pork sausages?

 

The standard order for Council BBQ events has always been beef sausages and vegetable patties (therefore providing one meat and one vegetarian option). Following the Council resolution of 26 August 2015 regarding the serving of pork, the addition of pork sausages was made to the standard order. To ensure that pork was available to anyone who requested it, they were held aside to be cooked on request. As the event was such a success, all sausages and patties of all varieties were cooked and consumed.

 

2.      Why were so many halal sausages ordered and so little pork sausages ordered?

 

The ratio of sausage and pattie ordering was determined by a number of factors:

 

·         To keep costs as low as possible while still providing a quality product, especially as this was a free event (beef sausages are cheaper than pork);

·         The fact that we have never previously had a request for a pork sausage at a free BBQ indicating that pork eaters will also eat beef (and therefore again, keeping our costs to the ratepayer lower); and

·         The population demographics of the surrounding area with high community populations of Arabic and Indian families making beef and vegetarian options preferable.

 

3.      Who made this request? We're any Councillors involved in this decision making?

 

This decision was made by staff. No Councillors were involved in the decision.

 

4.      How many pork sausages were ordered and how many halal sausages were ordered?

 

In total food for 1,000 serves was ordered. This was 300 vegetarian patties, 650 beef halal sausages and 50 pork sausages.  This was considered to be an appropriate approach considering the community.

 

 

5.      How many halal sausages were left over and how many pork sausages were left over?

 

All sausages were happily and gratefully consumed by members of the public.

 

6.      Why did the CEO refuse to answer the above questions to community concerns via a Councillor request?

 

No adverse comments or complaints were received on the day of the event regarding the availability of pork sausages. Following the event, no comments have been received from the public – other than overall praise for a great event. The purchasing of pork sausages was done in line with best practice regarding value for ratepayers and to meet the Council resolution of 26 August 2015.

 

The content of the original email received concerning this matter was the reason that the CEO determined that it did not require a response.


57

 

ITEM NO:      QWN 02

FILE NO:        045951.2016

SUBJECT:     Question with Notice - Clr Stanley

 

Please address the following:

 

Kurrajong Road, Prestons

 

1.      Can I be advised when the last traffic management study was done for Kurrajong Road?

2.      Since the expending of the link between Prestons and Carnes Hill the traffic has increased the right hand turn to Cowpasture Road, there is concerning traffic behaviour due to frustration at the right turn from Kurrajong Road to the Carnes Hill Shopping Centre. Also the intersection at the roundabout at Kurrajong Road and San Merino Drive is causing traffic to back up in both directions.

 

3.      Are there future plans to address this?


Heritage Properties in private ownership

 

4.      I believe there are several properties listed as local heritage value in the current LLEP can I be advised how many?

 

5.      What does Council do or can it do to retain these properties for the future?

 

6.      Is there any legal requirement for these properties to be retained for the future?

 

7.      When will an review be done of heritage properties in Liverpool and when will that report be presented to Council?

 

This Question With Notice (QWN) was submitted by the QWN deadline but was inadvertently omitted from the Council meeting Agenda. A response to these questions will be included in the 30 March 2016 business papers.


57

ITEM NO:      CONF 01

FILE NO:        031699.2016

SUBJECT:     Proposed acquisition of an easement for drainage purposes over Lots 119-122 DP 15226, 19-25 Riverview Road, Pleasure Point

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

 

1.    Approves the acquisition of an easement for drainage purposes over Lots 119-122 DP 15226, 19-25 Riverview Road, Pleasure Point, on the terms outlined in the confidential report;

 

2.    Keeps confidential the attachment supplied under separate cover containing the compensation amount payable pursuant to the provisions of Section 10A(2)(c) of the Local Government Act 1993 as this information would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business; and

 

3.    Authorises the relevant documentation necessary for the formalization of the easements to be signed under Power of Attorney, by Council's delegated officer.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Stanley              Seconded: Clr Hadid

 

That the recommendation be adopted.

 

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

 


59

Clr Hadchiti left the Chambers at 9.12pm.

 

ITEM NO:      CONF 02

FILE NO:        032164.2016

SUBJECT:     Key Sites Master Planning Steering Committee Minutes from Meeting held 2 February 2016

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

 

1.   Receives and notes the Minutes of the Key Sites Master Planning Steering Committee Meeting held on 2 February 2016;

 

2.   Adopts the recommendation put forward in this report; and

 

3.   Keeps confidential the minutes supplied in this report containing information pursuant to the provisions of Section 10A(2)(c) of the Local Government Act 1993 as it contains information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Hadid                 Seconded: Clr Balloot

 

That the recommendation be adopted.

 

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

 


65

Clr Hadchiti returned to the Chambers at 9.13pm.

 

ITEM NO:      CONF 03

FILE NO:        037752.2016

SUBJECT:     Tender ST2493 - Georges River Boardwalk and Pedestrian/Cycleway Bridge Design and Project Management

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council: 

 

1.    Accepts the Tender from BG&E Pty Limited for Tender ST2493 Georges River – Boardwalk and Bridge Design at the GST exclusive price of $450,104.97.

 

2.    Makes public its decision regarding Tender ST2493 Georges River – Boardwalk and Bridge Design.

 

3.    Notes that the Director Infrastructure and Environment will finalise all details and sign the Letter of Acceptance following publication of draft Minutes on Council website for the tender, giving it contractual effect, in accordance with delegated authority.

 

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

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Hadid                 Seconded: Clr Shelton

 

That the recommendation be adopted.

 

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

 

Vote for:                                Mayor Mannoun

                                                Clr Balloot

                                                Clr Hadchiti

                                                Clr Hadid

                                                Clr Harle

                                                Clr Mamone

                                                Clr Ristevski

                                                Clr Shelton

 

Vote against:                         Clr Karnib

                                                Clr Stanley

 

 


 

ITEM NO:      CONF 04

FILE NO:        039751.2016

SUBJECT:     ST2497– Provision of Stray Animal Pound and Emergency Capture Patrol

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council: 

 

1.    Declines to accept the Tender for Tender ST2497 Provision of Stray Animal Pound and Emergency Capture Patrol.

 

2.    In accordance with Section 178, Clause 3(e) of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005, enter into negotiations with Transpet Australia Pty Ltd regarding the schedule of rates.

 

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

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Shelton              Seconded: Clr Mamone

 

That Council defers this report to enable further discussions between Council officers and the current operator.

 

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

 

Councillors voted unanimously for this motion.

 

 


 

Clr Hadid left the Chambers at 9.20pm.

 

Clr Hadid returned to the Chambers at 9.23pm.

 

Clr Mamone left the Chambers at 9.36pm.

 

Clr Mamone returned to the Chambers at 9.45pm.

 

Clr Stanley left the Chambers at 9.45pm.

 

Clr Stanley returned to the Chambers at 9.49pm.

 

Clr Hadid left the Chambers at 9.54pm.

 

ITEM No: Mayor 04

SUBJECT: Asbestos Issue

 

That Council move into Closed Session in accordance with Section 10A(2)(a) of the Local Government Act 1993 to discuss the asbestos issue and also have a discussion in Open Session prior to going into Closed Session.

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Mayor Mannoun     Seconded: Clr Balloot

 

That the recommendation be adopted.

 

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

 

Mayor Mannoun requested that the CEO’s comments made in Open Session be transcribed and included in the Minutes of this meeting. This is provided below:

 

Chief Executive Officer Update on Asbestos Issue

 

“Thanks Mr Mayor.  There are a number of issues I can bring Council an update on. 

 

Enforceable Undertaking

I did mention last time that we are in the process of preparing an undertaking with the EPA.  That’s a formal document about how we are going to remediate the sites that have been identified. That document is getting close to completion now and we would expect that it would be with EPA for their consideration and determination by the end of this week.  That’s the document that is put together following the audit process we did last year and subsequently the EPA’s indication that they were fundamentally okay with most of the suggested ways that we had intended to remediate the identified sites.

 

Western Depot – Devonshire Road, Kemps Creek

You are aware that Council adopted a tender at the last Council meeting for the removal of that material plus other sites such as 12th Avenue, that we are in the process of doing final contract negotiations with the relevant contractor. We thought that it would start this week but there are a couple of small issues that needs to be resolved with the contractual negotiations. We would expect that the work will start within the next couple of weeks.                                                                                                                                          

 

 

Sligar Avenue – Heathcote Road, Hammondville

If you have been past Sligar Avenue, that’s been fenced off for quite some time. We are capping that site with a concrete path and that work is well under way and we expect that work will be completed and that site would be remediated by end of this month.

 

Stante Reserve – Hall Circuit, Middleton Grange

Stante Reserve which has been a significant matter of discussion tonight, that material has been removed. It’s been cleared by hygienist and air monitoring has indicated no air borne material at that location and that information is being provided to the Serbian Club.

 

Stroud Park

Stroud Park was an issue where there was a few small stock piles of illegally dumped material in the park. That caused some issues in terms of not being able to slash the park. So that’s now been done by specialised contractor. The illegal stock piles of dumped waste will be removed and we would expect going forward that Stroud Park would get clearance from hygienists and then fall back into normal routine for grass maintenance and mowing purposes.

 

Rickard Road and Newbridge Road

Rickard Road and Newbridge road - we’ve lumped them into two different locations. They are actually amalgam of different lots. They are called parks but they are actually consequence of the Moorebank Voluntary Acquisition Scheme. Houses were demolished many years ago. It would appear that the demolition methodologies were not the greatest.  There has been some asbestos material on the ground there. That also led to an issue where we could not mow because of asbestos on there. The grass has been cut mechanically, the material with the grass has been raked and disposed of as it was asbestos waste. The surface again will be checked by hygienists and subject to getting a clearance from the hygienist that area will go back into the maintenance program and available for our staff to mow. 

 

Casula High School

We’ve done some testing there and the testing has shown that there is some asbestos material on the fill that we put in there. It’s also shown that there was asbestos material on the site, prior to us putting the fill there. It is likely a consequence of demolition work by the school in the past. So we are at the moment, negotiating and discussing with the EPA the most appropriate remediation activities that we should undertake on that site.

 

BMX Track at Powell Park and the Liverpool Radio Rallycross Car Club at Iraking Avenue, Moorebank

Two issues have come up which I believe I’ve sent emails to all Councillors to alert them to.  There’s been facebook information out there, so it’s not private and unknown but the BMX Track at Powell Park and the Liverpool Radio Rallycross Car Club at Iraking Avenue, Moorebank, both of those sites are Council land but they are leased by the two groups.  Asbestos is being found in both those sites. The sites are being secured and no longer in use. A little bit more complicated by the standard site because we are having to negotiate with the EPA as we are the land owner about the remediation,  but also to discuss with the lessee as they are the group that imported the material that’s now - has been tested and seen to be contaminated. There will be a bit of work with negotiation with the lessees and EPA on what the most appropriate remediation approach is for that.

 

 

 

There’s also a site adjacent to Brickmakers Creek at Durrant Oval. There is an old deposit of asbestos, looks like it’s an old deposit of contaminated waste. We are finding these sites because we are physically going out looking for locations and double checking  to see what's around. Again this is a site where we will discuss with the EPA, it’s illegal dumping activity once again. But as the land owner, we have the responsibility to discuss with EPA the most appropriate remediation, likely removal and subsequent testing and air monitoring as part of that process.

 

Waste Management System

I have indicated that the last exercise is well underway and we might have a first draft for that sometime in July/August this year. That’s a document that we have discussed with EPA and are indicating to the EPA that we will be prepared to make that available to other Councils. There are no other Councils that have a waste management system that complies with the PO&E Act. So this would be ground breaking exercise for the Council and also has indicated that we would likely become a reference site for other Councils in the State on how to deal with the asbestos issue and what management systems you need to deal with those things.

 

So I think that’s pretty much we are at with remediation on the site and progress with EPA.”

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Mayor Mannoun     Seconded: Clr Hadchiti

 

Ask the USU to consider asking all Councils, in particular Wollongong Council, if they have tested their staff for exposure to asbestos.

 

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

 

Division called:

 

Vote for:                                 Mayor Mannoun

Clr Balloot

Clr Hadchiti

 

Vote against:                         Clr Harle

Clr Karnib 

Clr Mamone

Clr Ristevski

Clr Shelton

Clr Stanley

 

Council moved into Closed Session at 10.04pm. Clr Hadchiti, Clr Hadid and Clr Karnib were not in the Chambers when the meeting went into Closed Session.

 

Clr Karnib returned to the Chambers at 10.06pm.

 

Clr Hadchiti returned to the Chambers at 10.08pm.

 

Clr Hadid returned to the Chambers at 10.08pm.

 

Mayor Mannoun left the Chambers at 10.09pm, the Deputy Mayor, Clr Hadchiti took the Chair.

 

Mayor Mannoun returned to the Chambers at 10.11pm.

 

Clr Mamone left the Chambers at 10.18pm.

 

Clr Mamone returned to the Chambers at 10.21pm.

 

Council moved back into Open Session at 10.25pm.

 

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Mayor Mannoun     Seconded: Clr Hadchiti

 

That Council receive and note the information.

 

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


 

 

 

THE MEETING CLOSED AT 10.26pm.

 

 

<Signature>

Name: Ned Mannoun

Title:     Mayor

Date:     30 March 2016

I have authorised a stamp bearing my signature to be affixed to the pages of the Minutes of the Council Meeting held on  24 February 2016. I confirm that Council has adopted these Minutes as a true and accurate record of the meeting.

 


67

 

 

 

 

 

 

MINUTES OF THE Extraordinary Meeting

HELD ON 21 March 2016

 

 

PRESENT:

Mayor Ned Mannoun

Councillor Balloot

Councillor Hadchiti

Councillor Hadid

Councillor Harle

Councillor Karnib

Councillor Mamone

Councillor Ristevski

Councillor Shelton

Councillor Stanley

Councillor Waller

Mr Carl Wulff, Chief Executive Officer

Mr Gary Grantham, Chief Financial Officer / Director Corporate Services

Ms Toni Averay, Director Planning and Growth

Dr Eddie Jackson, Acting Director Community and Culture

Mr Wayne Carter, Director City Presentation

Mr Michael Cullen, Director Economic Development

Mr Raj Autar, Director Infrastructure and Environment

Ms Carole Todd, Director Business Improvement

Mr John Morgan, Director Property and Commercial Development

 

 

 

OPENING                              6.01pm

PRAYER                               The prayer of the Council was read by Pastor John Keane from West Hoxton Community Church.

APOLOGIES                         Nil

CONDOLENCES                Nil

Declarations of Interest

Nil


 

Notices of Motion

 

ITEM NO:      NOM 01

FILE NO:        073007.2016

SUBJECT:     Formalise the motion passed by Council on 15 March 2016

 

NOTICE OF MOTION

 

That Council:

 

1.   Formalise and publish the motion passed by Council in Closed Session on 15 March 2016, in the corrected form as follows:

 

That:

 

1.   Council accept in principle the offer of separation of employment as suggested by the Chief Executive Officer in his draft deed dated 15 March 2015 and delegate to Chief Financial Officer the authority to review and seek legal advice on this draft deed.

 

2.   Michael Cullen, Director Economic Development take on the role of Acting Chief Executive Officer from 29 March 2016 for a period of up to 12 months.

 

3.   Council request from the Office of Local Government advice on an alternate Chief Executive Officer. It is the Council’s intention that the newly elected Council select a permanent Chief Executive Officer.

 

4.   For avoidance of doubt, delegations of the Chief Executive Officer be transferred to the Acting Chief Executive Officer effective 29 March 2016.

 

5.   A deed consistent with this motion be provided to Council under confidential cover for endorsement as part of Council’s Extraordinary Meeting on 21 March 2016.

 

6.   Council keep the contents of the Deed of Release confidential under Section 10A(2)(a) of the Local Government Act 1993 as it deals with a staffing matter. 

 

2.   Confirm and adopt the Minutes of the Extraordinary Meeting of Council of 15 March 2016, pursuant to clause 21.5 of Council’s Code of Meeting Practice, subject to the correction above, and any other corrections as identified by Council.

 

Clr Ristevski arrived at the Chambers at 6.05pm.

 

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Stanley              Seconded: Clr Mamone                         

1.      Formalise and publish the motion passed by Council in Closed Session on 15 March 2016, in the corrected form as follows:

 

That:

 

1.      Council accept in principle the offer of separation of employment as suggested by the Chief Executive Officer in his draft deed dated 15 March 2015 and seek legal advice on this draft deed.

 

2.      Michael Cullen, Director Economic Development take on the role of Acting Chief Executive Officer from 29 March 2016 for a period of up to 12 months.

 

3.      Council request from the Office of Local Government advice on an alternate Chief Executive Officer. It is the Council’s intention that the newly elected Council select a permanent Chief Executive Officer.

 

4.      For avoidance of doubt, delegations of the Chief Executive Officer be transferred to the Acting Chief Executive Officer effective 29 March 2016.

 

5.      A deed consistent with this motion be provided to Council under confidential cover in due course.

 

6.      Council keep the contents of the Deed of Release confidential under Section 10A(2)(a) of the Local Government Act 1993 as it deals with a staffing matter. 

 

2.      Confirm and adopt the Minutes of the Extraordinary Meeting of Council of 15 March 2016, pursuant to clause 21.5 of Council’s Code of Meeting Practice, subject to the correction above, and with the following further amendments:

 

1.      That the Minute for NOM01 be amended to note that a motion, moved by the Mayor and seconded by Clr Balloot, and seeking an extension of speaking time for Clr Hadchiti on the item, was declared LOST.

 

2.      That the Minute for NOM01 be amended to note that, following the completion of the recess at 7:26pm, a rescission motion (relating to the motion to deal with item NOM 01 in Open Session) signed by Clrs Hadchiti, Mamone and Ristevski was put to the Council and was declared CARRIED.

 

3.      Delegate and authorise the Mayor to sign the Deed of Release with the Chief Executive Officer on the terms consistent with the draft deed dated 15 March 2016, provided to councillors under separate confidential cover.

 

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

 

Division Called:

 

Vote for:                                 Clr Harle

                                                Clr Karnib

                                                Clr Mamone

                                                Clr Ristevski

                                                Clr Shelton

                                                Clr Stanley

                                                Clr Waller

 

Vote Against:                        Mayor Mannoun

                                                Clr Balloot

                                                Clr Hadchiti

                                                Clr Hadid

 

  


 

The meeting closed at 6.13pm.

 

 

<Signature>

Name: Ned Mannoun

Title:     Mayor

Date:     30 March 2016

I have authorised a stamp bearing my signature to be affixed to the pages of the Minutes of the Council Meeting held on  21 March 2016. I confirm that Council has adopted these Minutes as a true and accurate record of the meeting


73

Ordinary Meeting 30 March 2016

Notices of Motion Of Rescission

 

NOMR 01

Rescission of CONF 03 - Proposed disposal of Lot 8 DP 246745, 150 Heathcote Road, Hammondville from Council meeting 3 February 2016

 

Strategic Direction

Leading Proactive Council

Position Council as an industry leader, delivering best practice and innovation

Key Policy

Property Strategy

File Ref

074677.2016

 

 

NOTICE OF MOTION OF RESCISSION

 

Two rescission motions were received to rescind the following resolution from the Council meeting 3 February 2016:

 

CONF 03 - Proposed disposal of Lot 8 DP 246745, 150 Heathcote Road, Hammondville

 

That Council:

 

1.    Agrees to sell Lot 8 DP 246745, 150 Heathcote Road, Hammondville, by placing the property on the open market for sale by way of public auction through a local real estate agent;

 

2.    Agrees to set the reserve price for the public auction as outlined in the confidential report;

 

3.    Authorises the Chief Executive Officer or his nominee to negotiate the sale of Lot 8 DP 246745, if not sold under the hammer, for a sale price of not less than five percent below the reserve price, on the day of auction, and execute the contract for sale to facilitate the exchange of contracts on the day of the auction;

 

4.    Agrees that if the property is not sold at auction it is immediately placed on the open market for sale by private treaty;

 

5.    Transfers the proceeds of sale into the General Property Reserve; and

 

6.    Keeps confidential the details supplied in the confidential report pursuant to the provisions of Section 10A(2)(c) of the Local Government Act 1993 as this information would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business.

 

7.    An amount of 20% of the proceeds go back into park upgrades.

 

8.    That the remaining 80% be used for community facilities.

 

The first rescission motion was received from Clrs Mamone, Ristevski, Shelton and Stanley and provided no alternate motion.

 

The second rescission motion was received from Mayor Mannoun and Clrs Hadchiti and Hadid and provided the following alternate motion:

 

That Council:

 

1.   Hold a public meeting in order to seek feedback from the community I nrelation to this park.

 

2.   Ensure that as a minimum the residents bounded by Nuwarra Road, Heathcote Road, Walder Avenue (to the Public School) & the M5 are sent invitations to attend the meeting.

 

3.   Notify Councillors by way of a Council report on the results of this meeting once it has taken place.  


75

Ordinary Meeting 30 March 2016

Notices of Motion

 

NOM 01

WSROC Delegates

 

Strategic Direction

Leading Proactive Council

Lead partnerships and collaboration with community, business and governments

Key Policy

Long-Term Financial Plan

File Ref

067959.2016

Author

Sabrina Mamone - Councillor

 

 

Background

 

WSROC's primary role is to represent the councils and communities of Western Sydney, as well as developing resource sharing and other co-operative projects between member councils.

 

There are approximately 14 Councils that are associated with WSROC and Liverpool has been a member of WSROC since 1973.

 

It costs Council an annual fee of $68,000 to hold two delegates on the WSROC Board currently held by Clr Tony Hadchiti and Clr Mazahr Hadid.

 

Given the recent changes the State Government is proposing with Council amalgamations and the effect those changes will bear on the community, It is important that the WSROC Board is represented by various.

 

 

NOTICE OF MOTION

 

That Council:

 

1.    Review the current WSROC delegates with the following actions to consider:

 

a) termination of current delegates

b) increasing the of delegates

c) calling on nominations for new delegates

 

2.    Writes to WSROC informing them of any changes to the delegates that Council has voted on

 

 

 

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER’S COMMENT

 

WSROC was established in 1973 and Liverpool City Council has been a member since this time.

 

There are 10 Councils that make up WSROC, each Council pays an annual membership of $68,000 plus GST.

 

Council can nominate a maximum of two (2) directors to the WSROC board.  The current Directors are Clr Tony Hadchiti (also President) and Clr Mazhar Hadid.  Appointment of Council’s Directors can be withdrawn in writing under the signature of the General Manager whom he or she represents and that member (Council) appoints a new Director in his or her stead.

 

Each year (October), WSROC holds an AGM where the delegated board members vote a president and other significant positions of the board.

 

The above information submitted for Council’s consideration.

 

CONSIDERATIONS

 

Economic and Financial

There are no economic and financial considerations.

Environmental and Sustainability

There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.

Social and Cultural

There are no social and cultural considerations.

Civic Leadership and Governance

Provide information about Council’s services, roles and decision making processes.

Deliver services that are customer focused.

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

Actively advocate for federal and state government support, funding and services.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

 

Nil


77

Ordinary Meeting 30 March 2016

Notices of Motion

 

NOM 02

Delegations Of The Mayor 

 

Strategic Direction

Proud Engaged City

Engage and consult with the community to enhance opportunities for communication and involvement

Key Policy

Communications Plan

File Ref

075222.2016

Author

Peter Ristevski - Councillor

 

 

Background

 

Various delegations of the Mayor were changed in 2012 for the first time.

 

Current policy states that Council resources must NOT be used for electioneering. Ratepayers money should not be used for this purpose. Being an election year the Mayors current self-promotion may be seen as electioneering.

 

This motion is to make sure Council is in line with current policy.

 

NOTICE OF MOTION

 

That Council:

 

1.   Remove the delegation of the Mayor as the spokesperson for Council. Media statements can only be made by the Mayor ONLY after a resolution of Council.

 

2.   Replace the Mayoral and Deputy Mayoral column in the newspapers with a Councillors column for Council and Community events with each Councillor providing a column on a rotational basis. 

 

3.   Replace the "Mayoral mobile office" with the "Mayor and Councillors mobile office" removing the words "Ned Mannoun".

 

4.   Replace the Mayors message in the monthly Newsletter with a Councillors message featuring a story from each Councillor.

 

5.   Change all Invitations to the community to be from "Liverpool City Councillors" removing the words "Mayor Ned Mannoun" including those made on social media, via random phone calls and/or surveys to households, letters to households, posters, formal invitations, radio commercials and any other means that Council invites the community to any event.

 

6.   Ensures the Mayor's photo is not used on Council invitations or any publication.

 

7.   Mayoral Minutes adhere to the OLG Practice Note 16 dated August 2009. An extract of the relevant clause of the practice note is included below:

 

2.7 Mayoral Minutes

 

2.7.1 What is a mayoral minute?

 

The mayor may put to a meeting (without notice) any matter which the council is allowed to deal with or which the council officially knows about (cl.243(1) of the Regulation). This would cover any council function under the Act or other legislation, or any matter that has been brought to the council’s attention, for example, by letter to the mayor or the general manager.

 

This power to make mayoral minutes recognises the special role of the mayor. A mayoral minute overrides all business on the agenda for the meeting, and the mayor may move that the minute be adopted without the motion being seconded.

 

Mayoral minutes should not be used to introduce, without notice, matters that are routine, not urgent, or need research or a lot of consideration by the councillors before coming to a decision. These types of matters would be better placed on the agenda, with the usual period of notice being given to the councillors.

 

2.7.2 Can mayoral minutes be introduced at council committee meetings?

 

A council committee consisting entirely of councillors must run its meetings as set out in the Meeting Code (s.360(3) of the Act). Each council committee can decide on its own procedure (cl.265 of the Regulation) and these could be adopted in the Meeting Code. This includes procedures on mayoral minutes.

 

2.7.3 Can a mayoral minute be amended?

 

While not addressed in the Regulation, mayoral minutes may be altered in practice. This could be covered in council’s Meeting Code. Changes to mayoral minutes should avoid making changes that will introduce, without notice, matters which need research or a lot of consideration by the councillors before coming to a decision.

 

 

 

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

Undertake communication practices with the community and stakeholders across a range of media.

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

 

Nil   


79

Ordinary Meeting 30 March 2016

Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel Report

 

IHAP 01

DA-713/2015 - Demolition of existing structures, subdivision to create (33) Torrens title lots and associated road and landscaping works at 25-45 Jardine Drive Edmondson Park

 

Strategic Direction

Liveable Safe City

Deliver an efficient planning system which embraces sustainable urban renewal and development

Key Policy

Urban Development Plans

File Ref

056599.2016

Report By

George Nehme - Senior Development Planner

Approved By

Toni Averay - Director Planning & Growth

 

Property

Lot 49 DP29317, 25-45 Jardine Drive Edmondson Park

Owner

CRO Developments Pty Ltd

Applicant

Lean Lackenby & Haywood Liverpool Pty Ltd

 

 

Executive Summary

 

Council has received and considered a development application DA-713/2015, proposing the demolition of existing structures, subdivision to create (33) Torrens title lots and associated road and landscaping works at Lot 49 in DP 29317 at 25-45 Jardine Drive Edmondson Park. This application was lodged on 31 July 2015.

 

This application was referred to the 22 February 2016 meeting of the Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel (IHAP) as the development seeks to vary Clause 4.1 of the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan (LLEP) 2008 which requires a minimum lot size of 450m². The proposed lot sizes for Lots 12 and 23 of the subject development are both 375m², representing a variation of 16.6%.

 

The IHAP recommendation was to approve the development application subject to conditions of consent as contained within the Council Officer’s IHAP report (See Attachment 1).

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council approves Development Application DA-713/2015 subject to the recommended conditions of consent contained within the Council Officer’s IHAP report.

 

Background

 

Council has received and considered a development application DA-713/2015, proposing the demolition of existing structures, subdivision to create (33) Torrens title lots and associated road and landscaping works at Lot 49 in DP 29317, 25-45 Jardine Drive Edmondson Park.

 

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

 

The application is accompanied by a written request to vary Clause 4.1 of the LLEP 2008 which prescribes the minimum lot size of 450m² for a portion of the development site. The proposed subdivision involves a variation to the minimum lot size stipulated under clause 4.1 for the development site. In the portion of the development site that requires a minimum lot size of 450m²; two lots being Lots 12 and 23 propose a lot size of 375m², representing a variation of 16.6%.

 

The Site

 

The site is identified as Lot 49 in DP 29317 and is located at 25-45 Jardine Drive Edmondson Park.  The site is an irregular shaped corner allotment located on a splayed intersection of Jardine Drive.  The subject site has an arc frontage to Jardine Drive. The development site has a southern boundary length of 157.31m and a western boundary length of 142.48m. The total site area equates to approximately 2 hectares. The site also has a slope from east to west of approximately 6m.

 

Currently, the subject site contains a single storey brick residence with associated outbuildings that are to be demolished as part of the subdivision.

 

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

Subject Site

Figure 1: Aerial image of the subject site.

 

The context of the area is predominately characterised by semi-rural/residential allotments that are undergoing a transition to low density residential allotments. To the north, south, east and west of the subject site are large semi-rural/residential allotments most of which contains single dwellings.

 

Figure 2: The site and surrounding locality.

 

 

 

 

 

details of the proposal

 

The proposed development consists of:

 

·    Demolition of existing structures

·    Subdivision to create (33) Torrens title lots and associated road and landscaping works.

 

The application is accompanied by a written request to vary Clause 4.1 of the LLEP 2008 which prescribes the minimum lot size of 450m² for a portion of the development site. In the portion of the development site that requires a minimum lot size of 450m²; two lots being Lots 12 and 23 propose a lot size of 375m², representing a variation of 16.6%.

 

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

 

Figure 3: Proposed Lot layout for subject site.

 

 

the issues

 

Variation to Clause 4.1 – Minimum Subdivision Lot Size

 

The key issue identified with respect to the proposal relates to the variation to the minimum subdivision lot size control under clause 4.1 of the LLEP 2008. The extent of the variation is 16.6%

 

Clause 4.1 of the LLEP 2008 requires minimum subdivision lot sizes to be achieved on the majority of sites that are to be subdivided within the Liverpool Local Government Area (LGA). With regards to the subject site, two separate subdivision lot size controls apply to the site. A minimum subdivision lot size of 300m² applies to the southern portion of the site along the southern boundary and a minimum subdivision lot size of 450m² applies to the remainder of the allotment. The different lot size controls that affect the site are detailed in figure 4.

 

  Figure 4: Minimum Lot Size Requirement – LLEP 2008

 

Proposed Lots 12 and 23 fail to comply with the minimum subdivision lot size required under clause 4.1. In accordance with clause 4.1 the northern portion of the subject site requires a minimum lot size of 450m². The proposed lot sizes for Lots 12 and 23 within the minimum 450sqm lot size area are 375m², representing a variation of 16.6% to the development standard. The lots that do not comply with Clause 4.1 are shown in Figure 5 below.

 

 Figure 5: Lots that do not comply with clause

 

Consequently, pursuant to Clause 4.6 of the LLEP 2008 the applicant has submitted a written request seeking a variation to the minimum subdivision lot size control, as prescribed by clause 4.1.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Clause 4.6 (3) prescribes:

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

·    Proposed lots 12 and 23 have an area of 375m², but do not satisfy the mapped subdivision lot size requirements of 450m². The proposed lots are generally compliant with the subdivision controls under the LDCP 2008 in respect to lot widths and general configurations which enable each lot to comfortably accommodate a future low density detached dwelling in accordance with the objectives of the R1 General Residential Zone.

·    The proposed lots directly adjoin mapped 300m² lot sizes to the immediate south and west and the proposed lot sizes of 375m² provide an appropriate transition between 300m² lot sizes and larger 450m² lot sizes.

·    The proposed lots are generally rectangular in configuration and suitably shaped to accommodate future dwellings.

·    The topography of the site is flat and suitable to accommodate the proposed smaller lots.

 

The following comments are offered in response to the variation sought to Clause 4.1:

 

·    The proposal is compliant with the minimum dwelling density required for the site. A total of 31 lots are required and 33 lots are proposed.

·    The proposed non-compliant lots are located directly on the transition boundary between the 300sqm lot size area and the 450sqm lot size area. The proposed lots lend itself to an appropriate transition between the two lot size and creates diversity within the streetscape.

·    The non-compliant lot sizes are able to accommodate a dwelling house.

·    The proposal remains consistent with the objectives of the R1 General Residential Zone.

 

Having regard to the above, it is considered that strict compliance with Clause 4.1 Minimum subdivision lot size is unreasonable and unnecessary in this instance.

 

Independent Hearing and assessment panel

 

At their meeting on 22 February 2016, IHAP made the following recommendation:

 

The Panel recommends that council grant development consent to DA-713/2015 subject to conditions outlined in the council officer’s report.

 

Conclusion

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CONSIDERATIONS

 

Economic and Financial

Enhance the environmental performance of buildings and homes.

Environmental and Sustainability

Enhance the environmental performance of buildings and homes.


Social and Cultural

Regulate for a mix of housing types that responds to different population groups such as young families and older people.


Civic Leadership and Governance

There are no civic leadership and governance considerations.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

 

1.         Applicant and Land Owner Details DA-713/2015 Council Report AttachmentView

2.         IHAP ReportView (Under separate cover)

3.         IHAP Recommendation View (Under separate cover)  


87

IHAP 01

DA-713/2015 - Demolition of existing structures, subdivision to create (33) Torrens title lots and associated road and landscaping works at 25-45 Jardine Drive Edmondson Park

Attachment 1

Applicant and Land Owner Details DA-713/2015 Council Report Attachment

 


97

Ordinary Meeting 30 March 2016

Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel Report

 

IHAP 02

1166/2014 - Demolition of existing dwellings and outbuildings; removal of trees on site; erection of two residential flat buildings containing a total of 61 units; associated basement parking; Torrens title subdivision to create three lots; road construction; and dedication of road at 240 Croatia Avenue, Edmondson Park.

 

Strategic Direction

Liveable Safe City

Create clean and attractive public places for people to engage and connect

Key Policy

Urban Development Plans

File Ref

052803.2016

Report By

Marcus Jennejohn - Senior Development Planner

Approved By

Toni Averay - Director Planning & Growth

 

 

Property

Lot 823 DP 228850

240 Croatia Avenue

Edmondson Park

Owner

Mr G Reynolds & Mrs M Reynolds

Applicant

Mr G Reynolds & Mrs M Reynolds

 

Executive Summary

 

Council has received and considered a development application DA-1166/2014, proposing the construction of two residential flat buildings containing a total of 61 units at 240 Croatia Avenue, Edmondson Park. The application was lodged on 22 December 2014.

 

The application was referred to the 22 February 2016 meeting of the Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel (IHAP) as the development seeks to vary Clause 4.4 of the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan (LLEP) 2008, which requires a maximum floor space ratio (FSR) of 1.0:1. The development involves the creation of two residential flat buildings and the proposed FSR on Lot 2 is 1.39:1, representing a variation of 39% to the development standard.

 

The development also seeks to vary Clause 4.3 of LLEP 2008, which requires a maximum building height of 15m. The development involves the creation of two residential flat buildings and the proposed building height on Lot 2 is 16.1m, representing a variation of 7% to the development standard.

 

The IHAP recommendation was to approve the development application subject to conditions of consent as contained within the Council Officer’s IHAP report (see Attachment 2).

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council approves Development Application DA-1166/2014 subject to Recommended Conditions of Consent contained within the Council Officer’s report.

 

 

Background

 

Council has received and considered a development application DA-1166/2014, proposing

the construction of two residential flat buildings containing a total of 61 units at 240 Croatia Avenue, Edmondson Park.

 

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

 

The application is accompanied by a written request to vary Clauses 4.4 of the LLEP 2008 which prescribes the maximum FSR. An FSR of 1.0:1 applies to the site. The development involves the creation of two residential flat buildings and the proposed FSR on Lot 2 is 1.39:1, representing a variation of 39% to the development standard.

 

The application is accompanied by a written request to vary Clauses 4.3 of the LLEP 2008 which prescribes the maximum building height. A maximum building height of 15m applies to the site. The development involves the creation of two residential flat buildings and the proposed building height on Lot 2 is 16.1m, representing a variation of 7% to the development standard.

 

The Site

 

The site is identified as Lot 823 in DP 1193391 and is located at 240 Croatia Avenue, Edmondson Park. The site is a regular shaped allotment located on the west side of Croatia Avenue, approximately 75m south of Dalmatia Avenue. It has a frontage to Croatia Avenue and Passendale Road of approximately 82m and a depth of approximately 71m. The combined total site area is approximately 6,157m2. The site straddles a proposed service laneway known as Robertson Lane which is also proposed to be dedicated as part of the proposed development including a new east west road on its northern boundary.

 

The subject site is currently occupied by two detached residential dwellings. The site is approximately 825m north of the recently constructed Edmondson Park Railway Station and approximately 490m north of the Edmondson Park Town Centre.

 

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

 

Figure 1: Aerial image of the subject site

 

The site is situated within an existing rural area, which has been rezoned for urban development and forms part of the South Western Sydney Growth Centre. The site is adjoined in all directions by land which is zoned R1 - General Residential under LLEP 2008, notwithstanding Croatia Avenue (Bernera Road) which is zoned SP2 (Local Road). The site is situated within the “Urban Character Area” which is principally a dense urban area, comprising predominantly residential land uses and which provides a transition between the town centre and medium and low-density residential areas.

 

details of the proposal

 

The proposed development seeks consent for the demolition of existing dwellings and the construction of two residential flat buildings, a 5 storey and 4 storey component, comprising a total of 61 apartments. The proposal includes the construction of 2 levels of basement with a total of 116 car spaces and associated earthworks and roadworks. The proposal was referred to Endeavour Energy. General Terms of Approval have been issued by Endeavour Energy.

 

The application is accompanied by a written request, pursuant to Clause 4.6 of the LLEP 2008, to vary Clauses 4.4 of the LLEP 2008, which prescribes the maximum FSR.

 

The application is also accompanied by a written request, pursuant to Clause 4.6 of the LLEP 2008, to vary Clauses 4.3 of the LLEP 2008, which prescribes the maximum building height.

 

An extract of the proposed subdivision plan is provided in Figure 2 below. 

 

Figure 2: Proposed lot layout for subject site

 

the issues

 

Variation to Clause 4.4 – Maximum floor space ratio

 

The key issue identified with respect to the proposal relates to the variation to the FSR required by Clause 4.4 of the LLEP 2008.

 

The residential flat building on proposed Lot 2 fails to comply with Clause 4.4, which states

(2)  The maximum floor space ratio for a building on any land is not to exceed the floor space ratio shown for the land on the Floor Space Ratio Map.

 

Proposed Lot 2 seeks an FSR of 1.39:1, representing a variation of 39% (see Figure 3 below).

 

Figure 3: Ground floor plan of Lot 2 (residential flat building)

 

Consequently, the applicant has submitted a written request seeking a variation to the maximum FSR development standard as prescribed by Clause 4.4 LLEP 2008.

 

The objectives of Clause 4.6 of the LLEP 2008 are as follows:

 

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

 

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

 

Clause 4.6 (3) prescribes:

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

·    The proposed additional yield is unlikely to result in any demonstrable difference in terms of infrastructure capacity.

·    The low level of additional traffic generation would not have any perceptible impacts on network efficiency.

·    The extent of the non-compliance will not have any demonstrable impacts on infrastructure capacity or traffic generation.

·    The apparent bulk and scale of the development is broken up by Robertson Lane.

·    The proposed development does not result in an unreasonable bulk or development density. The proposed development is generally consistent with the bulk and density, which could have been achieved under an alternative development to the site.

·    The proposed FSR does represent an "appropriate correlation" between site area and development extent if the 1641m² reservation of Robertson Lane and the east west road is not excluded from the calculation of site area.

·    The proposed development does represent an excellent design outcome for which the proposed level of articulation and modulation is appropriate and also not limited or constricted as a consequence of the proposed FSR noncompliance.

The comprehensive variation response is available for review in the attached IHAP report.

 

The following comments are offered in response to the variation sought to Clause 4.4:

 

·    The design provided is a result of input from a design review panel (DRP) review and City Architect review. The form of the current proposal is in response to comments provided by Council’s DEP and City Architect.

·    The building form supports the future desired character of a boulevard with higher density residential development.

·    The southern interface of each building presents as the narrowest elevation to be sympathetic to the lower density development to the south.

·    The buildings have been designed with colours and finishes that will be suitable and appropriate and act to enhance the interface to the south.

 

Having regard to the above, it is considered that strict compliance with Clause 4.4 Floor space ratio is unreasonable and unnecessary in this instance, and there are sufficient environmental grounds to justify contravening the standard.

 


 

Variation to Clause 4.3 – Height of Buildings

 

The secondary issue identified with respect to the proposal relates to the variation to the maximum building height required by Clause 4.3 of the LLEP 2008.

 

The residential flat building on proposed Lot 2 fails to comply with Clause 4.3, which states:

 

(2)  The height of a building on any land is not to exceed the maximum height shown for the land on the Height of Buildings Map.

 

The residential flat building on Lot 2 proposes a maximum height of 16.1m, representing a variation of 7%. (see Figure 4 below).

 

Figure 4: Ground floor plan of Lot 2 (residential flat building)

 

Consequently, the applicant has submitted a written request seeking a variation to the minimum lot width control as prescribed by Clause 7.13(4) LLEP 2008.

 

The objectives of Clause 4.6 of the LLEP 2008 are as follows:

 

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

 

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

 

Clause 4.6 (3) prescribes:

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

·    Alternative design would be considered to be inferior in terms of architectural presentation of the roof and would also add to building construction costs and therefore impart negative housing affordability outcomes.

·    The proposal will provide a positive contribution to the establishment of the height density spine along Bernera Road (Croatia Avenue).

·    The height of the proposed building is consistent with the long term planned and design future building heights for this locality.

·    The proposed development delivers a high quality urban form and this is at least in part directly facilitated by the proposed variation to maximum building height.

·    The top parapet element of the design provides visual solidity to the roof of the building and assists in defining the top element of the design. Additionally, the staggered alignment of the roof line adds visual interest to the skyline and assists in breaking up the apparent bulk and scale of the proposed buildings.

·    Urban form within the precinct is to provide a transition between building heights within the top tier town centre precinct, down to surrounding medium and low-density residential precincts. The proposed development will continue to positively respond to this objective, notwithstanding the minor variation in maximum building height.

·    Reducing the height would:

derogate from the architectural integrity of the proposed buildings and deliver inferior streetscape outcomes.

translate to more expensive slab construction costs and therefore unnecessarily add to the cost of housing with resultant negative impacts on housing affordability.

The following comments are offered in response to the variation sought to Clause 4.3:

 

·    The design provided is a result of input from a design review panel (DRP) review and City Architect review. The form of the current proposal is in response to comments provided by Council and addresses context and appropriate design which was encouraged by Council.

·    Insisting on strict compliance with the height controls would result in an inferior built form in terms of architectural presentation.

·    The proposal does not result in a loss of privacy to adjoin lower scale development.

·    The higher of the two buildings (Lot 2) faces Croatia (Bernera) Road with the proposed building to the west (Lot 1) having a reduced height to address the lower density development across Passendaele Road. 

·    The varying heights help address the ‘uniformity of building forms and facades’ concern raised by the DRP.

 

Having regard to the above, it is considered that strict compliance with Clause 4.3 height of buildings is unreasonable and unnecessary in this instance and the request to vary the development standard is supported in the circumstances of this application.

 

Independent Hearing and assessment panel

 

At their meeting on 22 February 2016, IHAP made the following recommendation:

 

§     The panel recommends that council grant development consent to DA-1166/2014 subject to the conditions recommended by Council Officers.”

 

Specifically, the above recommendation was supported by the following comments:

 

§     “The panel is supportive of the design outcome of higher density development adjacent to the transport corridor stepping down to 4 storey development toward the lower density to the east of the development site.

§      

The panel notes that the FSR is compliant with LLEP 2008 if the area of the proposed road dedication is taken into account in the calculation of site area and that the exceedance of FSR occurs only as a result of the creation of separate allotments on either side of the proposed lane.”

 

The recommended conditions of consent are attached.

 

Conclusion

 

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

 

CONSIDERATIONS

 

Economic and Financial

Enhance the environmental performance of buildings and homes.

Environmental and Sustainability

Enhance the environmental performance of buildings and homes.


Social and Cultural

Regulate for a mix of housing types that responds to different population groups such as young families and older people.


Civic Leadership and Governance

There are no civic leadership and governance considerations.



ATTACHMENTS

 

1.         IHAP ReportView (Under separate cover)

2.         IHAP RecommendationsView (Under separate cover)  


97

Ordinary Meeting 30 March 2016

Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel Report

 

IHAP 03

DA-698/2015 - Demolition of existing structures, construction of a new service station, food & drinks premises, commercial premises & signage at 629-631 Hume Highway, Casula

 

Strategic Direction

Liveable Safe City

Deliver an efficient planning system which embraces sustainable urban renewal and development

Key Policy

Urban Development Plans

File Ref

055297.2016

Report By

Jonathan Cleary - Senior Development Planner

Approved By

Toni Averay - Director Planning & Growth

 

 

 Property

LOT 30 DP 3112, LOT 31 DP 3112

629-631 Hume Highway, Casula NSW 2170

Owner

ACKERMAN ROTH PTY LTD

Applicant

ACKERMAN ROTH PTY LTD

 

Executive Summary

 

Council has received and considered a development application DA-698/2015 for the proposed demolition of existing structures and the construction of a service station, a food and drink premises, a detached retail premises, associated carparking, and business identification signage at 629-631 Hume Highway, Casula.

 

This application was referred to the 22 February 2016 meeting of the Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel (IHAP) as the development seeks to vary Clause 7.15 of the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan (LLEP) 2008 which requires a minimum building street frontage of 90 metres in the B6 Enterprise Corridor zone.  The site has a frontage of 71.205 metres to Hume Highway.  This represents variation of 20.9% for the site.

 

The IHAP recommendation was to:

·    provide additional information relating to the pre and post development levels along either side of the eastern and northern boundaries;

·    amend the landscape plan that:

properly reflects existing and proposed conditions, and better incorporates the existing mature vegetation along the western boundary; and

increases the width of landscaping to a minimum of 1 metre clear of all structures such as kerbs, retaining walls etc. along the northern and eastern boundary;

·    provide details of the proposed safety measures to prevent vehicles from crashing through the northern boundary into the childcare centre; and

·    investigate potential measures designed to mitigate the visual impact of the acoustic barrier/retaining wall along the eastern boundary.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council approves DA-698/2015 subject to the amended recommended conditions of consent (See Attachment 4)

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

Council has received and considered a development application DA-192/2015 for the proposed demolition of existing structures and the construction of a service station, a food and drink premises, a detached retail premises, associated carparking, and business identification signage at 629-631 Hume Highway, Casula.

 

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

 

The application is accompanied by a written request to vary Clause 7.15 of the LLEP 2008 which prescribes the minimum building street frontage in Zone B6.  A minimum street frontage of 90 metres applies to the site.  The site has an existing frontage of 71.205 metres to Hume Highway, Casula representing an existing non-compliance with Clause 7.15 of 20.9%.

 

The Site

 

The subject site is legally described as Lots 30 and 31 in DP 3112 and is located at 629-631 Hume Highway, Casula.  The site has a frontage of approximately 71 metres to Hume Highway with a site area of 4,137m2. 

 

The property contains three detached structures, a man-made pond, and an in-ground swimming pool.

 

The site is located approximately 1.3km east of the Hume Highway/Hume Motorway intersection, and approximately 2.5 km south-west of the Hume Highway/M5 Motorway intersection.

 

The aerial photographs illustrated below in Figure 1 provides a contextual overview of the immediate area.

 

Figure 1 - Site and locality map

details of the proposal

 

The application seeks approval for the following:

·    Demolition of the existing unused structures on site;

·    Construction of a service centre;

·    An attached food and drinks premises with drive-through facility;

·    Construction of a detached retail premises (use is not specified at this stage);

·    A total of 46 car parking spaces including 2 accessible spaces;

·    Business identification signage;

·    Two vehicle crossings to the Hume Highway; and

·    Landscaping works.

 

The service centre would include 6 bowsers, fuel canopy, underground fuel tanks, and a convenience store operated by Shell and Coles Express with a total Gross Floor Area of 200m2.

 

The food and drinks premises, operated by Hungry Jacks, would have a Gross Floor Area of 210m2.  The detached retail premises would have Gross Floor Area of 425m2.  The application does not indicate an occupier for the retail premises.  A separate application would be required for the use of the retail premises.

 

The proposed hours of operation for the service centre and the food and drinks premises are 24 hours a day, Monday to Sunday.

 

The site plan of the proposal is shown below in Figure 2.

 

Figure 2 – Proposed Site Plan

 

the issues

 

Variation to Clause 7.14 – Minimum building street frontage

 

Clause 7.15(2) of LLEP 2008 identifies a site on which any building is to be erected shall have at least one street frontage to a classified road of at least 90 metres in B6 Enterprise Corridor zone.  The subject site has a street frontage of 71.205m, which is a variation of 18.795m or 20.9%.

 

The applicant has submitted a written request seeking variation to the minimum street frontage prescribed by Clause 7.15, as required by Clause 4.6 of the LLEP 2008.

 

The objectives of Clause 4.6 are as follows:

 

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

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

 

Clause 4.6(3) prescribes:

 

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

 

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

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

 

The departure from the minimum street frontage development standard is supported by a written request from the applicant under Clause 4.6 of LLEP 2008 as follows:

 

It is considered that strict compliance with the development standard is unreasonable and unattainable in this particular case given the unique location and setting of the site. The site comprises two allotments of land which shall be consolidated under this application. The land to the west comprises a consolidated allotment supporting a large, established commercial complex. The site to the east comprises narrow, single allotments which extend between Pine Road and Hume Highway and these allotments support older style multi-dwelling unit developments utilising the Pine Road access in the north. There is therefore no opportunity for the site to amalgamate further in order to strictly comply with clause 7.15 of the LEP requiring 90m frontage.

 

Despite the LEP variation, the proposal meets the relevant objectives of both the B6 zone and the objectives of Clause 7.15 as detailed below:

 

·    The proposed vehicular access arrangements for the site are safe and efficient and compliant with Council’s DCP 2008 requirements and relevant Australian Standards.

·    The vehicular access design provides separated entry and exit points for the site and incorporates suitable setback from side boundaries to ensure adequate sight lines and minimal impact on the classified road.

·    The site allows suitable business exposure without dominating the streetscape or complicating the development pattern along Hume Highway. Adequate setbacks have been incorporated within the site and there is suitable building separation within the development to minimise the bulk and scale of the development.

 

The objectives of the B6 Zone are met by the proposal as follows:

 

·    The proposal involves a mix of compatible uses within the site that are compatible with the location on a classified road.

·    The proposal provides a range of employment opportunities within the site for the three land uses.

 

The proposed variation will continue to meet the objectives of the relevant clauses, as outlined above and results in no unreasonable adverse environmental planning outcome as a result of the proposed departure. The development maintains consistency with the objectives for the B6 Enterprise Corridor Zone and presents high quality development that is compatible with the amenity and character of the locality and well suited to the classified road location.

 

Having regard to the above, it is considered that strict compliance with Clause 7.15 is unnecessary and unreasonable in this case, and that based on the circumstances of this proposal, it is reasonable to allow flexibility in the application of smaller street frontage. There are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the development standard.

 

Independent Hearing and assessment panel

 

At their meeting on 22 February 2016, IHAP made the following recommendation:

 

“The panel considers that the application as presently before council is not in a form that the panel can properly determine. The panel recommends that the application be deferred so that council officers can request:

·    additional information relating to the pre and post development levels along either side of the eastern and northern boundaries,

·    an amended landscape plan that:

properly reflects existing and proposed conditions, and better incorporates the existing mature vegetation along the western boundary

increases the width of landscaping to a minimum 1 metre clear of all structures such as kerbs, retaining walls etc. along the northern and eastern boundary

·    details of the proposed safety measures to prevent vehicles from crashing through the northern boundary into the childcare centre

·    potential measures designed to mitigate the visual impact of the acoustic barrier/retaining wall along the eastern boundary.

 

The IHAP recommendations have been addressed by the applicant and the following modifications have been made:

 

a)   An amended landscape plan had identified the retention of vegetation adjacent to the western boundary on amended plans. 

Comment:

 

Amended plans were received indicating the retention of the trees adjacent to the western boundary.  Conditions of consent are recommended for these trees to be retained and tree protection measures be installed to minimise damage during construction.

 

To offset the removal of the two Spotted Gums at the front of the site, a condition of consent is recommended that 3 native species be replanted within the front landscaped area adjacent to the vehicle entrance.  The development is limited in the space available for replacement planting that is free of significant constraints.

 

b)   Increased width of landscaping adjacent to the western and northern elevations, as shown on the amended plans.

Comment:

 

Amendments have addressed the comments made by the IHAP.

 

c)   A vehicle guard rail adjacent to the drive through entrance to minimise the potential for vehicles to crash through the northern boundary to the child care centre has been included, as indicated on the amended plans.

Comment:

 

Amendments have addressed the comments made by the IHAP.

 

d)   Utilised Perspex within the top 1 metre of the acoustic barrier at a 45 degree angle.

Comment:

 

The inclusion of the angled portion of the acoustic barrier would reduce the height of the barrier by 300mm.

 

The tallest portion of the acoustic barrier would be adjacent to the entrance to the drive through at the north-eastern corner of the site.  An acoustic engineer has indicated that a cantilevered acoustic barrier “does not break the line of sight that is required to isolate drive through noise emissions from the adjacent receivers”.  Therefore, the acoustic barrier would be a total vertical height of 3.5 metres high (2 metres being solid and 1.5 metres being transparent Perspex).  When viewed the adjacent dwellings, the difference in ground levels would result in a solid barrier approximately 3 metres high, with an additional 1.5 metres of transparent material.

 

The modified designs have attempted to reduce the bulk and scale of the acoustic barrier when seen from the adjacent residential property by the inclusion of transparent material and a cantilevered design.  It is considered that the proposal has addressed the IHAP recommendation and is acceptable.

 

Conclusion

 

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

 

CONSIDERATIONS

 

Economic and Financial

Further develop a commercial centre that accommodates a variety of employment opportunities.

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

2.         IHAP ReportView (Under separate cover)

3.         IHAP Recommendation for DA-698/2015View

4.         Amended Recommended Conditions of Consent View (Under separate cover)  


107

IHAP 03

DA-698/2015 - Demolition of existing structures, construction of a new service station, food & drinks premises, commercial premises & signage at 629-631 Hume Highway, Casula

Attachment 3

IHAP Recommendation for DA-698/2015

 


 


115

Ordinary Meeting 30 March 2016

Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel Report

 

IHAP 04

DA-192/2015 - Demolition of existing structures and construction of a two storey commercial building and associated carparking, use as a health services facility, and business identification signage at No. 25 Bathurst Street, Liverpool

 

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

051781.2016

Report By

Jonathan Cleary - Senior Development Planner

Approved By

Toni Averay - Director Planning & Growth

 

 

Property

25 Bathurst Street, Liverpool NSW 2170

Owner

MR D G Johnson

Applicant

Mr D G Johnson

 

Executive Summary

 

Council has received and considered a development application DA-192/2015, proposing the demolition of existing structures and the construction of a two storey commercial building and associated carparking, use as a health services facility, and business identification signage.  This application was lodged on 16 March 2015.

 

This application was referred to the 22 February 2016 meeting of the Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel (IHAP) as the development seeks to vary Clause 7.14 of the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan (LLEP) 2008 which requires a minimum building street frontage of 24 metres for sites within the B4 Mixed Use zone.  The site has a frontage of 16.24 metres to Bathurst Street.  This represents variation of 32.3% for the site.

 

The IHAP recommendation was to:

(a)  Investigate the consolidation of the site with the adjoining carwash at No. 23 Bathurst Street, Liverpool;

(b)  Redesign the building to a form that would reflect its town centre location;

(c)  Amend the landscape plan to include a planting buffer at the front boundary so as to make a positive contribution to the streetscape; and

(d)  Redesign the front fence to acknowledge its town centre location (see Attachment 2).

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council approves DA-192/2015 subject to the amended recommended conditions of consent (See Attachment 3).

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

Council has received and considered a development application DA-192/2015, proposing the demolition of existing structures and construction of a two storey commercial building and associated carparking, the use as a health services facility, and business identification signage.

 

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

 

The application is accompanied by a written request to vary Clause 7.14 of the LLEP 2008 which prescribes the minimum building street frontage in Zone B4.  A minimum street frontage of 24 metres applies to the site.  The site has an existing frontage of 15.2 metres to Bathurst Street, Liverpool representing an existing non-compliance with Clause 7.14 of 32.3%.

 

The Site

 

The subject site is legally described as Lot B DP 385078 and Lot 9 DP 18255 and is located at 25 Bathurst Street, Liverpool. The site is regular in shape, with a frontage of approximately 15.2m to Bathurst Street with site area of approximately 689.2m2

 

The property contains an existing single storey dwelling and timber awning. The property is affected by a sewer line located to the rear of the property. The sewer line will need to be encased to Sydney Water requirements.

 

In close proximity to the subject property to the northeast is the Liverpool Town Centre Shopping Centre (Westfield). The Liverpool Council Administration Building, Library and other community facilities are also located in the Centre, including Liverpool Hospital.

 

The aerial photograph is illustrated below in Figure 1, which provides a contextual overview of the immediate area.

 

 

Figure 1 - Site and locality map

The Liverpool Town Centre provides a mixture of land uses, as described above, but also residential development on the fringe of the centre in the form of residential flat buildings (medium density) and single dwelling houses. These dwellings have been identified for higher density development in the form of apartments, including the subject site. Some of these dwellings are currently used for similar medical practices. A carpark is located directly opposite the site.

 

details of the proposal

 

The application seeks approval for demolition of the existing dwelling and construction of a two storey commercial building and usage as a health care facility, associated carparking and business identification signage. The tree at the rear within the adjoining property may require to be lopped. The proposal provides for ten (10) carparking spaces, including one accessible space.

 

The ground floor of the building will contain three (3) consultation/surgery rooms, a reception, workstation, an assessment room, a workshop area/room and amenities (total 222.23m2). The first floor contains an open workstation area (total 199.78m2). Total floor area of the building is 432.34m2. The proposal also involves the erection of a sign on the proposed 2.1m high front fence.

 

The proposed hours of operation are from 8am to 6pm Monday to Saturday.

 

The site plan of the proposal is shown below in Figure 2.

Figure 2: Proposed site plan

the issues

 

Variation to Clause 7.14 – Minimum building street frontage

 

Clause 7.14(2)(a) of LLEP 2008 identifies a site on which any building is to be erected shall have at least one street frontage to a public street (excluding service lanes) of at least 24 metres in B4 Mixed Use zone.  The subject site has a street frontage of 16.24m, which is a variation of 7.76m or 32.3%.

 

The applicant has submitted a written request seeking variation to the minimum street frontage prescribed by Clause 7.14, as required by Clause 4.6 of the LLEP 2008.

 

The objectives of Clause 4.6 are as follows:

 

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

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

 

Clause 4.6(3) prescribes:

 

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

 

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

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

 

The departure from the minimum street frontage development standard is supported by a written request from the applicant under Clause 4.6 of LLEP 2008 as follows:

 

It is considered that the public interest is better served as a consequence of the variation of the development standards of LLEP 2008 due to the constraints imposed by the development on the adjoining properties to the north and south, which have been developed. In addition, the subject property is an isolated property and cannot be amalgamated with other properties to meet the standards of Clause 7.14. Clearly the public interest is providing a health care facility for the growing population close to all amenities and services that are available in Liverpool.

 

Compliance with the development standard under Clause 7.14 is both unreasonable and unnecessary in this case given that the characteristics of the site and the circumstances of the proposed development having regard to the existing street frontage. The potential site development is in keeping with the existing character and the form of development that has occurred in the immediate area having regard to the zone applicable to the site and the adjoining sites. The built form desired by Council and established within the “Desired Future Character Statement” is evident in existing development and planned development.

The proposed development is considered reasonable for the following reasons:

 

·    The proposed development has been carefully designed to minimise adverse amenity impacts on adjoining properties. Careful site responsive design has ensured that the technical non-compliance with the street frontage does not give rise to significant amenity impacts for the immediate locality;

·    As discussed above, the proposed development is consistent with the objectives of Clause 7.14 of LLEP 2008; and

·    The site is highly constrained by existing development and if a reduction in the frontage is not granted, then the site has no development potential having regard to the zoning of the land.

 

In addition, the proposed streetscape when viewed from various locations will provide variety and interest. What is achieved by permitting the proposed development is a streetscape that has various architectural elements.

 

There will also be a variety of building materials used on the proposed building to complement the future streetscape and to provide active street fronts along Bathurst Street, which forms an integral component of the Liverpool Town Centre.

 

In our opinion, the best planning practice should recognise these constraints and respond to the opportunity to value add to this infill development by going beyond basic numerical compliance checking, and consider broader structural and urban design frameworks. On this basis, the opportunity is available to consider variations through the proposed building’s siting, and as stated above, to comply with clause 7.14.

 

Although the proposed development does not adhere to strict compliance to the minimum street frontage, it still satisfies the objectives of the Clause.  The following comments are provided in relation to how the proposed development satisfies the objectives of Clause 7.14:

 

(a)        To ensure that visually buildings have an appropriate overall horizontal proportion compared to their vertical proportions;

 

The proposed development achieves a scale and density of development that creates well-proportioned vertical and horizontal facades.

 

(b)        To ensure that vehicular access is reasonably spaced and separated along roads and lanes;

 

The proposed development provides adequate vehicular access and the crossing is reasonably separated along the street.  

 

(c)        To provide appropriate dimensions for the design of car parking levels;

 

Due to the site frontage the carparking is provided at ground level. Therefore, this objective does not strictly apply.

 

(d)        To encourage larger development of larger office, business, residential and mixed use buildings provided for under this plan.

 

The proposed development achieves a scale and density of development suitable for the site.

 

Having regard to the above, it is considered that strict compliance with Clause 7.14 minimum street frontage is unnecessary and unreasonable in this case, and that based on the circumstances of this proposal, it is reasonable to allow flexibility in the application of smaller street frontage. There are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the development standard.

 

Independent Hearing and assessment panel

 

At their meeting on 22 February 2016, IHAP made the following recommendation:

 

The panel recommends that council defer determination of DA-192/2015 so that council officers can request the additional information referred to in the minutes and for that information to be considered prior to determination.

Specifically, the following additional information is requested:

 

(a)  Investigate the consolidation of the site with the adjoining carwash at No. 23 Bathurst Street, Liverpool;

(b)  Redesign the building to a form that would reflect its town centre location;

(c)  Amend the landscape plan to include a planting buffer at the front boundary so as to make a positive contribution to the streetscape; and

(d)  Redesign the front fence to acknowledge its town centre location

The following is noted with respect to the recommendations of the Panel:

 

(a)  The adjoining property is currently operating as a carwash, approved under DA-979/2013.  The assessment of this application considered that the site, due to its frontage to Elizabeth Drive, did not require amalgamation with No. 25 Bathurst Street to be developed.

A submission was received as part of DA-979/2013 which indicated that No. 25 Bathurst Street intended to develop independently of No. 23 at a later stage.  Council acknowledged this future development as part of the assessment of DA-979/2013.  It is considered that requiring the consolidation of No. 23 and No. 25 would be unreasonable in this instance.

 

(b)  The existing structure on site appears a single storey, weatherboard dwelling house to the street.  The proposed building would appear a two storey dwelling house with a significant front setback. 

It is considered that redesigning the building to appear as a commercial development would not be in keeping with the existing streetscape which is primarily residential developments.  The proposal provides an appropriate transition between the residential flat buildings to the south and the newly operational car wash to the north and is considered more appropriate than a multi-storey mixed use design with zero side setbacks.

 

The proposed design is not inconsistent with the objectives of the B4 Mixed Use zone within the LLEP 2008 or the Liverpool City Centre objectives of the LDCP 2008 and is acceptable.

 

(c)  The existing parking arrangement indicates all parking spaces with a 0m front setback.  Each car space is indicated to be 2.5 metres wide.  The minimum width for a car space pursuant to AS 2890.1 is 2.4 metres wide. 

 

Therefore, to allow for landscaping within the front setback, a condition of consent is recommended that spaces 1 through 8 shall be reduced in width to 2.4 metres in compliance with AS 2890.1 and a minimum 500mm wide landscaped strip shall be constructed along the front boundary.  This would result in a non-compliance with parking provisions under the LDCP 2008 which requires 10 spaces for the proposed health services facility. 

 

In this instance, the shortfall of 1 car space is considered minimal as the site is located within the Liverpool City Centre with access to a public car park on the western side of Bathurst Street.  It is considered that the shortfall would not cause a detrimental impact to the locality.

 

(d)  A condition of consent is recommended that that front fence be reduced in height from 2.1metres to 1.2 metres.  Amended plans were received which also include landscaping within the front setback to acknowledge and address the town centre location similar to the adjacent properties.

 

Conclusion

 

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

 

CONSIDERATIONS

 

Economic and Financial

Further develop a commercial centre that accommodates a variety of employment opportunities.

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.         IHAP ReportView (Under separate cover)

2.         IHAP Recommendation for Da-192/2015View (Under separate cover)

3.         Amended recommended conditions of consentView (Under separate cover)    


119

Ordinary Meeting 30 March 2016

Chief Executive Officer Report

 

CEO 01

Corporate Sponsorships

 

Strategic Direction

Proud Engaged City

Strengthen and celebrate Liverpool’s unique community identity

Key Policy

Communications Plan

File Ref

034931.2016

Report By

Jennifer Havilah - Strategic Communications & Research Manager

Approved By

Carl Wulff - Chief Executive Officer

 

 

Executive Summary

 

Council provides financial assistance to the community through the Corporate Sponsorship program.

 

The Financial Contributions Panel (FCP) recently considered applications from local residents and community groups for Corporate Sponsorship.

 

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

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council endorses the Financial Contributions Panel’s recommendations for the provision of $16,000 (GST exclusive) under the Corporate Sponsorship Program as summarised in the table below. If the recommended amount of $16,000 is endorsed, the remaining balance will be $NIL.

 

Applicant name

Amount

Dekoda Exhibitions & Events

$3,000 ex gst

The Martial Arts Newspaper Online

$3,000 ex gst

Precedent Productions

$2,500 ex gst

PCYC Liverpool

$7,500 ex gst

 

REPORT

 

This report contains the most recent recommendations by the FCP for Corporate Sponsorship.

 

Corporate Sponsorship

Council delivers a Corporate Sponsorship Program for local organisations seeking financial support to deliver events that benefit Liverpool. One application for corporate sponsorship was received by Council. The application met the program criteria and is 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

PROJECT NAME & DESCRIPTION

AMOUNT REQUES-TED

AMOUNT RECOMM-ENDED

Dekoda Exhibitions & Events

The Bargain Craft Expo, Whitlam Leisure Centre, 17 – 19 June

Expo for sale of craft supplies with 2000-3000 expected attendees. $5 entry fee.

 

Funds are being requested to assist with a marketing campaign.

 

Benefits: logo inclusion on event signage and promotional material, opportunity to display signage at the event. Sponsor recognition with media releases.

 

Alignment with program criteria:  Approx 80-120 exhibitors will come to Liverpool for the expo and will stay at local hotels.  Whilst the activity is not occurring in the city centre, it uses a local venue and local contractors.

 

Recommended for funding at the $3,000 level in line with similar events.

$9,000-$10,000 ex GST

$3,000 ex GST

The Martial Arts Newspaper Online

The Martial Arts Spectacular, Whitlam Leisure Centre, 14 May

An array of exciting, action packed Martial Arts Demonstrations to be enjoyed by both Martial Arts Enthusiasts and the general public.

 

The entry fee is $30 for adults, $25 for children and $75 for a family, with an expected attendance of 2500-3000.

 

Funds are being requested for hosting and promoting the event.

 

Benefits: Branding on advertising, speaking opportunity, opportunity to display signage at the event, sponsor recognition in media releases.

 

Alignment with program criteria:  While the activity is not occurring in the city centre, it will attract a large crowd and bring national and international guests to Liverpool. The event uses local suppliers and businesses for equipment rental and catering.

 

Recommended for funding at the $3,000 level in line with similar events.

$10,000 ex GST

$3,000 ex GST

Precedent Productions

Local Business Awards, 19 July

An annual event, the program rewards local businesses for excellence. The local business awards have been operating for 30 years.

 

Benefits

Support sponsor

Logo on all promotional materials, presentation of 1-3 categories, 2 complimentary tickets.

 

Strong alignment with program criteria as it supports local businesses and economic activity whilst stimulating activity within the city centre.

 

Recommended for funding in line with previous level of support as support sponsor.

$2,500 ex GST

$2,500 ex GST

PCYC Liverpool

Time4Kids, 14 April

Annual fundraising event where prominent members of the community are ‘locked up’ to ‘do time’ to prevent youth crime.

Money raised from the event will be allocated to running programs targeting crime prevention including the Nations of Origin sporting competition, homework help, music therapy, mental health awareness and mentoring programs.

 

Funds will be used to assist with running the free crime prevention programs.

 

Benefits include: Branding on all promotional material and at the event. Sponsor recognition on all media releases.

 

Aligns with program criteria focused on community and social development.  Recommended for funding in line with previous support.

$7,500 ex GST

$7,500 ex GST

 

CONSIDERATIONS

 

Economic and Financial

 

The 2015/16 Corporate Sponsorship Program has a budget of $125,000, with a remaining balance of $NIL. If the recommended amount of $16,000 is endorsed, the remaining balance will be $NIL.

 

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

 

Nil  


121

Ordinary Meeting 30 March 2016

Business Improvement Report

 

DBI 01

Growing Liverpool 2023 - Six-monthly Progress Report

 

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

062313.2016

Report By

Phillip Lee - Corporate Strategy and Performance Project Officer

Approved By

Carole Todd - Director Business Improvement

 

 

eXEcutive Summary

 

This six-monthly Progress Report provides an overview of Council’s performance for the July to December 2015 period against the 4-year Delivery Program and 2015-16 Operational Plan and Budget. It demonstrates operational achievements and provides information and statistics for all areas of Council’s operations during the period. It is Council’s first Performance Report for the 2015-16 Operational Plan.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council receives and notes the six-monthly Progress Report which outlines the progress of all Principal Activities contained in the 4-year Delivery Program and 2015-16 Operational Plan.

 

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 seven 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.

 

The 4-year Delivery Program and 2015-16 Operational Plan 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 2015-16 year, these actions make up Council’s annual Operational Plan. In June 2015, Council determined to deliver 25 Principal Activities as part of its 4-year Delivery Program, with 99 specific actions for the 2015-16 year and 11 Strategic Projects. The Delivery Program also includes 123 key performance measures (KPI).

 

Section 404(5) of the Local Government Act (1993) requires the Chief Executive Officer to ensure that 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. The Progress Report attached contains information on the progress of all Principal Activities, Strategic Projects, actions and KPIs for the July to December 2015 period.

 

By the end of the December half year, 91% or 91 actions in the Delivery Program and Operational Plan were completed or are on track. Fifteen actions were completed in the quarter. Highlights include the Midnight Basket Ball program, review of the Animal Management Program, refurbishment of Warwick Farm Early Education and Care Centre, a strategic review of Museum Services and delivery of an art competition and award. Nine actions have been delayed. These are listed in the table below along with an update on their status.

 

Delayed Principal Activities

 

Delivery Program Reference

Actions

Update

1.1.1

Develop a supply chain delivery program for businesses based in Liverpool

The initial Supply Chain program offered in 2015 was a one off program that was delivered in conjunction with the NSW Department of Trade and Investment. Program funding is not available in 2015/16.

3.1.2

Explore opportunities and feasibility of vocational programs 

Research into legislative requirements and budget feasibility is currently in the preliminary stages to run vocational program from Casula Preschool during term break closures. These include physical space requirements, staffing structure and fee structure. A report will be prepared in the second half of the year.

3.2.7

Complete consultations for the Miller Skate Park

Delayed pending approval of Recreation Strategy

3.3.4

Implement online booking system for casual venue hire

A cost review was undertaken on specialised chairs and variety of tables outside of the standard style. The purchase costs were found to be very high and that hiring of tables/chairs would not be cost effective. In addition, due to the size of the tables and stacking of the specialised chairs, storage is inadequate. Investigations are continuing.

7.5.3

Implement Modern Telephony

Executive Team decided to put this project on hold.

7.5.4

Undertake a data cleanse of the TRIM Names and Address register

The need for this action is under review

7.4.1

Implement and integrate a new delegations management

After attempting to integrate Council’s delegations system into the LG Legal database, it has become evident that the system is not capable of meeting Council’s expected functionality levels.  A new project, utilising automated macro-enabled spreadsheets, is under development and project completion is now expected by June 2016.

 

Strategic Projects

One Strategic Project, namely Construction of Kurrajong Road, was completed in the half-year period and the remaining 10 are in progress. The majority of these are on track or ahead of schedule and only two are experiencing some delays while still on track. These two are the Cultural and Arts Policy and Plan, Tourism Policy and Plan Project and Building Our New City Project.

 

Key Performance Indicators

There are 34 of the 123 key performance indicators that are not applicable this reporting period i.e. they are only calculated annually, or are either unavailable or need some further consideration. Of the remaining 88, 82% have been assessed as on track with 18% needing some attention for the desired target to be met. However some of these are affected by seasonal influences, temporary resourcing issues or as new measures may have unrealistic targets. For these reasons no conclusions on performance should be drawn at this stage in the year. Nevertheless these will be closely monitored.

 

The details of progress on all the Principle Activities, actions and KPIs are in the full report at Attachment 1.

 

It is recommended that Council receives and notes the six-monthly Progress 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.         Six-monthly Progress Report to  Council July to December 2015View (Under separate cover)   


121

Ordinary Meeting 30 March 2016

Chief Financial Officer

 

CFO 01

Investment Report February 2016

 

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

030838.2016

Report By

Vishwa Nadan - Manager Financial Services

Approved By

Gary Grantham - Chief Financial Officer / Director Corporate Services

 

 

Executive Summary

 

This report details the Council’s Investment portfolio.

 

At 29 February 2016, Council held investments with a market value of $169.49 million. The portfolio yield for twelve months ended was 3.30 per cent exceeding the benchmark of 2.23 per cent by 107 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.

 

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 29 February 2016, Council held investments with a market value of $169.49 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 February 2016, the ratio of market value compared to face value of various debt securities is shown in the table below.

 

Asset Class

Feb-16

Jun-15

Senior Debts (FRN’s & *TCD’s)

99.74 %

 100.49%

MBS (Reverse Mortgage Backed Securities)

  64.59%

  66.01%

* 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.

 

Portfolio Maturity Profile

 

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

 

Term To maturity

Total

% Holdings

Term To maturity Policy Limit

Cash & Cash at Call

22,059,141

13.02%

100%

Term Deposit < 1 Year

41,000,000

24.19%

100%

Tradeable Securities

52,565,117

31.01%

100%

Term Deposits 1 to < 3 Years

31,000,000

18.29%

60%

Term Deposits 3 to < 5 Years

21,000,000

12.39%

25%

Grandfathered Securities

1,862,339

1.10%

N/A

Total Portfolio

169,486,597

100.00%

 

Market Value by Issuer and Institution Policy limit as per Investment Policy

 

 

Overall Portfolio Credit Framework compliance to Investment Policy

 

 

 

 

Portfolio Performance against Bank Bill Swap Rate (BBSW)

 

The 90 day BBSW is often referred to as the reference rate for market interest rates and, in particular, is used to benchmark yield on fixed Income securities.

 

Council’s investment portfolio yield for the 12 months ended 29 February 2016 was 3.30 per cent which exceeded benchmark of 2.23 per cent by 107 basis points for the same period. Council continues to achieve a solid outcome despite ongoing margin contraction and significantly lower deposit yields on offer. Council’s ongoing out performance 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:

 

 

Investment Portfolio at a Glance

Portfolio Performance vs. 90 day Bank Bill index over the 12 month period.

MCWB01114_0000[1]

The portfolio yield for 12 month ended is 107 basis points above the benchmark for the same period (3.30% against 2.23%).

Annual Income vs. Budget

MCWB01114_0000[1]

Council’s investment year to date interest income was above budget as at 29 February 2016 by $14k.

 

Investment Policy Compliance

Legislative Requirements

 

MCWB01114_0000[1]

Fully Compliant.

Portfolio Credit Rating Limit

MCWB01114_0000[1]

Fully Compliant.

 

Institutional Exposure Limits

MCWB01114_0000[1]

Fully Compliant.

Term to Maturity Limits

MCWB01114_0000[1]

Fully Compliant

 

 

Economic Outlook – Reserve Bank of Australia

The Reserve Bank Board meets eleven times each year, on the first Tuesday of each month, except in January. The cash rate remains at historically low level of 2.0 per cent and it is adversely impacting returns on investment. Returns on Term Deposits and Floating Rate Notes have significantly dropped since the last twelve months. The average market returns on term deposits are:

·    Longer term deposits (> 3years maturity) - 3.0% to 3.4% p.a

·    Medium term (2 to 3 years to maturity) - 2.9 % to 3.0 % p.a.

·    Short term deposits rate (less than one year to maturity) – ranges from 2.3% to 2.9% per annum.

·    Cash & Cash At Call accounts range from1.7% to 2.5%

·    31 Days’ Notice Account 2.7%

 

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 year to date interest income was above budget as at 29 February 2016 by $14k.

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.         Investment Details - February 2016View

2.         Performance Graph: Actual to Budget - February 2016View  


129

CFO 01

Investment Report February 2016

Attachment 1

Investment Details - February 2016

 


 


133

CFO 01

Investment Report February 2016

Attachment 2

Performance Graph: Actual to Budget - February 2016

 


129

Ordinary Meeting 30 March 2016

Chief Financial Officer

 

CFO 02

2016 National General Assembly of Local Government

 

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

059045.2016

Report By

George Georgakis - Manager Council and Executive Services

Approved By

Gary Grantham - Chief Financial Officer / Director Corporate Services

 

 

Executive Summary

 

The 2016 National General Assembly of Local Government (NGA) will be held in Canberra from Sunday 19 June – Wednesday 22 June 2016.

 

This report recommends that Council nominates delegates to attend the 2016 National General Assembly.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council nominates delegates to attend the 2016 National General Assembly of Local Government to be held in Canberra from Sunday 19 June – Wednesday 22 June 2016.

 

 

REPORT

 

The National General Assembly of Local Government (NGA) is a key event on the local government calendar. It is convened by the Australian Local Government Association (ALGA) for local councils across Australia and is an opportunity for Councils to identify and discuss national issues of priority for the sector and to agree on possible steps which could be taken to address these issues.

 

The 2016 NGA will be held in Canberra from Sunday 19 June to Wednesday 22 June 2016. A copy of the program is attached. Registration, accommodation, meals and travel costs will be incurred. Council is entitled to one vote at the NGA but is not limited on the number of Councillors who can attend.

 

The Australian Local Government Association (ALGA) Board is calling for motions for the 2016 NGA under the theme of ‘Partners in an Innovative and Prosperous Australia’.

 

This theme reflects the renewed focus across all levels of government on the roles and responsibilities of the public sector and the challenges of meeting our communities’ needs.

To be eligible for inclusion in the NGA Business Papers, motions must follow the principles set out by the ALGA Board, namely:

 

1.   Be relevant to the work of local government nationally;

 

2.   Be consistent with the theme of the NGA;

 

3.   Complement or build on the policy objectives of your state and territory local government association;

 

4.   Propose a clear action and outcome; and

 

5.   Not be advanced on behalf of external third parties which may seek to use the NGA to apply pressure to Board members, to gain national political exposure for positions that are not directly relevant to the work of, or in the national interests of the local government sector.

 

A copy of the NGA call for motions Discussion Paper is attached.

 

The deadline for motions is 22 April 2016 and all motions submitted must be adopted by Council.

 

CONSIDERATIONS

 

Economic and Financial

The costs associated with attending the 2016 NGA are included in the 2015/2016 budget and the costs per delegate are:

-     Registration: $925 per person

-     Accommodation: $345 per night

-     Meals: $230 (buffet dinner on 20 June and conference dinner on 21 June 2016)

-     Travel via Council vehicle

Environmental and Sustainability

Raise community awareness and support action in relation to environmental issues.


Social and Cultural

Raise awareness in the community about the available services and facilities.


Civic Leadership and Governance

Act as an environmental leader in the community.

Facilitate the development of community leaders.

Provide information about Council’s services, roles and decision making processes.

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

Actively advocate for federal and state government support, funding and services.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

 

1.         2016 National General Assembly Letter of Invitation and Call for MotionsView

2.         2016 National General Assembly of Local Government - Program


145

CFO 02

2016 National General Assembly of Local Government

Attachment 1

2016 National General Assembly Letter of Invitation and Call for Motions

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


161

CFO 02

2016 National General Assembly of Local Government

Attachment 2

2016 National General Assembly of Local Government - Program

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


163

Ordinary Meeting 30 March 2016

Chief Financial Officer

 

CFO 03

Councillor representation on Audit and Risk Committee

 

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

059792.2016

Report By

George Georgakis - Manager Council and Executive Services

Approved By

Gary Grantham - Chief Financial Officer / Director Corporate Services

 

 

Executive Summary

 

This report recommends a change to the Councillor representation on the Audit and Risk Committee so that it’s reflective of the representation outlined in the Internal Audit Guideline issued by the Office of Local Government.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

 

1.   Amend Clause 7.1 of the Audit and Risk Committee Charter to read:

“The Deputy Mayor and one Councillor will be the Council representatives on this Committee. All other Councillors are welcome to attend the meetings, however would not have voting rights.” 

 

2.   Nominate the Deputy Mayor and Councillor Shelton as its representatives on the Committee for the current one year term.

 

3.   Officers to source a third independent panel member to join the Committee, following which Clause 7.2.1 of the Committee Charter to be amended to provide for three independent members. 

 

REPORT

 

Council at its meeting in September 2015 (and then when adopting the minutes in October 2015) appointed representatives to the various internal and external Committees.

 

The representatives appointed to the Audit and Risk Committee were:

 

·    Councillor Hadchiti (Deputy Mayor) and Councillors Hadid, Mamone and Shelton

 

The Audit and Risk Committee Charter (under Clause 7.1) however states that:

 

“The Deputy Mayor and one Councillor will be members of this Committee”.

 

It was the intention of Council staff to therefore prepare a report to Council with a view to amending Clause 7.1 of the Committee Charter, to be reflective of the four appointed Councillor representatives as resolved by Council in October 2015.  

 

It has been noted however, that an Internal Audit Guideline (attached to this report, in the Attachments Booklet) has been issued by the Office of Local Government (under Section 23A of the Local Government Act) and as per s23A(3), “a Council must take any relevant guidelines issued under this section into consideration before exercising any of its functions”.

 

Section 23A states:

 

(1) For the purposes of this Act, the Departmental Chief Executive may from time to time prepare, adopt or vary guidelines relating to the exercise by a council of any of its functions.

 

(2)  The Departmental Chief Executive may only prepare, adopt or vary guidelines relating to the exercise by a council of functions conferred or imposed on the council by or under any Act or law that is not administered by or the responsibility of the Department of Local Government if the Departmental Chief Executive has first obtained the concurrence of the Minister administering or responsible for the administration of the other Act or law.

 

(3)  A council must take any relevant guidelines issued under this section into consideration before exercising any of its functions.

 

(4)  The guidelines for the time being in force are to be made available to councils on request and, on payment of such fee (if any) as the Departmental Chief Executive may determine, to any interested person

 

Clause 4.2 of that Guideline states (in part) that:

 

"Ideally the audit committee should consist of at least three and preferably no more than five members comprised of independent external members, who should be in the majority, and Councillors other than the Mayor (or an Administrator)."

 

Clause 7.2.1 of the Committee Charter states that (other than Councillor representation):

 

“Other members of this Committee include two independent members. These members will participate equally with others in terms of discussion and debate and will also have voting rights.”

If the Committee Charter was to be amended to reflect the October 2015 Council resolution for four Councillors to be on the Committee, then the independent representatives would be in the minority.

 

This report has been prepared to bring this to Council’s attention and to recommend that Council have only two appointed representatives (as voting members) in accordance with the Committee’s Charter, so that the independent representatives are not in the minority.

 

Given that the Deputy Mayor is one of the appointed representatives, it is recommended that the Deputy Mayor be Council’s representative and that Councillor Shelton (as he is the Councillor who has attended most meetings) be the other Councillor representative with voting rights. 

 

All other Councillors are welcome to attend the meetings, however would not have voting rights. It is therefore proposed to amend Clause 7.1 of the Committee Charter to read:

 

“The Deputy Mayor and one Councillor will be the Council representatives on this Committee. All other Councillors are welcome to attend the meetings, however would not have voting rights”.

 

The ideal option, as outlined above in Clause 4.2 of the Guideline, would be to increase the Committee membership to five, with two Councillor representatives and three independent representatives, so that the independent representatives are in the majority. It is therefore proposed that Council staff source a third independent panel member to join the Committee.

 

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.         Office of Local Government - Internal Audit GuidelinesView (Under separate cover)

2.         Audit and Risk Committee Charter


163

CFO 03

Councillor representation on Audit and Risk Committee

Attachment 2

Audit and Risk Committee Charter

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 

 


177

Ordinary Meeting 30 March 2016

Community and Culture Report

 

DCC 01

Draft Graffiti Management Strategy 2016-2018

 

Strategic Direction

Liveable Safe City

Create clean and attractive public places for people to engage and connect

Key Policy

Community Safety and Crime Prevention Strategy

File Ref

064789.2016

Report By

Kamrun Rahman - Community Development Worker (Community Safety)

Approved By

Eddie Jackson - Acting Director Community & Culture

 

 

Executive Summary

 

At its meeting on 25 November 2015, Council resolved to place the draft Graffiti Management Strategy 2016-2018 on public exhibition for a period of 28 days, to allow for public comments and submissions and to receive a further report after a review of public submissions.

No submissions were received on the draft Strategy and Action Plan during the public exhibition period.

 

This report proposes that Liverpool City Council’s Graffiti Management Strategy and Action Plan 2016-2018 be adopted.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council adopts the final Graffiti Management Strategy 2016-2018.

 

 

REPORT

 

At its meeting on 25 November 2015, Council resolved to publicly exhibit the draft Graffiti Management Strategy 2016-2018 for a period of 28 days, and receive a further report on the Graffiti Management Strategy and Action Plan 2016-2018 following public exhibition.

 

In accordance with the resolution, the draft Graffiti Management Strategy 2016-2018 was placed on public exhibition for 28 days from 10 February to 9 March 2016. The exhibition period was advertised through local media, libraries, customer service centre, Council website, Facebook, Liverpool Listens, interagency meetings and community networks. It should be noted that no submissions were received from the community during the public exhibition period.

 

The Graffiti Management Strategy 2016-2018 is the primary document reflecting Council’s ongoing commitment in minimising illegal graffiti around the local government area through community education and awareness.

 

The Graffiti Management Strategy and the Action Plan 2016-2018, was developed following a comprehensive review of the Graffiti Management Strategy 2012-2015, research on best practice principles and consultation with internal and external stakeholders.  It aims to build on the outcomes of previous strategies to continue the ongoing work of tackling the problem of graffiti in Liverpool. The Graffiti Management Strategy outlines Council’s graffiti removal process, reporting policy, and an action plan outlining the activities Council will undertake to address graffiti.

 

Council’s Graffiti Management Strategy continues to encourage partnership approaches and will continue the framework used in the initial strategy, which groups the action plan 2016-2018 under five strategic areas:

 

1. Community Education and Engagement

2. Removal

3. Prevention

4. Art Redirection

5. Partnership

 

The final Graffiti Management Strategy and Action Plan 2016-2018 are recommenced for adoption.

 

CONSIDERATIONS

 

Economic and Financial

The costs associated with delivering the action plan are included in Council’s budget for 2015-2016. Further funding will be sourced through grants or through Council’s budget processes for following years.

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 policies and plans that prevent crime.

Provide cultural centers and activities for the enjoyment of the arts.


Civic Leadership and Governance

There are no civic leadership and governance considerations.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

 

1.         Graffiti Management Strategy and Action Plan 2016-2018 (FINAL)View (Under separate cover)  


177

Ordinary Meeting 30 March 2016

Community and Culture Report

 

DCC 02

Liverpool Listens Evaluation 1 January 2015 to 31 December 2015

 

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

034198.2016

Report By

Rochelle Baughan - Community Planning Policy Officer

Approved By

Eddie Jackson - Acting Director Community & Culture

 

 

Executive Summary

 

At its meeting on 25 February 2015, Council resolved to receive “a further evaluation report on the effectiveness of Liverpool Listens in February 2016.”

 

An evaluation has been undertaken to assess Council’s use of Liverpool Listens as an online engagement tool over the past year (1 January to 31 December 2015). This report summarises a review of its use over the last 12 months and highlights key consultation projects undertaken during this period. This report recommends that a further progress report be provided to Council in 12 months’ time.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

 

1.    Receives and notes this report; and

 

2.    Receives a further report in 12 months on the progress of Liverpool Listens.

 

 

REPORT

 

Liverpool City Council has been operating Liverpool Listens, an online community engagement platform, since October 2013. Following a trial period, Council resolved in February 2015 to fund operation of the platform for a further three years and receive an evaluation report after 12 months. This report presents a summary of the evaluation of Liverpool Listens for this period.

 

 

 

Internally, there has been increasing use of Liverpool Listens by staff during the last 12 months. Staff have become more aware of how it can assist them to undertake engagement, from providing community members with the opportunity to make formal submissions to collaborating on the design of public spaces. The number and type of contributions made by the community has varied depending on the topic, the extent of advertising and the way in which consultation tools have been utilised.

 

Highlights since launch of Liverpool Listens: March 2014 - present

 

·    Over 30,000 visits to the website

·    1,457 engaged visitors

·    1,309 registered participants. This is in addition to the many people who contribute to Liverpool Listens anonymously (which is permitted in some instances to encourage greater use of the site).

As can be seen from the above graph, visitation and use of the Liverpool Listens webpage fluctuates over the operational period. Peaks in the graph indicate times when key matters of interest have gone live on the webpage and generated a spike in activity.

 

 

Evaluation of the past year: 1 January 2015 to 31 December 2015

 

Over the past year there have been a total of 17,592 visits to the Liverpool Listens website. A total of 1,041 people have been engaged through surveys, discussion forums, newsfeeds, quick polls and stories. A total of 8,146 people have been informed by Liverpool Listens. This equates to a cost of $3.54 per informed user of the webpage. This is highly cost effective when compared with other types of community engagement. However, it should be noted that while on-line community engagement is increasingly important, it cannot be considered as effective engagement if used in isolation.

 

Top projects

Over the last 12 months, 47 projects have been hosted on the Liverpool Listens website. The projects that received the highest level of activity throughout the year were:

 

Renaming part of the suburb of Moorebank

459 contributors

Gained interest due to strong resident networks.

 

Moorebank Recyclers

201 contributors

Gained interest due to media coverage of the legal proceedings and the ongoing updates to the community about progress and documents received by the Courts, encouraging people to make submissions.

 

Installation of toilets at Wattle Grove

92 contributors

Gained interest due to media attention, public opinion and controversy over identified cost.

 

A new community and cultural facility in Liverpool

86 contributors

Gained interest through topic of interest and relevant networks.

Making Middleton Grange

53 contributors

Gained interest through direct mail-out to residents and creative and diverse use of tools, encouraging people to make contributions.

 

Maximising Potential

Internal staff feedback on the Liverpool Listens website has been very positive. As staff have become more aware of the benefits of using the site, they are becoming more creative in the ways in which they use their project page to share information with the community. Staff have indicated that they have been pleased with the way in which data is collated, analysed and reported on, saving staff valuable time.

 

Use of engagement tools

Whilst staff have frequently used the survey tool, the website has largely been used for the provision of information to the community rather than providing meaningful opportunities to input into decision making. In examples where a tangible opportunity is provided to the community, participation rates are typically very high, e.g. renaming part of the suburb of Moorebank and Installation of toilets at Wattle Grove.

 

Many of the other available engagement tools remain underutilised, such as Q&A, Brainstormer and Discussion Forums. Further staff training on engagement tools other than surveys is required to increase the diversity of opportunities available to the community.

 

The other observation from the last 12 months of operation is that Council can improve the tail end of engagement processes, particularly in ensuring that information is relayed back to the community on the outcomes of the engagement process. Of the 22 projects which closed or were archived during the review period, 14 (64%) did not provide any feedback. Of the 8 (36%) that did provide feedback, only 3 (14%) reported back the outcome of engagement (i.e. presented the consultation findings on the webpage). None clearly identified how feedback was incorporated or contributed to decision-making.

 

In summary, the key challenges of Liverpool Listens to be addressed in the next 12 months of operation are as follows:

 

·    Further hands-on training for staff across Council in how to utilise Liverpool Listens, particularly with regard to the wide array of engagement options available on the platform; and

·    Better monitoring of how Council reports back on the outcomes of community engagement projects.

 

Liverpool Listens has been an efficient and effective community engagement mechanism for staff, providing the community with information and offering opportunities to comment and contribute to ideas, policies and plans. In 2016, training will be provided to promote better and greater use of the site, with an overall goal of reaching 2,000 engaged participants (approximately 1% of the population) over the next year.

 

CONSIDERATIONS

 

Economic and Financial

Annual program cost as budgeted is $28,875. This equates to a cost of $3.54 per informed user of Liverpool Listens.

Environmental and Sustainability

There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.


Social and Cultural

Inform and provide opportunities for the community to participate in Council decisions regarding policies and planned works.


Civic Leadership and Governance

Undertake communication practices with the community and stakeholders across a range of media.

Encourage the community to engage in Council initiatives and actions.

 

ATTACHMENTS

 

Nil


181

Ordinary Meeting 30 March 2016

Community and Culture Report

 

DCC 03

Liverpool Youth Council Annual Report 2014-2015

 

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

066861.2016

Report By

Derek Tweed - Community Development Worker (Youth)

Approved By

Eddie Jackson - Acting Director Community & Culture

 

 

Executive Summary

 

This report is tabled in order to present the Liverpool Youth Council Annual Report 2014-2015.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

 

1.   Supports representatives from the 2014-2016 Youth Council to present the Liverpool Youth Council Annual Report 2014-2015 in open session of Council.

 

2.   Receives and notes the Liverpool Youth Council Annual Report 2014-2015 and thanks its members for their contributions, including those of Deputy Mayor Councillor Tony Hadchiti, Councillor Sabrina Mamone, Councillor Peter Harle and Councillor Wendy Waller.

 

REPORT

 

In May 1999, Council endorsed a Youth Strategy that included the establishment of the Liverpool Youth Council. Since that time, the Liverpool Youth Council has become a dynamic forum that reflects the needs of young people and the commitment of Council to young people. During the 2014-2015 Youth Council term, there were 12 committed, enthusiastic and hardworking young people involved in Youth Council activities.

 

The purpose of the Liverpool Youth Council is to provide a link between young people and Council and to act as a consultative mechanism. It provides an opportunity for young people to have their say and to develop skills in leadership.

 

Each year the Youth Council produces an annual report detailing their activities over the previous financial year. The 2014-2015 annual report is attached for the information of Council. Below is a summary of highlights for 2014-2015:

 

·  Delivery of Street Legacy V event celebrating Youth Week 2015;

·  Volunteer support at various Council initiatives;

·  Planning of activities at Council's Australia Day Event in 2015;

·  Ongoing delivery of the RADAR radio program on 2GLF, including increased promotion of the program; and

·  Involvement in consultations and training.

 

More detailed information about Liverpool Youth Council initiatives is included in the Annual Report 2014-2015 that is attached under a separate cover.

 

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

Facilitate the development of community leaders.

Encourage the community to engage in Council initiatives and actions.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

 

1.         Liverpool Youth Council Annual Report 2014-2015View (Under separate cover)    


183

Ordinary Meeting 30 March 2016

Infrastructure and Environment Report

 

DIEN 01

Review of Tree Management Policy

 

Strategic Direction

Natural Sustainable City

Reduce adverse environment impacts for present and future generations

Key Policy

Integrated Environmental Sustainability Action Plan

File Ref

059021.2016

Report By

Madhu  Pudasaini - Manager Technical Support

Approved By

Raj Autar - Director Infrastructure and Environment

 

 

Executive Summary

 

Council, at its meeting held on 25 November 2015, considered the draft Tree Management Policy and resolved to place it on public exhibition for input and comments. Council also resolved that community input be sought on the current tree replacement strategy.

 

The draft Policy was publicly exhibited between 20 January 2016 and 19 February 2016 and following close of the exhibition period, only one submission was received, which has been satisfactorily resolved.

 

This report recommends that Council adopts the Tree Management Policy.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council adopts the Tree Management Policy.

 

 

REPORT

 

Council’s Tree Management Policy (Policy) was updated and submitted for Council consideration at its meeting of 25 November 2015. The Policy was updated to:

 

·    Accommodate current best practices in tree management by the neighbouring Councils, as well as Councils across NSW;

 

·    Simplify policy statements and separate the policy from procedures for the management of trees on private and Council managed lands; and

 

·    Acknowledge recent legislative changes that affect Council’s tree management.

 

Following consideration of the draft Policy, Council resolved to place it on public exhibition for community input and comments. Council also discussed the current arrangements for tree replacement and resolved that community input be sought on Council’s policy on replacing trees that are removed.

 

Tree Replacement

 

The replacement of any tree that is removed following Council approval is governed by Council’s Tree Management Procedure (attached) which requires that any tree removed be replaced with another tree that has a minimum pot size of 15 litres. The Policy and the corresponding procedures encourage the residents to replace the tree/s with appropriate Australian native species.

 

While it is acknowledged that the exemption provisions of the Policy relating to removal of trees within three metres of a built structure would make monitoring and enforcement of tree replacement difficult, it is considered that Council’s procedure will encourage residents to replace trees with appropriate species in an appropriate location within the property, where practical.

 

Similar procedures are also in place governing the replacement requirements for trees on Council managed lands. The procedure incorporates a winter tree replacement program and provides extensive details relating to the preferred species to be used and includes details to be followed for planting on Council nature strips, parks and reserves.

 

Council considers that the current policy provides an effective arrangement for the management of trees on private as well as public lands.

 

Outcome of Public Exhibition

 

The draft Policy was placed on public exhibition between 20 January 2016 and 19 February 2016 through advertisements in the local papers and on Council’s website. Copies of the document were also made available to the public at all of Council’s libraries and Customer Service Centres.

 

One public submission was received regarding the separation of the procedures from the policy document. The resident was satisfied with the response that the draft Policy had been simplified by separating the policies from the procedures and that the procedures will remain in place.

 

CONSIDERATIONS

 

Economic and Financial

Increase efficiency in the tree assessment process and reduced tree related compliance issues.

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.

Raise community awareness and support action in relation to environmental issues.


Social and Cultural

Preserve and maintain heritage, both landscape and cultural as urban development takes place.


Civic Leadership and Governance

Act as an environmental leader in the community.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

 

1.         Tree Management Policy View

2.         Tree Management Procedure for private property and land not managed by Council View

3.         Tree Management Procedure for property and land managed by Council View  


193

DIEN 01

Review of Tree Management Policy

Attachment 1

Tree Management Policy

 


 


 


 


 


 


197

DIEN 01

Review of Tree Management Policy

Attachment 2

Tree Management Procedure for private property and land not managed by Council

 


 


 


 


209

DIEN 01

Review of Tree Management Policy

Attachment 3

Tree Management Procedure for property and land managed by Council

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


211

Ordinary Meeting 30 March 2016

Infrastructure and Environment Report

 

DIEN 02

Austral and North Leppington - Management of Stormwater

 

Strategic Direction

Natural Sustainable City

Enhance and protect natural corridors, waterways and bushland

Key Policy

Floodplain Risk Management Plans

File Ref

066022.2016

Report By

Madhu  Pudasaini - Manager Technical Support

Approved By

Raj Autar - Director Infrastructure and Environment

 

 

Executive Summary

 

Austral, Leppington North and East Leppington are the precincts of the South West Growth Center that fall within the Liverpool Local Government Area (LGA). The precincts were released for residential development and rezoned in March 2013. Kemps Creek, Bonds Creek and Scalabrini Creek are the three major natural waterways that traverse through these precincts.

 

As part of the precinct planning process, the Department of Planning developed a Water Cycle Management Strategy (WCMS).  The strategy identifies the need for a large number of flood detention basins, creek enhancement works, culvert amplifications works and overland flow provisions to allow safe occupation of the precinct.  The strategy has also identified the need for several water quality treatment devices to achieve water quality improvement targets specified in the strategy.

 

Utility providers including Sydney Water and Endeavor Energy are currently planning and designing their respective service infrastructure to facilitate the development. A concept design of stormwater and water quality management facilities have therefore become necessary to guide the utility providers to avoid any potential future conflicts with utility services and to facilitate development. 

 

Accordingly, Council would like to invite tenders for the investigation and concept design of the necessary stormwater infrastructure to inform the planning and design of utility infrastructure as well as to enable the orderly development of the Austral and Leppington precincts.

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

 

1.       Authorises the Director Infrastructure and Environment to invite tenders for the design of required stormwater infrastructure to facilitate development of the Austral and Leppington Precincts.

 

2.       Notes that budget is available in the S94 Reserve for necessary investigation and design works.

 

REPORT

 

Austral, Leppington North and East Leppington are the precincts of the South West growth Center that fall within the Liverpool Local Government Area (LGA). The precincts were released for residential development by the Minister for Planning in October 2009 and subsequently rezoned in March 2013. Kemps Creek, Bonds Creek and Scalabrini Creek are the three major natural waterways that traverse through the precincts.

 

The proposed precincts developments will transform the current rural landform into urban residential precincts. Without an appropriate stormwater management system, the proposed developments will have significant adverse impacts on flooding and water quality of natural waterways.

 

In order to address issues with flooding and water quality, the Department of Planning developed a WCMS as part of precinct planning process. Due to the complexity of the creek system and the geography of the area, the strategy proposed construction of large number of flood detention basins, creek enhancement works, culvert amplifications works and overland flow provisions to allow safe occupation of the precinct. The strategy has also identified the need for several water quality treatment devices to achieve water quality improvement targets specified in the strategy.

 

Utility providers including Sydney Water and Endeavor Energy are currently planning and designing their respective service infrastructure to facilitate the development. Alignment and grade of stormwater drainage network and devices will be essential to coordinate the alignment of these utility services.  The design of stormwater and water quality management facilities is therefore essential to guide the utility providers to avoid any infrastructure conflicts and to facilitate the development. 

 

Accordingly, Council would like to invite tenders to engage an experiences and qualified contractor for the investigation and concept design of the necessary stormwater infrastructure to enable development of the Austral and Leppington precincts.

 

The scope of the engagement will include:

 

·    Concept design of a series of flood detention basins at strategic locations in order to control increased stormwater runoff from proposed developments;

·    Concept design of a series of bio-retention basins and water quality control devices in accordance with the best management practices and Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) principles;

·    Analysis and preliminary concept design of major trunk drainage system for the precincts; and

·    Assessment of flood conveyance capacities of the existing road crossings (culverts and bridges) and development of options to allow flood free access under the 100 year ARI flood event.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

The design and construction of these devices will be funded through S94 Contribution. It is estimated that approximately $1,000,000 will be required to complete the designs. The budget will be included in the 2016/17 Operational Plan.

 

CONSIDERATIONS

 

Economic and Financial

Enhance the environmental performance of buildings and homes.

Facilitate economic development.

Minimise flood related economic risk to individuals and community.

Environmental and Sustainability

Manage the environmental health of waterways.

Manage air, water, noise and chemical pollution.

Enhance the environmental performance of buildings and homes.


Social and Cultural

Preserve and maintain heritage, both landscape and cultural as urban development takes place.

Minimise flood related social risk to individuals and community.


Civic Leadership and Governance

Act as an environmental leader in the community.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

 

Nil  


211

Ordinary Meeting 30 March 2016

Planning and Growth Report

 

DPG 01

Collimore Car Park - Truck Parking

 

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

032672.2016

Report By

Alex Helderman - Parking Services Coordinator

Approved By

Toni Averay - Director Planning & Growth

 

 

Executive Summary

 

At its Meeting held on 3 February 2016, Council considered a Notice of Motion concerning monopolised truck parking by several driving schools in the dedicated truck parking area in the Collimore Park Car Park. Council resolved that a report be presented to the April 2015 Ordinary Council meeting.

 

In accordance with the resolution, the investigation has assessed a range of options including timed parking restrictions, paid parking, and the installation of CCTV.

 

The investigation has identified that the most cost effective approach to address the monopolisation is the introduction of 2 hour parking restrictions between 6.00am and 6.00pm, Monday to Saturday.  Parking officers would patrol the carpark to enforce these restrictions.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

 

1.    Approves the introduction of 2 hour parking restrictions between 6.00am and 6.00pm, Monday to Saturday in the truck parking area at Collimore Park.

 

2.    Notes that Council parking officers will enforce these restrictions through regular patrols.

 

 

REPORT

 

Council at its Ordinary Meeting held on 3 February 2016, considered a Notice of Motion (NOM) concerning monopolised truck parking by several driving schools, in the dedicated truck parking area in Collimore Park Car Park and resolved that a report be presented to the April 2016 Ordinary Council meeting.

 

Since 2008, the northern section of Collimore Park, along Elizabeth Drive, has been a dedicated truck parking area. It contains 12 truck parking spaces.  It was set aside to accommodate truck parking close to the Liverpool City Centre, particularly for interstate truck drivers who need to park their trucks while staying overnight in nearby residential areas. 

 

The truck parking area was listed in Council's Truck Parking Policy adopted on 26 June 2013.  Currently the truck parking spaces are unrestricted, with the intention of permitting parking overnights or weekends. This was aimed at preventing heavy vehicles parking in residential streets close to the City Centre, in accordance with the NSW Road Rules regulations.

 

The use of the car park by driving schools restricts the number of available parking spaces for drivers who wish to use the car park for the purpose for which it was intended; that is,   overnight stays.

 

The following parking management options have been investigated:

 

·     2P 6am - 6pm Monday to Saturday, timed parking restriction - This would permit trucks to park overnight, on weekdays, thereby meeting the intent of the car park.

 

·     Ticketed Parking - Considering the twelve available parking spaces, the cost of installing a ticketed parking machine, maintenance of the machine and potential vandalism, this option would be expensive and is not recommended.

 

·     CCTV – Several cameras would be required. Given the capital and ongoing operational costs associated with installation, monitoring and management, this option is not recommended.

 

·     Combinations of the above options - An assessment of a combination of the above options, indicates that the most cost effective option  is the installation of the timed parking restriction accompanied by appropriate enforcement.

 

CONSIDERATIONS

 

Economic and Financial

Provide efficient parking for the City Centre.

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

 

Nil


213

Ordinary Meeting 30 March 2016

Planning and Growth Report

 

DPG 02

Draft LLEP 2008 (Amendment 57)  & LDCP 2008 (Draft Amendment 22) - Rezoning of Part of Ardennes Avenue, Edmondson Park

 

Strategic Direction

Liveable Safe City

Deliver an efficient planning system which embraces sustainable urban renewal and development

Key Policy

Urban Development Plans

File Ref

064206.2016

Report By

Ian Stendara - Strategic Planner

Approved By

Toni Averay - Director Planning & Growth

 

Property

4 Moscow Road, Edmondson Park (Lot 102 DP 1201660)

2088 Camden Valley Way, Edmondson Park (Lot 1 DP 652146)

Lot 2 Camden Valley Way, Edmondson Park (Lot 2 DP 1194117)

Lot 3 Camden Valley Way, Edmondson Park (Lot 3 DP 1194117)

Lot 202 Camden Valley Way, Edmondson Park (Lot 202 DP 1209527)

Owner

Rmemberance Drive Pty Ltd

Gobbo Holdings Pty Ltd

Mr Bruno Vartuli and Ms Nancy Vartuli

Mr Savero Catanzariti and Mrs Francesca Catanzariti

Applicant

Rememberance Drive Pty Ltd

 

 

Executive Summary

 

Council, at its meeting of 29 July 2015 resolved to proceed with a planning proposal to amend Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 (LLEP 2008) and to amend Liverpool Development Control Plan 2008 (LDCP 2008) to assist in the orderly development of Lots 2, 3 & 202, No. 2088 Camden Valley Way and 2 Moscow Road, Edmondson Park.

 

The future Ardennes Avenue is currently zoned SP2 Infrastructure (Local Road).  It runs along the eastern side of the land and designated as a 30m wide Asset Protection Zone (APZ) road for bushfire protection.

 

Detailed subdivision design revealed that the road width was wider than necessary, as the APZ could be located within a narrower road reserve and within the front setback of residential properties. As a result, a planning proposal was prepared to rezone a 9.5m portion of Ardennes Avenue from SP2 Infrastructure to R1 General Residential.

 

Following public exhibition and notification to public authorities, no objections were received. Accordingly it is recommended that Council adopts the proposed amendments

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

 

1.    Adopts draft Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 (Draft Amendment No. 57) and forwards a copy of the attached planning proposal and supporting documentation to the Department of Planning and Environment for finalisation.

 

2.    Adopts Liverpool Development Control Plan 2008 (Draft Amendment No. 22) and forward a copy of the Development Control Plan (as per changes attached) to the Department of Planning and Environment for notification.

 

 

Report

 

Site Context and Background

 

The land is located at Lot 101 DP 1201660, Lots 2 & 3 DP 1194117, Lot 202 DP 1209527 and Lot 1 DP 652146, No. 2088, Camden Valley Way and 2 Moscow Road, Edmondson Park. (See Figure 1 on the following page)

 

Edmondson Park was originally rezoned for urban development under Liverpool LEP 1997 on 31 March 2006 and subsequently incorporated into Liverpool LEP 2008.

 

To the north east was Tree Valley Golf Course and to the west was rural residential dwellings and market gardens.  Residential development is currently taking place to the north and west of the site.

 

To the south and east of the future Ardennes Ave, there is a conservation area, which is zoned E1 National Parks and Nature Reserves, as well as an area for public recreation, zoned RE1 Public Recreation, by State Environmental Planning Policy (Major Development) 2006.


 

Draft amendment to Liverpool LEP 2008

 

Figure 1: Site context and aerialThe amendment seeks to rezone a 9.5 metre wide portion of the future Ardennes Ave, from SP2 Infrastructure (Local Road) to R1 General Residential, as the extent of the Outer Protection area is not required to provide adequate bushfire protection.

 

 

In planning the precinct, the Asset Protection Road (Ardennes Avenue), shown in Figure 2, was proposed to provide a bushfire buffer between the developing urban area to the west of Ardennes Avenue and the Conservation Area located to the east.  The Conservation Area will retain significant vegetation.  Upon investigation by two bushfire studies (submitted in support for multiple DAs to subdivide the land) it was found that the 30m width of the future Ardennes Ave was more than necessary to provide adequate bushfire protection.  Accordingly the road reserve could be narrowed with the additional land being used for residential development.

 

The extent of the rezoning and change to planning controls is shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2: Land to which Planning controls are proposed to change

Amendment to the Liverpool DCP 2008

 

An amendment to Part 2.11 of Liverpool DCP 2008 is also required to change reference to Ardennes Avenue as an Asset Protection Road (APR).  The entire length of Ardennes Avenue through the subject lands will be changed from an APR to a Former Asset Protection Road (FAPR) to reflect the new standard being sought.

 

The amendment will replace the current APR cross section (Figure 17 of the DCP) with the cross section shown in Figure 4.  Parts of the written statement of the DCP will also be amended to correctly reference this APR as a FAPR. All proposed changes to Part 2.11 of the LDCP 2008 are attached.

Figure 3: The new cross section of a Former Asset Protection Road to replace the current cross section for an Asset Protection Road