COUNCIL AGENDA

 

Ordinary Council Meeting

27 June 2018

 

FRANCIS GREENWAY CENTRE

170 GEORGE STREET LIVERPOOL


 

 

 

                                                                                     

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You are hereby notified that an Ordinary Council Meeting of Liverpool City Council will be held at the Francis Greenway Centre, 170 George Street, Liverpool on Wednesday, 27 June 2018 commencing at 6.00pm. Doors to the Francis Greenway Centre 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.

 

 

 

 


Kiersten Fishburn

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

 

 

 


 

 

 


Order of Business

 

                                                                                                              PAGE     TAB

Opening

Acknowledgment of Country and Prayer

National Anthem

Apologies 

Condolences

Confirmation of Minutes

Ordinary Council Meeting held on 30 May 2018..................................................................... 7

Declarations of Interest

Public Forum

Mayoral Report

NIL

Notices of Motion Of Rescission

NIL

Development Application Determination Report

NIL

City Economy and Growth Report

EGROW 01    Street naming.................................................................................................. 41......... 1

EGROW 02    Proposed Austral/Leppington North Planning Controls Amendments............ 45......... 2

EGROW 03    Smoking in Macquarie Mall............................................................................ 55......... 3

EGROW 04    Exempt Development Provisions for Fencing in Cartwright.......................... 70......... 4

EGROW 05    Sydney Western City Planning Panel Membership....................................... 73......... 5

Chief Executive Officer Report

CEO 01          Endorsement of Delivery Program 2017-2021 and Operational Plan 2018-19 and Budget (including Statement of Revenue Policy).......................................... 77......... 6

CEO 02          Committee meeting minute approval process................................................ 82......... 7

City Community and Culture Report

COM 01          Grants, Donations and Corporate Sponsorship.............................................. 85......... 8

COM 02          Liverpool City Council Sporting Grants Program 2017/2018......................... 88......... 9

COM 03          Leisure Centre Event Fees Comparison........................................................ 93....... 10

COM 04          Liverpool Listens and Liverpool District Forums Evaluation........................... 97....... 11

City Corporate Report

CORP 01        Investment Report May 2018....................................................................... 107....... 12

CORP 02        Local Government Remunerational Tribunal Annual Report and Determination under sections 239 and 241 of the Local Government Act 1993................. 115....... 13

City Presentation Report

NIL

City  Infrastructure and Environment Report

NIL

Committee Reports

CTTE 01         Minutes of the Intermodal Committee Meeting held on 15 May 2018......... 118....... 14

CTTE 02         Minutes of the Strategic Panel held on 4 June 2018.................................... 123....... 15

CTTE 03         Minutes of the Environment Advisory Committee Meeting held on 8 May 2018     128 16

CTTE 04         Minutes of the Local Traffic Committee Meeting held on 16 May 2018...... 134....... 17

CTTE 05         Minutes of Civic Advisory Committee meeting held on Tuesday 12 June 2018..... 139 18

Questions with Notice

NIL

Presentations by Councillors

 

Notices of Motion

NOM 01          Medium Density Development..................................................................... 148....... 19  

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 WT2708 - A new automated truck wash bay at the Rose Street Depot

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   Liverpool Youth Council Committee Community Member Nomination 2018-2020

Reason:     Item CONF 02 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).  

Close

 

THIS PAGE IS BLANK
 

 


 

 


 THIS PAGE IS BLANK


 

 

 

MINUTES OF THE Ordinary Meeting

HELD ON 30 May 2018

 

 

PRESENT:

Mayor Wendy Waller

Councillor Ayyad

Councillor Balloot

Councillor Hadchiti

Councillor Hadid

Councillor Hagarty

Councillor Harle

Councillor Kaliyanda

Councillor Karnib

Councillor Rhodes

Councillor Shelton

Ms Kiersten Fishburn, Chief Executive Officer

Mr Tim Moore, Director City Economy and Growth / Deputy CEO

Mr Chris White, Director City Corporate

Ms Tina Sangiuliano, Acting Director City Community and Culture

Dr Eddie Jackson, Director City Deal

Ms Margaret Diebert, Acting Director City Presentation

Mr Raj Autar, Director City Infrastructure and Environment

Mr John Morgan, Director Property and Commercial Development

 

The meeting commenced at 6.00pm.

 

 

OPENING                                                 6.00pm

Prayer

ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF COUNTRY,          The prayer of the Council was read by Pastor 

PRAYER OF COUNCIL AND                 Stephen Reddish of New Life Christian Ministries.

AFFIRMATION TO BE READ BY         

 

NATIONAL ANTHEM                             The National Anthem performed and recorded by

                                                                  Rebekah Ferro was played at the meeting.

APOLOGIES                                            Nil              

 

 

CONDOLENCES                           

 

Uncle Stephen Williams (read by Mayor Waller)

 

Uncle Stephen Williams was born 30 July 1952 and died 16 April 2018 after a lengthy illness.

 

A proud Wiradjuri man and local Aboriginal Elder, Uncle Stephen had lived in the Liverpool area for most of his life. During this time, he had been an integral part of the Liverpool community. He used his experiences and knowledge as a Wiradjuri man to educate and inform the wider community on the lives and culture of Aboriginal people, both locally and further afield. Uncle Stephen utilised his artistic skills to share the stories of Aboriginal people with local communities. He regularly volunteered his time to projects such as Council’s Aboriginal Consultative Committee, and Strong Fathers, Strong Families; a project which engages Aboriginal men in the community and encourages them to be positive role models. He hosted many Aboriginal art workshops to engage the community, including working on several large mural projects in the Liverpool area.

 

Uncle Stephen was a constant presence at Council events and functions. He was often called upon to conduct smoking ceremonies and Acknowledgements to Country. Uncle Stephen was honoured for his commitment to volunteering and contributing to the local community by being named Liverpool’s “Citizen of the Year” in 2014.

 

Uncle Stephen was a warrior for Liverpool, a proud Wiradjuri man, an advocate for Aboriginal people and culture, and most importantly, a long-time friend to many here at Council. He will be very missed by all in the Liverpool community.

 

On behalf of all at Liverpool City Council, I humbly express my deepest condolences to Uncle Stephen’s family and friends at this difficult time. I am sure that Uncle Stephen’s community spirit will live on in all those whom had the pleasure of knowing him.

 

May he rest in peace.

Motion:                                   Moved: Mayor Waller          Seconded: Clr Hadchiti 

That Council writes to the family of Uncle Stephen Williams expressing our condolences for their loss.

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


 

Confirmation of Minutes

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Shelton              Seconded: Clr Rhodes

 

That the minutes of the Ordinary Meeting held on 26 April 2018 be confirmed as a true record of that meeting subject to the following comment and change:

In relation to QWN 01 Question With Notice - Clr Hadchiti;

i)              The outcome of the remaining Council court appearances shown on pages  27 and 28 of the minutes be provided to Councillors once known; and

 

ii)             The response to question 6 was updated and provided to Councillors via memo and the response is copied below;

 

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

 Declarations of Interest                                     

 

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

 

Item:               NOM 02 Better Land Use Support

 

Reason:         Clr Rhodes is on the Planning Panel.

 

Clr Rhodes left the Chambers for the vote of this item.  

 

 

Clr Harle declared a non-pecuniary, but significant interest in the following item:

 

Item:               NOM 02 Better Land Use Support

 

Reason:         Clr Harle is on the Planning Panel.

 

Clr Harle left the Chambers for the vote of this item.

Public Forum

 

Presentations (items not on agenda)

 

Nil

 

Representations (Items on Agenda)

 

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

 

NOM 02 Better Land Use Support

 

  1. Mr Michael Andjelkovic addressed Council on the following item:

 

COM 04 Edmondson Park Community Infrastructure Update

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Shelton              Seconded: Clr Kaliyanda

 

That a three minute extension of time be given to the speaker.

 

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

 

Clr Hadchiti asked this name be recorded as having voted against the above motion to grant an extension of time. 

 

  1. Mr Ricardo Lonza will address the Council on the following item:

 

NOM 03 Saving Our Koalas

 

 

URGENCY MOTION

 

Background

 

A report in last weekend’s Sunday Telegraph reported that the Parramatta Bronto blew an engine last week and is now offline.

 

The Parramatta Bronto was the closest appliance of its kind to Liverpool, with the closest one now at Crows Nest.

 

When the Paper Mill caught fire last September it was this Parramatta Bronto which was the primary appliance in use.  It was this vehicle that the firefighters used to access the building and eventually put the fire out.

 

With this vehicle now offline and the ever increasing number of high rises being constructed in Liverpool, it is a matter of urgency that the Mayor contact the State Government to answer the following questions:

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Hagarty             Seconded: Clr Hadchiti

 

That Council:

 

Direct the Mayor to write to the State Government authority and minister as soon as possible asking the following:

 

  1. How long will the Parramatta Bronto be offline?

 

  1. What alternative arrangements have been put in place to ensure there are adequate aerial appliances within a reasonable distance of the Liverpool CBD?

The Mayor ruled that this was a matter of urgency and as such, the above motion was dealt with at this meeting.

 

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

 

 

URGENCY MOTION

 

Clr Ayyad expressed her disappointment of the ‘white flight’ in Western Sydney comment recently made by the NSW Opposition Leader, Mr Luke Foley and proposed a motion regarding the matter. 

 

In accordance with Clause 16.6.2 of Council’s Code of Meeting Practice, the Mayor ruled

that the business proposed was not a matter of urgency, however she agreed that she would write to the NSW Opposition Leader to point out that Council has concerns about the disharmony such comments could make in this area.

 


12

 

Chief Executive Officer Report

ITEM NO:       CEO 01

FILE NO:        093203.2018

SUBJECT:     Extraordinary Meeting of Council, Monday 29 October 2018

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council hold an Extraordinary Meeting on Monday 29 October 2018 to present the audited financial reports for 2017-18 to Council.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Hadchiti             Seconded: Clr Ayyad

 

That Council give notice and hold the scheduled Ordinary Council meeting of 31st October 2018 on the 29th October 2018 instead.

 

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

 


13

ITEM NO:       CEO 02

FILE NO:        123933.2018

SUBJECT:     Local Government NSW Annual Conference

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That:

 

1.    Any Councillors who wish to attend the 2018 Local Government NSW Annual Conference notify the Councillor Support Officer;

 

2.    Council determine its voting delegates for the Conference; and

 

3.    A further report be submitted to Council dealing with:

 

a)    Any motions Council may wish to submit to the Conference; and

b)    The Conference Program.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Shelton              Seconded: Clr Rhodes

 

That the recommendation be adopted.

 

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

 


14

ITEM NO:       CEO 03

FILE NO:        126665.2018

SUBJECT:     Code of Meeting Practice - Proposed amendment to include webcasting

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

 

1.   Places the proposed amendment to Council’s Code of Meeting Practice, to include a Clause relating to webcasting (as shown below) on public exhibition for at least 28 days, inviting public comment and submissions;

 

“The proceedings, including all debate, of all ordinary and extraordinary meetings held in the council chamber excluding those parts of the meeting which are held in confidential session in accordance with Section 10A(2) of the Local Government Act 1993, shall be webcast. It should also be noted that the Public Forum section of Council meetings will not be webcast. Council is not responsible for defamatory statements made by members of the public at a council meeting, whether published by the Council or not.”

 

2.   Receives a further report following the public exhibition period, or if no objections are received, delegate to the CEO to adopt the proposed change to the Code of Meeting Practice.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Rhodes              Seconded: Clr Ayyad

 

That the recommendation be adopted.

 

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

 


15

 

City Community and Culture Report

ITEM NO:       COM 01

FILE NO:        095196.2018

SUBJECT:     Grants, Donations and Corporate Sponsorship

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council endorses the funding recommendation of $10,000 (GST exclusive) under the Corporate Sponsorship (Outgoing) Program for the following project:

 

Applicant

Project

Recommended

Igbo Community Australia Inc

African Cultural & Dinner Nite 2018

$10,000


That Council endorses the funding recommendation of $1,804 (GST exclusive) under the Community Grants Program for the following project:

 

Applicant

Project

Recommended

Anglicare

NAIDOC Week – Because of Her We Can

$1,804

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.

 


16

ITEM NO:       COM 02

FILE NO:        127626.2018

SUBJECT:     Draft Recreation, Open Space and Sports Strategy

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

 

1.   Endorse updates made to the draft Recreation, Open Space and Sports Strategy; in accordance with community feedback received during public consultation and internal review; and

 

2.   Adopt the draft Recreation, Open Space and Sports Strategy.

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Kaliyanda          Seconded: Clr Hadchiti

 

That the recommendation be adopted.

 

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

 


17

ITEM NO:       COM 03

FILE NO:        131660.2018

SUBJECT:     Redevelopment of Phillips Park, Lurnea

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

 

1.    Adopts the Draft Landscape Masterplan Report attached and as outlined in figure 2 for redevelopment of Phillips Park, Lurnea;

 

2.    Notes that a detailed design will now proceed on the basis of the Draft Landscape Masterplan Report; and

 

3.    A further report be brought forward to Council addressing the tennis needs for Lurnea and surrounding areas in line with the strategic directions outlined in the Draft Recreation, Open Space and Sports Strategy.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Hagarty             Seconded: Clr Rhodes

 

That Council:

 

  1. Adopts the Draft Landscape Masterplan Report attached and as outlined in figure 2 for redevelopment of Phillips Park, Lurnea;

 

  1. Notes that a detailed design will now proceed on the basis of the Draft Landscape Masterplan Report;

 

3.    A further report be brought to the August 2018 Council meeting addressing the tennis needs for Lurnea and surrounding areas in line with the strategic directions outlined in the Draft Recreation, Open Space and Sports Strategy.  The report is to also include a list of proposed alternative sites and timeframes and costs associated with those alternatives for tennis facilities; and

 

  1. Take into consideration the outcomes of the childcare needs studies currently being undertaken and also consideration of an income generating asset in the review of the final Master Plan for the community facilities.

 

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

 


18

ITEM NO:       COM 04

FILE NO:        138569.2018

SUBJECT:     Edmondson Park Community Infrastructure Update

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

 

1.    Receives and notes staff’s report concerning the Edmondson Park Community Forum, and the future delivery options for the delivery of infrastructure in Edmondson Park;

 

2.    Notes that, in the event terms can be agreed within the expected timeframe, a report concerning the status of a Voluntary Planning Agreement with Frasers is expected to be brought to Council for consideration in the coming months;

 

3.    Directs the CEO to write to Landcom and request a briefing for Councillors in relation to their plans and strategies concerning the future delivery of infrastructure and open space in Edmondson Park;

 

4.    Directs the CEO to continue making representations to Transport for NSW concerning the inadequate commuter car parking situation in Edmondson Park, and the impact this situation is having on residents of the suburb and surrounding catchment;

 

5.    Notes the ongoing efforts of the CEO and staff to engage with the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal (IPART) on seeking approval to close the Section 94 funding gap as discussed in the report, with a view to providing additional funding of infrastructure delivery in Edmondson Park and elsewhere;

 

6.    Approves and adopts the proposed strategy to forward-fund the land cost shortfalls identified for the Bernera Road Extension project and Edmondson Park Flood Detention Basin project as outlined in this report, noting that this funding model may serve as a blueprint for future up-front infrastructure delivery where available;

 

7.    Approves application(s) for loan(s) under the NSW Government Low Cost Loans Initiative to give effect to the strategy;

 

8.    Delegates authority to the CEO and Council’s nominated Power of Attorney holder to execute any required documentation to give effect to this resolution;

 

9.    Directs the CEO to include the repayment of these loans in future budget review processes, and in future s.94 contribution plans applicable to Edmondson Park and surrounding areas;

 

10.  Directs the CEO to repay elements of the loan funding in advance of the listed schedule, if and when funding for such a purpose becomes available from either additional HAF grant funding, or from additional s.94 contributions assigned for this purpose; and

 

11.  Direct the Common Seal of Council to be applied to any document required to be executed to give effect to this resolution, as and if required by the NSW Treasury Corporation.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Hagarty             Seconded: Clr Rhodes

 

That Council:

 

1.    Receives and notes staff’s report concerning the Edmondson Park Community Forum, and the future delivery options for the delivery of infrastructure in Edmondson Park;

 

2.    Notes that, in the event terms can be agreed within the expected timeframe, a report concerning the status of a Voluntary Planning Agreement with Frasers is expected to be brought to Council for consideration in the coming months;

 

3.    Directs the CEO to write to Landcom and request a briefing for Councillors in relation to their plans and strategies concerning the future delivery of infrastructure and open space in Edmondson Park;

 

4.    Directs the CEO to continue making representations to Transport for NSW concerning the inadequate commuter car parking situation in Edmondson Park, and the impact this situation is having on residents of the suburb and surrounding catchment;

 

5.    Notes the ongoing efforts of the CEO and staff to engage with the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal (IPART) on seeking approval to close the Section 94 funding gap as discussed in the report, with a view to providing additional funding of infrastructure delivery in Edmondson Park and elsewhere;

 

6.    Approves and adopts the proposed strategy to forward-fund the land cost shortfalls identified for the Bernera Road Extension project and Edmondson Park Flood Detention Basin project as outlined in this report, noting after further evaluation that this funding model may serve as a blueprint for future up-front infrastructure delivery where available;

 

7.    Approves application(s) for loan(s) under the NSW Government Low Cost Loans Initiative to give effect to the strategy;

 

8.    Delegates authority to the CEO and Council’s nominated Power of Attorney holder to execute any required documentation to give effect to this resolution;

 

9.    Directs the CEO to include the repayment of these loans in future budget review processes, and in future s.94 contribution plans applicable to Edmondson Park and surrounding areas;

 

10.  Directs the CEO to repay elements of the loan funding in advance of the listed schedule, if and when funding for such a purpose becomes available from either additional HAF grant funding, or from additional s.94 contributions assigned for this purpose; and

 

11.  Direct the Common Seal of Council to be applied to any document required to be executed to give effect to this resolution, as and if required by the NSW Treasury Corporation.

 

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

 


21

 

City Corporate Report

 

ITEM NO:       CORP 01

FILE NO:        110998.2018

SUBJECT:     Investment Report April 2018

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council receives and notes this report.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Shelton              Seconded: Clr Ayyad

 

That the recommendation be adopted.

 

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

 


22

ITEM NO:       CORP 02

FILE NO:        123216.2018

SUBJECT:     Budget Review - March 2018

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

 

1.    Receives and notes the report; and

 

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

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Shelton              Seconded: Clr Hadchiti

 

That Council:

 

  1. Receives and notes the report;

 

  1. Approves the identified budget variations in accordance with this report; and

 

3.    Notes in future, separate statements are to be produced with respect to the Compliance Levy, Environmental Rate Levy and the City Development Fund.

 

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

 


23

ITEM NO:       CORP 03

FILE NO:        136014.2018

SUBJECT:     Woodward Park Master Plan

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council receives and endorses the Woodward Park Master Plan update and proposed next steps.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Kaliyanda          Seconded: Clr Rhodes

 

That the recommendation be adopted.

 

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

 


24

 

Committee Reports

ITEM NO:       CTTE 01

FILE NO:        118929.2018

SUBJECT:     Minutes of the Liverpool Sports Committee Meeting held on 1 March 2018

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council receives and notes the Minutes of the Liverpool Sports Committee Meeting held on 1 March 2018.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Kaliyanda          Seconded: Clr Hagarty

 

That the recommendation be adopted.

 

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

 


25

ITEM NO:       CTTE 02

FILE NO:        132872.2018

SUBJECT:     Minutes of the Liverpool Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting held on 7 May 2018

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

 

1.    Receives and notes the Minutes of the Liverpool Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting held on 7 May 2018; and

 

2.    Endorse the recommendations in the Minutes.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Harle                  Seconded: Clr Rhodes

 

That the recommendation be adopted subject to the following amendments:

 

·         The date in the first sentence under the heading of “5.1 Former Liverpool Courthouse” on page 149 of the Council Agenda be corrected from November 2018 to “November 2017” so that the sentence reads as follows:

 

“The building was state heritage listed in November 2017 and is currently vacant”.

 

·         The third sentence under the heading of “Strategic direction” on page 152 of the Council Agenda was said by Peter Savidis.  His name is to be included in that paragraph so that the first part of the information under that heading is to read as follows;

 

“Clr Rhodes noted the strategy is a step in the right direction however not all aspects were agreed to on her part. However as Liverpool being the 4th oldest town in Australia, it should showcase the rare significance of the buildings to the public and would be of great service.

 

Peter Savidis said: ‘As people in the community are fragmented and don’t share Information with each other, a lot of work will need to be done to improve a sense of community and connection to these sites and the people surrounding’”.

 

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

 

 


26

ITEM NO:       CTTE 03

FILE NO:        135897.2018

SUBJECT:     Minutes of the Audit, Risk and Improvement Committee Meeting held on 4 May 2018

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

 

1.    Receives and notes the Draft Minutes of the Audit, Risk and Improvement Committee Meeting held on 4 May 2018; and

 

2.    Endorses the recommendations in the Draft Minutes.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Kaliyanda          Seconded: Clr Hagarty

 

That the recommendation be adopted.

 

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

 


27

 

Notices of Motion

ITEM NO:       NOM 01

FILE NO:        136768.2018

SUBJECT:     Library Opening Hours

 

BACKGROUND

 

The Liverpool Youth Council has been advocating for the extension of opening hours of the Liverpool City and Carnes Hill Libraries for the period of the HSC trial and final exams during their term.

 

They have consulted widely with young people who use the libraries for study and support during their exams, and believe that extending the opening hours would not only be beneficial for young people in the Liverpool LGA, but that these measures would be enthusiastically supported by young people and their families.

 

Recently, Council officers provided advice that extending the opening hours of both Liverpool City and Carnes Hill libraries to 9am – 8.30pm Monday to Sunday during the HSC period would have significant budget implications. The suggested alternative was to change the late closing of Green Valley Library from Tuesday and Thursday to Monday and Wednesday, and to open Carnes Hill Library till 8pm from Monday – Friday.

 

This would allow the Liverpool network to have 3 libraries open until 8pm most nights of the week for the 9 week HSC period. It would do so without as significant a budget impact.

 

Upon discussion with members of the Liverpool Youth Council, this was thought to be a reasonable initiative to trial in the 2018 HSC period, with data to be collected to inform future direction of library opening hours.

 

NOTICE OF MOTION (Submitted by Clr Kaliyanda)

 

That Council:

 

1.   Change the late opening hours of Green Valley Library to Monday and Wednesday rather than Tuesday and Thursday during the HSC period;

 

2.   Open Carnes Hill Library until 8pm from Monday to Friday during the HSC period;

 

3.   Monitor the attendance/usage of library facilities by students during the HSC period; and

 

4.   Develop a community survey for students and their families to monitor and evaluate the impact of these changes on them.

 

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Kaliyanda          Seconded: Clr Hadchiti 

 

That Council:

 

1.   Change the late opening hours of Green Valley Library to Monday and Wednesday rather than Tuesday and Thursday during the HSC period;

 

2.   Open Carnes Hill Library and Liverpool Library until 8pm from Monday to Friday during the HSC period;

 

3.    That the other libraries (Moorebank, Miller and Casula) also be opened for two 2 nights per week until 8.00pm during the HSC period;

 

4.   Monitor the attendance/usage of library facilities by students during the HSC period;

 

  1. Develop a community survey for students and their families to monitor and evaluate the impact of these changes on them; and

 

  1. Data to come back to Council in relation to usage of the libraries during the extended hours.

 

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

 


29

Clr Rhodes and Clr Harle declared a non-pecuniary interest in respect of NOM 02 and were not in the Chambers when this item was voted on.

ITEM NO:       NOM 02

FILE NO:        137668.2018

SUBJECT:     Better Land Use Support

 

Background

 

Council has spent considerable resources in challenging the development application for a recycling plant on the site better known as the Moorebank Recyclers.

 

Unfortunately, Council and the community lost its battle and consent was granted.

 

Recently the CEO advised Council that the site has been sold and the new owner will consider other options.

 

Council and the community celebrated this news as after a long battle, a better more suited planning outcome for that site may be achieved.

 

It is now up to the new owners to progress any proposal for the site but as a Council it is important to make clear and official our in principle support for a more suited land use.

 

NOTICE OF MOTION (Submitted by Clr Hadchiti)

 

That Council:

 

1.   In principle, support a proposal for a residential (and auxiliary) land use on the site known as the Moorebank Recyclers in lieu of a recycling facility;

 

2.   Note that any proposal needs to undergo the standard assessment process;

 

3.   Work closely with the proponent to ensure the best possible outcome for the site in a timely manner, should a proposal be received; and

 

4.   Organise a community BBQ once and if the development approval for the recycling plant is surrendered.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Hadchiti             Seconded: Clr Ayyad

 

That the recommendation be adopted.

 

 

Amendment:                                                                        Moved: Clr Hagarty     Seconded: Clr Kaliyanda 

 

That when and if a new development application is put forward, that the proponent work with the local community as soon as practical.

 

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

 

The Motion (moved by Clr Hadchiti) was then put to the meeting and was declared CARRIED.

 

Division called:

 

Vote for:                                Mayor Waller

                                                Clr Ayyad

                                                Clr Balloot

                                                Clr Hadchiti

                                                Clr Hadid   

                                                Clr Hagarty

                                                Clr Kaliyanda

                                                Clr Karnib

 

Vote against:                         Clr Shelton

 

Note: Clr Rhodes and Clr Harle were not in the Chambers when this item was voted on.

 


31

Clr Rhodes returned to the Chambers at 7.15pm.

 

Clr Harle returned to the Chambers at 7.15pm

ITEM NO:       NOM 03

FILE NO:        140742.2018

SUBJECT:     Saving Our Koalas

 

Background

 

Koalas are one of Australia's most iconic animals, recognisable around the world. However, Koala populations are under increasing pressure. Koala conservation programs are being undertaken on a national, state and local level and Liverpool needs to do its part.

 

The Koalas of the Georges River corridor do not stop at the Liverpool/Campbelltown LGA borders, they move through bushland and along the Georges River gorge from Appin, through Wedderburn to Kentlyn, then onto Glenfield.

 

They go beyond the Campbelltown Council area, through suburbs like Holsworthy, Wattle Grove, Moorebank and the Army lands in the LGA of Liverpool, then on to Sandy Point and turn up in places like Menai in the Sutherland Shire.

 

So all the LGAs of Wollondilly, Campbelltown, Liverpool, Wingecarribee, Sutherland and Wollongong share this Koala colony and should act to protect it, each of these LGA’s have a responsibility to engage and accept their part in preserving our Koala population.

 

All LGA’s who share this last and only Australian colony of remaining disease-free koalas, need to work collaboratively with the State Government Office of Environment and Heritage and the Roads and Maritime Service and the Army so as to protect habitat and provide 'safe' ways for koalas to cross roads.

 

In the last two months 9 Koalas have been killed on roads, 8 on the Appin Rd and another on Heathcote Road. With other reports of another Koala killed on the Moorebank Road.

 

Fencing and wildlife underpasses and overpasses are implemented elsewhere (Queensland an NSW North coast) so why not for these Koalas in this part of Sydney?

 

Liverpool Council is to be congratulated in that we are already engaged with projects that are being undertaken under the existing Saving Our Species (SOS) program that is facilitated by the Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH), but we need a collaborative approach that reaches beyond these projects and the Liverpool LGA and addresses the issues for the South West Sydney colony of Koalas who do not abide by LGA boundaries.

 

 

What we now ask Liverpool Council to do is support and participate in the “Protecting the koalas of South West Sydney Summit” and work collaboratively by bringing everyone to the table that includes Local State and Federal MP's and Candidates, adjoining Councils, State Environmental representatives, State Planning, Roads & Maritime Services, National Parks, Total Environment Centre, local environmental groups, and community members.

 

Liverpool Council CEO states “Council cannot ignore that this Koala population is travelling and even populating parts of the Liverpool LGA and they need our protection”.

 

Liverpool Council needs to take a pro-active stance, support the Summit, work collaboratively with our neighbouring LGA’s who advocate for even greater collaboration in bringing all Government departments and the community to the table so that a regional sustainable South West Sydney koala solution may be implemented.

 

Please follow the link below and sign the petition to help protect our Koalas

 

https://www.thepetitionsite.com/298/817/733/save-sydney-koalas/

 

NOTICE OF MOTION  (Submitted by Clr Rhodes)

 

That Council Investigate and report back to Council July Meeting 2018 on:

 

1.   The provision of a Koala Management Plan that supports the State Government and neighbouring LGA’s Koala Management Plans for the protection of Koala habitat and migration paths along the Georges River that includes the provision of 'safe' ways for koalas to cross roads; and

 

2.   Write to the State Government to request funding through the NSW Koala Strategy that includes their commitment tofixing priority road-kill hotspots across NSW”, to include the migration routes along the Georges River and through the Liverpool LGA.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Rhodes              Seconded: Clr Hagarty

 

That Council:

 

  1. Continues to support the State Government initiatives and actions to preserve

and enhance Koala population through the NSW Koala Strategy; 

 

  1. Also support by means of collaboration and participation in a Wollondilly 'Conserving the Koalas of South Western Sydney' Summit, that further advocates for an integrated comprehensive koala conservation plan for South Western Sydney. The focus of which will bring key players together to develop strategies to better conserve koala populations dealing with issues of connected habitat corridors, reducing road strike issues and disease management. Invitees would include Local State and Federal MP's and Candidates, adjoining Councils, State Environmental representatives, State Planning, Roads & Maritime Services, National Parks, Total Environment Centre, local environmental groups, and community members; 

 

  1. The petition circulated by Wollondilly Council be placed in Council’s libraries; and

 

  1. Clr Rhodes, and any other interested councillors, be nominated to attend the summit as Council’s representatives. 

 

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

 


34

ITEM NO:       NOM 04

FILE NO:        140801.2018

SUBJECT:     Toda Exchange Student Program

 

Background

 

Liverpool Council has committed to re-establishing the Council Student Exchange Program with our Sister City Toda.

 

Despite that there has been interest from a number of our local schools in participating in the Liverpool Council Program to send students to Toda it seems that there is not enough time to organise such participation for September 2018.

 

However some of the schools participating have concerns about the financial constraints some families may have in being able to participate, due to the cost involved. If Council was to consider on a case by case framework of financial support to those in need it would make the student exchange available to the broader student community within our LGA.

 

I remind Council that the single most important objective raised by our fellow Councillors from Toda last year was their wish that Liverpool re-engage in the Student Exchange Program with them. They wished that the program be reinstated this year but knowing that it is not possible it is even more important that we make the student exchange program a success on the next available occasion.

 

It would be a great disappointment to our Sister City if this was not to happen because the schools participating are from socio-economic disadvantaged areas.

 

Councils financial assistance to make it happen would go a long way to promoting the Program at the participating schools and ensuring greater interest and the on-going success of the program in following years.

 

The cultural exchange through participating schools is not to be under estimated in measuring positive outcomes, not only for the participating Students but also for the Liverpool economy by encouraging business and other cultural exchanges and opportunities that can only be of benefit to the entire Liverpool Community.

 

The other single most important topic of discussion by the members of the Toda delegation here in Australia, was Business.

 

Considering that Liverpool cannot fulfil their first request in September to re-engage the Student exchange program, it would perhaps be of interest to both the people in Toda and here in Liverpool to include representatives from the Business sector.

 

There are many Business organisation in Liverpool who would be interested in attending should Council and Toda agree and I am sure that Toda would look favourably upon Liverpool Council meeting at least one of their objectives mentioned when they last visited Australia.

 

I ask Councillors to support the motion.

 

NOTICE OF MOTION (Submitted by Clr Rhodes)

 

If the Toda Student exchange Program is to commence in September 2018, that Liverpool Council consider, on an individual application basis:

 

­  Granting financial assistance to applications from students wishing to travel to Toda as a part of the Liverpool Council Toda Student Exchange Program in 2018.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Rhodes              Seconded: Clr Harle

 

That Council:

 

  1. Considers granting financial assistance to applications from Students wishing to travel to Toda as a part of the Liverpool Council Toda Student Exchange Program on a case by case basis;

 

  1. Investigate if Toda would welcome a business representation to be a part of the October 2018 Sister City cultural exchange; 

 

  1. If approved invite business representatives who would like to participate in the 2018 Toda Cultural Sister City exchange on the basis that they fund their own expenses; and

 

  1. If a Councillor becomes an elected State or Federal member, then they are to pay their own expenses for the Toda trip.

 

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

 


36

 

Confidential Items

ITEM NO:       CONF 01

FILE NO:        129474.2018

SUBJECT:     Compulsory Acquisition of Lot 21 DP 1231320, Lot 21 Gurner Avenue, Austral (formerly part of 185 Gurner Avenue, Austral)  for drainage purposes

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

 

1.    Proceeds with the compulsory acquisition of that part of Lot 21 DP 1231320 being zoned ‘SP2 Infrastructure”, for the purposes of drainage;

 

2.    Proceeds with the making of the necessary application to the Minister for Local Government and the Governor in accordance with Section 187 of the Local Government Act 1993 to obtain approval to provide an acquisition notice if required, and commence compulsory acquisition of Lot 21 DP 1231320 in accordance with the provisions of Section 24 of the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991 and Section 69 of the Supreme Court Act 1970;

 

3.    Authorises the CEO and/or her nominee to negotiate with the owners to acquire Lot 21 DP 1231320 at the value as determined in an updated valuation report;

 

4.    Authorises the Chief Executive Officer to approve any payments required for the acquisition of Lot 21 DP 1231320 by either agreement, or if agreement is not reached, at the Valuer General’s determination; and

 

5.    Authorises its delegated officer to execute any document, under Power of Attorney, necessary to give effect to this decision.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Shelton              Seconded: Clr Hagarty

 

That the recommendation be adopted.

 

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


37

COUNCIL IN CLOSED SESSION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Harle                  Seconded: Clr Hadchiti

 

That Council move into closed session to deal with CONF 02 and CONF 03.

 

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

 

Mayor Waller advised that Council would now move into Closed Session to deal with Items CONF 02 and CONF 03 pursuant to the provisions of S10(A)2 d)(i) of the Local Government Act because the items contain commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it.

 

Mayor Waller called a recess of Council at 7.27pm so that members of the public could leave the Chambers.

 

Council moved into Closed Session at 7.39pm

ITEM NO:       CONF 02

FILE NO:        135570.2018

SUBJECT:     WSROC Contract - WR03-12/13- Road Rehabilitation and Asphalt Services - Contract Extension Request

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Shelton              Seconded: Clr Hadid

 

That Council:

 

1.    Offers an extension to the below listed contractors until 31 December 2018 for the Tender WR03-12/13 Road Rehabilitation and Asphalt Services, and places those contractors who accept the extension on a panel of preferred contractors;

Contract Portion

List of Contractors

Asphalt Deliver and Lay

·         State Asphalt Services Pty Ltd

·         Bernipave Pty Ltd

·         Borthwick & Pengilly Asphalts Pty Ltd

Asphalt Ex -Bin

·         State Asphalt Services Pty Ltd

·         Fulton Hogan Industries Pty Ltd (Minto/Wallgrove)

Crack Sealing

·         SuperSealing Pty Ltd

Mill and Fill

·         State Asphalt Services Pty Ltd

Pavement Restoration

·         Bernipave Pty Ltd

·         J&G Excavations & Asphalting (NSW) Pty Ltd

·         Borthwick & Pengilly Asphalts Pty Ltd

Profiling

·         Stabilised Pavements Of Australia Pty Ltd

·         State Asphalt Services Pty Ltd

·         Borthwick and Pengilly Pty Ltd

Spray Sealed Bituminous Surfacing

·         State Asphalt Services Pty Ltd

Stabilisation and/or Unbound Pavement Reconstruction

·         Stabilised Pavements of Australia Pty Ltd

Surface Preservation, Enrichment or Rejuvenation

·         Downer EDI Works Pty Ltd

Asphalt Pavement Reconstruction

·         Borthwick and Pengilly Pty Ltd

·         J and G Excavations Pty Ltd

·         Stabilised Pavements of Australia Pty Ltd

 

2.    That such an extension be offered pursuant to s.55(3)(i) of the Local Government Act 1993, for the following reasons:

 

a)   The listed contractors, and the rates in question, were subject to detailed market testing as part of a WSROC tender performed in 2013 and accepted by Council at the time;

b)   Following a review by staff, it is considered that these rates remain highly competitive, and offer excellent value when compared to prevailing market rates for the same types of supply;

c)   The listed suppliers have performed to a satisfactory standard during the contract period; and

d)   The extension being sought is of a short duration, and is required to allow the calling of fresh tenders for the supply in question;

 

3.    Notes that the Director - City Infrastructure and Environment will finalise all details and extend the contract following acceptance by the tenderers of Council’s offer; and

 

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.

 

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

 

Councillors voted unanimously for this motion.


39

ITEM NO:       CONF 03

FILE NO:        136411.2018

SUBJECT:     Tender WT2706 Design Construct - SES Retrofit Ground Floor, 1 Hoxton Park Rd, Liverpool

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Shelton              Seconded: Clr Rhodes 

 

That Council delegate authority to the CEO to determine the tender in this matter.

 

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

 

Councillors voted unanimously for this motion.

 

 

MOTION TO MOVE BACK INTO OPEN SESSION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Karnib                Seconded: Clr Hagarty

 

That Council move back into Open Session.

 

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

 

Council moved back into Open Session at 7.51pm.

 

Mayor Waller advised the gallery of the motions which Council passed during Closed Session.


 

 

THE MEETING CLOSED AT 7.52 pm.

 

 

<Signature>

Name: Wendy Waller

Title:     Mayor

Date:     27 June 2018

I have authorised a stamp bearing my signature to be affixed to the pages of the Minutes of the Council Meeting held on  30 May 2018. I confirm that Council has adopted these Minutes as a true and accurate record of the meeting.

 

    


41

Ordinary Meeting 27 June 2018

City Economy and Growth Report

 

EGROW 01

Street naming

 

Strategic Direction

Creating Connection

Celebrate diversity, promote inclusion and recognise heritage

File Ref

136272.2018

Report By

Louis Chen - Strategic Planner

Approved By

Tim Moore - Director, City Economy and Growth / Deputy CEO

 

 

Executive Summary

 

The purpose of this report is to seek a Council resolution on current street naming requests. All street names have been assessed using Council’s Naming Convention Policy and in consultation with the Geographical Names Board (GNB) of NSW.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

 

1.    Supports the street names Rieckmann Lane, Bratchell Court and Brushtail Court noted in Items 1 and 2 of this report;

 

2.    Delegates to the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to begin the process of gazettal; and

 

3.    Does not support the renaming of part of Dragoon Road noted in Item 3.

 

REPORT

 

Three street naming proposals were received in May 2018. All street names have been assessed using Council’s Naming Convention Policy, in consultation with the Geographical Names Board (GNB) of NSW. The names have been checked for duplication using the GNB’s Online Road Naming System. Names that have previously been approved by Council are not listed in this report.

 

Item 1: Laneway behind Maryvale Avenue, Liverpool

An application has been lodged to name the unnamed laneway behind Maryvale Avenue, Liverpool, running from Memorial Avenue to St Pauls Crescent, Rieckmann Lane. The name commemorates Mr Werner Rieckmann, one of the first immigrants to settle in Memorial Avenue. He helped many newly arrived residents build their homes and temporary dwellings and provided assistance during periods of flood. At the time of his passing on 21 September 2016, he was the oldest living resident on Memorial Avenue.

 

Item 2: 30 Old Glenfield Road, Casula (Lot 17 DP1017718)

 

One new road will be created as part of the approved subdivision of 30 Old Glenfield Road, Casula. It is proposed to name the road Bratchell Court after former alderman and mayor of Liverpool, Thomas George Bratchell, who resided in Liverpool for 20 years. He had a strong association with public movements in Liverpool including presidency of the Liverpool Employment Committee, Liverpool’s All Saints’ Church committee and was also a trustee of the Roman Catholic Cemetery. He passed away on 30 September 1935.

 

Brushtail Court is proposed as a back-up name in the instance Bratchell Court is objected to by the GNB. The name Brushtail refers to the common brushtail possum, a frequently observed marsupial in the local area.

Item 3: 70-80 Croatia Avenue, Edmondson Park

An application has been lodged to rename the section of Dragoon Road, north of Dalmatia Avenue, Edmondson Park, Skradin Road. This road is currently not constructed.

 

The name is an acknowledgement of a small town in Croatia, Skradin, where the applicant was born, linking to the names of Croatia Avenue and Dalmatia Avenue in Edmondson Park. The applicant was a former resident of the site and his family had lived in the Liverpool area for over 50 years.

 

It is recommended that Council does not approve a change to this street name on the grounds that this name is not consistent with the local theme (World War II in commemoration of John Edmondson VC).

 

 

Next Steps

 

All street names supported by Council will be:

 

·  Placed on public notification for 28 days in the local newspaper;

·  The GNB and other relevant state agencies (Australia Post, NSW Ambulance, Fire and Rescue NSW, NSW Rural Fire Service, NSW State Emergency Service, NSW Volunteer Rescue Association, Roads and Maritime Services and NSW Police Force) will be notified using the GNB’s Online Road Naming System to seek endorsement.

 

CONSIDERATIONS

 

Economic

There are no economic and financial considerations.

Environment

There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.


Social

Preserve and maintain heritage, both landscape and cultural as urban development takes place.


Civic Leadership

Foster neighbourhood pride and a sense of responsibility.

Legislative

Roads Act 1993

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

 

Nil


45

Ordinary Meeting 27 June 2018

City Economy and Growth Report

 

EGROW 02

Proposed Austral/Leppington North Planning Controls Amendments

 

Strategic Direction

Strengthening and Protecting our Environment

Exercise planning controls to create high-quality, inclusive urban environments

File Ref

141323.2018

Report By

Ian Stendara - Strategic Planner

Approved By

Tim Moore - Director, City Economy and Growth / Deputy CEO

 

 

Executive Summary

 

The Austral and Leppington North Precincts (ALN) were rezoned in March 2013 from predominately rural uses to urban uses to provide an additional 17,350 homes. Following a review of the planning controls, including the Indicative Layout Plan (ILP) for new roads, a number of small adjustments are considered necessary.

 

These are:

 

1.   Draft an amendment to State Environmental Planning Policy (Sydney Region Growth Centres) 2006 (the SEPP) and the Liverpool Growth Centres Precinct Development Control Plan (the DCP) to optimise the road network, allowing existing lots to develop more easily, increase pedestrian permeability, and respond to newly established developments which were not accounted for when planning was finalised by the Department of Planning in 2013;

 

2.   Draft an amendment to the DCP and Contributions Plan (CP) to remove a number of road bridge crossings to optimise the expenditure for new assets in the area;

 

3.   Draft an amendment to the DCP to modify existing controls for the provision of traffic safety infrastructure (Local Area Traffic Management or LATM), allowing a more transparent and considered approach to traffic safety in the area.

 

This amendments proposed are considered necessary early on in the development of the Austral/Leppington North precinct in order to:

 

1.   Increase development feasibility of some land holdings by amending the planned road network;

 

2.   Ensure that reduced car dependency goals can be realised by increasing pedestrian priority permeability,

3.   Reduce the costs of development and the on-going maintenance costs of Council assets by removing some future road bridges which cross creeks which are not considered necessary and will not adversely impact connectivity throughout the precinct.

 

4.   Streamline development assessment by providing transparency to developers, increase local traffic safety, and encourage greater street activity by clarifying LATM facility controls.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

 

1.    Supports the drafting of a Development Control Plan and State Environmental Planning Policy amendment to the proposed road network in the Austral/Leppington North release area including local area traffic management controls and consequential amendments to the Austral / Leppington North Contributions Plan;

 

2.    Note that opportunities to undertake some or all of this work as part of a City Deal commitment to review the design and engineering standards for the Western City District will be explored; and

 

3.    Receives a further report detailing the draft SEPP, DCP and Contributions Plan amendments once drafted.

 

REPORT

 

Background

Austral was rezoned in March 2013 by the Department of Planning. This was the first precinct in Liverpool to be rezoned under the Growth Centres SEPP. The SEPP and the DCP were both drafted by the Department, with input from Council. Land which is subject to the SEPP, and DCP is shown in Figure 1 below.

 

The Indicative Layout Plan (ILP) is a map which shows the future road network, and the land uses in the precincts (e.g. low density residential, open space etc.). The ILP is a map contained within the DCP. The ILP provides Council, developers and land-owners with certainty as to how the land will be developed in a coordinated manner. It is important that land is developed according to the ILP to ensure that precinct scale planning objectives are achieved.

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Department listed the following factors as key objectives for the transport and access network in the Austral and Leppington North precincts:

 

·    A hierarchy of roads should separate local traffic and through traffic, to allow access to planned centres whilst maintaining residential amenity;

 

·    The road network should allow for efficient public transport routes, and maximise connectivity options with public transport users;

 

·    A grid-layout road network which maximises the ability for residents to walk or cycle by a short route from home to destinations;

 

·    Retain existing roads where possible;

 

·    Roads should respond to the location of lot boundaries to maximise subdivision efficiency;

 

·    Respond to local topography and vegetation (create opportunities for views);

 

·    Local streets should terminate at open spaces, to provide views and maximise overlooking of public spaces;

 

·    Major roads are to provide direct access to town centres and industrial zones.

Figure 1: Land to which the Austral/Leppington North SEPP and DCP applies

 

Network Optimisation

Whilst the ILP is relatively successful in achieving the objectives for the transport and access network more broadly, there are a number of instances where the adopted DCP road network and the written controls do not provide for optimal outcomes:. These include:

 

·    Block Depth:

In some instances the distance between new planned roads (as indicated by the ILP) is too great or too little to allow for efficient subdivision. A standard street block should be about 60-70 metres deep to allow for 30-35m deep lots (most off-the-plan project homes are designed for 30m deep lots).

 

·    Lot Boundaries:

There are some instances where the location of planned streets do not align with existing lot boundaries, which results in residue land which cannot be developed until surrounding properties also develop.

 

·    Cross-streets:

Some blocks do not have regularly spaced cross-streets. Regular cross streets improve pedestrian connectivity and legibility, by allowing for greater freedom of movement (an area that allows for free movement is said to be highly permeable).

 

The aims of the proposed SEPP and DCP amendment will be to optimise the road network layout by:

 

·    Making properties easier to develop by accommodating sufficient roads to provide access to new lots,

·    Make land subdivision more efficient by providing nominal block depths in low density areas of 60-70m, where achievable,

·    Spreading burdens and benefits associated with roads more equitably amongst land-owners, thereby facilitating development, and

·    Increasing pedestrian permeability in the precinct, by ensuring that excessively long street blocks are dissected by new roads or pedestrian access paths.

 

Maps will be prepared showing the existing ILP road network and proposed changes, including a brief description as to why the change is proposed.

 

Block Depth

 

Most future roads in Austral have been planned to ensure that street blocks will be about 60-70m deep; however, there are some instances where the distance between roads is far wider or narrower. Many blocks are noted as being up to 80m deep, with some even being greater than 100m. In low density residential areas the optimal depth of street blocks is 60-70m deep, in order to provide a typical lot depth of 30-35m. Blocks of 30-35m deep allows construction of most of-the-plan project homes, with an area of private open space and landscaping in the backyard.

 

In areas with these problematic street blocks, Council officers have been assessing applications were developers are varying the ILP road network. Whilst Council officers can support varying the ILP network when impacts are minimal and isolated to the subject development site, broad scale variations, of which Council has been receiving, leads to a disjointed road network and can burden neighbouring land-owners with additional issues. This piecemeal amendment approach undermines the planning framework, and will ultimately lead to a less attractive residential environment for future residents.

 

Lot Boundaries

 

There are some instances where the existing lot boundaries and the ILP road network do not align. This results in some land-owners being burdened with a large number of new roads to be constructed on their properties, whilst their neighbours may have so little road construction that they can’t provide access to new lots. This can often result in a stalemate, where neither land-owner can feasibly develop, without undertaking a formal agreement, or paper subdivision which can add more time and cost for the development. Whilst the existing lot/subdivision pattern cannot be changed, and the creation of residue land is sometimes unavoidable, there are some instances where the planned ILP roads can be shifted or re-oriented to provide for a more efficient and equitable solution, where owners can develop independently of one-another.

 

Cross Streets

 

It is good practice that street blocks are no longer than 200m in length, and the written DCP controls require that there is to be no more than 250m between cross streets. This is an important urban design consideration where the choice to walk or cycle is heavily influenced by the time and effort to reach a destination. Pedestrians and cyclists are far more sensitive to distance than motorists, given the speed at which they travel and the physical exertion of movement. As such, it is important to have regularly spaced cross streets to ensure that pedestrians and cyclist do not have to walk or cycle around overly large street blocks. Providing easily walkable neighbourhoods has obvious health benefits, and can also reduce congestion and parking problems at local schools and shops.

 

There is a current inconsistency between the ILP and DCP with regards to street blocks being in excess of 250m. This does not promote an easily walkable environment. The proposed DCP amendment will add cross streets where blocks are in excess of 250m deep.

 

Bridge Crossings

The objectives of removing some bridge crossing are based on ensuring that:

·    The road network remains sufficient for distributing traffic in the precincts,

·    Pedestrian permeability is not impacted by the removal of road bridge crossings,

·    Any bridge crossings are capable of being designed to a standard which does not impede stormwater flows, nor presents a safety issue for residents in the event of storm conditions,

·    Any existing and future residents will retain road access, and that alternative routes will be provided should any proposed bridges be removed.

·    Minimise costs of development, by reducing contributions expenditure in relation to proposed bridges and culverts,

A number of road bridges or culverts are proposed in the Precinct. The construction of new bridges across creeks are funded via developer contributions. The plan is comprised of the construction and land acquisition costs of all infrastructure and facilities that needs to be constructed in Austral and Leppington North for new developments.

 

Some of these bridge crossings intersect creeks at very shallow angles (longer bridges cost significantly more than shorter bridges which cross creeks at 90 degrees). Further, many of these bridges are for local roads, not higher order collector roads, therefore some are not required for traffic circulation purposes. It is proposed that the DCP and Contributions Plan are amended to reduce the number of identified creek crossings, when they are not needed. It is suggested that some of these crossings may still need pedestrian bridges to ensure that pedestrian permeability is not negatively impacted in this process. Pedestrian only bridges are generally much smaller and have lower construction costs and can be more easily oriented to provide a shorter crossing length.

 

Traffic Safety

 

Key objectives of preparing such an amendment are:

 

·    For local streets, prioritise pedestrian and cyclists, and provide a pleasant environment which encourages walking and social interaction, whilst maintaining vehicular access;

·    Increase road safety by providing a street design to ensure a low-speed traffic environment (40-50km/h) on local streets by influencing driver behaviour, through both visual and physical cues;

·    Provide certainty and transparency to developers by specifying the street design requirements and the general location and type of traffic calming facilities required;

·    Improve public amenity and the local streetscapes by encouraging the use of LATM facilities which do not add visual clutter, but rather soften the streetscape;

·    Minimise the loss of on-street parking and disruptions to residents;

·    Provide traffic calming devices which minimise costs of construction and maintenance;

·    Discourage traffic calming devices which decrease pedestrian and cyclist safety, induce noise, are a visual blight,, and in some cases cause damage to vehicles.

 

The design of streets has a major influence on driver behaviour, particularly vehicle speeds. Residential areas have a posted speed limit of 50km/h, and it is standard practice to design a street to ensure that drivers are influenced to drive within the speed limit. Without such a design approach (including traffic calming devices), and given the large number of long streets that exist and are planned for in Austral, it is very likely that drivers will exceed the speed limit. This presents obvious safety and amenity issues between drivers and other road users, especially pedestrians. It also limits other important roles the street should for the community to enjoy and for children to play.

Perceived carriageway width, corner geometry, deflection devices, textured surfaces, and landscaped features all influence driver behaviour. The written DCP for the Austral/Leppington North precincts contains some provisions which are aimed at traffic calming; however, some of the controls are not clear and sometimes conflicting. The controls were also written in a manner which assumed a single developer would be developing a substantial amount of land (e.g. many hectares yielding 100s or 1,000s of lots).

Unfortunately, this strategy will be largely ineffective in Austral due to the significantly smaller land-holdings compared to most traditional greenfield release areas (most existing lots in Austral are approximately 1.2 hectares, which may only yield 20-30 subdivided lots). As developers are only providing short amounts of road at a time, they cannot determine the optimal location of traffic calming facilities, as they cannot be certain as to how properties surrounding them will develop. There is also an issue that each developer will approach traffic safety differently, leading to a disjointed approach which will ultimately result in less desirable outcomes. This will result in poorer integration of traffic safety devices and will likely result in Council having to retro-fit such devices, which are much costlier and disrupt established residents.

 


Figure 2 below shows a street design approach on a street in West Hoxton, which contributes to a low speed environment suitable for residential areas. This approach does not clutter the area with signage, nor rely on potentially damaging speed bumps, or the police for enforcement and speed cameras. It encourages slow and cautious driving

Figure 2: Wyattville Drive, West Hoxton, various elements of the streetscape encourage a low-speed traffic environment

Master planned Local Area Traffic Management (LATM) schemes have been used effectively in Liverpool’s former release areas, such as Cecil Hills, Prestons, Hoxton Park and West Hoxton. Given the success of this approach in Council’s former greenfield areas, Council planners suggest that a similar approach is used for the Austral and Leppington North precincts. Providing more prescriptive design requirements for streets and indicating the location of traffic calming devices up-front will provide clarity and certainty to developers and ensure that local streets will be safe for pedestrians, cyclists, motorists, and residents.

 

It is proposed to introduce a Local Area Traffic Management (LATM) section to the DCP. This would include a repeal of existing controls in the DCP for traffic calming facilities which are at times contradictory. The new section will streamline the assessment of traffic safety impacts, as well as set expectations with regards to the location of traffic calming facilities. This section is vital in ensuring matters of traffic safety are adequately addressed and co-ordinated across the entirety of the Austral and Leppington North Precincts.

 

Next Steps

 

If Council resolves to support amending the SEPP, DCP and Contributions Plan, Council officers will prepare the necessary documents (DCP/DCP amendment) and a planning proposal for the SEPP amendment and report this to a future Council meeting. The SEPP amendment will be submitted to the Department of Planning and Environment (DPE) seeking gateway determination.

 

Upon completion of public authority consultation the proposal would then move to public exhibition. During this time, landowners, developers, and other interested parties would be able to submit a response to Council regarding the proposed changes. This provides an opportunity for land-owners to comment on how the changes would affect them, and/or suggest any changes. Each submission would be assessed on its own merit, and the ILP can be further adjusted based upon consideration of community input.

 

The City Deal commitment for a review of design and engineering standards across the Western City District is intended to be progressed by the Western Sydney Planning Partnership, once established. Council officers will progress the proposed amendments as outlined in this report, and identify opportunities to incorporate the work with the broader design and engineering standards review, where timeframes and priorities permit.

 

Consultation

 

Detailed consultation has occurred with all relevant divisions of Council. Strategic Planning also advised the relevant DPE officers in regards to the need for the proposed changes to the ILP.

 

Council’s Strategic Planning and Development Assessment team advocated for the ILP road optimisation. This was discussed with Development Assessment, Land Development Engineering, and Traffic and Transport staff.

 

Council’s Technical Support team advocated for the removal of certain proposed road bridges. This was discussed with Strategic Planning, Floodplain and Water Management, and Infrastructure Delivery staff.

 

Council’s Strategic Planning team advocated for the LATM provisions. This was discussed with Development Assessment, Land Development Engineering and Traffic and Transport staff.

 

As part of any SEPP or DCP amendment community consultation would occur, with a minimum exhibition period of 28 days.

Financial Implications

 

Council may need to engage a suitably qualified consultant to devise a LATM plan and related urban design inputs for the Austral and Leppington North Precincts if this cannot be carried out internally or through the Western Sydney City Deal design and engineering standards review.

 

CONSIDERATIONS

 

Economic

Deliver and maintain a range of transport related infrastructure such as footpaths, bus shelters and bikeways.

Deliver a high quality local road system including provision and maintenance of infrastructure and management of traffic issues.

Environment

Support the delivery of a range of transport options.


Social

Support policies and plans that prevent crime.


Civic Leadership

There are no civic leadership and governance considerations.

Legislative

Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979

State Environmental Planning Policy (Sydney Region Growth Centres) 2006

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

 

Nil


55

Ordinary Meeting 27 June 2018

City Economy and Growth Report

 

EGROW 03

Smoking in Macquarie Mall

 

Strategic Direction

Strengthening and Protecting our Environment

Exercise planning controls to create high-quality, inclusive urban environments

File Ref

148735.2018

Report By

Vi Girgis - Senior Officer City Precinct

Approved By

Tim Moore - Director, City Economy and Growth / Deputy CEO

 

 

Executive Summary

 

At the Ordinary Meeting of 28 March 2018, Council resolved to obtain a report exploring the issues surrounding smoking in Macquarie Mall. Key findings in this report include:

 

·    Under the Local Government Act 1993, Council has the authority to regulate smoking in public places, and on Council-owned properties, including outdoor dining structures leased to businesses.

·    NSW Health is the appropriate authority to enforce smoke-free zones under the Smoke-free Environment Act 2000.

·    The CBD Committee discussed the issue and would support the exploration of two options to combat the issue: 1) enacting a total smoke-free zone in the Mall; or 2) instating smoking zones at either ends of the Mall.

·    Council received 463 responses to the community survey: 59% of respondents indicated ‘too much smoking’ as their reason for not going to Macquarie Mall, and 71% indicated that ‘no more smoking’ would encourage them to go more regularly.

·    Fourteen businesses in Macquarie Mall participated in the business survey related to the issue. Six indicated that designating a smoke-free zone would have a positive effect on their business; four indicated a negative effect; and four said that it would not affect their business at all. However, in response to the question about support for a smoke-free zone, nine businesses were against the designation of Macquarie Mall as a smoke-free zone.

·    A review of the implementation of smoke-free zones in some Sydney LGAs showed that there is support for such policies, and that these, broadly, have been welcomed by the community and businesses. No smoke-free policies have been rescinded, indicating broad support following a change to smoking restrictions.

·    A review of global research on the economic impacts of smoke-free zones on hospitality businesses found that, overwhelmingly, there were no negative economic impacts to restaurants and bars of the implementation of smoke-free zones. In fact, in some cases, positive economic impacts and increased value of trade and related business value were recorded.

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

 

1.    Receives and notes this report; and

 

2.    Determines what, if any, decisions they wish to make regarding this issue, noting the options presented in Section 5 of this report.

REPORT

1.    BACKGROUND

 

1.1  COUNCIL RESOLUTION

 

At the Ordinary Meeting of 28 March 2018, Council resolved to obtain a report for a future briefing session as to the following:

 

1.    The extent of Council’s legal powers to police and regulate smoking in Macquarie Mall;

2.    The extent of Council’s existing resources, financial or otherwise, to police and regulate smoking in Macquarie Mall;

3.    Options (and any attendant issues) as to how smoking in Macquarie Mall might in the future be regulated and policed;

4.    Any other matter staff may feel is relevant;

5.    Gather some information from the business owners on their views on the issue;

6.    That the matter and the substance of this motion be referred to the CBD Committee for their consideration; and

7.    That a survey for all residents be included in Liverpool Listens.

 

1.2  RELEVANT LEGISLATION

 

Under the Local Government Act 1993, section 632, Council has power to regulate smoking in a public place by erecting signage which prohibits smoking in that place. Enforcement of these regulations would fall under the responsibility of Council, which has resourcing and financial implications.

 

The Council-owned outdoor dining structures are currently leased to Macquarie Mall businesses through the Macquarie Mall Outdoor Dining Permit, issued by Council. A review of the conditions of the permit will enable Council to ensure businesses/permit holders adhere to smoke-free zones designated by Council.

 

The Smoke-free Environment Act 2000 makes a number of outdoor public places smoke-free, including commercial outdoor dining areas which are:

·    A seated dining area

·    Within 4 metres of a seated dining area on licensed premises, restaurants or cafes

·    Within 10 metres of a food fair stall

 

The law does not prevent the creation of designated outdoor smoking areas in licensed premises and restaurants. However, such spaces cannot be located within 4 metres of the seated dining area on the premises, and must meet all other requirements of the Smoke-free Environment Act 2000.

 

NSW Health is the appropriate regulatory authority to enforce smoke-free zones under the provisions of this act. Penalties range from $330 to $5,500 for failing to comply with legislative requirements.

 

1.3  CBD COMMITTEE RESPONSE

 

At the CBD Committee Meeting of 12 April 2018, the Committee discussed the contents of the resolution. The Committee concluded that it is concerned about smoking in Macquarie Mall and would support the exploration of two options to combat the issue: 1) Enacting a total smoke-free zone in the Mall; or 2) Instating smoking zones at either ends of the Mall.

 

2.    COUNCIL SURVEY RESULTS

 

2.1  COMMUNITY SURVEYS

 

The Community Survey was administered through Liverpool Listens and was available from 12 April to 28 May, and received 463 responses. The survey was promoted through direct emails to the Liverpool Listens database, Council’s social media platforms, a media release, and an e-newsletter from Council’s business e-news.

 

Some comments received through Council’s Facebook page include:

·     I’d love to see a properly enforced smoking ban in the mall. As a bonus, it would help get rid of the antisocial element.

·     Smoking should be removed from the mall. If you want it to be inviting and vibrant, it is a must.

·     No smoking please. It’s a place for family with young children. Many mum with bubs strolling around the area need to cope with the smoke.

 

The Survey Report is attached, with key findings outlined below.

 

How regularly do you go to Macquarie Mall?

5+ times per week                                                        84

1-4 times per week                                                       143

Occasionally                                                                 224

Never                                                                            13

 

 

Why DO you go the Macquarie Mall?

Able to smoke in café areas                                        32

Able to smoke in public areas                                      34

Good restaurants and cafes                                         156

Good retailers and businesses                                     129

Play equipment                                                            64

Just passing through                                                    307

It feels safe                                                                   28

For work                                                                       77

Other                                                                            17

 

If other, please specify (a cross section of responses)

·     For events.

·     Just Chilling Out and enjoying the surroundings sometimes waiting for my wife to get back from her shopping sprees.

·     Passing through means to Westfields, Banking etc.

·     I boycott it completely, due to smoking.

 

Why DON’T you go to Macquarie Mall?

Too much smoking                                                      275

Restaurant and café options are not good                   87

Retail options are not good                                           140

Nothing to do in the Mall                                               78

Feels unsafe                                                                 140

Other                                                                            34

If other, please specify (a cross section of responses)

·     my clothes end up smelling like old smoke.

·     I do try to avoid going through where possible as there is way too much smoking.

·     I do not NOT go there because of the smoking.

·     safety is a an issue for elderly people and homeless people, for teenagers as a parent you always have concerns.

 

What would encourage you to go to Macquarie Mall more regularly?

No more smoking                                                         329

Better dining options                                                     223

Better retail options                                                       255

Other                                                                            53

If other, please specify (a cross section of responses)

·     Cleaner more vibrant atmosphere.

·     It would be better if there were fewer places for smoking and much further away from dining. I respect people’s right to smoke, I just don’t want to smell it while eating and on my clothes.

·     Entertainment or art.

·     Better play equipment.

·     More shade is needed. The current shade is dominated by older men smoking in the cafes.

·     I’ll go either way. I like the space.

·     Merchants to provide smoking areas/table with adequate ventilation.

·     Security, as often fights or unsafe behaviour occurs in the area which makes the area not appealing to go to.

·     one is lucky to get one of the tables because they are taken up by old men playing cards, chess and they stay there all day.

·     smoking is ok just keep it away from the main areas.

·     I would love to stop and sit and have a coffee.

·     It feels grotty, in part because of the smoking.

 

Any other comments regarding smoking in Macquarie Mall (a cross section of responses)

·    There are so many good cafes but I hesitate to use them sometimes as all you can smell is the smoking that takes place so close to them.

·    I have lived in Liverpool my whole life and have always found the smoking in Macquarie Mall to be a deterrent to going there. My son has also said he doesn't want to go to the mall, and didn't want to stay for activities because of the smoking.

·    I'm a smoker myself, but walking through you see all these cafes that are full of smokers that sit there all day and drink coffee. It would be more appealing and encourage better quality cafes and restaurants if this was banned or limited to smaller area.

·    Makes the air polluted. Do not like walking through smoky haze. Not fair on non-smokers. Smells horrible seems to go through everything. Too close to eating, so I won’t eat there. Not good for people with breathing problems.

·    Leave it as is good to have a coffee and smoke.

·    Council should be encouraging healthy living and ban smoking in these cafes. There are children around as well. It's disgusting.

·    I would not consider eating there due to the numbers of smokers. The economic argument that banning smokers is ridiculous. Smokers go there and sit on one coffee for hours. People would dine there and drink coffee and spend more money without smokers.

·    I have no choice but to inhale smokers' pollution. I object to breathing their garbage in when I am not a smoker. I don't have a choice because it permeates the atmosphere. I avoid the mall when with my daughter because she has a lung condition.

·    The only people using Macquarie Mall are the people that just sit there and smoke.

·    Walking pass the mall you are welcome by a plume of cigarette smoke. I would never take my children to any of the cafes there. I don’t like to sit down for a coffee and leave smelling of other people’s cigarette smoke. Please look after our community.

·    I have small children and walking through the clouds of smoke used to just make us avoid it totally. It has improved a lot recently but I don’t use any of the dining options.

·    Can council please make sure that the government smoking bans around places selling food get enforced? Rules without follow up are meaningless and is actually killing the businesses there.

·    I enjoy smoking there.

·    Limit this to designated areas only.

·    If in controlled areas, why not allow it?

·    The cafes have smoking and non-smoking sections, this does not work. The smoke just blows across into the non-smoking area. There is nothing worse than having a coffee or a meal with smoking blowing in your face.

·    Smoking is a legal activity stop making life impossible for smokers. Sincerely, a non-smoker who has never tried it and has no intention to.

·    The alfresco dining areas have been taken over by smokers. All rate payers should be able to enjoy the facilities and dine outdoors. It appears that currently this is a select group that sit all day smoking, this should be for everyone.

 

2.2  BUSINESS SURVEYS

 

All businesses in Macquarie Mall were given the opportunity to respond to a private survey regarding the effects of public smoking on their businesses. Businesses were engaged through emails, face-to-face interactions, and a meeting. Fourteen businesses responded to the survey, with results as follows:

 

Q1. Is allowing smoking on your premises important to your business?

Yes – 9

No – 5

 

Q2. If all of Macquarie Mall was a smoke-free zone, how would this affect your business?

It would have a positive effect on my business – 6

It would have a negative effect on my business – 4

Would not affect my business – 4

 

Comments

·     It will have positive effect on all business as it give smoke free environment means more families will visit increasing business. Plus we need to promote healthy areas specially when new students are coming to visit and study in Liverpool.

·     People smoke outside my premises and cigarette butts near the branch outside will go if no smoking.

·     I believe that having non-smoking would increase families and teenagers into our outside eating areas.

·     People stand near shop and smoke.

·     It would not because it’s a bakery.

·     All our customers are smokers and making Macquarie Street a smoke-free area would result in our customers leaving.

·     95% of my customers are smokers, they come to have a smoke, and coffee and relax. If smoking in the mall was banned, it will have a huge impact on my business.

·     Yes, it would affect my business to a very high level. Smoking has never been an issue, it is an open area. Why only Mac Mall? Should be whole of Liverpool. Mac Mall business owners have suffered enough.

 

Q3. Would you support making Macquarie Mall a smoke-free zone

Yes, the entire Mall should be a smoke-free zone – 5

No, conditions should remain the same – 9

 

Comments

·     It’s time we change our image, especially when such educated Uni students and professors are going to visit, we need to change their view so that sooner or later they make a move to live here if they are coming from other suburbs.

·     Better for the environment and invite more families to the mall.

·     Safer for all.

·     Making the Mall a smoke free zone can only bring more people into this area. Currently it can be an unpleasant experience sitting or walking through the Mall, taking in second-hand smoke.

·     The smoking is a vital part of our business.

·     Prefer non-smoking but smoke far away is fine.

·     Keep the smokers happy.

·     No because there are businesses who rely on smokers.

·     Smoking is a large part of the generation in Liverpool at the moment. I believe people gather around the coffee shops to drink and smoke.

·     It should stay same as we have smoking and non-smoking zones. Opportunity and equality for everyone.

·     I do not support it. Liverpool was busier before the smoking law and the renovations. My business was booming before all of this. People feel discriminated against and my owner as well.

 

Q4. Any other comments regarding smoking in Macquarie Mall?

·     It’s a big time not only here but any other public place where still outdoor smoking is allowed need to be stopped or banned.

·     Cafes need to sell food in order to make large profits. Having a smoke and coffee isn’t generating enough profit. Help them sell food and the smoking will stop.

·     If Macquarie mall becomes smoke free it will make most of cafes and restaurants lose their business more than 50%.

·     Non-smokers can go elsewhere because they are non-spenders.

·     I think Council is not in touch with Liverpool. Should be concentrating the real issues in Liverpool. 

 

3.    CASE STUDIES: IMPLEMENTATION OF SMOKE-FREE ZONES IN SYDNEY LGAs

 

Waverly Council: Bondi Junction and Bondi Beach Smoke-Free Trial, 2016/17

 

On 15 December 2015, Waverly Council resolved to implement a 6 month trial to ban smoking within a designated area of Bondi Junction. Prior to the implementation a marketing and communications plan was implemented and ash trays were removed from Council bins within the area. Businesses were well informed and supportive of the trial.

 

During implementation of the ban Council rangers engaged with smokers to inform them of the ban. Some results of these interactions are:

·    Baseline numbers of smokers at peak periods were collected at the commencement of the trial. By the trial’s end in, these numbers had more than halved.

·    The main excuse for the smokers was not enough signs being the reason for their breach. With this feedback, additional signs were added to the bin enclosures in April and a noticeable improvement was recorded in May.

 

Furthermore, businesses were surveyed before and after the trial to gauge their support for a smoke-free environment. Survey results indicated that:

·    Those who thought a smoke-free trial would be ‘great’ maintained that sentiment after the trial.

·    Most businesses who initially thought the trial would be ‘not good’ or ‘bad’, or who said ‘don’t care’, were supportive of a smoking ban at the end of the trial.

 

The smoke-free trial in Bondi Junction was a success. There was a significant reduction of smokers to approximately a third of the pre-trial numbers. Cigarette butt litter has halved and the vast majority of businesses have reported no affect to their businesses.

 

City of Sydney: Martin Place Smoke-Free Trial, 2015/16

 

The City of Sydney implemented a 12-month smoke-free trial commencing on 11 May 2015. The trial was preceded by a public education campaign to explain the reasons and benefits of the smoking restriction.

 

Results of the trail were as follows:

·    At the start of the trial, the number of weekly cautions issued by rangers was almost 600. This number declined rapidly to just over 300 by June, just under 300 by July, and plateauing at just under 200 by April 2016. 

·    During the pre-trial period of April 2015, weekly illicitly discarded cigarette butts was 1,600. When the trial began in May 2015, this number fell to over 800. By the end of the trial the number remained steady at under 800 cigarette butts per week.

 

An online survey was available throughout the trial for the public. There were 512 respondents to the survey, with the following results:

·    Do you support the smoke-free trial in Martin Place? 79% answered ‘Yes’.

·    Would you support an extension of the trial to other areas? 79% answered ‘Yes’.

·    Are you more likely or less likely to visit an area if you know it is smoke-free? 79% answered ‘More likely’.

 

In June 2016 the City of Sydney endorsed the permanent implementation of a smoke-free zone in Martin Place. On the ground, the site continues to work well, with significant reduction in smoking activity. However, feedback indicates that many smokers have relocated to nearby laneways and plazas, creating complaints from neighbouring properties, tenants and pedestrians, which in turn generates requests to create additional smoke-free areas.

 

Pitt St Mall has also been designated as a smoke-free area, however with less acceptance generally than Martin Place. There is consistent feedback that smoking is still occurring, particularly on the public seating. The seating throughout Martin Place does not seem to attract groups that stay for long periods, as is the case in Pitt St Mall.

 

Due to the growing number of requests for additional smoke-free areas, the City of Sydney has written to the Minister for Health to request a review of the Smoke-free Environment Legislation with a view to creating new categories of smoke-free areas, in consultation with local government and the wider community.

 

Wollongong City Council, Crown Street Mall Smoke-Free Policy

 

Wollongong City Council endorsed the implementation of a smoke-free zone throughout the Crown Street Mall from 1 November 2013. Following a 12 month deployment, Council staff provided a report in March 2015 which outlined education and promotion activities undertaken in partnership with a range of stakeholders since the implementation of the smoke-free zone. The report also presented results of an intercept survey conducted in the same period in the adjoining Arts Precinct. A total of 190 surveys were completed with over half of respondents answering that smoking should not be allowed in the Arts Precinct.

 

At its July 2015 meeting, Wollongong City Council adopted the following policies:

·    The reviewed Smoke-free (Recreation Areas) Policy.

·    The revised Wollongong Arts Precinct Smoke-free Policy.

·    The new Crown Street Mall Smoke-free Policy.

 

The key objectives of the Crown Street Mall Smoke-free Policy are as follows:

1.   Provide community leadership in taking measures to protect the health and social wellbeing of the community.

2.   Raise community awareness of the issues associated with smoking.

3.   Improve the health of community members.

4.   Improve public amenity and maintenance of Council property.

5.   Minimise cigarette-butt pollution on the environment.

 

This Policy is due for review in June 2018.

 

Furthermore, under the General Conditions of the Council’s Outdoor Restaurant on Public Land policy, all licensees of outdoor dining areas “shall not permit any patron or other persons to smoke on any part of the approved area and shall ensure that at all times”.

 

4.    AN OVERVIEW OF THE RESEARCH ON ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF SMOKE-FREE ZONES ON HOSPITALITY BUSINESSES

 

The National Drug Strategy Household Survey 2016

 

Tobacco smoking status, people aged 14 years or older, by socio-economic status:

·    1st quintile (most disadvantaged): 20% are smokers.

·    2nd quintile: 17% are smokers.

·    3rd quintile: 14.7% are smokers.

·    4th quintile: 13.4% are smokers.

·    5th quintile (most advantaged): 9.3% are smokers.

 

Mohammad Siahpush from the Centre for Behavioural Research in Cancer concluded that “The financial and health burden of smoking coupled with the fact that disadvantaged groups have markedly higher smoking prevalence suggests that smoking exacerbates social class differences in health and standards of living…Thus, policies that reduce prevalence in disadvantaged groups are likely to reduce social inequalities.” (Siahpush, 2004)

 

Report on Adult Health, NSW Population Health Survey, 2008

 

When questioned about the ‘impact of total smoking ban on outdoor dining areas’, adults aged 16 years and over responded as follows:

·    38% of males and 43% of females stated they would frequent a venue ‘more often’ if it banned smoking in outdoor areas.

·    6% of males and 5% of females stated they would visit ‘less often’ if it banned smoking in outdoor areas.

·    The remainder of the respondents indicated it would not affect their attendance.

 

C. Miller and S. Kriven, Smoke-free Dining in South Australia: Surveys of Community Attitudes and Practices after 4 and 18 months, Tobacco Control Research and Evaluation Report, 2002

 

A survey of community attitudes towards South Australia’s smoke-free dining laws found that support for the laws was high, increasing from 81% after 18 months.

·    Smoker support increased from 54.8% after four months to 61% after 18 months.

·    Patrons reported increased enjoyment of dining out and were found to be slightly more likely to dine out following the introduction of the smoke-free dining laws.

·    80.7% of smokers reported that smoke-free dining laws hadn’t affected dining habits.

 

‘Evaluating the Effectiveness of Smoke-Free Policies’ from International Agency for Research on Cancer, World Health Organisation, 2009

 

The general observation was made that in nearly all countries, the number of non-smokers in the population exceeds the number of smokers. This raises the likelihood that any revenues lost from changes in smokers’ patronage will be offset by greater revenues from non-smokers increasing patronage of venues with smoke-free policies. Findings related to the impact of smoke-free policies on the hospitality sector are as such:

·    Studies based on sales data: smoke-free policies do not adversely affect the business activity of restaurants and bars, with several providing evidence of small positive impact of the policy on sales.

·    Studies based on employment data: studies conclude that smoke-free policies have had either no significant impact or small positive impact on employment.

·    Studies based on the number of businesses: studies which used various measures of the numbers of restaurants and bars found there were no negative economic impacts of smoke-free policies on these businesses.

·    Studies based on business value: two studies looked at the impact of smoke-free policies on the value of restaurants and bars. The studies concluded that the value of restaurants was 16% higher in smoke-free jurisdictions than in those that allowed smoking, while the value of bars was unaffected by policies banning smoking.

·    Studies based on consumer/patron surveys: the implementation of smoke-free policies had no significant impact on dining/drinking out practices, and any reductions in the frequency of such practices among smokers are made up for by increases in the frequency of dining/drinking among non-smokers.

·    Studies based on owner/manager surveys: despite the potential for bias through the ‘negative placebo effect’, studies based on survey data concluded that there is either no impact or a small, positive economic impact from smoke-free policies.

 

5.    OPTIONS FOR COUNCIL

 

The Council resolution of 28 March 2018 resolved to bring this report providing Councillors with information on community sentiment regarding smoking in Macquarie Mall and Council’s authority to manage this.  Should Council wish to further respond to this issue, the following possible resolutions are provided: 

 

1.   Designate Macquarie Mall as a smoke-free zone, the requirements of which will be:

 

(a)  Develop and implement a comprehensive education and communications program, prior to and during the smoke-free zone implementation, to raise awareness amongst the community and business owners;

 

(b)  Erect signage in Macquarie Mall which clearly communicates that it is a smoke-free zone;

 

(c)  Amend the Macquarie Mall Outdoor Dining Permit to ensure permit holders’ adherence to the smoke-free zone;

 

(d)  Increase active patrols by Council rangers to enforce conditions of the revised Macquarie Mall Outdoor Dining Permit; and

 

(e)  Lobby NSW Health to increase active patrols towards the enforcement of smoke-free zones.

 

2.   Designate smoking and non-smoking areas in Macquarie Mall, the requirements of which will be:

 

(a)   Develop and implement a comprehensive education and communications program, prior to and following introduction of the smoke free areas;

 

(b)   Designate the majority of Macquarie Mall, including all dining areas and Council shade structures, to be non-smoking;

 

(c)   Designate smoking areas to only the Moore St and Elizabeth St ends of Macquarie Mall, as per map provided below;

 

(d)   Develop and implement a comprehensive education and communications program, prior to and during the smoke-free zone implementation, to raise awareness amongst the community and business owners;

 

(e)   Erect signage in Macquarie Mall which clearly communicates smoking and non-smoking areas;

 

(f)   Amend the Macquarie Mall Outdoor Dining Permit to ensure permit holders’ adherence to the smoke-free zones;

 

(g)   Increase active patrols by Council rangers to enforce conditions of the revised Macquarie Mall Outdoor Dining Permit; and

 

(h)   Lobby NSW Health to increase active patrols towards the enforcement of smoke-free zones.

 

3.   Take no further action – maintain the current conditions of Macquarie Mall

 

 


 

CONSIDERATIONS

 

Economic

Facilitate economic development.

Facilitate the development of new tourism based on local attractions, culture and creative industries.

There may be financial considerations, depending on Council’s decisions.

Environment

Manage air, water, noise and chemical pollution.

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


Social

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

Deliver high quality services for children and their families.


Civic Leadership

Act as an environmental leader in the community.

Foster neighbourhood pride and a sense of responsibility.

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

Deliver services that are customer focused.

Legislative

Smoke-Free Environment Act 2000

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

 

1.         Liverpool Listens survey report to Smoking in Macquarie Mall (Under separate cover)  


69

Ordinary Meeting 27 June 2018

City Economy and Growth Report

 

EGROW 04

Exempt Development Provisions for Fencing in Cartwright

 

Strategic Direction

Strengthening and Protecting our Environment

Exercise planning controls to create high-quality, inclusive urban environments

File Ref

154218.2018

Report By

Ian Stendara - Strategic Planner

Approved By

Tim Moore - Director, City Economy and Growth / Deputy CEO

 

 

Executive Summary

 

This report is to provide an update to Council on the matter of property boundary fencing being erected in the suburb of Cartwright under exempt development controls in SEPP (Exempt & Complying Development Codes) 2008 (the Code SEPP) following a Council resolution of 13 December 2017.

 

That resolution (NOM 01) stated:

 

1.       Council write to the Department of Planning and Environment to have the matter of the erecting of fences as exempt development under the Exempt and Complying Development Codes SEPP 2008 investigated, as the specific provisions under the SEPP relating to the erecting of fences is producing poor planning outcomes for the Liverpool Local Government Area.

 

2.       Report back to Councillors on the outcome of those representations.

 

On 18 January 2018, Council staff wrote to the Department of Planning and Environment (the Department) advising of the above resolution of Council and requesting the Department review the legislation concerning fencing in Cartwright as exempt development.

 

On 5 February 2018, the Department responded requesting additional details of the areas affected. On 13 March 2018, Council staff provided the Department with maps and further details. The Department has advised that they will consider a change to the SEPP to address this issue as part of a housekeeping amendment to the Code SEPP. Any housekeeping amendment will be publicly exhibited, allowing Council and the community to respond. There is no timeframe provided by the Department for this work to be completed. Staff will continue to request this issue be resolved.

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council receives and notes this report.

 

 

REPORT

 

Background

 

At its meeting on 13 December 2017 Councillor Harle lodged a Notice of Motion (NOM 01):

 

“That Council write to the Department of Planning and Environment to have the matter of the erecting of fences as exempt development under the Exempt and Complying Development Codes SEPP 2008 investigated, as the specific provisions under the SEPP relating to the erecting of fences is producing poor planning outcomes for the Liverpool Local Government Area”.

 

The Notice of Motion is a result of several property owners erecting 1.8m high fences on the primary frontage of properties in the suburb of Cartwright. The suburb of Cartwright is notable as properties face a common footpath between dwellings, rather than the street. Non obtrusive fencing is important to ensure passive surveillance, which can reduce instances of opportunistic crime.

 

As a result, Council resolved to:

 

1.         Write to the Department of Planning and Environment to have the matter of the erecting of fences as exempt development under the Exempt and Complying Development Codes SEPP 2008 investigated, as the specific provisions under the SEPP relating to the erecting of fences is producing poor planning outcomes for the Liverpool Local Government Area.

 

2.       Report back to Councillors on the outcome of those representations.

 

Council’s first letter to the Department

 

Council’s first letter (Attachment 2), dated 18 January 2018, requested that the Department considers an exemption, or amendment to the controls in the SEPP relating to the erection of fencing, as it applies to land in Cartwright. It was suggested that the development standards relating to the erection of property boundary fences are resulting in unintended outcomes in Cartwright, due to the area’s unique subdivision and development pattern.

 

The Department’s first response

 

The Department responded to Council’s letter (Attachment 3), dated 5 February 2018, requesting that Council provides further information in relation to the matter. The Department sought information as to what properties were affected by fences at the front of dwellings, and a description of how many streets were potentially affected.

 

Council’s second response

 

Upon visually inspecting the suburb and noting walkways in which dwellings faced the communal area rather than the street, Council officers prepared another letter to the Department (Attachment 4), dated 13 March 2018, detailing the urban design issues with a map of potentially affected areas.

 

The Department’s second response

 

In an email dated 5 June 2018, the Department indicated that it would be considering fencing in Cartwright as part of a housekeeping amendment to the SEPP. The Department did not provide any indication as to when this would occur, but did indicate that such an amendment would be subject to public exhibition.

 

Next Steps

 

Staff will continue to liaise with the Department to highlight the significant urban design and public safety issues. Council and the community will be given the opportunity to comment on the draft amendment if and when it is publicly exhibited by the Department.

 

CONSIDERATIONS

 

Economic

There are no economic and financial considerations.

Environment

There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.


Social

Support policies and plans that prevent crime.


Civic Leadership

There are no civic leadership and governance considerations.

Legislative

State Environmental Planning Policy (Exempt and Complying Development Codes) 2008

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

 

1.         Resolution - Council meeting 13 December 2017 - NOM 01 - Review of SEPP 2008 relating to the erecting of fences (Under separate cover)

2.         Council's First Letter to Department of Planning & Environment (Under separate cover)

3.         Department's First Response to Council (Under separate cover)

4.         Council's Second Letter to Department of Planning & Environment (Under separate cover)  


72

Ordinary Meeting 27 June 2018

City Economy and Growth Report

 

EGROW 05

Sydney Western City Planning Panel Membership

 

Strategic Direction

Strengthening and Protecting our Environment

Exercise planning controls to create high-quality, inclusive urban environments

File Ref

164262.2018

Report By

Lina Kakish - Manager Development Assessment 

Approved By

Tim Moore - Director, City Economy and Growth / Deputy CEO

 

 

Executive Summary

 

Amendments to the Environmental Planning and Assessment (EP&A) Act 1979 came into force on 1 March 2018. The amendments to the EP&A Act mean that property developers and real estate agents are no longer able to sit as either state-nominated or council-nominated Panel members.

 

Council’s nominated Panel members are currently:

 

1.   Councillor Hadid; and

2.   Councillor Hadcihti.

 

Council’s nominated alternate Panel members are currently:

 

1.   Councillor Rhodes; and

2.   Councillor Harle.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

 

1.    Receives and notes this report;

 

2.    Appoints Clr Rhodes and Clr Harle as Council’s Sydney Western City Planning Panel members; and

 

3.    Determines two alternate members of the Sydney Western City Planning Panel.

 

 

 

 

REPORT

 

As of 1 March 2018, Clause 2.13 of the EP&A Act 1979 provides the following criteria for members of Sydney district and regional panels:

 

2.13   Members of Sydney district and regional planning panels

 (3)  A person is not eligible to be a member of a Sydney district or regional planning panel if the person is:

(a)  a property developer within the meaning of section 96GB of the Election Funding, Expenditure and Disclosures Act 1981, or

Note.

Section 96GB (1) of the Election Funding, Expenditure and Disclosures Act 1981 provides that property developer includes a person who is a close associate of a property developer.

(b)  a real estate agent within the meaning of the Property, Stock and Business Agents Act 2002.

 

Council’s appointed Panel members Councillors Hadid and Hadchiti have made a valuable and significant contribution to the operations of the panel over many years. However, they are no longer eligible for Panel membership as they hold a real estate license as outlined under Clause 2.13(3)(b) above.

 

Due to these recent legislative changes, it is recommended that Councillors Harle and Rhodes be appointed as Council’s nominated regional panel members and that two alternates are appointed for panel membership. 

 

CONSIDERATIONS

 

Economic

There are no economic and financial considerations.

Environment

There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.


Social

There are no social and cultural considerations.


Civic Leadership

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

Legislative

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

 

1.         New Legislative Provisions relating to the Joint Regional Planning Panels and Sydney Planning Panels


74

EGROW 05

Sydney Western City Planning Panel Membership

Attachment 1

New Legislative Provisions relating to the Joint Regional Planning Panels and Sydney Planning Panels

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator

 


76

Ordinary Meeting 27 June 2018

Chief Executive Officer Report

 

CEO 01

Endorsement of Delivery Program 2017-2021 and Operational Plan 2018-19 and Budget (including Statement of Revenue Policy)

 

Strategic Direction

Leading through Collaboration

Strive for best practice in all Council processes

File Ref

144818.2018

Report By

Claudia Novek - Corporate Planner

Approved By

Hiba Soueid - Manager Corporate Strategy and Performance

 

 

Executive Summary

 

This report proposes to adopt Council’s draft Delivery Program 2017-2021 and Operational Plan 2018-19 and Budget, including the Statement of Revenue Policy (fees and charges) in accordance with Sections 404 and 405 of the Local Government Act (1993).

 

At the Council meeting on 26 April 2018, Council resolved that the draft Delivery Program 2017-2021 and Operational Plan 2018-19, and the Statement of Revenue Policy (fees and charges) be placed on public exhibition, with a further report to be provided to Council following public exhibition.

 

Public exhibition was undertaken from 30 April 2018 until 28 May 2018 with one submission received during the period. Council staff have also undertaken a review of the capital works program in light of changes in the development and construction sectors. This has resulted in several changes to the budget which are outlined in this report.

 

This report recommends that Council adopt the Delivery program 2017-2021 and Operational Plan 2018-19 and Budget, including the Statement of Revenue Policy (fees and charges).

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

 

1.       Adopt the Delivery Program 2017-2021 and Operational Plan 2018-19 and Budget, including the Statement of Revenue Policy (fees and charges); and

 

2.       Makes the fees and charges for the Financial Year commencing on 1 July 2018 as outlined in the Statement of Revenue Policy that was exhibited with the draft Delivery Program 2017-2021 and Operational Plan 2018-19 and Budget.

 

REPORT

 

At its meeting on 26 April 2018, Council resolved to place the draft Delivery Program 2017-2021 and Operational Plan 2018-19 and Budget, and Statement of Revenue Policy (fees and charges) on public exhibition for a period of 28 days. The draft plans were placed on public exhibition from 30 April 2018 until 28 May 2018.

 

The Delivery Program 2017-2021 activates the Community Strategic Plan (CSP), Our Home, Liverpool 2027, through actions and ongoing measures that are divided into the four directions outlined in the CSP. These directions address the quadruple bottom line.

 

The Operational Plan 2018-19 details the actions that Council will undertake within the Financial Year.

 

These plans are incorporated into one document that also includes the budget and capital works program.

 

The Statement of Revenue Policy (fees and charges) is attached under a separate cover and outlines the proposed rates, fees and charges for 2018-19.

 

The Local Government Act (1993) requires the Operational Plan and annual budget to be adopted by 30 June each year.

 

Adjustments Proposed from Exhibition Budget

 

Staff have recommended a number of adjustments to the proposed 2018-19 budget. These changes are reflected in the summary proposed budget adjustments in the document attached to this report, and recommended for adoption.

 

The proposed changes to Council’s capital works budget include:

 

1.    Decrease in “Capital Grants & Contributions - Others” of $16.8 million representing a reduction in developer Works-in-Kind as discussed below.

 

2.    Reduction in the proposed capital expenditure for Works-in-Kind (WIK) of $13.4 million. The reason behind this proposed change is that, since the original forecasting of expected 2018/19 WIK expenditure some 6 months ago, it has become clear that a large volume of forecast WIK projects are likely to be delayed beyond FY2018-19. This emerging trend was apparent in the recent write-down of WIK delivery in the 2017-18 Quarter 3 budget review, and has been caused by delays in developers meeting anticipated construction milestones that would trigger the delivery of the expected WIK projects under Development Application conditions and Voluntary Planning Agreement instruments. These projects are instead expected to be delayed into future financial years from 2019-20 and beyond, as the planned milestones are reached.

 

3.    Reduction in the proposed capital expenditure for Civic Place of $30.9 million. The reason for this proposed change relates to the expectation held during original budget planning in late 2017 and early 2018, which anticipated finalisation of Amendment 52 by March 2018.  Given Amendment 52 has still not yet been released, all Civic Place application, approval and construction forecasts have required adjustment. Staff are still hopeful to commence demolition works before the end of FY2018-19, but the unanticipated further delays have necessitated a significant reduction in proposed Civic Place spending in FY2018-19, with a corresponding increase in forecast expenditure in future financial years. Depending on the progress of Amendment 52, further adjustments may be necessary via the quarterly review process.

 

4.    Reduction in the proposed capital expenditure for land acquisitions of $34.5 million. The reason for this proposed change is due to a lack of capacity to carry through with budgeted land acquisitions over the next 6 months, as well as changing land acquisition priorities under the City Deal and Property Acquisition Strategy, and the need to prioritise key land acquisitions required for the delivery of scheduled capital works in 2018-19. Capacity issues are being addressed, and may require additional spending on staff resources in both the Property and Legal areas. Furthermore, and depending on how many planned acquisitions require compulsory process, this number may rise or fall over the course of the year, requiring further revision as part of the quarterly review process.

 

5.    Increase in the proposed capital expenditure for Bernera Road and Edmondson Park Basin 14 Projects of $17 million. At its meeting on 30 May 2018, Council resolved to forward-fund shortfalls identified for the Bernera Road Extension project and Edmondson Park Flood Detention Basin 14 through NSW Governments Low Cost Loan initiative.

 

6.    Decrease in borrowings of $2 million representing a delay in borrowing for Liverpool Civic Place ($24 million) and inclusion of newly approved low cost loan funding for Bernera Road Extension and Edmondson Park Detention Basin ($22 million).

 

Public Exhibition

 

Information on the documents was distributed using the following methods:

 

·     Hard copies of the documents were places at Council’s Customer Service Centre and all Council libraries;

·     A Public Forum was held in Liverpool City Library;

·     The documents were placed on the Public Exhibition page of Council’s website;

·     A project was placed on Liverpool Listens with downloadable copies of the documents;

·     Advertising was placed in the Liverpool Leader over three weeks;

·     A public notice was placed in the Liverpool Leader;

·     Information was placed on Council’s Facebook page during the exhibition period;

·     Printed flyers were placed into the ‘Rural Run’;

·     Direct emails were sent to members on Liverpool Listens and members of the District Forums.

Public Submissions

 

Council has received one submission for the Delivery Program 2017-2021 and Operational Plan 2018-19 and Budget. A summary of the feedback received and officer responses are included in the table attached to this report.

 

Changes made to the document as a result of the submission include editorial changes such as correction of spelling errors and the addition of detail to highlighted measures.

 

Staff Submissions

 

Staff reviewed the documents during the exhibition period and have proposed minor amendments which are outlined in the table attached to this report. 

 

In addition, several minor editorial changes have been made

 

Council would like to thank those who submitted feedback on the Delivery Program and Operational Plan.

 

As a result of the public exhibition consultation, it is recommended that Council adopt the Delivery Program 2017-2021 and Operational Plan 2018-19 and Budget, including the Statement of Revenue Policy (fees and charges).

 

CONSIDERATIONS

 

This report recommends adoption of Council’s Delivery Program 2017-2021 and Operational Plan 2018-19 and Budget, and Statement of Revenue Policy (fees and charges). The Delivery Program and Operational Plan cascade from the Community Strategic Plan and contribute towards the achievement of the community’s vision.

 

Economic

There are no economic and financial considerations.

Environment

There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.


Social

There are no social and cultural considerations.


Civic Leadership

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

Deliver services that are customer focused.

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

Legislative

The Local Government Act (1993) requires the Operational Plan and Budget to be adopted by 30 June in any year before the coming Financial Year.

 

ATTACHMENTS

 

1.         Summary of Proposed Changes to Budget and Revenue Strategy (Under separate cover)

2.         Staff Changes for Delivery Program 2017-2021 and Operational Plan 2018-19 (Under separate cover)

3.         Staff Response to Public Submission on Delivery Program 2017-2021 and Operational Plan 2018-19 and Budget, including Statement of Revenue Policy (Under separate cover)

4.         Delivery Program 2017-2021 and Operational Plan 2018-19 (Under separate cover)

5.         Draft Revenue Pricing Policy - Fees and Charges FY 2018-19 (Under separate cover)  


81

Ordinary Meeting 27 June 2018

Chief Executive Officer Report

 

CEO 02

Committee meeting minute approval process

 

Strategic Direction

Leading through Collaboration

Strive for best practice in all Council processes

File Ref

153848.2018

Report By

George   Hampouris - Head of Audit Risk and Improvement

George Georgakis - Manager Council and Executive Services

Approved By

Kiersten Fishburn - Chief Executive Officer

 

 

Executive Summary

 

The purpose of the report is for Council to endorse a revised approach to the minute approval process for all Committees of Council. 

 

There are 15 Committees of Council with a varied approach towards their respective minute approval process. The meeting frequency ranges from bi-monthly to bi-annually.

 

The minutes of some Committee meetings are submitted to Council for adoption and then considered again when the Committee next meets to confirm their minutes. The minutes though have already been adopted by Council.

 

In other instances, the minutes of Committee meetings are referred back to the Committee prior to them being submitted to Council for adoption. This can result in a time lag by the time the minutes are submitted to Council for adoption and redundant information or delayed response time in actioning or addressing recommendations pertaining to those meeting minutes.

 

To provide for a consistent approach which allows for Committee members to review the meeting minutes, whilst not delaying Committee minutes being submitted to Council for adoption, a Committee minutes approval process is recommended.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council endorses the revised approach to the meeting minute approval process for all Committees of Council.

 

REPORT

 

There are a number of Committees of Council with a varied approach towards their respective minute approval process.

 

The matter was raised by the Audit, Risk & Improvement Committee, with the aim of adopting a consistent approach which allows for Committee members to review the meeting minutes prior to them being submitted to Council, whilst not delaying minutes being submitted to Council for adoption.

 

A revised approach to the minute approval and circulation process is recommended. The intent of this initiative is to create consistency in this regard across all Committees of Council and expedite the tabling of minutes to Council.

 

Should Council approve the revised process, details will be circulated to all Committees for the consistent approach to be followed.

 

The proposed revised minute approval process is as follows;

 

1.   Committee of Council meeting held;

2.   Draft minutes finalised and circulated to voting members within 2 weeks of meeting date;

3.   Voting members are provided 1 week from time of circulation to provide any feedback on draft minutes;

4.   All feedback incorporated with the revised meeting minutes re-circulated to voting members as final, with the Chairperson of the Committee ruling on any wording in dispute;

5.   Meeting minutes tabled to Council meeting for noting and/or endorsement; and

6.   At the subsequent Committee meeting, the Council adopted meeting minutes are tabled for information only.

 

Based on the proposed minute approval process, the minutes will be tabled to Council within 1 to 2 months from the Committee meeting date.

 

In the unlikely event further amendments are requested at a Committee meeting on final minutes, these amendments will be minuted in the meeting minutes on the day, and if subsequently adopted by Council, would be retrospectively noted and changed in the previous minutes that the proposed changes related to.

 

CONSIDERATIONS

 

Economic

There are no economic and financial considerations.

Environment

There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.


Social

There are no social and cultural considerations.


Civic Leadership

Encourage the community to engage in Council initiatives and actions.

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

Deliver services that are customer focused.

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

Legislative

There are no legislative considerations relating to this report.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

 

Nil  


84

Ordinary Meeting 27 June 2018

City Community and Culture Report

 

COM 01

Grants, Donations and Corporate Sponsorship

 

Strategic Direction

Creating Connection

Implement access and equity for all members of the community

File Ref

132770.2018

Report By

Galavizh Ahmadi Nia - Manager Community Development and Planning

Approved By

Tina Sangiuliano - Acting Director City Community and Culture

 

 

Executive Summary

 

Council is committed to building strong and resilient communities in the Liverpool Local Government Area and to maximising social wellbeing. One way of achieving these goals is to provide financial support in the form of grants, donations, and sponsorship to individuals and groups to develop leadership skills, increase participation in community activities and address identified social issues.

 

This report presents the funding recommendation for the Corporate Sponsorship (Outgoing) Program for Council’s consideration.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council endorses the funding recommendation of $10,000 (GST exclusive) under the Corporate Sponsorship (Outgoing) Program for the following project:

 

Applicant

Project

Recommended

Friends of India Australia

Ganashotsava

$10,000

 

 

REPORT

 

Corporate Sponsorship (Outgoing) Program

 

The Corporate Sponsorship (Outgoing) Program received one application which met the criteria and is recommended for funding as outlined below:

 

 

 

Applicant

Friends of India Australia

Location

Liverpool

Organisation

Other Incorporated Entity

Project Name

Ganeshotsava 2018

Description

Objective

A three day celebration and cultural event open to everyone in the Liverpool community.

Outcomes

·    The event will be inclusive of the whole Liverpool LGA and broader community;

·    The event attracts many people from the community, including international visitors to Liverpool;

·    Injection of financial benefits into the Liverpool business district; and

·    Strengthens community pride, encourages community participation and promotes an understanding of cultural values.

Beneficiaries

·    7,000 residents and visitors to Liverpool;

·    300 local volunteers; and

·    Liverpool business groups, hotels, food venues and shops in the Liverpool CBD.

Amount Requested

$10,000

Amount Recommended

$10,000

Recommendation

Recommended for funding

The applicant has aligned the project outcomes to Council’s Community Strategic Plan ‘Direction 1 - Creating Connection’ and ‘Direction 3 – Generating Opportunity’ by delivering a community event or activity promoting access and equity for all members of the community. 

The project aligns with the following funding program priority:

Community, cultural, and social benefit

·    Provides an innovative opportunity to meet community needs,  promote Liverpool’s cultural diversity and celebrate our City’s uniqueness;

·    Enhances Liverpool’s profile and reputation as an outward looking, creative and connected city; and

·    Creates opportunities for education and information exchange between Council, the community and the sector.

 

CONSIDERATIONS

 

Economic

Corporate Sponsorship (Outgoing)

Corporate Sponsorship

budget allocation

Corporate Sponsorship

current balance (in deficit)

Should Council endorse the recommended amount of:

Remaining Corporate Sponsorship budget

(in deficit)

$100,000

-$45,222

$10,000

-$55,222

 

Community Grants

Community Grants

budget allocation

Community Grants

current balance

No recommended amount for June

Remaining Community Grants budget

$102,000

$65,923

$0.00

$65,923

 

Matching Grants

Matching Grants

budget allocation

Matching Grants

current balance

No recommended amount for June

Remaining Matching Grants budget

$200,000

$46,470

$0.00

$46,470

 

Total funds remaining following report endorsement

Total combined budget allocation

Total combined grants current balance

Should Council endorse the recommended amount of:

Remaining combined grant budget

$402,000

$67,171

$10,000

$57,171

 

 

Environment

There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.

Social

Support community organisations and groups to deliver services.

Civic Leadership

There are no civic leadership and governance considerations.

Legislative

Local Government Act 1993 - s356.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

 

1.         Corporate Sponsorship (Outgoing) Policy (Under separate cover)

2.         Grants and Donations Policy (Under separate cover)  


87

Ordinary Meeting 27 June 2018

City Community and Culture Report

 

COM 02

Liverpool City Council Sporting Grants Program 2017/2018

 

Strategic Direction

Creating Connection

Create a dynamic, inclusive environment, including programs to support healthy living

File Ref

152568.2018

Report By

Mark Westley - Sports Development Officer

Approved By

Tina Sangiuliano - Acting Director City Community and Culture

 

 

Executive Summary

 

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

 

The total amount of available grant funds for the 2017/2018 financial year is $30,000 with $5,000 of this total targeted at applications that support sports participation by people with a disability.

 

This report recommends the allocation of sporting grants in line with the recommendations of the Liverpool Sports Committee grants assessment panel.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council adopts the following recommendations for the allocation of sporting grants funding, as recommended by the Liverpool Sports Committee grants assessment panel:

 

Club

Project Description

Proposed Grant Amount

Casula Lakers Baseball Club

Purchase of sporting equipment and a line marking machine.

$4,496

Liverpool Catholic Club Junior Rugby League Club

Purchase of sporting equipment

$3,930

Liverpool Olympic Sports and Social Club

Purchase of sporting equipment

$5,000

Liverpool City Robins Sports Club (Football)

Car park safety lighting improvement

$5,000

Werriwa All Breeds Dog Training Club

Purchase of sporting equipment

$1,837

Southern Districts Softball Association

Purchase of sporting equipment

$1,591

Kemps Creek United Soccer Club

Floodlighting upgrade project

$5000

Mt Pritchard and District Community Club

Purchase of sporting equipment to support an Autism and special needs football program

$3,146

 

REPORT

 

A total of $30,000 has been allocated within Council’s 2017/2018 budget for distribution to sporting clubs through the Liverpool City Council Sporting Grants program. Of the $30,000, $5,000 is allocated to applications that support sports participation by people with a disability.  The maximum grant is limited to $5,000 per applicant.

 

Applications are assessed against the following criteria:

 

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

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

c)   Proof of costs must be provided.

d)   Applications must be received before the closing date.

e)   Applications must be signed by Club Office Bearers.

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

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

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

 

1.   Sports Development - (e.g. Coaching clinics, sports camps, training and development)

2.   Ground Development - (e.g. Minor capital improvements)

3.   Maintenance Equipment - (e.g. Line marking and ground maintenance equipment)

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

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

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

 

In this year’s program Council received 14 applications from 13 sporting organisations requesting a total of $71,926 inc GST in grants assistance. 

 

Applications were assessed by a panel of 3 sporting delegates from the Liverpool Sports Committee and Council’s Sports Development and Leisure Officer.  The following allocation of grants were recommended by the panel:

 

Club

Project Description

Proposed Grant Amount

Casula Lakers Baseball Club

Purchase of sporting equipment and a line marking machine.

$4,496

Liverpool Catholic Club Junior Rugby League Club

Purchase of sporting equipment

$3,930

Liverpool Olympic Sports and Social Club

Purchase of sporting equipment

$5,000

Liverpool City Robins Sports Club (Football)

Car park safety lighting improvement

$5,000

Werriwa All Breeds Dog Training Club

Purchase of sporting equipment

$1,837

Southern Districts Softball Association

Purchase of sporting equipment

$1,591

Kemps Creek United Soccer Club

Floodlighting upgrade project

$5,000

 

The following allocation of grants under the disability category of the grants program were recommended by the assessment panel:

 

Club

Project Description

Proposed Grant Amount

Mt Pritchard and District Community Club

Purchase of sporting equipment to support an Autism and special needs football program

$3,146

 

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

 

 

Club

Project Description

Requested Grant Amount

Panel Assessment

Hinchinbrook Hornets Junior Rugby League Club

Not stated in the application

$15,000

The grant requested exceeds the stated limit of $5000 and the supporting information provided with this application was poor making it a low priority for funding.

Moorebank Sports Soccer Club

Football player development program

$5,000

Under this proposal the club proposed to contract player coaching services to a third party provider for a total of $19,800 of which they requested $5,000 from Council.  Just as equipment and clothing that becomes the property of an individual is not funded under this grants program, the subsidising of an individual’s participation in a coaching program is considered a low priority.

Liverpool City Robins Sports Club

Purchase of sporting equipment

$7,500

The Liverpool City Robins have submitted 2 grant applications and have been recommended to receive $5,000 for their car park Floodlighting project.

Valley United Rugby League Football Club

Purchase of sporting equipment

$2,363

The application did not provide adequate pricing information and was given a low funding priority.

Moorebank Baseball/ Softball Club

Purchase of sporting equipment

$5,000

This club received funding from the 2016/2017 grants program and are therefore not eligible.

Fairfield Liverpool Cricket Association

Cricket Coaching and development program

$5,000

This application did not provide adequate pricing information to be considered.

 

CONSIDERATIONS

 

Economic

Funding of $30,000 has been allocated within the 2016/2017 budget to fund the Liverpool Sporting Grants Program.

Environment

There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.


Social

Support community organisations, groups and volunteers to deliver coordinated services to the community.


Civic Leadership

There are no civic leadership and governance considerations.

Legislative

There are no legislative considerations relating to this report.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

 

Nil


91

Ordinary Meeting 27 June 2018

City Community and Culture Report

 

COM 03

Leisure Centre Event Fees Comparison

 

Strategic Direction

Creating Connection

Create a dynamic, inclusive environment, including programs to support healthy living

File Ref

160408.2018

Report By

Mark Westley - Sports Development Officer

Approved By

Tina Sangiuliano - Acting Director City Community and Culture

 

 

Executive Summary

 

At the 26 April 2018 Council meeting it was resolved that a report comparing event fees charged by Council’s current leisure management contractor with those of comparative neighbouring Councils should be brought to Council following concern expressed regarding pricing increases by the organisers of a Karate event.

 

This report has been prepared to compare the pricing approach of neighbouring Councils to Council’s major events venue, the Whitlam Leisure Centre.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council receives and notes this report.

 

 

REPORT

 

Liverpool City Council has three Leisure Centres with indoor sports stadiums. The most common usage of these courts is the hosting of locally based sports competitions, however there is demand within the community for these venues to host casual sporting and other community events.

 

The Michael Clarke Recreation Centre and Michael Wenden Aquatic Leisure Centre are both local standard venues offering a two court stadium facility that historically have experienced a low level of demand for casual events. The E.G. Whitlam Leisure Centre is a regional standard Centre offering three basketball courts, a number of auxiliary spaces and extras such as portable grandstand seating that make the Centre a desirable venue for larger cultural and sporting events. 

 

Research conducted with representatives from neighbouring Councils including Fairfield, Campbelltown and Camden Councils reveals that whilst these Councils do not have a venue comparable to the Whitlam Centre, they do have a small number of one and two court indoor sports facilities.   These centres reported low demand for casual sporting and cultural events highlighting that the centres were almost exclusively used for weekly sporting competitions. 

 

Fairfield City Council’s Fairfield Leisure Centre has a one court indoor stadium and the Fairfield Youth Centre has two indoor courts.  The Council’s Manager – Showground, Golf Course & Leisure Centres reports that there is little demand at these centres for casual events.  The Fairfield Showground is Council’s major events venue for major outdoor events however the lack of comparable facilities to the Whitlam Centre makes it difficult to compare pricing. 

 

What can be compared however is the way the Fairfield Showground charges casual event users for the disruption of Council operated weekly events.  Fairfield Council operates a weekly markets each Saturday at the Fairfield showground.  Where a casual event wants to use the venue in a way that would preclude this regular Saturday activity the Council has a fee $20,000 in their fees and charges document to cover the relocation.

 

A further area of comparison is how Council manages requests for discounting of the showground hire fees.  Discounts to the charges identified in Council’s fees and charges document are not given by the Showground Management, there is however a process through which Council approve to give the event organizer a donation that can be used to help them pay the full fee.  Belgravia Leisure reports a similar approach with the Whitlam Leisure Centre where they have, when assessed as appropriate, offered reduction of fees as a form of event sponsorship.

 

Campbelltown City Council’s Administration Clerk – Sports, Recreation and Leisure reported that whilst there was little casual event use demand at Council’s indoor sports centres, casual use would be charged at the rate of $85 per court per hour Monday to Friday and $100 per court per hour for weekend use.  This compares with the rate of $76.50 applied to the Whitlam Leisure Centre courts.

 

Belgravia Leisure currently hold the contract to operate Council’s Whitlam, Wenden and Michael Clarke recreation centres to June 2022.  The contract between Council and the Leisure Centre contractor makes it clear that these facilities must be managed in a way that supports diversity of usage.  To this end the Whitlam Leisure Centre attracts many events each year which bring people from outside the Liverpool LGA benefiting the local community and economy. These events include:

 

·    Train Show

·    National Futsal Tournament

·    National and State Karate Tournaments

·    Cultural festivals

 

The Whitlam leisure Centre offers event organisers 2000 square metres of space which is charged at $3,000 per day ($1,500 per 1000 square metres, a 22% discount on the court hire fees for the equivalent time).  There are few facilities comparable with the Whitlam Centre with an open and flat floor space, free parking, easy loading dock and events entry which make the facility a popular events space. The state sports centre is a comparable event space which whilst the full venue offers 3,000 square meters of event space, the minimum space that an event can use is set at 1,500 square metres. The pricing comparison is 1,500 square metres of space which is charged at $4,000 per day ($2,666 per 1000 square metre).

 

A further competitive advantage that the Whitlam Centre has over the State Sports Centre is in the area of parking costs.  While the Whitlam Centre offers no-cost parking, participants and spectators at state sport centre events pay around $25 per day for parking.

 

Belgravia report that their event income contributes to the community programs run by the centre which they either subsidise or offer for free to a target group to best support the community. These programs include Swim Champs and Take Charge (a 60 day free membership for people living with mental illness). In addition the management of the Whitlam Centre over the past 12 months has included a number of community based events to which Belgravia have not applied hire fees. These events listed are in the table below.

 

Event

Value of Fees Waived

South West Sydney Disability Expo

$9,000

Aboriginal Elders Olympics

$3,000

Aboriginal Awareness Shield Event

$3,000

Mental Health Forum

$3,000

Nights under the Stars – Homelessness Event

$3,000

 

Through Council’s investigation of event pricing it is considered that the range of variables between each centre makes it impractical to arrive at a usable comparison.  However what has been borne out by this investigation is that Belgravia has a commitment to the attraction of new events and the long term retention of existing events in Liverpool.

 

The resolution for this report to be developed was instigated by concerns expressed by Karate NSW over fees applied to a recent booking.  The explanation offered by Belgravia for this increased pricing was that the invoicing for the recent event included costs of all use of rooms within the Whitlam Leisure Centre that the event had requested access to.  The invoice included pricing not just for the stadium $3,000 per day but the pricing for the use of the Frank Olliveri Room ($84.50 per hour) and the multi-purpose room ($90.00 per hour). 

 

The difference between the current invoice and previous years is that, whilst the Karate event used the rooms at previous events, the fees had not been included in their invoice to indicate their value so that the hirer did not understand the level of value they were getting at no cost.  The Centre has now moved to an approach where they list all of the appropriate charges.  The option of offering a sponsorship for the event exists where the pricing represents a challenge to the event organiser. 

 

Since the April Council meeting the Whitlam Leisure Centre management has been in discussions with Karate NSW to secure the Whitlam Leisure Centre to host major Karate NSW events for the next 4 years. Belgravia Leisure and NSW Karate as of June 2018 have agreed to fees for all upcoming events for 2019 and are working towards a mutually beneficial agreement to secure the Whitlam Leisure Centre as the venue for Karate events for the next 4 years.  Belgravia Leisure has also offered to assist NSW Karate with actively seeking and applying for grants and funding to contribute towards State, National and International events.

 

 

CONSIDERATIONS

 

Economic

There are no economic and financial considerations.

Environment

There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.


Social

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

Provide cultural centres and activities for the enjoyment of the arts.

Support access and services for people with a disability.

Deliver high quality services for children and their families.


Civic Leadership

Encourage the community to engage in Council initiatives and actions.

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

Deliver services that are customer focused.

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

Legislative

There are no legislative considerations relating to this report.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

 

Nil


95

Ordinary Meeting 27 June 2018

City Community and Culture Report

 

COM 04

Liverpool Listens and Liverpool District Forums Evaluation

 

Strategic Direction

Creating Connection

Celebrate diversity, promote inclusion and recognise heritage

File Ref

161102.2018

Report By

Galavizh Ahmadi Nia - Manager Community Development and Planning

Approved By

Tina Sangiuliano - Acting Director City Community and Culture

 

 

Executive Summary

 

This report provides the evaluation outcomes for the following community engagement methods:  

 

Liverpool Listens

At the 25 September 2013 Council meeting, Council resolved to proceed with a trial of an online community engagement platform called Engagement HQ, which Council chose to call Liverpool Listens, and to receive a report at the end of the trial that evaluated its effectiveness. In February 2015, Council endorsed allocation of funds to continue the subscription to Engagement HQ for a further three years. Ongoing annual evaluation of Liverpool Listens was conducted for the 2015-2017 period. In April 2018, Council noted the 2016 evaluation report and made the following resolution:

 

·    That Council receives a further report within 12 months with a full evaluation of Council’s online engagement and future options.

 

This evaluation has been completed and it is recommended that Council endorse the renewal of the subscription to Liverpool Listens for a further three years, at a cost of $36,647 per annum.

 

Liverpool District Forums

In January 2017, Council established the Liverpool District Forums as a mechanism to promote dialogue, community engagement and communication with the community and resolved to:

 

·    Review the operation of the District Forums 18 months after commencement.

 

This review has been completed and this report provides an overview of the operation of the Forums over the past 15 months and makes recommendations for changes to the delivery and operation of some of the forums. 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

 

1.   Receives and notes this report;

 

2.   Renew the subscription of Liverpool Listens for a further three years from 2018-2021 to allow this platform to expand on its current functions, and maintain consistent engagement methods for both internal and external users;

 

3.   Continue with the Rural District Forum to be held on a bi-monthly basis; 

 

4.   Continue the Eastern District Forum and change its frequency from quarterly to bi-monthly; 

 

5.   Continue operating the amalgamated 2168 District Forum and 2168 Resident Action Group, meeting monthly during the day;

 

6.   Continue the New Release District Forum on a quarterly basis;

 

7.   Amalgamate the City Centre District Forum with the existing CBD Committee;  

 

8.   Discontinue the Established District Forum; and

 

9.   Deliver community forums on a needs basis, inviting government and private sector representatives, for broader community engagement on matters of interest and concern.

 

REPORT

 

Liverpool Listens evaluation (Engagement HQ)

In 2014, Council introduced Liverpool Listens, Council’s online community engagement platform to engage community members who live, study, work or visit Liverpool. Liverpool Listens uses a program called EngagementHQ, supplied by Bang the Table. During the evaluation of Liverpool Listens, Council staff investigated other online community engagement program providers and concluded that EngagementHQ presents the best functionality and value for money for Council.

 

Liverpool Listens has drawn a larger pool of community members than any other single method of engagement used by Council. The community members engaged with Liverpool Listens are demographically and geographically representative of the Liverpool Local Government Area (LGA), and have participated in engagement activities including surveys, polls and web-based discussion forums. Online engagement has increased in popularity and is fast becoming the fastest, easiest and most cost-effective way to reach a large number of people due to the convenience of engagement at any time and on mobile devices. 

 

Since its launch in 2014, Liverpool Listens has seen a steady increase in community participation and engagement with Council projects and consultations. The following are key usage highlights to date:

 

 

Total visits

New registrations

Aware

Informed

Engaged

Number of projects

2014-15

15,500

835

13,900

5,800

698

27

2015-16

17,900

294

14,300

9,000

891

27

2016-17

20,100

79

16,100

8,700

287

28

2017-18

17,500

148

12,500

5,900

928

19

Total

71,000

1,356

56,800

29,400

2,804

101

 

 

Average unique visitors per project

Average informed participants

Average engaged rate

2014-15

574

42%

5%

2015-16

663

63%

6%

2016-17

718

54%

2%

2017-18

921

47%

7%

Total

702

52%

5%

* 2017-18 includes 1 May 2017 to 31 May 2018

 

Local councils using EngagementHQ on average get an engagement rate of 4.2% and Liverpool Listens has exceeded this in almost all years with an average of 5%. This could be due to the types of projects published over that period and the community buy-in and interest. As a result, Liverpool Listens also has a higher than average informed rate (52%), with most local councils having an average of 40% of participants reading documentation, or information about a project prior to commenting. Registered users are predominantly in the 25 to 55 year age group.

 

Projects that Liverpool Listens participants have engaged with include: 

·    Smoking in Macquarie Mall;

·    Phillips Park Redevelopment – Lurnea Community Hub;

·    Making Middleton Grange – Planning your Green Spaces;

·    Liverpool’s Bike Plan;

·    Recreation, Open Space and Sports Strategy;

·    Cultural Strategy;

·    Naming Council’s parks, reserves and green spaces;

·    Have your say about Liverpool’s future (Delivery Program and Operational Plan); and

·    Have your say on Council’s Australia Day and New Year’s Eve events.

 

It should be noted that anonymous users, participants that have made an anonymous contribution, make up a large proportion of engaged users. This is due to the intentional decision to keep surveys open to enable a wider response rate from people who did not wish to register but still had an interest in contributing to a project such as providing feedback on events or programs. 

 

The table below outlines the user type and activities they undertook while visiting the Liverpool Listens site.

 

User type

Unique visits

Actions

Contributions

Anonymous User - participants that made an anonymous contribution

68,362

75,791

2,807

Registered User - engaged participants that are registered users

2,188

5,714

4,071

 

Site statistics have shown that visitors to Liverpool Listens are directed to the site predominantly through Google, Facebook and the Council webpage, and other sites to a lesser degree. Visitors are accessing the site using desktop computers, mobile phones and tablets. It is interesting to note that in the last year access via mobile phones has increased by 8% (36.7% to 44.7%) while desktop access has decreased by 7% (53.3% to 46.4%) compared to the previous year. This demonstrates the need for Council to continue to use a community engagement method that is accessible and convenient to engage broadly with an increasingly mobile community.

 

Engagement tools summary 

 

EngagementHQ offers a suite of tools that allow for deeper forms of engagement. The following table represents a summary of how the community have used Liverpool Listens, engaging predominantly through a forum, a survey or newsfeed:

 

Forum topic summary

Surveys summary

Newsfeed summary

17 forum topics

35 surveys

59 newsfeeds

95 contributors

851 contributors

2,430 visits

663 contributions

1,080 contributions

2,330 visitors

 

Additional engagement tools include budget allocator, guestbook, Q&A, maps and ideas summary, places, stories and polls which are used less frequently. However, with increased staff promotion and training on Liverpool Listens it is expected that these tools will become more frequent methods of engagement.

 

 

Benefits

Liverpool Listens has provided the following benefits for Council in its engagement with the community, including:

·    Becoming a familiar and well-used ‘brand’ in the community as a key community engagement platform for Council;

·    Aligning with best practice engagement methods by providing options for users to choose their preferred level of engagement (aware, informed or engaged);

·    Providing a useful and multi-functional platform for Council to engage with the community on a variety of projects. The data collation, analysis and reporting functions save valuable staff time;

·    Providing a user-friendly platform for the community to easily provide feedback to inform Council projects and programs. Positive feedback has been received from community members suggesting that Liverpool Listens is a quick and easy way to provide feedback to Council;

·    24/7 accessibility providing a convenient method for the community to have their say in their own time and from personal computers and mobile devices resulting in engagement from a broader cross-section of the community; and

·    The participant database becoming an appreciating asset for Council and an effective way to inform/notify the community about projects and developments in the LGA.

 

Scope for improvement

 

Although much success has been achieved by using Liverpool Listens over the past four years, there is scope for improvement. The following are considerations to build on past community engagement achievements:

 

·    Increase the number of registered participants. Currently there is 1% of the population in the Liverpool Listens database. Improved marketing and promotion to the community about projects and issues will enable this;

·    Creating participant groups based on areas of interest will assist with targeting community consultation on relevant projects;

·    Linking with Council’s e-planning portal to enable easier public notifications and submissions on development applications and planning proposals on public exhibition;

·    Increase use of the other interactive tools such as places, ideas and budget allocator to encourage engagement. These tools are different to surveys as they are more interactive and ‘open’, often eliciting different, more meaningful responses; and

·    Closing the loop on each of the projects by informing the participants of the outcomes of the consultation. This could be done through infographics (quick snapshot) or a full report. Providing participants with outcome reports often increases the likelihood of future engagement.

 

This report recommends that Council endorse the renewal of the Liverpool Listens subscription for a further three years from 2018-2021 and build on this engagement platform to expand the current functions while maintaining consistency for both internal and external users.

 

District Forums review

In January 2017, Council resolved to establish the Liverpool District Forums as a mechanism to promote dialogue, community engagement and communications with the community. Accordingly, six District Forums were established, encompassing the following suburbs: 

·    Rural District: Badgerys Creek, Bringelly, Greendale, Kemps Creek, Luddenham, Rossmore, Silverdale, Wallacia;

·    City Centre District: Liverpool City Centre;

·    Established District: Casula, Liverpool (excluding City Centre), Lurnea, Prestons, Warwick Farm;

·    New Release District: Cecil Park, Austral, Middleton Grange, West Hoxton, Cecil Hills, Elizabeth Hills, Len Waters Estate, Hoxton Park, Carnes Hill, Horningsea Park, Leppington, Denham Court, Edmondson Park;

·    Eastern District: Chipping Norton, Hammondville, Holsworthy, Moorebank, Voyager Point, Pleasure Point, Wattle Grove; and

·    2168 District: Ashcroft, Busby, Cartwright, Green Valley, Heckenberg, Hinchinbrook, Miller and Sadleir.

 

The primary functions of the District Forum are to provide the opportunity for Council to:

a)   Engage and consult with the community about local matters, including those affecting the broader Liverpool LGA;

b)   Convey information about Council services and operations;

c)   Encourage active and meaningful community participation in Council matters;

d)   Provide the community with the means to identify and solve local issues and to take appropriate action, where possible; and

e)   Respond appropriately to the community on matters raised.

 

The following table is a summary outline of the attendance records and agenda items covered over the past 15-month period:

District

 

Total number of attendees

Agenda highlights

Rural

 

 

 

 

250

 

 

 

·    Challenges and opportunities for the district;

·    Council’s Delivery Program and Operational Plan;

·    Crime and cyber safety information;

·    Community safety/scams/break ins;

·    Community Facilities Strategy;

·    Western Sydney Airport updates;

·    Planning and developments; and

·    Traffic and road related issues.

City Centre

 

 

12

 

 

·    Challenges and opportunities for the district;

·    Council’s Delivery Program and Operational Plan;

·    Community Facilities Strategy;

·    Liverpool data network; and

·    City Centre activation.

 

Established

 

 

28

 

 

·    Challenges and opportunities for the district;

·    Council’s Delivery Program and Operational Plan;

·    Community Facilities Strategy; and

·    General community news and issues.

 

 

New Release

 

 

45

 

 

·    Challenges and opportunities for the district;

·    Council’s Delivery Program and Operational Plan;

·    Community Facilities Strategy;

·    Western Sydney Parklands; and

·    Education and health precinct information.

 

 

 

Eastern

99

 

 

 

 

 

·    Challenges and opportunities for the district;

·    Council’s Delivery Program and Operational Plan;

·    Community Facilities Strategy;

·    Affordable housing/boarding houses;

·    Traffic modelling;

·    Collaboration City concept;

·    Voyager Point and Pleasure Point community forum; and

·    Traffic and road related issues.

 

2168

 

36

 

 

·    Challenges and opportunities for the district;

·    Council’s Delivery Program and Operational Plan;

·    Community Facilities Strategy;

·    Miller Masterplan; and

·    General community news and issues.

 

A review of the District forums found that residents’ attendance at each district has varied over the past 15 months. There has been steady participation at both the Rural and Eastern District Forums; while the City Centre, Established, New Release and 2168 District Forums have experienced low to medium attendance rates. At the majority of the latter forums a quorum has not been reached. While some residents have attended for information purposes (i.e. guest speakers or a topic of interest on the agenda), a high number of participants at meetings are those residents who have a history of engagement with Council.

 

A number of measures have been introduced to increase participation rates, including change of meeting times and frequency, amalgamation, targeted social media promotion, promotion through Council website, letterbox drops, existing networks, newspaper, notice boards and attendance at various community events.

 

Further review of the terms of reference and structural adjustments including community forums similar to that held for Edmondson Park residents on a needs basis are recommended as additional options to increase community participation.

 

This report makes the following recommendations on the forums:

 

·    Continue with the Rural District Forum on a bi-monthly basis. The forum is well-attended and the community are engaged with topics of discussion. It provides a positive opportunity for Council to maintain its relationship with residents in the semi-rural areas of Liverpool to inform, engage and consult. In particular, this level of engagement is required with consideration to residents’ request for ongoing updates on the Western Sydney Airport development, provision of community infrastructure, and Council services.

 

·    Continue the Eastern District Forum and change its frequency from quarterly to bi-monthly forums as per recent request from residents. The Forum is well attended in its current format, and provides the community the opportunity to be informed, engaged and consulted on areas of concern, in particular the Moorebank Intermodal development, road and traffic matters and other areas of interest.

 

·    Continue operating the amalgamated 2168 District Forum and 2168 Resident Action Group, meeting monthly during the day. Due to low attendance rates, the residents attending agreed to the amalgamation in 2017. A downside to this change is that working residents are not able to attend a day time meeting. It is recommended that community forums on a needs basis are planned as additional options to address this limitation and provide opportunity for broader community engagement on matters of interest and concern.

 

·    Continue the New Release District Forum on quarterly basis. Generally, the Forum has had a low attendance rate, however participation numbers have increased in recent months. The New Release District is undergoing significant growth, requiring a communication pathway with the community to inform, engage and consult. In addition to quarterly forums, it is recommended that community forums on a needs basis are planned as additional options for broader community engagement on matters of interest and concern. 

 

·    Amalgamate the City Centre District Forum with the existing CBD committee. Historically, the City Centre Forum has had a very low attendance rates and has not reached a quorum during this evaluation period, meaning it is not a viable option to continue. The CBD committee engages a range of local businesses, stakeholders and community members on strategies to drive economic, social and cultural development in the CBD. Continuation of the City Centre District Forum is a duplication of resources, functions and outcomes Council aims to achieve. Should Council endorse this recommendation, a review of the CBD Committee Charter will be required to update the membership section to allow residents’ attendance to raise and discuss matters of interest and concern.  

 

·    Discontinue the Established District Forum. The Forum meets quarterly and has had low attendance rates. On the majority of occasions, a quorum has not been reached. Matters raised by residents attending have been mainly of customer service nature, and this Forum is not an effective platform to manage customer service requests. It is recommended that community forums on a needs basis are planned for the Established District for broader community engagement on matters of interest and concern. 

 

·    In addition to quarterly and bi-monthly forums, deliver community forums on a needs basis, inviting government and private sector representatives, for broader community engagement on matters of interest and concern.

 

CONSIDERATIONS

 

Economic

The following economic and financial considerations to be taken into consideration:

·    A budget of $36,647 per annum has been allocated to the Liverpool Listens in the operational budget.

·    A budget of $44,500 per annum has been allocated to community engagement, including the cost of delivering Liverpool District Forums and a need basis community forums.

Environment

There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.


Social

·    Increase community engagement.

·    Encourage community participation in decision making.

·    Implement access and equity for all members of the community.

·    Celebrate diversity and inclusion.

·    Strive for best practice in all Council processes.


Civic Leadership

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

·    Encourage the community to engage in Council initiatives and actions.

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

·    Deliver services that are customer focused.

Legislative

·    Local Government Act 1993.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

 

Nil  


104

Ordinary Meeting 27 June 2018

City Corporate Report

 

CORP 01

Investment Report May 2018

 

Strategic Direction

Leading through Collaboration

Seek efficient and innovative methods to manage our resources

File Ref

142853.2018

Report By

John Singh - Revenue Accountant

Approved By

Vishwa Nadan - Manager Finance

 

 

Executive Summary

 

This report details Council’s Investment portfolio.

 

At 31 May 2018, Council held investments with a market value of $229 million.

 

The portfolio yield to the end of May 2018 is 72 basis points above the AusBond Bank Bill index.

 

 

AusBond Bank Bill Index (BBI)

Benchmark

1.78%

Portfolio yield

2.50%

Performance above benchmarks

0.72%

 

Return on investment for the 11 months ended to May 2018 was $1.3 million higher than budget.

 

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.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council receives and notes this report.

 

 

REPORT

 

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

Council’s Portfolio

 

At 31 May 2018, Council held investments with a market value of $229 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:

 

 

 

 

The ratio of market value compared to face value of various debt securities is shown in the table below.

 

Asset Class

May -18

Jun-17

Senior Debts (FRN's & TCD's)

100.30%

100.85%

MBS (Reverse Mortgage Backed Securities)

59.26%

60.13%

T-Corp Unit Trusts

102.25%

100.39%

 

* 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 grandfathering provision in regards to its investment portfolio holdings. The grandfathering 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.

 

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

 

Overall Portfolio Credit Framework compliance to Investment Policy

 

 

 

 

Portfolio Performance against relevant market benchmark.

 

Council’s Investment Policy prescribes AusBond Bank Bill Index (ABBI) as a benchmark to measure return on cash and fixed interest securities. The ABBI represents average daily yield of a parcel of bank bills. Historically there has been a positive correlation between changes in the cash rate and the resulting impact on the ABBI benchmark.

 

The portfolio yield to 31 May 2018 exceeded the AusBond Bank Bill index by 72 basis points (2.50% against 1.78 %).

 

Council continues to achieve a solid outcome despite ongoing margin contraction and significantly lower market term deposit yields. Comparative yields for the previous months are charted below:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 Performance of Portfolio Returns against Budget

 

Council’s investment income for the 11 months to May 2018 exceeded budget by $1.3 million mainly due to higher actual monthly average portfolio holdings compared to budgeted monthly average portfolio holdings for the period.

 

 

Investment Portfolio at a Glance

 

 

Portfolio Performance

 

 

MCWB01114_0000[1]

 

The portfolio yield to 31 May 2018 exceeded the AusBond Bank Bill index by 72 basis points (2.50% against 1.78%).

Annual Income vs. Budget

MCWB01114_0000[1]

Council’s investment interest income exceeded budget by $1.3 million as at 31 May 2018 mainly due to higher actual monthly average portfolio holdings compared to budgeted monthly average portfolio holdings.

 

Investment Policy Compliance

Legislative Requirements

 

MCWB01114_0000[1]

Fully Compliant.

Portfolio Credit Rating Limit

MCWB01114_0000[1]

Fully Compliant.

Institutional Exposure Limits

X

Investments in Police Credit Union (SA) is slightly higher than the policy limit - $2m maturing in August 2018 will be recalled.

Overall Portfolio Credit Limits

MCWB01114_0000[1]

Fully Compliant.

Term to Maturity Limits

MCWB01114_0000[1]

Fully Compliant.

 

Economic Outlook – Reserve Bank of Australia

The Reserve Bank has left the official cash rate on hold at 1.5 per cent in its 5 June 2018 meeting. The current 1.5 per cent cash rate is at a historically low level and impacts returns on investment.

 

Certificate of Responsible Accounting Officer

The Manager Financial Services, 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.

 

Independent verification by Head of Audit, Risk and Improvement (HARI)

Council requested an independent review of its investment portfolio by Audit Risk and Improvement Committee (ARIC) or its representative under delegated authority. The ARIC has agreed for its Chairperson to provide a certificate on a quarterly basis – the next certificate will be presented to Council on 29 August 2018.

 

CONSIDERATIONS

 

Economic

Council’s investment interest income exceeded budget by $1.3 million as at 31 May 2018 mainly due to higher actual monthly average portfolio holdings compared to budgeted monthly average portfolio holdings.

Environment

There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.


Social

There are no social and cultural considerations.


Civic Leadership

There are no civic leadership and governance considerations.

Legislative

Council is fully compliant with the requirements of the Local Government Act 1993 – Investment Order (authorized investments) and with reporting requirements under Clause 212 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

 

1.         Investment Portfolio - May 2018  


110

CORP 01

Investment Report May 2018

Attachment 1

Investment Portfolio - May 2018

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


112

Ordinary Meeting 27 June 2018

City Corporate Report

 

CORP 02

Local Government Remunerational Tribunal Annual Report and Determination under sections 239 and 241 of the Local Government Act 1993

 

Strategic Direction

Leading through Collaboration

Encourage community participation in decision-making

File Ref

151072.2018

Report By

Ellen  Whittingstall - Coordinator Governance 

Approved By

Chris White - Director City Corporate

 

 

Executive Summary

 

On 17 April 2018 the Local Government Remuneration Tribunal (the Tribunal) produced their Annual report and Determination under sections 239 and 241 of the Local Government Act 1993 (the Act).

 

It is recommended that Council notes this report and resolves to fix the fees payable to the Mayor and Councillors within the limits as determined by the Local Government Remuneration Tribunal.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council pursuant to Section 248 and 249 of the Act, resolves to fix the fees payable to the Mayor and Councillors for the period 1 July 2018 to 30 June 2019 to an amount equal to the maximum allowable under the determination of the Local Government Remuneration Tribunal, dated 17 April 2018.

 

 

REPORT

 

Council’s adopted Civic Expenses and Facilities Policy states that the purpose of the policy is to ensure that there is accountability and transparency in the reimbursement of expenses incurred or to be incurred by Councillors. The policy also ensures that the facilities provided to assist Councillors to carry out their civic duties are reasonable.

 

On 17 April 2018 the Local Government Remuneration Tribunal (the Tribunal) produced their Annual report and Determination under sections 239 and 241 of the Local Government Act 1993 (the Act).The Tribunal determines the categories by which each council is classified and the maximum and minimum amounts of fees to be paid to mayors and councillors.

 

The Tribunal has categorised Metropolitan Large Council’s as typically have a minimum population of 200,000 and may include features such as:

 

·    Total operating revenue exceeding $200M per annum;

·    The provision of significant regional services including, major education, health retail sports and other recreation and cultural facilities;

·    Significant industrial, commercial and residential centres and development corridors; and

·    High population growth.

 

Councils that are categorised as Metropolitan Large are considered to have a sphere of economic influence and provide regional services considered to be greater than those of other metropolitan councils.

 

The Local Government Remuneration Tribunal has determined (effective 1 July 2018) that:

 

1.   Pursuant to Section 239 of the Act that Liverpool City Council will be categorised a ‘Metropolitan Large’ Council; and

 

2.   Pursuant to Section 241 of the Act, the annual fees to be paid Councillors and Mayors in a Metropolitan Large Council, be a minimum of $17,980 and a maximum of $29,670. An additional fee is to be paid to the Mayor at a minimum of $38,200 and maximum of $86,000. These fees represent a 2.5 per cent increase which is consistent with the government’s policy on wages.

 

In recognition of the increasing workload and time commitments required by the Mayor and Councillors, and noting that almost all metropolitan councils have adopted the tribunal maximum, it is recommended that Council fix the fees payable to the Mayor and Councillors for the period 1 July 2018 to 30 June 2019 to the maximum allowable within the above limits.

 

CONSIDERATIONS

 

Economic

The fees to be paid have been included in the 2018 - 2019 budget.

Environment

There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.


Social

There are no social and cultural considerations.


Civic Leadership

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

Legislative

Section 248, 249 of the Local Government Act 1994 (LG Act)

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

 

1.         Local Government Remunerational Tribunal Annual Report and Determination under sections 239 and 241 of the Local Government Act 1993 (Under separate cover)

2.         Civic Expenses and Facilities Policy (Under separate cover)     


115

Ordinary Meeting 27 June 2018

Committee Reports

 

CTTE 01

Minutes of the Intermodal Committee Meeting held on 15 May 2018

 

Strategic Direction

Leading through Collaboration

Increase community engagement

File Ref

141974.2018

Report By

Marcus Jennejohn - Acting Executive Planner

Approved By

Tim Moore - Director, City Economy and Growth / Deputy CEO

 

 

Executive Summary

 

This report is tabled in order to present the Minutes of the Intermodal Committee Meeting held on 15 May 2018.

 

The Committee members discussed a number of matters however there were no motions.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council receives and notes the Minutes of the Intermodal Committee Meeting held on 15 May 2018.  

 

REPORT

 

The Minutes of the Intermodal Committee Meeting held on 15 May 2018 are attached for the information of Council. It is noted that the Committee members discussed a number of matters however there were no motions.

 

The Minutes identify actions that Council staff will undertake, none of which will have any financial impact on Council.

    

CONSIDERATIONS

 

Economic

There are no economic and financial considerations.

Environment

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


Social

There are no social and cultural considerations.


Civic Leadership

Encourage the community to engage in Council initiatives and actions.

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

Legislative

There are no legislative considerations relating to this report.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

 

1.         Intermodal Committee Meeting Minutes - May 2018  


117

CTTE 01

Minutes of the Intermodal Committee Meeting held on 15 May 2018

Attachment 1

Intermodal Committee Meeting Minutes - May 2018

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


120

Ordinary Meeting 27 June 2018

Committee Reports

 

CTTE 02

Minutes of the Strategic Panel held on 4 June 2018

 

Strategic Direction

Leading through Collaboration

Strive for best practice in all Council processes

File Ref

144683.2018

Report By

Claudia Novek - Corporate Planner

Approved By

Hiba Soueid - Manager Corporate Strategy and Performance

 

 

Executive Summary

 

This report is tabled in order to present the Minutes of the Strategic Panel Meeting held on 4 June 2018.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council receives and notes the Minutes of the Strategic Panel Meeting held on 4 June 2018.

 

REPORT

 

The Minutes of the Strategic Panel held on 4 June 2018 are attached for the information of Council.

 

The Minutes identify actions for Council staff to undertake, none of which will have any financial impact on Council.

    

CONSIDERATIONS

 

Economic

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

Facilitate economic development.

Further develop a commercial centre that accommodates a variety of employment opportunities (in the City Centre).

Environment

There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.


Social

Deliver high quality services for children and their families.

Review community recommendations to create a collaborative approach to Council’s strategic direction.

Improve Liverpool’s social profile to achieve a community renewal of the City Centre.


Civic Leadership

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

Deliver services that are customer focused.

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

Work in partnership with organisations to achieve the best result for the community.

Achieve an integrated and coordinated approach to deliver strategic initiatives.

Make informed decisions as a Council.

Legislative

There are no legislative considerations relating to this report.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

 

1.         Strategic Panel Meeting Minutes June 2018  


122

CTTE 02

Minutes of the Strategic Panel held on 4 June 2018

Attachment 1

Strategic Panel Meeting Minutes June 2018

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


125

Ordinary Meeting 27 June 2018

Committee Reports

 

CTTE 03

Minutes of the Environment Advisory Committee Meeting held on 8 May 2018

 

Strategic Direction

Strengthening and Protecting our Environment

Develop, and advocate for, plans that support safe and friendly communities

File Ref

154913.2018

Report By

Madhu  Pudasaini - Manager Technical Support

Approved By

Raj Autar - Director City Infrastructure and Environment

 

 

Executive Summary

 

This report is tabled in order to present the Minutes of the Environment Advisory Committee Meeting held on 8 May 2018.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council receives and notes the Minutes of the Environment Advisory Committee Meeting held on 8 May 2018.

 

REPORT

 

The Minutes of the Environment Advisory Committee held on 8 May 2018 are attached for the information of Council.

 

The Minutes identify a number of actions that require Council staff to undertake, none of which will have any financial impact on Council.

         

CONSIDERATIONS

 

Economic

There are no economic and financial impacts.

Environment

Manage the environmental health of waterways.

Protect, enhance and maintain areas of endangered ecological communities and high quality bushland as part of an attractive mix of land uses.

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


Social

Support community organisations, groups and volunteers to deliver coordinated services to the community.


Civic Leadership

Act as an environmental leader in the community.

Encourage the community to engage in Council initiatives and actions.

Legislative

There are no legislative considerations relating to this report.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

 

1.         EAC Minutes - 8 May 2018  


127

CTTE 03

Minutes of the Environment Advisory Committee Meeting held on 8 May 2018

Attachment 1

EAC Minutes - 8 May 2018

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


131

Ordinary Meeting 27 June 2018

Committee Reports

 

CTTE 04

Minutes of the Local Traffic Committee Meeting held on 16 May 2018

 

Strategic Direction

Generating Opportunity

Advocate for, and develop, transport networks to create an accessible city

File Ref

156791.2018

Report By

Charles Wiafe - Service Manager Traffic and Transport

Approved By

Tim Moore - Director, City Economy and Growth / Deputy CEO

 

 

Executive Summary

 

This report is tabled to present the Minutes of the Local Traffic Committee (LTC) Meeting held on 16 May 2018. The Committee considered eleven (11) Agenda Items, four (4) Technical Discussion Items and ten (10) General Business Items. A copy of the LTC minutes is attached.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council adopts the following recommendations as outlined in the attached minutes:

 

i)    Item 1 - College Street/Moore Street, Liverpool - Proposed changes to the existing on-street parking.

·     Conversion of the existing ‘No Stopping’ zone along College Street outside Liverpool TAFE to nine (9) ‘2P’ car parking spaces (with ‘Rear to Kerb’ restriction), 10m ‘No Parking’ restriction and six (6) ‘Motor Bikes Only’ spaces, as shown in Attachment 1.1.

·     Conversion of the ‘Front to Kerb’ spaces along Moore Street, Liverpool, to ‘Rear to Kerb’ spaces.

ii)   Item 2 - Mannix Parade, Warwick Farm - Proposed introduction of resident parking scheme

·     Introduction of a Resident Parking Scheme and associated parking restrictions indicating ‘2P PERMIT HOLDERS EXCEPTED, AREA LCC-003’ in Council’s car park fronting Mannix Parade, Warwick Farm.

·     The Roads and Maritime Services concurrence be sought prior to installing ‘2P’ parking restrictions.




iii)  Item 3 - Campbell Street, Liverpool - Proposed raised threshold at the existing pedestrian crossing.

·     Upgrade the existing marked pedestrian crossing across Campbell Street, as shown in Attachment 3.1.

·     RMS is to be requested to signpost 40 km/h High Pedestrian Activity Area in the Campbell Street section between Bigge Street and Bathurst Street, Liverpool.

 

iv)  Item 4 - Cubitt Drive, Denham Court  - Road safety improvements

·     Carry out linemarking and signposting in the vicinity of 23 and 25 Cubitt Drive, Denham Court.

 

v)   Item 5 - Sadleir Avenue, Sadleir - Relocation of a bus stop

     Relocation of the existing bus stop at the front of 4 Sadleir Avenue, Sadleir, is to be deferred for review in two or three months following the launch of new bus timetable in June 2018.

 

vi)  Item 6 - Liverpool City Centre  - Special community event, Festival of Chariots

·     The event is classified as Class 2 Special Event according to the RMS Special Event guidelines.  The applicant is to:

o   Submit Traffic Management Plan to Council and RMS for endorsement.

o   Police approval for the management of the street parade and rolling road closures.

o   Advertisement of event in the local papers.

o   Submission of a public liability insurance.

·     Council is to arrange meeting with the event organisers, Police, bus companies to ensure minimum impact from the proposed event.

              

vii) Item 7 - Railway Street and Railway Serviceway, Liverpool  - Special community event, ‘Eat Your Heart Out Liverpool’

·     The event is classified as Class 2 Special Event according to the RMS Special Event guidelines.  The applicant is to:

o   Submit Traffic Management Plan to the RMS for endorsement.

o   Police approval and management of the street closure.

o   Advertisement of event in the local papers.      

viii) Item 8 - Liverpool City Centre  - Special community event, NAIDOC street parade

·     The event is classified as Class 4 Special Event (under police control) according to the RMS Special Event guidelines.      

ix)  Item 9 - Edmondson Park Town Centre Development  - Proposed bus stops

·     Approves the proposed bus stops, bus zones locations and associated signs and linemarking scheme as shown in Attachments 9.2 and 9.3.


         

x)   Item 10 - Items approved under Delegated Authority

·      13 Items were approved under delegated authorities during the period 7 March 2018 to 4 May 2018.
         

xi)  Item 11 - Liverpool Local Traffic Committee Charter

·     The Local Traffic Committee Charter was adopted by the Committee. 

 

REPORT

 

In addition to the above eleven (11) agenda items, the Committee also considered the following four (4) Technical Discussion and ten (10) General Business Items.

 

Technical Discussion Items

 

TD1       Reserve Road, Casula – Bus Shelter Relocation – Not supported

TD2       Liverpool City Centre – Charity Walk for Scleroderma – Noted

TD3       Liverpool City Centre –Sydney Water Waste Water Infrastructure Project – Noted

TD4     53 Clyde Avenue, Moorebank – Traffic Impact of a Proposed Child Care Centre – Liaise with the RMS

 

General Business Items

 

GB1       Holsworthy Station commuter car park – Congestion caused by right turning right vehicles into The Boulevarde – Council to investigate

GB2       Elizabeth Street /Bigge Park, Liverpool – Domestic Violence Parade – Police to confirm the route

GB3       Church Road, Moorebank – Heavy vehicles illegally parked – Police to enforce

GB4       Morley Avenue, Hammondville – Children playing on the road – Council to investigate

GB5       St Christopher’s, Holsworthy – Request for a pedestrian fence – RMS to investigate

GB6       Memorial Avenue and Hume Highway, Liverpool - Slip lanes – RMS to investigate

GB7       Northumberland Street, Liverpool – Mobility parking – Council to investigate

GB8       Latest traffic software – Council to organize demonstration

GB9       Dalmeny Drive, Prestons – Changes to the existing bus zone times – Council to investigate

GB10     Wonga Road, Lurnea – Removal of bus stop signCouncil to investigate

 

Budget impact of matters arising from the minutes

Item

Description

Funding

1

College Street/Moore Street, Liverpool – Proposed on-street Parking Changes

RMS Traffic Facilities Grant

2

Mannix Parade, Warwick Farm – Proposed Introduction of Resident Parking
Scheme

Council’s Minor Traffic Facilities Program

3

Campbell Street, Liverpool – Proposed Raised Threshold at the Existing  Pedestrian Crossing

Council’s Minor Traffic Facilities Program

4

Cubitt Drive, Denham Court – Proposed Road Safety Improvements

Council’s Minor Traffic Facilities Program

5

Sadleir Avenue, Sadleir – Proposed Relocation of Bus Stop

N/A

6

Liverpool City Centre – Special Community Event, Festival Of Chariots

Event organiser

7

Railway Street And Railway Serviceway, Liverpool – Special Community
Event, ‘Eat Your Heart Out Liverpool’

Council

8

Liverpool City Centre – Special Community Event, NAIDOC Street March

Event organiser

9

Edmondson Park Town Centre Development – Bus Stops

Developer

10

Items Approved Under Delegated Authority

N/A

11

Liverpool Local Traffic Committee Charter

N/A

 

CONSIDERATIONS

 

Economic

Provide efficient parking for the City Centre.

Enhance the environmental performance of buildings and homes.

Deliver a high quality local road system including provision and maintenance of infrastructure and management of traffic issues.

Environment

Promote an integrated and user friendly public transport service.

Support the delivery of a range of transport options.


Social

Improve road and pedestrian safety


Civic Leadership

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

Legislative

NSW Roads Act 1993

NSW Road Transport (Safety & Traffic Management) Act 1999

Roads and Maritime Service Traffic Management and Road Design Guidelines.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

 

1.         Minutes of the Local Traffic Committee Meeting held on 16 May 2018 (Under separate cover)  


135

Ordinary Meeting 27 June 2018

Committee Reports

 

CTTE 05

Minutes of Civic Advisory Committee meeting held on Tuesday 12 June 2018

 

Strategic Direction

Leading through Collaboration

Strive for best practice in all Council processes

File Ref

158363.2018

Report By

George Georgakis - Manager Council and Executive Services

Approved By

Kiersten Fishburn - Chief Executive Officer

 

 

Executive Summary

 

This report is tabled in order to present the Minutes of the Civic Advisory Committee Meeting held on 12 June 2018.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council receives and adopts the minutes of the Civic Advisory Committee Meeting held on 12 June 2018. 

 

REPORT

 

The Minutes of the Civic Advisory Committee Meeting held on 12 June 2018 are attached for the information of Council.

 

The Minutes identify a number of actions that require Council staff to undertake, none of which will have any financial impact on Council.

 

CONSIDERATIONS

 

Economic

There are no economic and financial considerations.

Environment

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


Social

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

Preserve and maintain heritage, both landscape and cultural as urban development takes place.


Civic Leadership

Encourage the community to engage in Council initiatives and actions.

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

Deliver services that are customer focused.

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

Legislative

There are no legislative considerations relating to this report.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

 

1.         Civic Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes from 12 June 2018  


137

CTTE 05

Minutes of Civic Advisory Committee meeting held on Tuesday 12 June 2018

Attachment 1

Civic Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes from 12 June 2018

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 


PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator

 


144

Ordinary Meeting 27 June 2018

Notices of Motion

 

NOM 01

Medium Density Development

 

Strategic Direction

Strengthening and Protecting our Environment

Exercise planning controls to create high-quality, inclusive urban environments

File Ref

164298.2018

Author

Nathan Hagarty - Councillor

 

 

Background

 

The nature of our residential suburbs is changing. Many freestanding homes in suburbs like Chipping Norton, Moorebank and Casula have been knocked down and turned into medium density townhouses and terraces. This has had a knock on effect to infrastructure with small suburban streets being clogged.

 

In mid-May the State Government announced a halt on development in Ryde and Canterbury Bankstown Councils citing the need for infrastructure to catch up with development.

 

The freeze includes the deferment of a new medium density housing code which makes it easier for existing residential homes to be turned into terraces, townhouses and other two-storey developments.

 

Figures from the NSW Planning & Environment show that in the last five years Liverpool ranks 7th in the number of dwellings built in Sydney while the two Councils that have had a freeze on development, Canterbury Bankstown and Ryde, rank 6th and 10th respectively.

 

WSROC welcomed the decision with WSROC President Stephen Bali saying “We need to ensure we are prioritising sustainable growth. Growth that is supported by state infrastructure such as roads, drainage, parks, community centres and public transport,” and “That means planning and budgeting for infrastructure first, and allocating growth second."

 

Since the initial announcement, Lane Cove and Northern Beaches have received an exemption from the medium density code, while Randwick, Georges River, Sutherland, Hawkesbury and Strathfield have also sought or are seeking an exemption.

 

These exemptions and requests for exemption come after the minister said he was prepared to extend the freeze to any other council in Sydney seeking to amend its Local Environment Plan (LEP).

 

The two reasons given for the freeze, an infrastructure deficit and the review of an LEP, both apply to Liverpool. As announced in the City Deal, Liverpool will be undertaking an extensive review of our LEP and our infrastructure deficit, especially with regards to traffic, are well known.

 

In order to comprehensively review the LEP, including any changes to medium density and the impact on infrastructure, it is essential all information be known. As such, any review of the LEP must be informed by the 2016 RMS traffic study on congestion in Liverpool and Moorebank.

 

NOTICE OF MOTION

 

That Council:

1.   Request a deferment from the Minister on the implementation of the new medium density housing code in line with other Councils in the Sydney area; and

 

2.   Call on the State Government to release the 2016 RMS traffic study into congestion in Liverpool and Moorebank in order to better inform a review of the LEP.

 

CONSIDERATIONS

 

Economic

Deliver and maintain a range of transport related infrastructure such as footpaths, bus shelters and bikeways.

Deliver a high quality local road system including provision and maintenance of infrastructure and management of traffic issues.

Environment

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

Social

Preserve and maintain heritage, both landscape and cultural as urban development takes place.

Civic Leadership

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.

Legislative

There are no legislative considerations relating to this report. 

 

ATTACHMENTS

Nil