COUNCIL AGENDA

 

Ordinary Council Meeting

30 September 2020

 

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You are hereby notified that an Ordinary Council Meeting of Liverpool City Council will be held online on Wednesday, 30 September 2020 commencing at 6.00pm.

 

Liverpool City Council Meetings are livestreamed onto Council’s website and remain on Council’s website for a period of 12 months.  If you have any enquiries, please contact Council and Executive Services on 8711 7584.

A close up of a logo

Description automatically generated

Dr Eddie Jackson

ACTING CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

 

 

 


 

 

 


Order of Business

 

                                                                                                              PAGE     TAB

Opening

Acknowledgment of Country and Prayer

Apologies

Condolences

Confirmation of Minutes

Ordinary Council Meeting held on 26 August 2020................................................................. 7

Declarations of Interest

Public Forum

Mayoral Report

NIL

Notices of Motion Of Rescission

NIL

Chief Executive Officer Report

CEO 01           Outcome of Public Exhibition of amendments to the Revenue Pricing Policy 2020-21.................................................................................................................... 50......... 1

CEO 02           Election of Deputy Mayor............................................................................... 55......... 2

CEO 03           Appointment of Councillors to Committees and Affiliated Bodies.................. 58......... 3

CEO 04           Mayoral Direction pursuant to Section 226(d) of the Local Government Act 1993    69 4

CEO 05           Adoption of new Code of Conduct and Code of Conduct Procedures.......... 72......... 5

City Economy and Growth Report

EGROW 01    Planning proposal request to amend development standards and Schedule 1 of the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 to facilitate a mixed use development in the B6 zone at 146 Newbridge Road, Moorebank......................................... 89......... 6

EGROW 02    Planning proposal request to amend development standards and Schedule 1 of the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 to facilitate residential development at the proposed George's Cove marina at 146 Newbridge Road, Moorebank 108......... 7

EGROW 03    Planning proposal request to rezone land and amend development standards at 1370 Camden Valley Way, East Leppington................................................ 124......... 8

EGROW 04    Issues and Options Report - Potential amendment to Liverpool Local Environmental Plan to permit a Recreation Facility (Outdoor) at 25 Dwyer Road, Bringelly........................................................................................................ 141......... 9

EGROW 05    Park Naming Application - Request to rename Cirillo Reserve, Middleton Grange 153 10

EGROW 06    Business Resilience Grants.......................................................................... 162....... 11

City Community and Culture Report

COM 01          Grants, Donations and Corporate Sponsorship........................................... 173....... 12

COM 02          Acquittal Report for Grants, Donations and Corporate Sponsorship Program 2019/2020 FY............................................................................................... 177....... 13

COM 03          Child Safe Policy........................................................................................... 193....... 14

City Corporate Report

CORP 01        Bigge Park Cafes - Lot 702 DP 1056246, Bigge Street, Liverpool.............. 214....... 15

CORP 02        COVID-19 Response - City Development Fund Rebate Program............... 217....... 16

CORP 03        Investment Report August  2020.................................................................. 221....... 17

City Presentation Report

NIL

City Infrastructure and Environment Report

INF 01             2019-20 Capital Works Carryover of Projects.............................................. 230....... 18

Committee Reports

CTTE 01         Meeting Notes of the Liverpool Access Committee meeting held on 13 August 2020.............................................................................................................. 238....... 19

CTTE 02         Minutes of the Aboriginal Consultative Committee meeting held on 6 August 2020 271         20

CTTE 03         Minutes of the Audit, Risk and Improvement Committee Meeting held on 7 August 2020.............................................................................................................. 276....... 21

CTTE 04         Minutes of the Tourism and CBD Committee meeting held on 18 August 2020      292 22

CTTE 05         Minutes of the Intermodal Precinct Committee meeting held on 1 September 2020 298        23

CTTE 06         Minutes of Strategic Panel Meeting held on 10 August 2020...................... 303....... 24

Questions with Notice

QWN 01          Question with Notice - Clr Rhodes - Georges River Bank Stabilisation...... 311....... 25

QWN 02          Question with Notice - Clr Hagarty - Western Sydney Parklands Trust...... 329....... 26

QWN 03          Question with Notice - Clr Kaliyanda - Wattle Grove Lake.......................... 332....... 27

QWN 04          Question with Notice - Clr Hagarty - JobKeeper and JobSeeker................ 336....... 28

QWN 05          Question with Notice - Clr Hadchiti - Western Sydney Aerotropolis State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) 2020............................................... 337....... 29

Presentations by Councillors

 

Notices of Motion

NOM 01          Integrated Pest Management Policy and Strategy....................................... 338....... 30

NOM 02          Liverpool Multicultural Park.......................................................................... 340....... 31

NOM 03          Housing targets and our fair share............................................................... 342....... 32

 

 

 

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    Confidential Question With Notice - Management of the operating system for the parking meters

Reason:     Item CONF 01 is confidential pursuant to the provisions of s10(A)(2)(d i) (d ii) (d iii) 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; AND commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council; AND commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed reveal a trade secret.

 

CONF 02    Acquisition of Lot 1047 DP2475 being 265 Sixth Avenue, Austral

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

 

CONF 03    ST2964 Environment Restoration Plan Bush Regeneration Program of Works 2020-2023

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

 

CONF 04    Out of Office Hours Compliance Officers

Reason:     Item CONF 04 is confidential pursuant to the provisions of s10(A)(2)(a) of the Local Government Act because it contains personal matters concerning particular individuals (other than councillors).

 

CONF 05    Acquisition of Lot 410 in DP 1233750, 70 Seventeenth Avenue in Austral for drainage purposes.

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

 

CONF 06    Three (3) year Extension of Civica Spydus Managed Services Agreement

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

 

 

 

CONF 07    RCL2989 Tree Maintenance Services

Reason:     Item CONF 07 is confidential pursuant to the provisions of s10(A)(2)(d i) (d ii) 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; AND commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council.

 

CONF 08    Acquisition of part of 13 First Avenue, Hoxton Park

Reason:     Item CONF 08 is confidential pursuant to the provisions of s10(A)(2)(c) of the Local Government Act because it contains information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business.

 

CONF 09    International Trade Engagement Strategy and New Zealand Trade Mission update

Reason:     Item CONF 09 is confidential pursuant to the provisions of s10(A)(2)(d i) (d ii) 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; AND commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council.  

Close


 

MINUTES OF THE Ordinary Meeting

HELD ON 26 August 2020

 

 

PRESENT VIA VIDEO CONFERENCING:

Mayor Wendy Waller

Councillor Ayyad

Councillor Hadchiti (arrived at the meeting at 6.27pm)

Councillor Hadid

Councillor Hagarty

Councillor Harle

Councillor Kaliyanda

Councillor Karnib

Councillor Rhodes

Councillor Shelton

Dr Eddie Jackson, Acting Chief Executive Officer

Mr George Hampouris, Acting Director City Corporate

Ms Tina Sangiuliano, Acting Director City Community and Culture

Mr Peter Patterson, Director City Presentation

Mr Raj Autar, Director City Infrastructure and Environment

Mr David Smith, Acting Director City Economy and Growth

Ms Ellen Whittingstall, Acting Internal Ombudsman

Mr James Ng, General Counsel Manager Governance Legal and Procurement

Ms Lina Kakish, Manager Development Assessment

Mr Tim Pasley, Manager Waste and Cleansing

Mr Andrew Stevenson, Chief Strategy and Engagement Officer

Mr George Georgakis, Manager Council and Executive Services

Ms Susan Ranieri, Coordinator Council and Executive Services (minutes)

 

The meeting commenced at 6.00pm.

u Prayer and Affirmation

STATEMENT REGARDING WEBCASTING OF MEETING

The Mayor reminded everyone that in accordance with Council’s Code of Meeting Practice (other than the Public Forum Section), the meeting is being livestreamed.

 

ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF COUNTRY, PRAYER OF COUNCIL AND AFFIRMATION TO BE READ BY

 

The prayer of the Council was read by George Georgakis, Manager Council and Executive Services.

 


 

APOLOGIES

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Shelton              Seconded: Clr Hadid

That a leave of absence be granted to Clr Balloot for his absence from the Council meeting.

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

CONDOLENCES - Victims of the Beirut Explosion (to be read by Mayor Waller)

 

ITEM NO:       MAYOR 01

FILE NO:        218625.2020

 

Victims of the Beirut Explosion (read by Mayor Waller)

 

On 4 August 2020, a massive explosion tore through the port area in Beirut, in Lebanon, killing at least 163 people, including one Australian, and injuring more than 5000. The death toll is expected to rise as emergency workers continue to search through devastated areas of the city. About 300,000 people have been left homeless. 

 

The force of the explosion destroyed the port and resulted in the near total destruction of downtown Beirut within at least a 5km radius. The explosion was felt in parts of Europe and heard in Cyprus, an estimated 240km away. 

 

Liverpool is home to a large number of people of Lebanese ancestry, and Council values the contribution Lebanese Australians have made to the rich fabric of Liverpool. Many people in the Liverpool Local Government Area remain deeply distressed about the explosion and its impact on Beirut. Others continue to have concerns for the safety and welfare of their family members and friends who remain in Lebanon.  

 

On behalf of Liverpool City Council, I express my deepest condolences to the families and friends of the victims, and my thoughts and prayers are with the people who were injured in the explosion. To the people of Lebanon and all Lebanese Australians, I offer my solidarity and support on behalf of all Councillors during this devastating time. 

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Mayor Waller

 

That Council:

 

  1. Write to the Lebanese Consulate expressing our condolences and solidarity; and

 

  1. Donate $20,000 to AusRelief to support the victims of the Beirut explosion.

 

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

 

Councillors voted unanimously for this motion.

 

Confirmation of Minutes

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Shelton              Seconded: Clr Hadid

 

That the minutes of the Ordinary Meeting held on 29 July 2020 be confirmed as a true record of that meeting subject to the following change:

Item: NOM 04 Toll Mania

Remove the word “suggest” in point 2 so that point 2 should now read:

  1. Write to the State Government requesting:

·           a toll-free period on the M8; and

·           the removal of the toll, or a cash back scheme, or other measures to alleviate the financial burden on residents on the old M5 East.

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

 

Declarations of Interest

 

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

 

Item:          EGROW 06 LEP Review: Public Exhibition outcomes – Phase 1 Planning Proposal and Local Contributions Plan.

 

Reason:     Clr Ayyad owns a property in the affected area.

 

Clr Ayyad will remain in the virtual meeting for the duration of this item. 

 

 

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

 

Item:          EGROW 01 – Draft Warwick Farm Racing Precinct Structure Plan, Planning Proposal and Local Contributions Plan.

 

Reason:     He has family members that live in Warwick Farm.

 

Clr Harle will leave the virtual meeting and will not be participating in the debate.

 

 

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

 

Item:          QWN 04 – Question with Notice – Clr Rhodes – Georges River Bank Stabilisation.

 

Reason:     Clr Shelton holds office in an organisation, which has no regulatory powers,          but is otherwise involved in the issues raised.

 

Clr Shelton will remain in the virtual meeting for the duration of this item. 

 

Public Forum

Presentation – items not on agenda

Nil. 

Representation – items on agenda

 

1.      Mr Tom Goode on behalf of Ethos Urban made a written submission on the following item:

 

EGROW 01 - Draft Warwick Farm Racing Precinct Structure Plan, Planning Proposal and Local Contributions Plan.

 

2.      Mr Marc Conners made a written submission on the following item:

 

EGROW 01 - Draft Warwick Farm Racing Precinct Structure Plan, Planning Proposal and Local Contributions Plan.

 

3.      Ms Danica Canoza on behalf of AE Design Studio made a written submission on the following item:

 

EGROW 01 Draft Warwick Farm Racing Precinct Structure Plan, Planning Proposal and Local Contributions Plan.

 

4.      Mr Martin Musgrave on behalf of PPM Consulting made a written submission on the following item:

 

EGROW 06 - Post Exhibition Report - LEP Review Phase 1 Planning Proposal (Amendment 82) and Draft Land Use Planning Strategies.

Mayoral Minute

ITEM NO:       MAYOR 02

FILE NO:        218668.2020

SUBJECT:     Local Government Representation on the National Cabinet

 

The Prime Minister, Premiers and Chief Ministers met in Sydney on 13 March this year and agreed to establish a National Cabinet to coordinate Australia’s response to the coronavirus pandemic.

 

The National Cabinet has proven effective in taking decisions in Australia’s interest and the Prime Minister announced on 29 May that it would continue beyond the pandemic. Local Government is not represented in the National Cabinet. The Australian Local Government Association (ALGA) has been given a seat on the National Federation Reform Council, but this body will only meet once a year.

 

All three tiers of government should be represented on the National Cabinet. Councils have an important role to play because we are the level of government closest to the people. We are also responsible for the delivery of a range of vital community services, programs and infrastructure. 

 

Over coming months, the National Cabinet is likely to face enormous challenges unlike those seen by governments in recent times. This will require the three levels of government to collaborate and support each other to encourage economic growth, implement reforms, create jobs, assist businesses and residents and rebuild consumer confidence.

 

A seat at the table will ensure Local Government can contribute to the discussion, highlight the impact of federal policies and help shape a stronger future for everyone in Australia. Getting it right on the ground is local government’s area of expertise.

 

The ALGA Board and LGNSW are advocating for the inclusion of councils in the National Cabinet, a position I am sure is supported by all Councils.

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Mayor Waller  Seconded: Clr Rhodes

 

That Council:

 

1.      Writes to NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian and local Federal and State Members of Parliament to highlight the critical necessity for Local Government representation on the National Cabinet and seeks their assistance in requesting that the First Ministers review the decision to exclude Local Government;

 

 

 

 

2.      Seeks a meeting with local Federal and State MPs to discuss in more detail the importance of having Local Government representation on the National Cabinet and the value of partnerships with Councils in achieving the objectives of the National Cabinet and the national reform agenda; and

 

3.      Notes that the Australian Local Government Association, LGNSW and other state/territory local government associations will continue to advocate for Local Government representation on the National Cabinet and for local government’s interests in all relevant forums.

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

 


 

 

Chief Executive Officer Report

ITEM NO:       CEO 01

FILE NO:        205990.2020

SUBJECT:     Local Government NSW Conference 2020

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                 Moved: Clr Hadid                  Seconded: Clr Rhodes 

 

That:

 

1.    Any Councillors who wish to attend the 2020 Local Government NSW Annual Conference notify the Councillor Support Officer by 4 September 2020;

 

2.    Council determine its voting delegates for the Conference, noting that Liverpool City Council is entitled to 10 voting delegates for voting on motions and also noting that Councillor Hadid is entitled to one vote as he is a Director of the Association; and

 

3.    Endorse the motions as outlined in the report to be submitted to the Conference.

 

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

 


ITEM NO:       CEO 02

FILE NO:        209245.2020

SUBJECT:     Biannual Progress Report

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                 Moved:  Clr Shelton              Seconded: Clr Rhodes

 

That Council notes and receives the Biannual Progress Report which outlines the progress of Principal Activities detailed in the Delivery Program 2017-2022 and Operational Plan 2019-2020.

 

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


Clr Harle left the virtual meeting at 6:17pm.

 

City Economy and Growth Report

 

ITEM NO:       EGROW 01

FILE NO:        144667.2020

SUBJECT:     Draft Warwick Farm Racing Precinct Structure Plan, Planning Proposal and Local Contributions Plan

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                 Moved:  Clr Rhodes              Seconded: Clr Hadid

 

That Council:

 

  1. Notes the advice of the Liverpool Local Planning Panel;

 

  1. Notes that a feasibility study will be completed as recommended by the Liverpool Local Planning Panel;

 

  1. Places the draft structure plan, planning proposal and local contributions plan on public exhibition, pursuant to the Liverpool Community Participation Plan 2019 for 28 days;

 

  1. Receives a further report, following public exhibition, detailing any submissions received and any amendments proposed to the structure plan, planning proposal and/or local contributions plan; and 

 

5.    Holds a virtual community meeting with the constituents about the proposal during the time of the exhibition.

 

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

Vote for:           Mayor Waller, Clr Ayyad, Clr Hadid, Clr Hagarty, Clr Kaliyanda, Deputy Mayor Karnib and Clr Rhodes.

Vote against:   Clr Shelton.

Note: Clr Harle and Clr Hadchiti were not in the virtual meeting when this item was voted on.

Clr Balloot was an apology for the meeting.


Clr Harle returned to the virtual meeting at 6:24pm.

 

Clr Hadchiti arrived at the meeting at 6:27pm.

ITEM NO:       EGROW 02

FILE NO:        184343.2020

SUBJECT:     Report back - Consideration of implementing a Development Assessment Compliance Policy

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                 Moved: Clr Rhodes              Seconded: Clr Shelton

 

That Council receive and note the report noting that the Enforcement Policy is under review and will be reported to the December 2020 Council meeting.  

 

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

 


ITEM NO:       EGROW 03

FILE NO:        203447.2020

SUBJECT:     Post Exhibition Report - Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 Amendment 71 - Rezoning of certain lands in Prestons for Environmental Conservation

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                 Moved: Clr Hagarty              Seconded: Clr Shelton

 

That Council:

 

1.   Notes the judgements of the Land & Environment Court relating to development applications on the subject sites;

 

2.   Notes the Gateway determination (and Gateway alterations) for Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 Amendment 71 and the submissions received;

 

3.   Proceeds with Amendment 71 and delegates authority to the A/CEO (or his delegate) to liaise with the NSW Parliamentary Counsel’s Office and the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment to finalise the amendment; and

 

4.   Notify the submitters of Council’s decision.

 

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

Vote for:           Mayor Waller, Clr Ayyad, Clr Hadid, Clr Hagarty, Clr Kaliyanda, Deputy Mayor Karnib, Clr Rhodes and Clr Shelton.

Vote against:   Clr Hadchiti and Clr Harle.

Note: Clr Balloot was an apology for the meeting.


ITEM NO:       EGROW 04

FILE NO:        204535.2020

SUBJECT:     Status update on planning proposal requests in Moorebank

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                 Moved: Clr Shelton              Seconded: Clr Rhodes

 

That Council receives and notes this report.

 

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

 


ITEM NO:       EGROW 05

FILE NO:        207685.2020

SUBJECT:     Street Naming Request - Austral

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                 Moved: Clr Hadid                  Seconded: Clr Harle

 

That Council:

 

  1. Supports the re-naming of Kalbian Street to Catanzariti Drive, Austral;

 

  1. Forwards the name to the Geographical Names Board (GNB), seeking formal approval;

 

  1. Publicly exhibit the name in accordance with Council’s Naming Convention Policy, for a period of 28 days, following formal approval from the GNB; and

 

  1. Authorises the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to undertake the process of gazettal, if there are no submissions received during public exhibition.

 

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

 


 

City Community and Culture Report

 

ITEM NO:       COM 01

FILE NO:        194252.2020

SUBJECT:     Report back to Council - Alcohol-Free Zones Public Exhibition

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                 Moved:  Clr Shelton              Seconded: Clr Hadid

 

That Council endorse the re-establishment of Liverpool’s Alcohol-Free Zones for a period of four years to 1 September 2024.

 

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

 


ITEM NO:       COM 02

FILE NO:        201003.2020

SUBJECT:     Report Back to Council - Mimosa Park, 22 Box Rd, Casula

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                 Moved: Clr Ayyad                 Seconded: Clr Hadchiti

 

That:

 

1.    The matter be referred to community consultation for 14 days with 2 options being:

 

i.              Mimosa Park to be retained as a park; or

ii.            Rezone and dispose of Mimosa Park.

 

2.    A report to be brought back to the October Council meeting on the feedback from the community consultation.

 

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

Vote for:           Clr Ayyad, Clr Hadchiti, Clr Hadid, Clr Harle and Clr Rhodes.

Vote against:   Mayor Waller, Clr Hagarty, Clr Kaliyanda, and Clr Shelton

Note: Clr Balloot was an apology for the meeting.

 


ITEM NO:       COM 03

FILE NO:        203891.2020

SUBJECT:     COVID-19 Impact on Sporting Field Hire Revenue

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                 Moved: Clr Ayyad                 Seconded: Clr Rhodes

 

That Council:

 

1.    Endorse the application of approved 2019/2020 and 2020/2021 sporting field fees and charges on a pro-rata basis for the 2020 winter and 2020/2021 summer seasons; and

 

2.    Endorse the waiving of winter season 2020 fees charged to the Liverpool City Robins Sports Club.

 

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

 


ITEM NO:       COM 04

FILE NO:        206666.2020

SUBJECT:     Collingwood Visitation Precinct Masterplan

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                 Moved: Clr Rhodes               Seconded: Clr Harle

 

That Council:

 

1.    Receives and notes the report; and

 

2.    Endorses funds of $150,000 – 200,000 in the 2020/21 financial year to engage a consultant to undertake the Masterplan.

 

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

 


 

City Corporate Report

 

ITEM NO:       CORP 01

FILE NO:        201823.2020

SUBJECT:     Investment Report July  2020

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                 Moved:  Clr Rhodes              Seconded: Clr Shelton 

 

That Council receives and notes this report.

 

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

 


 

Committee Reports

 

ITEM NO:       CTTE 01

FILE NO:        191798.2020

SUBJECT:     Minutes of the Environment Advisory Committee held on 22 June 2020

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                 Moved:  Clr Kaliyanda          Seconded: Clr Hadid

 

That Council receives and notes the Minutes of the Environment Advisory Committee Meeting held on 22 June 2020. 

 

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

 


ITEM NO:       CTTE 02

FILE NO:        207606.2020

SUBJECT:     Minutes of the Liverpool Pedestrian, Active Transport and Traffic Committee meeting held on 22 July 2020

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                 Moved:  Clr Kaliyanda          Seconded:  Clr Hadid

 

That Council adopts the following recommendations of the Committee:

 

Item 1 - Kurrajong Road and Wingham Road roundabout, Carnes Hill – Proposed raised threshold across the eastbound approach.

 

·        Council approves the proposed raised threshold for eastbound traffic on the approach to Kurrajong Road/William Buckley Drive/ Wingham Road roundabout.

·        The project is to include tree planting and landscaping in the central island.

 

Item 2 - Sandringham Drive, Cecil Hills – Reconfiguration to permit additional on-street parking.

 

·        Council approves the proposed signs and line marking associated with localised road widening of the section of Sandringham Drive in front of Cecil Hills Heritage Farm.

 

Item 3 - Seventeenth Avenue, Austral – Proposed children’s crossing and associated signs and line marking Scheme.

 

·        Council approves the proposed children’s crossing and associated signs and line marking scheme.

 

Item 4 - Flynn Avenue, Middleton Grange – Proposed raised threshold.

 

·        Council approves installation of a raised threshold in the form of asphaltic concrete as a temporary facility until such a time that the road section is reconstructed.

 

Item 5 - Reilly Street and Gill Avenue, Liverpool – Proposed roundabout upgrade.

 

·        Council approves the proposed raised thresholds and associated signs and line marking scheme.

·        The project is to investigate the inclusion of landscaping in the central island.

 

 

Item 6 - Soldiers Parade, Edmondson Park – Additional on-street parking.

 

·        Council approves on-street kerbside parking with associated signs and line marking along the western side of Soldiers Parade.

·        Council approves installation of a raised median island as part of the kerbside parking works.

 

Item 7 - Heathcote Road/Bardia Parade/Walder Road intersection upgrade, Holsworthy - Signs and line marking Scheme.

 

·        Council approves the signs and line marking along Bardia Parade and Walder Road as well as a central median island on the Walder Road approach to Heathcote Road.

 

Item 8 - Kelly Street, Austral – Proposed roundabout and signs and line marking scheme.

 

·        Council approves the proposed traffic facilities including the roundabout and associated signs and line marking scheme.

·        The project is to investigate tree planting and landscaping in the central island.

 

Item 9 - Items approved under delegated authority

 

·        Council notes the traffic facilities approved under delegated authority between 20 May 2020 and 22 July 2020.   

 

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

 


Questions with Notice

ITEM NO:       QWN 01

FILE NO:        190647.2020

SUBJECT:     Question with Notice - Clr Hagarty - Appeal Powers Against Land and Environment Court Decisions

 

Please address the following:

 

1.         What appeal powers do Council (or the public) have when an applicant’s appeal of previously refused DA is upheld by the Land and Environment Court?

 

Response

 

What is the applicant’s right of appeal against refusal of a DA?

 

Where the Council is the consent authority for development and decides to refuse consent to a development application (‘DA’), the applicant has the right to appeal to the Land and Environment Court (‘Court’) within 6 months of the decision.

 

When is the Council a party to an appeal against refusal of a DA?

 

The Council is the consent authority responsible for determining the DA, and hence a party to the appeal to the Court, where the decision to refuse consent was made by the local planning panel/regional planning panel on the Council’s behalf or by an officer of the Council under delegated authority from the Council.

 

Can members of the public be a party to an appeal against refusal of a DA?

 

Only the applicant and the Council are parties to the appeal proceedings, unless the Court orders that another person is joined as a party, which is uncommon.

 

Members of the public have no right of appeal to the Court against a decision by the Council to refuse consent to a DA.

 

Can an objector appeal against refusal of a DA that is designated development?

 

No. An objector can only appeal a decision of a consent authority to grant consent to designated development.

 

If the Court grants consent to designated development, ordinarily, an objector cannot appeal the Court’s decision.

In very limited circumstances, an objector can bring judicial review proceedings to review a decision by the Court to grant consent to a designated development.

 

On what basis is an appeal against refusal of a DA dealt with by the Land and Environment Court?

 

An appeal against the refusal of a DA is heard and determined by the Court on the planning merits of the DA.

 

The appeal does not involve a review of the Council’s decision but instead involves the making of an entirely new decision.

 

The appeal is ordinarily heard and determined by a commissioner of the Court rather than a judge.

 

Who can appeal the Land and Environment Court’s determination of an appeal against the refusal of a DA & on what basis?

 

Ordinarily, only parties to the appeal have a right to appeal the Court’s decision in an appeal against refusal of a DA. Therefore, ordinarily only the applicant and the Council will have appeal rights against the Court’s decision.

 

Where an appeal against the refusal of a DA is heard and determined by a commissioner of the Court, the Council has a right to appeal to a judge of the Court against an order or decision made by the Commissioner but only on a question of law. The appeal must be brought within 28 days. The Council may bring a further appeal to the Supreme Court against the decision of the judge of the Court, but only on a question of law, and the leave of the Supreme Court is required for it to do so. This further appeal process must be commenced within 28 days.

 

Where the Council is a party to an appeal against the refusal of a DA that is heard and determined by a judge of the Court, the Council may appeal to the Supreme Court against the decision of the judge on a question of law. The appeal process must be commenced within 28 days.

 

What is a question of law?

 

In general terms, a question of law is one that must be answered by applying relevant legal principles to interpretation of the law rather than by applying facts and evidence. Thus, in an appeal involving a question of law, the appellate body does not review the merits of the decision the subject of the appeal but rather the legal basis on which the decision was made.

 

 


ITEM NO:       QWN 02

FILE NO:        190649.2020

SUBJECT:     Question with Notice - Clr Kaliyanda - Processing of Organic Waste in the Liverpool LGA

 

Please address the following:

 

1.   How much of waste collected in the Liverpool LGA is organic waste? How much of this is organic food waste?

 

2.   How much organic waste in the Liverpool LGA actually ends up in landfill?

 

3.   Do we currently have any policies or strategies in place to divert organic food waste from landfill?

 

4.   Are there collective procurement contracts or similar arrangements for organic waste in NSW?

 

Response

 

1.    How much of waste collected in the Liverpool LGA is organic waste? How much of this is organic food waste?

 

     In 2019/2020 there was 16,736.69 tonnes of organic garden waste collected through the    Council’s kerbside garden waste bin. From a recent audit, 48% of the red bin waste is         food material. This means that in 2019/2020 there was 24,860.75 tonnes of food waste      in       the red general waste bin.

 

2.    How much organic waste in the Liverpool LGA actually ends up in landfill?

 

All waste in the red general waste bin currently goes to landfill. The waste in the organics garden bin is processed into soil products.

 

 

3.   Do we currently have any policies or strategies in place to divert organic food waste from landfill?

 

The NSW government is currently working on a 20 year Waste Strategy which is due to be released in late 2021. Council has undertaken research into a local strategy and is waiting for the release of the state strategy to finalise our strategy. This will give council the ability to align our strategy with the state government targets and goals and respond accordingly.

 

The Domestic Waste Collections tender which is currently being evaluated will have provisions for future changes in bin configurations and processing locations. This will give council the opportunity to adapt to any future opportunities such as Food Organics Garden Organics (FOGO), energy from waste, or other technologies.   

 

Council has also placed an application for a grant under the Local Government Transition Fund. This grant will commission a feasibility and transition strategy around FOGO. Council will also be supporting the separate WSROC submission around food waste disposal option in multi-unit dwellings.  

 

Council does encourage residents to divert food waste from there general waste bins by offering residents a $50 rebate off a compost bin or worm farm reciprocal. Council also offers community workshops on worm farming and composting. Our waste primary school and preschool program address worm farming and composting.


 

4.   Are there collective procurement contracts or similar arrangements for organic waste in NSW?

 

Liverpool is working with Camden, Campbelltown, Liverpool, Wollondilly and Wingecarribee to collectively tender and secure the provision of waste processing and disposal services for:

        General Waste

        Recycling

        Organics

        Bulky Waste

 

The project aims to ensure Councils have collective bargaining power to attract market investment in technology and infrastructure to service the South West Sydney region. Through this partnership, the Councils will also gain access to a dedicated facility, secure disposal and price certainty for the life of the contract.

 


ITEM NO:       QWN 03

FILE NO:        216410.2020

SUBJECT:     Question with Notice - Clr Hagarty - Western Sydney Parklands Trust

 

Background

 

In July the Berejiklian government announced it will fold the Centennial Park and Moore Park, Parramatta Park and the Western Sydney Parklands trusts into a new super trust.

 

This move would appear to run counter to Western Sydney Parklands' ethos of being Western Sydney's backyard and the Greater Sydney Commissions' Metropolis of Three Cities Plan.

 

While Centennial, Moore & Parramatta Parks are established open space which have existed for well over a century, Western Sydney Parklands is still being developed.

 

The social, economic and cultural needs of Western Sydney must be determined by the people of Western Sydney.

 

With this latest move and the impact of COVID-19 on the NSW budget, Liverpool needs reassurance that plans for Western Sydney Parklands are still on track.

 

Please address the following:

 

  1. Are plans for the development of the Liverpool section of Western Sydney Parklands still on track?
  2. Will these plans change with the Western Sydney Parklands Trust being rolled into a super parklands trust?

 

  1. How will the unique needs and priorities of Western Sydney and Western Sydney Parklands be catered for in this new structure?

 

  1. What structure will the board of the new trust take?

 

  1. How many board members on the new trust will be from Western Sydney?

 

  1. Will a board quota be set to ensure sufficient representation from Western Sydney?

 

A response to these questions will be provided in the 30 September 2020 Council meeting business papers.

 


ITEM NO:       QWN 04

FILE NO:        218196.2020

SUBJECT:     Question with Notice - Clr Rhodes - Georges River Bank Stabilisation

 

Please address the following:

 

Can Council provide a report on the recent collapse of the Eastern bank of the Georges River opposite the Council dog park and bordering the Moorebank Intermodal.

 

1.      What is being done to stabilise the banks of the Georges River at this particular site and others along the Georges River?

2.      Who is responsible to stabilise the bank of the Georges River?

3.      When will stabilisation of the Georges River bank be done?

4.      Explain the Georges Riverkeeper’s involvement vs conditions imposed on development applications to stabilise the Georges River banks?

 

Recent collapse of the Georges River bank alongside the Moorebank Intermodal site and opposite the Council dog park was disturbing to say the least.

 

A large chunk of the bank that borders the Moorebank Intermodal Development site recently fell into the River.

 

When the ground is left bare by human activities including clearing, building (and related activities) and vehicle use such as 4WD's and trail bikes the soil is easily washed away when it rains. Examples of this can be seen between Sandy Point and Alfords Point as sediment from the ridges washes into Mill Creek and then into the Georges River. This erosion removes the fertile topsoil and the soil that is washed into waterways can contain plant nutrients, minerals, organic matter and seeds. It can also contain pesticides and toxic heavy metals. 

 

When soil, sand, dust, cement, paint and building debris reach the waterways, they can:

·            increase the risk of flooding;

·            block drains;

·            spread weeds to bushland;

·            result in algal blooms;

·            cause health problems for swimmers; and

·            smother and suffocate water plants and animals and impact on their ability to reproduce.

 

 

 

The size of the erosion that fell into the Georges River in the one event is of particular concern and needs to be addressed.

 

A response to these questions will be provided in the September 2020 Council meeting business papers.

 


ITEM NO:       QWN 05

FILE NO:        219555.2020

SUBJECT:     Question with Notice - Clr Kaliyanda - Wattle Grove Lake

 

Please address the following:

 

1.    What measures have been undertaken to improve the water quality at Wattle Grove Lake? What measures have been found to be successful?

 

2.    What is the underlying issue with the water quality at Wattle Grove Lake?

 

3.    What measures are still being undertaken, or are currently planned, to improve the water quality at Wattle Grove Lake?

 

4.    How has Council sought partnerships and worked with other organisations in order to address this issue?

 

 

A response to these questions will be provided in the September 2020 Council meeting business papers.

 


38

 

ITEM NO:       CEO 03

FILE NO:        220014.2020

SUBJECT:     Nominations for Public Space Legacy Program

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                 Moved:  Clr Hagarty             Seconded: Clr Kaliyanda

 

That Council:

 

1.    Notes the NSW Government’s new Public Space Legacy Program and that $4.75 million of open space funding is available to Liverpool City Council; subject to meeting the eligibility criteria;

2.    Endorse the selected projects, as set out in the Council report, for submission to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment under the Public Space Legacy Program; and

 

3.    Direct the Acting CEO to lodge an application under the Public Space Legacy Program consistent with the recommendations of this report.

 

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

 

Foreshadowed Motion:            Moved: Clr Rhodes             Seconded: Clr Harle

 

That Council:

 

1.    Notes the NSW Government’s new Public Space Legacy Program and that $4.75 million of open space funding is available to Liverpool City Council; subject to meeting the eligibility criteria;

2.    Endorse the selected projects, as set out in Option 2 as shown below, for submission to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment under the Public Space Legacy Program; and

 

Project

Cost

Macquarie Street (Central) upgrade

$2.9m

Wylde Park BMX Track

$1.2m

Bigge Street Heritage Park

$0.65m

 

$4.75m

 

3.    Direct the Acting CEO to lodge an application under the Public Space Legacy Program consistent with the recommendations of this report.

 

The Foreshadowed motion (moved by Clr Rhodes) then became the motion and on being put to the meeting was declared CARRIED.

 

 


 

ITEM NO:       EGROW 06

FILE NO:        210487.2020

SUBJECT:     Post Exhibition Report - LEP Review Phase 1 Planning Proposal (Amendment 82) and Draft Land Use Planning Strategies

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                 Moved: Clr Ayyad                 Seconded: Clr Rhodes

 

That Council:

 

1.    Notes the Gateway determination for Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 Amendment 82 and the submissions received on the planning proposal and draft strategies;

 

2.    Proceeds with Amendment 82, subject to the amendments proposed in the post exhibition version of the planning proposal included in Attachment 4;

 

3.    Delegates authority to the A/CEO to make any other minor typographical or editing amendments to the planning proposal and to forward the amended planning proposal to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment for finalisation;

 

4.    Adopts the amended Local Housing Strategy; Centres and Corridors Strategy and Industrial and Employment Lands Strategy, with the exception of Middleton Grange remaining a town centre rather than a local centre;

 

5.    Delegates authority to the A/CEO to make any other minor typographical or editing amendments to the strategies and to forward the amended strategies to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment for endorsement; and

 

6.    Notify submitters of Council’s decision.

 

On being put to the meeting the motion (moved by Clr Ayyad) was declared LOST with the Mayor using her casting vote.

Vote for:           Clr Ayyad, Clr Hadchiti, Clr Hadid, Clr Harle and Clr Rhodes.

Vote against:   Mayor Waller, Clr Hagarty, Clr Kaliyanda, Deputy Mayor Karnib and Clr Shelton.

 

 

 

 

 

Foreshadowed motion:         Moved: Clr Hagarty               Seconded: Clr Karnib 

 

That Council:

 

1.    Notes the Gateway determination for Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 Amendment 82 and the submissions received on the planning proposal and draft strategies;

 

2.    Proceeds with Amendment 82, subject to the amendments proposed in the post exhibition version of the planning proposal included in Attachment 4;

 

3.    Delegates authority to the A/CEO to make any other minor typographical or editing amendments to the planning proposal and to forward the amended planning proposal to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment for finalisation;

 

4.    Adopts the amended Local Housing Strategy; Centres and Corridors Strategy and Industrial and Employment Lands Strategy;

 

5.    Delegates authority to the A/CEO to make any other minor typographical or editing amendments to the strategies and to forward the amended strategies to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment for endorsement; and

 

6.    Notify submitters of Council’s decision.

The Foreshadowed motion (moved by Clr Hagarty) then became the motion and on being put to the meeting was declared CARRIED with the Mayor using her casting vote.

Vote for:           Mayor Waller, Clr Hagarty, Clr Kaliyanda, Deputy Mayor Karnib and Clr Shelton.

Vote against:   Clr Ayyad, Clr Hadchiti, Clr Hadid, Clr Harle and Clr Rhodes.

Note: Clr Balloot was an apology for the meeting.

 

PRESENTATION BY COUNCILLORS

 

Nil.

 

Notices of Motion

ITEM NO:       NOM 01

FILE NO:        216306.2020

SUBJECT:     Parking on Verges and Nature Strips

 

Background

 

Parking on verges and nature strips can attract fines. Alternatively, parking in some of Liverpool's smaller streets blocks the access of emergency services vehicles and garbage trucks

 

Previously, Council has passed initiatives to deliver more on street parking and allow second driveways. In April, Council sought to bring some common sense to the issue of parking on verges and nature strips. However, there still appears to be some confusion, with a number of residents still being fined for parking on a verge or nature strip.

 

It is evident that a clear and easily understood policy needs to be developed for the benefit of residents, compliance staff and Councillors.

 

NOTICE OF MOTION (Submitted by Clr Hagarty)

 

That Council:

 

1.    Update relevant policies and procedures to give clear and unambiguous guidance setting out when a fine will or won't be issued for parking on a verge or nature strip, including pictures and diagrams;

 

2.    Bring back any updated policies to the October meeting of Council; and

 

3.    Run an awareness campaign on this clear and unambiguous guidance through the District Forums, social and traditional media and other suitable forums.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                 Moved: Clr Hagarty              Seconded: Clr Karnib

 

That Council:

 

1.    Update relevant policies and procedures to give clear and unambiguous guidance setting out when a fine will or won't be issued for parking on a verge or nature strip, including pictures and diagrams;

 

2.    Bring back a report to the October Council meeting; and

3.    Run an awareness campaign on this clear and unambiguous guidance through the District Forums, social and traditional media and other suitable forums.

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

 


ITEM NO:       NOM 02

FILE NO:        218682.2020

SUBJECT:     Register of Legal Proceedings

 

Background

 

Carrying out non-permitted uses puts lives and property at risk. It can also have a detrimental impact on the environment.

 

With the courts not sitting as frequently as they did pre-COVID-19, compliance matters requiring legal action are taking longer to resolve.

 

Despite numerous orders, some residents and businesses are continuing to undertake these non-permitted uses while Council awaits a legal outcome.

 

Unfortunately, this is creating the false perception among some that Council is not carrying out its compliance duties efficiently or effectively. This is certainly not the case.

 

Council needs to explore all means to stop this illegal activity.

 

NOTICE OF MOTION (Submitted by Clr Hagarty)

 

That Council:

 

1.    Pending legal advice, set up a page on the Council website that lists the current compliance action awaiting a legal outcome; and

 

2.    Post a link to this page on social media once a month.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                 Moved: Clr Hagarty              Seconded: Clr Hadchiti

 

That Council give consideration to setting up a Council page that identifies all legal proceedings during the Policy review being brought back in December.

 

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

 


ITEM NO:       NOM 03

FILE NO:        219498.2020

SUBJECT:     Use of Data to Improve Energy Efficiency and Reduce Pollution

 

Background

 

The ClimateClever app enables users to measure and monitor electricity, gas and water consumption. Developed by Curtin University, it provides users with an action plan on how to be more efficient with their energy use, reducing pollution and utility bills.

 

ClimateClever works in three simple steps:

 

A growing number of local governments across Australia have partnered with ClimateClever to offer residents, local schools and businesses a way to measure their energy consumption, reduce pollution and save on their utility bills.

 

Some of the benefits for local governments include:

 

The ClimateClever initiative already has a number of local government partners, including the Cities of Albany, Canning, Stirling and Mosman Council.

 

With Liverpool regularly having the worst air quality in the Sydney basin, we should welcome initiatives that encourages schools, households and businesses to plant more trees and reduce pollution.

 

A standard partnership costs $850 + GST.

 

NOTICE OF MOTION (Submitted by Clr Kaliyanda)

 

That Council:

 

1.    Trial a standard partnership with the ClimateClever initiative for 12 months;

2.    Run a public awareness campaign to encourage take up of the app among local schools, businesses and households; and

3.    Report back in 12 months on the efficacy of the app, in particular, its effectiveness in meeting the goals of Council’s 10 year Community Strategic Plan.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                 Moved: Clr Kaliyanda          Seconded: Clr Karnib

 

That Council:

 

1.    Trial a standard partnership with the ClimateClever initiative for 12 months;

2.    Run a public awareness campaign to encourage take up of the app among local schools, businesses and households; and

3.    Report back in 12 months on the efficacy of the app, in particular, its effectiveness in meeting the goals of Council’s 10 year Community Strategic Plan.

 

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

 


 

Confidential Items

ITEM NO:       CONF 01

FILE NO:        195722.2020

SUBJECT:     Endorsement of the Liverpool Access Committee membership 2020 - 2022

 

COUNCIL DECISION

 

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Hagarty              Seconded: Clr Hadid

 

That Council endorses the applicants outlined in the table below as members of the Liverpool Access Committee:

 

Name

Suburb

Representation Category

Ellie Robertson

Holsworthy

Category 1

Peter Fraser

Liverpool

Category 1

Jim Simpson

Liverpool

Category 1

Quang Nguyen

Casula

Category 1

Grace Fava

Liverpool

Category 2

Najla Turk

Kemps Creek

Category 2

Leanne Park

Liverpool

Category 2

Kaye Bruce

Liverpool

Category 2

Christine O’Neill

Casula

Category 3

Mohamed Issak

Liverpool

Category 3

Toby Pitt    

Fairfield East

Category 3

Theresa Tran

Liverpool

Category 3

 

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

 


ITEM NO:       CONF 02

FILE NO:        207987.2020

SUBJECT:     ST2954 - Waste, recyclables and Garden Organics Collection Services (2020/2321)

 

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Harle                   Seconded: Clr Shelton

That Council:

1.    Accept the Tender from J.J Richards & Sons Pty Ltd T/A JJ’s Waste & Recycling for Tender ST2954 – Waste, Recyclables and Garden Organics Collection for an initial seven (7) years at the GST inclusive price of $77,074,081 (Option 1), $82,871,231 (Option 2) contract term with the option of extending three (3) in 1 year increments.

2.    Makes public its decision regarding tender ST2954 – Waste, Recyclables and Garden Organics Collection.

3.    This report has been brought to Council because the Chief Executive Officer’s instrument of delegation, approved by Council in accordance with the current provisions of section 377 of the Local Government Act 1993, only permits the Chief Executive Officer to approve (and not to reject) tenders up to a value of $2 million.

4.    Delegates the Acting Chief Executive Officer to finalise all details and sign the Letter of Acceptance following publication of draft Minutes on Council website for the tender, giving it contractual effect, in accordance with delegated authority.

5.    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.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Motion:                                 Moved: Clr Hadchiti           Seconded: Clr Hadid

 

Mayor Waller advised that Council would now move into Closed Session to deal with Item CONF 03 Funding for RAID Moorebank Class 1 Merits Appeal pursuant to the provisions of S10A(2)(g) of the Local Government Act because the item contains advice concerning litigation, or advice that would otherwise be privileged from production in legal proceedings on the ground of legal professional privilege.

 

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

 

RECESS

 

Mayor Waller called a recess at 8.20pm.

 

RESUMPTION OF MEETING

The meeting resumed at 8.30pm in Closed Session.

 

ITEM NO:       CONF 03

FILE NO:        209895.2020

SUBJECT:     Funding for RAID Moorebank Class 1 Merits Appeal

 

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion:                                  Moved: Clr Rhodes              Seconded: Clr Hadchiti

 

That Council:

 

1.    Notes the legal advice by Senior Counsel representing RAID Moorebank Inc. that the Class 1 Appeal in the NSW Land and Environment Court in relation to development consent for Moorebank Precinct West Stage 2 (SSD 7709) has reasonable prospects of success; and

 

2.    Approves the provision of up to a total of $300,000 in legal funding for RAID Moorebank Inc. for the appeal, to be paid subject to the presentation of invoices to Council.

 

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

 

OPEN SESSION

 

Council moved back into Open Session at 8:36pm, Mayor Waller then read out the above resolution from the Closed Session.

 

 

 

THE MEETING CLOSED AT 8.37pm.

 

 

<Signature>

Name: Wendy Waller

Title:    Mayor

Date:    30 September 2020

I have authorised a stamp bearing my signature to be affixed to the pages of the Minutes of the Council Meeting held on  26 August 2020. I confirm that Council has adopted these Minutes as a true and accurate record of the meeting.

 

 

 

 


1

Ordinary Meeting

30 September 2020

Chief Executive Officer Report

 

CEO 01

Outcome of Public Exhibition of amendments to the Revenue Pricing Policy 2020-21

 

Strategic Direction

Leading through Collaboration

Strive for best practice in all Council processes

File Ref

240618.2020

Report By

Hiba Soueid - Manager Corporate Strategy and Performance

Approved By

Andrew Stevenson - Chief Strategy and Engagement Officer

 

 

Executive Summary

 

At its meeting on 29 July 2020, Council resolved to adopt the Delivery Program 2017-22 and Operational Plan 2020-21 including Budget and Revenue Pricing Policy (fees and charges).

 

In addition, Council resolved to receive a further report following the public exhibition of several amendments to the Revenue Pricing Policy.

 

These amendments included waiving or reducing several planning related fees which had been on public exhibition in order to maintain the 2019-20 financial year pricing and allow Council to be more competitive.

 

The 28 day public exhibition period has ended with no submissions being received. Consequently, it is recommended that the proposed amendments be adopted.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council adopts the amendments to the Revenue Pricing Policy (fees and charges) which are outlined in this report.

 

 

REPORT

 

Amendments to Fees and Charges FY 2020-2021

 

Several rate amendments were proposed to the Draft Revenue Pricing Policy (fees and charges) which was tabled at the Council meeting on 29 July 2020. These amendments included postponing fee increases for early education services until 28 September 2020 and the waiving or reduction of several planning related fees. Detailed information regarding these are outlined below.

 

Fee Details

Exhibited Fees

New Fees

Comments

Children's Services

 

 

 

Fees and Security Deposits - Casula Pre-School, Cecil Hills, Hinchinbrook, Holsworthy, Prestons, Warwick Farm and Wattle Grove

Various Fees

Various Fees – as exhibited

Exhibited fees to take effect on 28th September 2020.

Council has received an offer for transition payments from the federal government to support services return to the Child Care Subsidy.  The relief package aims to keep services viable and for families to access affordable childcare.  The financial offer is contingent on Council's deferral of childcare fee increases until 28th September 2020.

Construction Certificates

 

 

 

New Single Class 1A Dwelling (residential) including registration - CC, PCA, OC and Registration

$1,281.20

$1,250

Maintain FY 2019/2020 pricing to be market competitive.

New Granny flat (residential) including registration - CC, PCA, OC and Registration

$1,281.20

$1,250

Maintain FY 2019/2020 pricing to be market competitive.

Combined New Granny flat and New Class 1 Dwelling (residential) including registration - CC, PCA, OC and Registration

 

 

 

$1,845

$1,800

Maintain FY 2019/2020 pricing to be market competitive.

Fee Details

Exhibited Fees

New Fees

Comments

Complying Development

 

 

 

Erection of New Dwelling including registration - CDC, PCA, OC and Registration

$1,845

$1,800

Maintain FY 2019/2020 pricing to be market competitive.

Erection of New Granny Flat including registration - CDC, PCA, OC and Registration

$1,538

$1,500

Maintain FY 2019/2020 pricing to be market competitive.

Erection of Combined Dwelling and Granny Flat including registration - CDC, PCA, OC and Registration

$2,255

$2,200

Maintain FY 2019/2020 pricing to be market competitive.

Swimming Pools - CDC, PCA, OC and Registration

$1,025

$1,000

Maintain FY 2019/2020 pricing to be market competitive.

Development Assessment

 

 

 

Master Plan Development Application Fee

$12,860

$0

Fee has been replaced by Concept DA under Sec 256B Concept Development Applications

Fee for Modification to a Master Plan Development Application

50% of the Master Plan Development Application Fee

$0

Fee has been replaced by Concept DA under Sec 256B Concept Development Applications

Road Occupancy Applications

 

 

Include this note under the fee header:

An exemption to this fee applies to applications for or on behalf of a public authority.

 

 

 

Fee Details

Exhibited Fees

New Fees

Comments

Road Occupancy Charges – Full and Partial Road Closures

 

 

Various Fees

Various Fees – as exhibited

Insert a map to clearly identify what land is in and out of the Liverpool CBD for the purpose of calculating fees (map of Liverpool CBD is attached separately).

S10.7 Certificates Administration – Planning Certificates

 

 

 

 

Outstanding Notices issued under LG Act 735/608

Fee as exhibited

Fee as exhibited

Amend fee name to:

Outstanding Notices issued under LG Act 735/608 and EP&A Act 10.2

 

Public Exhibition

 

The proposed changes were publicly exhibited in line with the requirements of Section 610F of the Local Government Act 1993 which states that Council must provide public notice of all fees for 28 days and consider any submissions duly made during the period of public notice.

 

Council did not receive any submissions on the proposed amendments. It is therefore recommended that Council adopts the proposed fees and charges.

 

CONSIDERATIONS

 


Governance

The proposed fees were placed on public exhibition in line with the below legislation.

Legislative

The proposed fees and charges were placed on public exhibition in line with the requirements of Section 610F of the Local Government Act:

610F Public notice of fees

(1) A council must not determine the amount of a fee until it has given public notice of the fee in accordance with this section and has considered any submissions duly made to it during the period of public notice.

(2) Public notice of the amount of a proposed fee must be given (in accordance with section 405) in the draft operational plan for the year in which the fee is to be made.

(3) However, if, after the date on which the operational plan commences--

(a)   a new service is provided, or the nature or extent of an existing service is changed, or

(b) the regulations in accordance with which the fee is determined are amended, the council must give public notice (in accordance with section 705) for at least 28 days of the fee proposed for the new or changed service or the fee determined in accordance with the amended regulations.

Risk

Failure to publicly exhibit and approve changes to fees and charges may result in non-compliance with the above legislation and may result in enforceable action by the Office of Local Government, Planning and Policy.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

 

1.         Revenue Pricing Policy Fees and Charges FY 2020-2021 (Under separate cover)  


1

Ordinary Meeting

30 September 2020

Chief Executive Officer Report

 

CEO 02

Election of Deputy Mayor

 

Strategic Direction

Leading through Collaboration

Strive for best practice in all Council processes

File Ref

242015.2020

Report By

George Georgakis - Manager Council and Executive Services

Approved By

Andrew Stevenson - Chief Strategy and Engagement Officer

 

 

Executive Summary

 

Section 231 of the Local Government Act 1993 allows Councillors to elect a person from among their numbers to be the Deputy Mayor. The report recommends that Council proceeds with the election of the Deputy Mayor to be conducted by the Returning Officer.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council proceeds with the election of the Deputy Mayor to be conducted by the Returning Officer for the September 2020 – September 2021 period.

 

 

REPORT

 

The Minister for Local Government has postponed the election requirements under Section 318B of the Local Government Act 1993. NSW Council elections will now be held on Saturday 4 September 2021.

 

The election requirements under s318A of the Act relate to the holding of an ordinary election or a by-election only.

 

The requirement to elect a Deputy Mayor under Section 231 of the Local Government Act 1993 has not been postponed. This means that Council must hold an election for a Deputy Mayor when the term of the current Deputy Mayor ends in September this year.

 

 

Section 231 of the Local Government Act 1993 allows Councillors to elect a person from among their numbers to be the Deputy Mayor. Liverpool City Council’s election of Deputy Mayor occurs annually in September.

 

Section 231(2) of the Local Government Act states that “the person may be elected for the Mayoral term or a shorter period”. Traditionally, terms are for one year.

Schedule 7 Clause 394 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 provides that nominations for the Deputy Mayor must be in writing signed by at least two Councillors, one of whom may be the nominee. The nominee must consent in writing to the nomination. Completed nomination forms may be delivered or emailed to the Returning Officer prior to or during the meeting. The nomination form is attached.

 

The Acting Chief Executive Officer is the Returning Officer for the election of Deputy Mayor.

 

Schedule 7 Clause 394 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 also provides that if more than one Councillor is nominated, the Council is to resolve whether the election is to proceed by preferential ballot, by ordinary ballot, or by open voting.

 

As the Council meeting will be conducted online via Microsoft Teams, Council will need to resolve to conduct the election of Deputy Mayor by open voting.

 

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.

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

Legislative

Section 231 of the Local Government Act 1993.

Risk

The risk is deemed low and considered to be within Council’s risk appetite.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

 

1.         Nomination Form - Election of Deputy Mayor


1

CEO 02

Election of Deputy Mayor

Attachment 1

Nomination Form - Election of Deputy Mayor

 

PDF Creator


1

Ordinary Meeting

30 September 2020

Chief Executive Officer Report

 

CEO 03

Appointment of Councillors to Committees and Affiliated Bodies

 

Strategic Direction

Leading through Collaboration

Encourage community participation in decision-making

File Ref

244060.2020

Report By

George Georgakis - Manager Council and Executive Services

Approved By

Andrew Stevenson - Chief Strategy and Engagement Officer

 

 

Executive Summary

 

The purpose of the report is for Council to appoint the Councillor representatives to Committees and affiliated bodies where nominations are required. 

 

At a meeting in September each year, Council elects persons to all positions, including Chairpersons, delegates to all community committees and affiliated bodies. The method for election for all positions shall be determined by Council.

 

The report outlines the Committees and affiliated bodies which Council has endorsed and recommends that Council appoints the Councillor representatives for the period to September 2021. 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

 

1.    Appoints Councillors as representatives to the following Committees for the period to September 2021:

a.    Aboriginal Consultative Committee

b.    Audit, Risk & Improvement Committee

c.    Casula Powerhouse Arts Centre Board

d.    Companion Animal Advisory Committee

e.    District Forums

f.     Environment Advisory Committee

g.    Heritage Advisory Committee 

h.    Liverpool Access Committee

i.      Liverpool Sports Committee

j.      Tourism & CBD Committee

k.    Youth Council

 

2.    Notes that all Councillors are members of the following Committees, and as such specific appointments are not required;

a.   Budget Review Panel

b.   Strategic Panel

c.   Civic Advisory Committee

d.   Community & Safety Prevention Committee

 

3.    Appoints Councillors as representatives to the following community committees and affiliated bodies and notifies them of their representatives for the period to September 2021:

a.    Georges River Combined Councils Committee 

b.    Western Sydney Migrant Resource Centre

c.    Liverpool Pedestrian, Active Transport and Traffic Committee

d.    Macarthur Bushfire Management Committee

e.    NSW Metropolitan Public Libraries Association

f.     South West City Planning Panel

g.    South West Sydney Academy of Sport (SWSAS)

h.    Western Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils (WSROC)

 

 

REPORT

 

Appointment of Councillors to Council Committees

 

Council is required to nominate its Councillor representatives for the committees it establishes. Those nominated to be representatives for the committees must be endorsed by a resolution of Council. Council reviews the membership and elects persons to all committees annually in September.

 

The Minister for Local Government has postponed the local government Council elections (which were to be held in September 2020) to Saturday 4 September 2021. At the Council meeting on 25 September 2019, Council appointed its Councillor representatives to its various Committees for the period to September 2020.

 

With the current term of Council now extending by 12 months, the Office of Local Government has advised that the current appointments must end in September 2020.

 

The Office of Local Government has suggested the following options:

-     Council resolve to extend the existing appointments in line with the postponement of the local government elections; or alternatively

-     Council resolve to redetermine the representatives as usual at the September Council meeting.

 

The following information provides an outline of committees established by Council.

 

Note, the list in the table below does not include the following Committees as all Councillors are members, and as such, specific appointed representatives are not required:

-     Budget Review Panel

-     Strategic Panel

-     Civic Advisory Committee, and

-     Community & Safety Prevention Committee.

 

It should also be noted that at the 24 September 2014 Council meeting, Council resolved that “for internal Council Committees, all Councillors are entitled to attend, speak and participate in Committee deliberations”. 

 

Aboriginal Consultative Committee

Purpose

The Aboriginal Consultative Committee has been established primarily to provide an open line of communication between Council and the Aboriginal community.

Meeting Information

Quarterly, first Thursday, 6.00pm-8.00pm

Representatives

Mayor (or delegate) and one Councillor

Current Representatives

Mayor Waller and Clr Shelton

 

Audit, Risk and Improvement Committee

Purpose

The objective of the ARIC is to review the following aspects of Council’s operations: compliance; risk management; fraud control; financial management; governance; implementation of Council’s strategic plan, delivery program and strategies; service reviews; collection of performance measurement data by Council; provide information to Council for the purpose of improving Council’s performance of its functions; and external accountability. 

Meeting Information

Quarterly, 3:00 – 5:00pm on a Friday

Representatives

Deputy Mayor and one Councillor

Current Representatives

Deputy Mayor Karnib and Clr Shelton

 

Casula Powerhouse Arts Centre Board       

Purpose

This Board has been established primarily to assist in the production and promotion of cultural programs including literature, music, performing arts, visual arts, craft, design, film, video, community arts, Aboriginal arts and collections of moveable cultural heritage programs.

Meeting Information

Bi-monthly, 4:30-6:00pm on a Thursday.  Not currently meeting as has undertaken an EOI process for community members.

Representatives

Mayor (or delegate), Deputy Mayor, and one Councillor

Current Representatives

Mayor Waller and Clr Kaliyanda.

 

Companion Animal Advisory Committee    

Purpose

This is a Council community advisory committee and reports to Council. Its purpose it to bring together interested community members to provide a consultative forum to raise issues relating to Companion Animals. To enable Council to engage with its community by listening to and responding to their needs and concerns. The group will not involve itself with individual aspects or issues of specific animal operational/regulatory matters.

Meeting Information

Quarterly at 7.00pm on the first Tuesday

Representatives

Mayor (or delegate), and one Councillor

Current Representatives

A report was submitted to the July 2020 Council meeting to endorse the Terms of Reference. A Councillor representative has not yet been determined.

 

District Forums

Purpose

For residents to come along and: contribute to Council plans and decision-making; share ideas to help solve local issues; participate in community-led projects; and be informed on Council services and operations.

Meeting Information

Bi-monthly for Rural and Eastern Forums; and

Quarterly for New Release/Established and 2168 Forums.

Representatives

One Councillor to chair.

Rural District Chairperson

Clr Harle

New Release/Established District Chairperson

Clr Hagarty

2168 District Chairperson

Mayor Waller

Eastern District

Chairperson

Clr Rhodes

 

Environment Advisory Committee

Purpose

This committee has been established primarily to consider and provide input to Council’s environment programs by making recommendations to Council.

Meeting Information

Bi-monthly, 5:30pm on a Monday.

Representatives

Two Councillors

Current Representatives

Clrs Shelton and Harle

 

Heritage Advisory Committee 

Purpose

This committee has been established primarily to support the conservation and promotion of heritage within the Liverpool Local Government Area by providing relevant community based advice and assistance.

Meeting Information

Quarterly, 6:00-7:00pm on a Tuesday.

Representatives

Two Councillors

Current Representatives

Clrs Hadid and Harle

 

Intermodal Precinct Committee

Purpose

The Intermodal Committee has been established primarily to respond to the challenges presented by the proposed Intermodal at Moorebank.

Meeting Information

Quarterly, 6:00pm–7:30pm on a Tuesday

Representatives

Two Councillors  (Clrs Hadchiti and Rhodes)

Current Representatives

At its meeting of 26 February 2020 Council adopted the Intermodal Precinct Committee Charter and revoked the Intermodal Committee Charter. At the 27 May 2020 Council meeting, Councillors Hadchiti and Rhodes were appointed as Council’s representatives, and as such can continue for the next 12 months. A separate report has been included in this Council Agenda paper relating to nominating a Chair to the Intermodal Precinct Committee.

 

Liverpool Access Committee

Purpose

This committee has been established primarily to provide advice to Council which will effectively improve and alleviate access difficulties experienced by people with disabilities in Liverpool.

Meeting Information

Bi-monthly, 12:00noon-3:00pm on a Thursday

Representatives

Mayor (or delegate) and one Councillor

Current Representatives

Mayor Waller and Clr Harle

 


Liverpool Sports Committee

Purpose

The committee has been established to:

a)   Provide a forum for representing the views of sporting organisation members, clubs and associations to Council relating to sporting matters; and

b)   Assist with the promotion, coordination and growth of sporting codes within the Liverpool LGA.

Meeting Information

Quarterly, 7:00pm-9:00pm on the last Thursday of the month

Representatives

Mayor (or delegate)

Current Representatives

Clr Kaliyanda

 

Tourism & CBD Committee

Purpose and Meeting information

The Committee has been established to provide relevant advice and recommendations to Council relating to:

a)   The development of the visitor economy in the Liverpool LGA, including through recreation, tourism, activations and major events;

b)   Council initiatives to enhance tourism, encourage business growth, attract visitors and boost economic development in the Liverpool LGA; and

c)   Council initiatives to drive economic, social and cultural development in the CBD.

Meeting Information

Bi-monthly, 10:00am–12noon on a Thursday

Representatives

Mayor (or delegate) and four Councillors

Current Representatives

Clrs Balloot, Hadid, Hadchiti, Hagarty and Shelton

 

Youth Council

Purpose

The Liverpool Youth Council has been established primarily to provide advice to Council about issues relating to young people, to act as a consultative mechanism for young people and to promote the interests of young people in Liverpool.

Meeting Information

Monthly, Wednesday 6.00pm – 8.00pm

Representatives

Mayor (or delegate) and two Councillors

Current Representatives

Mayor Waller, Clr Hagarty and Clr Kaliyanda

Appointment of Councillors to Community Committees and Affiliated Bodies

 

Each September Council also nominates its Councillor representatives for various community committees and affiliated bodies. Those nominated to be representatives must be endorsed by a resolution of Council.

 

The following information provides an outline of bodies currently affiliated with Council:

 

Georges River Combined Councils Committee  (GRCCC)

Purpose

The primary role of the Georges River Combined Councils Committee (GRCCC) is to develop programs and partnerships, and to lobby government organisations and other stakeholders in order to protect, conserve and enhance the Georges River.

Meeting Information

Bi-monthly, 6pm on a Thursday

Representatives

Two Councillors

Current Representatives

Clrs Harle and Shelton

 

Western Sydney Migrant Resource Centre (WSMRC)

Purpose

The Liverpool MRC provides a range of services and support for people from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds, and undertakes community development and advocacy.

Meeting Information

Bi-monthly, 5:30-7:30pm

Representatives

Two Councillors

Current Representatives

Deputy Mayor Karnib

 

Liverpool Pedestrian, Active Transport and Traffic Committee

Purpose

To provide advice on regulatory traffic facilities, line marking or signage to Council

Meeting Information

Bi-monthly, 9:30am-12:30pm on a Wednesday

Representatives

Mayor (or delegate)

Current Representatives

Clr Hagarty

 

Macarthur Bushfire Management Committee

Purpose

The Bushfire Management Committee is responsible for planning for and advising in relation to bush fire prevention and coordinating firefighting.

Meeting Information

Quarterly, 10:00am – 12:00noon

Representatives

One Councillor

Current Representatives

Clr Harle

 

NSW Metropolitan Public Libraries Association (NSW MPLA)

Purpose

The NSW MPLA is the peak body that represents the interests and development of public libraries in metropolitan areas and is aimed at “positioning, sustaining and developing public libraries in the greater Sydney region for the social, cultural and economic benefit of their communities”. 

Meeting Information

Quarterly

Representatives

Two representatives, one of whom shall be an elected Councillor and the other generally being a Library Manager.

Current Representatives

Clr Kaliyanda

 

South West City Planning Panel

Purpose

The primary function of the South West City Planning Panel is to determine regionally significant development applications. 

Meeting Information

Monthly

Representatives

Two council appointed members, one of whom is required to have expertise in one or more of the following areas: planning, architecture, heritage, environment, urban design, land economics, traffic and transport, law, engineering or tourism.  Expertise may be demonstrated by formal qualifications or relevant skills, knowledge and practical experience.

Current Representatives

Mayor Waller and Clr Harle, with Clrs Hagarty, Karnib and Rhodes as alternates

 

South West Sydney Academy of Sport (SWSAS)

Purpose

The SWSAS provides talented athlete identification and development programs which assist athletes to successfully realise their sporting potential.

Meeting Information

Board meets six times per year, varies between 5:30 – 6:00pm, Thursday

Representatives

One Councillor

Current Representatives

Clr Kaliyanda

 

Western Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils (WSROC)

Purpose

WSROC is run by a board that represents member councils in Sydney, and supports business improvement, research and partnerships

Meeting Information

Bi monthly, on a Thursday, venues and timing vary

Representatives

Mayor and one Councillor

Current Representatives

Clr Rhodes and Clr Balloot

 

 

CONSIDERATIONS

 

Economic

Provision has been made in the 2020/21 budget for costs associated with the committees.

Environment

There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.


Social

There are no social and cultural considerations.


Civic Leadership

Facilitate the development of community leaders.

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.

Risk

The risk is deemed to be low and is considered to be within Council’s risk appetite.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

 

Nil


1

Ordinary Meeting

30 September 2020

Chief Executive Officer Report

 

CEO 04

Mayoral Direction pursuant to Section 226(d) of the Local Government Act 1993

 

Strategic Direction

Leading through Collaboration

Strive for best practice in all Council processes

File Ref

246500.2020

Report By

George Georgakis - Manager Council and Executive Services

Approved By

Andrew Stevenson - Chief Strategy and Engagement Officer

 

 

Executive Summary

 

To report to Council on one instance where the Mayor, pursuant to Section 226(d) of the Local Government Act 1993 exercised in cases of necessity, the policy-making functions of the governing body of the Council between meetings of the Council.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council note and endorse the Mayoral Direction dated 28 August 2020 attached to the report.

 

 

REPORT

 

Section 226 of the Local Government Act 1993 outlines the role of the Mayor and Section 226(d) states that the role includes the following:

 

“To exercise, in cases of necessity, the policy-making functions of the governing body of the Council between meetings of the Council.”

 

On 28 August 2020 the Mayor made a determination/direction pursuant to the policy-making responsibilities under s.226(d) of the Act.

 

The Mayoral Direction relates to directing the Acting CEO to prepare an issues and options report to be included in the agenda for the Ordinary Meeting of Council on 30 September 2020 detailing the options available to Council to amend the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 (LEP) to permit, with development consent, a recreation facility (outdoor) at 25 Dwyer Road, Bringelly. This could be via an amendment to Schedule 1 “Additional Permitted Uses” of the LEP.

 

The reasons why the determination/direction was necessary and could not be delayed until the next Ordinary Meeting of Council are outlined in the attached Mayoral Direction.

The Mayoral Direction is attached to the report.

 

The report referred to in the Mayoral Direction has been prepared and is included in the Agenda for the September Ordinary Meeting.

 

CONSIDERATIONS

 

Economic

Facilitate economic development.

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

Environment

There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.


Social

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

Support access and services for people with a disability.

Deliver high quality services for children and their families. 


Civic Leadership

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

Legislative

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

Risk

The risk is deemed to be low and considered to be withing Council’s risk appetite.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

 

1.         Mayoral Direction dated 28 August 2020  


1

CEO 04

Mayoral Direction pursuant to Section 226(d) of the Local Government Act 1993

Attachment 1

Mayoral Direction dated 28 August 2020

 

PDF Creator


1

Ordinary Meeting

30 September 2020

Chief Executive Officer Report

 

CEO 05

Adoption of new Code of Conduct and Code of Conduct Procedures

 

Strategic Direction

Leading through Collaboration

Strive for best practice in all Council processes

File Ref

239029.2020

Report By

Ellen Whittingstall - Acting Internal Ombudsman

Jessica Saliba - Acting Coordinator Governance

Approved By

Dr Eddie Jackson - Acting Chief Executive Officer

 

 

Executive Summary

 

The Office of Local Government (the OLG) completed a review of the Model Code of Conduct (the Model Code) and Model Procedures for the Administration of the Code (the Model Procedures). The outcome of the review is a revised Model Code of Conduct 2020 and revised Model Code of Conduct Procedures 2020, as set out in sections 440, 440AA and 440AAA of the Local Government Act 1993. (They replace the previous Model Code and Model Procedures issued by the OLG in 2019.)

 

Section 440 of the Local Government Act 1993 (the Act) requires that councils must adopt a code of conduct that incorporates the provisions of the Model Code (or is consistent with the Model Code).

 

Section 440AAA sets out the required contents for a council’s code of conduct. The adopted code may include provisions that supplement the Model Code but they must not be inconsistent with them.

 

Section 440AA of the Act requires that councils must adopt procedures for the administration of the code of conduct that incorporate the provisions of the Model Procedures. The procedures to be adopted by councils may include provisions that supplement the Model Procedures but they must not be inconsistent with them.

 

This report recommends that Council adopt the Code of Conduct and the Code of Conduct  Procedures (with minor amendments) and arrange appropriate training for the Mayor and Councillors, members of Council staff, members of Council advisory committees, Council volunteers and Council contractors.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

 

1.    Adopt the Code of Conduct and Code of Conduct Procedures attached to this report;

 

2.    Retain the maximum $50 cap on the acceptance of gifts and benefits;

 

3.    Retain the position that all gifts and benefits no matter the monetary value are declared;

 

4.    Request the Chief Executive Officer to arrange appropriate training for the Mayor and Councillors concerning recent changes to the Code of Conduct and Code of Conduct Procedures; and

 

5.    Note that Council’s Governance team will provide appropriate training and resources in regard to the Code of Conduct for Council staff, members of Council advisory committees, Council volunteers and Council contractors.

 

REPORT

 

1.   Commentary

 

The Model Code sets out the minimum ethical and behavioural standards that all council officials in NSW are required to comply with by:

·     prescribing uniform minimum ethical and behavioural standards for all councils in NSW;

·     providing clear guidance to council officials about the minimum ethical and behavioural standards expected of them as council officials;

·     providing clear guidance to local communities on the minimum ethical and behavioural standards they can expect of the council officials who serve them;

·     promoting transparency and accountability;

·     promoting community confidence in the integrity of the decisions councils make and the functions they exercise on behalf of their local communities; and

·     promoting community confidence in the institution of local government.

 

Council’s current Code and Procedures are based on the Model Code and Model Procedures, previously issued by the OLG in 2019.

 

A summary of the main changes to the Code and Procedures is set out in the OLG Circular attached to this report.

 

Council’s Acting Internal Ombudsman and the Acting Coordinator Governance recommend that Council should adopt the Model Code and Model Procedures with only minor amendments, as permitted by the OLG, which would make the Code and Procedures applicable to members of Council advisory committees, Council volunteers and Council contractors.

 

Amendments have been made to the gifts and benefits provisions of the Model Code of Conduct. The amendments:

·     Lift the $50 cap on the value of gifts that may be accepted to $100.

·     Clarify that items with a value of $10 or less are not “gifts or benefits” for the purposes of the Model Code of Conduct and do not need to be disclosed

 

However, councils are not obliged to amend their codes of conduct to lift the cap on the value of gifts that may be accepted if they do not wish to. It is open to councils to retain the existing $50 cap or to impose another cap that is lower than $100.

 

ICAC have reported that the offering and acceptance of gifts and benefits represents a considerable corruption risk. For example, gifts may be offered for the purpose of developing a favourable relationship that can be unduly exploited by the giver at a later date.

There are specific risks related to Council accepting gifts and benefits from third-parties, such as suppliers, recipients of services, or individuals and entities that are regulated or licensed by the council.

Giving due consideration to the advice from ICAC, it is recommended the council retain the existing $50 cap and that all gifts and benefits are declared no matter the monetary value.

Council has an ongoing program of Code of Conduct training for members of Council staff and members of Council committees, undertaken by its Governance team. Training and resources will also be provided for Council volunteers and Council contractors. Suitable training in the new versions of the Code and Procedures will also be arranged for the Mayor and Councillors.

 

The Internal Ombudsman will continue to act as Council’s Code of Conduct Complaints Coordinator and Disclosures Coordinator.

 

CONSIDERATIONS

 

Economic

There are no economic and financial considerations, apart from the cost of any Code of Conduct training provided by external trainers

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.

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

Legislative

Local Government Act 1993, sections 440, 440AA and 440AAA

Risk

There is no risk associated with this report.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

 

1.         Office of Local Government Circular 20-32 Code of Conduct

2.         Model Code of Conduct and Model Procedures at a Glance

3.         Draft Code of Conduct (Under separate cover)

4.         Draft Code of Conduct Procedures (Under separate cover)  


1

CEO 05

Adoption of new Code of Conduct and Code of Conduct Procedures

Attachment 1

Office of Local Government Circular 20-32 Code of Conduct

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


1

CEO 05

Adoption of new Code of Conduct and Code of Conduct Procedures

Attachment 2

Model Code of Conduct and Model Procedures at a Glance

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


1

Ordinary Meeting

30 September 2020

City Economy and Growth Report

 

EGROW 01

Planning proposal request to amend development standards and Schedule 1 of the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 to facilitate a mixed use development in the B6 zone at 146 Newbridge Road, Moorebank

 

Strategic Direction

Strengthening and Protecting our Environment

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

File Ref

196421.2020

Report By

Kweku Aikins - Strategic Planner

Approved By

David Smith - Acting Director City Economy and Growth

 

Property

146 Newbridge Road, Moorebank (Lot 70 DP 1254895)

Owner

Tanlane Pty Ltd

Applicant

Benedict Industries Pty Ltd

 

 

Executive Summary

 

On 18 October 2017, Council received a request to prepare a planning proposal on behalf of Tanlane Pty Ltd for a portion of land at 146 Newbridge Road, Moorebank. The site is located south of Newbridge Road, within the precinct Council refers to as Moorebank East. The proponent refers to the proposed development as “Georges Cove Village”.

 

This planning proposal request is one of five requests that have been lodged in five areas (Site A to E) within the Moorebank East precinct.  This site is currently zoned B6 Enterprise Corridor.

 

The planning proposal request as lodged proposed amending Schedule 1 of the LEP to permit a childcare centre, senior housing and health care facility on the site, increasing the height of buildings development standard from 15m to 30m and increasing the floor space ratio development standard from 0.75:1 to 2:1.

 

To ensure appropriate consideration of all requests in the Precinct, Council engaged Tract Consultants to prepare a structure plan to guide the assessment of the planning proposal requests for the first four sites (Sites A to D).

 

Following completion of the structure plan, the proponent amended the planning proposal request in March 2020 (Attachment 1) by removing the proposed childcare and seniors living and reducing the height of buildings development standard from 30m to 25m and reducing the floor space ratio development standard from 2:1 to 1.88:1.

 

The amended planning proposal request would permit development of a 6-storey mixed-use development, consisting of 126 residential apartments, 6,747m2 of combined retail and commercial space and 2,800m2 of communal rooftop open space.

 

Advice was sought from the Liverpool Local Planning Panel (LPP) at its meeting on 29 June 2020 in accordance with the Local Planning Panel Direction – Planning Proposals dated 23 February 2018. The planning assessment report presented to the Local Planning Panel is included in Attachment 2.

 

The report outlines that the proposal has strategic and site-specific merit and recommends that a planning proposal be prepared and submitted to the Department of Planning, Industry & Environment (DPIE) for a Gateway determination. The Panel agreed with the above recommendation and supported the proposal proceeding to a Gateway determination. A copy of the panel’s advice is included in Attachment 3. The panel also advised Council to consider negotiating a voluntary planning agreement for affordable housing on the site and to prepare a site-specific Development Control Plan (DCP) containing design excellence provisions.

 

It is recommended that Council notes the advice of the LPP, supports in principle the planning proposal request and submit a planning proposal to DPIE seeking a Gateway determination and public exhibition.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

 

1.    Notes the advice of the Liverpool Local Planning Panel;

 

2.    Endorses in principle the planning proposal request;

 

3.    Delegates to the A/CEO authority to prepare the formal planning proposal including any typographical or other editing amendments if required;

 

4.    Notes that negotiations will occur with the proponent on a potential voluntary planning agreement for the provision of affordable housing;

 

 

 

 

5.    Forwards the planning proposal to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment pursuant to Section 3.34 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, seeking a Gateway determination with a request that Council be authorised as the local plan making authority and that the Gateway determination be conditioned requiring relevant technical documents be updated, that Section 9.1 Direction 2.6 (Remediation of Contaminated Land) be updated and a site specific DCP be prepared prior to public exhibition;

 

6.    Subject to Gateway determination, undertakes public exhibition and community consultation in accordance with the conditions of the Gateway determination and Council’s Community Participation Plan; and

 

7.    Receives a further report on the outcomes of public exhibition and community consultation.

 

 

Report

 

The site and locality

 

The site is a portion of land at 146 Newbridge Road, Moorebank, legally described as Lot 70 DP 1254895. It is south of Newbridge Road, within the development precinct Council refers to as Moorebank East identified in Figure 1 below. The proponent refers to the proposed development as “Georges Cove Village”.

 

The site is a 10,700m2 irregular shaped allotment located approximately 4.7km east of the Liverpool city centre and 2km west of Moorebank Shopping Centre. The site has been used for extractive and recycling operations since development consent was issued in 1992. The site contains some stockpiled soils and construction materials.

 

To the west of the site is a vegetation buffer and Brickmakers Drive, and to the east is the former Flower Power site. Immediately south is the future Georges Cove residential estate and Georges Cove Marina. Further east is the Georges River, and further north is the industrial lands of Chipping Norton.

 

Figure 1: Aerial image of the site and locality, approximately outlined in red (source: Near Map)

 

Background

 

On 18 October 2017, a planning proposal request was lodged with Council, seeking the following amendments to the LLEP:

·     Amend Schedule 1 to permit a childcare centre, senior housing and health care facility on the subject site;

·     Increase the HOB from 15m to 30m; and

·     Increase the FSR from 0.75:1 to 2:1.

 

The planning proposal request is one of five planning proposals lodged within the development precinct Council refers to as the Moorebank East precinct. The other planning proposals include:

 

RZ- 4/2017 - The former Flower Power site to the east at 124 Newbridge Road (Site B);

RZ-1/2019 - The ‘Georges Cove’ residential site to the immediate south (Site C); and

RZ-5/2018 - The Mirvac site immediately south at 146 Newbridge Road (Site D) – (Cove Marina); and

RZ-2/2020 - Further south is another planned mixed-use development known as EQ Riverside.

 

These sites are shown in Figure 2 below.

 

A close up of a map

Description automatically generated

Figure 2: Moorebank East precinct, sites A-E (Nearmap)

At its meeting on 26 August 2020, Council received and noted a report on the status of the current planning proposals within Moorebank, including those within the Moorebank East Precinct.

 

Council has sought independent urban design and environmental advice to resolve several key planning issues and to determine if the proposed scale of development is appropriate and can be accommodate within the Moorebank East precinct. In this regard, Council engaged Tract Consultants in 2018 to provide strategic and urban design advice to assist with the integration and coordination of each of the planning proposal requests at a precinct level.

 

Tract Consultants prepared a structure plan and development yield analysis that balances development interfaces between each of the sites (A-D) consistently. The structure plan with a recommended road network is as shown in Figure 3 below.  Site E was not included within the structure plan as a planning proposal request had not yet been lodged, at the time.

 

A close up of text on the side of a building

Description automatically generated

Figure 3: Moorebank East precinct Structure Plan (Tract Consultants)

 

 

The general agreed-upon urban design outcome for Site A, as shown in Figure 4 below, is:

·      3-4 Storey built form to Newbridge Road;

·      3-4 Storey built form to the internal DCP Road

·      6 storey setback upper form to DCP road

Figure 4: Peer Review Urban Design Outcome – Site A circled in black (Tract Consultants)

 

Following completion of the structure plan, the proponent amended the planning proposal request in March 2020 by removing the proposed childcare and seniors living and reducing the height of buildings development standard from 30m to 25m and reducing the floor space ratio development standard from 2:1 to 1.88:1. The amended planning proposal request would permit development of a 6-storey mixed-use development, consisting of 126 residential apartments, 6,747m2 of combined retail and commercial space and 2,800m2 of communal rooftop open space.

 

At its meeting on 27 July 2020, Council resolved to exhibit all planning proposals that have been lodged within Moorebank (excluding Site C as it had already been supported by Council) in accordance with Council’s Community Participation Plan. The exhibition period concluded on 10 September 2020 with three submissions being received including two objections.

 

Apart from the abovementioned planning proposals, development consent was issued on 24 June 2020 to subdivide 146 Newbridge Road (Lot 70 DP 1254895) along its zoning boundaries to create Sites A, C and D (with the exception of 0.41 hectares of RE2 land which is proposed to be rezoned to R3 under planning proposal RZ-1/2019).

 

Proposed Amendment to the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008

 

The current planning proposal request seeks to amend the LLEP to facilitate a mixed-use development supporting approximately 126 residential apartments, 6,747m2 of combined retail and commercial space, and 2,800m2 of communal rooftop open space. The proposed amendments to the LEP to achieve this are:

·     An amendment to Schedule 1 to allow for a ‘health care facility’ (medical centre) and retail premise with a maximum GFA of 4,200m²;

·     An amendment to the FSR Map from 0.75:1 to 1.88:1; and

·     An amendment to the HOB Map from 15m to 25m.

 

It is recommended that the ‘health care facility’ is removed from the proposal as this use is currently permitted under Clause 57(1) of the State Environmental Planning Policy Infrastructure (2007).

 

Planning Assessment

 

A planning assessment report including detailed assessment of the merits of the proposal against the District and Region Plans and the Department of Planning’s ‘Guide to Preparing Planning Proposals’, is provided included as Attachment 2. The report outlines that the planning proposal has strategic and site-specific merit and should proceed to a Gateway determination.

 

Advice of the Liverpool Local Planning Panel

 

Pursuant to Clause 2.19(1)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, a planning proposal must be submitted to the Local Planning Panel (LPP) for their advice prior to consideration by the Council.

 

At its meeting on 29 June 2020, the LPP considered the planning proposal request and agreed that the proposal demonstrates strategic and site-specific merit and supported the planning proposal proceeding to a Gateway determination, taking into consideration matters in the minutes outlined below:

 

“The Panel notes the Council officer’s response to the affordable rental housing targets in the Greater Sydney Region Plan. The Panel is also aware that Council’s draft local housing strategy provides evidence that the Liverpool LGA suffers from one of the highest rates of rental stress in the country. In light of the targets in the Region Plan and the draft strategy, the Panel recommends that Council invite the applicant for the planning proposal to submit a planning agreement to Council that commits to a minimum number of affordable rental housing units being provided as part of the planning proposal.

 

The Panel notes that the site is located in a prominent location and will introduce new and substantial built form in the locality. The Panel recommends that Council considers including in the amended site specific DCP for the site a requirement that future development in the site achieves design excellence. The DCP should describe the design objectives that Council considers are necessary to achieve design excellence for this site.

 

The Panel recommends that the Council officers’ report to Council that progresses the planning proposal specifically addresses the requirements listed in clauses 4(a), (b), (c) and clause 5 of section 9.1 direction 2.6 (remediation of contaminated land).

 

The Panel otherwise considers that the planning proposal exhibits strategic and site-specific merit for the reasons outlined in the Council officer’s report.”

 

Officer Comment on Local Planning Panel Advice

 

It is recommended that Council support in-principle the planning proposal request and forwards a planning proposal to DPIE seeking a Gateway determination and public exhibition.

 

As outlined in LPP advice, it is recommended that the proponent consider preparing a VPA offer to provide affordable rental housing as part of any future development. Subject to a favorable Gateway determination, Council will work with the proponent to determine what DCP amendments are required to achieve design excellence.

 

Consistency with Ministerial Direction 2.6 (Remediation of Contaminated Land)

 

The site has been used as a recycling facility since the original development consent was issued in 1992. Accordingly, the site has been identified as being contaminated by the previous extractive uses that occurred on the site.  Therefore, assessment has been carried out to ensure the proposal meets the requirements of Ministerial Direction 2.6 as outlined in Table 1.

 

What a planning proposal authority must do if this direction applies

Response

4(a) the planning proposal authority has considered whether the land is contaminated, and

The site has been used as a recycling facility since the original development consent was issued in 1992. Accordingly, the site has been identified as being contaminated by the previous extractive uses that occurred on the site.

4(b) if the land is contaminated, the planning proposal authority is satisfied that the land is suitable in its contaminated state (or will be suitable, after remediation) for all the purposes for which land in the zone concerned is permitted to be used, and

Development consent has been issued for the subdivision of the broader site (Lot 70 DP 1254895), for which a Phase 1 Preliminary Investigation, Site Audit, a draft Long-Term Environmental Management Plan (LTEMP) and a revised Remediation Action Plan (RAP), were submitted.

 

The proponent is to provide confirmation that the above documentation applies to the subject planning proposal request. This can be included as a condition of Gateway determination to provide assurance that the land will be suitable for residential development after remediation.

4(c) if the land requires remediation to be made suitable for any purpose for which land in that zone is permitted to be used, the planning proposal authority is satisfied that the land will be so remediated before the land is used for that purpose. In order to satisfy itself as to paragraph (4)(c), the planning proposal authority may need to include certain provisions in the local environmental plan

Remediation of the site will largely be undertaken in accordance with the consent for the subdivision of the broader site. Accordingly, remediation will take place prior to redevelopment and associated construction works.

(5) Before including any land specified in paragraph (2) in a particular zone, the planning proposal authority is to obtain and have regard to a report specifying the findings of a preliminary investigation of the land carried out in accordance with the contaminated land planning guidelines

As discussed earlier, relevant documentation has already been submitted for the subdivision of the broader site. Confirmation as to how the documents relate to this proposal can be provided after a Gateway determination is issued.

Table 1: Consistency with Ministerial Direction 2.6

 

Consistency with the Local Strategic Planning Statement

 

All planning proposals must be consistent with Council’s adopted Local Strategic Planning Statement (LSPS) – Connected Liverpool 2040.

 

The LSPS identifies the Moorebank East Precinct as an Urban Development Investigation Area on the Structure Plan map (page 20). It also provides strategic directions to support the implementation of the Regional, District and Community Strategic Plan.

 

The four key directions are: connectivity, livability, productivity and sustainability. The planning proposal aligns with the following directions and relevant priorities as outlined in Table 2:

 

Planning Priority

Comment

Liveability

Planning Priority 7 – Housing choice for different needs, with density focused in the City Centre and centres well serviced by public transport

The proposal would support additional housing supply and housing choice by delivering approximately 126 dwellings which would assist in meeting Liverpool City Council’s five-year housing supply target.

The Liverpool Local Strategic Planning Statement identifies the Moorebank East precinct as an urban development investigation area on the Structure Plan map (page 20). 

Planning Priority 9 - Safe, healthy and inclusive places shaping the wellbeing of the Liverpool community

The proposal will facilitate a mixed-use development which including communal open space facilities. This would encourage walkability and wellbeing.

Productivity

Planning Priority 12 – Industrial and employment lands meet Liverpool’s future needs

The retail component would lead to increased employment opportunities for local workers.

Sustainability

Planning Priority 15 – A green, sustainable, resilient and water-sensitive city

The proposed development would include approximately 2,800m2 of communal rooftop open space to be made available to residents living on the site that could advance liveability and sustainability on the site. Further water-sensitive outcomes, e.g. water-sensitive urban design components could be pursued later at the post-Gateway or DA stages.

Table 2: Consistency with the LSPS

 

Consistency with Supporting Strategies

 

At its meeting on 26 August 2020, Council adopted the Liverpool Local Housing Strategy, Industrial and Employment Lands Strategy and Centres and Corridors Strategy. These strategies address specific actions outlined in the LSPS and guide future planning.

 

The Centres and Corridors Strategy identifies that the Liverpool B6 Enterprise Corridor zone currently allows a broader range of uses than most B6 zones in Greater Sydney. It highlights a need to prevent out of centre developments which may have an impact on existing centres.

 

The planning proposal proposes a retail premises with a maximum gross floor area of 4,200m2. The site is not identified as a local centre and forms part of the larger Moorebank East renewal precinct. This is reflected in the LSPS which identifies the Moorebank East precinct as an Urban Development Investigation Area. It is therefore considered that the planning proposal request would support a broader-placed based role and cater for shopping and retail needs of the precinct and surrounding area and is consistent with the District Plan, LSPS and Centres and Corridors Strategy.

 

 

Consultation

 

Preliminary Community Consultation

 

At its meeting on 27 July 2020 Council resolved to exhibit all planning proposals that have been lodged within Moorebank. Accordingly, the proposal was placed on public exhibition for 28 days, in accordance with Council’s Community Participation Plan.

 

The exhibition period concluded on 10 September 2020 with three submissions being received including two objections. Summaries of the submissions and officer’s response are listed in Table 3, and copies (of the objections) are included in Attachment 5.

 

Issue Raised

Officer Response

Support

The planning proposal request is consistent with the changing use of the riverfront land, from industrial and commercial to residential and open space. This village environment would complement the adjoining Georges Cove Marina. We look forward to further consideration of the plans as they progress.

Noted.

Objection 1*

As a resident and ratepayer of Liverpool City Council I totally object to this development.

 

We do not need another disaster; cars cannot move along Newbridge Road as it is - It does not need any further traffic that this development would bring

The submitted Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) indicates that subject to the construction of improvement works at key intersections, including as part of other developments in the local area including Sites A-E, traffic impacts of the development can be minimised.

Council’s Traffic and Transport Unit has reviewed the submitted TIA and has requested submission of a revised TIA at the post Gateway stage.

In addition, Transport for NSW (TfNSW) has been consulted regarding cumulative traffic impacts of the Moorebank East Precinct and the proposed traffic improvement works.

At the post Gateway stage, traffic impact assessment will be completed in conjunction with TfNSW to identify improvement works and appropriate funding mechanisms to minimise traffic impacts.

Any time we get heavy rain Newbridge Road floods

Newbridge Road is subject to flooding. Access to the site is from both Newbridge Road and a new DCP road that will be flood free. Flooding issues have been addressed in the planning assessment report including the provision of a pedestrian flood evacuation route from the site.

I am against:

-any further development- leave this flood prone land vacant

- any additional houses or retail

- any increase in height of building

- any increase in floor space

- any shops or retail

- any rezoning

- any apartments

Tract Consultants were engaged to recommend appropriate land uses and densities on sites in the Moorebank East precinct and have prepared a structure plan that ensures the orderly development of the precinct.

At this early stage in the planning process, Council is satisfied that the proposal addresses amenity, flooding and traffic impacts. These issues will be further addressed in detail once a Gateway determination is issued and consultation is carried out with relevant state agencies/authorities.

This proposal should be in the only local paper publishing in print, The Champion

Residents need to know

The proposal was exhibited on Council’s website and in the ‘Liverpool Champion’ for a period of 28 days between 14 August and 10 September 2020.

Objection 2

I write to oppose the amending of Schedule 1 of LLEP for Georges Cove Village at 146 Newbridge Road, Moorebank (Site).

 

As a retailer and property owner within Liverpool LGA, I believe that the current B6 zoning and LLEP controls should remain.

 

Amending the LLEP to allow for 4,200m2 of retail floor space and approximately 126 dwelling is a substantial overdevelopment and detrimental to other centres in the Liverpool area. 4,200m2 of retail floor space is substantial and this would certainly take the focus from the retail and business centres in Moorebank, Chipping Norton, Hammondville, Wattle Grove, Liverpool and proposed centre at Holsworthy.

The planning proposal request proposes a larger retail premise than permitted currently under the LEP and will serve an increased population in the Moorebank East precinct as urban development takes place. The planning proposal request is supported by an Economic Needs Assessment (ENA) prepared by Location IQ, which indicates that the Moorebank Shopping Village and Chipping Norton Market Plaza would be impacted to a medium extent, with other centres being minimally impacted. However, the ENA finds that increased competition between supermarkets is beneficial to consumers and will not significantly affect the viability of centres. Additionally, the ENA provides a sound justification for a full line supermarket (which the planning proposal is facilitating). Nearby supermarkets at Wattle Grove, Chipping Norton and Moorebank are heavily patronised with limited opportunity for expansion.

Clause 7.23 of the LLEP states that “development consent must not be granted for retail premises if the GFA of the premises exceeds 1600m².”

 

Accordingly, Council should maintain the current B6 restrictions on retail:

 

not exceeding GFA of 1600m²;

not allowing for speciality retail stores but rather being restricted to bulky goods and showrooms; and

not allowing for the inclusion of a ‘health care facility’.

The intent of the floor space restriction is to ensure that the viability of established and planned centres is not significantly affected. The ENA notes there is scope to increase the retail offering on this site as it is within an ‘Urban Development Investigation Area’ (as identified in the LSPS). There are no additional land uses being proposed, as the previously proposed childcare centre and seniors housing have been removed from this proposal and health care facilities are already permitted on the subject site.

SGS Economics and Planning’s “Liverpool Centres and Corridors Strategy” does ‘not support the creation of a new local centre’ at 146 Newbridge Road, Moorebank. The report states at page 93 that:

even with 1,500 sqm of retail floorspace instead of the 3,584.6 shown in the masterplan, this development would constitute a new local centre including a range of retail premises and other services (the proposed health care facilities, seniors housing and child care centre) in an out of centre location. Open space and a bus service along Newbridge Road are available next to the subject site, but it is not co-located with the wide range of social infrastructure that would be expected for a new local centre site.

The submitted Economic Needs Assessment prepared by Location IQ, indicates that the proposal would not provide a significant number of specialty shops, thereby enabling residents to patronise other centres/shops in the surrounding area. Additionally, the proposed seniors housing and child care centre have since been removed from the proposal, with health facilities already being permitted on the site. Given that the site is not characterised as a ‘local centre’, there is no inherent requirement to ensure that the site is co-located with social infrastructure. Regardless, the Social Impact Assessment prepared by Cred Consulting Pty Ltd identifies a range of services and social infrastructure within a kilometer of the site including a public primary school; a public high school; a medical centre; a shopping centre; a library; a community room; two open space areas (within 800 m); and future access to 2ha of foreshore open space. Therefore, the proposed development is not inconsistent with the “Liverpool Centres and Corridors Strategy” and would enhance the wide range of services already available in the locality.

Apart from bus, this area is not well serviced by existing rail networks. This would mean that residents of the 126 dwellings would be highly reliant on cars and would add to traffic in the Liverpool area.

The development site is not close to a train station; however, the site is close to bus route M90 along Newbridge Road. The bus route operates with 10 minutes service frequency during weekday peak hours and at least 20 minutes service frequency during daytime hours on weekends and public holidays. To minimise traffic impacts of the proposed development Council will consult with TfNSW during state agency consultation to identify improvement works and a funding mechanism for improvement works to be carried out.

Table 3: Response to submissions

*It is advised that ‘Objection 1’ was made for all planning proposals within the Moorebank East Precinct.

 

Internal Consultation

 

Flooding Issues

 

The Moorebank East precinct and the area north of Newbridge Road close to Georges River is flood prone and the site is identified as being subject to low, medium and high flood risks. The original planning proposal request was supported by a flood impact assessment report prepared by National Project Consultants (NPC) Pty Ltd (Attachment 7).

 

Council’s Floodplain and Water Management team has reviewed the report and advise that the design concept is consistent with the mitigation measures and principles outlined in the NSW Flood Prone Land Policy and Floodplain Development Manual 2005. This addresses Ministerial Direction 4.3 (Flood Prone Land).

 

However, given the extent of modifications (i.e. changes in land uses) to the original planning proposal, it is recommended that a revised flood impact assessment report be prepared at the post-Gateway phase. The revised report is to account for any differences between the current and previous proposal and will be requested as a condition of any Gateway determination.

 

In 2018, NSW State Emergency Service (NSW SES) advised Council that an evacuation route would be required for any residential development within the Moorebank East precinct. Design and delivery of a flood evacuation route must be consistent with NSW SES’s principles for evacuation. Council engaged environmental and natural hazard specialists Molino Stewart to investigate and report on the flooding and evacuation risks for each of the proposed development sites (within the Moorebank East Precinct). This work culminated in the Moorebank East Flood Evacuation Analysis Report in November 2019.

 

In response, an elevated pedestrian bridge from Site C is proposed by Mirvac to provide an acceptable pedestrian evacuation route for Sites A, C and D during a probable maximum flood event (PMF). The bridge has been approved as part of the operative consent for DA-24/2017 (issued on 24 June 2020) which approved the subdivision of the broader site into sites A, C and D.

 

With the proposed elevated pedestrian bridge/evacuation route, in the event of a flooding emergency, residents would have the option to be evacuated by either car, or as a last resort on foot (via the elevated pedestrian bridge).

 

Land Contamination Issues

 

The site has been identified as being contaminated by the previous extractive uses that occurred on the site. The proponent submitted a Detailed Site Investigation (DSI) and Remediation Action Plan (RAP) prepared by Douglas Partners in 2016 and 2017 respectively. Council’s Environment & Health Section has expressed the following concerns:

·      The DSI and RAP have been superseded by other environmental documentation submitted as part of the subdivision (DA-24/2017) of the broader site. The environmental documentation for the subdivision includes a Site Audit, draft long-term environmental management plan (LTEMP) and a revised RAP.

·      Furthermore, Ministerial Direction 2.6 (Remediation of Contaminated Land) supersedes Clause 6 of SEPP No. 55 - Remediation of Land. Particularly, the Ministerial direction indicates that planning authorities are to consider contamination at any time during the preparation of an environmental planning instrument but are not required to before the gateway assessment.

 

The proponent will be required to confirm how the documentation submitted with the DA relates to the subject planning proposal request, as a condition of any Gateway determination. It is considered that contamination issues will be further addressed in detail during state agency consultation with the EPA.

 

Traffic Impacts

 

Council’s Traffic and Transport unit has reviewed a Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) report (Attachment 8) submitted with the original planning proposal. The TIA outlines that subject to the construction of the internal road network, and improvement works at key intersections as part of other developments in the local area including Sites A-E, traffic impacts of the development can be minimised.

 

A revised TIA is required to address traffic impacts and related concerns. Submission of the revised TIA will be a requested as a condition of any Gateway determination. During state agency consultation, the planning proposal will be referred to Transport for New South Wales (TfNSW) for further traffic impact assessment.

 

Urban Design Issues

 

The proposed concept design and development standards are satisfactory at this stage in the planning proposal process. However, at the post-Gateway stage, Part 2.10 (Moorebank East) of the LDCP will need to be amended to include controls for ‘Site A’ including design excellence provisions. The requirement to prepare a DCP amendment will be requested as a condition of any Gateway determination.

 

Bushfire Impacts

 

The site is affected by Category 1 Bushfire Prone Vegetation on its western boundary. A bushfire assessment report of the previous planning proposal was submitted and reviewed by Council officers. An updated bushfire assessment report will need to be submitted during the post-gateway stage to demonstrate consistency with the amended proposal and concept architectural plan. Submission of an updated bushfire assessment report will be requested as a condition of any Gateway determination.

 

 

Social Impacts

 

The submitted social impact assessment (SIA) of the original (2017) planning proposal has been reviewed by Council. Given the extent of modifications (i.e. changes in land uses) it is recommended that a revised SIA is prepared. The revised SIA is to assess the social impacts of the current proposal. Submission of the revised SIA will be requested as a condition of any Gateway determination.

 

Next Steps

 

If Council supports the planning proposal request, a formal planning proposal will be prepared and submitted to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE) seeking a Gateway determination.

 

A further report will be provided to Council following the public exhibition period detailing submissions received and any amendments proposed.

 

CONCLUSION

 

The planning proposal request has both strategic and site-specific merit. This report notes that there are several environmental, traffic management, and urban design details to be resolved at the post gateway stage.

 

It is recommended that Council endorses the planning proposal to proceed to a Gateway determination with a further report prepared for Council’s consideration following state-agency consultation and public exhibition period, detailing any submissions received and any amendments proposed.

 

CONSIDERATIONS

 

Economic

Facilitate economic development.

Environment

Manage air, water, noise and chemical pollution.

Enhance the environmental performance of buildings and homes.


Social

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


Civic Leadership

Encourage the community to engage in Council initiatives and actions.

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

Legislative

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

Risk

The risk is deemed to be Low. If Council does not support the planning proposal request, there is a risk that the landowner will seek a review of Council’s decision by the Sydney Western City Planning Panel.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

 

1.         Planning Proposal (Under separate cover)

2.         Planning Assessment Report (Under separate cover)

3.         Local Planning Panel Advice (Under separate cover)

4.         Moorebank East Status Update - 26 August 2020 (Under separate cover)

5.         Public Submissions (Under separate cover)

6.         Economic Needs Assessment (Under separate cover)

7.         Flood impact assessment (Under separate cover)

8.         Traffic impact assessment (Under separate cover)  


1

Ordinary Meeting

30 September 2020

City Economy and Growth Report

 

EGROW 02

Planning proposal request to amend development standards and Schedule 1 of the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 to facilitate residential development at the proposed George's Cove marina at 146 Newbridge Road, Moorebank

 

Strategic Direction

Strengthening and Protecting our Environment

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

File Ref

246006.2020

Report By

Kweku Aikins - Strategic Planner

Approved By

David Smith - Acting Director City Economy and Growth

 

Property

146 Newbridge Road,  Moorebank (Lot 70 DP 1254895)   

Owner

Tanlane Pty Ltd

Applicant

Mirvac Homes (NSW) Pty Ltd

 

 

Executive Summary

 

On 6 July 2018, Council received a request to prepare a planning proposal on behalf of Mirvac Homes (NSW) Pty Ltd for a portion of land at 146 Newbridge Road, Moorebank. The development site is south of Newbridge Road, within the precinct Council refers to Moorebank East precinct. The proponent refers to the proposed development as Georges Cove marina.

 

This planning proposal request is one of five requests that have been lodged in five areas (Site A to E) within the Moorebank East precinct. The subject site is currently zoned RE2 (Private Recreation).

 

The planning proposal request (Attachment 1) seeks to amend Schedule 1 of the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 (LLEP) to permit residential development and to increase the height of building (HOB) development standard from 21m to 35m and increase the floor space ratio (FSR) development standard from 0.25:1 to 0.4:1.

 

The planning proposal request will facilitate a future residential development comprising of 21 terrace dwellings and 353 apartments adjacent to the proposed Georges Cove marina.

Advice was sought from the Liverpool Local Planning Panel (LPP) at its meeting on 31 August 2020 in accordance with the Local Planning Panel Direction – Planning Proposals dated 23 February 2018. The planning assessment report presented to the LPP is included in Attachment 2.

 

The report outlines that the proposal has strategic and site-specific merit and recommends that a planning proposal be submitted to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment for a Gateway determination. The panel agreed with the above recommendation and supported the proposal proceeding to a Gateway determination. A copy of the panel’s advice is included in Attachment 3. The panel also recommended that Council to prepare a site-specific Development Control Plan (DCP) that establishes urban design controls and includes provision for a public pedestrian link around the western edge of the marina, in a north–south alignment.

 

It is recommended that Council notes the advice of the LPP, supports in principle the planning proposal request and submits a planning proposal to DPIE seeking a Gateway determination and public exhibition.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

 

1.    Note the advice of the Liverpool Local Planning Panel;

 

2.    Endorses in principle the planning proposal request;

 

3.    Delegates to the A/CEO authority to prepare the formal planning proposal including any typographical or other editing amendments if required;

 

4.    Forwards the planning proposal to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment pursuant to Section 3.34 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, seeking a Gateway determination with a request that Council be authorised as the local plan making authority and that the Gateway determination be conditioned requiring a site specific DCP be prepared prior to public exhibition;

 

5.    Subject to Gateway determination, undertakes public exhibition and community consultation in accordance with the conditions of the Gateway determination and Council’s Community Participation Plan; and

 

6.    Receives a further report on the outcomes of public exhibition and community consultation.

 

 

 

Report

 

The site and locality

 

The site is a portion of land at 146 Newbridge Road, Moorebank, legally described as Lot 70 DP 1254895. It is south of Newbridge Road, within the development precinct Council refers to as Moorebank East identified in Figure 1 below. The proponent refers to the proposed development site as ‘Georges Cove Marina’. 

 

The site is a 10,700m2 irregular shaped allotment located approximately 4.7km east of the Liverpool city centre and 2km west of Moorebank Shopping Centre. The property is under the single ownership of Tanlane Pty Ltd and is the site of a former sand mining operation by Benedict Sands, which is nearing the end of its life cycle.

 

A close up of a sign

Description automatically generated

Figure 1: Aerial image of the site and locality (source: Near Map)

 

Background

 

At its meeting on 31 August 2016, Council resolved to support a planning proposal to amend the LEP for land located at 146 Newbridge Road, Moorebank (Lot 70 DP 1254895).

 

The proposal sought to enable residential uses within the RE2 Private Recreation zone (limited to a key site area) and included a zone boundary adjustment in which 4190sqm of land would be rezoned from RE2 Private Recreation to R3 Medium Density Residential. The proposal was to facilitate the development of approximately 125 dwellings alongside the marina development, and nine additional lots to the south of the existing R3 Medium Density Residential land.

 

A Gateway determination was issued for the planning proposal on 9 March 2017. However, Moorebank Recyclers, the previous owners of Lot 6 DP 1065574 (which is directly south of the subject site) appealed the Gateway determination in the Land and Environment Court. The legal challenge was made on the basis that the planning proposal did not adequately address the now repealed Clause 6 of State Environmental Planning Policy No 55 – Remediation of Land (SEPP 55).

 

On 21 December 2017, the Class 4 appeal Moorebank Recyclers Pty Ltd v Tanlane Pty Ltd (No 2) [2017] NSWLEC 186 was dismissed. Moorebank Recyclers subsequently lodged an appeal against this decision in the NSW Supreme Court and the Gateway determination was declared invalid by the Court of Appeal on 18 December 2018.

 

Given the outcome of previous legal proceedings, the proponent has since lodged a new request to prepare a planning proposal which seeks to permit residential uses within the RE2 zone (limited to a key site area). This proposal is to facilitate approximately 353 apartments and 21 terrace dwellings. The zone boundary adjustment was also lodged as a separate planning proposal that was endorsed by Council at its meeting on 27 July 2020.

 

The planning proposal request (for residential uses) is one of five planning proposals lodged within the development precinct Council defines as the Moorebank East precinct. The other proposals include:

·        RZ-9/2017 - The ‘Georges Cove Village’ site to the far north along Newbridge Road (Site A);

·        RZ-4/2017 - The former ‘Flower Power’ site to the east at 124 Newbridge Road (Site B);

·        RZ-1/2019 - The ‘Georges Cove’ residential site to the immediate north (Site C); and

·        RZ-2/2020 - The planned mixed-use development known as ‘EQ Riverside’ to the immediate south at Lot 6 Newbridge Road (Site E).

 

These proposals are shown in Figure 2 below.

 

At its meeting on 26 August 2020, Council received and noted a report on the status of the current planning proposals within Moorebank, including those within the Moorebank East Precinct.

 

A close up of a map

Description automatically generated

Figure 2: Moorebank East precinct, sites A-E (Nearmap)

 

Council has sought independent urban design and environmental advice to resolve several key planning issues and to determine if the proposed scale of development is appropriate and can be accommodate within the Moorebank East precinct. In this regard, Council engaged Tract Consultants in 2018 to provide strategic and urban design advice to assist with the integration and coordination of each of the planning proposal requests at a precinct level.

Tract Consultants prepared a structure plan and development yield analysis that balances development interfaces between each of the sites (A-D) consistently. The structure plan with a recommended road network is as shown in Figure 3 below.  Site E was not included within the structure plan as a planning proposal request had not yet been lodged, at the time.

 

 A close up of text on the side of a building

Description automatically generated

Figure 3: Moorebank East precinct Structure Plan, Sites A-D (Tract Consultants)

 

At its meeting on 27 July 2020, Council resolved to exhibit all planning proposals that have been lodged within Moorebank (excluding Site C as it had already been supported by Council) in accordance with Council’s Community Participation Plan. The exhibition period concluded on 10 September 2020 with two submissions being received, including one objection.

 

Apart from the abovementioned planning proposals, development consent was issued on 24 June 2020 to subdivide 146 Newbridge Road (Lot 70 DP 1254895) along its zoning boundaries to create Sites A, C and D (with the exception of 0.41 hectares of RE2 land which is proposed to be rezoned to R3 under planning proposal RZ-1/2019). Additionally, Council is currently assessing a DA (DA-611/2018) for the proposed Georges Cove Marina at 146 Newbridge Road.

 

Proposed Amendment to the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008

 

The current planning proposal request seeks to amend the LEP to facilitate a development consisting of approximately 374 dwellings (353 apartments and 21 terraces) within a key site in the existing RE2 zone. The proposal is to be achieved through the following amendments to the LLEP:

·      Schedule 1 amendment to permit residential accommodation (limited to residential flat buildings and multi-dwelling housing);

·      Increase HOB from current 21m to 35m; and

·      Increase FSR from current 0.25:1 to 0.4:1.

 

Planning Assessment

 

A planning assessment report including detailed assessment of the merits of the proposal against the District and Region Plans and the Department of Planning’s ‘Guide to Preparing Planning Proposals’, is included as Attachment 2. The report outlines that the planning proposal request has strategic and site-specific merit and should proceed to a Gateway determination.

 

Advice of the Liverpool Local Planning Panel

 

Pursuant to Clause 2.19(1)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, a planning proposal must be submitted to the Local Planning Panel (LPP) for their advice prior to consideration by the Council.

 

At its meeting on 31 August 2020, the LPP considered the planning proposal request and agreed that the proposal demonstrates strategic and site-specific merit and supported the planning proposal proceeding to a Gateway determination (Attachment 3). The LPP advice is outlined below:

 

Background information 

 

·        The proposed pedestrian bridge over Brickmakers Drive (which is required for flood free evacuation of the Moorebank East precinct) will be constructed as part of the residential development to the north of the marina site and will be available for use by residents of the proposed apartments in the planning proposal;

 

·        The suitability of the site having regard to land contamination has been assessed by Mirvac’s consultants and Council’s experts as part of the subdivision of the Tanlane holding which was approved earlier in 2020. Those reports considered the site suitable for the permitted uses subject to the site being rehabilitated in accordance with an approved long-term environmental management plan;

 

·        There is an existing voluntary planning agreement between Mirvac and Council that requires Mirvac to build a pedestrian bridge over the entrance to the marina adjacent to the River foreshore. A potential amendment to this agreement is currently being negotiated. The amendment, if agreed, will replace the requirement to build a bridge with a requirement to provide a north-south public pedestrian access around the western edge of the marina. Council’s position is that the new pedestrian access should also be created as an easement on the title of the land; and

 

·        A precinct specific development control plan is to be prepared post Gateway that will establish urban design controls which will require the design of any future development enabled by the planning proposal to incorporate a genuine public pedestrian link around the western edge of the marina, in a north–south alignment.

 

Strategic Merit

 

·        The Panel agrees with Council officers’ conclusion that the planning proposal has strategic merit having regard to the broader policy context including the Three Cities Regional Plan, the Western City District Plan and the Local Strategic Planning Statement. The amendments to Liverpool LEP 2008 contained in the planning proposal will increase the supply of housing, and the diversity of housing types in the Liverpool LGA, in an area of high amenity that has reasonable public transport opportunities.

 

Site Specific Merit

 

·        The Georges River is both a constraint (flooding) and an opportunity (amenity). The Panel encourages Council to undertake a regional evacuation analysis that includes the entire Moorebank and Chipping Norton area so that clear provision can be made for the safe evacuation of residents in the event of flooding.

 

·        The Panel encourages Council to pursue the urban design outcomes as described by Council’s City Design Unit, in any future development control plan applying to the land, and to pursue an easement on title allowing public access along any future pedestrian route.

 

·        The Panel acknowledges that Council is currently considering a draft precinct wide traffic study which proposes a staged improvement works program. The Panel considers there is a need to investigate improvements to traffic capacity in the precinct and recommends that Council progresses the draft precinct wide traffic study and implements the findings of that study prior to any further amendments to Liverpool LEP 2008 in the precinct.

 

·        The Panel notes that land contamination has been assessed by the landowner’s consultants and Council’s experts. The Panel recommends that a full summary of the results of the assessment and recommendations of the contamination experts be put before the elected representatives when the matter is reported prior to Gateway.

 

Conclusion

 

·        Having regard to the matters outlined above the Panel considers that the planning proposal has strategic and site-specific merit. The Panel recommends that the planning proposal proceed to Gateway determination and that the post Gateway actions mentioned in the Panel’s minutes above be implemented.

 

Officer Comment on Local Planning Panel Advice

 

It is recommended that Council support in-principle the planning proposal request and forwards a planning proposal to DPIE seeking a Gateway determination and public exhibition.

 

The LPP advice recommends Council prepare a regional flood evacuation study and an integrated traffic study for the precinct. Council is currently undertaking the regional flood study which will be completed by the end of September 2020. In addition, Council officers have consulted with Transport for NSW to ensure the cumulative traffic impacts of proposed development in the Moorebank East precinct is understood and that required traffic improvement works, and a funding mechanism is identified. Further detailed discussion with occur with TfNSW once a Gateway determination is issued as part of the state agency consultation phase.

 

There is an existing executed Planning Agreement applying to the site which requires a pedestrian bridge to be constructed at the entrance to the marina. The proponent is considering amendments to the VPA to remove this requirement and replace it with a pedestrian pathway along the western edge of the marina. This proposal is currently under assessment by Council and will be reported to a future Council meeting for a decision. 

As recommended by the LPP, Council will work with the proponent to determine appropriate DCP amendments to achieve design excellence.

 

Consistency with Ministerial Direction 2.6 (Remediation of Contaminated Land)

 

The site has been used as a recycling facility since the original development consent was issued in 1992. Accordingly, the site has been identified as being contaminated by the previous extractive uses that occurred on the site.  Therefore, assessment has been carried out to ensure the proposal meets the requirements of Ministerial Direction 2.6 as outlined in Table 1.

 

What a planning proposal authority must do if this direction applies

Response

4(a) the planning proposal authority has considered whether the land is contaminated, and

The site has been used as a recycling facility since the original development consent was issued in 1992. Accordingly, the site has been identified as being contaminated by the previous extractive uses that occurred on the site.

4(b) if the land is contaminated, the planning proposal authority is satisfied that the land is suitable in its contaminated state (or will be suitable, after remediation) for all the purposes for which land in the zone concerned is permitted to be used, and

A Site Audit and Remediation Action Plan (RAP) have been submitted as part of the marina DA on the subject site. Council’s Environmental Health Section has advised that the site will be made suitable after remediation in accordance with the RAP and Site Auditor’s conditions (subject to preparation and validation of a Section A Site Audit Statement prepared by an accredited Site Auditor).

4(c) if the land requires remediation to be made suitable for any purpose for which land in that zone is permitted to be used, the planning proposal authority is satisfied that the land will be so remediated before the land is used for that purpose. In order to satisfy itself as to paragraph (4)(c), the planning proposal authority may need to include certain provisions in the local environmental plan

Remediation of the site will largely be undertaken in accordance with any prospective development consent for the marina. Council’s Environmental Health Section advised that the land requires remediation in accordance with the RAP and Site Auditor’s conditions for the proposed use. Accordingly, Council’s Environmental Health Section is satisfied that remediation will occur prior to construction.

(5) Before including any land specified in paragraph (2) in a particular zone, the planning proposal authority is to obtain and have regard to a report specifying the findings of a preliminary investigation of the land carried out in accordance with the contaminated land planning guidelines

A preliminary site investigation has been submitted and a Site Audit and RAP have also been submitted as part of the marina DA on the subject site. The submitted documents are considered to be satisfactory and will be used to inform a Long-term Environmental Plan for the site.

Table 1: Consistency with Ministerial Direction 2.6

 

 

 

 

Consistency with the Local Strategic Planning Statement

 

All planning proposals must be consistent with Council’s adopted Local Strategic Planning Statement (LSPS) – Connected Liverpool 2040. The LSPS identifies the Moorebank East precinct as an Urban Development Investigation Area on the Structure Plan map (page 20). It also provides strategic directions to support the implementation of the Regional, District and Community Strategic Plan. The four key directions are: connectivity, liveability, productivity and sustainability. The planning proposal request aligns with Planning Priority 7 as outlined in Table 2:

 

Planning Priority

Comment

Liveability

Planning Priority 7 – Housing choice for different needs, with density focused in the City Centre and centres well serviced by public transport

The proposal would support additional housing supply and housing choice by delivering approximately 374 dwellings which would assist in meeting Liverpool City Council’s five-year housing supply target. The Liverpool Local Strategic Planning Statement identifies the Moorebank East precinct as an urban development investigation area on the Structure Plan map (page 20).

Table 2: Consistency with the LSPS

 

Consultation

 

Preliminary Community Consultation

 

On 27 July 2020 Council resolved to exhibit all planning proposals that have been lodged within Moorebank. Accordingly, the subject proposal was placed on public exhibition for 28 days, in accordance with Council’s Community Participation Plan.

 

The exhibition period concluded on 10 September 2020 with two submissions being received including one objection. Summaries of the submissions and officer’s response are listed in Table 3.

 

Issue Raised

Officer Response

Support

This planning proposal request for the Georges Cove Marina is consistent with the changing use of the riverfront land, from industrial and commercial to residential and open space. We look forward to further consideration of the plans as they progress.

Noted.

Objection

As a resident and ratepayer of Liverpool City Council I totally object to this development.

Noted. 

We do not need another disaster; cars cannot move along Newbridge Road as it is - It does not need any further traffic that this development would bring

The submitted Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) indicates that subject to the construction of improvement works at key intersections, including as part of other developments in the local area including Sites A-E, traffic impacts of the development can be minimised.

Council’s Traffic and Transport Unit has reviewed the submitted TIA and has requested submission of a revised TIA at the post Gateway stage.

In addition, Transport for NSW (TfNSW) has been consulted regarding cumulative traffic impacts of the Moorebank East Precinct and the proposed traffic improvement works.

At the post Gateway stage, traffic impact assessment will be completed in conjunction with TfNSW to identify improvement works and appropriate funding mechanisms to minimise traffic impacts.

Any time we get heavy rain Newbridge Road floods

Newbridge Road is subject to flooding. Access to the site is from both Newbridge Road, Brickmakers Road and a new DCP road that will be flood free. Flooding issues have been addressed in the planning assessment report including the provision of a pedestrian flood evacuation route from the site.

I am against:

- any further development- leave this    flood prone land vacant

- any additional houses or retail

- any increase in height of building

- any increase in floor space

- any shops or retail

- any rezoning

- any apartments

Tract Consultants were engaged to recommend appropriate land uses and densities on sites in the Moorebank East precinct and have prepared a structure plan that ensures the orderly development of the precinct. At this early stage in the planning process, Council is satisfied that the proposal addresses amenity, flooding and traffic impacts. These issues will be further addressed in detail once a Gateway determination is issued and consultation is carried out with relevant state agencies/authorities.

This proposal should be in the only local paper publishing in print, The Champion

Residents need to know

The proposal was exhibited on Council’s website and in the ‘Liverpool Champion’ for a period of 28 days between 14 August and 10 September 2020.

Table 3: Response to submission

*It is advised that the objection was made for all planning proposals within the Moorebank East Precinct.

 

Internal Consultation

 

Flooding Issues

 

The Moorebank East precinct and the area north of Newbridge Road close to Georges River is flood prone and the subject site is identified as being subject to low, medium and high flood risks within its boundaries.

 

A flooding report prepared by Cardno was submitted with the planning proposal request. This report was reviewed by Council’s Floodplain and Water Management team who advised that the design concept is consistent with the mitigation measures and principles outlined within the NSW Flood Prone Land Policy and Floodplain Development Manual 2005. This addresses the Ministerial Direction 4.3 (Flood Prone Land).

 

In 2018, NSW State Emergency Service (NSW SES) advised Council that an evacuation route would be required for any residential development within the Moorebank East precinct. Design and delivery of a flood evacuation route must be consistent with NSW SES’s principles for evacuation. Council engaged environmental and natural hazard specialists Molino Stewart to investigate and report on the flooding and evacuation risks for each of the proposed development sites (within the Moorebank East Precinct). This work culminated in the Moorebank East Flood Evacuation Analysis Report in November 2019.

 

In response, an elevated pedestrian bridge from Site C is proposed by Mirvac to provide an acceptable pedestrian evacuation route for Sites A, C and D during a probable maximum flood event (PMF). The bridge has been approved as part of the operative consent for DA-24/2017 (issued on 24 June 2020) which approved the subdivision of the broader site into sites A, C and D.

 

With the proposed elevated pedestrian bridge/evacuation route, in the event of a flooding emergency, residents would have the option to be evacuated by either car, or as a last resort on foot (via the elevated pedestrian bridge).

 

Land Contamination Issues

 

The site has been identified as being contaminated by the previous extractive uses that occurred on the site. The proponent submitted a Preliminary Site Investigation (PSI) prepared by Douglas Partners in 2018. However, Council’s Environmental Health Section advised that the subject proposal “shall be accompanied by a Section B Site Audit Statement and Site Audit Report prepared by an NSW EPA Accredited Site Auditor confirming that:

·     The nature and extent of contamination has been appropriately determined at the proposed development site;

·     The investigation, remediation or management plan is appropriate for the intended purpose; and

·     The site can be made suitable for the proposed land use in accordance with the submitted Remediation Action Plan (Report J14149RP1, Version V2, Final) prepared by EMM Consulting dated 11th March 2016 or any modified Remediation Action Plan as required.

 

The Site Audit Statement shall also confirm that the preliminary investigation of the land was carried out in accordance with the contaminated land planning guidelines and satisfactorily addresses the Land and Environment Court’s findings dated 28th February 2018.

 

It is requested that the NSW EPA accredited site auditor also verifies whether the Applicant was required to provide a report on a detailed investigation (as referred to in the contaminated land planning guidelines) to obtain sufficient information to develop the Remediation Action Plan. If remediation is to include a cap and contain strategy, it is requested that the site auditor reviews the Long-Term Environmental Management Plan for ongoing management of the site.

 

A Site Audit and RAP have since been submitted for the marina DA on the subject site. Subject to development consent, it is proposed that a notation will be included on any Planning Certificate for Lot 70 DP 1254895, 146 Newbridge Road, Moorebank NSW under Section 10.7(5) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. The notation shall specify that the land is contaminated and subject to a Site Audit Statement, leading to the preparation of a Long-Term Environmental Management Plan. Accordingly, any future residential development would be required to comply with this Long-Term Environmental Management Plan.

 

Additionally, Ministerial Direction No 2.6 (Remediation of Contaminated Land) supersedes Clause 6 of SEPP No. 55- Remediation of Land. Particularly, the Ministerial Direction indicates that planning authorities are to consider contamination at any time during the preparation of an environmental planning instrument but are not required to before the Gateway assessment. Contamination issues will be further addressed in detail during state agency consultation with the EPA. Accordingly, the proposal satisfactorily satisfies Ministerial Direction 2.6 (Remediation of Contaminated Land).

 

Urban Design Issues

 

The proposed concept design and development standards are satisfactory at this stage in the planning proposal process. However, at the post-Gateway stage, Part 2.10 (Moorebank East) of the LDCP will need to be amended to include controls for ‘Site D’ which align with the agreed-upon urban design outcome. This process will also ensure that the current Marina DA under assessment and a future development as facilitated by this planning proposal will integrate cohesively to produce a high-quality built form and public domain outcome. The requirement to prepare a DCP amendment can be included as a condition of Gateway determination.

 

Traffic Impacts

 

Council’s Traffic and Transport Unit has reviewed a Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) report submitted with the planning proposal request.  The TIA outlines that subject to the construction of the internal road network, and improvement works at key intersections as part of other developments in the local area including Sites A-E, traffic impacts of the development can be minimised.

 

Council officers have consulted with TfNSW to identify improvement works and a funding mechanism required to minimise the cumulative traffic impacts of development in the Moorebank East precinct. This will continue during formal state agency consultation following the issuing of a Gateway determination.

 

Next Steps

 

If Council supports the planning proposal request, a formal planning proposal will be prepared and submitted to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE) seeking a Gateway determination.

 

A further report will be provided to Council following the public exhibition period detailing submissions received and any amendments proposed.

 

CONclusion

 

The planning proposal request has both strategic and site-specific merit. This report notes that there are several environmental, traffic management, and urban design details to be resolved at the post gateway stage.

 

It is recommended that Council endorses the planning proposal to proceed to a Gateway determination with a further report prepared for Council’s consideration following state-agency consultation and public exhibition period, detailing any submissions received and any amendments proposed.

 

CONSIDERATIONS

 

Economic

Facilitate economic development.

Environment

Manage air, water, noise and chemical pollution.

Enhance the environmental performance of buildings and homes.


Social

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


Civic Leadership

Encourage the community to engage in Council initiatives and actions.

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

Legislative

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979

Risk

The risk is deemed to be Low. If Council does not support the planning proposal request, there is a risk that the landowner will seek a review of Council’s decision by the Sydney Western City Planning Panel.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

 

1.         Planning Proposal Request (Under separate cover)

2.         Planning Assessment Report for Liverpool Local Planning Panel (Under separate cover)

3.         Local Planning Panel Advice (Under separate cover)  


1

Ordinary Meeting

30 September 2020

City Economy and Growth Report

 

EGROW 03

Planning proposal request to rezone land and amend development standards at 1370 Camden Valley Way, East Leppington

 

Strategic Direction

Strengthening and Protecting our Environment

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

File Ref

209517.2020

Report By

Masud Hasan - Senior Strategic Planner

Approved By

David Smith - Acting Director City Economy and Growth

 

 

 Executive Summary

 

Council has received a planning proposal request (Attachment 1) from the landowner, Vicliz Pty Ltd to rezone the site at 1370 Camden Valley Way, East Leppington (Lot E in DP28997) from R3 Medium Density Residential to B1 Neighbourhood Centre, RE1 Public Recreation to R3 Medium Density Residential, R2 Low Density Residential to RE1 Public Recreation and to amend development standards.

 

The site is located within the Liverpool portion of the East Leppington Precinct, which forms part of the South West Growth Centre under State Environmental Planning Policy (Sydney Region Growth Centres) 2006 (Growth Centre SEPP).   

 

The planning proposal request seeks to expand the existing neighbourhood centre to   accommodate additional retail floor area and to reorganise the development of residential, commercial and recreational uses on the site. This requires an amendment to the current zoning and layout of open space, commercial and residential areas within the site.

 

The planning proposal request seeks to amend the upper limit of permissible total Gross Floor Area (GFA) in Clause 6.4 under Appendix 8 - Liverpool Growth Centre Precinct Plan of the Growth Centres SEPP by increasing the maximum retail GFA from 2,500m2 to 4,800m2.

 

The Height of Building Map, Land Reservation Acquisition Map, Lot Size Map and Residential Density Map under the Growth Centres SEPP are to be amended as part of this proposal to reflect the modified zoning boundaries proposed.

 

The planning proposal request also requires amendments to Schedule 3 (East Leppington Precinct) of the Liverpool Growth Centre Precincts Development Control Plan 2013. The DCP amendments reflect the proposed changes to the zoning boundaries and the proposed increase of the retail GFA provision. In addition, the DCP amendments include changes to the ILP road network, pedestrian and cycleway network and the layout of the Neighbourhood Centre to make it consistent with the planning proposal request.

 

A voluntary planning agreement (VPA) has been offered by the proponent in support of the planning proposal request. The recreation facilities proposed under the VPA offer are over and above the Contributions Plan provisions for the site (details are provided in Table 1). The proposed VPA offer will assist in the early delivery of recreation facilities, without any additional cost to Council.

 

Advice was sought from the Liverpool Local Planning Panel (LPP) at its meeting on 29 June 2020 in accordance with the ‘Local Planning Panel Direction – Planning Proposals’ dated 23 February 2018. The planning assessment report presented to the Local Planning Panel is included in Attachment 2.

 

The report outlines that the proposal has strategic and site-specific merit and recommends that a planning proposal be prepared and submitted to the Department of Planning, Industry & Environment (DPIE) for a Gateway determination. The Panel agreed with the above recommendation and supported the proposal proceeding to a Gateway determination. A copy of the panel’s advice is included in Attachment 3.

 

It is recommended that Council note the advice of the LPP, support in principle the planning proposal request, and submit a planning proposal to DPIE seeking a Gateway determination and public exhibition.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

 

1.   Notes the advice of the Liverpool Local Planning Panel;

 

2.   Endorses in principle the planning proposal request, subject to the proponent finalising the required amendments to the Liverpool Growth Centres Precinct DCP;

 

3.   Delegates to the A/CEO authority to prepare the formal planning proposal including any typographical or other editing amendments if required;

 

4.   Delegates to the A/CEO authority to negotiate a Voluntary Planning Agreement with the proponent, agree the terms of the offer with the proponent and report back to Council the details of the VPA prior to exhibition of the planning proposal, consistent with the Council’s Planning Agreements Policy;

 

5.   Endorses in principle the potential public benefits, to be further negotiated, including:

·           Social Court located within Open Space Area ‘C’ of approximately 330m2 including outdoor seating, basketball and netball hoop and bocce area including tree planting;

·           Concrete walking loop located within Open Space Area ‘C” of approximately 180m;

·           Pedestrian crossing (including refuge island) located in the southern portion of the site across the future collector road to the open space area;

·           Boardwalk/bridge across riparian corridor along the south-east portion of the site of approximately 70m;

 

6.    Forwards the planning proposal to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment pursuant to Section 3.34 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, seeking a Gateway determination with a recommendation that amendments to the Liverpool Growth Centres Precinct DCP is included as a Gateway condition to be satisfied prior to public exhibition;

 

7.    Subject to Gateway determination, undertake public exhibition and community consultation on the planning proposal in accordance with the conditions of the Gateway determination and Council’s Community Participation Plan;

 

8.    Receive a further report on the outcomes of public exhibition and community consultation.

 

 

REPORT

 

Background

 

The planning proposal request seeks to expand the existing neighbourhood centre area to accommodate additional retail floor area, and reorganise development of residential, commercial and recreational uses on the site. 

 

On 2 March 2016, following a meeting with Council staff, pre-lodgement advice was provided to the proponent including:

-        That a substantial portion of the land was not granted Biodiversity Certification and was subject to the Threatened Species Conservation (TSC) Act 1995;

-        A portion of the land was subject to controls on existing native vegetation under Clause 6.3 of the Growth Centre SEPP. The objective of the clause is to manage existing native vegetation in accordance with the relevant biodiversity measures under Part 7 of Schedule 7 of the TSC Act;

-        That the (2016) proposal involved a significant reduction of open space. The area of open space proposed to be removed was designated as a local recreation area and it would be inappropriate to relocate the desired uses on flood liable land;

-        That there might be scope to reshape the open space without a reduction in its area in order to achieve a better and more efficient development outcome;

-        That the proposed retail centre should be located on the collector street so that it functioned as a main street not as a ‘drive in’ shopping centre. Shop top housing could be provided on the R3 zone adjacent and opposite the retail centre to reinforce the sense of place in the centre;

-        That the entrance from Camden Valley Way into the precinct was to be by a public street as per the Development Control Plan (DCP) and not directly through the service station site; 

-        The retail centre might be accessed from the service station via a car parking structure so that it did not encourage vehicles to take shortcuts through the service station;

-        The lots should be organised so that the dwellings face and reinforce the street hierarchy and open space; and

-        That these issues must be addressed before any further consideration could be given to supporting a planning proposal request.  

 

·    On 3 March 2017, following the pre-lodgment meeting in March 2016, a planning proposal request was lodged with Council. The proposal sought to rezone the land and included modifications to the street layout under the Indicative Layout Plan (ILP) for the East Leppington precinct. This also included amendments to the Neighbourhood Centre layout included in the Development Control Plan (DCP).

 

·    On 19 July 2017, the applicant was advised of planning issues that needed to be addressed:

-      The required protection of the native vegetation on the site,

-      The reduction of open space area and potential detrimental impacts of an extended Neighbourhood Centre on the nearby centres such as, Leppington and Edmondson Park.

 

·    On 2 May 2018, the proponent submitted a revised concept plan for the open space and met with Council staff. A letter of advice was sent to the proponent on 12 June 2018 raising concerns with the concept plan including the reduction of open space area, proposed removal of protected vegetation, traffic impacts and potential adverse impacts of an extended Neighbourhood Centre on the nearby centres such as, Leppington and Edmondson Park

 

·    On 22 August 2018, the proponent submitted an updated concept plan and updated supporting documents. Correspondence was sent to the proponent on 19 October 2018, detailing matters such as the protection of Existing Native Vegetation (ENV) located on the site and the reduction of open space area. Council recommended that a modified proposal be prepared that would not reduce the quantum of open space and that would not impact on non-certified land.

 

·    In early 2019, the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE) confirmed that the existing native vegetation, as originally mapped, still constituted Existing Native Vegetation (ENV) as defined under the Biodiversity Certification Order, and as such could not be cleared. 

 

·    On 9 August 2019, the proponent submitted a revised proposal with a proposed zoning map including a reconfigured RE1 Public Recreation space for Council’s review.

 

·    On 20 September 2019, Council staff advised the proponent that the quantum of RE1 zoned land should be equal to or greater than the current RE1 zoned land. In addition, the section of SP2 Infrastructure (local drainage) zoned land area should be excluded from  the calculation of RE1 zoned land.

 

·    On 16 December 2019, a meeting was held between the proponent and Council officers. Advise was provided on the following:

-     The planning proposal request and the associated DCP amendments should be dealt with separately within the planning proposal report, as the DCP modifications can be considered upon the planning proposal receiving Council’s in-principle support;

-     The proposed rezoning of SP2 Infrastructure zoned land to RE1 Public Recreation zone would not be supported by Council as the SP2 zoned land would be required for drainage infrastructure planned for the precinct;

-     The portion of SP2 zoned land might be considered as open space where it constituted an open drain. If the SP2 zoned land was linked to the existing RE1 land, and all would be in Council ownership, there would be no net loss of open space; this could be further justified by the embellishment proposed for the RE1 zoned land under the VPA offer. 

-     DPIE advised that the proposed extension of Gross Floor Area (GFA) for the neighbourhood centre would not be considered until a time when planning for the Leppington Town Centre is finalised.

 

·    On 31 March 2020, the proponent submitted a revised planning proposal request with additional supporting information. The proposal excluded SP2 zoned land towards the calculation of total open space area on the site. The area of resulting RE1 zoned land due to the proposed rezoning and reshaping remained equal to what was originally provided.

 

·    On 29 June 2020, the planning proposal request was considered by the Liverpool Local Planning Panel (LPP). The panel considered the planning proposal request and provided their advice that the proposal has strategic and site-specific merit. This is further discussed in the following section of this report.

 

 

 

 

Site Description and Locality

 

The site is located at 1370 Camden Valley Way, East Leppington (Lot E in DP28997). The site is part of the East Leppington precinct and was rezoned pursuant to the Sydney Region Growth Centres SEPP 2006, in August 2014, to permit primarily a mix of residential density development.

 

The site currently contains land parcels zoned: B1 Neighbourhood Centre, RE1 Public Recreation, R3 Medium Density Residential, R2 Low Density Residential and SP2 Infrastructure. The zones and Indicative Layout Plan are intended to provide for a neighbourhood centre, medium and low-density residential developments, and passive recreation open space and stormwater drainage.

 

The site is bound by Camden Valley Way to the west, the Upper Canal to the east, private land holdings primarily zoned R3 Medium Density Residential and R2 Low Density Residential to the north and south as shown in Figure 1.

 

Figure 1: Aerial view of the subject site (Source: NearMap January 2020)

Leppington Station and the future Leppington town centre are approximately 1.5km north west of the site. Bus services along Camden Valley Way provide access to Leppington Station, Narellan Town Centre and Liverpool City Centre and will provide access to the future Leppington Town Centre. Bus stops are located along Camden Valley Way, with the nearest bus stop 200m from the site.

 

Other surrounding land uses are as follows:

·     Willowdale Shopping Centre, within the Campbelltown LGA, is approximately 1km south-west of the site.

·     Antegra Estate Retirement Village and Forest Lawn Gardens cemetery are to the north and north-east of the site respectively.

·     Leppington Public School is approximately 1km north-west and John Edmondson High School is approximately 4km north-east of the site.

·     Edmondson Park Village Square (along Camden Valley Way) is approximately 4km east of the site.

 

The site has access to the M5 and M7 Motorways via Camden Valley Way and Cowpasture Road respectively. Bringelly Road is approximately 1.8 km north of the site and provides connection to the future Western Sydney Airport and Aerotropolis.

 

The site’s location, including the abovementioned surrounding land uses and transport links are shown as Figure 2 below.

 

Figure 2: Locality Map – subject site highlighted (source: Urban Design Statement prepared by Benson McCormack Architecture, dated March 2020, Page no. 5)

 

Proposed Amendments to State Environmental Planning Policy (Sydney Region Growth Centres) - 2006

 

As indicated above, the site is currently zoned as B1 Neighbourhood Centre, RE1 Public Recreation, R3 Medium Density Residential, R2 Low Density Residential and SP2 Local Drainage under the Growth Centres SEPP 2006, as shown in Figure 3.

 

The neighbourhood centre was initially zoned to cater for the retail and service needs of future population of the East Leppington precinct. Since the urban release, residential yield has been tracking at greater densities than was planned, increasing the demand for retail floor space and service provision within the centre.

 

As a result, the planning proposal request seeks to increase the current zoned neighbourhood centre from 2,500m2 to 4,800m2 and to reorganise the residential, commercial and recreational land uses. In addition, the planning proposal request proposes an amendment to development standards, and Clause 6.4 of Appendix 8 of the Growth Centres SEPP.

 

This requires an amendment to the current commercial and residential zonings and layout of the open space, as well as amendment to the Liverpool Growth Centre Precincts DCP, which is discussed in the next section of this report.

 

Figure 3: Existing zoning – subject site highlighted

 

The proposal is seeking to rezone parts of the subject site as follows: 

•      R3 Medium Density Residential to B1 Neighbourhood Centre;

•      RE1 Public Recreation to R3 Medium Density Residential; and

•      R2 Low Density Residential to RE1 Public Recreation. (Refer to Figure 4)

 

Figure 4: Proposed land use zoning – subject site highlighted

 

Figure 5 below summarises the land zoning amendments proposed:

 

Figure 5: Matters addressed within the planning proposal

 

The planning proposal request increases the permissible retail GFA from 2,500m2 to 4,800m2 to meet the increased demand for retail floor area within the precinct. The amended clause will read –

 

“6.4 Maximum gross floor area for retail premises in Zone B1 in East Leppington Precinct

Despite any other provision of this Precinct Plan, the total gross floor area of all retail premises on land in Zone B1 Neighbourhood Centre within the East Leppington Precinct must not exceed 4,800 square metres.” 

 

The Height of Building Map, Land Reservation Acquisition Map, Lot Size Map and Residential Density Map under the Growth Centre SEPP are to be amended as part of this proposal to reflect the modified zoning boundaries proposed on the site.

 

Amendments to the Liverpool Growth Centre Precincts Development Control Plan

 

The planning proposal request requires amendments to Schedule 3 - East Leppington Precinct of the Liverpool Growth Centre Precincts Development Control Plan (the DCP) to ensure it consistent with the planning proposal request. 

 

Amendments to the DCP reflect changes to the zone boundaries and the increase in retail GFA provision. The amendments include changes to the local road network, pedestrian and cycleway network and the layout of the Neighbourhood Centre in the DCP. This is to be achieved by amending the DCP controls, maps and figures, including the Indicative Layout Plan (ILP) as detailed below:

 

·    The Indicative Layout Plan (ILP) is a map in the DCP which shows the future road network and the land uses in the precinct (e.g. residential, open space etc.). This provides Council, developers and landowners with certainty as to how the land will be developed in a coordinated manner. Upon support of the planning proposal request, the ILP is to amend:

-       The road currently located to the north of the Neighbourhood Centre is relocated to the northern boundary of the site. This is to reflect the extended neighbourhood centre area and to provide road connection with residential developments to the north of the centre.

-       The local road along the western edge of the open space area, is realigned to make it consistent with the reconfigured zoning boundaries.

-       The local road connecting the neighbourhood centre to the reconfigured open space area, is envisaged to be widened to allow for a tree lined boulevard with pedestrian and cycleway emphasis. This will provide a pedestrian and cycleway connection between the neighbourhood centre and the public recreation area, facilitating easy access and visual connection to the open space area.

 

The draft ILP amendments are outlined in Figure 6. This may be subject to change upon refinement between Council staff and the proponent to ensure that the ILP provides for orderly development.

Figure 6: Proposed amendments to the ILP road network

 

·    The numerical restriction on retail Gross Floor Area (GFA) of the neighbourhood centre under Section 3.1 of the East Leppington precinct DCP, is to be amended. The upper limit of permissible retail GFA within the centre will be increased from 2,500m2 to 4,800m2. This is to reflect the proposed increase of retail GFA under the planning proposal. Amended section of the DCP will read:

 

“Under the Liverpool Growth Centre Precinct Plan a maximum gross floor area of 4,800m2 applies to retail premises within the Neighbourhood Centre”.

 

·    A revised layout is proposed to replace the current layout of the neighbourhood centre at ‘Figure 3-2: Desired future layout of the Neighbourhood Centre’ of the DCP (refer to Figure 7). The proposed layout represents the extended area of the neighbourhood centre. It outlines public domain interfaces such as points of entry, active facades, vehicle access points and loading areas to guide the future development of the centre. Refinement of this figure will be coordinated between Council staff and the proponent.

Figure 7: Proposed desired future layout of the Neighbourhood Centre

 

Miscellaneous Amendments to the DCP

 

The following maps and figures in the East Leppington Precinct DCP are to be amended to reflect the changes to zoning boundaries, the local road network, the neighbourhood centre layout and the pedestrian and cycleway network:

·      Figure 2-3: Key elements of water cycle management and ecology strategy

·      Figure 2-7: Bushfire risk and asset protection zone requirements

·      Figure 2-10: Potential noise attenuation measures

·      Figure 2-11: Residential structure

·      Figure 2-12: Precinct road hierarchy

·      Figure 2-13: Pedestrian and cycleway network

·      Figure 2-19:  Desired future subdivision layout – Very Low Density Residential – Upper Canal

·      Figure 3-1: Location of Neighbourhood Centre

·      Figure 3-2: Desired future layout of the Neighbourhood Centre

 

It is proposed (should the planning proposal receive a Gateway determination) that a draft DCP will be prepared and considered by Council at a further meeting for its consideration prior to proceeding with any public agency and community consultation.

 

Draft Voluntary Planning Agreement Offer

 

The proponent has prepared a letter of offer to enter into a Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA) in support of the planning proposal request (Attachment 4). Under the letter of offer, recreation facilities are proposed to be delivered. These facilities are over and above the planned infrastructure under the East Leppington Development Contributions Plan.

 

Table 1 shows the list of facilities proposed to be delivered under the VPA. Refer to Figure 8 for location of proposed VPA works.

 

Embellishment

Dimensions

Width (m)     Length (m)   Area (m2)

Treatment

 

1.1 Social Court

 

20

20

330

Gravel surface plaza with outdoor seating and tree plantings. Informal recreation elements (i.e. Basketball/netball hoop, bocce etc.)

1.2 Walking Loop

2

180

340

Broom Finished Concrete.

1.3 Link Across Riparian Corridor (Boardwalk/ Bridge)

 

3

70

(Actual span of boardwalk TBC)

175

Broom finished concrete path connecting to boardwalk spanning riparian corridor.

Structure: Steel & timber

Decking: Timber

Balustrade: Steel & timber 

1.4 Pedestrian Crossing

 

3.6

17

n/a

Painted white markings on road asphalt in accordance with AS1742.10. Pedestrian refuge to be included if required.

Table 1: Proposed works under VPA offer

Figure 8: Location of proposed VPA works (highlighted in red boxes)

 

The proposed facilities will assist in early delivery of recreation facilities in the area, without any additional cost to Council. The list of facilities under the VPA offer was reviewed by Council’s Recreation and Open Space team and Infrastructure Planning team.

 

If Council supports the VPA offer, and the planning proposal receives a Gateway determination, a formal VPA will be drafted for Council’s consideration. Similarly, a draft DCP will also be prepared. It is proposed that the draft VPA and DCP is presented to Council for consideration prior to any public agency or community consultation.

 

Advice of the Local Planning Panel

 

Pursuant to Clause 2.19(1)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, a planning proposal must be considered by the Local Planning Panel (LPP) for their advice prior to consideration by the Council.

 

The Local Planning Panel considered the planning proposal at their meeting on 29 June 2020 and agreed that the proposal has strategic and site-specific merit and that they support the proposal proceeding to a Gateway determination. The advice of the LPP is included in Attachment 3.

 

Consistency with the Local Strategic Planning Statement

 

All planning proposals must be consistent with Council’s adopted Local Strategic Planning Statement (LSPS) – Connected Liverpool 2040.

 

The LSPS identifies the site within the Growth Area on the Structure Plan map (page 20). It also provides strategic directions to support the implementation of the Regional, District and Community Strategic Plan.

 

The four key directions are: connectivity, livability, productivity and sustainability. The planning proposal aligns with the following directions and relevant priorities as outlined in Table 2:

 

Planning Priority

Comment

Liveability

Planning Priority 6 – High quality, plentiful and accessible community facilities, open space and infrastructure aligned with growth

The planning proposal request, with its reconfigured centre and public open space, will provide the opportunity to deliver a wide array of community facilities and social infrastructure for the thriving community.

Planning Priority 9 - Safe, healthy and inclusive places shaping the wellbeing of the Liverpool community

The proposal will facilitate the development of a larger centre, responding to an increase in forecast population, and an area of open space that can be delivered to a higher standard than what is possible under the development contributions plan.

Productivity

Planning Priority 11 – An attractive environment for local jobs, business, tourism and investment’

The planning proposal request is consistent with the planning priority as the proposed extension of the neighbourhood centre area will deliver a larger centre to attract more local businesses, investments and job opportunities.

Sustainability

Planning Priority 14 – Bushland and waterways are celebrated, connected, protected and enhanced

The planning proposal request is consistent with this planning priority as the proposal is protecting the Bonds Creek riparian corridor and its associated drainage land. It also retains the designated Existing Native Vegetation (ENV) area. The reconfigured open space land surrounding the riparian corridor and the protected ENV land create opportunities for the enhanced enjoyment and functionality of the green space.

Table 2: Consistency with the LSPS

 

Consistency with Supporting Strategies

 

At its meeting on 26 August 2020, Council adopted the Liverpool Local Housing Strategy, and Centres and Corridors Strategy. These strategies address specific actions outlined in the LSPS and guide future planning.

 

The Centres and Corridors Strategy acknowledges the site as a future Local Centre. The strategy acknowledges that inclusion of the proposed centres in the retail hierarchy “should not change the development expectations of these centres, which are mostly set in growth area DCPs and the State Environmental Planning Policy (Sydney Region Growth Centres) 2006.” (Liverpool Centres and Corridors Strategy, 2020, P. 23). The centre would still be defined as a local centre, as per the strategy, if the increase in GFA is supported

 

The planning proposal does not notably increase or decrease residential lot yield on the site, rather the area of residential zoned land is reconfigured around a larger centre and re-arranged open space area. Regardless, the proposal is still largely consistent with the Local Housing Strategy, given that it seeks to increase opportunities for medium density (missing middle) housing typologies next to an identified centre, and close to amenities such as public open space.

 

Preliminary Public Exhibition

 

In accordance with the requirements of Council’s Community Participation Plan (CPP), preliminary public exhibition of the planning proposal request was undertaken for 28 days between 8 August 2020 and 16 September 2020. No submissions were received during the public exhibition period.

 

Consultation

 

Consultation was undertaken with Council’s internal departments including Council’s Community Development & Planning, City Economy, City Environment, Traffic and Transport, City Design and Public Domain and Floodplain and Water Management teams. No significant issues were identified that cannot be addressed prior to the proposal being finalised.

 

The matters primarily related to required amendments to the local road network, recreation facilities and a revised layout of the Neighbourhood Centre to reflect the reconfigured zoning boundaries. The issues can be resolved by the proposed DCP amendments and the works proposed under the VPA offer. 

 

Subject to receiving Council support and a Gateway determination, and Council endorsing the draft DCP and the VPA at a future meeting, formal community consultation will occur with a minimum exhibition period of 28 days.

 

Public Authority consultation will also be undertaken as per the conditions of the Gateway determination. It is proposed that adjacent landowners, and the landowner of each property who is affected by changes to planning controls be notified in writing.

 

Next Steps

 

If Council supports the planning proposal request, a formal planning proposal will be prepared and submitted to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE) seeking a Gateway determination.

 

The Gateway determination may require additional technical studies to be undertaken in parallel with the development of a draft DCP and VPA. The draft DCP and VPA will be reported back to Council. Following endorsement, the planning proposal, draft DCP, and draft VPA would then proceed to public exhibition.

 

A further report will be provided to Council following the public exhibition period detailing submissions received and any amendments proposed.

 

Conclusion

 

The planning proposal will promote positive social, environmental and economic outcomes by introducing housing diversity and choice, as well as superior open space and recreation outcomes. The associated DCP amendments and VPA will further assist in achieving these outcomes.  

 

The planning proposal request has strategic and site-specific merit and it is recommended that Council endorses the proposal to proceed to a Gateway determination.

 

CONSIDERATIONS

 

Economic

Facilitate economic development.

Environment

Support the delivery of a range of transport options.


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

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979

Risk

The risk is deemed to be Low. If Council does not support the planning proposal request, there is a risk that the landowner will seek a review of Council’s decision by the Sydney Western City Planning Panel.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

 

1.         Planning Proposal Request (Under separate cover)

2.         Planning Assessment Report for Local Planning Panel (Under separate cover)

3.         Advice of Local Planning Panel (Under separate cover)

4.         Draft Voluntary Planning Agreement offer (Under separate cover)  


1

Ordinary Meeting

30 September 2020

City Economy and Growth Report

 

EGROW 04

Issues and Options Report - Potential amendment to Liverpool Local Environmental Plan to permit a Recreation Facility (Outdoor) at 25 Dwyer Road, Bringelly

 

Strategic Direction

Generating Opportunity

Attract businesses for economic growth and employment opportunities

File Ref

237969.2020

Report By

Luke Oste - Executive Planner

Approved By

David Smith - Acting Director City Economy and Growth

 

 

Executive Summary

 

On 28 August 2020, the Mayor issued a Mayoral Direction (Attachment 1), pursuant to Section 226(d) of the Local Government Act 1993, requiring the A/CEO to prepare a report that details options available to Council to amend the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 (LEP) to permit, with development consent, a Recreation Facility (Outdoor) at 25 Dwyer Road, Bringelly.

 

The Mayoral Direction relates to the Burns Outdoor Obstacle Training facility which was issued a Notice of Proposed Stop Use Order, Demolish Works Order and Restore Works Order on 4 August 2020 due to the use being prohibited in the R5 Large Lot Residential zone under the LEP.

 

The facility has operated for the last five years with the landowners believing the use was permitted without development consent in the zone as a home occupation.

 

This report recommends that Council prepares a planning proposal to amend Schedule 1 of the LEP to permit, with development consent, a Recreation Facility (Outdoor) at 25 Dwyer Road, Bringelly and forwards the planning proposal to the Department of Planning, Industry, and Environment (DPIE) seeking a Gateway determination.

 

It is also recommended that the Phase 2 LEP Review considers amending the list of land uses that are permissible with development consent in the R5 Large Lot Residential zone, to include Recreation Facility (Outdoor).

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

 

1.    Directs the A/CEO to prepare a planning proposal to amend Schedule 1 of the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 to permit, with development consent, a Recreation Facility (Outdoor) at 25 Dwyer Road, Bringelly and delegates authority to the A/CEO to forward the planning proposal to the Department of Planning, Industry, and Environment seeking a Gateway determination;

 

2.    Notes that if a Gateway determination is issued, state agency consultation and public exhibition will be undertaken, and a post-exhibition report will be prepared for Council’s consideration; and

 

3.    Investigates including Recreation Facility (Outdoor) as a land use permitted with development consent in the R5 Large Lot Residential zone as part of Phase 2 of the LEP Review.

 

 

REPORT

 

Background

 

Over the past five years, the site at 25 Dwyer Road, Bringelly has been used as a Recreational Facility (Outdoor) known as Burns Outdoor Obstacle Training.

 

Council received a complaint on 10 July 2020 regarding the use of the premises. Council officers investigated the matter and determined the use did not have a development consent and was prohibited in the R5 Large Lot Residential zone under the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008.

 

The landowners established the facility believing it was a home occupation and that the use was development permitted without consent. The LEP defines a home occupation as:

 

Home occupation means an occupation that is carried on in a dwelling, or in a building ancillary to a dwelling, by one or more permanent residents of the dwelling and that does not involve –

a)   the employment of persons other than those residents, or

b)   interference with the amenity of the neighbourhood by reason of the emission of noise, vibration, smell, fumes, smoke, vapour, steam, soot, ash, dust, wastewater, waste products, grit or oil, traffic generation or otherwise, or

c)   the display of goods, whether in a window or otherwise, or

d)   the exhibition of any signage (other than a business identification sign), or

e)   the sale of items (whether goods or materials), or the exposure or offer for sale of items, by retail,

but does not include bed and breakfast accommodation, home occupation (sex services) or sex services premises.

 

The use being undertaken on the site is not carried on in a dwelling or in a building ancillary to a dwelling and is therefore not defined under the LEP as a home occupation. The use is properly defined as a Recreation Facility (Outdoor) under the LEP:

 

recreation facility (outdoor) means a building or place (other than a recreation area) used predominantly for outdoor recreation, whether or not operated for the purposes of gain, including a golf course, golf driving range, mini-golf centre, tennis court, paint-ball centre, lawn bowling green, outdoor swimming pool, equestrian centre, skate board ramp, go-kart track, rifle range, water-ski centre or any other building or place of a like character used for outdoor recreation (including any ancillary buildings), but does not include an entertainment facility or a recreation facility (major).

 

This use is prohibited in the R5 zone. Council therefore issued a Notice of Proposed Stop Use Order, Demolish Works Order and Restore Works Order on 4 August 2020.

 

There has been a strong community response in support of the continued operation of Burns Outdoor Obstacle Training. A change.org petition has to date received over 5,000 signatures. The Mayor therefore issued a Mayoral Direction pursuant to Section 226(d) of the Local Government Act 1993 on 28 August 2020 requiring the A/CEO to prepare a report that details options available to Council to amend the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 (LEP) to permit, with development consent, a Recreation Facility (Outdoor) at 25 Dwyer Road, Bringelly.

 

Site Description

 

The site is known as 25 Dwyer Road, Bringelly and is legally described as Lot 80 within DP 27550. The sites topography is relatively flat, and the allotment is regular in shape. The site currently contains two dwellings, a pool, various storage sheds, a small dam, and outdoor training equipment at the front. The site is within a broader residential area typified by large residential lot developments.

 

Figure 1 shows the site within its locality. Figure 2 shows the site within its regional context.  

 

Figure 1: Aerial view of subject site (Nearmap Aug 2020)

Figure 2 - Regional Context Map (Google Maps)

Planning Framework

The site is zoned R5 Large Lot Residential under the LEP and the objectives of the R5 Large Lot Residential zone are:

·     To provide residential housing in a rural setting while preserving, and minimising impacts on, environmentally sensitive locations and scenic quality.

·     To ensure that large residential lots do not hinder the proper and orderly development of urban areas in the future.

·     To ensure that development in the area does not unreasonably increase the demand for public services or public facilities.

·     To minimise conflict between land uses within this zone and land uses within adjoining zones.

·     To ensure that a high level of residential amenity is achieved and maintained.

·     To provide for complementary uses that are of low impact and do not unreasonably increase the demand for public services or public facilities.

 

Figure 3 – Existing land use zoning in the LEP (subject site outlined in red)

The site is subject to the following development standards under the LEP:

·      Minimum lot size of 2 hectares;

·      Maximum height of buildings of 8.5m; and

·      Maximum floor space ratio (FSR) of 0.2:1.

 

The site is located south-west of the Western Sydney International (Nancy-Bird Walton) Airport (WSA) which is currently under construction.

The site is identified within the Dwyer Road precinct of the Western Sydney Aerotropolis Plan (WSAP) and is a non-initial precinct not subject to rezoning under State Environmental Planning Policy (Western Sydney Aerotropolis) 2020. Therefore, the Liverpool LEP continues to apply.

 

Options to permit a Recreational Facility (Outdoor) at 25 Dwyer Road, Bringelly

 

The options available to Council to permit, with development consent, a recreational facility (outdoor) on this site are:

 

Option 1 – Schedule 1 Amendment to the LEP

 

A Schedule 1 amendment to the LEP allows a specific additional use to be permitted on a site, subject to development consent, even if it is not listed as a permitted land use in the land use tables in the LEP.

 

The advantage of Option 1 is that it will provide a tailored solution to the current issue by permitting the use of the site as a Recreation Facility (Outdoor) with development consent. Given the minor nature of the proposal, there is no requirement for the planning proposal to be considered by the Liverpool Local Planning Panel (LPP), which will reduce the time taken to progress the planning proposal to a Gateway determination.

 

The Local Planning Panels Direction – Planning Panels (Attachment 2) issued by the Minister for Planning & Public Spaces under Section 9.1 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act states:

 

1.   A council to whom this direction applies is required to refer all planning proposals prepared after 1 June 2018 to the local planning panel for advice, unless the council’s general manager determines that the planning proposal relates to:

a.   the correction of an obvious error in a local environmental plan,

b.   matters that are of a consequential, transitional, machinery or other minor nature, or

c.   matters that council’s general manager considers will not have any significant adverse impact on the environment or adjoining land.

 

(Emphasis added)

 

It is considered that this planning proposal would not have any significant adverse impact on the environment or adjoining land that can’t be appropriately managed through the merit assessment of a development application, and if considered appropriate to approve, with conditions.

 

A potential downside of this option is that the community could perceive Council is giving preferential treatment to the landowner by allowing a currently prohibited land use in the R5 zone to be permitted, subject to a future development consent and that other landowners are not been afforded the same opportunity.

 

Option 2 – Amendment to the Land Use Table in the LEP

An alternate way of permitting a Recreation Facility (Outdoor) is to amend the R5 land use table by adding Recreation Facility (Outdoor) to the list of land uses permitted with consent in the zone. This will then permit the use on all sites within the R5 zone across the LGA, subject to future development consent.

This option would also require a minor amendment to Part 3.8 Non-Residential Development in Residential Zones in the Liverpool Development Control Plan 2008 (DCP) to include guidance for the development of Recreation Facility (Outdoor) in the R5 Large Lot Residential zone.

Table 1 identifies other Councils that permit Recreation Facility (Outdoor) with development consent in the R5 Large Lot Residential zone in their LEPs.


LGA


Recreation Facility (Outdoor) permissibility

Camden Council

Yes

Campbelltown City Council

Yes

Hawkesbury City Council

Yes

Penrith City Council

No

Shoalhaven City Council

No

Wingecarribee Shire Council

Yes

Wollondilly Shire Council

No

Wollongong City Council

No

Table 1 – Permissibility of the ‘Recreation Facility (Outdoor)’ use in the R5 zone

The advantage of Option 2 is that it will resolve the current issue by permitting Recreation Facility (Outdoor) with development consent on the site and on other R5 zoned sites throughout the LGA. However, there is a risk that the timeframe may be slower than Option 1 as the LEP would be amended by adding this use for all R5 zoned land within the LGA.

It is also likely that the planning proposal would be required to be considered by the Liverpool Local Planning Panel given that it would have a larger scope when compared to Option 1 resulting in a slightly longer period of time to proceed to a Gateway determination.

Figure 4 below identifies the location of the existing R5 zone land in the Liverpool LGA

Figure 4 Location of R5 zoned land in Liverpool LGA

Option 3

The recommended option is to pursue a Schedule 1 amendment to the LEP as per Option 1 and pursue Option 2 as part of the LEP Review Phase 2 process. The advantage of Option 3 is that the planning proposal, to permit with development consent, the ongoing operation of the Burns Outdoor Obstacle Training facility can progress in a timely manner.

The broader issue of whether Council should permit, subject to development consent, a Recreation Facility (Outdoor) throughout the R5 zone can then be considered as part of the LEP Review Phase 2.

Conclusion

It is recommended that Council supports Option 3 and directs the A/CEO to prepare a planning proposal to amend Schedule 1 of the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 to permit, with development consent, a Recreation Facility (Outdoor) at 25 Dwyer Road, Bringelly and delegates authority to the A/CEO to forward the planning proposal to the Department of Planning, Industry, and Environment seeking a Gateway determination.

In addition, it is recommended that as part of Phase 2 of the LEP Review, Council investigates including Recreation Facility (Outdoor) as a land use permitted with development consent in the R5 Large Lot Residential zone.

 

 

 

CONSIDERATIONS

 

Economic

Facilitate economic development.

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

Environment

There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.


Social

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

Support access and services for people with a disability.

Deliver high quality services for children and their families.


Civic Leadership

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

Legislative

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979

Risk

There is no risk associated with this report.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

 

1.         Mayoral Direction

2.         Local Planning Panels Section 9.1 Direction - Planning Proposals


1

EGROW 04

Issues and Options Report - Potential amendment to Liverpool Local Environmental Plan to permit a Recreation Facility (Outdoor) at 25 Dwyer Road, Bringelly

Attachment 1

Mayoral Direction

 

PDF Creator


1

EGROW 04

Issues and Options Report - Potential amendment to Liverpool Local Environmental Plan to permit a Recreation Facility (Outdoor) at 25 Dwyer Road, Bringelly

Attachment 2

Local Planning Panels Section 9.1 Direction - Planning Proposals

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


1

Ordinary Meeting

30 September 2020

City Economy and Growth Report

 

EGROW 05

Park Naming Application - Request to rename Cirillo Reserve, Middleton Grange

 

Strategic Direction

Creating Connection

Celebrate diversity, promote inclusion and recognise heritage

File Ref

240735.2020

Report By

Murray Wilson - Executive Planner

Approved By

David Smith - Acting Director City Economy and Growth

 

 

Executive Summary

 

An application has been received from the previous part landowners of Cirillo Reserve (Attachment 1) to rename the under-construction sporting complex in Middleton Grange from ‘Cirillo Reserve’ (Cirillo Sporting Complex) to ‘Segatto Sporting Complex’.

 

In 2010, Council proposed the naming of several parks in Middleton Grange, including this park. The Geographical Names Board (GNB) undertook public exhibition on Council’s proposal and gazetted the park as Cirillo Reserve.

 

The GNB discourages the renaming of public places, including parks and reserves, and given the name Cirillo Reserve is well known, it is not recommended that Council supports the renaming of Cirillo Reserve to Segatto Sporting Complex.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

 

1.    Does not support the renaming of Cirillo Reserve to Segatto Sporting Complex;

 

2.    Investigates the naming of a building or sports field within Cirillo Reserve as “Segatto” to recognise the previous part ownership of the reserve.  

 

REPORT

 

In 2009, Council received a request to name a future park located to the north of Middleton Grange Public School as Cirillo Reserve.

 

In June 2010, at the request of Council, seven possible park names within Middleton Grange were placed on public exhibition by the Geographical Names Board (GNB) (including the request for Cirillo Reserve). The public exhibition included advertisement in the Liverpool City Champion from 16 June 2010 to 16 July 2010. (Attachment 2 and 3).  

 

The GNB did not receive any objections to the proposed park names. Subsequently, they gazetted the park names including Cirillo Reserve on 30 July 2010 (Attachment 4).

 

Cirillo Reserve (Sporting Complex) is under construction with work scheduled to be completed in December 2020, weather permitting.

 

In July 2020, Council received a request from the former part landowner on which part of the reserve is located to rename Cirillo Reserve to ‘Segatto Sporting Complex’.

 

Previous Land Ownership of Cirillo Reserve

 

Seven allotments, as shown in Figure 1 make up Cirillo Reserve. Across the seven allotments, there have been four landowners as shown in Table 1. The adjoining landowner south of the reserve is shown in Table 2.

 

Figure 1 – Cirillo Reserve (Sporting Complex) and Previous Ownership.


Table 1 – Cirillo Reserve Allotments and Previous Owners.

 

Lot and DP

Previous Owners

Acquired by Council 

Lot B DP 381267 

Sau

26/9/2005

Lot 2 and 3 DP 1115645

RMS

30/10/2007

Lot 189 DP 2475

Ricciulli and Romeo

20/6/2005

Lot 35 and 36 DP 1044841 (Previously Lot 186 & 187 DP 2475)

RMS (Previously owned by Maric)

30/10/2007

Lot 37 DP 1044841

Segatto

4/4/2005

 

As shown above (light blue in Figure 1), a portion of Cirillo Reserve (Lot 37 DP 1044841) was once owned by the Segatto family, while the Cirillo family owned land outside of the subject site (orange in Figure 1). 

 

Table 2 – Adjoining land

 

Lot and DP

Previous Owners

Acquired by Council 

Lot 12 DP 1089776

Cirillo

23/11/2005

 

Issues with renaming Cirillo Reserve

 

There are several issues with the requested renaming of Cirillo Reserve:

·     The re-naming of parks and reserves is discouraged by the GNB as it is confusing and disruptive;

·     The naming of parks and reserves in Middleton Grange was undertaken in 2010 including public exhibition with no objections were received;

·     The Segatto family were not the only previous landowners. There are three other previous landowners that could in future dispute the name ‘Segatto’ if it was to be renamed ‘Segatto Sporting Complex’;

·     Although the sporting complex is still under construction, the name ‘Cirillo Reserve’ has been the name of the reserve for almost 10 years; 

·     Cirillo Reserve is due to be completed and opened by December 2020 (weather permitting). Renaming may delay any signposting and directional signage; 

·     If the renaming request is supported by Council, it will also need to be supported by the GNB to proceed to exhibition. If there are objections to the proposed renaming, and only if Council wish to proceed, and the GNB agrees with Council’s wish to proceed, GNB will then make a recommendation to the Minister. 

 

Alternative

 

Whilst it is understood why the request has been made, it is recommended that the name change is not supported for the reasons above. An alternative, which has been discussed with the Segatto family, is that Council instead supports the naming of a building or sports field within the reserve.

 

CONSIDERATIONS

 

Economic

There are no economic 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

There are no civic leadership and governance considerations.

Legislative

Geographical Names Act 1966

Risk

There is no risk associated with this report.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

 

1.         Naming Request

2.         Advertisment

3.         Government Gazette 11 June 2010

4.         Government Gazette 30 July 2010  


1

EGROW 05

Park Naming Application - Request to rename Cirillo Reserve, Middleton Grange

Attachment 1

Naming Request

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


1

EGROW 05

Park Naming Application - Request to rename Cirillo Reserve, Middleton Grange

Attachment 2

Advertisment

 

PDF Creator


1

EGROW 05

Park Naming Application - Request to rename Cirillo Reserve, Middleton Grange

Attachment 3

Government Gazette 11 June 2010

 

PDF Creator


1

EGROW 05

Park Naming Application - Request to rename Cirillo Reserve, Middleton Grange

Attachment 4

Government Gazette 30 July 2010

 

PDF Creator


1

Ordinary Meeting

30 September 2020

City Economy and Growth Report

 

EGROW 06

Business Resilience Grants

 

Strategic Direction

Generating Opportunity

Attract businesses for economic growth and employment opportunities

File Ref

252492.2020

Report By

Julie Scott - Manager City Economy

Approved By

David Smith - Acting Director City Economy and Growth

 

 

Executive Summary

 

At the ordinary meeting held on 29 July 2020, Council resolved the following in relation to Business Resilience Grants:

 

That Council:

 

1.      Defer the report to the September 2020 Council meeting;

 

2.      If the situation regarding COVID-19 deteriorates, that the matter be brought back to an earlier meeting or an extraordinary meeting.

 

The following report provides an update on the situation for Liverpool businesses regarding COVID-19. Local Government Area data in the report comes from REMPLAN’s COVID-19 summaries. The remainder of the data is analysis from 151 business sentiment surveys conducted by Council staff in August 2020.

 

Employment, economic output, salaries and wages, and gross regional product have been affected across all industries. The majority of businesses are surviving and still trading, but 12 said they were not confident they would last the next 6-12 months.

 

It is recommended that Council conclude the grants program and that a further report be provided to Council in May 2021 on the status of the Liverpool economy 12 months on from the first lockdown period and following the acquittal of the Business Resilience Grants program.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

 

1.    Conclude the Business Resilience Grants program and allocate no further funding, noting that:

·  50 grants have now been issued through the program;

·  due to the competitive nature of the process not all applicants could receive a grant; and

·  the allocated budget has been exhausted.

 

2.   Receive a further report in May 2021 on the status of the Liverpool economy 12 months on from the first lockdown period and following the acquittal of the Business Resilience Grants program.

 

 

REPORT

 

Background

 

In June 2020, Council resolved to provide grants to 50 businesses, including 28 Liverpool CBD businesses using the City Development Fund and 22 businesses outside the Liverpool CBD using reallocated City Economy budget. Not all applications could be funded due to limited funds available and the large number of applications. All grants were distributed by the end of the 2019/20 financial year.

 

In July 2020, Council resolved to defer a report until September 2020 regarding the Business Resilience Grants which were distributed as part of Council’s response to COVID-19. That report gave three possible recommendations: concluding the grants process; or open a second round of grants to all businesses; or open a second round of grants to only those businesses which were unsuccessful in the first round.

 

This report is an update on the status of the Liverpool economy using Local Government Area data from REMPLAN’s COVID-19 summaries and analysis of 151 business sentiment surveys conducted by Council staff in August 2020. REMPLAN is an economic data forecasting tool. The REMPLAN data is for July 2020.

 

Employment, economic output, salaries and wages, and gross regional product has been affected across all industries. The majority of businesses interviewed are surviving and still trading, but 12 said they were not confident they would last the next 6-12 months.

 

Current status of Liverpool Economy

 

According to data from REMPLAN, employment fell across local industry sectors by 2.5 per cent (see Figure 1). National Economics estimates there are 90,000 jobs in the LGA. A 2.5 per cent fall applied to this figure would indicate employment has fallen to 87,750. The greatest decrease in employment and in percentage terms is Retail Trade.

 

NSW unemployment for July was 7.2 per cent. Australian Bureau of Statistics local area data on current local jobs in Liverpool LGA is unavailable until late September (after the writing of this report). 

 

 

Figure 1 – Impact on Employment

 

 

 

In Liverpool, prior to COVID-19 and the introduction of social lockdown measures to manage the pandemic, the total monthly output across all local industry sectors was estimated at $1.970 billion. For July 2020, industry output is estimated at $1.887 billion, a fall of 4.2 per cent (see Figure 2). The greatest decrease in output is in Construction. In percentage terms its Other Services.

 

The Other Services Division includes a broad range of personal services; religious, civic, professional and other interest group services; selected repair and maintenance activities; and private households employing staff. Units in this division are mainly engaged in providing a range of personal care services, such as hair, beauty, diet and weight management services; providing death care services; promoting or administering religious events or activities; or promoting and defending the interests of their members.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 2 – Impact on Output

 

 

 

Prior to the introduction of lockdown measures, the total monthly expenditure for wages and salaries across all local sectors was estimated at $489 million. For July 2020 the total of wages and salaries is estimated at $467 million, a fall of 4.4 per cent. Figure 3 shows the greatest decrease in wages and salaries is in Manufacturing. In percentage terms it’s Financial and Insurance Services.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 3 – Impact on Wages & Salaries

 

 

 

The following graph shows the impact of the pandemic on ‘Value-Added’. Value-Added can be calculated by subtracting local expenditure and expenditure on regional imports from the output generated by an industry sector, or alternatively, by adding the Wages & Salaries paid to local employees, the gross operating surplus and taxes on products and production. Value-Added by industry sector is the major element in the calculation of Gross Regional Product. Across all local industry there has been a fall from $895 million to $830 million – or 7.2 per cent. Figure 4 shows the greatest decrease is in Construction. In percentage terms it’s Arts and Recreation Services.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 4 – Impact on Value-Added

 

 

JobKeeper

 

Businesses eligible for JobKeeper had a decline in revenue of at least 30 per cent. In the Liverpool LGA it is estimated that 41 per cent of businesses (estimated at 7175 businesses) have applied for JobKeeper support. Liverpool ranked 97 out of 535 local government areas in Australia.

 

Business sentiment surveys

 

During August 2020, redeployed CPAC staff spoke to 151 businesses to offer further support from the City Economy Team, understand how they have responded to the changing conditions of the pandemic and how they feel about the future.

 

The team spoke to range of industries (as seen in Figure 5), the majority in the Accommodation and Food Services category and Retail Trade.

 


 

Figure 5: Industries reached in LCC surveys

 

 

 

The survey found that 95 per cent of businesses were open as normal or trading in some capacity. Confidence about the future was mixed, but the majority were very confident or somewhat confident they would survive the next 6-12 months. Nine per cent (12) were not confident they would survive.

 


 

Figure 6: Business Confidence

 

 

Sixty per cent of businesses applied for JobKeeper on behalf of their staff when it first became available. Fifty per cent will continue with JobKeeper, and 41 per cent said they would apply for additional (previously ineligible) staff to go on JobKeeper.

 

The latest federal government Jobkeeper data shows 10,354 applications across the LGA in June.

 

Postcode

April

May

June

2168

963

987

1003

2179

372

397

410

2556

156

163

163

2171

1140

1177

1220

2170

4070

4193

4293

2178

235

251

259

2565

917

971

987

2174

229

238

236

2745

780

835

864

2173

294

300

299

2172

87

94

97

2557

473

513

523

TOTAL

9716

10119

10354

 

 

A range of responses has emerged to changing conditions. The graph below shows some of the measures taken or effects of the pandemic.

 

 

Discussions with businesses found a range of responses, including:

·     A tax agent offering more online services and avoiding face-to-face meetings;

·     A law firm said they were moving to a paperless office and JobKeeper “was very useful to keep staff employed”. Another law firm has decreased the number of days they are open from five to four;

·     An architect said they were still in business, but receiving smaller jobs as larger clients had dried up;

·     Food trucks have been struggling with the cancellation of local events;

·     A travel agent is expecting to close after they process refunds;

·     Casula businesses suffered during the COVID cluster, but are slowly recovering;

·     A clothing shop said business was down and it felt like people didn’t want to spend;

·     A manufacturing business said business slowed but they had not made huge losses, while another manufacturer said turnover had dropped 55 per cent.

 

More than 100 businesses were followed up again by one of Council’s Business Support officers by email, with 82 requesting to be put on the Open for Business Directory and 50 referred to Business Connect.

 

 

 

 

NSW Government support for businesses

 

The NSW Government has provided a number of grants for eligible small businesses including:

·     a $3000 Small Business Recovery Grant – 365 grants to the value of $1,083,599 were approved

·     an export assistance grant of up to $10,000

·     a Small Business Support Grant of up to $10,000 – 988 grants to the value of $9,814,485 were approved

 

Business NSW Survey results

 

A Business NSW survey of more than 1000 NSW businesses during July 2020 found the following:

·      71 per cent were unlikely to be in a position to hire new staff by October 2020

·      134,000 fewer employed people in NSW since COVID-19

·      Tourism, construction, transport, hospitality and education are the least likely industries to be back to normal by October 2020

·      2 in 5 say they would be closed without JobKeeper

 

Business Resilience Grants

 

Fifty Business Resilience Grants were distributed by June 30, 2020. City Economy staff spoke to all applicants, both successful and unsuccessful. Grant recipients will be followed up by phone during September/October 2020 to ensure they are on track with their grant expenditure.

 

Due to the intense one-on-one support from Council for local businesses, and the support provided through the Rebuilding Liverpool’s Economy package, officers recommend no further grants program at this stage.

 

The grants will be acquitted by February 2021 and it would be timely to report on the program by May 2021, as well as review the status of the local economy 12 months on from the March lockdowns and following the cessation of JobKeeper.

 

CONSIDERATIONS

 

Economic

Facilitate economic development.

Environment

There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.


Social

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


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.

Legislative

There are no legislative considerations relating to this report.

Risk

The risk is deemed to be Low.

The risk is considered within Council’s risk appetite.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

 

Nil


1

Ordinary Meeting 30 September 2020

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

217621.2020

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 (LGA) and to maximising social wellbeing. Council helps achieve these goals by providing financial support through grants and sponsorships to develop leadership skills, increase participation in community activities and address identified social issues.

 

Impacts from COVID-19 and respective social distancing requirements continue to limit the capacity and eligibility of programs, projects, or events. To ascertain community safety, demonstrate compliance with NSW Health guidelines, and show evidence of proactive and measurable program governance, applicants have been requested to provide a response to COVID-19 safety management.

 

This report provides funding recommendations totalling $10,000 under the Corporate Sponsorship Program. 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

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

 

Applicant

Project

Recommended

International Sports Karate Association (IKSA)

29th ISKA NSW OPEN

$10,000

 

 


 

 

REPORT

 

Corporate Sponsorship

 

The Corporate Sponsorship Program received one application which met the eligibility criteria and is recommended for funding as follows:

 

Applicant 

International Sports Karate Association (IKSA)

Project 

 29th ISKA NSW OPEN

Amount Requested

$10,000

Total Project Cost

$30,490

Location

Whitlam Leisure Centre, Liverpool

Date

22 November 2020

About the applicant

Active in 60 countries, ISKA’s Australian arm was established in 1995. Holding a 55% market share of World-Wide market in Kickboxing sports - outside of Thailand - ISKA has a strong global presence.

In Australia, ISKA aims to be the peak body for sports martial arts competition. Under its current leadership in Australia, ISKA has taken matters concerning martial arts competition to the highest levels of state and federal government to ensure that the adequate governance is in place for continued growth of the sport.

Locally, they have operated with the Kemp's Creek International Martial Arts Centre, which has operated for over 40 years. It is the longest running Martial Arts School to operate in the same place in Australia. The Centre offers Thai Boxing, Brazilian Jiu Jitsu and Mixed Martial Arts, with a focus on broadening the appeal of the sport for men, women and children. They have recorded 20,000 students that have accessed the Centre.

Description 

Objectives:

The 29th NSW OPEN is a national, multi-style martial arts tournament open and inclusive to all competitors from 3 to 60+ years of age, with both male and female disciplines. The NSW OPEN is the lead up tournament for the 2021 ISKA World Cup, which will be a major international event and promote Liverpool as a key competitive sports destination.

The tournament will create the opportunity for martial arts schools and many culturally diverse groups to be represented and celebrate their skills together. Additionally, it will attract community members to spectate, learn more about the sports on display, connect with local and national organisations, and become involved in healthy, physical activities.

Funding will be used to offset eligible staging, seating, sound, advertising, and facilitation costs to provide free access to spectators, enabling Liverpool residents to enjoy a day of free entertainment. 

  Outcomes:

·     In accordance with NSW Health guidelines on COVID-19, deliver a unique and nationally recognised martial arts tournament in Liverpool; 

·     Provide economic benefits to local businesses and industries generated from competitor and spectator traffic; and

·     Promote and provide free access to spectators to enjoy a day of competitive sport in Liverpool, learn more about martial arts, and become involved with the sporting community.

COVID-19 Safety Plan

For community sporting activities that involve more than 20 participants, the organiser must have a COVID-19 Safety Plan.

Participants will include players, people who are training, officials and spectators. The maximum number of participants at a community sporting activity must not exceed 500 participants. Record keeping for spectators must take place for all ticketed community sporting activities. Martial arts training and competition activities that are not sanctioned by the Combat Sports Authority are permitted to take place.

In support of their application, ISKA have submitted a COVID-19 Safety Plan.

Beneficiaries 

·     Up to 500 participants and spectators; and

·     Secondary benefits to local businesses and industries generated from competitor and spectator traffic.

Assessment 

Recommended for Funding - $10,000 

The applicant’s project aligns with the Community Strategic Plan Direction 1 Creating Connections and Direction 3 Generating Opportunity and meets the Corporate Sponsorship Program’s funding outcomes. The 29th IKSA NSW OPEN will:

·     Stimulate economic movement for hotel, catering, transport and food industries in the Liverpool LGA;

·     Positively promote Liverpool as a key tourist and competitive sporting destination;

·     Provide access for all community members to engage and learn more about the health and physical benefits of martial arts; and

·     Run the event in accordance with a COVID-19 Safety Plan.

Economic Benefit 7.7 – 2. a), b), and d).

Community, cultural, and social benefits 7.7 – 2. b), and e).

Expected program outcomes 7.7.1 - a), b), c), d), and e). 

CONSIDERATIONS

 

Economic

CORPORATE SPONSORSHIP

Budget

Balance

Recommended funding in this report

Remaining

$100,000

$90,000

$10,000