Agenda of Ordinary Meeting - 11 December 2019

Order of Business

PAGE TAB

Opening

Acknowledgment of Country and Prayer

National Anthem

Apologies

Condolences

Confirmation of Minutes

Ordinary Council Meeting held on 20 November 2019........................................................... 7

Declarations of Interest

Public Forum

Mayoral Report

NIL

Notices of Motion Of Rescission

NIL

Chief Executive Officer Report

NIL

City Economy and Growth Report

EGROW 01 Draft Liverpool City Centre Public Domain Master Plan................................ 60......... 1

EGROW 02 Warwick Farm Precinct................................................................................... 67......... 2

EGROW 03 Liverpool City Centre Car Parking Strategy................................................... 79......... 3

EGROW 04 Liverpool Local Strategic Planning Statement............................................... 87......... 4

EGROW 05 Review of parking restrictions on major access roads in the Liverpool City Centre 97 5

EGROW 06 Guidelines for the assessment of on-street parking along narrow streets.. 106......... 6

EGROW 07 Draft Liverpool Contributions Plan 2019 - Austral and Leppington North.... 117......... 7

EGROW 08 Proposed planning proposal - amendment to dwelling density map in the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 for certain lands in Pleasure Point............ 124......... 8

City Community and Culture Report

COM 01 Request for Exemption for Bellbird Bar and Dining Catering Supplies....... 137......... 9

COM 02 Response to QWN 05 from 28 August 2019 - consultation with Liverpool's ageing community..................................................................................................... 141....... 10

City Corporate Report

CORP 01 Single Source Software Solution for Council - Proposed Procurement Process 148 11

CORP 02 Reducing Red Tape - Development of Policies, Standards, Charters, Procedures and Strategies............................................................................................... 154....... 12

CORP 03 Woodward Place Public Engagement.......................................................... 157....... 13

CORP 04 Response to NOM 04 from 31 July 2019 - Opportunities for the Repurposing of Council Owned or Controlled Land for Affordable Housing......................... 162....... 14

CORP 05 Investment Report November 2019 (to be included in Addendum Book)

City Presentation Report

NIL

City Infrastructure and Environment Report

INF 01 Koala Habitat Corridors................................................................................ 169....... 15

INF 02 Peer review of Clean Air for New South Wales: 2018 Update (Doctors for the Environment Australia, 2019)....................................................................... 174....... 16

Committee Reports

CTTE 01 Minutes of the Liverpool Youth Council Meeting held on 6 November 2019 181 17

CTTE 02 Minutes of the Aboriginal Consultative Committee Meeting held on 7 November 2019.............................................................................................................. 188....... 18

CTTE 03 Minutes of the Liverpool Pedestrian, Active Transport and Traffic Committee meeting held on 13 November 2019............................................................ 208....... 19

CTTE 04 Minutes of the Strategic Panel Meeting held on 12 November 2019.......... 233....... 20

CTTE 05 Minutes of Budget Review Panel 14 November 2019................................. 242....... 21

Questions with Notice

QWN 01 Question with Notice - Clr Hagarty - Granny Flats....................................... 249....... 22

QWN 02 Question with Notice - Clr Hagarty - Edmondson Park Commuter Car Park 254 23

QWN 03 Question with Notice - Clr Hagarty - Feral Cats........................................... 255....... 24

QWN 04 Question with Notice - Clr Kaliyanda - CBD Shopfront Activation Project... 261....... 25

QWN 05 Question with Notice - Clr Hadchiti - Warwick Farm.................................... 264....... 26

QWN 06 Question with Notice - Clr Hadchiti - Civic Place......................................... 265....... 27

QWN 07 Question with Notice - Clr Hadchiti - Contamination Reports...................... 266....... 28

QWN 08 Question with Notice - Clr Hadchiti - Middleton Grange.............................. 267....... 29

QWN 09 Question with Notice - Clr Hadchiti - DA's and Planning Proposals............ 268....... 30

QWN 10 Question with Notice - Clr Hadchiti - Flooding............................................. 269....... 31

QWN 11 Question with Notice - Clr Hadchiti - Professional Development................. 270....... 32

QWN 12 Question with Notice - Clr Rhodes - External Reports Commissioned by Council 271 33

QWN 13 Question with Notice - Clr Rhodes - RMS Traffic Modelling........................ 272....... 34

QWN 14 Question with Notice - Clr Harle - Access to GIPA Information Referred to in the Confidential Section at Council Meeting 20 November 2019...................... 273....... 35

QWN 15 Question with Notice - Clr Harle - Leasing of 33 Moore Street, Liverpool... 274....... 36

QWN 16 Question with Notice - Clr Harle - Refurbishment Costs of Council Buildings at Hoxton Park Road Complex......................................................................... 275....... 37

QWN 17 Question with Notice - Clr Harle - Parkbridge Estate................................... 276....... 38

QWN 18 Question with Notice - Clr Hadid - Briefing Session on the City Deal......... 277....... 39

QWN 19 Question with Notice - Clr Ayyad - Civic Place............................................ 278....... 40

QWN 20 Question with Notice - Clr Balloot - Warwick Farm Precinct Economic Study 279 41

QWN 21 Question with Notice - Clr Hadchiti - 35 Scott Street, Liverpool.................. 280....... 42

QWN 22 Question with Notice - Clr Hagarty - Edmondson Park Commuter Car Parking 281 43

Presentations by Councillors

Notices of Motion

NIL

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 Proposed Granting of an Easement to Drain Water over Council's Public Reserve known as Discovery Park, 40 Atkinson Street, Liverpool - Lot 77 DP 27242

Reason: Item CONF 01 is confidential pursuant to the provisions of s10A(2)(c) of the Local Government Act because it contains information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business.

CONF 02 Acquisition of Lot 297 DP 752060 being Lot 297 Illaroo Road, Hoxton Park for drainage and open space purposes

Reason: Item CONF 02 is confidential pursuant to the provisions of s10A(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 Relocation of Liverpool District Men's Shed to Pearce Street Liverpool

Reason: Item CONF 03 is confidential pursuant to the provisions of s10A(2)(c) of the Local Government Act because it contains information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business.

CONF 04 Update on Bathurst Street extension project and plans for a multi-level car park at 362 Macquarie Street, Liverpool

Reason: Item CONF 04 is confidential pursuant to the provisions of s10A(2)(c) of the Local Government Act because it contains information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business.

CONF 05 Request to Renew Contract - Chief Executive Officer

Reason: Item CONF 05 is confidential pursuant to the provisions of s10A(2)(a) of the Local Government Act because it contains personal matters concerning particular individuals (other than councillors).

Close

MINUTES OF THE Ordinary Meeting

HELD ON 20 November 2019

PRESENT:

Mayor Wendy Waller

Councillor Ayyad

Councillor Balloot (arrived at 6.03pm)

Councillor Hadchiti

Councillor Hadid

Councillor Hagarty

Councillor Harle

Councillor Kaliyanda

Councillor Karnib

Councillor Rhodes

Councillor Shelton

Ms Kiersten Fishburn, Chief Executive Officer

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

Mr Raj Autar, Director City Infrastructure and Environment

Mr Chris White, Director City Corporate

Dr Eddie Jackson, Director City Community and Culture

Mr Peter Patterson, Director City Presentation

Mr David Smith, Manager Planning & Transport Strategy

Mr David Maguire, Internal Ombudsman

Mr Michal Szczepanski, Senior Property Officer

Mr Andrew Stevenson, Chief Strategy and Engagement Officer

Mr Vishwa Nadan, Chief Financial Officer

Mr George Georgakis, Manager Council and Executive Services

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

The meeting commenced at 6.00pm.

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 Pastor Claudio Alosi from Living Grace Christian Church.

NATIONAL ANTHEM

The National Anthem performed by Rebekah Ferro was played at the meeting.

APOLOGIES

Nil.

CONDOLENCES

Nil.

Clr Balloot arrived at the meeting at 6.03pm.

Confirmation of Minutes

Motion: Moved: Clr Shelton Seconded: Clr Ayyad

That the minutes of the Ordinary Meeting held on 28 October 2019 be confirmed as a true record of that meeting.

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

Declarations of Interest

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

CONF 04: Code of Conduct Final Investigation Report.

Reason: Clr Hagarty is involved in the complaint.

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

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

CONF 04: Code of Conduct Final Investigation Report.

Reason: Mayor Waller is a party to the proceedings.

Mayor Waller left the Chambers for the duration of this item.

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

CONF 03: 2020 Australia Day Awards.

Reason: Clr Harle knows one of the nominees that has been nominated for an Australia Day Award.

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

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

QWN 03: Question with Notice - Clr Hadchiti - Warwick Farm Precinct.

Reason: Clr Harle has family members that reside in the area.

Clr Harle remained in the Chambers for the duration of this item.

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

CONF 03: 2020 Australia Day Awards.

Reason: Clr Kaliyanda knows one of the nominees nominated for an Australia Day Award.

Clr Kaliyanda remained in the Chambers for the duration of this item.

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

NOM 02: WSROC Genx 100% Renewable Solar Power Purchase Agreement Opportunity.

Reason: Clr Rhodes is the treasurer of WSROC.

Clr Rhodes remained in the Chambers for the duration of this item.

Clr Rhodes declared a pecuniary interest in the following item:

CTTE 01: Minutes of the Tourism and CBD Committee meeting held on 1 October 2019.

Reason: Clr Rhodes is not a member of the Tourism and CBD Committee but suggested the Committee invite the South West Sydney Tourism Taskforce (SWSTT) to present at one of their meetings.

Clr Rhodes knows all the people on the SWSTT through the Liverpool Business Chambers. She has no financial interest in SWSTT. Members of SWSTT do advertise in her magazine.

Clr Rhodes remained in the Chambers for the duration of this item.

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

CONF 04: Code of Conduct Final Investigation Report.

Reason: Clr Rhodes is the person mentioned in that report.

Clr Rhodes made a brief statement at the beginning of the item, then left the Chambers for that item.

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

MAYOR 01 International Kempo Martial Arts Academy Pty Ltd lease arrangements.

Reason: Clr Hadchiti’s children train at the Integrated Martial Arts Centre (IMC), though not at the Kemps Creek centre. Clr Hadchiti has no interest and pays standard fees.

Clr Hadchiti remained in the Chambers for the duration of this item.

Public Forum

Presentation – items not on agenda

Mr John Anderson addressed Council on the following item:

Moorebank Intermodal Freight Hub.

Motion: Moved: Clr Shelton Seconded: Clr Rhodes

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

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

2. Mr Michael Byrne of East Liverpool Progress Association addressed Council on the following item:

Moorebank Intermodal – legal appeal.

Motion: Moved: Clr Rhodes Seconded: Clr Harle

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

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

Representation – items on agenda

Nil.

mayoral MINUTES

ITEM NO: MAYOR 01

SUBJECT: International Kempo Martial Arts Academy Pty Ltd lease arrangements

International Kempo Martial Arts Academy has been operating in Liverpool for the past 40 years and are the long-standing lessee of the hall at the Bill Anderson Reserve, Kemps Creek.

To clarify the status of the lease with International Kempo Martial Arts Academy Pty Ltd which will expire on 31 December 2019, I move as a matter of urgency that Council:

Motion: Moved: Mayor Waller

Confirm its commitment to offer a three year lease extension to the International Kempo Martial Arts Academy Pty Ltd, as the long-standing lessee of the hall at the Bill Anderson Reserve, Kemps Creek;

Such an extension should be granted from 1 January 2020 to 31 December 2022, and on the same terms as those contained in the current lease, including rent reviews; and

Exempt this lease from the tender requirements under s.55(3)(e) of the Local Government Act 1993, as the term of the lease is less than five (5) years.

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

Councillors voted unanimously for this motion.

During this item as the motion was being read out, Clr Hadchiti declared a non-pecuniary, less than significant interest as his children train at the Integrated Martial Arts Centre (IMC) though not at the Kemps Creek centre.

Item no: Mayor 02

file no: 298358.2019

subject: renew Our Libraries Phase Two

The NSW Public Libraries Association’s (NSWPLA) Renew Our Libraries funding campaign secured a $12.95 million increase in Grants and Subsidies funding for NSW libraries in the 2019/20 NSW state budget – the largest single increase in funding since the introduction of the Library Act in 1939.

The average increase in state funding contributions paid to NSW councils for expenditure on library services in 2019/20 is 72.9% more than 2018/19 funding. This positive outcome is thanks to the efforts of more than 80% of NSW councils (ours included) to support the Renew Our Libraries campaign.

NSWPLA recently relaunched Renew Our Libraries Phase Two, focusing on the future sustainability of library funding through cost of living indexation and protection via inclusion of the new funding arrangements in library legislation. This step is critical to ensure that councils will receive the increased level of library funding in perpetuity, and in step with future cost of living increases. Without this assurance, funding for our libraries can easily diminish over time, leaving NSW councils to once again meet the shortfall.

It is important to note that Renew Our Libraries Phase Two seeks to index the funding and protect the future funding for libraries provided by the NSW government, regardless of which party is in power at any given time.

RECOMMENDATION:

Motion: Moved: Mayor Waller

That Council makes representation to local State Member(s) and relevant Ministers in relation to the need for a sustainable state funding model for the ongoing provision of public library services;

That Council write to the Hon. Don Harwin, Minister for the Arts and the Hon. Walt Secord, Shadow Minister for the Arts, calling for bi-partisan support for Consumer Price Index (CPI) indexation of state funding for NSW public libraries, as well as legislation of all elements of the 2019-20 to 2022-23 NSW state funding model; and

That Council endorses the distribution of the NSW Public Libraries Association NSW library sustainable funding advocacy information in Council libraries, as well as involvement in any actions proposed by the Association.

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

Councillors voted unanimously for this motion.

During discussion on the above item, following a request from Clr Hadid, Mayor Waller advised that Council will also send a letter of thanks to Local Government NSW for their lobbying and support regarding the allocation of funds for local Councils.

Chief Executive Officer Report

ITEM NO: CEO 01

FILE NO: 273000.2019

SUBJECT: Council Meeting Dates - January to December 2020

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Confirms the Council meeting time as 6.00pm and Council meeting dates for the 2020 calendar year as follows:

· 3 February 2020

· 24 February 2020

· 30 March 2020

· 27 April 2020

· 25 May 2020

· 29 June 2020

· 27 July 2020

· 31 August 2020

· 19 October 2020

· 16 November 2020

· 14 December 2020

2. Place appropriate notices in the local newspapers advising the community of the dates and commencing times of Council meetings for the 2020 calendar year.

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion Moved: Clr Ayyad Seconded: Clr Hadchiti

That Council:

1. Confirms the Council meeting time as 6.00pm and Council meeting dates for the 2020 calendar year as follows:

· 5 February;

· 26 February;

· 25 March;

· 29 April;

· 27 May;

· 24 June;

· 29 July;

· 26 August;

· 21 October;

· 18 November; and

· 16 December.

2. Place appropriate notices in the local newspapers advising the community of the dates and commencing times of Council meetings for the 2020 calendar year.

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

ITEM NO: QWN 02

FILE NO: 271209.2019

SUBJECT: Question with Notice - Clr Hadchiti - Parking Meters

Please address the following:

Since the introduction of parking meters:

1. How much revenue has been collected (just a number)?

Year	Northumberland Street Carpark	Bathurst Street Carpark	On-Street Meter Revenue	TOTAL
2012	$0	$544,243	$0	$544,243
2013	$295,055	$292,323	$1,216,661	$1,804,039
2014	$353,704	$288,594	$1,037,252	$1,679,550
2015	$364,925	$297,155	$958,172	$1,620,252
2016	$407,486	$269,288	$971,561	$1,648,335
2017	$462,469	$307,263	$951,785	$1,721,517
2018	$556,945	$362,485	$1,055,873	$1,975,302
2019	$539,378	$336,911	$1,005,574	$1,881,863
Total	$2,979,962	$2,698,261	$7,196,877	$12,875,100

NOTE:

The above figures represent gross revenue only and do not include any allowances for maintenance or operating costs on meters or parking facilities.

2. How many new car parking spaces have been created in that time (just a number)?

These figures are the quantum of spaces delivered by Council. This does not reflect those included in developments.

CITY CENTRE - Car parks - 87 spaces

- On street - 10 spaces

OUTSIDE CITY CENTRE - 130 spaces

PARKING SPACES REHABILITATED - 79 spaces

CAR PARK EXPANSION

Woodward Park - 208 spaces (Estimated completion – December 2019)

NEW CAR PARK CONSTRUCTION – Speed Street - 77 spaces

NEW CAR PARK CONSTRUCTION - Civic Centre - 300 spaces

(Due for completion late 2022 – early 2023)

3. How much has been issued in fines (just a number)?

Total number of fines issued:- 13,752

Total Value of fines issued:- $1,391.712.00

Total Value of fines paid:- $ 968,424.39

NB: the above figures relate only to fines issued for over stay or no ticket display in a metered parking space.

In relation to the new parking meters:

1. What was the cost of the introduction?

Parking Meter Upgrades	Amount
Upgrade to Pay by Plate (Paid)	$406,000
On road automated process	$ 69,000
Total Budget	$475,000

2. Did the expenditure require a tender process?

No, as Council had a contract with the existing provider, and this item was managed as a variation to that contract.

3. Who authorised the expenditure?

The CEO, in order to avert a significant and ongoing WHS safety risk.

ITEM NO: QWN 03

FILE NO: 288469.2019

SUBJECT: Question with Notice - Clr Hadchiti - Warwick Farm Precinct

Please address the following:

1. Given that I am yet to receive a response, is the CEO aware of any correspondence in relation to the Warwick Farm precinct that went against the wishes of the elected body?

If so what has been done about it?

Motion: Moved: Clr Hadchiti Seconded: Clr Shelton

That this item be discussed in Closed Session later at the meeting under section 10A(2)(g) of the Local Government Act 1993 because it 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.

Note: This matter was dealt with later in the meeting in Closed Session.

ITEM NO: QWN 07

FILE NO: 288449.2019

SUBJECT: Question with Notice - Clr Kaliyanda - CBD Shopfront Activation Project

Please address the following:

1. What is the current timeline of the project?

2. Which impacts has the project had – both quantitative and qualitative?

3. Is there capacity to continue the project following the commencement of the Civic Place Project?

4. If not, what options are available to ensure that community benefits are not lost?

A response to these questions will be provided in the 11 December 2019 Council meeting business papers.

Clr Hadid left the Chambers at 7:21pm.

Presentations by Councillors

Clr Rhodes made a presentation to Council as shown below:

I wish to advise Council that at the WSROC Board meeting 14^th November 2019 I was re-elected as Treasurer to the WSROC Board.

I look forward to continuing Council representation.

During my time of council representation since 2016, I have never missed a meeting and have lobbied for infrastructure in Western Sydney, paying particular attention to South West Sydney with one of my passions being the need to link the cities in west Sydney not only to each other but also to the new Airport.

I have successfully managed to re-introduce the Leppington spur continuation to the new airport as a WSROC lobbying priority to State and Federal Governments.

I continue to support WSROC in lobbying for the Bankstown line to Liverpool.

New Stations and rail / rapid transportation links and service infrastructure that services and links the Western City in a similar way as the inner-city suburbs of Sydney is infrastructure that is required not only to grow the area, but also to create and provide access to much need job opportunities.

The new stations and transportation infrastructure links would also alleviate the parking congestion currently experienced at many of Liverpool train stations.

I have participated in many of WSROC’s conferences and events advocating not only in the best interest of Liverpool Council but for the Western City.

Director Peter Patterson attended the last WSROC meeting representing the CEO, and at the conclusion of the meeting one of his comments to me was “You are no shrinking Violet, you had a lot to say.”

And I do!

I serve and will continue to serve this Council and Liverpool passionately.

I thank Council for giving me the opportunity to do so.

Clr Hadid returned to the Chambers at 7:23pm.

Notices of Motion

ITEM NO: NOM 01

FILE NO: 284773.2019

SUBJECT: Speed Camera Warning Signs

Background

Earlier this month, the State government confirmed it is considering removing signs that warn drivers as they are approach fixed and mobile speed cameras. The rationale for speed cameras, since their introduction, has been one of safety, not revenue raising. Removing these signs will stop drivers slowing down and therefore decrease safety.

Peter Khoury, a spokesman for NRMA, said of the changes "We want people to change their behaviour behind the wheel, not three weeks later when they get a fine in the mail." Former Deputy NSW Police Commissioner Nick Kaldas has labelled the move "one of the worst decisions I've seen in traffic law enforcement for some time."

Liverpool City Council has a long standing principle of first warning people and businesses, before further punitive action in many areas of compliance, so too should the State Government.

NOTICE OF MOTION (submitted by Clr Hagarty)

That Council:

1. Direct the CEO to write to the Minister of Transport expressing Council's opposition to the move; and

2. In the event the State Government does remove warning signs, erect similar warning signs at all locations in the Liverpool LGA where fixed speed cameras are present.

COUNCIL DECISION.

Motion: Moved: Clr Hagarty Seconded: Clr Kaliyanda

That the recommendation be adopted.

Foreshadowed Motion: Moved: Clr Harle Seconded: Clr Rhodes

That Council:

Direct the CEO to write to the Minister of Transport expressing Council’s support with the removal of camera warning signs which may increase the number of infringements being issued that will impact financially on residents in the Liverpool LGA and request if the signs are to be removed that:

i) Light camera infringements be restricted to demerit points only and carry no financial fines; and

ii) Direct the CEO to write to State Government, Local Government NSW, WSROC, SSROC and neighbouring Councils, Liverpool State and Federal members requesting their support for this motion.

On being put to the meeting the motion (moved by Clr Hagarty) was declared CARRIED and the Foreshadowed Motion (moved by Clr Harle) therefore lapsed.

Ordinary Meeting 11 December 2019

City Economy and Growth Report

EGROW 01

Draft Liverpool City Centre Public Domain Master Plan

Strategic Direction	Leading through Collaboration Increase community engagement
File Ref	142025.2019
Report By	David Petrie - Manager City Design and Public Domain
Approved By	Tim Moore - Director, City Economy and Growth / Deputy CEO

EXEcutive Summary

The City Design and Public Doman has used its internal design team to develop a draft master plan for the public spaces including streets, lanes and plazas in the Liverpool city centre. The master plan is a ten year plan of improvements developed by Council staff working collaboratively with businesses, the community, State agencies and internal Council stakeholders.

The master plan is the result of an iterative process combining research, site analysis, bench-marking and stakeholder engagement to produce a detailed list of opportunities and constraints. It provides a list of improvements that aim to meet the needs of the community, and significantly enhance the design quality and function of the city centre, now and into the future.

Improvements will be delivered in stages, with short, medium and long term outcomes for city streets. Short term plans include new street trees, pavements and furniture for key city streets, while longer term plans include implementation of active transport and improvement of the public spaces associated with the Liverpool Railway Station.

The finalisation of a prioritised action plan will be completed with the information gathered from the community and stakeholders through the public exhibition period.

A copy of the draft masterplan is at Attachment 1.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Endorse the Draft Liverpool City Centre Public Domain Master Plan for public exhibition for a minimum period of 60 days; and

2. Delegates to the CEO the finalisation of the Draft Liverpool City Centre Public Domain Master Plan if no submissions are received; or receive a further report outlining details of the submissions received, and outline proposed further action.

REPORT

BACKGROUND

Draft Liverpool City Centre Public Domain Master Plan

For ease of reference when reading the Liverpool City Centre Public Domain Master Plan, a description of each report section is outlined as follows:

1. Project context: an introduction and background to the project including the scope of work, the area included in the study, alignment with the Community Strategic Plan and Council corporate values.

2. Strategic Review: the strategic review provides an overview of each of the national, state, regional and local; plans, policies and strategies that relate to the Liverpool city centre.

3. Site Analysis: the physical characteristics of the site area and its context are described with analysis in plan, text and images. Opportunities and constraints are outlined in this section as they are considered further in the development of the plan.

4. Community and Stakeholder Engagement: an overview of the community engagement process and the feedback provided by the community and stakeholders.

5. Master Plan Principles and Benchmarking: the design principles and design objectives that have been developed based on best-practice that was researched through the benchmarking of other similar projects.

6. Master Plan: the master plan strategies in this section are depicted in text, illustrative plans, cross sections, 3D renders, diagrams that describes the proposed strategies for the improvement of the city streets and public spaces.

7. Project Implementation: the probable costs for the project and articulates the way in which the document can be delivered.

8. Appendices: additional background information relevant to the master plan that can be read if required.

The draft master plan aims to deliver a city centre that is a great place to live, work, recreate and support commerce for city businesses. To achieve the vision, the plans proposed the following key strategies:

· New street tree planting to all city streets.

· Standardisation and clear specification of pavement treatments for city streets, service ways, driveways and plazas.

· Standardised palette of street furniture including seats, drinking fountains, rubbish and recycling bins, multifunction poles and pedestrian lighting.

· Implement Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) initiatives that reduce stormwater runoff and increase stormwater quality when it enters the Georges River.

· Support existing car parking strategies and increase car parking numbers across the city centre.

· Improved intersection design at key intersections.

· A signage typology with signage locations across the city centre for wayfinding, interpretation and identification.

· Improved activation and use of key public plazas including the existing Liverpool Library forecourt.

· Proposed designs that support service and access requirements to Council’s service ways, while providing additional uses for activation and events.

· Support for public transport initiatives of Council (e.g. FAST corridor) and State government agencies (e.g. TfNSW).

· Improved pedestrian connections between key locations and places of interest including open space.

Financial Implications

An overview of costs for the project is included in the master plan. The list of costs is provided as draft and indicative information only and may vary as improvements are delivered by others, sometimes at no cost to Council. For example certain public domain improvements will be undertaken by the private sector das part of a site redevelopment. Further discussions will occur within Council before the finalisation of the draft plan to scope and budget for staged improvements within the city centre. These items will be used to influence the Long Term Financial Plan for design and construction cost allocation.

Council staff Input

The development of the master plan has been a collaborative process with input from all disciplines across Council. The feedback occurred at several times through the development of the plans, and staff comments have been incorporated. The collaborative and iterative process has been helpful in developing multifunctional infrastructure that benefits many users. The internal stakeholders include:

· City Environment and Infrastructure

· Infrastructure Delivery

· Technical Support

· Special Projects

· City Community and Culture

· Library and Museum Services

· Community and Development Planning

· Children’s Services

· Casula Powerhouse Art Centre

· Civic Events, Facilities Management, Recreation Management

· City Corporate

· Governance, Legal and Procurement

· People, Organisational Development

· Financial Services

· Information and Technology

· Customer Experience

· Property

· Risk Management, Work Health and Safety

· City Presentation

· City Works

· Operational Facilities

· City Economy and Growth

· City Design and Public Domain

· Planning and Transport Strategy

· Development Assessment

· City Economy

· Community Standards

· Infrastructure Planning

There is strong support for the master plan from across Council. The plan spatially locates the strategies of many disciplines including active transport initiatives, urban tree canopy, water sensitive cities as well as giving design guidance for infrastructure delivery when designing streetscape outcomes.

Community Engagement

During April and May 2019, extensive community engagement gathered feedback on why and how people visit the heart of Liverpool, as well as what changes they would like to see occur in the city centre.

Community engagement events and an online survey were advertised with a letter distributed to 10,000 households and businesses. Advertisements were placed in a local newspaper, on the Council website, on posters in Liverpool City library and as posts on Council’s Facebook page.

There were a range of issues and requests raised by the community, common themes for improvements include:

· More trees and greenery

· Better public toilets

· Reduction of rubbish and trolleys in the streets

· More public seating, seats, tables and shelters

· Better management of traffic congestion and parking

· More green space

· More nightlife

· Walkable streets.

The feedback received from the community has been used to inform the draft master plan.

Stakeholder Engagement

Extensive engagement was completed with stakeholders that have and interest in the Liverpool city centre. The list of key stakeholders that helped developed the plan includes:

· Western Sydney University

· University of Wollongong

· Transport of NSW (TfNSW)

· TAFE Western Sydney

· Sydney Water

· Liverpool innovation Precinct

· Schools infrastructure NSW

· Westfield – Centre Group

· NSW Roads and Maritime Service (RMS)

· NSW Police Force

· NSW Office of Open Space

· NSW Health

· NSW Department of Planning, Industry and Environment

· Liverpool Public School

· Liverpool Hospital

· Liverpool Girls College

· Liverpool Boys College

· Great Sydney Commission

· Government Architect NSW

· Liverpool Chamber of Commerce and Industry

· Western Sydney Planning Partnership

· All Saints Catholic Primary and Secondary College

Stakeholders are strongly supportive of the proposed master plan and articulated their keen interest in reviewing the final draft master plan report during the exhibition period.

Public Exhibition

Public exhibition is proposed as the next phase of the master planning process. Public exhibition will allow for the community, businesses and stakeholders to have another round of input on the draft master plan to ensure the proposed master plan meet community requests. The feedback will also be used to confirm the prioritisation of work as part of the implementation of short, medium and long term actions.

The public exhibition period will be for a period of 60 days. All submissions will be reviewed with feedback integrated in an updated master plan. The feedback will be presented back to Council along with the final draft master plan in 2020.

Conclusion

The draft Liverpool City Centre Public Domain Master Plan has followed a collaborative process to establish the values consistent with the view of the local community, business, the State government and other stakeholders. To ensure the plans meet the needs of users, it is now appropriate for the community to again have the opportunity for input through a public exhibition process.

CONSIDERATIONS

The wide collaboration undertaken and complex nature of the city environment will achieve a multi-functional approach to city infrastructure management and the following strategic considerations:

Economic	Further develop a commercial centre that accommodates a variety of employment opportunities. Deliver and maintain a range of transport related infrastructure such as footpaths, bus shelters and bikeways. Encourage and promote businesses to develop in the hospital health and medical precinct (of the City Centre). Provide efficient parking for the City Centre. Deliver a high quality local road system including provision and maintenance of infrastructure and management of traffic issues. Facilitate economic development. Facilitate the development of new tourism based on local attractions, culture and creative industries.
Environment	Manage the environmental health of waterways. Enhance the environmental performance of buildings and homes. Promote an integrated and user friendly public transport service. Support the delivery of a range of transport options.
Social	Support policies and plans that prevent crime. Preserve and maintain heritage, both landscape and cultural as urban development takes place. Support community organisations, groups and volunteers to deliver coordinated services to the community. Promote community harmony and address discrimination. Support access and services for people with a disability. Deliver high quality services for children and their families.
Civic Leadership	Act as an environmental leader in the community. Undertake communication practices with the community and stakeholders across a range of media. Foster neighbourhood pride and a sense of responsibility. Encourage the community to engage in Council initiatives and actions. Deliver services that are customer focused. Operate a well-developed governance system that demonstrates accountability, transparency and ethical conduct. Actively advocate for federal and state government support, funding and services.
Legislative	There are no legislative considerations relating to this report.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Liverpool City Centre Public Domain Master Plan (Attachment Booklet 2)

Ordinary Meeting 11 December 2019

City Economy and Growth Report

EGROW 02

Warwick Farm Precinct

Strategic Direction	Generating Opportunity Meet the challenges of Liverpool’s growing population
File Ref	275196.2019
Report By	Graham Matthews - Senior Strategic Planner
Approved By	Tim Moore - Director, City Economy and Growth / Deputy CEO

Executive Summary

At its meeting of 31 July 2019, Council considered a planning proposal to rezone 240 Governor Macquarie Drive, Warwick Farm from B5 Business Development to part B4 Mixed Use and part R4 High Density Residential.

The report to Council recommended that Council endorse a modified version of the planning proposal and for it to be submitted to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE) for a Gateway determination (Attachment 1).

Following discussion on the matter, Council subsequently resolved:

That Council:

1. Note the advice provided by the Liverpool Local Planning Panel.

2. Delegate to the CEO to provide a report back to Council by the December 2019 Council meeting that includes the possible number of dwellings that would be permitted in the remaining Warwick Farm precinct presuming the LEP is revised to rezone the Warwick Farm Racing precinct to B4 mixed business and presuming all Government Departments and Agencies agree to the change in zoning currently being considered by Council.

3. Endorses in principle the planning proposal for 240 Governor Macquarie Drive, Warwick Farm, subject to the provision of the Council report to be provided at the December 2019 Council meeting and the possible need for the proponent to submit a modified proposal that takes into consideration the report from Council in which the number of dwellings permissible is proportionate to the area of the development site and the total number of dwellings that would be possible in the remaining Warwick Farm Racing Precinct area if the LEP is revised to include B4 in that remaining area and if the rezoning the remaining site was subsequently approved by Gateway.

4. Notes the current VPA offer from the proponent and that a new VPA would need to be negotiated should the council report identify the need for a revised submission from the proponent.

This report addresses point 2 of the above resolution.

In relation to point 3 of the resolution, the applicant for the planning proposal exercised their right to seek a rezoning review as Council had not made a decision on the planning proposal within 90 days of lodgement of the proposal.

The review was considered by the Sydney Western City Planning Panel (SWCPP) on 10 September 2019. The SWCPP published its determination on 13 September 2019 stating that the proposal should not be submitted for a Gateway determination as the proposal had not demonstrated strategic merit. A memo advising of the Panel’s decision was provided to the Mayor and Councillors on 13 September 2019 (Attachment 2).

The advice provided to Council by the Panel (Attachment 3) stated that the decision of the Panel not to forward the planning proposal to the DPIE for a Gateway determination is final and that there are no opportunities for it to be reconsidered or challenged on its merits.

Relevantly, the Panel stated:

Although the proponent’s request for a Rezoning Review has been unsuccessful, the proponent may still lodge a new proposal for the site in the future. Therefore, I have encouraged further liaison directly with Council, if the proponent would like to pursue this matter further (emphasis added).

The proponent provided legal advice that disputed the Panel’s decision that the planning proposal cannot be reconsidered by Council and requested that Council still consider the planning proposal and submit it to DPIE for a Gateway determination. Council subsequently obtained legal advice which confirmed the Panel’s advice above is correct.

Given the Panel’s decision that the planning proposal not proceed to the next stage of the plan making process, no further action can be taken by staff in relation to points 3 and 4 of the above Council resolution.

The Panel has advised the proponent they may still lodge a new proposal in the future for Council’s consideration. As at the date of writing this report, no new planning proposal for this site has been lodged with Council.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Notes the Sydney Western City Planning Panel’s decision on the planning proposal to rezone 240 Governor Macquarie Drive, Warwick Farm;

2. Notes that the Local Strategic Planning Statement (LSPS) confirms Council’s commitment that the Warwick Farm precinct should be investigated for a mix of uses, including residential development in the short term;

3. Notes that Council’s vision for the Warwick Farm precinct is inconsistent with the Greater Sydney Commission’s (GSC) adopted Liverpool Collaboration Area Place Strategy and that this position has been communicated to the GSC on multiple occasions, including through the LSPS assurance process;

4. Notes that a request has been made to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment for LEP Review funding to be reallocated for the development of a structure plan for the Warwick Farm precinct to implement actions of the Local Strategic Planning Statement.

5. Notes that if the LEP funding reallocation request is unsuccessful, Council will need to consider appropriate funding in the 2020/21 budget to develop a structure plan for the Warwick Farm precinct;

6. Directs the CEO to prepare a structure plan for the Warwick Farm precinct noting that the structure plan will determine:

· the appropriate density of development in the precinct, including built form and building typologies including height and floor space ratio development standards;

· open space, community and recreation facilities to support urban renewal;

· likely traffic and transport upgrades;

· amenity issues;

· flooding considerations; and

· development contributions.

REPORT

The purpose of this report is to address point 2 of the resolution of 31 July 2019:

This report provides a high level estimation of the number of dwellings that could be considered for the Warwick Farm precinct assuming the land is zoned for higher density residential and complementary uses.

The Warwick Farm precinct is part of the Liverpool Collaboration Area, established pursuant to Objective 5 of the Sydney Regional Plan, A Metropolis of Three Cities. In September 2018 the GSC published the Liverpool Collaboration Area Place Strategy.

The Place Strategy projects that the Liverpool Collaboration Area has the capacity for up to 18,800 new dwellings by 2036 in addition to 16,200 new jobs.^{^[1]}

The Place Strategy envisages that the Warwick Farm precinct should develop as part of an Innovation/Research/Health/Advanced manufacturing precinct, excluding residential uses. However Council has not endorsed that vision or the Place Strategy itself.

Council endorsed the draft Liverpool Strategic Planning Statement (LSPS) at its 26 June 2019 meeting, which identifies Council’s vision for the Warwick Farm precinct to be an urban renewal precinct and for it to develop for a mix of uses, including residential.

The draft LSPS has been subject to two formal assurance reviews to date by the GSC to ensure that the exhibited version of the LSPS ‘gives effect to’ the District Plan, which is a requirement of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979.

The feedback received during the assurance process confirms that the LSPS is aligned with the District Plan with the exception of Council’s vision for the Warwick Farm precinct, due to the inconsistency with the GSC adopted Liverpool Collaboration Area Place Strategy. Council has not endorsed the Place Strategy for Liverpool and this position has been communicated to the GSC on multiple occasions, including through the LSPS assurance process.

Clause 3.9(3A) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act states:

The council for an area that is in the Greater Sydney Region must not make a local strategic planning statement unless the Greater Sydney Commission has advised the council in writing that the Commission supports the statement as being consistent with the applicable regional and district strategic plans

The LSPS must ‘give effect to’ the District Plan, and as a result, there remains uncertainty about whether Council’s vision for the Warwick Farm precinct, which is identified in the LSPS, will be supported by the GSC.

Council staff will continue to advocate to the GSC regarding Council’s resolved position with respect to the Warwick Farm precinct.

Assumptions have been made to provide meaningful advice on Point 2 of the above resolution. The Collaboration Area partners (GSC, DPIE, TfNSW, Health and Education) have agreed that the Liverpool Collaboration Area has the potential for 18,800 new dwellings divided relatively evenly between the three residential growth areas within the Collaboration Area being:

· Liverpool city centre: where Council has rezoned much of the land in the core of the CBD from B3 Commercial Core to B4 Mixed Use pursuant to Liverpool Local Environmental Plan (LLEP) 2008 (Amendment 52) to facilitate the development of approximately 6,800 new dwellings;

· Moore Point: is currently an industrial zoned site. A significant portion of this growth area is occupied by cable manufacturers Prysmian. Planning proposals lodged with Council seek to rezone the site for a mix of uses including high-density residential development. The expected yield is approximately 6,000 new dwellings; and

· Hargrave Park: which is a low rise residential area to the north of the Liverpool city centre and the Hume Highway, with a large proportion of Land and Housing Corporation owned dwellings. The area is traversed by two creeks (Cabramatta and Brickmakers), which provide generous open space corridors. There are two schools, a small community centre and a highway underpass which provides access to the Warwick Farm railway station.

The Place Strategy envisages that Hargrave Park should develop as a diverse residential precinct, which is defined as follows:

Diverse residential – a mix of housing densities and typologies, from affordable to executive housing, from low to high density, retaining or enhancing the current proportion of affordable housing.

The anticipated residential yield of Hargrave Park is approximately 6,000 new dwellings.

Increased commercial development in Liverpool city centre

The Liverpool LEP Revision document (Attachment 4), which underpinned the city centre rezoning, envisaged that Amendment 52 would facilitate up to 6,900 additional dwellings.

The Liverpool LEP Revision document was prepared before the scope of the rezoning was finalised, however and some of the sites envisaged for Mixed Use development were retained as Commercial Core, precluding residential development on those sites. In addition, DAs for some other significant sites, that were assumed to transition to a mix of commercial/residential uses in the Liverpool LEP Revision document, have sought approval for 100% commercial development.

The most recent correction in the housing market has also resulted in a larger number of development applications in the newly zoned B4 area proposing wholly commercial buildings. Provided that these buildings are constructed as planned, there is potential for reallocating this excess housing capacity within the Warwick Farm precinct and still be consistent with the Place Strategy’s total number of 18,800 new dwellings which has been agreed to by State agencies.

As a result, Liverpool city centre would be unlikely to develop the 6,900 dwellings anticipated by Amendment 52, by 2036. Dwellings not developed in the city centre could be taken-up in the Warwick Farm precinct, subject to site constraints being appropriately addressed.

In arriving at an estimate of approximately 6,900 new dwellings for the city centre, the Liverpool LEP Revision Document divided the core of Liverpool city centre into 11 discrete sub-precincts as depicted in Figure 1 below.

Figure 1: Liverpool city centre sub-precincts (source: Liverpool LEP Revision document)

The expected yields (expressed as retail, commercial, community and residential floor space) envisaged in the Liverpool LEP Revision Document are reproduced in Figure 2 below.

Figure 2: Expected development yields, resulting from LLEP 2008 (Amendment 52) (source: Liverpool LEP Revision document)

Based on an analysis of DAs lodged (and approved or still under assessment) and pre-DA advice issued, it is estimated that 75% of the 818 dwellings envisaged for the E3 sub precinct (bounded by Elizabeth, George, Bigge and Scott Streets) and 25% of the 2,025 dwellings envisaged for the G2 sub precinct (located mainly to the north of Macquarie Street/Terminus Street) are unlikely to be developed. This means that approximately 1,100 dwellings anticipated for development in the Liverpool LEP revision document could feasibly be taken-up in Warwick Farm.

A map identifying the sites used to calculate the 1,100 dwelling figure is included as Attachment 5.

Additionally, Council staff estimated how many dwellings might be developed in the Warwick Farm precinct, under existing zoning and development standards, if all lots were subdivided to the current minimum lot size in the LEP.

As depicted in Figure 3 below, there are 56 existing lots zoned R2 Low Density Residential within the Warwick Farm precinct. The minimum lot size under the LEP is 600 m².

A desktop analysis shows that 41 of the 56 lots could be subdivided (some to yield multiple lots). If all existing lots were subdivided to the minimum lot size, this would yield 132 lots; being an additional 76 lots.

Figure 3: R2 Low Density Residential zoned land in the Warwick Farm precinct (source: Geocortex)

Based on the above desktop analysis, an additional 1,200 dwellings could be developed in the Warwick Farm precinct, if it were rezoned to permit higher-density residential outcomes, noting that certain site constraints would need to be addressed. Developing this number of additional dwellings within the Warwick Farm precinct would ensure that the number of new dwellings within the Liverpool Collaboration Area would be remain consistent with the Place Strategy figure of 18,800, as agreed by all relevant NSW government departments and authorities.

The additional 1,200 dwellings proposed could be developed across the Warwick Farm precinct (inclusive of proposed dwelling yields on 240 Governor Macquarie Drive,) in a range of typologies including residential flat buildings, townhouses, terraces or other forms of infill housing. The structure plan would make recommendations as to how the area could be developed.

The formal opinion of relevant State agencies is only provided once a planning proposal receives a Gateway determination. Conditions applying to Gateway determinations require Council to consult with relevant public authorities and to respond to their comments, prior to the finalisation of a planning proposal.

Other matters

The dwelling estimate provided is based on broad assumptions, as outlined above. The data does not take account of site specific constraints that arise when developing land such as the Warwick Farm precinct.

Matters that will require further analysis include the following.

1. Assessing the economic impacts of relocating all horse-training facilities from their existing location and potential relocation to the Warwick Farm racetrack itself. Should the training facilities be relocated, they may move elsewhere in Sydney, with consequent loss of jobs/revenue to the Liverpool local economy.

2. The future intention of the land owners of 240 Governor Macquarie Drive, Warwick Farm following the decision of the Western City Planning Panel to not allow the planning proposal to proceed to a Gateway determination.

3. The long-term future of the industrial zoned land at the south of the precinct (currently occupied by Visy, Direct Freight and others) and the potential for that land to transition to higher order uses as discussed in the Place Strategy.

Adaption to flood risk, noting the precinct is situated within a flood planning area under the LEP.

Additional access/egress from the Warwick Farm precinct for flood evacuation purposes must be considered in collaboration with the State Emergency Service (SES).

4. Additional roadworks to divert existing heavy vehicle traffic away from high density residential areas if developed in the Warwick Farm precinct.

5. The scope of a revised contributions plan which would be required to support future development in the precinct.

6. Responding to any concerns raised by State authorities in the public agency consultation as required by any future Gateway determination

All of the matters detailed above would need to be considered in detail as part of future planning investigations, initially as part of the development of a precinct structure plan, and prior to the development of any planning proposal for rezoning the Warwick Farm precinct for higher density residential uses.

Conclusion

Council’s Local Strategic Planning Statement (LSPS) confirms Council’s commitment that the Warwick Farm precinct is investigated for a mix of uses, including residential development in the short term (2020).

This report estimates that an additional 1200 dwellings could be developed in the Warwick Farm precinct, without exceeding the planned growth of 18,800 dwellings in the Liverpool Collaboration Area by 2036.

Noting the above, it is recommended that a structure plan for the area be commissioned by Council. A request has been made to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment for LEP Review funding to be reallocated for the development of the structure plan.

If the LEP funding reallocation request is unsuccessful, Council will need to consider appropriate funding in the 2020/21 budget to undertake this work.

The structure plan will determine:

· the appropriate density of development in the precinct, including built form and building typologies including height and floor space ratio development standards;

· open space, community and recreation facilities to support urban renewal;

· likely traffic and transport upgrades;

· amenity issues;

· flooding considerations; and

· development contributions.

The structure plan should take account of all land zoned R2 Low Density Residential in addition to 240 Governor Macquarie Drive, Warwick Farm, which is currently zoned B5 Business Development.

The structure plan would make recommendations for potential amendments to Floor Space Ratio (FSR), Height of Building and Minimum Lot Size development standards in addition to additional requirements for open space and other considerations of amenity.

Once completed, the draft structure plan would be presented to Council for consideration. The drafting of a structure plan for Warwick Farm would be the first stage of the preparation of a planning proposal to rezone the precinct for higher density residential development.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	Facilitate economic development.
Environment	There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.
Social	There are no social and cultural considerations.
Civic Leadership	There are no civic leadership and governance considerations.
Legislative	Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979

ATTACHMENTS

1. EGROW 04 - 31 July 2019 Council report - Planning Proposal - 240 Governor Macquarie Drive, Warwick Farm (Under separate cover)

2. Memo to Mayor and Councillors - Planning Panel decision - Planning Proposal 240 Governor Macquarie Drive, Warwick Farm (Under separate cover)

3. Letter from Sydney Western City Planning Panel - Planning Proposal Decision for 240 Governor Macquarie Drive, Warwick Farm (Under separate cover)

4. Liverpool LEP Revision document (Under separate cover)

5. Commercial-only developments planned for Liverpool city centre (Under separate cover)

Ordinary Meeting 11 December 2019

City Economy and Growth Report

EGROW 03

Liverpool City Centre Car Parking Strategy

Strategic Direction	Generating Opportunity Advocate for, and develop, transport networks to create an accessible city
File Ref	280199.2019
Report By	Charles Wiafe - Service Manager Traffic and Transport David Smith - Manager Planning & Transport Strategy
Approved By	Tim Moore - Director, City Economy and Growth / Deputy CEO

Executive Summary

This report recommends that Council adopts the Liverpool City Centre Car Parking Strategy 2019-2029 (the Strategy) which enables greater car parking capacity within the Liverpool city centre. This strategy applies to the Liverpool city centre and is an update to previous strategies prepared in 2010, 2013 and 2017 given the projected growth in both jobs and housing over the next 10 years.

The Liverpool city centre has a strong retail and commercial core, significant residential development and a growing health and education precinct.

The Strategy guides the management of existing and future car parking in the Liverpool city centre and has actions to improve parking in the Liverpool city centre including:

· optimising existing parking infrastructure;

· identifying new parking opportunities;

· improving parking / directional signage; and

· identifying funding sources.

The Liverpool City Centre Car Parking Strategy identifies the need for further optimisation of car parking in the city centre, demand management, mode shift to public transport and additional car parking to meet the needs of a growing city.

There are 10,502 parking spaces (on and off-street) in the Liverpool city centre. 137 additional car parking spaces have recently been constructed at Woodward Park with an additional 120 spaces currently under construction and due to be completed in December 2019. Council has also resolved to repurpose the site at 68 Speed Street, Liverpool to provide an additional 75 car parking spaces.

This strategy identifies two additional multi-level car parks for further investigation, being a new multi-level car park at Bathurst Street/Macquarie Street and at Collimore Park/Woodward Park. These areas would provide for approximately 1,000 additional car parking spaces. Council’s Civic Place development is planned to provide 285 additional car parks. Together, with works completed, under construction and planned for under this Strategy, there will be an increase in publicly accessible parking in the city centre of 1,617 spaces.

The city centre also accommodates a large number of private car parking spaces within commercial, residential and mixed use developments. The amount of private parking is assessed with each development application, relative to parking rates specified in the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan. Based on the city centre’s development potential, private car parking spaces are forecast to increase from the existing 5,325 spaces to approximately 14,000 spaces, an increase of approximately 8,676 spaces.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council adopts the Liverpool City Centre Car Parking Strategy 2019-2029.

REPORT

Background

Council has prepared a number of parking strategies to manage parking demand in the city centre over the last 10 years. The first strategy was adopted in February 2010 and was updated in June 2013. The second strategy was adopted by Council in July 2017.

The key deliverables of the 2010 strategy were:

· Establish a free commuter carpark at Collimore Park;

· Increase the number of on-street parking spaces in the city centre;

· Rationalise and simplify on and off-street parking time restrictions;

· Introduce pay and display parking on-street and off-street in selected areas of the city centre core;

· Investigate the decommissioning and reconstruction of the Northumberland Street carpark, including temporary parking areas;

· Introduce a residential parking permit policy;

· Increase access to the city centre carparks, and improve conditions for vehicular traffic, buses, pedestrians and cyclists.

The key deliverables of the 2017 strategy were:

1. Convert all Council-controlled off-street car parking locations within the CBD to short-term time-restricted parking of 3P or less.

2. Extend short-term parking further into the currently unrestricted adjacent on-street areas within the Activity Centre zone.

3. Develop peripheral parking stations for commuter and staff parking, external to the CBD area.

4. Develop future customer/visitor parking in precinct parking structures, located on the periphery of the CBD Ring Road.

5. Prepare an electronic /dynamic signage strategy.

6. Consider alterations to CBD parking pricing structure.

Delivered Actions

Through the implementation of these strategies, Council has managed parking demand in the Liverpool city centre by introducing parking meters, timed parking restrictions and a parking permit policy.

Council has increased parking supply in the Liverpool city centre by constructing additional car spaces at Collimore Park, Whitlam Leisure Centre (Woodward Park) and the temporary Bathurst Street car park at 352 Macquarie Street.

Council has endorsed the repurposing of 68 Speed Street, Liverpool for addition car parking in the south of the city and additional public car parking is planned at the Council’s Civic Place development on Scott Street and a multi-story car park at Collimore Park/Woodward Park.

Council continues to advocate for faster and more reliable and accessible public transport both within the Liverpool LGA and to key employment centres including Parramatta and the Sydney CBD.

Council has collaborated with the NSW government in implementing the new ‘Park n Pay’ smart phone app which allows drivers to pay for parking and top up using their smart phones.

Why prepare a new Strategy

The importance of a new car parking strategy is underpinned by rapid growth and key objectives in the Sydney Region Plan - A Metropolis of Three Cites, which earmarks the Liverpool city centre as part of the metropolitan city cluster within the Western Parkland City. Over the coming decades, the city centre is expected to undergo significant land use change and population growth. The city centre has a strong retail and commercial core, significant residential development to the north and south of the city centre core and a growing health and education precinct through the Liverpool Innovation Precinct.

Council has rezoned the majority of the city centre (from B3 Commercial Core to B4 Mixed Use) to facilitate increased mixed-use development to assist in the growth and revitalisation of the city centre. In addition, Council has positioned the Liverpool city centre as Sydney’s next CBD and there are significant opportunities arising from development of the Western Sydney International Airport and the Aerotropolis and the Liverpool Innovation, Health and Education Precinct. This level of development will have a major impact on critical transport infrastructure in the Liverpool city centre including access to public transport and car parking.

The Liverpool City Centre Car Parking Strategy identifies the need for further optimisation of car parking in the city centre, including demand management, mode shift to public transport and additional car parking in appropriate locations to meet the needs of a growing city.

Journey to work data reveals that the proportion of workers accessing the Liverpool city centre by car (and parking in the city centre) is higher than that of Parramatta and substantially higher than that of the Sydney CBD. As the city centre is positioned to be the next CBD in Sydney, the proportion of workers accessing the Liverpool city centre by vehicles needs to decline steadily and public transport use needs to increase to ensure a sustainable city, to avoid significant additional traffic congestion and to maximise the place qualities and attributes of Liverpool CBD for jobs growth and economic productivity.

There are approximately 10,502 car parking spaces within the city centre. This includes 2,602 on-street spaces and 7,900 off street spaces (public and private). Existing on-street parking demand in the city centre is high with an occupancy rate of at least 85%. The car parking strategy notes that ‘turnover’ of limited on-street car parking spaces is important because it increases economic activity and provides clear benefits for the business community.

The demand for off-street car parking is also high in the city centre, with the exception of Light Horse Park Car Park which was observed to have an occupancy rate of between 0-25%. This is likely reflective of its distance to the CBD Core as well as other local services and facilities.

Car parking pricing for off-street parking in the Liverpool city centre is lower in comparison to other Sydney CBDs such as Parramatta. The minimum all day off-street parking cost in Parramatta is $14 compared to $11 in Liverpool. A typical on-street car space is priced at approximately $2.20 to $2.70 per hour (short-term parking) which is lower than public transport fares within the locality. For example, a short bus ride up to 3km ($2.90 adult fare) or a short train ride up to 10km ($3.61 peak adult fare).

To be successful in implementing the strategy, demand for car parking needs to be managed, including options to reduce demand through mode shift to active and public transport.

About the Strategy

The Strategy focuses on the Liverpool city centre as defined by the Liverpool Development Control Plan 2008. This area is bound by Moore Point to the east, Hume Highway to the north and west and the Shepherd Street Precinct to the south.

The purpose of the Strategy is to manage parking demand and supply in the Liverpool city centre over the next 10 years. The Strategy establishes a baseline of the city’s parking environment, acknowledges current car parking provision and issues, and includes a Delivery Plan.

Principles and Objectives

The Strategy includes the following key principles:

· Optimise the capacity of short-term and long-term parking within the Liverpool city centre;

· Strike an appropriate balance between parking provision and demand by ensuring that pedestrian priority and amenity is maintained on all streets;

· Ensure that any decisions which may cause economic impacts on local businesses are minimised;

· Provide an urban environment and transport network which encourages public and active transport choices to reduce car parking demand;

· Provide a clear and accessible car parking environment;

· Ensure adequate provisions are made for motorcycle, bicycle and mobility impaired users;

· Ensure that management of parking responds to changing transport systems and services, and is adaptable to new technologies (such as car sharing schemes); and

· Align with relevant NSW Government and Council strategies.

The strategy includes objectives to ensure the key principles are delivered:

· Identify the appropriateness of providing increased car parking within the Liverpool city centre;

· Further evaluate the concept of concentrating public parking at the periphery of the city centre, including shuttle bus services into the city centre core;

· Provide parking infrastructure that responds to land use changes, population and economic growth in the centre over the next 10 years;

· Improve parking accessibility (general and special needs) for shoppers, visitors, trades people and local businesses to support economic growth;

· Explore and deploy smart parking technologies to support an efficient and innovative city centre; and

· Provide a delivery framework, to improve parking over the next 10 years, including the recommended number and location of car spaces.

Actions and Deliverables

The following actions are identified in the Strategy:

A1. Provide a benchmark for the appropriate supply of public parking;

A2. Improve and simplify parking signage;

A3. Optimise existing on-street parking provision;

A4. Investigate opportunities for long-term parking to be located at the periphery of the city centre;

A5. Investigate the potential for ride-sharing facilities in residential areas;

A6. Review Council’s parking prices;

A7. Investigate all funding sources for additional parking in the city centre;

A8. Investigate and identify alternative uses for car parks

The deliverables identified below represent individual projects which can address one or more of the actions in the strategy.

	Deliverable	Description	Timeline
D1	Public parking rate benchmarks	To provide the right amount of public car parking for Liverpool, a benchmark should be developed by using current research on the supply and demand of public parking (for short-term and all-day parking) in modern, vibrant city centres.	Short term 2020/2021
D2	Investigate further opportunities to provide angled parking	Indicate where angled parking bays can be located in accordance with the City Centre Public Domain Masterplan and parking rate benchmarks.	Short to long term 2019/2029
D3	Collimore/Woodward Park carpark upgrades	Construct a multi-deck car park at Collimore Park or alternatively increase the number of new spaces at Woodward Park (as part of the Woodward Place masterplan) to provide all-day parking for city centre employees, visitors and university students.	Short to medium term 2019/2024
D4	Introduce a car share scheme into Liverpool city centre	Identify any barriers to the roll-out of a car share system within the city centre and work with prominent car share companies as to how these barriers can be overcome and identify the location of dedicated car parking spaces for these vehicles.	Short term 2019/2020
D5	Dynamic parking guidance system	Guided by the City Centre Public Domain Masterplan, provide electronic/dynamic directional wayfinding to off-street parking facilities (with the potential to include on-street facilities as this becomes available) including the number of available parking spaces. The signs can be linked to a mobile phone app to alert drivers of parking opportunities.	Short to long term 2019/2029
D6	Provide simplified parking signage	Use of simplified signs in the city centre, in addition to or replacement of existing signs to make it easier for motorists to understand parking restrictions and improve traffic flow/safety.	Short term 2020/2021
D7	Car parking pricing	A review of current parking prices for on-street and off-street parking areas.	Short term 2020/2021
D8	Optimising usage of car parking spaces	Encourage turnover of parking spaces within the city centre by reviewing parking fees for on-street parking (longer than 2 hours); prioritising parking near health facilities; introducing timed parking restrictions (3 or 4 hour parking) to unrestricted parking areas; and re-evaluating parking restrictions in the city centre core (to 30min).	Short to long term 2020/2029
D9	Construct new Bathurst Street car park (between Terminus and Macquarie Street)	Redevelop an existing at-grade car park with a multi-story car park containing approximately 290 car parking spaces across 7 levels.	Medium to long term 2022/2027
D10	Construct new car park at 68 Speed Street	Demolish an existing disused community facility and construct an at-grade carpark comprising approximately 75 car spaces.	Short term 2020/2021

Consultation

In preparing this Strategy, consultation has been undertaken with the Planning & Transport Strategy, City Design & Public Domain; City Economy; Community Development and Planning; Infrastructure Delivery and Property & Commercial Development departments.

Conclusion

This Strategy identifies actions and a delivery plan to increase the availability of parking within the city centre as well as encouraging mode shift to active and public transport to manage demand for car parking in the Liverpool city centre.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	Further develop a commercial centre that accommodates a variety of employment opportunities. Provide efficient parking for the City Centre. Deliver a high quality local road system including provision and maintenance of infrastructure and management of traffic issues. Facilitate economic development.
Environment	Promote an integrated and user friendly public transport service. Support the delivery of a range of transport options.
Social	Preserve and maintain heritage, both landscape and cultural as urban development takes place.
Civic Leadership	Actively advocate for federal and state government support, funding and services.
Legislative	There are no legislative considerations relating to this report.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Liverpool City Centre Car Parking Strategy 2019 (Under separate cover)

Ordinary Meeting 11 December 2019

City Economy and Growth Report

EGROW 04

Liverpool Local Strategic Planning Statement

Strategic Direction	Generating Opportunity Meet the challenges of Liverpool’s growing population
File Ref	292542.2019
Report By	Cameron Jewell - Strategic Planner
Approved By	Tim Moore - Director, City Economy and Growth / Deputy CEO

Executive Summary

At its meeting of 26 June 2019, Council considered a report on the draft Local Strategic Planning Statement - Connected Liverpool 2050 and resolved to:

1. Endorse the draft LSPS and place it on public exhibition for a period of 6 weeks (July 2019 to early August 2019); and

2. Receive a further report following the public exhibition period detailing submissions received and any amendments proposed.

The draft Local Strategic Planning Statement (LSPS) was publicly exhibited for six weeks, from 28 June 2019 to 9 August 2019.

Council received 147 formal submissions; 542 survey responses; and over 680 “big ideas” in response to the exhibition of the LSPS.

This report addresses the community and government agency submissions and amendments made to the LSPS in response.

The LSPS has been informed by extensive community, Councillor, staff and Government agency engagement, analysis of existing Council strategies and consideration of State planning documents.

The LSPS has been updated following community consultation, State agency engagement and assurance reviews by the Greater Sydney Commission. The LSPS maintains Council’s core planning principles and vision for land use in the LGA.

It is recommended that Council endorses the LSPS and forwards it to the Greater Sydney Commission (GSC) for formal assurance review. Under Section 3.9(3A) of the Act, the LSPS cannot be made unless the GSC has advised Council in writing that it supports the LSPS as being consistent with the Western City District Plan.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Endorses the Liverpool Local Strategy Planning Statement (LSPS) and forwards it to the Greater Sydney Commission for formal assurance review;

2. Subject to receiving a formal letter of support from the Greater Sydney Commission (GSC), delegates to the CEO to adopt the LSPS, in accordance with Section 3.9(3A) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979; and

3. Notes that if changes, other than minor changes arise from the GSC assurance process, the LSPS will be reported back to Council.

REPORT

Background

Council has prepared a Local Strategic Planning Statement (LSPS) as required by Section 3.9 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 (the Act).

Under the Act, all NSW councils must prepare and make a LSPS and review it every seven (7) years.

Section 3.9(2) of the Act requires the following matters to be included in a LSPS:

(a) the basis for strategic planning in the area, having regard to economic, social and environmental matters;

(b) the planning priorities for the area that are consistent with any strategic plan applying to the area and (subject to any such strategic plan) any applicable community strategic plan under Section 402 of the Local Government Act 1993;

(d) the basis on which the council is to monitor and report on the implementation of those actions.

The LSPS represents Council’s 20-year land use vision for the City. Importantly, the LSPS must give effect to the Western City District Plan (Section 3.9(2)(b) of the Act) by implementing the directions, priorities and relevant actions at a local level.

Clause 11A of the Environmental Planning & Assessment (Savings, Transitional and Other Provisions) Regulation 2017 requires the draft LSPS be endorsed by Council and publicly exhibited.

At its meeting of 26 June 2019, Council considered a report on the draft LSPS - Connected Liverpool 2050 and resolved to:

1. Endorse the draft LSPS and place it on public exhibition for a period of 6 weeks (July 2019 to early August 2019); and

2. Receive a further report following the public exhibition period detailing submissions received and any amendments proposed.

The draft LSPS was subsequently publicly exhibited over a six-week period from 28 June 2019 to 9 August 2019.

The draft LSPS has been amended to address community and government agency submissions by providing greater context and clarification through inclusion of additional text and graphics to improve readability. It has also been amended in response to matters raised through the Greater Sydney Commission (GSC) assurance process.

The amended LSPS maintains Council’s core planning principles and vision for land use in the LGA.

The final LSPS is included as Attachment 1.

Details of public exhibition and community consultation is included in the LSPS Public Exhibition Report (Attachment 2) and summarised in the Engagement Timeline (Figure 1) below.

GSC assurance process

The LSPS is subject to an ‘assurance’ process conducted by the Greater Sydney Commission (GSC) to ensure that the LSPS ‘gives effect to’ the District Plan. This process has involved a number of “health checks” where the GSC provides feedback to Council on the contents and form of the LSPS.

It should be noted that at the health check meeting held on 20 November 2019 the GSC advised that Council’s vision for the Warwick Farm precinct is inconsistent with the GSC adopted Liverpool Collaboration Area Place Strategy and consequently was a “current risk to consistency” with the Western City District Plan. No changes, however have been made to the LSPS in this regard.

Under Section 3.9(3A) of the Act the LSPS cannot be made unless the GSC has advised Council in writing that it supports the LSPS as being consistent with the Western City District Plan.

Figure 1 – Community Engagement Timeline

LSPS Public Exhibition

The draft LSPS was exhibited on Council’s website from 28 June 2019 to 9 August 2019 and weekly notifications were placed in local papers – Liverpool Leader and Champion from 3 July until 7 August 2019. Notifications were also placed on social media platforms and a notification flyer was delivered to approx. 81,000 households across the Liverpool LGA.

Exhibition notifications and a link to Council’s exhibition website were also sent to local Members of Parliament, adjoining councils and relevant Government agencies.

The exhibition was in accordance with the LSPS Engagement Action Plan considered by Council at its meeting of 26 June 2019. In summary, this included an online survey, pop ups and drop-ins in key locations, public information displays, an online ideas board / interactive mapping tool, and consultation at relevant District Forums.

Council received 147 formal submissions; 542 survey responses; and over 680 “big ideas”.

Key community findings

The public exhibition identified that there is broad community support for:

· The protection of local character of our suburbs;

· High density development close to public transport and services;

· A greater variety of housing options in the LGA;

· More local action on climate change;

· Liverpool CBD to become a vibrant centre with extended trading hours by 2050;

· The Georges River to be at the heart of the Liverpool CBD with improved access; and

· Enhancement and protection of our rural lands (west of the Western Sydney Airport).

Community feedback identified the need for:

· More frequent public transport (including local buses, an express train to the Sydney CBD, and support for the FAST corridor);

· More local jobs;

· More car parking (including commuter car parking);

· Density in appropriate locations (specifically, the need to rezone land around Moorebank shopping centre);

· A review of land uses in Warwick Farm;

· More affordable housing and recognition of the benefits of affordable housing;

· More green space with trees, walking/cycle paths, and access to the Georges River;

· Better elaboration of the retail environment and importance of centres;

· Further consideration of Liverpool as an education city;

· Clearer mapping; and

· A cleaner, more accessible Georges River.

Government agency submissions

Submissions were received from 15 Government agencies. The following is a summary of key issues raised:

· Identify the FAST corridor in the context of its broader potential as a catalyst for public travel growth in the region;

· Supportive of emphasis on appropriate zoning of land near the proposed Western Sydney International airport to prevent development encroachment and maintain residential amenity;

· Supportive of protection of rural lands and advocacy for continued protection in Aerotropolis area;

· Supportive of defining boundaries between urban, non-urban and scenic lands provided this protects agriculture;

· Supportive of recognition of importance of agriculture in Aerotropolis and Future Food Systems CRC;

· Include goals and actions including working in partnership with Local Aboriginal Land Councils (LALCs);

· Ensure future land uses are in appropriate locations to minimise the risk to life and property from bush fire attack;

· Manage car parking demand;

· Supportive of improving community access to the Georges River;

· Consider strategies to reduce mosquito breeding habitats;

· Supportive of plan to protect remaining rural lands;

· Recommend opportunities to plan for social connection;

· Include child-friendly planning strategies;

· Acknowledge housing options that assist ageing in place;

· Include reference to mental wellbeing;

· Consult Department of Defence needs on any corridor marked on its land, including any practical implication of reserving such a corridor;

· Provide greater emphasis on the role of stormwater management and WSUD in reducing flooding risk;

· Address noise management, other than aircraft;

· Review Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD);

· Include increasing permeability both in public and private domains;

· Strengthen actions relating to key waste streams or activities;

· Moore Point rezoning needs to include planning for school infrastructure; and

· Include Department of Education as a collaborative education provider.

GSC health check process

The GSC conducted a health check of Council’s LSPS, providing the following advice:

· Change ‘Connected Liverpool 2050’ to ‘Connected Liverpool 2040’ to reflect the status of the LSPS as a 20-year land use vision;

· Remove reference to Liverpool as Sydney’s third CBD to ensure consistency with the Western City District Plan, which identifies Liverpool as part of a metropolitan city cluster within the Western Parkland City;

· Include further detail on the structure plan, including the addition of the Metropolitan Rural Area;

· Change Fifteenth Avenue corridor to reflect a path to the Aerotropolis and Airport, and update travel time projections to align with 30-minute city;

· Amend language of LSPS to better reflect collaboration with State partners;

· Include action to work with State to address land fragmentation in growth areas;

· Describe areas in the LGA that have biodiversity value;

· Better describe risks such as flood and bushfire; and

· Reference the status of State Environmental Planning Policies (SEPPs) and Ministerial Directions in the LSPS.

Changes made to the draft LSPS

The draft LSPS has been amended to address community and Government agency submissions, and input through the GSC assurance process, by providing greater context and clarification through inclusion of additional text and new mapping and graphics to improve readability. New actions have been added to better align with the Western City District Plan and reflect Council’s strategic work program, including:

· Investigating DCP changes to encourage green open space in high-rise development;

· Collaborating with the Department of Education to identify opportunities for sharing local school infrastructure with the wider community;

· Developing a community and recreation hub at Phillips Park, Lurnea;

· Reviewing R4 zoned land around local centres to address interface issues;

· Reviewing the LEP and DCP to ensure statutory planning controls protect key freight routes and employment lands from sensitive land uses; and

· Reviewing the LEP and DCP to ensure Water Sensitive Urban Design is adequately addressed.

A number of LSPS actions have also been rationalised to reduce duplication and further improve readability. However, it should be noted that the amended LSPS maintains Council’s core planning principles and vision for the LGA.

Some submissions raised issues that were not related to strategic land use planning or not deemed suitable for inclusion in the LSPS. In these instances, the submissions will be referred to the appropriate section of Council or, where appropriate, follow-up consultation with the submitter will be undertaken.

A summary of changes made to the exhibited draft LSPS is included at Attachment 3.

Conclusion

It is recommended that Council endorse the LSPS and forwards it to the Greater Sydney Commission (GSC) for formal assurance review. Under Section 3.9(3A) of the Act, the LSPS cannot be made unless the GSC has advised Council in writing that it supports the LSPS as being consistent with the Western City District Plan. Once a letter of assurance has been received from the GSC, it is recommended that Council delegate to the CEO to adopt the LSPS.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	Utilise the Western Sydney City Deal agreement to provide opportunities for residents in the LGA to enhance skills and education. Further develop a commercial centre that accommodates a variety of employment opportunities. Deliver and maintain a range of transport related infrastructure such as footpaths, bus shelters and bikeways. Encourage and promote businesses to develop in the hospital health and medical precinct (of the City Centre). Provide efficient parking for the City Centre. Enhance the environmental performance of buildings and homes. Deliver a high quality local road system including provision and maintenance of infrastructure and management of traffic issues. Facilitate economic development. Facilitate the development of new tourism based on local attractions, culture and creative industries.
Environment	Utilise the Western Sydney City Deal agreement to enhance liveability and environment of the LGA. Utilise the Western Sydney City Deal agreement to facilitate Planning and Housing in the LGA. Manage the environmental health of waterways. Manage air, water, noise and chemical pollution. Retain viable opportunities for local food production while managing land use to meet urban growth. Enhance the environmental performance of buildings and homes. Protect, enhance and maintain areas of endangered ecological communities and high quality bushland as part of an attractive mix of land uses. Raise community awareness and support action in relation to environmental issues. Promote an integrated and user friendly public transport service. Support the delivery of a range of transport options.
Social	Utilise the Western Sydney City Deal agreement to provide connectivity across the LGA through infrastructure and social initiatives. Preserve and maintain heritage, both landscape and cultural as urban development takes place. Regulate for a mix of housing types that responds to different
Civic Leadership	Act as an environmental leader in the community. Undertake communication practices with the community and stakeholders across a range of media. Encourage the community to engage in Council initiatives and actions. Provide information about Council’s services, roles and decision making processes. Operate a well developed governance system that demonstrates accountability, transparency and ethical conduct.
Legislative	Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979

ATTACHMENTS

1. Local Strategic Planning Statement (Under separate cover)

2. Local Strategic Planning Statement Public Exhibition Report (Under separate cover)

3. Summary of changes made to Local Strategic Planning Statement post exhibition (Under separate cover)

Ordinary Meeting 11 December 2019

City Economy and Growth Report

EGROW 05

Review of parking restrictions on major access roads in the Liverpool City Centre

Strategic Direction	Generating Opportunity Advocate for, and develop, transport networks to create an accessible city
File Ref	296676.2019
Report By	Charles Wiafe - Service Manager Traffic and Transport
Approved By	Tim Moore - Director, City Economy and Growth / Deputy CEO

Executive Summary

At its meeting on 29 May 2019, Council considered a Notice of Motion (NOM 04) – Parking Meters and resolved that Council:

1. Acknowledges Liverpool has a traffic and parking problem in the CBD;

2. Present a plan back to Council by the December 2019 meeting that:

a) Removes all parking along identified streets that serve as the major traffic flow routes in and out of the CBD and have a look at all options;

b) Has plans for a carpark at the southern end of the CBD that accommodates the maximum number of cars possible; and

3. Should the above not be completed with concrete plans by the December meeting, all parking meters be switched off the day after the Council meeting in December.

This report provides information on resolution point 1 and addresses point 2(a).

Resolution point 2(b) is subject to a separate report in the December business papers – EGROW08.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council endorses the recommended changes to parking restrictions identified in this report for further consideration and advice of the Liverpool Pedestrian, Active Transport and Traffic Committee.

REPORT

Traffic and parking arrangements in the CBD

a) Traffic conditions along major access roads in and out of the Liverpool CBD

Arterial roads, under the care and control of the (RMS), dominate the road network providing access to the CBD. These include Elizabeth Drive, Hume Highway, Hoxton Park Road, Newbridge Road and Terminus Street.

These arterial roads carry significant through traffic bypassing the CBD. With this arrangement, the CBD access roads and the following associated intersections experience traffic congestion and delays, particularly during the morning and afternoon peak periods.

· Hume Highway/Elizabeth Drive intersection.

· Hume Highway/Hoxton Park Road/Macquarie Street.

· Newbridge Road/Terminus Street and Speed Street.

· Newbridge Road/Moorebank Avenue/Heathcote Road.

Council has been making representations and working with the RMS to address the delays along sections of the above-mentioned roads providing access to the city centre.

In response to recent representations, the RMS has adopted a short-term strategy to carry out improvement works under the State government Pinch Point Program. These upgrades include:

· Hume Highway/Hoxton Park Road intersection - provision of additional right turn bay from the Hume Highway into Hoxton Park Road;

· Hume Highway/Bigge Street Intersection - dedicated left turn lanes into and out of Bigge Street; and

· Hume Highway/Memorial Avenue – extension of southbound right turn bay

In addition to the above, Transport for NSW (TfNSW), in consultation with the RMS, is preparing a Place-based Future Transport Strategy for Liverpool. This strategy will encourage higher public transport use and road network improvements to address existing delays and accommodate planned growth in the CBD. This strategy is expected to be released by TfNSW early next year and will be presented to Council.

In addition to the above mentioned arterial roads there are a number of Council controlled local streets that are important to vehicle movements within the CBD. These include: Elizabeth Street; Memorial Avenue; Moore Street; Bathurst Street; Bigge Street and Speed Street. Sections of these streets are shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1 - Vehicle circulation streets within the CBD

b) Parking arrangements along major traffic flow routes in and out of the Liverpool CBD

As indicated above, the roads providing access to the CBD are dominated by sections of Elizabeth Drive, Hume Highway, Hoxton Park Road, Newbridge Street and Terminus Street.

These classified road sections have Clearway zones and No Stopping or No Parking restrictions which do not permit on-street parking. With the exception of a small number of parking spaces on the southern side of Terminus Street, between Pirie Street and Macquarie Street these identified streets, which serve as the major traffic flow routes into and out of the CBD, contain no parking that interrupts the flow of traffic on these routes.

Elizabeth Street, Memorial Avenue, Moore Street, Bathurst Street, Bigge Street and Speed Street are local sub-arterial or collector roads, under the care and control of Council. These roads play a role in terms of vehicle circulation within the Liverpool CBD.

Parking arrangements along these streets includes:

· Timed meter parking - 1P and 2P;

· Timed parking - 2P;

· Regulated No Stopping parking restrictions at signalised intersections;

· No Parking restrictions (these do allow for pick up and set down of passengers);

· Bus Zones;

· Unrestricted parking.

Recommended changes to parking arrangements

In the interest of exploring all options for improvements to vehicle access, a review of the existing parking arrangements along the main circulation streets within the CBD has identified that traffic flow could be improved with relatively minor changes to parking arrangements. Details of current parking arrangements and recommended changes are outlined in the table below.

Road Section	Existing Parking Arrangement	Recommended changes
Bigge Street
Warren Swy to Elizabeth St
(Both Sides)	6-10am No Stopping 3-6pm No Stopping (1P 10am – 3pm)	AM no change recommended 3-7pm No Stopping (1P 10am – 3pm)
Elizabeth St to Campbell St
(Western Side – outside school)	8-9:30am Bus Zone & No Parking 2:30-4pm Bus Zone & No Parking	Add 6-8am No Stopping
(Eastern Side)	Unrestricted	AM no change recommended Add 3-7pm No Stopping
Campbell St to Lachlan St	Various restrictions	No change recommended
Elizabeth Street
Northumberland St to Macquarie Mall (MON-SAT)
(Southern Side)	6:30-9:30am No Stopping 3:30-6:30pm No Stopping	6-10am No Stopping 3-7pm No Stopping
(Northern Side)		No change recommended
Macquarie Mall to George St
(Southern Side)	6-10am No Stopping 3-7pm No Stopping	No change recommended
(Northern Side)	No Stopping & Bus Zone	No change recommended
George St to Bigge St
(Southern Side)	6:30-9:30am No Stopping 3:30-6:30pm No Stopping	6-10am No Stopping 3-7pm No Stopping
(Northern Side)	6:30-9:30am No Stopping 3:30-6:30pm No Stopping	6-10am No Stopping 3-7pm No Stopping
Bathurst St
Elizabeth St to Moore St
(Western Side)	6-10am No Stopping (2P 10am–3pm)	No change recommended
(Eastern Side)	2P 9am-6pm	No change recommended
Moore St to Memorial Ave
(Western Side)	6-10am No Stopping (2P 10am–3pm)	No change recommended
(Eastern Side)	2P 9am-6pm	No change recommended
Memorial Ave to Norfolk Swy
(Western Side)	No Stopping	No change recommended
(Eastern Side)	6:30-9:30am No Stopping 3:30-6:30pm No Stopping	6-10am No Stopping 3-7pm No Stopping
Memorial St
Hume Hwy to Castlereagh St
(Northern Side)	6:30-9am No Parking (1P 9am-6pm)	6-10am No Stopping 3-7pm No Stopping (1P 10am-3pm)
(Southern Side)		No change recommended
Castlereagh St to Bathurst St
(Northern Side)	6:30-9:30am No Stopping 3:30-6:30pm No Stopping (1P 9:30am – 3:30pm)	6-10am No Stopping 3-7pm No Stopping (1P 10am-3pm)
(Southern Side)		No Change recommended
Bathurst St to George St		No Change recommended

Maps showing these parking arrangements are contained in Attachment 1. If endorsed, these changes will be considered by the Liverpool Pedestrian, Active Transport and Traffic Committee at its next scheduled meeting for further consideration.

Conclusion

Arterial roads providing access to the Liverpool CBD have Clearways and No Stopping or No Parking restrictions, which do not permit on-street parking, with the exception of the southern side of Terminus Street, between Pirie Street and Macquarie Street.

Sections of local streets providing access within the CBD have parking arrangements which could be amended to further ease traffic congestion, particularly during the morning and afternoon peak periods. Outside of the peak hours traffic flow along these streets can be accommodated efficiently within single traffic lanes in each direction and further parking restrictions are not required.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	Deliver and maintain a range of transport related infrastructure such as footpaths, bus shelters and bikeways. Provide efficient parking for the City Centre. Deliver a high quality local road system including provision and maintenance of infrastructure and management of traffic issues.
Environment	Promote an integrated and user-friendly public transport service. Support the delivery of a range of transport options.
Social	There are no social and cultural considerations.
Civic Leadership	Deliver services that are customer focused.
Legislative	Roads Act and Road Rules

ATTACHMENTS

1. Current Parking Restrictions Map

Ordinary Meeting 11 December 2019

City Economy and Growth Report

EGROW 06

Guidelines for the assessment of on-street parking along narrow streets

Strategic Direction	Generating Opportunity Advocate for, and develop, transport networks to create an accessible city
File Ref	296878.2019
Report By	Charles Wiafe - Service Manager Traffic and Transport
Approved By	Tim Moore - Director, City Economy and Growth / Deputy CEO

Executive Summary

At its meeting on 31 July 2019, Council considered a report on a pilot study for the provision of on-street parking along narrow streets and resolved that

1) The CEO develop guidelines for the assessment and prioritisation of parking along narrow streets (Guidelines) by December 2019, noting the significant cost savings associated with the options in the pilot study presented at Council’s meeting on Wednesday, 31 July 2019.

2) Considers an appropriate funding allocation to deliver on-street parking projects when preparing the 2020/21 budget.

In response to the above resolution, guidelines have been prepared for the assessment and prioritisation of on-street parking requests. The guidelines are consistent with RMS Technical Direction (TTD 2014/004 July 2014), which outlines requirements for parking along narrow streets. A copy of the guidelines is included as Attachment 1.

The objectives of the guidelines are to:

a) provide a clear assessment methodology to assist Council in selecting streets where indented parking bays or alternative treatments can be provided;

b) provide design specifications and requirements for parking treatments along narrow streets;

c) ensure that parking along narrow streets complies with legislation, RMS Technical Directions and Australian Standards;

d) ensure that cost-effective parking treatments are provided along narrow streets (where practicable and feasible); and

e) ensure that parking treatments minimise impacts on street landscaping and utilities.

The guidelines will be used to develop a list of parking projects that can be considered for funding in future financial years. Council’s current delivery program (2019/20) does not include a budget allocation for on-street parking projects along narrow streets.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Adopts the Guidelines for the Assessment and Prioritisation of Parking along Narrow Streets; and

2. Notes that funding allocation for the provision of on-street parking along narrow streets can be considered in the 2020/21 and future years budgets.

REPORT

Guidelines have been prepared for the assessment and prioritisation of on-street parking requests. The guidelines have been prepared in accordance with RMS Technical Direction (TTD 2014/004 July 2014), which outlines the requirements for the provision of parking along narrow streets.

In accordance with the guidelines, Council will complete an assessment on on-street parking requests to determine whether alternate parking treatments are required based on the following factors:

a) An assessment of on-street parking demand versus supply;

b) Traffic efficiency and road safety issues caused by on-street parking such as impacting through traffic;

c) History of infringements;

d) Environmental/streetscape issues;

e) Impacts on utility.

If an alternate treatment is warranted, a strategic design and costing will be prepared and will be considered by the Liverpool Pedestrian, Active Transport and Traffic Committee and Council for approval.

Treatment options

The guideline outlines parking treatments including installation of parking restrictions and/or provision of verge or indented parking. It includes matter to be considered in the assessment, development and prioritisation of parking treatment options.

Figure 1 – Example of car parking spaces within nature strips

Funding

The timing of improvement works will be subject to Council funding. It is recommended that Council considers an appropriate budget allocation in the 2020/21 budget and in future financial years. If funds are exhausted in a financial year, the works can be listed for delivery in following financial years, pending funding decisions from Council.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	Deliver and maintain a range of transport related infrastructure such as footpaths, bus shelters and bikeways. Deliver a high quality local road system including provision and maintenance of infrastructure and management of traffic issues.
Environment	Support the delivery of a range of transport options.
Social	There are no social and cultural considerations.
Civic Leadership	Deliver services that are customer focused.
Legislative	RMS Technical Direction (TTD 2014/004 July 2014).

ATTACHMENTS

1. Guidelines for Assessment of Parking Spaces along Narrow Streets

Ordinary Meeting 11 December 2019

City Economy and Growth Report

EGROW 07

Draft Liverpool Contributions Plan 2019 - Austral and Leppington North

Strategic Direction	Strengthening and Protecting our Environment Exercise planning controls to create high-quality, inclusive urban environments
File Ref	299687.2019
Report By	Barry Millwood - Strategic Planning Contractor
Approved By	Tim Moore - Director, City Economy and Growth / Deputy CEO

Executive Summary

The Austral/Leppington North urban development area has recently undergone a refresh of the planning controls, as considered by Council at its meeting of 27 March 2019 (EGROW 06). This amendment provided Council with the opportunity to update specific elements of the accompanying development contributions plan, particularly as it relates to stormwater management, water quality and the escalating cost of land and works.

The contributions in the precincts are subject to a maximum cap imposed by the NSW Government. The procedure for having the cap lifted and for recovering foregone funds from the NSW Government involves preparing a submission to the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal (IPART) to obtain an assessment of the contributions plan. Council has been advised that IPART will only consider a recently made plan.

Accordingly an updated contributions plan for the Austral Leppington North Precincts was prepared. The draft contributions plan was exhibited for a period of 4 weeks during October and November 2019. Two submissions were received and are considered in this report, with no resultant changes to the exhibited plan.

The draft Liverpool Contributions Plan 2019 – Austral and Leppington North (refer to Attachment 1) proposes a rate of $56,097 per typical lot created. This is an increase of approximately $500 from the current rate, though this is currently capped at $30,000.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Adopt the Liverpool Contributions Plan 2019 – Austral and Leppington North; and

2. Forward Liverpool Contributions Plan 2019 – Austral and Leppington North to the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal and then Minister for Planning and Public Spaces for consideration and determination.

REPORT

Background

Council at its meeting of 25 September 2019 resolved to exhibit a revised contributions plan for the Austral Leppington North precincts. The scope of the changes included:

· Deletion of various drainage works following receipt of a revised drainage strategy, which are replaced with works in the land subdivision;

· Adjustment to the unit value of land (any increase in land acquisition costs are not as a result of Council seeking to acquire more land); and

· Adjustment of the unit cost of infrastructure, other than drainage, indexed to today’s values.

The revised contributions plan was exhibited for a period of 30 days from Wednesday 16 October 2019 to Friday 13 November 2019.

The Austral and Leppington North Precincts were rezoned by the NSW Government for urban development in March 2013. The NSW Government controlled the preparation of the Indicative Layout Plan, the rezoning and the subsequent Development Control Plan, all with input from Council. The NSW Government also prepared Liverpool Contributions Plan 2014 - Austral and Leppington North, based on the Indicative Layout Plan and with input from Council.

This contributions plan came into force on 26 May 2015. Council has been collecting contributions since that time to fund infrastructure in the precinct. The plan is subject to a cap on contributions imposed by the NSW Government.

There is a procedure for having the cap progressively lifted and for recovering foregone funds from the NSW Government. This begins with preparing a submission to the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal (IPART) to obtain an assessment of the contributions plan. Council has been advised that IPART will only consider a recently made plan. Accordingly an updated contributions plan for the Austral Leppington North Precincts was prepared in conjunction with consultants.

Overview of submissions

Two submissions were received following an extension granted in the final days of the exhibition period. The matters raised in these submissions are detailed below. It is recommended that the contributions plan be adopted in its current form without amendment.

Issue: Sudden increase in the contributions rate

Response:

The change to the contribution rate is only increasing by approximately $500 to $56,097 (per typical lot), despite indexation and land costs being updated to 2019 rates. This is a relatively minor increase relative to the significant increases in property values that have occurred in the area since the commencement of the contributions plan in 2014. The NSW Government imposed cap on contributions has kept the cost of contributions within the precinct at $30,000.

Ministerial Direction Environmental Planning and Assessment (Local Infrastructure Contributions) Direction 2012) first implemented the cap in 2012. It was updated over 2 years ago to incorporate the phasing out of the cap. The Direction identifies the progressive phasing out of the cap as follows:

Relevant period		Maximum amount of contribution
1	Date on which 2017 amendment direction takes effect to 31 December 2017	$30,000 for each dwelling or each residential lot
2	1 January 2018 to 30 June 2018	$35,000 for each dwelling or each residential lot
3	1 July 2018 to 30 June 2019	$40,000 for each dwelling or each residential lot
4	1 July 2019 to 30 June 2020	$45,000 for each dwelling or each residential lot
5	On and from 1 July 2020	An amount determined in accordance with the applicable contributions plan, if the contributions plan is a specified contributions plan as in force at the date on which the 2017 amendment direction takes effect or an IPART reviewed contributions plan

However, the increased rate will not apply immediately after the contributions plan is adopted by Council. The new contributions plan will be submitted to IPART for assessment. Once this is completed, the contributions plan will be referred to the Minister for Planning and Public Space for determination as to whether to provide gap funding for the value of contributions foregone due to the cap and whether to remove the cap that currently applies to the precincts

Despite the provisions of the Ministerial Direction, it is unclear whether the Minister will remove the cap progressively or allow Council to charge the full rate as required by the Contribution Plan.

Based on Council records as at October 2019, there are several years’ supply of land that is under construction, approved, under assessment or in Pre DA, all of which are unlikely to be affected by any removal of the cap on contributions.

Issue: Application of new rates

Response:

Clarification is sought that the new contributions rate will only be applied to development application lodged after the Ministerial Determination on the draft contributions plan and that new contributions will be incrementally applied.

Council will only be able to impose the full value of the contributions under the draft contributions plan after the Ministerial Determination has been issued. It is the intention of Council to administer contributions for the precinct in accordance with the Ministerial direction and charge the amount identified in the direction. As detailed previously, the Ministerial Direction was updated 2 years ago to commence the removal of the cap. This should have been a factor in financial decision of developers when negotiating deals in any area affected by a cap on contributions.

It must be emphasised that any proposal by Council to stage the increase in the value of the contributions in the future would create a financial deficit in the cost of providing infrastructure in the Austral and Leppington North Precincts, which would need to be funded by Council. The potential cost to Council of delaying the collection of the full rate contribution is approximately $20million per year. This annual shortfall will be addressed once Council is collecting strictly in accordance with the updated contributions plan.

Issue: Clearly identify the infrastructure delivery priorities

Response:

A submission states that the contributions plan should clearly identify the infrastructure delivery priorities for infrastructure in order to facilitate development and avoid provision of temporary infrastructure such as temporary stormwater detention basins.

The contributions plan includes general staging priority. However the staging of development and thus infrastructure is dependent on the provision of water and sewer services by Sydney Water. Only a limited portion of the precincts is able to be serviced at present due to the lack of water and sewer mains. Council prioritises the acquisition of land for and construction of strategically located drainage basins in the precincts in the areas that are already or being serviced.

It is considered that as the provision of water and sewer and the related staging of development are not within the control of Council and therefore it is difficult to be more definitive in the contributions plan on the staging of infrastructure.

It is noted that Council staff undertake an annual review of development trends, forecasts and changes to infrastructure needs. This process assists with land acquisition and infrastructure delivery priorities. These priorities are identified in a range of documents including the annual budget and the Delivery Plan and Operational Plan.

Issue: Excessive number of roundabouts

Response:

The submission stated that the number of roundabouts is in excess of the measures that were identified in the original Traffic and Transport Assessment prepared by AECOM for the then Department of Planning and Environment to inform the rezoning and preparation of the contributions plan.

The original report to Council on 26 November 2014 noted that additional roundabouts at various intersections were added to the contributions plan to improve traffic and pedestrian safety on some of the existing long straight streets. It is noted that the AECOM’s original traffic report focussed on traffic volumes and not on traffic and pedestrian safety. There is no change to these in the draft contributions plan. The existing contributions plan explains the reasons for the additional roundabouts.

Issue: Exhibition omitted appropriate water cycle management strategy

Response:

The submission inferred that the exhibition of the revised contributions plan, which included changes to the water cycle management infrastructure, was not accompanied by the study that was undertaken to provide its justification. It was also requested that the contributions plan be re-exhibited.

The drainage background studies that support the contributions plan were exhibited on Council’s web page in conjunction with the contributions plan. There is no need to re-exhibit the contributions plan.

Issue: Cost of drainage swales

Response:

A submission does not support the proposed street drainage swales to replace bio-detention basins. They have requested the cost of the road cross section should be exhibited prior to finalising the contributions plan.

The proposed street drainage swales are part of the revised street designs that were reported to Council on 27 March 2019 as part of the revision of street designs for the Austral and Leppington North precincts. The proposed design of the streets was a result of the drainage study that found that the proposed bio-detention basins would not be effective. The proposed design is considered the most effective way to address the stormwater quality demands as well as respond to Council’s desire to provide car parking bays and provide satisfactory local area traffic management up front rather than needing to retrofit such infrastructure in the future at the Council’s cost.

Issue: Drainage costs across sub-catchments

Response:

A submissions seeks clarification on whether drainage costs will be applied at a differing rate for the sub-catchments that are not provided with a basin.

All development will contribute at the same rate irrespective of the location of any detention basins as the trunk drainage strategy is not divided into separate catchments but operates as one comprehensive system.

Issue: Existing demand credits

Response:

Clarification was requested relating to how the existing demand credits for non-essential infrastructure are generated.

The background information supporting the contributions plan (included in the exhibition package) details that a credit is created where there was a dwelling or dual occupancy existing on a lot at the time that the original contributions plan came into force. A map is provided in the contributions plan that shows this.

It should be noted that there are no contributions on development for non-essential infrastructure due to a Ministerial Direction limiting the scope of contributions which are above the cap.

Next steps

Submission to IPART

Once the revised contributions plan has been adopted a submission to IPART will be prepared by consultants, familiar with the requirements of IPART. It is anticipated that IPART will do an initial assessment of the submission and will have a series of meetings with Council/our consultants to explore fine detail in all the costings supporting the contributions plan. It is anticipated that this process may take 6 – 12 months.

IPART undertake a forensic review of the contributions plan, including cost, need, nexus and apportionment. Despite the proposed rate being $56,097 for a typical lot, it is possible that this rate will be revised, upward or downward, as a part of the IPART process.

Once IPART has done an assessment, it will issue a preliminary report for Council to comment on and then following receipt of comments, prepare a final report to submit to the Minister for Planning and Public Spaces.

Ministerial Determination

The Department of Planning, Industry and Environment will prepare a report for the approval of the Minister based in part on the IPART review. The Minister will then determine whether to provide gap funding for the value of contributions foregone due to the cap and whether and to what extent the cap should be lifted.

Any changes to the cap would not apply to existing consents. If the Minister determines to raise or remove the cap, the new revised contribution amount would apply to all new applications and any applications lodged but not determined.

If required, a report will be submitted to Council providing an overview of any changes made to the contributions plan through the IPART or Ministerial Determination process. This will ensure that Councillors are aware of the impact of any such changes and the associated financial implications for development and any impacts on the delivery of new infrastructure for growing communities.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	Deliver and maintain a range of transport related infrastructure such as footpaths, bus shelters and bikeways. Deliver a high quality local road system including provision and maintenance of infrastructure and management of traffic issues.
Environment	Manage the environmental health of waterways. Support the delivery of a range of transport options.
Social	Provide cultural centres and activities for the enjoyment of the arts. Deliver high quality services for children and their families.
Civic Leadership	Act as an environmental leader in the community. Foster neighbourhood pride and a sense of responsibility. Actively advocate for federal and state government support, funding and services.
Legislative	Ensures consistency with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 and relevant planning circulars and directions related to developer contributions.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Liverpool Contributions Plan 2019 - Austral and Leppington Precincts (Under separate cover)

Ordinary Meeting 11 December 2019

City Economy and Growth Report

EGROW 08

Proposed planning proposal - amendment to dwelling density map in the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 for certain lands in Pleasure Point

Strategic Direction	Strengthening and Protecting our Environment Exercise planning controls to create high-quality, inclusive urban environments
File Ref	302127.2019
Report By	Luke Oste - Strategic Planner
Approved By	Tim Moore - Director, City Economy and Growth / Deputy CEO

Executive Summary

This report seeks Council’s support for the preparation of a planning proposal to amend the dwelling density map in the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan (LLEP) 2008 to increase the permitted number of lots on sites along Pleasure Point Road in Pleasure Point from four lots to five lots.

The LEP lot restriction in Pleasure Point was imposed primarily due to water and sewerage servicing constraints when the LEP was prepared in 2008. As Sydney Water has improved services in Pleasure Point, there is a need to review the LEP.

Council has approved a previous development application in Pleasure Point that exceeded the four-lot yield restriction through the use of Clause 4.6 of the LEP. That Clause allows development standards in the LEP to be varied if Council is satisfied that compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary and that there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify the variation. Appropriate services were able to be provided to new lots in the area, and as a result, the application was approved.

In 2016, DA-724/2016 was assessed by Council with a recommendation for approval. The DA was considered by the Liverpool Local Planning Panel (LPP) who refused the application on the basis that Clause 7.12 of the LEP is not a development standard and cannot be varied under Clause 4.6 of the LEP. This opinion from the LPP differed from how Council previously interpreted the LEP. The applicant then commenced Class 1 proceedings in the Land and Environment Court to allow the development to proceed. On 15 November 2018, the Court upheld the LPPs decision and refused the application.

The applicant appealed the Land and Environment Courts decision, and through conciliation, it was agreed between the parties that Council could pursue a planning proposal to amend the dwelling density map to increase the maximum number of lots permissible in this area.

It is therefore recommended that Council supports the preparation of the planning proposal and notes that there will be a further report back to Council once the planning proposal has been drafted for Council’s further consideration.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Directs the CEO to prepare a planning proposal to amend the dwelling density map in the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan (LLEP) 2008 that increases the permitted number of lots on certain sites along Pleasure Point Road, Pleasure Point from four lots to five lots; and

2. Notes that, once drafted, the planning proposal will be reported to the Liverpool Local Planning Panel for advice and to a future Council meeting for a decision on whether to seek a Gateway determination from the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment.

REPORT

Background

Clause 7.12 of the LEP limits the development of certain lands identified as “Restricted Lot Yield” on the Dwelling Density Map. For Pleasure Point, the LEP limits the subdivision of four large sites to no more than four lots each.

An appeal against the decision of the Commissioner of the Land and Environment Court was lodged by the applicant. Through those proceedings, a compromise was reached between the parties (Liverpool City Council and the applicant). It was agreed between the parties that Council could pursue a planning proposal to amend the dwelling density map to increase the maximum number of lots permissible in this area.

The Sites

The planning proposal would apply to the following land:

Address	Legal Description
46 Pleasure Point Road	Lot 86 within DP 1134481
48 Pleasure Point Road	Lot 85 within DP 1134481
50 Pleasure Point Road	Lot 84 within DP 1134481
52 Pleasure Point Road	Lot 83 within DP 1134481
Lot 5 Pleasure Point Road	Lot 5 within DP 239468
62 Pleasure Point Road	Lot 77 within DP 1134478
64a Pleasure Point Road	Lot 761 within DP 1217961
64b Pleasure Point Road	Lot 762 within DP 1217961
66 Pleasure Point Road	Lot 78 within DP 1134478
68 Pleasure Point Road	Lot 75 within DP 1134478
70 Pleasure Point Road	Lot 71 within DP 1134477
72 Pleasure Point Road	Lot 72 within DP 1134477
74 Pleasure Point Road	Lot 73 within DP 1134477
76 Pleasure Point Road	Lot 74 within DP 1134477

Figure 1 – Location of subject site outlined in red (Nearmap 2019)

Figure 2 – Dwelling Density Map (LLEP 2008)

The land subject to the planning proposal is zoned R5 (Large Lot Residential) along the western side and E2 (Environmental Conservation) along the eastern side (see Figure 3). All land located 60m or further from Pleasure Point Road is identified as Environmentally Significant Land under the LLEP 2008. A riparian corridor is located through the centre of the land, running down the slope northwards to the Georges River. An informal unsealed fire trail is located along the rear of the individual lots that is recognised and protected under the Liverpool Development Control Plan 2008 (LDCP 2008).

Figure 3 – Zoning Map of the Subject Site (LCC Geocortex)

Residential development is limited to the western edge fronting or connecting to Pleasure Point Road. The majority of development is in the form of single dwelling houses, with some utilising battle-axe lot configurations. A recently constructed dual occupancy is located in the south-western corner of the subject site.

Figure 4 – Looking south-east toward Lot 5 Pleasure Point Road (LCC)

Figure 5 – Looking north-east at the dual occupancy development and down Pleasure Point Road

Site History

Amendment 84 Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 1997

In February 2002, Impala Homes expressed interest in developing Lots 4, 5, 6 and 7 Pleasure Point Road, Pleasure Point for residential purposes. Due to the significance of the vegetation present and public interest, this matter was subject to a public meeting and subsequent representations from key community representatives. As a result of these meetings the proposed development was scaled down to 16 residential lots fronting Pleasure Point Road. This lot yield restriction was included, in part, in response to community consultation:

The community at the time stated that:

· Limited development would be supported;

· There was support for the development principles proposed by the developer;

· Protection of defined environmental corridors with no development in these areas;

· No development should occur at the rear of the subject lots;

· There should be no medium density development;

· There should be no zero lot line development;

· There should be no significant traffic impacts on Pleasure Point Road; and

· There is some scepticism as to Council’s ability to enforce proposed environmental controls.

Figure 6 – Aerial Image of the Subject Site in May 2002 (Geocortex LCC)

The “Restricted Lot Yield” was imposed on the land on 1 April 2005 with the gazettal of Amendment 84 to the Liverpool LEP 1997. When the LLEP 2008 was prepared, this control was included.

DA-180/2015

This DA was lodged on 10 March 2015 and sought consent for the subdivision of the existing lot into two lots This one additional lot proposed, combined with the four existing lots resulted in five lots in total, rather than the maximum of four permitted by the LEP.

A written Clause 4.6 variation request was provided by the applicant justifying the contravention of Clause 7.12 of the LLEP 2008. Council was satisfied with the variation request and the DA was recommended for approval. As the DA proposed a variation of more than 10% to a deemed development standard in the LLEP 2008, the DA was required to be considered by the then Liverpool Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel (IHAP).

On 24 August 2015, the IHAP recommended approval of the application subject to the conditions contained within the Council officer’s report. Subsequently, the DA was approved by the full Council on 30 September 2015.

DA-724/2016

This DA was lodged on 4 August 2016 and sought consent for a two lot Torrens title subdivision of Lot 74 in DP 1134478, known as 76 Pleasure Point Road. This subdivision resulted in five lots, rather than the maximum of four permitted by the LEP.

On 26 March 2018 the then Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel (IHAP) deferred determination of the DA pending the submission of additional information relating to:

i. Whether Clause 7.12 is a prohibition or a development standard capable of being varied under Clause 4.6 of LLEP 2008;

ii. A variation request from the applicant setting out justification for the variation to Clause 7.12 having regard to the tests in Clause 4.6 of LLEP 2008 and relevant Land and Environment Court decisions; and

iii. Further information on the existing restriction on use affecting the land relating to the conservation management plan for the land within zone E2.

A supplementary report addressing the information required by the then IHAP was provided and considered by the new Liverpool Local Planning Panel (LPP) (formerly IHAP) on 7 May 2018. The LPP refused the DA, primarily on the grounds that Clause 7.12 is a prohibition and not a development standard capable of being varied under Clause 4.6 of LLEP 2008.

The applicant then commenced Class 1 proceedings in the Land and Environment Court to allow the development to proceed. On 15 November 2018, the Court upheld the LPPs decision and refused the application. An appeal against the decision of the Commissioner of the Land and Environment Court was lodged by the applicant. Through those proceedings, a compromise was reached between the parties (Liverpool City Council and the applicant). It was agreed between the parties that Council could pursue a planning proposal to amend the dwelling density map to increase the maximum number of lots permissible in this area.

Planning Proposal Justification

This planning proposal is considered appropriate to allow the development as sought by DA-724/2016 with minimal environmental impacts.

Council has approved a previous development application in this area that created five lots. Council planners recommended approval for DA-724/2016 based on a merit assessment of the application, including the availability of services, and the previous IHAP recommendation and decision of Council. Amending the current lot yield restriction through a planning proposal will provide legal clarity to this past Council decision and for future DA’s.

The planning proposed will retain the biodiversity and scenic significance of the eastern portions of the site, while allowing for appropriate development.

Consultation

If Council endorses the preparation of a planning proposal, consultation will be undertaken with key State agencies including Sydney Water and NSW Rural Fire Service.

If Council endorses the planning proposal at a future Council meeting, the Gateway determination issued by the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment will stipulate formal consultation requirements for public exhibition.

Conclusion

It is recommended that Council supports the preparation of a planning proposal and notes that there will be a further report back to Council once the planning proposal has been drafted for Council’s further consideration.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	Facilitate economic development.
Environment	Protect, enhance and maintain areas of endangered ecological communities and high-quality bushland as part of an attractive mix of land uses.
Social	There are no social and cultural considerations.
Civic Leadership	Act as an environmental leader in the community.
Legislative	Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979

ATTACHMENTS

1. Development Activity Summary

Ordinary Meeting 11 December 2019

City Community and Culture Report

COM 01

Request for Exemption for Bellbird Bar and Dining Catering Supplies

Strategic Direction	Leading through Collaboration Seek efficient and innovative methods to manage our resources
File Ref	271830.2019
Report By	Craig Donarski - Director Casula Powerhouse Arts Centre
Approved By	Dr Eddie Jackson - Director City Community and Culture

Executive Summary

Bellbird Bar and Dining is a Council-owned and run restaurant located within the Casula Powerhouse Arts Centre (CPAC). Historically, and owing to the nature of sourcing of fresh and seasonal ingredients necessary in quality restaurant operations, the restaurant has not fitted neatly within the requirements of Council’s procurement standards.

Bellbird’s philosophy is guided by the principles of local, sustainable, seasonal, affordable and accessible food. Bellbird Bar and Dining is run by Head Chef, Federico Rekowski and Sous Chef, Steven Pham who focus on showcasing locally-sourced, seasonal produce through simple and delicious recipes. Approximately 40% of its produce is sourced directly from the CPAC garden and the remainder of the produce is sourced either locally or regionally.

Two exemptions have been approved in the past. The second exemption was approved for a short period to allow for a formal quote process to be undertaken. The formal quote process was undertaken with the view of creating a panel arrangement however, this exercise proved to be unsuccessful with only four submissions being received across all categories.

To meet the ongoing operational needs for Bellbird, it is recommended that Council continue to use the suppliers listed below by endorsing a formal engagement process with these suppliers for up to five years (to January 2025) pursuant to 55(3)(i) of the Local Government Act 1993.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council exempt the purchase of meat, seafood, fruit and vegetables, dry goods, dairy products and bakery goods from the tender and formal quotation process, and delegate authority to the CEO or her delegate to negotiate directly with the below suppliers to continue their engagement with Council to provide supplies to Bellbird Bar and Dining for up to five years (to January 2025) pursuant to 55(3)(i) of the Local Government Act 1993, for the following reasons:

a) These suppliers have a proven record of providing highest quality fresh and dry good supplies at competitive prices; and

Category	Suppliers
Meat Products	· City Meats · Andrews Meat Industries · Vic Meats · Campisi Continental Butchery · Haverick Meats Pty Ltd · Pendle Hill Meat Market
Seafood Products	· Foodlink Australia Pty Ltd · Fishboyz Pty Ltd · Bidbest Australia · De Costi · M & G Seafoods · Poulos Bros Seafoods
Fruit and Vegetables	· Sydney Direct Fresh Produce · Tom & Franks Wholesale Fruit & Vegetables · Simon George & Sons · Premier Fruit & Vegetables · Harvest Fresh Australia · Samson's Fruit and Vegetables
Dry Goods	· Foodlink Australia Pty Ltd · Fishboyz Pty Ltd · Bidbest Australia · PFD Food Services · Plateau Food Distribution
Dairy Products	· Xu Family Group · Simotas Food Distributors · Parmalat · Food & Dairy Co · Nicks Food · Dairy Solutions
Bakery Goods	· Sabroso Bread n More · VSE International

b) A competitive market-testing process has been undertaken, and the response is considered unsatisfactory to meet the needs of Council.

REPORT

Bellbird Bar and Dining is a Council-owned and run restaurant located within the Casula Powerhouse Arts Centre. Historically, and owing to the nature of sourcing for fresh and seasonal ingredients necessary in quality restaurant operations, the restaurant has not fitted neatly within the requirements of Council’s procurement standards. Bellbird Bar and Dining’s location is unique within the Casula Powerhouse Arts Centre and delivers a casual setting with a touch of fine dining. The restaurant creates a selection of modern Australian dishes using locally sourced seasonal produce that draw influences from French, Asian and South American cuisines. Whilst approximately 40% of its produce is picked straight from the CPAC garden the remainder of the produce is sourced either locally or regionally.

A formal quote process was undertaken with the view of creating a panel arrangement however, this exercise proved to be unsuccessful with only four submissions being received across all categories.

Through the e-tendering portal the formal quotation process was undertaken for the supply of seafood, meat, dry goods, dairy products, bakery, fruit and vegetables. Given the nature of the industry the response was less than favourable with only two responses from dry good suppliers, one each from bakery and fruit and vegetable suppliers and no responses received from seafood, meat or dairy suppliers.

Procurement Services contacted a number of suppliers before the deadline to encourage submissions however the unanimous response was that they did not have the time to complete the paperwork and that online ordering facilities were available for use by Bellbird. The fresh produce suppliers were also not prepared to quote on price as their prices are market-based and change from day to day.

Fresh produce is routinely sourced with local suppliers, with the majority of existing suppliers being small businesses who do not have the experience, time or staff available to complete the paperwork required to respond to the Request for Quote.

Bellbird currently deals directly with these suppliers, and the building of a trusting relationship gives Bellbird an advantage in getting the best prices possible when purchasing their fresh produce, which also means that Bellbird is supporting the local community and economy.

The supply quantities ordered by Bellbird are relatively small compared to other restaurants, due primarily to the fact that Bellbird is not open for dinner, which may be a contributing factor for disinterest from larger suppliers.

For the above reasons, this report recommends that Council, under s.55(3)(i) of the Local Government Act 1993, resolve to exempt the requirement for a formal quotation or tender process for engaging suppliers to provide ongoing supplies as listed above for the next five years.

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	There are no civic leadership and governance considerations.
Legislative	There are no legislative considerations relating to this report.

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

Ordinary Meeting 11 December 2019

City Community and Culture Report

COM 02

Response to QWN 05 from 28 August 2019 - consultation with Liverpool's ageing community

Strategic Direction	Creating Connection Implement access and equity for all members of the community
File Ref	285392.2019
Report By	Galavizh Ahmadi Nia - Manager Community Development and Planning
Approved By	Dr Eddie Jackson - Director City Community and Culture

Executive Summary

At the Council meeting held on 28 August 2019, the following motion on a Question with Notice was carried:

That Council:

1. Notes the special needs of Liverpool’s ageing population; and

2. Receives a report back to the December 2019 Council meeting on how Council can identify and address the special needs of the ageing population in the community through Consultation Policy and Procedures and Council’s Social Impact Policy and Procedures.

This report is tabled in order to present Council’s current engagement methods and strategies with Liverpool’s ageing population; and to highlight mechanisms to identify and respond to their needs in accordance with Council’s Community Engagement and Social Impact Assessment (SIA) policies.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council receives and notes this report.

REPORT

Seniors are a significant and growing part of the local community. It is predicted that 30% of the world’s population will be over 65 years by 2050 (compared with 16% now). The current average life expectancy is 83 years, which is likely to increase with advances in medical technology and increased standards of living over time

According to the 2016 census, residents aged over 65 years represent 10.4% of Liverpool’s population, compared to 16% of the population in New South Wales and Australia. Statistically speaking, Liverpool’s population currently in this age bracket is thus significantly lower than both the state and national averages.

However, the percentage of the population in Liverpool aged over 65 years is expected to increase to 14.1% by 2041. By comparison, all population groups in Liverpool below 35 years of age are expected to decrease in the next 20 years, demonstrating that seniors will represent a significant and growing percentage of the Liverpool population during that time.

People in NSW are living longer, with the average life expectancy of 83 years projected to increase by about 9 years by 2050. The proportion of the population made up of people aged 65 and over is projected to increase to 22% in 2031 and 26% by 2051. This demographic trend will present both new opportunities and challenges.

The Cooperative Research Centre (CRC) has conducted a research on the important economic and social contributions made by older Australians. The research identified that social connection and interaction as being important to people 65 years and over, and to be valued for their contribution to society rather than a ‘burden’ on the ‘working age’ community. Particular to economic contributions, people in this age group want to make further contributions, whether that is continuing to work past retirement age, sharing their experiences as mentors and guides for young people in the workforce, or providing opportunities for ageing community members to upskill and learn new skills. These findings correlate with the feedback received from Liverpool older population, reported on page five of this report.

STRATEGIC APPROACH TO MEETING THE NEEDS OF THE AGEING POPULATION

Council has a key role in creating a socially just, inclusive and sustainable community. This responsibility is shared with the federal and state governments and the non-government sector. To uphold this role, the process of identifying and responding to the needs of vulnerable groups in the community, including the ageing community, is paramount. In this regard, understanding the special needs and capabilities of the ageing population assists Council to plan ahead for challenges and opportunities.

Overarching strategic documents such as the Community Strategic Plan (Our Home Liverpool, 2027), Social Justice Policy and Social Impact Assessment Policy are some of the guiding documents that inform directions and strategies when working with Liverpool’s ageing populations. A summary of each document and its reference to the ageing population is set out below:

Community Strategic Plan (Our Home Liverpool, 2027):

The plan acknowledges Liverpool as a city with a very diverse population that faces numerous challenges. The first of four strategic directions established by the plan is “Creating Connections”: this direction emphasises the importance of social connections within Liverpool to create a harmonious community and making sure access to its facilities and services is provided to all, including the special needs of Liverpool’s ageing population.

Social Justice Policy

The Policy is an overarching commitment to Council’s effort to redress the impact of social and economic inequalities both on the people experiencing it and on the wider community. Through the Policy, Council recognises that there are several groups within our community who may be categorised as disadvantaged and/or at considerable risk due to different circumstances. In regard to our ageing population, these circumstances may have led to issues around social isolation, financial difficulties, access and representation. Council acknowledges this fact and confirms its commitment to support adequate delivery of programs, services, information and opportunities to these groups. Council will do this through our convening role to facilitate local collaboration for program planning and delivery, community consultation, advocacy and provision of funds through Council’s Grant and Donations Program.

Social Impact Assessment Policy

The policy, through its rigorous mechanisms for assessing, monitoring and managing the social consequences of any planned intervention, makes sure that the voices of Liverpool’s marginalised groups, including our ageing population are heard during the decision making process. This includes ensuring effective engagement with affected groups in our community, to identify, understand and manage the specific needs they might have. For example; any residential development application that intends to create housing options for Liverpool’s ageing population is required to complete a Comprehensive Social Impact Assessment (CSIA) to ensure best design outcomes for seniors are achieved. In relation to our aging population, understanding and ensuring their specific needs are at the forefront of planning and decision making processes is one of the main purposes of the subject policy.

Community Engagement Policy

The Policy affirms Council’s commitment to community engagement and supporting effective, coordinated and consistent community engagement practices across the whole of Council. It acknowledges that community participation and input add value to all of Council’s, planning and decision making, leading to better and more sustainable outcomes. The Policy sets out the guiding principles for community engagement which provides direction and guidance when planning Council’s engagement activities to ensure that engagement is tailored to be relevant and appropriate for specific target groups.

Other key strategies

Council’s Recreation, Open Space and Sports Strategy; Community Facilities Strategy and Disability Inclusion Action Plan includes guiding principles that reflect best practice approaches to open space management, and design and planning for sports and recreation and community facilities. The strategies provide guidance for the planning of programs, services and facilities to ensure they consider and meet the needs of the ageing population and include:

· Planning for the future;

· Equity and access – the needs of parents and children, older persons and people with disability are given a high priority;

· Integrated and multi-purpose facilities – to ensure Council’s facilities are built to meet diverse needs of the community including older people;

· Accessibility and Connectivity – for all age and interest groups including people with a disability and low mobility; and

· Safer by design principles.

Recent examples of community infrastructure projects planned or delivered with consideration to the needs of diverse age groups and interest groups include:

· Development of Lighthorse Park Masterplan;

· Revitalisation of Bigge Park;

· Planning of McGirr Park Tennis Courts;

· Planning for Georges River Boardwalk and Pedestrian Cycleway Bridge;

· Delivery of inclusive play equipment at Carnes Hill Community and Recreation Precinct; and

· Delivery of Casula Parklands.

ENGAGEMENT MECHANISMS OF WORKING WITH AGEING POPULATION

Council has in place comprehensive and diverse engagement mechanisms with Liverpool’s ageing population in various capacities such as leading, convening, co-convening, partnering and supporting roles. Council has developed Accessible Consultation Guidelines, an internal resource for staff when engaging with both seniors and people with disability in the Liverpool community. The Guidelines outline ways that Council can tailor its engagement methods in order to ensure that any consultation with these specific community groups is suited to their needs.

The following are examples of Council’s engagement methods with residents and government and non-government agencies:

· Co-convening the South West Sydney Aged and Disability Forum – the Forum provides an opportunity for Council to gain a detailed understanding of the needs of the ageing community through its relationships with key organisations and service providers in the aged and disability sector;

· Convening the Liverpool Access Committee – the Committee provides advice to Council on issues of mobility and access for people with disability and seniors in Liverpool. This Committee provides a mechanism through which Council consults with seniors and people with a disability in Liverpool. The Liverpool Access Committee is an endorsed and important engagement tool to ensure that Council facilities and services meet the needs of these specific community groups.

· Community engagement events including:

o Facilitating opportunities for ageing community members to engage through tailored events and programs. For example, as part of the New South Wales Seniors Festival, Council hosted an event at Casula Powerhouse Arts Centre which featured entertainment, food and the opportunity to engage with Council and the wider community. This event is held annually and is tailored specifically to seniors. Additionally, as part of the 2019 Seniors Festival, Council hosted a series of information sessions in March and April 2019 which provided information and resources on services and supports specific to seniors. Topics included support in navigating the My Aged Care online portal, information regarding Centrelink entitlements and other financial benefits, and advice on preparing wills, guardianship arrangements and powers of attorney; and

o Hosting the annual Seniors Concert. These concerts provide an opportunity to socialise and engage with other aged residents in the Liverpool area. Over 900 local aged residents attend this event each year. Council utilises this event as a way to consult with aged residents. This year, Council consulted seniors on what is most important to them as they age in Liverpool, and what barriers they experience to ageing well in Liverpool that Council may be able to support. The highlights of community feedback are outlined in the consultation section of this report.

· Assessing the needs of the ageing community as part of Council’s review of Social Impact Assessments for development proposals.

Consultation also occurs through the Liverpool District Forums and various research studies related to safety and community infrastructure planning for example, Council is currently participating in a research project being conducted by the University of New South Wales. The “Healthy Ageing and Policy Environment in Liverpool” research study aims to explore the ways that governments plan for the diverse needs of an ageing population and incorporate an inclusive, age-friendly perspective into public policy decision-making. A number of Council staff have participated in this project, providing advice and information on Council’s role in planning for the ageing population to meet the needs of Liverpool’s ageing population. This research project will include discussions with the local ageing community to provide an insight into their experience of mobility and access in Liverpool to ultimately inform Council’s decision – making and priority-setting relating to an age-friendly city.

CONSULTATION

Council staff recently consulted with over 400 aged community members at the annual Seniors Concert held on 20 – 21 November. As part of this consultation, seniors were asked two questions, with four suggested answers, as well as the opportunity to provide their own unique responses:

· What is most important to me?

o Healthy mind and body

o Being able to socialise

o Feeling safe

o Feeling part of my community

· What barrier affects me most?

o Transport and access

o Technology

o Lack of information

o My personal wellbeing

The majority of participants identified having a healthy mind and body and feeling safe as what matters most to them. Anecdotally, many seniors spoke of how remaining physically healthy contributed to their overall ability to be part of their community.

The barriers which most residents identified as a challenge for them was transport and access. A number of participants spoke of the difficulty of parking in the Liverpool City Centre, and limited public transport options, particularly the frequency of bus services to some areas. Many seniors identified this as a barrier to ageing well in Liverpool.

The feedback from the consultation will be made available to Council departments for consideration and to inform policies and strategic directions, where relevant, toward creating and maintaining an age-friendly city. This will include drawing on these results as evidence when advocating for the needs of Liverpool’s ageing community with relevant agencies such as Transport for NSW, Roads and Maritime Services, NSW Health and NSW Police.

Council will continue to consult residents, including ageing residents, using a range of mechanisms to explore opportunities for the ageing population to draw on their knowledge, skills and life experiences to inform decisions; and to ensure the needs of all community members are considered in the planning and delivery of Council’s programs, services and facilities.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	Consultation and program cost budgeted in the operational budgets.
Environment	There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.
Social	Raise awareness in the community about the available services and facilities. Regulate for a mix of housing types that responds to different population groups such as young families and older people. Support community organisations, groups and volunteers to deliver coordinated services to the community. Support access and services for people with a disability.
Civic Leadership	Undertake communication practices with the community and stakeholders across a range of media. Foster neighbourhood pride and a sense of responsibility. Encourage the community to engage in Council initiatives and actions. Deliver services that are customer focused. Actively advocate for federal and state government support, funding and services.
Legislative	There are no legislative considerations relating to this report.

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

Ordinary Meeting 11 December 2019

City Corporate Report

CORP 01

Single Source Software Solution for Council - Proposed Procurement Process

Strategic Direction	Leading through Collaboration Strive for best practice in all Council processes
File Ref	287415.2019
Report By	Chris White - Director City Corporate
Approved By	Chris White - Director City Corporate

Executive Summary

On 25 September 2019, staff reported to Council on the question of exempting various software applications from the tender process, pending the commencement of a comprehensive market test directed at procuring a single source software system for corporate applications.

To this end, staff have now engaged Local Government Procurement (LGP) to assist in preparing suitable documentation to progress the receipt of proposals from the major providers in the market who have a current solution that may meet Council’s needs.

LGP has recommended that staff seek a proactive tender exemption for the proposed procurement process concerning Single Source Software, in order to ensure Council’s support for the project before work is progressed.

This report addresses that request, and seeks Council support for the proposed procurement process.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1) Endorse the strategic direction proposed by the report of staff, and progress the process to engage with a provider of an enterprise-level software solution from a single provider with established products and experience in the NSW local government sector (“Single Source Software Solution”);

2) Exempt the proposed purchase of a Single Source Software Solution for Council from the Expression-Of-Interest component of the selective tender process, pursuant to s.55(3)(i) of the Local Government Act 1993, on the following basis, and for the following reasons:

a) Council are seeking to engage with a current, established provider of comprehensive, local-government-focused software systems that offer broad functionality across the most critical areas of local government operations;

b) Following a careful review by staff, there are only three known providers with systems that may potentially meet Council’s needs, namely:

i) Technology One Ltd (and its associated entities);

ii) Infor Global Solutions Pty Ltd (and its associated entities); and

iii) Civica Pty Ltd (and its associated entities);

c) Staff will undertake a comprehensive selective tender in relation to the product offerings of the above entities, under the guidance of both Local Government Procurement, and external probity advisors; and

d) Staff will report the outcomes of this market testing process to Council for a final decision on the provider to be selected for the Single Source Software Solution.

REPORT

Background:

Over the past two decades or more, Liverpool City Council has adopted a “best of breed” approach to procuring software technologies for internal and external service delivery. As a consequence, Council’s technology environment has evolved in complexity, to the point where its four most significant systems (being Customer Relationship Management (CRM), Finance, Document Management, and Assets) are all provided by different companies - namely:

· Content Manager (aka “Trim”) - since 2009;

· Technology One (financials) - since 2006;

· Assetic (asset management) - since 2015;

· Infor Pathway (rates and CRM) - since 2001.

In addition to the above systems and providers, Council has at least 15 additional systems covering various additional areas of functionality such as asset management, human resources and payroll, compliance, library services, children’s services, and safety (among others).

These systems have some degree of interoperability, which has allowed for channels of integration. However, Council staff have started the journey of investigating a possible move to a consolidated system that will be able to perform most, if not all, of the above-mentioned functions.

Proposed Single-Source Software Solution:

Based on staff research to date, the high-level benefits of such a system are expected to include:

A. Improved customer experience, in the form of options to migrate more and improved services online, and the possibility of introducing customer access accounts to monitor their interactions with Council.

B. Streamlined business processes, allowing staff to perform most or all of their day-to-day tasks in the one system environment;

C. Improved data management practices, in that fewer data sets will be required in a single-source environment (promoting better data quality and reduced re-work and data entry requirements);

D. Improved data reporting and dashboarding, enabling improved strategic visibility of business metrics and better data comparison;

E. Reduced system complexity, improving overall system and workforce performance;

The option of Council building its own system, or partnering with an external provider to build a bespoke system, was considered. However, this was not considered feasible or desirable, for the following reasons:

1. Scale – Council’s expected spend across the range of systems required is not expected to be sufficient to enable the development and maintenance of a bespoke system;

2. Risk – Council would be committed to a system which is not widely used across the sector, introducing risks around compatibility and system security, as well as unique financial and reputational risks in the event of issues with the system;

3. Shared costs and benefits – Being a part of a broader system environment, funded by a large number of other similar client councils, offers the potential for Council to share in development of new products and services at a much lower cost;

4. Development time – building a bespoke system that requires ground-up development will take significant time, which will not be necessary in the case of acquiring a currently-available solution.

The executive also considered the option of continuing with current processes of following a “best-of-breed” approach with manual integration. However, the clear benefits of a single-source solution were considered too good to ignore.

To this end, Council’s executive recently endorsed a consideration of a single-source software approach, aimed at replacing the majority of existing systems with a single-source solution over the coming 3-5 years.

Council’s executive has established the following broad expectations for a new single-source system environment:

i) The provider of the new system must have a proven track record of performance within a NSW local government context;

ii) The provider of the new system must be capable of providing a single-source, enterprise-level solution that will meet a broad range of Council’s software needs;

iii) The provider in question must be able to demonstrate a strong commitment to local government technology and systems, through both a past and committed future stream of investment in systems relevant to local government operations;

iv) The provider in question must be able to demonstrate their products across the key areas of local government operations, and be in a position to submit their products to comparison in a qualitative test involving competitive systems;

v) Council must be confident that the providers included in a market test will remain committed to their local-government-based systems for the foreseeable future.

Staff have performed significant research into the options available for improving Council’s system performance on the basis of the criteria above. At present, it is considered that only three providers meet this criteria – specifically:

· Technology One Ltd (and its associated entities);

· Infor Global Solutions Pty Ltd (and its associated entities); and

· Civica Pty Ltd (and its associated entities).

It should be noted that Council currently has discrete systems from all three of these providers.

Procurement Requirements:

The expected annual cost of a single-source software solution, together with associated hosting and/or maintenance costs, will be well in excess of the legislated tender threshold. In addition, given the long commitments required for such contracts, it is expected that the overall commitment throughout the life of such a contract will exceed the Chief Executive Officer’s delegated authority to approve. As such, the determination of this process will be a matter for Council.

Ordinarily, and pursuant to clauses 167-168 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005, such processes could be conducted either by way of a public tender, or an Expression Of Interest (followed by a selective tender).

Given there are only three potential providers for this proposed purchase, staff recommend that approval be given to run a selective tender under clause 168 (involving the identified providers), without the need for an Expression of Interest (EOI).

This is possible pursuant to s.55(3)(i) of the Local Government Act 1993, and will save significant time in the procurement process by avoiding the need for an EOI. Staff recommend that such an allowance be given, in order to expedite the process.

The results of the proposed selective tender will then be reported to Council, together with a comprehensive evaluation report and recommendation.

As previously noted, this exercise is highly complicated. Staff are working with Local Government Procurement and with external probity advisors to progress the specification and undertake further qualitative assessment of all three providers’ products (which has already been ongoing for many months). Once documentation is ready, staff intend to seek proposals from the three providers, with a goal of completing the report and recommendation to Council by April 2020.

At that time, and should Council elect to proceed, it is expected that at least 3-6 years will be required to migrate Council’s existing systems (and the underlying data sets) into the new environment.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	There are no economic and financial considerations.
Environment	There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.
Social	Raise awareness in the community about the available services and facilities. Support community organisations, groups and volunteers to deliver coordinated services to the community. Deliver high quality services for children and their families.
Civic Leadership	Undertake communication practices with the community and stakeholders across a range of media. Encourage the community to engage in Council initiatives and actions. Provide information about Council’s services, roles and decision making processes. Deliver services that are customer focused. Operate a well developed governance system that demonstrates accountability, transparency and ethical conduct.
Legislative	Local Government Act 1993, s.55(3)(i) Local Government (General) Regulation 2005, cl.167-168

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

Ordinary Meeting 11 December 2019

City Corporate Report

CORP 02

Reducing Red Tape - Development of Policies, Standards, Charters, Procedures and Strategies

Strategic Direction	Leading through Collaboration Strive for best practice in all Council processes
File Ref	298594.2019
Report By	Ellen Whittingstall - Coordinator Governance
Approved By	Chris White - Director City Corporate

Executive Summary

On 28 October 2019 Council endorsed the Development of Policies, Standards, Charters, Procedures and Strategies Framework (Framework), and directed the CEO to commence a process of workshopping existing policies with councillors, with a view to assessing each existing policy’s status under the framework by December 2020.

The initial three policies for review were presented at the November Councillor Briefing, and are now referred to Council for status review.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1) Rescind the following policies:

a) Development Engineering Bonds Policy;

b) Hoardings Policy; and

c) Erosion and Sediment Control Policy.

2) Note that the following proposed Standards are intended for adoption by the CEO under the Development of Policies Standards Charters Procedures and Strategies framework:

a) Development Engineering Bonds Standard (included as Attachment 1 to the report of staff); and

b) Hoardings Standard (included as Attachment 2 to the report of staff).

REPORT

The Framework identifies five tiers of policy and procedural documents, and defines the features of each type of document. This will allow the policy burden on Council to be reduced, and mandates operational processes to be managed by the CEO.

In accordance with the Framework, and following a briefing with councilors, the following policies are intended to be revised as Standards and/or Procedures:

i) Hoardings Standard and Procedure.

ii) Development Engineering Bonds Standard.

The proposed revised standards, in each case, included as attachments to this report.

The Erosion and Sediment Control Standard was not drafted as all requirements for sediment and erosion controls are covered in the Development Control Plan Part 1. It is also a standard requirement for all Development Application (DA) lodgments involving construction that a sediment and erosion control plan be submitted. As part of the conditions of consent issued for a DA there are standard erosion and sediment control conditions imposed. Based on the above, the need of a separate erosion and sediment control policy is not required.

It is recommended that Council rescind the polices in question, and note the proposed standards intended for adoption by the CEO.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	Facilitate economic development.
Environment	Raise community awareness and support action in relation to environmental issues.
Social	There are no social and cultural considerations.
Civic Leadership	Undertake communication practices with the community and stakeholders across a range of media. Deliver services that are customer focused. Operate a well developed governance system that demonstrates accountability, transparency and ethical conduct.
Legislative	There are no legislative considerations relating to this report.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Development Engineering Bonds Standard (Under separate cover)

2. Hoardings Standard (Under separate cover)

Ordinary Meeting 11 December 2019

City Corporate Report

CORP 03

Woodward Place Public Engagement

Strategic Direction	Creating Connection Celebrate diversity, promote inclusion and recognise heritage
File Ref	300463.2019
Report By	Rithy Poch - Senior Project Manager
Approved By	Chris White - Director City Corporate

Executive Summary

Liverpool City Council is progressing with the development of the Woodward Place Masterplan - an aspirational 25 year plan for an iconic lifestyle precinct at the heart of Liverpool, with world class facilities to support a connected and diverse community.

The goal of the masterplan is to elevate the current Woodward Park site to provide high quality multi-use facilities that offer both a regional benchmark for design and maximise community use.

Due to the timing of major events such as Australia Day and the ‘pop-up’ inflatable waterplay at Woodward Place, Council project staff and the engagement team see an opportunity to re-engage with the existing on-site users from December 2019 to provide update and undertake direct community engagement.

It is considered prudent that engagement be undertaken from December 2019 to February 2020 to meaningfully contribute to and inform the design process that will ultimately lead to the draft final masterplan. Community engagement will assist in bridging the gap between current and future uses and assist the design process to contribute to community ownership of Woodward Place as part of the masterplan process.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Approves the endorsed Woodward Place blueprint to be the ‘public facing document’ to inform the community engagement process;

2. Direct the Chief Executive Officer to commence community, on-site stakeholders, and agency consultation to inform and support the development of the draft final masterplan; and

3. Note that the design schemes will remain confidential until a draft masterplan is finalised and briefed to Council.

REPORT

Background

On the 12 December 2018 meeting, Council approved and adopted the Woodward Place Blueprint to progress the development of the Woodward Place Masterplan.

In March 2019, prior to the Expressions of Interest for a design team, Council staff engaged with on-site users and community hire groups to advise of Council’s intentions concerning the master planning of Woodward Place.

On 28 August 2019, Councillor introductions were provided to the awarded design team and on 29 August 2019, internal staff engaged in a design workshop which provided valuable input into a design process that explored a range of options for the site.

A further Councillor briefing update was provided on 29 October 2019, with feedback received over the three conceptual framework options for the initial concepts.

Woodward Place Master Plan

Liverpool City Council is in the process of creating Woodward Place Masterplan - an aspirational 25 year plan for an iconic lifestyle precinct at the heart of Liverpool, with world class facilities to support a connected and diverse community.

Woodward Park is a landmark site in the heart of Liverpool. Within its 28 hectares at the heart of the City Centre, Liverpool City Council aims to transform Woodward Park into Woodward Place, a hub for city life.

The Masterplan is unique in its approach to providing place activation opportunities in the design of the site. From concept design to implementation and future programming, the site will put activation and vibrancy at its forefront to create a special and meaningful place in Liverpool.

Given probity concerns and potential commercial-in-confidence considerations relating to land values in the area, the design process must remain confidential. Councillors will be consulted in relation to these issues throughout the process.

Staff will use the previously endorsed Woodward Place blueprint and recent building typology precedents to engage with the public. These sources will provide ample opportunity for staff to engage with the public and draw ideas, without introducing any preconceived concepts.

The opportunity to engage with the full range of diverse stakeholders and cultures that enriches the Liverpool local government area is a key consideration in taking advantage of the Australia Day and the ‘pop-up’ inflatable water park event to be organized from 28 December 2019 to 27 January 2020.

Financial Implications

Council staff will utilise internal staff and external resources on the proposed Australia Day event as well as during the ‘pop-up’ inflatable water park activation period. Public engagement will be in or around the Council stall established for the event.

These costs can be funded within the current project budget.

Critical Dates / Timeframes

Following Council approval, the engagement schedule is proposed to include the following key steps:

Consultation with providers / stakeholders	December 2019 – February 2020
Consultation with patrons (Whitlam Leisure Centre)	December 2019 – February 2020
Consultation with the public (‘Pop-up’ inflatable park)	28 December 2019– 27 January 2020
Consultation with the public (Australia Day)	26 January 2020
Consultation with users (City Library)	December 2019 – February 2020
Consultation with community (On-line survey)	December 2019 – February 2020
Consultation with agencies (Land Council, Crown Land, RMS, etc…)	December 2019 – completion

Conclusion

The development of the Woodward Place masterplan is a strategic project necessary for the future development of the Liverpool CBD. It is a timely piece of work given the strategic growth of the Liverpool CBD and its connectivity to major state government infrastructure projects such as the Western Sydney Airport and the Aerotropolis.

All key stakeholders have expressed a desire for a masterplan that is distinctly Liverpool in character, and thus the on-going on-site user group and community consultation is a vital part of the design process to ensure that Woodward Place develops the necessary community ownership and participation.

With the masterplan being a few months away from the draft design stage, and with the upcoming major events of Australia Day and ‘pop-up’ inflatable water park activation being held at Woodward Place, a perfect opportunity exists for community engagement that will contribute significantly support the design program.

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	Raise awareness in the community about the available services and facilities. Provide cultural centres and activities for the enjoyment of the arts. Support policies and plans that prevent crime. Promote community harmony and address discrimination. Deliver high quality services for children and their families.
Civic Leadership	Undertake communication practices with the community and stakeholders across a range of media. Foster neighbourhood pride and a sense of responsibility. Facilitate the development of community leaders. Encourage the community to engage in Council initiatives and actions. Deliver services that are customer focused. Actively advocate for federal and state government support, funding and services.
Legislative	There are no legislative considerations relating to this report.

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

Ordinary Meeting 11 December 2019

City Corporate Report

CORP 04

Response to NOM 04 from 31 July 2019 - Opportunities for the Repurposing of Council Owned or Controlled Land for Affordable Housing

Strategic Direction	Leading through Collaboration Seek efficient and innovative methods to manage our resources
File Ref	300553.2019
Report By	Tina Sangiuliano – Strategic Organisational Change Manager
Approved By	Chris White - Director City Corporate

Executive Summary

At the Ordinary Council meeting on 29 May 2019, Council considered a report on the repurposing of the property at 75-77 Hill Road, Lurnea for affordable/community housing. At that meeting, Council resolved to endorse the repurposing of that property for housing, including community housing.

Subsequently, at its 31 July 2019 meeting, Council further resolved relevantly as follows (at NOM04):

That Council:

1. Directs the CEO to provide a report back to Council by December 2019 detailing opportunities for the repurposing of Council owned or controlled land in the LGA for the purpose of affordable housing, noting any action on any report will be subject to community consultation

This report details opportunities for the repurposing of Council owned or controlled land in the LGA for the possible delivery of affordable housing. In considering possible suitable sites, an analysis of the decommissioning of ageing, outdated and retired community buildings has been undertaken based on a range of factors, as outlined in the Community Facilities Strategy 2017, including location, proximity to other facilities, age, condition, occupancy and likely future capital costs. The rationalisation of these facilities has led Council officers to undertake an analysis of several of the identified facilities/sites within the report. A further assessment was conducted for repurposing options to include affordable housing, based on the selection of criteria on potential site suitability as outlined in the State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 (SEPP).

The evaluations are indicative only and they remain subject to a more detailed assessment of each facility, with particular consideration to other Council policies and strategies.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council receives and notes this report.

REPORT

In response to Council’s resolution of 31 July 2019, this report has been prepared to review the available options for repurposing of Council owned or controlled land in the LGA for the purpose of affordable housing.

In August 2017, Council endorsed the Community Facilities Strategy (Strategy). The aim of the Strategy was to transform Council’s ageing stock of community facilities into a world-class network of modern facilities that are attractive, flexible, address community need, and become a hub for community interaction – a focal point for community life. The rationalisation of these facilities has led Council officers to undertake a review of several of the identified sites within the report. This included an investigation into:

· combining facilities to form a new community recreation precinct in various identified locations;

· allow single purpose use facilities to be repurposed for other community uses; or

· potential sale of facilities to fund new district level services, and/or potentially repurpose for other purposes, including affordable housing.

Based on the broad outcomes of the Strategy, as well as the criteria contained in the State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 (SEPP), a further assessment was conducted for repurposing options for affordable housing based on a selection of criteria for potential site suitability, such as:

· land being surplus Council land and currently under-utilised

· land being designated ‘operational land’

· land being within 400 meters of transport hubs

· land being of suitable proximity to amenities

· land/site is not part of Council’s short-term Delivery Program of works

· land has economic potential which with affordable housing development, assists Council to realise the delivery of other infrastructure needs

· land designated ‘community land’ creates a strong business case to rezone and reclassify a portion of land to provide affordable/community housing

The recommendations are indicative only and they remain subject to a more detailed assessment of each facility, with particular consideration to other Council policies and strategies.

Case for Affordable/Community Housing

Studies based on international and national level data present a direct correlation between affordable housing provision and rates of homelessness and the capacity to increase the quality of life for socio-economically disadvantaged communities. A lack of affordable housing supply creates a new cohort of homeless persons/families who have trouble entering and/or remaining in the private rental market. Increasing the supply of affordable housing is the simplest step local governments can take to create a tangible furtherance for this situation.

One of the biggest roadblocks for local governments tackling the problem is the considerable gap between the identification of housing need, and development of appropriate plans and regulations to ensure the delivery of the facilities in locations where the highest need exists. Liverpool has the potential to accommodate more affordable housing given our LGA’s overall growth rate. Specific opportunities are presented by major infrastructure that occur adjacent to some of our LGA’s most disadvantaged areas.

Drivers for better outcomes and increased efficiency in affordable/community housing include size, design and location. Most of the existing supply of social and affordable housing is out of sync with the changing demographics. Recent data suggests that the demand for one or two-bedroom dwellings outstrips the supply, which results in under-utilisation or inappropriate housing match with the required social needs.

Design is important as it can influence outcomes relating to social inclusion, social justice and place making. Design choice also affects people with specific needs such as accessibility to accommodation and proximity to services.

The location of any housing facility is vital for its long-term success. Outdated policies usually increase social exclusion by inadvertently displacing people on lower incomes. In New South Wales, 28% of affordable social housing tenants are unemployed, 94% receive Centrelink benefits as their primary income. In many areas of affordable social housing jobs are limited. The delivery of more affordable housing developments around key transit precincts and activity centres with links to schools, community hubs, transport and sporting amenities is critical.

Social Justice Policy

Council’s Social Justice Policy, adopted in 2018, recognises that Liverpool is one of the fastest growing LGAs in Australia with high proportions of people from culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) backgrounds. As a result, Liverpool faces challenges regarding social disadvantage in the context of rapid growth. There is a need for capacity building in pockets of significant socio-economic disadvantage.

Some of the principles enshrined in the policy include equity, access and community strength. The policy aims to establish systemic, structural and social arrangements to improve equal opportunity as a core social value in our city. It involves finding the optimal balance between joint responsibilities as a community and as individuals to foster social inclusion, strengthening the local community and increasing opportunities for people who may experience barriers or disadvantage.

Council’s role in Affordable and Community Housing

The delivery of affordable community housing falls outside the core services Council typically provides. However, in support of Council’s Social Justice Policy, surplus land can be used to provide a service to increase affordable and community housing stock.

In addition, Council is currently preparing a Local Housing Strategy, reflecting key priorities and targets of the Western City District Plan, and Council’s Local Strategic Planning Statement. The Strategy will set a clear plan for types and location of new housing in the LGA over the next 10 and 20 years. This will set Council’s 6-10 year housing target. The Strategy is informed by the recent 2019 Local Housing Study, which indicated that while Council has enough zoned land to meet demand for new housing, there is more action needed to improve the diversity and affordability of housing. The Strategy will specifically address affordable rental housing, in addition to other methods to increase housing affordability.

Assessment of Suitable Sites:

The table below provides an assessment of Council-owned facilities, identified to be rationalised as part of the Strategy, and reviews their suitability for affordable housing under the criteria contained within the SEPP. The SEPP has some relevant criteria regarding the best location for affordable housing. They include land area and designation, zoning and residential permissibility and accessible area. They are used in the table below, together with some other council specific criteria to evaluate suitability of available sites.

Facility name	Recommendation in Community Facilities strategy	Current Community Need	Rationale for possible repurpose	Land Area and Designation	Zoning & Residential Permissibility	Accessible Area*
Junction Youth Centre 11^th Avenue, Austral.	Rationalise (within 10years)	-Only facility currently servicing Austral community -Size and quality of facility currently suitable for demand -Alternative not met by market	-Old Facility -Planning work underway for new district facility in major town centre Planning underway for new neighbourhood facility in northern section of austral release area -Retain until development in Austral proceeds New district facility	Crown 97,120 sqm	RE1 – Residential accommodation not permissible.	No. Nearest bus stop on Edmondson Ave is 400m walk. Bus frequency does not meet the definition of a regular service.
Chipping Norton Community Centre Cnr Central Avenue and Homestead Avenue, Chipping Norton.	Rationalise (within 10years)	-One of two facility currently servicing Chipping Norton community -Not heavily utilised by community	-Low occupancy -Low visibility -Masterplan for area currently underway which can investigate combining all facilities in one central location. The masterplan can investigate a new district facility in the Chipping Norton Lakes Precinct that accommodates multi-purpose community centre, café/restaurant and other complementary uses	Crown 36,040 sqm	RE1 – Residential accommodation not permissible.	No.
Oliveri/City Office Hall Cnr Tantangara Street and Jundabyne Street, Heckenberg.	Rationalise (within 5 years)	-Currently has single purposed licensed tenant (NGO)	-Relocation of NGO to neighbouring centre in Hinchinbrook Community Centre -Expired economic life -Poor location	Operational 1,056 sqm	B1 – Residential uses permissible as shop-top housing only.	Yes. Bus stop 175m walk on Matthew Ave with two services per hour.
Dr CR O’Brien Hall 30 Woodard Crescent, Miller.	Rationalise (within 5 years)	-Currently has single purposed licensed tenant (NGO)	All Sites identified are: -Nearing end of Economic life - Masterplan for area currently underway which can investigate combining all facilities in one central location. The masterplan can investigate a new community recreation precinct that may include some or all of the following elements:, Multi-purpose community facility, library, space for health services and NGO’s operating in the Miller and 2168 postcode area. Co-located with renewed Michael Wenden Centre	Operational 816 sqm	B2 – Residential uses permissible on 1^st floor and above.	Yes. Bus stop 70m walk on Woodward Cres with 5-6 services per hour.
Miller Community Centre 30 Woodard Crescent, Miller.	Rationalise (within 5 years)	Currently has single purposed licensed tenant (NGO)		Included above	As above.	As above.
Miller Health Centre 30 Woodard Crescent, Miller.	Rationalise (within 5 years)	Currently has single purposed licensed tenant (NGO)		Included above	As above.	As above.
Miller Senior Citizens Centre 29 Shropshire Street, Miller.	Rationalise	Has deed covering use		Community Land 393 sqm	RE1 – Residential accommodation not permissible.	Yes. Bus stop 170m walk on Woodward Cres with 5-6 services per hour.

* Accessible Area

Area that meets the definition of an accessible area as per clause 4 of the SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009:

Accessible area means land that is within:

(a) 800 metres walking distance of a public entrance to a railway station or a wharf from which a Sydney Ferries ferry service operates, or

(b) 400 metres walking distance of a public entrance to a light rail station or, in the case of a light rail station with no entrance, 400 metres walking distance of a platform of the light rail station, or)

(c) 400 metres walking distance of a bus stop used by a regular bus service (within the meaning of the Passenger Transport Act 1990) that has at least one bus per hour servicing the bus stop between 06.00 and 21.00 each day from Monday to Friday (both days inclusive) and between 08.00 and 18.00 on each Saturday and Sunday.

From the above analysis of Council facilities that have been identified for rationalisation over the next 5-10 yrs for the potential use as Affordable Housing, only those facilities at Miller appear to address the required criteria. In this regard, it is considered prudent that a more thorough review be undertaken as part of the review of the Miller Master Plan 2016, currently underway.

It is acknowledged that Council also has significant volumes of other land available – much of it in the form of reserves, parks, pocket parks, and the like. An analysis of every single lot under the SEPP criteria would constitute a massive exercise. However, should any specific locations be identified by councilors as potentially suitable under the SEPP criteria, staff would welcome the opportunity to review them individually.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	Enhance the environmental performance of buildings and homes.
Environment	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. Support community organisations, groups and volunteers to deliver coordinated services to the community. Promote community harmony and address discrimination. Deliver high quality services for children and their families.
Civic Leadership	Undertake communication practices with the community and stakeholders across a range of media. Foster neighbourhood pride and a sense of responsibility. Encourage the community to engage in Council initiatives and actions. Provide information about Council’s services, roles and decision making processes. Deliver services that are customer focused. Operate a well developed governance system that demonstrates accountability, transparency and ethical conduct. Actively advocate for federal and state government support, funding and services.
Legislative	State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009.

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

Ordinary Meeting 11 December 2019

City Infrastructure and Environment Report

INF 01

Koala Habitat Corridors

Strategic Direction	Leading through Collaboration Strive for best practice in all Council processes
File Ref	292635.2019
Report By	Michael Zengovski - Manager City Environment
Approved By	Raj Autar - Director City Infrastructure and Environment

Executive Summary

Council, at its meeting held on 27 March 2019, considered a report regarding the creation and preservation of Koala habitat corridors as a means of stabilising Koala populations across the LGA. At this meeting, it was resolved that Council write to Sutherland Council and the Minister of Defence to seek their support in the creation of a preservation corridor through the Defence owned lands in Holsworthy.

This report provides an update on feedback received from Sutherland Council and the Minister for Defence Industry.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council receives and notes the report.

REPORT

Background

At its meeting held on 27 March 2019, Council resolved to:

1. Write to Sutherland Council seeking their support for the need for a koala corridor that links the Liverpool LGA and the Sutherland LGA through the Military owned land;

2. Seek their support to also contact the Minister of Defence seeking support for a connecting corridor;

3. Contact the Minister of Defence after the May election to maintain avocation for Koala corridor through the Defence land; and

4. Report back to the July Council meeting on all outcomes.

Koala Corridors through Defence Land

At a Councillor workshop held in November 2018, a Koala habitat corridor was identified linking the Georges River and Harris Creek, through the Holsworthy Defence lands. At a subsequent Council meeting, Council considered a report on Conservation of Koala Habitat Corridors and resolved to contact Sutherland Shire Council and Ministry of Defence seeking support for a Koala corridor through the Defence land.

Minister for Defence Industry, Melissa Price has written to Council advising that Defence is already actively participating in targeted conservation programs relevant to the Macarthur Koala population. The Minister has also advised that Defence is already complying with the pertinent legislation and policy relating to Koala conservation actions. Defence considers the existing Koala corridors to be sufficiently maintained with evidence of healthy koala activity within the Holsworthy Training Area. Based on the foregoing, Defence is of the view that there is no further requirement to undertake additional activity in relation to managing the koala population within Defence lands.

A copy of the letter from the Minister for Defence Industry, Melissa Price is attached.

While the response from Sutherland Shire Council has been more favourable and supportive of Council’s initiative (copy attached), in view of the response from the Minister for Defence Industry, Council considers that no further action can be taken at this stage.

Koala Safety in Liverpool

As has been previously reported, there are no other known populations of Koalas in the Liverpool LGA and current ecological data indicates that there are no areas of Council managed bushland capable of supporting Koalas. Extending the range of Koalas beyond the Holsworthy Defence land will subject Koalas to greater risk. This includes:

§ Starvation from inadequate source of food;

§ Vehicle strike on urban roads;

§ Predation by cats, dogs and foxes; and

§ General increase in stress levels increasing susceptibility to disease.

To that end, it is recommended no further measures be taken to extend Koala habitats beyond their existing natural range. Instead, continued support and advocacy for Koalas at a regional level is the most appropriate course of action. In this regard, Council will be donating an amount of $2400 to the Koala Hospital donated by Council staff,.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	There are no economic and financial considerations.
Environment	Protect, enhance and maintain areas of endangered ecological communities and high quality bushland as part of an attractive mix of land uses. Raise community awareness and support action in relation to environmental issues.
Social	There are no social and cultural considerations.
Civic Leadership	Act as an environmental leader in the community. Actively advocate for federal and state government support, funding and services.
Legislative	There are no legislative considerations relating to this report.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Reply regarding Koala Corridors - Minister for Defence

2. Reply regarding Koala Corridors - Sutherland Council

Ordinary Meeting 11 December 2019

City Infrastructure and Environment Report

INF 02

Peer review of Clean Air for New South Wales: 2018 Update (Doctors for the Environment Australia, 2019)

Strategic Direction	Strengthening and Protecting our Environment Exercise planning controls to create high-quality, inclusive urban environments
File Ref	288580.2019
Report By	David Smith - Manager Planning & Transport Strategy Michael Zengovski - Manager City Environment
Approved By	Raj Autar - Director City Infrastructure and Environment

Executive Summary

Council at its meeting of 27 March 2019 resolved following a recommendation of the Intermodal committee that Council:

Engage a suitably qualified consultant to peer review the air quality report by Dr Ben Altwood, whilst incorporating other data from local reports and Council’s air quality monitoring data, and report these findings back to the Intermodal Committee and Council.

Council engaged ERM Australia Pacific Pty Ltd through Cardno to undertake the peer review. The draft report was presented to the 14 August 2019 Intermodal committee meeting as required by the Council and is now presented to Council.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Receives and note this report; and

2. Notes that a range of actions have already been identified, which will over time assist to improve air quality in the LGA.

REPORT

As required by Council’s resolution of 27 March 2019, Council engaged ERM Australia Pacific Pty Ltd to undertake a peer review of the document “Clean Air for New South Wales: 2018 update” published by Doctors for the Environment, Australia (2019). The peer review report is included in Attachment 1.

A summary of the peer review reports findings is provided below:

· ERM’s review of OEH PM10 and PM2.5 monitoring data for the period 2010 to 2018 supports the DEA analysis that the air quality measured at the Liverpool OEH station is amongst the highest of the data collected in the Sydney Basin.

· Elevated short-term results from 2018 were due to the increase in the number of exceptional events, such as frequent exceptional events, such as dust storms, bushfires and hazard reduction burning. This is not unusual given the prolonged drought conditions currently being experienced in NSW.

· Based on the Sydney Particle Characterisation Study, smoke from biomass burning/diesel motor vehicles are the most common sources in the Sydney Basin, with secondary sulfates and motor vehicles the next most common sources. The study notes that the data from Liverpool shows a strong seasonal variation, with concentrations higher in winter months. The study assumed this is due to wood smoke and biomass burning from domestic heating and is not associated with bushfire events which are frequent in summer. Annual average concentrations of PM10 and PM2.5 have increased at all monitoring sites during 2018 compared with 2017. NSW EPA notes this is primarily due to the increase in the number of exceptional events, such as dust storms, bushfires and hazard reduction burning. Again, these have increased with the prolonged drought conditions across NSW.

· All the measured exceedances of the 24-hour average PM10 and PM2.5 standard at the Liverpool OEH monitoring station during 2018 were deemed by NSW EPA to be caused by exceptional events i.e. primarily due to hazard reduction burns, not solely as a result of pollution generated by transport or industry.

· The maximum 24-hour average PM10 and PM2.5 concentration and number of days the relevant criteria exceeded was higher at eight other western Sydney OEH station locations.

· Ozone concentrations in Liverpool were lower in 2018 than 2017. However, as ozone is a secondary pollutant, its formation is driven by both meteorology and pollution upwind of Liverpool.

Further, at its meeting of 28 August 2019, Council considered and endorsed a report (Attachment 2), which outlined a range of strategies to address air quality in Liverpool. In view of this, it is considered that the outcomes of the peer review be noted and Council continue to implement the identified improvement measures.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	There are no economic and financial considerations.
Environment	Manage air, water, noise and chemical pollution.
Social	There are no social and cultural considerations.
Civic Leadership	Act as an environmental leader in the community.
Legislative	There are no legislative considerations relating to this report.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Peer review of Clean Air for New South Wales: 2018 update (Under separate cover)

2. Clean Air for Liverpool - Council Report

Ordinary Meeting 11 December 2019

Committee Reports

CTTE 03

Minutes of the Liverpool Pedestrian, Active Transport and Traffic Committee meeting held on 13 November 2019

Strategic Direction	Generating Opportunity Advocate for, and develop, transport networks to create an accessible city
File Ref	296105.2019
Report By	Charles Wiafe - Service Manager Traffic and Transport
Approved By	Tim Moore - Director, City Economy and Growth / Deputy CEO

Executive Summary

This report presents the recommendations from the Liverpool Pedestrian, Active Transport and Traffic Committee meeting held on 13 November 2019. At the meeting, the Committee considered eleven (11) agenda items and eight (8) general business items.

The recommendations of the Committee are as follows:

RECOMMENDATION

That Council adopts the following recommendations of the Committee:

i) Item 1: Pacific Palm Circuit, Hoxton Park - Proposed combined crossing

· Approves the proposed pedestrian crossing facility and associated signs and linemarking scheme in front of the Malek Fahd Islamic School at 210 Pacific Palms Circuit, Hoxton Park.

ii) Item 2: Huckstepp Serviceway – Request for additional loading zone

· Approves the proposed loading zone.

iii) Item 3: 85 Sixteenth Avenue, Austral - Signage and Linemarking Scheme

· Approves the proposed signs and linemarking scheme.

iv) Item 4: Reilly Street, Liverpool – Request for a raised Pedestrian Crossing

· Approves the existing marked pedestrian crossing to a raised pedestrian crossing across the section of Reilly Street between Rowe and Macdonald Avenues, Liverpool.

v) Item 5: North Liverpool Road and Montgomery Road intersection, Green Valley – Proposed Roundabout Upgrade

· Approves the intersection upgrade with the associated signs and linemarking scheme.

vi) Item 6: Cartwright Avenue, Miller – Proposed raised threshold

· Approves the proposed raised threshold and associated signs and linemarking scheme.

vii) Item 7: Nuwarra Road, Moorebank – Decommissioning of bus stops

· Approves decommissioning redundant bus stops with the exception of the two bus stops for school services.

viii) Item 8: Parking arrangement for GoGet Vehicles

· Approves the signposting with RMS sign number R5-447 “No Parking Authorised Car Share Vehicles Excepted” at the 10 locations with GoGet to negotiate with shopping centres for additional parking locations.

ix) Item 9: Junction road, Moorebank – Proposed roundabout

· Approves installation of a roundabout.

x) Item 10: Items Approved Under Delegated Authority.

· Notes the traffic facilities approved under Delegated Authority between 19 September 2019 and 10 November 2019.

xi) Item 11: Proposed PATT committee meeting dates for 2020

· Council approves the following meeting dates and for inclusion in the corporate calendar:

Meeting Number	Date
1	Wednesday 29 January 2020
2	Wednesday 18 March 2020
3	Wednesday 20 May 2020
4	Wednesday 22 July 2020
5	Wednesday 23 September 2020
6	Wednesday 18 November 2020

REPORT

This report presents the recommendations of the Liverpool Pedestrian, Active Transport and Traffic Committee meeting held on 13 November 2019. At the meeting, the Committee considered eleven (11) agenda items and eight (8) general business items.

It is recommended that Council adopt the Committee’s recommendations on the agenda items as outlined above. The general business items discussed and recommended actions are as follows:

General Business Items

GB1 Liverpool City Centre Public Domain Master Plan

The Manager of City Design and Public Domain gave a presentation on the draft City Centre Urban Domain Master Plan and discussed with the Committee arrangements and possible impacts of the Master Plan. The Committee provided comments on suggested reduced signposted speeds in the City Centre, tree planting and impact on car parking provision. A full report on the master plan is included in the December business papers.

GB2 Delfin Drive – Request for Speed Humps

The Member for Holsworthy representative requested the committee consider the installation of speed humps across sections of Delfin Drive. Council would undertake a speed classification assessment and if required identify suitable locations for installation of speed humps and present options to a future committee meeting.

GB3 Edmondson Park the Mews - Proposed signs and linemarking

A proposed sign and linemarking scheme for two private roads in the Edmondson Park Town Centre development (referred to as Mews) was discussed. The RMS and the Police are to consider the scheme and provide concurrence under delegated authority.

GB4 College Street – Proposed Pedestrian Crossing facility and rearrangement of existing parking spaces

Design of a proposed pedestrian crossing facility across College Street was discussed. Copies of the design have been given the RMS, the Police and the local bus company representatives. Comments will be addressed in the design for further consideration.

GB5 Epsom Road, Chipping Norton

Councillor Rhodes advised that she has received representations for the faded 40km/h speed limit pavement marking to be re-linemarked. She also indicated that Epsom Road is now attracting through traffic and affecting turning movements to adjoining residential properties. It was discussed and agreed that Council could linemark the left and right turn approaches to Newbridge Road at the signalised intersection.

GB6 Hoxton Park Road near Cowpasture Road

Councillor Rhodes and Councillor Harle raised concern about speeding and noise particularly near the Cowpasture Road intersection and requested that the Police should enforce speeding along the two road sections.

GB7 Hill Road, Lurnea

Councillor Harle raised concern about emergency vehicles at the medical centre. Council will investigate parking and provide a response to Councillor Harle.

GB8 Airfield Drive, Len Waters Estate

The Chairperson request an update on proposed linemarking on the road section. Council to follow up on the request and provide further advice to the Chairperson.

GB9 Warwick Farm – 4P

The Chairperson requested update on changes to the parking close to the Warwick Farm station to 4P parking. Council technical advisers outlined that changes require Transport for NSW approval prior to consultation with local residents. Transport for NSW approval is yet to be obtained. Update will be provided on the issue next year.

Budget impact of matters arising from the minutes

Item	Description	Funding, Indicative Cost and Timing
1	Pacific Palm Circuit, Hoxton Park - Proposed combined crossing	Developer (Malek Fahd Islamic School).
2	Huckstepp Serviceway – Request for additional loading zone	RMS block grant $400. This financial year.
3	85 Sixteenth Avenue, Austral - Signage and Linemarking Scheme	Developer.
4	Reilly Street, Liverpool – Request for a raised Pedestrian Crossing	Council’s traffic facilities program. $50,000. 2019/2020 financial year.
5	North Liverpool Road and Montgomery Road intersection, Green Valley – Proposed Roundabout Upgrade	Federal Blackspot 2019/20 Program Grant.
6	Cartwright Avenue, Miller – Proposed raised threshold	Federal Blackspot 2019/20 Program Grant.
7	Nuwarra Road, Moorebank – Decommissioning of bus stops	RMS block grant $400. This financial year.
8	Parking arrangement for GoGet Vehicles	Developer (GoGet).
9	Junction Road, Moorebank – Proposed roundabout	Council’s traffic facilities program. $150,000. 2020/2021 financial year.
10	Items Approved Under Delegated Authority	RMS block grant funding and Council minor traffic facilities program. $2,500. This financial year.
11	Liverpool Pedestrian Active Transport and Traffic Committee recommended dates	No financial implication.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	Provide efficient parking for the City Centre. Deliver a high quality local road system including provision and maintenance of infrastructure and management of traffic issues.
Environment	Promote an integrated and user friendly public transport service. Support the delivery of a range of transport options.
Social	Support access and services for people with a disability. Improve road and pedestrian safety.
Civic Leadership	Actively advocate for federal and state government support, funding and services.
Legislative	NSW Roads Act 1993 NSW Road Rules NSW Road Transport (Safety & Traffic Management) Act 1999 Roads and Maritime Service’s Traffic Management and Road Design Guidelines Australian Standards Austroads Technical Guidelines

ATTACHMENTS

1. Liverpool Pedestrian, Active Transport and Traffic Committee Meeting Minutes 13 November 2019

Ordinary Meeting 11 December 2019

Questions with Notice

QWN 01

Question with Notice - Clr Hagarty - Granny Flats

Strategic Direction

Strengthening and Protecting our Environment

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

File Ref

301899.2019

QUESTION WITH NOTICE

Background

Granny flats, as the name suggests, are often used as housing for our older residents. Many older residents have limited financial means and downsize to a granny flat in order to live within those means.

Council recently introduced a contributions plan for the construction of granny flats. At present, there is no mechanism to enable payment of these contributions via instalments.

Please address the following:

1. What legal or other impediments are there to allowing the payment of contributions in instalments for those who can exhibit limited financial means?

Response

A granny flat, or secondary dwelling as it is now called, is a self-contained dwelling located on the same lot as a principal dwelling and located either within, attached to or detached from the principal dwelling.

Secondary dwellings are a traditional form of residential accommodation and an increasingly common form of housing. They are often developed as accommodation for family members and people on a low income and therefore make an important contribution to housing choice and affordability.

However, many secondary dwellings also represent a commercial decision by property owners. The population that occupy a growing number of secondary dwellings add to the demand for local infrastructure and services. Council should therefore have a consistent approach to payment of local infrastructure contributions for all new housing, including secondary dwellings.

Payment of local infrastructure contributions for secondary dwellings is required under:

· Liverpool Contributions Plan 2018 - Established Areas (see Figure 1); and

· Liverpool Contributions Plan 2008 – Austral and Leppington North (see Figure 2).

The above contribution plans require payment of the relevant contribution prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate or, in the case of a Complying Development Certificate (CDC), prior to commencement of work. These payments are prescribed by a condition of consent applied to development consents or CDCs. The majority of secondary dwellings are developed with a CDC.

At present, neither of the above contribution plans provide a mechanism for payment of contributions in instalments. The Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 and associated regulations do not address how payments are to be made. It is therefore up to the relevant contribution plan to determine these administrative arrangements. Any change to the timing of payments or to enable payment by instalment would require an amendment to the relevant contribution plans.

While there are no legislative impediments to Council enabling payments by instalment, Council are strongly advised against this course of action for the following reasons:

· Extending a form of credit for secondary dwelling developments could set a precedent for a similar approach with other development types;

· Following occupation of a secondary dwelling, Council would have limited means to ensure full recovery of payment instalments;

· Recovery of outstanding payment instalments would require Council to initiate often lengthy and expensive debt recovery processes; and

· Unrecovered debts would leave Council to cover the cost of infrastructure otherwise funded by contributions.

Council could consider amending the relevant contribution plan to allow the payment of contributions for secondary dwellings (approved with a development application) until a later point in the development/construction cycle, i.e. prior to the Occupation Certificate. Such a change would risk a loss of some contributions, in situations where a secondary dwelling development does not proceed to obtain an Occupation Certificate. The precedence of such an approach may also add pressure for this delayed payment to apply to other types of developments, with impact on the timely delivery of local infrastructure from delayed cash flows.

It is recommended the Council do not make any changes to the existing arrangements for payment of local infrastructure contributions for secondary dwellings.

Figure 1: Area within yellow boundary subject to contributions for secondary dwellings

Figure 2: Area within red boundary subject to contributions for secondary dwellings

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

Ordinary Meeting 11 December 2019

Questions with Notice

QWN 03

Question with Notice - Clr Hagarty - Feral Cats

Strategic Direction

Leading through Collaboration

Seek efficient and innovative methods to manage our resources

File Ref

301915.2019

QUESTION WITH NOTICE

Background

A vast majority of cat owners are responsible, caring and compassionate. They ensure their pets are easily identified through a collar or micro-chipping, are desexed and do not impose a danger to other animals. Council also does it part by offering free micro-chipping days and discounts for desexing.

Feral cats on the other hand kill native wildlife, damage property, rummage through residents bins and infect and attack domestic animals. They are a major problem no level of government appears willing or able to solve.

According to Council staff, feral cats fall under the responsibility of the Federal Department of the Environment and Energy. According to correspondence from the Federal Department of the Environment and Energy, the Australian Government is not responsible for the management of feral animals. The State Government advises Local Council enforces the relevant legislation, the Companion Animals Act 1998.

The Companion Animals Act 1998 states "any person may lawfully seize a cat if that action is reasonable and necessary for the protection of any person or animal (other than vermin) from injury or death". The Act is not entirely clear what can then be done with the caged feral cat once it is captured.

Please address the following:

1. Who is responsible for feral cats?

The Federal Department of the Environment and Energy is responsible for the implementation of the threat abatement plan which includes feral cats (refer to email from Julie Quinn – Assistant Director, Environmental Biosecurity Section). It would seem from her email that the Federal Government does not have a dedicated program for implementation.

State and Federal Governments have agreed to coordinate and expand national efforts to curb feral cats. On 8 November 2019 following a meeting of Environment Ministers it was agreed to form a working group aimed at extending control methods and developing new techniques to control feral cats.

Control methods used to capture feral cats include trapping and shooting. It is not an area that Council is experienced or resourced in.

2. What is Council's current policy for dealing with feral cats?

There is no policy for dealing with feral cats.

3. What legislative impediments currently exist that restrict residents and Council in dealing with feral cats?

Methods used for the management of wild animals in order to reduce adverse impacts on the environment must be humane, target specific and effective.

Codes of practice and standard operating procedures for the humane control of pest animals in Australia have been developed by the NSW Department of Primary Industries. These provide general information on best practice management for different animal species, including feral cats.

There are also standard operating procedures that describe specific control techniques and their application.

While there is no legislative impediments it is not recommended that residents deal with feral cats as their management is complex.

4. What penalties exist for residents who feed and otherwise allow feral cats to prosper?

There are no penalties.

5. What potential changes to the law could be made to allow residents and Council to better deal with feral cats?

Dogs can be declared "dangerous" or "menacing", would treating feral cats in a similar manner be useful?

Management of feral cats should be left with the State and Federal governments to deal with as specific management strategies need to be followed and applied.

Advice received from NSW Department of Primary Industries and in particular from the Invasive Species Officer, recommends that the Greater Sydney Local Land Services should be contacted regarding specific colonies of feral cats.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Email from Julie Quinn – Assistant Director, Environmental Biosecurity Section, Department of the Environment and Energy

2. Response from The Hon. Shelley Hancock MP regarding the Companion Animals Act 1998

Ordinary Meeting 11 December 2019

Questions with Notice

QWN 04

Question with Notice - Clr Kaliyanda - CBD Shopfront Activation Project

Strategic Direction

Generating Opportunity

Create an attractive environment for investment

File Ref

301934.2019

QUESTION WITH NOTICE

Please address the following:

1. What is the current timeline of the project?

The program is ongoing and has an annual budget of $80,000.

2. Which impacts has the project had – both quantitative and qualitative?

Below are figures outlining expenditure of the SFUP since it began:

2017/18
Shop 1	$8,000
Shop 2	$32,000
Shop 3	$16,000
Shop 4	$8,000
Total	$64,000
2018/19
Shop 1	$16,000
Shop 2	$8,000
Shop 3	$7,837.50
Total	$31,837.50
2019/20 (to date)
Shop 1	$8,000
Shop 2	$16,000
Total	$24,000

Surveys were sent to the five businesses who participated in the SFUP in 2018/19 and 2019/20. Three businesses responded, with results below:

(i) Would you go through the process again?

Yes – 3

(ii) Would you recommend it to others?

Yes – 3

(iii) Do you have any suggestions on what could be done differently?

· No – happy with how it was done and the process

· No – quick and easy

· No – simple and straight forward

(iv) Have you noticed any improvements to your business as a result of the upgrade?

· Yes – perception is good, now modern and clean, plus more traffic

· Too soon to tell, but feels more secure and easier for clients to see in

· This is a completely new business.

(v) Do you have any processes in place to measure the results of the upgrade?

Yes – 3

(vi) If no, would you like some assistance from an external business advisor?

Yes – 2

No – 1

3. Is there capacity to continue the project following the commencement of the Civic Place Project?

Yes – funds will continue to be available for the SFUP.

4. If not, what options are available to ensure that community benefits are not lost?

Funds will continue to be available for the SFUP.

Pop-Up Program

1. What is the current timeline of the project?

The PUP in Northumberland Arcade will be wound up on Friday 13 December 2019. Council’s property team will be taking over the premises to procure commercial leases. Whilst the property team will seek commercial rents to assist with the operational costs of the arcade and the carpark, offers from local and innovative operators who will help to activate the arcade, paying less than the commercial rent, will also be considered.

2. Which impacts has the project had – both quantitative and qualitative?

The PUP was instigated in 2017 in order to assist artisans and emerging retail business operators to test their concepts and conduct local, low-level research in a low-risk and low rent space. It also gave them the opportunity to test their own management skills required to run a business. Tenants were chosen through an expression of interest process.

During this period, a total of five tenants have leased the spaces for a period of between 6-12 months. Two of the businesses that used the space had the opportunity to test their ideas and conclude that it was not viable in a commercial setting. Feedback from these businesses indicates that the program was valuable in enabling them to test their business idea in a low-risk setting that did not have huge financial impact on them. Before being advised of the program’s cessation, a few applicants were placed on a waiting list for the next round of EOIs.

Due to the program being wound up and Council being unable to go out for EOI, one of the spaces has been occupied by the Centre for Civic Innovation (CCI) since October and will continue until 12 December. The CCI is an Australian-first in Liverpool. It is a proof-of-concept trial, fulfilling actions in the Liverpool Innovation Strategy to:

· facilitate opportunities for community members to engage in innovation projects; and

· investigate and embrace opportunities for community-led innovation.

The CCI began opening on Fridays only, but has expanded to four days a week with the help of volunteers from Settlement Services International. The CCI now gets 3-4 people per day coming in to discuss their ideas.

Anecdotally, there has been a strong appetite for the CCI concept. It has provided a place where community members can go if they have an idea that will make a difference in their community. The advice they receive at the CCI provides a pathway to turn their ideas into an initiative, a not-for-profit, or a business.

3. Is there capacity to continue the project following the commencement of the Civic Place Project?

There may be an opportunity for this program to re-commence in the new Civic Place development, if retail space can be made available at an appropriate lease rate.

4. If not, what options are available to ensure that community benefits are not lost?

Relocation of the Liverpool city library to Civic Place may provide an option for the program to operate within the current library site, if retail space can be made available at an appropriate lease rate.

The library and Civic Place options can be further investigated by Council staff.

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

[1] Liverpool Collaboration Area Place Strategy, section 4.1, page 15.

1
EGROW 05	Review of parking restrictions on major access roads in the Liverpool City Centre
Attachment 1	Current Parking Restrictions Map

1
INF 01	Koala Habitat Corridors
Attachment 2	Reply regarding Koala Corridors - Sutherland Council

Strategic Direction	Leading through Collaboration Encourage community participation in decision-making
File Ref	288925.2019
Report By	Galavizh Ahmadi Nia - Manager Community Development and Planning
Approved By	Dr Eddie Jackson - Director City Community and Culture

1
CTTE 01	Minutes of the Liverpool Youth Council Meeting held on 6 November 2019
Attachment 1	Minutes of the Liverpool Youth Council meeting held on 6 November 2019.

Economic	There are no economic considerations.
Environment	There are no environmental considerations.
Social	Raise awareness in the community about the available services and facilities. Provide cultural centres and activities for the enjoyment of the arts. Support community organisations, groups and volunteers to deliver coordinated services to the community. Promote community harmony and address discrimination.
Civic Leadership	There are no civic leadership and governance considerations.
Legislative	There are no legislative considerations relating to this report.

1
CTTE 02	Minutes of the Aboriginal Consultative Committee Meeting held on 7 November 2019
Attachment 1	Minutes of the Aboriginal Consultative Committee meeting held on 7 November 2019.

1
CTTE 04	Minutes of the Strategic Panel Meeting held on 12 November 2019
Attachment 1	Strategic Panel Minutes 12 November 2019

Strategic Direction	Leading through Collaboration Strive for best practice in all Council processes
Key Policy	Long-Term Financial Plan
File Ref	301545.2019
Report By	Earl Paradeza - Senior Management Accountant
Approved By	Vishwa Nadan - Chief Financial Officer

Economic	There are no economic considerations relating to this report
Environment	There are no environment considerations relating to this report
Social	There are no social considerations relating to this report
Civic Leadership	There are no civic leadership considerations relating to this report
Legislative	There are no legislative considerations relating to this report.

1
CTTE 05	Minutes of Budget Review Panel 14 November 2019
Attachment 1	Minutes of Budget Review Panel - 14 November 2019