Agenda of Ordinary Meeting - Wednesday, 24 February 2021

Order of Business

PAGE TAB

Opening

Acknowledgment of Country and Prayer

National Anthem

Apologies

Condolences

Confirmation of Minutes

Ordinary Council Meeting held on 03 February 2021.............................................................. 6

Declarations of Interest

Public Forum

Mayoral Report

NIL

Notices of Motion Of Rescission

NIL

Chief Executive Officer Report

CEO 01 Annual Code of Conduct Complaints Statistics Report................................. 35......... 1

City Economy and Growth Report

EGROW 01 Proposed Natural Disaster Clause in Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 41 2

EGROW 02 Submissions on Draft Western Sydney Aerotropolis Precinct Plan, Draft Special Infrastructure Contribution Plan and Draft Western Sydney Place Infrastructure Compact.......................................................................................................... 57......... 3

EGROW 03 Post exhibition report - Liverpool Local Environmental Plan Amendment 89 - Recreation Facility (Outdoor) at 25 Dwyer Road, Bringelly........................... 71......... 4

City Community and Culture Report

COM 01 Post Exhibition Report - Miller Social Infrastructure Masterplan................... 75......... 5

City Corporate Report

CORP 01 Biannual Progress Report - December 2020................................................. 86......... 6

CORP 02 Budget Review - December 2020................................................................ 146......... 7

CORP 03 Investment Report January 2021................................................................. 181......... 8

CORP 04 2021 National General Assembly of Local Government.............................. 190......... 9

CORP 05 Mayoral Direction pursuant to Section 226(d) of the Local Government Act 1993 195 10

City Presentation Report

NIL

City Infrastructure and Environment Report

INF 01 Integrated Pest Management Policy and Strategy....................................... 198....... 11

Committee Reports

CTTE 01 Liverpool Sports Committee Minutes of meeting held 26 November 2020. 200....... 12

CTTE 02 Minutes of the Community Safety and Crime Prevention Advisory Committee meeting 3 December 2020........................................................................... 212....... 13

CTTE 03 Minutes of the Liverpool Access Committee meeting held on 9 December 2020 214 14

CTTE 04 Minutes of the Aboriginal Consultative Committee meeting held on 26 November 2020.............................................................................................................. 223....... 15

CTTE 05 Minutes of the Liverpool Youth Council Committee Meeting held 8 December 2020 230 16

CTTE 06 Minutes of the Environment Advisory Committee Meeting held on 14 December 2020.............................................................................................................. 238....... 17

Questions with Notice

QWN 01 Question with Notice - Clr Hadchiti - Fast Transit Corridor.......................... 246....... 18

QWN 02 Question with Notice - Clr Hadchiti - Drainage Channels Rural/Growth Areas 250 19

QWN 03 Question with Notice - Clr Hadchiti - Water Detention Basins Growth Areas 252 20

QWN 04 Question with Notice - Clr Hadchiti - Developer Road Construction Growth Areas 254 21

QWN 05 Question with Notice - Clr Hadchiti - Kerb Gutter and Roads Fronting Council Owned Land Growth Areas.......................................................................... 256....... 22

QWN 06 Question with Notice - Clr Shelton - Liverpool Pioneers' Memorial Park..... 258....... 23

QWN 07 Question with Notice - Clr Hadchiti - Boardwalk at the Paper Mill............... 259....... 24

QWN 08 Question with Notice - Clr Hadchiti - Service Level Agreements................. 260....... 25

QWN 09 Question with Notice - Clr Hadchiti - Heritage Review................................ 261....... 26

QWN 10 Question with Notice - Clr Hadchiti - Machinery Purchase.......................... 262....... 27

QWN 11 Question with Notice - Clr Hadchiti - Wait Time for Household Clean Up Service 263 28

QWN 12 Question with Notice - Clr Hadchiti - One Lane Bridge on Sixth Avenue, Austral 264 29

QWN 13 Question with Notice - Clr Hadchiti - Twenty Sixth Avenue, Austral Resurfacing 265 30

QWN 14 Question with Notice - Clr Hadchiti - Edmondson Avenue, Austral - Part Road Resurfaced.................................................................................................... 266....... 31

QWN 15 Question with Notice - Clr Hadchiti - Extra Road Lanes on Greenway Drive, West Hoxton........................................................................................................... 267....... 32

QWN 16 Question with Notice - Clr Hadchiti - Drive Through to Inspect the Quality of Roads in the Rural Area........................................................................................... 268....... 33

QWN 17 Question with Notice - Clr Hadchiti Annual Fire Safety Statement (AFSS). 269....... 34

Presentations by Councillors

Notices of Motion

NOM 01 The Global Greening Project - Tourism Ireland........................................... 270....... 35

NOM 02 Australian Air League Moorebank 60th Anniversary Commendation.......... 272....... 36

NOM 03 Climate Action Plan...................................................................................... 274....... 37

NOM 04 Liverpool Business Resilience Campaign.................................................... 277....... 38

NOM 05 Moratorium on Cemeteries........................................................................... 279....... 39

NOM 06 Food and Organic Waste.............................................................................. 281....... 40

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 Companion Animals Advisory Committee Membership 2021-2023

Reason: Item CONF 01 is confidential pursuant to the provisions of s10(A)(2)(a) of the Local Government Act because it contains personal matters concerning particular individuals (other than councillors).

CONF 02 Tourism and CBD Committee - New Community Representative

Reason: Item CONF 02 is confidential pursuant to the provisions of s10(A)(2)(a) of the Local Government Act because it contains personal matters concerning particular individuals (other than councillors).

CONF 03 Question with Notice - Clr Hadchiti - Section 7/11 Contributions

Reason: Item CONF 03 is confidential pursuant to the provisions of s10(A)(2)(c) of the Local Government Act because it contains information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business.

Close

MINUTES OF THE Ordinary Meeting

HELD ON 3 February 2021

PRESENT:

Deputy Mayor Hadid

Councillor Ayyad

Councillor Balloot

Councillor Hadchiti

Councillor Hagarty

Councillor Harle

Councillor Kaliyanda

Councillor Karnib

Councillor Rhodes

Councillor Shelton

Dr Eddie Jackson, Chief Executive Officer

Mr George Hampouris, Acting Director City Corporate

Ms Tina Bono, Acting Director City Community and Culture

Mr David Smith, Acting Director City Economy and Growth

Mr Peter Patterson, Director City Presentation

Mr Raj Autar, Director City Infrastructure and Environment

Ms Nada Mardini, Manager Community Standards

Mr John Milicic, Manager Property

Ms Jennifer Chenhall, General Counsel, Manager Governance Legal & Procurement

Ms Ellen Whittingstall, Acting Internal Ombudsman

Mr Vishwa Nadan, Chief Financial Officer

Mr George Georgakis, Manager Council and Executive Services

Ms Maree Stewart, Coordinator Council and Executive Services (minutes)

The meeting commenced at 6.00pm.

STATEMENT REGARDING WEBCASTING OF MEETING

The Deputy Mayor reminded everyone that in accordance with Council’s Code of Meeting Practice the meeting is being livestreamed.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF COUNTRY, AFFIRMATION AND PRAYER OF COUNCIL

The prayer of the Council was read by the Chief Executive Officer, Dr Eddie Jackson.

APOLOGIES

Motion: Moved: Clr Hadchiti Seconded: Clr Shelton

That Mayor Waller be recorded as an apology for this meeting and leave of absence be granted.

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

CONDOLENCES

ITEM NO:	COND 01
FILE NO:	025716.2021
SUBJECT:	CONDOLENCE MOTION - Michael Coffey OAM (read by Deputy Mayor Hadid)
Tonight, we pause to honour the memory of Liverpool Catholic Club President, Michael Coffey OAM. The father of three, grandfather of seven, successful businessman and keen golfer passed away unexpectedly and peacefully on Monday 11 January aged 79. Michael will be remembered for making a major difference in the community. These achievements were also recognised in 2015 when he was awarded the Medal of the Order of Australia (OAM) for service to business, commerce and the community. The son of a firefighter, Michael was born on 26 October 1941 and grew up in Bathurst and then Pymble. After graduating with a Bachelor of Science degree from the University of NSW, Michael began working for the CSIRO’s food division in 1959. He was part of the team that revolutionised food preservation and transport through the use of shipping containers to import and export goods. Michael moved to the private sector in 1969. He was recruited by shipping company OCL, which later became P&O Containers. Michael played a role in opening up international trade relationships around the world. He travelled to the Middle East and India. He also led Australian trade missions to Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Pakistan and Iran. He later founded the logistics company River Heights Trading Consultancy and worked as the managing director for 21 years. Michael met his wife Trudy at a Catholic Youth Organisation dance in Liverpool. The couple married in 1967 and later settled in Lansvale. Trudy is the Director of Social Work at South Western Sydney Local Health District. At his funeral service at All Saints Catholic Church, Liverpool, on Wednesday 27 January, his daughter Roz said Michael treasured people and nurtured and cherished his relationships. “If you know dad, you’d know it was literally not possible for him to sit next to someone in any setting and not strike up a conversation and shortly after a mutual connection would be formed and a new friendship would be the result,’’ she said. Roz said her father was a devoted family man who also had genuine care and compassion for people involved in all of the organisations he had been part of. “Dad held all of his roles with great pride. He took all of his board roles seriously and brought enthusiasm and corporate governance to all of his positions,’’ she said. Michael became a member of Liverpool Catholic Club in 1998. He was appointed to the Board in 2004 before serving as the Assistant Treasurer from 2004 to 2015 and Vice President from 2015 to 2016. Michael served as the President from 2016 until his death. He has also served as a board member and later honorary chairman of Karitane Mothercraft Society, which helps parents in the first five years of their child’s life. Michael was a board director at Carrington Centennial Care in Camden. He was a former president and board member of the Rotary Club of Liverpool West. Michael was a life member of the Australian Arab Chamber of Commerce and Industry. He had previously served as president of that organisation. On behalf of Liverpool City Council, I express my deepest condolences to Trudy, their children, grandchildren and extended family members and friends during this difficult time. Michael will be missed by the community. May he rest in peace.
COUNCIL DECISION Motion: Moved: Clr Hadchiti Seconded: Clr Kaliyanda That Council writes to the family of Michael Coffey to express our condolences for their loss. On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

Confirmation of Minutes

Motion: Moved: Clr Shelton Seconded: Clr Rhodes

That the minutes of the Ordinary Meeting held on 16 December 2020 be confirmed as a true record of that meeting.

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

Declarations of Interest

Nil

Public Forum

Presentation – items not on agenda

Nil

Representation – items on agenda

Nil

Notices of Motion

ITEM NO: NOM 01

FILE NO: 019306.2021

SUBJECT: Aerotropolis Acquisition Scheme

BACKGROUND

The current system for compulsory land acquisition is unfair and inefficient. Adequate contributions to acquire land take years to be collected while landowners, ratepayers and new residents are disadvantaged:

· New residents have to wait many years for infrastructure to be built.

· Council and ratepayers are forced to pay more due to increasing land values and inflation.

· Landowners are stuck with a plot of land they can't sell or develop.

The flaws in this system are starkly apparent at the Aerotropolis. Despite earmarking a large amount of the 11,200 hectare site for parks and open space, at this stage, the State Government has only committed to acquiring land along a small stretch of Thompsons Creek. With no other buyers, this has left landowners in these areas with little option but to sit and wait, with no concrete timeline or a plan for their land to be acquired.

Since the Western Sydney Airport and the Aerotropolis were announced, landowners and residents have asked for certainly in the process and a reliable timeline. With commitment from all three levels of government, a better, fairer, more efficient process is possible. Residents in these areas are experiencing stress, illness and family breakdown. Those with hardship, should be given the chance to be able sell up and move on.

NOTICE OF MOTION (Submitted by Clr Hagarty)

That Council:

1. Notes:

· The current system for compulsory land acquisition is unfair and inefficient;

· Existing land acquisition schemes such as the Moorebank Voluntary Acquisition Scheme; and

· Exiting hardship provisions for land acquisition.

2. Write to the State Government proposing an Aerotropolis Acquisition Scheme to allow for expedited land acquisition for landowners experiencing hardship in the Aerotropolis.

3. Upon approval:

· Seek collaboration from the State and Federal Government to fund and administer the scheme; and

· Assess the viability of applying a similar scheme to all land acquisitions in the Liverpool LGA.

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion: Moved: Clr Hagarty Seconded: Clr Karnib

That Council:

1. Notes:

· The current system for compulsory land acquisition is unfair and inefficient;

· Existing land acquisition schemes such as the Moorebank Voluntary Acquisition Scheme; and

· Exiting hardship provisions for land acquisition.

2. Write to the State Government proposing an Aerotropolis Acquisition Scheme to allow for expedited land acquisition for landowners experiencing hardship in the Aerotropolis;

3. Upon approval:

· Seek collaboration from the State and Federal Government to fund and administer the scheme; and

· Assess the viability of applying a similar scheme to all land acquisitions in the Liverpool LGA.

4. That Council write to WSROC, neighbouring Councils, LGNSW, ALGA, Western Parklands City Authority, State and Federal MP’s to support this proposal.

Foreshadowed motion: Moved: Clr Hadchiti Seconded: Clr Rhodes

That Council:

1. Receive a further report on the list of properties that need to be acquired through a government agency and also write to those affected landowners and advise them of the hardship policy;

2. Notes:

· The current system for compulsory land acquisition is unfair and inefficient;

· Existing land acquisition schemes such as the Moorebank Voluntary Acquisition Scheme; and

· Exiting hardship provisions for land acquisition.

3. Write to the WSROC, neighbouring Councils, Western Parklands City Authority and State and Federal MP’s urging the state and federal governments to work with local government on an Aerotropolis Acquisition Scheme to allow for expedited land acquisition for landowners;

4. Upon approval:

· Seek collaboration from the State and Federal Government to fund and administer the scheme; and

· Assess the viability of applying a similar scheme to all land acquisitions in the Liverpool LGA.

5. Submit the motion to the National General Assembly annual conference requesting forward funding acquisition scheme that will enable local governments to provide infrastructure supporting the development of national assets.

6. Write to the state government asking them why the date referred to for release of the Wianamatta-South Creek Delivery Strategy has been removed.

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

Voting (for the motion moved by Clr Hagarty)

For: Clr Hagarty, Clr Harle, Clr Kaliyanda, Clr Karnib

Against: Deputy Mayor Hadid, Clr Ayyad, Clr Balloot, Clr Hadchiti, Clr Rhodes, Clr Shelton

Voting (for the Foreshadowed motion moved by Clr Hadchiti)

For: Deputy Mayor Hadid, Clr Ayyad, Clr Balloot, Clr Hadchiti, Clr Hagarty, Clr Harle, Clr Karnib, Clr Kaliyanda, Clr Rhodes, Clr Shelton

Against: Nil

Councillors voted unanimously for this motion.

ITEM NO: NOM 02

FILE NO: 019373.2021

SUBJECT: Community Gardens Policy and Strategy

BACKGROUND

Community gardens can fulfil a variety of functions in addition to food production, including the enhancement of healthy lifestyles and good nutrition, reduction in social isolation, encouraging a sense of place, improving local food security and management of public spaces. The people of Liverpool, through the Liverpool Local Strategic Planning Statement (LSPS) community consultation process, have identified the significance of community gardens and have expressed their support for the development of these as well as other local food systems.

Community gardens improve the social fabric within and among communities by increasing and deepening social connections. They also foster community engagement and improve participation as members are able to self-manage the gardens.

Community gardens and other local food system are increasingly being supported in Australian towns and cities in consonance with growing demand for local/regional food. The high community demand in local government associations across Australia for community gardens is in recognition of the wide range of benefits they provide. External factors such as concerns about the environment and climate change, food miles and ‘Grow Local’ movement are also giving impetus towards the provision of space for community garden and contribute to an increasing number of community gardens.

NOTICE OF MOTION (Submitted by Clr Kaliyanda)

That Council:

1. Develop a Community Gardens Policy and Strategy document to:

· Provide a framework for residents who want to establish a community garden

· Encourage existing community gardens to be self-managed to a high standard

2. Explore the feasibility of incorporating footpath gardening into these documents; and

3. Investigate funding opportunities to develop community gardens in the Liverpool LGA.

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion: Moved: Clr Kaliyanda Seconded: Clr Harle

That Council:

To explore the feasibility of expanding community gardens, including footpath gardening and their long-term operation and financial sustainability; and

Report back the finding to Council at the June 2021 Council meeting.

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

Ordinary Meeting

24 February 2021

City Economy and Growth Report

EGROW 01

Proposed Natural Disaster Clause in Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008

Strategic Direction	Strengthening and Protecting our Environment Exercise planning controls to create high-quality, inclusive urban environments
File Ref	008291.2021
Report By	Murray Wilson - Principal Strategic Planner
Approved By	David Smith - Acting Director City Economy and Growth

Executive Summary

The Department of Planning, Industry & Environment (DPIE) are offering Councils the opportunity to opt-in to an initiative that would add a new natural disaster clause into their respective Local Environmental Plans (LEPs).

This initiative is in response to the 2019/20 summer bushfires and subsequent floods that destroyed and/or damaged over 3,000 homes across the State. The objective of the clause is to allow the rebuilding or repair of the original lawful dwelling if that dwelling has been destroyed or damaged in a natural disaster.

If Council agrees to opt-in to this initiative, DPIE will amend the LEP accordingly without the need for Council to prepare a planning proposal.

It is recommended that Council opt-in to this initiative and advise DPIE of Council’s decision.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Opt-in to the initiative from the Department of Planning, Industry & Environment (DPIE) for a new natural disaster clause to be included in the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan, State Environmental Planning Policy (Sydney Region Growth Centres) and State Environmental Planning Policy (State Significant Precincts);

2. Request DPIE consider applying this clause in suitable zones subject to SEPP (Western Sydney Aerotropolis);

3. Endorse the zones as outlined in this report to be subject to the opt-in clause; and

4. Write to Department of Planning, Industry and Environment advising of Council’s decision.

REPORT

Background

During the 2019-2020 summer, NSW was devastated by bushfires that destroyed over 2,400 homes and damaged over 1,000 more. Subsequent floods also affected large parts of NSW causing further damage to homes and infrastructure. Many of these landowners are now seeking planning approvals to enable them to rebuild or repair their dwellings.

DPIE has received feedback from councils across the State advising that in some instances, where dwellings were originally permitted, approved, and constructed under historical planning instruments, they are now no longer permitted due to changes to local planning controls over time.

To address this issue, and to fast track these approvals, DPIE has been working with local councils in developing an optional clause that DPIE can include into LEPs statewide that will only apply if a natural disaster occurs.

Natural Disasters

DPIE defines natural disasters as – a naturally occurring, rapid onset event that causes serious disruption to life or property in a community or region, such as floods, bushfires, earthquakes, storms, cyclones, storm surges, landslides and tsunamis. A natural disaster can include a state of emergency declared under section 33 of the State Emergency and Rescue Management Act 1989.

Proposed Natural Disaster Clause

DPIE, in consultation with councils, have developed a natural disaster clause that can be included into the Liverpool LEP which aims to clarify that a dwelling, including a secondary dwelling, can be rebuilt or repaired if the original lawful dwelling was destroyed or damaged in a natural disaster.

The proposed clause is shown below:

Dwelling house or secondary dwelling affected by natural disaster;

(1) The objective of this clause is to enable the repair or replacement of lawfully erected dwelling houses and secondary dwelling that have been damaged or destroyed by a natural disaster.

(2) This clause applies to land in the following zones—

(a) [set out the zones to which the clause is to apply],

(3) Despite any other provision of this Plan, development consent may be granted to

development on land to which this clause applies to enable a dwelling house or

secondary dwelling that has been damaged or destroyed by a natural disaster to be

repaired or replaced if—

a) the dwelling house or secondary dwelling was lawfully erected, and

b) the development application seeking the development consent is made to the consent authority no later than 5 years after the day on which the natural disaster caused the damage or destruction.

The clause clarifies that a dwelling, including a secondary dwelling, can be rebuilt or repaired if the original lawful dwelling was destroyed or damaged in a natural disaster. A merit assessment through the DA process is still required.

This clause will:

· Only apply to the rebuild or repair of dwelling (including secondary dwelling) that has been destroyed or damaged in a natural disaster (with development consent);

· Save the applicant time and money by removing the need to request a variation to development standards under the applicable LEP (Clause 4.6 variation);

· Allow the consent authority to assess and determine the application on its merits.

Clause Gives Landowners Flexibility

The clause will provide benefits to impacted landowners who have been affected by a natural disaster.

The clause intends to eliminate the need for applicants to:

· Prepare formal requests to vary a development standard.

· Demonstrate the continuance of an existing use in circumstances where dwelling houses or secondary dwellings are no longer permitted with consent in the relevant zone (applicants will need to demonstrate that the existing dwelling was lawfully erected).

Assessment and Use of the Natural Disaster Clause

For development applications relying on this new Clause, LEP provisions themselves must not be used as a reason for refusal. However, if the consent authority considers that the risk, or other environmental impacts associated with the proposed development is inconsistent with relevant considerations, the consent authority can refuse the application on that basis.

To further clarify, Council is unable to refuse the DA to rebuild a destroyed dwelling on the basis that it does not comply with a development standard in the applicable LEP. However, Council will be able to undertake a merit assessment under the EP&A Act, and if Council considers the site is unsuitable for redevelopment e.g. due to flooding concerns, then the DA may be rejected on that basis.

Recommendation to ‘Opt-in’ to include the Clause in the LEP/EPIs

DPIE are giving councils the option to ‘opt-in’ to this initiative to include this new clause into their respective LEPs and other Environmental Planning Instruments (EPIs) applying to their LGA i.e. Growth Centres SEPP.

For Liverpool, there are other EPI’s that this clause should also apply to, including:

· State Environmental Planning Policy (Sydney Region Growth Centres) 2006

· State Environmental Planning Policy (State Significant Precincts) 2005.

It is recommended that Council opt-in for the inclusion of this clause into the Liverpool LEP and the above environmental planning instruments.

It is also recommended that Council request DPIE consider applying this clause in suitable zones subject to SEPP (Western Sydney Aerotropolis).

Where this clause should apply

If this clause is endorsed by Council for inclusion in the LEP/EPIs, Council is then required to nominate the zones to which this clause should apply. It is recommended that the following zones apply:

Liverpool LEP 2008

• RU1 Primary Production

• RU2 Rural Landscape

• RU4 Primary Production Small Lots

• R1 General Residential

• R2 Low Density Residential

• R3 Medium Density Residential

• R4 High Density Residential

• R5 Large Lot Residential

• E2 Environmental Conservation

• E3 Environmental Management

SEPP Sydney Region Growth Centres

• RU6 Transition

• R2 Low Density Residential

• R3 Medium Density Residential

• RE1 Public Recreation (Optional)

• E4 Environmental Living

State Environmental Planning Policy (State Significant Precincts) 2005

• E4 Environmental Living

• R1 General Residential

Optional inclusion of RE1 Public Recreation Zone (Sydney Region Growth Centres)

It is noted that the RE1 Public Recreation zone is an optional zone that could be subject to this clause.

Council is currently progressing a land acquisition program for land in Austral and Leppington zoned for a public purpose under the Growth Centres SEPP. In circumstances where land in the RE1 zone is still in private ownership (i.e. it has not been acquired and may not be for some time) and a dwelling is subsequently destroyed or damaged by a natural disaster, it is considered fair and equitable to provide the landowner with the ability to seek a merit based assessment through the DA process for the repair or replacement of the dwelling. It is therefore recommended that this zone is included in the ‘opt-in’ clause.

Conclusion

It is recommended that Council opt-in to this initiative and advise DPIE of Council’s decision.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	Facilitate economic development.
Environment	There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.
Social	There are no social and cultural considerations.
Civic Leadership	Deliver services that are customer focused.
Legislative	Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979
Risk	There is no risk associated with this report.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Proposed Standard Instrument (Local Environmental Plans) Amendment (Natural Disasters) Order

2. Policy Consultation Paper

3. Frequently Asked Questions

4. Guidance for Implementation

Ordinary Meeting

24 February 2021

City Economy and Growth Report

EGROW 02

Submissions on Draft Western Sydney Aerotropolis Precinct Plan, Draft Special Infrastructure Contribution Plan and Draft Western Sydney Place Infrastructure Compact

Strategic Direction	Strengthening and Protecting our Environment Exercise planning controls to create high-quality, inclusive urban environments
File Ref	008305.2021
Report By	Shaun Beckley - Manager, Infrastructure Planning Ian Stendara - Executive Planner Nancy-Leigh Norris - Senior Strategic Planner
Approved By	David Smith - Acting Director City Economy and Growth

Executive Summary

During November 2020, the NSW Government released the following draft plans for public exhibition:

· Western Sydney Aerotropolis Precinct Plan (Western Sydney Planning Partnership)

· Western Sydney Aerotropolis Special Infrastructure Contributions Plan (Department of Planning, Industry & Environment)

· Draft Place Infrastructure Compact (Greater Sydney Commission).

The exhibition timeframes for these documents were all extended to 26 February 2021 to allow adequate time for the community and stakeholders, including Council to comment on these plans.

Draft Western Sydney Aerotropolis Precinct Plan – accessed at this link here

The draft Precinct Plan has been developed for the initial Aerotropolis precincts, being the Aerotropolis Core, Badgerys Creek and Agribusiness precincts within the Liverpool LGA. The draft Precinct Plan builds upon the established planning framework for the Aerotropolis, and provide a finer level of detail, including the location of specific land uses, open space and road corridors.

Significant work has been undertaken by the Western Sydney Planning Partnership to develop the draft Precinct Plans in a short period of time. Council’s primary concerns include the lack of detail to adequately assess a development application at the individual lot level, no details on the required acquisition of land needed for proposed infrastructure (e.g. open space and stormwater) and the extent and location of open space.

The submission includes 45 recommendations to the Western Sydney Planning Partnership, with key recommendations including the preparation of an Indicative Layout Plan (similar to that applying to the Austral release area), amendment to SEPP (Western Sydney Aerotropolis) 2020 to reflect the final Precinct Plan, and rationalising open space provision across the Aerotropolis.

Draft Western Sydney Aerotropolis Special Infrastructure Contribution – accessed at this link here

Infrastructure within the Aerotropolis will be enabled by two primary plans: Liverpool and Penrith City Council’s Joint s7.12 Aerotropolis Contributions Plan and the Western Sydney Aerotropolis Special Infrastructure Contribution (SIC).

The purpose of the SIC is to identify a funding source for specific infrastructure projects that will support the initial precincts within the Aerotropolis, including roads, rail, open space and biodiversity offsets.

Key issues identified in Council’s submission relate to the need for a NSW Government Agency or Authority to support the efficient delivery of infrastructure across the Aerotropolis, regardless of whether it is state or local infrastructure; lack of an acquisition strategy; overlapping SICs (Aerotropolis SIC and Western Sydney Growth Areas SIC) and the need to increase focus on the delivery of sustainable transport within the FAST corridor.

Draft Western Sydney Place Infrastructure Compact – accessed at this link here

Within the Liverpool LGA, the Western Sydney Place Infrastructure Compact (WS PIC) applies to the growth areas of the Aerotropolis, Austral, Leppington, and Edmondson Park. The intent of the WS PIC is to identify and sequence the delivery of State Government infrastructure that will be required to support new jobs and dwellings within these growth areas.

Key issues identified in Council’s submission relate to infrastructure provision that is not in line with experienced and forecasted growth within the LGA, critical infrastructure previously identified for Austral and Leppington North that has largely been abandoned, and the cost of providing local infrastructure which has not been considered despite the State Government restricting Council’s ability to levy for “non-essential infrastructure”. Key recommendations in the submission include the provision of infrastructure to support employment growth within the Liverpool metropolitan cluster, increased State Government funding of infrastructure aligned with established areas of the Central River City and the Eastern Harbour City, and prioritisation of the delivery of the FAST Corridor.

This report summarises Council’s submissions on these draft plans.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Endorses the submission on the draft Western Sydney Aerotropolis Precinct Plan and forwards a copy to the NSW Department of Planning, Industry and Environment and the Western Sydney Planning Partnership.

2. Endorses the submission on the draft Western Sydney Aerotropolis Special Infrastructure Contributions Plan and forwards a copy to the NSW Department of Planning, Industry and Environment.

3. Endorses the submission on the draft Western Sydney Place Infrastructure Compact and forwards a copy to the Greater Sydney Commission.

REPORT

This report details background information and summarises the Council submissions on the following draft plans:

· Western Sydney Aerotropolis Precinct Plan

· Western Sydney Aerotropolis Special Infrastructure Contributions Plan

· Western Sydney Place Infrastructure Compact

1. Draft Western Sydney Aerotropolis Precinct Plan

The NSW Government finalised the initial Aerotropolis Planning Package on 13September 2020, which included the following documents:

· Western Sydney Aerotropolis Plan (WSAP)

· State Environmental Planning Policy (Western Sydney Aerotropolis) 2020 (SEPP)

· Western Sydney Aerotropolis Development Control Plan Phase 1

· Section 9.1 Ministerial Direction: Implementation of the Western Sydney Aerotropolis Plan

The Aerotropolis SEPP came into effect on 1 October 2020. This marked the rezoning of the initial precincts within the Aerotropolis, being the Aerotropolis Core, Badgerys Creek, Wianamatta-South Creek, and Agribusiness Precincts within the Liverpool LGA, and the Northern Gateway Precinct in the Penrith LGA.

A draft Precinct Plan for these initial precincts was released by the Western Sydney Planning Partnership (the Partnership) on 9 November 2020. The draft Precinct Plan builds upon the initial planning framework listed above by continuing to establish the strategic vision and objectives of the initial precincts. It sets out the location of land uses and specifies criteria for land development, including the staging of infrastructure delivery, water cycle management, open space framework, centre hierarchy, and built form requirements. The draft Aerotropolis Phase 2 Development Control Plan (DCP) is anticipated to be placed on public exhibition in early 2021.

The submission on the draft Precinct Plan (Attachment 1) is in three main parts:

· Main Submission (summarised below)

· Attachment A: Issues raised by the community to Council staff (summarised below)

· Attachment B: Table of detailed issues and recommendations

Key concerns and recommendations

Collaborative approach to developing Precinct Plan

Council staff were given the opportunity to provide comments throughout the development of the draft Precinct Plan. However, the final draft Precinct Plan was not presented to the Planning Partnership Project Control Group for endorsement prior to exhibition. A letter was sent to the Western Sydney Planning Partnership on 5 November 2020 reiterating Council’s unresolved concerns, including the use of low flood risk (PMF) land as recreation areas, and the lack of detail within the draft Precinct Plan to develop a final Indicative Layout Plan (ILP). These concerns are also included in Council’s submission. The submission recommends that the established governance framework of the Partnership is used in finalising the draft Plan and for the development of future documents.

Detail within Precinct Plan

The level of detail provided within the draft Precinct Plan is suitable to assist in the progression of plans for large and/or master plan sites. However, the detail is not sufficient for the plan to be interpreted at the individual lot level, as certainty of what is to be developed is not provided. A higher level of detail is required to support the assessment of individual development applications and state significant developments. An Indicative Layout Plan (ILP) which condenses all relevant precinct information within a single plan is required for the initial Aerotropolis precincts.

Council staff are already in discussion with the Partnership regarding this issue. The submission recommends that the level of detail within the draft Precinct Plan is increased to the level of an Indicative Layout Plan, to ensure adequate assessment of both small and large sites.

Acquisition and Zoning in SEPP (Western Sydney Aerotropolis) 2020

The SEPP uses broad land use zones of Enterprise, Agribusiness and Environment & Recreation (not Standard Instrument land use zones) to provide a high degree of flexibility of permissible land uses across the Aerotropolis. It was the intent of the Precinct Plan to add the next layer of detail, which would ordinarily be identified at the zoning stage.

Council understood that the SEPP would be amended to ensure its alignment with the Precinct Plan. The expected amendment would have included the rezoning and mapping of acquisition for additional open space, stormwater basins/drainage infrastructure and classified roads. However, an amendment to the SEPP is no longer proposed. This creates confusion as to how the Plan can be implemented and who is responsible for the acquisition of land and delivery of infrastructure. For example, there is land zoned Enterprise, Mixed Use or Agribusiness under the SEPP, yet within the draft Precinct Plan it is identified as open space or water basins, and therefore cannot be developed in accordance with the applicable SEPP land use zone.

The release of land for development requires the commitment for land acquisition, as seen in other land releases such as Austral, Leppington and Edmondson Park. It is vital that the Precinct Plan clearly identify government (State and Local) responsibility as well as the developer’s responsibility in infrastructure delivery. The submission recommends that the SEPP should be amended to ensure alignment with the final Precinct Plan.

Open Space within draft Precinct Plan

The Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE) are currently preparing a Wianamatta-South Creek Delivery Strategy in response to the previous public exhibition on the initial Aerotropolis planning package. The delivery of the Wianamatta-South Creek Precinct is therefore not addressed in the draft Precinct Plan. Council’s submission recommends that the Partnership advocate for involvement in the development of this Strategy, due to their previous involvement in the area.

The draft Precinct Plan identifies land for open space within the low flood risk (PMF) area adjacent to the Wianamatta-South Creek Precinct. It is recognised that additional open space is required throughout the precincts to ensure people are within walking distance to open space and to mitigate urban heat island effects. The submission recommends that any additional open space is to be located away from the ‘green spine’ of the Wianamatta-South Creek Precinct, as it should be supplementary to open space shown in the Western Sydney Aerotropolis Plan.

The extent of open space within the draft Precinct Plan is significant and has raised concerns regarding acquisition costs, delivery, and maintenance. Through the drafting process of the plan, the extent of open space was further reduced in response to comments by Council staff. However, the submission again recommends the extent is reduced to ensure its effective delivery.

Flexibility of Precinct Plan

The draft Precinct Plan currently require a planning proposal to be undertaken for any changes to the Plan. This is a stringent measure which will put pressure on resources, resulting in unnecessary delays. It is recommended that changes can be based on merit and major changes may require further assessment.

Additionally, the draft Precinct Plan doesn’t allow for flexibility regarding transition of land over time to achieve the end state of the Plan. It is recommended that temporary or short-term uses should be permissible as long as they can demonstrate how the final form of the Plan can be achieved.

Changes and clarification of various Precinct Plan requirements

The submission requests various amendments or clarification across sections of the draft Precinct Plan, including:

· Height and Floor Space Ratio: Recommend that exact numbers for development standards are provided instead of using ranges.

· Amalgamation: Reassess the amalgamation pattern to ensure equitable development potential across lots.

· Wildlife Hazard Management: The draft Precinct Plan is relatively silent on wildlife management as it primarily refers to land use requirements under the SEPP. It is recommended that the Precinct Plan clarifies the intent of “Government Commitment Areas” identified within the Draft Wildlife Management Assessment Report. It should clearly state that these commitment areas (Environment & Recreation Zone, biodiversity land, Mixed Use Zone and Luddenham Village), have no further restrictions (other than those in the SEPP). Additionally, the Precinct Plan should state that any restrictions do not apply to the road networks or the existing landscape.

· Affordable Housing: Support the proposed affordable housing contribution in the range of 5-10% identified in the Greater Sydney Region Plan.

· Tourism: Investigate incorporating tourism opportunities in the Precinct Plan and SEPP.

· Agribusiness Precinct: recommend that the imagery and the written controls are reviewed to ensure they align with each other, and consider gaps in information regarding the Agribusiness Hubs.

Aerotropolis Planning Framework

The draft Precinct Plan is a 233 page document, with the first two chapters containing background (non-assessable) information, and the assessable sections (Chapters 3-5), contain significant amounts of “Principles Guidelines”, which are also non-assessable. It is recommended that the non-assessable information is identified to assist in the assessment process. Additionally, it is recommended that the Partnership assist Council in the preparation of an assessment template and/or integration of the planning framework into Council’s ePlanning system.

Issues Raised by the Community

The submission also notes the issues the community have raised with Council staff through the exhibition period:

· Acquisition: As noted within the submission, residents have reasonably requested any land identified for open space or water basins be marked for acquisition. Significant stress has been experienced by the community where they have been rezoned under the SEPP then shown as open space or affected by basins within the draft Precinct Plan, and clarification on how this land is to be developed has not been provided.

· Environment & Recreation Zoning: There is still concern amongst the community regarding the implications of the Environment and Recreation zone. The submission requests the Partnership liaise with DPIE on the development of the Wianamatta-South Creek Delivery Strategy.

· Clarity of Plans: The draft Precinct Plan was released in A4 size and are not clear as to where individual lots applied. It is requested that release of future plans ensure they are legible to how they affect individual sites.

· Dwyer Road Precinct: Many businesses in the Dwyer Road Precinct desire more certainty in order to expand. If this area was already rezoned, it would have the capacity to be serviced in a timely fashion and could potentially attract new business.

· Level of Engagement: Letters to residents and landowners in the Aerotropolis advising of this exhibition were distributed by the Western Sydney Planning Partnership. The community expressed frustration with the level of engagement from this public exhibition, as limited engagement was available due to Covid-19.

2. Draft Western Sydney Aerotropolis Special Infrastructure Contributions

The NSW Department of Planning, Industry and Environment have released a proposed Special Infrastructure Contributions (SIC) for land within the Aerotropolis. All land zoned by the Aerotropolis SEPP will be subject to the contribution, including the initial and non-initial precincts. The proposed contribution rates are detailed in table 1 below:

Table 1: Proposed SIC contribution rates

Zone	NDA charge per hectare of net developable area (indexed annually)	Station precinct charge (% of the cost of carrying out development)
Mixed Use	$500,000	2%
Enterprise	$200,000	1%
Agribusiness	$200,000	N/A
Industrial	$200,000	N/A
Environment and Recreation	Nil	N/A
SP2 Infrastructure	Nil	N/A

The SIC will provide for contributions of up to $1.1 billion and will be collected from developers to deliver State and regional infrastructure. The types of infrastructure the SIC is expected to help fund include:

· State and regional roads.

· Public and active transport like bus, rail and cycle paths.

· Public and open space.

· Biodiversity offset.

· Hospital, ambulance and community health facilities.

· Primary, secondary and special purpose education facilities.

· Justice facilities, such as court houses.

· Emergency facilities including police, fire and rescue.

· Community facilities, like multi-use community and cultural facilities.

A feasibility study was undertaken in support of the SIC, which also includes consideration of Council’s draft Section 7.12 Contributions Plan. This report identifies that if the 6.5% rate proposed in the draft s7.12 plan were to change, then a review of the SIC would be necessary to ensure that the feasibility of development in relation to government charges is properly considered.

Key Concerns and recommendations

The draft submission is included in Attachment 2. Key concerns and recommendations are detailed below.

Need for increased certainty around land acquisition

One of the key outstanding issues in relation to the delivery of infrastructure within the Aerotropolis is land acquisition. The Aerotropolis SEPP includes land reservation for a relatively small amount of land in Thompsons Creek.

The infrastructure identified in the draft SIC, as well as Council's own draft contributions plan, requires the acquisition of significant amounts of land to enable the delivery of the various infrastructure projects.

The lack of an acquisition reservation map in the Aerotropolis SEPP (or viable mechanism to trigger acquisition) provides a great level of uncertainty for when and where these infrastructure items will be delivered. This approach creates uncertainty on both the acquisition authority and existing landowners particularly those who may be facing hardship, to initiate the acquisition process.

It is acknowledged that this issue is more related to the Aerotropolis SEPP and Precinct Plan than the SIC, however the SIC will need to account for lands to be acquired by state entities. The inclusion of refined land reservation acquisitions maps will provide a greater level of certainty and transparency around the provision of infrastructure in the Aerotropolis.

Coordination of infrastructure delivery

As a package, the Place Infrastructure Compact, SIC and Contributions Plan identify a significant amount of infrastructure to be delivered in the Aerotropolis. There is a significant risk of overlap in the roles and responsibilities for delivery of specific items, as well as colocation of particular items between agencies and councils.

It is important that there is a coordinated approach taken to the delivery of infrastructure to minimise disruption to the community and maximise the benefit of each item. Council would like to see a state agency tasked with overseeing the delivery of infrastructure that is administered under state and local plans. This agency could also be used to facilitate land acquisition.

Overlapping SICs

The Aerotropolis SIC proposes to overlap land already included under the Western Sydney Growth Areas SIC (WSGASIC). There is also the additional charge for the proposed metro stations within certain areas of the aerotropolis. Supporting documentation identifies that the WSGA SIC will be discounted in these overlapping areas.

This approach of having overlapping SICs, as well as the additional station charge for some land, is likely to be confusing to stakeholders and developers as they seek to understand the full impact of infrastructure charges on their development proposals. Land parcels should only be subject to one SIC.

There is concern about the impact on the delivery of infrastructure within the Growth Centre if the related SIC is discounted. Discounting the WSGA SIC will create a shortfall for funding of identified projects within the Growth Centre. While the Aerotropolis is an important precinct, it should not come at the cost of infrastructure within the Growth Centre.

It is suggested that the WSGA SIC will need to be comprehensively reviewed to ensure its consistency with the role of the Aerotropolis and the infrastructure provided across both precincts aligns.

FAST corridor

The SIC includes collection and allocation of funds for transport infrastructure. However, there is a lack of funding for the FAST corridor and related infrastructure to be delivered in accordance with the vision for the corridor. The SIC identifies $19M to be collected for this project and yet the total project cost is in the vicinity of $500M.

The FAST project has the ability to provide a fast and sustainable transport connection from the Western Sydney Airport and Aerotropolis to the existing Liverpool city centre. This transport connection could be delivered cheaper than other transport modes and be operational ahead of the commencement of operations at the airport. Transport for NSW are supportive of this project and it should therefore have greater emphasis in the SIC.

There are 13 recommendations included in the submission. The key recommendations include:

· Facilitate the development of an acquisition strategy (and the preparation of a land acquisition reservations map) for the Aerotropolis SEPP.

· Ensure there is a coordination agency of the NSW Government to oversee the delivery of infrastructure across State and Local Government plans.

· The Growth Centres SIC is reviewed to remove duplicate charges across land within the Aerotropolis and to ensure complementary work schedules.

· Include additional detail on the 15th Avenue upgrade to include reference to the FAST initiative and associated cost.

3. Draft Western Sydney Place Infrastructure Compact

The Western Sydney Place Infrastructure Compact (WS PIC) applies to land stretching from Glenfield in the south-east, to Penrith in the north-west. Within the Liverpool LGA it includes the Liverpool Aerotropolis Precincts, Austral, Leppington, and Edmondson Park. The intent of the PIC is to identify and sequence the delivery of State Government infrastructure that will be required to service new jobs and dwellings within the area.

The WS PIC favors a ‘Thriving Aerotropolis’ focused growth trajectory and uses a modified version of the Common Planning Assumptions (CPA) data to project dwelling, population and job figures for 20 and 40 years from 2016. All infrastructure planning and delivery is based upon these projections. Council staff support the intent and implementation of a PIC in the Liverpool precincts as per the PIC’s objectives of matching infrastructure delivery with place and population outcomes, rather than on a business case approach.

This can redress several decades of underinvestment in growth precincts and other areas in Western Sydney and should tie infrastructure investment with population growth. However, the PIC has fundamental deficiencies in its evidence base, assumptions and aspirations, which could result in infrastructure delivery not being aligned to growth in the Liverpool LGA, leaving residents and businesses without essential services.

Key Concerns and Recommendations

The draft submission is included in Attachment 3. Key concerns and recommendations are detailed below.

Whilst the WS PIC presents an opportunity to align infrastructure investment with growth in Western Sydney, there are several factors which will undermine this from being achieved, including:

· The preferred growth scenario does not match Council’s ambition of strengthening the metropolitan cluster and supporting jobs in the Liverpool City Centre.

· The evidence base upon which the WS PIC estimates future jobs, dwellings and population is flawed, resulting in the identification of infrastructure also being misaligned with realistic growth patterns.

· The cost of local government infrastructure has not been considered.

· Infrastructure commitments under the plan do not align with infrastructure plans which were prepared for the growth centres.

· The way in which infrastructure business cases will be measured under the plan does not consider external impacts and will not necessarily result in improving the measurement/outcomes against which the PIC will be measured.

· The WS PIC does not realise opportunities to rationalise key utility corridors, nor does it recognise the critical role of drinking water and sewerage infrastructure in greenfield areas.

· There are concerns about assumptions being made about community demands for non-government schools, resulting in lesser access to public education.

· There needs to be greater consultation with local residents and developers.

· Council would like to see greater prioritisation of the FAST corridor.

Whist the WS PIC intends on providing a relatively substantial amount of transport, health and education infrastructure in the new Aerotropolis core, this area is yet to be serviced by critical infrastructure, such as amplified drinking water and sewerage utilities. This will inevitably delay substantial growth in this precinct and will result in delays to the provision of infrastructure.

The number of residents which will be served by infrastructure in the Aerotropolis will also be limited because most of the population will live on the eastern side with relatively little population to its west. In early years where there is little population within a 30 minute catchment of the Aerotropolis, it is far more important to emphasise jobs growth in the existing metropolitan cluster (including Liverpool) which have much greater populations living within 30 minutes by public transport to these centres.

The implications of the PIC severely under-estimates population growth and capacity within the South West Priority Growth Area. The result is that these areas will be underserviced by infrastructure, and key infrastructure will not be delivered in line with growth; thereby continuing the trend of underinvestment in infrastructure in growth areas that Liverpool has experienced for several decades. Table 2 below identifies the infrastructure that was identified in the precinct planning studies that were carried out in support of the Austral and Leppington North Precincts, compared to infrastructure committed by the PIC to 2056.

Table 2:Comparison of Infrastructure requirements under the Austral and Leppington North Precinct plan compared to Commitments by the WS PIC

Infrastructure Item	ALN Precinct requirement	WS PIC Commitment
Primary Schools	Upgrade to Austral Public School, 4 new primary schools (plus upgrade of Leppington Primary School identified by DPIE as part of the Leppington Town Centre review)	Upgrades to Austral Primary School only
High Schools	1 new high school in the Austral precinct	None
TAFE NSW Campus	1 campus in the Leppington Town Centre	None
Police Station	1 potential police station in the Leppington Town Centre	None
Courthouse	1 potential courthouse in the Leppington Town Centre	None
Health Facilities	1 Integrated Primary Health Facility	None
Community facilities	Regional Indoor sport and aquatic facility (un-funded); Regional Library and community facility (un-funded)	None

The Austral and Leppington North Precincts have been steadily supplying new residential lots for approximately 5 years. Council staff are also noting a trend of increased development density, which will result in higher population and dwelling numbers, and therefore demand for infrastructure, than was assumed by the Department of Planning when the area was rezoned nearly a decade ago.

Given a considerable scaling back of infrastructure, combined with evidence showing that the population yield is likely to be higher than initially planned in the precinct, Council staff would have to recommend that an urgent rezoning review be carried out in the SWPGA precincts, should the PIC not account for adequate infrastructure to service these populations. The infrastructure commitments are considered unsatisfactory to service a precinct which has been forecast to house more than 70,000 residents once completed.

Key recommendations include:

1. Greater emphasis be placed on providing infrastructure to ensure that employment growth occurs in the metropolitan cluster, which supports the airport and Aerotropolis.

2. That the state government increases its portion of funding of infrastructure in the WS PIC area to be more aligned with established areas of the Central River City and the Eastern Harbour City.

3. That the portion of funding of infrastructure in the Aerotropolis to be derived from contributions and customer charges is reduced in value to costs similar to other precincts in the Central River City or the Harbour City.

4. That the PIC includes the capital costs of local infrastructure in its assessments and feasibilities.

5. That the population projections be revised to account for more realistic growth (acknowledging development already delivered in Edmondson Park and Austral).

6. Review existing precinct plans for Edmondson Park, Austral and Leppington North, and the Aerotropolis precinct to ensure that infrastructure that was identified in those plans is committed to and sequenced appropriately

7. Any staging, sequencing and priority plans should reflect the provision of sewerage and water infrastructure.

8. That DPIE, Council’s and the NSW Department of Education and Training work together to better plan for school infrastructure in greenfield areas. Ensure that the private sector is not relied on as the first and only preference in greenfield areas.

9. Develop a communication strategy which provides critical information to affected landowners and provides residents with a greater understanding as to what each plan is for and how it will impact them.

10. Prioritise the delivery of the FAST Corridor.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	Utilise the Western Sydney City Deal Agreement to create Jobs for the Future. 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. 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. Protect, enhance and maintain areas of endangered ecological communities and high quality bushland as part of an attractive mix of land uses. Support the delivery of a range of transport options.
Social	Provide cultural centres and activities for the enjoyment of the arts. Regulate for a mix of housing types that responds to different population groups such as young families and older people. Deliver high quality services for children and their families.
Civic Leadership	Implementation and Governance of the Western Sydney City Deal agreement. Actively advocate for federal and state government support, funding and services.
Legislative	Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000
Risk	The risk is deemed to be High. The commencement of these plans without necessary amendment will have a significant impact on Council. There is also the potential reputational risk as Council is also involved in planning and infrastructure provision within the Aerotropolis. The risk is not considered to be within Council’s risk appetite, if plans are approved unchanged.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Submission on Aerotropolis Precinct Plan (Under separate cover)

2. Submission on Place Infrastructure Compact (Under separate cover)

3. Submission on Special Infrastructure Contribution (Under separate cover)

Ordinary Meeting

24 February 2021

City Community and Culture Report

COM 01

Post Exhibition Report - Miller Social Infrastructure Masterplan

Strategic Direction	Creating Connection Implement access and equity for all members of the community
File Ref	014601.2021
Report By	Galavizh Ahmadi Nia - Manager Community Development and Planning
Approved By	Tina Bono - Acting Director City Community and Culture

Executive Summary

In late 2019, Council engaged consultants to prepare a Social Infrastructure Masterplan for Miller. The purpose of the Masterplan is to provide Council with a vision and recommendations for renewal and redevelopment of Council-owned community infrastructure. This will be aligned with the strategic directions of Council, to progressively redevelop the community infrastructure to meet the needs and aspirations of the community now and into the future.

The draft Miller Social Infrastructure Masterplan was presented to Council at its meeting on 27 October 2020. At the meeting, Council resolved that it:

1. Receives and notes the report;

2. Adopts the Draft Masterplan for public exhibition for community information and feedback for a period of 28 days;

3. Delegates to the A/CEO the finalisation of the draft Masterplan if no submissions received; or receive a further report outlining details of the submissions received at the conclusion of the exhibition period;

4. Subject to Council’s adoption of the Masterplan, develops a staged implementation strategy by June 2021.

The draft Masterplan recommends effective integration of social infrastructure within Miller, to improve amenities, permeability and accessibility. The improvements to existing infrastructure and provision of new facilities are recommended by the draft Masterplan through several defined stages, including:

· A new multi-purpose community hub integrated with surrounding public open spaces at Miller Square over 3 stages, to include a library with adaptable programming spaces, function and meeting room spaces to accommodate social and community services, health programs, art initiatives, social meeting spaces and adaptable space for education and learning programs;

· New safe pedestrian-friendly spaces;

· New open and connected axis into Miller Square with a boulevard of trees;

· Proposed increase of urban tree canopy on precinct scale that connects and identifies key connection corridors;

· A staged redevelopment of the Michael Wenden Aquatic Leisure Centre;

· Creating connections among various destinations and facilities; and

· Renewal works to existing parks and open spaces to improve their accessibility and safety and to optimise utilisation.

The Draft Masterplan was placed on Public Exhibition from 12 November 2020 to 21 December 2020. A total of 3 submissions and feedback from two Focus Groups were received. Public submissions and feedback from Focus Groups presentations have been compiled and are presented as Attachment 1 of this report.

This report presents the key findings from the Public Exhibition period and presents the revised Draft Masterplan for Council’s consideration.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Receives and notes the report;

2. Adopts the revised Draft Miller Social Infrastructure Masterplan.

3. Commences the development of a staged Implementation Strategy.

4. Report back the findings of the Implementation Strategy by June 2021.

REPORT

1. BACKGROUND

The renewal of assets and social infrastructure in Miller has been a priority of Council for several years. In 2016, Council endorsed a conditional Masterplan for renewal of the Miller Town Centre. The Masterplan outlined Council’s aspiration to redevelop the existing community facilities, including recreation and leisure facilities, to meet the current and future community needs for inclusive, affordable, and accessible facilities. Prior to that, Council prepared a preliminary concept Masterplan in 2009 (for internal purposes only) which investigated substantial changes to the Miller Town Centre. The Masterplan explored the potential for land swaps, improved sight lines and relocation of Miller Square. Both studies had a broader scope including pedestrian and vehicle connectivity, private investment in the town centre, and integration of public and private spaces.

In December 2019, Council engaged a consultant to prepare a Social Infrastructure Masterplan for Miller to meet the following objectives:

· Identify urban renewal opportunities within the Miller Town Centre;

· Improve linkages and connectivity between residential areas and Council’s community facilities and open spaces;

· Improve connections for both pedestrians and vehicles within the study scope area;

· Provide accessible, proportionate, quality, usable and safe community facilities; and

· Improve sightlines, surveillance, and safety within the public domain.

The Draft Masterplan presents the findings and recommendations for Council’s consideration. Additionally, the draft Masterplan identifies potential funding sources for detailed design and staged delivery.

Miller is home to 3,252 residents, forecast to grow to 5,682 by 2036. With the Miller population containing a high proportion of lone-person households in the suburb of Miller, there is a propensity for social isolation. A consideration in the future planning of facilities is to provide safe and accessible spaces for people to enhance social connections.

The community and stakeholder engagement, combined with further qualitative assessments and benchmarks, highlights the need to review the current provision of social infrastructure. There is relatively large number of standalone local community facilities clustered along Woodward Crescent, many of which are old, small, inadequate, inflexible and require significant upgrades. Council’s Community Facilities Strategy has identified that many of these facilities need to be reviewed and repurposed in the medium term.

Council officers developed a consultation plan seeking community and other key stakeholders’ input on the Draft Masterplan. This report responds to the above Council resolution of 27 October 2020, inclusive of Public Exhibition outcomes.

2. PUBLIC EXHIBITION OUTCOMES

In response to Item 1 of the Council Resolution of 27 October 2020, Council Officers developed a Community Consultation Plan (Plan) seeking community and other stakeholders’ input, with a focus to inform and engage with residents of Miller and surrounding suburbs, as well as local agencies. The Plan took into consideration the COVID-19 social distancing restrictions, and measures were taken to ensure adhering to NSW Health guidelines.

The table below outlines the Public Exhibition stages, inclusive of a description of the activities undertaken at each stage.

Engagement Stage	Action
Stage 1	Develop a Communication and Consultation Plan
Stage 2 Communication and engagement methods	Online Surveys · Public Exhibition period was open from 12 November 2020 to 21 December 2020 · Placement of surveys on Liverpool Listens from 12 November 2020 Public Notifications · Notice on Council’s Facebook page to inform and direct community members to the survey on Liverpool Listens page to provide input. Two Facebook notices were posted on 12 November and 8 December respectively. · Developed A3-posters and A5-flyers directing residents to the Liverpool Listens page. · The posters/flyers were displayed at Miller Library and distributed to the Michael Wenden Aquatic Leisure Centre and Miller Hub. · Agency/stakeholder emails – the 13 participants in the detailed stakeholder interviews were contacted to advise them of the exhibition of the draft Masterplan on 18 November 2020. These stakeholders included: o CORE Community Services; o New Horizons; o Department of Communities and Justice; o Exodus Foundation; o Liverpool PCYC; o Michael Wenden Aquatic Leisure Centre; o Wesley Mission; o Hume Community Housing; o Evolve Housing; o Gooboora Aboriginal Men’s Group (NSW Health, SWLHD); o Centre for Health Equity Training Research and Evaluation; and o TAFE NSW, Miller College. Focus Group Consultations · Presentation of the draft Masterplan to the 2168 Interagency on Thursday 26 November 2020. · Presentation of the Draft Masterplan to the 2168 District Forum on 7 December 2020.
Stage 3	Compiling feedback received through online surveys and stakeholders’ consultations

2.1 Liverpool Listens

The Draft Masterplan was placed on Public Exhibition from 12 November to 21 December 2020 on the Liverpool Listens page seeking community feedback on the proposed plans.

Two notices on Council’s Facebook page was posted on 12 November and 8 December, reaching around 2,753 people, to inform and direct residents to Liverpool Listens page. The notices were viewed 65 times and received 32 reactions, comments and shares. There were no negative comments posted.

During the exhibition period, Council received a total of 3 submissions. Attachment 1 records all received submissions along with the Council Officer and Consultant’s response to the comments received.

2.2 Focus Group consultations

2168 District Forum

The Draft Masterplan was presented to the 2168 District Forum on 7 December 2020. At the Forum, the key themes and outcomes from the community engagement stage were presented and residents were advised of the exhibition and submission process.

2168 Interagency

Council officers presented the Masterplan to the 2168 Interagency on Thursday 26 November 2020. A link to the documents on exhibition was provided to Centre for Health Equity Training, Research and Evaluation (CHTRE) and 2168 Interagency members.

Summary of feedback received during the Public Exhibition period

The table below provides summary of the comments and feedback received from the Public Exhibition and Focus Group consultations.

Feedback	Council Officer/Consultant response
Respondent noted Masterplan would benefit from a process such as Health Impact Assessment to formally evaluate the likely health impacts of the delivery of this masterplan with a view of maximizing positive health impacts over time	Council should support the development of a detailed Health Impact Assessment by NSW Health of the plans to support community health measures and outcomes of the Masterplan.
The respondents recommended ongoing engagement and involvement in the planning of community facilities in Miller.	The proposed detailed design of a new multi-purpose and integrated community hub will require input and expertise from a range of community and agency stakeholders.
School Infrastructure NSW (SINSW), as part of the Department of Education (DoE), is supportive of this aspect of the draft Masterplan and is open to exploring joint and shared-use opportunities with Council between Miller Technology High School and the surrounding community. SINSW also recognises that there may be further joint and shared-use opportunities in Miller through the utilisation of Miller Public School.	Any joint and shared-use agreements of facilities would be subject to timing between Council and SINSW.
Respondents noted that there are a range of benefits from providing public domain initiatives and upgrades that consequentially encourage active and sustainable travel such as shared paths, local traffic calming and improved accessible ramps.	Council has signed a Memorandum of Understanding with South Western Sydney Local Health District and has co-funded a Healthy Places Urban Designer position. The next step is to develop the first stage of shovel ready projects with a focus on street and park improvements.
Respondent supported the need for suitable indoor facilities (Basketball) across the area, with the Michael Wenden Aquatic Centre to remain as one of main facilities in Liverpool.	The Action Plan identifies a detailed feasibility study on the staged redevelopment of Michael Wenden Aquatic Leisure Centre, including 2 additional indoor courts as part of the Masterplan.

3. REVISED DRAFT MASTERPLAN

In consideration of the submissions received during Public Exhibition period, this report recommends the following amendments to the Draft Masterplan:

1. Support and strengthen the actions identified in the submission by NSW Health (South Western Sydney Local Health District) to undertake a Health Impact Assessment (HIA) funded by NSW Health. NSW Health will evaluate the likely health impacts of the Miller Social Infrastructure Masterplan in the community through undertaking a HIA in collaboration with Council and other stakeholders, with a view to maximising positive health outcomes over time.

2. Amend Action 11.1 to include the broader opportunity identified with Miller Public School and other schools in the area.

3. Amend the Masterplan to further strengthen the importance of sustainable active transport opportunities between Miller Town Centre and local schools.

4. MASTERPLAN LOBBY BROCHURE

The Community Development and Planning team are collaborating with the Communications team to develop a draft brochure for the Masterplan. The draft brochure is proposed to display Council’s long-term vision for the renewal of Miller’s social infrastructure including a summary of recommended facilities and concept designs, and benefits to the Liverpool community. In addition, the Communications team is investigating opportunities for media coverage of the masterplan.

5. HIGH LEVEL PROGRAM

The draft Masterplan articulates both a short and long-term vision for the future redevelopment of Miller’s social infrastructure; and allows for facilitated discussion with other landowners in the Miller Town Centre. It includes a recommended action plan for a staged redevelopment and renewal of Miller’s social infrastructure into innovative and modern facilities.

While the Masterplan presents a long-term vision for renewal of social infrastructure in Miller, there are aspects of this vision that could be explored for staged delivery through the 4-year Delivery Program.

Should it be adopted by Council, and in line with Council’s resolution of October 2020, an Implementation Strategy will be developed by June 2021 to deliver on the vision through a staging process. The Implementation Strategy will include working with landowners, developing a shared vision for Miller Square around an improved public domain and a purpose-built community hub and enhancing the role and function of Miller Square. Further, improved connections between places, spaces and facilities, applying a ‘people first’ approach and effectively integrating open space and facilities in Miller to improve safety, visual amenity, permeability and accessibility are essential.

The Implementation Strategy will include a feasibility study of proposed facilities, a funding strategy (including opportunities for grant funding), and delivery staging options to suit funding based on the recommended short to long term Action Plan. The Implementation Strategy will investigate opportunities to prioritise shovel ready and site-specific projects identified in the Masterplan with a focus on renewal and improvements to facilities such as parks, roads and footpaths and short-term improvements to the Michael Wenden Aquatic Centre.

The Masterplan recommends the redevelopment of Michael Wenden Aquatic and Leisure Centre. The redevelopment costs are estimated at approximately $66m.

In 2019 Council resolved to adopt an Aquatic and Leisure Centre (ALC) Strategy. The ALC Strategy considered the current provision of, and future demand for aquatic and leisure centres across the wider Liverpool community and made recommendations for future infrastructure development. The ALC highlighted that there was unmet demand for swimming, indoor sport and recreation within the broader catchment of Michael Wenden Aquatic Leisure Centre. The Draft Masterplan considered the recommendations in ALC strategy and reinforced the importance of Michael Wenden Aquatic Leisure Centre in providing important recreation opportunities for the Miller and surrounding 2168 communities. The Masterplan recommends the next step is to undertake a detailed feasibility study on the staged redevelopment of Michael Wenden Aquatic Leisure Centre.

Council is cognisant of the substantial investment recommended in the Draft Masterplan, especially for the redevelopment of Michael Wenden Aquatic Leisure Centre, and has now commenced planning for the feasibility processes. The feasibility study will also ensure that the staging and investment planned for Michael Wenden Aquatic Leisure Centre considers the broader provision of Aquatic and Leisure Centres across the Liverpool LGA as well as the 2168 catchment. Council is currently seeking to engage appropriate consultancy services to prepare the report.

6. CONCLUSION

The Draft Masterplan was placed on Public Exhibition from 12 November to 21 December 2020, with a total of three submissions received. The Draft Masterplan has been updated to reflect the feedback received during the exhibition period.

In consideration to community and other stakeholder’s feedback through the Public Exhibition period, this report presents the revised Draft Masterplan for Council’s consideration. The revised Draft Masterplan is attached to this report as Attachment 2.

Subject to Council’s endorsement of the Draft Masterplan, Council officers will commence the necessary investigations and studies to develop the Implementation Strategy, including a funding strategy for a staged delivery.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	Facilitate the development of new tourism based on local attractions, culture and creative industries. Facilitate economic development. Funding for short to longer term costs of the masterplan.
Environment	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.
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. Support community organisations, groups and volunteers to deliver coordinated services to the community. Support access and services for people with a disability. Deliver high quality services for children and their families.
Civic Leadership	Undertake communication practices with the community and stakeholders across a range of media. Encourage the community to engage in Council initiatives and actions. Provide information about Council’s services, roles and decision-making processes. Deliver services that are customer focused.
Legislative	There are no legislative considerations relating to this report.
Risk	Potentially leading to unplanned and unfunded works. The risk is currently considered to be Medium and within Council’s Risk Appetite.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Attachment 1 - Public Exhibition Feedback Summary

2. Attachment 2 - Draft Miller Social Infrastructure Masterplan (Under separate cover)

Ordinary Meeting 24 February 2021

City Corporate Report

CORP 02

Budget Review - December 2020

Strategic Direction	Generating Opportunity Meet the challenges of Liverpool’s growing population
File Ref	025425.2021
Report By	Earl Paradeza - Senior Management Accountant
Approved By	Vishwa Nadan - Chief Financial Officer

Executive Summary

In July 2020 Council adopted its 2020/21 operating budget with projected revenue of $295.8m and expenditure of $205.1m. In terms of the net operating result before grants and contributions provided for capital purposes, Council budgeted for an operating deficit of $5.691m.

For Quarter 1 ended 30 September 2020, Council approved adjustments through resolutions and the budget review process, resulting in a revised revenue target of $302.8m and expenditure of $210.0m. This translated to a revised deficit net operating result before grants and contributions provided for capital purposes of $6.736m.

The review of Council’s budget at 31 December 2020 identified further adjustments and if approved will result in a $9.531m net operating deficit before grants and contributions for capital purposes for 2020/21 (Ref attachment 1 – Note D).

The second quarter budget review for 2020/21 has resulted in a $14.070m overall decrease in Council’s capital expenditure program (Ref attachment 1 – Note E).

RECOMMENDATION

That Council approves the identified budget variations in accordance with this report.

REport

Legislative Requirements

Clause 203(1) of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 requires the Responsible Accounting Officer to provide a quarterly budget review not later than two months after each quarter's end. This report provides an overview of the results on the financial review for the quarter ended 31 December 2020.

Commentary

Operating Budget

In July 2020, Council adopted its 2020/21 operating budget with projected revenue of $295.8m and expenditure of $205.1m. In terms of the net operating result before grants and contributions provided for capital purposes, the Council budgeted for an operating deficit of $5.691m.

For Quarter 1 ended 30 September 2020, Council approved adjustments through resolutions and budget review process, resulting in a revised revenue target of $302.8m and expenditure target of $210.0m. This translated to a revised deficit net operating result before grants and contributions provided for capital purposes of $6.736m

A comprehensive budget review conducted at 31 December 2020 has resulted in further budget adjustments, as detailed in Attachment 2. As part of the Budget Review, managers have conducted a review of their programs with a view to providing a revised forecast for the financial year ending 30 June 2021. Managers take into consideration events that have occurred to date and/or information that has become available since the adoption of the original budget and the impact of which provides the basis for the budget adjustments.

The review has resulted in $5.176m (Ref attachment 1 – Note A) decrease in total revenue mainly attributable to the following:

· - $2.4m deferment of contribution from Cantebury/ Bankstown Council due to delays in works on Georges River Foot Bridge;

· - $2.1m deferement of city deal funds due to delays in works on Lurnea Community Hub project;

· -$1.9m expected gain on sale of Scott Street property will not be realised by 30 June 2021 due to delays in obtaining RMS approval which is a pre-requisite for the sale;

· -$0.6m decrease in sub-leasing rental income due to delays in securing a tenant for space at L6, 35 Scott Street;

· +$1.0m additional grant for Newbridge Road Intersection Upgrade project under Western Sydney Infrastructure Planning Program;

· +$0.5m additonal grants for road works under Local Roads and Community Infrastructure Program; and

· +$0.4m additional grant from Department of Planning Infrastructure for review of Liverpool LEP.

Total expenditure is projected to increase by net $0.980m (Ref attachment 1 – Note B), mainly comprising:

· +$600k required for urgent road repair works;

· +$400k consultancy for review of Liverpool LEP (grant funded);

· +$250k increase allocation for disposal of drainage waste, cleaning of drainage pipes and fits, and cleaning of creeks and waterways to reduce flooding events;

· +$150k urgent repair of clay and concrete segmental paved footpaths within the CBD area;

· +$111k consultancy to completion of sign and line marking asset register update;

· +$90k CPAC building fire compliance works; and

· -$500k expected council-wide salary savings.

The proposed budget changes will increase the budgeted operating deficit before grants and contributions for capital purposes to $9.531m (Ref attachment 1 – Note D).

Capital Budget

In July 2020, Council approved its $148.3m capital works program for 2020/21. Council subsequently approved carry over of projects valued $23.4m that were planned but not completed in 2019/20.

In Quarter 1 budget review, capital expenditure program was increased by $373k.

The second quarter budget review has resulted in $14.1m decrease to Council’s capital expenditure program (Ref attachment 1 – Note E). The budget adjustments include the following:

· -$6.4m delay in land acquisition Basin 6 & Basin 29 Flood Detention at Austral;

· -$3.0m delay in rehabilitation works on Georges River Foot Bridge;

· -$2.5m delay in Scott Street road closure works awaiting RMS approval; and

· -$2.1m delay in construction works on Phillip Park – Redevelopment of Lurnea Community Hub project.

At 31 December 2020, Council has a capital expenditure program of $158.0m as detailed in

Attachment 3.

The YTD capital expenditure to 31 December 2020 was $37.2m.

The Table 1 below provides summary of the budget results:

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

Attachment 1 - Quarter 2 Budget Review Summary (QBRS): This report presents a summary of Council's budgeted financial position at end of the quarter. The key indicators include:

1. The revised budgeted income and expenditure for the year against the original estimate of annual income and expenditure as shown in Council’s Operational Plan

2. Changes following Quarter 2 budget review

3. The proposed revised budget for 2020/21 financial year

Attachment 2 – This report provides details of operating budget adjustments

Attachment 3 – This report provides details of capital budget adjustments

Attachment 4 & 5 – Grants Status Report: Has two components, first listing all annual grant submissions and second, listing all grants that have been applied for during the quarter detailing the project title, amount sought, funding body and status of the application. Council officers are continually seeking alternate sources of funding as opportunities arise.

Attachment 6 - Cash and Investments Statement: Providing a reconciliation of restricted and unrestricted funds to the level of Cash and Investments held as at 31 December 2020

Attachment 8 - Consultancy and Legal Expenses

Attachment 9 - Contracts and Other Expenses

Attachment 10 - City Development Fund and Environment Levy

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

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	The revised budget net operating result before Grants and Contributions following Quarter 2 Budget Review and Council resolutions to 31 December 2020 will be a deficit of $9.531m.
Environment	There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.
Social	There are no social and cultural considerations.
Civic Leadership	Deliver services that are customer focused. Operate a well-developed governance system that demonstrates accountability, transparency and ethical conduct.
Risk	Clause 203(1) of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 requires the Responsible Accounting Officer to provide a quarterly budget review not later than two months after each quarter's end. Breach of legislation if not done.

ATTACHMENTS

1. QBRS - Consolidated Financial Results

2. Operating Budget Adjustments

3. Capital Budget Adjustments

4. Grant Status Report - Applications

5. Grant Status Report - Received

6. Cash & Investment Report

7. Key Performance Indicators

8. Consultancy & Legal Expenses Budget Review Statement

9. Contracts & Other Expenses Statements

10. City Development Fund & Environment Levy Reserves

Ordinary Meeting 24 February 2021

City Corporate Report

CORP 03

Investment Report January 2021

Strategic Direction	Leading through Collaboration Seek efficient and innovative methods to manage our resources
File Ref	026576.2021
Report By	John Singh - Accountant - Investments & Treasury Management
Approved By	Vishwa Nadan - Chief Financial Officer

executive summary

This report details Council’s investment portfolio and its performance for the month ended 31^st January 2021:

· Council held investments with a market value of $301 million;

· The economic environment globally, including Australia, suffered significantly from the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in March. The market value of Council’s investment in Floating Rate Notes (FRN) has since improved;

· RBA has decided to lower the cash rate to 0.10% with an indication to keep it at this level for next three years. This will have significant impact on Council’s interest earnings;

· The portfolio yield was 122 basis points above the AusBond Bank Bill index;

	AusBond Bank Bill Index (BBI)
Benchmark	0.29%
Portfolio yield	1.51%
Performance above benchmarks	1.22%

· Return on investment was $1.3m lower than the original budget. This does not take into account $1.5m capital gain on FRN’s. Assuming these FRN’s hold value to 30 June 2021, the budget shortfall will be sufficiently balanced.

· Council’s investment advisor, Amicus Advisory, has completed its review of Emerald Mortgage Backed Securities and recommends Council continue to hold its investments in the “Class A” and both “Class C” securities given current poor market pricing. MBS Securities are now not rated;

· Council’s investments and reporting obligations fully complied with the requirements of section 625 of the Local Government Act 1993 and clause 212 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005;

· Council’s portfolio also fully complied with limits set out in its current Investment Policy; and

· Council is committed to NSW TCorp’s balanced investment framework and held 20.22% of its portfolio in ADI’s rated BBB and below.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council receives and notes this report.

REPORT

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

Council’s Portfolio

At 31^st January 2021, Council held investments with a market value of $301 million. Council’s investment register detailing all its investments is provided as an attachment to this report. In summary, Council’s portfolio consisted of investments in:

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

Asset Class	Jan -20	Jun-20
Senior Debts (FRN's ,TCD's & FRB)*	101.53%	100.75%
MBS (Reverse Mortgage Backed Securities)	75.58%	62.11%
T-Corp Unit Trusts	103.14%	102.81%

*Definition of terms

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

· Fixed Rate Bond (FRB) – returns Fixed Coupon (interest) Rate and is tradeable before maturity.

· Floating Rate Note (FRN) - returns an aggregate of a fixed margin and a variable benchmark (usually BBSW).

The economic environment globally, including Australia, suffered significantly from the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in March. The market value of Council’s investment in FRN’s has since improved. Council has sufficient funds in its current account and has no plans at this stage to sell off any of its FRN’s to meet its short-term cashflow requirements.

Council is fully compliant with the requirements of the Ministerial Investment Order including the grandfathering provisions. The grandfathering provisions state that Council may continue to hold to maturity, redeem or sell investments that comply with previous Ministerial Investment Orders. Any new investments must comply with the most recent Order. Council continues to closely monitor the investments in its portfolio to ensure continued compliance and minimal exposure to risk.

Council is committed to NSW TCorp’s balanced investment framework and held 20.22% of its portfolio in ADI’s rated BBB and below.

Emerald – Mortgaged Backed Securities

Council’s new investment advisor, Amicus Advisory, was asked on appointment to review Council’s investments in “grandfathered” mortgage backed securities. Amicus has completed its review and recommends Council continue to hold its investments in the “Class A” and both “Class C” securities given current poor market pricing. Notwithstanding this recommendation, Amicus has assessed that both “Class C” securities are likely to eventually default. However, Council will continue to receive interest up until default which is likely to be many years away. Fitch Rating Agency has decided to withdraw its rating on mortgage backed securities and as a result, Council investments in these securities are now classed non-rated.

Portfolio Maturity Profile

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

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

Overall Portfolio Credit Framework compliance to Investment Policy

Portfolio performance against relevant market benchmark.

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

The portfolio yield to 31^st January 2021 exceeded the AusBond Bank Bill index by 122 basis points (1.51% against 0.29%)

Council portfolio continues to perform at above benchmark rates despite ongoing margin contraction and significantly lower market term deposit yields. Comparative yields for the previous months are charted below:

Performance of Portfolio Returns against Budget

Council’s investment income for January 2021 is lower than the original budget by $1.3m. This does not take into account $1.5m capital gain on FRN’s. Assuming these FRN’s hold value to 30 June 2021, the budget shortfall will be sufficiently balanced.

Investment Portfolio at a Glance

Portfolio Performance

The portfolio yield to 31^st January 2021 exceeded the AusBond Bank Bill index by 122 basis points (1.51% against 0.29%).

Annual Income vs. Budget

Council’s investment interest income is lower than the original budget by $1.3m as at 31^st January 2021 and will be closely monitored.

Investment Policy Compliance

Legislative Requirements		Fully Compliant
Portfolio Credit Rating Limit		Fully Compliant
Institutional Exposure Limits		Fully Compliant
Overall Portfolio Credit Limits		Fully Compliant
Term to Maturity Limits		Fully Compliant

Economic Outlook – Reserve Bank of Australia

The Reserve Bank has left the official cash rate on hold at 0.10 per cent in its meeting on 2^nd February 2021.The current 0.10 per cent cash rate is at a historically low level and impacts returns on investment.

Certificate of Responsible Accounting Officer

The Chief Financial Officer, as Responsible Accounting Officer, certifies that the investments listed in the attached report have been made in accordance with section 625 of the Local Government Act 1993, clause 212 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 and Council’s Investment Policy at the time of their placement. The previous investments are covered by the grandfathering clauses of the current investment guidelines issued by the Minister for Local Government.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	Council’s investment interest income is lower than the original budget by $1.3m as at 31^st January 2021 and will be closely monitored.
Environment	There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.
Social	There are no social and cultural considerations.
Civic Leadership	There are no civic leadership and governance considerations.
Legislative	Council is fully compliant with the requirements of the Local Government Act 1993 – Investment Order (authorized investments) and with reporting requirements under clause 212 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005.
Risk	The capital value and return on investment is subject to market risks. Investment limits prescribed in Council’s policy framework is aimed to mitigate these risks. Market interest is expected to stay at its lowest rate for a long period and will continue to put pressure on Council’s budget.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Investment Portfolio - January 2021

Ordinary Meeting

24 February 2021

City Corporate Report

CORP 04

2021 National General Assembly of Local Government

Strategic Direction	Generating Opportunity Meet the challenges of Liverpool’s growing population
File Ref	032917.2021
Report By	George Georgakis - Manager Council and Executive Services
Approved By	George Hampouris - Acting Director City Corporate

Executive Summary

The 2021 National General Assembly of Local Government (NGA) is scheduled to be held from Sunday 20 June – Wednesday 23 June 2021. This report is for Council to consider and endorse proposed motions to be sent and endorse the Councillors to attend.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Endorse the three motions to be submitted to the National General Assembly as outlined in the report; and

2. Endorse the attendance of Mayor Waller, Councillor Shelton, Councillor Hagarty and Councillor Rhodes at the Conference.

REPORT

Council considered a report on the National General Assembly at its meeting on 3 February 2021 and resolved:

That:

1. Councillors submit motions to the CEO by 10 February 2021 for consideration at the 24 February 2021 Council meeting; and

2. Any Councillors interested in attending the National General Assembly contact the CEO by 10 February 2021 for consideration at the 24 February 2021 Council meeting.

In relation to point 1 of the above resolution, in addition to a motion considered during NOM 01 (Aerotropolis Acquisition Scheme) at the 3 February 2021, two other motions were provided by Councillor Kaliyanda for Council to consider at the 24 February 2021 meeting.

All three proposed motions, together with background information is provided below.

· Acquisition Scheme

Further information on the motion discussed at the 3 February 2021 meeting is shown below for Council’s consideration and endorsement:

Background

It was identified that the current system for compulsory land acquisition is unfair and inefficient. Adequate contributions to acquire land take years to be collected while landowners, ratepayers and new residents are disadvantaged:

· New residents have to wait many years for infrastructure to be built;

· Council and ratepayers are forced to pay more due to increasing land values and inflation; and

· Landowners are stuck with a plot of land they can’t sell or develop.

Generally when a major Federal or State infrastructure proposal is announced, there is a significant uplift in values of surrounding development land. Currently there is no method of value capture associated with the increased land values to allow distribution of funds to Councils to assist in the upfront acquisition of land or provision of additional community facilities generated by the surrounding development.

As a result of the announcements and commencement of construction of the Western Sydney Airport, land values of land identified with future development potential have escalated significantly. However, owners of land identified for a potential future public purpose are stranded in finding it difficult to sell their land.

It is considered that there is an opportunity for a funding scheme to be developed between the Federal and State Governments through tax revenues raised in association with property transactions in the Local Government Areas in which major infrastructure proposals are being undertaken.

This could include investigating opportunities in the current tax regimes, where at a Federal level a portion of GST raised on property transactions could be allocated into an acquisition scheme, and at State level increased revenue generated from stamp duty and land tax as a result of property value increases could be allocated into an acquisition scheme and a community facility development fund.

Currently within the NSW contributions regime, there is no mechanism for contributions to be raised for the delivery of community facilities in new development/growth areas.

Motion:

That:

1. The National General Assembly request that the Federal Government investigate forward funding acquisition scheme that will enable local governments to provide infrastructure supporting the development of national assets; and

2. The investigation of a forward funding acquisition scheme also consider funding opportunities through a value capture process or increased funds generated in the existing tax regime due to higher land values and transaction volumes associated with areas of major infrastructure delivery.

· Community spaces/work hubs

Objective

It is suggested that Local Governments that are able to take a portfolio approach with multiple government owned assets can unlock economies of scale to deliver better management and superior financial and social output gains. There is work being done on models for management of government portfolios of affordable space, including how they could be managed by a socially orientated property management company (a property management company driven by social purpose) alongside community partners to provide long-term solutions and financial returns, as well as building the capacity of local people and agencies.

A fund created to adequately resource such initiatives and foster such collaborations are integral as local governments do not have the capacity to go it alone, and in some states or territories, may be restricted from doing so.

Key Arguments

The various impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and associated restrictions have drastically shifted the way that people work, and their perceptions of their work environments. Where inner-urban centres were favoured locations for offices, co-working or shared work hubs, there is a need to decentralise such facilities.

Local government, as the closest level of government to the community, is conveniently placed to understand and meet the localised needs of their communities. Therefore, establishing a framework through which local governments can partner with private sector and community organisations to deliver better local economic infrastructure is important to better meet the needs of the economy of the future.

Motion:

That the National General Assembly calls on the Australian Local Government Association Board to advocate to Federal, State and Territory Governments, and other relevant authorities to develop a framework and establish a fund to support and incentivise cooperation across state and local governments, the private sector and community organisations to deliver better, integrated co-working or shared work hub options for the community.

· City Deals

Objective

Improved planning systems and governance frameworks are critical to streamline the actions of all three levels of government. Continued reform of the responsibilities shared between the three levels of government for planning, funding and delivery of strategic transport, economic and community development infrastructure is the only way forward. Sector-led infrastructure at state level leads to uncoordinated outcomes and assets, with communities suffering from delivery lags in critical community and social infrastructure.

By accelerating planning and investment collaboration frameworks, such as the City Deal program, all stakeholders including state agencies, landowners and developers, business and industry representatives are brought together in the planning and delivery framework to deliver well-sequenced high amenity places.

Key Arguments

An holistic approach within and across all levels of government is needed to respond to COVID-19 and rebalance the spatial structure of our cities through evidence-based metropolitan scale planning.

Integrated planning that accounts for population growth, land use, transport and social infrastructure more responsibly and more equitably, and sequences investment and development appropriately is urgently needed.

To prevent the continued isolation of communities already burdened with poor access to job opportunities, infrastructure and services, metropolitan planning must adopt an integrated and place-based approach to development and infrastructure sequencing, with local government - representing the communities - at the centre of this process.

Motion:

That the National General Assembly calls on the Federal Government to recommit to genuine partnership between three levels of Government in the City Deal model, and commit resources to progress stalled negotiations; reconcile real progress against planned outcomes such as in the Western Sydney City Deal; and leverage the learnings from the current City Deals to inform improved and replicable models for future Deals.

All motions require a clear national objective, a summary of the key arguments in support of the motion, and endorsement of council. Motions are to be lodged online through the Australian Local Government Association website no later than Friday 26 March 2021.

In relation to point 2 of the above resolution, Mayor Waller, Councillor Shelton, Councillor Hagarty and Councillor Rhodes have expressed interest in attending the Conference.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	There are no economic and financial considerations with this report.
Environment	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	Raise awareness in the community about the available services and facilities.
Civic Leadership	Act as an environmental leader in the community. Facilitate the development of community leaders. Encourage the community to engage in Council initiatives and actions. Provide information about Council’s services, roles and decision making processes. Deliver services that are customer focused. Operate a well-developed governance system that demonstrates accountability, transparency and ethical conduct. Actively advocate for federal and state government support, funding and services.
Legislative	There are no legislative considerations relating to this report.
Risk	The risk is deemed to be low and is considered within Council’s risk appetite.

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

Ordinary Meeting

24 February 2021

Questions with Notice

QWN 01

Question with Notice - Clr Hadchiti - Fast Transit Corridor

Strategic Direction

Leading through Collaboration

Seek efficient and innovative methods to manage our resources

File Ref

019732.2021

QUESTION WITH NOTICE

Council has invested a lot of time and money working on plans for a fast transit corridor from the CBD through to Fifteenth Avenue.

Please address the following:

1. What has the cost been to the ratepayer, including staff cost, promotional material, study tours (converting points if used to real dollars) etc?

2. What stage is this project at?

Response

Background

Council’s vision is for the Fast Transit Corridor to be a high-quality public transport link between Liverpool CBD and the Airport/Aerotropolis.

The corridor consists of the following road links:

· Liverpool Station along Moore Street to Hoxton Park Road.

· Hoxton Park Road along the existing Liverpool to Parramatta transit way to Banks Road.

· Hoxton Park Road, from Banks Road to Cowpasture Road.

· Fifteenth Avenue, from Cowpasture Road to the Western Sydney Airport and Aerotropolis.

The corridor in its local context is shown below.

Council’s Local Strategic Planning Statement (LSPS) identifies the FAST corridor as a project of strategic significance to Council, and other strategic planning documents including the Liverpool City Centre Public Domain Plan identify the corridor.

The NSW Government, through the Western Sydney Growth Centres State Infrastructure Contribution (SIC) levy, has allocated funding for road upgrades along the following road sections:

· Hoxton Park Road between the end of the existing Liverpool to Parramatta transit way (at Banks Road) to Cowpasture Road.

· Fifteenth Avenue between Cowpasture Road and Devonshire Road.

The Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE) administers SIC funding.

1. What has the cost been to the ratepayer, including staff cost, promotional material, study tours (converting points if used to real dollars) etc?

This project is largely a SIC funded project. Council secured $4,845,500.00 in grant funding from DPIE towards the concept and detailed designs for the upgrade of the section of Fifteenth Avenue between Cowpasture Road and Devonshire Road.

There has been general funds expenditure of $56,214.58 to date which is not claimable expenditure under the SIC funding agreement. In addition, Council utilised accumulated air points for travel which amounted to $21,037.03 (if converted into dollars).

Expenditure Summary

Total project expenditure to date = $2,025,380.34

Grant funding received to date = $2,742,500.00

2. What stage is the project at?

TfNSW and Council have both received funding under the SIC and design investigations for the upgrade of the above-mentioned road sections is underway.

The status of the two projects are as follows:

TfNSW upgrade of Hoxton Park Road

TfNSW has completed a strategic concept design which involves road widening to provide two dedicated bus lanes along both sides of the existing four-lane road. The design was placed on public exhibition early last year. TfNSW provided a briefing to Councillors on the project.

The main project feature which attracted community submissions was the arrangement to restrict right turn movements into and out of Dorrigo Avenue. Council also raised a concern that the provision of two dedicated bus lanes as a continuation of the existing Liverpool to Parramatta transit lane would be a better arrangement should an upgrade to a mass transit system such as light rail or trackless tram be required in the future.

Council’s Fifteenth Avenue Road Upgrade

Council engaged consultants with the funding provided by DPIE to prepare an optioneering report on the corridor between Liverpool City Centre and the Airport as well as a strategic concept design for the road section between Cowpasture Road and Devonshire Road.

The optioneering report has been completed and is used as an advocacy document for the project. The report has enabled Council to advise DPIE and TfNSW on the need for a coordinated design and implementation strategy for the project’s delivery.

In response, the three agencies have funded the preparation of an Integrated Transport Corridor Plan to ensure a uniform design approach and implementation strategy can be adopted. The plan is expected to be completed in the middle of 2021.

In addition, to fulfill the commitment in the Western Sydney City Deal, TfNSW has engaged consultants to prepare delivery programs for the provision of rapid bus networks from Penrith, Liverpool and Campbelltown to Western Sydney International (Nancy-Bird Walton) Airport before it opens in 2026, and to the Western Sydney Aerotropolis. The report on this is expected to be completed in the middle of 2021.

Project Advocacy

The advocacy to date has included representations to the Department of Planning, Industry & Environment, Transport for NSW, the Minister for Transport and Roads and meetings with senior DPIE and Transport for NSW representatives. This has enabled Council to highlight the importance of the project to DPIE and TfNSW management and both agencies have agreed to partner with Council to prepare an Integrated Transport Corridor Plan.

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

Strategic Direction	Leading through Collaboration Strive for best practice in all Council processes
File Ref	024142.2021
Report By	Ellen Whittingstall - Acting Internal Ombudsman
Approved By	Dr Eddie Jackson - Chief Executive Officer

Economic	The cost of managing Code of Conduct complaints made against Councillors is set out in this report.
Environment	There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.
Social	There are no social and cultural considerations.
Civic Leadership	Provide information about Council’s services, roles and decision-making processes. Operate a well-developed governance system that demonstrates accountability, transparency and ethical conduct.
Legislative	Local Government Act 1993, section 440AA
Risk	The risk is deemed to be Extreme / High / Medium / Low. [Event that has an effect on objectives] caused by [cause/s] resulting in [consequence/s]. The risk is considered within / outside Council’s risk appetite. There is no risk associated with this report.

1
CEO 01	Annual Code of Conduct Complaints Statistics Report
Attachment 1	Code of Conduct Complaint Statistics 1 September 2019 - 31 August 2020

1
EGROW 01	Proposed Natural Disaster Clause in Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008
Attachment 2	Policy Consultation Paper

1
EGROW 01	Proposed Natural Disaster Clause in Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008
Attachment 3	Frequently Asked Questions

1
EGROW 01	Proposed Natural Disaster Clause in Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008
Attachment 4	Guidance for Implementation

Economic	Facilitate economic development. Facilitate the development of new tourism based on local attractions, culture and creative industries.
Environment	There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.
Social	Support community organisations, groups and volunteers to deliver coordinated services to the community. Support access and services for people with a disability.
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. Operate a well-developed governance system that demonstrates accountability, transparency and ethical conduct.
Legislative	Environmental Planning and Assessment 1979
Risk	The risk is deemed to be Low. The risk is considered within Council’s risk appetite.

1
CORP 02	Budget Review - December 2020
Attachment 5	Grant Status Report - Received

1
CORP 02	Budget Review - December 2020
Attachment 6	Cash & Investment Report

1
CORP 02	Budget Review - December 2020
Attachment 7	Key Performance Indicators

1
CORP 02	Budget Review - December 2020
Attachment 8	Consultancy & Legal Expenses Budget Review Statement

1
CORP 02	Budget Review - December 2020
Attachment 9	Contracts & Other Expenses Statements

1
CORP 02	Budget Review - December 2020
Attachment 10	City Development Fund & Environment Levy Reserves

Strategic Direction	Creating Connection Celebrate diversity, promote inclusion and recognise heritage
File Ref	036446.2021
Report By	George Georgakis - Manager Council and Executive Services
Approved By	George Hampouris - Acting Director City Corporate

Economic	Costs associated with carrying out the Mayoral Direction.
Environment	Enhance the environmental performance of buildings and homes. Raise community awareness and support action in relation to environmental issues.
Social	Preserve and maintain heritage, both landscape and cultural as urban development takes place.
Civic Leadership	Act as an environmental leader in the community. 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. Operate a well-developed governance system that demonstrates accountability, transparency and ethical conduct.
Legislative	Section 226(d) of the Local Government Act 1993.
Risk	The risk is deemed to be medium and is considered to be within Council’s risk appetite.

1
CORP 05	Mayoral Direction pursuant to Section 226(d) of the Local Government Act 1993
Attachment 1	Mayoral Direction dated 9 February 2021

Economic	There are no economic or financial considerations.
Environment	There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.
Social	Support community organisations, groups and volunteers to deliver coordinated services to the community.
Civic Leadership	There are no civic leadership and governance considerations.
Legislative	Sections 356(3), 377(1), and 378 of the Local Government Act 1993.
Risk	There are no risk considerations.

1
CTTE 01	Liverpool Sports Committee Minutes of meeting held 26 November 2020
Attachment 1	Minutes of the Liverpool Sports Committee meeting held on 26 November 2020

Strategic Direction	Creating Connection Deliver a range of community events and activities
File Ref	001224.2021
Report By	Galavizh Ahmadi Nia - Manager Community Development and Planning
Approved By	Tina Bono - Acting Director City Community and Culture

1
CTTE 03	Minutes of the Liverpool Access Committee meeting held on 9 December 2020
Attachment 1	Minutes of the Liverpool Access Committee meeting held 9 December 2020

1
CTTE 04	Minutes of the Aboriginal Consultative Committee meeting held on 26 November 2020
Attachment 1	Minutes of the ACC - 26 Nov 2020

Strategic Direction	Leading through Collaboration Encourage community participation in decision-making
File Ref	013641.2021
Report By	Galavizh Ahmadi Nia - Manager Community Development and Planning
Approved By	Tina Bono - Acting Director City Community and Culture

1
CTTE 05	Minutes of the Liverpool Youth Council Committee Meeting held 8 December 2020
Attachment 1	Minutes Liverpool Youth Council 8 December 2020

1
CTTE 06	Minutes of the Environment Advisory Committee Meeting held on 14 December 2020
Attachment 1	Minutes of the Environment Advisory Committee Meeting held on 14 December 2020