COUNCIL AGENDA
Ordinary Council Meeting
23 February 2022
Francis Greenway Centre,
170 George Street, Liverpool
You are hereby notified
that an Ordinary Council Meeting of Liverpool City Council will be held
at the Francis Greenway Centre, 170
George Street, Liverpool on Wednesday, 23 February 2022
commencing at 6.00pm. Doors to the Francis Greenway Centre will open at 5.50pm.
Liverpool City Council
Meetings are livestreamed onto Council’s website and remain on
Council’s website for a period of 12 months. If you have any enquiries, please contact Council
and Executive Services on 8711 7584.
Mr Peter Diplas
ACTING CHIEF EXECUTIVE
OFFICER
Opening
Acknowledgment of Country and Prayer
National Anthem
Apologies
Condolences
Confirmation of Minutes
Ordinary
Council Meeting held on 02 February 2022.............................................................. 6
Declarations of Interest
Public Forum
Mayoral Report
NIL
Notices of Motion Of Rescission
NIL
Chief Executive Officer Report
NIL
Planning & Compliance
Report
PLAN 01 Post-exhibition
report - Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 Amendment 88 and amendments to
the Liverpool Growth Centre Precincts Development Control Plan at 1370 Camden
Valley Way, Leppington............................................. 63......... 1
PLAN 02 Special
Flood Considerations Clause in the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008................................................................................................................ 75......... 2
PLAN 03 Status
update on planning proposal request at Lot 6 Newbridge Road, Moorebank 84 3
PLAN 04 Planning
proposal to amend Schedule 5 - Environmental Heritage of the Liverpool Local
Environmental Plan 2008...................................................................... 96......... 4
PLAN 05 Endorsement
of submission on the Discussion Paper: A New Approach to Rezonings..................................................................................................... 101......... 5
PLAN 06 Endorsement
of submission on the NSW Government's Infrastructure Contributions Reforms.................................................................................. 112......... 6
Community & Culture Report
COM 01 Liverpool
District Forums - Evaluation Report.............................................. 121......... 7
Corporate Services Report
CORP 01 Biannual
Progress Report - December 2021............................................... 131......... 8
CORP 02 Budget
Review - December 2021................................................................ 134......... 9
CORP 03 2022
National General Assembly of Local Government.............................. 163....... 10
CORP 04 Investment
Report January 2022................................................................. 194....... 11
City Presentation Report
NIL
Infrastructure &
Environment Report
INF 01 Georges
River Revitalisation Committee..................................................... 205....... 12
INF 02 Local
Roads and Community Infrastructure Program.................................. 218....... 13
Economy & Commercial
Development Report
ECD 01 Reclassification
of Augusta Cullen Plaza to Community Land.................... 223....... 14
ECD 02 Liverpool
Health and Innovation Trade Delegation to New Zealand........... 226....... 15
ECD 03 Public
Sector Working Hub........................................................................... 233....... 16
Committee Reports
CTTE 01 Minutes
of the Liverpool Pedestrian, Active Transport and Traffic Committee meeting
held on 3 February 2022................................................................ 242....... 17
Questions with Notice
QWN 01 Question
with Notice - Clr Harle - Ongoing Illegal dumping occurring in Edmondson Park
and generally in the Liverpool LGA...................................................... 251....... 18
QWN 02 Question
with Notice - Clr Kaliyanda - Youth Strategy................................ 254....... 19
QWN 03 Question
with Notice - Clr Goodman - Flood Evacuation Plan.................... 256....... 20
QWN 04 Question
with Notice - Clr Kaliyanda - Georges River Flood Studies.......... 257....... 21
QWN 05 Question
with Notice - Clr Harle - Wattle Grove Lakeside Park.................. 258....... 22
QWN 06 Question
with Notice - Clr Hagarty - Pet Adoptions..................................... 259....... 23
Presentations by Councillors
Notices of Motion
NOM 01 Council
Policies and Standards.................................................................... 260....... 24
NOM 02 Property
Maintenance - Newbridge Road, Moorebank................................ 262....... 25
NOM 03 Hybrid
Community Forums........................................................................... 264....... 26
NOM 04 Moorebank
Intermodal Development Special Levy..................................... 266....... 27
NOM 05 Mountain
Bike Racing Track......................................................................... 268....... 28
NOM 06 Pre-existing
projects for inclusion into the Big Plan considerations............ 270....... 29
NOM 07 Government
Grants and Funding................................................................. 271....... 30
NOM 08 Council
contract budget concerns................................................................ 273....... 31
NOM 09 Potholes........................................................................................................ 274....... 32
NOM 10 Name
Suggestion for Unnamed Bridge........................................................ 275....... 33
NOM 11 Michael
Wenden Aquatic Centre Upgrade................................................... 276....... 34
NOM 12 Assisting
the Liverpool Chamber of Commerce to Support the Liverpool Business Economy....................................................................................................... 279....... 35
Council
in Closed Session
The
following items are listed for consideration by Council in Closed Session with
the public excluded, in accordance with the provisions of the Local Government
Act 1993 as listed below:
CONF 01 Proposed Acquisition of Lot 133
DP17134, 39 Newbridge Road, Chipping Norton the Moorebank Voluntary Acquisition
Scheme
Reason: Item CONF 01 is
confidential pursuant to the provisions of s10(A)(2)(c) of the Local Government
Act because it contains information that would, if disclosed, confer a
commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting (or
proposes to conduct) business.
CONF 02 Legal Affairs Report - 1 October
2021 to 31 December 2021
Reason: Item CONF 02 is
confidential pursuant to the provisions of s10(A)(2)(g) of the Local Government
Act because it contains advice concerning litigation, or advice that would
otherwise be privileged from production in legal proceedings on the ground of
legal professional privilege.
CONF 03 Proposed Road Closure and
Sale/Land Swap of part of Hanwell Serviceway and part of Elizabeth Street,
Liverpool (to be provided in Addendum Booklet)
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 2 February 2022
PRESENT:
Mayor Ned Mannoun
Councillor Ammoun
Councillor Goodman
Councillor Green
Councillor Hadid
Councillor Hagarty
Councillor Harle
Councillor Kaliyanda
Councillor Karnib
Councillor Macnaught
Councillor Rhodes
Mr Peter Diplas, Acting Chief Executive Officer
Mr Paul Perrett, Director Corporate Services
Ms Tina Bono, Director Community & Culture
Ms Nada Mardini, Acting Director Planning & Compliance
Mr Raj Autar, Director Infrastructure & Environment
Mr John Morgan, Director, Economy & Commercial Development
Ms Jennifer Chenhall, General Counsel, Manager Governance, Legal and
Procurement
Ms Ellen Whittingstall, Internal Ombudsman
Mr Vishwa Nadan, Chief Financial
Officer
Ms Lina Kakish, Manager City Planning
Ms Anthea Desmond, Acting Manager Communications
Mr Charles Wiafe, Service Manager
Transport Management
Mr George
Georgakis, Manager Council and Executive Services
Ms Susan Ranieri, Coordinator Council and Executive Services (minutes)
The meeting commenced at
6.07pm
|
STATEMENT REGARDING
WEBCASTING OF MEETING
|
The Mayor
reminded everyone that in accordance with Council’s Code of Meeting
Practice (other than the Public Forum Section), the meeting was being
livestreamed.
|
|
ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF
COUNTRY, PRAYER OF COUNCIL AND AFFIRMATION
|
The prayer of the Council was read by Reverend Paul Mosiejczuk from
Liverpool Baptist Church
|
|
NATIONAL ANTHEM
|
The National Anthem was
played at the meeting.
|
STATEMENT REGARDING OATH AND
AFFIRMATION OF OFFICE (read by the Acting CEO)
Under Section 233A of the Local
Government Act 1993, the Mayor and Councillors are required to take an oath or
make an affirmation of office.
Oaths or affirmations of office
must be taken or made by each Councillor at or before the first meeting of the
Council after being elected.
For the
purposes of these meeting minutes, I advise that the Mayor and all Councillors
took an oath or affirmation of office at a ceremony held on 27 January 2022.
APOLOGIES
Nil.
CONDOLENCES
1. Beverley Joan
(Bev) Barfield
2. William Patrick (Bill) Sadler
|
ITEM NO:
|
COND 01
|
|
FILE NO:
|
028572.2022
|
|
SUBJECT:
|
Condolence Motion - Beverley Joan (Bev) Barfield (read
by Mayor Mannoun)
|
|
Tonight, we pause to honour the memory of Beverley
Joan Barfield, known as Bev Barfield, who passed away last month. She was a
prolific contributor to the preservation and promotion of Liverpool’s
history and heritage.
Bev Barfield was born Beverley Joan Whitney in Lismore NSW in 1941. In
1952 the Whitney family moved to Hargrave Park (now part of Warwick Farm),
which was the beginning of Bev’s ongoing connection with the Liverpool area.
At Hargrave Park her father worked as a Fire Brigade Officer and the family
lived in a Nissen hut, a prefabricated metal structure. Bev also had fond
memories of swimming in Cabramatta Creek.
In 1954 Bev started at Liverpool Girls High School in one of their
earliest student intakes. After school she worked at the Daily Telegraph. She
met Alan Barfield at Liverpool Baptist Church, and they later married at the
same church in 1963.
Bev and Alan Barfield’s first home was at 22nd
Avenue, West Hoxton, and their children Sharon and Peter were born while they
were living there. The Barfield family moved outside the Liverpool LGA in
1972, to Kent Street, Minto, where their youngest daughter Jennifer was born.
Despite living slightly outside Liverpool’s boundaries, Mrs
Barfield’s strong connection to the area remained.
Volunteering was a significant part of Bev Barfield’s life. Her
daughter Jennifer also attended Liverpool Girls High School and Mrs Barfield
volunteered at her old school’s canteen for many years. Her volunteer
contribution continued when in 2004 she became a member of the Friends of
Liverpool Regional Museum and Collingwood House.
Collingwood House, built by Captain Eber Bunker from 1810, was one of
Bev Barfield’s great passions, and she served on the Collingwood House
Committee as Treasurer and then as Secretary for many years. Council often
called on her to open Collingwood House for tours and school programs, which
included the cleaning and preparation of the historic house for visitors. Her
work has ensured Collingwood House has survived in excellent condition up
until the present day.
Bev Barfield was also a member of the City of Liverpool and District
Historical Society for many years, serving on the committee and helping in
the archives. As a keen family historian Bev Barfield also joined the
Liverpool Genealogy Society in 2004 and remained a member until 2020, when
failing health meant she could no longer travel.
Council’s Heritage Advisory Committee benefited from Bev Barfield’s
extensive knowledge of the Liverpool area, and she also sat on other Council
committees as a community representative. Mrs Barfield’s substantial
service to the Liverpool community was recognised in 2017 when she was made
an Honorary Officer of the Order of Liverpool. She counted many members of
the Liverpool community as friends, including several Councillors and staff
of Liverpool City Council.
Bev Barfield is survived by her children Sharon, who is
here with us this evening, Peter and Jennifer, her grandchildren, and great
grandchildren. On behalf of Liverpool City Council, I humbly express my
deepest condolences to her family and friends. Our thoughts and prayers are
with Bev’s loved ones during this difficult time.
May she rest in peace.
COUNCIL DECISION
Motion: Moved:
Clr Rhodes Seconded:
Clr Kaliyanda
That Council writes to the family
of Bev Barfield to express our condolences for their loss.
On being put to the meeting the
motion was declared CARRIED.
A one minute silence was then
observed for Bev Barfield.IL DECISION
That
Council:
|
|
ITEM NO:
|
COND 02
|
|
FILE NO:
|
02857.2022
|
|
SUBJECT:
|
Condolence Motion - William Patrick (Bill) Sadler (read
by Mayor Mannoun)
|
|
Tonight, we pause to honour the memory of William
Patrick Sadler, better known as Bill Sadler, a former Alderman and Deputy
Mayor of Liverpool City Council.
Bill Sadler sadly passed away on Wednesday 1 December 2021 at the age
of 93, after a short illness. He lived in the Liverpool area for several
decades, until he retired to Salamander Bay on the Central Coast 18 years
ago.
Mr Sadler was elected as an Alderman for North Ward at a by-election
in October 1973 and served until 1976, and again between 1977 and 1980. He
also served as Deputy Mayor of Liverpool from October 1974 to September 1975.
Within the Liverpool community, Bill Sadler was a strong advocate,
particularly for the residents of Green Valley.
Prior to his election as an Alderman, Mr Sadler served for six years
in the Royal Australian Navy in the 1950s. He later worked in the automotive
industry and was involved with several local car dealerships. He was also
involved with local newspapers the Liverpool Champion and Liverpool Leader.
Mr Sadler ran as a candidate in several State and Federal election
campaigns. He was an independent candidate for Werriwa at the 1969 election,
and the Liberal candidate for Werriwa at the 1975 election and 1978
by-election. He was also the Liberal candidate for Campbelltown at the 1978
state election.
Bill Sadler is survived by his wife of 65 years Kay and their three
children. On behalf of Liverpool City Council, I humbly express my deepest
condolences to his family and friends. Our thoughts and prayers are with
Bill’s loved ones during this difficult time.
May he rest in peace.
COUNCIL DECISION
Motion: Moved:
Clr Rhodes Seconded:
Clr Kaliyanda
That Council writes to the family
of Bill Sadler to express our condolences for their loss.
On being put to the meeting the
motion was declared CARRIED.
A one minute silence was observed
for Bill Sadler.
|
BRING ITEMS FORWARD
Motion: Moved:
Clr Hadid Seconded:
Clr Goodman
That the
following items be brought forward and dealt with now:
·
CORP 02 - Election of Deputy
Mayor;
·
NOM 01 - Sydney Western City
Planning Panel;
·
NOM 02 - Ibis Management;
·
NOM 03 - Moorebank Intermodal -
Noise Abatement Community Engagement;
·
NOM 04 - Liverpool Garden
Competition;
·
NOM 05 - Improving our Parks for
our Residents; and
·
NOM 07 - Establishment of a
Georges River Committee.
On being put to the meeting the
motion was declared CARRIED.
ITEM NO: CORP
02
FILE NO: 007883.2022
SUBJECT: Election
of Deputy Mayor
|
COUNCIL
DECISION
Motion: Moved:
Clr Hadid Seconded:
Clr Macnaught
That:
1.
Council proceeds with the
election of the Deputy Mayor to be conducted by the Returning Officer for the
2 February 2022 – 28
September 2022 period; and
2.
The method of election for the
position of Deputy Mayor of Liverpool City Council for the term 2 February 2022 – 28 September 2022 be determined by Open Vote.
On being put to the meeting the motion was declared
CARRIED.
Nominations
Nominations
were called for the position of Deputy Mayor by the Chief Executive Officer
as the Returning Officer.
The
Acting Chief Executive Officer advised that two nominations had been
received, being for Clr Rhodes and Clr Harle.
The
following votes were recorded:
|
|
CLR
HARLE
|
CLR
RHODES
|
|
Councillor
|
|
|
|
Mayor
Mannoun
|
|
x
|
|
Clr
Ammoun
|
|
x
|
|
Clr Goodman
|
|
x
|
|
Clr Green
|
x
|
|
|
Clr Hadid
|
|
x
|
|
Clr Hagarty
|
x
|
|
|
Clr Harle
|
x
|
|
|
Clr
Kaliyanda
|
x
|
|
|
Clr Karnib
|
x
|
|
|
Clr
Macnaught
|
|
x
|
|
Clr Rhodes
|
|
x
|
Clr Rhodes was declared the
Deputy Mayor.
Motion: Moved:
Mayor Mannoun Seconded: Clr Macnaught
That:
1.
Clr Rhodes be declared the
Deputy Mayor of Liverpool City Council for the term 2 February 2022 – 28 September 2022;
2.
Council’s
Register of Delegations be amended accordingly;
3.
All ballot papers be collected
and destroyed by the returning officer; and
4.
Council thank the outgoing
Deputy Mayor, Clr Hadid for his service to the role.
On being put to the meeting the motion was declared
CARRIED.
|
FILE NO: 016567.2022
SUBJECT: Sydney Western City Planning Panel
|
NOTICE OF
MOTION (submitted by Clr Harle)
That Liverpool City Councillors appointed to the Sydney
Western City Planning Panel (SWCPP) be remunerated at the same rate as State
Government appointed Planning Panel Members.
|
|
COUNCIL
DECISION
Motion: Moved:
Clr Harle Seconded:
Clr Hadid
That:
1.
Liverpool City Councillors
appointed to the Sydney Western City Planning Panel (SWCPP)
be remunerated at the same rate as community representatives appointed
to the Liverpool Local Planning Panel Members (LLPP); and
2.
Council
advertise the proposed change to the remuneration.
On being put
to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.
|
FILE NO: 017591.2022
SUBJECT: Ibis
Management
|
Background
Over recent years there has been a marked increase
in the number of Ibis birds roosting in trees within the CBD causing health
and safety concerns to the general public.
Railway Parade, near the front entrance to the
Liverpool Primary School in particular has areas that are not safe to sit or
stand in due to bird droppings regularly fouling the footpath and seating
areas. Similar problems occur in Macquarie Street and areas where food scraps
are problematic.
NOTICE OF
MOTION (submitted by Clr Harle)
That Council investigates possible action
that may be taken to reduce the health and safety impacts of Ibis birds in
the CBD and suburban areas. A report to be brought to the April 2022 Council
Meeting.
COUNCIL
DECISION
Motion: Moved:
Clr Harle Seconded:
Clr Hadid
That Council investigates possible action that may be taken to reduce
the health and safety impacts of Ibis birds in the CBD and suburban areas. A
report to be brought to the June 2022 Council Meeting.
On being put
to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.
|
FILE NO: 017722.2022
SUBJECT: Moorebank
Intermodal - Noise Abatement Community Engagement
|
Background
In December 2019 the Independent Planning Commission
gave conditional consent to Moorebank Intermodal Precinct West Concept +
Stage 1 (SSD 5066) Modification 1 and Moorebank Intermodal Precinct
West Stage 2 (SSD 7709) after 3 years of assessment and negotiation between
the DPIE and Qube.
MPW Concept Modification 1 (SSD 5066) was originally
exhibited in July - August 2016 and re-exhibited in December 2016. MPW Stage
2 (SSD 7709) was originally exhibited in October - November 2016.
Both Liverpool City Council and RAID Moorebank Inc
were among the 1000s of local objectors across the July 2016 - February 2017
exhibitions. Based on the statutory deadline falling in the Christmas
holidays and outside Council’s meeting schedule RAIDM Inc. undertook
lodgment of a Class 1 Appeal of MPW Stage 2 (SSD 7709) on behalf of the
community at large. Liverpool City Council resolved in early 2020 to support
and fund this appeal.
· Due to delay in disbursing funds the
proceedings ultimately lasted from Jan 2020 until the end of June 2021. The
most significant contributing factor was the later Moorebank Intermodal
Precinct West Concept + Stage 1 (SSD 5066) Modification 2 and West
Stage 2 (SSD 7709) Modification 1 which was notified on 24
December 2021 and had the effect of quadrupling the scope of the appeal
and thus at minimum doubling its cost.
· The modifications in concert with a
frustrated (s34) Conciliation and Subpoena process effectively consumed the
resolved budget by January 2021. RAIDM Inc informed the Acting General
Manager, Acting Planning Director and new General Counsel of this
circumstance at that time and made request of further funding to cover the
extended scope and finish the appeal (= adding a Junior Counsel and a Visual
Expert with extended work to be done by existing Instructing Solicitor,
Senior Counsel and Traffic, Air and Noise Experts)
In the February, March and April 2021 meetings
Liverpool City Council declined to contribute the necessary additional
funding. $300,000 had been allocated and disbursed and a further $285,000 -
$440,00 was sought by RAIDM Inc. on the basis that unused monies would be
returned.
As a consequence RAIDM Inc. and the appeal was
without a barrister as of March 2021 and was without a solicitor (any formal
representation) from April 2021. The final hearing was selected by the court
in January 2021 for a 7 day hearing in June 2021. To ensure that the appeal
and $300,000 in ratepayers funds didn’t come to naught, and importantly
to ensure the community had its day in court RAIDM Inc. resolved to select an
“Agent” who could represent RAIDM Inc. and the appeal at the Bar
table.
The Vice President of RAIDM Inc. was selected and as
a layperson ran the appeal in place of the barrister. Before the end of the
hearing and reservation of judgement by the Senior Commissioner, RAIDM Inc.
had secured an additional Noise Pollution Condition (140 & 140A). In
principal this condition would see $15mil worth of ineffective noise walls be
converted into localised in home noise abatement.
A possible $15mil of benefit and the priceless
long-term health and amenity outcomes for a portion of Liverpool is a 50 fold
return on the Liverpool Council investment of $300,000. In funding to RAID to
prepare and lodge the Appeal in the L&E Court.
NOTICE OF
MOTION (submitted by Clr Rhodes)
That Council:
1. Direct the CEO to prepare and execute:
a. A communication and engagement strategy
to inform all relevant residents of Casula regarding the additional noise
condition placed on Moorebank Intermodal (MPW S2) and the potential access to
$30,000 in onsite (their home) noise abatement (double glazing and air
conditioning) so as to collect information and interest in having their homes
assessed;
b. A liaison and advocacy strategy with the
relevant stakeholders (DPIE and Qube) to facilitate 1a, and ensure all
eligible residents have access to the assessment process agreed to by DPIE
and Qube; and
2. Allocate resources for compliance and
planning management that will pursue all mitigating conditions to full
effect. In this instance Condition 140 and the new 140A
UPDATED MOTION
(submitted by Clr Rhodes)
That Council:
1.
Direct the CEO to
prepare and execute:
a.
A public
communication to fully inform all relevant residents of Casula and other
affected suburbs regarding the additional noise condition placed on Moorebank
Intermodal (MPW S2) and the potential access to noise abatement for affected
properties.
b.
Council write to DPIE
requesting consideration be given to preparing a communication plan to inform
residents, in plain English, of the requirements on the applicant of
Condition B140a.
c.
A liaison and
advocacy strategy with the relevant stakeholders (DPIE and Qube) to
facilitate distribution of above DPIE communication that assists all
eligible residents to have access to the information and assessment
process agreed to by DPIE and Qube;
|
|
COUNCIL
DECISION
Motion: Moved:
Clr Rhodes Seconded:
Clr Macnaught
That Council:
a.
Direct the CEO to
prepare and execute a public communication through social media
and other forms of normal social engagement
with the community to fully inform all relevant residents of Casula
and other affected suburbs regarding the additional
noise condition placed on Moorebank Intermodal (MPW S2) and the potential
access to noise abatement for affected properties;
b.
Write to DPIE
requesting consideration be given to preparing a communication plan to inform
residents, in plain English, of the requirements on the applicant of
Condition B140a;
c.
Prepare a
liaison and advocacy strategy with the relevant stakeholders (DPIE and Qube)
to facilitate distribution of above DPIE communication that assists all
eligible residents to have access to the information and assessment process
agreed to by DPIE and Qube; and
d.
Include a report on the cost estimation following the advice from
DPIE.
On being put
to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.
|
FILE NO: 018362.2022
SUBJECT: Liverpool
Garden Competition
|
Background
Many
local governments across Australia run garden competitions to encourage pride
in our streetscapes and local communities, as well as create teaching and learning
opportunities for people within our communities who are interested in gardens
and gardening.
During
the pandemic, we have seen a greater appreciation for our local natural
environment and green spaces as we work from home and take on new hobbies.
A
local Liverpool Garden Competition is a fabulous opportunity to celebrate the
many passionate gardeners who have made a difference to our community spaces through gardening and the
competition gives us an opportunity to hear their stories. Over the years,
more people understand that we are dealing with more difficult conditions
including drought, flood and fire and there has been a greater interest in
sustainability – how the garden is created and maintained.
Therefore,
the competition could also be an opportunity to help more people within our
community understand the principles and practices of sustainable gardening.
It
should engage and encourage entries from young aspiring green thumbs
(children) to older green thumbs (seniors), individual gardeners, families,
community groups, cultural groups, gardeners with different abilities,
commercial organisations and school communities.
Categories
could include:
· Best Large Garden
· Best Small Garden
· Best Courtyard/Balcony Garden
· Best Edible Garden
· Best Native & Habitat-friendly Garden
· Best School Garden
· Best Non-residential Garden
· Best Bushcare Site
· Best Community Garden
NOTICE OF
MOTION (submitted by Clr Kaliyanda)
That
Council:
1. Develop an outline for a Spring Garden Competition
for our local community by the April 2022 Council meeting; and
2.
Identify the costs
and resources required for such an initiative.
COUNCIL
DECISION
Motion: Moved:
Clr Kaliyanda Seconded: Clr
Hagarty
That
Council:
1.
Develop an outline
for a Spring Garden Competition for our local community by the
April 2022 Council meeting; and
2.
Identify the costs
and resources required for such an initiative; and
3.
That a “Best
Rural Garden” category also be considered for inclusion.
On being put
to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.
|
FILE NO: 018461.2022
SUBJECT: Improving
our Parks for our Residents
|
NOTICE OF
MOTION (submitted by Clr Ammoun)
That Council:
1. Prioritise the maintenance of our parks
and improve on the level of service that is currently being delivered.
2. Implement a scheduled cleaning program
for Council toilets at, but not limited to, the following parks:
a. Casula Parklands
b. Bigge Park
c. Stante Reserve
d. Chipping Norton Lakes
3. Review the amount of and type of bins at
Council Parks, including the installation of Smart Compactor Bins.
|
|
COUNCIL
DECISION
Motion: Moved:
Clr Ammoun Seconded:
Clr Goodman
That Council:
1.
Prioritise the
maintenance of our parks and improve on the level of service that is
currently being delivered.
2.
Implement a scheduled
cleaning program for Council toilets at, but not limited to, the following
parks:
a. Casula Parklands
b. Bigge Park
c. Stante Reserve
d. Chipping Norton Lakes
3.
Review the amount of
and type of bins at Council Parks, including the installation of Smart
Compactor Bins.
4.
Provide a budget allocation of $50,000 from the
general reserve to be able to deliver this extra level of service.
5. Note the CEO's comments, in particular:
o
a comprehensive
Parks Operational Review has been underway since 2021 and is due for
completion in the first half of this year
o
a scheduled cleaning
program is in place for the parks’ toilet amenities
o
an initial review of
bins throughout the LGA was conducted in 2021
6. Explore a trial program of smart bins in
a high profile and high traffic park and report back to Council on the
progress of this trial at the July 2022 meeting.
7. Explore the use of FOGO bins in public
parks once it is introduced to regular household waste.
8. Make maintenance request calls easier
for the public by publishing Council’s Customer Service Request details
in parks and public toilets. Such signs were previously placed in the rural
areas and this should now be extended to the local urban parks as well.
On being put
to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.
|
FILE NO: 018479.2022
SUBJECT: Civic
Place
|
|
|
COUNCIL
DECISION
Motion:
Moved:
Clr Goodman Seconded Clr
Macnaught
That this item be dealt with at the end of the meeting in Closed
Session pursuant to Section 10A(2)(d) of the Local Government Act 1993 as it contains commercial information of a confidential
nature.
On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.
|
confirmation of Minutes
Motion: Moved:
Clr Hadid Seconded:
Clr Harle
|
That the
minutes of the Ordinary Meeting held on 24 November 2021 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
1. Mr Michael Byrne (President, East
Liverpool Progress Association) addressed Council on the following
matter:
Matter: Moorebank
Intermodal, status
Motion:
Moved:
Clr
Hadid Seconded:
Clr Rhodes
That a three minute extension of time be given to Mr Byrne.
On being put to
the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.
Motion:
Moved:
Clr Rhodes
Seconded: Clr Hadid
That a further three minute extension of time be given to Mr Byrne.
On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.
Representation – items on agenda
1. Dr
Criss Moore addressed Council on the following item:
Item QWN
01 Question with Notice - Clr Harle -
DA-1212/2021 at 437 Hume Highway, Casula
Motion:
Moved:
Clr Harle Seconded:
Clr Hadid
That
a three minute extension of time be given to Dr Moore.
On being put to
the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED
ITEM NO: MAYOR 01
FILE NO: 018516.2022
SUBJECT: Kurrajong Road - Design Investigation for Staged
Improvements
|
Background
Kurrajong Road is a major east/west collector road
between Hume Highway, Casula and Cowpasture Road, Carnes Hill, two classified
State Roads.
Kurrajong Road provides direct access to Casula,
Prestons, and Carnes Hill, and indirect access to two Prestons Industrial
areas along Bernera Road and Lyn Parade. It also provides access to the
Casula Mall and Carnes Hill Market Place Shopping
centres, as well as Prestons Primary School and Amity College (Preston
Campus).
Kurrajong Road has been constructed in stages, with
the eastern section constructed much earlier, following by the western
section, and finally a missing section, through the second stage development
of Carnes Hill, between Carnes Hill and Prestons.
Due to the different construction stages, Kurrajong
Road has the following different road carriageway widths and traffic lanes:
· Four Lane Road - between Cowpasture Road and Bernera
Road as well as between Hume Highway and Old Kurrajong
Road.
· Two Lane Road - The remaining road section between
Bernera Road and Old Kurrajong Road.
Due
to increasing traffic movements, the following road sections are experiencing
traffic delays particularly during the morning and afternoon peak periods:
· Between Wonga Road and the M7 Motorway bridge,
including the existing roundabout at Kurrajong Road/Lyn Parade/Beech Road.
· Between M7 Motorway bridge and San Marion Drive
roundabout (particularly in front of Amity College).
· Between Cowpasture Road and Sarah Hollands Drive
(particularly in front of Carnes Hill Market Place Shopping centre).
The
community has therefore been calling for these road sections to be improved.
To
carry out the required upgrades to improve traffic conditions at the
above-mentioned road sections, Council needs to investigate staged upgrade
solutions, prepare a consolidated improvement road upgrade design layout, and
seek funding for staged delivery.
The
upgrade is to include road sections such as in front of the Amity College
where line marking could permit four lanes or parking bays. The funding
option is to include an amendment of the relevant developer contribution
plan/s.
RECOMMENDATION
That Council directs the CEO to:
1. Assess
and identify improvement solutions for a staged implementation to improve
traffic conditions of the road sections experiencing delays;
2. Prepare
a consolidated improvement road design layout for stage improvements;
3. Identify
funding sources including amendments to relevant developer contribution
plan/s; and
4. Report
the assessment, improvement solutions with funding sources, to the April 2022
Ordinary Council meeting.
COUNCIL
DECISION
Motion: Moved:
Mayor Mannoun Seconded: Clr Kaliyanda
That Council directs the CEO to:
1.
Assess and identify
improvement solutions for a staged implementation to improve traffic
conditions of the road sections experiencing delays;
2.
Prepare a consolidated
improvement road design layout for stage improvements;
3.
Identify funding
sources including amendments to relevant developer contribution plan/s;
4.
Report the
assessment, improvement solutions with funding sources, to the April 2022
Ordinary Council meeting;
5.
Include community
consultation as part of the process; and
6.
Continue noise
abatement testing and the results be incorporated into the final designs and
proposal presented to TfNSW.
On being put
to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.
|
ITEM NO: NOM 07
FILE NO: 018625.2022
SUBJECT: Establishment of a Georges River Committee
|
Background
Liverpool has
the potential to be an amazing, modern, well planned river city, with the
Georges River touching many suburbs of our LGA.
To reach its
potential, we need to be able to deliver access to the river for all of our
residents and visitors in an efficient and responsible way.
As it stands,
there are multiple projects at varying stages of proposal along the river
front. It makes sense to bring all stakeholders together, with the community,
and relevant industry experts to work through each proposal, to achieve the
best outcome.
NOTICE OF
MOTION (submitted by Clr Macnaught)
That Council:
1. Establish a Georges River
rejuvenation committee;
2. Create a charter for the committee
with the following points of reference:
a. Giving all residents of Liverpool
access to the river for recreation, transport and leisure;
b. To guide the appropriate urban
regeneration of the river; and
c. Create a holistic, deliverable
vision and plan for the river – for the short, medium and long term.
3. Work constructively with all
relevant stakeholders to achieve this vision;
4. Appoint all Councillors as members
of the committee; and
5. Charter to be presented to the
Council at the next Council meeting.
|
|
COUNCIL
DECISION
Motion: Moved:
Clr Macnaught Seconded: Clr Hadid
That Council:
- Establish a Georges River rejuvenation committee, that
meets bimonthly and reports to Council.
- Create a charter based on similar Council committees
with the following points of reference
- Maximising access for all residents of and visitors to
Liverpool access to the river for recreation, transport and leisure
- To investigate and advise the appropriate urban and
ecological regeneration of the river
- Advise on a holistic, deliverable vision and plan for the
river – for the short, medium and long term
- Work constructively with all relevant stakeholders to
achieve this vision.
- Appoint all Councillors as members of the committee.
- Charter to be presented to the Council at the next
Council meeting.
6. Call
for EOI as soon as possible after the adoption of the Charter for community
members and stakeholders.
On
being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.
|
ITEM NO: MAYOR 02
FILE NO: 018548.2022
SUBJECT: 30km/h Speed Limit Pilot Program in the Liverpool City
Centre Core
|
Background
Transport for NSW (TfNSW) implemented a 30km/h speed
limit in the Liverpool city centre core as part of a pilot program trial in
Liverpool and Manly city centres in July 2020, as part of a COVID19 response
to support more active travel and reduce crashes.
TfNSW is yet to complete its assessment of the pilot
program and advise Council on the outcome, or whether the reduced speed limit
would be introduced in other central business districts.
In meantime the community has been expressing
concerns about the reduced speed limit, the through road sections with the
reduced speed limits, when assessment of the pilot program will be completed,
and whether infringements are being issued (and hence revenue raising).
The community concerns includes whether the reduced
speed limit should only apply to the streets in the centre core such as
George Street and Northumberland Street.
Council previously investigated changing George
Street and Northumberland Street to two-way streets. Such arrangement
could reduce traffic speed and help to achieve the reduced speed TfNSW is
seeking to achieve, in the city centre core.
Current reduced traffic volumes may also give a
result that the pilot program has resulted in reduced crashes in the city
centres, and that the program has been successful.
In response to community concerns, TfNSW is to be
requested to complete its assessment of the pilot program and provide its
findings to the Council for its input, including community feedback on the
implementation of a speed limit in the city centre. A letter should
also be written to the Minster for Metropolitan Roads on the issue.
RECOMMENDATION
That Council directs the CEO to:
1.
Write to TfNSW and
the Minister for Metropolitan Roads requesting the 30km/h speed
limit be lifted to 40km/h, similar to other city centres;
2.
Organise meetings
with the Minister and or other relevant stakeholders to achieve
this; and
3.
Prioritise this as a matter of urgency.
COUNCIL
DECISION
Motion: Moved:
Mayor Mannoun
That the recommendation be
adopted.
On being put to the meeting
the motion was declared CARRIED.
|
FILE NO: 028886.2022
SUBJECT: 100 Day Plan
|
RECOMMENDATION
That Council direct the CEO to:
1. Start the process for a development application to
be prepared for the following swimming pool projects:
a. Carnes Hill Swimming Pool
b. A swimming pool to replace the Holsworthy Swimming
Pool
2. Start the process for a development application to be prepared for the
following parking projects:
a. Northumberland Street Carpark
b. Bathurst Street Carpark
c. Eat Street Carpark (on Macquarie/Terminus Streets)
3. Investigate and prepare a report on creating 500
additional parking spots in Liverpool CBD and making current parking more
accessible, focussing on the Northumberland Street carpark.
4. Investigate suitable locations for car parks near
Liverpool Hospital and Liverpool Railway Station.
5. Commence the design process for a continuous
cycle/walk track along the Georges River (from Casula through to Liverpool to
Pleasure Point) and enter discussions with private landowners along the
riverfront seeking to grant Council access/right of carriageway over their
land for the community.
6. Commence design work to upgrade Chipping Norton Lake
parklands with the inclusion of a new park on the corner of Riverside Road
and Newbridge Road.
7. Commence investigations into upgrades of the
following roads:
a. 15th Avenue from Kingsford Smith Avenue
to Cowpasture Road
b. Qantas Boulevard, with a focus on
increasing the capacity for north bound exiting onto Cowpasture Road.
8. Take all necessary steps to progress Council to
become a Net Zero Council. Council should acknowledge that the environment is
our most precious asset and proactively work to reduce pollution in our local
community, and protect and enhance our waterways and natural environment by
ensuring:
a. All new buildings that are being built
consider solar/geothermal/tree canopy/stormwater and provide a proactive
resource to assist developers etc with this process in a cost-effective
fashion
b. The tree canopy on our streets is
increased to tackle the urban heat island affect that is happening in our
suburbs
c. Work is carried out to establish electric recharge stations
in our LGA
d. Paper use at Council is significantly reduced as
much as possible
e. Opportunities are identified for Council to install
solar panels on Council land
9. Investigate bringing back the major event
‘Starry Sari Night’ and the night markets in the Liverpool CBD as
part of the 2022 Events program.
10. Improve
amenity and activation of public spaces by investigating more opportunities
for food trucks/pop ups, in but not limited to, Bigge Park, Chipping Norton
Lakes, Casula Parklands.
11. Investigate
and bring a report back to Council on the establishment of an Austral
Delivery Unit. The Delivery Unit would be a dedicated team of professionals
for the purposes of:
a. Making sure that Austral is a community with high
living standards for its residents
b. Improve the urban design of the community
c. Provide consistency in development assessment
d. Being potentially located in Austral (subject to a
further report on cost)
e. Improving the tree canopy that is being destroyed
f. Investigating methods of forward funding
infrastructure, including but not limited to, parks, roads, and drainage
g. Providing advocacy that leads to more affordable
housing and improved transport connections (such as 15th Avenue
upgrade and Sydney Water sewerage delay)
12. Start
the process of refining the ongoing service measures for development
assessment services for the next iteration of the Delivery Program and
Operational Plan to ensure consistent and clear assessment times are being
provided to people lodging DAs, subject to the size and scale of each
application.
13. Prepare
a planning proposal to lower the height of buildings development standards in
the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 down to 12m in the following
suburbs:
a) Chipping Norton
b) Wattle Grove
c) Hammondville
d) Casula
e) Prestons
f) Carnes Hill
g) Cecil Hills
h) Green Valley.
Council notes that the planning proposal
is required to be considered by the Liverpool Local Planning Panel prior to
being reported back to Council on a decision on whether to forward the
planning proposal to the Department of Planning and Environment seeking a
Gateway determination.
14. Start the process to create a new
Liverpool LEP as a matter of urgency.
COUNCIL
DECISION
Motion: Moved:
Mayor Mannoun
That Council
direct the CEO to:
1. Start the process for a development
application to be prepared for the following swimming pool projects:
a. Carnes Hill Swimming Pool
b. A swimming pool to replace the Holsworthy Swimming
Pool
2. Start the process for a development
application to be prepared for the following parking projects:
a. Northumberland Street Carpark
b. Bathurst Street Carpark
c. Eat Street Carpark (on Macquarie/Terminus
Streets)
3. Investigate and prepare a report on
creating 500 additional parking spots in Liverpool CBD and making current
parking more accessible, focussing on the Northumberland Street carpark.
4. Investigate suitable locations for car
parks near Liverpool Hospital and Liverpool Railway Station.
5. Commence the design process for a
continuous cycle/walk track along the Georges River (from Casula through to
Liverpool to Pleasure Point) and enter discussions with private landowners
along the riverfront seeking to grant Council access/right of carriageway
over their land for the community.
6. Commence design work to upgrade Chipping
Norton Lake parklands with the inclusion of a new park on the corner of
Riverside Road and Newbridge Road.
7. Commence investigations into upgrades of
the following roads:
a. 15th Avenue from Kingsford
Smith Avenue to Cowpasture Road
b. Qantas Boulevard, with a focus on
increasing the capacity for north bound exiting onto Cowpasture Road.
8. Take all necessary steps to progress
Council to become a Net Zero Council. Council should acknowledge that the
environment is our most precious asset and proactively work to reduce
pollution in our local community, and protect and enhance our waterways and
natural environment by ensuring:
a. All new buildings that are being built
consider solar/geothermal/tree canopy/stormwater and provide a proactive resource
to assist developers etc with this process in a cost-effective fashion
b. The tree canopy on our streets is
increased to tackle the urban heat island affect that is happening in our
suburbs
c. Work is carried out to establish electric
recharge stations in our LGA
d. Paper use at Council is significantly
reduced as much as possible
e. Opportunities are identified for Council
to install solar panels on Council land and buildings
f.
Council adopts a
trial for electric vehicles as part of zero net emissions and enter into
discussions with petrol stations and sites for powering stations for these
vehicles.
9. Investigate bringing back the major event
‘Starry Sari Night’ and the night markets in the Liverpool CBD as
part of the 2022 Events program.
10. Improve amenity and activation of public
spaces by investigating more opportunities for food trucks/pop ups, in but
not limited to, Bigge Park, Chipping Norton Lakes, Casula Parklands.
11. Investigate and bring a report back to
Council on the establishment of an Austral Delivery Unit. The Delivery Unit
would be a dedicated team of professionals for the purposes of:
a. Making sure that Austral is a community
with high living standards for its residents
b. Improve the urban design of the community
c. Provide consistency in development
assessment
d. Being potentially located in Austral
(subject to a further report on cost)
e. Improving the tree canopy that is being
destroyed
f. Investigating methods of forward funding
infrastructure, including but not limited to, parks, roads, and drainage
g. Providing advocacy that leads to more
affordable housing and improved transport connections (such as 15th
Avenue upgrade and Sydney Water sewerage delay)
12. Start the process of refining the ongoing
service measures for development assessment services for the next iteration
of the Delivery Program and Operational Plan to ensure consistent and clear
assessment times are being provided to people lodging DAs, subject to the
size and scale of each application.
13. Prepare a planning proposal to lower the
height of buildings development standards in the Liverpool Local
Environmental Plan 2008 down to 12m in the following suburbs:
a) Chipping Norton
b) Wattle Grove
c) Hammondville
d) Casula
e) Prestons
f) Carnes Hill
g) Cecil Hills
h) Green Valley
Council notes that the planning proposal is required
to be considered by the Liverpool Local Planning Panel prior to being
reported back to Council on a decision on whether to forward the planning
proposal to the Department of Planning and Environment seeking a Gateway
determination.
14. Start the process to create a new
Liverpool LEP as a matter of urgency.
- Notes that planning was underway during the last term of
Council for the following:
- Carnes Hill Swimming Pool
- A new swimming pool in the Holsworthy area
- Additional car parking in the CBD
- A continuous cycle/walk track along the Georges River
(from Casula through to Liverpool to Pleasure Point)
- The upgrade of Chipping Norton Lake parklands
- The upgrade of Fifteenth Avenue
- The upgrade of Qantas Boulevard
- Increased tree canopy on our streets
- Fast charge electric recharge stations in our LGA
- Opportunities for Council to install solar panels on
Council land
- Opportunities for food trucks/pop ups on public land
- A comprehensive review of the Local Environment Plan
(LEP)
- Notes that parking at Liverpool Hospital and Liverpool
Railway Station is the responsibility of the State Government and work
with the State Government for additional parking near these sites
- That the above be incorporated into the process for
consideration into the new Community Strategic Plan.
- Where appropriate, undertake community consultation on
the above.
- Funding be provided from the unrestricted reserves to
fund these projects.
- That Council receive a report back in order to secure
more money on Council being proactive in finding and securing grants.
- Councillors be briefed monthly,
or quarterly, on the progress of the 100 day plan and a progress report
be put on the website.
On
being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.
|
ITEM NO:
|
ITEM NO: MAYOR 04
FILE NO: 891975.2022
SUBJECT: Tonga Tsunami Event 2022
|
|
On
15 January 2022 an underground volcano erupted within the Kingdom of Tonga,
sending tsunami waves crashing into the Tongan shore.
The
tsunami devastated the country’s infrastructure and wiped out all
buildings on some small islands. It also damaged the sole undersea cable that
connects Tonga’s communications to the rest of the world, putting the
country in near total isolation.
Council
values the contribution Tongan Australians have made to the rich fabric of
Liverpool. Many people in the Liverpool Local Government remain deeply
distressed about the devastation the tsunami has caused and its impact on
Tonga and have concerns for the safety and welfare of their family and
friends who remain in Tonga.
On
behalf of Liverpool City Council, I express my deepest condolences to the
families and friends of those who lost their lives during this natural
disaster, and my thoughts and prayers are with the people who were injured in
the tsunami. To the people of Tonga and all Tongan Australians, I offer my
solidarity and support on behalf of all Councillors during this difficult
time.
RECOMMENDATION
That
Council:
- Write to the Honorary Consul-General of Tonga expressing our
support and condolences; and
- Provide financial
assistance of up to $10,000 towards helping the local Tongan community
to send relief care packages to their families in Tonga
- Work with the
Consulate-General of the Kingdom of Tonga to coordinate the shipping of
relief care packages through Rotary Tonga.
COUNCIL
DECISION
Motion: Moved:
Mayor Mannoun
That the recommendation be adopted.
On being put to the meeting the motion was declared
CARRIED.
Councillors voted unanimously for this motion.
RECESS
Mayor Mannoun called a recess at 8.24pm.
RESUMPTION OF MEETING
Council resumed the meeting at 8.46pm with all
councillors present.
|
Chief Executive Officer Report
ITEM NO: CEO 01
FILE NO: 001346.2022
SUBJECT: Annual Code of Conduct Complaints Statistics Report
|
COUNCIL
DECISION
Motion: Moved:
Clr Rhodes Seconded:
Clr Macnaught
That Council receive and
note this report and the attached Complaints Statistics Report, which has
been submitted by the Internal Ombudsman to the Office of Local Government.
On being put
to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.
|
Planning & Compliance Report
ITEM NO: PLAN 01
FILE NO: 319665.2021
SUBJECT: Quarterly Report - Clause 4.6 Variations to
Development Standards
|
COUNCIL
DECISION
Motion: Moved:
Clr Harle Seconded:
Clr Rhodes
That Council receives and notes this report.
On being put to the meeting the
motion was declared CARRIED.
Councillors voted unanimously
for this motion.
|
FILE NO: 006407.2022
SUBJECT: Revocation of Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel
Charter
|
COUNCIL
DECISION
Motion: Moved:
Clr Rhodes Seconded:
Clr Harle
That
Council revoke the
Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel Charter adopted by Council on
19 September 2017.
On
being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.
Councillors voted unanimously for this motion.
|
Corporate Services Report
ITEM NO: CORP 01
FILE NO: 361551.2021
SUBJECT: Investment Report December 2021
|
COUNCIL
DECISION
Motion: Moved:
Clr Harle Seconded:
Clr Goodman
That:
1.
Council receives and
notes this report; and
2.
At a future briefing,
Council’s investment managers provide an overview on Council’s
investment strategy, what the constraints are both internal based on policy
and external based on legislation and look at past performance, long term
performance and how Council’s investment portfolio works.
On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.
|
FILE NO: 020053.2022
SUBJECT: Appointment
of Councillors to Committees and Affiliated Bodies
|
COUNCIL
DECISION
Motion: Moved:
Mayor Mannoun Seconded: Clr Rhodes
That Council:
1.
Appoint Councillors as
representatives to the following Committees for the period to September 2022:
|
Aboriginal Consultative
Committee
|
|
Representatives
|
Mayor (or delegate) and one
Councillor
|
|
Representatives 2022
|
Mayor Mannoun and Clr Green
|
|
Audit, Risk and Improvement
Committee
|
|
Representatives
|
The Office of Local Guidelines state that one
– two Councillors are to be appointed, and that the Mayor is not to
be appointed.
In addition, two to three external independent
members, at least one with financial expertise and one of whom is to be the
Chair.
Council’s current Charter states that the
Deputy Mayor and one Councillor is to be appointed.
The Mayor and other Councillors
can attend, however do not have voting rights.
|
|
Representatives 2022
|
Deputy Mayor Rhodes and Clr
Harle
|
|
Casula Powerhouse Arts Centre (CPAC) Board.
Proposed name change to CPAC
Advisory Committee.
|
|
Representatives
|
Mayor (or delegate), Deputy
Mayor, and one Councillor
|
|
Representatives 2022
|
Deputy Mayor Rhodes,
Clr Goodman and Clr Kaliyanda
|
|
Companion Animal Advisory
Committee
|
|
Representatives
|
Mayor (or delegate), and one
Councillor
|
|
Representatives 2022
|
Mayor Mannoun and Deputy Mayor
Rhodes
|
|
District Forums
|
|
Representatives
|
One Councillor to chair.
|
|
Rural District Chairperson
2022
|
Clr Harle
|
|
New Release/Established
District Chairperson 2022
|
Clr Hagarty
|
|
2168 District Chairperson
2022
|
Clr Green
|
|
Eastern District
Chairperson 2022
|
Deputy Mayor Rhodes
|
|
Environment Advisory Committee
|
|
Representatives
|
Two Councillors
|
|
Representatives 2022
|
Clr Harle, Clr Ammoun and Clr
Kaliyanda
|
|
Heritage Advisory
Committee
|
|
Representatives
|
Two Councillors
|
|
Representatives 2022
|
Clr Harle and Clr Hadid
|
|
Intermodal Precinct Committee
|
|
Representatives
|
Two Councillors
|
|
Representatives 2022
|
Deputy Mayor Rhodes and Clr
Macnaught
|
|
Liverpool Access Committee
|
|
Representatives
|
Mayor (or delegate) and one
Councillor
|
|
Representatives 2022
|
Clr Harle
|
|
Liverpool Sports Committee
|
|
Representatives
|
Mayor (or delegate)
|
|
Representatives 2022
|
Clr Ammoun and Clr Goodman
|
|
Tourism & CBD Committee
|
|
Representatives
|
Mayor (or delegate) and four
Councillors
|
|
Representatives 2022
|
Deputy Mayor Rhodes,
Clr Ammoun, Clr Goodman, Clr Macnaught Clr Hadid and Clr Hagarty.
|
|
Youth Council
|
|
Representatives
|
Mayor (or delegate) and two
Councillors
|
|
Representatives 2022
|
Clr Kaliyanda, Clr Hagarty and
Clr Macnaught
|
2. Endorses the current practice of all
Councillors being members of the following Committees;
a. Budget Review Panel
b. Strategic Panel
c. Civic Advisory Committee
d. Community & Safety Prevention
Committee
3. Appoints Councillors as
representatives to the following community committees and affiliated bodies
and notifies them of their representatives for the period to September 2022:
a. Civic
Risk Mutual Ltd Members Assembly (Note, the appointed Councillor is to be the
representative for the duration of the Council term)
b. Georges River Combined Councils
Committee
c. Liverpool Pedestrian, Active Transport
and Traffic Committee
d. Macarthur Bushfire Management Committee
e. NSW Metropolitan Public Libraries
Association
f. Sydney Western City Planning Panel
g. South West Sydney Academy of Sport
(SWSAS)
h. Western Sydney Regional Organisation of
Councils (WSROC)
- Notes that all Councillors are members of the
following Committees, and as such specific appointments are not required:
a.
Budget Review Panel
b.
Strategic Panel
c.
Civic Advisory Committee
d.
Community & Safety
Prevention Committee
5. That Council receive a report on re-establishing a
Multicultural Advisory Committee.
- Appoints Councillors as representatives to the following
community committees and affiliated bodies and notifies them of their
representatives for the period to September 2022:
|
Civic Risk Mutual Ltd Members
Assembly
|
|
Representatives
|
One Councillor and a senior staff member.
Note: Civic Risk Mutual encourages
Councils to appoint its representative for the duration of the Council
term.
|
|
Representatives 2022
|
Mayor Mannoun
Alternate - Clr Hagarty
|
|
Georges River Combined
Councils Committee (GRCCC)
|
|
Representatives
|
Two Councillors
|
|
Representatives 2022
|
Clr Macnaught and Clr Harle
|
|
Liverpool Pedestrian, Active
Transport and Traffic Committee
|
|
Representatives
|
Mayor (or delegate)
|
|
Representatives 2022
|
Mayor Mannoun
|
|
Macarthur Bushfire Management
Committee
|
|
Representatives
|
One Councillor
|
|
Representatives 2022
|
Clr Harle
|
|
NSW Metropolitan Public
Libraries Association (NSW MPLA)
|
|
Representatives
|
Two representatives, one of whom
shall be an elected Councillor and the other generally being a Library Manager.
|
|
Representatives 2022
|
Clr Green
|
|
Sydney Western City Planning
Panel
|
|
Representatives
|
Two council appointed members, with at least one of
whom is required to have expertise in one or more of the following areas:
planning, architecture, heritage, environment, urban design, land
economics, traffic and transport, law, engineering or tourism.
Expertise may be demonstrated by formal qualifications or relevant skills,
knowledge and practical experience.
The Planning Panel Secretariat
has recommended that Council nominate two alternate members for the Panel
in the instance the delegated permanent representatives are not available.
|
|
Representatives 2022
|
Mayor Mannoun and Clr Harle,
with Deputy Mayor Rhodes ,Clr
Hagarty and Clr Hadid as alternates.
|
|
South West Sydney Academy of
Sport (SWSAS)
|
|
Representatives
|
One Councillor
|
|
Representatives 2022
|
Clr Kaliyanda
|
|
Western Sydney Regional
Organisation of Councils (WSROC)
|
|
Representatives
|
Mayor and one Councillor
|
|
Representatives 2022
|
Mayor Mannoun and
Deputy Mayor Rhodes with Clr Kaliyanda and Clr Harle as alternates.
|
On being put
to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.
|
FILE NO: 008996.2022
SUBJECT: Countback
to fill any casual vacancy on Council
|
COUNCIL
DECISION
Motion: Moved:
Clr Hadid Seconded:
Clr Harle
That
pursuant to
Section 291A(1)(b) of the Local Government Act 1993, Liverpool City Council
declares that casual vacancies occurring in the office of a Councillor within
18 months after the last ordinary election of Councillors for the Council on
4 December 2021 are to be filled by a countback of votes cast at that
election for the office in accordance with section 291A of the Act; and
directs the CEO to notify NSW Electoral Commission of the Council’s
decision within seven days of the decision.
On being put to the meeting the motion was declared
CARRIED.
|
FILE NO: 009599.2022
SUBJECT: Local
Government NSW Annual Conference
|
COUNCIL
DECISION
Motion: Moved:
Seconded:
Clr Harle
That:
1.
Any Councillor who
wishes to attend the LGNSW Conference to be held in Sydney from Monday 28
February to Wednesday 2 March 2022 notify the Councillor Support Officer by 7
February 2022;
2.
Council appoint Mayor Mannoun, Clr Ammoun, Clr Goodman, Clr Green, Clr Kaliyanda, Clr Karnib, Clr
Macnaught, Clr Rhodes and Clr Hadid as voting delegates for the LGNSW
Conference; and
3.
Council notes that in addition to the nine, Councillor Hagarty is entitled to one vote as he is a Director of
the Association.
On being put
to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.
|
FILE NO: 011248.2022
SUBJECT: Annual Financial Reports 2020/21
|
COUNCIL
DECISION
Motion: Moved:
Clr Rhodes Seconded:
Clr Macnaught
That Council
receives and adopts this report.
On being put
to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.
|
City Presentation Report
ITEM NO: PRES 01
FILE NO: 006630.2022
SUBJECT: Nappy and
Sanitary Product Report
|
COUNCIL
DECISION
Motion: Moved:
Clr Hagarty Seconded:
Clr Rhodes
That Council:
1.
Approve to start a
trial program for reusable Nappies and Sanitary products, with the allocated
grant funding provided by the Better Waste and Recycling fund until
exhausted.
2.
Limit the items eligible for
rebate as identified in the report.
3.
Measure and report back to
Council as soon as possible once the allocated funding is exhausted on the
effectiveness of the program.
On being put to the meeting the motion was declared
CARRIED.
|
Infrastructure & Environment Report
ITEM NO: INF 01
FILE NO: 009225.2022
SUBJECT: Local Roads and Community Infrastructure Program
|
COUNCIL
DECISION
Motion: Moved:
Mayor Mannoun Seconded: Clr Rhodes
That:
1.
This item be deferred to the next ordinary Council meeting on 23
February 2022 in order for Councillors
to receive a briefing on the projects prior to committing funding.
2.
The briefing also include the upgrades required to Jardine Park in
Casula.
On being put
to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.
|
Committee Reports
ITEM NO: CTTE 01
FILE NO: 017492.2022
SUBJECT: Minutes of Budget Review Panel 18 November 2021
|
COUNCIL DECISION
Motion: Moved:
Clr Rhodes Seconded:
Clr Hadid
That
Council adopts the minutes
of the Budget Review Panel meeting held on 18 November 2021.
On being put to the meeting the motion was declared
CARRIED.
|
Questions with Notice
ITEM NO: QWN 01
FILE NO: 016147.2022
SUBJECT: Question with Notice - Clr Harle - DA-1212/2021 at 437
Hume Highway, Casula
|
Council sent a letter to affected Casula area
residents on 4 January 2022 as below:
“Council has received a Development
Application (DA) for Demolition of existing structures, removal of trees,
construction of a four-storey building over 2 levels of basement carparking.
Proposed use of the ground level is for a pub containing a bistro, sports
bar; VIP lounge (including gaming) and outdoor dining. Levels 1 to 3 is for
the purpose of a hotel, containing a total of 72 rooms at the address shown
above. Our records indicate you are the owner/occupier of a property near
this site. In line with Council's Notification Policy, you are invited to
review the development proposal and if you wish, express views about the
development and any possible effects on your property. Please submit any
comments to Council in writing by 25 January 2022.”
Please address the following:
1. Does this notification comply with
Councils Policy on notifying Development Applications during the
December-January period?
This development application is required to be both
notified to properties within 75m of the subject site and publicly advertised
for 14 days in accordance with the Liverpool Community Participation Plan
2019.
The Community Participation Plan 2019 also requires
that public exhibition and/or notification periods over the traditional
Christmas / New Year period be extended so as not to include the period
between 20 December and 10 January (inclusive).
The notification letter identified an extended
submission period closing date of 25 January 2022 to ensure the dates between
4 January and 10 January 2022 were not counted in the 14-day notification
period.
Given the significant community interest in this
development application, Council extended the advertising/notification period
to 3 February 2022. Council wrote to the property owners within 75m of the
development site on 19 January 2022 advising of the extension to the
submission period and published the required public notice on Council’s
website.
2. What can Council do to ensure residents
that may have been on Holidays during this significant Holiday period are not
disadvantaged?
As noted above,
the notification letter identified an extended submission period closing date
of 25 January 2022 to ensure the dates between 4 January and 10 January 2022
were not counted in the 14-day notification period.
Given the significant community interest in this
development application, Council extended the advertising/notification period
to 3 February 2022. Council wrote to the property owners within 75m of the
development site on 19 January 2022 advising of the extension to the
submission period and published the required public notice on Council’s
website.
3. Council opposed a similar application for
a Pub in the area in 2018, based on its Social Impact Assessment Policy, and
ensured legal resources were made available at the time and resulted in the
DA being rejected in the Land and Environment Court. Can Council ensure
similar resources will be made available if required?
The applicant for this development application has
recently lodged a “deemed refusal” appeal in the Land and
Environment Court. As a result, the Land and Environment Court will now
determine this application.
Council is currently preparing the Statement of
Facts and Contentious and will engage an expert to review the social impacts
of the proposal and who will provide expert evidence to the Land and
Environment Court in the subject Class 1 Appeal.
|
FILE NO: 016557.2022
SUBJECT: Question with Notice - Clr Harle - Ongoing Illegal
dumping occurring in Edmondson Park and generally in the Liverpool LGA
|
Council purchased covert cameras some time ago
specifically for obtaining evidence of illegal dumping occurring in isolated
areas. Council had hired trailer mounted surveillance cameras on a trial
basis.
Please address the following:
1. Can Council provide an update on what is
being done to prevent and reduce the incidence of illegal dumping within the
Liverpool LGA?
2. Have the covert cameras that were used in
various locations within the Liverpool LGA resulted in obtaining evidence of
those carrying out illegal dumping and has that evidence resulted in legal
action against the dumpers?
3. Did the cameras also obtain incidents of
illegal drug dealings occurring in Edmondson Park on Jardine Drive and has
any legal action resulted from that data?
4. If any of the above information is
confidential or subject to legal privilege, can that be provided in a
Confidential Report and or a briefing session?
A response to these questions will be provided in the business papers
for the Council meeting 23 February 2022.
|
FILE NO: 018373.2022
SUBJECT: Question with Notice - Clr Kaliyanda - Youth Strategy
|
Please address the following:
1. When was the Liverpool Youth Strategy and
Action Plan last updated?
2. What timeframe is in place for review and
refresh of the Youth Strategy and Action Plan?
A response to these questions will be provided in the business papers
for the Council meeting of 23 February 2022.
|
Presentations
by Councillors
|
ITEM
NO:
|
Presentations
by Councillors
|
|
Clr Kaliyanda tabled a petition from residents in response
to Development Application 1305/2021 at 2 and 3 Wilga Close Casula.
|
Motion: Motion:
Mayor Mannoun Seconded: Clr Rhodes
That Council move into Closed Session to deal with the
following items:
·
Item NOM 06 –
Civic Place is confidential pursuant to Section 10A(2)(d) of the Local Government Act 1993 as
it contains commercial information of a confidential nature.
·
Item MAYOR 05 – Personnel
Matter is confidential pursuant to the provisions of S10A(2) )(a) of
the Local Government Act 1993 because it contains personnel matters pertaining
to particular individuals (other than Councillors).
·
Item MAYOR 06 – Appointment of Acting
Chief Executive Officer is confidential pursuant to the provisions of s10A(2)(a)
of the Local Government Act 1993 because it contains personnel matters
concerning particular individuals (other than Councillors).
RECESS:
Mayor
Mannoun called a recess of Council at 9.36pm to allow members of the gallery to
leave the Chambers.
CLOSED SESSION:
The meeting resumed at 9.49pm in Closed Session
with all Councillors present.
ITEM NO: NOM 06
FILE NO: 018479.2022
SUBJECT: Civic Place
|
Background
There is much angst in the community relating to the
delivery of Civic Place and the impacts on Council’s long term
financial plan.
It is imperative that this project, the single
largest capital expenditure item this Council has seen, is not just a shiny
new building but in fact adds value to the ratepayer.
|
|
COUNCIL DECISION
Motion:
Moved:
Clr Goodman Seconded Clr
Ammoun
That
Council:
1. Notes the following resolutions of Council from the 5
February 2020 meeting to:
o
Engage a suitably qualified
organisation to undertake a full review/audit on the Civic Place project from
its inception, including but not limited to the changes of the design to
value for money; and
o
Resources be allocated from the
unrestricted reserve to undertake this review.
2. Provide all Councillors with a comprehensive briefing on
the Project Development Agreement relating to the Liverpool Civic Place
project, including but not limited to:
o
the scope, findings and
recommendations of previous reviews and audits by:
§
the NSW Auditor General
§
Council's Audit, Risk and Improvement
Committee
§
Prosperity Advisors
§ external probity advisors, OCM
o
an update on plans to secure tenants
by 1 July 2024 for the following:
§
Liverpool Civic Place surplus office
space
§
33 Moore Street
§
the existing library site
§ the Hoxton Park road office
o
a scenario analysis including but not
limited to potential rental income delays, projected lease yield and project
cost escalation.
3.
A briefing on Council’s long
term financial plan including sensitivity analysis on Council’s
forecasted revenue, expenditure streams and projected cash position.
On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.
|
|
MAYORAL MINUTE
ITEM NO: MAYOR
05
REPORT OF: Mayor
Ned Mannoun
SUBJECT: Personnel
Matter
COUNCIL DECISION:
Motion:
Moved: Mayor Mannoun
Seconded: Clr Hadid
That Council:
1.
Acknowledges the contributions
and capabilities of the CEO over the course of his employment with Council,
noting that he was employed in varying roles for over 7 years.
2.
Note that the current
CEO’s contract will expire on 30 November 2025.
3.
Terminate the CEO’s contract
from 11 February 2022 under Section 10.3.5 of the employment contract.
4.
Direct the Mayor to enter into
direct negotiation with the Chief Executive Officer to formally agree on a
deed of settlement amount.
5.
Direct the Mayor to notify the
CEO in writing of the decision to terminate the employment contract within 24
hours of the conclusion of the meeting.
6.
Direct the Mayor to
notify the CEO in writing within 4 hours of reaching an agreement on the deed
of settlement, including the monetary fee being paid by Council upon
termination.
 On being put to
the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.
Vote For: Mayor
Mannoun, Clr Ammoun, Clr Goodman, Clr Hadid, Clr Macnaught, Clr Rhodes
Vote
Against: Clr Green, Clr Hagarty, Clr Harle, Clr
Kaliyanda, Clr Karnib
|
|
Mayoral Minute
ITEM NO: MAYOR
06
REPORT OF: Mayor
Ned Mannoun
SUBJECT Appointment
of Acting Chief Executive Officer
|
|
COUNCIL DECISION:
Motion:
Moved: Mayor Mannoun
Seconded: Clr Hadid
That Council:
- Notes that Dr Eddie Jackson will be terminated from his position
of CEO on COB Friday, 11 February 2022.
- Undertake a competitive process of appointing a Chief Executive
Officer.
- Immediately seek the services by way of RFQ for a suitable
independent consultant to assist in the recruitment process.
- Immediately seek the services of an independent Probity Advisor to
participate in the recruitment process.
- Establish a working group with the delegation of Council to
undertake the following tasks:
a.
Work with the appointed
independent Consultant to draft and finalise a Position Description (P.D.)
for the Chief Executive role;
b.
Provide instruction to the
appointed consultant on advertising and interview arrangements;
c.
With guidance and assistance
from the independent consultant, negotiate and agree on in-principle contract
terms, subject to approval by Council, with the preferred candidate; and
d.
With guidance form the appointed
independent consultant, prepare a report to the Council that provides a
detailed assessment of the interviewed candidates, and makes a recommendation
for appointment by the Council.
- Notes that the final decision to appoint a Chief Executive
Officer, will be made by the Council, as required by S.344 of the Local
Government Act 1993.
- Appoints Peter Diplas as Acting Chief Executive Officer, with all
delegated authority currently assigned to the position Chief Executive
Officer, for up to 12 months from 4 February 2022 or until such time as
a new permanent Chief Executive Officer appointed, and commences in the
position, whichever is the lesser period.
- Delegate authority to the Mayor to negotiate on behalf of Council,
suitable terms with Mr Diplas (Acting CEO) for his appointment to the
role of Acting Chief Executive Officer.
- Note that once a permanent Chief Executive Officer is appointed a
separate Committee will need to be established to set and monitor key
performance indicators for the new Chief Executive Officer.
On being put
to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.
Vote For: Mayor
Mannoun, Clr Ammoun, Clr Goodman, Clr Green, Clr Hadid, Clr Hagarty, Clr
Kaliyanda, Clr Karnib, Clr Macnaught, Clr Rhodes
Vote Against: Clr Harle
|
Mayor Mannoun moved the
meeting into Open Session at 10:59pm and read the resolutions made in Closed
Session.
THE MEETING CLOSED AT 11.06pm.
<Signature>
Name: Ned Mannoun
Title: Mayor
Date: 23 February 2022
I have authorised
a stamp bearing my signature to be affixed to the pages of the Minutes of the
Council Meeting held on 2 February
2022. I confirm that Council has adopted these Minutes as a
true and accurate record of the meeting.
Ordinary Meeting
23 February 2022
Planning & Compliance Report
|
PLAN 01
|
Post-exhibition report - Liverpool
Local Environmental Plan 2008 Amendment 88 and amendments to the Liverpool
Growth Centre Precincts Development Control Plan at 1370 Camden Valley Way,
Leppington
|
|
Strategic
Direction
|
Strengthening
and Protecting our Environment
Exercise
planning controls to create high-quality, inclusive urban environments
|
|
File Ref
|
346216.2021
|
|
Report By
|
Masud Hasan
- Senior Strategic Planner
|
|
Approved
By
|
David Smith
- Director Planning & Compliance
|
At
its meeting on 30 September 2020, Council resolved to support a planning
proposal request to rezone land and amend development standards in the State Environmental Planning Policy (Sydney Region
Growth Centres) 2006 (Growth Centres SEPP)
for land at 1370 Camden Valley Way, Leppington (Attachment 1).
At its meeting of 26 May 2021, Council resolved
(Attachment 2) to endorse a supporting draft local planning agreement (LPA) and
delegated authority to the A/CEO to negotiate, publicly exhibit, and execute
the planning agreement. At its
meeting of 25 August 2021, Council resolved (Attachment 3) to place a draft
amendment to the Liverpool Growth Centres Precinct DCP on public exhibition for
community consultation and comment.
Following
Council’s resolution, a planning proposal (Amendment 88) was prepared
(Attachment 4) and submitted to the Department of Planning and Environment
(DPE) for a Gateway determination. On 22 December 2020, DPE issued a Gateway determination. A Gateway alteration was issued on 17 November 2021 by
DPE following an extension request from Council given the delayed local
government elections and caretaker period. Both the original Gateway
determination and alteration are in included as Attachment 5. The
Gateway determination, as amended, requires the finalised planning proposal to
be forwarded to DPE by 28 February 2022.
Amendment
88, the draft amendments to the DCP and the local planning agreement were all publicly exhibited from 3 September 2021
until 3 October 2021 in accordance with the conditions of the Gateway
determination and Council’s Community Participation Plan. During the
public exhibition period, no submissions were received.
One State agency submission (Attachment 6) was
received from Transport for New South Wales (TfNSW) during the state agency consultation period, which
raised concern about the cumulative traffic impact of the proposed
Neighbourhood Centre gross floor area (GFA) increase. TfNSW also did not
support the vehicular access provisions to the centre via the existing highway
service centre. In response to this submission, the one-way exit provisions
between the service centre and the retail part of the Neighbourhood Centre have
been removed from the centre layout under the draft DCP amendment. This is to
restrict vehicular access to the centre from the service station.
This
report recommends that Council proceeds with Amendment 88 and delegates
authority to the A/CEO (or delegate) to liaise with DPE and the Parliamentary
Counsel’s Office (PCO) to finalise the amendment. It is also recommended
that Council adopts the amendments to the Liverpool Growth Centre DCP and
delegates authority to the A/CEO (or delegate) to liaise with DPE to publish
this amendment. Finally, it is recommended that Council notes the supporting
local planning agreement has been approved by the A/CEO under the delegation of
Council from the 26 May 2021 meeting (Attachment 8) and executed by
Council’s Power of Attorney.
That Council:
1. Notes the Gateway determination for
Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 (Amendment 88) and the results of
public authority consultation and community consultation;
2. Proceeds with Amendment 88 and
delegates authority to the A/CEO (or delegate) to liaise with the Parliamentary
Counsel’s Office and the Department of Planning and Environment to
finalise Amendment 88;
3. Adopts amendments to Schedule 3
of the Liverpool Growth Centre Precincts Development Control Plan and delegates authority to the A/CEO (or
delegate) to liaise with the Department of Planning and Environment to publish
the DCP amendment;
and
4. Notes the supporting local planning agreement has been
approved by the A/CEO under the delegation of Council from the 26 May 2021
meeting and executed by Council’s Power of Attorney.
Background
Council
received a planning proposal request from the landowner, Vicliz Pty Ltd to
rezone the site and amended development standards at 1370 Camden Valley Way,
Leppington (Lot E in DP28997) (Figure 1).
The
site is located within the Liverpool portion of the East Leppington Precinct
which forms part of the South-West Growth Centre under State
Environmental Planning Policy (Sydney Region Growth Centres) 2006 (Growth
Centres SEPP).
Figure 1: Locality map - subject site
highlighted (Source: Urban Design Statement prepared by Benson McCormack)
The key objective of the planning proposal
is to expand the existing neighbourhood centre area to accommodate additional
retail floor area and to reorganise the residential, commercial, and
recreational uses on the site. This is achieved by reconfiguring the extent of
zone boundaries on the site, as per Figure 2 and 3 below, and amending the
maximum permissible retail Gross Floor Area (GFA) from 2,500m2 to
4,800m2.
Figure 2: Existing land use zoning - subject
site outlined
Figure 3: Proposed land use zoning -
subject site outlined
Gateway Determination
On 22 December 2020, DPE issued a Gateway
determination for the planning proposal (Amendment 88). A Gateway alteration was issued on 17 November 2021 by
DPE following an extension request from Council due to delays caused by the
local government elections and caretaker period. Both the original Gateway
determination and alteration are attached to this report (Attachment 5). The Gateway determination, as amended, stipulates that
the planning proposal must be finalised and forwarded to DPE by 28 February
2022.
The Gateway determination conditions for Amendment 88
required Council to undertake several actions. These conditions were satisfied
in consultation with DPE prior to public exhibition. The conditions and Council
responses are provided below.
· Prior to public exhibition, the following to be
completed -
(a) the planning proposal to
be updated to identify the number of homes and jobs under existing and proposed
controls;
It is estimated that 20-21 fewer residential dwellings
and 63 additional jobs can be created under the proposed planning controls. The
planning proposal report was updated to reflect these numbers prior to the
public exhibition.
(b) supporting studies to be
updated to ensure consistency with the proposed number of homes and jobs identified
by condition (a);
As the total number of dwellings are estimated to be
reduced under Amendment 88, it was considered that the supporting studies are
adequate in demonstrating sufficient infrastructure to support the residential
and retail components.
(c) the planning
proposal and relevant supporting studies to be updated to determine the passive
and open space needs as a result of the rezoning having regard to:
- walkable
access within 400m of homes;
- the
future population;
- recreational
need;
- the
network of open space including the need for active vs passive open space;
- draft
Greener Places Design Guide
The Open Space Planning Report and the concept master
plan submitted demonstrates that the public open space and recreation
facilities are located within less than 400m walking distance from the
residential areas and the neighbourhood centre. The open space is proposed to
be connected to the centre and the residential area through a proposed tree
lined boulevard. As fewer residential dwellings are estimated under the
planning proposal and the quantum of open space area within the site is to
remain same, the open space and its proposed network are considered sufficient
to meet the recreational needs of the future population.
(d) Upon finalisation
of condition (b), the planning proposal to be updated to identify the amount of
usable open space proposed differentiating between land that is constrained and
unconstrained e.g. land containing infrastructure, biodiversity value, flood
affected, etc.
The
Open Space Plan submitted in support of Amendment 88 demonstrated suitable
public open space and amenities with easy access to residents. It also
identified the amount of usable open space proposed, differentiating between
land that is constrained and unconstrained by infrastructure, biodiversity
values and flooding.
Public Authority Consultation
Council
consulted with public agencies identified in the Gateway determination on 2
September 2021, and requested comments be received no later than 3 October
2021. A summary of comments received from these agencies and Council responses
are summarised in Table 2 below:
Table 1: Public authority
consultation
|
Agency (required by
Gateway)
|
Comments
|
Council
response
|
|
Transport for New South
Wales (TfNSW) (Attachment 6)
|
Planning Proposal
|
|
TfNSW
raised no objection. However, they advised that the cumulative traffic impact
of the planning proposal was not assessed in the traffic impact report
prepared in support of Amendment 88. It is advised that the additional trips
external to the precinct are highly likely to be generated due to the
increased retail offering and the current access arrangements to the centre
from Camden Valley Way, via the highway service centre (comprising of an
existing service station and a future fast food restaurant location).
|
The
increase in retail GFA is anticipated to generate approximately 200
additional vehicle trips per hour. Due to the proposed increase of retail GFA
and the increased retail offering, some of these trips may originate from a
broader catchment and come from Camden Valley Way, via the highway service
centre, as opposed to the East Leppington neighbourhood. Council staff
consider that this does not warrant a full update of the traffic and
transport report prepared for the entirety of the East Leppington precinct.
The cumulative traffic impact assessment of the subject development and its
impacts on the signalised intersection of Camden Valley Way and the future
collector road will be required as part of a future development application
(DA).
No
amendment to the planning proposal is proposed as the cumulative traffic
impact due to the retail GFA increase is considered insignificant.
|
|
Growth Centre DCP
|
|
Future
vehicular access to the Neighbourhood Centre, or the rest of the development,
from the highway service centre site is not supported. It is recommended to
have access off the local road network. The DCP and the Indicative Layout
Plan (ILP) should be amended accordingly.
|
The
DCP has been amended accordingly.
|
|
It
is recommended that future development of the Neighbourhood Centre should
maximise sustainable active transport accessibility to provide a convenient
alternative for residents of the precinct to access daily needs.
|
Figure 2-13: Pedestrian and Cycleway Network and Figure 3-2: Desired Future Layout of the
Neighbourhood Centre of the draft DCP proposes amended cycleway and
pedestrian linkages to maximise sustainable active transport accessibility to
the centre. The amended cycleway and pedestrian network will also facilitate
convenient access to the local open space and recreation area for residents.
|
|
Campbelltown City Council
|
No response received
|
Nil
|
|
Camden Council
|
No response received
|
Nil
|
|
Department of Planning,
Industry and Environment (Environment, Energy and Science group)
|
No response received
|
Nil
|
|
Sydney Water
|
No response received
|
Nil
|
|
Jemena Gas Network
|
No response received
|
Nil
|
Community
Consultation
In
accordance with the Gateway determination, Amendment 88 was placed on public
exhibition from 3 September 2021 until 3 October 2021. The draft DCP and the
draft LPA were also placed on public exhibition as a unified package. Notices
regarding the public exhibition were placed on Council’s website and
letters were sent to adjoining landowners and occupiers.
No
submissions were received in relation to Amendment 88, the draft DCP and the
draft LPA during the public exhibition period, and as such no further changes
are considered necessary following public exhibition.
Amendments to the Liverpool Growth Centre Precincts
Development Control Plan (Growth Centre DCP)
To reflect the changes to the zone boundaries and the
increase in retail GFA provision under the planning
proposal, the DCP controls, maps and figures, including the Indicative Layout
Plan (ILP) are amended. The proposed DCP amendments (as exhibited) are
summarised below:
· The ILP is amended to reflect the changes
in the road network and the
land uses in the precinct (e.g., residential, open space etc.) resulting from
the planning proposal.
· The numerical restriction on retail Gross Floor Area (GFA) of
the Neighbourhood Centre under Section 3.1 of the East Leppington Precinct DCP
is amended to ensure consistency with the planning proposal.
· A new clause (Clause 7) and new
Figure 3-3 are included in subsection 3.1 East Leppington Neighbourhood Centre
under Section 3 - Centre Development Controls of the DCP to ensure the design
and construction of the street (tree lined boulevard) is consistent with the
proposed DCP amendments.
· A revised layout is proposed to
replace the current layout of the neighbourhood centre at ‘Figure 3-2:
Desired future layout of the Neighbourhood Centre’ of the DCP. The
proposed layout represents the extended area of the Neighbourhood Centre. In
response to the submission from TfNSW, the one-way exit provisions between the
service centre and the retail part of the Neighbourhood Centre are removed in
the proposed centre layout of the DCP. This change is made at the
post-exhibition stage (refer to Figure 4).
Figure 4: Proposed desired future
layout of the Neighbourhood Centre (post-exhibition)
· Additional site-specific
controls for the subject site are included under the newly added Section 4.6 of
the DCP (as exhibited) to ensure that future development within the subject
site will create active frontage with the designated public spaces, including
the open space area.
· Relevant maps and figures in
the DCP are amended to reflect the changes to zoning boundaries, the local road
network, the Neighbourhood Centre layout and the pedestrian and cycleway
network, as exhibited under the draft DCP.
The
post-exhibition version of the DCP is included in Attachment 7. Minor changes
were made in response to TfNSW comments as detailed in Table 1.
Draft Local Planning Agreement (LPA)
Council
at its meeting on 26 May 2021 endorsed the draft LPA and resolved to delegate
authority to the A/CEO to negotiate with the proponent further before
proceeding to public exhibition.
Upon
receiving the quantity surveyors report on the estimated costs from the
proponent, Council confirmed the estimated costs of works (contributions
value). Council then exhibited the draft LPA with Amendment 88 and the draft
DCP amendment concurrently.
Table
1 below shows the list of facilities proposed to be delivered under the LPA
with their contributions value. Refer to Figure 5 for location of the proposed
LPA works.
The
LPA is in addition to the required monetary contributions payable under the
Contributions Plan.
Table 2: Proposed works under the LPA
with their contributions value
|
Embellishment
|
Dimensions
|
Treatment
|
Contributions Value
|
|
Width (m)
|
Length (m)
|
Area (m2)
|
|
1. Social
Court
|
20
|
20
|
400
|
Broom finished concrete surface plaza
with outdoor seating and tree planting. Informal recreation elements (i.e.,
Basketball/netball hoop, bocce etc.)
|
$814,436
|
|
2. Walking
Loop
|
2.5
|
180
|
450
|
Broom finished concrete.
|
$255,617
|
|
3. Link
Across Riparian Corridor (Boardwalk/ Bridge)
|
3.5
|
70
|
245
|
Broom finished concrete path connecting
to boardwalk and spanning riparian corridor.
Structure: Steel and timber
Decking: Recycled plastic
Balustrade: Steel and timber
|
$726,375
|
|
4. Pedestrian
Crossing
|
3.6
|
17
|
n/a
|
Raised and marked pedestrian crossing in accordance
with AS1742.10. Pedestrian refuge to be included.
|
$270,920
|
Figure 5: Location of proposed LPA
works within the site (highlighted in red boxes)
Conclusion
The Gateway determination
requirements for Amendment 88 have been satisfied and matters raised by public
authority agencies have been addressed or will be appropriately considered as
part of a future DA process.
It
is recommended that Council proceeds with
Amendment 88 and delegates authority to the A/CEO (or delegate) to liaise with
DPE and the Parliamentary Counsel’s Office (PCO) to finalise the
amendment. It is also recommended that Council adopts the amendments to the
Liverpool Growth Centre DCP and delegates authority to the A/CEO (or delegate)
to liaise with DPE to publish this amendment. Finally, it is recommended that
Council notes the supporting local planning agreement has been approved by the
A/CEO under the delegation of Council from the 26 May 2021 meeting (Attachment
8) and executed by Council’s Power of Attorney.
|
Economic
|
Further develop a commercial centre that
accommodates a variety of employment opportunities.
|
|
Environment
|
Support the delivery of a range of transport
options.
|
Social
|
There are no social and cultural considerations.
|
Civic
Leadership
|
Encourage the community to engage in Council
initiatives and actions.
Provide information about Council’s services,
roles and decision-making processes.
|
|
Legislative
|
Environmental Planning and Assessment Act
1979
|
|
Risk
|
The risk is deemed to be low.
The risk is within Council’s risk
appetite.
|
1. Council
Resolution - 30 September 2020 (Under separate cover)
2. Council
Resolution - 26 May 2021
(Under separate cover)
3. Council
Resolution - 25 August 2021
(Under separate cover)
4. Planning
Proposal - Amendment 88
(Under separate cover)
5. Gateway
determination and alteration (Under separate cover)
6. TfNSW
submission (Under
separate cover)
7. Post-Exhibition
DCP amendment (Under
separate cover)
8. Local
Planning Agreement (Under
separate cover)
9. Local
Planning Agreement - Explanatory Note (Under separate cover)
10. ASIC
Extract for Vicliz Pty Ltd - Owner of 1370 Camden Valley Way Leppington
(Under separate cover) - Confidential
Ordinary Meeting
23 February 2022
Planning & Compliance Report
|
PLAN 02
|
Special Flood Considerations Clause in
the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008
|
|
Strategic
Direction
|
Strengthening
and Protecting our Environment
Exercise
planning controls to create high-quality, inclusive urban environments
|
|
File Ref
|
318279.2021
|
|
Report By
|
Brianna Van
Zyl - Strategic Planner
|
|
Approved
By
|
David Smith
- Director Planning & Compliance
|
Council’s
management of flood prone land is governed by the NSW Government Flood Prone
Lands Policy, Floodplain Development Manual, and associated Guidelines, which
together support appropriate development of flood prone land. Relevant policy
and guidelines for developing flood prone lands are translated into development
controls through Council’s Development Control Plan 2008 (DCP) and the
Local Environmental Plan 2008 (LEP).
Currently, the following development types are
considered critical or sensitive uses and are subject to flood-related controls
under Clause 7.8A of the LEP if they are located within the PMF area:
· Caravan Parks;
· Correctional Centres;
· Early education and care facilities;
· Emergency Services Facilities;
· Group homes;
· Hospitals;
· Respite day care centres;
· Senior housing; and
· Tourist and visitor accommodation.
In May 2021 as part of a new flood-prone land package,
the Department of Planning and Environment (DPE) introduced the following nine
additional development categories to the list of critical and sensitive
developments as well as strengthened
objectives. In addition to the
above nine development types, the following additional developments will be
subject to flood related controls if they are located within the PMF area:
· Boarding houses;
· Eco-tourist facilities;
· Educational establishments;
· Hazardous industries;
· Hazardous storage establishments;
· Hostels;
· Information and education facilities;
· Sewerage system; and
· Water supply system.
The above changes will be made by introducing a new
Special Flood Consideration clause in the LEP (Clause 5.22) that will replace
the existing Clause 7.8A. Both the existing and proposed clauses are provided
at Appendix 1.
DPE is seeking Council endorsement to amend the LEP to include the new Special Flood Consideration Clause 5.22, which will enable council to apply
these additional controls without the need for Council to prepare its own
planning proposal.
It is recommended that Council opt into the Special
Flood Consideration Clause 5.22 and endorse this change to the LEP. If endorsed
by Council, a formal letter will be sent to DPE advising that Council has
resolved to opt into the Special Consideration Clause 5.22. If Council does not endorse this change, the existing
Clause 7.8A will remain within the LEP.
That Council:
1. Endorses the Special Flood Consideration Clause 5.22 for inclusion
into the Liverpool Local
Environmental Plan 2008 by the
Department of Planning and Environment; and
2. Advises the Department of Planning and
Environment of Councils decision.
Background
Council’s
management of flood prone land is governed by the NSW Government’s Flood
Prone Lands Policy, Floodplain Development Manual, and associated Guidelines,
which together support appropriate development of flood prone land. Relevant
policy and guidelines for developing and occupying flood prone lands are
translated into development controls in Council’s Development Control
Plan (DCP) and the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 (LEP).
Development
controls correspond to the nature and extent of flood risk, and there are two
categories where flood-related controls apply as outlined below:
1. Flood Planning Areas (FPA) – these are areas affected by the 100-year flood and
flood-related planning controls are in place for all types of developments to
ensure safe occupation of flood affected land. The 100-year flood refers to the
1% Annual Exceedance Probability (AEP) flood, which has a 1% or 1 in 100 chance
of occurring in any one year. A 500mm freeboard has been added to the 100-year
flood levels as a factor of safety for setting of building floor levels.
Together these provide the Flood Planning Level (FPL) i.e., 1% AEP + 500mm =
FPL and determines the full extent of the FPA as shown in Figure 1 below.
2. Probable Maximum Flood (PMF) - for areas beyond the FPA and up to the
PMF, the Policy requires planning controls for certain types of developments
only. The PMF is the largest flood that could conceivably occur at a particular
location. While it’s not economically feasible to provide protection
against all floods, there are certain types of developments identified by the
state government as having a higher risk to life and therefore warranting the
consideration of the impacts of rarer flood events beyond the 1% AEP. The
current Government Guidelines generally preclude the use of PMF to set development controls for residential development and it stipulates that development controls will need to be applied to critical infrastructure (such as hospitals) and sensitive developments (like nursing homes) in floods exceeding the 100-year event.
The following diagram explains flood risk categories and
permissible developments including the subject special flood consideration
area.
Figure 1 - Flood Risk Categories and
Development
DPE Flood Prone Land Package
The Department of Planning and Environment (DPE)
released a draft Flood Prone Land Package in July 2020. Following a period of
consultation, the Flood Prone Land Package came into effect on 14 July 2021.
The current flood-related package has restricted
councils in NSW from applying development controls on land between the 1%
Annual Exceedance Probability (AEP) and the Probable Maximum Flood (PMF). As a
result, development has occurred in floodplains, above the 1% AEP but below the
PMF, with limited or no flood-related development controls to manage the risk
or to build flood resilience into communities. This poses a risk to the
physical and economic safety of communities, results in less resilient communities
and creates an increasing risk to the NSW Government when extreme floods occur.
The revised flood-prone land package allows a more contemporary approach to
better manage flood risk beyond the 1% AEP, including building greater
resilience considering the effects of climate change.
The updated package addresses the key concerns
including the safety of people, the management of potential damage to property
and infrastructure, and the management of the cumulative impacts of
development, particularly on evacuation capacity. The new package will ensure
both existing and future communities are more resilient to flooding through
addressing flood risk appropriately, as not all flood risk is the same for the
same probability flood event and this needs to be taken into consideration when
undertaking land-use planning.
Special Flood Consideration Clause – Clause 5.22
As discussed above, the key change relates to the
introduction of a new special
flood consideration clause in the LEP (Clause 5.22). This new clause provides
strengthened objectives and introduces nine additional development categories to the list of
critical and sensitive developments. These additional developments will be subject to flood-related controls if they are
located within the PMF, which
includes minimum floor level at PMF and flood evacuation considerations. The
following table illustrates the change to the list of sensitive developments in
the current LEP Clause 7.8A and in the new Clause 5.22. A copy of the current
LEP Clause 7.8A and the new Clause 5.22 is attached with this report (Attachment
1).
Table 1 - Existing and Proposed
Critical and Sensitive Land Use Categories
|
Item
|
Existing
– LEP Clause 7.8A
|
Proposed
– LEP Clause 5.22
|
|
1
|
Caravan
Parks
|
Caravan Parks
|
|
2
|
Correctional
Centres
|
Correctional Centres
|
|
3
|
Early
education and care facilities
|
Early education and care facilities
|
|
4
|
Emergency
Services Facilities
|
Emergency Services Facilities
|
|
5
|
Group
homes
|
Group homes
|
|
6
|
Hospitals
|
Hospitals
|
|
7
|
Respite
day care centres
|
Respite day care centres
|
|
8
|
Senior housing
|
Senior housing
|
|
9
|
Tourist
and visitor accommodation
|
Tourist and visitor accommodation
|
|
10
|
|
Boarding houses
|
|
11
|
|
Eco-tourist facilities
|
|
12
|
|
Educational establishments
|
|
13
|
|
Hazardous industries
|
|
14
|
|
Hazardous storage establishments
|
|
15
|
|
Hostels
|
|
16
|
|
Information and education facilities
|
|
17
|
|
Sewerage system
|
|
18
|
|
Water supply system
|
The objectives of Clause 5.22 are to add an additional layer of
consideration when assessing development. The clause will help Council make
informed decisions when considering applications on land affected by flooding.
The additional land-uses listed are critical and high risk, and it is therefore
considered prudent to opt into the amended clause to ensure additional
consideration is given to these land uses during the assessment process.
Consultation
Council’s Floodplain and Water Management
Department endorse the inclusion of the proposed Special Flood Consideration
Clause in the Liverpool LEP.
Conclusion
It is recommended that Council opt into the Special
Flood Consideration Clause 5.22 and endorse this change to the LEP. If endorsed
by Council, a formal letter will be sent to DPE advising that Council has
resolved to opt into the Special Consideration Clause 5.22. If Council does not endorse this change, the existing
Clause 7.8A will remain within the LEP.
|
Economic
|
There are no economic and financial considerations.
|
|
Environment
|
There are no environmental and sustainability
considerations.
|
Social
|
There are no social and cultural considerations.
|
Civic
Leadership
|
Act as an environmental leader in the community.
|
|
Legislative
|
Environmental and Planning Assessment Act 1979
|
|
Risk
|
The risk is deemed to be Medium.
There is a moderate risk to Council if
the provisions are not adopted into the LEP as there is no legally binding
considerations for development applications of the additional nine (9)
critical and sensitive land uses in PMF zone.
|
1. Current
LEP Clause 7.8A and Proposed LEP Clause 5.22
|
0
|
|
PLAN
02
|
Special
Flood Considerations Clause in the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008
|
|
Attachment
1
|
Current
LEP Clause 7.8A and Proposed LEP Clause 5.22
|
Ordinary Meeting
23 February 2022
Planning & Compliance Report
|
PLAN 03
|
Status update on planning proposal
request at Lot 6 Newbridge Road, Moorebank
|
|
Strategic
Direction
|
Strengthening
and Protecting our Environment
Exercise
planning controls to create high-quality, inclusive urban environments
|
|
File Ref
|
046341.2022
|
|
Report By
|
Luke Oste -
Coordinator Strategic Planning
|
|
Approved
By
|
David Smith
- Director Planning & Compliance
|
At its meeting on 24 November 2021, Council resolved
the following in relation to NOM01:
That:
1. Council
remains strongly opposed to a concrete crushing facility at the Moorebank
Recyclers site; and
2. A report be
brought back to the February 2022 Council meeting with any issues relating to
this particular planning proposal, and whether that relates to the proponent or
Council.
This report has been prepared in response to point two
of Councils resolution.
The
Department of Planning and Environment (DPE) have advised Council that planning
proposals in the Liverpool Collaboration Area and Moorebank East cannot be
progressed until the Georges River Regional Flood Evacuation Study is finalised
and the suitability of the sites for rezoning relating to flood evacuation is
considered. This includes this site.
Council
is working with its consultant, proponents, and various state agencies to
finalise the study.
In addition to flood evacuation issues, there are
other issues that need to be addressed by the proponent. These were detailed in
the 16 December 2020 Council report (Attachment 1), Liverpool Local
Planning Panel (LPP) assessment report (Attachment 2) and LPP advice (Attachment
3). The proposal in its current form does not demonstrate strategic and
site-specific merit and in its current form is unlikely to receive a Gateway
determination from DPE.
All planning proposal requests must
demonstrate strategic merit in relation to the strategic planning framework
which includes the Sydney Region Plan, the Western City District Plan and
Councils Local Strategic Planning Statement (LSPS). Proposals must demonstrate
consistency or justifiable inconsistency with a number of Section 9.1
Ministerial Directions.
Key site-specific
planning issues with the current proposal that need to be addressed relate to:
· Flooding;
· Flood Evacuation;
· Site contamination;
· Biodiversity impacts; and
· Density and supporting infrastructure.
The complex environmental,
flooding and contamination issues affecting the site currently remain unresolved
by the proponent.
That Council receive and notes
this report.
Moorebank East Precinct – Site and Locality
Description
The Moorebank East Precinct is a collection of sites
that are largely undeveloped and are located along the western bank of the
Georges River on the eastern border of the Liverpool LGA. The precinct is
bounded by the following:
· North – Newbridge Road initially, and then the
Chipping Norton industrial estate. To the north-west is the Chipping Norton
residential area. To the north-east is a significant expanse of green space
including Riverside Park.
· South – Brighton Lakes Golf Club initially, and then
the M5 South-West motorway. To the south-west is the Brighton Lakes residential
development.
· East – The site is bound by the Georges River, with
the Canterbury Bankstown LGA on the east side of the river. To the north-east
is the Davy Robinson Park and boat ramp, as well as some residential
development that is subject to the Moorebank Voluntary Acquisition Scheme.
Milperra is located on the east side of the river, with significant open and
green space located in proximity to the precinct.
· West – Wurrungwuri Reserve initially and then
Brickmakers Drive. To the west of Brickmakers Drive is the Georges Fair
residential area and Moorebank Town Centre approximately 1km west from the
subject precinct.
Figure 1 – Context
Map of the Subject Precinct (Source: Near Map)
The precinct has been divided
into five distinct sites in accordance with the varying developments being
proposed as part of both planning proposal requests and development
applications (DA’s). For simplicity, each site within the precinct is
identified this way within this report and planning documentation. These are
visually represented in Figure 2. They are also listed in Table 1.
Table 1 – Moorebank East
Precinct Sites
|
Site Name
|
Address
|
Planning Proposal
|
Stage
|
|
Site A
|
146 Newbridge Rd
|
RZ-9/2017
|
Pre-Gateway
|
|
Site B
|
124 Newbridge Rd
|
RZ-4/2017
|
Pre-Gateway
|
|
Site C
|
146 Newbridge Rd
|
RZ-1/2019
|
Awaiting Finalisation by
Minister
|
|
Site D
|
146 Newbridge Rd
|
RZ-5/2018
|
Pre-Gateway
|
|
Site E
|
Lot 6 Newbridge Rd
|
RZ-2/2020
|
Pre-Gateway
|
Figure 2
– Aerial Map of the Subject Precinct and Sites A – E (Source: Near
Map)
Site E (RZ-2/2020)
The Planning Assessment Commission (as it
was then known) issued a development consent on 11 September 2015 for a
materials recycling facility on the subject site. The Land and Environment
Court subsequently confirmed this approval on 14 July 2017 after Council
appealed the approval.
In 2018, the previous owner sold Lot 6
Newbridge Road. At Council’s meeting on 30 May 2018, Council resolved the
following in relation to NOM 02:
That Council:
1. In principle, support a
proposal for a residential (and auxiliary) land use on the site known as the
Moorebank Recyclers in lieu of a recycling facility;
2. Note that any proposal needs to
undergo the standard assessment process;
3. Work closely with the proponent
to ensure the best possible outcome for the site in a timely manner, should a
proposal be received; and
4. Organise a community BBQ once
and if the development approval for the recycling plant is surrendered.
A planning proposal request was lodged
with Council on 5 March 2020 that sought to achieve the proponent’s
vision, ‘to provide a diverse, vibrant, active and accessible
residential neighbourhood, bound by the banks of the Georges River and
surrounding river woodland, to create an attractive place to live and
play’. The proposal seeks to facilitate the following development:
· 2,000 apartments;
· 800m2 of community
facilities;
· 1,700m2 of retail,
restaurant, and associated uses;
· 730m of foreshore
walkway/activation waterfront, facilitating open space linkage to adjoining
residential and recreational sites; and
· A series of ecological and
recreational parks
Figure 3 – Site E
(RZ-2/2020) extract from Urban Design Report (Source: DEM)
To achieve this proposed development, the
planning proposal seeks to rezone:
· The existing E2 (Environmental
Conservation) land within Lot 6 Newbridge Rd to a combination of R1 (General
Residential) and RE1 (Public Recreation); and
· Part of the existing E2 (Environmental
Conservation) land on land adjoining to the west to SP2 (Infrastructure) to
enable access to the site.
Figure 4
– Proposed rezoning of Site E (RZ-2/2020) – ‘Moorebank
recyclers’ (Source: SG Haddad Advisory and FGCS)
In addition to the proposed rezoning, the
following amendments to development standards within the LEP are proposed:
· Include a maximum Height of Buildings
control of 50m; and
· Increase the maximum Floor Space Ratio
control from 0.01:1 to 1:1.
The timeline of the planning
proposal request since lodgment is summarised in Table 2:
Table 2
– Site E (RZ-2/2020) timeline
|
Timeline
|
|
Date
|
Milestone/Event
|
|
05/03/20
|
Planning proposal lodged and received by Council.
|
|
03/06/20
|
Internal technical referrals undertaken
|
|
30/06/20
|
Letter detailing the outcomes of the initial
assessment and required additional information sent to the proponent.
|
|
28/07/20
|
Meeting between the proponent and
Council staff regarding the issues identified in the initial assessment.
|
|
13/08/20
|
Planning proposal was placed on initial public
exhibition until 20 September 2020.
The proposal received two community responses during
this period, and one agency response. Of the two community responses, one was
in support and the other was in opposition.
|
|
25/08/20
|
Proponent provided a written response to
issues raised by Council.
|
|
30/11/20
|
Planning proposal request reported to the Liverpool
Local Planning Panel (Attachment 2).
In summary, the LPP recommended that the planning
proposal does not proceed to a Gateway determination (Attachment 3).
|
|
10/12/20
|
DPE written correspondence to Council
directs that no Moorebank East planning proposal may proceed to Gateway
determination until such time as the Georges River Regional Flood Evacuation
Study is finalised and the planning proposals are informed by the study.
|
|
16/12/20
|
The planning proposal request is reported to a Council
meeting (Attachment 1). Council resolved to:
1. Receive and note this report;
2. Continue to negotiate with the proponent
around issues of density, flood mitigation;
3. Note the correspondence from the
Department of Planning, Industry and Environment dated 10 December 2020 that
Council finalise the Regional Flood Evacuation Study and that the Study
informs those planning proposals in the Moorebank East precinct prior to forwarding
planning proposals in this precinct to DPIE for a Gateway determination;
4. Invite the proponent to work with Council
Officers on an amended planning proposal that also investigate opportunities
to collaborate with neighbouring developments, Canterbury Bankstown Council
and the State Government for the possible inclusion of a bridge crossing the
Georges River;
5. Defer a decision on whether to forward
this planning proposal request to the Department of Planning, Industry and
Environment for a Gateway determination until after the Regional Flood
Evacuation Study and further report to Council regarding issues in (2) above
has been completed in April 2021; and
6. Consider options for the design and
construction of a fully accessible shared path along the Georges River.
|
|
4/2/21
|
Meeting with the proponent, their
consultant team and Council staff to discuss technical issues and next steps.
|
|
18/02/21
|
Proponent provided initial written response to LPP
report and proposes a range of future measures to address outstanding issues.
|
|
18/02/21
|
Council had a phone conversation with
the proponent who indicated that they would provide a new planning proposal
with an amended design. This would include a new urban design that involves
less vegetation clearing, would address flooding issues, and would provide
justification for environmental impacts, including those caused by access
arrangements.
It was agreed that a high-level summary
of an amended planning proposal would be presented to Council staff for
comment. This would then inform an amended planning proposal with supporting
documentation.
|
|
22/3/21
|
Phone call with proponent – Council requested
that the proponent provide an indication as to the timing of the amended
planning proposal.
|
|
30/3/21
|
Proponent provides Council with
high-level concepts to inform an amended proposal for discussion.
|
|
31/3/21
|
Meeting with the proponent, their consultant team
and Council staff to discuss the submitted high-level concepts and next
steps.
|
|
25/6/21
|
Council writes to the proponent to
indicate that the draft Georges River Regional Flood Evacuation Study require
further input from the SES.
The proponent provides a written
response to indicate that they have “considered the matters outlined in your
email, the attachments, and the history of this matter. On that basis, we
have decided to proceed with our Material Recycling Facility in line with our
approval.”
|
|
28/6/21
|
Council provides a written response to the proponent
requesting the intentions of the
proponent in relation to the planning proposal and further advising that
Council will continue to progress the draft Georges River Regional Flood Evacuation Study to enable strategic planning work to continue within
the Moorebank East precinct.
The
proponent has not yet elaborated further regarding their intentions for the
planning proposal.
|
It should be noted that the planning proposal has not
been formally withdrawn by the proponent and no formal amendments have been
lodged by the proponent following Council’s 16 December 2020 resolution.
Regional
Flood Evacuation Study
In
October 2019, Molino Stewart prepared a report for Council on flood evacuation
potential in the Moorebank Peninsula in the Liverpool LGA. This was
specifically for the potential development of five sites in the Moorebank East
precinct that were subject to planning proposal requests. It was beyond the
scope of that report to assess the constraints which may be imposed by the
evacuation of existing development in the established areas of Moorebank and
Chipping Norton, which may take up some, or all, of the local road capacity.
Consequently,
Molino Stewart was engaged to prepare a broader Georges River Regional Flood
Evacuation study to investigate flood evacuation challenges for both the
Moorebank Peninsula and the Liverpool Collaboration Area. This was identified
as an action within the Liverpool Place Strategy, to be undertaken by the SES.
The
Department of Planning and Environment (DPE) have advised Council that the Site
E planning proposal request cannot be progressed until such time as the draft
Georges River Regional Flood Evacuation Study is finalised and the suitability
of the site for rezoning in relation to the flood evacuation issue is assessed.
This is also the case for the other active planning proposal requests that are
impacted by outcome of the draft study. Council continues to work with the
consultant, proponents and State agencies to finalise this report.
Issues to be addressed by the proponent
Several unresolved issues
remain that must be addressed by the proponent as detailed in the 16 December 2020 Council report (Attachment
1), Liverpool Local Planning Panel (LPP) assessment report (Attachment 2)
and LPP advice (Attachment 3).
The proponent must demonstrate
strategic merit in relation to the strategic planning framework:
· Greater Sydney Regional Plan:
o Objective 14 – A Metropolis of Three Cities – integrated land use and transport creates walkable and
30-minute cities;
o Objective 25 – The coast and waterways are protected and healthier;
o Objective 27 – Biodiversity is protected, urban bushland and remnant
vegetation is enhanced; and
o Objective 37 – Exposure to natural and urban hazards is reduced.
· Western City District Plan:
o Planning Priority W3 – Providing services and social
infrastructure to meet people’s changing needs;
o Planning Priority W5 – Providing housing supply, choice and
affordability, with access to jobs, services and public transport;
o Planning Priority W14 – Protecting and enhancing bushland and
biodiversity; and
o Planning Priority W20 – Adapting to the impacts of urban and
natural hazards and climate change.
· Liverpool Local Strategic Planning
Statement (LSPS):
o Planning Priority 6 - High-quality, plentiful, and accessible
community facilities, open space and infrastructure aligned with growth;
o Planning Priority 7 - Housing choice for different needs, with
density focused in the City Centre and centres well serviced by public
transport;
o Planning
Priority 14 - Bushland and
waterways are celebrated, connected, protected, and enhanced; and
o Planning
Priority 15 - A green,
sustainable, resilient, and water-sensitive city.
Consistency or justifiable inconsistency with the
following s.9.1 Ministerial Directions must be achieved for the planning
proposal to progress:
· Direction 2.1 – Environmental
Protection Zones;
· Direction 2.2 – Coastal Management;
· Direction 2.6 – Remediation of Land;
· Direction 3.4 – Integrating Land Use
and Transport;
· Direction 4.1 – Acid Sulfate Soils;
· Direction 4.3 – Flood Prone Land;
· Direction 5.10 – Implementation of
Regional Plans.
The key site-specific planning
issues with the proposal, in addition to the inconsistencies with the strategic
planning framework, are:
· Flooding: The nature of the site, being within a high
hazard flood zone, requires significant flood mitigation measures to enable the
development and to allow for safe evacuation. The development currently
proposes significant fill up to the Probable Maximum Flood level (PMF) (up to
10m) and therefore requires substantial compensatory flood storage. Resulting
impacts have not been sufficiently identified at this stage in the planning
process, and appropriate mitigation measures have not been provided.
· Contamination: Despite
requests for sufficient information, there remains a level of uncertainty
around the contaminated state of the site and the required remediation pathways
to be followed by the proponent to enable residential development on this site.
· Biodiversity: The proposal involves a significant loss of
vegetation and habitat across the site (which is zoned Environmental
Conservation) due to the level of manipulation of the foreshore area and due to
the proposed access arrangements through Council owned (and Environmental
Conservation zoned) Wurrungwurri Reserve. It is acknowledged that significant
work that has been undertaken to identify the biodiversity value of the site,
however insufficient strategies and mechanisms are provided to ensure these
ecological values are protected as part of the proposal, and to demonstrate
consistency with key ministerial directions.
· Density: The proposed density remains a concern, including
the appropriateness of 2,000 dwellings on the subject site, in an out of centre
location with poor public transport connectivity.
As stated in correspondence from Council
to the proponent, as highlighted within the December 2020 Council report, and
this report, the complex environmental, flooding and contamination issues
affecting the site remain unresolved.
Conclusion
This report provides a status update on the planning proposal request as
requested by Council. The planning proposal request cannot progress to Gateway
determination until the draft Georges River Regional Flood Evacuation Study,
being prepared by Council’s flood consultant Molino Stewart, is finalised
and the site suitability for rezoning is considered in relation to the
conclusions and recommendations of this study. Council is working with Molino
Stewart, the various state agencies, and relevant proponents to finalise the
study.
Council is also awaiting additional
information from the proponent in relation to several outstanding issues that
were outlined in the December 2020 report to Council. These issues must be
addressed to demonstrate the strategic and site-specific merit of the proposal.
It is recommended that Council receive and notes this
report.
|
Economic
|
Facilitate economic development.
|
|
Environment
|
Manage the environmental health of waterways.
Manage air, water, noise and chemical pollution.
Protect, enhance and maintain areas of endangered
ecological communities and high quality bushland as part of an attractive mix
of land uses.
|
Social
|
Regulate for a mix of housing types that responds to
different population groups such as young families and older people.
|
Civic
Leadership
|
Encourage the community to engage in Council initiatives and actions.
Provide information about Council’s services, roles and decision
making processes.
Operate a well-developed governance system that
demonstrates accountability, transparency and ethical conduct.
|
|
Legislative
|
Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979
|
|
Risk
|
There is no risk associated with this
report.
|
1. 16
December 2020 Council Report and Resolution (Under
separate cover)
2. Local
Planning Panel Report (Under separate cover)
3. Local
Planning Panel Advice (Under separate cover)
Ordinary Meeting
23 February 2022
Planning & Compliance Report
|
PLAN 04
|
Planning proposal to amend Schedule 5 -
Environmental Heritage of the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008
|
|
Strategic
Direction
|
Strengthening
and Protecting our Environment
Exercise
planning controls to create high-quality, inclusive urban environments
|
|
File Ref
|
395502.2021
|
|
Report By
|
Lilyan Abosh
- Strategic Planner
|
|
Approved
By
|
David Smith
- Director Planning & Compliance
|
Council
resolved at the 28 April 2021 and 30 June 2021 meetings to prepare a planning
proposal to list 122 Atkinson Street, Liverpool and 124 Moore Street, Liverpool
in Schedule 5 Environmental Heritage of the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan
2008 (LEP) (Attachments 1 and 2).
Consistent
with Council’s resolution, a planning proposal has been prepared which
lists the above properties in Schedule 5 of the LEP as well as removing other
items from Schedule 5 which have been
demolished because of previous Part 3A or State Significant Development (SSD)
or State Significant Infrastructure (SSI) applications (Attachment 3).
The
planning proposal was considered by the Liverpool Local Planning Panel (LPP) on
25 October 2021 as required by the Local Planning Panels Direction – Planning
Proposals issued by the Minister for Planning under Section 9.1 of the
Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. The LPP advised that the
planning proposal has merit and should proceed to the Department of Planning
and Environment (DPE) for a Gateway determination (Attachment 4).
This
report recommends that Council endorses the planning proposal and forwards the
planning proposal to DPE seeking a Gateway determination.
That Council:
1. Notes the advice of the Liverpool Local
Planning Panel;
2. Endorses the planning proposal to amend
Schedule 5 – Environmental Heritage of the Liverpool Local Environmental
Plan 2008;
3. Delegates to the Acting CEO (or delegate)
to make any typographical or other editing amendments to the planning proposal
if required;
4. Forwards the planning proposal to the
Department of Planning and Environment pursuant to Section 3.34 of the Environmental
Planning and Assessment Act 1979, seeking a Gateway determination, with a request that Council be authorised
as the local plan making authority;
5. Subject to Gateway determination, undertake
public exhibition and community consultation in accordance with the conditions
of the Gateway determination and the Liverpool Community Participation Plan;
6. Receive a further report on the outcomes of
public exhibition and community consultation; and
7. Notify the owners of 122 Atkinson Street,
Liverpool and 124 Moore Street, Liverpool of Council’s decision to
endorse the planning proposal for a Gateway determination and to provide advice
on the next steps in the plan making process.
Background
This planning proposal seeks to amend the Liverpool
Local Environmental Plan 2008 (LEP) to include 122 Atkinson Street, Liverpool
and 124 Moore Street, Liverpool in Schedule 5 Environmental Heritage of the
LEP. The properties are the subject of Interim Heritage Orders issued pursuant
to a Council resolution in November 2020 and February 2021. The Interim
Heritage Orders are still in force.
In accordance with the NSW Government guidelines for
issuing Interim Heritage Orders, a Preliminary Assessment of Heritage
Significance was undertaken for each property, identifying the potential for
heritage significance and the need to undertake a more detailed assessment of
each property.
In November 2020, FORM Architects were engaged by
Council to prepare an Assessment of Heritage Significance for 122 Atkinson
Street, Liverpool. The report noted that the building is historically and
socially significant and therefore meets the threshold for heritage listing in
the LEP.
In March 2021, Edwards Heritage were engaged by
Council to prepare an Assessment of Heritage Significance for 124 Moore Street,
Liverpool. The report noted that despite the locality evolving over time, the
significance of the building as one of the first scout halls in the area and a
purpose-built scout hall has not been undermined. Therefore, the property meets
the threshold for heritage listing in the LEP.
Planning
Proposal
Consistent
with Council’s resolution, a planning proposal has been prepared which
lists the above properties in Schedule 5 of the LEP as well as removing other
items from Schedule 5 which have been
demolished because of previous Part 3A or State Significant Development (SSD)
or State Significant Infrastructure (SSI) applications (Attachment 3).
The
planning proposal seeks to amend Schedule 5 of the LLEP 2008 to:
Add:
122 Atkinson Street, Liverpool (Lot 52 DP
1090837)
124 Moore Street, Liverpool (Lot 1 DP
10447)
Remove:
Item 4 – Badgerys Creek Road,
Bringelly (Lot 1 DP 90328, Lot 1 DP 109666)
Item 5 – 225-245 Badgerys Creek Road,
Bringelly (Lot 1 DP 417901, Lot 1 DP 109666)
Item 59 – 5-35 Yarrunga Road,
Prestons (Lot 34 DP 2359)
Item 27 – Greendale Road, Greendale
(Lot 1 DP 1115589, Lot 2 DP 1115589)
Item 36 – Campbelltown Road,
Ingleburn [Edmondson Park]
(Part Lot 1 DP 831152, Part Lot 2 DP 831152)
Item 57A – Moorebank Avenue (Lot 1 DP
1048263)
Planning
Assessment
The
planning assessment report considered by the Liverpool Local Planning Panel is
provided at Attachment 5. It includes an assessment of the merits of the
proposal against the District and Region Plans, the Liverpool Local Strategic
Planning Statement (LSPS) and the Department of Planning “Guide to
preparing planning proposals”. The report concluded that the planning
proposal has site-specific and strategic merit and will result in the conservation of the sites
identified as being historically significant while also removing sites that are
no longer required to be listed.
Advice of the Liverpool Local Planning Panel
The planning proposal was considered by the Liverpool
Local Planning Panel (LPP) on 25 October 2021 for advice. The LPP supported the
planning proposal proceeding to DPE for a Gateway determination.
A summary of the LPP advice and Council’s
responses are provided in Table 1.
Table 1 – LPP Advice and Council Staff Response
|
LPP Advice
|
Council Staff Response
|
|
The Panel advises
Council that it sees merit in the Planning Proposal proceeding, noting that
the site owners must be engaged during the statutory process and the
community be given the opportunity to comment, and also that descriptors in
the documentation need to be checked for accuracy and amended where
necessary.
|
This report includes a recommendation to notify
owners of the outcome of Council’s decision and to advise of the next
steps in the plan making process. Owners will be engaged regularly throughout
the next phases of the planning process.
|
Conclusion
It is recommended that Council endorse the
planning proposal and that it be forwarded to DPE for a Gateway determination.
This is supported by the advice of the LPP, and Council’s assessment that
the proposal has both strategic and site-specific merit.
Upon receipt of a Gateway determination,
public exhibition and community consultation will be undertaken. Council will
then receive a post-exhibition report for a final decision on the proposal
including any possible amendments resulting from the consultation process.
|
Economic
|
There are no economic and financial
considerations.
|
|
Environment
|
There are no environmental and
sustainability considerations.
|
Social
|
Preserve and maintain heritage, both landscape and cultural
as urban development takes place.
|
Civic
Leadership
|
There are no civic leadership and
governance considerations.
|
|
Legislative
|
Environmental Planning and Assessment Act
1979.
|
|
Risk
|
The risk is deemed to be Low.
The risk is considered to be within
Council’s risk appetite.
|
1. Council
Resolution - 28 April 2021 - CONF 04 - Update on Interim Heritage Orders (Under separate cover)
2. Council
Resolution - 30 June 2021 - CONF 06 - Interim Heritage Order - 124 Moore
Street, Liverpool (Under separate cover)
3. Planning
Proposal (Under separate cover)
4. Local
Planning Panel Advice (Under separate cover)
5. Planning
Assessment Report to Local Planning Panel (Under
separate cover)
6. 122
Atkinson Street, Liverpool - Assessment of Heritage Significance - FORM
Architects (Under separate cover)
7. 124
Moore Street, Liverpool - Assessment of Significance - Edwards Heritage (Under separate cover)
8. Draft
LEP Amendment Map 1 (Under separate cover)
9. Draft
LEP Amendment Map 2 (Under separate cover)
10. Draft
LEP Amendment Map 3
(Under separate cover)
Ordinary Meeting
23 February 2022
Planning & Compliance Report
|
PLAN 05
|
Endorsement of submission on the
Discussion Paper: A New Approach to Rezonings
|
|
Strategic
Direction
|
Strengthening
and Protecting our Environment
Exercise
planning controls to create high-quality, inclusive urban environments
|
|
File Ref
|
022421.2022
|
|
Report By
|
Brianna Van
Zyl - Strategic Planner
|
|
Approved
By
|
David Smith
- Director Planning & Compliance
|
On 15 December 2021, the Department of Planning and
Environment (DPE) announced two initiatives as part of the Planning Reform
Action Plan. These two initiatives include:
· A new Local Environmental Plan (LEP)
Making Guideline (the Guideline), which seeks to better explain the process
to rezone land and will implement new improvements to the process; and
· Discussion Paper: A New Approach to
Rezonings.
The
new Guideline (Attachment 1) was published and came into effect on 15
December 2021. The Guideline goes into greater detail to explain the planning
proposal process to proponents and Councils. Whilst the Guideline delivers some
immediate amendments, the changes are relatively minor in comparison to the
longer-term reforms outlined in the Discussion Paper (Attachment 2).
The
Discussion Paper is on exhibition until 28 February 2022, and DPE is seeking
feedback on these reforms. The Discussion Paper suggests substantial changes
including new roles, the removal of the Gateway process, mandatory timeframes,
mandatory fee structures and new appeal pathways. The Discussion Paper also
asks for responses to specific questions to guide the consultation process on
these reforms.
A
draft submission has been prepared (Attachment 3) that provides detailed
comments and concerns as well as specific answers to the questions asked by
DPE. In summary, the draft submission states that Council supports more
efficient assessment of planning proposals; however, Council
does not support some of the proposed changes and requests that further
consideration takes place in relation to those. Several considerations have
been overlooked and the implication of diminishing Councillor involvement in
planning decisions is of concern.
It is recommended that the draft submission is
endorsed by Council and submitted to DPE by 28 February 2022.
That Council:
1. Endorses the submission on the Department
of Planning and Environment’s discussion paper: A New Approach to
Rezonings; and
2. Submits the endorsed submission to the
Department of Planning and Environment by 28 February 2022.
Background
In August 2020, the Department of Planning and
Environment (DPE) announced the Planning Reform Action Plan in response to the
Covid-19 pandemic. The action plan consisted of a series of initiatives to
streamline and improve the NSW Planning System. On 15 December 2021, as part of
the Planning Reforms, DPE announced two new initiatives. The first being the
new LEP Making Guideline (the Guideline) (Attachment 1) which was
published and came into effect on the 15 December 2021 and replaces the
previous guidelines:
· Local Environmental Plans: A guide to
preparing local environmental plans (2018)
· Planning Proposals: A guide to preparing
planning proposals (2018).
Secondly, a Discussion Paper A new approach to
rezoning was placed on public exhibition. The Discussion Paper suggests
considerable changes to the planning proposal process. These changes if adopted in their current form will
have an impact on Council’s strategic planning functions, the role of
Councillors in the planning proposal process, and potentially impact on
development outcomes.
Local Environmental Plan (LEP) Making Guideline
The Guideline does not significantly alter Councils
current procedures; however, several immediate changes will need to be considered
when assessing and preparing a planning proposal, as outlined below:
· Scoping / Pre-lodgment – Scoping is the first stage in the
planning proposal process. In the new Guideline scoping is not required, but
strongly recommended, and will become mandatory for some planning proposal
under the rezoning reforms. Council already encourages pre-lodgment meetings,
and this initiative will continue under the new Guideline.
· Categories of planning proposals – Planning proposals will now be
classified into four different categories. Each category has a number of tests
and is based on the strategic consistency and complexity of the proposal. Each
category has associated timeframes; however a proposal’s specified
category can be changed throughout the process. The categories are defined
below:
Table 1 - Proposed Categories of
Planning Proposals
|
Category
|
Description
|
|
Category
1 (Basic)
|
Administrative,
housekeeping, and minor local matters such as:
· listing a local heritage item, supported by a study endorsed by the
department’s Environment, Energy and Science group;
· reclassifying land where the Governor of NSW’s approval is not
required;
· attaining consistency with an endorsed local strategy; and
· fast-tracked changes of environmental planning instruments under
section 3.22 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.
|
|
Category
2 (Standard)
|
Site-specific rezoning
applications seeking a change in planning controls consistent with strategic
planning, such as:
· changing the land-use zone if a proposal is consistent with the
objectives identified in the LEP for that proposed zone;
· altering the principal development standards of the LEP;
· adding a permissible land use or uses and/or any conditional
arrangements under Schedule 1 Additional Permitted Uses of the LEP;
· ensuring consistency with an endorsed strategic planning or local
strategic planning statement; and
· classifying or reclassifying public land through the LEP.
|
|
Category
3 (Complex)
|
Applications that may
be not consistent with strategic planning, including any LEP amendment not
captured under category 1 or 2. Examples include:
· changing the land use zone and/or the principal development standards
of the LEP, which would increase demand for infrastructure and require an
amendment to, or preparation of, a development contributions plan;
· responding to a change in circumstances, such as the investment in new
infrastructure or changing demographic trends;
· requiring a significant amendment to, or preparation of, a development
contributions plan or a related infrastructure strategy; and
· making amendments that aren’t captured as principal LEP, standard
or basic planning proposal categories.
|
|
Category
4 (Principal LEP)
|
A
comprehensive or housekeeping rezoning application led by Council, proposing
broadscale policy change to the LEP for the whole LGA.
|
· Benchmark timeframes - Planning proposals will now be subject
to benchmark timeframes. The timeframes specify the maximum length of time for
each stage in a planning proposal. It should be noted that the current
benchmark timeframes do not account for the role of the Local Planning Panel
(LPP) in the existing process. The impacts of not meeting the benchmark
timeframes are not clear in the new Guideline. Although, it does state that the
Minister may alter a Gateway Determination to not proceed where there have been
significance delays in the progressing.
Figure 1 - Planning Proposal
Benchmark Timeframes (Source: DPE)
Discussion Paper
– A New Approach to Rezoning
The
Discussion Paper outlines a possible new approach to rezoning and seeks
feedback by asking several specific questions. The new approach, in comparison
to the existing, is illustrated in Figure 2.
Figure 2 - Comparing the
current and proposed rezoning frameworks (Source: DPE)
A
summary of the major changes proposed within the Discussion Paper are:
· New Categories and Timeframes – The Discussion Paper lists four new
categories for rezoning applications, with corresponding timeframes as
reflected in Figure 3. The categories are the same as those introduced by the
new Guideline as discussed above, however the timeframes are significantly
shorter to reflect the perceived efficiencies gained by the new rezoning
process.
Figure 3 - Proposed
categories and benchmark timeframes (Source: DPE)
· Scoping
– The scoping (pre-lodgement) process will become mandatory for planning
proposals. The scoping process will involve extensive consultation between
Council, DPE and state agencies, and will require the proponent to prepare a
high-level scoping report and attend a meeting to discuss the report and
provide preliminary feedback.
· New Roles
– The Discussion Paper suggests various changes to the roles of DPE,
Councillors, the LPP, and proponents in the planning proposal process:
o DPE – A reduced role unless Council is the
proponent or the proposal is for state significant development;
o Councillors – Councillors will only see a
planning proposal at the very end of the process, with the opportunity to
provide in-principle support earlier removed as part of the proposed framework;
o LPP – The role of the LPP is currently unclear,
and clarification is required if referrals for planning proposals is still
mandatory for Council;
o Proponents – The proponent would be more greatly
recognised in the planning proposal process, and would be responsible for
driving more steps, which are currently the responsibility of Council. For
example, the proponent would be responsible for the public exhibition and
response to submissions phase.
· Planning Agreements, Contributions Plan and DCP
Amendments – There is minimal
mention of Planning Agreements and Contributions Plan amendments throughout the
Discussion Paper. It is currently unclear if the processes involving these
additional supporting elements will change. This omission is a key concern
given that these elements are typically the primary source of delays for
planning proposals.
· New Fee Structure – The Discussion Paper seeks to implement a standardised fee
structure for planning proposals. This is based on the premise that a Council
should be able to levy a fee to cover the cost of staffing to assess such
proposals. The Discussion Paper presents three options for a potential new fee
structure as outlined in Table 2.
Table 2 - Proposed Fee Structure
Options
|
Option
|
Explanation
|
|
Option 1:
Fixed Assessment Fees
|
· Assessment fees are fixed by the rezoning authority,
based on the category of rezoning application, and divided into
sub-categories based on the complexity of the rezoning application.
· Sub-categories are based on the extent of change to
zoning and/or development standards by location and site area, along with
other matters that complicate the assessment process (such as whether a
proposal includes a VPA).
· No fees would be charged for any other associated
costs such as consultant fees for peer reviews.
· If a rezoning application is withdrawn after
lodgement, the proponent could be entitled to a set percentage refund of
fees, depending on the stage the rezoning application reaches.
· This option provides certainty for proponents and
lessens the administrative burden for rezoning authorities. However, it may
not always result in actual costs being recovered.
|
|
Option 2:
Variable Assessment fees
|
· Assessment fees are based on the estimated costs a
rezoning authority would incur on a case-by-case basis, depending on the
category of rezoning application, staff time in scoping meetings and a
forward estimate of staff hours required to assess the rezoning application.
· Associated costs would be charged to the proponent
based on actual costs incurred.
· If a rezoning application is withdrawn
post-lodgement, the proponent could be entitled to a refund of fees not yet
expended by the rezoning authority.
· This option will achieve actual cost recovery but
will be time-consuming to administer and uncertain for proponents.
|
|
Option 3:
Fixed and Variable Assessment fees
|
· Assessment fees have a fixed and variable component.
The fixed fee would be charged upfront, based on the category of rezoning
application (similar to option 1). In addition, a variable fee is charged
once the rezoning application is finalised, based on actual staff hours that
exceed the costs covered by the fixed fee.
· To reduce the risk of non-payment of the variable
fee component, proponents of complex rezoning applications could be required
to provide a bank guarantee at lodgement.
· Associated costs will be charged to the proponent
based on the actual costs incurred.
· This option will achieve actual cost recovery and be
less time-consuming to administer and more certain for proponents than option
2 (although less so than option 1).
|
· Planning Guarantee – The Discussion Paper looks to
implement a planning guarantee which requires Councils to refund a proportion
of lodgement fees if mandated timeframes are not met.
· Appeal Pathways – There are currently two ways that a decision can be reviewed: A
rezoning review, and a Gateway review, both are only available close to the
beginning of the current process. The Discussion Paper seeks to include a
review opportunity for private proponents at the end of the process, if
progress has been delayed or if the proponent is dissatisfied with the final
decision. The Discussion Paper explores a merit appeal right to the Land and
Environment Court, as well as an alternate option to appeal to the Independent
Planning Commission.
Draft Council Submission
A
draft submission has been prepared (Attachment 3) that provides detailed
comments and concerns as well as specific answers to the questions asked. The
draft submission states these changes are likely to have a significant impact
on Council’s strategic planning process, the role of Councillors in the
planning proposal process, and will potentially impact negatively on
development outcomes if adopted in their current form.
Whilst
aspects of the Discussion Paper suggest improvements and streamlines parts of
the assessment process, other amendments require further consideration. The new
process sees a significant reduction in the involvement of DPE including
removal of the Gateway Determination stage. It also diminishes Councillor involvement
in planning decisions which is of concern.
The
draft submission provides detailed comments in response to the Discussion
Paper, clear recommendations in relation to these comments, and answers to the
specific questions asked by DPE.
The
recommendations contained within the draft submission are:
1. Increase the timeframe for ‘adequacy
assessment / permission’ to enable a more thorough assessment.
2. Indicate the instance of re-exhibiting a
proposal within the timeframes.
3. Introduce a stop-the-clock provision.
4. Enable fees to be charged at the scoping
phase to account for the additional level of assessment required prior to
lodgement.
5. Enable information requests to still occur,
with a stop-the-clock provision to apply during this stage.
6. DPE is included in the scoping stage and
provide in-principal support and conditions to inform planning proposals at an
early stage.
7. DPE functions as a central coordination
body to facilitate state agency consultation
8. Additional Councillor involvement is
included earlier in the process, prior to exhibition to enable an indication of
in-principal support at a political level.
9. The requirement for Council to seek advice
from the LPP is retained, and this element is accounted for in the proposed
timeframes.
10. Indication of support from relevant state agencies is
required on any justified inconsistency with s9.1 Ministerial Directions.
11. The proposed framework
accounts for Planning Agreements and / or Contributions Plan amendments and /
or DCP amendments in parallel with planning proposals including scoping,
reporting to Council for in-principal support, public exhibition, assessment,
reporting to Council for endorsement and, finalisation.
12. Retain the ability for
Council’s to charge fees to assess Planning Agreements and / or
Contributions Plan amendments and / or DCP amendments in parallel with planning
proposals.
13. A fixed and variable fee
structure is established (Option 3) to enable cost recovery in accordance with
the complexity of planning proposals.
14. Refine the planning
guarantee element further to account for external sources of delay and avoid
unnecessary refusals.
15. Incorporate the existing
rezoning review process involving the Regional Planning Panel into the proposed
framework.
Next Steps
The
new approach to rezoning, outlined in the Discussion Paper, is on exhibition
until 28 February 2022. DPE have indicated that the feedback received will
refine the new approach to rezoning with the intent of implementing changes in
late 2022.
Conclusion
The report provides a summary of two recent
initiatives announced by DPE on 15 December 2021.
· A new Local Environmental Plan (LEP)
Making Guideline (the Guideline), which seeks to better explain the process
to rezone land and will implement new improvements to the process; and
· Discussion Paper: A New Approach to
Rezonings.
It
is recommended that Council receive and note the new Guideline.
It
is recommended that the draft submission (Attachment 3) is endorsed by
Council and subsequently submitted to DPE by 28 February 2022.
|
Economic
|
Facilitate economic development.
|
|
Environment
|
Protect, enhance and maintain areas of endangered ecological
communities and high quality bushland as part of an attractive mix of land
uses.
|
Social
|
Preserve and maintain heritage, both landscape and cultural as urban development
takes place.
Regulate for a mix of housing types that responds to different
population groups such as young families and older people.
|
Civic
Leadership
|
Provide information about Council’s services, roles and decision
making processes.
|
|
Legislative
|
Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979
|
|
Risk
|
The risk is deemed to be Medium
The outcomes of the Discussion Paper
could result in significant changes to the planning proposal process if
changes are not made as recommended in Council’s draft submission.
The risk is considered within
Council’s risk appetite.
|
1. Local
Environmental Plan Making Guideline (Under separate
cover)
2. Discussion
Paper - A new approach to rezonings (Under separate
cover)
3. Draft
Submission (Under separate cover)
Ordinary Meeting
23 February 2022
Planning & Compliance Report
|
PLAN 06
|
Endorsement of submission on the NSW
Government's Infrastructure Contributions Reforms
|
|
Strategic
Direction
|
Strengthening
and Protecting our Environment
Exercise
planning controls to create high-quality, inclusive urban environments
|
|
File Ref
|
035742.2022
|
|
Report By
|
Lina Kakish
- Manager City Planning
|
|
Approved
By
|
David Smith
- Director Planning & Compliance
|
In early 2020, the NSW Government requested the
NSW Productivity Commissioner undertake a review of the infrastructure
contributions system in New South Wales and report back with recommendations
for reform.
The
Productivity Commission undertook this review and released their final report
in December 2020 (Attachment 1), which included 29 recommendations. The NSW
Government accepted all 29 recommendations of the report, which set the
following priority reforms:
· amending the local government rate peg to
reflect population growth
· cost reflective section 7.11 contributions
based on efficient costs
· requiring infrastructure contributions
plans to be developed upfront prior to rezoning
· retaining the simplicity of section 7.12
levies but with a higher maximum rate for residential development
· introducing rigor in the application of
section 7.4 planning agreements (State and local)
· broad-based regional contributions of
between $8,000 and $12,000 per dwelling in Greater Sydney, the Central Coast,
Hunter and Illawarra-Shoalhaven, in place of special infrastructure
contributions
· restoring water charges for Sydney Water
and Hunter Water, which are currently set at zero
· simplifying the system with digital tools,
adopting benchmark costs and use of standardised templates.
In direct response to the Productivity
Commissioner’s review of the infrastructure contributions system, the NSW
Government introduced a Bill to the NSW Parliament proposing amendments to
Infrastructure Contributions in the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act
1979 (EP&A Act), as well as the Environmental
Planning and Assessment Regulation, 2000 (Regulation).
Two major changes effected by the Bill
include:
1. The introduction of land value
contributions
This is a charge on land within an identified
“land value contribution area” based on the amount of land required
for public infrastructure, and the amount of developable land in the precinct.
Payment of a land value contribution would need to be satisfied:
· as a condition of development consent (if
land not sold following rezoning), or
· before completion of the sale.
This amendment represents a mechanism for
capturing the value of rezoned land and aims to split contributions (and thus,
the cost of development) more equally across landowners and developers. This
could have a major impact on Council’s contributions system, especially
the collection of funds for the timely acquisition of land.
2. Major changes to Section 7.12
contributions
The amendment includes limits on:
· The maximum levy amount for specific
development types
· The type of development that the levy can
be imposed on
· The local government areas where a local
levy can be imposed
Other effects brought about by the
amendment include:
· The replacement of State Infrastructure
Contributions (SIC) by Regional Infrastructure Contributions (RIC)
· Requirements for Planning Agreements to
undergo public exhibition rather than notification (Note: Council already
undertakes public exhibition for Planning Agreements.)
· The review of Local Strategic Planning
Statements (LSPSs) every 5 years instead of every 7 years
· Provisions for the recovery of charges,
fees, contributions and money by Council
· Expanding the scope for Regulations and
Ministerial Directions in general.
Council lodged a submission to the Upper House Inquiry on the Bill
in July 2021, asking for more information. Council’s submission
recommended that the Bill not progress until the necessary additional
information was made available. This was based on the following issues:
· The amendments to the
Regulations have not been released;
· The relationship with other
scheduled reforms is unclear; and
· Councils are not being given
clear and sufficient timeframes to respond and adapt to the reforms.
Following strong advocacy from LGNSW and councils, the Department
of Planning and Environment (DPE), formerly known as the Department of
Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE), committed to a full exhibition
package and provided assurance to councils that the reforms would not proceed
until councils had the opportunity to comment on the further information
provided. Following this commitment from DPIE, the following key dates are
noted:
· Mayoral roundtable November 2021 (including
Liverpool City Council’s former Mayor)
· 5 November 2021 - local council election
caretaker period commences
· 26 November 2021 - Responses due to IPART
on draft report on essential works list and benchmark costs
· 10 December 2021 - responses due to DPIE on
full DPIE exhibition package
· 31 December 2021 - Independent Pricing and
Regulatory Tribunal (IPART) Final Report on essential works list and benchmark
costs due
· Early 2022 - Newly formed Councils to make
a submission to DPIE on full DPIE exhibition package
· July 2022 - Start of the new contributions
system foreshadowed by the Minister
Council
engaged GLN Planning to work with Council to prepare a submission in response
to DPIEs exhibition package (Attachment 2) and IPARTs report on the essential
works list and benchmark costs (Attachment 3). Both submissions are draft
officer submissions due to the Council caretaker period not allowing for
Council endorsement until now.
While
Council officers are generally supportive of the proposed reforms, there are 21
recommendations raising matters relating to how the reforms may impact
Liverpool City Council. These recommendations are discussed in detail below.
Councils submission to IPART provided a
response to the 18 questions included in IPART’s draft report and notes
included in the full exhibition package. Council’s ongoing concerns
regard the exclusion of community facilities from the essential works list was
noted within this submission.
That Council
endorses the submission on the NSW Government reforms to the Infrastructure
Contributions system.
The NSW Government has introduced a Bill to Parliament
which sets out infrastructure contributions reforms to be progressed in
response to the Productivity Commission’s report released in December
2020, outlining key reforms to be undertaken by the NSW government in relation
to NSW Infrastructure contributions.
The NSW government has advised that these reforms are
anticipated to provide a range of key benefits and outcomes to councils, as
summarised below:
Figure 1: DPEs anticipated key benefits and outcomes
resulting from the reforms
A timeline for key milestones of these reforms is
outlined below:
Figure 2: NSW Government’s timeline in relation
to infrastructure contributions reforms
Based on this timeline, it is now envisaged that DPE
and IPART will consider council submissions in response to the exhibited reform
package and work towards the timeframe of adopting the reforms by July 2022. It
is anticipated that there will be a package of documents (including practice
notes and ministerial directions) which will accompany the Bill once it becomes
legislation.
Liverpool City Council Officer Submission to DPE
Council officers together with GLN have reviewed the
NSW Government’s exhibited infrastructure contributions reforms package,
including twenty-three documents prepared by DPE and the IPART which were
placed on public exhibition until 10 December 2021. Council has identified
twenty-one recommendations for consideration by DPIE in progressing the
reforms. The recommendations are listed below and further context behind each
recommendation is provided within Attachment 2.
Recommendation 1: Council supports the proposed reforms
that encourage councils to forward fund infrastructure delivery by allowing
councils to pool funds between contributions plans and recoup interest costs
associated with borrowing.
Recommendation 2: Allow councils to continue to levy non-residential
development above the maximum rate of 1 per cent where they have previously
obtained approval from the Minister to do so, and where it can be demonstrated
that the new contributions rates proposed under the reforms would not result in
lower net income than under the previously approved plan (as is the case with
the Liverpool City Centre s7.12 Contributions Plan).
Recommendation 3: Include provisions in the Regulation that
enable councils to seek the Minister’s approval to levy above the
proposed s7.12 rates and outline the process for approval and information
required.
Recommendation 4: Amend the draft regulation so that the following s7.12
rates should be able to be levied: • $12,000 per dwelling • $50 per
square metre for retail and commercial floor space.
Recommendation 5: Council supports the proposed amendments concerning
the public exhibition of planning agreements and annual reporting requirements.
Recommendation 6: Council supports the proposed amendments requiring
councils to keep and make public an affordable housing contribution register.
Recommendation 7: Council supports the proposed amendments simplifying
and standardising exemptions, noting that Council can decide to apply its own
additional exemptions if required.
Recommendation 8: The proposed timing for the review of existing
contributions plans and adoption of new contributions plans (1 July 2024)
should be aligned with the proposed essential works list transitional
arrangements (1 July 2025) to allow Council to efficiently review and adopt new
plans and avoid the need to undertake a further review and update of its new
plans shortly after adoption.
Recommendation 9: The Land Value Contribution (LVC) should be based on
the sale price of the land to better reflect the actual cost of acquiring land
identified in a contributions plan.
Recommendation 10: The LVC method should include an allowance for costs
incurred when acquiring land identified in contributions plans under the Just
Terms Compensation Act.
Recommendation 11: The amount of land included in the Land Value
Contribution Area (LVCA) should be uncapped if a planning proposal and
contributions plan demonstrates consistency with the principles of efficient
design and the efficient use of land as outlined in the reforms, to ensure
there is no funding gap.
Recommendation 12: Amend the definition and process for determining a
Land Value Contributions Area (LVCA) to ensure it excludes all land which is
not subject to intensification under a planning proposal.
Recommendation 13: Update the proposed amendment to the Act or Regulation
to allow a LVC obligation to be satisfied by a developer dedicating public
purpose land identified in the contributions plan.
Recommendation 14: Allow councils to develop and utilise their own
customised LVI to index the value of land to be acquired and land contributions
by engaging a certified valuer annually.
Recommendation 15: Amend the EP&A Regulation to allow councils to
immediately adopt contributions plans once amendments required by IPART and the
Minister have been made, without the need to consider further exhibition.
Recommendation 16: The proposed Aerotropolis SIC should be made prior to
July 2022, or alternatively the infrastructure identified in the proposed SIC
should be fast-tracked into the new RIC Growth Infrastructure Needs Long List,
to ensure that the regional infrastructure required to support the Aerotropolis
is included in the relevant infrastructure funding mechanism.
Recommendation 17: The Greater Sydney Region should be divided into
smaller sub regions to ensure that funds collected to deliver infrastructure
required to support development will be spent where growth is occurring.
Recommendation 18: The RIC fund allocation process should include the
publishing of the full list of projects that were considered for funding, the
reasons why projects were successful or unsuccessful, and an independent appeal
and review process where councils and other stakeholders can appeal RIC
investment decisions made by the State government.
Recommendation 19: The entire RIC prioritisation and governance framework
should be linked to growth and population forecasts to ensure that
infrastructure is prioritised for Sydney’s growth areas including the
Aerotropolis and the South-West Growth Area, and the framework should be
subject to a regular and independent review to ensure the guiding principles
and objectives are being met.
Recommendation 20: The timely preparation and approval of contributions
plans alongside planning proposals requires the active involvement of State
government agencies in the efficient design / master planning phase, and
commitments by those agencies to sign off on infrastructure requirements for
planning proposals in a reasonable time. The State government should therefore
develop and require agencies to adhere to protocols for involvement and timely
decision making in the plan making process
Recommendation 21: Extend the timeframe for adoption of a contributions
plan or planning agreement from 6 months to 12 months after the gazettal of a
planning proposal, to minimise the likelihood of Council being unable to levy
contributions on new development where a contributions plan has been delayed.
Council Officer Submission to IPART
In response to the Terms of Reference issued by the
NSW Government, IPART has conducted a review of the local contributions system
with a focus on the essential works list, nexus, efficient design, and
benchmark costs for local infrastructure. From this review IPART have developed
a principles-based approach to contributions plan preparation consistent with
the NSW Productivity Commission’s recommendations.
Council Officers along with GLN, have prepared a
submission (Attachment 2) which responds to the eighteen questions included in
IPART’s draft report and notes Council’s ongoing concerns regard
the exclusion of community facilities from the essential works list.
Key observations
· Through these reforms, the proposed RIC
will replace the SIC, through transitional provisions, so as not to impact areas
such as Liverpool City Council who currently have a SIC applying to some parts
of its LGA. This is the funding mechanism by which the NSW government collects
developer contributions to deliver regional infrastructure.
· The NSW Government will not be taking any
local contributions from councils.
· These reforms do not address the ongoing
concerns raised by many councils (particularly those growth area councils such
as Liverpool, Blacktown, Penrith, Camden), regarding the Essential Works List,
which prevents councils from levying contributions for the purpose of building
and fitting out a community facility. This creates a significant financial
burden on council.
· The Land Value contribution component
requires more detail from the NSW Government to be better understood and is not
compulsory for councils to incorporate this type of levy into their
contributions plans.
Conclusion
It is recommended
that Council endorses the
submission on the NSW Government reforms to the Infrastructure Contributions
system.
|
Economic
|
There are no economic and financial considerations.
|
|
Environment
|
There are no environmental and sustainability
considerations.
|
Social
|
There are no social and cultural considerations.
|
Civic
Leadership
|
Actively advocate for federal and state government support, funding and
services.
|
|
Legislative
|
Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979
Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000
Environmental Planning and
Assessment Amendment (Infrastructure Contributions) Bill 2021
|
|
Risk
|
There is no risk associated with this
report.
|
1. Final
Report - Review of Infrastructure Contributions in NSW by the Productivity Commission (Under separate cover)
2. Liverpool
City Council Contributions Reforms Submission to DPE
(Under separate cover)
3. Liverpool
City Council submission to IPART (Under separate cover)
Ordinary Meeting
23 February 2022
Community & Culture Report
|
COM 01
|
Liverpool District Forums - Evaluation
Report
|
|
Strategic
Direction
|
Creating
Connection
Implement
access and equity for all members of the community
|
|
File Ref
|
032565.2022
|
|
Report By
|
Galavizh
Ahmadi Nia - Manager Community Development and Planning
|
|
Approved
By
|
Tina Bono -
Director Community & Culture
|
The Liverpool District
Forums (the Forums) were established in 2017 as a formal
community engagement mechanism. The Forums provide a platform for ongoing
dialogue between Council and the community about important matters affecting
local communities, including matters that affect the broader Liverpool LGA. The core
functions of the Forums include:
· Convey information about Council
services and operations;
· Encourage active and meaningful
community participation in Council matters;
· Provide the community with the means
to identify and help solve local issues and take appropriate action where
possible; and
· Respond appropriately to the
community on matters raised.
The delivery and operation of the Forums
are guided by the Terms of Reference, which is reviewed bi-annually.
An operational evaluation of the Forums was undertaken
in mid-2021 to better understand their effectiveness, the challenges and value
for money of the past four years. This evaluation included consultation with Council departments, particularly those who are closely engaged with the Forums,
the Executive Management Team and chairing Councillors. The evaluation took
into consideration the COVID-19 impact on engagement and expertise acquired on
alternatives models of engagement, such as tapping into online platforms.
Overall, the evaluation identified that the Forums do
present a significant opportunity for Council to engage with community members
on matters of importance through a structured mechanism. The Forums are, to
some extent, continuing to deliver on their core functions, predominantly
facilitating a process for information sharing and providing responses to
issues raised by residents. The evaluation found that the Forums’ agendas
tend to include a high percentage of customer service-related matters.
Furthermore, in contrast to Forums with localised agenda items, the Forums that
featured on targeted, topical or district level matters as part of the agenda
were attended by a more diverse and larger number of residents and were found
to be highly effective. A cost analysis, including the cost of Council staff
time and resources allocated and the number of residents attending and
benefitting was found to be significantly high.
In order to improve the effectiveness of the Forums
and to address the challenges identified, this report recommends a redesign of
the Forums structure, frequency and delivery model as follows:
· Themed/ topical issues forum – host one forum
per district annually on themed or topical issues relevant to the district.
This forum will have high level resource and preparation for high level
attendance, will engage other government agencies and will be responding to
critical and district level issues concerning communities. Examples of such
forums in the past include Aerotropolis Planning in 2019, Middletown Grange
Town Centre Planning Proposal in 2019, Edmondson Park Information Session in
2018 and Moorebank Planning in 2020. Agenda for these forums are driven by the
Executive Management Team in consultation with Councillors.
· General forums – host two-three forums each
district per annum. These forums will require lower-level preparation and
resources, potentially have lower attendance, and serves as a continuous
platform for residents to discuss local issues and for Council to share
information and consult. Agendas
for these forums are driven jointly by Council departments, Councillors and
residents.
· Hybrid delivery model – a combination of online
and face-to-face delivery model for convenient and long-term cost-effective outcomes,
providing flexibility, accessibility and greater participation and engagement
from residents, Council staff and Councillors.
That Council:
1. Receives and notes this report;
2. Endorse to deliver up to four
forums per district, one being a themed/ topical issue forum relevant to each
district;
3. Endorse a hybrid delivery model, effective from
2022.
BACKGROUND
The Liverpool District Forums (the Forums) were
established in 2017 as a formal community engagement mechanism to
develop and strengthen community bonds and engagement with Council. The Forums
provide a platform for ongoing dialogue between Council and the community about
important matters affecting local communities, including those matters that
affect the broader Liverpool LGA. The core functions of the Forums
include:
· Convey information about Council
services and operations;
· Encourage active and meaningful
community participation in Council matters;
· Provide the community with the means
to identify and help solve local issues and take appropriate action where
possible; and
· Respond appropriately to the
community on matters raised.
District Forum Map
DATA COMPARISON OF FORUMS DURING 2019 – 2020
COVID-19 has had complicated impacts on
Council’s community engagement platforms, including the Forums. In April 2020, Council moved to deliver the Forums in
an online format. The following tables outline statistical data on the number of Forums held in the
years 2019/2020, attendance numbers, key matters discussed and operational
cost. They include Councillor, resident
and staff engagement with the Forums in 2019, when forums were delivered
exclusively face-to-face; and in 2020, when forums were delivered exclusively
online. The Forums have continued to be held in the online format while COVID
restrictions have been in place, up to February 2022.
|
Number of forums held
|
2019
|
2020
|
|
Online Forum
|
0
|
16
|
|
Face-to-Face Forum
|
25
|
2
|
|
Extra-Ordinary
Forum
|
4
|
0
|
|
Cancelled Forums
(Covid-19)
|
0
|
2
|
|
Total Forums
|
25
|
18*
|
Û in 2020, 6 Rural Community Reference Group meetings which were
being convened by Council ceased operation, replaced by the Planning
Partnership’s Aerotropolis Community Group which is convened by the
Western Sydney Planning Partnership.
The following tables outline the average number of
residents, staff and Councillors attending the Forums for the same period (2019
- 2022).
Since
moving the Forums online, there has been a significant increase in Council
staff and Councillors’ participation. Residents’ participation in
online Forums in 2020 was low compared to 2019 where the forums were delivered
face-to-face. Attendance in 2168 and New Release districts significantly
decreased during 2020. While the attendance numbers in the online delivery
method have been low, there has been a trend of regular community
representation, suggesting the ongoing need for Forums as a platform to engage
with the community.
Another
set of data reviewed in this period was the common issues and agenda items
across all districts. The following matters, mostly customer service related,
were found to be generally common topics of discussion at all Forums:
· Road repairs, traffic, road safety and
general parking;
· Parks management and maintenance;
· Illegal dumping and waste management;
· Environmental management including
vegetation/floodplain concerns;
· Crime and safety concerns;
· Planning proposals and Development
Applications; and
· Access to timely, adequate and
well-maintained infrastructure.
The
evaluation identified that of the issues raised, while some were
Council-related, others were within jurisdiction of State or Federal government,
requiring Council advocacy. Approximately thirty-five Council and external
guest speakers attended the forums in 2020.
The
following table outlines the district specific matters of concern that were
placed on agendas:
|
Forum
|
Key
Issues Raised
|
|
2168
District Forum
|
· Access to facilities in particular for young
people
· Engagement with highly disadvantaged
populations and a lack of community advocacy
· Employment and jobs locally
· Miller Social Infrastructure Masterplan
|
|
Eastern District Forum
|
· Redevelopment plans and density increases
· Development Applications – particularly related to apartment
complexes
· Moorebank Intermodal
· Ageing community facilities
|
|
New
Release/Established District Forum
|
· Rapid growth and lack of social infrastructure
(parks and open space, facilities)
· Middleton Grange – town centre
· Edmondson Park – town centre
· Traffic and road safety
|
|
Rural District Forum
|
· Uncertainty around the impact of Western Sydney Airport
development and community anxiety
· Illegal car wrecking and waste dumping
· Issues around mixed-use zoning
· The changing of rural landscape
|
The
overall findings of the evaluation relating to attendance can be summarised as
follow:
· Councillor and Staff participation/attendance was
higher at the online Forums held in 2020;
· Resident participation was higher for the face-to-face
Forums held in 2019, compared to online forums in 2020;
· Resident participation and engagement with topics
presented in themed/topical Forums such as the Aerotropolis, Edmondson Park and
Middleton Grange suburb meetings were higher. A total of 1,300 residents
attended these targeted forums in 2019;
· Greater staff attendance across Council departments
has led to provision of more timely and efficient responses to residents’
queries – many that would previously have been taken on notice were
addressed at the Forums; and
· The operational cost of the online delivery format has
been significantly lower.
THE EVALUATION OVERVIEW
Over four years on from the establishment of the
Liverpool District Forums, this operational evaluation of the Forums was
conducted to better understand their effectiveness, the challenges,
opportunities for improvement and value for money. This process consulted
with relevant Council departments, particularly those who have had regular
engagement with the Forums, the Executive Management Team and chairing
Councillors. The consultation sought responses to the following survey
questions:
· Are the Forums an effective tool to inform
and consult residents? How are the Forums working for you
(staff/chairpersons)?;
· What do you consider to be the key
challenges and pain points?;
· How could you/your departments be more
engaged in the delivery of the Forums?; and
· How could the Forums be improved to better
meet Council’s community engagement needs?
Key Findings
The evaluation identified a number of challenges and
opportunities for improvement.
Challenges
· The Forums are resource intensive –
The convening of the Forums across all districts require the same level of
resources and preparation time, regardless of the number of attendees. This at
times results in an excessive investment of Council staff time and resources
where the Forums do not reach the minimum quorum;
· Dealing with non-Council related issues -
The Forums are an open avenue for residents to discuss matters of importance to
them. For this, the non-Council related matters raised at the Forum remain
unresolved or experience a lengthy time to achieve an outcome;
· Customer service topics – The Forums
are not intended to manage everyday customer service matters (i.e, maintenance
and illegal dumping), which can be resolved by contacting Council’s
Customer Service as the matter arises. However, they continue to be dominant at
most Forums, and at times repetitive in nature;
· Responding to issues – matters for
discussion are submitted late and may lack adequate background information. At
times, this can be challenging for staff to anticipate the context and respond
to resident queries during the forum, resulting in community dissatisfaction
with Council responses;
· Localised and household matters –
Localised and household matters continue to be raised at meetings. Such matters
are more appropriate to be discussed separately with the resident or the
households impacted; and
· The attendance diversity and numbers
– The attendance diversity and numbers at the Forums are mostly
unchanged. This is not fully representative of issues and broader interest
groups in the community.
Opportunities
· Flexibility of the forums – The
forums require a flexible approach in the structure of both face-to-face and
online sessions. The community, Councillors and staff participation before and
during COVID-19 has changed. A hybrid model should be considered to maximise
participation and provide convenient and accessible options for all;
· General Business/ Q&A session –
Provide a cut off period for submission of agenda items, being two weeks prior
to the Forums. This will allow staff to prepare adequate responses in time for
compiling of paperwork or to investigate unclear queries;
· Utilise the Forums as a platform to engage
for meaningful information and consultation and increase of Council departmental
representation at Forums for direct engagement. Council’s Executive
Management Team (EMT) and Managers to proactively utilise the Forums to inform,
consult and advise community on strategic plans, operational services and
community consultation activities;
· Hold dedicated forums on district level
issues – Dedicate at least one Forum per district annually to address and
respond to district level issues, to encourage open communication between
Council, other government agencies and residents, rather than town-hall style
meetings;
· Improved promotion of the Forums to
increase diversity and number of attendees that are representative of broad
range of issues in the community and to achieve effective engagement and
diversity at Forums. A suggested method included an automated link being
distributed to residents for online attendance; and
· Adjust the frequency and structure of the
forums to better suit significant priority projects and initiatives.
BUDGET
The operational cost of the Forums at their
face-to-face format are approximately $10,000. This budget is allocated to
cover the cost of catering, security, first aid and equipment hire expenditures
(for major forums). The operational expenditure of the Forums in 2020 was $740
as they were delivered online, except for two sessions. This amount does not
include staffing resources.
As the Forums are held outside Council’s
operational hours (after hours), the major operational cost is overtime cost
for convening staff and Time-in-Lieu (TIL) for attending staff. In 2019, the
TIL accrued by staff attending meetings was estimated to be 5776 hours, and
7980 hours in 2020. A high-level costing estimate for an average Forum attended
by 15-20 residents is approximately $1,500-$2,000.
RECOMMENDED CHANGES
In order to improve the effectiveness of the Forums
and to address the challenges identified, this report recommends a redesign of
the Forums structure, frequency and delivery model as follows:
· Themed/topical issues forum – host one forum per
district annually on themed or topical issues relevant to the district. This
forum will have high level resource and preparation for high level attendance,
will engage other government agencies and will be responding to critical and
district level issues concerning communities. Examples of such forums in the
past include Aerotropolis Planning in 2019, Middletown Grange Town Centre
Planning Proposal in 2019, Edmondson Park Information Session in 2018 and
Moorebank Planning in 2020. Agenda for these forums are driven by Executive
Management Team in consultation with Councillors.
· General forums – host two-three forums each
district per annum. These forums will require lower level preparation and
resources, potentially have lower attendance, and serves as a continuous
platform for residents to discuss local issues and for Council to share
information and to consult. Agendas
for these forums are driven jointly by departments, Councillors and residents.
· Hybrid delivery model – a combination of an
online and face-to-face delivery model for convenient and long-term
cost-effective outcomes, providing flexibility, accessibility and greater
participation and engagement from residents, Council staff and Councillors.
Council’s Information Technology team has
investigated appropriate technological resources to ensure seamless and
efficient delivery of the District Forums in a hybrid model. A one-off cost of
purchasing the required technology is estimated to be $13,860 (incl. GST). This
cost includes the purchase and maintenance of equipment, as well as training of
relevant staff in its use.
CONCLUSION
Overall, this evaluation identified that the Forums
continue to provide an important avenue for community to engage with Council.
This report provides statistical data on the operation of the Forums; and in
consultation with various Council departments, EMT and chairing Councillors
highlights current challenges and discusses opportunities for improvement to
maximise effectiveness, efficiency and outcomes for community and Council. The
report presents a number of changes to the current structure, frequency and
delivery method of the Forums for Council’s consideration.
|
Economic
|
The cost of the required technology to
effectively facilitate District Forums in a hybrid model of delivery is
estimated to be $13,860 (incl. GST).
This cost includes the purchase and maintenance of
equipment, as well as training of relevant staff in its use.
|
|
Environment
|
There are no environmental and sustainability
considerations.
|
Social
|
Raise awareness in the community about the available
services and facilities.
|
Civic
Leadership
|
Undertake communication practices with the community and stakeholders
across a range of media.
Foster neighbourhood pride and a sense of responsibility.
Encourage the community to engage in Council initiatives and actions.
Provide information about Council’s services,
roles and decision- making processes.
|
|
Legislative
|
There are no legislative considerations relating to
this report.
|
|
Risk
|
The risk is considered within the
Council’s risk appetite and is deemed to be low.
|
Nil
Ordinary Meeting
23 February 2022
Corporate Services Report
|
CORP 01
|
Biannual Progress Report - December
2021
|
|
Strategic
Direction
|
Leading
through Collaboration
Strive for
best practice in all Council processes
|
|
File Ref
|
022693.2022
|
|
Report By
|
Hiba Soueid
- Manager Corporate Strategy and Performance
|
|
Approved
By
|
Paul Perrett
- Director Corporate Services
|
The
Biannual Progress Report provides an overview of Council’s performance
against the Principal Activities in the Delivery Program and Operational Plan
that were scheduled for the July to December 2021 period.
This is the first progress
report for 2021-2022 and has been prepared in accordance with the Office of
Local Government Integrated Planning and Reporting Guidelines and Section 404 (5) of
the Local Government Act (1993).
By
the end of December 2021, 76 of the 93 Principal Activities in the Delivery
Program were reported as on track, fifteen were affected by Covid-19 and two
needed attention. An overview of all Principal Activities in the Delivery
Program and Operational Plan have been included in the attached report.
That Council notes and receives the Biannual Progress Report which
outlines the progress of Principal Activities detailed in the Delivery Program
2017-2022 and Operational Plan 2021-2022.
On 26 April 2017, Council adopted the Community
Strategic Plan, Our Home, Liverpool 2027. Our Home, Liverpool
2027 outlines the community’s vision and priorities for Liverpool.
The Plan was developed after extensive engagement with the community and
contains four directions for the future of Liverpool. These directions are
underpinned by the quadruple bottom line and guide Council’s operations
and service delivery for the next ten years.
Council’s Delivery Program 2017-2022 and
Operational Plan and Budget 2021-2022 outline Council’s commitment to the
community. The combined document details 93 Principal Activities that Council
has committed to delivering.
Section 404 (5) of the Local Government Act (1993)
requires the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to ensure that a progress report is
provided to Council at least every six months. It should include information
and updates on the Principal Activities that have been detailed in the
four-year Delivery Program. This allows Council and the public to monitor
progress.
During this period, Council continued to
support residents and local businesses in the Covid-19 recovery stage. Council
extended the provision of financial assistance to ratepayers and approved 214
applications for Covid-19 rates payment relief. Council also delivered the
Support Local campaign and encouraged the community to visit and support small
businesses.
Council
continued to deliver initiatives to support the economic growth of Liverpool
including the implementation of a two-year CBD Open for Business plan to assist
the city centre in post Covid-19 recovery. Additional initiatives included the
Christmas in the Mall event from December to January which featured a lighting
installation activation and a focus on the evening and night-time economy.
Council delivered major infrastructure works including the $1.6 million
development of Stante Reserve, Middleton Grange which includes a new water play
facility, children’s playground, car park and lighting.
The attached report provides detailed information on
each of the 93 Principal Activities detailed in the Delivery Program 2017-2022.
By
the end of December 2021, 76 of the 93 Principal Activities in the Delivery
Program were reported as on track, fifteen were affected by Covid-19 and two
needed attention.
|
Governance
|
The Delivery
Program and Operational Plan sets the direction for Council’s strategic
agenda, including all economic, environmental, social and civic leadership
requirements.
|
|
Legislation
|
The Delivery
Program and Operational Plan have been developed in line with the Local
Government Act 1993.
In
particular Section 404 (5)
of the Local Government Act states:
“The
general manager must ensure that regular progress reports are provided to the
council reporting as to its progress with respect to the principal activities
detailed in its delivery program. Progress reports must be provided at least
every 6 months.”
|
|
Risk
|
The risk is
deemed to be High. Failure to provide
regular progress reports to the council with respect to the principal
activities detailed in its delivery program at least every 6 months may
result in non-compliance with the above legislation and may result in
enforceable action by the Office of Local Government, Planning Policy.
|
1. Biannual
Progress Report - July to December 2021 (Under separate
cover)
Ordinary Meeting
23 February 2022
Corporate Services Report
|
CORP 02
|
Budget Review - December 2021
|
|
Strategic
Direction
|
Generating
Opportunity
Meet the
challenges of Liverpool’s growing population
|
|
File Ref
|
046437.2022
|
|
Report By
|
Earl
Paradeza - Senior Management Accountant
|
|
Approved
By
|
Vishwa Nadan
- Chief Financial Officer
Paul Perrett
– Director Corporate Services
|
Operating budget
The table below provides a summary of
Council’s original 2021/22 operating budget, the revised operating budget
as at 30 September 2021 (Q1), and the new revised operating budget as at 31
December 2021 (Q2).
|
|
Original budget ($m)
|
Q1 (Sep 21) revised budget ($m)
|
Q2 (Dec 21) revised budget ($m)
|
Q1 – Q2 favourable / (unfavourable)
movement ($m)
|
|
Rates
|
149.4
|
149.5
|
150.5
|
1.0
|
|
Other operating revenue
|
58.6
|
56.9
|
57.3
|
0.4
|
|
Capital grants and
contributions
|
97.6
|
104.7
|
100.9
|
(3.8)
|
|
Expenditure
|
(219.5)
|
(220.9)
|
(221.9)
|
(1.0)
|
|
Net operating result
|
86.1
|
90.2
|
86.8
|
(3.4)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less capital grants and
contributions
|
(97.6)
|
(104.7)
|
(100.9)
|
3.8
|
|
Net result
|
(11.6)
|
(14.5)
|
(14.1)
|
0.4
|
Council resolved to receive a report as
part of the first quarter budget review to identify strategies to reduce the
deficit and bring Council back to a balanced budget. However, the Covid-19
lockdown and restrictions imposed since the beginning of the first quarter were
not anticipated. This has impacted the identification of cost saving strategies
due to Council’s changing priorities and resolutions to support
ratepayers during this time.
The review of Council’s budget as at
31 December 2021 identified further adjustments, and if approved, will result
in a $14.1 million net operating deficit before capital grants and
contributions for 2021/22 (Refer attachments 1 and 2 – Note D). The
slightly improved result is primarily driven by:
· increased revenue from rates ($1.0m)
· increased user charges ($1.6m)
· increased operating grants ($0.4m)
partially offset by:
· reduced income from treasury investments ($1.4m)
· increased costs associated with tipping and waste
($0.7m)
· increased legal costs ($0.4m).
Capital budget
The table below provides a summary of
Council’s original 2021/22 capital budget, the revised capital budget as
at 30 September 2021 (Q1), and the new revised capital budget as at 31 December
2021 (Q2).
|
|
Original budget ($m)
|
Q1 (Sep 21) revised budget ($m)
|
Q2 (Dec 21) revised budget ($m)
|
Q1 – Q2 increase / (decrease) ($m)
|
|
Infrastructure and
environment
|
59.4
|
78.0
|
73.7
|
(4.3)
|
|
Economy and Commercial
Development
|
162.7
|
163.8
|
163.8
|
-
|
|
Other
|
34.0
|
41.3
|
42.2
|
0.9
|
|
Capital expenditure
|
256.1
|
283.1
|
279.7
|
(3.4)
|
The increase in Q1 was primarily due to
revotes. The current Q2 review has resulted in a $3.4 million overall decrease
to $279.7 million (Refer attachment 3 – Note E). The Q2 reduction in
capital expenditure is primarily due to the deferral of $3.0 million on the GMD
and Hume Highway Intersection Upgrade Project resulting from delays in land
acquisition, final design and approvals.
Unrestricted cash
On 1 July 2021, Council had an
unrestricted cash balance of $24.0 million. This is projected to be $28.4
million by 30 June 2022 (Refer attachment 6).
Key financial indicators (refer attachment 7)
The table below provides a summary of
Council’s key financial indicators.
|
KPI
|
Indicator
|
Comment
|
|
Operating performance
ratio
|
|
No material change.
Requires Council to achieve a balanced budget before capital grants and
contributions
|
|
Own source operating
ratio
|
|
Council’s 57.2% is
close to the benchmark of 60%
|
|
Debt service ratio
|
|
|
That Council approves the identified budget variations
in accordance with this 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 2021 (Q2).
Operating budget
For the quarter ending 30 September 2021
(Q1), Council approved adjustments through resolutions and the budget review
process, resulting in a revised revenue target of $311.1 million and
expenditure of $220.9 million. This translated to a revised net operating
deficit before capital grants and contributions of $14.4 million.
A comprehensive budget review conducted
for the quarter ending 31 December 2021 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 2022. 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 a net $2.4
million (Refer attachment 1 – Note A) decrease in total revenue mainly
attributable to the following:
Decreases:
· $3.0 million capital grant for an intersection upgrade
on Governor Macquarie Drive and Hume Highway as it awaits land acquisition,
final design and approvals
· $2.2 million unsuccessful capital grants on various
cycleway projects
· $1.4 million recognition of decrease in market value
of investments
· $0.9 million loss of income due to Covid-19 lockdown
and restrictions
· $0.6 million funding adjustment to reflect Local Roads
and Community Infrastructure (LRCI) phase one grant received from last
financial year
· $0.2 million funding adjustment on the Fifteenth
Avenue Smart Transit (FAST) project taken over by Department of Planning,
Industry and Environment (DPIE)
Increases:
· $2.2 million recognition of prior years’ revenue
based on determination of development applications
· $1.0 million additional rates revenue based on actual
rates levied for the year
· $0.8 new grants received under the LRCI phase three
program
· $0.6 million increased works-in-kind undertaken by the
developer for road works and land under roads
· $0.5 million grant received from DPIE for The Festival
of Place – Open Streets project
· $0.3 million grant received from NSW
Office of Sports towards Bigge Park Tennis Complex Revitalisation project
· $0.3 million grant received under the Coastal and
Estuary Program
· $0.2 million grant funding under the Western Sydney
Infrastructure Plan round four
Total expenditure is projected to increase
by net $1.0m (Refer attachment 1 –
Note B), mainly comprising:
Increases:
· $0.8 million additional tipping fees due to tonnage
increase in household rubbish collection
· $0.8 million additional funds required for pavement
repairs on various roads and emergency road patching works to be carried out
until the end of the financial year
· $0.5 million The Festival of Place – Open
Streets project towards night-time activation and promotional events funded
from grant
· $0.4 million additional legal costs for compliance
matters
· $0.4 million additional funds to continue with
required services to newly added parks and reserves and to maintain utmost
standard
· $0.3 million additional overtime to deliver required
services, undertake after hours work, and attend emergency callout works due to
Covid-19 restrictions
· $0.3 million funds required to reduce backlog of
concrete footpath, kerb and gutter maintenance works due to Covid-19
restrictions
· $0.1 million funding required for new sites added to
regular maintenance of creeks and waterways
· $0.1 million funding for mandatory dam safety review
of seven prescribed dams across the Local Government Area that have reached 15
years of age as per the new regulation of Dam Safety NSW
Decrease:
· $2.5m estimated salary savings based on year-to-date
results
The proposed budget changes
will revise the forecasted operating deficit before capital grants and
contributions to $14.1 million (Refer attachment 1 – Note D).
Capital budget
In June 2021, Council approved its $256.1
million capital works program for 2021/22. Council subsequently approved carry
over of projects valued at $19.1 million that were planned but not completed in
2020/21.
In the Q1 budget review, the capital
expenditure program was increased by a further $7.9 million.
The Q2 budget review has resulted in a $3.5
million decrease to Council’s capital expenditure program (Refer
attachment 1 – Note E). The budget adjustments include the following:
Decreases:
· $3.0 million deferment of intersection upgrade on Governor
Macquarie Drive and Hume Highway as it awaits land acquisition, final design
and authority approvals
· $2.2 million unsuccessful grants on various cycleway
projects
· $0.2 million FAST project taken over by
DPIE
Increases:
· $0.6 million developer’s claim for
works-in-kind submitted earlier than anticipated
· $0.3 million sports and recreation facilities
improvements, including roofing upgrades, accessible toilet and changeroom
refurbishments to Hoxton Park Reserve, Scott Memorial Park and Whitlam Park
· $0.3 million access upgrades in accordance
with the Accessibility Audit Report. Building access improvements for community
centres at Bringelly, Voyager Point, Heckenberg, Frank Oliveri and the
Liverpool Neighbourhood Centre
· $0.3 million construction works for the
Bigge Park Tennis Complex Revitalisation funded from grant
· $0.3 million budget towards erosion
protection works at two stormwater outlets with associated riparian vegetation
treatment
At 31 December 2021, Council has a capital
expenditure program of $279.6 million as detailed in Attachment 3.
The year-to-date capital expenditure to 31
December 2021 was $37.4 million.
The Table below provides a summary of the
budget results:
Details of the proposed budget changes are
provided in the attachments.
Attachment
1 – Summary Financial Results (Consolidated) – Q2 Budget Review
Summary (QBRS): This report presents
a summary of Council's budgeted financial position at end of the quarter.
Attachment
2 – Operating Budget Adjustments: This report provides details of
operating budget adjustments
Attachment
3 – Capital Budget Adjustments: This report provides details of capital
budget adjustments
Attachment
4 & 5 – Grants Status Reports: 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 – Forecast Cash and
Investments: Providing a
reconciliation of restricted and unrestricted funds held as at 31 December
2021.
Attachment 7 – Key Performance
Indicators
Attachment 8 - Consultancy and Legal
Expenses
Attachment 9 – Contracts: Contracts entered into during the quarter
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.
|
Economic
|
The revised budget net operating result before Grants
and Contributions following Quarter 2 Budget Review and Council resolutions
to 31 December 2021 will be a deficit of $14.1 million.
|
|
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.
|
|
Legislative
|
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.
|
|
Risk
|
The risk is deemed to be low.
The risk is considered within
Council’s risk appetite.
|
1. QBRS
- Consolidated Financial Results
2. Operating
Budget Adjustments
3. Capital
Budget Adjustments
4. Grant
Status Reports - 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
|
0
|
|
CORP
02
|
Budget
Review - December 2021
|
|
Attachment
1
|
QBRS
- Consolidated Financial Results
|
|
0
|
|
CORP
02
|
Budget
Review - December 2021
|
|
Attachment
2
|
Operating
Budget Adjustments
|
|
0
|
|
CORP
02
|
Budget
Review - December 2021
|
|
Attachment
3
|
Capital
Budget Adjustments
|
|
0
|
|
CORP
02
|
Budget
Review - December 2021
|
|
Attachment
4
|
Grant
Status Reports - Applications
|
|
0
|
|
CORP
02
|
Budget
Review - December 2021
|
|
Attachment
5
|
Grant
Status Report - Received
|
|
0
|
|
CORP
02
|
Budget
Review - December 2021
|
|
Attachment
6
|
Cash
& Investment Report
|
|
0
|
|
CORP
02
|
Budget
Review - December 2021
|
|
Attachment
7
|
Key
Performance Indicators
|
|
0
|
|
CORP
02
|
Budget
Review - December 2021
|
|
Attachment
8
|
Consultancy
& Legal Expenses Budget Review Statement
|
|
0
|
|
CORP
02
|
Budget
Review - December 2021
|
|
Attachment
9
|
Contracts
& Other Expenses Statements
|
Ordinary Meeting
23 February 2022
Corporate Services Report
|
CORP 03
|
2022 National General Assembly of Local
Government
|
|
Strategic
Direction
|
Generating Opportunity
Meet the
challenges of Liverpool’s growing population
|
|
File Ref
|
032472.2022
|
|
Report By
|
George
Georgakis - Manager Council and Executive Services
|
|
Approved
By
|
Paul Perrett
- Director Corporate Services
|
The
2022 National General Assembly of Local Government (NGA) will be held from
Sunday 19 June to Wednesday 22 June 2022 and will be a hybrid event. The report
seeks a resolution from Council to select the Councillors to attend (either
virtually or in person in Canberra) and for Council to endorse any motions it
may wish to submit.
That:
1. Any Councillor who wishes to attend the
2022 National General Assembly of Local Government (either virtually or in
person) notify the Councillor Support Officer by 2 March 2022; and
2. The Council determines whether to submit
any motions for debate at the National General Assembly.
The National General Assembly of Local
Government (NGA) is a key event on the local government calendar. It is
convened by the Australian Local Government Association (ALGA) for local
Councils across Australia.
The NGA provides a platform for Local Government
to address national issues and advocate to the federal government on critical
issues facing the sector.
As the national voice of local government,
the ALGA advocates on behalf of Australia’s 537 Councils for funding and
policy outcomes that support local governments to deliver better results for
their communities.
The 2022 NGA will be held from Sunday 19
June to Wednesday 22 June and will be a hybrid event. Registrations are now
open for both on-site and virtual attendees. The NGA will be held in Canberra
for those attending in person.
The program is being finalised and will be provided to
Councillors upon receipt.
Council is entitled to one vote at the NGA, but is not
limited to the number of Councillors who can attend. The Mayor is
Council’s voting delegate.
The ALGA is calling for motions for the 2022 NGA under
the theme of “Partners in Progress”, focusing on how
partnerships, particularly between the Australian Federal Government and local
governments, can tackle the immediate challenges facing communities and help
the industry prepare for the future.
The ALGA is calling for motions for the NGA on any
strategic issues of national importance.
The ALGA has prepared the Discussion Paper (attached
to this report) which covers some of the critical national policy areas that
the sector needs to consider now and into the future and will help with the
preparation of any motions.
Motions can address one or more of the issues
identified in the discussion paper.
To be eligible for inclusion in the NGA Business
Papers, and subsequent debate on the floor of the NGA, motions must meet the
following criteria:
1. Be relevant to the work of local government
nationally.
2. Be consistent with the themes of the NGA.
3. Complement or build on the policy
objectives of your state and territory local government association.
4. Be from a Council which is a financial
member of their state or territory local government association.
5. Propose a clear action and outcome.
6. Not be advanced on behalf of external third
parties that may seek to use the NGA to apply pressure to Board members or to
gain national political exposure for positions that are not directly relevant
to the work of, or in the national interests of, local government.
All motions require a clear national
objective, a summary of the key arguments in support of the motion, and
endorsement of council. Motions should be lodged online at alga.asn.au
no later than 11:59pm on Friday 25 March 2022.
Should Council wish to submit any motions,
they would need to be endorsed at the 23 February 2022 Council meeting to meet
the above deadline.
The ALGA’s 2022 Federal Election
Priorities document (referred to in the ALGA correspondence) is also attached
to this report for the information of Councillors.
|
Economic
|
The following costs will be incurred per
delegate:
Registration:
$989 per person (or $689 for virtual delegates).
Accommodation:
Approximately $345 per night (for delegates attending in
person).
Meals:
Total
of $325 for the conference dinners on 20 and 21 June (for delegates attending
in person).
Travel:
Via
Council vehicle (or reimbursed mileage allowance if using private vehicle)
for delegates attending in person.
|
|
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.
|
1. Correspondence
from ALGA
2. Call
for Motions Discussion Paper
3. ALGA's
2022 Federal Election Priorities
|
0
|
|
CORP
03
|
2022
National General Assembly of Local Government
|
|
Attachment
1
|
Correspondence
from ALGA
|
|
0
|
|
CORP
03
|
2022
National General Assembly of Local Government
|
|
Attachment
2
|
Call
for Motions Discussion Paper
|
|
0
|
|
CORP
03
|
2022
National General Assembly of Local Government
|
|
Attachment
3
|
ALGA's
2022 Federal Election Priorities
|
Ordinary Meeting
23 February 2022
Corporate Services Report
|
CORP 04
|
Investment Report January 2022
|
|
Strategic
Direction
|
Leading
through Collaboration
Seek
efficient and innovative methods to manage our resources
|
|
File Ref
|
033701.2022
|
|
Report By
|
Chi Nguyen -
Accountant - Investments & Treasury Management
|
|
Approved
By
|
Vishwa Nadan
- Chief Financial Officer
|
This report details Council’s investment
portfolio and its performance as at 31 January 2022. Key highlights include:
· Council held investments with a market
value of $445 million.
· The Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) has
maintained the official cash rate at 0.10 per cent. Economic forecasts suggest
that the official cash rate may increase to 2.0 per cent by mid-2024[1].
· Continued low rates in the money markets
will depress future earnings for Council. As existing Floating Rate Notes
(FRNs) and Term Deposits (TDs) mature, they will be reinvested at lower
prevailing interest rates.
· The portfolio yield was 95 basis points
above the benchmark (AusBond Bank Bill Index)
|
|
AusBond
Bank Bill Index (ABBI)
|
|
Benchmark
|
0.03%
|
|
Portfolio yield
|
0.98%
|
|
Performance above
benchmark
|
0.95%
|
· Year-to-date, Council’s investment
income was $1.9 million lower than the original budget. This is primarily due
to $1.6 million for unrealised decline in fair value of FRNs due to
unfavourable market movements since July 2021.
· To date, Council’s investment in
mortgage-backed securities (MBSs) are valued at $524 thousand below face value.
Council’s investment advisor (Amicus Advisory) continues to review
Council’s investment in MBSs and recommends Council continue to hold its
investments in the Class A and both Class C securities. There is significant
uncertainty associated with these investments, however presently the investment
advisors believe there is, on balance, more upside opportunity than downside
risk. This is subject to ongoing regular review. MBSs are no longer 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, noting the
exception applicable to MBSs (as investment in them pre-dates the current
Investment Policy).
· Council is committed to NSW TCorp’s
balanced investment framework and held 24.26 per cent of its portfolio in ADIs
rated BBB and below.
That Council
receives and notes this 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
As at 31 January 2022, Council held investments with a
market value of $445 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-22
|
Jun-21
|
|
Senior debts (FRNs ,FRBs and
TCDs)*
|
100.55%
|
101.27%
|
|
MBSs (mortgage-backed
securities)
|
79.31%
|
71.06%
|
|
T-Corp unit trusts
|
103.16%
|
103.17%
|
*Definition of terms
· FRN - Floating Rate Note - returns an
aggregate of a fixed margin and a variable benchmark (usually the Bank Bill
Swap Rate).
· FRB - Fixed Rate Bond – returns a
fixed coupon (interest) rate and is tradeable before maturity.
· TCD - Transferrable Certificate of Deposit
- 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-day Bank Bill Swap Rate).
The economic environment globally, including
Australia, suffered significantly from the start of the Covid-19 pandemic in
March 2020. The market value of Council’s investment in FRNs has since
improved. Council has sufficient funds in its current account and has no plans
at this stage to sell off any of its FRNs to meet its short-term cashflow
requirements.
Council is fully compliant with the requirements of
the Ministerial Investment Order including the grandfathering[2]
provisions. 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 24.26 per cent of its portfolio in ADIs 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 There is significant uncertainty associated with these
investments, however presently the investment advisors believe there is, on
balance, more upside opportunity than downside risk. 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 in the future. 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 as non-rated. To date,
Council’s investment in mortgage-backed securities (MBSs) are valued at
$524 thousand below face value.
Portfolio maturity profile
The table below shows the percentage of funds invested
at different durations to maturity.
Counterparty
policy limit compliance
Credit rating policy limit compliance
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 January 2022 exceeded the AusBond Bank Bill index by 95 basis
points (portfolio yield: 0.98%; ABBI: 0.03%)
Council portfolio continues to perform at above
benchmark rates despite ongoing margin contraction and significantly lower
market yields on term deposits. Comparative yields for the previous months are
charted below:
Performance
of portfolio returns against budget
Year-to-date, Council’s investment income was
$1.9 million lower than the original budget. This is primarily due to $1.6 million for unrealised
decline in fair value of FRNs due to unfavorable market movements since July
2021.
|
|
YTD
Budget
|
YTD
Actuals
|
Budget
Variance
|
|
Interest yield on cash holdings
|
$1.9m
|
$1.6m
|
($0.3m)
|
|
Fair value market movement
|
$0.5m
|
($1.1m)
|
($1.6m)
|
|
Total
|
$2.4m
|
$0.5m
|
($1.9m)
|
Investment
portfolio at a glance
|
Portfolio
Performance
|
![MCWB01114_0000[1]](CO_20220223_AGN_454_AT_files/image085.png)
|
The portfolio
yield to 31 January 2022 exceeded the AusBond Bank Bill index by
95 basis points (portfolio yield: 0.98%; ABBI: 0.03%).
|
|
Annual Income
vs. Budget
|
|
Council’s investment income was $1.9 million
lower than the original budget as at 31 January 2022.
|
Investment
policy compliance
|
Legislative requirements
|
|
Fully compliant, noting exception applicable to grandfathered
mortgaged-backed investments.
|
|
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 of Australia has left the
official cash rate on hold at 0.10 per cent in its meeting on 1 February 2022.
The current 0.10 per cent cash rate is at an historically low level and impacts returns on
investment. Economic forecasts
suggest that the official cash rate may increase to 2.0 per cent by mid-2024[3].
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.
|
Economic
|
Council’s investment income was $1.9 million
lower than the original budget as at 31 January 2022.
|
|
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.
|
1. Investment
Portfolio January 2022
|
0
|
|
CORP
04
|
Investment
Report January 2022
|
|
Attachment
1
|
Investment
Portfolio January 2022
|
Ordinary Meeting
23 February 2022
Infrastructure & Environment Report
|
INF 01
|
Georges River Revitalisation Committee
|
|
Strategic
Direction
|
Strengthening
and Protecting our Environment
Protect and
enhance bushland, rivers and the visual landscape
|
|
File Ref
|
030581.2022
|
|
Report By
|
Raj Autar -
Director Infrastructure & Environment
|
|
Approved
By
|
Raj Autar -
Director Infrastructure & Environment
|
Council, at
its meeting held on 2 February 2022, considered the following Notice of Motion
for the establishment of a Georges River Revitalisation Committee, and
resolved:
That Council:
1. Establish a Georges
River rejuvenation committee, that meets bimonthly and reports to Council.
2. Create a charter based
on similar Council committees with the following points of reference:
a. Maximising access for all residents of and visitors to Liverpool
access to the river for recreation, transport and leisure
b. To investigate and advise the appropriate urban and ecological
regeneration of the river
c. Advise on a holistic, deliverable vision and plan for the river
– for the short, medium and long term
3. Work constructively
with all relevant stakeholders to achieve this vision.
4. Appoint all Councillors
as members of the committee.
5. Charter to be presented
to the Council at the next Council meeting.
6. Call for EOI as soon as
possible after the adoption of the Charter for community members and
stakeholders.
This report presents the draft charter for the new
committee as per the above resolution.
That Council:
1. Determines the composition and numbers of
representatives for other members of the Georges River Revitalisation Committee
including community and industry representatives.
2. Adopts the charter for the establishment of
a Georges River Revitalisation Committee.
Background
The Georges River is one of the major river systems in
the Sydney Basin and is a significant natural asset for the Liverpool
community. The Georges River and associated parklands are key
assets and destinations in Liverpool, which plays a major role in supporting
the urban renewal and revitalisation of the City Centre and adjoining lands.
However,
there is an extensive range of issues that currently affect the management and
utilisation of the river and have hampered the recreational use and enjoyment
of the river and adjoining parklands to its full potential. To address the
identified constraints and transform areas of the Georges River and associated
parklands into vibrant and
active public spaces, Council launched
the River Connections Program. This
flagship Program has involved the
planning and delivering of a package of high value projects along the Georges
River corridor to leverage the available
opportunities to create public spaces of high quality and character along the
river. The identified program of projects under the River Connections banner
aim to:
· improve the connection of the City Centre
to the river;
· improve the presentation and arrival
experience of the City Centre from Newbridge Road; and
· improve the function and aesthetics of the
riverfront parklands, reflecting the values and attributes which make it unique
to and befitting as a major City Centre.
To bring focus to the River Connections program, Council, at its meeting held on 2 February 2022,
resolved to establish a Georges River Revitalisation Committee. It is
considered that this Committee will work collaboratively with relevant
stakeholders to, over time, achieve
Council’s goal of transforming areas of the Georges River and associated
parklands into vibrant and
active public spaces.
Committee Scope
The
Georges River Revitalisation Committee will work collaboratively with relevant
stakeholders to, over time, achieve
Council’s goal of transforming areas of the Georges River and associated
parklands into vibrant and
active public spaces. This is expected to be achieved by:
· formulating and articulating a clear vision
for Georges River and its surrounds; and
· providing input in the development of
programs and projects that balances the development, recreational use and
environmental outcomes of the area surrounding the Georges River.
Membership
It is recommended that the membership of Georges River Revitalisation Committee include
community representatives as well as representatives from relevant industries
such as the Georges River Keeper, Sydney
Water and other relevant state agencies.
Conclusion
The
attached draft Charter for the Committee outlines the purposes, objectives and
functions of the Georges River Revitalisation Committee, and seeks its
endorsement. This report also requests that Council determines the full make-up
of the Committee with regards to community and industry representation.
Industry representation would include persons with professional background in environmental, water or river
management sectors.
|
Economic
|
Deliver and maintain a range of transport related infrastructure such
as footpaths, bus shelters and bikeways.
Facilitate the development of new tourism based on local attractions,
culture and creative industries.
|
|
Environment
|
Manage the environmental health of waterways.
Manage air, water, noise and chemical pollution.
Protect, enhance and maintain areas of endangered ecological
communities and high quality bushland as part of an attractive mix of land
uses.
Raise community awareness and support action in relation to
environmental issues.
|
Social
|
Raise awareness in the community about the available services and
facilities.
Preserve and maintain heritage, both landscape and cultural as urban
development takes place.
Deliver high quality services for children and their families.
|
Civic
Leadership
|
Act as an environmental leader in the community.
Foster neighbourhood pride and a sense of responsibility.
Deliver services that are customer focused.
Actively advocate for federal and state government support, funding and
services.
|
|
Legislative
|
The management of all rivers is governed by various
regulations, which would be important considerations in the planning for the
in-river activation works.
|
|
Risk
|
The purpose of the Georges River Revitalisation Committee includes the identification
and mitigation of risks associated with the management of Georges River and
its associated parklands.
|
1. Draft
Georges River Revitalisation Committee Charter
|
0
|
|
INF
01
|
Georges
River Revitalisation Committee
|
|
Attachment
1
|
Draft
Georges River Revitalisation Committee Charter
|
Ordinary Meeting
23 February 2022
Infrastructure & Environment Report
|
INF 02
|
Local Roads and Community
Infrastructure Program
|
|
Strategic
Direction
|
Leading
through Collaboration
Seek
efficient and innovative methods to manage our resources
|
|
File Ref
|
033781.2022
|
|
Report By
|
Keith Cowley
- Acting Manager Infrastructure Delivery
|
|
Approved
By
|
Raj Autar -
Director Infrastructure & Environment
|
In
2020, the Australian Government provided $1.5 billion towards a new Local
Roads and Community Infrastructure Program (LRCI Program). The LRCI Program
supports local councils to deliver priority local road and community
infrastructure projects across Australia, supporting jobs and the resilience of
local economies to help communities bounce back from the COVID-19 pandemic.
Liverpool
Council has so far received a total of $8.3 million under this Program, which
has been allocated as follows:
1. Phase 1 $1.4M -
Schoeffel Park upgrade works in Horningsea Park. The works include the
provision of playgrounds, gyms, a pump bike track, amenities, associated
parking and landscaping. These works are underway and anticipated to be
completed by April 2022.
2. Phase 2 $6.9M - a total
of 15 infrastructure renewal projects that have been brought forward from
Council’s long term priority program of works. These include a range of
reconstruction and upgrade works to roads and buildings to improve condition
and serviceability. These works are at various stages of the design and
construction processes and are on track for delivery by 30 June 2022, as per
the funding requirements.
In
May 2021, as part of the 2021-22 Budget, the Australian Government announced a
further $1 billion towards Phase 3 of the LRCI Program. Liverpool Council will
receive a total of $2,861,432 to continue delivering these community projects.
Based on the funding guidelines, eligible projects must be undertaken between 1
January 2022 and 30 June 2023.
This
report is accordingly seeking Council approval of the projects nominated for
funding under Phase 3 of the LRCI Program, which will be delivered over the
2021/22 and 2022/23 Program Years. The proposed projects for inclusion in Phase
3 of the LRCI Program are shown in Section 2 of this Report.
That Council approves the projects listed in this
report to be included for funding under the Local Roads and Community
Infrastructure Program, and be included in Council’s 2021/22 and 2022/23
Capital Works Program.
1. LRCI Program
The LRCI Program is part of Government’s
response to the COVID-19 pandemic to assist local governments deliver road and
community infrastructure projects, as well as to create local job opportunities. The objective of the LRCI Program is to stimulate
additional infrastructure construction activity in local communities across
Australia to assist communities to manage the economic impacts of COVID-19.
The intended outcomes of the LRCI Program are to:
· provide stimulus to protect and create
local short-term employment opportunities through funded projects following the
impacts of the COVID-19; and
· deliver benefits to communities, such as
improved road safety, accessibility and visual amenity.
Council has received a total of $8.3 million under this
Program, which has already been allocated to a range of projects across the
LGA. Council will receive a
further $2,861,432 under Phase 3 of the LRCI Program subject to Council
approval of the projects in this report.
2. Program requirements and proposed projects
for LRCI Phase 3
Based on the Guidelines, eligible projects must be in
addition to Council’s existing Capital Works Program and must be
completed by June 2023. In view of the stipulated timeframes for the
expenditure of these grants, it is proposed to bring forward projects from
Council’s existing priority program of works. A list of proposed projects
is shown below. The projects identified for funding are generally renewal type
projects that do not require the more time-consuming front-end project planning
and approval processes. These include:
· Reconstruction and resurfacing of road
pavements;
· Repairs to Council’s community
facilities to ensure ongoing serviceability;
· Provision of key footpath missing links to
improve accessibility and connectivity;
· Provision of additional bus shelters; and
· Access improvements at Council’s
community facilities.
These works will have a measurable impact on improving
the condition of Council’s community infrastructure. With regards to
economic impacts, the NSW
Treasury Employment Calculator indicates that generally between 5 and 10 jobs
are supported for every $1M spent on construction. While at
this stage it is difficult to estimate the number of jobs created or supported
as a result of Liverpool’s allocation of the Program funding, the
relevant jobs related data will be collected during the course of the Program
and reported via quarterly status reports as per the Program Guidelines.
The proposed projects for inclusion in the LRCI Program
are shown in the table below. It is to be noted that to ensure early
commencement of necessary planning activities, Council, as part of the First
Quarter Budget Review, has endorsed the first three projects in the table
below.
|
Project Description
|
2021/22
|
2022/23
|
|
1. Dalmeny Drive (Ash Road to Balgownie
Road), Prestons - road rehabilitation works
|
$500,000
|
|
|
2. Feodore Drive (Tudor Crescent to
Clementina Circuit), Cecil Hills - road rehabilitation works
|
$500,000
|
|
|
3. Paramor Reserve, Green Valley - bicycle
and walking path
|
$120,000
|
|
|
4. Pye Hill Reserve - playground and
landscaping improvements
|
|
$1,100,000
|
|
5. Ash Road Sports Ground - playground
installation
|
$100,000
|
|
|
6. Building Access Improvements - access upgrades
across various sites in accordance with Accessibility Audit Report
|
|
$270,432
|
|
7. Sports & Recreation Facilities
Improvements - roofing upgrades and toilet/changeroom refurbishments at three
sites
|
|
$271,000
|
|
Sub
Totals
|
$1,220,000
|
$1,641,432
|
|
TOTAL $2,861,432
|
3. Proposed delivery strategy
It is proposed to phase the identified projects over
the next 18 months to allow commencement of project planning and procurement in
early 2022 followed by onsite construction activities during the latter part of
the year. Council’s existing panel contracts will be used where possible
and short-term contract labour will be secured for project administration
support. The latter part of the proposed program will be incorporated in the
2022/23 Operational Plan.
4. Impacts on the current capital works
program
The value of Council’s current program of
infrastructure capital works is $77 million. The proposed LRCI Program phasing
and resourcing will allow Council to meet the LRCI Program obligations without
any significant impact on the current program of capital works.
5. Conclusion and recommendation
The LRCI Program offers Council the opportunity to
accelerate various areas of its infrastructure management program to not only
improve the standards of its infrastructure, but also to create and preserve jobs
by driving downstream demand for labour, materials and resources. Council
approval of the proposed list of additional projects will enable timely
planning and procurement activities to be undertaken to ensure completion of
the LRCI Program by June 2023.
|
Economic
|
Deliver and maintain a range of transport related infrastructure
such as footpaths, bus shelters and bikeways.
Deliver a high-quality local road system including provision and
maintenance of infrastructure and management of traffic issues.
Deliver high-quality social infrastructure to meet the needs of
the community.
|
|
Environment
|
Consideration to ensure sustainability in design and
construction of civil and social infrastructure.
Raise community awareness and support action in
relation to environmental concerns.
|
Social
|
Provide suitable infrastructure to meet the communities social and
recreational needs.
|
Civic
Leadership
|
Provide information about Council’s services, roles and
decision-making processes.
Actively advocate for federal and state government support,
funding and services.
|
|
Legislative
|
There are no legislative considerations relating to
this report.
|
|
Risk
|
There is no risk associated with this report.
|
Nil
Ordinary Meeting
23 February 2022
Economy & Commercial Development Report
|
ECD 01
|
Reclassification of Augusta Cullen
Plaza to Community Land
|
|
Strategic
Direction
|
Creating
Connection
Provide community
facilities which are accessible to all
|
|
File Ref
|
353884.2021
|
|
Report By
|
Neeraj Kumar
- Project Manager – Building Construction
|
|
Approved
By
|
John F
Morgan - Director Economy & Commercial Development
|
Augusta
Cullen Plaza is currently classified Operational land. The proposal is to
reclassify Augusta Cullen Plaza as Community land, to ensure the open space
component, which is now an integral part of Liverpool Civic Place, is
maintained.
That Council:
1. Proceed with the reclassification of
Augusta Cullen Plaza, except for the School of Arts building envelope, to
community land; and
2. Authorise the Acting CEO (or delegate) to
execute all necessary documents.
The purpose of this report is to seek Council approval
for the reclassification of Augusta Cullen Plaza, excepting the School of Arts
building envelope, as community land.
Liverpool Civic Place, located at 52 Scott Street,
Liverpool, is a proposed mixed-use development which will incorporate Council
offices, Council chambers, Library, Childcare, hotel, commercial offices and
retail space. Liverpool Civic Place has been identified as a key site,
anchoring, and providing the catalyst for further development at the southern
end of Liverpool CBD.
Liverpool Civic Place will also provide an inviting
civic plaza to hold events and functions or simply a place for members of the
public to meet and interact and establish a destination point within the
Liverpool CBD.
The civic plaza will contain new granite paving,
landscape gardens and native tree species, which will make the civic plaza a
key feature of Liverpool Civic Place.
Adjacent to this civic plaza and library building, is
the existing Augusta Cullen Plaza. The design philosophy for Liverpool Civic
Place, is for Augusta Cullen Plaza to tie into the civic plaza as integral open
space. It is proposed that the Augusta Cullen Plaza will be an open space to
hold events and functions in conjunction with the civic plaza or potentially as
a standalone event space. The new library, at Liverpool Civic Place, will
connect the new civic plaza to the existing Augusta Cullen Plaza with access
across the front and rear of the library building, essentially connecting civic
plaza and Augusta Cullen Plaza as one space.
Augusta Cullen Plaza is an open space with turf and
gardens, with a frontage to Macquarie Street and situated within Augusta Cullen
Plaza is the School of Arts building. The School of Arts building has had
various uses over its lifespan. Recently, most of the uses have been of a
commercial nature, with the current proposal to utilise the building now
potentially for Council activities.
Augusta Cullen Plaza is a stratum lot, PT 201 DP
1224084, and sits over the basement for 300 Macquarie St. and is currently
classified as Operational land. To the rear of Augusta Cullen Plaza is the 300
Macquarie Street building, a private mixed use residential development. 300
Macquarie Street has rights to an air and light easement over Augusta Cullen
Plaza, which extends over the ground plane. Though Augusta Cullen Plaza sits on
Operational land, undertaking any redevelopment or substantial embellishment to
the land will be restricted by the air and light easement and the 300 Macquarie
St. basement.
Hence, the proposal is to reclassify Augusta Cullen
Plaza as community land, except for the envelope encompassing the School of
Arts building. The School of Arts building is a commercial operation for
Liverpool City Council and will and should remain as operational land.
By reclassifying the balance of Augusta Cullen Plaza,
as community land, the community can be assured that open space at Augusta
Cullen Plaza will remain for community use. In addition, should Augusta Cullen
Plaza be used for purposes other than community use, a Council Resolution will
be required.
Therefore, it is recommended that Council proceed with
the reclassification of Augusta Cullen Plaza, excluding the School of Arts
building envelope, from operational to community land.
|
Economic
|
There are no economic and financial considerations.
|
|
Environment
|
There are no environmental and sustainability
considerations.
|
Social
|
Preserve and maintain heritage, both landscape and cultural as urban
development takes place.
|
Civic
Leadership
|
Encourage the community to engage in Council initiatives and actions.
|
|
Legislative
|
There are no legislative considerations relating to
this report.
|
|
Risk
|
There is no risk associated with this
report.
|
Nil
Ordinary Meeting
23 February 2022
Economy & Commercial Development Report
|
ECD 02
|
Liverpool Health and Innovation Trade
Delegation to New Zealand
|
|
Strategic
Direction
|
Generating
Opportunity
Create an
attractive environment for investment
|
|
File Ref
|
025322.2022
|
|
Report By
|
Gary Dawes -
Senior Officer International Engagement
|
|
Approved
By
|
John F
Morgan - Director Economy & Commercial Development
|
At its meeting held 29 May 2019 Council resolved to
adopt the International Trade Engagement Strategy.
The strategy identified New Zealand as the number one
trade destination for ease of doing business and as a primary focus area for
Council to develop activities to accelerate trade success for the local
economy. The strategy recommended targeting the medical and education sectors
and including cross-border collaboration and inviting leading researchers for
exchanges and tours with the Liverpool Innovation Precinct (LIP).
As such, a trade mission to NZ, which included a civic
and business delegation, was completed by Council in January 2020. This
mission was considered a success as several international agreements were
confirmed advancing the collaborative work and co-operation with clinicians,
researchers, and industry within the health sector innovation ecosystems of
Australia and New Zealand. Positive feedback from delegates was received
and there continues to be positive outcomes such as the Trans-Tasman partnership in medical
technology and food innovation
and engagement with LIP members and entities in NZ.
It is proposed to organise a follow up trade mission
to New Zealand
This report recommends a part two
continuation of the original civic and business delegation, which will align
with the Liverpool Innovation Precinct priorities. Council will partner with
the Business Western Sydney and
Austrade Auckland to facilitate arrangements for the
delegation to visit New Zealand in June 2022 with an anticipated budget of a
maximum of $20,000. It should be noted that, with ongoing public health orders in relation to
the current Omicron outbreak, that a watching brief will be maintained in the
lead up to the departure.
A second trip inclusive of Council’s
civic delegation would:
· Mature Council’s
relationship with Auckland Council and Austrade in NZ
· Provide learnings from
Auckland’s urban placemaking and innovation precinct success
· Solidify the recent
Trans-Tasman MoU agreements with face to face meetings
· Provide the opportunity to
officially invite NZ’s senior administrative leaders to tour and view the
Liverpool Innovation (LIP) and Aerotropolis Precinct concepts. This would
assist to build on the Trans-Tasman collaborations developing across health and
medical technology, food innovation, and education sectors
· Business to business (B2B) meetings
arranged for business delegates that have potential to result in export
agreements and export orders
· Conduct the trade mission during Healthtech
Week Auckland to maximise networking and business opportunities.
That Council:
1. Approves the Trade and Civic
delegation to Auckland, New Zealand in June 2022 subject to public health
orders in both countries;
2. Determine which Councillors will
attend as members of the delegation;
3. Endorse expenditure for this
delegation of up to $20,000 from the City Economy budget; and
4. Receive a future report on the outcomes of the visit.
Background
As its meeting held 29 May 2019 Council resolved to
adopt the International Trade Engagement Strategy (the strategy).
The strategy is underpinned by the quadruple bottom
line approach of Liverpool’s Community Strategic Plan particularly
Direction 3: Generating Opportunity. The strategy will assist Council in
meeting its commitment to:
· Attract businesses for economic growth and
employment opportunities
· Create an attractive environment for
investment
· Align with NSW Government’s Trade
Statement to ‘increase exports as a percentage of NSW’s economy to
reach 130 billion by 2024 and increase the number of NSW’s exporting
businesses’.
The strategy identified NZ as the number one trade
destination for ease of doing business and as a primary focus area for Council
to develop activities to accelerate trade success for the business community
and, as such, an initial Trade Mission was organised and completed in January
2020.
The initial Trade Mission to NZ included a civic and
business delegates business program and hosted a number of innovation start-ups
and entrepreneurs.
The strategy recommended several sectors that should
be immediate areas of focus for the local economy including aerospace and
defence, medicine and education. It highlighted the opportunity of “an
open environment of medical innovation across the Tasman”.
The strategy recommended that Council:
· Encourage cross-border collaboration on
data gathering and research into shared problems
· Build relationships/programs with leading
NZ universities in growth fields (i.e. medical, engineering)
· Lobby for increasing mutual recognition of
TAFE NSW qualifications
· Invite senior administrative members of
major NZ cities to tour the Liverpool Innovation Precinct
· Invite leading researchers for exchanges at
Liverpool Hospital and Innovation Precinct and the Ingham Research Institute.
New Zealand Trade Delegation 2022 - this follow up mission is aimed at:
· Maturing the relationships with Austrade,
Auckland Council, and key partners for example:
o Solidify the recent TransTasman Biobridge
agreement including face to face meetings with partners involved - advancing
the existing collaborative work and co-operation with clinicians, researchers,
and industry within the health innovation ecosystems of Australia and New
Zealand
o Progress collaboration on the Food
Innovation New Zealand MOU with LIP
· Provide learnings and experience the
success of Auckland’s exemplary urban placemaking and Innovation Precinct
Program initiatives
· Business to business (B2B) meetings
arranged for business delegates that have potential to result in export
agreements and export orders
Program Overview
A proposed itinerary* would involve:
|
Sat/Sun 25th
/ 26th June 2022
|
The delegation flying from Sydney to Auckland
|
|
Monday 27th
June 2022
|
A civic program with the Mayor and Councillors
having an economic briefing from Austrade NZ, targeted site visits, meetings
and a civic reception to be held with the Mayor of Auckland
|
|
Tuesday 28th
June 2022
|
Attend a half day Program at HealthTech Week
Auckland; Followed by site visit and networking
|
|
Wednesday 29th
June 2022
|
A business matching (B2B) program facilitated by
Austrade Auckland; Civic Program Ends 4pm and departing Auckland for
Sydney at convenience.
|
|
Thursday 30th
June 2022
|
Business to Business Program til 5pm. End of
Mission dinner or depart Auckland.
|
|
Friday 1st
July 2022
|
Half day cultural tour for remaining delegates and
depart Auckland for Sydney.
|
*proposed travel dates
*The program is subject to Auckland Council and
Austrade reviewing the local events calendar and suggesting the most
appropriate dates to travel.
Proposed Delegation
Successful trade missions are typically sector
focussed. Based on recommendations in the strategy and improving the
program from the 2020 mission, it is suggested that the trade delegation be
tailored to the health and education sectors in relation to the Liverpool
Innovation Precinct yet be inclusive also of companies involved in specialised
health and wellbeing products and pharmaceutical and nutraceutical products.
The trade delegation will provide opportunities for
LIP members and private business delegates to showcase their business
capabilities, promote their research and connect them with New Zealand markets,
buyers, researchers, and business leaders.
It is proposed that the delegation would include the
following attendees:
· Mayor
· Councillors as determined
· CEO or Delegate
· LIP Director
· Manager City Economy
· Senior Officer International Engagement
(Project Coordinator)
Liverpool Innovation Precinct Members
Liverpool Innovation Precinct members and their
representatives will be invited to participate in the delegation on the basis
that they fund their own travel and accommodation expenses.
· Darryl Harkness, CEO, Ingham Institute of
Applied Medical Research
· Amanda Larkin, CEO, South Western Sydney
Local Health District
· Josephine Chow, Director Strategic
Projects, South Western Sydney Local Health District
· Representatives from Western Sydney
University, University of Wollongong, University of NSW and TAFE NSW
Business Matching
For Business Matching arrangements there are two
concurrent service delivery areas.
1. LIP Members with an academic, education and
research focus
2. Private business delegates that require a
range of potential partners and strategic allies from distributors, major
supply chain operators, corporations and large firms
Group 1 Business Matching targets
· Auckland Council
Auckland is NZ’s leading economic region,
generating more than a third of the country's GDP. Auckland is an economic hub
of the Asia Pacific region and one of the world's most business-friendly
markets. More than 100 multinational corporations call Auckland their
Asia-Pacific home
· Auckland's technology and
knowledge-intensive industries employ thousands of STEM workers, undertaking
high levels of research and development powering their economic growth.
Auckland's tech sector comprises ICT and software companies across fields
including cyber security, big data and fin-tech, and high-tech manufacturing
such as medical devices and aerospace engineering
· The University of Auckland is NZ's largest
university with over 40,000 students.
· The Newmarket Innovation Precinct (NIP)
connects industry professionals with the University's research and technical
experts
· The National Institute for Health Innovation
(NIHI) are experts in providing researchers, data management and analytics
support and commercialisation/deployment of health initiatives
· Centre for Advanced Magnetic Resonance
Imaging (CAMRI) is the first MRI venture in NZ to focus on high-end research
work as well as routine clinical imaging
· Auckland Medical Research Foundation played
a lead role in the establishment of a Medical School in the University of
Auckland
· New Zealand's MedTech Centre of Research
Excellence is the single point of contact for NZ's capability and resources in
MedTech
· Manukau Institute of Technology
· Medical Technology Association of New
Zealand - the leading industry body representing medical technology
manufacturers, importers and distributors of medical devices in New Zealand
· Government Departments – Ministry of
Health, Ministry of Covid Response, Minster of Trade
Group 2 Business Matching potential targets
· Fisher & Paykel Healthcare
· Rocket Lab (Space)
· Woolworths NZ
· Auckland Airport Company
· Kiwi Property Group
· My Food Bag – e-commerce Food &
Beverage operator
· Hotel groups and major hospitality
companies
· Medical sector businesses and
organisations, e.g. Ryman Healthcare
· Technology, Data, Robotics and Blockchain
companies
· Buyers such as: Importers, Distributors and
Medical Devices wholesalers
Key Initiatives
in Auckland
· GRIDAKL is part of the innovation precinct
in Auckland's Wynyard Quarter, designed to maximise innovation by harnessing
the power of collaboration. Creating pathways for innovative individuals,
entrepreneurs, and businesses to connect, share ideas and access the tools they
need to help them grow.
· The Southern Initiative (TSI) plans and
delivers a long-term programme of coordinated investment and actions to bring
about transformational social, economic and physical change in Auckland.
· Auckland Co-Design Lab is funded by
Auckland Council and sponsored by eight central government departments.
· NZ HealthTech Week / MTANZ HealthTech
Conference 27th-29th June 2022
In addition to these institutions and initiatives, a
full business program will be developed and coordinated by Austrade to allow
for LIP members to conduct business, export and investment activities for
potential international trade engagement and growth.
Resources, Pricing, Billing & Legal
An estimated cost for this delegation is up to $20,000,
which includes travel costs, accommodation, transport, food, gifts, and other
incidental expenses.
Council will use Federal Government partners such as
Austrade Auckland as key in market service providers and similar organisations
who possess the networks and capability required.
It is recommended that Council commence facilitating
arrangements for a delegation from Liverpool to New Zealand and to endorse
expenditure to a maximum of $20,000 which includes travel costs, accommodation, transport, food,
gifts and other incidental expenses.
|
Economic
|
Further develop a commercial centre that accommodates a variety of
employment opportunities.
Encourage and promote businesses to develop in the hospital health and
medical precinct (of the City Centre).
Budget estimate of up to $20,000 does not include an
Austrade business matching service fee or associated costs to host an event
in market
|
|
Environment
|
There are no environmental and sustainability
considerations.
|
Social
|
There are no social and cultural considerations.
|
Civic
Leadership
|
Facilitate the development of community leaders.
|
|
Legislative
|
The trade delegation plans are based on the premise
that Australia and New Zealand’s international borders will be open for
travel in June 2022.
|
|
Risk
|
It is also noted that with ongoing public health orders in relation
to the current Omicron outbreak, that a watching brief will be maintained in
the lead up to the departure.
|
Nil
Ordinary Meeting
23 February 2022
Economy & Commercial Development Report
|
ECD 03
|
Public Sector Working Hub
|
|
Strategic
Direction
|
Generating
Opportunity
Attract
businesses for economic growth and employment opportunities
|
|
File Ref
|
028661.2022
|
|
Report By
|
Chris
Guthrie - Coordinator Business Development
|
|
Approved
By
|
John F
Morgan - Director Economy & Commercial Development
|
At its ordinary meeting held on 16
December 2020, Council considered a report on activities relating to the potential
for Public Sector Working Hubs to be established in the region and specifically
in Liverpool CBD.
At that same meeting, Council resolved to receive and note the report and noted that
a further update on this initiative, will be provided by the June 2021 Council
meeting.
Whilst recent lockdowns have somewhat
limited commercial activity in the Liverpool CBD, new research has informed the
future planning of CBDs.
That Council:
1. Receives and
notes the update on the potential for Public Sector Working Hubs in Liverpool;
and
2. Notes that
the Covid-19 pandemic and subsequent lockdowns has impacted take up rates of
commercial office space in the Liverpool CBD.
Background
At its ordinary meeting held on 16 December
2020, Council considered a report relating to the potential for Public Sector
Working Hubs to be established in the region and specifically in the Liverpool
CBD.
The following resolution was passed at this meeting:
That Council receives and notes this report and notes that a
further update on this initiative will be provided by the June 2021 Council
meeting.
Since then, the Liverpool area has been further
impacted by the Covid pandemic and many offices remained either vacant or were
functioning at limited capacity, reducing progress on further development of
this initiative. An update on the matter was delayed, as it was prudent to wait
until the local economy was “re-opened for business”.
However, despite the overall slowdown, there were some
positive developments occurring in the CBD during that time:
· Progress on construction of a serviced
apartment complex on Northumberland Avenue
· Continued progress on the Council’s
own Liverpool Civic Place development
· Further approvals for development of two
mixed use towers in the CBD
· Incentives allow landlords to adjust their
rental rates to reflect changing market conditions and tenant demand.
‘Effective rent’ is the term used to describe the rent after
commercial lease incentives have been factored in. This figure is lower than
the ‘face rent’ amount that has been negotiated previously between
the landlord and tenant.
Commercial incentives provided by landlords,
particularly during the recent economic slowdown reached up to 35% of
‘face rents’ in some parts of Sydney. In Parramatta incentives were
typically offered between 25% - 30% according to recent research.
Business Western Sydney Closer to Home Report
A new Business Western Sydney report has
found that Western Sydney’s metropolitan centres could share in a $450
million annual boost to their local economies and attract more jobs, if the
hybrid working week becomes a permanent fixture of work-life balance, after the
COVID pandemic has passed.
Headlining this report, is a request to
establish a $1 Billion Western Sydney Renewal Fund, that will
enable a five-year urban renewal programme to allow more than 100,000 people to
work closer to home and generate an economic surge in city centres, such as
Liverpool, Bankstown, Blacktown, Campbelltown and Penrith.
Other key recommendations from the report include:
1. The
State Government continue to pilot and expand hubs across Sydney. These hubs
need to be in the metropolitan clusters including Campbelltown, Liverpool,
Penrith, Blacktown, Bankstown, Olympic Park and Parramatta. This will ensure
that a large portion of the workforce is able to work within 15 minutes from
home.
2. Private
companies should consider how they structure their organisations and invest in
a more distributed workforce with satellite offices and co-working spaces in
regional centres closer to where their employees live.
3. Employers,
both public and private, need to invest in the necessary infrastructure needed
to support the hybrid working week, including regionally located, “touch
down” offices and co-working spaces so employee can spend more time
working closer to home.
4. The
State Government should conduct a review into Business Improvement Districts
and the regulation surrounding them. If we are to see Councils succeed, we must
ensure that they have streamlined frameworks that allow them to flourish. This
will ensure that each city centre can accommodate the hybrid economy and
maintain these strong working hubs that are more attractive places to work. We
need each tier of Government to join with local businesses to coordinate
investments in place making and renewal. The State Government remove red tape
which prevents the local businesses and landowners from establishing Business Improvement
Districts in NSW.
5. Local
Government needs to ensure that each of their city centres have the services
and amenities to accommodate a significant increase in local employment. We
need to ensure our planning and land use controls encourage agglomeration and
provide a competitive and compelling option for employees to want to work in
them.
6. That
local Government introduce changes to their LEP’s and LSPS’s to
encourage small strong retail distribution. The Chamber will explore a retail
study to understand the planning shortfalls and cold spots in Western Sydney
that can be addressed.
Liverpool Civic Place – A Western Parkland City
Transformation Hub
Council’s City Economy Unit has previously
developed a Liverpool Commercial Office Prospectus, which details future and
proposed development within the Liverpool CBD. This prospectus is upgraded
regularly as progress is made on construction and additional development
approvals.
To further strengthen and facilitate investment in
commercial development in the CBD and all the jobs this would generate, further
research was conducted, specifically in relation to the Council’s own
Liverpool Civic Place development.
Liverpool’s Civic Place development will deliver
a mix of civic, community and commercial spaces to Sydney’s third CBD.
Just over 70 per cent of the development will house Liverpool Council’s
library, a new childcare centre, Council offices and chambers. The remaining 30
per cent sets the scene for a new economy opportunity – a third space to
support a new breed of hybrid working, while reaffirming the City’s
long-term role as a major centre for government.
The document produced from the research (and attached)
will be promoted and marketed to various sectors as follows:
A ‘touchdown’ office for the NSW and
Commonwealth Public Services, and relevant industry associations such as:
· Planning offices of major infrastructure
investments (eg Major road projects • Major rail projects • Major
hospital projects)
· Schools Infrastructure NSW
· Department of Planning, Industry and
Environment
· Department of Infrastructure, Transport,
Regional Development and Communications (Western Sydney Unit)
· Business Western Sydney
· Government Business Units and other
authorities
As restrictions further ease, efforts will now extend
towards promotion of co-working hubs in the CBD both in relation to the
Liverpool Civic Place project but also in support of the various private
developments already happening and proposed in the CBD.
The changed working paradigm in CBDs has forced
planners to rethink office environments and flexibility is now more important
than ever. A multitude of national and international research suggests more
people will be choosing hybrid models of work (wfh/office) and CBDs now need to
become places where people want to go for work and play rather than where they
have to go to obtain an income. CBDs will need to evolve into central
experience districts to suit these changes demands.
One example from a multitude of research undertaken
over the last two years includes the Productivity Commission’s Research
Report from September 2021. – “The COVID-19 pandemic forced many
workers and firms — up to 40% of workers — to experiment with
working from home. While the stay-at-home orders that forced this experiment
are gradually easing across the developed world, the level of working from home
is likely to remain much higher than it was before the pandemic. This forced
experiment showed that many people could do their jobs at home just as well as
in the office. Workers really valued the time and money saved through not
commuting, as well as the extra flexibility in their lives. And some firms can
see potential productivity improvements, and/or cost savings, in a world of
more work from home.”
|
Economic
|
Facilitate economic development.
There are internal resourcing implications in undertaking a
communications Campaign as outlined to Council previously.
|
|
Environment
|
There are no direct environmental and sustainability
considerations although as reported in the minutes, the Moorebank Intermodal
Company is proposing to take over responsibility for biodiversity management
of the site and there are some changes already to the ongoing management of
the “Dustbowl” area.
|
Social
|
Raise awareness in the community about the available services and
facilities.
|
Civic
Leadership
|
Encourage the community to engage in Council initiatives and actions.
Provide information about Council’s services, roles and decision
making processes.
Deliver services that are customer focused.
|
|
Legislative
|
There are no legislative considerations relating to
this report.
|
|
Risk
|
The risk is deemed to be Low.
|
1. Liverpool
Civic Place Western Parkland City Transformation Hub
|
0
|
|
ECD
03
|
Public
Sector Working Hub
|
|
Attachment
1
|
Liverpool
Civic Place Western Parkland City Transformation Hub
|
Ordinary Meeting
23 February 2022
|
CTTE 01
|
Minutes of the Liverpool Pedestrian,
Active Transport and Traffic Committee meeting held on 3 February 2022
|
|
Strategic
Direction
|
Generating
Opportunity
Advocate
for, and develop, transport networks to create an accessible city
|
|
File Ref
|
033191.2022
|
|
Report By
|
Charles
Wiafe - Service Manager Transport Management
|
|
Approved
By
|
David Smith
- Director Planning & Compliance
|
This
report presents the recommendations of the Liverpool Pedestrian, Active
Transport and Traffic Committee meeting held on 3 February 2022. At the
meeting, the Committee considered ten (10) agenda items, two (2) technical
discussion items and eight (8) general business items.
A
copy of the meeting minutes with the Committee’s recommendations are
included in Attachment 1.
That Council adopts the following
Committee recommendations:
Item 1 - Hume Highway and Governor Macquarie Drive Intersection
Upgrade – Signs and Line Marking Scheme
· Approves the signs and line marking scheme,
as shown in Attachments 1.1-1.8 of the Committee agenda attachment booklet.
· Requests TfNSW consider inclusion of
straight arrows in the through lane in their approval of the traffic control
signal phasing design
Item 2 - Kingsbury Road and adjacent Laneway, between
Gellibrand Road Perrone Road - Request for Traffic Calming Devices
· Request the Police to carry out speed
enforcement and for the outcome to be provided at the May 2022 Traffic
Committee meeting.
· Consider a report with speed classification
to be presented to the May 2022 Traffic Committee meeting.
Item 3
- Edmondson Avenue, Austral – Interim Intersection Treatments
· Approves interim intersection treatments at
the Edmondson Avenue/Fifteenth Avenue and Edmondson Avenue/Fourteenth Avenue
intersections as shown in
Attachment 3.1-3.2 of the Committee
agenda attachment booklet.
Item 4 - William Buckley Drive, Carnes Hill –
Request for Traffic Calming and Parking Restrictions
· Approves the installation of an entry
threshold treatment and central median island along William Buckley Drive
approximately 45m west of Kurrajong Road.
· Undertakes community consultation with
affected residents prior to installation.
Item
5 - Foskett Road, Edmondson Park – Proposed One Way (Northbound)
Arrangement
· Approves the signs and line marking scheme
including edge line marking, for one way southbound for the section of Foskett
Road, between Jardine Drive and Antwerp Avenue, Edmondson Park as indicated in
Attachment 5.1 of the Committee
agenda attachment booklet.
· Undertakes community consultation with the
affected residents prior to installation.
· Submits the required transport management
plan to TfNSW for endorsement prior to installation
Item 6 - Hoxton Park Road and Gillespie Street,
Liverpool – Proposed No Right Turn Restriction
· Approves the implementation of the traffic
facilities as shown in Attachments 6.1 and 6.2 of the Committee agenda attachment booklet subject to TfNSW endorsement of the
required Transport Management Plan.
· Requests TfNSW to investigate a median
island on Hoxton Park Road between Gill Avenue and Hume Highway
· Investigates the opening of Gillespie
Street and Pearce Street
Item 7 - Bus Stops – To be decommissioned
· Approves decommissioning of the five bus stops along Wilson Road and a stop each along
Green Valley Road and North Liverpool Road as listed in the minutes.
· Requests Transit Systems to remove the bus
stops from TfNSW’s Transit Stop Management System.
Item 8 - Flowerdale Road, Liverpool – Traffic
changes in front of Liverpool West Public School
· Approves the proposed traffic facilities
and associated signage and line marking as shown in Attachments 8.1- 8.8 of the
Committee agenda attachment
booklet.
· Detailed design drawings including supplementary No Parking and
Kiss and Ride signs, are to be submitted to TfNSW for review prior installation.
· Council requests the Department of Education to undertake community
consultation with the affected residents along Mainsbridge Avenue prior to
implementation of the parking arrangements
Item 9 - Railway Serviceway Special Opening Event
– Special Community Event
· Classifies the event as a Class 3 Special
Event with the associated conditions requiring the preparation of a special
events transport management plan to be submitted to TfNSW for review prior to
the event.
Item 10 - Railway Street Shared Spaces Demonstration
Project
· Approves in principle for grants funding
applications to be submitted to undertake temporary changes to Railway Street
and associated signage and line marking as shown in Attachment 10 of the Committee agenda attachment booklet. Should funding be secured, detailed design is to be submitted to the
Committee for its endorsement prior to implementation.
This
report presents the recommendations of the Liverpool Pedestrian, Active
Transport and Traffic Committee meeting held on 3 February 2022. At the
meeting, the Committee considered ten (10) agenda items, two (2) technical
discussion items and eight (8) general business items.
A
copy of the meeting minutes, incorporating the Committee’s
recommendations on the agenda items is included in Attachment 1. It is
recommended that Council adopts the Committee’s recommendations on the
agenda items as outlined above.
The
technical discussion item and general business items, with recommended actions
are as follows:
Technical Discussion Items
TD1 - Bus Route to Liverpool Hospital during its expansion
As outlined in the minutes, as part of the hospital expansion, the main entrance
to the hospital has been relocated from Elizabeth Street to Campbell Street.
Council
has received local resident's request to relocate the existing bus stop on
Elizabeth Street to Campbell Street. As Transport for NSW (TfNSW) is
responsible for providing bus services to the public in NSW, Council requested
TfNSW to consider revised bus services to the temporary gate.
TfNSW
advised Council that the existing bus stop at Elizabeth Street in front of the
former hospital gate would not be relocated or the current bus route changed.
Recommendation
The Committee discussed and noted that whilst TfNSW would not reroute
bus services, the agency is to place a notice at the Liverpool Train Station
informing passengers of the available bus service to the temporary gate.
TD2 - CBD Revitalisation Program – Liverpool
Alive at Night, April Activation
Council has applied for funding
to run a month-long activation in the CBD that will involve a series of
lighting art installations in various arcades, laneways, and Macquarie Mall.
As part of the event, there is
a number of way-finding signage details that are non-standard which are being
proposed.
Recommendation
The committee raised no objection to the
proposed installations on footpaths for the activation
General Business Items
GB1 - Heathcote Road and The Avenue – Installation of
Interim Traffic Signals
TfNSW is upgrading the section of Heathcote Road
between Infantry Parade, Holsworthy and The Avenue, Voyager Point.
As part of the project, the Heathcote Road/The Avenue
intersection will be upgraded to a signalised intersection.
Following community representations, TfNSW agreed and
installed interim traffic signals at the intersection in December 2021.
Recommendation
The Committee noted that interim traffic signals have
been installed
GB2 - Kurrajong Road - Proposed Improvement Options
Council has received community requests to consider
improvements along Kurrajong Road to improve traffic flow and road safety.
Identified locations and improvement works includes
the following:
· The existing roundabout at Lyn Parade/Beech
Road – Replacement of roundabout with traffic signals.
· Road section in front of Amity College
– Amity College has recently implemented traffic management works.
Traffic monitoring will be carried out to assess possible improvements.
· Intersection with Mowbray Street –
Unsignalised T-intersection to be signalised.
· Section between Cowpasture Road and Sarah
Holland Drive – Extension of existing right turn from Kurrajong Road into
Cowpasture Road, restriction of right turn movements from Kurrajong Road into
the Shopping Centre driveway, signalisation of the existing midblock pedestrian
refuge
Recommendation
Council carries out assessment and design
investigations and presents reports to future meetings for further
consideration.
GB3 - Henderson Road, Edmondson Park – Request for
marked pedestrian crossing
· Ed Square Management has requested
installation of a marked pedestrian crossing across Henderson Road
approximately 60m west of Soldiers Parade
Recommendation
The Committee discussed but did not support
installation of the requested marked pedestrian crossing as it would result in
three pedestrian crossings across a 140m section of Henderson Road.
GB4 - 25-27 Governor Macquarie Drive
Council has received funding
from the Federal Government under its Western Sydney Infrastructure Program to carry out improvement works on
sections of Governor Macquarie Drive (GMD) close to Newbridge Road and the Hume
Highway.
The improvement work close to Newbridge
Road is between Newbridge and Alfred Road. This includes extension of a right
turn bay into Newbridge Road and installation of a central median island.
Council has received representations to investigate options to enable a float truck to turn
into and out of the driveway at 25 – 27 GMD.
The two options investigated involve narrowing the median island to enable left
in / left out movements or the provision of a gap to enable right in / right
out movement. Both options require minor widening of the property driveway.
Recommendation
The Committee discussed and expressed concern about
the second option (Right turn in and out) as it may encourage other vehicles to
use such an opening.
Detailed design investigation including geotechnical investigation, survey,
detailed design and cost estimate is to be carried out in consultation with the property owner and be presented to the
Traffic Committee meeting in March 2022 for further consideration.
GB5 - Bigge Street, Liverpool – Road Closure
The Police representative outlined that it has
received a request concerning possible closure of Bigge Street form Hume
Highway to Lachlan Street to enable crane removal. The committee expressed
concern on impact on traffic to the Liverpool City Centre (along the road).
Recommendation
A meeting to be organised with the proponent with a
view to identify an arrangement which would minimise traffic impacts (of the
proposed road closure).
GB6- Delays at Newbridge Road and Nuwarra Road Signalised Intersection
The Deputy Mayor has received concerns that the Newbridge Road and Nuwarra Road signalised intersection is not functioning efficiently and causing traffic
congestion including for through traffic.
The concern has been referred to the TfNSW Network Operations Coordinator for the Liverpool LGA who has advised that
operation of the traffic signals have been changed for the morning and
afternoon periods to improve traffic flow.
In addition, the
intersection in the next few months will be upgraded to a diamond operation on
Nuwara Road which will also improve the intersection operation and traffic
flow.
The upgrade will include installation of a pedestrian
crossing on the eastern side of Newbridge Road to help pedestrians cross
Newbridge Road safely.
Recommendation
The Committee discussed and noted the changes that
have been implemented by TfNSW Network Operations Coordinator as outlined in
the report.
GB7 – Stanton Street, Liverpool - Rat Run
Councilor Harle raised concern about a rat run through
Stanton Street which the Committee considered at a previous meeting.
Recommendation
Council to consult the residents and identify
improvement solutions including possible changes to the traffic signal phasing
at the Flowerdale Road / Memorial Avenue intersection
GB8 - Spencer Road, Cecil Hills - Crash
Councilor Hagarty advised that there had been a recent
crash along Spencer Road and the previously approved speed humps should be
installed
Recommendation
Council to prioritise and install the previously
approved speed humps.
Budget impact of matters arising from the minutes
|
Item
|
Description
|
Funding, Indicative Cost and Timing
|
|
1
|
Hume Highway and
Governor Macquarie Drive Intersection Upgrade – Signs and Line Marking
Scheme
|
Federal Government grant funding under Western
Sydney Infrastructure Program.
Indicative Cost – No cost to Council (Total
project cost $7.1 million)
Timing – Early 2023.
|
|
2
|
Kingsbury Road
and Adjacent Laneway, between Gellibrand Road Perrone Road - Request for
Traffic Calming Devices
|
Deferred item
|
|
3
|
Edmondson
Avenue, Austral – Interim Intersection Treatments
|
Minor traffic facilities program.
Indicative Cost - $5,000
Timing – Early 2022
|
|
4
|
William Buckley
Drive, Carnes Hill – Request for Traffic Calming and Parking
Restrictions
|
Minor traffic facilities program.
Indicative Cost - $25,000
Timing – Early 2023
|
|
5
|
Foskett Road,
Edmondson Park – Proposed One Way (Northbound) Arrangement
|
TfNSW block grant funding
Indicative Cost - $2,000
Timing – Early 2022
|
|
6
|
Hoxton Park Road
and Gillespie Street, Liverpool – Proposed No Right Turn Restriction
|
Developer
Indicative Cost - No cost to Council.
Timing – Dependent on developer’s
construction program
|
|
7
|
Bus Stops
– To be decommissioned
|
Transit Systems Bus Company
|
|
8
|
Flowerdale Road,
Liverpool – Traffic Changes in front of Liverpool West Public School
|
Developer (Department of Education)
Indicative Cost - No cost to Council.
Timing – Dependent on developer’s
construction program
|
|
9
|
Railway
Serviceway Special Opening Event – Special Community Event
|
CBD Activation
|
|
10
|
Railway Street
Shared Spaces Demonstration Project
|
Grant funding if successful
|
|
Economic
|
Provide efficient parking for the City Centre.
Deliver a high-quality local road system including provision and
maintenance of infrastructure and management of traffic issues.
|
|
Environment
|
Promote an integrated and user-friendly public transport service.
Support the delivery of a range of transport options.
|
Social
|
Support access and services for people with a disability.
Improve road and pedestrian safety
|
Civic Leadership
|
Actively advocate for federal and state government support, funding and
services.
|
|
Legislative
|
Roads Act.
|
|
Risk
|
The risk is deemed to be Low.
The risk is considered within
Council’s risk appetite.
|
1. Minutes
of the Liverpool Pedestrian, Active Transport and Traffic Committee Meeting
held on 3 February 2022 (Under separate cover)
Ordinary Meeting
23 February 2022
|
QWN 01
|
Question with Notice - Clr Harle -
Ongoing Illegal dumping occurring in Edmondson Park and generally in the
Liverpool LGA
|
|
Strategic
Direction
|
Strengthening
and Protecting our Environment
Protect and
enhance bushland, rivers and the visual landscape
|
|
File Ref
|
017678.2022
|
Council purchased covert cameras some time ago
specifically for obtaining evidence of illegal dumping occurring in isolated
areas. Council had hired trailer mounted surveillance cameras on a trial basis.
Please address the following:
1. Can Council provide an update on what is
being done to prevent and reduce the incidence of illegal dumping within the
Liverpool LGA?
2. Have the covert cameras that were used in
various locations within the Liverpool LGA resulted in obtaining evidence of
those carrying out illegal dumping and has that evidence resulted in legal
action against the dumpers?
3. Did the cameras also obtain incidents of
illegal drug dealings occurring in Edmondson Park on Jardine Drive and has any
legal action resulted from that data?
4. If any of the above information is
confidential or subject to legal privilege, can that be provided in a
Confidential Report and or a briefing session?
Response (provided by City Presentation)
1. Can Council provide an update on what is
being done to prevent and reduce the incidence of illegal dumping within the
Liverpool LGA?
Illegal dumping within Liverpool is a significant
challenge for Council due to the breath and depth of the Local Government Area.
Although Council strives to identify and action dumping within the community
utilising active patrolling, Council relies heavily from the public to notify a
dump.
Council currently has operational covert cameras in
known illegal dumping hotspots. Our Illegal Waste Rangers proactively
patrol known hotspots and engage operational clean-up crews to monitor hotspots
during the regular maintenance programs. Council continues to promote the
services of the Community Recycling Centre (CRC) located at the Rose Street
Depot and throughout the challenges of the pandemic, Council was committed to
continuing to operate this service for the community.
In 2020/2021, 81 infringements were handed out, two
infringements were a result of overt cameras and 34 were a result of covert
cameras. The total amount in fines as a result of these successful
infringements resulted in $119,250 for
Council.
The Waste Team is working towards the development of a
new in house designed overt camera set up. Further information on the
overt cameras will be provided in the near future, when the project is
finalised and operational. Our team have also designed some new signage and
Council is confident this will promote awareness towards illegal dumping and
the penalties for offenders it they are caught. An example of the
new signage that will support the new overt cameras is provided below.
Council is also in the process of renewing agreements
with third party providers to reinstate covert cameras in the known LGA illegal
dumping hotspots.
2. Have the Covert cameras that were used in
various locations within the Liverpool LGA resulted in obtaining evidence of
those carrying out illegal dumping and has that evidence resulted in legal
action against the dumpers?
The covert and overt cameras used were very effective
in gathering evidence resulting in legal action against dumpers. Overt cameras
are recommended as a deterrent to illegal dumping however, it is a significant
investment for Council when engaging third party operators for the latest
camera equipment. In 2020 to 2021 Council spent $118,624 on Overt Cameras and
$44,500 on Covert Cameras
When an illegal dump is investigated and evidence is
gathered, the alleged illegal dumper is interviewed, and this often leads to a
penalty being issued and enforced against the person responsible for the
illegal dump.
3. Did the cameras also obtain incidents of
illegal drug dealings occurring in Edmondson Park on Jardine Drive and has any
legal action resulted from that data?
The covert cameras did obtain incidents of illegal
drug activity on Jardine Drive, Edmondson Park. All evidence was handed over to
the NSW Police. Unfortunately, Council is not privy to the outcomes of the
investigations as the NSW Police will not provide this information.
4. If any of the above information is
confidential or subject to legal privilege, can that be provided in a
Confidential Report and or a briefing session?
All evidence of an illegal dump that leads to an
investigation is subject to legal privilege and can not be provided by the NSW
Police to Council. In future, the Council can prepare a report on illegal
dumping at various hotspot areas however, this report would only contain
information of a non-sensitive nature.
Nil
Ordinary Meeting
23 February 2022
|
QWN 02
|
Question with Notice - Clr Kaliyanda -
Youth Strategy
|
|
Strategic
Direction
|
Leading
through Collaboration
Strive for
best practice in all Council processes
|
|
File Ref
|
030904.2022
|
Please address the following:
1. When was the Liverpool Youth Strategy and
Action Plan last updated?
Response (provided by Community & Culture)
The
most recent iteration of the Liverpool Youth Strategy and Action Plan was for
the period 2012 – 2017. Since that time, activities and programs relating
to young people in Liverpool were integrated in the wider Community Development
and Planning Strategy and Business Plan, as well as Council’s overarching
Community Strategic Plan and Delivery Program and Operational Plan.
2. What timeframe is in place for review and
refresh of the Youth Strategy and Action Plan?
Response (provided by Community & Culture)
In
the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, many young people across Australia have
reported feelings of isolation, poor mental health and a lack of wellbeing, as
well as challenges in accessing education, employment and community programs
and services. Further, and in alignment with this broad sentiment, the
Liverpool Youth Council has identified four key priorities for their current
term:
· Mental health
· Education
· Employment
· Engagement with local schools
To
guide and inform Council in addressing these priorities for local young people,
the Community Development and Planning team have commenced development of a new
Youth Strategy. This Strategy will outline Council’s goals and objectives
for working with local young people and set clear targets to work with the
youth sector in improving outcomes for young people in Liverpool.
The
goals identified in the Youth Strategy will support Council’s broader
Community Strategic Plan (CSP). The Youth Strategy will underpin
Council’s work in meeting Directions One: Creating Connection and Four:
Leading Through Collaboration by identifying clear objectives which seek to
address access, inclusion and participation for and by young people in
Liverpool. Further, the process of consultation with local young people, the
youth services sector and relevant community stakeholders will support
alignment with the CSP by encouraging community participation in
decision-making and supporting collaboration with the community sector and
residents.
Phase
one of developing the new Youth Strategy, including data review and analysis,
and a consultation survey with the local youth services sector and other
relevant government and non-government organisations is currently underway. The
consultation survey is designed to assist Council’s convening role, to
identify and or reconcile key priorities across the youth services landscape to
better understand the gaps and opportunities for collective response and
action.
The
Draft Strategy is intended to be presented to Council by May 2022 for
consideration and to place on public exhibition.
Nil
Ordinary Meeting
23 February 2022
|
QWN 03
|
Question with Notice - Clr Goodman -
Flood Evacuation Plan
|
|
Strategic
Direction
|
Leading
through Collaboration
Strive for
best practice in all Council processes
|
|
File Ref
|
044215.2022
|
Please address
the following:
Does Council
have a flood evacuation plan in place for the LGA?
A
response to this question will be provided in the business papers for the
Council meeting of 30 March 2022.
Nil
Ordinary Meeting
23 February 2022
|
QWN 04
|
Question with Notice - Clr Kaliyanda -
Georges River Flood Studies
|
|
Strategic
Direction
|
Strengthening
and Protecting our Environment
Protect and
enhance bushland, rivers and the visual landscape
|
|
File Ref
|
044398.2022
|
Please address the following:
1. What update is
there on the Georges River Flood Evacuation Studies currently being conducted
by DPIE?
2. What impact will
the proposed development along the Georges River have on existing developments,
especially residential developments, and on local flooding?
3. What community
consultation has been done/is proposed in this area, either by DPIE or Council?
4. Will residents be
advised about the potential for increased risk of future flooding?
A
response to these questions will be provided in the business papers for the
Council meeting of 30 March 2022.
Nil
Ordinary Meeting
23 February 2022
|
QWN 05
|
Question with Notice - Clr Harle -
Wattle Grove Lakeside Park
|
|
Strategic
Direction
|
Strengthening
and Protecting our Environment
Protect and
enhance bushland, rivers and the visual landscape
|
|
File Ref
|
044424.2022
|
With
reference to Wattle Grove Lakeside Park, please address the following:
1. Is there a Master plan for Wattle Grove Lakeside Park,
if so, how is it funded and does it include provision for the replacement of
the North/West timber retaining wall (full of white ants) with a one-time
improvement of cut sandstone blocks as was done at Clinches Pond?
2. What more can be done to improve the water quality of
Wattle grove lake, short of emptying it and removing all of the 30-year built
up sludge, decomposing vegetation and refuse washed into the lake?
3. What is the primary funding source for the ongoing
maintenance of flood retention basins in the Liverpool LGA?
A response to these questions will be provided in the
business papers for the Council meeting of 30 March 2022.
Nil
Ordinary Meeting
23 February 2022
|
QWN 06
|
Question with Notice - Clr Hagarty -
Pet Adoptions
|
|
Strategic
Direction
|
Leading
through Collaboration
Strive for
best practice in all Council processes
|
|
File Ref
|
044436.2022
|
Please address the following:
1. How does Council determine the adoption
fees at the Liverpool Animal Shelter?
2. Is there a process for reducing fees for
animals held long term?
3. Does Council conduct regular benchmarking
for adoptions fees against other Councils and animal shelters?
A response to these questions will be provided in the
business papers for the Council meeting of 30 March 2022.
Nil
Ordinary Meeting
23 February 2022
|
NOM 01
|
Council Policies and Standards
|
|
Strategic
Direction
|
Leading
through Collaboration
Strive for
best practice in all Council processes
|
|
File Ref
|
041518.2022
|
|
Author
|
Fiona
Macnaught - Councillor
|
The Local Government Act 1993, sections 226 and 232
speak to the role of the Mayor and Councillors.
These sections refer to policy or policies no less
than five times.
During the previous term of Council, a number of
policies were converted to standards, as approved by the then Council.
In order to ensure this Council can best represent the
community, it is imperative to gain an understanding on the reasoning behind
the conversion of such policies, and an opportune time to ensure those policies
still active are current and up to date.
That Council direct the Acting Chief Executive Officer
to present a report by the April 2022 meeting on:
1. All policies that were converted to
standards during the previous Council term, with a short brief on why the CEO
thought it would be better suited as a standard; and
2. All current policies, including their
actual review date.
ACTING CHIEF
EXECUTIVE OFFICER’S COMMENT
Council adopted the ‘Policy Drafting Standard:
Policies, Standards, Charters, Procedures and Strategies’ (the Standard)
on 30 July 2020. This document clearly sets out the guidelines for the setting
or revoking of Council Policies, Procedures and Standards.
In summary, this means that if there is a current
policy that has been adopted by Council that is being sought to be revoked and
changed to a standard, under the ‘Policy Drafting Standard’ then a
report must go to Council for a resolution in order for that to occur. Section
4.14 ‘Revoking’ of the standard, states that ‘Policies,
Charters and Strategies can only be revoked by a formal resolution of
Council’. Further, that ‘Council standards and Procedures can only
be revoked by the approval of the CEO’.
A report will be brought to the April Council meeting
outlining policies that were revoked via Council resolution. This report will
include the report that put before council, upon which the resolution was
passed. With the recent change in Council’s CEO, it is not possible to
provide an explanation as to why a decision was made, the Council report will
be provided as background for this. The report will also contain information on
all current council policies and review dates.
Attached for ease of reference is the ‘Policy
Drafting Standards’.
1. Policy
Drafting Standards (Under separate cover)
Ordinary Meeting
23 February 2022
|
NOM 02
|
Property Maintenance - Newbridge Road,
Moorebank
|
|
Strategic
Direction
|
Strengthening
and Protecting our Environment
Protect and
enhance bushland, rivers and the visual landscape
|
|
File Ref
|
041532.2022
|
|
Author
|
Fiona
Macnaught - Councillor
|
The area along Newbridge Rd Moorebank, from Henry
Lawson Drive to Brickmakers Drive, contains a mix of residential, open space,
commercial and industrial properties. Presently the area appears neglected and
overgrown in many parts. Some of the properties involved are sitting idle
awaiting consent to change use and redevelop, and some properties have been
acquired by Council under the Voluntary Acquisition scheme. These properties
are at risk of not being upgraded for some time, however the neglect of their
upkeep should be addressed.
That Council:
1. Direct the Acting Chief Executive Officer
to write to landowners along Newbridge Rd Moorebank between Henry Lawson Drive
and Brickmakers Drive requesting that they tend to the upkeep of their
properties to a standard that allows safe passage along the path, and improves
the general amenity of the area; and
2. Direct the Acting Chief Executive Officer
to prioritise the mowing and clearing of all Council owned properties in the
area described, to allow safe passage along the path, and through the blocks to
access the river
ACTING CHIEF
EXECUTIVE OFFICER’S COMMENT
Response to Point
1
There is a statutory process Council must follow in
relating to writing to landowners regarding the upkeep of their property.
Section 124 of the Local Government Act 1993 provides
for the issuing of Orders by Council.
In relation to this NOM, Order 21, contained in
Section 124 of the Local Government Act 1993, allows Council to issue an Order
to a landowner or occupier where the state of their property is, in the opinion
of a Council authorised officer, in an unsafe or unhealthy condition.
Council is aware of a number of properties in this
area that are considered unsafe or unhealthy and is in the process of issuing
Notices to landowners prior to any further action, including the issuing of an
Order.
Most of the overgrown areas are council owned land (76
properties) plus overgrown nature strips.
Response to Point 2
The overgrown Council owned land
is located on Newbridge Road, at present these properties are currently
classified as “Areas Under Management” which require additional
consideration and are serviced utilising third party service providers under
the supervision of the Environment team.
Works on this site have been
confirmed to commence on Monday 21st of February 2022 after which
the site will continuously be monitored and serviced when required with
consideration of the additional requirements of the site.
Nil
Ordinary Meeting
23 February 2022
|
NOM 03
|
Hybrid Community Forums
|
|
Strategic
Direction
|
Leading
through Collaboration
Encourage
community participation in decision-making
|
|
File Ref
|
041558.2022
|
|
Author
|
Fiona
Macnaught - Councillor
|
Community Forums are one of the most important tools
Council has for engaging with Community members, particularly on issues local
to them. Over the past two years most forums have been successfully conducted
online. Now that we are moving into the new space of “living with
Covid”, we need to ensure we continue to provide access to all community
members who wish to attend these forums.
Direct the Acting Chief Executive Officer to
investigate and provide a report (no later than the April meeting) on the
resources required and associated costs to implement the ability to conduct
hybrid model Community Forums, whereby people can attend on site or online
simultaneously.
ACTING CHIEF
EXECUTIVE OFFICER’S COMMENT
The Liverpool District Forums are one of
Council’s key consultative mechanisms. The forums provide a valuable
opportunity for residents to discuss matters of importance within their community
and for Council to consult on key projects, strategies and plans.
Throughout 2020 and 2021, the Liverpool District
Forums were conducted online via Microsoft Teams in response to ongoing
COVID-19 restrictions. As restrictions continue to ease, Council has now
recommenced holding face-to-face forums across four districts – 2168,
Eastern, New Release/Established and Rural.
An evaluation of the Liverpool District Forums
including a cost/benefit analysis, review of participation numbers from both
Council and community representatives, agenda items and an investigation of
alternate delivery methods was conducted in 2021. The results of this
evaluation will be presented to Council at its 23 February 2022 meeting. This
evaluation report includes details of Council’s investigation of the
required resources and associated costs of facilitating forums in a hybrid
model – both virtually and in-person.
Nil
Ordinary Meeting
23 February 2022
|
NOM 04
|
Moorebank Intermodal Development
Special Levy
|
|
Strategic
Direction
|
Strengthening
and Protecting our Environment
Exercise
planning controls to create high-quality, inclusive urban environments
|
|
File Ref
|
043430.2022
|
|
Author
|
Karress
Rhodes - Councillor
|
It has been previously claimed that the
Moorebank Intermodal Development Special Levy is confidential pursuant to the
provisions of s10(A)(2)(d i) of the Local Government Act because it contains
commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed
prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it.
1. Note that the agreement between LCC and MICL is
not commercial in confidence, as it is already in the public sphere and that
the following explanation is a note to the said financial statements:
"Moorebank
Intermodal Company (MIC) is a wholly owned Australian Government entity
established to facilitate the development and operation of an intermodal
terminal at Moorebank. MIC is exempt from paying council rates, however, under
Commonwealth's competitive neutrality policy, it has entered into an agreement
with Liverpool City Council to pay rates equivalent ex-gratia sum payable at
commencement of every financial year. The agreement takes a retrospective
effective from 1/1/17.”
2. It is in Councillor and public interest the
understand the details of funds received and expenditure as a part of the in
lieu of rates agreement between LCC and MICL.
3. It is Council’s responsibility to be
open, transparent, and accountable for the Council Budget.
That Council directs the A/CEO to:
1. Establish an internally restricted
reserve titled “Moorebank Intermodal Company Ltd Ex-Gratia Funds”;
2. Effective from 1 July 2022, keep all
funds received from MICL in this reserve and account for all expenditure
incurred on agreed activities with MICL;
3. Provide quarterly performance report to
Council outlining funds received, spent and the balance of funds in this
reserve;
4. Make available to all Councillors under confidentiality
arrangements the contents of any verbal or written agreement between Liverpool
and MICL or any other authorities in relation to the ex-gratia payment; and
5. Provie a confidential report at
Council’s April 2022 meeting outlining all funds received and expensed
under this agreement in the period 1 January 2017 to 30 June 2022.
Nil
Ordinary Meeting
23 February 2022
|
NOM 05
|
Mountain Bike Racing Track
|
|
Strategic
Direction
|
Creating
Connection
Create a
dynamic, inclusive environment, including programs to support healthy living
|
|
File Ref
|
043431.2022
|
|
Author
|
Karress
Rhodes - Councillor
|
Liverpool has recently been made aware of illegal
mountain bike racing tracks being built in the Liverpool LGA
This illegal activity has shown the passion and
interest within the community for this growing Olympic sport. It has also
enabled Council to locate the areas within the LGA where the interest in this
emerging sport is most prominent.
Mountain bike racing is one of the fastest growing
national sporting interests with enthusiasts travelling throughout Australia to
compete in national and international championship events. As a sport it is greatly
contributing to the visitor economies in areas where these events are held.
By investing in the infrastructure for mountain bike
racing tracks Council is encouraging Liverpool young people who may one day be
representing Australia at the Olympic games whilst encouraging health exercise
Council would be providing additional youth infrastructure that will have far
reaching effects such as decreasing vandalism and improving the mental and
physical health of our young constituents.
The Western Sydney Sports Academy of which Liverpool
is a member already has current programs that Liverpool could link into which
creates pathways for participants towards professional careers and to achieve
their maximum potential.
The positives to Liverpool, the positives for our
residents, the opportunity to engage in the Western Sydney Sports Academy
programs and the opportunity to become a part of national competitions and
championships would not only contribute to Liverpool’s visitation economy
but also assist the hospitality sector which is identified as one of the most
COVID hit sectors in our Liverpool economy.
By increasing our visitor economy, we assist all
business in the Liverpool LGA.
Investing in mountain bike racing track/s is a benefit
to the entire Liverpool LGA.
That Council
1. Identifies suitable land within
the Liverpool LGA that might accommodate the establishment of mountain bike
racing tracks;
2. Engage with the Western Sydney
Academy of Sport and community mountain bike racing clubs and enthusiasts; and
3. Include the provision of
mountain bike racing track/s into the processes of the Big Plan for costing for
further consideration of Council.
Nil
Ordinary Meeting
23 February 2022
|
NOM 06
|
Pre-existing projects for inclusion
into the Big Plan considerations
|
|
Strategic
Direction
|
Creating
Connection
Create a
dynamic, inclusive environment, including programs to support healthy living
|
|
File Ref
|
043432.2022
|
|
Author
|
Karress
Rhodes - Councillor
|
As resolved at the previous Liverpool Council meeting,
it is necessary that all the items either new or pre-existing be included into
the Big Plan in order for all items to be considered into the strategic plans,
budget considerations and in terms of priority of delivery.
That
Council include in the Big Plan consideration for the already initiated
projects of:
1. The Collingwood Visitation
Precinct; and
2. The Liverpool Animal Shelter.
Nil
Ordinary Meeting
23 February 2022
|
NOM 07
|
Government Grants and Funding
|
|
Strategic
Direction
|
Leading
through Collaboration
Seek
efficient and innovative methods to manage our resources
|
|
File Ref
|
043433.2022
|
|
Author
|
Karress
Rhodes - Councillor
|
With the Federal Government elections looming it is
imperative that Liverpool Council maximises all opportunities to acquire
government grants and funding for all political parties.
It is evident that there is great opportunity for
Liverpool Council to maximise their government grants and funding particularly
in the next few years as government elections are held.
Liverpool Council currently has only a small team
delegated with this task, and to take full advantage of the opportunities
Liverpool Council needs to make sure we have the capacity at Council to
maximise our need to increase revenue through whatever means available to us.
Liverpool Council does need to be able to address
budget concerns and it is noted that other proactive Councils are already looking
at and implementing other ways to increase Council revenue without impacting on
rate payers.
COVID and other economic conditions has possibly
created new economic realities for Council that necessitates Council to
concentrate as much attention and funds as is possible to address the need and
opportunity to increase revenue for Liverpool Council that does not negatively
impact on our constituents.
That Council:
1. Make provision to increase and
improve Council’s opportunities to attain funding and grants;
2. Investigate and initiate any
other legal additional means that Council might increase revenue without
negative impact on ratepayers;
3. Invest immediately from general
revenue $160,000 to improve and expand Liverpool Council grants and funding
processes; and
4. Further allocate in the new
financial year budget from general revenue a further $480,000 to assist points
2 and 3 above.
Nil
Ordinary Meeting
23 February 2022
|
NOM 08
|
Council contract budget concerns
|
|
Strategic
Direction
|
Leading
through Collaboration
Strive for
best practice in all Council processes
|
|
File Ref
|
043434.2022
|
|
Author
|
Karress
Rhodes - Councillor
|
There have been recent concerns raised to
Councillors in regards to contracts awarded for subcontract work, that has
impact on the Liverpool Council budget.
That Council:
1. Provide a workshop opportunity
ASAP to raise issues in context to the budget of Council in regards to
subcontract contracts awarded for park maintenance and bush regeneration; and
2. Make available to Councillors
under confidentiality agreement contracts awarded from 2016 to 2022 for parks
maintenance and bush regeneration.
Nil
Ordinary Meeting
23 February 2022
|
Strategic
Direction
|
Leading
through Collaboration
Strive for
best practice in all Council processes
|
|
File Ref
|
043918.2022
|
|
Author
|
Richard
Ammoun - Councillor
|
Unfortunately,
there are too many potholes on our roads. Throughout the election campaign many
of our residents wanted Council to focus on this core function. This motion
calls on Council to identify all the potholes immediately and fix them as a
matter of priority.
That Council:
1. Immediately undertake an audit of all
Council roads identifying all potholes;
2. Report back to council asap with cost to
fix/patch them and timeline; and
3. Acknowledge that local roads are
Council’s responsibility and provide the adequate level of funding in the
next budget to deliver a level of service the community expects.
Nil
Ordinary Meeting
23 February 2022
|
NOM 10
|
Name Suggestion for Unnamed Bridge
|
|
Strategic
Direction
|
Leading
through Collaboration
Encourage
community participation in decision-making
|
|
File Ref
|
044128.2022
|
|
Author
|
Karress
Rhodes - Councillor
|
I have been asked by a constituent if it
would be possible to name the bridge that currently has no name on Kurrajong
road that connected Carnes Hill be called “Harry Hunt Memorial
Bridge”?
That Council recommend that the bridge on Kurrajong
Road that connects Carnes Hill be called Harry Hunt Memorial Bridge.
Nil
Ordinary Meeting
23 February 2022
|
NOM 11
|
Michael Wenden Aquatic Centre Upgrade
|
|
Strategic
Direction
|
Creating
Connection
Provide community
facilities which are accessible to all
|
|
File Ref
|
044226.2022
|
|
Author
|
Melhem
Goodman - Councillor
|
Council
previously engaged @Leasure Planners to undertake a ‘Liverpool
Aquatic and Leisure Centres
Strategy’.
This strategy
is current and dated 19/07/2019.
The strategy looked at current centres operated by Council
and also the need for centres in the future to meet the growing population needs.
In particular the findings
for
the Michael
Wenden Aquatic & Leisure Centre were as
follows:
· The current catchment has 69,279
people and is
estimated to grow to
72,087
by 2026
· Unmet demand for swimming could be as
high as 530,525 visits annually growing to 537,400
by 2026
· Unmet demand for sports courts at Wenden could be as
high as 168,600 visits annually growing to 173,400 by
2026.
· Current annual
visitations exceeds CERM benchmarks for like facilities
Amongst other things
it
also looked at short and long term strategies as
well as recommendations
as below:
Short Term Development and Location Strategy
· Consider the centre as part of Miller Town Centre Master Plan - Master plan
centre for the long term and consider design that incorporates a PCYC
· Add 2-3
basketball/ netball compliant courts in the short term, to cater for
club
competition sports
Long Term Development and Location Strategy
· Demolish centre, except existing courts and splash park
· Rebuild on the same site as
a district level centre
Actions
Planning
3.1 Include the existing Wenden Centre and PCYC as
part of Miller Town Centre Master Plan.
3.2 Prepare a
master plan for the redevelopment of Wenden on the existing site, integrating PCYC services and facilities.
3.3 Ensure a differentiated pricing and market focus between Whitlam and
Wenden. Wenden should be more leisure and social
equity focused.
3.4 Retain the existing sports courts and splash park, while demolishing and
redeveloping other components. Include additional
indoor 8
lane and warm water pools, outdoor leisure and aquatic play facilities and 2
additional
sports
courts. Consider the addition of a
small allied health area
and facility components as
per The Strategy
in Chapter 10.
Funding
3.5 Partner with PCYC in the redevelopment of facility, on the basis of some capital contribution 2019/20.
3.6 Monitor additional
funding opportunities through federal
and state government funding sources
3.7 Offer contract management of this centre in conjunction with Whitlam, Clarke and any
new
centre in the outer west as a package, to a
single management entity
to
maximise economies of scale and program
differentiation.
3.8 Develop a draft agreement for long term management of the centre in
conjunction with PCYC and Council’s
contract management group.
3.9 If
space permits and following master plan, seek allied health provider for
centre to provide physiotherapy and rehabilitation services
with contribution
to
facility fit out.
My understanding is that this
centre has been included as part of the Miller Town Centre Master Plan.
As stated in the report the unmet demand is extremely
high and continues to
increase as
the
population increases.
The Centre is a key
asset for Council
and the community which it services
deserve a modern upgraded facility. Given that Councillors have not yet had the opportunity to be briefed on what progress
has
been made I have no doubt the A/CEO’s
comments
to
this motion will quickly
bring us
all
up to date.
In saying that the following is
proposed:
That Council direct the A/CEO to:
1. Immediately
engage a
suitably
qualified organisation to start the planning
process
to
either demolish and rebuild or renovate & expand the Michael Wenden Aquatic Centre;
2. Consult with the elected body from the start of planning to delivery;
3. Consult with the community
during the planning process;
4. Enter negotiations
with relevant partners not limited to those mentioned in
point 3.5 under funding;
and
5. Present a
timeline to Council at the next ordinary meeting for this
project
from the start of the planning process
to
delivery subject to funding.
Nil
Ordinary Meeting
23 February 2022
|
NOM 12
|
Assisting the Liverpool Chamber of
Commerce to Support the Liverpool Business Economy
|
|
Strategic
Direction
|
Generating
Opportunity
Attract
businesses for economic growth and employment opportunities
|
|
File Ref
|
044444.2022
|
|
Author
|
Karress
Rhodes - Councillor
|
Liverpool
Chamber of Commerce is a valuable NFP coordinator and service provider to the
Liverpool business community.
The
Chamber encourages and welcomes new business into the Liverpool LGA, that thereafter
contributes to the Liverpool economy and further contributes to increasing
local employment.
The
Chamber has worked successfully with Council in many ways for as long as I can
remember, however having once been the Secretary for the Chamber before 2016
and my first being elected to Council, I am aware of a Councillor's table being
an automatic inclusion at their once a month guest speaker meetings.
As
previous Secretary to the Chamber I know how important a regular Councillor
table of attendance assists the Chamber meetings to encourage business in
Liverpool.
Having
Councillors in attendance assists the Chamber to attract a high calibre of
guests speakers which in turn increases membership and non-member attendance.
Having
Councillors in attendance enables local business to address issues enabling
Councillors to have greater understanding of not only the issues some
businesses face but it also sends a powerful message to businesses in
attendance or that are contemplating starting business in the Liverpool LGA
that Council is genuinely supportive and proactive in their support of local
businesses.
In
previous years Council would
book the Chamber table under the Council membership, that would invite a
combination of Councillors and Directors, with the condition that if people
booked into the event but failed to attend, they would have to repay Council
the attendance cost.
Since
2020 local businesses have been seriously impacted by COVID, a Councillor table
will help the business economy to recover.
And
as such there has never been a better time for Council to reinstate the
guaranteed Councillor attendance at the Chamber meetings.
It
will assist the Chamber to attract new businesses into our LGA and attract new
and exciting Guest speakers.
It
will assist in increasing local employment.
It
will assist in greater communication between Council and the Business
community.
It
will help to grow Liverpool's Business economy.
That Council:
1. Reinstate the automatic practice of booking
a Councillor table at the Liverpool Chamber of Commerce, Guest speaker monthly
meetings;
2. The table be named and known as The Harry
Hunt OAM table in recognition and honour of Harry Hunt OAM as the Liverpool
Chamber's longest serving President and in memory of Harry's remarkable service
and advocacy for Liverpool;
3. The table to be booked under Liverpool
Council's Liverpool Chamber of Commerce membership; and
4. Condition of non-attendance after booking
to be the financial responsibility of those people who accepted, but who failed
to attend.
Nil
