Agenda of Ordinary Meeting - Wednesday, 30 March 2022

MINUTES OF THE Ordinary Meeting

HELD ON 23 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

Mr David Smith, Director Planning & Compliance

Mr Tim Pasley, Acting Director City Presentation

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

Ms Julie Scott, Manager Economic Development

Mr John Milicic, Manager Property

Mr George Georgakis, Manager Council and Executive Services

The meeting commenced at 6.00pm.

STATEMENT REGARDING WEBCASTING OF MEETING

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

ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF COUNTRY, PRAYER OF COUNCIL AND AFFIRMATION

The prayer of the Council was read by Father Paul Monkerud from All Saints Catholic Church.

NATIONAL ANTHEM

The National Anthem was played at the meeting.

APOLOGIES

Nil.

CONDOLENCES

ITEM NO:	COND 01
FILE NO:	057743.2022
SUBJECT:	Harry Hunt OAM (1944 to 2022)
Tonight, we pause to honour the life of Harry Hunt OAM, also known as “Mr Liverpool”, a giant within our local community. Harry Hunt sadly passed away this month on Wednesday 9 February, aged 77. Harry was a third-generation Chinese-Australian. He was born in September 1944 in Warialda, a small town in the North West Slopes region of New South Wales. He was the youngest of seven children born to parents Leong Wun-Ginn and Harry Hin Hunt. His father had run the general store in Warialda for several years before Harry’s birth. Shortly after Harry was born, the Hunt family relocated to Sydney where Harry’s father and older brothers began several businesses, operating fruit shops, before later venturing into the motel industry. Hunt’s Motel at the Crossroads on the Hume Highway began as an 11-unit motel in 1960. Initially helping to run the family enterprise Harry eventually took over the management of the motel and on-site restaurant, and he later became sole owner. Harry clearly shared his family’s entrepreneurial spirit. Under Harry’s leadership the motel expanded significantly. He also worked hard to make the restaurant successful and was an early proponent of outdoor dining. The restaurant was long known as “Hunt’s Seafood Restaurant” catering for the increasing appetite of Sydney seafood diners. Over Harry’s long tenure as Hunt’s proprietor the business expanded to the large 134 room hotel it is today, with function and conference facilities. As a successful local business owner Harry was heavily involved with the Liverpool Chamber of Commerce, and he served as president of the organisation for 13 years. He was also the president of the Liverpool City Liquor Accord and recently served as a judge for the Western Sydney Business Awards. He was also a long-time supporter of the Greater Narellan Business Chamber and Cabramatta Chamber of Commerce. Harry was also the president of the South West Sydney Tourism Association and worked hard to promote the region as an attractive destination. He was also an active member of Liverpool City Council’s Tourism and CBD Committee. Harry was a vocal proponent of a second Sydney Airport being constructed at Badgerys Creek, calling for the project long before the Federal Government officially gave it the green light. Harry’s many philanthropic efforts are perhaps the most incredible aspect of his legacy. I can only mention a fraction of these. Harry was a long-time member of Liverpool Rotary Club, Chairman of the Liverpool Red Shield Appeal and supporter of the Red Cross and Lifeline Macarthur. He was also a sponsor of the Shining Stars Foundation, and he would donate 150 or more meals to the homeless every single week. Harry’s charity work benefited several local organisations including Liverpool Hospital, the Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research and Liverpool SES. It has been estimated Harry’s charitable efforts in the local community amounted to on average $50,000 worth of donations every year. He was also well-known for the annual Christmas lunches he hosted for disadvantaged community members, and during the bushfire crisis of late 2019/early 2020 Harry provided free accommodation to people affected who had nowhere else to go. The extraordinary business and charitable achievements of Harry Hunt were recognised by several accolades, and he was awarded the Medal of the Order of Australia (OAM) in 2007. Other awards include the Sir Alan Walker Foundation Award in 2014 for his contributions to Lifeline Macarthur, and several Liverpool City Council awards. These included Business Person of the Year in 1990, Companion of the Order of Liverpool in 2000, Citizen of the Year in 2005, the Macquarie Award in 2017 and Senior Citizen of the Year in 2021. Harry Hunt was a dear friend and mentor to many who will be remembered for his generosity and infectious smile. The hundreds of condolence messages across social media marking Harry’s passing are a testament to his widespread and remarkable impact on the people of Liverpool and beyond. His passing truly marks the end of an era and leaves a hole in the heart of our community. Harry’s legacy will be felt by so many, for years to come. Harry is survived by his wife Sybra who he married in 1971. Sybra was a key part of Harry’s success and supporter of many philanthropic efforts. Harry and Sybra celebrated their 50th wedding anniversary last year. Harry is also survived by his children Sue-Lei, Ti and Maylei, son-in-law Paul, and grandchildren Madeline and Lucy. I humbly express my deepest condolences to his family and friends. Our thoughts and prayers are with Harry’s loved ones during this difficult time. May he rest in peace. COUNCIL DECISION Motion: Moved: Mayor Mannoun Seconded: Clr Rhodes That Council officially recognise Harry Hunt’s contribution to the community. On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED. The Councillors voted unanimously for this item. Council then observed one minute of silence in honour of Mr Harry Hunt.

Confirmation of Minutes

Motion: Moved: Clr Hadid Seconded: Clr Macnaught

That Council deal with this item in Closed Session at the end of the meeting in accordance with section 10(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.

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

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

During the meeting, while dealing with NOM 12, Clr Hagarty declared a non-pecuniary, less than significant interest in the following item:

NOM 12 Assisting the Liverpool Chamber of Commerce to Support the Liverpool Business Economy

Reason: Clr Hagarty is a member of the Liverpool Chamber of Commerce.

Clr Hagarty left the Chamber for the duration of the item.

During the meeting, while dealing with NOM 12, Clr Harle declared a non-pecuniary, less than significant interest in the following item:

NOM 12 Assisting the Liverpool Chamber of Commerce to Support the Liverpool Business Economy

Reason: Clr Hagarty is a member of the Liverpool Chamber of Commerce.

Clr Harle left the Chamber for the duration of the item.

MOTION OF URGENCY

Clr Macnaught requested Mayor Mannoun accept a Motion of Urgency relating to Civic Place and that it be dealt with in Closed Session at the end of the meeting in accordance with section 10(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.

Mayor Mannoun accepted this item as a Motion of Urgency and it was then dealt with at the end of the meeting.

PUBLIC FORUM

Presentation – items not on agenda

1. Mr Robert Storey addressed Council on the following matter:

Coopers Paddock Vegetation Management Plan

Motion: Moved: Clr Rhodes Seconded: Mayor Mannoun

That a three minute extension of time be given to Mr Storey

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

2. Ms Maria Kneipp addressed Council on the following matter:

Stop the Pub in Casula

Motion: Moved: Clr Hadid Seconded: Mayor Mannoun

That a three minute extension of time be given to Ms Kniepp.

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

Representation – items on agenda

1. Mr John Anderson addressed Council on the following item:

Item: NOM 04 Moorebank Intermodal Special Levy

Motion: Moved: Mayor Mannoun Seconded: Clr Rhodes

That a three minute extension of time be given to Mr Anderson.

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

MAYORAL MINUTES

ITEM NO: MAYOR 01

SUBJECT: 2021 Election

FILE NO: 059470.2022

Democracy is the foundation on which Western Society is built upon. Envisioned by the Ancient Greek Philosophers, we now benefit immensely from this concept. So much so that many countries in the world envy our system and processes.

Fundamental to this is allowing voters the opportunity to hear what their candidates have to say.

This Mayoral Minute acknowledges the wonderful efforts of U8F Fitness and the Liverpool Chamber of Commerce in organising live stream discussions with the 2021 Mayoral candidates so that the community could hear from their candidates.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Acknowledge and thank U8F Fitness for their efforts in preparing 2 x livestream Mayoral Candidate Discussions during the 2021 election period.

2. Acknowledge and thank the Liverpool Chamber of Commerce for their efforts in organising a Mayoral Candidate presentation during the 2021 election period.

3. Write to both organisations to formally thank them.

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion: Moved: Mayor Mannoun

That Council:

1. Acknowledge and thank U8F Fitness for their efforts in preparing 2 x livestream Mayoral Candidate Discussions during the 2021 election period.

2. Acknowledge and thank the Liverpool Chamber of Commerce for their efforts in organising a Mayoral Candidate presentation during the 2021 election period.

3. Acknowledges and thank 2GLF for their efforts in organising a Mayoral Candidate presentation during the 2021 election period.

4. Write to the organisations to formally thank them.

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

The Councillors voted unanimously for this item.

ITEM NO: MAYOR 02

SUBJECT: New Depot

FILE NO: 059481.2022

The basics of Local Government are the three R’s - Roads, Rates, and Rubbish.

Never in Liverpool’s history has this been more important than it is today.

Council employees at the Depot work hard to deliver the community that we all expect, however they can’t do this without the right equipment, tools, and support.

These employees also deserve to work in conditions and facilities that are best practice.

This Mayoral Minute calls on Council to immediately upgrade the Rose Street Depot.

RECOMMENDATION:

That Council:

1. Immediately start the process to lodge a DA to upgrade the Rose Street Depot.

2. In the interim, identify alternate solutions to provide a better mechanical workshop immediately and delegate to the A/CEO to action.

3. Aim to have the construction of the new Depot programmed in the 2023-24 budget, if not earlier.

4. Fund the upgrade of the Rose Street Depot from the general reserve.

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion: Moved: Mayor Mannoun

That Council:

1. Immediately start the process to lodge a DA to upgrade the Rose Street Depot.

2. In the interim, identify alternate solutions to provide a better mechanical workshop immediately and delegate to the A/CEO to action.

3. Bring back a report to the March 2022 meeting of Council to identify the scope of works, including costing and the issues involved that are present at the Depot.

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

The Councillors voted unanimously for this item.

Planning & Compliance Report

ITEM NO: PLAN 01

FILE NO: 346216.2021

SUBJECT: 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

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion: Moved: Clr Harle Seconded: Clr Rhodes

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

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

The Councillors voted unanimously for this item.

ITEM NO: NOM 11

FILE NO: 044226.2022

SUBJECT: Michael Wenden Aquatic Centre Upgrade

BACKGROUND

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:

NOTICE OF MOTION (submitted by Clr Goodman)

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.

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion: Moved: Clr Goodman Seconded: Clr Ammoun

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. Include a timeline at the April 2022 Council meeting for this project from the start of the planning process to delivery in the Community Strategic Plan, subject to funding.

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

Division

The Councillors voted unanimously for this item.

ITEM NO: CONF 03

FILE NO: 031771.2022

SUBJECT: Public Notification outcome of Proposed Road Closure and Sale/Land Swap of part of Hanwell Serviceway and part of Elizabeth Street, Liverpool

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion: Moved: Clr Rhodes Seconded: Clr Hagarty

That this matter be deferred to the March 2022 Council meeting.

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

ADJOURNMENT OF MEETING

At 11.01pm, Mayor Mannoun adjourned the meeting.

The Confirmation of the Minutes of the Council meeting held on 2 February 2022 and the Motion of Urgency raised by Clr Macnaught (both on page 4 of these minutes) had not yet been dealt with and would be dealt with when the meeting reconvened.

RECONVENING OF MEETING IN CLOSED SESSION

At 6.02pm on 24 February 2022 Mayor Mannoun reconvened the meeting in Closed Session to deal with the following items:

· Confirmation of Minutes of the meeting of 2 February 2022;

· Motion of Urgency (from Clr Macnaught)

The following Councillors and staff were present:

Councillors

Mayor Mannoun

Clr Ammoun

Clr Goodman

Clr Green

Clr Hadid

Clr Hagarty

Clr Harle

Clr Kaliyanda

Clr Karnib

Clr Macnaught

Clr Rhodes

Staff

Mr Peter Diplas, Acting Chief Executive Officer

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

Ms Ellen Whittingstall, Internal Ombudsman

Ms Susan Ranieri, Coordinator Council & Executive Services

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

Motion: Moved: Clr Hagarty Seconded: Clr Harle

That Council move into a Committee of the Whole.

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

Motion: Moved: Clr Ammoun Seconded: Clr Goodman

That the minutes of the Ordinary Meeting held on 2 February 2022 be confirmed as a true record of that meeting.

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

Motion Moved: Clr Hagarty Seconded: Clr Rhodes

That Council move out of a Committee of the Whole.

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

The Mayor requested Ms Jennifer Chenhall, General Counsel, Manager Governance, Legal and Procurement and Ms Ellen Whittingstall, Internal Ombudsman leave the meeting.

MOTION OF URGENCY

SUBJECT: Civic Place

ITEM NO: MOU 01

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion: Moved: Clr Macnaught Seconded: Clr Rhodes

That Council direct the CEO to:

1. Engage an independent auditor and investigator to assess the procedural validity and legal appropriateness of decisions made regarding (but not limited to):

a. Commercial borrowings to fund the cost of the project.

b. Execution of the loan documents with regards to commercial funding.

c. The necessity to seek additional funds to complete the project as planned and advertised to the community, with particular regard to when senior staff and the CEO were made aware of the deficit in funding, and the decision not to bring that information to Council as a matter of urgency.

d. The way in which interest rate subsidies were sought through childcare and library components of the building.

2. Appoint a project management specialist, with a proven history of successful delivery of projects of this size and complexity to manage all aspects of the construction and fit out of Civic Place moving forward (ASAP, following procurement processes).

3. Bring a report back to Council on the findings of points 1 and 2.

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

OPEN SESSION

Motion: Moved: Mayor Mannoun Seconded: Clr Green

That Council move back into Open Session.

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

Council moved back into Open Session at 6.53pm.

Mayor Mannoun then read the resolutions for the following items that were passed in Closed Session on the 23^rd and 24^th February, 2022 (and are shown on the previous pages of these minutes):

· CONF 01 Proposed Acquisition of Lot 133 DP17134, 39 Newbridge Road, Chipping Norton the Moorebank Voluntary Acquisition Scheme;

· CONF 02 Legal Affairs Report - 1 October 2021 to 31 December 2021;

· CONF 03 Public Notification outcome of Proposed Road Closure and Sale/Land Swap of part of Hanwell Serviceway and part of Elizabeth Street, Liverpool; and

· MOU 01 Civic Place

THE MEETING CLOSED AT 6.56pm.

Name: Ned Mannoun

Title: Mayor

Date: 30 March 2022

I have authorised a stamp bearing my signature to be affixed to the pages of the Minutes of the Council Meeting held on 23 February 2022. I confirm that Council has adopted these Minutes as a true and accurate record of the meeting.

Ordinary Meeting

30 March 2022

Planning & Compliance Report

PLAN 01

Planning Proposal Request - 84 Memorial Drive, Liverpool

Strategic Direction	Strengthening and Protecting our Environment Exercise planning controls to create high-quality, inclusive urban environments
File Ref	337357.2021
Report By	Brianna Van Zyl - Strategic Planner
Approved By	David Smith - Director Planning & Compliance

Property	84 Memorial Drive, Liverpool
Owner	Canterbury Leagues Club Ltd
Applicant	Zhinar Architects

Executive Summary

Council is in receipt of a planning proposal request for land at 84 Memorial Avenue Liverpool (Lot 100 DP 1014714) (Attachment 1). The planning proposal request seeks to amend Schedule 1 of the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 (LEP) to include residential flat buildings, serviced apartments, and commercial premises as an additional permitted land use, and to amend the height of buildings and floor space ratio development standards. The site is currently zoned RE2 Private Recreation and the proposed land uses are prohibited in the RE2 zone.

The proposed amendments to the LEP are intended to facilitate the development of approximately:

· 1,150 apartments;

· 150 hotel rooms;

· 44 serviced apartments;

· 670m² of active commercial boulevard floor space; and

· 9,300m² for a registered club.

Council assessed the planning proposal request (Attachment 2) as not having sufficient strategic or site-specific merit and recommended that the proposal should not proceed to the Department of Planning and Environment (DPE) for a Gateway determination. Council sought an independent peer review of its assessment (Attachment 3) which concluded that Council’s assessment was reasonable and justified.

The planning proposal request was considered by the Liverpool Local Planning Panel (LLPP) who agreed unanimously with Council’s assessment including the proposal lacking strategic and site-specific merit. The LPP advised that the proposal as lodged should not proceed (Attachment 4).

Council has written to the proponent on multiple occasions advising that the proposal should be amended or withdrawn. On 29 October 2021, the proponent advised that they would not be withdrawing or amending the planning proposal request.

It is recommended that Council not support the planning proposal request.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Notes the assessment of the planning proposal request for land at 84 Memorial Avenue, Liverpool (Lot 100 DP 1014714) and the independent peer review;

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

3. Not support the planning proposal request and not refer it to the Department of Planning and Environment for a Gateway determination;

4. Advises the proponent of Council’s decision.

REPORT

Background

Council received a planning proposal request for land at 84 Memorial Avenue, Liverpool (Lot 100 DP 1014714) (Attachment 1) seeking the following amendments to Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 (LEP):

· Amend Schedule 1 of the LEP to include residential flat buildings, serviced apartments, and commercial premises as additional permitted uses;

· Amend the maximum height of buildings development standard from 25m to a mix of 37m, 62m and 77m; and

· Amend the floor space ratio development standard from 0.25:1 to a mix of 3.02:1, 3.37:1 and 5.45:1.

Site context

The site is a 2.97-hectare parcel of land adjoining Woodward Park on the western side of the Hume Highway opposite the Liverpool City Centre (see Figure 1 below). The site is zoned RE2 Private Recreation and is surrounded to the south and west by RE1 Public Recreation zoned land. To the north across Memorial Avenue is R4 High Density Residential zoned land, and to the east across the Hume Highway is R4 High Density Residential zoned land (see Figure 2 below). The site is approximately 880 metres west of the Liverpool train station.

Figure 1: Site Map – Subject site approximately outlined in red (Source: NearMap)

Figure 2: Zoning Map – Subject site approximately outlined in red (Source: LCC Geocortex)

Planning Assessment

The planning assessment report considered by the Liverpool Local Planning Panel (LPP) is provided at Attachment 2. It includes an assessment of the merits of the proposal against the District and Region Plan, the Liverpool Local Strategic Planning Statement (LSPS) and the Department of Planning’s ‘Local Plan Making Guidelines’. The report concluded that the planning proposal request does not have site-specific and strategic merit and should not proceed.

Independent Peer Review

Prior to referral to the LPP, Council commissioned an independent review on the assessment of the proposal (Attachment 3).

The independent review confirmed Council’s assessment of the proposal and found that the conclusions and recommendations made by Council were justified. Ultimately, both Council’s assessment and the independent review concluded that the proposal lacked sufficient strategic and site-specific merit to proceed.

Local Planning Panel advice

The planning proposal request was referred to the Liverpool Local Planning Panel for advice as required by the Local Planning Panels Direction – Planning Proposals. The advice of the LPP is included as Attachment 4.

The Panel unanimously agreed with the Council assessment that the proposal lacked strategic and site-specific merit.

Since the LPP advice was issued, a meeting was held between the proponent and Council regarding amendments to the planning proposal that could improve its strategic and site-specific merit. However, no amendment has been presented to Council for consideration.

Draft Woodward Park Master Plan

Woodward Park is immediately adjacent to the subject site and is zoned RE1 Public Recreation, and contains the Whitlam Leisure Centre, netball courts, football field and a range of community services.

Whilst an entirely separate project to the subject planning proposal, a draft master plan has been endorsed by Council which also includes this site. The aim of the master plan is to provide high quality facilities for both active and passive recreation to support the ongoing growth of the Liverpool City centre and surrounds. This proposal is not consistent with the draft masterplan.

Correspondence

Since the LPP meeting on 24 June 2019 there has been limited correspondence from the proponent. The table below outlines the timeline of correspondence.

Date	Type	Issuer	Details
9 July 2019	Email	LCC	Email from Council to the proponent with LPP Assessment Report, Peer Review and LPP Minutes attached.
8 August 2019	Email	GAT Consultants	Email from the proponents’ consultants asking for further time on the proposal.
8 August 2019	Email	LCC	Email confirming more extension of time, however notification of decision required in August.
6 September 2019	Email	LCC	Email from Council asking the proponent to confirm how they would like to proceed.
11 September 2019	Email	GAT Consultants	Email from the proponent’s consultants asking for the proposal to be put on hold.
13 November 2019	Meeting	LCC and GAT Consultants	A meeting between both Council and GAT Consultants discussing the proposal.
14 November 2019	Email	LCC	Email from Council to the proponent after meeting clarifying points and asking how they would like to proceed.
26 February 2020	Email	Canterbury Leagues Club	Email from the proponent regarding an article on the Woodward Park Master Plan and requesting a meeting with the property team.
14 July 2020	Email	LCC	Email from Council requesting update to the proposal and explaining the article of concern.
8 July 2021	Email	LCC	Email from Council requesting an update and / or withdrawal of the proposal by 30 July 2021.
20 October 2021	Letter	LCC	A letter explaining Council staff will put a report to the November Council meeting recommending the planning proposal not proceed. However, it is staff’s preference that the planning proposal instead be withdrawn.
29 October 2021	Email	Canterbury Leagues Club	An email stating the club will not be withdrawing the planning proposal.
11 November 2021	Email	LCC	An email stating the proposal will be considered by Council in early 2022.

Given recent planning reforms enacted by the NSW Government, Council can no longer hold consideration of this proposal in abeyance as requested previously by the proponent.

Next Steps

If Council adopts the recommendation that the proposal should not proceed, Council will write to the proponent advising them of Council’s decision. The proponent may seek a rezoning review which would be considered by the Sydney Western City Planning Panel.

Conversely, if Council supports the proposal, it will be forwarded to DPE seeking a Gateway determination.

Conclusion

Council assessed the planning proposal request as not having sufficient strategic or site-specific merit and it is recommended that the proposal not proceed to the Department of Planning and Environment (DPE) for a Gateway determination.

Council sought an independent peer review of its assessment which concluded that Council’s assessment was reasonable and justified.

The request was considered by the Liverpool Local Planning Panel who agreed that the proposal lacked strategic and site-specific merit. The LPP advised that the proposal as lodged should not proceed.

It is therefore recommended that Council not support the planning proposal request.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

A fee has been paid by the proponent for the assessment and processing of this planning proposal request.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	Facilitate economic development.
Environment	There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.
Social	There are no social and cultural considerations.
Civic Leadership	Encourage the community to engage in Council initiatives and actions. Provide information about Council’s services, roles and decision making processes. Operate a well-developed governance system that demonstrates accountability, transparency and ethical conduct.
Legislative	Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979
Risk	The risk is deemed to be Low. There is a risk that Council’s decision is reviewed by the Sydney Western City Planning Panel. The risk is considered within Council’s risk appetite.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Planning Proposal Request (Under separate cover)

2. Planning Assessment Report (Under separate cover)

3. Independent Peer Review (Under separate cover)

4. Local Planning Panel Advice (Under separate cover)

5. Current ASIC Extract – Canterbury League Club Ltd (Under separate cover) - Confidential

Ordinary Meeting

30 March 2022

Planning & Compliance Report

PLAN 02

Post Exhibition Report - Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 Amendment 94 at 193 Macquarie Street, Liverpool

Strategic Direction	Strengthening and Protecting our Environment Exercise planning controls to create high-quality, inclusive urban environments
File Ref	394933.2021
Report By	Brianna Van Zyl - Strategic Planner
Approved By	David Smith - Director Planning & Compliance

Property

193 Macquarie St, Liverpool

Lot 1 DP 628824

77 Moore St, Liverpool

Lot 2 DP 1189772

Owner

Archer and Beckett Pty Ltd

Applicant

Archer and Beckett Pty Ltd

Executive Summary

At its meeting on 26 May 2021 (EGROW06), Council resolved to support a planning proposal request at 193 Macquarie Street and 77 Moore Street, Liverpool to amend the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 (LLEP2008) as follows:

· Relocate the site from ‘Area 11’ to ‘Area 8” on the Floor Space Ratio (FSR) map; and

· Repeal Clause 7.40 (introduced under Amendment 56)

Future development of the site would support approximately 180 residential apartments and 4,519sqm of combined retail and commercial space resulting in approximately 195 future jobs on an ongoing basis.

The planning proposal (Attachment 1) was submitted to the Department of Planning and Environment (DPE) for a Gateway determination, pursuant to section 3.34 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

A Gateway determination was issued by DPE on 16 July 2021 (Attachment 2). The planning proposal was publicly exhibited from 1 October 2021 to 31 October 2021 in accordance with the conditions specified in the Gateway Determination, and no community submissions were received. State agency consultation was also conducted (Attachment 3), and there were no objections raised.

This report recommends that Council proceeds with Amendment 94 to the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008, and delegates authority to the A/CEO (or delegate) to liaise with DPE and the NSW Parliamentary Counsel’s Office (PCO) to finalise the amendment.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Notes the Gateway determination for Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 (Amendment 94) and the results of public authority and community consultation; and

2. Proceeds with Amendment 94 to the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 and delegates authority to the Acting CEO (or delegate) to liaise with the NSW Parliamentary Counsel’s Office and the Department of Planning and Environment to finalise Amendment 94.

REPORT

The site and locality

The subject site is in the Liverpool City Centre and is located at the corner of Macquarie Street and Moore Street, with direct frontage to ‘Macquarie Street Mall’.

The locality predominantly consists of retail and commercial development in the B4 Mixed Use and B3 Commercial Core land use zones. There are high density residential and mixed-use developments on the periphery of the City Centre with further development being planned for the City Centre core, as a result of the Amendment 52 City Centre rezoning.

Map

Description automatically generated

Figure 1 - Aerial image of the locality (Source: Near Map)

The planning proposal (Attachment 1) relates to land at 77 Moore Street (Lot 1 DP 628824) and 193 Macquarie Street, Liverpool (Lot 2 DP 1189772). The site is zoned B4 Mixed Use and has an applicable FSR of 3:1 (and is identified in ‘Area 11’ on the FSR Map). LLEP 2008 Clauses 7.1A (‘Satisfactory Arrangements Clause’) and 7.40 apply to this site as a result of LLEP 2008 Amendment 56.

Figure 2 - Aerial image of the site (source: Near Map)

Background

The site has been subject to LEP amendments since the implementation of LLEP 2008. The two most relevant amendments include:

Amendment 52

In June 2015, Council prepared a planning proposal to rezone large portions of the Liverpool City Centre from B3 Commercial Core to B4 Mixed Use to “facilitate an increased population in the city centre and contribute toward Council’s vision to increase activity and vibrancy within the CBD”. The proposal also sought to include additional provisions for increased development potential on ‘opportunity sites’. However, it was proposed that 77 Moore Street and 193 Macquarie Street would form part of the proposed ‘Fine Grain Precinct’ (‘Area 7’), thereby precluding the site from qualifying as a potential ‘opportunity site’. Accordingly, the owner of 77 Moore Street and 193 Macquarie Street requested that the site be excluded from Amendment 52 and that efforts be made to keep progressing their separate planning proposal that had been lodged in June 2014 (Amendment 56).

A Gateway determination was issued for Amendment 52 on 24 September 2015 and a revised version of the planning proposal was publicly exhibited between 18 November and 29 January 2015. A post-exhibition report was presented to Council on 27 July 2016 and due to further revisions and delays caused by the need to include a ‘Satisfactory Arrangements’ clause, Amendment 52 was finally gazetted on 4 September 2018.

Amendment 56

In June 2014, Abacus Property Services Pty Ltd submitted a planning proposal request to rezone the site from B3 Commercial Core to B4 Mixed Use. The proposal also sought to increase the permissible height from 18 to 70 metres and increase the FSR from 3:1 to 6:1.

In July 2015, the proposal was amended to increase the permissible height from 18 to 100 metres and retain the FSR of 3:1 (and include a provision for minimum commercial/retail floor space). Subsequently, at its meeting on 29 July 2015, Council resolved to provide in-principle support to the proposal and forward it to DPE for a Gateway determination (subject to potential amendments made under delegated authority).

The proposal was forwarded to DPE in November 2015 once consensus was reached with the applicant regarding a 37.5% minimum commercial/retail floor space requirement being incorporated into the planning proposal. A Gateway determination was issued on 28 July 2016 and a post-exhibition report was presented to Council on 26 April 2017. Due to delays caused by the impending gazettal of Amendment 52, and the need to include the site in the corresponding ‘Satisfactory Arrangements’ clause, Amendment 56 was gazetted on 22 March 2019. LLEP 2008 Clauses 7.1A (Satisfactory Arrangement Clause’) and 7.40 apply to this site as a result of LLEP 2008 Amendment 56.

The subject planning proposal:

This planning proposal amends the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 as follows:

· Relocate the site from ‘Area 11’ to ‘Area 8’ on the Floor Space Ratio Map; and

· Repeal Clause 7.40 (Amendment 56).

The intent of the planning proposal is to bring the subject site into conformity with the surrounding sites that are currently identified as ‘Area 8’ on the FSR Map in the LEP. Future development would support approximately 180 residential apartments and 4,519sqm of combined retail and commercial space resulting in approximately 195 future jobs on an ongoing basis.

The proposal was referred to the Liverpool Local Planning Panel (LPP) on 3 May 2021 who advised that the proposal has strategic and site-specific merit and supported the proposal proceeding to Gateway determination.

Gateway Determination

DPE issued a Gateway Determination on 16 July 2021 (Attachment 2) which indicated that Council was the local plan-making authority for the proposal. State agency consultation was required with:

· Heritage NSW;

· Transport for NSW;

· Sydney Metro Airports (Bankstown Airport); and

· Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications.

Council has now satisfied all the conditions of the Gateway Determination, and the current deadline to complete Amendment 94 is 16 April 2022.

CONSultation

Community Consultation

The planning proposal was placed on public exhibition between 1 October 2021 and 31 October 2021. No submissions were received, and as such no changes to the planning proposal are proposed.

Public Authority Consultation

The conditions of the Gateway determination required the following state agencies to be consulted. A compiled record of state agency consultation is provided at Attachment 3. Each submission and Council’s response is summarised in Table 1 below:

Table 1 - Summary of State Agency Consultation

Agency	Comment
Heritage NSW	Heritage NSW recommended the preparation of an Aboriginal Cultural Heritage assessment as the site’s archaeological potential is considered moderate to high. Although the comments are advisory, it is pertinent that all parties are provided with clarity about how potential impacts on items of Aboriginal Heritage significance will be addressed. Subsequently Council and the applicant suggested an Aboriginal Due Diligence Assessment (DDA) is submitted instead, which will be required at the Development Application stage (DA). The Aboriginal DDA will ensure that a genuine attempt is made to protect and conserve any aboriginal objects on the site. This approach was also supported by the proponent’s consultant. Heritage NSW subsequently confirmed that they were supportive of this approach.
Transport for NSW	Transport for NSW raised no objections to the proposal, subject to there being no direct vehicular access via Moore Street and this being restricted in a site specific DCP. The Liverpool Development Control Plan (DCP) 2008 Part 4, Liverpool City Centre Clause 4.4.1.1 requires vehicular access from the secondary street where possible. Moore Street is considered the Primary frontage with the secondary street being Macquarie Street. Therefore, Council’s current DCP supports the outcome TfNSW envisions by restricting access to the secondary street. The current DCP is considered sufficient. Noting that vehicular access is prohibited on this part of Macquarie Street, vehicular access to the site will be from Davis Serviceway. This is supported by the DCP.
Sydney Metro Airports (Bankstown Airport)	Bankstown Airport requested an Aeronautical Assessment for the proposal. This was then provided by the Proponent. Bankstown Airport requested this assessment be referred to Air Services Australia. They advised that future development at the maximum height proposed will have no impact on Bankstown Airports Airspace and therefore had no objection to the proposal.
Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications:	The Department of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Development responded and advised Bankstown Airport was best placed to comment on the proposal.

Next Steps

If Council resolves to finalise Amendment 94 as recommended, staff will liaise with NSW Parliamentary Counsel Office (PCO) and DPE to begin the legal drafting of the amendment to the LEP. Once finalised, Liverpool LEP 2008 Amendment 94 will be notified in the NSW Government Gazette.

Conclusion

The Gateway determination requirements and matters raised by state agencies have been satisfied. It is therefore recommended that Council finalises Amendment 94 to the LEP 2008 and delegates authority to the A/CEO (or delegate) to liaise with PCO and DPE to finalise Amendment 94.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

There are no financial implications relating to this recommendation.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	Further develop a commercial centre that accommodates a variety of employment opportunities. Facilitate economic development.
Environment	There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.
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	The risk is deemed to be Low. The risk is considered within Council’s risk appetite.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Planning Proposal (Under separate cover)

2. Gateway determination (Under separate cover)

3. State Agency Consultation (Under separate cover)

4. Current ASIC Extract - Archer & Beckett Pty Ltd (Under separate cover) - Confidential

Ordinary Meeting

30 March 2022

Planning & Compliance Report

PLAN 03

Planning Proposal Request - 104 Fifteenth Avenue, West Hoxton

Strategic Direction	Strengthening and Protecting our Environment Exercise planning controls to create high-quality, inclusive urban environments
File Ref	050242.2022
Report By	Lilyan Abosh - Strategic Planner
Approved By	David Smith - Director Planning & Compliance

Property	104 Fifteenth Avenue, West Hoxton
Owner	Dalco (NSW) Pty Ltd & Covo Positano Pty Ltd
Applicant	Fabrizio D'Alfonso

Executive Summary

On 27 October 2021, Council received a planning proposal request on behalf of Mr Fabrizio D’Alfonso for land at 104 Fifteenth Avenue, West Hoxton. An updated planning proposal request (Attachment 1) was submitted to Council on 8 February 2022 following a request for additional information.

The planning proposal request seeks to amend the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 (LLEP 2008) to relocate the key site polygon as it relates to 104 Fifteenth Avenue, on the Key Sites Map in the LEP. The key site provision applying to the eastern portion of the site allows for additional permitted uses, being a service station and take away food and drinks premises.

In July 2021, Council received a Development Application (DA-750/2021) for the subject site seeking the demolition of the existing structures and construction of a service station and convenience store, take away food and drinks premises (McDonalds), childcare centre and Torren’s title subdivision into 19 residential allotments.

The Development Application (DA) was referred to Transport for New South Wales (TfNSW) for concurrence. TfNSW advised the future road boundary of Fifteenth Avenue will likely necessitate additional land to be acquired along the Fifteenth Avenue and Second Avenue frontages. Due to the encroachment of the future road boundary into the key site polygon, the service station and take away food and drinks premises could no longer be accommodated within the key site boundary.

Accordingly, the intent of the planning proposal request is to facilitate the development of the service station and take away food and drink premises, in accordance with the development outcome proposed under DA-750/2021. The DA is intended to be assessed concurrently with this planning proposal.

The planning proposal request was considered by the Liverpool Local Planning Panel (LPP) on 28 February 2022, as required by the Local Planning Panels Direction – Planning Proposals. Following consideration of the planning assessment report (Attachment 2), the LPP advised (Attachment 3) that the proposal has strategic and site-specific merit and supported the proposal proceeding to a Gateway determination.

It is recommended that Council note the advice of the LPP and support the planning proposal request proceeding to the Department of Planning and Environment (DPE) for a Gateway determination, noting that a further report will be provided to Council after state-agency consultation and public exhibition is complete.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

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

2. Endorses in principle the planning proposal request to amend Clause 9 in Schedule 1 – Additional permitted uses of the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008;

3. Delegates to the Acting CEO (or delegate) the preparation of the formal planning proposal including any typographical or other editing amendments 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;

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

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

REPORT

Site and locality

The planning proposal request relates to land at 104 Fifteenth Avenue, West Hoxton (Lot 2 DP 1074727). The subject site is irregularly shaped and has a total area of approximately 18,230m². The site is located at the corner of Fifteenth Avenue and Second Avenue. Fifteenth Avenue is currently under investigation for further upgrades, including road widening. A transmission line easement on the neighbouring lot also runs adjacent to the western boundary of the property.

The site is zoned part R2 Low Density Residential and part SP2 Infrastructure. The portion of land zoned SP2 Infrastructure relates to the future road widening of Fifteenth Avenue and is to be acquired by Transport for New South Wales (TfNSW) in accordance with Clause 5.1 of the LLEP 2008.

The lot is identified as a key site within Clause 9 of Schedule 1 Additional permitted uses in the LEP, allowing for the development of a service station and take away food and drink premises. The key site provision only applies to the eastern portion of the lot and restricts any takeaway food and drink premises to a maximum gross floor area (GFA) of 300m².

Figure 2 - Zoning of the subject site (Source: LCC Geocortex)

Background

In July 2021, a Development Application (DA-750/2021) was lodged for demolition of the existing structures and construction of a service station and convenience store, take away food and drinks premises (McDonalds), childcare centre for 90 children and Torren’s title subdivision into 19 residential allotments.

Pursuant to Section 138 of the Roads Act 1993, the application was referred to TfNSW for concurrence. On 3 September 2021, TfNSW responded with the following:

“TfNSW advises that the subject property is within an area under investigation for the proposed Fifteenth Avenue Upgrade. The subject site (Lot 2, DP 1074727) will likely be affected by road widening to facilitate for the rapid transit corridor from Liverpool to Nancy Bird Walton Airport. As such the development should not intrude on the potential future road boundary (blue line) as stipulated in the attached aerial image.”

The potential future road boundary indicated in Figure 3 by TfNSW necessitates the acquisition of additional land and encroaches significantly into the key site polygon. As a result, the site configuration proposed under DA-750/2021 could no longer be accommodated.

Subject Planning Proposal

The planning proposal request, prepared by Michael Brown Planning Strategies, initially sought to amend the Key Sites Map, Land Acquisition Map and Land Zoning Map, to reflect the additional land to be rezoned SP2 Infrastructure. Prior to lodgment, Council suggested the Land Acquisition Map and Land Zoning Map not be amended as part of this proposal, as the area require for future acquisition will be informed by the final design of the Fifteenth Avenue upgrade, which is not completed.

Additional Information Request

Following an initial assessment of the proposal, a request for additional information was sent to the proponent on 10 January 2022. The points outlined within the letter relating to the irregular shape of the proposed key site provision were addressed in the amended planning proposal requested submitted on 8 February 2022.

The planning proposal request seeks to amend the LLEP 2008 to facilitate the development of a service station and take away food and drinks premises. It is envisaged that future development of the entire site will comprise of a:

· Service station and associated convenience store;

· Take away food and drink premises;

· Childcare centre for 90 children; and

· Torrens title subdivided residential allotments.

The proposal is to be achieved through relocating the key site polygon as it relates to Lot 2 DP 1074727 Fifteenth Avenue on the Key Sites Map.

Figure 4 - Existing (left) and proposed (right) Key Site Map polygon (Source: Michael Brown Planning Strategies)

Planning Assessment

The planning assessment report considered by the Liverpool Local Planning Panel (LPP) is provided at Attachment 2. It includes an assessment of the merits of the proposal against the District and Region Plan, the Liverpool Local Strategic Planning Statement (LSPS) and the Department of Planning’s ‘Local Plan Making Guidelines’. The report concluded that the planning proposal request has site-specific and strategic merit and will rationalise the development of the site in accordance with the key site provision.

Liverpool Local Planning Panel Advice

The planning proposal request was considered by the LPP on 28 February 2022 for advice. The LPP supported the planning proposal request proceeding to DPE for a Gateway determination.

Council staff comments on the LPP advice is outlined in Table 1.

Table 1 - LPP Advice and Council Staff Response

LPP Advice	Council Staff Comment
The Panel neither endorses or disendorses any particular design for the service station, take away food and drink premises and/or childcare centre. Detailed design issues and the inter-relationship between proposed uses are a matter for the proponent and Council’s development assessment officers in consultation with State Agencies as part of the DA.	Noted. Matters surrounding compatibility of the uses and detailed design will be dealt with in the separate assessment of DA-750/2021 noting that these uses are already permissible with consent.
The Panel recommends Council officers reconsider their assessment of the Planning Proposal against Section 9.1 Ministerial Direction 6.3. The Planning Proposal appears to be inconsistent with that direction. However, the Panel considers that the inconsistency is justified on the basis that it is of minor significance, being a minor mapping change to an existing Key Site boundary.	Council agrees with the panel’s consideration of the proposal against Ministerial Direction 6.3. The planning proposal will reflect this prior to being reported to DPE for a Gateway determination.
The Panel also recommends that the Planning Proposal be publicly notified concurrently with an amended development application in accordance with section 3.40 of the EP&A Act.	Council will ensure the planning proposal and amended DA are exhibited concurrently should the proposal receive a Gateway determination.

ConCLUSION

It is recommended that Council endorse in principle the planning proposal request 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 sufficiently demonstrated 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.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

There is no unbudgeted financial impact if Council supports the recommendation in this report. A fee has been paid by the proponent for the assessment and processing of this planning proposal request.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	Facilitate economic development.
Environment	There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.
Social	There are no social and cultural considerations.
Civic Leadership	Encourage the community to engage in Council initiatives and actions. Provide information about Council’s services, roles and decision making processes. Operate a well-developed governance system that demonstrates accountability, transparency and ethical conduct.
Legislative	Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.
Risk	The risk is deemed to be Low. The risk is considered within Council’s risk appetite.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Planning Proposal Request (Under separate cover)

2. Planning Assessment Report (Under separate cover)

3. Local Planning Panel Advice (Under separate cover)

4. Current ASIC Extract - Dalco (NSW) Pty Ltd (Under separate cover) - Confidential

5. Current ASIC Extract - Covo Positano Pty Ltd (Under separate cover) - Confidential

Ordinary Meeting

30 March 2022

Community & Culture Report

COM 01

Synthetic Sports Playing Surfaces Investigation

Strategic Direction	Creating Connection Provide community facilities which are accessible to all
File Ref	079580.2022
Report By	Craig Lambeth - Coordinator Sports and Recreation
Approved By	Tina Bono - Director Community & Culture

Executive Summary

At the Council meeting dated 2 July 2021, Council resolved:

That Council:

1. Explore the feasibility of environmentally sustainable alternatives to synthetic turf surfaces for playing fields and recreational spaces.

2. Monitor the progress of DPIE’s investigation to sustainable alternatives to synthetic grass including for fields of national and international standards.

3. Work with local sporting clubs and association to monitor and mitigate the impacts of synthetic turf fields on the urban heat island effect, as part of the overall measures to address this issue.

Council Officers have since undertaken a review of the available research to examine the feasibility of synthetic turf playing surfaces as an alternate to natural turf playing surfaces. The DPIE report released in November 2021, is not conclusive in defining the suitability of synthetic turf surfaces. However, there has been significant research undertaken by Smart Connection Consultancy that has formed the basis for recommendations by State Sporting Organisations with respect to synthetic field installation.

The research and recommendation by Smart Connection Consultancy has some local application and considers a range of factors to determine site suitability for the installation of synthetic grass playing surfaces. These factors include among other things local biodiversity, venue demand, and the capacity for asset replacement at the end of its lifecycle.

Council has now engaged Smart Connection Consultancy to develop a venue eligibility criterion, technical specifications that will guide council in its consideration of synthetic playing fields.

It is anticipated that this framework will be presented to Council for the July 2022 meeting.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council receives and notes this report.

REPORT

BACKGROUND

In July 2021 Council resolved to investigate the feasibility of environmentally sustainable synthetic playing surfaces as a suitable alternative to natural turf playing surfaces.

Synthetic sports field surfaces have emerged as a global trend in sporting infrastructure development as an alternate to natural surfaces. Synthetic sport fields surfaces are regarded as having substantially greater durability than turf field, with the ability to withstand higher volumes of foot traffic in high demand environments. Locally, Liverpool City Council has three (3) synthetic playing surfaces within the LGA, with representation by sporting clubs indicating an appetite for the installation of additional synthetic fields.

The motion presented to Council supported the announcement by NSW Department of Planning Industry and Environment (DPIE) that it had commissioned an independent review into the use of synthetic alternatives to natural turf in NSW community sports fields.

However, substantial research has been undertaken by Australian-based Smart Connection Consultancy that considers the benefits of synthetic playing surfaces, against the potential environmental impacts. The conclusions from Smart Connection Consultancy indicate that synthetic playing surfaces offer greater durability than grass surfaces however that benefit should be carefully considered against the local environmental impacts with reference to those areas of ecological sensitivity.

Investigations

The initial report by DPIE was released in November 2021. The report outlines a range of key findings and makes some preliminary recommendations on the suitability of synthetic sports surfaces. A summary of this report is outlined in Appendix 1 of this report.

The report, undertaken by Otium Planning and Ethos Urban was intended to provide DPIE with a better understanding of the potential social, environmental, and economic impacts, benefits, and limitations of using synthetic turf as a replacement for natural grass in public open space across NSW. The report, however, is inconclusive as to whether synthetic surfaces:

- Offer greater durability than natural or hybrid turf surfaces;

- Are more cost effective in terms of ongoing maintenance costs;

- Are materially impactful on the local environment;

- Provide a safer playing environment.

DPIE is continuing to canvas Local Government throughout NSW on their use of, and experience with synthetic playing surfaces. Liverpool City Council is an active member in the associated working parties developed by DPIE.

Smart Connection Consultancy, regarded as a lead authority in synthetic playing surface technology in Australia, has undertaken significant, independent research on the use of artificial playing surfaces. The research undertaken by Smart Connection Consultancy, in 2018, considers the value of synthetic playing surfaces and has been used to develop standards of synthetic surfaces adopted by a number of State Sporting Organisations (SSO’s). The report from Smart Connections identifies that:

- Synthetic Sports Surfaces offer greater durability with the capacity to accommodate up to 60 hours pf usage per week;

- Technological enhancements to synthetic sports surfaces can have minimal impact on the local environment. European research concludes no local environmental impact from the use of Poly Aromatic Hydrocarbons;

- There are some negative global carbon emissions comparative to natural turf surfaces – the extent of the carbon emissions depends upon whether the surface is recycled at the end of its lifecycle and the compounds used;

- Although artificial turf is hotter at the surface, it does not pose any concerns when it comes to heat island. The report further highlights that some artificial turf surfaces offer greater heat resistance than others, and this depends on the materials used; and

- While there may be lower costs associated with maintenance, synthetic sports surfaces have a limited asset life. The length of the asset life will depend on a variety of factors that included the product selected, the level of usage and climatic influences. The savings in ongoing maintenance may be offset by the costs associated with resurfacing at the end of the asset life.

Local Context

Council currently has three (3) synthetic sports facilities located within the Moorebank Hockey Club facility at Ernie Smith Reserve, Moorebank. The installation of these pitches was undertaken by Moorebank Hockey Club in 2017, noting a financial contribution of $300,000 was made by Council to support the project.

Council has recently been approached to support the upgrade of additional ovals to synthetic playing surfaces by local sporting clubs. These proposals include:

1. The installation of a synthetic Football (Soccer) field at Ernie Smith Reserve as part of the larger upgrades by SDSFA funded through pre-election commitments to Southern Districts Soccer Football Association;

2. The installation of a synthetic Football (Soccer) pitch at Hoxton Park Reserve as part of upgrades plans presented and funded by Liverpool Olympic FC;

3. The resurfacing upgrades of to up to two (2) synthetic pitches within the Moorebank Hockey Complex as part of the Clubs submission for funding through the Greater Sydney Sports Facility Fund 2021 by Moorebank Hockey Club; and

4. The installation of a synthetic playing field at Ireland Park by Liverpool Rangers FC with a funding source yet to be determined.

Findings

In addressing directly, the item to explore the feasibility of environmentally sustainable alternatives to synthetic turf surfaces for playing fields and recreational spaces; the research presented by Smart Connection Consultancy indicates that synthetic playing surfaces, may represent a viable playing surface option within the local community where:

- There is high levels of usage of the venue and where natural surfaces may not be able to cope with the resultant traffic;

- The replacement cost at the end of the asset life can be incurred by Council;

- The selected product meets the specific criteria of the States Sporting Organisations, where such guidelines exist;

- The selected product is made up of the components that have the least local environmental impacts; and

- The installation of synthetic playing surfaces is not undertaken in areas of environmental sensitivity.

The suitability of synthetic surfaces should be considered on a case-by-case basis and defined range of criteria will be developed that identifies local venues that may meet the suitability criteria for synthetic pitch installation.

Council has monitored the progress of DPIE’s investigation and research presented by Smart Connection Consultancy for sustainable alternatives to synthetic grass including for fields of national and international standards, the investigations of synthetic sports surfaces by DPIE are ongoing. The initial report is not conclusive in its recommendations on the suitability of synthetic sports surfaces. DPIE has established a Local Government Working Group to further investigate the suitability of playing surfaces throughout NSW. Liverpool Council has representation within this working group and will continue to collaborate with DPIE and other Working Party representatives on this project.

Outcomes from the ongoing DPE investigations will be incorporated into Council’s policy framework where appropriate.

In regard to Councils ongoing work with local sporting clubs and associations to monitor and mitigate the impacts of synthetic turf fields on the urban heat island effect, as part of the overall measures to address this issue, Council has engaged Smart Connection Consultancy to provide expert advice on the establishment of technical specifications for synthetic playing surfaces suitable for the Liverpool environment. A key part of the consultation process will be to seek feedback from Sporting Clubs and Associations.

Conclusion

The findings in this report represent an opportunity to further consider the installation of synthetic playing surfaces throughout the LGA. Where natural turf surfaces are unable to cope with the demands placed on them, and where there is minimal local environmental impacts, synthetic playing surfaces may present a suitable solution to meet the increasing demand for sports fields. However, this should be assessed on a case by case basis to ensure the preservation of environmentally sensitive areas.

The recommendations from Smart Connection Consultancy for Council will form the basis for the establishment of a Synthetic Playing Surfaces Policy for Council’s adoption.

These recommendations and the subsequent draft policy will be available for review in July 2022.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

There are no financial implications relating to this recommendation.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	There are no economic and financial considerations.
Environment	Manage the environmental health of waterways. Enhance the environmental performance of buildings and homes. Protect, enhance and maintain areas of endangered ecological communities and high-quality bushland as part of an attractive mix of land uses. There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.
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. Support community organisations, groups and volunteers to deliver coordinated services to the community. There are no social and cultural considerations.
Civic Leadership	Act as an environmental leader in the community. Undertake communication practices with the community and stakeholders across a range of media. Foster neighborhood pride and a sense of responsibility. 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	There is no risk associated with this report.

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

Ordinary Meeting

30 March 2022

Corporate Services Report

CORP 01

Revised Model Code of Meeting Practice

Strategic Direction	Leading through Collaboration Strive for best practice in all Council processes
File Ref	064737.2022
Report By	Ellen Whittingstall - Internal Ombudsman George Georgakis - Manager Council and Executive Services Jennifer Chenhall - General Counsel, Manager Governance, Legal and Procurement
Approved By	Paul Perrett - Director Corporate Services

Executive Summary

The Model Code of Meeting Practice (Model Code) was introduced in 2019 and provides a

standard set of provisions on how councils in NSW should run their council and committee

meetings.

From March 2021, the Office of Local Government (OLG) revised the Model Code of Meeting Practice (Model Code) following extensive consultation. On 12 November 2021, the Local Government (General) Amendment (Model Code of Meeting Practice) Regulation 2021 was prescribed under the Local Government (General) Regulation 2021 for the purposes of the Local Government Act, 1993, section 360(1).

Councils are required to adopt a Code of Meeting Practice that incorporates the mandatory provisions of the Model Meeting Code prescribed by the Regulation. A council’s adopted meeting code may also incorporate the non-mandatory provisions of the Model Meeting Code and any other supplementary provisions adopted by the council.

Before adopting a new code of meeting practice, under section 361 of the Local Government Act, 1993, councils are required to exhibit a draft of the code of meeting practice for at least 28 days and provide members of the community at least 42 days in which to comment on the draft code.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Place the Draft Code of Meeting Practice on public exhibition for (28 days) and receive comments up to (42 days) in accordance with Section 361 of the Local Government Act, 1993; and

2. Receive a further report at the May 2022 Council meeting following the public consultation period, or if no submissions are received, delegate to the Acting CEO to adopt the Code of Meeting Practice as exhibited.

REPORT

Councils are required to make the following administrative arrangements in preparation for

commencement of their new Code of Meeting Practice:

· Exhibit the Draft Code of Meeting Practice for at least 28 days and provide members of the community at least 42 days to comment on the Draft Code of Meeting Practice;

· Adopt a new Code of Meeting Practice within 12 months of the local government elections (by December 2022); and

· Determine if Council will allow councillors to attend meetings by audio-visual link after 30 June 2022. If yes, the Draft Code of Meeting Practice needs to be adopted by 30 June 2022.

Note: The requirement for councillors not to be personally present at meetings in order to participate in them has been extended to 30 June 2022 under Section 237 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2021. If Councils fail to adopt a new Code by 30 June 2022, then they will have no provision to allow for remote attendance by councillors at their meetings.

Model Code of Meeting Practice

The Model Code contains mandatory and non-mandatory provisions. The mandatory provisions must be included in a Council’s Code of Meeting Practice whilst councils can decide to either opt-in or opt-out of using the non-mandatory provisions. Councils also have the ability to include supplementary provisions within their individual Code of Meeting Practice. However, these supplementary provisions must not be inconsistent with the mandatory provisions contained in the Model Code.

Key Features and Changes to the Model Code of Meeting Practice

Circular 21-35 has been received from the Office of Local Government (OLG) detailing the

revised development of the Model Code. The key features of the new Model Code are:

· New provisions that allow councils to permit individual councillors to attend meetings by audio-visual link and to hold meetings by audio-visual link in the event of natural disasters or public health emergencies. The provisions governing attendance at meetings by audio-visual link are non-mandatory. Councils can choose not to adopt them or to adapt them to meet their own needs.

· Amendments to the provisions governing the webcasting of meetings and disorder at meetings to reflect amendments to the Local Government (General) Regulation 2021.

· An amendment implementing Recommendation 6 in the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) report, in relation to its investigation of the former Canterbury City Council (Operation Dasha). ICAC recommended that the Model Code be amended to require that council business papers include a Statement of Ethical Obligations as a reminder to councillors of their oath or affirmation of office, and their requirement to adequately manage conflicts of interest.

Layout of the Draft Code of Meeting Practice

The Model Meeting Code applies to all meetings of councils and committees of councils of which all the members are councillors (committees of council). Council committees whose members include persons other than councillors, may adopt their own rules for meetings unless the council determines otherwise.

Councils must adopt a code of meeting practice that incorporates the mandatory provisions of the Model Meeting Code.

A council’s adopted code of meeting practice may also incorporate the non-mandatory provisions of the Model Meeting Code and other supplementary provisions. However, a code of meeting practice adopted by a council must not contain provisions that are inconsistent with the mandatory provisions of this Model Meeting Code.

A council and a committee of the council of which all the members are councillors must conduct its meetings in accordance with the code of meeting practice adopted by the council.

The provisions of the Model Meeting Code that are:

· Mandatory provisions are shown in black font;

· Non-Mandatory provisions are shown in red font;

· Previously adopted details which are unique to Liverpool City Council are shown in green font; and

· Supplementary Liverpool City Council provisions are shown in blue font.

The non-mandatory provisions (red font) cover areas of meeting practice that are common to most councils, but where there may be a need for some variation in practice between councils based on local circumstances. The non-mandatory provisions also operate to set a benchmark based on what the OLG sees as best practice for the relevant area of practice.

All references to committees of Council in the Draft Code of Meeting Practice refer to a committee consisting only of councillors and does not refer to advisory committees or working parties.

Suggested alterations to the Code of Meeting Practice:

It is recommended that the notice period for the inclusion of a notice of motion on the agenda be changed from seven (7) business days before the meeting, to close of business nine (9) business days (not including the day of the meeting) before the meeting is to be held.

The CEO comment to each Notice of Motion will also include financial information regarding the notice of motion. The additional time will assist staff in providing a CEO comment. The Notice of Motion template which outlines the information to be included in the CEO comment is included in part 24 of the code on page 48.

Giving notice of business to be considered at council meetings

3.9 A councillor may give notice of any business they wish to be considered by the council at its next ordinary meeting by way of a notice of motion (NoM). To be included on the agenda of the meeting, the NoM must be in writing and must be submitted by close of business nine (9) business days (not including the day of the meeting) before the meeting is to be held. Where a NoM is received after the nine (9) day cut-off date, the NoM will be put forward to the next ordinary meeting.

It is recommended that the same timeframe apply for Questions with Notice, with responses to be provided at the same Council meeting. The relevant clauses are copied below:

Questions with Notice

3.14 A Councillor may, by way of notice submitted under clause 3.9, ask a question for response by the CEO about the performance or operations of the Council. The Question with Notice (QWN) must be in writing and must be submitted by close of business nine (9) business days (not including the day of the meeting) before the meeting is to be held. Where a QWN is received after the nine (9) day cut-off date, the QWN will be put forward to the next ordinary meeting.

3.16 The CEO or their nominee may respond to a QWN submitted under clause 3.14 by way or a report included in the business paper for the relevant meeting of the Council or orally at the meeting. Where a QWN cannot be addressed at the forthcoming meeting, the QWN will be addressed at the next ordinary meeting.

The suggested changes relating to the non-mandatory provisions are listed below:

i. Clauses 3.11 and 3.12

These non-mandatory clauses relate to the requirement for the CEO to submit a report to Council in certain circumstances to address issues pertaining to Notices of Motion. In addition to the CEO comment to each Notice of Motion, there will also be a financial implication section completed by staff.

3.11 If the CEO considers that a notice of motion submitted by a councillor for consideration at an ordinary meeting of the council has legal, strategic, financial or policy implications which should be taken into consideration by the meeting, the CEO may prepare a report in relation to the notice of motion for inclusion with the business papers for the meeting at which the notice of motion is to be considered by the council.

3.12 A notice of motion for the expenditure of funds on works and/or services other than those already provided for in the council’s current adopted operational plan must identify the source of funding for the expenditure that is the subject of the notice of motion. If the notice of motion does not identify a funding source, the CEO must either:

(a) prepare a report on the availability of funds for implementing the motion if adopted for inclusion in the business papers for the meeting at which the notice of motion is to be considered by the council, or

(b) by written notice sent to all councillors with the business papers for the meeting for which the notice of motion has been submitted, defer consideration of the matter by the council to such a date specified in the notice, pending the preparation of such a report.

ii. Clauses 3.33 – 3.38

These non-mandatory clauses relate to Pre-Meeting Briefing Sessions to be held prior to each Ordinary Meeting. Council already holds a Councillors Briefing Session in the week preceding Ordinary Meetings and has adopted a Councillor Briefing Procedure. As such, it is recommended that our existing practice be continued and the clauses relating to pre-meeting briefing sessions be included in the Meeting Code for completeness.

3.33 Prior to each ordinary meeting of the council, the CEO may arrange a pre-meeting briefing session to brief councillors on business to be considered at the meeting. Pre-meeting briefing sessions may also be held for extraordinary meetings of the council and meetings of committees of the council.

3.34 Pre-meeting briefing sessions are to be held in the absence of the public.

3.35 Pre-meeting briefing sessions may be held by audio-visual link.

3.36 The CEO or a member of staff nominated by the CEO is to preside at pre-meeting briefing sessions.

3.37 Councillors must not use pre-meeting briefing sessions to debate or make preliminary decisions on items of business they are being briefed on, and any debate and decision-making must be left to the formal council or committee meeting at which the item of business is to be considered.

3.38 Councillors (including the mayor) must declare and manage any conflicts of interest they may have in relation to any item of business that is the subject of a briefing at a pre-meeting briefing session, in the same way that they are required to do so at a council or committee meeting. The council is to maintain a written record of all conflict of interest declarations made at pre-meeting briefing sessions and how the conflict of interest was managed by the councillor who made the declaration.

iii. Clauses 5.13 – 5.14

These non-mandatory clauses allow for the cancellation of a meeting under certain circumstances.

It is recommended that these non-mandatory clauses be included in the Meeting Code.

5.13 Where, prior to the commencement of a meeting, it becomes apparent that a quorum may not be present at the meeting, or that the health, safety or welfare of councillors, council staff and members of the public may be put at risk by attending the meeting because of a natural disaster or a public health emergency, the mayor may, in consultation with the CEO and, as far as is practicable, with each councillor, cancel the meeting. Where a meeting is cancelled, notice of the cancellation must be published on the council’s website and in such other manner that the council is satisfied is likely to bring notice of the cancellation to the attention of as many people as possible.

5.14 Where a meeting is cancelled under clause 5.13, the business to be considered at the meeting may instead be considered, where practicable, at the next ordinary meeting of the council or at an extraordinary meeting called under clause 3.3.

iv. Clauses 5.15 – 5.29

These non-mandatory clauses relate to meetings held by audio-visual link and attendance by councillors at meetings by audio-visual link. It is recommended that these non-mandatory clauses be included in the Meeting Code.

Meetings held by audio-visual link

5.15 A meeting of the council or a committee of the council may be held by audio-visual link where the mayor determines that the meeting should be held by audio-visual link because of a natural disaster or a public health emergency. The mayor may only make a determination under this clause where they are satisfied that attendance at the meeting may put the health and safety of councillors and staff at risk. The mayor must make a determination under this clause in consultation with the CEO and, as far as is practicable, with each councillor.

5.16 Where the mayor determines under clause 5.15 that a meeting is to be held by audio-visual link, the CEO must:

(a) give written notice to all councillors that the meeting is to be held by audio-visual link, and

(b) take all reasonable steps to ensure that all councillors can participate in the meeting by audio-visual link, and

(c) cause a notice to be published on the council’s website and in such other manner the CEO is satisfied will bring it to the attention of as many people as possible, advising that the meeting is to be held by audio-visual link and providing information about where members of the public may view the meeting.

5.17 This code applies to a meeting held by audio-visual link under clause 5.15 in the same way it would if the meeting was held in person.

Attendance by councillors at meetings by audio-visual link and attendance by councillors at meeting by

5.18 Councillors may attend and participate in meetings of the council and committees of the council by audio-visual link with the approval of the council or the relevant committee.

5.19 A request by a councillor for approval to attend a meeting by audio-visual link must be made in writing to the CEO prior to the meeting in question and must provide reasons why the councillor will be prevented from attending the meeting in person.

5.20 Councillors may request approval to attend more than one meeting by audio-visual link. Where a councillor requests approval to attend more than one meeting by audio-visual link, the request must specify the meetings the request relates to in addition to the information required under clause 5.19.

5.21 The council must comply with the Health Privacy Principles prescribed under the Health Records and Information Privacy Act 2002 when collecting, holding, using, and disclosing health information in connection with a request by a councillor to attend a meeting by audio-visual link.

5.22 A councillor who has requested approval to attend a meeting of the council or a committee of the council by audio-visual link may participate in the meeting by audio-visual link until the council or committee determines whether to approve their request and is to be taken as present at the meeting. The councillor may participate in a decision in relation to their request to attend the meeting by audio-visual link.

5.23 A decision whether to approve a request by a councillor to attend a meeting of the council or a committee of the council by audio-visual link must be made by a resolution of the council or the committee concerned. The resolution must state:

(a) the meetings the resolution applies to, and

(b) the reason why the councillor is being permitted to attend the meetings by audio-visual link where it is on grounds other than illness, disability, or caring responsibilities.

5.24 If the council or committee refuses a councillor’s request to attend a meeting by audio-visual link, their link to the meeting is to be terminated.

5.25 A decision whether to approve a councillor’s request to attend a meeting by audio-visual link is at the council’s or the relevant committee’s discretion. The council and committees of the council must act reasonably when considering requests by councillors to attend meetings by audio-visual link. However, the council and committees of the council are under no obligation to approve a councillor’s request to attend a meeting by audio-visual link where the technical capacity does not exist to allow the councillor to attend the meeting by these means.

5.26 The council and committees of the council may refuse a councillor’s request to attend a meeting by audio-visual link where the council or committee is satisfied that the councillor has failed to appropriately declare and manage conflicts of interest, observe confidentiality or to comply with this code on one or more previous occasions they have attended a meeting of the council or a committee of the council by audio-visual link.

5.27 This code applies to a councillor attending a meeting by audio-visual link in the same way it would if the councillor was attending the meeting in person. Where a councillor is permitted to attend a meeting by audio-visual link under this code, they are to be taken as attending the meeting in person for the purposes of the code and will have the same voting rights as if they were attending the meeting in person.

5.28 A councillor must give their full attention to the business and proceedings of the meeting when attending a meeting by audio-visual link. The councillor’s camera must be on at all times during the meeting except as may be otherwise provided for under this code.

5.29 A councillor must be appropriately dressed when attending a meeting by audio-visual link and must ensure that no items are within sight of the meeting that are inconsistent with the maintenance of order at the meeting or that are likely to bring the council or the committee into disrepute.

v. Clauses 7.1 – 7.4

These non-mandatory clauses relate to the Modes of Address at the meeting for the Chairperson, Councillors and Council staff.

It is recommended that these non-mandatory clauses be included in the Meeting Code.

7 Modes of Address

7.1 If the chairperson is the mayor, they are to be addressed as ‘Mr Mayor’ or ‘Madam Mayor’.

7.2 Where the chairperson is not the mayor, they are to be addressed as either ‘Mr Chairperson’ or ‘Madam Chairperson’.

7.3 A councillor is to be addressed as ‘Councillor [surname]’.

7.4 A council officer is to be addressed by their official designation or as Mr/Ms [surname].

vi. Clause 9.10

Similar to Clauses 3.11 and 3.12, this non-mandatory clause relates to the requirement for the CEO to submit a report to Council in certain circumstances to address issues pertaining to Mayoral Minutes.

It is recommended that this be included in the meeting code.

9.10

Where a mayoral minute makes a recommendation which, if adopted, would require the expenditure of funds on works and/or services other than those already provided for in the council’s current adopted operational plan, it must identify the source of funding for the expenditure that is the subject of the recommendation. If the mayoral minute does not identify a funding source, the council must defer consideration of the matter, pending a report from the CEO on the availability of funds for implementing the recommendation if adopted.

vii. Clause 10.9

Motions requiring the expenditure of funds.

This non-mandatory clause relates to the requirement for a motion or an amendment to a motion which if passed would require the expenditure of funds on works and/or services other than those already provided for in Council’s current adopted operation plan to identify the funding source.

10.9

A motion or an amendment to a motion which if passed would require the expenditure of funds on works and/or services other than those already provided for in the council’s current adopted operational plan must identify the source of funding for the expenditure that is the subject of the motion. If the motion does not identify a funding source, the council must defer consideration of the matter, pending a report from the CEO on the availability of funds for implementing the motion if adopted.

viii. Clause 13

Dealing with items by exception

This non-mandatory clause deals with how Council can resolve to adopt multiple items of business on the agenda by way of a single resolution. Council has often done this particularly when considering reports on Committee minutes and it is recommended that this be included in the meeting code.

13.1 The council or a committee of council may, at any time, resolve to adopt multiple items of business on the agenda together by way of a single resolution.

13.2 Before the council or committee resolves to adopt multiple items of business on the agenda together under clause 13.1, the chairperson must list the items of business to be adopted and ask councillors to identify any individual items of business listed by the chairperson that they intend to vote against the recommendation made in the business paper or that they wish to speak on.

13.3 The council or committee must not resolve to adopt any item of business under clause 13.1 that a councillor has identified as being one they intend to vote against the recommendation made in the business paper or to speak on.

13.4 Where the consideration of multiple items of business together under clause 13.1 involves a variation to the order of business for the meeting, the council or committee must resolve to alter the order of business in accordance with clause 8.2.

13.5 A motion to adopt multiple items of business together under clause 13.1 must identify each of the items of business to be adopted and state that they are to be adopted as recommended in the business paper.

13.6 Items of business adopted under clause 13.1 are to be taken to have been adopted unanimously.

13.7 Councillors must ensure that they declare and manage any conflicts of interest they may have in relation to items of business considered together under clause 13.1 in accordance with the requirements of the council’s code of conduct.

ix. Clause 14.20

Obligations of councillors attending meetings by audio-visual link

This non-mandatory provision deals with the obligation of councillors participating in meetings by audio-visual link during closed session items. It is recommended that this be included in the meeting code.

14.20 Councillors attending a meeting by audio-visual link must ensure that no other person is within sight or hearing of the meeting at any time that the meeting is closed to the public under section 10A of the Act.

x. Clauses 15.14 – 15.17

Expulsion from meetings

Clauses 15.14 – 15.17 deal with expulsion from meetings. These are mandatory

provisions in the meeting code, however council must use either clause 15.14 or clause 15.15.

Note, Council’s current Code provides for clause 15.15 and it is recommended that this be retained, however this is a decision for Council.

15.14 All chairpersons of meetings of the council and committees of the council are authorised under this code to expel any person, including any councillor, from a council or committee meeting, for the purposes of section 10(2)(b) of the Act.

15.15 All chairpersons of meetings of the council and committees of the council are authorised under this code to expel any person other than a councillor, from a council or committee meeting, for the purposes of section 10(2)(b) of the Act. Councillors may only be expelled by resolution of the council or the committee of the council.

Note: Councils may use either clause 15.14 or clause 15.15. Note, Council’s current Code provides for clause 15.15 and it is recommended that this be retained, however this is a decision for Council.

15.16 Clause [15.14/15.15] [delete whichever is not applicable], does not limit the ability of the council or a committee of the council to resolve to expel a person, including a councillor, from a council or committee meeting, under section 10(2)(a) of the Act.

15.17 A councillor may, as provided by section 10(2)(a) or (b) of the Act, be expelled from a meeting of the council for having failed to comply with a requirement under clause 15.12. The expulsion of a councillor from the meeting for that reason does not prevent any other action from being taken against the councillor for the act of disorder concerned.

xi. Clauses 15.21 – 15.22

How disorder by councillors attending meetings by audio-visual link may be dealt with.

These non-mandatory clauses deal with how disorder by councillors attending meetings by audio-visual link may be dealt with. It is recommended that the clauses by included in the meeting code.

15.21 Where a councillor is attending a meeting by audio-visual link, the chairperson or a person authorised by the chairperson may mute the councillor’s audio link to the meeting for the purposes of enforcing compliance with this code.

15.22 If a councillor attending a meeting by audio-visual link is expelled from a meeting for an act of disorder, the chairperson of the meeting or a person authorised by the chairperson, may terminate the councillor’s audio-visual link to the meeting.

xii. Clause 16.2

Conflicts of interest (when attending a meeting by audio-visual link)

This non-mandatory clause deals with how councillors participating in meetings by audio-visual link are to deal with pecuniary or significant non-pecuniary conflicts of interest. It is recommended that this clause be included in the meeting code.

16.2 Councillors attending a meeting by audio-visual link must declare and manage any conflicts of interest they may have in matters being considered at the meeting in accordance with the council’s code of conduct. Where a councillor has declared a pecuniary or significant non-pecuniary conflict of interest in a matter being discussed at the meeting, the councillor’s audio-visual link to the meeting must be suspended or terminated and the councillor must not be in sight or hearing of the meeting at any time during which the matter is being considered or discussed by the council or committee, or at any time during which the council or committee is voting on the matter.

xiii. Clause 18

Time limits on Council meetings

Clauses 18.1 – 18.4 deal with time limits for Council meetings.

Council’s current meeting code provides that meetings are to conclude no later than 11.00pm without an extension.

There is a non-mandatory provision which allows Council to extend the time of the meeting by resolution if the business of the council is unfinished (at 11.00pm).

It is recommended that council’s current practice of not allowing for an extension beyond 11.00pm remain in place, however this is a decision for Council. Note, the information highlighted below is not included in council’s current code.

18.1 Meetings of the council and committees of the council are to conclude no later than 11.00pm without an extension.

Note: Staff required to attend Council meetings will be instructed by their immediate supervisor to commence work on the day of the scheduled Council meeting at a time that will ensure that their ordinary hours of work shall not exceed 12 hours in any one day excusive of unpaid meal breaks, The affected staff should not resume duty without receiving 10 consecutive hours off duty.

18.2 If the business of the meeting is unfinished at 11.00pm, the council or the committee may, by resolution, extend the time of the meeting.

18.3 If the business of the meeting is unfinished at 11.00pm and the council does not resolve to extend the meeting, the chairperson must either:

(a) defer consideration of the remaining items of business on the agenda to the next ordinary meeting of the council, or

(b) adjourn the meeting to a time, date and place fixed by the chairperson.

18.4 Clause 18.3 does not limit the ability of the council or a committee of the council to resolve to adjourn a meeting at any time. The resolution adjourning the meeting must fix the time, date, and place that the meeting is to be adjourned to.

xiv. Clause 19.2(a) and 20.22

Minutes of council meetings and committee meetings.

This non-mandatory clause deals with information to be contained in the minutes. It is recommended that this be included in the meeting code.

19.2(a) and 20.22

The CEO must ensure that the following matters are recorded in the council’s minutes:

(a) the names of councillors attending a council meeting and whether they attended the meeting in person or by audio-visual link

CONCLUSION

The Code of Meeting Practice structure assists decision making by allowing effective

decision processes and use of time, Councillors to fulfil their responsibilities under the Local

Government Act and a structured community input and participation in decision.

The Code of Meeting Practice sets the benchmark that allows Council to make lawful and financially responsible decisions.

financial implications

There are no financial implications relating to this recommendation.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	There are no economic and financial considerations.
Environment	There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.
Social	There are no social and cultural considerations.
Civic Leadership	Facilitate the development of community leaders. Encourage the community to engage in Council initiatives and actions. Provide information about Council’s services, roles and decision making processes. Deliver services that are customer focused. Operate a well-developed governance system that demonstrates accountability, transparency, and ethical conduct.
Legislative	Sections 360 and 361 of the Local Government Act 1993.
Risk	The risk is deemed to be low and is considered to be within Council’s risk appetite.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Office of Local Government Circular on the Model Code of Meeting Practice (Under separate cover)

2. Draft Code of Meeting Practice (Under separate cover)

3. Office of Local Government Model Code of Meeting Practice (Under separate cover)

Ordinary Meeting

30 March 2022

Corporate Services Report

CORP 02

Investment Report February 2022

Strategic Direction	Leading through Collaboration Seek efficient and innovative methods to manage our resources
File Ref	074817.2022
Report By	Chi Nguyen - Accountant - Investments & Treasury Management
Approved By	Vishwa Nadan - Chief Financial Officer

Executive Summary

This report details Council’s investment portfolio and its performance as at 28 February 2022. Key highlights include:

· Council held investments with a market value of $454 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 93 basis points above the benchmark (AusBond Bank Bill Index

	AusBond Bank Bill Index (ABBI)
Benchmark	0.03%
Portfolio yield	0.96%
Performance above benchmark	0.93%

· Year-to-date, Council’s investment income was $2.1 million lower than the original budget (prior month: $1.9 million). This is primarily due to $1.9 million for unrealised decline in fair value of FRNs due to unfavourable market movements since July 2021.

· Year-to-date, Council’s investment in mortgage-backed securities (MBSs) are valued at $522 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 advisor believes 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 22.67 per cent of its portfolio in ADIs rated BBB and below.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council receives and notes this report.

REPORT

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

Council’s portfolio

As at 28 February 2022, Council held investments with a market value of $454 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.

*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, 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 22.67 per cent of its portfolio in ADIs rated BBB and below.

Mortgaged-backed securities

Council’s investment advisor (Amicus Advisory) was asked on appointment to review Council’s investments in grandfathered mortgage-backed securities (MBSs). 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 MBSs and as a result, Council’s investments in these securities are now classed as non-rated. Year-to-date, Council’s investment in MBSs are valued at $522 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 for the month of February 2022 exceeded the ABBI index by 93 basis points (portfolio yield: 0.96%; ABBI: 0.03%)

Council’s 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 $2.1 million lower than the original budget. This is primarily due to $1.9 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	$2.1m	$1.9m	($0.2m)
Fair value market movement	$0.6m	($1.3m)	($1.9m)
Total	$2.7m	$0.6m	($2.1m)

Investment portfolio at a glance

Portfolio Performance

The portfolio yield for the month of February 2022 exceeded the AusBond Bank Bill index by 93 basis points (portfolio yield: 0.96%; ABBI: 0.03%).

Annual Income vs. Budget

Council’s investment income was $2.1 million lower than the original budget as at 28 February 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 March 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.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	Council’s investment income was $2.1 million lower than the original budget as at 28 February 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.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Investment Portfolio February 2022

Ordinary Meeting

30 March 2022

Corporate Services Report

CORP 04

Council approval to apply for an Additional Special Variation (ASV)

Strategic Direction	Leading through Collaboration Seek efficient and innovative methods to manage our resources
File Ref	093151.2022
Report By	Hiba Soueid - Manager Corporate Strategy and Performance Vishwa Nadan - Chief Financial Officer
Approved By	Paul Perrett - Director Corporate Services

Executive Summary

This report seeks Council approval to apply for a one per cent permanent Additional Special Variation (ASV) from 2022-23 onwards under Section 508(2) of the Local Government Act.

On 7 March 2022, the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal (IPART) announced that councils can apply for an additional special variation due to the delayed local government elections and 2022-23 rate peg being lower than what councils had forecast in their 2021-22 long-term financial plans (LTFPs).

This one-off ASV is for councils that can demonstrate the need for a special rates variation to meet the obligations they set for 2022-23 in their 2021-22 Integrated Planning and Reporting (IP&R) documentation. The maximum council can apply for is 2.5 per cent. This is applicable to Liverpool City Council, as the LTFP factored in a two per cent increase and was only granted one per cent by the IPART. This has resulted in a $1.13 million shortfall in Council’s operational budget in 2022-23.

Council meets the ASV application criteria by demonstrating that it:

• will have a $1.13 million shortfall in its 2022-23 operating budget (this estimate is based on a permissible yield of $113.5 million and 77,639 rateable properties)

• budgeted for a two per cent rate peg in 2022-23 and following nine years

• publicly exhibited last year its Long-Term Financial Plan through its Integrated Planning and Reporting processes

• is unable to meet the increased cost of its services (for example the staff award increase effective from 1 July 2022 is two per cent).

If successful, Council intends to use the additional funds to maintain essential service delivery levels to the community.

Currently Council will be increasing its 2022-23 rates in accordance with the IPART determination of one per cent. Should Council apply for the ASV, the average impact on ratepayers would be an additional $12 per residential property per annum. The impact on the average rural property would be an additional $30 per annum.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council authorise the Acting Chief Executive Officer to submit an application to the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal for a permanent Additional Special Variation of one per cent, commencing in the 2022-23 financial year under Section 508(2) of the Local Government Act.

REPORT

When developing Council’s Long Term Financial Plan, a two per cent rates increase was forecast in Council’s operational budget. This was publicly exhibited last year as per Integrated Planning and Reporting requirements. However, the IPART only granted councils a one per cent increase, resulting in a $1.13 million shortfall in Council’s published approved budget.

As a result of the delayed council elections and the 2022-23 rate peg being lower than what councils have forecast, the NSW Government and the IPART introduced a one-off Additional Special Variation (ASV) round for the 2022-23 financial year. Through this scheme, the maximum council can apply for is 2.5 per cent (including a population factor^{^[4]}). However, Council’s Long-Term Financial Plan anticipated only a two per cent increase, so this is the maximum that Council can apply for.

By applying to the IPART for an ASV of one per cent, Council will be able to address the shortfall in its approved operational budget and fund services in line with the increases projected through its LTFP.

Financial impact on ratepayers

The financial impact of an additional one per cent increase on the average ratepayer is outlined in the table below.

Property Type	Average rates increase for 2022-23 as approved by IPART	Average impact of ASV	Average rates in 2022-23	Average rates due with ASV
Residential Properties	$12	$12	$1212	$1224
Rural Properties*	$30	$30	$3030	$3060

*Calculated on the average rural property rate of $3000 per annum.

Additional Special Variation (ASV) application criteria

Council will need to address the following criteria when applying for the ASV:

ASV Criteria	How Council meets the criteria
Council has demonstrable financial need such that, in the absence of a special variation, council would not have sufficient funds to meet its obligations as identified in its 2021-22 LTFP as and when they fall due in 2022-23.	Council will have a $1.13 million shortfall in its operating budget. This estimate is based on a permissible yield of $113.5 million and 77,639 rateable properties.
Where councils are applying for a permanent special variation, in addition to the above criterion, the council has demonstrable financial need for the special variation to be retained in its rate base on an ongoing basis.	The LTFP budgeted for a two per cent rate increase for each of the ten years. Not receiving the additional one per cent will reduce Council’s ability to improve its financial position.
Council’s 2021-22 Integrated Planning and Reporting documentation budgeted for an income increase above the percentage specified for the council for 2022-23 under section 506 of the Act.	Council publicly exhibited its Long-Term Financial Plan through its Integrated Planning and Reporting processes, including a two percent rate increase each year.
Council has resolved to apply for the special variation under section 508(2) of the Act and that the resolution clearly states whether the resolution is for a temporary or permanent special variation under section 508(2) of the Act.	Subject to Council resolving to approve this Council paper.
The amount of the additional income that council will receive if the special variation is approved.	$1.13 million.
Why the special variation is required.	Council is unable to meet the increased cost of its services. For example, the staff award increased pay by two per cent effective from 1 July 2022. Council will use the additional funds to maintain essential service delivery levels to the community.
That the council has considered the impact on ratepayers and the community in 2022-23 and, if permanent, in future years if the special variation is approved and considers that it is reasonable.	The average impact on ratepayers would be an additional $12 per residential property per annum. The impact on the average rural property would be an additional $30 per annum.

This one-off SRV round is available for the 2022-23 financial year only. Unlike the existing annual special rate variation process, councils will not be required to undertake a separate community consultation process to apply. Instead, the IPART will consider the consultation undertaken through Council’s Integrated Planning and Reporting process and consider the Council resolution to apply. Applications for an ASV close on 29 April 2022 with decisions being made by June 2022.

It is therefore recommended that Council resolve to apply for a permanent Additional Special Variation of one per cent, commencing in the 2022-23 financial year under Section 508(2) of the Local Government Act.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Should Council be successful in its application to the IPART for an ASV, the additional one per cent in income will address the $1.13 million shortfall in Council’s operational budget as outlined in the Long-Term Financial Plan.

Should Council resolve not to apply for an ASV or be unsuccessful in its application, there will be a $1.13 million gap in its operational budget, resulting in either a decrease of Council’s overall service delivery to the community, or reduced opportunity to improve its financial position.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	The financial considerations have been outlined in the body of the report.
Environment	There are no direct environmental and sustainability considerations.
Social	It is not anticipated that a one per cent increase to the rates will result in financial hardship. In addition the funding will be used to maintain essential service delivery levels to the community and minimise the impact of a Consumer Price Index (CPI) increase on its services.
Civic Leadership	Council has a responsibility to be a prudent and fiscal financial leader. By applying for an Additional Special Variation, Council is using the mechanisms available to address its budget deficit
Legislative	Should Council choose to submit an application, it will be in line with Section 508(2) of the Local Government Act that stipulates: “The Minister may, by instrument in writing given to a council-- (a) specify the percentage by which the council's general income or the amount of an annual charge for domestic waste management services, or both, for a specified year (being the year in which the instrument is given or a later year) may be varied, and (b) impose conditions with respect to the variation of that percentage”
Risk	The risk is deemed to be High. Should Council not submit an application for an ASV, it is at risk of either not maintaining its current level of services to the community or reducing its ability to improve its current financial position.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Office of Local Government Circular - Guidelines for Additional Special Variation (ASV) Process for 2022-23

Ordinary Meeting

30 March 2022

City Presentation Report

PRES 01

Interim Report - Rose Street Depot Upgrade

Strategic Direction	Leading through Collaboration Seek efficient and innovative methods to manage our resources
File Ref	088512.2022
Report By	Benny Wong - Manager Operational Facilities
Approved By	Tim Pasley - Acting Director, City Presentation

Executive Summary

At the Council meeting held on 23 February 2022, the following Council resolution was passed:

That Council:

1. Immediately start the process to lodge a DA to upgrade the Rose Street Depot.

2. In the interim, identify alternate solutions to provide a better mechanical workshop immediately and delegate to the A/CEO to action.

3. Bring back a report to the March 2022 meeting of Council to identify the scope of works, including costing and the issues involved that are present at the Depot.

This interim report is being provided in response to point 3 of the above resolution.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council receive and note this report.

REPORT

A Depot Masterplan Revision G dated 2018 was prepared by Council Property Services and Consultant (Complete Urban). It addressed the existing Rose Street Liverpool Depot’s compliance concerns, the upgrade works to meet Australian Standards, and further investigations which are required.

During 2018 to 2021, collaboration work with Transport for NSW was undertaken to acquire industrial zoned land in Austral, with the intent to accommodate a new bus depot as well as the Central depot for Liverpool. This work concluded when Council was informed that TfNSW no longer prioritize this work. Along with Council staff turn-over in key roles at the Depot, the projects delayed. In September 2021, the Depot Transition Strategy work was reactivated, exacerbated by the need to maintain business continuity model to mitigate COVID impacts.

Council’s previous Consultant was re-engaged to undertake review based on phasing of works for Rose Street as well as the Central depot to accommodate business continuity, any minor organizational structural re-alignment, current and planned depot works and function. Works are currently being undertaken to provide recommendation for the scope of works required for stage 1 at the Rose Street Liverpool Depot (a future satellite depot) and a stage 2 works in the Central depot at Devonshire Road, Austral (a future Central depot). A new detail report is anticipated by May 2022, in which it will be presented to Council in the May or June 2022.

In the meantime, urgent compliance works such as roof replacement, toilet upgrade and environmental protection works are being progressed with funding accommodated within the 2021/22 budget with non-urgent project being deferred. Furthermore a site tour of Blacktown City Council’s Depot has been scheduled for 4 May 2022 for Councillors.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

2021/22 Costs associated with this recommendation are within Council’s current budget.

2022/23 Costs associated with this recommendation are not in Council’s

long-term financial plan. The impact on the budget and long-term financial plan pending on the Consultant’s report in May or June 2022.

Below are the list of 2021/22 scope highlights but not limited to:

Item Type	Scope	2021/22
Compliance	Rectification of the asphalt/kerosene oil cleaning area.	$100,000
Compliance	Renewal of dilapidated amenities (Toilets & showers)	$200,000
Compliance	Substation design, due to current depot load already at maximum capacity.	$50,000
Compliance	Switchboard’s upgrade	$30,000
Compliance	Security access upgrade	$50,000
Compliance	Roof renewal, due to beyond economical repair.	$300,000
Compliance	Drainage unblocking	$50,000
Compliance	Staff lunchroom upgrade	$50,000
Compliance	Traffic Management Investigation & Design	$25,000
Compliance	Staff administration space upgrade design	$30,000

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	Enhance the environmental performance of buildings. Deliver a high-quality maintenance of infrastructure and management.
Environment	Minimize commercial waste. Manage the environmental health of waterways. Manage air, water, noise and chemical pollution. Enhance the environmental performance of buildings. Raise community awareness and support action in relation to environmental issues.
Social	There are no social and cultural considerations.
Civic Leadership	Deliver services that are customer focused.
Legislative	The Environmental Protection Authority and the Australian Standards.
Risk	The risk of not upgrading the depot is high due to non-compliance. The risk is considered within Council’s risk appetite.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Liverpool Operations Centre Depot Masterplan Report Revision G dated 2018. (Under separate cover)

Ordinary Meeting

30 March 2022

Infrastructure & Environment Report

INF 01

WestInvest Fund - Liverpool Priority Projects

Strategic Direction	Generating Opportunity Meet the challenges of Liverpool’s growing population
File Ref	076882.2022
Report By	Raj Autar - Director Infrastructure & Environment
Approved By	Raj Autar - Director Infrastructure & Environment

Executive Summary

On 24 February 2022, the NSW Government announced its $5 billion WestInvest program to help fund transformational infrastructure projects that will enhance communities and help create jobs in Western Sydney.

WestInvest aims to build new and improved facilities and local infrastructure that will deliver immediate community benefits across 15 Local Government Areas, including Liverpool. The Program is designed to improve local communities including revitalised high streets, improved parks, new sporting fields, better local traffic flow and active transport links.

A total of $2 billion will be reserved for high-priority community projects with an initial $400 million directly allocated to 15 Western Sydney Local Government Areas to advance shovel-ready local projects. The remaining $1.6 billion of the $2 billion community project fund will be allocated through a competitive round of grants open to non-government organisations, including community groups, not for profits, Local Aboriginal Land Councils, and local councils.

The $2 billion community project fund is anticipated to open before the end of March 2022 for eight weeks, with successful projects expected to be determined by September 2022. This report recommends that the following projects be endorsed for funding application for the two tranches of the $2 billion:

1. Light Horse Park embellishment and upgrades estimated to cost approximately $34 million.

2. Carnes Hill Aquatic & Leisure Centre - $55M

3. Carnes Hill Sporting Fields - $20M

4. Sinozich Park & Sporting Facility, Edmondson Park - $20M

5. Edmondson Park Community Facility - $20M

6. Liverpool Animal Shelter, Rossmore Grange - $12M

7. Miller Town Centre - renewal of the central Miller Square Precinct $27M

8. Light Horse Park upgrade - pedestrian bridge $20M

9. Light Horse Park Upgrade - lift connection to railway station $10M

10. Brickmakers Creek - Woodward Park $30M

11. Liverpool Stadium - Woodward Park $400M

12. Georges River Parklands and Chipping Norton Lakes Precinct $15M

RECOMMENDATION

That Council receives and notes this report.

REPORT

1. Introduction and background - the WestInvest Fund

2. Funding available

The $5 billion WestInvest Fund is broken down as follows:

a) A total of $3 billion will be made available to NSW Government agencies to deliver transformational projects that are ready to go and will benefit local communities.

b) A total of $2 billion will be reserved for high-priority community projects with an initial $400 million directly allocated to 15 Western Sydney Local Government Areas to advance shovel-ready local projects.

§ The initial Local Government tranche is designed to deliver immediate community benefit, with each local council eligible for between $20 million and $35 million, depending on population size. Liverpool is anticipated to received approximately $28M based on its population size.

§ The remaining $1.6 billion of the $2 billion community project fund will be allocated through a competitive round of grants open to non-government organisations, including community groups, not for profits, Local Aboriginal Land Councils, and local councils.

3. Funding scope

WestInvest funding will be provided to build new and improved facilities that will deliver community benefit and help turbocharge economic recovery across the following six areas:

§ Parks, urban spaces and green space;

§ Enhancing community infrastructure such as local sporting grounds;

§ Modernising local schools;

§ Creating and enhancing arts and cultural facilities;

§ Revitalising high streets; and

§ Clearing local traffic.

4. Eligibility criteria

While details around eligibility criteria haven’t been released, the State Government aims to prioritise projects based on their potential to drive immediate transformational change and make Western Sydney a better place to live, work, play, connect with nature and raise a family - now and into the future.

In addition to Councils, NSW Government agencies, community groups and non-government agencies are also eligible for the grant. Once further details on eligibility criteria are released, Council will work with existing and potential new partner agencies and groups to secure funding to deliver projects that support liveability and improve infrastructure to benefit Liverpool residents and visitors.

Councils will also need to provide evidence that they can fund the ongoing operating and maintenance costs of an infrastructure project seeking WestInvest funding.

5. Timelines

The $2 billion community project fund is anticipated to open before the end of March 2022 for eight weeks, with successful projects expected to be determined by September 2022 as indicated on the adjoining timeline. The required delivery timelines will be provided as part of the project selection criteria in late March.

6. Project selection process

Liverpool Council is currently planning and delivering a package of high value community projects across the LGA that aim to bring long-term value to its community. These projects are essential and valuable to the health, social and economic wellbeing of the Liverpool community.

Further, it is considered that projects that are at advanced stages of planning and design processes would maximise Council’s chances of success and would ensure early delivery of community benefits. Accordingly, the projects proposed for application for funding have been sourced from:

§ Council’s existing list of Strategic Projects.

§ Council’s recently endorsed 100 Day Plan.

§ This is Liverpool - Priority Projects 2021, which is a document prepared in anticipation of the WestInvest Fund.

7. Proposed projects

Project	Description	WestInvest Funding category	Indicative estimated project cost
1. Light Horse Park Upgrade - park improvements	Transforming currently underutilised Light Horse Park into an active and vibrant public space through large scale landscape improvements, playgrounds and associated recreational spaces, lighting upgrades and provision of a community building. The project also aims to improve both physical and visual connections to Georges River through the provision of a range of infrastructure including a pedestrian bridge, lift and bridge to Liverpool railway Station, lookout structures, jetties, and pontoons.	§ Parks, urban spaces and green spaces. § Enhancing community infrastructure such as local sporting grounds.	§ Park - $24M, design + tender in July 2022. § Community facility - $10M § Total amount $34M § Funding available: o WCD $2M o S711 $4M § Funding sought $28M
2. Carnes Hill Aquatic & Leisure Centre	Carnes Hill Aquatic Centre will service the substantial unmet community demand for aquatic facilities within the area and attract more than 200,000 annual visitations. The facility will comprise: § 25m Indoor Pool § Learn to Swim Pool § Leisure Pool and Splash Park § Spa/Sauna and Steam room	§ Parks, urban spaces and green spaces. § Enhancing community infrastructure such as local sporting grounds.	§ $55M § Strategic concept and estimates complete § Detailed design, DA and procurement - 24 months
3. Carnes Hill Sporting Fields	Carnes Hill sporting fields will provide state of the art recreational facilities for the broader community.	§ Parks, urban spaces and green spaces. § Enhancing community infrastructure such as local sporting grounds.	§ $20M § Strategic concept and estimates complete § Detailed design and procurement - 18 months
4. Sinozich Park & Sporting Facility	Provision of a state-of-the-art sporting and recreation precinct that offers a diverse mix of uses and activities along Cabramatta Creek in Edmondson Park.	§ Parks, urban spaces and green spaces. § Enhancing community infrastructure such as local sporting grounds.	§ $20M § Detailed design, DA and procurement - 24 months (subject to land acquisition)
5. Edmondson Park Community Facility	Provision of a community facility comprising a range of community services including a library, which will be integrated with the recently announced Vertical High School for Edmondson Park.	§ Parks, urban spaces and green spaces. § Enhancing community infrastructure such as local sporting grounds.	§ $20M § Design underway and will be delivered by Frasers Property in accordance with Planning Agreement.
6. Liverpool Animal Shelter	Establishment of Council’s own animal holding facility at Rossmore Grange comprising: § 2000sqm facility for housing animals. § 13,000sqm site area. To accommodate 120 dogs, cats and other pets.	§ Parks, urban spaces and green spaces. § Enhancing community infrastructure such as local sporting grounds.	§ $12M § Detailed design, DA and procurement - 24 months
7. Miller Town Centre - renewal of the central Miller Square Precinct	Provision of a new multi-purpose community hub integrated with surrounding public open spaces at Miller Square. The hub to include a library with adaptable programming spaces, meeting room space to accommodate social and community services, health programs, space for arts, informal meeting spaces and adaptable space for education and learning programs.	§ Parks, urban spaces and green spaces. § Enhancing community infrastructure such as local sporting grounds. § Creating and enhancing arts and cultural facilities	§ $27M
8. Light Horse Park Upgrade - pedestrian bridge	Provision of a pedestrian bridge over the existing railway pylons to improve access to Georges River and adjoining parklands.	§ Parks, urban spaces and green spaces. § Enhancing community infrastructure such as local sporting grounds.	§ $20M
9. Light Horse Park Upgrade - lift connection to railway station	Provision of a lift connection between Light Horse Park and Liverpool railway Station to improve access to the park from the City Centre.	§ Parks, urban spaces and green spaces. § Enhancing community infrastructure such as local sporting grounds.	§ $10M
10. Brickmakers Creek, Woodward Park	Brickmakers Creek Restoration and Regional Playspace for Urban Cooling.	§ Parks, urban spaces and green spaces. § Enhancing community infrastructure such as local sporting grounds.	§ $30M
11. Liverpool Stadium, Woodward Park	30,000 capacity regional stadium with retractable surface.	§ Parks, urban spaces and green spaces. § Enhancing community infrastructure such as local sporting grounds. § Creating and enhancing arts and cultural facilities	§ $400M
12. Georges River Parklands and Chipping Norton Lakes Precinct	The Georges River Parklands and Chipping Norton Lakes precinct projects will include renewal and development of community facilities, recreation and open space and desired public domain improvement works: § New Riverside Park -Foreshore Walks $4.26M § Riverside Gateway Park, $700K § Chipping Norton Lakes Park upgrades (pathways, foreshore access and stabilization and picnic areas, $10.4M	§ Parks, urban spaces and green spaces. § Enhancing community infrastructure such as local sporting grounds. § Creating and enhancing arts and cultural facilities	§ $15M

8. Conclusion and recommendation

While Council has progressed investigation and design of numerous major projects, the unavailability of required levels of funding has precluded the delivery of some of these projects. It is considered that the WestInvest Fund provides the opportunity to bring forward and deliver some of Council’s key strategic projects.

Subject to Council endorsement, the proposed projects listed above will be nominated under the WestInvest Funding Program. Further, as additional viable projects are identified during the grant application process, Council will be including these in the application for the WestInvest Fund. Updates on any additional projects will be provided to Council via ongoing briefings and reports.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

As stated above, a key selection criterion relates to Council’s ability to fund the ongoing operating and maintenance costs of an infrastructure project seeking WestInvest funding. Accordingly, the ongoing financial impacts of the proposed projects will be determined as part of the application process. For successful applications, ongoing operating and maintenance costs will be incorporated in Council’s Long Term Financial Plan.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	The delivery of the identified projects will facilitate economic development, will create and support jobs and will facilitate the development of new tourism based on local attractions, culture and creative industries.
Environment	Enhance the environmental performance of buildings and homes. Protect, enhance and maintain areas of endangered ecological communities and high quality bushland as part of an attractive mix of land uses. Raise community awareness and support action in relation to environmental issues.
Social	Provide cultural centres and activities for the enjoyment of the arts. Preserve and maintain heritage, both landscape and cultural as urban development takes place. Deliver high quality services for children and their families.
Civic Leadership	Foster neighbourhood pride and a sense of responsibility. 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.

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

Ordinary Meeting

30 March 2022

Economy & Commercial Development Report

ECD 01

Outdoor Dining Policy Review 2022

Strategic Direction	Generating Opportunity Create an attractive environment for investment
File Ref	063468.2022
Report By	Vivien Le - Senior Officer Economy and Place Chris Guthrie - Acting Manager City Economy
Approved By	Julie Scott - Acting Director Economy & Commercial Development

Executive Summary

The Outdoor Dining Policy has been updated to reflect community and business demands and to align to current best practice in outdoor dining in NSW and Australia. The proposed changes aim to reduce barriers to entry for businesses to undertake outdoor dining, while ensuring the safety and amenity of the general public.

Proposed changes include the removal of a Statement of Environmental Effects, removal of boundary identification where applicable, introduction of pro rata payments, and the introduction of new innovative outdoor dining areas. These changes aim to encourage greater outdoor dining adoption by businesses which ultimately will contribute to building vibrant and lively City for use by the Liverpool community.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Notes the current Outdoor Dining Policy is overdue for review and has been updated by Council officers to reflect the changing nature of the municipality.

2. Adopts the updated Outdoor Dining Policy 2022 and notes the policy will be reviewed further to reflect Council’s Public Domain Technical Manual when that document becomes available and to incorporate feedback from businesses, community, and Council following the current proposed changes.

REPORT

Background

Council’s existing Outdoor Dining Policy was adopted in March 2016. The policy was due for review in 2019/2020, however the Covid-19 situation impacted this process.

Following consultation internally, and, as a result of feedback from existing and future Outdoor Dining Permit holders, the Policy has been updated to reflect the changing nature of Liverpool’s CBD and LGA and emerging trends in outdoor dining within NSW and beyond.

Currently there are 20 Outdoor Dining Permits across the municipality with 11 of those based in the Macquarie Mall.

A key objective from the City Activation Strategy (2019-2024) is: To foster an 18-hour walkable city with a lively and well-integrated mix of activities to attract private investment and stimulate Liverpool’s communities to make greater use of the City Centre and its attributes.

And from the Destination Management Plan (2018/19 – 2022/23): To build a thriving visitor economy and increase the economic benefits that flow from tourism to local businesses and communities through unique visitor experiences.

The Public Domain Master Plan, a 10-year strategy for an upgraded CBD public realm, was adopted by Council in 2020. A Public Domain Technical Manual, which provides additional detail related to the Master Plan, is currently under development.

Summary of changes to the Outdoor Dining Policy

Overall, the review aimed to facilitate the creation of more vibrant and inviting spaces for use by the Liverpool community, whilst also providing opportunity for local business expansion. Changes to the policy aimed to streamline the application and approval process and reduce barriers to entry for businesses to encourage greater outdoor dining adoption and ultimately improve the liveliness of the City’s private-public domain and the visitor experience.

Key changes for Council to note in the reviewed Outdoor Dining Policy include:

· Removal of the requirement for a Statement of Environmental Effects (SEE)

· Removal of the requirement for boundary identification of outdoor dining areas where applicable

· Pro rata payments for Outdoor Dining Permits based on application dates

· Reduction in fees (50%) for non-smoking Outdoor Dining Permits

· Introduction of new areas for outdoor dining, including parklets and innovative outdoor dining spaces such as underutilised laneways

· Use of neighbouring properties for Outdoor Dining, with owner’s consent

· Council reserves its right to utilise unutilised outdoor dining areas outside of permitted hours, for corporate and/or community events conducted by Council

· Streamlined online application process

· Introduction of a design review step to ensure outdoor dining furniture is of high design quality and aligns to the future character of the City

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

There are no financial implications relating to this recommendation.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	Further develop a commercial centre that accommodates a variety of employment opportunities. Deliver and maintain a range of transport related infrastructure such as footpaths, bus shelters and bikeways. Facilitate economic development. Facilitate the development of new tourism based on local attractions, culture and creative industries.
Environment	There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.
Social	Raise awareness in the community about the available services and facilities.
Civic Leadership	Encourage the community to engage in Council initiatives and actions. Deliver services that are customer focused.
Legislative	Relevant legislative considerations have been taken into account in development of the Policy.
Risk	The risk is deemed to be Low.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Outdoor Dining Policy 2022 (Under separate cover)

Ordinary Meeting

30 March 2022

Notices of Motion

NOM 01

Don't Leave Local Communities Behind - 2022 Federal Election

Strategic Direction

Leading through Collaboration

Increase community engagement

File Ref

092641.2022

Author

Nathan Hagarty - Councillor

Background

The next Federal Election is expected to be held in May 2022.

Working in conjunction with its member state and territory associations, the Australian Local Government Association (ALGA) has developed a framework and resources for a national advocacy campaign that will run in the lead up to this election.

Based around the tagline of “Don’t Leave Local Communities Behind”, the goal is to secure funding and policy commitments that will support every Australian council and community, and ensure all Australians have an equal opportunity to share in the benefits of Australia’s post-pandemic recovery.

All Australian councils have been asked to participate in this campaign to ensure a coordinated approach that will deliver the best possible outcomes.

The Don’t Leave Local Communities Behind campaign will promote 17 priority asks in the portfolios of:

· economic recovery

· transport and community infrastructure

· building resilience

· circular economy, and

· intergovernmental relations.

These priorities are based on motions passed by councils at ALGA’s annual National General Assembly and have been endorsed by ALGA’s Board which is comprised of representatives from all state and territory Local Government Associations. They have been assessed by independent economists and would add around $6.46 billion per year to Australia’s Gross Domestic Product while creating 43,444 jobs.

The Don’t Leave Local Communities Behind campaign will run for five weeks, with each week focussing on one of the five portfolio areas. The full list of national Federal Election priorities that will be promoted through this campaign is outlined below:

Economic recovery

1. An initial injection of Financial Assistance Grants to local government of $1.3 billion to support communities and jobs and also resolve the current practice of bringing forward two quarterly Financial Assistance Grant payments each year.

2. A commitment to return Financial Assistance Grants to at least one percent of Commonwealth taxation revenue via a phased approach.

Transport and community infrastructure

3. $500 million per annum for a four-year continuation of the Local Roads and Community Infrastructure Program.

4. A strategic local roads investment program of $300 million per annum over four years to address road transport first and last mile issues and congestion on local roads.

5. An increase in Roads to Recovery to $800 million per annum (an additional $300 million per annum) and the Black Spot Program to $200 million per annum over four years, while addressing the South Australian road funding anomaly by making the additional $20 million per annum to SA in 2021-22 and 2022-23 permanent.

6. Continuing the Stronger Regional Digital Connectivity Package at $55 million over four years.

7. $200 million over four years to assist councils to develop and implement innovative housing partnerships.

Building resilience

8. A targeted disaster mitigation program of $200 million per annum for four years which will reduce the costs of response and recovery and strengthen community resilience.

9. A commitment to ensuring betterment funding as a core element of disaster recovery funding arrangements.

10. A commitment to include community infrastructure that is publicly accessible and owned, and local government waste, water and wastewater assets under Disaster Recovery Funding Arrangements.

11. A Local Government Climate Response Partnership Fund of $200 million over four years to enable planning and preparation to minimise the impacts of climate change in local communities and enable councils to achieve climate neutrality as soon as practicable.

12. $100 million per annum over four years provided directly to local governments to support the capabilities of Indigenous councils and the implementation of the Closing the Gap local/regional voice.

Circular economy

13. Support to provide guidance and advice to councils on how to unlock the circular economy locally, particularly in rural, regional, and remote areas.

14. Support to investigate and, if feasible, implement a national bin harmonisation program that will improve kerbside recycling, reduce contamination, and maximise opportunities for reuse.

15. $100 million per annum over four years to fund local government circular waste innovation projects.

Intergovernmental relations

16. Reinstating local government representation to the primary intergovernmental forum in Australia, the National Cabinet.

17. Ensuring local government’s ongoing voting membership of other relevant Ministerial forums.

ALGA has developed free campaign resources that can be adapted and used by all councils to ensure a consistent and effective approach.

Participating in a national advocacy campaign does not preclude this council from advocating on additional local needs and issues, but it will strengthen the national campaign and support all 537 Australian local governments.

NOTICE OF MOTION

That Council:

1. Support the national funding priorities of the Australian Local Government Association (ALGA), which would contribute an estimated $6.46 billion per year to Australia’s GDP and create 43,444 jobs; and

2. Support and participate in the Australian Local Government Association’s advocacy for their endorsed national funding priorities by writing to the local Federal Member(s) of Parliament, all known election candidates in local Federal electorates and the President of the Australian Local Government Association to:

· express support for ALGA’s funding priorities;

· identify priority local projects and programs that could be progressed with the additional financial assistance from the Federal Government being sought by ALGA; and

· seek funding commitments from the members, candidates and their parties for these identified local projects and programs.

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

[1] Westpac’s Australia and New Zealand Weekly – Week beginning 7 February 2022.

[2] Grandfathering is a provision in the Ministerial Investment Order (12 January 2011) that allows Council to hold investments which would otherwise be non-compliant with Council’s new Investment Policy and the Ministerial Investment Order.

[3] Westpac’s Australia and New Zealand Weekly – Week beginning 7 February 2022.

[4] The population factor is an increase introduced by the IPART in 2021-22 to allow councils, in particular growth councils, to maintain total per capita general income as their population increases and ensure that there is a linear relationship between population growth and council costs.

1
CORP 03	2022 Australian Local Government Women's Association NSW Branch Conference
Attachment 1	ALGWA Conference Draft Program

1
CTTE 01	Minutes of the Audit, Risk and Improvement Committee Meeting held on 4 February 2022
Attachment 1	Final ARIC Minutes - 4 February 2022

1
CTTE 01	Minutes of the Audit, Risk and Improvement Committee Meeting held on 4 February 2022
Attachment 2	Final ARIC Annual Assurance Report 1 July to 30 June 2021

1
CTTE 02	Meeting Notes of the Liverpool Youth Council meeting held on 12 October 2021 and Minutes of the Liverpool Youth Council meeting held on 8 February 2022
Attachment 1	Meeting Notes of the Liverpool Youth Council 12 October 2021

1
CTTE 02	Meeting Notes of the Liverpool Youth Council meeting held on 12 October 2021 and Minutes of the Liverpool Youth Council meeting held on 8 February 2022
Attachment 2	Minutes Liverpool Youth Council 8 February 2022

Economic	The costs associated with attending the 2022 ALGWA NSW Conference are included in the 2021/22 budget (the costs will be incurred in the current financial year) and the early bird costs per delegate are: - Registration: $1,025 per person which includes the welcome reception and gala dinner.
Environment	Raise community awareness and support action in relation to environmental issues.
Social	Raise awareness in the community about the available services and facilities.
Civic Leadership	Act as an environmental leader in the community. Undertake communication practices with the community and stakeholders across a range of media. Facilitate the development of community leaders. Provide information about Council’s services, roles and decision making processes. 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	Include any relevant legislation and section here.
Risk	The risk is deemed to be low and is considered to be within Council’s risk appetite.

Strategic Direction	Leading through Collaboration Encourage community participation in decision-making
File Ref	066148.2022
Report By	Galavizh Ahmadi Nia - Manager Community Development and Planning
Approved By	Tina Bono - Director Community & Culture

Economic	There are no financial considerations.
Environment	There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.
Social	Raise awareness in the community about the available services and facilities. Support community organisations, groups and volunteers to deliver coordinated services to the community.
Civic Leadership	Facilitate the development of community leaders. 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.

1
CTTE 03	Minutes of the Environment Advisory Committee Meeting held on 7 February 2022
Attachment 1	Minutes of the Environment Advisory Committee - 7 February 2022

1
CTTE 04	Minutes of the Strategic Panel meeting held on 14 February 2022
Attachment 1	Minutes of the Strategic Panel meeting held on 14 February 2022

Strategic Direction	Generating Opportunity Attract businesses for economic growth and employment opportunities
File Ref	077210.2022
Report By	Susana Freitas - Visitor Economy Officer
Approved By	Julie Scott - Acting Director Economy & Commercial Development

Economic	Facilitate economic development. Facilitate the development of new tourism based on local attractions. Culture and creative industries.
Environment	There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.
Social	Provide cultural centres and activities for the enjoyment of the arts. Preserve and maintain heritage, both landscape and cultural as urban development takes place. Deliver high quality services for children and their families.
Civic Leadership	Foster neighbourhood pride and a sense of responsibility. Facilitate the development of community leaders.
Legislative	There are no legislative considerations relating to this report.
Risk	There is no risk associated with this report.

1
CTTE 05	Minutes of the Tourism and CBD Committee Meeting held 22 February 2022
Attachment 1	Minutes of the Tourism and CBD Committee held 22 February 2022

1
CTTE 06	Minutes of Budget Review Panel 17 February 2022
Attachment 1	Minutes - Budget Review Panel Meeting 17 February 2022

Council	Dog	Cat
Blacktown	$435	$226
Fairfield	$375	$225
Campbelltown	$334.60	$177.50