Agenda of Ordinary Meeting - Wednesday, 29 June 2022

MINUTES OF THE Ordinary Meeting

HELD ON 25 May 2022

PRESENT:

Mayor Ned Mannoun

Councillor Ammoun

Councillor Goodman

Councillor Green

Councillor Hadid

Councillor Hagarty

Councillor Harle

Councillor Kaliyanda

Councillor Karnib (via virtual link)

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 (via virtual link)

Mr Tim Pasley, Acting Director City Presentation

Mr Michael Zengovski, Acting Director Infrastructure & Environment

Mr John Morgan, Director Economy & Commercial Development

Ms Ellen Whittingstall, Internal Ombudsman (via virtual link)

Mr Vishwa Nadan, Chief Financial Officer

Mr George Georgakis, Manager Council and Executive Services

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

The meeting commenced at 6.00pm.

Anthem

STATEMENT REGARDING WEBCASTING OF MEETING

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

ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF COUNTRY, PRAYER OF COUNCIL AND AFFIRMATION

The prayer of the Council was read by Reverend Timothy Booker from St Luke’s Anglican Church Liverpool.

NATIONAL ANTHEM

The National Anthem was played at the meeting.

APOLOGIES

Nil.

CONDOLENCES

Nil.

Confirmation of Minutes

Motion: Moved: Clr Hadid Seconded: Clr Macnaught

That the minutes of the Ordinary Meeting held on 27 April 2022 and Extraordinary Meeting held on 10 May 2022 be confirmed as a true record of that meeting.

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

Declarations of Interest

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

Item: NOM 05 - South West Sydney Tourism Taskforce (SWSTT).

Reason: Clr Rhodes has been elected to the South West Sydney Tourism Taskforce (SWSTT) Executive as a Director to replace the late Harry Hunt.

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

Public Forum

Presentation – items not on agenda

Nil.

Representation – items on agenda

1. Mr Hussein Oubani, on behalf of Arrahman College addressed Council on the following item:

Item EDC 04 Proposed Road Closure and Sale of part of Gurner Avenue, Austral (adjoining No. 5 Gurner Ave)

Motion: Moved: Mayor Mannoun

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

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

MOTION OF URGENCY

Item No: MOU 01

Subject: Legal Action Against Young Adults Disabled Association (YADA) Inc.

Clr Hagarty requested Mayor Mannoun accept a Motion of Urgency relating to legal action against Young Adults Disabled Association (YADA) Inc.

In accordance with Clause 9.3 of Council’s Code of Meeting Practice, the Chairperson Mayor Mannoun, ruled the above matter as urgent and as such it was dealt with at this meeting.

Motion: Moved: Clr Hagarty Seconded: Clr Goodman

That Council defer the legal action against Young Adults Disabled Association (YADA) Inc until further information is available and that information be provided to Councillors at a Councillor Briefing Session.

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

Clrs Hadid, Hagarty and Kaliyanda left the Chambers at 6:27pm.

Clrs Hadid, Hagarty and Kaliyanda returned to the Chambers at 6:30pm.

MOTION OF URGENCY

Item No: MOU 02

Subject: Community Amenity and Mitigation Needs to Address Negative Impacts Developments in East Liverpool in Consideration of the 2022-23 Budget

Clr Rhodes requested Mayor Mannoun accept a Motion of Urgency relating to community amenity and mitigation needs to address negative impacts developments in East Liverpool in consideration of the 2022-23 Budget.

The matter of urgency was requested so that Councillors may be fully informed in time to consider budgetary matters in the 2022-23 Budget.

In accordance with Clause 9.3 of Council’s Code of Meeting Practice, the Chairperson Mayor Mannoun, ruled the above matter as urgent and as such it was dealt with at this meeting.

Motion: Moved: Clr Rhodes Seconded: Clr Ammoun

That Council notes:

Council is in receipt of significant Ex Gratia Rates and Developer contributions from the Intermodal Development.

Council has raised significant issues of concern about the 220ha western precinct of the Moorebank Intermodal site and possible regulatory breaches.

Council has consistently raised concerns regarding the need for mitigation of traffic, noise, air quality and visual impact in Liverpool and in particular Liverpool east which is further compounded by a growing number of significant developments in the area to ensure relevant legislation and regulation is enacted.

Council remains strongly opposed to the Moorebank Recyclers as it is also similarly to the Intermodal development, not consistent with our long-term vision for ecologically sustainable development for East Liverpool and its CBD.

The opportunity for a Class 4 (civil enforcement) and possibly Class 4 (judicial review) and Class 1 (merits) filings still exists to hold the relevant Moorebank Intermodal stakeholders accountable to planning regulations, with anticipated costs of proceedings and orders falling to these relevant stakeholders.

That Council Reports back to the June Council meeting to address the following:

a. The legal and or physical breaches of conditions of consent and relevant local, state, national and international legislation and regulation, that due to their contravention are or will impact on Liverpool ratepayers negatively.

b. Identify what legal remedies exist in accordance with Council’s role as community representative and advocate.

c. Identify the financial amounts currently held by Council as a result of the Ex Gratia Rates and Developer contributions from the Intermodal Development and the financial accounts of income and expenses allocated since first collected.

d. Identify mitigation works with projected costings that are made necessary to address the impact on the quality of life of Liverpool residents, including new infrastructure needs and projected ongoing costs eg. Road maintenance in all affected areas.

e. Identify possible advocation for funding to address the infrastructure needs with costings in order to address the negative impacts as a result of the Intermodal Development.

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

motion of urgency

Clr Hagarty asked that that the following motion be moved:

As soon as practicable, Council obtains legal advice on every motion passed at this meeting tonight to ensure that what is passed is legal and advise Councillors of the outcome as soon as possible.

Mayor Mannoun ruled the above motion was not urgent and as such was not dealt with at this meeting.

Mayor Mannoun advised that he didn’t believe it was urgent as Council staff do that anyway, because Council can’t direct the CEO to act on motions that are illegal so that happens as a course of action regardless.

The Mayor then stated that the normal course of action is that Councillors are advised after a Council meeting informing them that they can’t act upon a resolution if it’s deemed it was not legal.

Mayoral Report

ITEM NO: MAYOR 01

FILE NO: 163363.2022

SUBJECT: Leading in Good Governance Practices

COUNCIL DECISION:

Motion: Moved: Mayor Mannoun Seconded: Clr Rhodes

That Council create a policy that enables Councillors to access independent external professional advice and the draft policy is brought back to the July Council Meeting pending a briefing from Local Government NSW (LGNSW) and Office of the Local Government (OLG) to Councillors about what advice is available to them.

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

ITEM NO: MAYOR 02

Community & Culture Report

ITEM NO: COM 01

FILE NO: 390436.2021

SUBJECT: Crown Lands Classification and Initial Categorisation

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion: Moved: Clr Rhodes Seconded: Clr Harle

That Council:

1. Receive and note this report;

2. Endorse the Initial Categorisation and Classification of Crown Lands as identified in Attachment 1 for public exhibition; and

To authorise the Chief Executive Officer to finalise and provide written notice to NSW Crown Lands of Initial Categorisation and Classification applied to Crown Lands under the management of Council as a Crown Land Manager, as per section 3.23 of the Crown Land Management Act; and as identified in Attachments 1 and 2.

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

Ordinary Meeting

29 June 2022

Chief Executive Officer Report

CEO 02

Recruitment of Chief Executive Officer

Strategic Direction	Leading through Collaboration Strive for best practice in all Council processes
File Ref	187856.2022
Report By	Paul Perrett - Director Corporate Services
Approved By	Paul Perrett - Director Corporate Services

Executive Summary

The Council resolved on 2 February 2022 to:

1. terminate the CEO’s contract (Dr Eddie Jackson)

2. appoint an Acting Chief Executive Officer (Peter Diplas)

3. commence the recruitment process for the role of Chief Executive Officer by

a. seeking the services of an independent recruitment consultant

b. engaging an independent probity advisor

c. establishing a working group with the delegation of Council.

Council has completed the request-for-quotation (RFQ) process for an independent recruitment consultant. A recommendation for approval by Council has been submitted as a Confidential Report to this Council meeting.

Sarah Mullins, Partner, O’Connor Marsden & Associates (OCM) has been appointed as the independent probity advisor.

The Council is now required to resolve the members of the selection panel. As per the Division of Local Government Department of Premier and Cabinet Guidelines for the Appointment and Oversight of General Managers (The Guidelines), it is recommended that the panel consist of the Mayor, the Deputy Mayor, the independent recruitment consultant, and two councillors to be nominated by Council resolution.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Resolves to appoint the selection panel consisting of the Mayor, Deputy Mayor, the independent recruitment consultant and two councillors.

2. Resolves which two Councillors it will appoint to the selection panel for recruitment of the Chief Executive Officer role.

REPORT

The Coordinator Governance initiated the process to appoint a Probity Advisor. Council requested a quote from one of the probity advisors on the Council’s panel and a scope of works was sent to the probity advisor in line with the procurement standards. Council received a fee proposal by way of email. The Coordinator Governance appointed Sarah Mullins, Partner, O’Connor Marsden & Associates (OCM) to be the independent probity advisor on 2 June 2022.

Sarah Mullins has over 17 years’ experience in the provision of probity, corruption prevention and ethics to all levels of government. Sarah has been a Principal at OCM since its establishment in 2009. With a specific focus on NSW and local government, she has completed over 1600 probity engagements and has an in depth understanding of the Local Government Act 1993 and the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005.

On 6 June 2022, Council issued an RFQ via Tenderlink to engage an independent consultant to assist in the recruitment process for the role of the Chief Executive Officer. Council used the same panel used in the recruitment process for the previous Chief Executive Officer. The RFQ closed on 10 June 2022 and Council received three responses.

A panel consisting of Paul Perrett, Director of Corporate Services, Raj Autar, Director of Infrastructure and Environment and Brett Goodridge, Chief People Officer, individually rated the submissions against the criteria consisting of

· local government experience

· professional qualifications and experience

· methodology.

A meeting to review the rankings was held on 15 June 2022. The participants in this meeting included the three panel members, the independent probity advisor and two procurement officers. In addition to the above ratings, price was added as the final criterion in order to finalise the scoring and ranking. Based on the final proposals, a preferred supplier was selected as the independent recruitment consultant, and a separate confidential report is provided for Council’s approval.

In accordance with the Guidelines, Council recommends the members of the selection panel for the recruitment process to consist of Mayor, Deputy Mayor, two councillors and the independent recruitment consultant. The selection panel will remain the same throughout the entire recruitment process.

The Guidelines are attached to this Council paper to inform Councillors of the best practice in relation to recruiting a local government General Manager.

The selection panel is required to prepare a confidential report for Council that:

· outlines the selection process

· recommends the most meritorious applicant with reasons

· recommends the eligibility list if appropriate

· recommends that no appointment is made if the outcome of interviews is that there are no suitable applicants.

Only Council (not the selection panel) may resolve to approve the appointment of a person to the position of Chief Executive Officer.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Costs associated with this recommendation have been included in Council’s budget for 2022-23 and long-term financial plan. The Chief Executive Officer position is budgeted for, and there is a budget in 2022-23 of $150k for the recruitment of executive positions.

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	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. Actively advocate for federal and state government support, funding and services.
Legislative	Local Government Act 1993
Risk	There is no risk associated with this report.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Division of Local Government Department of Premier and Cabinet Guidelines for the Appointment and Oversight of General Managers (under separate cover)

Ordinary Meeting

29 June 2022

Chief Executive Officer Report

CEO 03

Local Government Remunerational Tribunal
Annual Report and Determination under sections 239 and 241 of the Local Government Act 1993

Strategic Direction	Leading through Collaboration Strive for best practice in all Council processes
File Ref	170158.2022
Report By	Jessica Saliba - Coordinator Governance
Approved By	George Hampouris - Head of Audit, Risk and Improvement

Executive Summary

On 20 April 2022 the Local Government Remuneration Tribunal (the Tribunal) produced their Annual report and Determination under sections 239 and 241 of the Local Government Act 1993 (the Act).

It is recommended that Council notes this report and resolves to set the fees payable to the Mayor and Councillors within the limits as determined by the Local Government Remuneration Tribunal.

The tribunal has determined a 2 per cent increase in the minimum and maximum fees applicable for the 2022-23 financial year, commencing from 1 July 2022.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Receives and notes the 2022 Annual Report and Determination – LGRT; and

2. Resolves to set the fees payable to the Mayor and Councillors for the period 1 July 2022 to 30 June 2023 to an amount equal to the maximum allowable under the determination of the Local Government Remuneration Tribunal, dated 20 April 2022.

REPORT

The requirements governing the Mayor and Councillors’ annual remuneration is outlined in Council’s adopted Civic Expenses and Facilities Policy.

On 20 April 2022 the Local Government Remuneration Tribunal (the Tribunal) produced their Annual Report and Determination under sections 239 and 241 of the Local Government Act 1993 (the Act). The Tribunal determines the categories by which each council is classified, and the maximum and minimum amounts of fees to be paid to mayors and councillors.

There has been no change to the Council categories, Liverpool City Council remains in the Metropolitan large category.

The Tribunal has categorised “Metropolitan Large” councils as typically having a minimum residential population of 200,000 and may include features such as:

· Total operating revenue exceeding $200M per annum;

· The provision of significant regional services to greater Sydney including, major education, health retail sports and other recreation and cultural facilities;

· Significant industrial, commercial and residential centres and development corridors; and

· High population growth.

Councils that are categorised as “Metropolitan Large” are considered to have a sphere of economic influence and provide regional services considered to be greater than those of other metropolitan councils.

The Local Government Remuneration Tribunal has determined (effective 1 July 2022) that:

1. Pursuant to Section 239 of the Act that Liverpool City Council will be categorised a “Metropolitan Large” council; and

2. Pursuant to Section 241 of the Act, the annual fees to be paid to Councillors and Mayors in a Metropolitan Large Council, be a minimum of $19,180 and a maximum of $31,640. An additional fee is to be paid to the Mayor at a minimum of $40,740 and maximum of $92,180. These fees represent a 2 per cent increase which is consistent with the government’s policy on wages.

Existing Allowance

2021/22

Proposed Allowance

2022/23

Mayor

$90,370

$92,180

Councillor

$31,020

$31,640

In recognition of the increasing workload and time commitments required by the Mayor and Councillors (and noting that almost all metropolitan councils have adopted the tribunal maximum) it is recommended that Council set the fees payable to the Mayor and Councillors for the period 1 July 2022 to 30 June 2023 to the maximum allowable within the above limits.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Costs associated with this recommendation have been included in Council’s budget for the current year and long-term financial plan. The financial impacts are outlined in the table below.

	2022/23	2023/24	2024/25	2025/26	2026/27
Operating budget / LTFP impact	$8,632	$8,632	$8,632	$8,632	$8,632
Capital budget impact	-	-	-	-	-
Ongoing unbudgeted impact to opex from capital expenditure	-	-	-	-	-
Unbudgeted impact to unrestricted cash	-	-	-	-	-
Funding source	General reserves	General reserves	General reserves	General reserves	General reserves

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	The fees to be paid have been included in the 2022-2023 budget
Environment	There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.
Social	There are no social and cultural considerations.
Civic Leadership	Operate a well-developed governance system that demonstrates accountability, transparency and ethical conduct.
Legislative	Section 239 and 241 of the Local Government Act 1994 (LG Act)
Risk	There is no risk associated with this report.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Local Government Remuneration Tribunal Annual Report

2. OLG Circular 2022

Ordinary Meeting

29 June 2022

Chief Executive Officer Report

CEO 04

Council Policies and Standards

Strategic Direction	Leading through Collaboration Strive for best practice in all Council processes
File Ref	187824.2022
Report By	Jessica Saliba - Coordinator Governance
Approved By	George Hampouris - Head of Audit, Risk and Improvement

Executive Summary

On 23 February 2022 Council resolved:

That Council direct the Acting Chief Executive Officer to present a report by the April 2022 meeting on:

1. All policies that were converted to standards during the previous Council term, with a short brief on why the CEO thought it would be better suited as a standard; and

2. All current policies, including their actual review date.

This report will provide the Council with background information of how the ‘Development of Policies, Standards, Charters, Procedures and Strategies’ framework adopted by Council on 26 October 2019 commenced.

A copy of Council’s Policy Register as of 31 May 2022 is also attached and provides the Council with a list of all the policies, standards and charters that Council has and their actual review date.

Due to a turnaround in staff, there was a delay in bringing this report back to council.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council receive and note the policy register;

REPORT

On 29 October 2014, Council passed resolution directing council staff to commence a review of Council policies to reduce red tape and deliver greater efficiency.

The subsequent 2015 review achieved improvements in the quality of policies, updated policy content, and reduced the number of policies from 162 to 160.

A report to Council on 28 October 2019 proposed a Framework for the ‘Development of Policies, Standards Charters, Procedures and Strategies’ (Framework), aiming to reduce red tape and to ensure that strategic direction of Council is established as the fundamental decision-making process.

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

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

· Development Engineering Bonds Policy (adopted as Standard);

· Hoardings Policy (adopted as a Standard); and

· Erosion and Sediment Control Policy (rescinded).

The Framework identified the five tiers of policy and procedural documents and defined the features of each tier. This provided a clear definition and what constitutes a policy, standard, charter, procedure and strategy:

· Council resolved policy: A policy approved by a Council resolution. It can only be revoked or amended by Council under section 372 of the Local Government Act 1993, unless delegated authority is given by the Council to the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to do so under section 377 of the Local Government Act 1993, these policies include mandatory or ‘other’ Council resolved policies.

Policy refers to a set of ideas or a plan of what to do in a particular situation or set of circumstances. Policies are adopted by a resolution of Council. These Council policies are mandated by legislation or can be strategic in nature. Some of these policies can only be adopted after public consultation, as set out in legislation

· Standard: A Standard is approved by the CEO under section 377 of the Local Government Act 1993. It can only be revoked or amended by the CEO, unless the CEO has given delegated authority to a member of Council staff to amend or revoke Standards are a mandatory and prescriptive set of rules which should be consistently followed by Council staff and other stakeholders which relate to a critical operational activity or function

· Strategy: is a collection of statements of a strategic direction or intent aimed at addressing an identified need, gap or issue.

· Procedure: refers to a documented set of actions that is the official or accepted way of doing something to implement a policy or standard or a legislative requirement. It usually identifies the person(s) responsible, provides a timeline and sets out the process for implementation.

· Charter: A charter provides details of the manner in which a Council committee or panel operates and conducts its meetings.

It also aimed to better reflect the strategic issues integral to sustained service delivery for the community by:

· reducing red tape;

· ensure that valuable Councillor time is focused on the strategic direction of Council; and

· ensure operational issues are adequately addressed in a timely and efficient manner.

Chief Executive Officer endorsed Standards

Standards approved by the CEO are:

· Animal Management Standard – Current policy is still in place with a report being prepared for an upcoming Council meeting to have the policy revoked;

· Development Engineering Bonds Standard;

· Enforcement Standard;

· Hoarding and Tower Crane Standard; and

· Overgrown Vegetation Enforcement Standard – was previously an operational policy that was endorsed by the Chief Executive Officer (CEO); therefore, the CEO was able to approve the policy changing to a standard.

In line with the adopted Framework, reports in Attachment 5 were presented to Council for endorsement.

Council’s policy register contains 116 policies. Of those 116 policies, 80 are overdue and 36 are current.

Attachment 6 lists the policy documents and their reviews dates.

Council staff are currently working on ways in which it can improve policy management to ensure policies are updated within a timely manner.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

There are no financial implications relating to this recommendation.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	There are no economic considerations.
Environment	There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.
Social	There are no social and cultural considerations
Civic Leadership	Operate a well-developed governance system that demonstrates accountability, transparency and ethical conduct.
Legislative	Local Government Act 1993 Local Government Regulation 2005

ATTACHMENTS

1. Notice of Motion NOM 05 - Council Meeting 29 October 2014 (Under separate cover)

2. Report to Council Meeting 28 October 2019 - Corp 1 - Reducing Red Tape - DoPSCPaS (Under separate cover)

3. Adopted Framework - Development of Policies, Standards, Charters, Procedures and Strategies - 26 October 2019 (Under separate cover)

4. Current Framework - Development of Policies, Standards, Charters, Procedures and Strategies 30.7.2020 (Under separate cover)

5. Policy reports to Council from 2019 relating to Framework (Under separate cover)

6. Policy List (Under separate cover)

Ordinary Meeting

29 June 2022

Chief Executive Officer Report

CEO 05

Investment Report May 2022

Strategic Direction	Leading through Collaboration Seek efficient and innovative methods to manage our resources
File Ref	186067.2022
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 31 May 2022. Key highlights include:

· Council held investments with a market value of $444 million.

· The Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) has raised the official cash rate from 0.35 per cent to 0.85 per cent. Economic forecasts suggest that the official cash rate may increase to around 2.0 per cent by December 2022.

· The expected increase in cash rate will improve future interest earnings for Council.

· The portfolio yield (for the year to May 2022) was 121 basis points above the benchmark (AusBond Bank Bill Index)

	AusBond Bank Bill Index (ABBI)
Benchmark	0.05%
Portfolio yield	1.26%
Performance above benchmark	1.21%

· Year-to-date, Council’s investment income was $4.7 million lower than the original budget (prior month: $4.3 million). This is primarily due to $4.6 million for unrealised decline in fair value of Floating Rate Notes (FRNs) due to global market uncertainties, in particular the ongoing war in Ukraine. This is a mark-to-market issue and will not affect the long-term cash flow expectation from the investments.

· Year-to-date, Council’s investment in mortgage-backed securities (MBSs) are valued at $646 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 26.39 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 31 May 2022, Council held investments with a market value of $444 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, is suffering significantly from the Covid-19 pandemic and conflict in Ukraine. 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 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^{^[1]} 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 26.39 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 $646 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 year to May 2022 exceeded the ABBI index by 121 basis points (portfolio yield: 1.26%; ABBI: 0.05%)

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 $4.7 million lower than the original budget (prior month: $4.3 million). This is primarily due to $4.6 million for unrealised decline in fair value of FRNs due to global market uncertainties. This is a mark-to-market issue and will not affect the long-term cash flow expectation from the investments.

	YTD Budget	YTD Actuals	Budget Variance
Interest yield on cash holdings	$2.9m	$2.8m	($0.1m)
Fair value market movement	$0.8m	($3.8m)	($4.6m)
Total	$3.7m	($1m)	($4.7m)

Investment portfolio at a glance

Portfolio Performance

The portfolio yield for the month of May 2022 exceeded the AusBond Bank Bill index by 121 basis points (portfolio yield: 1.26%; ABBI: 0.05%).

Annual Income vs. Budget

Council’s investment income was $4.7 million lower than the original budget as at 31 May 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 increased the official cash rate to 0.85 per cent in its meeting on 7 June 2022. Economic forecasts suggest that the official cash rate may increase to around 2.0 per cent by December 2022.

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 $4.7 million lower than the original budget as at 31 May 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.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Investment Portfolio May 2022

Ordinary Meeting

29 June 2022

Chief Executive Officer Report

CEO 06

LGNSW Annual Conference and Casual Vacancy on LGNSW Board

Strategic Direction	Leading through Collaboration Strive for best practice in all Council processes
File Ref	184574.2022
Report By	George Georgakis - Manager Council and Executive Services
Approved By	George Hampouris - Head of Audit, Risk and Improvement

Executive Summary

The Local Government NSW (LGNSW) Annual Conference will be held from Sunday 23 October to Tuesday 25 October 2022 at the Crown Plaza Hunter Valley.

The report provides information in relation to voting delegates which Liverpool City Council will be entitled to for voting at the Casual Vacancy Election and for voting on motions at the Conference and the deadline dates.

A further report will be submitted to the July 2022 Council meeting for Council to consider motions to be submitted to the Conference.

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1. Any Councillors who wish to attend the LGNSW Conference at the Hunter Valley from Sunday 23 October to Tuesday 25 October 2022 notify the Councillor Support Officer by 15 July 2022.

2. Council determine its voting delegates for the LGNSW Casual Vacancy Election, noting that Liverpool City Council is entitled to 9 voting delegates for voting on the Board election, and also noting that Councillor Hagarty is entitled to one vote as he is a Director of the Association.

3. Council determines its voting delegates for voting on motions at the conference, noting that Liverpool City Council is entitled to 10 voting delegates for voting on motions, and also noting that Councillor Hagarty is entitled to one vote as he is a Director of the Association.

4. Council receive a further report at the July 2022 Council meeting to consider motions to be submitted to the Conference.

REPORT

The LGNSW Annual Conference will be held from Sunday 23 October to Tuesday 25 October 2022 at the Crown Plaza Hunter Valley.

The Conference is the main policy making event for the local government sector where issues are debated and motions put forward for consideration by delegates.

The deadline for motions to be submitted to the Conference is 29 August 2022. A report will be submitted to the July 2022 Council meeting for Council to consider motions it wishes to submit to the October Conference. The proposed motions to be considered for submitting to the Conference will be drawn from recent Council resolutions.

The guide for submitting motions has not yet been finalised by LGNSW and will be attached to the July 2022 report.

This report deals with two components of the LGNSW, being;

· A casual vacancy on the LGNSW Board for the office of Director (Metropolitan/Urban Council); and

· LGNSW Annual Conference.

Casual vacancy on the LGNSW Board for the for the office of Director (Metropolitan/Urban Council)

LGNSW have advised that a casual vacancy exists on the LGNSW Board for the office of Director (Metropolitan/Urban Council) and arrangements have been made with the Australian Electoral Commission to conduct the election by postal ballot in accordance with the LGNSW rules and their timetable (attached to this report).

Metropolitan/Urban members are required to advise LGNSW of the names and postal addresses of their nominated voting delegates for the election by 7 July 2022.

Only Councillors from Metropolitan/Urban members are eligible to nominate as a candidate and to vote in the elections. Nominations close at 12.00pm on Thursday 30 June 2022. Individual Councillors can nominate and this does not require a Council resolution. An election notice was sent to Councillors in the Councillor Update on 2 June 2022 and is also attached to this report along with a nomination form.

Liverpool City Council is entitled to nine (9) voting delegates in the election and the names of the voting delegates is to be determined by Council resolution. It should be noted that Councillor Hagarty is entitled to a vote as he is a Board member.

Attendees, voting delegates and motions for LGNSW Conference

The guide for submitting motions has not yet been finalised by LGNSW and will be attached to the July 2022 report.

Member Councils must advise LGNSW of the names of their nominated voting delegates by 10 October. Liverpool City Council is entitled to ten (10) voting delegates. In addition, Councillor Hagarty is entitled to a vote as he is a Board member.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Registration for the Conference will open on 4 July 2022. Costs will be provided at that stage and will be included in the July 2022 report to Council. Costs are expected to be in the order of $2,500 per delegate which includes registration, travel accommodation and meals.

Costs associated with the conference have been included in Council’s 2022/23 budget.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	Registration for the Conference will open on 4 July 2022. Costs will be provided at that stage and will be included in the July 2022 report to Council. Costs are expected to be in the order of $2,500 per delegate which includes registration, travel accommodation and meals. Costs associated with the conference have been included in Council’s 2022/23 budget.
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. 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	There are no legislative considerations relating to this report.
Risk	The risk is deemed to be low and is within Council’s risk appetite.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Notice of LGNSW Casual Board Vacancy and Nomination Form

2. Notice of the 2022 LGNSW Annual Conference

Ordinary Meeting

29 June 2022

Chief Executive Officer Report

CEO 07

Endorsement of Community Strategic Plan 2022-2032, Delivery Program 2022-2026 and Operational Plan, including Revenue Pricing Policy (fees and charges) 2022-2023 and Resourcing Strategy

Strategic Direction	Leading through Collaboration Strive for best practice in all Council processes
File Ref	192869.2022
Report By	George Hampouris - Head of Audit, Risk and Improvement Vishwa Nadan - Chief Financial Officer
Approved By	Peter Diplas - Acting Chief Executive Officer

Executive Summary

At the Council meeting on 27 April 2022, it was resolved that Council approves the draft Community Strategic Plan 2022-2032 to go on public exhibition for 28 days.

At the Council Extraordinary meeting on 10 May 2022, it was resolved that:

1. Council places the draft Delivery Program 2022-2026, Operational Plan, Long Term Financial Plan and Revenue Pricing Policy (Fees and Charges) on Public Exhibition for 28 days, with the following amendments:

· Allocate $1 million to install a CCTV network to deal with the problem of illegal dumping in the local government area; and

· On page 43 of the Draft Budget 2022-23 and Long Term Financial Plan, remove the reference to 30km speed limit in line item 103062, so that it reads “Liverpool City Centre Traffic Calming Proposal”

· The introduction to Strategic Objective 1 be amended to read as below:

“Our community wants a healthy, inclusive and engaging city that is integral to their way of life in Liverpool. This strategic objective focuses on social connections which foster a sense of belonging and the ability to create harmonious communities.”

2. Councillors be provided with information on how the resolutions of Council are captured or not captured within the budget, in particular the visitation precinct; and

3. Council receives a further report at the June 2022 Council meeting to approve these after a review of public submissions and any associated changes.

This report provides an overview of the submissions received during the public exhibition periods and proposes to endorse the draft Community Strategic Plan 2022-2032, adopt the draft Delivery Program 2022-2026 and Operational Plan, including Revenue Pricing Policy (fees and charges) 2022-2023, draft Long Term Financial Plan 2023-2032, draft Asset Management Plan and Strategies 2022-2032 and endorse the Workforce Management Strategy 2022-2026 in accordance with Sections 403, 404 and 405 of the Local Government Act (1993).

Public exhibition of the draft Community Strategic Plan was undertaken from 29 April until 27 May 2022 with 90 submissions received during the period.

Public exhibition of the draft Delivery Program 2022-2026 and Operational Plan, including Revenue Pricing Policy (fees and charges) 2022-2023 and draft Long Term Financial Plan 2023-2032 was undertaken from 13 May until 10 June 2022 with 13 submissions received during the period.

This report also provides information on changes which have been made to the draft Revenue Pricing Policy (fees and charges) during the public exhibition period, including the increase to the companion animal registration fees for 2022-23 in accordance with the Office of Local Government Circular 22-16 / 2 June 2022 / A821940, published on 2 June 2022. The Companion Animals fee adjustment is tabled in Attachment 9 and the Office of Local Government Circular in Attachment 10.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Adopt the draft Community Strategic Plan 2022-2032, draft Delivery Program 2022-2026 and Operational Plan 2022-2023, incorporating the amendments outlined in this report;

2. Adopts the Revenue Pricing Policy (fees and charges) for the period commencing 1 July 2022, with the adjustment to the Companion Animal Fee as outlined in Attachment 9;

3. Adopt the Resourcing strategy including the draft Long-Term Financial Plan 2023-2032 and draft Asset Management Plan and Strategies 2022-2032;

4. Endorse the draft Workforce Management Strategy 2022-2026; and

5. Notes submissions received during the public exhibition periods and associated recommendations.

REPORT

At its meeting on 27 April 2022, Council resolved to place the draft Community Strategic Plan 2022-2032 on public exhibition for 28 days. The draft plan was placed on public exhibition from 29 April until 27 May 2022 with 90 submissions received during the period.

The Community Strategic Plan is the highest-level plan that a council will prepare. The purpose of the Community Strategic Plan is to identify the community’s main priorities and aspirations for the future and to plan strategies for achieving these goals. It guides all remaining strategies and plans and must be developed by councils with and on behalf of the community. The Local Government Act (1993) and the Local Government (General) Regulation (2021) require each local government area to have a Community Strategic Plan which is developed and endorsed by Council.

Although Council has a custodial role in preparing the Community Strategic Plan for the community, the strategic objectives and accompanying strategies may be delivered by a range of stakeholders including community members, businesses and government departments. The Community Strategic Plan needs to be reviewed with each Council term and endorsed by June 30 following a Council election.

At the Extraordinary Council meeting on 10 May 2022, Council resolved that the draft Delivery Program and Operational Plan 2022-2023 including Revenue Pricing Policy (fees and charges) and draft Long-Term Financial Plan 2023-2032 be placed on public exhibition, with a further report to be provided to Council following public exhibition. Public exhibition was undertaken from 13 May until 10 June 2022 with 13 submissions received during the period.

The four-year Delivery Program is Council’s statement of commitment to the community. It outlines Council’s response to the Community Strategic Plan, its services to the community and how it will contribute to achieving its goals during its term of office. The Plan aligns with the NSW Government’s State Priorities and Regional plans, including the Greater Sydney Commission, Our Greater Sydney 2056 - Western District Plan and NSW State Government Priorities.

The annual Operational Plan provides detailed actions for each of the services outlined in the Delivery Program. The plan identifies the specific projects, programs and activities that have been scheduled for the next financial year. The Local Government Act (1993) requires the Operational Plan and annual budget to be adopted by 30 June each year.

The Delivery Program and Operational Plan address social justice principles of access, equity, participation and rights and outline how Council will engage with the community and other stakeholders to determine service level expectations and identify appropriate measures. The document also identifies major projects and addresses ongoing improvements to the efficiency, productivity, financial management and governance of Council.

The Office of Local Government revised the Integrated Planning and Reporting Guidelines in September 2021. Council has incorporated the revisions in the Delivery Program and Operational Plan and Long-Term Financial Plan. In line with recent changes to the guidelines, reference to the Delivery Program and Operational Plan being presented as separate documents has been removed. As such, for ease of reading and accessibility the Delivery Program and Operational Plan are presented in one document.

Council has a custodial role in initiating, preparing and maintaining the Delivery Program and Operational Plan on behalf of the community. Council will monitor the progress and delivery of actions and report against progress of the Delivery Program at least every six months as legislated under the Local Government Act (1993) through Biannual Progress Reports.

The Long-Term Financial Plan includes Council’s 2022-2023 budget and financial projections for the next 10-years. It informs decision-making and demonstrates how the objectives of the Community Strategic Plan and services in the Delivery Program and Operational Plan will be resourced and funded.

The Long-Term Financial Plan includes:

· Council’s 2022-2023 budget;

· projected income and expenditure, balance sheet and cash flow statement;

· planning assumptions;

· sensitivity analysis, highlighting factors and assumptions most likely to impact the Long Term Financial Plan;

· financial modelling for different scenarios;

· methods of monitoring financial performance; and

· major capital and operational expenditure implications.

Council’s Audit, Risk and Improvement Committee had a special meeting in June this year with relation to the Long-Term Financial Plan. The minutes of these meetings (which captures the discussion points along with any resolution/s made) are tabled at this meeting as a separate agenda item. This provides Council with additional independent scrutiny over the Long-Term Financial Plan.

The Revenue Pricing Policy (fees and charges), Attachment-3 provides information about Council’s services, budget, roles and decision-making processes for 2022-2023. Council’s budget is required to be adopted in June each year for implementation in line with the new financial year on July 1.

The Revenue Pricing Policy includes:

· a detailed estimate of the council’s income and expenditure;

· a statement with respect to each ordinary rate and each special rate proposed to be levied;

· information on each charge proposed to be levied; and

· Council’s proposed pricing methodology for determining the prices of goods and the approved fees.

The 10-year Asset Management Strategy and Plans ensure Council’s assets are well managed and maintained to meet the needs of the current community and support future growth. The Asset Management Plan aims to demonstrate responsive management of Council’s assets (and services provided from these assets), compliance with regulatory requirements, and to communicate funding required in providing the required levels of service.

The Plan is expected to facilitate the prudent and responsible management of Council’s assets by:

· ensuring that all assets provide the required levels of service in the most cost-effective manner and in a way that minimises life cycle costs;

· identifying maintenance and renewal activities that are necessary to maintain these services and determining funds required to provide this service;

· identifying and managing risk and liability resulting from the operation of public assets through;

o a program of regular inspections and monitoring activity to assess asset condition and performance, and

o undertaking a risk-based approach to identify operational, maintenance, renewal and capital development needs, and applying economic analysis techniques to select the most cost effective work programme.

· understanding and meeting the impact of growth through demand management and infrastructure investment; and

· ensuring that assets are managed to deliver Council’s strategic outcomes.

The four-year Workforce Management Strategy outlines the skills, staffing and human resources required to achieve the actions detailed in the Delivery Program and Operational Plan. Council’s Workforce Management Strategy identifies a range of people strategies and actions to deliver the community’s vision. Specifically, this Workforce Management Strategy will enable:

· continued development of people capability and enhanced capacity to respond to evolving and changing Council priorities and strategic directions, together with alignment with demographic challenges and opportunities, emerging labour market trends and operates within financial constraints;

· sustained ability for Council to attract, engage, develop, recognise, and reward talented people; and

· continued focus on resource and workplace planning.

Public Exhibition

The draft Community Strategic Plan was placed on public exhibition for feedback from 29 April until 27 May 2022, and the Delivery Program and Operational Plan, including Revenue Pricing Policy (fees and charges) and Long-Term Financial Plan were placed on public exhibition from 13 May 2022 to 10 June 2022. All documents were available online and were accessible for download and feedback through Council’s website. Hardcopies were also available at all Council libraries, Council’s Customer Service Centre and CPAC. Information on the documents was exhibited using the following methods:

· Community Stakeholder Information Session held on 11 May 2022 at Council’s Scott Street building;

· Community Information Session held on 12 May at Liverpool City Library;

· Notice of the public exhibition was displayed on the digital screens in the Library, Customer Service Centre and on Council’s big screen in Macquarie Mall;

· The draft plans featured on the Public Exhibition page of Council’s website and on Liverpool Listens ‘Have Your Say’ page;

· A survey was available for the draft plans on Council’s website during their respective public exhibition periods;

· The draft Community Strategic Plan was featured on a dedicated page on Liverpool Listens;

· A promotional video featuring the Mayor inviting the community to have their say on the Community Strategic Plan;

· Public exhibition of the draft Community Strategic Plan was featured in Liverpool Champion on 11 and 18 May 2022;

· A direct link to the documents was featured on Council’s home page for the duration of the public exhibition;

· Public notices were placed on Council’s social media platforms including Facebook, LinkedIn and Instagram;

· Posters were displayed at Council’s key locations including, CPAC, Customer Service and all Council libraries;

· Notice of the public exhibition was emailed to various Council databases including local businesses, service providers, government stakeholders, community forums and committees;

· An email from the Acting Chief Executive Officer was sent to staff inviting feedback; and

· Notices were featured in Council’s internal communication platforms, In the Loop and Yammer.

Community Consultation during the exhibition period

Council conducted phase two community engagement during the public exhibition period through face-to-face engagement at a Community Stakeholder Information Session held on 11 May 2022 at Council’s Scott Street building and a Community Information Session held 12 May 2022 at Liverpool City Library. During the sessions, Council staff answered questions relating to the draft documents and attendees also participated in an activity where they were invited to comment on the strategic objectives and 10-year strategies. A total of 35 community members attended the sessions.

In addition to the information session, Council continued to engage with the community and encourage feedback on the plans through vox pops and surveys available on Council’s website. The surveys, seeking feedback on the documents were promoted through notices on Council’s social medial platform, Facebook, Instagram and LinkedIn and two notices in the Liverpool Campion.

Feedback from the information sessions activity is tabled in Attachment 11, minutes of the Community Stakeholder Information Session is tabled in Attachment 7 and minutes of the Community Information Session is tabled in Attachment 8.

Overall more than 2800 community members contributed to the development of the Community Strategic Plan, Long-Term Financial Plan and Delivery Program and Operational Plan during phase one and two community engagement.

Public Submissions

Council received a total of 90 submissions for the Community Strategic Plan and 13 Submissions for the Delivery Program and Operational Plan. A register of the submissions received from the community and Council staff are tabled in Attachment 11. For ease of reference, where the submission resulted in a recommended amendment it has been highlighted in the register of submissions. The proposed changes have been extracted from Attachment 11 and are outlined in the table below.

Council has reviewed all submissions and provided responses. The following amendments are recommended to the Community Strategic Plan, Delivery Program and Operational Plan based on the Community’s and staff feedback. If endorsed, Council intends to implement these items using existing resources identified in the budget. Council will formally respond to all written submissions.

Item	CSP page #	Recommended inclusions to the Community Strategic Plan
1	46/61	Include *‘Increase the level of shade in public spaces’* as an additional 10-year Goal within the strategic objective Liveable, Sustainable, Resilient.
1	46/61	Include *“I can find shade when I need it’* as a KPI to measure the strategic objective “Liveable, Sustainable, Resilient”
2	44	Include *‘Increase in walking, cycling, and public transport mode share’* as an additional 10-year goal within the Healthy, Inclusive, Engaging strategic objective to reflect the 10-year integrated transport network strategy.
3	44	Proposed amendment of the 10-year strategy within the strategic objective – Healthy, Inclusive, Engaging objective from ‘Support active and healthy lifestyles by improving footpaths, cycleways and walkways’ to ‘Support active and healthy lifestyles by improving footpaths, cycleways and walkways and other infrastructure that promotes and supports active transport’.
4	46	Proposed amendment of the 10-year strategy within the strategic objective – Liveable, Sustainable, Resilient objective from’ Deliver effective and efficient planning to provide the best outcomes for a growing city’ to ‘Deliver effective and efficient planning and high-quality design to provide best outcomes for a growing city’.
5	48	Proposed amendment of the 10-year strategy within the strategic objective - Evolving, Prosperous, Innovative objective from ‘Implement planning controls to create high-quality, inclusive urban environments’ to ‘Implement planning controls and best practice urban design* to create high-quality, inclusive urban environments’.*

Changes made to the Community Strategic Plan, Long-Term Financial Plan, Delivery Program and Operational Plan as a result of the submissions include editorial changes including correction of spelling errors. Changes also include the incorporation of community’s suggestions submitted during the public exhibition period that were deemed appropriate and are tabled in Attachment 11.

Additional changes made to the Community Strategic Plan include the incorporation of phase two community engagement activity data, community comments (vox pops), update of the LGA map, update of Council’s responsibility as a ‘Funder’ to further articulate Council’s’ responsibility of this role, an abbreviations page and the inclusion of Enterprise Risk Management Statement (page 23) to deliver best practice in Council operations as follows;

‘Liverpool City Council is committed to best practice risk management processes. Council’s Risk Management Framework is closely aligned to the ISO31000 risk management standards. Risk management remains central to all operations and these are identified and managed to ensure efficient and effective service delivery. Council’s risk management practices covers a broad range of strategic risks including; developer contributions, COVID-19, waste management, Western Sydney International Airport, Liverpool Civic Place, Western Sydney City Deals and climate change.

Changes to the Delivery Program and Operational Plan include a revised format where both plans are presented in one document, coding of the strategic objectives for ease of reference, 10-year strategies and service areas, inclusion of a financial summary, update of the Mayors message, incorporation of the community’s suggestions submitted during the public exhibition period that were deemed appropriate (tabled in Attachment 11), and an abbreviations page.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Changes to Companion Animal Fees

Fees and charges relating to companion animals are governed by the Companion Animals Regulation 2018. During the public exhibition period, Council received Circular 22-16 / 2 June 2022 / A821940 from the NSW Office of Local Government outlining changes to the fees related to this regulation. Consequently, Council’s draft Revenue Pricing Policy Fees and Charges 2022-2023 will be updated to reflect the new fees following Council’s adoption. A summary of the changes can be found in Attachment 9, 2022-2023 Fees and Charges Amendments Companion Animal Fees and the Office of Local Government Circular in Attachment 10.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	The Community Strategic Plan encompasses as series of economic, environmental, social and civic leadership considerations. It outlines strategies for achieving these. Delivery Program and Operational Plan actions which address the economic aspect of the Community Strategic Plan are categorised within the Strategic Objective – Evolving, Prosperous and Engaging.
Environment	The Community Strategic Plan encompasses as series of economic, environmental, social and civic leadership considerations. It outlines strategies for achieving these. Delivery Program and Operational Plan actions which address the environmental aspect of the Community Strategic Plan are categorised within the Strategic Objective – Liveable, Sustainable and Resilient.
Social	The Community Strategic Plan encompasses as series of economic, environmental, social and civic leadership considerations. It outlines strategies for achieving these Delivery Program and Operational Plan actions which address the social aspect of the Community Strategic Plan are categorised within the Strategic Objective – Healthy, Inclusive and Engaging.
Civic Leadership	The Community Strategic Plan encompasses as series of economic, environmental, social and civic leadership considerations. It outlines strategies for achieving these Undertake communication practices with the community and Delivery Program and Operational Plan actions which address the civic leadership aspect of the Community Strategic Plan are categorised within the Strategic Objective – Visionary, Leading, and Responsible.
Legislative	The Community Strategic Plan has been developed in line with the Local Government Act 1993. In particular Section 402 of the Local Government Act states: (1) Each local government area must have a community strategic plan that has been developed and endorsed by the council. A community strategic plan is a plan that identifies the main priorities and aspirations for the future of the local government area covering a period of at least 10 years from when the plan is endorsed. (2) A community strategic plan is to establish strategic objectives together with strategies for achieving those objectives Furthermore, Section 406 states: (1) The regulations may make provision for or with respect to integrated planning and reporting guidelines (referred to in this Chapter as "the guidelines"* ) to be complied with by councils.* The Integrated Planning and Reporting Essential elements checklist ascertains the following: 1.6 The council must place the draft Community Strategic Plan on public exhibition for a period of at least 28 days and comments from the community must be accepted and considered prior to the endorsement of the final Community Strategic Plan. The Delivery Program and Operational Plan have been developed in line with Section 404 and 405 of the Local Government Act (1993) In particular Section 404 of the Local Government Act (1993) – Delivery Program stipulate that: (1) A council must have a program (called its "delivery program”) detailing the principal activities to be undertaken by the council to perform its functions (including implementing the strategies set out in the community strategic plan) within the resources available under the resourcing strategy. (2) The council must establish a new delivery program after each ordinary election of councillors to cover the principal activities of the council for the 4-year period commencing on 1 July following the election. Section 405 of the Local Government Act (1993) – Integrated Planning and Reporting Guidelines stipulate that: A council must have a plan (called its "operational plan") that is adopted before the beginning of each year and details the activities to be engaged in by the council during the year as part of the delivery program covering that year. Section 406 of the Local Government Act (1993) - Operational plan stipulate that: (1) The regulations may make provision for or with respect to integrated planning and reporting guidelines (referred to in this Chapter as "the guidelines") to be complied with by councils. (2) Without limiting subsection (1), the regulations may impose requirements in connection with the preparation, development, consultation on and review of, and the contents of, the community strategic plan, resourcing strategy, delivery program, operational plan, community engagement strategy, annual report and environment reporting of a council. This Integrated Planning and Reporting guidelines outline the following Essential Elements: 1.1 The Resourcing Strategy must include provisions for long-term financial planning, workforce management planning and asset management planning. 1.2 The council must post a copy of the adopted components of the Resourcing Strategy on its website 3.10 The Long-Term Financial Plan must be publicly exhibited for at least 28 days and submissions received by the council in that period must be accepted and considered before the final Long-Term Financial Plan is adopted by the council. 3.11 Each council must develop and endorse a Workforce Management Strategy to address the human resourcing requirements of a council’s Delivery Program. 3.15 Each council must prepare and adopt an Asset Management Policy, an Asset Management Strategy and Asset Management Plans for each class of assets to support the Community Strategic Plan and Delivery Program.
Risk	The risk is deemed to be High. Failure to prepare and deliver a Community Strategic Plan, Delivery Program, Operational Plan and budget, Resourcing Strategy including Long-Term Financial Plan, Asset Management Plan and Workforce management Strategy may result in enforceable action by the Office of Local Government, Planning Policy.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Draft Community Strategic Plan 2022-2032 (Under separate cover)

2. Draft Delivery Program 2022-2026 and Operational Plan 2022-2023 (Under separate cover)

3. Draft Revenue Pricing Policy Fees and Charges 2022-2023 (Under separate cover)

4. Draft Long-Term Financial Plan 2023-2032 (Under separate cover)

5. Draft Asset Management Strategy and Plans 2022-2032 (Under separate cover)

6. Draft Workforce Management Strategy 2022-2026 (Under separate cover)

7. Meeting Minutes of Stakeholder Information Session, Wednesday 11 May 2022 (Under separate cover)

8. Meeting Minutes of Community Information Session, Thursday 12 May 2022 (Under separate cover)

9. 2022-2023 Fees and Charges - Companion Animal Fees Amendments (Under separate cover)

10. Office of Local Government Circular - Increases to companion animal fees for 2022-23 (Under separate cover)

11. Summary of submissions and commentary (Under separate cover)

Ordinary Meeting

29 June 2022

Chief Executive Officer Report

CEO 08

Liverpool City Council Picnic Day

Strategic Direction	Leading through Collaboration Strive for best practice in all Council processes
File Ref	201594.2022
Report By	Peter Diplas - Acting Chief Executive Officer
Approved By	Peter Diplas - Acting Chief Executive Officer

Executive Summary

A Notice of Motion was submitted by Councillor Kaliyanda for the 25 May 2022 Council meeting as shown below:

The Council, subject to prior consultation with the Acting CEO:

1. Resolves that it is the policy of the Council that only employees who are union members are to be granted leave on the annual Union Picnic Day.

2. Directs the Acting CEO to implement this policy.

Council at its meeting on the 25 May 2022 resolved:

That Council defer this to the 29 June Council meeting in order to receive a report with the comparable policy for neighbouring Councils.

The report to also include within our own Council employees regardless of memberships, how this picnic day/ day in lieu / day off is written into their contract or their work agreement with the financial benefits if any.

This report is in response to the above resolution.

RECOMMENDATION

That

1. The report be received and noted.

2. The Picnic Day entitlement has been in place at Liverpool City Council since at least 2008. There is more to consider than the perceived financial benefits in removing such an entitlement. The Picnic Day is an important employment value proposition with a positive impact which supports mental health and general well-being for over 65% of Liverpool Council’s employees who are non-financial members of a union.

3. There is also the consideration with the existing challenging labour market. Within our LGA we have the Western Sydney Airport (which has already commenced a rigorous recruitment process with the aim of appointing up to 22,000 employees – many of whom will live within the Liverpool LGA) and surrounding Aerotropolis as well as Bradfield City being developed with industry competing for the same talent pool. If Council wants to become an employer of choice and attract, recruit, and retain the people that Council needs to succeed in the future, the Picnic Day is an important cost-effective ethical incentive.

4. The “financial benefit” for Council to remove the Picnic Day entitlement will be outweighed by the impact of staff moral and strong negative reaction given such a decision will not ensure Council’s long term financial sustainability.

5. Finally, the longevity of the entitlement to take leave on Union Picnic Day gives rise to a real risk that this has been implied into the employment contracts by way of custom and practice.

REPORT

Background

Council’s Leave Management Policy (which is an operational policy of Council endorsed by the CEO) provides information and guidance on the management of a range leave entitlements in accordance with applicable Awards, agreements, legislation and related policies.

The right of employees who are not financial members of the union(s) to take leave on the Union Picnic Day is contemplated within Clause 21B(iv) of the Local Government State Award 2020. This includes an entitlement to take “such other leave as may be approved by the employer”.

Since 2008, on the same day as the Union Picnic Day, this Council has provided paid leave to employees who are not financial members of the union(s) and who are not required to work on Union Picnic Day. This was granted at the discretion of the CEO on a year-by-year basis. Since December 2018, Picnic Day has formed part of Council’s Leave Management Policy.

Clause 4.22 of the Leave Management Policy provides for a Picnic Day that is available to all employees of Council (subject to operational requirements and sufficient staff coverage) to coincide with the Union Picnic Day.

Local Government State Award

Since 2005, the Local Government (State) Award has provided employees who are not financial members of the union (s) and who are not required to work on Union Picnic Day, with a right to apply to the employer to take paid or unpaid leave on the Union Picnic Day including “such other leave as may be approved by the employer.” (refer Clause 21B (iv) of the Local Government (State) Award 2020).

Legal advice provided to Council states that:

“Council’s decision to make available Picnic Day leave is consistent with the Award’s contemplation that ‘such other leave’ may be available to staff and is not inconsistent with other types of discretionary leave contemplated by the Award.”

“How this picnic day / day in lieu / day off is written into their contract or their work agreement”

There is a case of implied contractual entitlement

Council’s Leave Management Policy (which is an operational policy of Council) was developed in consultation with Council’s Joint Consultative Committee. The JCC is a forum for consultation between Council and its employees, and includes union appointed representatives, employee elected representatives and management appointed representatives.

Clause 4.22 of the Leave Management Policy provides for a Picnic Day, that is available for all employees (subject to operational requirements and sufficient coverage), and is to coincide with the Union Picnic Day under the Local Government (State) Award.

Legal advice provided to Council states that:

“Policies usually confer discretionary benefits that can be changed or withdrawn as a matter of managerial prerogative provided that prerogative is not exercised in a manner which is capricious. However, clause 2.1 of the Policy states ‘The Leave Management Policy provides information and guidance on the management of leave entitlements in accordance with applicable Awards, agreements, legislation and related Council policies.’ Having acknowledged Picnic Day as an ‘entitlement’ it may be difficult for Council to argue it to be a discretionary benefit. This is particularly so given the long standing nature of the Policy.”

There is also custom and practice to consider

Legal advice provided to Council states that:

“for a significant period prior to the implementation of the Policy, the leave was available for staff for a period of at least ten years. Those circumstances give rise to the possibility that the Picnic Day may have become a contractual entitlement implied by custom and practice through usage. In order to be implied through usage the practice must be notorious, certain and reasonable, and it must not be contrary to law”.

“Whilst we are not instructed as to the notoriety of the practice, given the paid day off has been available organisation wide since at least 2008, we anticipated that it will have sufficient notoriety to meet this requirement. The Policy provisions are also certain, reasonable and, as they are consistent with the Award they are not contrary to law. As such, if the paid day off has existed more or less in the same way since 2008 then there would be significant risk, if it were tested before a Court or Commission, that it would be held to be an entitlement that had been implied into the employment contracts.”

“in our opinion, there is a real risk that the Picnic Day is an entitlement which Council could not withdraw absent staff consent.”

“A similar scenario was examined in ‘Notification under section 130 by New South Wales Local Government, Clerical, Administrative, Energy, Airlines and Utilities Union of a dispute with Newcastle City Council re half-day paid leave [2014] which discussed a proposal by the Newcastle City Council to, without consultation or consent of employees, combine a paid picnic day/Christmas party with a half day Christmas grant day on productivity and expense arguments. The half day Christmas grant day had been available to employees for approximately 30 years including more recently under the terms of a policy. In that matter, the Commission held that the Council could not withdraw the half day Christmas grant day by combining it with the picnic day/Christmas party because it had become, prior to the implementation of the policy, a customary usage imported into the contract of employment.”

“Whilst each case will turn on its own facts, absent instructions about a significant change year to year in the application of the paid day off, in our opinion, there is a real risk that the Picnic Day is an entitlement which Council could not withdraw absent staff consent.”

In closing, and noting the advice above, although the Leave Management Policy does not form a part of the contract of employment per se’, the nature and extent of the granting of a paid day off to non-union members have become a contractual entitlement implied by custom and practice through usage.

Discretionary leave as an operational matter

In the Newcastle City Council dispute referenced above, the Commission commented that the half day Christmas grant day, also known as the Lord Mayor grant day, was “flawed in, as much as that the Lord Mayor holds no executive authority to grant or not grant employee entitlements’.

Legal advice provided to Council states:

“Provided it is within the bounds of Council’s workforce management strategy and the resources approved by the Council, the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) has the discretion to approve applications by employees to access a range of different discretionary leave entitlements. This includes applications by employees to access a range of discretionary leave requirements. This includes applications by employees who are not financial members of the union(s) to take such other leave as the CEO considers appropriate on the Union Picnic Day.

“Comparable policy for neighbouring Councils”

In terms of other metro councils, Penrith, Hawkesbury, Bayside and North Sydney Councils provide an equal entitlement for non-financial members of the unions to take leave on the Union Picnic Day.

“Financial Benefits”

In accordance with the relevant provisions of the Award and Leave Management Policy, a distinction applies to the applicable rates of pay where, due to operational requirements, a union member or a non-financial member of a union is required to work on the Picnic Day.

For Union members who are required to work on the Picnic Day they are remunerated, by either:

· Double time and a half – Ordinary pay plus time and a half for hours worked

· Ordinary pay plus half pay for hours worked and time in lieu

Unlike employees who are financial members of a unions, the employees who are not financial members of a union do not receive the option of any penalty and or overtime payments for the time worked on the Picnic Day. These employees will be paid normal rates of pay and will be granted time in lieu equivalent to the time they have worked, at single time.

The Picnic Day entitlement (additional one day leave) for non-union staff represents a nominal loss of productivity of around $180K (union members: $93K). If all non-union staff were required to work this day, given the large number of union staff taking the day off, it is likely that there would be significant lost productivity of non-union staff regardless, due to the lack of necessary resourcing on the day.

Further, it is likely that many non-union staff would choose to take other leave on this day if the Picnic Day was not offered as part of employment conditions at Liverpool City Council. This would further reduce the value associated with lost productivity. Therefore, while it is impossible to quantify the net lost productivity, it would nevertheless be significantly less than the nominal $180K.

Whilst removing this one day leave entitlement may marginally improve productivity of non-union staff, it will not decrease overall staff costs, and therefore the monetary impact to Council is nil. However, only union members receive overtime rates if they are required to work on the Picnic Day. This has a real monetary impact on Council that would otherwise be avoided if not for the Picnic Day provision.

Legal advice provided to Council states:

“the information we have been provided to inform the background of our advise does not set out the impact of the Picnic Day on the financial sustainability of Council. Whilst it suggest some productivity losses, those losses are difficult to quantify as they are not equivalent to the staffing costs of leave (noting these staffing costs would be incurred in any event) and do not take into account the positive impact the reward of the day off will have on work efforts on surrounding days.”

Summary

The Picnic Day entitlement has been in place at Liverpool City Council since at least 2008. There is more to consider than the perceived financial benefits in removing such an entitlement. The Picnic Day is an important employment value proposition which supports mental health and general well-being for over 65% of Liverpool Council’s employees who are non-financial members of a union.

There is also the consideration with the existing challenging labor market. Within our LGA we have the Western Sydney Airport (which has already commenced a rigorous recruitment process with the aim of appointing up to 22,000 employees – many of whom will live within the Liverpool LGA) and surrounding Aerotropolis as well as Bradfield City being developed with industry competing for the same talent pool. If Council wants to become an employer of choice and attract, recruit, and retain the people that Council needs to succeed in the future, the Picnic Day is an important cost effective ethical incentive.

Finally, the longevity of the entitlement to take leave on Union Picnic Day gives rise to a real risk that this has been implied into the employment contracts by way of custom and practice.

Legal advice provided to Council states:

In our opinion, absent a very thorough and well-argued submission to show that the removal of this particular entitlement is necessary to prevent financial instability, a motion directing the CEO to exercise his discretion to grant or deny particular discretionary leave in a particular way, would be an unreasonable interference with the CEO’s functions.”

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	There are economic and financial considerations as outlined in the report.
Environment	There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.
Social	There are no social and cultural considerations.
Civic Leadership	Provide information about Council’s services, roles and decision making processes.
Legislative	There are no legislative considerations relating to this report.
Risk	The risk is deemed to be Low and is considered to be within Council’s risk appetite.

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

Ordinary Meeting

29 June 2022

Planning & Compliance Report

PLAN 01

Post Exhibition Report - Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 Amendment 84

Strategic Direction	Generating Opportunity Meet the challenges of Liverpool’s growing population
File Ref	161934.2022
Report By	Cameron Jewell - Senior Strategic Planner
Approved By	David Smith - Director Planning & Compliance

Property	Lot 71 within DP 1134477; Lot 72 within DP 1134477; Lot 73 within DP 1134477; Lot 74 within DP 1134477; Lot 75 within DP 1134478; Lot 77 within DP 1134478; Lot 78 within DP 1134478; Lot 761 within DP 1217961; Lot 762 within DP 1217961; and Lot 5 within DP 239468.
Owner	Multiple owners
Applicant	Liverpool City Council

Executive Summary

At the Council meeting of 11 December 2019 (EGROW 08), Council resolved to prepare a planning proposal to amend the Dwelling Density Map of the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 (LEP) applying to four large lots along Pleasure Point Road, Pleasure Point (DP 1134477, DP 1134478, DP 239468 and DP 1134481), in order to increase the existing four-lot restriction stipulated within Clause 7.12 of the LEP to a maximum of five lots. The impetus for the planning proposal is to increase the yield potential of these lots, and to formalise the existence of a five-lot subdivision that was previously approved.

A planning proposal, Draft Amendment 84 to the LEP, was prepared in accordance with this resolution and presented to the 29 July 2020 Council meeting (EGROW 04). The planning proposal was submitted to the Department of Planning and Environment (DPE) for a Gateway determination in accordance with Council’s resolution.

A Gateway determination was issued by DPE on 23 September 2020 (Attachment 1), which required Council to prepare a bushfire report, conduct State agency consultation and place the proposal on public exhibition. The Gateway expiry was 23 September 2021. Due to delays in procuring a bushfire report and consultation with the Rural Fire Service (RFS) taking longer than expected, the Gateway determination expired on 23 September 2021, before the bushfire report could be finalised.

DPE advised Council that the Gateway would not be extended, and a new planning proposal should be progressed. As the completed bushfire report (Attachment 2) indicated that the northernmost site (Site 4) would be unable to facilitate additional development based on Planning for Bushfire regulations, it was recommended that this site be removed from the updated planning proposal.

An updated planning proposal (Attachment 3) was submitted to DPE for a Gateway determination in February 2022, with a reissued Gateway determination received on 17 March 2022 (Attachment 4).

The planning proposal was sent to State agencies and placed on public exhibition between 30 March and 22 April 2022 in line with the Gateway conditions. No submissions were received as a result of public exhibition. No objections were received from State agencies (Attachment 5).

This report updates Council on the outcomes of public consultation of the planning proposal and recommends that Council proceed with Amendment 84 to the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008, and delegates authority to the A/CEO to liaise with DPE and the Parliamentary Counsel’s Office to finalise the amendment.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Notes the Gateway determination for Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 (Amendment 84) and the results of public authority consultation and community consultation; and

2. Proceeds with Amendment 84 to the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 and delegates authority to the Acting CEO (or his delegate) to liaise with the Parliamentary Counsel’s Office and the Department of Planning and Environment to finalise the amendment.

REPORT

Background

A dwelling density restriction of four dwellings applies to four original large lots identified in Figure 1 and 2 along Pleasure Point Road, Pleasure Point. The LEP lot restriction at the subject site was put in place primarily due to water and sewerage constraints in place when the LEP was prepared in 2008.

Figure 1: Location of initial subject site outlined in red (Nearmap)

Figure 2: Initial Subject Site – Four Original Large Lots (Geocortex LCC)

Table 1: Initial Subject Site Lots

Original Large Lot	Address	Legal Description
Lot 1	70 Pleasure Point Road	Lot 71 within DP 1134477
	72 Pleasure Point Road	Lot 72 within DP 1134477
	74 Pleasure Point Road	Lot 73 within DP 1134477
	76 Pleasure Point Road	Lot 74 within DP 1134477
Lot 2	62 Pleasure Point Road	Lot 77 within DP 1134478
	64a Pleasure Point Road	Lot 761 within DP 1217961
	64b Pleasure Point Road	Lot 762 within DP 1217961
	66 Pleasure Point Road	Lot 78 within DP 1134478
	68 Pleasure Point Road	Lot 75 within DP 1134478
Lot 3	Lot 5 Pleasure Point Road	Lot 5 within DP 239468
Lot 4	46 Pleasure Point Road	Lot 86 within DP 1134481
	48 Pleasure Point Road	Lot 85 within DP 1134481
	50 Pleasure Point Road	Lot 84 within DP 1134481
	52 Pleasure Point Road	Lot 83 within DP 1134481

At its meeting on 11 December 2019, Council considered a report recommending that a planning proposal be prepared to amend the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 (LEP) by increasing the permitted number of lots on certain sites along Pleasure Point Road in Pleasure Point, from four lots to five lots.

At this meeting, it was resolved:

That Council:

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

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

Initial Proposed Amendment to the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008

The initial proposed amendment to the LEP increased the existing dwelling density restriction of four lots to a maximum of five lots for four sites listed in Table 1 and illustrated in Figure 1. The dwelling density restriction applied to four original large lots identified in Figure 2 and represented by distinct colors in Table 1.

Initial Gateway Determination

DPE issued a Gateway determination on 15 January 2020 (Attachment 1), which included several conditions that were to be satisfied. The most pertinent was the following:

· Prior to public exhibition, Council is required to prepare a bush fire report in consultation with the Rural Fire Service and update the planning proposal to address the unresolved inconsistency with Section 9.1 Direction 4.4 Planning for Bushfire Protection.

The Gateway expiry was 23 September 2021. Due to delays in procuring a bushfire report and consultation with the Rural Fire Service (RFS) taking longer than expected, the Gateway determination expired on 23 September 2021, before the bushfire report could be finalised.

DPE advised Council that the Gateway would not be extended, and a new Gateway request should be submitted.

Bushfire Report

As part of the Gateway process for Amendment 84 to the LLEP 2008, a bushfire report was prepared by Peterson Bushfire, based on Planning for Bush Fire Protection 2019 development standards, which came into effect on 1 March 2020 (Attachment 2). The report found the following:

· The Asset Protection Zone (APZ) constraint measured from the forest hazard (C2 zone) leaves two of the four sites (Site 1 and 3) with potential developable area. Site 2 already has the proposed limit of five dwellings and the APZ constraint on Site 4 prevents further development.

· The physical separation between Site 1 and Site 3 prevents a through road around the eastern side of the development to act as a continuous perimeter road. Therefore, Sites 1 and 3 would require their own individual access road and turning facility. Private property access roads can link up with the existing fire trail requirement to ensure through access to the rear of all four sites is maintained. Hydrants would also need to be installed along the roads to ensure new dwellings have a compliant water supply for fire-fighters.

In conclusion, the report indicated that the proposal was not considered incompatible with the surrounding environment and bushfire risk (though no additional development could be supported on Site 4), and that with sound bushfire management, the proposal could exist within the bushland setting.

As shown in Figure 3, Sites 1 and 3 have capacity to support additional development. Access road solutions for these properties are also shown.

Figure 3: Development potential and road access solution. Source: Peterson Bushfire

Updated planning proposal

As the Gateway determination expired on 23 September 2021, DPE advised Council to submit a new Gateway request and to omit Site 4 from the proposal due to there being no potential for further development on site, as indicated in the bushfire report.

The updated planning proposal (Attachment 3) site encompasses three original large lots within the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 (LLEP) as shown below in Figure 4, Figure 5 and Figure 6.

Figure 4: Location of subject site outlined in red (Nearmap)

Figure 6: Zoning Map of the Subject Site (LCC Geocortex). Note: subject site outlined in red

Gateway Determination

DPE issued a Gateway determination on 17 March 2022 (Attachment 4), which included conditions in relation to timing and consultation requirements. The Gateway expiry is 17 September 2022.

The planning proposal and relevant documentation were placed on public exhibition between 30 March 2022 and 22 April 2022. No submissions were received and, as such, no further changes to the planning proposal are proposed as a result of the public exhibition.

Public Authority Consultation

Letters were sent to Rural Fire Service (RFS); NSW State Emergency Services (SES); DPE Environment and Heritage (EHG); Endeavour Energy; and Jemena Gas Networks as part of the public agency consultation on 28 March 2022.

No objections were raised in relation to the planning proposal; however, several issues were raised that would need to be addressed at the development application (DA) stage.

A summary of each submission received during public authority consultation is provided in Table 2, and original copies included in Attachment 5.

Table 2: Summary of public authority consultation comments

Public Authority	Comment	Officer’s response
RFS	No specific objections raised to the proposal.	Noted.
	The alternate solution proposed for access to comply with the performance criteria of table 5.3b of Planning for Bush Fire Protection (PBP) 2019 is supported.	Noted.
	Future dwellings on the future lots must be located outside the proposed Asset Protection Zone as identified in the Figure 5 - Access of the submitted bush fire report prepared by Peterson Bushfire	Noted.
	The current bush fire report does not outline the appropriate bush fire protection measures for the existing dwellings within the subject site and needs to be addressed where subdivision (or increase in density) is proposed in the future.	Noted. Can be addressed at DA stage.
SES	The consent authority will need to ensure that the planning proposal is considered against the relevant Ministerial Section 9.1 Directions, including 4.3 – Flood Prone Land and is consistent with the NSW Flood Prone Land Policy as set out in the NSW Floodplain Development Manual, 2005.	Noted. The proposal is not located within the flood planning area therefore the indicated Ministerial Direction and flood policies do not apply.
EHG	No biodiversity assessment has been provided in relation to the proposal.	The planning proposal only allows additional development on land zoned R5 where there is no mapped biodiversity value. No biodiversity assessment is deemed necessary at this stage though further information may be required at the DA stage.
	Site 1 and Site 2 are partially identified on the NSW Biodiversity Values map. Any clearing of native vegetation or additional impacts prescribed by section 6.1 of the Biodiversity Conservation Regulation 2017 will result in future development triggering the Biodiversity Offset Scheme Threshold.	Noted.
	The site has large areas mapped as a Threatened Ecological Community, Cooks River/Castlereagh Ironbark Forest which is listed as a Serious and Irreversible Impact Entity under the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 (BC Act). If future development triggers the Biodiversity Offset Scheme, any impacts to this community would require assessment of potential Serious and Irreversible Impacts in accordance with the Biodiversity Assessment Method 2020.	Noted.
	The proposal indicates access roads will be required to the rear of the R5 zoned land, adjacent to the C2 – Environmental Conservation Zone boundary. Adequate consideration and assessment of the extent of direct and indirect impacts from the construction and use of these roads on the C2 zone has not been provided. Any future development of the site, including access roads, should be designed so they do not impact upon or encroach within the existing C2 zoned land.	Noted.
	The Bushfire Report acknowledges that proposed APZs have not considered the riparian corridor and potential buffer requirements associated with the creek line that runs almost parallel to the C2 boundary and that consideration of this constraint may further restrict potential developable area within the sites. If bushfire constraints restrict development potential on sites 1 and 3, the intent of the proposal may not be achievable. If greater APZs were required, EHG would not support these extending into the C2 zoned land.	Noted. RFS has not raised any objections to how the APZ has been defined therefore it is not considered that any changes are required at this stage. Further detail may be required at the DA stage.
	Several threatened species records existing within close proximity to the subject sites including Acacia pubescens, Hibbertia puberula, Allocasuarina diminuta subsp. mimica and the Koala. A review of threatened species records within NSW BioNet confirms that the subject land is habitat for many threatened flora and fauna species.	Noted. The C2 zoning and asset protection zones mean that it is unlikely that development will impact on biodiversity values. However, any biodiversity impacts can be addressed at DA stage.
	There is no discussion provided regarding measures proposed to achieve objectives of C2 land.	Noted. Measures to achieve the objectives of the C2 zoning will be considered and incorporated into the future subdivision and development of the site.
	Noting above issues, EHG does not raise any significant concerns to the subject proposal.	Noted.
Endeavour Energy	Endeavour Energy has no objections if conditions are met at the DA stage	Noted.
	To ensure an adequate connection, the applicant will need to engage an Accredited Service Provider (ASP) of an appropriate level and class of accreditation to assess the electricity load and the proposed method of supply for the development.	Noted. Can be addressed at DA stage.
	An extension and / or augmentation of the existing local network may be required. Whilst pole mounted substation no. 7539 located on the road verge of the site is likely to have some spare capacity sufficient to facilitate the proposed development, it is not unlimited.	Noted. Can be addressed at DA stage.
	The low voltage service conductors and customer connection points must comply with the ‘Service and Installation Rules of NSW’.	Noted. Can be addressed at DA stage.
	The minimum required safety clearances and controls for buildings and structures and working near overhead power lines must be maintained at all times.	Noted. Can be addressed at DA stage.
	Existing trees which are of low ecological significance in proximity of overhead power lines should be removed and if necessary replaced by an alternative smaller planting.	Noted. Can be addressed at DA stage.
Jemena Gas Networks	Confirmation that Jemena does not operate gas mains or high pressure gas pipelines within the planning proposal area, and that Jemena has no objections to the planning proposal.	Noted.

As there were no objections raised, or issues that must be addressed at the planning proposal stage, no changes to the planning proposal are recommended as a result of public authority consultation.

Next Steps

If Council resolves to finalise Amendment 84 as recommended, staff will liaise with the NSW Parliamentary Counsel’s Office and DPE to begin the legal drafting of the amendment to the LEP. Once finalised, Liverpool LEP 2008 Amendment 84 will be notified in the NSW Government Gazette.

Conclusion

The Gateway determination requirements for Amendment 84 have been satisfied and matters raised by public authority agencies will be appropriately considered as part of a future DA process.

It is recommended that Council finalises Amendment 84 to the LLEP 2008 and delegates authority to the Acting CEO (or his delegate) to liaise with the Parliamentary Counsel’s Office and DPE to finalise Amendment 84.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

There are no financial implications relating to this recommendation.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	Facilitate economic development.
Environment	Protect, enhance and maintain areas of endangered ecological communities and high quality bushland as part of an attractive mix of land uses.
Social	There are no social and cultural considerations.
Civic Leadership	There are no civic leadership and governance considerations.
Legislative	Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.
Risk	The risk is deemed to be Low. The risk is considered within Council’s risk appetite.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Initial Gateway Determination (Amendment 84) (Under separate cover)

2. Bushfire Report (Under separate cover)

3. Amended Planning Proposal (Under separate cover)

4. Reissued Gateway determination (Under separate cover)

5. State agency submissions (Under separate cover)

6. ASIC search (Under separate cover) - Confidential

Ordinary Meeting

29 June 2022

Planning & Compliance Report

PLAN 02

Public artwork to commemorate the 150th Anniversary of Liverpool as a Municipality

Strategic Direction	Creating Connection Celebrate diversity, promote inclusion and recognise heritage
File Ref	164365.2022
Report By	Clare Cochrane - Public Arts Officer
Approved By	David Smith - Director Planning & Compliance

Executive Summary

Council resolved at its 27 April 2022 meeting to receive a further report at the June 2022 Council meeting for the creation of a permanent legacy of the 150th Anniversary of Liverpool as a Municipality in the form of a work of Public Artwork, as part of the detailed design work for Lighthorse Park.

27 June 2022 marks the 150th anniversary of Liverpool being proclaimed a municipality. This is a significant milestone in the history of the City of Liverpool and a key point in time to celebrate various events related to the history and development of Liverpool over this period.

This report outlines five different options for proposed artworks, all of which can be designed to be incorporated into the detailed design work for the upgrade of Lighthorse Park. The recommended option is a ‘Treasure Hunt’ style public artwork, comprising of 20 small bronze or stainless-steel sculptures that will symbolise key milestones that have occurred over the last 150 years.

The narrative and design of the artwork would be developed in consultation with Council staff and Councillors, including through a workshop facilitated by the selected artist, to identify suitable milestones to be reflected in the public artwork. The artwork can be funded using existing budget allocation for the Lighthorse Park upgrade project.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Endorse the ‘Treasure Hunt’ public artwork option; and

2. Direct the A/CEO to procure an artist to develop the narrative and design for the artworks, in consultation with Council staff and Councillors, and deliver the artwork as part of the Lighthorse Park upgrade.

REPORT

Introduction

This report outlines five different options for the proposed artworks, all of which can be designed to be incorporated into the detailed design work for the upgrade of Lighthorse Park.

History of Liverpool

Liverpool has a rich, diverse, and unique history, spanning from at least 40,000 years ago with the arrival of First Nations peoples, 244 years ago with the arrival of the first British explorers seeking arable land, 164 years ago when transnational migrants arrived as skilled workers, and 150 years since Liverpool was proclaimed as a municipality.

Various significant events and milestones have occurred over the 150-year period, related to the demography of the community, and establishment of notable local industries, economies, educational institutions, and infrastructure, which can be celebrated through the proposed public artwork.

The table below provides examples of some of the key milestones in Liverpool’s history which could inform the narrative and design for the proposed public artwork. A more comprehensive summary of milestones is included in Attachment 1 ’Summary of Milestones in the History of Liverpool’.

Date	Milestone
At least 40,000 years ago	Arrival of First Nations people to NSW (including Liverpool).
1798	First land grants provided by British colonies in the Liverpool area (formerly known as ‘Banks Town’).
1810	Governor Lachlan Macquarie founded Liverpool and named it in honor of the Earl of Liverpool.
1813	Construction of first road between Sydney and Liverpool.
c.1857	Railway line extended to Liverpool.
c.1858	First recorded migration to the Liverpool area (13 South American shepherds and their flock of 276 llamas arrive at Thomas Holt’s property).
1872	Liverpool municipality declared, with a population of 1,338. Richard Sadlier becomes Liverpool’s first Mayor.
1907	First telephone connected to Liverpool Town Hall. Described by an Alderman as a “new-fangled notion”.
1914	Light Horse Regiment was transferred to Holsworthy.
1960 – 1968	NSW Housing Commission builds 5,600 homes in Green Valley.
1985	Badgerys Creek selected as the site for the Western Sydney International (Nancy-Bird Walton) Airport.
2026	Western Sydney International (Nancy-Bird Walton) Airport expected to open.
c.2027 (expected)	NUW Alliance (University of Newcastle, UNSW, the University of Wollongong and Western Sydney University) to open the first ‘multiversity’ within the Western Sydney Aerotropolis.

Artwork Options

This report outlines five different options for the proposed artworks, these being: the ‘Treasure Hunt‘, ’Silhouettes‘, ’Freestanding Sculpture’, ’Bridge Works‘, and ’Integrated‘ public artwork. The section below is a summary including a description, location within the site, advantages and disadvantages, and estimated cost, for each option. The cost estimates have been prepared using rates provided by artists and fabricators that specialise in each artwork type and have been based on examples of equivalent artworks that have been constructed recently and include a 15% contingency, however they do not factor in inflationary pressures due to rising fuel and transportation, and material costs. A detailed cost estimate will be prepared in conjunction with the detailed design for the artwork.

A Site Plan showing the location of each artwork option is included in Attachment 2 ’Site Location Plan’, and examples of each option are included in Attachment 3 ’Examples of Public Artwork Options’.

Option 1 – ‘Treasure Hunt’ (Preferred Option)

Description

Option 1 comprises a collection of 20 individual small sized sculptures, cast from bronze, stainless steel or cement, located across the site. The sculptures can be affixed to other infrastructure within the park, such as sandstone blocks or feature boulders, play spaces elements, seating, railings, and on surfaces such as walls and paving.

Each individual sculpture would represent an object, document, or quotation which depict a significant milestone in the City of Liverpool‘s history. Collectively, these sculptures form a ’treasure hunt’, providing activation and engagement for users, across the site.

Advantages

· Site coverage – As a collection of several individual artworks, it provides the greatest coverage across the site.

· Cost effective – As the sculptures would be affixed to other infrastructure, they would not require ground excavation works or separate footings, resulting in reduced cost.

· Durable – The sculptures would be constructed from robust materials, such as bronze, stainless steel or cement, which are highly resistant to damage and vandalism, require minimal maintenance, and can withstand extreme weather conditions such as flooding, which occurs in this location.

· Flexible and adaptable – The collection of sculptures can be added to over time, as significant events continue to occur in Liverpool’s history.

· Accessible and engaging – Given the small scale of the sculptures, and the flexibility to situate them in various locations within the site, they would be tactile, engaging, fun and inclusive, enabling users of all levels of ability to engage with artworks. As a ’treasure hunt’ they would also function as a play element, further activating the site.

· Multiple narratives – Given that the artwork comprises of several individual elements, it would allow for multiple stories and events that have occurred over the 150-year period, to be reflected and celebrated.

Disadvantages

· Scale – The size of the individual artworks is small and does not provide a singular statement.

· Awareness – The artworks will require information to contextualise them in Liverpool’s timeline, such as plaques.

Estimated Cost

Item	Estimated Cost
Workshop with Councilors and Council staff to develop the narrative and design for the sculptures	$770
Design and fabrication of sculptures	$92,900
Transport and installation of sculptures	$2,900
Contingency (15%)	$14,486
Total	$111,056

Option 2 – ‘Silhouette Sculptures’

Description

Option 2 comprises a collection of ten medium or life-sized silhouette-style cut out sculptures, dispersed throughout the site. The sculptures would be six millimeters thick, laser cut from Corten steel material, and affixed to the ground with concrete footings.

Each silhouette sculpture would represent an individual or group of people or animals, objects, documents, or quotations which depict a significant milestone in the City of Liverpool‘s history. Collectively, these silhouette-style sculptures form a story, providing an educational experience and engagement for users, across the site.

Advantages

· Site coverage – As a collection of several individual artworks, it provides coverage across the site.

· Landmark – Due to their size, the sculptures would provide impact and act as a landmark feature.

· Durable – The sculptures would be constructed from Cortel steel, which has a natural patina that will disguise scratches. It would also be resistant to other forms of damage and vandalism, require minimal maintenance, and can withstand extreme weather conditions such as flooding, which occurs in this location.

Disadvantages

· Scale – The medium size of the individual artworks means that they will only be viewable from a certain distance.

· Limited detail – As the sculptures would be silhouette-style, a limited amount of detail is able to be achieved, and the messaging would only be viewable from a limited distance.

· Awareness – The artworks would require information to contextualise them in Liverpool’s timeline, such as plaques.

· Installation – The sculptures would require concrete footings. Given the site conditions, additional cost may be incurred associated with remediation of contaminated soil on site and additional structural engineering required, to ensure the footings are suitable to withstand the impacts of flooding which occurs on the site.

Estimated Cost

Item	Estimated Cost
Workshop with Councilors and Council staff to develop the narrative and design for the sculptures	$2,500
Design of sculptures	$40,000
Construction, transportation and installation of sculptures (excluding footings)	$11,000
Earthworks and supply and installation of footings	$22,000
Contingency (15%)	$11,325
Total	$86,825

Option 3 – ‘Free Standing Sculpture’

Description

Option 3 comprises one singular large sized free-standing sculpture, situated in a prominent location within the site. The sculpture would be approximately four to six meters tall, constructed from Corten steel material, and affixed to the ground with large concrete footings.

The singular sculpture would be a conceptual representation of the City of Liverpool‘s history, and would feature as a dramatic, striking, landmark piece of infrastructure, within the site.

Advantages

· Landmark – Due to its large size, the sculpture would provide significant impact and act as a landmark feature.

· Durable – The sculpture would be constructed from Cortel steel, which has a natural patina that will disguise scratches. It would also be resistant to other forms of damage and vandalism, require minimal maintenance, and can withstand extreme weather conditions such as flooding, which occurs in this location.

· Engagement – The form of the sculpture could be designed as a mechanism to frame certain views within and/or beyond the site. For example, it could be placed to frame and capture views of people entering or using the site, thereby incorporating the past, present and future people of Liverpool into the narrative of the artwork.

Disadvantages

· Interpretation – Given the artwork would be a singular form, it would require a conceptual narrative. Therefore, it may be challenging to depict and commemorate 150-years of history within the one artwork and could limit the accessibility of the artwork to the community.

· Cost – This is the most expensive option, due to its size and associated construction and installation cost, including the need for large footings

· Given the site conditions, additional cost may also be incurred associated with remediation of contaminated soil on site and additional structural engineering required, to ensure the footings are suitable to withstand the impacts of flooding which occurs on the site.

· Limited flexibility and adaptability – Given that this would be a large singular artwork, it is less flexible and adaptable when compared with the other options that are a collection of smaller artworks, that can be added to over time, as significant events continue to occur in Liverpool’s history.

· Time and Approvals – This option would likely take the longest time to deliver, given the needed for the preparation and assessment of a Development Application, and the need for the application to be referred to the Liverpool Local Planning Panel, for final determination.

Estimated Cost

Item	Estimated Cost
Workshop with Councilors and Council staff to develop the narrative and design for the sculpture	$2,500
Design of sculpture, structural engineering design and certification for footing/s, and preparation of Development Application	$6,000
Fee for lodgment of Development Application	$4,000
Construction of sculpture	$75,000
Transport and installation of sculpture (excluding footing/s)	$5,000
Earthworks and supply and installation of anchoring/s and footing/s	$75,000
Contingency (15%)	$25,125
Total	$192,625

Option 4 – ‘Bridge Works'

Option 4 comprises an artwork applied to the underside and/or pylons of “Light Horse Bridge”, within the park, either in the form of a series of murals (Option 4a), or lightworks (Option 4b), as described below. It is noted that both options could also be considered for incorporation into the future pedestrian bridge that will be located above the park and extend over the Georges River.

Description (Option 4a, Bridge Murals)

Option 4a comprises a series of six (6) painted murals, applied to the bridge pylons and/or underside of the bridge, within the park. The murals would wrap horizontally around the pylons, extending two (2) meters from the base and up to six (6) meters to the top of each of the pylons. This would assist in protecting the murals during flood events, and minimise the likelihood of vandalism and damage occurring to the artworks. The murals could also extend to the underside of the bridge.

The murals would depict significant milestones in the City of Liverpool‘s history, and collectively could form a story, providing an educational experience and engagement for users using the space under the bridge.

Advantages (Option 4a)

· Multiple narratives – Given that the artwork is in the form of murals, it would allow for multiple stories and themes to be incorporated to reflect 150-years of Liverpool’s history.

· Local Opportunities – There are several local artists specialising in mural artworks, that could work independently or in collaboration with other artists, and therefore this option could provide work and development opportunities for the local community.

· Durable – Due to the location and installation methodology, the artwork is unlikely to be impacted by vandalism, damage, or flood events, and would require minimal maintenance.

· Impact – Given their location, the murals would be incorporated into the future play space, which will contribute to activating the space and providing additional engagement for park users.

Disadvantages (Option 4a)

· Ownership and Approvals – the bridge is owned by Transport for NSW, and any works to the bridge would require their approval. It is noted that Transport for NSW have restrictions and limitations on the type, style, material, and colour palette for artworks on their assets. As such, any deviations from these rules could result in extensive delays in seeking approval, and/or approval may not be granted.

· Access and Maintenance – The responsibility and permission for maintenance and repairs may be unclear and/or contentious.

· Design – Due to the structural design of the underside of the bridge, it would be difficult to apply murals to the surface.

· Future Widening – Transport for NSW has future plans to widen the bridge which could impact the artworks.

Estimated Cost (Option 4a)

Item	Estimated Cost
Workshop with Councilors and Council staff to develop the narrative and design for the murals	$700
Design of the murals	$4,000
Installation and materials for painting the murals	$45,000
Hire of lift equipment for painting of murals	$24,000
Supply and installation of anti-graffiti coating (including equipment hire)	$7,000
Contingency (15%)	$12,200
Total	$92,900

Description (Option 4b, Bridge Lightworks)

Option 4b comprises lightworks using dynamic illumination, projected onto the bridge pylons and/or underside of the bridge structure, within the park. Projectors would be installed onto the pylons and energy efficient LED lights would be aimed to project content onto the pylons and/or underside of bridge, during the day and/or night.

The projections could include sculptural, conceptual or realistic imagery and/or text, that depict significant milestones in the City of Liverpool‘s history, and could be used to narrate a story, providing an engaging experience for site users and help activate the space under the bridge.

Advantages (Option 4b)

· Adaptability and flexibility – The projections can be changed at any point in time, including for special events held in the park. This option also allows for a number of different artworks to be delivered, providing opportunities for a high number of significant milestones and events in Liverpool’s history, to be displayed and added to over time.

· Impact – Given their location, the lightworks would be incorporated into the future play space, which will contribute to activating the space and providing additional engagement for park users, both during the day and/or night.

· Visibility – The light works would be highly visible within the site and could also be visible from the train-line, surrounding streets, the Georges River and future development to the east of the river. The lightworks could also be turned on at night, thereby supporting night-time activation and passive surveillance within the park.

· Innovative – This option is an innovative format for artwork to display, narrate and commemorate significant themes and milestones in Liverpool’s history.

Disadvantages (Option 4b)

· Ongoing cost – A permanent electricity supply is required to facilitate this artwork, and as such there would be ongoing operational costs to Council.

· Access and Maintenance – The responsibility and permission for maintenance and repairs may be unclear and/or contentious.

· Future Widening – Transport for NSW has future plans to widen the bridge which could impact the artworks; and

· Awareness – the artworks would require information to contextualise them in Liverpool’s timeline, such as signage at ground level.

Estimated Cost (Option 4b)

Item	Estimated Cost
Workshop with Councilors and Council staff to develop the narrative and design for the light projections	$2,500
Design of the artworks and projection system, and structural engineering design and certification, and preparation of Development Application	$35,000
Fee for lodgment of Development Application	$4,000
Transport, supply and installation of the projection system, including equipment hire	$80,000
Supply and installation of electricity, including equipment hire	$40,000
Programming of imagery onto projection system	$10,000
Contingency (15%)	$25,725
Total	$197,225

Note: Ongoing cost for electricity supply has not been included in the above cost estimate table. This would need to be investigated if Council decides to proceed with this option.

Option 5 - ’Integrated’

Description

Option 5 comprises artworks integrated into other structures and objects including the proposed new building, pavement, and furniture, within the site.

A series of mosaic style tiles would be incorporated in various locations, including ten bands laid at paved junction points throughout the site, two bands laid within the proposed community garden, and a 3 x 3-meter section affixed to the wall of the future community center building. The tiles would be printed with text and/or images that depict significant milestones in the City of Liverpool‘s history and could be added to over time.

Approximately twelve individual bench seats would also be included, that are custom designed to incorporate artwork. The seats would be in pairs for maximum impact and be situated throughout the site, including in the future community garden, incorporating designs that reflect the history of Liverpool.

Advantages

· Bespoke – This option provides an opportunity to incorporate bespoke furniture, and wall and floor treatments within the site, and the artworks and their respective stories would feel imbedded into the park, thereby contributing to a unique sense of place.

· Site coverage – As a collection of several individual artworks, it provides coverage across the site.

· Multiple narratives – Given the form of artwork, it would allow for multiple stories and themes to be incorporated to reflect 150-years of Liverpool’s history.

· Community Involvement – There would be potential for the community to be involved in the development of the mosaic tile artworks, thereby increasing their sense of ownership and civic pride of the site.

· Adaptable – Additional mosaic tiles could be installed over time to commemorate future historic milestones in Liverpool’s history.

· Accessible and engaging – Given the artworks would be integrated with functional items such as furniture and walking paths, they would be engaging, interesting and would further activate the site.

Disadvantages

· Awareness – The artworks would require information to contextualise them in Liverpool’s timeline, such as plaques or signage.

· Damage and Vandalism – Whilst durable materials and finished would be incorporated, this option would likely be susceptible to damage and vandalism, which would result in additional maintenance, and/or repair or replacement cost to Council.

Estimated Cost (Tiles)

Item	Estimated Cost
Workshop with Councilors and Council staff to develop the narrative and design for the artworks	$1,500
Design of the artworks, tiles and furniture	$2,500
5x Community Workshops to develop the artworks	$7,500
Fabrication of wall tiles	$8,800
Fabrication of pavement tiles	$3,700
Installation of the tiles	$10,000
Contingency (15%)	$5,100
Total	$39,100

Estimated Cost (Benches)

Item	Estimated Cost
Workshop with Councilors and Council staff to develop the narrative and design for the artworks	$2,500
Design of the artworks, and structural engineering design and certification	$10,000
Fabrication of the bespoke benches	$48,000
Transport and installation of the benches	$5,000
Contingency (15%)	$9,900
Total	$75,400

Estimated Cost (Tiles and Benches)

Item	Estimated Cost
Total Cost for Option 5	$111,000

Conclusion

The recommended option is the ‘Treasure Hunt’ style public artwork (Option 1), comprising of 20 small bronze, stainless steel and/or cement sculptures that will symbolize key milestones that have occurred over the 150-year period of Liverpool’s history.

As a collection of individual artworks, it provides the greatest coverage across the site, enables multiple stories and events to be reflected and commemorated, and is flexible and adaptable, enabling additional sculptures to be added to the collection over time, as significant events continue to occur and become part of Liverpool's history. There is potential for the collection to expand in the future and become part of a wider collection of artworks along the river foreshore, as an educational and engaging experience for the community, that will support the activation of the Georges River.

Given the small scale of the sculptures there is flexibility to situate them in various locations, including within the future play space, along walkways, and attached to infrastructure such as retaining walls, and furniture, fixtures, and fittings. This would provide an accessible, tactile, fun, and inclusive experience, enabling users of all levels of ability to engage with the artworks. As a ’treasure hunt’ style artwork, the collection of sculptures would also function as a play element, providing a sense of wonder and exploration for park users. The sculptures could also be designed to be interactive, whereby they involve physical engagement by the audience to achieve their purpose, such as ’instagrammable’ public art.

The sculptures would be affixed to other infrastructure, and therefore would not require ground excavation works or separate footings, resulting in a cost-saving and relatively straightforward installation, when compared to the other options. They would also be highly durable and resistant to damage and vandalism, require minimal maintenance, and would be able to withstand extreme weather conditions, including flooding which occurs on this site.

The sculptures could be incorporated into the detailed design for the site upgrade and funded using existing Council budget allocation for the upgrade works. This option would not require a Development Application or approvals from Transport for NSW, and there would be no significant on-going cost to Council, such as the need for electricity supply to facilitate the artwork.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Council will be receiving $28 million of guaranteed funding through the NSW Government’s WestInvest program, which will be allocated to the Lighthorse Park Upgrade project. $200,000 of this funding will be allocated to cover the cost of the artwork, which will be sufficient to cover the cost of any of the proposed artwork options.

The cost estimates have been prepared using rates provided by artists and fabricators that specialise in each artwork type and have been based on examples of equivalent artworks that have been constructed recently and include a 15% contingency, however they do not factor in inflationary pressures due to rising fuel and transportation, and material costs. A detailed cost estimate will be prepared in conjunction with the detailed design for the artwork.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	There are no economic and financial considerations.
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. Promote community harmony and address discrimination. Deliver high quality services for children and their families.
Civic Leadership	Undertake communication practices with the community and stakeholders across a range of media. Foster neighbourhood pride and a sense of responsibility.
Legislative	There are no legislative considerations relating to this report.
Risk	There is no risk associated with this report.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Summary of Milestones in the History of Liverpool

2. Site Location Plan

3. Examples of Public Artwork Options

Ordinary Meeting

29 June 2022

Planning & Compliance Report

PLAN 03

Moorebank Intermodal - Update on 2022 Council Resolutions

Strategic Direction	Strengthening and Protecting our Environment Exercise planning controls to create high-quality, inclusive urban environments
File Ref	186888.2022
Report By	Luke Oste - Coordinator Strategic Planning
Approved By	David Smith - Director Planning & Compliance

Executive Summary

This report provides an update on two Council resolutions relating to the Moorebank Intermodal.

In response to MOU 02, Council resolved at the 25 May 2022 Council meeting to receive a report back to the June 2022 meeting addressing several points. These were primarily related to concerns around possible compliance issues.

All development applications for the Moorebank Intermodal development are State Significant, known as State Significant Development Applications (SSD’s). These are assessed, determined, and enforced by the Department of Planning and Environment (DPE). Consequently, Council has no monitoring or compliance responsibilities for these developments. If there are concerns regarding compliance with these consents, they are to be raised with DPE’s compliance team.

It is noted that the proponent also facilitates the Moorebank Logistics Park Community Consultative Committee (CCC). The CCC has an active membership of people who live locally or are members of a stakeholder group. Council staff also participate in the CCC and provide feedback to the proponent on any concerns received from the community in relation to the construction and operation of the Moorebank Intermodal site.

Secondly, in response to NOM 03, Council resolved at the 2 February 2022 meeting to undertake public communications and prepare a liaison and advocacy strategy in relation to the outcomes of the Land and Environment Court (LEC) appeal proceedings in respect of Moorebank Precinct West Stage 2 (SSD 7709) (MPW 2). This was specifically related to Conditions of Consent B140 and new condition B140A (Attachment 1). Council staff have liaised with DPE and the proponent team in relation to NOM 03 and Council’s resolution, addressing point (b) of this resolution. These communications have clarified the application of these conditions, noting that:

· There is no change to the requirement to provide a noise wall on the western boundary (condition B129).

· The decision by the LEC in respect MPW 2 did not create an available pool of $15m funding for noise abatement.

· The earliest mechanism for consideration of any receiver mitigation is forecast at this stage to be December 2024.

As such, any public communication would be premature and likely only raise expectations unfairly for surrounding residents at this early stage. Council staff also spoke to DPE who clearly stated that they would not provide nor participate in any such communication process as per points (b), (c), and (d) of Council’s resolution. It is therefore recommended that Council not proceed with points (a), (c) and (d) of the previous resolution.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Receive and note the report; and

2. Not proceed with points (a), (c) and (d) of NOM 03 from the 2 February 2022 Council meeting.

REPORT

MOU 02 - Community Amenity and Mitigation Needs to Address Negative Impacts Developments in East Liverpool in Consideration of the 2022-23 Budget

At the 25 May 2022 Council meeting, Council considered MOU 02 and resolved to note several points as follows:

1. Council is in receipt of significant Ex Gratia Rates and Developer contributions from the Intermodal Development.

2. Council has raised significant issues of concern about the 220ha western precinct of the Moorebank Intermodal site and possible regulatory breaches.

3. Council has consistently raised concerns regarding the need for mitigation of traffic, noise, air quality and visual impact in Liverpool and in particular Liverpool east which is further compounded by a growing number of significant developments in the area to ensure relevant legislation and regulation is enacted.

4. Council remains strongly opposed to the Moorebank Recyclers as it is also similarly to the Intermodal development, not consistent with our long-term vision for ecologically sustainable development for East Liverpool and its CBD.

5. The opportunity for a Class 4 (civil enforcement) and possibly Class 4 (judicial review) and Class 1 (merits) filings still exists to hold the relevant Moorebank Intermodal stakeholders accountable to planning regulations, with anticipated costs of proceedings and orders falling to these relevant stakeholders.

Council also resolved to receive a report back to the June 2022 meeting addressing several points. A response to each point is provided below.

a. The legal and or physical breaches of conditions of consent and relevant local, state, national and international legislation, and regulation, that due to their contravention are or will impact on Liverpool ratepayers negatively.

All development applications for the Moorebank Intermodal development are State Significant, known as State Significant Development Applications (SSD’s). These are assessed, determined, and enforced by DPE. Consequently, Council has no monitoring or compliance responsibilities for these developments. If there are concerns regarding compliance with these consents, they are to be raised with DPE’s compliance team.

b. Identify what legal remedies exist in accordance with Council’s role as community representative and advocate.

As per the response to point (a) above, Council does not have regulatory authority to enforce compliance with SSD’s. If there are concerns regarding compliance with these consents, they are to be raised with DPE’s compliance team.

It is noted that the proponent also facilitates the Moorebank Logistics Park Community Consultative Committee (CCC). Established in 2019, the Moorebank Logistics Park CCC has an active membership of people who live locally or are members of a stakeholder group. Council participates within the CCC and provides feedback to the proponent on any concerns received from the community in relation to the construction and operation of the Moorebank Intermodal site. This has been a typically positive collaborative relationship with the committee members and proponent team.

Ex-gratia income and expenditure

Ex-gratia payments received		$9.117m
Less: Direct operating expenses
Staffing	($0.128m)

Pollution controls	($1.505m)
Erosion protection	($0.177m)
Environmental reviews and controls	($0.931m)
Road maintenance	($2.180m)	($4.921m)
Less: Contribution towards capital expenditure		($2.678m)
Less: Administration overheads (10%)		($0.544m)
Balance of funds – 30 June 2021		$0.974m

SIMTA Developer Contributions

Council holds $9,550,927.27 in contributions. These contributions have not been expended; however, the draft 2022/2023 budget identifies a list of capital works, of which some will be funded by these contributions.

Mitigation works (directly relating to the Intermodal development) are conditions of consent and must be undertaken by the proponent in accordance with each respective consent.

Council holds $9,550,927.27 in contributions that can be used to fund infrastructure projects. As identified above, these contributions have not been expended; however, the draft 2022/2023 budget identifies a list of capital works, of which some will be funded by these contributions.

e. Identify possible advocation for funding to address the infrastructure needs with costings in order to address the negative impacts as a result of the Intermodal Development.

Council continues to advocate for state and federal grant funding applications to meet the ongoing needs of the broader Liverpool community. The newly formed Grants and Partnerships team leads this process with key staff across the organisation.

NOM 03 - Moorebank Intermodal - Noise Abatement Community Engagement

At the 2 February 2022 Council meeting, Council resolved the following in consideration of NOM 03:

That Council:

a. Direct the CEO to prepare and execute a public communication through social media and other forms of normal social engagement with the community to fully inform all relevant residents of Casula and other affected suburbs regarding the additional noise condition placed on Moorebank Intermodal (MPW S2) and the potential access to noise abatement for affected properties;

b. Write to DPIE requesting consideration be given to preparing a communication plan to inform residents, in plain English, of the requirements on the applicant of Condition B140a;

c. Prepare a liaison and advocacy strategy with the relevant stakeholders (DPIE and Qube) to facilitate distribution of above DPIE communication that assists all eligible residents to have access to the information and assessment process agreed to by DPIE and Qube; and

d. Include a report on the cost estimation following the advice from DPIE.

This resolution was in relation to the outcomes of the Land and Environment Court (LEC) appeal proceedings in respect of Moorebank Precinct West Stage 2 (SSD 7709) (MPW 2), specifically related to Conditions of Consent B140 and new condition B140A (Attachment 1).

Since Council’s resolution, Council staff have met with both the Department of Planning and Environment (DPE) and the proponent team (LOGOS). This was facilitated by the Planning Delivery Unit (PDU) of DPE. Several clarifications were made in relation to NOM 03 and the subsequent Council resolution.

· Firstly, there is no change to the requirement to provide a noise wall on the western boundary. This remains a condition of consent B129 under SSD 7709 (MPW 2).

· Secondly, the decision by the LEC in respect MPW 2 did not create an available pool of $15m funding for noise abatement.

A summary of the requirements under condition B140 and B140A is provided below:

· Condition B140 is not initially triggered until 12 months after either commencement of operation of the terminal or occupation of the first warehouse.

· The noise survey required under condition B140A(a) is not required to be completed prior to September 2023, on current forecasts provided by the proponent.

· The results of the noise survey would therefore be provided to the DPE by October 2023.

· Only where the noise survey identifies a noise exceedance, are the subsequent assessments under condition B140A(f) required.

· The Residual Noise Impact Mitigation Plan under condition B140A(g) would be required only where additional mitigation was required after considering the assessment under condition B140A(f)(v).

· The Preliminary Residual Noise Impact Report required under condition B140(ix) would be forecast for completion in December 2023.

· On present timings the first operational noise monitoring would need to be completed by March 2024 and the operational noise report would be required to be completed by May 2024, at the earliest.

· The Residual Noise Impact Mitigation Plan and Proposal for At Property Noise Mitigation Plan, if required, would be forecast for completion by December 2024.

· Where required, any offer for receiver-based treatments (such as double glazed windows potentially) would be required to be completed by March 2025, in accordance with B140A(h)(iii).

Noting that there is no $15m funding pool available for residential abatements, outside of the conduct of the attended noise survey, the earliest mechanism for consideration of any receiver mitigation is forecast to be December 2024.

As such, any public communication would be premature considering the above and likely only raise expectations unfairly for surrounding residents at this early stage. Council staff also spoke to DPE who clearly stated that they would not provide nor participate in any such communication process as per points (b), (c), and (d) of Council’s resolution. It is therefore recommended that Council not proceed with points (a), (c) and (d) of the previous resolution to NOM 03 from the 2 February 2022 Council meeting.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

There are no financial implications relating to this recommendation.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	Deliver a high quality local road system including provision and maintenance of infrastructure and management of traffic issues. Facilitate economic development.
Environment	Manage air, water, noise and chemical pollution.
Social	There are no social and cultural considerations.
Civic Leadership	Undertake communication practices with the community and stakeholders across a range of media. Encourage the community to engage in Council initiatives and actions. Provide information about Council’s services, roles and decision making processes. 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

1. Condition B140 and B140A (SSD 7709)

Ordinary Meeting

29 June 2022

Planning & Compliance Report

PLAN 04

Review of the Liverpool Design Excellence Panel Charter and Procedure

Strategic Direction	Strengthening and Protecting our Environment Exercise planning controls to create high-quality, inclusive urban environments
File Ref	191849.2022
Report By	William Attard - Manager Development Assessment
Approved By	David Smith - Director Planning & Compliance

Executive Summary

The Liverpool Design Excellence Panel (DEP) was established in 2015 along with the Liverpool Design Excellence Panel Charter and Procedure (DEP Charter) to examine and evaluate design aspects of certain development proposals, to ensure a high quality of development is maintained in Liverpool. Since its establishment, the DEP convenes monthly and has been instrumental in providing expert design advice on development applications.

The primary function of the DEP is to provide Council officers and applicants with independent expert advice relating to urban design, architecture, landscape architecture and sustainability. The advice seeks to inform the assessment of development applications with a view to promoting the delivery of the highest quality urban design, architecture, landscape architecture, and sustainable and inclusive design within Liverpool.

The Liverpool DEP Charter was revised in October 2020, and along with processes associated with membership, function, procedures and terms and conditions associated with the Liverpool DEP, outlines the types of development required to be referred to the Liverpool DEP for expert and independent design advice.

The DEP Charter and Procedure is due for review this year and this report recommends only minor changes to the DEP referral criteria for certain development types to ensure an efficient development assessment process and avoid unnecessary referrals to the DEP, given Council has internal design expertise within the City Design and Public Domain unit.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council endorses the minor amendments to the Design Excellence Panel Charter and Procedure as outlined in Attachment 1.

REPORT

Design Excellence Panels are panels formed of independent design experts, who provide advice on the design quality of development proposals, to allow consent authorities to determine whether such applications will positively contribute to the built environment and public domain. DEPs also provide independent design advice to Council on design principles for planning proposals and policy documents i.e., Local Environmental Plans, Development Control Plans, Precinct Plans, Master Plans, and other design related policies.

Pursuant to State Environmental Planning Policy No 65 – Design Quality of Residential Apartment Development (SEPP 65), Design Review Panels or similar (i.e., Design Advisory Panels, Design Excellence Panels, etc.) may be constituted by the Minister for Planning to enhance the design quality of apartment development.

In accordance with Clause 2.2 of the DEP Charter, the following types of development proposals are currently referred to the DEP for expert and independent design advice:

(a) All residential flat buildings.

(b) Medium-density developments of thirty (30) units or more.

(d) New buildings or major extensions to existing development within commercial zones (being B1, B2, B3, B4 and B5 zones).

(e) Any development which has an interface with significant public space or items of heritage significance.

(f) Any development deemed by the Manager Development Assessment and/or Manager City Design and Public Domain (now Manager City Planning) to have a potentially significant impact on the amenity of the locality or region; and

(g) Any development for a new building or major extensions to existing development (except for low-density residential development) adjacent to the Georges River or environmentally sensitive land or vegetation.

To assist in refining the referral criteria, a review of surrounding Council’s DEP Charters and Procedures or equivalent, has been undertaken, inclusive of City of Sydney, and an understanding of the types of development referred to the respective Council’s DEP has been tabulated below:

COUNCIL	DESIGN EXCELLENCE PANEL CRITERIA
Camden Council	- Residential accommodation that is three (3) or more storeys in height. - Commercial development that is three (3) or more storeys in height. - Development in the Camden Heritage Conservation Area that are two or more storeys in height (unless not readily visible from the public domain. - Any other developments that are considered by Council staff to require advanced urban design assessment.
Campbelltown City Council	- New residential apartment development above three (3) storeys. - Medium density developments including shop top housing of twenty (20) units or more. - New commercial buildings over three storeys or with a floor area of 2000sqm or more. - Boarding houses. - Any other development / proposal that in the opinion of the General Manager or a Director should be referred to the Campbelltown DEP. - Any modification of consent for a development that meets the qualifying referral criteria and proposes a significant change to the approved built forma and public interface of the development.
City of Parramatta Council	- Residential flat buildings and mixed-use developments, with affordable rental housing. - Residential flat buildings and mixed-use developments in the city centre, which have not been subject of a design competition. - Residential flat buildings and mixed-use developments in the town centre. - Townhouses with 5 of more units. - Boarding houses which are 3 or more stories, and purpose built. - New or major external alterations to commercial buildings in the city centre, which have not been subject to a design competition. - Large scale health and medical services developments in Westmead. - Large childcare centres with more than 70 children, and purpose built. - Large aged care facilities, and purpose built. - New and large places of public worship, and purpose built.
City of Sydney	- Significant urban design, architecture and landscape architecture projects intended to be undertaken by the City. - Significant urban design, architecture and landscape architecture projects intended to be undertaken by the private sector. - Development applications and projects that may have a significant public domain, public interest, heritage impact and foreshore impact. - The Sydney 2030 project particularly regarding the future of the City’s urban design and public domain quality. - The development and implementation of the City’s planning and public domain policies as they affect urban design, architecture and landscape architecture. - How the City’s public and private projects can achieve the City’s stated environmental commitments and design excellence. - The procurement of design services. - The Central Sydney Planning Strategy and the City’s planning controls including Local Environmental Plans and Development Control Plans.
Cumberland City Council	- Any development proposal subject to the design excellence provisions of the Cumberland Local Environmental Plan. - Any development proposal incorporating buildings with a height greater than 25m. - Any development proposal voluntarily referred to the DEP by an Applicant for development of any kind.
Inner West Council	- All SEPP 65 applicable development. - Larger boarding houses, major commercial buildings, or significant public domain projects. - Significant proposals such as master plans, development control plans, urban design strategies, planning proposal. - Any other matter at the discretion of the Manager Development Assessment (North).
Penrith City Council	Has an Urban Design Review Panel, however, there is no set referral criteria. Planning staff advise applicants that a review be undertaken for applications deemed to be major such as residential flat buildings, hotels, places of worship and gateway sites.

The following commentary regarding the current referral criteria pursuant to Clause 2.2 of the Liverpool DEP Charter is provided below, with recommended changes to ensure an efficient development assessment process and avoid unnecessary referrals to the DEP.

(a) All residential flat buildings

Comment: Consistent with SEPP 65, all residential flat building development applications are required to be considered by the Liverpool DEP. The referral criteria requiring applications of this type to be reviewed by the Liverpool DEP is considered appropriate.

(b) Medium-density developments of thirty (30) units or more

Comment: Considering the scale of a medium-density development of thirty (30) units, the referral criteria requiring applications of this type to be reviewed by the Liverpool DEP is considered appropriate.

(c) New developments within the Liverpool City Centre over three (3) storeys

Comment: The referral criteria requiring applications of this type to be reviewed by the Liverpool DEP is considered appropriate. Clause 7.5 of the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 requires that development involving the construction of a new building or external alterations to an existing building in the Liverpool city centre must exhibit design excellence. Given Council has internal design expertise within the City Design and Public Domain unit, who can provide comments on smaller scale development types, it is considered appropriate that this referral criteria remain unchanged.

(d) New buildings or major extensions to existing development within commercial zones (being B1, B2, B3, B4 and B5 zones).

Comment: The referral criteria require all buildings and major extensions to existing developments within commercial zones to be referred to the Liverpool DEP, which is considered excessive and not consistent with referral criteria (c) above which only applies to new development over 3 storeys.

It is recommended that this referral criteria be updated to reflect new buildings within business zones (outside of the Liverpool city centre) which are three (3) storeys or more to better align with referral criteria (c) above.

(e) Any development which has an interface with significant public space or items of heritage significance

Comment: The intent of this criteria is to consider impacts of development on significant public spaces and items of heritage significance. As Council’s Heritage Officer already considers a proposals potential impact on an item of heritage significance, and to avoid duplication, it is proposed to remove the requirement for a DA to be referred to the DEP if it has an interface with an item of heritage significance. Design matters will be still considered via a referral to Council’s City Design team.

(f) Any development deemed by the Manager Development Assessment and/or Manager City Design and Public Domain (now Manager City Planning) to have a potentially significant impact on the amenity of the locality or region

Comment: The intent of this criteria is to afford applications not captured by the Liverpool DEP Charter to be considered by the Liverpool DEP, where there is potential for a development to have a significant impact on amenity.

The referral criteria requiring applications deemed appropriate by Liverpool City Council’s Manager Development Assessment and/or Manager City Planning to be reviewed by the Liverpool DEP is considered appropriate.

(g) Any development for a new building or major extensions to existing development (except for low-density residential development) adjacent to the Georges River or environmentally sensitive land or vegetation.

Comment: The intent of this criteria is to ensure new developments or major extensions to existing developments do not detract from the context of the Georges River or areas of environmentally sensitive land or vegetation.

The referral criteria requiring applications of this type to be reviewed by the Liverpool DEP is considered appropriate and has assisted Council in achieving better design outcomes, particularly for industrial / commercial developments adjoining ESL land (e.g., better facade / interface treatments, amenity outcomes for site occupants / users, incorporation of sustainability measures).

It is recommended that the wording of this clause is updated to provide greater clarity as follows:

"Any new building or major extensions to existing buildings (except for low-density residential development) adjacent to the Georges River, or any new industrial or commercial development adjacent to environmentally sensitive land or vegetation".

CONCLUSION

It is recommended that the updated DEP Charter and Procedure be endorsed by Council as detailed in Attachment 1.

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	Provide information about Council’s services, roles and decision making processes.
Legislative	There are no legislative considerations relating to this report.
Risk	There is no risk associated with this report.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Draft Liverpool Design Excellence Panel Charter and Procedure 2022

Ordinary Meeting

29 June 2022

Community & Culture Report

COM 01

Grants, Donations and Community Sponsorship

Strategic Direction	Creating Connection Deliver a range of community events and activities
File Ref	184676.2022
Report By	Galavizh Ahmadi Nia - Manager Community Development and Planning
Approved By	Tina Bono - Director Community & Culture

Executive Summary

Council is committed to building strong and resilient communities in the Liverpool Local Government Area (LGA) and to maximising social wellbeing. Council helps achieve these goals by providing financial support through grants and sponsorships to develop leadership skills, increase participation in community activities and address identified social issues.

Impacts from COVID-19, including the respective physical distancing requirements have impacted on capacity and eligibility of programs, projects, or events. To ascertain community safety, demonstrate compliance with NSW Health guidelines, and demonstrate evidence of proactive and measurable program governance, applicants have been requested to provide information on their compliance with COVID-19 safety guidelines.

This report provides a recommendation for funding totalling $9,595 from the Community Sponsorship program.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council endorses the funding recommendation of $9,595 (GST exclusive) under the Community Sponsorship Program for the following projects:

Applicant	Project	Recommended
CORE Community Services	Bus About	$4,959
South Cares	Back to School Support	$5,000

REPORT

Community Sponsorship Program

The Community Sponsorship Program received two applications, which met the eligibility criteria and is recommended for funding as follows:

Applicant	CORE Community Services
Project	Bus About
Amount Requested	$4,959	Total Project Cost	$8,794
Location	Penang Gardens Blue Mountains Botanic Gardens Nurragingy Reserve	Date	04/07/2022
About the Applicant	CORE Community Services Ltd is a not-for-profit organisation that has been serving the communities of Southwest Sydney since 1979. CORE Community Services is dedicated to delivering evidence based integrated services to create sustained changes in people’s lives. Their work covers five key areas: Children’s Services, Youth Services, Multicultural Communities, Aged and Disability Care and Community Connections. CORE stands for the following values – Caring, Opportunity, Respect and Empowerment.
Description	Objectives: This project aims to build community relations, reduce social isolation & promote integration through delivering three bus trips for seniors, carers and people with disabilities across the Liverpool LGA. It is expected that 150 local residents take part in this project. The goal of the project is to increase leisure opportunities reflecting individual needs & interests and provide opportunities for socialising, friendship & promoting connectedness amongst the seniors from diverse communities. Outcomes: · Celebrate diversity and promote inclusion; · Provide a range of community events and activities for our senior residents; and · Promote and support healthy living.
COVID-19 Safety Plan	The applicant has considered the health and safety risks associated with COVID-19 and has a COVID-19 safety plan registered with NSW Health.
Beneficiaries	· 144 Senior residents of Liverpool’s LGA.
Assessment	Recommended for Funding - $4,959 The project aligns with the Community Strategic Plan Direction 1 Creating Connection and meets the Community Grants Program’s funding priorities. Expected program outcomes 7.4.1 a), b), c), and f).

Applicant	Souths Cares
Project	Back to School Support
Amount Requested	$5,000	Total Project Cost	$11,935.00
Location	24 Primary and High School in the Liverpool LGA.	Date	15/07/2022
About the Applicant	South Cares was established in 2006 as an independent, public benevolent institution. The South Cares charity has been built upon the South Sydney Rabbitohs’ long and proud history of supporting the community; in particular Aboriginal and/or Torres Islander people. South Cares’ charter is to support disadvantaged and marginalised youth and their families through the delivery of capacity building programs addressing education, training, health and employment needs.
Description	Objectives: This project 'Back to School Support' aims to deliver 200 hampers including fruit and vegetable, healthy and nutritious lunches and snack options to First Nations families experiencing food insecurity, to be provided during school terms three and four. The project will respond to food affordability challenges experienced by families from low socio-economic backgrounds. This program will support families and their children with access to healthy and nutritious food while studying at school. Outcomes: · Promote and support healthy living; · Provide and supports financially disadvantaged community members with food insecurity; and · Support students overcome barriers to achieve their educational and employment aspirations.
COVID-19 Safety Plan	The applicant has considered the health and safety risks associated with COVID-19 and has a COVID-19 safety plan registered with NSW Health.
Beneficiaries	· 400+ residents of Liverpool LGA.
Assessment	Recommended for Funding - $5,000 The project aligns with the Community Strategic Plan Direction 1 Creating Connection and meets the Community Grants Program’s funding priorities. Expected program outcomes 7.4.1 c), and f).

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Costs associated with this recommendation have been included in Council’s budget for the current year and long-term financial plan. Full breakdown of operating budget is included below.

COMMUNITY SPONSORSHIP
Budget	Balance	Recommended for funding by Councillors April 2022 Council resolution.	Remaining
$100,000	$31,180	$5,000	$26,180
COMMUNITY GRANTS
Budget	Balance	Recommended funding in this report	Remaining
$102,000	$86,000	$9,959	$76,041
MATCHING GRANTS
Budget	Balance	Recommended funding in this report	Remaining
$200,000	$200,000	Nil	$200,000
SUSTAINABLE ENVIRONMENT GRANTS*
Budget	Balance	Recommended funding in this report	Remaining
$75,000	$65,000	Nil	$65,000
COMBINED FUNDING BALANCE
Combined Budget	Combined Balance	Total recommended funding in this report and May Council resolution	Remaining
$477,000	$382,180	$14,959	$367,221

* Sustainable Environment Grants funding is via a rate levy and is only eligible to be used for the Sustainable Environment Grants Program.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	Costs associated with this report have been included in Council’s budget for the current year and long-term financial plan.
Environment	Support schools and community groups to play an active role in reducing their impact on the environment and implementing environmentally sustainable actions.
Social	Support community organisations and groups to deliver services.
Civic Leadership	Role model to applicants, residents, and the general public, on COVID-19 safe practices and procedures when supporting funding requests.
Legislative	Local Government Act 1993 - s356.
Risk	Risk of supporting these activities is considered low. Applicants have provided information on their compliance with COVID-19 safety guidelines published by NSW Health.

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

Ordinary Meeting

29 June 2022

City Presentation Report

PRES 01

Pothole Report

Strategic Direction	Leading through Collaboration Seek efficient and innovative methods to manage our resources
File Ref	199852.2022
Report By	Terry Bilal - Acting Manager Civil Works
Approved By	Tim Pasley - Acting Director, City Presentation

Executive Summary

Following recent wet weather and flood events, Liverpool City Council was declared as a natural disaster affected area. This increased rainfall has unfortunately led to accelerated damage and deterioration to our extensive road network; with Council receiving over 1500 customer requests regarding potholes and road repairs since these storms occurred.

Council’s road network across the Local Government Area (LGA) has deteriorated with areas of the road that have potholes and are in immediate need of repair.

Council at its meeting of 23rd of February 2022 moved a Notice of Motion that Council:

1. Immediately undertake an audit of all council roads identifying all potholes.

2. Report back to Council as soon as possible with cost to fix/patch them and timeline.

3. Acknowledge that local roads are council’s responsibility and provide the adequate level of funding in the next budget to deliver a level of service the community expects.

There was a further Notice of Motion by Council at the meeting of 25th of May 2022 that calls for Council to:

1. Investigate the use of artificial intelligence in the asset tracking and monitoring of service vehicles; and

2. Investigate the use of artificial intelligence or other technology to support the early detection of road defects.

This report looks at the current problems the potholes present to Council, the current operation and the likely solutions for Council to undertake to ensure that it is able to attend to and repair the potholes in a timely manner.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council receive and note this report.

REPORT

Current Situation

The current situation relating to potholes across the road network is a result of prolonged wet weather and flooding.

Whenever it rains and the rainwater accumulates on the road and the use of the road with heavy vehicles squeeze the water into the pavement. The repeated squeezing into the asphalt causes the cracking. The water gets through those cracks and weakens the soil under the road which leads to even more cracking and eventually a pothole.

Recent prolonged wet weather has also risen the groundwater level that also weakens the subgrade of the road surface causing a more frequent road failure resulting in the creation of potholes.

The constant repair of the road with potholes also weakens the road structure. Every subsequent dig to repair the pothole causes the structural integrity of the road surface to be weakened. A combination of vibration from vehicles and exposure to the elements causes these weaknesses to turn into cracks, which can in turn become potholes.

Roads with a high proportion of heavy goods vehicle traffic are also more susceptible to damage as a result of impact and vibration.

It is important to fix potholes as soon as possible. During wet weather, it may be necessary to apply a temporary fix, until weather conditions are conducive to completing a proper repair. A patched pothole may last for some months or even a few years but is much less effective than permanent resurfacing. Often the best way to fix potholes is therefore, to resurface a whole section of road.

Due to the existing poor condition of the asphalt road in this LGA and since pothole patching is just a temporary solution to reduce safety hazards and only used to treat isolated defects in the road network, it is therefore recommended by geotechnical engineers to undertake renewal works which include resurfacing of the pavement and rehabilitation.

Furthermore, although pothole patching seems to be the only solution that can be underway during wet weather, there are several drawbacks and shortcomings associated with this method. Unfortunately, the cold mix doesn’t stick very well to the inside of a pothole and therefore the mix ends up pouring out of the hole. Also water can seep into the cold mass, freeze, expand and push the cold mix out of the pothole.

With respect to cost effectiveness also, money is saved if permanent resurfacing can be implemented, instead of paying for the temporary solution first which lasts only for months and then do the renewal work again. Considering the above-mentioned facts, its far better to execute the complete pavement of the entire affected areas.

Table 1 summarises the conservative geotechnical properties of a conventional asphalt road that can be utilised for design considerations of maximum cyclic loading of 150 kN per wheel.

	γ sat (kN/m³)	γ unsat (kN/m³	E΄ (kN/m²)	ν΄	c΄ (kN/m²)	ϕ΄	Thickness (m)
Asphalt	20	20	2,100,000	0.4	370	36	0.25
Base	22	20	100,000	0.35	30	43	0.5
Sub-base	20	18	50,000	0.3	40	14	1.5

The following figure schematically shows a typical asphalt road and the layers underneath. In this particular project, it’s assumed that the Base and Sub-base layers are in good condition and the scope of the work is resurfacing of the asphalt road only. However if the mentioned layers are problematic, a thorough geotechnical investigation report is required to fix the issues first before the execution of pavement.

Diagram

Description automatically generated

Operations for Pothole Repair

A summary of workflow of the operations team attending to the potholes is provided in the flowchart below.

The current practices of fixing the potholes includes the use of hot mix and cold mix of asphalt.

The current service level for the repair of potholes is two weeks. Council aims to repair the potholes within two weeks of receiving the customer request. Often with the resources available, Council has to resort to getting staff to work overtime to meet the two week turnaround.

We experienced extreme weather conditions since March 2022,

• Liverpool City Council has received more than 1500 pothole requests since March 2022.

• Liverpool City Council has used 1040 tonnes of hot and cold mix since March 2022.

Resources

Council has limited resources available for the repair of potholes. The resources available for the reactive maintenance of potholes are as follows:

• There are currently two pothole repair crew that attend to the potholes across the LGA.

• An estimate of $1,750,000 has been drafted in next years budget for road maintenance (pothole repairs - make safe duties)

• The budget covers 8 staff, material cost (asphalt, emulsion and sealing aggregate) and operating expenditures for respective equipment (2 x Pothole Patching Trucks and 1 x Jet Master Spray-seal Truck).

Pothole Repair Technologies

The current practices of fixing the potholes includes the use of hot mix and cold mix of asphalt. Due to the weather and other factors that affect road conditions, some repairs are short-lived and the same areas are repaired repeatedly. In spite of considerable progress made in pavement materials and pavement mechanics, pothole repair remains an area in which little progress has been made. Clearly, there is a need for long-lasting, cost-effective materials and construction technologies for repairing potholes.

Council needs to investigate some of the critical components associated with pothole formation and pothole repair in order to propose solutions that can reduce the occurrence of potholes and increase the durability of pothole repairs.

Some of the components that needs to be investigated include pavement preservation activities that could be used to prevent the initiation and formation of potholes, investigating and documenting the use of traditional as well as innovative materials and technologies used for pothole repairs.

What is derived from the investigations needs to be utilised for more effective pothole repair works.

Future Innovations

Council is trialling smart technologies for the inspection of the road network to find smarter and more efficient ways to monitor and maintain road assets across the LGA including potholes.

Liverpool City Council will be trialling roadMX™ a comprehensive smart asset vision system from industry experts Black Moth, designed specifically for local governments. Through its vision system, roadMX™ provides councils with robust, extensive and high-frequency network coverage to create a complete virtual image and map of road assets.

Black Moth’s roadMX™ is a complete end-to-end solution that combines the latest in AI technology, machine learning and human intelligence to monitor, assess and identify road defects before they become hazardous to the community.

To effectively provide the service outlined in this proposal, Black Moth will utilise its pre-fitted hardware of waste collection vehicles of that are currently contracted to Council. The potholes will be detected using AI and similar technologies that will be used to detect and classify defects that are captured by the forward-facing cameras on the waste collection vehicles.

The information captured by the smart camera system will feed into Council’s workflow that will minimise the investigation time for the programming and repair of potholes.

This will create a proactive way to deal with potholes which will get identified early and programmed to repair before it becomes a problem.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Artificial intelligence technology is currently being investigated. The cost can be absorbed through our domestic waste levy.

This service is provided though our current waste provider.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	There are no economic and financial considerations.
Environment	There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.
Social	There are no social and cultural considerations.
Civic Leadership	There are no civic leadership and governance considerations.
Legislative	There are no legislative considerations relating to this report.
Risk	There is no risk associated with this report.

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

Ordinary Meeting

29 June 2022

Infrastructure & Environment Report

INF 01

Governor Macquarie Drive and Hume Highway Intersection - Utility Adjustments

Strategic Direction	Generating Opportunity Meet the challenges of Liverpool’s growing population
File Ref	188081.2022
Report By	John Lac - Manager Infrastructure Delivery
Approved By	Raj Autar - Director Infrastructure & Environment

Executive Summary

Council is preparing to undertake major improvements and upgrades at the intersection of Governor Macquarie Drive and Hume Highway in Warwick Farm to alleviate congestion and cater to predicted future growth in traffic across the area. Due to the presence of extensive underground utilities, a major aspect of this upgrade comprises relocation and adjustments to these utilities to enable the necessary road works to be undertaken.

The Local Government Act and Regulations require that formal tenders be sought publicly for works with an estimated value over $250,000.

Since activities associated with public utilities are governed by provisions of other Acts, which restrict works on these assets to the respective utility authority, this report recommends that Council use the relevant exemption provisions in the Local Government Act 1993 to enter into contracts with relevant utility authorities for the necessary relocation works without inviting public tenders.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Resolves to not seek public tenders for the relocation and adjustment of utilities belonging to Telstra Corporation and Jemena Asset Management Pty Ltd in accordance with Section 55(3)(i) of the Local Government Act 1993, on the basis that extenuating circumstances exist that prevent competitive tenders from being called.

2. Enter into a contract with Telstra Corporation for the adjustment of telecommunication assets for the intersection upgrade works at Governor Macquarie Drive and Hume Highway.

3. Enter into a contract with Jemena Asset Management Pty Ltd for the adjustment of gas assets for the intersection upgrade works at Governor Macquarie Drive and Hume Highway.

REPORT

Background

Council is preparing to undertake major improvements and upgrades at the intersection of Governor Macquarie Drive (GMD) and Hume Highway in Warwick Farm to alleviate congestion and cater to predicted future growth in traffic across the area. The works are being funded through the Western Sydney Infrastructure Plan (WSIP) Local Roads Package - Round 3 with Council receiving an allocation of $7.1M from Transport for NSW (TfNSW) for the delivery of this project.

These works will include the:

· Upgrade of a section of GMD, between the Hume Highway and the Australian Turf Club access road, from two to four lanes;

· Installation of a left turn slip lane from the Hume Highway into GMD;

· Installation of a left turn slip lane from GMD into the Hume Highway; and

· Installation of paved shared paths along GMD.

Due to the presence of extensive underground utilities, a major aspect of these works requires relocation and adjustments to these utilities to enable necessary road works to be undertaken.

Utility Adjustments

A summary of estimated costs to adjust the various utilities affected by these works is as follows:

Utility Service	Estimated Cost
Telstra	$500,000
Jemena Gas	$400,000
Total	$900,000

Contracts involving expenditures exceeding $250,000 are covered under Section 55 of the Local Government Act 1993, which states that Council must invite public tenders before entering contracts for such works. Section 55(3)(i) permits Council to not invite tenders where extenuating circumstances exist and decides by resolution to not call tenders.

In the case of utilities, legislation governing their operation precludes third parties from working on their assets; this is considered as an extenuating circumstance. For reasons stated below, it is recommended that Council use this and other provisions of the Act to enter into contracts with the relevant utility authorities for the necessary adjustment works without inviting public tenders.

1. Telstra Assets

The sections of GMD and Hume Highway affected by these works contain extensive below-ground Telstra assets. The affected assets require adjustment to enable the required areas to be cleared for these upgrade works.

Operation and management of Telstra assets are governed by the Telecommunications Act 1997 and Division 474 of the Criminal Code Act 1995. These Acts stipulate that any installation, maintenance, or operation of the telecommunications network can only be undertaken by Telstra or its authorised representatives.

As such, works associated with Telstra assets cannot be undertaken by parties other than Telstra (or its agents) and in accordance with Section 55(3)(i) of Local Government Act, it is concluded that extenuating circumstances exist.

2. Gas Assets

Gas mains have also been identified within this section of GMD and Hume Highway that will require adjustment to enable these upgrade works. Gas networks in the State are owned by Jemena Gas Networks. Jemena Asset Management, a sub-unit of Jemena Gas Networks, operates and maintains the gas network on behalf of Jemena Gas Networks.

Any activity associated with the management and operation of the gas network is controlled under the provision of the Gas Supply Act 1996. Jemena Asset Management is the only authority permitted under the Gas Supply Act to undertake any work on Jemena Gas Networks assets, hence any adjustments to gas mains cannot be publicly tendered.

In view of this, and in accordance with Section 55(3)(i) of the Local Government Act, it is concluded that extenuating circumstances exist.

Summary and Conclusions

In view of the value of these proposed utility adjustment works, Council would normally be required to invite public tenders under the Local Government Act. However due to provisions under other Acts, which are considered extenuating circumstances, Council is exempt from the requirement to invite public tenders for these necessary works under Section 55(3)(i) of the Local Government Act.

Accordingly, it is recommended that Council enter into a contract with Telstra Corporation for the adjustment of telecommunication assets for these intersection upgrade works.

It is also recommended that Council enter into a contract with Jemena Asset Management Pty Ltd for the adjustment of gas assets for these intersection upgrade works.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Costs associated with this recommendation have been included in Council’s budget for the current year and long-term financial plan. These utility adjustment works will be fully funded by the $7.1M WSIP Grant awarded to Council by TfNSW.

These intersection upgrade works will be built to current standards, minimising the need for major maintenance or renewal works at this location for 10 years or more. If maintenance is required at this intersection, these works will be undertaken by TfNSW as the road authority responsible for management of GMD and Hume Highway intersection.

Ongoing operational costs to Council resulting from these intersection upgrade works are anticipated to be minimal, with only the operating costs for lighting to be borne by Council with negligible impact to Council’s operating budget.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	Deliver a high-quality local road system including provision and maintenance of infrastructure and management of traffic issues. Reduce long-term operating and capital costs by improving asset conditions associated with these intersection upgrade works.
Environment	Reduce vehicular greenhouse gas emissions by improving travel times and reducing traffic congestion.
Social	Reduce travel times and traffic congestion for commuters.
Civic Leadership	Improve driver and pedestrian safety, and reduce risk of accidents, by introducing additional slip lanes and shared paths.
Legislative	Local Government Act 1993 – Section 55(3)(i) Local Government Regulation 2005
Risk	Mitigate risk of accidents for drivers and pedestrians by introducing additional slip lanes and shared paths.

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

Ordinary Meeting

29 June 2022

Economy & Commercial Development Report

ECD 01

Proposed Road Closure and Potential Future Sale of part of Gurner Avenue, Austral (adjoining No. 5 Gurner Ave)

Strategic Direction	Leading through Collaboration Strive for best practice in all Council processes
File Ref	176772.2022
Report By	John Milicic - Manager Property
Approved By	John F Morgan - Director Economy & Commercial Development

Executive Summary

An application has been received for the permanent closure and purchase of a section of Gurner Avenue, Austral, adjoining 95 Seventeenth Avenue, Austral to the west and 5 Gurner Avenue, Austral to the south.

The application has been received from the developer of 5 Gurner Avenue, Austral, being Firststyle Homes Pty Limited, which proposes to incorporate this section of road area into a future stage of their adjoining development. Council has also received interest from Arrahman College, which is located at 95 Seventeenth Avenue, Austral for this section of the road area to be used by the College.

The total area of road proposed to be closed is approximately 1,899 square metres (subject to survey). The land is zoned R2 – Low Density Residential. A residual area of approximately 800 square metres would remain as road reserve.

In support of the Colleges concerns the Principal (Arrahman College) addressed the Council at its meeting on 25 May 2022 on this item being Item 13 on the agenda.

This report recommends that Council approves the commencement of a road closure process for the closure of the identified section of Gurner Avenue, which will involve a public notification process to allow the potential future sale of the land, as outlined in this report.

A public notification process which would also involve notification with service authorities would determine if there were any impediments to a road closure proceeding. As a further report would be required it would also allow Council to consider any further public or service authority representations prior to progressing with a road closure process.

On this basis it is also recommended, that a further report would be presented to Council upon obtaining the necessary concurrence from the service authorities and NSW Crown Lands to a road closure and addressing any public submissions, prior to proceeding with a land sale. This further report would provide details of valuation of the land and also include a recommendation on an open method of sale, prior to proceeding with any proposed land sale.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Approves the commencement of a road closure process of a section of Gurner Avenue, Austral as outlined in the report;

2. Notes, that a public notification process which also involves the notification of relevant service authorities and NSW Crown lands will be undertaken;

3. Approves to classify the land compromising any area of closed road area as “Operational” land pursuant to s.43 of the Roads Act 1993;

4. Authorises the A/CEO or his delegated officer to execute any documents, under Power of Attorney, necessary to give effect to this decision; and

5. Resolves that a further report be made to Council upon completion of the road closure consultation process, prior to any proposed sale progressing.

REPORT

Following an amendment to the Roads Act 1993 on 1 July 2018 local councils are now responsible for closing council public roads. Prior to this, councils applied to Department of Planning, Industry and Environment – Crown Lands (the Department) to close a council road.

Under the previous process, consultation with service authorities would be undertaken with a subsequent public notification process prior to seeking Council approval to support a road closure application to NSW Crown Lands. Under the new process, it is identified that Council approval should be obtained to progress a road closure process.

Under this process Council is required to confirm the status of vesting a public road and notify all notifiable authorities when proposing to close a Council public road. If there are any objections, associated with the public notification process, Council is also required to address the objections.

The application has been received from the developer of 5 Gurner Avenue, Austral, being Firststyle Homes Pty Limited to incorporate this section of road area into a future stage of their development.

Plan showing proposed Road Closure area provided by the developer (area highlighted in red on the proposed subdivision layout plan).

Map showing the proposed road area.

The total area of road proposed to be closed outlined in red on the above plan/map is approximately 1,899 square metres (subject to survey). A residual area of approximately 800 square metres would remain as road reserve.

The developer of 5 Gurner Avenue, Austral was advised that, should the road closure be approved, Council would be seeking payment of current market value, which would be determined by a valuation undertaken by an independent valuer. As identified, the section of road proposed to be closed has an area of approximately 1,899 square metres and is zoned R2- Low Density Residential

Council has also received an interest from the Arrahman Benevolent Society Ltd (College), which is located at 95 Seventeenth Avenue, Austral for the section of road adjacent to its boundary. The College had indicated that it was not in a position to pay market value and would object, if the road was to be closed.

It was also indicated, by the College, that the road reserve at this location was currently being utilised as a fire evacuation point for the College and that closure and sale may impact on the opportunity for further growth opportunity of the College. It was requested that Council consider retaining this as a reserve/open space buffer area.

In support of the Colleges concerns the Principal (Arrahman College) addressed the Council at its meeting on 25 May 2022 on this item being Item 13 on the agenda. The Principal spoke to the following:

Background

Arrahman College situated in Austral is a newly established school and state significant project under DA 616/2016 that officially commenced in January this year after being significantly impacted by COVID-19.

The College is approved for 800 kindergarten to year 12 students, primarily serving the members of the Liverpool City Council district. Arrahman College anticipates rapid growth and demand being situated in an area that is undergoing rapid transformation. The College is committed to delivering exemplary service to local community as well as upholding the values and reputation of Liverpool City Council.

Arrahman College expressed its position to object to the proposed road closure and sale of the road reserve on the following grounds:

Item 1

The area is currently used as a fire evacuation assembly point for the college. This would be particularly required once the college receives its enrolment capacity of 800 students at stage 4 construction.

There are no other safe alternatives and/or greenspaces available for the college in close proximity. I also kindly request that Item 1 particularly is detailed in tonight’s minutes.

Item 2

The closure of the road may result in future construction that will obscure the presence of the college and hinder the college’s general operations.

Item 3

The area should be reserved for Arrahman College as a future growth opportunity to meet the growing demands of the local community.

Item 4

The closure of the road does not form part of Council’s District Control Plan and will not provide the Council with any significant benefit through the intended sale.

Item 5

The onus of maintaining the road reserve has been on Arrahman College since July 2018. Being a key part to the egress of the college, we currently pay to have the area cut, cleaned, maintained every 3 weeks.

I note that the area has never been serviced and/or maintained by Liverpool City Council since the acquisition of land back in 2016.

Item 6

As part of DA 616/2016, Arrahman College was required to forfeit approximately 30% of the total land area to make way for internal and external roads (at the College’s expense - I might add) which have now been handed over to Liverpool City Council.

The acquisition of the proposed road reserve in the future by the College can obviously offset the internal land and the use for operational purposes. We are a not-for-profit and providing the community with an essential service in comparison to a corporate investment strategy currently being considered by the neighbours.

In the event that the Council considers proceeding with the road closure and sale of the road reserve, then Arrahman College requests that Council gives the College priority over the adjoining neighbours.

The area will provide the College with future growth opportunities including the management of traffic, expansion of the learning spaces and additional playground or greenspaces essential for our students and the community’s growth and development. However, the immediate direction to proceed with the road closure and sale will place Arrahman College with financial challenges and we are currently working effortlessly to expand the current facilities to cater for the growing demand and needs of the local community during challenging economic conditions.

I ask Council considers deferring any decision on proceeding with the proposed road closure and sale of the road reserve until such time (hopefully in a couple of years) when the growth and immediate operation requirements of the College are known. I also do not see a benefit in proceeding with the item in a public exhibition as the Council should simply shelve the idea for future considerations.

Council Officer response

Council has received a road closure request from the the developer of 5 Gurner Avenue, Austral, being Firststyle Homes Pty Limited, which proposes to incorporate this section of road area into a future stage of their adjoining development

The College has requested that Council provide priority to the College over the neighbours or to defer any decision any decision on proceeding with the proposed road closure and sale of the road reserve until such time (hopefully in a couple of years) when the growth and immediate operation requirements of the College are known

On this basis, it is also noted that the College has identified an interest in this land in the future, given that it is not in a position to consider purchase at this time.

Based on potential multiple interest in the property, if a road closure process is approved, both parties would need to be provided an opportunity to submit bids for the land under an open method of sale. Under ICAC guidelines, Council is required to maximise any returns on disposal of public asset, and in this situation, where there are at least two parties with an interest in the land a public open method of sale would need to be considered if a road closure was to be approved after a public notification process was undertaken.

The area shown edged red (on the Map showing the proposed road) only forms part of the road reserve adjoining the College. An area of approximately 800 square metres of road reserve would still be available.

Given that the College may have an interest in purchasing this portion of the road reserve in the future, it is recommended that a public notification process be undertaken to proceed with the road closure for the area subject to the current request.

Any further report to Council, should it approve proceeding with a public notification process for the proposed road closure, would specifically address any objections and conditions associated with any submissions made, including the existing items raised by the College

Based on the application made for the road closure, Council has two options:

Option1: Approve to proceed with a public notification process for the proposed road closure with a further report to be provided to Council. It should be noted that there is potential for Council to obtain income from any potential sale if a road closure is approved.

Option 2: Resolve not to proceed with a road closure process. Council would be foregoing the potential to maximise income for its asset if a road closure process was approved.

Recommendations

This report recommends, that Council approves Option 1, which is to approve to proceed with the commencement of a road closure process, including public notification for the closure of the identified section (outlined in red on the above plan/map) of Gurner Avenue, Austral.

It is also recommended, that a further report would be presented to Council, upon obtaining the necessary concurrence from the service authorities and NSW Crown Lands to a road closure, prior to proceeding with a sale of the land. This further report would provide details of valuation of the land prior to proceeding with any proposed land sale.

As a public notification process is also required, if there are any objections, they will also be reported back to Council. A public notification process would allow the College to make a submission, should it wish to either object or support the proposal or express interest in the closure of the residue section of road reserve immediately adjoining its property.

It is also recommended that if the identified section of the road is closed that it be classified as “Operational” land pursuant to s.43 of the Roads Act 1993.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

There are currently no financial implications relating to this recommendation. Should the road closure be approved in a future report of Council, it is intended to identify any potential income that Council could receive from a potential sale of land at that time.

It should be noted that the current developer request presents an opportunity for Council to obtain a current market value of the land, if the road closure was to be approved. This opportunity could be lost if the developer proceeds with development of the adjoining parcel.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	Facilitate economic development.
Environment	There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.
Social	There are no social and cultural considerations.
Civic Leadership	There are no civic leadership and governance considerations.
Legislative	The Local Government Act 1993 and The Roads Act 1993
Risk	The risk is deemed to be Low as a public consultation process will be undertaken with a further report to be presented to Council.

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

Ordinary Meeting

29 June 2022

Committee Reports

CTTE 01

Minutes of the Liverpool Local Traffic Committee meeting held on 18 May 2022

Strategic Direction	Leading through Collaboration Strive for best practice in all Council processes
File Ref	180893.2022
Report By	Charles Wiafe - Manager Transport Management
Approved By	David Smith - Director Planning & Compliance

Executive Summary

This report presents the recommendations from the Liverpool Local Traffic Committee meeting held on 18 May 2022. At the meeting, the Committee considered ten (10) agenda, one (1) special, and seven (7) general business items.

A copy of the meeting minutes along with Attachment Booklets 1 and 2 with the Committee’s recommendations are included in Attachments 1, 2 and 3.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council adopts the following Committee recommendations:

Item 1 - Reilly Street and Webster Road, Lurnea – Proposed Intersection Upgrade

Approves the proposed roundabout modifications as shown in the Committee’s agenda attachment booklet.

Item 2 – Buchan Avenue, Edmondson Park - New Primary School Proposed Traffic Facilities

Approves the installation of the following traffic facilities as shown in Committee’s agenda attachment booklet.

· Combined marked pedestrian and children crossing across Buchan Avenue and Faulkner Way.

· Bus zone on the northern side of Buchan Avenue.

· Signs and line markings to provide dedicated right turn and shared left/through lanes on both northern and southern approaches along Faulkner Way at its intersection with Buchan Avenue.

· Splitter islands in Buchan Avenue at its intersection with Faulkner Way.

Item 3 – Soldiers Parade, Edmondson Park – New North Commuter Carpark

Approves the traffic management works including marked pedestrian crossing as shown in Committee’s agenda attachment booklet.

Item 4 – Skyline Crescent, Horningsea Park – Proposed B-Double Route

Approves Skyline Crescent, Horningsea Park to be classified and gazetted as a 26m B-Double route.

Item 5 – Kingsbury Road, Gellibrand Road, Perrone Road, and Access Laneway behind Edmondson Park Camden Valley Way Shops – Request for Speed Humps

Requests the NSW Police Force to undertake speed enforcement and provide advice at a future meeting.

Item 6 - Bus Stops to be decommissioned

· Approves decommissioning of 29 defunct bus stops in Liverpool, Busby, Cecil Hills, Green Valley, Miller, and Warwick Farm as listed in the report.

· Requests Transit Systems to remove the defunct bus stop signs, including from TfNSW’s Transit Stop Management System.

Item 7 – 25-27 Governor Macquarie Drive, Chipping Norton – Request for Median Modification

Approves modification of the existing central median on Governor Macquarie Drive between Newbridge Road and Alfred Road, Chipping Norton as shown in the Committee’s agenda attachment booklet.

Item 8 – Fifteenth Avenue/Second Avenue intersection, Middleton Grange – Proposed Pedestrian Crossing Facility

Approves installation of interim pedestrian refuges across Fifteenth Avenue and Kingsford Smith Avenue as shown in Committee’s agenda attachment booklet.

Item 9 – Flynn Avenue, Southern Cross Avenue and McIver Avenue, Middleton Grange – Request for Road Closure

Approves the temporary road closures to regulate traffic along sections of Flynn Avenue, Southern Cross Avenue and McIver Avenue, west of the residential area through the Western Sydney Parklands.

Item 10 – Approved Items under delegated authority

Notes the approved items under delegated authority.

REPORT

This report presents the recommendations of the Liverpool Local Traffic Committee meeting held on 18 May 2022. At the meeting, the Committee considered ten (10) agenda, one (1) special, and seven (7) general business items.

A copy of the meeting minutes along with Attachment Booklets 1 and 2 with the Committee’s recommendations is included in Attachments 1, 2 and 3. It is recommended that Council adopts the Committee’s recommendations on the agenda items as outlined above.

Comments on the general business items with recommended actions are as follows:

Special Item

S1 – Traffic Committee Charter

The special item considered a minor amendment to the Liverpool Local Traffic Committee Charter to be reflect the name change from Liverpool Pedestrian, Active Transport and Traffic Committee back to Local Traffic Committee to simplify the name.

The Committee discussed and supported the minor amendment to the charter.

General Business Items

GB1 - Stockton Avenue, Moorebank – Request for 15-minute Timed Parking

Council has received a Mayoral representation on behalf of local shop owner with a request to change existing No Parking Zone along the eastern side of Stockton Avenue to permit 15 minutes parking.

Council has sought and received approval under delegated authority to signpost 30m of the existing No Parking zone as 30 minutes timed parking and associated bus zone relocation.

GB2 - Park Road and Grimson Crescent Intersection, Liverpool – Proposed Intersection Line Marking and Request for the Traffic Calming Device

Council has received a Mayoral representation on behalf of local residents with a request to install signs and line marking to improve sight distance and address speeding concerns.

As the works are proposed on a classified road, TfNSW is required to approve and supervise the installation.

Council will review the intersection layout and seek approval under delegated authority to install splitter islands, if required, introduce parking restrictions and reline marking to improve sight distance and reduce speeding.

GB3 - Ascot Drive, Chipping Norton – Request for parking restriction

Council has received a representation from Councillor Harle on behalf of local residents of Ascot Drive between Norton Avenue and Homestead Avenue, Chipping Norton concerning permanent parking of a trailer with a request to consider installation of timed parking on the western side of Ascot Drive to prevent such parking.

Since the meeting, the Police have advised that the caravan type trailer registration expired in 2019 and has since been cancelled. This vehicle is not road worthy.

The smaller trailer is currently registered and there is no offence being committed with it being on the side of the road. Both vehicles are registered to the property owners.

GB4 - Webster Road, Lurnea – Installation of flashing school sign

Council has received representation that pedestrian and vehicular access to St Francis Xavier Catholic School along Webster Road has changed to pedestrian access via Wonga Road and vehicular access via Webster Road.

TfNSW requested Council provide information on the use of the access arrangement off Webster Road and to provide justification on whether an additional flashing light is required.

GB5 - Huon Crescent, Holsworthy – Request for Pedestrian Crossing

Council has received representation from the local member for Holsworthy on behalf of a resident whose daughter was hit by a car whilst crossing the road close to the Holsworthy Primary and High Schools, with a request for installation of a marked pedestrian crossing.

Council will carry out pedestrian and traffic counts and design layouts to be presented to the July 2022 Traffic Committee meeting for further consideration.

GB6 - 45 Bobin Road, Sadleir – Request for Speed Hump

Council has received representation from Councillor Goodman on behalf of a local resident concerning speeding with a request for installation of traffic calming devices such as speed hump to be considered.

Council will carry out a speed classification assessment and the Police will be requested to include the street in their patrols for speed enforcement.

GB7 – Ash Road, Cartwright – Request for additional street sign

Councillor Harle advised that there is no street directional sign at the signalised Hoxton Park Road/Ash Road intersection.

TfNSW has been requested to investigate and if required, install an additional directional street sign close to the intersection.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

The actions contained in the minutes are funded as outlined in the table below, with costings provided in the confidential attachment:

Item	Description	Funding, Indicative Cost and Timing
1	Reilly Street and Webster Road, Lurnea – Proposed Intersection Upgrade	Councils minor traffic facilities program
2	New primary school in Edmondson Park – Proposed Traffic Facilities	No cost to Council, Developer funded
3	Edmondson Park North Commuter Carpark and Signalised Pedestrian Crossing	No cost to Council, Developer funded
4	Skyline Crescent, Horningsea Park – Proposed B-Double Route	No cost involved
5	Kingsbury Road, Gellibrand Road, Perrone Road, And Access Laneway behind Edmondson Park Camden Valley Way Shops – Request for Speed Humps	No cost involved
6	Bus Stops to be Decommissioned	No cost to Council, Transit Systems to undertake the work
7	25-27 Governor Macquarie Drive, Chipping Norton – Request for Median Modification	Councils funding allocation on the project
8	Fifteenth Avenue/Second Avenue intersection, Middleton Grange – Proposed Pedestrian Crossing Facility	Councils minor traffic facilities program
9	Flynn Avenue, Middleton Grange – Request for Road Closure	Councils minor traffic facilities program
10	Approved Items Under delegated authority	No cost to Council, TfNSW Block grant funding

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	Provide efficient parking for the City Centre. Deliver a high-quality local road system including provision and maintenance of infrastructure and management of traffic issues.
Environment	Promote an integrated and user-friendly public transport service. Support the delivery of a range of transport options.
Social	Support access and services for people with a disability. Improve road and pedestrian safety
Civic Leadership	Actively advocate for federal and state government support, funding and services.
Legislative	Roads Act.
Risk	The risk is deemed to be Low. The risk is considered within Council’s risk appetite

ATTACHMENTS

1. Minutes of the Liverpool Traffic Committee meeting held on 18 May 2022 (Under separate cover)

2. Traffic Committee Attachment Booklet 1 (Under separate cover)

3. Traffic Committee Attachment Booklet 2 (Under separate cover)

4. Local Traffic Committee - Financial Implications Costings - Confidential

Ordinary Meeting

29 June 2022

Notices of Motion

NOM 04

Temporary Animal Shelter Arrangements with Rossmore Vet

Strategic Direction

Leading through Collaboration

Strive for best practice in all Council processes

File Ref

195558.2022

Author

Karress Rhodes - Councillor

Background

The arrangements made with Rossmore Vet for temporary Liverpool Council Animal Shelter started with the closure of the Liverpool Animal Shelter (LAS) in 2020. At that time, after a year of investigating where a new shelter could be built, it was finally decided on Rossmore Grange when Council was advised that it was the quickest pathway of providing the new facility which gave reason for the acceptability of the temporary animal shelter arrangements at Rossmore Vets.

It has always been known that the temporary facilities were only made acceptable by means of a temporary solution and that the new Animal shelter should be provided as soon as possible. The recent sharp drop in temperatures has made questionable the acceptability of Council’s temporary solution. The freezing conditions in winter and unbearably hot conditions in summer borders on cruelty to the unfortunate dogs who end up in the facility.

Council is doing all that it can do to return dogs home without the need to go to the Animal shelter, rehoming and returning more dogs faster than ever before. Despite all efforts by Council, the Liverpool facility is always at or near capacity.

A recent visit to Rossmore Vets to assess the noise or possible noise from that might emanate from the still to be built new animal shelter made far too obvious the poor conditions our animals were being forced to endure.

The temporary solution for the animal shelter has outlived the term temporary and must as a matter of urgency be addressed by Council to progress the building of the new Animal Shelter without further delay.

Councillors and Council need to attend a tour of the Rossmore Vet facilities and also the Animal Welfare League, at Badgerys Creek, who are the authorising body of licenses for Council Animal Shelters, to fully understand and to be fully educated on the current temporary Council solution as compared to the industrial leader in the animal welfare sector to be able to make qualified decisions as to why there is not only a need to prioritise the building of the Liverpool Animal Shelter, but also the standards to be included in the new shelter.

NOTICE OF MOTION

That Council direct the A/CEO to:

1. Make arrangements for Councillors to attend a tour of the Rossmore Vet and Animal Welfare League operations before the July 2022 Council meeting.

2. Make available funds within the budget to build the new Animal Shelter within 2 years.

3. Purchase 4 new animal exercise yards to the same quality, size and price as those provided at Rossmore Vets by the facilities operator.

4. Immediately provide and pay for heating to Liverpool Council Animal Pens at the Rossmore Facility.

5. Immediately provide blankets to the Liverpool Council Animal Pens and organise for the laundering of the blankets at Council’s expense.

6. Initiate a volunteer roster to assist Council now and into the future operations of the Liverpool Animal Shelter; and

7. Initiate an exercise routine that enables all animals to be exercised twice a day that identifies each dog and is recorded in reports to Council.

ACTING CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER’S COMMENT

In relation to point 1 of the Motion, a tour of Rossmore Vet and Animal Welfare League (AWL) can be organised for the first week of July 2022. Following confirmation of the date from the AWL and Rossmore Vet, invitations will be sent to Councillors.

In relation to point 2 of the Motion, this is a matter for Council. With regards to funding for the establishment of Council’s own Animal Shelter, a provision of $10M has been made in the Long-Term Financial Plan to undertake the following project planning, development and delivery activities. Meanwhile, Council is also seeking funding through the WestInvest Fund for the development of Liverpool Animal Shelter. This cost estimate will be refined and updated as more details become available.

2022/23	2023/24	2024/25
$360,000 for background studies, front-end planning and master planning of the site to determine the best location of the animal shelter.	$640,000 for design, environmental assessment, DA and Request for Tender documentation.	$9M - for procurement and construction.

A minimum period of three years is required to fully complete the shelter.

In relation to point 3 of the Motion, Council reviewed the exercise yards recently purchased by Rossmore Vet and considers that the purchase by Council of six moveable yards will be suitable for the numbers of dogs Council is likely to have at any time. The estimated cost to Council is $2,740 with each yard approximately $380 plus two dividers at approximately $230 each. These yards are portable and can be used by Council in another location in the future.

In relation to point 4 of the Motion, heating elements are not considered suitable in the current location as it can be dangerous for the dogs as the dog kennels are not fully enclosed. However, installing blinds at the front of the kennels is more suitable and recommended. The Rossmore Vet operator has advised that arrangements have been made for blinds to be installed.

In relation to point 5 of the Motion, Rossmore Vet has provided jackets and coats for the dogs, however Council has placed an order for additional jackets/coats for the dogs and the operator is providing blankets and ongoing washing.

In relation to point 6 of the Motion, Council does not operate the shelter. It is a private business. A volunteer program can be considered once Council is operating its own facility.

In relation to point 7 of the Motion, dogs are exercised and provided with one-on-one enrichment activities daily by Council’s Assistant Animal Ranger and Animal Rehoming Officer as well as staff from Rossmore Vet.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

A provision of $10M has been made in the Long-Term Financial Plan to undertake the following project planning, development and delivery activities. Meanwhile, Council is also seeking funding through the WestInvest Fund for the development of Liverpool Animal Shelter. This cost estimate will be refined and updated as more details become available.

2022/23	2023/24	2024/25
$360,000 for background studies, front-end planning and master planning of the site to determine the best location of the animal shelter.	$640,000 for design, environmental assessment, DA and Request for Tender documentation.	$9M - for procurement and construction.

A minimum period of three years is required to fully complete construction of a new shelter. This estimate will be refined and updated as more details become available.

To purchase additional exercise yards and jackets for the dogs will cost $2,740 with each yard approximately $380 plus two dividers at approximately $230 each. This cost can be catered for within the existing budget allocated by Council without an additional budget allocation.

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

[1] 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.

1
CEO 01	Superannuation for Mayor and Councillors
Attachment 1	Draft Civic Expenses and Facilities Policy

1
CEO 06	LGNSW Annual Conference and Casual Vacancy on LGNSW Board
Attachment 2	Notice of the 2022 LGNSW Annual Conference

1
PLAN 02	Public artwork to commemorate the 150th Anniversary of Liverpool as a Municipality
Attachment 3	Examples of Public Artwork Options

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	There are no social and cultural considerations.
Civic Leadership	Actively advocate for federal and state government support, funding and services.
Legislative	There are no legislative considerations relating to this report.
Risk	The risk is deemed to be Low. Engagement in political lobbying by external agencies on behalf of Council is considered within Council’s risk appetite.

1
CTTE 02	Notes from Budget Review Panel Meeting 19 May 2022
Attachment 1	Notes - Budget Review Panel Meeting 19 May 2022

1
CTTE 03	Minutes of the Special Audit, Risk and Improvement Committee Meeting held on 1 June 2022 - Long-Term Financial Plan
Attachment 1	FINAL Minutes - Special ARIC meeting 1 June 2022 - Long-term Financial Plan

2021/22 FY – Streets programmed for indented parking
Ringarooma Circuit	West Hoxton
Bellerive Close
Lambe St
Elyard Circuit
Ferraro Cr
Flame Tree Street	Casula
Athlone Street	Cecil Hills
Inverell Ave	Hinchinbrook
Tulich Ave	Prestons
2022/23 FY - Streets identified as medium to high priority (these are likely to be undertaken within the 2022/23 FY, subject to resourcing and the outcome of community consultations)
Edinburgh Circuit	Cecil Hills
Ulster Street	Cecil Hills
Mullumbimby Avenue	Hoxton Park
Bellingen Way	Hoxton Park
Monkton Avenue	Middleton Grange
Haerse Ave	Chipping Norton
9 Kitchen Place	West Hoxton
Macksville Street	Carnes Hill
Graziers Way
Savery Road
Crossly Avenue
Alchemist Way
Reibey Road
Landholder Road