Agenda of Ordinary Meeting - Wednesday, 27 September 2023

MINUTES OF THE Ordinary Meeting

HELD ON 30 August 2023

PRESENT:

Mayor Ned Mannoun

Councillor Ammoun

Councillor Goodman

Councillor Green

Councillor Hadid

Councillor Hagarty

Councillor Harle

Councillor Kaliyanda

Councillor Karnib (Online)

Councillor Macnaught

Councillor Rhodes

Hon John Ajaka, Chief Executive Officer

Mr Farooq Portelli, Director Corporate Support

Ms Tina Bono, Director Community & Lifestyle

Ms Lina Kakish, Director Planning & Compliance

Ms Michelle Mcilvenny, Director Customer & Business Performance

Mr Shayne Mallard, Director City Futures

Mr Jason Breton, Director Operations

Mr David Galpin, General Counsel, Manager Governance, Legal and Procurement

Mr Vishwa Nadan, Chief Financial Officer

Mr Charlies Wiafe, Principal Transport Planner (online)

Ms Jessica Saliba, Acting Manager Council and Executive Services

Ms Melissa Wray, Council and Executive Support Officer (minutes)

The meeting commenced at 2.00pm

STATEMENT REGARDING WEBCASTING OF MEETING

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

ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF COUNTRY, PRAYER OF COUNCIL AND AFFIRMATION

The prayer of the Council was read by Reverend Paul Mosiejczuk from Liverpool Baptist Church.

NATIONAL ANTHEM

The National Anthem was played at the meeting.

COUNCILLORS ATTENDING REMOTELY

Clr Karnib requested permission to attend the meeting via MS Teams.

Motion: Moved: Mayor Mannoun Seconded: Clr Kaliyanda

That Clr Karnib be granted permission to attend the meeting via MS Teams.

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

APOLOGIES

Nil

CONDOLENCE MOTIONS

ITEM NO:

COND 01

SUBJECT:

Condolence Motion – Peter Donald Fraser (1936 to 2023) (read by Mayor Mannoun)

Tonight, we pause to honour the memory of Peter Donald Fraser, former Liverpool City Council Alderman. Peter passed away on April 6, 2023, aged 86.

Peter was born on October 12, 1936, in Coogee and attended local schools, St Bridget's Primary and De La Salle College. His interest in the environment appears to have started early; Peter spent his time before and after school swimming and fishing at the nearby beach and collecting empty bottles for threepence so he could go to the movies.

After finishing school Peter worked in several different jobs and completed National Service army training. In 1959 he married his wife Joan, and they had four children.

Peter’s connection with the Liverpool area began when he started working for Standard Telephones and Cables in Moorebank. Peter and Joan soon moved to the area, settling initially into a temporary house on Memorial Avenue, Liverpool. Over the next four years Peter oversaw the construction of their permanent home on the same block.

From early in his residence in Liverpool Peter became actively involved in local affairs. He was a member of the Labor Party and was elected to Liverpool City Council at the local government elections on September 24,1983.

Peter served on Council until 1987. He also worked locally for Cablemakers and Grace Brothers in Liverpool until his retirement in 1991. After his retirement Peter continued working closely with Council and served on several committees including the Environmental Advisory Committee, Access Committee, Civic Advisory Committee and Liverpool Floodplain Management Committee.

A passion for environmental conservation was always at the heart of Peter’s tireless community activism. He was particularly involved with Liverpool’s floodplain management, and he lived for several decades near Maxwells and Cabramatta Creeks.

In 1988 Peter’s commitment was recognised by Liverpool Council creating ‘The Fraser Environment Award’ in his honour. Presented each year at Council’s Australia Day Awards, the award remains one of Council’s most important accolades.

As a wheelchair user, Peter was also a long-term member of the Access Committee.

He advocated for enhancing footpaths and pedestrian crossings, improving disability access particularly on public transport, and curbing illegal dumping in the area.

Peter Fraser embodied all the best qualities of a truly dedicated local citizen. His contribution to Liverpool was immense and our community owes him a debt of gratitude for his lifetime of service.

Peter is survived by his wife of over 60 years, Joan. I humbly express my deepest condolences to his family and friends. Our thoughts and prayers are with Peter’s loved ones during this difficult time.

May he rest in peace.

Councillor Harle’s Condolence Motion

I knew Peter for many years, I lived in the same street, Memorial Avenue, for several decades. Peter was always a staunch environmental supporter for the community, hence the Peter Fraser Environmental Award named after him.

Peter was well known as a concerned community Councillor for many years and well liked. Peter was easily recognised travelling on his mobile scooter wearing an Akubra Hat and proudly displaying an Aussie flag wherever he went. As the Mayor stated, Peter was involved in many Council committees over many years and for several decades after retiring as an elected Councillor. Peter will be sadly missed for the good he did, often with extreme passion, for the overall good of the community.

ITEM NO:	CONDs 02
SUBJECT:	In Memory of Captain Danniel Lyon, Lieutenant Maxwell Nugent, Warrant Officer Class 2 Joseph Laycock, and Corporal Alexander Naggs
REPORT:	Mayor Ned Mannoun
DATE:	30 August 2023
It is with great sadness that we pay our respects and offer our heartfelt condolences to the families of Captain Danniel Lyon, Lieutenant Maxwell Nugent, Warrant Officer Class 2 Joseph Laycock, and Corporal Alexander Naggs. These four exceptional individuals, members of the 6th Aviation Regiment of the Australian Army Aviation based at the Holsworthy Army Barracks, were engaged in a noble duty, serving our country, and striving to ensure our safety and security. We mourn the loss of four brave souls who tragically lost their lives in a devastating incident that has left our community and our nation in deep sorrow. Captain Lyon, Lieutenant Nugent, Warrant Officer Laycock, and Corporal Naggs were sons, brothers, friends, colleagues, and guardians of our nation's values. As we reflect on the tragedy that has befallen us, let us also remember the countless hours of training, the camaraderie, and the unyielding sense of duty that defined their lives. Their contributions, both in uniform and as members of our community, have left an indelible mark on our city and our nation. In this moment of profound grief, we extend our unwavering support to the families and loved ones left behind. Please know that as a community, we share in your pain and sorrow. To assist during this tough time, Council initiated a fundraising campaign. I would like to move that Council donates $5,000 to the Holsworthy Community Group to support the families and loved ones during this tough time. Let us honour the legacy of Captain Danniel Lyon, Lieutenant Maxwell Nugent, Warrant Officer Class 2 Joseph Laycock, and Corporal Alexander Naggs by continuing to uphold the values they dedicated their lives to protect. I encourage all of us to unite as a city, to provide strength to those who need it most, and to remember that even in the darkest of times, the light of unity and compassion can guide us through. Lest We Forget. RECOMMENDATION: That Council: Writes to the families of Captain Danniel Lyon, Lieutenant Maxwell Nugent, Warrant Officer Class 2 Joseph Laycock, and Corporal Alexander Naggs expressing our condolences for their tragic loss Donates $5,000 to the Holsworthy Community Group to support the families of Captain Danniel Lyon, Lieutenant Maxwell Nugent, Warrant Officer Class 2 Joseph Laycock, and Corporal Alexander Naggs Observe a minute of silence in their memory.
COUNCIL DECISION Motion: Moved: Mayor Mannoun Seconded: Clr Ammoun That the recommendation be adopted. On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED. One minute silence was then observed for Captain Danniel Lyon, Lieutenant Maxwell Nugent, Warrant Officer Class 2 Joseph Laycock, Corporal Alexander Naggs and Mr Peter Donald Fraser. One minute silence was

Confirmation of Minutes

Motion: Moved: Clr Rhodes Seconded: Clr Macnaught

That the minutes of the Ordinary Meeting held on 26 July 2023 be confirmed as a true record of that meeting.

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

Declarations of Interest

Councillor Hagarty declared a non-pecuniary interest, but less than significant in the following items:

Item: COM 02 – Grants Donations and Community Sponsorship Report

Reason: Clr Hagarty has an association with one of the organisations,

Item: COM 05 – Permanent Home for the City of Liverpool Historical Society

Reason: Clr Hagarty is a current member of the Historical Society

Item: CONF 02 – Liverpool Access Committee Member Nominations 2023

Reason: Clr Hagarty has an association with the applicants and nominees.

Councillor Hagarty remained in the chamber.

Councillor Kaliyanda declared a non-pecuniary interest, but less than significant in the following items:

Item: COM 02 – Grants Donations and Community Sponsorship Report

Reason: Councillor Kaliyanda has an association with one of the organisations,

Item: COM 05 – Permanent Home for the City of Liverpool Historical Society

Reason: Councillor Kaliyanda is a current member of the Historical Society

Councillor Kaliyanda remained in the chamber.

Mayor Mannoun declared a non-pecuniary interest, but less than significant in the following items:

Item: Plan 01 – Planning Proposal to amend the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 at 93-145 Hoxton Park Road, 51 Maryvale Avenue and 260 Memorial Avenue, Liverpool.

Reason: Mayor Mannoun has previously worked at the Real Estate as a consultant in 2016 and 2021 and has provided advice to the owner.

Item: Plan 06 – Variation to VPA – 11 (146 Newbridge Road, Moorebank)

Reason: Mayor Mannoun has made comments on social media, which could be perceived as having influence and a position on this matter.

Item: CONF 01 – Proposed Acquisition of Lot 161 DP17134, 31 Rickard Road, Chipping Norton under the Moorebank Voluntary Acquisition Scheme

Reason: Mayor Mannoun is family friends with the owners.

Mayor Mannoun left the chamber during these items.

Councillor Goodman declared a non-pecuniary interest, but less than significant in the following item:

Item: PLAN 08 – Amendment to Fees & Charges for Planning Certificates and Private Certifier Certificate Registrations

Reason: Clr Goodman’s brother is a private certifier.

Councillor Goodman left the chambers during this item.

Public Forum

Nil.

MAYORAL MINUTES

ITEM NO:	MAYOR 01
SUBJECT:	Western Sydney University
REPORT:	Mayor Ned Mannoun
DATE:	30 August 2023
Western Sydney University's substantial investment of $340 million into the new Bankstown City campus is a remarkable development that holds great promise for the entire South West Sydney region. This forward-looking initiative reflects the university's commitment to nurturing educational excellence and fostering innovation. The innovative design of the 18-storey campus, with its emphasis on technology-rich environments and specialised focus on health, advanced manufacturing, and education, is poised to equip students with the skills and knowledge needed to thrive in the modern workforce. Moreover, Western Sydney University's dedication to sustainability, as exemplified by the 6-Star Green Star design rating of the campus, showcases its responsible stewardship of the environment. This commitment not only aligns with global environmental goals but also sets a shining example for other institutions to follow. In the context of Liverpool, Western Sydney University's presence in the heart of the city stands as a testament to the university's role as a positive force in the community. The outstanding campus in Liverpool, coupled with the new Bankstown facility, reinforces WSU's significant contribution to the educational, economic, and social growth of South-West Sydney. These campuses are not just physical structures; they represent centres of learning, innovation, and community engagement and play an active role in shaping the future of our region. The City of Liverpool is particularly fortunate to be a beneficiary of Western Sydney University's commitment. The university's influence extends beyond the confines of its campuses, reaching into our local neighbourhoods and impacting lives through education, research, and community involvement. As Liverpool and the surrounding areas continue to evolve and grow as part of Australia's fastest-growing region, the contributions of Western Sydney University remain invaluable and deeply appreciated. COUNCIL DECISION Motion: Moved: Mayor Mannoun Second: Clr Green That Council: Recognises the remarkable impact Western Sydney University has had on South West Sydney and the Liverpool LGA Writes to the Vice Chancellor of Western Sydney University, Barney Glover AO and Board Members, congratulating WSU on their incredible new Bankstown City Campus and enduring contribution to education in South Western Sydney On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED. Councillors voted unanimously for this motion. the meeting the motion was declared

ITEM NO:	MAYOR 02
SUBJECT:	Introduction of a Project Control Committee
REPORT:	Mayor Mannoun
DATE:	30 August 2023
The city of Liverpool is experiencing substantial growth and development, leading to an influx of 7.11 Developer Contributions designated for infrastructure projects to accommodate this expansion. The delays in the investment of 7.11 Developer Contributions infrastructure funding have resulted in additional costs to our ratepayers due to missed opportunities and the depreciation of funds in a rapidly evolving market. The current market conditions indicate a significant and continuous increase in the cost of building materials, further highlighting the urgency of prompt investment to prevent the devaluation of allocated funds. The creation of the Project Control Committee is crucial to address the challenges presented by delays in infrastructure project investment. By establishing this committee, we affirm our commitment to responsible fiscal management, timely project execution, and the realisation of projects that contribute to the well-being and growth of our community. Therefore, I move that Council recognises the need for a dedicated ‘Project Control Committee’ to oversee and ensure the timely and efficient execution of infrastructure projects funded by 7.11 & 7.12 Developer Contributions and Voluntary Planning Agreements (VPAs), to maximise the benefits of these funds for our community, with the below charter and responsibilities. RECOMMENDATION: That Council: Establishes a ‘Project Control Committee with the below Charter. Charter: The Project Control Committee is established to provide oversight and guidance on the design, planning, and execution of all Council infrastructure projects funded by 7.11 Developer Contributions. The committee's primary focus is to ensure that these funds are utilised effectively and efficiently, delivering high-quality infrastructure that meets the needs of our growing community. Responsibilities: · Review project proposals and designs, ensuring alignment with community needs, Council goals, and relevant regulations. · Monitor project timelines and budgets to prevent delays and cost overruns, with the aim of delivering projects within approved schedules. · Collaborate with relevant departments and stakeholders to ensure transparent communication and coordination throughout project life cycles. · Regularly assess the impact of market trends on project costs and adjust plans accordingly to optimise the utilization of funds. · Guide the contribution of plans and implementation of them to ensure the community receives the benefit as soon as possible. · Provide recommendations to the Council for necessary adjustments or reallocation of funds based on changing project requirements or unforeseen circumstances. Committee Composition: The Project Control Committee shall consist of five Councillors appointed by a vote on the floor of Council, reflecting a diverse representation of the community's interests and expertise. Meeting Frequency: The committee shall convene monthly at a time to be determined by the Chair to review project progress, discuss challenges, and make informed decisions regarding project design, timelines, and budget allocation. Councillor Hagarty raised a Point of Order Due to the complexity of the motion and time given to consider it. This motion breaches the spirit of the Mayoral Minutes. Mayor Mannoun ruled the point of order is not upheld. MOTION OF DISSENT Councillor Hagarty then moved a motion of dissent. Motion: Moved: Clr Hagarty Seconded: Clr Kaliyanda That Council move a motion of dissent. On being put to the meeting the motion was declared LOST. COUNCIL DECISION Mayor Mannoun then moved the below motion. Motion: Moved: Mayor Mannoun Seconded: Clr Rhodes That Council: 1. Establishes a ‘Project Control Committee with the below Charter. Charter: The Project Control Committee is established to provide oversight and guidance on the design, planning, and execution of all Council infrastructure projects funded by 7.11 Developer Contributions. The committee's primary focus is to ensure that these funds are utilised effectively and efficiently, delivering high-quality infrastructure that meets the needs of our growing community. Responsibilities: · Review project proposals and designs, ensuring alignment with community needs, Council goals, and relevant regulations. · Monitor project timelines and budgets to prevent delays and cost overruns, with the aim of delivering projects within approved schedules. · Collaborate with relevant departments and stakeholders to ensure transparent communication and coordination throughout project life cycles. · Regularly assess the impact of market trends on project costs and adjust plans accordingly to optimise the utilization of funds. · Guide the contribution of plans and implementation of them to ensure the community receives the benefit as soon as possible. · Provide recommendations to the Council for necessary adjustments or reallocation of funds based on changing project requirements or unforeseen circumstances. 2. Committee Composition: The Project Control Committee shall consist of five Councillors appointed by a vote on the floor of Council, reflecting a diverse representation of the community's interests and expertise. 3. Meeting Frequency: The committee shall convene monthly at a time to be determined by the Chair to review project progress, discuss challenges, and make informed decisions regarding project design, timelines, and budget allocation. 4. A draft charter and report will be brought back to council. 5. All members of council will be on the committee. On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

ITEM NO:	MAYOR 03
SUBJECT:	Implementation of GANT Chart for Comprehensive Tracking of Council Projects and Reports
REPORT:	Mayor Ned Mannoun
DATE:	30 August 2023
Effective and transparent management of Council projects and reports is paramount to the successful delivery of services and initiatives that benefit the community of Liverpool. The availability of accurate and up-to-date data on project timelines and budgets is essential for Councillors, enabling them to make informed choices that best serve the interests of the community. The demand for consistent and clear information from Council staff regarding project progress, changes in timeline, and budget adjustments has been emphasised by Councillors as a vital requirement for effective governance. The implementation of a comprehensive and clear GANTT Chart system for tracking Council projects and reports is recognised as a valuable tool to provide a visual representation of project schedules, milestones, and financial allocations. The primary objective of the GANTT Chart system is to enhance the transparency and efficiency of project and report management within the Council by providing a visual representation of project timelines, milestones, and budget allocations. This tool will facilitate effective decision-making, communication, and accountability among Councillors and staff. The demand for consistent and clear information for Councillors underscores the necessity of implementing a GANTT Chart system. The availability of timely, accurate, and visually represented project data will empower Councillors to make well-informed decisions that align with the community's best interests. Furthermore, understanding the history of a matter including changes to budget and timelines is paramount to Councillors making considerate decisions on behalf of the community. The implementation of a GANTT Chart system for Council projects and reports will be a significant step towards enhancing accountability, and effective governance. By adopting this system, Council reaffirms its commitment to providing comprehensive and reliable information to its members and to serving the community more effectively. COUNCIL DECISION Motion: Moved: Mayor Mannoun That Council: Introduces a GANTT Chart system for integration into the Council's existing project management and reporting processes to ensure seamless tracking and updating of information. The GANTT Chart system will offer a visual timeline representation of project phases, milestones, and key deadlines, enabling Council members to have a clear overview of project progress. The system should incorporate mechanisms for highlighting changes to project timelines and budgets, ensuring that Council members are promptly informed about any adjustments. Budget allocations and reallocations shall be graphically represented within the GANTT Chart, offering a comprehensive understanding of the financial aspects of each project or report. Council staff shall be responsible for updating the GANTT Chart system as projects progress, ensuring that the information remains accurate and up to date. The Council will organise training sessions to familiarise Council members and staff with the GANTT Chart system, ensuring its effective utilisation for decision-making and reporting purposes. Adds the GANTT Charts to the monthly Council Meeting Agenda as a standing item. On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

ITEM NO:	MAYOR 04
SUBJECT:	Public Art in Bigge Park
REPORT:	Mayor Ned Mannoun
DATED:	30 August 2023
Bigge Park stands as a cherished public space within our community, offering respite and solace to residents and visitors alike, including visitors from Liverpool Hospital. A Public Arts program in the park has the potential to play a special role in enhancing the cultural experience of the park's patrons. In this context, it is just to acknowledge the Holy Mother Mary's role as a universal symbol of hope, compassion, and healing. Throughout history, the Mother Mary has been venerated as a source of comfort, especially by those facing illnesses and challenges. Incorporating elements of the Mother Mary's symbolism into the park's artistic endeavours can provide a deeper sense of solace to individuals who frequent the park, particularly those seeking respite or having loved ones in the nearby Liverpool Hospital. Moreover, the strategic proximity of Bigge Park to Liverpool Hospital highlights the significance of this motion. As a place that witnesses the convergence of diverse emotions and experiences, the park can offer a serene environment for patients, families, and healthcare providers to find moments of reprieve from the demands of medical care. A thoughtful integration of artistic elements that pay homage to the Holy Mother Mary's symbolism can contribute to fostering a sense of calm and hope in those navigating challenging medical journeys. Taking the above into consideration, I move that Council undertakes a comprehensive investigation into a Public Art program at Bigge Park. This investigation should aim to explore how artistic interventions inspired by the Holy Mother Mary's symbolism can be integrated sensitively into the park's environment, with the goal of providing a space of solace, reflection, and healing. I am confident that this initiative will not only enrich the emotional fabric of our community but also align with our commitment to supporting the well-being of individuals facing health-related difficulties.
COUNCIL DECISION Motion: Moved: Mayor Mannoun That Council: Investigates and implements a Public Art program at Bigge Park. Collaborates with local artists, community members, and relevant stakeholders to ensure that the artistic interventions are culturally respectful and sensitive to the needs of our diverse community. Considers as part of the investigation process the appropriate placement of artistic installations within the park, considering the flow of foot traffic, natural elements, accessibility and activation be considered as part of this. Evaluates potential funding sources, including grants and community contributions, to support the development and maintenance of the Public Art program. A report will be brought back to council. On being put to the meeting the motion was declared CARRIED.

Mayor Mannoun left the chamber at 2.50pm and Councillor Hadid, Deputy Mayor, became the chairperson.

Planning & Compliance Reports

ITEM NO: PLAN 01

FILE NO: 190451.2023

SUBJECT: Planning proposal to amend the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 at 93-145 Hoxton Park Road, 51 Maryvale Avenue & 260 Memorial Avenue, Liverpool.

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion: Moved: Deputy Hadid Seconded: Clr Green

That council defer this item and direct the CEO to consult with the community.

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

Councillors voted unanimously for this motion.

NOTICES OF MOTION

ITEM NO: NOM 02

FILE NO: 276577.2023

SUBJECT: Toda Student Exchange

Background

Council's relationship with its sister city, Toda, stretches back 30 years. As a city with a new international airport being constructed on our doorstep, Liverpool’s sister city relationship has enabled our cultural ties to enhance commercial opportunities.

A key pillar of this relationship is the student exchange program.

The exchange program allows students from Japan to be based and study at local Liverpool schools. These exchanges have been extremely successful and resulted in strong and fruitful bonds between our two cities.

With Liverpool positioning itself as the third CBD and an international airport set to open in 2026, Japan is a key relationship for our city. The future bonds that will deliver the opportunity promised by Western Sydney Airport and Bradfield, may well be formed through our sister city student exchange.

As Councillor Rhodes wisely stated in 2017:

I remind Council that the single most important objective raised by our fellow Councillors from Toda last year was their wish that Liverpool re-engage in the Student Exchange Program with them...

It would be a great disappointment to our Sister City if this was not to happen because the schools participating are from socio-economic disadvantaged areas.

Council’s financial assistance to make it happen would go a long way to promoting the Program at the participating schools and ensuring greater interest and the on-going success of the program in following years.

The cultural exchange through participating schools is not to be under estimated in measuring positive outcomes, not only for the participating Students but also for the Liverpool economy by encouraging business and other cultural exchanges and opportunities that can only be of benefit to the entire Liverpool Community.

NOTICE OF MOTION (submitted by Clr Hagarty)

That Council direct the CEO to bring a report back to Council at the September 2023 meeting on:

1. Costs to Council in previous years specifically for the student exchange program with Toda students coming to Liverpool;

2. Potential costs to fund the student exchange program for Toda students coming to Liverpool in July 2024; and

3. Potential sources for funding the student exchange program in July 2024, including but not limited to:

o Liverpool Council

o Western Sydney Airport

o Japan Local Government Centre

o Consul General of Japan

o AusTrade

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion: Moved: Clr Hagarty Seconded: Clr Rhodes

That the recommendation be adopted.

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

MOTION OF URGENCY

Clr Macnaught requested Mayor Mannoun accept a Motion of Urgency in relation to Nuwarra Road vehicle weight limit. She stated it was urgent due to the item being required to be tabled at the next Traffic Committee meeting and in the interest of public safety.

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

ITEM NO:

MOU 01

SUBJECT:

Nuwarra Road vehicle weight limit

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion: Moved: Clr Macnaught Seconded: Clr Kaliyanda

That Council:

1. Introduces a 5 tonne weight limit to vehicles travelling along Nuwarra Road, south of Newbridge Road.

2. Investigates the feasibility and costs of roadworks that entail widening of Nuwarra Road to provide two southbound lanes, south of Brickmakers Drive, and the widening of Brickmakers drive Westbound to two lanes from Christiansen Blvd to Nuwarra Rd.

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

Mayor Mannoun left the chambers at 4.27pm and Clr Hadid, the Deputy Mayor, became the chairperson.

Confidential Items

ITEM NO: CONF 01

FILE NO: 210709.2023

SUBJECT: Proposed Acquisition of Lot 161 DP17134, 31 Rickard Road, Chipping Norton under the Moorebank Voluntary Acquisition Scheme

COUNCIL DECISION

Motion: Moved: Clr Macnaught Seconded: Clr Rhodes

That Council:

1. Approves the acquisition of Lot 161 DP 17134, 31 Rickard Road, Chipping Norton under the provisions of the Moorebank Voluntary Acquisition Scheme, for the price and terms outlined in this confidential report;

2. Upon settlement of the acquisition, classifies Lot 161 DP 17134, 31 Rickard Road, Chipping Norton as ‘Community’ land;

3. Keeps confidential this report pursuant to the provisions of Section 10A(2)(c) of the Local Government Act 1993 as this information would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business; and

4. Authorises its delegated officer to execute any documents, under Power of Attorney necessary to give effect to this decision.

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

Ordinary Meeting

27 September 2023

Planning & Compliance Report

PLAN 01

Post Exhibition Report - Liverpool Local Environmental Plan Amendment 97 - 61-71 Goulburn Street (Liverpool Private Hospital)

Strategic Objective	Evolving, Prosperous, Innovative Develop the economic capacity of local businesses and industries
File Ref	173198.2023
Report By	Brianna Van Zyl - Senior Strategic Planner
Approved By	Lina Kakish - Director Planning & Compliance

Executive Summary

On 31 August 2022, Council endorsed a planning proposal for 61-71 Goulburn Street, Liverpool (Lot 9 Sec 41 DP 758620, Lot 1 DP 25642, Lot 20 DP 1113807, Lot 8 Sec 41 DP 758620, Lot 2 DP 610334 and Lot 1 DP 610334). The planning proposal seeks to amend the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 (LLEP 2008) to facilitate the development of a private hospital (health service facility), consulting and education suite space, and ancillary retail.

The proposed change to the Height of Building (HOB) development standard is from 35m to 79m and the proposed change to the Floor Space Ratio (FSR) development standard is from a mapped FSR of 2.5:1 (or 3.5:1 under FSR bonuses available under LLEP 2008 Clause 4.4(2)(c)), to 6.9:1. The increased development standards will only apply if a Health Services Facility is developed, and the proposed amendments intend to facilitate the development of approximately:

· 155 private hospital beds;

· 12,540m² Gross Floor Area of consulting and education suite space; and

· 353m² Gross Floor Area of retail.

The subject planning proposal received a Gateway determination on 5 December 2022, and was publicly exhibited from 12 April to 12 May 2023. During the exhibition period, Council received two individual submissions, both of which opposed the proposal.

As required by the Gateway determination, the planning proposal was referred to State agencies including NSW Transport, Sydney South-West Local Health District, Civil Aviation Safety Authority, Sydney Water, State Emergency Services (SES), and two internal teams within the Department of Planning and Environment (DPE) being the Biodiversity and Conservation team, and the Resilience team.

This report details the feedback received during the exhibition and outlines Council’s response to the issues raised. Notably, two of the state agencies being SES, and the two internal DPE teams raised concern in relation to flooding, specifically, in relation to evacuation. Following the exhibition period, Council staff have worked collaboratively with both DPE and the proponent to ensure these matters can be addressed.

Following post-exhibition assessment, the planning proposal demonstrates strategic and site-specific merit, and it is therefore recommended that the planning proposal be forwarded to DPE to make the amendment, as it is noted that Council is not the nominated plan making authority.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Notes this report, the Gateway determination dated 5 December 2022 for Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 (Amendment 97), the submissions received from the State Agencies, and members of the public;

2. Proceeds with Amendment 97 to increase the permissible Height of Building to 79m and Floor Space Ratio to 6.9:1 for the purpose of a Health Services Facility;

3. Delegates authority to the Chief Executive Officer (or his delegate) to forward the planning proposal to the Department of Planning and Environment as the plan making authority for this planning proposal; and

4. Notifies the submitters of Councils decision.

REPORT

Background

History

On 27 June 2022, the planning proposal was referred to the Local Planning Panel for advice where the panel agreed (3-1) with Council’s assessment that the proposal had strategic and site-specific merit. However, the Panel indicated there was an absence of contextual and economic justification for the proposed extent of the uplift in HOB and FSR development standards. Additional economic justification was provided on 5 April 2023 (Appendix 15), which addressed the panels concerns.

The planning proposal was referred to Council on 31 August 2022, where the following was resolved:

That Council:

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

2. Endorses in principle the planning proposal request to amend the floor space ratio and height of buildings development standards in the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008.

3. Delegates to the Acting CEO (or delegate) to prepare the formal planning proposal including any typographical or editing amendments if required.

4. Forwards the planning proposal to the Department of Planning and Environment pursuant to Section 3.34 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, seeking a Gateway determination.

5. Recommends to the Department of Planning and Environment that a detailed economic demand analysis be conditioned as part of any Gateway determination.

6. Subject to Gateway determination, undertake public exhibition and community consultation in accordance with the conditions of the Gateway determination and the Liverpool Community Participation Plan.

7. Receives a further report on the outcomes of public exhibition and community consultation; and

8. Advised the proponent of Council decision

The proposal was subsequently referred to the DPE for assessment, and a Gateway Determination was issued on 5 December 2022. The proposal was publicly exhibited from 12 April to 12 May 2023. The results of exhibition are outlined in this report.

Site Description

The planning proposal request relates to six lots along 61-71 Goulburn Street, Liverpool (see Figure 1). The site area is approximately 4,674m².

The site presently comprises three four-storey residential apartment buildings, a single storey dwelling house and a double-storey detached garage. The site is zoned MU1 Mixed Use, and has additional permitted uses under Schedule 1 of the LEP, whereby:

· Development for the purpose of light industry is permitted with consent but only if the industry is medical research and development; and

· Development for the purpose of office premises is permitted with consent by only with respect to the medical or health industries.

Figure 1: Aerial of subject sites (Source: Nearmaps)

The northern part of the site is impacted by the helicopter flight path for Liverpool Hospital, which is shown below (Figure 2). Whilst this is not a prohibition on development, the Local Health District comments are required to be taken into consideration when assessing the Development Application. The proposal was referred to both Sydney South Western Local Health District, and Civil Aviation Authority during the legislation public exhibition. Their responses are detailed in this report.

Figure 2: Key Site Map (Red Hash = Helicopter Flight Path, Blue = Additional uses)

(Source: LLEP 2008)

Locality

The site is in Liverpool City Centre to the north of Bigge Park and directly adjacent to the Liverpool Hospital (Figure 3). The block is bounded by Campbell Street to the north, Elizabeth Street to the south, and Bigge Street to the west. It is approximately 500m from Liverpool Train Station.

Figure 3: Locality Map (Source: Nearmaps)

The site in zoned MU1 Mixed Use zone under the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 (LLEP 2008), with the adjacent hospital zoned SP2 (Health Services Facility and Educational Establishment). There is land zoned R4 High Density Residential immediately to the north.

The proposal also falls within an area known as the Liverpool Innovation Precinct. The Land Use Analysis and Precinct Strategy for the Liverpool Innovation Precinct indicates there is desire for a new private hospital, with close connectivity to the key clinical functions of the existing Liverpool Hospital.

Current Planning Proposal

The planning proposal seeks to amend FSR and HOB development standards in the LLEP 2008 to facilitate the development of a private hospital (health services facility), consulting and education suite space, and ancillary retail.

The proposed change to the HOB development standard is from 35m to 79m and the proposed change to the FSR development standard is from a mapped standard of 2.5:1 (with bonus available under Clause 4.4(2)(c) increasing to 3.5:1), to 6.9:1. The proposed amendments to the LLEP 2008 intend to facilitate the development of approximately:

· 155 private hospital beds;

· 12,540m² Gross Floor Area of consulting and education suite space; and

· 353m² Gross Floor Area of retail.

This will be achieved through identifying the site under the Key Site Map in the LLEP 2008, to apply the increased HOB, and FSR, when the development of a Health Service Facility, and its ancillary uses as noted within the planning proposal report are proposed (Attachment 1).

Essentially, this means the HOB and FSR maps are retained as existing under the LLEP 2008, and the Key Site Map and associated clause for increased development standards will only be used when the development includes a health services facility, and its ancillary uses.

Gateway Determination

The Gateway determination was issued 5 December 2022, and required the LEP to be completed by 22 September 2023. This was subsequently extended until 2 November 2023 to grant additional time for consideration of the state agency submissions (Attachment 16).

The Gateway required the planning proposal report and supporting documentation to be updated prior to commencing public exhibition, including information regarding overland flooding on the site. On the 10 March 2023, Council wrote to DPE seeking clarification that the Gateway conditions had been adequately addressed. On 22 March 2023, DPE responded conditions had been addressed and the proposal could proceed to public exhibition. DPE also issued an amended Gateway, which included consultation with State Emergency Services (SES).

Due to delays in receiving and addressing State agency comments, a Gateway determination extension was granted, enabling the initial deadline on 22 September 2023 to be extended to 3 November 2023.

Community Consultation

The planning proposal was placed on public exhibition from 12 April to 12 May 2023, in accordance with Council’s Community Participation Plan. The exhibition included notification via letters to properties within the block bounded by Goulburn Street, Bigge Street, Campbell Street and Elizabeth Street. The notification letters were sent to both the owners and occupiers of each building. Information was also available on Liverpool Listens, Council’s E-Planning Portal and NSW Planning Portal.

During the exhibition period, Council received 4 calls from people who lived within the vicinity, and 2 individual submissions, which are included in Attachment 17, and are summarised below:

Table 1 Assessment of Community Submissions

Issue

Council Response to issue

Community Submission 1:

Density / Building Height

The planning proposal seeks to increase HOB and FSR significantly, in an area that is comparatively low scale apartment development at present (three storey apartments). It is noted the LEP contains height and density greater than what is existing on the site.

The accompanying visual impact assessment (Attachment 12) indicates that the proposal would have some moderate/high visual impacts, particularly at Bigge Park / Elizabeth St, looking into Goulburn St, and a moderate impact from the centre of Bigge Park.

The proposal details a number of measures to reduce perceived bulk and visual impacts, including retention of established trees, landscaping on podium levels, and façade treatment, articulation and colour selection to better blend with landscape. The specified building height is considered appropriate in the context of the Liverpool City Centre and given the sites close proximity to the Liverpool Hospital.

Levy

The submission asked how much the yearly levy will be increased with 20 floors added.

This is not a relevant consideration of a planning proposal. The development will be charged the applicable Developer Contributions fees if / when the proposal does proceed to the Development Application stage (via the State Significant Development Pathway). Council rates team will follow the relevant procedures to calculate the applicable rates to the site.

Public Hospital

The submission asked how many beds will be for the public hospital.

This is not a relevant consideration of a planning proposal. This is an agreement between the hospital and South-Western Local Health District. Council will not be involved in these discussions.

Community Submission 2:

Overshadowing

The submission stated overshadowing must be considered.

As outlined above, the proposal has included a number of measures to reduce the bulk and visual impacts of the proposal. Council staff requested that no additional shadow is to cast on Bigge Park than that of the maximum allowable building envelope of the adjacent lot to the south. This southern lot has an additional local provision, Cl 7.2 Sun access in Liverpool city centre, that restricts building height in order to protect public space from overshadowing. Council staff are comfortable that the revised planning proposal sufficiently minimises visual impacts and overshadowing, particularly upon Bigge Park.

Streetscape planting:

The submission raised concerns with the streetscape planting being maintained, and if it will be on public or private land. The submission questioned the maintenance schedule and how large the trees will mature.

The planning proposal is not locking in a design, as the conceptual plans show the vision rather the final design outcomes. If the proposal proceeds, it will be required to seek approval through the State Significant Development pathway. This will be a consideration for the Development Application stage.

Public Authority Consultation

Council sent out referrals to the relevant state agencies on 12 April 2023, with the exception of the State Environmental Services (SES), which was sent on 20 April after the Gateway Alteration was received. There were significant delays in responses from DPE, with comments received by 16 June 2023. Following this, further consultation occurred to ensure the planning proposal can be progressed to finalisation.

A summary of agency consultation in accordance with the Gateway determination is below.

1. Sydney Water

Agency Comment: Detailed servicing requirements will be provided at section 73 stage (i.e. Development Application Stage). Specifically, the submission listed requirements in relation to provision of Water and Wastewater services. The full submission is included in Attachment 16.

Council Response: Sydney Waters comment relate to design considerations, and processes that form part of the Development Application procedures. This will be considered as part of the future State Significant Development assessment.

2. Transport for NSW (TFNSW)

Agency Comment: TfNSW has reviewed the proposal and has no requirements as the proposed development is unlikely to impact the classified road network. Refer to Attachment 16 for TfNSW Submission.

Council Response: No amendments required.

3. Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA)

Agency Comment: The maximum building height according to the planning proposal is 79m. The distance between the helipad and the building is approximately 200m. Therefore, the slope from the helipad to the top of the building would be approximately 25%. This exceeds the slopes described in NASF Guideline. However, it is understood the flight path is further north than what is shown in the LLEP 2008 maps.

As such, CASA do not object to the planning proposal, provided it is approved by NSW Health Infrastructure / South Western Sydney Local Health District.

Council Response: No amendment required. Consultation occurred with Sydney South Western Local Health District below.

4. Sydney South Western Local Health District (SWLHD)

Agency Comment: The proposed building will not encroach on the established flight path, as the proposed conceptual plans indicate the building is offset 7m from the northern boundary. In addition, SWLHD had the below image created by an architectural firm which shows the flight path direction (at 306 degree magnetic). Therefore, the flight path is not obstructed by the proposed building. However, during construction, cranes will need to be illuminated with appropriate lighting that is compliant with night vision devices and cannot touch the arc (the edge of the flight path).

Figure 4: Image of proposed building (shown in purple) and the flight path.

(Source: South-Western Local Health District)

Council Response: The flight path outlined in the LLEP 20008 is correct, however the map within the LLEP 2008 has an additional buffer, hence why a larger proportion of the site is affected than the map referred to above. Given SWLHD has stated the proposal will not obstruct the flight path, no amendment is required. Further, consultation will occur with SWLHD during the State Significant Development (SSD) process.

5. State Emergency Services (SES)

Agency Comment: The SES submission stated that the consent authority will need to ensure that the planning proposal is considered against the relevant Ministerial Section 9.1 Directions, including 4.1 Flooding, and is consistent with the NSW Flood Prone Land Policy as set out in the NSW Floodplain Development Manual 2009 (the manual). Specifically, the submission stated that attention should be given to the principles outlined in the manual which relate to risk assessment, evacuation of the existing community, the cumulative impacts of such development and any development strategies dealing with flooding.

In addition, the submission suggested additional recommendations relating to overland flooding. This included the consideration in relation to ground floor businesses, and basement car parking design. The full submission can be found in Attachment 16.

Council Response: The planning proposal is not locking in a design, rather considering additional building height and floor space on a site where a health services facility is already permissible. The comments in relation to design of the basement, and ground floor businesses will be addressed during the State Significant Development process. The additional flood considerations are detailed below in the ‘Flooding’ section of this report.

Additional Agency Comment: On 5^th September 2023, Council received a second submission from the State Emergency Services regarding the proponent’s response to submissions. Refer to Attachment 24. The additional submission recommends flood risk is to be considered strategically and before rezoning occurs, as the population of the facility will increase by approximately 450 people as a result of the proposal, meaning additional people would be impacted by a Probable Maximum Flood event.

Council Response: As detailed further below, it is the position of Council that the subject site is not located within the Probable Maximum Flood area under Council’s endorsed flood study. It is also noted that the PMF level is the largest flood event that could conceivably occur at particular location, and does not set a time range like other flood levels due to the rarity of the event.

6. Department of Planning and Environment

As part of the Gateway determination, two internal teams from the Department were required to comment: DPE Resilience Team and Biodiversity Conservation team (also known as Environment and Heritage Group (EHG)). Both the teams made comments which are detailed below.

a) DPE Biodiversity and Conservation (Environment and Heritage Group)

The EHG initially responded on 12 May 2023, after Council staff sought further clarity, a follow up response was received on 13 June 2023.

Agency Comment: The exhibited proposal does not adequately assess and consider flood impact and risk for the following reasons:

· The assessment of flooding conditions in the Flood Impact Assessment did not consider the full range of flood events and is based on old information; and

· The flood evacuation analysis indicates that the site would have evacuation constrains during major and extreme flood events, as such a review of evacuation constrains should be undertaken to inform the planning proposal.

Council Response: This is responded to in detail, in the ‘flooding’ section below.

b) DPE Resilience

On 16 June 2023, Council received a response from the Department of Planning and Environment on behalf of DPE Resilience team.

Agency Comment: The provided Flood Impact Assessment does not identify the site as flood prone land or affected by mainstream flooding. However, this is not correct as the site is mapped in the Georges River Flood Study 2020 as being within the Georges River mainstream flood extent in an extreme flood event. The Liverpool City Centre Overland Flow Path Mapping (BMT WBM, 2016) study also shows the site is affected by overland flooding in the PMF event. Therefore, DPE consider the site is flood prone land, and Ministerial Direction 4.1 is to be considered and justified.

The planning proposal and supporting documents should be updated to consider the Flood Planning Area associated with the Georges River mainstream flooding. The additional information should also assess and consider evacuation of the site and the surrounding street.

DPE requested the PMF event be considered in the assessment for both overland flow and mainstream flooding. The assessment should report on mainstream flood behaviour in extreme events and may make specific recommendations in relation to finished floor levels, requirements where the basement entry is to be set, and the provision of a stand-alone emergency power to sustain hospital operations in a flood event. The assessment should assess any impact on the adjacent hospital and not result in any loss of flood storage.

In addition, DPE also recommended detailed local 2D Flood Modelling of the local overland flow design flood events as well as the PMF event, however this request was withdrawn by DPE on 15 August 2023.

An evacuation assessment should also be required for the site and the surrounding street. DPEs full comments are included in Attachment 16.

Council Response: The proposal is not locking in a design, rather considering additional building height and floor space on a site where a health service facility is already permissible. The comments in relation to design of retaining walls with the stormwater easement and finished floor levels will be addressed during the State Significant Development process. Additional information was provided by the proponent, and additional flood considerations are detailed below in the ‘Flooding’ section of this report.

Post Gateway Assessment

A. Easement re-location

A drainage easement is located through 63 Goulburn Street, it is required to be relocated as it currently runs through the middle of the six sites and cannot be built over. Gateway Condition 1f required an appropriate solution to be confirmed for the easement relocation. This matter was referred to Council Flood Engineer team who gave in principle support for the relocation of the easement, subject to the following information and design testing being provided at DA stage:

· Preferred Option: Investigate an option to follow existing topography and redirect existing overland flow & stormwater pipes down along the western boundary and then southern boundary of the proposed development to Goulburn Street. Undertake hydrologic/hydraulic modelling and demonstrate that the proposal will have no adverse flooding impact on adjoining sites and Goulburn Street.

· Alternative Option: Proposed reversal of overland flow and stormwater pipeline (as per Civil design plans and stormwater report by Henry & Hymas). However, addition information must be provide including increase impervious factor, and a modelling assessment is undertaken.

All of the relevant considerations are included in Attachment 18.

B. Flooding

Under Council’s endorsed flood mapping, the site is not identified affected by the Georges River, Cabramatta Creek or Anzac Creek. The latest overland flood study for Liverpool CBD was undertaken in 2016 and has considered the upgraded trunk drainage system in the CBD. The below image shows 1% AEP overland flood extent with flood depth extracted from this study, affecting a minor portion of the site to a depth of approximately 210mm on Goulburn Street, which is considered negligible.

Image 5: 1% AEP Overland Flood Extent (Source: Liverpool CBD Overland Flood Study 2016)

The Department of Planning and Environment did not recognise the information above as the latest available information, stating that the Georges River Flood Study 2020 was the most up to date, and identified this site as within the mainstream flood extent in extreme events. Council reinstated the position that the Georges River Flood Study is not an endorsed Study, and therefore the site is not affected by mainstream flooding. The Study was not endorsed as the extent of Probable Maximum Flood across the study area was significantly reduced in comparison to the existing flood extent, with an exception for certain sites, including this site, where the PMF extent was slightly increased.

In order to address the SES, EHG and DPE concerns, the proponent has provided the following documentation:

· Proponent Letter to DPE Regarding Response to Submissions (Attachment 19)

· Proponent Response to Submissions (Attachment 20)

· Qualitative Flood Risk Assessment and Emergency Response (Attachment 21)

This provided additional justification and assessment around the relevant Ministerial Directions, and flooding documentation. The planning proposal document (Attachment 1) has been updated to reflect the additional information.

On 15 August 2023, DPE requested commentary from the proponent in how this additional information has considered DPE’s ‘Flood Impact and Risk Assessment Guideline’. The proponent submitted a response to this request on 23 August 2023 (Attachment 22).

It is noted that on 2 August 2023, DPE also requested additional flood modelling to occur on the site, however this request was withdrawn on 15 August 2023.

Additionally, the Post-Exhibition material was reviewed by Council’s Floodplain Team, which provided the following comments:

1. It is understood that the Flood Emergency Assessment (BMT, 8 August 2023) has been prepared to address the concerns raised by SES and DPE, particularly in relation to flood emergency response strategy for the development in a PMF flood event. The study has considered flood affectation of the site for storm events up to the PMF predicted by Georges River Flood Study (BMT, 2020) and Liverpool City Centre Overland Flow Path Study (BMT WBM, 2016) along with the findings of Georges River Evacuation Modelling (2022, Molino Stewart).

2. As per Council adopted Georges River Floodplain Risk Management Study (Bewsher, 2004) the site is not affected by PMF from mainstream Georges River flooding. Accordingly, flood emergency evacuation from the premises is not an issue from Council’s perspective.

3. The site and its vicinity including Goulburn Street is predicated to be inundated by overland flooding up to the PMF event in accordance with the Overland Flow Path Study (BMT WBM, 2016) and preparation of flood emergency response plans for Local PMF event is required.

4. Preparation of flood emergency response plans for the site considering that the site is affected by PMF from mainstream Georges River flooding as predicted by the Georges River Flood Study (BMT, 2020) is considered a conservative approach which will also address flood emergency evacuation requirement for overland flooding in a PMF event.

Consequently, Council staff recommend the planning proposal proceeds. It is noted that further flood modelling and site specific treatments will be required to be approved at the State Significant Development Application stage.

Next Steps & Conclusion

If Council resolve to finalise Amendment 97 as recommended, staff will forward the planning proposal to DPE to make the plan, as Council is not the Local Plan Making Authority for this proposal. Gateway determination is due to expire on 3 November 2023.

Once finalised, LLEP 2008 Amendment 97 will be notified in the NSW Government Gazette. A State Significant Development Application for the Private Hospital would need to progress following the planning proposal process to enable the delivery of the proposed development.

It is recommended that the planning proposal proceeds to finalisation, as the proposal demonstrates site-specific and strategic merit, and post-exhibition matters have been adequately addressed.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

There are no financial implications relating to this recommendation.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	Further develop a commercial centre that accommodates a variety of employment opportunities.
Environment	There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.
Social	Support community organisations, groups and volunteers to deliver coordinated services to the community.
Civic Leadership	There are no civic leadership and governance considerations.
Legislative	Sections 3.31 to 3.37 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.
Risk	Deferral of a decision will result in the timeframe for completing this planning proposal exceeding the timeframe specified by the Gateway determination, and the planning proposal will lapse. The risk is deemed to be low, as Council is not the Plan Making Authority. The risk is deemed to be within Council’s appetite.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Post Exhibition Planning Proposal - Liverpool Private Hospital (Under separate cover)

2. Urban Design Report (Under separate cover)

3. Updated Transport Assessment (Under separate cover)

4. Water Sensitive Design and Stormwater Report (Under separate cover)

5. Preliminary Aboriginal Cultural Heritage and Historical Archaeological Advice (Under separate cover)

6. Historical Impact Statement (Under separate cover)

7. Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment (Under separate cover)

8. Market Needs Analysis - April 2022 (Under separate cover)

9. Socio-economic Impact Assessment - November 2021 (Under separate cover)

10. Economic Demand Analysis (Under separate cover)

11. Flood Impact Assessment - February 2023 (Under separate cover)

12. Updated Visual Impact Assessment - February 2023 (Under separate cover)

13. Peer Reviewed Preliminary Site Investigation - March 2023 (Under separate cover)

14. Architectural Concept Plan and Shadow Diagrams - March 2023 (Under separate cover)

15. Gateway Determination and Gateway Extension (Under separate cover)

16. State Agency Submissions (Combined) (Under separate cover)

17. Community Submissions (Redacted) (Under separate cover)

18. Council's Easement Relocation Comments (Under separate cover)

19. Post Exhibition - Proponent Letter to DPE Regarding Response to Submissions (Under separate cover)

20. Post Exhibition - Proponent Response to Submissions (Under separate cover)

21. Post Exhibition - Qualitative Flood Risk Assessment and Emergency Response (Under separate cover)

22. Post Exhibition - Proponent response to DPE Flood Risk Management Guideline (Under separate cover)

23. ASIC Report (Under separate cover) - Confidential

24. Additonal SES Response - September 2023 (Under separate cover)

Ordinary Meeting

27 September 2023

Planning & Compliance Report

PLAN 02

Amendments to Liverpool Development Control Plan - Family Friendly Apartments and Apartment Design Guide Update

Strategic Objective	Evolving, Prosperous, Innovative Implement planning controls and best practice urban design to create high-quality, inclusive urban environments
File Ref	247515.2023
Report By	Stephen Peterson - Senior Strategic Planner
Approved By	Lina Kakish - Director Planning & Compliance

Executive Summary

At its Ordinary Meeting of Council on 31 May 2023, Council resolved to:

1. Investigate amendments to the Liverpool Development Control Plan 2008 for the Liverpool CBD to better encourage the development of larger, family friendly apartments.

2. Investigate improved quality and design requirements that matches the specific needs of families living in apartments in the Liverpool CBD.

3. Write to Federal and State Planning Ministers calling for incentives to encourage family friendly apartments.

4. That the report be brought to the Governance Committee which further investigates the needs of families with children.

In relation to the Liverpool Development Control Plan (LDCP 2008), the following sections apply to Residential Flat Buildings:

· Part 3.7 Residential Flat Buildings (applies outside of the City Centre).

· Part 4 Development in the City Centre.

In response to this resolution, a review of the objectives and controls in the Liverpool Development Control Plan 2008 (LDCP 2008) occurred to facilitate the delivery of family-friendly apartments in Liverpool CBD and a report (Attachment 5) was referred to the August 2023 Governance Committee Meeting. At the Governance Committee, it was resolved to present the proposed amendments to a Council meeting.

This Council report addresses the following:

1. Amendments to the Liverpool DCP (Part 3.7 and Part 4) to encourage Family Friendly Apartments; and

2. Amendments to Part 3.7 of the DCP to update this section with the NSW Apartment Design Guide.

Action 11 of the Liverpool Local Housing Strategy, states ‘Review apartment mix controls for RFB development in the City Centre, R1 and R4 zones’.

Part 3.7 and Part 4 of the DCP has been updated in response to the 31 May 2023 Council Meeting resolution and action 11 of the Liverpool Local Housing Strategy. The new proposed Apartment Diversity Section also addresses the resolution and recommendations of the 22 August 2023 Governance Committee Meeting. This includes changes to dwelling mix, objectives and controls encouraging family friendly apartments.

The draft amended LDCP 2008 Part 3.7 also includes amendments to align the DCP Part with State Environmental Planning Policy 65 - Design Quality of Residential Apartment Development (SEPP 65), and the Apartment Design Guide (ADG).

The ADG applies to apartment development applications lodged from 19 June 2015 and determined after 17 July 2015. Section 6A of SEPP 65 states that a Development Control Plan cannot be inconsistent with certain aspects of the ADG including:

- visual privacy;

- solar and daylight access;

- common circulation and spaces;

- apartment size and layout;

- ceiling heights;

- private open space and balconies;

- natural ventilation; and

- storage.

As the current part 3.7 of LDCP 2008 was last updated on 19 February 2014, it is proposed to be amended to reduce conflict with the ADG and to provide clarity regarding design and assessment.

It is recommended that Council endorses the Draft DCP Amendments and proceeds to publicly exhibit the Draft DCP’s in accordance with Council’s Community Participation Plan 2022. The Draft DCP amendments are to be presented to the Liverpool Design Excellence Panel, in accordance with clause 15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021.

Upon completion of exhibition, it is recommended that Council receives a further report detailing the outcomes of the Design Excellence Panel and of the public exhibition period including any submissions received.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Receive and note this report;

2. Supports in principle the proposed amendment to Part 3.7 Residential Flat Buildings (Outside Liverpool City Centre) and Part 4 (Development in Liverpool City Centre) of the Liverpool Development Control Plan 2008;

3. Delegates authority to the CEO (or delegate) to make minor or topographical changes to the DCP prior to public exhibition;

4. Undertake Public Exhibition of the draft DCP Amendment, for 28 days in accordance with the Liverpool Community Participation Plan;

5. As part of the community consultation period, present the draft Liverpool Part 3.7 amended Development Control Plan to the Design Excellence Panel (DEP), in accordance with clause 15 of Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulations 2021.

6. Receives a further report detailing the outcomes of the Design Excellence Panel and outcome of the public exhibition period including any submissions received. Alternatively, if no objections are received, delegate to the CEO for the Draft Development Control Plans to be finalised.

REPORT

Background

The Liverpool Development Control Plan 2008 (LDCP 2008) provides detailed planning and design guidelines to support the planning controls in areas subject to the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 (LLEP 2008).

In relation to the LDCP 2008, the following sections apply to Residential Flat Buildings:

· Part 3.7 Residential Flat Buildings (applies outside of the City Centre).

· Part 4 Development in the City Centre.

A report was referred to the 22 August 2023. At the Committee meeting, it was resolved:

That the Committee recommends that Council:

1. Note proposed draft amendments to the Liverpool Development Control Plan 2008, Part 4 Development in Liverpool City Centre and Part 3.7 Residential Flat Buildings in the R4 Zone, to encourage family friendly apartments.

2. Note further draft amendments will occur to align Part 3.7 Residential Flat Buildings in the R4 Zone with the Apartment Design Guide.

3. Present draft amendments to the Liverpool Design Excellence Panel, as required by Clause 15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021.

4. Receive a Council report detailing the proposed draft LDCP 2008 amendments, detailing the outcomes of the Design Excellence Panel.

The Committee further resolved the following:

5. Objectives to allow developer to justify providing alternate dwelling mixes for unique and innovative developments;

6. Investigate the existing dual-key apartment provisions to see if amendments to the ‘maximum 10% dual key units’ can be increased;

7. Incentives or bonuses to further encourage family friendly apartment development; and

8. Exceptions to state government policies. For example, communal open space.

This report addresses the following aspects:

- Update Part 3.7 and Part 4 of LDCP 2008 to encourage Family Friendly Apartments.

- Update Part 3.7 to align the part with the Apartment Design Guide.

- Address within Part 3.7 and Part 4 of LDCP 2008 the further recommendations from the 22 August 2023 committee meeting minutes.

Family Friendly Apartments

The Apartment Design Guide (ADG) includes section 4K relating to Apartment Mix with design criteria stating:

“A variety of apartment types is provided. The apartment mix is appropriate, taking into consideration, the distance to public transport, employment and education centres, the current market demands and projected future demographic trends, the demand for social and affordable housing and different cultural and socioeconomic groups.” Further the ADG design criteria states “flexible apartment configurations are provided to support diverse household types and stages of life including single person households, families, multi-generational families and group households.”

Currently Part 4 of the LDCP 2008 includes section 4.2.10 (Housing Choice and Mix) whilst Part 3.7 of LDCP 2008 does not include any apartment mix controls.

Action 11 of the Liverpool Local Housing Strategy states to ‘Review apartment mix controls for RFB development in City Centre, R1 and R4 zones’. Housing Priority 1 of the Strategy aims to provide ‘a diverse range of housing options and flexibility of use is provided to ensure the housing needs of the Liverpool community are met’.

In order to address section 4K of the ADG, Housing Priority 1 and Action 11 of the Liverpool Local Housing Strategy, and the recommendations of the 22 August 2023 Governance meeting, the following changes are proposed to section 4.2.10 (Housing Choice and Mix) of Part 4 (City Centre) of the LDCP 2008, and these controls are to also be included within Part 3.7 (RFB’s outside of City Centre) of the LDCP 2008:

Table One: Section 4.2.10 (Housing Choice and Mix) of Part 4 of the LDCP 2008

	Current	Proposed
Studio/One Bedroom apartments	Minimum 10%	Minimum 10%
Three or more bedroom apartments	Minimum 10%	Minimum 25%
Dual Key apartments	Maximum 10%	No minimum or maximum*
Adaptable apartments	Minimum 10%	Minimum 10%

* Subject to both dual key apartments meeting the ADG requirements, e.g. solar access requirements.

Additional controls proposed include:

- Clarification that the apartment diversity section applies to development for the purpose of residential flat buildings only and does not apply for Boarding House, Senior’s Housing, Group Homes, Co-Living or Build to Rent developments or for residential flat buildings provided by social housing providers, public authorities and joint venture under SEPP (Housing) 2021;

- Controls stating that apartments with various number of bedrooms are to be located on different levels and with different orientations (I.e., facing north, east etc) and for adaptable apartments to be located on the ground floor for accessibility.

In relation to the additional Committee resolutions:

5. Objectives to allow developer to justify providing alternate dwelling mixes for unique and innovative developments;

· A Development Control Plan is not a statutory document and can be amended where required and justified. The objectives of each section contain emphasis to provide for a variety of housing choice, and the nature of the DCP already allows for amendments such as these to occur, when justified. The proposed controls state that the part applies to development for the purpose of residential flat buildings only, and does not apply for boarding house, senior’s housing, group homes, co-living or build to rent, or developments by social housing providers, public authorities and joint ventures.

6. Investigate the existing dual-key apartment provisions to see if amendments to the ‘maximum 10% dual key units’ can be increased;

· Part 4 of the DCP allows for maximum of 10% dual key units. In response, no minimum or maximum for dual key apartments are proposed, subject to both dual key apartments meeting the ADG requirements, e.g. solar access requirements.

7. Incentives or bonuses to further encourage family friendly apartment development; and

· Incentives or bonuses would need to be enabled under the LLEP 2008. The LLEP 2008 already contains significant bonuses and development standards for development to occur. It is recommended to proceed with increased requirements under the Development Control Plan.

8. Exceptions to state government policies. For example, communal open space.

· State Environmental Planning Policy 65 (SEPP 65) applies to development residential flat building developments, and overrides the non-statutory weight of a DCP. Clause 6A of SEPP 65 also specially overrides certain matters, such as storage and solar access. Part 3.7 of the DCP has been updated (as discussed below) to ensure it only contains provisions which are able to exceed the requirements of SEPP 65.

The draft amendments outlined above to Part 3.7 and Part 4 of LDCP 2008 emphasise a focus on housing affordability, increased housing rental opportunities, greater apartment diversity and larger family friendly 3 bedroom and greater apartments.

Update Part 3.7 of the DCP to align with SEPP 65 and Apartment Design Guide (ADG)

The current version of LDCP 2008 Part 3.7 Residential Flat Buildings in the R4 Zone (Outside the City Centre) is dated 19 February 2014. Since this time:

- Environmental Planning Instrument (EPI) State Environmental Planning Policy No 65—Design Quality of Residential Apartment Development (SEPP 65) has been amended.

- The Apartment Design Guide (ADG) applies for apartment development applications lodged from 19 June 2015 and determined after 17 July 2015. The ADG replaced the previous Residential Flat Design Code.

SEPP 65 applies to development for the purpose of a residential flat building, shop top housing or mixed use development with a residential accommodation component. SEPP 65 includes 9 design quality principles.

The SEPP states that, ‘Development consent must not be granted if, in the opinion of the consent authority, the development or modification does not demonstrate that adequate regard has been given to—

(a) the design quality principles, and

(b) the objectives specified in the Apartment Design Guide for the relevant design criteria.

Further, clause 6A of SEPP 65 states that DCP’s cannot be inconsistent with controls regarding:

- Visual privacy

- Solar and daylight access

- Common circulation and spaces

- Apartment size and layout

- Ceiling heights

- Private open space and balconies

- Natural ventilation

- Storage

Clause 6A of SEPP 65 also states that if a DCP contains provisions that specify requirements, standards or controls in relation to a matter to which clause 6A of SEPP 65 applies, those provisions are of no effect regardless of when the DCP was made.

Part 3.7 has therefore been updated as follows:

- Deletion of sections and controls which are contained within clause 6A of SEPP 65 (matters listed above, where a DCP cannot be inconsistent with the ADG requirements).

- Deletion of sections and controls which are duplicated with the same intent within parts 3 and 4 of the ADG.

- New section regarding Apartment Diversity with emphasis on larger family friendly apartments (as noted within this report).

- New section regarding amalgamation for developments which do not meet the minimum lot size or lot width, or that would result in an isolated site or adjoining site not meeting the minimum lot size or lot width.

- Inclusion of percentage of apartments capable of being adapted for habitation by seniors and/or persons with disabilities.

- Encouragement of larger amenity for apartments including emphasis on larger balconies and storage (Note. This can only be encouraged as per clause 6A of SEPP 65).

This part was updated in consultation with Council’s Development Assessment section. Further it is noted currently that all development applications for residential flat buildings are required to be referred to the Design Excellence Panel. This will occur as part of the community exhibition period.

The amendment to Part 3.7 Residential Flat Buildings (Outside Liverpool City Centre) of LDCP 2008 is anticipated to help streamline the development application process associated with residential flat building development. This has occurred by removing duplication with SEPP 65 and the ADG, whilst still ensuring the matters of clause 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, (including the impact of a developments environmental, social and economic impacts in the locality) are adequately considered during the assessment process.

Minor Housekeeping

It is noted that a minor housekeeping change is proposed in Part 4 Development in the City Centre, Chapter 4.4.2 Onsite Car Parking. The proposed change is to enable above ground car parking to be an available option for all Development Applications (DA’s), rather than solely available to Concept DA’s. Control is also strengthened to ensure visual impacts are addressed.

Conclusion & Next Steps

As per the Environment Planning and Assessment Regs 2021, and Council’s Community Participation Plan, the amendments, if supported, will be placed on public exhibition, for a minimum of 28 days.

In addition, the amendments will be referred to the Liverpool Design Excellence Panel in accordance with clause 15 of Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulations 2021. Upon completion of exhibition, it is recommended that Council receives a further report detailing the outcomes of the Design Excellence Panel and of the public exhibition period including any submissions received. Alternatively, if no objections are received, that Council delegate to the CEO for the Draft Development Control Plans to be finalised.

ATTACHMENTS

1. DCP amendment - Part 3.7 Residential Flat Buildings (Under separate cover)

2. DCP amendment - Part 4 Development in the City Centre (Under separate cover)

3. Governance Committee Meeting Report - 22 August 2023 - Amendments to Liverpool Development Control Plan - Family Friendly Apartments and Apartment Design Guide Update (Under separate cover)

4. Governance Committee Meeting Minutes - 22 August 2023 - Amendments to Liverpool Development Control Plan - Family Friendly Apartments (Under separate cover)

Ordinary Meeting

27 September 2023

Planning & Compliance Report

PLAN 03

Local Heritage Management Policy

Strategic Objective	Healthy, Inclusive, Engaging Embrace the city’s heritage and history
File Ref	238513.2023
Report By	Thomas Wheeler - Heritage Officer
Approved By	Lina Kakish - Director Planning & Compliance

Executive Summary

The Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A 1979) requires Councils to identify and protect items of heritage significance within their respective Local Government Areas (LGA). It is cognisant of Council to ensure that while it is protecting items of heritage significance, it is providing the best possible guidance in accordance with the applicable legislative requirements and industry best practices.

The proposed Local Heritage Policy (LHP) aims to fill a gap in the heritage management functions of Liverpool City Council (LCC) and enhance the guidance and advice available to owners and managers of heritage items.

The proposed LHP does not increase the requirements on an owner of a heritage item, but clearly defines and documents what is already required and how it should be submitted to Council. The intent is to minimise delays to the Development Application (DA) process as well as divert applications to the Minor Works Applications (MWA) pathway where a DA is not required.

This report provides an overview of the policy and its purpose, and seeks endorsement of the draft Policy, for public exhibition.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Receives and notes this report.

2. Places the Draft Policy on public exhibition for a period of 21 days.

3. Notes that a report be prepared for Council after the exhibition period outlining any submissions received and the relevant responses.

REPORT

It is a legal requirement under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A 1979), Heritage Act 1977, and the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974, that Development Applications or Council-initiated Reviews of Environmental Factors that may impact Aboriginal Cultural Heritage (or built, natural and archaeological heritage), are required to submit certain documents with their Development Application to ensure assessment under the relevant legislation.

Council has prepared a draft Local Heritage Policy (Policy), which outlines clear objectives and principles that reflect Council's obligations under the legislative instruments identified above, as well as ensures best practice is consistently implemented in the care and management of heritage located within the Liverpool Local Government Area (LGA).

The policy provides direction on the following key aspects of heritage management within the Liverpool LGA.

Heritage Framework

The policy identifies the various mechanisms and guides that either have been developed or are in the process of being developed to identify, protect, support, and manage heritage within the Liverpool LGA. The intent of this section is to demonstrate the suite of documents and guides which are available to owners and developers of heritage sites, as well as internal Council staff, ensuring there is information available up-front to the public.

Liverpool Heritage Inventory

The Liverpool Heritage Inventory (LHI) is a legally required register of heritage items within the LGA. This section of the policy guides the approach for listing and delisting, including the identification of the criteria for heritage listing, and linking to a proposed procedure that will outline internal processes for the implementation of Interim Heritage Orders (IHOs) and assessments of heritage significance.

The intent of this section is to provide a consistent approach to heritage identification and protection that reflects best practice, and is robust and informative.

Minor Works and Maintenance

A common misconception with heritage is that any work (regardless of scale) to a heritage item requires development consent from the Council, and the preparation of extensive plans and consultant reports. This is incorrect, noting that Section 5.10 of the LEP provides Council with the ability to issue exemptions for minor works and maintenance to heritage items, removing the requirement for Development Applications.

This section outlines the key policies for submitting a request for a minor works permit and what processes Council will follow.

Demolition and Relocation

Demolition and relocation is a contentious matter, in relation to listed heritage items. This section of the policy outlines when demolition and relocation would be supported in relation to a heritage item, and what is required to accompany a development application that is seeking the demolition of a heritage item.

Preparing a Development Application

This section of the policy represents the core of the document, and its relevance to development assessment and review of environmental factors processes. It clearly outlines pre-lodgement and development application requirements, including descriptions and guides for the various documents required, such as conservation management plans, statements of heritage impact and archaeological assessments.

This section also notes when these documents may be required and minimum requirements for content and preparation.

The intent of this section is to provide information upfront, to avoid delays to development applications.

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	Preserve and maintain heritage, both landscape and cultural as urban development takes place.
Civic Leadership	There are no civic leadership and governance considerations.
Legislative	Include any relevant legislation and section here. There are no legislative considerations relating to this report.
Risk	The risk is deemed to be Low.

ATTACHMENTS

1. 2023.08.30 - Heritage Policy (Final Draft) (Under separate cover)

Ordinary Meeting

27 September 2023

Planning & Compliance Report

PLAN 04

Liverpool LEP 2008 - Draft Conservation Zones Study

Strategic Objective	Liveable, Sustainable, Resilient Protect and enhance our natural environment and increase the city’s resilience to the effects of natural hazards, shocks and stresses
File Ref	281057.2023
Report By	Lilyan Abosh - Strategic Planner
Approved By	Lina Kakish - Director Planning & Compliance

Executive Summary

At its Ordinary Meeting of Council on 26 October 2022, Council resolved to investigate the potential rezoning of 1 Sirius Road, Lot 68 and Lot 75 Sirius Road, Voyager Point from C3 Environmental Management to C2 Environmental Conservation, within the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 (LLEP 2008).

Consistent with this resolution, a Sirius Road Issues and Options Report was tabled at the 26 April 2023 meeting. This report recommended a broader review of the Conservation Land Use Zones within the LLEP 2008, which would also assess the Sirius Road properties and numerous other sites. Council however moved to defer this item on two occasions, requesting further information on development approvals and community engagement.

At its meeting of 26 July 2023, it was resolved amongst other things:

“That Council:

2. Undertakes a Conservation Zones Study as part of the Principal LEP Review Project;

3. Allocate funding to the LEP Review budget to complete this Study;

4. Further investigates the rezoning of 1 Sirius Road, Lot 68 Sirius Road and Lot 75 Sirius Road, Voyager Point along with other identified sites, as part of the broader Conservation Zones Study;”

The need for such a review has been instigated by previous biodiversity studies completed for Council, which have made zoning recommendations and requested for the investigation of Conservation zones. The protection of environmentally significant areas was also highlighted as a key priority of the community, during the initial public exhibition period held for the LEP Review Project in late 2022.

This report presents the findings of the Draft Conservation Zones Study (the Study) (Attachment 1), which applies to the following land use zoned under the LLEP 2008:

· C1 National Parks and Nature Reserves (C1 zone)

· C2 Environmental Conservation (C2 zone)

· C3 Environmental Management (C3 zone)

The Study reviews how the Conservation zones are currently applied and their intended use. This includes the establishment of criteria for the application of each zone, and recommendations for new permissible land uses. A summary of the recommendations is shown in the below table.

Criteria	C1	C2	C3
Land designated as National Park	ü
Public land with ‘high’ conservation values		ü
Private land with ‘high’ conservation values			ü
Land with a development outcome or conservation mechanism		ü	ü
Environmentally constrained land with a current C3 zone		ü
Environmentally constrained land not currently zoned C3			ü

The Appendices of the Study (Attachment 1) assesses certain sites and makes draft zoning recommendations using the criteria established. Appendix A of the Study is the review of Council owned RE1 Public Recreation sites and Appendix B of the Study is a review of privately owned sites.

A total of 27 sites zoned RE1 Public Recreation (RE1) were selected for review, due to their environmental attributes and previous biodiversity studies which have recommended the application of a Conservation zone to RE1 sites which reflect a conservation purpose. Of the 27 sites, 15 are recommended to be rezoned (partly or fully) to a Conservation zone. The recommendations were closely informed by Council’s Plans of Management, with areas categorised as ‘Community Land – Sportsground’ not proposed to be rezoned.

A total of 15 properties in private ownership (including the Sirius Road sites) were selected for review. Majority of these sites are burdened by S.88B Instruments, development consent conditions or other arrangements which necessitate the preservation of significant land.

Of these, 11 are recommended to be rezoned (partly or fully) to a Conservation zone. This will ensure planning controls are reflective of site constraints, which already restrict development on these sites. It is noted that No. 1 Sirius Road, Lot 68 and Lot 75 Sirius Road, Voyager Point are proposed to be retained as C3 Environmental Management and no changes are proposed to these sites.

It is recommended that Council endorse the draft Conservation Zones Study, to enable the preparation of a draft Planning Proposal. The draft Planning Proposal can undergo early exhibition, including engagement with private landowners, and further internal engagement.

This is in accordance with Council’s Community Participation Plan which states “For large scale planning proposals, Council will also exhibit the planning proposal for 28 days prior to a Council decision on whether to endorse the planning proposal for a Gateway determination. Feedback from the community will be incorporated into a report to Council”.

The draft Planning Proposal will be presented to the Liverpool Local Planning Panel (LPP) for comment. Following this, a report will be presented to a Council meeting, detailing the comments received from the community and the LPP. If supported up until this point, further consultation would occur at the post-Gateway stage before any rezoning was finalised.

If timing allows, the Draft Conservation Zones Study will be incorporated into the broader LEP review process.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Endorse in principle the Draft Conservation Zones Study;

2. Prepare a draft Planning Proposal to amend the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 in accordance with the zoning recommendations in the draft Conservation Zones Study;

3. Undertake an initial public exhibition of the Planning Proposal, in accordance with the Liverpool Community Participation Plan;

4. Present the draft Planning Proposal and supporting draft Conservation Zones Study to the Liverpool Local Planning Panel for advice;

5. Receive a further report on the draft Planning Proposal and the draft Conservation Zones Study, including the outcomes of the early public exhibition period and the Liverpool Local Planning Panel.

REPORT

BACKGROUND

Council Resolutions

At its Ordinary Meeting of Council on 26 October 2022, Council resolved the following:

“That Council:

7. Investigates the rezoning of 1 Sirius Road and lots 68 and 75 Sirius Road, Voyager Point from C3 Environmental Management to C2 Environmental Conservation;

8. Consult with the owners of the properties and include their feedback in the report back to Council;

9. Receive a further report back to Council following this investigation for a decision on whether to progress a planning proposal to rezone those sites to C2 Environmental Conservation; and

10. Allocate funding from the LEP review budget to complete these investigations.”

Consistent with this resolution, a Sirius Road Issues and Options Report was considered at the 26 April 2023 meeting, which incorporated feedback from all respective landowners. The report recommended a broader review of the Conservation zones, which would assess the three Sirius Road properties and numerous other sites. Council however moved to defer the item until further information on development approvals was provided. A report to address this motion was subsequently presented at the 31 May 2023 Council meeting, where the item was again deferred.

A further report was then considered at the Planning and Infrastructure Governance Committee Meeting of 20 June 2023, which provided details on anticipated community engagement. At this Committee meeting, it was decided to proceed with a Council report, seeking endorsement to undertake a study.

In accordance with this, a Council report was prepared for the meeting held on 26 July 2023. At this meeting, Council resolved the following:

“That Council:

1. Receives and notes this report;

2. Undertake a Conservation Zones Study as part of the Principal LEP Review Project;

3. Allocate funding to the LEP Review budget to complete this Study;

5. Examine any other sources of funding outside of the budget, including any grants from State and/ or Federal Government.”

This report addresses points 2, 3 and 4 of the above resolution and outlines the findings of the draft Conservation Zones Study (Attachment 1).

Significance of the Study

The need for a broader review of the Conservation zones has been largely instigated by biodiversity studies previously completed for Council. The Liverpool Biodiversity Management Plan 2012 (LBMP 2012) recommended zones be assessed to ensure significant areas are appropriately protected. The LBMP 2012 and Liverpool Biodiversity Management Guidelines 2016 also make rezoning recommendations, particularly in relation to land zoned RE1 Public Recreation.

The protection of environmentally significant areas was also highlighted as a key priority of the community during the initial public exhibition for the LEP Review Project held in late 2022. The survey question regarding the protection of waterways, trees and vegetation scored the highest results out of all survey questions, with 88% of respondents rating this matter as either ‘Highly Important’ or ‘Important’. A significant number of written submissions requested retention of trees, bush regeneration and urban heat management to be a priority of Council.

DRAFT CONSERVATION ZONES STUDY

The draft Conservation Zones Study investigates how the below Conservation zones are currently applied and their intended use. This includes the establishment of criteria for the application of each zone, and recommendations for new permissible land uses:

· C1 National Parks and Nature Reserves (C1 zone)

· C2 Environmental Conservation (C2 zone)

· C3 Environmental Management (C3 zone)

A summary of the recommendations for each zone is discussed further below.

C1 National Parks and Nature Reserves

The application of this zone, land use table and zone objectives are largely restricted by the Standard Instrument – Principal Local Environmental Plan and the provisions of the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974. As such, no changes are proposed for this zone.

C2 Environmental Conservation

The C2 Environmental Conservation (C2) zone applies to certain publicly and privately owned sites within the LLEP 2008. Privately owned sites currently zoned C2 are the result of significant constraints and conservation mechanisms, such as S.88B Instruments which restrict development potential. The Study recommends retaining the C2 zone where it already applies under the LLEP 2008, and to also apply it to sites identified as:

· Publicly owned land with ‘high’ conservation values;

· Land with a conservation mechanism or negotiated development outcome (such as a S.88B Instrument restriction or Condition of Development Consent); and

· Undevelopable land with a current C3 Environmental Management zone.

The C2 zone provides limited development opportunities, which is why the above criteria is proposed. If the C2 zone is applied irrespective of the above criteria it is likely to trigger acquisition requirements for Council.

In terms of development standards, it is proposed to standardise the minimum lot size requirement to 40HA (with existing C2 lots to retain their current minimum lot size requirement). A large lot size will appropriately limit development, reduce the potential for land fragmentation and increase opportunities for future biodiversity offset sites.

The Study also recommends expanding the list of permitted uses (with consent) to include ‘Jetty’ and ‘Recreation Area’. These uses align with the zone objectives without undermining the conservation value of the land. It is noted that the LEP Review will include these proposed Land Use Table amendments (i.e. inclusion of Jetty and Recreation Area), whilst the development standards and zone changes will proceed separately.

C3 Environmental Management

The C3 Environmental Management (C3) zone in the LLEP 2008 primarily applies to lots in private ownership, with a few sites owned by a public authority. The Study recommends retaining the C3 zone where it already applies under LLEP 2008, and to also apply it to:

· Privately owned land with ‘high’ conservation values;

· Privately owned land with a negotiated development outcome; and

· Land significantly constrained by natural hazards and processes.

The Study recommends the inclusion of ‘Business Identification Signs’, ‘Water Recreation Structure’ and ‘Recreation Area’ as permitted uses (with consent), which will occur as part of the LEP Review process. These will complement existing permitted uses and support the limited range of development opportunities appropriate for this zone.

A summary of the proposed Conservation zone application criteria is shown in Table 1 below.

Table 1 - Summary of Zone Application Criteria

Criteria	C1	C2	C3
Land designated as National Park	ü
Public land with ‘high’ conservation values		ü
Private land with ‘high’ conservation values			ü
Land with a development outcome or conservation mechanism		ü	ü
Environmentally constrained land with a current C3 zone		ü
Environmentally constrained land not currently zoned C3			ü

The appendices of the Conservation Zones Study applies the criteria for zone application to numerous publicly and privately owned sites and makes draft rezoning recommendations. These recommendations will be subject to further assessment by the relevant Departments within Council, as well as undergo public exhibition.

1. RE1 Public Recreation Sites (Appendix A of the Study)

A total of 27 sites zoned RE1 Public Recreation (RE1) were selected for review. These sites are either owned by Liverpool City Council (or marked for Council acquisition) or another public authority. The review of RE1 land has arisen from Council’s biodiversity studies, which recommend the application of a Conservation zone to RE1 sites which reflect a conservation purpose.

Nominated RE1 sites (see Figure 1) were generally selected on the basis of including one or more of the following environmental attributes:

· Land mapped as ‘State Core or Corridor’ or ‘Regional Core’;

· Endangered or Critically Endangered Ecological Communities;

· Wildlife Corridor / Riparian Corridor;

· Known Threatened Species Habitat; and

· Coast Wetlands mapped under the SEPP (Resilience and Hazards) 2021.

Of the 27 RE1 sites, 15 are recommended to be rezoned (partly or fully) to a Conservation zone, as outlined in Table 1 below. The remainder of sites reviewed but not recommended for a rezoning are omitted from the table below. The complete review of all sites can be found at Attachment 1 (within Appendix A of the draft Study).

The draft recommendations were closely informed by Council’s available Plans of Management, with areas categorised as ‘Community Land – Sportsground’ not proposed to be rezoned. Land considered for active recreation activities within the draft Cabramatta and Brickmakers Creek Masterplan and draft Georges River Parklands and Chipping Norton Lakes Spatial Framework are also not proposed to be rezoned.

It is noted that provisions in Division 12 of the State Environmental Planning Policy (Transport and Infrastructure) 2021 permit various developments (e.g. recreation areas, roads, lighting, landscaping, viewing platforms etc.) on land owned by a public authority. The application of a Conservation zone does not preclude these activities from occurring by Council in the future.

Table 2 - Zoning Recommendations for RE1 Sites

Park / Reserve Name		Current Zone	Recommended Zone*	Whole or Part
Bill Anderson Park	RE1 Public Recreation		RE1 Public Recreation & C2 Environmental Conservation	Part
Cabramatta Reserve	RE1 Public Recreation		C2 Environmental Conservation	Whole
Dwyer Oval	RE1 Public Recreation		RE1 Public Recreation & C2 Environmental Conservation	Part
Freeman Oval	RE1 Public Recreation		RE1 Public Recreation & C2 Environmental Conservation	Part
Durrant Oval	RE1 Public Recreation		RE1 Public Recreation & C2 Environmental Conservation	Part
Osmond Reserve	RE1 Public Recreation		RE1 Public Recreation & C2 Environmental Conservation	Part
Lieutenant Cantello Reserve	RE1 Public Recreation		C2 Environmental Conservation	Whole
Peter Pan Park	RE1 Public Recreation		RE1 Public Recreation & C2 Environmental Conservation	Part
Glen Regent Reserve	RE1 Public Recreation		C2 Environmental Conservation	Whole
Harris Creek Field	RE1 Public Recreation & W1 Natural Waterways		C2 Environmental Conservation & W1 Natural Waterways	Part
Murragan Park	RE1 Public Recreation		C2 Environmental Conservation	Whole
Havard / Pasquale Minnici Parks	RE1 Public Recreation & SP2 Drainage		C2 Environmental Conservation & SP2 Drainage	Part
Woolway Park	RE1 Public Recreation		RE1 Public Recreation & C2 Environmental Conservation	Part
Cabrogal Reserve	RE1 Public Recreation & SP2 Drainage		C2 Environmental Conservation & SP2 Drainage	Whole
Dalmeny Reserve	RE1 Public Recreation		C2 Environmental Conservation	Whole

*Note – Supporting development standards (e.g. Floor Space Ratio, Minimum Lot Size) will also be amended if a draft Planning Proposal is progressed.

A map of the united states

Description automatically generated

Figure 1 - Map of RE1 Public Recreation Sites reviewed under the Draft Study

2. Privately Owned Sites (Appendix B of the Study)

A total of 15 sites (see Figure 2) in private ownership were selected for review. Majority of these sites are either wholly or partly burdened by S.88B Instruments, development consent conditions and/or other site restrictions that necessitate the preservation of land on account of their biodiversity value.

Of the 15 sites, 11 are recommended to be rezoned (partly or fully) to a Conservation zone, as outlined in Table 2. Sites omitted from the table are not recommended to be rezoned. The complete review of all sites can be found at Attachment 1 (within Appendix B of the draft Study).

Figure 2 - Map of privately owned sites reviewed by the Draft Study

Table 3 - Zoning Recommendations for Privately Owned Sites

Address	Current Zone	Recommended Zone*	Reason
Lot 514 Willowie Way, Pleasure Point (Lot 514 DP 1183310)	C3 Environmental Management	C2 Environmental Conservation	S.88B restriction requires the lot to be retained for environmental management, and not to be cleared, altered or damaged.
Lot 792 Heathcote Road, Pleasure Point (Lot 792 DP 48718)	C2 Environmental Conservation & R2 Low Density Residential	C2 Environmental Conservation	Owned by a public authority (not Council) with high conservation values on site.
Pavesi Place, Hinchinbrook (Lot 113 DP 1120172)	R2 Low Density Residential	C2 Environmental Conservation & R2 Low Density Residential (split zone)	S.88B restriction to retain the lot as flood storage and rehabilitated riparian land.
Lot 101 Rossini Drive, Hinchinbrook (Lot 101 DP 1120172)	R2 Low Density Residential	C2 Environmental Conservation & R2 Low Density Residential (split zone)	S.88B restriction to retain the lot as flood storage and rehabilitated riparian land.
44 Manildra Street, Prestons (Lot 37 DP 1192727)	R2 Low Density Residential	C3 Environmental Management	Private land with ‘high’ conservation value. DCP identifies site as being for bushland preservation, with a DA refused on this basis.
Lot 23 Corrimal Street, Prestons (Lot 23 DP 1197839)	R2 Low Density Residential	C3 Environmental Management	Private land with ‘high’ conservation value. Previous DA consent condition for a 27 lot subdivision required the lot to be retained and not cleared.
10 Burando Road, Prestons (Lot 1 DP 1129090)	E5 Heavy Industrial & C2 Environmental Conservation	C2 Environmental Conservation (further) & E5 Heavy Industrial (split zone)	Development consent condition required the eastern vegetated portion to be an offset area and protected from future development.
Lot 100 Bapaume Road, Moorebank (Lot 100 DP 1049508)	E4 General Industrial	C2 Environmental Conservation (further) & E4 General Industrial (split zone)	Site Restriction. Refer to Confidential Attachment 2.
Moorebank Avenue, Moorebank (Lot 1 & Lot 4 DP 1197707)	C3 Environmental Management, E4 General Industrial & SP2 Infrastructure	C2 Environmental Conservation, C3 Environmental Management, E4 General Industrial & SP2 Infrastructure	Site Restriction. Refer to Confidential Attachment 2.
Lot 4 Casula Road (Lot 4 DP 1130937)	C3 Environmental Management	C2 Environmental Conservation	Site Restriction. Refer to Confidential Attachment 2.

*Note – Supporting development standards (e.g. Floor Space Ratio, Minimum Lot Size) will also be amended if a draft Planning Proposal is progressed.

The rezoning of the above lots will ensure land use planning controls are reflective of site constraints, which already restrict development. This will address the current misalignment between the zoning and site affectations and help reduce uncertainty for landowners moving forward.

Sirius Road Sites

Council originally resolved to investigate the potential rezoning of No. 1 Sirius Road, Lot 68 and Lot 75 Sirius Road, Voyager Point from C3 to C2. The rezoning of these properties to C2 is likely to trigger Council’s acquisition requirements, as the sites do not meet any of the criteria established for the C2 zone. It is therefore proposed to retain these sites as C3. It is noted that the existing C3 zoning affords these sites significant protection already against environmental impacts resulting from future development.

NEXT STEPS & CONSULTATION

Subject to Council’s endorsement of the draft Conservation Zones Study, a draft Planning Proposal will be prepared based on the draft zoning recommendations. Initial community consultation will occur on the draft Planning Proposal for a minimum period of 28 days, in accordance with the Liverpool Community Participation Plan. This will include targeted consultation with directly impacted landowners, detailing the proposed changes to their site. There will also be the opportunity for landowners to meet with Council staff to discuss the proposal if desired. The draft Planning Proposal will also be submitted to the Liverpool Local Planning Panel (LPP) for advice.

Feedback received from the community exhibition period and the LPP will be considered, and a further report will then be submitted to Council, prior to the endorsement of a Planning Proposal.

Conclusion

It is recommended that Council endorse the recommendations of the draft Conservation Zones Study. This will strengthen the legislative protections of ecologically valuable land and is consistent with the community’s vision for the Liverpool LGA.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

There are no financial implications relating to this recommendation. Although Council resolved to “Allocate funding to the LEP Review budget to complete this Study”, the Study was subsequently undertaken by Council staff within existing budget allocations.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	There are no economic and financial considerations.
Environment	Manage the environmental health of waterways. Protect, enhance and maintain areas of endangered ecological communities and high quality bushland as part of an attractive mix of land uses.
Social	There are no social and cultural considerations.
Civic Leadership	There are no civic leadership and governance considerations.
Legislative	Clause 7 of the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974.
Risk	The risk is deemed to be Low. Should Council endorse the draft Study, this does not finalise any rezoning recommendations. The draft Planning Proposal will undergo an early public exhibition period, allowing feedback to be received. Further consideration will also occur at the post-Gateway stage of the Planning Proposal. The risk is considered within Council’s risk appetite.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Draft Conservation Zones Study & Site Investigations (Under separate cover)

2. Draft Conservation Zone Study & Site Investigations - Non Redacted Version of Appendix B (Under separate cover) - Confidential

3. Table of Existing Conservation Zoned land under LLEP 2008 (Under separate cover)

4. Department of Planning and Environment - Environment and Heritage Group LEP Review Advice (Under separate cover)

5. LEP Practice Note for Conservation Zones - PN-09 002 (Under separate cover)

Ordinary Meeting

27 September 2023

Planning & Compliance Report

PLAN 05

Edmondson Park Landcom Street Naming

Strategic Objective	Liveable, Sustainable, Resilient Deliver effective and efficient planning and high-quality design to provide best outcomes for a growing city
File Ref	290453.2023
Report By	Danielle Hijazi - Strategic Planner
Approved By	Lina Kakish - Director Planning & Compliance

Executive Summary

This report seeks Council endorsement for twenty-nine (29) proposed street names to be located within Landcom’s land in Edmondson Park.

The Street naming theme for Edmondson Park is military and the proposed names are:

· Amiens Road

· Caesar Boulevard

· Compass Concourse

· Horrie Road

· Jericho Road

· Jezzine Lane

· Juno Drive

· Justin Road

· Lone Pine Lane

· Milo Avenue

· Nassau Lane

· Nell Street

· Opossum Street

· Pedro Crescent

· Pilckem Path

· Polygon Lane

· Prince Loop

· Rafa Walk

· Rank Road

· Roosevelt Crescent

· Saidor Street

· Samakh Street

· Sandy Way

· Sarbi Circuit

· Semut Street

· Shaggy Ridge

· Sharon Walk

· Tex Crescent

· Tulkarm Street

The proposed names have been assessed using Council’s Naming Convention Policy and have been granted pre-approval by the NSW Geographical Names Board (GNB).

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Supports the military theme names including Amiens Road, Caesar Boulevard, Compass Concourse, Horrie Road, Jericho Road, Jezzine Lane, Juno Drive, Justin Road, Lone Pine Lane, Milo Avenue, Nassau Lane, Nell Street, Opossum Street, Pedro Crescent, Pilckem Path, Polygon Lane, Prince Loop, Rafa Walk, Rank Road, Roosevelt Crescent, Saidor Street, Samakh Street, Sandy Way, Sarbi Circuit, Semut Street, Shaggy Ridge, Sharon Walk, Tex Crescent, and Tulkarm Street

2. Forwards the names to the Geographical Names Board, seeking formal approval;

3. Publicly exhibits the names in accordance with Council’s Naming Convention Policy, for a period of 28 days, following formal approval from the GNB; and

4. Authorises the Chief Executive Officer to undertake the process of gazettal, if there are no objections received during public exhibition.

REPORT

Background

In June 2023 Council staff were contacted by Landcom to name several Street sections within Precinct 3 and 9 in Edmondson Park.

A map of a city

Description automatically generated Figure 1 Proposed indicative only Street layout plan for Precinct 3 Edmondson Park

A map of a neighborhood

Description automatically generated

Figure 2 Proposed indicative only Street layout plan for Precinct 9 Edmonson Park

First Nation Naming

At the 27 July 2022 meeting, Council resolved to develop a process for first nations naming, renaming and co-naming of places and spaces in Liverpool. That work is currently underway in conjunction with the Aboriginal Consultative Committee.

It should be noted that the Edmondson Park precinct is developing rapidly, and the list of available names to assign to new streets is exhausted. There are new subdivisions near completion, and it is crucial that new street names are gazetted as a matter of urgency.

The Geographical Names Board requirements for Aboriginal naming state:

A name nominated by a Local Government Council will not be accepted by the GNB unless the Local Aboriginal Land Council and relevant Aboriginal communities have been consulted.

Unfortunately, the timeframes for researching new names (of an indigenous origin, figure or thing), agreeing to spelling, and having multiple stakeholders endorse the names, has the potential to impact upon the delivery of subdivisions in the area causing time and financial consequences for prospective homeowners. The proposed names ensure a unified theme is continued for the locality.

Proposed Names

The Street naming theme for Edmondson Park is military and the proposed street names commemorate Australian war dogs and names of Australian war battles.

Below is a list of the proposed names that have been compiled with pre-approval granted from the GNB as follows:

Amiens Road

WWI Battle involving Australia. Battle of Amiens: Allied victory, one of the first major battles involving armored warfare.

Caesar Boulevard

Caesar was an Australian tracker dog trained at the Ingleburn infantry camp, who served in South Vietnam between 1967-1971 and did not return from the war.

Compass Concourse

WWII Battle involving Australia. Operation Compass was a British victory, with involvement of the 6th Australian Division.

Horrie Road

Horrie was an Australian messenger dog trained at the Ingleburn infantry camp, who served in South Vietnam between 1967-1971 and did not return from the war.

Jericho Road

WWI Battle involving Australia. Capture of Jericho was an Egypt Expeditionary Force victory, with involvement of the Australian Light Horse Brigade.

Jezzine Lane

WWII Battle involving Australia. Battle of Jezzine an Australian tactical victory, involvement of the 25th Australian Brigade.

Juno Drive

Juno was an Australian tracker dog trained at the Ingleburn infantry camp, who served in South Vietnam between 1967-1971 and did not return from the war.

Justin Road

Justin was an Australian tracker dog trained at the Ingleburn infantry camp, who served in South Vietnam between 1967-1971 and did not return from the war.

Lone Pine Lane

WWI Battle involving Australia. Battle of Lone Pine a victory battle for ANZAC.

Milo Avenue

Milo was an Australian tracker dog trained at the Ingleburn infantry camp, who served in South Vietnam between 1967-1971 and did not return from the war.

Nassau Lane

WWII Battle involving Australia. Landing at Nassau Bay. An allied victory, with involvement of the 17th Australian Infantry Brigade.

Nell Street

Nell was an Australian messenger dog trained at the Ingleburn infantry camp, who served in South Vietnam between 1967-1971 and did not return from the war.

Opossum Street

WWII Battle involving Australia. Operation Opossum. An Australian success, Australian Z Special unit rescue of the Sultan of Ternate.

Pedro Crescent

Pedro was an Australian war dog trained at the Ingleburn infantry camp, who served in the Malayan Emergency between 1950-1959 and did not return from the war.

Pilckem Path

WWI Battle involving Australia. Battle of Pilckem Ridge. An Anglo-French victory, involvement of the 3rd Australian Division.

Polygon Lane

WWI Battle involving Australia. Battle of Polygon Wood. A British victory, involvement of the 4th & 5th Australian Division.

Prince Loop

Prince was an Australian war dog trained at the Ingleburn infantry camp, who served in the Malayan Emergency between 1950-1959 and did not return from the war.

Rafa Walk

WWI Battle involving Australia. Battle of Rafa. A British Victory, involvement of the Australian Flying Corps and Light Horse Brigade.

Rank Road

Rank was an Australian war dog trained at the Ingleburn infantry camp, who served in the Malayan Emergency between 1950-1959 and did not return from the war.

Roosevelt Crescent

WWII Battle involving Australia. Battle of Roosevelt Ridge. An Allied victory, involvement of the 2/6th Australian Infantry Battalion.

Saidor Street

WWII Battle involving Australia. Landing at Saidor. An Allied victory, involvement of the 5/7/9th Australian Division.

Samakh Street

WWI Battle involving Australia. Battle of Samakh was an Australian Light Horse Brigade Victory.

Sandy Way

Sandy was an Australian messenger dog trained at the Ingleburn infantry camp, who served in South Vietnam between 1967-1971 and did not return from the war.

Sarbi Circuit

Sarbi was an Australian war dog trained in explosive detection, who served Australia in the Afghanistan war between 2007-2012. Sarbi was the Recipient of RSPCA Purple Cross Award and passed away aged 12 after a short battle with cancer.

Semut Street

WWII Battle involving Australia. Operation Semut an allied victory, with involvement of the Australian Z Special unit.

Shaggy Ridge

WWII Battle involving Australia. Battle of Shaggy Ridge. An allied victory, with involvement of the Australian 7th Division & the RAAF.

Sharon Walk

WWI Battle involving Australia. Battle of Sharon. British/French victory, with involvement of the Australian Mounted Division.

Tex Crescent

Tex was an Australian war dog trained at the Ingleburn infantry camp, who served in the Malayan Emergency between 1950-1959 and did not return from the war.

Tulkarm Street

WWI Battle involving Australia. Battle of Tulkarm. British victory, involvement of the Australian Mounted Division.

Further information on the history of the above-mentioned war dogs and battles can be found at:

· Australian War Memorial https://www.awm.gov.au/

· Australian Defence Force Trackers and War Dogs Association New South Wales – ADF Trackers & War Dogs Association (aussietrackers.org)

· Department of Veteran Affairs https://www.dva.gov.au/

Next Steps

If supported by Council, the above street names will be placed on public exhibition for 28 days. If no objections are received, the naming request will be forwarded to the GNB for formal approval and gazettal. Council officers will consider all submissions during the public notification period. The following three potential scenarios are likely to arise:

No objections received

The naming requests will be forwarded to the GNB for formal approval and gazettal to the NSW Parliamentary Counsel’s Office (PCO) under the delegation of the Chief Executive Officer (or delegate). Relevant stakeholders such as Australia Post, NSW Ambulance, Fire and Rescue NSW, NSW Rural Fire Service, NSW State Emergency Service, NSW Volunteer Rescue Association, Transport for NSW and the NSW Police Force, will be notified.

Objections from the relevant agencies

Council will not proceed with the naming requests. A report to Council will be prepared for the next available meeting outlining the reason for rejection.

Submissions received from the community

If there is a community objection, or reason to reconsider the proposed name, a report will be prepared for the next available Council meeting with a recommendation based on the submissions received.

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	Preserve and maintain heritage, both landscape and cultural as urban development takes place.
Civic Leadership	Foster neighbourhood pride and a sense of responsibility.
Legislative	Roads Act 1993. Roads Regulation 1998. Pursuant to section 162 of the Roads Act, Council may name and number all public roads for which it is the roads authority. Council may only name a road if it has given the Geographical Names Board at least one month’s notice of the proposed name. Regulation 7 (Roads Act) prescribes a procedure for naming roads, requiring prior publication of a proposal, notification of relevant parties and consideration of submissions. If a relevant party objects, Council may not proceed with the proposal without ministerial approval.
Risk	The risk is deemed to be Low. There is a low risk that if the proposed names are not supported, development will be delayed due to a lack of suitable new street names. The risk is considered within Council’s risk appetite given the recommendation of the report.

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

Ordinary Meeting

27 September 2023

Planning & Compliance Report

PLAN 06

Street Naming - Middleton Grange

Strategic Objective	Liveable, Sustainable, Resilient Promote and advocate for an integrated transport network with improved transport options and connectivity
File Ref	303967.2023
Report By	Danielle Hijazi - Strategic Planner
Approved By	Lina Kakish - Director Planning & Compliance

Executive Summary

This report responds to the Council resolution from the 30^t August Council meeting, where it was resolved that Council:

“Supports the seven additional street names being Ansett, Rex, Bonza, Jetstar, Bird- Walten, Pilot and Wirraway Street and/or any other name that is consistent with the Australian Aviation Industry to be used in the forthcoming future town centre and subdivisions nearing completion that have varied the current ILP of the suburb.”

Five of these proposed street names by Council cannot be used as they are not in accordance with the addressing principles outlined in the Geographical Names Board - NSW Addressing Policy User Manual 2021, as well as Council’s Naming Convention Policy.

Consequently, this report proposes an alternate list of six additional street names being Jetstream Avenue, Nacelle Street, Pilot Street, Radome Street, Skyport Street and Wirraway Street. These names have been granted pre-approval by the NSW Geographical Names Board (GNB). In response to the Council resolution from August, Boeing Avenue is no longer proposed given that it is not consistent with the Australian Aviation Industry.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Notes the assessment of the endorsed street names being Ansett, Rex, Bonza, Jetstar, Bird- Walton, Pilot and Wirraway Street

2. Supports the alternate list of six additional street names being Jetstream Avenue, Nacelle Street, Pilot Street, Radome Street, Skyport Street and Wirraway Street to be used in the forthcoming future town centre and subdivisions nearing completion that have varied the current ILP of the suburb.

3. Forwards the names to the Geographical Names Board, seeking formal approval;

4. Publicly exhibits the names in accordance with Council’s Naming Convention Policy, for a period of 28 days, following formal approval from the GNB; and

5. Authorises the Chief Executive Officer to undertake the process of gazettal, if there are no objections received during public exhibition.

REPORT

Background

At the meeting held on 30^th August 2023, Council staff sought endorsement to compile seven additional street names being Boeing Avenue, Jetstream Avenue, Nacelle Street, Pilot Street, Radome Street, Skyport Street and Wirraway Street to be used in the forthcoming future town centre and for subdivisions nearing completion (Attachment 1).

Council did not support all of the above names and instead endorsed “…seven additional street names being Ansett, Rex, Bonza, Jetstar, Bird Walton, Pilot and Wirraway Street and/or any other name that is consistent with the Australian Aviation Industry…” (the resolution is provided on the last page of Attachment 1).

When considering a street name Council staff must assess the names in accordance with the addressing principals outlined in the Geographical Names Board - NSW Addressing Policy User Manual 2021, as well as Council’s Naming Convention Policy.

Council endorsed list of proposed Street names

Below is an assessment of each name Council endorsed at the 30^th August 2023 meeting.

Ansett

The NSW Addressing Policy User Manual Section 6.7.4 Uniqueness Duplication states:

“Uniqueness is the most essential quality to be sought in proposing a new road name.

A road name will be regarded as a duplicate if it is the same or similar in spelling or sound to an existing name, regardless of the road type. Road names shall not be duplicated:

• Within the same address locality

• Within the adjoining locality

• Within a duplicated locality anywhere in NSW

• Within the proximity radius of 10km in a Metropolitan Urban Area”

The name Ansett was rejected by the GNB as it is considered too similar sounding to existing road names within the duplication radius. This includes Annette Street in Cabramatta West and Annette Avenue in Ingleburn.

Rex, Bonza and Jetstar

The NSW Addressing Policy User Manual Section 6.7.5 Acceptable Road Names states:

“Commercial and business names shall not be used, particularly where the name can be construed to be promoting the business. However, business names no longer in use and which promote the heritage of an area are acceptable.”

The names Rex, Bonza and Jetstar are names of active Australian airlines and are considered to be commercial and business names, therefore they cannot be supported.

It should be noted that a street named Qantas Boulevard in Middleton Grange was approved prior to the current NSW Addressing Policy.

Bird Walton

The NSW Addressing Policy User Manual Section 6.7.4 Uniqueness Duplication states:

“Uniqueness is the most essential quality to be sought in proposing a new road name.

A road name will be regarded as a duplicate if it is the same or similar in spelling or sound to an existing name, regardless of the road type. Road names shall not be duplicated:

• Within the same address locality

• Within the adjoining locality

• Within a duplicated locality anywhere in NSW

• Within the proximity radius of 10km in a Metropolitan Urban Area”

Bird Walton Avenue is the name of an existing street in Middleton Grange and cannot be duplicated within the suburb or a 10km radius.

Figure 1: Street map highlighting existing location of Bird Walton Avenue

Pilot and Wirraway

The names Pilot and Wirraway were included in the original list seeking endorsement from Council. Council endorsed these names at the 30 August 2023 meeting. The names Pilot and Wirraway meet the NSW Addressing Policy User Manual 2021 principals and have been granted pre-approval from the GNB.

Any other names consistent with Australian Aviation

Council staff have conducted significant research to identify suitable names with Australian aviation history. Australian aviation names are featured prominently within the suburb of Middleton Grange and a list of suitable Australian aviation names is exhausted (Please refer to Attachment 2 Middleton Grange Street Name Map, which details the Australian aviation themed names contained within the suburb).

Next Steps

It is recommended that the six additional street names being Jetstream Avenue, Nacelle Street, Pilot Street, Radome Street, Skyport Street and Wirraway Street considered at the August Council meeting are endorsed. These names have been granted pre-approval by the GNB.

If endorsed, these six new street names will be placed on public exhibition for 28 days. Council officers will consider all submissions during the public notification period. The following three potential scenarios are likely to arise:

No objections received

The names will be forwarded to the GNB for formal approval and gazettal to the NSW Parliamentary Counsel’s Office (PCO) under the delegation of the Chief Executive Officer (or delegate). Relevant stakeholders such as Australia Post, NSW Ambulance, Fire and Rescue NSW, NSW Rural Fire Service, NSW State Emergency Service, NSW Volunteer Rescue Association, Transport for NSW and the NSW Police Force, will be notified.

Objections from the relevant agencies

Council will not proceed with the naming request for the name(s) that received an objection. A report to Council will be prepared for the next available meeting outlining the reason for rejection.

Submissions received from the community

If there is community objection, or reason to reconsider a proposed name, a report will be prepared with a suitable recommendation for the next available Council meeting.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

There are no costs associated with endorsing and exhibiting the proposed street names.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	There are no economic and financial considerations.
Environment	There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.
Social	Preserve and maintain heritage, both landscape and cultural as urban development takes place.
Civic Leadership	Foster neighbourhood pride and a sense of responsibility.
Legislative	Roads Act 1993. Roads Regulation 1998. Pursuant to section 162 of the Roads Act, Council may name and number all public roads for which it is the roads authority. Council may only name a road if it has given the Geographical Names Board at least one month’s notice of the proposed name. Regulation 7 (Roads Regulation 2018) prescribes a procedure for naming roads, requiring prior publication of a proposal, notification of relevant parties and consideration of submissions. If a relevant party objects, Council may not proceed with the proposal without ministerial approval.
Risk	The risk is deemed to be Low. There is a low risk that if the proposed names are not endorsed, delays will be experienced for the development of the town centre and the final residential subdivisions in Middleton Grange due to a lack of approved street names. The risk is considered within Council’s risk appetite.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Council Report and Resolution - 30 August 2023

2. Existing Middleton Grange Street Name Map

Ordinary Meeting

27 September 2023

Planning & Compliance Report

PLAN 07

Provisions for Electric Vehicle Infrastructure in Development Control Plans - Financial Implications Report

Strategic Objective	Liveable, Sustainable, Resilient Deliver effective and efficient planning and high-quality design to provide best outcomes for a growing city
File Ref	304160.2023
Report By	Danielle Hijazi - Strategic Planner
Approved By	Lina Kakish - Director Planning & Compliance

Executive Summary

This report responds to a Council resolution from the 30^th August 2023 meeting to defer a report seeking endorsement from Council to amend relevant Development Control Plans (DCPs) to incorporate requirements for electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure in new dwellings. The deferral decision was made with the intention of a report back to Council with the financial implications of the infrastructure including the installation costs and operational costs before a decision can be made.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Receives and notes the financial implications including installation and operational cost associated with EV infrastructure in new dwellings;

2. Endorses the draft amendments of the Liverpool Development Control Plan 2008, Liverpool Growth Centre Precinct Development Control Plan, and Edmondson Park South Development Control Plan 2012 to include controls for EV charging stations as detailed in (Attachment 1);

3. Place the draft amendments to the Liverpool Development Control Plan 2008, Liverpool Growth Centre Precinct Development Control Plan and Edmondson Park South Development Control Plan 2012 on public exhibition for a minimum period of 28 days; and

4. Delegates to the CEO the finalisation of the draft Development Control Plans should no objections be received; or receive a report summarising the details of the submissions upon conclusion of the exhibition period.

REPORT

Background

At the 29September 2022 Council meeting, Council resolved to:

1. Investigate suitable planning controls that will require new development in Liverpool to make provision for electric vehicle charging infrastructure.

Subsequently, at the 29 March 2023 Council meeting, Council resolved to endorse the Climate Change Policy and Liverpool Climate Action Plan. The Liverpool Climate Action Plan identifies the key actions and priorities Council must undertake to achieve emissions reduction pathways for Liverpool Council Operations and the Community.

One of the key actions detailed in the Liverpool Climate Action Plan is for electric vehicle planning provisions to be made in all new buildings.

At the 30 August 2023 Council meeting, a report was prepared seeking endorsement from Council to amend Council’s relevant Development Control Plans (DCPs) to incorporate requirements for electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure in new dwellings. The amendments align with existing state government policies, including the Electric and Hybrid Vehicle Plan and the Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Guidelines, the State Environmental Planning Policy (Transport and Infrastructure) 2021 and the National Construction Code (NCC).

The proposed amendments to Council’s Development Control Plans will only apply to new dwellings ensuring the controls do not contradict or hinder what is already legislated by the Transport SEPP and the NCC.

The proposed amendments are as follows:

Objective added:

a) To ensure the adoption of sustainable transportation practices by the integration of electric vehicle charging infrastructure in all new dwellings.

Control added:

1. Any new dwelling shall be provided with a dedicated 32-amp circuit provided in the electricity distribution board for the purpose of vehicle charging, and:

a. a minimum of 1, 7 kW (32 A) type 2 electric vehicle charger located in the garage, carport or other parking area, Or

b. That the electrical distribution board is adjacent to the garage, carport or other parking area, Or

c. In instances where the electrical distribution board is not on the wall adjacent to a garage, carport or other parking area, an electrical conduit, pull-string and cover-plate is provided between the electrical distribution board and the vehicle parking area in a manner which permits a vehicle charger to be installed without penetrating any wall, ceiling or floor.

Council deferred the decision pending a report back to Council with the financial implications of the infrastructure including the installation costs and operational costs.

Financial implications of EV infrastructure

Installation Costs

The NRMA website has a dedicated Electric Vehicle Hub section which details the costs involved with installing the infrastructure required for EV charging as well as estimating the operating costs involved.

The proposed amendments to the DCP require a minimum of 1, 7kw (32 A) type 2 electric vehicle charger. The NRMA website states: the cost of the charging station itself can range from $600 to $2,500, depending on the brand and features. The installation cost can range from $500 to $1,500, depending on the location of the installation and any necessary electrical upgrades.

The proposed amendments to the DCP also state that: In instances where the electrical distribution board is not on the wall adjacent to a garage, carport or other parking area, an electrical conduit, pull-string and cover-plate is provided between the electrical distribution board and the vehicle parking area in a manner which permits a vehicle charger to be installed without penetrating any wall, ceiling or floor.

The projected cost analysis for the installation of an electrical conduit, pull-string, and cover-plate hinges primarily on the skilled labor expenses incurred by a certified electrician. This estimation falls within the range of $100 to $250.

It is important to note that the estimated installation costs outlined within this report pertain to the outfitting of existing dwellings. The contemplated amendments in the Development Control Plan (DCP) are wholly applicable to new residential dwellings only and would be incorporated into the overall cost assessment for a new home build with negligible impact on the future homeowner.

Operational costs

Table 2: EV charging rates (Source: EV charging at home NRMA)

A chart of a charging station

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

The NRMA website states:

The time it takes to charge an EV depends on a few factors:

· Charge rate: The power output of a charger in kW factoring in a 10% loss in power as energy passes through an EV's onboard AC to DC inverter.

· Battery capacity: An EV battery's capacity, measured in kWh.

· Level of charge: The current charge of the EV. Batteries tend to charge fastest within the 30 to 80% capacity range.

For instance, to calculate charging time for an EV with a 39kWh battery capacity using a Level 2 charger at a 7kW charge rate, we would use the below formula:

39kWh/ (7kW x 0.9) = 6 hours 12 minutes

Battery capacity / (Charging power x 0.9) = Total empty to full charging time

Based on the above formula the operating costs are estimated to be as follows:

Level 2 EV charging = approx. 6hrs using 7kw/h

Therefore, cost would be 6 x 7 x 0.3424 = $14.38 for one charging session (approximately)

*Estimate based on EV with 39kWh battery and 305km range

Other factors including individual electricity providers and rates would need to be considered in the operating costs.

Further costs estimates can be found on the below website:

NRMA Electric Vehicle Hub: Electric Vehicles Australia: Driving the Future With Sustainable Mobility (mynrma.com.au)

Next Steps

If supported by Council, the proposed amendments to the Development Control Plans (Attachment 1) will be placed on public exhibition for 28 days. Council officers will consider all submissions during the public notification period and the following two potential scenarios are likely to arise:

No objections received

Council delegates authority to the CEO to adopt the changes to the abovementioned Development Control Plans as outlined in attachment 1 of this report.

Submissions received from the community

If there is community objection, or reason to reconsider the proposed amendments, a report will be prepared for the next available Council meeting outlining a recommendation based on the submissions received.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

There are no financial implications relating to this recommendation.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	There are no economic and financial considerations.
Environment	Enhance the environmental performance of buildings and homes.
Social	There are no social and cultural considerations.
Civic Leadership	Act as an environmental leader in the community.
Legislative	Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021
Risk	There is no risk associated with this report. The risk is considered within Council’s risk appetite.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Council Report and Resolution - 30 August 2023

Ordinary Meeting

27 September 2023

Community & Lifestyle Report

COM 01

Report on Most Blessed Nights 2023

Strategic Objective	Healthy, Inclusive, Engaging Deliver great and exciting events and programs for our people and visitors
File Ref	288913.2023
Report By	Clara McGuirk - Events Officer
Approved By	Tina Bono - Director Community & Lifestyle

Executive Summary

At its May 2023 meeting, Council resolved that a report be brought to Council on the economic benefit to Liverpool of Most Blessed Nights and provide learnings to evaluate operational matters, and how Council can improve the delivery of future CBD events for the Liverpool community.

Most Blessed Nights has demonstrated its value through community engagement and beneficial impacts to the local economy. In two years, the event has doubled in attendance – with 300,000 people visiting the Macquarie Mall precinct across five weekends.

Alongside attendance, the event reached 1,069,230 people on Council owned social media channels throughout the online campaign, achieving a 56% increase from 2022 and a 60% increase in engagement through shares. This included an organic reach of 832,575.

The average spend per attendee is estimated at $25 per person, equalling to a total visitor spend of $7,500,000 resulting in a total impact of Liverpool Economy of $10,267,424.

Most Blessed Nights (MBN) speaks to Liverpool’s ambition for a vibrant, activated City Centre, fostering collaboration between the Council and retailers to establish a strong nighttime economy.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Receives and notes the report.

2. Adopts for Most Blessed Nights 2024 to expand onto Macquarie Street; and

3. Approves $100,000 towards the expansion of the event in the next quarterly review.

REPORT

1. Background

Most Blessed Nights (MBN) addresses Liverpool’s ambition for a vibrant, activated City Centre, fostering collaboration between Council and retailers to establish a strong nighttime economy, and attract further investment by:

a) Establishing Macquarie Mall as an entertainment precinct, leveraging its connectivity, accessibility, and prominence.

b) Encouraging local businesses to extend their trading hours or participate in pop-up versions of their establishments.

c) Improving community safety at night.

d) Provide improved amenity for residents.

e) Improve Liverpool’s reputation as a liveable city; and

f) Promote Liverpool as a destination for domestic and international tourism.

Most Blessed Nights is the largest festival in Liverpool’s event calendar annually comprising of 27 events of varying scale. It is held in Macquarie Mall (the Mall) running over 5 weeks, the event largely comprises of a hawker-style food market, predominately featuring Middle Eastern cuisine. In 2023, MBN featured 15 local businesses and 50 new vendors from across Sydney.

From March 24 until 23 April 2023, the market attracted 300,000 attendees – effectively doubling in attendance from its inaugural year. The event attracted attendees from Greater Sydney, with 22% of attendees surveyed stating that they were visiting from outside the Local Government Area.

Widely, the event is considered a success in gaining widespread attention, unprecedented attendance, an overall exceptional response, being a platform for new investment attraction and promoting Liverpool as a vibrant hub during those five weeks. It has aided the widespread recognition of Macquarie Mall as a special precinct and boosted promotion of Council’s broader cultural events and activations.

The event has elevated Liverpool’s profile and positively promoted Liverpool as a destination for cultural tourism, meeting strategic objectives outlined in the City Activation Strategy 2019-2024 which address.

· Providing more nighttime activities for the community, and for local businesses to field test markets and trading models.

· Establishing a robust activation program for Macquarie Mall.

· Celebrating our unique cultural diversity and weaving this narrative into experiences, providing authentic representation to enhance the cultural profile and brand of Liverpool; and

· Engaging youth and student activity within the City Centre and offer nighttime activities.

2. Opportunities and Successes

Most Blessed Nights was considered a success given its high attendance, positive feedback, and local business engagement, with enhancements implemented from debriefing and assessments of its establishment year. These include:

a) Improvements to the site map, ensuring that Council was effectively using all available footprint whilst managing pedestrian flow.

b) Site map amendments resulting in better revenue outcomes to put back into production costs.

c) Consistently producing CBD based events across three nights to seed activity and build traction.

d) Provision of dining facilities to encourage longer dwelling times.

e) Positioning of the Knafeh: Bearded Bakers activation that has become synonymous with Most Blessed Nights.

f) Improved queue management and establishment, quick response from staff and pre-determined course of action for queue spillover.

g) Introduction of the Elizabeth Street overflow area to provide more opportunities for vendors, further amenity to patrons and expanded activation and benefit to new businesses.

h) Longer Expression of Interest period for engaging stallholders, and a detailed onboarding process including capacity building practices for new businesses or bricks-and-mortar businesses producing a pop-up food stall for the first time.

i) Opportunity to showcase local businesses and provide potential new businesses to Liverpool with a low-risk platform to test the local market; and

j) Over $10 million of economic impact to the local economy.

2.1 Increased vendor opportunities and revenue

The Macquarie Mall site has limited functional space due to existing infrastructure and multiple access points. MBN was the prime opportunity to test Macquarie Mall’s stallholder capacity. At maximum, 42 food stalls were accommodated without heavily impeding the crowd floor, obstructing key assets such as Liverpool Plaza, or any drastic issues with crowding/queueing.

Subsequently, the Council earned $73,000 in revenue from stallholder fees across the five-week period – including local business discounts. With fees & charges increasing for the new financial year, this is set to rise. The inclusion of 42 food vendors meant that patrons could sample a wide variety of offerings and encourage prolonged dwelling times.

2.2 Improving the eventgoer experience.

Most Blessed Nights provides an elevated experience where patrons can dine onsite, with furniture and passive dining infrastructure to cater for different group sizes simultaneously.

Line management improved with mitigation measures in place across staff and security. Tensor barriers were able to ensure a quick response for manipulating queues and diverting patrons away from the central event aisle.

Upon experiencing unprecedented crowds in its first week, action was taken to expand the site. Whilst budget and time limited expanding further than Macquarie Mall proper, the solution was to create a sub-precinct in Elizabeth Street that could cater for 4-5 trucks and activate nearby restauranteurs by encouraging foot traffic. Restauranteurs were at first enthusiastic, establishing a point of sale at their shopfront to sell their goods.

Businesses were provided with a detailed brief and information on food safety and hygiene requirements, provided guidance from staff and given multiple check ins from event staff during trade.

In total the Council generated interest from 140 food vendors in its initial round and ongoing interest throughout the 5 weeks of delivery.

2.3 Survey Results and Reach

Overall event satisfaction was high, with 93% of survey respondents stating they were satisfied with the experience and 89% rating the food 4/5 or higher.

Of those surveyed at the event, 95% identified the event as the key factor for visiting the Liverpool CBD that day. Amongst the survey respondents, 22% stated that they resided outside of Liverpool LGA attracting new spend into the local economy.

Alongside attendance, the event reached 1,069,230 people across our social media channels throughout the campaign, achieving a 56% increase from 2022 and a 60% increase in engagement through shares. This included an organic reach of 832,575.

2.4 Investment and Economic Benefits

Most Blessed Nights 2023 cost $390,000 to deliver across 15 nights, placing per night production costs at $26,000. With an average attendance of approximately 20,000 a night this equates to a per-head cost of approximately $1.30.

The average spend is estimated at $25 per person, equalling to a total visitor spend of $7,500,000 resulting in a total impact of Liverpool economy of $10,267,424.

According to Economy.id the impact of Most Blessed Nights on the local economy led to an increase in indirect demand for intermediate goods and services from across related sectors. The indirect industry impacts are estimated to be an additional $3 million in output. There was an additional contribution to the Liverpool economy through consumption effects including more wages and salaries spent in the local economy. It is estimated that this resulted in a further increase in value-added of $293,164.93.

In an anonymous survey, some vendors disclosed their earnings at around $4,000 - $10,000 a night, having to hire additional staff to meet demand and turnaround requirements, fostering an array of temporary employment opportunities in our local area. As a result, it is estimated that the demand for labor throughout the event created an additional equivalent of 9.2 annual local jobs (economy.id).

3. Venue Challenges

The event has been met with considerable challenges, none more prominent that its rapid growth set against a relatively restrictive venue. As with any CBD based events, obstacles exist when planning a large-scale event against a site that has its own user groups, utility, and passive activation. Despite the potential Macquarie Mall has as an entertainment precinct, there are inherent issues due to the incredible interest that Most Blessed Nights has achieved in its short term. If these aren’t addressed, they risk the likelihood of return visitation, compromising the event goer experience and event brand. These include:

a) Acknowledging the constraints of the site and the need to investigate expanding the event footprint to allow for growth due to unprecedented interest.

b) Lack of public amenities, of which the venue lacks space to implement without compromising event set-up.

c) Existing structures were not erected for pop-up stall use and have incurred accelerated wear and tear due to heat from vendor cooking equipment.

d) Pavers are porous and susceptible to stain. Many of the pavers are also untextured, enhancing the risk of slip and trip hazards.

e) Event floor is incredibly narrow, creating a challenge for waste management and the removal of event bins at peak periods.

f) House-power is scarce in Macquarie Mall and needs to be heavily supplemented with generator power.

g) General safety during bump-in and out of the event due to ongoing anti-social behaviour in Macquarie Mall (this is being addressed through collaboration with Liverpool Local Area Command).

h) Site cannot be closed off completely and pedestrian access is still abundant creating security issues.

i) Ambiguity around outdoor dining structures and their ownership, reluctance from Macquarie Mall residing businesses to relinquish their dining structures for the purpose of the event resulting in dormant spaces throughout the event.

j) Lack of enthusiasm from a small number of Macquarie Mall businesses to partake in the event within the remit required (i.e., consistent trade, week on week, for the duration of the festival); and

k) Ongoing infringement of local businesses and patrons of the NSW Smoke-Free Environmental Act 2000 banning smoking and usage of e-cigarettes in commercial outdoor dining areas including within 10 metres of a food fair stall due to reputation of The Mall catering to smokers.

3.1 Floorplan and Usable Space

Whilst event feedback was extremely positive, referencing the vibrant atmosphere and cultural representation, it was paired with concerns over crowd density. Fixed infrastructure such as raised planter beds, bench seats and outdoor dining structures restrict usable space within Macquarie Mall. This not only affects crowd flow and management, it also inhibits revenue as only a limited number of stalls can be placed onsite at one time.

Crowd dwelling times were promising but relatively short, likely indicating that the site was congested, and the crowd remained fluid as a result. On average, the crowd stayed for an hour during peak times and half an hour on Friday evenings.

A table with numbers and a few hours

Description automatically generated

Average dwelling times across Most Blessed Nights

3.2 Public Amenities

Presently, to conserve footprint and leverage existing amenities – parking, toilet and change room facilities are promoted as being within Liverpool Plaza. This has been negotiated as in-kind sponsorship through the Plaza in addition to using one of their vacant offices as a Event HQ and the compound area on the corner of Moore Street and Macquarie Mall as event back-of-house and plant equipment. Whilst the partnership with the Plaza has been mutually beneficial, it does highlight the lack of amenities and the challenges that exist with usable footprint in the mall.

In 2022, supplementary portable toilets were used in addition to Liverpool Plaza. These were found to be under utilised by patrons compared to the Plaza toilets, possibly because of the proximity to the main event floor. To adhere to best practice principles on the distance between food preparation areas and dining areas, toilets can only be placed offsite or forfeit room for additional vendors or dining.

With expansion of site, to Macquarie Street, we can have offsite areas with more flexibility.

3.3 Wear & Tear and Cleanliness

Existing structures were likely not intended for food-pop up use, but to maximize footprint and cost save with the use of existing infrastructure, pop-up vendors must use the outdoor structures permanently fixed to the mall. This has since exacerbated the wear and tear of the structures, which were already in need of repair and maintenance.

Similarly, the Mall’s pavers have been identified by CBD maintenance as too porous to effectively remove imbedded strains. Whilst surface oil can be removed, unsightly markings remain due to frequency and type of use. Events have introduced mitigation measures such as temporary floor coverings and cleaning fees for stallholders, but there exists day-to-day litter and spills that also have an impact on the quality and cleanliness of the mall ground surface.

3.4 Anti-Social Behaviour and Foot Traffic

There remain regular accounts of anti-social behaviour in the mall. Retailers often provide informal accounts of these occurrences but do not progress to formally reporting to the relevant authorities. Together with Liverpool Police, progress is being made on improving safety in the mall outside of events and during event build. Initiatives include:

- Regular meetings with businesses on proactive and collective efforts towards curbing this behaviour; and

- Education on reporting crime and anti-social behaviour to NSW Police quickly and assist in surveillance of the mall.

During MBN and other Major Events in the Mall, there is a clear reduction in visible crime or anti-social behaviour, but this is also helped by the passive surveillance, security presence and dilution of problem individuals given the masses of event attendees.

As the Mall is still a passive space and cannot be enclosed for the purpose of the event, as an event space it remains vulnerable to problems relating to crime, intoxication, and antisocial behaviour. Council staff and suppliers have been victims of anti-social behaviour including theft, verbal abuse, and physical violence on multiple occasions.

3.5 Resident Businesses

Despite its considerable earning and marketing potential, Council is still challenged in onboarding some of the resident mall businesses to partake in consistent and cohesive integration. Some businesses were disinterested in participating but would not relinquish their outdoor structures until well into event times due to their trading hours, making it difficult to program activities, stalls or dining. Council officers are currently reviewing operational provisions.

Within these, terms for Special Events will include use of stalls for dining and activities after the business’s approved trading time under their DA. Where a business chooses to participate in the event as a stallholder, they will be provided notice on the intention to comply with the standard 3x3m stallholder area that is standard for pop-up food vendors working within a marquee structure to maximize footprint. This will mean areas that are not in use can be repurposed for dining and other unintrusive activations to allow for their uninterrupted daily trade.

Terms will also include compliance with the Smoke-free Environment Act 2000 which bans smoking and the use of e-cigarettes in a commercial outdoor dining area, such as:

· A seated dining area;

· Within 4 meters of a seated dining area on licenced premises, restaurant, or café;

· Within 10 meters of a food fair stall; and

· 10 meters from children’s play equipment

This would render the immediate Macquarie Mall a Smoke-free zone during event times given its condensed nature and proximity to food stalls. Ultimately, this will likely improve the event-goer experience and improve overall perception of the mall given regular and categorical feedback from past surveys regarding the presence and acceptance of smoking in these outdoor dining structures and the Mall surrounds in general a significant deterrent in visiting the Mall.

4. Learnings and Opportunities

Naturally, there are a plethora of learning opportunities to have come from two years of producing Most Blessed Nights. Whilst significant changes could have been implemented across its second year, the trial-and-error process has been important in managing risk and encouraging the organic growth of the event. With additional resources and an established events calendar ahead, 2024 is the year where MBN could be elevated further. Key learnings include:

a) Expanding event site in response to interest from both the audience and vendors.

b) Additional amenities for patrons in Macquarie Mall once footprint have been alleviated, with the addition of toilets, accessible amenities, baby change rooms and prayer rooms.

c) Clarity of purpose for MBN – its interfaith dialogue was imbedded into the brand, however there is still confusion from segments on the community on what is appropriate against different religious context and future dates due to changing calendar for religious events.

d) Post-event maintenance and cleansing to reset and refresh the site for day-to-day patrons and businesses.

e) More cohesive campaign message across the CBD and directional signage from various gateways across the city.

f) Distinct and established look & feel for the event, such as the original pendant lighting feature from 2022; and

g) Clear messaging around Macquarie Mall and MBN as a Council initiative.

4.1. Expanding the Site

Upon assessment, natural expansion of the event would see it spill into Macquarie Street and potentially Civic Place forecourt. This would have significant implications for businesses on the street and those utilising laneway access. However, this could be a prime opportunity for businesses in Liverpool to benefit from an exponential increase in foot traffic and CBD visitation.

This would also provide space for additional amenities, and potentially more than double the revenue given increases to stallholder fees for FY2023/24, estimated at approximately $150,000.

The elongated site would allow for a natural connection to Liverpool Civic Place as an activated zone, and linkages to retail food businesses and restaurants in southern Macquarie Street and Memorial. The expansion will also provide the opportunity to activate and engage businesses ahead of the WestInvest Macquarie Street Upgrade which focuses on increased pedestrianization and street beautification.

Sound mitigation and vehicle movement considerations would need to be made for the Liverpool Islamic Centre that resides on the corner of Macquarie and Moore Streets to minimise potential disruptions.

Together with revenue, production budget would need to increase by $100,000 to accommodate:

· Additional infrastructure: generator hire, fuel, structures, fencing, dining, amenities.

· Road closures and traffic control.

· Security, waste management, cleansing and first aid costs; and

· Staffing and labour to move items in and out of site for reduced disruption to businesses.

To reduce costs and impacts, this would ideally entail continuous road closure in effect from 6am Friday until 4am Mondays each week for five weeks. The road closure will not impact business operations as all businesses will remain with ongoing access to back-of-house laneways for deliveries.

For comparison, Ramadan Nights in Lakemba has an approximate production budget of $1,000,000 and runs for 31 Nights. It does not include dining facilities with patrons finding passive seating or standing. Structures are not provided, with most vendors using existing awnings as food coverings. Cold food storage and power is not supplied, serviced, or managed by qualified electricians.

The council’s Major Events team would need to commence consultation and submit traffic management plans by end of October 2023.

5. Conclusion

Most Blessed Nights is a mainstay of the Liverpool events calendar, has achieved success in gaining widespread attention, unprecedented attendance, an overall exceptional response and promoting Liverpool as a vibrant hub during those five weeks. It has aided the widespread recognition of Macquarie Mall as a special precinct and boosted promotion of Council’s broader cultural events and activations.

The proposed expanded site allows Liverpool Civic Place to be activated and provides linkages to retail food businesses and restaurants across Macquarie Street. The expansion will also provide the opportunity to activate, trial increased pedestrianization and engage businesses on Macquarie Street ahead of the WestInvest Upgrade.

The average spend per attendee is estimated at $25 per person, equalling to a total visitor spend of $7,500,000 resulting in a total impact of Liverpool Economy of $10,267,424.

Upon expanding the event, Council could see an attendance of 500,000 throughout the event and increased dwell times. Early estimates equate to approximately $20.5 million total impact on the local economy.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Costs associated with expanding the Most Blessed Nights site to Macquarie Street ($100,000) are outside of Council’s current budget and long-term financial plan.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	Further develop a commercial centre that accommodates a variety of employment opportunities. Facilitate economic development. Facilitate the development of new tourism based on local attractions, culture, and creative industries.
Environment	There are no environmental and sustainability considerations.
Social	Provide cultural centres and activities for the enjoyment of the arts. Support policies and plans that prevent crime. Preserve and maintain heritage, both landscape and cultural as urban development takes place. Promote community harmony and address discrimination.
Civic Leadership	Foster neighborhood pride and a sense of responsibility. Encourage the community to engage in Council initiatives and actions. Deliver services that are customer focused.
Legislative	There are no legislative considerations relating to this report.
Risk	Expanding the event into Macquarie Mall resulting in Road Closure will have impacts on road users and will require consultation with businesses, the traffic committee, local bus companies. The risk is considered within the Council’s risk appetite.

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

Ordinary Meeting

27 September 2023

Community & Lifestyle Report

COM 02

Grants Donations and Community Sponsorship Report

Strategic Objective	Healthy, Inclusive, Engaging Promote a harmonious community that celebrates its diversity
File Ref	297917.2023
Report By	Jacqueline Newsome - Coordinator Community Development
Approved By	Tina Bono - Director Community & Lifestyle

Executive Summary

Council is committed to building strong and resilient communities in the Liverpool Local Government Area (LGA) and 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.

This report provides a recommendation for endorsement of funding totalling $25,000 from the Community Grants Program and Community Sponsorship Program.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Endorses the funding recommendation of $10,000 (GST exclusive) under the Community Grants Program for the following project:

Applicant	Project	Recommended
Western Sydney Migrant Resource Centre	Liverpool Education and Employment Expo	$5000
Global Women	Breast Cancer Awareness Program	$4000

2. Endorses the funding recommendation of $16,000 (GST exclusive) under the Community Sponsorship Program for the following projects:

Applicant	Project	Recommended
Multicultural Association of Asia & Pacific Incorporated	Fiji Day Australia Festival	$10,000
Delta TV	Music Festival	$6000

REPORT

Community Grants Program

The Community Grants Program received two applications which met the eligibility criteria and are recommended for funding as follows:

Applicant	Western Sydney Migrant Resource Centre
Project	Liverpool Education and Employment Expo
Amount Requested	$5,000	Total Project Cost	$5,000
Location	Liverpool, NSW 2170	Date	26 January 2024
About the Applicant	Western Sydney Migrant Resource Centre (WSMRC) is part of the Liverpool Refugee and Migrant Interagency (LRMI), a sector network facilitated in partnership with Liverpool City Council and WSMRC. For purpose of meeting Councils eligibility criteria, WSMRC is acting as an auspice on behalf of the Education and Employment sub-group. The employment sub-group was established in 2022 through sector consultations which identified the need for education and employment programs and awareness for newly arrived migrant and refugee communities.
Description	Objectives: The Liverpool Education and Employment Expo is designed to empower CALD (Culturally and Linguistically Diverse) communities by raising awareness and providing clear pathways to training and employment opportunities. This Expo will primarily focus on industries with high demand within the Liverpool LGA, including Health, Retail/Hospitality, Construction, and Leisure and Sporting sectors. Funding will be used to deliver a free event featuring: · Information stalls offering insights into training courses; · Expert industry advisors guiding job seekers; · Workshops to equip attendees with practical skills and enhance their employability; and · Panelists featuring successful CALD employees will share their personal journeys, including the challenges they faced and the highlights of their experiences. Participants will have the opportunity to ask questions and gain invaluable advice from these panelists. Outcomes: · Reduced barriers for CALD communities seeking education and employment opportunities; and · Improved employability in CALD communities through access to training courses, industry advice and practical workshops.
Beneficiaries	CALD communities, employment agencies, and local job seekers.
Assessment	Recommended for Funding - $5,000 The project aligns with the Community Strategic Plan Objective 1 - Healthy, Inclusive, Engaging, Objective 4 – Visionary, Leading, Responsible and meets the Community Grant Program funding priorities. Expected program outcomes 7.4.1 d), e) and f)

Applicant	Global Women
Project	Pink Ribbon Event - Breast Cancer Awareness
Amount Requested	$4,000	Total Project Cost	$5,000
Location	Edmondson Park, NSW 2170	Date	10 October 2023
About the Applicant	Global Women is a local registered charity organisation with a goal to improve access to healthy lifestyle for women by raising awareness for early diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer. Global Women empowers women from all backgrounds, particularly the CALD and subcontinent to priortise their health and wellbeing by delivering a range of free interactive activities and workshops for its members.
Description	Objectives: The Pink Ribbon Breast Cancer lunch event aims to increase awareness of breast screening and encourage women to take steps that lead towards to early detection and prevention of breast cancer. Women from CALD backgrounds often struggle to understand the importance of breast screening and early intervention due to the stigma associated with seeking health advice regarding breast cancer. This event will equip guests with: · Breast cancer resources and information on local screening sites, early detection procedures, and support networks available to women; · Medical information from bi-lingual panellists consisting of medical staff and doctors; and · Advice and tips from inspirational breast cancer warriors addressing the importance of early detection in relation to living with breast cancer, and or fighting it. Outcomes: · Increase participation of CALD women in community health activities; · Improved access to information and resources that address breast cancer prevention and early intervention; and · Strengthened social and physical wellbeing for women by raising awareness on breast cancer and the importance of early detection through breast screening.
Beneficiaries	CALD Women, local breast cancer networks and support groups.
Assessment	Recommended for Funding - $4,000 The project aligns with the Community Strategic Plan Objective 1 - Healthy, Inclusive, Engaging, Objective 4 – Visionary, Leading, Responsible and meets the Community Grant Program funding priorities. Expected program outcomes 7.4.1 a), b) and c)

Community Sponsorship Program

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

Applicant	Multicultural Association of Asia & Pacific Incorporated
Project	Fiji Day Australia Festival
Amount Requested	$10,000	Total Project Cost	$36,000
Location	Woodward Park, Liverpool NSW 2170	Date	14 & 15 October 2023
About the Applicant	Multicultural Association of Asia & Pacific Incorporated (MAAPI) is a volunteer-based organisation providing community-based activities that promote East Asian & Fijian culture to the broader community. MAAPI are an active group in the Liverpool LGA ensuring programs are free and accessible to everyone in the community.
Description	Objectives: MAAPI is seeking funds to deliver a free two-day event at Woodward Park to celebrate Fiji Day. The Fiji Day Australia Festival will have traditional stalls, food stalls, and fun family rides. Fijian and cultural performances with live music will also be part of the entertainment. Outcomes: · Increase community participation and community connection through multicultural events and experiences; · Celebrate diversity and promote inclusion; · Deliver economic benefit to the Liverpool LGA; · Promote tourism through regional, national, and international visitors; and · Promotes Liverpool’s reputation as a great place to live, work, and invest, with promotional opportunities for Council.
Beneficiaries	· Over 5000 attendees over the two-day festival · Local businesses and suppliers supporting the event.
Assessment	Recommended for Funding - $10,000 The project aligns with the Community Strategic Plan Objective 1 - Healthy, Inclusive, Engaging, Community Strategic Plan Objective 2 - Livable, Sustainable, Resilient, and Community Strategic Plan Objective 3 - Evolving, Prosperous, Innovative and meets the Community Sponsorship Program’s funding priorities. Expected program outcome 7.7.2 a), b), c), d), and e).

Applicant	Delta TV Australia Incorporated
Project	Music Festival
Amount Requested	$6,000	Total Project Cost	$11,900
Location	Casula Powerhouse Arts Centre (CPAC), Casula NSW 2170	Date	23 September 2023
About the Applicant	Delta TV Australia Incorporated (DTVAI) is a not-for-profit local community cultural organisation that provides a platform for local community artists and musicians to showcase their talents at events that engage the broader community. DTVAI recognises the large number of subcontinent migrants residing in Liverpool and aims to bring the community together with free music festival.
Description	Objectives: DTVAI is seeking funds to deliver a music festival at CPAC. The event is free to attend, with several local artists from Liverpool performing with traditional instruments such as the sitar (traditional guitar) and tabla (a set of two small drums). The program will showcase Bengali and Hindi cultural performances alongside live instrumental music and singing. Outcomes: · Increase community participation and community connection through multicultural events and experiences; · Celebrate diversity and promote inclusion; · Promote local talent to the broader community; and · Promote Liverpool’s reputation as a great place to live, work, and invest, with promotional opportunities for Council.
Beneficiaries	· Over 300 local attendees · Local artists and musicians
Assessment	Recommended for Funding - $6,000 The project aligns with the Community Strategic Plan Objective 1 - Healthy, Inclusive, Engaging, and Community Strategic Plan Objective 3 - Evolving, Prosperous, Innovative and Objective 4 – Visionary, Leading, Responsible, and meets the Community Sponsorship Program’s funding priorities. Expected program outcome 7.7.2 a), b), c), d), and e).

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

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

COMMUNITY SPONSORSHIP
Budget	Balance	Recommended for funding in this report	Remaining
$100,000	$47,971	$16,000	31,971
COMMUNITY GRANTS
Budget	Balance	Recommended funding in this report and $1000 in small grants program to CEO	Remaining
$102,000	$64,739	$9,000	$55,739
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	$75,000	Nil	$75,000
COMBINED FUNDING BALANCE
Combined Budget	Combined Balance	Total recommended funding in this report	Remaining
$477,000	$387,710	$25,000	$361,710

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	The financial impacts are outlined in the report above.
Environment	Raise community awareness and support action in relation to environmental issues.
Social	Support community organisations, groups, and volunteers to deliver coordinated services to the community.
Civic Leadership	Foster neighborhood pride and a sense of responsibility. Operate a well-developed governance system that demonstrates accountability, transparency, and ethical conduct.
Legislative	Local Government Act 1993, including sections 24 and 356. The council may by resolution contribute money or otherwise grant financial assistance to people for the purpose of exercising its functions. The Council’s grant programs are targeted to ensure a lawful and consistent approach to its contributions and financial assistance. Key functions that are supported are Council’s functions of providing goods, services, and facilities, and conducting activities, appropriate to the current and future needs within the Liverpool local community and of the wider public, subject to the Local Government Act, the regulations, and any other law.
Risk	There is no risk associated with this report.

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

Ordinary Meeting

27 September 2023

Corporate Support Report

CORP 01

Election of Deputy Mayor

Strategic Objective	Visionary, Leading, Responsible Demonstrate a high standard of transparency and accountability through a comprehensive governance framework
File Ref	299607.2023
Report By	Jessica Saliba - Acting Manager Council & Executive Services
Approved By	Farooq Portelli - Director Corporate Support

Executive Summary

Under section 231(1) of the Local Government Act 1993 (the Act) Councillors can elect a person from among their numbers to be the Deputy Mayor.

This report recommends that Council proceeds with the election of the Deputy Mayor to be conducted by the Returning Officer (Chief Executive Officer).

Under section 231(4) of the Act Councillors may elect a person from among their number to act as Deputy Mayor if the Deputy Mayor is prevented by illness, absence or otherwise from exercising a function under this section, or if no Deputy Mayor has been elected.

The report considers whether Council may elect an alternate Deputy Mayor. This would be on the basis that the alternate Deputy Mayor can only act as Deputy Mayor in the absence of the elected Deputy Mayor.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Determines the method of voting to be used for the election of Deputy Mayor; and

2. Determines whether to elect an alternate Deputy Mayor, noting the advice set out in the report; and

3. Once determined, the returning officer to conduct the election of the Deputy Mayor for the period of 27 September 2023 – September 2024; and

4. The returning officer to conduct the election of the alternate Deputy Mayor for the period of 27 September 2023 – September 2024.

REPORT

Under section 231 of the Act Councillors can elect a person from among their numbers to be the Deputy Mayor. Section 231(2) of the Local Government Act 1993 states that “the person may be elected for the Mayoral term or a shorter period”.

The deputy mayor may exercise any function of the mayor at the request of the mayor or if the mayor is prevented by illness, absence or otherwise from exercising the function or if there is a casual vacancy in the office of mayor (section 231(3) of the Act).

Traditionally for Liverpool, terms are for one year with the election occurring annually in September.

Alternate Deputy Mayor

Consideration has been given to the possibility of Council electing an alternate Deputy Mayor at the same time as electing the Deputy Mayor. Section 231(4) of the Act provides that:

The councillors may elect a person from among their number to act as deputy mayor if the deputy mayor is prevented by illness, absence or otherwise from exercising a function under this section, or if no deputy mayor has been elected.

Advice was sought from the Office of Local Government (OLG) regarding an alternate Deputy Mayor. They advised that:

· in line with section 231(1) of the Act ‘only one person may be elected to the office of Deputy Mayor’; and

· ‘the election of a councillor to act as deputy mayor under subsection 4 of the Act must occur at the time that the substantive holder of that office is prevented from exercising their functions’.

Legal advice was sought regarding the correct interpretation of section 231 of the Act. The natural and ordinary interpretation of section 231(4) is that it sets out the circumstances or preconditions for Council to appoint a Deputy Mayor. On this basis, Council’s power to appoint a Deputy Mayor is only triggered where either:

(a) the deputy mayor is prevented by illness, absence or otherwise from exercising a function under section 231; or

(b) no deputy mayor has been elected.

For Council to appoint an alternate Deputy Mayor, it would have to construe section 231(4) as enabling Council to appoint a person who would only be Deputy Mayor on the occurrence of one of the conditions in section 231(4) (deputy mayor prevented from acting or no deputy mayor). Section 231(4) does not state that an alternate Deputy Mayor can be appointed nor that the power of appointment can be exercised in anticipation of the conditions being met, which Parliament could have done if that was its intention.

If Council chooses to appoint an alternate Deputy Mayor, this would need to be on the basis that the alternate will only be the Deputy Mayor in the event that the elected Deputy Mayor is prevented by illness, absence or otherwise from exercising a function under section 231. The alternate cannot at any prior or other time use the Deputy Mayor title, nor can they exercise the functions of the Deputy Mayor.

Election Process

In line with Schedule 7 Clause 1 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2021 (Regulation), the returning Officer will be the Chief Executive Officer.

Schedule 7 Clause 2 of the Regulation provides for the following:

· Nominations for the Deputy Mayor must be in writing signed by at least two Councillors, one of whom may be the nominee;

· The nominee must consent in writing to the nomination; and

· Completed nomination forms must be delivered or emailed to the Returning Officer.

A copy of the nomination form is attached to this report.

Council needs to resolve the method of voting to be used for the election of Deputy Mayor and Alternate Deputy Mayor.

If only one Councillor is nominated, that Councillor is duly elected.

If more than one Councillor is nominated, Schedule 7 Clause 3(2) of the Regulation provides that Council is to resolve whether the election is to proceed by:

· Open voting (i.e. show of hands);

· Ordinary ballot (i.e. a secret ballot (place an “x” on the ballot paper against the name of the candidate of their choice); or

· Preferential ballot (i.e. place 1, 2, 3 etc on the ballot paper against each candidate).

Ballot papers will be available at the meeting if required.

If one or more Councillors are participating in the meeting online via Microsoft Teams, Council must resolve to conduct the election of Deputy Mayor and Alternate Deputy Mayor by open voting.

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. Operate a well-developed governance system that demonstrates accountability, transparency and ethical conduct.
Legislative	Section 231 of the Local Government Act 1993 and Schedule 7 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2021.
Risk	The risk is deemed to be low and considered to be within Council’s risk appetite.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Nomination Form for Deputy Mayor and Alternate Deputy Mayor

Ordinary Meeting

27 September 2023

Corporate Support Report

CORP 02

TfNSW proposed Construction Lease over Council land being part of Lot 5000 DP 855173 off Albemarle Place, Cecil Hills

Strategic Objective	Liveable, Sustainable, Resilient Promote and advocate for an integrated transport network with improved transport options and connectivity
File Ref	299731.2023
Report By	John Milicic - Manager Property
Approved By	Farooq Portelli - Director Corporate Support

Executive Summary

Council at its meeting on 24 November 2021 resolved that it had no objection to Transport for NSW (TfNSW) compulsorily acquiring a construction lease for a period of 4 years, over Part Lot 5000 DP 855173, situated off Albemarle Place, Cecil Hills having an area of 397 square metres.

The construction lease was identified as being required to facilitate the M12 project, with timely entry to the land required, to undertake essential construction works to deliver this critical state significant infrastructure.

Subsequent to the Council resolution of 24 November 2021, TfNSW have requested an increase in the construction lease area from 397 square metres to 820 square metres. TfNSW have offered a rental payment for the lease area of 820 square metres for a term of 4 years for occupation of Council’s land which equates to $131,836.36 exclusive of GST, plus an administration fee of $636.36 exclusive of GST and legal fees of $2,750 GST inclusive.

TfNSW have requested that Council provide consent to the compulsory acquisition of a four-year construction lease. As the land is classified as “Community” land, Council cannot consent to a dealing, however, Council can advise it has no objection to the compulsory acquisition process.

It is recommended that Council resolves that it has no objection to the compulsory acquisition of the construction lease over an area of 820 square metres, for a period of 4 years, over part of Lot 5000 DP 855173 situated off Albemarle Place, Cecil Hills, for compensation payable in the amount of $131,836.36 exclusive of GST plus plus administration fee of $636.36 exclusive of GST and legal fees of $2,750 GST inclusive on the terms outlined in this report.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Resolves that it has no objection to TfNSW compulsorily acquiring a construction lease, for a period of 4 years, over Part Lot 5000 DP 855173, situated off Albemarle Place, Cecil Hills and having an area of 820 square metres, for compensation payable to Council as outlined in this report.

2. Authorises its delegated officer to execute any document, under Power of Attorney, necessary to give effect to this decision.

REPORT

Council at its meeting on 24 November 2021 resolved that it had no objection for Transport for NSW (TfNSW) to compulsorily acquire a construction lease for a period of 4 years, over Part Lot 5000 DP 855173, situated off Albemarle Place, Cecil Hills having an area of 397 square metres.

Transport for NSW (TfNSW) have written to Council seeking an increase in the construction lease area from 397 square metres to 820 square metres over Council land being part Lot 5000 DP 855173 at Albemarle Place, Cecil Hills as part of its M12 Motorway, M7 to Northern Road project. It has been identified that the construction lease would be required for a four-year period (with provision to be extended) which is expected to commence in early 2024.

Council’s land, being Lot 5000 DP 855173, has a total area of 1.469 hectares and forms part of a buffer between the adjoining Elizabeth Drive and residential homes situated off Albemarle Place and Isabel Street, at Cecil Hills. The land is zoned, RE1-Public Recreation, and is classified as “Community” land.

The TfNSW proposal for road construction, at the above location, necessitates a construction lease for temporary road construction over part of the subject, land shown by green hatching on the attached plan (TfNSW Sketch Plan SR 5459).

A aerial view of a canal

Description automatically generated

Extract of TfNSW Plan (proposed construction lease area hatched Green)

This will facilitate the M12 project with timely entry to the land required to undertake essential construction works to deliver this critical state significant infrastructure.

TfNSW have advised that access to the proposed construction lease area will only be via Elizabeth Drive as the land is only required for temporary construction purposes associated with Elizabeth Drive. TfNSW have also advised that consultation has taken place for the project as per the EIS and amendment assessment process. Council has also been advised that any removed vegetation will be reinstated like for like where possible and in accordance with urban and landscaping design plans.

As the land is classified “Community” land, Council is limited in its dealings with the land, under the provisions of the Local Government Act 1993. On this basis, TfNSW is seeking Council's consent, to acquire the construction lease for the additional area, being 820 square metres in total.

As part of its proposal to Council, TfNSW have submitted a lease memorandum with an offer for occupation of Council land in the amount of $131,836.36 exclusive of GST for the four-year period, based on a construction lease area of 820 square metres, plus administration fee of $636.36 exclusive of GST and legal fees of $2,750 GST inclusive.

In reference to the request that Council provide consent to the acquisition, given Council’s limitations in dealings associated with “community” land, it is recommended that Council resolve that it has no objection to the proposal to compulsorily acquire a construction lease over the identified Council “community” land.

TfNSW have also sought a reduction to the standard Proposed Acquisition Notice period of 90 days to 7 days, to provide certainty of obtaining construction access to the site. It is recommended, that Council approve a reduced period of 14 days to allow for Council to review its claim for compensation if agreement has not been reached beforehand.

It is recommended that Council resolves to that it has no objection to the compulsory acquisition of the construction lease, for a period of 4 years, over part of Lot 5000 DP 855173 situated off Albemarle Place, Cecil Hills for an area of 820 square metres for rental compensation of $131,836.36 exclusive of GST plus plus administration fee of $636.36 exclusive of GST and legal fees of $2,750 GST inclusive on the terms outlined in this report.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Council will receive a payment of $131,836.36 exclusive of GST as rental for the occupation of Council land.

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	Facilitate economic development.
Environment	Support the delivery of a range of transport options.
Social	There are no social and cultural considerations.
Civic Leadership	There are no civic leadership and governance considerations.
Legislative	Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991 and Local Government Act 1993.
Risk	The risk is deemed to be Low Risk as TfNSW would be required to compulsorily acquire a construction lease interest and pay compensation to Council.

ATTACHMENTS

Nil

Ordinary Meeting

27 September 2023

Corporate Support Report

CORP 03

Investment Report August 2023

Strategic Objective	Visionary, Leading, Responsible Ensure Council is accountable and financially sustainable through the strategic management of assets and resources
File Ref	303281.2023
Report By	Vishwa Nadan - Chief Financial Officer
Approved By	Farooq Portelli - Director Corporate Support

Executive Summary

This report details Council’s investment portfolio and its performance at 31 August 2023. Key highlights include:

· Council held investments with a market value of $429 million.

· The Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA)’s official cash rate is at 4.10 per cent.

· The portfolio yield (for the year to August 2023) was 24 basis points above the benchmark (AusBond Bank Bill Index)

	AusBond Bank Bill Index (ABBI)
Benchmark	3.61%
Portfolio yield	3.37%
Performance above benchmark	0.24%

· Year-to-date, Council’s investment income was $1.82 million higher than the original budget. This is due to a combination of increase in market interest rates and unrealised gain in fair value of Floating Rate Notes (FRNs).

· Year-to-date, Council’s investment in mortgage-backed securities (MBSs) is valued at $404 thousand below face value. Council’s investment advisor 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 section 212 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2021.

· 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 17.00 per cent of its portfolio in ADIs rated BBB and below.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council receive and note this report.

REPORT

Section 212 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2021 requires that the Responsible Accounting Officer must provide Council with a written report setting out details of all money that Council has invested under section 625 of the Local Government Act 1993.

Council’s portfolio

At 31 August 2023, Council held investments with a market value of $429 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).

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 17.00 per cent of its portfolio in ADIs rated BBB and below.

Mortgaged-backed securities

Council’s investment advisor regularly reviews investments in grandfathered mortgage-backed securities (MBSs) and continues to recommend “hold” position on investments in 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, the investment advisors 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 $404 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

Compliance with Investment policy – In summary

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

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 August 2023 exceeded the ABBI index by 24 basis points (portfolio yield: 3.61%; ABBI: 3.37%).

Comparative yields for the previous months are charted below:

Performance of portfolio returns against budget

Year-to-date, Council’s investment income was $1.82 million higher than the original budget. This is due to a combination of increase in market interest rate and unrealised gain in fair value of Floating Rate Notes (FRNs).

	YTD Budget	YTD Actuals	Budget Variance
Interest yield on cash holdings	$1.78m	$3.05m	$1.27m
Fair value market movement	$0.00m	$0.55m	$0.55m
Total	$1.78m	$3.60m	$1.82m

Economic outlook – Reserve Bank of Australia

The Reserve Bank of Australia has kept the official cash rate at 4.10 per cent in its meeting on 5 September 2023.

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, section 212 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2021 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 $1.82 million higher than the original budget at 31 August 2023.
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	Local Government Act 1993, section 625 Local Government (General) Regulation 2021, section 212 As required by the Local Government Act, Council is fully compliant with the ministerial requirements specified in the Local Government Act 1993 – Investment Order (relating to investments by councils) and with reporting requirements under section 212 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2021.
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 August 2023

Ordinary Meeting

27 September 2023

Corporate Support Report

CORP 04

NSW Grants Commission - Financial Assistance Grants Policy

Strategic Direction	Visionary, Leading, Responsible Ensure Council is accountable and financially sustainable through the strategic management of assets and resources
File Ref	305061.2023
Report By	Vishwa Nadan - Chief Financial Officer
Approved By	Farooq Portelli - Director Corporate Support

Executive Summary

The report outlines the NSW Grants Commission’s methodology which is used to calculate the Financial Assistance Grant paid to Council in FY 2023/24.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council receives and notes this report.

REPORT

Financial assistance grants are paid to councils under a Commonwealth scheme established under the Local Government (Financial Assistance) Act 1995. The Commonwealth provides financial assistance to the States for their grants commissions to allocate to local governing bodies. The objective is to improve the following for local governing bodies:

· financial capacity,

· capacity to provide an equitable level of services to residents,

· certainty of funding,

· efficiency and effectiveness, and

· services to aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities.

The assistance is provided to the States in the form of general grants and additional funding and on the basis of national principles. Councils may use the allocated funds at their discretion and are accountable to their ratepayers.

In accordance with its policy framework, the NSW Grants Commission wrote to Council on 5 September 2023 outlining the methodology used to calculate the $10.1 million Financial Assistance Grant allocated to Council for FY 2023/24.

The NSW Grants Commission letter and supporting information is attached, however, summarized as follows:

	$	$
Estimated 2023/24		10,057,871
Add: 2022/23 adjustment:
Final assessment 2022/23	9,888,489
Less: Paid to Council	9,417,848	470,641
Less: Paid in advance – June 2023		(10,308,623)
Payable (quarterly instalments)		219,889

In addition, the letter included an invitation to Council to make a special submission for consideration in determining the 2024/25 grant allocation. The submission provides Council with the opportunity to present information on the financial impact of inherent expenditure disabilities beyond Council’s control that are not generally recognised in the current methodology. Disability in this instance means for example, Council’s circumstances to raise income due to lower than State average population.

The NSW Grants Commission’s current methodology for allocating the Financial Assistance Grant is in principle driven by the key factors discussed below as compared to the NSW State standard.

1. General purpose component is measured by the following:

a) Population – There will be no disadvantage allowance where the population is greater than the NSW State standard. Liverpool’s estimated resident population of 239,430 is greater than the State standard of 63,714. The population estimate provided is correct as per the profile.id.com.au website and is current as of 30 June 2022. The population estimates are likewise used to determine eligibility based on several expenditure factors.

b) Pensioner Rebate Allowance – Where the NSW State standard is greater than the LGA % of pensioner rebates, no allowance is applicable. Liverpool’s pensioner rebates of 12.9% is less than the 14.6% NSW State standard.

c) Revenue Allowance – No allowance will be given where the LGA’s land values are greater than the NSW State standard. On both urban and non-urban properties, Liverpool’s values were greater than the average NSW State values.

2. Local Roads Component

Liverpool Council currently receives an allowance under the local road’s component as its local road length of 931km is less than the 1,573km NSW State standard.

Council staff have not identified any other disability factor that can be put forward for consideration by the NSW Grants Commission.

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	There are no civic leadership and governance considerations.
Legislative	The financial assistance grants scheme operates under the Local Government (Financial Assistance) Act 1995.
Risk	There is no risk associated with this report.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Letter from NSW Grants Commission - 5 Sept 23

Ordinary Meeting

27 September 2023

Operations Report

OPER 01

Managing Drainage Channels and Waterways

Strategic Objective	Liveable, Sustainable, Resilient Manage stormwater and drainage infrastructure to mitigate risk to the environment and the community
File Ref	301942.2023
Report By	Maruf Hossain - Coordinator Floodplain and Water Management
Approved By	Jason Breton - Director Operations

Executive Summary

The Council, at its meeting held on 30 August 2023, considered a report regarding the management of Hopkins Creek in West Hoxton/Hinchinbrook and presented potential modification options to improve the condition and performance of the creek. Council at this meeting resolved to defer endorsing the preferred creek modification option and directed the CEO to bring back to Council a previous report presented to Council which included the drainage systems that don’t work and the costs to go back to rectify them.

The report discusses stormwater management approaches under the concept of Sponge City and stormwater management initiatives by Council.

The report presented to Council on 29 September 2021 as Attachment 1.

The Report presented to Council on 30 August 2023 as Attachment 2.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Receives and notes this report.

2. Endorses Hopkins Creek Modification Option 4 as reported on 30 August 2023 for improvement, existing creek condition, performance, and maintenance requirements.

3. Endorses to proceed with the community consultation on Option 4 with the residents and property owners bordering Hopkins Creek.

REPORT

1. Sponge City

Sponge City is an urban stormwater management model in the form of a sustainable drainage system and a set of nature-based solutions that use natural landscapes to catch, store and clean water prior to discharging into the natural waterways, and for reuse as recycled water. Sponge cities are part of a worldwide movement that goes by various names: green infrastructure in Europe, low-impact development in the United States, nature-based solutions in Canada and water-sensitive urban design (WSUD) in Australia.

2. Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) in Liverpool LGA

The key objectives of our water quality improvement initiatives are to embed the thinking of WSUD principles in to all Council businesses, ensure the compliance of the initiatives within Council, development community and general public, and influence the State and Federal Government to invest on this important area of concern. While Council has been implementing a number of initiatives and programs in the past, Council has introduced new Water Management Policy and Water Quality Management Strategy in 2016, which aim to achieve this outcome progressively in a coordinated way. By doing this, Liverpool Council will become a water sensitive council and WSUD will become a way of our life.

Over the past decade the Council has made significant achievements in stormwater management in accordance with the current best management practices for stormwater management.

A range of programs are currently in place to manage water quantity and quality in new urban release areas and existing areas. The key actions include:

§ WSUD provisions in new development – raingardens and bio retention basins;

§ Development of a Technical Guidelines for WSUD;

§ Development of water quality model MUSIC Link for Liverpool LGA;

§ Revised Water Quality Development Control Plan (DCP);

§ Water quality treatment systems installed by Council as part of road, footpath and park upgrade works;

§ Environment Restoration Program (ERP) strategy and riparian zone management.

While Council’s current DCP has specific water quality targets to improve water quality and ecological health of waterways and wetlands, the Integrated Water Quality Management Strategy together with the revised Development Control Plan and WSUD technical guideline enables a more coordinated and consistent application of current best management practice across the LGA.

In recognition of council’s initiatives and success Council has won the prestigious NSW Local Government Excellence in Environment Award in 2018. As outlined above, Council has developed the WSUD guidelines for stormwater management and being implemented across the LGA including in Middleton Grange, Cecil Hills, Edmondson Park, Austral and Leppington. Examples of such WSUD initiatives include the following.

WSUD in Elizabeth Hills

WSUD in Middleton Grange

Wetland at Cecil Hills

Clinches Pond at Moorebank

Water quality improvement from its existing stormwater network has been a real challenge due to the complexity and cost involved in retrofitting the existing system. This challenge has been exacerbated by the anticipated future growth. While Council had number of ad-hoc initiatives to improve water quality of its waterways in the past, a need for more integrated approach has recently been realised. As a result, the Council is implementing a number of initiatives to embed the thinking of WSUD principles into Council business with an aim to improve and maintain water quality performance of our rivers and waterways. Current initiatives include:

A. Hopkins Creek modification works as outlined in the Council Report dated August 2023 – Attachment 2.

B. Affleck Graden Creek modification works – design is being finalized and works will be undertaken in 2023-24 under the capital works program.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Costs associated with this recommendation for Hopkins Creek modification works are outside of the Council’s current budget and long-term financial plan. It is proposed to undertake the project in two (2) stages, lower reach of the creek in 2024-25 and the upper reach in 2027-28 financial years under the Capital Works Program.

	2023/24	2024/25	2025/26	2026/27	2027/28
Operating budget / LTFP impact
Capital budget impact		$2,862,000			$2,095,000
Ongoing unbudgeted impact to opex from capital expenditure
Unbudgeted impact to unrestricted cash
Funding source

CONSIDERATIONS

Economic	Enhance the environmental performance of stormwater assets.
Environment	Manage the environmental health of waterways. Manage air, water, noise and chemical pollution.
Social	Promote community education and awareness as key element to manage water quality.
Civic Leadership	Act as an environmental leader in the community.
Legislative	Water Management Act 2000.
Risk	There could be potential breaches of the Water Management Act if compliance with the requirements of the Act is not achieved.

ATTACHMENTS

1. The Report Presented to Council on 29 September 2021

2. The Report Presented to Council on 30 August 2023 - Hopkins Creek Modification Options

Ordinary Meeting

27 September 2023

Operations Report

OPER 02

Operations Parks Review - September update

Strategic Objective	Visionary, Leading, Responsible Place customer satisfaction, innovation and best practice at the centre of all operations
File Ref	306650.2023
Report By	Matthew Morris - Manager City Works
Approved By	Jason Breton - Director Operations

Executive Summary

This report is an update from the City Open Spaces team as per the Council Resolution, and in response to Councils Delivery Program 2022 – 26 and Operational Plan 2022 – 2023.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council receives and notes the updates for September 2023.

REPORT

This report provides updates as to some activities presented to Council in the 2023 Park Review.

1. A comprehensive register to be developed of all the Council’s Assets.

Council resolved in August 2023 to procure the Maintenance Module for the Asset Management System (Brightly®), already in place at LCC. Beyond Asset Management (BAM) are currently preparing a roadmap for the Operations Directorate which includes consolidation of 96% of Infrastructure Assets, already mapped to include Parks, Sporting Grounds and, in fact, all other asset classes. Once completed, this database will provide the data to not only participate in a predictive work schedule, but to more accurately forecast lifecycle maintenance costs.

2. A comprehensive program of Parks activities led by the incoming CEO.

As of the date of this Report:

· The Operations Directorate has not had any IR issues before the IRC

· The Operations Directorate re-opened the Western Depot on Devonshire Street.

· The Operations Directorate has dedicated HR Business Partners assigned

· The Operations Directorate has continued weekly meetings with the USU

· Team events have occurred, and some overt signs of morale improvement are evident, these include celebrating some important milestones with staff such as the opening of Cowpasture Road in August, and the health and wellness event R U OK? BBQ at Bigge Park Friday on September 1st, 2023.

3. Expand the use of the Asset Management Software called Brightly®.

Data capture is continuing and some initial work on dashboarding via PowerBi® has commenced. We expect this will be applied initially to our Major Projects and Capital Works Programs enhancing our budget management capability and delivering a transparent and contemporary view of Asset condition.

4. Parks Maintenance Work Standards (Appendix A) which details a baseline delivery service offering.

The Operations Directorate is now clearly aligned to the model displayed in the Parks Review. A Sports fields Coordinator has been appointed and teams assigned. Suburbs have been mapped and assets counted. The next 2 – 3 months will see all assets in the one suburb (precinct) being allocated to one team. As each precinct is mapped, a weekly asset schedule will be produced. Given there are over 800 individual open spaces assets, this will not be finalised until early 2024.

5. A more collegiate and collaborate industrial model.

This model has been established which includes, but is not limited to:

· Weekly United Services Union (USU) / City Operations meetings each Thursday

· Engagement to continue the City Operations 36 Hour Week Services Agreement

· Consensus to continue dialogue around safety and efficiency projects

· A re-invigoration of matters to the Joint Consultative Committee

· Staff Breakfasts at City Operations with all the Executive Leadership Team (ELT).

6. Modelled resource levels through to 2031.

All operational roles are either recruited or are currently in the marketplace. Longer Term modelling will be encapsulated in the LTFP 2024/2034

7. Re-opening of the Western Depot.

The Western Depot reopened during the first week in August 2023 with several staff already working out of the location, including but not limited to the Shoulder and Heavy Patch Road Repair Team and Facilities Teams.

8. Research and develop green efficiencies.

The Parks team has recently conducted trials of a Conquest Electric Footway Sweeper and Eco-Teq zero turn out front mowers. Analysis and performance reviews of these trials are being compiled.

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	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

27 September 2023

Operations Report

OPER 03

McGirr Park Playground

Strategic Objective	Healthy, Inclusive, Engaging Improve liveability and quality of life for the community by delivering vibrant parks, places and facilities
File Ref	312427.2023
Report By	John Lac - Manager Infrastructure Delivery
Approved By	Jason Breton - Director Operations

Executive Summary

This report aims to inform Council of impacts to the proposed playground project at McGirr Park and Ron Darcy Oval in Miller, following Council resolutions at the 23 May 2023 Extraordinary Meeting and 28 June 2023 Ordinary Meeting, which resulted in the reallocation of funding from these projects.

The McGirr Park playground project has received $600k in approved grant funding through the Department of Planning & Environment (DPE) Green Space Program. As part of the funding agreement, Council is required to provide a 1:1 co-contribution toward the project which has been sourced from S7.11 Developer Contributions.

The Ron Darcy Oval project received $300k in approved grant funding through the NSW Club Grants program which also required a Council co-contribution; which in this case comprised of $900k in general funds.

With the May and June resolutions to reallocate funding from both projects to upgrades Michael Wendon, there is no longer a co-contribution component available to match the grant funding and meet grant requirements.

DPE have provided a final hard deadline of April 2024 to complete the McGirr Park project and meet grant requirements. To meet this timeframe, the decision to proceed with this project must be made by end of September 2023 to allow sufficient time for design, procurement and construction activities to take place.

If Council chooses to proceed with the project, there is potential to request reallocation of the Club Grants funding to the McGirr Park Project, bringing the potential budget total to $1.5M.

Council must now consider whether to reallocate funding to proceed with the McGirr Park project or return the grant funding and postpone the project.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Resolves to immediately allocate $600k in S7.11 Developer Contribution funding to the McGirr Park Playground Project to serve as Council’s Co-contribution for the DPE Green Space Program and proceed with project delivery. In addition, seek approval through the Club Grants Program for the reallocation of $300k grant funding, originally slated for Ron Darcy Oval, to the McGirr Park Playground project.

2. Resolves to return the $600k Green Space Program grant funding to DPE and postpone delivery of the McGirr Park Playground Project to a future program year when alternative funding sources are identified.

REPORT

At the 23 May 2023 Extraordinary Council meeting, it was resolved to place the Draft Delivery Program 2022-2026 and Draft Operational Plan and Budget 2023-2024, Statement of Revenue Pricing Policy (fees and charges) and draft Long-Term Financial Plan on public exhibition for 28 days from 25 May 2023 to 21 June 2023 subject to the following amendments:

- Reallocation of $1.28M from the McGirr Park playground project; and

- Reallocation of $900k from the Ron Darcy Oval project to upgrades at Michael Wenden

These items including the above amendments were subsequently endorsed at the 28 June 2023 Ordinary Council meeting.

Both projects have a significant grant funding component, with $600k for McGirr Park through the DPE Green Space Program and $300k for Ron Darcy Oval through the Club Grants Program, both which require Council co-contribution. As a result of this resolution, both the McGirr Park and Ron Darcy Oval projects no longer have sufficient budget to meet grant funding requirements or to proceed with works.

Extensions to the Mcgirr Park project timeline have been requested and approved, with DPE providing a final hard deadline of April 2024 to complete the project and meet grant requirements. To meet this timeframe, the decision to proceed with this project must be made by end of September 2023 to allow sufficient time for design, procurement and construction activities to take place.

In particular, the $600k Green Space program has had timeline extensions approved with DPE stipulating a hard deadline of April 2024 for delivery to meet grant requirements. To meet this timeframe, the decision to proceed with this project must be made by end of September 2023 to allow sufficient time for design, procurement and construction activities to take place.

Should Council choose to proceed with the McGirr Park Playground project, there is potential to request approval for the reallocation of the $300k Club Grants funding to the McGirr Park project, bringing the total potential playground budget to $1.5M, allowing for a maximised delivery scope.

Should Council choose not to proceed with the McGirr Park Playground project, the $600k Green Spaces grant will need to be returned to DPE. The $300k Club Grants component for Ron Darcy Oval will also need to be returned if the project does not proceed due to insufficient Council co-contribution.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Costs associated with this recommendation are outside of Council’s current budget and long-term financial plan. The impact on the budget and long-term financial plan are outlined in the table below.

	2023/24	2024/25	2025/26	2026/27	2027/28
Operating budget / LTFP impact
Capital budget impact	-$600,000
Ongoing unbudgeted impact to opex from capital expenditure
Unbudgeted impact to unrestricted cash
Funding source	S7.11

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	Deliver services that are customer focused. 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

^{^[1]} Legge, S, Woinarski, JCZ, Dickman CR, Murphy, BP, Leigh-Ann, W & Calver MC 2020, ‘We need to worry about Bella and Charlie: the impacts of pet cats on Australian Wildlife’, Wildlife Research.

^{^[2]} Stobo-Wilson et al. 2011, ‘Counting the bodies: estimating the numbers and spatial variation of Australian reptiles, birds and mammals killed by two invasive mesopredators’, Diversity and Distributions.

^{^[4]} RSPCA NSW Keeping Cats Safe at Home project. Viewable at: https://www.rspcansw.org.au/keeping-cats-safe/

0
PLAN 06	Street Naming - Middleton Grange
Attachment 1	Council Report and Resolution - 30 August 2023

0
PLAN 06	Street Naming - Middleton Grange
Attachment 2	Existing Middleton Grange Street Name Map

Strategic Objective	Evolving, Prosperous, Innovative Maintain strong relationships with agencies, stakeholders and businesses to achieve beneficial outcomes for the city
File Ref	302405.2023
Report By	Susana Freitas - Visitor Economy Officer
Approved By	Shayne Mallard - Director City Futures

0
CTTE 01	Minutes of the Tourism and CBD Committee 29 August 2023
Attachment 1	Minutes of the Tourism and CBD Committee Meeting August 2023

0
CTTE 02	Minutes of the Intermodal Committee meeting 7 August 2023
Attachment 1	Minutes of the Intermodal Meeting August 2023

0
CTTE 03	Minutes of the Civic Advisory Committee meeting held on 17 August 2023
Attachment 1	Civic Advisory Minutes from 17 August 2023_Excluding Item 3

Strategic Objective	Healthy, Inclusive, Engaging Communicate, listen, engage and respond to the community by encouraging community participation
File Ref	313379.2023
Report By	Michael Zengovski - Manager City Environment
Approved By	Jason Breton - Director Operations

0
CTTE 04	Minutes of the Environment Advisory Committee Meeting held on 19 June 2023
Attachment 1	Environment Advisory Committee (EAC) Meeting Minutes from 19 June 2023

0
CTTE 05	Minutes of the Liverpool Heritage Advisory Committee
Attachment 1	Minutes of the Heritage Advisory Committee on 20 March 2023

Strategic Objective	Healthy, Inclusive, Engaging Support an inclusive community by fostering access and equity for all
File Ref	314578.2023
Report By	Jacqueline Newsome - Coordinator Community Development
Approved By	Tina Bono - Director Community & Lifestyle

0
CTTE 06	Minutes of Community Safety & Crime Prevention Advisory Committee held on 7 September 2023
Attachment 1	Minutes of the Community Safety and Crime Prevention Advisory Committee meeting - 7 September 2023