NOTICE OF Council MEETING

 

 

 

The Meeting of Parramatta City Council will be held in the Council Chamber, Fourth Floor, 2 Civic Place, Parramatta on Monday, 24 November 2008 at 6:45 pm.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dr. Robert Lang

Chief Executive Officer

 

 

Parramatta – the leading city at the heart of Sydney

 

30 Darcy Street Parramatta NSW 2150

PO Box 32 Parramatta

 

Phone 02 9806 5050 Fax 02 9806 5917 DX 8279 Parramatta

ABN 49 907 174 773  www.parracity.nsw.gov.au

 

“Think Before You Print”



COUNCIL CHAMBERS

 

 

 

 

 

GALLERY

 


Ordinary Council

 24 November 2008

 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

ITEM                                                         SUBJECT                                              PAGE NO

 

1       CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES - Regulatory Council - 10 November 2008

2        APOLOGIES

3        DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

4        Minutes of Lord Mayor

5        Public Forum  

6        PETITIONS

7        Rescission Motions

7.1     20 Rawson Street, Epping. (Lot 4 DP 9193) (Lachlan Macquarie Ward).  

8        COUNCIL MATTERS TO BE ADOPTED WITHOUT DISCUSSION

9        Regulatory Reports

9.1     Church Street Road Reserve and 353A - 353C Church Street, Parramatta. (Arthur Philip Ward).

9.2     13-15 Kleins Road and 30-36 Briens Road Northmead (Lots 1-5 DP 15342 and Lot B DP 320582) (Arthur Phillip Ward)

9.3     First Home-Owners Boost Scheme - Fast Tracking Development Applications

10      City Development

10.1   Merrylands RDS Area (Further Report) 

11      Roads Paths Access and Flood Mitigation

11.1   Review of M4 Toll

11.2   Parramatta Traffic Committee - 6 November 2008

11.3   Traffic Engineering Advisory Group - 6 November 2008

12      Culture and Leisure

12.1   Naming of an Unnamed Public Reserve in Parramatta as Baludarri Wetland

12.2   Parramatta Cultural Trust

12.3   Sir Thomas Mitchell Reserve, 21B Yates Avenue Dundas Valley

12.4   Proposed Additional Dog Off-Leash Areas

13      Community Care

13.1   Response to Council Request to Report on Advisory Committee Achievements

14      City Leadership and Management

14.1   Presentation of 2007/08 Financial report to the Public

14.2   Investments Report for September 2008

14.3   2008/09 Management Plan - September Quarterly Review

14.4   Status Report of Implementation of ICAC Recommendations

14.5   Tender No 29/2008 Westpool/UIP Service Providers Broking and Claims Management

14.6   Affirmation and Review of Civic Office Expenses and Facilities Policy  

15      Notices of Motion

15.1   Congratulations to Councillor Prabir Maitra

15.2   Traffic Congestion in Epping

15.3   Annual Christmas Lights Decorations Competition beginning 2009

15.4   Protecting the Privacy of Individuals Submitting Objections to Development Applications

15.5   Internal Council Ombudsman

15.6   Delegations from Council

15.7   Whistleblower Protection Policy  

16      Closed Session

16.1   Proposed Developer Contributions Framework - 61 Mobbs Lane Epping - Channel 7 Site

This report is confidential in accordance with section 10A (2) (c) of the Local Government act 1993 as the report contains information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business.

 

16.2   Tender No. 19/2008 Memorial Drive, Granville - Construction of Stormwater Drainage, Reconstruction of Kerb and Gutter, Road Pavement and Associated Works.

This report is confidential in accordance with section 10A (2) (d) of the Local Government act 1993 as the report contains commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed (i) prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it; or (ii) confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council; or (iii) reveal a trade secret.

 

16.3   Tender No. 18/2008 Guildford Road, Guildford Town Centre Upgrade - Civil, Drainage, Paving, Landscape and Streetscape Works.

This report is confidential in accordance with section 10A (2) (d) of the Local Government act 1993 as the report contains commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed (i) prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it; or (ii) confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council; or (iii) reveal a trade secret.

 

16.4   Tender No. 23/2008 Colquhoun Park Cycleway - Construction of Concrete Cycleway and Associated Civil and Landscape Works.

This report is confidential in accordance with section 10A (2) (d) of the Local Government act 1993 as the report contains commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed (i) prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it; or (ii) confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council; or (iii) reveal a trade secret.

 

16.5   Tender for Security Services

This report is confidential in accordance with section 10A (2) (d) of the Local Government act 1993 as the report contains commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed (i) prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it; or (ii) confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council; or (iii) reveal a trade secret.

17      DECISIONS FROM CLOSED SESSION

18      QUESTION TIME

 


Ordinary Council

 24 November 2008

 

 

 

Rescission Motions

 

24 November 2008

 

7.1    20 Rawson Street, Epping. (Lot 4 DP 9193) (Lachlan Macquarie Ward).


Ordinary Council 24 November 2008

Item 7.1

RESCISSION MOTION

ITEM NUMBER         7.1

SUBJECT                   20 Rawson Street, Epping. (Lot 4 DP 9193) (Lachlan Macquarie Ward).

REFERENCE            DA/514/2008  - D01072248

REPORT OF              Manager Development Services       

 

To be Moved by Councillor L E Wearne and Seconded by Councillors A A Wilson and J Chedid:-

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

“That the resolution of the Regulatory Council Meeting held on 10 November 2008 regarding the Development Application for 20 Rawson Street, Epping, namely:-

 

(a)     That Council grant consent to Development Application No. 514/2008 subject to standard conditions and the following extraordinary condition:

 

1.      The premises being used exclusively as a single dwelling house and not being adapted for, or used as a dual occupancy.

Reason:     To ensure the premises is used as a sole occupancy.

 

(b)     Further, that the objectors be advised of Council’s determination of the application.

 

be and is hereby rescinded.”

 

 

Attachments:

1View

Copy of previous report considered by Council at its Meeting on 10 November 2008

24 Pages

 

 

  


Ordinary Council

 24 November 2008

 

 

 

Regulatory

 

24 November 2008

 

9.1    Church Street Road Reserve and 353A - 353C Church Street, Parramatta. (Arthur Philip Ward).

 

PLEASE NOTE:        This matter was considered at the Council Meeting on Monday, 10 November 2008, where all motions and amendments were lost. There being no motion before the floor, the matter has been re-listed for consideration at this Council Meeting.

 

9.2    13-15 Kleins Road and 30-36 Briens Road Northmead (Lots 1-5 DP 15342 and Lot B DP 320582) (Arthur Phillip Ward)

 

 

 

 

9.3    First Home-Owners Boost Scheme - Fast Tracking Development Applications


Ordinary Council 24 November 2008

Item 9.1

REGULATORY

ITEM NUMBER         9.1

SUBJECT                   Church Street Road Reserve and 353A - 353C Church Street, Parramatta. (Arthur Philip Ward).

DESCRIPTION          Section 96(1)(A) Modification to an approved outdoor dining for 180 chairs. The modification seeks to relocate 4 tables and associated chairs, erection of an awning and extension of hours of operation. (Location Map - Attachment 2)

REFERENCE            DA/26/2006/C - Submitted: 4 July 2008

APPLICANT/S           Meat and Wine Company (Parramatta) Pty Ltd

OWNERS                    Parramatta City Council

REPORT OF              Manager Development Services       

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

 

To determine an application which seeks to modify Development Consent No. 26/2006 in the following manner:

 

(i)        Relocation of 4 tables and associated chairs,

(ii)       Construction of an awning and

(iii)      Extension of hours of trading of the outdoor area from the approved (7am to 10pm) to 7am to 12 midnight, 7 days a week.

 

The application has been assessed by an independent consultant town planner and referred to Council due to Council being the applicant and owner of the site.

 

The modifications recommended for approval as it is consistent with the aims and objectives of the zoning applying to the land, and is generally consistent with Council’s City Centre LEP 2007 and City Centre DCP 2007. In addition, it will contribute to an improved functionality, service and presentation of the restaurant.

 

PLEASE NOTE:        This matter was considered at the Council Meeting on Monday, 10 November 2008, where all motions and amendments were lost. There being no motion before the floor, the matter has been re-listed for consideration at this Council Meeting.

 

 

RECommendation

 

That Council modify Development Consent No. 26/2006 as follows.

 

1.         Replace condition 1 with the following:

 

“1.       The development is to be carried out in compliance with the following plans and documentation listed below and endorsed with Council’s stamp, as amended by the conditions of consent.

 

Drawing No

Dated

Job No. 461005, Drawing No. 03 prepared by DS17

January 2006

Job No. 461005, Drawing No. 02 prepared by DS17 – typical seating dimension and railing elevation only, layout of tables and chairs amended by the following plans

January 2006

One plan unnumbered, titled Ground Floor Plan, showing the layout of tables and chairs, prepared by DS17

Undated, received by fax on 19.09.08

One plan titled “Plan” showing layout of 4 tables, prepared by Alfresco Shade

Undated

One plan titled “West Wall Elevation”, prepared by Alfresco Shade

Undated

One plan titled “West Wall Elevation”, prepared by Alfresco Shade

Undated

One plan titled “Section A - A”, prepared by Alfresco Shade

Undated

 

Document(s)

Dated

Document titled “Statement of Environmental Effects and Statement of Heritage Impact”, prepared by Graham Edds & Associates, as amended by the following documents.

February 2008

Document titled “Statement of Environmental Effects – Proposed Relocation of Outdoor Seating”, prepared by Design Cubicle

July 2008

Document titled “Traffic and Pedestrian Safety Assessment Outdoor Dining Areas”, prepared by Thompson Stanbury Associates

22 April 2008

Waste Management Plan

25/2/2008

Document titled “Transistor Café, 353A Church Street, Parramatta Noise Management Plan and House Policy”, prepared by Karima Catering Enterprises Pty Ltd, with the exception of the components addressing the provision of live music within the site.

21 August 2006

Document titled “Extended Existing Trading Hours Transistor Café 353A Church Street, Parramatta Environmental Noise Assessment”, prepared by Acoustic Logic Consultancy

21 August 2006

Reason:     To ensure the event is carried out in accordance with the approved plans.”

 

2.         Replace condition 7 with the following:

 

7.         The hours of operation of the outdoor area being restricted to 7.00am to 12.00 midnight, seven days per week.

Reason:       To minimise the impact on the amenity of the area.

 

3.         Replace condition 15 with the following:

 

15.       The outdoor dining area is to be enclosed on a maximum of three sides and the PVC screens are only to be used in rainy or windy weather, in accordance with Council’s Outdoor Dining Policy 2003 or between 10pm and midnight as required by the recommendations of the “Extended Existing Trading Hours Transistor Café 353A Church Street, Parramatta Environmental Noise Assessment”, prepared by Acoustic Logic Consultancy, dated 21 August 2006.

 

4.         Replace condition 17 with the following:

 

17.      No live entertainment is to be provided within the external dining area or within the associated restaurant.

Reason:       To minimise the impact on the amenity of the area.

 

5.         Replace condition 18 with the following:

 

18.      The restaurant and associated outdoor dining area shall at all times be operated in accordance with the recommendations of the “Extended Existing Trading Hours Transistor Café 353A Church Street, Parramatta Environmental Noise Assessment”, prepared by Acoustic Logic Consultancy, dated 21 August 2006” and the “Transistor Café, 353A Church Street, Parramatta Noise Management Plan and House Policy”, prepared by Karima Catering Enterprises Pty Ltd, dated 21 August 2006 as amended by the conditions of this consent.”

Reason:       To minimise the impact on the amenity of the area.”

 

6.         The following additional conditions be included in the consent:

 

19.       A noise complaints register is to be maintained on the premises and is to identify all noise complaints and the response taken to such complaints. The register is to be made available for viewing upon request by Council officers or Police.

Reason:       Ensure appropriate ongoing management of noise issues.

 

20.      The semi-transparent plastic sheets extending from the northern-most segment of the Church Street seating area (under the umbrella in closest proximity to the pedestrian crossing on Church Street) are to be removed from all 3 sides. The 2 sections of barrier fencing around the periphery of that segment are to be removed. All tables and chairs and other equipment for storage of materials, together with any other material in this area that may block sight lines towards pedestrians using the Church Street crossing are to be removed permanently. These works are to be carried out at the cost of the applicant. Council will cut back the strip hedge along Church Street to be 6m from the pedestrian crossing and will provide feature paving bricks as required at no cost to the applicant.

Reason:       To maintain amenity of the streetscape.

 

21.       A 2m wide path of travel is to be maintained to the exit door adjoining the relocated tables and chairs and the existing approved tables and chairs.

Reason:       To ensure public safety.

 

22.      Approval is required under section 126 the Roads Act 1993 and an activity approval under Section 68 Part E the Local Government Act 1993 is also required for the proposed works.

Reason:       To fulfil requirements under the legislation.

 

 

SITE & LOCALITY

 

1.         The site is known as 353A-C Church Street, Parramatta (Lot 2 in DP 740382), and the adjoining Church and Market Street road reserves. The site contains the Riverside Theatres and a restaurant known as the Meat and Wine Company and includes tables and seating for 176 persons as external seating within the road reserves. The site is surrounded by a mix of uses and building types, including entertainment, open space, commercial, retail and residential uses.

 

PROPOSAL

 

2.         DA/26/2006/C seeks to modify Development Consent No. 26.2006 in the following manner:

 

(a)  Relocate 4 tables and the associated 6 chairs from the northern most section of the outdoor dining area along the Church Street kerb, to adjacent to the building,

(b)  Provide a new awning to shelter the new tables and chairs,

(c)   The modification also seeks to use the outdoor area (existing and proposed area) between 7am and 12midnight, 7 days a week being an increase of 2 hours. It is noted that the internal part of the restaurant currently has approval to operate to 12midnight.

 

3.         The modification also seeks to use all of the 44 tables and 176 chairs between 7am and 12midnight 7 days a week, being an increase of 2 hours per day over the currently approved 10pm closing time.

 

4.         As such, the application seeks approval to modify:

 

Condition 1          which identifies the approved plans, by amending the approved plans to show the new location of the seating and structures

Condition 7          which sets the hours of use, by increasing the hours of use to 7am to midnight 7 days a week.

Condition 18        which limits the period for the extended trading hours, by deleting the condition.

 

STATUTORY CONTROLS

 

Parramatta City Centre Local Environmental Plan 2007

 

5.         The site is part zoned B4 Mixed Use (353A-C Church Street) and part unzoned (road reserves) under Parramatta City Centre Local Environmental Plan 2007. The use as a restaurant is permitted in the B4 Mixed Use zone with consent and pursuant to clause 13 of the City Centre LEP 2007 is also permitted on unzoned land.

 

6.         The proposal is consistent with the objectives of the B4 Mixed Use zone and does not alter the number of tables and chairs and as such the car parking provisions of clause 22C of the City Centre LEP 2007 are not relevant to the assessment of the application.

 

7.         Clause 13 of the City Centre LEP 2007 applies to unzoned land and requires Council to consider the following prior to the approval of any use on that land:

 

(a)       must consider whether the development will impact on adjoining zoned land and, if so, consider the objectives for development in the zones of the adjoining land, and

(b)       must be satisfied that the development is appropriate and is compatible with permissible land uses in any such adjoining land.

 

8.         The adjoining zone is B4 Mixed Use and the use for seating for the restaurant is only sustainable with the operation of the restaurant on the adjoining site. As such the proposed use of the unzoned land is supportive of the use of the adjoining land and is consistent with the objectives of the Mixed Use zone. Given the use is to operate in conjunction with the restaurant on the adjoining land, it is compatible with the use on the adjoining land.

 

9.         Clause 22G of the City Centre LEP 2007 requires Council to ensure development identified as being within Special Areas is compatible with the character and significance of the Special Areas, reinforces the specific attributes and qualities of the Special Area and has regard to the objectives of the Special Area identified in the City Centre DCP.

 

10.       Whilst the site is located within the Prince Alfred Park Special Area, the nature of the proposal is so minor that there are no specific controls of relevance under the City Centre DCP. The proposal is consistent with the objectives for the Prince Alfred Park Special Area.

 

Parramatta City Centre Development Control Plan

 

11.       Due to the minor nature of the works proposed the majority of the City Centre DCP does not apply to the application, including the Building Form, Access, Parking and Servicing and Environmental Management sections. The potentially relevant sections are Section – Pedestrian Amenity and Section 7 – Controls for Special Areas, which are addressed following.

 

12.       Two controls within Section 3 of the City Centre DCP – Pedestrian Amenity apply to the application. The relevant controls identify the site as being one upon which outdoor dining is encouraged and require that clear lines of sight be provided for pedestrians.

 

13.       The site currently contains a significant amount of outdoor dining and this is continued in the application, consistent with this control.

 

14.       The amended layout of the outdoor dining is being proposed to provide an improved line of sight for vehicles approaching the pedestrian crossing on Church Street. Currently the location of the tables nearest the crossing limit the sight distance of vehicles and reduce the level of safety for pedestrians using the crossing. A Traffic and Pedestrian Safety Assessment prepared by Thompson Stanbury Associates that accompanied the application indicates that the relocation of the set of four tables and chairs closest to the pedestrian crossing to another position would significantly improve the safety of pedestrians using the pedestrian crossing by increasing the sight lines to them from vehicles using Church Street. Therefore the proposal satisfies this control.

 

15.       Section 7 – Controls for Special Areas of the City Centre DCP provides specific controls for the Prince Alfred Park Special Area, in which the site is located, however none of the controls are relevant given the minor nature of the works proposed. The proposal is consistent with the objectives and desired future character for the Prince Alfred Park Special Area.

 

CONSULTATION

 

16.       In accordance with Council’s Notification Development Control Plan, the proposal was notified between 11 August and 25 August 2008. Three submissions from individuals were received. The following issues were raised in the submissions. 

 

17.       The footpath area is already affected and no more area should be provided for the restaurant.

 

The proposal does not result in an increased area of usage of the footpath, but rather seeks to relocate the area of usage given concerns raised in relation to sight line distances from vehicles to pedestrians using the pedestrian crossing on Church Street.

 

18.       The exhaust from the kitchen does not work and odours and fumes come into 7/346 Church Street

 

            This is not a matter that is relevant to the assessment of the application as no amendments are being sought to the kitchen or odour systems. .

 

19.       Existing use results in unacceptable impact to bedrooms of 5/346 Church Street and extension of hours to midnight will make the situation worse.

 

Potential impacts of the increased trading hours would be a loss of amenity to nearby residences due to noise from patrons (whilst on the premises and after leaving the premises) and noise from staff during closing up of the premises, removal of glasses, removal and storage of tables and chairs and cleaning of the premises. Such activities may result in additional noise impacts upon nearby residences that could lead to sleep disturbances.

 

Acoustic reports lodged with previous modification requests for the extended trading hours have addressed the potential for noise disturbances due to patrons on the site, both within the premises and within the outdoor dining area and have found likely noise impacts to be within acceptable noise ranges, subject to use of the drop down plastic sheets after 10pm (to be conditioned). The site has been operating on extended hours for over twelve months, both in its previous form as a café and in its current form as a more up-market steak house, without any significant level of complaint. The operation as a restaurant which also caters for the theatre goers of the adjoining theatre is less likely to result in noisy or rowdy patron behaviour and as such, given the previous two trial periods did not result in significant amenity impacts for nearby residents, it is unlikely the restaurant will.

 

REFERRALS

 

NSW Police

 

20.       Given the potential for the extended trading hours to affect the Liquor Licence for the premises and to result in problems with noise and patron behaviour, the application was referred to the Police for comments. The Police raised no objections to the proposal in their response to the notification.

 

Traffic

 

21.       The application was referred to the Traffic Engineer to address the issue of sight distance to the pedestrian crossing on Church Street. The Traffic Engineer raised no objections to the proposal subject to a series of conditions, which have been included in the recommendation.

 

Property

 

22.       The application was referred to the Property Section as the proposal is located on a Council owned road reserve. The Property Section raise no objections to the proposal subject to conditions that have been included in the recommendation. As a result of the revised external dining layout, a revised outdoor permit is required to be obtained. Discussions have commenced with the operator in regards to the revised permit.

 

ISSUES

 

Pedestrian Safety

 

23.       The likely impacts of the proposed changes to the layout of the outdoor dining and associated structures have been addressed previously in this report, being an improvement in pedestrian safety through the provision of improved sight distances to pedestrians using the Church Street pedestrian crossing from vehicles travelling along Church Street.

 

Noise

 

24.       The remaining potential impacts would result from the proposed permanent increase in outdoor trading hours from 7am – 10pm 7 days a week to 7am to midnight 7 days a week. Potential impacts of the increased trading hours would be a loss of amenity to nearby residences due to noise from patrons (whilst on the premises and after leaving the premises) and noise from staff during closing up of the premises, removal of glasses, removal and storage of tables and chairs and cleaning of the premises). Such activities may result in additional noise impacts upon nearby residences that could lead to sleep disturbances. It is noted that the restaurant currently has approval to operate to 12midnight.

 

25.       Acoustic reports lodged with previous modification requests for the extended trading hours have addressed the potential for noise disturbances due to patrons on the site, both within the premises and within the outdoor dining area and have found likely noise impacts to be within acceptable ranges, subject to use of the drop down plastic sheets after 10pm (to be conditioned).

 

26.       No additional information has been provided to support the request for additional hours, and whilst the previous reports addressed the need for staff to carryout packing away and cleaning up the area for closure of the restaurant in a quiet manner and managing patrons to minimise the chances of noise disturbances to neighbours, such measures cannot prevent such disturbances completely. Such measures, particularly in relation to patrons, can only seek to reduce the length and frequency of such disturbances.

 

27.       However, the site has been operating on the extended hours for over twelve months, both in its previous form as a café and in its current form as a more up-market steak house, without any significant level of complaint. The operation as a restaurant, which also caters for the theatre goers of the adjoining theatre, is less likely to result in noisy or rowdy patron behaviour and as such, given the previous two trial periods did not result in significant amenity impacts for nearby residents, it is unlikely the restaurant will.

 

28.       However, it is noted that the current consent does not incorporate the recommendations of the acoustic report and the Noise Management Plan and House Policy as conditions of consent and it would be appropriate for any modification of the consent to include both as conditions of consent. Further, an ongoing maintenance of logs of reported disturbances should also occur, to allow appropriate management responses to noise complaints. Further, given the change in nature of the operation, it is appropriate that a condition of consent prevent live music from being performed from the site.

 

29.       Subject to all of the above recommended conditions to ensure a suitable level of amenity is maintained for nearby residents, and which have been agreed to by the applicant, and given the successful trial periods previously, it is considered appropriate to allow trading to midnight 7 days a week for this use in this location.

 

 

Kerry Gordon

Director

Kerry Gordon Planning Services

Consultant Town Planner

 

Attachments:

1View

Plans and Elevations

5 Pages

 

2View

Locality Map

1 Page

 

3View

History of Application

1 Page

 

4View

DSU 14/2006 - Regulatory Council Report for DA/26/2006 - 13 February 2006

9 Pages

 

5View

DSU 152/2006 - Regulatory Council Report for DA/26/2006/A - 9 October 2006

6 Pages

 

 

 

REFERENCE MATERIAL

 


Ordinary Council 24 November 2008

Item 9.2

REGULATORY

ITEM NUMBER         9.2

SUBJECT                   13-15 Kleins Road and 30-36 Briens Road Northmead (Lots 1-5 DP 15342 and Lot B DP 320582) (Arthur Phillip Ward)

DESCRIPTION          Demolition and construction of a 2 storey mixed use development containing a supermarket and 9 residential units over basement parking for 66 vehicles. (Locality Map attachment 1)

REFERENCE            DA/212/2008 - Submitted 2 February 2008

APPLICANT/S           Milestone Management Pty Ltd

OWNERS                    Mr K Lewis, Mrs K Scully, Ms D Esber, Mr N Esber, Councillor P Esber, Mr D Petratos, Mrs P Petratos, Mr E Jones, Mrs M Campbell.

REPORT OF              Manager Development Services       

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

To determine Development Application No. 212/2008 which seeks approval for demolition and the construction of a mixed used development containing 9 residential units and a supermarket.

 

The application was referred to Council’s Drainage Engineer, Traffic Engineer, Environmental Health Officer, Urban Designer and Landscape Officer, who support the proposal, subject to conditions.

 

Councillor Pierre Esber is a joint owner of No. 34 Briens Road Northmead. To ensure transparency in the development assessment process this report has been peer reviewed by an external planning consultant. The peer review concurs with the recommendation of this report. The peer review is attachment No. 8.

 

Seventeen objections, a petition with 18 signatures, and a petition with 466 signatures were received in respect of this application.

 

The application has been referred to Council for determination due to the number of submissions received.

 

Mixed use development is a permissible use in the zone and the site is suitable for this type of use. Whilst the site is located in close proximity to a major intersection the development consent will require the construction of a median island and roundabout which aim to minimise negative impacts on the operation of the road network. Accordingly, approval of the development application is recommended.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

(a)     That Development Application No. 212/2008 be approved, subject to standard and the following extraordinary conditions:

 

1.      Deliveries to the supermarket may only occur between the hours of 7.00am to 2.30pm, and between the hours of 6.00pm to 10.00pm. From Monday to Friday only one articulated vehicle delivery is permitted during the hours of 7.00am to 8.30am.

Reason: To protect the amenity of the adjoining residential flat building in Howard Avenue and to ensure that deliveries occur at appropriate times.

 

2.      The trading hours of the supermarket are restricted to 7.00am to 9.00pm daily.

Reason: To protect the amenity of the area.

 

3.      The fence/wall to the southern side of the patios for units 2-8 is to have a minimum height of 1600mm above the level of the adjacent pedestrian pathway.

Reason: To provide adequate privacy to the patios.

 

4.      Two of the proposed units are to be adaptable dwellings in accordance with the Australian Standard No. 4299. Revised plans demonstrating compliance with this requirement are to be submitted for the approval by the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

Reason: To ensure compliance with Part 4.4.3 ‘Housing Diversity and Choice’ of Parramatta DCP 2005.

 

5.      The garbage compactor shall only be used during the hours of 7.00am to 10.00pm.

Reason: To protect the amenity of the area.

 

6.      A roundabout is to be constructed at the intersection of Kleins Road and Balmoral Road, and a concrete median island is to be provided in Kleins Road from the proposed roundabout at the intersection of Balmoral Road and Kleins Road to the intersection of Kleins Road and Briens Road. 

 

A detailed plan for the construction of the roundabout and the concrete median island, including associated signposting and linemarking, is to be submitted to Council for approval at least 4 months prior to occupation of the building.  The approval for the construction of the roundabout is to be obtained prior to the issue of the construction certificate. The construction of the roundabout and concrete median island is to be completed to Council’s satisfaction prior to occupation of the building.

 

All costs associated with the design and construction of the roundabout and the median are to be borne by the consent holder.

Reason: Traffic Safety.

 

7.      Seventy-four (74) off-street parking spaces (including 2 disabled parking spaces) are to be provided, permanently marked on the pavement and used accordingly, as per the approved plans. The dimensions for resident’s and customer parking spaces and aisle width to be in accordance with AS 2890.1-2004 (2.4m wide x 5.4m long clear of columns plus 300mm clearance adjacent walls & 6.2m aisle width minimum).  The disabled parking spaces are to have dimensions of 3.8m wide x 5.5m long in accordance with Parramatta DCP 2005 as indicated on the approved plans.

Reason: Traffic Safety.

 

8.      The combined entry and exit driveway for the at grade parking area and loading dock access, plus the driveway for basement access is to be provided in accordance with the approved plans. The driveway is to be constructed according to AS 2890.1- 2004 and Council’s specification. Traffic calming devices (speed humps or similar) are to be provided within the carparking area in the basement for safety reasons.

Reason: Traffic Safety.

 

9.      Driveway and ramp gradients shall comply with Clause 2.5.3 and Clause 3.3 of AS2890.1-2004. Column locations to be in accordance with AS 2890.1-2004. Traffic facilities, such as; wheel stops, bollards, kerbs, signposting, pavement markings, lighting and speed humps, shall comply with AS2890.1-2004. Details of compliance with this condition are to be included on the plans submitted with the application for construction certificate.

Reason: Traffic Safety.

 

10.    Clear sight lines shall be provided at the property boundary line to ensure adequate visibility between vehicles leaving the carpark and pedestrians along the Kleins Road footpath (in accordance with Figure 3.3 of AS 2890.1-2004).  Any landscaping, fences or walls in this area are to be no greater than 0.6m higher than the boundary level at the driveway.  Details of compliance with this condition are to be included on the plans submitted with the application for construction certificate.

Reason: Traffic Safety.

 

11.    The minimum available headroom clearance for the basement carpark is to be signposted at all entrances and clearance is to be a minimum of 2.2m (for cars and light vans including all travel paths to and from parking spaces for people with disabilities) measured to the lowest projection of the roof (fire sprinkler, lighting, sign, and ventilation), according to AS 2890.1-2004. Details of compliance with this condition are to be included on the plans submitted with the application for construction certificate.

Reason: Traffic Safety.

 

12.    A convex mirror to be installed within the ramp access for the basement carpark (one near the entry driveway and one at the bottom of the ramp access) with its height and location adjusted to allow an exiting driver a full view of the driveway in order to see if another vehicle is coming through. Details of compliance with this condition are to be included on the plans submitted with the application for construction certificate.

Reason: Traffic Safety.

 

13.    For footpath construction and/or restoration, if included as part of the final DA Consent Conditions, shall require a Road Occupancy Permit and Road Opening Permit. The applicant shall submit an application for a Road Occupancy Permit through Council’s Traffic & Transport Services and a Road Opening Permit through Council’s Restoration Engineer, prior to carrying out the construction/restoration works.

Reason: Traffic Safety.

 

14.    Full time "No Stopping" restrictions are to be implemented along the Briens Road frontage of the development site.  This restriction should be implemented prior to the commencement of any demolition works relating to the proposed development.   Prior to the installation of the parking restrictions, the applicant is to contact the RTA's Traffic Management Services on phone: (02) 8849 2030 for a works instruction. 

Reason: Traffic Safety.

 

15.    Full time "No Stopping" restrictions to be installed along the site's entire Kleins Road frontage and full time "No Parking" restrictions to be installed along the site's entire Howard Avenue frontage, subject to the approval of the Parramatta Traffic Committee under Delegated Authority, prior to final occupation of the premises.  Details are to be submitted to Council for approval at least 4 months prior to occupation of the building.  The “No Stopping” and “No Parking” restrictions are to be implemented prior to occupation of the building.

Reason: Traffic Safety.

 

16.    A pedestrian crossing is to be marked on the pavement from the at grade staff parking area to the kerb ramp that provides access to the pedestrian ramps. The at-grade car parking spaces are to be used and signposted for employees only. The linemarking and provision of signage is to occur prior to the issue of the occupation certificate.

Reason: Traffic Safety.

 

17.    Prior to the issue of a construction certificate a detailed plan showing the surface treatments for the at grade car park shall be submitted to Council for approval. The plan shall include details of the colours and/or textures that will be used to provide an aesthetically appealing surface treatment to the car park.

Reason: To ensure that the development has an acceptable impact on the visual qualities of the streetscape.

 

(b)     Further, that objectors be advised of Councils decision.

 

 

SITE & LOCALITY

 

1.      The site is comprised of six individual allotments, No.’s 30-36 Briens Road Northmead and No.’s 13-15 Kleins Road, Northmead. Each of the allotments contains a single dwelling house, garden, and associated outbuildings. The development site has an area of 3422m2 with frontages of 36.27m to Howard Avenue, 58.9m to Briens Road and 28.04m to Kleins Road.

 

2.      A three storey mixed use development is located at No. 38 Briens Road. This recently constructed development adjoins the western boundary of No. 36 Briens Road and the northern boundary of No. 15 Kleins Road. A four storey mixed use development at No.1-3 Howard Avenue adjoins the southern boundaries of No.’s 30-34 Briens Road and the eastern boundaries of No.’s 13-15 Kleins Road. A single storey dwelling is located on the allotment which adjoins the southern boundary of No. 13 Kleins Road.

 

3.      A local shopping area is located on the western side of Kleins Road opposite the vehicle entrance and at-grade car park of the proposed development. Twelve on-street parking spaces are provided within the frontage of the shopping strip. The area to the west of Kleins Road is zoned predominantly residential, whilst the area to the east of Kleins Road is zoned Mixed Use 10 and Employment 4. An extract from the zoning map is provided as attachment No. 2.

 

4.      That part of Northmead on the southern side of Briens Road has been subject to extensive re-development in recent times. Of particular note is a master plan development currently under construction at No.’s 56-98 Briens Road, No.’s 37-57 Balmoral Road and No.’s 38-40 Redbank Road Northmead. When completed, this development will contain 238 residential units.

 

PROPOSAL

 

5.      The proposal incorporates the demolition of existing structures and the construction of a two storey mixed use development over a single level of basement carparking with a supermarket at the ground floor level and 9 residential units on the first floor level. The building has frontage to Howard Avenue and Briens Road. Vehicular access to the site is provided from Kleins Road. The Kleins Road frontage incorporates the driveway which provides access to the basement car park and another driveway which will service the loading dock and the at grade employee parking area. The basement is divided into two compartments, a compartment for the supermarket customers/resident visitors and a separate section for the residents of the units. Fifty-three car spaces are provided for the supermarket customers and 11 car spaces are provided for the residents. The at grade parking area provides 8 parking spaces for employees of the supermarket. Resident visitor parking consists of two spaces located within the supermarket customer car park.

 

6.      The proposed store hours are 7.00am to 9.00pm daily. The proposed delivery hours are 6.00am to 10.00pm daily.

 

STATUTORY CONTROLS

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards (SEPP 1) & Draft State Environmental Planning Policy (Application of Development Standards) 2004

 

7.      An objection under the provisions of SEPP 1 was lodged as the proposed development provides 13 more car spaces than the maximum number of parking spaces permitted by Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 28. The SEPP 1 objection is worthy of Council’s endorsement and is discussed in further detail within this report.

 

Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 28

 

8.      The site is within the ‘Primary Centre’ area as defined by SREP 28. In the ‘Primary Centre’ area the parking controls are maximums rather than minimums. SREP No. 28 limits the maximum number of parking spaces for the development to 61. The development provides a total of 72 spaces which exceeds the maximum number of spaces by 11. The applicant has provided a SEPP 1 objection in support of the departure from the development standard.

 

Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2001

 

9.      The site is zoned Mixed Use 10 under Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2001. The development is defined as a ‘mixed use development’. The proposal is permissible within the Mixed Use 10 zone with the consent of Council. The proposed development is consistent with the objectives of the PLEP 2001.

 

Parramatta Development Control Plan 2005

 

10.    The provisions of Parramatta Development Control Plan 2005 have been considered in the assessment of the proposal. The development is consistent with the aims and objectives of the DCP. Non compliances with the requirements of the DCP are addressed in the ‘ISSUES’ section of the report.

 

ISSUES

 

Traffic

 

11.    A Traffic Report was submitted with the development application. The application was referred to the RTA in accordance with the requirements of SEPP (Infrastructure), and the application has also been reviewed by Council’s Traffic Engineer.

 

12.    The applicant’s Traffic Consultant conducted traffic counts on a Friday afternoon and at midday on a Saturday. These times represent peak times when the supermarket will generate the most amount of additional traffic and will have the greatest impact on the operation of the road network. The traffic report indicates that the highest traffic increase will be in the Kleins Road frontage of the site between the entrance driveways and Briens Road. It is predicted that increases on Briens Road would be between 30-45 additional vehicles per hour two way.

 

13.    The traffic report indicates that the intersection of Briens Road and Kleins Road currently operates with an average delay of 50 seconds per vehicle in the weekday afternoon peak period and that the additional traffic generated by the development would increase the delay to 52 seconds. An average delay of 50-52 seconds per vehicles is classified as a level of service ‘D’ by the SIDRA traffic analysis programme. A ‘D’ level of service is defined as, ‘satisfactory but operating near capacity’.

 

14.    The RTA has advised Council that the intersection of Briens Road and Kleins Road currently operates at capacity during the weekday evening peak. The RTA has advised in part that, ‘…the additional traffic generated by this proposal will worsen the level of queuing and delay on this approach’. The RTA have recommended that in conjunction with the roundabout a median island should also be constructed in Kleins Road. Council’s Traffic Engineer concurs with the advice of the RTA and an extraordinary condition requiring the construction of the median island has been included in the recommendation. Whilst the RTA raised concerns with the proposed development they did not recommend that the application be refused. The advice of the RTA is attached to this report as attachment No. 3.

 

15.    Residents have advised Council that they experience significant delays whilst queuing at the Briens Road/Kleins Road intersection and that people are using residential streets including Balmoral Road to avoid the queues at the Briens Road/Kleins Road intersection. For people travelling north from Church Street to Briens Road/Old Windsor Road/Cumberland Highway an alternative to turning left at the intersection of Briens Road and Windsor Road is to make a left turn from Church Street onto Boundary Road then a right turn onto Briens Road. This route avoids the delays experienced at the intersection of Briens Road and Windsor Road but causes additional delays at the intersection of Kleins Road and Briens Road.

 

16.    The planning controls which apply to the Mixed Use 10 zone allow significantly higher densities than what was previously permissible in the area. A maximum building height of 3 storeys and a floor space ratio of 1.5:1 applies to the Mixed Use 10 zone. The proposed development has a height of 2 storeys and a FSR of 0.67:1. A commercial development with a gross floor area of 5133m2 is potentially permissible on the development site. The gross floor area of the proposed development is 2352m2, 54% less than the maximum gross floor area permitted. The density of the development and therefore the amount of traffic generated by the development is significantly less than the maximum permitted by the planning controls. Providing that the development does not result in a dangerous traffic situation or otherwise unduly impede the safe and efficiency flow of traffic in the surrounding road network, it would not be possible to refuse the development due to the amount of traffic it would generate.

 

17.    To ensure that the development has minimal impact on the road network Council’s Traffic Engineer has recommended that a median island be constructed in Kleins Road between the intersection of Kleins Road/Briens Road and the intersection of Balmoral Road/Kleins Road. The median would prevent vehicles from making a right turn out of the site and hindering the southbound flow of traffic as they try to join the queue of vehicles in the northbound lane on the western side of Kleins Road.

 

18.    As vehicles forced to turn left out of the site due to the median island may wish to join the north bound lane in Kleins Road there is potential for vehicles to perform illegal U turns at the intersection of Balmoral Road/Kleins Road to achieve this objective. Council’s Traffic Engineer has recommended that a roundabout be constructed at the intersection of Balmoral Road/Kleins Road. This roundabout would prevent people from making illegal U turns in Kleins Road, thus improving traffic safety.

 

Traffic Committee

 

19.    The conditions regarding the construction of the median island in Kleins Road and the roundabout at the intersection of Balmoral Road and Kleins Road will be considered by the Parramatta Traffic Committee at its meeting on 27 November 2008. 

 

Car Parking

 

20.    The maximum number of car spaces permitted under the provisions of SREP No. 28 is 48 for the retail component and 13 spaces for resident and resident visitor parking. A maximum of 61 spaces are permitted by the SREP. The development provides a total of 74 car spaces. The car parking allocation is 13 for residents and resident visitors, 53 for supermarket customers, and 8 spaces for employees. The applicant is seeking approval for 13 more car spaces than permitted by SREP No. 28. The applicant has submitted a SEPP 1 objection in support of the variation of the development standard for car parking.

 

21.    The applicant has put forward the following reasons in support of the SEPP 1 objection:

21.1  The supermarket use is one which generally requires people to use their cars, as the volume of goods purchased makes it difficult for people to walk or use public transport.

21.2  A high proportion of the customers will be people stopping off at the supermarket on their way to and from work or home, they will not be making special trips for the sole purpose of shopping at the supermarket.

21.3  The proposed development will strengthen the level of service of the local shops on Kleins Road by bringing more shoppers into the area.

21.4  The additional car parking is short term parking for shoppers rather than long term parking for commuters, the additional car parking would not discourage the use of public transport.

21.5  A reduction in car parking spaces to comply with the SREP would reduce the convenience of the store for customers and result in increased on street car parking. The demand for on street car parking will increase in the future due to zonings which permit higher density development in the area.

 

22.    The parking controls are within Part 10 ‘Transport’ of SREP 28. Clause 54 of SREP 28 puts forward the following aims in relation to Part 10, ‘Transport’.

 

“(a) to facilitate growth of the Parramatta Primary Centre mainly by the use of public transport, particularly by improving public transport access to and from Parramatta, by promoting efficient circulation of transport within Parramatta, and by supporting policies that encourage greater public transport use,

(b) to achieve an overall mode split of 50% between public transport and private vehicles for the Parramatta Primary Centre (allowing for adjustments between Precincts) with a mode split of 60% for the City Centre Precinct favouring public transport (including walking and cycling) for the journey to work when employment growth reaches 60,000 in the Parramatta City Centre,

(c) to assist in reducing transport vehicle kilometres travelled over western Sydney by encouraging a greater concentration of development in the Parramatta City Centre,

(d) to encourage appropriate public transport infrastructure in order to achieve a high-quality public transport system,

(e) to implement parking policies that discourage continued reliance on private vehicle use, reduce traffic congestion and improve pedestrian amenity.”

 

23.    The principal objective of the parking controls in SREP No. 28 is to encourage the use of public transport. In areas well serviced by public transport and with high density office/commercial development this is achieved by reducing the number of commuter car parking spaces. Council has previously resolved to adopt a similar approach in the Parramatta CBD by interpreting the parking controls in Parramatta City Centre LEP 2007 as maximums. The subject site is not located in a CBD and is not in close proximity to a railway line. The subject site is in close proximity to a major road and the main form of public transport is buses.

 

24.    A supermarket use is not one which lends itself to being serviced predominantly by public transport. Customers doing a weekly shop are likely to purchase a significant number of goods and to transport these goods they are likely to require the use of a car. It is considered unlikely that people would use public transport for trips to the supermarket if their intention was to purpose a small number of goods as it would be more convenient to make small purchases at a shop in close proximity to their home or workplace.

 

25.    The applicant has advised that most ALDI supermarkets require approximately 60 car parking spaces. The recently approved ALDI supermarket in Guildford has 69 car parking spaces. 

 

26.    Land and Environment Court case law supports the opinion that a SEPP 1 objection can be upheld where the development standard is not relevant to the development or the objective of the standard would be defeated or thwarted if compliance was required. In the circumstances of this case it is considered that compliance with the standard may result in the following outcomes which are not consistent with the objective of the development standard:

26.1  Compliance with the standard may encourage customers to use the existing on street parking on Kleins Road, this may create a pedestrian safety issue as pedestrians would have to cross Kleins Road in order to access the store.

26.2  Compliance with the standard may encourage customers to use the existing on street parking on Kleins Road thus reducing the number of safe and convenient car parking spaces available for the customers of the local shops. 

26.3  Additional demand for on street parking may affect the safety of the road network by increasing congestion and encouraging risky vehicle manoeuvres.

26.4  Reducing the number of car spaces is unlikely to encourage the use of public transport because the supermarket shoppers are likely to require a private vehicle to transport the goods they purchase from the store.

 

27.    For the above reasons it is recommended that Council uphold the SEPP 1 objection and allow a variation of the development standard for car parking because compliance is considered unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstances of this case.

 

B Doubles

 

28.    On 25 August 2008 Council resolved to prohibit B Double vehicles from using various roads located within the Parramatta LGA. The proposed supermarket will be serviced by 19m semi trailers and the resolution of Council does not relate to any roads within proximity of the development site.

 

Delivery Times

 

29.    The statement of environmental effects suggested that deliveries would occur between the hours of 6.00am and 10.00pm whilst part 7.1 ‘Loading Dock’ of the acoustic report states that deliveries should only to be carried during the hours of 7.00am to 10.00pm.

 

30.    The RTA and Council’s traffic engineer have recommended that deliveries should not take place during peak traffic periods. Whilst this view is not without merit, the operating requirements of the supermarket require a delivery of produce in the morning prior to the store opening. Council’s Traffic Engineer has also advised that the issue of queuing at the Kleins Road/Briens Road intersection is more pronounced in the morning peak than the afternoon/evening peak period. Accordingly it is recommended that deliveries be restricted to the hours of 7.00am to 2.30pm and 6.00pm to 10.00pm daily, with a single articulated vehicle delivery being permitted during weekdays between the hours of 7.00am to 8.30am.

 

Street Setback

 

31.    Part 3.2 of Parramatta DCP 2005 states that for commercial development a nil street setback applies to sites zoned Mixed Use 10. A nil setback has been provided to the portions of the development with frontage to Briens Road and Howard Avenue. The development is set back from the Kleins Road frontage of the site with an at-grade car park and basement entry ramp addressing Kleins Road.

 

32.    The objective of the nil setback control is to provide a built edge to the properties zoned Mixed Use 10. No‘s 1-15 Kleins Road and No. 38 Briens Road are zoned Mixed Use 10. No. 38 Briens Road and No. 1-3 Kleins Road have been developed for the purposes of a mixed use development and a nil setback has been provided to the street frontage of these buildings which contain commercial/retail tenancies. The combination of a nil street setback and active frontages provides a similar streetscape character to that seen in the shopping strip on the western side of Kleins Road opposite the development site. No. 38 Briens Road and No. 1-3 Kleins Road are the only allotments zoned Mixed Use 10 which have been developed in recent times, No.’s 5-15 Kleins Road contain single dwellings and no development consents have been issued for any higher density development.

 

33.    Whilst the development could be amended to provide a built edge to the Kleins Road frontage of the site the design of any built form would be compromised by the requirement to provide an opening 9.8m in width for the driveway to the at grade parking area and loading dock, and an opening 5.5m in width for the driveway which provides access to the basement car park. It is considered that the design quality of any built form would be compromised to such an extent by the access requirements that it would have a negative impact on the visual qualities of the streetscape.

 

34.    The applicant has amended the landscape plan by deleting the car space which adjoins the Kleins Road frontage and creating an enlarged landscaped area with revised tree planting consisting of Sydney Blue Gums with a potential mature height of more than 15m. The applicant also submitted an amended plan with a 5m high by 3m wide pylon sign and 2.4m high wall to the Kleins Road frontage of the site. The landscape treatment will ensure that the rear elevation of the building at No. 1-3 Howard Avenue is adequately screened, however concern is raised that the proposed 5m high pylon sign and 2.4m high wall is of excessive scale and does not provide a built edge which would have a positive impact on the visual quality of the streetscape. For this reason the plan that incorporates this amendment will not form part of any approval.

 

35.    The plans do not specify the proposed finish for the at grade parking area accessed from Kleins Road, the section drawings suggest that the surface of the car park will be the concrete slab that forms the roof of the basement. Having regard to the proximity of the parking area to the street and the size of this area, concern is raised that a surface treatment such as plain concrete would have a negative impact on the visual quality of the streetscape. A condition is recommended requiring a detailed paving plan to be submitted to Council’s satisfaction prior to the construction certificate being issued.

 

36.    The combination of the additional landscaping and an improved surface treatment to the car park will ensure that the development makes a reasonable contribution to the visual quality of the streetscape. Having regards to the constraints of the site, the type of development proposed, and the condition requiring an improved surface treatments to the car park, the non compliance with the street setback requirement is considered acceptable.

 

Solar Access

 

37.    A recently completed 4 storey mixed use development is located to the south of the subject site at No. 1-3 Howard Avenue. The proposed development will reduce solar access to three ground floor units within this development. These units have a north east facing living room with a sliding glass door. The proposed development will cast a shadow over the glass door. It is noted that existing balconies on the first floor level cast a shadow over the glass doors at the current time.

 

38.    At the present time unit No. 7 only receives direct solar access from 2.00pm to 3.00pm due to the shadow cast by the balcony above and the shadow cast by the wall which adjoins the eastern side of the patio. The development will cast a shadow over the glass door to the living room from 2.00pm to 3.00pm and the unit will not receive any direct solar access on the winter solstice.

 

39.    At the present time unit No. 8 receives solar access from 12.00pm to 3.00pm, satisfying the 3 hours solar access requirement of the DCP. Solar access will be slightly reduced from 12.00pm to 1.00pm and reduced to less than 10% of the surface of the glass door from 2.00pm to 3.00pm. Unit No. 8 will receive approximately 30 minutes of solar access on the winter solstice.

 

40.    At the present time Unit No. 13 receives solar access from 12.00pm to 3.00pm, satisfying the 3 hours solar access requirement of the DCP. The development will reduce solar access from 2.00pm to 3.00pm to approximately 20% of the surface area of the glass door. At the present time the unit receives solar access from 12.00pm to 3.00pm.

 

41.    To determine whether the impact of the development on solar access is acceptable or warrants refusal of the application, the first issue to consider is whether the form of the development is in accordance with the planning controls. This approach is based on the principle that impacts caused by non compliant development is less likely to be acceptable than impacts caused by compliant development. Overshadowing is influenced by three main factors; solar orientation, height and the distance between buildings.

 

42.    The ground floor units at No. 1-3 Howard Avenue are particularly vulnerable to overshadowing because they are on the southern side of the development. The balconies on the first floor level of the building also cast a shadow over the glass doors of the ground floor units and reduce solar access to a varying extent throughout the day. The design of the building does not promote solar access and the shadow diagrams suggest that in addition to the ground floor units, the single aspect units on the first and second floor levels would also fail to achieve compliance with the 3 hour solar access requirement of the DCP.

 

43.    The planning controls permit a height of 3 storeys. The proposed development has a height of 2 storeys. Measured in metres, the portions of the development which cast a shadow over the ground floor units have a height of 8.3m for the screen around the mechanical plant area and 10.6m for the parapet over the resident lift and fire stair area. The height of the development in metres is equivalent to, or slightly less than, the height a 3 storey building.

 

44.    The DCP requires that the ground and first floor levels of the development have a minimum setback of 1.5m from the northern boundary of No. 1-3 Howard Avenue. The screen which surrounds the mechanical plant area has a setback of 5.4m from the boundary and the parapet over the resident lift and fire stair area has a setback of 6.1m from the boundary. The portions of the development which cast the shadow over the ground floor units at No. 1-3 Howard Avenue are set back further from the boundary than required by the DCP.

 

45.    The loss of solar access to units 7, 8 and 13 at No. 1-3 Howard Avenue is considered acceptable for the following reasons:

45.1  The windows of the units are highly vulnerable to overshadowing.

45.2  The height and setback of the proposed development meet or exceed the requirements of the planning controls.

45.3  The overshadowing is restricted to the late afternoon in winter at a time when the sun will have minimal positive impact in terms of providing natural heat for the units.

45.3  The residential flat design code produced by the Department of Planning suggests that living rooms for a minimum of 70% of units within a development should receive 3 hours solar access. This requirement is less onerous than the requirement of Parramatta DCP 2005 which requires all units to achieve 3 hours solar access

 

Rear Setback

 

46.    Part 3.2 of Parramatta DCP 2005 states that the rear setback of mixed use development is to be 15% of the depth of the block. This control requires that the development be set back 6m from the western boundary of No.1-3 Howard Avenue. Part 4.1.10 ‘Landscaping and Parramatta DCP 2005 states that the rear setback area is to be a deep soil zone. Buildings, basement car parks and paved areas are not included as deep soil zones.

 

47.    At the ground floor level portions of the at grade car park are located within the required setback area. At the basement level the piled wall and the supply fan room are located within the required setback area. The piled wall has a setback of 4.4m from the boundary. The depth of soil above the basement ceiling and piled wall is between 770mm and 1500mm.

 

48.    The encroachments of the basement into the rear setback zone are due to car park aisle width restrictions and the encroachments of the car park are due to the manoeuvring requirements of the 19m delivery trucks.

 

49.    The objectives of the DCP which relate to the deep soil zone controls include encouraging the provision of mature vegetation including large and medium sized trees, to provide for continuous vegetation corridors, to provide for the infiltration of water to the water table and minimising run-off. 

 

50.    The landscape plan indicates that 3 X Sydney Blue Gum and 9 X NSW Christmas Bush will be planted in the rear setback area. The Christmas Bush has a height of 6m and the Sydney Blue Gum has a potential mature height of 30m-40m. Several species of shrubs and ground covers are also proposed. The rear setback will be densely landscaped with a mix of species and will provide a positive outlook for the adjoining units at No. 1-3 Howard Avenue and the Kleins Road streetscape.

 

51.    Despite the encroachment of the basement car park and the paved area into the rear setback zone the proposed rear setback area will achieve the objectives of the development control plan.

 

Communal Open Space

 

52.    Parramatta DCP 2005 requires that 10m2 of communal open space be provided for each dwelling within a mixed use development. As there are 9 dwellings within the development 90m2 of communal open space is required. Each unit within the development is provided with a 36m2 patio in addition to a 12m2 balcony. No communal open space has been provided.

 

53.    Depending on the size of a development, communal open space may facilitate areas for landscaping and active or passive recreation. Communal open space in large developments may incorporate BBQ’s and seating areas which allow for entertaining or playgrounds for children.

 

54.    The patio provided for each unit has dimensions of 6m by 6m, for a total area of 36m2.  The Residential Flat Design Code suggests that minimum private open space area for an apartment at ground level or similar space on a structure, such as a podium should be 25m2. The area of the proposed patios exceeds this requirement by 11m2. Parramatta DCP 2005 requires a townhouse to have a minimum private open space area of 40m2. The proposed patios are only slightly smaller in area than the minimum private open space area required for a townhouse.

 

55.    The proposed patios will allow for a range of leisure activities including entertaining, and providing a space for small children to play. Having regard to the quality of the private open space proposed, the lack of any communal open space is considered to be acceptable.

 

Archaeology

 

56.    At the pre-lodgement stage the applicant was advised that the site is located within Archaeological Management Unit AM2918. This Archaeological Management Unit has been identified as having moderate archaeological potential within the Parramatta Historical Archaeological Landscape Management Study.

 

57.    An Initial Archaeological Assessment report was submitted with the development application. The report includes a history of the development of the site. The report concludes that the likelihood of Aboriginal Relics being located on the site is low and that the relics likely to be found on the site relate to the initial development of the allotments which occurred in the 1920’s.

 

58.    A condition will be imposed requiring the applicant/developer to obtain an exception to the requirement to obtain an excavation permit from the NSW Heritage Office under S139 of the Heritage Act prior to the commencement of excavation works.

 

CONSULTATION

 

59.    In accordance with Council’s Notification Development Control Plan, the proposal was notified between 16 April 2008 and 7 May 2008. Seventeen submissions of objection plus a petition of objection with 18 signatures and a petition of objection with 466 signatures was received.  The following issues were raised in the submissions:

 

There is no need for another supermarket

 

60.    The ‘need’ for a development is not a relevant matter for consideration under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act. The zoning of the site allows the proposed use.

 

The supermarket will impact on the viability of other businesses in the area

 

61.    The decision of the High Court of Australia in the matter of Kentucky Fried Chicken V Gantidis established the planning principle that the economic impact of a proposed use on other similar uses is not a relevant town planning consideration. Economic impact is only a relevant consideration under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act where the proposed development may result in the loss of services that would otherwise be unavailable to the community. There is no evidence that the proposed supermarket would result in the loss of services that are not available elsewhere in the locality.

 

The development will increase traffic

 

62.    The zoning of the site allows development with a significantly higher density than the existing building on the site. A development application cannot be refused due the likelihood of increased traffic when the density of the development is significantly less than the maximum permitted by the planning controls.

 

The development will reduce the number of car spaces available to the customers of the local shops on Kleins Road

 

63.    The development site is within the ‘Primary Centre’ area as defined by Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 28. Parking requirements in the Primary Centre are maximum rather than minimum requirements to encourage the use of public transport. The proposed development contains more than the maximum number of car spaces permitted by Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 28. The applicant has sought approval for the number of parking spaces that are usually provided to other similar ALDI stores. In the applicant’s experience the proposed number of car spaces is sufficient for the size of the supermarket proposed. A customer of the supermarket would need to cross Kleins Road if they were to use the on street parking spaces on Kleins Road. The convenience of being able to park in an undercover parking area with direct access to the supermarket is likely to discourage the supermarket customers from using the on street parking spaces instead of the basement parking area.

 

The dwelling mix is not acceptable

 

64.    Parramatta DCP 2005 provides a desirable dwelling mix for developments which contain 10 or more dwellings. The DCP allows the dwellings mix to be varied for smaller developments providing that a range of dwellings sizes are represented. The proposed development is comprised of 8 X 2 bedroom dwellings and 1 X 3 bedroom dwelling. The footprint of the first floor level makes if difficult to provide 1 bedroom dwellings. The proposed unit mix is considered acceptable.

 

The amenity of the proposed residential units is not acceptable

 

65.    Each unit is provided with a 12m2 north facing balcony and a 36m2 south facing patio. A north facing clerestory window will provide solar access to the living area. The internal layout of the units must balance the need for good solar access with protecting the unit from road traffic noise. The private open space for each unit exceeds the 10m2 requirement of the DCP. It is considered that the amenity of the units is acceptable having regard to the constraints of the site.

 

ON SITE MEETING

 

66.    Council, at its meeting of 26 May 2008, resolved that all applications subject to 7 of more submissions be subject to a site inspection prior to being determined at a Regulatory Meeting. In accordance with the resolution of Council an on site meeting was held on Saturday 26 July 2008 commencing at 10.30am. The meeting was attended by Council’s Team Leader – Development Assessment Team, Councils Senior Development Assessment Officer, Councillor Omar Jamal, the applicant and approximately 70 residents. The following issues were discussed at the meeting:

 

Has a traffic risk assessment been prepared? Will the development contribute to increased accidents?

 

67.    A traffic report prepared by Colston Budd Hunt and Kafes Pty Ltd was submitted with the development application. There is no statutory basis for the preparation of a traffic risk assessment. Increased traffic generated by the development is well within that anticipated by the zoning which applies to the site.

 

Balmoral Road carries a significant amount of traffic that has not been considered, the development will increase traffic in an already congested area.

 

68.    An increase in traffic is a consequence of rezonings which permit higher density development. The application could not be refused because the development would increase traffic.

 

There are regular accidents at the corner of Balmoral Road and Kleins Road.

 

69.    A condition of development consent will require a roundabout to be constructed at this intersection. This is likely to reduce the number of accidents at the intersection.

 

Does the scope of the traffic report include an analysis of the impact on the intersection of Balmoral Road and Kleins Road?

 

70.    The traffic report includes an analysis of the impact of the development on this intersection. This report was reviewed by Council’s Traffic Engineer who supports the proposal.

 

Does the traffic report consider the increased traffic generated by the new developments nearby (which contain over 230 apartments) that are under construction?

 

71.    Following the on site meeting a revised traffic report was submitted which included an assessment of the additional traffic generated by nearby developments which are currently under construction or unoccupied. The assessment showed that the development would increase traffic by between 20-25 vehicles per hour (two way) on Kleins Road and Balmoral Road. The applicant’s traffic consultant advised that the increased traffic would not change the level of service for the nearby intersections.

 

Where does ALDI think the traffic will be coming from? They think its all from the north but it will be from the south as well. This needs to be considered.

 

72.    The traffic report assumes that the traffic to the store will be coming from the north, south, and west.

 

Trucks will arrive at the site during morning peak hour and will cause traffic chaos as they try to enter the site.

 

73.    Only a single delivery will be permitted during the morning peak hours. This single delivery is unlikely to adversely effect the traffic movements during the morning peak hours.

 

All nearby intersections have a high level of saturation.

 

74.    The traffic report concluded that only the intersection of Briens Road/Kleins Road had a high level of saturation.

 

Westbus on Kleins Road should have a representative at the meeting because the increased traffic will affect them.

 

75.    This is a private matter for Westbus to consider.

 

A dedicated right hand turning lane from Kleins Road northbound should be added to the Kleins Road and Briens Road intersection.

 

76.    The RTA have advised Council that accident data does not support the provision of a dedicated right turn lane and that provided a dedicated right turning lane would require road widening.

 

Balmoral Road carries a very large number of vehicles and is essentially one way when cars are parked on both sides of the street.

 

77.    This is an existing issue. The proposed development is permissible and the increased traffic from the development does not warrant refusal of the application.

         

Speed humps should be provided in Balmoral Road and it should be made a one way street.

 

78.    This issue is not relevant to the assessment of the development application.

 

One resident stated that development on the site was inevitable and ALDI should be commended for providing the basement car park.

 

79.    This comment was noted.

 

The laneway behind the Kleins Road shop has become heavily used and dangerous.

 

80.    This comment was noted. This issue does not relate to the proposed development.

 

More parking is required in the area and Council should consider purchasing land to provide a car park.

 

81.    This issue is not relevant to the assessment of this development application.

 

How will ALDI control the use of the car park and ensure that it is only used by ALDI customers?

 

82.    Access to the car park will be controlled by boom gates that will be open during the store trading hours. Outside the store trading hours access will be restricted to the residents of the units and their visitors.

 

Are left and right turns permitted out of the store? What happens if people cannot make a right turn?

 

83.    A condition of consent requires the construction of a median in Kleins Road. This will prevent vehicles from making a right turn out of the site.

 

The surveys done for the traffic report were not at true the peak hours.

 

84.    The traffic surveys were done at the times when the store would be busiest and thus generating the most amount of traffic. Council’s Traffic Engineer has not raised any objections to the times the surveys were carried out.

 

The increased traffic would contribute to increased difficulties in accessing the parking spaces opposite the local shops.

 

85.    As sufficient on site parking is provided to the proposed mixed use development it is unlikely that there would be a significant increase in demand for on street parking spaces.

 

Will the report be considered before or after the Council elections?

 

86.    This report is being considered after the Council elections.

 

The ALDI store will compete with existing businesses in the area, including the existing shops on the western side of Kleins Road opposite the proposed ALDI store. The ALDI store will send the existing shops out of business.

 

87.    The economic impact of a proposed use on other similar uses is not a relevant matter for consideration under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act.

 

There are already a number of ALDI stores in the area.

 

88.    This issue is not a relevant town planning consideration.

 

The ALDI store should be located in a different area, such as the industrial area at the end of Kleins Road.

 

89.    A supermarket is not a permissible landuse in the industrial area at the southern end of Kleins Road.

 

Councillors and staff should visit the site at 3.00pm to see the reality of the traffic situation.

 

90.    Council’s Traffic Engineer has inspected the site on a number of occasions.

 

A resident asked whether the builder would be the same as the builders currently working in the area. Concern was raised that buildings in the area were not of satisfactory quality.

 

91.    A standard condition of consent will require the development to be constructed in accordance with the requirements of the Building Code of Australia.

 

One resident raised concerns with the quality of the apartments, particularly the southerly aspect of the living area, the bedrooms facing the road and queried what would be done in terms of acoustic protection.

 

92.    Whilst the living room of the units does face south, a north facing clerestory window will provide sunlight into the living room. A standard condition will be imposed requiring acoustic protection to be provided to the units in accordance with the relevant Australian Standards.

 

Will the ALDI development be making contributions and where will the money be spent?

 

93.    Both the residential and retail component of the development attracts the payment of section 94 contributions which will total approximately $51,000. The section 94 contributions received by Council are pooled so it is impossible to specify whether the contributions for this development will be spent in the same area.

 

Does Frank Sartor have the final say?

 

94.    The resident was advised that Parramatta Council was the consent authority for the development.

 

There are 200 elderly residents in a DOH complex on Redbank Road that need the supermarket.

 

95.    This comment was noted.

 

Is Council planning further re-zonings in the area?

 

96.    The issue of future re-zonings is not relevant to the assessment of this development application.

 

 

 

Jonathon Goodwill

Development Assessment Officer

 

 

Attachments:

1View

Locality Map

1 Page

 

2View

Zoning Map

1 Page

 

3View

Advice from the RTA

3 Pages

 

4View

Traffic Report prepared by applicant's consultant

19 Pages

 

5View

Applicant's response to the traffic issues raised at the on site meeting

4 Pages

 

6View

Traffic comments from Council's Traffic Engineer

6 Pages

 

7View

Plans and Elevations

14 Pages

 

8View

Peer Review by ENSR Pty Ltd

3 Pages

 

9View

Development Application History

1 Page

 

 

 

REFERENCE MATERIAL

 


Ordinary Council 24 November 2008

Item 9.3

REGULATORY

ITEM NUMBER         9.3

SUBJECT                   First Home-Owners Boost Scheme - Fast Tracking Development Applications

DESCRIPTION         

REFERENCE            F2004/07400 - 

APPLICANT/S          

OWNERS                   

REPORT OF              Manager Development Services       

 

PURPOSE:

 

To seek endorsement of a change to changing delegations to facilitate the fastrack of DAs that are subject to the Federal Government’s First Home Owner’s Boost Grant Scheme as recently resolved by Council.

 

SUMMARY

 

The Federal Government in October 2008 announced the First Home Owner Boost Scheme. This government initiative will assist first home buyers to purchase their first home. The scheme is administered by the NSW Government and is in addition to the $10,000 First Home Owner Grant.

 

First home buyers building a new home or purchasing a newly constructed home may be eligible for the $14,000 boost in addition to the existing $10,000 grant, bringing the total benefits to $24,000.

 

The Fist Home Owner Boost Scheme is time limited, with eligibility criteria requiring contracts for the purchase or construction of singe dwellings being entered into between 14 October 2008 and 30 June 2009 (inclusive), and time limits applying to the commencement and completion of construction.

 

Council has committed to the timely determination of development applications for the construction of single dwellings where the applicant may be eligible for the First Home Owner Boost Scheme. To ensure that this commitment is achieved administrative changes have been made to the development assessment process.

 

Changes include:

 

·    Identification at lodgement of DA of applicant’s eligibility under the First Home Owner Boost Scheme and file is to be marked accordingly;

·    Review by team leader within 2 days of lodgement to determine neighbour notification required and identification of any issues with plans;

·    Immediate referral of DA to a planner (following review by team leader) for assessment;

·    Site inspection is to take place within 7 days of lodgement of DA;

·    Assessment of the application is to be carried out during the 14 day neighbour notification period;

 

However, in cases where more than 3 submissions are received staff can not determine the development application. The referral of the application to a Council meeting will add at least 3 weeks to the determination time. In cases where more than 7 submissions are received a site meeting is also required to be held. The combined site meeting and referral to a Council meeting process will add at least 2 months to the determination time. This is unsatisfactory and does not assist on the timely determination of these minor applications.

 

Accordingly, it is recommended that amendments be made to delegations and the on-site meeting process be suspended for development applications that seek approval to the construction of single dwelling houses in cases where the applicant is eligible for the ‘First Home Owner Boost Scheme’.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

(a)     That the CEO be delegated the function of Council to

 

1.      Approve development applications for the construction of single dwelling houses in cases where the applicant is eligible for the ‘First Home Owner Boost Scheme’ irrespective of the number of submissions received for the period 14 October 2008 to 30 June 2009 (inclusive).

 

(b)     Further, that the current on-site meeting process be suspended for development applications that seek approval to the construction of single dwelling house in cases where the applicant is eligible for the ‘First Home Owner Boost Scheme’ for the period 14 October 2008 to 30 June 2009 (inclusive).

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

1       Council at its meeting of 20 October 2008 resolved the following:

 

(a)     That as a matter of urgency, the CEO set about introducing a system which can fast track development approvals for applicants who may wish to satisfy the Federal Government’s recently announced initiative to provide a $21,000 grant to people who wish to build a single dwelling as their first home.

 

(b)     That such a system be aimed at reducing the bureaucratic ‘red tape’ within the approval process and that such a system remain in place for the duration of the period to which the Federal Government refers to in relation to the scheme.

 

(c)     Further, that the CEO report to Council at the first available meeting on what processes have been put in place to address this initiative and, if necessary, for Council to review any specific delegations required in order for this policy to be actioned.

 

REPORT

 

First Home Owner Boost Scheme

 

2       The First Home Owner Boost Scheme is an Australian Government initiative to assist first home buyers to purchase their first home. The scheme is administered by the NSW Government and is in addition to the $10,000 First Home Owner Grant.

 

3       First home buyers building a new home or purchasing a newly constructed home may be eligible for the $14,000 boost in addition to the existing $10,000 grant, bringing the total benefits to $24,000.

 

4       Where a newly constructed home is being purchased, it must be the first sale of that home. The home must also never have been previously occupied as a place of residence, including occupation by the builder, a tenant or other occupant.

 

5       Substantially renovated homes may be considered as a new home. Where a substantially renovated home is being purchased, it must be the first sale of the home since it was substantially renovated. The home, since being substantially renovated, must also have been never previously occupied as a place of residence, including occupation by the builder, a tenant or other occupant.

 

6       Substantial renovations of a building are renovations where the entire building, or substantially all of the building, has been removed or replaced.

 

Eligibility criteria   

 

7       To be eligible for a First Home Owner Boost benefit, first home buyers must satisfy the requirements of the existing $10,000 First Home Owner Grant and the additional First Home Owner Boost requirements.

 

Additional criteria for First Home Owner Boost

 

8       New homes being purchased under a contract

To be eligible for the $14,000 boost benefit for the purchase of a newly constructed home, first home buyers must have entered into a contract for the purchase of a newly constructed home between 14 October 2008 and 30 June 2009 (inclusive).  

 

9       New homes being built under a building contract

To be eligible for the $14,000 boost benefit for building a new home, first home buyers must have entered into a contract for building a home between 14 October 2008 and 30 June 2009 (inclusive).

 

10     In addition:

·        construction must commence within 26 weeks of the contract.

·        the contract must specify a completion date for building work within 18 months of the construction commencing or construction must be completed within 18 months of the construction commence.

 

11     New homes being purchased ‘off the plan’

To be eligible for the $14,000 boost benefit for building a new home ‘off the plan’ the contract must be made between 14 October 2008 and 30 June 2009 (inclusive) and the contract must specify a completion date on or before 31 December 2010.

 

12     New homes being built by an owner builder

To be eligible for the $14,000 boost benefit for building a new home as an owner builder, construction (i.e. laying foundation) must commence between 14 October 2008 and 30 June 2009 (inclusive) and construction must be completed within 18 months of the construction commencing.

 

Administrative Changes to Assessment Process

 

13     Council has committed to the timely determination of development applications for the construction of single dwellings where the applicant may be eligible for the First Home Owner Boost Scheme. To ensure that this commitment is achieved administrative changes have been made to the development assessment process.

 

14     Changes include:

 

·        Identification at lodgement of DA of applicant’s eligibility under the First Home Owner Boost Scheme. Applicants are required to complete a declaration advising of eligibility under the scheme. The DA file is to be marked accordingly;

·        Review by team leader within 2 days of lodgement to determine neighbour notification required and identification of any issues with plans;

·        Immediate referral of DA to a planner (following review by team leader) for assessment;

·        Site inspection is to take place within 7 days of lodgement of DA;

·        Assessment of the application is to be carried out during the 14 day neighbour notification period;

·        In the event that any submissions are received within the 14 day notification period the issues are to be assessed and considered within 7 days and assessment of the DA finalised.

 

15     These administrative changes will greatly assist in the timely and ‘fast’ determination of these minor development applications, however the improvements to processing times can only be made where the number of submissions is no greater than 3.

 

16     In cases where more than 3 submissions are received staff can not determine the development application. The referral of the application to a Council meeting will add at least 3 weeks to the determination time. In cases where more than 7 submissions are received a site meeting is also required to be held. The combined site meeting and referral to a Council meeting process will add at least 2 months to the determination time. This is unsatisfactory and does not assist on the timely determination of these minor applications.

 

17     Accordingly, it is recommended that the CEO be delegated the function of Council to approve development applications for the construction of single dwelling houses in cases where the applicant is eligible for the ‘First Home Owner Boost Scheme’ irrespective of the number of submissions received for the period 14 October 2008 to 30 June 2009 (inclusive).

 

18     It is also recommended that the current on-site meeting process be suspended for development applications that seek approval to the construction of single dwelling house in cases where the applicant is eligible for the ‘First Home Owner Boost Scheme’ for the period 14 October 2008 to 30 June 2009 (inclusive).

 

 

 

Louise Kerr

Manager Development Services

 

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

 

REFERENCE MATERIAL

  


Ordinary Council

 24 November 2008

 

 

 

City Development

 

24 November 2008

 

10.1  Merrylands RDS Area (Further Report)


Ordinary Council 24 November 2008

Item 10.1

CITY DEVELOPMENT

ITEM NUMBER         10.1

SUBJECT                   Merrylands RDS Area (Further Report)

REFERENCE            F2006/01198 - D01049777

REPORT OF              Acting Manager Land Use and Transport Planning       

 

PURPOSE:

 

This report seeks Council’s endorsement of draft planning controls for the centre of Merrylands for inclusion in draft Parramatta Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 2008. Council previously considered the draft planning controls for this centre at its meeting on the 28 July 2008 and deferred its decision pending further analysis. This report responds to that decision of Council.

 

Council should adopt draft planning controls for Merrylands so that these can be included in draft Parramatta LEP 2008 and be provided to the Department of Planning for consideration along with the rest of the draft plan as part of the process of gaining approval to exhibit the draft plan.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

(a)     That Council adopt the draft planning controls for the RDS Centre of Merrylands as shown at Attachment 2 (Option 1), and that these be incorporated into the draft Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2008 prior to its exhibition.

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

1.      As provided in the detailed report at Attachment 1, Council previously considered draft planning controls for Merrylands (known as options 1 and 2) at its meeting on 23 June 2008. These are described in more detail in Attachment 4. It was recommended that Council adopt option 1 as the preferred land use strategy for the Merrylands RDS centre. Council resolved to adopt Option 1 but the resolution of 23 June 2008 was rescinded.  The matter was re-considered by Council at its meeting of 28 July 2008. At this meeting, a number of submissions were tabled and one resident addressed the public forum on behalf of residents of Smythe Street.

 

2.      At the meeting of the 28 July 2008, Council resolved:

 

(a)     That Council adopt the draft planning controls for the RDS Centres of Carlingford and East Rydalmere, as shown at Attachment 2 of Manager Land Use & Transport Planning Report, and that these be incorporated into the draft Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2008 prior to its exhibition.

(b)     That the draft planning controls for Merrylands be deferred and council officers undertake further analysis of the petitions tabled tonight, particularly in relation to the width of Smythe Street and in this regard, an audit of Smythe Street width be undertaken.

(c)     That an analysis be undertaken of new areas per zone in each of the scenarios.

(d)     Further, that the petition from residents of Albion Street also be considered in conjunction with this matter.

 

SUMMARY OF THE ANALYSIS

 

Petitions, submissions and public forum

 

3.      Three (3) petitions and one (1) submission were made to Council in respect of the draft planning controls. One petition and one submission were in support of Option 1, a second petition was in support of Option 1, subject to Albion Street being up zoned for high density residential development in this Option. The third petition and public forum address were in support of Option 2. The petitions, submission and public forum are all addressed in the detail report at Attachment 1.  The opportunity for community consultation will be during the public exhibition of the draft LEP. All submissions made at that time will be considered before a final decision is made by Council.

 

Smythe Street

 

4.      A detailed plan of Smythe Street is shown at Attachment 6. It provides widths of the roadway, location of trees and services. A travelling lane in each direction is available for the length of Smythe Street. Parking is available on both sides of the street for 78% of the street length. The road has been designed to narrow at a pinch point half way along its length and also at the Loftus Street intersection (which is left turn only into and out of Smythe Street). This is intended to direct and slow traffic and parking is restricted in these sections.

 

5.      Smythe Street is intended as a slow vehicle movement area and it is considered that the current configuration of Smythe Street is adequate for local residential traffic. Should Councillors wish to undertake other measures to manage traffic flow, options such as road widening or other traffic calming devices are discussed in Attachment 1.

 

Albion Street

 

6.      A number of residents of Albion Street petitioned Council seeking that Albion Street be zoned R4 for higher density development, and this be included in Option 1. It is considered this area should retain its low density zoning as it makes better provision for consolidated increase in residential density in the short term as well as preserving land for longer term growth.

 

Area per zone

 

7.      As required by Council’s resolution of 28 July 2008, an analysis has been undertaken for each option of the quantum of land area proposed to be zoned for high, medium and low density residential, mixed use and commercial. This has revealed that Option 1 would generate a greater amount of residential and commercial gross floor space while retaining a larger area of low density residential.

 

PREFERRED OPTION

 

8.      The recommended planning controls, being Option 1, will focus increased residential density in the northern portion of the precinct, whilst retaining the southern portion as a low density residential area, underpinning the area’s potential to accommodate further residential development in the longer term. It provides a practical and sustainable approach to planning and recognises that redevelopment of the Merrylands RDS centre should be allowed to proceed in stages.

 

NEXT STEPS

 

9.      This report details the preferred zoning, height and density options for Council to consider. Once the draft planning controls have been adopted by Council they will be included as part of draft Parramatta LEP 2008. The draft LEP must undergo a review by the Department of Planning as part of the process of seeking State Government approval to place the plan on public exhibition. It is anticipated this review will be completed in the coming months, following which the draft LEP will be reported to Council for endorsement enabling a formal request to the Department of Planning for approval to exhibit. Subject to this process it is anticipated that the draft LEP and DCP could be exhibited in early to mid 2009.

 

10.    Draft DCP controls will also be formulated, to provide more detailed planning guidance on built form outcomes, desired streetscape, building setbacks, future character, desired future pedestrian connections etc and will be reported for Council’s consideration.

 

 

 

Diane Galea                                                      Sue Stewart

Project Officer                                                 Acting Manager

Land Use & Transport Planning                Land Use & Transport Planning

 

 

Attachments:

1View

Detailed Report Deferred Areas November 2008

7 Pages

 

2View

Option 1 Merrylands

3 Pages

 

3View

Option 2 Merrylands

4 Pages

 

4View

Detailed Report Deferred Areas June 2008

8 Pages

 

5View

Public Forum Address & Reply 28 July 2008

3 Pages

 

6View

Smythe Street Detail Plan

1 Page

 

 

 

REFERENCE MATERIAL

  


Ordinary Council

 24 November 2008

 

 

 

Roads Paths Access and Flood Mitigation

 

24 November 2008

 

11.1  Review of M4 Toll

 

 

 

 

11.2  Parramatta Traffic Committee - 6 November 2008

 

 

 

 

11.3  Traffic Engineering Advisory Group - 6 November 2008


Ordinary Council 24 November 2008

Item 11.1

ROADS PATHS ACCESS AND FLOOD MITIGATION

ITEM NUMBER         11.1

SUBJECT                   Review of M4 Toll

REFERENCE            F2008/01549 - D01071410

REPORT OF              Senior Project Officer - Transport Planning       

 

PURPOSE:

 

This report is in response to a Notice of Motion and seeks Council endorsement of a submission to the Roads & Traffic Authority (RTA) on the M4 toll.  The submission suggests possible scenarios as there is no clear indication from State Government on the future of the toll.  The M4 passes to RTA ownership in 2010 and significantly impacts on the road network in Parramatta LGA especially Parramatta Road, Granville.  

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

(a)     That Council adopt this report as a submission to the Roads & Traffic Authority (Attachment 1) for its consideration of the future operation of the M4 with the following summary recommendations:

1.   the RTA consider a Sydney-wide toll system that is equitable,

2.   the RTA retain the M4 toll as demand management tool,

3.   the Cashback scheme be withdrawn after 2010 and the budget reallocated to fund transport improvements in Western Sydney,

4.   the toll be electronic payment collection only to reduce traffic congestion and increase capacity,

5.   a distance based toll be introduced between the Cumberland Highway and North Strathfield as fairer method of tolling and to reduce toll avoidance,

6.   and additional access ramps to the M4 be considered at James Ruse Drive and Church Street Parramatta,

 

(b)     Further, that Council forwards the submission to local State and Federal MPs and local Councils for their consideration and support.

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

1.      This report responds to a Notice of Motion by Clr Wilson on 23 June 2008 (Item 13.1).  That Council's professional officers prepare a report with a view to making a submission to the State Government requesting an extension to the toll subsidies on the M4 that are due to expire in 2010; and that this report also examine the effect of not renewing the subsidies on Parramatta's road network.

 

2.      The M4 links Penrith to North Strathfield with a toll at Silverwater.  It is owned by Statewide Roads Limited and passes to the RTA in February 2010.  Private car users who pay the toll electronically are eligible to claim a refund from State Government through their Cashback scheme.  There is no indication from the RTA nor the State Government on the future operation of the M4 toll.

 

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

 

4.      If the RTA removes the M4 toll after 2010 then the Cashback scheme will not be applicable.  Removing the toll is not recommended as this will result in more traffic congestion on the M4 and surrounding roads.  The toll should remain as a demand management tool by pricing its use competitively with public transport fares to encourage it as an alternative more sustainable form of transport.

 

5.      The M4/M5 Cashback scheme is effectively a private car subsidy with a 2008/09 budget of $102m.  By 2010, when the M4 passes to the RTA, the budget for the Cashback scheme since introduction is likely to have exceeded $1bn.  If the toll is retained then it is suggested that the Cashback scheme not be extended beyond 2010 as it subsides and promotes car use over public transport which is more environmentally sustainable and its use reduces road traffic congestion.  It is also against State Government policy on promoting public transport in addition to the scheme’s increasing cost.  Budget savings could be used to improve transport in Western Sydney including public transport improvements to reduce the need to travel by car and additional access to the M4 to remove traffic congestion from Parramatta Road, Granville.

 

6.      The RTA is moving towards electronic payment only tolling (e-tag or e-pass) to reduce congestion at toll plazas related to cash payments.  Electronic only payments also reduces the cost of toll collection.

 

7.      The M4 toll as with most toll roads is of the flat fee type, the M7 is the exception which is distance based.  On the M4, a proportion of drivers avoid the toll at Silverwater and use alternative routes which contribute to traffic congestion on Parramatta Road, Granville.  It is suggested that if the toll were electronic collection only then a distance based toll could be introduced between North Strathfield and the Cumberland Highway.  The impact and level of toll avoidance would be significantly reduced especially in Granville.

 

8.      A second reason for congestion on Parramatta Road, Granville is the limited access to the M4 at both James Ruse Drive and Church Street.  It is suggested that additional access ramps to the M4 be provided to assist with reducing traffic on Parramatta Road, Granville.

 

9.      There are numerous possible future scenarios that the RTA may consider for the M4 after February 2010.  The detailed report (attachment 1) considers the likely impacts of these scenarios and suggests to the RTA that ideally it should retain the M4 toll as a distance based electronic payment only toll and withdrawn Cashback scheme (and use the budget to fund transport improvements in Western Sydney).

 

CONSULTATION & TIMING

 

10.    The issue of the M4 toll was briefly discussed at a Councillor workshop on the draft Integrated Transport Plan for Parramatta City Centre on 5 May 2008.

 

11.    The M4 passes ownership from Statewide Roads Limited to RTA control on 14 February 2010.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

David Gray

Senior Project Officer - Transport Planning

Land Use & Transport Planning

 

 

Attachments:

1View

Detail Report - Review of the M4 Toll

7 Pages

 

 

 

REFERENCE MATERIAL

 


Ordinary Council 24 November 2008

Item 11.2

ROADS PATHS ACCESS AND FLOOD MITIGATION

ITEM NUMBER         11.2

SUBJECT                   Parramatta Traffic Committee - 6 November 2008

REFERENCE            F2004/06921 - D01072336

REPORT OF              Traffic and Transport Investigations Engineer       

 

PURPOSE:

 

To exercise the Delegation of Authority from the Road and Traffic Authority to regulate traffic

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That:-

 

(a)     Council adopt the recommendations of the Parramatta Traffic Committee held on 6 November 2008.

 

(b)     That staff work with the assistance of the Chairperson of the Parramatta Traffic Committee, to ensure that reports forwarded to Council from the Committee are more concise and its recommendations made more clear in future.

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

1.      A meeting of the Parramatta Traffic Committee was held in the Council Chambers on Thursday, 6 November 2008.

 

2.      That the proposals/recommendations of the Parramatta Traffic Committee are attached to this report of the Parramatta Traffic Committee.

 

 

 

Rosemarie Barretto

Traffic and Transport Investigations Engineer

 

 

Attachments:

1View

Report of the Parramatta Traffic Committee held on 6 November 2008

78 Pages

 

 

 

REFERENCE MATERIAL

 


Ordinary Council 24 November 2008

Item 11.3

ROADS PATHS ACCESS AND FLOOD MITIGATION

ITEM NUMBER         11.3

SUBJECT                   Traffic Engineering Advisory Group - 6 November 2008

REFERENCE            F2004/06921 - D01072341

REPORT OF              Traffic and Transport Investigations Engineer       

 

PURPOSE:

 

To provide advice to Council regarding traffic related matters.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That:-

 

(a)     Council adopt the recommendations of the Traffic Engineering Advisory Group meeting held on 6 November 2008.

 

(b)     That staff work with the assistance of the Chairperson of the Traffic Engineering Advisory Group, to ensure that reports forwarded to Council from the Advisory Group are more concise and its recommendations made more clear in future.

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

1.      A meeting of the Traffic Engineering Advisory Group was held in the Council Chambers on Thursday, 11 August 2008.

 

2.      That the proposals/recommendations of the Traffic Engineering Advisory Group are attached to this report of the Traffic Engineering Advisory Group.

 

 

 

Rosemarie Barretto

Traffic and Transport Investigations Engineer

 

 

Attachments:

1View

Report of the Traffic Engineering Advisory Group Meeting - 6 November 2008

41 Pages

 

 

 

REFERENCE MATERIAL

  


Ordinary Council

 24 November 2008

 

 

 

Culture and Leisure

 

24 November 2008

 

12.1  Naming of an Unnamed Public Reserve in Parramatta as Baludarri Wetland

 

 

 

 

12.2  Parramatta Cultural Trust

 

 

 

 

12.3  Sir Thomas Mitchell Reserve, 21B Yates Avenue Dundas Valley

 

 

 

 

12.4  Proposed Additional Dog Off-Leash Areas


Ordinary Council 24 November 2008

Item 12.1

CULTURE AND LEISURE

ITEM NUMBER         12.1

SUBJECT                   Naming of an Unnamed Public Reserve in Parramatta as Baludarri Wetland

REFERENCE            F2008/01238 - D01054190

REPORT OF              Recreation Planner       

 

PURPOSE:

 

To name the currently unnamed public reserve located at the end of Broughton and Pemberton Streets in Parramatta, Baludarri Wetland.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

(a)     That the unnamed public reserve at the end of Broughton and Pemberton Streets in Parramatta be endorsed in principle as Baludarri Wetland, and  be referred to the Geographical Names Board of NSW for formal assignment under the Geographical Names Act 1966.

 

(b)     That if approval is granted by the Geographical Names Board, a park name sign be erected at the reserve, to be funded from the parks improvement capital works budget.

 

(c)     Further, that any persons who lodged a submission in relation to the proposed name be advised of Council’s decision.

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

1.      Mr N McGrath from the Pemberton Street Bushcare Group requested that Council name the unnamed public reserve located at the end of Broughton and Pemberton Streets in Parramatta, as Warrigal Wetland. (Attachment 1) The name was suggested in recognition of the substantial population of native Tetragonia tetragonioides (commonly known as Warrigal Greens) in the reserve.

 

2.      The reserve proposed to be renamed is approximately 1.5 ha in size and comprises of Lot 1 DP 1239, Lot 5 DP 20765, Lots 1-2 DP 566807 and Lot 141 DP 537053. (Attachment 2) It is located on the northern side of the Parramatta River and contains both saltwater and freshwater wetlands which provide an ideal environment for a variety of native fauna and flora species.

 

3.      A report recommending the name Warrigal Wetland was submitted to Council on the 26 May 2008. However, as the word ‘Warrigal’ is of Aboriginal origin, Council deferred the matter pending further consultation with relevant Aboriginal organisations.

 

4.      Council staff have now undertaken further consultation with members of the Parramatta Aboriginal Advisory Committee and the Darug Peoples Advisory Committee (DPAC) regarding the interpretation and suitability of the proposed name. DPAC has recommended the name Baludarri Wetland as more appropriate for the reserve as Baludarri was an important Aboriginal identity and had a connection to the area in which the reserve is located. (Attachment 3)

 

5.      Baludarri (also known as Balloderree or Ballooderry) was the eldest son of Burramattagal elder, Maugoran and his wife Gooroobera, who were displaced from Parramatta during the first European occupation of Rosehill in November 1788. They were forced to move downstream on the northern side of the river into lands traditionally inhabited by the Wallumedegal (also pronounced Wallamattagal). Baludarri means ‘leatherjacket fish’, which would have been caught along the river and its estuarine areas east of Parramatta.

 

6.      Baludarri was one of the first indigenous Australians to develop friendly relations with early colonists and was befriended by Governor Phillip. In April 1791, he and another Aboriginal man assisted the Governor’s expedition up the Hawkesbury River by acting as interpreters with other tribes they encountered along the journey. Upon returning to Sydney, Baludarri lived at the Governor’s house and was encouraged by Phillip to trade fish with settlers at Parramatta. He built a new bark canoe and bartered fish caught near Port Jackson Heads in exchange for food and other goods with settlers and officers at Parramatta.

 

7.      In December 1791 Baludarri became ill and passed away. He was buried in the Governor’s garden at one of the first cross-cultural funerals conducted between Aboriginal and European people. His body was wrapped in an English jacket and jumper, instead of the traditional paperbark, and laid in his canoe together with his spears as he was carried to his final resting place. 

 

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

 

8.      A number of parks and reserves within the Parramatta Local Government Area have been named in connection with significant Aboriginal people who originally inhabited the area. In view of the size, location and significance of this public reserve it is appropriate for it to have a formal name.

9.      The proposed Baludarri Wetland name is supported in view of his connection and significance with the area in which the reserve is located. It also complies with the NSW Geographical Names Board’s ‘Guidelines for Place Names’.

 

CONSULTATION & TIMING

 

10.    The DPAC recommended name was discussed with Council’s Aboriginal staff, Mr McGrath and all respondents who provided comments on the original proposal (Attachment 4), all of whom were supportive of the new name.

 

 

Troy Holbrook

Recreation Planner

 

Attachments:

1View

Warrigal Wetland Naming Request - N McGrath

1 Page

 

2View

Map of Proposed Baludarri Wetland

1 Page

 

3View

Darug Peoples Advisory Committee Minutes & Baludarri Naming Suggestion

2 Pages

 

 

REFERENCE MATERIAL


Ordinary Council 24 November 2008

Item 12.2

CULTURE AND LEISURE

ITEM NUMBER         12.2

SUBJECT                   Parramatta Cultural Trust

REFERENCE            F2007/02363 - D01072226

REPORT OF              Arts and Cultural Project Officer - Animating the City - City Culture, Tourism and Recreation.

PREVIOUS ITEMS             10.6 - Election of Councillors to Internal/External Organisations/Boards/Committees - Regulatory Council - 7 October 2008      

 

PURPOSE:

 

Council at its Regulatory meeting on 7 October 2008 in reference to the Election of Councillors to Internal/External Organisations/Boards/Committees resolved that:

 

The appointment of Councillors to the Parramatta Cultural Trust Advisory Committee be deferred for 1 month pending a report from existing Councillor members of the Trust, with assistance from staff, on the Trust’s successes and works to date, together with advice of future plans”.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

(a)       That Council receive and note the contents of this report outlining the Cultural Trust’s proposed staged approach to its development

 

(b)       Further, that Council re-nominate the Lord Mayor and two Councillors to Parramatta Cultural Trust Advisory Committee

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

1.      Parramatta Council in implementing its 10 year Arts Plan for the City has recently established The Parramatta Cultural Trust. (See attached Trust Deed– Appendix 1).The principle intentions of the Cultural Trust are to:

 

a.   Create a public permanent and continuous investment fund that would enable Council to leverage its contribution as well as attract and yield an annual revenue stream for distribution  to major and minor cultural and arts projects;

b.   Act as an incentive to increase philanthropy towards the arts and culture in Parramatta;

c.   Create a stewardship of civic, business and cultural leaders to demonstrate leadership in the preservation, promotion and development of arts and culture in Parramatta.

 

2.      The Trust is a formal separate legal entity listed on the Register of Cultural Organisations (ROCO) as held by the Australian Government.  Its primary purpose is to promote culture through literature, music, the performing arts, visual arts, craft, design, film, television, radio, community arts, Aboriginal arts and moveable cultural heritage.

 

3.      The Trust as an independent organisation from Council has been granted tax exempt status in respect of its income and capital gains from donations, investment of capital or other receipts derived by the entity and can further provide incentive to people or entities to make donations to the entity by offering a tax deduction for the donations.

 

4.      The vision for the Cultural Trust is that it will provide a significant vehicle for financial investment, sustainability to and promotion of cultural activity in Parramatta and beyond. Western Sydney as one of Australia’s largest regional economies remains relatively untapped when it comes to philanthropic support.

 

5.      The Parramatta Cultural Trust is unique and the first of its kind in Western Sydney.  The Trust over the past 8 months has received widespread support and encouragement from key national organisations such as the Australian Business Arts Foundation (Abaf) and Artsupport Australia, both who specialise working closely with government, cultural, corporate, financial and philanthropic sectors to develop effective strategies business support and giving to the arts.

 

6.      Council opened the Cultural Trust’s primary public gift fund with the commitment in the 2007/08 financial year of $200,000 as its first principle investment. This investment has been transferred to the Trust and is now governed by the Trustee as set out in its Trust Deed.

 

7.      The Trust is currently governed by one Trustee (currently the Lord Mayor) and is assisted by an Advisory Committee.  The interim committee consists of the Chair, two Councillors, the Lord Mayor and Council’s Chief Executive Officer. The Advisory Committee has only met twice since formation meeting in March and July of this year.

 

8.      A further $100,000 has been committed by Council in this current 2008/09 Management Plan for the principal purpose of assisting in the start up process of the Trust.  Discussion and decisions from the first two Advisory Committee meetings has resulted in a proposal to appoint a specialist consultant to facilitate a program of workshops to deliver on a path forward for the Trust.

 

9.      Council is very fortunate to have attracted a very experienced consultant to assist in this process. David Fishel of Positive Solutions Pty Ltd has led business and strategic planning processes for many cultural organisations.  He has delivered training in board development, management and leadership skills, arts-business partnerships and strategic planning.  He is author of "Book of the Board", has been a board member of several cultural organisations in Australia and the UK and is currently Chair of the Creative Industries Precinct (CIP) Board at the Queensland University of Technology (QUT). 

 

10.    Importantly, he and his team have a good understanding of the cultural vision for Parramatta through the development of the Business Plan for the Parramatta Artists Studios, and also ably assisted on the submission for the New Generation Centre and Gallery for Civic Place, that resulted in the recent $5 million commitment by the NSW State Government to this project.

 

 

 

 

 

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

 

11.    It is proposed that once the Trust’s Advisory Committee is reformed a program of facilitated workshops will begin. As the Cultural Trust remains very much early in its evolution, it is proposed that the Advisory Committee will deliver on a staged approach to secure the Trust’s early development over the next six to eight months.  Subject to further discussion and refinement it proposed the following timetable and steps be taken to address the tasks identified is listed in Appendix 2.

 

12.    A proposed Stage One will essentially be to firmly bed down the operating fundamentals of the Trust. Clarity of objectives and roles are considered as the most important single element in energising the Advisory Committee, and moving the Trust onto an active fundraising footing. It is understood that there is a need to develop a clear, succinct Strategic Plan to guide the Trust’s early development, including:

 

a.   the bedrock values and articulated purposes

b.   the fundraising and development objectives

c.   a fundraising plan

d.   a marketing and communications plan

e.   financial and administrative processes for the Trust

 

This process will act to strengthen the fundamental thrust of the Trust and assist with its scope as a Parramatta based organisation with a broader operational base for Western Sydney.

 

13.    It is proposed that these actions and tasks will be further supplemented by articulation of a Terms of Reference for the Advisory Committee, ‘duty statements’ for the current and proposed Advisory Committee members, and recruitment strategies for Advisory Committee (and possibly Trust) members.

 

14.    In preparation of these planning workshops (focused on the Trust’s mission, goals, and brand and positioning issues) Council officers along with the consultant have begun to undertake benchmarking amongst other trusts and foundations, and to prepare brief discussion documents, in order to focus the Committee’s time and energy.

 

15.    It is proposed that Stage One would be completed in approximately ten weeks at an anticipated cost of between $15,000 -$20,000.

 

16.    Building off a solid platform from the above tasks, a proposed Stage Two will involve how the Trust will effectively communicate and have resonance with the community.  Fundamentally, tasks proposed in Stage Two will concentrate on product/service and donor benefit definition by actively recruiting the first potential patrons/ambassadors/board members through a targeted marketing plan.

 

17.    One proposal has been to consider the active recruitment of high profile ambassadors to assist in wide spread promotion and relationship building for the Trust that could then serve to attract a number of new Advisory Committee members. (See Appendix 3)

 

18.    It is envisaged that these ambassadors should personify passion, leadership, achievement and contribution, and embody a personal connection to Parramatta and Western Sydney. For example, there are any of a number of potential persons that have a strong level of achievement in business and/or the arts, like the calibre of individuals such as Frank Lowy, John Symonds, Toni Collette, Paul Hogan, Anh Do, Khoa Do, and Bryan Brown etc.

 

19.    Once considerable momentum is built through a strong dialogue of support for the Trust, further resourcing will enable strong long term relationships with donors and with the business, and arts communities.

 

20.    To date there has been a considerable amount of Council investment of resources into the initial establishment of the Parramatta Cultural Trust. The Trust remains an important mechanism for our communities to be actively involved and to own the City’s cultural needs and aspirations. It also provides the business community with an opportunity to connect with the City’s creative energy and be a part of the current renaissance now happening in Parramatta. 

 

21.    A reaffirmation of Councillors to the Advisory Committee will enable the Cultural Trust to move forward to a solid operating platform and begin its mission to build a solid investment fund that is then distributed to promote and encourage a wide range of arts and cultural practices in Parramatta.

 

CONSULTATION & TIMING

 

22.    Existing Councillor members of the Trust, namely Councillor Lim and Councillor Barber, along with relevant Council staff have prepared this report for Council’s consideration.

 

 

 

Andrew Overton

Arts and Cultural Project Officer - Animating the City - City Culture, Tourism and Recreation.

 

 

Attachments:

1View

Trust Deed

18 Pages

 

2View

Draft Task Outline

2 Pages

 

3View

Advisory Committee Criteria

1 Page

 

 

 

REFERENCE MATERIAL

 


Ordinary Council 24 November 2008

Item 12.3

CULTURE AND LEISURE

ITEM NUMBER         12.3

SUBJECT                   Sir Thomas Mitchell Reserve, 21B Yates Avenue Dundas Valley

REFERENCE            F2008/03679 - D01072292

REPORT OF              Property Program Manager       

 

PURPOSE:

 

The purpose of the report is to seek Council’s acceptance to a transfer of land title for Sir Thomas Mitchell Reserve from the Department of Housing.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

(a)     That  Council accepts the transfer of land titles for Sir Thomas Mitchell Reserve at 21B Yates Avenue Dundas Valley.

 

(b)     Further, that the Lord Mayor and the Chief Executive Officer be authorised to affix the Council seal to the documentation for transferring Lot W DP 36696, Lots 1134 and V DP 36698 being the land titles for Sir Thomas Mitchell Reserve, to Council.

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

1       The subject lots were created in 1960s when the area was subdivided by The Housing Commission of NSW for residential development.  By way of gazette notices in 1959 and 1963, these three parcels of land were dedicated by the Housing Commission of NSW as open space and vested in Parramatta City Council. 

 

2       An agreement has been reached with the NSW Department of Housing to transfer the subject land to Council, at no cost.

 

3       A detailed submission and a location plan of the subject land are at Attachments 1 and 2.

 

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

 

4       The Parramatta City Council has been maintaining the subject land for years for the purposes of a park and for general community use.  It is classified community and included in the Plan of Management for Parks adopted by Council on 28 February 2005.

 

CONSULTATION & TIMING

 

5       The proposed land transfer has the support of Council’s City Assets & Environment Unit.

 

 

Kwok Leung

Property Program Manager

 

 

Attachments:

1View

Detailed submission

1 Page

 

2View

Location plan

1 Page

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Council 24 November 2008

Item 12.4

CULTURE AND LEISURE

ITEM NUMBER         12.4

SUBJECT                   Proposed Additional Dog Off-Leash Areas

REFERENCE            F2005/00856 - D01074043

REPORT OF              Supervisor Open Space       

 

PURPOSE:

 

To recommend that Barnett Park (Winston Hills), Dan Mahoney Reserve (North Parramatta) and George Kendall Riverside Park (Ermington), be designated as dog off-leash areas.

 

Further, to seek Council endorsement to place proposals for two additional off-leash areas at Burlington Memorial Park (Northmead) and Scout Memorial Park (Granville), on public exhibition.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

(a)       That Council approve additional dog leash free areas at Barnett Park, Dan Mahoney Reserve and George Kendall Riverside Park (East of Spofforth Street).

 

(b)       That the above sites be provided with appropriate disposal facilities for dog faeces and be signposted accordingly.

 

(c)       That Council adopt two additional dog leash free sites at Burlington Memorial Park (Northmead) and Scout Memorial Park (Granville) for the purpose of public exhibition.

 

(d)       Further, that following the public exhibition period a further report regarding the sites be presented to Council for consideration.

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

1.      The Companion Animals Act 1998, was established to encourage responsible animal ownership and management. The Act placed additional responsibilities on councils to provide dog off-leash areas. In response to this Act, Council established off-leash areas in three locations;

a.   Cowells Lane Reserve Basin (Ermington)

b.   McCoy Park Basin (Toongabbie)

c.   Wolseley Street Reserve (Guildford)

 

2.      A report regarding the provision of additional dog leash free areas was presented to Council in July 2008. In summary the report recommended that due to the significant social and health benefits to dogs and their owners of leash free areas, that Council place on public exhibition a proposal to establish four additional sites at;

a.   Barnett Park (Winston Hills)

b.   Dan Mahoney Reserve (North Parramatta)

c.   Darcy Road Reserve (Westmead)

d.   George Kendall Riverside Park (Ermington).

 

3.      The original Council officer’s report can be found at Attachment 1. The subsequent Council resolution can be found at Attachment 2.

 

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

 

Publicly Exhibited Sites

 

4.      Council resolved on the 28 July 2008 to place on public exhibition a proposal for four (4) additional dog leash free areas at Barnett Park (Winston Hills), Dan Mahoney Reserve (North Parramatta), Darcy Road Reserve (Westmead) and George Kendall Riverside Park (Ermington).

 

5.      The public exhibition took place between the 13 August and 5 September 2008. Council received 48 submissions which have been assessed and a graph indicating the level of support for each of the four proposed locations is provided as Attachment 3.

 

6.      An analysis of submissions indicated strong support for dog off-leash areas at Dan Mahoney Reserve (62%) and George Kendall Riverside Park (68%). Overall the main issues raised in support of the proposal included:

a.   Current lack of local accessible off-leash areas

b.   Dog socialisation and exercise opportunities

c.   Owner socialisation and exercise opportunities

 

7.      However, local residents are generally unsupportive of the Darcy Road Reserve proposal (87.5%). The main issues raised against the proposal included:

a.   Lack of owner responsibility / control

b.   Dogs dangerous for children / other park users

c.   Dog Noise

d.   Dog faeces

e.   Fencing

On the basis of these responses, officers are recommending against proceeding with the leash free area at this site.

 

8.      A similar number of both supportive (4) and unsupportive (5) submissions were received in relation to the Barnett Park proposal. As both the Parramatta Sport and Recreation Plan and Council’s Animal Management officers have indicated the strong need for an off-leash area in Winston Hills, Council officers have recommended that this proposal proceeds. 

 

Fencing

 

9.      Fencing of dog off-leash areas was raised in a number of submissions, particularly where they are to be located adjacent to a busy road. In consideration of the characteristics of each site and the substantial cost of fencing, the following is recommended for the proposed off-leash areas:

a.   Dan Mahoney Reserve – Currently fully fenced

b.   George Kendall Riverside Park – No fencing required

c.   Barnett Park – Partial fencing (Barnett Road & Glasgow Streets)

The partial fencing of Barnett Park is costed at approximately $4,000. This cost can be funded through the Parks Improvement Capital Works budget.

 

10.    Council resolved on the 28 July 2008that at each leash free location, the following would be installed:

I. At least three bins for placement of dog faeces;

II.       Ordinance signs including advice that savage dogs should not be unleashed;

III.      Plastic bags for collection of dog faeces.”

 

Installing these facilities at the three proposed sites will require a total of nine (9) bins at approximately $100 each, plus installation. In addition, Council would be required to install three regulatory signs per site, with an overall estimated total cost of $1,800 for nine (9) signs.  These costs can be funded from the Parks Improvement Capital Works budget. Other associated minor costs to be incurred would include the maintenance of rubbish receptacles and the restocking of plastic bags for the collection of dog faeces. These costs will be funded from the City Operations Cleansing and Parks Maintenance operational budgets as well as the Open Space Parks Improvement budget.

 

Proposed Additional Sites

 

11.    On the 28 July Council resolved that “staff examine options for additional dog leash free areas in Harris Park, North Granville and South Parramatta and options have since been examined by Open Space staff.  Open space provision in Harris Park and South Parramatta is limited, all parks within these areas are considered unsuitable for off-leash dog use due to; size, location of other facilities such as playgrounds and eating areas, and proximity to heritage properties.

 

12.    Scout Memorial Park (East Area between water canals) in Granville has been identified as a potential suitable location within this area to establish an additional dog off-leash area. This park is located close to Granville CBD and provides an enclosed grassed area between Sydney Water canals and southern residential property boundaries. This makes it suitable for a leash-free area. A playground is found within this park but is located on the other side of the canal thus preventing conflict developing between play equipment and dogs. An informal cricket pitch exists within the proposed off-leash site, however it currently receives limited use, so would be compatible with off-lead dogs within this large grass area. An aerial photograph of Scout Memorial Park with the proposed off-leash area depicted is found in Attachment 4.

 

13.    It was also resolved by Council on the 28 July 2008 “that Council enter into discussions with Parramatta Park with a view to obtaining at least a once a week arrangement in the Park”. Parramatta Park is managed by a trust under the Parramatta Park Trust Act 2001. Accordingly, Council has approached the Parramatta Park Trust requesting the use of an area in the park for a dog leash-free area. The Trust is currently assessing this proposal and will notify Council once a decision has been reached.

 

14.    On the 13 October 2008 Council received a petition from Mrs J O’Dowd on behalf of 35 Northmead residents requesting that Council consider designating Burlington Memorial Park in Northmead as a dog leash-free area (Refer Attachment 5). This petition was signed by 35 local residents who have indicated the need for a dog off-leash facility in the local area. The park is located next to a bus depot and provides a suitable grassed area for dogs to run leash-free. However, fencing would be required on the Boundary Road side of the park which is used by a large volume of buses and other traffic that use the road to avoid the nearby busy Church Street and Cumberland Highway intersection. The cost of fencing this park would be approximately $9,000. This funding could be considered in the 2009/10 Open Space Capital Improvement budget. Given the areas separation from other proposed off-lead dog areas there is a need for such a facility in this location. Council officers therefore recommend that this site be placed on public exhibition to enable the surrounding residents a chance to comment on this proposal. An aerial photograph is attached depicting the location of this proposed off-leash dog area. (Refer Attachment 6)

 

15.    Council also resolved on the 28 July 2008 that a report be provided which explores the options of self composting disposal units for dog faeces and the sandy dog urinal”. Council officers have now investigated the available self composting disposal options and the only available products are designed for domestic use for up to four dogs. As Council’s off-leash areas are publicly accessible, the number of dog faeces placed within these products would exceed their capacity and therefore they are not considered appropriate for use in open space areas.

 

16.    In relation to sandy dog urinals (also called ‘pooch patches’), Council officers have contacted Wyong and Warringah Councils, who have trialled the use of these facilities at their dog off-leash areas. They consist of a patch of sand with a central post provided within the off-leash area. The sand and post encourage the dogs to defecate (Refer Attachment 7). Dog owners can then dispose of the faeces in the bins provided nearby. However, feedback received from both Wyong and Warringah indicated a varying level of success, and did not recommend the use of them due to a number of problems associated with their provision, including vandalism and children using the area as a sandpit.

 

CONSULTATION & TIMING

 

17.    Community consultation has been an important component in the proposed establishment of additional dog off-leash areas. Council has promoted an open, transparent approach, providing opportunities for all interest groups and members of the community to contribute comments and to discuss specific issues.

 

18.    The proposal was placed on public exhibition at Council’s administration building, libraries and website from Wednesday 13 August 2008 until Friday 5 September 2008 as per Attachment 8. Temporary notification signs were erected within all of the proposed off-leash locations. Letters were also issued to relevant Park Committees and immediate surrounding residents advising them of the proposed dog off-leash areas.

 

19.    During the public exhibition period, 48 submissions were received from local residents and relevant organisations regarding the four proposed dog leash-free areas. All the written submissions have been reviewed, an assessment made of the issues and the level of support for each of the proposed off-leash locations.

 

20.    If approval is granted to proceed with the public exhibition of the two (2) additional locations, letters will be forwarded to the local residents surrounding the two proposed additional off-leash sites, inviting them to comment. Information will also be displayed at Council libraries, posted on the Council website and temporary notification signs erected in all of the proposed reserve locations. The results of the public consultation will then be provided in a further report to Council.

 

 

 

James Smallhorn

Supervisor Open Space

 

 

Attachments:

1View

28 July Council Report - Additional Dog Leash Free Areas

3 Pages

 

2View

Council Minute - Additional Dog Leash Free Areas

1 Page

 

3View

Dog Off-Leash Submission Summary Graph

1 Page

 

4View

Map of Proposed Scout Memorial Park Dog Off-Leash Area

1 Page

 

5View

Petition requesting Dog Off-Leash area at Burlington Memorial Park

5 Pages

 

6

Map of Proposed Burlington Memorial Park Dog Off-Leash Area

1 Page

 

7

Pooch Patch Example Photos

1 Page

 

8

Dog Off-Leash Area Public Exhibition Display Poster

1 Page

 

 

 

REFERENCE MATERIAL

  


Ordinary Council

 24 November 2008

 

 

 

Community Care

 

24 November 2008

 

13.1  Response to Council Request to Report on Advisory Committee Achievements


Ordinary Council 24 November 2008

Item 13.1

COMMUNITY CARE

ITEM NUMBER         13.1

SUBJECT                   Response to Council Request to Report on Advisory Committee Achievements

REFERENCE            F2005/01941 - D01070320

REPORT OF              Community Capacity Building Officer; Community Capacity Building Officer        

 

PURPOSE:

 

At the Council meeting of 7th October 2008, Council agreed that the confirmation of existing members to the Community Advisory Committees be deferred for 1 month pending a report to be provided as to the respective achievements of each Committee over the last 4 years from the relevant staff who manage the Committees.

 

This report provides information on the achievements, strengths and weaknesses of Council’s Advisory Committees and members of the Committees are to be commended for the skills, knowledge and expertise that they freely provide on a regular basis.  It is recognised, however, that the Advisory Committee format presents a number of the limitations and challenges.  A number of new strategies are proposed, to either complement or replace the role of Advisory Committees and to enable Council to more effective engage with the broader community. 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

(a)       That Council recognises that whilst Advisory Committees were relevant at the time they were established, a range of other, more appropriate and contemporary community engagement strategies are currently being implemented and will continue to be developed to ensure communication between Council and community is as efficient and effective as possible.

 

(b)       That the Access Committee is not re-established in its current form and that access issues are addressed in a range of community forums to be established by the CCB Team. 

 

(c)        That Council not re-establish in its current form the Arts Advisory Committee and that the City Culture, Tourism and Recreation Unit staff establish a broader community engagement strategy across the arts Community that will involve regular forums and other consultation mechanisms.

 

(d)       That  the ATSI Committee is not re-established in its current form and that Council establish a number of community engagement strategies including:

·     a shorter term Council NAIDOC/Sorry Day Advisory Group convened annually for a four month period by the Community Capacity Building (CCB) and Events Teams

·     quarterly community forums organised by the CCB Team for ATSI communities across the LGA

·     the establishment and resourcing by the CCB Team of a Parramatta Aboriginal Service Providers Network.

 

(e)     That the Community Safety Advisory Committee is not re-established in its current form and that the previous membership is integrated appropriately into the Community Safety Precinct Committee and the Leadership Group which will oversee progress on the CBD Crime Prevention Strategy Implementation Plan.

 

(f)      That the Cycleways Committee is not re-established in its current form and that as part of a broader community engagement strategy cycling issues are addressed in a range of community forums to be established by the Transport Planning Team. 

 

(f)      That the Heritage Committee is continued in its current form and Council proceed with membership recruitment in accordance with the Committee’s Terms of Reference.

 

(g)     That the Multicultural Advisory Committee is not re-established in its current form and the previous members be invited to join the Residents Panel to increase the number of CALD community members.

 

(h)     That the Youth Advisory Committee is not re-established in its current form and the CCB Team continue to develop and implement a range of other, more appropriate community engagement strategies for young people.

 

(i)      Further that Council write to all retiring members of the Community Advisory Committees thanking them for their support during the previous Council term and inviting them to join the Residents Panel.

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

1.        Advisory Committees have been part of Parramatta City Council’s community engagement processes since 1991 and have assisted Council in the development and implementation of a range of policies, projects and activities.   Current Advisory Committees exist for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander, Access, Arts, Community Safety, Cycleways, Heritage, Multicultural and Youth.   Meetings are held regularly with the minutes and any recommendations subsequently reported to Council.

 

2.        All Councillors are welcome to attend Advisory Committee meetings as they are ex-officio members of all Advisory Committees.  While community membership varies between Committees, the term of membership is generally four years to coincide with the Council term.

 

3.        At the Council meeting of 7th October 2008, Council considered a report which proposed that rather than seeking new nominations for membership of the Advisory Committees at this time, that Council reconfirm existing membership for a further twelve months in order that the members could be consulted and the Terms of Reference reviewed and reported to Council.   Council deferred the matter and requested a further report detailing the respective achievements of each Committee over the last 4 years.

 

4.        The following indicators have been used to describe each Committee’s achievements:

 

(a)     representation of membership (Average attendance/ Profile of membership/ Councillor attendance)

(b)     examples of activities of Committees (Committee driven events,  Advice/ input into Council processes, Advice/ input to external agencies)

 

REVIEW FINDINGS

 

5.      An audit of the work of the Advisory Committees over the last 4 years indicates that:

 

(a)     For the majority, the same issues are raised regularly, often by the same members. These include issues that are outside of Council’s scope.

 

(b)     No formal process is in place to ensure that issues raised in meetings are related to the Committees’ terms of reference, or Council’s Parramatta Twenty25 Strategy.

 

(c)     The Advisory Committees provide a limited opportunity to a small number of individuals (an average attendance of 6) to discuss and/or comment on a range of issues.  By its very nature the committee structure limits or narrows Council's ability to garner information on a wider range of issues, including those that are complex and difficult to address (such as domestic violence and neighbourhood cohesion) and those that emerge as critical issues (such as mortgage stress, and racial violence). 

 

6.      The findings on each Committee are summarised in Attachment 1.   The conclusions suggested by each review include:

 

(a)     Members of the Access Advisory Committee are a valued resource to Council as they advocate to increase the awareness of Council staff and help to embed access considerations in relevant Council processes.  They provide expertise and bring experience to access related issues.  However the current structure of the Committee limits its effectiveness.

 

(b)     The Arts Advisory Committee has achieved considerable positive outcomes for Council and the Parramatta communities: it has played a role in developing and implementing Council’s arts and cultural plans and activities e.g. Arts Facilities and Cultural Places Framework. However, we need broader models of consultation with the community in Parramatta to meet the maturing needs of a changing arts environment. There has been considerable growth in the arts community locally as Councils service provision for the arts has increased in recent years.

 

(c)     The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (ATSI) Advisory Committee has been a valuable resource to Council providing information on ATSI issues and priorities and driving significant cultural events including Burramatta NAIDOC and Sorry Day activities over the past 8 years.   However, its achievements are constrained as its membership is not representative of diverse ATSI communities across the area and its discussion and recommendations are often outside Council’s scope.   Other strategies such as quarterly community forums and establishing a local Aboriginal Service Providers Network would further enhance Council’s engagement with the ATSI community.

 

(d)     The Community Safety Advisory Committee has been a valuable resource in the development of the CBD Crime Prevention Plan and the identification of various community safety issues in the area.

 

However Community Safety Precinct Committees are currently being established in all Police Local Area Commands and will provide NSW Police, government agencies, local Members of Parliament, Council, community and business members with a formal process through which information can be exchanged and local safety concerns identified and addressed. 

 

Further, the CBD Crime Prevention Strategy implementation plan is to be overseen by a leadership group comprising NSW Police, Attorney General’s Department, Chamber of Commerce and Council (including Councillors and key Council staff). This group is scheduled to be established in February 2009.  This group is the re-establishment of the Leadership Group that oversaw the development of the City Centre Crime Prevention Plan, it is a committee of and convened by Council to be established for the term of the strategy. 

 

(e)     The Cycleways Advisory Committee includes a number of active members committed to local cycling issues but there are several key organisations and groups who are not currently represented.  The existing structure does not effectively and efficiently serve the growing needs of the community.

 

(f)      The Heritage Committee is considered to be functioning efficiently and effectively. The Committee make a valuable contribution that promotes heritage and conservation issues ensuring such matters are key considerations in Council decisions e.g. input into Residential Development Strategy. 

 

(g)     The focus of the Multicultural Advisory Committee has not been easy to maintain. However it did successfully implement the Religious Understanding Project 2007 and its membership is active in a number of other multicultural networks within the area.  Parramatta is fortunate in having a number of highly effective community organisations that provide a broad range of leadership on multicultural issues and activities that have direct bearing on the wellbeing of many families in the Parramatta LGA, and while the establishment of the Multicultural Advisory Committee was timely in it’s day, it is pleasing to note that there are now a range of resources available to the community that have developed since this committee was first established.

 

(h)     The Youth Advisory Committee includes a number of active members committed to youth issues. However membership is not representative of the diverse groups of young people in our communities and attendance is poor given the significant number of commitments many of the young people have.  The formal committee structure is one of the least effective ways to engage with young people today, and we need to explore other types of engagement strategies such as electronic media, Internet options (ie chat rooms), community forums and engagement with educational institutions in the area. The CCB Team has a number of alternative engagement strategies with young people in place and which it is developing, including the Youth 4 Youth Fiesta Council, Step to the Future Forum 2008 and the Civics Education Program.

 

ISSUES

 

7.      The Community Advisory Committees were established prior to Council’s Residents Panel program which now generates a significant amount of input from a representative base of over 2000 Parramatta residents coupled with the extensive consultation and engagement process that has been undertaken in the preparation of Council’s Twenty25 Strategy over the past 5 years; the LGA wide consultation with all community agencies located in or servicing the Parramatta LGA undertaken by the Community Capacity Building Team; as well a range of local consultative forums such as the Community Spirit events held in 2006 and 2007.  These new community engagement initiatives have to varying degrees lessened the role and impact of the Advisory Committee structure and outcomes such as obtaining expert advice and gauging community opinion in relation to critical or emerging issues.

 

8.      The Advisory Committee structures are relatively labour and resource intensive, requiring a convenor, a member of the executive support team, on occasion representatives/guest speakers from other Council departments, room hire, refreshment costs and follow up time for convenors to chase up any matters raised and prepare a Council Report for each meeting. The conservative estimate cost for the eight committees across a 12 month period is $30,000 (average cost of each Committee meeting ($475).

 

9.      The CCB Team has developed a number of alternate community engagement strategies for Council’s consideration as outlined in the table below.

 

Arts

·     Cultural Trust establishment

·     Artsmart Artist professional development program

·     Art professional projects fund

·     Regular forums and Workshops with artist at the Parramatta Artists Studios

·       Issues based and general forums (two per year)

·       Web based consultation

·       Use of Residents Panel

 

 

10.    The proposed strategies seek to target Council’s approach and resources to ensure we are in the best position to obtain expert input and key information on critical matters of importance to Parramatta’s communities.  They also seek to demonstrate how we value the time of our volunteers and community members by ensuring we provide the best possible mechanisms with which to gather their feedback.

 

 

 

Maggie Kyle                                                                Donna Mosford

Community Capacity Building Officer             Community Capacity Building Officer

 

 

Attachments:

1View

Advisory Committee Audits 2004 - 2008

11 Pages

 

 

 

REFERENCE MATERIAL

  


Ordinary Council

 24 November 2008

 

 

 

City Leadership and Management

 

24 November 2008

 

14.1  Presentation of 2007/08 Financial report to the Public

 

 

 

 

14.2  Investments Report for September 2008

 

 

 

 

14.3  2008/09 Management Plan - September Quarterly Review

 

 

 

 

14.4  Status Report of Implementation of ICAC Recommendations

 

 

 

 

14.5  Tender No 29/2008 Westpool/UIP Service Providers Broking and Claims Management

 

 

 

 

14.6  Affirmation and Review of Civic Office Expenses and Facilities Policy


Ordinary Council 24 November 2008

Item 14.1

CITY LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT

ITEM NUMBER         14.1

SUBJECT                   Presentation of 2007/08 Financial report to the Public

REFERENCE            F2004/05862 - D01051071

REPORT OF              Manager - Finance       

 

PURPOSE:

 

To present the 2007/08 Financial Report and Auditors Report to the public.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That the 2007/08 Financial Report and the Auditors Report be received and presented to the public.

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

1.      The Council is required to present the 2007/08 Financial Report and Auditors Report to the General Public in accordance with the provisions of the Local Government Act 1993.

 

2.      The Council at its meeting held on the 20 October 2008 referred the 2007/08 Financial Report to its Auditors PricewaterhouseCoopers for audit.           

 

3.      The 2007/08 Financial Report and Auditors Report was placed on public exhibition at the Darcy Street Administrative Building and the Parramatta City Library.  An advertisement was placed in the local newspaper on 12 November 2008 advising that the reports would be presented to the public at the Council meeting of 24 November 2008 and inviting submissions on the reports to be received by 1 December 2008.

 

4.      A copy of the Auditors Report and the previous report to Council is attached for Councillors information.

 

5.      The Council must ensure that copies of all submissions received by it are referred to the auditor, and may take such action as it considers appropriate with respect to any such submission, including the giving of notice to the Director-General of any matter that appears to require amendment of the Council’s financial reports.

 

6.      The Auditors in their 2007/08 report state that all indicators are better than accepted industry benchmarks and reflect a sound and stable financial position.

 

CONCLUSION

 

7.      The presentation of the Council’s 2007/08 Financial Report and the Auditors Report to the public at the Council meeting of the 24 November 2008 will ensure that Council meets its statutory obligations in respect of financial reporting.

 

 

 

 

Jenny Fett

Manager Finance

 

 

Attachments:

1View

Auditor's Report - Section 417(2) -

1 Page

 

2View

Report on the Conduct of the Audit
for Year Ended
30 June 2008-Section 417(3) -

3 Pages

 

3View

Independant Auditor's Report

1 Page

 

4View

Previous Report to Council on 20 October 2008 -

5 Pages

 

 

 

REFERENCE MATERIAL

 


Ordinary Council 24 November 2008

Item 14.2

CITY LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT

ITEM NUMBER         14.2

SUBJECT                   Investments Report for September 2008

REFERENCE            F2008/01474 - D01062797

REPORT OF              Manager - Finance       

 

PURPOSE:

 

To inform Council of the investment portfolio performance for the month of September 2008.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council receives and notes the investments report for September 2008.

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

1.         In accordance with clause 212 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005, a report setting out details of all money invested must be presented to Council on a monthly basis.

 

2.         The report must include a certificate as to whether or not the investments have been made in accordance with the Act, the Regulations and the investment policy of Council.

 

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

 

3.         The Council’s investment portfolio stood at $89.2 Million as at 30th September 2008. (Previous month $81.8 Million) The weighted average portfolio held for September 2008 was $89.4 Million (Refer attachment 1).

 

4.         Council invests directly with Local Government Financial Services (LGFS), various term deposit providers and with funds managers utilising the services of Grove Financial Services. There are also investments with the Commonwealth Bank for loan offset funds.

 

5.         The average interest rate on Council’s investments for the month compared to the Bank Bill Index is as follows:

 

                                                                   Monthly      Annualised

 

                             Total Portfolio              -0.16%      -0.75%

                             Funds Managers         -0.54%      -4.65%

                             Bank Bill Index               0.59%      7.37%

           

NB: Annualised rates are calculated on a compounding basis assuming that the interest returns are added to the initial investment amount and reinvested.

 

6.         After allowing for Council’s loan offsets and at call funds, Council recorded a negative annualised return of -0.75% in the month for its total investment portfolio. The negative return recorded by Council was below the Bank Bill Index of 7.37%. Fund managers also recorded a negative annualised rate of

-4.65% for the month of September. 

 

7.         The amount of funds invested at the end of September increased from the previous month by 7.6 Million. This increase was due to a late inflow of rates receipts from the 1st instalment which were due by the 31st August 2008.

 

8.         September was a month dominated by financial market distress as US and Japanese equity markets plummeted to levels last seen during the 2000-2002. As the global financial sector collapsed, central banks worldwide rushed to inject hundreds of billions of dollars into money markets to ensure the supply of funds does not deteriorate an already illiquid marketplace.

 

9.       The continued Global credit crisis and continuing speculation of a possible recession resulted in Council’s overall portfolio falling well below the bank bill index by approximately 8.12%. This negative return can be attributed to the poor performance of council’s remaining pool of Funds Managers and Equity Linked Notes which are negatively affected by the volatile global credit market being experienced worldwide.   Volatility will continue for some time, meaning October returns will be even more adversely affected.  We will continue to reduce our exposure to Managed Funds as the opportunity arises to do so without locking in losses.   We have a couple of long term funds that are still expected to return our capital at maturity.

 

10.       The Blackrock Diversified Credit Fund recorded a mark to market loss of approximately $235K for the month of September, however this fund is currently being liquidated and all funds as they are drawn down will be placed in term deposits and cash at call. This will help stabilise council’s return in future months. The decision made by the Finance team to lock $16.2M of Civic place investments into a 6 month term deposit at 8% has proven to be advantageous with rates now starting to drop significantly.

 

11.       The following details are provided on the attachments for information:

 

                   Graph – Comparison of average funds invested with loans balance

                   Graph – Average interest rate comparison to Bank Bill Index

                   Graphs – Investments and loans interest compared to budget

                   Summary of investment portfolio

 

12.       The Certificate of Investments for September 2008 is provided below:

 

Certificate of Investments

 

I hereby certify that the investments for the month of September 2008 have been made in accordance with the Act, the Regulations and Council’s Investment Policy.

 

13.       There is no standard report attachment - detailed submission - attached to this report.

 

 

 

 

 

Jenny Fett

Finance Manager

 

 

Attachments:

1View

Investments & Loans - Performance

1 Page

 

2View

Summary of Investments Portfolio

2 Pages

 

 

 

REFERENCE MATERIAL

 


Ordinary Council 24 November 2008

Item 14.3

CITY LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT

ITEM NUMBER         14.3

SUBJECT                   2008/09 Management Plan - September Quarterly Review

REFERENCE            F2008/03450 - D01065734

REPORT OF              Manager - Finance       

 

PURPOSE:

 

1.         Section 407 of the Local Government Act 1993 requires the General Manager (Chief Executive Officer) to report to the Council within 2 months after the end of each quarter as to the extent to which the performance targets set by the Council’s Management Plan have been achieved during that quarter.

 

2.         Clause 203 of the Local Government (General Regulation) 2005 requires that the Responsible Accounting Officer (Manager Finance) prepare and submit to the Council, not later than 2 months after the end of each quarter, a budget review statement that shows, by reference to the estimate of income and expenditure set out in the Management Plan, a revised estimate of the income and expenditure for that year. The Responsible Accounting Officer is also required to include with the budget review statement, a report as to whether or not the Responsible Accounting Officer believes that the statement indicates that the financial position of the Council is satisfactory, having regard to the original estimate of income and expenditure, and if that position is unsatisfactory, recommendations for remedial action.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

(a)       That Council adopt the Chief Executive Officer’s September 2008 Quarterly Review of the 2008/09 Management Plan and Budget. (Attachment 1).

 

(b)       That Council note and approve the actual results and variations to the previously adopted budget estimates for the 2008/09 financial year as detailed in Attachment 1.

 

(c)       Further, that Council adopt the Responsible Accounting Officer’s report on the financial position of the Council.

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

1.         The attached Quarterly Review September 2008 contains the Chief Executive Officer’s report, detailing the extent to which the performance targets set by the Council’s 2008/09 Management Plan have been achieved on a Program basis.

 

2.         The Review also details at pages 14 to15 and 75 the actual income, expenditure and proposed budget adjustments for 2008/09 with comparisons to the original budget and the approved budget incorporating re-votes previously adopted by Council.

 

3.         The Quarterly Review September 2008 was submitted to Council’s Program Panels’ meeting on 17th November 2008. Any changes from the Program Panels’ meetings will be incorporated as an addendum to this document to be considered at the Council meeting.

 

4.         In addition to reporting Councils Operating Result and capital expenditure Councils reports on its Financial Performance Summary.  For internal reporting purposes Council separates its activities into Services and Projects.  Services are reported in the Financial Performance summary and consist of the regular functions that Council provides to the community to meet its statutory requirements. Some restricted revenue and depreciation expenses are excluded. Any surplus of Services Revenue over Services Expenditure is available to fund Projects.

 

5.         Projects are either –

 

Capital expenditure works which create new or replacement assets that enhance the capacity of Council to deliver services

 

or

 

Operating Projects which consist of expenditure that provides new or enhanced services or is for an ongoing service funded from restricted revenue which Council wants to monitor. This expenditure does not create an asset.

 

6.         In putting together the 2008/09 Budget, Council undertook a prioritisation process to determine which Projects should be undertaken given the limited funds available.  Projects are funded from any Services surplus plus a combination of loans, special rates, reserves, specific purpose Government grants and contributions such as Section 94 funds which must be used for specific purposes.

 

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

 

Report of the Responsible Accounting Officer

 

7.         As noted earlier in this report the Responsible Accounting Officer is required, as part of the Quarterly Management Plan Review, to report on the financial position of the Council.

 

Operating Statement result

 

8.         Council is required to produce a financial statement in accordance with statutory accounting standards and generally accepted accounting principles. This Operating Statement does not include funds transferred to and from reserves and includes depreciation and the profit/loss on disposals of assets.

 

9.         Council’s original budget, adopted in June 2008 as part of the 2008/09 Management Plan, was to deliver a balanced operating result.

 

10.      At its meeting on 25 August 2008 Council resolved to re-vote funds of $10.55M (Projects $10.275M & Services $0.275M) relating to incomplete projects from 2007/08 into the 2008/09 Budget. A large component of this was for the completion of the Parramatta Pool $4.9M.

 

11.      Of the total revotes, $1.6M related to operating expenditure and this expenditure in 2008/09 had a direct negative impact on the forecast operating result for 2008/09. Council was advised at that time that the deficit resulting from the re-votes could be partly offset by new unbudgeted capital grants which were then subject to confirmation.

 

Operating surplus/(deficit)

 

Original Budget adopted with Management Plan                  Nil

 

Revised Budget following 30 June re-votes               ($1.6M)

 

The September Review forecast                       Surplus  $0.26M. 

 

12.      The September Review forecast includes an increase in revenue of $3.382M and an increase in forecast expenses of $1.545M. The major areas that have caused the variation to the operating result are as follows:

 

User Charges & Fees increased $0.522M

 

Aquatic Centres income up $553k

Parking Meters Revenue up $250k

Community Centres – Rec Halls income up $95k

Hoarding Fees down $140k

Construction Certificates down $260k

 

Investment Income decreased $1.6M

 

Down $1.585M- This is an estimated likely impact on Councils investments in Managed Funds resulting from the global financial crisis.  This will be reviewed again in December.

 

Grants and Contributions increased $2.38M

 

Financial Assistance Grant up by $483k

Wharf Road Boat Ramp $300k - Capital

Sportsground upgrade $150k -  Capital

Parramatta Cycleway project $1.1M – Capital

Fish Ladders $280K -Capital

 

Gain on sale of assets increased by  $2.98M

 

This gain on sale relates to the sale of land at the site of the Macquarie Street Carpark to Integral energy.  This had previously been valued at market value but on advice from Council’s auditor it was recorded at cost.   The proceeds from this sale have been transferred to the Property Reserve.

 

Other Revenues decreased $0.9M

 

Property rentals down $1.1M

Increased Aquatic Centre Catering Sales $0.12M

 

 

 

Employee Costs increase $1.9M

 

Salaries increased by $1.2M. To achieve a balanced operating result in the original budget each area was given an employee savings target.  As part of the CEO’s 2% target savings challenge, offsetting savings were identified elsewhere in the budget plus additional savings of $507K.  The year to date actuals expenditure was in excess of the year to date budget because the impact of this savings target.  Casual wages increased in Parramatta and Granville Swimming Centres by $0.82M offset by increased revenues. The Workers Compensation insurance premium has increased by $0.194M. Net savings in other employee costs are $0.3M.

 

Borrowing Costs $0.2M

 

The net reduction of $0.244M in interest on loans primarily relates to Civic Place loans and results from expected reductions in interest rates.  Many of our other loans are at fixed rates.

 

Materials and Contracts $0.7M

 

The total increase was $0.726M, which primarily relates to an increase in Fuel Costs of $0.63M, partially offset by some savings in materials.  Fuel costs remained high during the first quarter, presenting significant challenges to last year’s targets in this area.  The revised budget reflects a slight increase on last year’s actuals.

 

Other Operating expenses $0.6M

 

Reduction of $0.6M relates to general savings target

 

Projects Summary

      

Original Budget adopted with Management Plan            $30.465M

 

       Revised Budget following re-votes                                    $40.7M

 

       The September Review forecast                                $43.0M

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Projects bids, new and increases to existing

 

Project

Approved Budget

Annual Forecast

Increase

Funding Source

13093. CAP - 07/08.Parramatta War Memorial Swimming Centre

$4,896,094

$5,196,094

$300,000

S94

13529. 08/09 CAP Civic Pl Proj Mgmt

$608,000

$908,000

$300,000

Civic Place Reserve

13549. 08/09 CAP Drainage Const Big 7

$600,000

$620,000

$20,000

S94 and Contributions

11800. Fish Ladders Parramatta River

$312,360

$592,360

$280,000

Grants

13550. 08/09 CAP Floodplain Prop Acquis

$400,000

$550,000

$150,000

Property Acquisition Reserve

13728. Printer Device Replacement

 $            -

$314,653

$314,653

Street Furniture Reserve

12858. OP - TBL - Model for Duck River

$113,000

$303,000

$190,000

Grants

13586. 0708 CAP Wharf Road Boat Ramp

 $            -

$300,000

$300,000

Grants

13727. Cap 08/09 Lotus to MS

 $            -

$297,000

$297,000

Street Furniture Reserve

13536. 08/09 CAP City of Trees

$250,000

$278,965

$28,965

Open Space, S94 and loans t/f from Road Repair Project

13307. Barton Park Carpark Upgrade

 $            -

$229,833

$229,833

Open Space, S94 and loans t/f from Road Repair Project

12477. CAP - 2006/07 Epping TMAP

 $            -

$150,000

$150,000

Epping T Map Reserve

13719. 08/09 - Blacktown Cycleway

 $            -

$120,000

$120,000

Grants

12865. OP - 2006/07 Estuary Mngt Plan

$10,000

$120,000

$110,000

Grants/Sub Infrast Special Rate

13733. Binalong Park, Toongabbie

 $            -

$90,000

$90,000

Grants

11996. OP - SMART Transport to Parramatta

$30,178

$85,123

$54,945

Grants

12577. CAP - 2006/07 City Ctre Transp Plan

$11,000

$60,000

$49,000

S94

13360. CAP 07/08 Macquarie Street Bus

 $            -

$16,827

$16,827

Grants

12567. CAP - 2006/07 Lord Mayor Art

 $            -

$10,000

$10,000

Revenue

13834 –OP –Councillor Support Project

 $            -

$80,000

$80,000

Revenue

Total

 

 

$3,091,223

 

 

Financial Performance Summary - Services and Projects forecast result against Management Plan Budget 2008/09

 

13.      As part of the 2008/09 Management Plan, Council adopted a Services Budget, which excludes depreciation, which resulted in a surplus of $9.46M. This amount was allocated to funding Projects in a total Projects budget of $30.47M.

 

14.      As noted earlier in this report, Council re-voted an additional $10.275M of 2007/08 Projects into 2008/09. These Projects were incomplete in 2007/08 and the revenue which was to fund the works was set aside in reserves. The re-votes took the total Projects budget to $40.7M made up of operating projects $4.3M and capital projects $36.4M.  Following the September Review total forecast Project expenditure is $43.0M.

 

15.      The Services and Projects Financial Summary is shown at pages 14 to 15 of the Quarterly Review September 2008. Unlike the Operating Statement, this Summary is more focused on funding sources. Revenue received that is restricted to a specific purpose, (such as Special Rates and capital grants and contributions) and which is not matched by expenditure, is transferred to reserves until expended. (For information purposes the total of restricted revenues is appended to the Financial Summary.)

 

16.      Following this quarterly review the forecast year end revenue funds available for projects  has moved from the adopted Budget of $9.47M to $7.6M a reduction of $1.87M. New Project proposals requiring revenue funding of $0.09M have been put forward.

 

17.      This movement is due to the same factors that influence the operating result and are described earlier in this report. As a result of the reduction in revenue funds available for projects it became necessary to review funding of existing and proposed projects. 

 

18.      Changes to Section 94 enabled the Parramatta Pool project to increase the funding from Section 94, releasing Street Furniture Reserve funding of $3.462M. The released funds are proposed to be used to replace revenue funding of 1.344M on the Road Repair and Maintenance project and to fund IT projects totalling $0.631M which relates to high priority IT projects. The Councils-On-Line upgrade has been delayed while we assess Parramatta’s long term business technology strategy. However there are some urgent IT issues that need addressing and the $630K identified in this quarterly review is to fund two important IT projects during this financial year. These projects are the migration from Lotus notes to MS Exchange for our email system and replacement of printers. While these IT project costs will be offset to some extent from expected savings from printer lease rentals over 2 to 3 years, the acquisition cost of the printers and new software is $630K this year. This is proposed to be funded from the redundant Street Furniture reserve which council has previously resolved to deplete.

 

19.      The remaining balance of the Street Furniture Reserve (which came from a lump sum payment from the Adshel contract) is proposed to be transferred to the IT reserve to cover anticipated expenditure on computer replacements over this financial year.   Full details on this item will be presented in the December quarter for councils’ consideration.

 

20.      Council has complete discretion over the expenditure of this Reserve. The use of the Street Furniture Reserve for this purpose amends a council resolution made on 28 June 1999 which recommended the use of the reserve for three possible projects, namely:

                       

-      seeding the development of an aquatic/leisure centre;

-      undertaking substantial refurbishment and upgrading of the Parramatta (and possibly Granville) Town Hall to mark the centenary of Federation;

-      property acquisition associated with the redevelopment of Civic Place

 

Responsible Accounting Officer’s Statement

 

21.      Following a review of the attached Quarterly Review September 2009, it is considered that the financial position of the Council is satisfactory, though challenging.

 

 

 

Jenny Fett

Manager Finance – Responsible Accounting Officer

 

 

Attachments:

1

September 2008 Quarterly Review of the Management Plan and Budget (Copies distributed to Councillors and Senior Staff Only)

 

 

 

 

REFERENCE MATERIAL


Ordinary Council 24 November 2008

Item 14.4

CITY LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT

ITEM NUMBER         14.4

SUBJECT                   Status Report of Implementation of ICAC Recommendations

REFERENCE            F2007/01985 - D01070624

REPORT OF              Manager Service Audit and Review        

 

PURPOSE:

 

To provide Council with an updated response to the recommendations of the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) report into corrupt conduct associated with the regulation of brothels in Parramatta so as to enable an updated report to be provided to the ICAC.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

(a)       That Council receive and note this report.

 

(b)       Further, that Council refer this report together with the schedule at Attachment 1 to the ICAC for information.

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

1.      The ICAC commenced an investigation into the activities of the Compliance Section of the Development Services Unit in November 2006. In August 2007 the ICAC published a report of their investigation finding that the former Team Leader Compliance Services acted corruptly in accepting cash and sexual favours in exchange for failing to undertake inspections and for providing prior warning of inspections.

 

2.      In August 2007 Council provided the ICAC with a status report relating to the thirteen recommendations contained in the ICAC report. A detailed report of improvements arising out of the ICAC report was provided to Council on 29 October 2007 (SAR 34/2007 refers).

 

3.      In May 2008 two reports were provided to Council covering the ICAC Investigation into the Compliance Section (Attachment 2) and the Regulation and Enforcement of Brothels and Massage Parlours (Attachment 3). At its meeting of 26 June 2008, Council referred the two reports to the ICAC for information.

 

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

 

4.      In a report to Council of 26 June 2008 (Attachment 3), the Strategic Analyst, Crime and Corruption Prevention concluded that “Overall, PCC has either met or exceeded the recommendations from the ICAC report following investigation of the Compliance Section in 2007”. A similar conclusion was drawn in an independent review of the implementation commissioned by the previous Acting General Manager.

 

5.      The re-structure of the Outcomes and Development Group approved by Council in July 2008 has resulted in the Compliance Services Team moving from the Development Services Unit to the Regulatory Services Unit. A number of changes to procedures have been implemented, and further development is required as vacant positions are substantially filled. The updated report to the ICAC reflects a number of these changes.

 

6.      Council’s implementation plan relating to the ICAC recommendations was provided to the ICAC in December 2007. The implementation plan is posted on the ICAC website. Council is required to provide the ICAC with updates on progress of the implementation plan on an annual basis in 2008 and 2009.

 

7.      Following a meeting with ICAC officers in August 2008, the Manager Service Audit & Review secured an extension to the reporting deadline to enable this report to be provided to the newly elected Council.  In a letter from the ICAC dated September 2008, the Commission requested a 12 month implementation progress report be provided by 28 November 2008.

 

8.      The current status of implementation of the ICAC recommendations is provided in the pro-forma schedule at Attachment 1.

 

 

 

Michael Quirk

Manager – Service, Audit and Review

 

 

Attachments:

1View

12 Month Implementation Progress Report

8 Pages

 

2View

Status Report of Implementation of ICAC Recommendations (D00917795)

3 Pages

 

3View

Regulation & Enforcement of Brothels and massage Parlours (D00935148)

5 Pages

 

 

 

REFERENCE MATERIAL

 


Ordinary Council 24 November 2008

Item 14.5

CITY LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT

ITEM NUMBER         14.5

SUBJECT                   Tender No 29/2008 Westpool/UIP Service Providers Broking and Claims Management

REFERENCE            F2004/06882 - D01072369

REPORT OF              Service Manager Commercial and Risk       

 

PURPOSE:

 

It is intended that Westpool and Metro Pool will undertake a tender on member Councils behalf for the provision of Broking and Claims Management Services. In accordance with the Local Government Act 1993 and Local Government (General) Regulations 2005. Council must resolve to permit this to be done on their behalf. Westpool and Metro Pool will then submit the results and a recommendation back to the member Council for approval.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

(a)     That the Council resolve that Westpool be delegated authority to undertake a review of our insurance broker and claims management team on council’s behalf.

 

(b)     That the results and recommended tenderers be submitted back to Council for approval.

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

1.      Westpool and Metro Pool undertook a review of the brokers and claims management team in 2004.  Previously, AON provided all services, however after analysis of the tender, Willis was appointed as the brokers and Claims Management Australasia was appointed as the claim management team.

 

2.      The broker is responsible for assisting the Pool in its negotiation of all insurance with exception of Workers’ Compensation.  The current broker operates on a fee structure with no commissions to be paid.

 

3.      Our claims management team are responsible for assisting risk managers in the management of medium to large claims.  They work with the lawyers and, if required, provide independent advice.  They also liaise with our insurance claims team located in London in relation to claims that exceed our self insured retention.  Claims Management Australasia also operates on a fee basis and no commissions.

 

4.      Both contracts were for an initial term of three years with a two-year extension.  In April 2007 the Joint Pools decided to extend the contract due to good performance until April 2009 and as that date is fast approaching, the Pools are seeking members’ delegated authority to undertake the tender process on their behalf.

 

5.      The tender is required in accordance with the Local Government Act as the fees for both services exceed the limit of $150,000.  We have discussed the issue of tendering with the Department of Local Government and they advise that until such time as the Act is amended, Local Government mutuals are required to submit results of tenders back to the council for approval.

 

6.      It is intended that Westpool and Metro Pool will undertake the tender on members’ behalf and then submit results and a recommendation back to the members for approval.

 

7.      Before we commence this process we require delegated authority to undertake the tender process on council’s behalf.

 

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

 

8.      Westpool must obtain each member Councils approval prior to commencing a formal tender process on behalf of all member Councils. As the current contracts are approaching expiry it is necessary to receive approval from each Council to commence this process.

 

CONSULTATION & TIMING

 

9.      All member Councils are consulted via their respective representatives that attend Westpool Risk Management Committee and Westpool Board meetings.

 

 

 

Michael Maclean

Service Manager Commercial and Risk

 

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

 

REFERENCE MATERIAL

 


Ordinary Council 24 November 2008

Item 14.6

CITY LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT

ITEM NUMBER         14.6

SUBJECT                   Affirmation and Review of Civic Office Expenses and Facilities Policy

REFERENCE            F2005/02435 - D01070627

REPORT OF              Policy Review Officer       

 

 

LATE REPORT

 

 

Please Note: This report will be distributed to Councillors and Senior Staff next week

  


Ordinary Council

 24 November 2008

 

 

 

Notices of Motion

 

24