Agenda of Council - 23 May 2011

COUNCIL CHAMBERS

The Lord Mayor Clr John Chedid – Elizabeth Macarthur Ward

Dr. Robert Lang, Chief Executive Officer - Parramatta City Council

Sue Coleman – Group Manager City Services			Assistant Minutes Clerk – Joy Bramham
Greg Smith – Group Manager Corporate			Minutes Clerk – Grant Davies
Sue Weatherley–Group Manager Outcomes & Development

Clr Paul Barber – Caroline Chisholm Ward			Clr Lorraine Wearne - Lachlan Macquarie Ward
Clr Mark Lack – Elizabeth Macarthur Ward			Clr Paul Garrard - Woodville Ward
Clr Glenn Elmore – Woodville Ward			Clr Scott Lloyd – Caroline Chisholm Ward
Clr Pierre Esber– Lachlan Macquarie Ward			Clr Andrew Wilson – Lachlan Macquarie Ward
Clr Prabir Maitra – Arthur Phillip Ward			Clr Andrew Bide – Caroline Chisholm Ward
Clr Julia Finn – Arthur Phillip Ward	Clr Michael McDermott, Deputy Lord Mayor - Elizabeth Macarthur Ward	Clr Antoine (Tony) Issa, OAM – Woodville Ward	Clr Chiang Lim– Arthur Phillip Ward

Staff

GALLERY

Council 23 May 2011

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ITEM SUBJECT PAGE NO

1 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES - Council - 27 April 2011, Council (Development) - 9 May 2011

2 APOLOGIES

3 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

4 Minutes of Lord Mayor

5 Public Forum

6 PETITIONS

7 Economy and Development

7.1 Report on the Public Exhibition and Public Hearing of the Planning Proposal into the rezoning and reclassification of various Council owned sites

7.2 Request for refund of fees for Hoarding - 20 Victoria Road, Parramatta.

7.3 Result of public exhibition of amended Development Contribution Plans

7.4 Heritage Advisory Committe for April 2011

7.5 30 George Street, Parramatta ( Lot 1 & 2 DP 812461 & Lot 2 DP 41207) (Elizabeth Macarthur Ward)

7.6 Shop 3, 197 Church Street, Parramatta
(Cor Lot 1 DP 710335) (Arthur Phillip Ward)

7.7 9 Hassall Street, Parramatta - draft Voluntary Planning Agreement - results of public exhibition

7.8 9 Hassall Street Parramatta (Lot 6 Sec 2 DP 241 & Lot 14 DP 11507)

7.9 DA Assessment Governance Framework

8 Community and Neighbourhood

8.1 Draft Lake Parramatta Reserve Plan of Management

8.2 Draft Parramatta Street Tree Plan

8.3 1 Park Road Rydalmere

8.4 Proposal to Rename a small part of Amos Street, Parramatta to Kfarsghab Place, Parramatta

8.5 Finalisation of the Sportsground Capacity Review

8.6 Lease Surrender - Westfield Occasional Care Centre

9 Governance and Corporate

9.1 Appointment of Delegate and Alternate Delegate to the Westpool Board

9.2 Procurement Policy Review and Update

9.3 Investments Report for March 2011

9.4 2010/14 DELIVERY PROGRAM AND 2011/12 OPERATIONAL PLAN

9.5 Delivery Program and Operational Plan – Quarterly Review March 2011

9.6 2011 Asia Pacific Cities Summit - Brisbane, QLD - 6-8 July 2011

10 Notices of Motion

10.1 Dry July 2011

11 Closed Session

11.1 Tender No. 3/2011 Dundas Shops, Station Street, Dundas – Streetscape Upgrade – Including Minor Concrete and Paving Works, Landscaping, Street Furniture and Traffic Calming Facilities.

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.

11.2 Proposed Memorial to the Late George Khattar

This report is confidential in accordance with section 10A (2) (a) of the Local Government act 1993 as the report contains personnel matters concerning particular individuals.

12 DECISIONS FROM CLOSED SESSION

13 QUESTION TIME

Council 23 May 2011 Item 7.1

ECONOMY AND DEVELOPMENT

ITEM NUMBER 7.1

SUBJECT Report on the Public Exhibition and Public Hearing of the Planning Proposal into the rezoning and reclassification of various Council owned sites

REFERENCE F2009/02710 - D01940417

REPORT OF Property Development Manager

PURPOSE:

This report provides the current status of the Planning Proposal, summarises the submissions received to the public exhibition and comments on the report of the independent Chairperson to the public hearing and makes recommendations for the Planning Proposal to be amended prior to being referred back to the Department of Planning.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council consider this report, its attachments and all submissions in accordance with section 58 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act, 1979 and approve the following;

(i) The rezoning and reclassifications of the sites as identified within Attachment 2 under the headings Proposed Zone and PDG Recommendations

(ii) The rezoning to B4 and reclassification to operational of the following RTA owned land subject to the Care Control and Management of Council;

· Lot 1 and Lot 2 in DP 22104

(iii) The following heritage items be removed from Schedule 5 of the Draft Parramatta LEP 2011 (once gazetted)

· 40 Cowper Street Granville

· 38 Marion Street Parramatta

(b) That Council adopt the Planning Proposal as amended in this report and forward it to the Department of Planning for finalisation and gazettal

BACKGROUND

1. On 9 February, 2009 Council adopted the Draft LEP 2008 subject to a review of the implications upon all Council owned lands.

2. The review resulted in a report being submitted to Council on 24 August, 2009 with a follow up report on 14 September, 2009 and the recommendations of this report were adopted by Council.

3. Previous Council Resolutions referred to the following properties;

· 14 King Street Dundas - Council Meeting 10 November, 2008

· 42 Bridge Street Rydalmere - Council Meeting 25 June, 2007

· Boundary Street South Granville – Council Meeting 25 June, 2007

4. All of these 29 sites have been wrapped into a Planning Proposal as a result of the Department of Planning requiring a separate Planning Proposal for all Council owned properties that were subject to rezoning or reclassification, rather than incorporating them within the Draft Parramatta LEP 2010.

5. Don Fox Planning were appointed to prepare the documentation for the Planning Proposal.

6. The Planning Proposal was submitted to the Department of Planning in June 2010 and Council was notified on 9 July, 2010 that the proposal had proceeded through the Gateway Determination. The Minister had consented to the Proposal to be publicly exhibited. Further revisions to the Gateway Determination were issued on 2 August, 2010 and 14 September, 2010.

7. The Proposal was exhibited from 14 September until 22 October, 2010 and a number of written and verbal submissions were received. A summary of these submissions are a part of the Don Fox Report in Attachment 1.

8. Following the public exhibition those sites that were to be reclassified from community land to operational were required to undertake further consultation at a public hearing which was conducted on 28 February, 2011.

9. After the public hearing a report was prepared by the independent Chairperson which commented on the submissions and provided recommendations on each of the sites. The recommendations and the report forms part of the Don Fox Planning report in Attachment 1 of this report.

ISSUES

10. Council officers have considered the report of the Independent Chairperson and the report of Don Fox Planning and the greater majority of the sites have been recommended for reclassification to operational. The sites that differ from the original Planning Proposal will be discussed in turn.

11. Site No. 1- 10 Emma Crescent, Constitution Hill. The Planning Proposal called for an R2 zoning and a reclassification to operational.

Independent Chairperson Recommendation - The land be retained as “community land”.

Property Development Group comments - There was sufficient evidence of its use as a park over an extended period within the 9 written submissions and a number of verbal submissions from the local residents and it appears that the utilisation and the amenity it provides were underestimated in our initial review of the land.

Property Development Group recommendation - That the reclassification and rezoning of this land be withdrawn from the Planning Proposal.

12. Site No. 3 - 7 Ronald Avenue, Dundas. The Planning Proposal called for an R2 zoning and reclassification of the land to operational to allow for a sale to the adjoining owner.

Independent Chairperson Recommendation - “The part of the land to the west of the prolongation of the rear boundary of the property at 7 Ungarra Street to Ronald Avenue be re-classified as “operational land” and the remainder of the land be retained as “community land under the terms of the Local Government Act 1993 and incorporated into Upjohn Park.”

PDG comments - This could be facilitated by a boundary adjustment with very little expense and so this recommendation is supported.

Property Development Group recommendation - That the recommendation of the Independent Chairperson be adopted.

13. Site No. 4 - 14 King Street, Dundas Valley. The Planning Proposal zoned the land R2 and reclassified the land operational, inclusive of the pathway. This follows the inability of Council to dispose of the land with the current mixed classification.

Independent Chairperson Recommendation - “The land containing the existing pathway linking King Street to Boardman Street be retained as “community land” and the remainder of the land be reclassified as “operational land” under the terms of the Local Government Act 1993.” Property Development Group Comments – The Chairperson considered that the pathway should be classified community due to its community use and that Council should subdivide the pathway from the balance of the land and then dispose of the balance, possibly with a plan for a dwelling on a reduced frontage.

Property Development Group Recommendation – That the recommendation of the Independent Chairperson be adopted. A DA be prepared and lodged with an objection to the development standard regarding the reduced frontage and with a plan for a residential dwelling, if required, to facilitate the disposal of the site.

14. Site No. 5 – 7 Wyralla Avenue Epping. The Planning Proposal proposed an R2 zoning and reclassification to operational land. The Chairperson stated that he was persuaded that there was sufficient evidence that the land had been used for recreational purposes for many years, despite the utilisation study indicating that it was mainly used to access the kindergarten from Wyralla Avenue.

Independent Chairperson Recommendation - “That the land be retained as “community land” under the terms of the Local Government Act 1993.

Property Development Group Comments - PDG does not support this recommendation but is prepared to recommend that a walkway be retained to the rear of the kindergarten facility whilst the kindergarten continues its current use and the site be reclassified as operational.

Property Development Group Recommendation – That the land be classified as operational land under the terms of the Local Government Act 1993 and that a walkway be retained from Wyralla Avenue to the Isobel Pulsford Kindergarten while the kindergarten remains in use.

15. Site No. 9 – 22A Cowells Lane Ermington. The Planning Proposal proposed an R2 zoning and reclassification to operational.

Independent Chairperson Recommendation - “The land be reclassified as “operational land” under the terms of the Local Government Act 1993 following the satisfactory relocation of the recreational facilities currently available on the land to an alternative site”.

Property Development Group Recommendation - That the recommendation of the Independent Chairperson be adopted.

16. Site No. 14 – 4 & 6 Wharf Road & 661 Victoria Road Melrose Park. The Planning Proposal proposed a B4 zoning and reclassification to operational land.

Independent Chairperson Recommendation - “The land be reclassified as “operational land” under the terms of the Local Government Act 1993 and Council should consider the Ermington Gospel Trust’s submission relating to the history of the land’s acquisition and its request that land be restored to the Trust’s ownership”.

Property Development Group Comments. A submission was also received from the RTA who currently is the Registered Proprietor of two parcels Lot 1&2 in DP 221045 which are under the Care Control and Management of Council and are surrounded by Council holdings. The RTA has no objection to these parcels also being rezoned to B4 and reclassified to operational land.

Property Development Group Recommendation – That the recommendation of the Independent Chairperson be adopted and that the RTA properties under the Care Control and Management of Council being lots 1 and 2 in DP 221045 be rezoned B4 and classified as operational land under the terms of the Local Government Act 1993.

CONSULTATION & TIMING

17. Community consultation took place at the public exhibition of the Planning Proposal from 15 September 2010 until 22 October, 2010 and at the Public Hearing on 28 February, 2011. Notification was issued prior to both the public exhibition and hearing and advertisements appeared in the local newspapers giving the required notice.

18. There was considerable consultation with the Land Use and Transport Planning team, Open Space Management team, the Executive Team and Strategic Asset Management.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATION FOR COUNCIL

19. The adoption of the recommendations within this report will enable the rezoning and reclassification of 26 of the 29 sites. These sites will be available for development and/or disposal which will enable Council to renew and embellish existing public reserves as well as provide capital for the objectives of the Property Development and Investment Policy.

Name Graeme Bleus

Title Property Development Manager

Attachments:

1 View	7572A Planning Proposal Report to Council	81 Pages
2 View	Zones and Classifications for Planning Proposal	1 Page

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 23 May 2011 Item 7.2

ECONOMY AND DEVELOPMENT

ITEM NUMBER 7.2

SUBJECT Request for refund of fees for Hoarding - 20 Victoria Road, Parramatta.

REFERENCE LA/307/2007 - D01946043

REPORT OF Group Manager Outcomes and Development

PURPOSE:

This report considers a request from the developers of the project at 20 Victoria Road to have some or all their fees associated with hoardings refunded. It is recommended that no fees be refunded.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council receives and notes this report and advises the proponent at 20 Victoria Road, Parramatta that no Hoarding fees will be refunded.

BACKGROUND

1. Council issued development consent for a mixed use development of the corner of Victoria Road and Church Street. The site is known as 20 Victoria Road. The development commenced in 2007 and has recently been completed. Due to the size and nature of this development, hoardings were required to be erected around the site to protect pedestrians and road users while demolition and construction was being undertaken. Construction includes significant excavation as well as being a 7-storey building.

2. In accordance with Council’s standard fees and charges, a fee was charged for the use of Council’s footpath to erect the hoardings.

3. In 2009 and again in 2010, the applicant approached Council to waive the hoarding fees. A total of $188,484 has been paid for the hoardings. The letter from the proponent is attached.

4. In response to the request to waive the fees, the applicant had been advised that the fees had been charged in accordance with Council’s Fees and Charges Policy and therefore there was no basis to refund the fees.

5. The proponent is dissatisfied with this advice and is seeking a review by Council. In seeking review by Council, the proponent raises these following points:

· Council’s fees are inequitable as they charge the same fee rate for hoardings in areas of high and low pedestrian use in the CBD. They argue that their site is a low pedestrian use compared with, for example, the Eat Street area of Church Street and therefore should attract a lower fee.

· Development of the site was delayed significantly during archaeological investigation of the site which included students undertaking investigation. This delay added to the hoarding fees they eventually paid. The proponent argues that construction on the site was delayed for nine months due to archaeological investigation.

· They had made a significant contribution in terms of Section 94A monies as well as upgrade to the public domain around the site.

6. Council’s records indicate that the development made a contribution of $ $777,268.86 (DA779/2006, DA779/2006/A & DA779/2006C) in accordance with Council’s Section 94 plan. In addition, they have constructed public domain to Council’s standards along the frontages of both Church Street and Victoria Road. These are standard requirements for development in the CBD.

7. In relation to concerns about the inequity of Council’s hoarding fees, a review of other Council policies indicates that hoarding fees are generally a standard rate without variation for pedestrian high traffic areas.

8. It is certainly open to Council to refund some or all of the fees if it felt that the fees were inappropriate for this development. There is no evidence to suggest that fees have been over-charged.

Sue Weatherley

Group Manager Outcomes and Development

Attachments:

1 View

Letter from the Proponent

4 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 23 May 2011 Item 7.3

ECONOMY AND DEVELOPMENT

ITEM NUMBER 7.3

SUBJECT Result of public exhibition of amended Development Contribution Plans

REFERENCE F2005/01594 - D01948157

REPORT OF Project Officer, Land Use &Transport Planning

PURPOSE:

The purpose of this report is to present to Council the results of the public exhibition of the amended Development Contribution Plans being Parramatta Civic Improvement Plan (Amendment No.1) and Parramatta S94A Development Contributions Plan (Amendment No. 1), and recommends that Council adopt the documents in order to commence their operation.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council adopt Parramatta Civic Improvement Plan (Amendment No. 1) and Parramatta S94A Development Contributions Plan (Amendment No. 1) as detailed at Attachments 1 and 2.

(b) That a notice be placed in the local newspapers advising of the adoption of the Parramatta Civic Improvement Plan (Amendment No. 1) and Parramatta S94A Development Contributions Plan (Amendment No. 1).

(c) Further that a copy of the adopted Development Contributions Plans be forwarded to the Minister for Planning as required by the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act.

BACKGROUND

1. Parramatta City Council has two (2) development contribution plans being the Parramatta Civic Improvement Plan (applies to the CBD) and the Parramatta s94A Development Contribution Plan (applies to the rest of the LGA). These plans commenced in December 2007 and April 2008 (respectively). Changes in legislation since that time have given rise to the requirement for some minor housekeeping amendments to both plans as detailed at Attachment 3.

2. In January 2011 Council’s Economic Development Team circulated to Councillors a draft options paper regarding business investment and attraction in Parramatta CBD over the next 3 years. One issue explored in the discussion paper is the impact of development contributions on the supply of new commercial buildings. The paper recommended that Council consider accepting staged development contribution payments in the Parramatta city centre, in an attempt to reduce the upfront imposition on developers as a means for attracting new commercial development. Amendments were proposed to the Civic Improvement Plan to enable greater flexibility in the application of contributions on commercial developments in the city centre as detailed at Attachment 3.

3. At its meeting of 28 February 2011, Council resolved:

(a) That Council adopt the draft amendments to the Parramatta Civic Improvement Plan and Parramatta S94A Development Contributions Plan as detailed at Attachment 3.

(b) That Council exhibit the amendments to the contribution plans for a period of not less than 28 days and the outcome of the exhibition be reported back to Council.

(c) Further, that the CEO be delegated the authority to correct any minor anomalies, typographical errors and the like in the contribution plans, without further reporting to Council.

4. The draft amendments were exhibited from 16 March 2011 to 15 April 2011. No submissions were received in response to the public exhibition.

DISCUSSION

5. In accordance with Clause 32(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation, a Council may amend a contributions plan by a subsequent contributions plan. Only, minor amendments can be made without making a new plan.

6. Given the nature of the amendments proposed in this case, new plans are required to be made to replace the former versions. These new plans will be known as Parramatta Civic Improvement Plan (Amendment No. 1) and Parramatta S94A Development Contributions Plan (Amendment No. 1) and will have the effect of repealing the current versions of the plan.

7. It is noted that these plans while legally forming new contribution plans, are consistent with the earlier version of the plans with regard to their intent and application. The only changes being made are those adopted by Council on 28 February 2011. A summary of these amendments is provided at Attachment 3, and a copy of the Detailed Council Report of 28 February 2011 is provided at Attachment 4.

NEXT STEPS

8. In accordance with relevant legislation, after considering any submissions received during the exhibition period, Council can adopt the plans as exhibited; with changes; or not at all. Should Council resolve to adopt the new Development Contribution Plans, a notice is required to be placed in the local newspaper within 28 days of the date of the decision, at which time the plans would come into effect. Furthermore, Council is required to provide the Minister for Planning with a copy of the plans.

Diane Galea Jennifer Concato

Project Officer Acting Manager

Land Use Planning Land Use Planning

Attachments:

1 View	Parramatta Civic Improvement Plan (Amendment No.1)	48 Pages
2 View	Parramatta S94A Development Contributions Plan (Amendment No.1)	40 Pages
3 View	Summary of contribution plans amendments	1 Page
4 View	Detailed Council Report of 28 February 2011	11 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

None.

Council 23 May 2011 Item 7.4

ECONOMY AND DEVELOPMENT

ITEM NUMBER 7.4

SUBJECT Heritage Advisory Committe for April 2011

REFERENCE F2005/01945 - D01948873

REPORT OF Project Officer

PURPOSE:

To inform Council of the key discussion points of the meeting of the Heritage Advisory Committee on 20 April 2011.

RECOMMENDATION

That the minutes of the Heritage Advisory Committee meeting of 20 April 2011 be received and noted.

BACKGROUND

1. Council’s Heritage Advisory Committee meets every two months and comprises 11 members.

2. Council’s Heritage Advisory Committee met on 20 April 2011. This report provides a summary of the key discussion points of that meeting for Council’s information and consideration. The minutes of the meeting are contained in Attachment 1.

ISSUES

3. The main issues considered at the meeting are outlined below.

(a) Mrs Elizabeth Boesel made a presentation (item 17/11) on the geological importance of the Dundas Diatreme, located on the Sir Thomas Mitchell Reserve, Dundas Valley. The Committee noted the availability of further material to assist in the interpretation on the Dundas Diatreme and expressed its continued support for the listing of the diatreme on the State Heritage Register. These matters will be further considered as part of Council's comprehensive heritage review.

(b) The Committee provided feedback (item 18/11) on site visits to Governor Phillip's campsite, at the junction of Toongabbie and Darling Mills Creeks and the Parramatta River, Northmead and to the Cumberland Hospital. The Committee resolved that it supports the heritage listing of the Governor Phillip's campsite and requested the provision of interpretive signage for the site. Furthermore, the Committee requested that Council take appropriate action to ensure the removal of the destructive vine on the Norma Parker Correctional Centre, adjacent to the grounds of Cumberland Hospital. In response to these matters: the listing of Governor Phillip's campsite will be considered as part of Council's comprehensive heritage review; the Parramatta Stories Project Officer has been requested to investigate the provision of interpretive signage and the Heritage Office of the NSW State Government has been requested to investigate the removal of the vine on the Norma Parker Correctional Centre.

(c) The Committee responded and made suggestions (item 21/11) on the presentation for the naming of a series of lane ways in the Parramatta City Centre.

(d) The Committee recommended (item 25/11) that the following applications for funds from Council's Local Heritage Fund be granted: $1000 for 25 Reid Street, Merrylands and $1000 for 9 Kent Street, Epping.

4. There are no requests for additional expenditure arising from this meeting.

Paul Kennedy Jennifer Concato

Project Officer Acting Manager

Land Use Planning Land Use Planning

Attachments:

1 View

Heritage Advisory Committee Minutes for 20 April 2011

5 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

None.

Council 23 May 2011 Item 7.5

ECONOMY AND DEVELOPMENT

ITEM NUMBER 7.5

SUBJECT 30 George Street, Parramatta ( Lot 1 & 2 DP 812461 & Lot 2 DP 41207) (Elizabeth Macarthur Ward)

DESCRIPTION Proposed Mobile Vending Unit (Coffee Cart)

REFERENCE DA/128/2011 - Lodged 14 March 2011

APPLICANT/S Mars Hill Cafe

OWNERS Parramatta City Council

REPORT OF Manager Development Services

DATE OF REPORT

9 May 2011

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

The application is referred to Council as the land on which the mobile vending unit will be placed is a Council owned pedestrian laneway. The application has also been assessed by an independent planning consultant.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Approval is sought to operate a mobile vending unit predominantly selling coffee within the pedestrian lane that runs between Nos. 28 and 38 George Street. The pedestrian lane is currently being upgraded, with construction works being carried out to provide for new paving, street trees and a bin, to improve the pedestrian amenity of this access way to the Council car park in Erby Place.

The coffee cart would be located immediately adjacent to the eastern wall of the NAB building at No. 28 George Street, allowing for pedestrian flow to the east of the coffee cart, with a clearance width of approximately 1.9m. The cart will occupy approximately 6m². The cart is a self contained unit, providing a small sink and refrigerator and the sides open out to provide a small roof/awning. The cart will be closed down (closed unit has dimensions of 2.2m x 0.75m) at the completion of services each day and stored in situ, parallel to the abovementioned wall. The cart will be chained to fixed anchor points adjoining the wall.

The cart will be operated by a maximum of 2 staff at any one time and will operate between 6.30am to 5.30pm on Mondays to Fridays and between 7.30am and 4pm on Saturdays. The operation of the cart is part of a social enterprise with funding from Department of Education, Employment and Work Relations and Parramatta City Council. The cart will sell coffee, tea, soft drinks, pre-packaged coffee beans, muffins, banana bread and cookies.

The coffee cart contains signage including the logo “Mars Hill Café”.

Water for the operation of the cart will be brought to the site daily and waste water and garbage is to be removed on a daily basis for disposal off site.

In accordance with Council’s Notification DCP, owners of surrounding properties were given notice of the application for a period of 14 days between 18 March and 1 April 2011. In response, no submissions were received.

The site is zoned B3 Commercial Core zoning under the City Centre LEP. The proposed use is defined as a kiosk and is permissible with the consent of Council as it is not a nominated prohibited use. The proposal is consistent with the provisions of Parramatta City Centre LEP and DCP.

Accordingly, the application is recommended for approval.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council as the consent authority grant development consent to Development Application No. 128/2011 for the operation of a coffee cart at No. 30 George Street, Parramatta, as shown on the approved plans, subject to the attached conditions in Attachment 1.

Kerry Gordon

Consultant Town Planner

Kerry Gordon Planning Services Pty Ltd

Attachments:

1 View	Section 79C Report	11 Pages
2 View	Locality Plan	1 Page
3 View	Plans and elevations	5 Pages

Council 23 May 2011 Item 7.6

ECONOMY AND DEVELOPMENT

ITEM NUMBER 7.6

SUBJECT Shop 3, 197 Church Street, Parramatta
(Cor Lot 1 DP 710335) (Arthur Phillip Ward)

DESCRIPTION Fitout and use of Shop 3 as a bank with associated signage.

REFERENCE DA/183/2011 - 1 April 2011

APPLICANT/S Beirut Hellenic Bank Ltd

OWNERS Holdmark Properties Pty Ltd

REPORT OF Manager Development Services

DATE OF REPORT 9 May 2011

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

The application is referred to Council for determination as the subject premises is a heritage listed item.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The development application seeks consent to fitout and use the existing premises as a bank, being the ‘Beirut Hellenic Bank’ as well as to erect associated signage.

The proposal involves the fitout of an open-plan style bank, the provision of an ATM, machine, and the provision of 3 signs, being 2 under-awning signs and a hamper sign. The proposed hours of operation of the premises are Monday to Friday 8.30am – 6.00pm, and 10 staff are proposed to be employed on the premises.

The site is located on the ground floor of a 2 storey commercial/retail building. The building is heritage listed under Schedule 5 of the City Centre LEP and is known as the former Murray Bros Department store.

The application was notified in accordance with Council’s Notification Policy and no submissions were received.

The likely impacts of the proposed development have been assessed and the proposed development is considered acceptable subject to conditions requiring the deletion of one of the under-awning signs, a reduction in height of the hamper sign, a change in background colour of one of the under-awning signs and ATM surrounding and the non-illumination of the permitted under-awning sign and ATM surrounding.

Accordingly, the application is recommended for approval subject to conditions.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council as the consent authority grant development consent to Development Application No. 183/2011 for the fitout and use of the premises as a bank with associated signage at Shop 3, 197 Church Street, Parramatta subject to conditions of consent as shown in Attachment 1.

Maya Sarwary

Senior Development Assessment Officer

Attachments:

1 View	Section 79C Report	18 Pages
2 View	Location map	1 Page
3 View	Plans	5 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 23 May 2011 Item 7.7

ECONOMY AND DEVELOPMENT

ITEM NUMBER 7.7

SUBJECT 9 Hassall Street, Parramatta - draft Voluntary Planning Agreement - results of public exhibition

REFERENCE F2010/03065 - D01950941

REPORT OF A/ Service Manager Land Use and Planning

PURPOSE:

To report on the outcomes of the public exhibition of a draft Voluntary Planning Agreement in relation to a proposed Section 96(2) Modification Application to modify an approved mixed use development at 9 Hassall Street, Parramatta.

A memo will be distributed after the close of the public exhibition of the draft VPA on

18 May 2011 outlining any submissions received and providing a recommendation regarding the draft VPA

RECOMMENDATION

That the Council receive and note the memo dated 20 May 2011.

BACKGROUND

1. A section 96(2) modification application (DA/848/2008/A) was lodged on 7 October 2010 that proposes additional floor space and height to an approved (DA/848/2008) mixed use development. This section 96(2) modification application was accompanied by a proposal for the developer to enter into a Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA) with Council. The section 96(2) modification application is the subject of a separate assessment and report to Council.

2. The draft VPA provides for the developer to deliver the payment of a monetary contribution to Council to be used towards the provision of public infrastructure or alternatively to deliver a residential unit to Council for affordable housing purposes. The draft VPA has been put forward by the proponent as a public benefit due to variations proposed in the section 96(2) application to the prescribed height and floor space ratio requirements.

3. On 8 November 2010 Council considered a report and resolved to proceed with negotiations for a VPA, as follows:

(a) That Council proceed with negotiations for a Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA) in relation to a proposed mixed use development at 9 Hassall Street, Parramatta.

(b) That delegated authority be given to the CEO of Council to negotiate the VPA on behalf of Council and report back with a recommendation for approval or otherwise of the VPA.

(c) That the draft VPA be publicly exhibited at an appropriate stage prior to being reported back to Council.

(d) Further, that the assessment by Council staff of the development application and the proposed VPA negotiation be kept separate and independent processes.

4. The report raised the potential for the developer to provide Council with a residential unit for Council’s use, or alternatively to make a cash contribution to be used by Council for provisions of public infrastructure.

ASSESSMENT OF DRAFT VPA

5. The draft VPA was assessed under the terms of Council’s Planning Agreements Policy and the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act and Regulation. As part of this process the public benefit of the proposed monetary contribution or dedication of a residential unit was assessed.

6. The draft VPA was assessed separately to the section 96(2) modification application. A cross functional team (excluding staff in the Development Services Unit) was established to assess all aspects of the proposed VPA.

DRAFT VPA OFFER

7. The draft VPA (refer to Attachment 1) provides for the developer, at no cost to Council, to deliver:

1. a cash contribution (to the value of $300,000 and indexed quarterly);

or, alternatively

2. a residential unit (of a greater value than $300,000).

8. The developer would make the decision as to the deliverable of the VPA prior to the release of the Construction Certificate relating to DA/848/2008 (as amended).

9. The residential unit would be Unit 16, Tower A, 9 Hassall Street, Parramatta, being a one bedroom apartment, with one car parking space and one storage area located on Basement Level 2 as detailed at Attachment 2. A schedule of finishes to the residential unit is included at Attachment 3. In addition, the developer would ensure that a new refrigerator (with freezer compartment), washing machine and clothes dryer are supplied and installed in the residential unit prior to occupation. Each appliance is to comply with the minimum star rating for water efficiency and energy efficiency as detailed in the VPA (refer to Attachment 1).

10. The residential unit would be used by Council for affordable housing purposes in accordance with Council’s adopted Affordable Housing Policy and Implementation Plan 2009. One of the key strategies of this plan is to increase the amount of affordable rental housing available in the Parramatta LGA to working households with low to moderate incomes through the creation of an ‘Affordable Housing Bank’ (to be managed by community housing providers). This residential unit would initiate the creation of this ‘Affordable Housing Bank’ within the prescribed timeframes of the plan, being 2009/10 – 2013/14.

RELATIONSHIP TO DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS

11. It is noted that the development contributions that would be levied towards the section 96(2) modification application (DA/848/2008/A) and the original development application (DA/848/2008) have a total value of approximately $150,000. This equates to 3% of the development cost and is in accordance with Council’s Civic Improvement Plan. Depending on the deliverable of the VPA (i.e. the cash contribution or the residential unit), the VPA may be in lieu of development contributions.

12. Should the deliverable of the VPA be in the form of the residential unit then this would be in lieu of the section 94A development contribution required by DA/848/2008 (as amended)

13. Should the deliverable of the VPA be in the form of the cash contribution of $300,000, then it is recommended that $150,000 would be paid as a section 94A contribution in accordance with the relevant condition of consent. The remaining $150,000 would be put towards the establishment of the ‘Affordable Housing Bank’ administered by Council.

TIMING OF VPA DELIVERABLES

14. Should the developer decide to provide Council with the monetary contribution, the payment of $300,000 (indexed quarterly in accordance with movements in the Consumer Price Index) would be made prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate. In the case of the dedication of the residential unit, this would be transferred to Council at the date of issue of the Occupation Certificate in respect of the residential unit.

VALUE OF VPA OFFER

15. An independent valuation of the residential unit was prepared by F.C. Carrapetta and Associates – Registered Valuers. The indicative valuation of the residential unit is considered to be of a value greater than $300,000. This valuation has been ascertained by the current fair market value of the property and the schedule of finishes of the residential unit. Consideration was given to the sale and current listings of other residential units within the locality as well as the available sales within the nearby high-rise development at No 13-15 Hassall Street, Parramatta. Should the deliverable of the VPA be the residential unit, it would become an asset to Council which is likely to increase in value over time.

16. The public benefit value of the VPA is $150,000 as this is the amount the developer would otherwise not have to pay in the form of a section 94A contribution.

PUBLIC EXHIBITION

17. In accordance with relevant legislation and Council’s VPA policy, the draft VPA was placed on public exhibition for a period of 28 days (between 20 April 2011 and 18 May 2011). No submissions had been received at the time of finalising this report (i.e. 4 May 2011). Council will be advised of the outcome of this notification period prior to the Council meeting by way of a memo.

18. The exhibition included a personalised mail out to the adjoining properties. Documents made available included; the draft VPA document; an explanatory note to accompany the draft VPA; plans of the residential apartment- its layout, its location within the building and the location of the car parking space, and a schedule of finishes. This information was made available at Council’s Administration Offices as well as Council’s website.

CONCLUSION

19. The value of the VPA is more than the development contributions required to be paid in relation to the development application as proposed to be amended. The VPA presented to Council would result in the payment of a monetary contribution (in the amount of $300,000) to be used towards the provision of public infrastructure (section 94A and ‘Affordable Housing Bank’), or alternatively the provision of a residential apartment to Council for affordable housing purposes (of a value greater than $300,000). The residential unit would initiate the creation of an ‘Affordable Housing Bank’ in accordance with Council’s Affordable Housing Policy and Implementation Plan. It is recommended that Council enter into this VPA subject to the finalisation of the legal drafting.

Jennifer Concato

A/Manager Land Use Planning

Attachments:

1 View	Draft Voluntary Planning Agreement	11 Pages
2 View	Plans of the residential unit	3 Pages
3 View	Schedule of finishes	2 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 23 May 2011 Item 7.8

ECONOMY AND DEVELOPMENT

ITEM NUMBER 7.8

SUBJECT 9 Hassall Street Parramatta (Lot 6 Sec 2 DP 241 & Lot 14 DP 11507)

DESCRIPTION Section 96(2) application to an approved mixed use development. The application seeks approval to increase the height of the building to 23 storeys, reconfigure existing units to create 7 additional units, and provision of 16 new units (within the new floors) to provide a total of 164 units. Other modifications include incorporating a Voluntary Planning Agreement into the consent, floor layout changes, and the addition of 10 car spaces.

REFERENCE DA/848/2008/A - Lodged 7 October 2010

APPLICANT/S H S D (Parra) Pty Ltd

OWNERS H S D (Parra) Pty Ltd

REPORT OF Manager Development Services

DATE OF REPORT 29 April 2010

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

The original DA was determined by Council and the applicant has been in negotiations with Parramatta City Council to enter into a voluntary planning agreement under Section 93f (2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act. A separate report on this matter has been prepared by Council’s Land Use and Transport Planning Unit. The report is listed in this agenda.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Development Consent No. 1757/2002 was issued on 4 August 2003 for the construction of a 17 storey mixed use building comprising 118 residential units and 2 commercial units.

Development Consent No. 848/2008 was issued on 10 August 2009 for the addition of 4 storeys (known as 15 to 18) and an additional 23 residential units (total 141) to the building approved in Development Consent No.1757/2002.

The current application seeks approval for the following modifications to the development approved in DA/848/2008:

· Increase the height of the building from 21 storeys to 23 storeys.

· Increase the number of units from 141 units to 164 units and vary the mix of units. 24% of units have 1 bedroom and a study, 60% of units have 2 bedrooms and 16% of units have 3 bedrooms.

· Increase the Floor Space Ratio from 6.5:1 to 7:5:1 (11,407m² to 13,096m²).

· Increase the number of car parking spaces within the basements from 152 spaces to 162 spaces.

· Modify the internal floor layouts on each level.

Three submissions have been received during the exhibition period raising issues with property devaluation, views, overshadowing, waste production, heritage, tree removal and increase in housing. The issues raised do not warrant refusal or further modification to the proposal.

Key to the determination of whether the modifications to the approved DA are appropriate is the question of whether there is merit in allowing significant variation to the floor area and FSR of the approved DA and variation to the FSR standard of Clause 22 of the City Centre LEP.

The approved building has a floor area of 11,407.3m² and a floor space ratio of 6.5:1. The proposed modifications seek to increase the floor area of the approved building by 1,689m². The additional floor area results in a FSR of 7.5:1m, which is a variation to Clause 22 - Maximum FSR control. The variation to the FSR control is a fundamental planning policy issue. There is also minor non compliance to the 72m height limit by 615m.

It is the opinion of planning officers that additional floor area does not significantly alter the bulk and scale of the building, does not modify the building footprint or modify the approved landscape plan and thus is supported.

Furthermore, the application went before the Parramatta Design Review Panel for consideration who resolved that there were no specific design issues associated with the S96 application.

The applicant has been in negotiations with Parramatta City Council to enter into a voluntary planning agreement under section 93f(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act. The draft VPA has been put forward by the proponent as a public benefit due to the height and FSR variations. In accordance with Council’s Policy for Voluntary Planning Agreements the content of a planning agreement is not to prejudice the merit based assessment of a DA and has not been considered in the assessment of merit of this proposal.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council as the consent authority, modify development consent No. 848/2008 in the following manner:

Modify condition no. 1 as follows:

1. The development is to be carried out in accordance with the following plans and documentation listed below and endorsed with Council’s stamp, except where amended by other conditions of this consent:

Drawing N⁰	Dated
Ground Floor Plan 2906B-DA-01	August 2010
Basement 1, Basement 2 and 3, Basement 4 2906B-DA02	August 2010
Level 1 Floor Plan, Level 2 Floor Plan, Level 3 Floor Plan 2906B-DA03	August 2010
Level 4-9 Floor Plan, 10-11 Floor Plan and 12-16 Floor Plan 2906B-DA04	August 2010
Level 17 Floor Plan, Level 18-19 Floor Plan, Level 20 Floor Plan 2906B-DA05	August 2010
Level 21 Floor Plan, level 22 Floor Plan, Roof Terraces 2906B-DA06	August 2010
North west elevation 2906B-DA07	August 2010
North East Elevation 2906B-DA08	August 2010
South East Elevation 2906B-DA09	August 2010
South West Elevation 2906B-DA10	August 2010
Sections 2906B-DA11	August 2010
Coloured Elevations

Note: In the event of any inconsistency between the architectural plan(s) and the landscape plan(s) and or storm water disposal plan(s) the architectural plan(s) shall prevail to the extent of the inconsistency.

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

Modify condition no. 4 as follows:

4. Provision of 162 off-street parking spaces (including 6 parking spaces for disabled persons) to be provided, permanently marked on the pavement and used accordingly. The dimensions for resident’s 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 & 5.8m aisle width minimum). The disabled parking space dimensions to be 3.8m wide x 5.5m long according to Council’s DCP 2005.

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

(c) In the event that Council accept the Voluntary Planning Agreement the following conditions are recommended to be included on any modified development consent:

1. Prior to the issue of the first construction certificate for work to which this consent relates, the applicant shall enter into a Voluntary Planning Agreement with Council in the terms of the offer made by the applicant in connection with the subject development application, and that this Voluntary Planning Agreement replaces Condition 16 relating to the obligation to pay section 94A development contributions.

2. Prior to the issue of the first construction certificate the developer must register the Voluntary Planning Agreement on the relevant folios Torrens Title Register held by the NSW Office of Land and Property information pertaining to the land.

Ashleigh Matta

Development Assessment Officer

Attachments:

1 View	Section 79C Report	20 Pages
2 View	Locality Map	1 Page
3 View	Plans	7 Pages
4 View	Original Sec 79C report	36 Pages
5 View	Original approved plans	8 Pages
6	Confidential plans	5 Pages
7	Original confidential plans	4 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 23 May 2011 Item 7.9

ECONOMY AND DEVELOPMENT

ITEM NUMBER 7.9

SUBJECT DA Assessment Governance Framework

REFERENCE F2008/00998 - D01951193

REPORT OF Group Manager Outcomes and Development

PURPOSE:

This report reviews key components of the Governance Framework for the assessment of Development Applications, including:

- Delegations to the Chief Executive Officer for the determination of applications;

- Site inspections;

- Notifications of development applications over the Christmas period;

- Referral of development applications to external agencies; and

- Consideration of DAs at both Council meetings.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council re-affirm the decision of 9 March 2009 and amended on 28 June 2010 regarding the functions delegated to the Chief Executive Officer that relate to the determination of development applications, subject to the following changes, being:

(1) Approve development applications (including Section 96 applications) provided:

i. There are not more than 9 objections to the development; or

ii. The development does not involve a variation to a Development Standard of more than 10%; or

ii. The development application does not relate to land in which Council holds, or has recently held, a direct pecuniary interest; or

iii. The development application is not known to have been made, or relate to a property owned by a member of staff or a Councillor; or

iv. The development application does not involve demolition of a heritage item; or

v. The development application does not relate to a brothel, massage parlour, sex service premises, restricted premises, tattoo parlour, place of public worship, infill housing under the Affordable Housing SEPP or boarding house;

vi. The application does not seek a review of determination under Section 82A review; or

vii. The application is not a Section 96(AA) application, or

viii. The application is not a Section 96(2) application where the original development application was determined by the elected Council; or

ix. The application is not a Section 96 (1A) application where the original development application was determined by the elected Council and the modification sought relates to a condition which was added by the Council beyond the recommendation contained in the officer report.

(b) That if any 2 or more Councillors give the CEO notice in writing that a DA should be considered at a Council Meeting, that application must be referred to Council for determination.

(c) That a monthly report be provided to Councillors listing in summary all development applications which have any of the following characteristics:-

i. still under consideration for 6 months or longer;

ii. more than $750,000 in value;

iii. have attracted any objections;

iv. have an impact or are in a heritage or conservation zone.

(d) That the site inspection, if required, occur in the week before the Council meeting, once the officers’ assessment report has been completed;

(e) That an amendment to the Notification Development Control Plan be prepared to introduce an extended notification period over the Christmas period as outlined in the attached report;

(f) That referral to NSW Police Service of DAs be for liquor licences matters associated with Hotels and Clubs unless the CEO determines otherwise; and

(g) Further, that the Code of Meeting Practice be amended to provide for the consideration of development applications at all Council meetings.

BACKGROUND

1. In June 2010, the Council adopted amendments to the Delegations to the Chief Executive Officer to determine development applications.

2. It is timely that a review be undertaken into the effect of those changes. In addition, it is appropriate to consider some other components of the DA Assessment Governance Framework including;

- site inspections;

- notifications of development applications over the Christmas period; and

- referral of development applications to external agencies.

- consideration of DAs at both Council meetings.

3. The ATTACHED report benchmarks Parramatta City Council’s DA assessment processes and performance against the City of Sydney, North Sydney Council, the City of Ryde, the Hills Shire, and Willoughby Council. The report also considers some possible changes to the DA Assessment Governance Framework. The report makes a number of recommendations relating to these matters.

ISSUES AND DISCUSSION POINTS

4. The key issues discussed in the ATTACHED report are:

Delegations

¨ Current delegations include some provisions which are unclear or redundant and there is inconsistency in the call up provisions (3 Councillors for heritage items and 2 for other types of DAs).

¨ The median value of the DAs referred to the Council for determination is only $26,000.

¨ The percentage of DAs being referred to the Council for determination is 14%, which is significantly higher than the State average of 4%, and the highest it has been at PCC in over 10 years.

¨ The increase in the number of DA determined by the full Council aligns with a decrease with the number of DA assessed in less than 40 days.

¨ The full Council adopts the recommendation of the staff in relation to development applications for 94% of DAs.

¨ The average assessment time for DAs determined by the full Council is 136 days compared to the average for all DAs of 80 days.

¨ The average queue time due to the agenda preparation process for DAs which are referred to Council for determination is 26 days.

¨ The consideration of DAs at a Council meeting is a batching process which affects smooth work flows.

¨ While it is standard practice to refer DAs with a variation to a development standard greater than 10%, to the Council for determination this is not reflected in the terms of the delegations.

¨ With the general call up provisions, it may not be necessary to set a number of objections that would trigger referral to Council, other than those DAs that have a Site Inspection (ie 10 or more objections).

5. It is recommended that the following changes be made to the Delegations.

· That only heritage matters involving the demolition of heritage items be referred to Council and the general a call up provision remain in the event that a Councillor is concerned about the nature of the building work associated with a heritage item.

· That Section 96 applications of DAs originally considered by Council only be referred to Council when it is a Section 96(2) applications or where it involves a condition which the Council added beyond the recommendation of the Council Officers.

· DAs that receive more than 9 objections be referred to the Council for determination. This aligns to the Site Inspection requirements and if a Councillor has a concern about a DA for which there are fewer objections the “call up” provision would enable the Councillor, with the support of a colleague, to “call up” that DA to the Council.

· DAs that have a variation to a Development Standard of greater than 10% be referred to Council.

Site Inspections

6. An independent report, by Mr Jason Perica, recommended that the current Site Inspection process be modified so that the Site Inspections do not occur until after the Officer’s report has been prepared so that there can be no suggestion that Councillors attending site meetings have either pre-determined the application or are directing staff on the recommendation they should make in the assessment of the application.

7. It would be possible to conduct site inspections in the week before the Council meeting. There is a 13 day window of opportunity to arrange these meetings.

Notification Policy

8. The current notification policy specifies that DAs should not be on notification from16 December until 14 January of the following year. This means that an application lodged in late November may not commence notification until the 14 January, 40 days after the application was lodged.

9. The consequence of Council’s policy is that, on 14 January this year, 150 DAs commenced notification and 14 days later most of these completed their notification period. A key issue for the smooth processing of development applications and an efficient use of resources is to create smoother work flows (eg. remove batching of work).

10. The current policy creates a significant batching problem with the assessment of applications and also creates an expectation for applicants that once their notification is completed officers will finalise the assessment. Without a significant change to resources, it would simply not be possible to complete the assessment of 150 DAs quickly after that period.

11. Batching of notifications is reflected throughout the first quarter of every year and the number of DAs determined in January and February is low and assessment times higher through March and April.

12. It is recommended that an amendment be prepared to the Notification DCP to provide for an extended notification period over the Christmas period with reminder letters sent during the notification period, to replace the no-notification period.

External Referrals

13. Parramatta City Council has a very high number of referrals to external agencies. (9% of DAs). The average time taken for an external agency to respond is 86 days There are a number of mandatory referrals which cannot be modified. These include Rail Corp for development near rail corridors, and the RTA for development around significant road corridors.

14. However, an area where we have a number of optional referrals is the NSW Police Service. This includes referrals to NSW Police Service for crime prevention applications associated with massage parlours, brothels and other sex premises. Council’s Community Crime Prevention Officer has a very good relationship with the NSW Police Service and he is in constant liaison with them to understand emerging issues and trends.

15. Referrals to the Police on average take 156 days on crime prevention matters and 57 days for liquor establishments. This demonstrates that despite various efforts to engage the police on these crime prevention matters their interest in these matters (at the DA stage) is reflected in the referral times for these DAs.

16. It may be appropriate to only continue with the referrals on liquor licences issues associated with hotels and clubs including modifications to hotels and clubs, and then allow the Community Crime Prevention Officer, who also comments on applications to determine whether he should also seek advice from the NSW Police Service. The Community Crime Prevention Officer also has a responsibility to monitor the activities associated with DAs to identify any matters that should be referred to him for comments or to be referred to the NSW Police Service and any change to the standard referrals would not alter that ongoing relationship.

Council Meeting Cycle

17. Council currently considers DAs only once a month. This adds to the queue time for DA assessment, causes delays for customers and increases the impact of batching of work.

18. If DA matters were considered at both Council Meetings, it is likely that if the level of Officer Delegation was increased, then at each Council Meeting 5 applications would be considered. This would provide smoother workflow and reduce delay for customers.

CONSULTATION & TIMING

19. A workshop was conducted with Councillors on 18 April 2011 to discuss these issues.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATION FOR COUNCIL

20. There are no financial implications to Council in the adoption of any recommendations of this report.

Sue Weatherley

Group Manager Outcomes and Development

Attachments:

1 View

DA Governance Framework Review May 2011

15 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 23 May 2011 Item 8.1

COMMUNITY AND NEIGHBOURHOOD

ITEM NUMBER 8.1

SUBJECT Draft Lake Parramatta Reserve Plan of Management

REFERENCE F2007/01973 - D01880225

REPORT OF Open Space & Natural Resources Planner

PURPOSE:

To seek Council’s endorsement for the public exhibition of the draft Lake Parramatta Reserve Plan of Management.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That the draft Lake Parramatta Reserve Plan of Management be placed on exhibition for 28 days in the Parramatta City (central) Library, Constitution Hill Library, Council’s Customer Service Centre and website.

(b) That the draft Lake Parramatta Reserve Plan of Management also be placed on exhibition for 28 days in the Carlingford Library (The Hills Shire), The Hills Shire and NSW Land and Property Management Authority websites.

(c) Further, that a report be submitted to Council upon completion of the public exhibition period for consideration and assessment of the public submissions received.

BACKGROUND

1. Lake Parramatta Reserve is a popular 90 hectare bushland reserve located two kilometres north of the Parramatta CBD. It is comprised of Crown Land reserved for public recreation and includes the water body formed through the damming of Hunts Creek. The lake originally provided the water supply for Parramatta, with the surrounding bushland retained to protect the water quality. Parramatta City Council has been appointed as Trust Manager and has the responsibility for the reserves care, control and management as provided for under the Crown Lands Act 1989.

2. It is an increasingly popular picnic venue attracting a significant number of both local residents and visitors from throughout metropolitan Sydney, particularly on weekends. The reserve is predominantly bushland and a circuit walking track provides opportunities for visitors to experience local native flora and fauna. Visitor facilities such as picnic shelters, barbeques and equal access playground are concentrated in the main visitor precinct. A small kiosk operates during the day to provide light meals and drinks for visitors. The kiosk is complemented by a small cottage and nearby meeting room which provides an attractive venue for small groups.

3. The current Plan of Management for the reserve was adopted in 1999 and required review to reflect the actions undertaken to date. Council is also seeking to investigate the development of a new larger café and restaurant incorporating a function room to cater for various events or meetings. This is to be sited on or near the existing kiosk.

4. Council resolved on the 24 August 2009 “that action be taken to review the Plan of Management for Lake Parramatta Reserve subject to consultation with the Department of Lands so as to consider the following facilities: New restaurant / café / kiosk with restaurant to be capable of seating 80-100 patrons and to include a facility to enable groups of up to 300 people to assemble for events New buildings are to be located on or near the current kiosk area.”

5. In December 2009, the Minister for Lands consented to the preparation of a new draft Plan of Management for Lake Parramatta Reserve pursuant to section 112 (2) of the Crown Lands Act 1989. Council has engaged Environmental Partnership consultants to prepare the draft Lake Parramatta Reserve Plan of Management (LPPOM), which provides prioritised objectives, actions and performance measures to guide the future planning and development of the reserve. The draft LPPOM also investigates the feasibility of developing a new café / restaurant and function centre compatible with the environmental significance of the reserve and maintaining equity of access (Attachment 1).

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

6. The draft LPPOM has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the Crown Lands Act 1989 and other relevant legislation including State Environmental Planning Policy 19 (Bushland in Urban Areas), Dam Safety Act 1978 and Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995. It is consistent with Parramatta Twenty25 and other Council strategic documents including the Biodiversity Plan, Open Space Plan and Parramatta River Foreshore Plan.

7. Lake Parramatta Reserve is Crown land reserved for ‘Public Recreation’ and its development and use must be consistent with this public purpose. To reflect the significant natural and cultural heritage of the reserve, the draft LPPOM recommends that an additional ‘Environmental Protection’ purpose be assigned under the Crown Lands Act 1989. This additional purpose would exclude the main visitor precinct and is consistent with the Aboriginal cultural heritage interpretation and bush regeneration activities undertaken in the reserve.

8. The land within the reserve was used extensively by local Aboriginal people prior to European settlement, due to an abundance of fresh water and food sources. This is reflected in the former Aboriginal occupation sites located within the reserve. The local Aboriginal community associate a high level of cultural heritage significance with the reserve and this is reflected in the establishment of the ‘Arrunga Bardoo Bushfood Garden’ and the annual ‘Sorry Day’ event held in the reserve. The draft LPPOM identifies that future development in the reserve should reflect and incorporate Aboriginal cultural heritage.

9. Jenny Rand & Associates were engaged to undertake a commercial feasibility study for a café / restaurant and/or function centre at the reserve as part of the development of the draft LPPOM. The key findings of the study included:

· High competition / low demand exist for a large restaurant / function centre (as recent significant increase in restaurant and function/conference centre venues in Parramatta and surrounding areas, e.g. Church St ‘Eat-Street’, Sydney Olympic Park, Parramatta Park);

· limited parking / public transport / reserve capacity;

· high risk operation / limited profitability (patronage is highly weather dependent / premises lack flexibility);

· café building, caretakers cottage and meeting room all require an extensive upgrade as they have reached the end of their economic life;

· minimal public support exists for a restaurant / permanent function centre (however there is significant support for kiosk upgrade and temporary event marquee space);

· a large function centre / restaurant is unlikely to be supported by the Minister for Lands as these are considered to be incompatible with reserve ‘public recreation’ purpose.

In consideration of the above factors, the commercial feasibility study recommends that Council not proceed with the proposal for a 300 seat function / conference centre and 100 seat café / restaurant.

10. The commercial feasibility study also identified the limitations of the current kiosk / cottage / meeting room facilities (particularly during peak periods). It provides a number of recommendations to better cater for peak visitor periods and allow for small events, including;

· A 120 seat facility (60 indoor and 60 outdoor) in the current location through the demolition of existing kiosk / cottage (Estimated by Environmental Partnership to cost $500,000 - however final costings would be subject to detailed design);

· Integrated toilet facilities (including facilities for disabled persons);

· Improve links to meeting room / picnic areas / carpark;

· Upgrade of the existing small first floor meeting room;

· Provision of a temporary marquee area on the lake edge;

· Café / meeting room theme to reflect natural / cultural heritage of the reserve.

11. The draft LPPOM identifies the significant values and issues impacting upon the reserve. It outlines key strategies for future management and development through a prioritised action plan that will improve visitor recreational opportunities whilst conserving and enhancing this unique bushland environment. The key strategy themes include;

· Enjoying the Reserve;

· Getting to and around the Reserve;

· Conserving the Reserves environment, heritage and character;

· Preservation and maintenance of the Reserve and buildings.

CONSULTATION & TIMING

12. Environmental Partnership consultants conducted three separate consultation workshops including; community representatives (1 July 2010), Council’s Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Advisory Committee (24 August 2010) and Councillors and Executive Team (1 December 2010). These workshops involved identification of the key values and issues affecting the reserve and discussion of future priority actions.

13. The draft LPPOM is required to be publicly exhibited in accordance with s113 of the Crown Lands Act 1989. A copy of the draft LPPOM has been issued to the NSW Land and Property Management Authority (LPMA) for review and comment on behalf of the Minister for Lands. No comments have been received from the LPMA due to a recent restructure and staff changes; however it is anticipated that comments and approval to exhibit will be forthcoming shortly. Subject to approval by Council, a notice of public exhibition under the Crown Lands Act 1989 is required to be placed in the NSW Government Gazette and a copy of the draft LPPOM placed on the LPMA website.

14. It is recommended that the draft LPPOM be placed on public exhibition for 28 days in the Parramatta City (central) Library, Constitution Hill Library, Council’s Customer Service Centre and website. As Lake Parramatta Reserve adjoins The Hills Shire LGA, it is also recommended that the draft LPPOM also be exhibited at Carlingford Library and on The Hills Shire website.

15. Following public exhibition a further report will be presented to Council for consideration. This will outline the public submissions received, comments on their assessment and the relevance of the submissions with the document.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATION FOR COUNCIL

16. Actions arising from the adopted Lake Parramatta Reserve Plan of Management will be funded on a staged basis over time through Council’s annual budget and capital works programs supported by;

· Special Rates for Open Space, City Centre, Suburban Infrastructure (Environment, Roads and Neighbourhoods);

· Stormwater Management Service Charge (Stormwater Levy);

· Section 94A Development Contributions Plan.

17. There will also be an opportunity to seek grant funding towards implementing components of the plan through various Federal and State government departments. The implementation of the improvement works identified in the plan will be subject to obtaining appropriate ongoing funding.

Troy Holbrook

Open Space & Natural Resources Planner

Attachments:

1 View

Draft Lake Parramatta Plan of Management

107 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 23 May 2011 Item 8.2

COMMUNITY AND NEIGHBOURHOOD

ITEM NUMBER 8.2

SUBJECT Draft Parramatta Street Tree Plan

REFERENCE F2011/00837 - D01908051

REPORT OF Open Space & Natural Resources Planner

PURPOSE:

To seek Council’s endorsement for the public exhibition of the draft Parramatta Street Tree Plan.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That the draft Parramatta Street Tree Plan be placed on public exhibition for 28 days in the Parramatta City (central) Library, branch libraries, Council’s Customer Service Centre and website.

(b) Further, that a report be submitted to Council upon completion of the public exhibition period for consideration and assessment of the public submissions received.

BACKGROUND

1. Council adopted the Parramatta Planting Strategy (PPS) in 2002 to promote the greening of Parramatta and to provide strategic guidance for all planting throughout the local government area (LGA). The PPS aims to increase community participation and awareness of the environmental, aesthetic and health benefits of tree planting within streets and public spaces. It also provided best-practice design and management guidelines for planting throughout Parramatta’s public domain.

2. In recognition of the importance of urban street trees, an audit of existing street trees was conducted. This detailed the current level of tree provision and range of species in each street throughout the LGA. The audit findings highlighted the typically ad-hoc approach to the provision of street trees in the past and the narrow range of species typically present. The draft Parramatta Street Tree Plan (PSTP) was developed in response to the findings which identified the need for a more strategic approach to future street tree provision.

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

3. The NSW Local Government Association acknowledges the importance of urban vegetation in facilitating sustainable urban living through their ‘Urban Forest Policy’ (Attachment 1). Council also recognises that urban street trees are an important feature of the urban landscape and contribute significantly to neighbourhood character and aesthetics. In recognition of the diversity of social, economic and environmental benefits they deliver to the community, the draft Parramatta Street Tree Plan (PSTP) has been developed to guide the strategic provision of street trees throughout the LGA (Attachment 2).

4. Council manages over 36,000 street trees of various species, which are of differing stages of life (ranging from recently established to semi-mature and mature specimens). Our street trees are regularly assessed and maintained by qualified staff to best-practice arboricultural standards. Increasing urban densities and a changing environment are resulting in urban street trees experiencing significant environmental challenges which require a strategic management approach. The distinctive neighbourhood types throughout the LGA, from residential and heritage conservation areas to the city centre and industrial precincts, also present both challenges and opportunities for urban street trees.

5. The draft PSTP aims to significantly improve and increase the health, longevity and number of street trees throughout the Parramatta LGA through a coordinated approach to their provision and management. It has been developed to complement Council’s Tree Preservation Order (1996) and aims to:

· foster increased knowledge and awareness of the importance of street trees;

· maintain and enhance the tree canopy throughout the LGA by selecting trees appropriate to site constraints and location characteristics;

· provide a transparent and accountable decision making process for tree planting, maintenance and removal assessments;

· guide private property owners, developers and Council in the selection, planting, establishment and maintenance of street trees.

6. A master species list has been included in the draft PSTP. This list has been compiled in consideration of existing street trees, locally indigenous and species which perform well in an urban environment. It will be used as a basis for the development of detailed maps outlining the recommended species for each street throughout the LGA.

7. The revised tree species listing has been prepared in close consultation with a cross section of relevant Council staff and also after consideration of a number of similar local council tree strategies. It is recognised that careful attention needs to be given to tree species selection and planting location due to the possible impacts on underground and overhead utility services, traffic sight lines, footpaths, council infrastructure and private properties. Past experience has shown many species are too large for the site or have intrusive root systems which prove costly to regularly maintain and/or remove prematurely.

8. The practise by some property owners of naturestrip gardens is also widely recognised as providing a positive contribution to the amenity of local streetscapes. It is a commonly accepted that property owners / residents maintain the naturestrip abutting their property. Council is committed to the development of attractive streetscapes and working with residential property owners to ensure that naturestrip gardens are appropriately created and maintained by the residential property owners. The draft PSTP provides guidelines to ensure that naturestrip gardens are designed and maintained to minimise potential safety risks and that appropriate access and sightlines for pedestrians, road users and utility providers are maintained.

9. To assist residents with safety, access and other relevant considerations associated with planting their nature strip, Council would require permission prior to the commencement of planting. This process would not involve a fee and would not be applied retrospectively.

CONSULTATION & TIMING

10. It is recommended that the draft PSTP be placed on public exhibition for 28 days in the Parramatta City (central) Library, branch libraries, Council’s Customer Service Centre and website.

11. Following public exhibition a further report will be presented to Council for consideration. This will outline the public submissions received and comments on their assessment and their relevance with the document.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATION FOR COUNCIL

12. The implementation of the PSTP will be funded primarily through the Council’s existing annual City of Trees Program. Funding for the development of detailed LGA-wide street tree species maps will be subject to approval by Council as part of the annual budget approval process.

Troy Holbrook

Open Space & Natural Resources Planner

Attachments:

1 View	NSW Local Government Association Urban Forest Policy	4 Pages
2 View	Draft Parramatta Street Tree Plan	54 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 23 May 2011 Item 8.3

COMMUNITY AND NEIGHBOURHOOD

ITEM NUMBER 8.3

SUBJECT 1 Park Road Rydalmere

REFERENCE F2010/00351 - D01873937

REPORT OF Property Program Manager

Council at its meeting on 27 April 2011 resolved that the matter be deferred to the meeting to be held on 23 May 2011.

PURPOSE:

The purpose of the report is to seek Council's approval to acquire 1 Park Road Rydalmere for the purpose of public open space and a section of the Parramatta Valley Cycleway by compulsory process.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council in accordance with Section 186 of Local Government Act 1993 authorise acquisition of 1 Park Road Rydalmere (Lot 681 DP 15160 and Lot 1 DP 575846) excluding minerals and an easement under dealing Q102632, by compulsory process for the purpose of public open space and section of the Parramatta Valley Cycleway.

(b) Further, that Council resolve to make an application to the Minister for Local Government and the Governor of NSW to compulsorily acquire the subject property.

BACKGROUND

1. On 31 October 2005 Council received and noted the Parramatta Valley Cycleway Masterplan which details the route of Parramatta Valley Cycleway (PVC) from Wharf Road, Melrose Park to Church Street, North Parramatta. This includes details of land to be acquired by Council. The plan states that Council investigate the voluntary acquisition of Lot 681 DP5160 and undertake works to construct a cycleway between Park Road and Thackery Street footbridge in Rydalmere. On 27 April 2009 Council adopted the Parramatta Bike Plan 2009 and included a section of cycle route between Thackery Street footbridge and Park Road.

2. The Roads & Traffic Authority’s (RTA) NSW Bike Plan (2010) includes the River Cities Bike Program. This 10 year program focuses on increasing cycling levels in the regional cities of Penrith, Parramatta and Liverpool. The RTA allocated $1,000,000 in 2010/11 to Council to construct a 3 metre wide concrete shared pedestrian and cycle path from Rydalmere Wharf to Park Road including a section across the subject property. The section from Rydalmere Wharf to Thackery Bridge is due to be complete in April 2011.

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

3. The land for the subject property is zoned “Land Reserved for Open Space” in Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No.28 – Parramatta with the Council being noted on the plan as the acquiring authority (Attachment 1).

4. Under Council’s draft Local Environmental Plan 2011, the land for the subject property is zoned part “RE1 Public Recreation” and part “W2 Recreational Waterway”, and identified as “Local Open Space (RE1)” on Land Reservation Acquisition Map for Council acquisition.

5. The subject property is located within the Camellia and Rydalmere Strategic Precinct in the draft Parramatta Development Control Plan 2011. Key objectives of this precinct are to ‘improve public access along the foreshore to create a regional pedestrian and open space network’ and to ‘provide for recreational use of the foreshore and establishment of paths for walking and cycling’.

6. The subject property is also within the core riparian zone of the Parramatta River and is subjected to the ‘Wetlands Protection Area’ provisions in the Sydney Harbour Catchment Regional Environmental Plan (SREP). It contains a dilapidated seawall and is currently experiencing considerable bank erosion. Council acquisition of this property will enable significant environmental improvement works to be undertaken in accordance with the objectives of the SREP. These works will improve bank stability, reduce erosion, increase habitat connectivity, improve aquatic vegetation health and provide a buffer between nearby industrial development and the waterway.

7. Arup a consultant in transport planning has been engaged to explore various options for constructing the proposed public open space being extension to Reid Park and cycleway / pedestrian path.

For the open space corridor, the consultant has recommended the paved carriageway of 1 Park Road to be realigned and shortened to extent of the northern boundary of 1 Park Road to allow continuation of the open space corridor between Thackeray Street Bridge and Reid Park (east of Park Road). Such provision of an open space corridor will act as a buffer between nearby industrial development and Parramatta River.

With the alignment for the cycleway / footpath, the consultant has identified the following three options:

Option 1 (red line) – This option provides a direct connection for the cycleway / footpath coming east of Park Road to go through 1 Park Road and connect to the existing cycleway / footpath at Eric Primrose Reserve. However the foot of the Thackeray Street Bridge, which landed at the northern end of 1 Park Road impedes the desired route alignment and makes it not possible.

Option 2 (green line) – This option provides for the cycleway / footpath to go through 1 Park Road to the underside of Thackeray Street Bridge using a boardwalk structure under the bridge and a concrete path to connect to the existing cycleway / footpath at Eric Primrose Reserve. This is the least cost option excluding land acquisition of 1 Park Road and seawall reconstruction costs.

Option 3 (blue line) – This option comprises the construction of a boardwalk structure along the river foreshore of 1 Park Road, underneath the Thackeray Street Bridge to connect to the existing cycleway / footpath at Eric Primrose Reserve. The disadvantage of this option is that the boardwalk will encroach into Parramatta River waterway and affects marine vessels and transportation. It also relies on carrying out extensive repair to the seawall, which has partly crumbled due to lack of repair and wave action.

Plans showing the open space corridor extension and the cycleway / footpath alignment options (red, green and blue lines) are in Attachment 2.

After consideration of the open space corridor extension and evaluation of these options, the consultant has concluded that:

“Option 2 is the most preferred route alignment (for the cycleway / footpath) because of a lower capital costs than Option 3, suitable horizontal and vertical alignment, minimized environmental impacts and minimized encroachment into the Parramatta River waterway.” and:

“Land acquisition of 1 Park Road (Lot 681 DP 15160 and Lot 1 DP 575846) is required to achieve the Reid Park Extension, to complete improvements to the seawall and the construction of the shared path”.

For reference, an extract of the consultant report is in Attachment 2.

8 Accordingly acquisition of the subject property for use as public open space including use for a shared cycleway / pedestrian path is considered to be for a public purpose. The acquisition is also consistent with Council’s Open Space Plan (2003) which includes ‘give high priority to the acquisition of land where the development and completion of corridor linkages can occur’ and ‘acquire land to facilitate the completion of the Parramatta local and regional bike network’ as priority actions.

9 Once the Ermington Nature Walkway is complete in June 2011, the PVC east of Park Road will be complete from Wharf Road, Melrose Park. Considering the PVC west of Park Road, Council delivered Part A of the Park Road to South Street. Part B is under detailed design and Part C is under investigation. The other outstanding missing link is between the University of Western Sydney and Morton Street which is under detailed design. All of these sections have been funded by the RTA River Cities Program which continues in 2011/12.

10 In February 2010, the Council wrote to the former owner of the subject property and commenced purchase negotiation. The former owner confirmed his willingness to sell and indicated that he had offers from other parties interested in the subject property. No offers were made to the former owner to purchase the subject property at that time, as Council was waiting for confirmation of funding from RTA for the cycleway project.

11 While negotiation was underway, the subject property was sold in April 2010 to the current owner for $510,000. For information, the sale was a private sale to the sitting tenant who had been there for more than 5 years. It is the opinion of Council’s valuation consultants that the sale price is above the open market value and represents special value to the current owner being the sitting tenant.

12 Since April 2010 purchase negotiations have had with the current owner by correspondence, phone discussions and meeting. The owner has repeatedly indicated that he is not interested in selling the subject property.

13 Currently the subject property is used as a depot with workshop for a crane hire business of the owner. The owner will have to vacate and relocate the business once the subject property is compulsorily acquired and compensation paid.

14 Based on the recommendation of the valuation consultants (Attachment 3), two purchase offers have been made to the owner the last being an offer made in February 2011 to purchase the subject property for $600,000 with no response received.

15 Accordingly it is recommended that the Council should consider exercising its power under Section 186 of Local Government Act 1993 and seek the approval of the Minister for Local Government and the Governor of NSW to acquire the subject property for a public purpose by compulsory process.

CONSULTATION & TIMING

16 The Council’s Land Use and Transport Planning Unit and Open Space & Natural Resources Unit have been consulted in the course of negotiations.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATION

17 The cost for acquiring the subject property will be funded out of the $1,000,000 allocated by RTA to Council in 2010/11 as part of the River Cities Bike Program. In view of the protracted purchase negotiation with the owner of the subject property, the RTA has agreed in principle to roll over the funding to 2011/12 subject to confirmation by senior RTA management following the recent change of State Government.

Kwok Leung

Property Program Manager

Attachments:

1 View	Extract of SREP28	1 Page
2 View	Extract of consultant report	7 Pages
3	Extract of valuation	10 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 23 May 2011 Item 8.4

COMMUNITY AND NEIGHBOURHOOD

ITEM NUMBER 8.4

SUBJECT Proposal to Rename a small part of Amos Street, Parramatta to Kfarsghab Place, Parramatta

REFERENCE F2006/00231 - D01849191

REPORT OF Manager.Information Systems

PURPOSE:

To present to Council the results of the investigation into the proposal to rename a small part of Amos Street, Parramatta to Kfarsghab Place, Parramatta.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council not proceed with the proposal to rename a small part of Amos Street, Parramatta to Kfarsghab Place, Parramatta.

(b) That Council advise in writing the petitioner and effected residents that the proposal will not proceed.

BACKGROUND

1. A petition was presented at the Council Meeting on 27 September 2010 proposing to rename a small part of Amos Street, Parramatta to Kfarsghab Place, Parramatta. Council considered a Notice of Motion on this matter on the same evening and resolved:

(a) That Council produce a report recommending the merits of renaming a part of Amos Street, Parramatta, east of Good Street, to Kfarsghab Place, Parramatta, to reciprocate the existence of “Parramatta Road” in Kfarsghab, Lebanon.

(b) That Council, as part of the report, consider the written support and petitions received from the community of and associated to that part of Amos Street, Parramatta.

(c) That Council conducts an appropriate public consultation with respect to this proposal in order to ensure proper consideration of this renaming proposal.

(d) That Council write to Holroyd City Council to ask for their support and concurrence to this proposal.

(e) Further, that Council’s report outline a formal submission to the Geographic Names Board for this renaming of this part of Amos Street, Parramatta, to Kfarsghab Place, Parramatta, upon the final approval of Council.

2. Amos Street, Parramatta is shared between Parramatta City Council and Holroyd City Council, with the boundary between the Parramatta City Council and Holroyd City Council located on Amos Street. (See Attachment 2)

3. Councillors received a memorandum on this matter dated 3 December 2010 advising that Council was awaiting a response on proposal from Holroyd City Council.

ISSUES

4. Residents that would be affected by the proposed renaming received a letter from Council advising of the proposal.

5. There were 2 objections received from residents. Both residents would be directly affected by the proposed name change.

a) The first objection from an occupier of Amos Street, was based on the proposal having something to do with the building/club currently located at the end of Amos Street.

b) The second objection from a resident of Amos Street who objected on the basis of – The heritage of the area being taken away, the closeness of the Eastern end of Amos Street to the very historical Parramatta Park, Time and inconvenience to change personal details.

6. Holroyd City Council was consulted on the proposal and correspondence indicates that they consulted with residents prior to considering the matter at its meeting on 21 December 2010.

7. Holroyd City Council has confirmed in correspondence that it does not support or concur with the request to rename part of Amos Street, Parramatta to Kfarsghab Place, Parramatta. (See Attachment 1)

8. In accordance with Council’s Street Naming Policy (Policy 283) Section 1.7.4 “Names should be easy to read, spell and pronounce. Names should where possible be phonetically spelt (spelt how they are pronounced).

9. Similarly, the Department of Land’s Guidelines for the naming of roads states that names should be reasonably easy to read, spell and pronounce in order to assist both service providers and the travelling public.

10. Given the objections received from Holroyd City Council and residents and the likely difficult some community members would have to read, spell and pronounce the proposed name, it is recommended that Council not proceed with the proposed name change.

CONSULTATION

11. Residents that would be affected by the proposed renaming received a letter dated the 25^th October, 2010 from Council advising of the proposal.

12. Holroyd City Council was consulted on the proposal and considered the matter at its Council meeting on 21 December 2010. The matter was rejected, after consultation with residents.

13. No further consultation has been undertaken due to the requirement from the Department of Land’s Guidelines that road names should be reasonably easy to read, spell and pronounce.

14. In line with Council’s Street Naming Policy, the Geographical Names Board are not advised of any proposed name choice until Council has determined that the proposal is to proceed.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATION FOR COUNCIL

15. There are no known financial implications for Council.

Elios Alexoulis

Information Communications and Technology Manager

Attachments:

1 View	Response From Holroyd City Council - Amos Street Name Change	1 Page
2 View	Map of Amos Street	2 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 23 May 2011 Item 8.5

COMMUNITY AND NEIGHBOURHOOD

ITEM NUMBER 8.5

SUBJECT Finalisation of the Sportsground Capacity Review

REFERENCE F2010/00504 - D01941500

REPORT OF Service Manager Recreation Facilities and Programs

PURPOSE:

To endorse the Sportsground Capacity Review.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That the Sportsground Capacity Review be adopted by Council.

(b) That Council receives a further report on proposed priority projects and key actions arising from the Review

(c) Further, that the community and stakeholder workshop participants be advised of the outcome of Council’s decision and thanked for their efforts in providing valuable input into the review.

BACKGROUND

1. The Sportsground Capacity Review was undertaken to inform the future use, development and management of sportsgrounds within the Parramatta LGA.

2. The review was initiated by Council in response to the increasing demands on sportsgrounds with the view to optimising the use of sports fields and achieving long term sustainability.

3. Council at its meeting on the 28 February 2011 resolved that the draft Sportsground Capacity Review be placed on exhibition for 28 days.

ISSUES / OPTIONS / CONSEQUENCES

4. The Sportsground Capacity Review identifies the significant values and issues impacting Council’s sportsgrounds. It outlines key recommendations for future direction, principles and guidelines relating to sports field use, asset renewal and maintenance.

5. The report considers the issues and capacity implication for each playing field and provides directions for the use of each playing field for the winter and summer seasons. It states which playing fields require the use to be decreased, maintained, or monitored and which fields can sustain increased use.

6. The report also considers the future direction for the maintenance and development of existing and additional playing fields to cater for future increasing demand has also been explored in the report.

7. The findings of the review will be incorporated in the future revision of Council’s Sport and Recreation Plan.

CONSULTATION / TIMING

8. In April and June 2010, Suter Planners conducted consultation workshops with key stakeholders and community representatives. These workshops involved identification of the key values and issues affecting the review and discussion of future priority actions. These workshops included representatives from sports clubs, park committees, and sports associations.

9. Significant internal consultation was also held with Council’s Recreation Facilities and Programs, Park Services and Open Space and Natural Resources teams throughout the entire process.

10. Councillors were provided with a draft version of the Sports Ground Capacity Review when Suter Planners conducted a Councillor workshop on the 7 June 2010. The workshop covered the findings of the capacity review, sports ground infrastructure, unauthorised organised use and ground closures. Councillor feedback was recorded and incorporated into the revised document.

11. The draft plan was placed on exhibition in Parramatta Central Library, on Council’s website, and within the customer service centre during the period 14 March 2011 to 18 April 2011.

12. Two (2) submissions were received and considered during this period.

a. A submission from Epping Croquet Club asking why the Croquet Club wasn’t included within the review. A response was provided explaining that the review was specific to actual sportsgrounds and their capacity and did not include other types of sporting and recreation facilities. The submission did not prompt any amendments to the review document. Attachment 1 (provided to Senior Staff and Councillors only).

b. A submission from Little Athletics (Barton Park) stating that the participation numbers contained within the report had increased since its preparation. The submission also noted that consistency of the reference to Barton Park / PH Jeffery Reserve was required, and a question regarding management of unauthorised use of facilities was raised. A response was provided explaining that all data contained within the report was accurate at the reported collection date and that analysis and modelling through the review acknowledged that participation numbers were likely to grow in the future. Evaluation of the implementation of the report will occur on an annual basis. The response also stated that Council Officers were continuing to investigate the best model to manage unauthorised use. The submission prompted minor changes to the review document, including consistency in the reference of the name of Barton Park / PH Jeffrey Reserve. Attachment 2.

13. Following these submissions and feedback from internal staff and the consultants, minor amendments were made to the review document to incorporate the feedback and comments received. These were minor amendments and did not affect the overall recommendations. The final document is Attachment 3 of this report.

14. Evaluation of implemented recommendations will occur on an annual basis. The implementation and evaluation will be undertaken by Council’s Recreation Facilities and Programs, Park Services and Open Space and Natural Resources teams.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATION

15. Some of the directions outlined in the Review suggest improvements to facilities and grounds which will have a resource implication. Council can use the review to identify future works and allocate funding accordingly. Grant funding and partnership arrangements could also be sought to contribute to achieving directions that require a resource allocation.

16. Any actions and recommendations identified by Council Officers through the review will be funded through existing Council Programs supported by Special Rates for Open Space, City Centre, Suburban Infrastructure (Environment, Roads and Neighbourhoods), and relevant Section 94A Development Contributions Plan.

17. There will also be opportunities to seek grant funding towards implementing components of the plan through various Federal and State government departments.

Nick Wright

Service Manager Recreation Facilities and Programs

Attachments:

1 View	Response to Epping Croquet Club Submission	1 Page
2 View	Response to Little Athletics Submission	2 Pages
3 View	Final report - Sportsground Capacity Review	202 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 23 May 2011 Item 8.6

COMMUNITY AND NEIGHBOURHOOD

ITEM NUMBER 8.6

SUBJECT Lease Surrender - Westfield Occasional Care Centre

REFERENCE F2004/06012 - D01948342

REPORT OF Service Manager. Children's Services

PURPOSE:

To seek Council’s endorsement for the Council Seal to be affixed to the lease surrender documents for the Westfield Occasional Care Centre.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council affirm the cessation of operation of the Westfield Occasional Care Centre and bringing to an end Council’s lease of the premises.

(b) That Council authorise the affixation of the Council seal to the lease surrender documents comprising a Deed of Surrender of Lease and Lease Surrender instrument.

(c) Further, that Council authorises the Chief Executive Officer to sign all other documents relevant to the cessation of operation of the Westfield Occasional Care Centre and bringing to an end Council’s lease of the premises.

BACKGROUND

1. Council resolved on 22 March 2010 to implement the proposal outlined in the report concerning the cessation of the future operation of the Westfield Occasional Care Centre.

2. In accordance with the Council resolution of 22 March 2010 negotiations were commenced with Westfield (as landlord) to bring the lease to an end and the Centre ceased operation on 23 December 2010.

3. Council occupied the Centre under Lease No 2000866 that expires on 9 April 2016. Negotiations with Westfield resulted in another tenant being located who was willing to continue operating the premises as a child care centre. The new tenant has signed a lease with Westfield and Westfield is willing to allow Council to surrender its lease.

4. Lease surrender documents have been received from Westfield. The lease surrender documents have been considered and are considered satisfactory from both a commercial and legal perspective. The lease surrender documents must be signed in order to formalise the lease surrender. Signature byway of affixation of the Council Seal is necessary because the lease surrender document includes an instrument that must be registered with the Land and Property Management Authority.

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

5. Council staff worked with families who were users of the Centre to ensure that their needs were met and positions were allocated in Council’s Long Day Care Centres to families who required care for 2011.

6. Families provided positive feedback regarding the support that staff and Council provided for them through this time.

7. The three permanent staff that worked at the Centre have been transferred to positions at other Council Centres.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATION FOR COUNCIL

8. The early exit from the lease will save Council $30,000 in outgoings for this financial year and $290,000 in total for the remaining years of the lease.

Carolyn Isaac-Dean

Service Manager Children & Family Services

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 23 May 2011 Item 9.1

GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE

ITEM NUMBER 9.1

SUBJECT Appointment of Delegate and Alternate Delegate to the Westpool Board

REFERENCE F2004/06545 - D01933363

REPORT OF Team Leader Council Support

PURPOSE:

To seek the nomination of a delegate and alternate delegate to the Board of Westpool following the recent resignation of Councillor A Issa OAM MP.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council appoint a delegate and alternate delegate to the Board of Westpool.

BACKGROUND

1. Council is in receipt of correspondence from Councillor A Issa OAM MP resigning from Westpool as a result of work commitments associated with his recent election as State Member for Granville.

2. Council joined Westpool in June 2002. Westpool’s mission is to provide a one stop shop for risk management services for its Member councils now and for the future through risk sharing and excellence in Management. The Board is made up of a Councillor and a staff member (generally the General Manager), from Blacktown, Blue Mountains, Fairfield, Hawkesbury, Liverpool, Penrith as well as Parramatta. Council’s Chief Executive Officer, Dr Lang, is Council’s member of the Board.

3. Westpool Board meetings are held bi-monthly on a Monday from 9.30am finishing around 12.30pm. The appointed delegate may be required to attend workshop sessions from time to time.

4. On 7 October 2008, Council resolved that Councillor A Issa, OAM be appointed as the delegate to the Board of Westpool.

5. On 22 March 2010, Council resolved that Councillor M McDermott be appointed as an alternative delegate to the Board of Westpool

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

6. Following Councillor Issa’s resignation, Councillor McDermott, as alternate delegate, was contacted, however, Councillor McDermott is not in a position to take up the role of delegate due to work commitments and has suggested that Council also seek a replacement alternate delegate for Westpool.

7. Accordingly, this matter is placed before Council to seek the appointment of a delegate and alternate delegate to Westpool.

Grant Davies

Team Leader – Council Support

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 23 May 2011 Item 9.2

GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE

ITEM NUMBER 9.2

SUBJECT Procurement Policy Review and Update

REFERENCE F2007/01684 - D01937843

REPORT OF Service Manager Commercial and Risk; Environmental Management System Coordinator ; Community Capacity Building Officer ; Project Officer. Economic Development

PURPOSE:

To present the draft revised Procurement Policy for adoption by Council.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That the revised Procurement Policy be adopted by Council.

(b) That the following policies superseded by the revised Procurement Policy be rescinded:

§ Policy 211 Purchasing Australian Products Policy and Procedure.

§ Policy 212 Quotations for Supply and Service under $100K

§ Policy 214 Tender Policy and Procedures

BACKGROUND

1. Council currently has in place a number of documents that, together, are considered to comprise Procurement Policy. These include:

§ Policy 287 Procurement Policy

§ Policy 211 Purchasing Australian Products Policy and Procedure.

§ Policy 212 Quotations for Supply and Service under $100K

§ Policy 214 Tender Policy and Procedures

§ Policy Appendix – Sustainable Procurement

2. Over the past several years, Council has made a number of changes to the way it procures goods and services to improve consistency and transparency. This has:

a. aligned procurement practice with PCC’s objectives for responsible business practice, including sustainability;

b. simplified the process for becoming a preferred supplier;

c. reduced the overall number of suppliers of both goods and services, and remove duplication and use of non-aligned providers by ensuring compliance with the system;

d. tailored a best-practice approach that suits PCC’s culture and structure; and

e. introduced eTendering, centralised the issue of tender documents and communications with suppliers with embedded probity processes.

f. Issuesd Council’s Code of Conduct and Statement of Business ethics to suppliers applying for Councils business as standard practice.

3. The existing Policy is due for review and the opportunity has been taken to consolidate the range of documents, formalise the ongoing improvements into policy, ensure that Council’s procurement processes meet legislative requirements and best practice guidelines, and embed sustainability concepts.

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

4. The revised Procurement Policy incorporates all relevant procurement documents into a single policy statement and will be supported by guidelines that facilitate compliance with the policy.

5. The revised Policy will improve the quality and effectiveness of PCC’s existing procurement systems and assist with meeting Council’s legislative and probity obligations. Further, the inclusion of local economic and social considerations represent a significant innovation in the local government sector and in procurement practice more generally, reinforcing PCC’s role as an innovative leader in local government.

6. The principle changes made to the Policy are:

a. a clearer distinction between policy, guidelines and procedures, with the Policy focusing on defining objectives and principles, and all information about how to implement the procurement principles residing in the associated Guidelines and Procedures documents;

b. consolidation of other procurement sub-policies into the one policy document, including those addressing sustainability considerations, superseding stand-alone documents and increasing ease of use for staff; and

c. inclusion of the definition of a contract, supporting the Local Government Act’s requirement that a tender is required where a contract extends over two years or has a value greater than $150,000 inclusive of GST.

7. Elimination of older documents and inclusion of their requirements into a single policy will also reduce risks to Council. The existence of multiple policies and guidelines relating to procurement has previously led to potential for misinterpretation of Councils procurement requirements.

8. The adoption and implementation of this Policy would assist Council in meeting new standards released by the NSW Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water (DECCW) for councils wishing to receive financial assistance under its Waste and Sustainability Improvement Payment (WaSIP) Program. PCC is eligible to receive $831,627 this year and will receive ongoing benefits including a significant reduction in waste, electricity and transport costs, as well as assistance in meeting legislative requirements. A significant condition for receiving this funding is development of a sustainable procurement program by 30 June 2011.

CONSULTATION & TIMING

9. Extensive discussion has occurred within Council. A key factor has been the long term involvement and support of the City Assets and Environment team and the alignment of processes across Council to one standard. The recent policy review process has been driven by a cross-functional project team and has included delivery of a requisitioners’ workshop. Further, reference has been made to ICAC findings and papers, State Government Procurement, Division of Local Government and Local Government Procurement in the development of the updated policy.

10. An internal review of Councils procurement was facilitated with the involvement of IAB Services. This was a key outcome of the development and adoption of an Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) register. Procurement comprises a significant uninsurable risk within Councils overall risk portfolio. This is consistent with risks faced by most other Local Government entities.

11. The current Audit Plan, based on ERM findings, included a review of procurement. A separate Audit by IAB Services identified a range of matters the majority of which have already been or will be addressed by the changes arising from adoption of the updated policy and roll out of a comprehensive training program over the next six months for all managers.

12. A discussion paper about the development of the Procurement Policy and other work on the Procurement Framework was distributed to Councillors on 12th November 2010. In addition a Councillor Workshop was held on 20 April 2011 with the briefing notes circulated to all Councillors.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATION FOR COUNCIL

13. The simplification and integration of procurement into one overarching policy and the associated improvements in associated documentation will support a continuous improvement process. The benefits to Council will be tracked and reported on an ongoing basis.

14. The revised Policy will be a key element to meet the WaSIP standards set by DECCW, making Council eligible for $831,627 funding this financial year, and further funding ongoing.

15. Participation in the Local Government and Shires Association Sustainable Choice program, which can only be joined by resolution of Council, would also assist in fulfilling the WaSIP standards relating to sustainable procurement.

16. Effective implementation of the draft Policy will require training for staff as well as suppliers to assist them in understanding Councils procurement policy.

Greg Smith

Group Manager Corporate

Attachments:

1 View

DRAFT Procurement Policy

3 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 23 May 2011 Item 9.3

GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE

ITEM NUMBER 9.3

SUBJECT Investments Report for March 2011

REFERENCE F2009/00971 - D01941216

REPORT OF Manager Finance

PURPOSE:

To inform Council of the investment portfolio performance for the month of March 2011.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council receives and notes the investments report for March 2011.

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 closing balance of Council’s investment portfolio as at the 31st March 2011 was $85.2M (Previous Month $84.1M).The weighted average Funds held throughout the period was approximately $85.9M.

4. Councils overall investment holdings increased by approximately $1.1M due to February rates instalments that were received in early March 2011.

5. Council holds a diversified range of investment products which include:

· Managed Funds

· Term Deposits (Including Investment – Loan offsets)

· Floating Rate Notes

· Cash at call

Council engages CPG Research and Advisory for assistance in all investment matters relating to advice, risk and portfolio weighting.

6. The weighted average interest rate on Council’s investments for the month of March 2011 versus the UBSA Bank Bill Index is as follows:

Monthly Annualised

Total Portfolio 0.556% 6.68%

Funds Managers 0.595% 7.14%

UBSA Bank Bill Index 0.42% 5.04%

Councils Financial Year to Date return is 6.66% versus the UBSA bank bill index of 4.84%

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

7. Council’s overall portfolio exceeded the UBSA Bank Bill Index by approximately 1.64%. The strong return can be attributed to the performance of CFS Global which recorded an annualised 1 month return of 9.27%. CFS comprises of approximately 11% of the overall portfolio.

8. Term deposits make up approximately 62% of total holdings and have interest rates ranging from 6.10% to 7.40%. Terms to maturity fall between 30 days & 3 years.

9. Council has held Floating rate notes with National Australia Bank and ING valued at $4M each since 2009. ING matured in March 2011 and realised a capital gain on sale of $52K. NAB was sold prior to maturity and recorded a capital gain of $18K. Both of these floating rate notes earned interest throughout the life of the investment of BBSW plus 1.00% -1.40% (approx).

10. Upon redemption of the Floating rate notes. Council reinvested $8M in new investments which included:

· Rabo 5 Year Term Deposit @ 7.15%

· 3 year Floating Rate Note Bank of Scotland @ BBSW plus 1.90%

· 3 Year Building Society Term Deposit @ 6.80%

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 March 2011 is provided below:

Certificate of Investments

I hereby certify that the investments for the month of March 2011 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.

Alistair Cochrane

Manager Finance

Attachments:

1 View	Investments & Loans - Performance	1 Page
2 View	Summary of Investments Portfolio	2 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 23 May 2011 Item 9.4

GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE

ITEM NUMBER 9.4

SUBJECT 2010/14 DELIVERY PROGRAM AND 2011/12 OPERATIONAL PLAN

REFERENCE F2010/01685 - D01945183

REPORT OF Manager Finance

PURPOSE:

To adopt the amended 2010/14 Delivery Program, 2011/12 Operational Plan, 2011/12 Schedule of Fees and Charges following consideration of submissions received as a result of the public exhibition of the draft documents.

To consider the exhibition of proposed 2011/12 annual charges and fees relating to commercial waste management services that were not previously included with the exhibited 2011/12 fees and charges.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That subject to the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal approving Council’s application for a special variation to general income, Council adopt the amended 2010/14 Delivery Program and 2011/12 Operational Plan, including the additional expenditure on the CITSR project noted in this report, and Budget (Attachment 1) and the 2011/12 Schedule of Fees and Charges (Attachment 2).

(b) That subject to the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal approving Council’s application for a special variation to general income, Council approve the budgeted income, expenditure and reserves transfers shown in the 2011/12 Operational Plan and vote the necessary funds.

(c) That the following proposed 2011/12 annual charges and fees for commercial waste management services be placed on public exhibition:

240 litre bin recycle service $88.40 annual charge (GST does not apply)

240 litre bin garden waste service $88.40 annual charge (GST does not apply)

140 litre bin replacement $60.50 per bin (including GST)

240 litre bin replacement $66.00 per bin (including GST)

BACKGROUND

At its meeting on 11 April 2011 Council resolved to adopt the Draft Amended 2010/14 Delivery Program and Draft 2011/12 Operational Plan (including the Budget and Fees and Charges) and place them on public exhibition. Notice of the exhibition was given in local newspapers and copies of the documents were available at the Administration building, libraries, Riverside Theatres and the Heritage/Visitor Information Centre. Details were also placed on Council’s website and included a facility for the community to provide feedback by email. In addition, the Delivery Program/Operational Plan Expo was held on 12 May at Riverside Theatres.

A key element of the Delivery Program is Council’s application to IPART for a special rate variation for the years 2011/12 to 2013/14 which was submitted on 25 March. IPART’s requirements for determining applications state that, following exhibition, Council must adopt its Delivery Program and Operational Plan and submit a copy of the resolution to IPART by 3 June. IPART will then make its determination of Council’s application by 10 June.

The time constraints imposed by IPART’s timetable, Council meeting schedules and the legislative requirements for exhibition have meant that the exhibition period does not close until 22 May. This report therefore will only include details of any submissions received from the community up to the time of this report being finalised. Details of any further submissions received during the exhibition period will be provided to Council prior to the Council meeting at which this report is considered. No submissions had been received when this report was finalised.

Following IPART’s determination it is proposed to report to Council at its 27 June meeting on the outcome and at the same meeting Council would determine and make the rates and annual charges to apply in 2011/12.

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

Amendments to the previously adopted Delivery Program 2010 – 2014

Council adopted its 2010/14 Delivery Program last year as part of the Integrated Planning and Reporting legislative requirements. The Delivery Program was re-exhibited as it now includes the funding of the proposed new Operations Centre and changes to the timing and composition of Civic Place expenditure and funding.

In conjunction with adopting the draft Delivery Program and Operational Plan at its meeting on 11 April, Council also adopted its updated Long Term Financial Plan. The updated LTFP forward financial estimates are in line with the amended Draft Delivery Program 2010-2014 budget estimates.

As reported on 11 April, the updated forecasts have resulted in an improvement in Council’s projected annual operating results (excluding capital grants and contributions) compared with the original Delivery Program estimates. Council will eliminate its operating deficit as planned in 2014/15, however the surplus will be $2.7M rather than the previously predicted $0.2M surplus. These estimates assume Council’s application to IPART is successful.

Amendment to the previously adopted draft Operational Plan 2011/ 2012

As part of the March Quarterly Review of the 2010/11 Operational Plan, an amount of $1,103,394 for the CITSR project that was included in the 2010/11 Budget has been deferred and the funds retained in the Computer Reserve. These funds are to be spent on components of the eParra project which will now take place in 2011/12. The 2011/12 Operational Plan will therefore be amended to include this expenditure in 2011/12 with the equivalent funds transferred from the reserve.

Rating strategy within the Delivery Program/ Operational Plan and special variation application to IPART

An application was made last year to the Minister for Local Government for a special variation to rates income for each of the 4 years 2010/11 to 2013/14 as part of the adopted Delivery Program’s strategies to achieve financial sustainability by 2014/15. The application also included a special variation that would enable the continuation indefinitely of the special business rates for CBD Infrastructure and Economic Development. As reported to Council, this application was only partially approved by the Minister. The increase sought for 2010/11 was approved, however a limit of 3 years on raising the resulting income was imposed by the Minister. The Minister did not approve the increases sought for 2011/12 to 2013/14.

Following recent legislative changes, rate pegging increases and applications for special rate variations above rate pegging are now being determined by the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal (IPART).

In accordance with Council’s adopted Delivery Program, an application was submitted to IPART for a special rate variation for the 3 years 2011/12 to 2013/14. The application had to be submitted by 25 March. The application sought rate increases of:

2011/12 - 4.3% comprising known rate peg 2.8% and special variation 1.5% (The total amount of 4.3% is unchanged from last year’s application, however last year our assumption for rate pegging was 3.3% with the special variation being 1%. IPART has already determined that the rate pegging for 2011/12 will be 2.8%)

2012/13 - 4.3% comprising rate peg assumed 3.3% and special variation 1%

2013/14 – 9.2% comprising: 4.3% (rate peg assumed 3.3% and special variation 1%) plus 4.9% to continue the special variation approved in 2010 and due to cease at the end of 2012/13.

The 4.9% relating to the continuation of the 2010 special variation comprises 2% applicable to all ratepayers as part of Council’s financial sustainability strategy and 2.9% to continue the funding for the CBD infrastructure and economic development special rates. The special rates are levied on those business ratepayers benefiting from the expenditure of the funds raised.

The impact on the average residential ratepayer of the increases forecast for 2011/12 to 2013/14 would be as shown in the following table. It should be noted that in the table the figures for the 2013/14 year do not include the renewal of the 2010/11 special variation of 4.9% expiring in 2012/13 as it does not represent an increase over the previous year.

Description	2010/11	2011/12	2012/13	2013/14	Total increase 2011/12 to 2013/14	Annual average increase over 3 years
Rate peg	2.6%	2.8%	3.3% forecast	3.3% forecast
Special variation	2.0%	1.5%	1.0%	1.0%
Average rate	$787.60	821.47	$856.79	$893.63
Rate peg increase		$22.05	$27.11	$28.27	$77.43	$25.81
Special variation		$11.82	$8.21	$8.57	$28.60	$9.53
Total increase		$33.87	$35.32	$36.84	$106.03	$35.34

As previously reported to Council, discussions took place with IPART as to the need to conduct additional community consultation, given that the latest application is in line with the previous application and extensive consultation was conducted last year. IPART advised that Council should conduct another survey of residential ratepayers to ensure that they understood the latest proposal and to gauge the community’s attitude to it. Councillors were previously advised of the results of the survey which was a random telephone survey of 400 people who either paid rates or who had lived in the area for at least 6 months. The survey gave the following key outcomes:

· The majority of respondents understood the issues concerning the special rate variation

· Overall respondents were supportive of the special rate variation to provide required services and infrastructure improvements.

· On a scale of importance of 1 (no support) to 10 (maximum support), 56% of respondents scored the importance of the special variation from 6 to 10 with the average score 5.9.

· 25% scored the proposal from 1 to 4, 17% scored a 5 and 2% did not respond.

2011/12 Operational Plan Budget

The budget delivers an operating result before capital income of $4.787M deficit. This is an improvement of approximately $1M compared to the planned result for the 2011/12 year in the Delivery Program adopted last year. This result assumes Council is successful in its special rate application of an increase of 1.5% in addition to rate pegging of 2.8%. If Council’s application for the additional 1.5% is unsuccessful, rates revenue would be reduced by $1.3M and the deficit would increase to $6.1M.

Included in the operating budget are operating projects totalling $3.031M. Details of operating projects are shown for each Pillar within the Delivery Program/Operational Plan.

Capital expenditure of $53.947M is included within the budget. Details of capital projects are shown for each Pillar within the Delivery Program/Operational Plan.

The Civic Place operating budget is constructed per the current project development agreement with Grocon. The budget also includes the income and expense estimates for the Civic Place property portfolio and interest expense estimates in relation to Civic Place loan borrowings. Also included in the services budget is the loan principal repayment in relation to repaying the current loan borrowings for the Civic Place project. These budgeted items are contingent on the conditions precedent in the project agreement. If these are delayed, budget adjustments will be made at Quarterly Reviews.

Additional annual charges and fees

As part of the Services Review it is proposed to introduce a recycling service to commercial premises. Council currently only offers a garbage service. The Services Review estimated a net annual return to Council of $49,000 from the introduction of the service. The proposed annual charges and fees for the new service were omitted from the exhibited draft Operational Plan and draft Fees and Charges. It is proposed that Council now exhibit the proposed charges for 28 days as required by legislation. Following the exhibition period they will be brought back to Council on 27 June for consideration of any submissions and determination. The proposed 2011/12 annual charges and fees are:

240 litre bin recycle service $88.40 annual charge (GST does not apply)

240 litre bin garden waste service $88.40 annual charge

140 litre bin replacement $60.50 (including GST)

240 litre bin replacement $66.00 (including GST)

CONSULTATION & TIMING

The Draft Delivery Program and Operational Plan were developed through collaboration between Councillors, management and staff in a series of planning workshops. Community engagement was achieved from the on going input of the Residents’ Panel, the public exhibition of all relevant documents, community surveying in relation to the special rates variation proposal and the holding of the “Expo”.

To enable IPART to determine Council’s special rate application, Council must adopt its Delivery Program and Operational Plan and submit a copy of the resolution to IPART by 3 June. IPART will then make its determination by 10 June.

Section 405 of the Local Government Act requires Council to adopt the 2011/12 Operational Plan by 30 June 2011.

Manager Finance

Alistair Cochrane

Attachments:

1 View	Draft 2010/2014 Delivery Program, 2011/12 Operational Plan and Budget	98 Pages
2 View	Draft 2011/12 Fees and Charges	81 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 23 May 2011 Item 9.5

GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE

ITEM NUMBER 9.5

SUBJECT Delivery Program and Operational Plan – Quarterly Review March 2011

REFERENCE F2010/02573 - D01946254

REPORT OF Manager Finance

PURPOSE:

To provide the March 2011 Quarterly Review of the 2010/14 Delivery Program and 2010/11 Operational Plan.

Section 403 of the Local Government Act requires the General Manager (Chief Executive Officer) to provide progress reports to the Council, with respect to the principal activities detailed in the Delivery Program, at least every 6 months.

Clause 203 of the Local Government Regulation requires the Responsible Accounting Officer (Manager Finance) to prepare and submit to the Council a budget review statement that shows, by reference to the estimates of income and expenditure set out in the Operational Plan, a revised estimate of the income and expenditure for the year.

The budget review statements and a revision of estimates within the Operational Plan must be reported to Council within two months after the end of each quarter (except the June quarter).

The Responsible Accounting Officer is also required to report as to whether or not he believes the financial position of the Council is satisfactory, having regard to the original estimate of income and expenditure.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council adopt the Chief Executive Officer’s March 2011 Quarterly Review of the 2010/14 Delivery Program and 2010/11 Operational Plan. (Attachment 1).

(b) Further, that Council adopt the Responsible Accounting Officer’s report on the financial position of the Council and the revised estimates of income and expenditure as detailed in Attachment 1

BACKGROUND

1. The attached March 2011 Quarterly Review contains the Chief Executive Officer’s progress report on the principal activities contained within Council’s 2010/14 Delivery Program and 2010/11 Operational Plan. The Review is presented under the Four Pillars format adopted by Council.

· Environment & Infrastructure

· Community & Neighbourhoods

· Economy & Development

· Governance & Corporate

2. The Review details in the Operating Statement the actual income and expenditure results for the year to March compared to the budget previously adopted by Council and revised forecasts for the full year. The Responsible Accounting Officer’s Report in the Review, includes an analysis of the year to date result and the reasons for the major variances from the previously adopted budget.

3. The March 2011 Quarterly Review was considered at a workshop on 18 May 2011. Any proposals from the workshop will be incorporated as an addendum to this document to be considered at the Council meeting.

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

4. Relevant issues/options/consequences are noted within the Quarterly Review document.

CONSULTATION & TIMING

5. Consultation has taken place with all relevant staff that have Delivery Program, Operational Plan and budgetary responsibilities.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATION FOR COUNCIL

6. Details of the financial implications are contained within the Review.

Alistair Cochrane

Manager Finance

Attachments:

1 View

Draft March 2011 Quarterly Review 2010/2014 Delivery Program & 2010/11 Operational Plan – copies previously circulated for Councillors’ workshop

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 23 May 2011 Item 9.6

GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE

ITEM NUMBER 9.6

SUBJECT 2011 Asia Pacific Cities Summit - Brisbane, QLD - 6-8 July 2011

REFERENCE F2005/00046 - D01949480

REPORT OF Executive Support Manager

PURPOSE:

This report is placed before Council to seek the appointment of a Councillor to attend the 2011 Asia Pacific Cities Summit being held in Brisbane QLD from 6-8 July 2011.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council nominate one (1) Councillor to attend the 2011 Asia Pacific Cities Summit being held in Brisbane (Brisbane Convention & Exhibition Centre), QLD from 6-8 July 2011.

BACKGROUND

1. “The 2011 APCS is a Brisbane City Council initiative and for the past 15 years, it has attracted some of the world’s most influential city and business leaders to share ideas and solutions to global challenges. The 2011 Summit will again bring together mayors, senior civic officials and international business leaders from Asia Pacific, Europe, the Middle East and the Americas.”

2. The theme of this years conference ‘The Business of Cities’ is made up of three streams: the business of green cities, the business of smart and connected cities, and the business of growing cities.

3. Keynote speakers at this Summit will be Sir Richard Branson and Rudy Giuliani.

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

4. As the conference is unclassified, it would fall under Category C of Council’s relevant policy, attendance at which is limited to one (1) Councillor or appointed delegates only.

5. A copy of the Summit program and registration brochure is appended as Attachment 1.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATION FOR COUNCIL

6. Delegate registration, travel, accommodation and out-of-pocket expenses will total approximately $4270 per delegate.

Scott Forsdike

Executive Support Manager

Attachments:

1 View

2011 Asia Pacific Cities Summit Program & Registraion

22 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

1 View	Background	3 Pages
2 View	Campaign overview	12 Pages
3 View	Press release	1 Page