Agenda of Council - 23 April 2012

Council 23 April 2012

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ITEM SUBJECT PAGE NO

1 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES -Council (Development) - 10 April 2012

2 APOLOGIES

3 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

4 Petitions

5 Minutes of Lord Mayor

6 Public Forum

7 PETITIONS

8 Economy and Development

8.1 58 O'Connell Street - Parramatta NSW 2150
Lot 1 DP 900803 ( Arthur Phillip Ward)

8.2 351 Blaxcell Street, SOUTH GRANVILLE
(LOT 15 DP 35007) (Woodville Ward)

8.3 78- 80 Adderton Road, CARLINGFORD
Lot 3 DP 20820, Lot4 DP 20820 & Lot 5A DP 387106
(Elizabeth Macarthur Ward)

8.4 1 Grose Street , Parramatta NSW 2150
(Lot 1 DP 1117917) (Arthur Phillip Ward)

8.5 65 & 68 McArthur Street, Guildford
(Lot 1 DP 748923 & Part Lot 1 DP 748923)(Woodville Ward)

8.6 1 Grand Avenue, CAMELLIA NSW 2142
(Lot 1 DP 226202, Lot 1 DP 579735, Lot 2 DP 579735, Lot 201 DP 669350, Lot 102 DP 1146308)
(Elizabeth Macarthur Ward)

8.7 Former Channel 7 Studios, 61 Mobbs Lane, Epping
(Lot 1 DP 129023, Lot 2 DP 129023, Lot 1 DP 570891, Lot 2 dp 732070) (Lachlan Macquaire Ward)

8.8 Planning Proposal 2-12 River Road West, Parramatta

8.9 Submission to the NSW Department of Planning and Infrastructure on proposed changes to the LEP making process

9 Environment and Infrastructure

9.1 Parramatta City Council Climate Extremes Risk Assessment and Adaptation Plan

9.2 Minutes of the Parramatta Traffic Committee meeting held on 29 March 2012

9.3 Minutes of the Traffic Engineering Advisory Group meeting held on 29 March 2012

9.4 Council Submission on the Discussion Paper on the NSW Long Term Transport Master Plan

10 Community and Neighbourhood

10.1 Review of Council's Advisory Committees

10.2 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Advisory Committee Meeting 27 March 2012

11 Governance and Corporate

11.1 CBD & Town Centre Design and Development Conference - 23 -24 May 2012 - Sydney

11.2 National General Assembly of Local Government Conference - 17 - 20 June 2012 - Canberra

11.3 Investments Report for February 2012

12 Notices of Motion

12.1 Review of Depot Operations

13 Closed Session

13.1 Tender 6/2012 North East Corner of Church and Palmer Streets, Parramatta – Construction of New Footpath with Exposed Aggregate Concrete Pavers, New Kerb Ramps and Associated Works.

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

13.2 Tender 5/2012 Rawson Street to Boronia Park, Epping – Access Pathway Upgrade – Construction of New Widened Pathway, Kerb Construction and Associated Works.

13.3 2012 PCC Annual Grants Program

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.

13.4 Potential acquisition of land in Guildford for local open space

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

14 DECISIONS FROM CLOSED SESSION

15 QUESTION TIME

Council 23 April 2012 Item 8.1

ECONOMY AND DEVELOPMENT

ITEM NUMBER 8.1

SUBJECT 58 O'Connell Street - Parramatta NSW 2150
Lot 1 DP 900803 ( Arthur Phillip Ward)

DESCRIPTION Section 96(1a) application to modify condition 13 ( payment of a monetary contribution for mitigation of the loss of low rental bedrooms) arising from strata subdivision of the building.

REFERENCE DA/174/2011/A - lodged 14 December 2011

APPLICANT/S Byrnes PDM Pty Ltd

OWNERS Classy Business Pty Ltd

REPORT OF Manager Development Services

DATE OF REPORT 6 february 2012

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

NOTE: This report was deferred from the Council Meeting on 27 February 2012. Further advice will be provided to Councillors just prior to the Council Meeting to be held on 23 April 2012.

Application seeks to modify a Development Consent determined by the elected Council and the condition being modified was subject to debate when Council previously considered the application.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Council on 10 October 2011 granted consent to the Strata subdivision of a residential flat building at 58 O’ Connell Street containing 10 units. The provisions of SEPP Affordable Rental Housing (ARHSEPP 2009) were considered in the assessment of the application as the strata subdivision is going to result in the loss of affordable housing.

The Section 96 application seeks to modify condition 13. Condition 13 currently reads:

“A monetary contribution of $95,760 for mitigation of the loss of low-rental bedrooms is to be paid. The contribution is to be paid to the Chief Executive, Housing NSW, Department of Human Services. The evidence of such a payment is to be submitted to the Council prior to the issue of a subdivision certificate.”

The applicant seeks to modify this condition by seeking to quarantine not less than three (3) of the two (2) bedroom units for affordable housing (low rental) for a period of not less than 5 years from the date of registration by way of a positive covenant. This would be in lieu of the payment of $ 95,760 to Housing NSW and is suggested by the applicant as they believe the strata subdivision does not result in any loss of low cost rental housing.

The application was been notified in accordance with Council’s Notification Development Control Plan and no submissions have been received.

The proposed modification would not comply with the requirements of ARHSEPP (2009) and contravenes the Ministerial directions issued under section 94G (3) (b) of the EP& A Act 1979. The request to modify the condition is also not supported by Council’s Social Outcomes group .The proposed modification is therefore recommended for refusal.

RECOMMENDATION

Pursuant to Section 80(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979

That Council not support the request to modify condition 13 for the following reasons:

1. The proposed modification does not comply with the requirements of State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009.

2. The proposed modification would not comply with the Ministerial directions issued under Section 94G (3) (b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

3. The proposed modification is not in the public interest.

Sasi Kumar

Senior Development Assessment Officer

Attachments:

1 View	Section 79C Report	15 Pages
2 View	Location Plan	1 Page
3 View	Section 79C report for DA/174/2011	30 Pages
4 View	Determination Notice for DA/174/2011	5 Pages
5 View	Ministerial Direction	1 Page

Council 23 April 2012 Item 8.2

ECONOMY AND DEVELOPMENT

ITEM NUMBER 8.2

SUBJECT 351 Blaxcell Street, SOUTH GRANVILLE
(LOT 15 DP 35007) (Woodville Ward)

DESCRIPTION Section 96 (2) Modification to approved alterations and additions to an existing heritage dwelling. Modifications include:
1. Internal room reconfiguration including associated external wall changes;
2. Rear roof modification;
3. Alterations to front awning.

REFERENCE DA/216/2009/A - Submitted 10 February 2012

APPLICANT/S De'bonnaire Designz

OWNERS Mr & Mrs Zreika

REPORT OF Manager Development Services

DATE OF REPORT 28 March 2012

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

The application is being referred to Council for determination as the application involves structural work to a listed heritage item.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The development application seeks consent to modify a development consent which granted approval to alterations and additions to a heritage item. The modifications proposed in this application have been constructed and include an amended internal room reconfiguration and associated external wall and fenestration changes, amended roof design, alterations to the front awning and reworking of the rear landing and access stairs.

The alterations and additions to the dwelling house are permissible in the R2 low density zone under Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011.

The subject site is identified as containing a local Heritage Item (houses built for Housing Commission) as listed in Schedule 5 of Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011. The application was referred to Council’s Heritage Advisor who raised no objection to the works.

The works as constructed are consistent with the objectives of Parramatta LEP 2011 and Parramatta DCP 2011. The proposal is therefore considered satisfactory as the works result in minimal impact on the streetscape, adjoining properties and the heritage significance of the site and surrounds.

The application was notified in accordance with Parramatta DCP 2011, and no submissions were received.

Accordingly, the application is recommended for approval subject to conditions

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council as the consent authority, modify development consent DA/216/2009 in the following manner:

Modify condition no. 1 in the following way:

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

Site plan, Floor plan, Elevations, Section and Calculations, Issue G, prepared by DeBonnaire Designz

14/2/2012

Detailed stormwater Plan

Prepared by De’bonnaire Designz

August 2009

Document(s)	Dated
Basix Certificate No. A130384	27/12/2011

Note: In the event of any inconsistency between the architectural plan(s) and the landscape plan(s) and/or stormwater disposal plan(s) (if applicable), 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.

The addition of the following condition:

5a. The area annotated ‘front yard landscaped’ within the front setback is to be either a deep soil zone or landscaped area as defined in Parramatta DCP2011 (marked in red on the stamped plans).

Reason: To comply with Council requirements.

(b) The matter has been referred to Council’s Development Compliance Team under SR49638 for investigation and issue of a possible Penalty Infringement Notice associated with the unauthorised as-built works.

Nicholas Clarke

Development and Certification OfficerAttachments:

1 View	S79C Assessment Report	9 Pages
2 View	Locality Map	1 Page
3	Confidential Plans	2 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 23 April 2012 Item 8.3

ECONOMY AND DEVELOPMENT

ITEM NUMBER 8.3

SUBJECT 78- 80 Adderton Road, CARLINGFORD
Lot 3 DP 20820, Lot4 DP 20820 & Lot 5A DP 387106
(Elizabeth Macarthur Ward)

DESCRIPTION Section 82A review of a Section 96(2) application which sought approval to modify Development Consent No. DA/908/2005 for a town house development containing 9 dwellings. The modifications include:
1. Changes to the basement carpark including the deletion of the deep soil planting from internal courtyards;
2. Changes to the internal layout;
3. Changes to the external facade; and
4. Changes to the roof.

REFERENCE DA/908/2005/A - 22 February 2012

APPLICANT/S Mr. J Symin

OWNERS Mr. J Symin

REPORT OF Manager Development Services

DATE OF REPORT – 28 March 2012

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

Application relates to a Section 82 (A) review.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Section 82(A) review application seeks Council’s is for reconsideration of a refusal of a Section 96(2) application for 9 townhouses. The modifications include;

1. Changes to the basement car park including the deletion of the deep soil planting from internal courtyards;

2. Changes to the internal layout;

3. Changes to the external facade; and

4. Changes to the roof.

The Section 9692) application was refused on 11 November 2011 as the applicant did not provide adequate evidence that the physical commencement of the approved development occurred prior to 17 October 2011. As a result it was considered the consent had lapsed.

A statutory declaration from the Principal Certifying Authority was submitted to the Council on 20 March 2012 which states that there was physical commencement of works prior to 17 October 2011. The statutory declaration provides evidence that DA/908/2005 was physically commenced prior to 17 October 2011 and has not lapsed. Council’s General Counsel has provided advice that a statutory declaration is one piece of evidence that can be used to demonstrate physical commencement.

The application was notified as per Council’s Development Control Plan and two submissions were received .The submissions raise issue with potential traffic constraints , privacy and permissibility issues. The submissions have been considered in the assessment and the issues raised do not warrant further modification or refusal of the application.

After consideration of the development against the relevant statutory and policy provisions, the proposal is considered to be suitable for the site and is in the public interest as it will not unduly impact the environment. Therefore, it is recommended that the application be approved.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council as the consent authority, change its previous determination of Development Application No.DA/908/2005/A and approve the proposed modifications to DA/908/2005 in the following manner:

1. Changes to the basement car park including the deletion of the deep soil planting from internal courtyards;

2. Changes to the internal layout;

3. Changes to the external facade; and

4. Changes to the roof.

(b) Further that, persons who made a submission be advised of Council’s decision.

Sasi Kumar

Senior Development Assessment Officer

Attachments:

1 View	Section 79 C Report	26 Pages
2 View	Location Plan	1 Page
3 View	Architectural Plans	1 Page
4 View	Statutory Declaration	2 Pages
5	Architectural Plans- Confidential	4 Pages

Council 23 April 2012 Item 8.4

ECONOMY AND DEVELOPMENT

ITEM NUMBER 8.4

SUBJECT 1 Grose Street , Parramatta NSW 2150
(Lot 1 DP 1117917) (Arthur Phillip Ward)

DESCRIPTION Section 96(2) modification to an approved 54 place child care centre. Modification includes construction of basement storage beneath the approved child care centre .

REFERENCE DA/412/2011/A - 24 January 2012

APPLICANT/S Zhinar Architects

OWNERS Parramatta Leagues Club Limited

REPORT OF Manager Development Services

DATE OF REPORT – 3 april 2012

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

The Section 96(2) application relates to a Child Care Centre and a heritage listed site.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Section 96 (2) application seeks to modify the approved two storey child care centre (DA/412/2011) by providing for a basement ( 114m²) to be used as ancillary storage with associated emergency stairs and window. The basement is located within the approved Building C envelope to the south western part of the building with stairway access to the ground floor.

The application was notified as per Council’s Development Control Plan and one submission was received. The issues raised in the submissions relate to the design of the building and other general planning issues not directly related to the changes that form part of this modification application and they have been considered in the assessment. On the basis of this assessment, modification or refusal of the application is not warranted.

The subject building is within a recently consolidated lot which includes heritage listed buildings. The building (Building C) is approved for construction and is not identified as having heritage value. All works the subject of this application relate to Building C only. The applicant has provided a Heritage excavation exemption permit from the Heritage Council of New South Wales. Council’s Heritage Advisor raises no objection to the proposal.

After consideration of the proposed modifications against the relevant statutory and policy provisions, the proposed modification is suitable for the site and is in the public interest and it would not have any adverse impact on the environment or the heritage listing of the site. Therefore it is recommended that the application be approved.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council as the consent authority modify Development Consent No. 412/2011 in the following manner:

1. Modify condition No. 1 as follows:

Drawing N⁰	Dated
Site plan Job no. 8048 , DA-S96-02, Issue A by Zhinar architects	24 January 2012
Floor plans Job No.8048 , DA-S96-02 ,Issue A by Zhinar Architects	24 January 2012
Elevations and Sections plan , Job No. 8048 , DA-S96-02 ,Issue A by Zhinar architects	24 January 2012
Concept drainage plan No. 6435-C DA01 and DA02, Issue A and Stormwater and Onsite Detention Layout Drawing and Notes, Drawing No. 1117-CD A01, Issue “D”, sheet 1 of 1, prepared by HKMA Engineers	16 June 2011 and 20 February 2012

Document(s)	Dated
Acoustic Report by Acoustic Logic	12 June 2011
Arborist report prepared by Redgum Horticultural	10 August 2011
Child care Operational Management Plan	16 June 2011
Waste Management Plan	1 July 2011
Statement of Environmental Effects	16 June 2011 and 1 July 2011
Materials Schedule

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

2. Add the following conditions to the consent:

88. Prior to the commencement of any excavation works on site, the applicant must submit for approval by the Principal Certifying Authority (with a copy forwarded to Council) a full dilapidation report on the visible and structural condition of all neighbouring structures within the ‘zone of influence’ of the required excavation face to twice the excavation depth.

The report should include a photographic survey of adjoining properties detailing their physical condition, both internally and externally, including such items as walls, ceilings, roof, structural members and other similar items. The report must be completed by a consulting structural/geotechnical engineer as determined necessary by that qualified professional based on the excavations for the proposal and the recommendations of the geotechnical report. Where the consulting geotechnical engineer is of the opinion that no dilapidation reports for adjoining structures are required, certification to this effect shall be provided for by the Principal Certifying Authority prior to any excavation. A copy of the dilapidation report shall be submitted to Council.

In the event that access for undertaking the dilapidation survey is denied by an adjoining owner, the applicant must demonstrate in writing to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority that all reasonable steps have been taken to obtain access and advise the affected property owner of the reason for the survey and that these steps have failed.

Note: This documentation is for record keeping purposes only, and may be used by an applicant or affected property owner to assist in any action required to resolve any dispute over damage to adjoining properties arising from works. It is in the applicant’s and adjoining owner’s interest for it to be as detailed as possible.

Reason: Management of records.

89. Prior to the issue of an amended construction certificate or an occupation certificate which ever is earlier, an additional amount of $ 600.00 pursuant to Section 94A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act , 1979 and the Parramatta Section 94 A development Contributions Plan is payable to Parramatta City Council. This is due to the increase in the estimated building cost. At the time of payment, the contribution levy will be indexed quarterly in accordance with movements in the Consumer Price Index (All Groups Index) for Sydney issued by the Australian Statistician.

Reason: To comply with legislative requirements.

90. The applicant shall engage a suitably qualified person to prepare a post construction dilapidation report at the completion of the construction works. This report is to ascertain whether the construction works created any structural damage to adjoining buildings, infrastructure and roads. The report is to be submitted to the PCA. In ascertaining whether adverse structural damage has occurred to adjoining buildings, infrastructure and roads, the PCA must:

· compare the post-construction dilapidation report with the pre-construction dilapidation report, and

· have written confirmation from the relevant authority that there is no adverse structural damage to their infrastructure and roads.

A copy of this report is to be forwarded to Council.

Reason: To establish the condition of adjoining properties prior building work and any damage as a result of the building works.

91. The stormwater system for the basement shall be constructed in accordance with the basement stormwater plan i.e. “Stormwater and Onsite Detention Layout Drawing and Notes”, Drawing No. 1117-CD A01, Issue “D”, prepared by HKMA Engineers (sheet 1 of 1) dated 20/02/2012. In order to make satisfactory arrangements for the operation of the stormwater pump‑out system, the system shall be designed and constructed to ensure the following are provided:

(a) A holding tank capable of storing the sub-soil drainage infiltrating from around basement for at least 2 hour duration storm event allowing for pump failure or 3m³ as proposed and shown on the approved stormwater plan, whichever is higher in capacity.

(b) Two pump system (on alternate basis) capable of emptying the holding tank at a rate equal to the lower of:

i. The permissible site discharge (PSD) rate; or

ii. The rate of inflow for the one hour, 5 year ARI storm event.

(c) An alarm system comprising of basement pump-out failure warning sign together with a flashing strobe light and siren installed at a clearly visible location at the entrance to the basement facing towards the entrance, in case of pump failure.

(d) A 100 mm freeboard to all parking spaces.

(e) Submission of full hydraulic details and pump manufacturers specifications.

(f) Pump out system to be connected to a stilling pit and gravity line before discharge to the street gutter.

Plans and design calculations along with certification from the designer indicating that the design complies with the above requirements are to be submitted to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority prior to issue of the Construction Certificate.

Reason: To ensure satisfactory storm water disposal.

92. The basement shall be used only for ancillary storage associated with the child care centre.

Reason: to ensure compliance with approved conditions.

(b) All other conditions of DA/412/2011 remain unmodified.

(c )Further, that persons who made a submission be advised of Council’s decision.

Sasi Kumar

Senior Development Assessment Officer.

Attachments:

1 View	Section 79 C Report	13 Pages
2 View	Location Plan	1 Page
3 View	Architectural Plans	2 Pages
4	Architectural Plan- confidential	1 Page

Council 23 April 2012 Item 8.5

ECONOMY AND DEVELOPMENT

ITEM NUMBER 8.5

SUBJECT 65 & 68 McArthur Street, Guildford
(Lot 1 DP 748923 & Part Lot 1 DP 748923)(Woodville Ward)

DESCRIPTION Use of a portion of an existing industrial building fronting Marian Street at 65 McArthur Street as a place of worship. Approval is also sought to use No. 68 McArthur Street as a carpark for the place of worship at 65 McArthur Street.

REFERENCE DA/394/2011 - Submitted 14 June 2011

APPLICANT/S W Hawshar

OWNERS WD & HD Pty Limited

REPORT OF Manager Development Services

DATE OF REPORT 26 March 2012

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

This application is referred to Council for determination as the proposal is for a place of public worship.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The application seeks approval for the use a portion of an existing industrial building fronting Marian Street at 65 McArthur Street as a place of worship and to use No. 68 McArthur Street as a carpark for the place of worship at 65 McArthur Street.

The development application was submitted before the gazettal of LEP 2011. The subject sites (65 & 68 McArthur Street) are zoned Employment 4 under the provisions of LEP2001. A place of public worship and associated car parking are permissible land uses under the zoning provisions of LEP2001. The application is also a permissible land use within the current IND1 General Industrial zoning applying to the land under Parramatta LEP 2011.

The application proposes to use the premises at 65 McArthur Street as a prayer hall and the only proposed activity is for praying. The proposed development has a useable floor space of approximately 268m² to accommodate 130 worshippers. The application proposes the following hours of operation:

Permanently Fixed Regular Daily Prayer Times
Prayer	Time	Maximum Number in Attendance
Early Morning Prayer	5:00am to 6:30am	20
Midday Prayer	12:30pm to 1:30pm	20
Afternoon Prayer	3:00pm to 3:30pm	20
Evening Prayer	6:00pm to 6:30pm	20
Night-time Prayer	7:30pm to 8:30pm	20
Friday Prayer	12:00pm to 1:30pm	130
Special Event Calendar Islam's Holiest Month - Ramadan
Daily	7:00pm to 9:30pm	40
Aid-EI-Fater (Last day of Ramadan)	7:00am to 10:00am	70
Aid EI-Adha	7:00am to 10:00am	70

The application requires the provision of 76 car parking spaces under the Place of Public Worship DCP. The application proposes to provide a car park at 68 McArthur Street for the use of the place of public worship. This car park will accommodate 78 vehicles and complies with the DCP.

It should be noted that the use of the place of worship has commenced at 65 McArthur Street. The car park at 68 McArthur Street has not as yet been developed and is currently being used for the storage of wall and floor tiles.

The application was notified in accordance with Council’s Notification DCP and 20 individual submissions, 1 anonymous petition (11 signatories) and 1 petition (197 signatories) were received in response to the notification of the application. The issues raised within the submissions relate to traffic, car parking, noise, operational times, unauthorised use, suitability of the site and the tidiness of the existing tile yard. The issues raised within the submissions do not warrant refusal of the application. The issues have been discussed in detail within the Section 79C assessment report contained in Attachment 1.

The proposed development is consistent with the objectives contained in the Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2001 and Parramatta Development Control Plan 2005. The proposed place of public worship is appropriately sited without unduly impacting on the amenity of nearby residential properties. The application is therefore recommended for approval subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions.

The current unauthorised use is being carried out within a building that has not as yet been upgraded to comply with the Building Code of Australia. There are also issues pertaining to car parking as there is no dedicated parking areas on site for the current unauthorised use. Given these outstanding issues with the use, it is considered that the matter be referred to Council’s Compliance Team to order the premises to cease operation until such time as an Occupation Certificate is issued.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Development Application No. DA/394/2011 to use a portion of an existing industrial building fronting Marian Street at 65 McArthur Street as a place of worship and to use No. 68 McArthur Street as a carpark for the place of worship on land at 65 McArthur Street, Guildford be approved subject to conditions of consent as outlined in Attachment 1.

(b) Further, that the matter be referred to Council’s Compliance Team to order the premises to cease operation until such time as an Occupation Certificate is issued and explore legal action or issue of PIN for continued use of premises without consent.

Kate Lafferty

Senior Development Assessment Officer

Attachments:

1 View	Section 79C Assessment Report	44 Pages
2 View	Locality Map	1 Page
3 View	Plans & Elevations	6 Pages
4 View	Draft Plan of Management	4 Pages

Council 23 April 2012 Item 8.6

ECONOMY AND DEVELOPMENT

ITEM NUMBER 8.6

SUBJECT 1 Grand Avenue, CAMELLIA NSW 2142
(Lot 1 DP 226202, Lot 1 DP 579735, Lot 2 DP 579735, Lot 201 DP 669350, Lot 102 DP 1146308)
(Elizabeth Macarthur Ward)

DESCRIPTION Transitional Part 3A of Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 - MP 10_0028 - Remondis Alternative Waste Treatment Facility, Camellia

REFERENCE NCA/2/2011 - 29 April 2010

APPLICANT/S Remondis Pty Ltd

OWNERS Billbergia Group Pty Ltd

REPORT OF Manager Development Services

DATE OF REPORT

5^th April 2012

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

To seek Council’s endorsement of a submission to the Director General of the Department of Planning on the project application for approval for the Remondis Alternate Waste Treatment Facility

The application is made under Schedule 3 of State Environmental Planning Policy (Major Development) 2005. Under Part 3A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the proposal is declared as a Major Project and the Minister for Planning is the Consent Authority for the above project

SITE DESCRIPTION

The majority of the subject site is currently covered by a mix of ‘hard surfaces’ of concrete and bitumen. Portions are also grassed which cover pre-existing fills and other cap deposits. There are no buildings currently on the property and no natural surfaces. The site is currently used for the purposes of storing shipping containers.

The site forms a part of a larger area of an industrial zone located between the Parramatta River, Camellia railway station and Grand Avenue. The site is surrounded by a variety of industrial and commercial uses. To the east are large industrial/commercial warehouses. To the east is the Tilrox Building and Grand Avenue. Grand Avenue provides a buffer to the Camellia industrial area from the Rosehill Gardens Race Course and the Parramatta City Raceway precincts.

The site, which was previously occupied by James Hardie Industries (JHI) was used for the manufacture of fibrous and related products and chemical manufacturing. The site formerly consisted of warehouse buildings which have now been demolished to slab. These construction platform slabs remain.

PERMISSIBILITY

The site is zoned as IN3 Heavy Industrial under Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011. The proposed development comprising of 2 alternative waste treatment plants is a “waste or resource management facility” and is defined as any of the following:

a.) a resource recovery facility,

b.) a waste disposal facility

c.) a waste or resource transfer station

d.) a building or place that is a combination of the things referred to in (a)-(c).

Accordingly, the proposed waste treatment plans are permissible with consent.

BACKGROUND

On 1 April 2011, Council provided a response on the adequacy of the Draft Environmental Assessment stating that additional issues should be included in the DGRs relating to the following:

· Traffic;

· Environmental Protection;

· Heritage;

· Landscaping;

· Contamination; and

· Clause 41M Height of Buildings (SREP 28).

On 11 August 2011, Council provided a response on the adequacy of the amended Environmental Assessment providing comments on the following:

· Site Audit for Contaminants and Geotechnical Review; and

· Traffic.

On 23 February 2012, an exhibition of the application began and Council was notified and invited to make a submission.

On 10 April 2012 Council suspended standing orders to discuss the site and requested that staff prepare a submission on the proposed use of the site as an Alternative Waste Treatment Facility.

THE PROPOSAL

The Major Project seeks approval for the Remondis Alternate Waste Treatment Facility including the following:

· A Commercial & Industrial Resource Recovery Facility (CIRRF) with a capacity to process up to 100,000 tonnes per annum (tpa) of commercial and industrial waste;

· A Source Separated Organic Resource Recovery Facility (SSORRF) facility with a capacity to process 50,000 tpa of food and green waste; and

· Ancillary infrastructure.

Waste treatment on the site will involve the following:

· Waste streams will be delivered to the site by waste collection contractors, and sourced from within the greater Sydney metropolitan area.

· The site would operate 24 hours per day, seven days per week throughout the year.

· Putrescible waste entering the ‘wet’ stream would undergo biological stabilisation in a static tunnel composting process in accordance with EPA/DEC Guidelines.

· Raw compost would be taken by truck to licensed composting facilities in southern and western Sydney for compost refinement, marketing and sale.

· Materials with a high recycling content would enter the ‘dry’ stream, where marketable recycling materials (paper, cardboard plastics, metal and timber) would be recovered and sold in bales to secondary processors according to their specifications.

· All non-putrescible waste which cannot be reused will enter a ‘bulk nuisance’ waste stream and be sent to a licensed Class II landfill in western Sydney for disposal.

The site is heavily contaminated with asbestos, as well as hydrocarbons and metals due to James Hardie manufacturing fibrous cement on the site prior to 1996. However, following completion of works in an earlier Voluntary Remediation Agreement with the EPA, the site was declared to pose no significant risk of harm provided remediation in accordance with the Site Management Plan (SMP) developed in 2004 was maintained at all times.

The proposed development will be constructed on an engineered platform above the site to minimise disturbance to site capping and the only penetration of the site seal will be to access underground services. It is understood that the only excavation of the site will occur generally in accordance with Figure 4.3 of the Environmental Assessment Dated February 2012.

According to the Site Management Plan – Eastern Portion Former James Hardie Site Grand Avenue Camellia (17 March 2004) contained in Annexure D of the Positive Covenant for the site, 95% of the site is currently covered with ‘hard’ surfaces, mostly concrete and bitumen. The rest of the site is unsealed being mostly grassed areas or garden beds.

The proposal will include a heavy duty concrete base on top of the existing hard surface. The base will have a concrete strength of 32-40Mpa and have a nominal slab thickness of 170-200mm.

A visit to the site revealed some erosion was occurring on the northern boundary of the site due to the Parramatta River.

It is noted that vehicles must pass over land owned by Rail Corporation New South Wales to access the site.

A number of issues have been identified including the following:

· Contamination;

· Air Quality;

· Noise;

· Environmental Protection Zone treatment including proposed vegetation, erosion prevention and Council’s long term vision to have public access along both sides of the river;

· Traffic and Parking;

· Impact on Neighbouring Properties;

· Management of the site during construction;

· Management of the site during operation;

· Greenhouse Gas Emissions

· Flooding

· Heritage.

· The need to ensure that any future use of the site will not impact on the existing capping to ensure that workers on the site and surrounding sites are not exposed to asbestos fibres.

· Whether a Waste Treatment plant is an appropriate use of this site.

These issues are discussed in further detail within the attached submission.

The Lord Mayor and Councillors were notified of the proposal on 23 February 2012 by the Service Manager, Development Assessment Services.

The Department of Planning is exhibiting the application between 23 February 2012 and 10 April 2012. An extension has been granted to Council, allowing the attached draft submission to be endorsed by Council.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council endorse the attached submission made by Council staff.

David Little

Development Assessment Officer

Development Assessment Team

Attachments:

1 View	Draft submission	32 Pages
2 View	Locality Plan	1 Page
3 View	Extent of Proposed Excavation Works Plan	1 Page
4 View	Surface Cover Plan	1 Page
5 View	Indicative Depth of Asbestos Contaminated Fill Plan	1 Page
6 View	Rydalmere West and Camelia Image from "Parrmatta River Foreshore Plan 2009 - 2016"	1 Page
7 View	Architectural Plans	15 Pages
8 View	Positive Covenant and Site Management Plan	30 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 23 April 2012 Item 8.7

ECONOMY AND DEVELOPMENT

ITEM NUMBER 8.7

SUBJECT Former Channel 7 Studios, 61 Mobbs Lane, Epping
(Lot 1 DP 129023, Lot 2 DP 129023, Lot 1 DP 570891, Lot 2 dp 732070) (Lachlan Macquaire Ward)

DESCRIPTION Pursuant to Section 75W (1)(a) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, a modification of approval is sought to vary the relevant conditions pertaining to the timing of installing Traffic Lights at the corner of Marsden Road and Mobbs Lane in connection with the development at 61 Mobbs Lane, Epping.

REFERENCE NCA/5/2011 - Submitted 26 March 2012

APPLICANT/S Meriton Apartments Pty Limited

OWNERS Karimbla Properties (No 9) Pty Limited

REPORT OF Manager Development Services

DATE OF REPORT

4 APRIL 2012

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

To seek Council’s endorsement of a submission to the Director General of the Department of Planning on the project application to modify conditions on approved major project applications: Major Project 05_0086, Major Project 08_0258, Major Project 10_0107 and Major Project 10_0158.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council endorse the submission made by Council staff provided in Attachment 1 which opposes further delay to install the Traffic signals at the intersection of Mobbs Lane and Marsden Road.

BACKGROUND

22 August 2006 The Minister approved a Concept Plan (MP 05_0086) for residential development, landscaped open space and associated facilities, which permits the following development on the site:

• a maximum of 650 dwellings

• a maximum of 80,000m2 gross floor area (GFA) equivalent to a maximum floor space ratio (FSR) of 0.89: 1

• a maximum of 96,000m2 total envelope area

• a maximum of 73 dwellings per hectare on land

• a maximum height of 6 storeys

• the provision of a minimum of 5% one (1) bedroom dwellings

• the provision of a maximum of 15% three (3) bedroom + study dwellings

• landscaped public open space (no less than 3.1 hectares) and private open space

• associated services and infrastructure

• land use distribution, building heights, densities, dwelling mixes and types

• strata and Torrens title subdivision.

The following condition relating to traffic signals was included in the consent:

Condition B4.4

The intersection at Marsden Road and Mobbs Lane is to be constructed and Operational prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate for the 150th dwelling on the site as provided in the 'Preferred Project Report' dated December 2010, prepared by Architectus or within 24 months from the date of this approval (MP05_0086 MOD 2), whichever occurs first.

15 September 2009 Buildings 4 & 5 - Stage 1 Residential (MP08_0257) were approved by the Minister. These buildings contained a total of 134 dwellings. It is noted that Buildings 3 and 7 were deleted during the assessment process prior to determination of the application.

On 17 January 2011 Buildings 1, 2, and 3 (MP10_0107) were approved by the Minister for the construction of 28 townhouses.

An amendment to the Concept Plan was approved by the Minister on 21 February 2011. These amendments included the following:

Ø Increase the number of dwellings from 650 to 800 and amend the dwelling mix;

Ø Delete total envelope area and 73 dwellings per hectare requirements;

Ø Replace the definition of Gross Floor Area;

Ø Inclusion of a 120m2 neighbourhood shop;

Ø Increase the number of car parking spaces on the site; and

Ø Increase the total common open space on site by an additional 4,265m²

The following condition relating to traffic signals was included in the consent:

Condition B3

Traffic Signal works to Marsden Road I Mobbs Lane Intersection

Certified copies of the civil/traffic signal design plans at the Marsden Road / Mobbs Lane intersection approved by MP08_0258, drawn by a suitably qualified person, shall be submitted to the RTA for consideration and approval prior to the release of the Construction Certificate by the Certifying Authority for any part of the development that exceeds 150 dwellings with a child care centre of 225 dwellings

without a child care centre and commencement of road / signal works.

The approval road signals at the intersection of Marsden Road / Mobbs Lane shall be fully constructed and operational prior to the release of any Occupation Certificates by the Certifying Authority for part of the development that exceeds 150 dwellings with a child care centre or 225 dwellings without a child care

centre.

12 July 2011 Buildings 7 and 8 (MP10_0158) were approved by the Minister on for the construction of 130 dwellings.

The following condition relating to traffic signals was included in the consent:

Condition B2 currently reads:

The approved road signals at the intersection of Marsden Road and Mobbs Lane shall be fully constructed and operational prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate for the 150^th dwelling on the former Channel 7 site, or within 24 months from the date if the approval of MP05_0086 MOD2, whichever occurs first.

25 August 2011 The Minister approved the following modifications (MP08_0258):

Ø Amended Tree Removal Plan for the removal of selected trees;

Ø Amended Community Title staged subdivision;

Ø Insert Stage 1 Community Title Plan of Subdivision; and

Ø Insert new condition for replacement tree planting.

The following condition relating to traffic signals was included in the consent:

Condition C40(a) currently reads:

The proposed signals at the intersection of Marsden Road/Mobbs Lane shall be fully constructed and operational prior to the release of any Occupation Certificates by the Certifying Authority for part of the development that exceeds 150 dwellings with a child care centre or 225 dwellings without a child care centre.

Certified copies of the civiI / traffic signal design plans at the Marsden Road / Mobbs Lane intersection shall be submitted to the RTA for consideration and approval prior to the release of the Construction Certificate by the Certifying Authority for any part of the development that exceeds 150 dwellings with a child care centre or 225 dwellings without a child care centre and commencement of road / signal works.

26 March 2012 The Department of Planning notified Council via letter dated 26 March 2012, that Meriton Apartments Pty Ltd has submitted a request to modify MP05_0086, MP08_0258, MP10_0107 and MP10_0158.

27 March 2012 The Lord Mayor and Councillors were notified of the proposal by the Service Manager, Development Assessment Services.

THE PROPOSAL

Consent is sought to modify the conditions relating to the timing of the installation of the traffic signals at the Marsden Road and Mobbs Lane intersection. The application proposes to delay the installation of the traffic signals.

The proposal specifically involves the following:

Ø Amend Condition B4.4 of Major Project No. 05_0086

Amend condition B4.4 which currently requires the traffic signals to be installed prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate for the 150th dwelling on the site or within 24 months from the date of this approval.

The application proposes to amend condition B4.4 as follows:

The proposed signals at the intersection of Marsden Road/Mobbs Lane shall be fully constructed and operational prior to the release of the Final Occupation Certificate by the Certifying Authority for that part of the development exceeding 472 dwellings.

Ø Amend Condition C40 (a) of Major Project No. 08_0258

Amend condition C40 (a) which currently requires the traffic signals to be installed prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate for part of the development that exceeds 150 dwellings with a child care centre or 225 dwellings without a child care centre.

The application proposes to amend condition C40 (a) as follows:

Certified copies of the civil / traffic signal design plans at the Marsden Road / Mobbs Lane intersection shall be submitted to the RTA for consideration and approval.

Ø Amend Condition B3 of Major Project No. 10_0107

Amend condition B3 which currently requires the traffic signals to be installed prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate for any part of the development that exceeds 150 dwellings with a child care centre of 225 dwellings without a child care centre.

The application proposes to amend condition B3 as follows:

Certified copies of the civil / traffic signal design plans at the Marsden Road / Mobbs Lane Intersection approved by MPOB_0258, drawn by a suitably qualified person, shall be submitted to the RTA for consideration and approval

The proposed signals at the intersection of Marsden Road / Mobbs Lane shall be fully constructed and operational prior to the release of the Final Occupation Certificate by the Certifying Authority for that part of the development exceeding 472 dwellings.

Ø Amend Condition B2 of Major Project No. 10_0158

Amend condition B2 which currently requires the traffic signals to be fully constructed and operational prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate for the 150^th dwelling on the former Channel 7 site, or within 24 months from the date if the approval of MP05_0086 MOD2, whichever occurs first.

The application proposes to amend condition B2 as follows:

The proposed signals at the intersection of Marsden Road / Mobbs Lane shall be fully constructed and operational prior to the release of the Final Occupation Certificate by the Certifying Authority for that part of the development exceeding 472 dwellings.

Meriton have provided the following justification for the proposed amendments:

Ø To adjust the timing of installing the traffic signals so that all the above mentioned conditions are consistent with each other; and

Ø Extend the timeframe to install the traffic signals due to delays from receiving relevant approvals from RMS.

Meriton have provided the following table of events:

CONCLUSION

The proposed amendment to delay the installation of the traffic signals at the intersection of Mobbs Lane & Marsden Road is strongly opposed.

The traffic signals are a key deliverable under the Voluntary Planning Agreement and are required as soon as possible to accommodate the increase in traffic from the proposed development.

Under Schedule 1 of the Planning Agreement, the traffic signals are required to be installed prior to the issuing of an Occupation Certificate for the 150^th dwelling (where an Occupation Certificate has been issued for a Childcare Centre) or prior to the issuing of an Occupation Certificate for the 225^th dwelling (where an Occupation Certificate has not been issued for a child care centre).

The proposal to amend the conditions to require the traffic signals to be installed prior to the release of the Final Occupation Certificate for the development exceeding 472 dwellings is inconsistent with the requirements of the Planning Agreement and is strongly opposed by Council.

Ashleigh Matta

Development Assessment Officer

Attachments:

1 View

Submission by Council

3 Pages

Council 23 April 2012 Item 8.8

ECONOMY AND DEVELOPMENT

ITEM NUMBER 8.8

SUBJECT Planning Proposal 2-12 River Road West, Parramatta

REFERENCE RZ/6/2010 - D02319508

REPORT OF Group Manager Outcomes and Development

PURPOSE:

The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s endorsement of a revised planning proposal to rezone land at 2-12 River Road West, Parramatta from industrial to mixed use, with a maximum height of 40 metres (12 storeys), and maximum FSR of 3.4:1 and a foreshore building line of 15 metres. Further, that Council endorse the referral of the planning proposal to the Department of Planning and Infrastructure (DP&I) for Gateway determination

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council endorse a revised planning proposal for 2-12 River Road West, Parramatta to:

· rezone the land to part B4 Mixed Use and part RE1 Public Recreation;

· permit a maximum building height of 37 metres (11 storeys) at Nos. 2-8 River Road West and 40 metres (12 storeys) at Nos. 10-12 River Road West;

· permit a maximum floor space ratio of 3.4:1 at Nos. 2-8 River Road West and 3.3:1 at Nos.10-12 River Road West;

· require a foreshore building line of 15 metres measured to the mean high water mark;

in accordance with maps provided at Attachment 3..

(b) That a revised planning proposal be referred to the Department of Planning & Infrastructure for Gateway determination.

(c) That subject to Gateway determination, the planning proposal be placed on public exhibition and referred to relevant public authorities in accordance with the conditions set by the Gateway determination.

(d) Further, that a report be put to Council on the draft Development Control Plan (DCP) and draft Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA) for the site for endorsement to publicly exhibit concurrently with the planning proposal.

BACKGROUND

1. Nos. 2-12 River Road West, Parramatta are located within a small light industrial precinct generally bound by Parramatta River, James Ruse Drive and Tramway Avenue. The site adjoins the Parramatta River and is currently used for general light industrial purposes and car parking, with many of the buildings reaching the end of their economic life.

2. At its meeting of 13 December 2010, Council considered the subject planning proposal and resolved to support the rezoning of land from Industrial to Mixed Use and Public Recreation. However, no determination of maximum height or floor space ratio was made at that time and was subject to further consideration of flooding and heritage issues.

3. In February 2011, the Department of Planning (now DP&I) issued a Gateway determination which supported the rezoning of the land, but which required additional information in relation to heritage, flooding, acid sulfate soil and land contamination, and foreshore building lines to enable determination of suitable height and densities across the site (see Attachment 2).

4. In October 2011 Council engaged Godden Mackay Logan (GML) to undertake a heritage study to review the Area of National Significance, the historic view corridors and building height controls for land within parts of Harris Park, Rosehill and Camellia, including a case study of the planning proposal at 2-12 River Road West. The report recommended that for the subject site that building heights should generally not exceed the current height limit of RL14 (approximately 3 storeys), with some capacity to permit one additional storey (to maximum RL 17). This was detailed to Councillors at a workshop in November 2011, and on 5 December 2011 Council considered a report regarding this matter and resolved:

(a) That Council endorse Option 2 to guide the future direction for the assessment of the Planning Proposal at 2-12 River Road West, Parramatta as follows:-

Option 2

That Council endorse the continued assessment of the Planning Proposal to rezone the land to enable mixed use development with a maximum height exceeding RL 17 and that further information be provided by the proponents detailing the likely future building heights and envelopes for the site.

(b) Further, that in developing the planning proposal and working with the applicant, pre-eminent in thinking be heritage impacts on Elizabeth Farm, keeping as much of the river foreshore publicly accessible as possible and protecting ecological communities that may exist in the area.

5. In January 2012 a balloon test was undertaken demonstrating the maximum height and density of the proposed building envelopes and potential impact upon view corridors, and was viewed from multiple vantage points including Elizabeth Farm Garden and Reserve and Broughton Street on the northern side of the River. The balloon test demonstrated the built form proposed will be highly visible and will impact upon historic views. A workshop detailing the balloon test was made to Councillors in March 2012.

REVISED PLANNING PROPOSAL

6. The revised planning proposal seeks to rezone the land to part B4 Mixed Use and part RE1 Public Recreation, with a maximum height and FSR of 11 storeys (37 metres) and 3.4:1 at Nos. 2-8 and 12 storeys (40 metres) and 3.3:1 at Nos. 10-12, with a foreshore building line of 15 metres to the mean high watermark along the entire site.

7. It is noted that the FSR is expressed with regard to the portion of the site that will be zoned B4 in accordance with the technical mapping guidelines of DP&I. When expressed over the entire site area, the FSR is 2.5:1, which is generally consistent with densities applied to similar zonings across the LGA. The maximum height proposed is consistent with gazetted maximum heights at No. 2 Morton Street on the opposite side of the Parramatta River.

ISSUES

8. In order to finalise the planning proposal, the Gateway determination required that key issues relating to flooding, impact on historic view corridors, acid sulfate soils and site contamination be addressed.

9. While some flood modelling has been undertaken, Council is awaiting the finalisation of a flood study which will consider the impacts of climate change and sea level rise on the Lower Parramatta River Catchment and this will update flood data that will need to be addressed prior to the approval of any development on the site. This will be enforced through LEP and DCP controls.

10. With regard to historic views, one point to point view location (from Elizabeth Farm to Macarthur House) is proposed to be retained by the indicative building envelopes. However, the overall development sought by the planning proposal will not retain other historic view corridors and panoramas, noting that these are compromised by existing vegetation. Council at its meeting of 5 December 2011 resolved to consider heights greater than RL 17 over the site in order to foster renewal of the river foreshore, recognising other benefits to the community associated with this urban renewal

11. The site is known to be contaminated and proposed redevelopment of the site could also see the exposure of acid sulfate soils. However, prior to the approval of any development, a Stage 2 Contamination Assessment and Remediation Plan, as well as an Acid Sulfate Soil Management Plan will be required to be taken into consideration and approved by relevant authorities before any future development applications are approved on the site.

12. The detailed report at Attachment 1 outlines the issues in more detail whilst Attachment 5 examines the relevant 117 Directions of the State government that must be satisfied for the rezoning to proceed.

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN (DCP)

13. In conjunction with the rezoning of the land, development controls will be prepared for the site for inclusion in Parramatta Development Control Plan 2011. Controls for the site would ensure that key urban design controls are set out, and that controls are provided in relation to site specific issues including flooding and historic views. Draft DCP controls will be reported to Council separately for endorsement and public exhibition.

VOLUNTARY PLANNING AGREEMENT (VPA)

14. In conjunction with the planning proposal, Council would be seeking to finalise its negotiation with the proponents to enter into a Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA). To date negotiations have generally included dedication of the river foreshore land; provision of public infrastructure including shared path, seating, lighting etc along the foreshore; restoration of the riverbank and riparian corridor including erosion control and native vegetation restoration; provision of a through site link from River Road West to Parramatta River; monetary contributions toward pedestrian bridge over the Parramatta River; and contribution toward signalisation of River Road West and James Ruse Drive intersection. The proponents have agreed in principle to providing these public benefits. The final draft VPA will be reported to Council separately for endorsement and public exhibition.

PUBLIC CONSULTATION

15. Consultation with public authorities and formal public exhibition of the planning proposal will occur subject to the Gateway determination being issued by DP&I.

16. The draft DCP and VPA associated with the planning proposal would be exhibited concurrently with the planning proposal and reported back to Council at a later date.

NEXT STEPS

17. Should Council endorse the planning proposal, it will be sent to DP&I for final ‘Gateway determination’. Once the Gateway determination is received, the planning proposal will be placed on public exhibition.

18. Council officers will continue to finalise draft DCP controls and the VPA and will report back to Council for endorsement to publicly exhibit these documents concurrently with the planning proposal.

19. After public exhibition of the planning proposal, DCP and VPA, a report will be put to Council regarding the outcome of the exhibition and recommending any final changes for endorsement by Council.

Sue Weatherley

Group Manager Outcomes & Development

Attachments:

1 View	Detailed Report (Assessment of the Planning proposal 2-12 River Road West)	10 Pages
2 View	Gateway Determination Letter issued by Department of Planning dated 9 February 2011	4 Pages
3 View	Draft Zoning, Height, Floor Space Ration and Foreshore Building Maps	4 Pages
4 View	Proponent's Planning Proposal prepared by Hamptons Property Services	19 Pages
5 View	Address of 117 Directions	12 Pages
6 View	Balloon Test Montages prepared by PTI Architecture dated 1 March 2012	5 Pages
7 View	Historic View Corridor Image prepared by PTI Architecture	1 Page

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 23 April 2012 Item 8.9

ECONOMY AND DEVELOPMENT

ITEM NUMBER 8.9

SUBJECT Submission to the NSW Department of Planning and Infrastructure on proposed changes to the LEP making process

REFERENCE F2007/02152 - D02321561

REPORT OF A/Manager Land Use Planning

PURPOSE:

To seek Council’s endorsement of a submission to the NSW Department of Planning and Infrastructure’s draft Policy Statement on proposed changes to the LEP making process prior to it being forwarded to the Department for its consideration.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council adopt the submission at Attachment 2 to the draft Policy Statement on the proposed changes to the LEP making process and forward the submission to the NSW Department of Planning and Infrastructure for its consideration.

BACKGROUND

1. An independent review of the NSW planning system is currently underway to deliver a planning system that is modern, transparent and provides clarity for investors.

2. In the meantime, the NSW Department of Planning and Infrastructure (the Department) has prepared a draft Policy Statement (Attachment 1) seeking the views of councils, industry and the community on proposals to give councils more plan-making powers and improve the delivery of LEPs.

3. The changes proposed in the draft Policy Statement are procedural and are premised on existing legislative powers and do not require amendments to the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 to facilitate their implementation.

4. The draft Policy Statement is on exhibition from 27 March to 4 May 2012.

THE PROPOSED CHANGES

The draft Policy Statement outlines two proposed changes to the LEP making process:

a. Delegate the making of routine LEPs to councils. This proposal would delegate routine LEPs to councils to prepare and make following a Gateway determination by the Department that the planning proposal can proceed. Routine LEPs include:

i. Mapping alterations/corrections that do not alter strategy endorsed development standards

ii. Section 73A matter e.g. amending references to documents, agencies and minor anomalies

iii. Reclassifications of land consistent with a strategy/supported by an adopted Open Space study

iv. Heritage LEPs supported by an Office of Environment and Heritage endorsed study

v. Spot rezoning consistent with an endorsed strategy or surrounding zones or in accordance with a broader Government policy.

Under this proposal Council rather than the Department will deal directly with the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel (PCO) to negotiate and agree to the final wording of the instrument, prior to making the LEP. When the final wording of the instrument has been adopted by Council, it will be forwarded to the Department who will request notification on the NSW legislation web page through PCO. The Department’s function at this late stage is administrative only, it will not review the legal instrument or council’s decision to make the instrument. There would also be reporting requirements relating to processing times to inform on-going improvements to the system.

b. Allow for independent reviews of some council and departmental decisions in the plan making process. This proposal would allow proponents and councils to request an independent review (by either a Joint Regional Planning Panel or the Planning Assessment Commission) of decisions made in relation to a planning proposal before the Minister makes an LEP (non-routine LEPs). The plan making reviews are:

i. Pre-Gateway reviews – which may be requested by a proponent before a planning proposal has been forwarded for Gateway determination. If a proponent has requested that a council prepare a planning proposal there are two situations where the proponent (within a certain timeframe) may ask for an independent review:

1. the council has decided NOT to proceed with the planning proposal; or

2. the council has not made a decisions after 60 days of receiving the proponent’s request.

The proposal would need to meet certain criteria for the Department to determine whether it is eligible for an independent review. The Department would prepare a report to the regional panel on the planning proposal. The panel would review this report, the proposed instrument and submissions made by the council and proponent. The panel would advise the Minister on whether or not the proposed instrument should be submitted to the Gateway for determination.

ii. Gateway reviews – which may be requested by a proponent or council following a Gateway determination, within a certain timeframe and before consultation on the planning proposal has commenced, when the Gateway determination is made that:

1. the planning proposal should not proceed;

2. the planning proposal should be resubmitted to the Gateway; or

3. imposes requirements (other than consultation requirements) or makes variations to the proposal that the proponent or council thinks should be reconsidered.

SUMMARY OF SUBMISSION

5. The submission at Attachment 2 includes comments on the proposed amendments to the LEP making process as outlined in the draft Policy Statement. The following is a summary of these comments.

a. Delegate the making of routine LEPs to councils.

Greater delegation to councils particularly of routine LEPs is supported as it will give councils greater accountability. Councils previously had similar delegation before the new Gateway system was introduced. The delegation criteria would need to be very clear.

b. Allow for independent reviews of some council and departmental decisions in the plan making process.

This proposal could potentially take decision making away from councils. Concerns are raised on certain aspects of this proposal.

Pre-Gateway reviews

There should be no opportunity for a proponent to request a review prior to Gateway where Council does not support a proponent initiated planning proposal. A pre-Gateway review would take decision making away from councils on a policy matter. If the council does not support a significant rezoning proposal, and this decision is challenged by the proponent, with the Department agreeing to a review, the decision making powers are then given to the JRPP/PAC. This contradicts the notion of this draft policy statement of “increasing councils’ roles and responsibilities” in plan making.

The 60 day timeframe is inadequate and unrealistic for councils to assess and make a determination on a planning proposal including a ‘routine LEP’ and in particular a planning proposal that seeks a significant change to the current zoning regime or existing development pattern in a locality. The 60 day timeframe does not reflect the time it takes to consult with internal and external experts on certain studies, seek preliminary advice from State Government Authorities, begin preparing a site specific DCP (i.e. to address certain elements that cannot be accommodated in a planning proposal), negotiate a VPA and meet internal reporting timeframes.

Gateway reviews

Allowing either the council or proponent independently to instigate a Gateway review could be problematic. Should a Gateway determination impose additional requirements (other than consultation requirements) or makes variations to the proposal, the council should be the only body who can challenge a gateway determination, not the proponent. When a landowner instigated planning proposal is adopted by council it becomes the council’s planning proposal. It should be the council’s responsibility to discuss the Gateway determination and its position on the matter with the landowner, not the Departments. This approach would be consistent with the notion of this draft policy statement of “increasing councils’ roles and responsibilities” in plan making.

Community consultation

Community consultation occurs too late in the LEP making process - after a proposal has been considered by Council and the Department at Gateway. Timeframes should allow for earlier consultation particularly for major planning proposals.

CONCLUSION

6. It is recommended that Council adopt the submission provided at Attachment 2, to the draft Policy Statement on proposed changes to the LEP making process and forward the submission to the NSW Department of Planning and Infrastructure for its consideration.

Jennifer Concato

A/Manager Land Use Planning

Attachments:

1 View	Department’s draft Policy Statement – More local, more accountable plan making	7 Pages
2 View	Submission Draft Policy Statement More Local More Accountable Plan Making - Proposed Amendments to the LEP Making Process	3 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

None.

Council 23 April 2012 Item 9.1

ENVIRONMENT AND INFRASTRUCTURE

ITEM NUMBER 9.1

SUBJECT Parramatta City Council Climate Extremes Risk Assessment and Adaptation Plan

REFERENCE F2010/00355 - D02319885

REPORT OF Senior Project Officer – Environmental Outcomes

PURPOSE:

To report to Council on the results of a workshop on the Council Climate Extremes Risk Assessment and Adaptation Plan and seek Councils adoption of the Plan.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council adopt the Parramatta City Council Climate Extremes Risk Assessment and Adaptation Plan and;

(b) Further, that copies of the adopted Plan be issued to Parramatta Central Library and placed on Council’s website under publications.

BACKGROUND

1. A report was presented to Council on 27^th April 2011 seeking Council’s adoption of the “Climate Extremes Risk Assessment and Adaptation Plan” following public consultation.

2. The adopted motion from the 27^th April 2011 meeting was “That the report be received and noted and referred back to the Executive for further review and consultation with Councillors”.

3. A further Councillor Workshop was held on 19^th March 2012 to further discuss and clarify the contents and the intention of the Plan. Draft minutes from this Workshop are attached to this Report.

Issues/Options/consequences

4. The Plan describes how climatic extremes such as heatwaves and floods may affect the LGA in the future and how the risks associated with these extremes can be managed.

5. Contents of the Plan include vulnerability maps by suburb indicating the socio-economic capacity of different communities within the LGA to adapt to projected impacts such as storms, floods and heatwaves; priority table of key climatic risks for the LGA; and adaptation strategies to address the risks, including their costs, priority, responsible Council officer and timeframe.

6. Of the 48 identified risks for Parramatta, the highest priority risks include: increased premature deaths from extreme heatwaves; increased lifecycle costs to public and private assets such as roads and drainage systems; more rapid degradation of habitat and possible local extinction of threatened species; more frequent stormwater, river and tidal flooding; and increased cost of insurance related to the impact of these extreme weather events.

7. It is intended that the adaptation strategies developed as part of this Climate Adaptation Plan will be integrated into Council’s existing risk management framework e.g. the corporate risk register, business Continuity plan, Strategic Asset Management Plan, Disaster Plan, Flood Plain Risk Management Plans, the Pandemic Plan and insurance considerations with WESTPOOL.

Financial implications for Council

8. An indicative cost of all identified actions totals $780,000 over a period of 10 years (or $78,000 per year on average). Examples of actions include:-

a. Developing plans to assist vulnerable groups such as seniors during prolonged heatwaves

b. Increasing the number of green spaces in the CBD to help reduce peak temperatures

c. Enhancing Council’s policies to manage biodiversity

d. Expanding community gardens wherever possible

e. Revising Councils business continuity plan to include greater emphasis on possibility of extended power interruptions

9. The above costs are not likely to require a separate budget for the delivery of the identified actions. It is expected that actions identified in the Plan will be funded through existing operating and capital budgets and new grant opportunities provided by State and Federal Government.

10. The production of the Climate Extremes Risk Assessment and Adaptation Plan was funded through the State Government’s Waste and Sustainability Improvement Payment (WaSIP). Council received a total of $964,000 in WaSIP grant funding in 2011/12. To comply with WaSIP funding Standards, Council must undertake a climate change risk assessment for Council operations and submit the assessment report to NSW OEH by 31 May 2012. The 2010/11 WaSIP Standards also flagged that Councils should move on to prepare a Climate Adaptation Plan by 2012/13. Failure to comply with these requirements may jeopardise future WaSIP funding.

Consultation and Timing

10. In July 2010, the consultants conducted three stakeholder workshops involving internal and external representatives from other government agencies and community as part of the process of identifying, prioritising risks and adaptation strategies. In addition, interviews were conducted with 12 Council managers as well as a presentation to Level 3 managers.

11. A Councillor workshop was conducted in October 2010. A copy of the workshop presentation was forwarded to all Councillors for information the following day.

12. The draft Plan was publicly exhibited for 65 days between Wednesday 8^th December 2010 and February 11^th February 2011.

13. A second Councillor Workshop was held on 19 March 2012.

Paul Hackney Helen Papathanasiou

Senior Project Officer – Environmental Manager Environmental Outcomes Outcomes

Attachments:

1 View	Climate Extremes Risk Assessment and Adaptation Plan (Circulated under separate cover to Councillors and Senior Staff. If you would like a copy pls contact Council Support on 98065314.)	176 Pages
2 View	PowerPoint presentation from Councillor workshop of 19 March 2012	20 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 23 April 2012 Item 9.4

ENVIRONMENT AND INFRASTRUCTURE

ITEM NUMBER 9.4

SUBJECT Council Submission on the Discussion Paper on the NSW Long Term Transport Master Plan

REFERENCE F2010/00746 - D02322697

REPORT OF Senior Project Officer - Transport Planning

PURPOSE:

To seek Council endorsement of this submission to the Discussion Paper on the NSW Long Term Transport Master Plan.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council adopts this submission to the Discussion Paper on the NSW Long Term Transport Master Plan.

(b) Further that Council continues to promote, investigate and delivery key transport projects to support the planned growth of Parramatta and Western Sydney.

BACKGROUND

1. The Discussion Paper on NSW Long Term Transport Master Plan was released in February 2012. The paper has been developed by the NSW Government to outline trends and issues facing the State over the next 20 years and seeks community input on the possible priorities, issues and solutions. The closing date for submissions on the Discussion Paper is 27 April 2012.

2. Following the Discussion Paper a Draft NSW Long Term Transport Master Plan will be released in mid 2012. This will also be followed by public exhibition and consultation. The Final NSW Long Term Transport Master Plan will be released at the end of 2012.

RESPONCE TO DISCUSSION PAPER

3. The following are responses to the Discussion Paper using the same headings in the document

NSW Government and Transport Objectives

4. The NSW Government needs to respond to the existing low level of accessibility and social inequity across Western Sydney by planning and providing better transport connectivity to the regional cities, particularly public transport to provide increased access to jobs, education, health and community facilities and services. This will support the planned population growth in Western Sydney and reduce journey lengths which in turn will increase the quality of life for Western Sydneysiders and mitigate the need for the continued expensive investment in transport infrastructure to service Sydney CBD. The city of cities model for the metropolitan Sydney increases Sydney’s productivity and supports economic growth by locating the population closer to their needs.

5. The transport objectives are generally supported but there are few details on how these objectives will shape the actions that will delivery the Transport Master Plan.

6. NSW Government’s role in transport needs to include the funding of bus stop facilities through local Councils. NSW Government provides local bus services but does not fund the provision of bus stop facilities and relies on local Councils to do so.

7. NSW Government can work more effectively with local government through increased engaging on all aspects of all modes of transport from planning and investigation to the delivery and maintenance of services.

20 Year Challenge

8. One of the aims of the plan is to fully integrate transport in planning, policy and regulation however the Transport Master Plan is only for 20 years (2032) while the existing Metropolitan Plan covers the period up to 2036. The transport and planning strategies need to have the same timelines to be effective.

9. In addition to a 20 year Transport Plan, there needs to be a longer plan with a range of say 25 to 50 years. Transport projects can take considerable time from planning to implementation. The North West Rail Link started in the late 1990s and expected to operate from 2020, some 20 years later. NSW Government needs to investigate and plan much longer than 20 years to preserve future transport corridors and development opportunities. There is only one new short corridor in NW Sydney that is currently under consideration. This is insufficient for metropolitan Sydney’s future needs.

10. The assessment of the 20 year transport challenges are very broad and thus it is difficult to provide any comments or input beyond the fact that Sydney is growing and with it the transport challenges. The energy challenges appear to underestimate Australia’s oil dependency with the growing cost of oil and the need to invest in alternative independent sustainable energy options.

Sydney Transport

11. The Discussion Paper focuses on Sydney CBD and therefore it is difficult to provide any comments from a Parramatta or Western Sydney perspective until the draft Transport Master Plan is released when more details are released.

12. The discussion on the growth centres focuses on connections to Sydney CBD with little reference to the regional cities connections to support the growth of local regional jobs and reduce the transport stresses on Sydney CBD.

13. The section on Sydney’s transport corridors are too broad to offer any significant insight into the transport challenges or constraints in Parramatta or Western Sydney.

14. The section below is supported by the later section on Council’s adopted policies and positions.

Rail

15. Train services in inner metropolitan areas need to have higher frequencies which lend themselves to metro style single deck services to meet the all day demand for travel. Whereas outer areas need faster express style services focusing on connecting commuters to Sydney CBD and the regional cities.

Road

16. There needs to be investigations into roads pricing with managed motorways to improve the road network as well as a focus on improving existing north-south road corridors (Homebush Bay Dr and Silverwater Rd corridors) through additional infrastructure. Road travel in Sydney, like the public transport network is focused on Sydney CBD. This needs to be re-focused on the key north-south trips outside of Sydney CBD, particularly in Western Sydney where road freight is dominant. Council’s proposed Regional Ring Road could significantly contribute to easing traffic movements around Parramatta and across Western Sydney.

Bus

17. Buses need more bus priority to achieve higher levels of reliability and in turn attract more passengers as well as increase the efficient use of road space. Bus services need to better integrate with rail and ferry services to achieve higher levels of public transport use across Sydney. Some bus corridors need to be reviewed to assess whether the public transport mode needs to be changed to meet current and future demand as well as address the transport challenges.

Light Rail

18. The role of light rail in Sydney needs to be fully considered for Western Sydney with possible systems centred around the three regional cities. Light rail is cheaper, quicker to implement and operate than heavy rail without the need for high density populations to support it. Buses are suited to lower levels of patronage with lower costs and flexible routes, however they have limited passenger capacity and must share the road and congestion with other vehicles.

19. Parramatta already suffers significant bus challenges with bus and passenger congestion at the interchange and within the city centre. An increase in bus services over the next 5 years will significantly increase the operational challenges which need a long term plan to address the issue of growing transport demand.

Ferry

20. Ferry services on the Parramatta River need to respond to the current and future demand as well as drive demand to support the employment opportunities in Parramatta. The current service fails to do this. There is a need for services from the Inner West to Parramatta.

Cycling

21. NSW Government needs to continue to support local Councils to deliver Sydney’s regional cycle network. It is difficult to encourage cycling without supporting infrastructure.

Pedestrian

22. Local Councils play a key role in providing and encouraging pedestrian movement. Councils and State Government need to work more closely together at interchanges and key transport nodes to ensure the best possible pedestrian facilities are provided to encourage and support public transport use.

Freight Transport

23. Rail freight infrastructure improvements are underway but the Plan focuses on improving road access to Port Botany to accommodate the freight demand. The plan appears to indicate that the solution is the M4 East (and the Inner West Motorway) however the plan shows that freight activity is located in South West Sydney (south of the M4 and around the M5 and M7 corridors). There appears to be a mis-match between the freight travel demand and the suggested solution. This is not to say that the M4 East is not justified on its own terms but it is clearly not linked to the issue of freight access to Port Botany.

24. There appears to be a lack of further freight rail line projects to tackle the growing freight demand within Sydney. There is a need to consider a Western Sydney freight line to access Port Botany on exclusive freight lines. In addition, it is understood that the yet to be complete Southern Sydney Freight Line, will reach operating capacity within a short period from opening. Both State and Federal Governments need to work together to harmonise the investment and operation of rail freight infrastructure within Sydney and across NSW. The current complex network and operational control is restricting economic growth and productivity.

COUNCIL’S ADOPTED POSITIONS AND POLCIES

25. Council’s Integrated Transport Plan for Parramatta City Centre (May 2010) sets out key actions which should be considered by the State Government in the NSW Long Term Transport Master Plan. These actions are listed below using the numbering from the Integrated Transport Plan and have been updated to reflect changes since the plan was adopted:

Continue land use planning techniques that encourage and support sustainable transport use (E1)

Council adopted the residential development strategy to concentrate residential targets around public transport nodes. State Government’s Metropolitan Strategy plans for future population growth to be within 30 minutes of a regional city under the city of cites model. The NSW Long Term Transport Master Plan needs to ensure that this is supported through the management of existing transport assets and future infrastructure investment and services.

Increase transport efficiency of existing transport services & assets (E2)

This covers the more efficient use of private cars through initiatives such as car sharing and managed motorways as well as the more efficient use of public transport through greater use, service integration and provision of bus priority.

Support environmentally sustainable vehicles (E3)

Council advocates the State Government to recognise the benefits of supporting the development of more sustainable powered vehicles to address the challenges of climate change, air pollution and the finite supply of fossil fuels.

Walking school bus program (TB3)

Council recommends that State Government initiates a Walking School Bus Program as part of a wider travel behaviour program to encourage active and sustainable transport to tackle obesity as well congestion.

Pedestrian and cycle amenity zone (W2)

Roads & Maritime Services in partnership with Council, has recently implemented extensions to Parramatta’s 40kph city centre zone. Council sees this scheme as essential in the growth of the city with future stages planned.

Cycle routes to the city centre (C1)

Roads & Maritime Services has significantly funded Council, through the River Cities Program of the NSW Bike Plan, for the delivery of cycle infrastructure and skills training over the last two years. Council believes that it is important that State Government continues to fund local Councils to encourage healthy sustainable travel choices.

Cross-city bus services (B1)

Council maintains its position on advocating for cross-city bus services in Parramatta. This not only provides direct transport services for bus passengers to both Westmead and University of Western Sydney (and other centres) but reduces the increasing pressure of more bus layover space in Parramatta city centre.

Bus stop access program (B4)

Council estimates that will it cost some $7m to bring the approximately 835 bus stops within Parramatta LGA to the Disabled Discrimination Act standards. It is imperative that State Government assists local Councils to fund the required works as local bus services are provided by State Government.

Lobby State and Federal Governments to construct the Parramatta to Epping Rail Link (PERL), prepare a feasibility study into the Parramatta to Castle Hill Rail Link and restore the Cumberland Line service. (R1)

Last year Council undertook studies to support both the PERL and the amended North West Rail Link via Parramatta to assist both State and Federal Governments to overcome their differing positions. Council has since prepared the concept of a Western Sydney Light Rail network to address the long term future population growth in Western Sydney and employment growth in Parramatta.

Sydney Metro (R2)

The previously proposed scheme still has merit as part of a long term transport solution for travel between Parramatta and Sydney CBD. This transport option needs to be re-considered against the future population growth for Parramatta.

Commuter ferry service to Parramatta (F1)

Continue to lobby State Government for a commuter ferry service to Parramatta from the Inner West supporting the growth of both the Inner West (residential) and Parramatta (regional city with a full range of employment, education, health and community needs).

Regional Ring Road (RN1)

Council advocates for a Regional Ring Road to untangle the eight strategic road corridors that converge on Parramatta. This will benefit cross-regional car and freight movements by reducing delay and congestion, as well support the continued growth of Parramatta, Westmead and Western Sydney.

City Ring Road (RN2)

Council plans a series of intersection improvements to form a City Ring Road to better manage traffic demand around Parramatta city centre.

East Coast Fast Rail

In additional, Council advocates for the Federal Government’s East Coast Fast Rail scheme to consider a station in Parramatta. This will provide Western Sydney with faster regional and interstate transport options as well as support the planned growth of Western Sydney. Sydney’s current airport poorly serves Western Sydney.

David Gray

Manager Transport Planning

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Summary – Integrated Transport Plan for Parramatta City Centre (May 2010)

Western Sydney Light Rail Network

Western Sydney Regional Ring Road

Council 23 April 2012 Item 10.1

COMMUNITY AND NEIGHBOURHOOD

ITEM NUMBER 10.1

SUBJECT Review of Council's Advisory Committees

REFERENCE F2004/07575 - D02313667

REPORT OF Community Capacity Building Officer

NOTE: This Report was deferred from the Council Meeting of 26 March 2012

PURPOSE:

The report provides information to Council on the effectiveness of its Advisory Committees including their membership and achievements since the Review of Council’s Advisory Committees in 2009. It also provides information on the Granville Youth and Community Recreation Centre’s (GYCRC) Management Advisory Committee and recommends the establishment of a Council GYCRC Advisory Committee.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council note the report of the effectiveness of its Advisory Committees including their membership, achievements and any challenges they are experiencing and ways of addressing these challenges.

(b) That the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander, Access, Cycleways and Heritage Advisory Committees continue to be resourced and supported to provide Council with information and advice from community members.

(c) That bi-annual Youth Issues fora and other community consultation strategies outlined in this report including social media and face-to-face fora continue to be utilised to engage with young people, families, artists, and other communities members.

(d) That the Granville Youth and Community Centre Management Advisory Committee be formalised as an Advisory Committee of Council and that current Management Committee Members provide input into the development of its Terms of Reference

(e) Further that Council seeks expressions of interest for Members of all the Advisory Committees in August 2012 to enable the new Council to re-establish the Committees following the local government elections.

BACKGROUND

1. At its meeting on 23 March 2009, Council considered a report on its Advisory Committees which included a summary of presentations made by Advisory Committee representatives at the Councillor Workshop held on 2 February 2009 and options regarding ways Council could effectively engage with communities.

2. At this meeting Council resolved to:

a) retain the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander, Access, Arts and Cycleways Advisory Committees

b) retain the Youth Advisory Committee and hold an initial forum which would provide young people with an opportunity to determine an appropriate meeting format and terms of reference

c) create a Community Advisory Committee which would establish two new programs: the LGA Wide Issues Fora and the Neighbourhood Issues and Improvement Program. This Committee would also absorb Members of the Community Safety Committee and the Multicultural Advisory Committee.

d) ratify Terms of Reference for Advisory Committees including common, Core Terms of Reference (Attachment 1).

e) investigate the possible creation of a Family, Technology and Environmental Advisory Committee, Working Party or Task Force.

3. At its meeting of 28 September 2009, after consideration of the lack of membership applications to the Arts Advisory Committee, Council determined to replace it with quarterly Arts consultation fora.

CURRENT STATUS OF ADVISORY COMMITTEES

The following provides information on the recent effectiveness of Council’s Advisory Committees and includes recommendations regarding these.

4. Aboriginal and Torres Strait islander Advisory Committee

The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Advisory Committee has continued to function well. It has 15 Members and meets monthly. In 2011 three meetings occurred which did not achieve a quorum however this was recognized by Members and the convenor as being unusual and indicated a number of Members were either ill or on holidays.

The Committee continues to have a strong interest and commitment to advising Council on a range of issues according to its Terms of Reference including internal matters such as celebrations and events that demonstrate Council’s respect and acknowledgement of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people including Sorry Day and NAIDOC; advising on naming local parks/reserves using Aboriginal words; the Management Plan for Lake Parramatta, the re-design of the Heritage Centre and the design and delivery of the Community Library and Social Services Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Expo. The Committee is also concerned with matters that are the responsibility of external agencies that are significant to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in the LGA. Such matters have included advising and supporting the listing of the Parramatta Sand Body onto the NSW State Heritage Register and advising archaeological consultants on a number of heritage digs related to particular developments in the LGA.

5. Access Advisory Committee

The Access Advisory Committee continues to function well. There are currently a total of 8 Members with two new Members joining the Committee in December 2010. Unfortunately, one member, Ms Barbara Jones who was appointed in September 2009, has passed away.

The Committee has continued to meet on a bi-monthly basis with regular full attendance by all Members. Only one meeting, in April 2011, since the previous review in 2009 did not achieve a quorum.

The Committee continues to discuss and advise on access-related issues for Council according to the Terms of Reference established, and has engaged with Council units on a range of matters including upgrades and changes to bus stops, emergency evacuation procedures, access-related standards and training within Council, footpath and crossing construction for local roads, Library facilities, and Council’s Development Application process. Some time is also spent discussing Council processes and means for individual and group engagement outside of the Committee, for both Members and the wider disability community.

6. Arts Quarterly Fora

Quarterly Arts fora have not been established, however, direct engagement with the arts community has occurred on specific issues and opportunities. For example, Pop Up Parramatta has established a working party that meets regularly and has a strong presence online and through social media. Pop Up Parramatta has created an opportunity for a new engagement between long-existing organisations such as the Parramatta Arts Society, ParraClay and the many artists that are participating in Pop Up Parramatta.

Where specific consultation regarding arts issues and opportunities is required, it is recommended that a combination of face-to-face fora and online and social media fora be used.

7. Community Advisory Committee

This Committee was established to provide advice and input into two new community engagement programs for communities in the LGA: the LGA Wide Issues Fora and the Neighbourhood Issues and Improvement Program. The Committee was also to absorb Members of the Community Safety Committee and the Multicultural Advisory Committee.

The Community Advisory Committee has not been able to meet its objectives as described in its Terms of Reference. Eight people applied for membership of the Committee and Council ratified their membership in September 2009. Three Members have resigned since 2009 and despite promoting the Committee over the past 12 months at a number of fora and community events, no other person has applied for membership. A low attendance at meetings has been a significant barrier to progressing the work of the Committee. Meetings have been cancelled due to a low number of Members planning to attend, or a quorum has not been reached due to the low number who actually attended.

Council Officers have taken steps to maintain the engagement of Members including: providing Members with a schedule of 2011 meeting dates early in the year; sending advance notice of meetings via email/ post and making reminder phone calls to Members 24 hours before scheduled meetings; provision of a guest speaker who had been involved in action-based advisory committees addressed the Committee in March 2011 to provide an example of how similar committees have been successful in other local government areas; and engaging Members in the design and delivery of 3 fora held in 2009 and 2010. Two of these fora were delivered by the Community Capacity Building (CCB) Team in partnership with the Community Advisory Committee, as the lack of a quorum meant the Committee itself could not make a formal decision to hold the fora.

The Community Capacity Building Team has continued to develop and implement a broad range of community engagement strategies with diverse communities across the LGA. These include strategies to engage communities on specific issues e.g. Homelessness Issues fora and those to engage specific communities e.g. place based fora, community events such as community celebrations, community pride days, and programs such Civics Education for Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Communities; Community Garden projects and national/international days of celebration for people with disabilities and senior citizens etc.

It is proposed that Council disband the Community Advisory Committee and continue to use of broad range of community engagement strategies to ensure it is connected to communities across the LGA and that its work is informed by these communities.

8. Cycleways Advisory Committee

The Cycleways Advisory Committee continues to function well. There are currently a total of 11 Members. One member has passed away and two have resigned. The Committee has continued to meet on a bi-monthly basis. The Committee continues to discuss and advise on cycling-related issues for Council according to the Terms of Reference established and has engaged with Council units on a range of matters including the design and construction of various sections of the Parramatta Valley Cycleway, the Lennox Bridge Portals, the audit of the Parramatta LGA bicycle network, Ride to Work Day and the Parramatta Commuter Challenge. Some time is also spent discussing the aims and objects of the committee, how to engage with the community and lessons learnt by other local government areas and community groups.

9. Heritage Advisory Committee

The Heritage Advisory Committee continues to function well. There are currently a total of 11 Members. One member representing the Granville Historical Society has resigned and replacement representation has been organised. The Committee has continued to meet on a bi-monthly basis. It continues to discuss and advise on heritage issues for Council according to the Terms of Reference established, and has engaged with Council units on a range of matters including the comprehensive heritage review, the Parramatta Stories project, development applications and Heritage Grant applications. The Committee's contribution to the comprehensive heritage review was especially significant advising in particular on which items of State significance should be added to the State Heritage Register.

10. Youth Advisory Committee

The Community Capacity Building Team held a Youth Forum in April 2009 inviting representatives from high schools across the LGA. Over 30 students from 6 high schools attended. Advice was provided to the team regarding an appropriate meeting format with over 80% indicating they would engage with Council through future Youth Fora. The CCB Team has subsequently held biannual Youth Fora inviting representatives from high schools across the LGA. An average of 6 high schools have sent representatives to each Forum with a total of 30-40 young people attending each one.

Since March 2009, a total of approximately 200 high school students have attended the biannual Youth Fora delivered by the CCB Team. Participants have consistently expressed a lack of interest in attending a Council Advisory Committee however they have also consistently indicated and stated in evaluations, their interest in attending future Youth Fora.

In addition to bi-annual Youth Fora, the CCB Team delivers a number of other programs and activities for young people including a range of activities delivered through Youth Week, community events and activities, Community and School Pride Days. In addition Council has funded a number of programs for young people through its Community Grants Program.

It is proposed that bi-annual Youth Issues Fora continue to be implemented in place of a Youth Advisory Committee.

11. Community engagement strategies regarding Family, Technology and Environmental issues.

At its meeting in March 2009, Council determined to investigate the possible creation of Family, Technology and Environmental engagement strategies. Since this time, a number of engagement strategies have been developed and implemented:

ParraConnect currently provides a mechanism for Council to stay informed and advised of technology issues. ParraConnect evolved from a partnership between CivicTEC and Parramatta City Council and the community under its e-Parra strategy initiated in 2009.

Whilst no one community engagement strategy has been developed regarding family issues, there are a number of strategies that Council implements that provide/could provide information and insight to Council on issues relevant to families in the LGA. These strategies include Community Voice and existing Advisory Committees, in particular the Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander and Access Advisory Committee.

Similarly, no single Council community engagement strategy has been developed regarding environmental issues however a number of different strategies are either implemented by Council or participated in by Council which provide information on community Members’ advice and opinions concerning the environment. These include Community Voice; independent surveys of community Members regarding relevant issues and fora including representatives of diverse stakeholder groups and community Members such as Parramatta River Estuary Management Commission and the Parramatta Catchment Authorities.

In addition to other engagement strategies designed to engage the Parramatta communities in Council matters, Community Voice, previously Council’s ‘Residents’ Panel’ provides opportunities for any person who lives, visits, owns/operates a business or undertakes paid or voluntary work’ to contribute to Council decisions and helps to establish future directions of Parramatta. Community Voice strategies include surveys, questionnaires, online polls, workshops and focus groups. Currently more than 700 people have registered for Community Voice.

12. Granville Youth and Community Recreation Centre Management Advisory Committee

The Granville Youth and Community Recreation Centre (GYCRC) Management Advisory Committee was established in 2003 with the purpose of:

· advising on policy development for GYCRC operations;

· providing advice on program development and coordination;

· advising on a strategic plan for GYCRC;

· advising on sponsorship proposals and assistance in seeking financial support to benefit GYCRC and

· provide advice on approaches for funding to other levels of government.

This Committee continues to meet and receives operational reports from staff and provides feedback on community needs and opportunities. The Committee has the potential to operate as a valuable opportunity for community engagement and consultation regarding GYCRC, however, there is some ambiguity regarding the current terms of reference of the Committee.

It is recommended that the Granville Youth and Community Recreation Centre Management Advisory Committee be formalised as an Advisory Committee of Council and that in consultation with the current Committee Members, the Terms of Reference be reviewed to clearly articulate the purpose and accountabilities of the Committee and that administration of this Committee follow the protocol established by other formally established Council Advisory Committees, including the regular reporting of meetings to Council.

An initial workshop was held with the Management Advisory Committee on 22 February 2012 at which this matter was discussed.

CONSULTATION & TIMING

13. Community feedback has helped to inform this review of the Advisory Committees and the proposed changes including increased use of regular fora with young people and social media and other online engagement strategies.

14. The core Terms of Reference for Council’s Advisory Committees links membership with the term of each Council. It is appropriate to commence the recruitment process by seeking expressions of interest from August 2012 in order to enable the Council to consider future membership of these Committees early in its new term.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATION FOR COUNCIL

14. There are no financial implications for Council arising from this report as resourcing of a wide range of community engagement activities including support for Advisory Committees is already included in Council’s Delivery Plan and Budget.

Maggie Kyle

Community Capacity Building Officer

Attachments:

1 View

Core Terms of Reference

5 Pages

Council 23 April 2012 Item 10.2

COMMUNITY AND NEIGHBOURHOOD

ITEM NUMBER 10.2

SUBJECT Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Advisory Committee Meeting 27 March 2012

REFERENCE F2005/01941 - D02316919

REPORT OF Community Capacity Building Officer

PURPOSE:

The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Advisory Committee met on 27 March 2012. This report provides a précis of the decisions made at this meeting.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That the minutes of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Advisory Committee of 27 March 2012 be received and noted.

(b) That Council accept the membership applications of Christina Nobilia,

Gai Sheree, Kerrie Kenton and Gordon Workman for Council’s Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Advisory Committee received during the last week of March 2012.

BACKGROUND

1. Council’s Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Advisory Committee meets monthly and comprises 17 members.

2. Council has recently received applications for additional member of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Advisory Committee and these are outlined below.

3. Council’s Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Advisory Committee most recently met on 27 March 2012. This report provides a summary of the decisions of the Committee.

APPLICATIONS FOR MEMBERSHIP

4. Membership applications to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Advisory Committee are made in writing and must indicate whether the applicant meets the stated selection criteria of the Committee. The selection criteria of this Committee was approved by Council at its meeting of 22 June 2009. Applicants must meet at least one of the following criterion: be an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander person who lives, works or studies in Parramatta LGA; be a member of the tribal Dharug people; or be an individual or representative of a local community organisations with a demonstrated commitment, sensitivity to and understanding of issues relating to the local Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.

5. The Terms of Reference for Advisory Committees stipulate that an interdepartmental panel consisting of three Council Officers considers a membership application and then submits a recommendation to Council indicating whether they meet the selection criteria. An interdepartmental panel was established following the applications received from Christina Nobilia; Gai Sheree; Kerrie Kenton and Gordon Workman.

6. The interdepartmental panel that considered the applications of Christina Nobilia, Gai Sheree, Kerrie Kenton and Gordon Workman determined that each met at least one of the selection criteria for membership of the Advisory Committee. All applicants work in the Parramatta LGA and one, Ms Kenton, also lives in the LGA. All applicants are also members of the Darug people. Ms Kenton has been a member of Council’s Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Advisory Committee in past years, including the Executive Committee, however she did not re-apply for membership when the Committee was spilled in August 2009. The interdepartmental panel recommends that applications for membership of Council’s Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Advisory Committee are accepted from Christina Nobilia, Gai Sheree, Kerrie Kenton and Gordon Workman.

MAIN DISCUSSION POINTS IN MEETING OF 27 MARCH 2012

7. The Committee congratulated recipients of the annual Zest Awards: Darug Tribal Aboriginal Corporation received the Outstanding Project within an Aboriginal Organisation/Group and the Committee further acknowledged the work of Gai Marheine and Christine Nobilia. The Committee also acknowledged the achievement of Aunty Carol Cooper who received the Outstanding Community Leader – Volunteer Capacity award.

8. Council Officer George Mannix, Senior Strategic Project Officer, Major Events, advised the Committee that the Major Events Team had submitted a report to Council on NAIDOC Week 2012 Celebrations. At its meeting of 26 March 2012 Council had noted this report which included the NAIDOC consultants review of NAIDOC and suggestions to improve Burramatta Family Fun Day as previously discussed by the Committee. These suggestions included improving stall holder mix, focusing on food, children’s activities and guided tours.

9. Mr. Mannix also advised the Committee that the budget for Burramatta NAIDOC 2012 would be $43,000 although it was likely an additional $8,000-10,000 would be allocated. In addition, the Committee was advised that its input and advice regarding Burramatta Family Fun Day would be received through regular Committee meetings rather than a NAIDOC Sub Committee.

10. The Committee was informed that the Major Events Team was considering the appointment of an Aboriginal Consultant to deliver the 2012 Burramatta Family Fun Day. Committee members advised that this person should be a local Darug person. Mr. Mannix informed the Committee that he would circulate the position description to interested people.

Council Officer’s comment:

The position description for the Burramatta Family Fun Day Consultant has been distributed to all Committee members and other individuals and organisations who have requested to be on the Advisory Committee’s network list.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATION FOR COUNCIL

10. There are no financial implications to Council

Maggie Kyle

Community Capacity Building Officer

Attachments:

1 View

Minutes Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Advisory Committee 27 March 2012

4 Pages

Council 23 April 2012 Item 11.2

GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE

ITEM NUMBER 11.2

SUBJECT National General Assembly of Local Government Conference - 17 - 20 June 2012 - Canberra

REFERENCE F2012/00069 - D02304846

REPORT OF Executive Support Manager

PURPOSE:

This report is placed before Council to seek the appointment of up to three (3) Councillors to attend the National General Assembly of Local Government Conference being held in Canberra from 17 – 20 June 2012.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council nominate up to three (3) Councillors ie. the Lord Mayor (or nominee) plus any other nominated Councillors to attend the National General Assembly of Local Government Conference being held in Canberra from 17 – 20 June 2012.

BACKGROUND

1. The National General Assembly of Local Government (NGA) is the premier local government event bringing together more than 700 mayors, councillors, and senior officers from councils across Australia to develop local government policy ideas, meet with key federal politicians and hear from renowned experts on the key issues affecting local government in Australia.

2. The theme for this year’s NGA is National Voice, Local Choice – Infrastructure, Planning, Services, and it is aimed at stimulating ideas about improving the way in which local government serves its communities and the way in which it works with other levels of government.

3. The three elements of the theme allow for an exploration of the key priorities and challenges facing governments and local communities.

* Infrastructure allows delegates to focus on the local and community infrastructure provided by local government and seeks to develop innovative ideas for the provision of this infrastructure now as well as into the future;

* Planning recognises the important role local government plays in planning for local communities. It asks delegates to consider how best to provide this critical role and the impact it has on shaping the future of communities in Australia; and

* Services refers to the wide range of services provided by local government and the need to ensure the delivery of these services caters to the needs and opportunities in Australia’s diverse communities.

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

4. This is a Category ‘B’ conference. Category ‘B’ permits attendance of three (3) Councillors ie Lord Mayor or nominee and 2 other Councillors.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATION FOR COUNCIL

5. Delegate registration, travel, accommodation and out-of-pocket expenses will total approximately $3500.00 per delegate.

Attachments:

1 View

Preliminary program for National General Assembly of Local Government Conference 2012

14 Pages

Council 23 April 2012 Item 11.3

GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE

ITEM NUMBER 11.3

SUBJECT Investments Report for February 2012

REFERENCE F2009/00971 - D02309240

REPORT OF Manager Finance

PURPOSE:

To inform Council of the investment portfolio performance for the month of February 2012.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council receives and notes the investments report for February 2012.

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 29th February 2012 was $92.1M. The weighted average Funds held throughout the period was approximately $83.3M.

4. 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 matter’s relating to advice, risk and portfolio weighting.

5. The weighted average interest rate on Council’s investments for the month of February 2012 versus the UBSA Bank Bill Index is as follows:

Monthly Annualised

Total Portfolio 0.66% 7.91%

Funds Managers 1.14% 13.67%

UBSA Bank Bill Index 0.40% 4.27%

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.

6. The investment portfolio outperformed the UBSA Bank Bill Index by approximately 3.64%. This outperformance can be attributed the CFS Global Credit Fund (21.05%). Credit market performance during February was again largely driven by the European Central Bank’s LTRO (Long Term Refinancing Operation). This has been instrumental in stabilising global financial systems. As a result, CFS, T-Corp and BT Funds outperformed the UBSA Bank Bill Index relatively comfortably during the month.

7. Term deposits make up approximately 64% of total holdings and have interest rates ranging from 5.80% to 7.40%. These premium rates have assisted Councils strong performance during the European Debt Crisis instability. Council’s term deposit portfolio has a weighted average return of 6.50%.

8. Actual year to date Interest income at Feb 12 has exceeded the revised budget by approximately $980k. Finance increased the interest income forecast at the Dec 2011 quarterly review; however CPG Research & Advisory recommended caution and conservatism at the time and advised that potential losses on managed funds caused by the uncertainty in Europe could eventuate. It would now appear that credit markets have not suffered the impact originally anticipated and Interest income will be revised upward by approximately $1M at the March 2012 review assuming market conditions remain unchanged. Interest income will also be assisted by the $8.2M received from a legal settlement which has been invested at 6.05%.

9. 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

10. The Certificate of Investments for February 2012 is provided below:

Certificate of Investments

I hereby certify that the investments for the month of February 12 have been made in accordance with the Act, the Regulations and Council’s Investment Policy.

11. 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

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 John Chedid – Elizabeth Macarthur 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, Deputy Lord Mayor – Lachlan Macquarie Ward
Clr Prabir Maitra – Arthur Phillip Ward			Clr Andrew Bide – Caroline Chisholm Ward
Clr Julia Finn – Arthur Phillip Ward	Clr Michael McDermott - Elizabeth Macarthur Ward	Clr Antoine (Tony) Issa, OAM MP – Woodville Ward	Clr Chiang Lim– Arthur Phillip Ward

1 View	Parramatta Traffic Committee Minutes of meeting held on 29 March 2012	8 Pages
2 View	Parramatta Traffic Committee Items for meeting held on 29 March 2012	35 Pages

1 View	Traffic Engineering Advisory Group Minutes of meeting held on 29 March 2012	4 Pages
2 View	Traffic Engineering Advisory Group Items for meeting held on 29 March 2012	23 Pages