|
Item 10.2 - Attachment 1 |
Granville Submission Parramatta Council |
NOTICE OF Council MEETING
SUPPLEMENTARY
PUBLIC AGENDA
An Ordinary Meeting of City of Parramatta Council will be held in the Cloister Function Rooms, St Patrick's Cathedral, 1 Marist Place, Parramatta on Monday, 9 March 2020 at 6.30pm.
Brett Newman
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY
Council 9 March 2020
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ITEM SUBJECT PAGE NO
9 Minutes of the Lord Mayor
9.1 National Redress Scheme....................................................................... 5
9.2 Appeals Process to Regional Traffic Committee for Parramatta Local Traffic Committee.................................................................................................. 7
10 Public Forum
10.1 PUBLIC FORUM 1: ITEM 18.1 - Local Strategic Planning Statement Seeking Endorsement.............................................................................. 9
10.2 PUBLIC FORUM 2: ITEM 18.1 - Local Strategic Planning Statement Seeking Endorsement............................................................................ 12
10.3 PUBLIC FORUM 3: ITEM 12.1 - Rescission Motion: Minutes of the Parramatta Traffic Committee Meeting held on 23 January 2020 - Item 2001 A2 - North Rocks Road at Alkira Road, Carlingford................ 31
10.4 PUBLIC FORUM 4: FOR INFORMATION ONLY: ITEM 18.1 Local Strategic Planning Statement Seeking Endorsement........................................ 39
THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY
Council 9 March 2020 Item 9.1
ITEM NUMBER 9.1
SUBJECT National Redress Scheme
REFERENCE F2019/03630 - D07315428
REPORT OF Lord Mayor, Councillor Bob Dwyer
|
PURPOSE:
The purpose of this Minute is to seek a report on the National Redress Scheme, detailing its genesis, current status and the responsibilities of Councils under the Scheme, including the role and specific obligations of Mayors.
|
|
That a report be brought to Council to detail the genesis and current status of the new National Redress Scheme which should include details of responsibilities and obligations of Councils under the Scheme as well as the associated role and specific obligations for Mayors.
|
BACKGROUND
1. The National Redress Scheme has been created in response to recommendations by the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse.
2. The Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse listened to thousands of people about the abuse they experienced as children. The abuse happened in orphanages, Children’s Homes, schools, churches and other religious organisations, sports clubs, hospitals, foster care and other institutions.
3. The National Redress Scheme:
a. Acknowledges that many children were sexually abused in Australian Institutions;
b. Recognises the suffering they endured because of this abuse;
c. Holds institutions accountable for this abuse; and
d. Helps people who have experienced institutional child sexual abuse gain access to counselling, a direct personal response, and a Redress payment.
4. Mayors and Council representatives were invited to a special briefing (5 March 2020) on the scheme with NSW Attorney-General the Hon Mark Speakman MP to understand new obligations under the National Redress Scheme for survivors of institutional child sexual abuse.
5. While historical cases of child abuse in councils are expected to be rare, Councils were signed up to the National Redress Scheme by the NSW Government.
6. This Minute calls for a report to be brought to Council that details the responsibilities and obligations of Councils under the Scheme as well as the associated role and specific obligations for Mayors, which may include providing a personal response if requested by a survivor.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATION FOR COUNCIL
7. The report to be brought to Council is to detail any financial implications for Council as a result of responsibilities and obligations under the National Redress Scheme.
Lord Mayor, Councillor Bob Dwyer
There are no attachments for this report.
REFERENCE MATERIAL
Council 9 March 2020 Item 9.2
ITEM NUMBER 9.2
SUBJECT Appeals Process to Regional Traffic Committee for Parramatta Local Traffic Committee
REFERENCE F2019/03630 - D07315489
REPORT OF Lord Mayor, Councillor Bob Dwyer
|
PURPOSE:
The purpose of this Minute is to seek the support of the Chamber to write to the Minister for Transport and Roads, the Minister for Police and Emergency Services, and local Members of Parliament, regarding the appeal process for the Local Traffic Committee.
|
|
(a) That Council write to the Minister for Transport and Roads, the Minister for Police and Emergency Services, and all local State Members of Parliament, and any other relevant person, recommending that the appeal process for decisions of the Parramatta Local Traffic Committee be reviewed. (b) Further, that this letter call for the appeal process to be reviewed with the objective of ensuring greater consideration is given to the serious concerns of Council and the community in local traffic matters and providing a more consistent and inclusive approach to the appeals process for all parties, for reasons of fairness and equity. |
BACKGROUND
1. NSW Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) has delegated certain aspects of the control of traffic on regional and local roads to the councils of Local Government Areas.
2. The RMS Guide to the Delegation to Councils for the Regulation of Traffic provides the policy and framework for councils to exercise the traffic functions delegated to them by the RMS. The guideline outlines the delegated functions, the limitations that apply to councils when exercising their delegated functions, the responsibilities of the various parties involved in the process, and the roles of the local and regional traffic committees.
3. The Delegation requires Council to seek the advice of the NSW Police and the RMS prior to exercising their delegated functions. This is generally done via the Local Traffic Committee (LTC).
4. In cases where the LTC advice is unanimous, and Council intends to follow that advice, Council may authorise the implementation of the facility or device without further notifying RMS or the NSW Police.
5. If the elected Council wishes to exercise a delegated function when the LTC advice is not unanimous, or the elected Council wishes to act contrary to unanimous LTC advice, then Council must notify in writing, both the NSW Police and the RMS representatives on the LTC.
6. Council then must refrain from taking any action for 14 days so that the NSW Police and the RMS is given an opportunity to appeal to the Chairperson, Regional Traffic Committee should they wish.
7. In the case of an appeal, the decision of the Chairperson, Regional Traffic Committee is binding and final for matters under the Road Transport (Safety and Traffic Management) Act 1999. For matters under the Roads Act 1993, further appeals may be made to the Minister for Roads.
8. There are four permanent members of the LTC, being representatives from:
a. NSW Police
b. Roads and Maritime Services
c. Local State Member of Parliament for the location of the particular agenda items
d. City of Parramatta Council
9. Only permanent members have a vote on LTC recommendations, and each vote is meant to have equal weight. If NSW Police or RMS disagrees with any of the LTC recommendations, or with the Council’s resolution on any LTC recommendation, they may lodge an appeal with the Regional Traffic Committee for consideration.
10. However, the other permanent members of the LTC are unable to appeal to the Regional Traffic Committee or appeal a decision of the Regional Traffic Committee direct to this body, and must appeal directly to the Minister for Transport and Roads, or additionally RMS in the case of the Local Member.
11. There are concerns that the appeal process is flawed, due to its varying methods of appeal for the permanent LTC members, and will not be considered by the general public as a fair and thorough appeal process.
12. This Minute calls for representations to the relevant Ministers and local State Members of Parliament, that this process be reviewed to provide greater opportunities for Council to partake in this appeal process. These representations would seek to achieve a more consistent and inclusive approach to the appeals process for all parties, including in the potential selection of the Chairperson, enabling Council to fully exercise the traffic functions delegated to them by RMS.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATION FOR COUNCIL
13. There are no new financial implications for Council as a result of this Lord Mayor Minute.
Lord Mayor, Councillor Bob Dwyer
There are no attachments for this report.
REFERENCE MATERIAL
Council 9 March 2020 Item 10.1
ITEM NUMBER 10.1
SUBJECT PUBLIC FORUM 1: ITEM 18.1 - Local Strategic Planning Statement Seeking Endorsement
REFERENCE F2018/01790 -
|
The Epping Civic Trust is the peak community body for the Epping area – an area that has undergone rapid change and unprecedented growth. I am here to speak to you about this key plan which will be used to direct the future of our suburb – which I note is called a Strategic Centre within the City of Parramatta.
The Trust prepared a detailed submission to this suite of plans that were put on exhibition together. We engaged expert assistance at a cost to our members who are Epping residents. However, we note that our submission, which was lodged on 11 November, is not referenced in the overview of community feedback. We have raised this with council last Wednesday, but I feel this raises serious concerns about the community consultation process. Therefore, I ask tonight for this item to be deferred until council can review all feedback received and ensure that it has all be looked at and covered in this paper. Otherwise the integrity of this process has been compromised.
Notwithstanding that, there are a number of points we would like to draw to your attention:
1) Housing
A key point in our submission was that housing development throughout the Epping ward should be slowed down until infrastructure to support the increased population had been built or purchased. Further, we argued that alongside housing development targets, we should see development targets for infrastructure.
Instead, this latest iteration of the LSPS seems to have increased the rate of housing development in Epping, seeking a target of 8910 new dwellings by 2036, versus 8755 in the earlier edition. See page 22.
And as far as any infrastructure targets, we must await a later edition of the CIS. We think this is unsatisfactory and these documents should be considered together.
2) Climate change and tree canopy
Since this plan was drafted, Australia has had the worst bushfires season in living memory, and one of the hottest summers ever. It is clear that the impact of climate change on urban environments is going to be a vital issue to be addressed in coming decades – both to reduce energy consumption cooling our homes but also to make our streets and built environment more liveable.
Trees are absolutely vital. Mature trees, not the ones we have to wait 20-40 years to grow. The mature trees that are being removed across the LGA at an unprecedented rate right now.
In the LSPS (Page 40) states the council is working to increase the tree canopy to 40% by 2050. This is far too long a time frame and will just serve to put off the work needed. We urge you now to amend this target to 2036 at least. The plan also highlights the cost of tree management – we are unhappy with this wording as again it could be used to defer the very necessary investment in both planting, maintaining and planning for a larger tree canopy.
We also ask for a review of the wording under 3.4.3 – climate change and resilience (page 39). There should be consideration of a green canopy in the reference to better design. That is reinstate the wording for better design ‘particularly passive design and the promotion of a green canopy’ that was in the draft version.
We request changes to 3.4.4 Tree canopy (Page 40):
1) Please add that the tree canopy is ‘enhanced’ across all geographical areas rather than ‘spread evenly’. 2) The last paragraph notes the costs related to tree management– we are unhappy with this focus as it could be used to defer the very necessary investment in both planting, maintaining and planning for a larger tree canopy. Please change the wording in the last sentence to show that the benefits of trees outweigh the management costs. Finally, we seek an amendment to the wording in one paragraph in item 3.2.3 Heritage– on page 25.
We would like the wording ‘Any changes proposed in these areas need to consider how the items of heritage can contribute to the future identity of a place’ to be reworded to: ‘Any changes proposed in these areas need to consider how the changes will enhance and contribute to the items of heritage’. The reason for this wording change is to better protect existing heritage by putting it first in decision making, rather than the other way around.
Thank you.
STAFF RESPONSE
· Council Officers acknowledge that the Epping Civic Trust submission was not captured in the submissions summary provided in Attachment 2 to the report at Item 18.1. · As the submission was sent to Council’s general email address, not the LSPS project mailbox, the submission was excluded from the submissions summary as a result. · When Council Officers were made aware of this, a detailed review and assessment of the key matters raised in the context and scope of the LSPS was carried out. A briefing note that responds to the matters raised in the submission was provided to Councillors before the meeting. · Council Officers have determined that the majority of the key matters raised in the submission relate to detailed planning work currently being undertaken under the Epping Planning Review project and these will be addressed by that project. · The submission also raises some matters that relate more broadly to the LSPS. These include the preparation of Local Character Statements, management of trees and green infrastructure, and the delivery of affordable housing. The LSPS includes actions to address these matters.
|
There are no attachments for this report.
Council 9 March 2020 Item 10.2
ITEM NUMBER 10.2
SUBJECT PUBLIC FORUM 2: ITEM 18.1 - Local Strategic Planning Statement Seeking Endorsement
REFERENCE F2018/01790 -
|
Good evening Councillors and Council officers, my name is Shellie Oates and I’m the joint owner of car yard properties at 56-60 Parramatta Road Granville. I therefore have a keen and personal interest in the locality. My consultant Town Planner Mr Ron Sim is also here to answer any questions you might have following this address.
Firstly, thank you for allowing me the opportunity to address Council concerning its Draft Local Strategic Planning Statement. I commend Council and its officers for producing an impressive and significant body of work to guide council’s strategic planning directions well into the future.
Our previous submissions to Urban Growth, Council and to the Greater Sydney Commission proposed establishing a B6 Enterprise Zone for industrially zoned properties fronting the southern side of Parramatta Road east of Duck Creek within the Clyde Industrial Area. We also suggested changes to permitted height and FSR controls and permitted land uses in order to incentivise redevelopment by allowing a proportion of residential use as part of future mixed-use proposals.
I’d like to stress that our aim is not to reduce the employment potential of sites in any way. By way of comparison, a Parramatta Road B6 Enterprise Zone has been adopted by many other Councils for properties fronting the highway specifically to encourage high quality employment generating uses. We believe a similar zone applied to properties east of Duck Creek could “kick start” renewal of what are visually unattractive older industrial buildings and car yards in the area by permitting a wider range of business uses in comparison with the current restrictive IN1 General Industrial Zone.
This industrial zoning fails to recognise that modern employment generating uses can now happily co-exist with business and residential activity as part of mixed-use developments. It also has a very low FSR of 1:1 and prohibits commercial premises. The end result is that there little or no incentive for myself or other owners in the area to redevelop their properties. In fact, our understanding is that apart from designated centres such as Granville, no significant redevelopment has taken place recently along this part of Parramatta Road for some time.
I’m sure you would agree that prominent sites fronting the highway need a targeted, flexible land use zoning approach to encourage well-designed mixed-use development which includes a proportion of shop-top housing. This would help to make redevelopment financially feasible and achieve timely improvements to the appearance of Parramatta Road. Encouraging and prioritising good urban design outcomes along the highway was a key objective of the Parramatta Road Urban Transformation Strategy. This clearly won’t happen if the current IN1 Industrial zoning along the highway is retained.
So we think as owners that the most logical solution is to apply a flexible B6 Enterprise land use zoning to our properties along Parramatta Road. This should also enable some shop-top housing to be provided in conjunction with predominantly employment-based uses to provide a financial incentive to redevelop. We’re aware Council’s Housing Strategy has identified adequate housing potential to meet current targets set by the Department. However, widening geographical options for residential uses may enable these targets to be met earlier.
We don’t believe that being pro-active by establishing a B6 Enterprise zone and also allowing limited shop top housing along Parramatta Road on properties close to public transport and to Granville shopping centre will adversely affect Council’s Housing Strategy or its Employment objectives. In fact, the opposite is likely to be the case.
Finally, we recently made a similar submission to Cumberland Council. As a result, the Planning Panel when reviewing Council’s Draft LEP recommended that Council officers examine the potential for shop top housing within their B6 Enterprise Zones along Parramatta Road. Other Councils such as Inner West Council already have a continuous B6 Zone along Parramatta Road. I understand they are currently exploring the possibility of allowing residential development within this zone as transport facilities along the road corridor improve. Thank you once again for the opportunity to address Council. I’ll leave a hard copy of our previous submissions for your consideration.
STAFF RESPONSE
The purpose of the Local Strategic Planning Statement is to provide high level strategic planning guidance for the City of Parramatta for the next 20 years, not to prescribe zoning changes for specific locations such as 56-60 Parramatta Road, Granville. The Local Strategic Planning Statement will provide the framework upon which future planning proposals can be assessed, but does not recommend any specific rezoning of land.
The site identified is however, subject to the Parramatta Road Corridor Urban Transformation Strategy that contains a number of recommendations and proposed land uses to guide future development along this key transport corridor. Further detail on the progression of any specific land use changes in this area will be reported to Council following the completion of a precinct wide traffic and transport study that is currently being undertaken by Council in conjunction with the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment and Cumberland Council. This will potentially lead to a planning proposal to implement the recommendations of the Strategy.
Should this matter proceed to public exhibition, any submission seeking land use changes such as those raised by Ms Oates will be considered and reported to Council accordingly. |
|
1⇩ |
Granville Submission Parramatta Council |
3 Pages |
|
|
2⇩ |
Granville Submission Urban Growth Department ad Parramatta Council - June 2016 |
11 Pages |
|
|
3⇩ |
Granville Updated Submission - March 2017 |
3 Pages |
|
|
Granville Submission Urban Growth Department ad Parramatta Council - June 2016 |
ITEM NUMBER 10.3
SUBJECT PUBLIC FORUM 3: ITEM 12.1 - Rescission Motion: Minutes of the Parramatta Traffic Committee Meeting held on 23 January 2020 - Item 2001 A2 - North Rocks Road at Alkira Road, Carlingford
REFERENCE F2019/04433 -
|
Installation of median strips on North Rocks Rd Alkira Road
What I am seeking from council is the median strips not to be installed as proposed, and an onsite meeting with the RMS and their report. The median strips will have a significant effect on the trade for both businesses a carwash cafe mechanical repairs. The Carwash owner has already raised his concerns and cannot see a future with the restrictions that are proposed as most of our customers come from the east of our site and turn right into the site and exit via the two exits one on the east of the property on North Rocks Road and the other one Alkira road.
I have been in a similar situation before with traffic upgrades to surrounding roads and major projects which led to the Service Station and Mechanical repairs closing down. Purchasing this property off a major road and working hard to keep the business successful and build a reputation and trust with the community was our goal, so when this proposal came it was a disappointment to see the median strips added.
The modified plans show an adjustment to the Alkira Median strip and our driveway. All traffic from the east on North Rocks and traffic heading south up Alkira and the workshop performing road tests will be jammed at numerous times of the day.
The proposed widening of the driveway may work on plans but there is an incline of over 2 meters within a short space that will give a driver a blind spot which could cause injury to a person standing at the top if a driver coming up the driveway, another concern is exiting our site via Alkira Road via the inside of the driveway to turn right.
I have always agreed for the need for traffic lights at the intersection as I have mentioned in my very first reply to Saniya from City of Parramatta and at onsite meetings. No one in this room has been on site more than myself to see the accidents over the last 20 years and to see the drivers do some silly things and children that are made to get out of the car to cross the road while their parents are stuck in traffic to go to school, it makes you sick! We here onsite have worked with Baulkham hills Council in the past to help stop the number of accidents at the entry of North Rocks park heading west on North Rocks Road with great success and a zero accident rate when it rains from that date.
Another concern is that the median strips will be used as a safe refuge to short cut the walkways, we see it often now with no median strips because children and adults are too lazy to walk to the crossing.
There is a photo of the latest car accident at the intersection, this is the common accident you see here when a car exits Alkira turns right to go west on North Rocks Road and didn’t see the car heading east, lucky no one was hurt. This is why I have never disagreed with the traffic light installation but can’t see how median strips would come into play.
Supporting documents show sites with similar business that have traffic Lights and no Median strips which have hundreds of apartments and a school across the road and they seem to function well.
Cnr Pennant Hills Rd Adderton Rd Cnr Pennant Hills Rd Jenkins Rd Cnr North Rocks Rd Statham Road BP North Rocks Our site side driveway Latest Accident
STAFF RESPONSE No staff response is provided.
|
|
1⇩ |
Photograph of Alkira Road without Traffic Lights |
2 Pages |
|
|
2⇩ |
Photographs of Sites with Traffic Lights |
4 Pages |
|
ITEM NUMBER 10.4
SUBJECT PUBLIC FORUM 4: FOR INFORMATION ONLY: ITEM 18.1 Local Strategic Planning Statement Seeking Endorsement
REFERENCE F2018/01790 -
|
I wish to speak before you this evening regarding item 18.1 - Local Strategic Planning Statement at tonight’s council meeting representing the members and stakeholders of Western Sydney Community Forum.
Our public forum is the need for greater consideration for the development of equitable and accessible social and affordable housing.
WSCF wishes to commend council’s commitment towards supporting long term affordable housing as well as its supported transport linkages.
We are seeking council to implement firm targets for both social and affordable housing within Parramatta CBD. For statistical context, Parramatta had a demand of 14,000 social and affordable dwellings in 2016. Existing supply at the time was 5,860 dwellings leaving an 8,420-dwelling shortfall. To address this shortage council should consider applying targets during the reviews of LEPs.
An increased consideration towards developing social and affordable housing in the CBD is an important factor towards reducing disadvantage. Access is a major determinant of health and wellbeing. By enabling greater access to the world class infrastructure and opportunities offered by Parramatta CBD for people with the lowest 40% of household incomes, benefits will be realised through an increase of social and economic resilience.
The provision of social housing also offers a safety net for marginal groups such as older people and people with disability that often have limited incomes and greater need for health, social and inclusion services.
Tabled is an excerpt of housing and homelessness data of Parramatta LGA from WSCFs 2019 Home in Western Sydney report.
STAFF RESPONSE No staff response is provided.
|
