Agenda of Council - Monday, 13 July 2020

MINUTES OF THE Meeting of City of Parramatta Council HELD IN THE CLOISTER FUNCTION ROOMS, ST PATRICK’S CATHEDRAL 1 MARIST PLACE, PARRAMATTA ON Tuesday, 9 June 2020 AT 6.30pm

These are draft minutes and are subject to confirmation by Council at its next meeting. The confirmed minutes will replace this draft version on the website once confirmed.

PRESENT

The Lord Mayor, Councillor Bob Dwyer and Councillors Benjamin Barrak, Phil Bradley, Donna Davis, Pierre Esber, Michelle Garrard (Deputy Lord Mayor), Andrew Jefferies, Sameer Pandey, Dr Patricia Prociv, Bill Tyrrell, Andrew Wilson, Lorraine Wearne and Martin Zaiter.

1. OPENING MEETING

The Lord Mayor, Councillor Bob Dwyer, opened the meeting at 6.28pm.

2. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF THE TRADITIONAL LAND OWNERS

The Lord Mayor, Councillor Dwyer, acknowledged the Burramattagal people of The Darug Nation as the traditional custodians of this land, and paid respect to their ancient culture and their elders past and present.

3. WEBCASTING ANNOUNCEMENT

The Lord Mayor, Councillor Dwyer, advised that this public meeting is being recorded and streamed live on the internet. The recording will also be archived and made available on Council’s website.

4. OTHER RECORDING OF MEETING ANOUNCEMENT

As per Council’s Code of Meeting Practice, the recording of the Council Meeting by the public using any device, audio or video, is only permitted with Council permission. Recording a Council Meeting without permission may result in the individual being expelled from the Meeting.

5. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

SUBJECT: Minutes of the Ordinary Council Meeting held on 11 May 2020

2747

RESOLVED (Tyrrell/Esber)

That the minutes be taken as read and be accepted as a true record of the Meeting.

SUBJECT: Minutes of the Extraordinary Council Meeting held on 27 May 2020

2748

RESOLVED (Bradley/Tyrrell)

That the minutes be taken as read and be accepted as a true record of the Meeting.

6. APOLOGIES/REQUESTS FOR LEAVE OF ABSENCE

SUBJECT: apologies/Requests for Leave of Absence

2749

RESOLVED (Tyrrell/Esber)

That the apologies received from Councillor Steven Issa be accepted and leave of absence granted.

7. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Councillor Zaiter declared a significant non-pecuniary interest in Item 18.5 being Post Exhibition: Planning Proposal, draft Development Control Plan and Draft Planning Agreement at 23-27 Harold Street, Parramatta (Deferred Item), as a company he is providing accounting services to is a client who may have a potential relationship in this matter. He left the meeting prior to consideration of the matter and did not take part in the vote therein.

8. MATTERS OF URGENCY (if any)

Procedural Motion

2750

RESOLVED (Esber/Tyrrell)

That a procedural motion be granted to allow consideration of a matter of urgency in relation to the rollover of ward budgets to the next financial year.

The Lord Mayor ruled the matter to be urgent.

SUBJECT MATTER OF URGENCY: Rollover of Ward Budgets

REFERENCE F2020/00619

FROM Pierre Esber

2751

RESOLVED (Esber/Garrard)

That accrual of ward budgets be rolled over to the next financial year.

9. Minutes of the Lord Mayor

9.1

SUBJECT 2020 Queen's Birthday Honours

REFERENCE F2019/03630 - D07467158

REPORT OF Lord Mayor, Councillor Bob Dwyer

2752

RESOLVED (Dwyer/Tyrrell)

That Council congratulate the members of the Parramatta community, as outlined in this Minute, for their contributions and recognition in the 2020 Queen’s Birthday Honours List.

9.2

SUBJECT Congratulations Senior Sergeant John Thompson

REFERENCE F2019/03630 - D07467185

REPORT OF Lord Mayor, Councillor Bob Dwyer

2753

RESOLVED (Dwyer/Tyrrell)

That Council congratulates Senior Sergeant John Thompson on his contributions to New South Wales and the NSW Police over his 60-year career, and wishes him all the best for the future.

Note: councillor Wilson left the meeting at 6:33pm and returned at 6:44pm during consideration of Item 9.2.

9.3

SUBJECT Council Meeting Schedule

REFERENCE F2019/03630 - D07467325

REPORT OF Lord Mayor, Councillor Bob Dwyer

2754

RESOLVED (Dwyer/Davis)

(a) That from July 2020, Council re-commence having two meetings per month as prescribed by Council’s Code of Meeting Practice.

(b) That Council note the proposed meeting dates for the remainder of 2020 are detailed in paragraph 4 of this Minute, and include the addition of two (2) meetings in September due to the postponement of the Local Government Elections to 2021.

(c) That the venue for these meetings be Cloisters Function Room, St Patrick’s Cathedral, noting the social distancing measures and venue requirements prescribed by the Commonwealth and State Governments.

(d) Further, that Council communicate this update to Councillors, staff and the public, and continue to provide information to the public on how to livestream Council meetings, and timely updates should further restrictions be lifted that may allow for physical public attendance at future meetings.

9.4

SUBJECT Westmead Traffic Congestion

REFERENCE F2019/03630 - D07467786

REPORT OF Lord Mayor, Councillor Bob Dwyer

2755

RESOLVED (Dwyer/Tyrrell)

(a) That Council note the current unsatisfactory traffic congestion and accessibility issues in the Westmead Health and Education Precinct, and note these conditions are set to worsen due to the significant growth and development of the precinct, including the new University site, and the proposed expansion of the Catholic Education Precinct on Darcy Road.

(b) That Council write to the Minister for Transport and Roads, the Minister for Planning and Public Spaces, the Member for Seven Hills and other relevant Ministers, to highlight the current unsatisfactory traffic congestion and accessibility issues in the entire Westmead Precinct.

a. the congestion and accessibility of the area, both currently and in light of its significant growth and development;

b. the prioritisation of surrounding regional, state and national road improvements to facilitate greater access to and through Westmead; and

c. highlight the need to ensure that traffic delays do not negatively impact ambulance and emergency response times.

(d) That Council also update the Councillors on the status of the Westmead Innovation District Master Plan, by way of Councillor Briefing Note or Workshop.

(e) Further, that Council also urgently investigate pedestrian safety improvements along Darcy Road, from Hawkesbury Road to Mons Road, including consideration of a safety guardrail or fence, following reports of local school children walking on the roadway, within two (2) months and make representations to or seek approval from relevant authorities to enable improvements.

9.5

SUBJECT Thank You Wayne Carter

REFERENCE F2019/03630 - D07469092

REPORT OF Lord Mayor, Councillor Bob Dwyer

2756

RESOLVED (Dwyer/Prociv)

(a) That Council thank Wayne Carter for his service as Executive Director City Assets and Operations, and commend him for the significant contributions to local and state government he has made throughout his career, spanning more than fifty years in the public service.

(b) Further, that Council wish him all the very best on this next phase of his life, as he transitions into retirement.

10. Public Forum

10.1

SUBJECT PUBLIC FORUM 1: Item 18.2 - Gateway Request: Planning Proposal at 8-14 Great Western Highway, Parramatta

REFERENCE RZ/6/2019

FROM Cheryl Bates

Note: The public forum was read by Brett Newman, on behalf of Cheryl Bates.

My name is Cheryl Bates and I am the President of the National Trust’s Parramatta Regional Branch.

The National Trust supports good, logical, and sensible strategic planning for Parramatta. With the amount of planning proposals being considered by Council, it is difficult to see how this can be achieved when ad hoc decisions are made.

Again, we are seeing developer’s spot rezoning tactics in play. This is an extraordinary increase in height and density on this site despite the current Parramatta Local Environmental Plan (2011). The objectives of the plan relating to height requires future buildings to have regard to heritage sites and their settings, and to ensure the preservation of historic views. This spot-rezoning is clearly contrary to those objectives.

There does not appear to be any consideration being given to this site’s proximity to two State heritage listed items: Lennox House – circa 1855; and Masonic Centre – circa 1915 that are on the site’s northern diagonal boundaries. Both these items are historically, aesthetically and representative of the cultural environment of Parramatta. The National Trust does not fully comprehend how these heritage items can now be marginalised.

The impacts of this excessive height and density will have overbearing and overshadowing implications for these heritage items.

If this amendment to the Parramatta Local Environment Plan 2011 proceeds, then any semblance of proper planning for Parramatta will yet again be lost. Until the Parramatta CDB Planning Proposal is in place and proper, strategic measures can inform the future development of Parramatta, please take this opportunity to vote against this spot-rezoning.

STAFF RESPONSE

The Planning Proposal has undergone a merit assessment and is consistent with the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal. Its height and density has been considered in the broader strategic work undertaken by Council.

An assessment of the Planning Proposal presented in the Local Planning Panel report (attached to the Council report) considered the proposal’s impact on the two heritage items. Council’s Heritage Advisor provided key recommendations in relation to mitigating impacts on the items which will be incorporated into a site specific Development Control Plan. These relate to maintaining the integrity of the buildings during construction and an assessment of the architectural response of any building to ensure it minimises adverse visual impacts in relation to the heritage items. Council will be required to consider a draft Development Control Plan for the site prior to any public exhibition of both the Planning Proposal and a draft Development Control Plan.

In response to the issue raised in relation to overshadowing, there will be no overshadowing of the proposal on the heritage items, as the heritage items sit to the north east and north west of the site. A solar analysis is presented in the Urban Design Analysis Report as part of the Planning Proposal documents which demonstrates this.

The Planning Proposal is being considered for the first time by Council in order to seek a Gateway Determination from the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment. If the Department grants Gateway Determination, public exhibition will be carried out of the Planning Proposal together with the draft DCP. Public authorities, including Heritage NSW will be formally consulted during public exhibition and members of the public will also be able to make submissions.

10.2

SUBJECT PUBLIC FORUM 2: Item 18.5 - Post-Exhibition: Planning Proposal - Draft Development Control Plan and Draft Planning Agreement at 23-27 Harold Street, Parramatta (Deferred Item)

REFERENCE RZ/27/2015

FROM Cheryl Bates

Note: The public forum was read by Brett Newman, on behalf of Cheryl Bates.

My name is Cheryl Bates and I am the President of the National Trust (NSW) Parramatta Regional Branch.

The National Trust supports the staff recommendation that this Planning Proposal be deferred awaiting a proper planning strategy for the area including the subject site at 23-27 Harold Street Parramatta.

The Trust has consistently called for protection of designated heritage items and heritage conservation areas through appropriate floor space ratios, setbacks and curtilage to allow the heritage significance of buildings and areas to be understood and appreciated even when Parramatta is a major part of the growth of New South Wales.

The Trust believes that the Urbis Study provides the best opportunity to allow a better outcome for heritage items and heritage conservation areas through a transition area of reduced height and floor space and greater setbacks to promote a better understanding and less oppressive setting for the important heritage features of the Parramatta CBD.

To progress this application contrary to Council’s resolution of 25 November 2019 that excised this area from the Parramatta CDB Planning Proposal is premature. Additionally, the more strategic action of Council staff to involve Councillors in a workshop and create a draft planning strategy for public exhibition in October 2020 will be circumvented.

The current Parramatta Local Environmental Plan (2011) outlines the following objectives relating to the height of buildings and states:

a) to nominate heights that will provide a transition in built form and land use intensity within the area covered by this Plan,

b) to minimise visual impact, disruption of views, loss of privacy and loss of solar access to existing development, Importantly,

c) to require the height of future buildings to have regard to heritage sites and their settings,

d) to ensure the preservation of historic views,

e) to reinforce and respect the existing character and scale of low-density residential areas,

f) to maintain satisfactory sky exposure and daylight to existing buildings within commercial centres, to the sides and rear of tower forms and to key areas of the public domain, including parks, streets, and lanes.

To progress this site-specific high-rise tower Planning Proposal ahead of a strategy for this heritage precinct will demonstrate a haphazard, ad-hoc approach to development that will impact on Parramatta’s unique heritage status into the future.

STAFF RESPONSE

No response is provided.

10.3

SUBJECT PUBLIC FORUM 3: Item 18.5 - Post Exhibition: Planning Proposal, Draft Development Control Plan and Draft Planning Agreement at 23-27 Harold Street, Parramatta (Deferred Item)

REFERENCE RZ/27/2015

FROM James Colman

Note: The public forum was read by Brett Newman, on behalf of James Colman.

This submission is made in response to Agenda Item 18.5 in the Business Paper for the Council Meeting on 9 June 2020.

1. The submission is made on behalf of civic and heritage interests in North Parramatta whose concerns are focussed on the complete absence of a dedicated planning strategy for North Parramatta – with particular attention to the area covered by the current proposed extension of the CBD north of the river and areas immediately adjoining to the east and west.

2. We strongly support the recommendation for deferring the progressing of the Planning Proposal, Draft Development Control Plan and draft Planning Agreement for the sites at 23-27 Harold Street in North Parramatta.

3. We commend Council’s intention to adopt a planning strategy for the planning investigation area containing the subject properties.

4. Further to this, we urge the Council to exploit to the full the planning opportunity presented by the officers’ recommendation for deferral. If carefully handled it will not cause delay in progressing the CBD rezoning south of the river which we fully support.

5. To assist Council to implement its declared intention to prepare and adopt a planning strategy for North Parramatta we formally request that the following points (amongst others) be taken into consideration during the plan preparation process :-

i. It must have on-going community input from the outset.

ii. The CBD zoning extension is not yet gazetted. There is time for a fresh approach to planning in the North Parramatta sector.

iii. North Parramatta is so far free of high-rise development.

iv. NP is one of Australia’s most historic urban precincts. It is rich in Indigenous and post-colonial heritage, with hundreds of listed heritage items of local, state, national and possibly world significance. The Church Street spine is part of the old colonial road to Windsor- probably Australia’s first country road.

v. A new dedicated plan for North Parramatta can link urban design, heritage, land use and other considerations consistent with the stated expectations of the Greater Sydney Commission, the Government Architect and the Minister.

vi. Existing zonings in North Parramatta have adequate capacity to satisfy current growth expectations. There is no supply problem.

vii. Finally and importantly: North Parramatta is a distinct geographical entity. There is exciting potential to exploit the existing ambience of the place to create a new low-rise, medium density mixed use cultural precinct, separate from yet complementary to the CBD to the south: not another “mini-Manhattan”. A new plan can embrace the Council’s adopted Cultural Plan and can exploit relevant elements of the recently adopted Local Strategic Plan. North Parramatta is the only area in the city centre to offer a chance to link these two important documents in a place-specific plan.

6. In the public interest we now urge the Council to seize this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to give this city a further claim to greatness. Every great city has its cultural, small business and historical precinct. Now is the time for this Council to take the first step towards achieving that objective. It is not too late.

STAFF RESPONSE

No response is provided.

11. Petitions

11.1

SUBJECT Increase in traffic to Westmead Catholic Precinct- Darcy Road

REFERENCE DA/853/2008

FROM Councillor Tyrrell

A petition signed by the public was tabled at the Council Meeting and reads:

“Stop Increase in traffic to Westmead Catholic Precinct, Darcy Road.”

2757

RESOLVED (Tyrrell/Davis)

That the petition be received, a copy of the petition be circulated to all Councillors and referred to the appropriate Council Officer for action.

11.2

SUBJECT Current state of traffic in George Street, Epping

REFERENCE F2020/00052

FROM Councillor Davis

A petition signed by the public was tabled at the Council Meeting and

reads:

“We raise concern about the current state of traffic in George Street, Epping and more particularly the speed at which cars travel along what is essentially a local residential road. In addition to and in conjunction with that investigation, the residents request the Council to find some form of traffic calming measures.”

2758

RESOLVED (Davis/Tyrrell)

(a) That the petition be received and a copy of the petition be circulated to all Councillors.

(b) Further, that the petition be placed on agenda on the next Traffic Committee.

12. Rescission Motions

Nil

Procedural Motion

2759

RESOLVED (Esber/Tyrrell)

That Item 13.1 to 13.3 be resolved en bloc.

13. Fair

13.1

SUBJECT FOR NOTATION: Investment Report for April 2020

REFERENCE F2009/00971 - D07402320

REPORT OF Tax and Treasury Accountant

2760

RESOLVED (Esber/Tyrrell)

That Council note the Investment Report for April 2020.

13.2

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Quarterly Budget Review - March 2020

REFERENCE F2019/04433 - D07401606

REPORT OF Commercial Manager

2761

RESOLVED (Esber/Tyrrell)

(a) That Council adopt the March 2020 Quarterly Budget Review Statement and the Responsible Accounting Officer’s report on the financial position of the Council.

(b) Further, that Council approve the revised estimates as follows:

1. Operating Budget deficit of ($0.4m) which is a reduction of ($5.2m) from December 2019 Forecast, including:

I. a decrease in Operating Revenue by ($11.9m) (predominantly related to lower user charges & fees and interest as a result of COVID-19);

II. an decrease in Operating Expenses by ($6.7m) (employee vacancies and re-phasing of operating projects);

2. A decrease in Capital Revenue by $23.1m (predominantly driven by a reduction in state grants and section 7.11 revenue);

3. A reduction in Capital Expenditure by $47.0m (as detailed in attached March 2020 QBRS).

13.3

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Vacancy in Civic Office

REFERENCE F2019/04433 - D07397146

REPORT OF Governance Manager

2762

RESOLVED (Esber/Tyrrell)

(a) That Council note the resignation of Councillor Paul Han of the North Rocks Ward, effective 30 April 2020.

(b) That Council apply to the Minister for Local Government seeking to dispense with a by-election to fill the casual vacancy in the civic office for the North Rocks Ward, in accordance with Chapter 10 Part 5 Section 294 of the Local Government Act 1993.

(c) Further, that the Councillor representative position held by Councillor Han on the following Advisory Committees remain vacant until September 2020, when a further report to Council will be tabled seeking representation on the various Advisory Committees for the remainder of the Council term:

- Floodplain Risk Management Committee;

- Metropolitan Public Libraries Association Inc.

13.4

SUBJECT LATE REPORT - FOR APPROVAL: Extension of Term for Independent Audit Risk and Improvement Committee Members

REFERENCE F2019/02413 - D07459115

REPORT OF Risk & Audit Manager

2763

RESOLVED (Garrard/Pandey)

That Council extend the terms of the independent Audit Risk and Improvement Committee members, Mark McCoy and Donna Rygate, for a 12 month period to 28 August 2021.

14. Accessible

14.1

SUBJECT FOR NOTATION: Variations to Standards under Clause 4.6 of Parramatta LEP 2011, Auburn LEP 2010, Holroyd LEP 2013, The Hills LEP 2012, Hornsby LEP 2013 and SEPP 1

REFERENCE F2009/00431 - D07250471

REPORT OF Group Manager - Development and Traffic Services

2764

RESOLVED (Tyrrell/Esber)

That the report be received and noted.

15. Green

Nil

16. Welcoming

Nil

17. Thriving

17.1

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Submission on Draft Liquor Amendment (24-hour Economy) Bill 2020

REFERENCE F2018/02117 - D07404753

REPORT OF Project Officer

2765

RESOLVED (Tyrrell/Esber)

(a) That Council approve a submission on the Draft Liquor Amendment (24-hour Economy) Bill 2020 provided at Attachment 1, noting Council’s support for the draft bill including:

i) The streamlined enforcement (demerit and reward) system for venues;

ii) The proposed removal of overlapping regulations relating to live music and liquor licences from future Development Applications;

iii) The classification of small bars as low risk (similar to restaurants);

iv) The improvement suggestions for the Cumulative Impact Assessment Framework (for licensed venues saturation), including increased guidance for local government on the assessment of small bar applications;

v) Suggestions for communication and collaboration strategies for local councils and local liquor accords to understand and implement the changes effectively.

(b) Further, that Council forward the submission to Liquor & Gaming NSW for their consideration.

18. Innovative

18.1

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Submission on the Infrastructure Contributions Review

REFERENCE F2020/01399 - D07386428

REPORT OF Project Officer Land Use

2766

RESOLVED (Tyrrell/Esber)

(a) That Council approve the submission at Attachment 1 on the State Government’s Infrastructure Contributions Review, noting that the main recommendations of the submission are summarised as follows:

i) The current review only proposes amendments to existing contributions mechanisms, while a more fundamental and holistic review of the NSW infrastructure planning and contributions framework needs to be undertaken.

ii) The proposals on value sharing are strongly opposed as they threaten to undermine Council’s current policy framework for Planning Agreements, which adopts value sharing as an equitable, transparent and evidence-based policy approach.

iii) Strengthened guidance is needed on negotiation practice and administration of Planning Agreements, such as independent third parties, cost recovery, dispute resolution, probity and other matters.

iv) If the Practice Note is finalised with minor changes, the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE) should urgently provide clarity about the implications for the current Planning Proposal and Planning Agreement processes underway, and appropriate transitional arrangements need to be put in place.

v) The section 7.11 threshold should be increased in accordance with Option 3 to $45,000 to increase Council’s capacity to apply a higher contribution rate without having to undergo an IPART review.

vi) Section 7.11 threshold indexation is supported, however, the chosen mechanism for indexation should accurately reflect infrastructure delivery and land costs, and should be reviewed periodically to remain relevant.

vii) IPART’s ‘essential works list’ should be expanded to include capital costs to reflect the realities of providing necessary infrastructure in urban infill areas.

viii) There should be assessment criteria and a clear process set out for Council to seek a higher section 7.12 levy above the 3% maximum in order to deliver the necessary infrastructure to support growth.

ix) The proposed maximum 0.2% of a contributions plan for administration costs should be increased to 1.5%.

x) Council’s Local Strategic Planning Statement should be included as a strategic document to be considered as part of the criteria for an increased section 7.12 percentage.

xi) The Special Infrastructure Contribution (SIC) guidelines should require consultation with councils during the SIC preparation process.

xii) The Regulation should be amended to require the State Government to report on SIC accounting in a similar capacity required by councils in the interest of transparency and accountability.

xiii) The SIC proposed for the City of Parramatta area to fund major infrastructure to support growth should be progressed in consultation with Council.

xiv) Additional requirements for reporting on contributions accounting should be streamlined into existing council accounting and reporting activities. Clarity is needed on the intended timeframe for introducing the additional reporting requirements to enable councils time to put in place the necessary processes.

xv) Further guidelines are needed to provide clarity to support the recovery of the costs associated with the negotiation, preparation, administration, and monitoring of planning agreements by councils.

(b) Further, that Council forward the submission to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment in response to the Infrastructure Contributions Review.

18.2	SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Gateway Request: Planning Proposal at 8-14 Great Western Highway, Parramatta REFERENCE RZ/6/2019 - D07392259 REPORT OF Student Project Officer
	MOTION (Tyrrell/Esber) (a) That Council endorse the Planning Proposal at Attachment 2 for the purpose of requesting a Gateway Determination for land at 8-14 Great Western Highway, Parramatta, which seeks to amend Parramatta Local Environment Plan 2011 (PLEP 2011) by way of: i. Increasing the height of building control from 28 metres to 211 metres; ii. Amending the controls so that the FSR which is to apply to the site is composed of mapped components and bonuses as follows: a. Mapped FSR increased from 3.5:1 to 10:1 of which a minimum of 1:1 FSR must be commercial uses; b. Design Excellence bonus (15% - 1.5:1); c. High Performing Buildings bonus (5% - 0.5:1); d. Opportunity Sites bonus (3:1); e. Unlimited commercial FSR above the 1:1 requirement; and iii. Insert a site-specific provision applying maximum car parking rates per the Parramatta CBD Strategic Transport Study. (b) That the Planning Proposal be forwarded to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment to request a Gateway Determination be issued. (c) That should a Gateway Determination be issued that structures the floor space ratio (FSR) and site specific clauses in an alternative way, that the Chief Executive Officer is authorised to make the necessary amendments to the Planning Proposal for the purposes of public exhibition, only where the total proposed FSR is unchanged. (d) That should a Gateway Determination be issued, a site-specific Development Control Plan be prepared in accordance with the design principles contained within this report. (e) That should a Gateway Determination be issued, the Chief Executive Officer be authorised to negotiate a Planning Agreement in accordance with Council’s Planning Agreements Policy. (f) That the draft site-specific Development Control Plan and draft Planning Agreement be reported to Council for endorsement prior to being publicly exhibited concurrently with the Planning Proposal. (g) That Council request the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment to issue Council’s Chief Executive Officer plan-making delegations for this Planning Proposal. (h) That Council authorise the Chief Executive Officer to correct any minor anomalies of a non-policy and administrative nature that may arise during the plan-making process. (i) Further, that Council note that the Parramatta Local Planning Panel’s advice to Council (Attachment 1) is consistent with the recommendations of this report.
	AMENDMENT (Barrak/Bradley) That Council defers consideration of the current motion until Council reviews its policies with a view to examining the efficacy of expanding its CBD core in order to preserve its function as a major NSW CBD. The amendment moved by Councillor Barrak and seconded by Councillor Bradley on being put was declared CARRIED. DIVISION The result being:- AYES: Clrs Barrak, Bradley, Davis, Pandey, Prociv, Wearne and Wilson NOES: Clrs Dwyer, Esber, Garrard, Jefferies, Tyrrell and Zaiter The amendment then became the motion. The motion moved by Councillor Barrak and seconded by Councillor Bradley on being put was declared CARRIED. DIVISION The result being:- AYES: Clrs Barrak, Bradley, Davis, Pandey, Prociv, Wearne and Wilson NOES: Clrs Dwyer, Esber, Garrard, Jefferies, Tyrrell and Zaiter
2767	RESOLVED (Barrak/Bradley) That Council defers consideration of the current motion until Council reviews its policies with a view to examining the efficacy of expanding its CBD core in order to preserve its function as a major NSW CBD.
	Note: councillor Esber left the meeting at 7:19pm and returned at 7:21pm during consideration of Item 9.2.
	Note: A Notice of Motion of Rescission signed by Councillors Tyrrell, Issa and Zaiter was lodged after the close of the meeting in relation to this matter.

Procedural Motion

2768

RESOLVED (Tyrrell/Garrard)

That the meeting adjourn for a short recess.

Note: The meeting was adjourned at 7:27pm for a short recess.

Procedural Motion

2769

RESOLVED (Tyrrell/Garrard)

That the meeting resume.

The meeting resumed in the Council Chambers at 7:46pm with the following Councillors in attendance: The Lord Mayor, Councillor Dwyer and Councillors Barrak, Bradley, Davis, Esber, Garrard (Deputy Lord Mayor), Jefferies, Pandey, Prociv, Tyrrell, Wilson, Wearne and Zaiter.

18.3

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Gateway Request: Planning Proposal for land at 85-91 Thomas Street, Parramatta

REFERENCE RZ/11/2016 - D07423319

REPORT OF Project Officer Land Use

2770

RESOLVED (Tyrrell/Esber)

(a) That Council endorse the Planning Proposal (at Attachment 1) for the purposes of seeking a Gateway Determination, for land at 85-91 Thomas Street, Parramatta which seeks to amend the Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011 in relation to the subject site by:

1. Maintaining the R4 – High Density Residential zone for the developable part of the site (3,825sqm) and extending the RE1 – Public Recreation zone for the undevelopable land affected by the Natural Resources - Biodiversity control,

2. Increasing the maximum Building Height (HOB) control from 11 metres to 22 metres across the R4 zoned part of the site, and removing the HOB control from the undevelopable land,

3. Increasing the Floor Space Ratio (FSR) control from 0.8:1 to 1.3:1 across the R4 zoned part of the site, and removing the FSR control from the undevelopable land,

4. Removing No.85 Thomas Street from the Land Reserved for Acquisition Map, subject to agreement being reached regarding the Planning Agreement referred to in (d) below.

(b) That the Planning Proposal be forwarded to the Department of Planning, Industry & Environment for a Gateway Determination.

(d) That the CEO be authorised to negotiate a Planning Agreement on behalf of Council in addition to any development contributions payable, and that the outcome of negotiations be reported back to Council prior to its concurrent exhibition with the draft site specific DCP and Planning Proposal.

(e) That Council advises the Department of Planning, Industry & Environment that the CEO will be exercising the plan-making delegations for this Planning Proposal as authorised by Council.

(f) That Council authorise the CEO to correct any minor anomalies of a non-policy and administrative nature that may arise during the plan-making process.

(g) Further, that Council note the advice of the Local Planning Panel (provided at Attachment 1) is consistent with Council officer’s recommendation.

DIVISION The result being:-

AYES: Clrs Barrak, Bradley, Dwyer, Esber, Garrard, Jefferies, Pandey and Tyrrell

NOES: Clrs Davis, Prociv, Wearne, Wilson and Zaiter

18.4

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Amendment to the East Epping Planning Proposal and draft amendments to the Hornsby DCP 2013

REFERENCE F2019/01712 - D07221356

REPORT OF Team Leader Land Use Planning

2771

RESOLVED (Tyrrell/Garrard)

(a) That Council note:

i. That the East Epping Planning Proposal was endorsed by Council at its meeting on 8 October 2019 for the purposes of addressing transition issues of high density areas adjacent to heritage conservation areas in Epping; and

ii. Subsequently the Planning Proposal received a Gateway Determination from the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE) on 10 January 2020.

(b) That Council endorse the following amendments to the East Epping Planning Proposal (at Attachment 1 provided under separate cover) for the purposes of forwarding to the DPIE to request the issuing of a revised Gateway Determination:

i. Inclusion of an additional 15 properties (1 to 31 Rockleigh Way) in the Planning Proposal to be consistent with Condition 1 of the Gateway Determination; and

ii. Amending the proposed height limit applying to the R3 Medium Density Residential zoned land in the Rockleigh Park Precinct (1-31 and 2-24 Rockleigh Way, 3-7 and 4-8 Brenda Way and 5A Essex St) from 9 metres to 11 metres, in order to be consistent with Council’s endorsed Harmonisation Planning Proposal.

(c) That Council request the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment to issue Council’s Chief Executive Officer plan-making delegations for this Planning Proposal.

(d) That Council endorse the following amendments to the Hornsby Development Control Plan 2013 (DCP) for the purposes of public exhibition:

i. The future widening of the pedestrian link between Essex Street and Forest Grove from 1.8 metres to 3 metres at Attachment 2.

ii. Setback, heritage and landscaping controls supporting the Planning Proposal for land at 1 – 7 and 2 – 8 Rosebank Avenue, Epping at Attachment 3.

iii. Correction of minor errors to the car parking clauses relating to Epping Town Centre at Attachment 4.

(e) That the Draft DCP Amendments be placed on public exhibition concurrently with the Planning Proposals for 1-7 and 2-8 Rosebank Avenue and various properties at East Epping for a minimum of 28 days and the outcome of the public exhibition be reported back to Council.

(f) Further, that Council authorise the Chief Executive Officer to correct any minor inconsistencies or anomalies of an administrative nature relating to the Planning Proposal, draft Development Control Plan that may arise during the drafting and exhibition processes.

DIVISION The result being:-

AYES: Clrs Barrak, Bradley, Davis, Dwyer, Esber, Garrard, Jefferies, Pandey, Prociv, Tyrrell, Wearne, Wilson and Zaiter

NOES: Nil

Note: Councillor Zaiter declared a non-pecuniary but significant interest in Item 18.5 and retired from the meeting prior to debate and voting thereon.

18.5

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Post-exhibition: Planning Proposal, draft Development Control Plan and draft Planning Agreement at 23-27 Harold Street, Parramatta (Deferred Item)

REFERENCE RZ/27/2015 - D07390570

REPORT OF Project Officer, Land Use Planning

2772

RESOLVED (Barrak/Davis)

(a) That as a result of Council’s resolution of 25 November 2019 to excise areas currently zoned R4 High Density Residential from the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal, Council defer progressing the Planning Proposal that is the subject of this report until Council has adopted a planning strategy for the planning investigation area containing the subject site.

(b) That Council note that work on the planning investigation area between Church Street and the Sorrell Street Heritage Conservation Area will be the subject of a Councillor workshop before a draft planning strategy is reported to Council for its consideration in October 2020, for the purposes of public exhibition.

(c) Further, that the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment be advised of Council’s resolution on this matter.

DIVISION The result being:-

AYES: Clrs Barrak, Bradley, Davis, Esber, Jefferies, Pandey, Prociv, Wearne and Wilson

NOES: Clrs Dwyer, Garrard and Tyrrell

Note: Councillor Zaiter returned to the meeting following consideration of Item 18.5.

18.6	SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Post-exhibition: Planning Proposal, draft site-specific Development Control Plan and draft Planning Agreement at 55 Aird Street, Parramatta REFERENCE RZ/18/2015 - D07351036 REPORT OF Project Officer, Land Use Planning
	MOTION (Tyrrell/Wilson) (a) That Council notes that one (1) submission was made during the public exhibition of the Planning Proposal, draft site-specific Development Control Plan and draft Planning Agreement at 55 Aird Street, Parramatta. (b) That Council endorse the Planning Proposal (provided at Attachment 2) for land at 55 Aird Street which seeks to amend Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011 (PLEP 2011) by way of: i. Increasing the height of buildings control from 36 metres to 80 metres; ii. Increasing the floor-space ratio (FSR) control from 4.2:1 to 10:1, noting that the application of the FSR sliding-scale would result in an effective FSR of 6:1 (6.9:1 with design excellence if the site is developed in isolation); iii. Applying maximum car parking rates in accordance with the Parramatta CBD Strategic Transport Study; and iv. Applying a minimum 1:1 commercial floor-space provision on the site. (c) That the Planning Proposal be amended to clarify the purpose of the minimum commercial floor-space provision is to encourage employment-generating uses in the case of a mixed-use development. (d) That Council forward the Planning Proposal to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment for finalisation and request that the final notification in the Government Gazette only be undertaken once Council confirms that the Planning Agreement has been executed. (e) That Council endorse for finalisation the site-specific Development Control Plan contained at Attachment 3 for insertion in Section 4.3.3 – Parramatta City Centre of Parramatta Development Control Plan 2011. (f) That Council enter into the Planning Agreement as exhibited at Attachment 4 and authorise the Chief Executive Officer to sign the Planning Agreement. (g) That Council authorise the Chief Executive Officer to make any minor amendments and corrections of a non-policy and administrative nature that may arise during the plan amendment process, relating to the Planning Proposal, Development Control Plan and Planning Agreement. (h) Further, that Council note that the Parramatta Local Planning Panel’s advice to Council (Attachment 1) is consistent with the recommendations of this report.
	AMENDMENT (Barrak/Prociv) That consideration of this matter be deferred for a Councillor Workshop within a reasonable time to consider the appropriateness of amending the CBD planning proposal to incentivise site amalgamation such that there is minimum appropriate site area for construction of the towers. The amendment moved by Councillor Barrak and seconded by Councillor Prociv on being put was declared LOST. DIVISION The result being:- AYES: Clrs Barrak, Bradley, Davis, Pandey, Prociv and Wearne NOES: Clrs Dwyer, Esber, Garrard, Jefferies, Tyrrell, Wilson and Zaiter The motion moved by Councillor Tyrrell and seconded by Councillor Wilson on being put was declared CARRIED. DIVISION The result being:- AYES: Clrs Dwyer, Esber, Garrard, Jefferies, Tyrrell, Wilson and Zaiter NOES: Clrs Barrak, Bradley, Davis, Pandey, Prociv and Wearne
2773	RESOLVED (Tyrrell/Wilson) (a) That Council notes that one (1) submission was made during the public exhibition of the Planning Proposal, draft site-specific Development Control Plan and draft Planning Agreement at 55 Aird Street, Parramatta. (b) That Council endorse the Planning Proposal (provided at Attachment 2) for land at 55 Aird Street which seeks to amend Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011 (PLEP 2011) by way of: i. Increasing the height of buildings control from 36 metres to 80 metres; ii. Increasing the floor-space ratio (FSR) control from 4.2:1 to 10:1, noting that the application of the FSR sliding-scale would result in an effective FSR of 6:1 (6.9:1 with design excellence if the site is developed in isolation); iii. Applying maximum car parking rates in accordance with the Parramatta CBD Strategic Transport Study; and iv. Applying a minimum 1:1 commercial floor-space provision on the site. (c) That the Planning Proposal be amended to clarify the purpose of the minimum commercial floor-space provision is to encourage employment-generating uses in the case of a mixed-use development. (d) That Council forward the Planning Proposal to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment for finalisation and request that the final notification in the Government Gazette only be undertaken once Council confirms that the Planning Agreement has been executed. (e) That Council endorse for finalisation the site-specific Development Control Plan contained at Attachment 3 for insertion in Section 4.3.3 – Parramatta City Centre of Parramatta Development Control Plan 2011. (f) That Council enter into the Planning Agreement as exhibited at Attachment 4 and authorise the Chief Executive Officer to sign the Planning Agreement. (g) That Council authorise the Chief Executive Officer to make any minor amendments and corrections of a non-policy and administrative nature that may arise during the plan amendment process, relating to the Planning Proposal, Development Control Plan and Planning Agreement. (h) Further, that Council note that the Parramatta Local Planning Panel’s advice to Council (Attachment 1) is consistent with the recommendations of this report.

18.7

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: COVID-19 Update

REFERENCE F2020/01447 - D07423509

REPORT OF Group Manager City Strategy

2774

RESOLVED (Tyrrell/Garrard)

(a) That Council note the progress of actions in Council’s COVID-19 Community Resilience and Economic Relief Package (Attachment A) adopted 7 April 2020.

(b) That Council approve an additional expenditure of $75,000 from the Economic Development Special Rate for a local business gift card support program and expansion of the successful Small Business Support Grants Program approved April 2020.

(c) That Council endorse the initial recovery package expenditure of $785,000 from its Cultural Fund Reserve to deliver the following Creative Economy Support Program for Council’s creative services and industry to adapt to current restrictions:

1.1 HOME AT Parramatta – Online Platform

1.2 HOME AT Parramatta – Digital Content – Culture

1.3 Riverside Theatres Digital – Studio Riverside and Your Riverside Online

1.4 Sound West Conference and Festival

1.5 Creative Economy Business Resilience Grants.

(d) Further, that Council write to the Minister for the Arts to consult on Council’s intentions relating to proposals for the expenditure of the Cultural Fund Reserve for creative economy and services support during the 2020/21 Financial Year.

Note: councillor Esber left the meeting at 8:50pm and returned at 8:53pm during consideration of Item 18.7.

19. Notices of Motion

19.1	SUBJECT NOTICE OF MOTION: Agreed NSW Parliament Legislative Council Motion of 13 May 2020 - Powerhouse Museum Production of Documents Order REFERENCE F2019/04433 - D07422777 FROM Councillor Prociv
2775	resolved (Prociv/Pandey) (a) That Council express support for the Agreed NSW Parliament Legislative Council Motion of 13 May 2020, ‘Powerhouse Museum Production of Documents: Order’. (b) That Council officers analyse all publically available documents, related to sections (a) as they are released. (c) That this analysis include any references to: (i) The existing Parramatta City Council 2016 Riverbank site Strategy; (ii) The social, cultural and monetary consequences for the City of Parramatta through the potential loss of the Riverbank precinct as proposed by Parramatta City Council in 2016; (iii) The existing Parramatta Aboriginal and European heritage based tourism industry; (iv) The retention of heritage items; (v) That Council staff include the result of this analysis in any submission made on the EIS on behalf of the Council. (d) Further, that a report of this examination and review be brought back to the Chamber at the Council Meeting on Monday, 13 August 2020.
	Note: councillor Garrard left the meeting at 9:25pm and returned at 9:27pm during consideration of Item 19.1.
	Note: A Notice of Motion of Rescission signed by Councillors Wilson, Tyrrell and Barrak was lodged after the close of the meeting in relation to this matter.

19.2

SUBJECT NOTICE OF MOTION: Granville Town Square

REFERENCE F2019/04433 - D07438383

FROM Councillor Prociv

2776

RESOLVED (Prociv/Pandey)

(a) That in the 2020/21 financial year, Council commence master planning the future Granville Town Square site bordered by Good, Cowper, Rowell and Bridge Streets, Granville.

(b) That $2.57M be allocated from the ‘Outside CBD’ S7.12 contributions plan and used for future embellishment and/or property acquisition at the future Granville Town Square site.

(c) That $800,000 of the East Street sale proceeds dedicated by Council in 2015 for the improvement of assets within the Granville area be allocated towards the future Granville Town Square site.

(d) Further, that $300,000 from these funds be directed to funding the master planning of the future Granville Town Square site.

Note:

1. councillor Tyrrell left the meeting at 9:43pm and returned at 9:45pm during consideration of Item 19.2.

2. councillor Esber left the meeting at 9:56pm and returned at 9:56pm during consideration of Item 19.2.

19.3

SUBJECT NOTICE OF MOTION: Wistaria Gardens transfer from NSW Health to Parramatta Park Trust

REFERENCE F2019/04433 - D07443704

FROM Councillor Davis

2777

resolved (Davis/Pandey)

That by 30 June 2020, the Lord Mayor write to the NSW Minister for Health, NSW Minister for the Environment, State Member for Parramatta and Mr Graeme Loy, WSLHD requesting:

(i) an update on actions taken thus far by NSW Health, Parramatta Park Trust and other relevant State Government departments and agencies to transfer the management of Wistaria Gardens (including Glengarriff House) to Parramatta Park Trust,

(ii) a date for the transfer of the Wistaria Gardens (including Glengarriff House) to the Parramatta Park Trust,

(iii) details about any proposed increase in funding to the Parramatta Park Trust for the initial repair and ongoing maintenance of Wistaria Gardens and Glengarriff House.

Note: councillor Wilson left the meeting at 9:57pm and returned at

9:57pm during consideration of Item 19.3.

19.4

SUBJECT NOTICE OF MOTION: Traffic Study Granville

REFERENCE F2019/04433 - D07443781

FROM Councillor Prociv

The motion was withdrawn.

20. QUESTIONS ON NOTICE

Nil

21. CLOSED SESSION

2778

RESOLVED (Tyrrell/Esber)

That members of the press and public be excluded from the meeting of the Closed Session and access to the correspondence and reports relating to the items considered during the course of the Closed Session be withheld. This action is taken in accordance with Section 10A(s) of the Local Government Act, 1993 as the items listed come within the following provisions:-

1 FOR NOTATION: Legal Status Report as at 20 May 2020. (D07413732) - This report is confidential in accordance with section 10A (2) (g) of the Local Government Act 1993 as the report contains advice concerning litigation, or advice that would otherwise be privileged from production in legal proceedings on the ground of legal professional privilege.

2 FOR APPROVAL: Tender 02/2019 Service Desk Managed Service for Procurement of ICT Hardware (Deferred Item). (D07250741) - 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.

3 FOR APPROVAL: Tender 15/2019 Receipt and Processing of Clean-up Material. (D07370721) - This report is confidential in accordance with section 10A (2) (c) (d) 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; AND 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.

4 FOR APPROVAL: Extension of Mixed Solid Waste Processing and Disposal Contract. (D06950974) - 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.

5 FOR APPROVAL: Proposed New Lease for Carlingford Bowling Club. (D07403743) - 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.

6 FOR APPROVAL: Proposed Purchase of 6 Valentine Avenue, Parramatta. (D07283046) - 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.

7 FOR APPROVAL: City of Parramatta Festival Proposal. (D07430585) - 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 (To ensure that Council can capitalise on the media opportunity through the media announcement of the new festival at a future date to be determined by Council.).

Procedural Motion

2779

RESOLVED (Esber/Tyrrell)

That Items 21.1 to 21.4 and 21.6 to 21.7 be resolved en bloc.

21.1

SUBJECT FOR NOTATION: Legal Status Report as at 20 May 2020

REFERENCE F2019/04434 - D07413732

REPORT OF Group Manager Legal Services

2780

RESOLVED (Esber/Tyrrell)

That Council note the Legal Status Report as at 20 May 2020.

21.2

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Tender 02/2019 Service Desk Managed Service for Procurement of ICT Hardware (Deferred Item)

REFERENCE F2019/04434 - D07250741

REPORT OF IT Service Delivery Manager

2781

RESOLVED (Esber/Tyrrell)

(a) That Council accepts the tender of the preferred tenderer for the Tender ITT 02/2019 Service Desk – Managed Service for the tender sum as outlined in paragraph 17 of the report.

(b) That all unsuccessful tenderers be advised of Council’s decision in this matter.

(c) Further, that Council delegate authority to the Chief Executive Officer to execute all necessary documents in relation to this matter.

21.3

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Tender 15/2019 Receipt and Processing of Clean-up Material

REFERENCE F2019/01469 - D07370721

REPORT OF Manager Sustainability & Waste

2782

RESOLVED (Esber/Tyrrell)

(a) That Council accepts the tender of the preferred tenderer as outlined in paragraph 11 of this report, for the receipt and processing of clean-up material from residential properties within the City of Parramatta LGA for an initial term of 2 years 4 months with two optional one year (1+1) extensions.

(b) That all unsuccessful tenderers be advised of Council’s decision in this matter; and

(c) Further, that Chief Executive Officer be given delegated authority to finalise and execute the contract documents.

21.4

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Extension of Mixed Solid Waste Processing and Disposal Contract

REFERENCE F2008/02639 - D06950974

REPORT OF Manager Sustainability & Waste

2783

RESOLVED (Esber/Tyrrell)

(a) That Council take up the second and final optional extension period for a further two years until 19 November 2022 for the receipt and processing of solid mixed waste (garbage) with SUEZ Recycling and Recovery Pty Ltd (ABN: 70 002 902 650).

(b) That Council continue to process all mixed solid waste through the Eastern Creek UR3R Facility in accordance with the current contract rates.

21.5

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Proposed New Lease for Carlingford Bowling Club

REFERENCE F2019/04434 - D07403743

REPORT OF Group Manager Property Assets & Services

2784

RESOLVED (Tyrrell/Wearne)

(a) That Council enter into a new lease with Carlingford Sports and Recreation Club for five (5) year term commencing from 7 December 2019.

(b) That Council delegate authority to the Chief Executive Officer to sign the lease and any other relevant documents in connection with this matter.

(c) Further, that no further action be taken with regard to the contents and suggestions contained in Clauses 13, 14 15, 16 and 17 of the report.

councillor Esber left the meeting at 10:18pm and returned at 10:21pm during consideration of Item 21.5.

21.6

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Proposed Purchase of 6 Valentine Avenue, Parramatta

REFERENCE F2019/04434 - D07283046

REPORT OF Group Manager Property Assets & Services

2785

RESOLVED (Esber/Tyrrell)

(a) That Council approve the acquisition of Lot 1 DP 610127 on the terms and conditions outlined in this report.

(b) That Council classify the land as Operational Land upon transfer of the land.

(c) Further, that Council delegate authority to the Chief Executive Officer to execute the Contract for Sale or Transfer and any other associated documents in order to complete this matter.

21.7

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: City of Parramatta Festival Proposal

REFERENCE F2014/02487 - D07430585

REPORT OF Group Manager City Experience

2786

RESOLVED (Esber/Tyrrell)

(a) That Council approve in principle support for the one (1) year sponsorship agreement with Western Sydney Business Connection Incorporated to secure City of Parramatta as the host city for the festival as detailed in paragraph three (3) of this report.

(b) Further, that Council delegate authority to the Chief Executive Officer to undertake further negotiations and execute the sponsorship agreement on behalf of Council.

Procedural Motion

2787

RESOLVED (Esber/Tyrrell)

That the meeting resume into Open Session.

22. REPORTS OF RESOLUTIONS PASSED IN CLOSED SESSION

The Chief Executive Officer read out the resolutions for Items 21.1 to 21.7.

23. CONCLUSION OF THE MEETING

The meeting terminated at 10:37pm.

THIS PAGE AND THE PRECEDING 27 PAGES ARE THE MINUTES OF THE ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON TUESDAY, 9 JUNE 2020 AND CONFIRMED ON MONDAY, 13 JULY 2020.

Chairperson

MINUTES OF THE Extraordinary Council Meeting of City of Parramatta Council HELD IN THE CLOISTER FUNCTION ROOMS, ST PATRICK’S CATHEDRAL 1 MARIST PLACE, PARRAMATTA ON Thursday, 2 July 2020 AT 6.30pm

These are draft minutes and are subject to confirmation by Council at its next meeting. The confirmed minutes will replace this draft version on the website once confirmed.

PRESENT

The Lord Mayor, Councillor Bob Dwyer and Councillors Benjamin Barrak, Phil Bradley, Donna Davis, Pierre Esber, Michelle Garrard (Deputy Lord Mayor), Steven Issa, Andrew Jefferies, Sameer Pandey, Dr Patricia Prociv, Bill Tyrrell, Andrew Wilson, Lorraine Wearne and Martin Zaiter.

1. OPENING MEETING

The Lord Mayor, Councillor Bob Dwyer, opened the meeting at 6.31pm.

2. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF THE TRADITIONAL LAND OWNERS

The Lord Mayor, Councillor Bob Dwyer, acknowledged the Burramattagal people of The Darug Nation as the traditional custodians of this land, and paid respect to their ancient culture and their elders past and present.

3. WEBCASTING ANNOUNCEMENT

The Lord Mayor, Councillor Bob Dwyer, advised that this public meeting is being recorded and streamed live on the internet. The recording will also be archived and made available on Council’s website.

4. OTHER RECORDING OF MEETING ANOUNCEMENT

No other recording announcements were made at this meeting.

28. APOLOGIES/REQUESTS FOR LEAVE OF ABSENCE

There were no apologies or requests for leave of absence made at this meeting.

6. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

There were no Declarations of Interest made at this meeting.

7. MATTERS OF URGENCY (if any)

There were no matters of urgency raised at this meeting.

Procedural Motion

MOTION (Tyrrell/Issa)

That a procedural motion be granted to allow consideration of Item 8.1 as three separate recommendations.

The motion moved by Councillor Tyrrell and seconded by Councillor Issa on being put was declared LOST.

8. Innovative

8.1

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Submission for State Significant Development Application for Powerhouse Museum

REFERENCE NCA/2/2020 - D07514607

REPORT OF Group Manager City Design

MOTION (Esber/ Davis)

PART 1: SUPPORT FOR POWERHOUSE MUSEUM RELOCATION TO PARRAMATTA

(a) That Council supports a museum focused on Science and Innovation, as part of an Arts and Cultural River Precinct in Parramatta.

(b) That Council strongly believes that Willow Grove and St George’s Terrace are highly significant to Parramatta and must be retained in any future developments on these sites.

(c) That the current proposed building design be reconsidered to retain, sympathise with, and incorporate Willow Grove and St George’s Terrace.

(d) That an urgent meeting be convened between the Premier of NSW, The Hon. Gladys Berejiklian, interested Councillors and relevant government officers, before or on the 16th July 2020, to discuss the retention of Willow Grove and St George’s Terrace.

PART 2: EIS SUBMISSION

That Part 2 be deferred until Part 1 is resolved.

PART 3: WILLOW GROVE AND ST GEORGE’S TERRACE

Further, that Council:

(a) reaffirm its support for the retention of Willow Grove and St George’s Terrace as part of a museum focused on Science and Innovation, as part of an Arts and Cultural River Precinct in Parramatta and advise the DPIE in writing accordingly at the time of lodgement of the Submission on terms consistent with the resolution of 9 December 2019; and

(b) receive and note the draft minutes of the Heritage Advisory Committee extraordinary meeting on 18 June 2020 (at Attachment 2) and advise the DPIE accordingly at the time of lodgement of the Submission.

AMENDMENT (Zaiter/Wilson)

PART 1: SUPPORT FOR POWERHOUSE MUSEUM RELOCATION TO PARRAMATTA

(a) That Council affirm its support for the relocation of the Powerhouse Museum to Parramatta given the significant benefits it will bring to Sydney’s Central River City, including:

a. 2,300 jobs during construction and 3,000 ongoing jobs; and

b. It being a major investment in cultural infrastructure in Central and Western Sydney; and

c. As a catalyst to begin rebalancing the social and cultural infrastructure within the Greater Sydney Area in support of the significant and rapid growth of Central and Western Sydney.

PART 2: EIS SUBMISSION

(b) That Council approve the Submission on the EIS (at Attachment 1) and forward it to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE), noting the following key items:

i. support for the relocation of the Powerhouse Museum to Parramatta;

ii. a request for greater collaboration in the design of the scheme and to work with the NSW Government on the matters in the Submission;

iii. the lack of consideration of heritage as a key element of the design;

iv. the lack of integration of the scheme with the public domain;

v. the lack of adequate consideration of and design for flooding impacts and the need for a superior flood responsive design;

vi. the design’s contextual response to Civic Link and failure to meet the objectives of this key pedestrian spine;

vii. the inappropriateness of the design of the undercroft; and

viii. other matters, including the name of the museum, environmental management, biodiversity, sustainability and reflectivity, and traffic, parking and loading.

(c) That Council authorise the Chief Executive Officer to make any amendments of a non-policy and administrative nature that may arise during the finalisation of the Submission.

PART 3: WILLOW GROVE & ST GEORGE’S TERRACES

(d) Further, that Council:

a. note its prior resolutions to support the retention of Willow Grove and St George’s Terraces as part of the Powerhouse Museum design; and

b. consider and, if approved, reaffirm its support for the retention of Willow Grove and St George’s Terraces and advise the DPIE in writing accordingly at the time of lodgment of the Submission on terms consistent with the resolution of 9 December 2019; and

c. receive and note the draft minutes of the Heritage Advisory Committee extraordinary meeting on 18 June 2020 (at Attachment 2) and advise the DPIE accordingly at the time of lodgment of the Submission.

Procedural Motion

2788

RESOLVED (Esber/Wilson)

That the meeting be adjourned at 6.55pm for a short recess.

Note: The meeting was adjourned at 7:55pm for a short recess.

Procedural Motion

2789

RESOLVED (Esber/Wilson)

That the meeting resume.

The meeting resumed in the Council Chambers at 7:00pm with the following Councillors in attendance: The Lord Mayor, Councillor Dwyer and Councillors Barrak, Bradley, Davis, Esber, Garrard (Deputy Lord Mayor), Issa, Jefferies, Pandey, Prociv, Tyrrell, Wilson, Wearne and Zaiter.

	FORESHADOWED AMENDMENT (Bradley/) PART 1: SUPPORT FOR POWERHOUSE MUSEUM RELOCATION TO PARRAMATTA (a) That Council affirm its support for a Powerhouse Museum in Parramatta given the significant benefits it will bring to Sydney’s Central River City, including: a. 2,300 jobs during construction and 3,000 ongoing jobs; and b. It being a major investment in cultural infrastructure in Central and Western Sydney; and c. As a catalyst to begin rebalancing the social and cultural infrastructure within the Greater Sydney Area in support of the significant and rapid growth of Central and Western Sydney. PART 2: EIS SUBMISSION (b) That Council approve the Submission on the EIS (at Attachment 1) and forward it to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE), noting the following key items: i. support for the relocation of the Powerhouse Museum to Parramatta; ii. a request for greater collaboration in the design of the scheme and to work with the NSW Government on the matters in the Submission; iii. the lack of consideration of heritage as a key element of the design; iv. the lack of integration of the scheme with the public domain; v. the lack of adequate consideration of and design for flooding impacts and the need for a superior flood responsive design; vi. the design’s contextual response to Civic Link and failure to meet the objectives of this key pedestrian spine; vii. the inappropriateness of the design of the undercroft; and viii. other matters, including the name of the museum, environmental management, biodiversity, sustainability and reflectivity, and traffic, parking and loading. (c) That Council authorise the Chief Executive Officer to make any amendments of a non-policy and administrative nature that may arise during the finalisation of the Submission. PART 3: WILLOW GROVE & ST GEORGE’S TERRACES (d) Further, that Council: a. note its prior resolutions to support the retention of Willow Grove and St George’s Terraces as part of the Powerhouse Museum design; and b. consider and, if approved, reaffirm its support for the retention of Willow Grove and St George’s Terraces and advise the DPIE in writing accordingly at the time of lodgment of the Submission on terms consistent with the resolution of 9 December 2019; and c. receive and note the draft minutes of the Heritage Advisory Committee extraordinary meeting on 18 June 2020 (at Attachment 2) and advise the DPIE accordingly at the time of lodgment of the Submission. The amendment moved by Councillor Zaiter and seconded by Councillor Wilson on being put was declared CARRIED. The amendment then became the motion. The foreshadowed amendment lapsed without a seconder. The motion moved by Councillor Zaiter and seconded by Councillor Wilson on being put was declared CARRIED on the Lord Mayor’s casting vote. DIVISION A division was called, the result being:- AYES: Councillors Barrak, Dwyer, Issa, Jefferies, Tyrrell, Wilson and Zaiter NOES: Councillors Bradley, Davis, Esber, Garrard, Pandey, Prociv and Wearne
2790	RESOLVED (Zaiter/Wilson) PART 1: SUPPORT FOR POWERHOUSE MUSEUM RELOCATION TO PARRAMATTA (a) That Council affirm its support for the relocation of the Powerhouse Museum to Parramatta given the significant benefits it will bring to Sydney’s Central River City, including: a. 2,300 jobs during construction and 3,000 ongoing jobs; and b. It being a major investment in cultural infrastructure in Central and Western Sydney; and c. As a catalyst to begin rebalancing the social and cultural infrastructure within the Greater Sydney Area in support of the significant and rapid growth of Central and Western Sydney. PART 2: EIS SUBMISSION (b) That Council approve the Submission on the EIS (at Attachment 1) and forward it to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE), noting the following key items: i. support for the relocation of the Powerhouse Museum to Parramatta; ii. a request for greater collaboration in the design of the scheme and to work with the NSW Government on the matters in the Submission; iii. the lack of consideration of heritage as a key element of the design; iv. the lack of integration of the scheme with the public domain; v. the lack of adequate consideration of and design for flooding impacts and the need for a superior flood responsive design; vi. the design’s contextual response to Civic Link and failure to meet the objectives of this key pedestrian spine; vii. the inappropriateness of the design of the undercroft; and viii. other matters, including the name of the museum, environmental management, biodiversity, sustainability and reflectivity, and traffic, parking and loading. (c) That Council authorise the Chief Executive Officer to make any amendments of a non-policy and administrative nature that may arise during the finalisation of the Submission. PART 3: WILLOW GROVE & ST GEORGE’S TERRACES (d) That Council: a. note its prior resolutions to support the retention of Willow Grove and St George’s Terraces as part of the Powerhouse Museum design; and b. consider and, if approved, reaffirm its support for the retention of Willow Grove and St George’s Terraces and advise the DPIE in writing accordingly at the time of lodgment of the Submission on terms consistent with the resolution of 9 December 2019; and c. receive and note the draft minutes of the Heritage Advisory Committee extraordinary meeting on 18 June 2020 (at Attachment 2) and advise the DPIE accordingly at the time of lodgment of the Submission.
	Note: Councillor Zaiter left the chamber at 7.26pm and returned at 7.27pm during consideration of this matter.
	Note: A Notice of Motion of Rescission was lodged after the closure of the meeting in relation to this matter.

The meeting terminated at 8.10pm.

THIS PAGE AND THE PRECEDING 6 PAGES ARE THE MINUTES OF THE EXTRAORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON THURSDAY, 2 JULY 2020 AND CONFIRMED ON 13 JULY 2020.

Chairperson

Council 13 July 2020 Item 14.3

ACCESSIBLE

ITEM NUMBER 14.3

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Minutes of the Parramatta Traffic Committee Meeting held on 11 June 2020

REFERENCE F2020/00082 - D07250009

REPORT OF Traffic and Transport Manager

PURPOSE:

To give consideration to the minutes and endorse the recommendations of the Parramatta Traffic Committee meeting held on 11 June 2020.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council note the minutes of the Parramatta Traffic Committee meeting held on 11 June 2020, as provided at Attachment 1.

(b) Further, that Council approve the recommendations of the Parramatta Traffic Committee meeting held on 11 June 2020 provided at Attachment 1 and in this report, noting the following financial implications for each item.

i. ITEM 2006 A1 – UHRIG ROAD, LIDCOMBE – PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN REFUGE ISLAND

The pedestrian refuge island and all associated works are to be installed by the developer of 11A and 13 Carter Street, Lidcombe at no cost to Council. Therefore, this proposal has no direct financial impact upon Council’s budget.

ii. ITEM 2006 A2 – RAWSON STREET AT BRIDGE STREET, EPPING – PROPOSED ‘NO LEFT TURN - VEHICLES UNDER 9M EXCEPTED’ RESTRICTION

The estimated cost for the installation of ‘No Left Turn – Vehicles under 9m Excepted’ restriction is $1,000. This work will be funded from the approved budget of $291,871 for the installation of pedestrian refuge island project in Bridge Street west of Rawson Street, Epping. Note that the pedestrian refuge island project has received 50% funding from the NSW Government under its Active Transport Program. The remaining 50% of the cost of the project will be funded by Council from its 2019/20 Active Transport Program Fund.

iii. ITEM 2006 A3 – CAMPBELL STREET PARRAMATTA, RAILWAY PARADE WESTMEAD AND PARK AVENUE WESTMEAD – PROPOSED WATTS PROFILE SPEED HUMPS

The estimated cost of the installation of 7 speed humps in Parramatta and Westmead is $100,000. Council received funding of $250,000 from the NSW Government under the Safe Speeds in High Pedestrian Activity and Local Areas Program to undertake the works related to the installation of ‘40km/h High Pedestrian Activity Area (HPAA)’ restrictions and associated traffic calming in Parramatta, North Parramatta, Westmead and Harris Park. To-date, Council has spent $89,000 for the installation of signs and pavement markings associated with the HPAA restrictions. The rest of the available balance will be used for this proposal.

iv. ITEM 2006 A4 – MASON STREET, NORTH PARRAMATTA – PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RESIDENT PARKING SCHEME

The approximate cost for the installation of the proposed ‘4 Hour Parking 8am-6pm Mon-Fri Permit Holders Excepted Area 05’ restrictions, ‘No Parking’ and ‘No Stopping’ signs in Mason Street, North Parramatta is $1,500. The proposed works would be funded by the Transport for NSW Block Grant funds for installation and maintenance of traffic signs and line markings in 2020/21.

v. ITEM 2006 A5 – CAROLINE CHISHOLM DRIVE EAST OF OLYMPUS STREET, WINSTON HILLS – PROPOSED SPEED CUSHIONS

The cost estimate for the proposed speed cushions in Caroline Chisholm Drive on both approaches to the existing pedestrian refuge island (east of Olympus Street), Winston Hills is $7,000. This project is 100% funded by Council from the Traffic Facilities Fund.

vi. ITEM 2006 A6 – INTERSECTION OF PARRAMATTA ROAD AND MARSH STREET, CLYDE – PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLIST FACILITIES

The design of this project has been funded from external grant funding.

The construction cost of all the works listed is approximately $1,039,222. A grant application has been made to the TfNSW Active Transport Program for funding the entire amount in FY2020/21. Should this application not be successful, construction would not proceed in FY2020/21, and Council will apply to the same program for grant funding in FY2021/22.

vii. ITEM 2006 A7 – EPPING TO CARLINGFORD CYCLEWAY

The approximate cost of all the works listed is approximately $1,950,260. The proposed works are 100% funded by State Government grants for installation and construction in FY2019/20 and FY 2020/21.

viii. ITEM 2006 A8 – TRIAL OF A CASHLESS AND TICKETLESS PAYMENT METHOD ON THE FLEET OF PARKING METERS

The approximate cost for the proposed implementation of cashless payment for parking in Parramatta, North Parramatta and Harris Park is $15,000. The proposed works would be funded by Paid Parking’s budget in 2019/2020.

BACKGROUND

1. Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) is legislated as the organisation responsible for the control of traffic on all roads in New South Wales under the Road Transport (Safety & Traffic Management) Act 1999. In order to deal with the large number and range of traffic related matters effectively, the RMS has delegated certain aspects of the control of traffic on local roads to councils. RMS has retained both the control of traffic on the State's classified road network and the control of traffic signals on all roads.

2. The RMS delegation to councils limits the types of prescribed traffic control devices and traffic control facilities that council can authorise and imposes certain conditions on councils. One of these conditions requires councils to obtain the advice of RMS and the Police prior to proceeding with any proposal. This is most commonly achieved by councils establishing a Local Traffic Committee.

3. The Committee is composed of four formal members each with one vote. These four members are a representative from Council, the Police, and Roads and Maritime Services and the Local State Member of Parliament or their nominee. The Parramatta Traffic Committee is an advisory body only, having no decision making powers. It is, primarily, a technical review committee that is required to advise the Council on traffic related matters referred to it by Council. In general, Council makes the decision, however, the Police and RMS can appeal Council’s decision to the Regional Traffic Committee.

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

4. The most recent meeting of the Parramatta Traffic Committee was held on 11 June 2020. The minutes of that meeting and the reports to that meeting are Attachments 1 and 2 of this report.

5. The recommendations from the Parramatta Traffic Committee meeting are provided below together with financial impact statements for each recommendation:

ITEM NO.

2006 A1 UHRIG ROAD, LIDCOMBE – PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN REFUGE ISLAND

That a pedestrian refuge island with associated signs and pavement markings be installed in Uhrig Road, Lidcombe by the developer of 11A and 13 Carter Street, Lidcombe (refer to attached plan) at no cost to Council.

Unanimous support.

Financial Impact Statement:

2006 A2 RAWSON STREET AT BRIDGE STREET, EPPING – PROPOSED ‘NO LEFT TURN - VEHICLES UNDER 9M EXCEPTED’ RESTRICTION

That the proposed ‘No Left Turn - Vehicles Under 9m Excepted’ restriction be installed in Rawson Street (northbound) at Bridge Street, Epping as shown in Figure 1 of the report subject to the Traffic Management Plan (TMP) being approved by Transport for New South Wales (TfNSW).

Unanimous support.

Financial Impact Statement:

2006 A3 CAMPBELL STREET PARRAMATTA, RAILWAY PARADE WESTMEAD AND PARK AVENUE WESTMEAD – PROPOSED WATTS PROFILE SPEED HUMPS

1. That three Watts Profile Speed Humps with associated signage and pavement markings be installed in Campbell Street between Marsden Street and Church Street, Parramatta as shown on the plan attached to this report.

2. That two Watts Profile Speed Humps with associated signage and pavement markings be installed in Railway Parade between Central Avenue and Park Avenue, Westmead as shown on the plan attached to this report

3. That two Watts Profile Speed Humps with associated signage and pavement markings be installed in Park Avenue between Railway Parade and Queens Road, Westmead as shown on the plan attached to this report

Unanimous support

Financial Impact Statement:

2006 A4 MASON STREET, NORTH PARRAMATTA – PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RESIDENT PARKING SCHEME

1. That a combination of ‘4 Hour Parking 8am-6pm Mon-Fri Permit Holders Excepted Area 05’, ‘No Parking’ and statutory ‘No Stopping’ restrictions be installed on Mason Street between Brabyn Street and Macarthur Street, North Parramatta as shown in the sketch attached to the report.

2. That all residential dwellings at 1-5 Mason Street, North Parramatta be included within Area 05 of the Resident Parking Scheme for the purpose of issuing a new permit.

Unanimous support

Financial Impact Statement:

2006 A5 CAROLINE CHISHOLM DRIVE EAST OF OLYMPUS STREET, WINSTON HILLS – PROPOSED SPEED CUSHIONS

1. That the installation of speed cushions on both approaches to the pedestrian refuge island in Caroline Chisholm Drive (east of Olympus Street), Winston Hills be approved in accordance with the plan attached to the report.

2. That PS-2 bicycle logos be line marked in Caroline Chisholm Drive (east of Olympus Street), Winston Hills on both approaches to the pedestrian refuge island.

Unanimous support

Financial Impact Statement:

2006 A6 Intersection of Parramatta Road and Marsh Street, Clyde – Proposed Pedestrian and Cyclist Facilities

1. That the installation of pedestrian and cyclist facilities at the signalised intersection of Parramatta Road on Marsh Street, Granville including the following items detailed below and as shown in the attached plan be approved.

- A new pedestrian and cyclist crossing at the western leg of the intersection,

- Upgrade of the southern leg of the intersection to include a pedestrian and cyclist crossing

- Regulatory signage on the southern side of Parramatta Road between George Street and Rowell Street, Granville to enable a shared path.

2. That the below works be considered as part of traffic signals upgrade works as detailed in recommendation 1.

- PS-2 bicycle logos on Berry, Marsh and Sutherland Streets.

- Lipless kerb on southwest corner for the transition between Marsh Street and the shared path.

- Reflective tapes on poles and posts.

3. That recommendations 1 and 2 are subject to the Traffic Control Signal Plan being approved by Transport for NSW and funding being available.

Unanimous support

Financial Impact Statement:

The design of this project has been funded from external grant funding.

2006 A7 EPPING TO CARLINGFORD CYCLEWAY

That a shared path and associated regulatory signage be installed on the eastern side of Marsden Road between Pennant Hills Road and Rickard Street, Carlingford as shown in the plan attached to the report.

1. That the existing footpath located on the southern side of Bridge Street between High Street and Wyralla Avenue, Epping, and between Pennant Parade and Barellan Avenue, Carlingford be widened, and shared paths and associated signage be installed as shown in the plan attached to the report. Council is currently upgrading the splitter island on Bridge Street west of Rawson Street, and the designs of each piece of infrastructure have been aligned so they can be delivered as separate projects with minimal re-work.

2. That the existing footpath on the western side of Victoria Street south of Bridge Street, Epping be widened and shared paths and associated signage be installed as shown in the plan attached to the report

3. That a pedestrian refuge island be installed in Rickard Street at Marsden Road, Carlingford as shown in the plan attached to the report.

4. That the existing splitter islands at the below locations be upgraded to pedestrian refuge islands as shown in the plan attached to the report

(a) High Street south of Bridge Street, Epping

(b) Rawson Street south of the roundabout Bridge Street, Epping

Unanimous support

Financial Impact Statement:

The approximate cost of all the works listed is approximately $1,950,260. The proposed works are 100% funded by State Government grants for installation and construction in FY2019/20 and FY 2020/21.

2006 A8 TRIAL OF A CASHLESS AND TICKETLESS PAYMENT METHOD ON THE FLEET OF PARKING METERS

That a trial of a cashless and ticketless payment method on all parking meters operating in the City of Parramatta LGA for a minimum of 12 month period be approved.

Unanimous support

Financial Impact Statement:

CONSULTATION AND TIMING

5. Details of the consultation undertaken with the Community and Councillors for each of the items considered at the meeting, including the response for each item, are included in Attachment 3.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATION

6. The financial implications are provided in the comments for each item.

CONCLUSION

7. Council officers recommend that the recommendations of the Parramatta Traffic Committee meeting held on 11 June 2020 be adopted by Council.

Richard Searle

Traffic and Transport Manager

Mark Leotta

Group Manager - Development and Traffic Services

Alistair Cochrane

Acting Chief Financial Officer

Jennifer Concato

Executive Director City Planning and Design

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

Attachments:

1 ⇩	Parramatta Traffic Committee Minutes of meeting held on 11 June 2020	7 Pages
2 ⇩	Parramatta Traffic Committee Item Reports for meeting held on 11 June 2020	70 Pages
3 ⇩	Consultation and Timing for the Parramatta Traffic Committee held on 11 June 2020	37 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 13 July 2020 Item 15.1

GREEN

ITEM NUMBER 15.1

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Management of Abandoned Trolleys

REFERENCE F2004/06447 - D07186832

REPORT OF Group Manager Regulatory Services

PURPOSE:

The purpose of this report is to provide Council with an update on the work undertaken to date on abandoned trolleys within the LGA, including data collected over the past 12 months with a recommendation to manage this issue into the future.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council note the information contained within this report.

(b) Further, that Council approve a six (6) month trial of issuing penalties for the non-collection of reported trolleys, and costs of the trial to be funded from existing operational budgets.

BACKGROUND

1. At the Council meeting of 25 November 2019, Councillor Prociv tabled a Notice of Motion that was resolved as follows:

(a) That a report be brought back to the Chamber for the first council meeting in 2020 containing;

i. An update on all work that has been done to address the motions that have already been moved in this Chamber regarding shopping trolley management;

ii. Any consultation that has been undertaken with neighbouring Councils on their trolley management strategies and policies regulatory policies and education strategies that have been successfully implemented.

PREVIOUS REPORTS TO THE CHAMBER

2. The issue of abandoned trolleys was initially raised by Councillor Prociv at the Council meeting held on 26 February 2018, with a Notice of Motion that was resolved as follows:

(a) That Council investigate its legal options, developing a formal policy to outline Council’s approach to abandoned or unattended trolleys in the Parramatta LGA.

(b) That Council, as part of this policy, implement a one-year trial program for the collection of abandoned shopping trolleys as part of its 2018/19 Operational Plan and Budget.

(c) That a report be brought back to Council that investigates the feasibility of introducing standard Conditions of Consent for local businesses where shopping trolleys are used to ensure effective trolley management systems, which may include Deposit/Refund Schemes (coin operated trolley release bays) or Trolley Containment Systems (electronic wheel-lock) and alternative methods of disposal.

3. Following this Notice of Motion, a report was provided to Council on 25 June 2018 containing information on the practices employed by both the City of Parramatta and other NSW Councils to manage abandoned shopping trolleys and the resources required to facilitate these. It was further resolved:

(a) That the Council not proceed with a formal policy on the management of abandoned shopping trolleys, and instead improve education and promotion relating to reporting of trolleys to the responsible agents of collection.

(b) That Council enhance its education and engagement over the next 6 months through the measures and opportunities detailed in the body of this report.

(c) That Council strengthen the current standard Conditions of Consent for businesses where shopping trolleys are used to ensure effective trolley management systems are in place, including convening a meeting with business operators in the LGA that provide shopping trolleys.

(d) Further, that a report be brought back to Council after 12 months detailing: -

i. The outcomes of the recommended enhancements and new approach in managing this issue.

ii. Cost of a collection and re-claim option for shopping trolleys.

FINDINGS FROM LOCAL AUDITS

4. To better understand the extent of the issue, officers from Council’s Cleansing and Sustainability and Waste Teams conducted several audits across key hotspots to examine the incidence and location of abandonment.

5. An initial sweep conducted in May 2019 focused on known hotspot areas around major retail outlets. The boundaries of this audit were defined by field staff based on their previous observations of dumping habits and general proximity to retail outlets and were conducted over a series of Mondays and Fridays in order to capture the aftereffects of the peak shopping periods of weekends and Thursday evenings.

Table 1. Number of Trolleys Observed in Known Hotspots Close to Retail Centre’s (May 2019)

Area	Friday	Monday
Parramatta	185	222
Carlingford	101	120
Wentworth Point	29	38
Epping	2	3

(Dates of observations included Friday May 17^th, Monday May 20^th, and Friday May 24^th)

6. It should be noted that the number and location of the trolleys observed varied between visits, indicating that the trolleys counted on a Friday had been collected and additional trolleys had been abandoned in that time.

7. Following this initial sweep, a repeat audit was conducted in June to cover a wider geographical area to include a full 1km radius from key retail outlets. Again, these audits were conducted over a series of Mondays and Fridays to capture data following the peak shopping periods, with this audit also looking to identify the source of trolleys in major hotspots in terms of the retailers the observations from these assessments are provided below.

Table 2. Number of Trolleys Observed within a 1km Radius of Retail Centre’s (June 2019)

Area	Friday	Monday
Parramatta	312	295
- Harris Park / Rosehill	93	68
- Parramatta Central	128	146
- North Parramatta	91	81
Carlingford	98	86
Wentworth Point	26	16
Epping	15	35

(Dates of observations included Monday June 3^rd, Friday June 7^th, Monday June 10^th,Friday June 14^th, and Friday June 28^th)

Table 3. Breakdown of Trolleys Observed within a 1km Radius of Retail Centre’s by Retailer (June 2019)

Area	Coles	Woolworths	Other
Parramatta	57%	25%	18%
Carlingford	30%	67%	3%
Epping	74%	20%*	6%

(*Note: It is assumed that these trolleys originate from Woolworths Marsfield which is located approximately 4km away from where the trolleys were found)

8. When observing the results for Parramatta alongside the use of coin lock mechanisms by retailers in this area (as outlined in Table 4 below), the use of these systems has very little impact on preventing trolleys from being abandoned on local streets.

ENGAGEMENT WITH LOCAL RETAILERS

9. Council officers from Cleansing, Regulatory, Place Management, and Sustainability and Waste have been in regular contact with retailers around the issue of abandoned trolleys. Field staff regularly notify local retailers of abandoned trolleys, while staff from Regulatory and Sustainability and Waste have engaged with both individual retailers and Centre Managers, (including Westfield Parramatta) around the use of limiting devices such as wheel locks and coin release systems.

10. An overview of the containment measures and collection systems in place with the major retailers in key hot spot areas is provided in Table 4 below.

Table 4. Trolley Management Systems employed by Major Retailers

Store	Containment	Collections
Coles North Parramatta	Coin Lock	Collections run twice per day (shared with Westfield Store).
Coles Parramatta Westfield	Coin Lock	Collections run twice a day (shared with North Parramatta store).
Woolworths Parramatta Westfield	Nil	Trolley collector onsite from 8am – 9pm collecting from within carparks and local streets (multiple sweeps each day).
Woolworths, Rosehill	Nil	Collection of trolleys is contracted out. (Trolley Trackers)
Woolworths Carlingford	Nil	Collection of trolleys is contracted out. (Trolley Trackers)
Coles Carlingford	Nil	Collection runs daily (collection vehicle shared with North Rocks).
Coles Epping	Coin Lock	Collection runs daily

11. Unfortunately, the discussions held with retailers and Centre Managers to date has not resulted in any new or improved containment or collection programs, and the incidence of abandoned trolleys on local streets has not significantly improved.

EDUCATION ACTIVITES

12. Over the past 12 months, Council has undertaken the following broad scale education and engagement activities to reduce the incidence of abandoned shopping trolleys:

(a) The addition of content to Council’s website around the reporting of abandoned trolleys;

(b) Articles in September Parra Pulse re ‘Keeping our City Clean’ – with message that dumping can attract fines and how to report abandoned trolleys;

(c) Flyer included in October rates notice re ‘Keeping our City Clean’ – with the message to leave trolleys at the store and report dumped trolleys;

(d) The inclusion of content regarding trolleys in Councils Waste calendar (distributed to all residents in the LGA each December);

(e) The development of collateral (i.e. Strata notices) with messaging that dumping can attract fines and how to report abandoned trolleys; and

(f) The development of postcards that can be letter box dropped in trolley hot spots encouraging the reporting of abandoned trolleys and the reporting of dumpers (distribution of these commenced in late January).

13. Staff have also worked with the Development Assessment Team to strengthen the Conditions of Consent for new retailers with regards to trolley containment and management.

ENGAGEMENT WITH NEIGHBOURING COUNCILS

14. Discussions with neighbouring Councils as well as Councils further afield confirm that this is an issue shared by local government.

15. The approach to managing this issue in Western Sydney varies slightly from Council to Council. As outlined in Table 5 below - the majority of WSROC Council’s advertise impounding fees in their Fees and Charges, but do not regularly impound trolleys as a standard practice. More commonly, abandoned trolleys are reported to the appropriate collection agency / retailer, and impoundment is only conducted as a result of repeat non-collection or for ‘blitz’ events such as the one initiated by Liverpool, Fairfield, Cumberland, Penrith and Blacktown in November 2019.

Table 5. Trolley Management Approaches employed by WSROC Councils

Council	Regulatory Response	Education	Impounding Fee 2019/20
Blacktown	Not standard practice – preference to report to collection agency	No formal program	$264
The Hills	Not standard practice – preference to report to collection agency	Web Page and Content in Calendar	$100
Cumberland	Not standard practice – preference to report to collection agency	No formal program	$229
Penrith	Not standard practice – preference to report to collection agency	No formal program	$103
Fairfield	Not standard practice – preference to report to collection agency	No formal program	$109.90
Liverpool	Not normally standard practice. Ran a collection and impounding blitz in June and again November 2019 (mixed responses from retailers)	Web Page Social Media Campaign	$22.60

16. Council staff have also engaged in ongoing discussions with Hornsby Shire Council, who commenced a dedicated impounding program in December 2018. The following is a synopsis of the outcomes from their Impounding Program:

(a) Ongoing issue following years of discussions with retailers;

(b) Resolved by Council in February 2018 to commence impounding if containment measures were not put in place by December 2018;

(c) Audits conducted in November 2018 found 499 trolleys in a 2km radius of Westfield in a single night, the repeat audit found 340 trolleys;

(d) Program commenced 9 December 2018, with collections / impounding occurring 4 mornings per week (Friday, Saturday, Sunday, and Monday);

(e) Program was staffed using a pool of 16 staff (each shift involving a team of 4 staff working 4 hours’ overtime), with an existing Administration Officer allocating 2 days per week for the administration of notices and releases;

(f) Impounded trolleys were collected using a dedicated trailer (purchased by Council) and held at the depot until release;

(g) Impounding notices were issued for batches of 10 trolleys at a total cost $525 per batch;

(h) Numbers of trolleys collected during the impounding program remained stable throughout the program, indicating no change in community behaviour;

(i) Hornsby Westfield announced the installation of wheel locking systems in September 2019; and

(j) Hornsby Shire Council ceased their impounding program in October 2019 as the incidence of abandoned trolleys had reduced significantly.

OUTCOMES AND KEY CONSIDERATIONS

17. Discussions with retailers and educational activities undertaken over the past 12 months has had little noticeable impact on the incidence of abandoned shopping trolleys across the identified City of Parramatta hot spots.

18. Regionally, the only initiative which seems to have had any significant impact on the repeated incidence of abandoned trolleys has been the Hornsby impounding program. This program was initiated following a considerable notification period in which retailers were consulted by senior managers of Council and was closed following the installation of wheel locking systems at the main shopping centre.

19. The ability of Council to impose financial penalties for trolleys left unattended in public places is also a key focus of the current review of the Impounding Act as outlined in the Discussion Paper released by The Office of Local Government in December 2019.

20. Options for imposing penalties have also been explored by Council’s Regulatory Team as outlined below:

(a) Impounding: This option has been delivered with mixed success across NSW, and would require significant resourcing, (including capital expenditure to secure a suitable storage area and collection trailer), the development of appropriate administrative systems, and adequate staffing to administer the program; and

(b) Issuing of Penalties: Under Sections 8 and 17 of the Impounding Act 1993, an item does not have to be taken to a pound for it to be “impounded” where the quantity or nature of the article concerned makes its delivery to or storage at a pound impracticable, unreasonably costly or more costly than the value of the article.

This option has yet to be trialled by a NSW Council that we are aware of, but would involve Council staff notifying retailers of unattended trolleys and requesting collection within a nominate timeframe, and then issuing penalties to retailers where reported (and tagged) trolleys are not collected within the required timeframe. This approach has the potential to provide a financial incentive to retailers to improve containment and collection systems, while not requiring Council to collect and store trolleys.

21. Following endorsement of either of these options, it is recommended that staff would engage with retailers to ensure that they were aware of Council’s intent to proceed with regulatory enforcement, and to encourage improved collection processes prior to any enforcement activity rolling out.

CONSULTATION & TIMING

Stakeholder Consultation

22. In addition to ongoing discussion with local retailers and neighbouring Councils, and the awareness raising activities outlined earlier in this report, the following stakeholder consultation has been undertaken in relation to this matter:

Date	Stakeholder	Stakeholder Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
April 2018	Trolley Tracker / Coles Trolley Collection Services	Consulted around current collection arrangements with local retailers. Trolley Tracker established a priority login for Council to elevate requests made by field staff.	Priority Login provided to staff in Cleansing and Regulatory	Sustainability and Waste
July – Nov 2019	Local Retailers (Coles, Woolworths, Westfield)	Agreed that trolleys leaving the shopping centers and being left on local streets is an issue but not planning to install wheel locks / erect additional signage (concerns around cost, blockages to exits, lack of impact of signage)	Flagged issue of trolleys left on local streets and the issues these create. Discussed current containment / collection measures and possible improvements.	Sustainability and Waste

Councillor Consultation

23. In addition to previous reports to the chambers, the following Councillor consultation has been undertaken in relation to this matter:

Date	Councillor	Councillor Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
June 2020	Councillor Davis and Councillor Prociv	Councillor Davis Requested further explanation on the regulatory option to around issuing penalties and how this would be conducted.	Upon attending to the unattended trolley Rangers would sticker the trolley and record its location (with photographs) for evidentiary purposes. Written communication would be sent to the retailer, informing them of its location and the need to collect within a nominated timeframe, and that a fine would be issued if not collected within this timeframe. This approach has been discussed with legal relevant to this being a defensible enforcement strategy.	Paul Lyth

FINANCIAL IMPLICATION FOR COUNCIL

24. The issuing of penalties for the non-collection of reported trolleys would require the following resources and expenses:

a) Utilisation of existing staff (Regulatory and Administrative) for an initial trial period of 6 months whereby staff record and report abandoned trolleys directly to the trolley owner (local store) during existing patrols, and issue a penalty notice ($220) for non-collection of reported trolleys within the specified timeframes;

b) Development and printing of collateral / tags ($2,000) sourced from Regulatory Services existing printing budgets; and

c) Pending the outcomes of this trial, a proposal outlining ongoing staff costs of additional staff / overtime would be brought to Council for consideration.

25. Alternatively, the introduction of an impounding strategy utilising council staff to impound trolleys would have the following estimated resource requirements and associated expenses:

a) Staff costs of approximately $328,000 pa (based on the example of Hornsby where a pool of staff rotate 4 x 4hr shifts per week with 4 staff per shift, and an administration officer allocating 2 days/week to administer notices and release);

b) Purchase of a trailer for the collection of trolleys ($10,000); and

c) Purchase or leasing of space for storage of impounded trolleys (minimum holding period of 28 days - costs to be explored further).

26. It is recommended that Council endorse a 6-month trial of issuing penalties as indicated in point 20b as this option requires less capital investment, can be resourced through existing staff and budgets, and involves a lower risk.

27. A review will be conducted at the end of the trial period to determine the effectiveness of the program, measured by:

1. The total number of abandoned trolleys being reported to retailers by Council

2. The number of days a trolley remains abandoned after being reported.

Paul Lyth

Group Manager Regulatory Services

Alistair Cochrane

Chief Financial Officer

Wayne Carter

Executive Director City Assets & Operations

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 13 July 2020 Item 15.2

GREEN

ITEM NUMBER 15.2

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: George Kendall Riverside Park Department of Planning Park Improvement Works

REFERENCE F2010/02287 - D07422752

REPORT OF Manager Open Space and Natural Resources

PURPOSE:

To obtain Council’s endorsement to enter into a Project Delivery Agreement with the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (Department) and Planning Ministerial Corporation (PMC) to enable the Department to undertake park improvement works at George Kendall Riverside Park and to endorse the transfer to Council of the Planning and Ministerial Corporation owned land parcels at George Kendall Riverside Park (as listed in Attachment 4), once the improvement works have been completed.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council approve the funding and delivery of the park improvement works at George Kendall Riverside Park by the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment NSW (Department) and thank the Department for its significant investment.

(b) That Council approve the Project Delivery Agreement (substantially in the form of Attachment 2) and delegate authority to the CEO to negotiate any amendments to that Project Delivery Agreement that Council’s CEO considers necessary and execute the Project Delivery Agreement, on behalf of Council.

(c) That on completion of the embellishment works by the Department at George Kendall Riverside Park, Council agrees to receive the transfer of ownership of the nominated parcels of land at George Kendall Riverside Park (as expressly listed within Attachment 4).

(d) That Council approve the Land Transfer Agreement (substantially in the form of Annexure A to the Project Delivery Agreement at Attachment 2) and delegate authority to Council’s CEO to negotiate any amendments to that Land Transfer Agreement that Council’s CEO considers necessary and execute the Land Transfer Agreement and any other documents required by NSW Land Registry Services on behalf of Council to give effect to the transfer to Council’s ownership of the nominated parcels of land at George Kendall Riverside Park listed within Attachment 4.

(e) Further, that Council delegate authority to Council’s CEO to negotiate and execute any further necessary or ancillary documents in connection with the improvement works at George Kendall Riverside Park or the transfer of the land parcels listed in Attachment 4 to Council’s ownership.

BACKGROUND

1. On 3 February 2019, the NSW Premier announced a $150 million Strategic Open Space program to secure and improve green space across Greater Sydney. Of this, $50 million will be spent across Greater Sydney to create better access to open space. This will be achieved by the creation of four new open spaces and the embellishment of four existing parks, providing greater recreational opportunities for each respective community. This program is known as the “Parks for People” program. The Open Space team within the Department will be leading this project in partnership with the Council and the Office of Strategic Lands.

2. This program seeks to improve livability in communities across Greater Sydney, in addition to social inclusion, environmental and social sustainability and public health benefits.

3. Under the Program, $10M has been allocated by the Department to the embellishment of George Kendall Riverside Park, Ermington. This funding allowance considers design and construction costs.

4. George Kendall Riverside Park is a large open space, approximately 27 hectares, located along the northern side of the Parramatta River in Ermington. The park’s location along the Parramatta River foreshore and strategic link across the river to Sydney Olympic Park enhances its regional significance.

5. George Kendall Riverside Park has an endorsed masterplan and tender-level design documentation, that was commissioned by Council over the last 10 years following public consultation with the surrounding community and sporting groups.

6. It is anticipated that these project works will focus on the central areas of the park. This area of the park is not currently embellished. The masterplan identifies the construction of the following facilities within the central precinct (Attachment 1):

a. a new full size central sports field (cricket and two soccer fields) with irrigation and lighting;

b. a series of constructed wetlands to harvest and treat stormwater in the centre of the park and enable irrigation of the sports field without the need to rely on potable water;

c. new pedestrian pathways;

d. improvements to the Parramatta Valley Cycleway;

e. spectator areas, and

f. cricket nets.

7. The embellishment works at George Kendall Riverside Park would be wholly managed and delivered by the Department at the Department’s cost, using the $10 Million allocated funding. The determination of the scope of the embellishment works is still being finalised but must be developed by the Department in line with the George Kendall Riverside Park Masterplan.

8. A legal agreement has been prepared to guide the construction works in the form of a Project Delivery Agreement. The Project Delivery Agreement has been extensively negotiated with the Department over a two-month period to ensure that Council’s and the communities interests are met. The Agreement sets out a process for Council to be involved in the project including review and feedback on the concept design and detailed design plans that will be developed as part of the project. The Department must use best endeavors to incorporate Council’s feedback and comments during this process. It also ensures that community consultation is undertaken to inform the final design outcome.

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

9. This significant investment will provide a good outcome for the community and aligns with Council’s strategic open space and sporting priorities. Councils Draft Community Infrastructure Strategy identifies a severe shortage of sportsground provision throughout Council’s Local Government Area (LGA), with the majority of our existing fields operating above capacity and unable to accommodate the additional demand facilitated by future population growth.

10. George Kendall Riverside Park is located within a significant growth corridor with and estimated increase of almost 40,000 residents by 2014. The large size of the reserve provides a unique opportunity to deliver additional sporting fields as required to meet the increased demand facilitated by surrounding increasing housing densities. Councils draft Community Infrastructure Strategy identifies opportunities to increase the number of sportsgrounds throughout the LGA and includes a key recommendation to deliver new sporting fields at George Kendall Riverside Park through implementation of the masterplan.

11. A large residential development is proposed to occur near George Kendall Riverside Park in the suburb of Melrose Park. A planning proposal submitted by Payce Consolidated is currently being considered by Council for the northern part of Melrose Park. This proposal is seeking to provide a single playing field and community open space within the site itself and will be accompanied by a Planning Agreement that will include contributions towards a range of infrastructure items to support the future development on site. Any contribution toward public open space within or outside the development is still subject to negotiation with Council and the developer, the outcomes of which will be reported to Council in the coming months. Sporting facilities at George Kendall Riverside Park and at the Melrose Park site will be required to meet the densification of the precinct.

12. In regards to the ‘Parks for People’ project the Department has submitted to Council a Project Delivery Agreement, addressing project intentions and delivery terms respectively. Prior to the engagement of a design consultant and the commencement of program works, the Department requires execution of the Project Delivery Agreement (Attachment 2).

13. The function of this binding Agreement is to capture the terms under which the Department, in consultation with Council, will deliver the proposed embellishment works.

14. The Agreement outlines items such as; project reporting and governance, design review and approval process, quality assurance, project timelines, maintenance and defects and a dispute resolution process.

15. Council’s participation in the design of the embellishment works are stipulated in Clause 5 of the Project Delivery Agreement, it outlines Council’s involvement in the selection of design consultants and design review stages. Clause 3 of the Agreement outlines Council’s participation in a Project Reporting Group that must meet once every 5 weeks with the Department providing a project progress update at each meeting.

16. George Kendall Riverside Park is made up of many different Lots that consists of: City of Parramatta Council land, Crown Land and Planning and Ministerial Corporation (PMC) land (Attachment 3). At the completion of this project, the Department has proposed to transfer the PMC land to Council via a Land Transfer Agreement (Annexure A of Attachment 2). This agreement outlines the terms of transfer of the subject land from PMC to Council.

17. As the ownership of land lots are scattered across the site, there are benefits for Council in taking ownership of the PMC land. It allows the site to be managed as a whole as it is almost impossible to embellish the individual lots without Council assets being spread across multiple lot ownership.

18. The PMC land that Council will be receiving pursuant to the Land Transfer Agreement is listed in Attachment 4. This land is subject to a range of restrictions imposed by Planning and Ministerial Corporation under the Land Transfer Agreement.

19. The PMC land must be classified as community land under section 25 of the Local Government Act 1993 and be maintained as open space parkland for recreational purpose. At least 80% of the Land must remain open space which means either an open area or an area with improvements and structures (such as roads, pavements, fences, tennis courts, pools and sports fields) that are not roofed and enclosed. However, the requirement for Open Space does not apply for the development of the Land authorised by a plan of management under the Local Government Act.

20. Council must not without the prior consent of PMC:

a. seek to rezone or vary the permitted use of the PMC Land;

b. reclassify the PMC Land under the Local Government Act 1993;

c. grant any lease, licence or other right of possession or use of the PMC Land for a period exceeding 21 years (including any option to renew); mortgage or charge the Land;

d. grant any other rights in the PMC Land including any easement, restrictive covenant or positive covenant for a period exceeding 21 years (including any option to renew) except an easement over part of the Land granted to a public authority for nominal consideration;

e. subdivide the PMC Land except a subdivision ancillary to the construction of infrastructure for public use.

21. As Council will become the owner of the PMC lands all maintenance of the lands would rest with Council. It is noted that Council currently maintains all of the PMC lands.

22. Part of the proposed works extend onto Crown land. Council is currently the Crown Land Manager of this lot as per the provisions of s3.13 of the Crown Land Management Act 2016. Council will continue to be responsible for the care, control and management of the Crown Land within the Reserve.

23. Council’s Open Space and Natural Resource team, Council’s Property Plan and Program team and Council’s legal team have been involved in the drafting and review of the Project Delivery Agreement and Land Transfer Agreement.

CONSULTATION & TIMING

Stakeholder Consultation

24. The following stakeholder consultation has been undertaken in relation to this matter:

Date	Stakeholder	Stakeholder Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
May 2020	Legal Services	Legal review of Project Delivery Agreement and Land Transfer Agreement undertaken	Legal comments negotiated into a revised Agreements with the Department of Planning	Open Space and Natural Resources/City Assets and Operations/Manager Open Space and Natural Resources
May 2020	Property Plan and Program	Agree with the provisions within the Land Transfer Agreement as they are consistent with community land classification.		Open Space and Natural Resources/City Assets and Operations/Manager Open Space and Natural Resources
June 2020	Recreation Facilities and Program	Ensure community access to playing fields and baseball diamonds.	Development of a Community Facilities Land map to limit construction activities within sports facilities. This has been included within the Project Delivery Agreement.	Open Space and Natural Resources/City Assets and Operations/Manager Open Space and Natural Resources
June 2020	Park Services	Review of on-going maintenance obligations	Maintenance costs to be included within future years’ budgets.	Open Space and Natural Resources/City Assets and Operations/Manager Open Space and Natural Resources
June 2020	Land Use Planning	Associated Voluntary Planning Agreements (VPA) from adjacent development sites.	Ensure VPA negotiations are aware of this $10 million investment at George Kendall Riverside Park	Open Space and Natural Resources/City Assets and Operations/Manager Open Space and Natural Resources

Councillor Consultation

25. The following Councillor consultation has been undertaken in relation to this matter:

Date	Councillor	Councillor Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
17 October 2019	Clr Prociv	Request an update on the progress of the masterplan and future planned works.	Site meeting held to discuss masterplan progress and the announcement of the State Government works.	Open Space and Natural Resources/City Assets and Operations/Manager Open Space and Natural Resources
20 December 2019	Lord Mayor	Request by the Member of Parramatta, The Hon. Geoff Lee MP regarding project update and request for City of Parramatta to undertake the funding works.	Enquiries made with the Department to determine if the City of Parramatta could deliver the park upgrade works. This was not possible due to the nature of the Parliamentary funding and structure of the Program.	Open Space and Natural Resources/City Assets and Operations/Manager Open Space and Natural Resources
22 June Councillor Briefing	Project update and briefing provided to Councillors by the Manager Open Space and Natural Resources.

26. The first stage of the project will be a peer review of the existing masterplan conducted by the Department’s designer for alignment with stated program objectives, proposed responses to technical matters and constructability.

27. Following this process, the Department will engage with the community following the development of an engagement strategy. The Department are in the final stage of preparing the draft community and engagement strategy for Council to review. The engagement strategy aims to demonstrate the partnership between State and Local Government in delivering this park upgrade project and will ensure that all community stakeholders are involved in the design review process.

28. Following the community engagement stage the design updates will be on boarded, with design reviews undertaken by the Department and Council, prior to design finalisation and the commencement of embellishment works for completion by 2022.

29. Once the embellishment works are completed by the Department, the land that is currently owned by the PMC that forms a portion of George Kendall Riverside Park will be transferred to Council’s ownership.

30. Council’s legal team have reviewed and support the Project Delivery Agreement and Land Transfer Agreement as attached.

31. The Land Transfer Agreement makes clear that, if requested, any formal recognition of the title hand over will be by the relevant Minister in a public ceremony.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATION FOR COUNCIL

32. The works undertaken by the Department of Planning at George Kendall Riverside Park will be at the Departments cost. The Department has allocated a $10M budget for this project.

33. The transfer of the PMC Land from the Corporation to the Council is at a cost of $1.00.

34. Council would be accepting the PMC land in its present state and condition including any contamination or hazardous substances. The former Parramatta Council used the lots as a municipal landfill between 1970 and 1979. The land parcels owned by PMC are known to be contaminated land. The lots contain residential, industrial and commercial waste. The contamination of the lots fits within a typical tip profile with methane gas and leachate present. There is a variable capping layer over the PMC lots, some lots will require additional capping while other lots may be compliant with capping standards. If lots are located outside of this project area the cost of further capping works would be at Council’s cost. These costs are not known and would require further detailed investigation to determine capping thickness. Council currently manages the monitoring of contamination across the park under the Contaminated Land Management in Public Parks budget (project 114371), this has an annual budget of $380,000. There would be no change to the current contaminated land management practices once Council takes ownership of the PMC lots.

35. Council currently spends $22,000 maintaining the project area at George Kendall Riverside Park. Based on the significant elements identified within the masterplan (such as the additional sporting field and its associated facilities) it is estimated that an additional annual maintenance budget of $69,000 will be required from November 2022. This can be captured from two funding sources; $34,000 from existing budget allocation and $35,000 from the Stormwater Levy Special Rate.

36. In partnership with Western Sydney Local Health District Council undertook a report on the social value of parks and sporting fields titled; ‘Valuing our green places - A Social Return on Investment evaluation of parks and sports fields in City of Parramatta, 2018’. This report found that $10 of value is created for every $1 invested in parks and sporting fields. This $10 Million investment provides a significant investment that would translate to $100 Million of social, environmental and economic value to the community.

37. The Project Delivery Agreement identifies that any financial risk associated with disturbance to the contamination caused by the project works will rest with the Department. The Department must ensure that all new works including contamination remediation are undertaken to current government regulations and Australian Standards. The risk for cost overruns would not fall to Council however they would likely result in a reduction to the scope of the project works.

38. To reduce the financial risk to Council for defects the appointed contractor for the works will be required to sign a deed poll in Council’s favor that will provide Council with contractual rights against the contractor under the construction contract.

39. Clause 12 of the Land Transfer Agreement provides that the proceeds from any compulsory acquisition (except the acquisition of an easement over part of the Land for infrastructure for public use), sale or other disposal of the Land must be shared equally between the parties with half the proceeds received by Council paid to PMC, except for the value of improvements and fixtures erected or installed by Council on the Land which will be entirely for Council. Council may deem this appropriate or seek to amend this clause to ensure that the share of the sale proceeds to PMC is reduced over time.

James Smallson

Manager Open Space and Natural Resources

Peter Lichaa

Manager Capital Projects

Wayne Carter

Executive Director City Assets & Operations

Ian Woodward

Group Manager Legal Services

Alistair Cochrane

Chief Financial Officer

Michael Tzimoulas

Executive Director Corporate Services

Jon Greig

Executive Director Community Services

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

Attachments:

1 ⇩	Attachment 1 - Central Precinct George Kendall Riverside Park Masterplan	1 Page
2 ⇩	Attachment 2 - Project Delivery Agreement including annexures	67 Pages
3 ⇩	Attachment 3 - Land Ownership Map George Kendall Riverside Park	1 Page
4 ⇩	Attachment 4 - Land Transfer Schedule	2 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 13 July 2020 Item 18.1

INNOVATIVE

ITEM NUMBER 18.1

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: LED Street Lighting Project

REFERENCE F2015/01298 - D07369496

REPORT OF Project Officer Environmental Outcomes

PURPOSE:

To update Council on the financial and energy reduction success of Phase 1 & 2 (2015 – 2019) LED Street Lighting upgrade projects, and to advise Council of potential Phase 3 LED street lighting upgrade projects:

· Phase 3a Ausgrid Residential Roads LED street lighting upgrade project.

· Phase 3b Endeavour Energy Major Roads LED street lighting preliminary business case.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That, Council notes the success of the Phase 1 and 2 of the Light Years Ahead LED street lighting project. At a capital cost of $2.06 million, Phase 1 and 2 combined, upgraded 6,727 LED street lights within the Endeavour Energy network and are on track to deliver operational savings of over $7 million over the life of the asset (Attachment 1).

(b) That, Council accepts the Ausgrid residential roads LED street lighting upgrade quote of $200,120.18 ex GST and endorses Ausgrid’s Option 3 - Council to fully fund the project. This project will upgrade an estimated 470 street lights to deliver a $54,054 annual energy savings and a ten year Net Present Value (NVP) of $185,451. Simple payback period is 3.7 years (Attachment 2).

(c) Further, that Council endorses the development of a full business case for the Phase 3b Major Roads LED Street Lighting upgrade project on the basis of the positive financial benefits detailed in the preliminary business case (Attachment 3), and that full business case be presented to Council upon completion for final decision.

BACKGROUND

1. City of Parramatta Council has a total of 15,379 street lights (as at 29/4/20). Of these:

· 84% are within the Endeavour Energy Network area; and

· 16% are within the Ausgrid Network area.

2. Of the City’s entire street lights:

· 64% are on residential roads; and

· 36% are on major roads.

3. Implementation of Phase 1 and 2 LED street lighting upgrade projects have resulted in 50% of Council’s residential road street lights now being energy efficient LED lights (7,644).

4. Map 1 (below) provides the locations of the upgraded LED streetlights within the Endeavour Energy network. Blue dots represent Phase 1 and green dots represent Phase 2 LED lights.

5. Street lighting charges are by far the single biggest component of Council’s energy bills.

6. Council’s Delivery Program (2018 – 2021) includes the following action 3.6.6.2 - Complete Phase 2 of the Light Years Ahead Project (Aug 2019), and prepare a business case to seek funding for Phase 3 (Aug 2020) of the Light Years Ahead LED Street Lighting Replacement Program.

7. At the Council Meeting of 13 June 2017 Council resolved:

a) That Council notes the three business case documents prepared as part of the Phase 2 Light Years Ahead LED Street Lighting project: Feasibility Study, Feasibility Study Update, and the Project Support Proposal and Scope.

b) That Council endorses to proceed with the Phase 2 Light Years Ahead LED street lighting replacement project to replace an estimated 5,970 streetlights to deliver an estimated $5.84 million in energy savings, and 36,493 tCO2-e greenhouse gas emission savings over the life of the asset (20 years).

c) That Council endorses the Endeavour Energy quote, and the following cost options of that quote:

a. Product choice - Gerard StreetLED 14W as the preferred lighting product.

b. Extent of replacement - Replacement Scenario 1 - Replacement of all existing residential street lights with LEDs.

d) That Council endorses the appointment of Ironbark Sustainability to provide project management and support throughout the Phase 2 project.

e) Further, that Council endorses to fully fund the Phase 2 ‘Light Years Ahead’ LED street lighting replacement project through Council’s internal funding sources, starting financial year 2017/18.

8. In 2017 Council adopted the City of Parramatta’s Environmental Sustainability Strategy with the goal to reduce corporate greenhouse gas emissions by 60% by 2038 (baseline of 2014/15). 50% of Council’s emissions are generated from street lighting and the Strategy includes an action to “deliver Phases 2 and 3 of the LED street lighting upgrade program”. The State Government’s Energy Saving Certificate (ESCs) Scheme provides a financial incentive to Council to reduce emissions through energy efficiency projects, thereby assisting Council to accelerate these types of projects.

PHASE 1 AND 2 STREET LIGHTING LED UPGRADE PROJECTS

9. Council has now completed Phase 1 (2015 - 2016) and Phase 2 (2017 - 2019) of the street lighting LED upgrade program. Area specific upgrade sites are identified broadly in paragraph 4 above or Map 1. The following table provides a summary of these projects:

	Actual		Projected
	No. Lights	Costs	Net savings (20yrs)
Phase 1	1,089	$161K	$1.7 million
Phase 2	5,638	$1.9M	$5.4 million
TOTAL	6,727	$2.06 million	$7.1 million

Table 1: Results of Phase 1 & 2 street lighting LED upgrade projects

Post Installation Verification of Phase 1 and 2 Benefits

10. Ironbark Sustainability were commissioned to complete an analysis of post LED light installation bills to verify if the business case savings are being achieved. The Phase 1 & 2 LED Street Lighting Upgrade Project: Post Installation Verification Report (Attachment 1) has substantiated that the LED lights have provided significant financial and emission savings for Council.

11. Table 2 below details the actual savings up to March 2020 as verified through post installation billing data. The table also includes projected saving up to the end of the 2022/23 financial year. These projected savings have been calculated from the tariff rates as locked in by the Australian Energy Regulator.

Outcomes from Phase 1 and 2 combined	Actual Savings					Projected (Modelled) Savings
Outcomes from Phase 1 and 2 combined	15/16	16/17	17/18	18/19	19/20		20/21	21/22	22/23
Cumulative energy and SLUOS cost savings	$9,305	$46,359	$104,841	$393,696	$766,932		$1.139m	$1.513m	$1.887m
Cumulative energy savings (kWh)	88,868	444,342	975,888	2,629,722	4,787,104		6,944,486	9,101,867	11,259,249

Table 2: Phase 1 & 2 verification of savings through billing data analysis

12. Since installation (starting 2015 through to 2019), the financial results are:

· $393,696 actual financial savings up to 2018/19.

· $766,932 saving by the end of this financial year 2019/20.

· $1.887 million projected saving by end of 2022/23.

· $7.1 million projected saving over 20 year asset life.

· $626,000 income through the Energy Saving Certificate (ESCs) that are generated by the 41,259 tCO₂-e reduction.

13. Since installation, the emission results are:

· 1,977 tCO₂-e actual emission savings 2018/19.

· 3,918.7 tCO₂-e savings by the end of this financial year 2019/20.

· 9,740 tCO₂-e projected emission savings by end of 2022/23.

· 41,259 tCO₂-e projected savings over 20 year asset life.

14. The actual Phase 1 and 2 project costs were reduced by $690,000 and these savings were achieved by:

· Claiming of Energy Saving Certificate (ESCs) Phase 1 ($63K) and Phase 2 ($564K). ESCs are a state government financial incentive to encourage investment in energy saving projects, including street lighting upgrades.

· Reducing costs during project implementation.

15. Overall this project had good community support and included a substantial community engagement and communications program including:

· A dedicated website www.lightyearsahead.com.au.

· A range of printed internal and external communication materials.

· Direct community engagement events with each council including at Parramatta’s Australian Day Festival 2016.

· Surveys showing strong and widespread community support for the program.

· Community Engagement Program Evaluation Report (appended with 13 June 2017 Council report).

16. The delivery of Phase 1 and 2 was as part of the Light Years Ahead project involving Councils from the Western Sydney region and was project managed by WSROC (since 2014). The Light Years Ahead project provided the following opportunities:

· Economy of scale through scaling up the number of street lights that reduced the price per light and bracket replacement.

· Leveraging consistency across participating councils and providing additional savings on maintenance costs and tariff charges.

· Providing transparency and consistence between the network provider and Council.

FUTURE OPPORTUNITIES

17. The following two opportunities have been identified for further street lighting upgrades which will deliver financial and energy savings to Council:

· Phase 3a is within the Ausgrid network and is proposing LED street lighting upgrades to residential street lights.

· Phase 3b is within the Endeavour Energy network and is proposing LED street lighting upgrades on major roads.

Phase 3a Ausgrid Residential LED Street Lighting Upgrade Project

18. In August 2019, Ausgrid approached all Council’s within their network to participate in their LED residential street lighting upgrade project. SSROC has provided technical support to all Ausgrid Councils by modelling the financial and carbon emission savings. SSROC’s modelling has guided discussions with Ausgrid to negotiate down the financial contribution required by Council.

19. Map 1 (above) highlights the location of the Ausgrid network within the municipality. These sections were transferred to the City of Parramatta through the amalgamation process.

20. In May 2020, an updated proposal from Ausgrid was received (Attachment 2), identifying 470 Ausgrid residential lights are eligible to be upgraded to energy efficient LED lights (the figures provided are Ausgrid’s current best estimations and could be subject to change during project implementation).

21. Table 3 below outlines the Ausgrid proposal:

Number of lights	470
Capital costs (lights and brackets)	$196,329.81
Residual costs	$3,790.37
TOTAL outlay cost	$200,120.18
Estimated ESCs income	-$30,000
Net Present Value (NPV) 10yr	$185,451
Estimated annual operating savings	$54,054
Simple payback	3.7 years or 3 years with ESCs sale

Table 3: Phase 3a Ausgrid LED residential street lighting upgrade proposal details

22. As noted in the Table above, the investment has a 3.7 year payback and with the sale of ESCs the project would be paid back within 3 years. The project will also generate an annual $54,054 operating savings.

23. Should Council proceed with the Ausgrid Phase 3a LED street lighting project the project management would be completed by Council staff with support from SSROC, who are available to help with identifying, advocating and negotiating additional savings relating to LED maintenance and tariff charges.

Phase 3b Endeavour Major Roads LED Street Lighting Upgrade Project

24. In December 2019, a preliminary business case (Attachment 3) was developed for the street lights on major roads within the Endeavour Energy network. This report seeks Council’s endorsement to move the preliminary business case to a full business case for this project including funding options.

25. The preliminary business case identified approximately 5,095 major roads street lights eligible to be upgraded to energy efficient LED lights.

26. Map 1 (above) shows the Endeavour network area.

27. Table 4 below outlines the preliminary business case expected outcomes:

LED Lighting upgrade cost	$3.6 - $7m
Net cost savings for Council (over 20-year life cycle)	$17.8 - $23.3m
Potential Energy Saving Certificates (ESCs) income	$0.4 - $0.9m

Table 4: Phase 3b Endeavour Energy major roads preliminary business case

28. The key activities that would be required to progress the preliminary business case to a fully scoped and detailed business case will include:

· Confirm assets and capital works eligible for the project;

· Consult external and internal stakeholders (Roads and Maritime Services & Endeavour Energy);

· Detail the project management; and

· Assess available funding options.

CONSULTATION & TIMING

Stakeholder Consultation

29. Both energy network providers (Ausgrid and Endeavour) have been consulted and are supportive of energy efficient LED street lighting upgrades.

Councillor Consultation

30. The following Councillor consultation has been undertaken in relation to this matter:

Date	Councillor	Councillor Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
June 2013	All	Resolution passed to implement Phase 1 LED Street Lighting upgrade project	Phase 1 implemented August 2015 – May 2016	City Strategy
June 2017	All	Resolution passed to implement Phase 2 LED Street Lighting upgrade project	Phase 2 implemented November 2017 – June 2019	City Strategy

FINANCIAL IMPLICATION FOR COUNCIL

Phase 3a Ausgrid Residential LED Street Lighting Upgrade Project

31. Funding exists within the publically exhibited 2020/21 operating budget and has been approved by Finance and Council’s Project Review Committee.

32. It is, therefore, recommended that Council fully fund the Ausgrid Phase 3a LED street lighting project from existing budget allocation starting from 2020/21 financial year.

33. The expected total project cost of the Ausgrid Phase 3a project is $200,120.18 ex GST.

34. Within 12 months of project completion, Council will be able to reduce the street lighting annual operation budget by approximately $54,054 and secure Energy Savings Certificates (ESCs) revenue (approximately $30,000).

Phase 3b Endeavour Major Roads LED Street Lighting Upgrade Project

35. At this point, we are NOT seeking a financial contribution from Council for the Phase 3b Endeavour Major Roads LED street lighting upgrade project. Existing internal staff resources would be utilised to further scope and develop the business case.

CONCLUSION

36. Given the successful delivery and benefits of the Phase 1 and 2 LED street lighting upgrade project, it is recommended that Council:

a. Proceed with the Phase 3a Ausgrid residential roads LED street lighting project.

b. Advance the Phase 3b Major Roads LED street lighting upgrade project by working with Endeavour Energy, WSROC and Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) to develop a full business case including potential funding options. Upon completion, the detailed business case for Phase 3b Major Roads LED street lighting upgrade project will be provided to Council for decision.

NEXT STEPS

37. Subject to Council approval to proceed, it is proposed that the following actions occur:

Action	Timeframe
Accept Ausgrid Quote dated 26 May 2020 (Attachment 2).	July 2020
Establish internal project management processes to oversee the Phase 3a and 3b projects.	July 2020
Ausgrid Phase 3a project commences.	August 2020
Endeavour Phase 3b project business case development.	August – December 2020
Present detailed Phase 3 business case to Council.	Early 2021

Karen Jones

Project Officer Environmental Outcomes

Helen Papathanasiou

Environmental Outcomes Manager

Alistair Cochrane

Chief Financial Officer

Geoff King

Group Manager City Strategy

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

Attachments:

1	Attachment 1: Phase 1 and 2 LED Street Lighting post installation Validation report June 2020 (confidential)	25 Pages
2 ⇩	Attachment 2: Phase 3a Ausgrid LED street lighting upgrade letter of offer	6 Pages
3	Attachment 3: Phase 3b Major Roads LED Street Lighting preliminary business case (confidential)	54 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 13 July 2020 Item 18.2

INNOVATIVE

ITEM NUMBER 18.2

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: City of Parramatta Council COVID-19 Recovery Plan

REFERENCE F2020/01447 - D07470915

REPORT OF Manager - Social Outcomes

PURPOSE:

To:

- update on the progress of actions in Council’s COVID-19 Relief Packages,

- modify a number of existing COVID-19 actions,

- approve of a small number of new recovery related actions.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council note the Progress Report (Attachment A) on the 23 Action Items in Council’s COVID-19 Community Resilience and Economic Relief Package (“Relief Package”), including that 8 actions have been completed,15 are ‘progressing- on track’ and none are behind schedule.

(b) That Council note the Community Grants Action Item has been completed (item F8) and 83 successful business grants’ recipients have been notified (item J6).

(c) That Council approve changes to 5 Actions Items in the existing Relief Package, to respond to the changing impacts of COVID-19 on the community and businesses (Attachment B), including:

i. Waiver of License and Hire Fees (F5(a)) – Staged reintroduction of licence and hire fees for outdoor dining, food stalls, temporary premises and advertising over the next 12 months;

ii. Waiver of License and Hire Fees (F5(b)) – Staged resumption of hire fees for community halls, parks and community venues over the next 3 months;

iii. On Street Parking (F6) – Staged return to normal parking monitoring and enforcement once occupancy reaches 80% of last year’s vehicle volumes;

iv. Waiver of Rents (F7(a)(b)) – Staged reintroduction of fees for Outdoor Dining Approval holders outside of the PLR Corridor, community groups, essential services and not for profit organisations, and staged reduction of rent relief on affordable housing dwellings;

v. Supporting Development (R2) - Consolidation and update of several approved planning related initiatives and actions into one action.

(d) That, Council endorse ongoing advocacy for the Shovel Ready and Acceleration Projects (R1) (Attachment C) noting they have the potential to generate over 20,000 short term jobs, 6,000 ongoing jobs and c.$24B of economic value.

(e) That, Council endorse acceptance of an invitation from the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment to join the Accelerated Assessment Program and approve the Council putting in place a complementary program, as outlined in paragraph 9 of the Paper.

(f) That, Council authorise the Lord Mayor and CEO to respond to requests for the utilisation of Council assets to support local emergency responses and essential COVID-19 related service delivery (R6).

(g) That Council prepare a plan to ensure there are available transport and parking options as people return to the CBD (R7).

(h) Further that, Council endorse the Lord Mayor to respond to a request from the University of Western Sydney for a letter of support for International Education in Parramatta (R15).

BACKGROUND

1. The impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic (COVID-19 or pandemic) has been felt across Australia since March 2020. As Australia’s fifth largest economy, Parramatta will bear a substantial portion of these impacts.

2. Council approved its first COVID-19 Community Resilience and Economic Relief Package on 7 April 2020 valued at $3 million, to respond and provide support for the local economy and community.

3. A further support package, including creative economy support, was approved 9 June 2020.

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

COVID-19 Community Resilience and Economic Relief Package – Progress Report

4. Council endorsed its COVID-19 Relief Package on 7 April 2020. This included 23 actions that focus on financial relief, jobs and investment, health and wellbeing, and support for vulnerable people, totalling $3 million in support. Of these actions, 8 have been completed, 15 are ‘progressing – on track’, and no actions are behind schedule.

5. An additional 5 actions were included in an endorsed Creative Economy Support Program on 9 June 2020.

6. A summary of progress of these actions is provided in the COVID-19 Community Resilience and Economic Relief Package – Action Tracker Progress Report June 2020 (Attachment A).

Previously endorsed COVID-19 Relief Package actions, now requiring revision

7. The nature and experience of COVID–19 in our community is changing, as are social distancing requirements. Re-opening of businesses, programs, services and facilities are well underway. Five of the actions that were endorsed by Council in its first COVID-19 Relief Package in April 2020 (which focused on relief measures in a time of crisis) are now no longer applicable in their current form and require revision to respond to the changing COVID-19 context.

8. The five actions proposed for revision are listed below. A comparison of the changes proposed against the original endorsed action application description, as well as the reason for the change, is provided in full at Attachment B:

Action Number	Title	Proposed New Description
F5(a)	Waiver of License and Hire Fees - Outdoor dining, food stalls, temporary premises and advertising	Council will provide a staged reintroduction of license and hire fees for outdoor dining licenses, food stalls, temporary premises, and advertising in line with continued easing of lockdown restrictions. The waiver of license and hire fees will apply: - between 1 July 2020 to 30 September 2020: 50% reduction - between 1 October 2020 to 31 December 2020: 50% reduction - between 1 January 2021 to 31 March 2021: 25% reduction - between 1 April 2021 to 30 June 2021: 0% reduction, return to normal A review of further need will occur at the end of this period, or if COVID-19 related circumstances significantly change.
F5(b)	Waiver of License and Hire Fees - Community halls, parks and community venues	From 14 July 2020 Council will resume the charging of ordinary fees for casual hire of community facilities and sports fields, and will extend a 50% fee waiver to annual hirers of community facilities and seasonal hirers of sports fields , for a further 3 month period. A review of further need will occur at the end of this period, or if COVID-19 related circumstances significantly change
F7 (a) (b)	Waiver of Rents- Rent relief to all valid Outdoor Dining Approval holders outside of the PLR Corridor, community groups, essential services and not for profit organisations	F7(a) Council will extend the rent waiver currently in place for Outdoor Dining Fees (outside of Parramatta Light Rail Corridor currently under construction) and Council owned assets which are occupied by community groups, essential services and not for profit organisations, with the following changes, which reflect the easing of social distancing and the reopening of trading with less restrictions. The rent waiver will apply: - between 1 July 2020 to 30 September 2020: 50% reduction - between 1 October 2020 to 31 December 2020: 50% reduction - between 1 January 2021 to 31 March 2021: 25% reduction - between 1 April 2021 to 30 June 2021: 0% reduction, return to normal A review of further need will occur at the end of this period, or if COVID-19 related circumstances (including legislation) significantly change. F7(b) In addition, Council will provide rent relief for tenants of City of Parramatta Council’s Affordable Housing Dwellings, if tenants qualify for financial hardship and a request is made for rent reduction, on the following basis: - between 1 July 2020 to 30 September 2020: 50% reduction - between 1 October 2020 to 31 December 2020: 50% reduction - between 1 January 2021 to 31 March 2021: 25% reduction - between 1 April 2021 to 30 June 2021: 0% reduction, return to normal A review of further need will occur at the end of this period, or if COVID-19 related circumstances (including legislation) significantly change.
F6	On Street Parking	The Council will put in place a range of measures to provide grace periods and cautions for time-limited on street parking spaces; however, Council will continue to enforce illegal parking to ensure public safety and turnover for short stay parking to support local businesses. Council will also reduce and change time limits in a number of local on street parking locations to facilitate takeaway services and support local business. The revised COVID19 Timed Parking Strategy (Extended Grace Period from 10 minutes to 1 hour and 2 cautions prior to a PIN issued on the 3rd occasion) continues. Normal Parking monitoring and enforcement will return once the parking occupancy rate reaches 80%. This will be monitored and compared against last year’s Mark Mode Vehicle volumes in Timed Parking Zones in the Parramatta CBD.
R2	Supporting Development	There have been a considerable number of changes to the original resolution around planning acceleration, and our intention is to consolidate these into the following actions: a) Review DAs and Planning Proposals being assessed by Council to prioritise economic stimulus opportunities, and make submissions to DPIE on State lead acceleration. b) Department of Planning, Industry and Environment Council Accelerated Assessment Program – Council has accepted an invitation to join this program that gives access to resources, guidance and support for accelerated assessment processes including a One Stop Shop service for State Government referrals and concurrences. c) Council is now accepting electronic lodgment of all development applications via NSW Planning Portal.
J2	E-Planning Acceleration – to combine with R2	Not applicable. Recommend consolidation with Action Item R2 to avoid duplication, and removal of Action J9.
J9	Planning Approval Acceleration – to combine with R2	Recommend consolidation with Action Item R2 to avoid duplication, and removal of Action J9.

9. Council Program of Prioritisation of Development Applications and Planning Proposals - Council staff have been working on an initiative to prioritise the assessment and progression of Development Applications and Planning Proposals that would contribute significantly to the recovery of the local economy from the effects of the pandemic based on the criteria below.

Development Applications:

1. Will the proposal create permanent/part time employment opportunities when operating

2. Does the proposal represent investment in the local business community

3. Does the proposal offer affordable housing options 

4. Does the proposal represent significant investment in our City, including residential development

5. Does the proposal generate significant construction jobs.

The basis for this approach comes from the need to support small to medium business investors who are typically local and will drive long-term employment options in our city, while contributing to services for the wider public. Examples of small to medium investment Development Applications are change of use to new businesses, expansion of existing businesses, new commercial, retail, office or industrial premises and child care centres.

Examples of affordable housing Development Applications comprise applications made under SEPP Affordable Rental Housing/SEPP Seniors Living, such as group homes, seniors living, Residential Flat Buildings with an affordable housing component and social housing proposed by the Crown.

Council has a dedicated City Significant Development assessment team who remain focused on Development Applications comprising major investment and/or have strategic significance for our City. These include, but are not limited to Development Applications for Wentworth Point, Parramatta Square, Carter Street and Melrose Park. Significant investors will typically deliver notable employment opportunities both during construction and in ongoing operation of any business, or improved housing choice. It is noted that these types of development are important economic drivers for our city creating construction jobs, and also a strong resident, worker and visitor base.

Planning Proposals:

1. Scale of employment and investment generation – short and long term

2. Potential for early finalisation (planning proposals that are almost at the end of process)

Staff resources are being applied to priority projects, noting most Planning Proposals have associated DCPs and VPAs which need to be finalised in conjunction with the Planning Proposal and often require a high level of staff resources to complete.

Importantly, the approach to the prioritisation of such applications is an administrative matter concerning the allocation of resources to support the recovery of the pandemic and does not involve any change to delegations or other processes and staff continue to seek Council endorsement of Planning Proposals under existing legislative and governance frameworks. An example of a recently finalised project is the proposal for a major mixed-use development at 14-20 Parkes Street, Harris Park.

10. Staff at the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE) have expressed interest in, and support for, this initiative. It is understood that this has helped inform the development of the recent DPIE initiative referred to below.

11. Department of Planning, Industry and Environment Council Accelerated Assessment Program – it is noted in the table that Council has joined this new Government program which aims to be a key factor in the investment attraction offering by a local council. It seeks to help councils attract local investment, jobs growth and opportunities program by giving access to resources, guidance and support for accelerated assessment processes. This includes a One Stop Shop service that will enable councils to escalate issues to resolve matters within State Government and explore systems improvements. An example being targeting reducing the time it can take for referrals of Planning Proposals and Development Applications to Government agencies such as Transport for NSW to be addressed.

12. The program does not change existing statutory processes or propose to change Council’s consultation processes, but targets improving the timeliness of how projects are assessed. DPIE staff have indicated support for Council’s own acceleration program and will work with Council staff to identify how the DPIE program can support Council’s aims.

13. The DPIE program will be developed over a series of meetings with DPIE staff and it is intended to ensure that Council’s use of the program is aligned with Council’s own acceleration program outlined earlier in this report.

Existing and proposed new recovery related actions that focus on rapid community and economic recovery post COVID-19

14. Council continues to focus its efforts to ensure City of Parramatta recovers as fast as possible and maximises new opportunities for a revitalised and more resilient City. This includes steps to financial sustainability, organisational recovery, business and community recovery, and Central City acceleration.

15. Work continues to implement several recovery focused actions that were endorsed by Council. A more detailed description of progress of all approved elements can be found in Attachment A.

Economic Development Program – Business grants and promotion of local business: Council continues to promote local businesses by the discover platform and listing, and the spot parking adaptation. 83 successful business grants’ recipients were notified in June 2020.

Creative Economy Relief Program – The implementation of this program has commenced, with a letter to notify and consult with the Premier (in her role as Arts Minister) prepared, and development of Cultural Grant criteria underway.

Supporting Development - Development Applications and Planning Proposals have been reviewed to prioritise economic stimulus opportunities. Council has made submissions to Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE) on its State led acceleration program for the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal and Aquatic and Leisure Centre Development Application. Discussions are being held with DPIE staff on how to expedite the consideration of these projects. Further, as noted earlier in this report, Council has accepted an invitation from DPIE to join the Council Accelerated Assessment Program that gives access to resources, guidance and support for accelerated assessment processes including a One Stop Shop service for State Government referrals and concurrences for Development Applications and Planning Proposals. Lastly, Council is now accepting electronic lodgement of all Development Applications via the NSW Planning Portal.

16. In addition, it is noted that Council staff will be reviewing Council’s approach and current resilience measures in light of the COVID-19 experience and learnings, as well as opportunities for business improvement to harness the positive changes and innovations that have occurred in this period to work practices.

17. Consideration of ways to accelerate Council’s capital works expenditure is ongoing, and most recently focused on formulating Council’s ‘Shovel Ready Projects’ submission to the State government. Council is also well positioned to support the reclaiming of public spaces post COVID-19 through its planning and future delivery of Parramatta Square and Light Rail activations and neighbourhood Family Fun Days.

18. A further four recovery focused actions are proposed for Council consideration:

Action Number	Title	Description
R1	Shovel Ready and Acceleration Projects	Note the identified, accelerated projects to support jobs and investment in our City with a proactive approach to advocacy and funding opportunities. Projects identified include: · City-shaping projects · Civic and cultural projects · Local infrastructure projects · Non-activated development applications in the CBD These shovel-ready projects will generate 21,400 short-term jobs, 5,970 long-term jobs and >$24.64b economic value.
R6	Utilisation of Council assets to support local emergency responses and essential service delivery	Provide Council assets for use, free of charge, for local emergency or essential services. This may include providing support for increased COVID-19 testing locations in key locations throughout the LGA, or alternative allied-health service delivery locations. This may also include the provision of special clinics established to enable suspected or confirmed cases to be directed away from Emergency Departments to reduce possible exposure to virus.
R7	Ensure transport and parking options to support people’s return to the CBD	Develop strategies to manage the movement of people in, out and around the Parramatta CBD (for both public and private transport modes) as the City and its workplaces move into recovery and re-opening stages. This will include: · approaches to managing peak hour movements, · developing and managing temporary and longer-term road and car park facilities use, · working with stakeholders to encourage flexible working, and cycling and walking infrastructure
R15	International education	The Vice Chancellor has written to the CEO highlighting the contribution of international students to Parramatta’s economy (over $100M per annum). The University requested the City publicly support international education – in partnership with the University – to cement Parramatta as one of NSW’s strongest international education destinations.

CONSULTATION & TIMING

Stakeholder Consultation

19. The following stakeholder consultation has been undertaken in relation to this matter:

Date	Stakeholder	Stakeholder Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
May – June 2020	Council Staff	All actions were developed with staff and management input.	Council’s Covid-19 related actions reflect staff and management input, both via individual consultation and the Crisis Management Team	City Strategy Unit

Councillor Consultation

20. The following Councillor consultation has been undertaken in relation to this matter:

Date	Councillor	Councillor Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
12/07/2020	All – via email	Requested information on review of community fee waiver	Proposal as set out in this report (5(b))	Jon Grieg
17/06/2020	All – via email	Financial impacts of changes to community facilities hire	Impacts as set out in this report (see Financial Impacts)	Jon Grieg
08/07/2020	All - Proposed Councillor Workshop	TBA	N/A	Geoff King

FINANCIAL IMPLICATION FOR COUNCIL

21. The proposed revisions to Council’s previously endorsed COVID-19 actions will reduce the amount of lost revenue to Council over the coming 3-month period (Q1), primarily through a paring back of license, hire fee and rent waivers as business re-opens. Any revenue from a return to partial charging for these services will result in a positive budget impact, given that the exhibited 2020/21 budget assumes no revenue from these services.

22. The cost to Council resulting from the proposed revisions to previously endorsed COVID-19 Relief Package actions is estimated to be as follows:

I. F5(a) Waiver of License and Hire Fees – returning to a 50% waiver rate for license and hire fees for outdoor dining licenses, food stalls, temporary premises, and advertising would realise approximately $30,000 in revenue in Q1.

II. F5(b) Waiver of License and Hire Fees – returning to a 50% waiver rate for community halls, parks and community venues would realise an estimated (maximum) of $114,000 in revenue for Q1, recognising that the current budget does not include any revenue for hire of these facilities in Q1 (due to COVID-19). The level of hire activity is not easy to predict at this stage.

III. F6 On Street Parking - Return to standard enforcement relies on a staged return relating to activity thresholds. Given the uncertainty of the timing of this threshold, it is difficult to estimate the financial impacts of this change. The current budget assumes a reduction of $1.7M for this activity in Q1, so returning to normal practice would result in a net improvement in Council’s position.

IV. F7(a) Waiver of Rents – Returning to 50% rent relief to all valid Outdoor Dining Approval holders outside of the PLR Corridor, community groups, essential services and not for profit organisations renting Council facilities would result in approximately $37,000 in revenue for Q1.

V. F7(b) Waiver of Rents – Affordable Housing Tenant Relief – if endorsed and applied at a 50% waiver, this would realise a maximum of $17,000 in revenue in Q1.

23. The cost to Council of the proposed new recovery related actions is as follows:

R1: Shovel ready and acceleration projects. No direct financial impact at this time.

R2: Supporting Development. No financial impact.

R7: Ensure transport and parking options support people’s return to the CBD. At this stage, the planning is being undertaken using existing staff resources. One of the outcomes of this planning is to identify any potential implementation costs.

R15 International education support. No financial impacts – this action is advocacy support for the University.

Megan Whittaker

Manager - Social Outcomes

Alistair Cochrane

Chief Financial Officer

Geoff King

Group Manager City Strategy

Jennifer Concato

Executive Director City Planning and Design

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

Attachments:

1 ⇩	Council COVID 19 Relief Package - Action Tracker Progress Report June 2020	7 Pages
2 ⇩	Proposed Changes to Application of Covid 19 Previously Endorsed Actions	4 Pages
3 ⇩	Parramatta Projects - Opportunties to Accelerate	3 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 13 July 2020 Item 18.3

INNOVATIVE

ITEM NUMBER 18.3

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Local Housing Strategy, Employment Lands Strategy Review and Update and Community Infrastructure Strategy

REFERENCE F2018/01832 - D07272665

REPORT OF Snr Project Officer Land Use; Senior Projects Officer; Team Leader –Land Use Planning

PREVIOUS ITEMS 18.1 - Draft Local Strategic Planning Statement, Draft Local Housing Strategy and Draft Community Infrastructure Strategy - Seeking endorsement for Public Exhibition - Council - 09 Sep 2019 6.30pm

PURPOSE:

To report to Council the feedback received from the exhibition of the Draft Local Housing Strategy, Draft Employment Lands Strategy Review and Update and Draft Community Infrastructure Strategy, to explain the changes to these draft strategies and to recommend their approval.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council approve the final Local Housing Strategy (LHS) at Attachment A, noting that it:

i. Provides strategic direction on where and when future housing growth will occur within the City of Parramatta.

ii. Housing growth will only be supported if it is aligned with the delivery of supporting local and regional infrastructure.

iii. Housing delivery is founded on a reduced growth rate that better responds to the delivery of required infrastructure.

(b) That Council approve the final Employment Lands Strategy (ELS) Review at Attachment B, noting that it:

i. Updates the status of employment land precincts across the City outlined in the Parramatta Employment Lands Strategy (2016), confirms the Strategic Direction for each precinct and does not propose any new policy changes.

(c) That Council forward the following strategies to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE) (consistent with the requirements of relevant section 9.1 Ministerial directions) for their review and approval:

i. The Council endorsed LHS (2020); and

ii. The Council endorsed ELS (2016) and the Council endorsed ELS Review and Update (2020).

(d) That Council delegate authority to the CEO to make minor amendments of a non-policy nature to the LHS and ELS Review and Update to enable their finalisation.

(e) Further, that Council approve the updated Community Infrastructure Strategy 2020 (CIS), at Attachment E, noting that it commits Council to pursuing, on its own and/or in partnership with others, the following over the next 20 years:

i. Provide an additional 14,500m² of library space across new and existing sites, as specified on pages 114 to 115 of the CIS, to ensure that library space provision meets the needs of the projected population growth to 2041.

ii. Provide an additional 25,300m² of multipurpose community space across new and existing Council-owned sites, as specified on pages 148 to 151 of the CIS, to ensure that community space provision meets the needs of the projected population growth to 2041.

iii. Work with Girl Guides and Scouts to improve the quality and community access to their existing halls in the short term, and in the longer term, provide suitable program space for Guide and Scout Groups in newly delivered multipurpose community hubs.

iv. Provide an additional 7,000m² of subsidised office and retail space for non-government organisations to deliver essential support services to our community, as specified on pages 228 to 229 of the CIS.

v. Advocate for high quality long day care (LDC) and out of school hours care (OSHC) services to be delivered to meet increasing demand, as specified on pages 260 to 263 of the CIS.

vi. Increase the provision of affordable rental housing by continuing to implement the Affordable Rental Housing Policy 2019, as endorsed by Council on 26 November 2018.

vii. Continue to support existing community gardens operating on Council-owned and Council-managed land, and support proposals to develop new community gardens where there is community support for their successful operation.

viii. Work towards delivery of a new aquatic facility in Parramatta Park, and progress master planning for the upgrade and renewal of Epping Aquatic and Leisure Centre.

ix. Provide an additional 30 indoor sports courts across the LGA to ensure that indoor sport and recreation space meets the needs of the projected population growth to 2041, and to assist in meeting the deficit of open space for formal sport, as specified on pages 372 to 373 of the CIS.

x. Increase the number of local play spaces from 121 to 136, and increase the number of district play spaces from 9 to 24, to ensure that play space provision meets the needs of the projected population growth to 2041, as specified on pages 424 to 427 of the CIS.

xi. Through redesign, increase the number of Council-owned sports fields from 63 to 80, and work with Department of Education to increase community access to sports fields located on school grounds outside of school hours, to ensure that sports field provision better meets the needs of the projected population growth to 2041, as specified on pages 474 to 479 of the CIS.

xii. Apply the recommendations of the CIS in negotiations of future voluntary planning agreements that include community infrastructure.

xiii. Incorporate projects identified in the CIS into the development contributions plan harmonisation project, and subsequent updates.

BACKGROUND

1. Revisions to the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act) introduced a requirement for councils to prepare a Local Strategic Planning Statement (LSPS) – a long-term vision for land use planning in a council’s local government area (LGA) which responds to broader priorities identified in the Central City District Plan (March 2018) (or “District Plan”). The City’s new LSPS was endorsed by Council on 30 March 2020 and came into effect on 31 March 2020 following receipt of a letter of Assurance from the Greater Sydney Commission.

Local Housing Strategy

2. As part of determining the housing vision within the LSPS, Council prepared a Draft Local Housing Strategy (LHS) relying on State Government guidelines for preparing local housing strategies. The Draft LHS provides strategic direction on where and when future housing growth will occur within the City of Parramatta. It also aligns with the housing requirements in the State Government’s District Plan (including targets). There is also a requirement for the LHS to be endorsed by DPIE in accordance with the relevant section 9.1 Ministerial Direction.

3. A key change that has now been introduced to the LHS is that the housing growth rates have been revised downwards. In the Draft LHS, the City’s population was set to double by the year 2036 via local and State government led planned precincts which have been in train for some time. In the revised LHS, whilst the same amount of growth will be delivered, the growth rate will be much slower so that it better responds to infrastructure delivery and is market achievable. This approach has been developed with and, endorsed by, the Greater Sydney Commission (GSC) through the LSPS Assurance process.

4. A further important change that has been introduced is confirmation in the Housing Vision and in the general narrative that housing growth will only be supported if it is aligned with the delivery of supporting infrastructure. This includes State infrastructure such as transport and school works, and local infrastructure such as that delivered by the Council which is generally identified in the Community Infrastructure Strategy that is also considered in this report.

Employment Lands Strategy – Review and Update

5. Council also prepared the Draft Employment Lands Strategy Review and Update (August 2019) (ELS Review and Update) which updates the status of employment land precincts across the City outlined in the Parramatta Employment Lands Strategy (2016). Together, they make up the vision for employment lands across the City.

6. The ELS Review and Update was originally appended to the LSPS and exhibited with it. A revised version has been developed (2020) based on exhibition feedback which provides an update on the status of each of the employment lands precincts and confirms the Strategic Direction for each precinct. It now forms a standalone document that updates Council’s strategy for key employment lands precincts based on decisions made since 2016 in locations such as Melrose Park, and does not propose any new policy changes. This revised version should be read in conjunction with the City’s ELS (2016) as both documents will now make up the City’s Employment Lands Strategy framework.

7. There is also a requirement for the ELS and ELS Review and Update and ELS (2016) to be endorsed by DPIE in accordance with the relevant section 9.1 Ministerial Direction.

Community Infrastructure Strategy

8. With regards to community infrastructure, Council also prepared a draft Community Infrastructure Strategy (CIS). The purpose of this Strategy is to plan for the community infrastructure required to meet the needs of the projected population growth that City of Parramatta is forecast to experience over the next 20 years.

9. The figure below shows the linkages between the LSPS, LHS, ELS Review and Update, Community Infrastructure Strategy and the Community Strategic Plan.

Figure 1 – Relationship of Council’s key plans and strategies on land use and infrastructure (extracted from the City of Parramatta LSPS)

EXHIBITION PERIOD

10. All of these strategic plans – the draft LSPS, the draft LHS and draft CIS (‘the strategies’) as well as the ELS Review and Update (which, at that time, was appended to the draft LSPS) were simultaneously exhibited for a 6 week period from 30 September to 11 November 2019. During this time, the community (residents, businesses, workers, visitors, interest groups, non-government and not-for-profit organisations, the development industry and applicants, State Government authorities and others) were able to comment on the draft strategies.

Consultation mechanisms

11. A number of consultation mechanisms were utilised to extend the reach of the strategies. These included media releases, public advertisements, social media posts, a letter mail out, email newsletters and drop-in sessions and throughout the duration of the exhibition period, a range of options were provided for the community to return feedback on the draft strategies:

a. For the LSPS, draft LHS and draft ELS Review and Update, the mechanisms utilised are detailed in Section 3.6 of the Community Engagement Report (LSPS & LHS) provided at Attachment C.

b. For the draft CIS, the mechanisms relied on are detailed in the Section 2 of the CIS Engagement Evaluation at Attachment F.

12. The CIS Project Team also presented to Council’s Access Committee.

Community feedback and policy matters relating to the LHS and ELS Review and Update

Submissions

13. Community feedback received via submissions on the draft LHS and the ELS Review and Update is detailed in Section 4 of the Community Engagement Report (LSPS & LHS) provided at Attachment C. A total of 87 submissions were received. In summary:

a. The key themes raised from residents and interest groups/ not-for-profit organisations relating to housing delivery were around the following:

i. Concern around the doubling of the City’s population and its impact on infrastructure, local character and amenity, and the need to provide housing diversity.

ii. The need to stage growth with infrastructure delivery.

iii. The need to protect low-density areas and protect tree coverage as well as protect land for employment.

iv. Concern around the influencing role of developers in the planning process.

Note: These stakeholders did not comment on industrial land issues.

b. The key points raised from the development and retail industries, applicants and investors relating to housing delivery and industrial land precincts were around the following:

i. The desire to accelerate renewal and/or land use change for their respective precinct/site or requests for site-specific planning proposals to be fast-tracked outside recommended LHS sequencing.

ii. Requests to review and/or amend planning controls relating to specific sites.

iii. The assertion that certain sites or precincts containing Employment Lands are underperforming and that alternative land uses should be considered despite Council’s Employment Lands Strategy (2016) (ELS) and exhibited draft ELS Review and Update (2020).

c. The key points raised from the State Government authorities relating to housing delivery and industrial land precincts were around the following:

i. The need to sequence housing growth in line with infrastructure delivery as well as ensure the LHS has flexibility to accommodate for the final recommendations of the Greater Sydney Commission’s Place-based Infrastructure Compact for Greater Parramatta Olympic Peninsula (GPOP PIC) - a strategic planning model that looks holistically at precincts to better align growth with the provision of infrastructure and services.

ii. Reinforcing the importance of integrated transport and land use planning to achieve a sustainable, liveable and productive city. This included protecting key industrial land.

d. Key points raised by adjoining Councils were around support for the Affordable Housing Contribution Scheme (City of Ryde and The Hills); for the opportunity to work with Council on planning for the Melrose Park Growth Precinct (City of Ryde); and support for the Draft GPOP PIC principle on infrastructure planning before growth (City of Ryde).

14. Refer to the Community Engagement Report at Attachment C for detailed responses to each submission received. Note that the first edition of the Community Engagement Report (March 2020) reported solely on the feedback on the Local Strategic Planning Statement which was reported to Council on 23 March 2020. The second edition at Attachment C updates the first edition by incorporating the feedback received on the Local Housing Strategy and the ELS Review and Update. This new content is shown in blue font.

Community Survey

15. Community feedback was also received via a community survey. A total of 495 survey responses were received on the draft LHS and LSPS (including the ELS Review and Update) - which is detailed in Section 4.3 of the Community Engagement Report at Attachment C. In summary the key themes on housing and employment land that were raised were around the following:

a. Respondents supporting the need for the staging of growth so that it does not happen all at once.

b. Respondents supporting more low-rise development was seen as important for housing diversity.

c. Affordable rental housing was seen as important.

d. Respondents supporting the need to protect critical areas for employment and urban services from residential development encroachment.

16. For further details, refer to Section 4.3 in Attachment C.

Release of the GPOP Draft PIC

17. In late 2019, a draft Place-based Infrastructure Compact Pilot (PIC) for the Greater Parramatta to Olympic Peninsula (GPOP) area was exhibited by the GSC. A Council report on Council’s submission on the draft PIC was considered by Council at its 16 December 2019 Council meeting (to Item 18.2). The endorsed submission was subsequently made to the GSC.

18. The draft PIC states that:

If all recent and proposed land use changes in GPOP were to happen in the near time, it would not be possible to fund all of the necessary infrastructure at the same time. Growth must be sequenced to meet market demand, but it must not outpace the NSW Government’s capacity to fund services and infrastructure (p.41).

19. To that end, references to the Draft GPOP PIC and its impact on the sequencing of planning proposals and growth precincts has been made within the LHS. Furthermore, references to the draft GPOP PIC were made in relation to the Camellia growth precinct consistent with wording in the endorsed LSPS which states that dwellings in Camellia will be subject to the State Government’s response to the Greater Sydney Commission’s GPOP PIC recommendations.

Conclusion

20. The feedback received resulted in additional amendments to the LHS and ELS Review and Update. This is further discussed in the ‘Post exhibition changes’ section below.

LSPS Assurance Framework affecting the LHS and ELS Review and Update

21. The GSC (and DPIE) requested a number of changes to the draft LSPS to ensure a direct line of sight to the District Plan and the Draft GPOP PIC. These changes resulted in amendments to the Draft LHS and Draft ELS Review and Update, as follows:

a. Requirement for DPIE endorsement - Ensuring there is a reference within the LHS and ELS Review and Update indicating a requirement for DPIE endorsement (as per relevant section 9.1 Ministerial directions);

b. Amending dwelling forecasts – Reducing the annual dwelling growth rates so they are realistic and achievable (based on a comparative benchmarking analysis). These reductions push out the delivery of the growth capacity identified beyond the 2036 District Plan period and involved:

i. Amending the Planning Forecast Scenario by lowering the annual dwelling forecast rates so that the equivalent annual dwelling growth rate can be realistically achieved by the market;

ii. Removing the Base Minimum Scenario given it closely equated with the amended Planning Forecast Scenario;

iii. Removing the Maximum Forecast Scenario given those annual dwelling forecast rates cannot be realistically achieved by the market (but still allowing for the potential maximum capacity yields beyond 2036, subject to certain infrastructure requirements being met);

iv. Adding an ‘Additional dwellings expected beyond 2036 (20+ years)’ column in Table B-1, Appendix B which shows how much growth will occur beyond the 2036 period; and

v. Reformatting and reducing the content of the growth precinct scenarios (at B-4 to B-16 in Appendix B of the LHS).

The above changes mean that the Council and State government endorsed planning proposals and planned precincts identified to accommodate the growth are still in train. However, the delivery will be slowed down so that the doubling of the City’s population that was predicted to occur by 2036 in the draft LHS (and draft LSPS) will now occur beyond 2036. Future reviews of the LHS will examine staging of the delivery of this growth. Refer also to Table B-1, Appendix B in the attached LHS (Attachment A).

c. Affordable housing delivery – two changes were made:

i. Table 12 - The principle underpinning affordable housing delivery in the LHS as outlined in Section 2.2.4 (refer to Attachment A) is to adopt a 5-10 percent minimum (subject to viability testing) affordable rental housing target within certain growth precincts for very low to low income households with the potential for higher than 5-10 percent on government and privately owned sites if viable. Table 12 entitled ‘Potential for affordable dwellings as part of an Affordable Housing Target Scheme’ (Section 2.2.4) which calculates the potential for the delivery of affordable dwellings to 2036, was amended by reducing the 5-10% range of affordable dwellings from 4,920 – 6,145 affordable dwellings to 1,555 – 2,735 affordable dwellings. As detailed earlier in this report, while this demonstrates a reduction of affordable housing dwellings being delivered within the 2016 to 2036 period, it is proportionate to the slowing down of all housing delivery which will extend beyond 2036. Future reviews of the LHS will examine the staging of the delivery of housing beyond 2036.

ii. Clarifying the terms around the affordable housing target for permanent affordable rental housing for both government-owned sites and privately owned sites in Section 2.2.4.

d. Housing diversity criteria - Including the LSPS Housing Diversity Criteria within the LHS;

e. Draft GPOP PIC - Referencing the Draft PIC for GPOP where appropriate; and

f. Detaching the draft ELS Review and Update table – the draft table of August 2019 was originally appended to the exhibited LSPS. It has been re-created as a stand-alone document as the ELS Review and Update (2020) and is attached to this report as Attachment B. This document, together with the ELS (2016) now make up Council’s Employment Lands Strategy framework. Both documents will be forwarded to the DPIE for endorsement, along with the LHS, consistent with State Government advice and relevant Ministerial directions.

Community feedback received - Draft CIS

Submissions

22. Community feedback received via submissions on the draft CIS is detailed in Attachment G. Twelve submissions were received from residents, sporting organisations, interest groups and a government agency.

a. The key themes raised were around the following:

i. General support for the CIS and its approach and recommendations

ii. Confirmation of the need for additional community infrastructure that is required to meet the future population’s needs

iii. Consideration of the spatial distribution of infrastructure

iv. The need for additional land to provide more open space.

Community Survey

23. Community feedback received via the community survey (298 respondents), pop-up stalls, social media promotion and presentations at Council’s 2019 Youth Forum on the draft CIS, are detailed in Attachment F. In summary, the key themes and issues raised were as follows:

a. Libraries are the most used community facility, with more than three quarters of respondents saying they used them, and young people also rating them as their most used community asset. 88% of those who used libraries indicated that they supported Council’s approach to libraries in the draft CIS;

b. Open space is highly valued by the community, with requests for Council to invest not only in its upgrade, but in the acquisition of additional land to create new parks;

c. Impacts of population density in general;

d. Parking, in general terms, but especially in relation to specific community infrastructure, e.g. libraries;

e. The need to ensure that the delivery of community infrastructure keeps pace with the level of residential development;

f. That many facilities, such as libraries and community halls, were either undersized, in need of refurbishment, or both; and

g. The view that public facilities should not be privatised.

Conclusion

24. The feedback received confirmed the general approach taken to planning for the needs of growth outlined in the CIS and also resulted in some amendments to the document.

POST EXHIBITION CHANGES TO THE STRATEGIES

Local Housing Strategy and ELS Review and Update

25. The feedback received during the exhibition process has resulted in the following amendments to the LHS:

a. Housing Vision - The Housing Vision has been revised to include a reference to housing diversity and local character. A new objective has been added to make it clear that housing growth must be supported by the local and regional infrastructure needed to service that growth.

b. Draft GPOP PIC - A brief summary of the Draft GPOP PIC and its policy implications for the LHS has been included in the Strategic Context section, given it was released for exhibition part way through the draft LSPS and draft LHS exhibition period. Also references to the Draft PIC for GPOP have been made, where relevant.

c. LSPS - A brief summary of Council’s LSPS and its policy implications has been included in the Strategic Context section given its endorsement in March 2020.

d. Dwelling approvals - updating of dwelling approval figures within growth precincts. The table below reflects the updated data from 2016 to December 2019 (which were originally shown up to March 2019 in the exhibited Draft LHS).

GROWTH PRECINCT	Estimated dwellings from DA approvals
Melrose Park (Victoria Road Frontage only)	280
Wentworth Point	3,170
Carter Street	2,080
Sydney Olympic Park	1,900
Camellia Town Centre	0
Parramatta East	0
Parramatta North	0
Parramatta CBD	1,190
Westmead (North Precinct)	50
Carlingford	1,190
Telopea	0
Granville (North and South)	1,750
Epping Strategic Centre	4,420
TOTAL APPROVALS IN GROWTH PRECINCTS	16,030

e. Dwelling Forecasts - Revisions to dwelling forecast figures to ensure consistency with the LSPS (as a result of a feedback received from the GSC) discussed in more detail earlier in this report.

f. DPIE endorsement - references that the LHS requires DPIE endorsement where included;

g. Figures - Updating map figures to improve legibility and correct dwelling growth.

h. Affordable housing - the terms around the affordable housing target for permanent affordable rental housing have been clarified for Government and privately owned sites.

i. Section 2.4 - improving the narrative at Section 2.4 to highlight the need for housing growth to be supported by infrastructure.

j. Implementation Plan - the corresponding LSPS action has been added to each Strategy Action in the Implementation Plan (Section 4.1).

k. Section 4.2 has been amended by:

i. Amending the delivery timeframes for some key planning proposals to be consistent with amendments made to Table B-1 in Appendix B; and

ii. Strengthening the narrative around staging/sequencing of key planning proposals to stress that:

· the sequencing and/or staging of planning proposals is key to delivering growth in line with infrastructure;

· working with the DPIE and the GSC to ensure that infrastructure supports growth; and

· relying on statutory mechanisms to achieve this.

These elements will require that developers cannot fast-track development ahead of local and State government infrastructure provision.

Note: All changes made to the Draft LHS (as exhibited) are shown in blue text.

26. The feedback received during the exhibition process has resulted in the following amendments to the ELS Review and Update (2020):

a. Content explaining the background to the ELS Review and Update (2020) and relationship of the document with the ELS (2016);

b. Reference to the precinct numbering from the ELS (2016);

c. Inclusion of a figure illustrating the locations of each employment lands precinct (taken from the endorsed LSPS);

d. Inclusion of relevant policies that have come into effect since endorsement of the ELS (2016) that have an impact on the City's employment lands precinct, such as the GSC's District Plan and Council's LSPS; and

e. Clarification of the Strategic Direction and Strategic Actions categories for each employment lands precinct which establish each employment land precinct's overall direction and broad land use.

27. The Community Engagement Report for the LSPS, LHS and ELS Review and Update at Attachment C includes further details on the changes made to the LHS and ELS Review and Update.

Community Infrastructure Strategy

28. The feedback received during the exhibition process resulted in the following amendments to the CIS:

a. Inclusion of further information about areas earmarked for new open space;

b. The addition of further information about the projected population growth identified in the draft LHS;

c. Clarifying actions in the Parks and Outdoor Space chapter, particularly to specify the difference between the proposed works at different parks; and

d. Minor corrections were made to some sections, specifically in relation to information on the Scouts and Guides hall network and Parramatta PCYC.

MONITORING AND IMPLEMENTING THE STRATEGIES

Local Housing Strategy and ELS Review and Update

LHS Actions

29. The LHS Actions are largely based on existing Policy Directions and Actions contained in the LSPS. They also correlate with existing Principle Activity and Focus Area within the City’s Delivery Plan and Operational Plan (DPOP). The table at Attachment D details each of the LHS actions and their correlation with the relevant DPOP Principle Activity and/or Focus Area and LSPS Policy Directions and/or Actions. It shows that all actions will be carried out using resources under existing work programs and budgets, with the exception of Action P2 to set up a floor space tracking system which is currently being investigated and also appears likely to be capable of being carried out using existing resources.

Monitoring / implementing the LHS and Employment Lands Strategies

30. The LHS data on dwelling numbers – existing and forecast - will be regularly monitored by Council’s Land Use Planning Team to track dwelling growth through the applications processes (planning proposals and their follow up development applications) as recommended in the LHS. Council’s Pathway system requires some minor augmentation to do this which Land Use Planning Staff are progressing.

31. Data on jobs and employment land area within employment lands precincts, as provided by State Government agencies, will be regularly reviewed to track trends within these precincts and inform future policy.

Community Infrastructure Strategy

CIS Actions

32. The CIS Actions are largely based on asset development, open space upgrades, and advocacy and policy work. The table at Attachment I details each of the CIS actions and their correlation with the actions in the Delivery Program and Operational Plan (DPOP). Actions relating to the development of new assets are subject to the endorsement of Council and the availability of resources, primarily from development contributions. Actions relating to open space upgrades for play spaces, parks and sports grounds will be used to inform and guide the annual works programs within the DPOP. The remaining advocacy and policy actions will be undertaken within existing staff resources. Actions are consistent with the Community Strategic Plan objective of Fair.

Monitoring / implementing the CIS

33. The projects and actions within the CIS will be incorporated into Council’s Pulse online reporting tool so that the progression of each action can be tracked and reported on.

34. Data on how Council is tracking with community infrastructure provision in relation to population growth will also be collected to monitor the provision gaps for open space and community facilities.

REVIEWING THE STRATEGIES

Local Housing Strategy and Employment Land Strategies

35. Because the City is growing at such a rapid rate – and as noted for the LSPS - the LHS and ELS will be comprehensively reviewed every four (4) to five (5) years. In between comprehensive reviews, they may have more frequent out-of-cycle reviews. These will be interim reviews limited in their scope. They will be informed by either a new local strategy prepared by Council; or a plan prepared by the DPIE or the GSC. The first out-of-cycle review of the LSPS is anticipated in 2021 after the GSC has finalised the GPOP PIC anticipated in late 2020. This may also require review of the LHS and ELS.

Community Infrastructure Strategy

36. The CIS is not bound by any legislative review timeframe. Given the review period identified for the LSPS and LHS, and the relationship between these strategies and the CIS, the same review timeframe will apply. The CIS will be comprehensively reviewed every four (4) to five (5) years or at the same time as the LSPS and LHS are comprehensively reviewed.

37. In addition to this, the CIS will be updated if and when new high growth areas are identified by the NSW Government, or if the plan for any identified high growth area changes significantly so as to alter the community infrastructure required to meet the projected population growth.

CONSULTATION & TIMING

38. Consultation has been detailed above in “Exhibition Period’ Section (refer to points 10 to 24 and Attachments C, G and H.

39. Numerous workshops have been held with Councillors since the initiation of the Strategies. The revised Strategies were recently presented to Councillors at a briefing session held on 18 May 2020. The purpose of the session was to brief the Councillors on the revised Strategies post exhibition for the purposes of a pending Council endorsement.

40. The outcomes were as follows:

a. In relation to the Draft LHS, Councillors requested that it:

i. stress the importance of the need for infrastructure to be provided to support housing growth.

ii. indicate that growth to be contained within the identified precincts so that low density areas can be protected.

Councillors also requested:

iii. A breakdown of the dwelling approvals in the City’s growth precincts since 2016; and

iv. A map of the growth precincts.

Amendments were subsequently made to the LHS and the dwelling approval breakdown and growth precincts map were circulated to the Councillors via a Councillor Briefing Note on 4 June 2020 which also included providing a breakdown of dwelling approvals across Council’s Growth Precincts and a supporting map.

b. In relation to the Draft ELS Review and Update, the Councillors raised no issues.

c. In relation to the Draft CIS, Councillors requested:

i. Confirmation that the Masonic Hall (now known as Boronia Grove Community Centre) had been factored into the document. This has been addressed in the document.

ii. Removal of reference to Rawson Street as the decided location for the future Epping Library. This has been addressed in the document.

iii. Revision of the Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC) chapter to reflect views on Council expanding its current role. This has been addressed in the document.

iv. Confirmation of the status of planned upgrades at Dundas Scout Hall, including issues caused be a rezoning of the land on which it is located. This will be addressed under separate cover.

41. Copies of the Strategies were circulated to Councillors on 4 June for early viewing (as requested at the briefing session). Councillors were reminded of the circulation of documents on 23 June and 26 June 2020. At the time of finalising this report no further comments were received by Councillors on the Strategies.

NEXT STEPS

Local Housing Strategy

42. Should Council approve the attached LHS the next steps are to:

a. Send the endorsed LHS to the DPIE for their review and approval (in accordance with relevant section 9.1 Ministerial direction).

b. Continue ongoing strategic planning work on growth precincts, including consideration of infrastructure provision and sequencing/staging issues, and also working proactively with relevant Government agencies in these precincts.

c. Augment Council’s Pathway system to establish a GIS based housing monitoring system that enables Council to track the delivery of housing growth across the City as recommended in the LHS.

d. Update Council’s Local Housing Strategy and Employment Land Strategy webpages.

e. Undertake the Next Steps in the LHS (Executive Summary, p.7).

ELS Review and Update

43. Should Council approve the attached ELS Review and Update the next steps are to:

a. Send the endorsed ELS (2016) and ELS Review and Update (2020) – the latter two documents making up Council’s Employment Lands Strategy – to the DPIE for their review and approval (in accordance with relevant section 9.1 Ministerial direction).

b. Progress Investigation Areas in accordance with the timeframe in the ELS Review and Update.

c. Update Council’s Local Housing Strategy and Employment Land Strategy webpages.

Community Infrastructure Plan

44. Should Council approve the attached CIS the next steps are to:

a. Engage with NSW Government with respect to the requirements outlined in the Community Infrastructure Strategy for Telopea Town Centre.

b. Advance engagement with Scouts and Guides NSW to implement pilot arrangements with selected halls.

c. Advance planning for future library and community hubs in Epping and Carlingford.

d. Pursue further shared use arrangements for community access to open space in schools with the Department of Education.

e. Update Council’s Community Infrastructure Strategy webpage.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATION FOR COUNCIL

45. Each of the Actions in the LHS (Section 4.1) have been reviewed against Council’s LSPS actions and the Principal Activities in the Council’s Delivery Plan 2018-2021. This review has identified that there are no associated budget and/or resource implications associated with the Actions because each action falls within an existing work program or budget, except in the case of Action P2 (Develop a system to track commercial and residential floorspace) where there is a potential budget implication. However, identification of any associated costs of this Action and budget sources will be determined in the implementation phase of the LHS. There are no financial implications associated with the ELS Review and Update, as this is only providing an update on the status of employment land precincts.

46. The CIS will provide guidance and assistance to Council to more efficiently link spending of funds to identified community need and priorities. Actions within the CIS are either linked to existing programs in Council’s Delivery Program and Operational Plan, or infrastructure projects that will be subject to Council endorsement before proceeding. The CIS will also be a tool for Council in negotiating funding for essential community infrastructure provision. Land Use Planning staff will use the Strategy as a direction to enable informed negotiation with developers on public benefit contributions and community infrastructure consideration as part of planning proposals, master planning and precinct renewal programs. And finally, the CIS will be a critical input into the preparation of updated contribution plans that are designed to ensure that Council effectively plans for infrastructure to meet population growth. A significant proportion of the anticipated development contributions to be collected over the next 15 years will be allocated to projects identified in the CIS. The total estimated cost of works included within the CIS is $1.1 Billion. With funds collected via the Parramatta CBD Planning Contributions Framework, including the updated 7.11 Contributions plan, there is potential to capture 80-90% of this total cost, dependent on the contributions rates that are finally endorsed by Council.

CONCLUSION

47. The three Strategies provide a vision for managing growth across the City aligned with the provision of supporting local infrastructure. Once endorsed, the Strategies, along with the recently endorsed LSPS, will provide clear guidance for the consideration of any new land use and infrastructure proposals and other planning and policy work undertaken for the City.

Jacky Wilkes

Snr Project Officer Land Use

Roy Laria

Land Use Planning Manager

David Birds

Group Manager, City Planning

Mark Egan

Senior Projects Officer

Geoff King

Group Manager City Strategy

Alistair Cochrane

Chief Financial Officer

Jennifer Concato

Executive Director City Planning and Design

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

Attachments:

1 ⇩	Attachment A - Draft Final Local Housing Strategy	188 Pages
2 ⇩	Attachment B - ELS Review and Update	20 Pages
3 ⇩	Attachment C - Revised Community Engagement Report	90 Pages
4 ⇩	Attachment D - Resource Implications Table	25 Pages
5	Attachment E - Draft CIS (separately enclosed)	685 Pages
6 ⇩	Attachment F - CIS Key Findings Report	25 Pages
7 ⇩	Attachment G - CIS Engagement Evaluation	8 Pages
8 ⇩	Attachment H - Submissions Summary - Draft CIS	19 Pages
9 ⇩	Attachment I - CIS Resource Implications Table	6 Pages

Council 13 July 2020 Item 18.4

INNOVATIVE

ITEM NUMBER 18.4

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Gateway Request - Planning Proposal for 355 and 375 Church St, Parramatta

REFERENCE RZ/10/2018 - D07454213

REPORT OF Project Officer

APPLICANT Stockland Development Pty Ltd

LANDOWNER McDonald’s Australia Ltd

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS CONSIDERED BY SYDNEY CENTRAL CITY PLANNING PANEL

DA/96/2015 – Staged development involving a redeveloped McDonald’s restaurant and concept approval for a future-mixed-use development; the Sydney West Joint Regional Planning Panel deferred its formal determination on this matter, and the application was withdrawn May 2016.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this report is for Council to consider a Planning Proposal for land at 355 and 375 Church St, Parramatta. This report recommends forwarding the Planning Proposal to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment with a request for a Gateway Determination.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council endorse for the purpose of forwarding to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE) with a request for a Gateway Determination the Planning Proposal included at Attachment 1 to amend Parramatta LEP 2011 for land at 355 and 375 Church St, Parramatta as follows:

1) Apply the Prince Alfred Square Solar Access Plane as the height controls for this site

2) Increase FSR from part 3:1/part 4:1 to 6:1 (exclusive of Design Excellence)

3) Apply maximum car parking rates as follows:

i. For floorspace used for the purposes of Take Away Food and Drink Premises: 1 space / 30 square metres of Gross Floor Area or 30 spaces (whichever is less). Noting that the Planning Proposal also includes a 5-year sunset clause for this parking rate, after which time this rate would revert to the rate contained in the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal.

ii. For residential and other commercial floorspace not part of the use described in 3)(i): the rates which are currently contained in the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal.

(b) That Council advises DPIE that the Chief Executive Officer will not be exercising the plan-making delegations for this Planning Proposal as authorised by Council on 26 November 2012.

(c) That a draft site-specific Development Control Plan (DCP) for the subject site be prepared that addresses matters including but not limited to:

1) Further defining the preferred two-tower scheme, including podium heights and tower setbacks, with a view to minimising any non-compliances with relevant ADG requirements;

2) Relationship to and mitigating impacts on Heritage Items;

3) Traffic issues such as sightlines, vehicle queuing, pedestrian safety and bicycle parking;

4) Demonstrating adaptive re-use potential of drive-through facility and at least some of the parking spaces proposed;

5) Active frontage requirements; and

6) Relationship to 383 Church Street isolated site.

(d) That the CEO be authorised to negotiate a draft Planning Agreement with the landowner in accordance with the Parramatta CBD Community Infrastructure framework and the following principles:

1) Dedication of footpath widening at the corner of Victoria Rd and Church St and of the small irregularly-shaped “notch” of land located in the centre of the city block (which would contribute to a future laneway running from Ross St to Victoria Rd), noting that Council’s policy on such dedications is to assign a nominal ($1) value to such dedications, as the Applicant is receiving the benefit of the FSR from the dedicated land;

2) A monetary contribution in line with the Parramatta CBD Community Infrastructure framework, noting that a potential use of some or all of this contribution for improvement of Prince Alfred Square should be explored as part of the negotiations (given the proximity of the site to the Square and that Council has recently completed a masterplan for it);

3) Addressing the potential circumstance in which the rate in the Parramatta CBD Community Infrastructure Framework changes;

4) Addressing the potential circumstance where this site proceeds in whole or in part as a non-residential use (in which case the framework would not apply to non-residential floorspace); and

5) Addressing the potential circumstance in which Council decides not to proceed with the Community Infrastructure framework, and instead pursues amendments to its other contributions plans.

(e) That the draft DCP and draft Planning Agreement are reported back to Council prior to their concurrent exhibition with the Planning Proposal.

(f) That Council authorise the CEO to amend the Planning Proposal to correct any minor anomalies of a non-policy and administrative nature that may arise during the plan-making process.

(g) Further, that Council note that the Parramatta Local Planning Panel’s advice to Council (included in Attachment 1) is consistent with the recommendations of this report.

PLANNING PROPOSAL TIMELINE

THE SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING CONTEXT

1. The site is illustrated in Figure 1 below. It is located in the block bounded by Victoria Road, Villiers Street, Ross Street and Church Street, Parramatta, and has an approximate site area of 4,796 square metres. The site has frontages to Victoria Road, Church Street and Ross Street. Prince Alfred Square is located South of the site (across Victoria Street), and the Parramatta Light Rail (PLR) Stage 1 corridor runs adjacent to the site along Church Street.

Figure 1: Subject site at 355 and 375 Church Street and surrounding context

Source: Council’s internal mapping with annotations from Council officers

2. Existing development on the site includes a retail/commercial building (corner of Victoria Road/Church Street), a McDonald’s restaurant (including surface parking and drive-through with vehicle access to both Victoria Road and Ross Street) and a two-storey office building (facing Ross Street).

3. The site does not include 383 Church Street, located at the corner of Ross and Church Streets. The existing development at 383 Church Street is a three-storey retail/commercial building. This report addresses the relationship between the subject Planning Proposal and 383 Church Street.

4. The western half of this city block is characterised by low to mid-rise commercial buildings. A previous Planning Proposal (RZ/9/2013) which was finalised in 2016 increased the planning controls over a portion of the western half of the block (illustrated in Figure 1) and involved increasing the FSR control from 2:1 to 4.8:1, and the maximum height control from 24m to 49m. RZ/9/2013 was initiated prior to Council’s strategic work to increase planning controls across the Parramatta CBD through the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal process, and therefore did not respond to the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal.

BACKGROUND

5. On 21 August 2018, Stockland Development Pty Ltd (“the applicant”) lodged a Planning Proposal with Council on behalf of McDonald’s Australia Ltd (“the landowner”) for land at 355 and 375 Church Street, Parramatta (“the site”).

6. The site was the subject of a previous Development Application (DA/96/2015) which proposed a staged development involving a redeveloped McDonald’s restaurant and concept approval for a future mixed-use development. On 11 November 2015, the Sydney West Joint Regional Planning Panel (JRPP) deferred its formal determination of this matter. In summary, the JRPP considered that the proposal was a “lost opportunity” given the significance of the site, and that a “more appropriate scale and city character” was needed.

7. This DA was subsequently withdrawn in May 2016. Following withdrawal of the DA, the landowner and applicant prepared a Planning Proposal in response to the evolving strategic planning context for the Parramatta CBD.

COMPARISON OF PLANNING CONTROLS

8. Table 1 outlines the planning controls for the site under three scenarios: (1) existing, (2) Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal and (3) recommended by Council officers for this site-specific Planning Proposal.

Table 1: Comparison of planning controls

	Parramatta LEP 2011	Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal endorsed by Council 25 November 2019	Planning Proposal recommended in this report
Zoning	B4 Mixed Use	B4 Mixed Use	B4 Mixed Use
Max. height of buildings	Part 34m, part 24m	Prince Alfred Square Sun Access Plane (which protects the southern part of the Square from any additional overshadowing between 12pm-2pm midwinter) (approx. 93m (29 stories) maximum within the portion of the site affected by the Sun Access Plane and no height limit on portion of site outside the Sun Access Plane)	Prince Alfred Square Sun Access Plane (which protects the southern part of the Square from any additional overshadowing between 12pm-2pm midwinter) (in the preferred reference design, this results in approx. 29 storeys within the portion of the site affected by the Sun Access Plane and approx. 32 storeys on the portion of the site outside the Sun Access Plane)
Maximum FSR	Part 3:1, part 4:1	6:1 (plus Design Excellence i.e. 6.9:1)	6:1 (plus Design Excellence i.e. 6.9:1)
Site-specific provisions	Nil	Maximum car parking rates: Residential: Studio: 0.1 spaces 1 bed: 0.3 spaces 2 bed: 0.7 spaces 3 bed: 1 space Commercial premises: M = (G X A) / (50 X T) Where: M is the maximum number of parking spaces, G is the gross floor area of all commercial uses in the building in square metres, A is the site area in square metres, and T is the total gross floor area of all buildings on the site in square metres Commercial - Take away food and drink premises: no rate provided.	Maximum car parking rates: Residential: Studio: 0.1 spaces 1 bed: 0.3 spaces 2 bed: 0.7 spaces 3 bed: 1 space Commercial premises (excluding Take Away Food and Drink Premises): M = (G X A) / (50 X T) Where: M is the maximum number of parking spaces, G is the gross floor area of all commercial uses (excluding Take Away Food and Drink Premises) in the building in square metres, A is the site area in square metres, and T is the total gross floor area of all buildings on the site in square metres Commercial - Take Away Food and Drink Premises: 1 space / 30 sqm GFA or 30 spaces, whichever is less; include a 5-year sunset clause for this provision
Maximum gross floor area (GFA)	15,047m²	33,092m²	33,092m²
Maximum dwelling yield	Approximately 177 units (maximum GFA / 85 m² for high density dwellings)	Approximately 389 residential units (assuming average GFA / 85 m² for high density dwellings and all FSR built as residential)	Approximately 346 residential units and approximately 1,355m² for Commercial Uses and Take Away Food and Drink Premises (as per current reference design)

9. Under the current provisions of the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal, the development proposed in the reference design would be eligible for the High-Performing Building Bonus. However, it is noted that the Applicant has not requested application of this bonus through this site-specific Planning Proposal process, therefore, the ability of this site to achieve the bonus within the Sun Access Plane has not been tested. The Applicant could potentially seek this bonus at DA stage, depending on the timing of that DA assessment process and the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal process.

10. Procedurally, it is recommended that the height and FSR controls outlined above are contained in a site-specific clause, rather than as mapped amendments. This is because current Parramatta LEP 2011 maps do not contain the Prince Alfred Square Sun Access Plane (this is to be introduced under the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal). It is noted that further guidance regarding structural clause drafting will be provided by DPIE and Parliamentary Counsel later in the process if required.

11. In summary, this Planning Proposal is consistent with the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal, with the exception of specifying a parking rate for the Take Away Food and Drink Premises use proposed as part of the reference design. This issue is discussed in further detail later in this report.

SUMMARY OF COUNCIL OFFICER ASSESSMENT

12. Council officers’ assessment of this matter is summarised below in Table 2. Please refer to the report to the Local Planning Panel (included at Attachment 1) for further details of the assessment.

Table 2: Summary of Council Officer Assessment

FSR and Height (Sun Access Plane [SAP] to Prince Alfred Square)

The FSR and height are consistent with the provisions for this site under the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal, and are therefore supported.

Reference Design and Tower Massing

The Applicant produced both two-tower and one-tower reference design schemes for this Planning Proposal, and Council officers support the two-tower reference design. While it does potentially have some non-compliances with the Apartment Design Guide, the result of the two-tower scheme is two off-set towers which are considered to be more appropriately scaled to the surrounding development. In contrast, due to the Prince Alfred Square SAP, a one-tower scheme concentrates most of the FSR along the Church St frontage into one tower with a large floorplate, as well as producing a higher podium / street wall. An important issue for the Development Control Plan (DCP) and Design Excellence process should be minimising any non-compliances of the two-tower scheme.

Heritage

The site is located in close proximity to many Heritage-listed items (refer Figure 7 and Table 2 of Attachment 1). Council’s heritage officer requested that the Planning Proposal be consistent with the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal and also recommended that preliminary consultation be undertaken with Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH). In summary, OEH raised concern in relation to the following:

· Impacts on Heritage items in the vicinity of the site

· Overshadowing to Prince Alfred Square

· Built form, including podium treatment and tower setbacks

· Impacts on Old Government House and Domain

· Archaeological impacts

Council officers’ detailed response to these matters is detailed in Attachment 1, including a summary of additional work completed by the Applicant in response. In general, Council officers consider that many of OEH’s concerns are more relevant to Development Application stage or are issues that have already been reviewed and assessed as part of the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal. It is also noted that OEH will have the opportunity to provide a formal response at exhibition stage for this Planning Proposal.

Flooding

A portion of the site is within the area of the Probable Maximum Flood (PMF), however the site is not affected by the 100-year Average Recurrence Interval (ARI). Council officers consider that flooding is not an impediment to the progress of this Planning Proposal.

Interface with Parramatta Light Rail (PLR)

Officers undertook a preliminary referral to Transport for NSW (TfNSW) given the proximity to the PLR Stage 1 Corridor. In summary, TfNSW’s preliminary comments relevant to the Planning Proposal stage related mainly to describing the desired contents of a Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) for the site, and requesting that the TIA should assess impacts of the development on PLR. The Applicant reviewed the PLR Environmental Impact Statement in response, and has made some amendments to their traffic assessment. It is noted that TfNSW will have the opportunity to provide a formal response at exhibition stage for this Planning Proposal. Further details of the preliminary consultation with TfNSW is described in the section of the report at Attachment 1 titled “Interface with Parramatta Light Rail (PLR)”. In conclusion, Council officers do not consider PLR an impediment to the progress of this Planning Proposal.

Traffic and Access Issues

The reference design envisages dual vehicle access from both Victoria Road (entry) and Ross Street (entry and exit), with retention of the drive-through facility located in the podium. The drive-through is integrated into the basement design and sleeved by lobbies and commercial/retail uses.

The final traffic report for this Planning Proposal states that the reference design will result in a reduction of traffic during peak periods. This is due to the reduction is traffic generation from the redeveloped McDonald’s restaurant offsetting the future traffic generation of the new uses at the site.

Given concerns about vehicle congestion and the need to rebalance transport habits towards active transport in a growing CBD identified in Council’s strategic transport work, Council officers raised the concern that the drive-through facility may not be the optimal long-term outcome for this site. The applicant responded to this view by demonstrating in their reference design a consideration of future adaptive re-uses for the drive-through facility, should it no longer be commercially desirable in the future. Council officers recommend that this matter is considered further during the DCP and Design Excellence stages.

Parking

The applicant has accepted the application of residential and commercial parking rates consistent with the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal, with the exception of the floor space used for Take Away Food and Drink Premises.

Following significant discussion with Council officers, the applicant proposed a rate of 1 space / 30 sqm of floor space for the aforementioned use.

In summary, Council officers’ initial response to the applicant was that – while officers did not have any strong reservations in terms of traffic generation of the proposed rate – officers did have concerns about the proposed rate relating to strategic vision and precedent. The Applicant’s benchmarking analysis had identified that the proposed rate would result in parking provision higher than that of a number of strategic centres in Sydney (including Sydney CBD (fringe) (13.5 spaces), Burwood (13.5), Green Square (13.5), North Sydney (16-18), Crows Nest (18), Kogarah (20), and Lane Cove (22.5)), and officers were concerned that accepting a rate greater than this group of centres would not align with the longstanding imperative to grow Parramatta CBD as Sydney’s Central City. In terms of precedent, officers were also concerned that accepting parking rates that do not align with Council’s established strategic framework would set a precedent that risks putting Council into the position of having to regularly renegotiate the rates in the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal. However, in light of the shared vision to see this site redeveloped in line with the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal, officers suggested a compromise position of 1 space / 45 sqm (resulting in approximately 20 parking spaces).

In response, the Applicant has stated that (due to development feasibility issues) development would not proceed under the rate suggested by Council officers.

Council officers’ position remains that a parking rate of 1 space / 45 sqm (about 20 spaces) would be more aligned with strategic goals for the Parramatta CBD that envisage significant mode shift away from vehicles and towards active transport. Nevertheless, officers are prepared to support the Applicant’s proposed rate on the following basis:

· Council officers acknowledge the broader shared vision for this site, which is to see it redeveloped in line with the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal (with which the proposal is otherwise consistent);

· Council officers acknowledge the Applicant’s position relating to feasibility, which is that the blanket commercial parking rate formula otherwise applied in the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal would make this development unviable in the short term. Council officers consider that car parking vs. active transport is one of many “transitional” issues facing the City as it assumes the role of Sydney’s Central City over the coming years. In other words, the viability of this development as proposed at present remains dependent on vehicle traffic. However, it is considered that the business model for this and many other vehicle-dependent businesses will necessarily rebalance toward active transport in coming years as (a) new public transport infrastructure comes on line and (b) a mix of public and active transport modes become the most viable transport option in to, out of and around the Parramatta CBD (given the significant increases in density).

· The proposed rate results in a decrease of approximately 50% in on-site parking associated with the existing use, and the traffic report states that the net result of the development will be a reduction in vehicle traffic during the peak.

· The Applicant has already completed conceptual work demonstrating how the drive through could be adapted to other uses in the future, and it is considered that this work could be extended to include at least some of the proposed parking.

· Appropriate limits could be applied to the Applicant’s proposed rate at clause drafting stage, as follows:

o Structuring the control to limit the parking to 1 space / 30 sqm or 30 spaces, whichever is less. This ensures that the number of spaces is capped at the 30 spaces, even if the size of the use increases at DA stage. It will also scale down the number of spaces if the size of the restaurant ends up being smaller than currently anticipated.

o Placing a 5-year “sunset” clause on this parking rate, after which time the control would revert to the blanket commercial rate applied to the rest of the commercial uses through the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal process. This ensures that, should the Applicant not gain development consent within 5 years of finalising this LEP amendment, the parking question would be reconsidered. During that time, it is anticipated that Council will have established a final parking rate regime through the finalisation of the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal, and by which time development feasibility calculations may have changed based on transport mode shifts in the CBD.

In summary, the final recommended Planning Proposal contains a rate for the Take Away Food and Drink Premises use of 1 parking space / 30 sqm GFA or 30 spaces (whichever is less), and includes a 5-year “sunset” clause provision.

Finally, Council officers note preliminary advice from DPIE and Transport for NSW as to how such a proposed variation to the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal rates might be viewed by State agencies as part of a Gateway assessment. These agencies have advised that they are generally not supportive of such variations, and the Applicant has been made aware of this position. Nevertheless, given the assessment provided above, Council officers do not object to establishing a specific rate for this use at the pre-Gateway stage. This will be assessed by DPIE and relevant State agencies as part of their Gateway assessment.

Active Street Frontage

This site is affected by Active Frontages controls in the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal. The reference design meets this requirement, and it is proposed to incorporate these aspects into the DCP / Design Excellence processes for this site.

Isolated Site

The Planning Proposal does not include land at 383 Church St (corner of Ross and Church Streets). The Applicant has demonstrated that they have begun the process to meet the NSW Planning Principle relating to isolated sites (as this will be an issue at DA stage), and have also completed design work showing how this site could develop under sliding-scale provisions of the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal.

While Council officers consider that amalgamation of these sites would likely facilitate a better planning outcome, Council officers do not consider that this matter should be an impediment to the progress of this Planning Proposal.

It is possible that DPIE will direct inclusion of this site via the Gateway determination for this Planning Proposal. In this instance, officers consider it would be prudent to request that sliding-scale provisions consistent with the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal are also included in an amended Planning Proposal, as it is not expected that these two sites would amalgamate in the near future. Council could make a decision to include 383 Church St to pre-empt this potential decision, however, this would result in further potential cost and delay for the applicant. Council officers consider that it is not justified to require the applicant to incur this cost unless DPIE deems it necessary.

Other Statutory Considerations

The proposal has been assessed against the statutory considerations including relevant local and regional strategies and planning policies and relevant Ministerial directions. Details of the assessment of these matters is included in the attached Planning Proposal.

13. In conclusion, based on the assessment summarised above, Council officers recommend progression of this Planning Proposal.

14. Council officers also recommend that Council advise DPIE that the CEO will not be exercising the plan-making delegations for this Planning Proposal. This is on the basis that Council is also advancing the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal (which affects this site), and the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal has not yet been approved by DPIE for finalisation.

LOCAL PLANNING PANEL ADVICE

15. The LPP considered this matter at its meeting of 16 June 2020. Their advice (refer Attachment 1) was consistent with Council officers’ recommendation.

PLANNING AGREEMENT

16. The Applicant has provided an initial letter of offer accepting that the value of the future Planning Agreement will be calculated at a rate of $150/sqm, consistent with the Parramatta CBD Community Infrastructure framework. The Applicant proposes to tie the final contribution to approved Gross Floor Area (GFA) rather than the nominal increase in FSR under the Planning Proposal, which is considered acceptable (a precedent has recently been set for this at another site-specific Planning Proposal). A calculation of the potential value of the future Planning Agreement is approximately $2,059,350 million is shown in table .

Table 3: Estimate of likely value of Planning Agreement

	Land Area	Base FSR	Planning Proposal FSR (excluding Design Excellence bonus)	Value based on $150/sqm of FSR uplift
Parcel A	659 sqm	4:1	6:1	$ 197,700
Parcel B	4,137 sqm	3:1	6:1	$ 1,861,650
Total	4,796 sqm			$ 2,059,350

17. Council officers recommend the negotiation of a draft Planning Agreement in accordance with the following principles:

a. Dedication of footpath widening at the corner of Victoria Rd and Church St and of the small irregularly-shaped “notch” of land located in the centre of the city block (which would contribute to a future laneway running from Ross St to Victoria Rd), noting that Council’s policy on such dedications is to assign a nominal ($1) value to such dedications, as the Applicant is receiving the benefit of the FSR from the dedicated land;

b. A monetary contribution in line with the Parramatta CBD Community Infrastructure framework, noting that a potential use of some or all of this contribution for improvement of Prince Alfred Square should be explored as part of the negotiations (given the proximity of the site to the Square and that Council has recently completed a masterplan for it);

c. Addressing the potential circumstance in which the rate in the Parramatta CBD Community Infrastructure framework changes;

d. Addressing the potential circumstance where this site proceeds in whole or in part as a non-residential use (in which case the framework would not apply to non-residential floorspace); and

e. Addressing the potential circumstance in which Council decides not to proceed with the Community Infrastructure framework, and instead pursues amendments to its other contributions plans.

18. It is recommended that the draft Planning Agreement is reported back to Council alongside the draft DCP (addressed in next section) prior to concurrent exhibition with the Planning Proposal.

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN

19. As is standard practice for site-specific Planning Proposals in the Parramatta CBD, Council officers will work with the Applicant to prepare a site-specific Development Control Plan (DCP) for the site. This DCP will address the issues raised in the assessment of the proposal, including, but not limited to:

a. Further defining the preferred two-tower scheme, including podium heights and tower setbacks, with a view to minimising any non-compliances with relevant ADG requirements;

b. Relationship to and mitigating impacts on Heritage items;

c. Traffic issues such as sightlines, vehicle queuing, pedestrian safety and bicycle parking;

d. Demonstrating adaptive re-use potential of drive-through facility and at least some of the parking spaces proposed;

e. Active frontage requirements; and

f. Relationship to 383 Church Street isolated site.

20. It is recommended that the draft DCP is reported back to Council alongside the draft Planning Agreement prior to concurrent exhibition with the Planning Proposal.

CONSULTATION & TIMING

21. It is expected that specific requirements for the public exhibition period would be set out in the Gateway determination for this Planning Proposal.

22. The details of preliminary consultation undertaken with relevant State Government agencies are detailed in the LPP report included at Attachment 1.

23. Council’s Heritage Advisory Committee (HAC) was briefed on this Planning Proposal at its meeting of 31 October 2018 and again at its extraordinary meeting of 3 June 2020. At the latter meeting, the HAC raised concerns about overshadowing and requested access to the overshadowing analysis (which has since become publically available in the LPP meeting Business Papers), and resolved as follows:

a. That the Committee note concerns of significant shadowing impact on Prince Alfred Square.

b. That the Committee note their concern of the scale of this proposal so close to other significant heritage sites.

c. That the Committee note the bulk and scale of the proposal is unsympathetic to the heritage streetscape and greenspace.

d. Further, that for the above reasons the Committee cannot support this proposal.

24. The HAC’s comments were circulated to the LPP members prior to the 16 June 2020 meeting at which the LPP considered this matter.

25. After considering the HAC’s comments, Council officers’ recommendation to Council on this Planning Proposal remains the same as was recommended to the LPP due to the following reasons:

a. this Planning Proposal is consistent with the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal (with the exception of the parking rate issue discussed previously);

b. heritage matters were considered during Council officers’ assessment process (refer discussion in this report and in Attachment 1); and

c. Council officers have recommended inclusion of heritage controls in the relevant DCP.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATION FOR COUNCIL

26. The financial implication for Council is a contribution in line with Council’s Community Infrastructure framework for the Parramatta CBD of approximately $2.06 million (depending on the final GFA approved through the relevant Development Application process).

Sarah Baker

Project Officer

Robert Cologna

Land Use Planning Manager

David Birds

Group Manager, City Planning

Alistair Cochrane

Acting Chief Financial Officer

Jennifer Concato

Executive Director City Planning and Design

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

Attachments:

1 ⇩

Local Planning Panel Minute and Report (including Planning Proposal and supporting studies as attachments)

299 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 13 July 2020 Item 18.5

INNOVATIVE

ITEM NUMBER 18.5

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Gateway Request - Planning Proposal for 114 – 118 Harris St, Harris Park

REFERENCE RZ/9/2018 - D07470540

REPORT OF Project Officer Land Use

LAND OWNER Harris Street Developments Pty Ltd

APPLICANT Think Planners Pty Ltd

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS CONSIDERED BY SYDNEY CENTRAL CITY PLANNING PANEL Nil

PURPOSE

The purpose of this report is for Council to consider a Planning Proposal for land at 114-118 Harris Street, Harris Park. This report recommends forwarding the Planning Proposal to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE) with a request for a Gateway Determination.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council endorse for the purposes of seeking a Gateway Determination from the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE) the Planning Proposal at 114–118, Harris Street, Harris Park (included as Attachment 1) which seeks the following amendments to Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011 in relation to the subject site:

1. Increase the maximum building height on the Height of Buildings Map from 54 metres (15 storeys) to 126 metres (32 storeys);

2. Increase the maximum FSR on the Floor Space Ratio Map from 4:1 to 10:1;

3. Inclusion of controls to deal with management of flooding including, but not limited to, provisions for safe refuge and ensure the building is capable of withstanding and does not obstruct flood flows; and

4. Amend the Special Areas Provisions Map to identify the site and add site-specific controls that provide for the following:

a. Provision outlining that the mapped FSR of 10:1 is subject to the sliding scale requirements of Clause 7.2 of the draft LEP provisions of the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal.

b. Requirement for minimum 1:1 commercial floor space.

c. Maximum parking rates, in line with the resolution of the City of Parramatta Council on 26 November 2019 with regard to parking rates in the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal.

d. Requirement to demonstrate Experiment Farm is not overshadowed by development of the site.

(b) That the Planning Proposal be forwarded to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment to request the issuing of a Gateway Determination.

(c) That a draft site-specific Development Control Plan (DCP) be prepared and reported to Council prior to its public exhibition. This draft DCP should address, at a minimum:

1. Built form and massing;

2. Building setbacks;

3. Flooding; and

4. Road widening.

(d) That with regards to a Planning Agreement for the subject site:

1. The applicant be invited to negotiate a Planning Agreement in line with Council’s policy position on Planning Agreements in the Parramatta CBD;

2. Delegated authority be given to the Chief Executive Officer to negotiate a draft Planning Agreement with the landowner in relation to the Planning Proposal on behalf of Council; and

3. The outcome of the negotiations shall be reported back to Council prior to the draft Planning Agreement being placed on public exhibition.

(e) That the Planning Proposal, DCP and Planning Agreement are concurrently exhibited.

(f) That Council advises DPIE that the Chief Executive Officer will not be exercising the plan-making delegations for this Planning Proposal as authorised by Council on 26 November 2012.

(g) That Council delegate authority to the Chief Executive Officer to correct any minor anomalies of a non-policy and administrative nature that may arise during the Planning Proposal, DCP and / or Planning Agreement processes.

(h) Further, that Council note that the Parramatta Local Planning Panel’s advice to Council (Attachment 2) is generally consistent with the recommendations of this report. However, the Panel added the following recommendation: ‘(g) That the high performance building bonus may apply to this particular site subject to no increase in height’. This recommendation is not supported by Council officers and is not included above for reasons outlined in this report.

PLANNING PROPOSAL TIMELINE

SITE DESCRIPTION AND SURROUNDING CONTEXT

1. The subject site has an area of 1,776 m² and its legal description is as follows: SP 35413 (114, Harris Street) and SP 53257 (116 – 118, Harris Street). The site is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Location of Site (site shown outlined in red)

2. The site is on the southeastern edge of the Parramatta CBD. To the east of the site is the Robin Thomas Reserve, which is one of the few city centre open space areas and contributes to the character and amenity of the area. Clay Cliff Creek (an open channel) adjoins the northern boundary of the site.

3. The immediate locality is characterised by a mix of uses and built form. To the west of the site is generally aged building stock that is currently undergoing a transition in character because of development approvals under construction and the recent Planning Proposal at 14 – 20 Parkes Street, Harris Park.

BACKGROUND

4. On 27 August 2018, a Planning Proposal was lodged for 114–118 Harris Street, Harris Park to remove the maximum height of building (HOB) under the incentive HOB map and to increase the maximum Floor Space Ratio from 4:1 to 14.5:1.

5. The Planning Proposal for 114 – 118 Harris Street is one of three Planning Proposals for land at the corner of Parkes and Harris Streets. Other Planning Proposals have been lodged for 24 Parkes Street and 26-30 Parkes Street. These three sites are shown in Figure 2. This report addresses the Planning Proposal for site 3 in Figure 2.

Figure 2: Three adjacent Planning Proposals, Harris Park

[1: 24 Parkes Street; 2: 26–30 Parkes Street; 3: 114–118 Harris Street)

6. The background to these three Planning Proposals extends over a period of approximately three years with extensive consultation with Council officer. During this time Council staff have raised a number of issues concerning development of the sites; the main issues relate to application of sliding scale, resolution of setbacks and site isolation particularly for 24 Parkes Street. The progress of these Planning Proposals was also impacted by conditions of the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal Gateway Determination requiring an analysis of the overshadowing impacts on nearby heritage properties including Experiment Farm. Council staff have been of the view that site consolidation is the best means to secure optimal built form and urban design outcomes and avoid site isolation.

7. Nevertheless, after consideration Council officers have reached the conclusion that 114–118 Harris Street can be reported as a stand-alone Planning Proposal as this site may be developed without amalgamation.

COMPARISON OF PLANNING CONTROLS

Table 1: Planning Proposal comparison to current controls and Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal

Scenario	Current Controls	Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal Controls	Recommended Site-specific Planning Proposal controls
Site Area – 1,776m²
Land zoning	B4 Mixed Use	B4 Mixed Use	B4 Mixed Use
FSR	4:1	Base: 4:1 Incentive: 10:1 (11.5 with bonus). However, under clause 7.2 of the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal LEP provisions the site is subject to a sliding scale, as resolved by Council on 24 March 2019	10:1 Under the sliding scale the permissible FSR for the site is 9.88:1 (which allows 11.362:1 with design excellence. This is reflected in the reference design).
Height of Buildings (HOB) / solar access plane	54m (15 storeys)	Base Height of Buildings map: 54m (15 storeys) Incentive Height of Building map: There is no numeric control on the Incentive HOB map; instead, a new “Area 1“ control is applied to protect solar access to Experiment Farm between 10am and 2pm midwinter.	The Height of Buildings map will show 126m (32 storeys) (145m - 38 storeys with design excellence). A control to protect Solar Access to Experiment Farm will also affect the permitted maximum height. The control will be modelled on the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal described in the adjoining row. Modelling suggests Experiment Farm will not be overshadowed if the building is at or below 145m. Given the height is based on preliminary modeling there is a small risk that a building at 145m could overshadow when detailed design work is completed. However this clause will ensure that a more detailed design prepared at Design Competition and Development Application stage will still comply with the requirement to keep Experiment Farm free from shadow at the specified periods of the day.
Land Acquisition	Nil	In the land reservation acquisition map for the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal the Harris Street frontage of the site is subject to the requirement for 3.5m road widening.	It is recommended that a Planning Agreement be negotiated to secure a 3.5m widening along Harris Street.
Minimum Commercial Floor Space	Nil	Minimum 1:1 commercial floor space required in mixed use development.	Insert clause that will require a minimum commercial floor space of 1:1.
Active Street Frontages	N/A	Active frontage proposed for Harris Street.	Active frontage provided on Harris Street via DCP controls.
High performing buildings (residential)	N/A	5% high performing building bonus.	High performing building bonus is not supported (refer to comments below).
Parking	Parking Rates	Endorsed Parking Rates consistent with City of Sydney CBD Parking rates - Category A.	Insert clause setting parking rates as per Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal.
Yield	Approximately 89 dwellings*	Approximately 218 dwellings.	Approximately 218 dwellings.

*Based on Average Unit size of 80m²

9. In summary, the Planning Proposal recommended for the subject site seeks to amend the core planning controls of FSR and HOB in a manner that is consistent with the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal as described in Table 1.

SUMMARY OF COUNCIL OFFICER ASSESSMENT

10. Council officers’ assessment of this matter is summarised below in Table 2. Please refer to the report to the Local Planning Panel (Attachment 2) for further details of the assessment.

Table 2: Summary of Council Officer Assessment

FSR

The FSR and height controls including the solar access protections for Experiment Farm are consistent with the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal and therefore are supported for inclusion in this site-specific Planning Proposal.

Sliding Scale/Amalgamation Issues

This planning proposal is one of three proposals at the corner of Parkes and Harris Streets that seek to trigger a sliding scale. Council officers consider that amalgamation of the sites would achieve better planning and urban design outcomes. However, the applicants have not been able to agree to amalgamate and wish to develop their sites separately. Under the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal each of the sites will be permitted to be developed individually subject to application of the sliding scale. Given this, Council officers consider that is acceptable to proceed with individual assessments for the site-specific planning proposals.

Application of High Performing Building Bonus

The applicant is seeking the high performing building 5% bonus. However the site does not meet the criteria to be eligible as the subject site is 1,776 m² rather than the required 1,800 m². Council officers do not support the application of this bonus because it would undermine the sliding scale provisions that are being applied to encourage higher FSR bonuses to be available if amalgamation occurs to achieve larger lots.

Built form and urban design

Council officers are yet to accept setbacks proposed by the applicant, but are committed to continue discussion on what appropriate setbacks might be. Setback negotiations will have a significant impact on FSR achievable for the site as height is limited by the need to avoid overshadowing of Experiment Farm. A draft DCP reflecting the outcome of these discussions on setbacks will be reported to Council for endorsement to be exhibited with the Planning Proposal. It is recommended Council permit the maximum FSR in accordance with the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal so if the applicant is able to satisfy Council that the setbacks are appropriate they can achieve this maximum FSR without having to amend the Planning Proposal. This approach allows an appropriate level of flexibility.

Heritage

Whilst the subject site does not contain any heritage items future development must ensure that solar access to Experiment Farm is protected. The reference design shows the development does not overshadow Experiment Farm. Further refinement and detail will need to be provided during the design excellence process and the development application stage to ensure this matter is appropriately managed and addressed.

Flooding

A portion of the site is subject to high hazard flooding and is affected by the 100-year Average Recurrence Interval (ARI). Nevertheless, the site is generally suitable for residential development from a flood risk perspective. This is subject to the inclusion of controls in the Planning Proposal that require development to address floodplain risk management in a manner consistent with the approach proposed in the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal. The controls will require safe areas for refuge and ensure the building is capable of withstanding and does not obstruct flood flows.

Traffic Issues

The Planning Proposal is required to take into consideration a provision on the Local Reservation Acquisition (LRA) Maps of the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal that provides for local road widening on the western side of Harris Street. The width of the widening is approximately 3.5 metres. The widening has been incorporated into the strategic traffic modelling for the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal, and at this stage it has been jointly agreed by Transport for NSW and Council to facilitate the creation of a potential additional lane along the west side of Harris Street. Therefore, it has been included in the Local Reservation Acquisition Maps for the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal. It is proposed that this road widening be achieved through negotiation of a Planning Agreement.

Parking

The applicant has accepted the application of residential and commercial parking rates consistent with the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal.

Other Statutory Considerations

11. In conclusion, based on the assessment summarised above, Council officers recommend progression of this Planning Proposal.

12. Council officers also recommend that Council advise DPIE that the CEO will not be exercising the plan-making delegations for this Planning Proposal. This is on the basis that Council is also advancing the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal (which affects this site), and the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal has not yet been approved by DPIE for finalisation.

LOCAL PLANNING PANEL’S ADVICE

13. The LPP considered this matter at its meeting of 16 June 2020, and generally resolved in accordance with the officer recommendation.

14. However, the Panel added one recommendation as follows:

(g) That the high performance building bonus may apply to this

particular site subject to no increase in height.

15. This report recommends that Council not accept the Panel's recommended amendment above. In summary, Council officers do not support application of the High Performing Building bonus to this site because it does not meet the minimum site size requirements for this bonus, and risks undermining provisions in the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal encouraging site amalgamation. For more detail, please refer to the information outlined in Table 2 above and to paragraphs 22 to 25 of the report to the Local Planning Panel (Attachment 2).

16. The Panel also included the following Additional Note in its determination:

‘That if the planning proposal proceeds to the development application

stage attention should be given to the degree of potential overshadowing of the park opposite’.

PLANNING AGREEMENT

17. The Applicant has provided an initial letter of offer proposing to make a voluntary financial contribution consistent with the Phase 1 Value Sharing methodology that will provide contributions toward community infrastructure. A calculation of the potential value of a future Planning Agreement is approximately $1,566,432 using the methodology shown in Table 3 below.

Table 3: Calculations for payment of monetary contribution

Development parameters
Site area	1,776 m2
Base Gross Floor Area	4:1 = 4 x 1,776 m2= 7,104 m2
Incentive Floor area (Phase 1)	9.88:1 = 9.88 x 1,776 m2 =17,546.88 m2
Uplift in Gross Floor Area	(17,546.88 – 7,104) = 10,442.88 m2
Community infrastructure payment required at $150/m²	$1,566,432 (Mixed use development with commercial and residential use)

18. Council officers recommend the negotiation of a draft Planning Agreement in accordance with the following principles:

a. Inclusion of the road widening dedication discussed above, noting that Council’s policy on such dedications is to assign a nominal ($1) value to such dedications, as the Applicant is receiving the benefit of the FSR from the dedicated land;

b. Addressing the potential circumstance in which the rate in the Parramatta CBD Community Infrastructure framework changes;

c. Addressing the potential circumstance where this site proceeds in whole or in part as a non-residential use (in which case the framework would not apply to non-residential floorspace); and

d. Addressing the potential circumstance in which Council decides not to proceed with the Community Infrastructure framework, and instead pursues amendments to its other contributions plans.

19. It is recommended that the draft Planning Agreement is reported back to Council alongside the draft DCP (addressed in next section) prior to concurrent exhibition with the Planning Proposal.

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN

20. As is standard practice for site-specific Planning Proposals in the Parramatta CBD, Council officers will work with the Applicant to prepare a site-specific Development Control Plan (DCP) for the site. This DCP will address the issues raised in the assessment of the proposal, including, but not limited to built form and massing, setbacks, flooding and road widening.

21. It is recommended that the draft DCP is reported back to Council alongside the draft Planning Agreement prior to concurrent exhibition with the Planning Proposal.

CONSULTATION & TIMING

22. It is expected that specific requirements for the public exhibition period would be set out in the Gateway determination for this Planning Proposal.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATION FOR COUNCIL

23. The financial implication for Council is a contribution in line with Council’s Community Infrastructure framework for the Parramatta CBD of approximately $1,566,432 (depending on the final GFA approved through the relevant Development Application process). This report recommends progression of a Planning Agreement process in line with Council’s policy position for the Parramatta CBD, in order to support the delivery of community infrastructure in the Parramatta CBD.

Paul Kennedy

Project Officer Land Use

Robert Cologna

Land Use Planning Manager

David Birds

Group Manager, City Planning

Alistair Cochrane

Chief Financial Officer

Jennifer Concato

Executive Director City Planning and Design

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

Attachments:

1 ⇩	Planning Proposal	36 Pages
2 ⇩	LPP minute and report	19 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 13 July 2020 Item 18.6

INNOVATIVE

ITEM NUMBER 18.6

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Draft Development Control Plan and draft Planning Agreement, 18 – 40 Anderson Street, Parramatta

REFERENCE RZ/4/2018 - D07175486

REPORT OF Project Officer Land Use

LAND OWNER: Australia and New Zealand International Investment Group Pty Ltd

APPLICANT: Landream

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS CONSIDERED BY SYDNEY CENTRAL CITY PLANNING PANEL: Nil

PURPOSE:

The purpose of this report is threefold:

· To report back to Council the outcomes of the preparation of a draft Development Control Plan (DCP) and the negotiation of terms for a draft Planning Agreement with the landowner in relation to this site.

· To seek Council’s endorsement of a draft site-specific Development Control Plan for purposes of concurrent exhibition with the relevant Planning Proposal and draft Planning Agreement.

· To seek Council’s delegation to finalise a draft Planning Agreement for purposes of concurrent exhibition with the relevant Planning Proposal and draft DCP.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council approve the draft Development Control Plan (DCP) at Attachment 1 for the purposes of public exhibition, subject to the following amendments:

1. Figure 3 to be finalised in accordance with the detailed design for landscaping to be agreed as part of the finalisation process for the draft Planning Agreement; this should include adding dimensions to the figure.

2. Figure 4 to be amended so that the residential podium height is notated as RL 30.4 and the building overhang near the on-site trees is deleted.

(b) That Council delegate authority to the Chief Executive Officer to finalise a draft Planning Agreement that takes into consideration the letter of offer at Attachment 2 for the purposes of public exhibition. This requires resolution of the following outstanding matters:-

· A process to ensure appropriate design, delivery and valuation of the footpath and park embellishment works;

· Determining whether the applicant be party to the agreement rather than the landowner;

· Confirmation on the timing of the following actions

o payment of contributions,

o delivery of the works in kind,

o registration and removal of the agreement from the title of the land; and

o defect rectification periods;

· Inclusion of a cap on the legal/administration costs payable by the applicant;

· Potential access to Council owned land for construction cranes; and

· Other legal, policy and security measures as they arise during the agreement drafting process.

(c) That the draft DCP and draft Planning Agreement (once draft versions are finalised) are publicly exhibited concurrently with the Planning Proposal for 18–40 Anderson Street previously endorsed by Council on 12 August 2019.

(d) That the public exhibition outcomes are reported back to Council.

(e) Further, that Council authorise the Chief Executive Officer to correct any minor inconsistencies or anomalies of an administrative nature relating to the Planning Proposal, draft DCP and draft Planning Agreement documentation that may arise during the drafting and exhibition processes.

BACKGROUND

The Site

1. The subject site is located at 18–40 Anderson Street, Parramatta. The legal description of the site is Lot 20 DP 792518, and it has a site area of approximately 8,075m². The site currently contains the seven-storey Holiday Inn Hotel, including 181 rooms, ground floor restaurant and bar, corporate function rooms, and other facilities. The site is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1 – Site Location Map (site shown outlined in red)

2. Immediately surrounding development comprises:

· North: 5–7 Parkes Street (Development Application DA/730/2016 recently approved for a 24-storey mixed-use development);

· South: a two-storey car repair facility with rooftop parking (further south are more repair shops and related facilities);

· East: Jubilee Park; and

· West: the two-storey PJ Gallagher’s Irish pub and multiple car dealership / repair shops along Church Street.

Planning Proposal History

3. On 9 May 2018, Landream lodged a Planning Proposal seeking to amend the Parramatta LEP 2011 in part to rezone the subject site from B5 Business Development to B3 Commercial Core and to permit residential accommodation and serviced apartments as additional permitted uses.

4. On 11 February 2019, Council endorsed progression of the Planning Proposal, after the matter had been considered by the Local Planning Panel and resolved:

(a) That Council note the recommendation of the Local Planning Panel dated 18 December 2018 in relation to this matter as detailed below, but with minor inconsequential changes relating to the format of site-specific provisions and a requirement for all documents to be publicly exhibited concurrently, noting that the Panel’s recommendation is consistent with the Council Officer’s recommendation to support the proposal.

(b) That Council endorse the Planning Proposal at 18 – 40 Anderson Street, Parramatta (included as Attachment 2) for the purposes of a Gateway Determination, which seeks the following amendments to Parramatta Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 2011 in relation to the subject site:

· Rezone the site from B5 Business Development to B3 Commercial Core;

· Amend the maximum building height in the Height of Buildings Map from 14 metres to part 120 metres and part 0 metres;

· Amend the maximum floor space ratio (FSR) on the Floor Space Ratio Map from 4:1 to 6:1;

· Amend Schedule 1 Additional Permitted Uses to add residential accommodation’ and ‘serviced apartments’ as additional permitted uses and include a provision limiting those additional permitted uses to a maximum FSR of 3:1 (and up to 3.9:1 FSR with design excellence) and subject to a minimum FSR of 3:1 being provided as non-residential floor space;

· Add site-specific controls that provide for the following:

o Requirement to demonstrate Jubilee Park is not overshadowed by development of the site;

o Reduced car parking rates in line with the Parramatta CBD Strategic Transport Study; and

o High performing building bonus and Dual Piping.

(c) That the Planning Proposal be forwarded to the Department of Planning and Environment to request the issuing of a Gateway Determination, noting that prior to public exhibition:

· issues relating to flood mitigation and risk assessment to be dealt with and if necessary the Planning Proposal will be amended; and

· a revised reference design will be finalised that addresses flood mitigation and urban design issues discussed in this report.

(d) That a site-specific Development Control Plan (DCP) be prepared and reported to Council prior to its public exhibition.

(e) That the applicant be invited to negotiate a potential Planning Agreement for the subject site and that delegated authority be given to the Chief Executive Officer to negotiate a Planning Agreement with the landowner in relation to the Planning Proposal on behalf of Council. The outcome of negotiations shall be reported back to Council prior to the draft Planning Agreement being placed on public exhibition.

(f) That the Planning Proposal, site-specific DCP and draft Planning Agreement be placed on public exhibition concurrently.

(g) That Council advises the Department of Planning and Environment that the Chief Executive Officer will be exercising the plan-making delegations for this Planning Proposal as authorised by Council on 26 November 2012.

(h) Further, that Council grant delegated authority to the Chief Executive Officer to correct any minor anomalies of a non-policy and administrative nature that may arise during the amendment process.

5. After receiving the request for a Gateway determination from Council, the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE) advised on 28 May 2019 that the Planning Proposal would not be processed further. DPIE had concerns with the intent to make residential accommodation an additional permitted use in the zone, which could undermine the commercial zone and the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal. Council and the proponent were encouraged to discuss a way forward for this proposal that aligned with the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal.

6. In response to DPIE’s concerns, Council endorsed on 12 August 2019 proposed amendments to the Planning Proposal for the purposes of requesting a Gateway Determination as follows:

· Rezone the site from B5 Business Development to B4 Mixed Use;

· Insert a site-specific provision requiring a minimum 3:1 non-residential FSR; and

· Remove the proposed site-specific additional permitted use provisions allowing for residential accommodation and serviced apartments.

7. On 3 October 2019, DPIE issued a Gateway determination allowing the Planning Proposal to proceed subject to conditions.

Comparison of Planning Controls

8. A comparison of current planning controls, proposed controls of the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal and controls of the amended Planning Proposal for the

subject site are shown in Table 1 below.

Table 1: Comparison of Controls

	Current Controls	CBD Planning Proposal Controls	Amended Site-Specific Planning Proposal
Area	8073m2
Zone	B5 Business Development	B3 Commercial Core (Residential and Serviced Apartments not permitted in B3 Zone)	B4 Mixed Use
FSR	4:1	6:1	6:1 (Minimum 3:1 non-residential FSR required)
HOB	18m	Base and Incentive are part 80m and part 0m, and requirement to comply with Sun Access Protection provision	Part 120m and part 0m, and compliance with Sun Access Protection provision
Yield	32,292m2 commercial floor*	49,247m2 commercial floor space*	Approximately 284 apartments ^ and either 24,219m2 of commercial floor space or a hotel with approximately 250 apartments^#

*Residential development is not permitted in these cases but hotels of 250 rooms or more could be included in the mix of commercial uses on the site

^ Based on Average apartment size of 85m2

# Hotel size based on concept in applicants urban design report

9. The site is subject to high-hazard flooding, and is affected by the probable maximum flood (PMF) event, as well as the 1:100 and 1:20 year flood.

10. The documentation submitted in support of the application indicates the applicant is intending to develop the site with a new hotel which will replace the hotel currently on site and a new residential tower development.

DRAFT SITE-SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN (DCP)

11. Pursuant to Council’s resolution of 11 February 2019, a draft DCP for this site is to be publicly exhibited concurrently with the Planning Proposal and draft Planning Agreement. Therefore, a draft DCP (Attachment 1) has been prepared for Council’s consideration.

12. The objectives of the draft DCP are as follows:

a. To create a high quality urban environment that provides a mix of uses including hotel, commercial and high density residential.

b. To allow for viable hotel and residential floor plates while ensuring that built form responds to site constraints related to flooding, overshadowing and tree protection.

c. To improve the quality and function of the public domain through provision of new pedestrian links and new park for passive recreation.

d. To minimise overshadowing to Jubilee Park.

e. To protect the mature fig trees in the northern portion of the site.

f. To encourage activation of the street and public domain.

g. To enable adequate flood conveyance and management while providing for the embellishment of portions of the Clay Cliff Creek corridor.

13. The controls in the draft DCP are divided into five sections, the content of which is summarised as follows:

a. Public Domain and Landscaping: controls relating to provision and design of a pedestrian access path along the Eastern boundary of the site and a public park, as well as controls relating to landscaping, active frontage along Anderson St, minimisation of vehicular access presenting to the street, and protection of the fig trees on-site.

b. Controls establishing building envelopes, particularly with regards to setbacks, podium heights, and inter-building separation, as well as protecting solar access to Jubilee Park.

c. Controls establishing appropriate flooding and stormwater management measures for the site, including allowing floodwater conveyance, providing landscaping, and preventing impacts to adjoining properties.

d. Parking and Access: these controls establish a single entry point off Anderson Street to serve both hotel and residential uses, the criteria for providing a porte-cochere driveway, and potential provision of a designated bus/passenger vehicle drop-off and pick-up zone on Anderson Street. The Applicant has expressed their preference for two vehicle entry points (rather than the single shared entry point otherwise provided for in the controls) due to the two land uses proposed at this site. Therefore, an objective and control relating to a scenario in which two crossings are unavoidable is also included in the DCP; this objective/control pair focuses on pedestrian safety, street trees and technical performance of the vehicle crossing.

e. Architectural resolution: controls addressing matters including viewlines from Great Western Highway, establishing positive public domain interface, and quality of the street walls / frontages.

14. It is recommended that the following minor amendments should be made to the DCP at Attachment 1 prior to its exhibition:

a. Figure 3 should be finalised in accordance with the detailed design for landscaping to be agreed as part of the finalisation process for the draft Planning Agreement (discussed in further detail later in this report), and this should include adding dimensions to the figure.

b. Figure 4 should be amended so that the residential podium height is notated as RL 30.4 (to make consistent with the notation for the non-residential podium height), and the building overhang near the on-site trees should be deleted (as Council officers’ position is that building setbacks should be open to the sky).

DRAFT PLANNING AGREEMENT

15. Negotiations have been proceeding on a Draft Planning Agreement for the subject site. A final letter of offer was provided to Council on 15 May 2020 (Attachment 2) and a draft VPA document submitted to Council on 2 June 2020. Since submission of the Draft VPA negotiations have continued to finalise the Planning Agreement. The sections below detail the current status of these negotiations.

Community Infrastructure Contribution

16. Council’s Planning Agreements Policy was adopted by Council at its Meeting on 26 November 2018. The Parramatta CBD Planning framework includes a resolution of Council dated 10 April 2017 which applies a ‘Phase 1’ community infrastructure amount of $150 per square metre and a ‘Phase 2’ community infrastructure amount of $375 per square metre. The Framework applies these value sharing amounts to increases in residential potential only. In this case it has been agreed with the applicant that the proposed amendment in the Planning Proposal allow for an increase of 3:1 development potential and that the community infrastructure contribution should be based on this uplift. Therefore the agreed value of the contribution is as detailed in Table 2 below

Table 2: Calculation of Community Infrastructure Contribution

Site Area	8,027 m²
Increase in residential development potential permitted by the proposed controls	3:1 = (3x8,027) = 24,081m2
Community infrastructure contribution Required ($150/additional m² residential)	24,081x$150/m²= $3,612,150

Works in Kind Planning Agreement Arrangements

17. Council’s Planning Agreements Policy allows for a Community Infrastructure contribution to be in the form of a monetary contribution or as works-in-kind. Under Council’s CBD Planning Strategy (endorsed by Council in April 2015) the subject site contains an area that Council could consider acquiring when the subject site is redeveloped as part of a land dedication and works-in-kind arrangement. Figure 2 is an extract from this strategy that shows Council’s strategy for a green space corridor extending over the subject site. The subject site is shown outlined in red and the portion of the site shaded green is the portion of the subject site to be acquired for open space sought under this strategy.

Figure 2: Extract from CBD Planning Strategy for Auto Alley precinct

18. An urban design analysis undertaken as part of previous studies to support the CBD Planning Strategy identified that a 3m-wide walkway along the eastern boundary the site would be desirable. Figure 3 shows the open space and walkway in green.

Figure 3: Proposed Open Space and Walkway -18-40 Anderson Street

19. The applicant has agreed to dedicate the land shown in dark green in Figure 3 to Council at no cost subject to them being able to utilise the FSR generated by the land on the remainder of the development site. The arrangement is consistent with Council’s Planning Agreement policy for the dedication of land.

20. The applicant has also agreed to undertake work to embellish the proposed walkway and park. The cash contribution required under Council’s Community Infrastructure framework would be decreased by the value of the works proposed to be undertaken by the applicant. This arrangement is consistent with Council’s Planning Agreement Policy Framework and the breakdown based on current estimates is shown in Table 3.

Table 3: Breakdown of Community Infrastructure Contribution to Council within Planning Agreement

Total Value of Community Infrastructure Contribution within Planning Agreement	$3,612,150
Embellishment Work* Value	$3,250,000
Monetary Contribution Payable	$362,150

*Based on estimate provided by the applicant – VPA will include a process to verify this cost.

21. Based on the current estimate, the embellishment works are less than the total community infrastructure contribution required. The applicant has requested that should, at the time the development occurs, the value of the works exceed the community infrastructure contribution payable that the difference be discounted from any Section 7.11/7.12 developer contributions payable for this development. Council Officers support inclusion of a clause to allow for this arrangement to be put in place as it is consistent with the works-in-kind provisions in the Council’s Planning Agreements Policy.

Other Planning Agreement negotiation Issues

22. The Planning Agreement will be drafted to achieve the following principles, which have been agreed with the applicant:-

· require that the Community Infrastructure Contribution will increase should Council endorse changes to the Community Infrastructure Framework to increase the rate payable. The rate that will be applied will be the rate in force when the development application for redevelopment of this site is approved.

· Include clauses that will require review of the Planning Proposal should Council replace the Community Infrastructure Framework with increased Developer Contributions Requirements. Unless this review is available to cover this circumstance the VPA would inadvertently require payment of double the Community Infrastructure Contribution amount to Council which is not the intention of the VPA.

· The dedication of the land identified in Figure 3 in dark green at no cost to

Council and embellishment of pathway and open space with the embellishment cost only to be offset against the Community Infrastructure Contribution;

· Any Section 7.11 or 7.12 contributions will still be payable. Should the value of works in kind for embellishment of the open space exceed the Community Infrastructure Contribution required the difference will be discounted from the Section 7.11 or Section 7.12 contributions payable or Council will arrange to refund of the difference through another mechanism agreed in the final VPA.

· Given the works in kind arrangements proposed, that Council’s normal requirement for the community infrastructure payment arrangements with 25% to be paid at construction certificate stage at 75% to be paid at occupation certificate stage be varied. The payment arrangements should ensure the payment required at construction certificate stage is adjusted to account for the value of the works in kind the applicant will deliver as part of the agreement.

23. It is recommended that Council delegate the CEO to finalise the draft Planning Agreement on behalf of Council for the purpose of exhibition. At the time of finalisation of this report the following procedural, design and legal details were still being finalised:-

· A process to ensure that:-

i. the detailed design and works proposed meet Council’s requirements,

ii. works are delivered in a safe and appropriate manner with appropriate levels of Council oversight;

iii. there is transparent methodology for a more detailed valuation of the works at time of delivery, and

iv. there is an agreed schedule for delivery of Community infrastructure funds and works in kind.

· Agreement on potential bank guarantees, bonds, arrangements for registration of and removal of the agreement from the title of the land, defect/rectification periods for works and other security measures that should be put in place to protect Council’s interests;

· Agreement on who should be party to the agreement. Council’s position is that the landowner should be party to the agreement. The applicant is suggesting they can provide warranties within the agreement that would allow for the developer to be party to the agreement rather than the owner. Council will only allow the applicants arrangement if the legal risks Council might bear are satisfactorily addressed by the warranties proposed by the applicant;

· The applicant has agreed to cover Council’s legal and administration costs but would like to have a maximum amount they could be asked to pay specified in the agreement. A quote will be obtained from Council solicitors to be used as the basis for negotiating any legal and administration cost cap included in the agreement;

· Whether Council will accept a request for the crane access to Council owned land to located cranes during the construction process.

CONSULTATION & TIMING

24. Pending Council’s resolution on this matter, the draft DCP and draft Planning Agreement will be publicly exhibited with the Planning Proposal. The exhibition will be conducted in accordance with the Gateway determination, the requirements of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and the Parramatta DCP 2011. The outcome of the public exhibition will then be reported to Council.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATION FOR COUNCIL

25. The Planning Agreement currently being negotiated will involve the applicant delivering an embellished park and potentially a monetary payment to a total value of $3,612,150 in addition to the Section 7.11 and 7.12 contributions payable at the time the development proceeds.

Paul Kennedy

Project Officer Land Use

Robert Cologna

Land Use Planning Manager

David Birds

Group Manager, City Planning

Alistair Cochrane

Chief Financial Officer

Jennifer Concato

Executive Director City Planning and Design

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

Attachments:

1 ⇩	DRAFT DCP – 18-40 Anderson Street, Parramatta	10 Pages
2 ⇩	Revised Letter of Offer - 18-40 Anderson Street, Parramattta v4	5 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Date	Councillor	Councillor Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
30 April 2020	All	Nil	Councillors advised (via email) of exhibition of the EIS (via email)	Executive Director, City Planning and Design
29 May 2020	All	Nil	Councillors invited (via email) to provide feedback to inform drafting of a submission	Executive Director, City Planning and Design
29 May 2020	Clr Prociv	Query about consideration of a station in Clyde	Responded (via email) that Council is currently focused on inclusion of a station at Camellia	Executive Director, City Planning and Design
24 June 2020	Clr Davis	Concerned about the future of the speedway and loss of RE2 Private Recreation land	Matter included in draft submission at Attachment 1	Transport Planning Manager

1 ⇩	Traffic Engineering Advisory Group Minutes of meeting held on 11 June 2020	11 Pages
2 ⇩	Traffic Engineering Advisory Group Item Reports for meeting held on 11 June 2020	128 Pages
3 ⇩	Consultation and Timing for the Traffic Engineering Advisory Group meeting held on 11 June 2020	8 Pages

Date	Stakeholder	Stakeholder Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
4 May 2020	Parramatta RSL sub-Branch	Supports proposed program and intend to hold commemorative service.	Ongoing communication with stakeholder.	City Experience, Civic Program
4 May 2020	Epping RSL sub-Branch	Supports proposed program.	Ongoing communication with stakeholder.	City Experience, Civic Program
27 May 2020	1^st/15^th Royal NSW Lancer Barracks	Supports proposed program.	Ongoing communication with stakeholder.	City Experience, Civic Program
27 May 2020	Royal NSW Lancer Museum	Supports proposed program.	Ongoing communication with stakeholder.	City Experience, Civic Program
4 May 2020	Parramatta Naval Association	Supports proposed program.	Advised Armed Forces activity and not further involved.	City Experience, Civic Program

1 ⇩	List of Council Investments by maturity - May 2020	9 Pages
2 ⇩	Investment and Loans Performance Graph - May 2020	1 Page
3 ⇩	CPG Comprehensive Investment Report - May 2020	19 Pages

1 ⇩	Parramatta City Centre - Lanes Policy: Existing + Proposed New Lanes, Arcades and Through Sites Links in Parramatta CIty Centre	1 Page
2 ⇩	Civic Link Framework Plan 2017	4 Pages
3 ⇩	Riverbank Development Blueprint	1 Page

1 ⇩	Request from Parramatta Female Factory Friends - Bicentenary 2021 Re-enactment Walk	1 Page
2 ⇩	Media Release - Parramatta Female Factory Friends 200 Years	1 Page