Agenda of Council - Monday, 7 December 2020

Council 7 December 2020 Item 13.2

ACCESSIBLE

ITEM NUMBER 13.2

SUBJECT FOR NOTATION: Minutes of the Cycleways Advisory Committee held between September 2019 and October 2020

REFERENCE F2013/00268 - D07702651

REPORT OF Senior Project Officer Transport Planning

PURPOSE:

To inform Council of the minutes of the Parramatta Cycleways Advisory Committee meetings held from September 2019 to October 2020.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council note the minutes of the Parramatta Cycleways Advisory Committee meetings held in 2019 on 25 September and 20 November, and in 2020 on 22 January and 12 August.

BACKGROUND

1. City of Parramatta Council’s Cycleway Committee meets every second month. The Committee currently comprises nine members representing various cycling interests.

2. In 2019 the Committee met on 25 September and 20 November. In 2020 the Committee met on 22 January and 12 August. See Attachments 1 to 4 for copies of the minutes.

3. Due to the nature of most issues discussed by the Committee, the minutes are reported annually.

SUMMARY OF COMMITTEE MINUTES

COMMUNITY FEEDBACK

4. The Committee has representation from a number of Bicycle Clubs and Bicycle User Groups in the area, namely BicycleNSW, Parramatta Cycling Club, CAMWEST, Children’s Hospital Westmead and BikeNorth. Committee members provided feedback to Council from their members on issues such as maintenance or safety concerns. Members also communicated Council policy, infrastructure proposals, and closures to their broader membership. The Committee also reviewed and suggested changes to the latest version of the Cycling Route Map prior to printing.

PROJECTS

5. The Committee members were briefed throughout the last 12 months on the status of cycling-related projects being delivered by Council or other parties and provided valuable input. All Council projects presented to the Committee had been through Council’s budget approval processes, of which a significant number of projects are fully or partially grant funded by the State Government.

6. The following Council projects received Committee feedback, including route reviews, recommendations on concept designs, as well as input during formal community consultation:

a. Epping to Carlingford Cycleway,

b. Ermington Foreshore Stages 1 and 2,

c. Alfred Street Cycleway Stage 1,

d. Marsh Street – Parramatta Road intersection upgrade,

e. Finalysons Creek Cycleway,

f. T-Way Cycleway.

CYCLING EDUCATION, EVENTS AND ACTIVITIES

7. The Committee received reports from Council officers on non-infrastructure activities through the year, and assisted in promoting these efforts to the wider cycling community, this included:

a. Guided rides around the LGA as part of NSW Bike Week for recreation and commuting,

b. Learn to Ride events at schools

c. Polite Path Program and Bike Repair sessions along the river where providers engaged with users along the river paths encouraging them to be more mindful, courteous and respectful.

8. Committee members participated in the Biketober Business Challenge. In 2019 almost 400 people who work in Parramatta cycled over 80,000km in October. Of these, 30% were new riders, and 25% were only occasional riders before taking part. A short summary is provided at Attachment 5.

9. Committee members also actively participated in leading rides around the LGA for new riders, as well as providing bike valet parking at Council events, and undertook counting for Bicycle Network Super Tuesday and Super Sunday surveys.

ADVOCACY

10. The Committee received a report on the changes at the intersection of Horwood Place and George Street as a result of Parramatta Light Rail, and the subsequent significant impact on cyclists. Horwood Place can no longer be used as a route because it is now blocked at George Street, and the lip on the continuous footpath on the southern side is very tall and causes issues with the front wheel of bicycles. A Committee member met with Parramatta Light Rail to discuss the issue and seek a better resolution.

11. The Committee has requested that Council officers report back on how lipless kerb ramps could be incorporated into the Council standards, as they can cause issues for cyclists when transitioning from the road, particularly at acute angles.

POLICY

12. The Committee requested to view the latest Council Hoarding Policy to ensure that Shared User Paths are taken into account when hoarding is constructed.

COMMUNICATION WITH OTHER COUNCIL COMMITTEES

13. A representative of the Committee attended all Parramatta Traffic Committee meetings and provided information on all relevant Traffic Committee items. A number of these matters are cycling specific projects, but also ensuring cyclists are considered on cycling routes when any new traffic facilities are proposed such appropriate signage, linemarking, as well as safe and coherent cycling facilities.

14. The Committee also collaborated with the Access Advisory Committee through the Deputy Chair attending Access Committee when possible.

CONSULTATION & TIMING

Stakeholder Consultation

15. N/A

Date	Stakeholder	Stakeholder Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A

Councillor Consultation

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

Date	Councillor	Councillor Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
22 January 2020	Clr Bradley	Attended meeting until 6:45pm	N/A	N/A

FINANCIAL IMPLICATION FOR COUNCIL

17. There are no financial implications in receiving and noting the minutes of the Cycleways Advisory Committee.

Mark Crispin

Senior Project Officer Transport Planning

Michael Jollon

Transport Planning Manager

Paul Perrett

Chief Financial Officer / Acting Executive Director Corporate Services

Geoff King

Group Manager City Strategy

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

Attachments:

1 ⇩	Cycleways Advisory Committee Minutes 25 September 2019	4 Pages
2 ⇩	Cycleways Advisory Committee Minutes 20 November 2019	5 Pages
3 ⇩	Cycleways Advisory Committee Minutes 22 January 2020	5 Pages
4 ⇩	Cycleways Advisory Committee Minutes 12 August 2020	7 Pages
5 ⇩	Biketober 2019 Summary	1 Page

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 7 December 2020 Item 13.3

ACCESSIBLE

ITEM NUMBER 13.3

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Minutes of the Parramatta Traffic Committee Meeting held on 5 November 2020

REFERENCE F2020/00082 - D07250443

REPORT OF Traffic and Transport Manager

PURPOSE:

That Council consider the minutes and approve the recommendations of the Parramatta Traffic Committee meeting held on 5 November 2020.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council note the minutes of the Parramatta Traffic Committee meeting held on 5 November 2020, as provided at Attachment 1.

(b) Further, that Council approve the recommendations of the Parramatta Traffic Committee meeting held on 5 November 2020 provided at Attachment 1 and in this report, noting the following financial implications for each item.

i. ITEM 2011 A1 BETTINGTON ROAD, CARLINGFORD – INSTALL PEDESTRIAN REFUGE ISLAND

The estimated cost of the pedestrian refuge island in Bettington Road south of Felton Road, Carlingford is $250,000. This project is 100% funded by Council from its 2020/21 Active Transport Program Funds.

Note that City of Parramatta Council’s Operational Plan 2020-2021 has allocated $1.5 million under Council’s Active Transport Program for traffic projects. A report was considered by the Parramatta Traffic Engineering Advisory Group (TEAG) on 11 June 2020 and by Council on 13 July 2020 regarding the revised 2020/21 Projects List (Ref. TEAG 2006 B5). This project has been included in the list for construction in 2020/21.

ii. ITEM 2011 A2 PEMBROKE STREET BETWEEN NORFOLK ROAD AND ESSEX STREET, EPPING – PROPOSAL TO RAISE THE EXISTING PEDESTRIAN CROSSING

The estimated cost of upgrading the existing marked pedestrian crossing located in Pembroke Street between Norfolk Road and Essex Street, Epping to a raised pedestrian crossing is $240,000. This project is 100% funded by Council from its 2020/21 Active Transport Program Funds.

iii. ITEM 2011 A3 evans road at yates avenue, dundas valley – proposed raised thresholds

The estimated cost for the installation of the raised thresholds in Evans Road on both approaches to Yates Avenue, Dundas Valley is $200,000. This project is 100% funded by Council from its 2020/21 Active Transport Program Funds.

iv. ITEM 2011 A4 wentworth avenue, toongabbie - proposed road modification works

The modification works are to be completed by the developer at 12 Station Road and 4-10 Wentworth Avenue, Toongabbie at no cost to Council. Therefore, this proposal has no direct financial impact on Council’s budget.

v. ITEM 2011 A5 DARCY ROAD BETWEEN DOROTHY STREET AND PIONEER STREET, WENTWORTHVILLE – RAISED PEDESTRIAN CROSSING

The estimated cost for the installation of a raised pedestrian crossing in Darcy Road west of Dorothy Street, Wentworthville is $240,000. This project is 100% funded by Council from its 2020/21 Active Transport Program Funds.

vi. ITEM 2011 A6 BEACONSFIELD STREET AT MELTON STREET NORTH, SILVERWATER – PROPOSED SPEED CUSHIONS

The estimated cost of installing the proposed speed cushions in Beaconsfield Street at both approaches to Melton Street North, Silverwater is $7,000. This project is 100% funded by Council from its 2020/21 Traffic Facilities Funds.

vii. ITEM 2011 A7 ryde street between angus avenue and carlingford road, epping – installation of a one-way restriction

The estimated cost of the proposed one-way restriction (northbound) on Ryde Street between Angus Avenue and Carlingford Road, Epping is $80,000. This project is 100% funded by Council from its 2020/21 Active Transport Program Funds.

Note that City of Parramatta Council’s Adopted Operational Plan 2020-2021 has allocated $1.5 million under Council’s Active Transport Program for traffic projects. A report was considered by the Parramatta Traffic Engineering Advisory Group (TEAG) on 13 August 2020 and by Council on 14 September 2020 regarding the revised 2020/21 Projects List (Ref. TEAG 2008 B4). This project has been included in the list for construction in 2020/21.

viii. ITEM 2011 A8 WARD sTREET, EPPING – INSTALLATION OF A NO RIGHT TURN RESTRICTION

The approximate cost for installing the part-time ‘No Right Turn 8am-9:30am 2:30pm-4pm School Days’ restriction is $1000. The proposed works will be funded by Transport for NSW Block Grant Funds for installation and maintenance of traffic signs and line markings in 2020/21. Accordingly, this proposal has no direct financial impact upon Council’s budget.

ix. ITEM 2011 A9 kleins road at moss street, northmead – proposed raised Threshold

The estimated cost for the installation of the raised thresholds in Kleins Road at Moss Street is $100,000. This project is 100% funded by Council from its 2020/21 Active Transport Program Funds.

Note that City of Parramatta Council’s Adopted Operational Plan 2020-2021 has allocated $1.5 million under Council’s Active Transport Program for traffic projects. A report was considered by the Parramatta Traffic Engineering Advisory Group (TEAG) on 11 June 2020 and by Council on 13 July 2020 regarding the revised 2020/21 Projects List (Ref. TEAG 2006 B5). This project has been included in the list for construction in 2020/21.

x. ITEM 2011 A10 felton road at baker street, carlingford – proposed 6-month trial of an ‘All traffic left only 2:30pm – 4:00pm School days’ restriction for eastbound motorists at the roundabout

The estimated cost of installing the proposed ‘All Traffic Left Only 2:30pm-4:00pm School Days’ restriction in Felton Road West (eastbound) at Baker Street is $1,000. The proposed works would be funded by Transport for NSW Block Grant funds for installation and maintenance of traffic signs and line markings in 2020/21. Accordingly, this proposal has no direct financial impact upon Council’s budget.

xi. ITEM 2011 A11 orchard road south of murray farm road, beecroft – proposed speed cushions

The cost estimate for the proposed speed cushions in Orchard Road south of Murray Farm Road is $10,000. This project is 100% funded by Council from the Traffic Facilities Fund.

xii. ITEM 2011 A12 proposed car share parking spaces in harris park, westmead and epping

According to 2020/21 Fees and Charges schedule, initial application fee of $397 and annual renewal application fee of $159 will apply for the installation of each dedicated car share parking spaces in the Parramatta LGA. These fees will cover the costs of installing and removing car share spaces.

xiii. ITEM 2011 A13 BETTINGTON ROAD AT YORK STREET, OATLANDS – REQUEST FOR A SPEED CUSHION ON THE NORTHBOUND APPROACH TO THE APPROVED ROUNDABOUT

The cost estimate for the proposed speed cushion in Bettington Road on the northbound approach of the approved roundabout at York Street, Oatlands is $3,500. This work would be funded as part of the construction of the roundabout at this intersection.

The cost estimate for the roundabout is $395,000. This project is 100% funded by Council from Developer Contributions. Note that the budget allocated for this project is $400,000.

xiv. ITEM 2011 A14 EPPING TO CARLINGFORD CYCLEWAY

Construction of the Epping to Carlingford Cycleway is fully funded by a TfNSW Active Transport grant and the estimated cost of construction is $725,000. Accordingly, this proposal has no direct financial impact upon Council’s budget.

BACKGROUND

1. Transport for NSW (TfNSW) 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, TfNSW has delegated certain aspects of the control of traffic on local roads to councils. TfNSW 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 TfNSW 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 TfNSW and 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, TfNSW 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 5 November 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.

2011 A1 bettington road, carlingford – install pedestrian refuge island

1. That Council proceed with upgrading the existing splitter island in Bettington Road south of the roundabout at Felton Road and Gowan Court, Carlingford to a complying pedestrian refuge island.

2. That recommendation 1 is subject to the following changes to parking restrictions as shown in the plan attached to the report:

a. Relocation of the existing bus stop and associated ‘Bus Zone’ restriction and bus shelter located on the east side of Bettington Road south of Felton Road to the south outside 180 Bettington Road.

b. Relocation of the existing ‘Mail Zone’ restriction located on the east side of Bettington Road south of Felton Road to the angled parking area in Felton Road.

c. Installation of a ‘No Stopping restriction on both sides of Bettington Road south of Felton Road.

d. Installation of PS-2 bicycle logos on the north, south and westbound approaches to the roundabout at Bettington Road and Felton Road, Carlingford.

e. Detailed design of the pedestrian refuge island being approved by Transport for New South Wales (TfNSW) prior to the commencement of construction.

Unanimous support.

Financial Impact Statement:

2011 A2 PEMBROKE STREET BETWEEN NORFOLK ROAD AND ESSEX STREET, EPPING – PROPOSAL TO RAISE THE EXISTING PEDESTRIAN CROSSING

1. That the existing marked pedestrian crossing located in Pembroke Street between Norfolk Road and Essex Street, Epping be upgraded to a raised pedestrian crossing as shown in the plan attached to the report.

2. That the existing zig-zag pavement marking located on both approaches to the pedestrian crossing in Pembroke Street east of Essex Street, Epping be removed as part of the installation of the raised pedestrian crossing as detailed in recommendation 1.

3. That recommendation 1 is subject to the detailed design of the raised pedestrian crossing being approved by Transport for New South Wales (TfNSW) prior to the commencement of construction.

Unanimous support.

Financial Impact Statement:

2011 A3 evans road at yates avenue, dundas valley – proposed raised thresholds

1. That raised thresholds with median islands and associated signs and pavement markings be installed in Evans Road on both approaches to Yates Avenue, Dundas Valley as shown in the plan attached to this report.

2. That PS-2 bicycle logos be installed on the northbound and westbound approaches to the intersection of Evans Road and Yates Avenue, Dundas Valley.

3. That recommendation 1 is subject to the detailed design of the raised thresholds in Evans Road at Yates Avenue, Dundas Valley being approved by Transport for New South Wales (TfNSW) prior to the commencement of construction.

Unanimous support.

Financial Impact Statement:

2011 A4 wentworth avenue, toongabbie - proposed road modification works

1. That the existing splitter island at the west leg of the roundabout near 4-10 Wentworth Avenue be upgraded to a Pedestrian Refuge Island in accordance with current standards as shown on the plan attached to the report subject to the installation of ‘No Left Turn –Vehicles under 9m Excepted’ restriction in Wentworth Avenue as detailed in recommendation 2.

2. That the existing ‘No Left Turn –Vehicles Over 15m’ restriction located in Wentworth Avenue, Toongabbie for northbound vehicles turning left to travel west towards the railway overpass be replaced with a of ‘No Left Turn –Vehicles under 9m Excepted’ restriction subject to the restriction being approved by the Traffic Committee process (including community consultation and TfNSW’s approval of a Traffic Management Plan).

3. That a new driveway be constructed as a fourth leg of the roundabout to provide access to the 4-10 Wentworth Avenue, Toongabbie as shown on the plan attached to the report.

4. That the existing service lane located outside 2-6 Wentworth Avenue, Toongabbie be removed and replaced with a new footpath and landscaped area as shown on the plan attached to this report

5. That a 12.8m long indented loading bay with a ‘Loading Zone’ restriction be installed on the north side of Wentworth Avenue east of the driveway of 2 Wentworth Avenue as shown on the plan attached to this report.

6. That recommendations 1-5 are subject to all costs associated with the road modification being paid for by the applicant at no cost to Council.

Unanimous support.

Financial Impact Statement:

2011 A5 DARCY ROAD BETWEEN DOROTHY STREET AND PIONEER STREET, WENTWORTHVILLE – RAISED PEDESTRIAN CROSSING

1. That the existing marked pedestrian crossing located in Darcy Road between Dorothy Street and Pioneer Street, Wentworthville be upgraded to a raised pedestrian crossing as shown in the plan attached to the report.

2. That recommendation 1 is subject to the detailed design of the raised pedestrian crossing being approved by Transport for New South Wales (TfNSW) prior to the commencement of construction.

Unanimous support.

Financial Impact Statement:

2011 A6 BEACONSFIELD STREET AT MELTON STREET NORTH, SILVERWATER – PROPOSED SPEED CUSHIONS

That speed cushions and associated signs be installed in Beaconsfield Street on both approaches to Melton Street North, Silverwater as shown in the plan attached to this report.

Unanimous support.

Financial Impact Statement:

2011 A7 ryde street between angus avenue and carlingford road, epping – installation of a one-way restriction

1. That a northbound one-way restriction with associated signage and pavement markings be installed on Ryde Street between Angus Avenue and Carlingford Road, Epping as shown in the plan attached to the report and subject to a Traffic Management Plan being approved by Transport for NSW (TfNSW).

2. That kerb extensions be installed on both sides of Ryde Street immediately north of Angus Avenue and on the east side of Ryde Street south of Carlingford Road, Epping as shown in the plan attached to the report.

3. That the existing parking restrictions in Ryde Street between Angus Avenue and Carlingford Road be replaced with a combination of ‘No Stopping’, ‘No Parking 8am-9:30am 2:30pm-4pm School Days’ and ‘P5 Minutes 8am-9:30am 2:30pm-4pm School Days’ restrictions as shown in the plan attached to the report.

4. That Epping West Public School be notified of the approval in item 1 and requested to advise parents of the turn ban. The school is to be notified at least 3 weeks prior to the change and be provided with the proposed date for the installation of signs.

5. That recommendations 2 and 3 are subject to recommendation 1 being implemented.

Unanimous support.

Financial Impact Statement:

2011 A8 WARD sTREET, EPPING – INSTALLATION OF A NO RIGHT TURN RESTRICTION

1. That a ‘No Right Turn 8am-9:30am 2:30pm-4pm School Days’ restriction be installed in Ward Street (southbound) at Carlingford Road (westbound), Epping as shown on the plan attached to the report subject to the Traffic Management Plan being approved by Transport for NSW (TfNSW).

2. That Epping West Public School be notified of the approval in item 1 and requested to advise parents of the turn ban. The school is to be notified at least 3 weeks prior to the change and be provided with the proposed date for the installation of signs.

Unanimous support.

Financial Impact Statement:

The approximate cost for installing the part-time ‘No Right Turn 8am-9:30am 2:30pm-4pm School Days’ restriction is $1000. The proposed works will be funded by Transport for NSW Block Grant Funds for installation and maintenance of traffic signs and line markings in 2020/21. Therefore, this proposal has no direct financial impact on Council’s budget.

2011 A9 kleins road at moss street, northmead – proposed raised Threshold

1. That a raised threshold with associated signs and pavement markings be installed in Kleins Road south of Moss Street, Northmead as shown in the plan attached to this report.

2. That PS-2 bicycle logos be installed in Kleins Road on both approaches to the raised threshold.

3. That recommendations 1 and 2 are subject to the detailed design of the raised thresholds in Kleins Road at Moss Street, Northmead being approved by Transport for New South Wales (TfNSW) prior to the commencement of construction.

Unanimous support.

Financial Impact Statement:

The estimated cost for the installation of the raised thresholds in Kleins Road at Moss Street is $100,000. This project is 100% funded by Council from its 2020/21 Active Transport Program Funds.

Note that City of Parramatta Council’s Adopted Operational Plan 2020-2021 has allocated $1.5 million under Council’s Active Transport Program for traffic projects. A report was considered by the Parramatta Traffic Engineering Advisory Group (TEAG) on 11 June 2020 and by Council on 13 July 2020 regarding the revised 2020/21 Projects List (Ref. TEAG 2006 B5). This project has been included in the list for construction in 2020/21.

2011 A10 felton road at baker street, carlingford – proposed 6-month trial of an ‘All traffic left only 2:30pm – 4:00pm School days’ restriction for eastbound motorists at the roundabout

1. That an ‘All Traffic Left Only 2:30pm-4:00pm School Days’ restriction be installed in Felton Road for eastbound motorists at the roundabout at Baker Street, Carlingford as shown in the attached plan subject to the Traffic Management Plan being approved by Transport for NSW (TfNSW).

2. That a report be presented to the TEAG and Council at the end of the 6-month trial period of the turn restriction as detailed in recommendation 1.

3. That Council note that, if the trial is successful then the restriction as detailed in recommendation 1 would be removed when traffic signals are installed at the intersection of Pennant Hills Road and Baker Street, Carlingford.

4. That Carlingford West Public School be notified of the approval in item 1 and requested to advise parents of the turn ban. The school is to be notified at least 3 weeks prior to the change and be provided with the proposed date for the installation of signs.

Unanimous support.

Financial Impact Statement:

The estimated cost of installing the proposed ‘All Traffic Left Only 2:30pm-4:00pm School Days’ restriction in Felton Road West (eastbound) at Baker Street is $1,000. The proposed works would be funded by TfNSW Block Grant funds for installation and maintenance of traffic signs and line markings in 2020/21. Therefore, this proposal has no direct financial impact on Council’s budget.

2011 A11 orchard road south of murray farm road, beecroft – proposed speed cushions

That the installation of speed cushions and associated signs in Orchard Road south of Murray Farms Road, Beecroft in accordance with the plan attached to the report be approved.

Unanimous support.

Financial Impact Statement:

The cost estimate for the proposed speed cushions in Orchard Road south of Murray Farm Road is $10,000. This project is 100% funded by Council from the Traffic Facilities Fund.

2011 A12 proposed car share parking spaces in harris park, westmead and epping

1. That eight (8) car share parking spaces be installed in Harris Park, Westmead and Epping as detailed below:

i. North side of Ada Street west of Wigram Street, Harris Park

ii. West side of Tottenham Street south of Raymond Street, Harris Park

iii. West side of Lydbrook Street south of Darcy Road, Westmead

iv. North side of Byrne Street west of Lydbrook Street, Westmead

v. West side of Edensor Street south of Kandy Avenue, Epping

vi. North side of Bridge Street east of Kent Street, Epping

vii. East side of Kent Street north of Carlingford Road, Epping

viii. West side of Cliff Road north of Carlingford Road, Epping

2. That a review of the usage of each individual car share spaces be carried out as part of the annual renewal of the car share spaces.

Unanimous support.

Financial Impact Statement:

2011 A13 BETTINGTON ROAD AT YORK STREET, OATLANDS – REQUEST FOR A SPEED CUSHION ON THE NORTHBOUND APPROACH TO THE APPROVED ROUNDABOUT

1. That the design of the approved roundabout at the intersection of Bettington Road at York Street, Oatlands be altered to include a speed cushion on the northbound approach to the roundabout.

2. That a PS-2 bicycle logo be installed in Bettington Road on the southbound approach to the intersection with York Street, Oatlands.

3. That recommendation 1 is subject to consultation being undertaken with the affected residents of 117-119 and 128 Bettington Road, Oatlands with no objections being received.

4. That a report be referred to the next Parramatta Traffic Committee if any objection is received from the affected residents regarding the installation of a speed cushion in Bettington Road, Oatlands as detailed in recommendation 1.

Unanimous support.

Financial Impact Statement:

The cost estimate for the roundabout is $395,000. This project is 100% funded by Council from Developer Contributions. Note that the budget allocated for this project is $400,000.

2011 A14 EPPING TO CARLINGFORD CYCLEWAY

1. That a refuge island and associated shared paths be installed in Midson Road south of Wyralla Avenue, Epping as shown on the plan attached to the report.

2. That a combination of shared path and separated footpath and bi-directional bike path on the southern side of Epping Road between Blaxland Road and Pembroke Street, Epping be installed as shown on the plans attached to the report.

3. That PS-2 bicycle logos be installed on Midson Road on both approaches to the refuge island at Wyralla Avenue, Epping.

4. That reflective tape be installed on all posts along the bike path and shared path in Epping Road, Epping.

5. That recommendations 1,2,3 and 4 are subject to the detailed design plans being approved by the Transport for New South Wales (TfNSW) prior to the commencement of construction.

6. That recommendation 2 is subject to the Traffic Control Signals (TCS) plan for the intersection of Epping Road and Essex Street, Epping being approved by TfNSW.

Unanimous support.

Financial Impact Statement:

CONSULTATION AND TIMING

6. 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

7. The financial implications are provided above.

CONCLUSION

8. Council officers recommend that the recommendations of the Parramatta Traffic Committee meeting held on 5 November 2020 be adopted by Council.

Richard Searle

Traffic and Transport Manager

Mark Leotta

Group Manager - Development and Traffic Services

Paul Perrett

Chief Financial Officer / Acting Executive Director Corporate Services

Jennifer Concato

Executive Director City Planning and Design

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

Attachments:

1 ⇩	Parramatta Traffic Committee Minutes of meeting held on 5 November 2020	13 Pages
2 ⇩	Parramatta Traffic Committee Item reports for meeting held on 5 November 2020	141 Pages
3 ⇩	Consultation and Timing for the Parramatta Traffic Committee meeting held on 5 November 2020	16 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 7 December 2020 Item 13.4

ACCESSIBLE

ITEM NUMBER 13.4

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Minutes of the Traffic Engineering Advisory Group Meeting held on 5 November 2020

REFERENCE F2020/00077 - D07250453

REPORT OF Traffic and Transport Manager

PURPOSE:

That Council consider the minutes and approve the recommendations of the Traffic Engineering Advisory Group meeting held on 5 November 2020.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council note the minutes of the Traffic Engineering Advisory Group meeting held on 5 November 2020, provided at Attachment 1.

(b) Further, that Council approve the recommendations of the Traffic Engineering Advisory Group meeting held on 5 November 2020 provided at Attachment 1 and in this report, noting the following financial implications for each item.

i. ITEM 2011 B1 oakes road, winston hills – review of Traffic conditions

This report does not recommend any changes in Oakes Road, Winston Hills. Therefore, this matter has no financial impact upon Council's budget.

ii. ITEM 2011 B2 PROJECT LISTS INCLUDING AN UPDATE ON PROJECTS FOR 2019/20 & 2020/21

There is no financial implication to Council as a result of this recommendation.

iii. ITEM 2011 B3 – OUTSTANDING WORKS INSTRUCTIONS

RMS Block Grant funds for 2020/21 have been used for these works.

1. The Traffic Engineering Advisory Group (TEAG) is similar to the Parramatta Traffic Committee, except that it only involves matters that do not invoke the Transport for NSW (TfSNW) Delegation to Councils. The TEAG does not have the formal voting process that Parramatta Traffic Committee has. It is, primarily, a technical review committee that advises Council on traffic related matters. TEAG also considers items where TfNSW maintains its control, such as speed limits, clearways and traffic signals or items for which TfNSW does not have control such as planning of future projects.

2. The most recent meeting of the TEAG was held on 5 November 2020. The minutes of that meeting and the reports to that meeting are Attachments 1 and 2 of this report.

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

3. The recommendations from the TEAG meeting are provided below together with financial impact statements for each recommendation:

ITEM NO.

2011 B1 oakes road, winston hills – review of Traffic conditions

1. That Council note that traffic calming, centreline marking, curve warning signs and chevron alignment markers are in place in Oakes Road, Winston Hills to reduce vehicle speed, delineate travel lanes and intersections, and reduce ‘corner cutting’.

2. That Council note that the pavement in Oakes Road, Winston Hills near the bend at Property No. 26 has been upgraded to a high level non-skid surface in April 2020.

3. That Council note that further treatment is not proposed near 26 Oakes Road, Winston Hills.

Unanimous support.

Financial Impact Statement:

This report does not recommend any changes in Oakes Road, Winston Hills. Therefore, this matter has no financial impact upon Council's budget.

2011 B2 PROJECT LISTS INCLUDING AN UPDATE ON PROJECTS FOR 2019/20 & 2020/21

1. That the Projects Lists for proposed traffic works be received and noted.

2. That Council note that a funding offer of $635,000 has been received under the NSW Government Active Transport Program to fully fund the construction of a pedestrian refuge island and continuous footpath treatments in Wentworth Avenue at the laneways opposite Toongabbie Railway Station; and footpath and kerb ramps on Cooyong Crescent.

3. That Council note that two (2) traffic projects have been completed between August and October 2020.

Unanimous support.

Financial Impact Statement:

There is no financial implication to Council as a result of this recommendation.

2011 B3 OUTSTANDING WORKS INSTRUCTIONS

That the information in relation to outstanding Works Instructions over the 3-month period between June and August 2020 be received and noted.

Unanimous support.

Financial Impact Statement:

RMS Block Grant funds for 2020/21 have been used for these works.

CONSULTATION AND TIMING

4. 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 FOR COUNCIL

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

Richard Searle

Traffic and Transport Manager

Mark Leotta

Group Manager - Development and Traffic Services

Paul Perrett

Chief Financial Officer / Acting Executive Director Corporate Services

Jennifer Concato

Executive Director City Planning and Design

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

Attachments:

1 ⇩	Traffic Engineering Advisory Group Minutes of meeting held on 5 November 2020	3 Pages
2 ⇩	Traffic Engineering Advisory Group Item reports for meeting held on 5 November 2020	27 Pages
3 ⇩	Consultation and Timing for the Traffic Engineering Advisory Group meeting held on 5 November 2020	2 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 7 December 2020 Item 13.5

ACCESSIBLE

ITEM NUMBER 13.5

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Post-exhibition report on proposed changes to the Community Engagement Strategy for the notification of development applications

REFERENCE F2016/03461 - D07705633

REPORT OF Group Manager - Development and Traffic Services

PURPOSE:

To report to Council the outcome of the public exhibition of the draft consolidated Development Application notification requirements, and to seek Council’s adoption of the draft consolidated Development Application notification requirements, as an appendix to Council’s Community Engagement Strategy.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council notes the submissions made during the public exhibition of the draft consolidated Development Application notification requirements, a summary of which is provided at Attachment 1.

(b) That Council adopt the draft consolidated DA notification requirements as an appendix to Council’s Community Engagement Strategy and as set out in Attachment 2, which seek to amend the notification requirements by way of:

i. implementing notification timeframes consistent with the current Parramatta Development Control Plan to apply across the Parramatta Local Government Area

ii. notifying all Development Applications for tree removal within Heritage Conservation Areas and on heritage listed sites for 14 days

iii. notifying change of use applications for 14 days where there is potential impact on residential amenity or business operation

iv. providing on-site signage as currently set out in the Parramatta Development Control Plan, to apply across the Parramatta Local Government Area.

v. providing letter notification requirements, less the inclusion of attachments, as currently set out in the Parramatta Development Control Plan, to apply across the Parramatta Local Government Area.

vi. notifying by letter the ten (10) closest surrounding properties for applications. Where there is no impact to adjoining properties to the rear of the subject site, notification be limited to the 5 closest surrounding properties to the side and opposite the subject site.

(c) Further, that Council delegate authority to the Chief Executive Officer to correct any minor inconsistencies or anomalies of an administrative nature that may arise during this process.

BACKGROUND

1. Council first considered changes to the DA notification requirements at the Council meeting of 11 May 2020. The matter was deferred at that meeting for a Councillor workshop.

2. A Councillor workshop was held on 18 May and the matter of notification and how Council could best engage with our community was also considered at the Access Advisory Committee meeting of 16 June 2020.

3. Council considered the draft changes to the DA notification requirements at the Council meeting of 27 July 2020, where it was resolved as follows:

RESOLVED (Pandey/Esber)

(a) That Council publicly exhibit for 28 days the draft consolidated notification requirements, as an appendix to Council’s Community Engagement Strategy, which in summary proposes the following:

(i) Changes to notification timeframes to apply across the Parramatta Local Government Area and as set out in Attachment 1.

(ii) On-site signage to be provided as set out in the Parramatta Development Control Plan, to apply across the Parramatta Local Government Area.

(iii) Letter notification requirements, less the inclusion of attachments, as set out in the Parramatta Development Control Plan, to apply across the Parramatta Local Government Area.

(b) That a report on the outcomes of the exhibition be brought back to Council for its consideration.

(c) That Council utilise legislation changes as they relate to Development Applications that do not require exhibition to:

(i) No longer advertise development application in printed newspapers;

(ii) Notify the ten (10) closest surrounding properties of each DA lodged;

(iii) Notify the owners corporation, owners and tenants of each lot;

(iv) Provide electronic access to Development Application documents at Council offices and libraries.

(d) That Council delegate authority to the Chief Executive Officer to correct any minor inconsistencies or anomalies of an administrative nature that may arise during this process.

(e) That Council investigate technological options to receive submissions to proposals and plans placed on public exhibition from people with disability by way of audio recording or transcription recording.

(f) Further, that all Councillors be furnished with a report on development applications lodged in the Local Government Area, divided into wards on a monthly basis.

4. It is proposed that the draft consolidated notification requirements now form an attachment to Council’s Community Engagement Strategy outlining how Council will undertake engagement related to development applications. Existing notification requirements for development applications will be removed from the DCP as part of the DCP harmonisation process.

5. Please note that a reference in this report to development applications is also a reference to modification applications and review applications under s4.55 and s8.2 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979.

PUBLIC EXHIBITION

6. Council’s resolution section (b) sought community feedback on section (a) i-iii. Sections (c), (d) and (e) were adopted on 27 July by Council. It is noted that some submissions have commented on section (c) matters relating to access to information and the number of surrounding properties notified.

7. The 28 day public exhibition commenced on 21 September 2020 and concluded on 19 October 2020. The community was able to provide feedback by putting in a submission by post, email or online via Council’s engagement portal, ‘Participate Parramatta’.

8. A total of seven submissions were received in response to the exhibition. Six of the submissions were from private households and one submission was on behalf of a community group. One submission supported the changes, the remainder raised concerns or suggestions. A summary of each submission and Council Officers responses are provided in the submission table at Attachment 1.

9. The issues raised in the submissions are indicated as follows:

Notification period

i. General support for the proposed extension to notification periods for some development types

ii. Longer exhibition period wanted for more complex proposals and in Epping

iii. Notification times do not include postal service timeframes

iv. Notification of amended applications should be the same as for the original DA

Notification letters

v. Notified properties should be determined by how far away the development is visible

vi. Letter notification should be expanded from 10 surrounding properties to all surrounding properties in high density areas like Wentworth Point.

vii. Notification should be expanded to include matters under State Environmental Planning Policy (Exempt and Comply Codes) 2008 and Building Certificates.

viii. Community groups should be separately emailed weekly notifications

ix. Notification to one owner inadequate

Notification requirements

x. Resident used to existing Hornsby notification requirements and seeks their retention

xi. Concern notification of development applications for tree removal in heritage conservation areas or on sites listed as a heritage item is being removed

xii. Concern development applications for demolition are not to be notified

xiii. Concern strata/stratum subdivision and commercial change of use does not require notification

xiv. Want on-site signage to continue and be expanded

Access to information

xv. Access to information, such as contact with Council staff, should be noted in the notification document

xvi. Newspapers, social media and the Participate Parramatta platform to notify applications and determinations

xvii. Lack of electronic access and physical mobility for some residents

xviii. Information on DA processes required

xix. Not all documents appear on-line (DA Tracker)

xx. Stability of on-line service

xxi. Submissions should be available on DA Tracker, unless confidentiality requested

xxii. How long determined applications are retained on-line

Other

xxiii. Concern that a community group submission counts as one submission

xxiv. Council should put a cap on how many times a developer can apply for or modify a DA

10. Council Officer response to the submissions is detailed in Attachment 1. Overall, the assessment concludes that consolidation of the notification requirements as exhibited and as set out in Attachment 2 should be adopted with some exceptions. For ease of reference, the changes to the notification requirements are explained below.

11. Following community consultation and Councillor feedback, changes have been made to clarify and retain certain notification requirements.

a. For clarification, on-site signage will continue to be provided in addition to letter notification for all Development Applications requiring 21 or 28 advertising.

b. For clarification, it is recommended to retain 14 day notification of development applications for tree removal in heritage conservation areas (HCA) or on a heritage listed site.

c. For clarification, the consolidated notification requirements have been amended to identify that change of use applications would require 14 day notification where there would be likely planning impact on residential amenity or surrounding business operation.

d. On 27 July 2020 Council resolved that the 10 closest surrounding properties be notified by letter. However, it is recommended that for applications where there is no impact to adjoining properties to the rear of the subject site, notification be limited to the 5 closest surrounding properties to the side and opposite the subject site. These changes are identified in the consolidated notification requirements and strike an appropriate balance between meaningful consultation commensurate with the development impact and the need to manage costs, assessment and process efficiency. This change would not require re-exhibition because it remains within the scope of the draft consolidated requirements to distinguish between more complex applications requiring longer periods and wider distribution of notification letters, and the simpler applications requiring 14 day notification. The change would maintain the objective of providing clarity and consistency across the LGA and ensure those properties potentially most impacted by more minor developments are still directly notified by Council.

12. A submitter expressed a view that in high density areas such as Wentworth Point, letter notification should extend beyond 10 surrounding properties. Under current notification requirements, Council generates upwards of 500,000 notification letters (with attachments) per year. This is driven largely by the significant number of high-rise residential strata developments within the Parramatta LGA. Letter generation is increasing with the increase in new developments being completed and occupied. It is estimated on average that a letter (with attachments) costs Council approximately $1.50 to send. This is approximated for materials and equipment, postage and staff resource.

13. Notification of 10 properties includes all units within those properties. Therefore, there can be hundreds if not thousands of letters generated for even fairly minor developments. By way of example, for an ordinary one-month period between 17 April to 22 May 2020, Council issued 7,414 letters to the owners and occupiers of strata schemes for advertised developments (such as new building works) alone and together with attachments, this totaled 33,633 pages of information at a total cost of $12,377.47. Council also issued a further 1764 letters to strata owners and occupiers for standard notified applications (such as proposed signage and internal works), and with attachments this accounted for 7,266 pages of information at a total cost of $3,600.90. It is not recommended to increase the number of properties that are notified by letter. Council’s website can be used to access DA notifications and documentation, and there is discretion for increased notification when needed.

14. Other concerns raised in the 7 submissions have been considered and on balance, no further amendment to the draft consolidated notification requirements is recommended.

15. It is noted that at Council’s meeting of 27 July 2020, it was resolved to continue notification to all owners and occupiers of property (including strata schemes) when an application requires notification.

16. Some of the 7 submitters expressed concern regarding limited or no access to electronic information by some members in our community. At Council’s meeting of 27 July 2020, it was resolved to no longer advertise development applications in printed newspapers. All development applications are notified on Council’s website. Letter notification and on-site signage will continue. Council planning staff remain available to assist the community with their planning inquiries. Council is working towards increasing its on-line presence and services to the community. Council’s DA Tracker has recently been upgraded.

17. At Council’s meeting of 27 July 2020, Council also resolved to investigate technological options to receive submissions to proposals and plans placed on public exhibition from people with disability by way of audio recording or transcription recording. This is an organisation-wide objective and is currently under investigation by City Engagement in partnership with Digital Marketing and Digital Transformation.

18. A submitter felt that Participate Parramatta could also be used for notification of development applications. Participate Parramatta is a useful platform to engage with our community. Strategic planning matters and proposals for significant public benefit proposals such as the Aquatic Centre have been placed on this platform. City Significant DAs could be advertised on this platform. It is not considered appropriate however, to lessen the effectiveness of this platform by ‘crowding’ it with all DA notifications, which are in excess of 1000 year on year, when Council’s website and DA Tracker provides this information, associated documents and ready access to make an on-line submission. Council’s DA Tracker has also been recently upgraded.

19. A submitter suggested Council consider a system similar to Planning Alerts for notification purposes. On 22 July 2019 Council resolved that a report be brought to a Council Meeting which explains the role, if any, of the City of Parramatta Council with the privately operated “Planning Alerts” which is understood to record details of recent Building Certificate applications lodged in our Local Government Area and how Council deals or responds to comments or feedback provided to Council via Planning Alerts. Planning Alerts is a third party platform that mines Council notification information from Council websites and then sends this electronically to a subscriber base. Council has no influence over the accuracy or efficiency of this service. In evolving Council services, Council may look to transition over time to electronic notifications in lieu of hard copy letters via an opt-in service. Council does not yet have this arrangement and such a project would need to be scoped, costed and endorsed. A proprietary system like Council's website, would be an accurate, time efficient, cost effective and direct communication channel with the community. As with Council's website, it is important that Council retains control over security, maintenance and upgrade of any such system. Council can receive submissions electronically through the website as well as receive emailed or posted submissions. This includes submissions via Planning Alerts. These are considered in accordance with legislation in the assessment of applications.

20. Some residents have raised concern with the nature of notification and approvals issued by private certifiers under State Environmental Planning Policy (Exempt and Comply Codes) 2008. However, as this is State legislation, Council is unable to enact any changes. For the same reasons, Council is unable to restrict the number of modification applications submitted by an applicant.

21. Concern was expressed by a submitter that notification periods should be increased for certain development types to 28 days. The draft consolidated notification requirements specify either 14 or 21 days depending on development type. These periods are consistent with those currently used under the Parramatta Development Control Plan requirements and typically increase notification timeframes over other DCP requirements. The exception to these timeframes relates to legislated timeframes for 28 days for an application for designated development, nominated integrated development, threatened species development or State significant development. These time frames are considered to strike a satisfactory balance between opportunity for community engagement and efficient assessment of development applications.

CONCLUSION

22. Consolidation of Council’s DA notification is required to provide consistency and clarity for the community. Consolidation is in line with harmonisation of the Local Environmental Plan and Development Control Plan. The proposed consolidated notification requirements meet the objectives and principles of Council’s Community Engagement Strategy.

23. Access to notification and associated documents is in line with modern customer service practice and is supported by continued letter notification and continued access to Council planning staff for assistance.

CONSULTATION & TIMING

24. The Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 sets out that draft community participation plans and any amendments are to be exhibited for a minimum period of 28 days. This has now been completed.

25. Following approval by Council, Council’s current Community Engagement Strategy will be updated with inclusion of an Appendix. The notification requirements set out in the Appendix will be effective when placed on Council’s website and supersede the varied notification requirements contained in all Development Control Plans that currently apply to the Parramatta Local Government Area.

26. Council’s website will be updated to advise customers of the changes.

Stakeholder Consultation

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

Date

Stakeholder

Stakeholder Comment

Council Officer Response

Responsibility

21/09/2020 -19/10/2020

Community

Notification period

Notification letters

Notification requirements

Access to information

Other

Comments addressed in this Council report and attachments

Group Manager Development and Traffic Services

16 June 2020

Access Advisory Committee

Concerns regarding:

- No printed media notification

- Letters of owners corporation only

- On-line access to information does not suit all.

- Preferred additional formats to provide feedback to Council – software and verbal

Comments addressed in Council report of 27 July 2020

Group Manager Development and Traffic Services

Councillor Consultation

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

Date	Councillor	Councillor Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
6 May	Councillor briefing on Council report	- Concerned with only owners corporation being notified and not individual strata owners and occupiers - In principle support for opt-in email notification – suggestion of sms option - Internet access for the elderly and other members of community	Comments addressed in Council report of 11 May 2020	Group Manager Development and Traffic Services
11 May	Report presented to Council	Deferred for workshop	Workshop organised for 18 May 2020	Group Manager Development and Traffic Services
18 May	Councillor workshop	Officers to consider the following feedback prior to reporting the matter to Council: - Access to notification material for persons with disability and elderly - Internet access for the elderly and other members of community – seeking printed advertising of DAs in regional papers (similar to Cumberland and Blacktown Councils) - Retention of Parramatta DCP notification timeframes which includes 21 day timeframes - Concerned with only owners corporation being notified and not individual strata owners and occupiers - In principle support for opt-in email notification – suggestion of sms option - Name change for My Development	Comments addressed in Council report of 27 July 2020 My Development Portal has been renamed to DA Tracker	Group Manager Development and Traffic Services

FINANCIAL IMPLICATION FOR COUNCIL

29. Under current notification requirements, Council generates upwards of 500,000 notification letters, including attachments, per year. It is estimated on average that a letter with attachments costs Council approximately $1.50 to send. This totals approximately $750,000 for the organisation and accounts for materials, postage and staff resources. Attachments typically account for one additional page (two-sided print) included with the notification letter. It is estimated that removal of attachments would save Council approximately $35,000 per annum. These savings would vary depending on the number of notification letters generated, which in turn varies depending on the number and type of DAs received by Council.

30. There are no other financial implications for Council in consolidating the DA notification requirements as recommended.

Mark Leotta

Group Manager - Development and Traffic Services

Jennifer Concato

Executive Director City Planning and Design

Anthea Hall

Group Manager City Engagement

Lindsay Woodland

Executive Director City Engagement and Experience

Paul Perrett

Chief Financial Officer / Acting Executive Director Corporate Services

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

Attachments:

1⇩	DA notification submission table Attachment 1	13 Pages
2⇩	Draft Consolidated Notification requirements Attachment 2	7 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 7 December 2020 Item 13.6

ACCESSIBLE

ITEM NUMBER 13.6

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Stormwater Disposal Policy Review

REFERENCE F2020/03338 - D07741904

REPORT OF Technical Specialist Manager

PURPOSE:

To advise Councillors that a scheduled review of the Stormwater Disposal Policy has been undertaken and to seek Council’s endorsement for minor changes to the Policy.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council approve the revised Stormwater Disposal Policy provided at Attachment 2.

BACKGROUND

1. The Stormwater Disposal Policy (the Policy) was originally adopted by Council in August 2015 and reviewed and endorsed by Council in July 2017. The Policy is now due for review as per the policy review schedule. The existing Policy (refer to Attachment 1) has been reviewed to ensure that it continues to be fit for purpose and remains consistent with relevant standards and industry best practice.

2. The Policy is applied to the Parramatta Local Government Area and all new development that requires consent from Council on private land and which requires on-site stormwater detention. The Policy communicates Council’s requirements to manage and drain stormwater adequately from a development to avoid or minimise local area flooding and associated damage to downstream properties and overloading of Council drainage infrastructure.

3. Adherence to the Policy allows consistent and timely assessment of development proposals through the lodgement of stormwater disposal plans and documentation that are of a high standard and meet all environmental, planning and Council requirements.

4. The Policy is due for review in 2020 as per the review schedule. The Policy remains relevant and is an essential component to the efficient review of stormwater plans associated with the assessment of development applications. The policy provides guidance to assist our community in designing for stormwater management and ensures consistency in approach.

5. A review of the Policy has identified that some minor changes are required to align with changes to clause numbers in legislation. Minor changes are also proposed to wording to clarify meanings and requirements, as well as some formatting.

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

Summary of the proposed changes

6. The changes are minor administrative, clarification and format changes. The proposed changes are to bring the Policy up to date with relevant legislation clauses, Court outcomes and to provide better clarification for the public of the meaning of some of the Policy provisions. Attachment 2 contains the revised Policy with proposed changes coloured red.

7. No substantial changes are proposed because the Policy remains relevant and aligned with engineering best practice and standards, and Council’s planning controls.

Why is the change to the policy needed?

8. Council Policies are reviewed every two years to ensure that they remain relevant and up to date. Wording has been adjusted to address feedback that has been provided by customers via service request enquiries, face to face contact with customers and via feedback at pre-lodgement meetings.

9. The Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act) has been revised with new clause numbers. The Policy has been updated to reflect those changes.

What are the changes?

10. Minor administrative amendments were required to formatting, wording and minor clarifications to provide clear and up to date stormwater policy guidelines to the public.

11. The changes are outlined by clause as following:

Clause Number	Type of change	Description of change	Amendments
1	Clarification	More explicit clarification that the Policy applies to all of the Parramatta LGA	This Policy applies: To the Parramatta Local Government Area
3.3	Clarification	The second bullet point has been added in accordance with a Court matter outcome.	• The location of the On-Site Detention System, WSUD and other water storage facilities shall not impact on the operation, functionality and safety of the proposed development. In this regard On-Site Detention Systems and other water storage facilities shall not be located within the subfloor of any habitable areas of residential dwellings, commercial buildings and childcare facilities. Surcharging, ventilation and access grates of these systems shall not impact upon required play areas for child care facilities.
3.3	Format	Formatting of fourth bullet point.	Format changed
3.3	Clarification	Additional clarification added to bullet point eight.	• Stormwater is to be discharged in the general direction as determined by the predevelopment topography of the site and within its natural catchment/sub-catchment. Filling of sites to achieve discharge by gravity is not supported.
3.4	Clarification	The third dash point has been added to provide customer clarification.	• Any exceptions to the Policy can only be considered where it can be demonstrated that there would be detrimental stormwater management outcomes through application of this Policy.
3.5	Administrative / Clarification	The title of the section and associated references to clauses of the EP&A Act have been updated to current clauses.	Information to be provided when submitting a Development Application (including s4.55 and s8.3)
3.5	Administrative / Clarification	The fifth bullet point has had a minor wording clarification.	• Where a site adjoins Crown land (such as a rail corridor, Sydney Water stormwater channel) and/or proposes discharge to a State owned asset, the approval of the asset owner must be obtained prior to lodgment of a Development Application (incl. s4.55 and s8.3 applications).
3.5	Administrative / Clarification	Clarification as to accompanying documents.	• Where an inter-allotment drainage easement/s is required, written acknowledgement from the downstream property owner/s, of an easement request must be obtained prior to lodgment of a Development Application (incl. s4.55 and s8.3 applications).
3.5	Clarification	Clarification as to the associated planning documents to be considered together with the Policy.	Any Local Environmental Plans applying to the Parramatta LGA Any Development Control Plans applying to the Parramatta LGA

12. The primary user group of this Policy are consultant engineers, but it is also of assistance to those looking to undertake a development. The Policy will continue to operate together with assistance provided by Council’s Development and Traffic Services engineers and Development Advice Team directly with customers.

13. Adherence to the Policy allows consistent and timely assessment of development proposals through the lodgment of stormwater disposal plans and documentation that are of a high standard and meet all environmental, planning and Council requirements.

CONSULTATION & TIMING

14. In reviewing the Policy, consideration has been given to feedback received from the general public and applicants through the pre-lodgement and development application process, from consultant engineers along with relevant recent Land and Environment Court decisions. As the changes are minor in nature and do not change the objectives, strategic intent or design provisions of or within the Policy, public exhibition is not necessary. Feedback has also been considered from Council’s City Assets engineers, the Catchment and Development Engineers, and the Development Advice Team.

Stakeholder Consultation

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

Date

Stakeholder

Stakeholder Comment

Council Officer Response

Responsibility

2017 to present

Consultant engineers

Applicants

Clarification on some points required

Clarification provided in reviewed policy

Development and Traffic Services

Councillor Consultation

16. Councillor consultation has not been undertaken in relation to this matter as changes relate to minor points of clarification, formatting and alignment with updated legislation clauses

Date	Councillor	Councillor Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
N/A

FINANCIAL IMPLICATION FOR COUNCIL

17. There are no direct financial implications for Council in adopting the changes to this Policy.

Robert Sutton

Technical Specialist Manager

Mark Leotta

Group Manager - Development and Traffic Services

Jennifer Concato

Executive Director City Planning and Design

Paul Perrett

Chief Financial Officer / Acting Executive Director Corporate Services

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

Attachments:

1 ⇩	Policy 340 - Stormwater Disposal Policy 2017	8 Pages
2 ⇩	Stormwater Disposal Policy Review October 2020	8 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 7 December 2020 Item 15.1

WELCOMING

ITEM NUMBER 15.1

SUBJECT FOR NOTATION: Minutes of the Riverside Advisory Board Meeting held on 8 October 2020

REFERENCE F2007/00388 - D07731626

REPORT OF Director Riverside Theatres

PURPOSE:

The Terms of Reference for the Riverside Theatres Advisory Board state that minutes of all meetings are to be reported to Council. This report seeks Council’s notation of the minutes of the meeting of the Riverside Theatres Advisory Board held on 8 October 2020.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council note the Minutes of the Riverside Theatres Advisory Board Meeting held on 8 October 2020 (Attachment 1).

BACKGROUND

1. The Riverside Theatres Advisory Board is a voluntary Committee of interested community members, Council staff and Councillors. The current Committee membership as at October 2020, comprises:

Ms Vyvienne Abla

Ms Genevieve Blanchett

Clr Donna Davis

Clr Bob Dwyer

Mr Jon Greig

Ms Rhonda Hawkins

Clr Andrew Jefferies

Mr Luke Mackey

Mr Alan Manly

Ms Keiasha Naidoo

Mr Vaughan Roles

Mr Carl Sciberras

Dr Jim Taggart OAM

2. The Advisory Board advocates for Riverside and its critical role as a major arts and culture attraction for Sydney’s Central City.

3. The primary purpose of the Committee is to advise Council on the strategic direction of the Riverside Theatres’ performance program and venues with reference to Council cultural plans and other relevant plans; to advise Council on Riverside Theatres’ strategic role in delivering Council’s vision for Sydney’s Central City as a culturally rich, successful, prosperous and destinational Parramatta; and to advocate for Riverside Theatres as western Sydney’s premier performing arts centre.

4. The Committee meets every two months with a minimum of six meetings each year.

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

Summary of the Advisory Board Meeting 8 October 2020

Director’s Report

5. Riverside re-opened on Tuesday 29 September. The Riverside COVID Safe Plan and comprehensive staff training ensured the reopening was safe for patrons attending.

6. Both the Lord Mayor and Riverside’s Director were interviewed by Channel 9 to mark Riverside’s reopening.

7. Riverside reopened with its Spot On Children’s Festival. The Festival comprised six different shows, four of which were streamed digitally. While venue capacities were restricted for Spot On and attendances relatively small, it is anticipated attendance numbers will increase in the future.

8. While Spot On could be attended live and digitally, a five year old said she would prefer to be at the Theatre in person because the performers could see her. The unique relationship between performers and audiences during live performance is recognised even by our youngest.

9. Spot On ticket sales skewed towards live sales even though a live ticket was four times the cost of a digital ticket. The two-way interaction of live theatre cannot be replicated at home. On the other hand digital sales resulted in a whole group of kids watching and participating remotely at their day-care centre.

10. Riverside’s National Theatre of Parramatta commenced rehearsals for Things I Could Never Tell Steven, a musical by Jye Bryant and due to open on 7^th November.

11. The Wharf Revue - Good Night and Good Luck (Sydney Theatre Company) is scheduled to open in late November. This well-loved annual show may well be the last Wharf Revue produced by the Sydney Theatre Company after 19 seasons at Riverside

12. The Public Health Order of 25 September 2020 permits entertainment venues to operate at 50% capacity which means the Riverside Theatre can now have up to 380 pax.

13. Sydney theatres began to re-open from September with many of them selling out shows due to restricted capacities. Once people have returned to in-venue live performances and have any safety concerns mitigated they will likely attend more regularly.

14. Council has been monitoring community COVID transition rates and community expectations regarding the provision of its services. In making decisions related to re-opening its services, Council and Riverside have prioritised community and staff safety.

15. Advisory Board members are supporting and promoting Riverside’s reopening to their networks.

16. Riverside has performed better than budget at the end of Q1. Q2 should also perform better than budget. Riverside is bound by corporate governance in place for the use of surplus operational funds.

17. From January onwards the Riverside’s schedule of activity will return to a more normal state with seating capacities at 50% or more. Riverside’s box office ticketing system allows patrons to select tickets in accord with COVID social distancing requirements.

18. The recently adopted Riverside Theatres Operational Plan 2020-2022 circulated to the Advisory Board aims to provide stability and predictability for staff over the next two years. The 2019 Staff Engagement Survey and a subsequent workshop in March revealed staff concern about the time frame of the Riverside redevelopment and how it might impact on the on-going operations of Riverside. As any change to Riverside’s current operations is unlikely before June 2022, the Plan will be rolled out over the coming two years. The Plan comprises seven sections:

a) Staff Structure
A key deliverable of this Operational Plan is an agreed, simplified Riverside Staffing Structure. Deliverables within the Plan include:

Confirmation of an agreed Riverside Staff Structure

Confirmation of staff tenure to June 2022

Recruitment to vacant positions

Changes in employment statuses e.g. transition from casual to temporary positions

Re-evaluation of the grading of specific positions (Positions TBC)

Review of hours of work

Ensuring stable leadership

b) Employee Engagement Plan

Monthly Community Services Executive Directorate Cascades and Quarterly Riverside All Staff Meetings

Two year operating model

Riverside on-boarding and Inductions

My Career development plans and opportunities

People and Culture presence and profile

Delivery of Employment Engagement Plan

c) The Program

Riverside Presentations

Venue Hires

National Theatre of Parramatta

Riverside Digital

d) Marketing

Program

Council

City

Advocacy and Influence

Stakeholder Alliance

e) Budget – Two Years

f) Compliance

COVID -19 and BAU

g) KPI’s

Utilisation, Occupancy, Performances/Events, Visitations

19. Any construction of a new Riverside is not likely to commence until after June 2022. The Riverside Re-development is still subject to considerable uncertainty, so the Theatres continuing to operate until June 2022 remains a working assumption.

20. There is a strong sense of optimism amongst staff, especially since the re-opening of the Theatres at the end of September. Riverside has responded well to the various Health Orders and is at the forefront of COVID safety given the practices and protocols adopted in accord with the Riverside COVID Safety Plan.

21. The programming team continues to work to confirm dates for 2021. Council’s legal team is working with Riverside to put COVID clauses into Riverside contracts.

22. Sydney Festival is proceeding at Riverside in January 2021 with two shows confirmed and possibly two more still to be confirmed.

Council Update

An update was provided by the Executive Director Community Services.

23. Riverside is the last of Council facilities to re-open to the community. Pools and Libraries have reopened gradually. Riverside has learned from other Council experiences and from other facilities and Riverside’s Operations Manager has been central to that process. COVID continues to be an extremely fluid situation and Council continually reviews Riverside’s COVID safe plans and practises. Riverside’s response to COVID will continue to evolve in accord with NSW Health guidelines.

24. Riverside Redevelopment and Business Case: There are three areas under review led by Council’s Property Development Group (PDG) and the Planning team at Council:

a. Design - a review of the Create NSW building design is underway in particular the planning and site constraints.

b. Capital costs and capital assumptions are being reviewed in the light of design changes.

c. Operating Model and Opex have been reviewed in particular benchmarking against other Australian venues and what any commercial operating mode might look like.

25. It is planned that the Operating Model benchmarking results will be shared with the Advisory Board, once they have been presented to the Councillor Riverside Re-development Steering Group.

Board Discussion – Riverside’s Future Directions: 2021 – 2025

The Chair spoke to a slidepack presentation “Riversides Future Directions: 2021 – 2025”. Comments and questions during the session included:

26. Is there sufficient community appetite for in-person theatre attendance during and post-COVID? An industry survey indicates a growing appetite although it is not yet firmly established that this will convert into ticket sales while COVID continues. While capacities have been restricted since the reopening of some Sydney venues, there have been examples of sell-out performances at theatre companies such as Sydney Theatre Company and Belvoir Theatre resulting in additional performances being added.

27. Current data and research should be included in next iteration of a Riverside Future Directions strategy.

28. How in the COVID recovery phase is burnout to be mitigated amongst producers, artists and staff?

29. Many producers and artists are using COVID to adapt to a new normal while planning for a broader audience reach (eg the ageing and those with disability) post COVID using a hybrid model of live performance plus accompanying digital delivery. The optimum mix is yet to be determined.

30. The Riverside’s Future Directions presentation includes key elements of the current 2017-2020 approved strategy. These elements form a foundation for a new future strategy 2021-2025.

31. To attract people back to the Theatres it is important to be working with restaurants on Eat Street and those in Parramatta Square. The future light rail connectivity will facilitate connecting restaurants with Riverside.

32. Is the Cultural Fund planned to be used to support activity at Riverside? While the work of mainstream and independent producers is currently stretched, the Cultural Fund and the Parramatta Cultural Trust should be left in reserve for future use. It was proposed that the Board seek clarity on how the Parramatta Cultural Trust funds might be accessed in the future.

33. Riverside current budget is able to support activity in 2020-2021. Savings are expected to the end of this year due to COVID restrictions. However, the program schedule from January 2021 will increase. Philanthropic funds and sponsorship will be a part of a future revenue mix. In 2021- 22 Riverside will again have to raise substantial revenue through hires and box office. It was noted that the Council four-year budget is based on the best information currently available. However, forward budgets might change due to unforeseen circumstances.

34. Riverside remains committed to supporting artists and maintaining its connection with audiences.

35. It is acknowledged that Council’s budget support has been fundamental to Riverside continuing to operate in 2020-2021. Councillors were thanked for Council’s support.

36. Riverside intends to deliver on its commercial objectives wherever possible.

37. Innovation creatively and commercially will be essential for Riverside to be successful in the future. The appetite for innovation should be captured in future strategic planning. The current 2017- 2020 Strategy already has innovation as a focus area.

38. The new Riverside redevelopment must be able to accommodate digital production and delivery. Riverside and Council teams will need to understand how that might occur.

39. Improved communication between the Advisory Board and the Riverside team will result in better business and artistic outcomes.

CONSULTATION & TIMING

Stakeholder Consultation

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

Date	Stakeholder	Stakeholder Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
10 October	Community Members of the Advisory Board	Comments are recorded in the Minutes of the Meetings attached to this report	n/a	Riverside Theatres / Community Services / Robert Love

Councillor Consultation

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

Date

Councillor

Councillor Comment

Council Officer Response

Responsibility

10 October

D Davis

B Dwyer

A Jefferies

B Tyrell

Comments are recorded in the Minutes of the Meetings attached to this report

n/a

Riverside Theatres / Community Services / Robert Love

FINANCIAL IMPLICATION FOR COUNCIL

42. Expenditure referred to in this report is contained within Council’s existing approved budgets.

Robert Love

Director Riverside Theatres

Paul Perrett

Chief Financial Officer / Acting Executive Director Corporate Services

Jon Greig

Executive Director Community Services

Attachments:

1 ⇩

Minutes of the Riverside Advisory Board Meeting 8 October 2020

6 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 7 December 2020 Item 15.2

WELCOMING

ITEM NUMBER 15.2

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Commemorating John Books

REFERENCE F2019/03627 - D07757521

REPORT OF Executive Officer

PURPOSE:

To seek Council’s endorsement for the amenities building, being delivered through the Max Ruddock Reserve upgrade, to be named in honour of the late John Cameron Books, former Parramatta City Councillor and Lord Mayor.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That the amenities building being delivered through the Max Ruddock Reserve upgrade be named in honour of former Lord Mayor John Books.

(b) That Council note the delivery of this upgrade has been endorsed by Council through the adopted Operational Plan & Budget 2020-2021, adopted July 2020.

(c) Further, that upon completion of the upgraded amenities building, the family of Mr Books be invited to be part of an official naming and formal dedication of the building and reserves upgrades.

BACKGROUND

1. At its meeting of 21 August 2019, Council resolved to investigate options to establish a memorial or dedication of an appropriate building to former Parramatta City Councillor and Lord Mayor John Cameron Books in the following resolution:

a. That Council officers investigate options to establish a memorial, or dedication of an appropriate location or building to former Parramatta City Councillor and Lord Mayor John Cameron Books, and report back to Council.

b. That this report consider Mr Books’ work in establishing the Rivercat service to Parramatta and consider the establishment of a memorial, or dedication of sites, on or along the Parramatta River in recognition of this.

c. Further, that the family of Mr Books and Councillors be consulted prior to the report being brought to Council, and Councillors invited to suggest sites for consideration.

2. John Cameron Books, a former Parramatta City Council Mayor and Lord Mayor, passed away on 17 August 2017, at the age of 76. After serving as Mayor in 1983-84, Mr Books won the State seat of Parramatta in 1988 and as the local Member of Parliament worked to introduce the Rivercat service between Parramatta and the Sydney CBD.

3. He was also a strong advocate for Parramatta being recognised as a Lord Mayoral City, which resulted in Royal Assent being granted in December 1988. He later served as Lord Mayor in 1996-97.

4. Among his many achievements as a Councillor for the Municipality of Blacktown (1968-1972) and Parramatta City Council (1972-1999), Mayor and Lord Mayor of Parramatta, Mr Books was instrumental in the successful transfer of Winston Hills, Toongabbie, Northmead and Pendle Hill from Blacktown to the Parramatta Local Government Area (LGA).

5. Other contributions of Mr Books include, but are not limited to:

a. Closure of Church Street, which led to the establishment of Church Street Mall

b. Establishment of the Sister City relationship with Cebu, Philippines in 1997

c. Advocacy for the establishment of a University in Western Sydney, now Western Sydney University

d. Railway “Y” Link between Merrylands and Parramatta

e. Tidal traffic flow on Windsor Road

6. At the time of his passing, Council offered its condolences to John Books’ family and friends, and held a minutes silence in the Chamber as a gesture of respect.

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

7. A preferred location has been identified, with the new amenities building to be delivered through the Max Ruddock Reserve upgrade proposed to be dedicated in Mr Books’ honour.

8. Max Ruddock Reserve is located on Junction Road, Winston Hills and is a busy community facility, used for soccer in winter and cricket in summer. It features an amenities building, car park, cricket nets and drinking fountains.

9. The delivery of a new playground and amenities pavilion at Max Ruddock Reserve was identified as a local priority for the Delivery Program at the New Futures Councillor Workshops held in February and March 2018.

10. Max Ruddock Reserve was identified as a future location of an upgraded amenities building with community meeting room to address the needs of both sporting teams and the local community. Its location adjacent to well-used community sports facilities and playground will result in consistently high use and frequent visitation by local residents and community groups.

11. The building will provide amenities to all visitors, including users of the sports fields, play equipment and meeting rooms. The building will also function as a flexible space for small events, including community workshops, meetings, presentations and private functions.

12. The planned new amenities building at Max Ruddock Reserve, Winston Hills was identified as the preferred and most appropriate location to be dedicated to Mr Books following consideration of his contributions to the City of Parramatta.

13. This was in recognition of his role in the transfer of Winston Hills to the Parramatta LGA during his time as a Councillor, and his strong ties with the local soccer and cricket clubs who frequent this location.

14. Consideration was also given to the renaming of the Queen Street Stairs on the river foreshore or the re-naming of an un-named park or reserve close by the River when determining the location. However his role in establishing the Rivercat service between Parramatta and the Sydney CBD in 1988 was achieved through his role as a Member of Parliament, rather than as a Parramatta Councillor or Mayor.

CONSULTATION & TIMING

Stakeholder Consultation

15. Community consultation for the playground aspect of the Max Ruddock Reserve upgrade took place in November 2019 and March 2020, with construction currently underway on the new community play space, including a climbing structure, nature play area, accessible pathways, picnic area and BBQ. Anticipated completion of the play space is December 2020.

16. Planning for the upgrade to the amenities building proposed to be named in honour of Mr Books, including detailed design and delivery, is expected to commence in September 2021.

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

Date	Stakeholder	Stakeholder Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
January – April 2020	Cultural Heritage & Tourism Unit	Provision of research into contributions of John Cameron Books to Parramatta LGA	Research incorporated into location identification and ongoing discussions	Executive Support Unit
September – October 2020	Place Services Unit	Advice provided on potential locations including buildings, un-named reserves and parks	Shortlist formed from staff feedback and prepared for Councillor consultation	Executive Support Unit
September – October 2020	Open Space and Natural Resources Unit	Advice provided on potential locations including buildings, un-named reserves and parks	Shortlist formed from staff feedback and prepared for Councillor consultation	Executive Support Unit
October 2020	Place Services Unit	Advice regarding Max Ruddock Reserve upgrade status and timeline	Information incorporated into Council report	Executive Support Unit
November 2020	Family of John Books	The family have expressed their support and appreciation of this proposal	Council will continue liaise with the family in relation to the naming and dedication of the building.	Executive Support Unit

Councillor Consultation

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

Date

Councillor

Councillor Comment

Council Officer Response

Responsibility

August 2020

Lord Mayor Cr Bob Dwyer

Seeking advice regarding processes for naming a park in its entirety or elements within a park i.e. playground or amenities building

Advice provided regarding processes

Open Space and Natural Resources Unit

September – October 2020

Lord Mayor Cr Bob Dwyer

Cr Lorraine Wearne

Cr Andrew Wilson

Provision of shortlisted locations to Councillors for consideration and feedback to staff

Max Ruddock Reserve amenities building identified as preferred location. Council report prepared to seek Council endorsement.

Executive Support Unit

FINANCIAL IMPLICATION FOR COUNCIL

19. The Max Ruddock Reserve Playground and Amenities Pavilion upgrade are under Property & Place Strategy 2020/21 and 2021/22 capital expenditure budget as per the adopted Operational Plan & Budget 2020-2021, adopted July 2020. The playground and planning for the amenities building will be funded in FY 20/21 with the construction of the amenities building occurring in FY 21/22.

Bronwyn Pullen

Executive Officer

Justin Mulder

Chief of Staff

Paul Perrett

Chief Financial Officer / Acting Executive Director Corporate Services

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 7 December 2020 Item 17.1

INNOVATIVE

ITEM NUMBER 17.1

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Progression of Some Site-Specific Planning Proposals in the Parramatta CBD

REFERENCE F2013/01409 - D07736256

REPORT OF A/Team Leader Land Use Planning

PURPOSE:

To respond to a request from the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment regarding progression of a range of site-specific Planning Proposals located within the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal area.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council note the correspondence at Attachment 1 from the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE) pertaining to site-specific Planning Proposals (SSPPs) in the Parramatta CBD.

(b) That Council not proceed with the following three SSPP processes for the following reasons:

Planning Proposal site

Reasons

107 George St, Parramatta

The Applicant is no longer pursuing this application and these controls will be achieved via the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal.

2 Sorrell St, Parramatta

286-302 Church St, Parramatta

Similar controls can be achieved via the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal for both these sites and, based on engagement with the Applicants, it is not possible to provide DPIE with a clear timetable on when these SSPPs can be progressed.

(c) That Council note further correspondence at Attachment 2 from DPIE including a Gateway alteration outlining that the SSPP for 66-68 Phillip St, Parramatta is not to proceed.

(d) Further, that Council write to DPIE to advise of Council’s resolution.

SUMMARY

1. Council is currently processing 26 site-specific Planning Proposals (SSPPs) that are located within the area of the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal. Council has historically processed SSPPs within the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal area in order to continue promoting development activity in the CBD while the broader strategic planning framework progresses towards resolution.

2. Council has received communication from the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE) that seeks feedback from Council on the progress of a number of SSPPs in the Parramatta CBD. Refer to letter at Attachment 1.

3. Council officers consider it prudent to evaluate the progression of those SSPPs at this point in time due to the following factors:

a. the exhibition of the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal allows for the progression of design competitions, and following this lodgement of Development Applications (DAs) against those exhibited controls, meaning that SSPPs are no longer necessary to advance projects towards construction and delivery phases;

b. the communication from DPIE at Attachment 1 which seeks an update on certain SSPPs; and

c. the introduction of Council’s Prioritisation Assessment Program for SSPPs, which gives rise to the need to free up Council’s City Planning resources to advance prioritised projects.

PLANNING PROPOSALS RECOMMENDED NOT TO BE PROGRESSED

4. In response to DPIE’s correspondence at Attachment 1 Council officers reviewed the SSPPs in the Parramatta CBD and had concluded that four SSPPs should be reported to Council with a recommendation not to proceed.

5. However, as outlined below, prior to this report being forwarded to Council, DPIE issued further communication effectively ending the process for one of those four SSPPs. Therefore, this report recommends not proceeding with three of those four SSPP processes, and also provides an update on the fourth SSPP for which DPIE has already ended the process.

Three SSPPs recommended not to proceed

6. For these three SSPPs, the development controls sought in the SSPPs will be delivered through the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal process. The history of these three SSPPs is as follows:

a. lodged over three years ago

b. consistent with the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal (so will be delivered via the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal process)

c. have not progressed in a timely manner due to the applicant disengaging from the process and failing to provide the information required to progress the SSPPs

d. have been issued Gateway determinations

e. have not progressed to exhibition.

7. Details of these applications and their status are discussed in Table 1 below:

Table 1: Three SSPPs recommended to not progress

Reference	Address	Status
RZ/16/2015	107 George St, Parramatta	The Planning Proposal was lodged in 2015. The Applicant advised Council officers in August 2020 that the landowner had sold the site, and the Applicant was no longer involved in the application.
RZ/17/2016	2 Sorrell St, Parramatta	The Planning Proposal was lodged in 2016. This SSPP has not progressed in the past year or so, and Council officers understand that this is due to complications relating to land ownership. The Applicant was advised in July 2020 that if the matter did not progress by the time the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal was placed on public exhibition, Council officers would write a report recommending that this SSPP not proceed on the basis that the application is not progressing in a timely manner and the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal will be instituting the same controls. The Applicant has advised that they wish to proceed with development, but have not provided a clear timetable as to when they would progress the associated Planning Agreement. With the exhibition of the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal complete, Council officers consider that an SSPP is no longer required on this site. The Applicant can continue progressing a site-specific Development Control Plan (DCP) and Planning Agreement in conjunction with Council officers as they work towards the Development Application stage.
RZ/14/2017	286-300 Church St, Parramatta	The Planning Proposal was lodged in 2017. The Gateway determination for this site requires that an adjacent site be included in the SSPP. To date, the adjacent landowners have not engaged to resolve issues related to the SSPP and its related Development Control Plan and Planning Agreement. The Applicant and the adjacent landowners were advised in July 2020 that if the matter did not progress by the time the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal was placed on public exhibition, Council officers would write a report recommending this SSPP not proceed on the basis that the application is not progressing in a timely manner and the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal will be instituting the same controls. Neither party had responded at the time of writing this report.

SSPP where DPIE has ended the process

8. At the time of writing this Council report, Council officers were also preparing to seek Council’s resolution not to progress the SSPP at 66 Phillip Street, Parramatta (RZ/25/2014). DPIE had requested in their correspondence to Council at Attachment 1 that Council consider withdrawing this Planning Proposal as DPIE would not be allowing any extension to the current Gateway Determination for this SSPP. The SSPP is described as follows:

a. lodged almost six years ago

b. had been issued a Gateway determination which is consistent with the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal

c. had not progressed to exhibition due to factors described below

9. For some time, the Applicant preferred to progress an SSPP that was inconsistent with the site-specific Gateway determination and the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal. The Applicant preferred to progress an option at 10:1 FSR, while the Gateway determination / Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal outline a 6:1 FSR for this site. The Applicant’s position prevented the SSPP from being progressed towards exhibition for two reasons:

a. the Applicant’s position was inconsistent with the terms of the Gateway determination allowing it to proceed to exhibition, and

b. an accompanying site-specific Development Control Plan and Planning Agreement were unable to be progressed for the site due to the lack of agreement over the density in the SSPP.

10. On 20 November 2020, Council officers received correspondence from the Applicant that they now wished to proceed to exhibition with an SSPP consistent with the Gateway determination.

11. On 23 November 2020, Council received correspondence from DPIE dated 20 November 2020 outlining that this Planning Proposal should not proceed, and a Gateway alteration to this effect was also attached (refer Attachment 2).

12. As DPIE has issued a letter and Gateway alteration stating that this SSPP should not proceed, Council officers consider that a resolution from Council is no longer required to end the SSPP process.

13. Should the Applicant wish to progress in a manner consistent with the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal, Council officers consider that a site-specific DCP and Planning Agreement may progress for this site without an accompanying SSPP (as those planning controls are to be delivered via the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal process).

Conclusion

14. Council officers do not consider that the remainder of the SSPPs on which DPIE is seeking an update in the letter at Attachment 1 are stalled in the same manner as the four SSPPs that this report addresses. These SSPPs can continue proceeding through their individual assessment processes alongside the broader Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal. As part of progressing these SSPPs, Council officers will make an assessment of the applications that have been lodged but not yet reported to Council. Where Council officers believe they are consistent with the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal and unlikely to be finalised before the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal, work on these applications may be put on hold or the applications may be requested to be withdrawn to ensure resources are properly focused on completing the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal and progressing SSPPs on Council’s Prioritisation Assessment Program.

CONSULTATION

Stakeholder Consultation

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

Date	Stakeholder	Stakeholder Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
13 August 2020	Applicant for 107 George St	Applicant advised that their client has sold the property and they have no more interest in the site or application.	The Planning Proposal should not proceed.	Group Manager City Planning
21 August 2020	Applicant for 2 Sorrell St	Applicant wrote to Council indicating they wish to proceed but they did not provide the information required to allow it to proceed to exhibition.	The Planning Proposal should not proceed, but the site-specific DCP and Planning Agreement can proceed once the Applicant has confirmed that they are still able to meet the requirements of the Planning Agreement.	Group Manager City Planning
28 July 2020	Applicant for 286-300 Church St	Officers notified the Applicant that if they did not provide the information required to progress the application Officers would recommend the Planning Proposal not proceed. No response was received.	The Planning Proposal should not proceed.	Group Manager City Planning
8 October 2020 & 20 November 2020	Applicant for 66-68 Phillip St	Officers notified the Applicant that this Planning Proposal was being reviewed, and that officers continue to be of the view that the proposal be made consistent with the Gateway determination & Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal. Note: On 20 November, Council officers received further communication that the Applicant now wished to proceed to exhibition with a consistent scheme.	The Planning Proposal should not proceed. Note: Further correspondence DPIE dated 20 November and further detailed in this report has ended this SSPP process.	Group Manager City Planning

Councillor Consultation

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

Date	Councillor	Councillor Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
5 Nov 2020	66 Phillip Street SSPP was subject of a Councillor workshop on this date.	Investigation of possible alternate planning controls for the street block including this site was requested as part of consideration of the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal.	The controls for this block containing this site will be included in the assessment of the submissions received following exhibition of the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal.	Group Manager City Planning

FINANCIAL IMPLICATION FOR COUNCIL

17. There are no direct financial implications for Council as a result of the recommendations in this report. Under Council’s Fees and Charges 2020/2021, these SSPPs are not eligible for a refund of Planning Proposal application fees, as they have already passed the Gateway stage. There would be efficiency benefits from no longer progressing these SSPPs in the form of freeing up staff resources to progress higher-priority projects.

CONCLUSION

18. Ending the four SSPP processes addressed in this report would result in a 15% decrease in the number of SSPPs in the Parramatta CBD. This would increase staff resources to progress other strategic planning matters, including:

a. the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal;

b. SSPPs targeted in Council’s Prioritisation Assessment Program; and

c. other active SSPPs which are considered more likely to result in timely development outcomes.

Sarah Baker

A/Team Leader Land Use Planning

Robert Cologna

Land Use Planning Manager

David Birds

Group Manager, City Planning

Paul Perrett

Chief Financial Officer / Acting Executive Director Corporate Services

Jennifer Concato

Executive Director City Planning and Design

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

Attachments:

1 ⇩	Correspondence from Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (23 October 2020)	3 Pages
2 ⇩	Correspondence from Department of Planning, Industry and Environment including Gateway alteration for 66-68 Phillip St, Parramatta (20 November 2020)	3 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 7 December 2020 Item 17.2

INNOVATIVE

ITEM NUMBER 17.2

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Public Exhibition - Draft Development Control Plan and draft Planning Agreement at 8-14 Great Western Highway, Parramatta

REFERENCE RZ/6/2019 - D07670441

REPORT OF Project Officer, Land Use Planning

APPLICANT GLN Planning

LANDOWNER JM Malouf Investments Pty Ltd and The Owners Strata Plan 8700

Development applications considered by sydney central city planning panel - Nil

PURPOSE:

To seek Council’s endorsement to publicly exhibit a draft site-specific Development Control Plan and draft Planning Agreement for land at 8-14 Great Western Highway, Parramatta, in conjunction with the Planning Proposal previously endorsed by Council.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council endorse the draft site-specific Development Control Plan for the land at 8-14 Great Western Highway Street, Parramatta, as provided at Attachment 1, for the purpose of public exhibition.

(b) That Council authorise the Chief Executive Officer to commence the legal drafting of a Planning Agreement in accordance with the terms outlined in this report and to finalise the draft agreement on behalf of Council for the purpose of public exhibition.

(c) That the draft site-specific Development Control Plan and draft Planning Agreement be placed on public exhibition concurrently with the Planning Proposal for land at 8-14 Great Western Highway Street, Parramatta, for a minimum period of 28 days, and the outcome of the public exhibition be reported back to Council.

(d) Further, that Council delegate authority to the Chief Executive Officer to correct any minor inconsistencies or anomalies of an administrative nature relating to the draft site-specific Development Control Plan and draft Planning Agreement documentation that may arise during the drafting and exhibition processes.

SITE DESCRIPTION

1. The subject site comprises 8 Great Western Highway (Lot 10 DP1097949) and 10-14 Great Western Highway, Parramatta (SP8700) and is approximately 2,386 square metres. The site has a single frontage on the Great Western Highway at its southern boundary. The site is bound by three to eight storey residential flat buildings along its western and northern boundaries and a single-storey commercial building on its eastern boundary (refer Figure 1).

Figure 1: An aerial image of the sites (outlined in yellow) and surrounds.

BACKGROUND

2. In October 2019, a Planning Proposal was lodged for 8-14 Great Western Highway, Parramatta, which sought to increase the maximum floor space ratio and maximum height of buildings controls in a manner consistent with the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal.

3. At its meeting on 19 May 2020, Council resolved to endorse the Planning Proposal with a maximum floor space ratio of 15:1 (with provisions for unlimited additional commercial floor space) and a height of buildings control of RL 211 metres (65 storeys) and to prepare a draft Development Control Plan and draft Planning Agreement to be exhibited with the Planning Proposal. A more detailed summary of the Planning Proposal is provided in the following section of this report.

4. On 1 September 2020, the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment issued a Gateway Determination which allowed the Planning Proposal to proceed to public exhibition. The Gateway Determination is provided at Attachment 2 and requires that the site-specific Planning Proposal be consistent with the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal prior to being finalised.

5. In accordance with Council’s resolution of 19 May 2020, Council Officers have worked with the applicant to prepare a draft site-specific Development Control Plan and draft Planning Agreement to allow for their concurrent exhibition with the site-specific Planning Proposal.

PLANNING PROPOSAL SUMMARY

Table 1: Comparison of planning controls sought for the subject site compared to existing controls and the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal

	Existing (Parramatta LEP 2011)	Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal	Site-specific Planning Proposal
Zoning	B4 Mixed Use	B4 Mixed Use	B4 Mixed Use
Height of Buildings	28m (8 storeys)	211m (65 storeys)	211m (65 storeys)
Floor Space Ratio	3.5:1	15:1 FSR (including the following). · 10:1 Mapped Incentive FSR (inclusive of 1:1 commercial FSR) · 1.5:1 Design Excellence FSR · 0.5:1 High Performing Building FSR · 3:1 Opportunity Site FSR · With the potential for unlimited additional commercial FSR¹	15:1 FSR (including the following): · 10:1 Mapped Maximum FSR (inclusive of 1:1 commercial FSR) · 1.5:1 Design Excellence FSR · 0.5:1 High Performing Building FSR · 3:1 Opportunity Site FSR · Unlimited additional commercial floor space¹ Total FSR of at least: 16.42:1
Parking	Car Parking rates per Parramatta LEP 2011	Car parking rates as per Parramatta CBD Strategic Transport Study	Car parking rates as per Parramatta CBD Strategic Transport Study
Development²	104 residential units^3. with some commercial GFA at ground level	417 residential units³ and minimum of 2,386m2 plus unlimited additional commercial GFA permitted within height control	399 residential units⁴ and minimum of 2,386m2 plus unlimited additional commercial GFA permitted within height control

1. Above the required 1:1 minimum commercial provision but within the Height of Building control requirement

2. Assumed Mixed Use redevelopment of site not completely commercial building

3. Based on average unit size of 80m2

4. Based on Reference Design submitted by applicant

DRAFT SITE-SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN

6. The draft site-specific Development Control Plan has been drafted in order to address the comments provided by Council’s Urban Design, Traffic and Heritage Officers during the initial assessment of the Planning Proposal. The site-specific Development Control Plan, as provided at Attachment 1, seeks to:

· Achieve a suitable built-form outcome that addresses its contextual surrounds;

· Ensure that the building design is sympathetic to nearby heritage items and does not detract from their value;

· Ensure that nearby heritage items are protected during the redevelopment of the subject site from construction or vibration damage;

· Require that any potential archaeology is managed in accordance with the requirements of Heritage NSW;

· Provide vehicular access points and circulation that minimises disruptions to the operation of the Great Western Highway;

· Future-proof the site should road widening be required along Great Western Highway; and

· Provide deep soil zones across the site to allow for adequate landscaping.

7. Proposed 3 metres side, and 6 metres front and rear ground level building setbacks aim to provide deep soil zone. Proposed tower setbacks are 9 metres, which is consistent with residential tower setbacks within the Parramatta CBD. The setbacks controls from the draft DCP are shown in Figure 2 below.

Figure 2: Podium and tower setbacks in the draft site-specific Development Control Plan

8. The site is in proximity to two State heritage-listed items - Lennox House and Parramatta Masonic Centre, as shown in Figure 3 overleaf.

Figure 3: Location of State heritage items (shown in beige) in relation to the site

9. The site-specific DCP acknowledges the site’s proximity to two heritage-listed items, and has archaeological potential, and in response the following controls have been included in the draft DCP:

a) Require that any development on the site must be accompanied with a geotechnical report and a structural engineer’s report to ensure that nearby heritage items are not impacted by the development;

b) Require that any damages or weakened fabric of the heritage items is repaired to Council’s satisfaction of as a result of this development;

c) Require that a visual impact analysis to be prepared as part of any development application for this site to ensure the buildings form, proportions, view lines, materials, colours and design are responding to the heritage items; and

d) Require that any archaeological requirements be coordinated with Heritage NSW before any development application is determined.

10. It is noted that the Planning Proposal was previously referred to Council’s Heritage Advisory Committee which expressed concern over the increase in height and the affect it will have on adjacent heritage items. If endorsed for public exhibition, the draft DCP will be presented to the Heritage Advisory Committee and their comments will be provided in the post exhibition report.

11. Great Western Highway is a classified road, meaning that agreement both at planning proposal and development application stages will be required from Transport for NSW (Roads and Maritime Services) for proposed access arrangements for this site.

12. Council is working with Transport for NSW on an Integrated Transport Plan to support the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal. This must be completed prior to the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal being finalised. Consultation with Transport for NSW on the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal and the site specific Planning Proposal, will confirm whether road widening will be required along this part of the Great Western Highway.

13. The site-specific DCP has been drafted so that if road widening is required, the building setbacks would remain unchanged (that is the building does not need to shift), and any road widening is accommodated in the front setback (as shown in Figure 4b). Council Officers acknowledge that this outcome will result in a limited capacity to provide deep-soil landscaping within the front setback, however, the outcome is still deemed acceptable in an urban context as the building will provide an active frontage along the street edge.

14. Furthermore, Council Officers conducted early consultation with Transport for NSW (Roads and Maritime Services),where it was indicated that vehicular ingress and egress into the site would need to be relocated to the western boundary so that the access point is located away from the Great Western Highway and Church Street intersection.

15. Council Officers acknowledge that this requirement is likely to impact upon the existing mature-aged trees located on this portion of the site regardless of the whether road widening is required or not (Refer Figure 4a & 4b). Provisions have been included in the site-specific DCP that ensure that the 6 metres front setback can be utilised for the planting of replacement trees.

Figure 4a: Treatment of the front setback if road widening is not required.

Figure 4b: Treatment of the front setback if road widening is required.

PLANNING AGREEMENT LETTER OF OFFER

16. The applicant has submitted a letter of offer which is provided at Attachment 3. In the offer, the applicant has proposed to provide Council with a monetary contribution of $150 per square metre for additional residential floor space facilitated by the Planning Proposal above that permitted under the current Parramatta LEP 2011 land use controls for residential floor space, exclusive of any additional residential floor space awarded under Design Excellence or High Performing Building bonuses.

17. Based on the residential floor space uplift generated by the Planning Proposal, the Planning Agreement would result in a monetary contribution of $5,010,600. This amount complies with Council’s Planning Agreements Policy which applies a Phase 1 value-sharing amount of $150 per square metre and a Phase 2 value-sharing amount of $375 per square metre.

18. The manner in which Phase 1 and Phase 2 value-sharing is applied is shown in Figure 5.

Figure 5: Diagrammatic representation of the application of Phase 1 and Phase 2 value-sharing

Note – Unlimited commercial Floor Space allowance on this site of 1.42:1 in this Site Specific PP is not reflected in the diagram as no value sharing contribution is required for this use under Council’s CBD Planning Framework

19. Using this methodology, the draft Planning Agreement value for the subject site is based on the following calculations:

Table 2: Calculation of the monetary contribution amount

Development parameters
Site Area	2,386m²
Base FSR	3.5:1
Base Gross Floor Area	(3.5 x 2,386m²) = 8,351m²
Incentive FSR	10:1
Incentive Gross Floor Area	(10 x 2,386m²) = 23,860m²
Phase 1 calculation
Uplift in Gross Floor Area	(23,860m²– 8,351m²) = 15,509m²
Increase in residential floor area multiplied by $150	(15,509m² x $150) = $2,326,350
Phase 2 calculation
Opportunity sites bonus	3:1
Opportunity sites Gross Floor Area	(3 x 2,386m²) = 7,158m²
Increase in residential floor area multiplied by $375	(7,158m²x $375) = $2,684,250
Total
Phase 1 total	$2,326,350
Phase 2 total	$2,684,250
Grand total	($2,326,350 + $2,684,250) = $5,010,600

20. However, the Gateway Determination for the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal requires Council to review its community infrastructure framework. Council Officers are currently reviewing this framework and aim to report to Council on the issue in early 2021.

21. The applicant’s Letter of Offer has agreed to draft the Planning Agreement in a manner whereby the monetary contribution can be adjusted should Council’s policy position on community infrastructure for residential floor space in the Parramatta CBD change. The applicant’s Letter of Offer also agrees to draft the Planning Agreement in accordance with standard terms provided in Council’s Planning Agreements template.

22. The applicant’s offer provides Council security that the contribution payable will be consistent with the contribution required for residential development at the time the development application is granted.

23. The monetary contribution is to be used by Council towards community infrastructure in the Parramatta CBD and is in addition to Section 7.11/12 development contributions payable with respect to any future redevelopment of this site.

24. Should Council accept the Planning Agreement letter of offer, the formal written agreement will be legally drafted and agreed to by both parties prior to public exhibition.

CONSULTATION & TIMING

25. The draft site-specific DCP and draft Planning Agreement will be publicly exhibited concurrently with the Planning Proposal for a minimum of 28 days. Public exhibition will include a notice and exhibition material placed on Council’s website, letters to nearby landowners notifying them of the exhibition, and hard-copy exhibition material placed in Council’s Customer Contact Centre and Parramatta Library.

26. Following the conclusion of the exhibition period, Council Officers will summarise and assess any submissions received. A report on the outcomes of the public exhibition will be provided to the Local Planning Panel addressing any objections received. If no objections are received, the matter will be reported directly to Council seeking approval to finalise the Planning Proposal and the accompanying site-specific DCP and Planning Agreement.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATION FOR COUNCIL

27. Should the Planning Agreement be drafted in accordance with Council’s Planning Agreements Policy and the terms of the applicant’s letter of offer, a monetary contribution of $5,010,600 would be provided to Council for community infrastructure in the Parramatta CBD. However, the Planning Agreement will be drafted in a manner so that the monetary contribution amount can be amended should Council adopt a different value-sharing rate.

CONCLUSION

28. It is recommended that Council:

· Endorse the attached Draft DCP for the purpose of public exhibition; and

· Authorise the Chief Executive Officer to finalise the legal drafting of the draft Planning Agreement on behalf of Council for the purpose of public exhibition.

29. The draft Planning Agreement and draft site-specific Development Control Plan will be publicly exhibited concurrently with the Planning Proposal for 8-14 Great Western Highway, Parramatta. The outcome of the public exhibition will be reported to Council following the public exhibition period.

Marko Rubcic

Project Officer, Land Use Planning

Bianca Lewis

Team Leader Land Use Planning

Robert Cologna

Land Use Planning Manager

David Birds

Group Manager, City Planning

Paul Perrett

Chief Financial Officer / Acting Executive Director Corporate Services

Jennifer Concato

Executive Director City Planning and Design

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

Attachments:

1 ⇩	Site-Specific Development Control Plan	9 Pages
2 ⇩	Gateway Determination	4 Pages
3 ⇩	Planning Agreement Letter of Offer	3 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 7 December 2020 Item 17.3

INNOVATIVE

ITEM NUMBER 17.3

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Post-exhibition - Re-exhibition of Planning Agreement and Development Control Plan - 295 Church Street, Parramatta

REFERENCE RZ/14/2014 - D07534754

REPORT OF A/Team Leader Land Use Planning

Current Landowner 295 Church Street Property Pty Ltd*

PROSPECTIVE LANDOWNER Rudolph Camillo*

Applicant Coronation Property Co Pty Ltd

*Note: Please refer to discussion of land ownership in report.

Development Applications considered by Sydney Central City Planning Panel: Nil

PURPOSE:

To allow Council to consider the outcomes of the re-exhibition of the Development Control Plan and Planning Agreement for 295 Church St, Parramatta, and a recommendation to finalise these documents.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council receives and notes the six Government agency submissions responding to the re-exhibition of the amended Development Control Plan (DCP) and amended Planning Agreement for 295 Church Street, Parramatta.

(b) That Council endorses the re-exhibited DCP (Attachment 1) for finalisation subject to the following two amendments, the first of which arose as a result of Transport for NSW’s submission and the second of which arose from an issue identified by Council officers during the re-exhibition period in association with legal drafting for the related LEP amendment:

i. Minor amendments/additions to the DCP controls to clarify that parking, loading and servicing (excluding set down and pick up for full size coach buses) should happen on-site.

ii. Removal of the DCP reference to parking controls in the current Parramatta Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 2011 Clause 7.14 (Car Parking for Certain Land in Parramatta City Centre) as the DCP should not pre-empt the drafting of the related site-specific Planning Proposal. Council also affirms its support for the parking provisions for this site being included in a site-specific clause rather than in the existing Clause 7.14.

(d) That subject to the Planning Agreement being updated to reflect the prospective new landowner, Council endorses the re-exhibited Planning Agreement (Attachment 2) for execution, and delegates authority to the Chief Executive Officer to sign the Planning Agreement on behalf of Council.

(e) That upon signing of the Planning Agreement, the agreement be forwarded to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE) in accordance with Section 25G of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

(f) That, noting that DPIE has requested a clear timetable for resolution of this Planning Proposal, if the prospective new landowner has not taken control of the property and signed the Planning Agreement by 28 February 2021, that Council advise DPIE that Council no longer wishes to progress the related Planning Proposal.

(g) That Council responds to the communication from DPIE at Attachment 3 by advising DPIE of this resolution and noting that this resolution should facilitate finalisation of the Planning Proposal, DCP and Planning Agreement in a timely manner.

(h) That Council supports the approach to drafting the LEP amendment outlined in this report as it relates to parking controls (noting that this approach confirms the limited range of parking rates included in the exhibited site-specific Planning Proposal rather than the more extensive parking range of rates exhibited in the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal, and recognising that this is a transitional issue arising as a result of the site-specific Planning Proposal’s proceeding in parallel with the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal).

(i) Further, that Council delegate authority to the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to correct any minor policy inconsistencies or any anomalies of an administrative nature relating to the Planning Agreement and Development Control Plan.

BACKGROUND: LODGMENT TO ORIGINAL EXHIBITION PERIOD

1. A Planning Proposal for land at 295 Church Street, Parramatta (Lot 1 DP 25055 and Lots 10, 11 and 12 DP 234508; site area 1,082 m²) was lodged with Council in September 2014. The site has two frontages being Church Street along the eastern (front) boundary and Freemasons Arms Lane along the western (rear) boundary.

Figure 1: Site identification map

Site map

2. Following initial assessment by Council officers, Council resolved on 12 October 2015 to proceed with a site-specific Planning Proposal as follows:

a. Increase the FSR from 3:1 to 10:1 (plus design excellence bonus for total FSR of 11.5:1); and

b. Increase the existing height control of 12m across the whole site to a height control of 12 metres for the part of the building located within 10 metres of the Church Street boundary and 150 metres for the remainder of the site (plus design excellence bonus for a maximum height of 172.5 metres).

At the time of this resolution, this was consistent with the content of the then-current Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal.

3. On 13 March 2017, Council authorised the content of a draft Development Control Plan (DCP) for the purpose of public exhibition with the Planning Proposal. At this time, Council also authorised the CEO to finalise a draft Planning Agreement to be publically exhibited with the Planning Proposal.

BACKGROUND: POST-EXHIBITION REPORTING AND RESOLUTION

4. The original exhibition of the Planning Proposal, draft Planning Agreement and draft DCP was from 1 August 2018 - 11 September 2018. The outcomes of the original exhibition period were subsequently reported to Council on 16 December 2019.

5. The reason for the delay between the original exhibition period and the post-exhibition report was that some of the strategic work underway as part of the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal had policy implications for this site - namely, the depth of the tower setback along the Church Street frontage. The 295 Church St Planning Proposal could not be progressed until a position supported by both Council and the Department of Planning, industry and Environment (DPIE) on tower setbacks in Church Street was resolved.

6. Completion of the Urban Design and Feasibility Study for the Church Street Precinct (prepared by Council officers) and the associated Heritage Study for the Church Street Precinct (prepared by City Plan Heritage) allowed for resolution of this policy matter, which was to institute a 12-metre tower setback along Church Street as part of the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal.

7. The amended 295 Church Street Planning Proposal containing a 12-metre tower setback was recommended to Council in the post-exhibition report on 16 December 2019. Council resolved to support the amended Planning Proposal, and also resolved at that time to defer sending it to the DPIE for finalisation until the re-exhibition of an amended DCP and amended Planning Agreement were reported back to Council.

8. Council also endorsed amendments to the draft DCP and Planning Agreement for re-exhibition. These were as follows:

a. DCP: In response to issues raised in Government agency submissions and additional information provided by the Applicant addressing flooding and design issues as a result of the first exhibition, Council officers recommended amendments to the DCP. Key amendments as resolved by Council were as follows:

i. Church Street setback: amending the tower setback in the DCP to match the 12-metre tower setback identified in the amended Planning Proposal.

ii. Traffic and transport issues: restrict vehicle access to Freemasons Arms Lane; residential maximum parking rates are to be used in accordance with the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal; and all parking to be located in basement parking levels.

iii. Flooding issues: all permanent and temporary non-residential floor spaces must be above the one per cent Annual Exceedance Probability (AEP) flood level plus 0.5-metre freeboard; all habitable floor space within the building must be above the PMF level.

b. Planning Agreement: Following the first exhibition, Council officers recommended that the following amendments be made to the Planning Agreement for re-exhibition:

i. Adding a standard review clause for Planning Agreements within the Parramatta CBD that allows a review if Council seeks to increase Section 7.11 and 7.12 contributions and decreases the community infrastructure contribution payable under Council’s Parramatta CBD Community Infrastructure policy framework. [This matter was considered by Council at its meeting of 11 June 2019 resulting in Council resolving that existing and future Planning Agreements for sites in the CBD include a clause that addresses this issue].

ii. Clarifying that no contribution would be required unless the development includes residential apartments.

9. Another matter that had arisen prior to the post-exhibition report was that the applicant had sought to progress a Design Excellence competition brief for the site. The brief responded to the density sought under this site-specific Planning Proposal, and also included provision for additional 2:1 FSR made permissible through the State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 (ARHSEPP) by providing a boarding house on site.

10. In response to the matter of the boarding house, Council also resolved on 16 December 2019 to write to the Minister for Planning and Public Spaces requesting that the ARHSEPP be amended to restrict the application of its bonus provisions in the Parramatta CBD. In addition, Council resolved that the 295 Church Street Planning Proposal was to be advanced only if the boarding house component was withdrawn.

BACKGROUND: ISSUES PERTAINING TO BOARDING HOUSE AND FURTHER AMENDMENT TO PLANNING AGREEMENT

11. Following the 16 December 2019 resolution, Council officers prepared a further report to Council on this Planning Proposal for its meeting of 11 May 2020. That report addressed two main (but separate) issues:

a. The report updated Council on the boarding house matter; and

b. The report also asked Council to consider a request made by the Applicant after the 16 December 2019 report to amend an additional aspect of the draft Planning Agreement.

Boarding House Matter

12. With reference to the boarding house matter, the 11 May 2020 report summarised the Minister’s response to Council’s letter raising concern about the ARHSEPP and the bonus floor space it allows in the Parramatta CBD, as well as subsequent responses from DPIE and the Applicant. This information is briefly summarised again below:

a. The correspondence from the Minister noted Council’s request and advised that DPIE would shortly exhibit amended planning policies related to affordable housing and a response from Council would be welcome at that time.

b. DPIE wrote to Council regarding this Planning Proposal, noting that the Planning Proposal did not seek to include provisions relating to boarding houses, and that the boarding house matter appeared to relate more directly to the assessment of a future development application (rather than the Planning Proposal).

c. The Applicant also wrote to Council clarifying that the Planning Proposal does not include a boarding house component and that they were of the view that it could be forwarded to DPIE for finalisation.

13. In response to the above correspondence, Council officers recommended that the boarding house matter and the Planning Proposal process should be treated separately. Council officers also recommended a course of action to Council regarding the general policy issue of boarding houses in the Parramatta CBD.

14. In response to the May report, Council resolved to forward the 295 Church Street Planning Proposal for finalisation (with a request for finalisation being subject to the endorsement of the re-exhibited DCP and execution of the Planning Agreement), and also resolved as follows relating to the boarding house matter:

(f) Further, that Council officers prepare a submission on the forthcoming exhibition of planning policies relating to affordable housing foreshadowed by the Minister for Planning and Public Spaces. This submission should:

i. be informed by an analysis of the potential infrastructure impacts of these provisions which is based on monitoring development proposals that respond to the provisions of the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal and the State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 bonus provisions for boarding houses, and

ii. subject to the analysis confirming the infrastructure impacts, it should make a request that the bonus provisions for boarding house proposals in State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 not be applied in the Parramatta CBD.

15. The State Government’s exhibition of amended affordable housing planning policies has since occurred. The issue outlined in the Council resolution cited above was addressed as part of Council’s submission to that exhibition (considered by Council at its meeting of 14 September 2020). DPIE has not yet released the final Housing Diversity SEPP following the policy exhibition earlier this year. Council staff understand that DPIE officers are currently reviewing submissions and preparing to report to the relevant Minister. Council staff are also participating in DPIE’s Council Boarding House Working Group, which acts as a sounding board for DPIE as they refine the draft SEPP.

Additional amendment to Planning Agreement requested by Applicant

16. The 11 May 2020 report recommended that Council agree to the Applicant’s request to amend the payment staging in the originally-exhibited Planning Agreement. This was on the basis that the requested staging accorded with Council’s Planning Agreements Policy. Council resolved to agree to the request and amend the Planning Agreement accordingly prior to its re-exhibition.

RE-EXHIBITION OF AMENDED DCP AND PLANNING AGREEMENT

17. The Planning Agreement and DCP were amended as per Council’s resolutions of 16 December 2019 and 11 May 2020, and were then re-exhibited from 20 July - 17 August 2020. Details of the exhibition are as follows:

a. notification letters were sent to the same community notification area as the original exhibition;

b. the same Government agencies were re-notified as those in the original exhibition;

c. the individuals who made a submission on the original exhibition were notified;

d. exhibition of materials on Council’s website; and

e. hard-copy folder of materials available in Council’s Customer Service Centre.

18. The COVID-19 Legislation Amendment (Emergency Measures) Act 2020 enacted on 14 May 2020 removed the requirement for hard copies of exhibition material to be made available during public exhibitions and removed the need to advertise public exhibitions of DCPs and Planning Agreements in a local newspaper. While a hard copy of the exhibited material was available in Council’s Customer Service Centre, it was not possible to view hard-copy exhibition material at Council Libraries during this exhibition period. Community members could also request alternative access to the exhibition material if required; however, Council officers did not receive any telephone calls from the public requesting to access hard copy material in an alternative manner.

19. No community submissions were received in response to the re-exhibition.

20. Six agency submissions were received in response to the re-exhibition. These consisted of four submissions from aerospace agencies, a submission from Transport for NSW, and a two-part submission from Heritage NSW. The agency submissions are addressed in the subsections below. The submissions dealt with the DCP or the development of the site more generally; no submissions specifically addressing the Planning Agreement were made.

Aerospace agency submissions

21. The four aerospace agency submissions are summarised below:

a. Airservices Australia: The development should be evaluated by Bankstown Airport, who will determine if the development needs to be referred to Airservices for assessment.

b. Bankstown Airport: There are restrictions relating to Bankstown Airport’s airspace that require assessment and approval. Any development taller than 156m RL will require a full aviation assessment, and developers will need to bear in mind that any cranes utilised while building will need to be assessed as well.

c. Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA): No comment on the DCP/Planning Agreement, as CASA only comments on specific airspace-related issues such as the height of buildings or construction cranes.

d. Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications (DITRDC): Any development on this site will require approval under the Airports (Protection of Airspace) Regulations 1996, including assessment by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority and Airservices Australia. Bankstown Airport (through Sydney Metro Airports) would be able to confirm the specific details of the relevant airspace above the site. DITRDC recommends the proponent continue to advise Bankstown Airport of the planned final height of any buildings as well as any associated crane activities to ensure that any approvals that may be required are obtained.

22. Council officers consider that the Development Application (DA) stage is the appropriate stage at which to address the issues raised by aerospace agencies. No changes to the DCP or Planning Agreement are recommended as a result.

Transport for NSW submission

23. Transport for NSW’s (TfNSW) submission is summarised and addressed in further detail below.

Table 1: Summary of Transport for NSW submission and Council officer response

Summary of Issue	Council Officer response
No comment is raised with the Planning Proposal, as TfNSW notes that the maximum parking rates are consistent with the parking rates stipulated in the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal.	The Planning Proposal contains the residential and general commercial formula rates. It does not contain the full range of rates in the exhibited draft Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal. This is considered by Council officers to be a transitional issue given the age of this Planning Proposal. In any case, the Planning Proposal has already been endorsed by Council and is with DPIE for finalisation.
Amend/add DCP controls relating to loading and servicing as follows (underlined text is new): C.10 Vehicle access ~~and vehicle loading~~ to the site including for car parking, loading and servicing, vehicle set down pick up including bus/coach is to be only from Freemasons Arms Lane, at the western side of the site. C.13 All loading and servicing, vehicle set down pick up including bus/coach and garbage collection area are to be catered for on-site and not rely on the surrounding kerbside on Freemasons Arms Lane or Phillip Street.	Generally, Council officers do not object to the clarification sought by these suggested amendments/additions, which is to reinforce that vehicular activities should happen on-site to minimise impacts on the surrounding road network. However, officers also note that the site cannot accommodate set down / pick-up for full size coach buses on-site. Therefore, amendments to the DCP controls are proposed as follows (underlined text is new): C.10 Vehicle access ~~and vehicle loading~~ to the site including for car parking, loading and servicing, vehicle set down pick up (excluding full size coach buses) is to be only from Freemasons Arms Lane, at the western side of the site. C.13 All loading and servicing, vehicle set down pick up (excluding full size coach buses) and garbage collection area are to be catered for on-site and not rely on the surrounding kerbside on Freemasons Arms Lane or Phillip Street.
Add DCP control as follows: C.14 Vehicles, including servicing vehicles, shall enter and exit the site on forward movements.	Due to the site size and access arrangements of this site, the ground floor plane is already heavily constrained. The likely outcome of adding this control would be less active uses on the ground floor, as more ground floor space would need to be taken up to design an arrangement where vehicles could satisfy this control. Active ground floor uses should be maximised along sites fronting Church Street. Therefore, officers consider that this control should not be added post-exhibition.
Comments on the reference design are summarised as follows: - The reference design shows an indented parking bay on Church St which will be removed as part of Parramatta Light Rail. - It is unclear if a through-site link is proposed, as it appears to impact on the loading dock at the rear in Freemasons Arms lane.	Noted. The reference design is a high-level concept, which will be further refined and developed as this development proceeds through Design Excellence and DA stages. No changes to the DCP/Planning Agreement are recommended as a result of this comment.

24. As noted above, as a result of this submission, a minor amendment is recommended to the DCP controls to clarify that vehicular activities should take place on-site (with the exception of pick up and set down for full size coach buses).

Heritage NSW submission

25. The Heritage NSW submission had two parts: one which related to World, National, State and Local Heritage considerations under the Heritage Act 1977, and one which related to Aboriginal Cultural Heritage considerations under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974. These two parts are summarised and addressed in further detail below.

Table 2: Summary of Heritage NSW submission and Council officer response - World, National, State and Local Heritage

Summary of Issue	Council Officer response
Heritage NSW’s previous submission to the earlier exhibition requested amendments to the Heritage Impact Statement. This submission notes that Council has addressed many of these concerns through the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal, and/or will do so through the DA process. Council should address the other matters raised in Heritage NSW’s original submission through the CBD Planning Proposal or through detailed design work at DA stage.	Noted.
Council should consult with the Federal Heritage Division within the Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment (DAWE), due to the potential visual impacts on Old Government House and Domain (OGHD).	The potential visual impacts are generated by the uplift in development potential given effect by the Planning Proposal for this site, which has already been exhibited and endorsed by Council, and is with DPIE for finalisation. Furthermore, a referral to the Federal department is not required as part of the relevant tripartite agreement for OGHD amongst Local, State and Federal governments, as the site is not within the Park Edge Highly Sensitive area.
Reiterated Heritage NSW’s previous submission points relating to local Heritage items; these are summarised as follows: · Consider matching podium scale to heritage items in the immediate vicinity · Consider design of materials in relation to heritage items in the immediate vicinity	Controls in the Built Form, Design and Massing section of the DCP (Attachment 1) already address these issues and these will be assessed at DA stage.
Heritage Council of NSW has concerns regarding the cumulative impacts of numerous Planning Proposals seeking density increases, and has also provided advice to Council on the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal. The Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal should be resolved prior to further consideration of individual site-specific Planning Proposals in Parramatta CBD.	Noted. The Heritage Council of NSW was consulted as part of the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal exhibition process. A submission was received to that exhibition and is being considered through the post-exhibition process.

Table 3: Summary of Heritage NSW submission and Council officer response - Aboriginal Cultural Heritage

Summary of Issue	Council Officer response
The site is of high Aboriginal archaeological sensitivity and there are numerous Aboriginal sites recorded in the immediate vicinity.	Noted.
Heritage NSW previously recommended that an archaeological desktop assessment and consultation with the Aboriginal community take place, and further noted that it is highly likely Aboriginal Heritage Impact Permits (AHIP) will be required for text excavation and for proposed works. The AHIP for the proposed works would need to be supported by an Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment Report (ACHAR). Council should start work on the assessments, consultation and permit at the earliest possible stage of the DA process.	Noted. Council will refer the project to Heritage NSW as part of the DA stage, where Heritage NSW will have the opportunity to provide comments and recommended conditions for the DA in relation to the matters outlined at left. The suggestion to begin the process early is noted, and Council has advised the applicant accordingly.

26. Council officers consider that the issues raised in the Heritage NSW submission can be addressed as part of the DA stage; and that a referral to DAWE is not necessary in this case. No changes to the DCP or Planning Agreement are recommended as a result of this submission.

ISSUE ARISING: LEP/DCP PARKING PROVISIONS

27. As stated above, no changes are recommended to these materials as a result of submissions with the exception of a minor amendment to the DCP relating to vehicular movements. Council officers have identified an issue with one aspect of the DCP while working with DPIE to progress the potential drafting language for the related LEP amendment.

28. The preliminary LEP drafting process has identified the need to determine how the parking provisions will be included in the LEP. Two potential options are as follows:

a. Existing Clause 7.14: The reduced parking rates for 295 Church Street could be included in the current Clause 7.14, which contains reduced parking rates. Several site-specific Planning Proposals seeking uplift commensurate with the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal have already been listed in this clause. Existing Clause 7.14 contains parking rates as follows:

i. reduced residential parking rates in line with the Parramatta CBD Strategic Transport Study

ii. a rate for “non-residential” uses, which is the formula generally used for commercial uses in line with the Parramatta CBD Strategic Transport Study.

b. Site-specific clause: The reduced parking rates for 295 Church Street could also be included in a site-specific clause, which would be drafted as follows:

i. reduced residential parking rates in line with the Parramatta CBD Strategic Transport Study

ii. a rate for “commercial” uses, which is the formula generally used for commercial uses in line with the Parramatta CBD Strategic Transport Study.

29. The relevant distinction between the above two options is that the current Clause 7.14 applies the commercial formula to all “non-residential” uses, while a site-specific clause would apply the commercial formula to “commercial” uses.

30. The above distinction between the two drafting options means that parking for a hotel use on this site would be assessed as follows:

a. Existing Clause 7.14: a hotel use would necessarily be assessed using the formula, as a hotel is a “non-residential” use; this would result in very minimal parking provision, as the formula provides strong restrictions on the amount of parking for these uses.

b. Site-specific clause: the site-specific clause would contain “residential” and “commercial” rates, therefore, a hotel use would need to be assessed against the existing PLEP rate for hotel uses; this rate allows more spaces than the Clause 7.14 formula referred to above, and is more aligned with the residential rates.

31. The above is salient because the Applicant is seeking to progress a hotel on this site. The evidence for this is that the winning Design Competition was for a primarily hotel use. Following discussions with Council officers earlier in the site-specific Planning Proposal process, it was agreed that the preferred assessment approach would be to apply the residential rates. Furthermore, the Applicant has progressed a Design Competition that applies the residential parking rates to the hotel use.

32. Council officers support preparation of new LEP controls using a site-specific clause for parking (option b above) for the following reasons:

· Council officers consider that this is the most technically accurate interpretation of the site-specific Planning Proposal as exhibited and resolved for finalisation by Council. This is because the content of the final Planning Proposal refers to “residential” and “commercial” parking rates (rather than “residential” and “non-residential” parking rates, as outlined in Clause 7.14).

· Council officers consider that this is a transitional issue where a bespoke solution must be crafted. The contents of this site-specific Planning Proposal were drafted some time ago, but its progress was delayed by strategic work undertaken as part of the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal, as well as the need to resolve Council’s position relating to the proposed boarding house. Due to these delays, the Planning Proposal does not include the wide range of parking rates for various land uses that is now contained in the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal, and that is generally contained in newer site-specific Planning Proposals in the Parramatta CBD.

· This option upholds the previous discussions Council officers have had with the Applicant, as it means the parking for the proposed hotel use would be assessed against the existing PLEP hotel parking rate (which is more similar to the residential parking rate previously agreed with the Applicant).

33. Council officers note that the re-exhibited DCP for this site contains the following control: “Parking rates are to be provided in accordance with Clause 7.14 in Parramatta LEP 2011”.

34. Taking into account the discussion outlined above about the LEP drafting, Council officers recommend that this DCP control referring to the LEP parking rates should be removed from the DCP prior to its finalisation. This recommendation is made on basis that the DCP should not make a reference that pre-empts the final drafting decision for the related site-specific Planning Proposal. To emphasise, Council officers support the LEP parking provisions for this site being drafted to include a site-specific clause rather than including the clause in existing Clause 7.14, and have included this position in the recommendation of this report.

35. Council officers consider that making this change does not require re-exhibition, and it removes an inconsistency between the DCP and the recommended drafting language for the LEP. The alternative would be to leave in this reference, and then have an inconsistent LEP and DCP on this matter (in which instance, the LEP would prevail and the DCP control would be irrelevant).

COMMUNICATION FROM DPIE AND LAND OWNERSHIP STATUS

36. While seeking a response from the Applicant to the above drafting issue, it was brought to Council officers’ attention that the Applicant no longer had an option/interest in the site and that the land ownership was changing hands. Communication was directed to representatives of the prospective landowner of the site. Therefore, Council officers sought confirmation from representatives of the prospective landowner of the prospective landowner’s position on the drafting approach proposed above and as well as the terms of the exhibited Planning Agreement (as this was negotiated with the original Applicant for the Planning Proposal).

37. Whilst in the process of seeking agreement on these matters, Council also received communication from DPIE (Attachment 3) noting that, if the Planning Proposal cannot be finalised prior to the end of 2020 (or a clear timeframe for delivery communicated), then Council should consider withdrawing the Planning Proposal. The communication also noted that the intended outcomes will be delivered through the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal.

38. The prospective landowner has confirmed that they do not object to the drafting approach outlined in this report.

39. At the time that Council officers were writing this report, the prospective landowner was still reviewing the terms of the exhibited Planning Agreement and had not confirmed their position on it. Therefore, the recommendation of this report nominates a reasonable timeframe (28 February 2021) within which Council officers consider the Planning Agreement could be finalised, pending the prospective landowner taking control of the land, and reviewing and signing the Planning Agreement. If the Planning Agreement has not been finalised within this timeframe, Council officers recommend that Council withdraw this Planning Proposal, as it is understood that DPIE is looking for this process to be concluded as soon as practicable, and the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal will deliver the same controls for the site if the site-specific Planning Proposal does not proceed.

40. Council officers have included in the recommendation of this report that Council withdraw the request to finalise the Planning Proposal if the Planning Agreement is not resolved in the timeframe nominated above.

CONSULTATION & TIMING

41. This report has detailed the consultation undertaken with the community and Government agencies on these matters.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATION FOR COUNCIL

42. The Planning Agreement endorsed by Council for exhibition outlines a $1,136,100 contribution to Council for purposes of community infrastructure within the Parramatta City Centre provided the site is developed for residential development. The reference scheme advanced as part of the design competition for this site proposes a hotel and boarding house development; the contribution in the Planning Agreement would only be applicable if residential accommodation uses (which do not include hotel or boarding house uses) are ultimately constructed on site.

43. No specific issues with the Planning Agreement were raised in the submissions. No changes are recommended to the Planning Agreement as a result of the exhibition.

CONCLUSION

44. In summary, Council officers recommend that the site-specific DCP and Planning Agreement should progress to finalisation as per the recommendation of this report.

45. A notice of Council’s decision pertaining to the site-specific DCP will be published on Council’s website within 28 days of the decision.

Sarah Baker

A/Team Leader Land Use Planning

Robert Cologna

Land Use Planning Manager

David Birds

Group Manager, City Planning

Paul Perrett

Chief Financial Officer / Acting Executive Director Corporate Services

Jennifer Concato

Executive Director City Planning and Design

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

Attachments:

1 ⇩	Re-exhibited site-specific Development Control Plan (DCP)	6 Pages
2 ⇩	Re-exhibited Planning Agreement	25 Pages
3 ⇩	Letter from Department of Planning, Industry and Environment	2 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Governance Manager		Lord Mayor Clr Bob Dwyer	Chief Executive Officer

	Minute Clerk
Clr Phil Bradley				Clr Lorraine Wearne	Sound
Clr Sameer Pandey				Clr Andrew Wilson
				Clr Andrew Jefferies
Clr Dr Patricia Prociv				Clr Bill Tyrrell	IT
Clr Pierre Esber				Clr Benjamin Barrak
Clr Donna Davis				Clr Martin Zaiter
Clr Michelle Garrard, Deputy Lord Mayor				Clr Steven Issa


	Press	Press

Public Gallery