NOTICE OF Council MEETING

PUBLIC AGENDA

 

An Ordinary Meeting of City of Parramatta Council will be held in the Cloister Function Rooms, St Patrick's Cathedral, 1 Marist Place, Parramatta on Monday, 12 April 2021 at 6.30pm.

 

 

 

 

Brett Newman

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

 


 

COUNCIL CHAMBERS

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

Executive Director City Engagement & Experience

Executive Director Community Services

Executive Director City Planning & Design

Group Manager City Strategy

Executive Director City Assets & Operations

Executive Director Corporate Services

Executive Director Property and Place

 

 

 

Press

Press

 

 

 

 

Public Gallery

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THIS PAGE IS LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK

                                                                               


Council                                                                                                                12 April 2021

 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

ITEM                                                         SUBJECT                                               PAGE NO

 

1       OPENING MEETING

2       ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF THE TRADITIONAL LAND OWNERS

3       WEBCASTING ANNOUNCEMENT

4       OTHER RECORDING OF MEETING ANOUNCEMENT

5       CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

Council - 22 March 2021............................................................................................ 8

6       APOLOGIES AND APPLICATIONS FOR LEAVE OF ABSENCE

7       DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

8       Minutes of the Lord Mayor

9       Public Forum

10     Petitions

11     Rescission Motions

Nil

12     Fair

Nil

13     Accessible

13.1           FOR NOTATION: Variations to Standards under Clause 4.6 of Parramatta LEP 2011, Auburn LEP 2010, Holroyd LEP 2013, The Hills LEP 2012, Hornsby LEP 2013 and SEPP 1........................................................... 40

13.2           FOR NOTATION: Minutes of Access Advisory Committee Meeting held on 16 February 2021................................................................................... 44

14     Green

14.1           FOR APPROVAL: Public Exhibition of the Heart of Play Masterplan 56

15     Welcoming

Nil

16     Thriving

16.1           FOR APPROVAL: Toongabbie Lane Naming Proposal................ 112

17     Innovative

17.1           FOR APPROVAL: Site-specific Development Control Plan for land at 89-91 George Street, Parramatta.................................................................. 136

17.2           FOR APPROVAL: Minutes of Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting held on 18 February 2021............................................................................ 205

17.3           FOR NOTATION: Minutes of the 5/7 Parramatta Square Advisory Group Meeting held on 18 February 2021.................................................... 225

18     Notices of Motion

18.1           NOTICE OF MOTION: Celebration of International Day of People with Disability................................................................................................. 232

18.2           NOTICE OF MOTION: Food Organics Recovery Trial.................. 235

18.3           NOTICE OF MOTION: Savings from Winterlight Contract............ 238

18.4           NOTICE OF MOTION: Blow Out in Council's Projects.................. 240

18.5           NOTICE OF MOTION: Prioritising Council Motions....................... 241

19     Questions with Notice

19.1           QUESTIONS WITH NOTICE: Questions Taken on Notice from Council Meeting - 22 March 2021.................................................................... 244

20     Closed Session

20.1           FOR NOTATION: Legal Status Report as at 15 March 2021

This report is confidential in accordance with section 10A (2) (g) of the Local Government Act 1993 as the report contains advice concerning litigation, or advice that would otherwise be privileged from production in legal proceedings on the ground of legal professional privilege.

20.2           FOR APPROVAL: Tender 31/2020 Carlingford High School Oval, Roselea Way, Carlingford - Stormwater Drainage Improvement and Associated Works

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

20.3           FOR APPROVAL: Tender 7/2021 Brodie Street, Rydalmere - Streetscape Upgrade Works

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

 

21     PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT OF RESOLUTIONS PASSED IN CLOSED SESSION

22     CONCLUSION OF MEETING

 

 

 

After the conclusion of the Council Meeting, and if time permits, Councillors will be provided an opportunity to ask questions of staff


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THIS PAGE IS LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK

 

 


MINUTES OF THE Meeting of City of Parramatta Council HELD IN THE CLOISTER FUNCTION ROOMS, ST PATRICK’S CATHEDRAL 1 MARIST PLACE, PARRAMATTA ON Monday,  22 March 2021 AT 6.30pm

 

These are draft minutes and are subject to confirmation by Council at its next

meeting. The confirmed minutes will replace this draft version on the website once

confirmed.

 

PRESENT

 

The Lord Mayor, Councillor Bob Dwyer and Councillors Benjamin Barrak (6:48pm), Phil Bradley (6:33pm), Donna Davis, Pierre Esber, Michelle Garrard (Deputy Lord Mayor), Steven Issa (6:32pm), Andrew Jefferies (6:34pm), Sameer Pandey, Dr Patricia Prociv, Bill Tyrrell, Andrew Wilson, Lorraine Wearne and Martin Zaiter.

 

1.      OPENING MEETING

 

The Lord Mayor, Councillor Bob Dwyer, opened the meeting at 6.30pm.

 

2.      ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF THE TRADITIONAL LAND OWNERS

 

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

 

3.      WEBCASTING ANNOUNCEMENT

 

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

 

The Lord Mayor further advised that all care will be taken to maintain privacy, however as a visitor in the public gallery, the public should be aware that their presence may be recorded.

 

4.      OTHER RECORDING OF MEETING ANOUNCEMENT

 

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

 

5.      CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

 

 

SUBJECT:         Minutes of the Council Meeting held on 8 March 2021

 

3117

RESOLVED      (Tyrrell/Garrard)

 

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

 

6.      APOLOGIES/REQUESTS FOR LEAVE OF ABSENCE

 

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

 

7.      DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

 

Councillor Pandey declared a non-pecuniary but significant interest in Item 17.3 – Post Gateway – Proposed Amendment to the Wentworth Point Precinct DCP 2014 and Draft Planning Agreement for 14-16 Hill Road, Wentworth Point (Sekisui Planning Proposal) (Deferred Item), being that he was a member of the Planning Panel for another application that was brought to the Panel in June 2018, for 14-16 Hill Road, Wentworth Point. He retired from the Chamber and took no part in the debate or vote thereon.

 

Councillor Tyrrell declared a non-pecuniary and less than significant interest in Item 17.6 – Post Exhibition – Planning Proposal, Development Control Plan and Planning Agreement – 197 and 207 Church St and 89 Marsden St, Parramatta, being that 13 years ago he was an employee of a supplier that provided financial services to the applicant and / or associates. He remained in the Chamber during debate and voting on the matter.

 

Note: Councillor Issa arrived at 6:32pm during consideration of Declaration of Interests.

 

8.      Minutes of the Lord Mayor

 

8.1

SUBJECT          Condolence Motion: James Law

 

REFERENCE   F2019/03630 - D07960724

 

REPORT OF     Lord Mayor, Councillor Bob Dwyer

 

3118

RESOLVED      (Dwyer)

 

(a)     That Council acknowledge the passing of City of Parramatta officer James Law, offering our condolences to his family, friends and colleagues.

 

(b)     That Council write a letter of condolence to the family of Mr Law, acknowledging his service to the City of Parramatta Council.

 

(c)     Further, that the Chamber hold a minute’s silence as a gesture of respect on Mr Law’s passing.

 

 

Note: The Chamber observed a minutes silence.

 

 

Note:

1.         Councillor Bradley arrived at 6:33pm during consideration of Item 8.1.

2.         Councillor Jefferies arrived at 6:34pm during consideration of Item 8.1.

 

8.2

SUBJECT          March 2021 NSW Floods

 

REFERENCE   F2019/03630 - D07960734

 

REPORT OF     Lord Mayor, Councillor Bob Dwyer

 

 

MOTION             (Dwyer/Zaiter)

 

(a)     That Council note the current significant wet weather occurring across eastern NSW, resulting in impacts from flood and storm conditions in the City of Parramatta.

 

(b)     That Council note the impacts to residents and businesses in our community, with many facing potential damage to property due to rainfall and localised flooding.

 

(c)     That Council note all Childcare Centres, Libraries, Riverside Theatres, Recreation and Aquatic facilities are open as planned, with the exception of Epping Library, and remote services including Meals on Wheels and Active Parramatta are also operational.

 

(d)     That Council thanks the NSW SES, NSW Police, emergency services personnel and other agencies who have responded to calls for help across the City.

 

(e)     That Council thanks the Council staff who have worked throughout the weekend, day and night, to inspect sites, assist emergency services, provide resources and commence the clean-up.

 

(f)      Further, that Council note that Council officers are continuing to work with the NSW SES, NSW Police and other agencies to continue to address the impacts of the wet weather event.

 

3119

RESOLVED      (Zaiter/Tyrrell)

 

That the motion be put.

 

 

The motion moved by Lord Mayor, Councillor Dwyer and seconded by Councillor Zaiter on being put was declared CARRIED.

 

3120

RESOLVED      (Dwyer/Zaiter)

 

(a)     That Council note the current significant wet weather occurring across eastern NSW, resulting in impacts from flood and storm conditions in the City of Parramatta.

 

(b)     That Council note the impacts to residents and businesses in our community, with many facing potential damage to property due to rainfall and localised flooding.

 

(c)     That Council note all Childcare Centres, Libraries, Riverside Theatres, Recreation and Aquatic facilities are open as planned, with the exception of Epping Library, and remote services including Meals on Wheels and Active Parramatta are also operational.

 

(d)     That Council thanks the NSW SES, NSW Police, emergency services personnel and other agencies who have responded to calls for help across the City.

 

(e)     That Council thanks the Council staff who have worked throughout the weekend, day and night, to inspect sites, assist emergency services, provide resources and commence the clean-up.

 

(f)      Further, that Council note that Council officers are continuing to work with the NSW SES, NSW Police and other agencies to continue to address the impacts of the wet weather event.

 

 

Note: Councillor Barrak arrived at 6:48pm during consideration of Item 8.2.

 

8.3

SUBJECT          100 Years of Rotary in Australia

 

REFERENCE   F2019/03630 - D07960835

 

REPORT OF     Lord Mayor, Councillor Bob Dwyer

 

3121

RESOLVED      (Dwyer/Davis)

 

(a)     That Council note that Rotary in Australia and New Zealand celebrates its first 100 years of service in 2021.

 

(b)     That Council acknowledge the work Rotary have done and continue to do in the City of Parramatta.

 

(c)     Further, that Council write to our local Rotary Clubs to acknowledge this significant milestone, and thank them for their commitment and contributions to the community.

 

8.4

SUBJECT          Bicentenary of Greek Independence Day - 25 March 2021

 

REFERENCE   F2019/03630 - D07961711

 

REPORT OF     Lord Mayor, Councillor Bob Dwyer

 

3122

RESOLVED      (Dwyer/Tyrrell)

 

(a)     That Council note that Thursday, 25 March 2021, is the Greek National Day of Independence.

 

(b)     That Council note that in 2021, Greeks across the world will be celebrating 200 years of Modern Greece.

 

(c)     That Council acknowledge the contributions made to the City of Parramatta by Greek Australians to our vibrant multicultural community.

 

(d)     Further, that Council fly the Greek flag supplied by St Ioannis Greek Orthodox Church at the Parramatta CBD River Foreshore flagpole on their National Day of Independence, Thursday 25 March.

 

 

Note: Councillor Davis left the Chamber at 7:02pm and returned at 7:02pm during consideration of Item 8.4.

 

8.5

SUBJECT          Attracting Retail to Parramatta

 

REFERENCE   F2019/03630 - D07961011

 

REPORT OF     Lord Mayor, Councillor Bob Dwyer

 

3123

RESOLVED      (Dwyer/Issa)

 

That a Lord Mayor Retail Roundtable be held before the end of June 2021, to engage with the retail industry and the arts and culture sector stakeholders for the purpose of promoting Parramatta as a destination of choice for retailers.

 

9.      Public Forum

 

9.1

SUBJECT          PUBLIC FORUM: Petition Received 22 February 2021 - Yummi Pet Food Products, 115-121 Ballandella Road, Pendle Hill

 

REFERENCE   F2021/00521 - D07956424

 

FROM                 Matthew Chalmers

 

 

I wish to speak before you this evening in relation to an illegal pet food manufacturing operation, Yummi Pet Food Products, at 115-121 Ballandella Road, Pendle Hill. I am here tonight on behalf of many residents of Burrabogee Road, and surrounding streets who have had their quality of life severely impacted by the foul and offensive smell that has been coming from this factory. I refer to a petition that was tabled during your meeting held on 22 February 2021.

 

The residents of our street have been complaining to City of Parramatta Council about the smell and noise from this operation for many months. We have pleaded for somebody from the council to come and investigate the smell. The smell is present at all hours of the day and night and on weekend. It is a smell like dead rotting meat at a garbage dump. The smell has affected all aspects of our daily life. We can’t enjoy our back yards; my children do not want to play outside. visitors to our home comment on the smell. We can’t open the windows, otherwise the smell fills the whole house. It has affected our health and mental wellbeing. I also believe that it is now affecting the values of our homes.

 

We understand that council confirmed that Yummi Pet Food Products is operating a manufacturing, and packing operation at this location without DA approval, in November 2020, and that an intent to issue a development control order was issued to Yummi Pet Food Products. We also understand that that a control order was issued in February 2021. The control order required that the operation cease, and the illegal manufacturing equipment removed by 12 March 2021. During this time, Yummi Pet Food Products made no attempt to cease operations. In fact it has appeared that lately the traffic has increased, and the smell has worsened.

 

During this time the site has been opening normally at 5:30am each morning Monday to Saturday and is often open on Sunday. I believe there is at least 15-30 workers currently at Yummi Pet Food Products alone. They regularly load and unload trucks before 6am. We have large, refrigerated semi-trailers parking in our street overnight with the motors running and the drivers sleeping in the cabins waiting for the operation to open so they can unload.

 

It is also worth highlighting that even though the address is 115-121 Ballendella Road, the actual entrance to the site is on Burrabogee Road, which is residential on one side of the street.

 

We have repeated contacted council asking for some investigation to the smell to occur, but we have been meeting with an answer that nothing can be done until after the control order expired on 12 March. Meanwhile we must live with the smell and noise.

 

It is very concerning, that during this whole time, we were able to get one ranger to come to the site once. That required many phone calls. We were lucky to meet the ranger and they confirmed the smell was obviously coming from 115-121 Ballendella Road.

Now the 12th of March has been and gone, the site is still operating, and the foul smell is still coming from the site. Refrigerate trucks are still delivering raw meat to the site for processing, and there is still too many workers at the site for this location to be simply operating as a warehouse.

 

It has also come to our attention that Yummi pet foods is now in discussions with Council DA team to lodge a DA. From understanding means they will be able to continue operating during the review phase.

 

We are all highly concerned that Yummi Pet food is blatantly ignoring all of councils control orders. We are concerned that they have receive little or no punishment for operating illegally, polluting the environment, and ignoring the councils control orders. We are now also very worried that council will approve any DA application they submit, and then the residents of our street will suffer for the rest of our lives with the foul smell and operation.

 

The smell not only effects our street, but many residents in the direction of the wind at the time.

 

We feel that council is favouring the commercial operations in the area and not listening to the concerns of the residents in the area.

 

We are also very upset by the lack of communication that council staff have given the residents. We have been provided the “case managers” details however the case manager rarely answers the telephone or emails. For the past three months the reply we have been receiving is “please wait until 12th March”. Now that 12th of march has passed the case officer has not answered any calls from any resident in the street and has not acknowledged or answered any emails we have sent.

 

I purchased my home at 59 Burrabogee Road, in 2011, the site at 115-121 Ballandella road is DA approved for Warehousing activities only. At that time there was no Yummi pet foods operating at the site. I did not and would not have ever purchased a house next to a pet food factory.

 

We implore Parramatta Council to not allow any approval for any Development application for this illegal operation to continue at Yummi Pet Food. We ask that Yummi pet food should also suffer some consequences for ignoring council DA process and control orders. Approval of any DA would simply be a reward to a commercial activity for breaking the law.

 

We also ask Parramatta Council to investigate the cause of the smell, and to check internally what it has been so difficult for this smell issue to be investigated.

 

Finally we request that hours of operation for the existing warehouses be enforced in line with State Environmental Planning Policy, and that the warehouses cannot operate before 7am on weekdays, 8am on Saturdays, and no work on Sundays or public holidays.

 

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR CITY ASSETS & OPERATIONS

 

Regulatory Services have carried out an investigation in respect to operation of Yummy Pet Food Products. The investigation confirmed that the manufacturing of food products is an unapproved use. As required by the legislation, a Notice of Intention to give an Order was given on 7 January 2021 with the order having been issued on 3 February 2021. The Order had a due date of Friday 12 March 2021. An inspection carried out on Monday 15 March 2021 revealed that the unauthorised use had not ceased thus a Penalty Infringement Notice was issued on the same day as well as a new Notice of Intention to Give an Order with a one week compliance date. As soon as the Notice due date passes, the Order will be served with only one week period of compliance. If the use does not ceases by the due date of the Order, Regulatory Services will initiate the process required for starting enforcement procedures in the Land and Environment Court.

 

 

Note:

1.         Councillor Esber left the Chamber at 7:08pm and returned at 7:11pm during the public forum.

2.         Councillor Issa left the Chamber at 7:12pm and returned at 7:13pm during the public forum.

3.         Councillor Issa left the Chamber at 7:15pm and returned at 7:17pm during the public forum.

 

9.2

SUBJECT          PUBLIC FORUM: Item 17.6 - Post Exhibition - Planning Proposal, Development Control Plan and Planning Agreement - 197 and 207 Church St and 89 Marsden St, Parramatta

 

REFERENCE   F2021/00521 - D07958049

 

FROM                 Adam Byrnes

 

 

·                Think Planners represent Holdmark, and speak in support of the recommendation and seek your adoption of the Planning Proposal and DCP.

 

·                We do however bring one matter before the Councillors for their attention and amendment.

 

·                The subject sites proximity to Parramatta Square, Parramatta Light Rail and Parramatta Metro Station is well known to you. The vision for this site for an A Grade Commercial Building and a 5 Star Hotel is also known to you. Our client is motivated to undertake a Design Competition (the brief is with the Council staff) and to commence and complete these significant projects speedily.

 

·                We object to the DCP acting as a quasi prohibition to the potential to provide below grade retail or commercial space. Please refer to paragraphs 13 -15 of the report.

 

·                The Council staff have pre-determined that this significant site is incapable of providing below ground retailing and commercial because of “flood management issues”.

 

·                A DCP cannot predetermine this. It is appropriate that these detailed flood investigations occur at the Development Application stage. At that stage it may well be determined that flooding cannot be resolved, or the opposite.

 

·                Why is this relevant? Our client is in discussions with a number of parties who are interested in pursuing activities such as Woolworths Metro or Coles Express below the commercial building; a wellness centre below the 5 start hotel; and a fine dining restaurant and cocktail bar in a unique partly below street level configuration. These activities contribute to a CBD and warrant careful investigation, thorough flood analysis, detailed development assessment. They should not be struck out on the basis of a DCP declaring that retail should be providing on ground floor only and restricting the sub ground areas to services and basement use only.

 

·                The State Government has not sought to prohibit below ground activity, in fact it proposes a Metro Station below ground that will have thousands of people circulate through it. Flooding is no prohibition to that venture and will of course require detailed analysis and assessment through the approval stages. Just as it should for the Holdmark site.

 

·                The Council staff have suggested that the drafting of the DCP is not a prohibition but just a guideline. But you and we expect Council to administer their DCP documents well. And if the DCP suggests that below ground should only be for servicing and parking, then Council officers will rightly refer to those words and also the fact that the DCP was publicly exhibited and adopted by the Councillors.

 

·                There is no detailed flood study completed for this site that would justify a DCP containing a quasi prohibition. That work is yet to be done. It will happen at the DA stage.

 

·                We seek that Council adopt the recommendation and include the following additional resolution: That the DCP be amended to remove references to retailing and commercial uses being only above ground and remove any inference that the only below ground use is for carparking or servicing. These are matters for development assessment.

 

ACTING EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR CITY PLANNING & DESIGN RESPONSE

 

This matter is addressed in paragraphs 11 to 16 in the Officer Report.  Council Officers do not support habitable floor space below ground due to flood management concerns.  The DCP seeks to put in place a policy framework that seeks to make assessment of future applications as efficient as possible. Council Officers are of the opinion that habitable floor space below ground is a significant risk and would only be permitted in exceptional circumstances where it can be demonstrated that risk can be managed. The control is able to be varied if it can be justified at Development Application stage that appropriate site-specific measures can be put in place to manage the risk. The DCP wording should be retained as amending it as suggested in the applicants submission would send the wrong message to the development market and may result in more applicants seeking floor space below ground in conditions that are unlikely to be supported. A potential impact of this could be increased processing times for Development Applications in the CBD if proposals for habitable floor space below the flood planning level are then lodged which have a low likelihood of being supported.

 

10.    Petitions

 

10.1

SUBJECT          Development of 1-7 Simpson Street, Dundas Valley NSW 2117

 

REFERENCE   DA/160/2021

 

FROM                 Pierre Esber

 

 

A petition signed by the residents of Simpson Street and surrounding streets, Dundas NSW 2117 reads:

 

“Help us preserve the character and charm of our street - Proposal: Demolition, tree removal and construction of a 6 storey mixed use building comprising 44 residential apartments and a ground floor child care centre accommodating 90 children over2 levels of basement parking.”

 

3124

RESOLVED      (Esber/Pandey)

 

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

 

(b)       Further, that the petitioners be informed of the progress of the development application.

 

10.2

SUBJECT          Yummi Pet Food Products, Pendle Hill, NSW 2145

 

REFERENCE   F2021/00521

 

FROM                 Sameer Pandey

 

 

A petition signed by residents of Pendle Hill and Toongabbie, NSW 2145 reads:

 

We the residents of Pendle Hill and Toongabbie, NSW 2145 petition Parramatta City Council to act on the offensive odour and noise that is coming from Yummi Pet Foods and the industrial units that operate from the same site. We are aware that this factory has been operating illegally and manufacturing pet foods without an approved DA on a location that is only approved for warehousing activities. For a number of years there has been becoming progressively worse and for at least the last 6 months there has been a persistent foul and offensive odour coming from this factory. This odour has significantly impacted the quality of life and mental wellbeing of the residents of the street. There has also been a significate increase in the number of trucks operating out of this factory. This includes trucks parking in the street day and night, trucks entering and leaving, trucks being loaded and unloaded, industrial garbage trucks and fork trucks operating at the factory at all hours of the day and night including weekends and Sundays. There is also a significant increase number of factory workers and staff now working at the site, who arrive and congregate in Burrabogee Road and enter the premises before 5am and 6am each day and on weekends. The entrance to the entire estate at this address in locate on Burrabogee Road. It has come to our attention that the owners of this site may submit a Development application to allow their operation to continue and this is of great concern, as our well-being is already servery effected. We request that all the residents of Burrabogee Road are included in any consultation and approval process relating to any proposed DA for this location.

 

We petition Parramatta City Council to investigate and enforce action against this illegal pet food factory that is operating without approval. We petition Parramatta City Council to enforce operating hours and days on this warehouse site. We petition Parramatta Council to reject any DA application to allow this illegal Pet Food Factory to continue operating and manufacturing at this location.”

 

3125

RESOLVED      (Pandey/Esber)

 

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

 

(b)       Further, that all Councillors be advised of the outcome of the investigation.

 

 

Matter of Urgency

 

3126

RESOLVED      (Esber/Garrard)

 

That a procedural motion be granted to allow consideration of a matter of urgency in relation to Harmony Day.

 

The Lord Mayor ruled the matter urgent.

 

3127

RESOLVED      (Esber/Garrard)

 

That Council formally recognise Harmony Day celebrated on 21 March each year by tabling a Lord Mayoral Minute and including the date on the Council’s corporate calendar.

 

 

Note:  Councillor Wilson left the Chamber at 7:27pm during consideration of the matter of urgency.

 

 

Matter of Urgency

 

3128

RESOLVED      (Issa/Zaiter)

 

That a procedural motion be granted to allow consideration of a matter of urgency in relation to seeking Council’s support for the running of a Holy Week Procession by Our Lady of Lebanon Cathedral.

 

The Lord Mayor ruled the matter urgent.

 

3129

RESOLVED      (Issa/Zaiter)

 

That Council write a letter of support to the Our Lady of Lebanon Cathedral in support of the Holy Week Procession.

 

 

Note:  Councillor Wilson returned to the Chamber at 7:29pm during consideration of the matter of urgency.

 

11.    Rescission Motions

 

Nil

 

12.    Fair

 

12.1

SUBJECT          FOR NOTATION: Investment Report for February 2021

 

REFERENCE   F2009/00971 - D07936139

 

REPORT OF     Tax and Treasury Accountant

 

3130

RESOLVED      (Tyrrell/Garrard)

 

That Council receive the Investment Report for February 2021.

 

13.    Accessible

 

13.1

SUBJECT          FOR APPROVAL: Response to NOM - Safety of Pedestrians and Food Delivery Bike Riders

 

REFERENCE   F2021/00077 - D07838433

 

REPORT OF     Road Safety Officer

 

3131

RESOLVED      (Pandey/Davis)

 

That Council defer consideration of this matter for a period of four (4) weeks to investigate what tangible actions Council can take to improve the safety within our Local Government Area.

 

14.    Green

 

14.1

SUBJECT          FOR APPROVAL: Belmore Park Masterplan

 

REFERENCE   F2021/00521 - D07920401

 

REPORT OF     Manager Open Space and Natural Resources

 

 

MOTION             (Zaiter/Tyrrell)

 

(a)      That Council adopts the Belmore Park Masterplan Report as amended in response to submissions received during the recent public exhibition.

 

(b)      That copies of the adopted Belmore Park Masterplan Report be made available to the public at the City of Parramatta Library and on Council’s website.

 

(c)       That all those who provided submissions during the public exhibition period be advised of Council’s decision and thanked for their contribution to the development of the Masterplan.

 

(d)      That detail design for the implementation of the adopted Belmore Park Masterplan Report commence in preparation for the application of funding opportunities.

 

(e)      Further, that in addition to this detailed design, further community consultation take place regarding the potential community garden identified within the Belmore Park Masterplan and that this consultation should include consideration of Sherwin Park and all other possible locations within the vicinity of Belmore Park, and the 'Friends of Belmore Park Community Garden' be invited to participate in this process.

 

 

AMENDMENT  (Bradley/Barrak)

 

That Council defer consideration of this matter for a period of four (4) weeks.

 

3132

RESOLVED      (Issa/Zaiter)

 

That the motion be put.

 

 

The amendment moved by Councillor Bradley and seconded by Councillor Barrak being put was LOST.

 

The motion moved by Councillor Zaiter and seconded by Councillor Tyrrell on being put was CARRIED.

 

3133

RESOLVED      (Zaiter/Tyrrell)

 

(a)      That Council adopts the Belmore Park Masterplan Report as amended in response to submissions received during the recent public exhibition.

 

(b)      That copies of the adopted Belmore Park Masterplan Report be made available to the public at the City of Parramatta Library and on Council’s website.

 

(c)       That all those who provided submissions during the public exhibition period be advised of Council’s decision and thanked for their contribution to the development of the Masterplan.

 

(d)      That detail design for the implementation of the adopted Belmore Park Masterplan Report commence in preparation for the application of funding opportunities.

 

(e)      Further, that in addition to this detailed design, further community consultation take place regarding the potential community garden identified within the Belmore Park Masterplan and that this consultation should include consideration of Sherwin Park and all other possible locations within the vicinity of Belmore Park, and the 'Friends of Belmore Park Community Garden' be invited to participate in this process.

 

 

Note: Councillor Bradley and Councillor Barrak requested that their names be recorded as having voted against the decision taken in this matter.

 

 

Note:

1.         Councillor Garrard left the Chamber at 7:36pm and returned at 7:38pm during consideration of Item 14.1.

2.         Councillor Issa left the Chamber at 7:39pm and returned at 7:45pm during consideration of Item 14.1.

3.         Councillor Esber left the Chamber at 7:42 and returned at 7:49pm during consideration of Item 14.1.

4.         Councillor Wilson left the Chamber at 7:49pm and returned at 7:51pm during consideration of Item 14.1.

 

15.    Welcoming

 

Nil

 

16.    Thriving

 

Nil

 

17.    Innovative

 

17.1

SUBJECT          FOR APPROVAL: Submission to DPIE on draft Westmead Place Strategy

 

REFERENCE   F2021/00521 - D07842149

 

REPORT OF     Project Officer Land Use; Team Leader Land Use Planning

 

 

MOTION             (Issa/Davis)

 

(a)     That Council approve the submission on the draft Westmead Place Strategy to the Department of Planning, Industry, and Environment (DPIE) at Attachment 2.

 

(b)     That Council note that a key element of Councils response to the draft Strategy is the need for the Department to complete the traffic and transport work proposed in the draft Strategy prior to any Strategy being endorsed by the Minister.

 

(c)       That Council endorse staff preparing a report on the risks and benefits of Council suspending consideration of Planning Proposals and assessment of Development Applications, unless the proposals or applications relate solely to increasing and/or supporting community health services, until the Minister for Planning and Public Spaces has approved the Strategy based on a comprehensive traffic and transport study, and Council has completed the analysis and consultation required to determine land use and density controls that are consistent with the Strategy.

 

(d)      Further, that the Lord Mayor and Ward Councillors meet the Minister and relevant officers with a view to putting forward Council’s position as to costs and opportunities in Westmead.

 

An amendment was moved by Councillor Bradley, which was accepted by Councillor Issa and Councillor Davis, the mover and seconder of the original motion.

 

Councillor Bradley stated that he wished to move a formal amendment.

 

 

AMENDMENT  (Bradley/)

 

(a)      That Council approve the submission on the draft Westmead Place Strategy to the Department of Planning, Industry, and Environment (DPIE) at Attachment 2, subject to it being amended to:

-           Include a request that the Heritage Precinct containing the Former Female Factory and associated nationally listed items be formally recognised as part of the Parramatta Park to be managed by the Parramatta Park Trust in conjunction with the World Heritage Listed Old Government House;

-           Include a recommendation that tourism opportunities, including heritage based tourism and medical tourism be investigated as part of the proposed Place Brand Strategy or in a separate Tourism Strategy for Westmead.

 

(b)      That Council note that a key element of Councils response to the draft Strategy is the need for the Department to complete the traffic and transport work proposed in the draft Strategy prior to any Strategy being endorsed by the Minister.

 

(c)       That Council endorse staff preparing a report on the risks and benefits of Council suspending consideration of Planning Proposals and assessment of Development Applications, unless the proposals or applications relate solely to increasing and/or supporting community health services, until the Minister for Planning and Public Spaces has approved the Strategy based on a comprehensive traffic and transport study, and Council has completed the analysis and consultation required to determine land use and density controls that are consistent with the Strategy.

 

(d)     Further, that the Lord Mayor and Ward Councillors meet the Minister and relevant officers with a view to putting forward Council’s position as to costs and opportunities in Westmead.

 

The amendment moved by Councillor Bradley lapsed without a seconder.

 

The mover and seconder of the original motion accepted the amendments into the original motion.

 

The motion moved by Councillor Issa and seconded by Councillor Davis was put to the vote.

 

Councillor Bradley raised a point of order in relation to the meeting proceedings.  The Lord Mayor ruled against the point of order.

 

 

MOTION             (Bradley/)

 

That Council dissent from the ruling of the Chairperson.

 

The motion of dissent moved by Councillor Bradley lapsed without a seconder.

 

The motion moved by Councillor Issa and seconded by Councillor Davis on being put was declared CARRIED.

 

3134

RESOLVED      (Issa/Davis)

 

(a)     That Council approve the submission on the draft Westmead Place Strategy to the Department of Planning, Industry, and Environment (DPIE) at Attachment 2 subject to it being amended to :

-                 Include a request that the Heritage Precinct containing the Former Female Factory and associated nationally listed items be formally recognised as part of the Parramatta Park to be managed by the Parramatta Park Trust in conjunction with the World Heritage Listed Old Government House

-                 Include a recommendation that tourism opportunities, including heritage based tourism and medical tourism be investigated as part of the proposed Place Brand Strategy or in a separate Tourism Strategy for Westmead.

 

(b)     That Council note that a key element of Councils response to the draft Strategy is the need for the Department to complete the traffic and transport work proposed in the draft Strategy prior to any Strategy being endorsed by the Minister.

 

(c)     That Council endorse staff preparing a report on the risks and benefits of Council suspending consideration of Planning Proposals and assessment of Development Applications, unless the proposals or applications relate solely to increasing and/or supporting community health services, until the Minister for Planning and Public Spaces has approved the Strategy based on a comprehensive traffic and transport study, and Council has completed the analysis and consultation required to determine land use and density controls that are consistent with the Strategy.

 

(d)     Further, that the Lord Mayor and Ward Councillors meet the Minister and relevant officers with a view to putting forward Council’s position as to costs and opportunities in Westmead.

 

 

Note: Councillor Tyrrell left the Chamber at 7:52pm and returned at 7:53pm during consideration of Item 17.1

 

 

Procedural Motion

 

3135

RESOLVED      (Dwyer/Garrard)

 

That the meeting be adjourned for ten (10) minutes.

 

 

Note: The meeting was adjourned at 8:06pm for a short recess.

 

3136

RESOLVED      (Dwyer/Wilson)

 

That the meeting resume.

 

 

The meeting resumed at 8:16pm with the following Councillors in attendance: The Lord Mayor, Councillor Bob Dwyer and Councillors Benjamin Barrak, Phil Bradley, Donna Davis, Pierre Esber, Steven Issa, Andrew Jefferies, Sameer Pandey, Dr Patricia Prociv, Bill Tyrrell, Andrew Wilson, Lorraine Wearne and Martin Zaiter.

 

17.2

SUBJECT          FOR APPROVAL: Pre Gateway - Planning Proposal for 64 Victoria Road, North Parramatta

 

REFERENCE   RZ/2/2020 - D07902200

 

REPORT OF     Project Officer Land Use

 

3137

RESOLVED      (Esber/Davis)

 

(a)     That Council endorse for the purposes of seeking a Gateway Determination from the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE), the Planning Proposal (at Attachment 1) for land at 64 Victoria Road, North Parramatta which seeks to amend Schedule 1 of the Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011 (PLEP 2011) to allow take away food and drink premises’ as an additional permitted use (limited to a maximum gross floor area of 100m2).

 

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

 

(c)     That Council advises the DPIE that the CEO will be seeking to exercise its plan-making delegations for this Planning Proposal, as authorised by Council on 26 November 2012.

 

(d)     Further, that Council delegates authority to the CEO to correct any minor anomalies of a non-policy and administrative nature that arise during the plan-making process.

 

DIVISION           A division was called, the result being:-

 

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

 

NOES:                Nil

 

Note: Councillor Pandey declared a non-pecuniary but significant interest in Item 17.3 and left the Chamber at 8:19pm prior to the consideration of the matter.

 

17.3

SUBJECT          FOR APPROVAL: Post Gateway - Proposed Amendment to the Wentworth Point Precinct DCP 2014 and Draft Planning Agreement for 14-16 Hill Road, Wentworth Point (Sekisui Planning Proposal) (Deferred Item)

 

REFERENCE   F2021/00521 - D07940398

 

APPLICANT/S  SEKISUI HOUSE AUSTRALIA PTY LTD

 

OWNERS          SH HOMEBUSH PENINSULA PTY LTD

 

REPORT OF     Land Use Planning Manager

 

3138

RESOLVED      (Prociv/Esber)

 

(a)     That Council note the issues addressed in the 22 February 2021 Council Report in Attachment 1 and those raised at the 3 March 2021 Councillor Workshop.

 

(b)     That Council endorse the draft amendments to the Wentworth Point Development Control Plan (DCP) 2014 at Attachment 2 that have been prepared in response to Council’s resolution on 26 August 2019 for the purposes of public exhibition.

 

(c)     That Council endorse the drafting of a Planning Agreement to reflect the following items included in the letter of offer at Attachment 3:

i)       Dedication and embellishment of foreshore reserve;

ii)      Dedication of future public transit corridor;

iii)     Burroway Road/Hill Road intersection upgrade works;

iv)     Community Infrastructure Maintenance agreement (5 years).

 

(d)     That Council delegate authority to the Chief Executive Officer to negotiate and determine the specific terms around the delivery of the proposed Planning Agreement items in accordance with Council’s Planning Agreements Policy (2018) including, but not limited to, staging, delivery, registration, defect rectification, security and the maintenance schedule prior to the Planning Agreement being placed on public exhibition. In addition, the Applicant be requested to include facilities for a broad age range of children within the proposed foreshore park.

 

(e)     That the draft DCP and draft Planning Agreement be publicly exhibited concurrently with the Planning Proposal (including the currently approved concept plan for the site as supporting information and specific consultation with the community on the concept plan and facilities to be provided in the foreshore park) for a period of 28 days and that a report be provided to Council on the outcomes of the public exhibition.

 

(f)      That Council write to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment seeking to remain the Planning Proposal Authority for the application, in accordance with Resolution 2346 of the 26 August 2019 Council Meeting which endorsed the Planning Proposal for Gateway.

 

(g)     Further, that Council delegate authority to the Chief Executive Officer to correct any anomalies of an administrative nature relating to the draft DCP and draft Planning Agreement documentation that may arise during the drafting and exhibition processes.

 

DIVISION           A division was called, the result being:-

 

AYES:                Councillors Davis, Dwyer, Esber, Garrard, Issa, Jefferies, Prociv, Tyrrell, Wearne, Wilson and Zaiter

 

NOES:                Councillors Barrak and Bradley

 

Note:

1.      Councillor Garrard returned to the Chamber at 8:19pm during consideration of Item 17.3.

2.      Councillor Pandey returned to the Chamber at 8:33pm after the consideration of Item 17.3.

 

17.4

SUBJECT          FOR APPROVAL: Post Gateway - Draft Development Control Plan and Letter of Offer (Planning Agreement) - 135 George St and 118 Harris St, Parramatta (Albion Hotel site)

 

REFERENCE   RZ/3/2017 - D07788396

 

REPORT OF     Project Officer-Land Use Planning

 

3139

RESOLVED      (Tyrrell/Garrard)

 

(a)     That Council endorse the site-specific draft Development Control Plan (DCP) at Attachment 1 for public exhibition.

 

(b)     That a draft Planning Agreement document be prepared to reflect the terms outlined at Attachment 2 and that the Chief Executive Officer be delegated authority to negotiate and finalise the legal drafting of the Planning Agreement on behalf of Council for the purposes of public exhibition.

 

(c)     That the draft DCP and draft Planning Agreement be publicly exhibited concurrently with the Planning Proposal for 135 George Street and 118 Harris Street previously endorsed by Council on 23 March 2020.

 

(d)     That the applicant update the reference design for the purpose of public exhibition so as to reflect the controls in the endorsed Planning Proposal and the draft DCP.

 

(e)     That Council requests the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment amend the Gateway determination for the related Planning Proposal to remove the requirement to include a satisfactory arrangements clause.

 

(f)      Further that Council authorises the Chief Executive Officer to correct any minor inconsistencies or anomalies of an administrative nature relating to the draft DCP and draft Planning Agreement documentation that may arise during the drafting and exhibition processes.

 

DIVISION           A division was called, the result being:-

 

AYES:                Councillors Dwyer, Esber, Garrard, Issa, Jefferies, Pandey, Tyrrell, Wearne and Zaiter

 

NOES:                Councillors Barrak, Bradley, Davis, Prociv and Wilson

 

17.5

SUBJECT          FOR APPROVAL: Post Gateway - Amended Melrose Park North Planning Proposal and Draft Site-Specific Development Control Plan and Planning Agreement

 

REFERENCE   F2021/00521 - D07906858

 

REPORT OF     Senior Project Officer Land Use Planning

 

 

MOTION             (Esber/Tyrrell)

 

(a)     That Council endorse the following amendments to the Melrose Park North Planning Proposal:

 

1)      Amend the site area to include 27 Hughes Avenue, Ermington

 

2)      Rezone 27 Hughes Avenue from R2 Low Density Residential to R4 High Density Residential

 

3)      Amend the applicable floor space ratio on 27 Hughes Avenue from 0.5:1 to 1.85:1

 

4)      Amend the maximum building height from 9m to 0m on 27 Hughes Avenue

 

5)      Include ‘Residential Flat Buildings’ as an additional permitted use within the B2 Local Centre zone

 

6)      Amend the existing Design Excellence provision to apply to Lots E, EA and G as identified by a blue outline in Figure 4 without the provision of floor space and height bonuses

 

7)      Appoint a Design Excellence Panel to provide design advice for all development applications within the northern precinct. Floor space and height bonuses are not to be awarded on any development lot 

 

8)      Add an additional 1,523m2 of residential floor space be permitted within the land area under Payce ownership and that the residential floor space across the entire planning proposal site area not exceed 508,768m2.

 

(b)     That Council endorse the draft Melrose Park North Site-Specific Development Control Plan (DCP) provided in Attachment 1 for the purposes of public exhibition.

 

(c)     That Council endorse the draft Planning Agreement based on the Letter of Offer provided in Attachment 2 for the purposes of public exhibition

 

(d)     That Council grant the CEO delegation to negotiate the terms of planning agreements with the landowners of 8 Wharf Road and 15-19 Hughes Avenue & 655 Victoria Road to an equivalent per unit contribution rate to that proposed for the Payce development and that these planning agreements be publicly exhibited and reported back to Council post-exhibition along with the planning proposal, draft DCP and Payce planning agreement.

 

(e)     That Council endorse the updated Melrose Park North Planning Proposal provided at Attachment 3 as detailed in the report for forwarding to the Department of Planning, industry and Environment for approval to be placed on public exhibition.

 

(f)      That the draft DCP and Planning Agreement be placed on public exhibition concurrently for a period of 28 days and that a report be provided to Council on the outcomes of the public exhibition.

 

(g)     Further, that Council delegate authority to the Chief Executive Officer to correct any anomalies of a minor non-policy nature that may arise during the review and public exhibition processes.

 

 

AMENDMENT  (Esber/Bradley)

 

That Council defer consideration of this matter for a period of two (2) weeks.

 

 

Note: Councillor Davis left the Chamber at 8:42pm and returned at 8:43pm during consideration of Item 17.5.

 

 

Procedural Motion

 

3140

RESOLVED      (Esber/Tyrrell)

 

That Council amend the order of business to consider Item 17.5 later in the Council Meeting.

 

 

Note: Item 17.5 was considered following Item 17.7.

 

17.6

SUBJECT          FOR APPROVAL: Post Exhibition - Planning Proposal, Development Control Plan and Planning Agreement - 197 and 207 Church St and 89 Marsden St, Parramatta

 

REFERENCE   RZ/4/2015 - D07788529

 

APPLICANT/S  Think Planners Pty Ltd

 

OWNERS          Holdmark Properties Pty Ltd

 

REPORT OF     Project Officer Land Use

 

3141

RESOLVED      (Esber/Pandey)

 

That Council defer consideration of this matter to a Councillor Workshop to be held within four (4) weeks, following which a report be brought back to Council.

 

DIVISION           A division was called, the result being:-

 

AYES:                Councillors Barrak, Bradley, Davis, Esber, Jefferies, Pandey, Prociv, Tyrrell, Wearne and Zaiter

 

NOES:                Councillors Dwyer, Garrard, Issa and Wilson

 

 

Note: Councillor Wilson left the Chamber at 8:48pm and returned at 8:51pm during the consideration of Item 17.6.

 

17.7

SUBJECT          FOR NOTATION: Minutes of the Smart City Advisory Committee Meeting held on 23 February 2021

 

REFERENCE   F2017/00685 - D07932396

 

REPORT OF     Project Officer

 

3142

RESOLVED      (Tyrrell/Garrard)

 

(a)     That Council note the minutes of the Smart City Advisory Committee meeting held on 23 February 2021 (provided at Attachment 1).

 

(b)     Further, that Council note the discussion regarding potential initiatives for the State Government Smart Places Acceleration Program, and the opportunity to submit these following review by Council’s Executive.

 

 

Procedural Motion

 

3143

RESOLVED      (Dwyer/Esber)

 

That the meeting be adjourned for ten (10) minutes.

 

 

Note: The meeting was adjourned at 8:55pm for a short recess.

 

 

Procedural Motion

 

3144

RESOLVED      (Esber/Tyrrell)

 

That the meeting resume.

 

 

The meeting resumed at 9:11pm with the following Councillors in attendance: The Lord Mayor, Councillor Bob Dwyer and Councillors Benjamin Barrak, Phil Bradley, Donna Davis, Pierre Esber, Steven Issa, Andrew Jefferies, Sameer Pandey, Dr Patricia Prociv, Bill Tyrrell, Andrew Wilson, Lorraine Wearne and Martin Zaiter.

 

17.5

SUBJECT          FOR APPROVAL: Post Gateway - Amended Melrose Park North Planning Proposal and Draft Site-Specific Development Control Plan and Planning Agreement

 

REFERENCE   F2021/00521 - D07906858

 

REPORT OF     Senior Project Officer Land Use Planning

 

 

Upon resumption of the Council Meeting, Mr Brett Newman, Chief Executive Officer provided Councillors with options for consideration of Item 17.5.

 

The amendment moved by Councillor Esber and seconded by Councillor Bradley was withdrawn.

 

The motion moved by Councillor Esber and seconded by Councillor Tyrrell on being put was declared CARRIED.

 

3145

RESOLVED      (Esber/Tyrrell)

 

(a)     That Council endorse the following amendments to the Melrose Park North Planning Proposal:

 

1)      Amend the site area to include 27 Hughes Avenue, Ermington

 

2)      Rezone 27 Hughes Avenue from R2 Low Density Residential to R4 High Density Residential

 

3)      Amend the applicable floor space ratio on 27 Hughes Avenue from 0.5:1 to 1.85:1

 

4)      Amend the maximum building height from 9m to 0m on 27 Hughes Avenue

 

5)      Include ‘Residential Flat Buildings’ as an additional permitted use within the B2 Local Centre zone

 

6)      Amend the existing Design Excellence provision to apply to Lots E, EA and G as identified by a blue outline in Figure 4 without the provision of floor space and height bonuses

 

7)      Appoint a Design Excellence Panel to provide design advice for all development applications within the northern precinct. Floor space and height bonuses are not to be awarded on any development lot 

 

8)      Add an additional 1,523m2 of residential floor space be permitted within the land area under Payce ownership and that the residential floor space across the entire planning proposal site area not exceed 508,768m2.

 

(b)     That Council endorse the draft Melrose Park North Site-Specific Development Control Plan (DCP) provided in Attachment 1 for the purposes of public exhibition.

 

(c)     That Council endorse the draft Planning Agreement based on the Letter of Offer provided in Attachment 2 for the purposes of public exhibition

 

(d)     That Council grant the CEO delegation to negotiate the terms of planning agreements with the landowners of 8 Wharf Road and 15-19 Hughes Avenue & 655 Victoria Road to an equivalent per unit contribution rate to that proposed for the Payce development and that these planning agreements be publicly exhibited and reported back to Council post-exhibition along with the planning proposal, draft DCP and Payce planning agreement.

 

(e)     That Council endorse the updated Melrose Park North Planning Proposal provided at Attachment 3 as detailed in the report for forwarding to the Department of Planning, industry and Environment for approval to be placed on public exhibition.

 

(f)      That the draft DCP and Planning Agreement be placed on public exhibition concurrently for a period of 28 days and that a report be provided to Council on the outcomes of the public exhibition.

 

(f)        Further, that Council delegate authority to the Chief Executive Officer to correct any anomalies of a minor non-policy nature that may arise during the review and public exhibition processes.

 

DIVISION           A division was called, the result being:-

 

AYES:                Councillors Barrak, Bradley, Davis, Dwyer, Esber, Garrard, Issa, Jefferies, Pandey, Prociv, Tyrrell and Zaiter

 

NOES:                Councillors Wearne and Wilson

 

 

Note: Councillor Garrard returned to the meeting at 9:12pm during consideration of Item 17.5.

 

18.    Notices of Motion

 

18.1

SUBJECT          NOTICE OF MOTION: $300+ Million at Risk from Council's Essential Community Infrastructure Program due to the NSW Government's New Infrastructure Contributions System

 

REFERENCE   F2021/00521 - D07944057

 

FROM                 Councillor Bradley

 

3147

RESOLVED      (Bradley/Pandey)

 

(a)     That Council notes that:

i.        Council decided at its meeting of 9 June 2020 at Item 18.1 in regard to the NSW Government’s Infrastructure Contributions Review inter alia that, “The proposals on value sharing are strongly opposed as they threatened to undermine Council’s current policy framework for Planning Agreements, which adopt value sharing as an equitable, transparent and evidence based policy approach”.

ii.       At this same meeting Council supported its submission which expressed concern about the threat to its 50% share of value uplift outside the CBD and included this reference, “Council staff estimate that the proposed draft Community Infrastructure provisions in the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal could potentially facilitate approximately $300 million worth of community infrastructure in the CBD. This would make a significant contribution to Council’s approximate $1.5 billion works program for new community infrastructure in the Parramatta CBD and would be at risk if the proposed system is brought into effect.”

iii.      Despite the Department of Planning noting that “The clarification and position on value capture drew out the strongest comments and opposing positions from stakeholders. Many councils, peak bodies and community representatives objected to the changes” (Ref.1), it has recently announced that “the exhibited position on value capture is maintained, as it is the Government’s policy position that planning agreements (Ref.1) cannot be used for the primary purpose of value capture” and that “they should not be used to capture land value uplift resulting from rezoning or variations to planning controls.” (Ref.2)

 

(b)     That Council prepare a report to be brought back to Council at a May meeting:

i.        To advise an estimate of the public value share funds at risk from planning proposal agreements outside the CBD;

ii.       To give an update on the review of Council’s development contributions plan framework to account for the loss of land value uplift sharing; and

iii.      To identify funding options including the possibility of government grants, to provide the community infrastructure needed for the planned residential growth. 

 

(c)     Further, that Council contact the NSW Member for Parramatta The Hon Dr Geoff Lee and the Minister for Planning and Public Spaces The Hon Rob Stokes urging them to work with Council to find a mechanism to address this $300+ million cut in community infrastructure funding necessary for the rapid inflow of additional residents to Parramatta.

 

18.2

SUBJECT          NOTICE OF MOTION: Interpretive Signs

 

REFERENCE   F2021/00521 - D07944187

 

FROM                 Councillor Pandey

 

3148

RESOLVED      (Pandey/Zaiter)

 

That:

 

(a)     A report be brought back to Council on significant sites around Parramatta where interpretive signs could be erected.

 

(b)     The report also to include the possibility of creating a registry of all interpretive signs.

 

(c)     The report should consider, setting up detailed historical/cultural/natural information about the sites identified to be stored on our website with a QR Code link from the Interpretive signs.

 

(d)     The report should also include recommendation on how we can encourage owners/operators of sites of heritage significance to adopt interpretive signs.

 

18.3

SUBJECT          NOTICE OF MOTION: Report on Misuse of Mobility Parking Scheme

 

REFERENCE   F2021/00521 - D07944293

 

FROM                 Councillor Pandey

 

3149

RESOLVED      (Pandey/Issa)

 

(a)     That Council note that there is ongoing misuse of Mobility Parking Scheme (MPS) within the Parramatta CBD and other heavy development and/or suburban CBD areas creating a barrier for vulnerable members of our community to visit these areas.

 

(b)     Further, that a report be brought back to Council within eight (8) weeks on the current misuse of the Mobility Parking Scheme within Parramatta CBD and other heavy development and/or suburban CBD areas, the report should outline measures available to streamline usage of disability parking within these areas.

 

 

Note:

1.         Councillor Wilson left the Chamber at 9:32pm and returned at 9:40pm during consideration of Item 18.3.

2.         Councillor Davis left the Chamber at 9:44pm and returned at 9:47pm during consideration of Item 18.3pm

 

19.    Questions with Notice

 

Nil

 

Note: Prior to moving into Closed Session, the Lord Mayor invited members of the public gallery to make representations as to why any item had been included in Closed Session. No member of the gallery wished to make representations

 

20.     CLOSED SESSION

 

3150

RESOLVED      (Esber/Bradley)

 

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

1       FOR APPROVAL: Tender 53/2018 - Unified Booking System. (D07880596) - This report is confidential in accordance with section 10A (2) (c) (d) of the Local Government Act 1993 as the report contains information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business; AND the report contains commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed (i) prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it; or (ii) confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council; or (iii) reveal a trade secret.

2       FOR APPROVAL: Tender 04/2020 - Aquatic Leisure Centre Parramatta - Design and Construct Contract. (D07879972) - This report is confidential in accordance with section 10A (2) (c) (d) of the Local Government Act 1993 as the report contains information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business; AND the report contains commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed (i) prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it; or (ii) confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council; or (iii) reveal a trade secret.

3.      QUESTION WITH NOTICE: Questions Taken on Notice from Council Meeting - 8 March 2021. (D07943405) - This report is confidential in accordance with section 10A (2) (d) of the Local Government Act 1993 as the report contains commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed (i) prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it; or (ii) confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council; or (iii) reveal a trade secret.

4.      LATE REPORT FOR APPROVAL: Winterlight 2021 Event Proposal. (D07953861) - This report is confidential in accordance with section 10A (2) (d) of the Local Government Act 1993 as the report contains commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed (i) prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it; or (ii) confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council; or (iii) reveal a trade secret.

 

20.1

SUBJECT          FOR APPROVAL: Tender 53/2018 - Unified Booking System

 

REFERENCE   F2021/00197 - D07880596

 

REPORT OF     Business Engagement & Solutions Consultant

 

3151

RESOLVED      (Issa/Tyrrell)

 

(a)     That Council approve the appointment of the preferred proponent for the delivery of a unified booking and ticketing system for the contract sum as outlined in paragraph 25 of this report.

 

(b)     Further, that Council delegate authority to Chief Executive Officer to finalise and execute all necessary documents.

 

20.2

SUBJECT          FOR APPROVAL: Tender 04/2020 - Aquatic Leisure Centre Parramatta - Design and Construct Contract

 

REFERENCE   F2017/02999 - D07879972

 

REPORT OF     Project Manager

 

3152

RESOLVED      (Zaiter/Garrard)

 

(a)     That Council note the current budget of $77,000,000 in the adopted Delivery Program and Operational Plan for Aquatic Leisure Centre Parramatta (ALCP).

 

(b)     That Council approve the revised project budget of $88,649,295 for the ALCP and the allocation of budget and funding sources as set out in the table below:

 

Description 

Budget

Funding Source

 Ref.

ALCP

$38,500,000

NSW State Government grant

 

ALCP

$37,400,000

Property Reserve

 

ALCP

$8,600,000

Sec 7.11 Leisure Centre upgrade

 

Public Art & Heritage  

$1,449,295

Sec 7.11 Civic Improvement plan

Para 18

Fit Out

$2,700,000

General Reserve

Para 29

 

(c)     That Council note modifications to the Development Application (DA) conditions set out in paragraphs 17 and 18 of this report will be sought to integrate the relevant conditions into the existing design and scope of ALCP and thereby reduce the cost.

 

(d)     That Council accepts the tender of the preferred proponent for the Design and Construction of the ALCP for the contract sum  outlined in paragraph 15 of the report and note all unsuccessful tenderers will be advised of Council’s decision

 

(e)     That Council note, the following budgeted provisions for ALCP operating costs:

i.        set costs of $368,275 for FY 21/22 and $1,932,255 for FY 22/23;

ii.       annual net operating loss of $2.0M  and $3.1M depreciation thereafter, and a report will be bought back to Council to approve a model and the    operating costs, based on the options in paragraph 31, table b) and d).

 

(f)      Further, that the Chief Executive Officer be given delegated authority to finalise and sign all necessary legal, contractual and statutory documentation in connection with the completion of the Aquatic Leisure Centre Parramatta.

 

 

Note: Councillor Barrak and Councillor Issa requested that their names be recorded as having voted against the decision taken in this matter.

 

20.3

SUBJECT          QUESTION WITH NOTICE: Questions Taken on Notice from Council Meeting - 8 March 2021

 

REFERENCE   F2020/03849 - D07943405

 

FROM                 Councillor Barrak

 

 

A response was provided to a confidential question taken on notice from the Council Meeting of 8 March 2021.

 

20.4

SUBJECT          LATE REPORT FOR APPROVAL: Winterlight 2021 Event Proposal

 

REFERENCE   F2021/00521 - D07953861

 

REPORT OF     Acting Group Manager, City Experience

 

3153

RESOLVED      (Garrard/Tyrrell)

 

(a)     That Council approve the staging of the Winterlight – The Winter Village event for 12 weeks within the date period of 17 May and 10 September 2021.

 

(b)     That Council enter into an agreement with the event proponents to deliver the event, including providing the value in-kind benefits as outlined in this report.

 

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

 

 

Procedural Motion

 

3154

RESOLVED      (Tyrrell/Esber)

 

That the meeting resume into Open Session.

 

21.    REPORTS OF RESOLUTIONS PASSED IN CLOSED SESSION

 

The Chief Executive Officer read out the resolutions for Items 20.1 to 20.4.

 

22.    CONCLUSION OF MEETING

 

The meeting terminated at 10:14 pm.

 

THIS PAGE AND THE PRECEDING 28 PAGES ARE THE MINUTES OF THE ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON MONDAY, 22 MARCH 2021 AND CONFIRMED ON MONDAY, 12 APRIL 2021.

 

 

 

 

 

Chairperson

 

 


Accessible

 

12 April 2021

 

13.1           FOR NOTATION: Variations to Standards under Clause 4.6 of Parramatta LEP 2011, Auburn LEP 2010, Holroyd LEP 2013, The Hills LEP 2012, Hornsby LEP 2013 and SEPP 1............................................................................................ 40

 

13.2           FOR NOTATION: Minutes of Access Advisory Committee Meeting held on 16 February 2021.................................................................................................. 44


Council 12 April 2021                                                                                                       Item 13.1

ACCESSIBLE

ITEM NUMBER         13.1

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

REFERENCE            F2009/00431 - D07851183

REPORT OF              Group Manager - Development and Traffic Services        

 

PURPOSE:

 

To provide Council with information each month on development applications determined where there has been a variation in development standards under Clause 4.6 of the Local Environment Plans or State Environmental Planning Policy No.1.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That the report be received and noted.

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

1.      During the reporting period 07 February 2021 to 14 March 2021, there was one (1) Development Application where there was a variation to a development standard under Clause 4.6. Refer to Attachment 1 for further details.

 

2.      Under Clause 4.6 of the relevant Local Environmental Plan (LEP) applying to the local government area of the City of Parramatta, development consent may be granted for development even though the development would contravene a development standard such as a height and/or floor space ratio standard contained within an LEP.

 

3.      State Environmental Planning Policy No 1 (SEPP 1) contains similar provisions to Clause 4.6 and allows development to be approved even though it may not comply with a development standard in a state planning instrument, such as another SEPP.

 

4.      A report is presented to Council each month on any development consent issued where the development does not comply with a development standard.  This report follows the reporting requirements prescribed in Planning Circular PS08-014 issued by the (then) NSW Department of Planning.

 

5.      Controls within Development Control Plans (DCP) are not development standards as a DCP is not an “environmental planning instrument”.

 

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCE

 

6.      There are no issues, options or consequence for Council associated with this report.

 

 

CONSULTATION & TIMING

 

7.      There are no consultation and timing considerations for Council associated with this report.

 

Stakeholder Consultation

 

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

 

Date

Stakeholder

Stakeholder Comment

Council Officer Response

Responsibility

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

 

Councillor Consultation

 

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

 

Date

Councillor

Councillor Comment

Council Officer Response

Responsibility

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

 

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

 

10.    There are no legal implications for Council associated with this report.


FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

 

11.    There are no financial implications for Council associated with this report.

 

 

FY 20/21

FY 21/22

FY 22/23

FY 23/24

Operating Result

 

 

 

 

External Costs

 

 

 

 

Internal Costs

 

 

 

 

Depreciation

 

 

 

 

Other

 

 

 

 

Total Operating Result

Nil

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Funding Source

NA

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CAPEX

 

 

 

 

CAPEX

 

 

 

 

External

 

 

 

 

Internal

 

 

 

 

Other

 

 

 

 

Total CAPEX

Nil

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Funding Source

NA

 

 

 

 

Mark Leotta

Group Manager Development and Traffic Services

 

David Birds

A/Executive Director City Planning & Design

 

 

Paul Perrett

Chief Financial Officer

 

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

 

 

Attachments:

1

Development Application Variations under SEPP 1 - 07 February 2021 - 14 March 2021

1 Page

 

 

 

REFERENCE MATERIAL


Item 13.1 - Attachment 1

Development Application Variations under SEPP 1 - 07 February 2021 - 14 March 2021

 

PDF Creator


Council 12 April 2021                                                                                                       Item 13.2

ACCESSIBLE

ITEM NUMBER         13.2

SUBJECT                  FOR NOTATION: Minutes of Access Advisory Committee Meeting held on 16 February 2021

REFERENCE            F2005/01944 - D07928956

REPORT OF              Community Capacity Building Officer, Community Capacity Building        

 

 

PURPOSE:

 

The Access Advisory Committee met on 16 February 2021. This report provides a precis of the key discussion points of that meeting for Council’s consideration.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council note the minutes of the Access Advisory Committee meeting held on 16 February 2021 (Attachment 1).

 

BACKGROUND

 

1.      The Council’s Access Advisory Committee meets bi-monthly, with the exception of the cancelled April 2020 and December 2020 meetings, and met on 16 February 2021. This report provides a summary of the discussion at the meeting.

 

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

 

Committee Meeting Main Discussion Points

 

2.      Mark Kunach and Timothy Hart were declared as Committee Chair and Deputy Chair respectively for the remaining meetings of 2021, with votes also submitted and counted after the meeting.

 

3.      Elena Lucio and Josh Henderson, Grimshaw Architects, and David Hands, Property and Place, updated the Committee on the latest designs for the Aquatic and Leisure Centre for Parramatta facilities and surrounding site. The presentation included reference to changes made in consideration of prior comments made by the Committee. The Committee provided comments on the designs, and made further recommendations for improving access, including for the operation of the facility. The Committee recommended that they be involved in testing and confirming accessibility of the facility prior to it being officially open to the public.

 

4.      The Committee were updated on the Council action to develop options to address parking issues experienced by people in the Parramatta CBD who drive and use wheelchairs. The Committee requested that Council investigate the use of automated number plate recognition systems in Council carparks.

 

5.      The Committee discussed ongoing issues with the state of footpaths in the CBD creating safety hazards for pedestrians. The Committee were informed that damaged footpaths and barriers to access are not only the result of Parramatta Light Rail works, but also frequently the works of public utility companies, and that Council has very limited influence over these works. Tanya Owen informed the Committee that a CEO Briefing Note is being finalised providing recommendations for action based on the external legal advice received regarding the activities of public utility providers in the public domain.

 

6.      Maria Maguire, Project Officer – Disability Inclusion Action Plan, updated the Committee on progress of the Plan and significant achievements made to date under the plan. The Committee were also informed that as the current Plan is to end June 2022, consideration is now being given to the development of the next Plan.

 

7.      The Committee discussed concerns in relation to people experiencing homelessness in Parramatta. Members discussed concerns for well-being of people, as well as the access hazards that arise from rough sleepers’ use of footpaths. The Committee were informed of Council’s approach to homelessness and actions committed to under the Homelessness Action Plan.

 

CONSULTATION & TIMING

 

Stakeholder Consultation

 

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

 

Date

Stakeholder

Stakeholder Comment

Council Officer Response

Responsibility

16 February 2021

Access Advisory Committee

Made comments on latest designs for the Aquatic and Leisure Centre for Parramatta, with additional recommendations for improving and maintaining access, and involvement of the Committee in the facility commissioning process.

Feedback from the Committee has been noted and will be taken into consideration in the final design process and operational plans for the facility.

Property and Place;

Social and Community Services 

16 February

Access Advisory Committee

Requested involvement in early planning stages of the Riverside redevelopment project.

Recommendation will be made to relevant Council officers to consult with the Committee during development of the Functional Briefs for redevelopment.

Social and Community Services

 

Councillor Consultation

 

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

 

Date

Councillor

Councillor Comment

Council Officer Response

Responsibility

16 February 2021

Councillor Phil Bradley

Present for the Access Advisory Committee

N/A

N/A

 

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

 

10.    There are no legal implications for Council associated with this report.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

 

11.    There are no financial implications for Council associated with this report. Any costs associated with activities referred to in this report are funded within existing budgets.

 

 

FY 20/21

FY 21/22

FY 22/23

FY 23/24

Operating Result

 

 

 

 

External Costs

 

 

 

 

Internal Costs

 

 

 

 

Depreciation

 

 

 

 

Other

 

 

 

 

Total Operating Result

Nil

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Funding Source

NA

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CAPEX

 

 

 

 

CAPEX

 

 

 

 

External

 

 

 

 

Internal

 

 

 

 

Other

 

 

 

 

Total CAPEX

Nil

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Funding Source

NA

 

 

 

 

Tanya Owen

Community Capacity Building Officer, Community Capacity Building

 

Rodrigo Gutierrez

Community Capacity Building Manager

 

David Moutou

Group Manager Social and Community Services

 

Jon Greig

Executive Director Community Services

 

Paul Perrett

Chief Financial Officer

 

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

 

 

 

 

Attachments:

1

Access Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes 16 February 2021

7 Pages

 

 

 

REFERENCE MATERIAL

 


Item 13.2 - Attachment 1

Access Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes 16 February 2021

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


 

Green

 

12 April 2021

 

14.1           FOR APPROVAL: Public Exhibition of the Heart of Play Masterplan..... 56


Council 12 April 2021                                                                                                       Item 14.1

GREEN

ITEM NUMBER         14.1

SUBJECT                  FOR APPROVAL: Public Exhibition of the Heart of Play Masterplan

REFERENCE            F2021/00521 - D07947727

REPORT OF              Place Manager       

 

 

PURPOSE:

 

To seek approval for public exhibition of the Heart of Play: North Parramatta Sporting and Recreation masterplan draft design.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

(a)     That the draft Heart of Play: North Parramatta Sporting and Recreation masterplan be placed on public exhibition from late April through late May for community comment.

 

(b)     That temporary signage be installed across the masterplan area to notify the community of the public exhibition period and their opportunities to engage.

 

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

 

BACKGROUND

 

1.      The Heart of Play (HoP) masterplan - community engagement and design is adopted as Focus Area 5.3.1.1 in the 20/21 Operation Plan.

 

2.      The masterplan area comprises Sherwin Park, Doyle Ground, Dan Mahoney Reserve, Old Saleyards Reserve, Corry Court Reserve, Barton Park and PH Jeffery Reserve.

 

3.      The HoP masterplan will be Council’s masterplan for a 30-hectare sporting and recreation network just two blocks east of the CBD’s northern extent. The masterplan has been guided by strategic community infrastructure need and community input. The HoP masterplan project provides a localised focus for 19 Council, regional, and state strategic documents.

 

4.      The HoP masterplan aligns with the Community Infrastructure Strategy by seeking to achieve the following (also detailed in Attachment 2, pages 12-13):

 

i.        Upgrade existing open spaces to increase their capacity to meet the growing population’s demand

ii.       Increase carrying capacity of existing playing fields through upgrades to playing surfaces and/or supporting infrastructure

iii.      Upgrade existing playgrounds to increase the number to provide a variety of play experiences

iv.      Repurpose parks to accommodate both formal and informal sports

v.       Develop better connections between open spaces and sportsgrounds

vi.      Repurpose alternative (non-traditional) spaces for both formal and informal sport and recreation.

 

5.      Community consultation for input on the draft masterplan design occurred from 29 June - 3 August 2020.

 

6.      1,081 responses were received through COVID-safe engagement methods, summarised in the community-facing report at Attachment 1.

 

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

 

7.      The following principles were developed based on community input received in the initial community consultation and have guided the masterplan design (Attachment 2):

 

i.        A connected and accessible network of parks

ii.       A welcoming place for all to play, day and night

iii.      Improved spaces for active sport and recreation

iv.      A healthy and sustainable environment.

 

8.      One of the seven open spaces included in the HoP masterplan area is Dan Mahoney Reserve (DMR). The DMR design will be exhibited for public comment separately and at a later date for the following reasons:

 

i.        DMR must be treated and upgraded as a priority due to asbestos contamination. The site is prioritised for permanent remediation works in 2020/21, to be funded from the Open Space & Natural Resources Asbestos Remediation Works Program 20/21 (DPOP 6.5.8.1). Given the scale of the site, other funding sources may be required.

ii.       The DMR site is currently undergoing investigations to inform the draft designs that will effectively address flooding, improve water quality in the creek, and permanently treat the site’s asbestos contamination to deliver an exceptional play space for dogs and humans.

iii.      More detailed input from the community was sought during the initial round of consultation in 2020 in order to inform the DMR draft design.

iv.      The HoP masterplan public exhibition will include proposed active transport connections between DMR and other HoP open spaces.

 

CONSULTATION & TIMING

 

Stakeholder Consultation

 

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

 

Date

Stakeholder

Stakeholder Comment

Council Officer Response

Responsibility

Multiple from project inception

Internal stakeholders: City Engagement, City Assets & Enviro., Social & Comm. Services, City Strategy

Collaboration and input on masterplanning and design

Integration of input in draft design

Place Services / Roz Palmer (RP)

29 June -
3 August 2020

Neighbouring residents (0.5km radius); community organisations; businesses; schools

Various regarding design input

Integration of input in draft design

Places Services / RP & Community Engagement

24/2/21

Registered community members via a Community Newsletter email and update to webpage

n/a

Informing the community of progress, next steps, and that HoP public exhibition will be separate to DMR public exhibition

Place Services / RP

 

10.    The initial round of COVID-safe consultation for community input from 29 June - 3 August 2020 provided the following points of engagement:

 

·          750 online survey responses, including 328 on the Heart of Play survey and 422 on the Dan Mahoney Reserve dedicated survey for more detailed input.

·          Approximately 290 pop-up board responses, including 120 Heart of Play responses and 170 Dan Mahoney Reserve responses.

·          15 telephone interviews with stakeholders from peak sporting bodies and local recreation user groups.

·          16 participants in 2 online workshops for input specifically on Dan Mahoney Reserve’s future use.

·          13 email submissions from community members and sporting associations.

·          500 flyers distributed to local households.

·          10 completed ‘Heart of Play scavenger hunt’ forms.

 

11.    A dedicated Participate Parramatta page provides project updates and resources: participate.cityofparramatta.nsw.gov.au/HOP_DAN.

 

Councillor Consultation

 

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

 

Date

Councillor

Councillor Comment

Council Officer Response

Responsibility

19/2; 21/5; 1/6; 20/9; 30/9; 8/10; 9/12 in 2020 & 24/2/21

Ward Councillors: DLM Garrard, Crs Barrak and Esber

Various regarding community need and agreement with community priorities

Integration of community input in draft design

Place Services / RP & Chris Patfield

19/6/20; 17/11/20

All Councillors

n/a

2 Councillor Briefing Notes: 1 for HoP community consultation and 1 dedicated to DMR

Places Services / RP & Legacy Asbestos, Erin Lottey

 

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

 

13.    There are no legal implications for Council associated with this report.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

 

14.    The consultant fees for masterplan design drafting, public exhibition, and associated community consultation costs are within the existing DPOP budget of $160,000 for the 20/21 Financial Year.  There are no unbudgeted financial implications for Council associated with the development and approval of the masterplan.

 

15.    Following the proposed public exhibition period, a Council Report to seek endorsement of the final Heart of Play masterplan design will further detail the funding and implementation strategy for the masterplan. The Draft Development Contributions Plan 2021 contains items for upgrades to the open spaces within the Heart of Play masterplan area. If the Draft Development Contributions Plan 2021 is adopted following its current public exhibition, the collection of the following apportioned funds will support implementation of the Heart of Play masterplan endorsed design:

 

excerpted from Draft Development Contributions Plan 2021

Appendix F, Work Program Item No.

Description

Apportioned Cost (,000)

Priority

Timing

O03

Old Sales Yard and/or Sherwin Park

 $5,175

 A

0-5 years

O15

Barton

 $2,075

 A

0-5 years

O16

Doyle Ground

 $1,950

 A

0-5 years

O17

PH Jeffery

 $1,038

 A

0-5 years

 

 

FY 20/21

FY 21/22

FY 22/23

FY 23/24

Operating Result

 

 

 

 

External Costs

 

 

 

 

Internal Costs

 

 

 

 

Depreciation

 

 

 

 

Other

 

 

 

 

Total Operating Result

Nil

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Funding Source

NA

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CAPEX

 

 

 

 

CAPEX

 

 

 

 

External

 

 

 

 

Internal

 

 

 

 

Other

 

 

 

 

Total CAPEX

Nil

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Funding Source

NA

 

 

 

 

 

Rosamund Palmer

Place Manager

 

Bruce Mills

Group Manager Place Services

 

Bryan Hynes

Executive Director Property & Place

 

Paul Perrett

Chief Financial Officer

 

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

 

 

 

 

Attachments:

1

Heart of Play Masterplan Community Engagement Report

11 Pages

 

2

Heart of Play Masterplan

38 Pages

 

 

 

REFERENCE MATERIAL

 


Item 14.1 - Attachment 1

Heart of Play Masterplan Community Engagement Report

 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


Item 14.1 - Attachment 2

Heart of Play Masterplan

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


 

Thriving

 

12 April 2021

 

16.1           FOR APPROVAL: Toongabbie Lane Naming Proposal.......................... 112


Council 12 April 2021                                                                                                       Item 16.1

THRIVING

ITEM NUMBER         16.1

SUBJECT                  FOR APPROVAL: Toongabbie Lane Naming Proposal

REFERENCE            F2020/02284 - D07851505

REPORT OF              Place Manager       

 

 

PURPOSE:

 

To endorse the proposed names for two existing un-named lanes in Toongabbie as outlined in this report.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

(a)     That Council approve the proposed names for two existing un-named lanes off Wentworth Avenue, Toongabbie as shown on the map at Attachment 1 of this report, as follows:

 

 

Lanes

Postmistress

Fettler

 

(b)     Further, that these names be referred to the Geographical Names Board (GNB) of NSW for formal assignment and Gazettal under the Geographical Names Act 1996.

 

BACKGROUND

 

1.      The two un-named public lanes are located between Wentworth Avenue and Cooyong Cresent in Toongabbie, within Toongabbie Shops local centre area as shown in Attachment 1.

 

2.      City of Parramatta Council (Council) is the authority responsible for the provision of address numbering to all properties within Parramatta Local Government Area (LGA) and the road names to all local and private roads located within the Parramatta LGA as outlined in Council’s Road Naming Policy (Policy 283) and the NSW Addressing User Manual (AUM) (2018) developed by NSW Geographical Names Board (GNB).

 

3.      As per section 3.2 in Council’s Road Naming Policy, preferred sources for road names include:

 

·        Aboriginal names,

·        Local history, including early explorers, settlers, and other eminent persons,

·        Thematic names such as flora and fauna,

·        Landmarks, and

·        Should be appropriate to the physical, historical or cultural character of the area.

 

4.      Council’s Cultural, Heritage & Tourism (CHT) team researched the history and identity of the area and proposed the following three names for the two existing lanes:

 

Proposed Name

Context

Postmistress lane

Mrs Amelia Riley was the Postmistress who ran the local Toongabbie Post and Telegraph Office that was located on this site from 1922. Two decades later, her daughter Nellie became the Postmistress. A Postmistress was so valuable and connected to the community with many being honoured as a helpful guide, counsellor and friend to those who migrated to the district. 

Fettler lane

William Bell Riley and his family lived on the site from 1913 to 1950s where the new lanes now pass through and next to Toongabbie Train Station. During the 1930s William was a Fettler. A person who does repair or maintenance work on railways.

 

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

 

5.      Accurate addressing information in NSW is required for adequate navigation, emergency response, service delivery and statistical analysis. To ensure that all property addressing and road naming is comprehensible, clear, accepted, unambiguous and readily communicated, all property addresses and road names must comply with the requirements of Chapter 6 “Addressing Principles” of the NSW AUM.

 

6.      It is important to note that this consultation took place throughout the COVID-19 outbreak. While the response rate was still quite strong, the government restrictions that were introduced which prevented face-to-face consultations and the situation more generally, may have had an impact on overall engagement numbers.

 

7.      No advertisements were placed in the local paper, as outlined in Council’s Policy and GNB Guidelines, as they no longer exist.  The proposal was promoted via Council’s social media and website instead.

 

8.      Council sought stakeholder and community feedback on three proposed names, asking respondents to select up to two names of their preference and were also given the opportunity to put forward an alternative name.  ‘Postmistress Lane’ and Fettler Lane’ were the highest-ranking proposed names and are put forward to Council for endorsement.

 

9.      None of the feedback raised by the community reached a level considered appropriate of the threshold (i.e. being a name considered grossly offensive and/or significantly likely to cause offence to a large group of the community or particular ethnic, religious or other specifically identifiable groups) determined to remove and replace any of the proposed names with an alternative.

10.    The names satisfy the addressing requirements of the Geographic Names Board (GNB), which has given prior concurrence to the proposed names.

 

11.    Council supports the recognition of Dharug, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander heritage of Parramatta in place naming and is seeking to work with Dharug traditional custodians to prepare Dharug names for future road naming proposals.

 

CONSULTATION & TIMING

 

Stakeholder Consultation

 

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

 

Date

Stakeholder

Stakeholder Comment

Council Officer Response

Responsibility

Mon 26 Nov 2018

Requestor submitted naming options for an existing unnamed lane off Wentworth Avenue, Toongabbie

Requestor submitted naming options for an existing unnamed lane off Wentworth Avenue, Toongabbie

Council reviewed the submission and provided a response based on GNB criteria and Council’s Road Naming policy

City Engagement & Experience / City Experience / Michelle Desailly – Interpretation & Strategy Coordinator

Tue 10 Oct 2020

City of Parramatta Council’s Heritage Advisory Committee – email seeking advice for thematic naming options

Nil comment provided

Nil response required

City Engagement & Experience / City Experience / Michelle Desailly – Interpretation & Strategy Coordinator

Wed 10 February 2021

At the commencement of the consultation, 185 properties were included in the mail out of a letter, which was distributed to owners of properties in directly affected streets surrounding the two lanes.

Feedback from those who received letters likely came through the survey hosted on Participate Parramatta, however confirming who actually provided comments isn’t possible.

N/A

Place Services / Property & Place / Eva Farlow – Place Manager;

 

Community Engagement / City Engagement & Experience / Mark Chircop – Community Engagement Officer

Wed 10 February to 3 March 2021

Promoted across Council’s social media channels. Paid advertisements were used on the City of Parramatta Facebook and Instagram accounts. $99.65 was spent on social media paid advertisements, reaching 5415 people. Also promoted using organic posts on the Participate Parramatta Facebook (6,949 followers) account.

Feedback received via social media was generally positive.

None of the feedback on proposed names were deemed to reach the threshold that warranted a response – i.e. that a name is considered grossly offensive and/or significantly likely to cause offence to a large group of the community or particular ethnic, religious or other specifically identifiable groups (as described in GNB Guidelines).

Place Services / Property & Place / Eva Farlow – Place Manager;

 

Community Engagement / City Engagement & Experience / Mark Chircop – Community Engagement Officer

Wed 10 February to 3 March 2021

LGA wide via ‘Participate Parramatta’ portal

199 responses were received via Participate Parramatta. 64 respondents provided comments. The page was visited by 730 individuals during the consultation period.

None of the comments on proposed names were deemed to reach the threshold that warranted a response – i.e. that a name is considered grossly offensive and/or significantly likely to cause offence to a large group of the community or particular ethnic, religious or other specifically identifiable groups (as described in GNB Guidelines).

Place Services / Property & Place / Eva Farlow – Place Manager;

 

Community Engagement / City Engagement & Experience / Mark Chircop – Community Engagement Officer

Monday 22 February 2021

Participate Parramatta Online Community Panel Email: 10,216 members.

N/A

N/A

Place Services / Property & Place / Eva Farlow – Place Manager;

 

Community Engagement / City Engagement & Experience / Mark Chircop – Community Engagement Officer

Wed 10 February to 3 March 2021

On-site signage - Signs were erected near the two affected lanes, promoting the feedback opportunity.

N/A

N/A

Place Services / Property & Place / Eva Farlow – Place Manager;

 

Community Engagement / City Engagement & Experience / Mark Chircop – Community Engagement Officer

Wed 10 February 2021

Surveyor-General - email notification about Melrose Park Precinct Naming Public consultation now live.

Nil comment provided

Nil response required

Place Services / Property & Place / Eva Farlow – Place Manager

Wed 11 February 2021

Requestor - email notification about Melrose Park Precinct Naming Public consultation now live.

Nil comment provided

Nil response required

Place Services / Property & Place / Eva Farlow – Place Manager

Fri 12 February 2021

City of Parramatta Council’s Heritage Advisory Committee - email notification about Melrose Park Precinct Naming Public consultation now live.

Nil comment provided

Nil response required

Place Services / Property & Place / Eva Farlow – Place Manager

 

Councillor Consultation

 

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

 

Date

Councillor

Councillor Comment

Council Officer Response

Responsibility

Wed 20 January 2021

ALL - via Councillor briefing note

Nil comment provided

Nil response required

Place Services Unit / Property & Place / Eva Farlow – Place Managers

Wed 10 February 2021

ALL – email notification regarding public consultation

Nil comment provided

Nil response required

Place Services Unit / Property & Place / Eva Farlow – Place Managers

 

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

 

14.    There are no legal implications for Council associated with this report.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

 

15.    The public consultation for the proposed road names was funded from existing dedicated general funds (Road Naming) and is included within existing budget.

 

16.    Once the naming proposal is approved, including gazettal by the GNB, Council will arrange for the fabrication and installation of street signs (including the subject street poles and sign blades) at Council’s expense.  These works will be funded from existing dedicated general funds (Road Naming) and is included within existing budget.

 

17.    The notification to relevant government authorities and publishing in the Government Gazette is currently provided without charge by the GNB.

 

 

FY 20/21

FY 21/22

FY 22/23

FY 23/24

Operating Result

 

 

 

 

External Costs

 

 

 

 

Internal Costs

 

 

 

 

Depreciation

 

 

 

 

Other

 

 

 

 

Total Operating Result

Nil

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Funding Source

NA

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CAPEX

 

 

 

 

CAPEX

 

 

 

 

External

 

 

 

 

Internal

 

 

 

 

Other

 

 

 

 

Total CAPEX

Nil

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Funding Source

NA

 

 

 

 

Eva Farlow

Place Manager

 

Bruce Mills

Group Manager Place Services

 

Bryan Hynes

Executive Director Property & Place

 

Paul Perrett

Chief Financial Officer

 

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

 

 

 

 

Attachments:

1

Toongabbie Lane Naming Proposal Map

1 Page

 

2

Key Findings and Engagement Evaluation Report

14 Pages

 

 

 

REFERENCE MATERIAL

 


Item 16.1 - Attachment 1

Toongabbie Lane Naming Proposal Map

 

PDF Creator


Item 16.1 - Attachment 2

Key Findings and Engagement Evaluation Report

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


 

Innovative

 

12 April 2021

 

17.1           FOR APPROVAL: Site-specific Development Control Plan for land at 89-91 George Street, Parramatta......................................................................................... 136

 

17.2           FOR APPROVAL: Minutes of Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting held on 18 February 2021................................................................................................ 205

 

17.3           FOR APPROVAL: Minutes of the 5/7 Parramatta Square Advisory Group Meeting held on 18 February 2021............................................................................ 225


Council 12 April 2021                                                                                                       Item 17.1

INNOVATIVE

ITEM NUMBER         17.1

SUBJECT                  FOR APPROVAL: Site-specific Development Control Plan for land at 89-91 George Street, Parramatta

REFERENCE            F2021/00521 - D07661044

REPORT OF              Project Officer-Land Use Planning       

 

 

LAND OWNER:         Various owners under Strata Plan 71180

APPLICANT:             Urbis per. GPT RE Limited

 

PREVIOUS DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS CONsidered by Sydney central city planning panel:

 

DA/954/2017: Determined by Panel 4 July 2018 : 89 George Street, Parramatta - 28 storey hotel building comprising 300 rooms and ancillary restaurant/bar, ballroom, outdoor terrace/pool and 67 above ground car parking spaces (car stacker); landscaping works; demolition of existing buildings. (Approved).

 

PURPOSE:

 

To recommend Council endorse a draft site-specific Development Control Plan for 89-91 George St, Parramatta for public exhibition.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

(a)     That Council endorse the draft Development Control Plan (DCP) at Attachment 1 for public exhibition, including insertion of controls reflecting the setbacks in “Option A” as outlined in this report.

 

(b)     That the draft DCP at Attachment 1 be amended to address the potential requirement for footpath construction within the frontage of the site as a result of the proposed road widening under the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal.

 

(c)     That the following public authorities are consulted during public exhibition:

 

i.        NSW Department of Education;

ii.       Transport for NSW;

iii.      Department of Planning, Industry and Environment – (both Planning and Environment, Energy and Science Branches);

iv.      Heritage NSW – Department of Premier and Cabinet;

v.       Aerospace agencies; Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA), Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications and Regional Development (DIRD); and

vi.      Utility providers – Endeavour Energy and Sydney Water.

 

(d)     That Heritage NSW is consulted during the public exhibition, and that Council notifies Heritage NSW as part of that consultation about the potential heritage significance of the olive tree in the front setback area of Perth House as it may warrant inclusion within the existing State Heritage Register listing for Perth House and the Moreton Bay Fig Tree.

 

(d)     That the results of the public exhibition be reported to Council.

(e)     Further, that the Chief Executive Officer be authorised to make amendments of an administrative, minor, or non-policy nature to the DCP during the drafting and exhibition process.

 

THE SITE

 

1.      The subject site comprises 87 George Street (Lot 1 DP505486) and 91 George Street (CP SP 71180), Parramatta and is approximately 2,869 square metres. The site has a single frontage to George Street at its northern boundary. The site is otherwise bound by a seven-storey commercial building to the east, Arthur Phillip High School to the south and Perth House (a State Heritage-listed item) to the west (refer Figure 1).

 

Calendar

Description automatically generated

Figure 1: The subject site outlined in blue. Sites with heritage listings are shaded beige.

 

PREVIOUS DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR PART OF SITE

 

2.      In November 2017, a Development Application (DA) was lodged on part of the site (89 George Street only – see Figure 1) seeking approval for demolition of existing structures and construction of a 28-storey hotel, comprised of 300 rooms, ancillary hotel uses and 67 car parking spaces. It was previously announced that the hotel would operate under the ‘Four Points by Sheraton’ chain. The DA was informed by a Design Excellence competition which was awarded to Group GSA.

 

3.      On 11 July 2018 the DA was approved by the Sydney Central City Planning Panel. It included several concessions to the Parramatta Development Control Plan (PDCP) 2011 setback and street-wall height controls, as shown in Table 1 below. 

 

Table 1: Comparison of setback and street wall controls under PDCP and the approved DA

 

PDCP 2011 relevant control

Approved DA

North (George St) setback

Podiuma. - 0m or creation of a 20m publicly accessible forecourt (the latter being an option that seeks to provide a forecourt that interprets the historical alignment of George St)

 

Tower above podiuma. 20m from George Street

7.5m setback from George Street boundary for podiumb.

 

10.5m for tower above podiumb.

Side setbacks

Podiuma. setback to both boundaries: 0m

Tower above podiuma. to both boundaries: 6m

East setback: 0m podiumb. 3m tower

West setback podium: 7.6m ground and first floor adjoining Perth House then 0m for upper 3 storeys of podium.

West setback tower: Variable 0.5-1.3m

Rear setback

Podiuma.: 0m

Tower up to 54m height: 9m

Tower above 54m height: 12m

Podiumb.  - 0m

Tower above podiumb.- 13.3m

a.   Podium under DCP controls has maximum height of 4 storeys but with height no greater than 14.5m

b.   Podium Approved in DA has height of 5 storeys (20.5m)

 

4.      It is acknowledged that the approved DA included several setback concessions. However, 91 George Street was not included in the DA and strict compliance with the DCP setback controls on the limited site footprint at 89 George Street would not have resulted in a feasible development scheme. Given that the site area has significantly expanded and feasibility settings have therefore been significantly altered, Council officers recommend that those setback concessions be re-examined as part of the site-specific DCP process at hand. This issue is discussed in further detail in this report.

 

SITE-SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN - BACKGROUND

 

5.      In September 2020, the Applicant approached Council’s Land Use Planning team to express an interest in developing 89-91 George Street as a wholly commercial building.

 

6.      The Applicant intends to progress a scheme which is compliant with the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal controls. Under these controls, the site could achieve a maximum height of buildings control of RL 211m and an unlimited floor space ratio for commercial buildings (as the site area is above the 1,800 square metre threshold). Due to the relative progress of the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal (having been exhibited and due to be reported to Council in Q2 2021), it is considered that the CBD Planning Proposal is highly likely to be finalised before any site-specific Planning Proposal amendment could be finalised. The Applicant and Council officers agreed that a site-specific Planning Proposal was not necessary or desirable in this instance.

 

7.      However, Council officers and the Applicant agreed to progress a site-specific DCP, so that the development proposal can progress through Design Excellence and DA lodgment stages prior to the finalisation of the new Parramatta CBD DCP (noting that a DA lodged in response to the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal would not be able to be determined until the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal is finalised as well.)

 

8.      The Applicant and Council officers worked in an iterative manner over late 2020 / early 2021 to progress a site-specific DCP that reconciled the stated commercial imperatives of the Applicant and various public domain impacts and policy issues identified by Council officers.

 

9.      The majority of matters in the DCP have ultimately been agreed upon by both sides, and the draft DCP being recommended for Council’s endorsement reflects the outcome of that collaboration. However, despite significant engagement, the Applicant and Council staff have not been able to resolve an agreed position on the setback controls. The applicant has advised that they require a greater floorplate of more than 1,500 sqm (net lettable area) to attract a Government tenant and as such require smaller setbacks.  Therefore, this report addresses three setback options as follows:

 

·        Option A: Council officer-recommended option;

·        Option B: Applicant-preferred option; and

·        Option C: Alternative option (while not recommended by Council officers, this option has been formulated by Council officers in response to the commercial imperatives stated by the Applicant.  This is an alternative to “Option B” in the event that Council forms the view that more commercial floorspace should be accommodated onsite than that envisioned under “Option A”).

 

SETBACK CONTROLS

 

Setback Controls Option A: Council officer-recommended

 

10.    The setbacks recommended by Council Officers are as below:

 

Table 2: Officer-preferred setbacks at 87-91 George Street, Parramatta

 

Podium

Tower

North (street) setback

6m

12m

East setback

0m

6m

West setback

0m*

3m

Rear setback

0m

6m

* Podium setbacks at the north-west corner will be subject to additional design controls relating to the interface with the adjacent heritage item.

 

11.    Figure 3 below depicts the setbacks proposed in Council Officer-recommended “Option A”.

 

Figure 2: Option A - The siting of the podium (blue) and tower (white) on the site.

 

12.    The DCP recommended in this report (with setbacks laid out in Table 2 above) is considered by Council Officers to maximise the commercial floorplate developable on this site, while still maintaining acceptable impacts on a range of urban design matters. Setback concessions have been made from those that would generally be supported in the Parramatta CBD, as follows:

 

Table 3: Proposed setbacks in comparison to current Parramatta DCP controls

Setback

Current PDCP Control

Proposed site-specific DCP Control

Justification

North podium

0m

6m

An increase in the setback is considered appropriate in order to develop sympathetically with the adjoining State listed heritage item (Perth House).

North tower

20m

12m

The history of recent development applications and Design Competitions indicates that Council has not been successful in enforcing the 20m tower setback from George Street.  Further, early indications suggest that the likely outcome of Council Officers’ work preparing the draft Parramatta CBD DCP will a reduction of the 20m setback to 12m. Based on the likely strategic outcome under the CBD DCP and the testing of the controls through recent DA assessment and Design Competitions, it is recommended that the front tower setback be prescribed at 12m.  It is considered that this setback is sufficient to reinforce the role of George Street as a main thoroughfare within the context of the historic Georgian grid of Parramatta while allowing for redevelopment of the site.

West tower

6m

3m

Perth House to the west is a State Heritage listed item, and therefore very unlikely to be redeveloped. The usual 6m required to achieve appropriate building separation can be acceptably reduced in this instance and the reduced setback is considered acceptable by Council heritage advisor.

Rear tower

Variable 9-12m

6m

Considered acceptable given this is the generally accepted setback for commercial buildings, and also given that the school site has a 5m wide driveway located between the subject site and the school buildings which provides a further “buffer” to the school buildings.

 

13.    It should be noted that concessions have been given to the setbacks in current Council controls on three of the four boundaries in recognition of the need to make the floor plate more viable. Council officers consider that further setback concessions would impact on a range of urban design and heritage issues in ways that Council Officers consider unsatisfactory. Key issues are summarised as follows:

 

i.        While it is recognised that the approved DA on 89 George St provided a significant setback concession this was necessary due to the size of the site (1,350sqm for 89 George Street alone) in that DA and the need to allow a viable floor plate for the proposed hotel. Also under that approval, the height was 28 storeys (93.5m). The subject proposal seeks to develop a larger site (89 and 91 George Street together have a site area of 2,869sqm) for a much taller building that reflects the controls under the  CBD Planning Proposal.  This allows for a building of 211m RL (approximately 50 storeys and 203m from ground). Given the much taller building proposed a setback of 3m to Perth House is considered an appropriate balance between the need to provide space surrounding the heritage item and a workable floor plate for development of the site.

ii.       A concession on the setback to the commercial site to the east would introduce building separation issues (particularly access to light and air, as well as visual impacts created by having densely-built towers).

iii.      A further concession on the setback to the school could introduce privacy/overlooking issues to the school site, as well as potentially future building separation issues should the school site redevelop.

iv.      A further concession to the setback to George St would undermine the strategic goal of widening the vista down George St.

 

Setback Controls Option B: Applicant-preferred Option

 

14.    The applicant does not support the setbacks proposed by Council Officers in “Option A”. The Applicant considers that these setbacks do not meet their commercial imperatives for development of the desired commercial floorplate size. As the Applicant and Council officers were unable to reach alignment on a preferred position on setbacks, Council officers agreed to put forward the Applicant’s position as part of this report in the form of an attachment authored by the Applicant. Please refer to Attachment 2 of this report to view the Applicant’s preferred option in detail, as well as the Applicant’s justification therein.

 

15.    In summary, the setback controls the Applicant is proposing are as follows:

 

Table 4: Applicant-preferred setbacks at 87-91 George Street, Parramatta

 

Podium

Tower

North (street) setback

7.5m

10.5m

East setback

0m

3m

West setback

Front part of the site near Perth House: 9m setback at lower podium levels and 0m setback at upper podium levels

 

Rear of the site farther from Perth House: 0m

1.3m

Rear setback

0m

6m

 

16.    Figure 3 below shows the setbacks proposed in the Applicant-preferred “Option B”.

 

Figure 3: Option B as preferred by the applicant.  The podium is in grey and tower in beige.  The rectangular area identified by the red asterisk reflects a 9m setback from the western boundary for the lower levels of the podium only.

 

 

17.    The rectangular area identified by the red asterisk in Figure 3 above would effectively appear as an undercroft or colonnade at the lower levels of the podium and would be set back 9 metres from the western boundary.  The upper levels of the podium would have a nil setback to the western boundary.  The applicant has prepared a massing diagram which illustrates this arrangement in Figure 4 below.

 

Figure 4: The massing as preferred by the applicant.  The area shaded red reflects the rectangular area identified by the red asterisk in Figure YY above.  (Source: Applicant’s Draft DCP)

 

18.    The image submitted by the applicant above in Figure 4 shows this area of the podium as having a setback of 9 metres at the lower level with the upper podium having a nil setback.  The precise details of the building form would be subject to the Design Excellence process in keeping with the heritage principles relating to Perth House. 

 

19.    The Addendum at Attachment 2 provided by the Applicant, includes the image in Figure 5 below.  This image demonstrates a hypothetical example of what these controls may look like in terms of the relationship of the proposed western podium setback with Perth House and the associated olive tree.

 

A picture containing outdoor, sky, building

Description automatically generated

Figure 5: Image of the potential relationship of the western setback of the site with Perth House and the olive tree. (Source: Extracted from Applicant’s Addendum – see Attachment 2).

 

20.    Further to this information from the Applicant which is extracted from the Addendum in Attachment 2, they have also prepared several points which they wish to be presented on their behalf.  The bullet points below are content prepared by the Applicant justifying the reasons for their preferred option which they have requested be included in the body of the Council report.  This was agreed to by Council Officers on the basis that it be made very clear that this content is from the applicant.  The bullet points from the applicant are shown in italics below:

 

i.        “GPT seeks the City of Parramatta’s support for GPT’s Site Specific DCP Proposal (Proposal).

ii.       To attract high quality national tenants in Parramatta, both market leading buildings with a minimum 1,500sqm floorplates are required.  Evidence of this position is that within the last 5 years, no national tenant within the Government or Financial Services sector has leased a floorplate less than 1,500sqm of Net Lettable Area (NLA).

iii.      On this basis, Council’s preferred Option (A) and alternative Option (B) will not attract the high quality tenants of a GPT A-Grade office building, therefore is not commercially viable.

iv.      GPT’s Proposal includes a built form envelope and floorplate that supports the viability of a substantial investment within Parramatta and urban design context of Perth House and George Street.

v.       GPT’s Proposal puts forward envelope controls facing George St and Perth House that are consistent with a currently approved DA awarded design excellence; refer to DA/954/2017. The remaining setbacks are consistent with built form outcomes within the commercial CBD core.

vi.      GPT is committed to high quality outcomes. This is demonstrated by our purchase of the heritage listed Perth House, which collectively with our Proposal, will deliver community focused outcomes for the precinct.

vii.     GPT’s Proposal demonstrates the rationale behind our civic considerations by improving the design response towards Perth House and George Street from Council’s alternative option (B).

viii.    GPT has a leading track record for delivering high quality assets. Our current ownership in Parramatta includes 60 Station Street and 32 Smith Street; Parramatta’s newest commercial office tower.

ix.      GPT will be investing over $800 million in the project and its delivery is estimated to enable a net uplift of over 15,100 direct and indirect job during the construction and operational phases of developments.

x.       Supporting the GPT Proposal will contribute a net uplift of $1.4 billion of annual direct and indirect Gross Value Add contribution to the local economy on an ongoing basis, in net present value terms.”

 

21.    The Applicant has since submitted further correspondence to confirm that they have offered to dedicate a 2 metre wide road widening to Council on the George Street frontage and have suggested a partnership with Council whereby they dedicate the land to Council, subject to Council endorsing their preferred controls within the draft DCP.  This issue is discussed further under the heading: “ROAD WIDENING ALLOWANCE TO ACCOMMODATE BICYCLE LANE.”

Setback Controls Option C: Alternative option

 

22.    In response to issues raised by the Applicant during the assessment process about commercial floorplate size, Council Officers undertook modelling of various built form arrangements on this site to test whether more floor space could be satisfactorily accommodated.

 

23.    This urban design analysis concluded that “Option A” discussed above remains the Council-officer recommended option. However, should Council form the view that larger floorplates should be accommodated at this site than that provided for in the officer-recommended “Option A”, Council officers conclude that a tower without a podium is a preferable built form option to that put forward by the Applicant; this option would have setbacks as follows:

 

Table 4: The ‘Option C ’ setbacks at 87-91 George Street, Parramatta

 

Podium

Tower

North (street) setback

No podium, i.e. bottom levels of the building to have identical setbacks to tower setbacks

12m

East setback

3m

West setback

3m

Rear setback

6m

 

24.    Figure 6 below depicts the setbacks proposed in “Option C”.

 

Figure 6: Option C - Siting of the alternative-option tower on the site (note this scheme does not include a podium)

 

25.    Option C has been formulated by Council’s City Design team to increase the size of the tower floorplate compared with Option A while not compromising Perth House.  As Perth House is a stand-alone small building with no podium, there is the opportunity to stop any podium on the lot to the east of Perth House and introduce a stand-alone tower without a podium.  Under this Option, any podium in future development would not extend onto the subject site at 89-91 George Street but will finish on the site to the east at 93 George Street.

 

26.    Option C introduces a different typology and locates a stand-alone tower on the lot. Because the tower is not encumbered by a podium, the set- backs around the tower can be regularised and slightly reduced. This enables a larger floorplate for the tower and a clear space around the tower. At the rear where the site adjoins the school and existing buildings there is the opportunity for some roof covering depending on design resolution.  Option C provides a slightly smaller tower floor plate than the proponent’s scheme (1,480sqm as opposed to 1,588sqm), however it is a superior outcome to that of the proponent because it:

 

i.        Enables a larger floorplate than the Officer preferred setbacks closer to the applicant’s target floorplate;

ii.       Reduces the perceived ‘crowding’ of Perth House created by the combination of tower, podium with different street setbacks including the under-croft on George Street and different setbacks on the side boundaries;

iii.      Creates a generous, clearly defined space between Perth House and the proposed tower;

iv.      Extends the space at ground level in which Perth House sits so that the tower is related to Perth House and not the lots to the east; and

v.       Opens up sight lines along George Street so that there are clear views to Perth House and the olive tree.

 

27.    Council officers wish to stress that “Option C” is not preferred or recommended by Council officers. Council officers’ recommended setbacks remain those discussed in “Option A” above.

 

Setback controls: Summary and comparison of Options A, B and C

 

28.    A comparison of the setback controls of all three schemes is provided in Table 5 below.  

 

Table 5: Comparison of setback controls and resulting estimated typical tower level floorplates

 

Option A

(officer recommended)

Option B (Applicant preferred)

Option C

 

North (street) setback *

12m

10.5m

12m

East setback

6m

3m

3m

West setback

3m

1.3m

3m

Rear setback

6m

6m

6m

Estimated Gross Building Area, typical tower level

1,677 sqm

1,985 sqm

1,850 sqm

Net Lettable Area (NLA)**, typical tower level (80% of GBA)

1,341.6sqm

1,588sqm

1,480sqm

* Note: all northern setbacks from the George Street frontage are measured from the current property boundary and include the area identified for road widening under the draft Land Reservation Acquisition Map under the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal.

 

** The Net Lettable Area (NLA) has been calculated using the same 80% efficiency assumption as Gross Floor Area.  The independent assessment of the St Johns Anglican Cathedral Planning Proposal by JPW Architects notes that at the early concept stage of development, an 80% efficiency rate assumption is appropriate for estimating the NLA.

 

 

Figure 7: Comparison of Option A, Option B and Option C respectively.

 

29.    The above analysis demonstrates that

 

(a)     Option A delivers 84% of the floorplate of the Applicant preferred Option B.

(b)     Option C delivers 93% of the floorplate of the Applicant preferred option B.

 

30.    Council officers conclude by recommending Option A due to the following main reasons:

 

(a)     Minimises the impacts on Perth House by creating a greater level of separation from the new building form on the subject site

(b)     Avoids unacceptable impacts on current and future commercial development on the site directly adjacent to the east, and more broadly avoids setting an undesirable precedent about building separation between commercial buildings which if repeated will see many large buildings with minimal spacing between them. The impact of this is that it impacts on light and movement of wind/air in the public domain and makes them much less desirable spaces. This is a poor outcome as activated well used public domain is an amenity and economic asset to the city;

(c)     Option A still delivers a significant portion of the floorplate sought in the Applicant-preferred option (84%);

(d)     Option A delivers a NLA floorplate of 1,341 sqm; 

(e)     Compared with the alternative Council Officer option (Option C), Option A is more reflective of the building typology promoted for the Parramatta CBD in terms of being a podium and tower arrangement.

 

31.    Finally, it is noted that the Applicant will still be able to seek to vary the recommended setbacks through the Development Application stages, particularly if the outcomes of the relevant Design Excellence competition support such variations. Giving concessions on DCP controls at DCP-drafting stage risks setting the scene for further concessions to setbacks without justification being fully demonstrated to be pursued through later processes.

 

URBAN DESIGN v COMMERCIAL FLOOR PLATE TRADE-OFF

 

32.    The tradeoff the applicant is asking Council to consider is to accept a poor quality urban design and heritage outcome in order to maximise the floor plate and therefore the value of their site.

 

33.    Officers acknowledge that sites with larger floor plates are sought after by potential tenants and therefore sites that can achieve larger floor plates will provide a greater return for the developer/building owner.

 

34.    The Strategy embedded in the CBD Planning Proposal for delivering future commercial floor space in the CBD was based on the study “ACHIEVING A-GRADE OFFICE SPACE IN THE PARRAMATTA CBD -ECONOMIC REVIEW” which was updated in 2019. In relation to floor plate size the advice provided in this study is:-

 

“New A-Grade office space generally needs to have a floorplate size of at least 1,300 sq.m, with most major tenants wanting a floorplate of over 1,500 sq.m. (It is also noted that in some instances tenants are looking for office accommodation with floorplates over 2,000 sq.m, which is more common in locations such as Macquarie Park and in new major development in the Sydney CBD such as Barangaroo). “

 

Note: The glossary of the study defines the floorplate area as being: “the rentable area of an entire floor”.  This is interpreted to refer to Net Lettable Area (NLA).

 

35.    One of the challenges for the Parramatta CBD delivering commercial floor space is the large number of relatively small sites which need would need to be amalgamated to allow for sites capable of accommodating A-Grade office buildings.

 

36.    Allowing the concession to setbacks requested by the applicant on this site would be seen as a precedent for other sites. A likely outcome is that Council will receive further applications to allow setback similar concessions on smaller sites for the same reason ie to maximise the floor plate size. This will decrease the incentive for sites to be amalgamated and undermine Council’s strategic imperative to drive amalgamation.

 

37.    The study includes a table of potential developments for commercial office space in Parramatta. Whilst the study was undertaken in 2019 it indicates at that time availability of sites to deliver 608,322sqm of A-Grade Office Space (all with a NLA greater than 1,300sqm). A copy of the table from the report is included as Attachment 3.  Some of the sites in the table have been realised such as sites in Parramatta Square. This shows that generally there is sufficient potential to deliver A Grade Office space in the CBD in the short to medium term.

 

38.    It should also be noted that Council strategy involves zoning areas of Auto Alley along Church Street in the south to provide further longer term potential for A-Grade Office space floor space.

 

39.    Given the short medium and long term A Grade options available in the CBD and the unsatisfactory precedent that would be set that would discourage site amalgamation, it is neither necessary nor consistent with Council’s strategic framework for delivering A-Grade office space in Parramatta, to endorse setbacks as proposed by the Applicant. Particularly given the negative urban design impacts and precedent that would be set if lesser setbacks were endorsed in the DCP.   

 

REMAINING SITE-SPECIFIC DCP CONTROLS

 

40.    Council officers and the Applicant came to agreement on nearly all other matters in the site-specific DCP aside from setback controls as discussed above. The remainder of the DCP controls are summarised in the following paragraphs.

 

Other matters – podium height

 

41.    Council Officers and the applicant did not come to a full agreement on the matter of the podium height control.  The applicant has requested a podium height control of a range between 14 and 25 metres.  This conflicts with the preferred height control of a range of 14 to 21 metres as preferred by Council Officers.

 

42.    The applicant has advised that they prefer the upper limit of the podium height range to be increased from 21 metres to 25 metres to give greater flexibility at the Design Competition stage.  In particular, they would like the potential to relate to the height of the existing commercial building adjoining to the east at 93 George Street while still being sympathetic to Perth House. 

 

43.    Council Officers recommend the podium height control reflect the range of 14 to 21 metres as this is a principle which is likely to be recommended to Council for the broader CBD through the draft CBD Development Control Plan.  Further, it is considered that any attempt to relate the podium height to the existing commercial building to the east will compromise the attempt to relate well to the much lower scale Perth House to the west.  It is also noted that the commercial building to the east is a 7 storey commercial building under Torrens Title and may itself be subject to redevelopment in the future.

 

Other matters – Heritage

 

44.    The draft site-specific DCP incorporates design principles that seek to ensure that the building’s interface with the adjacent heritage item is appropriate and does not diminish the heritage values of Perth House. The design principles deal with, amongst other things, façade treatment, view lines, ground-floor permeability, heritage interpretation and landscaping. These principles will be incorporated into the site-specific DCP irrespective of which setbacks are endorsed as part of this report. 

 

45.    When analysing the potential impact of the proposed new building on Perth House it was noted that there is a well established olive tree very close to the boundary shared by the subject site and Perth House. This tree is not included in the description of the heritage item at 85 George Street, Parramatta, which is described as ‘Perth House and Moreton Bay Fig Tree’.

 

46.    The Arborist Report, submitted with the previously approved DA on 87 George Street, stated that ‘The Olive tree near the north-eastern corner of the property is also an old specimen and may be a remnant of the original cottage garden, planted contemporary with Perth House. [The tree] is clearly visible as a mature specimen in the 1943 aerial photo of Sydney (SIX maps).

 

47.    A further site inspection carried out by Council’s Heritage Advisor and Landscape and Tree Assessment Officer revealed that the olive tree is likely to be at least 200 years old, and thus should be included within the heritage listing. Further, it is possible that the olive tree on the site is the oldest olive (of all subspecies) tree in the City of Parramatta area.

 

48.    As the site is State Heritage-listed, it is recommended that Heritage NSW be consulted as part of the exhibition of the site-specific DCP for the 87-91 George St site, and that Council request as part of that consultation that Heritage NSW consider adding the Olive Tree to the description of the item on the State Heritage Register.

 

49.    The draft DCP makes reference to the olive tree and its suspected heritage significance.  Further, the draft DCP includes the following provision: “C.1 (a)(3) Setbacks should maintain and enable continued maturity of the Olive Tree associated with Perth House.”

 

Other matters – Sustainability

 

50.    The applicant is relying on the implementation of the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal controls to commence their development, so as to achieve the greater FSR and height controls proposed under this policy. The Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal will introduce high performing buildings criteria which, under its current drafted form, would apply to the proposed development.

 

ROAD WIDENING ALLOWANCE TO ACCOMMODATE BICYCLE LANE

 

51.    A 2 metre strip along George St is nominated on the draft Land Acquisition Reservation map under the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal. The purpose of this LRA notation is to allow for a 2 metre road widening to occur to accommodate a future regional cycleway on George St. Functionally, the 2 metre setback would be used for footpath widening within the footprint of the site, to ensure the footpath was still wide enough after road widening to accommodate the cycleway has occurred.

 

52.    A Planning Agreement is not expected at this site under the Parramatta CBD Community Infrastructure framework, as this framework only applies to residential development. This site is zoned B3, therefore, no residential development option is possible. It is not considered that a Planning Agreement to secure the footpath widening is crucial, as an allowance for footpath widening can be made within the front podium setback in any of the options presented in this report, and this can be made a condition of consent at DA stage.

 

53.    The Applicant has offered to dedicate the 2 metre wide road widening to Council and has suggested a partnership with Council whereby they dedicate the land to Council subject to Council endorsing their preferred controls within the draft DCP.  Council Officers do not consider that this is an appropriate arrangement as the Applicant’s preferred setbacks are not supported.  Further, the front setback from George Street within all options is greater than 2 metres and would allow for this footpath widening to be provided as a condition of development consent without impacting on the development potential. However, given that the applicant has taken the position that support for the road widening is conditional upon their preferred setback being supported, they may object to any control being added to the Draft DCP and any condition being imposed on any future DA requiring to this effect. 

 

54.    Ultimately if the Council was unable to acquire the 2m strip via a DA process Council would be required to acquire the site. The setbacks proposed in all options mean this is feasible. Based on land values prepared by independent consultants for land acquisition as part of the CBD Planning Proposal project the expected cost would be in the order of $150,000.

 

55.    Council’s City Significant Development Team has requested that this matter be addressed in the draft Development Control Plan so as to provide a policy framework for any footpath widening to be required through the DA assessment.  It is recommended that the draft DCP at Attachment 1 be amended to address the potential requirement for footpath construction within the frontage of the site as a result of the road widening within the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal.

 

PRELIMINARY CONSULTATION WITH HERITAGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE

 

56.    The Heritage Advisory Committee (HAC) was given a short briefing on this site at its meeting of 21 October 2020. In response, the HAC resolved as follows:

 

That given the importance of Perth House (85 George Street) to the heritage of Parramatta, the Committee supports the provision of a 10m minimum setback along the western edge adjacent to the Heritage item.

 

57.    It is noted that a 10 metre setback along the western edge is more than the current Parramatta DCP controls and the application of such controls would impact on the ability to develop a commercially viable building on the site.

 

58.    Further, the Committee was advised that the western setback facing Perth House recommended by Council officers would be 0 metres for the podium and 3 metres for the tower. The setback facing Perth House would also be recommended to be subject to heritage controls which will likely result in an increase in the podium setback for part of the western setback as determined through the Design Competition process

 

59.    The Heritage Advisory Committee was updated on the project again at its meeting on 18 February 2021. The committee was advised that Council Officers and the applicant are yet to agree on the building’s setbacks. The committee subsequently resolved as follows:

 

That the Committee expresses to Council great concern over the proposal for the site-specific DCP adjacent to Perth House, specifically that there is insufficient area surrounding the cottage (curtilage), and that whilst the historic olive tree will be saved the 1790s fig tree is also a significant part of heritage landscape of Parramatta, which the Committee would also wish to protect.  

 

60.    It is reiterated that further design consideration will be undertaken at design excellence stage to ensure an appropriate interface with the curtilage of Perth House. Further, it is the intention of Council Officers to address the heritage value of the olive tree as part of the implementation of this site-specific DCP

 

CONSULTATION AND TIMING

 

61.    The recommendation of this report facilitates consultation with the community and relevant public agencies. Council officers propose to consult the following public agencies as part of the public exhibition:

 

i.        NSW Department of Education (due to proximity to school site)

ii.       Transport for NSW (RMS, Transport, PLR and Metro)

iii.      DPIE Environment, (both Planning and Energy and Science Branches as the latter branch deals with biodiversity, floodplain risk management and Aboriginal cultural heritage issues)

iv.      Heritage NSW – Department of Premier and Cabinet

v.       Aerospace agencies

vi.      Relevant utilities for energy and water

vii.     State Emergency Service (SES NSW)

 

62.    The table below demonstrates the consultation with other sections of Council that has been undertaken to date. No external consultation has yet been pursued. This will be pursued once the Draft DCP has been endorsed for exhibition by Council.

 

Date

Stakeholder

Stakeholder Comment

Council Officer Response

Responsibility

18/9/2020

City Design

Concerns were raised regarding applicant’s built form in terms of setbacks.  City Design formulated Options A and C and recommend Council adopt Option A

Comments reflected in recommendation to Council.

City Planning

18/9/2020

Heritage Officer

Concerns were raised regarding interface with Perth House.  Recommended design principles to be included in draft DCP.  Noted potential significance of Olive Tree.

Recommended controls reflected in Design Principles under the Section “Heritage”.

City Planning

18/9/2020

Environmental Outcomes

Noted that while there are existing ESD controls in PDCP 2011, these will be refined in the upcoming draft DCP for the CBD PP.  Recommended a similar approach with subject site with some amendment.

Noted that it is premature to introduce new ESD controls that have yet to be endorsed by Council through the upcoming DCP for the CBD PP.  Existing sustainability measures considered sufficient subject to some refinement as recommended by Environmental Outcomes.

City Planning

18/9/2020

Traffic and Transport

No changes requested.

Noted.

City Planning

18/9/2020

City Architect

Controls within first version of applicant’s DCP duplicate existing DCP.  Remove and advise applicant of Council’s endorsed Business Rules for Design Competitions.

Recommendation is reflected in draft DCP at Attachment 1.  Council’s endorsed Business Rules for Design Competitions were forwarded to applicant.

City Planning

18/9/2020

City Significant Development

Noted the previous DA history onsite and the identification of the Olive Tree by the applicant’s Arborist.  Also requested footpath widening be addressed in DCP.

Comments reflected in recommended controls.

City Planning

18/9/2020

Senior Catchment Engineer

No changes requested. 

Noted.  Flooding addressed in Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal.

City Planning

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATION FOR COUNCIL

 

63.    There is no direct financial implication to Council as a result of this report.

 

64.    The Draft DCP does not generate any increased floor area permissible on the site. It relies on the CBD PP for the increase in development potential described in this report. Also the site is zoned for commercial use so the Community Infrastructure Policy framework included in the draft CBD Planning Proposal does not apply. Developer contributions will be payable at Development Application stage.

 

65.    The report suggests that it may be possible to have the 2m land acquisition at the front of the site dedicated as part of the Development Application process, however there is a risk that this may not be possible if this is challenged by the applicant at Development Application stage. If the land is not able to be secured via the Development Application process current estimates suggest the cost of Council acquiring the land will be in the order of $150,000.

 

 

FY 20/21

FY 21/22

FY 22/23

FY 23/24

F24/25

Revenue Contribution

0

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Operating Result

 

 

 

 

 

External Costs

 

 

 

 

 

Internal Costs

 

 

 

 

 

Depreciation

 

 

 

 

 

Other

 

 

 

 

 

Total Operating Result

 

 

 

 

 

Funding Source

0

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CAPEX

 

 

 

 

 

CAPEX

 

 

 

 

 

External

 

 

 

 

 

Internal

 

 

 

 

 

Other

 

 

 

 

 

Total CAPEX

0

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CONCLUSION/ NEXT STEPS

 

66.    It is recommended Council endorse the Draft DCP incorporating the setbacks in Option A discussed in this report to allow the matter to be placed on public exhibition. The exhibition outcomes will be reported to Council to allow Council to determine the Draft DCP.

 

Felicity Roberts

Project Officer-Land Use Planning

 

Sarah Baker

A/Team Leader Land Use Planning

 

Roy Laria

Land Use Planning Manager

 

Robert Cologna

Acting Group Manager, City Planning

 

David Birds

Acting Executive Director, City Planning & Design

 

Paul Perrett

Chief Financial Officer

 

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

 

 

 

 

 

Attachments:

1

Draft Development Control Plan

13 Pages

 

2

Applicant's Addendum

34 Pages

 

3

Table of potential A grade office space

1 Page

 

 

 

REFERENCE MATERIAL

 


Item 17.1 - Attachment 1

Draft Development Control Plan

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THIS PAGE IS LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Item 17.1 - Attachment 2

Applicant's Addendum

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator












Item 17.1 - Attachment 3

Table of potential A grade office space

 

PDF Creator


Council 12 April 2021Item

INNOVATIVE

ITEM NUMBER         17.2

SUBJECT                  FOR APPROVAL: Minutes of Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting held on 18 February 2021

REFERENCE            F2013/00235 - D07910668

REPORT OF              Project Officer Land Use        

 

 

PURPOSE:

 

To inform Council of key discussion points from the Heritage Advisory Committee meeting on 18 February 2021 and to seek Council’s endorsement of recommendations relating to:

 

·        the appointment of new members to the Committee; and

·        applications for grants under Council’s Local Heritage Fund. 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

(a)     That Council receive and note the minutes of the Heritage Advisory Committee meeting of 18 February 2021.

 

(b)     That Council endorse the Selection Panel’s recommendations for the appointment of the following people as new members of Council’s Heritage Advisory Committee:

 

·        Chris Betteridge

·        Sam Kelly

·        Dr Wei Lei

 

(c)     Further, that Council approve the Heritage Grants recommendations, as included in Item 12 of Attachment 2, as follows:

 

i.        Decline a grant of $504.12 for 24 Albert Street, North Parramatta;

ii.       Make a grant of $2,675.00 for 68 Eastwood Avenue, Eastwood;

iii.      Support in principle a grant of $3,300.00 for 50 Wyralla Avenue, but funds not be released until the approvals issue has been satisfactorily resolved, and that a limit for the release of funds to the end of this financial year be imposed;

iv.      Decline a grant of $2,887.50 for 65 Harris Street, Harris Park but the applicant be encouraged to resubmit the application after the work has been carried out;

v.       Make a grant of $625.00 for 10 Rickard Street, Carlingford; and

vi.      Support in principle a grant of $3,300.00 for 83 Eastwood Avenue, Eastwood, but funds not be released until the approvals issues has been satisfactorily resolved, and that a limit for the release of funds to the end of this financial year be imposed.

 

BACKGROUND

 

1.      Council’s Heritage Advisory Committee (the Committee) meets every two months and currently comprises 12 members. The purpose of the Committee is to advise Council on how better to conserve, promote and manage heritage within the Parramatta Local Government Area (LGA) for current and future generations.

 

2.      Council receives periodic reports detailing the minutes of Heritage Advisory Committee meetings, in order to keep Council informed of the advice of the Committee. Council also has a decision-making role on Committee membership as well as on applications to the Local Heritage Fund (which are reported to Council via these periodic reports when such applications have been considered).

 

3.      This report summarises key discussion points from the 18 February 2021 meeting for Council’s information. The minutes of the meeting are provided at Attachment 1.

 

KEY DISCUSSION POINTS

 

4.      The key points discussed at the meeting are summarised below.

 

Business Arising (Item 4)

 

5.      The Committee received an update from Council staff on the relocation of the Subiaco Columns to Western Sydney University’s Parramatta South Campus, in response to a Committee resolution of 18 June 2020 and subsequent Council resolution of 27 July 2020. The Committee was advised that the University does not support the relocation of the columns to the Parramatta South Campus because of the significant space required to lay out the columns with an appropriate curtilage, the estimated costs involved and the University's financial position and strategic goals.

 

6.      In response to the advice from the University, a suggestion was made at the meeting to relocate the columns to an alternative site of Reid Park, a location visible from the river and near the Rydalmere Wharf and picnic area. The suggestion was supported by the Committee members and attendees along with Council staff.

 

7.      The Committee decided to request Council to investigate the suitability of Reid Park, Rydalmere for the relocation of the columns and further requested Council to seek heritage advice and provide an update to the Committee.

 

8.      In response to the Committee request, Council’s Open Space and Natural Resources Team has been requested to undertake the following action:

 

·        Investigate the suitability of Reid Park for the relocation of Subiaco columns;

·        Seek professional advice from the heritage consultant for the project on the suitability of Reid Park; and

·        Advise the Heritage Advisory Committee and Council (via the minutes of the Heritage Advisory Committee) on the outcome of the investigations.

 

These actions are ongoing and updates will be provided to the Committee at future meetings as they become available.

 

Committee Membership

 

9.      The Committee received the resignation of Committee member Dibya Chhetry, and noted that there are now three vacant positions on the Committee.

 

10.    The Committee was briefed on the outcome of a Selection Panel process to recommend the appointment of three new members to fill Committee vacancies. It was noted that the Selection Panel drew their recommendations from the established reserve list of prospective members, in accordance with a previous Council resolution of 22 July 2019.

 

11.    The Committee endorsed the Selection Panel’s recommendation to appoint the following people to fill the three vacancies for the current term ending September 2021:

 

·     Chris Betteridge

·     Sam Kelly

·     Dr Wei Lei

 

12.    Council’s Core Terms of Reference for Advisory Committees provides that after assessment, membership applications are submitted to Council for its decision and ratification. Accordingly, a recommendation is made to Council to endorse appointment of the above applicants. 

 

Heritage Mapping and Signage and Toongabbie's Heritage

 

13.    Council staff noted that these matters were included on the agenda arising from the Committee's request at its meeting on 26 November 2020.

 

14.    Council staff noted that the identification of properties in the Toongabbie area with heritage value has been considered in the past. A consultant, Rod Howard, completed a study in 2007 that came up with a large list of potential heritage items in Toongabbie. This study resulted in a good deal of community controversy and led to a review by the Government Architect’s Office that recommended that most of potential items not be proceeded with. The Committee was invited to provide comments and any directions on the identification of properties of heritage value in Toongabbie that Council staff could respond to.

 

15.    The Committee raised a number of issues in identifying and finding items in the Toongabbie area. In response, Council staff offered to review submitted Development Applications for the Toongabbie area to assist in new item identification and heritage preservation. 

 

16.    Subsequent to the Committee meeting, Council officers have considered the issue further. Council officers have concluded that this activity would be best undertaken as part of a broader heritage review project. Council has not committed the funding and resources to a broader heritage review at this time, however, should Council resolve to do so, this activity could be included at that time. Council officers will relay this conclusion back to the Heritage Committee at their next meeting.

 

Development Applications (Item 8)

 

17.    The Committee raised concerns that Development Applications, particularly in the Epping area, do not include information about colour finishes and that on occasions Heritage Impact Statements are missing from development application documentation. These omissions lead to poor heritage outcomes. The Committee's comments have been referred to Council's Development and Traffic Services Group for a response that can then be reported back to the Committee at its next meeting on 15 April 2021. The response is also proposed be included in the Council report on those minutes.

 

18.    Prior to the meeting, Committee members had been provided with a list of 11 Development Applications to consider at the meeting. Committee members discussed and commented on two applications as follows:

 

·        DA/363 /2018/A – Modification of DA/363/ 2018 for subdivision of Cumberland Hospital site into two lots. Committee members raised concern over the location of the proposed boundary line that would adversely impact on the integrity of heritage items. Council’s Heritage Advisor advised the Committee that, as this DA will be determined by the State Government, individual members should submit their comments to State Government.

·        DA/84/2021 – Painting of façade and display of business identification signs on a heritage listed building at 458 Church Street, Parramatta. The Committee expressed concern that the exterior colour selection is brand specific and therefore not permissible within heritage guidelines, along with the installation of an advertising balloon on the property roof. The Committee noted that a previous DA (DA/27/2020) was previously refused. The Committee's comments have been referred to Council's Development and Traffic Services Group for consideration as appropriate.

 

Cultural Heritage and Visitor Services Update (Item 5)

 

19.    A written update was provided by Council's Cultural Heritage and Tourism Manager on the following matters:

 

·        Parramatta's Virtual Tour: This tour (that enables potential visitors to get a taste of the city's rich cultural heritage places and stories online) has been completed and is now on the At Parramatta website.

·        Destination Management Plan (DMP): Discussions are underway with both internal and external shareholders as part of a review of the DMP and to ensure that it reflects current circumstances.

·        Western Sydney University and Parramatta and District Historical Society Partnership: University students and the Society collaborated in 2020 to create a new website and social media presence for Hambleton Cottage Museum.

·        Research and Collection Services: Digitisation of the archives, research material and cultural collections is a primary focus of the 2020/21 work plan. The Council’s Research and Collections Team continue to collaborate more broadly within Council and with other stakeholders to recognise significant anniversaries and events. This content generally includes research articles, epublications, audio visuals, image galleries and a display in the Heritage and Visitor Information Centre.

 

City Planning and Design Directorate Update (Item 9)

 

20.    The Committee was briefed on a number of proposals that Directorate staff are involved with. Table 1 below details the content of the briefing together with the Committee's response and action proposed by Council staff.

 

Table 1: Briefing on City Planning and Design Directorate Proposals

Proposal

Briefing content

Committee's response and staff action

Charles Street Square update

Archaeological excavations to commence in March and upgrade works to commence mid-year

Committee requested a report on archaeological findings and also requested an update on deliberations over the conclusion of statue of Arthur Phillip.

 

The Committee's requests have been referred to the City Transformation Team for consideration. In response, the Team advises that it will provide further updates on archaeological investigations and outcomes in due course and will arrange for an update on the Arthur Phillip artwork to be tabled at the next meeting of the Committee in April. 

Metro West concept

The Metro West concept that provides for the connection of Westmead to Sydney CBD has been through assessment and is close to getting Concept and Stage I Approval

 

Planning for Parramatta station at Horwood Place allows for protection of Roxy theatre and Kia Ora House at 64 Macquarie Street

Committee members understand that a Compulsory Acquisition Order has been served on the owners of Kia Ora house by the Parramatta Light Rail. The Committee recommends that Council request from Transport for NSW an update on the plans for the Kia Ora House heritage item, in particular the status of its ownership and clarification on reports of vibration damage to the front of the structure.

A response was sought from Council’s Transport Planning Manager and Program Interface Manager (Parramatta Light Rail) on matters raised by the Committee. Advice received is as follows: 

·      Sydney Metro West has stated in its response to submissions to the Environmental Impact Statement for concept and Stage 1 by City of Parramatta and others that Kia Ora will be retained and protected. 

·      Sydney Metro West is likely to have commenced the process of the acquisition of Kia Ora property, in terms of current procedures, as it lies within the construction site boundary of the Parramatta CBD Metro station.  

·      Sydney Metro has not yet begun construction although it has conducted some utility and geotechnical survey work under permit. It is unlikely and there is no knowledge of any potential vibration damage to the Kia Ora property. In addition, all owners were offered prior to work commencing a dilapidation report, by the main contractor Parramatta Connect. It was up to the owners to take up this offer, and then to contact Parramatta Connect  if they observed any damage. This is considered a private matter between the building owner and contractors. 

This advice has been referred to the Committee for its information. Further updates on the Sydney Metro West project will be provided to the Committee as appropriate.  

Site-specific DCP adjacent Perth House

The Committee was briefed on the project, including Council officers’ preferred setbacks for the project.

 

To be reported to Council in March or April 2021.

The Committee expresses great concern over the proposal for the site-specific DCP adjacent to Perth House, specifically that there is insufficient area surrounding the cottage (curtilage), and that whilst the historic olive tree will be saved the 1790s fig tree is also a significant part of heritage landscape of Parramatta, which the Committee would also wish to protect.

 

The Committee's comments have been referred to the City Planning Team for consideration. In response, the Team advises that the latest version of the site-specific DCP protects both the olive tree and fig tree. It is clarified that the State heritage listing for Perth House in Parramatta LEP 2011 includes the Morton Bay Fig Tree. However, the olive tree is not listed in the LEP and will be subject to further investigation as it is suspected to be an original planting alongside Perth House. This matter is planned to be addressed in the draft report to Council which recommends Council notify Heritage NSW of the olive tree’s potential to meet State heritage listing criteria for Perth House. The report will also address the approach to controls for the heritage interface to Perth House to manage impacts appropriately.

Three planning proposals at corner of Parkes and Harris Streets, Harris Park

Proposals are currently being assessed and the sites are close to the State Heritage Listed Experiment Farm and a number of HCAs. In addition there could be Aboriginal Cultural Heritage impacts along Clay Cliff Creek. 

Concept scheme prepared by Council staff to aid discussions with applicants achieve an FSR of generally 10:1 and heights ranging from 31 to 42 storeys

 

The Committee advised that it is not in favour of the presented Planning Proposals at the corner of Parkes and Harris streets. The Committee was concerned at the significant shadowing impact on neighbouring heritage properties and disagreed with the anticipated shading as demonstrated by Council's modelling. The Committee reiterated that protected Heritage items encompass the full curtilage in addition to buildings.

 

These comments have been referred to the City Planning team for consideration. In response, the team has confirmed from further testing that the concept scheme prepared by Council staff complies with the requirements of the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal for solar access to Experiment Farm. The area protected under the CBD Planning Proposal reflects the recommendation of the Hector Abrahams heritage study that was endorsed by Council on 10 July 2017. It is acknowledged that the area protected does not coincide with the full curtilage as contained in the State Heritage Register listing for Experiment Farm. The difference in the extent of the area protected and the Committee’s general concerns are matters that will need to be addressed more fully in the specific assessment of the three Planning Proposals. Further updates will be provided on this matter to the Committee

 

 

Local Heritage Fund (Item 12)

 

17.    The Committee recommended that Council endorse the recommendations detailed in Table 2 below relating to applications for funds from Council’s Local Heritage Fund, as they address relevant funding criteria of the Local Heritage Fund Guidelines for the reasons given:

 

Table 2: Applications for Local Heritage funds

Address

Work undertaken

Recommendation on funding

Reasons for recommendation

24 Albert Street, North Parramatta

New replacement screen door

That a grant of $504.12 not be made

Screen door not considered to have heritage value

68 Eastwood Avenue, Eastwood

Re-pointing and re-tucking of external brickwork

That a grant of $2,675 be made

Work enhances heritage value and street appeal of dwelling

50 Wyralla Avenue, Epping

Structural repairs

Support in principle a grant of $3,300, but funds not be released until the approvals issues has been satisfactorily resolved and that the limit for the release of funds is the end of this financial year.  If the approvals issue is not revolved by the end of the financial year the application will be rolled over into the next financial year. 

 

Works enhance structural and heritage integrity of the dwelling but works could require Council structural approval. Also, a Building Information Certificate application will be required, as the works have already been completed. 

 

65 Harris Street, Harris Park

Proposal for external painting of house

That a grant of $2,887.15 not be made, but the applicant be encouraged to resubmit the application after the work has been carried out

Proposed work will enhance heritage value and street appeal of dwelling in a prominent location. But fund guidelines provide that work must be completed prior to an application being lodged.

10 Rickard Street, Carlingford

Termite control

A grant of $625 be made

The control of termite infestation will help protect the heritage fabric of this dwelling

83 Eastwood Avenue, Eastwood

Structural repairs

Support in principle a grant of $3,300, but funds not be released until the approvals issues has been satisfactorily resolved and that the limit for the release of funds is the end of this financial year.  If the approvals issue is not resolved by the end of the financial year the application will be rolled over into the next financial year. 

Works enhance structural and heritage integrity of the dwelling but works require Council structural approval.  Also, a Building Information Certificate application will be required, as the works have already been completed. 

 

 

18.    The Committee was briefed that the total recommended expenditure of $9,900 is slightly less than the $12,083 allocated for this assessment period. The balance of $2,183 will be carried through to the next assessment period. The balance remaining in the fund after this assessment period is $20,369. There are three assessment periods which each have allocated funds during the course of the financial year; any unused funds from one assessment period are carried through to the next.

 

General Business

 

19.    The Committee requested updates on potential cracks in Lennox Bridge that occurred during substantial works, and the progress of restoration works for the historic red gums sign in Boronia Park, Epping. Updates have been sought from relevant Council staff that will be reported back to the Committee and subsequently Council through their consideration of Committee minutes.

 

20.    In response to a Committee request, Council staff will aim to distribute the meeting minutes to Committee members as soon as they are confirmed.

 

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

 

21.    There are no legal implications for Council associated with this report.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

 

22.    The report recommends that Council endorse the payment of four grants to a total of $9,900 which is available from Council's Local Heritage Fund. The total remaining in the 2020/21 budget will be $20,369. It is noted that of the four grants, two to the total value of $6,600 are for approval in principle with payment to be made before the end of the financial year subject to approval issues being resolved. 

 

23.    There are no unbudgeted financial implications for Council associated with this report.

 

 

FY 20/21

FY 21/22

FY 22/23

FY 23/24

Operating Result

 

 

 

 

External Costs

 

 

 

 

Internal Costs

 

 

 

 

Depreciation

 

 

 

 

Other

 

 

 

 

Total Operating Result

Nil

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Funding Source

NA

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CAPEX

 

 

 

 

CAPEX

 

 

 

 

External

 

 

 

 

Internal

 

 

 

 

Other

 

 

 

 

Total CAPEX

Nil

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Funding Source

NA

 

 

 

 

 

Paul Kennedy

Project Officer Land Use

 

Sarah Baker

A/Team Leader Land Use Planning

 

Robert Cologna

Acting Group Manager, City Planning

 

David Birds

Acting Executive Director, City Planning & Design

 

Paul Perrett

Chief Financial Officer

 

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

 

 

 

 

Attachments:

1

Minutes of meeting

9 Pages

 

 

 

REFERENCE MATERIAL

 


Item 17.2 - Attachment 1

Minutes of meeting

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Council 12 April 2021                                                                                                       Item 17.3

INNOVATIVE

ITEM NUMBER         17.3

SUBJECT                  FOR NOTATION: Minutes of the 5/7 Parramatta Square Advisory Group Meeting held on 18 February 2021

REFERENCE            F2021/00521 - D07961894

REPORT OF              Governance Manager        

 

 

PURPOSE:

 

To inform Council of key discussion points from the 5/7 Parramatta Square Advisory Group Meeting held on 18 February 2021.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council receive and note the minutes of the 5/7 Parramatta Square Advisory Group meeting held on 18 February 2021.

 

BACKGROUND

 

1.      Council’s 5/7 Parramatta Square Advisory Group (Advisory Group) meets every month currently comprises seven (7) members. The purpose of the Advisory Group is to guide the continued progress of the current design, construction and business readiness activities of 5 and 7 Parramatta Square.

 

2.      Council receives reports detailing the minutes of Advisory Group meetings, in order to keep Council informed of the advice of the Advisory Group. The Advisory Group will provide recommendations to Council separately on matters that require Council resolution.

 

3.      This report summarises key discussion points of this meeting for Council’s information. The minutes of the meeting are provided at Attachment 1.

 

KEY DISCUSSION POINTS

 

4.      The key points discussed at the meeting are summarised below.

 

Council Chambers Design Layout

 

5.      Options for the layout of the Council Chamber were provided to the Advisory Group for discussion.  The Advisory Group provided comments and feedback and requested a layout of the normal horseshoe (facing public gallery) seating 14 Councillors plus Chair centred on a raised platform with two seats either side and Executive Team at a separate table, to be provided to the next meeting of the Advisory Group for comment.

 

Tom Thompson Mural Relocation Options

 

6.      Options for the location of the Tom Thompson Mural were provided for discussion.  The Advisory Group agreed to locate the Tom Thompson Mural in the Level 4 Council Chamber Foyer, at the top of the grand staircase.

 

5PS Forecourt Design Proposal (Ramus Studios)

 

7.      Design options for the 5 Parramatta Square forecourt were presented to the Advisory Group for comment and feedback.  The Advisory Group requested to be provided with a flythrough of Options 1 and 3 to provide context within the entire area, and to include day and night context, including light illuminating from the Library space and to be presented to the Advisory Group at the next meeting.

 

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

 

8.      There are no legal implications for Council associated with this report.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

 

9.      There are no financial implications for Council associated with noting the minutes of the Advisory Group meeting.  All budget implications associated with the delivery of the 5 and 7 Parramatta Square project are subject to separate reports.

 

 

FY 20/21

FY 21/22

FY 22/23

FY 23/24

Operating Result

 

 

 

 

External Costs

 

 

 

 

Internal Costs

 

 

 

 

Depreciation

 

 

 

 

Other

 

 

 

 

Total Operating Result

Nil

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Funding Source

NA

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CAPEX

 

 

 

 

CAPEX

 

 

 

 

External

 

 

 

 

Internal

 

 

 

 

Other

 

 

 

 

Total CAPEX

Nil

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Funding Source

NA

 

 

 

 

 

Patricia Krzeminski

Governance Manager

 

Boz Lukin

Group Manager Project Delivery

 

Christopher Snelling

Group Manager City Experience

 

Bryan Hynes

Executive Director Property & Place

 

 

Paul Perrett

Chief Financial Officer

 

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

 

 

 

 

Attachments:

1

Minutes of the 5/7 Parramatta Square Advisory Group Meeting held on 18 February 2021

3 Pages

 

 

 

REFERENCE MATERIAL


Item 17.3 - Attachment 1

Minutes of the 5/7 Parramatta Square Advisory Group Meeting held on 18 February 2021

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


 

Notices of Motion

 

12 April 2021

 

18.1           NOTICE OF MOTION: Celebration of International Day of People with Disability 232

 

18.2           NOTICE OF MOTION: Food Organics Recovery Trial............................ 235

 

18.3           NOTICE OF MOTION: Savings from Winterlight Contract..................... 238

 

18.4           NOTICE OF MOTION: Blow Out in Council's Projects............................ 240

 

18.5           NOTICE OF MOTION: Prioritising Council Motions................................. 241


Council 12 April 2021                                                                                                       Item 18.1

NOTICE OF MOTION

ITEM NUMBER         18.1

SUBJECT                  NOTICE OF MOTION: Celebration of International Day of People with Disability

REFERENCE            F2021/00521 - D07965105

FROM                          Councillor Pandey       

 

MOTION

That a report be brought back within 8 weeks with ideas on organising an event on 3 December 2021, to promote and acknowledge the achievements and contributions of people with disability on the International Day of People with Disability, with the aim of:

 

i.        Celebrating the achievements of People with Disability

ii.       Provide an opportunity to educate people on issues around disability.

iii.      Promote Parramatta as an accessible and inclusive City

iv.      Connect service providers with People with Disability

v.       involving local disability organisations in the planning and running of the event, including such organisations as NSW  Deaf Society, Vision Australia, Northcott Parramatta, Muscular Dystrophy Assoc of NSW, Multicultural Disability Advocacy Association, Physical Disability Council of NSW, Paraplegic and Quadriplegic Association of NSW, and other interested disability organisations.

 

BACKGROUND

 

1.      International Day of People with Disability (IDPwD) is a United Nations sanctioned day that is celebrated internationally on 3 December. It aims to promote public awareness, understanding and acceptance of people with disability.

 

2.      IDPwD represents a significant opportunity for City of Parramatta to share its commitment, campaigns, leadership and stories of empowerment related to inclusion of people with disability.

 

3.      Demographics:

 

·           Over 4.4 million people in Australia have some form of disability. That's 1 in 5 people. 

·           17.8% of females and 17.6% of males in Australia have disability.

·           The likelihood of living with disability increases with age. 2 in 5 people with disability are 65 years or older. 

·           Of all people with disability, 1.9 million are aged 65 and over, representing almost half (44.5%) of all people with disability. This reflects both an ageing population and increasing life expectancy of Australians. 

·           2.1 million Australians of working age (15-64 years) have disability.

·           35.9% of Australia’s 8.9 million households include a person with disability.

 

Sameer Pandey

Councillor Pandey

 

 

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, COMMUNITY SERVICES RESPONSE

 

4.      International Day of People with Disability is marked by Council each year. The scale of activities to mark the occasion has varied over the last eight years to now be focused on being a major theme of programming at that time in Council’s libraries, Riverside Theatre and Over 55s Leisure and Learning.

 

5.      Prior to 2013 a larger event was held in what is now Centenary Square. The scale of that event was reduced following an evaluation of the event and in consultation with the Access Advisory Committee at the time. Since that time there has been a film competition held, photographic exhibition and community awareness campaigns.

 

6.      Within Council, International Day of People with Disability is marked via internal communications and at Council locations to increase awareness of the commitments made by Council in the Disability Inclusion Action Plan and inspire inclusion in all Council operations and programs.

 

7.      Council Staff are able to prepare a report, setting out options for an event celebrating International Day of People with Disability as requested by the Notice of Motion. This report can be prepared using existing resources, leveraging off current work. Therefore, there is no unbudgeted expenditure arising from the preparation of this report.

 

FINANCIAL AND RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS

 

8.      If Council resolves to approve this Notice of Motion in accordance with the proposed resolution, the financial implications will be included in the resultant report to Council.

 

9.      Current activities to mark the day make use of existing budgets for programming. No budget is currently allocated for an event to mark International Day of People with Disability in 2021.

 

 

FY 20/21

FY 21/22

FY 22/23

FY 23/24

Operating Result

 

 

 

 

External Costs

 

 

 

 

Internal Costs

 

 

 

 

Depreciation

 

 

 

 

Other

 

 

 

 

Total Operating Result

Nil

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Funding Source

NA

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CAPEX

 

 

 

 

CAPEX

 

 

 

 

External

 

 

 

 

Internal

 

 

 

 

Other

 

 

 

 

Total CAPEX

Nil

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Funding Source

NA

 

 

 

 

 

Sameer Pandey

Councillor Pandey

 

Jon Greig

Executive Director Community Services

 

Paul Perrett

Chief Financial Officer

 

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

 

 

 

 

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

 


Council 12 April 2021                                                                                                       Item 18.2

NOTICE OF MOTION

ITEM NUMBER         18.2

SUBJECT                  NOTICE OF MOTION: Food Organics Recovery Trial

REFERENCE            F2021/00521 - D07966176

FROM                          Councillor Esber       

 

MOTION

(a)     That Council investigate the cost-benefits and feasibility of transitioning to a Food Organics and Garden Organics (FOGO) service for residents under the next waste collection and processing tender/contract.

 

(b)     Further, that a report be brought back to Council in the new financial year with the outcomes of the Food Organics (FO) collection trial for multi-unit dwellings, and a workshop be organised with Councillors to determine the viability of introducing a new FOGO service across the City of Parramatta.

 

BACKGROUND

 

1.      In March 2020 the NSW Government announced $24 million in stimulus funding to support local councils and the waste processing industry with improving kerbside separation of food and garden waste and the quality of the resulting compost.

 

2.      In order meet Council’s waste target of 85% diversion from landfill by 2038, the recovery of food organics from the red-lid garbage bin is critical. NSW Environment Protection Authority (EPA) report that 69% of households in NSW have a green-lid bin for garden organics, and 43 Councils now offer a Food Organics and Garden Organics (FOGO) kerbside collection service.

 

3.      A Food Organics and Garden Organics (FOGO) service allows food to be added to the green-lid garden waste bin and recycled into top quality compost for use in agriculture, forestry and sporting field improvements. The compost quality is much better from a FOGO bin because it is not mixed with general garbage and only contains an average contamination by 2.6% by weight.

 

4.      Penrith, Inner West and Randwick Councils have all transitioned to a FOGO or a Food Only (FO) collection service in the Sydney metro. City of Parramatta must also consider a transition in order to be recognised as a resource recovery leader and to meet Council’s adopted diversion targets.

 

5.      An example of household kitchen caddies and bio-degradable liners for bagging of food organics is shown below:

 

 

Pierre Esber

Councillor Esber

 

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, CITY ASSETS & OPERATIONS RESPONSE

 

6.      In October 2020, Council received funding from NSW EPA to assist City of Parramatta transition to an improved food and garden organics compost product. The $180k in funding will facilitate extensive community survey and consultation, as well as financial modelling on the different waste collection/processing options available to achieve maximum resource recovery and value for money. This work will consider FOGO and FO options and is expected to be completed by July 2021.

 

7.      In March 2021, Council was successful in receiving a further NSW Environmental trust grant for trialing Food Organics (FO) collection in 1000 multi-unit dwellings (96 complexes) across Harris Park, Westmead, North Parramatta and Eastwood. The trial is proposed to commence in July 2021 and will conclude after 10 months. The outcomes of this experience will inform staff and Councillors of the lessons learnt and assist in the final decision on whether to pursue a FOGO and/or FO service under the new waste and recycling contract from 2024.

 

8.      It is recommended that any report back to Council be after the completion of the FOGO trial in May 2022. This will ensure that the report contains all the data and lessons learnt from the trial.

 

FINANCIAL AND RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS

 

9.      This work can be implemented using existing resources, leveraging off current staff and funding from received from NSW EPA, including a Local Government Transition grant for $180k and a further $225k for trialing of a Food Organics collection service across 1000 multi-unit dwellings in 2020/21.

 

 

FY 20/21

FY 21/22

FY 22/23

FY 23/24

Operating Result

 

 

 

 

External Costs

 

 

 

 

Internal Costs

 

 

 

 

Depreciation

 

 

 

 

Other

 

 

 

 

Total Operating Result

Nil

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Funding Source

NA

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CAPEX

 

 

 

 

CAPEX

 

 

 

 

External

 

 

 

 

Internal

 

 

 

 

Other

 

 

 

 

Total CAPEX

Nil

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Funding Source

NA

 

 

 

 

 

Pierre Esber

Councillor Esber

 

John Warburton

Executive Director, City Assets & Operations

 

Paul Perrett

Chief Financial Officer

 

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

 

 

 

 

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

 


Council 12 April 2021                                                                                                       Item 18.3

NOTICE OF MOTION

ITEM NUMBER         18.3

SUBJECT                  NOTICE OF MOTION: Savings from Winterlight Contract

REFERENCE            F2021/00521 - D07968281

FROM                          Councillor Wilson       

 

MOTION

That that the savings made from the new contract on the Winterlight event be moved to ward funds.

 

BACKGROUND

 

1.      Given the post COVID environment, it is important that Council undertake small projects as soon as possible.

 

Andrew Wilson

Councillor

 

ACTING EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR CITY ENGAGEMENT & EXPERIENCE RESPONSE

 

2.      In the Council meeting of 22 March 2021, Council resolved (3152):

 

(a)     That Council approve the staging of the Winterlight – The Winter Village event for 12 weeks within the date period of 17 May and 10 September 2021.

 

(b)     That Council enter into an agreement with the event proponents to deliver the event, including providing the value in-kind benefits as outlined in this report.

 

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

 

3.      As outlined in the associated Council Report of 22 March 2021, this represents a potential budget saving of $300,000 in the 2021/2022 financial year.

 

4.      As per the Council Report, it is recommended that future consultation with Councillors seek feedback and approval regarding the use of these budget savings within the 2021/2022 financial year. This includes the consideration that budget savings be utilised to progress key actions in the Council endorsed Events and Festivals Strategy or the savings may be used to deal with the budget shortfall in 2021/2022 financial year.

 

5.      An allocation of $100,000 is made per year per Ward, with unspent funds from previous years rolled over to the next financial year. Budgets for Ward funds for this financial year range from $100,000 to $200,000 per Ward.

 

6.      Within the City Events and Festivals unit, in conjunction with Place Services, Ward funding is utilised to present up to two (2) Family Fun Days in each Ward annually. In 2021/2022, these events will offer the community an opportunity to come together, connect and celebrate in their local areas. 

 

FINANCIAL AND RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS

 

7.      If savings from Winterlight are moved to Ward funding, this would result in a $300,000 reduction in the overall budget for the Events and Festivals Unit and a $300,000 increase to the $500,000 budget for Ward funding (not including unspent funds). The overall financial impact to Council would be neutral.

 

 

FY 20/21

FY 21/22

FY 22/23

FY 23/24

Operating Result

 

 

 

 

External Costs

 

-

 

 

Internal Costs

 

 

 

 

Depreciation

 

 

 

 

Other

 

 

 

 

Total Operating Result

 

-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Funding Source

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CAPEX

 

 

 

 

CAPEX

 

 

 

 

External

 

 

 

 

Internal

 

 

 

 

Other

 

 

 

 

Total CAPEX

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Funding Source

 

 

 

 

 

Andrew Wilson

Councillor Wilson

 

Tamara Hitchcock

Acting Executive Director, City Engagement and Experience

 

Paul Perrett

Chief Financial Officer

 

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

 

 

 

 

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

 


Council 12 April 2021                                                                                                       Item 18.4

NOTICE OF MOTION

ITEM NUMBER         18.4

SUBJECT                  NOTICE OF MOTION: Blow Out in Council's Projects

REFERENCE            F2021/00521 - D07981456

FROM                          Councillor Wilson        

 

MOTION

That Council contact the universities to undertake a study on the delivery of Council projects.

 

BACKGROUND

 

1.      Given the delays and budget blow outs in Council's building projects (the pool, Epping community center etc.) it is hereby moved that Council contact the universities to undertake a study on the delivery of Council projects.  We need to examine how we make sure our building projects do not run over time or over budget.

 

2.      Now that the development section is being rewarded and enjoying the confidence of the CEO to now undertaking VPA negotiation clearly the efficiency of the needs to be assessed and any improvements made asap.

 

Andrew Wilson

Councillor

 

STAFF RESPONSE

 

3.      A written staff response will be provided in a supplementary agenda prior to the Council meeting.

 

FINANCIAL AND RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS

 

4.      A written staff response will be provided in a supplementary agenda prior to the Council meeting.

 

Andrew Wilson

Councillor Wilson

 

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

 

 

 

 

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

 


Council 12 April 2021                                                                                                       Item 18.5

NOTICE OF MOTION

ITEM NUMBER         18.5

SUBJECT                  NOTICE OF MOTION: Prioritising Council Motions

REFERENCE            F2021/00521 - D07981523

FROM                          Councillor Wilson       

 

MOTION

(a)     That Council prepare a report into the prioritisation of Council motions.

 

(b)     Further, that the preservation of human life be made a priority.

 

BACKGROUND

 

1.      In my recent discussion with the CEO I advised him that saving children's lives was a major priority of mine and that Cr Prociv's motion on Granville Square (which I supported admittedly) had taken precedence and funding.

 

2.      The CEO mentioned the large number of Council motions that are on hand and that I could not expect things simply to be done because a notice of motion was passed. 

 

3.      Previously CEOs and GMs would automatically prioritise safety but it is apparently becoming a progressively more difficult job.

 

Andrew Wilson

Councillor

 

STAFF RESPONSE

 

4.      A written staff response will be provided in a supplementary agenda prior to the Council meeting.

 

FINANCIAL AND RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS

 

5.      A written staff response will be provided in a supplementary agenda prior to the Council meeting.

 

Andrew Wilson

Councillor Wilson

 

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

 

 

 

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

 


 

Questions with Notice

 

12 April 2021

 

19.1           QUESTIONS WITH NOTICE: Questions Taken on Notice from Council Meeting - 22 March 2021............................................................................................... 244


Council 12 April 2021                                                                                                       Item 19.1

QUESTIONS WITH NOTICE

ITEM NUMBER         19.1

SUBJECT                  QUESTIONS WITH NOTICE: Questions Taken on Notice from Council Meeting - 22 March 2021

REFERENCE            F2021/00521 - D07964388

FROM                          Governance Manager        

 

QUESTIONS TAKEN ON NOTICE FROM THE COUNCIL MEETING OF 22 MARCH 2021

Item

Subject

Councillor

Question

17.4

Post Gateway – Draft Development Control Plan and Letter of Offer (Planning Agreement) – 135 George Street and 118 Harris Street, Parramatta (Albion Hotel Site)

Issa

What is the timeframe for placing this planning proposal in public exhibition?

17.6

Post Exhibition – Planning Proposal, Development Control Plan and Planning Agreement – 197 and 207 Church Street and 89 Marsden Street, Parramatta

Issa

Why are the flooding controls imposed on this site different to other sites that are within the same flood level?

Is Council making broader policy decisions around flooding within the CBD inconsistent with specific sites?

 

BACKGROUND

 

1.      Paragraph 9.23 of Council’s Code of Meeting Practice states:

 

“Where a councillor or council employee to whom a question is put is unable to respond to the question at the meeting at which it is put, they may take it on notice and report the response to the next meeting of the Council.”

 

STAFF RESPONSE

 

2.      Staff responses to the questions taken on notice at the Council Meeting of 22 March 2021 are provided below:

 

Item

Subject

Councillor

Question

Response

Executive Director

17.4

Post Gateway – Draft Development Control Plan and Letter of Offer (Planning Agreement) – 135 George Street and 118 Hariss Street, Parramatta (Albion Hotel Site)

Issa

What is the timeframe for placing this planning proposal in public exhibition?

The decision Council made was to endorse the terms of the draft VPA and the content of the draft DCP so they can be exhibited with the Planning Proposal Council has previously endorsed.

 

The Draft VPA needs to be finalised based on the terms endorsed by Council.

 

The decision on whether to finalise the draft VPA document prior to the matter being reported to Council is made in discussion with the applicant.

 

In this case the applicant sought the report to Council on the understanding that the draft VPA would be prepared following the Council resolution but prior to exhibition.

 

The time taken to prepare the Draft VPA documentation will determine the timing of the exhibition.

 

The finalisation is dependent upon the time it takes to negotiate with the applicant and their solicitors the legal document and supporting information that makes up the draft Planning Agreement. Council has a template VPA agreement that is used as a starting point to minimise the time taken to negotiate and finalise the agreement and minimise the number of times Draft Agreements are exchanged between Council’s and the applicant’s solicitors.  The timeframe is highly dependent upon the response time from the corresponding solicitors and it is expected that this could take up to 6 weeks to complete.

 

During this period the other exhibition material is prepared simultaneously.

 

Once the Planning Agreement is finalised exhibition dates can be determined, and consultation letters and materials which must specify these dates can be finalised printed and sent to allow exhibition to commence. 

A/Executive Director City Planning and Design

17.6

Post Exhibition – Planning Proposal, Development Control Plan and Planning Agreement – 197 and 207 Church Street and 89 Marsden Street, Parramatta

Issa

Why are the flooding controls imposed on this site different to other sites that are within the same flood level?

Is Council making broader policy decisions around flooding within the CBD inconsistent with specific sites?

Council resolved to defer this matter for a Councillor Workshop.

 

The exhibited CBD Planning Proposal framework is supported by a flood study that was exhibited with the Planning Proposal. The flood study recognises that there is risk associated with allowing habitable development below the relevant flood levels. The recommended controls are based on an assessment of these risks.

 

An analysis of the decisions Council has made on other sites within the CBD will be provided in a workshop as part of the response to Council’s resolution to defer this matter.

A/Executive Director City Planning and Design

 

 

Patricia Krzeminski

Governance Manager

 

David Birds

Acting Executive Director, City Planning & Design

 

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

 

 

 

 

 

Attachments: