Agenda of Council - Monday, 26 April 2021

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, 12 April 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, Phil Bradley, Donna Davis, Pierre Esber, Michelle Garrard (Deputy Lord Mayor), Steven Issa, Andrew Jefferies (6:33pm), 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 6.32pm.

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 22 March 2021

3155

RESOLVED (Tyrrell/Esber)

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

6. APOLOGIES / REQUESTS FOR LEAVE OF ABSENCE / REMOTE ATTENDANCE

3156	RESOLVED (Issa/Tyrrell) That the request to attend the Council Meeting dated 12 April 2021 via remote means submitted by Clr. Issa due to business reasons, be accepted.

Note: Councillor Jefferies arrived at 6:33pm during consideration of apologies.

7. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Councillor Issa declared a non-pecuniary and less than significant interest in Item 17.1 - Site-specific Development Control Plan for land at 89-91 George Street, Parramatta, being that he was a member for the Sydney City Central Planning Panel which determined a Development Application related to this site. He retired from the Chamber and took no part in the debate or vote thereon.

Councillor Pandey declared a non-pecuniary and less than significant interest in Item 17.1 - Site-specific Development Control Plan for land at 89-91 George Street, Parramatta, being that he was a member for the Sydney City Central Planning Panel which determined a Development Application related to this site. He retired from the Chamber and took no part in the debate or vote thereon.

8. Minutes of the Lord Mayor

8.1

SUBJECT Condolence Motion: His Royal Highness The Duke of Edinburgh

REFERENCE F2019/03630 - D07997401

REPORT OF Lord Mayor, Councillor Bob Dwyer

3157

RESOLVED (Dwyer/Barrak)

(a) That Council acknowledge the passing of His Royal Highness Prince Philip, The Duke of Edinburgh.

(b) That the Lord Mayor send a letter of condolence to Her Majesty The Queen and the Royal Family on the passing of His Royal Highness Prince Phil, The Duke of Edinburgh.

(c) That Council note that flags were flown at half-mast across the City of Parramatta on Saturday 10, Sunday 11 and Monday 12 April 2021 in honour of His Royal Highness.

(d) That Council fly the flags at half-mast across the City of Parramatta on the day of the funeral in the United Kingdom, as per advice from the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet.

(e) That Council make appropriate arrangements for condolence books to be set up at Council’s libraries and Customer Contact Centre for a one month period for the community to pass on their condolences and Council’s website updated to provide the location list and that this be advertised in any Lord Mayoral columns published in local papers.

(f) Further, that the Chamber hold a minute’s silence as a gesture of respect for his service and commitment to Her Majesty The Queen and Commonwealth.

Note: The Chamber observed a minute’s silence.

8.2

SUBJECT Condolence Motion: Margaret McCartney

REFERENCE F2019/03630 - D07997688

REPORT OF Lord Mayor, Councillor Bob Dwyer

3158

RESOLVED (Dwyer/Wearne)

(a) That Council acknowledge the passing of Margaret McCartney, offering our condolences to her family and friends.

(b) That Council note Ms McCartney’s memorial service was held on Friday, 9 April 2021 and was attended by Cr Donna Davis, Cr Lorraine Wearne and Cr Phil Bradley.

(c) That Council officers provide advice to the Epping Ward Councillors regarding the memorials policy and process, and investigate opportunities for the installation of a memorial bench and planting of a memorial tree in an appropriate location in Epping in honour of Ms McCartney.

(d) Further, that the Chamber hold a minutes silence as a gesture of respect on her passing and in recognition of her dedication to the Parramatta community.

Note: The Chamber observed a minute’s silence.

Procedural Motion

MOTION (Tyrrell/Garrard)

That the order of business be amended to consider Item 17.1 – Site‑specific Development Control Plan for land at 89-91 George Street, Parramatta prior to Item 8.3.

The motion moved by Councillor Tyrrell and seconded by Councillor Garrard was WITHDRAWN.

8.3

SUBJECT Carmen Drive Reinvigoration Project wins Community Precinct Award

REFERENCE F2019/03630 - D07998216

REPORT OF Lord Mayor, Councillor Bob Dwyer

3159

RESOLVED (Dwyer/Barrak)

(a) That Council note the City of Parramatta Council’s Carmen Drive Reinvigoration Project won the Community Precinct Award at the 2020 Institute of Public Works Engineering Australasia (IPWEA) NSW & ACT Awards on Wednesday 24 March 2021.

(b) That Council note the West Epping Park Sporting Pavilion and Maintenance Facility project received a Highly Commended award in the ‘Projects greater than $500,000 and less than $5 million’ category.

(c) Further, that Council congratulate Council’s cross-functional team who delivered these projects on this fantastic achievement, and thank them for their hard work and dedication to designing and delivering projects for the benefit of our communities.

9. Public Forum

Nil

10. Petitions

10.1

SUBJECT Proposed Driveway Access from Pennant Hills Road to The King’s School

REFERENCE DA/738/2020

FROM Pierre Esber

An online petition signed by the residents of Oatlands, NSW and surrounding neighbourhoods opposing a proposed driveway from Pennant Hills to the King’s School reads:

“No Right Turn into Gollan Avenue of Pennant Hills Road.”

3160

RESOLVED (Esber/Pandey)

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

11. Rescission Motions

Nil

12. Fair

Nil

13. Accessible

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

3161

RESOLVED (Tyrrell/Esber)

That the report be received and noted.

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

3162

RESOLVED (Tyrrell/Bradley)

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

14. Green

14.1	SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Public Exhibition of the Heart of Play Masterplan REFERENCE F2021/00521 - D07947727 REPORT OF Place Manager
	MOTION (Esber/Garrard) (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) That a report be submitted to Council upon the completion of the public exhibition period for consideration and assessment of the public submissions. (d) That the following stakeholder groups are made aware of the public exhibition of the Heart of Play masterplan: i. All current and former sporting user groups accessing playing fields in the Heart of Play masterplan area ii. All Park Committees in the Heart of Play masterplan area iii. All schools in the Heart of Play masterplan catchment area iv. All registered respondents to the first round of Heart of Play masterplan community engagement v. All residents within a 0.5km radius of the Heart of Play masterplan area vi. Advantages & disadvantages of synthetic fields. (e) Further, that the Heart of Play masterplan exhibition is noted in the next Lord Mayor's column in print & electronic media.
3163	RESOLVED (Zaiter/Tyrrell) That the motion be put.
	The motion moved by Councillor Esber and seconded by Councillor Garrard on being put was declared CARRIED.
3164	RESOLVED (Esber/Garrard) (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) That a report be submitted to Council upon the completion of the public exhibition period for consideration and assessment of the public submissions. (d) That the following stakeholder groups are made aware of the public exhibition of the Heart of Play masterplan: i. All current and former sporting user groups accessing playing fields in the Heart of Play masterplan area ii. All Park Committees in the Heart of Play masterplan area iii. All schools in the Heart of Play masterplan catchment area iv. All registered respondents to the first round of Heart of Play masterplan community engagement v. All residents within a 0.5km radius of the Heart of Play masterplan area vi. Advantages & disadvantages of synthetic fields. (e) Further, that the Heart of Play masterplan exhibition is noted in the next Lord Mayor's column in print & electronic media.

15. Welcoming

Nil

16. Thriving

16.1

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Toongabbie Lane Naming Proposal

REFERENCE F2020/02284 - D07851505

REPORT OF Place Manager

3165

RESOLVED (Pandey/Tyrrell)

(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.

17. Innovative

Note: Councillor Issa and Councillor Pandey declared a non-pecuniary and less than significant interest in Item 17.1 and left the Chamber at 7:15pm prior to consideration of the matter.

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
	MOTION (Tyrrell/Garrard) (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 B” 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. (e) That the results of the public exhibition be reported to Council. (f) 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.
	AMENDMENT (Esber/Wearne) (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. (e) That the results of the public exhibition be reported to Council. (f) 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 amendment moved by Councillor Esber and seconded by Councillor Wearne on being put was declared CARRIED. DIVISION A division was called, the result being:- AYES: Councillors Barrak, Bradley, Davis, Esber, Prociv, Wearne and Wilson NOES: Councillors Dwyer, Garrard, Jefferies, Tyrrell and Zaiter The amendment then became the motion. The motion moved by Councillor Esber and seconded by Councillor Wearne on being put was declared CARRIED. DIVISION A division was called, the result being:- AYES: Councillors Barrak, Bradley, Davis, Esber, Prociv, Wearne and Wilson NOES: Councillors Dwyer, Garrard, Jefferies, Tyrrell and Zaiter
3166	RESOLVED (Esber/Wearne) (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. (e) That the results of the public exhibition be reported to Council. (f) 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.

Note: Councillor Issa and Councillor Pandey returned to the Chamber at 7:18pm after the consideration of Item 17.1.

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

3167

RESOLVED (Esber/Bradley)

(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 Li

(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.

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

3168

RESOLVED (Garrard/Tyrrell)

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

18. Notices of Motion

18.1

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

REFERENCE F2021/00521 - D07965105

FROM Councillor Pandey

3169

RESOLVED (Pandey/Barrak)

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.

18.2

SUBJECT NOTICE OF MOTION: Food Organics Recovery Trial

REFERENCE F2021/00521 - D07966176

FROM Councillor Esber

3170

RESOLVED (Esber/Wilson)

(a) That Council investigate the cost-benefits and feasibility of transitioning to a Food Organics and Garden Organics (FOGO) service (whereby organics are defined as vegetation material) 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.

Note: Councillor Issa left the Chamber at 7:39pm during consideration of Item 18.2.

18.3	SUBJECT NOTICE OF MOTION: Savings from Winterlight Contract REFERENCE F2021/00521 - D07968281 FROM Councillor Wilson
	MOTION (Wilson/Zaiter) That that the savings made from the new contract on the Winterlight event be moved to ward funds.
	AMENDMENT (Bradley/) That Council defer consideration of this matter to a Councillor Workshop. The amendment moved by Councillor Bradley lapsed without a seconder.
3171	RESOLVED (Tyrrell/Esber) That the motion be put.
	The motion moved by Councillor Wilson and seconded by Councillor Zaiter on being put was declared LOST.
	Note: 1. Councillor Esber left the Chamber at 7:43pm and returned at 7:46pm during consideration of Item 18.3. 2. Councillor Davis left the Chamber at 7:56pm and returned at 7:58pm during consideration of Item 18.3. 3. Councillor Garrard left the Chamber at 8:05pm and returned at 8:07pm during consideration of Item 18.3.

18.4

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

REFERENCE F2021/00521 - D07981456

FROM Councillor Wilson

MOTION (Wilson/)

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

The motion moved by Councillor Wilson lapsed without a seconder.

18.5	SUBJECT NOTICE OF MOTION: Prioritising Council Motions REFERENCE F2021/00521 - D07981523 FROM Councillor Wilson
	MOTION (Wilson/Prociv) (a) That Council prepare a report into the prioritisation of Council motions. (b) Further, that the preservation of human life be made a priority.
3172	RESOLVED (Zaiter/Wilson) That the motion be put.
	The motion moved by Councillor Wilson and seconded by Councillor Prociv on being put was declared LOST.
	Note: 1. Councillor Garrard left the Chamber at 8:13pm and returned at 8:17pm during consideration of Item 18.5. 2. Councillor Issa returned to the Chamber at 8:14pm and left again at 8:29pm during consideration of Item 18.5.

19. Questions with Notice

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

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

Note: Councillor Issa returned to the Chamber at 8:32pm during the discussion of Item 19.1.

20. CLOSED SESSION

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.

3173

RESOLVED (Tyrrell/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 NOTATION: Legal Status Report as at 15 March 2021. (D07924661) - This report is confidential in accordance with section 10A (2) (g) of the Local Government Act 1993 as the report contains advice concerning litigation, or advice that would otherwise be privileged from production in legal proceedings on the ground of legal professional privilege.

2 FOR APPROVAL: Tender 31/2020 Carlingford High School Oval, Roselea Way, Carlingford - Stormwater Drainage Improvement and Associated Works. (D07842815) - This report is confidential in accordance with section 10A (2) (d) of the Local Government Act 1993 as the report contains commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed (i) prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it; or (ii) confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council; or (iii) reveal a trade secret.

3 FOR APPROVAL: Tender 7/2021 Brodie Street, Rydalmere - Streetscape Upgrade Works. (D07842837) - 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 NOTATION: Legal Status Report as at 15 March 2021 REFERENCE F2020/03849 - D07924661 REPORT OF Group Manager Legal Services
	MOTION (Davis/Tyrrell) That Council note the Legal Status Report as at 15 March 2021.
3174	RESOLVED (Zaiter/Tyrrell) That the motion be put.
	The motion moved by Councillor Davis and seconded by Councillor Tyrrell on being put was declared CARRIED.
3175	RESOLVED (Zaiter/Tyrrell) That Council note the Legal Status Report as at 15 March 2021.

20.2

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

REFERENCE F2020/03255 - D07842815

REPORT OF Manager Capital Projects

3176

RESOLVED (Davis/Esber)

(a) That Council approve the appointment of the preferred proponent for the Carlingford High School Oval Stormwater Drainage Improvements at Roselea Way, Carlingford for the contract sum as outlined in paragraph 15 of the report.

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

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

20.3

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

REFERENCE F2020/03720 - D07842837

REPORT OF Manager Capital Projects

3177

RESOLVED (Bradley/Prociv)

(a) That Council approve appointment of the preferred proponent for the streetscape upgrade at Brodie Street, Rydalmere for the contract sum as outlined in paragraph 14 of this report.

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

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

Procedural Motion

3178

RESOLVED (Tyrrell/Wilson)

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 20.3.

22. CONCLUSION OF MEETING

The meeting terminated at 8:45pm.

THIS PAGE AND THE PRECEDING 16 PAGES ARE THE MINUTES OF THE ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON MONDAY, 12 APRIL 2021 AND CONFIRMED ON MONDAY, 26 APRIL 2021.

Chairperson

Council 26 April 2021 Item 12.2

FAIR

ITEM NUMBER 12.2

SUBJECT FOR NOTATION: Investment Report for March 2021

REFERENCE F2021/00521 - D07991747

REPORT OF Tax and Treasury Accountant

PURPOSE:

The purpose of this report is to inform Council of the investment portfolio performance and compliance for the month of March 2021.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council receive the Investment Report for March 2021.

BACKGROUND

1. In accordance with clause 212 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 (the Regulation), a report setting out details of all money invested must be presented to Council on a monthly basis.

2. The report must include a certificate as to whether or not the investments have been made in accordance with the Local Government Act 1993 (the Act), the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 and Council’s Investment Policy.

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

Investment Portfolio Summary

3. The investment portfolio closing balance as at 31 March 2021 was $528.9m. The average portfolio holdings held throughout the month was $530.6m.

4. The majority of Council’s investment portfolio is in term deposits (70%). The portfolio also includes liquid Floating Rate Notes (FRNs), cash, and the TCorp Long Term Growth Fund (LTGF).

5. Approximately 8% of the portfolio are less conservative long-term investments. The investment portfolio is well diversified and weighted towards higher-rated institutions.

6.
The table below lists the diversified range of investments held by Council as at 31 March 2021:

Table 1: Summary of investment portfolio

Performance Summary

7. Investment performance for the month. The investment portfolio reported an annualised return of 2.60% in March, outperforming the AusBond Bank Bill Index benchmark by 258 basis points. The TCorp Long Term Growth Fund (LTGF) (2.31% return for the month) and The CFS Global Managed Fund (CFS) (0.13% return for the month) were the main contributors towards the performance this month.

8. Historical investment performance. The table below provides year-to-date and historical investment performance compared to the Ausbond Bank Bill Index.

Table 2: Historical investment portfolio performance

9. Investment income. As at 31 March 2021, year-to-date investment income was $9.4m, approximately $1.4m above budget. The outperformance is primarily due to the TCorp LTGF (15.88% return year-to-date), and the CFS Global Managed Fund (6.13% return year-to-date). Council’s portfolio is also weighted towards term deposits and FRNs yielding above 1.50%.

Table 3: Year-to-date cumulative interest income

Performance by Investment Type

Floating rate notes (FRNs)

10. Council’s senior FRNs made up around 14% of the total investment portfolio at month-end. The market value of Councils FRNs collectively fell by approximately -0.08% equating to approximately $61k. During the month, Council sold $1.4m in FRNs, which resulted in a realized capital gain of $5k.

Table 4: Floating rate note investments (A- to AAA rated)

11. Council’s A- to AAA-rated FRNs are senior (high) ranked assets in the bank capital structure. It is expected that, if held to maturity, the FRNs will pay back their original face value, along with its quarterly coupons, throughout the life of the FRN.

12. Council’s advisors do not anticipate Council to lose any capital or interest payments from its current holding of these senior FRNs as all banks continue to maintain high capital buffers as required by the Australian Prudential Rating Agency (APRA). At month-end, Councils FRN’s are now marked at an unrealised capital gain of $840k.

13. They also have no concerns with Council’s investments in BBB-rated senior FRNs given all counterparties continue to maintain robust balance sheets with high levels of capital.

14. On a mark-to-market basis, these FRN’s fell around $14.5k in dollar terms for the month or -0.05%. The total unrealised capital gain is approximately $213k

Table 5: Floating rate note investments (BBB rated)

Northern Territory Treasury Corporation Senior Bonds (NTTC bonds)

15. NTTC bonds comprise 2.0% ($11m) of Council’s investment portfolio and are yielding between 0.90% and 1.00% for two- to five-year terms. NTTC bonds are a ‘retail’ offering and not ‘wholesale’ issuances. Given the lack of liquidity and high penalty costs if they were to be sold/redeemed prior to the maturity date, they are considered to be a hold-to-maturity investment and will be marked at face value throughout the term of the investment.

Term Deposits

16. Term Deposits account for around 70% of the total investment portfolio. Council’s term deposit portfolio was yielding 1.27% p.a. at month-end, with a weighted-average duration of around 540 days, or 1.5 years. The longer average duration will provide some income protection against the low interest rate environment for the next twelve months. However, as existing deposits mature, they will inevitably be reinvested at much lower prevailing rates.

17. Given interest rates have fallen to all-time lows, Council is likely to see a rapid decline in interest income over the next few financial years, with reinvestment offers likely to range between 0.40% and 0.70%.

TCorp Long Term Growth Fund

18. The TCorp Long Term Growth Fund accounts for around 5% of Council’s total investment portfolio. The Fund returned 2.31% for the month, or 30.91% annualised, as both domestic and international markets continued their rally.

Table 6: TCorp Long Term Growth Fund

19. According to Council’s advisors, it is anticipated that there will be a sustained level of volatility in equity markets, particularly as downside risks to global growth remain. Unemployment globally has risen considerably over recent months, with the collective economic impact likely to be more severe than the global financial crisis (GFC).

20. This Fund has a long-term view (7+ years). Given the exposure to volatile equity markets, Council should expect in some months to report negative returns, but over the long-term, it is expected to outperformTDs and FRNs.

CFS Global Credit Managed Fund

21. This fund accounts for around 2.7% of Council’s total investment portfolio. The Fund returned 0.13% (1.57% annualised) in March, as the market valuation of the fund’s assets in global credit securities (FRNs and bonds) marginally rose as credit spreads remained realtively flat.

Table 7: CFS Global Credit Managed Fund

22. The Fund holds a diverse range of securities across the global credit market. It remains very well diversified by issuer in order to mitigate default risk. It invests in nearly 600 corporate bonds from issuers in various countries and industry sectors. This grandfathered fund has a current running yield of 1.5%.

Cash-at-call

23. Cash-at-call makes up approximately 6% of the investment portfolio. Council has negotiated a special rate with National Australia Bank (cash rate plus 45 basis points, currently 0.55%). This rate is higher than most market TDs of one to twelve months.

Maturities

24. Council has a substantial investment allocation to securities and bonds, as well as the CFS Global Credit Managed Fund. The portfolio is well spread across maturities, utilising capacity available in short- to medium-term maturities.

25. The maturity profile as at 31 March 2021. The maturity profile table below illustrates that the maturity duration is well -spread with approximately 15% available in working capital, 22% maturing within twelve months, 19% in one to two years, 38% in two to five years, and a further 6% in greater than five years, maximising council’s returns in longer-term rates.

Graph 1: Maturity profile

Compliance

26. The portfolio complies with Council’s Investment Policy rating limits, with ample investment opportunity still available in A-rated institutions, and approx. $51m capacity in BBB+/unrated institutions.

Graph 2: Investment Policy rating capacity

*BBB+/BBB limits combined under Council’s investment policy.

27. Counterparty Limits. All individual counterparty limits comply with council’s investment policy, with the following exceptions:

Table 8: Exceptions to counterparty limits

Institution	Policy Limit ($‘000)	Held ($’000)	Overweight ($’000)	Reason	Compliance Date
Bank of QLD	52,878	54,228	1,350	This is technically NOT a breach of counterparty limits. Funds placed prior to current investment policy and are considered "Grandfathered". This will be brought back into compliance with the new policy by 29 April 2021 through the maturing of TDs.	29 April 2021
Q Bank	1,000	1,004	4	This is technically NOT a breach of counterparty limits. Funds placed prior to current investment policy and are considered "Grandfathered". This will be brought back into compliance with new policy by the end of 2021 as $500k matures on 14 December 2021.	14 Dec 2021
Judo Bank	250	3,500	3,250	This is technically NOT a breach of counterparty limits. Funds placed prior to current investment policy and are considered "Grandfathered". This will be brought back into compliance with the new policy by 26 September 2022.though the maturing of TDs.	26 Sept 2022

28. None of the counterparties listed in the table above are in technical breach of counterparty limits due to ‘grandfathering’ of these investments prior to the new investment policy. However, these are listed above in order to provide full transparency around when Council expects all ‘grandfathered’ counterparties to be brought back into compliance with the new investment policy.

29. Council engages CPG Research & Advisory (CPG) and Imperium Markets for assistance in all investment matters relating to advice, risk and portfolio weighting. CPG monitor the portfolio daily and conduct a monthly health check review. This confirms that Council’s portfolio is conducted in accordance with the Act, the Regulation and the Investment Policy.

Certification of Investments

30. I hereby certify that the investments for the month of March 2021 have been made in accordance with the Act, the Regulations and Council’s Investment Policy:

Paul Perrett, Chief Financial Officer.

CONSULTATION & TIMING

Stakeholder Consultation

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

Date

Stakeholder

Stakeholder Comment

Council Officer Response

Responsibility

31 Mar 2021

CPG Research & Advisory

Imperium Markets

All Investments are within Policy guidelines and supported by Councils independent advisor.

Refer CPG comprehensive Report

Noting the counterparty overweight position listed in this report, All remaining Investments are within Policy limits and reconcile to the General Ledger as at 31 March 21

Finance Team

Paul Perrett

CFO

Bruce MacFarlane

Treasury & Tax Accountant

Councillor Consultation

32. 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

FINANCIAL IMPLICATION FOR COUNCIL

33. Council’s interest income as at 31 March 2021 exceeds the year-to-date budget forecast by approximately $1.4m, and is currently being assessed as part of the March quarterly review.

Bruce MacFarlane

Tax and Treasury Accountant

Paul Perrett

Chief Financial Officer

Michael Tzimoulas

Executive Director Corporate Services

Attachments:

1 ⇩	Investment and Loans Performance Graph March 2021.pdf	1 Page
2 ⇩	CPG Comprehensive Investment Report - March 21.pdf	19 Pages
3 ⇩	List of Council Investments by maturity March 2021.pdf	9 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 26 April 2021 Item 12.3

FAIR

ITEM NUMBER 12.3

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Public Exhibition - Delivery Program Year Four; Draft Operational Plan and Budget 2021/22

REFERENCE F2021/00521 - D07809567

REPORT OF Commercial Manager; Acting Group Manager City Strategy

PURPOSE:

To request that the revised Delivery Program 2018-22, inclusive of the draft Year Four Operational Plan and Budget (2021/22) be endorsed for the purpose of public exhibition.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council endorse the Delivery Program 2018-2022 and the draft Year Four Operational Plan and Budget 2021/21 (DPOP) for the purpose of placing on public exhibition for a period of 28 days from 27 April to 24 May 2021.

(b) That Council note the feedback from the DPOP exhibition period will be presented at a Councillor Workshop prior to returning to Council for adoption on 28 June 2021.

(c) That Council endorse the commencement of the preparation of the new Community Strategic Plan (CSP), and Delivery Program (DP) for the three years from FY 2022/23 to FY 2024/25 including:

i. a review of the Key Focus Areas, Services and Key Service Measures in the current DPOP;

ii. a strategic financial goal of seeking to achieve a net unrestricted cash surplus over the medium term (i.e. 2 – 3 years).

(d) Further, that Council note the new CSP and DP are scheduled to be approved by the Council in Q4 of 2021/22.

BACKGROUND

1. In accordance with the Integrated Planning and Reporting (IP&R) requirements in the Local Government Act, Council has developed a Delivery Program for the period 2018-2022, inclusive of a draft annual Operational Plan and Budget for 2021/22.

2. The Delivery Program acts as a statement to the community from Council, detailing what it intends to undertake in order to achieve the objectives of the Community Strategic Plan (CSP). In 2018, City of Parramatta adopted a Delivery Program for the period 2018-2021, inclusive of a three year budget and an annual Operational Plan and Budget for Year One (2018/19).

3. The Plan has since been updated annually inclusive of the Focus Areas, programs, projects and budget for each year. In 2021/22, the Delivery Program has been extended a further year, due to the postponed 2020 local government elections extending the current IP&R cycle.

4. The Plan includes a schedule of fees and charges and proposed rates structure for 2021/22.

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

Delivery Program 2018-22

5. The Delivery Program 2018-2022 inclusive of the draft Operational Plan and Budget 2021/22 (the Plan) must be placed on public exhibition for a period of 28 days prior to adoption. This is in accordance with the Local Government Act 1993 s404(4).

6. The Plan must be adopted by no later than 30 June 2021. The draft Plan is now presented to Council for endorsement for public exhibition.

7. Any proposed changes to the Plan arising throughout the exhibition process will be discussed at a Councillor Workshop prior to seeking formal adoption on 28 June 2021.

8. The Plan comprises four parts;

a. Part One: Provides a context and discusses how the Plan was developed, how priorities were determined and how these priorities align to the Community Strategic Plan. (Attachment 1)

b. Part Two: Details the Principal Activities over the life of the Plan and annual Focus Areas, Services, and Service Measures of Council. (Attachment 1)

c. Part Three: Presents the 2021/22 budget, the Revenue Policy and the Rating and Charges Structure for 2021/22. (Attachment 1)

d. Part Four: Details the schedule of Fees and Charges for 2021/22, inclusive of an explanation of Council’s pricing policy and any proposed changes from the current financial year. (Attachment 2)

Process for developing the Operational Plan 2021/22

9. Focus Areas and Service Measures were comprehensively reviewed this year, to ensure clear and accurate articulation of our Focus Areas, reduction in duplication, and distinction between our key projects and business as usual (‘BAU’).

10. Key principles for updating the Plan for 2021/22 included:

a. Include defined projects in Focus Areas, being specific about deliverables and planned completion dates.

b. Remove ‘BAU’ and completed items from Focus Areas, and replace BAU with appropriate Service Measures if they don’t exist already.

c. Remove excess highly operational Service Measures, in favour of 1-2 high quality outcomes-based measures for each service.

d. Remove highly operational ‘internal support service’ Focus Areas: These services primarily support delivering our other community-facing Focus Areas.

e. Refine Service Descriptions: Better reflect what we deliver as BAU.

11. In total, Focus Areas have reduced from 161 in 2020/21, to 44 in the draft for 2021/22, including:

a. 16 Focus Areas removed that will be completed by 31 June 2021.

b. 79 BAU Focus Areas that have been moved/captured in Service Measures.

c. 12 Focus Areas paused or stopped for 2021/22.

12. Of the 44 Focus Areas included for 2021/22:

a. 31 have been identified to complete in 2021/22 (final year of this DPOP).

b. 13 have been identified to continue to the next DPOP (2022-25).

New Three-Year Delivery Program 2022/23 - 2024/25

13. A new three-year Delivery Program must be adopted after Council elections in September 2021 and before 30 June 2021, aligning with the length of the next Council term (Local Government Act s404(4)).

14. The development and review will include:

a. Ensuring that Focus Areas which are due to complete in 2020/21 and 2021/22 are completed;

b. Identification of 3Y Principal Activities and annual Focus Areas for the first year of the Plan;

c. Review of all Services and Service Descriptions from the current Plan, to accurately reflect the services provided by Council;

d. Review of all performance measures for the relevant Services;

e. Alignment of all budgets to their relevant Services and Focus Areas.

Review of Community Strategic Plan

15. City of Parramatta’s Community Strategic Plan (CSP) must be reviewed and endorsed by Council before by 30 June 2022 (Local Government Act s402(5)).

16. Review of the CSP will include comprehensive engagement with community, staff, strategic partners and Councillors throughout the 2021/22 Financial Year, including a review of the Goals, Supporting Strategies, Community Outcomes, and performance indicators in the Plan.

CONSULTATION & TIMING

Stakeholder Consultation

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

Date	Stakeholder	Stakeholder Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
Jan –March 2021	Group Managers, Executive Team	Involvement in draft DPOP, draft budget development	Drafts compiled	Finance; Corporate Strategy

Councillor Consultation

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

Date	Councillor	Councillor Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
4 March 2021	Finance Committee	Discussion on draft DPOP and Budget principles	Incorporated feedback into drafts	Finance; Corporate Strategy
1 April 2021	Finance Committee	Discussion on draft Budget	Incorporated feedback into drafts	Chief Financial Officer
7 April 2021	Councillor Briefing	Discussion on draft DPOP and Budget	Drafts finalised	Finance; Corporate Strategy

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

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

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

20. Parts three and four of the plan (see Attachments 1 and 2) provide details about the draft budget, rating, and fees and charges structures for 2021/22.

21. In 2021/22, Council is budgeting for a deficit of $15.8m (before capital grants and contributions), primarily due to:

a. ongoing COVID-19 impacts resulting in decreased rates and car park revenue

b. the loss of revenue associated with the compulsory acquisition of revenue-generating carparks by the New South Wales government

c. increased depreciation as a result of prior year’s revaluation increase in Council’s stormwater assets.

22. In 2021/22, Council is budgeting to spend $311.7m on capital works, including:

a. Parramatta Square development

b. the new Parramatta Aquatic and Leisure Centre

c. upgrading the Epping Aquatic Centre

d. Phillip Street Smart Street Stage 2

e. Parramatta Road Urban Amenity Improvement Program

f. City River works program.

23. The new approved harmonised rating structure will commence 1 July 2021.

24. Part four of the plan provides details about the draft fees & charges for 2021/22. The draft fees & charges for 2021/22 provide for a general increase of 3.0%. Select fees have varied from the standard increase after taking into account other factors such as community benefits and costs. Statutory fees are as per determination. Council’s fees and charges have been classified into 11 categories. Attachment 3 includes a list of fees and charges that are new, removed or have increased/decreased by more than 5%.

25. Public exhibition of the Delivery Program, Operational Plan and Budget 2021/22 will incur approximately $3,000 in costs for advertising, social media promotion, and translation services for exhibition materials. These costs are fully funded from the Corporate Strategy operating budget.

Chris Sleiman

Commercial Manager

Paul Perrett

Chief Financial Officer

Michael Tzimoulas

Executive Director Corporate Services

Dayne Glinkowski

Acting Group Manager City Strategy

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

Attachments:

1 ⇩	Draft DPOP Parts 1-3: Introduction, Focus Areas & Service Measures, Budgets 2021/22	103 Pages
2 ⇩	Draft DPOP Part 4: Fees & Charges 2021/22	51 Pages
3 ⇩	Key Changes to Draft Fees & Charges 2021/22	12 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 26 April 2021 Item 13.1

ACCESSIBLE

ITEM NUMBER 13.1

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Minutes of the Parramatta Traffic Committee Meeting held on 24 March 2021

REFERENCE F2021/00082 - D07842517

REPORT OF Traffic and Transport Manager

PURPOSE:

That Council consider the minutes and approve the recommendations of the Parramatta Traffic Committee meeting held on 24 March 2021.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council note the minutes of the Parramatta Traffic Committee meeting held on 24 March 2021, as provided at Attachment 1.

(b) Further, that Council approve the recommendations of the Parramatta Traffic Committee meeting held on 24 March 2021 provided at Attachment 1 and in this report, noting the following financial implications for each item.

i. ITEM 2103 A1 ALFRED STREET AT ALICE STREET, HARRIS PARK – INSTALL A RAISED PEDESTRIAN CROSSING

The estimated cost of the installation of the proposed raised pedestrian crossing is $440,000. This work will be 100% funded by Council from the 2020/21 and 2021/22 Active Transport Program Funds.

ii. ITEM 2103 A2 NEWINGTON RETAIL PRECINCT – PROPOSED SPEED CUSHIONS AS PART OF THE INSTALLATION OF A ‘40KM/H HIGH PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY AREA (HPAA)’ RESTRICTION

The estimated cost for the installation of 40km/h High Pedestrian Activity Area (HPAA) restriction and 12 Speed Cushions and the 40km/h HPAA in Newington is $74,627. Council has received 100% funding from the State and Federal Governments through their stimulus commitments towards Road Safety Programs to undertake these works by June 2021. This proposal therefore has no direct financial impact upon Council’s budget.

iii. ITEM 2103 A3 CLUB LANE, ERMINGTON – REVIEW OF TRAFFIC AND PEDESTRIAN CONDITIONS

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

BACKGROUND

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

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

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

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

4. The most recent meeting of the Parramatta Traffic Committee was held on 24 March 2021. The minutes of that meeting and the reports to that meeting are Attachments 1 and 2 of this report.

5. The recommendations from the Parramatta Traffic Committee meeting are provided below:

ITEM NO.

2103 A1 ALFRED STREET AT ALICE STREET, HARRIS PARK – INSTALL A RAISED PEDESTRIAN CROSSING

1. That the existing concrete splitter island located on Alfred Street south of Alice Street, Harris Park be converted to a raised pedestrian crossing as shown on the plan attached to the report be approved subject to all identified funding being available and PS-2 bicycle logos on Alfred Street being installed as detailed below.

- the northbound approach to the raised pedestrian crossing and

- southbound approach to the roundabout in Alfred Street at Alice Street

2. That the existing concrete splitter island located on Alice Street west of Alfred Street, Harris Park be replaced with a painted island as shown on the plan attached to the report and as part of the work detailed in recommendation 1 above.

3. That recommendations 1 and 2 are subject to the final designs being approved by the Transport for New South Wales (TfNSW) prior to the commencement of construction.

Unanimous support

2103 A2 NEWINGTON RETAIL PRECINCT – PROPOSED SPEED CUSHIONS AS PART OF THE INSTALLATION OF A ‘40KM/H HIGH PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY AREA (HPAA)’ RESTRICTION

1. That the information related to the installation of ‘40km/h High Pedestrian Activity Area (HPAA)’ restrictions in the Newington retail precinct as shown in Figure 1 of the report in 2020/21 be received and noted.

2. That speed cushions and PS-2 bicycle logos on the approach to speed cushions be installed in the following locations as part of the installation of ‘40km/h High Pedestrian Activity Area’ restrictions:

a. Avenue of Oceania between Newington Boulevard and Avenue of Europe

b. Avenue of Europe near Avenue of Oceania

c. Avenue of Americas between Avenue of Asia and Fariola Street

3. That recommendation 2 is subject to the final designs being approved by the Transport for New South Wales (TfNSW) prior to the commencement of construction.

Unanimous support.

2103 A3 CLUB LANE, ERMINGTON – REVIEW OF TRAFFIC AND PEDESTRIAN CONDITIONS

That the proposed temporary pedestrian safety improvement works at the existing marked pedestrian crossing in Club Lane, Ermington be deferred for further investigation.

Unanimous support.

CONSULTATION AND TIMING

6. Details of the consultation undertaken with the Community and Councillors for each item, are included in Attachment 3.

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

7. There

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

9. Funding for these projects has been confirmed through the Project Review Committee. The financial comments for each item are provided below:

Item No.
2103 A1	The estimated cost of the installation of the proposed raised pedestrian is $440,000. This work will be 100% funded by Council from the 2020/21 and 2021/22 Active Transport Program Funds.
2103 A2	The estimated cost for the installation of 40km/h High Pedestrian Activity Area (HPAA) restriction and 12 Speed Cushions and the 40km/h HPAA in Newington is $74,627. Council has received 100% funding from the State and Federal Governments through their stimulus commitments towards Road Safety Programs to undertake these works by June 2021. This proposal has therefore no direct financial impact upon Council’s budget.
2103 A3	There is no financial implication to Council as a result of this recommendation.

	FY 20/21	FY 21/22	FY 22/23	FY 23/24
*Item No. 2103 A1:*
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
*Item No. 2103 A2:*
Operating Result
External Costs
Internal Costs
Depreciation
Other
Total Operating Result	Nil
Funding Source	NA

CAPEX
CAPEX
External
Internal
Other
Total CAPEX	Nil
	NA
Funding Source
*Item No. 2103 A3:*
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

CONCLUSION

10. Council officers recommend that the recommendations of the Parramatta Traffic Committee meeting held on 24 March 2021 be adopted by Council.

Richard Searle

Traffic and Transport Manager

Mark Leotta

Group Manager - Development and Traffic Services

Paul Perrett

Chief Financial Officer

David Birds

Acting Executive Director, City Planning & Design

Attachments:

1 ⇩	Parramatta Traffic Committee - Minutes of Meeting held on 24 March 2021	4 Pages
2 ⇩	Parramatta Traffic Committee - Item Reports for Meeting held on 24 March 2021	36 Pages
3 ⇩	Consultation and Timing for the Parramatta Traffic Committee held on 24 March 2021	4 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 26 April 2021 Item 13.2

ACCESSIBLE

ITEM NUMBER 13.2

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Minutes of the Traffic Engineering Advisory Group Meeting held on 24 March 2021

REFERENCE F2021/00077 - D07842528

REPORT OF Traffic and Transport Manager

PURPOSE:

That Council consider the minutes and approve the recommendations of the Traffic Engineering Advisory Group meeting held on 24 March 2021.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council note the minutes of the Traffic Engineering Advisory Group meeting held on 24 March 2021, provided at Attachment 1.

(b) Further, that Council approve the recommendations of the Traffic Engineering Advisory Group meeting held on 24 March 2021 provided at Attachment 1 and in this report, noting the following financial implications for each item.

i. ITEM 2103 B1 REMBRANDT STREET SOUTH OF MELTON STREET, CARLINGFORD – REVIEW OF PEDESTRIAN CONDITIONS

This report identifies that a raised pedestrian crossing in Rembrandt Street south of Milton Street, Carlingford as the preferred pedestrian treatment to improve pedestrian safety at this location.

It is to be noted this location has been included in the “Draft City of Parramatta (Outside CBD) Development Contributions Plan 2021” (Draft Plan) for consideration of funding within 5 years.

ii. ITEM 2103 B2 REQUEST FOR Nine CAR SHARE SPACES IN PARRAMATTA, NORTH PARRAMATTA, EPPING AND WESTMEAD

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

It is to be noted that a report was considered by Council on 24 August 2020 regarding car share fees and charges and it was resolved to make no changes to the existing car share fees as detailed in Council’s Fees and Charges Schedule.

iii. ITEM 2103 B3 PARRAMATTA CBD - REVIEW OF ACCESSIBLE PARKING

This report recommends further investigations to increase height clearance and accessible car parking spaces at Eat Street Car Park. This report also recommends working with Parramatta Westfield to create an information pack for people with disabilities. These recommendations will only involve staff time to implement with an approximate value of $1500 from within existing employee budgets.

iv. ITEM 2103 B4 PROJECTS RECENTLY COMPLETED, PROJECTS CURRENTLY FUNDED, AND PROJECTS LISTS FOR CONSIDERATION OF FUTURE FUNDING

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

v. ITEM 2103 B5 OUTSTANDING WORKS INSTRUCTIONS

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

vi. ITEM 2103 B6 Intersection oF kissing point road and quarry road, dundas valley – REQUEST FOR UPDATE ON PROPOSED TRANSPORT FOR NSW INVESTIGATION

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

BACKGROUND

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

2. The most recent meeting of the TEAG was held on 24 March 2021. The minutes of that meeting and the reports to that meeting are Attachments 1 and 2 of this report.

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

3. The recommendations from the TEAG meeting are provided below:

ITEM NO.

2103 B1 REMBRANDT STREET SOUTH OF MELTON STREET, CARLINGFORD – REVIEW OF PEDESTRIAN CONDITIONS

That Council note that a proposal to replace the existing pedestrian refuge island in Rembrandt Street south of Milton Street, Carlingford has previously been included in the Traffic Projects List – Outside the Parramatta City Centre as a high priority project (for delivery within 0-5 years) and that it is now determined that the preferred pedestrian facility is a raised pedestrian crossing.

Unanimous support.

2103 B2 REQUEST FOR nine CAR SHARE SPACES IN PARRAMATTA, NORTH PARRAMATTA, EPPING AND WESTMEAD

1. That community consultation be undertaken for the installation of the nine (9) GoGet car share spaces listed below:

i. East side of Morton Street south of Gibson Road, Parramatta

ii. West side of Morton Street south of Broughton Street, Parramatta

iii. South side of Broughton Street west of Baludarri Drive, Parramatta

iv. North side of Grose Street west of Macarthur Street, North Parramatta

v. North side of Albert Street east of Church Street, North Parramatta

vi. West side of Forest Grove outside Forest Park, Epping

vii. East side of Hazelwood Place north of Cliff Road, Epping

viii. West side of Victoria Street north of Bridge Street, Epping

ix. North side of Railway Parade east of Alfred Street, Westmead

2. That the outcome of the community consultation for the installation of the car share spaces as detailed in recommendation 1 be referred to the Parramatta Traffic Committee for consideration.

Unanimous support.

2103 B3 PARRAMATTA CBD - REVIEW OF ACCESSIBLE PARKING

1. That a package of information regarding the maximum clearance for accessible car parking spaces and number of spaces in public car parks in the Parramatta CBD be developed and included on Council’s website for distribution to relevant groups through the Parramatta Access Advisory Committee.

2. That Council work with Westfield Parramatta to update the parking section of its website to include information related to accessible car parking spaces on the roof of its car park including the clearance available to access this area.

3. That Council investigate options to change the access arrangements in Eat Street car park to provide higher clearance for accessible parking spaces on the ground floor and increase the number of accessible car parking spaces.

4. That a report be presented to the TEAG in July 2021 addressing the items detailed in recommendations 1 to 3.

Unanimous support

2103 B4 PROJECTS RECENTLY COMPLETED, PROJECTS CURRENTLY FUNDED, AND PROJECTS LISTS FOR CONSIDERATION OF FUTURE FUNDING

1. That Council note that two (2) traffic projects have been completed in January and February 2021.

2. That Council note that an offer of 100% funding up to $149,627 under the Federal and State Government Stimulus Funding - Road Safety Program has been received for the installation of Vehicle Activated Signs in Wentworth Avenue, Pendle Hill/Toongabbie and a ‘40km/h High Pedestrian Activity Area’ restriction in Newington.

3. That the information regarding progress on currently funded projects be received and noted.

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

Unanimous support.

2103 B5 OUTSTANDING WORKS INSTRUCTIONS

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

Unanimous support.

BUSINESS ITEM:

2103 B6 Intersection oF kissing point road and quarry road, dundas valley – REQUEST FOR UPDATE ON PROPOSED TRANSPORT FOR NSW INVESTIGATION

That the enquiry made by Councillor Donna Davis to Transport for NSW regarding an update on proposed road improvement works at the intersection of Kissing Point Road and Quarry Road, Dundas Valley be received and noted.

Unanimous support.

CONSULTATION AND TIMING

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

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

5. There are no legal implications for Council associated with any of the items in this report.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

6. The financial comments for each item are provided below.

Item No.
2103 B1	This report identifies that a raised pedestrian crossing in Rembrandt Street south of Milton Street, Carlingford is the preferred pedestrian treatment. It is to be noted this location has been included in the “Draft City of Parramatta (Outside CBD) Development Contributions Plan 2021” (Draft Plan) for consideration of funding within 5 years.
2103 B2	According to 2020/21 Fees and Charges schedule, an initial application fee of $397 and annual renewal application fee of $159 will apply for the installation of each dedicated car share parking spaces in the Parramatta LGA. These fees include the costs of installing and removing car share spaces. It is to be noted that a report was considered by Council on 24 August 2020 regarding car share fees and charges and it was resolved to make no changes to the existing car share fees as detailed in Council’s Fees and Charges Schedule.
2103 B3	This report recommends further investigations to increase height clearance and accessible car parking spaces at Eat Street Car Park. This report also recommends working with Parramatta Westfield to create an information pack for people with disabilities. These recommendations will only involve staff time to implement with an approximate value of $1500 from within existing employee budgets.
2103 B4	There is no financial implication to Council as a result of this recommendation
2103 B5	Transport for NSW Block Grant funds for 2020/21 have been used for these works.
2103 B6	There is no financial implication to Council as a result of this recommendation

7. The table below summaries the financial impacts on the budget arising from approval of 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	N/A	N/A

Funding Source	N/A	N/A

CAPEX
CAPEX
External
Internal
Other
Total CAPEX	N/A	N/A

Funding Source	N/A	N/A

Richard Searle

Traffic and Transport Manager

Mark Leotta

Group Manager - Development and Traffic Services

Paul Perrett

Chief Financial Officer

David Birds

Acting Executive Director, City Planning & Design

Attachments:

1 ⇩	Traffic Engineering Advisory Group - Minutes of Meeting held on 24 March 2021	6 Pages
2 ⇩	Traffic Engineering Advisory Group - Item Reports for Meeting held on 24 March 2021	45 Pages
3 ⇩	Consultation and Timing for the Traffic Engineering Advisory Group Meeting held on 24 March 2021	3 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 26 April 2021 Item 13.3

ACCESSIBLE

ITEM NUMBER 13.3

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Endorsement of a Draft CBD Integrated Transport Plan for Exhibition

REFERENCE F2021/00521 - D07844996

REPORT OF Senior Project Officer Transport Planning

PURPOSE:

The purpose of this report is to seek Council endorsement for the exhibition of the draft Integrated Transport Plan as part of the CBD Planning Framework project.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council approve the attached draft CBD Integrated Transport Plan (“ITP”) at Attachment 1 for the purposes of exhibition.

(b) That the draft ITP be placed on exhibition for a minimum period of 28 days.

(c) That the outcomes of public exhibition of the ITP and the consideration of submissions are reported back to Council.

(d) Further, that the Chief Executive Officer be authorised to make any necessary minor amendments of a non-policy nature that are consistent with the intent of the draft ITP.

BACKGROUND

1. The Gateway Determination for the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal (CBD PP) issued by the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (Department) requires:

· The preparation of a Strategic Transport Study (STS) for public exhibition with the draft Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal,

· The preparation of a Mesoscopic Traffic Model (Meso) and Integrated Transport Plan (ITP) are required to be completed prior to finalisation of the CBD Planning Proposal.

2. The purpose of these three elements are to identify and quantify the traffic and transport impacts of the CBD PP, and identify appropriate responses by Government. The STS was completed in 2017 and was exhibited with the CBD Planning Proposal.

3. In partnership with Transport for NSW (TfNSW), the Meso Model and ITP have built on the work of the STS to provide additional detail and analysis of the transport task required to support the CBD PP across all modes: walking, cycling, public transport and private vehicles, and provide guidance on when actions will need to be taken.

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

Modelling Scenarios

4. The analysis within the ITP is based on forecasts from traffic and transport modelling. These forecasts are based on three “scenario years” across three land use options, and these are presented below in Tables 1 and 2. In the 2026 “scenario year” the full PP land use forecast was not considered achievable as this represents 40 years of development, in 2036 and 2056 the Base land use forecast not considered realistic as a baseline comparison. The key findings from this modelling is provided in detail below.

Table 1: Parramatta CBD planning proposal land use scenarios

Scenario	Description
Base Case	Assumes business as usual (no Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal) and includes full development of the already gazetted Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011 (LEP)
Partial Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal (Partial PP)	Includes full development of the LEP plus known site-specific planning proposals
Full Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal (Full PP)	Assumes full 40-year supply to 2056

Table 2: Modelled “Scenario years”

Scenario	2026	2036	2056
Base	Yes	No	No
Partial PP	Yes	Yes	Yes
Full PP	No	Yes	Yes

Key Findings

5. Delivery of the existing approved capacity within the CBD (base case) will almost double the forecast number of trips across the day from 274,000 to 451,000, and the full CBD PP will increase that again to just over 600,000 as per Figure 1 below.

Figure 1: Total daily trips per scenario

6. If current travel patterns (half of work trips to CBD by car in 2016) were carried into the future, the significant increase in trips caused by both currently allowed and proposed development would completely saturate the road network. There is limited capacity to expand to surface road network, therefore as overall trips increase, more efficient modes of transport need to be prioritised in order to move increased numbers of people to, through and around the city.

7. The significant increase in jobs and dwellings proposed in the CBD PP is well located from a transport perspective and can be supported with the appropriate supporting traffic and transport infrastructure as outlined below.

Walking and Cycling

8. A significant number of forecast trips are within the CBD itself or within 2-5km, and the most cost-effective and space efficient modes to transport people short distances are walking and cycling. In order to accommodate future development, it is forecast that walking and cycling will need to increase four or five-fold. To achieve this mode shift will require supporting policy and infrastructure. For pedestrians this includes lower speed limits, priority and safety upgrades as well as increased amenity within CBD and along Parramatta Ways routes and crossing points of major roads. For cyclists this means separated cycling facilities within the CBD that connect to the existing network.

9. These initiatives are aligned with those outlined in the relevant endorsed Council strategies, the CBD Pedestrian Strategy, Parramatta Ways and Bike Plan 2017 as well as TfNSW’s Future Transport 2056.

Public Transport

10. Public transport usage is forecast to increase four to five-fold, and carry the greatest share of trips into the CBD in the future of all modes. This not only requires increased capacity and services for heavy rail, but also upgrades and a more dispersed Parramatta interchange. The new Metro station in the CBD is forecast to be well utilised, but some of the greatest increases in patronage will be along key bus corridors. This will require additional capacity, but also investment in bus priority and infrastructure to service this need.

11. The proposed increase in patronage on Light Rail as a result of the CBD PP are marginal and considered well within the capacity of the current network. Patronage increases on Ferries were forecast to be negligible, however this is likely an outcome of perceived unreliability due to tides, slow speeds and frequency of services.

Private Vehicles

12. The existing road network is subject to significant congestion, however there are limited locations, due to development, topography, heritage and other factors, that constrain opportunities for improvement on both the outer and inner ring roads. A mesoscopic model (that has a more constrained, realistic network) was developed to test the impact of the existing LEP, CBD PP and the proposed changes to the private car parking rates in new developments.

13. The largest increase in traffic was due to the existing approved development (base case0. Once the CBD PP was tested in addition to these yields and adjustments were made to account for shift to other modes, car drivers re-timing their trips to avoid congestion, and the reduced parking rates (see “Parking Rate Testing following) the mesoscopic model found that the demand could be accommodated with a reasonable degree of congestion, higher than the base year but without widespread queuing through intersections preventing people moving through. Through this testing, it was identified the indicative maximum capacity of the road network was approximately 100,000 trips, but some of this capacity may be further reduced in the future when more space efficient modes will require additional surface road space, in particular buses.

14. Notwithstanding these general results, congestion was identified affecting key CBD streets and intersections such as Church St (in parts), Great Western Highway, Parkes Street, Harris Street, James Ruse Drive (in parts) and the Cumberland Highway. To ensure traffic can continue to function and support local businesses and residents, local intersection improvements should be implemented where feasible and providing value for money.

Parking Rate Testing

15. To reduce possible overs-supply of parking, Council, acting on advice in the STS, adopted interim parking requirements for Parramatta CBD in April 2017. Council’s parking rates for new residential and commercial development in the CBD were reduced to match City of Sydney “Category A” rates. The resolution adopting these rates also required that they be tested through the Meso Model.

16. In testing the rates, it was found in the “2026 Partial Planning Proposal” the parking rate reduction was found to remove 2-3,000 vehicle trips in each of the peak periods from a total of 63,900 in the AM and 105,000 in PM. In the “2056 Full Planning Proposal” it was more profound, with the reduced parking rates found to remove 9-12,000 vehicle trips in each of the peak periods from a total of 77,000 in the AM and 133,000 in PM.

17. This frees up capacity for freight and servicing, as well as essential trips by other users that need a private vehicle for their trip. Combined with the increase in public and active transport, the reduction in the car parking rate contributed to the development outlined in the CBD PP being able to be serviced from a traffic and transport perspective.

18. City of Sydney parking rates are categorised A, B & C based on accessibility to public transport. The same approach was used in the Parramatta CBD whereby any area outside of a 800m walk to Parramatta Interchange or future Metro, or 400m from Harris Park was proposed Category B areas permit a higher rate of on-site parking for residential dwellings due to greater distance from rail stations and commercial core, requiring residents to own a car for their daily needs. When tested through the model, this marginal increase in residential parking supply on the fringe had minimal impact on trip generation in the peak periods. Therefore it is recommended that the parking rates provided in Table 3 are applied as per Figure 2 in Attachment 1 be exhibited for public comment.

Table 3: Proposed revised parking rates

Figure 2: Proposed categories for residential parking.

Land Reservation Acquisition (LRA) Map

19. The LRA Map identifies land that is reserved for acquisition by government. A new draft LRA map was prepared to improve the capacity and capability of the existing surface roads, particularly at intersections for traffic and transport requirements to support the CBD PP. This was exhibited with the CBD PP. The existing Parramatta LEP 2011 LRA was used as the base, and strategic corridors and intersections were identified, then constraints such as heritage and existing significant development overlayed. Each location was tested to confirm whether it is required for either public transport, private vehicles or regional cycleways.

20. A total of 11 locations, mainly on the inner and outer rings roads, were identified for testing for private vehicle improvements, 8 of these had associated new LRAs. Of these locations, the improvements to performance justified the LRA in all locations except one, resulting in one less parcel being affected by LRA. The full details are provided at in the draft ITP at Attachment 1, but a summary is provided in Table 4.

Table 4: Locations tested

O'Connell St / Victoria Rd	Remove LRA
Harris St between George St and Parkes St	Retain LRA
	Retain LRA
	Retain LRA
Parkes St at Harris St	Retain LRA
Parkes St / Wigram St	Retain LRA
Great Western Hwy / Parkes St / Church St	Retain LRA
Great Western Hwy / Marsden St	Retain LRA

21. A total of 6 locations with associated new LRAs were tested for improvements to public transport, and of these 3 were retained after testing, resulting in three fewer parcels being affected by an LRA.

Table 5: Locations tested (Public Transport)

Great Western Hwy / Pitt St	Retain LRA
Smith St between George St and Macquarie St (west)	Retain LRA
Smith St between George St and Macquarie St (east)	Remove LRA
Smith St north of Phillip St (west)	Remove LRA
Smith St north of Phillip St(east)	Retain LRA
Wilde Ave / Victoria Rd	Remove LRA

22. TfNSW have advised Council that work is currently underway to identify future improvements, but that work will not be completed in time for the public exhibition of the draft ITP or finalisation of the CBD PP. Therefore, this list is not considered comprehensive, but a summary of the best available information at this time.

23. Two corridors were identified for testing of regional cycleways, Marsden Street and George Street. These tests involved generating high level concepts to spatially test the impacts of retrofitting them to the street network. Significant extra work is still required along with additional consultation to further refine these concept plans when they proceed. The Marsden Street Cycleway is priority for short term delivery, however the George Street Cycleway (due to the impact to parking) is not considered a short term priority.

24. Through the testing, it was identified that the LRA on Marsden between George Street and Campbell Street was not required but should be retained north of the River to allow parking on both sides of the street. The LRA on George Street was removed entirely on the southern side, and only retained on the north in 4 locations were either existing or potential future bus stops required additional space for pedestrians and cyclists. This has resulted in 11 fewer parcels on Marsden Street, and 25 fewer parcels on George Street being affected by the LRA. The high level concept plans are provided in the draft ITP at Attachment 1.

Applying the Vision

25. The ITP supports the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal, by providing a

strategic plan to manage the existing and future sustainable transportation needs of Parramatta CBD. The planned growth on the network can be accommodated by:

· Improvements to the public transport network on high trip corridors

· Delivery of walking and cycling infrastructure to cost-effectively shift trips within 30 minutes of the CBD

· Targeted upgrades of the road network to ensure maximized use of the existing road network

· Application of proven TDM to ensure the most efficient use of resources and road space allocation.

Recommended actions are provided in the draft ITP at Attachment 1.

CONSULTATION & TIMING

Stakeholder Consultation

26. Consultation with TfNSW as a key partner in the ITP has been ongoing throughout the development plan, as well as the supporting traffic and transport modelling.

27. Pending Council’s resolution on this matter, future consultation activities as part of the public exhibition of the draft ITP includes:

a. Hosting the exhibition on the Participate Parramatta with links from On Exhibition and Council web page.

b. Printed copies available at Customer Service Centre and Parramatta Library.

c. “Phone a Planner” booked sessions.

d. Industry presentation to Parramatta Chamber of Commerce.

e. Advertisements in the Parramatta Times and Parramatta News.

f. Organic and paid social media promotion.

g. Written notification of all State Agencies, local Members of Parliament and peak industry groups based in Parramatta.

h. Digital notification of existing project subscribers to the CBD Planning Proposal, all council advisory committees and digital subscribers to ePULSE.

i. Mail out to landowners with property affected by the LRA maps, or were affected by LRA, but it was removed as a result of the ITP analysis.

Councillor Consultation

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

Date

Councillor

Comment

Council Officer Response

Responsibility

15/3/2021

Clr Workshop

Lord Mayor

Dep Lord Mayor

Clr Bradley

Clr Davis

Clr Issa

Clr Pandey

Clr Prociv

Clr Tyrell

Clr Wilson

Ensure that all data excludes COVID period and is a true representation of existing conditions.

Clarification on why Westmead was included in PT analysis and not Granville.

Skepticism on the projected congestion and whether it reflects the lived experience, and on traffic models in general.

Current travel patterns based on private vehicle are hard/unlikely to shift, but acknowledging those living in the CBD do walk for many of their trips.

Clarification on what land uses surrounding the CBD were included in the scenarios.

Concerns on overflow parking from private developments into the public street parking.

Clarification sought on who pays for the LRAs. It is important to include all of them with the CBD PP.

Pedestrian safety and movement is very important, but how/will people shift to walking (what are the strategies on reaching City of Sydney levels), wayfinding for pedestrians is important.

Is an LRA needed for access to Fennell St carpark in the future.

George Street Cycleway is unlikely to be supported in the short term due to impact to parking in CBD.

Marsden St Cycleway looks fine, but how will access over GWH be resolved

Actions need clarification on responsibilities.

Traffic congestion will updated to ex-COVID

Granville was outside of the wider study boundary that ended at Parramatta Rd.

Noted

“Greater Parramatta” is included in the standard NSW development scenarios, but it is unclear which precincts this includes.

Noted

If an LRA is requested by TfNSW they are listed as the acquiring authority. If it is a council request on a Council road, Council is the responsible authority.

See endorsed CBD Pedestrian Strategy and Parramatta Ways.

Advice is that an LRA would not be required to access Fennell St Carpark in the future, depending on the scale traffic signals may be required at O’Connell St.

Noted, will not be short term priority.

Access over each side depends on TfNSW approval for a western leg, or turnover of north eastern corner that would allow for adequate space for pedestrians and cyclists.

Actions table will be updated

City Strategy

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

29. The ITP is not a statutory document, but is a supporting document required as part of the Gateway Determination Conditions of the CBD Planning Proposal to identify the traffic and transport impacts, as well as potential responses.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

30. If Council resolves to approve the public exhibition of the ITP in accordance with the proposed resolution, the costs of public exhibition will be approximately $3,500, comprising of $1,610 in advertising, $500 in social media promotion and $900 in printing and distribution of letters. This nominal amount can be covered within existing City Strategy operating budgets.

31. The infrastructure proposed in the ITP to support the CBD Planning Proposal largely rests with the NSW Government in the form of Public Transport. Walking and road upgrades are a mix of Council and NSW Government funded depending on the location and nature of the works. All cycling infrastructure identified in the CBD is eligible for 100% NSW Government funding for construction, but the design will likely require Council funding.

32. Infrastructure that is the responsibility of Council to deliver (including reservations for road widening) will be identified in a CBD Infrastructure Needs list that informs an upcoming Development Contributions Plan for the CBD and will soon be reported to Council.

33. The table below summarises the financial impacts on the budget arising from approval of this report.

	FY 20/21	FY 21/22	FY 22/23	FY 23/24
Operating Result
External Costs	3,500	0	0	0
Internal Costs	0	0	0	0
Depreciation	0	0	0	0
Other	0	0	0	0
Total Operating Result	NIL	NIL	NIL	NIL

Funding Source	Existing Budget

CAPEX
CAPEX
External	0	0	0	0
Internal	0	0	0	0
Other	0	0	0	0
Total CAPEX	NIL	NIL	NIL	NIL

Funding Source

Mark Crispin

Senior Project Officer Transport Planning

Michael Jollon

Transport Planning Manager

Dayne Glinkowski

Acting Group Manager City Strategy

Paul Perrett

Chief Financial Officer

Jon Greig

Executive Director Community Services

Attachments:

1 ⇩

Parramatta CBD Integrated Transport Plan Report V1.6

125 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 26 April 2021 Item 13.4

ACCESSIBLE

ITEM NUMBER 13.4

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

REFERENCE F2021/00077 - D07982548

REPORT OF Road Safety Officer

PURPOSE:

To respond to Council’s Notice of Motion on 9 November 2020 requesting a report be provided on the Safety of Pedestrians and Food Delivery Bike Riders.

Council at its meeting on Monday, 22 March 2021 considered a report on this matter and resolved:

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.

This resolution has been addressed with the addition of items 6, 7 and 8 to the recommendation and in additions to paragraphs 7(ii)c, 7(ii)d, and 7(v)d of this report.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Note that the preliminary draft guidelines for the ‘Food Delivery Rider Safety’ report have been released from the NSW Taskforce led by SafeWork NSW and Transport for NSW.

2. Note that staff will review the NSW Taskforce ‘Food Delivery Rider Safety’ final report due in April 2021 and Centre for Work Health and Safety’s ‘Work Health and Safety of Food Delivery Workers in the Gig Economy’ final report due in October 2021 and report back to Council on potential actions that Council could take to respond to the reports via the Traffic Engineering Advisory Group.

3. Note the Council programs outlined within this report that have been implemented and trialled by Council to date.

4. Promote any future programs focussing on the safety for adult cyclists to Food Delivery Riders too.

5. Invite a Food Delivery Riders representative on to the Cycleways Advisory Committee.

6. Liaise with the Parramatta Light Rail contractor to install further ‘Walk Your Bike’ signs in Church Street.

7. Install ‘Walk Your Bike – fines apply’ signs in Centenary Square to encourage cyclists to disembark and improve pedestrian safety.

8. Trial an engagement program with Parramatta Police Area Command which will provide Police with reflective arm/leg bands (or other items) for Police to distribute to cyclists during Police bike patrols.

9. Note that staff will continue to identify and address issues raised related to cyclist and pedestrian safety.

BACKGROUND

1. On 9 November 2020, Council considered a Notice of Motion regarding the safety of Food Delivery Riders and Pedestrians and resolved:

(a) That Council note:

(i) Community concerns related to the safety of delivery riders and pedestrians within the City of Parramatta.

(ii) Council note the risks from traffic, accidents and fatalities related to food delivery bike riders in Sydney in recent times.

(iii) Increase in food delivery bike riders due to COVID-19.

(iv) Concerns raised by residents for delivery riders use of footpaths. The riding of bicycles on the footpath poses a safety hazard to pedestrians, particularly those with limited mobility, the visually impaired and parents with prams.

(b) Further, that a report be provided on:

(i) Safety and Community awareness measures that council may implement to improve the safety of pedestrians and delivery riders.

(ii) Current relevant programs to improve awareness and safety.

(iii) Role of council in enforcing NSW Road Rule 250 in collaboration with LAC.

(iv) Educational and signage programs on safe riding to be conducted with providers of food delivery rider platforms such as Menulog, UberEats, Deliveroo, Dominos and other major providers.

(v) Means of direct engagement with riders, given the fact that food delivery platforms have not been proactive and have not shown interest in rider and community safety.

2. Four fatalities involving Food Delivery Riders (FDRs) occurred on Sydney roads in late 2020. Since the Council resolution initiating this report, the NSW Government has set up a ‘Food Delivery Rider Safety’ Taskforce to examine whether any avoidable risks may have contributed to the deaths of the food delivery riders. The investigation (led by SafeWork and Transport NSW), is expected to advise on safety improvements that could be made in this industry. The preliminary draft guidelines have been released from the NSW Taskforce (refer to reference SafeWork NSW and Transport for NSW Taskforce draft guidelines). The evaluation and findings report are scheduled to be completed in April 2021 (refer to reference SafeWork NSW and Transport for NSW Taskforce ‘Food Delivery Rider Safety’).

3. Furthermore, since February 2020, the NSW Government’s Centre for Work Health and Safety, in partnership with The Behavioural Insights Team (a policy consultant) and Macquarie University has undertaken research into food delivery in the gig economy. There are four phases to this research. Phase 1 explores the work health and safety perceptions of Food Delivery Workers (FDWs) while phase 2 researches the work health and safety perceptions of Food Delivery Platforms (FDPs). Phase 1 and 2 are now completed. It is intended that phases 3 and 4 will use the information gathered and engage key stakeholders within the industry to design and examine possible interventions to aid the work health and safety of those within the gig economy. The project is due for completion in October 2021 (refer to reference NSW Government Centre for Work Health and Safety, The Behavioural Insights Team, Macquarie University, Nov 2020).

4. Centre for Work Health and Safety’s report ‘Work Health and Safety Perceptions of Food Delivery Platforms in the Gig Economy’ notes that app-based food delivery accounts for 5.6% ($2.6b) of the restaurant trade in Australia and is growing at 86% per year without impacting income that restaurants would otherwise have made without app-based delivery (refer to reference AlphaBeta, February 2020, ‘Growing the Pie’ report).

5. The Covid-19 pandemic saw an increase in unemployment which in turn resulted in an increased supply of workers becoming FDRs. FDRs are generally paid per delivery. This may result in FDRs carrying out risky behavior (such as speeding or illegal cycling movements) in an effort to increase their volume of jobs. The Centre for WHS’s ‘Work Health and Safety Perceptions of Food Delivery Workers in the Gig Economy’ found that food delivery workers tend to be under 30 years old, male, and in Australia on student visas (the five most commonly reported countries of birth were India, Malaysia, Colombia, China and Indonesia). Furthermore, businesses which are serviced by food delivery riders are often located in high pedestrian activity areas resulting in a high interaction between food delivery riders and pedestrians.

6. It is recommended that Council note the preliminary draft guidelines released and that staff review the findings of the NSW Taskforce ‘Food Delivery Rider Safety’ report due in April 2021 and the findings of Centre for Work Health and Safety’s ‘Work health and safety of Food Delivery Workers in the Gig Economy’ report due in October 2021 and report back to Council on potential actions that Council could take to respond to the reports via the Traffic Engineering Advisory Group.

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

7. The responses to each part of Council’s resolution from 9 November 2020 are provided below.

(i) Safety and Community awareness measures that council may implement to improve the safety of pedestrians and delivery riders.

a. Council currently undertakes safety and community awareness measures as detailed in item (ii). The discussion in item (i) relates to possible additional measures that could relate to FDRs.

b. Based on information gathered in Council programs and the findings of the Work Health and Safety draft guidelines, many FDRs are unfamiliar with NSW road rules and/or NSW bike rules and this has been identified as a hazard. The NSW Taskforce provides details of what FDPs and FDRs should be doing to improve safety. The TNSW Taskforce does not indicate that there is any role for Councils in the training of FDRs. The safety awareness and behaviour of FDRs is primarily considered as a work health safety matter.

c. However, Councils and TfNSW have a role in road safety awareness for the public which also benefits FDRs. It is recommended that future programs focussing on safety or encouragement of cycling, such as bike week activities that are promoted to adult cyclists, are also promoted to FDRs. It is also recommended that Council invite a representative of Food Delivery Riders onto the Cycleways Advisory Committee.

(ii) Current relevant programs to improve awareness and safety.

Shared Path Behaviour Education Program

a. Shared paths are designated for the use of both bicycle riders and pedestrians. They provide valuable access where it is undesirable or unsafe to ride on the road. There are several shared paths in the CBD, generally in areas with low pedestrian volumes. Since May 2020, Council has installed temporary behavioral reminder signs on shared paths. There are currently twenty corflute signs with messaging of ‘Share and Take Care’, ‘Slow Down’, and ‘Ring Your Bell’ (refer to attachment 1). The ‘Ring Your Bell’ message encourages cyclists to courteously inform pedestrians that they are approaching. Signs are relocated every three months with shared path locations chosen based on feedback received from customers, incident reports and where higher cyclist and pedestrian volumes occur. Council has received positive feedback from members of the public, noting behavioural improvements of both riders and walkers within the vicinity of the signs including requests for more signs to be installed. The ‘Share and Take Care’ messaging has also been used on City of Parramatta drink bottles which are given away at path activations, Bike Week events and Australia Day activities.

b. This program also targets users of specific paths to improve etiquette and safety in a similar manner to the Delivery Rider Engagement Program (see part (v) below) except the shared path program engages with any fast moving cyclists (including FDRs) and pedestrians displaying unsafe behavior.

Walk Your Bike Advisory Signs

c. In July 2020, Council installed aluminium ‘Walk Your Bike’ advisory signs after receiving reports of FDRs riding on the footpath on the north side of Victoria Road outside Coles Entrada, North Parramatta. Police were notified of the reports. Furthermore, in consultation with Council, the Parramatta Light Rail contractor installed ‘Walk Your Bike’ signage in July 2020 on its Church Street hoardings (refer to attachment 1). Council will liaise with the Parramatta Light Rail contractor to install further ‘Walk Your Bike’ signs in Church Street and other areas that arise. Opportunities to install TfNSW road safety messaging on hoardings are also being considered. Note that it remains legal for children aged 16 and under and their carers to ride on these footpaths, therefore the signs are only advisory.

‘Walk your bikes - fines apply’ signs in Centenary Square

d. Police have advised Council cyclists have been observed riding in Centenary Square. As a result, Council is proposing to install ‘Walk Your Bike – fines apply’ signs in Centenary Square to encourage cyclists to disembark and improve pedestrian safety.

Bike Rack Installation

e. Delivery riders often congregate whilst waiting for a job which can lead to a large number of bicycles and riders in one area. Council is investigating locations to install suitable bike racks from within existing budgets. This will support FDRs and safe pedestrian passage. Wheelchair/motorised scooter access, sightlines, and ongoing PLR works need to be considered during location selection. However to reduce delivery time, some FDRs choose not to lock up their bikes and instead take their bikes into food outlets when picking up an order.

Bicycle Servicing Assistance Program for Bicycle Delivery Riders

f. With an increased number of bicycle delivery riders servicing customers and businesses within the LGA, the ‘roadworthiness’ of bicycles being used by delivery riders was identified as a safety concern. Due to the increased demand, bicycles were covering greater distances resulting in more ‘wear and tear’ on bicycles. Furthermore, it was recognised that delivery riders can share the use of one bike whilst working in shifts. It is acknowledged that bike maintenance can be seen as a low priority to the rider as being ‘off road’ while servicing occurs, results in a loss of income. This is a safety issue and concern for all road users, including pedestrians.

g. In April 2020, as a result of this identified risk, Council initiated a trial program to raise awareness of this issue and actively encourage delivery riders to service their bicycles. After seeking expressions of interest, Council engaged the services of a local bicycle repairer (based in the Parramatta CBD) to participate in Council’s ‘Bicycle Servicing Assistance for Bicycle Delivery Riders’ program. The program provided eligible riders with a $50.00 voucher to be redeemed towards the servicing of their bicycle. As a further incentive, the rider was also offered the use of a free loan bicycle from the repairer while their bicycle was serviced. Participants in the scheme completed a Council survey which provided Council with information on FDR’s road safety awareness and knowledge.

h. Over 20 applications were received however only 9 vouchers were issued as the remaining applicants lived outside of the Parramatta LGA. No vouchers were redeemed. The service provider was contacted by 3 voucher recipients who wanted to use the voucher to replace parts on their bike, not for maintenance. Council received positive feedback on the program initiative from Uber Eats. Greater numbers would have been achieved if bicycle parts were provided, rather than servicing, and riders living outside the Parramatta area could participate (refer to attachment 2 for further program information including flyer and voucher).

(iii) Role of Council in enforcing NSW Road Rule 250 in collaboration with LAC.

a. By law, Council Rangers are unable to issue fines to riders who ride on the footpath (NSW Road Rule 250). These fines can only be issued by the Police. Any change in the law to allow Council Rangers to issue fines would result in resource ramifications and additional cost to Council. The work health and safety of Council Officers in performing this duty would also need to be considered.

b. Council’s Ranger and Parking Services Manager contacted the Crime Prevention Officer (CPO) at Parramatta Police Area Command and the CPO at Auburn Police (Homebush area) reporting the complaints received regarding FDRs. Parramatta Area Command utilized their foot and bike patrol to actively target offenders (focusing on the CBD).

c. Feedback received from the Parramatta CPO noted that while fines have been issued, they have been minimal as fines can only be issued when Police directly witness an illegal rider. Most riders appear to be overseas students/workers (non-permanent residents) and fines do not appear to be an effective deterrent. The decision to either provide a warning or a fine is made on a case by case basis at the discretion of the Police Officer. Various factors are taken into account including time of day, pedestrian traffic, speed of the rider, danger to the public, prior warnings and whether a complaint was made by a member of the public and any other factors deemed relevant by the Officer. Furthermore, Council Rangers and Parking Services collaborated with Council’s City Safe Team to conduct a week long street count using CCTV footage to establish rider behaviour (such as riding on footpaths, time, number of riders and locations). This information was then provided to the Police to assist with patrols.

d. Other regulatory measures conducted by Rangers and Parking Services have included written correspondence to the 3 major delivery services (Deliveroo, Menu Log and Uber Eats) advising of the increase in complaints and requesting that they instruct their riders to use the road and not the footpath as per Section 250 of the Road Rules 2014.

(iv) Educational and signage programs on safe riding to be conducted with providers of food delivery rider platforms such as Menulog, UberEats, Deliveroo, Dominos and other major providers.

a. Onboard training is the process a food delivery worker does when signing up to deliver for a platform. Each platform can decide what work health and safety information is provided to FDRs and in what context and delivery. Some platforms offer little on WHS policies and practices while others provide links, articles, education videos and quizzes to FDRs during their onboarding process. The Centre for Work Health Safety project stated that ‘while the majority of FDWs cared about safety, and believed that WHS was their responsibility, many demonstrated a lack of understanding and skills implementing standard safety information and practice’.

b. The NSW Taskforce advises that when onboarding FDRs, the FDP should consider their suitability, knowledge, and competence to provide safe and reliable food delivery services (note that this information from the Taskforce includes motorcycle or scooter riders). It requires that the FDP should:

· Ensure FPRs are trained and competent to do the work and can:

- demonstrate an understanding of NSW road rules

- demonstrate an understanding of NSW bike rules

· Ensure that FDRs hold the necessary credentials to undertake the work:

- visa to work

- NSW Rider Licence – if the FDR has resided in NSW for over 3 months

· Ensure that FDRs have the skills and confidence to ride safely on NSW roads

- riding skills

- knowledge of specific hazards of the job

· Ensure that FDRs retain the necessary skills and competencies to work safely.

- annual refresher training

· Amend training requirements and competencies when new hazards are notified.

c. On 28 February 2021, the Sydney Morning Herald reported that as of 2 March 2021, Uber Eats will be commencing a new object recognition feature in its app to detect whether its riders are wearing a helmet. The rider will also be required to complete a checklist of their bike’s roadworthiness. Uber Eats will also begin distributing lights, reflective vests, bells and phone holders (however not helmets) to their riders during March 2021. The new helmet detection software and checklist are being implemented in Australia before anywhere else. Some other companies, including Deliveroo, already provide their riders with some safety items such as jackets.

(v) Means of direct engagement with riders, given the fact that food delivery platforms have not been proactive and have not shown interest in rider and community safety.

Delivery Rider Engagement Program

a. In August 2020 Council engaged Addventageous (a social enterprise bike education and training organisation) to monitor and engage with riders within the Parramatta CBD. This involved talking directly to riders regarding the road rules and their responsibilities. Approximately 90 riders across 6 days were engaged during this program (refer to attachment 3 for program report).

TfNSW Promotional Material

b. TfNSW provide creative assets and resources for advertising and educational purposes on various road safety issues. This material focuses on public education, rather than being specific to a workforce. There has been no educational material made available from TfNSW targeting FDRs on their road safety responsibilities whilst performing this service. TfNSW also has promotional material for road rules awareness that Council can use in promotions.

SafeWork Inspector Interaction

c. During February 2021, SafeWork Inspectors have been targeting high risk areas in Sydney to observe FDR behaviour and overall systems of work and evaluating what they see against the draft Work Health and Safety guidance developed to date. This included SafeWork Inspectors asking FDRs questions around their knowledge and understanding of the WHS requirements, and the way they are working (refer to attachment 4 for article report). Targeted locations have been selected from data analysed by the taskforce and include Parramatta.

Support Increased Police Engagement with Cyclists in the Parramatta CBD

d. The Crime Prevention Officer (CPO) at Parramatta Police Area Command has advised Council that both FDRs and cyclists commuting into the CBD have been observed to ride on footpaths. This activity is partially a result of road closures (due to PLR construction). Some cyclists do not disembark and continue their journey on footpaths which are affected by construction and cyclone fencing.

To assist Police in their engagement with cyclists in the Parramatta CBD, it is proposed to provide Parramatta Police Area Command reflective arm/leg bands (or other items) for Police to distribute to cyclists during Police bike patrols. This trial aims to facilitate Police interaction with cyclists in the CBD and encourage riders to follow the NSW Road Rule 250, whilst also providing a safety resource to cyclists. A budget of $500 from the Traffic and Transport promotions budget for 2021/2022 can be allocated to purchase approximately 50 pairs of reflective arm/leg bands for this trial engagement program. Council will assess the program with Police after distribution of the safety equipment is complete.

(vi) The feasibility of registration of cyclists in consultation with State Government.

a. In 2011, the Roads and Traffic Authority (now part of Transport for NSW) provided an internal briefing that considered registration of cyclists, which then became public. The briefing was in response to community stakeholders that, from time to time, raise the idea that bicycles used in NSW should be registered and display a number plate and/or that cyclists be licensed before being permitted to ride. The briefing stated that the ‘NSW Government’s position has been that it does not support such proposals, on the basis that safe and legal cycling should remain free of government fees and charges’ (refer to reference ‘Sustainable Transport Section briefing bicycle registration and Cyclist licensing’ 2011). The RTA advice was that it is ‘against the introduction of mandatory bicycle registration or cyclist licensing schemes’ and concluded that ‘reality-testing of suggested schemes shows the low likelihood of any resulting benefits justifying the difficulty and cost of introducing effective measures.’ Council staff are not aware of any more recent information in NSW on this subject.

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
n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a

Councillor Consultation

9. This report was deferred for a period of four (4) weeks to investigate what tangible actions Council can take to improve the safety within our Local Government Area. This resolution has been addressed with the addition of items 6, 7 and 8 of the recommendation.

Date	Councillor	Councillor Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
24/02/21	Councillor Pandey	See previous Council resolution for deferral.	See items 6, 7 & 8 of the updated recommendation. The additional items included in this report were discussed with Councillor Pandey on 8 April 2021 who was supportive of the proposals.	Manager Traffic and Transport

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

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

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

11. If Council resolves to approve this report in accordance with the proposed resolution, there will not be any financial impact on the budget. The recommendations in this report will involve staff time to implement with an approximate value of $500 from within existing employee budgets. In addition to this, an expenditure of $500 from the Traffic and Transport promotions budget will be allocated to provide Police with reflective arm/leg bands (or other items) for Police to distribute to cyclists during Police bike patrols

12. The financial impacts to the budget, as set out in this section, will not require to be included in the next Quarterly Budget Review for endorsement by Council.

13. The table below summarises the financial impacts on the budget arising from approval of 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

Tracey Holman

Road Safety Officer

Richard Searle

Traffic and Transport Manager

Mark Leotta

Group Manager - Development and Traffic Services

Paul Perrett

Chief Financial Officer

David Birds

Acting Executive Director, City Planning & Design

Attachments:

1 ⇩	Shared Path Behavioural Education Program and Walk Your Bike signage	2 Pages
2 ⇩	Assisted Bicycle Servicing for Bicycle Delivery Riders Program Report	2 Pages
3 ⇩	Addventageous Delivery Rider Engagement report	4 Pages
4 ⇩	Food Delivery Compliance Begins This Weekend Bicycle NSW	7 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

SafeWork NSW and Transport for NSW Taskforce ‘Food Delivery Rider Safety’

https://www.safework.nsw.gov.au/compliance-and-prosecutions/joint-taskforce-food-delivery-rider-safety

SafeWork NSW and Transport for NSW Taskforce draft guidelines

https://www.safework.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/959434/Draft-Guide-to-Managing-WHS-in-the-Food-Delivery-Industry.pdf

SafeWork Inspector Interaction

https://bicyclensw.org.au/food-delivery-compliance-begins-this-weekend/

NSW Government Centre for Work Health and Safety, The Behavioural Insights Team, Macquarie University (Nov 2020) ‘Work health and safety of food delivery workers in the gig economy’

Retrieved from

https://www.centreforwhs.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/932677/Work-health-and-safety-of-food-delivery-workers-in-the-gig-economy..pdf

NSW Government Centre for Work Health and Safety, The Behavioural Insights Team, Macquarie University (Nov 2020) ‘Work health and safety perceptions of food delivery platforms in the gig economy’

Retrieved from

http://www.centreforwhs.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/932623/Work-health-and-safety-perceptions-of-food-delivery-platforms-in-the-gig-economy..pdf

AlphaBeta, February 2020, ‘Growing the Pie’ Report https://alphabeta.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/growing-the-pie-final-report.pdf

RTA ‘Sustainable Transport Section briefing bicycle registration and Cyclist licensing’ 2011 report http://images.smh.com.au/file/2014/07/03/5566906/regofour.pdf?rand=1404379610781

Council 26 April 2021 Item 14.1

GREEN

ITEM NUMBER 14.1

SUBJECT FOR NOTATION: Floodplain Risk Management Committee Minutes 3 March 2019 and 17 November 2020

REFERENCE F2021/00521 - D07968448

REPORT OF Senior Project Officer Waterways

PURPOSE:

To inform Council of the confirmed Minutes of the 5 March 2019 Parramatta Floodplain Risk Management Committee meeting, as well as the draft Minutes of the 17 November 2020 Committee meeting.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council receive and note the confirmed Minutes of the 5 March 2019, and the draft Minutes of the 17 November 2020 Parramatta Floodplain Risk Management Committee meetings.

BACKGROUND

1. The City of Parramatta Floodplain Risk Management Committee (FRMC) is an Advisory Committee of Council and meets as required to provide strategic level advice to Council on any issues related to flooding.

2. The membership of the FRMC includes Councillors, community members and groups, landowners, businesses, environmental groups and government agencies. The FRMC is chaired by Clr. Phil Bradley.

3. A copy of the confirmed Minutes of the FRMC meeting held on 5 March 2019 is provided at Attachment 1. A summary of the draft minutes of this meeting was provided to Council at its Council Meeting of 22 July 2019. There were two changes made to Item 6c from the previously supplied draft Minutes.

a. Item 6c was modified to read, “It was indicated that Council is looking into the feasibility of installing CCTV cameras in high flood risk areas such as dams.”

b. The names of the dams being investigated were also added to Item 6c, being Lake Parramatta, McCoy Park Basin, North Rocks Reserve, Muirfield Golf Course Basin, and West Epping Reserve Basin.

These changes to the draft Minutes of the 5 March 2019 meeting were agreed at the 17 November 2020 FRMC meeting.

SUMMARY OF THE DRAFT MINUTES OF 17 NOVEMBER 2020 MEETING

4. A copy of the draft Minutes of the FRMC meeting held on the 17 November 2020 is provided at Attachment 2. These Minutes will be confirmed at the next meeting of the Committee, which is currently being planned for May 2021. A summary of the key Agenda and discussion items at the 17 November 2020 is provided as follows:

a. How the new light rail system will be managing flooding risk – Parts of the new Light Rail system will be affected by flooding. The Interface Manager Parramatta Light Rail (PLR), presented the nature of the risks across the different light rail areas. An explanation was given of the flood assessment carried out and the types of designs used to manage flood risks were discussed. Committee members then had a chance to ask questions before thanking the PLR team.

b. Preliminary flood related community feedback on two documents - the Draft CBD Flood Risk Plan and the Draft amalgamated CBD LEP – Councils Team Leader Land Use Planning, presented the CBD Planning Proposal, how Council plans to manage flood risk through planning controls, and the next steps for the engagement of the plans. It was noted that only limited responses have been received so far.

c. Progress report on the Parramatta River flood modelling project and timeline for finalisation of the modelling work – Council’s Supervisor Catchment Management, presented an update on progress and a current timeline for the completion of the Parramatta River Flood Study project. The timeline suggests that the Final Flood Study will be presented to Council for its endorsement in 2022.

d. Report on February 2020 flooding event – Council’s Catchment Systems Coordinator, presented the weather events that transpired on the 9^th and 10^th February 2020 that led to minor flooding in some parts of the catchment. Data from Councils FloodSmart Parramatta flood warning system and the community flood impacts were reviewed after the event and the event was found to be approximately a 1:5 to 1:20 year event, depending upon which creek catchment was affected. Based on this new data, changes to some flood warning trigger levels have been made.

5. The following two Agenda items for the 17 November 2020 meeting were deferred until the next Committee meeting:

a. Current operation and future plans for the FloodSmart Parramatta system; and

b. Reviewing and updating existing Council’s Floodplain Risk Management Policy (2014).

CONSULTATION & TIMING

Consultation - General

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

Date

Stakeholder

Stakeholder Comment

Council Officer Response

Responsibility

17 November 2020

Floodplain Risk Management Committee

Attached are the draft Minutes of the 17 November 2020 Committee meeting

This Council report summarises the draft Minutes of the 17 November 2020 Committee meeting

Consultation by Paul Hackney

City Strategy Unit / CEO Office

Consultation - Councillor

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

Date

Councillor

Councillor Comment

Council Officer Response

Responsibility

17 November 2020

Clr. Bradley, Clr Prociv

No comments

Councillors were consulted on draft Committee Minutes of 5 March 2019 at the 17 November 2020 Committee meeting, and approved them as being correct, subject to minor changes

Consultation by Paul Hackney

City Strategy Unit / CEO Office

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

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

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

9. If Council resolves to approve this report in accordance with the proposed resolution, the financial impact on the budget are set out in the table below.

10. The financial impacts to the budget, as set out in this section, will be included in the next Quarterly Budget Review for endorsement by Council.

11. The table below summarises the financial impacts on the budget arising from approval of this report.

	FY 20/21	FY 21/22	FY 22/23	FY 23/24
Operating Result
External Costs	0	0	0	0
Internal Costs	0	0	0	0
Depreciation	0	0	0	0
Other	0	0	0	0
Total Operating Result	NIL	NIL	NIL	NIL

Funding Source

CAPEX
CAPEX
External	0	0	0	0
Internal	0	0	0	0
Other	0	0	0	0
Total CAPEX	NIL	NIL	NIL	NIL

Funding Source

Paul Hackney

Senior Project Officer Waterways

Helen Papathanasiou

Environmental Outcomes Manager

Dayne Glinkowski

Acting Group Manager City Strategy

Paul Perrett

Chief Financial Officer

Attachments:

1 ⇩	Floodplain Risk Management Committee - Final Minutes 5 March 2019	5 Pages
2 ⇩	Floodplain Risk Management Committee - Draft Minutes 17 November 2020	7 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 26 April 2021 Item 17.1

INNOVATIVE

ITEM NUMBER 17.1

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

REFERENCE RZ/4/2015 - D07996359

APPLICANT/S Think Planners Pty Ltd

OWNERS Holdmark Properties Pty Ltd

REPORT OF Project Officer Land Use

Development applications considered by Sydney central city planning panel

Nil

PURPOSE

Development applications considered by Sydney central city planning panel

Nil

PURPOSE

To enable Council to consider the outcomes of the public exhibition of the Planning Proposal, draft site-specific Development Control Plan and draft Planning Agreement for land at 197 and 207 Church Street and 89 Marsden Street, Parramatta, and to seek Council’s endorsement to:

· forward the Planning Proposal to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment for finalisation, once the Development Control Plan (DCP) has been endorsed and the Planning Agreement has been executed by Council;

· finalise the site-specific DCP (with some amendments); and

· enter into the Planning Agreement.

To allow Council to consider issues and options identified at a Councillor Workshop held on 7 April 2020.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council receives and notes the submissions made during the public exhibition of the Planning Proposal, draft Development Control Plan (DCP) and draft Planning Agreement at 197 and 207 Church Street and 89 Marsden Street, Parramatta (a summary of submissions is provided at Attachment 1).

(b) That (subject to the clarification outlined in this report relating to removing any references to existing PLEP 2011 Clause 7.14) Council endorse for finalisation the Planning Proposal for land at 197 and 207 Church Street and 89 Marsden Street, Parramatta (provided at Attachment 2) which seeks to amend Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011 as follows:

· Apply an FSR of 10:1;

· Apply a height of part 105m part 12m;

· Include provisions that require a minimum 1:1 commercial floor space be provided in any redevelopment and allow for unlimited commercial floor space to be provided;

· Apply the full range of car parking rates specified in the current draft Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal.

(c) That Council submit the Planning Proposal to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE) for finalisation once the Planning Agreement has been executed by the Applicant and Council.

(d1) That Council finalise the DCP (Attachment 3) with the following amendments:

(i) removal of controls relating to vehicular access (refer to part (e) of this resolution below for further detail);(ii) ensuring servicing, loading and set down/pick up activities take place on site;

(ii) strengthening archaeology controls;

(iii) resolving inconsistencies in the exhibited DCP relating to basement retail use and parking due to flood considerations by removing any references to habitable floor space below the flood planning level not being permitted

(iv) protection of awning on Murray Bros building.

(d2) That prior to Council considering the Draft CBD DCP for approval that Council seek advice from the following stakeholders on whether a prohibition of habitable floor space in basements is appropriate in the Parramatta CBD context:

• Office of Environment and Heritage

• State Emergency Service (SES)

• Council Flood Plain Management Committee

• Consultants who prepared Council Flood Study that supports the CBD LEP.

(e) That, with regards to d1(i) above, Council’s current policy position on this matter is to support vehicle access arrangements whereby vehicles enter from Macquarie St and exit onto Marsden St, noting the following:

(i) This position should form the basis of assessment of this matter for

any Design Competition or Development Application at this site.

(ii) The matter of vehicle access at this site will be re-exhibited as part of

the draft Parramatta CBD DCP, or a Development Application at this site, whichever comes first.

(f) That Council delegate authority to the Chief Executive Officer to finalise the draft Planning Agreement at Attachment 4, and to sign the Planning Agreement on Council’s behalf.

(g) That Council officers write to DPIE to advise them of Council’s resolution on this matter and to request that DPIE considers commencing finalisation processes (such as legal drafting and map-making) prior to the formal submission of the Planning Proposal referred to in (c) above. (Note: The reason for making this request is to expedite plan-making processes.)

(h) That Council note the Local Planning Panel’s advice (refer to Attachment 5) is consistent with the Council Officer’s recommendation in the report.

(i) Further, that Council delegate authority to the Chief Executive Officer to make any minor amendments and corrections of a non-policy and administrative nature that may arise during the plan finalisation process, relating to the Planning Proposal, site-specific Development Control Plan and Planning Agreement.

COUNCIL MEETING 22 March 2021

1. Council considered a report on the subject Planning Proposal and supporting Development Control Plan on 22 March 2021 and resolved as follows:

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.

2. The previous report considered by Council has been reproduced below subject to the following amendments:

· New information provided under the headings “Councillor Workshop” and “Consultation and Timing” relating to the issue of basement flooding and consultation with Council; and

· Removal of the previous assessment and recommendations related to the DCP controls about habitable floor space below ground (in a basement level) which are now addressed in the section headed “Councillor Workshop”.

COUNCILLOR WORKSHOP

3. A Councillor workshop was held on 7 April 2021. The presentation to the workshop referred to the following issues:

a. Flood affectation of the site and the CBD more broadly;

b. Flood Policy and Council liability issues;

c. Examples of other sites where basements have been proposed at the Development Application stage.

4. It is important that Council actions comply with the requirements of the NSW Floodplain Development Manual, the Local Floodplain Risk Management Policy, and the Australian Institute for Disaster Resilience Handbooks; and are satisfactory to emergency management authorities who will then manage the implications of flooding when it occurs. Ensuring consistency with the Floodplain Development Manual provides Council with protections from liability under Section 733 of the Local Government Act. Council will achieve compliance by including provisions in the Parramatta Local Environmental Plan and CBD Development Control Plan that ensure development is consistent with these plans and strategies.

5. As part of the preparation of the CBD Planning Proposal a Flood Study has been undertaken because special Ministerial approval is required to increase the density of development in the Parramatta River flood plain. It makes recommendations for a suite of new flooding controls as follows:-

a. The LEP will include clauses that will ensure that all future occupants of the CBD can evacuate to a safe place in the event of any flood up to and including the Probable Maximum Flood.

b. CBD DCP will need to be reviewed to include controls on how developments are to be designed and managed to ensure that the evacuation requirements in the DCP can occur in a safe and efficient manner and to minimise risk to life and property.

6. Following consideration of these issues the recommendation is that Council Officers continue collect background information on the risk and responsibilities required to manage flooding in the Parramatta CBD before Council settles on a set of DCP policies to manage flooding in the Parramatta CBD.

7. In the short term, controls prohibiting habitable floor space can be removed from the Site Specific DCP being considered by Council for 197 Church Street. At the time of preparation of this report a Design Competition Brief was being formulated with the applicant that will permit the option of habitable basement floor space to be considered as part of the Development Application (DA) process. The requirements the applicant will need to satisfy to ensure compliance with the NSW Floodplain Development Manual, the local Flood Plain Risk Management Policy, and associated policies and documents, will be communicated as part of the Design Competition Brief process and formal pre-lodgement process for the DA. It should be noted that compliance with the objectives may not be possible on this site, but the applicant will be given the opportunity to make their case.

8. Further consultation and briefing to Councillors on this matter is proposed as part of the preparation of the draft CBD DCP. Officers will provide Councillors with additional information on the proposed flood related design controls, including material for inclusion that discourages habitable basement floorspace in the CBD, prior to the Draft DCP being reported to Council for its consideration. This will include advice from relevant State Government and Emergency Agencies, Council’s Flood Plain Management Committee and the consultant who advised Council on the CBD Planning Framework.

PLANNING PROPOSAL TIMELINE

SITE DESCRIPTION

9. The site is on the north-western corner of Church and Macquarie Streets, Parramatta. The subject site consists of two lots (Lot 1 DP 710335 and Lot 1 DP 233150) with a total site area of 4,307.4m². It is an irregular “L” shape, with frontages to Church Street to the east, Macquarie Street to the south, and Marsden Street to the west. (see Figure 1).

Figure 1: Site Location

COMPARISON OF PLANNING CONTROLS: EXISTING, PARRAMATTA CBD PLANNING PROPOSAL AND SITE-SPECIFIC PLANNING PROPOSAL

10. Table 2 outlines the planning controls for the site under (1) existing Parramatta LEP 2011, (2) the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal and (3) the site-specific Planning Proposal and demonstrates that this site-specific Planning Proposal is generally compliant with the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal.

Table 2: Planning Proposal comparison to Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal

Scenario	Current Controls	Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal Controls	Recommended Site-specific Planning Proposal controls
Land-Use	B4 Mixed Use	B4 Mixed Use	B4 Mixed Use
FSR	Part 3:1 Part 4:1	Base: Part 3:1 and Part 4:1 Incentive: 10:1 (11.5 with bonus)	10:1 (11.5:1 with design excellence bonus). (Plus additional commercial floor space – see below)
HOB	18m (6 storeys)	Base: Part 36m (12 storeys) and part 12m (4 storeys) Requirement to comply with Sun Access Protection provision and 12m for Church Street frontage.	Part 105m (32 storeys) and part 12m (4 storeys) on Church Street frontage [105 m being compliant with sun access requirements] Compliance with Sun Access Protection provision in the CBD PP.
Land Acquisition	Nil	In the land reservation acquisition map the Marsden Street frontage of the site is subject to the requirement for provision of a regional cycleway.	A draft Planning Agreement has been negotiated to secure a 2m right of public access over the 2m ground floor setback area in order to ensure a satisfactory publicly available footpath along Marsden Street.
Minimum Commercial Floor Space	Nil	Minimum 1:1 commercial floor space required in mixed use development Unlimited commercial floor space permitted as long as site area of 1,800 m2 achieved	Insert clause that will require minimum commercial floor space 1:1 and unlimited commercial floor space on this site (given the site area is greater than 1,800m2) consistent with CBD PP This will give the applicant the opportunity to apply for a total FSR of 11.8:1 (in the case that a non-residential option utilises the unlimited commercial floorspace provision) subject to meeting other Council requirements.
Active Street Frontages	N/A	Site identified on Active Frontage Map proposed for CBD PP	The site-specific DCP requires active frontages on Church, Macquarie and Marsden Streets
High performing buildings (residential)	N/A	5% high performing building bonus, potentially allowing up to 12:1 FSR total.	This Planning Proposal does not pursue the high performing building bonus provisions of the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal. Solar access and Apartment Design Guide requirements mean this site would be unlikely to achieve an FSR beyond 11.5:1 if it elected to use a residential development option.
High Performing buildings (commercial)		Office premises with a gross floor area (GFA) greater than 10,000m² are required to meet certain standards regarding energy and water targets. Dual piping to allow capacity for future use of recycled water.	This requirement of the CBD PP can be progressed through a design competition brief to achieve Design Excellence and will be further considered at DA stage. The reason why the requirement has not been included in the subject Planning Proposal is due to the age of the Planning Proposal and transitional issues associated with the evolving policy of the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal progressing alongside numerous site-specific Planning Proposals.
Parking	Parking Rates	Endorsed Parking Rates consistent with City of Sydney CBD Parking rates - Category A. These are subject to future review when more detailed parking and traffic studies can determine if these rates should be amended.	Insert clause setting site specific parking rates as per Council’s resolution on CBD Planning Proposal and Gateway Determination condition. Refer to further commentary in this report on clarifying the rates that will apply.
Solar Access	Clause 7.4 seeks to protect Parramatta Square from overshadowing	Clauses proposed to retain protection to portion of Parramatta Square between 12 noon and 2pm measured on 21 June.	The nominated height (part 105m and part 12m) for this site has been demonstrated through urban design analysis to be compliant with the outcomes sought in the Parramatta CBD. However, clause 7.4 in the existing LEP and the clause proposed in the CBD PP will continue to apply to this site to ensure development of this site cannot overshadow Parramatta Square at the designated time of the year.

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN AND PLANNING AGREEMENT

11. Council endorsed the draft Development Control Plan (DCP) and draft Planning Agreement for exhibition on 11 May 2020. The exhibited draft DCP (Attachment 3) covers matters including building form, public domain, traffic and transport, heritage and flood management.

12. On 11 May 2020 Council also resolved to give delegated authority to the CEO to negotiate and endorse for exhibition a draft planning agreement that takes into consideration the applicant's letter of offer and a particular negotiating position. The exhibited draft Planning Agreement (Attachment 4) makes provision:

· to secure a 2-metre right of public access over the ground floor setback along Marsden Street.

· for a monetary contribution to be used towards public domain improvement works within the Parramatta Central Business District, in the event that the land is developed for residential purposes (in line with Council’s policy framework on Community Infrastructure in the Parramatta CBD).

13. Table 3 provides Council officers’ best estimate of a contribution that could be achieved under the current proposed controls if residential development was to occur on the site.

Table 3: Calculation of Planning Agreement contribution

Development parameters
Site Area	4:1 part of site = 3,331.8 m² 3:1 Part of Site = 975.6 m² Total = 4,307.4 m²
Base FSR	Part 4:1 and Part 3:1
Base Gross Floor Area	4:1 Part of the site = 4 x 3,331.8 = 13,327 m² 3:1 Part of the site = 3 x 975.6 m² = 2,926.8 m²
Estimate FSR Achievable under Residential Scheme	8.2:1 across whole site⁽¹⁾ 4:1 Part of the site = 3,331.88.2 = 27,320.8m² 3:1 Part of the site = 975.68.2 = 7,999.9m²
Phase 1 calculation
Uplift in gross floor area	4:1 Part of Site - (27,320.8m² – 13,327m²)= 13,993.8m² 3:1 Part of Site - (7,999.9m² – 2,926.8m²)= 5,073.1m² Total Uplift = 13,993.8m² + 5,073.1m² = 19,066.9m²
Community infrastructure payment required at $150 /m²	(19,066.9m² x $150) = $2,860,035

(1) Estimate of Council Officers of Maximum FSR achievable to comply with SEPP 65 Design Guidelines and Solar Access Controls

PUBLIC EXHIBITION

14. The Planning Proposal, draft DCP and draft Planning Agreement relating to 197 and 207 Church Street and 89 Marsden Street, Parramatta were publicly exhibited from 16 November 2020 to 16 December 2020 in accordance with relevant provisions of the Gateway Determination and Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulations 2000.

15. Five submissions were received during the public exhibition period, comprising four from State agencies and one from Council's Heritage Advisory Committee. A summary of submissions and Council officers’ responses are provided in the submissions table at Attachment 1.

Table 4: Key Agency Issues and Council officer response

Key Issues	Council officer response
Heritage NSW
Requests consultation with the Heritage Division of the Federal Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment (DAWE) because of because of potential visual impacts on Old Government House and Domain (OGHD),	DAWE has responded that any development impacts are not likely to be significant, but a self-assessment should be undertaken to confirm this position with referrals to DAWE if needed. Council officers consider that these matters can be addressed at DA stage with any referral to DAWE being unlikely.
Request that the archaeological controls of the draft DCP should be revised to reflect the potential state significance of the archaeology on the site. Suggests the insertion of a new objective and associated control.	It is considered that the proposed revisions to the DCP will strengthen protection of archaeology of potential State significance and are supported. Nevertheless, revisions should also still recognise the importance of protection of archaeology of local significance. It is therefore recommended that the following amendments be made to the DCP: 1. That the current objective under bullet point 5 that states: Opportunities to salvage archaeological items unearthed during demolition works are to be considered. be replaced with: Opportunities to conserve local and State significant archaeological items to be considered. 2. That control C2 that states: If archaeological items are found during demolition and excavation, in the first instance, opportunities to salvage and reuse the items are to be incorporated. Where this is not practical or possible, an interpretation strategy is to be prepared. be replaced with: An archaeological assessment will be prepared for the site and the recommendations of the assessment incorporated into the detailed design. This includes the conservation of local and State significant archaeology. Where this is not possible or practical, excavation, salvage, reuse and/or interpretation of the archaeology in accordance with an approved archaeological research design and excavation methodology is to occur.
Transport for NSW
Advises that the proposed basement parking access on Macquarie Street as identified in the draft DCP is not supported. A vehicle egress at this location would direct vehicles into the light rail corridor and Sydney Metro Precinct and would impact pedestrian safety. Requests that the DCP be amended to require basement parking egress to be provided on Marsden Street, with the option of providing the corresponding ingress separately on Macquarie Street or alternatively combined on Marsden Street.	Council officers consider that the option of entry from Macquarie Street and exit onto Marsden Street is acceptable. Consequently, it is recommended that the following amendments be made to the DCP. Control C1 regarding vehicle access be amended to state: Ingress to the basement parking to be provided from Macquarie Street, immediately adjacent to the western boundary of the site and egress to be provided onto Marsden Street adjacent to the southern boundary of the site. Figure 4: site Reference Development Footprint Site Plan in the DCP should also be amended to reflect these access changes.
Requests that the proposed development should provide all loading and servicing parking, vehicle set down/pickup for within the subject site. Suggests the insertion of an appropriate control in the DCP.	Council officers consider the suggested amendment to the draft DCP acceptable. Therefore, it is recommended that the control sought by Transport for NSW should be included as C4 under the heading Traffic and Transport Objectives and Controls. “All loading and servicing parking, vehicle set down/pick up for point to point transport and bus/coach and bus/coach layover parking of adequate capacity to accommodate the demand of the development, is to be located within the site and in accordance with the RTA Guide to Traffic Generating Developments.”
Council should consider whether there is a need for a left-turn slip lane from Marsden St into Macquarie St.	This issue has been referred to Council’s traffic section for consideration. Council is currently planning for various road widenings and improvements as part of the infrastructure planning for the Parramatta CBD PP. The draft Land Reservation Acquisition map which is part of the Parramatta CBD PP does not identify this as a need at this point in time.
Some concern is raised about a future development at this site in proximity to Sydney Metro West running tunnels. The Applicant is requested to engage as soon as possible (and prior to lodgement of a DA) with TfNSW’s Sydney Metro West team about potential impacts of the basement on the Metro project at this location.	TfNSW is requesting a conversation with the Applicant as soon as possible, and prior to DA stage. Council officers note that a development on this site excavating at least 2m would also trigger a DA referral to Sydney Metro under the terms of the relevant Infrastructure SEPP. TfNSW’s submission has been sent to the Applicant for their action. Council Design Excellence and Development Assessment teams have also been alerted to this issue with regards to future applications.
Endeavour Energy
Raised the issue that a replacement/upgraded indoor substation as well as possibly an additional switching room to house a switching hub might be required onsite.	The Applicant has been notified of this issue, and this issue will be further examined through the Design Competition and Development Assessment stages.
Sydney Water
Sydney Water provided comments to assist in planning for the servicing needs of the proposal.	These comments are noted, and the Applicant has been forwarded a copy of the submission.
Sydney Water raised issue of investigating dual-piping controls	Dual piping controls were not included with this Planning Proposal; this is due to its age and transitional issues associated with the evolving Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal progressing alongside numerous site-specific Planning Proposal processes. The issue of dual piping could potentially be progressed through the design competition and DA stages.
Council’s Heritage Advisory Committee
Recommends a 15m tower setback from Church Street to open up the vista to and from Centenary Square and St John’s Cathedral and the Church Street heritage streetscape.	Council officers note the Committee's recommendation, but do not support any amendments to the exhibited documents as it is considered that a 12 m setback along Church Street represents the conclusion of extensive policy work. Urban design and commercial feasibility and heritage studies undertaken concluded that a 12 m tower setback to Church Street was justified. The Heritage consultants support for a 12 m setback was conditional on the implementation of a number of recommendations that will be drawn on in the preparation of a draft DCP for the Parramatta CBD

16. Aside from the DCP changes outlined above relating to archaeology and traffic, no other changes are recommended to the Planning Proposal, DCP or Planning Agreement as a result of the submissions received.

OTHER POLICY MATTERS FOR RESOLUTION

17. As well as the submissions received and discussed above, Council officers consider it prudent to address in this report a number of other matters relating to this Planning Proposal and associated documents. These are dealt with below, followed by a conclusion summarising recommended amendments.

Clarification of parking policy intent

18. Council’s resolution of 11 May 2020 on the subject Planning Proposal was very clear that it should “apply the full range of car parking rates specified in the current draft Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal”. However, the explanation of provisions in the exhibited Planning Proposal makes reference to adding this site to existing Clause 7.14, which deals with maximum parking rates and only includes the residential and commercial parking rates. Council officers consider that any references in the Planning Proposal to existing Clause 7.14 should be removed, which will clarify Council's policy intent.

Setback issues in comparison to adjacent site at 20 Macquarie St

19. The applicant for 197 Church Street lodged a submission to the exhibition at the adjacent site of 20 Macquarie Street (subject to an exhibition of DCP and Planning Agreement at roughly the same time as the exhibition for 197 Church Street), requesting:

a. Assurances that development potential at 197 Church St would not be affected by potential changes in development options at 20 Macquarie St., and

b. An amendment to the Macquarie St tower setback in the 197 Church St DCP (i.e. to change this setback from 6m to 3m, which would make it the same as the Macquarie St tower setback at 20 Macquarie St).

20. Issue “a” was addressed in the Council report about 20 Macquarie Street (Item number 17.2, 22 February 2021), whilst issue “b” is dealt within this report.

21. Council officers acknowledge that the draft DCPs for these two sites nominate different tower setbacks to Macquarie St. 20 Macquarie St has a setback of 3m and 197 Church St has a setback of 6m. This is illustrated in Figure 2 below.

Figure 2: Illustration of setback controls (Note particularly the tower setbacks along Macquarie St, which are 6m at subject site and 3m at neighbouring site of 20 Macquarie St)

22. Council officers generally support 6m tower setbacks in most CBD contexts but a 3m setback concession at 20 Macquarie Street was considered appropriate, particularly:

a. Council’s policy position for the 20 Macquarie St site, which is to waive the FSR sliding-scale in the event that a hotel is developed on this site; this was to support a viable hotel floorplate of 750 sqm.

b. A limit on the building height to protect solar access to Parramatta Square.

c. A proposed 2 metre road widening reservation on Marsden Street.

d. Relatively small site size (approximately 1,286 sqm).

23. Council officers acknowledge that the solar access/height and road widening constraints are also present at the 197 Church Street site, but do not recommend any amendments to the DCP controls for this site insofar as they pertain to the Macquarie St tower setback:

a. 197 Church Street is more than three times larger than the Macquarie Street site and Council officers consider that there is adequate space within the exhibited DCP controls for the 197 Church Street site to accommodate a viable development option without requiring a setback concession.

b. Council officers note that the DCP controls position at 197 Church Street Macquarie Street podium will consist of a heritage façade. Providing a setback concession would bring the tower closer to the podium/façade, introducing increased impacts on its legibility.

Murray Bros Building Awning

24. The addendum heritage report exhibited with the updated Planning Proposal recommends retention of the awning above the ground level of the Macquarie and Church Street façades as it is of high significance. Council officers agree that the awning is an integral part of the heritage façade of the building and should be retained.

25. Therefore, it is recommended that the objective under the first bullet point of Heritage Objectives and Controls of the DCP be amended to read:

“The façade, including the awning, of the Murray Bros building along Church Street and Macquarie Street is to be retained.”

RE-EXHIBITION OF THE DRAFT DCP

26. This report recommends amendments to the DCP relating to the following issues:

a. Vehicle access arrangements

b. Ensuring servicing, loading and set down/pick up activities take place on site

c. Strengthening archaeology controls

d. Removing any wording related to permissibility of habitable basement floor space

e. Protection of awning on Murray Bros building.

27. Council officers have analysed these amendments with regards to the need to re-exhibit the DCP.

28. The conclusion of this analysis is that the first of these issues – changing the vehicle access arrangements – should require re-exhibition. This amendment may impact on adjoining and opposite owners in terms of traffic and pedestrian safety. Other matters would not require exhibition because generally they are in response to State agencies submissions and would not generate additional impacts on public infrastructure or amenity.

29. Council officers have identified two options for re-exhibition of this issue:

a. Re-exhibit the entire site-specific DCP for 197 Church St

b. Remove controls relating to vehicle access arrangements from the site, and finalise the remainder of the site-specific DCP for 197 Church St. A note would be included in the DCP to say that the access arrangements are still to be determined and that Council’s preferred option (ie one way entry from Macquarie Street and one way exit from Marsden Street) will be exhibited as part of the forthcoming Parramatta CBD DCP.

30. Council officers consider option “b” preferable as it allows the remainder of the DCP to be finalised, and for the project to proceed towards Development Application stage. The community and relevant agencies would have the opportunity to comment on the vehicle access arrangements again either at DA stage, or as part of the broader Parramatta CBD DCP (if that DCP is exhibited earlier than a DA for the site).

PARRAMATTA LOCAL PLANNING PANEL

31. Council resolved on 14 May 2018 to refer Planning Proposals to the Local Planning Panel where a submission has been received during the public exhibition process, which requests that the Planning Proposal be amended. The Panel provides advice to Council on whether the Planning Proposal should be amended and whether or not to forward it to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment for finalisation.

32. The Local Planning Panel considered this matter at its meeting on 16 February 2021. In issuing its advice to Council, the Panel supported the findings found in the assessment report and endorsed the reasons for recommendation contained in that report so that the Planning Proposal can be finalised (refer to Local Planning Panel Report and minute at Attachment 5).

CONSULTATION & TIMING

Stakeholder Consultation

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

Date	Stakeholder	Stakeholder Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
During the Exhibition from 16 November 2020 to 16 December 2020	Heritage NSW	See comments previously provided in the report	See comments previously provided in report	City Planning
During the Exhibition from 16 November 2020 to 16 December 2020	Transport for NSW	See comments previously provided in the report	See comments previously provided in report	City Planning
During the Exhibition from 16 November 2020 to 16 December 2020	Endeavour Energy	See comments previously provided in the report	See comments previously provided in the report	City Planning
During the Exhibition from 16 November 2020 to 16 December 2020	Sydney Water	See comments previously provided in the report	See comments previously provided in the report	City Planning
During the Exhibition from 16 November 2020 to 16 December 2020	Council's Heritage Advisory Committee	See comments previously provided in the report	See comments previously provided in the report	City Planning
During the Exhibition from 16 November 2020 to 16 December 2020	Adjoining landowners/ occupiers written to as part of exhibition process	No submissions received	N/A	City Planning

Councillor Consultation

32. As detailed in the report, Council has previously endorsed the Planning Proposal, Draft DCP and draft Planning Agreement for exhibition and has been advised and consulted on the content.

33. A Councillor Briefing was held summarising the content of the report to be considered by Council on the 22 March 2021 was provided on 17 March 2021.

34. As indicated above a Councillor Workshop was held on 7 April 2021. The comments in the table below reflect what was discussed at the meeting.

Date	Councillor	Councillor Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
7 April 2021	Various	Questions about property flood affectation	Officers noted overland flow issues and Probable Maximum Flood affectation for this site	Acting Group Manager City Planning
7 April 2021	Various	Nature of risks that need to be managed and measures that can be put in place.	The flood risk and management of the risk needs to take into consideration the nature of the use. Intensive retail/ office/ commercial uses involve potential risk to life and property. Less intensive parking and storage uses where people are present for shorter periods of time are seen as less risky than habitable floor space.	Acting Group Manager City Planning
7 April 2021	Various	Questions about precedents	A number of examples where Council had been approached to approve basement levels as part of Development Applications in and around the CBD were discussed. One site on the corner of Victoria Road was approved in 2006 before current more stringent assessment processes were put in place. The development of Parramatta Square Building 5 (future Council Chambers and community facility) has a basement approved but the approval is conditional upon it only being used as an exhibition space. Conditions of the approval mean it cannot be used for more intensive uses such as theatre auditorium or performance space. In all other cases proposals for habitable basements for intensive uses have not been supported.	Acting Group Manager City Planning

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

33. The financial implications for Council associated with this report include the costs of reviewing the submissions and finalising the report. These costs can be funded from the City Planning budget.

34. If Council resolves to approve this report in accordance with the recommendation, Council will be in a position to receive a monetary contribution of $2,860,035 should a residential development proceed. This contribution is not included in the current adopted four-year budget and if resolved, will be include with the budget process or as part of quarterly review. The Planning Agreement monetary contribution would be delivered in addition to Section 7.12 contributions payable with respect to any redevelopment of the site.

35. If Council resolves to approve this report, staff will recommend the appropriate use of funds to deliver a capital project in line with the section 7.12 plans to Council at a later date. The capital works will incur future maintenance and depreciation expenditure that will be determined as part of the project planning process.

36. The table below represents the potential timing of the additional contribution to be received if Council resolves to approve this report, noting that the actual timing of receipt of funds will depend on the program for the development of the site which is yet to be determined.

	FY 20/21	FY 21/22	FY 22/23	FY 23/24	F24/25
Revenue Contribution			$2,860,035

Operating Result
External Costs
Internal Costs
Depreciation
Other
Total Operating Result
Funding Source			VPA Contribution

CAPEX
CAPEX
External
Internal
Other
Total CAPEX

CONCLUSION AND NEXT STEPS

37. It is recommended Council endorse the Planning Proposal for finalisation. It is also recommended that Council endorse the draft site-specific DCP, subject to amendments. It is recommended that the CEO sign the Planning Agreement on Council’s behalf, which would legally bring into force the agreement.

38. Subject to Council’s resolution, Council officers will forward the Planning Proposal to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment for finalisation once Council has endorsed the DCP for finalisation and the Planning Agreement has been executed. It is also recommended that officers write to DPIE advising them of Council's resolution on this matter and to request that DPIE consider commencing finalisation processes prior to the formal submission of the planning proposal (to expedite plan-making).

39. The DCP will come into effect when the LEP amendment comes into effect.

Paul Kennedy

Project Officer Land Use

Robert Cologna

Acting Group Manager, City Planning

Paul Perrett

Chief Financial Officer

David Birds

Acting Executive Director, City Planning & Design

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

Attachments:

1 ⇩	Summary of submissions	10 Pages
2 ⇩	Exhibited draft Planning Proposal	49 Pages
3 ⇩	Exhibited draft DCP	17 Pages
4 ⇩	Exhibited draft Planning Agreement	30 Pages
5 ⇩	Minute and report for LPP meeting	21 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Governance Manager		Lord Mayor Clr Bob Dwyer	Chief Executive Officer

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

1 ⇩	Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander Advisiory Committee Meeting Minutes 23 June 2020	7 Pages
2 ⇩	Proposed Marcia Donovan Memorial Garden Location Map	1 Page

Fibre-Optic Cable Installation & Repair	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	Approved Project Budgets	Approved Project Budgets	Approved Project Budgets	Approved Project Budgets


	Press	Press

Public Gallery