MINUTES OF THE Meeting of City of Parramatta Council HELD VIA AUDIO-VISUAL MEANS ON MONDAY, 12 JULY 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.

Note: In light of the NSW Government announcement on Saturday 26 June 2021 and the subsequent extension to the stay at home orders, the Council Meeting was held via audio-visual means.

PRESENT

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

1. OPENING MEETING

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

2. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF THE TRADITIONAL LAND OWNERS

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

3. WEBCASTING ANNOUNCEMENT

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

4. OTHER RECORDING OF MEETING ANOUNCEMENT

Nil

5. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

SUBJECT: Minutes of the Council Meeting held on 28 June 2021

3320

RESOLVED (Tyrrell/Garrard)

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

6. APOLOGIES/REQUESTS FOR LEAVE OF ABSENCE

3321

RESOLVED (Tyrrell/Wearne)

That the request to attend the Ordinary Council Meeting dated 12 July 2021 via remote means submitted by the following Councillors due to personal reasons, be accepted:

- Councillor Barrak

- Councillor Bradley

- Councillor Davis

- Councillor Esber

- Councillor Garrard

- Councillor Issa

- Councillor Jefferies

- Councillor Pandey

- Councillor Prociv

- Councillor Tyrrell

- Councillor Wearne

- Councillor Wilson

- Councillor Zaiter

7. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Note: Councillor Barrak arrived at 6:33pm during Declarations of Interest.

Councillor Barrak declared a non-pecuniary but significant interest in Item 17.2 - Post Exhibition – Draft City of Parramatta (Outside CBD) Development Contributions Plan 2021, being that he owns a property in the CBD. He retired from the meeting and took no part in the debate or vote on the matter.

Councillor Barrak declared a non-pecuniary but significant interest in Item 17.3 - Post Exhibition – Finalisation of the Harmonisation Planning Proposal and Draft Parramatta LEP following consideration of submissions received during the public exhibition period, being that he owns investment properties within the Local Government Area. He left the meeting and took no part in the debate nor vote on the matter.

Councillor Esber declared a non-pecuniary but significant interest in Item 17.3 - Post Exhibition – Finalisation of the Harmonisation Planning Proposal and Draft Parramatta LEP following consideration of submissions received during the public exhibition period, being that he owns both private and investment properties within the Local Government Area. He left the meeting and took no part in the debate nor vote on the matter.

Councillor Issa declared a non-pecuniary but significant interest in Item 13.3 – Reappointment of Alternative Members for the Sydney Central City Planning Panel, being that he is a member of the Panel. He left the meeting and took no part in the debate nor vote on the matter.

Councillor Pandey declared a non-pecuniary but significant interest in Item 13.3 – Reappointment of Alternative Members for the Sydney Central City Planning Panel, being that he is a member of the Panel. He left the meeting and took no part in the debate nor vote on the matter.

Councillor Pandey declared a non-pecuniary but significant interest in Item 17.3 - Post Exhibition – Finalisation of the Harmonisation Planning Proposal and Draft Parramatta LEP following consideration of submissions received during the public exhibition period, being that he owns investment properties within the Local Government Area. He left the meeting and took no part in the debate nor vote on the matter.

Councillor Wearne declared a non-pecuniary but significant interest in Item 17.3 - Post Exhibition – Finalisation of the Harmonisation Planning Proposal and Draft Parramatta LEP following consideration of submissions received during the public exhibition period, being that she owns two properties in the Local Government Area. She retired from the meeting and took no part in the debate or vote on the matter.

Councillor Zaiter declared a non-pecuniary but significant interest in Item 13.3 – Reappointment of Alternative Members for the Sydney Central City Planning Panel, being that he is a member of the Panel. He left the meeting and took no part in the debate nor vote on the matter.

Councillor Zaiter declared a non-pecuniary but significant interest in Item 17.3 - Post Exhibition – Finalisation of the Harmonisation Planning Proposal and Draft Parramatta LEP following consideration of submissions received during the public exhibition period, being that his practice provided accounting services to clients who may be impacted by this matter. He left the meeting and took no part in the debate nor vote on the matter.

Special Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest in Item 17.3

Councillor Bradley declared a Special Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest in Item 17.3 - Post Exhibition - Finalisation of the Harmonisation Planning Proposal and Draft Parramatta LEP following consideration of submissions received during the public exhibition period, being that he owns a property in the Local Government Area. He remained in the meeting during debate and voting on this matter.

Councillor Davis declared a Special Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest in Item 17.3 - Post Exhibition - Finalisation of the Harmonisation Planning Proposal and Draft Parramatta LEP following consideration of submissions received during the public exhibition period, being that she owns a property in the Local Government Area and has family who owns property in the Local Government Area. She remained in the meeting during debate and voting on this matter.

Councillor Dwyer declared a Special Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest in Item 17.3 - Post Exhibition - Finalisation of the Harmonisation Planning Proposal and Draft Parramatta LEP following consideration of submissions received during the public exhibition period, being that he owns a property in the Local Government Area and has family who owns property in the Local Government Area. He remained in the meeting during debate and voting on this matter.

Councillor Garrard declared a Special Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest in Item 17.3 - Post Exhibition - Finalisation of the Harmonisation Planning Proposal and Draft Parramatta LEP following consideration of submissions received during the public exhibition period, being that she owns a property in the Local Government Area and has family who owns property in the Local Government Area. She remained in the meeting during debate and voting on this matter.

Councillor Jefferies declared a Special Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest in Item 17.3 - Post Exhibition - Finalisation of the Harmonisation Planning Proposal and Draft Parramatta LEP following consideration of submissions received during the public exhibition period, being that he owns a property in the Local Government Area. He remained in the meeting during debate and voting on this matter.

Councillor Prociv declared a Special Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest in Item 17.3 - Post Exhibition - Finalisation of the Harmonisation Planning Proposal and Draft Parramatta LEP following consideration of submissions received during the public exhibition period, being that she owns a property in the LGA. She remained in the meeting during debate and voting on this matter.

Note: Councillor Barrak left the meeting at 6:36pm during Declarations of Interest.

8. Minutes of the Lord Mayor

8.1

SUBJECT 2023 LGNSW Annual Conference - Expression of Interest

REFERENCE F2019/03630 - D08137618

REPORT OF Lord Mayor, Councillor Bob Dwyer

3322

RESOLVED (Dwyer/)

That Council submit an Expression of Interest prior to the 23 August 2021 deadline to host the LGNSW Annual Conference 2023.

Note: Councillor Barrak returned to the meeting at 6:38pm during consideration of Item 8.1.

8.2

SUBJECT Development of a Flag Raising Ceremony Policy

REFERENCE F2019/03630 - D08138072

REPORT OF Lord Mayor, Councillor Bob Dwyer

3323

RESOLVED (Dwyer/Zaiter)

(a) That Council develop a policy to provide a framework for and guide the delivery of Flag Raising Ceremonies hosted by Council and the community in the City of Parramatta.

(b) That in developing this Policy, Council:

a. consult with Councillors, and local community and cultural leaders;

b. consider a delivery model that encourages members of culturally and linguistically diverse communities and local community groups to host ceremonies;

c. consider the genesis of each current ceremony, noting a number are legacy events;

d. consider how the policy can be reflective and responsive to the incredibly diverse community that calls the City of Parramatta home, noting our LGA is home to residents from over 100 countries around the world who together speak more than 140 languages.

(c) That Council note a report on alternate locations will be coming to Council following the 28 June 2021 resolution, being:

a. That Council reinstate the flag raising program suspended by Council at its meeting of 24 February 2020

b. Further, that a report on alternate locations for flag raising ceremonies be provided to Council due to Centenary Square being unavailable as a result of construction works.

(d) Further, that Council note this re-instatement of the program will re-direct funding from the Ward Family Fun Day program, and that additional costs should be expected as per the 28 June 2021 staff response, noting that alternate locations require additional infrastructure to deliver the events, including infrastructure required to adhere to COVID-safe practices.

Note:

1. Councillor Barrak left the meeting at 6:46pm and returned at 6:47pm during consideration of Item 8.2.

2. Councillor Prociv left the meeting at 6:49pm and returned at 6:49pm during consideration of Item 8.2.

8.3

SUBJECT Review of the Verge Maintenance Policy

REFERENCE F2019/03630 - D08139363

REPORT OF Lord Mayor, Councillor Bob Dwyer

3324

RESOLVED (Dwyer/Davis)

(a) That Council’s current Verge Maintenance Policy be reviewed to identify opportunities for expanding the Policy to include addressing unsightly or overgrown verges.

(b) That Council investigate the possibility of recovering the cost of verge maintenance from property owners.

(c) Further, that in undertaking this review, Council consider how the Policy can empower Council’s Operational Liaison Officers and Cleansing Services teams to address instances of overgrown verges where they are:

a. Negatively impacting the amenity and perception of our City, particularly at key entry points to our local government area and CBD;

b. Negatively impacting the health of our City and its residents by contributing to high pollen counts, allergy issues or potential rodent hazards; and

c. Negatively impacting the cleanliness of our City, trapping litter.

Note: Councillor Issa left the meeting at 6:55pm and returned at 6:56pm during consideration of Item 8.3.

8.4

SUBJECT Good Luck to Australia's Olympic and Paralympic Athletes

REFERENCE F2019/03630 - D08139961

REPORT OF Lord Mayor, Councillor Bob Dwyer

3325

RESOLVED (Dwyer/Zaiter)

That Council wish all the Australian Olympic and Paralympic athletes the best of luck as they prepare to take on the world in the Tokyo 2020 Olympic and Paralympic Games.

Matter of Urgency

3326

RESOLVED (Garrard/Esber)

That a procedural motion be granted to allow consideration of a matter of urgency in relation to the City of Parramatta Council’s COVID-19 Relief and Recovery Package.

The Lord Mayor ruled the matter urgent.

	MOTION (Garrard/Pandey) (a) That Council commend our local doctors, nurses and health care workers for their immense efforts to stop the spread of COVID-19. (b) That Council recognise that COVID-19 is having a significant impact on the community wellbeing and economy of Parramatta, and Council has a responsibility to work with partners to mitigate the social and economic consequences of this pandemic; (c) That Council approve parts of the previous COVID-19 Relief and Recovery Package for the period of lock down as outlined. (d) That Council re-endorse: a. Rates Hardship: Council will waive interest on late payments for Council Rates, where ratepayers satisfy the hardship criteria (as set out in the Rates Hardship Policy) – estimated cost of up to $300,000 per year; b. Rates Hardship: Council will put in place payment plans for late payments for Council Rates, where ratepayers suffer financial hardship and satisfy the hardship criteria (as set out in the Rates Hardship Policy): – estimated cost of up to $450,000; per year; c. Support Takeaway Businesses: Council will allow restaurants and takeaway businesses to provide takeaway services even if they do not have relevant approvals for takeaway services - estimated cost minimal; d. Waiver of Licence & Hire Fees: Council will waive pre-paid and ongoing licence fees and hire fees for outdoor dining licenses, food stalls, temporary, premises, advertising, community halls, parks and community venues for the period of the shutdown – estimated cost of up to $500,000; per year; e. On Street Parking: Council will put in place a range of measures to provide grace periods and cautions for time-limited on street parking spaces; however, Council will continue to enforce illegal parking to ensure public safety and turn over for short stay parking to support local businesses. Council will also reduce and change time limits in a number of local on street parking locations to facilitate take away services and support local businesses - estimated cost of up to $650,000; per year; f. Waiver of Rents: Council will waive all rents for Council owned assets which are occupied by community groups, essential services and not for profit organizations - estimated cost of up to $650,000; per year; g. Buy Local: Council will amend its tender policy to support the purchase of local good and services, where possible – estimated cost minimal. (e) Further, that Council review this matter after four weeks.
	AMENDMENT (Pandey/Zaiter) That a report be presented to the 26 July Council Meeting outlining targeted options and measures for the City of Parramatta community in response to the current COVID-19 climate. The amendment moved by Councillor Pandey and seconded by Councillor Zaiter on being put was declared CARRIED. The amendment then became the motion. The motion moved by Councillor Pandey and seconded by Councillor Zaiter on being put was declared CARRIED.
3327	RESOLVED (Pandey/Zaiter) That a report be presented to the 26 July Council Meeting outlining targeted options and measures for the City of Parramatta community in response to the current COVID-19 climate.
	Note: Councillor Barrak left the meeting at 7:18pm and returned at 7:20pm during consideration of the matter of urgency.

9. Public Forum

9.1

SUBJECT PUBLIC FORUM: Item 17.3 - Post Exhibition - Finalisation of the Harmonisation Planning Proposal and Draft Parramatta LEP

REFERENCE F2021/00521 - D08136845

SUMMARY OF PUBLIC FORUM STATEMENTS AND STAFF RESPONSES

No.	Submitter / Property	Summary of Public Forum	Council Officer’s Response
1.	Murray Colville	Submission on behalf of Toongabbie Anglican Church regarding proposed prohibition of public places of worship within the R2 Low Density Residential Zone	Objecting to Prohibition of Places of Public workshop (POPW) in R2 zones – Issue 5 – Paragraphs 82-88. Also Local Planning Panel (LPP) recommendation in Paragraph 7.
2.	Raj Gupta	Submission on behalf of St Paul’s Anglican Church regarding proposed prohibition of public places of worship within the R2 Low Density Residential Zone	Objecting to Prohibition of Places of Public workshop (POPW) in R2 zones – Issue 5 – see report Paragraphs 82-88. Also Local Planning Panel (LPP) recommendation in Paragraph 7.
3.	Michael Rowe	Submission on behalf of Anglican Church Property Trust Diocese of Sydney regarding proposed prohibition of public places of worship within the R2 Low Density Residential Zone	Objecting to Prohibition of Places of Public workshop (POPW) in R2 zones – Issue 5 – see report Paragraphs 82-88. Also Local Planning Panel (LPP) recommendation in Paragraph 7.
4.	Kai Cong	Submission regarding Application of FSR in R4 high density zones	Objecting to Proposed FSR - Issue 12 – FSR in R4 High Density zone – see report Paragraphs 126 – 135.
5.	Eugene Perchorowicz	Submission regarding site specific rezoning	Seeking site specific rezoning – see Attachment 3 to report - Submission No. 168 Response: Decision Pathway – 2: Not supported.
6.	Terry Page	Submission on behalf of residents in Simpson, Lois, Naomi Streets in Winston Hills regarding seeking dual occupancy prohibition in area	Winston Hills (east) Seeking Dual Occupancy Prohibition - Issue 1b Dual Occupancy – see report Paragraphs 35 – 38. Also LPP recommendation in Paragraph 7.
7.	Ana Vissarion	Submission regarding dual occupancy in R2 Low Density Residential Zone in Carlingford	Dual Occupancy Permissibility in Carlingford - Issue 1a Dual Occupancy – see report Paragraphs 24 – 34.

Note: Councillor Garrard left the meeting at 7:39pm during consideration of Public Forum.

10. Petitions

10.1	SUBJECT 37A-39 Grand Avenue, Camellia FROM Patricia Prociv
	A petition signed by the public was tabled at the Council Meeting and reads: “Our petition for the City of Parramatta Council to put a stop to the offensive noise at 37a -39 Grand Ave, Camellia. Together we demand that the City of Parramatta Council meet the needs of the Residents of Rydalmere by restricting the operations of Streamline Containers and FCL Transport and putting a stop to the offensive noise whilst they operate at 37a-39 Grand Avenue Camellia.”
3328	RESOLVED (Prociv/Bradley) That the petition be received and a copy of the petition be circulated to all Councillors.
	Note: Councillor Garrard returned to the meeting at 7:42pm during consideration of Item 10.1.

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

REFERENCE F2021/00521 - D08097868

REPORT OF Group Manager - Development and Traffic Services

3329

RESOLVED (Tyrrell/Esber)

That the report be received and noted.

13.2

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Public Exhibition of Alfred Street pedestrian and cyclist upgrade, and T-Way Cycleway re-alignment

REFERENCE F2021/00521 - D08096302

REPORT OF Senior Project Officer Transport Planning

3330

RESOLVED (Prociv/Esber)

(a) That Council approve the attached draft Alfred Street pedestrian and cyclist upgrade at Attachment 1 and Attachment 2 for the purposes of exhibition.

(b) That Council approve the attached draft T-Way Cycleway re-alignment at Attachment 3, for the purposes of exhibition.

(d) Further, that the outcomes of public exhibition of the plans be reported to Parramatta Traffic Committee, and in turn to Council.

Note:

1. Councillor Issa declared a non-pecuniary but significant interest in Item 13.3. He left the meeting at 7.42pm prior to consideration and vote on the matter.

2. Councillor Pandey declared a non-pecuniary but significant interest in Item 13.3. He left the meeting at 7.42pm prior to consideration and vote on the matter.

3. Councillor Zaiter declared a non-pecuniary but significant interest in Item 13.3. He left the meeting at 7.42pm prior to consideration and vote on the matter.

13.3

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Reappointment of Alternative Members for the Sydney Central City Planning Panel

REFERENCE F2021/00024 - D08110131

REPORT OF Strategic Business Manager

3331

RESOLVED (Tyrrell/Davis)

That Council reappoint the two external experts listed below as alternative representatives for Council on the Sydney Central Planning Panel for a period of three years:

1 Jane Fielding

2 Richard Thorp.

Note:

1. Councillor Issa returned to the meeting at 7.45pm after the consideration of Item 13.3.

2. Councillor Pandey returned to the meeting at 7.45pm after the consideration of Item 13.3.

3. Councillor Zaiter returned to the meeting at 7.45pm after the consideration of Item 13.3.

14. Green

14.1

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Adoption of the Heart of Play Masterplan

REFERENCE F2021/00521 - D08102731

REPORT OF Place Manager

3332

RESOLVED (Esber/Tyrrell)

(a) That Council adopts the Heart of Play Masterplan as amended (Attachment 1 – Final Heart of Play Masterplan) in response to submissions received during the May 2021 public exhibition.

(b) That copies of the adopted Heart of Play Masterplan be made available to the public at the City of Parramatta Library, the Dundas Branch Library and on Council’s website.

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

15. Welcoming

15.1

SUBJECT LATE REPORT FOR APPROVAL: 2021 Olympic Games Live Site (Deferred Item)

REFERENCE F2021/00521 - D08124471

REPORT OF Acting Group Manager, City Experience

3333

RESOLVED (Issa/Davis)

That Council take no further action.

16. Thriving

16.1

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Adoption of the Hill Road Masterplan

REFERENCE F2021/00521 - D07966053

REPORT OF Place Manager

3334

RESOLVED (Issa/Prociv)

(a) That Council adopts the Hill Road Masterplan as amended (Attachment 1 -Final Hill Road Masterplan) in response to submissions received during public exhibition.

(b) That copies of the adopted Hill Road Park Masterplan be made available to the public at the Wentworth Point Community Centre and Library, the City of Parramatta Library and on Council’s website.

(c) Further, that all those who provided submissions during the public exhibition period be advised of Councils decision and thanked for their contribution to the development of the Masterplan.

17. Innovative

17.1

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Post Gateway - Draft Planning Agreement for 22 Noller Parade, Parramatta

REFERENCE F2021/00521 - D08099189

REPORT OF Team Leader LUP

3335

RESOLVED (Tyrrell/Esber)

(a) That Council endorse the legal drafting of a Planning Agreement in accordance with the Letter of Offer provided in Attachment 1 to facilitate a monetary contribution of $225,000 to Council for the purposes of contributing towards the delivery of public domain works associated with, or new connections to, the Alfred Street Bridge.

(b) That the draft Planning Agreement be publicly exhibited concurrently with the Planning Proposal for a minimum period of 28 days and that a report be provided to Council on the outcomes of the public exhibition.

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

DIVISION A division was called, the result being:-

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

NOES: Nil

Note: Councillor Barrak declared a pecuniary interest in Item 17.2. He left the meeting at 7.48pm prior to consideration and vote on the matter.

17.2

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Post Exhibition - Draft City of Parramatta (Outside CBD) Development Contributions Plan 2021

REFERENCE F2019/00796 - D08093512

REPORT OF Team Leader Land Use Planning

3336

RESOLVED (Esber/Tyrrell)

(a) That Council receives and notes the submissions made during the public exhibition of the “Draft City of Parramatta (Outside CBD) Development Contributions Plan 2021” – a summary of submissions is provided at Attachment 1.

(b) That Council endorses the Draft City of Parramatta (Outside CBD) Development Contributions Plan 2021 Attachment 2 for finalisation with the following amendments:

(i) The addition of ‘“affordable housing or social housing by a social housing provider. If the development is mixed use, only the affordable housing/social housing component will be excluded” as development which is exempted from this Plan, and associated amendments to Section 1.3 of the Plan to support this addition.

(ii) Amend works program item C02 (new local community facility, Epping) to remove reference to location of Chambers Court to not have a specified location consistent with Council’s resolution of 9 July 2018.

(iii) Amend works program item C01 (new hub, Epping) to change the timing for the new hub from 0 to 5 years to 0 to 10 years to align with the Civic Plaza timing and better reflect the project’s complexity.

(iv) Various other administrative or minor changes as outlined in Table 5 of this report.

(c) That Council endorse the Plan to come into effect within 8 weeks from the date of the public notice of Council’s decision to allow sufficient time to incorporate the final Plan in Council’s systems and processes.

(d) That Council authorises the Chief Executive Officer to make any minor amendments and corrections of a non-policy and administrative nature that may arise during the Draft City of Parramatta (Outside CBD) Development Contributions Plan 2021 finalisation process.

(e) Further, that Council authorise the Chief Executive Officer, on behalf of Council, to amend the following Council-endorsed planning agreements for the purposes of public re-exhibition (if required), in order to include provisions which require any future development approvals granted on the associated land to contribute the equivalent to what they would have paid under current development contributions plans in lieu of any other development contribution requirement that may be in place at the time the approval is granted, as follows:

(i) Amendment of the planning agreement for 14-16 Hill Road, Sydney Olympic Park with Sekisui House Australia Pty Ltd and SH Hill Road Development Pty Ltd to include the application of equivalent rates contained within the Auburn Development Contributions Plan 2007 (Amendment No. 1); and

(ii) Amendment of the planning agreement for 38-42, 44 and 44A Wharf Road, Melrose Park, 657 Victoria Road, Melrose Park and 27-29 Hughes Avenue, Ermington with Payce MP2 Pty Ltd and associated parties to include the application of equivalent rates contained within Parramatta Section 94A Development Contributions Plan (Amendment No. 5) 2017,

and that the outcomes of the re-exhibition will be reported to Council.

DIVISION A division was called, the result being:-

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

NOES: Councillors Bradley, Wearne and Wilson

Note:

1. Councillor Esber declared a non-pecuniary but significant interest in Item 17.3. He left the meeting at 7.54pm prior to consideration and vote on the matter.

2. Councillor Pandey declared a non-pecuniary but significant interest in Item 17.3. He left the meeting at 7.54pm prior to consideration and vote on the matter.

3. Councillor Wearne declared a non-pecuniary but significant interest in Item 17.3. She left the meeting at 7.54pm prior to consideration and vote on the matter.

4. Councillor Zaiter declared a non-pecuniary but significant interest in Item 17.3. He left the meeting at 7.54pm prior to consideration and vote on the matter.

17.3

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Post Exhibition - Finalisation of the Harmonisation Planning Proposal and Draft Parramatta LEP following consideration of submissions received during the public exhibition period

REFERENCE F2021/00521 - D08109213

REPORT OF Land Use Planning Manager

3337

RESOLVED (Issa/Tyrrell)

(a) That Council:

(i) Note the Local Planning Panel (LPP) Report at Attachment 15 to this report and the LPP Minutes of that meeting at Attachment 16.

(ii) Note the submissions made in response to the public exhibition of the Parramatta Harmonisation Planning Proposal (Harmonisation PP) as summarised at Attachments 3 to 5 including the Council officer responses.

(iii) Endorse for the purpose of finalisation the content of the exhibited Harmonisation PP subject to the amendments described in this report which are summarised in Attachment 1 (identified as ‘Changes that are supported (via Decision Pathway 1 - Green)’).

(iv) Note the requested changes to the Harmonisation PP summarised in Attachment 1, which are recommended not to be supported (identified as ‘Changes that are not supported (via Decision Pathway 2 - Red)’);

(v) Support further investigation of the matters set out in Attachment 1 (identified as ‘Changes that have merit for further investigation (via Decision Pathway 3 - Orange)’.

(vi) Council prepare a separate Planning Proposal seeking to prohibit dual occupancy in Simpson Street, Lois Street and Naomi Street South, Winston Hills (by adding the properties in these streets to the areas on the Dual Occupancy Prohibition Map) and this separate Planning Proposal is pursued as a matter of urgency to minimise the amount of time when dual occupancy remains permitted in Simpson Street, Lois Street and Naomi Street South and that the CEO be delegated responsibility for endorsing the final form of the Planning Proposal documents.

(vii) That should any development application for dual occupancy in Simpson Street, Lois Street and Naomi Street South be lodged during the period whilst the use remains permitted, that Council not support that development application.

(viii) That the following be added to the table in Attachment 1 identified as “Changes that have merit for further investigation - via Decision Pathway 3 – Orange) – that Council re-examine the approach to permitting Places of Public Worship in the R2 Residential Low Density zone.

(b) That Council approve forwarding the amended Harmonisation PP to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE) for finalisation.

(c) That Council note the application to DPIE, will also request the Harmonisation PP amend Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011 (PLEP 2011), in accordance with section 3.36 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

(d) 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 amendment process relating to the Harmonisation PP (and supporting documentation), Draft PLEP 2021 Amendment Instrument and Draft PLEP 2021 Amendment Maps. This includes the updating of property information for existing Heritage Items and existing Heritage Conservation Areas in Schedule 5 of the DPLEP.

(e) Further, that all submitters be notified of Council’s decision to endorse the amended Parramatta Harmonisation Planning Proposal (Harmonisation PP).

DIVISION A division was called, the result being:-

AYES: Councillors Bradley, Davis, Dwyer, Garrard, Issa, Jefferies, Prociv, Tyrrell and Wilson

NOES: Nil

Note:

1. Councillor Barrak returned to the meeting at 8.02pm after consideration of Item 17.3.

2. Councillor Esber returned to the meeting at 8.02pm after consideration of Item 17.3.

3. Councillor Issa retired from the meeting at 8:02pm and did not return.

4. Councillor Pandey returned to the meeting at 8.02pm after consideration of Item 17.3.

5. Councillor Wearne returned to the meeting at 8.02pm after consideration of Item 17.3.

6. Councillor Zaiter returned to the meeting at 8.02pm after consideration of Item 17.3.

18. Notices of Motion

18.1

SUBJECT NOTICE OF MOTION: Probity Checks for Chair, Alternate Chair and Independent Experts for the City of Parramatta Local Planning Panel

REFERENCE F2021/00521 - D08123513

FROM Councillor Bradley

3338

RESOLVED (Bradley/Pandey)

That Council write to the Minister for Planning and Public Spaces the Hon. Rob Stokes MP referring to his letter IRF 21/584 and asking if the probity checks also included whether the statutory declarations of each chair and expert also declared they were not a close relative or associate of a property developer or real estate agent, and if not, recommending to the Minister that this be done as soon as possible.

Note: Councillor Esber left the meeting at 8:04pm and at 8.05pm during consideration of Item 18.1.

19. Questions with Notice

Nil

20. CLOSED SESSION

3339

RESOLVED (Tyrrell/Zaiter)

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

1 FOR APPROVAL: Tender 06/2021 HR Systems. (D07985584) - 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.

2 FOR APPROVAL: 2021 Community Events Grant Funding. (D08101327) - 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: 12-22 Langston Place, Epping - Granting of Easements and Transfer of Land. (D08097288) - This report is confidential in accordance with section 10A (2) (c) (d) of the Local Government Act 1993 as the report contains information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business; AND the report contains commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed (i) prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it; or (ii) confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council; or (iii) reveal a trade secret.

4 FOR APPROVAL: Charles Street Square. (D08107323) - This report is confidential in accordance with section 10A (2) (c) (d) of the Local Government Act 1993 as the report contains information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business; AND the report contains commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed (i) prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it; or (ii) confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council; or (iii) reveal a trade secret.

20.1

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Tender 06/2021 HR Systems

REFERENCE F2020/03575 - D07985584

REPORT OF Systems Project Manager

3340

RESOLVED (Esber/Tyrrell)

(a) That Council approve the appointment of the preferred proponent for the delivery of a Human Resources Management System for the contract sum outlined in paragraph 23 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.

20.2

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: 2021 Community Events Grant Funding

REFERENCE F2021/00521 - D08101327

REPORT OF Senior Event Officer

3341

RESOLVED (Tyrrell/Esber)

That Council adopts the expenditure recommended by the Councillor Grants Committee for the April 2021 round of Community Events Grants as summarised in Attachment 1.

20.3

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: 12-22 Langston Place, Epping - Granting of Easements and Transfer of Land

REFERENCE DL/635/2021 - D08097288

REPORT OF Manager Property Plan & Program

3342

RESOLVED (Davis/Wearne)

That Council defer consideration of this matter to the next Council Meeting of 26 July 2021 and a Councillor Briefing and briefing note be provided to all Councillors.

20.4

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Charles Street Square

REFERENCE F2019/02844 - D08107323

REPORT OF Space Management Officer

3343

RESOLVED (Tyrrell/Pandey)

(a) That Council delegate authority to the Chief Executive Officer to finalise the terms and execute a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with Transport for NSW (TfNSW).

(b) That Council delegate authority to the Chief Executive Officer to finalise the terms and execute the Funding Deed with TfNSW.

(c) That Council approve the compulsory acquisition of the Water Edge Land by TfNSW as outlined in paragraph 8 of this report and delegate authority to the Chief Executive Officer to finalise the terms of the land acquisition by TfNSW.

(d) That Council grant a licence to TfNSW on terms outlined in paragraphs 15 and 16 of this report and delegate authority to the Chief Executive Officer to finalise and execute the terms of the licence.

(e) That Council grant a licence to Transdev on terms outlined in paragraphs 17 and 18 of this report and delegate authority to the Chief Executive Officer to finalise and execute the terms of the licence.

(f) That Council approve an exemption from tender for the TfNSW and Transdev licences pursuant to section 55(3)(i) of the Local Government Act 1993 due to the unavailability of competitive tenderers.

(g) That Council approve works to be carried out at 36 Charles Street, Parramatta at Council’s costs as outlined in paragraphs 19 and 20 of this report and delegate authority to the Chief Executive Officer to negotiate and execute any agreements with the owner of 36 Charles Street, Parramatta for the Council funded works.

(h) That a further report be presented to Council after the works at 36 Charles Street, Parramatta have been carried out in accordance with section 67(4) of the Local Government Act 1993.

(i) That Council delegate authority to the Chief Executive Officer to sign and execute all documents in connection with this matter.

(j) Further, that Council delegate authority to the Chief Executive Officer to seek to negotiate co-branding for the project and surrounding infrastructure with Infrastructure NSW (iNSW) and the NSW Government.

Procedural Motion

3344

RESOLVED (Tyrrell/Esber)

That the meeting resume in open session.

21. REPORTS OF RESOLUTIONS PASSED IN CLOSED SESSION

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

22. CONCLUSION OF MEETING

The meeting terminated at 8:27pm.

THIS PAGE AND THE PRECEDING 18 PAGES ARE THE MINUTES OF THE ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON MONDAY, 12 JULY 2021 AND CONFIRMED ON MONDAY, 26 JULY 2021.

Chairperson

Council 26 July 2021 Item 12.1

FAIR

ITEM NUMBER 12.1

SUBJECT FOR NOTATION: Investment Report for June 2021

REFERENCE F2021/00521 - D08133044

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 June 2021.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council receive the Investment Report for June 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 30 June 2021 was $547.5m. The average portfolio holdings held throughout the month was $555.5m.

4. The majority of Council’s investment portfolio is in term deposits (63%). 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 30 June 2021:

Table 1: Summary of investment portfolio

Performance Summary

7. Investment performance for the month. The investment portfolio reported an annualised return of 2.17%% in June, outperforming the AusBond Bank Bill Index benchmark by 214 basis points. The LTGF (2.44% return for the month) and Councils Managed Fund (0.51% 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 30 June 2021, year-to-date investment income was $12.3m, exceeding the annual budget by approximately $1.55m. The outperformance is primarily due to the LTGF (17.96% return year-to-date), and the CFS Global Managed Fund (5.41% return year-to-date). Council’s portfolio is also weighted towards term deposits and FRNs yielding approximately 1.24% and 1.16% respectively.

Table 3: Year-to-date cumulative interest income

Performance by Investment Type

Floating rate notes (FRNs)

10. Council’s senior FRNs made up around 11% of the total investment portfolio at month-end. The market value of Councils FRNs collectively rose by approximately 0.05% equating to approximately $31k in dollar terms. During the month, Council sold $950k in FRNs, which resulted in a realized capital gain of $11k.

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 FRNs are now marked at an unrealised capital gain of $671k.

13. On a mark-to-market basis, BBB FRNs rose by approximately $6k in dollar terms for the month, or 0.02% or $4.5k in dollar terms. The total unrealised capital gain is approximately $198k.

Table 5: Floating rate note investments (BBB rated)

Northern Territory Treasury Corporation senior bonds (NTTC bonds)

14. NTTC bonds comprise 4.0% ($23.5m) 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

15. Term Deposits account for around 66% of the total investment portfolio. Council’s term deposit portfolio was yielding 1.24% p.a. at month-end, with a weighted-average duration of around 573 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.

16. 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 0.80%, especially if placed under durations of around three years.

TCorp Long Term Growth Fund

17. The TCorp Long Term Growth Fund accounts for around 5.5% of Council’s total investment portfolio. The fund returned 2.44% for the month, or 34.13% annualised, as both domestic and international markets continued their rally.

Table 6: TCorp Long Term Growth Fund

18. 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, partcularly in relation to the continuing impact of COVID-19.

19. 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 outperform TDs and FRNs.

CFS Global Credit managed fund

20. This fund accounts for around 2.5% of Council’s total investment portfolio. The fund returned 0.51% (6.37%% annualised) in June, as the market valuation of the fund’s assets in global credit securities (FRNs and bonds) marginally rose as credit spreads tightened.

Table 7: CFS Global Credit Managed Fund

21. 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% and is a strong compared to cash, FRN’s and Term deposits.

Cash-at-call

22. Cash-at-call makes up approximately 13.5% 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

23. 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.

24. Overall, the portfolio remains well diversified from a maturity perspective, with around 30% of assets directed to medium term (2-5 years). Capacity remains in the medium term horizon, where advisors believe the most attractive yield can be found.

Table 8: Maturity profile

Compliance

25. The portfolio complies with Council’s Investment Policy rating limits, with ample investment opportunity still available in A-rated institutions, and approx. $65m capacity in BBB+/unrated institutions.

Graph 1: Investment Policy rating capacity

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

26. 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

Q Bank

1,000

1,004

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

1,000

750

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

27. 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.

28. Council engage Imperium Markets for assistance in all investment matters relating to advice, risk and portfolio weighting. Imperium monitor the portfolio daily and conduct a monthly health check review. This confirms that Council’s portfolio is being conducted in accordance with the Act, the Regulation and the Investment Policy.

Certification of Investments

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

Michael Tzimoulas, Executive Director Corporate Services.

CONSULTATION & TIMING

Stakeholder Consultation

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

Date

Stakeholder

Stakeholder Comment

Council Officer Response

Responsibility

30 June 2021

Imperium Markets

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

Refer Imperium Comprehensive Report

Noting the grandfathered counterparty overweight position listed in this report, All remaining Investments are within Policy limits and reconcile to the General Ledger as at 30 June 21

Finance Team

Michael Tzimoulas

Executive Director Corporate Services

Bruce MacFarlane

Treasury & Tax Accountant

Councillor Consultation

31. 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

32. Interest income as at 30 June 2021 exceeded the annual investment interest budget by approximately $1.55m. With longer dated investments yielding well above current market rates, this outperformance is anticipated to continue to return above the Ausbond Bank Bill index Benchmark for 2021-22.

Bruce MacFarlane

Tax and Treasury Accountant

Michael Tzimoulas

Executive Director Corporate Services

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

Attachments:

1 ⇩	Investment and Loans Performance Graph June 2021.pdf	1 Page
2 ⇩	Imperium Comprehensive Investment Report - June 21.pdf	34 Pages
3 ⇩	List of Council Investments by maturity June 2021.pdf	9 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 26 July 2021 Item 12.2

FAIR

ITEM NUMBER 12.2

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Chief Executive Officer Delegations associated with the 2021 Local Government Elections

REFERENCE F2021/00521 - D08090968

REPORT OF Governance Manager

workshop/briefing date: Nil

PURPOSE:

The purpose of this report is to seek a temporary increase in financial delegations to the Chief Executive Officer in cases of emergency, for the short period of time between the when Councillors cease to hold office at midnight Friday, 3 September 2021 until the first Council meeting of the new term following the 2021 Local Government Elections.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council provide unlimited financial delegation to the Chief Executive Officer in cases of emergency for the period of time from midnight Friday, 3 September 2021 until the first Council Meeting of the new term following the 2021 Local Government Elections.

(b) Further, that in the event that the Chief Executive Officer is required to deal with urgent business of the Council during this period, details of all business dealt with under this delegation be reported to the first available Council Meeting of the new term.

BACKGROUND

1. The next Local Government Election will be held on Saturday, 4 September 2021.

2. In accordance with Clauses 233 and 230 of the Local Government Act 1993 (the LG Act), Councillors will cease to hold office as at midnight Friday, 3 September 2021 until such time as the polls are declared by the NSW Electoral Commission. The relevant parts of the LG Act are set out below.

For what period is a councillor is elected:

(2) The office of councillor—

(a) commences on the day the person elected to the office is declared to be so elected; and

(b) becomes vacant on the day appointed for the next ordinary election of councillors, or on the occurrence of a casual vacancy in the office.

For what period is a mayor elected:

(1) A mayor elected by the councillors holds the office of mayor for 2 years, subject to this Act.

(2) A mayor elected by the electors holds the office of mayor for 4 years, subject to this Act.

(3) The office of mayor--

(a) commences on the day the person elected to the office is declared to be so elected, and

(b) becomes vacant when the person's successor is declared to be elected to the office, or on the occurrence of a casual vacancy in the office.

3. Typically, the declaration of polls will take place two (2) weeks following an ordinary election. It is noted that the City of Parramatta Council will have no governing body until the polls are declared and an oath / affirmation of office for Councillors has taken place.

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

4. The City of Parramatta Council has currently limited the financial delegation of the Chief Executive Office for new contracts / services to that equal to the awarding of tenders under the Local Government (General) Regulations 2009, being $250,000.

5. Having regard to the global and national events of the last two (2) years, including bush fires, floods and the pandemic, it is considered appropriate to increase the financial delegation of the Chief Executive Officer in order to immediately respond to matters of emergency, during the time Councillors cease to hold office.

6. As a matter of process, it is proposed that all matters dealt with under this emergency financial delegation be minuted and included in the agenda for the first Council Meeting of the new term. Any decision made by the Chief Executive Officer under this delegation is to be provided to the Council and the public for transparency and accountability.

CONSULTATION & TIMING

Stakeholder Consultation

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

Date	Stakeholder	Stakeholder Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
NA

Councillor Consultation

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

Date	Councillor	Councillor Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
NA

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

9. Council’s internal Legal Services Unit has been consulted and acknowledge the above interpretation of the LG Act, and agree that appropriate financial delegations be provided to the Chief Executive Officer during this period in cases of emergency.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

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

11. Should the Chief Executive Officer be required to expend funds of an emergency nature, these will be minuted and reported to the first meeting of the new term of Council and outlined in the appropriate quarterly budget review.

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

Funding Source	NA

CAPEX
CAPEX
External
Internal
Other
Total CAPEX	Nil

Funding Source	NA

Patricia Krzeminski

Governance Manager

Ian Woodward

Group Manager Legal Services

Michael Tzimoulas

Executive Director Corporate Services

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 26 July 2021 Item 12.3

FAIR

ITEM NUMBER 12.3

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Draft Sportsground Strategy and Action Plan

REFERENCE F2021/00521 - D07880378

REPORT OF Recreation Planner

PURPOSE:

To obtain Council endorsement of the draft Sportsground Strategy and Action Plan for public exhibition, in order to seek feedback from the community and other key stakeholders.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council endorses the public exhibition of the draft Sportsground Strategy and Action Plan (attachment 1) for not less than four weeks.

(b) Further, that a consultation process be undertaken to engage with the community, and other key stakeholders, on the draft Sportsground Strategy and Action Plan. And that, upon completion of the public exhibition period, feedback and submissions are reported back to Council, together with a revised Sportsground Strategy and Action Plan, for consideration.

BACKGROUND

1. The draft Sportsground Strategy and Action Plan (SSAP) provides a detailed roadmap for the provision of the City of Parramatta Council’s sportsground network to meet existing and future community needs. The development of this document has occurred as part of Focus Area 1.3.1.1 in the Delivery Program and Operation Plan 2018-2021.

2. For the purposes of the draft SSAP, sportsgrounds include land that is a turf area (natural or synthetic) used, or proposed to be used, primarily for formal sporting activities involving organised sports or the playing of outdoor games. The draft SSAP focuses on sportsgrounds under the ownership and/or management of Council, as well as those that Council has chosen to play a role in delivering or seeks to advocate for on behalf of the community.

3. Currently, Council has 33 sportsgrounds that provide 64 sporting fields. The sporting fields cover 53.6ha, with the total land area of the sportsgrounds being approximately 150ha. These are categorised through a hierarchical structure, namely, regional, district and local sportsgrounds, and cater for over 19,544 sporting club participants.

4. Considering that sport is played all year round, the effective use, management and development of Council’s sportsground facilities is one of the key drivers of their sustainability and increased community participation. In addition to a growth population, the growth in sport participation of underrepresented groups in the community, including, girls and women, requires careful assessment of the availability of sportsgrounds and associated facilities across the local government area.

5. The draft SSAP builds upon the Community Infrastructure Strategy (CIS) that was adopted in July 2020, which outlines strategic directions, targets and high-level recommendations for the delivery of community infrastructure to meet the needs of the city’s fast-growing population, to 2041.

6. The draft SSAP complements and delivers on the strategic directions of the CIS, through more detailed analysis and action-planning that will be used by Council to increase the number of sporting fields available to the community, and prioritise the equitable resourcing of sportsground upgrades across the network.

Sportsground Supply and Demand Analysis

7. Detailed analysis was undertaken to:

a. understand strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and challenges of each sportsground, as well as community needs and preferences; and

b. develop a robust model to estimate the gap in sporting field supply, focusing on the capacity of current sporting fields, as well as opportunities for acquisition and dedication of additional land.

8. This analysis used the professional knowledge and experience of staff and consultants, and relied on information provided by sports clubs, sports associations, recent facility audit surveys, and other relevant industry research.

9. The draft SSAP uses practical capacity to determine the capacity of Council’s current sportsground network and considers field area, hours of use and site specific features of each facility, for example, lighting, irrigation, amenities or the neighborhood context.

10. Currently, Council’s 64 sporting fields provide the practical capacity of 55 sporting fields. This is because not all of Council’s sporting fields are 0.8ha in size (a full-size rectangle field) and/or have elements which limit it from reasonably being able to be used for 25 hours per week. For example, as aforementioned, lighting, irrigation, amenities or the neighborhood context.

11. Based on this analysis to meet current demand in 2021, Council would need the practical capacity of 63 sporting fields, an additional practical capacity of 8 sporting fields. Therefore, based on this analysis, if the provision gap is then increased by the forecast population growth, Council will require the practical capacity of 106 sporting fields by 2041. This is an additional practical capacity of 51 sporting fields to meet the needs of a growing population, which is set to double by 2041.

12. There are various provision standards that can be employed when determining future community needs and potential gaps related to sportsgrounds. It is acknowledged that supply and demand modelling is only indicative, as it is based on a range of assumptions that are subject to a range of variables. However, they do provide a means to quantifying the likely demand and supply factors. Council has used practical capacity as a means to calculate the required number of sporting fields, as opposed to land area (ha), as it cannot physically deliver the required number of new sportsground facilities that have been identified through the CIS’s land area benchmarks (an additional 316ha by 2041).

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

13. The draft SSAP (Attachment 1) incorporates a 20-year action plan to address focus areas, outlining short, medium and long term priorities to guide the development of Council’s sportsground network. The action plan will assist Council and its partners in aligning resources to and advocating for recommended projects. Each identified action will need to go through the required feasibility and business case process before it is determined that a project can be delivered. The prioritisation and delivery of these activities may also change as new opportunities and constraints arise.

14. The focus areas include:

a. Improve maintenance and upgrade existing sportsgrounds to increase capacity;

b. Install strategically located synthetic sporting fields to increase capacity and take demand of turf sporting fields;

c. Deliver new sportsground facilities;

d. Increase community access to sporting fields not owned by Council; and

e. Implement efficient management processes to support and maximise the use of sportsground facilities.

15. The draft SSAP will equip Council to deliver new and upgraded sportsgrounds to our community. Once adopted, to deliver the draft SSAP, Council will:

a. Actively plan for projects identified within the Plan;

b. Secure funding through identified funding sources or other funding opportunities;

c. Undertake advocacy, planning and negotiation with the State Government, Department of Education, and the private sector, to meet sportsground needs within precinct plans and to facilitate access to non-Council owned land through Joint Use Agreements; and

16. While the draft SSAP focuses on Council’s sportsground network, specifically those with sporting fields, Council recognises that there are several other sport and recreation facilities with a significant gap in provision. These other types of facilities, like outdoor courts (eg. tennis, netball), indoor recreation facilities (eg. basketball, gymnastics) and aquatic facilities (eg. swimming, water polo), need to be considered in more detail separate to the draft SSAP.

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
Throughout 2020	Internal subject matter experts (Recreation, Parks, Open Space and Natural Resources)	Cycle of workshops following detailed Sportsground Supply and Demand Analysis	Draft focus areas and actions developed into Plan	Recreation Planner
January 2021 – April 2021	Internal stakeholders (Place Services, City Strategy, Land Use Planning, Property Services, City Engagement, Finance and Assets Management	Feedback sought on draft Strategy and Action Plan	Feedback incorporated	Recreation Planner

18. A public exhibition engagement period of not less than four weeks will be held. During this time, consultation with key sportsground stakeholders, including, peak sporting organisations, local associations and clubs, as well as the Department of Education and the general community. Community engagement activities will include:

a. Exhibition webpage on Councils ‘Participate Parramatta’ portal, comprising an online survey, frequently asked questions sheet, project updates, and digital mail-out of summary version (Attachment 2) of the draft SSAP to sportsground stakeholders.

19. The feedback and submissions will be reported back to Council once the public exhibition period is complete, together with a revised SSAP for Council’s consideration.

Councillor Consultation

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

Date

Councillor

Councillor Comment

Council Officer Response

Responsibility

17/05/2021

Councillor Workshop. Councillors Bradley, Davis, Garrard, Jefferies, Pandey, Tyrrell and Wearne

Request for circulation of draft Strategy and Action Plan. Request for more information on identified funding sources and benchmarking.

Draft Sportsground Strategy and Action Plan circulated to all Councillors via portal and hard copy on 2 June 2021.

Second workshop scheduled.

Recreation Planner

5/07/2021

Councillor Workshop. Lord Mayor Councillor Dwyer, Councillors Bradley, Davis, Garrard, Jefferies, Pandey, Tyrrell, Wearne and Wilson

Further information requested on Draft Contributions Plan for outside the CBD.

Site specific questions asked.

Questions taken on notice being replied to directly.

Group Manager Social and Community Services

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

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

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

22. The costs of development of the draft SSAP are met within operational budgets.

23. The draft SSAP provides guidance to Council to more efficiently link expenditure to identified community need aligned with Council’s Vision and Priorities. The draft SSAP will be a tool for Council when negotiating funding for essential sportsground facility provision. Council’s Land Use Planning team will use the strategy as a guide for public benefit contributions and review of sportsground provision within planning proposals, master planning and precinct renewal programs. The majority of draft SSAP projects are linked to updated contribution plans that are designed to ensure that Council effectively plans for infrastructure to meet population growth.

24. The draft SSAP works program contains sportsground infrastructure projects estimated to cost approximately $148 million over 20 years from 2021 to 2041. It should be noted that the draft SSAP is a guiding document to be implemented progressively over a 20 year period, as funding becomes available and developer contributions are collected. Funding sources have been identified of $107 million in capital costs, leaving a $41 million to be funded through external grants, partnerships and future resourcing strategies. This is equivalent to $2.05 million per year from 2021 to 2041.

25. It is noted that the draft SSAP will result in higher operational revenue and maintenance costs. These costs are estimated to be approximately $34 million in revenue over 20 years (approximately $1.7 million per year) and $28 million in maintenance expenditure (approximately $1.4 million per year).

26. The total funding gap (including both capital and operational) is provided at Table 1.

Table 1: Funding Gap

Total infrastructure costs (20 years)	$148M
Identified funding sources (Council’s long term financial plan, Draft Contributions Plan, grants)	$107M
Infrastructure funding gap	$41M
- Estimated revenue (from hire fees)	$34M
+ Operational and maintenance costs	$28M
Infrastructure funding gap (all income and operational costs)	$35M ($1.75M/year)

27. Council’s co-contribution could be reduced over time through the following mechanisms:

a. Explore state and federal government grants, for example, between 2019-2021, Council received on average $2.7 million p/a in grants for capital works for sports facility projects; and

b. Voluntary planning agreements providing additional funds or works- in-kind to deliver infrastructure. For example, delivery of new open space, as part of development within the LGA’s high growth precincts;

c. For projects that provide access to sportsgrounds not owned by Council, it is recommended that funding partnerships will need to be delivered once a Joint Partnership Agreement has been finalised and signed.

28. The draft SSAP identifies priorities and timeframes for delivery of the infrastructure items in the works program. Council’s annual review of available funding can also assist in determining how it prioritises delivery of capital works, including those works identified in the draft SSAP. This will assist with the allocation of contributions income and other funding that becomes available during the life of the draft SSAP, against the needs of the new population.

29. The draft SSAP will be reviewed every five years, to ensure that it reflects updated infrastructure demand analysis and costs, reviews funding received, considers Council’s capital works plan and identifies new opportunities and constraints.

30. The costs associated with public exhibition and any remaining advocacy and policy actions within the draft SSAP will be undertaken within existing staff resources.

31. This specific report does not contain any financial impacts. Any project within the draft SSAP, once endorsed, is required to conduct its own Business Case process.

32. 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	Nil	Nil	Nil

*Funding Source*	Nil	Nil	Nil	Nil

*CAPEX*
CAPEX
External
Internal
Other
*Total CAPEX*	Nil	Nil	Nil	Nil

*Funding Source*	Nil	Nil	Nil	Nil

Megan Ryan

Recreation Planner

Gregory Radford

Recreation Facilities & Programs Manager

David Moutou

Group Manager Social and Community Services

Michael Tzimoulas

Executive Director Corporate Services

Jon Greig

Executive Director Community Services

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

Attachments:

1⇩	Draft Sportsground Strategy and Action Plan	39 Pages
2⇩	Draft Sportsground Strategy and Action Plan Information Summary	8 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 26 July 2021 Item 13.1

ACCESSIBLE

ITEM NUMBER 13.1

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Integrated Transport Plan to support the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal

REFERENCE F2021/00521 - D08067098

REPORT OF Senior Project Officer Transport Planning; Transport Planning Manager

PURPOSE:

The purpose of this report is to consider the outcomes of the public exhibition of the Parramatta CBD Integrated Transport Plan (ITP) to support the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal, and to seek Council’s endorsement of the revised ITP to be forwarded to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council notes the community feedback received during exhibition of the draft Parramatta CBD Integrated Transport Plan.

(b) That Council approve further investigation of the following changes to the CBD Planning Proposal recommended by the Integrated Transport Plan:

1 Remove LRA on O'Connell St / Victoria Rd

2 Remove LRA on Smith St between George St and Macquarie St (east)

3 Remove LRA on Smith St north of Phillip St (west side)

4 Remove LRA on Wilde Ave / Victoria Rd

5 Remove LRA southern side George Street

6 Remove LRA on Marsden Street between George St and Campbell St east side

7 Change residential parking rates to ‘B’ rates for locations over 800 m from Parramatta Train Station, planned Parramatta Metro Station and over 400 m from the Harris Park Train Station,

and that these be added to list of items in the Changes that have merit for further investigation (via Decision Pathway 3 - Orange) in Group 1, as resolved by Council on 15 June 2021 (Item 17.1) for the CBD Planning Proposal and noting that further consultation with Transport for NSW will occur as part of any statutory requirement associated with the LEP amendment process.

(c) That Council endorses the revised Parramatta CBD Integrated Transport Plan provided at Attachment 1, and forward it to the Department of Planning Industry and Environment to support finalisation of the CBD Planning Proposal.

(e) Further, that Council write The Minister for Transport and the Local Member of the NSW Legislative Assembly to seek support for Council’s request to collaborate on the implementation of the Integrated Transport Plan, and to jointly produce an Access Strategy for the Parramatta CBD.

BACKGROUND

1. Condition 1.(l) of the Gateway Determination for the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal (CBD PP) issued by the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE) on 13 December 2018 requires the preparation of a Strategic Transport Study (STS), Mesoscopic Traffic Model, and an Integrated Transport Plan (ITP) prior to the CBD PP finalisation.

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 PP.

3. Council has worked in partnership with Transport for NSW (TfNSW), to prepare a Mesoscopic Traffic Model and ITP to build 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.

4. The ITP supports the Parramatta CBD PP 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 maximise the efficiency of the existing road network.

· Application of proven Travel Demand Management (TDM) to ensure the most efficient use of resources and road space allocation.

5. The ITP for CBD and the Mesoscopic Traffic Model were endorsed for exhibition by Council on 26 April 2021.

CONSULTATION & TIMING

6. From the 6^th of May 2021 to 3^rd of June 2021, the Draft City of Parramatta Integrated Transport Plan for Parramatta CBD (Draft ITP) was publicly exhibited. A total of 45 submissions were received by email, telephone, and through a survey on Council’s online engagement portal, ‘Participate Parramatta’. Additionally, Council officers conducted an industry briefing with the Economic Development Committee of the Parramatta Chamber of Commerce, briefed executives and staff across Council, and the local member of the NSW Legislative Assembly. A detailed Engagement Evaluation Report is provided at Attachment 2.

Early consultation with Transport for NSW

7. Consultation with Transport for NSW (TfNSW) on transport matters affecting the Parramatta CBD has been ongoing throughout the preparation of the CBD Planning Proposal. At the statutory level, Condition 2 of DPIE’s Gateway Determination required formal consultation with TfNSW, along with a shortlist of other key State agencies, prior to the exhibition of the CBD Planning Proposal. At that time, (late 2019 and early 2020) TfNSW did not provide any formal feedback at this early stage.

8. Furthermore, Condition 4 of the DPIE’s Gateway Determination required Council consult TfNSW, along with other agencies and service providers, during the exhibition phase of the CBD Planning Proposal. At this time, TfNSW provided a formal response and was subject to a separate report to Council at the 15 June 2021 Council meeting (Item 17.1).

9. As part of the preparation of the ITP, Council officers consulted regularly with officers from TfNSW on the methodology, considerations, and outputs of the plan.

Consultation on the exhibition of the ITP

Submissions from Residents and Individuals

10. Twenty submissions were received from individuals commenting on the ITP. Individuals included residents, and people who work in, or visit the CBD. Submissions from individuals were widely supportive, with no significant objections raised to the ITP. Five (20 per cent) individuals expressed direct support for the ITP or elements of the ITP.

· Nine supported the general theme of increasing walking or offered additional ideas to improve walking.

· Six supported cycling or called for additional facilities for cycling.

11. Submissions from individuals included recommendations for additional public transport, walking and cycling facilities. Individuals also called for road transport improvements and had concerns about parking and road congestion. Individuals also had concerns with behaviors exhibited by users of the transport network, such as aggressive driving and cyclists not giving way to pedestrians on shared paths.

12. None of the comments submitted by individuals require changes to the draft ITP. Suggestions for new infrastructure will be passed on to responsible Council or State officers for consideration when implementing the ITP. Many recommendations dealt with operational matters which can be promptly addressed. Submissions by individuals with officer responses are summarised at Attachment 3.

Submissions from Landowners Regarding CBD Properties

13. Fourteen submissions were received from landowners regarding CBD properties. These included owner/occupiers, developers, and representatives of larger landowners. Submissions from landowners included:

· Queries about existing Land Reservation Acquisition (LRA) designated in the Parramatta LEP 2011 and not recommended to be removed, for example road frontage at 64-66 Great Western Hwy.

· Queries about LRAs proposed for the CBD Planning Proposal which have been tested and found not to be required, for example 14-16 Lamont Street.

· Queries, concerns and objections to LRA proposed in the CBD PP which are recommended to be retained. A summary of these submissions and an officer response is provided in the table below.

ID	Address	Comment	Council Officer Response
COM021	Westfield Parramatta, Marsden Street	Commented on the proposed Marsden St cycleway. Believes that the proposed underpass design may affect the existing retaining wall of the property. Proposes to have a meeting to discuss potential impacts	The cycleway concept design has been prepared for to spatially test the facility and to consult with the community. Council will consult further with landowners and community in the design and consideration of the cycleway. Council officers have contacted the landowner to schedule a meeting in July 2021.
COM029	17 Harold St	Objects to the designation of an LRA to implement the regional cycleway in Villiers Street. Believes that acquisition of the LRA will affect the current use of the site.	Council officers met with the landowner and explained that development of the regional cycleway will not affect the operations of the existing use. Should the site be developed, the 2m LRA is required to restore a full street verge.
COM030	93 George Street Pty	Seeks to correct the number of car parking spaces depicted in front of 93 George Street. Objects to the relocation of the George St bus stop to 60m west on George St due to being immediately in front of the emergency egress point. Recommends the relocation of the George St bus stop further east. Objects to the depiction of the proposed car space that would block the driveway crossing.	Current plans for the George Street Cycleway are in early stages of planning and are subject to further design refinement. Should the cycle path proceed it would be subject of project specific consultation and design.
COM032	8, 10-12 Victoria Road, 2A Villiers Street	Objects to the LRA and cycleway based on expected impacts to redevelopment plans (including an approved Site-Specific Development Control Plan) for the site. Queries details of the LRA and cycleway and possible impacts to re-development. Highlights that an existing 1.0m reservation along Villiers Street is incorrectly depicted as 1.2 m. Requests to meet with Council Officers to discuss further.	The 1.2 m setback was transposed incorrectly. The ITP has been updated to state the cycleway concept designs have been prepared for consultation only, and all measurements and set-outs of facilities are indicative. Due to the competing needs of the built form of this site and the existing SSDCP, a setback of the ground floor only will be investigated in further detail as part of the Marsden Street Cycleway. Council officers met with the landowner in July 2021 and will continue to work collaboratively to resolve the issue.
COM034	110 George Street	Supports the proposed raised pedestrian crossing across George St. However, recommends relocation from east of George St/Barrack Lane to be located west of the crossing. Notes the reconfiguration of the bus stop (Bus Stop #215069) to accommodate the George St Cycleway. However only supports Option A, which is in front of 130 George St (Option A). Objects to option B (in front of 110 George St). Suggests if raised pedestrian crossing is implemented west of Barracks Lane intersection, Option B would interfere with the crossing. Believes it would raise safety concerns. Believes Option A would have less impact as there are two more mature trees located in front of 110 George Street.	Current plans for the George Street Cycleway are in early stages of planning and are subject to further design refinement. Should the cycle path proceed it would be subject of project specific consultation and design. Due to the completing complexities of flooding, trees, drainage, location of the pedestrian priority crossing, bus stop requirements and detailed turning path analysis around Barrack Lane access it is not possible do determine the location of the bus stop in relation to the bicycle path until significant further design work is undertaken. It is therefore recommended to retain the LRA across the frontage of both 110 and 130 George Street.

14. Submissions by landowners are described in detail at Attachment 4.

Submissions from Public Authorities, Organisations, Service Providers and Businesses

15. Ten submissions were received from public authorities, organisations, service providers and businesses. These were:

· Endeavour Energy

· Parramatta Police Area Command

· ComfortDelGro Corporation NSW

· Heritage NSW

· Western Sydney Local Health District

· The Hills Shire Council

· Catholic Education - Diocese of Parramatta

· Stockland

· Sydney Water

· TfNSW

16. In their submissions to the ITP, public authorities and organisations generally raised issues which relate to their interests. The utilities Endeavour Energy and Sydney Water requested Council to consult with them regarding any impacts to their assets. The Parramatta Police Command recommended implementation of Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CEPTED). ComfortDelGro Corporation, a bus contractor to Transport for NSW, highlighted operational issues including the need for bus stops and layover facilities, and advocated adjustments to bicycle plans. Western Sydney Local Health District voiced support for the ITP and for increased public transport and walking and cycling, and advocated trials of 30 km/h speed limits in the CBD.

17. The Hills Shire Council notes the large number of commuters who drive between the Hills and Parramatta, and supports activity to hasten improved public transport connections, including heavy rail. Catholic Education of the Diocese of Parramatta expressed strong support for active and sustainable modes of travel and highlighted the importance of maintaining a safe pedestrian environment for students. Stockland supports the recommendation for Category B parking rates for residential developments which are further from mass transit rail stations and advocates expedited adoption of these parking rates. Most of these submissions are noted by Council officers and will be carried forward for consideration during implementation of the ITP.

18. Heritage NSW called attention to omission of the significant Convict Drain which is underground beneath proposed bus facilities on Smith Street and a cycle path on George Street. Heritage requests reassessment of testing for LRA notation in these sites. Council officers have updated the ITP to state that future design for facilities in this location must take into consideration impacts and appropriate treatment to heritage items including the underground Convict Drain which passes through the site.

19. TfNSW is a critical partner of City of Parramatta as it has primary responsibility for many facets of the transport system, including all arterial roads, traffic signals, public transport services, transport policies, and regulation. TfNSW has provided stakeholder input to Council throughout the preparation of the ITP. Comments raised by TfNSW have resulted in many editorial updates to the ITP, including corrections of fact and clarifications. Additionally, comments raised have resulted in elaboration or amendment to actions recommended by the ITP. Key issues raised by TfNSW in a letter covering its submission are detailed in the table below, and the submission is provided in detail at Attachment 6.

Transport for NSW – Key Comments

Summary of Submission

Council Officer Response

1. We would suggest a recommended action be included along the lines of: ‘Work with Transport for NSW to investigate new bus layover areas to support additional bus services’.

2. Future Transport 2056 has been updated and provides more detail on each of the PT modes across Greater Sydney, including Parramatta. Jacobs and the City of Parramatta Council may wish to include this information in the Strategic Context and Parramatta Future sections https://future.transport.nsw.gov.au/future-transport-strategy/greater-sydney-network/greater-sydney-network-refinement

3. The proposed cycling network reflects TfNSWs’ ambition for cycling access into, through and within the Parramatta CBD -- A key consideration is to note the importance of proposed north-south cycling connections through Parramatta CBD.

4. TfNSW will undertake further work with the City of Parramatta Council on the proposed actions defined.

5. The integrity of all existing SP2 – Classified Road LRA reservations identified within Council’s current Parramatta LEP 2011 must be maintained.

6. TfNSW does not yet have a final position on all the amendments proposed to the LRA map.

7. However, concerns are raised over the removal of a number of proposed LRA locations in particular, and the remainder will also need to be more fully considered. This will require further discussions between Council and TfNSW to resolve, with agreement on amendments (if any) to reservations to be provided by TfNSW in writing, prior to the making of the plan.

8. Further (separate) analysis and studies could identify further improvements to the capacity and capability of the existing road network along with opportunities to improve public transport capability.

9. Given the refinement of the proposed road widenings will not be able to occur prior to the finalisation of the Planning Proposal, we encourage Council to work with TfNSW on the future amendments to the Parramatta DCP 2011.

10. It is noted that we have/are consulting with City of Parramatta Council on these ITAP corridors.

1. The ITP is updated

2. Added reference to ITP

3. The ITP is updated

4. Additional actions have been added in the ITP on working with TfNSW on Access Strategy for the CBD. This will consider and prioritise future improvements with more detail than has been addressed in the ITP.

5. The ITP only recommends removing new proposed LRA exhibited with the current CBD Planning Proposal. All reservations in the existing 2011 LRA with TfNSW as the acquisition authority have been retained.

6. Additional LRA can be considered through continued working arrangements between Council and TfNSW identified at Officer Response #4, above.

7. Proposed LRA was removed because it was deemed not needed for future transport upgrades, or the need could not be confirmed by TfNSW.

8. Council will work with TfNSW to identify and consider additional LRA through continued working arrangements between Council and TfNSW identified Officer Response #4, above

9. Council will work with TfNSW on future amendments to the DCP through continued working arrangements between Council and TfNSW identified in Officer Response #4, above.

10. Noted

20. Submissions by public authorities, organisations, service providers and businesses are provided in detail at Attachment 5.

21. As part of public exhibition of the ITP Council officers have briefed the Economic Planning Committee of the Parramatta Chamber of Commerce and Minister Geoff Lee, the local member of the NSW Legislative Assembly:

Date

Stakeholder

Stakeholder Comment

Council Officer Response

Responsibility

12 May 2021

Economic Planning Committee of the Parramatta Chamber of Commerce

Officers summarised the contents of the draft Integrated Transport Plan for the CBD.

Chamber of Commerce members discussed:

- the need to consider the continued development of Council's Ring Road Strategy, particularly the Regional (outer) Ring Road to maintain vehicle access to the CBD

- transport impacts of the new Museum of Applied Arts and Sciences, and

- changes in technology which will allow new ways of moving around the CBD (such as electric scooters).

Council actively advocates for its Ring Road Strategy, the ITP includes Action RN4, which advocates traffic improvements on the Regional (Outer) and City (inner) ring roads.

Council will adapt its strategies as new developments come online and new technologies change our travel options.

City Strategy

18 June 2021

Minister Geoff Lee

Discussion included:

- the purpose and consultation with State agencies in the development of the ITP

- consultation with State Government agencies on development of the ITP

- recent announcements and status of transport infrastructure upgrades for the CBD

- active travel along the Parramatta River

Officers will update Minister Lee's office once Council has considered the ITP for finalisation.

City Strategy

Internal Consultation

22. The following Internal consultation has been undertaken in relation to this matter:

Date	Internal Stakeholder	Stakeholder Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
11 May 2021	City Design	Enquiring whether the George St Cycleway has been fully tested to ensure that other transport modes such as buses and pedestrians were not adversely affected.	Current plans for the George Street Cycleway are in early stages of planning and are subject to further design refinement.	City Strategy
12 May 2021	Traffic & Transport	Recommends level walking paths around park ovals to promote a safe walking environment to the community	The recommendation is noted, however recreational walking is outside of the scope of the ITP.	City Strategy
14 May 2021	CEO, Group Manager City Strategy, Manager Transport & Traffic	Discussed that an effective implementation plan is needed to guide the provision of transport infrastructure and services in the CBD. This should include strengthened coordination and collaboration between Council and Transport for NSW. Council and TfNSW should prepare a public-facing document, which shows that transport investment will keep-up with private investment as the CBD grows. An Access Strategy should be an output of this collaboration.	The ITP is updated to include a general action (#G1) for Council to work with TfNSW on implementation of the ITP and other plans for transport improvements serving Parramatta a CBD. An action is added (#G2) to produce an Access Strategy for the CBD.	City Strategy

23. Councilors were briefed through a workshop of the ITP on 15 March 2021. The outcomes of this workshop were summarised in the report to Council’s 26 April 2021 meeting.

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

Post-Exhibition Changes to the ITP

24. Feedback from exhibition of the ITP has resulted in some changes to the draft ITP as exhibited. Numerous edits are non-substantive, comprised of clarifications, corrections, and re-statements of publicly available information. These minor edits are not separately detailed in this report but are identified in detail within officer responses available at Attachments 3 to 6.

25. More substantive edits undertaken include clarifications to statements and depictions of proposed LRAs, and adding to and modifying recommendations. Whilst highlighting these changes, they do not require re-exhibition of the ITP because they are clarifications of the exhibited recommendations to keep or remove LRAs, and are detailed in the below table.

Comment #	Reference	Summarised Comment	Requested Edit to ITP
COMM025	124 & 126 Marsden St and 11 Parkes St	Requested information regarding land reservation acquisition affecting these properties, particularly whether any footpath would be lost.	On p 59, In Table 19: Results of LRA Testing, clarify Item 19 (Marsden Street) by adding the underlined words: "Remove LRA on east side of Marsden Street between George St and Campbell St. Retain all other areas."
COMM030	8, 10-12 Victoria Road, 2A Villiers Street	The submitter believes that there are negative repercussions upon its ability to enact its vision upon its development due to the perceived understanding of losing the required gross floor area. The submitter requests for further information in order to gain a comprehensive understanding of the consequences and wishes to meet with council.	Clarified Section 5.2.5, Land Reservation Acquisition, by adding to the description for the appended cycleway concept designs, "All setting out of facilities and measurements are indicative only and subject to confirmation, further design testing and consultation."
COMM038	Heritage NSW	Raises the correction of a heritage item I647 as convict drain as it has been entered as both 'residence' and 'convict drain' in the Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011. Requests the reassessment of Land Reservation Acquisition Testing sites 13 and 18 (adjacent to 130 George St) due to potential impacts on the 'convict drain'	In Table 19: Results of LRA Testing, added: "Future design for facilities in this location must take into consideration impacts and appropriate treatment to heritage items including the underground Convict Drain which passes through the site." to item 13 and item 18.
TFNSW - A	TfNSW - Key issues in letter	We would suggest a recommended action be included along the lines of: ‘Work with Transport for NSW to investigate new bus layover areas to support additional bus services’.	Action PT 4 PT 4 modified to: "Work with NSW government to investigate the prioritisation of on-street public transport services and to investigate new bus layover areas."
TfNSW - D	TfNSW - Key issues in letter	TfNSW will undertake further work with the City of Parramatta Council on the proposed actions defined	Added section 6.1. which includes: "This ITP is a strategic document, developed to support consideration of the CBD Planning Proposal. While the ITP shows how active, public and road transport can support planned development in the CBD, as a strategic document, it does not go into the detail of how and when transport improvements will be developed. Council and the State have joint responsibilities for transport in the CBD. Council and Transport for NSW should work together to refine the improvements identified in the ITP and identify the future transport provision for the CBD. An early output of this collaboration should be a Parramatta CBD Access Strategy which guides the planning, design, and implementation of transport infrastructure and services in Parramatta CBD."
TfNSW - 67	5.4 Travel Demand Mgmt., p 75	While Transport for NSW supports the proposed actions to establish a Transport Management Association (TMA) and to run a Travel Choices Parramatta program in principle, proposed funding, resourcing, governance and delivery arrangements would need to be identified and agreed, prior to endorsement, as there are currently no funding or resourcing arrangements in place at Transport for NSW for the delivery of these actions. Responsibility for these items may better sit with Council, than TfNSW, at this time.	Added section 6.1. which includes: "This ITP is a strategic document, developed to support consideration of the CBD Planning Proposal. While the ITP shows how active, public and road transport can support planned development in the CBD, as a strategic document, it does not go into the detail of how and when transport improvements will be developed. Council and the State have joint responsibilities for transport in the CBD. Council and Transport for NSW should work together to refine the improvements identified in the ITP and identify the future transport provision for the CBD. An early output of this collaboration should be a Parramatta CBD Access Strategy which guides the planning, design, and implementation of transport infrastructure and services in Parramatta CBD." Recommended actions: GT1 - "Council and State Government will coordinate and collaborate on implementation of the ITP and other plans for transport improvements serving Parramatta CBD." GT2 - "Council and the State Government will collaborate to prepare an Access Strategy for the Parramatta CBD."

26. A correction was made to include both concept designs for the Marsden Street Cycleway north of Victoria Road at Appendix C. The exhibited ITP did not include the alternate scheme that removes the requirement for the LRA in that location by removing parking, this alternate scheme is now included. Including this alternate scheme in the ITP post-exhibition does not convey any status to the scheme nor require further exhibition. The exhibited concept plans for the cycleway were developed for spatial testing and consultation only. Any future design and consideration would include project specific consultation with affected landowners and community.

Recommended issues for future investigation

27. The exhibited ITP made recommendations which, if supported, will require consequential amendments to CBD planning controls at a later stage. These include revisions to the LRA Map and refinements to off-street car parking rates.

28. It is recommended to address these revisions through the pathway option identified as ‘Changes that have merit for further investigation (via Decision Pathway 3 - Orange)’, as discussed in the CBD Planning Proposal Post-Exhibition report of 15 June 2021 (Item 17.1), for issues that have merit for further exploration. However, some may not necessarily result in a policy change, and cannot be written into planning controls without exhibition.

29. The following changes are recommended for further consideration:

Remove LRA on O'Connell St / Victoria Rd

Remove LRA on Smith St between George St and Macquarie St (east)

Remove LRA on Smith St north of Phillip St (west side)

Remove LRA on Wilde Ave / Victoria Rd

Remove LRA southern side George Street

Remove LRA on Marsden Street between George St and Campbell St east side

Change residential parking rates to ‘B’ rates for locations over 800 m from Parramatta Train Station, planned Parramatta Metro Station and over 400 m from the Harris Park Train Station.

30. Recommended Category ‘B’ parking rates are compared to the Category ‘A’ rates (which are included in the CBD Planning Proposal) in the following table:

Land Use

Category

Maximum Parking Rate

Residential

Category A

0.1 spaces per studio dwelling

0.3 spaces per 1-bedroom dwelling

0.7 spaces per 2-bedroom dwelling

1 spaces per 3 or more-bedroom dwelling

Category B

0.2 spaces per studio dwelling

0.4 spaces per 1 bedroom dwelling

0.8 spaces per 2 bedroom dwelling

1.1 spaces per 3 or more bedroom dwelling

For each dwelling up to 30 dwellings – 0.167 spaces

For each dwelling more than 30 and up to 70 dwellings – 0.1 spaces

For each dwelling more than 70 dwellings – 0.05 spaces

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

31. 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

32. 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 within the ITP is eligible for 100% NSW Government funding for construction, but the design will likely require Council funding.

33. 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 a Development Contributions Plan for the CBD, which is being reported to Council separately.

34. The ITP calls for Council and TfNSW to work jointly on implementing the ITP and specifically calls for preparation of an access strategy for the CBD. This workplan would have to be developed with TfNSW, pending agreement to work with Council. Council is recommended to seek joint funding with TfNSW. An estimated cost of $75,000 is indicated for Council’s contribution to an access strategy. It is expected that these funds would have to be drawn from general funds, although opportunities to fund works through developer contributions will also be explored.

35. Any financial impacts to the budget will be included in a subsequent Quarterly Budget Review for endorsement by Council.

36. 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		37,500	37,500
Depreciation
Other
Total Operating Result		37,500	37,500

Funding Source		General Funds	General Funds

CAPEX
CAPEX
External
Internal
Other
Total CAPEX

Funding Source

Mark Crispin

Senior Project Officer Transport Planning

Michael Jollon

Transport Planning Manager

Nicole Carnegie

Acting Group Manager, City Strategy

Michael Tzimoulas

Executive Director Corporate Services

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

Attachments:

1 ⇩	Parramatta CBD Integrated Transport Plan	128 Pages
2 ⇩	ITP Engagement Evaluation Report	5 Pages
3 ⇩	ITP Submissions from Individuals	10 Pages
4 ⇩	ITP Submissions from Landowners about CBD Properties	3 Pages
5 ⇩	ITP Submissions from Public Authorities, Organisations, Service Providers and Businesses	8 Pages
6 ⇩	ITP Transport for NSW Detailed Comments Register	20 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 26 July 2021 Item 14.1

GREEN

ITEM NUMBER 14.1

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Adoption of the Arthur Phillip Park Masterplan

REFERENCE F2021/00521 - D08031744

REPORT OF Place Manager

PURPOSE:

To seek adoption of the Arthur Phillip Park Masterplan as amended in response to submissions received during the June 2021 public exhibition period.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council adopts the Arthur Phillip Park Masterplan as amended (Attachment 1 - Final Arthur Phillip Park Masterplan 2021) in response to submissions received during the June 2021 public exhibition period.

(b) That copies of the adopted Arthur Phillip Park Masterplan 2021 be made available to the public at the City of Parramatta Library, the Constitution Hill Branch Library and on Council’s website.

BACKGROUND

1. The renewed Arthur Phillip Park Masterplan 2021 (Attachment 1), includes an all-ability water play concept plan. This project is identified as a Parramatta Ward priority project in the DPOP 2018-21 pg. 16.

2. Arthur Phillip Park located in Northmead (Parramatta Ward). Redbank Road (northeast), Park Street (northwest) and Edward Street (southwest) bound the Park. The Council-owned and operated Redbank Children’s Centre day care is located within the park.

3. The park is currently identified in the Catchment 1 of the 2020 Community Infrastructure Strategy (CIS) as a local playground. Catchment 1 does not have an identified district* park despite a growing population.

*District park - The CIS defines district facilities as those that cater for Association competition, as well as servicing a local catchment to provide a mix of recreational, competitive and programmed formats for participants.

4. A masterplan was previously completed in 2000 to define the social spaces, improve connectivity and define the recreation spaces. In 2011, Coca Cola Amatil partially funded the construction of a new playground, a circuit pathway, and minor park improvements.

5. Arthur Phillip Park is transitioning from a local park to a district park due to rapid population growth experienced in the precincts of Northmead and Westmead.

6. The renewed masterplan for Arthur Phillip Park will provide a long-term future vision and statutory requirement to fund new district level recreational facilities and amenities.

7. The Masterplan area is 3.2ha in size and currently comprises of the following facilities:

· Two sports fields, currently used for football (soccer), rugby league and cricket and surrounded by a circuit path

· Amenities block consisting of public toilet, storage, change rooms and kiosk

· Children’s playground (corner of Redbank and Park street)

· Redbank Children’s Centre day care (Redbank Street)

· Fitness stations

· Basketball half court

· Picnic facilities and BBQ

· Redbank Street carpark, Park Street parking and Edward Street parking

8. The proposed future improvements identified in the Arthur Phillip Park Masterplan align with council’s adopted CIS:

i. Increasing the carrying capacity of current playing fields through supporting infrastructure upgrades or embellishments, playing surface upgrades and increased maintenance

ii. Upgrading existing playgrounds to expand the variety of play experiences (nature play, sensory play and imaginative play), including an all ability water play space

iii. Enhancing the pedestrian and cycle connections between play spaces

iv. Repurposing the park to accommodate both formal and informal sports

v. Developing better connections between open spaces and sportsground

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

9. The development of the renewed 2021 Arthur Phillip Park Masterplan was informed by three (3) phases of community consultation, Council’s Community Infrastructure Strategy, Parramatta Ward Councillor feedback, and an internal working group comprising of representatives from Councils Open Space, Parks, Recreation, Social Outcomes and Property teams.

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

10. Local residents, all current sporting user groups, and community ‘drop-in’ session attendees were supportive of the draft masterplan.

11. A total of 29 responses were received during public exhibition of the draft masterplan. Of those, only one (1) submission disagreed with the masterplan. The respondent who disagreed with the masterplan cited “I see no need or value in water park section.”

12. No significant amendments were made to the masterplan as a consequence of public exhibition. Further detail relating to the leveling sports field are provided (pg.28-29, Attachment 1) as a result of the ‘drop-in’ session discussions. Further consultation will be conducted to inform the concept design for each key component of Arthur Phillip Park as it is delivered.

13. Car parking studies were conducted on Friday 5 March 2021 (7.00 to 18:00) and on Saturday, 6 March 2021(8.00 to 17:00) to understand the existing car parking capacity at Arthur Phillip Park. There were 86 parking spaces available for use adjacent to or within 100m of the park during the time of analysis. Improvements to the carpark in the masterplan include:

a. remove the wooden posts from the off-street parking bays

b. mark the parking spaces as per AS2890.1:2004, Clause 2.4

14. The busiest car parking times identified at Arthur Phillip Park was during Saturday winter season sports events. A third car parking study was scheduled for June 2021 however due to the Queen’s Birthday weekend (12 June 2021), cancelled sports games due wet weather (19 June 2021) and COVID 19 restrictions enacted 26 June 2021, the winter season car parking survey will be rescheduled for the return of community sports at a later date. The results of this third car parking study will be published to the project webpage on Participate Parramatta participate.cityofparramatta.nsw.gov.au/arthur-phillip-masterplan.

15. A staging plan is included in the final masterplan (pg 42, Attachment 1) following confirmation of $1.15m funding from the NSW Public Spaces and Legacy Program 2020-22 to implement stage 1.

Stage 1 (2021/2022) includes the below provisions:

i. New district playground ( including inclusive accessible play, nature play space, ½ court basketball)

ii. New picnic and BBQ areas, seating, water fountains, waste bins

iii. New pathway lighting (preferably solar), bike parking

iv. New landscaping and tree planting

Stage 2 (2025 subject to funding availability)

i. Design and construct a water play facility

ii. Upgrade the existing sports field

iii. Improve park connectivity/ parking where relevant.

16. Community consultation is planned for late September 2021 to review the draft concept plan for Stage 1 implementation.

CONSULTATION & TIMING

Stakeholder Consultation

17. A dedicated project webpage with current project information and key milestones is available at participate.cityofparramatta.nsw.gov.au/arthur-phillip-masterplan.

18. The community engagement strategy was developed and included three distinct phases to best ensure the comprehensive collection of data.

· Phase 1 (Ideation) - 4 December 2020 to 4 February 2021

· Phase 2(Co design) - 19 April 2021 to 10 May 2021

· Phase 3 (Public exhibition) -31 May to 25 June 2021.

19. During public exhibition three in person drop in sessions were conducted at the following dates:

Thursday 10 June 4-6pm at Arthur Phillip Park, Northmead

Saturday 12 June 11-1pm at Arthur Phillip Park, Northmead

Saturday 19 June 1-3pm at Arthur Phillip Park, Northmead

20. Stakeholder interviews were conducted with the following organisations during Phase 1 and 3 consultation:

· Winston Hills Football Club

· Hills Football Association

· All Saints JRLFC

· Parramatta Junior Rugby League

· Parramatta District Cricket Association

· Coca Cola Amatil

21. A summary of the responses and reach of the 3 phases of consultation is provided below:

Phase 1 Ideation - 7 December 2020 to 4 February 2021
Intercept surveys	Stakeholder Interviews	Completed surveys	Formal submission	Webpage visitors	Social media reach	Social media impressions	Flyer/Mail distribution
23	5	233	3	1640	28,440	75,683	826
Phase 2 co design – 19 April 2021 to 10 May 2021
Intercept surveys	Stakeholder Interviews	Completed surveys	Formal submission	Webpage visitors	Social media reach	Social media impressions	Flyer/Mail distribution
n/a	n/a	273	n/a	1306	46,414	151,174	826
Phase 3 public exhibition –31 May to 25 June 2021
Drop in session attendance	Stakeholder Interviews	Completed surveys	Formal submission	Webpage visitors	Social media reach	Social media impressions	Flyer/Mail distribution
~27	5	28	1	1,528	36,920	100,305	826

22. Promotional flyers/letters were delivered to local residents who lived within 800m walking distance of Arthur Phillip Park to seek their feedback at each of the three phases of community consultation.

23. Additionally, a further 80 local residents who properties bordered the park were letterboxed directly and invited to attend a drop in session or contact the project team via phone or email during public exhibition.

24. Advertisements in Council’s publications and the ‘Parra News’ newspaper were provided to promote the consultation activities as described below:

Date	Publication	Consultation phase	Call to action
May 2021	Winter Active Parramatta e newsletter	Phase 3 public exhibition	Provide feedback on the draft masterplan
June 2021	ePULSE June	Phase 3 public exhibition	Provide feedback on the draft masterplan
Week commencing 31 May 7 June 14 June 21 June	Parra News Newspaper	Phase 3 public exhibition	Provide feedback on the draft masterplan

25. An internal working group was established to develop the project scope/brief, review consultation data, workshop draft concept designs, and review the draft masterplan before seeking Council approval for public exhibition.

26. The below table summarises the internal and external consultation activities to inform the Arthur Phillip Park Masterplan.

Date	Stakeholder	Stakeholder Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
31 July 2020 Develop Project scope	Representatives from OSNR, Social Outcomes, Landscape Architect, Parks, Recreation	Develop an agreed project brief to inform the development of the draft masterplan. Establish an internal working group to review community data and workshop the draft masterplan design	Project brief developed and subsequently approved by relevant Council teams, managers and Executive Directors.	Place Manager
30 September 2020 Confirm engagement strategy and requirements	Representatives from OSNR, Social Outcomes, Landscape Architect, Parks, Recreation	Due to COVID19 restrictions, stakeholder interviews preferred method of consultation with sporting groups.	Stakeholder interviews included in community engagement strategy	Place Manager
16 November 2020 Project inception meeting	Representatives from OSNR, Social Outcomes, Landscape Architect, Parks, Recreation, Community Engagement	Develop online survey and design consultation activities to collect ideas from the community to inform the masterplan.	Drop in sessions converted to intercept surveys due to COVID restrictions. Consultation period extended across the summer to give the community ample time to provide feedback. Local residents invited to visit Constitution Hill Library to provide feedback as an alternative to online survey	Place Manager
2 Dec 2020	Redbank Daycare Centre and Council’s community Services	Project update and engagement requirements	Feedback collated and input to draft masterplan design	Place Manager
4 Dec 2020 to 4 February 2021 Phase 1 community consultation	Park visitors Local sports clubs Local residents within 600m of the park Northmead Public School and Redbank Daycare Centre	Please see Phase 1 consultation report provided as Attachment 2.	Feedback collated and input to draft masterplan design	Place Manager/Community Engagement/Recreation Planning
22 Feb 2021 Review Phase 1 consultation data	Representatives from OSNR, Social Outcomes, Landscape Architect, Parks, Recreation, Community Engagement	Review phase 1 data for any data gaps, issues and develop engagement strategy for Phase 2 consultation	A QR code trail was developed to further tease out the community preferences and prioritise future upgrades at Arthur Phillip Park.	Place Manager/Community Engagement/Landscape Architect
19 April to 10 May 2021 Phase 2 community consultation	Park visitors Local sports clubs Local residents within 800m of the park Northmead Public School and Redbank Daycare Centre Coca Cola Amatil	Phase 2 consultation results will be published directly to Participate Parramatta upon completion of the consultation period.	Feedback collated and input to draft masterplan design	Place Manager/Community Engagement
28 April 2021 Workshop draft masterplan concepts	Representatives from OSNR, Social Outcomes, Landscape Architect, Parks, Recreation, Community Engagement	Workshop draft masterplan concepts to eliminate design options that increase capital and operating costs.	Feedback collated and input to draft masterplan design	Landscape Architect
5 May 2021 Review draft masterplan concept design	Representatives from OSNR, Social Outcomes, Landscape Architect, Parks, Recreation, Community Engagement, PSAS	Workshop draft masterplan concept to identify long term implications to Council prior to public exhibition	Feedback collated and input to draft masterplan design	Landscape Architect
31 May to 25 June 2021 Phase 3 consultation public exhibition	Park visitors Local sports clubs Local residents within 800m of the park Northmead Public School and Redbank Daycare Centre	Phase 3 consultation results will be published directly to Participate Parramatta upon completion of the consultation period.	29 formal submissions received 28 support 1 unsupport Local residents requested more detail relating to leveling sports field. This is now updated in the final masterplan (Attachment 1)	Landscape Architect

27. A total of 29 responses were received during public exhibition of the draft masterplan. Only one (1) submission disagreed with the masterplan. The respondent who disagreed with the masterplan cited “I see no need or value in water park section.”

28. Winston Hills Cricket Club requested “Council look at including practice nets in the master plan for Arthur Phillip. With an ever changing demographic, new nets would be greatly received by the wider community in the area”. Unfortunately cricket nets could not be included in the Arthur Phillip Park masterplan as the footprint of the park is limited and unable to accommodate the addition of cricket nets. Council acknowledges the growing popularity of cricket and the importance of the provision of public cricket nets and future cricket nets will be investigated at Mc Coy Park and Binalong Park Toongabbie.

29. A full breakdown of community consultation results and a comprehensive report for each phase of consultation will be published to Participate Parramatta participate.cityofparramatta.nsw.gov.au/arthur-phillip-masterplan.

Councillor Consultation

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

Date	Councillor	Councillor Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
15 July 2020	Clr Bradley Clr Pandey Clr Zaiter	Councillors agreed to undertake masterplan process for Arthur Phillip Park in addition to investigating water play opportunity	Commence project	Place Services
11 November 2020	Clr Bradley Clr Pandey Clr Zaiter	Discuss stakeholder engagement strategy and project milestones	Integration into project plan and community consultation activities	Place Services
17 February 2021	Clr Bradley Clr Pandey Clr Zaiter	Review Phase 1 consultation results and feedback	Integration masterplan and community consultation activities	Place Services
22 March 2021	Lord Mayor	Provide overview of the masterplan consultation and key project milestones	Integration masterplan and community consultation activities	Place Services
21 April 2021	Clr Bradley Clr Pandey Clr Zaiter	Provide overview of Phase 2 consultation activities. Review draft concept options	Integration masterplan and community consultation activities	Place Services
19 May 2021	Clr Bradley Clr Pandey Clr Zaiter	Review Phase 2 consultation results and feedback. Review draft masterplan	Integration masterplan and community consultation activities	Place Services
24 June 2021	Clr Bradley Clr Pandey Clr Zaiter	Review Phase 3 consultation results and feedback.	Integration masterplan and community consultation activities	Place Services

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

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

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

32. There are no unbudgeted financial implications for Council associated with the development and approval of the masterplan. The consultant fees for community consultation costs are within the existing DPOP budget of $140,000 for the 20/21 Financial Year.

33. Stage 1 of the masterplan will be fully funded by the NSW Public Spaces and Legacy Program 2020/22 ($1.15m).

34. Following adoption of the 2021 Draft Development Contributions Plan, the collection of the apportioned funds when accumulated will be used to implement future stages of the Arthur Phillip Park masterplan (identified in table 31 within that Plan, extracted below). As this is an open space area, all contributions are 100% apportioned.

Table 31: Open Space and recreation in the 2021 Draft Development Contributions Plan 2021 has identified funding for Arthur Phillip Park.

Line item No.

Description

Estimated Cost to Council

Apportioned Cost

Priority

Timing

O41

Local park upgrade, Northmead upgrade

one existing local park

in Northmead to a district park, ideally at Northmead Reserve or Arthur Phillip Park.

$15,000,000

5-10years

O42

Upgrade sports field, Northmead upgrade

fields and supporting

infrastructure to increase capacity at Arthur Phillip Park,

Northmead

$3,112,500

5-10years

35. In addition, funding to implement the masterplan will be sought through relevant NSW or Federal Government grant funding programs.

36. 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	N/A

CAPEX	Nil
CAPEX
External
Internal
Other
Total CAPEX

Funding Source	N/A

Myly Truong

Place Manager

Bruce Mills

Group Manager Place Services

Michael Tzimoulas

Executive Director Corporate Services

Bryan Hynes

Executive Director Property & Place

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

Attachments:

1 ⇩

Arthur Phillip Park Masterplan 2021

84 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 26 July 2021 Item 14.2

GREEN

ITEM NUMBER 14.2

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Adoption of the Binalong Park Masterplan

REFERENCE F2021/00521 - D08031774

REPORT OF Place Manager

PURPOSE:

To seek adoption of the Binalong Park Masterplan as amended in response to submissions received during the June 2021 public exhibition period.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council adopts the Binalong Park Masterplan as amended (Attachment 1 - Final Binalong Park Masterplan 2021) in response to submissions received during the June 2021 public exhibition period.

(b) That copies of the adopted Binalong Park Masterplan 2021 be made available to the public at the City of Parramatta Library, the Constitution Hill Branch Library and on Council’s website.

BACKGROUND

1. The Binalong Park Masterplan 2021 (Attachment 1) includes a concept plan for a community hub (local multipurpose indoor recreation facilities). This project is identified as a Parramatta Ward priority project in the DPOP 2018-21 pg.16.

2. Binalong Park is located in Old Toongabbie (Parramatta Ward). Toongabbie Public school (north) and Binalong Road (west) bound the park. On the east and south sides, residential housing bounds the park.

3. Binalong Park currently comprises of the following facilities:

· Four sports fields (currently used for soccer)

· Sports field amenities block consisting of toilets, change rooms, storage and kiosk

· Children’s playground

· Two multi-purpose hardcourt tennis courts

· Tennis amenities building consisting of kitchen facilities and toilets

· One basketball court

· Three netball courts

· Carpark

· Cricket nets (2 wickets)

4. The playground and sports ground is currently identified in the Catchment 1 of the 2020 Community Infrastructure Strategy (CIS) as a local facility. Currently, there are no district* size playgrounds and sportsgrounds in Catchment 1.

5. The development of a masterplan for Binalong Park will provide a long-term future vision and statutory requirement to fund a new district level recreational facilities and amenities.

6. The proposed future improvements identified in the Binalong Park Masterplan align with council’s adopted CIS:

i. Increasing the carrying capacity of current playing fields through supporting infrastructure upgrades or embellishments, playing surface upgrades and increased maintenance.

ii. Increasing the carrying capacity through the conversion of existing hardcourts to multipurpose courts to increase the diversity of recreational activities provided at the park.

iii. Increasing the length of play hours via a proposed park lighting strategy.

iv. Increasing park accessibility by leveling the fields, provision of a circuit path to support walking, Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) compliant amenities and facilities.

v. Increasing social activities and gatherings through the provision of local community indoor multipurpose rooms and facilities.

vi. Revising the car park configuration to improve traffic flow and sight lines

vii. Upgrading the entrance to the car park.

viii. Repurposing the park to accommodate both formal and informal sports

ix. Improving pedestrian safety connections and sight lines between open spaces and sportsground.

x. Repurposing alternative (non-traditional) spaces for both formal and informal sport and recreation.

7. The masterplan also provides Council with a ‘shovel ready’ plan to apply for State and Federal grant funding where applicable.

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

8. Toongabbie Public School, local residents (including those bounding Binalong Park on the east and south sides), all current sporting users groups, and community ‘drop-in’ session attendees were supportive of the draft masterplan.

9. A total of 42 submissions were received during public exhibition of the draft masterplan. Of those, 37 submissions supported the masterplan, 4 responses were undecided and 1 submission did not support the masterplan.

10. No significant amendments were made to the masterplan as a consequence of public exhibition. Further detail relating to the retaining wall and leveling the field to the northeast is provided (pg.31, Attachment 1) as a result of the ‘drop-in’ session discussions and consultation with Toongabbie Public School. Further consultation will be conducted to inform the concept design for each key component of Binalong Park as it is delivered.

11. Car parking studies were conducted on Thursday 11 March 2021 (7.00 to 18:00) and on Saturday, 13 March 2021 (8.00 to 17:00) to understand the existing car parking capacity at Binalong Park. The existing carpark has 104 car spaces including two (2) accessible. There were 215 parking spaces available for use adjacent to or located in surrounding streets near the park during the time of analysis.

12. The busiest car parking times were during Saturday winter season sports events. A third car parking study was scheduled for June 2021 however due to the Queen’s Birthday weekend (12 June 2021), cancelled sports games due wet weather (19 June 2021) and COVID 19 restrictions enacted 26 June 2021, the winter season car parking survey will be rescheduled for the return of community sports at a later date. The results of this third car parking study will be published to the project webpage on Participate Parramatta https://participate.cityofparramatta.nsw.gov.au/binalongpark.

13. Improvements to the carpark in the masterplan include:

i. A separate entrance and exit

ii. Relocation the carpark further down Binalong Park away from the Fitzwilliam intersection to reduce congestion

iii. Circuit path connection to the sports field and recreational amenities

iv. Improved layout to improve carpark efficiency

14. To achieve the above improvements the existing number of car spaces (104 spaces, including 2 accessible spaces) will be reduced to 92 car spaces including 2 accessible spaces. This reduction was tested during public exhibition, and no significant objections were received during ‘drop-in’ sessions and online survey feedback. The new carpark will be subject to Parramatta Traffic Committee review and further community consultation as part of the detailed concept design development. Modifications to the carpark size and layout can be refined at future consultations and subject to Parramatta Traffic Committee and Council approval.

15. The Binalong Master Plan is a long-term document that sets a holistic vision for the park to ensure that the individual components complement each other in alignment with Council adopted CIS, and assists to align Council’s embellishment of the park over a 20-year period.

16. Further investigation, site analysis, spatial measurement, civil engineering and architectural and sports field design is required to develop the corresponding detailed concept design relating to the multipurpose courts, new community building, sports field regrading, retaining wall, and carpark. Each of these components will include further community consultation to ensure that the final detailed concept designs meets with community and stake-holder requirements.

CONSULTATION & TIMING

Stakeholder Consultation

17. A dedicated project webpage with current project information and key milestones was made available at https://participate.cityofparramatta.nsw.gov.au/binalongpark

18. The community engagement strategy was developed and included three distinct phases to best ensure the comprehensive collection of data.

· Phase 1 understand the site - 4 December 2020 to 4 February 2021

· Phase 2 issues and mitigation options - 19 April 2021 to 10 May 2021

· Phase 3 public exhibition - 31 May to 25 June 2021

19. During public exhibition three in-person ‘drop-in’ sessions were conducted on the following dates:

Saturday 12 June 9-11am at Binalong Park, Old Toongabbie

Thursday 17 June 3-5pm at Binalong Park, Old Toongabbie

Saturday 19 June 2-4pm at Binalong Park, Old Toongabbie

20. Stakeholder interviews were conducted with the following organisations during Phase 1 and 3 consultation:

· Pendle Hill Football Club

· Granville and Districts Soccer Football Association

· Starlights Netball Club

· Pendle Hill Netball Club

· Parramatta District Cricket Association

· Pendle Hill Colts Cricket Club

· Binalong Park Committee

· Mark Cowper Tennis Coaching

· Toongabbie Public School

21. A summary of the responses and reach of the three phases of consultation is provided below:

Phase 1 Understand the site - 7 December 2020 to 4 February 2021
Intercept surveys	Stakeholder Interviews	Completed surveys	Email or Instagram submission	Webpage visitors	Social media reach	Social media impressions	Mail distribution
30	5	374	4	1715	26737	79 242	1024
Phase 2 Identify issues and mitigation options – 19 April 2021 to 10 May 2021
Intercept surveys	Stakeholder Interviews	Completed surveys	Email submission	Webpage visitors	Social media reach	Social media impressions	Mail distribution
n/a	n/a	165	1	1916	32537	119610	1024
Phase 3 Public exhibition and feedback–31 May to 25 June 2021
Drop in session attendance	Stakeholder Interviews	Survey submission	Email submission	Webpage visitors	Social media reach	Social media impressions	Mail distribution
~28	7	39	3	1,612	25991	93431	1024

22. Promotional flyers/letters were sent to local residents living within 600m walking distance of Binalong Park to seek their feedback at each of the three phases of community consultation.

23. Additionally, a further 54 local residents whose properties bordered the park were letterboxed directly and invited to attend a drop in session or contact the project team via phone or email during public exhibition.

24. Advertisements in Council’s publications and the ‘Parra News’ newspaper were provided to promote the consultation activities as described below:

Date	Publication	Consultation phase	Call to action
May 2021	Winter Active Parramatta e newsletter	Phase 3 public exhibition	Provide feedback on the draft masterplan
June 2021	ePULSE June	Phase 3 public exhibition	Provide feedback on the draft masterplan
Week commencing 31 May 7 June 14 June 21 June	Parra News Newspaper	Phase 3 public exhibition	Provide feedback on the draft masterplan

25. An internal working group was established to develop the project scope/brief, review consultation data, workshop draft concept designs and review the draft masterplan before seeking Council approval for public exhibition.

26. The below table summarises the internal and external consultation activities to inform the draft Binalong Park Masterplan.

Date	Stakeholder	Stakeholder Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
31 July 2020 Develop Project scope	Representatives from OSNR, Social Outcomes, Landscape Architect, Parks, Recreation	Develop an agreed project brief to inform the development of the draft masterplan. Establish an internal working group to review community data and workshop the draft masterplan design	Project brief developed and subsequently approved by relevant Council teams, managers and Executive Directors.	Place Manager
30 September 2020 Confirm engagement strategy and requirements	Representatives from OSNR, Social Outcomes, Landscape Architect, Parks, Recreation	Due to COVID19 restrictions, stakeholder interviews preferred method of consultation with sporting groups.	Stakeholder interviews included in community engagement strategy	Place Manager
16 November 2020 Project inception meeting	Representatives from OSNR, Social Outcomes, Landscape Architect, Parks, Recreation, Community Engagement	Develop online survey and design consultation activities to collect ideas from the community to inform the masterplan.	Drop-in sessions converted to intercept surveys due to COVID restrictions. Consultation period extended across the summer to give the community ample time to provide feedback. Local residents invited to visit Constitution Hill Library to provide feedback as an alternative to online survey	Place Manager
4 Dec 2020 to 4 February 2021 Phase 1 community consultation	Park visitors Local sports clubs Local residents within 600m of the park	Please see Phase 1 consultation report provided as Attachment 2.	Feedback collated and input to draft masterplan design	Place Manager/Community Engagement/Recreation Planning
22 Feb 2021 Review Phase 1 consultation data	Representatives from OSNR, Social Outcomes, Landscape Architect, Parks, Recreation, Community Engagement	Review phase 1 data for any data gaps, issues and develop engagement strategy for Phase 2 consultation	An online survey was developed to further understand issues and mitigation measures for community consideration at Binalong Park.	Place Manager/Community Engagement/Landscape Architect
19 April to 10 May 2021 Phase 2 community consultation	Park visitors Local sports clubs Local residents within 600m of the park Toongabbie Public School	Phase 2 consultation results will be published directly to Participate Parramatta upon completion of the consultation period.	Feedback collated and input to draft masterplan design	Place Manager/Community Engagement
28 April 2021 Workshop draft masterplan concepts	Representatives from OSNR, Social Outcomes, Landscape Architect, Parks, Recreation, Community Engagement	Workshop draft masterplan concepts to eliminate design options that increase capital and operating costs.	Feedback collated and input to draft masterplan design	Landscape Architect
29 April 2021	Phone call discussion with Mr Chris Brown, Toongabbie Public School Principal.	Discuss proposed park and car parking improvement options to inform the draft masterplan.	Feedback collated and input to draft masterplan design	Place Manager
5 May 2021 Review draft masterplan concept design	Representatives from OSNR, Social Outcomes, Landscape Architect, Parks, Recreation, Community Engagement, PSAS	Workshop draft masterplan concept to identify long term implications to Council prior to public exhibition	Feedback collated and input to draft masterplan design	Landscape Architect
31 May to 25 June 2021 Phase 3 consultation public exhibition	Park visitors Local sports clubs Local residents within 600m of the park Toongabbie Public School	Phase 3 consultation results will be published directly to Participate Parramatta upon completion of the consultation period.	42 submissions received 37 in support 4 undecided 1 unsupported Feedback collated and input to final masterplan design for Council endorsement	Place Manager/Community Engagement

27. A full breakdown of community consultation results and a comprehensive report for each phase of consultation will be published to Participate Parramatta https://participate.cityofparramatta.nsw.gov.au/binalongpark .

Councillor Consultation

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

Date	Councillor	Councillor Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
15 July 2020	Clr Bradley Clr Pandey Clr Zaiter	Councillors agreed to undertake masterplan process for Binalong Park in addition to investigating community building opportunity	Commence project	Place Services
11 November 2020	Clr Bradley Clr Pandey Clr Zaiter	Discuss stakeholder engagement strategy and project milestones	Integration into project plan and community consultation activities	Place Services
17 February 2021	Clr Bradley Clr Pandey Clr Zaiter	Review Phase 1 consultation results and feedback	Integration masterplan and community consultation activities	Place Services
22 March 2021	Lord Mayor	Provide overview of the masterplan consultation and key project milestones	Integration masterplan and community consultation activities	Place Services
21 April 2021	Clr Bradley Clr Pandey Clr Zaiter	Provide overview of Phase 2 consultation activities. Review draft concept options	Integration masterplan and community consultation activities	Place Services
19 May 2021	Clr Bradley Clr Pandey Clr Zaiter	Review Phase 2 consultation results and feedback. Review draft masterplan	Integration masterplan and community consultation activities	Place Services
24 June 2021	Clr Bradley Clr Pandey Clr Zaiter	Review Phase 3 consultation results and feedback.	Integration masterplan and community consultation activities	Place Services

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

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

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

30. There are no unbudgeted financial implications for Council associated with the development and approval of the masterplan. The consultant fees for community consultation costs are within the existing DPOP budget of $140,000 for the 20/21 Financial Year.

31. Following adoption of the 2021 Draft Development Contributions Plan, the collection of the apportioned funds when accumulated will be used to implement the Binalong Park masterplan (identified in tables 29 and 30 within that Plan, extracted below). As this is an open space area, all contributions are 100% apportioned.

Table 29: Community facilities in the 2021 Draft Development Contributions Plan 2021 has identified funding for new community facilities at Binalong Park.

Line item No.	Description	Estimated Cost to Council	Apportioned Cost	Priority	Timing
O18	New multipurpose meeting rooms, Toongabbie construction and fit out of new 1,000m2 multipurpose rooms in Toongabbie, ideally located at Binalong Park.	$1,194,000	$1,194,000	C	10-20 years

Table 31: Open Space and recreation in the 2021 Draft Development Contributions Plan 2021 has identified funding for Binalong Park.

Line item No.

Description

Estimated Cost to Council

Apportioned Cost

Priority

Timing

O66

Local park upgrade, Toongabbie – upgrade Binalong Park in

Toongabbie.

$7,500,000

10-20 years

32. In addition, funding to implement for Masterplan will be sought through relevant NSW or Federal Government grant funding programs.

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
Internal Costs
Depreciation
Other
Total Operating Result	Nil

Funding Source	N/A

CAPEX	Nil
CAPEX
External
Internal
Other
Total CAPEX

Funding Source	N/A

Myly Truong

Place Manager

Bruce Mills

Group Manager Place Services

Michael Tzimoulas

Executive Director Corporate Services

Bryan Hynes

Executive Director Property & Place

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

Attachments:

1 ⇩

Binalong Park Masterplan 2021

87 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 26 July 2021 Item 16.1

THRIVING

ITEM NUMBER 16.1

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Adoption of Granville Square Masterplan

REFERENCE F2021/00521 - D07966048

REPORT OF Place Manager

PURPOSE:

To seek the adoption of the Granville Square Masterplan and the Granville Place Plan.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council adopts the Granville Square Masterplan as amended (Attachment 1 - Final Granville Square Masterplan) in response to submissions received during the June 2021 public exhibition.

(b) That Council adopts the Granville Place Plan as amended (Attachment 2 – Final Granville Place Plan) in response to submissions received during the May 2021 public exhibition.

(c) That copies of the adopted Granville Square Masterplan and the Granville Place Plan be made available at the City of Parramatta Library and on Council’s website.

(d) Further, that all those who provided submissions during the public exhibition be advised of Councils decision and thanked for their contribution to the development of the Masterplan.

BACKGROUND

1. The Granville Square Masterplan is adopted as Focus Area 5.3.1.6 ‘Deliver a Masterplan for Granville Town Centre’ in the Delivery Program and Operational Plan 20/21 (DPOP).

2. The Masterplan provides a high-level vision for a Granville Town Square to be delivered over the next 3 - 10 years (Attachment 1 - Final Granville Square Masterplan).

3. The Masterplan identifies an area of approximately 3,500m² bounded by Cowper Street to the north, Rowell street to the east, and Bridge street to the west that will become a dedicated open, urban plaza for the Granville community.

4. The Masterplan has been guided by strategic community infrastructure need, community input, and the NSW State Government’s Parramatta Road Urban Amenity Improvement Program (PRUAIP).

5. The Granville Square Masterplan aligns with Council’s adopted Community Infrastructure Strategy (CIS) by seeking to achieve the following:

i. Ensuring sufficient public outdoor space for a rapidly growing population. North Granville will see a population increase of 343% by 2041 (5,600 people in 2019 to 24,800 by 2041 according to the CIS).

ii. Supporting the health and wellbeing of a diverse, high-density community who will have limited private space and therefore public spaces and facilities will become their outlet for social gathering and recreation.

iii. Acknowledging the important role public outdoor spaces play for our community and their sense of identity.

6. The Granville Square Masterplan also aligns with the NSW State Government’s PRUAIP vision by consolidating and embellishing the site to become approximately 3,500m² of public outdoor space.

7. The Department of Infrastructure and Planning (DPIE) through the PRUAIP also provided $8.16M of grant funding to acquire two (2) buildings along Bridge Street with the intention of creating an urban plaza at this site. Funding was provided to acquire the properties but not for embellishment.

8. Council also received $8.7M as part of the PRUAIP Good and Bridge Streets upgrade. Good and Bridge Streets are located directly adjacent to the proposed Granville Square. This significant investment will see the streetscape transformed into an outdoor dining precinct. Footpaths are being widened to allow for outdoor dining, creative catenary lighting is being installed to facilitate a nighttime economy. In addition, new street furniture, mature tree planting and a change of traffic to one-way southbound will make this a pedestrian friendly, activated and vibrant space.

9. The Granville Place Plan is adopted as Focus Area 5.3.1.4 ‘Develop a community-led Neighbourhood Policy and Place Plans to inform local services and project delivery’ in the Delivery Program and Operational Plan 20/21 (DPOP).

10. The Place Plan summarises and prioritises the needs of an area, including but not limited to infrastructure requirements, quality and type of amenity, and open space requirements. It goes further to articulate the history, heritage and character of the place to protect or create an identity and place pride (Attachment 2 - Granville Place Plan).

11. The Granville Place Plan has made use of public consultation, Council’s internal strategic documents, external strategic documents, and qualitative place measures to create a vision and actionable items for the precinct of Granville. This then allows Council to co-ordinate its resources in a way that better serves the specific needs of each unique community.

12. The Place Plan highlights projects such as the Granville Town Square, PRUAIP Good and Bridge Streets upgrade, and the PRUAIP North Granville Masterplan and demonstrates how these works fit into a greater vision for the precinct.

13. Community consultation for input and feedback on the draft Masterplan and Place Plan occurred from 24 March - 21 April 2021 and public exhibition of the Masterplan occurred 26 May - 28 June 2021.

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

14. Four (4) key Principles were developed to inform the Masterplan design:

i. To create a sense of place, identity and character for Granville Town Square;

ii. To create a community hub to encourage social interaction and activation;

iii. To prioritise pedestrian safety by structuring the built form, function and connections; and,

iv. To nurture urban ecology, implement green infrastructure and harness the community’s connection to nature.

15. The Masterplan design considers a precinct-wide need for public open space. There has been recent discussion in the media about the potential loss of 70 car parking spaces that would result from the delivery of this plan. Approximately 66 car parking spaces at the current Rowell Street car park would be lost in order to endow Granville Square (the Masterplan includes four (4) car parking spaces for transport connectivity ‘kiss and drop’ and dedicated accessible parking). However, from the outset of consultation Council has maintained that options for alternative parking arrangement close to the Granville train station will be investigated. Council is working to provide car parking as a part of a negotiated future voluntary planning agreement (VPA). In the event that a VPA is not possible, or Council would need to co-contribute to a negotiated VPA outcome, Council has included $4.183M for funding alternative car parking in Granville as a line item in the draft S7.11 Development Contribution Plan.

16. The Granville Town Square supports an incoming population who would live within walking distance of the square. By having community infrastructure and public transport near high density living, there is a reduced reliance on car usage.

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
24 March – 21 April 2021 (4 weeks) Round 1 Community Consultation – Imagine Granville campaign	Local Community * Posters * A5 flyers * Email * Pulse magazine * E-Pulse * Social Media * Newspaper ad * Online survey * Granville Public School * Video * Lord Mayors column & FB page * Translations	See engagement report Attachment 3 for full comments. Particular emphasis greenspace, seating and shade, light displays, toilet facilities, parking alternatives, accessibility and keeping it simple	Council officers have used community consultation to inform the masterplan.	Place Services
13 and 14 April 2021 Workshops and Focus Groups	Local Community members who registered for workshop Session 1: Tuesday 13 April at 12pm – 1pm in person Session 2: Wednesday 14 ONLINE via Zoom Session 3: Thursday 15 April at 6pm to 7pm in person	See engagement report Attachment 3 for full comments. Particular emphasis on keeping the area clean, having a space for markets and movie nights, with mention of a community bee hive	Council officers have used community consultation to inform the masterplan.	Place Services/ Engagement Team
March 2021 Face to Face meetings	Local Businesses along Good and Bridge Street	See engagement report Attachment 3 for full comments. Particular emphasis on parking.	Council acknowledges that alternative parking arrangements must be investigated and have pursued this internally via various channels.	Place Services
26 May – 28 June 2021 (4 weeks) Public Exhibition	Local community * Letter box drop to every CoP Granville dwelling * Posters * A5 flyers * Email * Pulse magazine * E-Pulse * Social Media * Newspaper ad * Online survey * Cumberland Council * Translations	See engagement report Attachment 4 for full comments. Mix of strong support. Citing that the Square will increase the health and quality of life for those living n Granville, and strong opposition based on the belief that parking will be lost.	Council has acknowledged the parking concerns of local businesses and sought to demonstrate how no net parking will be lost due to the delivery of the Masterplan.	Place Services
19 May 2021	Internal Council Teams – Traffic and Transport	A laneway that allows full access to the back of properties, and a pedestrian crossing along Cowper street and Rowell street	Included the laneway into the design	Place Services/Landscape Architects
30 June 2021	Internal Council Teams – Legal Team	Seek TfNSW’s agreement in writing to use the car park, and we might require a Redevelopment Notice due to a previous lease agreement on the site with TfNSW	Place Services asked Legal to review and provide advice regarding a lease agreement on the site, which was established in 2014.	Place Services
5 July 2021	Internal Council Team - Property	Feedback will used to further the delivery of the masterplan	Seeking advice on including car parking in any future VPAs in the area.	Place Services

Councillor Consultation

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

Date

Councillor

Councillor Comment

Council Officer Response

Responsibility

09/10/20

06/11/20

04/02/21

04/03/21

01/04/21

07/05/21

02/06/21

01/07/21

Rosehill Ward Councillors

Councillors are supportive of the creation of a masterplan for Granville Square

To provide regular updates to ward Councillors regarding community feedback.

Place Services

24/05/21

All Councilors

Council chamber approved public exhibition of Granville Square Masterplan

Public exhibition of the Granville Town Square Masterplan occurred from 26 May – 28 June 2021.

Place Services

19. During the Public Exhibition (26 May - 28 June 2021) the Granville Town Square Masterplan was presented to approximately 133,352 persons, culminating in thirty-one (31) formal responses. There was also an on online e-petition started by motivated local business owners along Good Street.

20. Based on the formal submissions, 48% of respondents supported the masterplan, 10% were unsure and 42% did not support the Masterplan. The main reason for not supporting the masterplan was concern about the loss of the 70 car parking spaces. This is addressed in paragraph 15 of this report.

21. The e-petition had two hundred and three (203) digital signatures, eight (8) of which noted their location was Granville. Of those eight (8), three (3) were duplicate submissions (meaning they had already provided a submission via email or online portal).

22. During the ‘Imagine Granville’ campaign participants were offered an opportunity to provide comment (add or change) four (4) vision statements that were in the Granville Place Plan. Overall, on average between 75- 82% of respondents agreed in full (i.e. answered ‘yes’) or to some extent (i.e. answered ‘to some extent’) with the vision statements.

23. Attachment 3 summarises the engagement results for the ‘Imagine Granville’ Campaign for the Granville Place Plan and Granville Square Masterplan (24 April – 21 March 2021).

24. Attachment 4 summarises the engagement results for the public exhibition of the Granville Town Square Masterplan (26 May – 28 June 2021).

25. Attachment 5 summarises Council’s responses to key issues raised during public exhibition of the Granville Square Masterplan.

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

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

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

27. Design work for the Granville Square Masterplan was delivered by Council’s Landscape Architecture team. Use of external consultants was within the existing DPOP budget of $300,000.

28. The Granville Square Masterplan is not fully budgeted for in the current DPOP. It is important to note that the Masterplan will be funded from the below sources (paragraphs 29 and 30) and funds will be collected over a number of years to complete the works.

29. Pending adoption of the draft S7.11 Development Contributions Plan 2021 following its public exhibition June 2021, the collection of the following 100% apportioned funds will support the implementation of the Granville Town Square endorsed design:

30. In addition to the Development Contributions Plan Council has previously resolved to allocate $ 3,370,000 capital to fund future embellishment and/or property acquisition at the future Granville Town Square site. This funding was sourced from the ‘Outside CBD s.712 Contributions Plan’ and the East Street sales proceed dedicated by Council in 2015. See Attachment 6 - D07479108 Action sheet 19.2 Notice of Motion Granville Town Square.

31. The Granville Place Plan is adopted as Focus Area 5.3.1.4 ‘Develop a community-led Neighbourhood Policy and Place Plans to inform local services and project delivery’ in the Delivery Program and Operational Plan 20/21 (DPOP). The Granville Place Plan was delivered through current operational resources and has no unbudgeted financial implications.

32. 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		N/A

CAPEX
CAPEX
External
Internal
Other
Total CAPEX		Nil

Funding Source		N/A

Stephanie Cascun

Place Manager

Bruce Mills

Group Manager Place Services

Michael Tzimoulas

Executive Director Corporate Services

Bryan Hynes

Executive Director Property & Place

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

Attachments:

1 ⇩	Attachment 1 - Granville Square Masterplan	48 Pages
2 ⇩	Attachment 2 - Granville Place Plan	58 Pages
3 ⇩	Attachment 3 - Engagement Report April 2021 - Imagine Granville	17 Pages
4 ⇩	Attachment 4 - Engagement Report June 2021 - Public Exhibition Granville Square Masterplan	75 Pages
5 ⇩	Attachment 5 - Responses to Community Feedback	9 Pages
6 ⇩	Attachment 6 - D07479108 Action Sheet 19.2 Notice of Motion Granville Town Square 9 June 2020	1 Page

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 26 July 2021 Item 16.2

THRIVING

ITEM NUMBER 16.2

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Phillip Street Smart Street Stage 2 Works

REFERENCE F2021/00521 - D08012236

REPORT OF Place Manager

PURPOSE:

To report to Council the detailed concept plan, funding opportunities and project delivery plan for the Phillip Street ‘Smart Street’ - Stage 2 project per Council’s Resolution of 30 November 2020, and to seek approval to proceed with detailed design, procurement, and delivery of the physical works.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council approve the Phillip Street Smart Street - Stage 2 detailed concept plan at Attachment 1.

(b) That Council approve the project budget of $4,321,508 from the CBD Infrastructure Special Rate and Internal CBD Infrastructure Reserve and $750,000 from ‘Your High Street’ grant funding (only applicable to this project) for a total project budget of $5,071,508 as detailed in paragraph 9.

(c) Further, that Council approve the accompanying project delivery plan for completion in December 2022 as outlined in Attachment 2.

BACKGROUND

1. On 30 November 2020, Council resolved as follows:

16.1 FOR APPROVAL: Response to Notice of Motion: Phillip Street Smart Street

RESOLVED (Zaiter/Issa)

(a) That Council allocate $325,000 from the C.I.S.R. to fund to detailed design of the Phillip Street ‘Smart Street’ Stage 2 project between Smith and Charles Streets, southern side.

(b) That Council allocate a further $4,321,508 from the CBD Infrastructure Special Rate (or the equivalent in rates collection in the 2021/22 and 2022/23 financial years in the event that Council adopts changes to enable harmonisation of Council rates) to ensure capital funding for the future construction of this project, subject to Council endorsing the report in item (c).

(c) Further, that a report outlining detailed scope, funding opportunities and project delivery plan for the next stages of this project is submitted to Council for consideration of an approval to proceed with project delivery, including but not limited to learnings from Stage 1 implementation and delivery.

2. The Phillip Street precinct, particularly between the northern side of Phillip Street and the Parramatta River, is going through significant change. The Phillip Street precinct will soon be home to 3,000 new residents. It will also be the city’s gateway to thousands of museum visitors, stadium attendees, and ferry arrivals - a major link to the CBD Foreshore, the museum, and the new sporting and entertainment precinct. As, such, the street is identified as a key CBD east-west connector in Council’s 'Walk Parramatta' strategy. This project reclaims up to 1.5m of roadway to create an expanded pedestrian/activation/outdoor dining space following-on from PLR works in the Church Street ‘Eat Street’ precinct where local economic forces see a desire for expansion. Council has approved two expanded Outdoor Dining areas in Stage 1 of the project thus far.

3. Stage 2 of the Phillip Street ‘Smart Street’ project is about enhancing community and customer satisfaction by integrating a key streetscape with large private and public developments in the precinct, enhancing connectivity, expanding a popular outdoor dining precinct, while also making the city smarter, safer and more sustainable.

4. Per Attachment 1, Stage 2 of the Phillip Street ‘Smart Street’ project includes the following areas:

· The southern side of Phillip Street between Smith and Charles Streets;

· Footpath and kerb line on corner of Charles Street - interfacing with Charles Street Square and Council’s Charles Street Square upgrade project;

· A small section between PLR boundary (Church & Phillip Street intersection) and Stage 1 boundary of works (near Erby Place).

5. The Stage 2 scope is an extension of Stage 1 works, integrating two core components:

a. Installation of the infrastructure needed to support technologies for a smart street (smart poles and optical fibre, etc), enabling seamless integration of ‘smart’ technologies into the streetscape. The roll-out of fibre-optic cable will future-proof the street by allowing new digital services as technology evolves, and provide ‘blank canvas’ for the city to test new smart technologies. Installed in first instance are, ‘smart’ irrigation, landscape lighting installations, digital wayfinding, smart street furniture, smart bins, additional CCTV, and temperature, humidity and air quality sensors connected to a water misting system to cool the street, along with customer-facing digital display screens reporting on the ‘health’ of the street and other relevant data such as upcoming ferry arrivals/departures. Due to Council’s successful application for the NSW State Government’s ‘Your High Street’ grant for this project, Stage 2 works will include the installation of kinetic pavers, generating power for the USB chargers built into the street furniture.

b. Streetscape Improvements to deliver on the Phillip Street vision of vibrant street level green ‘urban forest’ promenade that will link Parramatta Quay to the new stadium and, ultimately, the Parramatta Museum of Arts and Applied Sciences (MAAS). Due to Council’s successful application for the NSW State Government’s ‘Your High Street’ grant for this project, Stage 2 works will include the creation of a new activated arrival gateway directly opposite Parramatta Wharf, similar to the existing Erby Place pocket park. This integration with Council’s existing Charles Street Square upgrade project will create a high-quality, vibrant streetscape in this important precinct.

6. The physical works will commence in March 2022 upon receipt of approvals and are scheduled for completion by December 2022 as outlined in Attachment 2. This schedule falls in line with the milestones outlined in the signed NSW State Government’s ‘Your High Street’ grant agreement.

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

7. The aim of this project is to deliver streetscape upgrade works. The project has two funding sources: $750,000 in ‘Your High Street’ grant funding (only applicable to this project), and $4,321,508 funding from the CBD Infrastructure Special Rate and Internal CBD Infrastructure Reserve (previously reserved by Council in the 2021/22 Budget and Delivery Plan).

“The income raised by the levy of the CBD Infrastructure Special Rate will provide resources for the improvements to Infrastructure that will attract and is directly related to increasing business to the Parramatta CBD area. Services funded will include streetscape upgrades, street paving, security, street furniture, street lighting, and a focus on important area such CBD river foreshore, Church Street and our east west main streets (Phillip, George and Macquarie Streets).” - extract from rates notice

8. Council’s ‘Place Score’ pre-intervention research shows that CBD residents, workers and visitors want more outdoor dining, vibrancy, cafes, shade and seating along Phillip Street, with the ‘Top 3’ customer preferences (in order) for ‘Cleanliness’, ‘Safety’, and introducing ‘Elements of the Natural Environment’. This project addresses all of these customer preferences which will enhance Council’s overall Customer Satisfaction score. Further details about the project, including the data-driven investigations used to establish the need and location for the project, are provided at Attachment 3.

9. This project will provide the infrastructure needed to support technologies for a ‘Smart City’. The roll-out of fibre-optic cable will future-proof the street by allowing new digital services as technology evolves, and provide ‘blank canvas’ for the city to test new smart technologies. Installed in first instance are ‘smart’ street lighting installations, ‘smart’ screens, ‘smart’ bins, additional CCTV, and temperature, humidity and air quality sensors connected to a water misting system to cool the street.

10. The project team includes Future Cities to ensure that sensors (air quality, temperature, humidity, people and vehicle counters, and digital screens) are integrated Council’s communication network (TTN and GeoScada) providing full access and ongoing maintenance of the data.

11. Tree planting addresses customer preference, and supports a vibrant street level green ‘urban forest’ with 35% canopy cover when mature in alignment with Environmental Sustainability Strategy and Greater Sydney Commission target of 40%, and supporting customer preference.

12. The Phillip Street ‘Smart Street’ project is identified as a key Strategic Project on page 133 of the Delivery Program and Operational Plan (DPOP) 2019-20 and identified in the DPOP capital projects budget list.

“The aim of this project is to implement Parramatta’s first smart street in Phillip Street within the CBD. The project will deliver infrastructure needed to support technologies for a smart street and streetscape improvements that will help to form the wider Phillip Street vision of being the promenade that will link Parramatta Quay to the new stadium.”

13. Key Lessons Learned from ‘Stage 1’ of this project include:

a. Prior to ‘Stage 1’ of the Phillip Street ‘Smart Street’ project, the transformation of Church Street Mall into Centenary Square was the previous significant project funded by the CBD Infrastructure Special Rate. A key learning from that project was that CBD workers, visitors and residents place a high satisfaction rating on ‘transformational’ projects that change the ‘eye-level’ lived experience of this City and what it means to be a part of this City, as opposed to multiple, smaller projects.

b. The ‘smart’ infrastructure included in this project should become ‘Business As Usual’ for streetscape projects delivered in the Parramatta CBD and other key precincts. This is already in place for the $8.7M ‘Good and Bridge Street’ project in Granville. This will be Council’s second project using this streetscape upgrade methodology and is scheduled to commence construction in November 2021.

c. The permits required to undertake heritage testing took significantly longer to receive than forecasted in the project schedule. This risk will be mitigated in Stage 2 works by providing an expanded approval process and commencing the approval process at the commencement of the project cycle.

d. Design and procurement of ‘smart’ elements should occur earlier in the process. To address this, an overlay of smart elements is included in the detailed concept plan to accelerate the procurement and installation of ‘smart’ elements.

14. The Project Team will continue to work ‘hand-in-glove’ with Council project teams delivering the Charles Street Square and Civic Link projects to ensure seamless integration with the delivery of this project. This liaison occurred as part of ‘Stage 1’ works.

15. Metro West construction is south of George Street does not pose a risk to this project. This was validated in ‘Stage 1’ works.

16. There is a reputational and economic risk if the remaining section of the street is not upgraded.

17. The benefits that drive investment in this project include:

a. The reduction and re-allocation of cleansing resourcing due to installation of smart bins.

b. New and expanded outdoor dining applications due to the extension of the footpath and increased patronage along Phillip Street.

c. The generation of power via kinetic pavers to power on-street USB chargers.

d. Decrease in temperature levels and increased on-street thermal comfort due to the installation of waters misters and planting of mature street trees.

e. The integration of customer-facing digital display screens reporting on the ‘health’ of the street, and other relevant data such as upcoming ferry arrivals/departures and Council events and messages, drives a powerful perception change about a new ‘modern’ Parramatta.

CONSULTATION & TIMING

Stakeholder Consultation

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

Date	Stakeholder	Stakeholder Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
20 October 2020	Smart Cities Advisory Committee	Recommended that there be other visual additions (‘smart screens’) to display the impact of the misters on the temperature on the street and transport data. It was discussed that this could be done through API from Transport for NSW. It was also recommended that air quality data be included.	Feedback considered and incorporated in Stage 1 & 2 scope of works.	Place Services / Property & Place / Place Manager
29 October 2020	Project Review Committee	Endorsement given for initial phase to proceed to undertake detailed Design, Scoping and Costing analysis with Heritage work and investigation to be done in parallel. Physical works, if endorsed pursuant to a future Council report, would take place over two financial years.	Feedback accepted.	Place Services / Property & Place / Group Manager Place Services & Place Manager
18 May 2021	City Design - Charles Street Square Project owners	Endorsement provided for proposed works along footpath interfacing Charles Street Square.	Both project owners to collaborate with detailed design plans for this space.	Place Services / Property & Place / Place Manager
7 June 2021	City Planning & Design - Universal Design & Access	Proposed detailed concept plans meet universal accessible standards.	Present detailed concept plans to Council’s Access Committee for feedback once the project is endorsed.	Place Services / Property & Place / Place Manager
7 June 2021	City Strategy Unit - Future Cities & Environmental Outcomes teams	Identifying recommended sensor locations for Stage 2 and to integrate these smart elements into Council’s communication network (TTN and GeoScada) providing full access and ongoing maintenance of the data.	Advice has been integrated into the project scope (including design and delivery plans).	Place Services / Property & Place / Place Manager

Councillor Consultation

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

Date	Councillor	Councillor Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
24 June 2021	Parramatta Ward Briefing with Councillors Bradley, Pandey and Zaiter	Satisfied with the proposed scope of works	Nil comments required	Place Services / Property & Place / Group Manager Place Services

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

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

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

21. In a signed Deed of Agreement, Council has committed to expending $750,000 Department of Planning Industry and Environment (DPIE) ‘Your High Street’ grant funding by 31 May 2022.

22. The delivery of Stage 2 works will be funded from existing CBD Infrastructure Special Rate and Internal CBD Infrastructure Reserve ($4,321,508 over two financial years previously reserved by Council for this project as outlined in Attachment 4) and $750,000 DPIE ‘Your High Street’ grant funding (only applicable for this project). There are no unbudgeted financial implications for Council’s budget.

23. As identified in the CBD Infrastructure Special Rate Report attachment, a number of other projects are committed to be funded from the 2 CBD Infrastructure reserves, including the Phillip Street Smart Street Stage 2 works.

24. The 2 CBD Infrastructure reserves will (by FY2025) have an uncommitted closing balance of $6.7M available to fund further CBD infrastructure works.

25.

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

Funding Source

CAPEX
CAPEX
External
Internal
Other
Total CAPEX	Nil	Nil	Nil

Funding Source

Eva Farlow

Place Manager

Bruce Mills

Group Manager Place Services

Michael Tzimoulas

Executive Director Corporate Services

Bryan Hynes

Executive Director Property & Place

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

Attachments:

1 ⇩	Phillip Street Smart Street Stage 2 - Detailed Concept plan	9 Pages
2 ⇩	Philip Street Smart Street Stage 2 - Project Delivery Plan	3 Pages
3 ⇩	Phillip Street Smart Street Stage 2 - Background Information	5 Pages
4 ⇩	CBD Infrastructure Special Rate Report	1 Page

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 26 July 2021 Item 16.3

THRIVING

ITEM NUMBER 16.3

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Naming of 5 Parramatta Square Building

REFERENCE F2021/00521 - D07935341

REPORT OF Place Manager

PURPOSE:

To report back to Council on community feedback received regarding the proposed names for the 5 Parramatta Square building during public exhibition from Tuesday 25 May to Wednesday 16 June 2021.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council note the community feedback received on the public exhibition of the proposed names for the 5 Parramatta Square building.

(b) That Council approve further investigation to identify a broader selection of naming options for the 5 Parramatta Square building.

(c) Further, that a report be presented to Council outlining the result of this investigation along with a new process for naming the 5 Parramatta Square building.

BACKGROUND

1. The 5 Parramatta Square building is located within the heart of Parramatta’s historic civic precinct. Originally set aside as public land in 1792, the precinct has been used as an important meeting place, the location of colonial ‘feast days’ for the local Aboriginal people, as the town market-place, and, later, the site of the Council Administration building.

2. The site is being redeveloped as part of the wider Parramatta Square project. The 5 Parramatta Square building shown in Figure 1 is currently under construction and will contain a number of Council-owned and operated facilities, including a new Library space, community meeting rooms, and Council Chambers.

Figure 1: The 5 Parramatta Square building

3. On 24 May 2021, Council resolved the following actions:

(a) That Council approve the proposed names for 5 Parramatta Square building to be placed on public exhibition from Tuesday 25 May to Wednesday 16 June 2021.

(b) That community feedback on the proposed names be reported back to Council in July 2021.

Proposed Name

Background / context

Civic Place or The Civic

Civic denotes a town and the people who live in it, a building for City of Parramatta’s people. Site has a long history as the centre of Parramatta’s civic infrastructure - Town Hall, built adjacent in 1883; Council relocating to this site in 1958 and former Parramatta Library added in 1964; becoming Civic Place. Pays tribute to the past while celebrating the building as a new commitment to Parramatta’s civic future.

4. The Community Engagement team developed and arranged public consultation on the proposed names. The proposed names ‘Civic Place’ and ‘The Civic’ were placed on public exhibition as per the endorsed dates and approximately 367,693 people saw the opportunity to share their feedback. Details relating to community responses and feedback can be found in Attachment 1.

5. Communications and engagement channels used to promote the feedback opportunity to the community included:

· Social media and City of Parramatta website.

· Signs erected in the Parramatta Library and the Customer Contact Centre.

· A media release announcing the opportunity for community to comment on the proposed names was distributed to local print and digital media outlets on Thursday 27 May 2021.

· A half page advertisement was taken out in the Parra News on Tuesday 1 June 2021.

· Emails were sent to approximately 10,000 Participate Parramatta Online Community Panel members on Wednesday 2 June 2021 and 1,500 Community Connective EDM subscribers on Tuesday 1 June 2021

· The June edition of ePULSE which was distributed to approximately 60,000 subscribers on Wednesday 9 June 2021.

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

6. The 5 Parramatta Square building is currently unnamed. Place names reflect the relationship between people and place and creates the link that forms the basis for communication, location and addressing.

7. In lieu of a Council ‘Place Naming Policy’, the Geographic Names Board of NSW ‘Place Naming’ Policy (GNB Guidelines) was followed, including the principles for a naming framework:

· Consideration of names associated with the physical, historical or cultural character of the area;

· Consideration of Aboriginal (including dual naming), gender diverse, and commemorative names; and,

· Avoiding duplication of names (within the LGA or an adjoining LGA)

8. The proposed names (‘The Civic’ and ‘Civic Place’) satisfy the place naming requirements of the GNB Guidelines as they are associated with the physical, historical or cultural character of the area. ‘The Civic’ and ‘Civic Place’ associate to the historical and cultural character of the area.

9. From Tuesday 25 May to Wednesday 16 June 2021, 433 responses were submitted via Participate Parramatta and seven (7) email submissions were received (see Attachment 1 for further details). Below is a summary of feedback received:

· ‘Civic Place’ was opposed by 279 respondents, preferred in comparison to ‘The Civic’ by 43 respondents, and supported by 66 respondents. Respondents supporting the name ‘Civic Place’ indicated that it was appropriate given the proposed use of the building and that Civic Place denotes a government precinct, a central meeting point, and was direct.

· ‘The Civic’ was opposed by 327 respondents, preferred in comparison to ‘Civic Place’ by 18 respondents, and supported by 32 respondents. Respondents supporting the name ‘The Civic’ indicated that it was modern and catchy.

· Six (6) of the seven (7) email submissions requested options for the building name to be influenced by Dharug language. No submissions via email were in support of the two options provided and all seven (7) email submissions called for alternative naming options.

10. In general, community sentiment for both name options was negative. Respondents were disappointed with the limited naming options presented and a lack of names that either recognised Aboriginal heritage, that were ‘inspirational’, or unique to Parramatta. Most respondents shared their disappointment in a lack of name suggestions that recognised Aboriginal heritage.

11. However, none of the feedback reached the threshold level per the GNB Guidelines of the proposed names being considered as grossly offensive and/or significantly likely to cause offence to a large group of the community or particular ethnic, religious or other specifically identifiable groups.

CONSULTATION & TIMING

Stakeholder Consultation

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

Date	Stakeholder	Stakeholder Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
25 May – 16 June 2021	Community feedback provided via online survey hosted on Participate Parramatta - 433 submissions	Coded analysis from open text: • ‘Civic Place’ was opposed by 279 respondents, preferred in comparison to ‘The Civic’ by 43 respondents, and supported by 66 respondents. • ‘The Civic’ was opposed by 327 respondents, preferred in comparison to ‘Civic Place’ by 18 respondents, and supported by 32 respondents. In general, community sentiment for both name options was negative. Respondents were disappointed with the limited naming options presented and a lack of names that either recognised Aboriginal heritage, that were ‘inspirational’, or unique to Parramatta.	A response will be provided via Participate Parramatta and via email (to all community members that provided an email address during the consultation period) when further decisions have been made regarding the project.	City Engagement, City Engagement and Experience - delivered with and on behalf of: > Place Services, Property and Place; & > Property and Development Group, Property and Place
25 May – 16 June 2021	Community feedback provided via email - 7 submissions	6 of the 7 email submissions requested options for the building name to be influenced by Dharug language. No submissions via email were in support of the two options provided and all submissions called for alternative naming options. The submissions also touched on the missed opportunity to name the building something iconic and the lack of options that went out for consultation.	A response will be provided via via email when further decisions have been made on the project.	City Engagement, City Engagement and Experience - delivered with and on behalf of: > Place Services, Property and Place; & > Property and Development Group, Property and Place
Wed 26 May 2021 (telephone conversation)	Dharug Ngurra Aboriginal Corporation (DNAC)	Expressed deep disappointment on the exclusion of any First Nations name proposals with dual language for public exhibition feedback.	Advised DNAC of the outcome of the Council Meeting Agenda item 16.1 record at the Council Meeting on Mon 24 May 2021; that the two names selected by Councillors for public exhibition were: The Civic and Civic Place. DNAC were also advised of the public exhibition period, and how they could provide feedback.	City Experience, City Experience & Engagement, Interpretation & Strategy Coordinator.

Councillor Consultation

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

Date	Councillor	Councillor Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
24 May 2021	ALL	Council resolved the following: (a) That Council approve the proposed names for 5 Parramatta Square building to be placed on public exhibition from Tuesday 25 May to Wednesday 16 June 2021. (b) That community feedback on the proposed names be reported back to Council in July 2021. (c) Further, that the proposed names to be placed on public exhibition seeking community feedback is: Civic Place The Civic	Council officers proceeded with the public exhibition.	Place Services / Property & Place / Place Manager
30 June 2021	Lord Mayor, Clr Bradley, Clr Davis, Clr Esber, Clr Issa, Clr Prociv, Clr Wearne, Clr Wilson	Request for additional information regarding the public exhibition data, specifically the total number of responses received from various communication mediums, etc.	Requested information was provided to Councillors.	Place Services / Property & Place / Place Manager

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

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

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

15. An additional estimated cost of $20,000 may be required to retro-fit the signage after the completion of the building works, should Council not name the building by 26 July 2021 Council meeting. This would be funded from the existing 5 Parramatta Square project budget.

16. In addition to staff time, an anticipated cost of $7,000 would be incurred if Council determines to identify a broader selection of naming options for the 5 Parramatta Square building an initiate a new naming process. This would be funded from the existing 5 Parramatta Square project budget.

17. The public consultation for the proposed names was funded from the existing 5 Parramatta Square project budget.

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

Funding Source

CAPEX	nil
CAPEX
External
Internal
Other
Total CAPEX

Funding Source

Eva Farlow

Place Manager

Bruce Mills

Group Manager Place Services

Christopher Snelling

Group Manager City Assets Parramatta Square

Michael Tzimoulas

Executive Director Corporate Services

Jon Greig

Executive Director Community Services

Bryan Hynes

Executive Director Property & Place

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

Attachments:

1 ⇩

Naming of 5 Parramatta Square Building Key Findings & Engagement Evaluation Report

10 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 26 July 2021 Item 17.1

INNOVATIVE

ITEM NUMBER 17.1

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Phase 3B LED and Smarts Major Road Lighting Upgrade Project

REFERENCE F2021/00521 - D08133848

REPORT OF Project Officer Environmental Outcomes

workshop/briefing date: Nil

PURPOSE:

To report to Council the final business case for the Phase 3b LED & Smarts major roads lighting upgrade project (as per Council Resolution 18.1(c) 13 July 2020), and to advise that external funding for this project has been fully secured via the Federal Government’s Local Roads and Community Infrastructure (LRCI) Program. Further, to seek Council's endorsement to proceed to implementation given the 31 December 2021 deadline for delivery as per LRCI funding requirements.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council note the final business case and addendum for the Phase 3b LED & Smarts major roads lighting upgrade project (Attachments 1 and 2 respectively) prepared as per recommendation 18.1(c) 13 July 2020 Council meeting.

(b) That Council notes the Phase 3a LED residential street lighting upgrade (Ausgrid network) project is 95% complete (as per Council Resolution 18.1(b) 13 July 2020), and that forth coming annual energy savings of $54,054 and the one off Energy Saving Certificate estimated income of $30,000 are expected in 2021/22.

(c) That Council notes the success of securing $4,019,788 from the Federal Local Roads and Community Infrastructure (LRCI) Program to implement the Phase 3b LED & Smarts major roads lighting upgrade project (scenario 4a average, Attachment 2) on an estimated 3,372 lights located on local and regional major roads within the Endeavour Energy network.

(d) That Council notes Endeavour Energy’s Phase 3b LED & Smarts major roads lighting upgrade project preliminary quotes of $2,927,475 - $3,537,891 ex GST, Options 1 and 2 respectively, to upgrade an estimated 3,384 streetlights with LED and smart photoelectric (PE) cells on the local and regional major roads within their network area, saving Council between $6.3 and $8.2 million over the life of the asset (Attachment 3).

(e) That Council notes Ironbark Sustainability’s Phase 3b LED & Smarts major roads lighting upgrade project preliminary quote of $417,608 ex GST, to provide LED & Smart lighting technical, design, auditing, and project management expertise (Attachment 4).

(f) That Council approve an exemption from tender for Endeavour Energy and Ironbark Sustainability pursuant to section 55(3)(i) of the Local Government Act 1993 due to the unavailability of competitive tenderers. Council is convinced that a satisfactory result will not be achieved by inviting tenders.

(g) That Council delegate authority to the Chief Executive Officer to negotiate and accept Endeavour Energy and Ironbark Sustainability final quotes and any variations in accordance with the project’s objectives.

(h) That Council notes that the emission savings from the Phase 3b LED & Smarts major roads lighting upgrade project will generate an approximate income for Council of $442,000 - $795,000 through the NSW Energy Saving Scheme and its Energy Saving Certificates (ESC), adding to the $627,095 ESC income already received from Phases 1 and 2 of the Light Years Ahead LED street lighting projects.

(i) Further, that Council delegate authority to the Chief Executive Officer to negotiate, finalise and execute all documents in connection with this matter.

BACKGROUND

1. Since 2013 Council has been implementing streetlighting energy efficient LED upgrade projects in partnership with Endeavour Energy, WSROC and Ironbark Sustainability to:

(a) Reduce streetlighting operational and maintenance costs; and

(b) To progress towards Council’s goal of a 60% emissions reduction by 2038 (based on 2015 levels) within Council's Environmental Sustainability Strategy.

2. Council reports on the LED street lighting upgrade projects have been reported to Council's Ordinary Meetings of 8 July 2013, 13 June 2017 and most recently the 20 July 2020 Council Meeting, where Council resolved to:

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

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

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

PHASE 3B LED & SMARTS MAJOR ROADS STREET LIGHTING UPGRADE PROJECT

Business Case

3. The Phase 3b LED & Smarts major roads street lighting upgrade business case (Attachment 1) considered the 5,095 major roads (category V) lights (2,382 local, 990 regional and 1,723 state roads) within the Endeavour Energy network, that can be replaced with LED lights and smarts technology.

4. A business case addendum (Attachment 2) was developed to align with external funding availability which is detailed in items 14 to 16 in this report.

5. Specifically, scenario 4a average of the addendum has been selected to be delivered against available funding. This scenario includes:

(a) 3,372 (2,382 local and 990 regional) lights on major roads to be upgraded with the latest LEDs and smart controls

(b) Council is projected to save $6.3m and $8.2m over the 20-year life of the assets

(d) Expected payback is between 6 and 9 years, and

(e) Cumulative greenhouse savings of 36,594 tonnes.

Smart Lighting

6. The Phase 3b LED & Smarts major roads street lighting upgrade project includes the installation of smart PE cells and is a first for the City of Parramatta.

7. Smart PE cells allow for constant light output (CLO), which:

(a) Increases the life of the luminaire

(b) Further reduces operating costs and emissions through remote programming adjustments of the luminaire’s light output

(c) Normally a new luminaire is set above the Australian standard at the start of its light, to compensate for the reduction of light that occurs as the luminaire ages, and

(d) Includes smart light features, like trimming and dimming, will be able to be programmed in the future, further reducing operating costs and emissions.

8. The scale of Council’s installation of smart PE cells will be the largest installation in NSW, with similar scale projects already installed in Victoria and Queensland. Endeavour Energy and Council are dedicated to and excited about this historic achievement.

Endeavour Energy

9. Endeavour Energy are the asset owner with the legislative responsibility to manage streetlighting. Council is the customer with the responsibility to pay for operating energy consumption costs and maintenance costs.

10. Endeavour Energy’s quote is to procure and install the 3,384 LEDs and smart PE cells on the local and regional major roads within their network area of the City of Parramatta Local Government Area (Attachment 3).

11. Option 1 of the quote is for full installation of the 3,384 LED luminaires, 1,500 smart PE cells and 1,884 non-smart PE cells by the 31 December 2021 for $2,927,475 ex GST. There is currently a world-wide shortfall of smart PE cells due to the Covid-19 pandemic and Endeavour Energy have been informed at this stage that there are only 1,500 smart PE cells available. The installation of 1,884 non-smart PE cells will allow the project to be completed by 31 December 2021.

12. Option 2 of the quote is for full installation of the 3,384 LED luminaires, 3,384 smart PE cells by the 31 March 2022 for $3,537,891 ex GST. The City of Parramatta is one of many Australian Councils funded by LRCI to install smart streetlighting that are seeking a short timeline extension to the 31 March 2022, due to the worldwide delay in smart PE cells arriving in Australia.

13. If LRCI approve an extension to the 31 March 2022, then Option 2 will be the preferred option. If the completion date stays the 31 December 2021, then Option 1 will be the preferred option. Any underspend as part of Option 1 will be redirected to other LRCI projects as approved by the LRCI internal decision-making process.

14. Council notes the difference in the number LEDs and PE cells (3,372 business case and LRCI funding against the 3,384 Endeavour Energy quote). The number of streetlighting assets can vary depending on Endeavour Energy asset reviews. However, this not expected to impact on the project in any significant way.

15. These upgrades will save Council between $6.3 and $8.2 million over the life of the asset through reduced electricity costs and reduced Streetlighting Usage of System (SLUOS) maintenance costs.

16. Under the Electricity Supply Act 1995, only network operators may carry out electricity works on public land. Endeavour Energy is a network operator. Due to the specialised nature of the electricity works and Endeavour Energy’s ownership of the electricity assets, it is unlikely that competitive tenderers will be available. A satisfactory result will not be achieved by inviting tenders. Accordingly, an exemption from tender pursuant to section 55(3)(i) of the Local Government Act 1993 is recommended.

External Funding

17. On the 13 December 2020, Council was advised as to the availability of Federal funding Local Roads and Community Infrastructure (LRCI) Program. This program is administered by the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications (the Department), to stimulate additional local roads and community infrastructure construction activity in local communities to combat the socio-economic impacts of COVID-19.

18. Phase 3b LED & Smarts major roads streetlighting upgrade project was selected through a comprehensive internal process, to be funded under the LRCI program. An allocation of $4,019,788 was secured and confirmed by the Department on 27 May 2021.

19. The LRCI funding comes with the condition that the project must be completed by 31 December 2021.

LED & Smarts: Technical, Design & Project Support

20. To deliver the project, and as per our previous street lighting upgrades, the outsourcing of technical street lighting expertise will be required. These capabilities are sort on the basis that Council does not have internal skills and resources at this stage and to meet the 31 December 2021 deadline. The key requirements for project support are:

(a) Develop LED & Smarts street lighting design plan and maps

(b) Prepare bulk change over process with Endeavour Energy

(d) Keep Endeavour Energy accountable to ensure best value and outcomes for Council and community

(e) Develop and implementing project communication plan, and

(f) Project management including stakeholder engagement, communications, complaints, reporting, variations, smart tariff negations and night-time compliance auditing.

21. Ironbark Sustainability is a specialist local government consultancy that have worked with over 300 Councils, Main Road Authorities and Distribution businesses around Australia by assisting them to reduce energy and emissions through streetlighting LED and Smarts upgrade projects. The City of Parramatta have used Ironbark Sustainability’s project management and technical expertise services for both Phase 1 and 2 Light Years Ahead LED streetlighting upgrade projects.

22. Ironbark Sustainability are the preferred experts as they have:

(a) Led all previous streetlighting upgrade projects

(b) Completed all past projects within time and budget

(d) Developed the Phase 3b business case

(e) Have a strong relationship with Endeavour Energy

(f) Have completed hundreds of street lighting projects on behalf of Council around Australia; and,

(g) If Council were to go to market, it is unlikely that another consultant with the same value, knowledge, and ability to complete the project within the tight timeframe could be found.

23. Ironbark Sustainability are the only organisation that can deliver 16 (a) to (f) and can demonstrate 18 (a) to (g). WSROC, as project managers of Phase 1 and 2 Light Years Ahead LED upgrade projects. have reviewed Ironbark Sustainability quote and can attest to the pricing being fair and best value for money.

24. Due to the specialised nature of the services, it is unlikely that competitive tenderers will be available. A satisfactory result will not be achieved by inviting tenders. Accordingly, an exemption from tender pursuant to section 55(3)(i) of the Local Government Act 1993 is recommended.

25. Ironbark Sustainability’s quote of $417,608 ex GST is to provide LED & Smart lighting technical, design, auditing, and project management expertise throughout the Phase 3b LED & Smarts major roads lighting upgrade project (Attachment 4).

Energy Saving Certificates

26. As with Phases 1 and 2 streetlighting LED upgrade projects, Council will be eligible to receive an income through the NSW Energy Saving Scheme by generating and selling Energy Saving Certificates (ESCs).

27. The Phase 3b LED & Smarts major roads streetlighting upgrade project is modelled to reduce emissions by 36,594 TCO₂-e over the life of the asset or 1,830 TCO₂-e annually. This would generate an estimated income of $442,000 - $795,000 depending on market price at time of sale.

28. The ESC income cannot be claimed until installation is completed. The income is projected to be received within the 2021/22 financial year.

Conclusion

29. In summary, The Phase 3b LED & Smarts major roads street lighting upgrade project identifies significant financial and environmental savings for Council and promotes Council as a leading Smart City by being the first Council in NSW to activate smart technology on major roads streetlighting.

30. With the support of the LRCI funding Council is now able to implement the project and secure the significant financial and environmental benefits of:

(a) Upgrade 3,384 streetlights with LEDs and Smart PE cells

(b) Save $6.3 - $8.2 million on operational utility costs over the life of the asset

(d) Generate a one-off estimated income of $442,000 - $795,000 in 2021/22.

CONSULTATION & TIMING

Stakeholder Consultation

31. Endeavour Energy has been consulted and are supportive of energy efficient LED and smart technology street lighting upgrades and are very supportive to partner in this project through installation of the LED & Smart technology.

32. As project lead of the Phases 1 and 2 Light Years Ahead LED upgrade projects, WSROC has reviewed Ironbark Sustainability’s proposal and can attest to the pricing being fair and best value for money.

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

Date	Stakeholder	Stakeholder Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
Nil

Councillor Consultation

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

Date	Councillor	Councillor Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
June 2013	All	Resolution passed to implement Phase 1 LED Street Lighting upgrade project (Endeavour)	Phase 1 implemented August 2015 – May 2016	City Strategy
June 2017	All	Resolution passed to implement Phase 2 LED Street Lighting upgrade project (Endeavour)	Phase 2 implemented November 2017 – June 2019	City Strategy
July 2020	All	Resolution passed to implement Phase 3a LED street lighting upgrade project (Ausgrid) AND Develop a full business case for the Phase 3b major roads LED/ Smarts street lighting upgrade project (Endeavour Energy)	Phase 3a (Ausgrid) almost complete and moving into ESC income stage Phase 3b business case completed and $4million LRCI funding secured to implement upgrades on local and regional roads	City Strategy

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

35. Council’s Legal Services team will prepare the necessary legal documents upon receiving instructions from Council Officers.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

36. The $4,019,788 Phase 3b LED and Smarts major roads lighting upgrade project is fully funded through the federal government’s Local Roads and Community Infrastructure (LRCI), COVID-19 stimulus funding and has been included in Council’s budget.

37. The LRCI federal grant is based on ‘use it or lose it’ principle and failure to physically complete the agreed work schedule activities by 31 December 2021 will result in Council not receiving the full nominal funding allocation. If the Phase 3b program does not proceed and is not completed by 31 December, Council could face the risk of:

(a) Loss of a source of external funding to fund Council’s projects

(b) Damaging Council’s reputation and may hamper Council’s opportunity of receiving future grant assistance from the Department

38. The Energy Saving Certificates (ESCs) will generate an estimated $442,000 to $795,000 income upon the completion of this project and is predicted to be received during 2021/22. This is not budgeted currently and will be incorporated into future Quarterly Budget Reviews.

39. The project will also deliver $6.3M - $8.2M in operational utility cost reductions that have yet to be included in the budget. These savings will be incorporated into future Quarterly Budget Reviews as the savings are realised.

40. 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	NIL	NIL

Revenue - Energy Saving Certificate		TBD

CAPEX
CAPEX
External
Internal
Other
Total CAPEX

Funding Source

Karen Jones

Project Officer Environmental Outcomes

Helen Papathanasiou

Environmental Outcomes Manager

Nicole Carnegie

Acting Group Manager, City Strategy

Michael Tzimoulas

Executive Director Corporate Services

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

Attachments:

1	Phase 3b LED & Smart major roads lighting upgrade business case (separately enclosed) (confidential)	54 Pages
2	Phase 3b LED & Smart major roads lighting upgrade business case LRCI addendum (separately enclosed) (confidential)	8 Pages
3	Endeavour Energy Quote (separately enclosed) (confidential)	4 Pages
4	Ironbark Sustainability project management quote (separately enclosed) (confidential)	40 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 26 July 2021 Item 17.2

INNOVATIVE

ITEM NUMBER 17.2

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Gateway Request: Planning Proposal for land at 24 and 26 to 30 Parkes Street, Harris Park

REFERENCE F2021/00521 - D07610024

REPORT OF Project Officer Land Use

LAND OWNER 24 Parkes Street – SH Parkes International Pty Ltd and The Owners Strata Plan 5758

26 – 30 Parkes Street – Guang Tian Group Pty Ltd, Parkes Street NSW Pty Ltd, The Owners Strata Plan 16744 and GL Finance

114 – 116 Harris Street – Caydon Harris Street Pty Ltd, The Owners Strata Plans 35413/53257, Harris Street Developments Pty Ltd, Ms Zhao Zhang and Ms Emily Hickson

APPLICANT Think Planners Pty Ltd

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS CONSIDERED BY SYDNEY CENTRAL CITY PLANNING PANEL Nil

PURPOSE

The purpose of this report is for Council to consider a Planning Proposal for land at 24 Parkes Street, 26 – 30 Parkes Street and 114-118 Harris Street, Harris Park. This report recommends forwarding the Planning Proposal to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE) with a request for a Gateway Determination.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council endorse for the purposes of seeking a Gateway Determination under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 from the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE), a Planning Proposal for land at 24 Parkes Street, 26 – 30 Parkes Street and 114 – 116 Harris Street, Harris Park which seeks an exemption from the FSR sliding scale requirements of Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011 in relation to the subject sites.

(b) That the Planning Proposal at Attachment 1 be forwarded to the DPIE to request the issuing of a Gateway Determination, after being amended as follows:

i. Remove references pertaining to an exemption from the site size requirements for High Performing Buildings.

ii. Reformat and re-edit to reflect Council’s assessment into Council’s Planning Proposal template.

(c) That a draft site-specific Development Control Plan (DCP) for the subject sites be prepared and reported back to Council prior to its public exhibition. The draft DCP should address, at a minimum:

i. Built form and massing;

ii. Building setbacks;

iii. Flooding;

iv. Traffic and parking issues; and

v. Road widening.

(d) That the Planning Proposal and DCP are concurrently exhibited.

(e) That Council advises the DPIE that the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) will be exercising the plan-making delegations for this Planning Proposal as authorised by Council.

(f) That Council write to DPIE to advise that Council no longer supports the progression of the existing site-specific Planning Proposal for 114-118 Harris Street (which has already received a Gateway determination).

(g) That Council delegate authority to the Chief Executive Officer to correct any minor anomalies of a non-policy and administrative nature that may arise during the Planning Proposal and/or DCP processes.

(h) Further, that Council note that the Parramatta Local Planning Panel’s advice to Council (Attachment 2) is consistent with the recommendations of this report.

PLANNING PROPOSAL TIMELINE

SITE DESCRIPTION AND SURROUNDING CONTEXT

1. A description of the subject sites, shown in Figure 1, is outlined as follows:

· Site 1: 24 Parkes Street, site area 1,663 m², legal description SP 5758

· Site 2: 26–30 Parkes Street, site area 1,506 m², legal description: Lot 1, DP 599236 (26 Parkes Street), Lot 3, DP 599799 (28 Parkes Street) and SP 16744 (30 Parkes Street)

· Site 3: 114 – 116 Harris Street, site area 1,776 m², legal description: SP 35413 (114 Harris Street) and SP 53257 (116 Harris Street).

Figure 1: Sites related to Planning Proposal at the corner of Parkes St and Harris St, Harris Park

(1: 24 Parkes Street; 2: 26–30 Parkes Street; 3: 114–116 Harris Street)

2. The sites are on the southeastern edge of the Parramatta CBD. To the east of the site is the Robin Thomas Reserve, which is one of the few city centre open space areas and contributes to the character and amenity of the area. Clay Cliff Creek (an open channel) adjoins the northern boundary of the site.

3. The immediate locality is characterised by a mix of uses and built form. To the west of the site is generally aged building stock that is currently undergoing a transition in character because of development approvals under construction and the recent Planning Proposal at 14 – 20 Parkes Street, Harris Park.

BACKGROUND

4. Council is currently considering three separate Planning Proposals as follows (and as illustrated in Figure 1):

a) 24 Parkes St (RZ/5/2016) – preliminary proposal lodged 28 April 2016 and formal updated proposal lodged 16 August 2018

b) 26-30 Parkes St (RZ/10/2016) – lodged 20 May 2016

c) 114-116 Harris St (RZ9/2018) – lodged 27 August 2018

5. The background to these three Planning Proposals extends over a period of approximately five years with extensive consultation with Council officers. The consultation and analysis by Council officers is summarised in the “Timeline of Assessment History” table provided at Attachment 3.

6. During this time Council staff have raised a number of issues concerning development of the sites; the main issues relate to application of sliding scale, resolution of setbacks and site isolation particularly for 24 Parkes Street. The progress of these Planning Proposals was also impacted by conditions of the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal Gateway Determination requiring an analysis of the overshadowing impacts on nearby heritage properties including Experiment Farm. Prior to recent consultation with the applicant in 2020, Council staff have been of the view that site consolidation is the best means to secure optimal built form and urban design outcomes and avoid site isolation.

7. Despite Council officers preference for site amalgamation, Council officers have reached the conclusion that 114–118 Harris Street could be reported as a stand-alone Planning Proposal as this site could be developed to achieve acceptable urban design and planning outcomes without amalgamation. After being reported to the Local Planning Panel on 16 June 2020, Council on 13 July 2020 endorsed the Planning Proposal for 114-118 Harris Street for the purposes of seeking a Gateway Determination. On 29 September 2020 a Gateway determination was received from the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE).

8. In September 2020, Council officers came to the final position that a superior urban form is not achieved through amalgamation of the three sites. Following this conclusion, Council officers and the Applicant worked together extensively in late 2020 and early 2021 to resolve and agree a built form approach to the sites that did not apply the FSR sliding-scale. Officers are now comfortable that any detailed urban design issues can be resolved at the stage of preparing a DCP for the sites and need not impede the progress of developing LEP controls.

9. Council officers now question the continued utility of advancing the three existing, separate site-specific Planning Proposals insofar as they are consistent with the CBD Planning Proposal. This is because these site-specific Planning Proposals are relatively early in their process, and the timeframe for finalising the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal is by 30 September 2021. Having regard to the steps that the three site-specific Planning Proposals have yet to complete, it is unlikely that they would be finalised by that date. Therefore, Council officers do not recommend these Planning Proposals are progressed as part of a site-specific consideration. Council officers also see an administrative efficiency in progressing a single combined Planning Proposal, as opposed to three individual processes. This approach is supported by the Applicants.

10. While officers acknowledge that the 114-116 Harris Street Planning Proposal was originally advanced without this exemption, the further urban design work that has continued on all three sites has shown that a Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal compliant FSR, without application of the FSR sliding scale to each site, is likely to be acceptable on this site.

11. Therefore, this report recommends that the processes for the three existing Planning Proposals are ended in favour of advancing a single, combined Planning Proposal dealing with a single issue – that is, an exemption from the FSR sliding scale.

CURRENT PLANNING CONTROLS

12. The sites are subject to Parramatta LEP 2011 and the following key provisions apply to the sites:

i. zoning: B4 Mixed Use;

ii. maximum Height of Buildings (HOB): 54 metres;

iii. maximum Floor Space Ratio (FSR): 4:1.

13. The sites are not listed as heritage items. However, they are in close proximity to a number of heritage items and conservation areas as listed below and illustrated at Figure 2.

· 100768: Experiment Farm Cottage and Environs (State Significance);

· A00768: Experiment Farm Archaeological Site (State Significance);

· Experiment Farm Conservation Area.

Figure 2: Heritage properties in relation to subject sites

(Sites shown outlined in thick red)

Flooding

14. The northern margin of 24 Parkes Street and 114 – 116 Harris Street adjacent to Clay Cliff Creek is subject to high hazard flooding as well as the 1:100 and 1:20 year flood. The greater parts of all three sites are affected by the probable maximum flood (PMF) event and are classified as low-risk. Flood maps are shown in Figures 3 and 4.

Figure 3: Flooding (1:20 and 1:100 year flood)

(Sites shown outlined in red)

Figure 4: Flooding Hazard Levels

(Sites shown outlined in red)

ROAD WIDENING

15. The Parkes Street and Harris Street frontages are subject to road widening requirements as detailed in Table 1.

Table 1: Requirements of Land Reservation Acquisition (LRA) maps

	Current LRA	CBD PP LRA
Parkes Street	3 m – Local Road Widening (B4) for 26 – 30 Parkes Street and nil for 24 Parkes Street	3 m – Local Road Widening (B4) for 26 – 30 Parkes Street and nil for 24 Parkes Street
Harris Street	nil	3.5m – Local Road Widening (B4) for 26 – 30 Parkes Street and 114 – 116 Harris Street

16. It should be noted that whilst the current and CBD PP LRA maps show no road widening for 24 Parkes Street, Council’s Traffic Planning unit has requested widening ranging from 0 to 3 metres in width for the frontage of this site.

17. A summary of the current and Parramatta CBD PP controls is included at Attachment 4.

DESCRIPTION OF THIS PLANNING PROPOSAL

18. The Planning Proposal prepared by the applicant and included at Attachment 1 seeks amendments to Parramatta LEP 2011 (PLEP 2011) to include site specific provisions, as follows:

i. an exemption from the FSR sliding scale that would allow each site to achieve an FSR of 10:1 plus 15% design excellence (ie. totaling 11.5:1).

ii. an opportunity for each site to benefit from High Performing Buildings bonus FSR of 5% (despite each site not complying with the minimum site size requirement of 1,800 sqm). This would take the overall FSR to 12:1.

19. The Planning Proposal seeks to redevelop the sites as three multi-storey mixed-use apartment buildings. The buildings provide for basement car parking, up to 4 levels of podium for retail and commercial uses and upper level towers for apartments.

SUMMARY OF COUNCIL OFFICER ASSESSMENT

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

Table 2: Summary of Council Officer Assessment

Sliding Scale/Amalgamation Issues

All three sites are below 1,800 sqm in area, and would therefore trigger the FSR sliding scale provisions of clause 7.2 of the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal. However, Council officers are satisfied that an acceptable urban design outcome can be achieved if the sites develop separately. Consequently, amalgamation should not be encouraged in this case, and it is therefore acceptable to exempt the sites from compliance with the FSR sliding scale.

Application of High Performing Building Bonus

The applicant is seeking the high performing building 5% bonus. However, the sites do not meet the criteria to be eligible as the site areas are less than the required 1,800 m². Council officers do not support the application of this bonus because it would set an unacceptable precedent that site size requirements of CBD Planning Proposal are negotiable.

Built form and urban design

After extensive consultation and negotiation, the Applicant and Council staff have reached a compromise on proposed built form outcomes. This work has supported the conclusion that the sites can benefit from the full FSR under the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal, and further, this work is also proposed to support development of a future draft DCP for these sites.

Heritage

Whilst the subject site does not contain any heritage items future development must ensure that solar access to Experiment Farm is protected. Council officers are satisfied from the latest reference designs for the three sites (included in Attachment 2) that development can comply with the requirements of the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal for solar access to Experiment Farm. However, further refinement and detail will need to be provided during the Design Excellence process and later at the Development Application stage to ensure that compliance with the solar access controls is achieved.

Flooding

A small portion of the sites are subject to high hazard flooding and are affected by the 100-year Average Recurrence Interval (ARI). Nevertheless, the sites are generally suitable for residential development from a flood risk perspective subject to compliance with the controls of the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal. These controls require safe areas for refuge and ensure the building is capable of withstanding and does not obstruct flood flows.

Other Statutory Considerations

The proposal has been assessed against the statutory considerations including relevant local and regional strategies and planning policies and relevant Ministerial directions. Details of the assessment of these matters is included in the attached Planning Proposal.

21. In conclusion, based on the assessment summarised above, Council officers recommend progression of this Planning Proposal.

22. Council officers also recommend that Council advise DPIE that the CEO will be exercising the plan-making delegations for this Planning Proposal.

LOCAL PLANNING PANEL’S ADVICE

23. The LPP considered this matter at its meeting of 16 June 2021, and issued advice to Council in accordance with the officer recommendation.

PLANNING AGREEMENT

24. It is not proposed to require negotiation of a Planning Agreement for the subject sites. As part of Council’s consideration of the CBD Planning Proposal on (23 June 2021) Council resolved to pursue a new S7.12 Development Contributions Plan with a higher rate instead of the community infrastructure policy framework that previously saw Council pursue Planning Agreements to support planning proposals seeking increased density in the CBD. Road widenings discussed in paragraphs 13 and 14 of this report can be addressed at DA stage.

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN

25. It is recommended that a site-specific DCP be prepared that will deal with relevant issues including, but not limited to, built form and massing, setbacks, flooding, traffic and parking and road widening.

NEXT STEPS

26. In summary, Council officers recommend that Council:

i. progress the Planning Proposal described in this report (meaning that the Applicant’s Planning Proposal at Attachment 1 is amended to reflect the position recommended in this report and is put into Council’s format);

ii. prepare a site-specific DCP and report this back to Council;

iii. exhibit the Planning Proposal and site-specific DCP concurrently;

iv. withdraw its support for the existing Planning Proposal at 114-116 Harris Street that has received a Gateway determination; and

v. endorse other administrative matters as outlined in the recommendation.

27. Pending Council’s endorsement, the next step would be to send the Planning Proposal to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE) with a request for a Gateway Determination under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

CONSULTATION & TIMING

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

Date	Stakeholder	Stakeholder Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
Refer to dates in Attachment 3 of report	Applicant	Refer to comments in Attachment 3 of report	Refer to comments in Attachment 3 of report	City Planning
18 February 2021	Parramatta Heritage Advisory Committee	Refer to comments in paragraph 45 of report to Local Planning Panel at Attachment 2 regarding solar access to Experiment Farm.	Refer to comments in paragraphs 46 and 47 of report to Local Planning Panel at Attachment 2 noting that the solar access solar access provisions of the CBD PP are met in relation to Experiment Farm and that, further refinement and detail will need to be provided during the Design Excellence process and later at the Development Application stage to ensure that compliance with the solar access controls is achieved.	City Planning

Councillor Consultation

29. To date, consultation has taken place with Councillors on the Planning Proposal for 114 – 116 Harris Street. However, consultation has not taken place on the Planning Proposals for 24 Parkes Street and 26 – 30 Parkes Street. Consultation with Councillors on the combined Planning Proposal for all three sites will take place as part of the briefing before the matter is reported to Council.

Date	Councillor	Councillor Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
8 July 2020	Briefing at Cllr workshop on Planning Proposal for 114 – 116 Harris Street, Harris Park	Councillors noted contents of reports for Council meeting on 13 July 2020 (that included report for 114 – 116 Harris Street) and asked a range of clarification questions that were addressed by Council staff	N/A	City Planning

FINANCIAL IMPLICATION FOR COUNCIL

30. This report does not recommend progression of a Planning Agreement as the equivalent monetary contribution to that which would have been secured under the former CBD Planning Proposal framework, and required road widening dedication, would be secured at the Development Application stage through suitable conditions and development contribution requirements.

Paul Kennedy

Project Officer Land Use

Roy Laria

Land Use Planning Manager

Robert Cologna

Acting Group Manager, City Planning

Michael Tzimoulas

Executive Director Corporate Services

David Birds

Acting Executive Director, City Planning & Design

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

Attachments:

1 ⇩	Planning Proposal	36 Pages
2 ⇩	Minute and report for Local Planning Panel	24 Pages
3 ⇩	Timeline of Assessment History	2 Pages
4 ⇩	Comparison of current and CBD PP controls	1 Page

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 26 July 2021 Item 17.3

INNOVATIVE

ITEM NUMBER 17.3

SUBJECT FOR APPROVAL: Public exhibition – Draft Parramatta CBD Local Infrastructure Contributions Plan 2021

REFERENCE F2019/04041 - D08128406

REPORT OF Land Use Planning Manager

workshop/briefing date: 7 July 2021

PURPOSE:

To seek Council’s endorsement of the “Draft Parramatta CBD Local Infrastructure Contributions Plan 2021” for the purposes of public exhibition.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council approve the “Draft Parramatta CBD Local Infrastructure Contributions Plan 2021” (Draft Plan) at Attachment 1 for the purposes of public exhibition for a minimum period of 28 days.

(b) That a report on the outcomes of the public exhibition be provided to Council prior to finalisation of the Draft Plan.

(c) Further, that Council authorise the Chief Executive Officer to make minor non-policy and/or administrative changes to the Draft Plan, if needed, prior to it being placed on public exhibition.

SUMMARY

1. At its meeting on 15 June 2021 Council considered a report on the outcomes of the public exhibition of the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal (CBD PP). Council resolved to approve the revised Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal incorporating minor amendments and forward it to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE) for finalisation.

2. In doing so, Council also made resolutions regarding the preparation of a new section 7.12 contributions plan for Parramatta CBD, so as to ensure there is an adequate infrastructure funding framework in place to support anticipated growth. Specifically, it was resolved:

(g) That Council:

(i) Approve the preparation of a new Section 7.12 development contributions plan for the Parramatta CBD within 12 months; and

(ii) Note the plan will include a new contributions levy rate set higher than the current 3% rate, subject to feasibility testing of the levy rate.

(h) That Council request DPIE not finalise the amendments to PLEP 2011 until:

(i) Council has exhibited and endorsed a new Section 7.12 development contributions plan for the Parramatta CBD; and

(ii) DPIE has amended clause 25K of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 to allow the higher Section 7.12 development contributions rate.

3. The CBD PP seeks to evolve the character of the Parramatta CBD so that it can properly play the important role of the metropolitan centre for western Sydney and to ensure integration of land use with the significant investment in transport and other infrastructure being put in place by the State Government and Council.

4. One of the key elements of the exhibited CBD PP was the accessing of Incentive Floor Space Ratio (FSR) and Opportunity Site FSR through the inclusion of community infrastructure on site, to be formalised through a planning agreement. Since the CBD PP was exhibited, the DPIE finalised and released its new “Planning Agreements – Practice Note” in February 2021. This Practice Note does not support the use of Planning Agreements for the purposes of value capture.

5. To address this, the June 2021 Council report noted an alternative approach was recommended that preserves the original intent of the exhibited CBD PP by requiring compliance with key community infrastructure principles in order to access the Incentive FSR. A value sharing contribution will no longer apply and instead the report noted a new draft section 7.12 development contributions plan will be prepared with a higher rate. In this way, infrastructure funding will still be assured through this alternate funding pathway, if endorsed by both Council and the DPIE.

6. The June 2021 report noted the review of infrastructure funding for the CBD PP will lead to a new section 7.12 development contributions plan with a higher rate. This is the subject of the current report. It is intended that the new plan will be in place prior to the DPIE finalising the Council-endorsed CBD PP.

7. DPIE’s required timeframe for completing the amendment to Parramatta LEP 2011 under the CBD PP is by 30 September 2021. In accordance with Council’s resolution of 15 June 2021, Council officers submitted the CBD PP to DPIE for finalisation on 1 July 2021, consistent with Condition 6 of the Alteration to the Gateway Determination issued on 21 April 2021.

8. This report seeks Council’s endorsement of the Draft Parramatta CBD Local Infrastructure Contributions Plan 2021 (at Attachment 1) for the purposes of public exhibition.

BACKGROUND

9. Since 2013 Council has been engaged in a process to deliver a new planning framework to facilitate and strengthen the Parramatta CBD’s position as one of Sydney’s three metropolitan CBDs. The recently exhibited CBD PP is one of the main elements of the Parramatta CBD Planning Framework.

10. The CBD Planning Framework proposes planning controls that facilitate the delivery of an extra 46,000 jobs and 15,000 dwellings within the Parramatta CBD over the next 40 years. In doing so the CBD Planning Framework also delivers on key economic, social and cultural objectives for Western Sydney which is home to over half of Sydney’s population.

11. The CBD PP was publicly exhibited for six (6) weeks from 21 September 2020 until 2 November 2020. As noted in the June 2021 Council report, some infrastructure funding issues have arisen that have implications for the CBD PP since it was publicly exhibited.

12. In February 2021, the DPIE finalised and released its new “Planning Agreements – Practice Note”. The Practice Note has been made for the purposes of clause 25B of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 to assist parties (including Councils) in the preparation of planning agreements. The new Practice Note does not support the use of Planning Agreements for the purposes of value capture. Relevant extracts of the Practice Note have been copied below for reference:

“2.1 Fundamental principles

Planning authorities and developers that are parties to planning agreements should adhere to the following fundamental principles.

· Planning agreements should not be used as a means of general revenue raising or to overcome revenue shortfalls.

· Value capture should not be the primary purpose of a planning agreement.

…

2.3 Value capture

The term value capture is widely used and covers several different practices. This practice note does not attempt to define or discuss them all. In general, the use of planning agreements for the primary purpose of value capture is not supported as it leads to the perception that planning decisions can be bought and sold and that planning authorities may leverage their bargaining position based on their statutory powers.

Planning agreements should not be used explicitly for value capture in connection with the making of planning decisions. For example, they should not be used to capture land value uplift resulting from rezoning or variations to planning controls. Such agreements often express value capture as a monetary contribution per square metre of increased floor area or as a percentage of the increased value of the land. Usually the planning agreement would only commence operation as a result of the rezoning proposal or increased development potential being applied.”

13. One of the key elements of the exhibited CBD PP is that access to “Incentive FSR” and “Opportunity Site FSR” was through the inclusion of community infrastructure on site. The process for provision of the community infrastructure was intended to be stipulated through a separate Development Guideline, which would have included “value capture” monetary contribution rates to calculate the quantum of community infrastructure required, the contribution of which would be formalised through a planning agreement.

14. Inclusion of these rates was to ensure fairness, transparency and equity in the planning agreements process, and to improve efficiencies in making planning agreements between applicants and Council. However, given the effect of the new Practice Note for planning agreements, this approach is no longer possible, and a review of the planning proposal was required in the post-exhibition phase to remove this requirement and establish an alternative approach.

15. DPIE, in its approval of the CBD Planning Proposal in July 2020 to go on public exhibition, allowed these community infrastructure provisions to be retained for the purposes of exhibition, but noted that “further resolution of this matter will be required at the finalisation of the planning proposal”. This was because DPIE noted that the “draft planning agreements policy framework released by the DPIE in April 2020 provides a point of tension in applying Council’s intended approach”. The planning agreements practice note was only a draft at that time but has since been finalised by the DPIE, in February 2021.

16. In considering a way forward, Council officers referred back to the original Gateway determination for the CBD Planning Proposal, which included the following condition 1(m)iv:

“(m) in relation to infrastructure funding:

…

iv. consider a funding mechanism to support the provision of community infrastructure, such as the preparation of a new section 7.11 contributions plan or a potential increase to the levy under the current 7.12 contributions plan.”

17. In lieu of providing a community infrastructure provision system “in-built” within the CBD PP (as exhibited), a new draft section 7.12 contributions plan with an increased levy has been prepared for public exhibition purposes that, if adopted, will sit alongside the new Parramatta LEP 2011 Amendment for the Parramatta CBD.

18. The report of 15 June 2021 recommended that as a part of the resolution in finalising the CBD PP, Council also resolve to prepare a new section 7.12 contributions plan with a higher levy, so as to send a clear message to the market and community that whilst the ‘value sharing’ system (through the provision of community infrastructure) is being removed, infrastructure funding will still be pursued through this alternate funding pathway.

19. To preserve the original intent of the exhibited CBD PP, officers also recommended that rather than completely removing the original community infrastructure clause and base and incentive FSR maps, the clause instead be amended to include compliance with key community infrastructure principles in order to access the incentive FSR. The recommended key community infrastructure principles, as endorsed by Council on 15 June 2021, are:

· Public access to the community infrastructure network has been maximised in the design of the development.

· There is appropriate community infrastructure in place or planned to meet the needs of the proposed development acknowledging the additional density permissible under this clause.

· The development includes community infrastructure where the size of the site, the location of the site, and the nature of the development will allow for the provision of that community infrastructure.

CONTRIBUTION RATES

20. In its resolution of 15 June 2021, Council resolved to note the new section 7.12 plan will include a new contributions levy rate set higher than the current contribution rate of three (3) per cent of the development cost, subject to feasibility testing of the levy rate.

21. Under the existing section 7.12 plan that applies in the CBD, the Parramatta CBD Development Contributions Plan 2007, contributions for both residential and non-residential development are calculated at three (3) per cent of the development cost over $250,000 with contributions payable at the construction certificate stage.

22. The Draft Plan (at Attachment 1) proposes increasing existing contribution rates from three (3) per cent to the following:

· Development for the purpose of residential accommodation – five (5) percent of the development cost where the total development cost is over $250,000.

· Other development (excluding residential accommodation) – four (4) percent of the development cost where the total development cost is over $250,000.

· Mixed-use development (development including both residential accommodation and other land uses) – five (5) percent of the development cost where the total development cost is over $250,000.

· Any development where the development cost is $250,000 or less – no contribution required.

23. The Draft Plan also proposes to defer payment of contributions from the Construction Certificate (CC) stage to the Occupation Certificate (OC) stage for all development.

24. The Draft Plan’s proposed contribution rates have been prepared having regard to the following objectives:

· Development feasibility – ensure development remains feasible.

· Existing plan and value sharing income – at least match income that would have been received if the existing plan and CBD value sharing scheme was retained.

· Apportioned costs – provide a reasonable contribution towards development-generated (‘apportioned’) infrastructure demand and costs.

25. These are discussed separately in the following subsections. In summary:

· The infrastructure cost reasonably apportioned to development is approximately $1.19 billion over 40 years.

· If the existing plan and CBD value sharing scheme was to be retained, it is forecast that approximately $870 million in income would have been generated over the next 40 years.

· Feasibility testing indicates the maximum contribution rates that can be imposed while keeping development feasible is 5.02 per cent of the development cost for residential development and 4.19 per cent for non-residential development.

· The Draft Plan’s proposed contribution rates are forecast to generate approximately $1 billion in income over 40 years – this is less than the $1.19 billion in costs reasonably apportioned to development, but slightly more than the $870 million forecast to be received if the existing plan and value sharing scheme were retained.

Development-generated infrastructure demand and cost

26. As noted, a key objective in preparing the Draft Plan’s contribution rates is to ensure development provides a reasonable contribution towards development-generated (‘apportioned’) infrastructure demand and costs.

27. The provision of new and upgraded infrastructure is critical to realising Council’s vision and strategic objectives for Parramatta CBD as articulated in various strategies, policies and plans. Examples include Council’s CBD PP, Local Strategic Planning Statement, Local Housing Strategy and Community Infrastructure Strategy.

28. Council needs to provide a range of infrastructure to meet both the existing and new (development-generated) population’s infrastructure demand and cost. If Council does not provide this infrastructure then service levels for both the existing and new population will decline.

29. The Draft Plan includes approximately $2 billion of local infrastructure works to be provided by Council over the next 40 years. Of this, approximately $1.19 billion or 59 per cent can be reasonably attributed or ‘apportioned’ to development-generated infrastructure demand.

30. The Draft Plan’s contribution rates are forecast to generate approximately $1 billion in income over 40 years. This is reasonable as it is less than the $1.19 billion in costs reasonably apportioned to development. Due to feasibility testing results, Council officers do not recommend higher contribution rates to recover the full amount – this is discussed further in this report below.

31. Council will need to fund the balance using existing available funding (approximately $359 million) and other funding sources, such as future planning agreement contributions, general revenue and grants. This is discussed further in the financial implications section of this report.

Income under existing plan and CBD value-sharing scheme

32. In establishing the Draft Plan’s proposed contribution rates, a critical objective has been to ensure that income that will be generated under the new plan will at least match income that would be generated if the existing plan and CBD value sharing scheme was retained. As noted, the CBD value sharing scheme can no longer continue and this is a key reason for preparing the Draft Plan with higher contribution rates.

33. Hypothetically, if the CBD value sharing scheme was allowed to continue and it was retained along with the existing CBD contribution plan (with a contribution rate of 3%), analysis indicates approximately $870 million in income would be received over 40 years, as shown in Table 1. The analysis allows for value sharing rates to escalate at three (3) per cent each year.

Table 1 – Forecast income, existing plan and CBD value sharing scheme (over 40 years)

Source	Forecast income
Existing s7.12 levy @ 3%	$664m
Phase 1 value sharing @$150/sqm	$144m
Phase 2 value sharing @$375/sqm	$61m
Total	$870m

34. The Draft Plan’s contribution rates are forecast to generate approximately $1 billion in income over 40 years. This is more than the $870 million in income forecast to be generated if the existing plan and value sharing scheme was retained. This is consistent with the objective to ensure that income under the Draft Plan at least matches income if the existing plan and value sharing scheme was retained.

35. As noted, it is reasonable for income under the Draft Plan to be more than income under the existing plan and value sharing scheme as the income will still be less than the total infrastructure demand and cost reasonably apportioned to development. Council officers do not recommend to fully recover the costs due to the adverse impacts on feasibility, which is discussed further below.

Development feasibility

36. In its resolution of 15 June 2021, Council resolved to note the new section 7.12 plan will include a new contributions levy rate set higher than the current contribution rate of three (3) per cent of the development cost, subject to feasibility testing of the levy rate.

37. Consistent with Council’s resolution, Council engaged consultants Savills to undertake feasibility testing to establish a contribution rate which could be charged before adversely impacting development feasibility. A copy of the Savills report is provided at Attachment 2.

38. Two representative scenarios were tested:

· A commercial development with ground floor retail and upper floor offices

· A residential development with ground floor retail and upper floor residential apartments.

39. Council also sought advice from Savills on the impact of increasing section 7.12 contribution rates either immediately or over a period of time, that is, whether any increases to contribution rates need to be ‘phased-in’ over time.

40. Testing allowed for potential future regional infrastructure contributions for residential, retail and commercial development and transport infrastructure contributions based on the Productivity Commission’s recommendations in its 2020 Review of Infrastructure Contributions report.

41. The Commission recommended introducing new regional infrastructure contributions in place of special infrastructure contributions set at $10,000 per apartment, $35 per square metre of retail floor space (internal area), and $25 per square metre of commercial floor space (internal area). For transport infrastructure contributions, it recommended an additional $5,000 per dwelling (minimum). The Commission suggest that a transport infrastructure contribution for commercial development could also be considered, however no information is provided on specifically what that might be – any contribution amount would be subject to further consideration by DPIE.

42. In summary, the results of the feasibility modelling found that rates could be increased as shown in the table below while still maintaining a viable development:

Table 2 – Summary of results of feasibility testing (Savills)

FSR	S7.12 Rates - Residential (Mixed Use)	S7.12 Rates - Commercial
10:1	5.02%	4.19%
12:1	5.65%	4.49%
15:1	6.31%	4.59%

43. The results of this testing (in Table 1 above) are subject to the contribution being charged at the later Occupation Certificate (OC) stage (as opposed to the earlier Construction Certificate (CC) stage). By deferring payment from the CC stage to the OC stage, any financial burden on the development would have been resolved (ie. the project is completed, and, for example, the majority of units would have been sold or major tenants secured). This provides a significant financial benefit to the developer as the substantial financial imposition of development contributions is deferred until the project’s completion, in lieu of requiring payment prior to construction commencing.

44. In terms of the implementation timeframe, Savills provides the following conclusion:

“Savills recommends that if Council increases the section 7.12 contributions, that the increase is announced as soon as possible and could be introduced in the short term. However, we also recommend Council discusses with the State Government the likely timing of new Regional Infrastructure Contributions and Transport Infrastructure Contributions.”

45. The Draft Plan proposes increasing contribution rates as described in Paragraph 22 of this report. These recommended contribution rate increases are at the lower end of the range put forward by Savills as being feasible. The Draft Plan proposes to defer payment of contributions from the earlier Construction Certificate stage to the later Occupation Certificate stage. Further, it is proposed that the new plan would only apply to development applications lodged after the new plan’s commencement date, which would act as a type of “phase in” approach (noting that the new rates would need to be exhibited in draft form, then endorsed by Council, and then approved by the State Government prior to coming into effect).

46. In terms of residential development, which has been subject to the value sharing charge under the CBD PP, the increase to the contributions rate is effectively offset by the removal of the current value sharing charge (which has been in place for some time). However, in the case of commercial development, it is noted that this has never been subject to a value sharing charge under the CBD PP, so an increase to the contribution rate to four (4) per cent could reasonably be considered as a ‘new charge’ by the market. However, it is noted that since the commencement of the CBD PP preparation process in 2013 the viability of commercial office development has improved significantly in the Parramatta CBD (as evidenced by the significant office tower development that has been built or is under construction) and under the CBD PP unlimited commercial office floor space is available in the B3 Commercial Core zone and large sections of the B4 Mixed Use zone (adjacent to the B3 zone). Given this substantial uplift under the CBD PP, an increase to the s7.12 rate for commercial development is considered reasonable to help fund the infrastructure generated by this new development. If evidence around feasibility concerns was provided by stakeholders during the exhibition of the Draft Plan, this could be reconsidered at that time.

Contribution rate options tested

47. In deriving the Draft Plan’s contribution rates, Council officers tested income that would be received under several contribution rate options. Options tested comprised:

· Existing (base case) – that is, if the existing plan contribution rate of three (3) per cent was applied to all development and the value sharing scheme was retained.

· Options 1 and 2 – contribution rates needed to generate the same income as the existing (base case).

· Option 3 – contribution rates needed to generate more income than the existing (base case) and partially fund infrastructure costs reasonably apportioned to development.

· Options 4 and 5 – contribution rates needed to generate more income than the existing (base case) and fully fund infrastructure costs reasonably apportioned to development

48. Forecast income that would be received under each option is shown in Table 3 below, including the officer recommendation.

Table 3 – Options testing for new s7.12 levy rates

Options	Forecast income	Officer Recommendation
Existing (base case)
· All development 3% · Value sharing	$870m	Not applicable – value sharing not supported by DPIE
Income same as existing / base case
Option 1 · All development 4% · No value sharing	$870m	Not recommended · Residential could be charged more and still be feasible · Insufficient income to fund costs apportioned to development
Option 2 · Residential 4.5% · Commercial 3% · No value sharing	$870m	Not recommended · Residential and commercial could both be charged more and still be feasible · Insufficient income to fund costs apportioned to development
Income higher than existing / base case + partially fund $1.19b costs apportioned to development
Option 3 · Residential 5% · Commercial 4% · No value sharing	$1b	Recommended · Best balance of funding apportioned costs (though it will not fully fund apportioned costs) while ensuring contribution rates are feasible
Income higher than existing / base case + fully fund $1.19b costs apportioned to development
Option 4 · All development 5% · No value sharing	$1.19b	· Not recommended · Commercial not feasible
Option 5 · Residential 8.5% · Commercial 3% · No value sharing	$1.19b	· Not recommended · Residential not feasible

49. The Draft Plan’s proposed contribution rates are consistent with Option 3. Option 3 is recommended as it provides the best balance of providing income towards development-generated infrastructure costs while ensuring development remains feasible.

50. Other options are not recommended because development will either be unfeasible, could be charged more and still be feasible, or the income generated would be insufficient to fund development-generated infrastructure costs.

Other Councils’ contribution rates

51. As noted, the Draft Plan proposes increasing existing residential contribution rates from three (3) per cent to five (5) per cent, and existing non-residential contribution rates from three (3) per cent to four (4) per cent, and also deferring payment of contributions from Construction Certificate stage to Occupation Certificate stage for all development.

52. The highest section 7.12 levy rate that has been approved for a NSW Council is at Burwood town centre, which is at four (4) per cent of the development cost over $250,000. Liverpool and Penrith Councils recently proposed a draft section 7.12 levy of 6.5 per cent of the development cost for the Western City “Aerotropolis”. They are awaiting DPIE’s decision on whether the proposed rates are supported or not. A list of Councils which have been approved for contribution rates above the standard 1% levy are provided in Table 4 below.

Table 4 - Maximum percentage rates for other Councils – Clause 25K of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000

Council	Maximum s7.12 Percentage Rate
Wollongong	2%
Randwick (Kensington/Kingsford)	2.5%
Liverpool	3%
Newcastle	3%
Parramatta	3%
Willoughby	3%
Burwood	4%

DPIE criteria for a higher contribution rate

53. In February 2021 the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE) released a Practice Note for section 7.12 fixed development consent levies which includes the process and criteria for Councils to seek a higher maximum rate.

54. The Practice Note indicates Councils can apply to the Department requesting an increase to the maximum section 7.12 percentage levy above the percentages specified in clause 25K(1)(a) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 (EP&A Regulation), which is generally one (1) per cent of the development cost over $200,000. Clause 25K(1)(b) of the EP&A Regulation lists areas that are subject to higher maximum s7.12 percentage levies, which includes the Parramatta CBD with its current three (3) per cent rate. Increasing the rate further will require approval of the Minister.

55. The Department assesses a Council’s request, makes recommendations to the Minister, and if supported, has an amendment to the EP&A Regulation prepared to increase the levy. In assessing Councils’ requests, the Department consider individual geographical, socio-economic, and development contexts.

56. The Practice Note includes tables that provide guidance on the type of information required to assist the Department to make recommendations to the Minister. It indicates that the Minister retains the discretion to determine the rate of a Council’s maximum section 7.12 levy, including the ability to refuse a request even if the Council demonstrates that it meets the criteria.

57. The Department will assess all requests for higher maximum rates on their merits, including any requests to deviate from the outlined criteria or percentages. It notes that Councils may consider different maximum rates and thresholds for different types of development.

58. A summary of the criteria and Council Officer preliminary assessment of Parramatta CBD’s consistency with the criteria is provided in the tables below. This will be refined after the public exhibition to incorporate stakeholder and community feedback. In summary, Council Officers’ assessment indicates that the Parramatta CBD meets all the Department’s criteria for the Draft Plan’s proposed contribution rates.

59. If Council approves the Draft Plan for public exhibition and then later approves it for finalisation and adoption after the exhibition, Council Officers will write to the Department to formally seek approval for the Draft Plan’s contributions rates and an associated amendment to clause 25K of the Regulations to reflect the higher rates.

Table 5: DPIE criteria for Greater Sydney Region Councils for an increased levy of more than 1% of the cost of development

Criteria	Council Officer assessment
a. The strategic areas are identified in a regional plan, district plan or respective Local Strategic Planning Statement, as a strategic centre, growth area, local centre or economic corridor.	*Consistent.* Parramatta CBD is identified as a strategic centre and growth centre in the relevant regional plan, district plan and Local Strategic Planning Statement.
b. Local planning controls reflect, or are being amended to reflect relevant strategic direction and targets for the centre or defined area.	*Consistent.* Council is seeking to amend planning controls for the Parramatta CBD to reflect its strategic importance through the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal, which was recently endorsed by Council for submission to DPIE for finalisation.
c. A requirement for a review every 5 years from the date the new contributions plan comes into force is written into the contributions plan.	*Consistent.* The Draft Plan says Council will review it at least every 5 years.
d. Ongoing consultation with the Department regarding changes to works schedules will be undertaken, otherwise the higher percentage levy will no longer apply.	*Consistent.* Council Officers have consulted extensively with DPIE on the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal and associated infrastructure priorities. Council Officers will continue to consult with the Department on the Draft Plan’s works program.
e. The contributions plan should focus on delivering quality place-based community and green infrastructure, and public space improvements that enhance amenity of the centre.	*Consistent.* The Draft Plan works program focuses on delivering quality place-based community and green infrastructure, and public space improvements that enhance amenity of the Parramatta CBD.
f. The centre has been identified by the relevant strategic plan/s to accommodate significant employment growth. An example of this includes facilitating an increase of at least 25% more employment opportunities than currently available in the centre.	*Consistent.* Parramatta CBD has been identified in the relevant regional plan, district plan and Local Strategic Planning Statement to accommodate significant employment growth as the “Central City” for the Greater Sydney metropolitan area. Under the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal, changes to the planning controls will facilitate the delivery of an extra 46,100 jobs within the Parramatta CBD over the next 40 years. Compared with 51,100 jobs in 2016, this represents a 90% increase in employment in the Parramatta CBD.

Table 6: DPIE criteria for an increased levy of more than 2% of the cost of development

Criteria	Council Officer assessment
a. The works schedule has been prepared in consultation with the Department. This gives an opportunity for the Department to liaise and coordinate with broader infrastructure agencies in identifying strategic, place-appropriate infrastructure. Additionally, the Department can also help to ensure infrastructure needs are met in the most efficient manner.	*Consistent.* Council has consulted extensively with the Department on the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal and associated infrastructure priorities. Attachment 17c to the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal includes a Draft Infrastructure Needs Analysis (2017), which was in effect an early draft of the works plan schedule. Further, based on the advice of DPIE, a review of the works plan schedule was undertaken so as to ensure justification for the higher contribution rates would only be based on that portion of the works program that could be attributable to new development. So, even though the Draft Plan includes approximately $2 billion of local infrastructure works to be provided by Council over the next 40 years, in determining rates, Council officers only considered 59 per cent or approximately $1.19 billion as being reasonably attributed or ‘apportioned’ to development-generated infrastructure demand. Council officers will continue to consult with the Department on the Draft Plan works program.
b. Financial modelling is provided demonstrating that a maximum 2% levy on the cost of development is insufficient to deliver identified infrastructure in the proposed timeframe.	*Consistent.* Council Officers have prepared financial modelling demonstrating that a maximum 2% levy on the cost of development is insufficient to deliver identified infrastructure in the proposed timeframe. The Draft Plan’s contribution rates will provide significant funding towards the development-generated infrastructure demand and cost but will not fully fund this cost. Feasibility testing indicates the Draft Plan’s contribution rates and deferred payment to occupation certificate are feasible. Council Officers do not recommend increasing the Draft Plan’s contribution rates further as this may have an unacceptable feasibility impact on development.

OTHER KEY COMPONENTS

60. Apart from proposed updates to contribution rates, other key components of the Draft Plan include updates to population forecasts, works program and exemption provisions. These are described below.

61. When preparing local infrastructure contributions plans, Councils can choose to prepare section 7.11 ‘nexus-based’ plans or section 7.12 ‘fixed-rate’ plans. The existing Parramatta CBD plan is a section 7.12 fixed-rate plan. The Draft Plan is also a section 7.12 fixed-rate plan. A section 7.12 fixed-rate approach is considered to provide the best balance of income and flexibility in Parramatta CBD, noting that a substantial proportion of the forecast growth in the CBD will be non-residential development. A section 7.11 plan approach is not recommended for Parramatta CBD given the high levels of non-residential development forecast, and nexus and apportionment requirements that would limit Council’s capacity to fund infrastructure to meet development-generated demand.

62. The Draft Plan will apply to the ‘Parramatta City Centre’ area, as identified in the CBD PP. A map showing the area is provided in Figure 2 of the Draft Plan at Attachment 1 and is also copied below in Map 1 of this report. It is noted that where there is some overlap between the Draft Plan and the Outside CBD Contributions Plan for sites which are currently not within the CBD boundary, but will be once the CBD PP is finalised, the Draft Plan will supersede the Outside CBD Contributions Plan for those sites once it takes effect.

Map 1 – Land Application Area of the Draft Plan

Population forecasts

63. The Draft Plan includes updated population forecasts. All contributions plans include population forecasts. They are the key indicator of development-generated infrastructure demand and cost.

64. The Draft Plan includes updated population forecasts reflecting growth that will be enabled by the CBD PP. As noted, the CBD PP is expected to facilitate the delivery of an extra 46,000 jobs and 15,000 dwellings within the Parramatta CBD over the next 40 years.

Works program

65. Contributions plans include a works program, which identifies the local infrastructure that the relevant Council will deliver to meet the needs of the forecast development and an estimate of the timeframe within which it will be delivered. The works program also includes an estimate of the land and capital costs to Council of delivering each infrastructure item.

66. The Draft Plan includes an updated works program that reflects Council's current strategic infrastructure priorities for the Parramatta CBD. Infrastructure items identified in the Draft Plan have been drawn from existing Council plans and strategies that identify infrastructure needs, including:

· Community Infrastructure Strategy

· Parramatta City River Strategy

· Parramatta Ways Walking Strategy

· Parramatta City Centre Lanes Policy

· Parramatta CBD Strategic Transport Study

· Parramatta Bike Plan

· Parramatta Integrated Transport Plan.

Existing items from the works program of the current Section 7.12 CBD Contributions Plan have been carried across to the new works program in the Draft Plan, for example, the new Aquatics Centre at Mays Hill. The exceptions are works items that have already been constructed. In terms of new items that have been added, they generally reflect endorsed Council policies, for example, the regional cycleways network, smart city initiatives and Robin Thomas and James Ruse Reserves upgrades.

67. The Draft Plan works program includes 141 works items with a total estimated cost to Council of approximately $2 billion over 40 years. A breakdown of the total estimated costs by infrastructure category is shown in Table 7 below.

Table 7 – Draft Plan works program estimated costs, by infrastructure category

Infrastructure category	Estimated cost
Community facilities	$736m
Open space and recreation	$512m
Public domain works	$576m
Transport	$192m
Total	$2,015m

68. It is expected that development contributions collected under the Draft Plan will fund around $1 billion of this over 40 years. This is discussed further in the financial implications section of this report.

Exemptions

69. In preparing contributions plans, Councils can choose to exempt certain development from the need to pay contributions under the plan.

70. The existing plan exempts: (a) Development undertaken by or on behalf of Council, including works listed in the plan’s works program; (b) Development with a development cost of less than $250,000; and (c) Development excluded by a Ministerial direction.

71. The Draft Plan proposes to retain these exemptions and include a new exemption for affordable housing and social housing where this is delivered by or on behalf of a social housing provider or public authority.

72. An exemption to affordable and social housing development will actively support Council’s affordable housing target in its Local Housing Strategy – a target of 9,500 affordable housing dwellings being delivered by 2036 by removing the obligation to pay section 7.12 levies on these developments.

73. Council officers also recently recommended exempting this type of development outside the CBD in the Draft (Outside CBD) Parramatta Local Infrastructure Contributions Plan 2021, so this approach will ensure consistency across the entire LGA and facilitate the provision of more social and affordable housing.

NSW INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING REFORMS

74. The NSW Government is currently reviewing the NSW infrastructure contributions system, including section 7.12 contributions. As noted, the Draft Plan has been prepared as a section 7.12 fixed-rate plan.

75. In November 2020 the NSW Productivity Commission released its report on the Review of Infrastructure Contributions in New South Wales. The Commission’s report included 29 recommendations to reform the NSW infrastructure contributions system. Relevant recommendations include:

· Change the way section 7.12 contributions from a percentage of the development cost to a standard contribution rate per square metre with the rate for greater Sydney equivalent to three (3) per cent of capital cost for residential development ($10,000 per dwelling) and one (1) per cent for non-residential development.

· Only apply section 7.12 contributions to the net increase in development, that is, allow credit for existing development, contributions, similar to the way credits are provided under the existing framework for section 7.11 contributions.

· Allow draft plans exhibited before the new provisions commence, expected towards the middle of 2022, to continue.

· Require all plans to be updated consistent with the new provisions in 2024.

76. In March 2021, the NSW Government accepted all 29 recommendations in the Commission’s Final Report. The Government has indicated it is aiming to release draft provisions for public comment by the end of 2021 so the new provisions can commence towards the middle of 2022.

77. It is recommended that Council proceed with exhibiting the Draft Plan for the following reasons:

· the Productivity Commission has recommended that draft plans exhibited before the new provisions commence in 2022 can continue until 2024.

· there is significant uncertainty about the draft provisions to be released and the final provisions to be adopted - the final provisions to be adopted may be amended based on submissions from Councils and other stakeholders.

· delaying the Draft Plan would reduce development contributions income to Council and the amount of infrastructure that can be funded and delivered to meet development-generated infrastructure demand.

78. A similar issue arose during the recent exhibition of the Draft (Outside CBD) Parramatta Local Infrastructure Contributions Plan 2021. The draft outside CBD plan was exhibited from 17 March 2021 to 16 April 2021. As detailed in the report about the outcomes of the public exhibition considered by Council at its meeting on 12 July 2021, a total of 29 submissions were received in response to the exhibition. Of these, three (3) submissions from developers and industry groups recommended amending the exhibited draft plan to be consistent with the Commission’s recommendations. Council officers did not accept these submitters’ recommendations and recommended to finalise the draft plan for reasons similar to the reasons outlined above.

CONSULTATION & TIMING

Stakeholder Consultation

79. Should Council endorse the Draft Plan for the purposes of public exhibition, consultation with stakeholders will occur during the exhibition period.

Councillor Consultation

80. Infrastructure funding has been a critical component of the preparation of the CBD PP, which has been subject to a number of workshops with Councillors. In relation to the matter of a new contributions plan specifically, this has been subject to discussion at two Councillor workshops, as follows:

Date	Councillor	Councillor Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
24 March 2021	Councillor Workshop (need for a new contributions plan considered at CBD PP workshop)	Councillors noted the information provided. Subsequently, Council resolved to prepare a new contributions plan on 15 June 2021.	Council officers to prepare a new draft contributions plan, which has now been completed and is the subject of this report.	City Planning
7 July 2021	Councillor Workshop	Councillors sought further information in relation to the matter.	Council officers prepared a briefing note which addressed the requested additional information.	City Planning

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

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

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

82. Local infrastructure contributions form part of Council’s Resourcing Strategy, including its Long-Term Financial Plan, and will provide funding towards priorities in the Community Strategic Plan, 10-year capital works plan and four yearly Delivery Program.

83. The Draft Plan includes updated contribution rates and an updated works program that will be funded, in part, from contributions under the plan. The Draft Plan will generate new / additional funding compared to if the existing plan was retained, however, it also includes an updated works program where the estimated total cost of the works is greater than the existing plan’s works total. A comparison between the estimated income under the current framework with the proposed framework is provided in Table 8 below, which shows the new framework will generate $130 million in more income for Council.

Table 8 – Comparison of estimated income under current and proposed frameworks

Current Contributions Framework	Proposed Contributions Framework
S7.12 Plan (2007) - $664 million	Draft S7.12 Plan (2021) - $1 billion
Value Sharing - $205 million	No value sharing - $0
Total - $870 million	Total - $1 billion

84. It is common for section 7.12 plan works program costs to be significantly greater than the income forecast under the plan. This is because unlike section 7.11 plans, section 7.12 plans do not need to demonstrate ‘nexus’ between development and infrastructure provision or specify the maximum amount that will be funded using contributions. There is thus greater scope for section 7.12 plan works programs to be more flexible and aspirational.

85. The total estimated cost of works in the Draft Plan’s works program is approximately $2 billion over 40 years whereas the forecast contributions income during this period is approximately $1 billion. The amount already funded is approximately $359 million. The balance needed to fully fund the works program over 40 years is approximately $656 million (or approximately $16 million per year).

86. Mechanisms that can be applied to this include:

· Additional planning agreements that provide additional funds or works-in-kind to deliver infrastructure. For example, delivery of a new community facility or open space, as part of development on large sites.

· State and federal government grants.

· The detailed project design and development phase for infrastructure projects may also identify opportunities for cost and efficiency savings.

· Cross-subsiding new facilities as part of mixed-use development schemes on Council owned land, for example, by including an element of residential or commercial floorspace above community facility floor space.

· Explore utilisation of internal reserves, for example, the property development reserve.

87. Council will seek to the deliver works in the Draft Plan’s works program as funds from contributions and other sources become available. The indicative timeframe for delivering the works is specified in the Draft Plan’s works program.

88. The Draft Plan also indicates Council will review it at least every five years to ensure it reflects updated population projections, infrastructure demand, costs and funding. If actual or expected funding is different to what was forecast the works program can be updated to reflect this. This is a standard approach for reviewing development contributions plans.

COVID–19

89. COVID–19 may impact on development activity and associated development contributions income in the short term but is not expected to impact on development activity and contributions income in the long term, particularly given the prominence of the Parramatta CBD and its strategic importance.

90. The Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal provides capacity for new commercial and residential development in the Parramatta CBD that will last for a period of approximately 40 years.

91. In the short term, the economic effects of COVID–19 pandemic may impact on development and subsequent rates of worker and resident population increases, and potentially associated development contributions income.

92. In the long term, it is expected that the pandemic will have a limited impact on the forecast population for the Parramatta CBD. This is because development is seen as a key contributor in the post-pandemic economic recovery effort, the NSW Government’s investment in city-shaping infrastructure, including Sydney Metro West and Parramatta Light Rail, and the Parramatta CBD’s strategic location in the heart of the Greater Sydney region.

CONCLUSION

93. This report recommends Council approve the Draft Parramatta CBD Development Contributions Plan 2021, shown at Attachment 1, for public exhibition purposes.

94. The Draft Plan has been prepared following the release of a planning agreement practice note by DPIE in February 2021 which means Council’s CBD value sharing scheme can no longer continue, as had originally been envisaged under the CBD PP.

95. The Draft Plan will generate more income than would have been generated if the existing plan and CBD value sharing scheme was retained. This is reasonable as the income that will be generated is less than the infrastructure cost reasonably apportioned to development. The Draft Plan’s contribution rates are also supported by feasibility testing.

96. It is recommended that Council approve the Draft Plan for public exhibition purposes and that a report on the outcomes of the public exhibition be provided to Council prior to finalisation of the Draft Plan.

Roy Laria

Land Use Planning Manager

Robert Cologna

Acting Group Manager, City Planning

Michael Tzimoulas

Executive Director Corporate Services

David Birds

Acting Executive Director, City Planning & Design

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

Attachments:

1 ⇩	Draft Parramatta CBD Local Infrastructure Contributions Plan 2021	55 Pages
2 ⇩	Parramatta CBD Contributions Framework Review Feasibility Testing - Savills	23 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

Item	Subject	Councillor	Question
8.2	Lord Mayoral Minute – Development of a Flag Raising Ceremony Policy	Barrak	What is the per ceremony cost of flag raising ceremonies?


	Press	Press

Public Gallery