Agenda of Council - Monday, 12 September 2022

MINUTES OF THE Meeting of City of Parramatta Council HELD IN THE CLOISTER FUNCTION ROOMS, ST PATRICK’S CATHEDRAL 1 MARIST PLACE, PARRAMATTA ON Monday, 22 August 2022 AT 6:30pm

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

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

confirmed.

PRESENT

The Lord Mayor, Councillor Donna Davis and Councillors Phil Bradley, Kellie Darley, Pierre Esber, Michelle Garrard, Henry Green, Ange Humphries, Cameron Maclean, Paul Noack, Sameer Pandey, Dr Patricia Prociv, Dan Siviero, Georgina Valjak, Donna Wang and Lorraine Wearne.

1. OPENING MEETING

The Lord Mayor, Councillor Donna Davis, opened the meeting at 6:33pm.

2. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TO TRADITIONAL OWNERS OF LAND

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

Note: Councillor Phil Bradley arrived at the meeting at 6:34pm.

3. WEBCASTING ANNOUNCEMENT

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

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

4. GENERAL RECORDING OF MEETING ANOUNCEMENT

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

5. APOLOGIES AND APPLICATIONS FOR LEAVE OF ABSENCE OR ATTENDANCE BY AUDIO-VISUAL LINK BY COUNCILLORS

3945	RESOLVED (Bradley/Wang) That the request to attend the Ordinary Council Meeting dated 22 August 2022 via remote means submitted by Councillors Darley, Humphries and Wearne due to personal reasons be accepted.

Note: Councillor Cameron Maclean and Councillor Paul Noack arrived at the meeting at 6:35pm.

6. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

SUBJECT: Minutes of the Council Meeting held on 8 August 2022

3946

RESOLVED (Garrard/Valjak)

That the minutes be taken as read and be accepted as a true record of the Meeting, noting an amendment to the recording of the declarations of interest by Councillor Bradley on pages 10 and 11 of the minutes document replacing the words “this item” with “Item 13.3” and “Item 13.5” respectively.

7. DISCLOSURES OF INTEREST

There were no Declarations of Interest made at this meeting.

8. Minutes of the Lord Mayor

8.1

SUBJECT Cancer Council - 2022 Daffodil Day Fundraising Initiative

REFERENCE F2022/00105 - D08658418

REPORT OF Lord Mayor, Councillor Donna Davis

3947

RESOLVED (Davis/Pandey)

(a) That Council donate $2,000 to the Cancer Council’s Daffodil Day Appeal to support life-saving cancer research;

(b) That the Lord Mayor write to the Cancer Council to acknowledge their important work and inform them of Council’s donation; and

(c) Further, that Council note the City of Parramatta will proactively encourage staff and the community to support the fundraising initiative through internal communications and Council’s social media channels.

8.2

SUBJECT Thankyou Professor Peter Shergold AC and Congratulations Jennifer Westacott AO

REFERENCE F2022/00105 - D08658517

REPORT OF Lord Mayor, Councillor Donna Davis

3948

RESOLVED (Davis/Noack)

(a) That Council note Professor Peter Shergold AC will retire from his role as Chancellor of Western Sydney University in December after 12 years of exemplary service;

(b) That Council note Jennifer Westacott AO has been appointed as the next Chancellor of Western Sydney University, to commence early 2023;

(c) That the Lord Mayor write to Professor Shergold AC to congratulate him on his exemplary leadership and contributions to the City of Parramatta in his work for Western Sydney University;

(d) That Council congratulate Jennifer Westacott AO on her appointment as incoming Chancellor of Western Sydney University; and

(e) Further, that the Lord Mayor write to Ms Westacott extending our congratulations on her appointment and to reinforce our commitment to collaborate with the University to help drive western Sydney’s economic and social transformation.

9. Public Forum

There were no public forums for this meeting.

10. Petitions

There were no petitions tabled at this meeting.

11. Rescission Motions

There were no rescission motions at this meeting.

12. Reports to Council - For Notation

There were no for notation reports to Council tabled at this meeting.

Procedural Motion

3949

RESOLVED (Esber/Garrard)

That Items 13.3, 13.4, 13.5, and 13.7 be resolved en bloc.

13. Reports to Council - For Council Decision

13.3

SUBJECT Code of Conduct Review 2022

REFERENCE F2022/00105 - D08421473

REPORT OF Governance Projects Officer

3950

RESOLVED (Esber/Garrard)

That Council adopt the Draft Code of Conduct, inclusive of the Model Procedures for Administering the Model Code of Conduct, as per Attachment 2 to the Council report.

13.4

SUBJECT Expression of Interest - Selection of Members to Parramatta Light Rail Stage 2 Advisory Committee

REFERENCE F2017/01361 - D08561496

REPORT OF Group Manager Infrastructure Planning & Design

3951

RESOLVED (Esber/Garrard)

(a) That Council appoint the following individuals to the Parramatta Light Rail Stage 2 Advisory Committee:

i. Dr Shima Taheri

ii. Gregory Willis

iii. Saif Islam

iv. David Marr

v. Shant Ohannessian

vi. Daniel Green

vii. VeeLyn Tan

viii. Alisa Huang

ix. Suntharalingham Senthilanantha

(b) That Council thank all unsuccessful applicants who expressed interest in joining the Parramatta Light Rail Stage 2 Advisory Committee.

(c) Further, that Council note the Terms of Reference for the Parramatta Light Rail Stage 2 Advisory Committee (adopted on 23 May 2022) provides the Lord Mayor of the day is the Chairperson of the Committee, and that the Lord Mayor may wish to delegate this role as appropriate.

13.5

SUBJECT Expression of Interest - Selection of Community Members - Riverside Theatres Advisory Committee

REFERENCE F2022/00105 - D08594893

REPORT OF Director - Riverside Theatres

3952

RESOLVED (Esber/Garrard)

(a) That Council appoint the following persons to the Riverside Theatres Advisory Committees for the period of this Council term:

1. Dr Robert Lang

2. John Moore

3. Keiasha Naidoo

4. Cate Cunningham

5. Vyvienne Abla

6. Matthew Lazarus-Hall

7. Marwa Abouzeid

8. Jackie Emery

(b) That Council note those marked as being on an eligibility list for the Riverside Advisory Committee in Paragraph 1 of this report will fill any vacancies that arise in the first six months, as per the Terms of Reference.

(c) Further, that Council extend its appreciation to unsuccessful applicants, thanking them for their interest in supporting the work of Council through membership of the relevant Committee.

13.7

SUBJECT Naming Proposal for Three Unnamed Bushland Reserves along Plympton Road in Carlingford and Beecroft

REFERENCE F2022/00105 - D08615676

REPORT OF Senior Project Officer Place Services

3953

RESOLVED (Esber/Garrard)

(a) That Council endorse the name of ‘Yiribana Reserve’ for the Central Parcel of Bushland Reserve (Lot 134, DP 203054, known informally as Plympton Road Central Bushland Reserve) which runs between Calool and Orchard Roads Beecroft, as illustrated in the Site Map (see Attachment 1).

(b) That, in the event that the NSW Geographic Names Board rejects the name of ‘Yiribana Reserve’ for the Central Parcel of Bushland Reserve, Council endorse the other four identified Dharug names for that reserve in the following order: ‘Yanung Reserve’, ‘Burawa Reserve’, ‘Ngarra Reserve’, and ‘Ngurang Reserve’.

(c) That Council endorse the remaining Dharug names for the Eastern parcel of Bushland Reserve (Lot 133 DP 203054, Lot 10 DP 232552, Lot 78 DP 205869, known informally as Plympton Road East Bushland Reserve) which runs between Midson and Calool Roads, Carlingford/Beecroft, as illustrated in the Site Map (see Attachment 1) in the following order: ‘Yanung Reserve’, ‘Burawa Reserve’, ‘Ngarra Reserve’, and ‘Ngurang Reserve.

(d) That Council commence further research and community consultation for the West Parcel of Bushland Reserve (Lot 2 DP 215840, Lot 6 DP 207548, Lot 43, DP 31392, Lot 5 DP 234158, known informally as Plympton Road West Bushland Reserve) which runs between Orchard Road and Carlingford High School, Beecroft, as illustrated in the Site Map (see Attachment 1).

(e) Further, that the preferred names for the Central and Eastern parcels of Bushland Reserves be referred to the Geographical Names Board (GNB) of NSW for formal assignment and Gazettal under the Geographical Names Act 1996.

13.1

SUBJECT Minutes of the Parramatta Traffic Committee meeting held on 20 July 2022

REFERENCE F2021/00521 - D08386362

REPORT OF Traffic and Transport Manager

3954

RESOLVED (Noack/Green)

(a) That Council note the minutes of the Parramatta Traffic Committee held on 20 July 2022, provided at Attachment 1.

(b) Further, that Council approve the recommendations of the Parramatta Traffic Committee from the meeting held on 20 July 2022 provided at Attachment 1 and in the Council report, noting the following financial implications for each item, and noting an additional recommendation to Item 2207 A2.

I. ITEM 2207 A1 - HILL ROAD AND HOLKER STREET, SYDNEY OLYMPIC PARK AND WENTWORTH POINT – PROPOSED BILLBERGIA BENNELONG BRIDGE RUN ON SUNDAY 9 OCTOBER 2022

The proposed traffic management is to be implemented by the organiser of Billbergia Bennelong Bridge Run at no cost to Council. Therefore, this matter has no direct financial impact upon Council's budget.

II. ITEM 2207 A2 – PROPOSED CAR SHARE PARKING SPACES, WENTWORTH POINT

That this report has been deferred to the next Parramatta Traffic Committee meeting on 21 September 2022.

Further, that consultation be undertaken on the proposal with consultation letters to be sent to the Rosehill Ward Councillors, the Office of Geoff Lee MP for Parramatta, the Office of Lynda Voltz MP for Auburn and the Office of Sally Sitou Federal Member for Reid.

13.2

SUBJECT Minutes of the Traffic Engineering Advisory Group meeting held on 20 July 2022

REFERENCE F2021/00521 - D08386337

REPORT OF Traffic and Transport Manager

3955

RESOLVED (Noack/Green)

(a) That Council note the minutes of the Traffic Engineering Advisory Group meeting held on 20 July 2022, as provided at Attachment 1.

(b) Further, that Council approve the recommendations of the Traffic Engineering Advisory Group meeting held on 20 July 2022 as provided at Attachment 1 and in the Council report, noting the following financial implications of each item.

I. ITEM 2207 B1 - Intersection of Church Street, Albert Street and Pennant Hills Road, North Parramatta – Petition to review and extend the 40km/h school zone at Parramatta North Public School

This report provides an update on a request for Transport for NSW to investigate the extension of the 40km/h school zone at Parramatta North Public School. Therefore, this matter has no financial impact upon Council’s budget.

II. ITEM 2207 B2 - Hill Road, Wentworth Point – Update on the proposed improvements on Hill Road, Wentworth Point

This report provides an update on the proposed traffic improvements and other proposed works on Hill Road and Bennelong Parkway, Wentworth Point and Sydney Olympic Park. The recommendation from TEAG will require staff time to implement using existing resources.

III. ITEM 2207 B3 - PROJECTS RECENTLY COMPLETED, PROJECTS CURRENTLY FUNDED AND PROJECTS LIST FOR CONSIDERATION OF FUTURE FUNDING

There are no financial implications to Council as a result of this report.

IV. ITEM 2207 B4 – ON STREET PARKING IN THE PARRAMATTA CBD

There are no financial implications as a result of this report.

13.6

SUBJECT Planning Proposal for 168-176 Parramatta Road and 89-90 Cowper Street, Granville

REFERENCE F2022/00105 - D08594128

APPLICANT/S Planning Ingenuity

OWNERS JFC Developments Pty Ltd

3956

RESOLVED (Prociv/Siviero)

(a) That Council refuse the Parramatta Planning Proposal at 168-176 Parramatta Road and 89-90 Cowper Street, Granville for the following reasons:

1. The Planning Proposal is inconsistent with the height of development envisaged by the Parramatta Road Corridor Urban Transformation Strategy (PRCUTS), which sets the strategic planning framework for the precinct.

2. The Planning Proposal is premature given that an implementation plan is required to be prepared and adopted by Council, now that the precinct-wide traffic study is complete, to ensure road network upgrades and other infrastructure requirements are agreed, funding sources secured and able to be delivered consistent with the PRCUTS.

(b) That the applicant be advised of Council’s decision.

(c) Further, that Council note that Council officers are developing a project plan for a Council-led rezoning of the Granville precinct in-line with PRCUTS, and Councillors will be updated separately on this work.

DIVISION A division was called, the result being:-

AYES: Councillors Bradley, Darley, Davis, Esber, Garrard, Green, Humphries, Maclean, Noack, Pandey, Prociv, Siviero, Valjak, Wang and Wearne

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

13.8	SUBJECT Future waste services REFERENCE F2022/00105 - D08601963 REPORT OF Acting Group Manager Waste & Cleansing; Sustainability Officer Resource Recovery
	MOTION (Maclean/Darley) (a) That Council approve service option 3 outlined in paragraph 13 of the Council report to be specified in the future waste services tender. Service option 3 is as follows: 1. Weekly collection of general waste in a 80L bin, with the option for households to apply for a 140L bin for general waste for an additional fee. 2. Fortnightly recycling in 240L 3. Weekly collection of FOGO in 240L (b) Further, that Council note Council staff will be commencing the tendering of the domestic and commercial waste services.
	AMENDMENT (Garrard/Siviero) (a) That Council approve service option 1 outlined in paragraph 13 of the Council report to be specified in the future waste services tender. Service option 1 is as follows: 1. Weekly collection of general waste in a 140L bin, with the option for residents to down size to an 80L general waste bin or upsize to a 240L general waste bin for an additional fee; 2. Fortnightly recycling in 240L; 3. Weekly collection of FOGO in 240L. (b) Further, that Council note Council staff will be commencing the tendering of the domestic and commercial waste services. The Amendment moved by Councillor Garrard and seconded by Councillor Siviero was put and declared LOST. During debate on the Amendment, Councillor Bradley raised a Foreshadowed Amendment. After the Amendment was LOST, the Foreshadowed Amendment became the Further Amendment:
	FURTHER AMENDMENT (Bradley) (a) That Council approve service option 3 outlined in paragraph 13 of the Council report to be specified in the future waste services tender. Service option 3 is as follows: 1. Weekly collection of general waste in a 80L bin 2. Fortnightly recycling in 240L 3. Weekly collection of FOGO in 240L (b) That the contract option, by agreement of Council, be provided to revert the 80L bin collection frequency to fortnightly after 5 years. (c) Further, that Council note Council staff will be commencing the tendering of the domestic and commercial waste services. As there was no seconder, the Further Amendment LAPSED. Therefore, debate resumed on the original Motion. The Motion moved by Councillor Maclean and seconded by Councillor Darley was put and declared CARRIED:
3957	RESOLVED (Maclean/Darley) (a) That Council approve service option 3 outlined in paragraph 13 of the Council report to be specified in the future waste services tender. Service option 3 is as follows: 1. Weekly collection of general waste in a 80L bin, with the option for households to apply for a 140L bin for general waste for an additional fee. 2. Fortnightly recycling in 240L 3. Weekly collection of FOGO in 240L (b) Further, that Council note Council staff will be commencing the tendering of the domestic and commercial waste services.
	Note: Questions were taken on notice by Council staff for this item.

14. Notices of Motion

14.1

SUBJECT CBD Footpaths Audit and Pavement Replacement Program

REFERENCE F2022/00105 - D08642696

FROM Deputy Lord Mayor Councillor Sameer Pandey

3958

RESOLVED (Pandey/Green)

(a) That a report be provided to Council, based on Council’s current CBD footpath asset audit for the CBD, on the CBD pavement replacement program, including costs, in consultation with Councillors.

(b) Further, that staff provide a status report in September 2022 outlining the CBD footpaths that have been identified via the existing program for replacement.

Note:

1. Questions were taken on notice by Council staff for this item.

2. Councillor Esber left at 7:44pm and returning at 7:46pm during the debate on the item.

14.2

SUBJECT Name Change at Wentworth Point - Jewel and Sanctuary Buildings

REFERENCE F2022/00105 - D08618672

FROM Councillor Paul Noack

3959

RESOLVED (Noack/Siviero)

(a) That Council commence the NSW Geographic Names Board process, including community consultation, for a proposal to amend the suburb boundary of Wentworth Point to include the addresses of the Jewel and Sanctuary Buildings precinct which is currently located in the suburb of Sydney Olympic Park, as noted in the hatched area on the attached map.

(b) Further, that Council receive a report on the outcome of this process and community consultation to inform a determination for formal referral of the boundary change request to the NSW Geographic Names Board.

Note: Questions were taken on notice by Council staff for this item.

14.3

SUBJECT Long Serving Staff Recognition

REFERENCE F2022/00105 - D08642688

FROM Deputy Lord Mayor Councillor Sameer Pandey

3960

RESOLVED (Pandey/Garrard)

(a) That Council provide an update on recognition programs in place for long serving staff and high performing individuals and teams.

(b) Further, that the update include advice on the opportunity for Council to include in the recognition program an acknowledgement from Councillors as part of the overall approach, including provision for a meet and greet and a certificate of acknowledgement signed by all Councillors.

15. Questions with Notice

15.1

SUBJECT Questions Taken on Notice - 8 August 2022 Council Meeting

REFERENCE F2022/00105 - D08640963

REPORT OF Governance Manager

BACKGROUND

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

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

STAFF RESPONSE

Item 13.10 – Arthur Phillip Commemorative Public Art Project – Charles Street Square

During discussion on the Motion moved by Councillor Pandey, Councillor Wearne asked the following question:

The Oars Foot bridge is never lit, or very rarely lit. Why is this the case?

Executive Director City Assets and Operations Response

It is understood that there are technical issues with the operation of these lights, the staff responsible is on unexpected sick leave and will be back in early September. We will provide a more detailed response at a Council meeting in September.

Item 13.10 – Arthur Phillip Commemorative Public Art Project – Charles Street Square

During discussion on the Motion moved by Councillor Pandey, Lord Mayor Davis asked the following question:

When consultation was undertaken as part of the Masterplan for the Charles Street Wharf, did this include a public art component?

Executive Director City Planning & Design Response

In late 2019, Council endorsed for exhibition the Draft Concept Design for upgrades to the public domain at Charles Street Square. Information presented to the community throughout the public exhibition acknowledged the planned public artwork, stating: A major new public artwork featuring sculpture and projections on to the escarpment across the river, will tell the stories of the Parramatta and its people (Community information brochure, Feb 2020). Views on the potential content for the work (the broad story it should tell) were also canvassed via the engagement program.

The consultation summary report that accompanied the refined design for Council endorsement after exhibition, described the extent of the engagement program which provided information about the draft concept design to over 800,000 people (using letterbox drops, web visits, staffed displays, media, social media, document downloads), resulting in 115 formal submissions. Positive feedback on the project included support for the public art and interpretation opportunities – particularly in relation to Dharug stories, the river and natural environment, and key events over time. 63% of respondents were local residents, 4% were local businesses and 63% of participants wanted the public art and interpretation in the space to represent “the stories of the Dharug people and their connection to the land”; followed by local native plants and animals 58%, key events in Parramatta over time 53% and the dynamic river environment 52%.

In the public exhibition of the Review of Environmental Factors (REF) in September/October 2020, which included the detailed design for the public domain, the setting for a sculpture (proposed at the time), the housing of the artwork projectors and the projected light onto the escarpment was detailed. While the REF recognised content for the artwork itself was to be further developed (REF Community Summary page 01, Sept 2020) information on the ecological and lighting impacts (a technical assessment), and the proposed relevant lighting and biodiversity mitigations were included. These have been incorporated into the technical brief for the projection design. The REF exhibition reached some 160,000 people (using letterbox drops, web visits, social media, document downloads) and resulted in four formal submissions.

To further the development of the site interpretation plan for the project, a requirement of approvals under the Heritage Act for the public domain project, and to explore the incorporation of Dharug content into the artwork, a series of workshops were held with Dharug representatives late 2020 and early 2021 to advise and guide an approach to this content.

As part of ongoing engagement with local stakeholders (residents and business) regular updates are provided with the invitation to contact the project team. The lighting trial held on 9 May 2022, included signage and letterbox drops explaining the trial and the public art with a repeated invitation to contact the project team. No enquiries were received.

Item 13.10 – Arthur Phillip Commemorative Public Art Project – Charles Street Square

During discussion on the Motion moved by Councillor Pandey, Councillor Garrard asked the following question:

In relation to the Charles Street Wharf, what work is occurring down there at the moment? Can a briefing be held on this.

Executive Director Community Services Response

Council is currently doing a major project to upgrade the public domain adjacent to the Ferry Wharf at Charles Street Square. It follows the completion of the new Escarpment Boardwalk on the opposite side of the river.

The project is a key part of Council’s plans to revitalise the Parramatta River foreshore and is valued at approximately $12m. Work began in early 2022 and is programmed to finish in March 2023.

The upgraded Square will feature new ramps and stairs, a wide riverfront walk, paved terraces, an amphitheatre and new public shelter, set amongst extensive trees and gardens.

The Charles Street Square project is also being co-funded by Council and the NSW Government, which is contributing $4.65m to the $12.1m upgrade.

A briefing can be arranged for interested Councillors

Item 13.10 – Arthur Phillip Commemorative Public Art Project – Charles Street Square

During discussion on the Motion moved by Councillor Pandey, Councillor Wearne asked the following question:

How many residences would this Artwork be visible to?

i.e. how many residential units would be able to see this piece of artwork, and how many could it impact?

Executive Director Community Services Response

On the 9th of May 2022, projection tests were undertaken at Charles St Square to determine if there is any visual impact of the proposed Artwork on neighbouring areas. The scope of the test included the following:

Projection coverage area
Ambient light levels in the surrounding areas
Ability to view projection from various locations
Impact of the projection on surrounding community
Suitability of the projection equipment suggested in the options report
Location of projection equipment

The projection tests concluded that the projection will not impact neighbouring areas as it is contained to the rock wall of the embankment. The projector is located on the opposite side of the ferry wharf to the embankment, projecting across the water to the embankment. This projection throw is direct and mapped to the embankment. The projection does not spill outside of or beyond the embankment. This was confirmed via the projection test. Further, the optimal viewing location of the projection work is the ferry wharf and surrounding Charles St Wharf areas. Viewing from any other location is compromised by distance and angle of viewing, including height.

A staff review has identified three main residential apartment premises within the neighbouring area. This includes apartment premises on the corner of Charles and George Streets, Stewart Street and Queens Avenue. Further, there are also four main commercial premises on Charles and Phillip Streets in the neighbouring area. Light spill will not impact any of these premises, as they are outside of the projection area. Further, due to the distance from the projection and angle of viewing, these premises will have significantly reduced visibility of the projection work. One commercial premise at the ferry wharf will have a less-compromised view of the projection work, providing a point of interest for visitors, whilst not impacting their activity.

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

16. CLOSED SESSION

3961

RESOLVED (Esber/Maclean)

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:-

16.1 Legal Status Report as at 31 July 2022. (D08604807) - This report is confidential in accordance with section 10A (2) (e) of the Local Government Act 1993 as the report contains information that would, if disclosed, prejudice the maintenance of law.

16.2 Approval of Supplier for the receipt, processing and disposal of domestic and commercial garbage. (D08616131) - 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.

16.1

SUBJECT Legal Status Report as at 31 July 2022

REFERENCE F2022/00105 - D08604807

REPORT OF Group Manager Legal Services

3962

RESOLVED (Esber/Maclean)

That Council note the Legal Status Report as at 31 July 2022.

16.2

SUBJECT Approval of Supplier for the receipt, processing and disposal of domestic and commercial garbage

REFERENCE F2022/00105 - D08616131

REPORT OF Acting Group Manager Waste & Cleansing

3963

RESOLVED (Maclean/Bradley)

(a) That Council approve an exception to tender pursuant to section 55(3)(i) of the Local Government Act 1993.

(b) Further, that the Chief Executive Officer be delegated authority to sign off any relevant documents associated with extending the Agreement.

Procedural Motion

3964

RESOLVED (Esber/Maclean)

That the meeting resume into Open Session.

17. REPORTS OF RESOLUTIONS PASSED IN CLOSED SESSION

The Chief Executive Officer read out the resolutions for Items 16.1 and 16.2.

18. CONCLUSION OF MEETING

The meeting terminated at 8:11 pm.

THIS PAGE AND THE PRECEDING 14 PAGES ARE THE MINUTES OF THE ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON MONDAY, 22 AUGUST 2022 AND CONFIRMED ON MONDAY, 12 SEPTEMBER 2022.

Chairperson

Council 12 September 2022 Item 12.1

REPORTS TO COUNCIL - FOR NOTATION

ITEM NUMBER 12.1

SUBJECT Investment Report for July 2022

REFERENCE F2022/00105 - D08638730

REPORT OF Tax and Treasury Accountant

CSP THEME: Fair

workshop/briefing date: Nil

PURPOSE:

The purpose of this report is to inform Council of the investment portfolio performance and compliance for the month of July 2022.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council receive and note the Investment Report for July 2022.

BACKGROUND

1. In accordance with clause 212 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2021 (the Regulation), a report setting out details of all money invested must be presented to Council monthly.

2. The report must include a certificate as to whether the investments have been made in accordance with the Local Government Act 1993 (the Act), the Local Government (General) Regulation 2021 and Council’s Investment Policy.

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

Investment Portfolio Summary

3. The investment portfolio closing balance as at 31 July 2022 was $517.7m. The average portfolio holdings held throughout the month was $531m.

4. The majority of Council’s investment portfolio is in term deposits (76%). The portfolio also includes liquid floating rate notes (FRNs), cash, and the TCorp Long Term Growth Fund (LTGF).

5. Approximately 8% of the portfolio comprises less conservative long-term investments with exposure to credit markets and domestic and international shares. The investment portfolio is well diversified and weighted towards higher-rated institutions.

6. The table below lists the diversified range of investments held by Council as at 31 July 2022.

Table 1: Summary of investment portfolio

*COPC Internal Benchmark returns - based on Council’s individual benchmarks across the various asset classes it invests within its own portfolio. The following individual benchmarks are the measurements, used for each asset class.

Cash: RBA Cash Rate
Term Deposits: based on Council’s weighted average duration using multiple ADIs average monthly rate
FRNs: AusBond Credit FRN Index
CFS Global Credit Income Fund: AusBond Credit Index
NSW TCorpIM Long-Term Growth Fund: NSW TCorpIM Internal Benchmark

7. Investment performance for the month. The investment portfolio reported a monthly- actual return of 0.32% for July 2022 (or 3.82% on an annualised basis). Outperforming the monthly Ausbond bank bill index by 20 basis points (or 237 basis points annualised).

The monthly return was highlighted, by the strong performance of councils TCorp and CFS managed funds, which recorded actual monthly returns of 3.67% and 1.43% respectively.

The performance is also anchored by a handful of longer-dated 2018 Term deposits with fixed rates ranging from 3.25% to 3.70%.

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 Revenue: As at the end of July 2022, the cumulative actual interest/income earned, was approximately $1.285m above the budget for the month, due primarily to the outperformance of Councils Managed Funds.

Table 3: Cumulative Interest table

Note: Council values all managed funds, Floating rate notes, and bonds on a mark to market basis each month. Any gain or loss in valuation is capitalied to interest income based on actual monthly statements.

Table 4: Managed Fund Valuations Capitalised

During July, capital growth valuation on Managed funds equated to approximately $1.197m. This has been capitalised and is included in the cumulative interest shown in table 3.

The TCorp holding represents approximately 5½% of Council’s total investment portfolio and returned +3.67% (actual) during July. The TCorp’s valuation rose by over $1m during July, but advisors remain cautious, given the huge volatility the fund has suffered during this year.

The CFS Global Credit fund accounts for around 2½% of Council’s total investment portfolio. The Fund returned +1.43% (actual) in July, as the market valuation of the funds assets in global credit securities rose during the month.

10. Maturities and Transactions: Overall, the portfolio remains well diversified from a maturity perspective, with around 20% of assets directed to medium term (2-5 years).

Where liquidity permits, Imperium recommend new surplus funds be directed to 1-2 year fixed term deposits, given this is where the most attractive value can be achieved.

The following Investment transactions occurred during July 22:

Table 5: Investment Maturities

Table 6: New Investment Purchases

Any funds remaining after maturities and reinvestment, are used to replenish cash at call, and to fund weekly operational expenditure.

Table 7: Maturity profile

11. The portfolio complies with Council’s Investment Policy limits, with ample investment opportunity still available within all institutional rating, duration, and counterparty limits.

Graph 1: Investment Policy rating capacity

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

12. 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

No Exceptions

As at the end of July 2022, Council did not have an overweight position to any single ADI. Overall, the portfolio is well diversified across the entire credit spectrum, including some exposure to unrated ADIs.

A full list of counterparty holdings is available on page 9 of the Imperium comprehensive report (attachment 2)

13. Current Yields - Longer‑term bond yields have risen significantly in 2022 as central banks reverse their policy measures (i.e. remove quantitative easing), whilst undertaking aggressive interest rate hikes to try and control inflation.

Importantly, when interpreting the stance of monetary policy, in addition to the cash rate, it is important to consider how broader financial conditions are influencing the economic outlook, with markets now factoring the possibility of a global recession as early as the second half of 2023.

The RBA increased the official cash rate by another 50bp to 1.85% in early August 2022 and is looking to move towards their neutral setting of 2½% by calendar year-end.

Council’s term deposit book is approximately 76% of the portfolio, and was yielding 1.95% p.a. at month-end, with a weighted average duration of around 1.29 years. The current average yield remains very attractive given the dramatic falls in the official cash rate. With an upward sloping deposit curve, investors are rewarded if they can continue to maintain a longer average duration.

Those investors that can maintain a weighted average duration of +12-18 months are likely to yield, on average, up to 1% p.a. higher than those investors who maintain a weighted average duration of less than 6-9 months.

With markets factoring in additional rate hikes over coming months, this has seen a significant shift in longer‑term deposit rates, particularly over the past 6 months. The long-end of the deposit curve (+12 months) actually fell over July (compared to June) as the market starts to factor in a global recession:

Graph 2: Term Deposit Yields

Councils fixed bonds are yielding between 0.90-1.4 percentage p.a. The weighted average yield on these investments was 1.07% p.a., with a current weighted average duration of 2.97 years

14. Council engages 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.

15. Detailed investment performance commentary in relation to each investment product /type and counterparty, can be found in the Imperium comprehensive report attached.

Certification of Investments

16. I hereby certify the investments for the month of July 2022 have been made in compliance with the Act, the Regulations, Council’s Investment Policy, and the adviser’s recommendations.

John Angilley, Chief Financial and Information Officer

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

31 July 2022

Imperium Markets

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

Refer Imperium Comprehensive Report

All Investments are within Policy limits and reconcile to the General Ledger as at 31 July 2022

John Angilley

CFIO

Bruce MacFarlane

Treasury & Tax Accountant

Councillor Consultation

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

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

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

19. There are no legal implications resulting from this report.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

20. Actual investment revenue (interest and capitalised growth) exceeded the July monthly budget by approximately $1.285m on the back of strong performance of Councils growth and credit managed funds. Given the longer duration of these funds, monthly performance can be volatile. Advisors therefore have recommended Council remain cautious in interest forecasts. This will be revised at the September quarterly review.

Bruce MacFarlane

Tax and Treasury Accountant

John Angilley

Chief Financial and Information Officer

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

Attachments:

1 ⇩	Investment and Loans Performance Graph July 2022.pdf	1 Page
2 ⇩	Imperium Comprehensive Investment Report - July 22 .pdf	33 Pages
3 ⇩	List of Council Investments by maturity July 2022.pdf	7 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 12 September 2022 Item 13.1

REPORTS TO COUNCIL - FOR COUNCIL DECISION

ITEM NUMBER 13.1

SUBJECT 2022 Local Government NSW Annual Conference

REFERENCE F2022/00105 - D08400890

REPORT OF Executive Officer

CSP THEME: FAIR

workshop/briefing date: Nil

PURPOSE:

The purpose of this report is to seek Council endorsement of proposed motions and to appoint up to 10 Councillors as voting delegates for the 2022 Local Government NSW (LGNSW) Annual Conference. This report also seeks to update the Council Meeting Schedule to accommodate the Conference dates.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council nominate up to ten (10) Councillors, including the Lord Mayor, to be Council’s Voting Delegates for Motions at the 2022 Local Government NSW Annual Conference.

(b) That Council submit the following Motions for LGNSW to consider at its Annual Conference, further detailed at Attachment 1:

1 Consistent benchmarks, targets and reporting for environmental outcomes across all NSW Councils

2 Increase funding for Arts and Culture in Western Sydney

3 Advocating for changes to the State Environmental Planning Policy (Exempt and Complying Development Codes) 2008 to improve design outcomes for dual occupancy development

(c) Further, that the Council Meeting scheduled for Monday, 24 October 2022, be rescheduled to Monday, 31 October 2022 to rectify the conflict with the LGNSW Annual Conference.

BACKGROUND

1. The Local Government NSW (LGNSW) Annual Conference will be held from 23 to 25 October 2022 at the Crowne Plaza, Hunter Valley.

2. The Conference is an annual policy-making event for NSW general purpose councils and associate members where local councillors share ideas, debate motions and help determine the local government sector’s policy directions for the coming year.

3. Council-submitted motions will be debated and resolved to set LGNSW’s advocacy priorities for the year ahead, while a tradeshow, workshops and training sessions are available to support delegates in their efforts to effectively represent their communities.

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

4. Member councils are invited to submit motions for possible debate at the Conference, with the LGNSW Board resolving that submitted motions will be included in the Business Paper for the Conference where they:

a. Are consistent with the objects of the Association

b. Relate to or concern local government as a sector in NSW and/or across Australia

c. Seek to establish or change policy positions of LGNSW and/or improve governance of the Association (noting that the LGNSW Board is responsible for decisions around resourcing any campaigns or operational activities, and any necessary resource allocations will be subject to the LGNSW budgetary process)

d. Have a lawful purpose (a motion does not have a lawful purpose if its implementation would require or encourage non-compliance with prevailing laws)

e. Are clearly worded and unambiguous in nature, and

f. Do not express preference for one or several members over one or several other members.

5. Each motion submitted by Council to LGNSW for consideration at the Conference must include evidence of Council support for the motion. Such evidence may include an attachment note or extract from the minutes of the Council meeting, or a letter signed by both the Lord Mayor and Chief Executive Officer.

6. The following motions are proposed for Council’s consideration and submission to LGNSW, further detailed at Attachment 1:

a. Consistent benchmarks, targets and reporting for environmental outcomes across all NSW Councils

b. Increase funding for Arts and Culture in Western Sydney

c. Advocating for changes to the State Environmental Planning Policy (Exempt and Complying Development Codes) 2008 to improve design outcomes for dual occupancy development

7. In line with LGNSW rules, the latest date motions will be accepted for inclusion in the Conference Business Paper is midnight, Sunday 25 September 2022. Councils may still submit late motions via email up to 24 hours before the conference.

8. Business Papers will be issued by LGNSW the week commencing 10 October 2022.

9. Separate from Conference registration, member councils must advise LGNSW of the name(s) of their nominated voting delegates for conference by 5pm (AEDT) on 10 October 2022.

10. The formula for calculating Member Councils’ voting entitlements is prescribed at Rule 23 of the LGNSW (federal) rules. In accordance with these rules, City of Parramatta Council is entitled to ten (10) voting delegates for Conference Business.

11. All voting delegates for Conference Business must be registered to attend the Conference and be registered as a nominated voting delegate.

12. This report calls for Councillors to confirm Council’s voting delegates, whose names will then be provided by Lord Mayor and Councillor Support to LGNSW.

13. At the 13 September 2021 Council meeting, as part of the annual setting of Council meeting dates and locations for the next calendar year, Council resolved for a Council meeting to be held on 24 October 2022. This date coincides with the LGNSW Annual Conference. Therefore, to enable Councillors to attend the conference, it is suggested this meeting be rescheduled to be held a week later on Monday, 31 October 2022.

CONSULTATION & TIMING

Stakeholder Consultation

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

Date	Stakeholder	Stakeholder Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
2/5/2022	Cr Darriea Turley AM, LGNSW President	Official notification to Councils of LGNSW Annual Conference 2022	Directly circulated to all Councillors by LGNSW and included in the Councillor Weekly Newsletter	Lord Mayor and Councillor Support Unit
July 2022	Governance Team	Consultation regarding Council meeting scheduled for Conference dates	Inclusion of re-scheduling Council Meeting in motions and delegates report	Lord Mayor and Councillor Support
9/8/2022	Local Government NSW	Local Government NSW e-mail newsletter regarding Annual Conference Registrations and Motions	Directly circulated to all Councillors by LGNSW	Lord Mayor and Councillor Support Unit
11/8/2022	Cr Darriea Turley AM, LGNSW President & Scott Phillips, Chief Executive	Meeting to discuss LGNSW initiatives or advocacy programs that may interest CoP	Investigation of motions for LGNSW conference relating to Arts & Culture funding in Western Sydney, and Environmental outcomes reporting across all councils	Lord Mayor and Councillor Support
23/8/2022	Executive Team	Discussion of LGNSW Annual Conference including Councillor and ET attendance, motions and report	Preparation of additional motion on Complying Codes SEPP to improve design outcomes for dual occupancies	Lord Mayor and Councillor Support

Councillor Consultation

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

Date	Councillor	Councillor Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
Ongoing (May to August)	All Councillors	LGNSW Annual Conference included in Conferences and Professional Development opportunities listing on Councillor Portal and Councillor Weekly Newsletter Conferences and Upcoming Events listing.	NA	Lord Mayor and Councillor Support
7/7/2022	All Councillors	Placeholder calendar invitations to all Councillors for LGNSW Annual Conference Dates	Clarified to Councillors that clashing Council meeting will be re-scheduled	Lord Mayor and Councillor Support
12/7/2022	All Councillors	Call out to interested Councillors regarding Annual Conference attendance including provision of program and optional activities	Action responses and registrations as received.	Lord Mayor and Councillor Support
29/7/2022	All Councillors	Conference reminder sent to all Councillors	Action responses and registrations as received.	Lord Mayor and Councillor Support

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

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

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

17. If Council resolves to approve this report in accordance with the proposed resolution, there are no unbudgeted financial implications for Council’s budget.

18. Costs associated with the registration and participation of Councillors are provided for within the adopted Council Support 2022/23 operating budget, in line with the provisions of the Councillors’ Expenses and Facilities Policy.

19. There are no unbudgeted costs associated with the proposed rescheduling of the 24 October Council Meeting to 31 October 2022.

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

	FY 22/23	FY 23/24	FY 24/25	FY 25/26
Revenue
Internal Revenue
External Revenue
Total Revenue	Nil

Funding Source

Operating Result
External Costs
Internal Costs
Depreciation
Other
Total Operating Result	Nil

Funding Source

CAPEX
CAPEX
External
Internal
Other
Total CAPEX	Nil

Bronwyn Pullen

Executive Officer

Justin Mulder

Chief of Staff

John Angilley

Chief Financial and Information Officer

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

Attachments:

1 ⇩

Proposed Motions for 2022 LGNSW Annual Conference

3 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 12 September 2022 Item 13.2

REPORTS TO COUNCIL - FOR COUNCIL DECISION

ITEM NUMBER 13.2

SUBJECT Draft Community Engagement Strategy for Public Exhibition

REFERENCE F2022/00105 - D08555693

REPORT OF Community Engagement Senior Advisor

CSP THEME: ACCESSIBLE

workshop/briefing date: Monday 15 August 2022

PURPOSE:

To seek Council endorsement for the revised Draft Community Engagement Strategy to be placed on public exhibition.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council accept this report and its enclosures, including the Draft Community Engagement Strategy.

(b) That the revised Draft Community Engagement Strategy, as at Attachment 1, be placed on public exhibition for a period of 28 days from 14 September 2022 to 13 October 2022.

(c) That the Chief Executive Officer be authorised to make any further minor technical revisions and design changes prior to the draft Community Engagement Strategy being placed on public exhibition, if required.

(d) Further, that the Draft Community Engagement Strategy be referred back to Council for consideration for adoption following the public exhibition period.

BACKGROUND

1. In accordance with the Integrated Planning and Reporting (IP&R) framework and section 402A of the Local Government Act 1993, a Council must establish and implement a strategy for engagement with the local community (called its Community Engagement Strategy) when developing its plans, policies and programs, and for the purpose of determining its activities (other than routine administrative matters).

2. The City of Parramatta Community Engagement Strategy outlines Council’s approach to engaging with the community and stakeholders; it meets Council’s statutory obligations and provides transparency and clarity for the community and all stakeholders so that they can understand their role in the decision-making process.

3. The current Community Engagement Strategy underwent significant community and stakeholder consultation in mid-to-late 2019, with adoption of the Community Engagement Strategy by Council at its meeting on 9 December 2019.

4. On Monday 7 December 2020, Council also adopted the Consolidated Development Application Notification Requirements as an appendix to the Community Engagement Strategy.

5. Generally, the Community Engagement Strategy must be reviewed within three (3) months of a Local Government Elections. However, the Office of Local Government (OLG) has given Councils until the end of 2022 to complete this process, following the postponement of the Local Government Elections to 4 December 2021 due to COVID. Consequently, Council must adopt and publish a revised Community Engagement Strategy by 4 December 2022.

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

6. In July 2022, Council Officers commenced Stage One (1) consultation to support a review of the Community Engagement Strategy. Internal and external consultation formally ran for a period of three (3) weeks from 4 July 2022 to 25 July 2022.

7. Council officers have finalised a Draft Community Engagement Strategy, as at Attachment 1, which responds to the internal and external feedback.

8. The updated draft Community Engagement Strategy more clearly outlines how and when the community can expect to be engaged across different projects and provides greater clarity on the responsibilities of various stakeholder groups. Action items have also been updated and are now split into ‘ongoing’ and ‘short to medium-term’ actions for greater clarity. Prominent sections include:

a. What is community engagement?

b. Our approach to engagement

c. Responsibilities

d. Who do we engage with?

e. What engagement looks like at the City of Parramatta

f. When and how we engage

g. Implementation plan

h. Consolidated Notification Requirements

9. If the draft Community Engagement Strategy is approved for public exhibition, information will be made available at Council’s Customer Service Centre, on Council’s website, on the engagement portal (Participate Parramatta), and across Council’s network of libraries. The public exhibition will be promoted to the Participate Parramatta Community, via a local newspaper, and through various channels, such as social media and newsletters.

10. The following engagement activities will also be delivered:

a. Online survey hosted on Participate Parramatta

b. Hard copy surveys at the Customer Service Centre and all Council libraries

c. Pop-ups at the September/October family fun day/movie night series:

- Belmore Park, North Parramatta (Parramatta Ward) on Thursday 29 September 2022

- Boronia Park, Epping (Epping Ward) on Friday 30 September 2022

- Sturt Park, Telopea (Dundas Ward) on Saturday 1 October 2022

- Silverwater Park, Silverwater (Rosehill Ward) on Sunday 2 October 2022

- Max Ruddock Reserve, Winston Hills (North Rocks Ward) on Friday 7 October 2022

d. Mini workshops with the:

- Access Advisory Committee

- First Nations Advisory Committee

11. After the conclusion of the public exhibition stage, a Key Findings and Engagement Evaluation Report will be completed to capture any further feedback. If required, changes to the draft Community Engagement Strategy will also be made at this point.

12. To ensure the 4 December 2022 deadline for finalization and implementation of the draft Community Engagement Strategy is met, the following key milestones will be achieved:

a. Report to Council seeking endorsement to go on public exhibition – 12 September 2022

b. Public exhibition to commence for 28 days – 14 September 2022

c. Public exhibition closes – 13 October 2022

d. Report to Council with exhibition feedback and seeking approval of final Community Engagement Strategy – 28 November 2022

e. Final published – 2 December 2022

CONSULTATION & TIMING

13. A Key Findings and Engagement Evaluation Report has been finalised following Stage One (1) consultation on Council’s Community Engagement Strategy. This document, which can be found at Attachment 2, provides an overview of the engagement activities and analysis of the internal and external feedback.

Stakeholder Consultation

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

Date	Stakeholder	Stakeholder Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
Monday 4 – Monday 25 July 2022	Online survey with broader community including residents, visitors, business owners etc. (137 responses)	Feedback indicated: - Most people were aware about how they can have their say. - Satisfaction with Council’s approach to community engagement is generally high. - Improvements in the way we respond to feedback and greater information sharing will lead to enhanced credibility.	Feedback recorded and captured within Key Findings and Engagement Evaluation Report. Changes made to the draft Community Engagement Strategy as appropriate.	Research and Engagement
Monday 4 – Monday 25 July 2022	Feedback boxes for all community members at: - Parramatta Library - Dundas Library - Carlingford Library - Ermington Library - Epping Library - Constitution Hill Library - Wentworth Point Library - Customer Service Centre (9 responses)	Comments received in relation to need for Council to continue using traditional methods of promotion, including newspapers and post.	Feedback recorded and captured within Key Findings and Engagement Evaluation Report. Changes made to the draft Community Engagement Strategy as appropriate.	Research and Engagement
Sunday 10 July 2022	Open discussions with First Nations community members at NAIDOC Day (Parramatta Park)	Comments received in relation to putting greater trust in Indigenous leadership / guidance,and providing training in community leadership.	Feedback recorded and captured within Key Findings and Engagement Evaluation Report. Changes made to the draft Community Engagement Strategy as appropriate.	Research and Engagement
Wednesday 13 July 2022	Pop-up for all community members at Parramatta Farmers Market, Centenary Square	Comments received in relation to: - The good / great job Council is doing in the engagement space. - Needing more opportunities to provide feedback on contentious matters.	Feedback recorded and captured within Key Findings and Engagement Evaluation Report. Changes made to the draft Community Engagement Strategy as appropriate.	Research and Engagement
Thursday 14 July 2022	Pop-up for all community members at Huddle Family Fun Day, Karabi Community Centre, Constitution Hill	Comments received in relation to: - The good / great job Council is doing in the engagement space. - Needing more opportunities to provide feedback on contentious matters.	Feedback recorded and captured within Key Findings and Engagement Evaluation Report. Changes made to the draft Community Engagement Strategy as appropriate.	Research and Engagement
Tuesday 26 July 2022	Intercept surveying targeting youth and Western Sydney University students in Parramatta Square. (19 responses)	Feedback indicated that Council could be doing more to engage with youth and that young people do want to get involved and have their say.	Feedback recorded and captured within Key Findings and Engagement Evaluation Report. Changes made to the draft Community Engagement Strategy as appropriate.	Research and Engagement
Monday 1 August 2022	In-school workshop with primary students from North Rocks Public School.	Feedback indicated that Council could be doing more to engage with youth and that young people do want to get involved and have their say.	Feedback recorded and captured within Key Findings and Engagement Evaluation Report. Changes made to the draft Community Engagement Strategy as appropriate.	Research and Engagement
Tuesday 5 July – Wednesday 27 July 2022	Meetings / correspondence with internal project teams that regularly engage with the community, including: - Open Space - Governance - Strategic Land Use Planning - Major Projects and Precincts - Infrastructure Planning and Design - Rates - Place Services - Development and Traffic Services - City Design - City Strategy	Feedback received in relation to minor process and procedure improvements. Generally positive comments and an overall high level of satisfaction with community engagement.	Feedback recorded and captured. Changes made to the draft Community Engagement Strategy as appropriate.	Research and Engagement
Tuesday 19 July 2022	Workshop with Council’s Community Capacity Building team	Feedback on different ways that Community Capacity Building can contribute to improved engagement with various communities throughout the Parramatta LGA.	Feedback recorded and captured. Changes made to the draft Community Engagement Strategy as appropriate.	Research and Engagement

Councillor Consultation

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

Date	Councillor	Councillor Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
17 June 2022 (Councillor Briefing Note for Information)	All Councillors	Sought opportunities to speak with the Research and Engagement team prior to or near the start of stage one consultation.	Organised additional opportunities for Councillors to communicate with staff.	Research and Engagement
4 July 2022 (Online meeting)	Cr Darley	Spoke to: - How is Councillors’ feedback treated? - How Council treats feedback received over social media? - Greater clarity being required on how community can engage with Council. - The need for naming projects to be referenced. - A desire for less CBD centric engagement. - Improvements being needed in the development application process.	Feedback recorded and captured. Changes made to the draft Community Engagement Strategy as appropriate.	Research and Engagement
6 July 2022 (Online / face-to-face meeting)	Cr Davis, Cr Prociv, Cr Wearne, Cr Bradley	Requested additional consultation channels to be included. Also spoke to: - Need for more tailored approaches with NESB communities. - Greater clarity and consistency required on development applications.	Feedback recorded and captured. Additional consultation channels included, and changes made to the draft Community Engagement Strategy as appropriate.	Research and Engagement
15 August 2022 (Councillor Workshop)	Cr Bradley, Cr Esber, Cr Green, Cr Humphries, Cr Maclean, Cr Prociv, Cr Siviero, Cr Valjak, Cr Wang, Cr Wearne	Raised several points of discussion and questions, many of which centred around development related consultations. Overall positive comments provided on draft Strategy.	Feedback and questions reported and captured. Questions on notice provided to relevant staff for addressing.	Research and Engagement

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

16. If the timeline listed at paragraph 12 of this report is not followed, it is likely Council will miss the Office of Local Government’s 4 December 2022 deadline for adoption of the revised Community Engagement Strategy.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

17. If Council resolves to approve this report in accordance with the proposed resolution, there are no unbudgeted financial implications for Council’s budget.

18. The costs associated with public exhibition and consultation on the Draft Community Engagement Strategy will be covered by existing resources and budget.

19. An annual budget of $52,522 has been allocated from the ‘Engagement Critical Projects’ budget to support implementation of the actions outlined in the draft Community Engagement Strategy. It should be noted that all Council project teams are responsible for supplying their own budget to cover the cost of any engagement work completed on their respective projects.

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

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

	FY 22/23	FY 23/24	FY 24/25	FY 25/26
Revenue
Internal Revenue
External Revenue
Total Revenue	NIL	NIL	NIL	NIL

Funding Source	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A

Operating Result
External Costs
Internal Costs
Depreciation
Other
Total Operating Result	NIL	NIL	NIL	NIL

Funding Source	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A

CAPEX
CAPEX
External
Internal
Other
Total CAPEX	NIL	NIL	NIL	NIL

Mark Chircop

Community Engagement Senior Advisor

Anna Pijaca

Research & Engagement Manager

Carly Rogowski

Executive Director, City Engagement & Experience

Ian Woodward

Group Manager Legal Services

John Angilley

Chief Financial and Information Officer

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

Attachments:

1 ⇩	City of Parramatta Draft Community Engagement Strategy (Version for public exhibition - September 2022)	68 Pages
2 ⇩	Key Findings and Engagement Evaluation Report – Stage One Consultation on Draft Community Engagement Strategy	31 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 12 September 2022 Item 13.3

REPORTS TO COUNCIL - FOR COUNCIL DECISION

ITEM NUMBER 13.3

SUBJECT NSW E-Scooter Shared Scheme Trial

REFERENCE F2022/00105 - D08628594

REPORT OF Transport Planning Manager

CSP THEME: ACCESSIBLE

workshop/briefing date: 17 August 2022

PURPOSE:

The purpose of this report is for Council to consider participation in the NSW E-scooter shared scheme trial.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council note the NSW Minister for Active Travel announced a planned e-scooter trial in May 2022, and Transport for NSW has invited interested councils to submit a Request to Participate by 30 September 2022.

(b) That Council initiate its participation in the trial by:

1 Selecting and negotiating an agreement with a preferred provider and preparing the Request to Participate submission to Transport for NSW consistent with the parameters identified in this report, including:

i. An initial trial location along the Parramatta Valley Cycleway

ii. Criteria for Council to consider expansion of the trial location to the Greater Parramatta CBD area following three months of operation along the Parramatta Valley Cycleway.

2 Subject to completion of a Safety Audit for the initial trial location and approval by Transport for NSW, the e-scooter trial begin in the initial trial location.

(c) That the CEO engage with the Sydney Olympic Park Authority (SOPA) to consider any trial in Sydney Olympic Park to serve nearby precincts including Wentworth Point, Newington, and Carter Street, and, should SOPA pursue a trial, the CEO be delegated authority to enter into suitable arrangements for inclusion of these areas in any SOPA trial.

(d) Further, that the decision for expansion of the initial trial along the Parramatta Valley Cycleway to the Greater Parramatta CBD area be reported and determined by Council after three months of operation along the Parramatta Valley Cycleway.

BACKGROUND

1. At present, the use of electric scooters (e-scooters) is illegal on roads and paths in NSW unless participating in the recently announced trials of shared scheme e-scooters in the Western Sydney Parklands and the Australian Botanic Garden Mount Annan.

2. E-scooters are part of the emerging ‘micromobility’ trend, wherein small, lightweight vehicles provide new transport options for travellers. Micromobility devices are usually powered by small electric motors and often utilise emerging technologies like mobile phone integration and GPS-based vehicle guidance. Micromobility is generally a low-cost, environmentally positive way for people to get around urban areas with less reliance on driving.

3. Since approximately 2019, advances in battery technology and public interest in micromobility solutions has led to the rapid growth of both e-scooter sales and the opening of shared e-scooter schemes. Currently, apart from NSW, all Australian states and territories have either legalised all use of e-scooters or are allowing use via public trial schemes.

4. On 28 April 2022, the NSW Minister for Active Transport announced a trial of shared e-scooters in NSW and invited councils to express interest in the trial.

5. Council considered the invitation to participate in the trial at its meeting of 9 May 2022 and resolved to express interest in participating:

(a) That Council note that the NSW State Government has announced a planned trial of shared electric scooters and has invited councils to express interest in participating in a trial.

(b) That Council note that an expression of interest in the trial only commits Council consider its participation in the trial.

(c) Further, that Council writes to the Deputy Secretary, Cities and Active Transport at Transport for NSW expressing its interest in the trial and nominate Jennifer Concato, Executive Director City Planning & Design and/or their delegate as Council’s representatives to attend a briefing offered on 13 May 2022.

6. In July 2022, Transport for NSW published information and guidelines for the e-scooter trial online (https://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/projects/current-projects/nsw-e-scooter-shared-scheme-trial), key documents NSW E-scooter Shared Scheme Trial - Proposed Trial Parameters Attachment 1 and TfNSW Guide for councils and providers interested in participating in the NSW E-scooter Shared Scheme Trial Attachment 2 are appended to this report.

7. The key features of the State of NSW trial include:

a. The trial is for shared-scheme e-scooters only. These are privately owned, publicly available e-scooters which are left in the public domain and can be unlocked and used by registered users with a mobile phone app. Use of privately purchased e-scooters will continue to be illegal during the trial.

b. Participation in the trial is initiated by local council(s) working with nominated provider(s).

c. Each proposed trial location must undergo a safety assessment including safety audits of all roads and paths.

d. Transport for NSW will declare trial areas as Electric Scooter Use areas under the NSW Road Rules to facilitate the trial.

8. Councils who wish to participate are required to make Request to Participate submissions by 30 September 2022.

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

9. Transport Planning Council officers have consulted with internal and limited external stakeholders, Transport for NSW officers and representatives of e-scooter providers. Internal consultation has been conducted with officers of Traffic & Transport, Marketing & Brand, City Strategy, Regulatory Services, Procurement, Risk and Audit, and Legal Services. External consultation has been undertaken with neighbouring councils and Sydney Olympic Park Authority (SOPA), to identify any synergies in neighbouring areas.

10. E-Scooters have the following benefits:

a. Increased mobility and access for residents, workers and visitors. E-scooters are effective for short trips of 1 – 3 km as they can help provide ‘last mile’ connectivity between public transport, homes and jobs. Accordingly, they are often popular with tourists and visitors.

b. Improved environmental outcomes owing to e-scooters, as they are electrically powered and having fewer emissions than internal combustion engines.

c. They support active travel as they have similar infrastructure requirements to bicycles and shifting trips away from cars benefits both walkers and cyclists.

d. Offer a smart mobility solution, as e-scooters integrate with users’ digital lifestyles, provide opportunities to improve service through advanced mapping and vehicle controls, and provide data sharing for understanding current travel behaviours and planning future infrastructure.

11. However, the following risks exist, noting potential mitigations have been identified:

a. Safety is a key concern, for e-scooter riders as well as for all other path and road users, especially vulnerable users such as pedestrians and people with disabilities. E-scooters are a new form of urban transport, and regulation, vehicle design, rider skills and road user familiarity with the devices are continuing to grow. The trial feature rules, vehicle technology, and programs to help make e-scooters a safer form of urban transport:

· Under trial rules set by Transport for NSW, e-scooters will not be permitted to operate on footpaths. They may only operate on roads with 50 km/h or lower speed limits, on shared paths and bike lanes / paths. Speeds are limited to 20km/h on roads and 10km/h on shared paths. All riders are required to wear approved bicycle helmets. E-scooter providers offer additional safety technology, such as GPS mapping to enforce exclusion zones and speed limits, automated checking of helmet usage and safety programs such as learn to ride and on-board messaging.

· Regarding night operation, Transport for NSW requires front and rear lights and does not permit operation between 12 midnight and 5 am. Some providers require reaction time tests to unlock scooters in areas where drink-driving is a concern. Others have the ability to monitor erratic behaviour and encourage responsible riding.

b. Tripping hazard, impeded access and visual clutter caused by improper parking of scooters on footpaths and verges:

· E-scooter providers can offer GPS-controlled ‘no parking’ and areas where parking is preferred.

· E-scooter providers have controls to verify appropriate parking and can penalise users who park improperly.

· E-scooter providers will provide service level agreements for removal and relocation of improperly parked vehicles.

· E-scooter providers will pay operating fees to Council to cover Council’s costs associated with running the trial with the objective that there will be no net cost to Council.

c. Members of the public, riders and Council must be protected in the event of serious injury, death, or property damage that results from the use of e-scooters:

· Transport for NSW guidelines require e-scooter providers to provide public liability insurance of at least $20 million, with coverage for injury or damage to third parties. Transport for NSW requires public liability policies extend to cover council(s).

· Transport for NSW requires providers to have personal accident insurance to cover accidental injury for riders, and to have third-party rider liability insurance to cover injuries to pedestrians and other road users.

12. Council Officers have considered the transport benefits of an e-scooter trial, the comparative population density, access to public transport and low speed roads, cycle paths and shared paths. A shared e-scooter trial is likely to provide the greatest benefit in locations of greatest population density, greater economic and cultural activity and a mix of uses resulting in varied travel demand for different uses spread across the day. Therefore, an ideal location for a trial would have these attributes, in addition to a mix of low-speed roads, shared paths and cycle facilities, which can be used in the trial.

13. Staff have considered three (3) possible locations for e-scooter trials (depicted in Fig. 1, below). Trial area locations / boundaries would require confirmation through safety assessments, provider considerations and Transport for NSW approvals.

a. Greater Parramatta CBD (labelled ‘A’ on Fig. 1)
Generally the CBD area extended to the outer ring roads, including Westmead, North Parramatta, Harris Park and North Granville. E-scooter operation in Parramatta Park would have to be considered by Greater Sydney Parklands.

b. Parramatta Valley Cycleway (labelled ‘B’ on Fig. 1)
A corridor along the cycleway on the northern river foreshore, including parts of Parramatta between Victoria Road and the Western Rail Line, and parts of Rydalmere, Ermington and Melrose Park, south of Victoria Road. E-scooter operation in Parramatta Park would have to be considered by Greater Sydney Parklands.

c. Olympic Peninsula (labelled ‘C’ on Fig. 1)
Including Olympic Park plus nearby suburbs of Wentworth Point, Carter Street precinct and Newington. Any scheme progressed in this area will require consultation and coordination with the Sydney Olympic Park Authority (SOPA).

Figure 1: Potential e-scooter trial areas

14. A trial should first be considered in Area B - Parramatta Valley Cycleway, which incorporates high quality shared and cycleway paths, and provides trip-making attractions such as parks, the river foreshore, parts of the Parramatta CBD, universities and residential areas. Pending successful operation of an initial three-month period, Council should consider expanding the trial to serve Area A – Greater CBD, as this area, with greater population density, economic and cultural activity, is expect to benefit most from e-scooters. An e-scooter trial for suburbs on the Olympic Peninsula may also be successful, however, prior to such a trial, Council must coordinate with SOPA as key locations are within the Sydney Olympic Park precinct.

15. Selection of an e-scooter provider is to be conducted in accordance with Council’s Procurement Guidelines. As expected costs or income to Council is lower than tender thresholds, a competitive Request for Quotation process would be used to select a preferred provider.

a. Several e-scooter providers have approached Council in the months following the State’s announcement of the trial. Transport for NSW invited six (6) e-scooter providers to an e-scooter exposition in the Western Sydney Parklands in July. Staff attended this expo, met with providers, and tried their vehicles.

b. Staff have conducted interviews with all six (6) providers who were represented at the e-scooter expo, and have established a suitable list of three (3) providers based on following criteria:

· Ability to meet Council’s expected terms for the trial including location, operating parameters, and a service level agreement for complaints and enforcement.

· Compliance with TfNSW requirements, including insurance and a safety assessment for the operating area.

· Experience delivering shared-e-scooter services within Australia that meets the expectations of community and local government.

· A proposal that provides the greatest benefits (including levels of service and license fees paid to Council) to Council and community.

16. If a trial is endorsed by Council, officers are ready to finalise and issue a Request for Quotation to three providers to select one preferred provider to negotiate an agreement for the trial period.

17. It is recommended Council progress a trial with one (1) provider in Area B - Parramatta Valley Cycleway, with a view to expand the trial to Area A – Greater Parramatta CBD, following three (3) months of successful operation in Area B.

18. It is also recommended Council work with the SOPA to jointly consider a trial in Sydney Olympic Park to serve nearby precincts including Wentworth Point, Newington and Carter Street.

19. In addition to the operating parameters announced by Transport for NSW, the following additional parameters and features should be sought through the procurement process:

a. Establishment and automated enforcement of exclusion and ‘no parking’ zones, particularly in areas of high activity in Parramatta CBD.

b. Controls to discourage usage by alcohol-impaired and erratic riders.

c. Council to receive income to offset its cost to manage the trial with the objective that there should be no net cost to Council.

d. Criteria that Council will assess when considering whether the trial should expand from the initial trial area along the Parramatta Valley Cycleway to the CBD, including:

· Orderly operation of the trial such as user compliance with speed limits, helmet requirements and restrictions from riding on footpaths.

· Compliance with Council’s requirements, including % vehicles properly parked, removal of improperly parked vehicles within agreed timeframes, and sharing of data.

· Avoidance of major safety incidents such as crashes causing death of a rider, or death or serious injury of another road user or pedestrian.

20. It is recommended Council delegate authority to the CEO to progress the implementation of a trial, including:

a. work through Request for Quotation process to select preferred provider

b. negotiate an agreement with preferred service provider

c. submit Request to Participate to Transport for NSW

d. commence trial subject to approval by Transport for NSW.

21. Councillors will be regularly updated by staff on the status of the implementation of the trial, and the three (3) month threshold data will be reported back to Council to enable Council to consider expansion to the full CBD area.

CONSULTATION & TIMING

22. Transport for NSW has publicised its intention to conduct the trial, and media stories have discussed e-scooters and the planned trial.

Stakeholder Consultation

23. The following stakeholder consultations have been undertaken in relation to this matter:

Date	Stakeholder	Stakeholder Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
June – August 2022	Officers from Traffic & Transport, Marketing & Brand, City Strategy, Regulatory Services, Procurement, Risk and Audit, and Legal Services	Discussed opportunities, risks and mitigations for participation in the e-scooter trial	Incorporated feedback in background and recommendations in this report.	Strategic Land Use Planning/ City Planning & Design
June – August 2022	Officers of adjacent councils and Authorities	Discussed possible uptake of the e-scooter trial in adjacent jurisdictions	Incorporated feedback in background and recommendations in this report.	Strategic Land Use Planning/ City Planning & Design
June – August 2022	Officers of Transport for NSW	Attended briefings and an e-scooter exposition	Incorporated feedback in background and recommendations in this report.	Strategic Land Use Planning/ City Planning & Design
June – August 2022	E-scooter provider companies	Interviewed providers to understand the market and consider participation in the trial.	Incorporated feedback in background and recommendations in this report.	Strategic Land Use Planning/ City Planning & Design

Councillor Consultation

24. The following Councillor consultations have been undertaken in relation to this matter:

Date	Councillor	Councillor Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
17 August 2022	Councillor briefing	Questions about who uses e-scooters and why	E-scooters are used by many people for many reasons. Although they are more popular with younger adults (aged under 30 years) than other modes of transport, they are popular and can be used by any rider over 16 years old. They are particularly popular with tourists and recreation users, they can be useful for personal errands, appointments, and social trips. They have proven useful providing ‘last mile’ connections between homes, workplaces and transport facilities.	Strategic Land Use Planning/ City Planning & Design
17 August 2022	Councillor briefing	Concerns for usage by intoxicated riders	The NSW trial stipulates that e-scooters will not be operating after 12:00 without special permission. Council would not seek longer operating hours. Several of the e-scooter provider have time reaction tests and vehicle sensors to detect and stop intoxicated or other erratic behaviour.
17 August 2022	Councillor briefing	Concerns for risk to pedestrians and request for statistics about injuries to riders, property, pedestrians and rates of abandoned vehicles.	In Brisbane there were over 950 e-scooter related emergency department attendances in the period 2018-21. In this period there were over 6 million shared e-scooter trips taken and many more private e-scooter trips taken in Queensland. International studies have found e-scooter usage to account for about 115 injuries per million trips, a much higher injury rate than other modes of transport, and similar in number to motorcycle injury rates. Most e-scooter injuries are to riders. A 2020 study in Barcelona, found less than 5% of injuries were suffered by pedestrians. Additional performance data would be requested from providers as part of the RFQ.	Strategic Land Use Planning/ City Planning & Design
17 August 2022	Councillor briefing	Would e-scooters be marked with easily read identification numbers?	Yes. All e-scooter providers will mark their scooters with ID numbers, branding, and contact details.	Strategic Land Use Planning/ City Planning & Design
17 August 2022	Councillor briefing	Concerns for risk to pedestrians and insurance coverages	Required insurance coverages are detailed in this report.	Strategic Land Use Planning/ City Planning & Design
17 August 2022	Councillor briefing	Who is responsible for enforcing the rules for e-scooters?	Enforcement is the responsibility of NSW Police.	Strategic Land Use Planning/ City Planning & Design
17 August 2022	Councillor briefing	Concerns that appropriate communications are provided to the community.	Council would require and specify the e-scooter provider to undertake appropriate communications.	Strategic Land Use Planning/ City Planning & Design
17 August 2022	Councillor briefing	Concern that e-scooters will be vandalized, including dumping vehicles in creeks and the river.	A service level agreement will govern attention to improperly parked vehicles, and those that are creating a hazard. The shared e-scooters are expected to suffer less vandalism than the 2019 shared bike fleet as e-scooters are heavier than the previous shared bikes, and have GPS and communications links with local fleet managers.	Strategic Land Use Planning/ City Planning & Design

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

25. The key legal implications to Council would be with regard to any provisions established in an agreement which may expose Council to undue risk in the trial. This may include the risk of Council assuming liability for operation of the trial.

26. Council’s Risk and Audit and Legal Services units are aware of this project and any and all risks will be considered and addressed in the drafting of a Request to Participate submission and agreement with an e-scooter provider.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

27. A decision to participate in the trial is not expected to negatively impact Council’s budget. Council’s only expenditure for the trial will be in the form of services it usually undertakes such as regulation, customer service and communications. The cost of this activity is already included in existing budgets.

28. Council will ensure that all costs of the trial are covered in the form of access or license fees paid by the e-scooter providers. The scale of these fees will not be determined until an agreement is negotiated.

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

	FY 22/23	FY 23/24	FY 24/25	FY 25/26
Revenue
Internal Revenue
External Revenue	Unknown	Unknown
Total Revenue

Funding Source

Operating Result
External Costs	n/a	n/a
Internal Costs
Depreciation
Other
Total Operating Result

Funding Source

CAPEX	n/a	n/a
CAPEX
External
Internal
Other
Total CAPEX

Michael Jollon

Transport Planning Manager

Robert Cologna

Group Manager, Strategic Land Use Planning

Jennifer Concato

Executive Director City Planning and Design

John Angilley

Chief Financial and Information Officer

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

Attachments:

1 ⇩	NSW E-scooter Shared Scheme Trial - Proposed Trial Parameters	5 Pages
2 ⇩	TfNSW Guide for councils and providers interested in participating in the NSW E-scooter Shared Scheme Trial	7 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

n/a

Council 12 September 2022 Item 13.4

REPORTS TO COUNCIL - FOR COUNCIL DECISION

ITEM NUMBER 13.4

SUBJECT Proposed Homebush Bay West Development Control Plan Amendment and draft Planning Agreement for Block H, Precinct B, 16 Burroway Road and part 5 Footbridge Boulevard, Wentworth Point

REFERENCE F2022/00105 - D08385490

REPORT OF Project Officer Land Use

applicant: Fairmead Business Pty Ltd (Billbergia)

landowner: Fairmead Business Pty Ltd (Billbergia)

csp theme: INNOVATIVE

Development applications considered by Sydney central city planning panel Nil

PURPOSE

This report seeks Council’s consideration of the public exhibition outcome and determination of the proposed amendment to the Homebush Bay West Development Control Plan for Block H, Precinct B, 16 Burroway Road and part 5 Footbridge Boulevard, Wentworth Point.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council note the outcomes of the Public Exhibition for the proposed amendment to the Homebush Bay West Development Control Plan and Planning Agreement for Block H, Precinct B, 16 Burroway Road and part 5 Footbridge Boulevard, Wentworth Point.

(b) That Council refuse the proposed amendment to the Homebush Bay West Development Control Plan for Block H, Precinct B, 16 Burroway Road and part 5 Footbridge Boulevard, Wentworth Point for the following reasons:

i. The proposed development is inconsistent with the surrounding street grid, block pattern, perimeter block and tower forms established in Wentworth Point.

ii. The proposed building height, bulk and scale:

a. is inconsistent with the established built form and would result in adverse impacts on solar access to surrounding development and public domain, sky views, views from neighbouring developments and the public domain, and visual amenity.

b. is inconsistent with the building height principles established by the Homebush Bay West Development Control Plan 2013 (DCP) where a maximum of 25 storeys has been established to ensure new development remains below the height of towers in Rhodes and Sydney Olympic Park, and to transition height to adjoining lands.

c. would result in an undesirable interface with the public domain and foreshore promenade.

iii. The proposed increased building height would set an undesirable precedent for remaining development sites in the area and erode the established pattern of lower height development towards the foreshore.

iv. The configuration and proportion of proposed public open space does not present as being readily useable by the public, does not comply with the DCP and is insufficient to support the proposed additional floor area.

(c) That any new proposal must be consistent with the urban design requirements established in the proposed officer scheme included in this report (see Attachment 2).

(d) Further, that the Applicant be advised of Council’s decision.

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN TIMELINE

SUMMARY

1. The Applicant, Billbergia, has proposed to substantially amend the Homebush Bay West DCP (DCP) planning controls to facilitate a high-rise residential development comprising two separate Development Scenarios that have two towers, a podium element, and open space provision (refer to Attachment 3). Development Scenario 1 is for a 25-storey and 40-storey tower, Development Scenario 2 is for 40-storey tower and a 50-storey tower. See Figure 4 below.

2. The exhibited scheme (both Scenarios 1 and 2) was the result of a design competition that was endorsed by Council for public exhibition at the 11 May 2020 Council meeting. Given that no Local Environmental Plan (LEP) applies to the subject land (refer to background section below), the design competition brief determined by Council at the meeting on 11 May 2020 set a maximum floor area of 85,000m². Council subsequently endorsed a potential height of 50 storeys following consideration of the outcome of the design competition. It is noted that at this stage of the assessment process, Council officers had yet to undertake any community consultation on the proposal.

3. The proposal was publicly exhibited from 19 October to 16 November 2020. A total of 763 submissions were received of which 491 (64%) were opposed. Refer to Public Exhibition section below for further information.

4. Given the significant community concerns raised in submissions regarding the potential amenity impacts of the proposal, further design analysis was undertaken by Council officers. Following completion of the detailed urban design analysis it was apparent that the proposal was inconsistent with established design principles in this part of the Precinct, principally because of its excessive height and bulk, impacts on view lines, and inadequate provision of open space. The DCP requires 10,973m² public open space for this part of the Wentworth Point precinct including a public park of approximately 9,850m² in accordance with the indicative-built form diagram in the DCP, however whilst the exhibited Scenarios propose 24,050m² open space Council officers consider that only the 8,200m²“urban park” constitutes accessible and functional public open space. This area of public open space is less than the current DCP requirement and is not sufficient to serve the proposed additional floor area under either Scenario.

5. To demonstrate what an appropriate outcome for the site might be, a Council officer-preferred scheme was produced (Attachment 2). This scheme illustrates a 25-storey tower and a 16-storey tower and represents an optimal development outcome based upon established design principles in the Precinct.

6. It is considered that a new proposal is required that better responds to the considerable issues identified as part of public exhibition and Council officers’ urban design analysis. Any new proposal would be subject to further community consultation and Council endorsement prior to being adopted. Council officers’ preferred scheme should form the basis of any new proposal and DCP amendment lodged by the Applicant. If a future design competition is sought, a DCP amendment based upon Council officers preferred scheme would be required to form the basis for the Design Competition brief and be used as the basis of assessment for any Design Excellence winning scheme.

SITE DESCRIPTION

7. Block H is formally known as 16 Burroway Road and part 5 Footbridge Boulevard and is one of the last few undeveloped landholdings in Wentworth Point, situated along the foreshore on the western side of Homebush Bay. Block H is situated at the intersection of Burroway Road and Wentworth Place (refer to Figure 1) and is adjacent to the Bennelong Bridge, a key transport link between Wentworth Point and Rhodes. The total site area is approximately 31,609m².

Figure 1: Block H site outlined in red

8. An established characteristic of Wentworth Point is the transition of building heights from higher scale development further inland to lower scale development towards the foreshore. This is shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2: Transition of building heights (lower scale development along foreshore)

BACKGROUND

9. Wentworth Point forms part of the NSW Government-led urban renewal area of the former industrial lands on the Olympic Peninsula. In 2004, Wentworth Point was rezoned by the NSW Government. Please refer to the Detailed Report (Attachment 1) for further information.

10. Given no LEP applies to the subject land, there are no Floor Space Ratio (FSR) or building height standards relating to Block H that would ordinarily apply. Instead, the State Environmental Planning Policy (Precincts—Central River City) 2021 (SEPP) applies and requires compliance with the Homebush Bay West DCP. The DCP sets development controls for the building envelope, and therefore any changes to these height or floor area controls requires an amendment to the DCP.

11. The existing DCP controls allow for a maximum building height of up to 25 storeys and maximum GFA of 200,649m²for Block B. Due to the uptake from existing development, approximately 30,000m² residual GFA remains for Block H, permitting approximately 350 dwellings on the site (refer to Assessment section further below for more information). This is shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3: Maximum GFA under existing DCP controls

12. On 23 December 2016, the proposal was lodged by Billbergia to facilitate 2 high-rise residential buildings, with heights of 35 and 52 storeys (existing permissible heights are 16 and 25 storeys).

13. In 2017, a two-stage design excellence competition was undertaken for Block H (refer to Attachment 1).

14. At its meeting of 28 May 2018, Council considered a report on the draft DCP amendment. The Council officer recommendation was for the matter to be deferred until the receipt of further advice from Transport for NSW (TfNSW) regarding the potential traffic impacts of further increased density in Wentworth Point. Notwithstanding Council officers’ recommendation, Council resolved to proceed with stage 2 of the design excellence competition (stage 1 established the site’s concept masterplan) and to publicly exhibit the DCP amendment with a maximum of 85,000m² of residential floorspace for Block H (maximum of 35 storeys in height). The maximum 85,000m² uplift would be contingent on the NSW Government funding commitment to Parramatta Light Rail Stage 2 (or the provision of an equivalent bus service) and Metro West. Council also resolved to enter negotiations with the Applicant for a draft Planning Agreement for at least $70 million in public benefits (refer to Planning Agreement section further below for more information).

15. On 21 November 2019, the design jury unanimously agreed that the scheme presented by FJMT and Martha Schwartz Partners exhibited design excellence based upon the parameters set by the Council resolution of 28 May 2018. The winning design increased the building height to 50 storeys (refer to Attachment 5).

16. At its meeting of 11 May 2020, Council considered the revised scheme and resolved that the draft DCP amendment and draft Planning Agreement be publicly exhibited.

17. Public exhibition of the draft DCP amendment and draft Planning Agreement commenced on 19 October 2020 and on 16 November 2020.

18. In March 2021, Councillors were briefed on the exhibition outcomes. Councillors were advised that further precinct wide traffic modelling was to be undertaken to quantify the proposal’s traffic impacts.

19. In February 2022, the Applicant finalised the transport study which allowed Council officers to finalise assessment of the proposal.

20. In March 2022, Councillors were briefed on the transport study and Council officers’ urban design analysis.

PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION

21. The draft amendment to the Homebush Bay West DCP proposes 2 mutually exclusive residential Development Scenarios for Block H:

· Scenario 1 - approximately 642 dwellings (2 towers that are up to 25 storeys and 40 storeys - up to 47 storeys including the architectural articulation zone).

· Scenario 2 - approximately 997 dwellings (2 towers that are up to 40 storeys and 50 storeys - up to 57 storeys including the architectural articulation zone).

Figure 4: Scenario 1 (left) & Scenario 2 (right)

22. A draft Planning Agreement accompanies the proposed changes to the planning provisions for the site (refer to Attachment 4). The draft Planning Agreement proposes to facilitate a range of community benefits dependent upon the respective Development Scenario, however the assessment of the strategic merit and built form of the proposal must be carried out independently of the consideration of any community benefits that would arise from the Planning Agreement (refer to Planning Agreement section further below for more information).

23. The key changes proposed under the publicly exhibited DCP amendment relate to the GFA and building heights applying to the site. The changes are summarised in Table 1:

	Existing DCP Controls –	Exhibited Scenario 1	Exhibited Scenario 2	Council Officer-preferred scheme
Residential GFA	200,649m²total for Block B (which includes subject site Block H) Residual GFA due to existing development left over for Block H = 30,000m² (approx. 350 dwellings) If utilising the existing building height control (25 storeys) this facilitates 48,960m² (approx. 575 dwellings)	54,356m² (approx. 642 dwellings)	85,000m² (approx. 997 dwellings)	52,600m² (approx. 620 dwellings)
Building Height (Measured from Wentworth Place, being the highest part of the site)	25-storey tower to Wentworth Place 16-storey tower to Burroway Road If utilising the residual GFA (30,000m²) this facilitates only 6-storeys plus 1-storey perimeter block	1 x tower up to 25 storeys (102m) plus architectural articulation storeys 1 x tower up to 40 storeys (165.45m) plus architectural articulation storeys	1 x tower up to 40 storeys (165.45m) plus architectural articulation storeys 1 x tower up to 50 storeys (190.65m) plus architectural articulation storeys	25-storey tower to Wentworth Place 16-storey tower to Burroway Road.
Open Space	10,973m² total	Minimum 16,800m² open space including 8,200m² park	Minimum 16,800m²open space including 8,200m² park	Minimum 13,720m² open space including 10,500m² park
Foreshore Building Setback	30m	20m	20m	30m
Planning Agreement	N/A	Planning Agreement value of $33,841,000.	Additional value of $36,760,000 amounting to a total of $70,601,000.	TBD

Table 1: Development Scenarios

PUBLIC EXHIBITION

24. As a result of public exhibition, a total of 763 submissions were received of which 491 (64%) were opposed to the proposed changes, 169 (22%) were in favour of the proposal, and 103 (14%) were neither in favour of, nor against the proposal.

25. Key issues raised in the community submissions (refer to Attachment 1) include (in order of most common) traffic, density, height, strain on existing infrastructure, overshadowing, parking, view loss, open space, privacy, and precedent. This is shown in Figure 5.

Figure 5: Breakdown of Community Concerns in Submitted Objections

ASSESSMENT

26. Following public exhibition and consideration of the issues raised in submissions, Council officers undertook a detailed site analysis. Council officers also developed a preferred scheme (Attachment 2) that responded to issues raised in submissions including the characteristics of the site and design principles of the precinct.

27. In response to Council officers’ preferred scheme (maximum 25 storeys height), the Applicant submitted a revised scheme (maximum 45 storeys height). The Applicant’s revised scheme (Attachment 7) remains largely the same as the exhibited DCP amendment. Therefore, the revised scheme is included for information only and did not form part of Council officers’ detailed assessment.

28. Council officers’ assessment of the exhibited proposal is summarised below. Please refer to the Detailed Report (Attachment 1) for further information.

Height of Buildings (DCP control)

29. The proposed maximum building heights, 40 storeys in Scenario 1 and 50 storeys in Scenario 2, are significantly inconsistent with the immediate context. This is shown in Figure 6, Figure 7 and Figure 8. The height allocation on the peninsula presents two distinct skyline arrangements that are separated by the axis of Hill Road. Within the Wentworth Point precinct itself, a maximum 25-storey height limit exists along Wentworth Place before stepping away towards both the foreshore and Hill Road. Conversely, the Sekisui House site at 14-16 Hill Road references the Millennium Marker at Newington Nature Reserve with lower heights towards the centre of the site that splay outwards to 40-storey towers at the periphery.

Figure 6: Height of Buildings (Storeys) in Wentworth Point

Figure 7: Scenario 1 Context

Figure 8: Scenario 2 Context

Homebush Bay Foreshore Promenade

30. A key design principle contained in Section 5.3.2 of the Homebush Bay West Development Control Plan 2013 for the development of the Wentworth Point precinct is the transition of building heights from higher scale development to lower scale development towards the foreshore. The existing DCP controls require six storey building heights setback 30m from the foreshore to present a human scale of development and to lessen the dominance of buildings on the foreshore setting.

31. The proposed 40 storey tower would be within 20m of the foreshore and would result in adverse overshadowing of the public domain, and visual amenity impacts that would be incompatible with existing established development that respects this design principle.

32. No towers, both existing and planned, currently exist within 100m of the Homebush Bay foreshore. The proposed 50 storey tower would be within 35m of the foreshore. Consequently both towers in both scenarios would significantly breach the well established design principle of no towers within 100m of the foreshore. Council officers’ preferred scheme complies with this well established principle.

Gross Floor Area (DCP control)

33. Section 5.3.1 of the Homebush Bay West DCP establishes the maximum gross floor area (GFA) for the precinct. The total allowable GFA for this part of the Wentworth Point precinct (of which Block H forms a part) is 200,649m². Previous development approvals have resulted in the majority of the allowable GFA already being utilised, with approximately 30,000m² residual GFA remaining for Block H.

34. Section 5.3.2 of the existing Homebush Bay West DCP establishes a part 16 and part 25-storey height limit for Block H. Utilising these envelopes, Block H can accommodate more than the residual 30,000m² GFA, being approximately 48,960m² GFA (approximately 575 dwellings). Should the residual GFA only be utilised, this will accommodate approximately 350 dwellings.

35. Council officers’ preferred scheme is in accordance with the existing maximum building heights in the DCP (16 and 25 storeys), and can accommodate approximately 52,600m² GFA (approximately 620 dwellings). This equates to 22,600m²GFA (or 270 additional dwellings) over and above the current existing residual GFA (30,000m²). The reason for this additional GFA is due to a revised and more efficient building envelope design.

36. Council officers consider that Block H should be developed in accordance with the existing height controls, which (in conjunction with the setback controls) set the desired future character of the area. Council officers’ preferred design scheme is in accordance with the existing height controls.

37. The additional 270 dwellings that could be accommodated in Council officers’ preferred scheme is not expected to result in a worsening of transport impacts, given recent infrastructure commitments from the State Government and the outcomes of recent traffic modelling undertaken for the precinct (as outlined in the Transport section below).

Building Typology and Site Structure

38. The street grid of Wentworth Point offers continuous and framed views to water, contributing to legibility and wayfinding. Where there is a variation to this principle, towers are still located to ensure a visual continuation in the absence of a street.

39. The proposal locates towers directly in the observed views to sky along Park Street North, which increases the perceived density in the precinct and results in a greater number of neighbouring apartments experiencing a loss of direct views than what could be developed under existing DCP controls. Council officers’ preferred scheme maintains the continuity of the street structure and improves upon existing DCP controls that results in further preservation of existing view corridors.

View Sharing and View Loss

40. The proposal also obscures the view sharing potential from surrounding dwellings. The proposed towers visually converge creating a ‘wall’ of development that preferences the views from the proposal.

41. The number of units that will experience view loss is greater under the exhibited DCP Scenarios than the indicative-built form represented in the existing DCP, giving validity to community concerns over additional view loss.

Public Domain and Open Space

42. The amount of total public open space required at Block H under existing DCP controls is 10,973m² including a public park of approximately 9,850m² in accordance with the indicative-built form diagram in the DCP. These open space provisions are required to be delivered as part of any Development Application at Block H and are not dependent on a Planning Agreement.

43. This open space target is commensurate with the planned density for Wentworth Point. The proposed uplift in density therefore requires additional public open space to be provided over and above the existing minimum in the DCP. Both proposed Scenarios provide a total of 24,050m² open space on site. However, the delineated urban park space (the “Urban Park”), which is clearly separated from the development, is approximately 8,200m², while the remainder is dedicated to landscaping and is not necessarily perceived to be public open space (refer to Figure 8 below). The restricted size of the accessible public open space (“Urban Park”) is inadequate to serve the proposed GFA. Therefore, the proposed public open space is considered insufficient and is also considered to be poorly configured.

Figure 9: Proposed public open space (Council officers only consider the “Urban Park” to be readily accessible functional public open space). NOTE: The red dotted rectangle over the “Urban Park” illustrates the preferred size and location of Council officers’ preferred configuration, and the solid red rectangle illustrates the existing car park structure.

Precedent

44. The proposed significantly increased building height over and above existing DCP controls at Block H could set an undesirable precedent for the remaining development sites in the area that would erode the established urban design principle of lower height development towards the foreshore. This would result in adverse view loss, and solar access and visual amenity impacts as viewed from surrounding development and the public domain.

Transport

45. The Applicant’s February 2022 transport study (Attachment 6) concluded that the proposal would have no relative impact on projected traffic congestion in the future.

46. TfNSW had no objections to the transport study, noting the study was based upon TfNSW modelling. The study assumes the delivery of Metro West, Parramatta Light Rail Stage 2, Australia Avenue upgrade, and continued provision of bus services along Bennelong Bridge. Given the committed Government funding to transport infrastructure improvements in the broader area, the transport study concludes that an increase in density on the site will not result in significant impacts on the broader traffic network.

47. It is noted that the Applicant currently provides a free bus service (“Baylink Shuttle”) between Wentworth Point and Rhodes. It is understood that the provision of the bus service is contingent upon the approval of Scenario 2 and the Applicant has indicated in discussions with Council officers that the service may cease if the proposal is refused. However, Council officers consider that the provision of public transport that serves the local community is the responsibility of the NSW Government and requisite services should thus be provided by TfNSW.

PLANNING AGREEMENT

48. The assessment of the draft Planning Agreement is separate to the assessment of the DCP Amendment. The strategic merit and built form of the proposal must firstly be established before consideration can be given to the any associated draft Planning Agreement. This report has concluded that, on the assessment of its merits, the proposed DCP Amendment is not acceptable.

49. The value of the exhibited draft Planning Agreement is $36,760,000 for Development Scenario 1, and $70,601,000 for Development Scenario 2. The community benefits include road and intersection upgrades, shuttle bus services, child care centre, a library and community centre, public open space, and an indoor sports facility or water recreation facility.

50. Council sought community feedback on alternative infrastructure item options for inclusion in the draft Planning Agreement and received 763 responses. 38% of respondents preferred a water recreation facility, 34% had no preference, and 23% preferred an indoor sports facility (refer to Attachment 1).

51. A key component of the exhibited draft Planning Agreement is the continuation of the Applicant’s existing shuttle bus service connecting Wentworth Point and Rhodes until the opening of Parramatta Light Rail Stage 2 (or an equivalent bus service). The Applicant has subsequently proposed to continue the shuttle service until the opening of Metro West contingent upon the approval of Scenario 2.

CONSULTATION AND TIMING

Stakeholder Consultation

52. Council officers have undertaken extensive consultation with the Applicant and relevant State agencies (including TfNSW and the Department of Planning and Environment) since lodgment of the proposal (refer to Attachment 1).

Date	Stakeholder	Stakeholder Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
19 October to 16 November 2020 - public exhibition of draft DCP and draft Planning Agreement	Multiple	Comments in relation to the draft DCP and draft Planning Agreement	Refer to Attachment 1	City Planning and Design

Councillor Consultation

53. Councillor consultation has been undertaken on several occasions since lodgement of the proposal. The most recent Councillor briefings are noted below:

Date

Stakeholder

Stakeholder Comment

Council Officer Response

Responsibility

March 2021

All Councillors

Comments in relation to exhibition outcomes

Refer to Attachment 1

City Planning and Design

March 2022

All Councillors

Comments on Council Officers’ Urban Design Analysis

Refer to Attachment 1

City Planning and Design

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

54. There will be no financial implications for Council if it resolves in accordance with the recommendation.

55. If Council resolves to endorse the recommendations of this report, the financial impacts on the budget are set out in the table below.

	FY 22/23	FY 23/24	FY 24/25	FY 25/26
Revenue
Internal Revenue
External Revenue
Total Revenue	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A

Funding Source	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A

Operating Result
External Costs
Internal Costs
Depreciation
Other
Total Operating Result	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A

Funding Source	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A

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

CONCLUSION

56. It is recommended that the draft DCP amendment be refused as the proposed height and scale is significantly inconsistent with the established character of this part of Wentworth Point. The proposal would have a negative impact upon local amenity and would set an undesirable precedent for unsustainable additional development at Wentworth Point.

57. If the Applicant wishes to pursue an amended scheme consistent with Council officers’ preferred scheme, this will require a new proposal to be lodged. Alternatively, the Applicant could seek to develop the site in accordance with the existing DCP or continue the existing industrial use of the site subject to appropriate approvals.

Simon Coleman

Project Officer Land Use

William Jones

Team Leader Land Use Planning

Michael Rogers

Land Use Planning Manager

David Birds

Group Manager, Major Projects and Precincts

Kelly Van Der Zanden

Group Manager City Design

Jennifer Concato

Executive Director City Planning and Design

John Angilley

Chief Financial and Information Officer

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

Attachments:

1 ⇩	Detailed Assessment Report	48 Pages
2 ⇩	Urban Design Review - July 2022	51 Pages
3 ⇩	Exhibited Draft Development Control Plan - October 2020	22 Pages
4 ⇩	Exhibited Draft Planning Agreement - October 2020	70 Pages
5 ⇩	Design Excellence Competition Jury Report - November 2019	104 Pages
6 ⇩	Applicant Transport Study - PWC - Redacted - February 2022	94 Pages
7 ⇩	FJMT / Billbergia Revised Scheme - May 2022	78 Pages

Council 12 September 2022 Item 13.5

REPORTS TO COUNCIL - FOR COUNCIL DECISION

ITEM NUMBER 13.5

SUBJECT Naming Proposal for Unnamed Laneways in North Parramatta

REFERENCE F2022/00105 - D08644004

REPORT OF Senior Project Officer Place Services

CSP THEME: THRIVING

workshop/briefing date: Ward Councillor emailed 20 June 2022

PURPOSE:

The purpose of this report is to endorse the preferred names for three (3) unnamed laneways in North Parramatta, NSW 2151.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council endorse the use of Birrung Lane for the first unnamed laneway, which runs adjacent to Belmore Street in the South and Bellevue Street in the North and Whiting Lane in the East. The laneway runs parallel with Pennant Hills Road in the West. The name and location for the first unnamed laneway is illustrated in the Site Map as Laneway 1 (see Attachment 1).

(b) That Council endorse the use of Warrawal Lane for the second unnamed laneway, which runs adjacent to Belmore Street in the North, Oscar Lane to the West and Gladstone Street in the South. The laneway runs parallel with Trades Lane to the West, and Brickfield Street to the East. The name and location for the second unnamed laneway is illustrated in the Site Map as Laneway 2 (see Attachment 1).

(c) That Council endorse the use of Mula Mula Lane for the third unnamed laneway, which runs parallel to Gladstone Street in the North and Isabella Street to the South. The laneway intersects with Trades Lane to the East. The name and location for the third unnamed laneway is illustrated in the Site Map as Laneway 3 (see Attachment 1).

(d) Further, that the preferred name for each of the unnamed laneways be referred to the Geographical Names Board (GNB) of NSW for formal assignment and Gazettal under the Geographical Names Act 1996.

BACKGROUND

1. This naming project arose from community requests to name three (3) unnamed laneways in North Parramatta to improve deliveries and access to essential services.

2. Most of the abutting lots have rear access via these laneways with some recent townhouse developments/unit blocks having front doors/entry that face the northernmost laneway (Laneway 1), making Australia Post deliveries, courier deliveries, wayfinding and emergency services response difficult.

3. Unnamed laneway 1 is situated adjacent to Belmore Street in the South and Bellevue Street in the North and Whiting Lane in the East. The laneway runs parallel with Pennant Hills Road in the West. This laneway is used by most abutting lots which have front access via this lane. (Attachment 1 - Laneway 1).

4. Unnamed laneway 2 is situated adjacent to Belmore Street in the North, Oscar Lane to the West and Gladstone Street in the South. The laneway runs parallel with Trades Lane to the West, and Brickfield Street to the East. (Attachment 1 - Laneway 2).

5. Unnamed laneway 3 is situated parallel to Gladstone Street in the North and Isabella Street to the South. The laneway intersects with Trades Lane to the East. (Attachment 1 - Laneway 3).

6. To generate potential names, Council’s Cultural, Heritage & Tourism (CHT) team researched the history and identity of the area and proposed names for consideration. Council Officers also engaged a Dharug community elder from Dharug Boorooberongal Elders Aboriginal Corporation who researched and prepared additional names for the consultation process. These proposed names were submitted to the Geographical Names Board (GNB) to check the eligibility of the proposed names.

7. This evaluation ensures that only names meeting the uniqueness requirements of the NSW Address and User Manual (2021) are publicly exhibited and then presented to Council for consideration. Uniqueness is considered the most essential quality in proposing a new road name. A road name will be regarded as a duplicate by the GNB (and therefore rejected for use) if it is the same or similar in spelling or sound to an existing nearby roadway name, regardless of the type of road.

8. Ten (10) GNB pre-approved names were placed on public exhibition for community feedback. All impacted properties near the unnamed laneways were notified during consultation. To avoid ‘consultation fatigue’ (whereby Council would go out to consult for each laneway individually) the top three (3) naming preferences from community consultation are proposed for use at these unnamed lanes. Given the geographical proximity of each of the unnamed laneways, the proposed names are suitable for use, regardless of whether the names are applied to unnamed laneway one, two, or three.

9. Under the City of Parramatta Council’s Road Naming Policy (Policy 283) and the NSW Address Policy and User Manual (May 2021) developed by NSW Geographical Names Board (GNB), Council is the responsible authority for the provision of address numbering to all properties and road names to all local and private roads situated within the Parramatta Local Government Area (LGA). Council is also responsible for endorsing the authoritative road name and ensuring it is endorsed by the GNB.

10. The naming of road infrastructure is necessary to provide accurate addressing for deliveries within the development, not only to identify an owners’ individual business, but also for navigation, emergency response, service delivery (utilities, post) and for statistical analysis.

11. To ensure all road naming is comprehensible, clear, accepted, unambiguous and readily communicated, property addresses and road names must comply with Chapter 6 “Addressing Principles” of the NSW Address Policy and User Manual (2021). In the preparation of this project, Council utilised preferred sources in line with this policy and section 3.2 in Council’s Road Naming Policy (Policy 283), which identifies desirable sources as:

a. Aboriginal names,

b. Local history, including early explorers, settlers, and other eminent persons,

c. Thematic names such as flora and fauna,

d. Landmarks, and

e. Names appropriate to the physical, historical or cultural character of the area.

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

12. Council’s Research & Engagement team developed and arranged public consultation on the proposed names via Council’s engagement portal, Participate Parramatta. Public consultation ran for three (3) weeks (16 business days) from Monday 18 July to Monday 8 August 2022. A letter was sent via Australia Post to 610 impacted residents, and targeted social media was also utilised to alert residents and nearby businesses of the opportunity to provide feedback.

13. The exhibited names, pre-approved for use by the GNB, are listed with their description in the table below. A list of all shortlisted names (including those rejected by the GNB due to ‘duplication’) are at Attachment 2.

Proposed history and identity of the area	Context
Pound Lane	In reference to the public Parramatta pound that was off Pennant Hills Road and the unnamed lane.
Butchers Lane	Occupation of original grant holders William Ashby and Richard Harper.
Carnifex Lane	Alternative Old English Trade name for butcher.
Fleshewer Lane	Alternative Old English Trade name for butcher.
Stamp Lane	As a reference to the handmade brick(s) attributed to John Clews’ bricks being produced in Parramatta.
Cunneen Lane	In acknowledging of the Cunneen family who lived on Gladstone Street. This included a number of daughters of Mr James Cunneen (d. 11.05.1952, aged 87) of 3 Gladstone Street, and Mrs Harriet Cunneen (d. 1.04.1932, aged 57) of 13 Harold Street, Parramatta North including o No. 3 - Jessie May Dowling (nee Cunneen) o No. 13 - Elsie Catherine “Deedee” (nee Cunneen) the second daughter and wife of Alfred Victor Creed, World War One veteran o No. 7 - Ruby Olive Kelly (nee Cunneen) o No. 9 - Eileen Gladys Jackson (nee Cunneen)

*Proposed Indigenous Names	Context
Birrung Lane	Meaning Stars.
Duba Lane	Meaning Earth/clay or the ground.
Mulu Mulu Lane	Meaning Falling stars in a cluster.
Warrawal Lane	Meaning Milky Way / Pleiades.

*Indigenous people used their knowledge of the night sky to forecast the weather, and to determine seasonal changes to resources. Torres Strait Islanders use the scintillation of stars (twinkling) to determine when the northwest monsoon is arriving, and Aboriginal people used the ice rings around the Moon to forecast when wet weather was arriving. The arrival of the Seven Sisters in the evening sky brought the return of warm weather and resources, while their setting in the evening sky brought the winter. It also appears that Aboriginal people built solar observatories, so that they could mark the time of the year by the solstices.

14. Overall, the opportunity to provide feedback for this project was presented to an estimated 94,888 persons culminating in 106 formal contributions. Of those that made formal contributions, the community sentiment was positive, with Birrung Lane the preferred of the ten exhibited names for Laneway 1, with a weighted score of 6.48 of survey respondents expressing support for this name for the unnamed laneway.

15. Laneway 2 received a weighted score of 6.29 of survey respondents expressing support for the name Warrawal Lane.

16. Laneway 3 received a weighted score of 5.86 of survey respondents expressing support for the name Mula Mula Lane.

17. All names satisfy the addressing requirements of the Geographic Names Board (GNB), which has given prior concurrence for the use of the proposed names at this location.

CONSULTATION & TIMING

Stakeholder Consultation

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

Date	Stakeholder	Stakeholder Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
18.07.22 – 08.08.22	The community, via Council’s Participate Parramatta Engagement Portal	Feedback was captured through a survey hosted on the project page. Verbatim responses provided by community members is provided in Attachment 3.	The project page saw 2391 unique visitors and 2850 views. This resulted in a conversion of 103 completed surveys. Responses received from the community were reviewed against the Geographical Names Board of NSW ‘NSW Address Policy and User Manual’ (May 2021) guidelines for naming roads. No feedback identified the proposed names to be offensive, racist, derogatory or demeaning.	Senior Project Officer, Place Services Community Engagement Officer, Research & Engagement
15.07.22	610 impacted residents and business’ via direct mail out	Verbatim responses that may have been generated by accessing the survey from the letters QR code are provided in Attachment 3.	Letters detailing the exhibition and how to submit formal feedback were sent to residents and businesses near the unnamed laneways.	Senior Project Officer, Place Services Printing Officer, Corporate Services
18.07.22	The community, via 6 corflute signs placed at the 3 laneways	Verbatim responses that may have been generated by accessing the survey from the poster’s QR code are provided in Attachment 3.	A poster was designed to support and promote the exhibition. The poster also included a QR code which received a total of 76 scans.	Senior Project Officer, Place Services
18.07.22 – 31.07.22	The community, via Social Media	Feedback was captured through a survey hosted on the project page. Verbatim responses provided by community members is provided in Attachment 3.	A paid campaign across Facebook and Instagram. Overall, the social media combined campaign garnered a reach of 83,393 resulting in 3,771 link clicks to the project page.	Community Engagement Officer, Research & Engagement
21.07.22	The community, via Participate Parramatta Newsletter	Verbatim responses provided by community members and a summary of engagement findings is provided in Attachment 3.	Electronic direct notification was issued via the Participate Parramatta Newsletter (10,810 subscribers), seeing a 47.1% open rate.	Community Engagement Officer, Research & Engagement

19. In addition to this, there was one (1) suggestion for an alternative name from the community which was submitted to the GNB to check the eligibility of the proposed name. The name returned with a duplication which was the same to an existing name, regardless of the road type. As such, the naming suggestion provided during community consultation did not meet GNB requirements.

Councillor Consultation

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

Date	Councillor	Councillor Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
20.06.22	An email was provided to the Dundas Ward Councillors	No comments provided	NA	Senior Project Officer, Place Services
06.07.22	All - via a Councillor Briefing Note distributed through the Councillor Portal and the Councillor Weekly Newsletter	No comments provided	NA	Senior Project Officer, Place Services

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

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

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

22. If Council resolves to approve this report in accordance with the proposed resolution, the financial impact on the budget is set out in the table below. Council should note:

a. External operating costs associated with this project are $400 for paid advertisements to support engagement as part of the community consultation component of this project and are budgeted within Service Code 420097 - Road Naming and funded from General Revenue.

b. Once the naming proposal is approved, including gazettal by the GNB, Council is the responsible authority for the fabrication and installation of street signs (including the subject street poles and sign blades).

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

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

	FY 22/23	FY 23/24	FY 24/25
Revenue
Internal Revenue
External Revenue
Total Revenue	Nil

Funding Source

Operating Result
External Costs
Internal Costs
Depreciation
Other
Total Operating Result	Nil

Funding Source

CAPEX
CAPEX
External
Internal
Other
Total CAPEX	Nil

Kim Marsh

Senior Project Officer Place Services

Bruce Mills

Group Manager Place Services

Bryan Hynes

Executive Director Property & Place

John Angilley

Chief Financial and Information Officer

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

Attachments:

1 ⇩	Attachment 1 - Site Plan	1 Page
2 ⇩	Attachment 2 - List and description of pre-approved and rejected proposed names	4 Pages
3 ⇩	Attachment 3 - Unnamed Laneways, North Parramatta Engagement Evaluation	17 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 12 September 2022 Item 13.6

REPORTS TO COUNCIL - FOR COUNCIL DECISION

ITEM NUMBER 13.6

SUBJECT Parramatta Artists' Studios Relocation

REFERENCE F2022/00105 - D08612717

REPORT OF Director Parramatta Artist Studios & Cultural Services

CSP THEME: WELCOMING

workshop/briefing date: 18 July 2022

PURPOSE:

To seek Council approval of the relocation of Parramatta Artists’ Studios (PAS) to a Council-owned property at 3-5 Bridge Street, Granville and a PAS Relocation Project capital budget of $638,585, including an allocation of $250,000 to the PAS Relocation Project from the Property Reserve.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council approve the relocation of Parramatta Artists’ Studios to a Council-owned property at 3-5 Bridge Street, Granville.

(b) That Council approve the PAS Relocation Project capital expenditure budget of $638,585 (ex gst.), including $388,585 paid to Council as compensation by the State Government due to the compulsory acquisition of 68 Macquarie Street, and the allocation of $250,000 from the Property Reserve.

(c) Further, that Council grant delegated authority to the Chief Executive Officer to execute all agreements, contracts or deeds necessary to complete the PAS Relocation project.

BACKGROUND

1. Parramatta Artists’ Studios (PAS), an initiative of the City of Parramatta Council, was launched in 2006. Since then, it has built its reputation and impact as a key Council cultural service. PAS nurtures and promotes local artists, and directly supports more than 100 artists annually. Further it delivers community-engaged programs, with 114 programs delivered over the 21/22 Financial Year.

2. Annually, PAS delivers an Artistic Program that provides in-person and online programming for artists and community. Highlights in the 22/23 Artistic Program include: an artist symposium; a major exhibition; creative workshops for children and families (Future Artists Club and Rydalmere Hub); and a podcast series.

3. The Artistic Program is funded by the State Government via Create NSW. PAS has successfully been awarded this funding annually since 2006, and is critical funding required to deliver the Program. In the 22/23 Financial Year, PAS was successful in being awarded $142,000 for the Program which was a 42% increase in Create NSW funding from the previous year. While PAS is currently able to deliver its Artistic Program from a variety of locations, the risk to this funding increases the longer PAS is unable to secure an alternative studio site.

4. Since 2019, PAS has operated across two (2) commercially leased locations locations, being a Parramatta CBD site providing 14 studios and a Rydalmere site providing six (6) studios. The Parramatta CBD site also featured two event spaces, providing the main avenue for community programming. Together, these two (2) sites offered different types of studios to artists, with the CBD location providing the bulk of community programming in an accessible location. In June 2019, PAS was required to vacate its CBD site, due to compulsory acquisition by the State Government for the MetroWest Project in June 2021.

5. Due to the compulsory acquisition of the Parramatta CBD site at 68 Macquarie Street, Parramatta by the NSW State Government for the MetroWest project, PAS was required to vacate by 30 June 2021.

6. As a result of the compulsory acquisition, the State Government provided compensation to the City of Parramatta Council of $388,585 (ex gst) to support the PAS Relocation Project, including fit-out and relocation to a new location.

7. Current efforts have focused on identifying a new PAS location for the medium-term, whilst options for a permanent location are further explored, including opportunities in Parramatta North and other high-growth areas of the Parramatta LGA. Confirming a permanent location for PAS is a goal of Council’s Cultural Plan and would provide a stable future for the cultural organisation, from both a programmatic and financial perspective.

8. An extensive search of commercial and Council-owned properties was undertaken with the Property Assets, Services and Securities (PASS) team in 2021. After consideration of several factors such as location, building lay-out, accessibility, suitability for use, cost and availability, the preferred location to proceed with was determined to be 3-5 Bridge Street, Granville, a Council-owned property.

9. The Granville property was acquired by Council in 2021 to facilitate the Granville Town Square Master Plan vision. This Master Plan will provide an open urban plaza for the Granville community that will provide vital space for community activations and community gatherings such as markets and open-air cinemas. The Granville property will, at an appropriate time, be demolished to facilitate this vision.

10. The Master Plan is unfunded and appears in the Council Outside Contributions Plan (O26a) for delivery within ten (10) years. Sufficient funds are not anticipated to be collected for at least five (5) years, which aligns with PAS’ requirement for a five (5)-year tenure.

11. If Council applies for and receives grant funding to deliver the Master Plan before the five (5) years, Council will phase works undertaken to ensure PAS’ minimum five (5)-year tenure can be delivered.

12. To determine the feasibility of the Granville property, a Business Case and Initial Cost Plan were developed, and a building compliance review was undertaken. The Business Case and Cost Plan were approved by Council’s internal Project Review Committee in March 2022, whilst the building compliance review was completed in June 2022.

13. A Councillor Workshop was held on 18 July 2022 to provide information to Councilors on the project’s background, proposed location, schedule and budget.

14. The draft schedule for the relocation project includes:

· design works undertaken, September to October 2022

· tender to appoint builder, November to December 2022

· fit-out works, January to March 2023.

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

15. To ensure business continuity, PAS is currently delivering an alternative program to replace the program typically delivered at 68 Macquarie Street. This has included: providing programs at alternative venues within and beyond the Parramatta LGA; presenting outdoor temporary art projects; and providing digital programming, which has been important during peak pandemic periods.

16. During this time PAS has provided studio spaces to artists with partner venues including with the Wentworth Point Community Centre and Library, Boronia Grove Community Centre and the Powerhouse Discovery Centre as well as delivered outdoor arts programming in various LGA locations including Epping, Ermington and Newington.

17. Despite the success of delivering an alternative program, it is imperative that the new location be confirmed to: ensure operational continuity; maximise creative opportunities to artists and community; ensure Council’s compliance with State Government funding already awarded to PAS via Create NSW; and ensure future State Government funding success.

18. The Granville location provides several benefits including: an accessible location; operational continuity; contribution to the activation and revitalisation of Granville; and the building will allow PAS to deliver an expanded portfolio due to a slight increase in floor space from the previous CBD location. It is anticipated that this will enable PAS to deliver outcomes from their First Nations Engagement Strategy (currently in draft form) including a collaborative First Nations studio offering.

19. Council’s long-term financial planning has not forecast any income for the utilisation or activation of 3-5 Bridge Street.

20. Alternative strategies for the Granville property include being left vacant until demolition with no revenue return to Council or seeking a commercial tenant with revenue return to Council, which would be in the order of $180,000 per annum.

21. Base level occupancy compliance work would be undertaken to facilitate PAS’ tenure to the value of $250,000 (source: Property Reserve). To secure a commercial tenant, compliance requirements would expand, representing an increased cost to Council of between $150,000 to $250,000, additional to the $250,000 base level occupancy compliance works required.

CONSULTATION & TIMING

Stakeholder Consultation

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

Date	Stakeholder	Stakeholder Comment	Council Officer Response	Responsibility
February 2021	Focus group with six (6) current PAS artists	Artists discussed the importance of: access to public transport and parking; access to studios and size of studios, 24-hour access, common spaces.	Findings to be taken into consideration for the Relocation Project.	Community Services
15 April 2021	Project Review Committee	Lite Business Case presented. Revise Business Case including financial information.	Proceed with identification of premises for consideration and confirming financial information.	Community Services
18 August 2021	Current and former PAS artists, survey conducted in an online focus group of 24 attendees.	92% of artists felt that it was important or very important for PAS to be located in or near the Parramatta CBD. Most important reason cited: access by public transport and availability of parking; followed by access to CBD services including shops, printing and food.	Findings to be taken into consideration for the Relocation Project.	Community Services
6 December 2021	PAS Program Advisory Group including external and internal SMEs. 10 attendees.	Highlighted importance of building accessibility, safety considerations and noted Granville as a viable location.	Feedback to be taken into consideration for the Relocation Project.	Community Services
17 March 2022	Project Review Committee	Business Case and Initial Cost Plan approved. Proceed with proposal.	Next steps include BCA compliance review, Councillor Workshop and Council endorsement via Council Report.	Community Services

Councillor Consultation

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

Date

Councillor

Councillor Comment

Council Officer Response

Responsibility

18 July

Councillor Workshop

Lord Mayor Davis, Deputy Lord Mayor Pandey, Councillors Bradley, Darley, Green, Humphries, Maclean, Prociv, Siviero, Valjak, Wang.

Agreed with proposal. Next step, Council Report.

Proceed to Council Report.

Community Services

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

24. No contracts or agreements will be required.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

25. The compensation of $388,585 paid to Council by State Government, due to the compulsory acquisition of 68 Macquarie Street, has been restricted in the Property Reserve. It is recommended that a further $250,000 be allocated to the PAS Relocation Project from the Property Reserve, to provide a total Relocation Project capital budget of $638,585. The make good provision for 68 Macquarie Street of $142,500 is not required and will be released as detailed in the table below during the reforecast as part of the September Quarterly Review in FY2022/23.

26. There is currently a PAS operating lease budget of $337,856 per annum, which is also included in the Long Term Financial Plan. By PAS operating from the Council-owned property at 3-5 Bridge Street there is a direct saving of $337,856 per annum to Council in operating lease expense (which is noted as external cost in the table below).

27. Estimated depreciation of the fit-out is calculated based on a 5-year useful life at $128,000 per annum, based on the capital budget of $638,585.

28. All other PAS operating costs associated with delivering services from 3-5 Bridge Street are also included in Council’s current operating budget.

29. If PAS continues to occupy the 3-5 Bridge Street premises for the 5 year period, then the total cumulative operating result of Council, including the current financial year, will benefit by $1,529,636 from a $638,585 Capex outlay.

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

	FY 22/23	FY 23/24	FY 24/25	FY 25/26	FY 26/27	FY 27/28
Revenue
Internal Revenue
External Revenue
Total Revenue	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A

Funding Source

Operating Result
External Costs	($337,856)	($337,856)	($337,856)	($337,856)	($337,856)	($337,856)
Internal Costs
Depreciation		$128,000	$128,000	$128,000	$128,000	$128,000
Other (release of make good provision)	($142,500)
Total Operating Result	($480,356)	($209,856)	($209,856)	($209,856)	($209,856)	($209,856)
(negative result is a benefit)

Funding Source – Property Reserve	$250,000
Funding Source – Compensation NSW Gov	$388,585

CAPEX
External	$388,585
Internal	$250,000
Other	NIL
Total CAPEX	$638,585

Sophia Kouyoumdjian

Director Parramatta Artist Studios & Cultural Services

Ian Woodward

Group Manager Legal Services

Bryan Hynes

Executive Director Property & Place

John Angilley

Chief Financial and Information Officer

Jon Greig

Executive Director Community Services

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council 12 September 2022 Item 13.7

REPORTS TO COUNCIL - FOR COUNCIL DECISION

ITEM NUMBER 13.7

SUBJECT Recommendation on the naming of facilities in the Parramatta Aquatic Centre

REFERENCE F2022/00105 - D08631084

REPORT OF Strategic Communication Specialist

CSP THEME: FAIR

workshop/briefing date: 15 August 2022

PURPOSE:

To approve the names recommended for the constituent elements within the Parramatta Aquatic Centre based on the findings of the public engagement process.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council note the outcomes of the second stage of public engagement process on naming suggestions for the elements (rooms, facilities) within the facility

(b) Further, that Council endorse the names recommended for the constituent elements within the Parramatta Aquatic Centre as identified in paragraph 4 of this report.

BACKGROUND

1. At its meeting on 11 July 2022, Council endorsed a second stage of community engagement for the constituent elements within the Parramatta Aquatic Centre. The endorsement included the following actions for Council staff:

a. A shortlist of publicly submitted names was to be presented to the community, together with the submissions from Dharug representatives.

b. The community would be invited to vote on a preferred set of names using Dharug/English dual naming principles and primarily based around the theme of local fauna.

2. A range of resources were developed to support and promote the community engagement period which took place over two (2) weeks from Wednesday 13 July to Wednesday 27 July 2022. Collateral included posters (including QR code), screens at Council libraries and the Customer Service Centre, as well as a website banner and landing page. Further, established Council communication channels, including social media, ePulse and emails, were used to promote the engagement.

3. A project page on Participate Parramatta hosted the engagement and all communication channels directed feedback to be provided via this page. The community was invited to select between one (1) and eight (8) options from a list of sixteen (16) names, with an additional option to select ‘none of the above’. Overall, a total of 87 contributions were received: 85 via the online survey hosted on Participate Parramatta, and two via email. The following five names were voted most popular:

a. Barra Ngurang (eel room)

b. Yanada Ngurang (moon room)

c. Bugi Badu (swimming pool)

d. Gunggung Badu (frog pool)

e. Budyari Badu (good water)

ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES

4. Based on the outcomes from the community engagement process and the feedback of Dharug community consultants, operational staff associated with the new Parramatta Aquatic Centre determined the following names to be most appropriate and allocated to selected elements within the facility:

English name (primary wayfinding)	Dual name (incorporated in wayfinding signage where possible and on door plates)	Translation (referenced on actual door plates or interpretative panels)
Studio 1	Guman Ngurang	Casuarina room
Studio 2	Barra Ngurang	Eel room
Studio 3	Yanada Ngurang	Moon room
Community Room	Baraba Ngurang	Bullrush room
Kevin Hession Stand	N/A	N/A
50m Pool	Memorial Pool
25m Pool	Bugi Badu	Swimming pool
Spa, Steam and Sauna	Budyari Badu	Good water
Program Pool	Gulyangarri Badu	Children's pool
Activity Room	Dyanmila Ngurang	Play place
Splash Play Area	Gunggung Badu	Frog pool
Crèche Service	Gurang Ngurang	Infants' place

5. The inclusion of dual naming of the facilities will be worked through with a wayfinding specialist to confirm how this is best reflected in the signage suite. It is anticipated that, for the purposes of wayfinding signage, the English name will be primary. Wherever possible, the Dharug name will be incorporated into wayfinding signage and on nameplates for the spaces. The English translation of the Dharug names will be incorporated into name plates and interpretative panels.

6. Overall, ten (10) spaces or pools in the new facility have been selected to have a dual name. The proposed names are in addition to the names noted and endorsed at the 11 July 2022 meeting, namely the Kevin Hession Stand and the Memorial Pool (50m pool).

7. Gurang Badu (babies' pool) was voted sixth most popular in the engagement activity. However, it is proposed to use Gurang Ngurang as the name for the crèche service that will operate within the Community Room, in addition to other uses.

8. A map of the facility and brief rationale for the name allocations is provided at Attachment 1.

CONSULTATION & TIMING

Stakeholder Consultation

9. In addition to previous extensive Councillor and stakeholder consultation regarding the Parramatta Aquatic Centre naming, the following has been undertaken in relation to this matter:

Date

Stakeholder

Stakeholder Comment

Council Officer Response

Responsibility

13 July to 27 July 2022

Community

Views sought

for a shortlist of 16 naming options for the

elements within the facility.

Voting has helped guide the proposed allocations of Dharug names.

Community

Services / City

Engagement

and

Experience

August 2022

Internal stakeholders

Views sought

for the selection of proposed Dharug names for the elements and some services in the

facility.

Feedback has

helped guide the

proposals within

this report.

Community

Services

Councillor Consultation

10. Councillor workshops regarding the naming of the Aquatic Centre and the constituent elements were held on 22 June 2022 and 15 August 2022.

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

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

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

12. If Council resolves to approve this report in accordance with the proposed resolution, there are no unbudgeted financial implications for Council’s budget.

Julie-Ann Wigham

Strategic Communication Specialist

Carly Rogowski

Executive Director, City Engagement & Experience

John Angilley

Chief Financial and Information Officer

Brett Newman

Chief Executive Officer

Attachments:

1⇩

Proposed allocations of Dharug names - Parramatta Aquatic Centre

3 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Governance Manager		Lord Mayor Cr Donna Davis	Chief Executive Officer

	Minute Clerk
Cr Phil Bradley				Cr Lorraine Wearne	Sound
Cr Sameer Pandey, Deputy Lord Mayor				Cr Donna Wang
Cr Paul Noack				Cr Michelle Garrard
Cr Ange Humphries				Cr Dan Siviero	IT
Cr Dr Patricia Prociv				Cr Henry Green
Cr Pierre Esber				Cr Kellie Darley
Cr Cameron Maclean				Cr Georgina Valjak

Obligations
Oath [Affirmation] of Office by Councillors	I swear [solemnly and sincerely declare and affirm] that I will undertake the duties of the office of Councillor in the best interests of the people of the City of Parramatta Council and the City of Parramatta Council that I will faithfully and impartially carry out the functions, powers, authorities and discretions vested in me under the Local Government Act 1993 or any other Act to the best of my ability and judgement.
Code of Conduct Conflict of Interests
Pecuniary Interests	A Councillor who has a pecuniary interest in any matter with which the Council is concerned, and who is present at a meeting of the Council at which the matter is being considered, must disclose the nature of the interest to the meeting. The Councillor must not be present at, or in sight of, the meeting: a) At any time during which the matter is being considered or discussed, or b) At any time during which the Council is voting on any question in relation to the matter.
Non-Pecuniary Conflict of Interests	A Councillor who has a non-pecuniary conflict of interest in a matter, must disclose the relevant private interest in relation to the matter fully and on each occasion on which the non-pecuniary conflict of interest arises in relation to the matter.
Significant Non-Pecuniary Conflict of Interests	A Councillor who has a significant non-pecuniary conflict of interest in relation to a matter under consideration at a Council meeting, must manage the conflict of interest as if they had a pecuniary interest in the matter.
Non-Significant Non-Pecuniary Interests	A Councillor who determines that they have a non-pecuniary conflict of interest in a matter that is not significant and does not require further action, when disclosing the interest must also explain why conflict of interest is not significant and does not require further action in the circumstances.

Item	Subject	Councillor	Question
13.8	Future Waste Services	Garrard	How many residents have opted for a 240L general waste bin at this current time?
13.8	Future Waste Services	Valjak	What is the cost of replacing every 140L bin with an 80L bin?
14.1	CBD Footpaths Audit and Pavement Replacement Program	Bradley	Could an estimate be provided of what proportion of complying developments lodge an appropriate security bond or deposit with Council. This is with reference to the event of pavement damage occurring during works.
14.1	CBD Footpaths Audit and Pavement Replacement Program	Bradley	(Relating to the above question) It is my understanding that if a security bond is not provided, we cannot take direct action against the developer. Is that true?
14.2	Name Change at Wentworth Point – Jewel and Sanctuary Buildings	Garrard	Under the proposed change, would the postcodes remain the same?


	Press	Press

Public Gallery