3965

RESOLVED      (Esber/Garrard)

(a)    That the request to attend the Ordinary Council Meeting dated 12 September 2022 via remote means submitted by Councillor Wearne due to personal reasons be accepted.

(b)    Further, that the apology by Lord Mayor, Councillor Davis due to personal reasons be accepted and leave of absence granted.

SUBJECT:         Minutes of the Council Meeting held on 22 August 2022

3966

Resolved           (Noack/Siviero)

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

9.1

SUBJECT          PUBLIC FORUM 1: Item 13.4 - 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 - D08683385

FROM               Rick Graf

The Billbergia Group is disappointed in the report and recommendation, listed at item 13.4 on the proposed Homebush Bay West DCP Amendment.

We find it difficult to understand the apparent about-face on the 2-stage design excellence competition process run by City of Parramatta and supported by Council decisions through each stage of the process across 2017, 2018 & 2020. The recommendation to reject an international design excellence process run by Council, based on Council’s brief, and reject the independent jury findings that were accepted by Council - in favour of a new Council officer’s design scheme is disappointing.

At its most basic level, it does not give due recognition to the credentials of the internationally recognised architectural firms that participated in the process and the highly qualified independent expert jury including the City of Parramatta’s City Architect.

Billbergia invested more than a million dollars participating in the Council’s design excellence process over 6 years. The recommendation to disregard this process creates a risk for industry participation in future design excellence competitions in the LGA.

We contend that the report to Council and preferred scheme put forward contains errors and inconsistencies that cannot be sustained, including:

1.  Report commentary on building heights and setbacks setting “an undesirable precedent” and “that no towers, both existing and planned, currently exist within 100m of the Homebush Bay foreshore”.

A recommendation accepted by the previous Council of October 2021 for a similar location (known as Sanctuary by Sekisui) included built form of 3 x 40 storey towers, one of which is located within 32m of the Parramatta River foreshore.

2.  Report commentary stating the “proposed towers visually converge creating a ‘wall’ of development” fails to consider recent amendments to reposition the proposed towers improving view sharing.

On analysis, the alternative preferred scheme in the report includes a wall of buildings along Burroway Road, with a 25-storey tower immediately facing an existing building on Wentworth Place, maximising view loss for residents from this development.

3.  The proposed location of buildings in the report’s preferred scheme creates additional overshadowing of the 'Urban Park' during the critical daylight hours between 11am and 1pm, does not meet Council’s own DCP guidelines and is not the best outcome for the site.

In summary, Billbergia has been involved in Wentworth Point for more than 15 years and remains committed to creating a sustainable community with the services and amenities to make it a great place to live. Today, Wentworth Point has been recognised for excellence nationally across all industry bodies as a multi-award-winning master planned community development. Our Block H proposal has the potential to make Wentworth point even better.

We have worked in good faith with Council through a 2-stage design excellence competition process and have subsequently reduced building heights and repositioned the tower locations in response to community consultation.

Since public exhibition 2 years ago, Government funding commitments for Metro West rail, PLR2 and traffic improvements at Hill Road/Bennelong Parkway intersection and Australia Avenue roundabout have addressed all conditions set by the previous Council, with traffic modelling being endorsed by Transport for NSW.

Unfortunately, the recommendation in the report to Council does not appear to consider the amendments and relegates the scheme to attachment 7 of the Council Report.

Council is now being asked to endorse the report recommendation and an officer’s preferred reference scheme that has not been subject to third-party design process or community consultation, and has been publicly available for less than 7 days.

As the proponent and on behalf of the community, we strongly urge Council to reject the report recommendation and instead approve or alternatively re-exhibit the design scheme at attachment 7 of the Council report to enable proper consultation.

STAFF RESPONSE

The submission places heavy reliance on a design competition having been carried out to support the proposed DCP amendment.  It is important to be aware that a design competition is not required for this site. The applicant elected to run a design competition.  Council did not resolve to run the Stage 1 design competition.  Council did resolve in 2018 to proceed with the second half of the design competition, noting that this was not the recommendation of staff.  This in effect meant that Council directed that a design competition should be run for a pre-determined amount of floorspace on the site which is significantly greater than that allowed for by the current planning controls without the preliminary urban design analysis that would normally be carried out beforehand to set the basis for a DCP amendment, hence the initial assessment stage has been skipped. In other words, the identification of the draft planning controls that were placed on public exhibition did not follow due process. 

As a result of Council resolving in 2018 to proceed with the second half of the design competition, Council staff responded accordingly and endorsed the Design Competition Brief to the parameters set by Council.  The competition took place based on Council’s resolution to accommodate 85,000sqm on the site before any public consultation on that proposal had taken place, or there was an opportunity to test the proposal through preliminary urban design analysis. This is 55,000sqm above the current DCP control. This equates to approximately an extra 640 apartments.

The assertion now being made, following the first opportunity the community has had to express its views on the proposal, is that Council should discard community feedback and Council expert and professional assessment BECAUSE a design competition was held.  Council is required to consider the results of the public exhibition, and the last Council resolution required these results to be reported back to Council for consideration.

The applicant states that “The recommendation to disregard this process creates a risk for industry participation in future design excellence competitions in the LGA.” By no way does this experience undermine or create risk for industry as Council has well-established and consistent processes for all other applications whereby the design competition follows the establishment of new planning controls.

The applicant states “that the report to Council and preferred scheme put forward contains errors and inconsistencies that cannot be sustained”.  This is wrong. I will now respond to each of the detailed points made:

·    On the matter of the report stating “that no towers, both existing and planned, currently exist within 100m of the Homebush Bay foreshore”, reference is made for comparison to the Sekisui development on the other side of Hill Road away from the Homebush Bay foreshore.  The text in bold/italics in the officer report is completely accurate (see para 29 of the report on page 224).  The urban design assessment explained in the report clearly articulates the difference in foreshore setback requirements and height distribution which is DIFFERENT on the west side of Hill Road along the Parramatta River foreshore compared to the east side along the Homebush Bay foreshore.  

·    The applicant claims that analysis of the impact of the proposal on view sharing fails to consider adjustments made in the recently submitted alternative proposal, however these adjustments are not significant and only increase building separation by 2m (see analysis on p36-37 of Attachment 2).  Whereas the officer scheme co-locates towers and minimises floorplates so that the view loss resulting from the officer scheme results in about 48 less apartments being affected by view loss as opposed to the recently submitted alternative (see p37 of Attachment 2).

·         The submission claims that in relation to overshadowing of the park, the officer scheme “does not meet Council’s own DCP guidelines and is not the best outcome for the site”.  This is incorrect. The applicant’s exhibited draft DCP controls require a minimum of 30% solar access between 9am-3pm at any time of the year and 40% solar access between 10am-2pm during mid-winter.  The officer scheme maintains solar access compliance to the proposed park between 9:00am-2:00pm whereas the applicant’s preferred scenario (May 2022) only maintains solar access from 12pm-3pm.  Hence while both schemes have non-compliances with the applicant’s own draft controls, the applicant’s proposal has the significantly higher non-compliance (see p34-35 of Attachment 2).

·         The applicant claims that Wentworth Point has been recognised for excellence nationally across all industry bodies.  This is not accurate.  The industry bodies referred to include UDIA, Urban Taskforce and Master Builders’ Association, not design accredited bodies such as the Institute of Architects, Institute of Landscape Architects or the National Urban Design Awards.  The awards referred to were for the overall development and for its contribution of high-density combined with a range of community infrastructure, with easy access to public transport.  It is worth noting that the proposed design competition scheme proposes heights and density and a pattern of development contrary to the award winning Wentworth Point Marina development.  

The principal purpose of the report is to respond to submissions received during the exhibition period and present an assessment to Council for its consideration.  The alternative scheme referred to by the applicant and provided at Attachment 7 lacks detail to enable it to be accurately assessed by Council officers and to be immediately placed on public exhibition.  The report outlines a preferred staff scheme and clearly articulates a preference for the applicant to submit a scheme consistent with the staff preferred scheme.  This process would be the subject of an assessment, report to Council and if endorsed community consultation prior to it being finalised.

9.2

SUBJECT          PUBLIC FORUM 2: Item 13.4 - 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 - D08683436

FROM                 Mark Green

Thank you for the opportunity to speak.

I wish to express my concerns about the Council's recommendations for Block H. I am speaking primarily as a concerned resident of Wentworth Point who is involved in a number of Wentworth Point Community groups. I bring the perspective of a Strata & Community Association representative, a member of two Council Advisory groups, a teacher and a grandparent.

My concerns primarily relate to what I see as the lack of any comprehensive plan to address the fundamental issues faced by the Wentworth Point community. I have read the Council report on the proposed development and I am extremely concerned that it has had no input from the community, fails to address the chronic lack of open space and community infrastructure and accepts the almost certain destruction of our unique natural environment.

For those that are unaware of the unique nature of Wentworth Point and dare I say with Councillor Noack present I doubt that any Councillor in this chamber is unaware of Wentworth Point.

Wentworth Point is located on the junction of the Parramatta River & Haslams Creek and is the most easterly point of the City of Parramatta. According to the 2021 Census we have close to 13,000 residents, though the true figure is significantly higher because some of the apartment buildings are still classified as Sydney Olympic Park. There is only one old industrial road in and one road out of Wentworth Point. All residents live in apartments and according to the census we have a population density of 21,700 people per kilometre. This makes Wentworth Point one of the highest density postcodes in Australia.

To quote Councillor Noack, Wentworth Point is our version of Manhattan. The issue for myself and the community is that we don’t have parks, ovals, playgrounds or infrastructure to support the population. Local Rosehill Ward Councillor Siviero made the point recently that it is wrong to say that the infrastructure is insufficient to support the community because it is actually non-existent. We have no parks or playgrounds and one tiny private childcare centre. The only community owned facility is the Community Centre & Library which was paid for by Voluntary Planning Contributions from the same applicant.

It isn’t that we don’t have children in Wentworth Point. In fact, we have over 1,000 babies & toddlers, a primary school with 610 kids and expanding rapidly and 219 high school age children. The lack of infrastructure is not something that Council and planners are unaware of.

As early as 2013 Auburn Council & the Department of Planning highlighted the need to deliver community facilities as part of the planning for Wentworth Point to become an Urban Activation precinct.

We are now left with the proposal for Block H which is the last major private development site but no plan for how the needs of our community will be met. In fact, we are aware that the only piece of land remaining, a piece of Crown land adjoining the Peninsula is the subject of negotiations for future residential development. This adhoc planning approach has left myself and other residents frustrated and disillusioned.

You may wonder why we moved to Wentworth Point given the clear lack of infrastructure and services. Firstly, residents were promised, almost a decade ago, as part of the urban activation precinct that all levels of government would work together and with the private sector to provide the infrastructure and services for our unique community. Secondly, Wentworth Point is surrounded by exceptional natural beauty. Our Peninsula is on the tip of Homebush bay and our neighbours include the Badu Wetlands & Newington Nature Reserve. Homebush bay is Sydney’s most important site for migratory birds protected under the Ramsar convention. Wentworth Point Peninsula has remnant coastal saltmarsh which is protected under Biodiversity Conservation legislation. The Council’s recommendations don’t address the need to preserve and enhance this exceptional natural environment.

Finally, I wish to quote from the social impact assessment for the new High School at Wentworth Point by Urbis Pty Ltd for the Department of Education. “The proposal will have a very high negative impact on student access to open space and associated physical and mental health and wellbeing. This impact is likely to be more pronounced for Wentworth Point students given the existing deficit of open space throughout the suburb’.

STAFF RESPONSE

The submission appears to be founded on a misunderstanding of the process that has been followed.  The Council officer report has in fact been founded on an analysis of the 763 submissions that were made to Council following the public exhibition of the proposal.  That exhibition was the first time the public have been given an opportunity to express their views on the proposed changes to the planning controls and, as the report notes, the responses received, including one from this public forum speaker, were strongly opposed to the scale of development proposed.  These concerns in turn led to Council officers reviewing matters raised and developing an alternative proposal that is more aligned with the current planning controls and seeks to address community concerns raised.

In relation to the comment concerning the lack of open space, as the report notes, the current DCP requires 10,973sqm of public open space to be provided on the Block H site.  The staff recommendation notes that the configuration and proportion of proposed public open space in the applicant’s proposal 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.

The submission states that the Community Centre and Library was paid for by contributions from the applicant via a Voluntary Planning Agreement. To clarify, the cold shell of the Wentworth Point Community Centre and Library was delivered by the developer however the fitout was partly paid for by developer contributions collected from a range of developments in the area and was also part funded by Council.  It is noted that the draft Planning Agreement associated with the applicant’s original proposal offers $8 Million to Council to reimburse Council for funds it expended on the fit out of the facility.

The submission asserts that there is no comprehensive plan to address fundamental issues faced by the Wentworth Point community.  In fact, Wentworth Point does have existing planning controls that were established to help provide a balance of new development and supporting community infrastructure.  These controls take account of the need to consider the environmental impacts of new development, and it should be noted in that respect, that Block H itself has not been identified as having any existing natural characteristics that need special protection. The applicant’s proposal is seeking to significantly vary well-established existing planning controls for the site to be able to achieve approximately 640 additional dwellings. 

Block H is one of three remaining major undeveloped sites on the peninsula, the others being the State Government owned site to the north adjoining the park, and 37-39 Hill Road to the south.  Planning controls already exist for these sites and the staff recommendation reflects a concern that, if Council approves the applicant’s original or revised scheme to allow planning controls that disregard well established planning and design principles for this part of Wentworth Point to facilitate buildings of up to 50 storeys, being double the 25 storeys currently permitted by these controls, the proposed amendment could also set a precedent to allow even greater levels of development than the current controls allow on those other sites, generating a need for even more community infrastructure that they will not be able to satisfy.

The submitter’s concern that, as identified by the Department of Education, the proposal will have a very high negative impact on student access to open space and associated physical and mental wellbeing is acknowledged.  It is agreed that the substantial increase in density being sought at the site by the proposed DCP amendment is likely to result in such an impact. 

9.3

SUBJECT          PUBLIC FORUM 3: Item 13.4 - 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 - D08686168

FROM                 Anna Han

Thank you for the opportunity to speak before Council. I am here tonight to speak against the Proposed amendments to DCP and draft Planning Agreement for Block H. I support the Council officers’ recommendations and ask that Council refuse the proposed amendments.

I support findings in the assessment report especially analysis of negative impacts the proposal will have on ‘Public domain and open space’ and ‘Traffic and transport’ in the local area.

I am not keen on Council’s Preferred Scheme as the optimal design or outcome for the subject site Block H. This design poses many issues and the uplift in GFA and density alone is enough to raise concern. The Applicant currently has approval to build 29,743sqm in GFA and up to 25 storeys under current controls, I don’t see why Block H must have an uplift at all. Having said that, I do understand that the Preferred Scheme is only a guideline for the Applicant should they wish to submit a new proposal. I also do not support the applicant’s revised scheme (with building height up to 45 storeys instead of 50 storeys) and agree with Council officers that the revised scheme is “largely the same as the exhibited DCP amendment”.

I would like to remind this council what residents have done over the last four years to oppose this proposal.

There were two Public Forum speeches by residents to inform council of community objections (they occurred on 09/04/2018 and 28/05/2018).

Two petitions were lodged with Council (on 23/04/2018 and 28/05/2018) to oppose the amendments. The first petition had over 100 signatures and the second petition had over 800 signatures.

I believe the council officers’ report is comprehensive and well written, their recommendations are what this community’s been waiting for over the last four years.

·         We’ve written, translated, designed, printed and delivered over 7000 flyers to households across Wentworth Point and Rhodes.

·         We started an online petition that now has nearly 1700 signatures and has been submitted to Council tonight.

·         We designed “Say NO to Overdevelopment in Wentworth Point” T-Shirts and banners.

·         We’ve taken every possible opportunity to share information and raise awareness including multiple social media platforms.

I believe we have literally done everything we can therefore and now it is in your hands, the Councillors.

So many hours of work by so many residents have gone into opposing this proposal. Myself and many others would be saddened and extremely disappointed should council and councillors not adopt the recommendations in its’ entirety tonight.

There is absolutely no reason for anything short of a full and total objection to the proposed amendments. We were let down once before by the previous council, I am hopeful that we won’t be let down again by this current council.

Thank you.

STAFF RESPONSE

No staff response was provided.

Matter of Urgency

Councillor Esber put forward the following to Council:

I would like to move a Condolence Motion to recognise the passing of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, and show our respects for her commitment to the Commonwealth.

Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II passed away on 8 September 2022 at the age of 96.

For 70 years, Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II served the Crown, her country and the Commonwealth with grace, dignity and dedication.

The young Princess Elizabeth became Queen of England at the age of 25 after the death of her father, King George VI, in 1952. Her Coronation took place in Westminster Abbey on 2 June 1953. Her official title was Her Majesty Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God, Queen of Australia and Her other Realms and Territories, Head of the Commonwealth.

Queen Elizabeth II went on to become the longest-reigning British monarch, Australian sovereign and leader of the Commonwealth of Nations, which she navigated for seven decades with dignity, courage and commitment.

Queen Elizabeth II visited Australia 16 times during her reign, including 12 visits to NSW.

The people of Parramatta caught their first glimpse of Her Majesty during her first tour of Australia in 1954. The Queen and Prince Philip travelled on the Royal Train from Bathurst to Sydney, waving to crowds from the train’s observation deck as they passed through Parramatta.

On Thursday 30 April 1970, The Queen, accompanied by Prince Philip, officially opened the restored Old Government House, Parramatta, as a museum.

In 1986, Queen Elizabeth II officially opened the former Parramatta Stadium, an exciting occasion for our City and a moment in history that many in our community will never forget.

In 1988, Queen Elizabeth II elevated Parramatta’s position of mayor to Lord Mayor to mark the City’s bicentenary. Parramatta is one of just four councils in NSW with a Lord Mayor.

On 21 March 2000, Queen Elizabeth II also visited Sydney Olympic Park, the site of Sydney’s 2000 Olympics. During her visit, the Queen was shown through the Games’ basketball and swimming venues, the athletes’ village and Stadium Australia.

Her Majesty The Queen is succeeded by His Majesty The King, Charles the Third, by the Grace of God, King of Australia and his other Realms and Territories, Head of the Commonwealth.

3967

RESOLVED      (Esber/Garrard)

That the matter be considered at this meeting due to the reasons outlined above.

The Deputy Lord Mayor ruled the matter was of great urgency in accordance with clause 9.3 of Council’s Code of Meeting Practice.

3968

Resolved           (Esber/Garrard)

(a)   That Council acknowledge the passing of Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II;

(b)   That Council note our own formal condolences to His Majesty The King, Charles III, and the Royal Family are being prepared and will be sent to Buckingham Palace;

(c)   That Council note flags are being flown at half-mast across the City of Parramatta until the day after the funeral of the late Sovereign, Queen Elizabeth II;

(d)   That Council note condolence books are being set up at Council’s libraries and Customer Contact Centre for a one-month period for the community to pass on their condolences and Council’s website has been updated to provide the location list and link for the digital condolence book;

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

Note: Council held a minute’s silence.

Matter of Urgency

Councillor Esber put forward the following to Council:

I would like to move a Condolence Motion to recognise the passing of Mr John Moxon and show our respects for his contributions to the Parramatta community.

Mr John Bruce Moxon, long-time Northmead resident, disability advocate and former member of Council’s Access Advisory Committee, passed away on Monday, 5 September 2022. John was the loving husband of Margaret Tucker Moxon and father of three.

Following an accident that left him with quadriplegia at the age of 31, Mr Moxon dedicated his life to being an energetic and powerful advocate for people living with disability.

A graduate of Macquarie University, John Moxon worked in the NSW public service as a senior policy officer with responsibility for disability policy and recruitment, before moving into mainstream HR policy, industrial relations, training and development, and strategic planning. On his departure from the public service in 1998, Mr Moxon established his own consultancy business, Moxon Green and Associates Pty Ltd.

Over more than 40 years, John Moxon was an active disability advocate with an unwavering commitment to improving outcomes for people living with disability on a local, state and national scale.

In the City of Parramatta, Mr Moxon was one of the founders of Parramatta Computer Pals for Seniors in 2007, serving on the committee for ten years. He served as a founding member and one-time Chair of Council’s Access Advisory Committee. Mr Moxon served on Council’s Access Advisory Committee for over 25 years, and was the recipient of the 2010 Parramatta City Council Senior Citizen of the Year Award.

He was a tireless advocate for local initiatives and projects to make Parramatta more accessible and inclusive for all, including advocating for accessible footpaths, parks and facilities.

Mr Moxon also advocated for celebrations for International Day for People with Disability, was President of the Telopea / Dundas International Year of Disabled Persons committee, and served as Chair of Active Job Services, a Parramatta based job placement agency for people living with disability.

At a state and national level, Mr Moxon served as coordinator of the Wheeling Free program on 2SER-FM, President of the Australian Quadriplegic Association (now SCIA), Founding President of Physical Disability Council of Australia (now Physical Disability Australia) and its state counterpart PDCN, and a Founder of Lives Worth Living, a network of senior disability rights advocates.

John also participated in the Senate enquiry which led to the establishment of the Disability Discrimination Act and in 2013 was the recipient of a National Disability Award, the Lesley Hall Award for Lifetime Achievement in Disability, for his outstanding work to improve the lives of people with disability.

John Moxon was renowned for his passion and commitment, energetic leadership, as a voice of common sense and his dedication to influencing all levels of government to have more equitable policies and practices for people with disability to improve outcomes for all.

Many pieces of social infrastructure, not least of all PHIVE and Parramatta Aquatic Centre, carry a legacy of improved accessibility and inclusion as a result of John’s efforts.

3969

RESOLVED      (Esber/Valjak)

That the matter be considered at this meeting due to the reasons outlined above.

The Deputy Lord Mayor ruled the matter was of great urgency in accordance with clause 9.3 of Council’s Code of Meeting Practice.

3970

Resolved           (Esber/Valjak)

(a)   That Council acknowledge the passing of John Moxon, longtime local disability advocate, former member of the Council’s Access Advisory Committee and 2010 Parramatta City Council Senior Citizen of the Year; and

(b)   That the Chamber hold a minute’s silence as a gesture of respect on Mr Moxon’s passing and in recognition of his contributions to the Parramatta community.

(c)  Further, that the Council write to the family and offer our condolences.

Note: Council held a minute’s silence.

Matter of Urgency

Councillor Garrard put forward the following to the Council:

I would like to move a Motion for a report to be brought to Council in relation to the NRL Grand Final to be held in October 2022, and this is the only suitable Council meeting to make this request.

This request is with relation to the Parramatta Eels.

3971

RESOLVED      (Garrard/Siviero)

That the matter be considered at this meeting due to the reasons outlined above.

The Deputy Lord Mayor ruled the matter was of great urgency in accordance with clause 9.3 of Council’s Code of Meeting Practice.

3972

Resolved           (Garrard/Siviero)

(a)    That Council commence discussion with the Parramatta Eels regarding pre-grand final and post-grand final celebrations.

(b)    That a late report be brought back to the next Council meeting, to be held on 26 September 2022, outlining the details of the event and any associated costs.

(c)    Further, that Council install the Parramatta Eels flags throughout the Local Government Area (LGA) immediately after the PHIVE opening, and provided the flags can be readily accessed.

12.1

SUBJECT          Investment Report for July 2022

REFERENCE   F2022/00105 - D08638730

REPORT OF     Tax and Treasury Accountant

3973

Resolved           (Maclean/Garrard)

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

13.1

SUBJECT          2022 Local Government NSW Annual Conference

REFERENCE   F2022/00105 - D08400890

REPORT OF     Executive Officer

3974

Resolved           (Esber/Humphries)

(a)   That Council nominate the following Councillors to be Council’s Voting Delegates for Motions at the 2022 Local Government NSW Annual Conference:

-   Lord Mayor Councillor Donna Davis

-   Deputy Lord Mayor Councillor Sameer Pandey

-   Councillor Ange Humphries

-   Councillor Cameron MacLean

-   Councillor Dan Siviero

-   Councillor Donna Wang

-   Councillor Dr Patricia Prociv

-   Councillor Paul Noack

-   Councillor Phil Bradley

-   Councillor Pierre Esber

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

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.

13.2

SUBJECT          Draft Community Engagement Strategy for Public Exhibition

REFERENCE   F2022/00105 - D08555693

REPORT OF     Community Engagement Senior Advisor

3975

Resolved           (Darley/Maclean)

(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.  

Note:

1.      Councillors Garrard, Esber & MacLean left the Chamber at 7:38pm during consideration of the Item.

2.      Councillor MacLean returned to the Chamber at 7:41pm during consideration of the Item.

3.    Councillor Esber returned to the Chamber at 7:43pm during consideration of the Item.

4.     

5.      Councillor Garrard returned to the Chamber at 7:44pm during consideration of the Item.

13.3

SUBJECT          NSW E-Scooter Shared Scheme Trial

REFERENCE   F2022/00105 - D08628594

REPORT OF     Transport Planning Manager

3976

Resolved           (Prociv/Bradley)

(a)   That Council note the NSW Minister for Active Transport 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 Wentworth Point, Newington, and Carter Street area following six (6) 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 six (6) months of operation along the Parramatta Valley Cycleway.

DIVISION           A division was called, the result being:-

AYES:                Councillors Bradley, Esber, Humphries, Maclean, Noack, Pandey, Prociv and Siviero

NOES:                Councillors Darley, Garrard, Green, Valjak, Wang and Wearne

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

Motion                (Noack/Siviero)

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

(b)   That Council note the applicant has supplied an outline of a revised scheme that seeks to address concerns with the exhibited proposal.

(c)    That Council note further information is required to support the consideration of the alternative scheme including:

•        A detailed planning report identifying the impacts of the changes included in the revised scheme compared to the exhibited proposal;

•        A comprehensive urban design report providing an analysis of context, view sharing, overshadowing, solar access and other relevant matters;

•        Draft DCP Amendment reflective of the revised scheme;

•        Technical reports that update material submitted with the exhibited proposal addressing:

o   Transport, traffic, parking and access

o   Open space/active recreation opportunities

o   Community facilities

o   Other supporting infrastructure needs

•      Any associated updates to the proposed Planning Agreement.

(d)      Further, that Council request the applicant submits the additional information for the revised scheme, as noted in order that a report on the revised scheme can be made to Council to enable its consideration of the revised scheme for the purposes of public exhibition.

Foreshadowed Motion       (Prociv/Darley)

(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.

The Foreshadowed Motion lapsed as the Motion, when put, was declared CARRIED:

3977

Resolved           (Noack/Siviero)

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

(b)  That Council note the applicant has supplied an outline of a revised scheme that seeks to address concerns with the exhibited proposal.

(c)  That Council note further information is required to support the consideration of the alternative scheme including:

•        A detailed planning report identifying the impacts of the changes included in the revised scheme compared to the exhibited proposal;

•        A comprehensive urban design report providing an analysis of context, view sharing, overshadowing, solar access and other relevant matters;

•        Draft DCP Amendment reflective of the revised scheme;

•        Technical reports that update material submitted with the exhibited proposal addressing:

o   Transport, traffic, parking and access

o   Open space/active recreation opportunities

o   Community facilities

o   Other supporting infrastructure needs

•        Any associated updates to the proposed Planning Agreement.

(d)   Further, that Council request the applicant submits the additional information for the revised scheme, as noted in order that a report on the revised scheme can be made to Council to enable its consideration of the revised scheme for the purposes of public exhibition.

DIVISION           A division was called, the result being:-

AYES:                Councillors Esber, Garrard, Green, Humphries, Noack, Pandey, Siviero, Valjak, Wang and Wearne

NOES:                Councillors Bradley, Darley, Maclean and Prociv

ABSTAINED:    Nil

Procedural Motion

3978

RESOLVED      (Garrard/Noack)

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

Note: The meeting was adjourned at 9:03pm for a short recess.

13.5

SUBJECT          Naming Proposal for Unnamed Laneways in North Parramatta

REFERENCE   F2022/00105 - D08644004

REPORT OF     Senior Project Officer Place Services

3979

Resolved           (Esber/Humphries)

(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.

Note: Councillors Prociv and Bradley were not present during consideration of this matter.

13.6

SUBJECT          Parramatta Artists' Studios Relocation

REFERENCE   F2022/00105 - D08612717

REPORT OF     Director Parramatta Artist Studios & Cultural Services

3980

Resolved           (Siviero/Wang)

(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.

Note:

1.    Councillor Bradley returned to the Chamber at 9:14pm during the consideration of this matter.

2.    Councillors Garrard and Prociv were not present during consideration of this matter.

13.7

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

REFERENCE   F2022/00105 - D08631084

REPORT OF     Strategic Communication Specialist

Resolved           (Noack/Darley)

(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.

Note: Councillors Garrard and Prociv were not present during consideration of this matter.

14.1

SUBJECT          Amendment to the Companion Animals Act 1998

REFERENCE   F2022/00105 - D08670336

FROM                 Councillor Phil Bradley

3981

Resolved           (Bradley/Humphries)

That Council write to Local Government NSW (LGNSW) requesting they advocate for the NSW Government to amend the Companion Animals Act 1998, in consultation with Councils, to introduce best practice domestic cat containment requirements to keep cats securely protected at home.

Note:

1.    Councillor Prociv returned to the Chamber at 9:16pm during the consideration of the matter.

2.    Councillor Garrard returned to the Chamber at 9:17pm during the consideration of the matter.

14.2

SUBJECT          Carlingford West/ Cumberland High School Precinct - Traffic Issues

REFERENCE   F2022/00105 - D08662872

FROM                 Councillor Georgina Valjak

3982

Resolved           (Valjak/Darley)

(a)  That Council note the representations from residents regarding the extreme levels of congestion currently occurring near Carlingford West Public School in peak school times due to the increase in student numbers that has occurred in recent years.

(b)  That Council relay the concerns of local residents regarding the traffic congestion to the Department of Planning and Environment and to Schools Infrastructure NSW.

(c)  Further, that as a result of the continued parking infringements, Council consider the installation of cameras in those streets adjacent to CWPS identified as the most problematic following the recent Council parking ‘blitz’.

Note: Councillor Esber left the Chamber at 9:33pm returned to the Chamber at 9:38pm during consideration of the matter

14.3

SUBJECT          Unoccupied Dwellings in the Parramatta LGA

REFERENCE   F2022/00105 - D08668410

FROM                 Councillor Phil Bradley

3983

Resolved           (Bradley/Prociv)

(a)  That Council write to the Minister for Local Government, the Honourable Wendy Tuckerman, and the Minister for Planning and Homes, the Honourable Anthony Roberts requesting they:

1.   Explore more fully methods to identify unoccupied dwellings;

2.   Consider reforms to the Local Government Rating System, and the NSW Land Tax System to provide a financial disincentive for property owners to keep their investment properties unoccupied rather than for the purposes of residential accommodation;

3.   Consider urging or directing Councils to use any additional rate revenue derived from such unoccupied dwellings towards acquisition of key workers/ affordable housing and/or public social housing.

(b)  Further, that Council, recognising unoccupied dwellings is an issue across the Sydney Metropolitan area and NSW, write to the Western Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils (WSROC) Chief Executive Officer (CEO), adjoining Councils and Local Government NSW (LGNSW) seeking support for joint letters calling for the actions in points 1 to 3 above.

Note: Councillor Darley left the Chamber at 9:41pm and returned to the Chamber at 9:44pm during consideration of the matter.

15.1

SUBJECT          Questions Taken on Notice - 22 August 2022 Council Meeting

REFERENCE   F2022/00105 - D08659899

REPORT OF     Governance Manager

Item 13.4 – Application to seek Minister’s Consent to Grant a Lease over Community Land at 358Z North Rocks Road Carlingford

Question from Councillor Wang

During discussion on the motion moved by Councillor Valjak, Councillor Wang asked the following question:

How much are we going to receive from the acquisition?

Can we use the money for the North Rocks community?

Chief Finance and Information Officer Response

In relation to the first question, just to clarify, this is a proposed grant of lease (not an acquisition) of a portion of land at North Rocks Park to Vodafone, in order for Vodafone to operate its telecommunications facility at North Rocks Park. Subject to the Minister for Local Government consenting to the lease being granted, the per annum rental is $17,000 (plus GST), for a term of 10 years (constituted by two consecutive five year leases). The rental increases will be 3.5% per annum.

In relation to the second question, this site is governed by The Hills Parkland Generic Plan of Management 2012 (‘PoM’). This PoM states that the rent payable to Council for this site is to be ‘used for the embellishment of the reserve in which the facility is located’. In other words, the use of the rental income would need to be allocated to the embellishment of North Rocks Park.

Item 14.1 – Preservation of Publicly Owned Land at Wentworth Point for Open Space and Recreation

Question from Councillor Darley

During discussion on the motion moved by Councillor Noack, Councillor Darley asked the following question:

Landcom has outlined that in Stage one (1) of the works, they will be doing the walkway and cycleway around the peninsula.

Is the sea wall specifically covered within the existing development application or is a separate approval required?

Executive Director, City Planning and Design Response

Yes the seawall upgrade is included in the consent issued for the infrastructure works by the then Auburn City Council in 2015.

Item 14.1 – Preservation of Publicly Owned Land at Wentworth Point for Open Space and Recreation

Question from Councillor Bradley

During discussion on the motion moved by Councillor Noack, Councillor Bradley asked the following question:

On the site referred to by Councillor Noack, there was a series of swamp oaks. They were removed. I understand they are an iconic species of endangered ecological communities. I note there was a DA issued. Did the DA include approval for the removal of those swamp oaks?

Executive Director, City Planning and Design Response

Tree removal was approved under the original Auburn consent issued for the infrastructure works in 2015. The tree removal plan indicates all trees are to be removed (mainly pine trees from what the survey suggests) with the exception of the fig trees and saltmarsh. Refer to plan below.

It is also noted a tree approval (TA/592/2021) was granted by City of Parramatta on the 30 November 2021 for the removal of 4 x stands of swamp she oak primarily on the proposed high school site and partially adjoining the mixed use site. This is NOT part of the identified park area.  These 4 x stands included 22 identified swamp she oaks (range of young, semi-mature and mature) which were permitted to be removed to allow for remediation testing to be carried out. These trees were not an Endangered Ecological Community. The removal of these trees had already been allowed via the Auburn consent referred to above.

16.     CLOSED SESSION

3984

Resolved           (Esber/Garrard)

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  Tender 39/2021 Ermington Community Centre, Library and Carpark Accessibility Upgrade. (D08385414) - This report is confidential in accordance with section 10A (2) (d) of the Local Government Act 1993 as the report contains commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed (i) prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it; or (ii) confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council; or (iii) reveal a trade secret.

16.2 Tender 4/2022 Coffey Street and Hilder Road, Ermington between River Road and Tristram Street - Kerb & Gutter, Drainage and Associated Works. (D08440105) - This report is confidential in accordance with section 10A (2) (d) of the Local Government Act 1993 as the report contains commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed (i) prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it; or (ii) confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council; or (iii) reveal a trade secret.

16.3  Sale of land in front of 90-92 Victoria Road, North Parramatta. (D08641804) - This report is confidential in accordance with section 10A (2) (d) of the Local Government Act 1993 as the report contains commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed (i) prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it; or (ii) confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council; or (iii) reveal a trade secret.

16.4  Write Off of Sundry Debtor Accounts - Bad Debts (Deferred Item). (D08660955) - This report is confidential in accordance with section 10A (2) (b) of the Local Government Act 1993 as the report contains a discussion in relation to the personal hardship of a resident or ratepayer.

Matter of Urgency relating to the Recruitment of a new Chief Executive Officer – This item is confidential in accordance with section 10A (2) (a) of the Local Government Act 1993 as the report contains a discussion in relation to personnel matters concerning particular individuals.

Procedural Motion

3985

RESOLVED      (Humphries/Noack)

That Items 16.1, 16.2, 16.3 and 16.4 be resolved en bloc.

16.1

SUBJECT          Tender 39/2021 Ermington Community Centre, Library and Carpark Accessibility Upgrade

REFERENCE   F2021/02938 - D08385414

REPORT OF     Major Projects Manager

3986

Resolved           (Humphries/Noack)

(a)   That Council approve the appointment of the preferred proponent for the Ermington Community Centre, Library and Carpark Accessibility Upgrade for the contract sum as outlined in paragraph 15 of this report.

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

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

16.2

SUBJECT          Tender 4/2022 Coffey Street and Hilder Road, Ermington between River Road and Tristram Street - Kerb & Gutter, Drainage and Associated Works

REFERENCE   F2022/00182 - D08440105

REPORT OF     Major Projects Manager

3987

Resolved           (Humphries/Noack)

(a)   That Council approve appointment of the preferred proponent for the kerb & gutter, stormwater drainage and associated works at Coffey Street and Hilder Road, Ermington between River Road and Tristram Street, for the contract sum as outlined in paragraph 12 of this report.

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

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

16.3

SUBJECT          Sale of land in front of 90-92 Victoria Road, North Parramatta

REFERENCE   F2019/01873 - D08641804

REPORT OF     Property Officer

3988

Resolved           (Humphries/Noack)

(a)   That Council accept the negotiated position agreed dated 11 July 2022 (Attachment 1) and proceeds with the sale of Lot 10 DP 1282456.

(b)   That the proceeds of the sale of land be allocated to Council’s Property Reserve.

(c)   Further, that the CEO be delegated authority to execute all documents in relation to this matter.

16.4

SUBJECT          Write Off of Sundry Debtor Accounts - Bad Debts (Deferred Item)

REFERENCE   F2022/00105 - D08660955

REPORT OF     Rates Manager

3989

Resolved           (Humphries/Noack)

(a)   That Council approve the write-off of the outstanding bad debts for various Sundry Debtor accounts identified in Attachment 1 being $95,983.90 and Attachment 2 being $2,907.35, in accordance with section 213 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2021, which an aggregated total amount of $98,891.25.

(b)   That Council note the current outstanding doubtful debts for various Sundry Debtor accounts identified in Attachment 2, have an aggregated total amount of $136,554.22 after designated proposed write-offs.

(c)   That Council also note that a program is underway to regularly review the list of doubtful debts, attempt debt recovery and to collect both the original debt and associated recovery costs.

(d)   Further, that the results of the debt recovery efforts be reported back to the Finance Committee on a quarterly basis.

Matter of Urgency

Councillor Esber put forward the following to Council:

I would like to move a Motion to:

·       Acknowledge the resignation of Council’s Chief Executive Officer, Mr Brett Newman;

·       Determine Acting CEO arrangements for the intervening period following the departure of Mr Newman, including approvals for necessary delegations to the Acting CEO and;

·       To commence the recruitment process for a new CEO of City of Parramatta Council, including the establishment of a CEO Selection Panel.

3990

RESOLVED      (Esber/Prociv)

That the matter be considered at this meeting due to the reasons outlined above.

The Deputy Lord Mayor ruled the matter was of great urgency in accordance with clause 9.3 of Council’s Code of Meeting Practice.

3991

Resolved           (Esber/Prociv)

Acknowledgement of Service

(a)     That Council acknowledge the service of Council’s CEO Mr Brett Newman, and notes his departure effective from close of business on 30 September 2022.

(b)     That Council formally thanks Mr Newman for his contributions to the City, its residents, workers and visitors, and further thanks him for his strategic vision, dedication and the enormous personal effort he has brought to the role, particularly during the challenges presented by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Appointment of Acting CEO

(c)     That in the intervening period following the departure of Mr Newman and until a new CEO is appointed, Council appoint Mr Bryan Hynes as Acting CEO.

(d)     That pursuant to section 47 of the Interpretation Act 1987 and section 377 of the Local Government Act 1993, Council delegates to the Acting Chief Executive Officer from 1 October 2022 until a new permanent CEO is appointed and commences, the functions of the General Manager to exercise Council’s powers, functions, duties and authorities contained in legislation and the functions as specified in:

1.  the Local Government Act 1993, the Local Government (General) Regulation 2021 and any other relevant or related subordinate legislation; and

2.  any other legislation, regulations or other subordinate legislation under which Council has powers, authorities, duties or functions.

(e)     That these delegations are subject to the following:

1.  Any limitations or restraints under the provisions of the Local Government Act 1993 and any other legislation, regulations or other subordinate legislation relevant to this delegation;

2.  Any direction, limitations or restraints under any resolution made by Council relating to the exercise of any delegated power, function, duty or authority;

3.  The Acting CEO must exercise the delegated powers, functions, duties and authorities in accordance with and subject to:

i)     the provisions of the Local Government Act 1993, the Local Government (General) Regulation 2021 and any other relevant or related subordinate legislation; and

ii)    all and every policy adopted by resolution of the Council and current at the time of the exercise of the delegated powers, functions, duties and authorities.

(f)        That Council delegate to the Acting Chief Executive Officer the acceptance of tenders to a maximum value of $500,000 (incl GST) per tender.

(g)      That Council delegate to the Acting Chief Executive Officer the following road and traffic functions:

·                Line-marking (lane lines, separation lines, edge lines, barrier lines, etc);

·                Parking restrictions (excluding preferential and residential parking schemes);

·                Advisory sign posting;

·                Works zones;

·                Taxi zones / bus zones (subject to consultation with relevant associations and bodies and Transport for NSW);

·                Angled and disabled parking;

·                Light traffic thoroughfares;

·                Regulatory signs (other than turn restrictions and one-way restrictions);

·                Marked foot crossings and children crossings (other than raised crossings or where road narrowing is involved);

·                Temporary road closures / on-the-spot road closures for annual events (as per RMS requirements and subject to Police approval).

(h)      That the delegations provided to Brett Newman at the Council Meetings dated 7 February 2022 and 14 March 2022 be revoked as at the date of the commencement of the Acting Chief Executive Officer.

Commence procurement of Executive Search Firm

(i)      That the process to procure a senior executive recruitment agency to facilitate the process for the recruitment of a new CEO be commenced immediately and that, as advised by the Executive Director – People, Culture and Workplace, noting that the CEO Selection Panel, once established, will be delegated the authority to select the agency.

Establish CEO Selection Panel

(j)      That a CEO Selection Panel, comprising of the Lord Mayor, Councillor Davis, Deputy Lord Mayor, Councillor Pandey and Councillors Garrard, Humphries and Valjak be established to oversee the recruitment process.

(l)      That the CEO Selection Panel exercise the functions required to undertake the recruitment process, as outlined in the Office of Local Government’s Guidelines for the Appointment and Oversight of General Managers, including the selection of senior executive recruitment agency, determination of the position description, interview of candidates, salary package and conditions of employment.

(m)    Further, that the CEO Selection Panel’s recommended candidate be reported to Council for endorsement.

Procedural Motion

3992

RESOLVED      (Esber/ Pandey)

That the meeting resume in Open Session.