Agenda of Ordinary Meeting of Council

Ordinary Meeting of Council

TO BE HELD ON Tuesday, 28 April 2020 AT 7:00pm

Level 3, Council Chamber

Agenda

** ** ** ** ** **

NOTE: For Full Details, See Council’s Website –

www.kmc.nsw.gov.au under the link to business papers

The Livestream can be viewed here:

http://www.kmc.nsw.gov.au/Your_Council/Meetings/Council_Meeting_livestream

Disclaimer: All Ku-ring-gai Council Ordinary Meetings of Council are livestreamed for on-demand viewing on the KMC website. Although Council will do its best to ensure the public is excluded from the livestream, Council cannot guarantee a person’s image and/or voice won’t be broadcast. Accordingly, attendance at Council meetings is considered consent by a person for their image and/or voice to be webcast. Council accepts no liability for any damage that may result from defamatory comments made by persons attending meetings. As per clause 15.21 of Council’s Code of Meeting Practice, a person must not live stream or use an audio recorder, video camera, mobile phone or any other device to make a recording or photograph of the proceedings of a meeting of the council or a committee of the council without the prior authorization of the council.

APOLOGIEs

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Documents Circulated to Councillors

Confirmation of Reports to be Considered in Closed Meeting

NOTE:

That in accordance with the provisions of Section 10 of the Local Government Act 1993, all officers’ reports be released to the press and public, with the exception of following confidential report(s) and attachments:

C.1 Open Space Acquisiyion Planning - Gordon

In accordance with 10A(2)(c):

Attachment 1: Proposed Sites Presentation – Gordon – February - Draft

NOTE:

That in accordance with the provisions of Section 10 of the Local Government Act 1993, all officers’ reports be released to the press and public, with the exception of confidential attachments to the following General Business reports:

GB.8 Tender RFT1-2020 St Ives Village Green Community Hall and Youth Centre Upgrade

In accordance with 10A(2)(d)(iii):

Attachment 1: RFT1-2020 List of Submitters

Attachment 2: RFT1-2020 LVG Tender Evaluation Report

GB.14 Marian Street Theatre DA

In accordance with 10A(2)(d)(ii):

Attachment 2: MST Extended Masterplan Cost Estimate

Attachment 4: MST Staged Development Cost Plan

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTEs

Minutes of Ordinary Meeting of Council 3

File: S02131

Meeting held 17 March 2020

Minutes numbered 28 to 60

minutes from the Mayor

MM.1 Councillor Superannuation - Submission for the Office of Local Government Discussion Paper 3

File: S11705

The purpose of this Mayoral Minute is to provide a submission on behalf of Council to the Office of Local Government (OLG) in response to their Councillor Superannuation Discussion Paper.

In March 2020, the OLG released the attached discussion paper on Councillor Superannuation. The purpose of the discussion paper is to provide a platform for discussion regarding reasons for and against the payment of superannuation contributions for Mayors and Councillors, and for devising potential options and legislative models.

In the determination of Mayoral and Councillor fees, Ku-ring-gai Council is categorised as “Metropolitan Medium”. The current remuneration package for Mayors and Councillors is determined by the Local Government Remuneration Tribunal who considers a range of criteria based on size, volume of business dealt with, the extent of development, the diversity of the communities and any other matter of significance of the Council.

Presently, the Commonwealth Superannuation Guarantee (Administration) Act 1993 stipulates that Councils are not obliged to make superannuation contributions as part of Mayors and Councillors fees as we are elected to a civic office and therefore are not considered to be employees of the Council. However, Council is not constrained from making voluntary superannuation contributions on behalf of Mayors and Councillors as part of their current remuneration package.

Part 6 of the discussion paper offers four potential options:

1. To maintain the status quo.

2. To amend the NSW Local Government Act 1993 to require councils to pay a portion of the Mayor’s and Councillor’s fees equivalent to the superannuation guarantee amount.

3. To amend the NSW Local Government Act 1993 to require councils to pay an amount equivalent to the superannuation guarantee in addition to Mayors and Councillors fees.

4. To amend the NSW Local Government Act 1993 to give councils the option to pay an amount equivalent to the superannuation guarantee in addition to Mayors and Councillors fees.

I propose that Ku-ring-gai Council endorses option 4 of the OLG discussion paper. Presently, Councils have the ability to make voluntary superannuation contributions on behalf of Mayors and Councillors as a component of their fees. By amending the Local Government Act 1993 to enable councils to determine whether to make superannuation contributions as part of or in addition to remuneration fees, each Council will also have discretionary ability to determine which option, if any, is to be applied based on the sentiment and appetite of the Mayor and Councillors at any point in time, rather than applying a one-size-fits all solution.

Therefore I recommend Council endorses this Mayoral Minute and a submission be made to OLG as outlined in the recommendation below.

MM.2 COVID-19 – Financial Support 3

File: S05102

I am calling on Councillors to support the local government sector’s campaign for assistance in dealing with the health and economic crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Ku-ring-gai Council is already suffering the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic due to the temporary closure and suspension of services that Council provides to the community.

I am recommending that we support the campaign, which is being coordinated on behalf of the NSW sector by Local Government NSW (LGNSW) and at a national level by the Australian Local Government Association (ALGA).

Ku-ring-gai Council is struggling with the financial impacts of COVID-19. Council has faced increased costs and at the same time is experiencing declining revenue as more and more residents and businesses are forced into financial hardship. The impacts are rapidly escalating.

Ku-ring-gai Council is doing everything possible to provide support and deliver the services needed to protect community health and keep our communities running during these difficult times. The wellbeing, safety and livelihoods of our communities, customers, and staff is our top priority. However, additional assistance is required to minimise the impact on services, facilities and infrastructure.

It is critical that the local government sector receives adequate funding and resources to coordinate and deliver the goods and services needed as we navigate through, and recover from, natural disasters and the new challenges presented by COVID-19 and its massive impacts on people and our local economies.

In recent weeks the NSW State Government has announced support for councils by providing much needed assistance for council run childcare services. On Sunday 26 April 2020 the Minister for Local Government announced further support measures including funding councils’ increase in the emergency services levy for 2020/21, funding the wages of staff if they are stood down (unable to be provided work) for up to three months, and providing wider access to loan funding from T-Corp to councils that were previously ineligible. However, it appears that not all of the latest measures will be of benefit to Ku-ring-gai Council as it was already eligible for T-Corp loans and based on information from the Office of Local Government, Ku-ring-gai Council is unlikely to meet the eligibility criteria for wage support.

While the measures introduced to date are welcome, they do not go far enough in addressing the core financial issues facing local government due to the pandemic, which will run into many millions of dollars for Ku-ring-gai Council.

Council needs urgent financial assistance from the Federal Government and NSW State Government to maintain infrastructure, services and employment as well as funding to give councils the capacity to provide hardship assistance to the community.

The measures listed below would be effective and simple to implement:

· Increasing Financial Assistance Grants payments to 1% to help councils maintain essential functions and services, acknowledging the increased costs and mounting revenue losses arising from COVID-19, as well as giving councils capacity to provide hardship assistance to businesses and residents.

· Immediate financial assistance to support all councils, including providing support for councils to keep staff employed rather than only providing support for staff who are stood down.

· Providing stimulus funding to councils for projects that will help sustain council operations and boost local economies. This could be achieved through increasing or bringing forward funding under existing funding programs or introducing new programs. Existing Federal funding programs include the Roads to Recovery, Bridges Renewal and Road Safety Blackspots programs. State programs include Fixing Local Roads, Fixing Country Bridges and the Stronger Country Communities programs.

· Increased access to TAFE, VET and other apprenticeship opportunities that council staff can undertake to address skill shortages, especially for staff in non-essential services who are unable to be redeployed.

Therefore I recommend Council endorses this Mayoral Minute and the recommended actions below.

Recommendation:

A. That Ku-ring-gai Council calls on the Federal Government and NSW Government to urgently deliver comprehensive and multifaceted financial support and stimulus packages to local government to enable them to continue to operate effectively and provide essential services during the COVID-19 pandemic.

B. That Ku-ring-gai Council calls for the packages to include the following measures:

· Immediate financial assistance to support all councils, including providing support for councils to keep staff employed rather than only providing support for staff who are stood down.

C. That Ku-ring-gai Council commends the NSW and Federal Governments on their stewardship during this crisis and commits to working in partnership to protect community health and sustain local economies through this crisis.

D. That Council write to the local Federal and State Members – Member for Bradfield the Hon. Paul Fletcher MP, Member for Davidson the Hon. Jonathan O'Dea MP, Member for Ku-ring-gai Mr Alister Henskens MP, Prime Minister the Hon. Scott Morrison MP, NSW Premier the Hon. Gladys Berejiklian MP, Federal Treasurer the Hon. Josh Frydenburg MP, NSW Treasurer the Hon. Dominic Perrottet MP, NSW Local Government Minister the Hon. Shelley Hancock MP, Federal Minister for Local Government the Hon. Mark Coultan, Federal Opposition Leader the Hon. Anthony Albanese, NSW Opposition Leader Ms Jodi McKay MP, Federal Shadow Minister for Local Government Mr Jason Clare MP and NSW Shadow Minister for Local Government Mr Greg Warren MP, to confirm their support for increased financial assistance and stimulus funding for local government to help councils maintain essential services and employment during the COVID-19 pandemic.

E. That Ku-ring-gai Council endorses Local Government NSW’s sector-wide campaign to obtain financial assistance, employment support and stimulus funding for the local government sector.

F. That Council advise LGNSW President Linda Scott of the passage of this Mayoral Minute.

Petitions

PT.1 Petition to Allow Dogs to be Off-leash at Toolang Park and Install Gates 3

File: S07823

The large dog-loving community of St Ives use Warrimoo Oval on a daily basis. The oval is a meeting place for many people and their dogs who catch up at the same time each day and enjoy the benefits of being in the outdoors, exercising, forming strong community bonds and seeing their dogs play and socialise.

The start of the long soccer season each year puts an abrupt end to this treasured activity. The far-from-ideal alternative is Transmission Park which has no fencing at all, no toilets, no water available (it is still very warm and the dogs are hot and thirsty), uneven surfaces, lots of weeds and prickles and no off-street parking.

A better alternative would be to allow the community to use nearby Toolang Park. This area could very easily be enclosed with the addition of a couple of gates to enhance its safety, as it is closer to main roads than Warrimoo Oval.

It is a fantastic asset to have a local hub where neighbours can meet and build a real sense of community through a common love of dogs and the outdoors. This is especially important with the increase in high-density housing in St Ives and the higher ratios of people to green space.

If a lovely public greenspace as nice as Toolang Park is vacant (soccer training does not seem to happen there on weekday afternoons), then it is logical that throughout the soccer season it becomes a space that dog walkers can enjoy. This keeps both the soccer club happy and the locals satisfied that they have not been shafted from their local gathering place.

Please allow dogs to be off-leash at Toolang Park and improve the safety by closing off the openings in the fences with gates.

We, the undersigned, petition Ku-ring-gai Council to allow dogs to be off-leash at Toolang Park and install gates (105 signatures).

GENERAL BUSINESS

i. The Mayor to invite Councillors to nominate any item(s) on the Agenda that they wish to have a site inspection.

ii. The Mayor to invite Councillors to nominate any item(s) on the Agenda that they wish to adopt in accordance with the officer’s recommendation allowing for minor changes without debate.

GB.1 Ku-ring-gai Play Space Strategy - Post Exhibition 3

File: S02621

To seek Council Endorsement of the Ku-ring-gai Play Space Strategy following public exhibition.

Recommendation:

That Council adopts the Ku-ring-gai Play Space Strategy.

GB.2 Draft Revised Delivery Program 2018-2021 and Draft Operational Plan 2020-2021 3

File: FY00382/12

To place Council's draft Revised Delivery Program 2018-2021 and draft Operational Plan 2020-2021, incorporating the Budget, Capital Works Program, Statement of Revenue Policy and Fees and Charges for 2020-2021, on public exhibition.

Recommendation:

That the draft Revised Delivery Program 2018-2021, and draft Operational Plan 2020-2021, incorporating the Budget, Capital Works Program, Statement of Revenue Policy and Fees and Charges for 2020-2021, be endorsed and placed on public exhibition and that following public exhibition, a further report be submitted to Council for the consideration of submissions and adoption of the revised Delivery Program 2018-2021 and Operational Plan 2020-2021, including Fees and Charges.

That Council authorises new loan borrowing of $11.3 million for the St Ives Indoor sports complex to be repaid from future asset sales.

GB.3 Revised Resourcing Strategy 2020 - 2030 3

File: S11276

For Council to adopt the Revised Resourcing Strategy 2020 – 2030 incorporating the Long Term Financial Plan, Asset Management Strategy and Workforce Management Strategy.

Recommendation:

That Council adopt the Revised Resourcing Strategy 2020 – 2030 incorporating the Long Term Financial Plan, Asset Management Strategy and Workforce Management Strategy.

GB.4 Post Exhibition - Public Interest Disclosures Policy 3

File: CY00473/7

For Council to adopt the attached updated Public Interest Disclosures Policy (the policy).

Recommendation:

That Council adopts the attached updated Public Interest Disclosures Policy.

GB.5 Annual Report of the Audit, Risk and Improvement Committee for the year ended December 2019. 3

File: CY00578/3-1

To provide the annual report of the Audit, Risk & Improvement Committee (ARIC) from the Chair for the year ended December 2019 that highlights the Committee’s activities and achievements.

Recommendation:

That the annual report of the Audit, Risk &Improvement Committee received and endorsed at the meeting of 12^th March 2020 be presented to Council.

GB.6 Investment Report as at 31 March 2020 3

File: FY00623/2

To present Council’s investment portfolio performance for March 2020.

Recommendation:

A. That the summary of investments performance for March 2020 be received and noted and;

B. That the Certificate of the Responsible Accounting Officer be noted and report adopted.

GB.7 Progress Status Report - March 2020 3

File: FY00621/2

To provide Council with the Project Status Report reflecting results for Jan, February and March 2020

Recommendation:

That Council receive and note the Project Status Report for January, February and March 2020.

GB.8 Tender RFT1-2020 St Ives Village Green community hall and youth centre upgrade 3

File: RFT1-2020

To consider the tenders received for Tender RFT1-2020 St Ives Village Green Community Hall and Youth Centre Upgrade and to appoint the preferred tenderer.

Recommendation:

That in accordance with Section 55 of the Local Government Act and Tender Regulations, Council accept the Tender submitted by Tenderer ‘A’.

GB.9 Assessment of Planning Proposal for Lindfield Village Hub Sites 3

File: S12268

To report on the assessment of the Planning Proposal to amend the planning controls that apply to the Lindfield Village Hub land at 1 Woodford Lane, 2-12 Bent Street, 1B Beaconsfield Parade, 19 Drovers Way, Drovers Way Road Reserve and Woodford Lane Lindfield.

Recommendation:

That the Planning Proposal be submitted to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment for a Gateway Determination subject to the amendments and recommendations outlined in this report.

GB.10 Climate Change Policy and Action Plan 3

File: S09069/10

To seek Council’s endorsement of the draft Climate Change Policy 2020 and draft Towards Net Zero Emissions - 2030 Action Plan for public exhibition

Recommendation:

A. That the draft Climate Change Policy 2020 and draft Towards Net Zero Emissions 2030 Action Plan be endorsed for public exhibition.

B. That a further report be presented to Council following the public exhibition period outlining any changes and recommended amendments to the draft Climate Change Policy 2020 and draft Towards Net Zero Emissions 2030 Action Plan for final endorsement and adoption.

GB.11 Draft Sports Facilities Plan of Management 3

File: S10342

To seek Council approval to place the draft Sports Facilities Plan of Management on public exhibition in accordance with Local Government Act 1993.

Recommendation:

That Council place the draft Sports Facilities Plan of Management on public exhibition in accordance with the Local Government Act 1993.

GB.12 Dog Off-Leash Proposal at Bryce Oval, St Ives 3

File: S07823

The purpose of this report is to propose Bryce Oval, St Ives as a dog off-leash park and recommend a course of action to meet the needs of the localised community in St Ives.

Recommendation:

That Council approves community consultation for the use of Bryce Oval, St Ives as a dog off-leash park and that a further Council report is to prepared outlining feedback from the community.

GB.13 Gateway Determinations Planning Proposals - Council Land Gordon & Roseville 3

File: S11955

To have Council consider the Gateway Determinations issued for the planning proposals to rezone and reclassify 4 Pennant Avenue, Gordon and separately to rezone

47 Warrane Road, Roseville Chase.

Recommendation:

That Council determines how to proceed with Council owned land at 4 Pennant Avenue, Gordon and 47 Warrane Road, Roseville Chase.

GB.14 Marian Street Theatre DA 3

File: S12062-3

To seek Council approval to lodge the Marian Street Theatre (MST) Development Application (DA).

Recommendation:

That Council lodges the (extended) masterplan for the Marian Street Theatre Development Application (DA) but include a request for a partial Occupation Certificate (Staged Development) should insufficient funds be available to implement the extended masterplan in the first stage of refurbishment.

GB.15 St Ives Indoor Sports Centre Update 3

File: S12712-3

To update Council on progress of the proposed joint use indoor sports centre at St Ives High School.

Recommendation:

That Council receives and notes the project updates contained within this report.

GB.16 COVID-19 Pandemic Impacts on Council 3

File: S08410

To provide Council with an update on the impacts of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Recommendation:

A. That Council endorse the actions outlined in this report and further endorse the General Manager in taking future action as necessary to manage the impacts of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Council and the community.

B. That Council authorise the allocation of $100,000 funding for a COVID-19 Community Organisation Hardship and Assistance Grant Program.

Extra Reports Circulated to Meeting

Motions of which due Notice has been given

NM.1 Change of spelling of Narelle Avenue, Pymble to Narrelle Avenue 3

File: S03211

Notice of Motion from Councillor Szatow dated 8 April 2020

In June 1918, a 5000 strong memorial service was held at St Paul’s Cathedral in London for nurses who had fallen during the war. Three hundred and fifty names were listed on the Roll of Honour at the service. Among these was the name of a young Australian nurse: Sister Narrelle Hobbes. You won’t find her name on the Australian War Memorial because she and other impatient young women sailed to London to enlist before the Australian Army Nursing Service began actively recruiting. By mid-May 1915, she was in Malta and up to her elbows in the catastrophe that became known as Gallipoli. She later nursed the wounded and sick in India, Sicily and Mesopotamia. By mid-1917 she was ill and on 10th May 1918 at 10 o’clock in the morning, Sister Narrelle Hobbes died. She was thirty-nine. Buried at sea, just four days out from Fremantle. Her family were distraught with grief.

The eldest sister in the Hobbes family was Isabel, married to Donald Commons, a civil engineer and artist. It is their original home that is 3-5 ‘Narelle’ Avenue and it was Isabel who memorialised her sister by naming their property after her. The old bronze plaque on the sandstone fence has the name of the house: spelt NARRELLE in capital letters (attachment A1). Ku-ring-gai Council, as was common practice at the time, had approached Donald and asked if their street could be named after a fallen soldier. It was named “Narrelle Avenue” in honour of Sister Narrelle Hobbes. Unfortunately it was misspelt, not just once but three times – with one r (twice) and with an ‘M’ instead of an ‘N’.

It is time we addressed this oversight. Previous research pointed to the fact that Narrelle was christened Florence. She was however, never known as Florence, as the book about her life “Oceans of Love” points out (attachment A2). Likewise the notice of her death in the newspaper was misspelt – Narelle – not Florence - with an “N” but only one ‘r’ - not surprisingly given the circumstances. It was a fraught time – it took the war office a year to issue a death certificate.

My research has unearthed not only the bronze plaque on the front of the property with the “rr” spelling but the spelling of NARRELLE with a double “r” is to be found on:

· The memorial scroll which includes the emblem of George V, which was given to soldiers and nurses who died on active service in WW1

· Near the stained glass window of York Minster, England dedicated in the 1920’s

· Panel 43 of the Basra War memorial – her last official posting from where she was invalided in June 1917

· The Weilmoringle Honour Roll held by the Brewarrina Historical Society ( prior to serving she had been Matron at Brewarrina Hospital)

· Her handwritten letters donated to the Australian War Memorial and uploaded online (attachment A3 – see page 3).

· Robin Hall, who is an employee of Council corroborated the double r spelling in an email dated 25 February 2015. Narelle was Robin’s grandmother’s aunt.

· The Ku-ring-gai Historical Society’s newsletter April 2013, article by Kathie Rieth “It should be Narrelle Avenue, not Narelle Avenue”.

· The spelling of the name has been changed to “rr” in the heritage study of the house “Narrelle”.

I would like to thank Mary Warner the current owner of “Narrelle” who recently brought this issue to my attention and shared some of this ANZAC story.

Therefore I move that the Director of Operations:

A. Consult with residents of that street and the broader community regarding the change of spelling of the street from Narelle to Narrelle.

B. Report back to Council, the outcomes of the consultation.

NM.2 Planning Proposal for 45-47 Tennyson Avenue and 105 Eastern Road, Turramurra 3

File: S12120

Notice of Motion from Councillor Spencer dated 9 April 2020

Background

1. At its Ordinary Meeting of Council on 26 March 2019, Council resolved, inter alia, to support a Planning Proposal for 45-47 Tennyson Avenue and 105 Eastern Road, Turramurra.

2. On 13 November 2019 a Gateway determination was made which inter alia appointed Council as the local plan-making authority, required a site-specific development control plan or controls be prepared and publicly exhibited with the planning proposal and set a minimum period of 28 days for the planning proposal to be made publicly available for community consultation without stating any maximum time period.

3. At its Ordinary Meeting of Council of 18 February 2020 Council resolved, inter alia, to endorse for the purpose of public exhibition, the amendment to the Ku-ring-gai Development Control Plan (DCP) to include site-specific controls to support the Planning Proposal at 45-47 Tennyson Avenue and 105 Eastern Road Turramura and to place the amended DCP on public exhibition.

4. Council between 6 March and 3 April 2020 placed the planning proposal and the proposed amendment to its DCP on Council’s website and otherwise engaged in a public exhibition of them.

5. On 8 March 2020 the World Health Organization declared that COVID-19 was a pandemic and the number of COVID-19 cases started to escalate in NSW.

6. This progressively resulted in a number of NSW health warnings concerning the number of people who could meet together and the need for social distancing.

7. From 16 March 2020 Health orders were being progressively proclaimed by the NSW Government which enabled people to be fined up to $11 000 for congregating together in breach of the social distancing rules and ultimately in people being required to not leave their place of residence without reasonable excuse.

8. These restrictions on movement during the COVID-19 pandemic made ordinary public consultation where community groups could hand out flyers at shopping centres and other places of public meeting unlawful and practically impossible during most of the public exhibition period from 6 March to 3 April 2020.

Issues

1. Council and Councillors have received numerous appeals from residents, from March 2019 to the present day, expressing their concerns with regard to any rezoning and development of 45-47 Tennyson Avenue and 105 Eastern Road, Turramurra.

2. We have listened to our residents with great interest and believe that due to the restriction of movements resulting from the outbreak of COVID-19, all community consultation and ordinary processes or activities should be suspended until the full restoration of movements is in effect.

Thefore I move that Council resolves:

A. To immediately cease all activities by Council pursuant to the Gateway Determination dated 13 November 2019 including but not limited to all activities under section 3.34(2)(c) and schedule 1, clause 4 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 for the Planning Proposal in relation to 45-47 Tennyson Avenue and 105 Eastern Road, Turramurra and draft specific DCP amendment. This includes, but is not limited to, those resolved by Council during its Ordinary Council Meetings of 26 March 2019 and 18 February 2020.

B. That there will be a resumption of activities by Council halted under paragraph 1 (the resumption of public consultation), upon the full relaxation of all Public Health Orders and any other NSW Government constraints relating to public movement as a consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic if the relaxation results in the full restoration of the ordinary rights of citizens to engage in meetings, canvassing and the attendance at public and private places.

C. Upon the resumption of public consultation, the Planning Proposal and draft site-specific DCP amendment for 45-47 Tennyson Avenue and 105 Eastern Road, Turramurra, will again be placed on public exhibition for no less than a further 28 days (further exhibition).

D. That a report be brought back to Council no earlier than after the conclusion of the further exhibition period for Council to consider further progression of the Gateway Determination.

E. To notify all interested parties of this resolution, including but not limited to the Minister for Planning and Public Spaces.

BUSINESS WITHOUT NOTICE – SUBJECT TO CLAUSE 9.3 OF code of meeting practice

Questions With Notice

InspectionS– SETTING OF TIME, DATE AND RENDEZVOUS

Confidential Business to be dealt with in Closed Meeting

C.1 Open Space Acquisition Planning - Gordon

File: S04601/12

In accordance with the Local Government Act 1993 and the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005, in the opinion of the General Manager, the following business is of a kind as referred to in section 10A(2)(c), of the Act, and should be dealt with in a part of the meeting closed to the public.

Section 10A(2)(c) of the Act permits the meeting to be closed to the public in respect of information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business.

The matter is classified confidential because it deals with the proposed acquisition and/or disposal of property.

It is not in the public interest to release this information as it would prejudice Council’s ability to acquire and/or dispose of the property on appropriate terms and conditions.

Report by Manager Urban & Heritage Planning

John McKee

General Manager

** ** ** ** ** **

Minute Ku-ring-gai Council Page

MINUTES OF Ordinary Meeting of Council
HELD ON Tuesday, 17 March 2020

Present:	The Mayor, Councillor J Anderson (Chairperson) Councillors J Pettett & C Clarke (Comenarra Ward) Councillor P Kelly (Gordon Ward) Councillor S Ngai (Roseville Ward) Councillors C Kay & M Smith (St Ives Ward) Councillor D Greenfield (Wahroonga Ward)

Staff Present:	General Manager (John McKee) Director Corporate (David Marshall) Director Development & Regulation (Michael Miocic) Director Operations (George Bounassif) Director Strategy & Environment (Andrew Watson) Director Community (Janice Bevan) Corporate Lawyer (Jamie Taylor) Manager Urban & Heritage Planning (Antony Fabbro) Team Leader Urban Planning (Craige Wyse) Senior Urban Planner (Rathna Rana) Assistant Urban Planner (Angela Smidmore) Group Leader Major Projects (Geoffrey Douglas) Manager Governance and Corporate Strategy (Michael Wearne) Governance Support Officer/ Minutes Secretary (Rebecca Srbinovska)

The Meeting commenced at 7:00pm

The Mayor offered the Prayer

Apologies

File: S02194

Councillor Greenfield advised of apologies from Councillor Szatow due to illness.

Councillor Kelly advised of apologies from Councillor Spencer due to health reasons.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Greenfield/Clarke)

That the apologies from Councillor Szatow be accepted and leave of absence granted.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

(Moved: Councillors Kelly/Smith)

That the apologies from Councillor Spencer be accepted and leave of absence granted.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

The Mayor referred to the necessity for Councillors and staff to declare a Pecuniary Interest/Conflict of Interest in any item on the Business Paper.

Director Watson declared a significant non-pecuniary interest for C.2 – Major Projects Funding due to his role in assessing the planning proposal for the Lindfield Village Hub project. He advised he will leave the Chambers during discussion on the matter.

DOCUMENTS CIRCULATED TO COUNCILLORS

The Mayor referred to the documents circulated in the Councillors’ papers and advised that the following matters would be dealt with at the appropriate time during the meeting:

Memorandums:

GB.8 – Ku-ring-gai Draft Housing Strategy

Memorandum from Director Strategy & Environment dated 6 March 2020 adjusting the recommendation of the report.

GB.8 – Ku-ring-gai Draft Housing Strategy

Memorandum from Director Strategy & Environment dated 17 March 2020 adjusting Appendix 3 and the recommendation of the report.

GB.9 – Finalisation of Local Strategic Planning Statement

Memorandum from Director Strategy & Environment dated 5 March 2020 supplying attachment A1 to GB.9.

GB.16 (From OMC dated 18 February 2020) – NSW Department of Education – Joint Use Proposal— St Ives High School Indoor Sports Centre

Memorandum from Director Strategy & Environment dated 9 March 2020 responding to a question taken on notice at the 18 February 2020 OMC.

CONFIRMATION OF REPORTS TO BE CONSIDERED IN CLOSED MEETING

File: S02499/9

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Greenfield/Kelly)

That in accordance with the provisions of Section 10 of the Local Government Act 1993, all officers’ reports be released to the press and public, with the exception of:

In accordance with 10A(2)(d)(ii):

C.1 St Ives Medieval Faire 2020

Attachment 1 – St Ives Medieval Faire 2020 Proposal Andrew McKinnon

Attachment 2 – St Ives Medieval Faire Proposal 2020 – Elden McDonald Petrie Associates

Attachment 3 – St Ives Medieval Faire Proposal Bite Communications

Attachment 4 – St Ives Medieval Faire Proposal 2020 Team Phoenix

In accordance with 10A(2)(d)(i) & 10A((2)(d)(ii)

C.2 Major Projects Funding

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTEs

Minutes of Ordinary Meeting of Council

File: S02131

Meeting held 18 February 2020

Minutes numbered 01 to 24

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Greenfield/Pettett)

That Minutes numbered 01 to 24 circulated to Councillors were taken as read and confirmed as an accurate record of the proceedings of the Meeting.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Minutes of Extraordinary Meeting

File: S02131

Meeting held 25 February 2020

Minutes numbered 25 to 27

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Greenfield/Pettett)

That Minutes numbered 25 to 27 circulated to Councillors were taken as read and confirmed as an accurate record of the proceedings of the Meeting.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

minutes from the Mayor

VALE Ron Haddrick

File: CY00455/8

Vide: MM.1

This Mayoral Minute is to acknowledge the esteemed actor and cricketer Ron Haddrick, who passed away last month at the age of 90.

Ron Haddrick was an icon of his generation and managed to achieve prowess on the sporting field and great accomplishment as a stage and television actor.

Born in Adelaide in 1929, his theatrical career began at the Tivoli Theatre in Adelaide in the 1940s. Also a keen cricketer, he opened the batting for South Australia in a Sheffield Shield match in 1953. But his dreams of playing for the Australian cricket team took a different turn when the Shakespeare Memorial Theatre (now the Royal Shakespeare Theatre) played in Adelaide as part of a tour of Australia and held auditions, which led to Haddrick securing a contract to join the company at Stratford-Upon-Avon, where he worked with some of the biggest names in acting during that era, including Laurence Olivier, Vivien Leigh, John Gielgud, Peggy Ashcroft and Michael Redgrave.

In 1959 Ron returned to Australia and went on to perform around the country on stage for numerous theatre companies. He also made the move into television early, starring in the children’s science-fiction series The Stranger which was first broadcast more than 50 years ago.

Other television roles were in The Godfathers, Homicide, A Country Practice, Mother And Son, Home And Away, Water Rats, All Saints, Cloudstreet and most recently, the ABC TV series Rake.

Ron’s sporting achievements were also legendary. He played first-class cricket during the 1950s, representing South Australia on three occasions in the Sheffield Shield competition.

He received an MBE for his services to the arts in 1974. In 2012 he received the Equity Lifetime Achievement Award and in 2013 he was awarded a Member of the Order of Australia medal for his services to acting.

Ron Haddrick was a longstanding supporter of Marian Street Theatre, and many Ku-ring-gai residents would fondly remember his performances there as an actor on numerous occasions.

Wendy Blaxland interviewed Ron for her book on the history of Marian Street Theatre, and spoke warmly of him. “Ron gave so much pleasure as an actor to so many, and was such a generous and warm-hearted human being…..”

Ron Haddrick is survived by wife Lorraine, daughter Lynette and son Greg, daughter-in-law Margaret and grandchildren Taya, Milly and Jack. On behalf of Council and our community, I extend our deepest condolences to his family on their loss.

Resolved:

A. That the Mayoral Minute be received and noted.

B. That we stand for a minute’s silence to honour Ron Haddrick

C. That the Mayor write to Ron’s family and encloses a copy of this Mayoral Minute

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Recommendations from Committee

Minutes of Ku-ring-gai Traffic Committee 10 February 2020

File: CY00022/12

Vide: RC.1

Meeting held 10 February 2020

The Ku-ring-gai Traffic Committee presents its Minutes numbered KTC01 to KTC03 for adoption by the Council.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Pettett/Kelly)

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Junction Road & Grosvenor Street, Wahroonga

File: TM11/11

Ward: Wahroonga

Electorate: Ku-ring-gai

Vide Minute No KTC02

To consider the replacement of the roundabout at the intersection of Junction Road and Grosvenor Street with traffic signals.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Pettett/Kelly)

That Council seek funding from TfNSW to replace the existing roundabout at the intersection of Junction Road and Grosvenor Street with traffic signals.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Lindfield Village Green - On-street parking changes and traffic facilities

File: S12201

Ward: Roseville

Electorate: Davidson

Vide Minute No KTC03

To seek approval for on-street parking changes and associated traffic facilities aligned with the Lindfield Village Green (LVG) project

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Pettett/Kelly)

A. That the proposed on-street parking changes and associated traffic facilities aligned with the Lindfield Village Green project be approved.

B. That residents and businesses within the area directly affected by changes in this report be notified of Council’s decision.

C. That the on-street parking be reviewed regularly during construction and amended as appropriate.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Minutes of Ku-ring-gai Traffic Committee 2 March 2020

File: CY00022/12

Vide: RC.2

Meeting held 2 March 2020

The Ku-ring-gai Traffic Committee presents its Minutes numbered KTC04 to KTC07 for adoption by the Council.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Pettett/Smith)

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Traffic & Transport Policy

File: S02527

Vide Minute No KTC05

To update Council’s Traffic & Transport Policy, which was last updated in 2015.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Pettett/Smith)

That the updated Traffic & Transport Policy be adopted by Council.

For the Resolution: Representing Member for Ku-ring-gai, Transport for NSW and Councillor Spencer

Against the Resolution: Representing Member for Davidson

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

St Johns Avenue and Henry Street Gordon - alterations to parking restrictions

File: TM4/12

Ward: Gordon

Electorate: Ku-ring-gai

Vide Minute No KTC06

To seek approval for proposed changes to parking restrictions in St Johns Avenue and Henry Street following the adoption by Council of the final concept design for the St Johns Avenue Upgrade project.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Pettett/Smith)

That the proposed changes to parking restrictions in St Johns Avenue and Henry Street be referred to Transport for NSW for its approval and they be referred back to Ku-ring-gai Traffic Committee for consideration.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Yarrabung Road, St Ives

File: TM9/12

Ward: St Ives

Electorate: Davidson

Vide Minute No KTC07

To consider the construction of a pedestrian refuge island on Yarrabung Road at Stanley Street, St Ives.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Pettett/Smith)

A. That the matter be deferred until further consultation with Representing Member for Davidson, clarifying the issues raised in his email dated 25 February 2020.

B. To consider the impact on pedestrian demand on Yarrabung Road as a result of the new St Ives Basketball facility and the future project for Bedes Forest.

C. That the Plan be updated reflecting the changes being made to the give way line on Stanley Street.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

GENERAL BUSINESS

Business Engagement Update

File: S09438

Vide: GB.1

To provide Council with an update regarding the business engagement program, relevant local business statistics and a summary of results from Council’s first annual business survey.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Clarke/Greenfield)

A. That Council receive and note this report.

B. That Council conduct the Annual Business Survey and report on the results on an annual basis.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Complaints Management Policy, Procurement Policy and Statement of Business Ethics

File: S07012

Vide: GB.2

To adopt the revised Complaints Management Policy, Procurement Policy and Statement of Business Ethics.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Clarke/Greenfield)

A. That the revised Complaint Management Policy, Procurement Policy and Statement of Business Ethics be placed on public exhibition for a period of 28 days.

B. At the expiration of the public exhibition process, the following action be taken:

i) Should any submissions be received a further report be submitted to Council on the relevant policy or policies

ii) Should no submissions be received Council adopt the policies as attached to this report.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

2020 Women in Local Government Leadership Workshop

File: FY00581/5

Vide: GB.3

To advise Council of the 2020 Women in Local Government Leadership Workshop hosted by Liquid Learning.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Clarke/Greenfield)

That any Councillors interested in attending the 2020 Women in Local Government Leadership Workshop advise the General Manager by 24 March 2020.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Indigenous Economic Development Summit 2020

File: FY00581/5

Vide: GB.4

To inform Councillors of the Indigenous Economic Development Summit on 27-28 May 2020 in Darwin.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Clarke/Greenfield)

That any Councillors wishing to attend the Indigenous Economic Development Summit notify the General Manager by 31 March 2020.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Investment Report as at 29 February 2020

File: FY00623/2

Vide: GB.5

To present Council’s investment portfolio performance for February 2020.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Clarke/Greenfield)

A. That the summary of investments and performance for February 2020 be received and noted.

B. That the Certificate of the Responsible Accounting Officer be noted and the report adopted.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Revised Delivery Program 2018-2021 and Operational Plan 2019-2020 - Bi-Annual Report

File: FY00382/12

Vide: GB.6

To report to Council on the progress of the Revised Delivery Program 2018-2021 and Operational Plan 2019-2020, for the six month period July to December 2019.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Clarke/Greenfield)

That the six (6) month progress review of the Revised Delivery Program 2018-2021 and Operational Plan 2019-2020, for the period July to December 2019, be received and noted.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Waste Strategy

File: S12188-1

Vide: GB.7

To adopt the draft Waste Strategy.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Clarke/Greenfield)

That Council adopt the draft Waste Strategy.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Ku-ring-gai Draft Housing Strategy

File: S12198

Vide: GB.8

To have Council consider the draft Ku-ring-gai Local Housing Strategy for public exhibition.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Clarke/Greenfield)

A. That Council endorses the draft Ku-ring-gai Housing Strategy to 2036 (Attachment A1) and draft Ku-ring-gai Housing Strategy Technical Document (Attachments A2 and A3) subject to Table 1.7 page 18 of draft Ku-ring-gai Housing Strategy to 2036 (Attachment A1) and the Table on page 89 of the draft Ku-ring-gai Housing Strategy Technical Document (Attachment A2) being replaced with the updated figures dated 5 March 2020 and that other text and references within the Draft Housing Strategy and supporting documents including tables be adjusted accordingly to reflect the revisions to the updated Figure 1.7 Ku-ring-gai Housing provision target 2016-2036.

B. That the draft Local Housing Strategy and Draft Ku-ring-gai Housing Strategy Technical Document be placed on public exhibition for a period of six weeks (a minimum of 42 days).

C. That following exhibition, a report be brought back to Council detailing the outcomes of the exhibition.

D. That delegation be given to the Director, Strategy and Environment to correct any minor amendments or errors and inconsistencies to the draft Local Housing Strategy documents prior to public exhibition.

E. That the amended text for Appendix 3 contained within the memo from the Director Strategy and Environment dated 17 March 2020 be incorporated into the exhibition documents.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Finalisation of Ku-ring-gai Local Strategic Planning Statement

File: S12396

Vide: GB.9

For Council to finalise the draft Ku-ring-gai Local Strategic Planning Statement (LSPS).

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Clarke/Greenfield)

A. That subject to receipt of a Letter of Support from the greater Sydney Commission, Council adopts the Ku-ring-gai Local Strategic Planning Statement as endorsed by Council at the OMC of 19 November 2019.

B. That Council forwards the adopted Ku-ring-gai Local Strategic Planning Statement to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment to be published on the e-planning portal.

C. That those who made submissions be notified.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Post Exhibition - Consideration of Submissions - Planning Proposal for the consolidation of Local Environmental Plans (LEPs)

File: S12588

Vide: GB.10

For Council to consider the submissions received during the public exhibition of the Planning Proposal to consolidate LEPs.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Clarke/Greenfield)

A. That Council adopts the Planning Proposal for the consolidation of the Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan (Local Centres)2012 and Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2015 to form a single LEP for the whole of Ku-ring-gai, subject to the following amendment:

1. Amendment to heritage listing – 1 Vista Street, Pymble Item No. I656 amend item name from ‘Robyn Hill’ to ‘Robin Hill’

B. That Council reiterate its commitment to the retention and enhancement of Holford Crescent, Gordon by inclusion of the appropriate provisions in consequential amendments to the supporting Development Control Plan

C. That the Planning Proposal be submitted to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment in accordance with Section 3.36 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment be requested to make the plan.

D. That those who made submissions be notified of Councils decision.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Robert Pymble Park - Landscape Masterplan

File: S11630

Vide: GB.11

To seek Council’s endorsement of the finalised landscape masterplan for Robert Pymble Park, Pymble.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Clarke/Greenfield)

That Council adopts the finalised Robert Pymble Park Landscape Masterplan as attached to this report.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Recreation in Natural Areas Strategy

File: S11290

Vide: GB.12

For Council to adopt the exhibited Recreation in Natural Areas Strategy, with the amendments as outlined in this report.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Clarke/Greenfield)

A. That Council adopts the Recreation in Natural Areas Strategy 2020 to supersede the Recreation in Natural Areas Policy 1997 and the Unstructured Recreation Strategy 2010;

B. That a copy of the Recreation in Natural Areas Strategy 2020 is placed on Council’s website.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Policy Update - Bushfire Management Policy

File: S05914

Vide: GB.13

For Council to consider the update of the Bushfire Management Policy 2020.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Clarke/Greenfield)

That the Bushfire Management Policy be exhibited for at least 28 days and reported back to Council.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

St Ives Medieval Faire 2020

File: S09970/6

Vide: C.1

In accordance with the Local Government Act 1993 and the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005, in the opinion of the General Manager, the following business is of a kind as referred to in section 10A(2)(d)(ii), of the Act, and should be dealt with in a part of the meeting closed to the public.

Section 10A(2)(d) of the Act permits the meeting to be closed to the public for business relating to 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 Council, or

(iii) reveal a trade secret.

This matter is classified confidential under section 10A(2)(d)(ii) because it would confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council.

Report by Director Community dated 10 December 2019

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Clarke/Pettett)

That Council approve the appointment of Andrew McKinnon and Elden McDonald, as Medieval Faire event partners, and Bite Communications and Team Phoenix Events as Medieval Faire specialist operational contractors, as detailed in this report.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Having previously declared a conflict of interest with the Major Projects Funding matter, Director Watson left the Chamber.

Major Projects Funding

File: S10973

Vide: C.2

In accordance with the Local Government Act 1993 and the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005, in the opinion of the General Manager, the following business is of a kind as referred to in sections 10A(2)(d)(i) & 10A(2)(d)(ii), of the Act, and should be dealt with in a part of the meeting closed to the public.

Section 10A(2)(d) of the Act permits the meeting to be closed to the public for business relating to 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 Council, or

(iii) reveal a trade secret.

This matter is classified confidential under section 10A(2)(d)(i) because it deals with tenders. Tender details, should they be revealed, may result in commercial disadvantage to parties involved in the tender process. Some information provided to Council by tenderers is provided on the basis that Council will treat it as commercial in confidence.

It is not in the public interest to reveal details of these tenders or the assessment process. Tenderers have provided sensitive information about their operations in the confidence that their details will not be made public by Council. The practice of publication of sensitive information provided by tenderers could result in the withholding of such information by tenderers and reduction in the provision of information relevant to Council’s decision.

Section 10A(2)(d) of the Act permits the meeting to be closed to the public for business relating to commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed:

(iii) prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it, or

(iv) confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of Council, or

(v) reveal a trade secret.

This matter is classified confidential under section 10A(2)(d)(ii) because it would confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council.

Report by General Manager dated 29 February 2020

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Clarke/Greenfield)

That Council adopts the financial arrangements identified in the Financial Considerations section of this report.

For the Resolution: The Mayor, Councillor Anderson, Councillors Ngai, Pettett, Clarke, Greenfield, Smith and Kelly

Against the Resolution: Councillor Kay

Director Watson returned to the Chamber after all debate and voting on C.2 had concluded.

Motions of which due Notice has been given

Eryldene Historical House

File: S03527

Vide: NM.1

Notice of Motion from Councillor Szatow dated 28 February 2020

Eryldene is a heritage-listed former family residence and now house museum located at 17 McIntosh Street in the Sydney North Shore suburb of Gordon.

The house and garden symbolise a gentle way of life, tranquil, devoted to culture, beauty, and good taste. Regarded as the home of the plant camellia in Australia, Eryldene is an early twentieth century house and garden and is managed by the non-profit organisation Eryldene Trust who heavily rely on grants and volunteer assistance to maintain the building and surrounding gardens in their original condition.

There have been recent requests from Eryldene to Council for assistance with emergency maintenance work, however these requests could not be undertaken without Council approval. Requests such as these are usually low cost such as labour and the use of Council plant such as a tipper truck or stump grinder.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Greenfield/Pettett)

That Council approve staff to provide voluntary assistance with maintenance at Eryldene Historical House to the annual value of a maximum $5,000. This voluntary assistance would be for Council staff and Council plant hire cost only and would exclude the cost of any materials required for the task.

For the Resolution: Councillors Ngai, Clarke, Smith, Kelly and Kay

Against the Resolution: The Mayor, Councillor Anderson, Councillors Pettett and Greenfield

Construction of new footpaths

File: S12447

Vide: NM.2

Notice of Motion from Councillors Smith and Greenfield dated 2 March 2020

There are many streets in Ku-ring-gai that do not have footpaths. Councillors have recently been presented with maps showing existing footpaths across the local government area and maps that sadly showed the streets without footpaths. It has become apparent that there is a demand in the community for the provision of new footpaths in areas that do not currently have them.

We support the construction of new footpaths as a priority. However, we recognise that this must be balanced against other Council needs including looking after our existing assets, major capital projects, service provision and financial sustainability.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Smith/Greenfield)

A. That a report be prepared for Council that provides a detailed analysis of the condition and suitability of all classes of Council assets to meet the needs of our community both now and in ten years based on funding in the Long Term Financial Plan. The report will assess options to provide additional funding for new footpaths, considering the impacts on asset management and financial suitability.

B. That a progress report be provided in 3 months in respect to this matter, with a final report provided to Council in 6 months.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Library staff salaries in Ku-ring-gai

File: CY00438/8

Vide: NM.3

Notice of Motion from Councillor Kelly dated 28 February 2020

The salaries of library staff in local government are well below those of their state public service counterparts. A large number of qualified and competent candidates for library positions at local government level are not following through with their initial applications and it is widely believed to be because the salaries on offer to library staff are not competitive at a local government level.

Ku-ring-gai occupies a proud position as being the first signatory to the library legislation after it was enacted in 1945. We need to continue this leadership role by showing support for our library staff.

Motion:

(Moved: Councillors Kelly/Pettett)

That Council investigate the salary levels of council library staff compared to their state public service counterparts and return a report to council in time for the May OMC.

Councillor Pettett withdrew from and returned to Chambers during discussion on the matter.

The Motion was put and declared LOST.

For the Resolution: Councillors Ngai, Pettett, Kelly and Kay

Against the Resolution: The Mayor, Councillor Anderson, Councillors Clarke, Greenfield and Smith

The voting being EQUAL, the Mayor exercised her Casting Vote

AGAINST the Resolution

BUSINESS WITHOUT NOTICE – SUBJECT TO CLAUSE 9.3 OF code of meeting practice

Caring for the Community During this Time of Uncertainty

File:

Vide: 57

With the Novel Coronavirus rapidly impacting the lives of our residents, this motion is considered urgent and cannot wait until the next Ordinary Meeting of Council scheduled in six weeks’ time.

I would like to acknowledge the good work of Council’s Crisis Management Team in planning and preparing business continuity for essential services, however, I understand that not every staff member will be assigned to ‘business critical’ activities and some, in fact, may be prevented from carrying out their regular duties when the situation worsens.

Council’s mandate is to serve the community, and I believe that staff not allocated to ‘business critical’ activities could be freed up to care for the physical and mental health needs of vulnerable members of our society, doing things such as delivering groceries and medical supplies, or contacting isolated households to check that they are ok.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Ngai/ Pettett)

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

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

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

Motion:

(Moved: Councillors Ngai/Pettett)

A. That council’s senior leaders are given discretion to consider which and how many of our employees can be freed up to first identify those in need and then serve the community during this time of uncertainty. In doing this, council may choose to run its own initiatives but should also work with government authorities as well as other relevant organisations such as charities, community groups, supermarkets and pharmacies to determine where our staff can most appropriately be deployed. As always, council must ensure that any staff who have been reassigned are appropriately trained to carry out these tasks in a safe manner.

B. That council recognises that the reallocation of council staff may result in some delays to the execution of our Delivery Program and Operational Plan, and that staff should not be penalised for this during the performance review season.

C. That during this digital age, council should consider which aspects of our website, social media and telephone technology can be adapted to maximise the effectiveness of communication and service delivery.

D. That councillors receive an update on our council’s COVID-19 response as a standing item of the Ordinary Meeting of Council for the duration of this global pandemic. The standing report does not need to be lengthy.

E. That council’s annual report for FY19/20 should include a few paragraphs on what our council has done to support our community during this crisis.

Procedural Motion

(Moved: Councillor Clarke)

That the Motion be now put.

The procedural motion was put and declared carried.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

The Motion was put and declared LOST.

For the Resolution: Councillors Ngai, Pettett, Kelly and Kay

Against the Resolution: The Mayor, Councillor Anderson, Councillors Clarke, Greenfield and Smith

The voting being EQUAL, the Mayor exercised her Casting Vote

AGAINST the Motion/Resolution

questions with notice

Questions Taken on Notice at OMC 18 February 2020 by Councillor Kay

Question:

Councillor Kay, under the approvals process recommended by the EPM, do you feel comfortable that you could explain to your community why the development of the 2 basketball courts with associated integral car parking has been split into 3 different components for approval by way of a DA modification to the existing Department of Education approval, a complying development certificate and a review of environmental factors?

Response:

Yes. All three processes are a lawful way in which to obtain statutory approval for the project. If Council does not do this it cannot proceed in time to comply with the terms of its grant for $3.5m from the State Government for the project, and enjoy a lower cost through using the same contractor as the Department of Education and avoid duplication of costs. Overall using the EPM path will save Council probably $5m.

Question:

Councillor Kay, do you think Council committing to spend the amount of money this project is likely to cost without going through an open tender passes proverbial, as in pub test.

Response:

The proposal is for Council to use the Department of Education’s contractor who was selected under an open competitive tender process. Council is lawfully able to pay the State Government to come under the contract it had with its tenderer under section 55 (3) (b) the Local Government Act.

Question:

Having been provided with a copy of Council’s traffic assessment for the project, do you think the provisions of the education establishments and childcare facility CEPP can be met in relation to the requirement that that the development does not require an alteration of the traffic arrangements?

Response:

The Council’s traffic assessment concluded the road for access could accommodate the traffic demands of the project.

Question:

Councillor Kay, that document that you are putting forward, have you had any part in writing that?

Response:

My address to Council is my choice as to reading parts of the totality of information that is in my possession about the project.

Question Taken on Notice at OMC 18 February 2020 by Director Strategy and Environment

Supplied by Director Strategy and Environment in a Memorandum dated 9 March 2020.

Question:

Just in relation to the heads of agreement, how many times, how many versions have we had going backward and forward? You have mentioned three. How many previous are there?

Response:

As Councillors will appreciate this is not a straightforward question. There has been considerable interchange on particular commercial issues over a prolonged period of time.

In relation to complete versions of a draft HoA there are at least five.

Council received on three separate occasions (across a couple of years) the same HoA template from DoE. Each time it was received Council replied that it was a template and needed to be project specific.

Following more concentrated discussions Council provided a project specific sample HoA (between Council and TfNSW), thereafter a project specific HoA was received on 23.09.2019. This version of the HoA was sent to Minter Ellison for review.

On 20.12.2019 a revised format HoA was received from DoE which did not take into consideration any of the comments from Minter Ellison (which had been forwarded to DoE).

The Meeting closed at 8:38pm

The Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on 17 March 2020 (Pages 1 - 25) were confirmed as a full and accurate record of proceedings on 28 April 2020.

__________________________ __________________________

General Manager Mayor / Chairperson

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 28 April 2020	GB.1 / 58

Item GB.1	S02621

Ku-ring-gai Play Space Strategy - Post Exhibition

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

purpose of report:	To seek Council Endorsement of the Ku-ring-gai Play Space Strategy following public exhibition.

background:	The Ku-ring-gai Play Space Strategy has been prepared by Jeavons Landscape Architects on behalf of Ku-ring-gai Council. Following internal stakeholder consultation and review, a final document has been prepared by Council which was publicly exhibited between 24 February and 23 March 2020. This is a summarised strategy document, with the substantial two volume documents as supporting material. The document suite sets out guidelines for play provision and analyses the existing condition of Council’s 104 playgrounds, which are classified as Local, District or Regional.

comments:	Feedback on the Strategy was limited, but overall positive. Specific commentary on the strategy has been taken into consideration but there are no significant changes in the approach or outcomes.

recommendation:	That Council adopts the Ku-ring-gai Play Space Strategy.

Purpose of Report

To seek Council Endorsement of the Ku-ring-gai Play Space Strategy following public exhibition.

Background

The draft Ku-ring-gai Play Space Strategy was reported at the Ordinary Meeting of Council on 10 December, 2019 where it was resolved that the draft strategy be exhibited for a period of 4 weeks. Public Exhibition was conducted between 24 February and 23March 2020.

Comments

This report outlines the revised Strategy document prepared by Council to complement the two volumes prepared by Jeavons Landscape Architects, and feedback received during exhibition.

Overall, the Strategy received positive responses, requiring no major amendments. Council officers will consider the practical advice received from stakeholders regarding inclusivity and accessibility when upgrading or creating new play spaces. The ‘Community Consultation’ section goes into specific detail regarding the community consultation process and outcomes.

Given the volume of information in the two-volume report, it was deemed appropriate to develop a consolidated, summarised Strategy document that was more accessible for public exhibition. Council prepared this document in-house as the primary document for the exhibition ‘Our Say’ page on Council’s website – refer to Attachment A1.

Additional information incorporated into the Strategy document includes:

· updated maps for ease of readability;

· clear articulation of the strategic framework informing the Strategy;

· inclusion of Everyone Can Play – A Guideline to Create Inclusive Play Spaces;

- in addition to overarching State and Local Government planning objectives associated with play provision delivery, the State Government in conjunction with key experts in the field have recently produced a guiding document on planning for play spaces, and benchmarks for provision and quality. These ensure that accessibility and inclusivity are the fundamental principles for developing play spaces;

- this includes a ‘Play space Evaluation Checklist’ – a tool that allows an existing play space to be evaluated, and a ‘Design Principles Checklist’ for guidance on what to consider when designing a new playground;

- inclusion is a sliding scale. Due to the topography and financial constraints, not all play spaces can cater to everyone. However, the Everyone Can Play Guidelines are used to inform the design of every upgrade or new park so that we can do the best with what we have;

· a new funding model (discussed in the ‘Financial Considerations’ Section);

· an overview of the play spaces by Ward to ensure equitable distribution in the context of the Work Program; and

· the annual condition report for all playgrounds within the LGA has been examined and cross-checked against those playgrounds identified as ‘High Priority’ for upgrade in the Strategy to determine those projects included in the program. A revised priority upgrade program has been developed (refer Figure 1 below).

Figure 1 - Revised Playground Upgrade Priority Program

integrated planning and reporting

Operational Plan 2018-2019 (July 2018). Theme 3 – Places, Spaces and Infrastructure

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective	Delivery Program Term Achievement	Operational Plan Task
P6.1: Recreation, sporting and leisure facilities are available to meet the community’s diverse and changing needs.	P6.1.1: A program is being implemented to improve existing recreation, sporting and leisure facilities and facilitate the establishment of new facilities.	P6.1.1.1: Deliver Council’s adopted Open Space Capital Works Program. P6.1.1.3: Complete the design of identified parks incorporating accessibility and inclusive passive recreation facilities.

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

P6.1: Recreation, sporting and leisure facilities are available

to meet the community’s diverse and changing needs.

P6.1.1: A program is being

implemented to improve existing recreation, sporting and leisure facilities and facilitate the establishment of new facilities.

P6.1.1.1: Deliver Council’s adopted Open Space Capital Works Program.

P6.1.1.3: Complete the design of identified parks incorporating accessibility and inclusive passive recreation facilities.

Governance Matters

A long term objective of Council’s Community Strategic Plan is to ensure that recreation, sporting, and leisure facilities are available to meet the community’s diverse and changing needs.

The Strategy will assist Council in meeting this objective by providing a comprehensive framework which will assist Council to manage playgrounds, plan for new play spaces, and prioritise funding and resources within budgetary and maintenance constraints.

As part of Council’s Local Strategic Planning Statement we have committed to incorporating the Playground Strategy to help meet objectives under Liveability – Open Space Recreation and Sport, and Sustainability – Open Space Network. These include the following planning priorities:

· K17 providing a broad range of open space, sporting and leisure facilities to meet the community’s diverse and changing needs; and

· K27 ensuring the provision of sufficient open space to meet the need of a growing and changing community.

Risk Management

Council has an obligation to maintain its playgrounds to satisfactory and serviceable standards in order to prevent potential maladies and injuries. The playground strategy provides guidance on the design of future playgrounds and recommendations for the maintenance of those existing, with a priority rating based on need.

Financial Considerations

An approach to annual budgets for playground upgrades, and long term feasibility of playground replacements has been developed within Council which has resulted in a five year works program.

Funding of the playground strategy implementation will occur through a number of sources over the next five years. The primary source will be development contributions levied under Council’s S94A Contributions Plans which will supplement the existing capital works program funded through the Infrastructure and Facilities Reserve. The new program (Figure 2) proposes to upgrade 16 play spaces over the next five years. This will ensure that the majority of playgrounds that are nominated as ‘High Priority’ will be upgraded within 5 years. Noting that Selkirk Park play space upgrade has been included, although a low priority, the timing is to coordinate with works to Marian Street Theatre.

The funding has been developed on the premise that the majority of play spaces in the LGA have an equipment life span of approximately 20 years, and the works program developed from the strategy aims to upgrade all 104 play spaces within this timeframe.

Figure 2 - Play Space Upgrades - 5 year Works Program (2021-2025)

Year	Description	Suburb	Location	Priority	Estimated cost	Infrastructure & Facilities Reserve Funding	Section 94A Funding
2021	Na-rang Reserve	Gordon	70 Ridge Street	High	$250,000.00	$50,000.00	$200,000.00	2021
2021	Orange Green	North Turramurra	16-24 Allara Avenue	High	$250,000.00	$50,000.00	$200,000.00
2021	Dukes Green	East Lindfield	11 Wellington Road (East Lindfield Shops)	High	$250,000.00	$50,000.00	$200,000.00
2021	Kendall Village Green	West Pymble	27 Kendall Street	High	$250,000.00		$250,000.00	$850,000
2022	Selkirk Park	Killara	cnr. Marian Street and Culworth Avenue	Low	$250,000.00	$50,000.00	$800,000.00	2022
2022	Athena Avenue Reserve	St Ives	opposite no.30 Athena Avenue cnr. Hayle Street	Medium	$250,000.00	$50,000.00	$200,000.00
2022	Sequoia Close Park	West Pymble	4 Sequoia Close	High	$250,000.00	$50,000.00	$200,000.00	$1,200,000
2023	Ku-ring-gai Wildflower Garden	St Ives	420 Mona Vale Road	High	$900,000.00	$100,000.00	$800,000.00	2023
2023	Eldinhope Green	Wahroonga	opposite no.8 Morris Avenue	Medium	$250,000.00		$250,000.00
2023	Mitchell Crescent Reserve	Warrawee	nos.16 and 18 Mitchell Crescent to behind 16-22 Mitchell Crescent	Medium	$250,000.00		$250,000.00	$1,300,000
2024	Allan Small Park	Killara East	Saiala Road opposite nos.33-41	Medium	$250,000.00	$50,000.00	$200,000.00	2024
2024	Yarrabung Reserve	St Ives	no.59B Yarrabung Road	Medium	$250,000.00	$50,000.00	$200,000.00
2024	Peewee Park	West Pymble	no.37 Kiparra Street opposite Dunoon Avenue	Medium	$250,000.00	$50,000.00	$200,000.00
2024	Princes Park/ Primula Oval	Lindfield	cnr. Highfield Road and Primula Street	Medium	$250,000.00		$250,000.00	$850,000
2025	Queen Elizabeth Reserve*	Lindfield	Bradfield Road corner Charles Street	Medium	$900,000.00	$100,000.00	$800,000.00	2025
2025	Sir Robert Menzies Park	Wahroonga	cnr. Jordan Road and The Comenarra Parkway	Medium	$250,000.00		$250,000.00	$1,050,000
					$5,300,000	$650,000	$5,250,000

Social Considerations

Playgrounds are critical Council supplied infrastructure that enhances the social wellbeing across the community. Playgrounds are not only used by children and their carers, they are also important as social gathering places for the general public.

Environmental Considerations

Ku-ring-gai’s environment provides significant advantages and challenges relating to playgrounds. Some of these include:

· trees – care needs to be taken when locating play equipment beneath tree canopies to ensure sustained tree health;

· steep grades and topography – these provide significant challenges in terms of accessibility into and within a site; and

· biodiversity and riparian considerations – wherever possible locations with these considerations should seek to enhance the natural environment.

Community Consultation

The Draft Ku-ring-gai Play Space Strategy was publicly exhibited between 24 February and 23 March, 2020. The aim of the exhibition was to seek community feedback on the Strategy and also gauge the level of support from specific user groups.

Council promoted the public exhibition via a range of channels:

1) North Shore Times;

2) Ku-ring-gai E-news;

3) Facebook;

4) Council’s Online engagement portal (oursay);

5) direct email (to children’s service providers and disability/access interest groups and parents); and

6) printed copy of strategy at Council’s customer service centre and libraries.

The community was asked to provide feedback by the following means:

· online questionnaire;

· written submission;

· online discussion forum; and

· community workshop (focused on access and inclusion).

Despite the range of communications and engagement methods employed, levels of participation were low. This is usual for a technical strategic document like the Play Space Strategy. Council staff anticipated this, which is why access and inclusion interest groups were targeted due to their likely higher level of interest.

Community workshop

The access and inclusion community workshop was set up to ensure that the interest group had the chance to be fully briefed on the strategy, to ask questions and to suggest changes. Unfortunately, possibly due to impacts of the corona virus, the workshop only had one attendee. However an in depth discussion with the one attendee was very useful in relation to Strategy principles, particularly around signage in future play space development.

Community Participation

In summary:

· 7 completed online questionnaires;

· 2 written submissions (via email); and

· 1 attendee at workshop.

Key findings from the Engagement process

Of the online submissions that completed the questionnaires, the comments provided related to:

· a focus on play provision for younger children, and community gathering spaces;

· benchmarks associated with provision of shade, bins, lighting and toilet facilities; and

· funding

These are all considerations to be addressed as each individual space is upgraded or created in the context of the environment and its neighbouring play spaces. It is noted that whilst some of the benchmarks may appear generic, they allow for the flexibility to incorporate specific elements as required. A comprehensive brief guided by the strategy and internal stakeholder knowledge will developed by the Strategy and Environment team before handover to the Operations Design Team. Resolution of funding is clearly articulated in this report under ‘Financial Considerations’.

One comprehensive submission addressed specific details relating to the play space assessments that form the basis of the Volume 2 document. These details are included where appropriate into the document, and will be referenced in the development of briefs for future upgrades of play spaces.

The additional email submission from a workshop invitee provided a wealth of practical advice relating to access and inclusivity. It highlights the need for consideration of accessibility and inclusivity as two separate entities. This will be articulated through the site-by-site review and contextual response to each play space.

Key findings from the Engagement process included:

· feedback questionnaire response rated strategy 4/5;

· written responses indicated support for the strategy;

· community feedback led to some minor changes to ensure consistency in the documents however, no major changes resulted; and

· feedback received may require some site-specific matters to be addressed as required.

Internal Consultation

This has included two rounds of co-ordinated internal stakeholder engagement, with the feedback from these sessions incorporated into the document. An additional workshop has also been presented by the consultant to internal stakeholders on the practical implementation of the ‘Everyone Can Play’ Guidelines, including local case studies.

A Councillor briefing session was held on 4 November 2019 where the consultant (Jeavons Landscape Architects) provided a presentation on the strategy document.

In addition to extensive internal consultation, a peer review of the strategy document has been conducted by an in independent play consultant with extensive experience associated with both play space provision and strategy preparation. Comments from the review indicate that this is an ‘excellent and informative strategy’.

Summary

The play space strategy guides play space development and maintenance over a long term timeframe for Ku-ring-gai Council. The strategy is a snapshot of the current level of provision and needs based on demographic and development data. The strategy should be reviewed on a regular basis in order to meet changing needs.

The strategy has been developed on the premise that the majority of play spaces in the LGA have an equipment life span of approximately 20 years, and as such the renewal program developed from the strategy aims to upgrade all play spaces within this timeframe.

The two volumes prepared by Jeavons Landscape Architects will remain as supporting background information to the Strategy, and used in the development of future works programs, and prior to each play space upgrade.

Through this Strategy and the associated funding program, Council is committed to achieving its vision of providing the community with a comprehensive suite of play spaces across the LGA.

Recommendation:

A. That Council adopt the Ku-ring-gai Play Space Strategy 2020;

B. That all persons who made a submission be notified of Council’s decision.

William Adames

Community & Business Engagement Co-ordinator

Fleur Rees

Senior Landscape Architect

Bill Royal

Team Leader Urban Design

Antony Fabbro

Manager Urban & Heritage Planning

Andrew Watson

Director Strategy & Environment

Attachments:

A1⇩

Ku-ring-gai Play Space Strategy

2020/047616

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 28 April 2020	GB.2 / 114

Item GB.2	FY00382/12
	17 December 2019

Draft Revised Delivery Program 2018-2021 and Draft Operational Plan 2020-2021

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

purpose of report:	To place Council's draft Revised Delivery Program 2018-2021 and draft Operational Plan 2020-2021, incorporating the Budget, Capital Works Program, Statement of Revenue Policy and Fees and Charges for 2020-2021, on public exhibition.

background:	Under the Local Government Act Council is required to have an annual Operational Plan adopted before the beginning of each financial year, and to review its adopted Delivery Program each year, when preparing the Plan.

comments:	The Operational Plan has been developed to facilitate the delivery of this Council’s term achievements, containe d in its revised Delivery Program 2018–2021, while maintaining the key themes and any activities not yet completed. The Plan contains the services, projects and tasks to be undertaken by Council during the year, supported by an annual budget and works programs.

recommendation:	That the draft Revised Delivery Program 2018-2021, and draft Operational Plan 2020-2021, incorporating the Budget, Capital Works Program, Statement of Revenue Policy and Fees and Charges for 2020-2021, be endorsed and placed on public exhibition and that following public exhibition, a further report be submitted to Council for the consideration of submissions and adoption of the revised Delivery Program 2018-2021 and Operational Plan 2020-2021, including Fees and Charges. That Council authorises new loan borrowing of $11.3 million for the St Ives Indoor sports complex to be repaid from future asset sales.

Purpose of Report

Background

In 2018 Council adopted a new suite of strategic plans that form the Integrated Planning and Reporting (IP&R) framework under the Local Government Act, 1993. These documents include:

· Community Strategic Plan - Our Ku-ring-gai 2038;

· Delivery Program & Operational Plan; and

· Resourcing Strategy.

The Integrated Planning and Reporting requirements of the Local Government Act require Council to have an annual Operational Plan adopted before the beginning of each financial year, including details of Council’s activities to be undertaken that year, as part of the Delivery Program.

Council is also required to review its adopted Delivery Program each year, when preparing its Operational Plan. Once endorsed by Council the combined program and plan must be placed on public exhibition for a minimum period of twenty-eight (28) days to allow for community feedback.

Comments

Attachment A1 provides a copy of the draft Revised Delivery Program 2018-2021 and draft Operational Plan 2020-2021 incorporating the Budget, Capital Works Program and Statement of Revenue Policy.

Attachment A2 provides a copy of the draft Fees and Charges for 2020-2021, which is exhibited in a separate document.

The combined Delivery Program and Operational Plan contains Council’s term achievements for 2018 – 2021 along with an annual Operational Plan which details the services, projects and actions to be undertaken by Council during the third year of the Delivery Program. It has been developed to mirror the six (6) themes contained in the Community Strategic Plan and includes:

· Community, People and Culture

· Natural Environment

· Places, Spaces and Infrastructure

· Access, Traffic and Transport

· Local Economy and Employment

· Leadership and Governance

Preparation of the combined document included:

· A review of Council’s three year term achievements with no changes proposed;

· preparation of one year tasks representing Council’s services, identified major capital projects, a capital works program, operational projects and one off actions proposed for the year;

· implementation actions for Council policies and strategies as well as regional and state government strategies and legislation;

· a review of performance measures, established base line data and targets;

Organisational performance will be measured through the achievement of the one year tasks as well as performance indicators under each theme, developed to provide both qualitative and quantitative information back to the community.

integrated planning and reporting

Leadership and Governance

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

L1.1 – A shared long term vision for Ku-ring-gai underpins strategic collaboration, policy development and community engagement.

L1.1.1 – The priorities of our community are reflected in the Ku-ring-gai Community Strategic Plan and inform Council’s policy development, decision-making and program delivery.

L1.1.1.2 - Prepare Integrated Planning and Reporting documents including the Delivery Program, Operational Plan and Resourcing Strategy.

Governance Matters

Under the NSW Local Government Act and associated Integrated Planning & Reporting guidelines Council is required to prepare, exhibit and adopt a revised Delivery Program and new Operational Plan before 30 June 2020. The document must be placed on public exhibition for a minimum period of twenty-eight (28) days to allow for community feedback. Following exhibition a report on submissions and any proposed changes will be presented back to Council’s Ordinary Meeting of 30 June, 2020.

Risk Management

Council has a statutory obligation to review its Delivery Program and prepare an Operational Plan, and for them to be placed on public exhibition, for community feedback to be considered, and for the plans to be adopted by 30 June 2020.

The draft Delivery Program 2018-2021 and draft Operational Plan 2020-2021 must be informed by the Community Strategic Plan and follow the requirements of the Local Government Act, 1993.

Financial Considerations

Preparation of the Delivery Program and Operational Plan was substantially completed before the current measures were introduced to slow the COVID-19 virus by state and federal governments. Implications of those measures on Council’s program for next year will continue to be assessed over the coming months and are likely to be significant, with estimates of a possible impact in the order of $6m assuming the current social isolation measures remain in place for six months. Further information on any implications and the need for amendments to the program and plan will be the subject of further reports to Council.

Ku-ring-gai Council is in a sound financial position. Operating surpluses are important as they provide funding for capital works, and the 2020/21 budget provides for an operating surplus of $26 million after allowing for the depreciation expense on Council’s $1.418 billion portfolio of largely depreciable assets such as roads, footpaths, drains and buildings. If capital grants and contributions are excluded, the operating result remains in surplus, with a result of $12.8 million. This is consistent with Council’s Long Term Financial Plan which provides a framework to achieve continued operating surpluses.

The Operating Surplus contributes to Council’s capital works program. In 2020/21 the capital works program is $102 million. Details of the capital works program for 2020/21 can be found in the following pages.

Council’s Long Term Financial Plan and budget ensures that Council maintains adequate liquidity. This is demonstrated by the Unrestricted Current Ratio, for which the industry benchmark of greater than 1.5:1 is considered to be “Satisfactory” and greater than 2:1 to be “Good”. Council’s budget maintains a “Good” Unrestricted Current Ratio that is greater than 2:1.

Council’s 2020/21 budget provides for loan capital repayment of $397k. The outstanding loan is discharged by revenue from general funds provided by the future net revenue generated from leasing out the investment property at 828 Pacific Highway, Gordon.

A new two-year loan is also proposed to fund Council’s contribution to the new St Ives Indoor Sport Court facility (a total of $11.3 million for 2020/21 -2021/22). This loan will be repaid from proposed asset sales in 2022. Further information on this project is provided below.

The chart below reflects the additional loan as part of the outstanding loan balance for 2020/2021

Council’s proposed budget assumes that proceeds from asset sales will add $6.1 million to its capital income budget in 2020/21. These funds will be used to partly fund the infrastructure assets renewal program ($1.1 million) and the refurbishment of Marian Street Theatre ($5 million). Further information on this project is provided below.

Marian Street Theatre

The proposed capital budget for refurbishment of the Marian Street Theatre is estimated at $16.2 million phased over two years funded from the following sources: asset sales $14.8 million, general revenue $1.4 million . This is an increase of $5.7 million from the approved budget of $10.5 million. There is a separate report on the Marian Street project in this business paper.

The chart below shows the budget phasing and the funding sources proposed. It must be noted that a budget allocation has been approved by Council for the current financial year (2019/20) for commencement of tender documentation and design services. For 2021/22 a total of $5 million is allocated to the project.

St Ives Indoor Sport Complex – Joint use indoor sports facility

The proposed capital budget for the construction of the new indoor sport facility at St Ives High School is estimated at $17.4 million phased over two years from a combination of funding sources: grants $3.5 million, general revenue $2.6 million, loan $11.3 million, asset sales $0.2 million.

Council has resolved to spend significant funds on the design and DA for the facility and to meet the proposed timeframe for construction the planned funding from assets sales is not likely to be available in time. As such, a short-term loan of $11.3 million during 2020/21 and 2021/22 is proposed to fund Council’s contribution to the new St Ives Indoor Sport Court facility. This loan is assumed to be repaid from proposed asset sales by the end of 2022.

Council collects S7.11 (former S 94) contributions from developers to help pay for new infrastructure and facilities for the growing population of the area. Some of the works to be undertaken in the Contributions plan cater for the existing population and these works require a co-contribution from Council’s general funds. Some contributions will also be derived from development partners for the major local centre projects. The amount of works programmed to be undertaken over the next year are shown below (S7.11 $56 million, Council Contribution $2.3 million from asset sales reserve).

Council’s total Rates income is ‘pegged’ by the State Government and approval must be obtained for increases above this amount (known as Special Rates Variations).

In the 2020/21 budget the projected Rates income is $67.8 million. This amount includes the permanent existing Special Rates Variations for Infrastructure and the Environmental Levy.

A summary of Council’s Funding Statement showing the draft budget for 2020/21 and prior years is provided below:

Financial Challenges

While Council is in a sound financial position, it faces a number of challenges to achieve long term financial sustainability.

Council is relying on asset recycling (the sale of underutilised property) to fund new major capital projects, co-funding for projects funded from developer contributions and for renewing existing assets. Progress on selling assets has been slower than expected and further, approval for the rezoning of two significant properties earmarked for sale (bowling clubs) at the zoning requested has not been forthcoming. Rather, Council has recently been advised by the Department of Planning that the rezoning process may only proceed at a zoning which would provide significantly lower financial returns. Unless this is changed, future additional asset sales will be required or alternate funding sources identified, else projects will not be able to proceed.

Council is also embarking on town centre transformation projects such as the Lindfield Village Hub and Lindfield Village Green. These projects are very large compared to usual Council projects and are funded by the contribution of Council land, developer contributions and other funds. Due to the complex nature of the projects and the high value, they necessarily expose Council to a high degree of financial risk.

Managing infrastructure assets is a major challenge for Council, in particular providing enough funds to renew the existing assets in the context of a desire to build new assets. Council’s long term financial plan addresses the renewal of existing assets in terms of the core condition rating, however contemporary expectations are higher than allowed for in the Long Term Financial Plan (LTFP). Examples of this include the desire for footpaths where there are currently none, and community buildings that may be structurally sound but are no longer fit for purpose. These buildings do not meet the functional requirements of modern society due to the design, size, materials and layout. Other existing assets may also require more renewal funding than currently planned, in particular the stormwater drains network which is currently being inspected via camera analysis. Early indications are that these drains may require additional renewal works than is currently planned and funded.

Budget principles

Council’s budget for 2020-2021 is developed using the 10 year LTFP. The LTFP principles and financial sustainability tests applied in developing next year’s budget and future financial planning are outlined in Council’s Resourcing Strategy. The draft 2020-2021 budget has been developed to ensure that the LTFP financial targets are met and maintained in the future.

Major assumptions of the 2020-21 budget include:

· CPI of 1.7% applied;

· the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal (IPART) approved rate pegging increase of 2.6%;

· no price increase for domestic waste charges due to sufficient funding in the dwm reserve to cover the 2020/21 cost increases;

· fees and charges increased by an average of 2.1%;

· interest on investments estimated at 2.5%;

· employee costs increase of 3.3%;

· capital works and operational projects program of $102 million; and

· Section 7.11 (Development Contributions) revenue of $13 million transferred to externally restricted reserves and expenditure of $56.3 million from these reserves.

Rating Structure 2020-2021

Each year the NSW Government approves a maximum percentage increase in the total income a Council can receive from rates, known as the ‘rate-peg’. The rate peg for 2020-2021 has been determined by IPART at 2.6% and this percentage increase has been applied to Council’s rates.

Rates Structure including Rate Pegging increase of 2.6%

Type	Category	Rate in $	Min/Base Amount ($)	% of Revenue from Base for each rate	Yield $
Ordinary	Residential	0.00063039	$554.00		$32,199,462
Ordinary	Business	0.00339647	$554.00		$4,614,780
Special	Infrastructure - Primary Rate	0.00028946			$12,870,698
Special	Infrastructure - Primary Rate		$283.00	49.69%	$12,712,077
Special	Infrastructure - Special Rate Variation	0.00003481			$1,547,895
Special	Infrastructure - Special Rate Variation		$33.00	48.92%	$1,482,327
Special	Environmental - Special Rate Variation	0.00007108			$3,160,525

The Ordinary General Residential and Business Rates, plus the special ‘Infrastructure – Primary Rate’ together represent the total notional rates income of Council excluding the rates received from the two special rate variations. The above rates structure divides this amount into the Ordinary Rates (59%) and ‘Infrastructure – Primary Rate’ (41%).

Under this rates structure, Council will grant a voluntary pensioner rebate (in addition to the Statutory Rebate) of 8.5% of the total Council rates and charges. This voluntary rebate will apply to pensioners who are eligible for the Statutory Rebate.

Other Key Charges

Council levies a domestic waste management charge and a stormwater management charge. The domestic waste management charge varies depending on the service selected, with a base service with green waste being $455 pa. The stormwater management charge is $25 pa for a single residential property and $12.50 pa for a strata residential property.

Fees and charges schedule for 2020 - 2021

The draft Delivery Program and draft Operational Plan includes a range of proposed increases to current fees and charges in 2020-2021. Underlying these is the draft pricing methodology in relation to fees and charges which are not prescribed by legislation. The pricing methodology seeks to ensure Council recovers its costs in delivering of services, while also allowing for fees and charges to be discounted, where appropriate, in recognition of Council’s community service obligations.

Council’s Fees and Charges have been increased where appropriate. Fees that have not been subject to an annual increase include Statutory and Regulatory Fees, Development Contributions and those where it was not commercially viable to do so. Attachment A2 provides the 2020-2021 draft Fees and Charges Schedule.

Social Considerations

The draft Revised Delivery Program and draft Operational Plan have been developed to progress, during this Council’s term, the long term objectives contained in the Community Strategic Plan and achieve social outcomes from Council’s term achievements.

Environmental Considerations

The draft Revised Delivery Program and draft Operational Plan have been developed to progress, during this Council’s term, the long term objectives contained in the Community Strategic Plan and achieve environmental outcomes from Council’s term achievements.

Community Consultation

The draft Revised Delivery Program and draft Operational Plan will be placed on public exhibition for a minimum period of 28 days, and during this period input from the community will be sought, considered and reported back to Council in June 2020.

It is the responsibility of Council to consider all submissions made during the exhibition period, prior to adopting the Delivery Program and Operational Plan.

Internal Consultation

Councillors have been briefed on the budget parameters for 2020-2021. Consultation has taken place across the organisation in preparation of the draft Revised Delivery Program and draft Operational Plan, including preparation of the budget and revenue policy, development of tasks and review of performance measures.

Summary

In June 2018, Council adopted its three (3) year Delivery Program and annual Operational Plan.

The adopted Delivery Program has been reviewed and a new Operational Plan developed for 2020-2021 in accordance with the Local Government Act. The Operational Plan is the second plan developed for Council’s three year Delivery Program.

The development of the revised Delivery Program and Operational Plan has been informed by the community’s long term objectives contained in the Community Strategic Plan, Council policies and strategies, prioritisation of capital works projects, service delivery standards, income from external sources and fees and charges. As required by legislation these documents must be placed on public exhibition for a minimum period of twenty-eight (28) days to allow for community feedback.

It is recommended that the revised Delivery Program 2018-2021 and draft Operational Plan 2020-2021, incorporating the Budget, Capital Works Program, Statement of Revenue and Fees and Charges for 2020-2021, be placed on public exhibition for twenty-eight (28 days) and that following the consultation a further report be brought back to Council.

Recommendation:

A. That the report on Council’s draft Revised Delivery Program 2018-2021 and draft Operational Plan 2020-2021, be received and noted.

B. That Council authorises new loan borrowing of $11.3 million for the St Ives Indoor sports complex to be repaid from future asset sales

C. That pursuant to Sections 404 and 405 of the Local Government Act, 1993, the draft Revised Delivery Program 2018-2021, and draft Operational Plan 2020-2021, incorporating the Budget, Capital Works Program, Statement of Revenue Policy and Fees and Charges for 2020-2021 be endorsed and placed on public exhibition for a minimum period of 28 days.

D. That following public exhibition, a further report be submitted to Council to consider any submissions and to adopt the draft Revised Delivery Program 2018-2021, and draft Operational Plan 2020-2021, including Fees and Charges for 2020-2021.

Helen Lowndes

Integrated Planning Coordinator

Michael Wearne

Manager Governance and Corporate Strategy

Angela Apostol

Manager Finance

David Marshall

Director Corporate

Mette Kofoed

Strategic Management Accounant

Attachments:	A1⇨	Revised Delivery Program 2018-2021 and Operational Plan 2020-2021 - Draft April 2020	Excluded
	A2 ⇨	Draft Fees & Charges 2020-2021 - Public	Excluded	2020/082801

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 28 April 2020	GB.3 / 126

Item GB.3	S11276

Revised Resourcing Strategy 2020 - 2030

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

purpose of report:	For Council to adopt the Revised Resourcing Strategy 2020 – 2030 incorporating the Long Term Financial Plan, Asset Management Strategy and Workforce Management Strategy.

background:	The current Resourcing Strategy was adopted by Council in June 2018 as part of a new suite of strategic plans for Ku-ring-gai that form the Integrated Planning and Reporting Framework under the Local Government Act 1993 (the Act). Under the Act Council must have a Resourcing Strategy adopted which supports the Community Strategic Plan and the Delivery Program, and to review the Resourcing Strategy each year as part of the review of its Delivery Program.

comments:	The revised Resourcing Strategy includes the components of the Long Term Financial Plan, Asset Management Strategy and the Workforce Plan. These components are integrated and need to be revised annually to incorporate updated asset and financial information. Revisions to the components of the Resourcing Strategy reflect updated expenditure figures, changes to figures in our asset registers, progression of works in the Asset Management Improvement Plan and updated workforce planning statistics.

recommendation:	That Council adopt the Revised Resourcing Strategy 2020 – 2030 incorporating the Long Term Financial Plan, Asset Management Strategy and Workforce Management Strategy.

Purpose of Report

For Council to adopt the Revised Resourcing Strategy 2020 – 2030 incorporating the Long Term Financial Plan, Asset Management Strategy and Workforce Management Strategy.

Background

In June 2018, Council adopted a new suite of documents that form the Integrated Planning and Reporting (IP&R) framework. These documents included:

· Community Strategic Plan – Our Ku-ring-gai 2038;

· Delivery Program & Operational Plan; and

· Resourcing Strategy.

These plans are developed concurrently with the other plans of the IP&R framework.

The Resourcing Strategy is the link between the long-term Community Strategic Plan and the medium-term Delivery Program and details how the strategic aspirations of Ku-ring-gai can be achieved in terms of time, money, people and assets. The Resourcing Strategy is comprised of the following components:

· 10-year Long-term Financial Plan;

· 10-year Asset Management Strategy; and

· 10-year Workforce Management Strategy

The Resourcing Strategy is designed to be a living document to reflect changing financial and asset information. Initiatives within the Resourcing Strategy are reviewed annually to ensure relevance in the changing environment and to respond to any changes in Council’s Delivery Program.

Comments

The review of the Resourcing Strategy was substantially completed before the current measures were introduced to slow the COVID-19 virus by state and federal governments. Implications of those measures on Council’s program for next year will continue to be assessed over the coming months and are likely to be significant, with estimates of a possible impact in the order of $6m assuming the current social isolation measures remain in place for six months. Potential long-term implications will continue to be assessed over the coming months. Further information on any implications and the need for future amendments to the Resourcing Strategy will be the subject of further reports to Council.

A copy of the Revised Resourcing Strategy 2020-2030 is attached in four parts:

Attachment A1 – Introduction

Attachment A2 - Long Term Financial Plan

Attachment A3 - Asset Management Strategy

Attachment A4 - Workforce Management Strategy.

Long-Term Financial Plan (LTFP)

The Long Term Financial Plan (LTFP) is Council’s 10 year financial planning document with an emphasis on long-term financial sustainability. Financial sustainability is one of the key issues facing local government due to several contributing factors including cost shifting from other levels of government, ageing infrastructure and constraints on revenue growth. A financially sustainable Council is one that has the ability to fund on-going service delivery and renew and replace assets without imposing excessive debt or rate increases on future generations.

This is an important document, which tests the community aspirations and goals against financial realities. Contained in this plan are:

· projected income and expenditure, balance sheet and cash-flow statements;

· assumptions used to develop the plan;

· sensitivity analysis – highlight factors most likely to affect the plan;

· financial modelling for different scenarios;

· methods of monitoring financial performance.

Balancing expectations, uncertainty of future revenue and expenditure forecasts is one of the most challenging aspects of the financial planning process. As such, the longer the planning horizon, the more general the plan will be in the later years.

The LTFP has been revised to present the most current estimates and project scopes.

Asset Management Strategy (AMS)

The Asset Management Strategy includes the following:

· Asset Management Policy; and

· Asset Management Strategy.

The Asset Management Policy sets out principles, requirements and responsibilities for implementing consistent asset management processes throughout Council. It also ensures that Council, as the custodian of public infrastructure, has mechanisms in place to deliver infrastructure services in the most effective manner.

The AMS establishes the current condition and value of all assets; the preferred condition and level of service of all assets; and the systems, resources, processes and financing options to achieve the preferred condition and level of service.

The AMS is supported by Asset Management Plans for each asset class which are regularly reviewed. Together, these documents and our processes, data and systems (including asset registers and technical databases) make up Council’s Asset Management Framework.

The AMS has been revised to align with Councils updated Long Term Financial Plan. The capital expenditure figures and the required renewal costs have been included in the AMS to establish Council’s funding gap for infrastructure assets.

The Asset Management Improvement Plan, which is included in the AMS, has also been updated to reflect progression and allocate responsibilities.

Workforce Management Strategy (WMS)

The Workforce Management Strategy establishes a framework for building the capability of our workforce to provide Council with the people best able to inform its strategic direction, develop innovative approaches to complex issues, and deliver appropriate services effectively and efficiently. The WMS provides a link between service and strategic objectives and associated workforce implications and also spans 10 years.

The WMS has been revised to reflect current workforce statistics.

integrated planning and reporting

Leadership and Governance

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

L1.1 – A shared long term vision for Ku-ring-gai underpins strategic collaboration, policy development and community engagement.

L1.1.1 – The priorities of our community are reflected in the Ku-ring-gai Community Strategic Plan and inform Council’s policy development, decision-making and program delivery.

L1.1.1.2 - Prepare Integrated Planning and Reporting documents and complete all statutory reporting required under the Local Government Act 1993 and Integrated Planning and Reporting Framework.

Governance Matters

Section 403 of the Local Government Act, 1993, requires that Council has a long term Resourcing Strategy for the provision of the resources required to implement the strategies established in its Community Strategic Plan. The Resourcing Strategy includes long term financial planning, asset management planning and workforce management.

The Integrated Planning and Reporting guidelines under Section 406 of the Local Government Act, 1993, requires Council to review the strategy each year as part of its review of the Delivery Program.

The Local Government Code of Accounting Practice and Financial Reporting requires Council to report, in the annual financial statements, the condition of Council’s assets.

Risk Management

Council has a statutory obligation to prepare and adopt a Resourcing Strategy at the beginning of its term, and to review the strategy each year.

Risk management is a significant part of the development of the Resourcing Strategy and the identified risks are included in each component document.

Financial Considerations

Council’s LTFP quantifies the cost of Council’s services and capital expenditure for the next 10 years.

A portfolio of all project proposals has been developed, including estimates of costs and funding sources to determine current and future funding requirements. This project portfolio has been linked to the LTFP.

The plan contains a series of assumptions. Year 1 of the LTFP – 2020/21 is the draft budget for the next financial year and is based on Council’s current revised budget. Years two (2) to ten (10) are calculated by extrapolating the budgets across each of the remaining years using these assumptions and known changes.

Council’s Asset Management Strategy (AMS) is being progressively developed to identify the level of funding required to adequately maintain community assets and the most effective way of applying funds to ensure these assets continue to provide the level of service the community expects from them.

The LTFP has incorporated a principle of applying any otherwise surplus funding in future years to closing the asset renewal gap as a priority. Council continues to follow the principles of its adopted “Road to Sustainability” funding strategy. This strategy looks to address the infrastructure backlog and invest additional funding in infrastructure renewal as a priority. The Road to Sustainability identifies additional funding from a Horizontal Service Review (originally adopted in 2018) - a combination of additional operating revenue and decrease in operating expenditure, along with Asset Recycling (the divestment of underutilised assets).

Two scenarios have been developed :

Scenario 1 - Base Case Scenario with additional funding for Infrastructure

The base scenario of the LTFP shows the financial results of delivering the current level of service as per the 2020/21 budget expanded out over 10 years and adjusted by various price forecast indexes as detailed in the financial assumptions section of this document.

The adopted principle under this scenario is that $52 million of funds will be diverted towards Council’s assets renewal as a priority, from a combination of asset sales and horizontal service review initiatives. This scenario is sustainable according to the recognised financial sustainability measures and aligns with Councils current funding strategy described earlier in the report.

In addition to the standard renewal expenditure, approximately $18 million per year on average will also be allocated in maintenance as required by the Asset Management Strategy. Additional funding will also have a positive impact on Council’s infrastructure backlog, with a reduction in backlog of $23 million by 2023/24, meeting and overachieving the current industry benchmark for the backlog ratio. In addition, the funds will significantly reduce the cost to agreed level of service identified by the community. As per the current plan the cost to agreed level will be fully addressed after 2029/30.

Scenario 2 - Scenario with reduced funding for Infrastructure

The current scenario assumes reduced funding for infrastructure. Funding of $52 million originally identified through the Horizontal Service Review and Divestment of assets (proceeds from assets sale) may not eventuate resulting in significantly reduced funding and deterioration of the state of Council’s assets in the long term. Most financial sustainability indicators will be negatively impacted due to reduced revenue.

This scenario in the LTFP shows the financial results (impact on key indicators) of delivering the current level of service as per the forecast 2020/21 budget expanded out over 10 years with reduced funding for infrastructure. This scenario is not Council’s preferred one and is not considered sustainable.

Highlights and significant changes to the Long Term Financial Plan

The following LTFP highlights are based on Council’s preferred scenario from above, where the additional funding for infrastructure is addressed as a priority.

· A recurrent operating surplus before capital income and asset sales is achieved in all years to fund capital works.

· All Fit for the Future KPIs are met during the life of this Plan.

· Additional funds (above the standard renewal program) of $52 million over 10 years identified through the “Road to Sustainability” funding strategy to be redirected to infrastructure assets renewal from 2020/21 onwards contributing to closing the infrastructure backlog (cost to satisfactory) within the term of this financial plan.

· “Road to Sustainability” funding strategy identifies additional funding from the following initiatives and sources:

o Horizontal service review - a combination of additional operating revenue and decreases in operating expenditure.

· Asset Recycling (the divestment of underutilised assets).

· Property Development Reserve - Council has established a Property Development Reserve in the Long Term Financial Plan of $45 million, accumulated from the proceeds of asset sales. This reserve is created to ensure that Council has sufficient funds in reserve as a contingency for the financial risks of development for town centre revitalisation projects.

· A total of $206 million will be allocated to asset maintenance over 10 years, $257 million to asset renewals and $163 million (excluding Local Centre Major Projects) to build new or upgrade existing assets.

· Continuation of a permanent special rate variation for environmental programs and works (Environmental levy) of $3.2 million in 2020/21 and growing in future years.

· Maintaining a working capital target of $5 million in 2020/21, this is maintained at 5.5% of operating expenses (excluding depreciation).

· S94 Contributions Plan Projects totalling expenditure from S94 reserves of $323 million over 10 years. These works are included in the Plan on the proviso that future asset sales will be made to fund the estimated funding gap of projects that require a co-contribution from Council. ($14.7 million over 10 years).

· Delivery of a total capital works and other major projects program over 10 years totalling almost $680 million (at future prices). Some significant projects included in this and delivered within the next 10 years are:

o Implementation of Koola Park Master Plan

o Implementation of St Ives Village Green Master Plan

o Lindfield Village Green

o Lindfield Village Hub

o Turramurra Community Hub

o Construction of St Ives Showground Regional Play Space

o Marian Street Theatre, Marian Street, Killara – refurbishment of Marian street theatre.

o Joint use indoor sports facility - St Ives Indoor Sports Complex, St Ives High School, Horace Road, St Ives

o Gordon Recreation Area – Masterplan Implementation

o Local Centre Public Domain Improvements

o Council Chambers Upgrade

The full list of capital and operating projects proposed for the next year is provided in the Delivery Program 2018-2021 and Operational Plan 2019 -2020.

Financial Challenges

While Council is in a sound financial position, it faces a number of challenges to achieve long term financial sustainability.

Social Considerations

The Resourcing Strategy has been developed to implement strategies to achieve the long-term social objectives established in Ku-ring-gai’s Community Strategic Plan – Our Ku-ring-gai 2038.

Environmental Considerations

The Resourcing Strategy has been developed to implement strategies to achieve the long-term environmental objectives established in Ku-ring-gai’s Community Strategic Plan – Our Ku-ring-gai 2038.

Community Consultation

Extensive community engagement was undertaken by Council as part of the preparation and exhibition of the IP&R suite of plans, adopted by Council in 2018. This included the Resourcing Strategy. No further consultation is required for the review of the Strategy.

Internal Consultation

Councillors have been briefed on any changes to financial and budget parameters as part of the review of the Delivery Program and preparation of the Operational Plan, reported separately to this meeting. Consultation has taken place with relevant departments in the review of the Strategy.

Summary

The revised Resourcing Strategy includes the components of the Long Term Financial Plan, Asset Management Strategy and the Workforce Plan. These components are integrated and need to be revised annually to incorporate updated asset and financial information.

Revisions to the components of the Resourcing Strategy reflect updated expenditure figures from Council’s audited Financial Statements for 2018/19, changes to figures in our asset registers, progression of works in the Asset Management Improvement Plan and updated workforce planning statistics.

It is recommended that the revised Resourcing Strategy be adopted.

Recommendation:

That pursuant to Sections 403 and 406 of the Local Government Act, 1993, Council adopts the Revised Resourcing Strategy 2020-2030, incorporating the Long Term Financial Plan, Asset Management Strategy and Workforce Management Strategy.

Helen Lowndes

Integrated Planning Coordinator

Michael Wearne

Manager Governance and Corporate Strategy

Angela Apostol

Manager Finance

David Marshall

Director Corporate

Mette Kofoed

Strategic Management Accounant

Attachments:	A1⇨	Resourcing Strategy 2020-2030 -Introduction Section. Adopted June 2018. Revised April 2020	Excluded	2020/101375
	A2⇨	Long Term Financial Plan 2020-2030 - Adopted June 2018. Revised April 2020.	Excluded	2020/101359
	A3 ⇨	Asset Management Strategy 2020-2030 - Adopted June 2018. Revised April 2020.	Excluded	2020/101357
	A4 ⇨	Workforce Management Strategy 2020-2030 - Adopted June 2018. Revised April 2020.	Excluded	2020/101650

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 28 April 2020	GB.9 / 194

Item GB.9	S12268

Assessment of Planning Proposal for Lindfield Village Hub Sites

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

purpose of report:	To report on the assessment of the Planning Proposal to amend the planning controls that apply to the Lindfield Village Hub land at 1 Woodford Lane, 2-12 Bent Street, 1B Beaconsfield Parade, 19 Drovers Way, Drovers Way Road Reserve and Woodford Lane Lindfield.

background:	The Planning Proposal, lodged on 5 November 2019, seeks to amend the KLEP (Local Centres) 2012 to change the height of building and floor space ratio controls applying to the site. It also seeks to allow residential flat buildings with consent across the entire site, and to include a further site specific provision at Clause 6.9 to allow for rooftop plant, lift overruns, and rooftop communal open space (and associated structures) to be located above the proposed maximum height limits. The Planning Proposal was referred to the Ku-ring-gai Local Planning Panel for advice on 6 April 2020.

comments:	The Planning Proposal has been assessed against the provisions of the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment’s ‘A guide to preparing Planning Proposals’ and section 3.33 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. It is considered that there is sufficient merit to enable the Planning Proposal to be submitted to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment for a Gateway Determination, subject to the incorporation of the recommended amendments

recommendation:	That the Planning Proposal be submitted to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment for a Gateway Determination subject to the amendments and recommendations outlined in this report.

Purpose of Report

Background

Council has engaged consultant MG Planning Pty Ltd to conduct the assessment of this Planning Proposal as Council’s Major Projects Division is the applicant and Council is the landowner. An urban design assessment has also been prepared by consultants Zanardo Studio. Other assessments including biodiversity and traffic and transport issues have been carried out internally by Council’s specialists.

The Planning Proposal was submitted to Council on 5 November 2019. Following review, issues were identified and a request for further information was forwarded on 24 January 2020. The proponent submitted an amended proposal on 21 February 2020, however this submission did not include all required information. Following further submission of revised documentation a review of the Planning Proposal formally commenced on 6 March 2020. This report assesses the amended Planning Proposal requested not the Planning Proposal as originally submitted.

A copy of the Planning Proposal and appendices is included at Attachments A2-A10.

The proponent seeks to make the following amendments to the Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan (Local Centres) 2012 (KLEP Local Centres 2012) to:

· amend the maximum permissible height applying to the site on the Height of Buildings map from part 17.5m and part 26.5m to part RL115.6, part RL120.6 and part RL127.5 as shown on the proposed Height of Buildings map and deletion of a maximum height from the Woodford Lane Road Reserve;

· amend the maximum permissible Floor Space Ratio applying to the site on the Floor Space Ratio map from generally 1.3:1 to 2.21:1 as shown on the proposed Floor Space Ratio map and deletion of a maximum FSR from the Woodford Lane Road Reserve;

· amend Schedule 1 to allow residential flat buildings on the subject land as an additional use permitted with consent across the whole of the subject site (Note: currently permissible only on part of the site); and

· insert new Clause 6.9 to allow exceptions to the maximum height of buildings on the subject land for the purposes of rooftop plant, lift towers, lift motor rooms and or communal open space and access to and structures associated with such space.

(Note: the Planning Proposal seeks to limit this provision to the subject land only)

The proposed amendments to the KLEP Local Centres 2012 are intended to allow for development of the Lindfield Village Hub which is to become a community focal point with recreational activities and community facilities. It will include a new urban park, multi-purpose community facilities, commuter and community car parking and residential apartment buildings. The precinct is to be developed with a maximum height of 9 residential storeys or 5-6 commercial storeys (RL127.5) and maximum FSR across the site of 2.21:1. It is intended to deliver:

i) Community Hub: a range of facilities including a community centre, new park, restaurants and cafes, commuter car parking, new library with direct ground level access located adjacent to a new town square, and parking associated with new and existing uses.

ii) Public Realm: A community park with a retail and community facility frontage providing passive surveillance opportunities and a civic plaza for outdoor dining and other leisure and social activities. A pocket park with native plantings at the south-west corner of Bent Street and Drovers Way.

iii) Retail Arcade: A retail area arranged around the vertical circulation linking the basement levels to a civic plaza; including a supermarket and a mix of specialty retail at ground level.

iv) Residential: Buildings providing a mix of 1, 2 and 3 bedroom units totalling approximately 153 units.

v) Drovers Way: A new 15m wide, two-way, tree lined street with on street parking, landscaped areas and access into the retail arcade, and access to basement parking and servicing.

vi) Woodford Lane: An active lane providing opportunities for the retail units fronting Pacific Highway to open out to the civic plaza at the rear.

The new community park on Bent Street is intended to be a minimum of 3,000m² and the new central plaza approximately 900m² with public seating and outdoor dining opportunities. The proposed community facilities are to comprise 3,000m² including a new library with minimum area of 1,250m², community facility with area of 1,200m² and child care centre with area of 550m².

Three major new building envelopes are proposed:

· north-eastern – residential block with retail on ground floor and a maximum height of 9 storeys (rl127.5);

· southern - residential block with retail on ground floor and a maximum height of 9 storeys (RL120.6), and

· western – community facility block with retail on ground floor, childcare on upper level, attached dwellings on ground floor fronting Bent Street and a maximum height of 5-6 storeys (RL115.6).

Active frontages are proposed for each building envelope with the exception of the Drovers Way frontages (south) and the minor north-western and south-eastern frontages of the western block and south-eastern frontage of southern block.

A new commuter car park (135 spaces) is also proposed below ground (subject to funding by Transport for NSW) and a new kiss and ride area, public parking for 109 cars (to replace existing), and additional parking associated with newly proposed land uses (544 spaces). The 544 parking spaces required for the proposed uses are broken down as follows:

· 137 spaces for residents and 31 spaces for visitors;

· 309 spaces for retail uses;

· 61 spaces for community facilities; and

· 6 spaces for the childcare centre.

A total of 740 basement car parking spaces are therefore provided for.

The indicative design provides for a total 14,460m² of residential (equating to approximately 153 units) and 8,140m² of retail / commercial GFA in addition to the community facilities (3,000m² including child care centre). The total floor space therefore equates to a maximum of 25,600m² of GFA or FSR of 2.21:1 (over a site area of 11,580m² excluding the Woodford Lane road reserve).

Site Description and Local Context

The site is located in the Lindfield local centre, one street to the west of the Pacific Highway and Lindfield Train Station, and immediately adjoins the rear of premises fronting the highway. The site is irregular in shape, with frontages to Woodford Lane to the east, Bent Street to the north-west, the Drovers Way Road Reservation to the west and Beaconsfield Parade to the south.

The site is generally known as the Lindfield Village Hub and has a combined area of 1.3ha including road reserves (11,580m² excluding the Woodford Lane road reserve). It comprises the following landholdings:

· 1 Woodford Lane, Lindfield (Lot A DP 445525);

· 2 Bent Street, Lindfield (Lot 9 DP 1090427);

· 4 Bent Street, Lindfield (Lot 10 DP 3498);

· 6 Bent Street, Lindfield (Lot 3 DP 667420);

· 8 Bent Street, Lindfield (Lot 1 DP 724823);

· 10 Bent Street, Lindfield (Lot 4 DP 1226294 & Lot 8 DP1226294);

· 12 Bent Street, Lindfield (Lot 3 DP 1226294 & Lot 7 DP1226294);

· 1B Beaconsfield Parade, Lindfield (Lot 2 DP 1226294 & Lot 5 DP 1226294);

· 19 Drovers Way, Lindfield (Lots 1-15 DP 1099330 & Lot 1 DP 1226294);

· Drovers Way Road Reserve (Including Lot 6 DP 1226294); and

· Woodford Lane.

The site is located within the Lindfield local centre which comprises an established neighbourhood centre which is bisected by Pacific Highway and the T1 North Shore Rail Line. The rail line and highway is located on a ridge with land sloping away either side to the north-east and south-west. The centre is generally characterised by 2 storey shop-top housing development with speciality retail on the ground floor and residential or commercial office development above.

The subject site is located one block to the south-west of the highway at the rear of buildings fronting the highway across Woodford Lane, which acts as a service lane providing access to the rear of the shops and surface parking. The site is currently occupied by a surface car park comprising 109 parking spaces including a mix of short-term and unrestricted parking, roadways, vegetation, cleared vacant land and two existing dwellings (4 and 6 Bent Street).

The site is wholly owned by Ku-ring-gai Council and was previously subject to a site specific master plan and LEP and DCP amendment. The previous amendment to KLEP Local Centres 2012 was published in March 2017 (Amendment No. 6) and included changes to the zoning, height and floor space ratio (FSR) provisions for the site.

The current Planning Proposal indicates that it has been prepared in response to the Ku-ring-gai Council Draft Local Strategic Planning Statement (LSPS) produced in 2019 which outlines Council’s current planning priorities for the LGA and the Lindfield local centre specifically. The LSPS is now in place and came in to force on 19 March 2020. The Planning Proposal also notes that it responds to the Greater Sydney Commission North District Plan which came into effect in March 2018 and which requires Council to deliver 4,000 additional dwellings for the period 2016-2021.

The North District Plan and LSPS point to the need to provide new housing supply, choice and affordability on sites with good access to jobs, services and public transport. Further Council has identified that its residents seek greater choice in residential accommodation for all age groups. In light of this context, Council has identified the Lindfield Village Hub site as a location well suited to accommodate increased density in close proximity to an established train station and local centre. A review of the previous master plan was therefore undertaken and it was identified that the site is capable of accommodating an increase in the intensity of land use through changes to the maximum height of building and floor space ratio controls without resulting in significant adverse impacts in terms of overshadowing, visual massing and resident amenity.

The subject land is classified as operational land in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government Act 1993.

As noted above, the site is located to the south-west of the Lindfield local centre one block from the Pacific Highway. To the north-east, the site is directly adjoined by the rear of two-storey buildings with retail use on the ground floor and residential / commercial above fronting the Highway. Across Bent Street to the north-west, development is characterised by 2-3 storey residential development comprising a retirement village. A retirement village is also located to the south-west of the site at 3 Beaconsfield Parade. A scout hall is located to the south-east fronting Beaconsfield Parade.

The site and land to the east is generally zoned B2 Local Centre however land immediately adjacent to the site to the south-west is zoned R4 High Density Residential. One allotment within the site (Lot 5 DP 666521) fronting Bent Street is also currently zoned R4 High Density Residential.

The Lindfield Railway Station is located across the Pacific Highway to the north-east approximately 75 metres walking distance from the site with pedestrian access provided via two existing through site links between shops connecting from Woodford Lane to the western footpath of the Pacific Highway.

Image 1 – Aerial photo, site outlined in red (Source: Nearmap, image dated 22 October 2019)

Image 2 - Site boundaries, site outlined in red (Source: Urban Design Report, AJ+C, Oct2019)

As noted above the site is currently zoned B2 Local Centre and part R4 High Density Residential under the Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan (Local Centres) 2012.

Image 3 – Zoning Map Extract KLEP Local Centres 2012

Permitted land uses in the R2 Local centre zone include:

Boarding houses; Centre-based child care facilities; Commercial premises; Community facilities; Educational establishments; Entertainment facilities; Function centres; Group homes (permanent); Hostels; Information and education facilities; Light industries; Medical centres; Oyster aquaculture; Passenger transport facilities; Recreation facilities (indoor); Registered clubs; Respite day care centres; Restricted premises; Roads; Seniors housing; Service stations; Shop top housing; Tank-based aquaculture; Tourist and visitor accommodation; Water reticulation systems; Any other development not specified in item 2 or 4.

Permitted land uses in the R4 High Density Residential zone include:

Attached dwellings; Bed and breakfast accommodation; Boarding houses; Building identification signs: Business identification signs; Centre-based child care facilities; Community facilities; Dwelling houses; Environmental protection works; Exhibition homes; Flood mitigation works; Home-based child care; Home businesses; Home industries; Hostels; Multi dwelling housing; Neighbourhood shops; Oyster aquaculture; Places of public worship; Recreation areas; Residential flat buildings; Respite day care centres; Roads; Seniors housing; Shop top housing.

Development History

The Lindfield Village Hub site was the subject of a site specific Planning Proposal and master plan which resulted in a previous amendment to KLEP Local Centres 2012 published in March 2017 (Amendment No. 6) and included changes to the zoning, height and floor space ratio (FSR) provisions. Council has since reconsidered the site development potential in line with North District Plan and LSPS objectives. Subsequently, a report was put to the Council meeting of 20 August 2019 seeking Council’s endorsement of the lodgement of a Planning Proposal seeking to amend the KLEP Local Centres 2012 to increase the maximum height and Floor Space Ratio (FSR) provisions applying the site. At the meeting the Council resolved:

A. That Council endorse preparation and lodgement of a Planning Proposal, in accordance with Section 3.33 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, seeking to amend the Ku-ring-gai LEP (Local Centres) 2012 as it applies to the Lindfield Village Hub site as follows:

i. With a height control of no higher than the highest building in Lindfield being 23 – 41 Lindfield Avenue (known as the Aqualand building) which equates to no more than a 9 storey building on the Lindfield Village Hub site, including a provision at Clause 4.3 to allow for roof top plant, lift overruns and rooftop communal open space (and associated structures) to be located above the proposed maximum height limits, where appropriate.

ii. Amend the current additional permissible use provision at Clause 29 in Schedule 1 to allow development for the purpose of attached dwellings on the site, at the corner of Bent Street and Drovers Way, Lindfield.

B. That Council note the proposed amendment of Part 14E of the KDCP (LC) 2012 to reflect the Planning Proposal and the associated Urban Design Report and that this will remove reference to the current Lindfield Village Hub Masterplan.

C. That Council note the requirement to retain Lot 3 of DP1226294 as part of the project site area.

D. That Council note that the minimum areas (m2) to be provided for the following project components are as follows:

1 local park 3,000m2

2. plaza 900m2

3. library 1,250m2

4. community facility 1,200m2

E. That a funding strategy be developed to offset the anticipated reduction in revenue due to the reduction in proposed building heights.

F. That Council authorise the General Manager to finalise the Planning Proposal on its behalf as landowner, in accordance with recommendations A-E, and to submit the Planning Proposal to the relevant Planning Authority (Council).

Heights greater than 9 storeys were originally proposed for the site, however Council resolved to reduce the proposed height to a maximum of 9 storeys consistent with the existing tallest development within the Lindfield Local Centre on the northern side of the railway line (Aqualand building at 23-41 Lindfield Avenue).

Relevant to resolution A (i) and (ii) above, post lodgement the Planning Proposal has been amended to:

(1) remove the provision to allow attached dwellings on the site; and

(2) limit the provision which seeks to allow additional height over the permitted maximum for the roof top plant, lift overruns and rooftop communal open space (and associated structures) where appropriate to the site only and not to include it as a general provision that would apply to all land where KLEP Local Centres 2012 2012 applies.

The subject Planning Proposal is otherwise consistent with the above resolution of Council.

Comments

The Planning Proposal has been assessed against the provisions of the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment’s ‘A guide to preparing Planning Proposals’ and section 3.33 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

A detailed evidence-based assessment of the Planning Proposal and its supporting studies has been conducted. The Planning Proposal provides sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the proposal has strategic and site-specific merit. Accordingly, the Planning Proposal is supported subject to the incorporation of the recommended amendments stipulated in this report and in the Table of Assessment at Attachment A1.

The following is a summary assessment of the key planning issues associated with the Planning Proposal.

Strategic Merit

A Planning Proposal must demonstrate that the proposed amendments to a local environmental plan have strategic and site specific merit. The following is an assessment of the relevant merits of the Planning Proposal.

Regional Plan

The Planning Proposal is consistent with the objectives of the Greater Sydney Region Plan – A Metropolis of Three Cities, in particular:

· Objective 4 – Infrastructure use is optimised;

· Objective 7 – Communities are healthy, resilient and socially connected;

· Objective 10 – Greater housing supply;

· Objective 11 – Housing supply is more diverse and affordable;

· Objective 14 – Integrated land use and transport creates walkable and 30 minute cities;

· Objective 22 – Investment and business activity in centres;

· Objective 27 – Biodiversity is protected, urban bushland and remnant vegetation is enhanced; and

· Objective 31 – Public open space is accessible, protected and enhanced.

A Metropolis of Three Cities outlines that liveability incorporates access to housing, transport and employment as well as social, recreational, cultural and creative opportunities. Improved health, public transport and accessibility outcomes are achieved through the provision of schools, recreation, transport, arts and cultural, community and health facilities in walkable, mixed-use places co-located with social infrastructure and local services. Mixed-use neighbourhoods close to centres and public transport improve the opportunity for people to walk and cycle to local shops and services. Enhancing the safety, convenience and accessibility has many benefits, including healthier people, more successful businesses and centres. The proposal is consistent with these principles.

District Plan

The North District Plan highlights that the North District will continue to grow over the next 20 years with demand for an additional 92,000 dwellings. The five-year target (to 2021) for Ku-ring-gai is to provide an additional 4000 dwellings. Additional housing is to be provided in locations which are linked to local infrastructure. The focus of growth is therefore on strategic centres and areas close to transport corridors.

The Planning Proposal is consistent with the following planning priorities of the North District Plan:

· Planning Priority N1 – Planning for a city supported by infrastructure;

· Planning Priority N3 – Providing services and social infrastructure to meet people’s changing needs;

· Planning Priority N4 - Fostering healthy, creative, culturally rich and socially connected communities;

· Planning Priority N5 - Providing housing supply, choice and affordability, with access to jobs, services and public transport;

· Planning Priority N6 - Creating and renewing great places and local centres, and respecting the District’s heritage;

· Planning Priority N12 – Delivering integrated land use and transport planning and a 30min city;

· Planning Priority N20 – Delivering high quality open space; and

· Planning Priority N21 – Reducing carbon emissions and managing energy, water and waste efficiently.

The Planning Proposal will allow for a mixed-use development providing community facilities, a new park, retail development and 150+ new dwellings in a well-located site within the Lindfield Local Centre, in close proximity to public transport and a major transport route (Pacific Highway). The co-location of residential dwellings, social infrastructure and local services in centres provides for a more efficient use of land and enhances the viability of the centres and public transport. The proposal is therefore in accordance with the North District Plan strategy to focus growth in areas close to public transport as well as with the concept of a 30-minute city.

In accordance with the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment’s ‘A guide to preparing Planning Proposals’, a Planning Proposal is deemed to have strategic merit if it is consistent with the relevant district plan. As outlined above it is considered that the proposal is consistent with the objectives, priorities and strategies of both the Greater Sydney Region Plan and the North District Plan. It is therefore considered to have strategic merit.

Ku-ring-gai Local Strategic Planning Statement (LSPS)

The Ku-ring-gai LSPS came into effect on 19 March 2020 and provides a 20 year vision and planning priorities and associated actions for land use planning in Ku-ring-gai. The Planning Proposal is considered to be consistent with the stated vision and the following planning priorities in the Ku-ring-gai LSPS:

· K1. Providing well planned and sustainable local infrastructure to support growth and change;

· K3. Providing housing close to transport, services and facilities to meet the existing and future requirements of a growing and changing community;

· K4. Providing a range of diverse housing to accommodate the changing structure of families and households and enable aging in place;

· K6. Revitalising and growing a network of centres that offer unique character and lifestyle for local residents;

· K7. Facilitating mixed-use developments within the centres that achieve urban design excellence;

· K11. Promoting Lindfield as a thriving and diverse centre;

· K12. Managing change and growth in a way that conserves and enhances Ku-ring-gai’s unique visual and landscape character;

· K14. Providing a range of cultural, community and leisure facilities to foster a healthy, creative, culturally rich and socially connected Ku-ring-gai; and

· K17. Providing a broad range of open spaces, sporting and leisure facilities to meet the community’s diverse and changing needs.

The Planning Proposal does not adequately address the planning priority K5. Providing affordable housing that retains and strengthens the local residential and business community as claimed. There is no intent in the Planning Proposal to provide a dedicated affordable housing component in the future development and Council is yet to establish a SEPP 70 Affordable Housing Scheme to require the provision of affordable housing on the site. The mere provision of additional housing does not in itself contribute to housing affordability.

State Environmental Planning Policies (SEPPs) and Ministerial Directions

The Planning Proposal is not inconsistent with the State Environmental Planning Polices (SEPPs) applicable to the site and is generally consistent with the applicable Ministerial Directions (Section 9.1 Directions).

Site Specific Merit

The subject site is considered to be suitable for increased height and density, particularly given its location near to public transport, the Pacific Highway and within the Lindfield Local Centre. Notwithstanding this, the Planning Proposal does give rise to some potential impacts that should be addressed via amendments prior to it being forwarded to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment for a Gateway Determination.

The following comments and recommended amendments are made cognisant of the fact that a Planning Proposal is not a development application and does not consider the specific detailed matters for consideration under Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. A Planning Proposal only relates to an LEP amendment, and therefore needs to demonstrate that the proposed amendment itself is acceptable, with any future detailed design to be assessed at the later development application stage. Notwithstanding this, it is noted that an indicative design has been put forward as part of the Planning Proposal to illustrate the potential future built form that could be permissible subject to approval of the LEP amendment (and associated DCP controls).

Height

The location of the Lindfield local centre on the Highway and adjacent to the rail transport corridor with easy access to the Sydney CBD, indicates that it is an area appropriate for higher density (and height) transit-orientated development in accordance with the planning priorities outlined in the North District Plan. Given the strategic context, it is anticipated that the applicable heights and densities in the local centre will be increased in the future and that the proposed heights on the site should therefore be in keeping with the future context.

The Planning Proposal seeks to amend the applicable maximum height and floor space ratio (FSR) for the site to allow for a maximum permissible height of 9 residential storeys (RL127.5) consistent with the existing maximum height within the Lindfield Local Centre (to the north-east of the highway).

Image 4 – Basis of proposed height control (Source: Urban Design Report, AJ+C, Oct. 2019)

It is proposed that the highest building on site would be located in the north-east (9 storeys) with a lower building to the south-west (community building 4-5 storeys albeit with commercial floor to floor heights). A further 9 storey residential building is proposed at the southern end of the site. The urban design analysis submitted with the application acknowledges that the maximum height applicable to land adjacent to the site (east and west) is likely to increase over time. Land to the east (fronting the Pacific Highway) currently has an existing 11.5m height limit (3 storeys) and land to the west 17.5m (5 storeys). The analysis indicates that with the indicative design, appropriate separation distances to adjacent land are available based on existing and potential future height limits. The existing and proposed new roadways and proposed setbacks provide appropriate buffers to adjacent land and will ensure that future buildings can be designed to comply with relevant separation.

In relation to the appropriateness of buildings up to 9 residential storeys in height in the subject location, it is acknowledged that the site is on sloping land below the ridge line on which the railway line is located. The proposal, as amended, provides for a maximum height consistent with the existing maximum height within the centre which is considered not inappropriate. The site is highly accessible being immediately adjacent to development fronting the highway and within 45m walk of the train station. The proposed additional height and development density will allow the precinct to become a community focal point as planned and provide for the delivery of significant community facilities in the form of a new park, community centre, library and childcare centre in addition to public domain improvements, retail development and new high density housing. Further the proposed buildings will not result in any significant adverse impacts in terms of adverse shadow or visual impact and will provide appropriate amenity for future residents subject to detailed assessment at the development application stage. It is therefore considered that the proposed height is acceptable in the location.

Given the minimum floor height requirements under the Ku-ring-gai Local Centres Development Control Plan (Local Centres DCP), a height of RL127.5 (31m) would accommodate a 9 storey residential or mixed use building when viewed from any street however in the high part of the site sufficient room may not be available under the maximum RL to provide for rooftop plan, lift overruns and rooftop communal open space (and associated structures and access there to). On the lower parts of the site it is considered likely that the proposed height would be able to accommodate these structures.

The Planning Proposal therefore seeks to insert a new clause into KLEP Local Centres 2012 to allow for roof top plant, lift overruns and rooftop communal open space (and associated structures and access there to) to be located above the proposed maximum height limits, where appropriate. This new clause is proposed as a site specific clause and would therefore only apply specifically to the subject land.

Clause 4.6 of the LEP currently allows Council to consider variations to the maximum height of building control on a site by site basis where it can be demonstrated that strict application of the control is unnecessary and unreasonable in the circumstances of the case. Council has advised that it generally supports variations for the purposes rooftop plant, lift overruns and rooftop communal open space where adequately justified on a case by case basis. However in the particular circumstance and given the slope of the land and the proposed RL height limits, it is considered appropriate that the subject clause be inserted into the LEP to provide certainty and to allow for minor encroachments into the maximum height limit where justified. It will provide flexibility for the future design of the development on a site that has a significant fall.

Floor Space Ratio

In terms of FSR a maximum FSR of 2.21:1 is proposed across the site where a maximum FSR of 1.3:1 currently applies. An estimated gross floor area of 25,600m2 (equating to an FSR of 2.21:1) has been calculated given the proposed land use mix illustrated in the indicative design, as follows:

· GFA Residential = 14,459 m²

· GFA Retail = 8,142 m²

· GFA Community = 2,450m²

· GFA Child Care = 550m²

· Total = 25,600m2 / site area 11,580m2 = FSR 2.21:1

The indicative design illustrates that an FSR of 2.21:1 can be achieved on the site in a scheme which is compliant with relevant controls and which demonstrates design excellence. It is therefore considered that an FSR of 2.21: would sufficiently allow for a suitable development of the site up to 9 (residential or mixed use) storeys in height whilst at the same time ensuring all relevant community and open space infrastructure is delivered.

In addition to LEP amendments it is proposed to amend the Ku-ring-gai Local Centres DCP (KLCDCP) to include detailed but simplified controls to guide the future development of the precinct. Proposed controls include requirements in relation to the proposed planned future character including:

· identification of building footprints;

· access and movement arrangements;

· public domain requirements;

· community infrastructure to be delivered by VPA or other delivery mechanism;

· setbacks;

· built form and

· roads

It is considered that the proposed DCP controls are generally acceptable subject to some minor amendment as outlined in the Table of Assessment at Attachment A1

However in relation to the proposed land use mix, the DCP provisions as currently drafted would require that a minimum of only 5,000m² of retail / commercial floor space be delivered as part of the future development. This is in contrast to the indicative design which provides for 8,142m2 of retail floor space. Concern has been raised by Council’s Urban Design specialist that this provision could lead to reduced retail floor space and would result in pressure to convert excess floor space to residential use thereby stretching the building envelope and potentially compromising residential amenity. This position is supported by Council staff. To address this issue it is considered appropriate that a limit be placed on the permissible residential floor space on site. A limit of a maximum residential FSR of 1.3:1 is recommended. This would equate to a maximum residential floor space of 15,054m2 or approximately 59% of the maximum total floor space allowed on site. The indicative design provides for 14,459 m²of residential floor space therefore this allocation would easily be accommodated within this limit. It is considered that the proposed limit is reasonable and will encourage the remaining floor space to be taken up by retail/commercial uses. Should this not be viable a smaller development overall would result. Either way an appropriate land use mix would be achieved.

The proposed limitation should be implemented through the additional of subclause (2) in proposed Clause 6.9 as follows:

“6.9 Lindfield Village Hub development

(1) This clause applies to land known as “Lindfield Village Hub” in Lindfield at 1 Woodford Lane, 2-12 Bent Street, 1B Beaconsfield Parade, Drovers Way road reserve, 19 Drovers Way, and Woodford Land road reserve, Lindfield.

(2) The consent authority may grant development consent to development for the purpose of permissible residential uses on site but not where the total proposed residential uses exceed a maximum FSR of 1.3:1

(3) The consent authority may grant development consent to development for the purpose of rooftop plant, lift towers, lift motor rooms and or communal open space and access to and structures associated with such space, that would exceed or causes a building to exceed, the height limits set by clause 4.3, but only if the consent authority is satisfied that the structures:

(a) are for the purposes of equipment servicing the building, plant rooms, lift towers, lift motor rooms, fire stairs and other areas used exclusively for mechanical services or ducting; or

(b) are for the purpose of communal open space and access to, and structures associated with that space; or

(c) for both (a) and (b); and

(d) are not an advertising structure; and

(e) does not include floor space area and is not reasonably capable of modification to include floor space area; and

(f) will cause minimal overshadowing; and

(g) any such rooftop structure referred to in (1)(a) and 1(b) is fully integrated into the design of the building.”

Traffic and Parking

The Transport and Traffic Impact Assessment Report provided with the Planning Proposal (Attachment A4) notes that the land uses proposed as part of the revised masterplan for the Lindfield Village Hub site are consistent with the land uses approved in the original masterplan for the site. However, the revised masterplan includes a minor increase to retail uses, no commercial uses and the residential dwelling yield is proposed to increase by 63 units to a total of approximately 158 dwellings (Note: this number has not been revised to reflect the amended design). In addition, the report notes that the number of commuter parking spaces to be included within the development would be 135 spaces in addition to the replacement of the existing 109 spaces on site either within the basement or on street along the proposed new roadways within the site and spaces for other relevant uses totalling approximately 788 spaces.

Based on the proposed breakdown of land uses as outlined above, the report concludes access to and from the site would generally be available from the Pacific Highway via a new signalised intersection at Beaconsfield Parade, left-out at Bent Street, and the existing signalised intersection at Balfour Street and Havilah Road.

Utilising the Roads and Maritime Services Guide to Traffic Generating Developments the proposed development would generate a demand for 544 parking spaces in addition to the replacement of existing parking spaces and provision of 135 commuter parking spaces for Transport for NSW.

The Transport and Traffic Impact Assessment Report notes that the site is strategically well positioned to accommodate a mixed-use development with high quality recreational and community uses as it is aligned with the objectives of the Lindfield Local Centre DCP, Future transport 2056 and the Greater Sydney Region Plan, based on the following:

· located within a 10-minute walking catchment of several local services including retail, supermarkets, educational and recreational;

· located within 30-minutes of several employment, health and educational centres or precincts via public transport; and

· located within 30-minutes of several productivity and liveability destinations via cycling, as well as the Chatswood and Macquarie Park strategic centres.

It further notes that future planning of the Lindfield local centre should seek opportunities to maximise the ability to walk and cycle to/from the above locations via improvements to the walking and cycling networks.

In terms of traffic and intersection impacts the report identifies that the intersection of the Pacific Highway and Beaconsfield Parade requires signalisation as part of the project to enable right turn movements onto the Pacific Highway from the development (although this would be required with or without the development) and that subject to this provision the proposal will not result in an unacceptable traffic or pedestrian impact. It also notes that options exist to improve pedestrian connections across the Pacific Highway and that travel demand management measures should be implemented as part of any future development. This includes a site specific travel plan, limiting parking provision, bicycle parking provision and accommodating ride-sharing and car sharing on-site. These requirements should be included in the site specific DCP provisions applying to the site. Further the report indicates that the existing public transport provision is capable of meeting the demand generated by the development.

Council’s Strategic Traffic Engineer has reviewed the Planning Proposal and Transport and Traffic Impact Assessment and has advised that:

· The site has good access to public transport for new residents, and its location would provide them with access to a substantial number of jobs located in surrounding Strategic Centres and Health/Education precincts within 30 minutes by public transport, which is consistent with the North District Plan’s Planning Priority N12;

· A relatively high proportion of workers in the Zone are from the Lindfield/Roseville area, and the majority of them use a car to access the workplace despite the typical distance to work being less than 4km for these workers. This has implications for provision of parking for staff of the retail and community uses, but also for targeting improved walkability, active transport and public transport, in order to reduce the demand on private vehicle use;

· There is a good selection of primary and secondary retail, basic health/medical, educational, leisure/recreational and community cultural facilities within 5 minute walk of the site, which would contribute to the overall liveability and walkability of the site;

· Improving the place function of the streets adjacent to the site could be achieved through the implementation of high level strategies including traffic calming, improved pedestrian/bicycle access and priority and public domain improvements;

· The additional rail passenger demand generated by the proposal over the peak period is unlikely to cause (or significantly worsen) congestion at Lindfield Station, given there is spare capacity on rail services at Lindfield during the peak periods;

· Despite some short term bus stop capacity issues on Pacific Highway outside Lindfield station, the expected low demand for bus journeys to work during the peak period as a result of the proposal is unlikely to cause capacity at nearby bus stops. Similarly, given the low proportion of workers in the area using buses for their journey to work, the new workers are unlikely to cause capacity issues.

The advice notes that there are some issues with the Transport and Traffic Impact Assessment which should be amended including:

· The calculated traffic generations for the specialty retail uses in Table 7.2 appear not to be based on the relevant traffic generation rate in Table 7.1. This needs to be recalculated and updated in the table;

· For the AM peak hour traffic generation rate for retail uses noted in Table 7.1, the 50% reduction to the AM peak hour traffic generation rate appears to have been applied to the resulting traffic generations in Table 7.2. This needs to be recalculated and updated;

· The footnote to Table 7.2 suggests that the traffic generation from retail uses has been reduced by 20%, to allow for linked multiple-purpose trips as suggested in Transport for NSW/RMS guidelines. However, this discount appears to have not been applied to the weekday PM peak hour and Saturday peak hour traffic generations. This needs to be recalculated and updated;

· A link diagram, showing existing and future intersection movement counts, should be provided as part of Section 7.2, for transparency.

Further, the Strategic Traffic Engineer’s assessment notes that there are some issues relating to traffic assignments and the results of the traffic modelling which incorporate upgrade proposals to intersections on Pacific Highway, particularly in relation to the proposed traffic signals on Pacific Highway at Beaconsfield Parade and Strickland Avenue. Since transport infrastructure upgrades on Pacific Highway are a critical component of the proposal and Transport for NSW is the roads authority for Pacific Highway, the advice notes that issuing of a Gateway Determination could be conditional on the applicant providing evidence of consultation with/in-principle concurrence from Transport for NSW regarding the matters relating to the state/arterial road network.

Notwithstanding this advice it is considered that consultation with Transport for NSW can be undertaken post Gateway Determination during the exhibition of the Planning Proposal. This will ensure that the views of Transport for NSW are known prior to a decision being made on whether to proceed with the Planning Proposal.

Having regard to the above and subject to the amendments recommended, it is considered that the transport and traffic impact of the Planning Proposal is acceptable and will not result in any adverse impacts. A detailed assessment of the final design will be undertaken at the DA stage.

Overshadowing and Solar access

Shadow diagrams for mid-winter have been provided in the Planning Proposal’s Urban Design Report for a range of alternative massing options including the preferred Option 5 upon which the indicative design is based. The shadow diagrams illustrate that given the site orientation acceptable solar access can be preserved to adjacent sites with the proposed building envelopes. The location of the proposed public park in the northern corner of the site will ensure solar access is optimised throughout the year. Shadows generally fall to the south-west in the am but by midday are largely contained within the site. In the afternoon shadows fall to the east on the rear of neighbouring retail development which fronts the Pacific Highway. The diagrams therefore illustrate that adjacent sites will retain at least a minimum of 3 hours of sunlight with the proposed development in midwinter based on the preferred envelope. Further the additional shadow resulting from the proposed increase in height, when compared to the existing master plan (which is reflected in the existing DCP controls), is not considered to result in any significant impact. This is considered acceptable, noting that further detailed assessment would be undertaken at the development application stage.

In terms of solar access within the development, it is noted that the submitted indicative design complies with the ADG requirements and that greater than 70% of units will receive 2 hours+ of sunlight to living areas and private open space in mid-winter. Further less than 15% of units will receive no sunlight as stipulated. The indicative design therefore demonstrates that an acceptable design is available within the envelope. The proposal also complies with the required 70% of units below 9 storeys being able to be naturally cross ventilated.

It is therefore considered that the proposal is acceptable in terms of shadows and solar access and natural cross ventilation.

Biodiversity Impacts

The previous master plan and DCP and LEP amendments for the site provided that the majority of the vegetation on site would be removed. This will not be altered by the subject Planning Proposal, which seeks to allow additional height and FSR but does not result in any change to the development footprint. Accordingly it is considered that the vegetation impact of the Planning Proposal would be essentially the same as under the current provisions applying to the site.

A detailed Flora and Fauna Assessment has been prepared which describes the biodiversity values of the site and outlines measures to be taken to avoid, minimise and mitigate impacts to the vegetation and species habitat present.

The report identifies the number of biodiversity credits that would need to be retired if the development proceeds as contemplated by the Planning Proposal. It is noted that the offset requirements are not required at the Planning Proposal stage, but would be applicable at Development Application stage. The same arrangements would be applicable to development of the site under the current planning controls.

Notwithstanding the addition of the proposed pocket park and retention of the Tallow-wood tree, the revised design provides opportunities for an improved landscape setting and has a positive biodiversity impact.

Council’s Manager Environment and Sustainability has provided a referral for the Planning Proposal which generally concurs with the Flora and Fauna Assessment noting that a detailed Biodiversity Development Assessment Report will be required at the DA stage. However the advice also recommends amendments to the draft DCP provisions as follows:

· The creation of vegetative connectivity between the two parks on Bent Street (as shown in the reference scheme and site specific DCP), is a positive outcome. To ensure that this outcome is realised the existing objective within the site specific DCP should be updated to address this desired future outcome.

· New point - A community ‘pocket park’ to the north on Drovers Way. To include open space with deep soil planting consisting of locally native tree, shrub and understorey species, that reflect the relevant vegetation communities within the area; and is to exclude monocultures. This area may also include salvaged hollows or nest boxes.

· New point - A community ‘pocket park’ to the south of Drovers Way. To protect existing significant Tallow-wood tree. Providing deep soil planting including locally native tree, shrub and understorey species (excluding monocultures).

· Edit of point 3 (p 14-5) - “A community park on Bent Street of minimum 3,000m2 in size. It is to include a large open space with deep soil planting on the north-eastern corner of the site fronting Bent Street and Woodford Lane, play space, and flexible open space.”

The Urban Design Report proposed controls regarding street tree plantings (Section 5.2 Figure 96 – 99) are supported. This should be further informed by the following control: To enable planting of large trees within public open space (where deep soil is restricted by basement car parking), use of tree pits / values or other engineered structures is required.

These amendments are recommended in the Table of Assessment at Attachment A1.

The referral also recommends that the newly proposed pocket park on Bent Street be rezoned from existing R4 High Density Residential to RE1 Public Recreation as the land has been counted as deep soil area, provides for the conservation of an existing significant Tallow-wood tree and to provide improved consistency with the desired future use. It is considered that this is not necessary given the proposed Draft DCP provisions and as the land is included in the overall site to which the total maximum FSR applies. The Draft DCP provisions should however be strengthened to ensure this outcome as recommended (refer Table of Assessment at Attachment A1).

Contamination

Phase 1 and Phase 2 contamination reports were submitted with the Planning Proposal. The Phase 2 report notes that the site is not currently suitable for the proposed land use however can be made suitable subject to remediation and that a remediation action plan would therefore be required with any future development application.

However, the Planning Proposal allows an additional permissible land use: residential flat buildings on part of the site. It therefore changes the existing permissible land uses and provides for a use which Council cannot currently be satisfied is a suitable use for the site. Accordingly a remediation action plan should be prepared that clearly establishes that the site can be made suitable for the proposed future use prior to forwarding the Planning Proposal to the Department for a Gateway Determination.

Council’s Manager Environment and Sustainability has also advised that further groundwater assessment (and potentially a groundwater management plan) is required to inform the Remediation Action Plan. Accordingly this should similarly be undertaken prior to forwarding the Planning Proposal to the Department for a Gateway Determination.

Social and Economic Impacts

The Planning Proposal identifies the potential social, economic and environmental benefits of the proposal at a high level, including increased supply of housing, revitalisation of the existing development and wider local centre, provision of employment through construction and operation, and improved public domain interface. More specifically benefits are identified as:

Library, community centre and open space benefits including:

· access to services and programs;

· access to meeting and work spaces by local businesses and community groups;

· social interaction benefits;

· increased local amenity;

· complement to education institutions;

· environmental benefits; and

· non-use benefits.

Child care centre benefits including:

· early childhood development benefits; and

· workforce engagement benefits.

Transport benefits including:

· reduced travel time and vehicle operating costs;

· decongestion benefit;

· environmental benefits; and

· pedestrian benefits.

Transit-Oriented Development benefits including:

· improved travel outcomes;

· improved health outcomes;

· urban consolidation benefits; and

· improved housing choices.

Further the economic assessment report notes that when compared to the base case (master plan proposal consistent with existing planning controls) the proposal will have the following benefits:

Employment

· The development of the LVH under the proposed planning controls compared to the current controls will generate 127 additional FTE jobs during the construction phase, of which 70 will be directly created by construction expenditure on the LVH and an additional 57 via indirect effects; and

· Once complete, 75 additional FTE ongoing retail jobs will be created and as a result there will be an additional 66 FTE ongoing indirect jobs created, with total additional employment associated with the new Planning Proposal estimated at 141 additional jobs

Value-Added

· During the construction phase there will be an estimated value-added of $20.58M directly associated with the construction of the LVH and an indirect effect of additional $15.70M, resulting in a total contribution of $36.28M to Ku-ring-gai’s Gross Value Added across the construction phase; and

· Once operational the LVH is expected to contribute $3.47M in value-added, $2.49M directly and $0.98M indirectly, ongoing for each year of operation

Output

· Output is expected to increase by a total of $80.04M, $50.7M from direct construction costs and $29.34M from indirect effects, within the Ku-ring-gai LGA; and

· Operational activities are expected to contribute an additional $4.99M in output, $3.48M directly and $1.51M indirectly, ongoing for each year of operation

It is therefore considered that the Planning Proposal will result in positive social and economic impacts.

Public Benefits

The Planning Proposal identifies a number of public benefits including the proposed new park and plaza, pocket park, and community facilities including library, community centre and childcare centre that will be delivered as a result of the project. While these uses are referred to in the draft DCP provisions it is considered that further certainty is required to ensure that these key community and public infrastructure elements are delivered in a timely manner as part of, or prior to, the overall development of the land. Draft DCP control 14E.12.6 indicates that the key community infrastructure is to be delivered through a Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA) or other delivery mechanism.

Notwithstanding, it is considered appropriate that prior to the Planning Proposal being forwarded to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment for a Gateway determination, Council (as the Applicant) provides an assurance that it intends to enter into a Project Delivery Agreement (or the like) with a developer in which the obligation on the developer to deliver the public benefits of the park, library, community centre, childcare will be legally binding. This will provide further certainty that the key public benefits of the project are delivered.

Amendment to the Written Instrument

As noted above in addition to map amendments, the Planning Proposal seeks to make two modifications to the written instrument of KLEP Local Centres 2012 as follows:

1. Amend Clause 29 in Schedule 1 (Additional Permitted Uses) to allow residential flat buildings across the entire site; and

2. Insert new Clause 6.9 Lindfield Village Hub development to allow the consent authority may grant development consent to development for the purpose of rooftop plant, lift towers, lift motor rooms and or communal open space and access to and structures associated with such space, that would exceed or causes a building to exceed, the height limits set by clause 4.3, but only if the consent authority is satisfied that the structures:

(a) are for the purposes of equipment servicing the building, plant rooms, lift towers, lift motor rooms, fire stairs and other areas used exclusively for mechanical services or ducting; or

(b) are for the purpose of communal open space and access to, and structures associated with that space; or

(d) are not an advertising structure; and

(e) does not include floor space area and is not reasonably capable of modification to include floor space area; and

(f) will cause minimal overshadowing; and

(g) any such rooftop structure referred to in (1)(a) and 1(b) is fully integrated into the design of the building.”

It is considered that these amendments are appropriate as:

1. allowing residential flat buildings with consent across the whole site will provide consistency and allow flexibility in the location of the future buildings on site; and

2. allowing for exceptions to the maximum height clause will provide certainty as well as flexibility and is justified in the circumstances given the slope of the land.

Further rationale for this recommendation is outlined in the Table of Assessment at Attachment A1.

Amendments required to Planning Proposal

MG Planning supports the Planning Proposal in principle as it has demonstrated sufficient strategic and site-specific merit to enable it to be forwarded to the Department for a Gateway Determination, subject to the recommended changes presented in this report and the Table of Assessment at Attachment A1.

MG Planning identifies the key changes required to the Planning Proposal prior to forwarding for a Gateway Determination are as follows:

1. Amend the Planning Proposal as stated in the Table of Assessment (Attachment A1)

This is to ensure that the content is clear, correct and consistent with Council’s approach to land use planning prior to being presented for Gateway Determination and subsequent public exhibition.

2. Amend Building Height map

Maximum building height map to be reviewed with Council’s urban design specialist to ensure the map accurately reflects the proposed building envelope and does not inadvertently provide an opportunity to achieve additional height.

Review annotation of building height map to make clear maximum RLs (note: current annotation of RL6, 7 and 8 considered confusing as not an RL).

3. Amend proposed Clause 6.9 to limit the total residential uses on land to a maximum FSR of 1.3:1

As outlined in this report, proposed Clause 6.9 is to be amended to impose a limit of a maximum FSR of 1.3:1 on residential uses on the site.

4. Amend Schedule 1 ‘Additional Permitted Uses’ Clause 29

As outlined in this report, the proposed Schedule 1 amendment is to be modified to allow residential flat buildings across the entire site

Prepare an Additional Uses Map for the purposes of Schedule 1 Clause 29 (as above).

5. Amend the Draft DCP

As outlined in this report, an amended Draft DCP is to be provided (as outlined in Table of Assessment (Attachment A1)) which includes, among other matters identified, the following key amendments:

· requires active uses on Bent Street and wrapping around the corner of Bent Street and Drovers Way;

· identifies that the future community building is to be located at the corner of Bent Street and Drovers Way and is to provide an active frontage and direct pedestrian connection to both Bent Street and the park;

· requires that the park is to be located at or as close as possible to the level of Woodford Lane to ensure direct and accessible pedestrian access from the laneway for the full length of its frontage, and

· requires that the park is to be open to the sky and that the plaza is also to be open to the sky with the exception of awnings or the like where required for weather protection only.

6. Amend other reports as outlined in Table of Assessment (Attachment A1).

The proponent is to submit to Council two (2) hard copies of all documents (amended Planning Proposal and all attachments) and a USB with pdf versions of all documents and a Word version of the Planning Proposal.

ADVICE FROM KU-RING-GAI LOCAL PLANNING PANEL

Local Planning Panels Direction – Planning Proposals issued by the Minister for Planning under Section 9.1 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 requires Council to refer all Planning Proposals prepared after 1 June 2018 to the Ku-ring-gai Local Planning Panel for advice, before it is forwarded to the Minister for a Gateway Determination under Section 3.34 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

The Planning Proposal was reported to the Ku-ring-gai Local Planning Panel Meeting on 6 April 2020. A copy of the minutes of the meeting is included as Attachment A12. The Panel’s advice was that the Planning Proposal be submitted to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment for a Gateway Determination, subject to the amendments detailed in the report and Table of Assessment, and subject to the following amendments:

1. Post Gateway approval, but prior to the exhibition of the Planning Proposal, the applicant is to provide evidence of the in-principle support of Transport for NSW.

Reason: To allow for Transport NSW to provide comment on the infrastructure in a timely manner

2. Appendix 1– Table of Assessment P10: add:

Prior to the Planning Proposal being forwarded for a Gateway determination, Council (as the Applicant) is to provide assurance that it intends to enter into a Project Delivery Agreement (or the like) which includes, a legally binding obligation imposed on the Developer to deliver the public benefits of the park, library, community and childcare centres at the first stage of development.

Reason: To ensure the community facilities are delivered in the first stage of the development.

3. Delete Clause 6.9(3) – Site Specific Height Exception Clause.

Reason: To provide a consistent definition of height across the LGA and avoid site specific definitions.

4. Provide a Remediation Action Plan (RAP) prior to exhibition of the Planning Proposal.

Reason: Phase 1 and Phase 2 contamination reports conclude that the site can be made suitable for the proposed uses. It is reasonable for a RAP to be provided prior to exhibition.

5. Proposed Clause 6.9 be amended to impose a limit of a maximum FSR of 1.3:1 on residential uses (excluding affordable housing) on site notwithstanding the maximum permissible FSR of 2.21:1.

Reason: The residential FSR cap should not include affordable housing to provide an incentive to include affordable housing in this development.

6. Draft DCP, Public Domain 4 – add additional provision as follows:

vi) retain and protect the existing Tallowwood tree in the south of the site within the proposed pocket park to the west of Drovers Way

Reason: To protect the significant tree on the site

The KLPP also resolved that:

Should a Gateway Determination be issued for public exhibition of the Planning Proposal, site specific amendments to the Local Centres DCP as outlined in this advice report to be prepared and placed on public exhibition concurrent with the Planning Proposal.

Response to Advice from Ku-ring-gai Local Planning Panel

The following is an assessment of the merit of the advice provided by the KLPP and the potential implications for the planning proposal and Council.

1. Consultation with Transport for NSW:

Council’s Strategic Traffic Engineer suggested that the issuing of a Gateway for the Planning Proposal could be conditional upon the applicant providing evidence of consultation with/in-principle concurrence from Transport for NSW regarding the matters relating to the state/arterial road network. The MG Planning assessment was of the view that Transport for NSW concurrence should sought as part of agency consultation during the exhibition period, post gateway.

The KLPP formed the view that it was important that members of the public knew that there was in-principle support from Transport for NSW the traffic network could support the Planning Proposal prior to public exhibition.

Council has been in ongoing dialogue with Transport for NSW (formally RMS) regarding network planning and required infrastructure upgrades for Lindfield over many years without final resolution. The current phase of discussions were commenced in 2015. Earlier unresolved discussions commenced as early as 2013.

To try to seek a resolution, even if it is only ‘in principal support’ prior to public exhibition, has the potential to cause significant undue delay. It is standard practice that principle infrastructure agency consultation on planning proposals occur post Gateway.

This recommendation from the Panel should not be supported by Council and formal consultation with Transport for NSW should occur post the issuing of a Gateway Determination for the Planning Proposal.

2. Project Delivery Agreement

MG Planning formed the view that, in order to provide greater certainty that the key public benefits of the project are delivered, prior to the Planning Proposal being forwarded to DPI&E for a Gateway determination, Council (as the Applicant) provide an assurance that it intends to enter into a Project Delivery Agreement (or the like) with a developer in which the obligation on the developer to deliver the public benefits of the park, library, community centre, childcare will be legally binding. The KLPP supported this position but also felt that, should the project delivery be staged, the community benefits should be delivered in the first stage. This would provide even greater certainty that the community benefits from the project will be delivered in a timely manner.

While this approach is at face value reasonable, given Council is in the financial tender stage of project delivery, this recommendation from the Panel should be noted by Council only and addressed when it considers formal tenders in coming months.

3. Site Specific Height Exception Clause

The Planning Proposal seeks to insert a new site specific clause into KLEP Local Centres 2012 to allow for roof top plant, lift overruns and rooftop communal open space (and associated structures and access there to) to be located above the proposed maximum height limits, where appropriate. The purpose of the clause is to provide certainty and to allow for minor encroachments into the maximum height limit where justified without the reliance on clause 4.6 of the LEP. It would provide flexibility for the future design of the development on a site that has a significant fall.

The KLPP did not support the inclusion of this site specific clause as it would provide an inconsistent definition of height across the LGA. It is of the view that site specific definitions should be avoided.

While this view of the KLPP is noted, it should be noted that it is proposed to measure the height of buildings on the site through the use of a RL control rather than measuring in metres. The use of an RL control is a more precise measure and it differs to most other land in Ku-ring-gai. The only other land using the RL control is the recently rezoned portion of the Killara Golf Club. Given the precise nature of an RL control, the inclusion of the proposed clause 6.9 on the site can be justified to allow the design flexibility required without the uncertainty presented by the reliance of clause 4.6 for any variation to the height controls.

The proposed clause 6.9 is similar to the Standard LEP optional clause 5.6 Architectural roof features, which is used by a number of Local Government Areas within the Sydney metropolitan area. The objective of the clauses are to facilitate innovative design while ensuring that roof features are decorative elements and that the majority of the roof is contained within the maximum building height standard.

Other options available to councils who wish to provide flexibility in building height, while ensuring good design outcomes without significant impact on local amenity, is the use of a design excellence clause such as that used in the former Ku-ring-gai Town Centres LEP 2010. Clause 6.4 Urban design excellence for Key Sites sought to deliver the highest standard of urban and architectural design outcomes for Key Sites in the Ku-ring-gai town centres by providing additional height and floor space to proposals exhibiting outstanding architectural and urban design. The merit and potential impact of the proposals would be assessed by an independent panel of planning and design experts. Other Council’s such as Hornsby and Parramatta include ‘design excellence’ clauses in their LEPs that intend to facilitate similar outcomes. The Department of Planning, Industry and Environments’ Design Excellence Guideline (2010) defines design excellence. There may be potential scope to revisit such a clause.

In regard to height more generally, over the past 18 months Council has undertaken detailed built form studies for each of the four Local Centres. The studies were undertaken by experienced firms including CHROFI Architects, SJB Urban and Roberts Day. These companies are regularly working across Sydney on similar projects for local government and State government. The built form studies independently confirmed that heights of 12 to 15 storeys on selected sites in Turramurra, Lindfield and St Ives, and heights of 20+ storeys in Gordon, are appropriate, for the Ku-ring-gai Local Centres, within a broader Sydney Metro context.

Council engaged Jones Lang LaSalle and AEC Consultants to analyse development feasibility in each of the four centres. The studies found that commercial properties within the B2 zones are characterised by very high land values (particularly when compared to residential land), small lots and fragmented ownership patterns. The studies found that redevelopment of small commercial properties, typically the shops along the highways, require FSRs greater than 4.0:1 (and as high as 6.5:1) to reach development feasibility; redevelopment of large sites with a mix of retail and commercial uses to mixed use development require FSRs of higher than 3.0:1 to be feasible. Built form modelling indicates these FSRs typically result in building heights greater than 12 storeys.

The appropriate height standards and controls applying to this and other key sites in the primary Ku-ring-gai local centres is an ongoing consideration. In the meantime, the recommendation by the KLPP to not include proposed clause 6.9 should not be supported by Council. The inclusion of the clause is considered necessary to deal with the unique circumstances of the site.

4. Remediation Action Plan (RAP)

The MG Planning assessment of the Planning Proposal recommends that a Remediation Action Plan (RAP) for the site be prepared prior to the Planning Proposal being submitted for Gateway. The KLPP formed the view that RAP could be prepared for exhibition rather than Gateway so as not to cause undue delay. There was considered to be sufficient evidence in the Phase 1 and Phase 2 contamination reports to conclude that the site can be made suitable for the proposed uses.

This recommendation from the KLPP should be supported by Council.

5. Limit of maximum Residential FSR

Concern has been raised by Council’s Urban Design specialist that any reduction in retail floor space on the site would result in pressure to convert excess floor space to residential use thereby stretching the building envelope and potentially compromising residential amenity. To address this issue it is considered appropriate that a 1.3:1 FSR limit be placed on the permissible residential floor space on site. It is considered that the proposed limit is reasonable and will encourage the remaining floor space to be taken up by retail / commercial uses. Should this not be viable a smaller development overall would result. Either way an appropriate land use mix would be achieved.

The KLPP also noted that there was no intention by Council to include an affordable housing component as part of the residential development on the site. The Panel formed the view that while the 1.3:1 cap on residential FSR is justified, it would also be reasonable to consider that the FSR cap could be exceeded provided that extra floor space was dedicated to the provision of affordable housing. This could act as an incentive to include affordable housing in the future development.

The Ku-ring-gai LSPS includes the planning priority K5. Providing affordable housing that retains and strengthens the local residential and business community. There is also an accompanying action to prepare a SEPP 70 Affordable Housing Contribution Scheme for Ku-ring-gai to enable a mechanism for the delivery of local affordable housing. As Council is yet to establish its SEPP 70 Affordable Housing Scheme it is not possible to mandate the provision of affordable housing on the site. However, there is nothing preventing Council from delivering affordable housing on this site through the use of height and FSR bonuses for its provision.

The KLPP’s recommendation to exclude affordable housing from the residential FSR cap should be supported by Council.

6. Protection of Existing Tallowwood.

The KLPP expressed concern that the provisions in the DCP were not strong enough to ensure the protection of the existing substantial Tallowwood tree in the south-east corner of the site. While the tree is shown on a number of diagrams in the draft DCP, there was no reference to the tree in the written provisions. The additional DCP provision recommended by the Panel will assist in the protection and retention of the tree in any future development of the site and should be supported by Council.

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO THE PLANNING PROPOSAL

Having consideration of the assessment of the Planning Proposal by MG Planning and associated recommendations as well as the advice provided by the Ku-ring-gai Local Planning Panel, the following is a consolidated list of changes that are recommended to be made to the Planning Proposal and associated draft DCP prior to it being submitted for a Gateway determination:

1. Amend the Planning Proposal as stated in the Table of Assessment (Attachment A1) subject to the following amendment:

· Appendix 1– Table of Assessment P10: add:

Prior to the Planning Proposal being forwarded for a Gateway Determination, Council (as the Applicant) is to consider what assurances it can give that it intends to deliver the public benefits of the park, library, community and childcare centres at the first stage of development.

· Appendix 1 – table of Assessment P18: amend as follows:

A Remediation Action Plan is to be prepared that demonstrates that the land can be made suitable for the proposed residential use prior to the Planning Proposal being placed on public exhibition.

2. Amend Building Height map:

· Maximum building height map to be reviewed with Council’s urban design specialist to ensure the map accurately reflects the proposed building envelope and does not inadvertently provide an opportunity to achieve additional height.

· Review annotation of building height map to make clear maximum RLs (note: current annotation of RL6, 7 and 8 considered confusing as not an RL).

3. Amend proposed Clause 6.9 to limit the total residential uses on land, excluding affordable housing, to a maximum FSR of 1.3:1

4. Amend Schedule 1 ‘Additional Permitted Uses’ Clause 29

· The proposed Schedule 1 amendment is to be modified to allow residential flat buildings across the entire site

· Prepare an Additional Uses Map for the purposes of Schedule 1 Clause 29.

5. Amend the Draft DCP

· An amended Draft DCP is to be provided (as outlined in Table of Assessment (Attachment A1)) which includes, among other matters identified, the following key amendments:

o requires active uses on Bent Street and wrapping around the corner of Bent Street and Drovers Way;

o identifies that the future community building is to be located at the corner of Bent Street and Drovers Way and is to provide an active frontage and direct pedestrian connection to both Bent Street and the park;

o requires that the park is to be located at or as close as possible to the level of Woodford Lane to ensure direct and accessible pedestrian access from the laneway for the full length of its frontage, and

o requires that the park is to be open to the sky and that the plaza is also to be open to the sky with the exception of awnings or the like where required for weather protection only.

· Add additional provision under Public Domain 4 as follows:

o vi) retain and protect the existing Tallowwood tree in the south of the site within the proposed pocket park to the west of Drovers Way

6. Amend other reports as outlined in Table of Assessment (Attachment A1).

integrated planning and reporting

Theme 3 - Places, Spaces and Infrastructure

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

P2.1 A robust planning framework is in place to deliver quality design outcomes and maintain the identity and character of Ku-ring-gai

P2.1.1 Land use strategies, plans and processes are in place to effectively manage the impact of new development

P2.1.1.2: Continue to review the effectiveness of existing strategies, local environmental plans, development control plans and processes across all programs.

P4.1: Our centres offer a broad range of shops and services and contain lively urban village spaces and places where people can live, work, shop, meet and spend leisure time.

P4.1.1: Plans to revitalise local centres are being progressively implemented and achieve quality design and sustainability outcomes in collaboration with key agencies, landholders and the community.

P4.1.1.8: Finalise strategies and plans for Lindfield Local Centre and surrounds.

P4.1.1.9: Monitor, review and guide the Major Project proposals to ensure they deliver quality community outcomes and design excellence.

Governance Matters

The process for the preparation and implementation of Planning Proposals is governed by the provisions contained in the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

If Council fails to make a decision within 90 days (from the commencement of the review of the application) or if Council makes a decision to not support the Planning Proposal, the proponent can make a request to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment for a Rezoning Review.

Local Planning Panels Direction – Planning Proposals issued by the Minister for Planning under Section 9.1 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 requires Council to refer all Planning Proposals prepared after 1 June 2018 to the Local Planning Panel for advice, before it is forwarded to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment for a Gateway Determination under Section 3.34 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

Risk Management

This is a Planning Proposal initiated by Council and accordingly has been assessed by an independent planner and external urban design advice. Council should, to determine its position on the matter, specifically consider whether the Planning Proposal should be sent to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment for a Gateway Determination having regard to the Local Planning Panel’s advice and decide whether to proceed to public exhibition.

Council risks damage to its reputation if it does not undertake strategic land use planning in an effective and timely manner.

Financial Considerations

The Planning Proposal was subject to the relevant application fee under Council’s 2019/2020 Fees and Charges Schedule. The cost of the review and assessment of the Planning Proposal is covered by this fee.

The properties at 2 to 12 Bent Street Lindfield, that now form part of the Hub site, were acquired using development contributions levied under Ku-ring-gai Contributions Plan 2010 and will be utilised to provide for the open space and the new road components of the Hub development. Where most of any identified property will be required for infrastructure funded by the contributions, the whole of the existing property must be acquired from its owners and thence subdivided. A small part of the road land site, being 12 Bent Street, is residual to the area identified for the carriageway of the new road.

Clause 53(1) of the EP&A Regulations 2000 requires development contributions to be held as restricted assets and any amount earned by their investment (in any form) must be returned to the restricted account for use for the purposes for which it was levied (in this case roads). It is therefore flagged that the value of the residual land on 12 Bent Street Lindfield will need to be quantified for future reimbursement to the roads contributions restricted asset reserves.

A similar situation has previously arisen as part of the delivery of Hanson Way, the link road between Dumaresq Street and Moree Street in Gordon. The residual land that was not required for the carriageway, and thus not being utilised for the purpose for which it was acquired, became available for inclusion in the adjoining developable sites. Land on both sides of the Dumaresq Street end of Hanson Way has since been sold to the adjoining development sites. A similar situation is expected to arise in respect of residual land on the western side of Hanson Way at the rear of 35 Moree Street.

The applicant was specifically asked to address this issue by close of business on 9 April 2020. At the time of writing no written response had been received.

Social Considerations

The Planning Proposal is considered to have significant positive social benefits including the delivery of two new public parks, 3,000m² of community facilities and additional housing choice.

Environmental Considerations

The potential environmental impacts of the Planning Proposal have been considered in this assessment, and there are no known impacts that prevent the further consideration of the Planning Proposal. The impacts of any specific development that may occur on the site as a result of the proposal would be considered in detail at the development application stage.

Community Consultation

Council’s Major Projects unit has commissioned various community engagement activities. The extent and outcomes of these activities is described in detail within the Community Engagement Summary Report at Attachment A7.

In the event that the Planning Proposal is granted a Gateway Determination by the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment, the Planning Proposal would be placed on public exhibition in accordance with the requirements of the Gateway Determination and the Department of Planning and Environment’s publication ‘A Guide to Preparing Local Environmental Plans’.

The public exhibition would include notification to the surrounding properties and all material being made available on Council’s website.

Internal Consultation

The assessment of the Planning Proposal has included consultation with Council’s Strategic Traffic Engineer and the Environment and Sustainability section of Council.

Summary

A Planning Proposal has been submitted for the Lindfield Village Hub site which seeks to make the following amendments to the KLEP Local Centres 2012:

· Amend the Height of Buildings map from part 17.5m and part 26.5m to part RL115.6, part RL120.6 and part RL127.5 as shown on the proposed height map;

· amend the Floor Space Ratio map from generally 1.3:1 to 2.21:1 as shown on the proposed height map and deletion of a maximum FSR from the Woodford Lane Road Reserve;

· amend Schedule 1 to allow residential flat buildings across the entirety of the subject land; and

· insert new Clause 6.9 to allow exceptions to the height of buildings for the purposes of the purpose of rooftop plant, lift towers, lift motor rooms and or communal open space and access to and structures associated with such space.

Council has engaged consultant MG Planning Pty Ltd to conduct the assessment of this Planning Proposal. Studio Zanardo was also engaged to provide an urban design assessment. Assessment of traffic and transport and biodiversity issues have been carried out by Council’s Strategic Traffic Engineer and Biodiversity Officers respectively.

The Planning Proposal was reported to the Ku-ring-gai Local Planning Panel Meeting for its advice on 6 April 2020 in accordance with the Local Planning Panels Direction – Planning Proposals issued by the Minister for Planning under Section 9.1 of the EP&A Act 1979.

The assessment of the Planning Proposal and the consideration of the advice provided by the Ku-ring-gai Local Planning Panel has resulted in the following recommendations:

1. That the Planning Proposal and its attached reports are amended in accordance with the requirements of this Report and the Table of Assessment prior to submission for Gateway determination.

2. That changes are made to the proposed amendments to the KLEP Local Centres 2012 as follows:

· Proposed Clause 6.9 be amended to impose a limit of a maximum FSR of 1.3:1 on residential uses on the site notwithstanding the maximum permissible FSR of 2.21:1;

· amend proposed maximum height map in conjunction with Council’s urban design specialist to accurately reflect the proposed building envelope; and

· prepare an additional permitted uses map identifying the subject site.

3. That the draft site specific DCP provisions be amended as recommended should a Gateway be issued for the Planning Proposal.

It is considered that there is sufficient merit to enable the Planning Proposal to be submitted to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment for a Gateway Determination, subject to the incorporation of the recommended amendments stipulated in this report and in the Table of Assessment at Attachment A1.

Recommendation:

A. That the Planning Proposal to amend the planning controls that apply to the Lindfield Village Hub land at 1 Woodford Lane, 2-12 Bent Street, 1B Beaconsfield Parade, 19 Drovers Way, Drovers Way Road Reserve and Woodford Lane Lindfield be submitted to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment for a Gateway Determination, subject to the amendments detailed in this report and Table of Assessment (Attachment A1).

B. That should a Gateway Determination be issued for public exhibition of the Planning Proposal, site specific amendments to the Local Centres DCP as outlined in this report to be prepared and placed on public exhibition concurrent with the Planning Proposal.

C. That Council notes the advice of the Ku-ring-gai Local Planning Panel that it should enter into a Project Delivery Agreement (or the like) which includes a legally binding obligation imposed on the future Developer of the site to deliver the public benefits of the park, library, community and childcare centres at the first stage of development.

D. That the residual portion of land at 12 Bent Street to the west of the proposed new road be excluded from the Planning Proposal site area. The proposed floor space ratio standards in the Planning Proposal be recalculated to take into account the reduced site area while still providing for the same gross floor areas proposed in the Planning Proposal.

Helena Miller

Director, MG Planning Pty Ltd

Craige Wyse

Team Leader Urban Planning

Antony Fabbro

Manager Urban & Heritage Planning

Andrew Watson

Director Strategy & Environment

Attachments:	A1⇩	Table of Assessment		2020/081365
	A2⇩	Ammended Planning Proposal and RFI response		2020/081740
	A3⇨	Planning Proposal Appendix 1 - Urban Design Study and Urban Design Response to RFI	Excluded	2020/081742
	A4⇨	Planning Proposal Appendix 2 - Transport and Traffic Impact Analysis	Excluded	2020/081744
	A5 ⇨	Planning Proposal Appendix 3 - Phase 1 Contamination Report	Excluded	2020/081747
	A6 ⇨	Planning Proposal Appendix 3 (continued) - Phase 2 Contamination Report	Excluded	2020/081750
	A7 ⇨	Planning Proposal Appendix 4 - Community Engagement Activity Summary	Excluded	2019/332693
	A8 ⇨	Planning Proposal Appendix 5 - Flora and Fauna Report	Excluded	2019/332578
	A9 ⇨	Planning Proposal Appendix 6 - Benefits Statement and Economic Impact Assessment	Excluded	2020/081768
	A10 ⇩	Planning Proposal Appendix 7 - Draft Ku-ring-gai Local Centres DCP Part 14E		2020/081087
	A11 ⇩	Planning Proposal Appendix 8 - Copy of Council Resolution of 20 August 2019		2019/332701
	A12 ⇩	Ku-ring-gai Local Planning Panel Minutes - 6 April 2020		2020/101699

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 28 April 2020	GB.10 / 377

Item GB.10	S09069/10

Climate Change Policy and Action Plan

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

purpose of report:	To seek Council’s endorsement of the draft Climate Change Policy 2020 and draft Towards Net Zero Emissions - 2030 Action Plan for public exhibition

background:	The draft Climate Change Policy 2020 will supersede the Climate Change Policy 2015. The draft Towards Net Zero Emissions - 2030 Action Plan builds on Council’s Greenhouse Gas Reduction Action Plan (2015), and the progress made to date in reducing Council’s energy consumption and GHG emissions through projects funded by Council’s Environmental Levy, and operational budget.

comments:	On the basis of aligning Council’s Climate Change mitigation program with the Paris Agreement, a set of internal Council targets for GHG emissions and renewable energy have been determined. A community wide, GHG emissions goal has also been determined, which provides a means for Council to support community efforts to reduce local household and business emissions in line with the Paris Agreement. The internal Council emissions targets, and the community emissions goals form the primary objectives of this policy whilst the draft Towards Net Zero Emissions - 2030 Action Plan sets out a pathway to meet the objectives.

recommendation:	A. That the draft Climate Change Policy 2020 and draft Towards Net Zero Emissions 2030 Action Plan be endorsed for public exhibition. B. That a further report be presented to Council following the public exhibition period outlining any changes and recommended amendments to the draft Climate Change Policy 2020 and draft Towards Net Zero Emissions 2030 Action Plan for final endorsement and adoption.

Purpose of Report

To seek Council’s endorsement of the draft Climate Change Policy 2020 and draft Towards Net Zero Emissions - 2030 Action Plan for public exhibition

Background

The review of Council’s Climate Change Policy has considered Australia’s commitment to the Paris Agreement and the latest climate science, including the impacts of the GHG emissions pathways outlined by the IPCC’s Special Report on 1.5°C of Global Warming (SR15). The review fulfils the objective of the 2015 Climate Change Policy, viz.:

To continue to review Council’s greenhouse gas emission reduction targets, emissions budget and climate change mitigation and adaptation activities based on international, regional and local climate science and modelling.

The targets incorporated into the draft Climate Change Policy 2020 are provided in the Table below.

Table 1 Emission reduction and renewable energy targets

Emission trajectories	Council targets (2000 baseline)
Council
50% reduction	By 2030 or earlier
100% reduction (net zero emissions )	By 2040 or earlier
100% renewable energy	By 2030 whilst pursuing efforts to reach 100% renewable by 2025
100% reduction in fleet emissions	By 2040 or earlier
Community
100% reduction (net zero emissions)	By 2040 or earlier

Comments

As of 2018, global heating had reached approximately 1°C above pre-industrial levels due to anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases (IPCC 2018). This has coincided with a trend of increasing intensity and frequency of a number of climate and weather extremes (IPCC 2018, p177). The scientific literature indicates the extent of drought, flooding, heat waves, and tropical cyclones will escalate if global heating continues (IPCC 2018, p210). Many of the observed climate and extreme weather trends have already led to catastrophic ecological responses within Australia, and around the world (Harris 2018), with extensive economic, environmental, and social costs for local communities.

The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) states “Climate change represents an urgent and potentially irreversible threat to human societies and the planet” (IPCC 2018). In recognition of this, the overwhelming majority of countries around the world, including Australia, adopted the Paris Agreement in December 2015. Article 2 of the Paris Agreement commits signatories to:

Holding the increase in the global average temperatures to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels and pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels, recognizing that this would significantly reduce the risks and impacts of climate change.

In response to the Paris Agreement, the IPCC produced the Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C (SR15). This report acts as a scientific guide for governments, policy makers, and communities to respond to the challenge of the Paris Agreement objectives, and to understand the implications of global heating at 1.5°C and higher.

On the basis of aligning Council’s Climate Change mitigation program with the Paris Agreement, a set of internal Council targets for GHG emissions and renewable energy have been determined. A community wide, GHG emissions goal has also been determined, which provides a means for Council to support community efforts to reduce local household and business emissions, in line with the Paris Agreement.

The objectives of the draft policy are:

· To reduce Council’s greenhouse gas emissions (from fixed assets, street lighting and vehicles) to levels consistent with the international goal of limiting global heating to 1.5˚C above pre-industrial levels, with no overshoot. Equating to:

o a reduction in total GHG emissions of 50% by 2030 (relative to 2000 levels), or earlier;

o a reduction in total GHG emissions to net zero by 2040, or earlier.

· To reach 100% renewable energy for all grid-sourced electricity by 2030, whilst pursuing efforts to reach 100% renewable by 2025.

· To reduce fleet emissions to net zero by 2040, or earlier(based on 2000 levels).

· To support the community in the goal of reaching net zero GHG emissions by 2040. Through the delivery of programs and initiatives that further community GHG emission reductions efforts.

· To continue to review and make accessible, Council’s total GHG emissions footprint and emission reduction trajectory.

· To review and make accessible the Ku-ring-gai community’s total GHG emissions footprint and emission reduction trajectory.

· To reduce Council’s, the community’s and the natural and built environment’s vulnerability to the impacts of climate change.

· To increase Council’s, the community’s and the natural and built environment’s resilience to the impacts of climate change and associated extreme or intensified weather events.

integrated planning and reporting

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

Climate Change

A community addressing and responding to the impacts of climate change and extreme weather events.

Council’s vulnerability to climate change is reduced.

The community is effectively informed and engaged on climate change impacts and responses.

Implement priority actions in the Climate Change Adaptation Strategy.

Review the Climate Change Policy and implement priority actions.

Deliver the Climate Wise Communities program to build community resilience to the impacts of climate change and extreme weather events

Climate Change

Sustainable Resource Management

The community is effectively engaged in energy and water conservation and efficiency programs.

Implement programs to assist the community to reduce energy and water use.

Governance Matters

On the basis of aligning Council’s Climate Change with the Paris Agreement, and with consideration of the risks from 1.5°C pathways with and without overshoot, a set of internal Council targets for GHG emissions and renewable energy have been determined. A community wide, GHG emissions goal has also been determined, which provides a means for Council to support community efforts to reduce local household and business emissions, in line with the Paris Agreement.

Council’s Climate Change Policy and the supporting Towards Net Zero Emissions - 2030 Action Plan provides a pathway for Council to take all reasonable and practical measures to increase climate change resilience and reduce greenhouse gas emissions across the organisation and within the community in line with Australia’s commitment to the Paris Agreement.

This policy applies to all sections of Council. Council’s Manager Environment and Sustainability has overall responsibility for compliance with this Policy. Implementation of this Policy is the responsibility of the General Manager, all Directors, Managers, Supervisors and Council Staff

Under the Local Government Act 1993, Councils are required to manage the local environment with consideration to the principles of Ecologically Sustainable Development (ESD), which incorporates the Precautionary Principle. Section 7e of the Act requires ‘Councils, Councillors and Council employees to have regard to ESD principles in carrying out all of their responsibilities’.

Risk Management

The peak scientific body on climate change, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) states that, “Climate change represents an urgent and potentially irreversible threat to human societies and the planet” (IPCC 2018). Climate projections indicate the world faces large scale collapse and loss of entire ecosystems (IPCC 2018, p230); severe impacts to human health - from stronger heatwaves, lower air quality, and extreme loss of food and water security (IPCC 2018, p247); increased extent of extreme weather and climate events – flooding, drought, severe storms, wildfire (IPCC 2018, p255); and severe economic loss due to aggregated and compounding impacts (Climate Council 2019a).

Council’s Climate Change Policy and the supporting Towards Net Zero Emissions - 2030 Action Plan provide a pathway for Council to take all reasonable and practical measures to increase climate change resilience and reduce greenhouse gas emissions across the organisation and within the community. Council faces a reputational risk should it fail to meet the requirements of these policies and fail to show leadership on this issue.

Financial Considerations

The investments required to reach net zero emissions are outlined in the Draft Towards Net Zero 2030 Action Plan. All actions outlined in the Draft Towards Net Zero 2030 Action Plan are fully funded through the Environmental Levy. Resource allocation is provided in Table 5 of the Draft Action Plan and provided below:

Funding	2020/21	2021/22	2022/23	2023/24	2024/25	2025/26	2026/27	2027/28	2028/29	2029/30
Solar PV maintenance	$12,000	$12,279	$12,841	$13,398	$13,800	$14,214	$14,641	$15,080	$15,532	$15,998
Capital works upgrades	$360,000	$122,786	$128,411	$133,983	$138,002	$242,142	$146,407	$150,799	$155,323	$159,982
Operational energy efficiency measures	$160,000	$61,393	$64,206	$66,991	$69,001	$71,071	$73,203	$75,399	$77,661	$79,991
Continuing Professional Development Program	$15,000	$15,348	$16,051	$16,748	$17,250	$17,768	$18,301	$18,850	$19,415	$19,998
Sustainable Building Performance Standards	$10,000	$10,000
Integrated asset management plans for buildings	$80,000	$81,857	$85,608	$89,322	$92,001	$94,762	$97,604	$100,532	$103,548	$106,655
Capital Works New				$235,000	$216,000		$150,000	$160,000	$170,000
Chambers Capital Works	$250,000	$188,000	$174,000

Council has previously partnered with the SSROC program (which included most NSROC councils) for energy procurement. This partnership has been commercially beneficial for Council and the same SSROC group are now investigating purchase agreements for 100% renewable energy procurement. In order for Ku-ring-gai Council to be a party to the energy procurement, it is likely that a Local Government Act Section 55 exception would need to be exercised.

Social Considerations

There is significant concern within the community regarding climate change and associated impacts. Community expectation is for local government to take a leading role. Additionally, many residents of Ku-ring-gai have displayed a desire to reduce emissions and mitigate climate change.

The draft Climate Change Policy 2020 establishes a community wide, GHG emissions goal of net zero by 2040 and provides a means for Council to support community efforts to reduce local household and business emissions, in line with the Paris Agreement.

The draft action plan will be utilised for further engagement and education within the community and support the efforts that take place, improving a sense of collaboration and emphasising a shared responsibility between local government and the community.

Environmental Considerations

The risk posed to the environment by climate change is significantly reduced if warming peaks at 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels (IPCC SR15). The objectives set out in the draft Climate Change Policy 2020 and draft Towards Net Zero Emissions - 2030 Action Plan align Council’s emission targets with the effort to keep warming to 1.5°C and reduce some of the impacts associated with climate change.

Community Consultation

The draft Climate Change Policy 2020 and draft Towards Net Zero Emissions - 2030 Action Plan will be placed on public exhibition. Council will utilise social media and existing contact lists to inform interested residents of the public exhibition and request submissions. All submissions will be submitted and incorporated into final documents which will then be submitted for consideration and adoption by Council.

Internal Consultation

Internal consultation to date has included briefings to the Energy Management Working Group, briefing to group managers, input from Infrastructure Services, Waste & Cleansing, Financial Accounting, Urban Planning, Urban Design, Development Contributions Planning and Major Projects.

Additionally, two briefings have been conducted for Councillors. The Environment and Sustainability team will circulate the documents internally during the public exhibition and provide Council staff another opportunity to make submissions.

Summary

In November 2015, the 21^st Conference of the Parties (COP21) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) hosted international discussions on the state of climate change, and the threats posed by global heating. The seriousness of those threats led negotiators from 196 represented state parties (including Australia), to adopt by consensus, the language of the Paris Agreement, which includes the commitment to:

Holding the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels and pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels, recognizing that this would significantly reduce the risks and impacts of climate change.

On the basis of aligning Council’s climate change approach with the Paris Agreement, and with consideration of the risks from 1.5°C pathways with and without overshoot, a set of internal Council targets for GHG emissions and renewable energy have been determined. A community wide, GHG emissions goal has also been determined, which provides a means for Council to support community efforts to reduce local household and business emissions, in line with the Paris Agreement.

Council’s draft Climate Change Policy 2020 and the supporting Towards Net Zero Emissions - 2030 Action Plan provide a pathway for Council to take all reasonable and practical measures to increase climate change resilience and reduce greenhouse gas emissions across the organisation and within the community.

The objectives of the Draft Policy are:

o a reduction in total GHG emissions of 50% by 2030 (relative to 2000 levels), or earlier;

o a reduction in total GHG emissions to net zero by 2040, or earlier.

· To reach 100% renewable energy for all grid-sourced electricity by 2030, whilst pursuing efforts to reach 100% renewable by 2025.

· To reduce fleet emissions to net zero by 2040, or earlier (based on 2000 levels).

· To support the community in the goal of reaching net zero GHG emissions by 2040. Through the delivery of programs and initiatives that further community GHG emission reductions efforts.

· To continue to review and make accessible, Council’s total GHG emissions footprint and emission reduction trajectory

· To review and make accessible the Ku-ring-gai community’s total GHG emissions footprint and emission reduction trajectory.

· To reduce Council’s, the community’s and the natural and built environment’s vulnerability to the impacts of climate change.

· To increase Council’s, the community’s and the natural and built environment’s resilience to the impacts of climate change and associated extreme or intensified weather events.

Recommendation:

A. That the draft Climate Change Policy 2020 and draft Towards Net Zero Emissions 2030 Action Plan be endorsed for public exhibition.

Peter Vun

Senior Sustainability Officer

Jacob Sife

Manager Environment & Sustainability

Andrew Watson

Director Strategy & Environment

Attachments:	A1⇩	Controlled Document number 80 - Draft Climate Change Policy 2020		2020/103168
	A2⇩	Draft Towards Zero Emissions - 2030 Action Plan		2020/103171

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 28 April 2020	GB.11 / 468

Item GB.11	S10342

Draft Sports Facilities Plan of Management

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

purpose of report:	To seek Council approval to place the draft Sports Facilities Plan of Management on public exhibition in accordance with Local Government Act 1993.

background:	In April 2010, Council adopted the Sports Facilities Plan of Management, this is the only generic plan of management for sports facilities. This document received minor amendments in December 2015 following exhibition. In 2018, commencement of the Crown Land Management Act 2016 imposed a number of changes to the way councils manage lands as a Crown Reserve. To enable Council to comply with these requirements an audit of Crown Land and existing plans of management is being undertaken. The Sports Facilities Plan of Management is the first plan to be reviewed.

comments:	The draft Sports Facilities Plan of Management provides a review of the 2015 plan and will guide the future management and maintenance of these open space facilities. The intention is to incorporate the specific plans of management for North Turramurra Recreation Area and St Ives Village Green into the revised generic Sports Facilities Plan of Management. Otium Planning Group in conjunction with Parkland Planners were selected to assist Council with the review and updating of this document.

recommendation:	That Council place the draft Sports Facilities Plan of Management on public exhibition in accordance with the Local Government Act 1993.

Purpose of Report

To seek Council approval to place the draft Sports Facilities Plan of Management on public exhibition in accordance with Local Government Act 1993.

Background

Council adopted the current Sports Facilities Plan of Management in April 2010 with minor amendments made in December 2015 (Attachment A1). The plan was prepared, exhibited and adopted pursuant to the provisions relating to Community Land in the Local Government Act 1993.

Currently, sports facilities in the Ku-ring-gai area are included in the Council’s plans of management wherever they are located. There is currently one (1) generic plan of management and six (6) specific plans of management covering sports facilities.

The six (6) specific plans of management include:

· Bicentennial Park*;

· Canoon Road Recreation Area;

· Gordon Golf Course;

· North Turramurra Recreation Area;

· St Ives Showground and Precinct Lands; and

· St Ives Village Green.

*For consistency, the current and proposed Sports Facilities Plan of Management includes three (3) individual sporting facilities within Bicentennial Park – Lofberg Oval, Lofberg Road Netball Courts and Norman Griffiths Sportsground.

The Ku-ring-gai Local Government Area (LGA) has approximately 30 hectares of developed open space containing a wide spectrum of sport and recreation facilities including sportsgrounds at 43 locations.

The subject land for this plan of management is the whole of the Ku-ring-gai LGA. Some facilities are located on land owned by Ku-ring-gai Council, some are located on Crown Reserves where Council is the Reserve Trust Manager, and a small number of locations are owned by other agencies such as Sydney Water and National Parks. Regardless of ownership, these facilities will be included in the generic plan of management to provide a consistent management approach by Council.

Management of Crown Land

In July 2018, commencement of the Crown Land Management Act 2016 (CLM Act) introduced a number of changes to the way councils manage lands under a Crown Reserve including:

· making Council responsible for the assessment of Native Title and liable for compensation under the Commonwealth Native Title Act 1993 (NT Act) (articulated within Part 8 of the Crown Land Management Act 2016);

· changing Council from a “Reserve Trust Manager” to a “Crown Land Manager”, enabling lands to be managed under the Local Government Act 1993;

· the requirement for plans of management under the Local Government Act 1993 to include Crown reserves classified as community land, by July 2021 – including nominating an initial categorisation which aligns with the existing reserve purpose (changes to this categorisation can then be made through the statutory plan of management process); and

· the ability to request additional reserve purposes and changes to initial categorisation.

To enable Council to comply with these requirements an audit of Crown Land and existing plans of management has now commenced. The Sports Facilities Plan of Management is the first plan to be reviewed.

Comments

Objectives

The draft Sports Facilities Plan of Management (Attachment A2) provides a review of the current plan which will guide the future management and maintenance of these open space facilities. The objectives of the review are to achieve the following:

· to improve the amenity of open space (sportsgrounds) with the Ku-ring-gai Council Local Government Area;

· to prepare and establish the Plan of Management for these areas of open space that will guide the future management and maintenance of these open space facilities;

· to use the community inputs (via community and user groups consultation) collected by Council in the preparation of the Sports Facilities Plan of Management;

· to address the Ku-ring-gai Community Strategic Plan 2038; and

· to address Native Title requirements as informed by feedback from the Native Title Manager.

The intention is to incorporate the specific plans of management for North Turramurra Recreation Area and St Ives Village Green into the revised generic Sports Facilities Plan of Management.

Further, the scope of the project has included completion of research/discussions with relevant Council staff concerning sports facilities and a review of existing documentation relating to sports facilities in the Ku-ring-gai Local Government Area.

To seek Council approval to place the draft Sports Facilities Plan of Management on public exhibition in accordance with Local Government Act 1993.

Otium Planning Group in conjunction with Parkland Planners have been selected to assist Council with the review and updating of this document.

Issues

The new Plan of Management will address the following issues:

· demographics and demand;

· administration;

· infrastructure;

· service levels and maintenance;

· usage impacts; and

· finance.

Crown Land Management Act 2016 (CLM Act)

Council is required to forward a copy of the draft Sports Facilities Plan of Management to Crown Lands as the landowner before giving public notice (s39 of the Local Government Act 1993). This section of the Act allows Crown Lands to review the draft plan and Council must include in the plan any provisions required by Crown Lands as the land owner.

In addition, if Council has altered the initial agreed categorisation on the reserve, Council must seek consent of the Minister to alter the categorisation. This also must be completed before the public exhibition can occur as it determines whether public hearings are required.

Crown Lands has also made Council responsible for the assessment of Native Title and liable for compensation under the Commonwealth Native Title Act 1993 (NT Act) (articulated within Part 8 of the Crown Land Management Act 2016). Council has engaged Lands Advisory Services to complete a Native Title Status Report for all Crown Land sites (November 2019) and Native Title Advice (April 2020). This advice can be finalised following exhibition when Council is ready to finalise and adopt the Plan of Management.

Crown Lands will endeavour to get a response to Council by 24 April 2020, however, the average time taken for Crown Lands to review draft Plans of Management is 34 working days and will be subject to the number of reserves and quality of the plan of management.

Omission of Sandakan Memorial Reserve

The previous Sports Facilities Plan of Management has included Sandakan Memorial Reserve (Kirkpatrick Street, North Turramurra) as a sportsground. Due to the power lines that are positioned over this reserve, historically this site has never been utilised for formal sport and this is unlikely to change in the future. Therefore, this reserve has been omitted from the list of sportsgrounds in Ku-ring-gai.

Site Names

Prior to the submission of the final Sports Facilities Plan of Management, site names for all sporting facilities will be checked to confirm the right naming is provided. Due to the number of sites that are referred by several different names, Council will address land management unit information, the Geographical Names Board, names used on signs on site and any legal reserve trust names/dedications.

integrated planning and reporting

Theme 1 Community, People and Culture

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

C1.1: An equitable and inclusive community that cares and provides for it members

Council’s policies, programs and advocacy address the social, information and health needs of all age groups, reduce disadvantage and address gaps in service provision.

Develop and implement effective plans, services and programs to proactively address the changing needs of the community including recommendations and programs identified in Council’s Community Needs Analysis and Children’s Services Needs Study.

Theme 3 Places, Spaces and Infrastructure

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

P1.1: Ku-ring-gai’s unique visual character and identity is maintained.

Strategies, plans and processes are in place to protect and enhance Ku-ring-gai’s unique visual and landscape character.

Continue to review the effectiveness of existing strategies, plans and processes across all programs.

Theme 3 Places, Spaces and Infrastructure

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

P6.1: Recreation, sporting and leisure facilities are available to meet the community’s diverse and changing needs.

A program is being implemented to improve existing recreation, sporting and leisure facilities and facilitate the establishment of new facilities.

Progressively review and update Community Plans of Management.

Governance Matters

This draft plan of management has been developed to meet Council’s obligations in respect to public land management under the requirements of the Local Government Act 1993.

Risk Management

The issues of safety and risk management relate to providing a safe environment for players, spectators, casual and other users of sportsgrounds, and to the safety of residents whose properties adjoin them. Sportsgrounds in particular, due to the degree and nature of use they receive, are of increasing management concern in regards to risk and safety.

Consideration of risk primarily relates to providing a safe environment for players, spectators, casual and other users of sports facilities and also needs to consider the safety of adjoining land uses.

Site-specific risk management issues have been identified informing future possible maintenance regimes and capital improvement works. There are many opportunities to minimise risk at Council’s sports facilities through appropriate location and/or alignment of sports infrastructure; the proximity of roads, residences, passive recreation spaces and facilities such as picnic areas and playgrounds; horticultural maintenance regimes; playing surface and pavilion upgrades and safety fencing/barriers.

In addition to Council undertaking its own efforts to reduce safety risks, the organised users of facilities are reminded of their safety and risk mitigation obligations, with specific requirements listed within hire agreements of sites. It is the responsibility of all user groups to procure their own insurance. Insurance obligations are outlined in every agreement from a casual hire arrangement to a 21-year lease or licence. At the outset of any agreement and each year of a continuing tenure, Council requires evidence of current insurance certification. Council reserves the right to terminate any agreement with a non-compliant user group.

Financial Considerations

The financial impact of the public exhibition process includes the cost of advertising the exhibition of the draft Sports Facilities Plan of Management. This has been financed through the operational budget of the Strategy and Environment Department.

Once adopted, implementation of the draft Sports Facilities Plan of Management would largely be achieved within annual operational budget allocations. Specific proposals or actions within the plan would be the subject of separate submissions to Council as part of future integrated planning and reporting processes, including the Long Term Financial Plan and annual budgets.

Economic Value

The economic values of Council’s sports facilities are numerous. Council’s facilities can provide suitable venues to host the growing demand for sports tourism bringing cash flow into the area from throughout the region. This not only has a direct effect on the value to facility users but also provides indirect value to local retailers and local accommodation.

The second economic value is that our sports facilities add to the visual amenity of our streetscapes, which can have a positive effect on land and property values of the area.

Further, greater participation in organised and individual sports and exercise contributes to the overall physical and mental wellbeing of society and thereby reduces demands on the health system.

Social Considerations

Sport and outdoor recreation provide a forum for community development and social interaction. Engaging in sport provides people with an opportunity to socialise and build community networks in a relaxed atmosphere. Interacting as part of a team can aid individual development as well as broader community development through the learning of skills such as communication, negotiation and cooperation. Sports facilities also have value as informal meeting places which enhance social interaction within our community and may be used in times of emergency as a refuge.

Recreation is becoming an increasingly important value for individuals and the wider community as people are realising the benefits of recreation in achieving quality of life. Sports facilities provide a significant amount of recreation opportunities to the community such as regular participation in physical activity which can improve overall mental and physical health. It also mitigates the risks associated with obesity and sedentary lifestyles. Through Council’s visioning exercise, our community identified a need to strive for healthier lifestyle practices to achieve physical, mental and social wellbeing.

Environmental Considerations

Ku-ring-gai’s sports facilities network provides significant environmental value to the area. By being a significant section of Council’s open space reserve system, our sports facilities provide habitat and biolinkage opportunities for flora and fauna with many of our sites containing or being adjacent to significant stands of native vegetation and urban bushland.

Our sports facilities network also provides attractive visual amenity with native vegetation and landscaping which breaks up the urban landscape. In addition to this, the vegetation and canopy trees on our sports facilities provide microclimate effects to the local area through mitigating wind velocity and the heat island effect created within urbanised areas.

Community Consultation

The preparation of the draft Sports Facilities Plan of Management has involved a thorough consultation process, including a community, sporting user group and school online survey as well as a workshop for the user groups of sporting facilities.

Council received the following survey responses:

· Community – 271

· Sporting user groups – 36

· Schools – 14

Respondents were asked three questions regarding the attributes of the facility they visited most regularly:

1. What aspects do you value highly?

2. What improvements would you like to see?

3. How satisfied are you with the facility? If you are dissatisfied, please provide details as to why.

Respondents were also given an opportunity to provide additional comments on the review of the Sports Facilities Plan of Management. There was a wide range of comments made, with the top five themes:

· Improved collaboration and communication with Council;

· provide additional facilities;

· overall improvements to facilities;

· increased number of synthetic; and

· greater investment.

The Sports Facilities Plan of Management Workshop was held on Wednesday, 6 November 2019, Approximately 30 people attended from a variety of sporting groups including summer and winter sporting clubs and associations, schools, tennis players and personal trainers. The session was very productive and the collective feedback is valuable in contributing towards the review of this document.

If endorsed by Council, the draft Sports Facilities Plan of Management will be placed on public exhibition for a minimum of 28 days in accordance with the Local Government Act 1993. A further 14 days for public comment and a public hearing will also be included in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government Act 1993.

When the draft Sports Facilities Plan of Management is placed on exhibition it is anticipated that the most significant medium will be online access. Copies will be available in the Council Chambers and libraries only if they are open to the public. Notification through the online versions of local papers will occur periodically throughout the exhibition period. It is also intended that the exhibition will be highlighted within the Mayor’s column during the statutory notification period. Any persons contributing to earlier survey work or the 2019 workshop will be directly notified where an email or mail address has been provided.

Following public exhibition and consultation the draft Plan submissions will be considered, these documents amended where appropriate and reported to Council.

Internal Consultation

The draft Sports Facilities Plan of Management has been considered by Strategy and Environment, Development and Regulation, Operations, and Community Departments of Council.

Summary

In April 2010, Council adopted the Sports Facilities Plan of Management. It is the only generic plan of management for sports facilities. This document was reviewed with only minor amendments in December 2015.

In 2018, commencement of the Crown Land Management Act 2016 introduced a number of changes to the way councils manage lands as a Crown Reserve. To enable Council to comply with these requirements an audit of Crown Land and existing plans of management is being undertaken. The Sports Facilities Plan of Management is the first plan to be reviewed.

The draft Sports Facilities Plan of Management provides a review of the current plan that will guide the future management and maintenance of these open space facilities.

The intention is to incorporate the specific plans of management for North Turramurra Recreation Area and St Ives Village Green into the revised generic Sports Facilities Plan of Management.

The preparation of the draft Sports Facilities Plan of Management has involved a thorough consultation process, including a community, sporting user group and school online survey and a workshop for the user groups of sporting facilities.

Recommendation:

A. That the draft Sports Facilities Plan of Management be exhibited for a minimum of 28 days with a further 14 days for public comment in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government Act 1993.

B. That Council gains approval from Crown Lands for the draft Sports Facilities Plan of Management prior to giving public notice (s39 of the Local Government Act 1993). That Council include in the plan any provisions required by Crown Lands as the land owner.

C. That a virtual public hearing be held during the exhibition and public comment period in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government Act 1993.

D. That a further report be presented to Council following the exhibition and public comment period.

Guy Thomas

Strategic Recreation Planner

Antony Fabbro

Manager Urban & Heritage Planning

Andrew Watson

Director Strategy & Environment

Attachments:	A1⇨	Current Sports Facilities Plan of Management (adopted in April 2010 and amended in December 2015)	Excluded	2015/339576
	A2⇨	DRAFT Sports Facilities Plan of Management - OMC 24 April 2020	Excluded	2020/099743

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 28 April 2020	GB.13 / 483

Item GB.13	S11955

Gateway Determinations Planning Proposals - Council Land Gordon & Roseville

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

purpose of report:	To have Council consider the Gateway Determinations issued for the planning proposals to rezone and reclassify 4 Pennant Avenue, Gordon and separately to rezone 47 Warrane Road, Roseville Chase.

background:	The Planning Proposals for the Council sites sought to amend the zoning on both the sites from RE1 Public Recreation to R3 Medium Density Residential. On 17 February 2020 Gateway Determinations were issued by the NSW Department of Planning, Industry and Environment for the Planning Proposals for 4 Pennant Avenue, Gordon and 47 Warrane Road, Roseville Chase.

comments:	Gateway Determinations have been issued with conditions which require both planning proposals to be amended to reflect an R2 Low Density Residential zoning and associated development standards. It remains the view of Council staff that the Planning Proposals for 4 Pennant Avenue, Gordon and 47 Warrane Road, Roseville Chase demonstrate sufficient justification and strategic merit to support the originally proposed R3 Medium Density Residential zoning.

recommendation:	That Council determines how to proceed with Council owned land at 4 Pennant Avenue, Gordon and 47 Warrane Road, Roseville Chase.

Purpose of Report

To have Council consider the Gateway Determinations issued for the planning proposals to rezone and reclassify 4 Pennant Avenue, Gordon and separately to rezone

47 Warrane Road, Roseville Chase.

Background

On 8 May 2018 Council resolved to prepare Planning Proposals for two Council owned sites:

· 4 Pennant Avenue, Gordon; and

· 47 Warrane Road, Roseville Chase.

Table 1 below sets out the proposed amendments resolved by Council to include the following amendments in the Planning Proposal for each site:

	4 Pennant Avenue, Gordon	47 Warrane Road, Roseville Chase
Zoning	Rezone from RE1 Public Recreation to R3 Medium Density Residential	Rezone from RE1 Public Recreation to R3 Medium Density Residential
Height of Building	11.5m	11.5m
Floor Space Ratio	0.8:1	0.8:1
Minimum Lot Size	1200sqm	1200sqm
Classification	Reclassify from Community Land to Operational Land	No change. Currently classified Operational Land

Table 1 – Council Resolved Amendments for Planning Proposals – R3 Medium Density Residential

The Planning Proposals were submitted to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPI&E) for a Gateway Determination on 2 October 2018. There was an inordinate delay of some16 months in the DPI&E assessing the Planning Proposals. The DPI&E finally issued Gateway Determinations on 17 February 2020. The Gateway Determinations, Letters to Council and Department of Planning Assessment Reports are included at Attachments A1 – A6.

The Gateway Determinations have been issued with a number of conditions which require amendments to be made to the Planning Proposals prior to public exhibition. The conditions require the Planning Proposals to be amended from a proposed R3 Medium Density Residential zoning to a lower R2 Low Density Residential zoning and associated development standards.

The Assessment Reports (Attachments A5 and A6) note that the Planning Proposals have general strategic merit in relation to providing residential development and residential diversity in a location close to public transport and services. However, the Department considers that the proposed R3 Medium Density Residential zone is not an appropriate land use in these locations, as it is not in keeping with existing low density zoning and character of the surrounding and adjoining land.

It should also be noted that the letter from the DPI&E advising of the Gateway Determination for

47 Warrane Road, Roseville Chase (Attachment A4) contains an error. The letter states that Council requested a Gateway Determination for a Planning Proposal with R2 Low Density Residential zoning and associated development standards. This is incorrect. The Planning Proposal that Council requested a Gateway Determination for was for R3 Medium Density Residential zoning and associated development standards. Council has requested the Department of Planning to re-issue this letter to correctly reflect the Planning Proposal that was submitted by Council. This request is yet to be acted on.

Table 2 below sets out the amendments required to the Planning Proposals as per the Gateway Determinations:

	4 Pennant Avenue, Gordon	47 Warrane Road, Roseville Chase
Zoning	Rezone from RE1 Public Recreation to R2 Low Density Residential	Rezone from RE1 Public Recreation to R2 Low Density Residential
Height of Building	9.5m	9.5m
Floor Space Ratio	0.3:1	0.3:1
Minimum Lot Size	840sqm	790sqm
Classification	Reclassify from Community Land to Operational Land	No change. Currently classified Operational Land

Table 2 – Department of Planning Gateway Determination Conditions for Planning Proposals – R2 Low Density Residential zoning

Comments

Following the issue of the conditioned Gateway Determinations for 4 Pennant Avenue, Gordon and 47 Warrane Road, Roseville Chase, Council needs to consider what options are available and how best to proceed with each site.

Option 1 – Discontinue Planning Proposals and retain RE1 Public Recreation zoning

Council can discontinue the Planning Proposal for both sites, and retain the current RE1 Public Recreation zoning. Clause 3.35(4) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 sets out that Council may request the Minister, at any time, that the matter not proceed.

The following are some land uses that are permitted with consent within the existing RE1 Public Recreation zoning:

· centre-based childcare facilities;

· community facilities;

· recreation facilities (indoor) e.g. squash court, indoor swimming pool, gymnasium, etc;

· recreation facilities (major) e.g. large scale sporting or recreation activities attended by large numbers of people; and

· recreation facilities (outdoor).

Option 2 – Proceed with Planning Proposals for R2 Low Density Residential zoning

Council can proceed with the Planning Proposals for both sites in accordance with the requirements of the Gateway Determinations. The Planning Proposals would be required to be amended from R3 Medium Density Residential zone to R2 Low Density Residential zone and associated development standards as required by the conditions on the Gateway Determinations. Additionally, a number of technical studies are required to be prepared for each site to support the amended Planning Proposals, as per the conditions of the Gateway Determinations. The following studies are required to proceed with the R2 Low Density Residential zoning on the sites:

· traffic study;

· concept development scheme with Urban Design Study;

· flood risk management assessment/study (4 Pennant Avenue, Gordon only); and

· heritage impact statement (4 Pennant Avenue, Gordon only).

Once the Planning Proposals are revised in accordance with the Gateway Determinations they are required to be submitted to the Department of Planning for approval prior to public exhibition.

The following are some of the land uses that are permitted with consent with the R2 Low Density Residential zone:

· boarding houses;

· centre-based childcare facilities;

· community facilities;

· dwelling houses (minimum lot size of 840sqm for 4 Pennant Avenue, Gordon and 790sqm for 47 Warrane Road, Roseville Chase); and

· group homes.

Additionally, Seniors Housing is also be a permitted land use under the State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004.

Option 3 – Formal Gateway Review

Council can request a formal Gateway Review of the conditions placed on the Gateway Determination requiring the Planning Proposal to be amended to a R2 Low Density Residential zoning.

Gateway Reviews may be requested by a Council or a proponent following a Gateway Determination that:

a) the planning proposal should not proceed;

b) the planning proposal should be resubmitted to the Gateway; or

c) imposes requirements or makes variations to the proposal that the Council or proponent thinks should be reconsidered.

The Gateway Review is informed by advice from the Independent Planning Commission who will review the submitted Planning Proposal and Gateway Determination. The Minister will make a final decision on whether to alter the Gateway Determination based on the advice from the Independent Planning Commission, and the views of Council. These post-Gateway reviews apply only if the original Gateway Determination was made by a delegate of the Minister.

Planning Circular PS 18-012 Independent Reviews of Plan Making Decisions outlines that if the Gateway Determination is to proceed with the Planning Proposal but imposes conditions that the Council or proponent considers inappropriate, the Council or proponent has 14 days from being notified by the Department to indicate their intent to request a review. The Council or proponent would then have 42 days to formally apply for a Gateway Review. It should be noted that these timeframes for requesting a Gateway Review are only guidelines contained within a Planning Circular, and are not statutory. It should also be noted that from Council’s experiences to date, viz. Lordes Retirement Village, which at the time or writing still remains unresolved some two years after consideration by Council, take an inordinate amount of time to conduct and should consequentially be avoided if possible.

Option 4 – ‘Soft Review’ of Gateway Determination

Instead of proceeding with the lodgement of a formal Gateway Review and the process through the Independent Planning Commission, Council has the option of a ‘soft review’ of the Gateway Determination. Separate to the formal Gateway Review process, a council, as the PPA, may at any time request that the Gateway Determination be reconsidered and re-issued. This would involve a letter to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment requesting them to reconsider the conditions imposed on the Gateway Determinations.

In requesting the ‘soft review’ from DPI&E, it should be highlighted that Council now has an adopted Local Strategic Planning Statement in place, endorsed by the GSC, which identifies key local planning priorities for Ku-ring-gai. These local planning priorities include the concept asset recycling, as well as the provision of additional housing around centres which are serviced by the North Shore rail line or major bus routes along arterial roads.

In the first instance, is recommended that Council proceed with this option of requesting a ‘soft review’ of the Gateway Determination conditions by DPI&E, on the condition if no response is made within 30 Days then Council proceeds with Option 3 a formal Gateway Determination review. It should be noted that this approach will not deliver proceeds of sale to Council in a timely manner.

Preferred Option

Having regard to the four (4) options available to Council, the preferred option for both sites is Option 4 – ‘Soft Review’ of Gateway Review. Should the reconsideration of the Gateway Determination conditions by DPIE not be favourable or timely, then it is recommended that Council proceeds with Option 3 – formal Gateway Review. The following outlines why Option 3 and Option 4 are the preferred options:

1. In terms of Option 1 to retain RE1 Public Recreation zoning, both sites are former bowling clubs which have been vacant since the clubs terminated their leases in 2017 due to declining membership, accordingly there is no demand for the sites to continue their use as bowling clubs. Council has also undertaken an assessment of both sites against the principles of the Open Space Acquisition Strategy to determine whether the sites would be suitable for parks, and the sites have been found to not be suitable due to limited access, visibility, contamination and duplication of facilities with other parks in close proximity.

As the sites are not suitable for parks, and there is no demand for their historic use, should Council wish to retain the RE1 Public Recreation zoning on the sites, other alternative land uses would need to be considered.

2. In terms of Option 2 to proceed with R2 Low Density Residential zone, the Gateway Determinations require a number of studies to be undertaken for both sites in order to support the conditioned R2 Low Density Residential zoning prior to the public exhibition of the Planning Proposals. These studies will require funding and time to be completed. Additionally, consideration should be given to the significantly reduced financial value of the site with a R2 Low Density Residential zoning compared to the R3 Medium Density Residential zoning originally sought. Refer to Financial Considerations section of this report for further detail.

3. In terms of Option 3 and Option 4, a Gateway Review or ‘Soft Review’ of the conditions imposed by the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment, it is considered that the provision of medium density housing on these sites is consistent with the Ku-ring-gai Local Strategic Planning Statement Principles for Housing, as follows:

· ‘Principle – Stage housing delivery around centres of retail and economic activity that are serviced by the North Shore railway line or major bus routes along arterial roads including provision of housing diversity, affordability and accessibility

4 Pennant Avenue, Gordon is within 600m radius of Gordon Train Station, and the Gordon Local Centre. 47 Warrane Road, Roseville Chase is located within 200m radius of Warringah Road/Babbage Road an arterial road with major bus route, and the Roseville Chase Neighbourhood Centre. The proposed R3 Medium Density Residential zone in both of these locations will provide for housing diversity within these centres, which is supported by transport, services and infrastructure.

· ‘Principle - Locate medium density housing types within a 5min walk (400m radius) of Neighbourhood Centres serviced by major bus routes along arterial roads: Roseville Chase, West Gordon and North St Ives (subject to provision of priority bus infrastructure from Mona Vale to Macquarie Park and Dee Why to Chatswood)

47 Warrane Road, Roseville Chase is located within a 200m radius of the Roseville Chase Neighbourhood Centre, and Warringah Road/Babbage Road an arterial road with major bus routes. The strategic centres of Chatswood, Frenchs Forest, St Leonards, North Sydney and Sydney CBD can all currently be accessed within 30min (shown on Image 1, the mobility map below). The mobility and accessibility from the Roseville Chase Neighbourhood Centre will further increase with the future implementation of the Rapid Bus Transit (east-west connection) from Dee Why to Chatswood.

Image 1 – Mobility Plan Roseville Chase (Public Transport) from Ku-ring-gai Local Strategic Planning Statement

· ‘Principle - In considering areas for future medium and high density housing forms, the following areas are to be avoided: heritage conservation areas; areas of visual and aesthetic quality and character; areas within or affecting scenic and cultural landscapes; areas of intact tree canopy where the built form does not sit under the canopy; areas with multiple constraints including steep topography; areas with environmental values; areas that are bushfire prone and with evacuation risk; centres with limited transport and service access until improvements are implemented.’

Both sites do not fall into any of these criteria for locations where future medium and high density housing is to be avoided – they are not within HCAs, do not contain significant tree canopy, are not steep, are not bushfire prone or evacuation risk and both centres currently have access to good public transport connections in the form of train and bus routes.

4. The Assessment Reports prepared by the Department of Planning (Attachments A5 and A6) outlined that there is insufficient justification that the proposed R3 Medium Density zoning is appropriate for the site as this zone is not in keeping with existing low density zoning and character of the surrounding and adjoining land. As outlined in the Planning Proposal it is Council’s intention to prepare an Urban Design Study for each site, and develop site specific DCP controls to ensure the integration of the proposed medium density housing with surrounding local character. It should also be noted that as set out in the Land and Environment Court Planning Principle on compatibility in the urban environment, “buildings can exist together in harmony without having the same density, scale or appearance”

It is considered that the Planning Proposals for 4 Pennant Avenue, Gordon and 47 Warrane Road, Roseville Chase demonstrate sufficient justification and strategic merit to support the originally proposed R3 Medium Density Residential zoning, and for this reason Option 3, followed by Option 4 is the preferred option.

integrated planning and reporting

Theme 1 – Community , People and Culture

Theme 6 – Leadership and Governance

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

L2.1 Council rigorously manages its financial resources and assets to maximise delivery of services

L2.1.3 Council maintains its commitment to infrastructure asset management priorities

L2.1.3.1 Identify available funding sources in the Long Term Financial Plan and allocate to priority projects and assets

C6.1 Housing diversity, adaptability and affordability is increased to support the needs of a changing community

C6.1.1: Councils planning approach to the provision of housing across Ku-ring-gai is responsive and addresses the supply, choice and affordability needs of the community and the changing population

C6.1.1.3 Investigate opportunities to provide a range of housing choices as part of the preparation of a Ku-ring-gai Housing Strategy.

Governance Matters

The process for the preparation and implementation of Planning Proposals is governed by the provisions contained within the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

Risk Management

These Council owned sites are now vacant and there is no demand for the sites to continue their use as bowling clubs. The sites present an opportunity for Council to utilise the process of ‘asset recycling’ to invest in new assets or revitalise existing assets.

The concept of asset recycling has been built into Council’s Resourcing Strategies and Long Term Financial Plans over a number of Integrated Planning and Reporting Cycles. More recently, asset recycling has been adopted by Council and endorsed by the Greater Sydney Commission as part of the adoption and assurance of Council’s Local Strategic Planning Statement.

Council has a range of projects relying on asset sales as follows:

Infrastructure backlog $34.0m asset sales

S94 projects gap $16.0m asset sales

St Ives indoor courts $11.3m asset sales (total project cost $16.5)

Marian St Theatre $15.3m asset sales (total project cost $16.3m latest estimate)

Turramurra Hub

Lindfield Hub

As noted in Council’s Local Strategic Planning Statement “[i]t is noted that many of these projects will only proceed if new funding streams, including asset recycling, are available.”

Following the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment issuing the conditioned Gateway Determinations for the Planning Proposals to rezone these sites, Council needs to make a decision on how to best proceed.

Financial Considerations

AEC has prepared market advice for both sites (Attachments A7 and A8) in order to provide an understanding of the extent of difference in value for both sites, under the following scenarios:

· R2 Low Density Residential zone;

· R2 Low Density Residential zone with seniors living; and

· R3 Medium Density Residential zone.

The market advice is based on high level desktop assessment and analysis, and is therefore indicative only. The table below outlines approximate differences in the Residual Land Value of the two sites, based on the scenarios above.

	Approximate Difference in Residual Land Value
	R2 Low Density and R3 Medium Density	R2 Low Density (Seniors Living) and R3 Medium Density
47 Warrane Road, Roseville Chase	$18,000,000	$10,850,000
4 Pennant Avenue, Gordon	$13,550,000	$8,500,000

Table 3 – Approximate difference in Residual Land Value based on zoning

This indicates that the R2 Low Density Residential zone conditioned by the Gateway Determination does have a significant impact on the value of the sites, compared to the R3 Medium Density originally sought by Council. Should Council resolve to divest the sites sometime in the future with a R2 Low Density Residential zoning, it could expect a value of between $8.5m-$13.5m less for

4 Pennant Avenue, Gordon and a value of between $10.85m - $18.0m less for 47 Warrane Road, Roseville Chase.

Social Considerations

The proposed rezoning of the sites from to R3 Medium Density Residential would have assisted with providing additional housing supply and improved housing choice (townhouses) for Ku-ring-gai.

Additionally, any future divestment of the sites (with an R3 Medium Density Residential zoning) was earmarked to assist Council meet community expectations for the renewal and replacement of community infrastructure, such as the Marian Street Theatre and the St Ives High School Joint Use Indoor Courts.

Environmental Considerations

As a result of past land uses and activities on both sites, the Stage 1 and Stage 2 Site Investigations have confirmed there are areas of environmental concern (contamination) on both sites. The sites are able to be made suitable for future residential uses, subject to further assessment, management and remediation, but not without significant cost.

Community Consultation

The Planning Proposals have not yet been the subject of community consultation. The Gateway Determinations require a number of substantial amendments to the Planning Proposals which are required to be undertaken prior to public exhibition. The amended Planning Proposals are also required to be submitted to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment for approval prior to public exhibition. This process is not without considerable risk.

Internal Consultation

Internal consultation with other Departments of Council (where appropriate) has been undertaken in the preparation of this report.

Summary

Council submitted Planning Proposals for 4 Pennant Avenue, Gordon and 47 Warrane Road, Roseville Chase to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment on 2 October 2018 for a Gateway Determination. The Planning Proposals sought to rezone the sites from RE1 Public Recreation to R3 Medium Density Residential with associated development standards (and reclassify where required).

On 17 February 2020, the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment issued Gateway Determinations, however conditions have been included which require the Planning Proposals to be amended to R2 Low Density Residential. This has a significant financial impact on the ability of Council to fund other social infrastructure projects.

The preferred option for both sites is Option 4 – ‘Soft Review’ of the Gateway Determination by DPIE. Should the reconsideration of the conditions on the Gateway Determination by DPIE not be favourable or received within 30 Days, then it is recommended that Council proceed with Option 3 – formal Gateway Review.

Recommendation:

A. That Council write to the Secretary of the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment and request that the conditions attached to the Gateway Determinations for Planning Proposals for 4 Pennant Avenue, Gordon and 47 Warrane Road, Roseville Chase be reconsidered for the reasons outlined in this report.

B. That should an unfavourable response or no response be received within 30 days, then an application for a formal Gateway Review be prepared and submitted to Department of Planning, Industry and Environment.

Alexandra Plumb

Urban Planner

Craige Wyse

Team Leader Urban Planning

Antony Fabbro

Manager Urban & Heritage Planning

Andrew Watson

Director Strategy & Environment

Attachments:	A1⇩	Gateway Determination - 4 Pennant Avenue, Gordon	2020/044547
	A2⇩	Gateway Determination - 47 Warrane Road, Roseville Chase	2020/044545
	A3⇩	Letter from Department of Planning advising of Gateway Determination - 4 Pennnat Avenue, Gordon	2020/044544
	A4⇩	Letter from Department of Planning advising of Gateway Determination - 47 Warrane Road, Roseville Chase	2020/044540
	A5⇩	Department of Planning Gateway Assessment Report - 47 Warrane, Roseville	2020/044004
	A6⇩	Department of Planning Gateway Determination Assessment Report - 4 Pennant,Gordon	2020/044001
	A7⇩	Market Advice - 4 Pennant Avenue Gordon - AEC - 27 March 2020	2020/092273
	A8⇩	Market advice - 47 Warrane Road Roseville Chase - AEC 27 March 2020	2020/092271

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 28 April 2020	GB.14 / 570

Item GB.14	S12062-3

Marian Street Theatre DA

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

purpose of report:	To seek Council approval to lodge the Marian Street Theatre (MST) Development Application (DA).

background:	At the OMC of 26 June 2018, Council resolved, in part: B. That Council commits to the renewal of the Marian Street Theatre, consistent with the recent Council resolution, and bases the renewal on a multi-purpose plan concept. E. That work begins on building the revamped Marian Street ‘Theatre Plus’ within three years.

comments:	This report seeks to update Council on the preferred design for the Theatre and its environs and recommends approval to lodge the DA.

recommendation:	That Council lodges the (extended) masterplan for the Marian Street Theatre Development Application (DA) but include a request for a partial Occupation Certificate (Staged Development) should insufficient funds be available to implement the extended masterplan in the first stage of refurbishment.

Purpose of Report

To seek Council approval to lodge the Marian Street Theatre (MST) Development Application (DA).

Background

The MST operated as a local theatre for over 40 years until 2013 and prior to that was used as a theatre or public hall since being built in 1906.

Council closed the Marian Street Theatre in December 2013 to undertake urgent lighting, electrical and other associated upgrades but due to the building’s deteriorated state, the Theatre has remained closed ever since.

At the OMC of 26 June 2018, Council resolved as follows:

A. That Council receives and notes the Save Marian Street Theatre Committee Business Plan and staff continue to work with the Save Marian Street Theatre Committee and the community, in developing plans for the renewal and future management of the Marian Street Theatre utilising the detailed business plan submitted.

B. That Council commits to the renewal of the Marian Street Theatre, consistent with the recent Council resolution, and bases the renewal on a multi-purpose plan concept.

C. That Council recognises that within the Save Marian Street Theatre Business Plan there is a capital funding model but it is also recognised that Council may choose an alternative model.

D. That Council establishes a Project Steering Committee with an agreed set of skills to be determined.

E. That work begins on building the revamped Marian Street ‘Theatre Plus’ within three years.

F. That Council acknowledges and thanks the Save Marian Street Theatre Committee for their contribution and the significant work that has been undertaken to date.

Following on from the above, at the OMC of 12 March 2019, Council resolved as follows:

A. That Council approves a capital funding budget of $10.5M for refurbishment of the Marian Street Theatre.

B. That Council staff commence tender documentation for procurement and award of architectural design services to detail the refurbishment of the Marian Street Theatre working within the approved budget.

C. Council notes that the draft Business Case and Draft Preliminary Feasibility Report will be referred to the Marian Street Theatre Community Reference Committee and the Major Projects Advisory Committee (MPAC) for review prior to further consideration by Council.

Following a tender process and subsequent resolution from Council at the OMC of 11 June 2019, a consultant team was awarded the contract to begin design and documentation of a DA for the refurbishment works.

Comments

This report seeks to update Council on the status of the design and associated cost estimate and recommends approval of the design to be lodged as part of a Development Application (DA).

Vision for Proposed Theatre Performance Spaces

The Vision for the future of Marian Street Theatre includes the following key outcomes:

“Marian Street Theatre will be Ku-ring-gai’s innovative new community performance space.

It will provide a stage for a diverse range of expressive entertainers, from professional artists to talented community performers, who will deliver a program of stimulating and engaging productions for the community.

As well as a theatre experience visitors will enjoy cafe facilities and multi-purpose spaces, all connecting sensitively with the surrounding natural environment. Marian Street Theatre will honour its live theatrical traditions.

The focus will be on content diversity, which will include live performances, musical experiences and new productions. The goal will be to promote creativity, originality and inclusivity for anyone who enjoys the delight of great live performances.”

This Vision was developed with input from the Marian Street Theatre Community Reference Committee.

Planning, Form and Massing

The Design Report at Attachment A1 outlines the (extended) Masterplan design that has been fully documented and is now recommended for the DA. The following is an excerpt from the Design Report:

“With a focus on building a vibrant, multi-use arts venue with a strong focus on drama, the DA documented design includes multiple rehearsal and performance spaces, carefully selected to build ‘a theatre eco-system’.

Seven discrete spaces comprise the ‘eco-system’:

· main theatre space with 249 seats;

· experimental theatrette space with 63 seats;

· rehearsal space with 60 seats;

· flexible community space with 48 seats;

· café;

· main foyer space; and

· administration office space.

In addition to the works above, the development is also planned to include:

· new vehicle access driveway; and

· outdoor seating and informal amphitheatre.

The overall form of the building has been constrained in footprint to match as far as possible that of the existing theatre building, with some areas exceeding the existing footprint such as the new Level 2 balcony, larger foyer spaces and also a new, functional stage overrun on Level 3.

On the upper Level 2, a new theatre foyer, bar and balcony take advantage of views and provide surveillance opportunities for the park.

At the south-east of the building a new vertical circulation core provides the required fire egress and circulation upgrade for the theatre spaces to function as an ‘ecosystem’.

The eaves height of the new addition over the stage has been set to 780mm above the existing theatre auditorium ridge line to accommodate a functional stage overrun including stage lighting bars, stage bridge access and mechanical plant room. The form of the stage overrun has been shaped to complement the existing triangular facade facing Marian Street and the new balcony. In addition this will be screened by existing trees in the park.

A new balcony has been located at the park facing facade directly accessible from the theatre foyer.

The balcony is comprised of a variety of obtuse angles repeated in the veranda plan both positively and negatively, to replicate the ‘prow’ form of the existing Marian Street Theatre facade and is intended to build up a ‘family’ of angled forms to unite the old and new. The angled plan shapes set up a series of sub-spaces and vantage points for small groups to form naturally. The shapes are distinctive, and will serve to give an identity to the new Marian Street Theatre.

A new entry awning is also modelled to match as close as possible to the existing awning footprint”.

Image 1. Artist’s impression of the refurbished Theatre viewed from Marian Street.

Cost Estimates

An independent Quantity Surveyor (QS) has provided cost estimates for a design working within the Council resolved $10.5m budget (now escalated to $11.2m in 2019 dollars) as well as a cost estimate for the (extended) masterplan design that exceeds the current budget costing approximately $16.3m.

The project has been presented a number of times to a community reference group, briefings of Mayor & Councillors, and General Manager & Directors. Mid-way through the design process, at completion of ‘Concept Design’, QS were instructed to run a cost estimate using new information gained from more in depth studies including all engineering findings (structural, mechanical, electrical, hydrology, and civil). The building was found to be in considerably worse shape than suggested in the cost plan of $10.5m that was adopted for renovation works. The findings of the Concept Design Report were presented to the Mayor, Councillors, General Manager & Directors in October 2019. A budget overrun, largely due to the cost of upgrading infrastructure, of at least $13.7m was reported. Councillors were made aware at that time that design and documentation was continuing with a view to lodging a DA in early 2020.

Full documentation of the renovation works is now complete and the DA is ready to be lodged. The design has extended beyond the original scope (with input from the aforementioned parties) and is now considered to be in the realm of $5m over the original adopted budget. The design and cost estimate were presented to Councillors at the annual offsite workshop with the General Manager and Directors on 5 February 2020. The cost estimate is included in Confidential Attachment A2.

Following the 5 February 2020 meeting with Councillors, NS Group were commissioned to conduct an independent review of the MST project and present their findings and recommendations to the Major Project Steering Committee (MPSC).

current status

Due to the increase in cost of the project beyond the resolved budget, included in this OMC report is a design and associated cost plan representing what could be achieved for the (escalated) $11.2m budget. The design and cost plan represent a staged development whereby Council could open the facility but parts of the building would either be closed or only superficially renovated. The DA can request permission for a ‘Condition of Consent’ to allow Occupation Certificate (OC) for part of the application (staged development) should additional funds not be available by the time documentation for construction is required. See the ‘Staged’ design at Attachment A3 and the associated cost plan at Confidential Attachment A4.

While a conceptual ‘Staged Development’ plan has been created and costed, it does not need to be included in the DA. Staged development (partial OC) is allowed if all BCA requirements and relevant regulations can be met (the building is safe and accessible).

It is proposed, that during the assessment period, the Business Case is revisited to reflect both the $11.2m and the extended masterplan $16+m Options. This will give Council additional information by which to make a decision on the preferred construction budget and also time to consider additional funding sources (see below). It should be noted that this review has already been commissioned and is underway.

Prior to commencing detailed design for construction (which would not begin until after development consent is achieved) a construction budget must be determined. The construction documentation can then be tailored to delivery within the set budget.

Following the independent review of the project by NS Group, at their meeting on 27 March 2020 the MPSC made the following recommendations:

a) That MPSC approves reporting to Council recommending lodging the DA. The report is to contain an alternate design that can be delivered for the original budget should additional funds not be available to deliver the whole masterplan;

b) That during the DA assessment period, the MST Business Case is updated to study the Staged Development currently valued at some $11.2m budget as well as the holistic extended masterplan considered to cost some $16.3m.

c) That the MPAC is updated on the project prior to reporting to Council.

The Major Project Advisory Committee (MPAC) have reviewed the project and have submitted their report (11 April 2020) for the MPSC to review thereby satisfying the MPSC recommendation (c) above. This MPAC report is being provided to Councillors separately from the business paper.

Funding source

Beyond funding of the project from future asset sales, the extended masterplan offers rejuvenation and extension of Selkirk Park which is considered to offer open space improvements that qualify for s.7.11 funds (formerly s.94). This additional funding source is to be further explored and quantified during the DA assessment period. External landscape works are estimated to cost some $1.2m over the $11.2m staged internal works but are fully included in the extended masterplan $16+m cost estimate.

Project plan AND KEY DATES

Key Activities

Target Date

Status

Site Investigation Report

Nov 2018

Completed Nov 2018

Feasibility & (Draft) Business Case

Feb 2019

Completed March 2019

Council commits to preferred development Option and $10.5m budget

Mar 2019

Resolution at the OMC of 12 March 2019

Tender and commence DA Documentation

Apr 2019

Tender process was run and DA documentation commenced July 2019

Lodge DA

Nov 2019

Due to the extended DA notification period over Xmas and additional design complexities (such as fire engineering), the DA was ready for lodgement at the end of January 2020.

Receive Development Consent

Aug 2020

Unlikely depending on the lodgement date and the length of the DA assessment

Detailed Design to CC

Jan 2021

Pending DA assessment period

Tender and award contract for construction

Mar 2021

TBA

Commence construction

May 2021

TBA

integrated planning and reporting

Community, people and culture

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective	Delivery Program Term Achievement	Operational Plan Task
C1 - Community Wellbeing	C1.1 An equitable and inclusive community that cares and provides for its members.	Our community facilities are accessible and function as cultural hubs to attract a range of users
C2 - Cultural Diversity and Creativity	C2.1 A harmonious community that respects, appreciates, celebrates and learns from each other and values our evolving cultural identity.	Ku-ring-gai's rich cultural diversity and creativity is celebrated through programs and events.
C4 - Healthy Lifestyles	C4.1 A community that embraces healthier lifestyle choices and practices.	A range of cultural, recreational and leisure facilities and activities are available to encourage social interaction and stimulate everyday wellbeing.
P8 Improving the standard of our infrastructure	P8.1 An improved standard of infrastructure that meets the community’s service level standards and Council’s obligations as the custodian of our community assets.	Our public infrastructure and assets are planned, managed and funded to meet community expectations, defined levels of service and address inter-generational equity.
		Programs for infrastructure and asset maintenance management are delivered in accordance with the adopted Asset Management Strategy and Plans.

Governance Matters

The Council resolution of 8 May 2018 placed the renewal of the Marian Street Theatre in the Long Term Financial Plan. Resolution from the OMC of 26 June 2018 confirmed Councils resolve to re-establish the theatre.

Risk Management

Key risks are summarised as follows:

Risk 1 – No ‘asset sale’ funds are available for construction of the project

There is a risk to Council’s broader financial position if asset sales are not achieved to fund the project as currently reflected in Council’s Long Term Financial Plan and Operational Program and Delivery Plan.

Risk 2 – The final design exceeds the budget

At the time of achieving development consent, a budget for renovation works is required to be finalised whether it is for a staged implementation or to execute the holistic (extended) master plan. Construction documentation is then to be actively managed through progressive cost estimates to ensure the project stays within budget. Should tenders for construction exceed the budget a report outlining options would be submitted to the Council of the day requesting amendments to the design or additional funding.

Risk 3 – Delay in lodgement of the DA (February 2020) may have jeopardised the possibility of commencing construction works by mid- 2021

Additional reporting required of this project prior to lodging the DA may have already jeopardised the Council resolution to commence construction works by June 2021.

Risk 4 – Council reputation if the project is not delivered

Council’s reputation is not at risk from its decision to proceed with the project, rather, there is a reputational risk if the project is not delivered.

Financial Considerations

Council resolved on 8 May 2018 to undertake the renewal of Marian Street theatre and to allocate funds to the project in the long term financial plan (LTFP). As per the resolution, the project is to be funded by asset sales.

A project account (cost centre) has been established. Reserve funds have been drawn down to progress the design phase to achieve consent for development (Development Application). However, there is currently no (asset) funding source identified (isolated or quarantined) for this project.

Subject to asset sales proceeding, Council can make a decision about the timing and budget for construction at the time of achieving development consent (approved DA). However, it should be noted that

Council’s draft budget for 2020/21 is the subject of a separate report to this Council meeting and includes funding for this project.

The proposed capital budget for refurbishment of the Marian Street Theatre is estimated at $16.2 million phased over two years funded from the following sources: asset sales $14.8 million, general revenue $1.4 million . This is an increase of $5.7 million from the approved budget of $10.5 million. As mentioned previously in this report, there may be an opportunity to provide funding from s.7.11 and the amount required from asset sales.

Social Considerations

The proposal will achieve the following positive social and economic outcomes:

· provide new and improved creative, performance and community spaces, as well as (possibly) a new cafe for use by the broader community;

· provide improved accessibility for people with disabilities and building upgrades in line with current BCA, access and fire safety standards;

· provide improvements to the public open space known as Selkirk Park; and

· ensure the ongoing use of the Marian Street Theatre, which is currently vacant and disused.

The provision of additional community infrastructure, providing both indoor and outdoor community spaces will ensure that the Marian Street Theatre becomes a vibrant and popular place to meet and recreate for all ages.

Environmental Considerations

There are no environmental issues arising from this report. All environmental impacts have been considered and will be assessed as part of the DA/development consent process.

Community Consultation

Consultation with the community has occurred on numerous occasions with regard to the provision of live theatre in Ku-ring-gai.

Specific to this project, Council established a Marian Street Theatre Committee Reference Group. The reference group consists of Councillors, members of the Save Marian Street Theatre Committee, theatre and arts cultural specialists, and members of the community. This committee has an ongoing role of informing the direction and outcomes of the rejuvenated theatre. The reference group have met on the following occasions:

· 14 November 2018;

· 06 February 2019;

· 10 July 2019; and

· 09 October 2019.

An event day was also held in Selkirk Park on Sunday, 17 November 2019 to inform the broader community of progress with design of the project.

Further community consultation will be undertaken as part of due process through public notification of the DA.

Internal Consultation

GMD is the project owner and sponsor of the project.

The Major Projects Steering Committee and Major Project Advisory Committee have been informed and have had input into advancement of the project.

Summary

Full DA documentation of the renovation works is now complete and the DA is ready to be lodged. The design has extended beyond the original scope and is now considered to be in the realm of $5m over the original budget. Due to the increase in cost of the project, included in this report is a design and associated cost plan representing the (escalated) original $11.2m budget. The design represents a staged development whereby Council could open the facility but parts of the building would either be closed or only superficially renovated. The DA can request a ‘Condition of Consent’ to allow Occupation Certificate (OC) for part of the application (staged development – partial OC) should additional funds not be available by the time documentation for construction is required.

Prior to commencing detailed design for construction (which would not begin until after development consent is achieved) a budget must be determined. The construction documentation can then be tailored to delivery within the set budget.

It is proposed, that during the DA assessment period, the Business Case is revisited to reflect both the $11.2m and the (extended) master plan ($16+m) Options. This will provide Council with additional information by which to make a decision on the construction budget and also allow time to consider potential additional funding sources.

Recommendation:

A. That Council approve the (extended) masterplan design to be used for the Development Application with an understanding that a lesser budget could deliver part of the design through a staged development.

B. That Council note that during the DA assessment period the MST Business Case will be updated to study the (escalated) $11.2m budget as well as the holistic (extended) masterplan considered to cost some $16.3m.

Dean Payne

Project Leader – Strategy & Environment

Andrew Watson

Director Strategy & Environment

Attachments:	A1⇩	MST DA Design Report	2020/052837
	A2	MST Extended Masterplan Cost Estimate	Confidential
	A3⇩	MST Staged Development Architecture Drawings	2020/102159
	A4	MST Staged Development Cost Plan	Confidential

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 28 April 2020	GB.16 / 622

Item GB.16	S08410

COVID-19 Pandemic Impacts on Council

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

purpose of report:	To provide Council with an update on the impacts of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

background:	The COVID-19 Pandemic has had a profound impact on Council and the community. Council has taken swift and decisive action to address health and safety matters for staff and the community, and to transform work practices to enable most services to continue on a fully operational basis.

comments:	The General Manager formed a Crisis Management Team comprising Directors and select managers to guide Council’s response to the evolving pandemic. Decisions have been guided by information from state and federal government and relevant agencies. Social distancing and other measures have been introduced to manage the possible health impacts on staff and the community for matters within Council’s control.

recommendation:	A. That Council endorse the actions outlined in this report and further endorse the General Manager in taking future action as necessary to manage the impacts of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Council and the community. B. That Council authorise the allocation of $100,000 funding for a COVID-19 Community Organisation Hardship and Assistance Grant Program.

Purpose of Report

To provide Council with an update on the impacts of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Background

The COVID-19 Pandemic has had a profound impact on Council and the community. Council has taken swift and decisive action to address health and safety matters for staff and the community, and to transform work practices to enable most services to continue on a fully operational basis.

Comments

In early February 2020, Council activated its Crisis Management and Business Continuity Plan and Pandemic Procedure.

Since this time, the Crisis Management Team (CMT), which is comprised of the General Manager, Directors and select managers has been meeting regularly to guide Council’s response to the evolving pandemic.

Below is an update on the key measures undertaken to date.

Status of Services and Facilities

To address social distancing requirements, many of Council’s people facing services and facilities have been closed. Most other services provided by Council are continuing on a fully operational basis with Councillors and staff working from home where possible. An update on the status of Council services and facilities, as of Friday 10 April, is provided below.

Service / Facility	Current Status
CIVIC DEPARTMENT
Council Meetings and Public Forums	The meeting at 7pm Tuesday 28 April 2020 will be held online. Council meetings are physically closed to the public until further notice but can be viewed on the webcast. Public Forums are no longer being held in the Council Chambers as an interim measure. The public can still address Council through audio and audio-visual recordings (maximum 3 minutes) or written submissions to Councillors.
GM and Mayor’s Office	Fully operational
Councillors	Fully operational
Legal	Fully operational
Major Projects	Fully operational
COMMUNITY DEPARTMENT
Customer Service Centre	The Council’s over-the-counter customer service centre is temporarily closed to the public. Council continues to serve customers and residents through a number of channels including the call centre, live chat and online services. If there is a service unable to be provided online or over the phone, individual arrangements are made with the customer.
Communications	Fully operational
Vacation Care	Fully operational from Tuesday 14 April to Friday 24 April
Youth Centres	Drop-in centres closed, however staff have developed online resources and are communicating regularly with young people.
Thomas Carlyle Childcare centre	Open
Family Day Care	Open
Active Ku-ring-gai classes	Closed, however online classes have been developed
Community Halls and Meeting Rooms	Closed to the public with two licenced preschools operating from Roseville and West Lindfield.
Libraries	All branches closed to the public with Home Library Service and Libraribus continuing to operate. Extensive on-line services are available.
Art Centre	Closed
Wildflower Garden and Visitor Centre	Visitor’s Centre at the Wildflower Garden is closed to the public however the gardens remain open and some staff are on-site
Indoor spaces at St Ives Showground	Closed
Outdoor spaces at St Ives Showground	Open
Citizenship Ceremonies	Postponed
Events	Postponed
DEVELOPMENT AND REGULATION DEPARTMENT
Compliance and Regulation	Fully operational
Development Assessment	Fully operational - Face to face meetings between the public and the Duty Planning officer are suspended and replaced by phone calls.
STRATEGY AND ENVIRONMENT DEPARTMENT
Environment & Sustainability	Mostly operational – sustainability events and workshops are postponed.
Property Management	Fully operational
Urban Heritage & Planning	Fully operational
Special projects	Fully operational
OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT
Roads, footpaths drains	Fully operational
Traffic Management	Fully operational
Council Building Maintenance & Operations	Fully operational
Parks, Oval & Bushland	Mostly operational
- Ovals	Closed for organised sport and fitness groups with more than 2 participants. Ovals remain open to the general public.
- Playgrounds and Outdoor Fitness Equipment	Closed
- Dog off leash areas	Open
Tennis Courts	Closed
Golf Courses	Open
KFAC	Closed
Streetscape	Fully operational
Public Lighting	Fully operational
Fleet Management	Fully operational
Trade Waste	Fully operational
Domestic Waste	Fully operational
Projects	Fully operational
Design	Fully operational
Asset Management	Fully operational
Driveways	Fully operational
Tree Management	Fully operational
Sewer Maintenance	Fully operational
CORPORATE DEPARTMENT
Financial Management	Fully operational
Procurement	Fully operational
Governance & Corporate Strategy	Fully operational
Information Management	Fully operational
People & Culture	Fully operational

Other Activities to Support the Community

Council has been proactive in rapidly implementing changes to programs and service delivery to support the community during the pandemic.

Online Sustainability Events and Engagement

Notwithstanding that sustainability events and workshops are postponed, the Environment and Sustainability team have made significant progress towards moving events online. Engagement across all social media channels is up and a fully online What’s-on Calendar will be released shortly. Staff are utilising Facebook Live and Zoom to communicate with residents, promote educational and interesting content and ensure our community remained engaged.

Better Business Partnerships

Better Business Partnerships have reached out to the accredited business and played a key role in disseminating relevant information to local small business dealing with the impacts of Covid-19. A Supporting Better Business Partnerships Facebook page has been created to provide a network for business owners to communicate challenges faced by small business and potential solutions and opportunities, 100 local businesses have joined the Facebook page already. BBP are positioning themselves as a support network for business throughout the Covid-19 era and preparing to support business throughout the recovery phase.

Life Online

Council is continuing to serve residents during the COVID-19 pandemic with the Life Online web page at www.kmc.nsw.gov.au. Life Online allows residents to continue doing business with Council such as lodging permit applications, waste requests, requesting planning certificates, registering pets and asking for repairs to roads and other Council assets.

Other features of Life Online include group therapy sessions with a psychologist; story time readings for children by Mayor Jennifer Anderson, online exercise classes, a range of support for small businesses and free access to the Council’s e-library of music, magazines, books and movies. Life Online will help keep people supported and connected with both Council and others in the community.

Council also has a chat facility on its website allowing residents to talk online to a customer service officer on weekdays between 8.30am and 5pm.

Disability Services

Council staff have facilitated weekly music therapy classes via Zoom for people with disabilities who are unable to leave their homes. Staff have also worked with the Resilience Centre in developing COVID-19 resilience workshops via Zoom for carers and seniors, and Zoom Exploring Art Therapy programs with Studio Artes.

Staff have been in regular contact via Zoom or email with disability groups in the community to discuss specific needs and offer assistance, and communicate regularly with schools with students with disabilities to discuss their needs and offer support.

Seniors Services

The following information about services available for seniors has been emailed and posted directly to seniors, added to Council’s webpage, and distributed to pharmacies and supermarkets:

· Ku-ring-gai Neighbourhood Centre for ‘shop by list’ and deliver to door

· Community Transport for pick-up and delivery of pharmacy prescriptions and spectacles prescriptions

· Meals on Wheels

· Lifeline for emergency food and essentials packages

· The Home Library Service

· Carer support options offered by Northern Sydney Local Health District Carer Support Services

· Ku-ring-gai Neighbourhood Centre and Lifeline for regular social contact by phone with volunteers

Seniors have also been provided with direct links to:

· Council’s Life Online initiative

· Videos of seniors exercises and Qi Gong

· Meditation sessions run by Petrea King

· Weekly Resilience Workshops for seniors

· Assistance for seniors to connect on-line

· Scam awareness

Youth Services

· Regular Hornsby Ku-ring-gai Youth Network Meetings via ZOOM

· Planning for an online Mental Health Youth Forum in partnership with schools and the Northern Sydney Primary Health Network

· Online School Holiday activities including cooking video and trivia questions in partnership with Willoughby City Council

· Continued publication of monthly e-news promoting online support services for young people and parents

· Continued Facebook engagement, including drop-in and check-in sessions with youth workers 3 afternoons a week.

· Participating in Online Accidental Counsellor Training through LifeLine

· Researching planning for online professional development opportunities for community and youth workers

· Planning Online Games Night for young people through the Discord App

· Developing a Network and Partnership Group with local Councils including North Sydney, Ryde, Lane Cove and Willoughby Councils to collaborate and respond to emerging needs

· Participating in online networks with Hornsby Ku-ring-gai Domestic Violence Network, Community Drug Action Team and Headspace Consortium meeting

Survey to Community Organisations

Council staff have developed a survey that has been sent to over 350 community organisations to assist in identifying emerging issues, and to document gaps in service delivery associated with COVID-19. This survey will help ensure support services for vulnerable community members are maintained, by identifying opportunities to link service providers and community during this difficult time.

Library Services

The Libraribus and Home Library Service continues to operate with a significant increase in requests for services.

The Children's Services team has developed new initiatives in promoting literacy digitally through digital story-time sessions, lego games and various other activities providing both educational and entertainment for the community.

Library membership and E-services have also increased as people make use of the wide range of online resources available.

Council’s Parking Rangers are assisting the library staff in providing library materials to the community by delivering reserved books to local residents. Over 1,000 books have been be delivered over the past few weeks.

COVID-19 Community Organisation Hardship and Assistance Grant Program

It is recommended that Council develop a COVID-19 Community Organisation Hardship and Assistance Grant Program that would provide a total of $100,000 grant funding to community groups in need of emergency funding.

This grant program aims to provide ‘quick response’ financial assistance to eligible community organisations that are experiencing financial hardship as a result of COVID-19 related service disruptions, seeking to establish alternate service delivery models for business continuity, or seeking to provide support services to vulnerable residents impacted by COVID-19.

In order to ensure a quick response in providing funding to these groups, it is recommended that the program be advertised and assessed within four weeks. The application process will be designed so that it is simple for organisations to complete.

Key elements of the proposed grant program are outlined below.

Eligible organisations:

· Community organisations including community groups, arts/cultural groups and sporting groups in the community that have been directly impacted by COVID-19

· Community organisations that are based in the Ku-ring-gai LGA and/or can demonstrate that the proposed funding will substantially benefit Ku-ring-gai residents

Ineligible organisations:

· Organisations with sufficient funding support from other levels of government

· For-profit organisations

· Government departments and agencies

· Political groups

· Unincorporated community groups.

· Individuals

Eligible Projects:

· Direct financial assistance to community organisations experiencing hardship due to the impacts of COVID-19

· Operational projects that support community organisations to continue the delivery of services via alternate service delivery models

· Projects that support the delivery of services to vulnerable residents impacted by COVID-19

Ineligible projects:

· Projects that cannot commence by 30 June 2020

· Projects with sufficient funding support from other levels of government

· Projects that have a commercial purpose

· Capital expenditure unless directly related to the project or hardship claim

· Personal expenses

Funding Limits:

· Eligible organisations may receive a grant of up to $5,000, subject to the number of applications received

· To ensure that the assessment process is quick and funding can be provided without delay, grants awarded to applicants will be reduced if the recommended applications require more funding than is available

Assessment

· A selection panel comprised of key staff across Council would assess the applications according to the grants criteria. In order to avoid delays it is recommended that the grants be distributed to the community organisations immediately without reporting back to Council.

Other Conditions

· Grant funded projects will be expected to meet the usual conditions for community grants including acquittal processes and acknowledgment of Council.

Staffing Arrangements

Ensuring the ongoing health, safety and well-being of all Council employees is of critical importance in responding to the COVID-19 pandemic.

The following measures have been implemented in order to mitigate identified risks and/or address concerns relevant to the workforce:

· Staff are provided with regular updates on decisions made by the CMT together with useful COVID-19 resources and information from Council’s Employee Assistance Provider.

· Hand sanitiser has been installed at the entry and exit points of all Council workplaces.

· Staff working onsite have been provided with spray sanitser and paper towel for use at their workstations.

· Staff working in key support services have been split into different locations throughout Council buildings.

· Where possible, staff are working remotely in order to facilitate social distancing guidelines by reducing the number of people in the workplace.

· All non-essential internal and external meetings/conferences/workshops and training courses have been cancelled or postponed or will be delivered in a remote/virtual format.

· P2/N95 Face Masks have been made available to staff in front facing roles that have contact with the community or customers. (Note: whilst the wearing of face masks isn’t recommended by Safework NSW or NSW Health as necessary personal protective equipment, Council has provided masks for staff to wear if it will help them feel less anxious and more comfortable)

From an industrial perspective, LGNSW and the relevant staff unions have agreed to a unified approach to staffing matters during COVID-19 Pandemic, which have been documented in a ‘Joint Statement’ and a new temporary Award titled ‘Local Government (COVID-19) Splinter Award’.

Council is supporting staff and acting in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Joint Statement and ‘Local Government (COVID-19) Splinter Award’. A summary of key arrangements is provided below.

· Work flexibility: Flexible working arrangements will be made available to staff which will be managed in accordance with the Local Government (State) Award.

· Where a staff member is unable to work due to illness associated with COVID-19: Access to sick leave will be provided in the first instance and other leave options will be made available to staff who have exhausted their sick leave allocation.

· Where a staff member is not sick but excluded from the workplace due to COVID-19 isolation requirements: Working from home arrangements (undertaking substantive or alternate duties) will be looked at as a first option and where this is not possible, paid special leave will be offered for the period of the required isolation.

· Where a staff member is unable to work due to caring responsibilities (schools or caring facilities closed) or transport disruption associated with COVID-19: Up to 2 weeks paid special leave will be offered and other accrued entitlements will be available following this.

· Where the workplace is closed due to COVID-19: Working from home or an alternate location undertaking substantive or alternate duties will be looked at as a first option. Where this is not possible, three stages of temporary stand down provisions will be afforded to permanent staff as follows:

o Stage 1: Paid special leave for a period of up to 4 weeks at the ordinary rate of pay

o Stage 2: Paid Job Retention Allowance for a period of up to 3 months at an Award base rate which can be topped up with accrued leave entitlements

o Stage 3: Leave without pay.

· Special provisions for staff confirmed as being ‘regular’ casuals: Up to 2 weeks paid special leave will be offered to a ‘regular casual’ where they are required to isolate.

Council is committed to ensuring that staff continue to have meaningful and productive work during this challenging time. To date, the departments that have been directly affected by the pandemic have been able to effectively respond by redirecting and refocusing their resources in order to manage fluctuating demands. Some examples are provided below:

· While playgrounds and tennis courts have been closed and ovals are not being used by organised sport, parks and sports fields facilities are in high demand from the general public and groups of two for exercise. In response to this, the work of maintenance staff has been refocused to include the installation and maintenance of COVID-19 related measures (e.g. signage) however both reactive and proactive maintenance is continuing at all facilities.

· The Community department, where possible, has continued to provide services via alternate means from facilities that have been closed. The customer service and call centre staff continue to offer all services online and provision has been made for any residents who require meetings with staff. The library staff are providing deliveries to residents with the Libraribus and through the Home Library service, and Council Rangers have been delivering reserved library materials to library customers. Library staff have also been developing YouTube programs for craft and story time and have established a “help desk” to assist the increasing number of people now accessing online and streaming services, which in some instances, have seen up to a 40% increase. Library staff are also undertaking a full stocktake of materials and continue to process materials returned through the after hours return chutes at each branch.

· Community Development staff have continued to offer online services and have been regularly communicating with residents in the community and working closely with community support groups such as the Ku-ring-gai Neighourhood Centre, Meals on Wheels and Community Transport (see Other Services to Support the Community section within this report for more detail).The Wildflower Garden remains open to the public, however the Visitor’s Centre and other facilities are closed. Events staff have developed online programs including the “Wild at Home” program that encourages nature play at home using materials from the natural environment and recycled items. Staff also developed an Anzac Day virtual educational program with participation from local schools.

· Where feasible a number of Community staff are working from home. Local Studies library staff for example, are working from home on the “Amplify” oral history project in conjunction with the State Library of NSW, and library cataloguers and other administration staff are able to undertake their usual work from home. Staff are regularly using Zoom to ensure regular communications between staff and their supervisors.

Financial Impacts

For the purpose of estimating the financial impacts, it has been assumed that the COVID-19 Pandemic will impact on Council and the community for a period of six months. It is early days and the impacts are likely to vary from the estimates provided below. Updates will be provided to Council at appropriate intervals.

The financial impacts have been identified on a net cost basis, assuming that variable costs have been reduced where possible. However, it should be noted that while income in many cases will be reduced significantly, only marginal reductions in costs can be achieved due to the assumed short term nature of the disruption.

Below is some detailed information about possible impacts on leases and licences and children’s services. Following is a summary of estimated financial impacts on all services.

Leases and Licences

Negotiations regarding leases and licences for community groups, sporting groups, child care centres, commercial uses, and residential tenancies will be considered on a case by case basis.

In the case of community leases and licences, access and use of the premises will be the major consideration in assessing the level of rebate. Where a commercial rent is payable, applications for rent relief or rent deferment due to hardship will need to be substantiated, and consider a range of measures such as impact on revenue, net profit, level of government subsidy received under the stimulus package as well as other measures mandated by federal and state governments.

Negotiations about leases and licences for community and commercial buildings will be negotiated according to laws, lease requirements, and codes of conduct, which are currently subject to change. These arrangements will be reported separately to Council for approval.

On 8 April following the recent cabinet meetings, the Prime Minister made an announcement regarding a mandatory code of conduct in relation to commercial leases. A summary is provided below.

Overarching principles of the Code of Conduct:

· Tenants and landlords to agree on a bespoke arrangement on appropriate, temporary measures for assistance.

· Landlords and tenants to negotiate in good faith, act openly, honestly and transparently and provide sufficient and accurate information.

· Arrangements to be proportionate to revenue, expenses and profitability.

· The risk of default is borne by the landlord and the landlord should not seek to permanently mitigate risk through any negotiations.

· Negotiations to be considered on a case by case basis considering financial hardship, whether the tenant’s lease has expired or is soon to expire.

· Leases may be on holdover and discussions should contemplate this in formulating temporary arrangements.

Leasing principles:

· Landlord must not terminate leases due to non-payment (due COVID-19 related reduction in revenue).

· Tenants must remain committed to the terms of the lease.

· Landlords must offer tenants proportionate reductions in rent payable in the form of waivers and deferrals (this is defined) of up to 100% of the amount ordinarily payable, on a case by case basis, based on the tenant’s reduction in trade during COVID 19 and the subsequent recovery (this is not defined).

· Rental waivers must constitute not less than 50% of the total reduction in rent payable (and should constitute a greater proportion where failure to do so would compromise the tenant’s capacity to fulfil their obligations under the lease agreement). Regard must also be given to the landlord’s capacity to provide such assistance.

· Rental deferrals must be amortised over the balance of the lease term or 24 months, whichever is greater unless otherwise agreed.

· Any reduction in statutory charges (eg land tax) or insurance will need to be passed on to the tenant in the appropriate proportion under the terms of the lease.

· A landlord should seek to share any benefit it receives due to a deferral of loan payments with tenants in a proportionate manner.

· Landlords should seek to waive outgoings for tenants unable to trade (any may contemplate reducing services in this circumstance).

· Repayment arrangements should occur over an extended period to avoid placing the tenant under undue financial burden. No repayment should commence until the earlier of the Government announcing the pandemic as having ended or the existing lease expiring, taking into consideration a reasonable recovery period.

· No interest to be charged on waived or deferred rent.

· Landlords must not draw on tenant’s security for non-payment of rent during the pandemic period and or subsequent recovery period.

· Tenants should be provided with an opportunity to extend its lease for an equivalent period of the rent waiver / deferral.

· Landlords to agree on a freeze on rent increases for the duration of the pandemic

· No penalty on tenants that reduce trading hours if hours are prescribed in the lease

Binding mediation:

· Mediation will take place where tenants and landlords cannot agree on suitable arrangements.

· Landlords and tenants must not use mediation to frustrate or prolong reaching an outcome.

Eligibility:

· Turn over under $50M

· Eligible for Job Keeper (i.e. a 30% reduction in turnover (year on year)

· Businesses over $50M turnover – this code should apply in spirit but appears to be more at discretion / by negotiation

· Start date for this would be 3rd April (Job keeper start date)

Children’s Services

· Thomas Carlyle Children’s Service

Further to the Commonwealth Government’s support for free childcare, the Premier of NSW has announced a $133 million childcare package which specifically targets Council operated child care centres. Under the proposed new childcare funding arrangements, the NSW State Government will match the balance of the funds offered by the Commonwealth for the next six months. It is not anticipated that Council will be required to subsidise the operation of the service during this period.

· Family Day Care

The recently announced $133 million childcare package by the NSW Government also includes family day care services operated by local government. Details of the level assistance provided by the NSW Government will be available during the middle of April 2020, and is expected to mirror the financial assistance arrangements offered to long day care.

· Vacation Care

Vacation Care (April 14 – April 24) – staff estimate $31,000 will be provided for the 2 week period through the COVID-19 childcare payments for essential workers.

Summary of Possible Financial Impacts

Due to the rapidly changing circumstances and other unknowns, the below estimates are ballpark in order to provide Council with an indication of the impact of COVID-19. Estimates have been rounded to the nearest $100,000.

· Revenue from the use of halls, facilities, sporting ovals, programs and events will reduce as most of these facilities will be closed and activities suspended due to COVID-19. Users will not be expected to pay for facilities or services that have been booked but are not able to be used.

o Net Financial impact $1.8m

· Fees for outdoor dining will be waived

o Net Financial impact $0.1m

· Fees for fire safety, food and other health premises inspections will be waived

o Net Financial impact $0.2m

· Trade Waste fees for suspension of service will be waived and there will be a further net income reduction due to a decrease in demand for the service

o Net Financial impact $0.2m

· Negotiations will be required for commercial arrangements including KFAC and leases and licences for community and commercial buildings. These arrangements are very uncertain at this stage.

o Net Financial impact approximately $1.5m

· Alternative payment arrangements (such as deferred payment) with our ratepayers, residents and businesses facing hardship will be offered where appropriate. Suppliers will be assisted by expediting the early payment of invoices.

o Financial impact – not material

· Income from parking and other fines will decrease due to reduced demand for parking

o Net Financial impact $0.8m

· Income from fees for development assessment and compliance will decrease due to reduced development activity

o Net Financial impact $0.9m

· Cost of proposed COVID-19 Community Organisation Hardship and Assistance Grant Program

o Net Financial impact $0.1m

Total Net Financial Impact for six months $5.6m

Funding to Offset Financial Impacts

The financial impacts of the COVID-19 Pandemic are very uncertain at this stage however are expected to be significant. If the cost impact was to be approximately $5.6m as estimated in this report for a six month period, around half would be in the 2019/20 financial year and half in the 2020/21 financial year.

LGNSW is lobbying the state and federal governments to support local government during the pandemic. It appears to have been successful in obtaining financial support for Council childcare operations. If further support is not forthcoming, impacts would need to be offset by Council’s own resources.

Council is in a sound financial position and well placed to be able to withstand this short term shock. Nevertheless, funds spent during the pandemic are funds that will not be available for future services and assets.

Options to fund the financial impacts of the pandemic include spending reserves and working funds. This is a reasonable approach in the short term however these funds would then need to be replenished in future years to ensure Council has adequate liquidity and funds in reserve against possible future shocks. Another option is to borrow funds, however unless the pandemic impacts are much worse than estimated and for a longer time period, this is unlikely to be necessary nor recommended. The most likely approach to fund the financial impacts will be to reduce spending on services and infrastructure by deferring or deleting programs and projects.

A review is being undertaken to identify programs and projects that may be deferred or deleted to offset the financial impacts and will be reported to Council as part of the quarterly review process.

integrated planning and reporting

Theme 6: Leadership and Governance

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

L2.1 Council rigorously manages its financial resources and assets to maximise delivery of services.

L2.1.2 Council’s financial services provide accurate, timely, open and honest advice to the community.

Manages financial performance to achieve targets as defined in the Long Term Financial Plan.

Governance Matters

A crisis management team has been established by the General Manager to guide the Council operations during the pandemic.

Risk Management

Council has actively managed the risk to staff and the community due to the pandemic.

Financial Considerations

The financial impacts of the COVID-19 Pandemic are very uncertain at this stage however are expected to be significant, possibly $5.6m over a six month period.

Social Considerations

Council has been proactive in rapidly changing programs and service delivery to support the community during the pandemic.

Environmental Considerations

The Environment and Sustainability team have made significant progress towards moving events online.

Community Consultation

Internal Consultation

All Departments have been actively involved in responding to the pandemic.

Summary

Council has actively managed the risk to staff and the community due to the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Decisions have been informed by advice from state and federal government and relevant agencies. Social distancing and other measures have been introduced to manage the possible health impacts on staff and the community for matters within Council’s control. Council has been proactive in rapidly implementing changes to programs and service delivery to support the community during the pandemic.

The financial impacts of the COVID-19 Pandemic are very uncertain at this stage however are expected to be significant, possibly $5.6m over a six month period. Council is in a sound financial position and well placed to be able to withstand this short term shock. Nevertheless, funds spent during the pandemic are funds that will not be available for future services and assets. A review is being undertaken to identify programs and projects that may be deferred or deleted to offset the financial impacts and will be reported to Council as part of the quarterly review process.

Recommendation:

B. That Council authorise the allocation of $100,000 funding for the COVID-19 Community Organisation Hardship and Assistance Grant Program.

Janice Bevan

Director Community

George Bounassif

Director Operations

David Marshall

Director Corporate

Michael Miocic

Director Development & Regulation

Andrew Watson

Director Strategy & Environment

John McKee

General Manager

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 28 April 2020	MM.1 / 38

Item MM.1	S11705

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 28 April 2020	MM.2 / 54

Item MM.2	S05102

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 28 April 2020	PT.1 / 57

Item PT.1	S07823

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 28 April 2020	GB.4 / 135

Item GB.4	CY00473/7

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 28 April 2020	GB.5 / 161

Item GB.5	CY00578/3-1

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 28 April 2020	GB.6 / 173

Item GB.6	FY00623/2
	7 April 2020

ffPURPOSE OF REPORT:	To present Council’s investment portfolio performance for March 2020.

background:	Council’s investments are reported monthly to Council in accordance with the Local Government Act 1993, the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 and Council’s Investment Policy.

comments:	The net return on investments for the financial year to March 2020 was $3,814,000, against a budget of $3,751,000 giving a YTD favourable variance of $63,000.

recommendation:	A. That the summary of investments performance for March 2020 be received and noted and; B. That the Certificate of the Responsible Accounting Officer be noted and report adopted.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 28 April 2020	GB.7 / 182

Item GB.7	FY00621/2

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 28 April 2020	GB.8 / 189

Item GB.8	RFT1-2020

Attachments:	A1	RFT1-2020 List of Submitters		Confidential
	A2	RFT1-2020 Tender Evaluation Report		Confidential

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 28 April 2020	GB.12 / 477

Item GB.12	S07823

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 28 April 2020	GB.15 / 616

Item GB.15	S12712-3

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 28 April 2020	NM.1 / 636

Item NM.1	S03211

Background Information:	A1⇩	Name plaque on house Narrelle	2020/101958
	A2⇩	Cover of Narrelle Book	2020/101961
	A3⇩	Narrelle letter - see page 3	2020/101963

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 28 April 2020	NM.2 / 643

Item NM.2	S12120