Agenda of Council Meeting - 20 February 2019

Council Meeting

20 February 2019

Item No: C02/19-11

Quarter 2 Performance Report on the 2018/19 Operational Plan and Budget Review Statement

Responsible Division: People & Performance

Officer: Director People & Performance

File Number: S-57-50

Community Strategic Plan Goal: Transparent and accountable leadership

Summary

The purpose of this report is to update Council and the community on the progress in implementing the activities in the Operational Plan 2018-19. This includes the Quarterly Budget Review Statement.

In total, 13% of key projects planned for the 2018/19 year have already been completed, with 78% on track for delivery throughout the year. 3% are currently on hold and it has been recommended that 2 projects be discontinued.

Recommendation

That Council:

1. Receive the Quarter Two Performance Report on the Operational Plan 2018/19; and

2. Approve the revised estimates of income and expenditure for 2018/19 contained in the Quarterly Budget Review Statement.

Report

The Operational Plan 2018-19 identifies the key projects planned for delivery throughout the year, as well as the associated budget. These projects are in direct response to the strategic goals and community vision contained in the Community Strategic Plan 2017-27. The Q2 Performance Report at Attachment 1 shows progress in implementing the planned activities over the October to December period.

During the quarter, a number of projects were completed including:

· Waste Management and Resource Recovery Strategy

· Community Participation Plan for Planning

· Library Modernisation Project

· Fraud Control Plan

The majority of other projects (54 of 69) are running on track for delivery throughout the 2018-19 year. Two projects are on hold. These are:

· Granville Town Centre Planning Strategy (On hold since Q1) – now to be incorporated into the Cumberland LEP work over the next 2 years.

· Design and acquisition for Merrylands Ring Road – On hold awaiting an LGA wide traffic study.

The Merrylands CBD Revitalisation Project (Design phase) progressed from an ‘on hold’ status in Q1 to ‘on track’ at the end of Q2.

2 projects require attention and are recommended to be discontinued:

· Create a buyer behaviour and training program

· Develop a Social and Disability Procurement Policy

Highlights from our service delivery through the quarter include:

· Council delivered two major events for over 19,000 people this quarter, ‘Christmas in the Gardens’ at the Auburn Botanic Gardens and a Diwali Street Festival in Wentworthville town centre.

· Renewal of local roads and footpaths increased this quarter from 1.38kms of roads to 4.6kms and from 0.54kms of footpaths to 6.50kms.

· Council’s Recreation Team were awarded ‘Local Council of the Year’ at the Sports NSW Awards.

· The annual Schools Sustainability Expo was held this quarter and attended by 602 students over two days at the Central Gardens.

· The Waste and Resource Strategy 2018-23 was finalised and adopted by Council.

· The Child Protection Policy was adopted by Council and continues to be implemented by staff.

· Council’s Protection Officers coordinated with officers from NSW Police, RID Squad and the RMS to target trucks using local load limited roads which resulted in 39 trucks being stopped.

· Council has completed the auto returns system at Wentworthville Library.

· Attendees for the Learn-to-Swim Program increased this quarter from 14,758 to 34,692 attendees.

· Council adopted the Customer Experience Strategy and implementation has commenced.

Confirmation Statement from the Director Finance & Governance

Provided in the attachments to this report are a report from the Director Finance & Governance and Quarterly Budget Review Statement (QBRS) which refer to the period ended 31 December 2018. The QBRS indicates that Council’s financial position is satisfactory for the actual year-to-date income and expenditure, as well as the original and proposed revised estimates of income and expenditure for the year.

A quarterly project summary report with revised budgets is also provided in the attachments for the three major capital works projects currently underway, being the Granville Multipurpose Centre, Merrylands CBD Major Drainage Upgrade and Cumberland Swim Centre Modernisation.

Community Engagement

The Quarter Two Performance Report will be placed on Council’s website.

Policy Implications

The Operational Plan 2018-19 will be amended to include changes in the report.

Risk Implications

There are no risk implications for Council associated with this report.

Financial Implications

This report recommends that Council approve the revised income and expenditure estimates.

CONCLUSION

During the second quarter for 2018-19 Council has made significant progress with 9% of Key Projects already complete and another 78% on track for completion. Council is well positioned to deliver the activities committed to in the Operational Plan 2018-19.

As at the end of the second quarter, Council’s year-end projected financial position remains satisfactory, with the estimated net operating result before capital projected to finish the year with a surplus of $5.018m.

The details of the changes to the fees and charges outlined in the report enable a clearer understanding and application of these fees by council and the community.

Attachments

1. Council report - Q2 Financial Analysis ⇩

2. Quarterly Budget Review Statement for the period 01/10/18 to 31/12/18 ⇩

3. Major Project Granville Multipurpose Centre ⇩

4. Major Project Merrylands CBD Drainage ⇩

5. Major Project Swim Centres ⇩

6. Quarter 2 Performance Report October - December 2018 ⇩

Council Meeting

20 February 2019

Item No: C02/19-13

Response to Notice of Motion - Childcare

Responsible Division: Community Development

Officer: Director Community Development

File Number: HC-02-01-2/06

Community Strategic Plan Goal: A safe accessible community

Summary

This report provides a response to the ‘Notice of Motion – Childcare’ resolved at the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on 19 December 2018 (Min. 384 - C12/18-271). The report includes an explanation of the recent changes to the early childhood education and care planning context and the implications for Council. A preliminary overview of education and care (childcare) in the Cumberland Local Government Area (LGA) is also provided based on available data.

Further analysis of education and care supply and demand is underway as part of the Cumberland Children and Families Strategy, which is due to be presented to Council by June 2019.

Recommendation

That Council receive and note the information contained in this report.

Report

At the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on 19 December 2018, Council considered the ‘Notice of Motion – Childcare’, and resolved that:

“1. The report on Childcare Services in Cumberland to be delivered in February 2019 also include an explanation of the regulations, policies and guidelines currently used by Council’s planning officers to assess development applications for childcare services including matters relating to evacuation, proximity to major traffic hubs, limits on childcare places, emergency exits and any other relevant matters.

2. Council request a workshop with the peak bodies of the Early Childhood Education and Care sector (including the Australian Childcare Alliance NSW, the Community Early Learning Australia and Family Day Care NSW) to better understand the deficiencies in planning controls and Councils inability to better regulate the provisions contained within the NSW State Environmental Planning Policy (Educational Establishments and Child Care Facilities) 2017.

3. Council write to the Federal Minister for Education requesting the release of weekly de-identifiable occupancy data since 2 July 2018 of all childcare services within the Cumberland LGA so that Council can properly assess actual demand and supply and provide a report to council with the data collected.

4. Once all reports are received and workshop undertaken, Council write to the NSW Premier, the NSW Minister for Planning, and the NSW Minister for Early Childhood Education, outlining its considered concerns about issues where Council has limited regulating powers and conditions with respect of childcare planning approvals.”

Background

The term ‘education and care’ refers to a number of different types of services. Education and care for children aged under 5 years includes Preschool, Long Day Care (LDC), Occasional Care (OCC) and Family Day Care (FDC). Education and care for primary school aged children primarily includes Out of School Hours Care (OOSH). OOSH services can operate before and after school care as well as vacation care. See Attachment 1 for a glossary of these types of care.

The National Law and Regulations set a national standard for children’s education and care across Australia, meaning the same law is applied to each state and territory. The Regulations support the Law by providing detail on operational requirements including the National Quality Standard (NQS), the process of assessment and rating of a service against the NQS and the minimum requirements relating to the operation of an education and care service. The Australian Children’s Education and Care Quality Authority (ACECQA) is an independent national authority that assists governments in implementing the National Quality Framework (NQF) for children's education and care (ACECQA, 2019).

Education and care services in NSW are regulated by The Early Childhood Education Directorate (ECED) within the NSW Department of Education.

State Environmental Planning Policy

The key policies governing the assessment of childcare facilities in Cumberland are the State Environmental Planning Policy (Educational Establishments and Child Care Facilities) 2017 (SEPP), the Child Care Planning Guideline (included under Attachment 2), as well as Council’s Development Control Plans (Auburn DCP 2010, Parramatta DCP 2011, and Holroyd DCP 2013).

Introduced by the NSW Government in 2017, the SEPP sought to create greater consistency in terms of provision of educational establishments, including childcare facilities. It also sought to streamline the development approvals process by defining certain types of development which are exempt or complying development. Similar to other State Environmental Planning Policies, this SEPP overrides Council’s DCPs where the provisions conflict.

Specifically, the SEPP introduced non-discretionary development standards, which means that a development application for a centre-based childcare facility cannot be refused by Council (or a consent authority) on the grounds of location, provision of indoor/outdoor space, site area and site dimensions, and the colour of building materials or shade structures.

The SEPP further specifies that the following matters in a council’s DCP do not apply:

· Numbers or groupings of children

· Ages and age ratios of children

· Operational or management plans and arrangements

· Demonstrated need for childcare services

· Proximity of a facility to other childcare and early education facilities

· Various other matters covered in the design principles, or regulatory requirements in Parts 2, 3 and 4 of the Child Care Planning Guideline.

What this means in practice is that councils are no longer able to take into consideration or regulate issues such as proposed childcare centre size, design, need, and location of centres, despite many of these issues being considered to be fundamental by Council in the effective planning for, and approval of, childcare facilities across Cumberland. Many of these aspects are considered to have a significant impact on the quality of childcare facilities, and significant concerns around safe evacuation of children from centres and locational issues (for example on major/arterial roads) have been identified by Council staff and industry representatives.

In April 2017, Council prepared and lodged a submission to the NSW Department of Planning and Environment highlighting numerous issues and concerns in relation to the Draft State Environmental Planning Policy (Educational Establishments and Childcare Facilities) 2017. A copy of Council’s submission is included under Attachment 3. Council also contributed to an additional submission prepared by Local Government NSW, which is included under Attachment 4.

Now in effect, there are four major implications for Council as a result of the SEPP and the Child Care Planning Guideline, including:

1. The ongoing ability of Council to impact on the design of education and care services to ensure they are meeting best practice for children who are residents of the LGA or accessing early education and care in the LGA.

2. The ongoing ability of Council to impact on the location of education and care services to ensure they are constructed where they are needed in the LGA.

3. The ongoing ability of Council to impact the type of education and care services that are developed to ensure they meet the needs of workers in and residents of the LGA.

4. The ongoing ability of Council to ensure that the development of education and care services do not impact on the amenity of residents.

Current Supply of Education and Care in Cumberland LGA

As part of the Cumberland Children and Families Strategy under development, Council has undertaken an initial investigation into the current provision of education and care services across the Cumberland LGA and its suburbs. This includes an audit and mapping of all centres approved and in operation (Sourced from the Australian Children’s Education & Care Quality Authority (ACECQA) national register, 16 January 2019).

It should be noted that there is limited data currently available that enables Council to properly assess local supply and demand of education and care services. To address this, Council is undertaking a survey with local service providers around service utilisation. Council has also written to the Minister for Education requesting the release of weekly de-identifiable occupancy data of all childcare services within the Cumberland LGA as per Part 3 of the Council resolution (Min. 384 - C12/18-271).

There are currently a total of 161 childcare services within the Cumberland LGA. This excludes occasional care, which is currently not monitored by ACECQA. Education and care in Cumberland is provided by a variety of approved providers including Council, for-profit, not for profit and community or church based services.

Across the Cumberland LGA, there are currently:

· 9 preschools

· 96 long day care centres

· 25 family day care schemes

· 31 out of school hours (OOSH) services.

Breakdown of Service Type by Suburb

Suburb	Preschool	Long Day Care	Family Day Care	OOSH	Total Number of Services
Auburn	1	13	9	3	26
Berala	0	0	1	1	2
Chester Hill	0	0	1	0	1
Girraween	0	3	0	2	5
Granville	1	8	0	1	10
Greystanes	0	10	0	6	16
Guildford	0	12	3	3	18
Holroyd	0	1	0	0	1
Homebush West	0	0	0	0	0
Lidcombe	1	8	0	2	11
Mays Hill	0	0	0	0	0
Merrylands	2	20	5	2	29
Merrylands West	0	1	0	0	1
Old Guildford	0	0	0	0	0
Pemulwuy	1	2	0	1	4
Pendle Hill	1	2	0	1	4
Prospect	0	0	0	0	0
Regents Park	0	2	1	1	4
Smithfield	0	0	0	0	0
Toongabbie	0	0	0	0	0
South Granville	0	1	3	0	4
South Wentworthville	0	4	1	0	5
Wentworthville	1	7	1	2	11
Westmead	1	2	0	6	9
Woodpark	0	0	0	0	0
Yennora	0	0	0	0	0
TOTAL					161

Current Place Capacity

The Cumberland LGA has a total capacity of 12,586 education and care places per day. 10,214 of these places are for children aged 0-5 years. This number is for places only and may not represent the number of children. There are often multiple children who can utilise one place across different days and hours or the same child may attend more than one service. There are 20,180 children aged 0-5 years and 20,366 children aged 5-11 years in Cumberland (ABS, Census 2016).

Within Cumberland, family day care has the largest capacity of the service types. Family day care schemes are approved for a set number of educators; this varies from scheme to scheme. Cumberland LGA’s 25 family day care schemes have the capacity to care for up to 5536 children aged 0-5 years old at any given time. Family day care educators may also care for school aged children, however, to estimate this capacity is complex due to many variables.

There are a total of 4350 places at long day care centres and 328 places at preschools within the Cumberland LGA. Long day care services, who cater for 3-5 year olds, also deliver a preschool program to support the transition to school.

In the form of before school care, after school care and/or vacation care, OOSH services in Cumberland offer a total of 2372 places. Refer to the Chart 1 for ‘Total Place Capacity by Service Type.’

Snapshot of Council Owned and Operated Education and Care Services

Council directly operates a range education and care services included within the above service breakdowns, these include:

Service	Suburb	Age of Children	Service Type	Places
Auburn Long Day Care Centre	Auburn	0-5	Long day care	48
Frances Fisk Child Care Centre	Granville	0-5	Long day care	40
*Friend Park Children’s Centre	Wentworthville	0-5	Long day care	22
Guildford West Children’s Centre	Guildford West	0-5	Long day care	48
Holroyd Children’s Centre Banksia Babes	Merrylands	0-3	Long day care	30
Holroyd Children’s Centre Gumnut Grove	Merrylands	3-5	Long day care	45
Pemulwuy Children’s Centre	Pemulwuy	0-5	Long day care	65
Wenty Children’s Centre	Greystanes	0-5	Long day care	48
The Sometime Centre	Merrylands	0-5	Occasional Care	30
Cumberland Council Family Day	Merrylands	0-13	Family Day Care	75 educators
Guildford West OOSH	Guildford West	Primary school age	Out of School Hours Care	120
**Parramatta West OOSH	Parramatta West	Primary school age	Out of School Hours Care	120
Pemulwuy OOSH	Pemulwuy	Primary school age	Out of School Hours Care	60
Pendle Hill OOSH	Pendle Hill	Primary school age	Out of School Hours Care	120
Ringrose OOSH	Greystanes	Primary school age	Out of School Hours Care	120
Sherwood Grange OOSH	Merrylands	Primary school age	Out of School Hours Care	120
Widemere OOSH	Greystanes	Primary school age	Out of School Hours Care	45

* Friend Park Children’s Centre is currently closed for renovation. Children previously attending the service were transitioned into Council’s other education and care services.

**Parramatta West OOSH is located just outside the Cumberland LGA boundary. This service, as with many other services outside the LGA parameters, continues to service the children and families of Cumberland.

Considering Service Quality

There are many factors families consider when selecting education and care for their child. Service quality can be a major consideration which ultimately impacts utilisation. Education and care services are periodically assessed and rated against 7 quality areas of the National Quality Standard. Possible ratings results are:

· Excellent - this rating can only be awarded by application

· Exceeding National Quality Standard

· Meeting National Quality Standard

· Working Towards National Quality Standard

· Significant Improvement required - the regulatory authority will take immediate action.

Table 3: Assessment and Ratings Results Comparing Cumberland and NSW

Rating	Council Operated Services	Council %	All Education and Care Services in Cumberland	Cumberland %	All Education and Care Services in NSW	NSW %
Excellent	0	0%	0	0%	16	0.3%
Exceeding National Quality Standard	10	62.5%	33	20.5%	1456	27%
Meeting National Quality Standard	5	31%	60	37.5%	2396	44%
Working Towards National Quality Standard	0	0%	57	35.5%	1310	24%
Significant Improvement required	0	0%	1	0.6%	7	0.1%
Not rated	1	6%	10	6%	260	5%
Total	16		161		5445

Notes:

1. Table 3 features information sourced on 16 January 2019.

2. Percentages have been rounded up to the closest 0.5% unless the result was less than 1 e.g. 0.3%.

3. ‘Council operated services’ are counted in the ‘All education and care services in Cumberland’ as well as ‘All education and care services in NSW’.

4. Council’s ‘Not rated’ centre is its occasional care service, which as stated above is outside of scope currently.

5. Parramatta West OOSH is a Council operated service which is rated as Exceeding the National Quality Standard but was excluded in Table 3 due to its location.

Ensuring supply meets demand (and that there is no oversupply) for education and care services in Cumberland is important but so too is ensuring that the provision of education and care in the LGA is high quality and meets the cultural and social needs of residents.

Further Work Underway

Council has engaged Cred Consulting to oversee a full analysis of the supply and demand for Cumberland’s education and care services as a component of the Cumberland Children and Families Strategy.

This includes a demographic analysis that considers the increasing population, the social and cultural diversity of the LGA and the impact on demand for a range of education and care services to support the population. As mentioned earlier, the availability of data to properly assess supply and demand is limited. Council is currently surveying local providers of education and care to ascertain further data. Local service providers have been invited to complete a survey that specifically seeks data about vacancies and waiting lists. Surveys can be completed online or via telephone prior to the end of February 2019.

Council is also delivering a range of broader community engagement activities to enable community input into the development of the Cumberland Children and Families Strategy. An additional survey for residents aims to capture the priorities and issues impacting children and families in Cumberland, with one section focusing on education and care; what factors are most important when selecting a service and which suburbs they believe there is a need for further childcare services. This survey also closes in February 2019.

Consistent with Part 2 of the Council resolution (Min. 384 - C12/18-271), Council will also host a workshop with peak bodies of the Education and Care sector and local service providers on Thursday 11 April 2019 from 10m to 1pm at the Holroyd Centre to present the findings of its supply and demand analysis. Council Planning and Children’s Services staff will participate in and provide input into the workshop.

This further work will provide a more comprehensive analysis into supply and demand for education and care services across the Cumberland LGA and its suburbs in 2019 and to 2036. It will also assist in the development of a rate of provision for education and care specific to Cumberland and continue to address how the SEPP and statutory requirements affect Council’s ability to plan for and manage local services. Upon completion of this further work, Council will be in an improved position to undertake further advocacy action as required by Part 4 of the Council resolution.

Community Engagement

The Cumberland Children and Families Strategy involves a number of stages of community engagement, which are summarised below:

1. Stage 1 (July to November 2018): Over 300 parents/carers and 330 children participated in a survey and engagement activities to share their ideas and provide input into how to improve Cumberland for children and families.

2. Stage 2 (December 2018 to February 2019): ‘Have your say’ online survey launched asking families in the community to prioritise issues and areas most important to them.

3. Stage 3 (March 2019): Children and families will be invited to focus groups to assist in the development of actions.

4. Stage 4 (April 2019): Internal and External Workshops will be held with Council staff and the Education and Care sector and local service providers to share findings and assist in the development of actions.

The Cumberland Children and Families Strategy, is due to be presented to Council by June 2019 for public exhibition. A further Councillor Briefing will be scheduled prior to this time.

Policy Implications

There are significant policy implications for all councils arising from the introduction of the SEPP, and the areas where the SEPP overrides the local planning controls of councils. Of particular concern to Cumberland are the locational, size, operational, and demonstrated need criteria which are overridden by the SEPP, and cannot currently be used as grounds for refusal for a Development Application. At present the key avenue to address these implications is through ongoing advocacy for change, continued dialogue with the childcare sector, and through the research and analysis currently being undertaken by Council staff.

Risk Implications

Whilst the risks to Council are considered minimal, given that the State legislation overrides Council’s development control plans, this report identifies broader risks for the community, both in terms of children’s safety and more generally about the potential for provision of poorer-quality childcare facilities enabled by the SEPP. Council has already taken action to address these broader risks through its previous advocacy actions, as well as the needs analysis work being undertaken by Council for the development of the Cumberland Children and Families Strategy.

Financial Implications

Existing budget allocation has been provided to prepare the Cumberland Children and Families Strategy in the 2018/19 approved budget. This includes all community engagement activities and the supply and demand study for education and care services in Cumberland.

CONCLUSION

Council has a role to plan for, regulate and deliver services for children and families in Cumberland. The new State Environmental Planning Policy (Educational Establishments and Child Care Facilities) 2017, however, limits the role of Council as a consent authority on influencing where new early childhood education and care services can be built in the LGA and the design of the services. For centre-based education and care facilities, the matters for consideration in the SEPP and the Child Care Planning Guideline take precedence over controls in Council’s DCPs. This impacts on how Council can direct the delivery of new services in the future.

A comprehensive analysis of childcare supply and demand is underway as part of the Cumberland Children and Families Strategy. This further work along with the planned workshop with peak bodies of the Education and Care sector and local service providers will inform further advocacy action that seeks to improve Council’s ability to plan for and manage local education and care services into the future.

Attachments

1. Glossary - Types of Education and Care ⇩

2. NSW Child Care Planning Guideline (2017) ⇩

3. Council's Submission to NSW Department of Planning - Draft Education and Childcare SEPP (April 2017) ⇩

4. LGNSW Submission to NSW Department of Planning - Draft Education and Childcare SEPP (April 2017) ⇩

Council Meeting

20 February 2019

Item No: C02/19-14

Planning Proposal Request - 300 Manchester Road, Auburn

Responsible Division: Environment & Planning

Officer: Director Environment & Planning

File Number: PP-1/2018

Community Strategic Plan Goal: A resilient built environment

Summary

This planning proposal seeks to rezone land at Manchester Road from IN1 General Industrial to a mix of IN1 General Industrial, R4 High Density Residential, RE1 Public Recreation, B1 Neighbourhood Centre, and B7 Business Park zones.

The proposal has been placed on preliminary public exhibition (pre-Gateway), and was reported to the Cumberland Local Planning Panel (CLPP) in December 2018 with a recommendation that the Proposal be forwarded to the Department of Planning and Environment for a Gateway Determination. The CLPP did not support this recommendation, due to inconsistencies with strategic direction of the State Government and local issues.

It is recommended that the planning proposal be forwarded to the Department of Planning & Environment for a Gateway Determination. As part of this stage, further liaison would be undertaken with the Greater Sydney Commission and Department of Planning & Environment to address the issues raised by the Cumberland Local Planning Panel. This approach provides an appropriate mechanism to resolve outstanding issues and, if supported by the Gateway, would allow the planning proposal to proceed to formal community consultation prior to finalisation and consideration by Council.

Recommendation

That Council:

1. Request a Gateway Determination for the site of 300 Manchester Road, Auburn, with the following controls: IN1 General Industrial; R4 High Density Residential, RE1 Public Recreation; B1 Neighbourhood Centre; and B7 Business Park;

2. Provide the planning proposal as per recommendation 1 above to the Department of Planning & Environment as part of the Gateway Determination stage; and

3. Liaise with the Greater Sydney Commission and the Department of Planning & Environment on the matters raised by the Cumberland Local Planning Panel as part of the Gateway Determination stage.

Report

Background

In January 2018, a planning proposal request was lodged with Cumberland Council seeking to rezone the 14 hectare site at 300 Manchester Road from IN1 General Industrial zone to a mix of R4 High Density Residential, B2 Local Centre and RE1 Public Recreation (refer to Table 1 below).

This proposal was placed on preliminary public exhibition from 24 January 2018 to 26 February 2018 in accordance with Council’s Planning Proposal Notification Policy. In response to feedback received from Council, public submissions, and further technical input from traffic, acoustic and economic experts, the original proposal has subsequently been amended.

The amended proposal now seeks to rezone a smaller amount of land to R4 High Density Residential, retaining a larger area of the site as IN1 General Industrial. It also proposes to increase the amount of land zoned RE1 Public Recreation, replace the B2 Local Centre zone (originally proposed) with a smaller area of B1 Neighbourhood Centre zone, and introduce the B7 Business Park zone (Table 1).

Proposal – Lodged January 2018	Amended Proposal – September 2018
8.3 hectares zoned R4 High Density Residential: · approx. 1,800 dwellings · approx. 129 dwellings per hectare	5 hectares zoned R4 High Density Residential: · approx. 1,150 dwellings · approx. 83 dwellings per hectare
Floor space ratio: · 1:1 for the northern industrial land · 1.7:1 for the remainder of site	Floor space ratio: · 1:1 for the northern industrial land · 1.5:1 for the remainder of site
Maximum building heights of 9m - 42m (2-12 storeys)	Maximum building heights of 9m - 42m (2-12 storeys)
Residential GFA (approx): 164,000m²	Residential GFA (approx): 103,000m²
Industrial/Employment GFA (approx): 30,000 – 40,000 m2	Industrial/Employment GFA (approx): 75,000m2
Retail GFA (approx): 6,000m²	Retail GFA (approx): 1,000m²
Community GFA (approx): 2,000m²	Community GFA (approx): 1,000m²
1.78 hectares of open space	2.1 hectares of open space
Additional permitted uses: For the northern 4 hectares of the site where the industrial zone would be retained, amendments to allow additional permitted uses of Office premises (limited to max 10% of total GFA), Car park, Health service facility, Respite day care and Centre-based childcare facility are proposed.	Additional permitted uses: For the northern 6 hectares of the site where the industrial zone would be retained, amendments to allow additional permitted uses of Office premises (limited to max 10% of total GFA), Car park, Health service facility, Respite day care and Centre-based childcare facility are proposed.

Table 1: Comparison of current proposal (September 2018) and January 2018 proposal

The Site and its Context

The proposal applies to the land shown in Figure 1. The site comprises 2 separate parcels of land and is known as 300 Manchester Road, Auburn (comprising Lots 11 and 12 in DP1166540).

Direct access to the site is available from Manchester Road for a length of approximately 230m along the southern boundary (see Figure 1). Beyond this point, Manchester Road is a private road (within the RailCorp NSW land holding). There is a Right of Way (over this adjoining RailCorp land) which provides a connection to Manchester Road.

Figure 1: Access and Surrounding Land Uses

Site Context

The metropolitan-significant Clyde Marshalling Yards immediately adjoining the site to the north comprise a number of facilities servicing the Sydney Trains network, including: Auburn Passenger Rail Stabling Yard; Rail Maintenance Centre; Auburn Logistics Services Warehouse; and Auburn Network Base. In addition, Sydney Trains has a new headquarters for its Sydney Train operations accommodating approximately 1,500 employees.

The Duck River is located to the west of the site. Immediately to the south of the site is a low density residential area.

The closest part of the site is located approximately 1km walking distance from Auburn Station, with most of the site located beyond 1km from Auburn Station. Sydney Trains has indicated that any proposal to “open up to the general public rail land cannot be accommodated by RailCorp or Sydney Trains”, meaning there is no public pedestrian access to Clyde Station from the site (across RailCorp land).

Planning Controls

The current and proposed planning controls are summarised in Table 2 and shown graphically in figures 2 to 5.

Current Planning Controls under Auburn LEP 2010

Proposed Planning Controls

IN1 General Industrial zone

Rezone 8.1ha of the site from the IN1 General Industrial zone as follows:

B7 Business Park (1ha)

B1 Neighbourhood Centre

R4 High Density Residential (5ha)

RE1 Public Recreation (2.1ha)

Floor space ratio control of 1:1

Proposed floor space ratio control of 1.5:1 for portion of the site proposed to be rezoned (coloured light red in Figure 4)

No change to the existing 1:1 FSR control is proposed for the portion of the site remaining as IN1 (coloured light purple in Figure 4)

No height of building control

A proposed maximum height limit of up to 42 metres on the residential zoned land as follows (refer to Figure 5)

· 15m in areas coloured beige (development up to 4 storeys)

· 27m in areas coloured pink (development up to 8 storeys)

· 33m in 2 areas coloured light red (development between approximately 6 - 10 storeys)

· 42m in areas coloured maroon (development up to 12 storeys)

Minimum lots size control of 2000m²

No minimum lot size on the site

Table 2: Current and proposed planning controls

Figure 2: Existing zoning for the site Figure 3: Proposed zoning for the site

Figure 4: Proposed Floor Space Ratio Figure 5: Proposed Height of Building

Strategic Merit Assessment

A strategic merit assessment of the proposal was undertaken and found:

· Inconsistencies with the Greater Sydney Commission’s vision for industrial lands, as the Central City District Plan identifies the direction for all industrial lands within this district as “review and manage”. However, the proposed retention of a large proportion of the site for employment uses and the introduction of provisions which would permit a greater mix of employment uses and would likely facilitate increased productivity, was considered to have some merit.

· The proposed approach to employment land within the site was considered more likely to deliver jobs and contribute to local economic activity over the next 5-10 years, rather than retaining the status quo.

· Partial inconsistency with the Cumberland Draft Employment and Innovation Lands Strategy (EILS), which acknowledges the existing metropolitan-critical role of the land immediately north of the site in terms of passenger and freight rail operations and logistics across metropolitan Sydney, and the importance of this precinct’s future role “services for the service sector”. However, the proposed retention of 6 hectares of land for employment uses (IN1 General Industrial), as well as the proposed additional permitted uses and the introduction of the B7 Business Park zone (1ha) on the site, was considered likely to assist in attracting new employment generating uses, including innovative activities, and thus partially consistent with the direction set in the Draft Cumberland EILS for the site.

· The proponent’s Economic Feasibility Assessment concluded that it was not economically feasible to develop the site under the existing planning regime. Council’s independent peer review of this assessment concluded that redevelopment of the site under the existing planning controls was economically feasible.

· Limited access to public transport and to Parramatta CBD, with the majority of the site falling outside the 30 minutes access measure, given the site’s distance from Auburn Station, and current bus routes.

· Potential land use conflict, noting that although the proposal has been amended significantly since lodgement, there will still be some noise impact affecting proposed residential uses (refer to Attachment 1, Figure 10).

Public Benefit Offer

The applicant has proposed a public benefit offer as part of the proposal outlined in Table 3. Some components of the proponent’s public benefit offer are not considered to be public benefits because they are requirements of the proposed development. Adjustment for this results in an indicative public benefit offer of approximately $24.5 million. However, it is noted that the public benefit offer is the start of the planning agreement process, and further negotiation and consideration by Council would be required.

Public Benefit Offer	Comment
$6.25million of road widening and intersection upgrades including: · Manchester/Chisholm Road Intersection · Manchester/Cumberland Road Intersection · South Parade · Clyde/Mona Street Intersection	Public benefit
Bridge upgrades: Mona Street Bridge Upgrade ($4million) Wellington Road Bridge Upgrade ($1.25million)	Public benefit
$4m towards the Duck River Masterplan	Public benefit
Pedestrian Bridge over Duck River	Public benefit

Other Benefits to Development Site
$8.5million of Internal Roads	Required as part of development, therefore not considered as a public benefit
$11million Central Park and other open space	Substantially required as part of development, therefore not 100% considered as a public benefit (proportion would need to be identified)
$5million New Community Centre	Possible public benefit, however does not align with Council’s planning
$2million Shuttle Bus to Auburn	Temporary proposal. Not considered to be public benefit
Work with Council to create a potential bus only link from Manchester Road to Mona Street along Duck River	Dependent on successful negotiation between proponent, Transport for NSW and Bus operators
5% Affordable Housing – 58 units	Not consistent with Council’s policies in the form proposed.

Table 3: Public Benefit Offer

Cumberland Local Planning Panel

The amended proposal was reported to the Cumberland Local Planning Panel (CLPP) on 18 December 2018. The Panel’s advice to Council was that the Planning Proposal request should not be forwarded to the NSW Department of Planning and Environment for a Gateway Determination for the following reasons:

· “The proposal lacks strategic merit with regard to its inconsistency with the Central City District Plan Planning Priority C11: Maximising opportunities to attract advanced manufacturing and innovation in industrial and urban services land;

· The proposal lacks strategic merit with regard to the Draft Cumberland Employment and Innovation Lands Strategy which identifies the site’s role as “services for the service sector” i.e. services that are essential to the operation of local and regional economic activity;

· The proposal lacks strategic merit with regard to its pre-emption of the Greater Sydney Commission’s Industrial Lands Review; The proposal lacks strategic merit with regard to the site’s access to public transport, in particular the walking distances to railway stations;

· The proposal lacks strategic merit with regard to additional land use conflicts between the proposed new high density residential and industrial land and the environmentally sensitive Duck River corridor;

· The proponent’s economic justification is not convincing given the content of the peer review undertaken for the Council;

· The proposed access to the site is constrained and funnels through the neighbouring residential areas;

· Some of the uses of the proposed industrial land (childcare centre, health service facility and respite day care) are considered inappropriate; and

· The proposed additional residential dwellings are not required to meet Council’s dwelling targets under the Central City District Plan.

Community Engagement

Preliminary (pre-Gateway) notification of the planning proposal request (as lodged in January 2018) was undertaken from 24 January to 26 February 2018. The following submissions were received:

· 43 individual submissions and 3 groups of form letters (total 41 form letters);

· 11 Government /Public Agency submissions (many of which are adjoining land owners or own land within the notification area).

Key issues raised in the submissions included:

· the proposed scale is out of character with the surrounding area, and will lead to overdevelopment, loss amenity for the community, and overcrowding;

· the proposal will lead to a loss of employment and industrial lands - employment should be a priority, not housing;

· the proposal will place strain on existing local health facilities and hospital services and existing schools which are already at capacity;

· insufficient open space (i.e. RE1 land) provided for 1,800 new dwellings;

· the Duck River upgrade will diminish natural values of an already degraded river;

· poor accessibility - there is limited vehicular access to the site, and new development will add further pressure and worsen local traffic congestion (particularly Mona Street); and

· existing public transport infrastructure is in poor condition and will not cope with new development.

The transport agencies raised a number of issues in their submissions, including land ownership and access to the site, traffic and road network issues, noise generation, and pressure being imposed on Sydney Trains to alter the operations due to any potential noise and operations complaints.

The proponent also provided Council with 216 proponent-initiated emails of support following the close of the preliminary exhibition period. These emails were sought by the proponent via their website as a separate process outside the community engagement undertaken by Council staff.

The issues raised in submissions were in response to the Planning Proposal Request as lodged in January 2018, and not the amended proposal currently being considered. The amended Planning Proposal Request of September 2018 has been substantially revised in response to issues raised in submissions, issues raised by Council, and in response to Council officer’s strategic merit assessment.

Policy Implications

The assessment of the planning proposal by Council officers and the Cumberland Local Planning Panel both identified inconsistencies and partial inconsistencies with the District Plan and Council’s draft Employment and Innovative Lands Strategy. These issues need to be balanced with the potential opportunities offered by the planning proposal in relation to the utilisation of the site for a range of employment and residential activities.

The forwarding of the planning proposal to the Gateway Determination stage provides an appropriate mechanism to resolve outstanding issues and confirm strategic alignment with NSW Government policies. As part of the Gateway stage, this would occur prior to formal community consultation and finalisation for endorsement by Council.

Risk Implications

The key risk implications for Council associated with this report are discussed in the section on policy implications.

Financial Implications

Financial implications have been identified within this report and is included as part of the section on the public benefit offer.

CONCLUSION

The assessment of the planning proposal by Council identified some inconsistencies between the proposal and the local and district planning framework. It also identified some of the potential advantages of the proposal, including its potential to convert the site into a more economically productive site with 75,000m² employment GFA and up to 2,600 potential new jobs. It noted the implications of the site’s constrained access if the site was to be redeveloped or landuses intensified under the current LEP controls. Additionally, the assessment identified the public benefit offer which included proposed funding for a number of required intersection and traffic works, as well as potential to expedite improvements to Duck River as part of the Duck River Masterplan.

A review of the planning proposal by the Cumberland Local Planning found that the proposal lacked strategic merit in a number of key aspects, including: inconsistency with the Central City District Plan and the Draft Cumberland Employment and Innovation Lands Strategy’s identified role of the site and surrounds; its potential pre-emption of the Greater Sydney Commission’s Industrial Lands Review; the site’s limited access to public transport, in particular the walking distances to railway stations; and creation additional land use conflicts between the proposed new high density residential and industrial land and the environmentally sensitive Duck River corridor.

Attachments

1. Amended Planning Proposal - https://www.cumberland.nsw.gov.au/item-c02-19-13 ⇩

Council Meeting

20 February 2019

Item No: C02/19-15

Request for Revised Gateway Determination - Planning Proposal for 264 Woodville Road, Merrylands

Responsible Division: Environment & Planning

Officer: Director Environment & Planning

File Number: SC185

Community Strategic Plan Goal: A resilient built environment

Summary

At the Council meeting of 18 July 2018, Council resolved to amend the Planning Proposal for the site at 264 Woodville Road, Merrylands (former John Cootes Warehouse site) from a B4 mixed use zone, with a FSR of 2:1 across the entire site, to a split B2 Local Centre and R4 High Density Residential zone with an FSR of 2.4:1 at the front (B2) and an FSR of 1.5:1 (R4) at the rear of the site.

Since this resolution, the site has been sold and the new owner has requested that Council now support the original Gateway Determination for a proposed B4 Mixed Use zone, FSR of 2:1 and Height of Building control of 31 metres across the site.

This report discusses the merit of this request and recommends an alternative approach for Council’s consideration: B2 Local Centre zone with a Maximum Height of Building 31 metres and an FSR of 2:1 across the site; and, RE1 Public Recreation zone for the park. This report also makes recommendations about amendments to the site specific controls in the Development Control Plan.

Recommendation

That Council:

1. Request a new Gateway Determination for the site with the following controls: B2 Local Centre zone with a maximum building height of 31m and maximum FSR of 2:1 across the site; and RE1 Public Recreation zone for the park;

2. Endorse an amended Planning Proposal as per recommendation 1 above, to forward to the Department of Planning and Environment for finalisation, subject to the negotiation of a planning agreement to the satisfaction of Council;

3. Amend the Development Control Plan (DCP) controls ‘4.1.12 Woodville Road Neighbourhood Centre Precinct’ of the Parramatta DCP to reflect the amended proposal; and

4. Delegate to the General Manager authority to make minor non-policy corrections or formatting changes to the draft DCP controls prior to it coming into effect.

Report

Background

The planning proposal request for the site at 264 Woodville Road, Merrylands was transferred from the former Parramatta City Council to Cumberland Council after amalgamation with a Gateway Determination from the Department of Planning and Environment with the following key controls: B4 mixed use zone, maximum building height of 31m and an FSR of 2:1 across the site.

At the Council meeting of 18 July 2018, Council resolved to amend the Planning Proposal for 264 Woodville Road, Merrylands (former John Cootes Warehouse site) to a split B2 Local Centre and R4 High Density Residential zone with an FSR of 2.4:1 at the front and an FSR of 1.5:1 at the rear of the site. The change to a split zone and reduced FSR at the rear of the site addressed the concerns of surrounding residents that were raised during the public exhibition period, whilst still achieving an FSR of 2:1 generally across the site.

Following the recent sale of the site, the new owner has requested that Council now support the Gateway Determination that proposed the B4 Mixed Use zone, FSR of 2:1 and Height of Building control of 31 metres, across the site. This request reflects the new owner’s (proponent) new concept plan for the site.

New Proposal

The proponent’s new proposal seeks to create a neighbourhood centre in a single floor plate two storey podium development with approximately 25,000m² of retail floorspace and 25,000m² of residential floor space in 5 towers ranging from 6-8 storeys above the podium. This would create a development with a maximum building height of 10 storeys, and approximately 500 apartments. The proponent’s concept anticipates a range of retail, business, community and recreation uses at the ground and first level, including potential for a full line supermarket.

The proponent’s concept also proposes to relocate the 2000m² public park to the rear of the site (Highland Street frontage) and it also proposes a revised street layout.

The public benefit offer is addressed in a subsequent section of this report.

The new indicative concept plan for the proposal is shown in Figure 1a.

Figure 1a: New Indicative Concept Plan

Proposed Planning Controls

Zoning

The Proponent is seeking to revert to the original Gateway Determination that applied a B4 Mixed use zone across the entire site. This is not supported because the B4 Mixed Use zone is currently used for Cumberland’s major centre (Merrylands) and larger town centres (Granville, Auburn and Lidcombe) and it is expected that this approach would continue under the new Cumberland LEP. The objectives of the B4 zone are not considered suitable for a lower order neighbourhood centre location.

As previously recommended to Council, the B2 Local Centre zone is considered to be the most appropriate zone for the site (Figure 1b). The B2 Local Centre zone permits various uses with consent, including commercial premises (retail, business and office premises), community facilities, child care centres, and medical centres with shop top housing (apartments) above.

The B2 Local Centre zone is both consistent with Council’s strategic approach to the hierarchy of centres within Cumberland, as well as facilitating the proponent’s expressed intention for the site, and would ensure that their vision for their new neighbourhood centre can be realised.

Figure 1b: Recommended zoning plan

A RE1 Public Recreation zone is also proposed for the park area, which also provides a suitable setback between the site and adjoining properties.

Building Height

The proponent is seeking to revert to the original Gateway Determination’s proposed maximum building height of 31m (equivalent to approximately 9 storeys) across the entire site.

Similar to the previous planning proposal concept, the revised proposal seeks to create a transition in building heights with some graduation of building heights across the site with 4, 5, 7 and 9 storeys tower being proposed (Figure 2). Lower building heights are proposed for the western and southern edges.

Figure 2: Proposed Building Heights

The report considered by Council in July 2018 recommended a mix of the B2 Local Centre zone and the R4 High Density zone as well as commensurate maximum height and FSR controls to effectively achieve transition in building height and scale stepping down from the Woodville Road frontage. This approach was recommended on the basis that including these controls in the LEP would provide greater certainty, particularly for the interface with the surrounding lower density (2 storey) development and school adjoining the site. This approach responded directly to one of the requirements of the Gateway Determination.

Council could consider a blanket height control as sought by the proponent, which would mean reliance on Development Control Plan (DCP) controls to achieve transition in height and less certainty in terms of outcomes. This approach would require amendments to the DCP controls for the site to ensure an appropriate level of detail was included, as well as amending the controls to reflect the proponents indicative concept plan.

Floor Space Ratio

The proponent is seeking to revert to the original Gateway Determination’s proposed maximum FSR of 2:1 across the entire site.

With this approach, the DCP controls previously considered by Council will need to be amended ensure future development achieves an appropriate transition in terms of scale and density to the surrounding low density development and school.

The recommended approach of an FSR of 2:4:1 for the half of the site fronting Woodville Road and an FSR of 1:5:1 for the remainder of the site responded to the Gateway Determination by achieving and overall FSR of approximately 2:1 for the site, whilst specifically requiring a transition in the density of development away from the Woodville Road frontage. Council could consider the proponent’s request for a blanket FSR of 2:1 for the site; however this provides less certainty in terms of outcome and relies on the DCP controls to achieve an appropriate transition.

New Street Layout

The new proposal contains a revised street layout that differs to the current DCP controls. The revised street layout does not facilitate the extension of Highland Street through to Lansdowne Street. (Figure 3)

Figure 3: DCP Street Layout Revised New Street layout

The revised street layout seeks to facilitate the proposed single floor plate podium development and create separation to the neighbouring residential development. There is some merit to the revised street layout as it would provide greater separation between the school and the proposed neighbourhood centre development than what was previously proposed under the current DCP controls.

However, the DCP controls will need to be amended to reflect the revised street layout sought by the proponent, should Council wish to proceed with this proposal.

Relocated Public Park

The revised proposal relocates the 2,000m² public park to the rear of the site (Figure 4). This differs from the current DCP which locates the public park towards the centre of the site.

Figure 4: DCP location of Park Revised Location of Park

As with the revised street layout, the relocation of the public park is also required to facilitate the proposed development’s indicative single floor plate layout.

Whilst the location of the park in a more central location with the site (as required by the current DCP controls) was considered to be desirable design outcome, there is also merit in the proposed relocation of the park. Relocating the park to the rear of the site would provide separation between neighbouring residential to the west and the proposed neighbourhood centre development.

The DCP would need to be amended to reflect the relocation of the public park to the rear of the site.

Economic Impact Assessment

The proponent was required to undertake an economic impact assessment to determine whether the increase in the size of the proposed retail component would impact on the nearby centres of Guildford and Merrylands.

Hill PDA undertook this assessment on behalf of the proponent and determined that existing centres in the locality enjoy growth in retail trade due to growth in population and expenditure in the wider trade area. All centres should experience and increase in trading levels from 2018 to 2023 with or without the proposed centre on Woodville Road. On this basis, the trading impacts of the proposed larger retail component are considered acceptable.

The proportion of growth in expenditure captured by the new centre is well within acceptable limits enabling other centres to share some of that growth. The proposed neighbourhood centre would therefore not threaten the role, function or commercial viability of any existing centre.

Social Impact Assessment

A social impact assessment has been submitted in response to Council’s resolution of July 2018.

Hill PDA undertook this assessment on behalf of the proponent and concluded that the potential benefits arising from the development include:

· Job creation, with more than 300 jobs proposed during construction, and more than 800 jobs proposed when operational;

· Increased housing diversity, including additional housing supply suited to smaller households; and

· Enhancement of the built environment including:

o a more walkable neighbourhood with access to local services and opportunities for community interaction;

o added retail amenity, producing a benefit to workers and residents in the area; and

o an enhancement to the capacity of local facilities and services with a child care centre, medical centre.

This assessment is considered to adequately address Council’s resolution of July 2018.

Public Benefit Offer

A revised public benefit offer (which would form the basis of a Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA)) has been received from the Proponent, as follows:

· public park landscaped with a minimum area of 2,000m²;

· widening and landscaping of Woodville Road frontage;

· traffic signals on corner of Woodville Road and Lansdowne Street;

· a new road connection between Highland Street and Lansdowne Street;

· affordable key worker housing comprising 12 dwellings exclude from floor space ratio standard;

· monetary contribution of $50,000 towards community facilities; and

· monetary contribution of 1.5% of the value of the value of VPA contributions towards Council’s administration costs.

The Proponent seeks an offset against all the development contributions that would otherwise be payable from the subsequent DAs for this site.

The Proponent’s offer to provide 12 dwellings as affordable ‘key worker’ rental housing for 10 years is not consistent with Council’s Planning Agreements Policy. Council’s policy requires affordable housing dwellings to be dedicated to Council. Whilst there is merit in the proponent’s offer of key worker housing, these dwellings would not be dedicated to Council (as per the policy requirement) and would not guarantee supply of affordable/key worker housing beyond 10 years. In addition, the proponent would receive income whilst renting these dwellings, and would also derive income from the sale of these dwellings at the end of the 10 year period.

The proponent is also seeking that these dwellings be excluded from the FSR calculation, thereby receiving an FSR bonus for supplying these dwellings. Council’s Planning Agreement Policy seeks outright dedication of the affordable housing dwellings, and Council officers would need to progress negotiations in accordance with this policy, unless otherwise directed by Council.

The formal negotiation phase of the planning agreement would commence if a decision is made by Council to proceed with the Planning Proposal. During this negotiation, Council officers would seek more specific details of the benefits proposed and their timing in relation to the project. Clarification would also be sought on offerings that are a direct requirement of the development of the site or wider public benefit that would be reasonable to offset against monetary contribution payable.

A further report to Council on the outcomes of these negotiations would be provided.

Community Engagement

Post Gateway Exhibition was undertaken on the previous Planning Proposal and DCP controls from 17 January 2018 to 28 February 2018.

It is not known whether the Department of Planning and Environment (DP&E) will require re-exhibition of the Planning Proposal. As the B2 Local Centre Zone does not introduce any additional land uses that may impact on neighbouring properties, and as the Height of Building Control and FSR control have previously been on public exhibition, it is possible that re-exhibition may not be required.

An amended DCP would need to be exhibited for a period of 28 days. A notice would also be placed in local newspapers to advise of the date of exhibition. If further community engagement on the planning proposal is required, this would be undertaken in conjunction with the amended DCP.

A separate exhibition process will be undertaken for the VPA once a draft agreement has been negotiated.

Policy Implications

Part 4.1.12 Woodville Road Neighbourhood Centre Precinct of the Parramatta DCP would need to be amended to reflect the revised indicative concept if Council proceeds with this proposal.

Should Council resolve to proceed, a draft planning agreement would be negotiated, considered by Council, and then publicly notified in accordance with the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979. The Planning Proposal would then be forwarded to the DP&E to make the LEP amendment and publish it on the NSW Legislation website.

Risk Implications

There are minimal risk implications for Council associated with this report. It is noted that regardless of whether DP&E requires re-exhibition of the planning proposal, the biggest influence on the timing and progress of this proposal would be the negotiation of the Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA) that delivers acceptable public benefits for Council.

Financial Implications

Financial implications have been discussed in the section on Voluntary Planning Agreement. There are no other financial implications associated with this report.

CONCLUSION

The proponent’s request to revert to the B4 zone in the Gateway Determination is not supported, as the objectives of this zone and the use of this zone for a lower order neighbourhood centre are not considered appropriate. Application of the B2 local centre zone is recommended, as this is reflects the role of this potential centre and facilitates the proponent’s proposed concept. A RE1 Public Recreation zone is also recommended for the park site and this would provide an appropriate setback between the proposal and existing properties.

The DCP will need to be amended to facilitate the amended proposal. As the proponent is seeking a blanket building height and FSR control across the site, amending the DCP controls would provide Council and neighbouring residents and the community with greater detail and certainty on how transition and separation between neighbouring land uses would be maintained and that future development of the site would be consistent with the indicative concept that has been submitted to Council.

Attachments

1. Gateway Determination – 24 June 2016 ⇩

2. Planning Statement – Knight Frank Town Planning ⇩

3. Architectural Concept Drawings ⇩

4. Draft Letter of Offer ⇩

Council Meeting

20 February 2019

Item No: C02/19-16

Tender Evaluation Report - Auburn Civic Centre Mechanical (Air Conditioning) Upgrade

Responsible Division: Works & Infrastructure

Officer: Acting Group Manager Capital Projects

File Number: T-2018-022

Community Strategic Plan Goal: A resilient built environment

Summary

This report requests a Council resolution to reject all tenders and call for fresh tenders for Tender T-2018-022 for the mechanical (air conditioning) upgrade at the Auburn Civic Centre in accordance with Clause 178 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005.

Recommendation

That Council:

1. Reject all tenders and invite fresh tenders for Tender T-2018-022 for the mechanical (air conditioning) upgrade at the Auburn Civic Centre in accordance with Clause 178(3)(b) of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005.

2. Notify all tenderers of Council’s resolution in (1) above.

Report

Tender Information

Tender Number:	T-2018-022
Tender Title:	Auburn Civic Centre Mechanical (Air-Conditioning) Upgrade
Advertising:	9 August to 20 September 2018

Background

An energy consultancy, BCW Carbon and Energy (BCW), was engaged by the Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) in August 2016 under its Energy Efficient Business program to perform an Energy Audit for Cumberland Council of the mechanical (air conditioning) systems at the Auburn Civic Centre. The energy audit report evaluates overall energy consumption, illustrates current energy use and identifies potential areas of energy and cost savings.

Based on site observations, data analysis and discussion with Council regarding its operational priorities and plans, BCW recommended that Council should plan to replace or upgrade the existing mechanical (air conditioning) units within the next few years. This advice was peer reviewed in September 2017 by Council’s consultant, Jones Nicholson Consulting Engineers (JNCE) to review the options available. JNCE recommended, in summary, the replacement of the air conditioning units with the retention of the bulk of the duct work.

Tender Process

Select tenders were invited through NSW e-Tender websites on 9^th August 2018.

The invitation documents called for lump-sum tenders based on a Scope of Works.

Non-mandatory pre-tender meetings were held at the proposed work site on 15^th and 21^st August and 4^th, 6^th and 12^th September, 2018 to allow tenderers to become familiar with site conditions.

The following addenda were issued to all prospective tenderers during the invitation period.

Table 1: Clarification with Prospective Tenderers during the Tender Period

Date	Addendum Number	Description
20 August 2018	1	Existing mechanical plant and layout drawings at the ACC
21 August 2018	2	Tender Closing Date amended to 2pm Thursday 20 September 2018
29 August 2018	3	Site briefing scheduled for 6 September with mechanical engineer present
3 September 2018	4	Revised mechanical design issued – 9 drawings
13 September 2018	5	Pre Tender Site Meeting & Briefing notes

The tender portal closed at 2pm on 20^th September, 2018.

Details of Tenders Received

At the closing date of the tender, five (5) on time tenders were received as listed below:

Tenderer	ABN
A.G. Coombs (NSW) PTY. LTD.	Not provided
BMG Air Conditioning Pty Ltd	Not provided
Coral Air Conditioning Pty Ltd	36 119 753 141
Dallas Air Conditioning Pty Ltd	83 116 953 603
Dewpoint Air & Energy Pty Ltd	43 611 304 011

Weighted Evaluation

The tenders were scored against each of the weighted evaluation criteria as stated in the tender document as follows:

· Demonstrated Experience

· Demonstrated Capability

· Schedule of Program and Methodology

· Schedule of pricing information

Each Tender Evaluation Panel Member assessed and evaluated each of the tenders received independently and scored in accordance with the predetermined weightings. The Tender Evaluation Panel Member also determined in this process that the Tenders received, including supplementary information, were incomplete, missing or lacking in detail and as such could not be recommended to Council. As such the Tender Evaluation Panel has recommended that Council reject all tenders and invite fresh tenders.

Community Engagement

Council invited tenders from nineteen (19) preselected contractors listed on the NSW ProcurePoint (eTendering) prequalification scheme number SCM0256. The tender period satisfied the minimum period stated in Clause 168 of the Local Government General Regulation.

Policy Implications

The tender process was undertaken in accordance with Council’s Procurement Framework and Procedures.

Risk Implications:

Adoption of the report recommendations will ensure Council is compliant with the tendering requirements specified under the Local Government Act 1993 and Local Government (General) Regulation 2005.

Financial Implications:

A component for the design and initial works has been included in the Quarter 1 and 2 adjustments of the 2018/19 budget. Due to the outcome of this tender process, a further allocation has been proposed in the 2019/20 Capital Works budget to complete this work.

Conclusion

This report addresses the current status of Council Tender T-2018-022 for the mechanical (air conditioning) upgrade at the Auburn Civic Centre.

Based on reports provided to Council and completed by consultants, engaged as a result of an energy audit of Cumberland Council and commissioned by the Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) under its Energy Efficient Business program, Council entered into a process to tender for the upgrade of the Auburn Civic Centre mechanical air conditioning.

Council invited tenders from nineteen (19) preselected contractors listed on the NSW ProcurePoint (eTendering) prequalification scheme and five (5) tenders were received in response to Tender T-2018-022 by the tender closing date.

After undertaking a weighted evaluation of the submitted tenders it was determined that that the Tenders received were incomplete, missing or lacking in detail and as such could not be recommended to Council.

Consequently the Tender Evaluation Panel has recommended that Council reject all tenders and undertake a further process to obtain new tenders.

This report seeks a Council resolution to reject all tenders and undertake a further process to obtain new tenders as recommended by the Tender Evaluation Panel.

Attachments

1. Tender Evaluation Report (confidential)

2. Tender Evaluation Scoresheet (confidential)

Granville Ward
Clr Steve Christou	0419 651 187	Steve.Christou@cumberland.nsw.gov.au
Clr Ola Hamed	0405 070 007	Ola.Hamed@cumberland.nsw.gov.au
Clr Joseph Rahme	0418 995 471	Joseph.Rahme@cumberland.nsw.gov.au
Greystanes Ward
Clr Greg Cummings (Mayor)	0417 612 717	Greg.Cummings@cumberland.nsw.gov.au
Clr Ross Grove	0418 987 241	Ross.Grove@cumberland.nsw.gov.au
Clr Eddy Sarkis	0418 306 918	Eddy.Sarkis@cumberland.nsw.gov.au
Regents Park Ward
Clr Ned Attie	0419 583 254	Ned.Attie@cumberland.nsw.gov.au
Clr George Campbell	0409 233 315	George.Campbell@cumberland.nsw.gov.au
Clr Kun Huang	0418 911 774	Kun.Huang@cumberland.nsw.gov.au
South Granville Ward
Clr Glenn Elmore (Deputy Mayor)	0418 459 527	Glenn.Elmore@cumberland.nsw.gov.au
Clr Paul Garrard	0414 504 504	Paul.Garrard@cumberland.nsw.gov.au
Clr Tom Zreika	0449 008 888	Tom.Zreika@cumberland.nsw.gov.au
Wentworthville Ward
Clr Lisa Lake	0418 669 681	Lisa.Lake@cumberland.nsw.gov.au
Clr Suman Saha	0419 546 950	Suman.Saha@cumberland.nsw.gov.au
Clr Michael Zaiter	0418 432 797	Michael.Zaiter@cumberland.nsw.gov.au