Agenda of Ordinary Meeting of Council - Tuesday, 17 November 2020

Ordinary Meeting of Council

TO BE HELD ON Tuesday, 17 November 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 authorisation 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 confidential attachments to the following General Business reports:

GB.12 Management of Crown Land by Council

In accordance with 10(2)(d)( i):

Attachment 1: Crown Land Proposed for Transfer to Crown Land Manager Status

Attachment 2: Crown Land Proposed for Transfer to NPWS

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTEs

Minutes of Ordinary Meeting of Council 8

File: S02131

Meeting held 20 October 2020

Minutes numbered 190 to 209

minutes from the Mayor

MM.1 Outdoor Dining 27

File: S11530/2

The purpose of this Mayoral Minute is to set out some recommendations about how local food and beverage businesses can be assisted to take account of the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on eating out.

The COVID-19 pandemic has radically altered how most people go about their daily lives. It has changed the way we go out, where we go, what we do and how we interact with others. Our shopping and dining habits have also changed as a result. The pandemic has now increased the value of shared outdoor spaces such as streets and footpaths, as people seek the relative safety of socialising with others outside.

The restrictions placed earlier on the community gave rise to the opportunity for local residents to rediscover their own neighbourhoods. In turn, this has assisted many small businesses to also review their services and how they can adapt them to remain viable and provide what their customers are looking for. Our Council took early action to waive fees associated with outdoor dining permits and the annual lease fee of designated footpath areas.

As we continue to comply with current pandemic public health orders but also look to a post-COVID future, it makes sense to review our local neighbourhood centres and for Council to take innovative steps to create safer, vibrant and people-centric streets. While I am not advocating redesigning roads and footpaths, Council could assist in activating outdoor dining and retail opportunities to help local food-based businesses.

The COVID-safe requirement for businesses to provide social or physical distancing of 1.5 metres, plus limitations on group bookings, presents new challenges to many local dining and retail outlets. With this in mind, it is proposed that Council initiate some immediate research with relevant user groups. This research could quickly identify issues and use the feedback obtained so our current procedures can better respond to their needs and ideas.

This may include adapting current policies and administrative procedures to be more aligned with COVID-19 requirements. It could also mean being more responsive to new ways of doing business and providing much greater opportunity for businesses to use Council-owned land in neighbourhood retail zones.

I seek Council’s endorsement of the following recommendations:

Recommendation:

That:

A. Staff liaise with Council’s current outdoor dining permit holders to seek their feedback and ensure their continued viability through COVID-safe outdoor dining options.

B. Staff liaise with other local food and beverage businesses, business and state agencies to seek their feedback on the current business climate and how Council could better support their businesses. This liaison would focus on using outdoor spaces near their premises to make local streetscapes more vibrant while also ensuring their customers are COVID safe.

C. The fee relief currently provided to outdoor dining outlets be continued, with a review to be undertaken in March 2021.

D. Council staff review the Outdoor Dining Policy in light of the COVID-19 environment.

Petitions

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 Adoption of the revised Ku-ring-gai Community Participation Plan 2020 29

File: S12564/2

For Council to consider the finalisation of the revised Community Participation Plan following public exhibition

Recommendation:

That Council adopt the revised Ku-ring-gai Community Participation Plan 2020.

GB.2 Council Meeting and Public Forum Dates for 2021 72

File: CY00438/8

To set future Council Meeting and Public Forum dates for 2021.

Recommendation:

That Council adopt the proposed Council Meeting and Public Forum dates.

GB.3 Minutes of Audit, Risk & Improvement Committee meetings held on 18 June and 10 September 2020 79

File: CY00458/8

To provide Council with a copy of the Minutes from the Audit, Risk & Improvement Committee meetings held on 18 June and 10 September 2020.

Recommendation:

That Council receive and note this report.

GB.4 Analysis of Land and Environment Court Costs - 1st Quarter 2020 to 2021 90

File: FY00623/3

To report legal costs in relation to development control matters in the Land and Environment Court for the quarter ended 30 September 2020.

Recommendation:

That the analysis of Land and Environment Court costs for the quarter ended 30 September 2020 be received and noted.

GB.5 Investment Report as at 31 October 2020 102

File: FY00623/3

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

Recommendation:

That the summary of investments performance for October 2020 be received and noted; and that the Certificate of the Responsible Accounting Officer be noted and the report adopted.

GB.6 2020 - 2021 Budget Review - 1st Quarter ended September 2020 110

File: S09112/9

To inform Council of the results of the first quarter budget review of 2020/21 and proposed adjustments to the annual budget based on the actual financial performance and trend for the period 1 July 2020 to 30 September 2020.

Recommendation:

A. That the September 2020 Quarterly Budget Review and the recommended changes are received and noted.

B. That further savings to fund the net loss from COVID-19 Pandemic are identified and reported as part of December QBR.

GB.7 Funding of Council Infrastructure Assets 153

File: S11276

For Council to consider the funding of infrastructure assets.

Recommendation:

That Council receive and note the report.

GB.8 Ku-ring-gai Traffic Committee Meeting Dates for 2021 168

File: CY00022/12

To determine Ku-ring-gai Traffic Committee meeting dates for 2021.

Recommendation:

That Ku-ring-gai Traffic Committee meetings for 2021 be scheduled monthly between February and November as per dates requested and that meetings be held only as required.

GB.9 Heritage Reference Committee Minutes 172

File: CY00413/8

To have Council consider the minutes from previous Heritage Reference Committee (‘HRC’) meetings held on 3July 2019, 7 July 2020 and 8 September 2020.

Recommendation:

That Council receive and note the HRC minutes from 3 July 2019, 7 July 2020 and 8 September 2020.

GB.10 Management of Ku-ring-gai Mini Wheels Site - St Ives Showground 185

File: S07493

To report back to Council on remediation of the former mini-wheels site at St Ives Showground as required OMC149, GB.3, resolution (B), namely “That a report be presented to Council regarding the biodiversity offset funding options to rehabilitate the site in accordance with the Plan of Management.”

Recommendation:

That Council note the report on remediation of the former Mini Wheels site.

GB.11 Proposed Heritage Listing of 207 Eastern Road, Wahroonga 191

File: S10066

To have Council consider the proposed heritage listing of Laverty House, the property known as 207 Eastern Road, Wahroonga, on Schedule 5 of the Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2015 (‘KLEP 2015’).

Recommendation:

That a Planning Proposal be referred to the Ku-ring-gai Local Planning Panel (‘KLPP’) for the listing of Laverty House, the property known as 207 Eastern Road, Wahroonga, as an item of local heritage significance on Schedule 5 of the KLEP 2015.

GB.12 Management of Crown land by Council 260

File: S11976

To seek Council approval for an approach to be made to the Minister for Lands through the responsible state government agency, the NSW Department of Planning, Industry and Environment, NSW Crown Lands, for transfer of devolved lands to the NSW National Parks Reserve System and for Council to be appointed as a Crown Land Manager for Crown land that it currently administers under section 48 of the Local Government Act 1993 as devolved lands and, where appropriate, as a lessee.

Recommendation:

That Council gives approval to the General Manager and/or his delegate to approach the NSW Department of Planning, Industry and Environment, NSW Crown Lands with a view to negotiate and finalise the transfer of devolved lands and Crown land leased to Council’s management in the capacity as a Crown Land Manager. The report also recommends the potential transfer of some devolved lands which adjoin the national park estate to the National Parks and Wildlife Service directorate of the NSW Department of Planning, Industry and Environment.

Extra Reports Circulated to Meeting

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

Questions With Notice

QN.1 Mural on Lindfield Underpass 269

File: S05126

InspectionS– SETTING OF TIME, DATE AND RENDEZVOUS

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

Minute Ku-ring-gai Council Page

MINUTES OF Ordinary Meeting of Council
HELD ON Tuesday, 20 October 2020

Present:

The Mayor, Councillor J Anderson (Chairperson)

Councillors J Pettett & C Clarke (Comenarra Ward)

Councillors C Szatow & P Kelly (Gordon Ward)

Councillors S Ngai (Roseville Ward)

Councillors C Kay & M Smith (St Ives Ward)

Councillors D Greenfield & C Spencer (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 Corporate Communications (Virginia Leafe)

Manager Urban and Heritage Planning (Antony Fabbro)

Manager Finance (Angela Apostol)

Group Lead 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

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.

Councillor Ngai declared a less than significant non-pecuniary conflict of interest for Item GB.2. He is a member of East Lindfield Community Pre-school

Management Committee which has been nominated to receive a small grant. He will leave the meeting during debate on the item.

Councillor Kay declared a less than significant non-pecuniary interest in GB.13. She personally knows 2 of the applicants for the subject advisory group. She will leave the meeting during debate on the item.

The Mayor, Councillor Anderson declared a less than significant non-pecuniary conflict of interest for Item GB.11. Up until 2016, she resided next door to the subject property whilst the former owner held ownership and as such, she will remain in the chair during debate of the item.

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:

Late Items:

GB.15 - Progress Status Report - September 2020 - Report by Director Operations dated 8 October 2020 an attachment.

190

CONFIRMATION OF REPORTS TO BE CONSIDERED IN CLOSED MEETING

File: S02499/9

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Greenfield/Pettett)

GB.1 Lindfield Village Hub Update

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

Attachment 1: LVH - OMC - Attachment A1 to OMC Report on LVH Negotiation
Status - 20 October 2020

GB.13 Sustainable Recreation Advisory Group - member confirmation

In accordance with 10(2)(a):

Attachment 1: Community representative applications

GB.14 RFT6-2020 Waste Collection Services

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

Attachment 1: RFT6-2020 List of Submitters

Attachment 2: RFT6-2020 Tender Evaluation Report

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTEs

191

Minutes of Ordinary Meeting of Council

File: S02131

Meeting held 22 September 2020

Minutes numbered 168 to 189

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Clarke/Greenfield)

That Minutes numbered 168 to 189 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

192

Centenary of 1st Lindfield Scout Troop

File: CY00455/8

Vide: MM.1

It is my happy duty to inform Council and our community of an historic achievement for the scouting movement in Ku-ring-gai – the Centenary of the 1st Lindfield Scout Troop.

In late 1920 three Lindfield boys, Don Isles, Bill South and Norman ‘Nip’ Lawrence approached schoolteacher Mr Albert Woods at Gordon Public School to ask if he could be their Scoutmaster. The boys knew that Mr. Woods had seen service in World War 1 at Gallipoli and in France and that, coupled with his teaching experience, made them think he would be an ideal leader for their scouting activities.

After some thought Mr. Woods agreed to be their Scoutmaster and this decision led to the commencement and foundation of the 1st Lindfield Scout Troop on 22 September 1920.

From small beginnings the Lindfield scout troop soon expanded and along the way, marked some notable achievements. In its first year in 1922 it attracted enough members to attend a national Corroboree in Melbourne. In 1941 its clubhouse in Slade Avenue– still in use today – was officially opened by the Ku-ring-gai Mayor in 1941. The clubhouse was extended over the next decade to include rooms for senior scouts, Rovers and cubs.

In 1966 the clubhouse also became the base for local girl guides, but it was not until 51 years later in 2017 that girls were formally admitted to the scout troop. Nonetheless, female scout leaders have always had a strong influence at the 1st Lindfield Scout Troop. One example was Lady Cubmaster Miss Nola Beatty, appointed to the position in 1948. The scores of boys who passed through her care during three years between 1948 and 1951 greatly benefitted from her ever-enthusiastic guidance.

Since 1920, many Australian and pan-Pacific Jamborees, Corroboree, Senior Ventures, and Rover Moots have been held in Australia and 1st Lindfield has been represented at each one. Lindfield was at the ninth World Jamboree in England in 1957, which was the Jubilee Jamboree held to commemorate 50 years of scouting and also the 100th anniversary of the birth of Baden Powell.

In 2017, the Lindfield campsite was awarded the best of that year’s Corroboree out of 60 competing campsites. The senior troop and Rover Crew have grown in strength over the years and regularly hold major activities such as bushwalking in Tasmania at Christmas and ski trips in the winter time.

The 1st Lindfield Scout Troop are a great example of community, leadership and teamwork that continues to thrive to the present day. On behalf of the Council, I offer my congratulations and thanks to all who have served with the 1st Lindfield Scout Troop.

Resolved:

That:

A. This Mayoral Minute be received and noted.

B. The Mayor write to the 1^st Lindfield Scout Troop to congratulate them on the Centenary.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

PETITIONS

193

Objections to the development of the 5 storey apartment block at 1-3 Corona Avenue, Roseville

File: DA0300/19

Vide: PT.1

We, residents of Corona Ave, Maclaurin Parade, Nola Road, Nola Lane, Kings Avenue and Pacific Highway Roseville strenuously object to the development of the 5 story apartment block at 1-3 Corona Avenue, Roseville. Object to this development application (41 signatures).

Reasons for objection include but are not limited to:

- Exceeding the height of building limits (HOB)

- No plans for minimisation of residential impact re demolition, excavation and construction

- Traffic and parking congestion

- Up to 40 truck movements per day

- Destruction of animal habitats (powerful owls and other wildlife)

- Noise: Many people now work from home because of COVID-19

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Ngai/Pettett)

That the petition be received and referred to the appropriate Officer of Council for attention.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

GENERAL BUSINESS

194

Lindfield Village Hub Update

File: S10973-4

Vide: GB.1

This report provides an update on the Lindfield Village Hub project.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Pettett/Szatow)

That Council receive and note this report.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

195

Delegation of Authority - Deputy Mayor for 2020-2021 Term

File: CY00259/12

Vide: GB.3

For Council to give consideration to granting Delegations of Authority to the Deputy Mayor.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Pettett/Spencer)

That the Delegations of Authority as outlined in Attachment A1 be granted to the Deputy Mayor for the 2020 – 2021 term of Council.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

196

Disclosures of Interest Returns Register 2019/20

File: CY00440/8

Vide: GB.4

To table Council’s Clause 4.23 Disclosure of Interest Returns Register in accordance with Schedule 1 of the Ku-ring-gai Council Code of Conduct (the Code).

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Pettett/Greenfield)

That the tabling of the Disclosure of Interest Returns Register be noted.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

197

Invitation to Streetwork Glam and Grunge Fundraising Event

File: CY00043/12

Vide: GB.5

To inform Councillors of an invitation from StreetWork for their Glam and Grunge fundraising event that will be held virtually on Friday, 30 October 2020.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Pettett/Greenfield)

That any Councillors wishing to attend the fundraising lunch advise the General Manager by Friday, 23 October 2020.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

198

Audited General and Special Purpose Financial Statements for the year ended 30 June 2020

File: FY00623/3

Vide: GB.6

To present to Council the Annual Financial Statements for the year ended 30 June 2020 and audit reports from the Audit Office of NSW and to provide a summary of Council’s financial performance and financial position at 30 June 2020.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Pettett/Kelly)

That Council receive the audited Financial Statements for the year ended 30 June 2020 and the auditor’s report from the Audit Office of NSW.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

199

Investment Report as at 30 September 2020

File: FY00623/3

Vide: GB.7

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

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Pettett/Smith)

That:

A. The summary of investments and performance for September 2020 be received and noted.

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

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

200

Bushland Dumping and Encroachment Policy

File: CY00295/11

Vide: GB.8

For Council to adopt the exhibited Bushland Dumping and Encroachment Policy 2020.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Pettett/Szatow)

That:

A. Council adopt the Bushland Dumping and Encroachment Policy 2020;

B. A copy of the Bushland Dumping and Encroachment Policy 2020 be placed on Council’s website.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

201

Draft Ku-ring-gai Heritage Strategy

File: S12203

Vide: GB.9

To present the draft Ku-ring-gai Heritage Strategy (Attachment A1) for public exhibition.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Pettett/Smith)

That:

A. Council adopt the Draft Ku-ring-gai Heritage Strategy and it be placed on public exhibition for a period of 28 days.

B. A further report be brought back to Council after the exhibition period.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

202

Heritage Reference Committee Membership

File: CY00413/8

Vide: GB.10

To have Council consider the nominations of two new members to the Heritage Reference Committee (‘HRC’), consisting of a replacement representative from the Ku-ring-gai Historical Society, and a new community member to fill an existing vacancy.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Pettett/Kelly)

A. That Council accept Lorna Watt to the Heritage Reference Committee as the replacement member for Ku-ring-gai Historical Society; and

B. That Council accept Dr Zeny Edwards to the Heritage Reference Committee as a community member.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

203

RFT6-2020 Waste Collection Services

File: RFT6-2020

Vide: GB.14

To consider the tenders received for Waste Collection Services ten (10) year contract and to appoint the preferred tenderer.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Pettett/Spencer)

That:

A. As a result of considering the non-competitive tenders submitted for the proposed RFT6-2020 Waste Collection Services contract, and pursuant to Clause 178(1) of the Local Government (General) Regulation 1995 (“the Regulation”), Council declines to accept any of the tenders.

B. Fresh tenders as referred to in clause 178(3)(b)-(d) of the Regulation not be invited because such a procedure would cause delay and would be unlikely to achieve a satisfactory outcome in time for the commencement of the new contract in September 2021.

C. Pursuant to clause 178(3)(e) of the Regulation, the General Manager enter into negotiations with any person (whether or not the person was a tenderer) with a view to entering into a contract in relation to the subject matter of the tender in terms acceptable to Council’s requirements.

D. The Mayor and the General Manager be delegated authority to execute all documents on Council’s behalf relation to any contract formed as a result of the above.

E. The Seal of Council be affixed to all necessary documents.

F. All tenderers be advised of Council’s decision in accordance with clause 178 of the Regulation

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

204

Progress Status Report - September 2020

File: FY00621/3

Vide: GB.15

To provide Council with the Project Status Report reflecting results for July, August and September 2020

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Pettett/Kelly)

A. That Council receive and note the Project Status Report for September 2020.

B. That the Project Status Report be placed on Council’s website.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Having declared an interest in Item GB.2, Councillor Ngai withdrew from debate on the

matter.

205

2020 Ku-ring-gai Community Grants Program

File: FY00432/10

Vide: GB.2

To advise Council of applications received for the 2020 Ku-ring-gai Community Grants Program, and to recommend funding allocations for individual community and cultural groups.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Clarke/Kelly)

That:

A. $21,000 of unspent COVID-19 Community Grants be incorporated into the distribution funds for the 2020 Ku-ring-gai Community Grants Program.

B. The following community and cultural groups receive the recommended amounts from Council in 2020:

CATEGORY 1: SMALL EQUIPMENT

	Name of Organisation	Amount Sought	Amount Recommended
1	North St Ives Scout Troop	$2,000.00	$1,300.00
2	Cerebral Palsy Alliance - St Ives Respite	$2,000.00	$2,000.00
3	1st Gordon Scout Troop / The Scout Association of Australia NSW Branch	$2,000.00	$1,300.00
4	Ku-ring-gai Male Choir	$1,870.00	$1,300.00
5	Ku-ring-gai Community Workshop “The Shed”	$2,000.00	$2,000.00
6	West Pymble Bicentennial Bowling Club	$2,000.00	$1,300.00
7	Pals For Seniors Ku-ring-gai Inc	$ 648.00	$ 648.00
8	Ku-ring-gai Little Athletics Centre Inc	$2,000.00	$1,300.00
9	Stealers Baseball and Softball Club	$1,800.00	$1,300.00
10	Computer Pals for Seniors Turramurra (CPST)	$2,000.00	$1,900.00
11	Scouts Australia – Sydney North All Abilities Scout Group	$2,000.00	$2,000.00
12	Playgroup NSW Inc./on behalf Pymble Playgroup	$2,000.00	$1,300.00
13	Phoenix House Youth Services	$2,000.00	$1,300.00
14	2nd St Ives Scout Group	$2,000.00	$1,300.00
15	Sydney United Sports Club	$2,000.00	$1,300.00
16	1st Pymble Scout Group -The Scouts Association of Australia, NSW Branch	$2,000.00	Nil
17	Ku-ring-gai West Probus Club	$ 350.00	$ 350.00
18	St Lucy's School	$2,000.00	$1,500.00
19	1st Turramurra Scouts	$1,593.94	$1,300.00
20	Pymble Turramurra Pre-school Inc	$2,000.00	Nil
21	KU Fox Valley Preschool	$2,000.00	$1,300.00
22	The Eryldene Trust	$ 736.00	$ 736.00
23	St Ives Junior Cricket Club	$2,000.00	$1,300.00
24	Christ Church St Ives	$1,740.00	$1,300.00
25	East Lindfield Community Preschool	$2,000.00	$1,300.00
26	UCA - Roseville Congregation	$2,000.00	$1,300.00
27	St John Ambulance Australia (N.S.W)	$1,938.38	$1,939.00
28	Chabad House of the North Shore Limited	$5,000.00	$1,300.00
29	St John Ambulance (N.S.W)	$2,000.00	Nil
30	Wahroonga Public School P&C Association Inc	$2,000.00	$1,300.00
31	Warrawee Bowling Club	$2,000.00	$1,300.00
32	West Pymble Scout Group	$1,965.40	$1,300.00
33	Marian St Theatre for Young People	$1,800.00	$1,300.00
34	Ku-ring-Gai Netball Association	$ 500.00	$ 500.00
35	StreetWork Australia Limited	$2,000.00	$1,300.00
36	The Scout Association of Australia NSW Branch / 1st Lindfield Scouts	$ 935.00	$ 935.00
37	Probus Club of Barra Brui Inc	$1,399.00	$1,399.00
	Total	$68,275.72	$44,507.00

CATEGORY 2: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

	Name of Organisation	Amount Sought	Amount Recommended
1	Cerebral Palsy Alliance	$4,181.02	$4,181.00
2	Australian International Sports Organisation Pty Ltd	$3,000.00	$2,500.00
3	The Uniting Church in Australia Property Trust (NSW) on behalf of UCA - Gordon – Pymble Uniting Church	$5,000.00	$3,000.00
4	Hornsby Ku-ring-gai Domestic Violence Network	$5,000.00	$3,000.00
5	Ku Ring Gai Little Athletics Centre inc	$5,000.00	$3,000.00
6	Phoenix House Youth Services	$5,000.00	$3,000.00
7	Nutrition Australia NSW	$4,705.00	Nil
8	Rotary Club of Wahroonga Incorporated	$4,500.00	$3,500.00
9	KLAP Australia	$1,190.00	$1,190.00
10	St Swithun's Anglican Church Pymble	$3,768.00	$3,000.00
11	Parkinson's NSW-Hornsby Ku-ring-gai Parkinson's Support Group	$1,000.00	$1,000.00
12	UCA - Roseville Congregation	$5,000.00	Nil
13	Ryde/Hunters Hill Child and Family Interagency	$5,000.00	Nil
14	Active Opportunities Incorporated	$2,700.00	$2,700.00
15	Hornsby Gang Show	$5,000.00	Nil
16	StreetWork Australia Limited	$5,000.00	Nil
17	1st North Turramurra Scouts group	$5,000.00	$1,500.00
18	Playgroup NSW Inc./on behalf Pymble Playgroup	$4,500.00	Nil
19	CASS Care Ltd	$4,300.00	$3,500.00
20	Ku-ring-gai Branch of MS Support Group	$5,000.00	$4,000.00
21	The Shepherd Centre	$2,957.50	$2,262.00
	Total	$86,801.52	$41,333.00

CATEGORY 3: ARTS & CULTURAL

	Name of Organisation	Amount Sought	Amount Recommended
1	Hornsby Ku-ring-gai Community College	$4,888.00	Nil
2	The Eryldene Trust	$1,164.74	$1,165.00
3	Chabad House of the North Shore Ltd	$5,000.00	$3,500.00
4	Ku-ring-gai Youth Orchestra	$1,355.00	$1,355.00
5	Marian St Theatre for Young People	$4,500.00	$3,500.00
6	StreetWork Australia Limited	$5,000.00	$3,500.00
7	Cass Care Ltd	$3,200.00	$3,000.00
8	Ha'Tzofim Australia	$5,000.00	$3,500.00
9	St Ives High School P&C Association	$2,500.00	$2,000.00
10	The Cathedral Singers Incorporated	$3,000.00	$2,000.00
11	Support Marian Street Theatre	$4,800.00	$3,500.00
12	Multicultural Integration Community Support	$5,000.00	$3,500.00
13	The Cavalcade of History and Fashion Inc.	$4,466.00	$3,500.00
	Total	$49,873.74	$34,020.00

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Councillor Ngai returned to the meeting after debate on Item GB.2 concluded.

Having declared an interest in Item GB.13, Councillor Kay withdrew from debate on the matter.

206

Sustainable Recreation Advisory Group - member confirmation

File: S11290

Vide: GB.13

To provide Council with recommendations regarding community representatives nominated for the Sustainable Recreation Advisory Group.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Clarke/Kelly)

That:

A. The Terms of Reference for the Sustainable Recreation Advisory Group be amended to:

Community Membership will include :

· Four (4) members of the Ku-ring-gai community with demonstrable high-level of sport and/or recreation experience; and

· Four (4) members of the Ku-ring-gai community with demonstrable high-level environmental experience.

Community representatives will not be representatives of a peak body or similar sporting organisation. Community representatives must have a broad knowledge and understanding of natural area recreation issues.

One proxy representative may be appointed for the community representative positions (that is, a fourth community representative to attend meetings in the absence of another community representative).

B. Council approve the nine (9) community representatives recommended in the Confidential Attachment of this report.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Councillor Kay returned to the meeting after debate on the matter concluded.

207

Proposed Heritage Listing of 6 Springdale Road, Killara

File: S11660

Vide: GB.11

To present the Planning Proposal for the heritage listing of 6 Springdale Road, Killara following recommendation of the Ku-ring-gai Local Planning Panel (‘KLPP’).

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Clarke/Smith)

That:

A. Council adopt the planning proposal to amend KLEP 2015 to include 6 Springdale Road, Killara (Lot 1, DP505522) dwelling house and the interior as a potential heritage item in Schedule 5 and on the Heritage Map.

B. The Planning Proposal be forwarded to the Department of Planning and Environment for a Gateway Determination in accordance with the provisions of the EP&A Act and Regulations.

C. Council request the plan making delegation under Section 3.36(2) of the EP&A Act for this Planning Proposal.

D. Upon receipt of a Gateway Determination, the exhibition and consultation process is carried out in accordance with the Gateway Determination and requirements of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979.

For the Resolution: The Mayor, Councillor Anderson, Councillors Clarke, Greenfield, Smith and Szatow.

Against the Resolution: Councillors Kay, Kelly, Ngai, Pettett and Spencer.

The voting being EQUAL, the Mayor exercised her Casting Vote

IN FAVOUR of the Resolution

208

Proposed Synthetic Field at Norman Griffiths Sportsground, West Pymble

File: S07491

Vide: GB.12

To advise Council of the response to the community consultation for the proposed synthetic field at Norman Griffiths Sportsground, West Pymble and provide advice as to an alternate funding source to fund the project shortfall to allow the project to proceed to design and construction.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Pettett/Kelly)

That:

A. Recognising the importance accelerating capital works where feasible to assist with the Covid pandemic recovery, and particularly in light of the opportunities created by the Environmental Planning and Assessment (Local Infrastructure Contributions – Pooling of Contributions) Direction 2020 and the Environmental Planning and Assessment (Local Infrastructure Contributions – Information) Direction 2020, Council fund the shortfall of approximately $1.25 million for the synthetic upgrade of Norman Griffiths Oval from the Ku-ring-gai Contributions Plan 2010 from the “New hockey field and multi-purpose sportsfield” line item.

B. Council proceeds to design and construction of a synthetic surface at Norman Griffiths Sportsground this financial year.

C. All persons who submitted a response during the public exhibition period be provided an update of the decision.

D. The NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, as a stakeholder, be consulted throughout the development of the project.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Motions of which due Notice has been given

209

Draft Housing Strategy for Ku-ring-gai

File: S12198

Vide: NM.1

Notice of Rescission from Councillors Spencer, Ngai, Kay, Kelly and Pettett dated 22 September 2020

We, the undersigned, hereby move on rescinding MM.1 – Draft Housing Strategy for Ku-ring-gai, of the Ordinary Meeting of Council on 22 September 2020. This rescission includes all amendments and supplementary recommendations in relation to the matter.

MOTION:

(Moved: Councillors Spencer/Kelly)

That the above Notice of Rescission as printed be adopted.

Procedural Motion:

(Moved: Councillors Szatow/ Clarke)

That the Motion be now put.

For the Procedural Motion: The Mayor, Councillor Anderson, Councillors Clarke, Greenfield, Smith and Szatow.

Against the Procedural Motion: Councillors Kay, Kelly, Ngai, Pettett and Spencer.

The voting being EQUAL, the Mayor exercised her Casting Vote

IN FAVOUR of the Procedural Motion.

The Motion was put and declared LOST.

For the Motion: Councillors Kay, Kelly, Ngai, Pettett and Spencer.

Against the Motion: The Mayor, Councillor Anderson, Councillors Clarke, Greenfield, Smith and Szatow.

The voting being EQUAL, the Mayor exercised her Casting Vote

AGAINST the Motion.

QUESTIONS WITH NOTICE

Expenditure in 2018 Report

File: FY00561/9

Vide: QN.1

QUESTION:

Question from Councillor Kelly dated 2 October 2020:

Background

Following a question via email from a resident on 24 September 2020 and further exchanges, the Director of Finance explained the contents of the “Other Expenses” of the 2018 Annual Report of Council.

I was confused by the exchange and, although it was not made public, I am sure others would have the same questions with regard to council’s financial situation.

QUESTION:

Could the Director of Finance please provide a detailed accounting of the “Other Expenses” category of the 2018 report, clearly explaining the expenditure of all sums contained within that category in terms that might be understood by a novice in the accounting discipline.

ReSPONSE:

For the year ended 30 June 2018, the Income Statement from the Audited Financial Statements (copy below) showed $18,201k in Other Expenses. The categorisation of expenses is necessary to summarise the data. Other Expenses are the ones that do not generally fit in the other categories. This presentation of financial information is in accordance with accounting standards and requirements of the Office of Local Government.

A breakup of Other Expenses is provided in Note 4 to the Financial Statements, also provided below.

Note: the amount of $1,376k named Other includes catering, community programs, freight, licence fees, medical, property costs, security, venue hire. These are expenses that do not generally fit within the other predetermined categories in Note 4 above.

The Meeting closed at 8:30pm

The Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on 20 October 2020 (Pages 1 - 26) were confirmed as a full and accurate record of proceedings on 17 November 2020.

__________________________ __________________________

General Manager Mayor / Chairperson

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.	P2.1.1.1: Prepare plans and strategies as required by the Local Strategic Planning Statement.
P2.1.1.2: Continue to review the effectiveness of existing strategies, local environmental plans, development control plans and processes across all programs.

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective	Delivery Program Term Achievement	Operational Plan Task
L4.1: The community is informed and engaged in decision making processes for community outcomes.	L4.1.1: Innovative and effective community engagement fosters community participation and a better understanding of Council services, programs and facilities.	L4.1.1.3: Continue to monitor and report on the outcomes of community engagement and consultation and identified policy related issues.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 17 November 2020	GB.2 / 78

Item GB.2	CY00438/8
	16 April 2020

Council Meeting and Public Forum Dates for 2021

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

purpose of report:	To set future Council Meeting and Public Forum dates for 2021.

background:	Section 365 of the Local Government Act 1993 (the Act) requires that Council meet at least 10 times per year, each time in a different month. The dates set for 2021 attempt to avoid school holidays, public holidays and other events that may make attendance for Councillors and/or the public difficult. It is also proposed that Council go into recess from the second week of December to the end of January. Where possible, it is now Council’s practice to set Public Forums on the second Tuesday of each month and Ordinary Meetings of Council on the third Tuesday of each month.

comments:	A Council Meeting and Public Forum cycle for 2021 has been prepared for consideration.

recommendation:	That Council adopt the proposed Council Meeting and Public Forum dates.

Purpose of Report

To set future Council Meeting and Public Forum dates for 2021.

Background

Section 365 of the Local Government Act 1993 (the Act) requires that Council meet at least 10 times per year, each time in a different month.

The dates proposed reflect the new Code of Meeting Practice put to Council at the Ordinary Meeting of Council on 11 June 2019. The dates set for 2021 attempt to avoid school holidays, public holidays and other events that may make attendance for Councillors and/or the public difficult. It is also proposed that Council go into recess from the second week of December to the end of January.

Where possible, it is now Council’s practice to set Public Forums on the second Tuesday of each month and Ordinary Meetings of Council on the third Tuesday of each month.

Comments

The proposed scheduled meeting cycle for 2021 is as follows:

February
9 February 2021	Public Forum
16 February 2021	Ordinary Meeting of Council
March
9 March 2021	Public Forum
16 March 2021	Ordinary Meeting of Council
April
20 April 2021	Public Forum
27 April 2021	Ordinary Meeting of Council
May
11 May 2021	Public Forum
18 May 2021	Ordinary Meeting of Council
June
8 June 2021	Public Forum
15 June 2021	Ordinary Meeting of Council
July
13 July 2021	Public Forum
20 July 2021	Ordinary Meeting of Council
August
10 August 2021	Public Forum
17 August 2021	Ordinary Meeting of Council
September
NONE	Public Forum
14 September 2021	Ordinary Meeting of Council (Mayoral Election)
October
12 October 2021	Public Forum
19 October 2021	Ordinary Meeting of Council
November
9 November 2021	Public Forum
16 November 2021	Ordinary Meeting of Council
December
7 December 2021	Public Forum
14 December 2021	Ordinary Meeting of Council
February
8 February 2022	Public Forum
15 February 2022	Ordinary Meeting of Council

The school holiday periods for 2021 (sourced from https://education.nsw.gov.au/public-schools/going-to-a-public-school/calendars), public holidays (sourced from https://www.nsw.gov.au/about-new-south-wales/public-holidays/) and other potential conflicts in relation to the 2^nd and 3^th Tuesday of the month are listed in the table below, along with a proposed action. This table excludes the proposed recess period during December and January.

School Holiday Period	Public Holidays	Other Considerations	Dates Affected	Proposed Action
5 April 2021 to 16 April 2021	2, 3, 4, 5, 25 April 2021		13 April 2021 Public Forum 20 April 2021 Ordinary Meeting of Council	Ordinary Meeting of Council is pushed back to April 27 2021 and Public Forum to 20 April 2021 for minimal interference.
	14 June 2021	National General Assembly (NGA) of Local Government Conference 20-23 June 2021	22 June 2021	Public Forum is pushed forward to 8 June 2021 and Ordinary Meeting of Council is pushed forward to 15 June 2021.
28 June 2021 to 9 July 2021			None
		Local Government Elections 4 September 2021	14 September 2020 Public Forum	No Public Forum as the September OMC will be held on this date. This OMC will only consist of Mayoral and other election related matters.
20 September 2021 to 1 October 2020	5 October 2020		None.

Recess 2021/2022

It is proposed that the last Public Forum for 2021 be held on Tuesday, 7 December 2021 and that the last Ordinary Meeting of Council for 2021 be held on Tuesday, 14 December 2021, and that Council resume from the recess on Tuesday, 8 February 2022 for Public Forum and Tuesday, 15 February 2022 for the Ordinary Meeting of Council.

School holidays during this period run from Monday, 20 December 2021 to Monday, 27 January 2022.

integrated planning and reporting

Leadership and Governance

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

The organisation is recognised and distinguished by its ethical decision-making, efficient management, innovation and quality customer service.

Council's Governance framework is developed to ensure probity and transparency.

Comply with the requirements of the Local Government Act and Regulations.

Governance Matters

Section 365 of the Local Government Act 1993 (the Act) requires that Council meet at least 10 times per year, each time in a different month.

Risk Management

Nil.

Financial Considerations

Nil.

Social Considerations

Nil.

Environmental Considerations

Nil.

Community Consultation

Nil.

Internal Consultation

Nil.

Summary

Section 365 of the Local Government Act 1993 (the Act) requires that Council meet at least 10 times per year, each time in a different month.

Council’s current practice is to set Public Forums on the second Tuesday of each month and Ordinary Meetings of Council on the third Tuesday of each month.

The dates set for 2021 attempt to avoid school holidays, public holidays and other events that may make attendance for Councillors and/or the public difficult. It is also proposed that Council go into recess from the second week of December to the end of January.

A Council Meeting and Public Forum cycle for 2021 has been prepared for consideration.

Recommendation:

That Council adopt the following Meeting dates:

February
9 February 2021	Public Forum
16 February 2021	Ordinary Meeting of Council
March
9 March 2021	Public Forum
16 March 2021	Ordinary Meeting of Council
April
20 April 2021	Public Forum
27 April 2021	Ordinary Meeting of Council
May
11 May 2021	Public Forum
18 May 2021	Ordinary Meeting of Council
June
8 June 2021	Public Forum
15 June 2021	Ordinary Meeting of Council
July
13 July 2021	Public Forum
20 July 2021	Ordinary Meeting of Council
August
10 August 2021	Public Forum
17 August 2021	Ordinary Meeting of Council
September
NONE	Public Forum
14 September 2021	Ordinary Meeting of Council (Mayoral Election)
October
12 October 2021	Public Forum
19 October 2021	Ordinary Meeting of Council
November
9 November 2021	Public Forum
16 November 2021	Ordinary Meeting of Council
December
7 December 2021	Public Forum
14 December 2021	Ordinary Meeting of Council
February
8 February 2022	Public Forum
15 February 2022	Ordinary Meeting of Council

Michael Wearne

Manager Governance and Corporate Strategy

David Marshall

Director Corporate

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective	Delivery Program Term Achievement	Operational Plan Task
The organisation is recognised and distinguished by its ethical decision-making, efficient management, innovation and quality customer service.	Integrated risk management, compliance and internal control systems are in place to identify, assess, monitor and manage risks throughout the organisation.	Manage, coordinate, support and facilitate the effective operation of Council's Internal Audit function.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 17 November 2020	GB.4 / 96

Item GB.4	FY00623/3
	18 October 2020

Analysis of Land and Environment Court Costs - 1st Quarter 2020 to 2021

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

purpose of report:	To report legal costs in relation to development control matters in the Land and Environment Court for the quarter ended 30 September 2020.

background:	A person may commence proceedings in the Land and Environment Court in relation to a development application which has either been refused by Council or is deemed to have been refused. An appeal may also be commenced in relation to conditions of development consent and the issue of building certificates and orders

comments:	For the three months ended 30 September 2020, Council’s legal and associated payments in relation to the Land and Environment Court were $365,735. This compares with the annual budget of $1,315,300.

recommendation:	That the analysis of Land and Environment Court costs for the quarter ended 30 September 2020 be received and noted.

Purpose of Report

To report legal costs in relation to development control matters in the Land and Environment Court for the quarter ended 30 September 2020.

Background

A person may commence proceedings in the Land and Environment Court in relation to a development application which has either been refused by Council or is deemed to have been refused (a development application is deemed to have been refused if it has not been determined within a period of 40 days or such longer period that may be calculated in accordance with the Act). An appeal may also be commenced in relation to conditions of development consent and the issue of building certificates and orders. Council is a respondent to such proceedings.

Comments

Appeals Lodged

In quarter ended 30 September 2020 there were 6 new appeals lodged with the Land and Environment Court. The number of appeals received in prior years is as follows:

Financial year	Number of appeals received (whole year)
2016/2017	41
2017/2018	45
2018/2019	44
2019/2020	25
2020/2021 (as at 30 September 2020)	6

The appeals commenced during the quarter to 30 September 2020 concerned the following subject matters:

· Multi-unit housing

· Shop-top housing

· Dual occupancy

· New dwelling

· Community lot subdivision

· Childcare centre

costs

For the quarter ended 30 September 2020, Council made payments of $356,735 on appeals and associated expenses in relation to Land & Environment Court matters. This compares with the annual budget of $1,315,300.

In addition to expenditure on appeals, a further amount of $1,951 was spent in obtaining expert advice regarding development assessment matters.

Land & Environment Court Costs 2016/2017 - 2020/2021
*Financial Year*	*Total Costs*	*1st quarter September*	*2nd quarter December*	*3rd quarter March*	*4th quarter June*
2016/2017* (41 appeals lodged)	$1,054,747	$202,574	$196,949	$285,681	$369,543
*Financial Year*	*Total Costs*	*1st quarter September*	*2nd quarter December*	*3rd quarter March*	*4th quarter June*
2017/2018* (45 appeals lodged)	$1,267,706	$221,520	$461,976	$201,332	$382,878
2018/2019* (41 appeals lodged)	$1,648,229	$372,972	$491,788	$336,336	$447,133
2019/2020* (25 appeals lodged)	$1,892,040	$417,046	$446,071	$543,218	$485,705
2020/2021 (6 appeals lodged)	$356,735	$356,735

* Costs reported to Council in previous reports

The costs incurred in the period to 30 September 2020 represent 27% of the annual budget of $1,315,300.

As noted above, the number of appeals lodged up until current calendar year has been high. The commencement of appeals does not lie within the control of Council, however there a number of factors that appear to have influenced the volume of appeals:

· Amendments to the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act made in 2013 reduced the timeframe for lodgement of an appeal from twelve months to six months. This had the effect of applicants for more substantial and complex development proposals lodging appeals for no other reason than as a mechanism to preserve early appeal rights. The number of development applications received by Council in recent periods has itself been high. The recent amendments to the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act which took effect in August 2020, reinstated the appeal timeframe to 12 months.

· In addition, the prospect of changing economic market conditions in recent periods appears to have led to urgency on the part of developers, with a particularly high number and proportion of appeals commenced at an early stage on the basis of deemed refusal. As a result, Court listings are currently heavily booked and long delays for several months for the holding of both mediation conferences and hearings are occurring. Most recently, this situation has been exacerbated as a result of disruption caused by measures associated with COVID-19.

· Due to the abovementioned delays in the listing of Court-convened mediation conferences, the Court has required parties to participate in without-prejudice meetings in the meantime. These meetings have tended to result in additional iterations of amended plans being provided by applicants during the appeal process and therefore, additional costs.

Current delays in the Court have resulted in limited progress of many of the current appeals. Notwithstanding these factors, Council’s overall success rate in appeals has been high.

In relation to costs recovered, the amount of $73,500 had been recovered as at the end of the quarter to 30 September 2020 compared to an annual budget for costs recovered of $104,100.

Outcomes

At an early stage of each appeal, Council as respondent, is required to file with the Court a Statement of Facts and Contentions outlining the grounds which Council asserts as warranting refusal of a development, or alternatively, that may be addressed by way of conditions of consent.

In cases where issues raised by Council are capable of resolution by the provision by the applicant of additional information or amendment of the proposal, it is the Court’s expectation that this should occur. The Court’s current practice of listing appeals for a preliminary mediation conference before a Commissioner of the Court pursuant to section 34 of the Land & Environment Court Act, strongly encourages this.

In this context, any of three outcomes can be regarded as favourable, namely:

1. If the appeal is in relation to a deemed refusal of an application which, upon assessment, is appropriate for approval: that the development is determined by Council, allowing the appeal to be discontinued by the applicant and avoiding as much as is practicable the incurring of unnecessary legal costs;

2. If the issues raised by Council are capable of resolution by the applicant providing further information, or amending the proposal: that this occurs, so that development consent should be granted, either by Council or the Court;

3. If the issues raised by Council are either not capable of resolution or the applicant declines to take the steps that are necessary to resolve them: that the appeal is either discontinued by the applicant, or dismissed (refused) by the Court.

Seven matters were concluded during the quarter. A wholly or partly favourable outcome was achieved in all matters:

· One matter was discontinued by the applicant;

· Three matters were resolved by agreement in accordance with an amended proposal;

· Three matters were upheld in accordance with an amended proposal.

integrated planning and reporting

Leadership & 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.

Achieve financial sustainability targets

identified in the Long Term Financial

Plan.

Undertake quarterly reporting to Council on the financial performance of the

organisation.

Governance Matters

Under Section 428 of the Local Government Act 1993, Council is required to report legal costs, and the outcome of each case in its Annual Report.

Risk Management

Quarterly reporting of legal costs to Council together with information about the number, character and outcomes of proceedings enable ongoing oversight of this area of Council’s activity.

Financial Considerations

Land & Environment Court legal costs form part of Council’s recurrent operating budget.

Social Considerations

None undertaken or required.

Environmental Considerations

None undertaken or required.

Community Consultation

None undertaken or required.

Internal Consultation

This report has been developed with input from Council’s Corporate Lawyer, Director Corporate and Director Development & Regulation.

Summary

For the quarter ended 30 September 2020, Council made payments of $365,735 on Land & Environment Court appeals. This compares with the annual budget of $1,315,300.

Recommendation:

That the analysis of Land and Environment Court costs for the year ended 30 September 2020 be received and noted.

Tony Ly

Financial Accounting Officer

Jamie Taylor

Corporate Lawyer

Michael Miocic

Director Development & Regulation

David Marshall

Director Corporate

Attachments:

A1⇩

Individual Case Summary September 2020 - Land and Environment Court Costs

2020/322636

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 17 November 2020	GB.5 / 109

Item GB.5	FY00623/3
	2 November 2020

Investment Report as at 31 October 2020

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

PURPOSE OF REPORT:	To present Council’s investment portfolio performance for October 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 October 2020 was $1,251,000, against an annual budget of $1,197,000 giving a year to date favourable variance of $54,000.

recommendation:	That the summary of investments performance for October 2020 be received and noted; and that the Certificate of the Responsible Accounting Officer be noted and the report adopted.

Purpose of Report

To present Council’s investment portfolio performance for October 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

Investment Portfolio Performance Snapshot

The table below provides the investments portfolio performance against targets identified in Council’s Investment Policy as well as other key performance indicators based on industry benchmarks.

Cumulative Investment Returns against Budget

The net return on investments for the financial year to 31 October 2020 was $1,251,000 against an annual budget of $1,197,000 giving a year to date favourable variance of $54,000 as shown in the table below.

A comparison of the cumulative investment returns against year to date budget is shown in the Chart below.

Cash Flow and Investment Movements

Council’s total cash and investment portfolio at the end of October 2020 was $200,102,000 compared to $203,842,000 at the end of September 2020, a net cash outflow of $3,740,000 was mainly due to creditor payments.

Two investments matured and one new investment was made during the month. The funds were invested in shorter-term investments for higher rates of return.

Investment Performance against Industry Benchmark

Overall during the month of October the investment performance was above the industry benchmark. The benchmark is specific to the type of investment and the details are provided below. AusBond Bank Bill Index is used for all Council’s investments.

Table 1 - Investments Performance against Industry Benchmarks

Table 2 below provides a summary of all investments by type and performance during the month.

Attachment A1 provides definitions in relation to different types of investments.

Table 2 - Investments Portfolio Summary during October 2020

Investment by Credit rating and Maturity Profile

The allocation of Council’s investments by credit rating and the maturity profile are shown below:

integrated planning and reporting

Leadership & 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

Council maintains and improves its long term financial position and performance

Continue to analyse opportunities to expand the revenue base of Council

Governance Matters

Council’s investments are made in accordance with the Local Government Act (1993), the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 and Council’s Investment Policy.

Section 212 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 states:

(1) The responsible accounting officer of a council:

(a) must provide the council with a written report (setting out details of all money that the council has invested under section 625 of the Act) to be presented:

(i) if only one ordinary meeting of the council is held in a month, at that meeting, or

(ii) if more than one such meeting is held in a month, at whichever of those meetings the council by resolution determines, and

(b) must include in the report a certificate as to whether or not the investment has been made in accordance with the Act, the regulations and the council’s investment policies.

(2) The report must be made up to the last day of the month immediately preceding the meeting.

Risk Management

Council manages the risk associated with investments by diversifying the types of investment, credit quality, counterparty exposure and term to maturity profile.

Council invests its funds in accordance with The Ministerial Investment Order.

All investments are made with consideration of advice from Council’s appointed investment advisor, CPG Research & Advisory.

Financial Considerations

The budget for interest on investments for the financial year 2020/2021 is $3,580,800. Of this amount approximately $2,514,600 is restricted for the benefit of future expenditure relating to development contributions, $671,800 transferred to the internally restricted Infrastructure & Facility Reserve, and the remainder of $394,400 is available for operations.

Social Considerations

Not applicable.

Environmental Considerations

Not applicable.

Community Consultation

None undertaken or required.

Internal Consultation

None undertaken or required.

Certification - Responsible Accounting Officer

I hereby certify that the investments listed in the attached report have been made in accordance with Section 625 of the Local Government Act 1993, clause 212 of the Local Government General Regulation 2005 and Council’s Investment Policy.

Summary

As at 31 October 2020:

· Council’s total cash and investment portfolio is $200,102,000.

· The net return on investments for the financial year to October 2020 was $1,251,000 against an annual budget of $1,197,000, giving a YTD favourable variance of $54,000.

Recommendation:

That:

A. The summary of investments and performance for October 2020 be received and noted.

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

Tony Ly

Financial Accounting Officer

Angela Apostol

Manager Finance

David Marshall

Director Corporate

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 17 November 2020	GB.6 / 124

Item GB.6	S09112/9
	19 October 2020

2020 - 2021 Budget Review - 1st Quarter ended September 2020

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Purpose of report:	To inform Council of the results of the first quarter budget review of 2020/21 and proposed adjustments to the annual budget based on the actual financial performance and trend for the period 1 July 2020 to 30 September 2020.

background:	Section 203(1) of the Local Government Regulation 2005 requires that at the end of each quarter, a Budget Review Statement be prepared and submitted to Council that provides the latest estimate of Income and Expenditure for the current (2020/21) financial year.

comments:	Budget adjustments proposed in this review will decrease the forecast operating surplus (excluding capital items) by $2.7m compared to revised budget, primarily due to the financial impact of COVID-19 pandemic and increase in depreciation expense, partly offset by other adjustments in income and expense as detailed in the report. The forecast working capital balance at 30 June 2020 is projected to decrease to $4.3m, lower than the Long Term Financial Plan target of $5.2m. This includes the unfunded net loss of $969k from COVID-19 Pandemic. It is recommended that further savings are identified by December Quarterly Budget Review (QBR) to offset the loss and bring the working capital back to its LTFP target.

recommendation:	That the September 2020 Quarterly Budget Review and the recommended changes are received and noted. That further savings to fund the net loss from COVID-19 Pandemic are identified and reported as part of December QBR.

Purpose of Report

Background

In accordance with Part 9, Division 3, Clause 203 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 (“The Regulation”):

(1) Not later than 2 months after the end of each quarter (except the June quarter), the responsible accounting officer of a council must prepare and submit to the council a budget review statement that shows, by reference to the estimate of income and expenditure set out in the statement of the council’s revenue policy included in the operational plan for the relevant year, a revised estimate of the income and expenditure for that year.

(2) A budget review statement must include or be accompanied by:

a) a report as to whether or not the responsible accounting officer believes that the statement indicates that the financial position of the council is satisfactory, having regard to the original estimate of income and expenditure, and

b) if that position is unsatisfactory, recommendations for remedial action.

(3) A budget review statement must also include any information required by the Code to be included in such a statement.

The Office of Local Government has developed a set of minimum requirements that assists councils in meeting their obligations as set out in legislation.

At the Council meeting held on 30 June 2020, Council adopted the Revised Delivery Program 2018-2021 & Operational Plan 2020-2021, which incorporated the Annual Budget for 2020-2021.

Comments

This review analyses Council’s financial performance for the first quarter of 2020/21 and forecasts an end of financial year position by recommending budget adjustments to operating and capital budget.

Budget adjustments proposed in this review will decrease the forecast operating surplus (excluding capital items) by $2.7m compared to revised budget. This is primarily due to the financial impact of COVID-19 Pandemic and increase in depreciation expense, which is partly offset by other adjustments in income and expense as detailed in the report.

Financial impact and proposed funding of COVID-19 Pandemic

A major variation proposed for this review includes budget adjustments for loss of income and reduced costs (where possible) associated with COVID-19 Pandemic.

For estimating the financial impacts, it has been assumed that the COVID-19 Pandemic will continue to affect Council and the community for a period of at least 12 months therefore this report reflects the impact and proposed funding for the current financial year only and projects a forecast result to June 2021.

As the situation develops, the impacts are likely to vary from the estimates provided and further impacts will be assessed and reported to Council as part of the December review.

Funding Options of COVID -19 Pandemic

The estimated net financial impact (loss of revenue less reduced cost associated with the pandemic) for the current financial year has been estimated at $1.7m.

Council staff considered various options to fund the financial impacts of the pandemic in the short term, and recommends a combination of funding sources below. These include projected end of year savings from employee costs ($298k) across all departments due to deferral of employee performance incentive and the subsidy received for increased emergency levy ($439k) to partly offset increased costs. It must be noted that these options only partially fund the projected loss, therefore it is recommended that management continue to analyse and identify potential savings to cover the shortfall by December Quarterly Budget review (QBR). A total of $969k remains to be funded and will be reported to Council as part of the December QBR.

A summarised funding statement of the financial impact from COVID – 19 Pandemic is presented below:

It must be noted that due to the changing environment, the financial impacts are uncertain and close monitoring is required for the next few months to assess if funding sources identified are sufficient. It may be still necessary to spend reserves and working funds in the short term, which will need to be replenished in the future years to ensure Council has adequate liquidity and funds in reserve against possible unforeseen events.

Further to COVID-19 related budget adjustments, other adjustments are also recommended in this review and are discussed further in the report.

As mentioned above, the forecast operating surplus (excluding capital items) to June 2021 will decrease by $2.7m compared to revised budget. This is primarily due to the financial impact of COVID-19 Pandemic and increase in depreciation expense which is partly offset by adjustments in income and expense as detailed below.

The change to the operating income ($2.7m) is largely due to a decrease in user fees and other revenue mainly:

· Estimated loss of “user fees” due to COVID-19 related business interruption such as:

o Ku-ring-gai fitness and aquatic centre ($1.4m) partly offset by reduced expenditure;

o Postponement of St Ives Medieval Faire ($559k) fully offset by expenditure;

o Reduced Art centre income ($259k), permits and car parking fees ($205k) and a range of other community facilities ($122k);

o Development assessment revenue ($75k) partly funded by increased restoration fee income ($532k) offset by expenditure and work zone income ($150k);

· Increase in “rates” ($142k) due to higher than forecast supplementary rates;

· Decrease in “other revenue” due to estimated COVID-19 related loss of income such as parking fines ($700k) and other adjustments to community leases ($56k);

· Increased grants due to COVID-19 stimulus received ($439k) to offset increased Emergency Services Levy (ESL) expense ($370k); waste management grant (312k) partly offset by a transfer/ reclassification of R2R operational grant to capital grant ($588k);

The change to the operating expenditure ($3k) is mainly due to a combination of reduced expenditure mainly offset by increase in depreciation as detailed below:

· Decrease in “employee costs” due to deferral of the employee performance incentive scheme and less than budgeted award increase ($622k);

· Decrease in “materials and contracts” due to COVID-19 related business closures such as Ku-ring-gai fitness and aquatic centre ($927k), art centre and events contractors ($97k); Increased restoration contractors ($500k) offset by income and increased ESL fees for RFS and SES ($101k);

· Decrease in “interest expense” due to lower than budgeted interest rates ($258k);

· Decrease in “other expenses” due to lower advertising costs ($57k), parking and traffic infringement commission ($40k) and community rental rebates ($79k);

· Increased Emergency Services Levy (ESL) ($269k);

· Increased depreciation as a result of revaluation of infrastructure asset ($1.75m);

· Decreased operating project expenditure for St Ives Medieval Faire expenditure ($559k) (offset by income), offset by increased budget for PPE and other COVID-related costs ($45k).

Capital Budget

Major adjustments to the capital budget are due to:

· Projects deferred to future financial years ($23m);

· Capital grants and contributions received, mainly from Transport NSW for the Lindfield Village Green project ($8.9m);

· Unexpended Showground Stimulus grant allocated ($1.6m)

Other budget adjustments to capital projects are detailed further in the report and listed in Attachment A2.

The forecast working capital balance at 30 June 2021 is projected to decrease to $4.4m, moderately lower than the Long Term Financial Plan target of $5.2m.

Quarterly Budget Review Statements (QBRS)

The Quarterly Budget Review Statements (QBRS) as prescribed by the OLG guidelines are composed of the following budget review reports:

· Income and Expenses Budget Review Statement (Table 1)

· Capital Budget (Expenditure and Funding) Budget Review Statement (Table 2)

· Proposed Operating Budget Adjustments by Resource Group (Table 3)

· Proposed Capital Budget Adjustments by Resource Group (Table 4)

· Income and Expenses Statement by Theme (Table 5)

· Cash and Investments position (Table 6)

· Contracts and Consultancy Expenses (Table 7)

· Capital and Operational Projects Summary (Table 8)

· Statement by the Responsible Accounting Officer

These statements are shown below.

Proposed Budget Adjustments

The table below lists the proposed budget adjustments, including comments for the September Quarterly Budget Review.

Attachment A2 summarises all proposed budget adjustments for Projects.

The table below splits the current budget by six themes identified within Council’s Delivery Program 2018 – 2021. These themes are used as a platform for planning our activities to address the community’s stated needs and aspirations.

Cash and Investments position

Restricted funds are invested in accordance with Council’s Investment Policy. Total investments portfolio as per the September Investment Report is $203.8m.

A detailed Restricted Assets Report as at September 2020 (Actual) is shown in Attachment A1.

Contracts and Consultancy Expenses

Capital & Operational Projects Summary

Actual expenditure for capital and operational projects for the period ending 30 September 2020 is $13.2m against the full year budget of $136.5m. The September review decreases the forecast project budget by $13.9m, mainly from projects deferred ($24m) partly offset by new grants received ($8.9m) and allocated of unexpended grants ($1.64m).

The table and chart below shows the YTD actual project expenditure against 2020/21 full year revised budget and projected forecast.

The proposed budget changes to operational and capital projects represent a decrease of $13.9m. The most significant variations and projects proposed for adjustment are listed below:

Grants and contributions received

· Lindfield Village Green project - ($5.4m) contribution from Transport NSW as per anticipated milestone completion;

· St Ives Show Ground ($1.6m) stimulus grant;

· HPAA – Gordon ($1.1m);

· Turramurra Memorial Park Pavilion upgrade ($874k).

Projects deferred

· Indoor sports centre at St Ives High Scholl ($8m) deferred to 2020-21;

· New street between Gilroy Road and Turramurra Avenue ($4.5m) deferred to 2020-21;

· Bedes Forest Upgrade ($3m) deferred to 2020-21;

· Construction of new street, Turramurra (15m wide, two way traffic) ($1.3m) deferred to 2022/23;

· St Ives Village Green New Recreation Precinct ($1m) deferred to 2020-21.

All Proposed Budget adjustments for each Project and explanation for the changes are detailed in

Attachment A2 – Summary of Capital and Operational Project Budget Adjustments

Statement by Responsible Accounting Officer

It is my opinion the Quarterly Budget Review Statement for Ku-ring-gai Council for the quarter ended 30 September 2020 indicates that Council’s projected financial position at 30 June 2021 will be satisfactory, having regard to the projected estimates of income and expenditure and the original budgeted income and expenditure.

Due to the changing environment related to COVID-19 Pandemic, financial impacts are uncertain and are likely to vary from the estimates provided and further impacts will be assessed and reported to Council as part of the quarterly budget reviews.

One of Council’s key performance indicators in the Long Term Financial Plan (LTFP) is to provide for a minimum available working capital balance of $5.2m. The forecast working capital balance at 30 June 2021 projected to decrease to $4.4m, moderately lower than the Long Term Financial Plan target.

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

Section 203(1) of the Local Government Regulation 2005 requires that at the end of each quarter, a Budget Review Statement be prepared and submitted to Council that provides the latest estimate of Income and Expenditure for the current financial year.

Risk Management

Income and expenditure is managed through the quarterly budget review process. Although some income and expenditure cannot be directly controlled, it can be monitored and action taken to mitigate potential financial or budgetary risk. Further, Council staff utilise monthly management reporting for managing operational and project income and expenditure, and any budget variations are reported to the Director. The executive team are also provided with monthly financial reports that allow Directors to make informed decisions and plan ahead to ensure budget targets are met.

Financial Considerations

Budget adjustments proposed in this review will decrease the forecast operating surplus (excluding capital items) by $2.7m compared to revised budget. This is primarily due to the financial impact of COVID-19 Pandemic and increase in depreciation expense which is partly offset by other adjustments in income and expense.

The forecast working capital balance at 30 June 2020 is projected to decrease to $4.3m, lower than the Long Term Financial Plan target of $5.2m. This includes the unfunded net loss of $969k from COVID-19 Pandemic. It is recommended that management identifies further savings by December QBR to offset the loss and bring the working capital back to its LTFP target.

Social Considerations

Not applicable.

Environmental Considerations

Not applicable.

Community Consultation

Not applicable.

Internal Consultation

Finance met with directors and managers as part of the Quarterly Budget Review process to ensure departmental budget targets reflect current forecasts.

Summary

The recommended budget adjustments proposed in this review will decrease the forecast operating surplus (excluding capital items) by $2.7m compared to revised budget. This is primarily due to the financial impact of COVID-19 Pandemic and increase in depreciation expense which is partly offset by other adjustments in income and expense.

The forecast working capital balance at 30 June 2020 is projected to decrease to $4.3m, lower than the Long Term Financial Plan target of $5.2m. This includes the unfunded loss of $969k from COVID-19 Pandemic. It is recommended that management continue to identify further savings by December QBR to offset the loss and bring the working capital back to its LTFP target.

Due to the changing environment related to the COVID-19 Pandemic, financial impacts are uncertain and ongoing close monitoring is required to assess the financial impact and proposed funding sources.

Recommendation:

That:

A. The September 2020 Quarterly Budget Review and the recommended changes be received and noted.

B. Further savings to fund the net loss from COVID-19 Pandemic are identified and reported as part of December QBR.

Angela Apostol

Manager Finance

David Marshall

Director Corporate

Attachments:	A1⇩	Attachment A1 - Restricted Assets Report - September 2020		2020/315626
	A2⇩	Attachment A2 - Summary of Capital and Operational Project Budget Adjustments - September 2020		2020/315627

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 17 November 2020	GB.7 / 166

Item GB.7	S11276

Funding of Council Infrastructure Assets

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

purpose of report:	For Council to consider the funding of infrastructure assets.

background:	In March 2020, Council resolved as follows (in part): “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.”

comments:	Council’s main financial challenge is to manage its existing infrastructure assets with a replacement cost of $1.2 billion. Over a long period, infrastructure assets have been in decline. This is being addressed within limited financial resources. There has been a strong focus on renewing roads over the last decade and while the overall condition has improved, a backlog of roads in unsatisfactory condition remains. With regard to buildings however, most are run down and have not been renewed for many years. The stormwater network is also very old and the original pipes have not been renewed. Existing footpaths extending for some 398km have been adequately maintained, however there is a further 640km of street frontage within the LGA that does not have a footpath. There is risk associated with funding some of the planned infrastructure works due to uncertainty in achieving asset sales.

recommendation:	That Council receive and note this report.

Purpose of Report

For Council to consider the funding of infrastructure assets.

Background

In March 2020, Council resolved as follows:

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.

An update report was provided to Council in September 2020. It advised that Council had experienced a delay in the independent assessment of asset conditions due to the industry demand for the service and the COVID-19 restrictions. The assessment is now complete and is provided for Council to consider.

Comments

Council is custodian of infrastructure assets with a replacement cost of $1.2 billion. These assets have been in decline over many years. Overall, about 40% of the life of Council’s assets has been used up, with the value remaining in the assets about $700m.

There has been a growing awareness of the need to renew existing infrastructure assets, one of the most important elements of financial sustainability for a council. Infrastructure assets should be in a condition suitable for their intended purpose and over time enough should be spent to ensure this is maintained. This means that the amount spent on renewing existing assets should be at least equal to the amount of depreciation of those assets. Ideally, the expenditure is greater than depreciation such that any existing backlog (assets not in a satisfactory condition) can be reduced.

Council has endeavoured to address its infrastructure management challenges in recent years. There has been a strong focus on renewing roads over the last decade and while the overall condition has improved, a backlog of roads in unsatisfactory condition remains. With regard to buildings however, most are run down and have not been renewed for many years. The stormwater network is also very old and the original pipes have not been renewed. Existing footpaths extending for some 398km have been adequately maintained, however there is a further 640km of street frontage within the LGA that does not have a footpath.

Council is undertaking a large program of new building works. It is currently constructing the Lindfield Village Green and is progressing towards the construction of the St Ives Indoor Sports Centre, Marian St Theatre rebuild and Lindfield Hub.

Over a long period, infrastructure assets have been in decline. This is being addressed but the response is limited by financial constraints, and there is risk associated with funding some of Council’s planned infrastructure works due to uncertainty in achieving asset sales.

This report reviews the following:

1) Funding required from property asset sales

2) Funding for new infrastructure assets and the upgrade/expansion of existing assets

3) Funding for the renewal of existing infrastructure assets

4) Major town centre projects

1) Funding required from property asset sales

A major part of Council’s financial and asset strategy is the use of funds from the sale of various property assets to fund renewal of existing infrastructure assets, to upgrade existing assets and to construct new assets.

Listed below is the expenditure on infrastructure requiring funding from asset sales over the next 10 years.

Renewal of Existing Assets $39m

Upgrade / New Assets $37m

Major Town Centre projects $45m

TOTAL $121m

Council had anticipated being able to fund the majority of the above works from the sale of the existing Lindfield Library and the Gordon and East Roseville Bowling Club sites. This was on the basis of the bowling clubs being zoned for R3 residential development. However the State Government has not approved the R3 zoning and Council is now pursuing approval at R2 zoning. This means that funding available from the possible future sale of these properties will be substantially reduced.

Other properties will need to be identified for possible sale, or else the infrastructure program reduced.

2) Funding for new infrastructure assets and the upgrade/expansion of existing assets

Council is upgrading existing assets and building new assets at a cost of $146m over 10 years (excluding major town centre projects).

Funding from low risk revenue sources such as rates and s7.11 is $109m. There is also funding of $37m from asset sales, which as discussed earlier in this report is uncertain.

The projects with funding from asset sales are the St Ives Indoor Sports Centre ($13.5m), Marian St Theatre ($14.9m) and various s7.11 projects ($8.6m).

Council has resolved to fund the asset sales portion of the St Ives Indoor Sports Centre ($13.5m) from a loan, to be repaid when assets are sold. If the loan is not repaid from asset sales, repayments of $850k pa would need to be funded (20 year loan at 2.2%).

New Footpaths:

There are existing footpaths extending for 398km, however many streets do not have footpaths at all. To construct new footpaths on both sides of the street throughout the LGA would cost approximately $190m (for 640km). To construct new footpaths such that there was at least a footpath on one side of the street would cost approximately $80m (for 274km).

The current funding for footpaths over the next 10 years is approximately $2.8m. This includes $2.1m for s7.11 funded works such as main street improvements.

Most of the existing footpaths were built many years ago and successive councils have not extended the network. The funding required to construct new footpaths in areas without them is of such a large magnitude that it is beyond the financial capacity of Council to meaningfully address within existing resources.

An option to provide some additional funding towards new footpaths would be by decreasing planned expenditure on asset renewal. However as shown in this report, this would be detrimental to existing infrastructure assets. Building new assets makes the renewal problems worse. This is because new assets require redirection of funds that could have been spent on renewal, and further, additional assets increase the future maintenance and renewal burden.

Another option would be to decrease other services or projects, however the funding required to make a genuine impact on constructing new footpaths is so large that in reality a major additional income source would need to be found.

Council could consider a special rates levy for the construction of new footpaths. A 5% special rates increase would provide additional funds of approximately $3m pa. An application to IPART for a special rates increase would need to address infrastructure assets holistically and deal with the wider issues raised in this report.

If it is a priority for Council to provide some additional funding for new footpaths in the interim without adding a significant funding burden, it could increase the budget for new footpaths by a moderate amount (say $2m) and add it to the current allocation of $2.8m over the next 10 years. This would then provide $4.8m for new footpaths over 10 years.

An additional budget of $2m would fund approximately 7km of new footpaths (from the missing 640km) which would be allocated to the highest priority works.

3) Funding for the renewal of existing assets

Council has depreciable assets with a replacement cost of $1.2 billion.

Funding for renewal from low risk revenue sources of $202m, such as rates, is enough to almost cover depreciation over 10 years. This means that the overall condition of assets should not deteriorate further.

There is also renewal funding of $39m budgeted from asset sales which would reduce the backlog. However as discussed earlier in this report, this funding is uncertain.

To eliminate the backlog, a further $62m in funding would be required (which is unfunded).

Note that the backlog amount referred to above is an estimate of the practical cost to renew assets that are not in a satisfactory condition. This differs from the concept of "Cost to Satisfactory" which is a theoretical cost calculated assuming assets are able to be partly renewed to bring them to a satisfactory condition only, not an ‘as new’ condition. In many cases it is not practical or possible to partly renew an asset, such as a road pavement.

A breakup of asset renewal by asset type is shown on following pages.

Council has almost 200 buildings with a replacement cost of $181m. Most were built many decades ago and are run down and do not meet contemporary expectations. Approximately one third of buildings do not comply with requirements for disability access.

The renewal expenditure budget of $48m would be enough to cover the depreciation of buildings over the 10 year period and most of the existing backlog of assets in an unsatisfactory condition. Note that this backlog relates to the technical condition of assets, rather than function and modern preferences.

If asset sales funding of $22m is not realised, the overall condition of buildings will continue to deteriorate.

Council has a road/kerb and gutter network with a replacement cost of $566m.

The renewal expenditure budget of $113m would be enough to cover the depreciation of roads and kerb and gutter over the 10 year period, so theoretically the network would not deteriorate.

To eliminate the backlog of assets in an unsatisfactory condition, a further $68m in funding would be required (which is unfunded).

Council’s existing footpath assets have a replacement cost of $72m.

The renewal expenditure budget of $19m would theoretically exceed the existing backlog and depreciation over the 10 year period by $5m.

There is scope to transfer funding from footpaths renewal to other asset categories which are not as well funded.

The issue of constructing new footpaths was discussed earlier in this report.

Council has a stormwater network with a replacement cost of $242m.

The renewal expenditure budget of $21m would be enough to cover the depreciation of the stormwater network over the 10 year period, so theoretically the network should not deteriorate overall. However a small backlog of $2m would remain.

Additionally, if asset sales funding of $10m is not realised, the backlog would increase to $12m. In this case, the overall condition of stormwater assets would continue to deteriorate.

The vast majority of the stormwater network consists of very old pipes which have never been renewed. The above backlog figure is minimal, based on the assumption that the assets such as pipes will not need to be replaced. This is because it is not practical to dig up and replace the pipes in most cases, and would be cost prohibitive across the whole network. As such renewal of the network is likely to involve relining of existing pipes where necessary and replacement of pits. There is some degree of uncertainty about the future requirements and cost of renewal and to address this Council has commenced a program of inspection using camera technology. It is possible that the stormwater assets may require additional funding than currently allowed in future years.

These swimming pool, parks, tennis courts and other recreational assets have a replacement cost of $135m.

The renewal expenditure budget of $41m would exceed the existing backlog and depreciation over the 10 year period by $4m.

There is theoretically scope to transfer funding from swimming pool and recreation assets renewal to other asset categories which are not as well funded. It is noted however, that the additional funding is from asset sales which is uncertain.

4) Major town centre projects

The planned major town centre projects involve the construction of many large new buildings, underground car parks and associated infrastructure.

This report has set out some of the financial challenges Council faces in managing infrastructure assets in a sustainable way. If the major town centre projects were to add additional cost to Council’s budget for asset maintenance, renewal and operating costs, there would be less funds available for existing assets and services. Accordingly, these projects have been planned on the basis that they must be cost neutral and not to the detriment of Council’s wider asset management and financial sustainability requirements.

integrated planning and reporting

Leadership & 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

This report addresses the requirements of a Council resolution from March 2020.

Risk Management

Ensuring that infrastructure is in a satisfactory condition is a key element of risk management. There is uncertainty in achieving asset sales to fund some planned infrastructure works.

Financial Considerations

The main financial challenge Council faces is in managing its infrastructure assets with a replacement cost of $1.2 billion. This report provides an analysis of the requirements.

Social Considerations

Approximately one third of Council buildings do not meet disability access requirements. Other accessibility issues may arise if infrastructure is in an unsatisfactory condition.

Environmental Considerations

Older buildings are generally not constructed or fitted out to contemporary environmental standards.

Community Consultation

Community consultation would be required if a special rates increase was pursued.

Internal Consultation

GMD has considered the issues raised in this report and the implications.

Summary

Funding required from property asset sales:

Council requires $121m from asset sales ($37m to undertake planned asset upgrade and expansion projects, $39m for planned asset renewal and $45m for major town centre projects). This funding is uncertain.

Funding for new infrastructure assets and the upgrade/expansion of existing assets:

Council is upgrading existing assets and building new assets at a cost of $146m over 10 years (excluding major town centre projects).

Funding from low risk revenue sources such as rates and s7.11 is $109m. There is also funding of $37m required from asset sales, which is uncertain.

To construct new footpaths on one side of streets which do not currently have them would cost $80m (274 km), or $190m (640km) for both sides of all streets, which is unfunded. To meaningfully address this there would need to be a fundamental change to funding, such as a from special rates increase. If it is a priority for Council to provide some additional funding for new footpaths in the interim without adding a significant funding burden, it could increase the budget for new footpaths by a moderate amount (say $2m) and add it to the current allocation of $2.8m over the next 10 years. This would then provide $4.8m for new footpaths over 10 years.

An additional budget of $2m would fund approximately 7km of new footpaths (from the missing 640km) which would be allocated to the highest priority works.

Funding for the renewal of existing infrastructure assets:

Enough funding is available for asset renewal to almost cover the depreciation of existing assets without funding from asset sales. This means that, theoretically, the condition of infrastructure assets overall should not deteriorate. However, asset sales funding of $39m is relied upon to reduce asset renewal backlogs. A further $56m would be required to eliminate the backlog (assets in an unsatisfactory condition), which is unfunded.

Major town centre projects:

Due to financial constraints including difficulties in funding the renewal of existing infrastructure assets along with planned asset upgrades and other new assets, town centres projects have been planned on the basis that they must be cost neutral and not to the detriment of Council’s wider asset management and financial sustainability requirements.

Recommendation:

That Council receive and note this report.

David Marshall

Director Corporate

George Bounassif

Director Operations

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 17 November 2020	GB.10 / 187

Item GB.10	S07493

Management of Ku-ring-gai Mini Wheels Site - St Ives Showground

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

purpose of report:	To report back to Council on remediation of the former mini-wheels site at St Ives Showground as required OMC149, GB.3, resolution (B), namely “That a report be presented to Council regarding the biodiversity offset funding options to rehabilitate the site in accordance with the Plan of Management.”

background:	At the OMC of 26 May 2015, Council resolved to terminate the licence to Ku-ring-gai Mini Wheels Training Club Inc (KMWTC) for the use of the Mini Wheels club area at the St Ives Showground. This decision was in recognition of the site’s significant ecological value, including a large proportion of the site being part of the Duffy’s Forest EEC.

comments:	Following termination of the licence agreement between Council and Ku-ring-gai Mini Wheels Training Club Inc, Council commissioned a Site Management Plan (SMP) to provide management strategies for protecting the environmental and ecological values of the site ongoing. These actions were largely unfunded at the time. In order to implement requisite site management actions and rehabilitation works, Council has made efforts to secure funding through development offsets (including the NSW Biodiversity Offset Scheme and offsetting under the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act), the NSW Environmental Trust, and the Crown Land Showground Stimulus Grant program. Funding that has been secured will allow for bulk waste removal from site including an estimated 8000 tyres, completion of the draft SMP, and interpretive signage.

recommendation:	That Council note the report on remediation of the former Mini Wheels site.

Purpose

Background

At its meeting of 26 May 2015, Council resolved to terminate the licence to Ku-ring-gai Mini Wheels Training Club Inc (KMWTC) for the use of the designated Mini Wheels club area and clubhouse at the St Ives Showground (the site).

The Licence Agreement between Ku-ring-gai Council and Ku-ring-gai Mini Wheels Training Club Inc. (Mini Wheels) was formally terminated on 8 February 2016.

The decision to terminate the mini-wheels lease and rehabilitate the site was partly in recognition of the site’s significant ecological value, including a large proportion of the site being:

· vegetation commensurate with the Endangered Ecological Community Duffy’s Forest (under the NSW Biodiversity Conservation Act);

· identified as a ‘Priority Management Site’, as part of the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment Saving our Species program for Duffys Forest (previously referred to as the draft Duffys Forest Ecological Community Recovery Plan); and

· located above Coastal Upland Swamp Endangered Ecological Community (under the NSW Biodiversity Conservation Act and the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999).

The intention to rehabilitate the site is clearly articulated within the 2015 St Ives Showground and Precinct Lands Plan of Management (POM) and review of that plan of management, which is currently being developed.

In 2018 Council commissioned a Site Management Plan (SMP) to provide a range of management strategies to protect and enhance the long term environmental, and ecological values of the site while planning for passive recreation use, site enjoyment and required bushfire mitigation measures.

The SMP identified the priority actions of bulk waste removal, estimating 8000 tyres and 54 tonnes of material requiring removal from the site. Additionally, the SMP identified the presence and extent of Phytophthora (a plant pathogen) and the need to manage stormwater on site and isolate the contaminated area to prevent further spread.

The condition of the site is highly variable. Some areas display a high level of resilience and will continue to improve over time with the removal of the ongoing disturbance of the mini-wheel club and require little additional action. Other areas have been highly modified, the soil profiles have been completely removed or soil and other material have been imported. These areas will require complex site remediation works to assist natural regeneration. The removal of the estimated 8000 tyres will be a significant milestone and allow for a reassessment of the site remediation plan.

Comments

Remediation works required at the former mini-wheels site as detailed within the draft SMP include:

• track and trail closure and reconstruction (providing formal tracks and trials for walking and bushfire management);

• fencing and signage;

• options for park furniture/ platforms;

• waste collection and removal;

• excavation and soil relocation;

• reintegrating Duffys Forest soil profiles;

• improving stormwater management and site access;

• improvements / reconstruction of stormwater drainage, creation of aquatic habitats and erosion control basins;

• Phytophthora (a plant pathogen) control;

• weed and pest species removal;

• landscaping, bush regeneration and revegetation works;

• construction of habitat structures; and

• ongoing monitoring.

The required works are able to be broken up into packages.

To date, Council’s focus has been on funding these actions through grants and offset commitments from other Council works currently ongoing on the Showground. Discussions have also been had with other developers seeking offset or soil translocation opportunities from developments within Duffys Forest plant community type.

Additionally, Council has investigated many options for funding including establishment of a Biodiversity Stewardship Agreement (BSA) under the NSW Biodiversity Offset Scheme. However, the establishment of a BSA on this site is not an advisable course of action at this time; due to both complexities related to land ownership (being Crown land) and proposed future use (as addressed within the draft SMP and the draft St Ives Precinct Lands POM.

Council has prioritised the primary actions from the SMP and will consider allocation of funding from the environmental levy and Operations budget as well as grants and other funding sources as they are made available.

The priority actions are the bulk waste removal and containment of Phytophthora on site. These actions are currently underway and tyre removal from the site should be completed early 2021. To progress with the next stages of rehabilitation, Council will seek to align the site management objectives with the St Ives Precinct Lands POM due for finalisation this financial year. This document will also provide the overarching framework for future tracks and public accessibility to site, as well as how the site will integrate passive recreation opportunities.

integrated planning and reporting

Natural Environment

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

N2.1: Our bushland is rich with native flora and fauna.

P1.1: Ku-ring-gai’s unique visual character and identity is maintained.

N2.1.2: Ecological protection and understanding is integrated into land use planning.

P1.1.1: Strategies, plans and processes are in place to protect and enhance Ku-ring-gai’s unique visual and landscape character.

N2.1.2.1: Continually review and implement guidelines, processes and templates for environmental assessments.

N2.1.1.6 Implement the Ku-ring-gai Biodiversity Offsetting Code of Practice for Council owned or care, control and managed land.

Governance Matters

The SMP provides guidance on the actions that are required to rehabilitate the site. However, the overarching objectives will be articulated in the St Ives Precinct Lands POM which is currently in development.

The Plan of Management will reference the SMP as well as the existing Saving Our Species projects relevant to the site.

Risk Management

The risk associated with the site is that Council does not secure the funding required. In order to mitigate against this risk the works have been broken up into packages and prioritised. The current priority is the bulk waste removal which will be completed by early 2021.

Financial Considerations

Council has been in contact with developers seeking offset or soil translocation opportunities within Duffys Forest and will continue to explore avenues to fund rehabilitation through the NSW Biodiversity Offset Scheme and offsetting under Part 5 of the Environmental Protection & Assessment Act.

In 2017 Council was awarded $63,500 from the NSW Environmental Trust to consolidate and rehabilitate remnant Duffys Forest endangered ecological community at the former Mini Wheels site. This project will be completed by October 2021.

In October 2020 Council was unsuccessful in its application to Phase 2 of the NSW Showground Stimulus Funding Program. Council had requested funding for a range of items to enhance the St Ives Showground including $60,000 to go towards the removal of waste rubber tyres from the former Mini Wheels site.

Due to the unsuccessful funding application, budget for the prioritised tyre removal has now been sourced from Council’s existing budgets. Tyre removal is expected to be completed by early 2021.

Social Considerations

Given the current status of the Mini Wheels Site (unoccupied), the remediation works are not considered to impact community use of the site. Conversely, implementation of the proposed rehabilitation will provide educational opportunities, as well as the passive and recreational amenity of this and surrounding areas within the showground.

Environmental Considerations

Works proposed within the SMP will improve both on and off site biodiversity; improving vegetation extent and condition, fauna habitat, bushfire risk and Phytophthora management. Failure to implement site remediation could result in further degradation of the site.

Community Consultation

Community consultation regarding future management of the mini wheels site will be undertaken as part of the draft St Ives Precinct Lands POM.

Consultation related to the proposed site remediation works will be undertaken in line with the draft SMP, which identifies stakeholder and community group roles and responsibilities related to planning and implementation of the proposed works.

Internal Consultation

Internal consultation with operations and community has been undertaken regarding creation of the draft SMP and options for future funding.

Summary

The decision to terminate the mini-wheels lease and rehabilitate the site was partly in recognition of the site’s significant ecological value, including the presence of Endangered Ecological Community Duffy’s Forest.

The site is impacted by significant disturbance which took place over many years, and this includes, site erosion, a large amount of waste material such as tyres and imported soil and fill which remain on the site. The actions required to remediate the site are complex and funding will be sourced from multiple avenues, including offset funds, grants and Council.

The priority for the site is the bulk waste removal and this action will be part grant funded and part funded through Council’s existing budgets. The bulk waste removal will be completed early 2021. This coincides with the development of the St Ives Precinct Lands Plan of Management which will establish specific objectives for the site and how they will integrate with the intended rehabilitation of the site.

Following the development of these planning documents, Council will reassess the remediation requirements of the site and investigate further funding opportunities.

Recommendation:

A. That Council note the report on remediation of the former Mini Wheels site.

Penny Hemsworth

Team Leader - Natural Areas

Jacob Sife

Manager Environment & Sustainability

Andrew Watson

Director Strategy & Environment

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 17 November 2020	GB.11 / 194

Item GB.11	S10066

Proposed Heritage Listing of 207 Eastern Road, Wahroonga

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

purpose of report:	To have Council consider the proposed heritage listing of Laverty House, the property known as 207 Eastern Road, Wahroonga, on Schedule 5 of the Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2015 (‘KLEP 2015’).

background:	On 22 September 2020 Council resolved to make an Interim Heritage Order (‘IHO’) for 207 Eastern Road, Wahroonga using delegated authority and requested a that a Councillor site inspection be undertaken as soon as practicable. The IHO was gazetted on 25 September 2020 and a Councillor site inspection undertaken on Tuesday, 13 October 2020.

comments:	Council has commissioned architect and heritage consultant, Dr Scott Robertson of Robertson and Hindmarsh Pty. Ltd. to prepare a heritage assessment for the property known as 207 Eastern Road, Wahroonga. The assessment considers that the property meets the threshold for local heritage listing on the grounds of historic, associative, aesthetic, social, research, rarity and representative values. The assessment concludes that the property demonstrates significance through its connection with the Laverty family and their strong links to the NSW Art movement, as well as its association with renowned Australian architect Sydney Ancher, as an intact example of the his work.

recommendation:	That a Planning Proposal be referred to the Ku-ring-gai Local Planning Panel (‘KLPP’) for the listing of Laverty House, the property known as 207 Eastern Road, Wahroonga, as an item of local heritage significance on Schedule 5 of the KLEP 2015.

Purpose of Report

Background

On Thursday, 3 September 2020 the property known as 207 Eastern Road, Wahroonga was brought to the attention of Council officers by a group of architects. The group communicated their concern for the property’s vulnerability as an intact example of renowned Australian architect Sydney Ancher’s work, which is located on a large allotment that was (and still is) being advertised for sale. The property is not located within a Heritage Conservation Area (‘HCA’) nor is it within the immediate vicinity of any local or state heritage items.

On Tuesday, 8 September 2020, the potential vulnerability of the property was discussed with the Heritage Reference Committee (‘HRC’), who agreed that an Interim Heritage Order (‘IHO’) should be invoked in this instance. A preliminary heritage assessment was then completed by Council officers on 9 September 2020 (See Attachment A1).

Council has delegated authority under s.25 of the NSW Heritage Act 1977 (‘Heritage Act’) to make an IHO on the property. The purpose of an IHO being to provide Council with time to undertake an independent heritage assessment of the property to establish if it warrants formal heritage listing.

On 22 September 2020, the matter was raised at the OMC. At this meeting, Council resolved:

”Council resolve to place an Interim Heritage Order under section 25 of the NSW Heritage Act 1977 on Laverty House, 207 Eastern Road Wahroonga, Lot B, DP414327, to enable a full and proper evaluation of the heritage significance and prevent any harm to the site in the interim. Once the Interim Heritage Order is in place, that a site inspection for Councillors be arranged as soon as practicable.” (See Attachment A2).

On 25 September 2020 the IHO came into effect. The wording of the IHO is as follows:

“This Interim Heritage Order will lapse six months from the date that it is made unless the local Council has passed a resolution before that date; and

(i) in the case of an item which, in the council’s opinion, is of local significance, the resolution seeks to place the item on the heritage schedule of a local environmental plan with appropriate provisions for protecting and managing the item; or

(ii) In the case of an item which, in the Council’s opinion, is of State heritage significance, the resolution requests the Heritage Council to make a recommendation to the Minister for Heritage under section 32(2) of the Heritage Act to include the item on the State Heritage Register.” (See Attachment A3).

Under the above conditions of the IHO, the order will lapse on 25 March 2021 unless Council passes a resolution to list the item on the Schedule 5 of the KLEP 2015 to protect and manage the item, or it nominates the item for inclusion on the State Heritage Register. A flowchart of the IHO process can be viewed at Attachment A4.

Comments

Following the gazettal of the IHO, the property owner’s representative made contact with Council officers to arrange a meeting to discuss the process. This meeting was held at Council Chambers in person on Thursday, 8 October 2020. The owner’s representative was generally supportive of heritage listing the property however, expressed reservations about the IHO process and any likely impacts that this would have (or continue to have) on the property’s sale campaign. During the meeting, the style and approach to the Council commissioned heritage assessment was discussed, with the possible inclusion of a heritage curtilage review, reference to the advantages of Clause 5.10.10 Heritage Incentives of the KLEP 2015 and any potential for development in this regard.

The property owner’s representative requested that the processes be expedited as much as possible to limit impacts on their current sale campaign. However, it was discussed that the report would not commence until after the site inspection, which was scheduled for Tuesday, 13 October of the following week, and therefore unlikely to make the agenda for the November OMC.

An inspection of the property including the internals of the house was undertaken on Tuesday, 13 October 2020 with Councillors, Council’s commissioned heritage consultant and Council staff. The property owner’s representative and their Real Estate Agent were present and assisted during the inspection. After the inspection, Council’s commissioned heritage consultant was requested to commence their extended heritage assessment and complete as soon as they were able.

The NSW Heritage Assessment Criterion

A heritage item is a place, which may include built structures, landscapes, moveable objects and relics, that have recognised cultural significance. In NSW, heritage items of local significance are assessed against seven (7) criterion:

A. Historical significance – an item is important in the course, or pattern, of the cultural or natural history of the local area;

B. Historical association significance – an item has strong or special association with the life or works of a person, or group of persons, of importance to the local area’s cultural or natural history;

C. Aesthetic significance – an item is important in demonstrating aesthetic characteristics and/or a high degree of creative or technical achievement in the local area;

D. Social significance – an item has a strong or special association with a particular community or cultural group in the local area, for social, cultural or spiritual reasons;

E. Technical/Research significance – an item has potential to yield information that will contribute to an understanding of the local area’s scientific, cultural or natural history;

F. Rarity – an item possesses uncommon, rare or endangered aspects of the local area’s cultural or natural history; and

G. Representativeness - an item is important in demonstrating the principal characteristics of a class of the local area’s cultural or natural places; or cultural or natural environments.

207 Eastern Road – Heritage Assessment

The full heritage assessment has now been completed for Laverty House, the property know as 207 Eastern Road, Wahroonga, by Robertson and Hindmarsh Pty. Ltd. Dr Scott Robertson of this firm is a registered architect, who specialises in Post-war and Modern architecture. The final draft heritage assessment was provided to Council officers on 29 October 2020 (See Attachment A5). The assessment found that the property is of at least local heritage significance and should be included as a heritage item on Schedule 5 of the KLEP 2015.

The heritage assessment considers that the property meets the threshold for local heritage listing on the grounds of historic, associative, aesthetic, social, research, rarity and representative values. The assessment concludes that the property demonstrates significance through its connection with the Laverty family and their strong links to the NSW Art movement, as well as its association with renowned Australian architect Sydney Ancher, as an intact example of the his work.

The comprehensive Statement of Significance prepared by Robertson and Hindmarsh Pty. Ltd. for 207 Eastern Road, Wahroonga, expounds this importance. It reads:

“The substantially intact Laverty House is a rare example of an artist’s residence still with its functioning and identifiable artist studio. The way of life of the Laverty Family is still clearly evident in the extant planning and fabric of the house and studio. The design of the house and studio is of exceptional interest when planned expansion of the house is understood in order to cater for young couples of modest financial means in the post-war years, of post-war frugality, and of their increasing wealth and family size through later additions and enlargement of the small house nucleus.

The Laverty House is of local historical significance in demonstrating the post-World War 2 process of suburban infill development in earlier subdivisions. The Laverty House is of local aesthetic significance as its design exhibits the hallmarks of the Modernism with its clean lines, simple form, and walls of glass. The Laverty House is one of a series of houses within the Ku-ring-gai municipality that demonstrate the emergence of modern architecture in New South Wales, of which the architect Sydney Ancher was a leading proponent.

The Laverty House is of local associative significance because of its strong association with renowned architect, Sydney Ancher and his firm, Ancher, Mortlock & Murray and also because of its association with two prominent Australian artists, Ursula and Peter Laverty, who was Head of the National Art School and later Director of the Art Gallery of NSW. In this regard the house is of historical significance as the site of a meeting that inaugurated the concept of the international art biennale for Sydney. The Laverty House has the potential to yield information about cultural history in NSW, through its association with the artistic world, which is strongly reflected through the extant building fabric, arrangement and composition of elements on the site, including a purpose-built artist studio.

The surviving architectural drawings and the completed Laverty House demonstrate the palette of materials and construction methods employed by the architectural firm of Ancher, Mortlock and Murray that are recognised as forming a regional expression of modern architecture. The Laverty House demonstrates the key characteristics of the domestic work of the firm of Ancher, Mortlock and Murray in the 1940s, 1950s & early 1960s and demonstrates the firm’s use of similar details in houses for young couples of modest means in the economically constrained period after World War II.”

In conjunction with the listing of Laverty House, the report identifies a suggested heritage curtilage, refers to the advantages of Clause 5.10.10 Heritage Incentive of the KLEP 2015 and identifies the development potential for the rest of the site from a heritage perspective, including the possible subdivision arrangement, all of which would be subject to a full planning approval.

In support of the recognised heritage value, it is recommended that Council prepare a planning proposal to include Laverty House - 207 Eastern Road, Wahroonga on Schedule 5 of the KLEP 2015. To support the Planning Proposal a State Heritage Inventory form will also be prepared.

integrated planning and reporting

Theme 3: Places, Spaces and Infrastructure

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

Ku-ring-gai’s heritage is protected, promoted and responsibly managed.

Strategies, plans and processes are in place to effectively protect and preserve Ku-ring-gai’s heritage assets.

Implement, monitor and review Ku-ring-gai’s heritage planning controls including the development of a heritage strategy.

Governance Matters

This report addresses the first stage in obtaining a Gateway Determination for a Planning Proposal which seeks to list an item of local heritage significance under an amendment to Schedule 5 of the KLEP 2015. If the Planning Proposal is supported by the Department, the Planning Proposal will be placed on exhibition seeking further State agency and stakeholder feedback prior to being reported back to Council to decide if the property should be formally listed.

The process for the preparation and implementation of planning proposals is governed by the provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979. Council will seek the plan-making delegation under Section 3.36(2) of the EP&A Act to finalise the Planning Proposal.

Risk Management

There is a community expectation that places of heritage significance within the Ku-ring-gai Council LGA will be identified and protected. There is a strategic risk of damaging the reputation of Council if these culturally significant places are not identified and considered for protection.

Financial Considerations

The cost of preparing this report is covered by the Ku-ring-gai draft Principal Local Environmental Plan - Urban Planning & Heritage Budget – Strategy and Environment Department.

Social Considerations

The identification and protection of Ku-ring-gai’s heritage places contributes to the ongoing conservation of Ku-ring-gai’s community-valued historic landscape and garden suburbs.

Environmental Considerations

The retention and conservation of heritage places has an important role in protecting the environment. The environmental sustainability benefits afforded by the retention of heritage places includes the substantial reduction in building demolition and new construction waste, and the conservation of embodied energy in the existing buildings.

Community Consultation

As part of making the Interim Heritage Order for the site, the IHO was published in the NSW Government Gazette on 25 September 2020. Council advised the property owner on 25 September 2020 that the order had been approved and published in the NSW Government Gazette.

The purpose of the IHO was to enable a full assessment of the property’s heritage significance to be conducted. Council representatives and Dr Scott Robertson visited the property and met with the representatives of the property owner’s representative on 13 September 2020.

The property owner’s representative was notified of this report going before Council and will be further notified and have the opportunity to provide feedback if Council supports its listing in a planning proposal during the formal exhibition period.

Should the Planning Proposal receive a favourable Gateway Determination, it will be exhibited in accordance with the Department’s Gateway Determination requirements and with explanatory heritage information. This will involve appropriate notification and receipt of submissions on the draft Planning Proposal from the relevant State agencies and the general community, and a further report back to Council regarding this matter.

Internal Consultation

Consultation with relevant Departments of Council has taken place in preparing this report, in particular, Development and Regulation. In addition, Council’s Heritage Reference Committee has reviewed the proposed heritage item and moved a unanimous decision to support the listing.

Summary

An assessment of heritage significance supports the findings that Laverty House - 207 Eastern Road, Wahroonga is worthy of inclusion on Schedule 5 of the KLEP 2015. The purpose of this report is to instigate Council’s commencement of a Planning Proposal in relation to this listing.

Recommendation:

That:

A. Council proceed to prepare a Planning Proposal to amend KLEP 2015 to include Laverty House - 207 Eastern Road, Wahroonga [Lot B, DP414327] as a local heritage item on Schedule 5 of the KLEP 2015.

B. The Planning Proposal is referred to the Ku-ring-gai Local Planning Panel (‘KLPP’) for advice in accordance with the Local Planning Panel Direction – Planning Proposals.

C. A report be brought back to Council following the advice from the KLPP for Council to consider whether or not to forward the Planning Proposal for a Gateway Determination under section 3.34 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979.

Vanessa Holtham

Heritage Planner Specialist

Antony Fabbro

Manager Urban & Heritage Planning

Andrew Watson

Director Strategy & Environment

Attachments:	A1⇩	Final Preliminary Heritage Assessment - 207 Eastern Road Wahroonga	2020/285398
	A2⇩	Council Resolution - OMC188 - 207 Eastern Road, Wahroonga	2020/319606
	A3⇩	NSW Gazette - Interim Heritage Order IHO - 207 Eastern Road Wahroonga (Laverty House )	2020/319169
	A4 ⇩	Heritage NSW - Interim heritage orders process flowchart	2020/229568
	A5 ⇩	Robertson and Hindmarsh - Heritage Assessment - 207 Eastern Road (Laverty House)	2020/321901

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 17 November 2020	GB.12 / 263

Item GB.12	S11976

Management of Crown land by Council

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

purpose of report:	To seek Council approval for an approach to be made to the Minister for Lands through the responsible state government agency, the NSW Department of Planning, Industry and Environment, NSW Crown Lands, for transfer of devolved lands to the NSW National Parks Reserve System and for Council to be appointed as a Crown Land Manager for Crown land that it currently administers under section 48 of the Local Government Act 1993 as devolved lands and, where appropriate, as a lessee.

background:	The Crown Land Management Act 2016, which became operative on 1 July 2018, has the principle objective to reform and simplify the ownership, use and management of Crown land. Council provides care control, control and management of Crown land under a number of different legal and procedural frameworks including as a Crown Land Manager (formerly Reserve Trustee) and as a head lessee. In other instances, Crown land notified as devolved lands are managed by Council pursuant to section 48 of the Local Government Act 1993.

comments:	Rationalisation of these arrangements under the one regime by Council managing all Crown Land as a Crown Land Manager under the Crown Land Management Act would help improve the administration of Crown reserves by providing a consistent and unified method of management.

recommendation:	That Council gives approval to the General Manager and/or his delegate to approach the NSW Department of Planning, Industry and Environment, NSW Crown Lands with a view to negotiate and finalise the transfer of devolved lands and Crown land leased to Council’s management in the capacity as a Crown Land Manager. The report also recommends the potential transfer of some devolved lands which adjoin the national park estate to the National Parks and Wildlife Service directorate of the NSW Department of Planning, Industry and Environment.

Purpose of Report

Background

Crown reserves consist of Crown land set aside on behalf of the community for a wide range of public purposes including recreation and sport, open space, community halls as well as for environmental and heritage protection.

Ku-ring-gai Council currently provides care, control and management of Crown reserves through a number of different legal and procedural frameworks, including:

i. in the capacity as the Crown Land Manager (previously Reserve Trust Manager/Trustees) where Council can exercise all the functions conferred upon it under the Crown Land Management Act 2016 (CLM Act).

ii. devolved Lands which comprise Crown land that have been set aside as public reserves for councils to manage in accordance with section 48 of the Local Government Act 1993.

iii. as a lessee where Council has been given exclusive possession to carry out a prescribed activity on a defined parcel of Crown land; and

iv. as a holder of a Permissive Occupancy where Council has been given a revocable licence to conduct a prescribed activity on Crown land generally on a non-exclusive basis.

Each of these frameworks provides Council with differing land management authority and reporting, approval /authorisation processes which is not conducive consistent and effective management of Crown land.

The CLM Act was enacted to reform and simplify the ownership, use and management of Crown land in NSW through the consolidation of several pieces of legislation into one Act. The CLM Act commenced on 1 July 2018 and imposed a number of changes to the way councils formerly managed Crown Reserves including:

· changing the legal status of NSW councils from being Reserve Trusts to “Crown Land Managers”;

· authorising councils appointed as Crown Land Manager for specific dedicated Crown reserves to manage those parcels of Crown land as if it were community land under the Local Government Act 1993 (LG Act) subject to a compliant plan of management being in place;

· the requirement for plans of management under the LG Act to include Crown reserves classified as community land, by July 2021;

· the ability to issue leases and licences once an adopted plan of management was in place in the same manner as prescribed in the LG Act without having to receive Crown approval in most instances; and

· broader and more definitive responsibilities on the part of councils to assess native title when dealing with proposed works on the land and the grant of interests such as leases or licences where occupancy might impact on native title rights. Crown Land Managers are now legislatively required to engage a qualified native title manager to oversee and report on dealings that may affect native title. Associated implications include the potential for liability for compensation for actions taken by councils that have impacted on native title rights as provided for under the Commonwealth Native Title Act 1993 (NT Act) .

Comments

Subject to a final land status audit, Council currently administers some 532 hectares (ha) of Crown land, of which approximately 480 ha is managed in the capacity as a Crown Land Manager and approximately 52 ha as devolved lands. Council also occupies Crown land under leases and licences.

In order to improve the management of Crown lands under a single framework and decrease the complexity of associated management requirements, this report recommends that Council gives approval to the General Manager and/or his delegate to negotiate with the NSW Department of Planning, Industry and Environment, NSW Crown Lands (responsible to the Minister for Lands for management of Crown lands within NSW), the feasibility of categorising devolved and suitable parcels of leased/licensed Crown land to Council as the Crown Land Manager. A copy of the areas currently managed by Council as devolved lands is included in Attachment A1, however this is subject to further verification and investigation.

Council is also a lessee of the Crown and there are instances, such as in the case of the HART site at 451 Mona Vale Road, St Ives, where ongoing occupancy and management of the Crown land would be best facilitated under a Crown Land Manager structure rather than a lease or licence. Council’s approval in this regard is sought to extend to Crown land occupied under lease or licence by Council where it is considered administratively advantageous for Council to be a Crown land Manager rather than a lessee/licensee.

Additionally, a small number of Council managed devolved lands adjoin the NSW National Parks Reserve System (including Garigal and Lane Cove National Parks). A review of these lands suggest that some may be better placed within the National Park estate and managed by the NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS) directorate of NSW Department of Planning, Industry and Environment. This report further recommends that Council endorse negotiations being conducted within the Department to consider the feasibility of transferring the subject parcels of Crown land identified in Attachment A2 to the NPWS reserve system. Should the transfers be approved it should be noted that the lands will continue to be protected for conservation and open space purposes pursuant to the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974. Aspects associated with ownership and management of Council’s infrastructure on these lands, if any, will be addressed as part of any negotiations with the NSW Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (the Department).

Advice from the NSW Office of Local Government is that via a Council resolution, Council can apply to be granted Crown Land Manager status for devolved land and Crown land held under lease/licence by an application to the Department. Transfer of these lands to Council as a Crown Land Manager does not alter ownership, which remains with the Crown, and once a new plan of management is prepared and adopted, all Crown land under Council’s control will be able to be administered and managed consistently in the same fashion as community land under the LG Act.

In order to provide transparency and to enable land management to be carried out more holistically; most councils including Ku-ring-gai have historically included devolved lands within plans of management created for community land under the LG Act. However, the inclusion of devolved lands within such plans has only provided an overall direction rather than specific authorisation governing the use and management of such lands. The transfer of devolved lands to Council as a Crown Land Manager would correct this situation.

Plans of management define the values, use, management practices and intent for the broad public purpose for which the land has been reserved or dedicated. Within plans of management all lands are required to be categorised under Section 36(4) of the LG Act, as a natural area, a sportsground, a park, an area of cultural significance, or for general community use. As there are no changes proposed to the existing use of the devolved lands, the status will reflect those already articulated within existing plans of management.

As Crown Land Managers, councils are already responsible for complying with the NT Act in all their dealings and activities with respect to that Crown land. The addition of devolved lands and Crown land leased/licensed by Council under the Crown Land Manager structure has some risks, which will be dealt with in more detail under Risk Assessment section of this report.

integrated planning and reporting

Natural Environment and Places, Spaces and Infrastructure

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

N2.1: Our bushland is rich with native flora and fauna.

P1.1: Ku-ring-gai’s unique visual character and identity is maintained.

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

N2.1.2: Ecological protection and understanding is integrated into land use planning.

P1.1.1: Strategies, plans and processes are in place to protect and enhance Ku-ring-gai’s unique visual and landscape character.

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

N2.1.2.1: Continually review and implement guidelines, processes and templates for environmental assessments.

P1.1.1.1: Continue to review the effectiveness of existing strategies, plans and processes across all programs.

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

Governance Matters

Under the CLM Act, Council is no longer required to report to the Department/Minister for Lands annually via the online Crown Reserves Reporting System (CRRS). Despite there being no requirement to report annually on Crown Land, Council as a Crown Land Manager will still need to ensure proper accounting and record-keeping as the Department/Minister for Lands may, by written direction, require Council to at any time provide reports or other information on specified matters in relation to Crown Land.

The transfer of Council managed devolved and leased/licensed Crown land under a Council Crown Land Manager structure will enable the majority of Crown land in the Local Government Area to be governed in a unified and consistent manner under a plan of management as opposed to having differing processes and legislative responsibilities for managing Crown land. This will simplify internal processes and enable Council to evaluate the use of all Crown land in a fair and consistent manner increasing its transparency to the public. It will also assist in audit reporting to the Auditor General on the capitalisation of Council’s land-holdings, which are inclusive of Crown land managed.

The proposal is also consistent in meeting the objectives of the CLM Act insofar as streamlining the management of Crown land in NSW.

Risk Management

Council has received legal advice on the risks associated with Council assuming management of devolved lands in the capacity of Crown Land Manager.

Although the former Crown land legislation and the LG Act are largely silent about native title issues applicable to devolved lands, it is not entirely clear if any native title obligations extended to Council in managing devolved lands. Section 48 of the LG Act merely requires Council to “care” for the subject Crown land in accordance with a council’s obligation to exercise its functions in accordance with the Act. However, if Council became a Crown Land Manager of the devolved lands under the CLM Act then it would be required to provide care, control and management of that land including a clear statutory obligation for native title considerations and assessment for acts undertaken once transferred.

Council currently has trained native title managers who have undertaken approved training and, from time-to-time, utilises the services of a specialist consultant to undertake assessment of native title for works on Crown lands and in relation to the granting of legal interests such as leases or licences which might impact on native title.

Council’s legal advice also confirms that Council’s liability for contaminated lands in respect of devolved lands would not change if it became a Crown Land Manager of those lands. Under the Contaminated Land Management Act 1997 the responsible person for contaminated land (other than the entity which in fact caused the contamination) can fall upon the “owner or occupier” of the land. Council already has a potential liability irrespective of whether the control of the lands are under section 48 of the LG Act or as Crown Land Manager.

Council’s contamination data-base, captures known contamination issues, based on past land uses but it does not include any potential historic mine sites or quarries nor does it record incidental dumping. An on-site contamination survey of the devolved lands will be undertaken to assess the level of risk prior to an agreement being reached on the transfer of the lands to Council’s care, control and management as a Crown Land Manager.

A risk assessment for each parcel of devolved land will be undertaken and carefully assessed before any decision is made to formally effect any altered arrangements. This will also include further consultation with the Department, the NPWS and other relevant stakeholders, to ensure that Council is aware of relevant site impediments, including the existence of assets / infrastructure and existing / future management commitments (i.e. asset protection zones, fire trials, bush regeneration groups) and Council’s interests are fully safeguarded.

Financial Considerations

All Crown reserves under Council’s care and control (including devolved lands and managed by Council as Crown Land Manager), are recognised as assets of Council. While ownership of the reserves remains with the Crown, Council retains operational control of the reserves and are responsible for their maintenance and use in accordance with the specific purposes for which the reserves have been dedicated. Improvements on Crown reserves are also recorded as assets, while maintenance costs and revenues relating to the reserves are recognised within Council’s budgetary framework.

The key financial impacts of transferring the devolved and leased/licensed lands to Council as a Crown Land Manager will relate to:

· administrative, time and financial savings due to not having to obtain Crown Land Owners Consent in certain circumstances and not having to pay an application fee for such consent;

· increased work / costs associated with assessing Native Title compliance for these lots; and

· increased potential Native Title liability for acts undertaken following the change.

In the event there is approval given to transferring some of Council’s current managed devolved lands to the Department for addition to the NSW National Parks Reserve System there will be a resultant saving in management and administration costs due to the removal of these lands from Council’s management.

Social and environmental Considerations

The proposed changes are largely administrative in nature. The transfer of Council managed devolved and leased/licensed Crown land under a Council Crown Land Manager structure will enable the majority of Crown land in the Local Government Area to be administered in a unified manner consistent with adopted plans of management. Simplification of approval requirements will streamline management of lease / licences and activity approval processes and reduce approval timeframes and costs, enhancing management and environmental outcomes.

The transfer of some of Council’s managed devolved lands to the NSW National Parks Reserve System, will also provide increased legislative protection for biodiversity protection and management.

Community Consultation

Public consultation is not proposed as this is largely an administrative issue and does not impact on public use and enjoyment of the subject lands. However, consultation regarding the future management of these lands will be undertaken as required by the LG Act and the CLM Act; as Council updates relevant plans of management.

Internal Consultation

Internal consultation has been conducted within all relevant sections of Council, including Operations and Strategy and Environment and Community. Further internal consultation will be undertaken as required during negotiations with the Department.

Summary

Council provides care, control and management of Crown reserves through a number of different legal and procedural frameworks including where Council is the appointed Crown Land Manager under the CLM Act and pursuant to section 48 of the LG Act where Council is vested with the care of devolved lands. Council also occupies Crown land under lease/licence arrangements from the Crown for purposes associated with Council’s core functions. At the present time Council manages around 532 hectares (ha) of Crown Land as a Crown Land Manager with the remaining 52 ha being under Council’s care as devolved lands.

In order to improve the management of Crown lands and decrease the complexity of requirements associated with different management regimes, this report recommends that Council gives approval to the General Manager and/or his delegate to negotiate with the Department of Industry, NSW Crown Lands for the transfer of devolved lands and suitable parcels of leased/licensed Crown land to Council in the capacity as a Crown Land Manager.

This report further recommends that Council approves of the General Manager and/or his delegate being able to negotiate with the Department the potential transfer of selected parcels of devolved lands which adjoin the existing NSW National Parks Reserve System (including Garigal and Lane Cove National Parks) to the National Parks and Wildlife Service. If approved, these transfers will effectively remove these areas from Council’s open space management / reserves, however, it should be noted that they will be afforded an even higher level of legislative protections under the NSW National Parks and Wildlife Act, 1974.

Risks associated with any existing assets/infrastructure, existing site uses, proposals or other arrangements over devolved lands will be individually assessed on a case-by-case basis as a part of the proposed consultation with the Department.

Recommendation:

That:

A. Council resolve that an approach be made to the Department of Industry, NSW Crown Lands for Council to be appointed as a Crown Land Manager for Crown land that it currently administers as devolved lands under section 48 of the Local Government Act 1993, as set out in this report. The approach is to include Crown land that Council presently occupies as a lessee or licensee where it is considered administratively advantageous for Council to manage the land as a Crown land Manager.

B. Council resolve to negotiate and finalise with the Department, the potential transfer of selected parcels of devolved lands which adjoin the existing NSW National Parks Reserve System to the National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS). As ownership of the lands lie with the Department, this matter is entirely one for the Department to approve in consultation with the NPWS.

C. The General Manager and/or his delegate be given authority to undertake all transactions including the signing of any documentation with the Department to give effect to this resolution.

Vince Rago

Property Program Coordinator

Penny Hemsworth

Team Leader - Natural Areas

Steve Johnson

Manager Property

Jacob Sife

Manager Environment & Sustainability

Andrew Watson

Director Strategy & Environment

Attachments:	A1	Crown Land Proposed for Transfer to Crown Land Manager Status		Confidential
	A2	Crown Land Proposed for Transfer to NPWS		Confidential

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 17 November 2020	MM.1 / 28

Item MM.1	S11530/2

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 17 November 2020	GB.1 / 33

Item GB.1	S12564/2

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 17 November 2020	GB.3 / 81

Item GB.3	CY00458/8

Attachments:	A1⇩	ARIC Minutes - 18 June 2020		2020/303380
	A2 ⇩	ARIC Minutes - 10 September 2020		2020/303381

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 17 November 2020	GB.8 / 169

Item GB.8	CY00022/12

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 17 November 2020	GB.9 / 172

Item GB.9	CY00413/8

Attachments:	A1⇩	Heritage Reference Committee meeting minutes - 3 July 2019	2019/200425
	A2⇩	Heritage Reference Committee meeting minutes - 7 July 2020	2020/319646
	A3 ⇩	Heritage Reference Committee meeting minutes - 8 September 2020	2020/319652

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 17 November 2020	QN.1 / 267

Item QN.1	S05126