Parkwood Planning Proposal Proponent Submission...Further detail of the 2019 Cross Border Agency Forum is being prepared in a Forum Outcomes Report. This will This will be provided

Elton Consulting 01

To Yass Valley Council

From David Maxwell, Director, The Riverview Group

Date 15 May 2019

Subject Agency Consultation Process 2018-2019

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate compliance with the conditions of the 2018 Alteration of Gateway Determination for PP_2015_YASSV_001_03. It has been prepared by Elton Consulting on behalf of Riverview Projects (the Proponent).

Background The Proponent has been undertaking preparations for a cross-border development across Ginninderry (located in ACT) and Parkwood (located in NSW) for more than a decade. The Parkwood component of the development has been considered for rezoning since 2015 and has gone through various stages of assessment and approval with Yass Valley Council (YVC) and NSW Department of Planning and Environment (DPE).

The original Gateway Determination was issued by DPE in April 2015. It outlined eight conditions for the planning proposal to proceed, including a more detailed phase of engagement with government agencies, with particular regard to infrastructure and services. Individual agency and cross-agency discussions were held with ACT and NSW government agencies to canvass a range of options for service delivery, including a ‘base case’ and preferred options (where relevant) including possible timing, next steps and funding mechanisms. The options were tested with senior representatives from across the ACT Government Directorates in the lead up to the Cross Border Agency Forum held in March 2016. Outputs from the Forum were documented in an Outcomes Report and the 2017 Planning Proposal Report on Services and Infrastructure.

Based on the additional investigations undertaken by the Proponent, YVC recommended that DPE issue a Gateway Alteration for a revised planning proposal with additional detailed gathered since the 2015 Gateway Determination. DPE issued the Alteration of Gateway Determination in August 2018, which forms that basis of this revised Parkwood Planning Proposal. It contained six amendments to the 2015 Determination. The main focus of amendments was to conduct additional cross-border agency consultation to notify agencies of updates to the Services and Infrastructure Report and other additional information that had emerged as a result of the progression of the Planning Proposal.

Agency Consultation

Pre-Forum Agency Consultation

The Gateway Alteration included a condition for another agency forum to outline the intent of the revised planning proposal and identify any changes to servicing and infrastructure options. Prior to the forum, the project team undertook a series of interviews with individual agencies between December 2018 and March 2019. The purpose of these interviews was to target the specific services which agencies are responsible for, or will be responsible for, within the Parkwood development. The interviews focussed on identifying any requirements to alter the 2017 options. Potential changes included policy and legislative changes, or changes in key contacts which may have resulted in different approaches to service delivery. In total 19 agencies were available for individual interviews in the lead up to the 2019 forum.

Parkwood Planning Proposal Proponent Submission

Elton Consulting 02

2019 Cross-Border Agency Forum

As noted above, the Alteration of Gateway Determination included a new condition for another agency forum:

“Council is to undertake an agency forum as part of the consultation process with government agencies under condition 6. The forum will assist these agencies in preparing their submission on the proposal by providing them with an outline of the intent of the revised planning proposal and the proposed servicing framework contained in the Services and Infrastructure Report.”

The Alteration also listed the agencies to be included. In total, 46 participants from 23 agencies attended the 2019 Forum, in addition to three Council representatives and the Riverview Projects team.

The Cross-Border Agency Forum was held on 12 March 2019 with representatives from various NSW and ACT Government departments and agencies, as well as Yass Valley Council. Agencies invited included all those required by the Gateway Alteration in response to the resubmitted Planning Proposal in 2017. Additional interested agencies were also invited.

The purpose of the forum was:

» To update NSW and ACT agencies about the proposed Parkwood development and the planning approval process

» To provide an overview and gain any further feedback about the proposed approach to infrastructure and service delivery developed in consultation with Yass Valley Council, NSW and ACT government agencies

» To ensure agencies have sufficient information prior to being formally requested to provide submissions on the Planning Proposal.

The intent of the revised Planning Proposal was explained to the forum as were the guiding principles and the 2017 approach to planning and delivering services and infrastructure. As a result of consultation with individual agencies in 2018/19 and the cross agency Forum, the 2017 approach remains largely unchanged.

» A small number of additions to the guiding principles were suggested

» Detailed discussions about implementation of servicing arrangements raised some further issues for consideration, which have been noted for further immediate action in Section 4 or for follow up closer to construction

» The options, including preferred options, remain largely unchanged. The base case remains feasible within existing legislation, with the period 2-5 years before construction viewed as crucial for fine tuning and finalising the preferred option, with some to be confirmed earlier

» In addition, many delivery agencies as well as the NSW Cross Border Commissioner and the ACT Chief Minister, Treasury and Economic Development Directorate would prefer to achieve an approach which is regional rather than state and territory based. This was viewed as more efficient and effective in delivering services and infrastructure in accordance with the principles. In particular, there was a focus on achieving Principles 1 and 2: achieving the look and feel of a borderless community wherever possible, and providing a consumer centric service and complaints model of service delivery.

Updated principles guiding the planning of services and infrastructure are included at Appendix A and the Updated Services and Infrastructure Options are included at Appendix B. A separate Outcomes Report is also being prepared for DPE to assist its assessment of the Planning Proposal.

Elton Consulting 03

Post-Forum Actions

A series of immediate actions resulting from the 2019 Cross Border Agency Forum are listed below.

Immediate Actions from the 2019 Forum

Item Comments

Prepare revised school student population projections.

Elton Consulting and Riverview Projects currently preparing a revised Education Needs Analysis for consultation with and acceptance by ACT and NSW Education. ACT and NSW Education agencies to meet.

ESA, RFS, NSWRFS require a copy of the Trust Management Plan for bushfire management of the river corridor.

This has been distributed by Riverview Projects.

Update of Regional Bushfire Management Plan due soon.

Riverview Projects to co-ordinate a meeting to update those working on the plan about the Parkwood Planning Proposal.

Prepare brief for NSW Office of Local Government (OLG) about streamlining the rating process to achieve aligned rates for the NSW and ACT developments.

Draft brief with Yass Valley Council for review prior to going to OLG.

Conclusion The Proponent of the Parkwood Planning Proposal has undertaken extensive consultation with ACT and NSW government agencies in accordance with the conditions imposed by the 2018 Alteration of Gateway Determination.

This submission has summarised the extent of consultation and the outcomes of the 2019 Cross Border Agency Forum. Although some changes were recorded for the guiding principles and infrastructure and services options, the preferred options remain largely unchanged. The base case remains feasible within existing legislation and the period 2-5 years before construction remains crucial for fine tuning and finalising the preferred options, with some to be confirmed earlier.

Further detail of the 2019 Cross Border Agency Forum is being prepared in a Forum Outcomes Report. This will be provided to YVC and DPE to assist in the assessment of the Parkwood Planning Proposal and further demonstrate how the Proponent has satisfied the conditions of the 2018 Alteration of Gateway Determination.

A Updated Principles guiding planning of services and infrastructure

Look and Feel

1. Achieve the look and feel of a borderless community wherever possible.

2. Provide a consumer centric service and complaints model of service delivery.

3. Encourage both government and non-government service providers to be guided by these principles.

Local Service Provision

4. Establish same or similar service levels for local services in ACT and NSW wherever possible.

5. Implement the same or similar infrastructure standards in ACT and NSW wherever possible.

6. Set local government rates and charges at an adequate level to cover the costs of local services and infrastructure maintenance and renewal in the long term.

7. Recognise that if provided by ACT service providers, user charges for water, sewer, gas and electricity service provision in Parkwood will seek to recoup costs at levels comparable to ACT charges.

8. Ensure service provision into Parkwood from the ACT has no detrimental impact on service delivery in the ACT and NSW.

9. Use existing legislative opportunities to maximise options for delivery of local services into Parkwood by ACT Government and other providers.

State and Territory Service Provision

10. Utilise needs based planning to inform service provision and consider triggers for commencement of services.

11. Establish same or similar service levels for state services in ACT and NSW wherever possible.

12. Implement same or similar infrastructure standards in the ACT and NSW wherever possible.

13. Recognise existing and emerging Commonwealth, State and Territory service provision and financing agreements.

14. Build on existing cross agency MOUs and operational arrangements which already deliver coordinated NSW and ACT government services across the border for policing, emergency services and human services.

15. Build on and where needed further formalise engagement and dispute resolution procedures between governments related to operational MOUs, guided by the governance approach in the overarching MOU.

16. Use the framework of the overarching MOU between the ACT and NSW Governments to engage further, finalise arrangements and resolve potential and actual disputes to support service access and delivery.

Timing and process

17. Review service delivery proposals and policy directions in 2020 and then every 2 to 5 years before construction in NSW.

18. Use existing legislation and MOUs or other relevant instruments as a foundation for service delivery

Continue to explore opportunities created by legislative reform directions and change.

B Updated Infrastructure and Services Options This table was originally produced in Parkwood Planning Proposal Services and Infrastructure Report, 2017. It has been updated following the Cross-Border Forum on 12 March 2019 with updates in red. The table is organised with local services first in alphabetical order, followed by state and territory services in alphabetical order. The colour coding reflects the three workshop groups at the forum.

Local government, utilities, land management, environment, transport

Human Services and Health

Police and Emergency Services

Key infrastructure and services

Summary of service delivery options (preferred option in bold, if determined)

Recurrent funding source

Key steps Timing on key step

Local Services

Abandoned vehicles regulation

1. Yass Valley Council

2. Contracted by Yass Valley Council to ACT Government

Rates income and fines

Confirm option and resolve details

2 years in advance

Community strategic planning

Yass Valley Council Rates income Resolve details 2 years in advance

Companion animals’ management



Rates income and user charges

Confirm option and resolve details including

*regulatory amendment if ACT delivery

* explore harmonisation of NSW and ACT legislation

2 -5 years in advance





DA assessment 1. Yass Valley Council




» Explore harmonisation

» Consider whether assessment and certification require the same approach

2-5 years in advance

DA determinations Yass Valley Council Rates income and user charges



Development certification


2. Contracted by Yass Valley Council to ACT Government or ACT service provider



» Consider whether assessment and certification require the same approach


Community Home Support Service Program services


2. Community organisations

3. Contracted by Yass Valley Council to ACT Government or ACT service provider

Commonwealth funding- consumer based



Food shop regulation 1. Yass Valley Council


User charges Confirm option and resolve details

2 years in advance

Illegal dumping regulation




Confirm option and resolve details, including amendment to regulation if required






Library services 1. Yass Valley Council -mobile service

2. Contracted by Yass Valley Council to ACT Government- Kippax library possibly supported by a shop front drop off.




Parking regulation 1. Yass Valley Council


Fines and user charges

Confirm option and resolve details, including legislative position


Parks and open space maintenance



Rates income Confirm option and resolve details

2 years in advance

Private pool inspections


2. Contracted by Yass Valley Council to ACT Government or ‘authorised authority’


Confirm option and resolve details regarding necessary administrative action

2 years in advance

Public health inspections, including hairdressers




Confirm option and resolve details, including legislative position


Rate setting and collection

Yass Valley Council Rates income Confirm rating related to servicing costs


Roads, stormwater and footpaths maintenance



Rates income Confirm option and resolve details

Explore option of harmonising infrastructure standards

2 years in advance

5 years in advance

Waste collection and recycling



User charges Confirm option and resolve detail

2 years in advance

Key infrastructure and services Summary of service delivery options (preferred option in bold, if determined)

Recurrent funding source Key steps Timing on key steps

State and Territory Services

Ambulance Options

1. ACT Government from Aranda or Charnwood

2. NSW Government

User charges and possible subsidies

Confirm preferred option and associated subsidies


Child protection Options

1. Similar to current approach

» NSW Government from Yass or Queanbeyan

» Joint Investigation Response Team from ACT and NSW (for criminal matters)

2. ACT government

NSW Government

NSW and ACT governments as per existing arrangements for joint investigations

Review approach with agencies based on government policy directions


Community bus services

Non-government organisation Commonwealth funding and user charges

Monitor reform outcomes

Confirm approach


Community health Options

1. ACT Government from:

» existing sites, or

» a new service site within community hub

2. NSW government from sites as outlined above

3. Explore joint commissioning of services

Funding framework as per Commonwealth/State Government agreement Funding framework to be reviewed and updated every five years

Confirm preferred approach early for planning purposes

5 years in advance

Reviewed every 5 years

Community services A coordinated network of Government, Non-Government and Private sector provision

Community development position funded by Ginninderry Joint Venture. Ongoing community services funded by State and Commonwealth Government

Review situation to understand likely provision- reform directions suggest funding will be linked to consumers




Fire and rescue services

ACT Government, consistent with the current or an enhanced MOU

Negotiated as part of the MOU review

Review of existing MOU 2-5 years in advance

Desk top exercise - scenario modelling and testing


Gas and electricity services

Owned and supplied by ACTEWAGL User charges Resolve details 2 years in advance

Hospitals Canberra Hospital and Calvary Bruce Hospital (ACT) as per likely consumer choice

Funding as per Commonwealth/State/ Territory Government agreement

Monitor ongoing health agreements and associated financial arrangements




Natural resources and environment management

Management provided by the Ginninderry Environmental Management Trust and others.

Funding proposed to include: NSW - 1% levy on land sales - $100 rates surcharge per lot - commercial activities operated by Trust ACT -contribution from ACT government and developer equivalent to 1% levy on land sales -annual contribution from ACT government equivalent to $100/lot surcharge in NSW

- work with NSW Crown Lands regarding boundary issue and options for management of waterway

- include proposed funding arrangements in rating submission to OLG

- review details of implementation of Trust in NSW, noting the first stage of the Management Trust will be in place in ACT by 2020

2019/20

2-5 years in advance of opening of reserve in NSW

Policing Options

1. ACT and NSW police via existing Special Member model, with administrative enhancements

2. Option 1, plus joint patrols

3. Cross border justice scheme model, currently in place in border areas of South Australia, Northern Territory and Western Australia

4. Buffer zone option – a new model with ACT laws operating in Parkwood

A detailed feasibility assessment and new financial arrangements between ACT and NSW governments would be required for buffer zone option. No special financing arrangements anticipated for other options.

ACT and NSW governments to commence discussions about options, including buffer zone, and reach agreement on preferred direction.

2020

Public bus and other transport options

Options User charges Review any outstanding issues and triggers for




1. private operator in the region

2. ACT Government

early delivery of options eg park and ride; buses; carshare

Rural fire services Options

1. Provision of service from Wallaroo Road with the unit crossing Ginninderra Creek. Provision of service from Wallaroo Road with the unit crossing Ginninderra Creek.

2. Service provided by the ACT. MoU similar to Jervis Bay Territory would be an effective mechanism


Review of existing MOU

Risk planning


From 2016, updated every 5 years

Resolve option and confirm detail


Schools and education services

Options

1. Access for NSW residents to ACT schools

2. NSW Government to operate a school, potentially from K-Yr 12.

New access arrangements and possibly financing arrangement would be required between ACT and NSW Governments for Option 1. This could be in the form of recurrent funding (potentially via the Grants Commission). MOU to set framework for negotiations

Resolve preferred option.

If Option 1, financial arrangements may be required.

10 years in advance

State emergency services

Options

1. Provision of services from NSW (Yass, Goulburn or Queanbeyan)

2. Provision of services from the ACT, consistent with the current or an enhanced MOU


Review of existing MOU 2-5 years in advance

Test option in desk top exercises

2-5 years in advance or earlier if Ginninderra Falls open early



Water and sewerage services

Options

1. Bulk water supply by Icon Water, Yass Valley Council is retail supplier

2. Service owned and supplied by Icon Water

Appropriate water sensitive urban design and water harvesting are integral to both options.

User charges Sewerage service

- commence construction of new hydraulic services

- complete construction

October 2023

2025

Water

Review regulatory and pricing framework to maximise streamlining

Resolve water harvesting

2025


14 May 2019 Our ref: 17-004 General Manager Yass Valley Council PO Box 6 YASS NSW 2582 Attention: Liz Makin By email: [email protected] Submission to Parkwood Planning Proposal PP_2015_YASSV_001_03 (Council Ref: PP.2014.01)

Dear Liz, On behalf of the Riverview Projects (ACT) Pty Limited (hereinafter referred to as Riverview Projects) as proponents for the Parkwood Planning Proposal (Proposal), thank you for the opportunity to make a submission in response to the public exhibition of the Proposal by Council. The purpose of this submission is to restate key aspects of the Proposal and to respond to a number of matters that have arisen during the public exhibition. In summary, our client remains of the view that the Proposal will result in significant public benefit and greater conservation outcomes than existing. We also remain of the view that the proposed rezoning of part of the land for urban purposes is supportable and justifiable on its own merit. In summary and subject to Council’s consideration of the Proposal following public exhibition we note that the Proposal comprises the following:

▪ Parkwood forms part of the cross border Ginninderry urban release and contains an estimated 5,000 dwellings. ▪ Parkwood comprises approximately 600 hectares, of which approximately 394 hectares is proposed for urban development while approximately 213 hectares is to be reserved for conservation

purposes. ▪ The development program for Parkwood is expected to be 30 to 40 years.

This submission comprises the following:

1. A restating as to the purpose/aim of the Proposal. 2. Confirmation of the conservation outcomes as a result of the Proposal. 3. A restating of the proposed safeguards to ensure that satisfactory servicing arrangements are in place

before urban development occurs. 4. Confirmation that there is a viable and practical solution for all cross-border services to support a

functioning new community within Yass Valley. 5. Confirmation that there is a commitment to enter into a Voluntary Planning Agreement with State

Government to secure a proposed school site. 6. Confirmation that there is a commitment to enter into a Voluntary Planning Agreement with Council to

secure a site for a proposed works depot/service centre facility. 7. Confirmation that discussions have been held with several neighbouring land owners concerning road

access and ‘give and take’ fencing. 8. A response to issues and matters raised by others during the public exhibition. 9. A summary of the community feedback from the information sessions/community engagement

undertaken by Riverview Projects.

Submission – Parkwood Planning Proposal

2 | 17-001 Knight Frank Town Planning Sydney

1.The purpose/aim of the Planning Proposal The purpose/aim of the Planning Proposal is to:

1. Describe the unique strategic context of the subject lands both regionally and locally that makes Parkwood unlike any other location adjacent to the NSW/ACT border.

2. Outline the urban elements of the proposal. 3. Outline how the proposed development will function as a viable border adjacent community as part of

the wider Ginninderry urban release. 4. Outline the merits and basis for the proposed urban development based on a master plan and site

specific studies that ensure an integrated whole of release approach across the border with the ACT. 5. Outline the proposed approach to the protection of the ecological, cultural and heritage and landscape

values of the land. 6. Demonstrate that the proposed rezoning is supportive and justified in terms of both strategic and site

specific merit. 7. Seek the endorsement of Yass Valley Council to create a principal Parkwood LEP and amend the

Yass Valley LEP in the manner described in the Planning Proposal to facilitate the urban development of the land and the enhancement and conservation of the ecological and cultural values of the land.

8. To demonstrate the net community benefits of the proposed development to the Yass Valley and wider region.

2.Confirmation of the conservation outcomes as a result of the Planning Proposal. By way of comparison and for ease of reference, the following summarises the conservation outcomes of the Planning Proposal compared to the existing conditions.

Existing conditions Under the Planning Proposal

Can the public access the Falls from Parkwood Road?

NO The land between the Falls and Parkwood Road is privately owned with no rights for public access. Access to the Falls will remain closed if the Planning Proposal does not proceed.

YES The Planning Proposal provides for the reopening of public access to the Falls in a controlled manner supported by an interpretive centre and in consultation with local Aboriginal groups. Together with the Planning Proposal is the proposed progressive dedication of all the private land within the conservation corridor into public ownership.

Is the land use zoning based on site specific scientific studies

NO The current E3 zoning is not based on any site-specific scientific studies. There is no planning basis for suggesting it reflects the extent of known conservation/ecological values.

YES The proposed E2 zone boundary reflects a total of 13 site specific studies that have been undertaken including ground truthing by both Yass Valley Council and the Office and Environment and Heritage.

Does the zone provide the highest level of conservation protection

NO The current E3 zoning includes a range of uses not consistent with the ecological or conservation values of the land. They include dwelling houses; bed and breakfast; dual occupancies; horticulture; and extensive agriculture

YES The proposed E2 zoning is second only to an E1 (National Parks zone) in terms of protecting conservation values. It will prohibit all those uses referred to in the current E3 zone.



(which includes grazing by cattle and sheep and crops)

Is there any mechanism or plan to protect the conservation values?

NO There are no conservation plans, strategies or funding to protect the ecological values of the land.

YES In conjunction with the Planning Proposal will be the establishment of a Corridor Trust to fund and manage the ecological values of the Corridor.

3.An outline of the proposed safeguards which ensures that satisfactory servicing arrangements are in place before urban development occurs. Consistent with the approach to urban release areas across the State, the Planning Proposal aims to provide Council with the necessary certainty that appropriate services are in place before urban development occurs. That certainty for Council will be by way of recommended statutory requirements generally referred to as ‘satisfactory arrangements’. The current relevant specific wording within the Planning Proposal (with our underlining and bolding added) is as follows:

Arrangements for designated State and Territory public infrastructure

(1) The objective of this clause is to require satisfactory arrangements to be made for the provision of designated State and Territory public infrastructure before the subdivision of land in an urban release area to satisfy needs that arise from development on the land, but only if the land is developed intensively for urban purposes.

(2) Development consent must not be granted for the subdivision of land in an urban release area unless the Secretary has certified in writing to the consent authority that satisfactory arrangements have been made to contribute to the provision of designated State or Territory public infrastructure in relation to that land.

Public utility infrastructure

(1) Development consent must not be granted for development on land in an urban release area unless the Council is satisfied that any public utility infrastructure that is essential for the proposed development is available or that adequate arrangements have been made to make that infrastructure available when required

Development control plan

(1) The objective of this clause is to ensure that development on land in an urban release area occurs in

a logical and cost-effective manner, in accordance with a staging plan and only after a development control

plan that includes specific controls has been prepared for the land.

(2) Development consent must not be granted for development on land in an urban release area unless a

development control plan that provides for the matters specified in subclause (3) has been prepared on the

land.

(3) The development control plan must provide for all of the following:

a) A staging plan for the timely and efficient release of urban land, making provision for necessary

infrastructure and sequencing. A neighbourhood structure plan must be prepared in accordance with

the adopted staging plan addressing the following considerations:

a. Flooding requirements to provide safe access/egress for residents in times of flooding.

b. Bushfire requirements to ensure protection and management issues are identified through

land use planning to provide a safer environment to the community.

c. Biodiversity requirements to:



i. Conserve the diversity of native vegetation communities, including their component

species and genes throughout the identified E2 and E3 zones, and the

conservation/urban edge interface within Parkwood.

ii. Minimise the impact of development on the biodiversity of Conservation Corridor and

the conservation/urban edge interface.

d. Contamination requirements to ensure that the land to be developed is not subject to any

contaminants that may cause harm to the future population of Parkwood.

e. Cultural and Aboriginal heritage requirements to protect and enhance the sites, items or areas

of cultural and Aboriginal significance within Parkwood.

f. The design and siting of development ensuring that it takes into account the land capability in

terms of land form, slopes, drainage lines and soil erodability.

g. Access and movement requirements to:

i. Facilitate legible, safe and efficient pedestrian, bicycle, public transport and private

vehicle movements.

ii. Ensure pedestrian and cycle paths in Parkwood provide good access to key

destinations and through connections to the ACT.

iii. Connect neighbourhoods and provide identifiable transport routes. Vehicular access

into Parkwood from the ACT will be via Parkwood Road.

h. Essential service requirements to:

i. Ensure adequate utilities including water, sewerage, electricity, gas,

telecommunications and public lighting is available to service the future

development and peak demands.

ii. Ensure development is serviced by infrastructure designed to achieve sustainable

outcomes.

iii. Locate services that reduce environmental impact, are not visually obstructive and do

not compromise community safety.

iv. Provide public utilities in a timely, efficient and cost-effective manner.

i. Drainage requirements to ensure development in Parkwood incorporates stormwater

management, reuse, retention and detention strategies to limit change to the hydrological

system (flow rate and duration) of the receiving waterways.

j. Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) requirements to:

i. Ensure the layout and design of development promotes sustainable and integrated

land and water resource management strategies incorporating best practice

stormwater management, water conservation and environmental protection.

ii. Provide WSUD measures in a timely, efficient and cost effective manner.

k. Water and energy requirements to adopt principles of sustainable development in terms of the

overall usage of water and energy within the neighbourhood.

b) An overall transport movement hierarchy showing the major circulation routes and connections to

achieve a simple and safe movement system for private vehicles, public transport, pedestrians and

cyclists.



c) An overall landscaping strategy for the protection and enhancement of riparian areas and remnant

vegetation, including visually prominent locations and detailed landscaping requirements for both the

public and private domain.

d) A network of active and passive recreation areas.

4.Confirmation that there is a viable and practical solution for all cross-border services to support a functioning new community within Yass Valley. As required by the revised Gateway Determination, an updated inter-agency cross border forum has been held together with the preparation of a Services and Infrastructure Report. In summary the Services and Infrastructure Report confirms that “...there is at least one existing legal, practicable and financially feasible option for the delivery of all infrastructure and services. This is referred to as the ‘base case’ option …Based on a review of the services and infrastructure options, it is the conclusion of the Report that the Planning Proposal is supportable and justified in proceeding. The base case option provides certainty within existing legislation”. The revised Gateway Determination included a new condition for an updated inter agency forum stating that:

“Council is to undertake an agency forum as part of the consultation process with government

agencies under condition 6. The forum will assist these agencies in preparing their submission

on the proposal by providing them with an outline of the intent of the revised planning proposal

and the proposed servicing framework contained in the Services and Infrastructure Report.”

The revised Gateway Determination also listed the agencies to be included. In total, 46 participants from 23 agencies attended the 2019 Forum. A summary of the outcomes of the inter-agency cross border forum held on 12 March 2019 and as prepared by Elton Consulting is attached. In conclusion, the summary notes “...that although some changes were recorded for the guiding principles and infrastructure and services options, the preferred options remain largely unchanged. The base case remains feasible within existing legislation and the period 2-5 years before construction remains crucial for fine tuning and finalising the preferred options, with some to be confirmed earlier”. 5.Confirmation that there is a commitment to enter into a Voluntary Planning Agreement with State Government to secure a site for a proposed school site. On behalf of Riverview Projects, we can confirm a commitment to enter into a Voluntary Planning Agreement for the purposes of securing a site for a future State school. The offer from Riverview Projects to be forwarded separately to the Department of Education and Council will specify:

a) The size of the land holding to be set aside noting that this is anticipated to be in the range of 3.0 – 6.0 hectares, subject to detailed planning and the user requirements of the NSW Department of Education.

b) The specific location and dimensions of the land holding to be subject to detailed neighbourhood

planning in consultation with the NSW Department of Education.

c) The land holding will be handed over to State Government fully serviced.

d) The timing as to when the land holding is to be handed over. It is anticipated that this Planning Agreement will be in place prior to the making of the LEP amendment. 6.Confirmation that there is a commitment to enter into a Voluntary Planning Agreement with Council to secure a site for a proposed works depot/service centre facility. On behalf of Riverview Projects, we can confirm a commitment to enter into a Voluntary Planning Agreement with Yass Valley Council for the purposes of securing a site for a future Council works depot/service centre facility. The site is intended to accommodate a range of possible future Council user requirements to support the new community at Parkwood. The offer from Riverview Projects to be forwarded separately to Council will specify:



a) The size of the land holding to be set aside, subject to detailed planning and the user requirements of Council.

b) The specific location and dimensions of the land holding to be subject to detailed neighbourhood

planning in consultation with Council.

c) The land holding will be handed over to Council fully serviced.

d) The timing as to when the land holding is to be handed over. It is anticipated that this Planning Agreement will be in place prior to the making of the LEP amendment. 7.Confirmation that discussions have been held with a number of neighbouring land owners concerning road access and ‘give and take’ fencing. Discussions and agreement have been reached between Riverview Projects and the adjoining land owners concerning the following: a. Give and take fencing along Ginninderra Creek The land subject to the Planning Proposal shares a common boundary with a number of neighbouring properties along Ginninderra Creek.

Both sides of the Creek have and will continue to be used for the foreseeable future, for grazing and agriculture.

To facilitate the efficient operation of both properties the owners have a long standing “give and take”

arrangement whereby cattle watering from the creek is made available by each property to the other via “their”

side of the creek where this is sensible and necessary. The future urban development of the south side of the

creek will make this arrangement non-viable.

As a result of discussions with neighbouring land owners, an agreement has been reached as follows:

That, at least twelve months prior to the commencement of any significant urban development on Lot 1 DP

77101, Reid and Stevens, or, on their behalf, the Ginninderry Joint Venture, will:

1. Erect a stock fence along the top of bank of Ginninderra Creek on the south side of the creek extending from the ACT/NSW border to a point opposite the western boundary of Lot 1 DP 544209 and Lot 1 DP 546815 with suitable measures at both east and western boundaries of Lot 1 DP 544209 and Lot 1 DP 546815 to ensure that stock are contained, and

2. Subject to agreement at the time, and considering the desirability of limiting stock access to the creek for environmental management reasons, erect a stock fence along the top of bank of Ginninderra Creek on the north side of the creek extending from the ACT/NSW border to western boundaries of Lot 1 DP 544209 and Lot 1 DP 546815 and in the event that these fences are erected,

3. Provide permanent watering points suitable for cattle on the north side of the fence, with water being drawn from Ginninderra Creek, against water entitlements.

b. Road access to the ‘Parkwood’ and ‘Kilby Park’ properties

Discussions have been held with the owner of the ‘Parkwood’ property, (Lot 1 DP602262) and ‘Kilby Park’

property (Lot 1 DP 546815) on the north bank of Ginninderra Creek and adjacent to the above planning

proposal. As Council maybe aware, sole access to Parkwood and Kilby Park is from Parkwood road (a public

road) via a right of way which traverses Lot 1 DP771051, currently owned by Reid and Stevens Pty Ltd. It is

acknowledged that future urban development as a result of the Planning proposal will bring substantial change

and in order to confirm the long-term viability of access to Parkwood it has been agreed that the right of way

be “opened” in accord with the requirements of the NSW Roads Act 1993 as a dedicated public road.



Riverview Projects has no objection to this occurring and being done in the appropriate way and time as to be

agreed with the owners of Lot 1 DP 602262 and Lot 1 DP 546815 and Council.

7.Response to issues and matters raised by others during the public exhibition

Our client understands that during the public exhibition of the Planning Proposal, matters and contentions were

made that are factually not correct. Accordingly, and for the purposes of clarification we note the following:

a. Little Eagle

Suggestions have been made by others that urban developments in the woodlands and open space around

Canberra are reducing the breeding options for the Little Eagle and that although studies are being done, it is

unclear whether it can survive in the region. This is not correct, noting that information from the Little Eagle

research project, has established that the Little Eagle is surviving well in the region with at least nine known

nesting pairs in the ACT and more in adjacent NSW. Additionally, to imply that the Parkwood proposal will

consume woodland or open forest is wrong. All woodland and forest on the project site will be preserved in the

conservation reserve. The suggestion has also been made that with much of the Little Eagle territory planned

to be replaced by houses, the Little Eagle might no longer breed in the north of the ACT. This is incorrect.

Satellite tracking data has demonstrated that the foraging area of eagles using the Strathnairn nest (the one

closest to Parkwood) are at Wallaroo Road in NSW and the Murrumbidgee river and conservation area. Neither

is intended for housing development. The contentions as to the overall risk to the Little Eagle habitat are based

on historical research from 2005 and earlier. They do not reflect the more recent research.

b. EPBC Act

The suggestion has been made that the (Commonwealth) Environment Protection and Biodiversity

Conservation Act (EPBC Act) is a ‘failure’. The EPBC Act is the adopted statutory process under which the

overall Ginninderry project has been granted approval by the Commonwealth Minister for the Environment.

c.Bushfire

Statements have been made suggesting an unacceptable level of bushfire risk at Parkwood. The Parkwood

planning proposal, as with all the Ginninderry project, and all other such developments in the ACT and NSW,

is required to comply with the standards for bushfire management in urban areas set by the NSW Rural Fire

Service in NSW and the ACT Emergency Services Agency in the ACT. The standards are rigorous and

Ginninderry has no reason to believe that they are not wholly appropriate. If the project does not comply, and

continue to comply in the future, with the Agency requirements then it cannot proceed.

It is important to also note that the NSW Rural Fire Service is independently reviewing the adequacy of the

proposed bush fire protection measures.

Notwithstanding the above, there has been considerable reliance by others on bush fire comments from only

one source being a paper commissioned in 2017 by JJ Sharples. No reference is made to the substantial work

that has been completed on bushfire planning (EcoLogical Pty Ltd, The West Belconnen Project Bushfire

Management Strategy, June 2014), and the peer review of the Sharples work by Dr Grahame Douglas, UTS,

June 2017.

d.Aboriginal Cultural heritage

It is contended by others that, having urban development in this area is likely to result in the complete

destruction of some of these (Aboriginal artefact) sites and a significant degradation of many others. This is



not correct noting the detailed aboriginal archaeological and cultural heritage studies that have been carried

out with the full participation of Aboriginal stakeholder groups. The land does include important sites of

Aboriginal cultural heritage significance and these will be preserved strictly in accordance with the wishes of

Aboriginal stakeholder groups, including the Ngunnawal people.

e. Yass Governance

It is contended that several thousand new households with urban issues will be vying for the attention of Yass

Valley Council which has traditionally dealt with the issues within a rural and regional context. It should be

noted that considerable time and discussions have been held with Council in terms of the funding and delivery

of services in order to support a functioning new community from the day it is established.

8.Summary of the community feedback from the information sessions/community engagement

undertaken by Riverview Projects.

Over the period July 2017 to May 2019, significant community engagement has been undertaken in the Yass Valley in relation to the Parkwood Planning Project, the Yass Valley component of the cross-border Ginninderry project. At the time of writing, this engagement is continuing.

The purpose of the engagement is: To give Yass Valley residents the opportunity to learn about the

Parkwood/Ginninderry proposal prior to the statutory public consultation period in order to: Ask

questions, raise issues and propose ideas.

The centrepiece of the engagement has been a unique ‘café-based’ engagement about Parkwood/Ginninderry

for a total time period of over 10 months. A deliberate decision was taken to meet the community in live, busy

venues in the form of two local cafés – one in Yass and one in Murrumbateman. The idea behind this was to

remove barriers to community participation and to provide an environment that would be more natural and less

pressured, and also increase the number of people with the opportunity to learn about the Parkwood Proposal.

In addition to the café-based opportunities, the engagement has involved:

• Theme-based public presentations

• Meetings and briefings with Yass Valley community groups

• Training and Employment opportunities for Yass Valley residents

• Arts and Culture connections between Ginninderry and the Yass Valley arts community

• Yass Valley community participation in the Ginninderry People & Place Group

Through the engagement, over 1000 people have engaged directly with a project team member and an

estimated 2000 people have engaged indirectly with the project. The project team appreciates the valuable

feedback that has been received on a range of issues and themes, including links with the rest of the Yass

Valley; conservation; cross-border services; housing; environmental management and sustainability. The

feedback has been taken on board in the ongoing planning of the Ginninderry development.

The report on the outcomes and feedback from the community engagement is attached to this submission.

This report is an ‘interim report’ given the community engagement is ongoing.

9.Conclusion

On behalf of Riverview Projects, thank you again for the opportunity to make a comment on the Planning

Proposal. Riverview Projects remain committed to the planning and delivery of a new and sustainable

community and the highest level of protection and management of the conservation values of the

Murrumbidgee River and Ginninderra Creek corridors. We look forward to a continuing ongoing collaborative

approach with Council.



Yours faithfully Mark Grayson Director M: 0400 413 701

Parkwood Planning Proposal

Interim Report on Yass Valley Engagement, July 2017-April 2019 Overview This report outlines community engagement undertaken for the Ginninderry Project team in relation to the Parkwood Planning Project, the Yass Valley component of the cross-border Ginninderry project. This in an interim report as engagement is continuing at the time of writing.

While informal discussions with the community around Parkwood commenced in 2011, In

2017, the Ginninderry team made the decision to initiate informal community engagement with the following purpose:

To give Yass Valley residents the opportunity to learn about the Parkwood/Ginninderry proposal prior to the statutory public consultation period in order to: Ask questions, raise issues and

propose ideas. Over the period July 2017-May 2019, engagement with the Yass Valley community has involved the following components.

• General community consultation o Phase 1 Community Consultation at Trader & Co Yass, July-November 2017 o Phase 2 Community Constulation in Murrumbateman, November 2017-April 2018 o Phase 3 – Ginninderra Falls and Parkwood consultation at Trader & Co, Yass and at

Markets, April-May 2019

• Theme-based public presentations

• Engagement with Yass Valley community groups

• Training and Employment opportunities for Yass Valley residents

• Arts and Culture connections between Ginninderry and the Yass Valley arts community

• Ginninderry People & Place Group

The community engagement has been planned and overseen by Strategic Development Group, a Yass-based firm with expertise and experience in consultation for development projects in the ACT, NSW and internationally.

Approach The centrepiece of the engagement has been a unique ‘café-based’ engagement. A deliberate decision was taken to meet the community in live, busy venues in the form of two local cafés – one in Yass and one in Murrumbateman. The idea behind this was to remove barriers to community participation that can occur when using, for example, a shopfront that has a sole purpose. Using a café space was felt to provide an environment that would be more natural and less pressured, and also increase the number of people with the opportunity to learn about the Parkwood Proposal. Using a café space meant that the approach to community engagement was informal. People were encouraged to simply look at a model of the proposed development, written information provided and have the option to talk to a project team member. As a clear indication of the project’s commitment to be accessible to the Yass Valley community, this café-based engagement has involved a total time period of over 10 months.

The approach has also included opportunities for community groups to discuss the project and particular engagement with the Yass Valley community around training, employment, arts and culture.

Summary of engagement Phase 1 Community Consultation – Trader & Co, Yass, July-November 2017 Between July and November 2017

• 571 people directly engaged with a Ginninderry team member

• Estimated 1600 people looked at the model and display

• 20 people filled in comment/question cards

• Over 100 USBs with information were taken

• 120 school students visited

Phase 2 Community Consultation – Win’s Creek, Murrumbateman, November 2017-April 2018 Based on feedback from the Murrumbateman Community, the model and display were taken to a Win’s Creek Café in the village of Murrumbateman. Murrumbateman has a smaller population than Yass and is geographically closer to the Parkwood site.

Between November 2017 and April 2018:

• 66 people directly engaged with a Ginninderry team member

• Estimated 100 people looked at the model and display


Phase 3 Community Consultation – Trader & Co, Yass, Murrumbateman Market, Yass Market Between November 2017 and April 2018

• 74 people directly engaged with a Ginninderry team member at Trader & Co

• 135 people directly engaged with a Ginninderry team member at Markets

• Estimated 340 people looked at the model and display at Trader & Co


Theme-based public presentations

27 people attended community presentations from the Ginninderry team on the following topics:

• Smart Living

• Water sensitive urban design

• Art and culture

• SPARK Training & Employment

Community group engagement Meetings/briefings with a range of Yass Valley community groups, including an estimated 150 people from:

• Onerwal Land Council

• Yass Valley Business Chamber (of which Riverview is a member)

• Individual Yass Valley Businesses (for example real estate and earthmoving companies)

• Yass Lions Club

• Yass and Murrumbateman Rotary Clubs

• YassArts

• Yass High School

• Local churches and church-based service organisations

• Villlage of Hall and District Progress Association

• Combined Community Association Presidents

Ginninderry People & Place Group The Ginninderra Project has convened a People and Place Group (PPG) to share information and to

ensure community views are heard in planning for Parkwood/Ginninderry. The group:

• receives information about the Ginninderry/Parkwood project

• generates ideas for achieving positive outcomes for the project

• provides an opportunity for the project team to understand and consider stakeholder views

The People and Place Group has consistently had Yass Valley representation, including from: Yass Valley Business Chamber; Wallaroo Rd community; Yass High School

Training and Employment The Ginninderry Training and Employment program, Spark, has engaged closely with the Yass Valley Community as the project has great potential to provide employment and business opportunities for the Yass Valley:

• SPARK has been running a Construction program in Yass since 2017

• Program delivers a Certificate II Construction Pathways along with a white card and asbestos awareness card – all nationally recognised qualifications

• Prepares unskilled individuals for entry level work in the construction sector and as a feeder for apprenticeships

• Purpose of program is to deliver a training program locally, a construction program had not been delivered in Yass for over 10 years

• Many people don’t have access to a car so travelling to Goulburn or Canberra for construction training was nearly impossible

• There is also a serious skills shortage in the construction sector so to have more local people with basic skills in construction is good for the town

• Program results: o 2017 – started with 17, finished with 13 – 7 of these 13 are employed o 2018 – started with 15, finished with 12 – 7 of these 12 are employed and another 2

have returned to school o 2019 – started with 12 (ongoing)

Arts and Culture Ginninderry’s strong focus on art and culture has created many connections with the strong arts and tourism scene in the Yass Valley:

• Set up meeting with Yass Arts and Strathnairn Arts to develop an ‘Artist Studio Trail’ – ‘16

• Planning assistance with Yass Community Garden Open Day – ‘17

• Yass arts community invited to contribute to PhD research – Role of the artist in sustainable urban development – ’17

• Sponsorship of Yass Sculpture in the Paddock project – ’17, ‘18

• Sponsorship of Sculpture in the Paddock Schools program ’17, ‘18

• Exhibition of Sculpture in the Paddock Schools program works at the Link - ’17, ‘18

• Assistance with Turning Wave Irish Music Festival - ‘17

• Meetings with Minister for Communities to advocate for youth funding in Yass – ‘17

• Assistance to Yass Valley Council with funding application for youth officer position – ‘17

• Assistance to Yass Valley Council with Public Art Policy and cultural planning – ‘17

• Yass artists selected to participate in Capital Arthouse Collection catalogue – ’17, ’18, ‘19

• Yass performing artists paid to perform at Ginninderry festivals and exhibition openings ’17, ’18, ’19 and ongoing

• Yass artists, makers, designers and crafts people invited to sell wares at Springfest – ’17, ‘18

• Yass arts and crafts community invited to run Crafternoons workshops with venue hire waived – ’17, ’18, ‘19

• Commissioned Yass artist to produce decorative tiles for amenities block in Neighbourhood 1 Park – ’18, ‘19

• Invitation to Yass artists to exhibit at the Link – ’17, ’18, ’19 and ongoing

• Involvement of Yass community in Ginninderry Local History Study – ’17, ’18, ‘19

• Ginninderry “With One Voice Choir” performance at the Yass Valley Business Chamber Christmas Celebration

Key themes emerging from Yass Valley feedback Yass Valley residents have been curious about the proposal and constructive in their engagement – mostly suggesting ideas not raising concerns. Links to rest of Yass Valley

• Roads and cycle trails into Parkwood

• Business opportunities for Yass Valley businesses

• Opportunities for tourism and art

• Cross border logistics

Conservation:

• Ginninderra Falls o Support for re-opening the Falls area to the community o Concern about proximity to housing

• Conservation area – size, accessibility, opportunities for recreation

• Concerns about "urban sprawl"

Services

• Medical services/health

• Training & Employment

• Water quality & sewerage

• Schools

Housing

• Affordable housing

• Size, aesthetics Environmental Management & Sustainability

• Landfill capping

• Bushfires

• Runoff pollution

• Green spaces

• Renewable energy

Documents

Parkwood Planning Proposal Proponent Submission...Further detail of the 2019 Cross Border Agency Forum is being prepared in a Forum Outcomes Report. This will This will be provided