31 October, 2005
Dear Councillor,
In pursuance of the provisions of the Local
Government Act, 1993 and the Regulations thereunder, notice is hereby given
that an ORDINARY MEETING of Penrith
City Council is to be held in the Council Chambers, Civic Centre, 601 High
Street, Penrith on Monday 31 October 2005 at 7:00PM.
Attention is directed to the statement
accompanying this notice of the business proposed to be transacted at the
meeting.
Yours Faithfully
Alan Travers
General Manager
BUSINESS
1. APOLOGIES
2. LEAVE OF ABSENCE
Leave of absence has been granted to:
Councillor Bradbury - 31 October 2005 to 4 December 2005 inclusive.
3. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES
Ordinary Meeting - 10 October 2005.
4. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Pecuniary Interest (The
Act requires Councillors who declare a pecuniary interest in an item to leave
the meeting during discussion of that item)
Non-Pecuniary Interest
5. ADDRESSING THE MEETING
6. MAYORAL MINUTES
7. NOTICES OF MOTION
8. ADOPTION OF REPORTS AND
RECOMMENDATION OF COMMITTEES
Local Traffic Committee Meeting - 10 October 2005.
Policy Review Committee Meeting - 17 October 2005.
9. MASTER PROGRAM REPORTS
10. URGENT REPORTS (to
be dealt with in the master program to which the item relates)
11. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE
12. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
Monday 31 October 2005
table of contents
seating arrangements
meeting calendar
confirmation of minutes
report and recommendations of committees
master program reports
PRAYER
“Sovereign
God, tonight as we gather together as a Council we affirm that you are the
giver and sustainer of life. We come
together as representatives of our community to make decisions that will
benefit this city and the people within it.
We
come not in a spirit of competition, not as adversaries, but as
colleagues. Help us to treat each other
with respect, with dignity, with interest and with honesty. Help us not just to hear the words we say,
but also to hear each others hearts. We
seek to be wise in all that we say and do.
As
we meet, our concern is for this city.
Grant us wisdom, courage and strength.
Lord,
help us. We pray this in the name of
Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.”
Statement of Recognition of Penrith City’s
Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander
Cultural Heritage
Council values the unique
status of Aboriginal people as the original owners and custodians of lands and
waters, including the land and waters of Penrith City.
Council values the unique
status of Torres Strait Islander people as the original owners and custodians
of the Torres Strait Islands and surrounding waters.
We work together for a
united Australia and City that respects this land of ours, that values the
diversity of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultural heritage, and
provides justice and equity for all.
Council Chambers Seating
Arrangements
Managers
Chief Financial Officer
Barry Husking
MEETING CALENDAR
October 2005 - December 2005
|
TIME |
OCT |
NOV |
DEC |
Mon |
Mon |
Mon |
||
Ordinary Meetings |
7.00 pm |
|
|
5 |
|
31 |
21 # |
12 |
|
Policy
Review Committee |
7.00 pm |
|
14 |
|
# Meetings
at which the Management Plan quarterly reviews are presented. #+ General
Manager’s presentation – half year and end of year review @ Strategic Program progress
reports |
v Meeting at which the Draft Management Plan
is adopted for exhibition * Meeting
at which the Management Plan for 2005/2006 is adopted ü Meeting at which the 2004/2005 Annual Statements
are presented ^ Election
of Mayor/Deputy Mayor (only business) |
-
Council has two Ordinary
Meetings per month where practicable.
-
Extraordinary Meetings are held
as required.
-
Policy Review Meetings are held
monthly where practicable.
-
Members of the public are
invited to observe meetings of the Council. Should you wish to address Council,
please contact the Executive Officer, Glenn McCarthy on 47327649.
Ordinary
Meeting |
Monday 10 October 2005 |
UNCONFIRMED MINUTES
OF THE ORDINARY MEETING OF PENRITH CITY COUNCIL HELD IN THE
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
ON MONDAY 10 OCTOBER 2005
AT 7:01PM
The meeting opened with the
National Anthem and Prayer read by the Reverend Neil Checkley.
His Worship the Mayor, Councillor John Thain read a statement of recognition of Penrith City’s Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Cultural Heritage.
His Worship the Mayor Councillor John Thain, Councillors Jim Aitken OAM, Kaylene Allison, David Bradbury (arrived at 7:09PM), Lexie Cettolin, Kevin Crameri OAM, Greg Davies, Mark Davies, Jackie Greenow, Karen McKeown, Susan Page, Garry Rumble, Pat Sheehy AM.
486
RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor
Pat Sheehy that apologies be received from Councillor
David Bradbury.. |
487 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Pat Sheehy seconded Councillor Greg Davies that the minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of 26 September 2005 be confirmed. |
Councillor Pat Sheehy declared a non pecuniary interest in Item 8, Application to rezone Lot 1 DP 542395 and Lot 740 DP 810111 Elizabeth Drive, Luddenham to allow an Advanced Waste Treatment Facility in conjunction with the existing quarry and landfill operation. Applicant: Mullane Planning Consultants Pty Ltd; Owner: SITA Australia Pty Ltd as the owner is a sponsor of the Penrith Regional Gallery and Councillor Sheehy is a director of the Penrith Regional Gallery and Lewers Bequest Ltd and he reserved his right to speak and vote on the item.
Councillor Jackie Greenow declared a non pecuniary interest in Item 8, Application to rezone Lot 1 DP 542395 and Lot 740 DP 810111 Elizabeth Drive, Luddenham to allow an Advanced Waste Treatment Facility in conjunction with the existing quarry and landfill operation. Applicant: Mullane Planning Consultants Pty Ltd; Owner: SITA Australia Pty Ltd as the owner is a sponsor of the Penrith Regional Gallery and Councillor Greenow is a director of the Penrith Regional Gallery and Lewers Bequest Ltd and she reserved her right to speak and vote on the item.
Councillor Karen McKeown declared a non pecuniary interest in Item 8, Application to rezone Lot 1 DP 542395 and Lot 740 DP 810111 Elizabeth Drive, Luddenham to allow an Advanced Waste Treatment Facility in conjunction with the existing quarry and landfill operation. Applicant: Mullane Planning Consultants Pty Ltd; Owner: SITA Australia Pty Ltd as the owner is a sponsor of the Penrith Regional Gallery and Councillor McKeown is a director of the Penrith Regional Gallery and Lewers Bequest Ltd and she reserved her right to speak and vote on the item.
488 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jackie Greenow seconded Councillor Mark Davies that Standing Orders be suspended to allow members of the public to address the meeting, the time being 7:06PM. |
Ms Sharon
Lilley of Londonderry, the owner of the proposed development, addressed the
meeting on Item 6, Development Application 04/2745 for the demolition
of an existing dwelling and the construction of Seniors Living Development at
Lot 5111 and Lot 5112 DP 1057000 (No.
6) Lofty Place, Cranebrook, and spoke in favour of the recommendation. Ms Lilley said that there was a growing
demand for the type of seniors living development contained in the development
application. She said that she had
co-operated with Council to come to the outcome proposed in the development
application and that the design was of good quality and suited the area where
it is proposed to build the development.
Councillor David
Bradbury arrived at the meeting the time being 7:09PM.
Mr Neil Joines of
Cranebrook, a neighbour of the proposed development, addressed the meeting on Item 6, Development Application 04/2745 for the demolition
of an existing dwelling and the construction of Seniors Living Development at
Lot 5111 and Lot 5112 DP 1057000 (No.
6) Lofty Place, Cranebrook, and spoke against the recommendation. Mr Joines said that the development
threatened the privacy of adjoining properties and that the building material
should be brick. He said that the
access to amenities was not adequate considering that it was on top of a hill
and residents would be required to cross two busy roads to get to a bus
stop. Mr Joines said that there were
opportunities for this type of development in newer release areas and putting
them in established residential streets would inevitably create disputes with
existing home owners in the area.
resumption
of standing orders |
489 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jackie Greenow seconded Councillor David Bradbury that Standing Orders be resumed, the time being 7:13PM. |
PRESENTATION
FROM PENRITH PANTHERS BMX CLUB
His Worship the Mayor, Councillor John Thain
informed the meeting that 680 competitors from around New South Wales had
attended the BMX State Titles held in Penrith on 1 October 2005, and that
riders from Penrith Panthers BMX Club had taken first place in thirteen of the
forty classes competing.
Mr Don Tierney, the Club’s Secretary
addressed the Council and spoke about the success of the Championships and he
and Mr Mark Cheshire, the Club’s Vice President made a presentation of a framed
jersey to Council in appreciation of Council’s support of the Club.
COUNCIL’S SPONSORHIP OF
WESTERN SYDNEY INDUSTRY AWARDS ACKNOWLEDGED
His Worship the Mayor, Councillor John Thain
informed the meeting that Council had received a plaque to acknowledge its Silver
Sponsorship of the 2006 Western Sydney Industry Awards.
The
City in its Broader Context
494
RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jim Aitken seconded Councillor
Garry Rumble That: 1. The information
contained in the report on Grant Applications under the Castlereagh
Community Fund be received. 2. Subject to the adoption of the Open Space
Action Plan, the upgrade of the field surface at Londonderry Park be included
in the 2006/07 Management Plan. |
9 Proposed
Glenmore Park Child and Family Precinct 1344/1,4122/51
Pt2 |
495
RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jim Aitken seconded Councillor
Garry Rumble That: 1. The information contained in the report on
the Proposed Glenmore Park Child and Family Precinct be received. 2. Council adopt, in principle, the proposed
model for the Glenmore Park Child and Family Precinct. 3. Tender processes for architectural services
including master plan design options, design development and documentation
are commenced. 4. A further report be submitted
for Council’s consideration with a preferred design and quantity surveyor’s
costing before proceeding to tender for construction. |
496 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jim
Aitken seconded Councillor Garry Rumble that the information
contained in the report on Use of Cook Park for Premier League Soccer
be received. |
497
RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jim Aitken seconded Councillor
Garry Rumble that the information concerning the
upgrading of the Netball Amenities Building at Jamison Park be received. |
21 Development
Application 05/1384 - Proposed refurbishment and extension to the western
grandstand, new lift to eastern grandstand and new forecourts at Lot 2 DP
773983 (No. 143) Station Street, Penrith. Applicant: Penrith District Rugby
League Football Club; Owner:
Department of Lands DA05/1384 |
498
RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jim Aitken seconded Councillor
Garry Rumble That: 1. The information contained in the report on Development
Application 05/1384 - Proposed refurbishment and extension to the western
grandstand, new lift to eastern grandstand and new forecourts at Lot 2 DP
773983 (No. 143) Station Street, Penrith be received 2. The information contained in the report on Development
Application 05/1384 - Proposed refurbishment and extension to the western
grandstand, new lift to eastern grandstand and new forecourts at Lot 2 DP
773983 (No. 143) Station Street, Penrith be approved, subject to the
following conditions: Standard Conditions A001, A008, A011, A012, A019, A021, A039,
A040, B002, B003, B004, B005, B006, D001, D009, D010, E01A, E006, E008, E009,
G002, H01F, H041, H011, H024, I003 (Reworded for Ransley Street), I003
(Reworded for Mulgoa Road), K001, K002, K025, L007, L008, P002, Q01F, Q005. Special Conditions 1. Prior to the issue of the Construction
Certificate for that stage of the development, amended plans shall be
provided to and approved by Council’s Manager Building Approvals & Environment
Protection (BAEP) in relation to the design of the western façade of the
proposed western grandstand. The amended design is to provide additional
articulation, modulation and elements of visual interest. 2. Prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate
for that stage of the development, amended plans and further detail shall be
provided to and approved by Council’s Manager BAEP in relation to the fencing
proposed as part of this development application. The fencing is to be
temporary in nature, and shall consist of relocatable panels and operable
gates. A Management Plan shall be submitted detailing fencing arrangements
that maximises public access to the improved forecourt areas when the stadium
is in ‘non-event’ mode. 3. Prior to the issue of the Final Occupation
Certificate, a Venue Management Plan detailing evacuation procedures shall be
provided to and approved by Council’s Manager BAEP. 4. Prior to the issue of the Final Occupation
Certificate, amended plans shall be submitted to and approved by Council’s
Manager BAEP detailing the relocation of the existing disabled car parking
spaces to the area adjacent to the existing pump station on the north western
corner of the subject site. 5. Construction of the proposed development
shall be in accordance with AS0428.1-2001 Design for Access and Mobility 6. Prior to the issue of the Construction
Certificate for that stage of the development, details of the position and
screening of any roof plant on the western grandstand roof shall be provided
to and approved by Council’s Manager BAEP. 7. Within 12 months from the date of issue of
the final Occupation Certificate, an amended Traffic Management Plan, noting
the new configuration of the stadium, shall be submitted to Council’s Manager
BAEP. General parking provisions for ‘event days’ shall also be analysed in
this report. This report shall form the basis of future discussions relating
to the required parking provisions of any proposal to increase the overall
capacity of the stadium. 8. The fixed seating rows to the front, rear
and sides of the accessible seats/seating areas are to be reserved in the
ticketing sales for first choice by patrons booking tickets in advance, and
in conjunction with accessible seating sales. In this regard a minimum of 30 seats
shall be made available for this purpose prior to the day of the event. 9. No signage is approved as part of this
development application. Signage is to form the subject of a separate
development application. 10. The Landscape Plan submitted with the development
application is not approved. Prior to the issue of the Construction
Certificate for that stage of the development, an amended Landscape Plan
shall be submitted to and approved by Council’s Manager BAEP. 11. Prior to the issue of the Construction
Certificate for the western façade of the western grandstand, a sample board
and schedule of finishes and materials shall be submitted to and approved by
Council’s Manager BAEP. 12. Use of the stadium and public address system
must comply with the provisions of the Protection of the Environment
Operations Act 1997 (POEO). 13. Prior to the issue of the Occupation
Certificate, details regarding the alterations and additions to the public
address system are to be provided to Council, and are to comply with the
provisions of the POEO Act 1997. 14. Prior to the issue of the Construction
Certificate for that stage of the development, plans detailing the
installation of a dual plumbing system that would be adaptable for connection
to a recycled water system, should it become available, are to be submitted
to and approved by Council’s Manager BAEP. 15. Prior to the issue of the Construction
Certificate for that stage of the development, a Sustainability Report shall
be submitted to and approved by Council’s Manager BAEP detailing the use of
recycled water and the beneficial use of collected stormwater. 16. Use of the Corporate Facility as a Reception
Centre is prohibited. The Corporate Facility is only to be used in
conjunction with an event being held at the stadium where members of the
public would be attending other public areas of the stadium. 17. Soils
and waste material to be removed form the site is to be disposed of at an
approved site. |
499
RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor
Pat Sheehy That: 1. The information contained in the report on Formula
One Superboat Event be received 2. Council
donate a total of $6,500 to Australian Formula One Superboat Series Inc for
the Formula One Superboat Event, to be made up of $3,500 from the City
Marketing budget and $1, 000 from each Ward’s voted works budget. |
6 Development
Application 04/2745 for the demolition of an existing dwelling and the
construction of Seniors Living Development at Lot 5111 and Lot 5112 DP
1057000 (No. 6) Lofty Place,
Cranebrook. Applicant: Pretech Pty Ltd;
Owner: P & S Lilley DA04/2745 |
500
RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Pat Sheehy seconded Councillor
Greg Davies That: 1. The
information contained in the report on Development Application 04/2745 for
the demolition of an existing dwelling and the construction of Seniors Living
Development at Lot 5111 and Lot 5112 DP 1057000 (No. 6) Lofty Place, Cranebrook be received 2. That
Council support the objections pursuant to State Environmental Planning
Policy 1 in respect of Clause 12(4)(a) of Penrith Local Environmental Plan
1998 and Clause 38(4)(c) of State Environmental Planning Policy (Seniors
Living) 2004 3. That
Development Application 04/2745 for the demolition of an existing dwelling
and the construction of Seniors Living Development at Lot 5111 and Lot 5112
DP 1057000 (No. 6) Lofty Place,
Cranebrook be approved by granting a Deferred Commencement consent, subject
to the conditions in Schedule 1 and Schedule 2 below: Schedule 1 The consent shall not operate until Council is satisfied with the
following additional information, which shall be submitted within 3 months of
the date of the determination of this consent: 3.1 The
submission of revised hydraulic plans, which are consistent with the
architectural plans approved with this application, and which also address
the following matters: a) The
375 outlet pipe through the reserve is excessive with the provision of OSD
and should be reduced in size b) The
extension of Council’s pipe system in Indy Crescent is not required and the
proposed drainage shall be reconfigured with connection to the kerb c) Additional
surface gratings shall be provided to the tank along with step irons at entry
point d) Details
of when the high level overflow of the tank operates is to be provided e) The sump is to be
removed from control pit f) Courtyard
levels require adjustment to be compliant with the BCA in terms of providing
adequate drainage clearance to proposed floor levels. 3.2 The
submission of a revised landscape plan prepared by a consultant listed in
Council’s approved Landscape Consultants Register. This plan shall consistent
with the architectural plans approved with this application, and which
otherwise satisfies the requirements in Council’s Landscape Development
Control Plan. The landscape plan
shall also identify: a) The
design, materials and colour of all boundary fencing b) The
materials and colour finishes of the internal driveway. 3.3 The
submission of a Construction Management Plan detailing arrangements for: a) Demolition b) Excavation
and site works c) Construction d) Employee
parking e) Plant/equipment
delivery and storage f) Materials
delivery and storage g) Traffic
and pedestrian management. Schedule 2 Conditions Special conditions 3.4 The
development shall be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans
numbered A01 – A10, issue D, dated 28/6/05, prepared by Pretech Pty Ltd the
application form and any supporting information received with the application
except as maybe amended in red on the attached plans, or by the conditions in
this Notice. In this regard the plans shall be amended as follows: a) The
first floor bathroom windows in the western elevation of Units 1 and 2 shall
be deleted. Any window serving these bathrooms shall instead be located
within the northern elevation of those units b) None
of the ground floor bedrooms in any unit shall have walls comprising a
‘concertina’ type construction c) Fencing
in proximity to Tree # 15 shall be constructed in accordance with the
recommendation in Section 6 of the Tree Report prepared by About Trees d) The
site plan and relevant architectural plans shall be modified to be consistent
with the revised site plan, being Drawing No. A02, Issue E, dated 26/9/05,
drawn by Pretech Pty Ltd e) The
mistletoe in Tree 15 shall be removed, and minor pruning undertaken under the
direction of a qualified arborist, to limit the amount of debris that will
fall onto Unit 6. Units 1, 6 and 12 shall be provided with ‘gutter guard’ to
limit the degree of ongoing maintenance to these units These details shall be included in any plans approved with a
Construction Certificate. 3.5 The
development shall be completed in accordance with the schedule of finishes
received from Pretech Pty Ltd, Drawing No. A16, Issue A dated 16 December
2004, and details for fencing and driveway treatments as shown on the
landscape plan approved to satisfy Schedule 1 of the consent 3.6 Compliance
with Construction Management Plan approved to satisfy Schedule 1 of the
consent 3.7 Drainage
shall be completed generally in accordance with the plans approved to satisfy
Schedule 1 of the consent 3.8 Prior
to the issue of any Occupation Certificate a restriction under Section 88B of
the Conveyancing Act shall be registered against each unit to satisfy clause
20 (1) and (2) of State Environmental Planning Policy (Seniors Living) 2004 3.9 Prior
to the issue of any Occupation Certificate the Principal Certifying Authority
shall be provided with a Compliance Certificate confirming that all units
within the development satisfy the requirements of clauses 51- 72 of State
Environmental Planing Policy (Seniors Living) 2004 3.10 Tree
numbers 2,3,4, 12,13,15 and 16, as identified in the report prepared by About
Trees, shall be retained and incorporated into the development 3.11 Prior
to the release of any Occupation Certificate the Principal Certifying
Authority shall be provided with a Compliance Certificate confirming that a
Restriction under the Conveyancing Act has been registered preventing the
media and / or study rooms in unit 1 and 7 – 12 being converted for use as
bedrooms 3.12 Submission
of plans to the Principal Certifying Authority (PCA) prior to the issue of
any Construction Certificate, showing full design details for the method of
construction, and materials, for that section of the driveway and visitor
parking spaces in proximity to Trees 2,3 and 4, shown shaded on Drawing No
A02, issue E prepared by Pretech Pty Ltd. These plans shall be accompanied by
certification from a suitably qualified arborist confirming the suitability
of these works relative to the root zones of Trees 2, 3 and 4 3.13 A
suitably qualified arborist shall provide the following certification to the
Principal Certifying Authority (PCA) during the construction of the
development: a) Confirmation
that all measures outlined in the Tree Protection Plan (Section 9 of the Tree Report prepared by
About Trees) are installed on site prior to any works commencing. In this
regard it is noted that Trees Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 12, 13, 15 and 16 are to be
retained and protected b) Upon
completion of the ground floor of all units, provide confirmation that the
measures outlined in the Tree Protection Plan remain in place, and are
satisfactory c) Prior
to excavation for services and drainage, confirm that all relevant
contractors were advised of the requirements of the Tree Management Plan. d) Prior
to construction of the driveway confirm that all relevant contractors were
advised of the requirements of the Tree Management Plan e) Upon
completion of the driveway and visitor spaces in proximity of Trees 2, 3 and
4, provide confirmation that construction was completed in accordance with
conditions elsewhere in this Notice f) Provide
certification that the measures outlined in the Tree Protection Plan were
satisfactory at the time landscaping of the site was completed. Standard conditions 4. A008,
A009, A011, A014, A019F, A038, A039, A043, B001, B002, B003, B004, B005,
B006, B007, D001, D009, D010, E001, E005, E006, G002, G004, H01F, H003, H041,
H002, H013 (c, e, f, g, h, i = building specifications) H015, H022, H024,
H026, H028, H030, I003 (Lofty Place – b, e, g, h), I004 (f – the provision of concrete footpaths and associated works,
including necessary pedestrian crossing facilities, to ensure the provision
of safe pedestrian access from the site to the nominated bus stop in
Andromeda Drive. These additional
works shall link the existing footpath in Hindmarsh Street to the bus stop by
creating a new pedestrian crossing in Hindmarsh Street, south west of the
existing roundabout, and another new crossing in Andromeda Drive, south east
of the existing roundabout. A bus
shelter is to be provided at the bus stop in Andromeda Drive. These works shall be designed to satisfy
the relevant AustRoads and Roads and Traffic Authority Guidelines. All costs
associated with these works shall be borne by the applicant.), K001 (delete ‘roads and’)
K002, K007, K009, K016, K019, K025, K027, K036, K037, L001 (landscape plan
approved to satisfy Schedule 1), L002, L003, L007, L008, L010 (prepared by
About Trees [Tree numbers 2,3,4, 12,13,15 and 16] ) N001 (North
Cranebrook Release Area - $71,354),
N001 (Cultural Facilities - $1032), P002, Q001, Q005, Q006 (dot points
1,7,8,9,12) 5. Persons
who made submissions in respect to the proposed development to be advised of
Council’s decision in writing. 6. A
further report be brought to Council regarding the reconciliation of SEPP5
provisions for Seniors Living Developments with Council’s own aspirations for
aged housing within the future Integrated Local Plan for the Penrith LGA. Councillors Lexie
Cettolin and Kevin Crameri requested that their names be recorded as having
voted against the motion. |
8 Application
to rezone Lot 1 DP 542395 and Lot 740 DP 810111 Elizabeth Drive, Luddenham to
allow an Advanced Waste Treatment Facility in conjunction with the existing
quarry and landfill operation. Applicant: Mullane Planning Consultants Pty
Ltd; Owner: SITA Australia Pty Ltd RZ04/0035 |
501
RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Kevin Crameri seconded Councillor
Lexie Cettolin That
the matter be deferred pending a further report that examines the
implications for air quality for surrounding residents, and that provides: 1.
Comprehensive
information about the facility in Perth, mentioned in Item 8 of the Business
Paper for 10 October, and the extent to which the Perth facility compares
with the facility proposed for Luddenham 2.
Information
on the source of the odour in the vicinity of the Eastern Creek waste
treatment facility and landfill site. |
Councillor Crameri left the meeting the time being
8:23pm.
502 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor David
Bradbury seconded Councillor Jackie Greenow That: 1. The information contained in the report on East Ward Skate Park - Mark Leece Oval, St Clair be received 2. The
additional $125,000 for the construction of the Skate Park be allocated from
the balance of the Recreation Reserve. |
The
City Supported by Infrastructure
13 Local
Government Road Safety Program - Roads and Traffic Authority Grant Funding
2005-2006
9019/91 |
503
RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Pat Sheehy seconded Councillor
Greg Davies That: 1. The information contained in the report on Local
Government Road Safety Program - Roads and Traffic Authority Grant Funding
2005-2006, be received 2. Council accepts the grants from the Roads and Traffic Authority as outlined in the report 3. Council
congratulate the Road Safety Coordinator on the success of the road safety
programs mentioned in the report. |
14 Landcom
- Property Lot 101 DP 700213
Brookfield Avenue Werrington Downs 160658 |
504
RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jim Aitken seconded Councillor
Pat Sheehy That: 1. The information contained in the report on Landcom
- Property Lot 101 DP 700213
Brookfield Avenue Werrington Downs be received 2. Landcom be informed that Council appreciates the opportunity in
offering the land for sale, but is not interested in acquiring the land. |
505
RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jim Aitken seconded Councillor
Pat Sheehy that the information
contained in the report on Pecuniary Interest Returns be received. |
506 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jim
Aitken seconded Councillor Pat Sheehy that the information contained in the
report on 2004/05
Annual Statements be received |
507 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jim
Aitken seconded Councillor Pat Sheehy That: 1. The
information contained in the report on Provision of Banking Services be received 2. Council
renew its banking relationship with the Commonwealth Bank for the period July
1 2005 to June 30 2009 in line with the expression of interest received from
the Bank dated 27 June 2005. |
18 Council Property - Granting of an Easement
for Electricity Padmount Substation on Council Land Lot 2 DP 597201 Carinya
Avenue, St Marys to Intregral Energy and the Transfer of Integral Energy's
land to Council 177365 |
508 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jim
Aitken seconded Councillor Pat Sheehy That: 1. The information contained in the report on Council Property - Granting of
an Easement for Electricity Padmount Substation on Council Land Lot 2 DP
597201 Carinya Avenue, St Marys to Intregral Energy and the Transfer of
Integral Energy's land to Council be received 2. Council grant Integral Energy an Easement for Padmount Substation
and connecting cables over Lot 2 DP 597201 in Carinya Avenue, St Marys. 3. The existing Integral Energy site Lot 1 DP 597201, to be
transferred to Council after they demolish and remove all their
infrastructure from the site as compensation for the granting of the
easement. 4. Lot 1 DP 597201 to be classified as “operational” land upon
transfer to Council. 5. Integral Energy to bear all reasonable costs associated with the
granting of the easement. 6. Lots 1 and 2 DP 597201 be consolidated. 7. The
Common Seal of the Council of the City of Penrith be placed on all necessary
documentation. |
19 Late
Notice of Motion to the 2005 NSW Local Government Association Conference 6503/4 |
509 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jim
Aitken seconded Councillor Pat Sheehy That: 1. The
information contained in the report on Late Notice of Motion to the 2005 NSW Local
Government Association Conference be received 2. Penrith
City Council submit a late Notice of Motion to the 2005 NSW Local Government
Association Annual Conference proposing that the Conference calls upon the
State Government to amend Section 525(1) and Section 526(1)(a) & (3) of
the Local Government Act 1993, so that a rateable person’s application for
re-categorisation of their land is limited to the current financial year. |
20 Council
Property - Lease of Shop 1 Allen Arcade, 140-142 Henry Street, Penrith 320469
LE4 Pt 3 |
510 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jim
Aitken seconded Councillor Pat Sheehy That: 1. The
information contained in the report on Council Property - Lease of Shop 1 Allen
Arcade, 140-142 Henry Street, Penrith be received 2. Council approve the assignment of the existing lease within Shop 1 at 140-142 Henry Street Penrith from DFG Clinics Pty Limited to Healthscope Limited. 3. The
Common Seal of the Council of the City of Penrith be placed on all necessary
documentation relating to the assignment. |
511 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jim
Aitken seconded Councillor Pat Sheehy That: 1. The
information contained in the report on Amendment to Council's 2005 Meeting
Calendar be received 2. An
Ordinary meeting of Council be scheduled for Monday 31 October 2005. |
Councillor Garry Rumble left the
meeting the time being 8:25PM.
Councillor Jackie Greenow requested Leave of Absence for 17 October 2005. |
His Worship the Mayor, Councillor
John Thain ruled that the matter was urgent and should
be dealt with at the meeting. 512 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor
Jim Aitken seconded Councillor Karen McKeown that Leave of Absence be granted
to Councillor Jackie Greenow for 17 October 2005. |
Councillor Jackie Greenow requested that Council make a
donation of $600 from East Ward voted works to the Mamre Project to cover the cost of hiring chairs and a stage for
their Arts and Crafts Colonial Fair on the weekend of 15 and 16 October. |
His Worship the Mayor, Councillor
John Thain ruled that the matter was urgent and should
be dealt with at the meeting. 513 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jackie Greenow seconded
Councillor Greg Davies that Council donate $600 from East Ward voted works to
the Mamre Project to cover the cost of hiring chairs and a stage for their
Arts and Crafts Colonial Fair on the weekend of 15 and 16 October. |
Councillor Garry Rumble returned to the
meeting the time being 8:28PM.
Councillor Kevin Crameri returned to the
meeting the time being 8:29PM.
Councillor David Bradbury requested that a memo outlining the
implications of the NSW Court of Appeal’s decision in Baulkham Hills Shire
Council vs Group Development Services Pty Ltd. [2005] NSWCA 315 |
Councillor Jim Aitken requested a memo regarding the
possibility of Council lobbying Australia Post to investigate the
installation of a post box in front of the Public School in Lakes Drive
Glenmore Park. |
Councillor Jim Aitken requested
that a report be brought to Council to address the problems with the bus stop
that was relocated from Glenmore Park shops.
The problems include lack of paving, a steep slope and the absence of
a shelter. |
Councillor Jim Aitken requested
a report on the use by Westbus of low step entry buses. He has received representations suggesting
that Westbus has stopped the use of such buses and
that this is affecting the elderly, the disabled and mothers with young
children. |
Councillor Jim Aitken requested
a report on the possibility of Penrith City Council working with the
University of Western Sydney to develop a scholarship program along the lines of the program currently
operating between the University and Blacktown City Council. |
QWN 8 Footpath
on Southern Side of Rodgers Street, Kingswood |
Councillor Jim Aitken requested an update
on the time frame for the construction of
a concrete pavement in Rodgers Street Kingswood. |
Councillor Jim Aitken requested an update
on the closing of Ransley Street Penrith and a copy of any advice regarding
the matter given to Penrith A H & I
Society or those associated with the upgrade of Penrith Stadium. |
Councillor Jim Aitken requested
that Councillors be given a workshop briefing on the issues concerning State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) 55 seniors
living type developments, including: ·
Where they can be built ·
Where they are needed ·
Control over who occupies them ·
Affordability ·
Costs for developers. |
Councillor Jim Aitken requested a memo detailing
Council’s intention regarding a tree in front of 8 Recreation Ave Penrith. |
QWN 12 Development
Application Determined By Council DA05/0080 |
Councillor Garry Rumble
requested a memo providing information
about Development Application DA05/0080 regarding 73-79 Littlefields Road
Mulgoa and asked whether it needed be referred to Council for
determination. Councillor Rumble
requested that a letter be written to M & C Cafai to clarify apparently conflicting
advice about the size of a proposed farm shed. |
QWN 13 Development
Application Determined By Council DA03/2954 |
Councillor Garry Rumble
requested that Development Application 03/2954 & CC 03/0897 regarding
145-175 Fairlight Road Mulgoa be referred
to Council for determination. |
QWN 14 Presentation
to Council by Cavesinni Constructions Pty Ltd DA03/3292 |
Councillor Garry Rumble
requested that arrangements be made for Cavesinni Constructions Pty Ltd to make a
30 minute presentation to Council at the Council meeting where the
determination is made on the Development Application for 538 – 556 High
Street Penrith. |
Councillor Garry Rumble
requested a report on Council’s involvement
in any public immunisation program or emergency response initiatives in
response to the possibility of an outbreak of bird flu. |
QWN 16 Funds
for Upgrade of Surveyors Creek Softball Complex |
Councillor Garry Rumble
requested that a total of $14,876 be
provided to the Penrith City Softball Association for the provision of back
nets and four dugouts at the Surveyors Creek Softball Complex, provided that
the Association repay half the amount back to Council over two years. |
His Worship the Mayor, Councillor John Thain ruled that the matter was urgent
and should be dealt with at the meeting. 514 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Garry Rumble seconded
Councillor Greg Davies That: 1. Council provide a total of $14,876 in funds, taken equally from
each Ward’s voted works budget, to the Penrith City Softball Association to
be used for the provision of back nets and four dugouts at the Surveyors
Creek Softball Complex. 2. Penrith City Softball Association repay to Council a total of
$7438, being half the amount provided, in three instalments over a two year
period, with the repaid money being allocated equally to each Ward’s voted
works budget. |
QWN 17 Development
Application Determined By Council DA05/1535 |
Councillor Garry Rumble requested that
Development Application DA05/1535 concerning additions at 35 Bursaria
Crescent Glenmore Park be referred to Council for determination. |
Councillor Mark
Davies requested that a report be brought to Council on the possibility of
Council working on a joint campaign with Westbus to encourage the use of
public transport in the City and to raise the profile of Westbus’ services. |
DECLARATION OF INTEREST
Councillor David Bradbury declared a
non-pecuniary interest in Item 4 of the Agenda for Committee of the Whole, Acquisition
of Open Space - Gipps Street, Claremont Meadows as he is the owner of a
property in the vicinity and indicated that he would leave the meeting during
the discussion and voting on this item.
515 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor
Jackie Greenow seconded Councillor Karen McKeown that the meeting adjourn to the Committee of the Whole to deal with the
following matters, the time being 8:45PM. |
1 Presence
of the Public
CW1 RESOLVED on the motion of Councillor Jackie Greenow seconded Councillor Karen McKeown that the press and public be excluded from Committee of the Whole to deal with the following matters:
City
In Its Environment
2 Demolition
of dwelling at 30 Eton Road, Cambridge Park 256154
This item has been referred to Committee of the Whole as the report
refers to discussion in relation to the personal hardship of a resident or ratepayer;
AND advice concerning litigation, or advice that would otherwise be privileged
from production in legal proceedings on the ground of legal professional
privilege and discussion of the matter in open meeting would be, on balance,
contrary to the public interest.
Leadership and Organisation
3 Acquisition of Road Widening - Lenore
Lane, Erskine Park LE/18
This item has been referred to Committee of the Whole as the report
refers to commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed
(i) prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it; or (ii)
confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council; or (iii) reveal a
trade secret and discussion of the matter in open meeting would be, on balance,
contrary to the public interest.
4 Acquisition of Open Space - Gipps
Street, Claremont Meadows DA02/2956
This item has been referred to Committee of the Whole as the report
refers to commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if
disclosed (i) prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it;
or (ii) confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council; or (iii)
reveal a trade secret and discussion of the matter in open meeting would be, on
balance, contrary to the public interest.
Councillor Lexie Cettolin left the
meeting the time being 8:47PM and did not return.
CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS
The meeting resumed
at 9:22PM and the General Manager reported that the Committee of the Whole met
at 8:45PM on Monday 10 October 2005, the following being present:
His Worship the Mayor
Councillor John Thain, Councillors Kaylene Allison, David Bradbury, Kevin
Crameri, Greg Davies, Mark Davies, Jackie Greenow, Karen McKeown, Susan Page,
and Pat Sheehy
and the Committee of
the Whole excluded the press and public from the meeting for the reasons set
out in CW1 and that the Committee of the Whole submitted the following
recommendations to Council.
2 Demolition of dwelling at 30 Eton Road, Cambridge Park 256154 |
CW2 RECOMMENDED on
the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Pat Sheehy That: 1. The
information contained in the report on Demolition of
dwelling at 30 Eton Road, Cambridge Park be received 2. Council
confirm that on Monday 19 September 2005 its intention was to defer
discussion of the matter until the Council meeting on 10 October 2005 and
that Council’s officers were authorised to issue a new notice of entry 3. Council notes the intention that its Officers use their delegation to enter and demolish the building on the property 30 Eton Road, Cambridge Park. |
3 Acquisition of Road Widening - Lenore Lane, Erskine Park LE/18 |
CW3 RECOMMENDED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies
seconded Councillor Jim Aitken That: 1. The
information contained in the report on Acquisition of Road Widening - Lenore Lane,
Erskine Park be received 2. Council pay compensation to Integral Energy for the dedication of 50.67m2 of land from Lot 2 DP1063283 in accordance with the summary as outlined in the report. |
Councillor David Bradbury left the meeting, the time being 9:21PM
4 Acquisition of Open Space - Gipps Street, Claremont Meadows DA02/2956 |
CW4 RECOMMENDED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies
seconded Councillor Jim Aitken That: 1. The
information contained in the report on Acquisition of Open Space - Gipps Street,
Claremont Meadows be received 2. Council pay compensation to Westminster Development Pty Limited
for the dedication of 1.048ha from Lot 1 DP 27233 in accordance with the
Claremont Meadows Section 94 Plan as outlined within the summary of the
report. 3. The land be classified as “Community” land. |
Councillor David Bradbury returned to the meeting the time being 9:22PM.
ADOPTION
OF Committee of the Whole
516 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg
Davies seconded Councillor Mark Davies that the
recommendation contained in the Committee of the Whole and shown as CW2 to
CW4 be adopted. |
There being no further business the Chairperson declared the meeting closed the time being 9:22PM.
Procedure
for Addressing Meetings
Anyone can request permission to address a meeting, providing that the
number of speakers is limited to three in support of any proposal and three
against.
Any request about an issue or matter on the Agenda for the meeting can
be lodged with the General Manager or Public Officer up until 12 noon on the
day of the meeting.
Prior to the meeting the person who has requested permission to address
the meeting will need to provide the Public Officer with a written statement of
the points to be covered during the address in sufficient detail so as to
inform the Councillors of the substance of the address and a written copy of
any questions to be asked of the Council in order that responses to those
questions can be provided in due course.
In addition, prior to addressing the meeting a person addressing Council
or Committee will be informed that they do not enjoy any privilege and that
permission to speak may be withdrawn should they make inappropriate comments.
It should be noted that speakers at meetings of the Council or Committee
do not have absolute privilege (parliamentary privilege). A speaker who makes any potentially
offensive or defamatory remarks about any other person may render themselves
open to legal action.
Prior to addressing the meeting the person will be required to sign the
following statement:
“I (name) understand that the meeting I intend to
address on (date) is a public meeting.
I also understand that should I say or present any material that is inappropriate,
I may be subject to legal action. I
also acknowledge that I have been informed to obtain my own legal advice about
the appropriateness of the material that I intend to present at the above
mentioned meeting”.
Should a person fail to sign the above statement then permission to
address either the Council or Committee will not be granted.
The Public Officer or Minute Clerk will speak to those people who have
requested permission to address the meeting, prior to the meeting at 6.45pm.
It is up to the Council or Committee to decide if the request to address
the meeting will be granted.
Where permission is to be granted the Council or Committee, at the
appropriate time, will suspend only so much of the Standing Orders to allow the
address to occur.
The Chairperson will then call the person up to the lectern or speaking
area.
The person addressing the meeting needs to clearly indicate:
· Their
name;
· Organisation
or group they are representing (if applicable);
· Details
of the issue to be addressed and the item number of the report in the Business Paper;
· Whether
they are opposing or supporting the issue or matter (if applicable) and the action they would like the
meeting to take;
·
The interest of the speaker (e.g. affected person,
neighbour, applicant, applicants
spokesperson, interested citizen etc).
Each person then has five minutes to make their address. Those addressing Council will be required to
speak to the written statement they have submitted. Permission to address Council is not to be taken as an
opportunity to refute or otherwise the points made by previous speakers on the
same issue.
The Council or Committee can extend this time if they consider if
appropriate, however, everyone needs to work on the basis that the address will
be for five minutes only.
Councillors may have questions about the address so people are asked to
remain at the lectern or in the speaking area until the Chairperson has thanked
them.
When this occurs, they should then return to their seat.
Steve Hackett
Public Officer
02 4732 7637 August
2003
Mayoral Minutes
Item Page
1 Council
Recognised for Excellence in Risk Management
123 1
2 The
Passing of Senior Constable Bob Tengdahl 123 2
31 October
2005 |
|
Leadership and
Organisation |
|
Mayoral Minute
Council Recognised
for Excellence in Risk Management
I am very pleased to report that Penrith City Council has been awarded the 2005 Westpool Risk Management Excellence Award and the Richard Oliver International Excellence in Risk Engineering Practices for Joint Local Government Pools Risk Management Award for 2005.
The 2005 Westpool Risk Management Excellence Award consists of a perpetual trophy and plaque, and the Joint Local Government Pools Risk Management Award includes a cheque for $500 to encourage the continued investment in risk management.
The awards recognised Council’s development of a system for the management and maintenance of trees in the public domain. Staff in our Parks Construction and Maintenance department developed the tree inspection and assessment procedure to prioritise requests for service, and to identify the resources required to provide the service.
Council staff also identified the potential to develop this system further, from one that responds to reported problems into a proactive risk-management based model for the management of street trees. Such a model could also be used by other local government authorities or agencies charged with managing trees. It has great potential to improve streetscapes and air quality, and the effectiveness and efficiency of Council resources, as well as greatly reducing risk exposure.
I congratulate Council’s Parks Construction and Maintenance staff and Risk Management staff for the high standard of work that has been recognised. Those staff were:
· Raphael Collins, Parks Construction & Maintenance Manager · Greg Butchard, Senior Parks Asset · Roger Bisby, Parks Asset Co-ordinator · Kevin George, Parks Asset Co-ordinator · Geoff Lawson, Parks Asset Co-ordinator · Kris Pope, Parks Asset Co-ordinator |
· Wendy Marks, Parks Administration Officer · Alison Amos, Parks Secretary · Lindsay Clarke, Parks Co-ordinator · Ken Muir, Risk Management Coordinator · Keeley Preston, Insurance Officer. |
I would also like to thank Westpool and Willis Insurance Brokers for running these award programs and their ongoing efforts to improve the quality and operation of Local Government.
John Thain
Mayor
31 October
2005 |
|
Leadership and
Organisation |
|
Mayoral Minute
The Passing of
Senior Constable Bob Tengdahl
Council was saddened to hear of the passing
last Monday night of Senior Constable Bob Tengdahl who was a dedicated member
of the New South Wales Police Service for 33 years and represented the St Marys
Local Area Command on the Local Traffic Committee since December 1998.
Senior Constable Tengdahl’s knowledge and
experience made him a much-valued member of the Committee, particularly in
regard to traffic legislation and road safety issues, and his sense of humour,
commitment, and contribution to the community will be sorely missed.
On behalf of Council and the Penrith
community, I offer our condolences to Bob’s wife Lynne, his sons, Garth and
Paul, and his family and friends.
Bob’s funeral was held this morning at St Nicholas of Myra Church.
John Thain
Mayor
Reports of
Committees
Item Page
1 Report
and Recommendations of the Local Traffic Committee Meeting of Penrith City
Council held on Monday 10 October 2005. x 1
2 Report
and Recommendatios of the Policy Review Committee Meeting held at Penrith City
Council on Monday 17 October 2005. x 6
31 October
2005 |
|
Leadership and
Organisation |
|
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE
Local
Traffic Committee MEETING
HELD ON 10 October, 2005
Chairperson: Asset Manager – David Burns
Declarations of
Interest: No declarations
received
The Local Traffic
Committee met at 9:00am and concluded at
11.30am and made the following recommendations:
MASTER PROGRAM
REPORTS
The City Supported by Infrastructure
1 Appointment of Local Traffic Committee
Representative for Allan Shearan, Member for Londonderry (31/5 Pt 10) |
LTC106
RESOLVED That the information contained in the report on Appointment of Local Traffic Committee
Representative for Allan Shearan, Member for Londonderry be received. |
2 Glebe Place, Penrith - Request for
Provision of Parking Restrictions (GL/03) |
LTC107 RESOLVED That: 1. The information contained in the report on Glebe
Place, Penrith - Request for Provision of Parking Restrictions be received 2. Approximately 60m of full-time “No Stopping” restrictions be
provided on the southern side of Glebe Place, Penrith across the two
driveways servicing the two staff parking areas of Governor Phillip Nursing
Home, and a further 30m of full-time “No Stopping” restrictions be provided
across the driveway of the service vehicle access 3. Australia Post be requested to relocate the existing street
posting box on the southern side of Glebe Place, Penrith fronting the Governor
Phillip Nursing Home to approximately 10m east of its current location 4. The applicant be advised. |
3 B-Double Route & 4.6m High Vehicle
Route Application - Kurrajong Road, North St Marys (9020/13 Pt 3) |
LTC 108 RESOLVED That: 1. The information contained in the report on B-Double
Route & 4.6m High Vehicle Route Application - Kurrajong Road, North St
Marys be received 2. A field trial be conducted to determine the suitability of the B-double to use Kurrajong Road, North St Marys, from Glossop Street to the Case New Holland premises 3. A further report be
submitted to the Local Traffic Committee following the field trial. |
4 Request for Speed Enforcement -
Various Locations (9003/1 Pt 6) |
That: 1. The information contained in the report on Request
for Speed Enforcement - Various Locations be received 2. Police be requested to investigate and conduct speed enforcement
at the locations listed in the above table and a report be submitted to the
Local Traffic Committee within three months following the investigation. |
5 Trinity Drive, Lewis Road, &
Pasturegate Avenue, Cambridge Gardens - Speeding Vehicles (TR/02;
LE/13; PA/03) |
LTC 110 RESOLVED That: 1. The information contained in the report on Trinity Drive, Lewis Road, &
Pasturegate Avenue, Cambridge Gardens - Speeding Vehicles be received 2. Further investigation be carried out with a view to developing a Local Area Traffic Management (LATM) scheme within the precinct, and a report be submitted to the Committee following the investigation 3. Another speed classification survey will need to be carried out to determine the change in heavy vehicle usage in Lewis Road, Cambridge Gardens in the vicinity of the hotel and shopping centre 4. Council’s Road Safety Co-ordinator be requested to install the Speed Alert Mobile (SAM) unit at Trinity Drive, Lewis Road, and Pasturegate Avenue, Cambridge Gardens to advise and alert motorists of their travelling speed 5. Traffic safety at Trinity Drive,
Lewis Road, and Pasturegate Avenue, Cambridge Gardens continue to be
monitored. |
6 Heavey
Street, Werrington - Change Existing Bus Stop to Full-Time Bus Zone (9001/8 Pt19) |
LTC 111 RESOLVED That: 1. The information contained in the report on Heavey Street, Werrington -
Change Existing Bus Stop to Full-Time Bus Zone be received 2. The existing “Bus Stop” on the northern side of Heavey Street, Werrington, opposite Werrington Public School, be changed to 20m of full-time “Bus Zone” and be relocated approximately 30m east adjacent the “No Stopping” restrictions on the approach to the wombat crossing 3. The existing 120m of full-time “No Stopping” restrictions on the northern side of Heavey Street, opposite Werrington Public School, be removed with the exception of 10m on the departure side of the wombat crossing 4. The linemarking in the vicinity of the school be reviewed 5. The Principal of Werrington Public School and Westbus be advised. |
7 Allen Place Carpark - Pedestrian
Safety Issues 9201/1 Pt 3 |
That: 1. The information contained in the report on Allen
Place Carpark - Pedestrian Safety Issues be received 2. A further report be submitted back to the Committee following completion of a conceptual design and estimate of the proposed pedestrian safety improvements identified in the report. 3. The development consent conditions for the shops fronting High Street be checked regarding requirements for the servicing of “bins” 4. The Penrith City Centre
Manager be consulted regarding mitigating the impact of “skip bins” in Allen
Place to the rear of the shops fronting High Street. |
8 Gibbes Street/Mulgoa Road, Regentville
- Traffic Safety Issues (GI/01 &
MU/01 Pt15) |
LTC 113 RESOLVED That: 1. The information contained in the report on Gibbes Street/Mulgoa Road,
Regentville - Traffic Safety Issues be received 2. Traffic safety issues and possible improvement works identified in the report occurring on Mulgoa Road, Regentville between the Glenmore Parkway roundabout and the Gibbes Street intersection be referred to the Roads and Traffic Authority for further investigation and appropriate action 3. The Police be advised. |
9 GENERAL BUSINESS
9.1 Bus Stop – Birmingham Road, South Penrith
(Raised Westbus) (9001/8 Pt 19) Council at its meeting on 1 August 2005 resolved, on the recommendation of the Local Traffic Committee, to approve the installation of the bus stop in front of 48 Birmingham Road. Following consultation process by
Westbus, it was stated that the resident has no objections to the
installation of the bus stop in front of their property. However, Westbus representative states
that “the resident has claimed not to have received the notification letter from them and
denies having left a telephone message agreeing to the new bus stop. The resident claims to live alone, and has
no need for on-street parking, except during weekends when the bus stop is in
operation”. This
bus stop is for Route N2, which operates all weekend long. Westbus received
objections from numbers 50 and 52, both being elderly ladies living alone, who
did not want people standing out front of their house waiting for a bus. Westbus
considered that the current position of the bus stop best serves the
community, and request the LTC to re-confirm and/or re-consider the approved
bus stop location. |
That the current approved
bus stop location remain unchanged. |
9.2 Bus Stop - Sydney Street, Oxley Park
(corner Adelaide Street) (Raised St Marys Police) (9001/8 Pt19) |
St Marys Police representative has
requested that the bus stop on the south - western corner of Sydney Street
and Adelaide Street, Oxley Park be re-located approximately 40m-50m near the
existing pedestrian crossing opposite the school due to safety issue, so that
students leaving the Oxley Park Primary School may exit via the rear entrance
near the cemetery, rather than walk in the vicinity of the roundabout. It was advised that a number of incidents
have occurred relating to indecent exposure to young children as they walk to
or from Oxley Park Primary School within the vicinity of the
intersection. This matter has been
discussed with Westbus and no objection was raised to relocate the bus
stop. The RTA, Penrith Police and
Local Member for Penrith representatives have also been requested to comment
on this matter and raised no objections to the proposed relocation. Westbus representative indicated that
notices would need to be placed at the existing bus stop advising of the new
location, as well as advise school staff, who can also advise parents of the
relocation of the bus stop. The
drivers have been advised on Tuesday, 4 October 2005 informing them to pick
up any children at the relocated position. |
LTC 115 RESOLVED That the
Committee endorse relocation of the existing bus stop in Sydney Street to a
distance of approximately 40m-50m south of its current position. |
9.3 Union
Lane, Penrith - No Parking restriction (Raised Councillor Rumble) (UN/03
Pt 2) |
Traffic westbound along Union Lane has an
existing No Stopping zone on both sides between Worth Street and the end of the road. It was reported that a shop owner has been issued with an
Infringement Notice and booked for stopping within the No Stopping zone when
the driver stopped to open the gate/roll-a-door. It was requested that the existing parking restriction on the northern
side be investigated for a possible No Parking or Loading Zone. |
LTC 116 RESOLVED That the matter be investigated. |
31 October
2005 |
|
Leadership and
Organisation |
|
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE
Policy
Review Committee MEETING
HELD ON 17 October, 2005
Chairperson: His
Worship the Mayor, Cr John Thain
Declarations
of Interest: No declarations
received
The Committee met at 7:04PM and concluded at 7:41PM and made the following recommendations:
1 Code of Conduct and Promoting Better
Practice 754/8
Part 4 |
The Legal Officer, Mr Stephen
Britten, gave a short presentation to the meeting about the Model Code of
Conduct. 1
RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor
Garry Rumble That: 1. The information contained in the report on the Code of Conduct
and Promoting Better Practice be received 2. Council submit an urgent motion to the 2005 Local
Government and Shires Association Annual Conference indicating that the Model
Code of Conduct in its current format is unworkable and requires further
consultation between Councils and the Department of Local Government. |
Item Page
The
City as a Social Place
1 Life
Education NSW 7003/8 1
2 Section
96 Modification of Development Consent No. 03/1018 for the parking of a truck
at Lot 200 DP 815535 (No. 28) Grays Lane, Cranebrook. Applicant: G & L
Cettolin; Owner: G & L Cettolin
DA03/1018 3
3 Development
Application 04/0856 for the demolition of an existing hotel and the
construction of a new two storey hotel building over basement parking at Part
Lot 23 and Part Lot 24, Section 30, DP 1855 and Lot 25 DP 656834 (No. 180) Great Western Highway, Kingswood.
Applicant: Valge Architects Pty Ltd;
Owner: Kayora Pty Ltd DA04/0856 8
4 Assistance
Towards Amateur Sportspersons and Representatives in the fields of Art, Music,
Culture - Overseas and Interstate Travel 6016/1 Pt38 25
5 Castlereagh
Crematorium and Cemetery Business Plan 1008/2 28
6 Alterations
and Additions to Penrith Regional Gallery and Lewers Bequest (PRG & LB)
38/143 33
7 Joan
Sutherland Performing Arts Centre (JSPAC) Extensions Project 961/19 36
8 Section
96 Modification to Development Application 03/2954 for a proposed Rumpus Room
at Lot 5 DP 235175 (No. 145-175) Fairlight Road, Mulgoa. Applicant: Andrew
Soane and Heather Soane; Owner: Andrew
Soane and Heather Soane DA03/2954 41
9 Funding
Grant Offer from the National Motor Vehicle Theft Reduction Council - Operation
Bounce Back 05/06 1027/14 pt 8 55
URGENT
14 Development
Application 04/2239 for an Educational Establishment at Part Lot 14 DP 707375
Water Street, Werrington. Applicant: Ingham Planning Pty Limited; Owner: The Pared Foundation DA04/2239 87
The
City Supported by Infrastructure
10 Coreen
Avenue, Penrith - Proposed Provision of Load Limit Restriction CO/02 Pt4 59
Leadership
and Organisation
11 Summary
of Investments & Banking for the period 31 August 2005 to 27 September 2005
6031/4 65
12 2004-2005
Corporate Annual Report 10/46 70
13 City
Operations Directorate Report to end of September 2005 153/2 71
The
City In Its Environment
URGENT
15 Grant
funding for the use of recycled organics on sporting fields. 3000/39 106
The City as a Social Place
Item Page
1 Life
Education NSW 7003/8 1
2 Section
96 Modification of Development Consent No. 03/1018 for the parking of a truck
at Lot 200 DP 815535 (No. 28) Grays Lane, Cranebrook. Applicant: G & L
Cettolin; Owner: G & L Cettolin
DA03/1018 3
3 Development
Application 04/0856 for the demolition of an existing hotel and the
construction of a new two storey hotel building over basement parking at Part
Lot 23 and Part Lot 24, Section 30, DP 1855 and Lot 25 DP 656834 (No. 180) Great Western Highway, Kingswood.
Applicant: Valge Architects Pty Ltd;
Owner: Kayora Pty Ltd DA04/0856 8
4 Assistance
Towards Amateur Sportspersons and Representatives in the fields of Art, Music,
Culture - Overseas and Interstate Travel 6016/1 Pt38 25
5 Castlereagh
Crematorium and Cemetery Business Plan 1008/2 28
6 Alterations
and Additions to Penrith Regional Gallery and Lewers Bequest (PRG & LB)
38/143 33
7 Joan
Sutherland Performing Arts Centre (JSPAC) Extensions Project 961/19 36
8 Section
96 Modification to Development Application 03/2954 for a proposed Rumpus Room
at Lot 5 DP 235175 (No. 145-175) Fairlight Road, Mulgoa. Applicant: Andrew
Soane and Heather Soane; Owner: Andrew
Soane and Heather Soane DA03/2954 41
9 Funding
Grant Offer from the National Motor Vehicle Theft Reduction Council - Operation
Bounce Back 05/06 1027/14 pt 8 55
31 October
2005 |
|
The City as a Social
Place |
|
The City as a Social Place
1 |
7003/8 |
Compiled by: Yvonne
Perkins - Community Safety Coordinator
Authorised by: David Burns - Asset Manager
Strategic Program
Term Achievement: A community safety plan, building
on a partnership with police, the community and other stakeholders is in place
and supported by Council’s programs.
Critical Action: Maintain and implement a Community Safety Plan for the City with the aid
of relevant stakeholders that responds to current prioritised issues.
Purpose:
To seek Council
approval to continue its support to Life Education NSW in its delivery of
preventative drug and alcohol programs to school aged children in the Penrith
Local Government Area (LGA).
Background
Council, at its meeting on the 7 February 2005, resolved to support Life Education NSW in its provision of preventative drug and alcohol programs to school aged children in the Penrith LGA.
Life Education NSW is a not-for-profit community based organisation. It is based at Colyton and its primary goal is the provision of preventative drug and alcohol education programs to the community, particularly to primary school aged children.
In the Penrith LGA, these programs are facilitated in a purpose built mobile classroom. Life Education NSW has also purchased a bus to transport children from schools mainly within the Penrith LGA to its centre in Hewitt Street, Colyton.
The support provided to Life Education NSW involved the provision of a truck and driver to move the purpose built mobile classroom between schools in the Penrith LGA and to adjoining Councils. Fairfield City Council and Holroyd City Council move the classroom within their LGAs. Life Education has provided a copy of their Certificates of Insurance nominating Penrith City Council as an interested party. The level of insurance is more than adequate.
Other support provided by Penrith City Council included servicing of the bus and the provision of training the driver in conducting daily maintenance checks. Any repairs to the bus are paid by Life Education NSW.
The provision of this assistance supports the action in Strategy 4, Key Area 2 of the Penrith Valley Community Safety Plan to “Network and support drug and alcohol resource agencies to promote drug and alcohol education programs”. The program run by Life Education NSW is a preventative program targeted at primary school aged children.
Current
Situation
Life Education NSW has requested that the assistance provided by Council in 2005 be provided in 2006. The actual cost of the assistance in 2005 was $1,504.19 (servicing $719.01; classroom movement $785.18) and was funded as a Community Safety Initiative in the Community Safety and Neighbourhood Renewal Program.
Funding is available in this year’s Community Safety Program to provide the assistance to Life Education. This assistance will allow the provision of preventative drug and alcohol education programs to school aged children within the Penrith LGA and support the action in the Penrith Valley Community Safety Plan referred to above.
That: 1. The
information contained in the report on Life Education NSW be received 2. Council continue its support of Life Education NSW in its provision of preventative drug and alcohol programs to school aged children in the Penrith LGA, as detailed in the report. |
There are no attachments for
this report.
31 October
2005 |
|
The City as a Social
Place |
|
The City as a Social Place
2 |
Section 96
Modification of Development Consent No. 03/1018 for the parking of a truck at
Lot 200 DP 815535 (No. 28) Grays Lane, Cranebrook Applicant: G & L
Cettolin; Owner: G & L Cettolin |
DA03/1018 |
Compiled by: Schandel
Jefferys - Senior Environmental Planner
Authorised by: Wayne Mitchell - Acting Building
Approvals and Environmental Protection Manager
Strategic Program
Term Achievement: Redevelopment of existing areas
contributes to safe, sustainable, affordable and satisfying living environments
and cohesive communities.
Critical Action: Work in partnership with the local community to foster understanding of
the reasons why established areas are redeveloping.
Purpose:
To enable Council
to determine a request to modify the development consent (No. 03/1018) to allow
the consent to operate beyond the 6 month time limit. As per Council Policy
this application is reported to Council for determination as one of the
applicants is a Councillor. The
application is recommended for approval.
Background
Council approved development application (No. 03/1018) on 28 June 2004 for the parking of one truck on the subject site. The approval was issued with a condition limiting the consent to a period of six months. A six-month period was given to trial the land use and to ensure implementation of conditions of consent relating to visual and acoustic impacts of the proposal. Previous applications and trial periods are discussed in Council’s report of 28 June 2004 (attached).
The
Site
The site is a corner allotment with an area of 4210m˛. The site has an 81m frontage to Komirra Road and 50m frontage to Grays Lane. The site is generally flat and contains several Eucalyptus trees scattered over the property. The locality comprises rural residential allotments characterised by scattered woodland.
An existing single storey dwelling is located on this site. To the south is a single storey dwelling and to the east is a detached dual occupancy fronting Komirra Road. A vacant allotment containing dense vegetation is located immediately opposite Komirra Road (to the north of the site). See locality map and site plan appended to the previous report which is attached.
The
Proposal
The applicant is seeking to delete Condition 2 of the consent notice, which currently reads:
“This
consent is limited to a period of six months from the date of this notice of
development consent. Prior to the
expiry of this consent the applicant shall submit a request to have the time
limitation reviewed.”
The consent notice was issued on 19 July 2004 and the six-month period expired on 19 January 2005. The modification request was received on 4 January 2005.
Community
Consultation
In accordance with Council’s Notification and Advertising Development Control Plan the application was notified to adjoining nearby residents and exhibited from 25 January to 8 February 2005. Two submissions have been received in response, both from the same resident raising concerns regarding non-compliance with conditions of consent.
Matters raised in submissions are addressed in the assessment section of this report.
Planning
Assessment
Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 provides that Council may, on application being made by the applicant, modify a development consent if:
(a) it is
satisfied that the proposed modification is of minimal environmental impact,
and
(b) it is
satisfied that the development to which the consent as modified relates is
substantially the same development as the development for which the consent was
originally granted and before that consent as originally granted was modified
(if at all), and
(c) it has
notified the application in accordance with:
(i) the
regulations, if the regulations so require, or
(ii) a
development control plan, if the consent authority is a council that has made a
development control plan under section 72 that requires the notification or
advertising of applications for modification of a development consent, and
(d) it has
considered any submissions made concerning the proposed modification within any
period prescribed by the regulations or provided by the development control
plan, as the case may be.
The proposed modification does not physically change the original approval and is therefore of minimal environmental impact. The proposed deletion of condition 2 of the development consent does not alter the nature and operation of the proposal other than timeframe therefore it is the same development as previously approved and is within the scope of a modification request. This modification therefore satisfies the test of being substantially the same development as the approved proposal.
Additionally, the provisions of Section 79C of the Act require consideration under any application to modify consent. The following matters are considered relevant to the current application.
1. Statutory
Considerations
1.1 Sydney
Regional Environmental Plan No. 20 – Hawkesbury-Nepean River (SREP 20)
SREP 20 provides an overall direction for planning to protect the environment of the Hawkesbury-Nepean Catchment within which the proposed development is located. The deletion of this condition would not compromise the water or scenic qualities of the river environment.
1.2 Penrith
Local Environmental Plan 201 (Rural Lands) and Rural Lands Development Control
Plan
The
proposal was previously assessed under the provisions of these plans. It was found to be consistent with the aims,
objectives and other specific provisions of the Rural Lands LEP and the Rural
DCP. The deletion of condition 2 of the development consent is not considered
to vary the outcomes of the assessment of the original application and the
proposal remains consistent with the provisions of these plans. As discussed later in this report, the
relevant conditions of the consent have been satisfied and continued parking of
one truck will not have an adverse impact on the local amenity.
2. The likely impacts of the development
2.1 Non compliance with conditions of consent
A resident has raised concern that
conditions of the development consent had not been met. A compliance check was conducted after
lodgement of the modification request, which revealed that the following
conditions of consent have now been satisfied; this has included the following:
· Provision of the 40cm high
lattice screen top to the existing 1.5m high fence
· Provision of 6 advanced native
shrubs or trees at a distance of 1.5m apart
· Provision of road base material
to truck parking area and bitumen to the front boundary
· Parking of only one truck on-site
(Condition 5)
· Submission of an Acoustic Report
(Condition 9) certifying that the development complies with the Environmental
Protection Authorities relevant Amenity, Intrusive and Sleep Disturbance
criteria
· Submission of documentation to
show that the truck’s clutch fan is to be serviced by an authorised repairer
Condition 5 of the development consent
requires that no more than one truck is to be stored on the property and that
this truck is to be stored in the approved designated area. A complaint was
received in May 2005 suggesting more than one truck was on the property. A subsequent inspection revealed that there
was only one truck parked on the subject property and another truck parked
close by on the street. As the second
truck was not parked on private property this falls outside of Council’s
ability for enforcement under the existing consent. Council officers have inspected the property on a number of other
occasions and not observed more than one truck on the site. To ensure that the
approved truck only is parked on site, however, an additional condition is
proposed to read:
Council’s Senior Environment Officer has
reviewed the Acoustic Report required by Condition 9 and found that the
submitted report satisfies the condition as it has demonstrated that the noise
mitigation measures required by the initial acoustic report have been
implemented. This Report has also
certified that the development complies with the Environmental Protection
Authorities relevant Amenity, Intrusiveness and Sleep Disturbance
criteria. It is also suggested that
notwithstanding the requirement for development consent, noise impacts
generated from the parking of a truck on the property could be effectively
regulated through the Protection of the Environment Operations Act, 1997. If there are sufficient grounds for taking
further action this may occur through the issue of a Noise Control Notice or
Prevention Notice and can include the imposition on fines.
The vehicle
associated with the business (when not in use) is to be parked on site in the
location approved on the submitted plans
This condition is within the scope of this
modification proposal and would enable enforcement action if a vehicle
associated with business was to be parked in the nearby streets.
Conclusion
The proposed modification of development
consent (seeking to delete condition 2 from development consent (DA 03/1018))
is considered to be substantially the same development as originally considered
and approved by Council. The
modification does not seek to change the nature of the proposal merely to
enable its permanent operation.
Recent inspections of the property have
revealed that the conditions of consent have been satisfied and the proposal is
satisfactory in relation to the relevant environmental criteria. The planning provisions allow an owner of a
rural property to park up to 2 trucks used in the pursuit of their principal
livelihood provided that there are no unreasonable impacts from the land use
and subject to development consent.
Assessment of this application,
documentation submitted and works undertaken to meet consent conditions
indicate that the continued use of the property as proposed would not create
unreasonable impacts on adjoining properties.
It is certainly recognised that continued
compliance with the conditions of consent is critical to the satisfactory
environmental outcome of this proposal.
It is recommended that the current application be approved will continue
to conduct random monitoring of the trucks parked on the site and nearby.
That: 1. The information contained in the report
on Section 96
Modification of Development Consent No. 03/1018 for the parking of a truck at
Lot 200 DP 815535 (No. 28) Grays Lane, Cranebrook be received 2. The modification request be approved by way of: 2.1 deleting Condition 2 2.2 Adding a condition that reads: The vehicle associated with the business (and not in use) is to be parked on site in the location approved on the submitted plans. |
Previous
Council Business Paper dated 28.06.05 |
8 Pages |
Attachment |
31 October
2005 |
|
The City as a Social
Place |
|
The City as a Social Place
3 |
Development
Application 04/0856 for the demolition of an existing hotel and the
construction of a new two storey hotel building over basement parking at Part
Lot 23 and Part Lot 24, Section 30, DP 1855 and Lot 25 DP 656834 (No. 180) Great Western Highway, Kingswood Applicant: Valge Architects Pty Ltd;
Owner: Kayora Pty Ltd |
DA04/0856 |
Compiled by: Brad
Roeleven - Contract Planner
Authorised by: Wayne Mitchell - Acting Building
Approvals and Environmental Protection Manager
Strategic Program
Term Achievement: Redevelopment of existing areas
contributes to safe, sustainable, affordable and satisfying living environments
and cohesive communities.
Critical Action: Work in partnership with the local community to foster understanding of
the reasons why established areas are redeveloping.
Purpose:
To provide Council
with an assessment of a development application which seeks consent for the
redevelopment of a hotel at 180 Great Western Highway, Kingswood, which is a
significant development for that locality.
The report recommends that the development be approved.
Introduction
Development Application 04/0856 proposes to demolish the existing Kingswood Hotel and construct a new, larger, hotel incorporating basement parking.
The site is zoned 3(A) General Business under the Penrith Interim Development Order No. 9 the provisions of which permit with consent a hotel, shop and the ancillary dwelling house for the on-site manager.
This report provides details of the proposal an assessment of the key issues and recommends ‘deferred commencement’ approval of the development subject to conditions.
The
Site
The proposed development is at No.180 Great
Western Highway Kingswood, comprising Part Lots 23 and
24, Section 30, DP 1855 and Lot 25 DP 656834.
This land is positioned on the south-western
side of the intersection of the Highway and Bringelly Road, and is prominent
not only for its corner location, but also because it sits at the eastern entry
to the Kingswood commercial zone, opposite Kingswood Railway Station.
The development site is regular in shape.
The northern boundary to the Highway is 45.1m, the eastern boundary to Bringelly
Road is 33.3m, the southern boundary to Wainright Lane is 53.1m and the western
site boundary is 38.1m. Total site area is 1944m˛.
This site currently supports the Kingswood
Hotel, a two storey building over basement cellar, set along the Highway frontage
of the property. The licensed floor area of the current hotel building is
approximately 547m2. The ground floor of this building contains the licensed
areas, games room, function room, administration and various ancillary areas.
The upper floor is for accommodation, and including 13 rooms with associated
facilities. A beer garden and parking area, for 8 vehicles, are set along the
Wainright Lane boundary of the allotment.
Site topography is characterised by a fall
of about 2m away from the Highway down towards the Wainright Lane (rear) site
boundary. Existing vegetation comprises minor landscaping adjacent the Highway
elevation of the Hotel, and a single canopy tree at the rear of the site
towards Bringelly Road boundary. A stand of street trees also extends across
the Highway frontage of the site.
A locality plan is attached/appended.
The
Proposal
This application seeks consent to demolish the existing Kingswood Hotel and construct a new two storey hotel with basement parking. This new building would have a total floor space of 3177m˛ and would comprise:
Basement
· 36 car parking spaces for patrons, plus 2 spaces for staff, with separate entry and exit driveways to Wainright Lane
· Loading dock
· Waste storage area
· Cool rooms and ancillary storage areas
· Pedestrian lobby to lift for access to hotel
Ground floor (1597.88m˛)
· Principal pedestrian entry and lobby from Highway frontage
· Secondary pedestrian entry and lobby from Wainright Lane
· Gaming lounge
· Bar with lounge areas
· Bistro with associated kitchen and storage areas
· Bottle shop to Highway frontage
· Vacant retail premise (for separate occupation) to Highway frontage
· Office administration, staff and patron amenities
First
floor (1579.38m˛)
· Pool table with lounge area
· Bar with lounge areas
· Office and administration areas
· 2-bedroom Managers apartment
· Outdoor terraces to the Highway, Bringelly Road and Wainright Lane elevations
Notification
In accordance with Council’s Notification
and Advertising Development Control Plan the application was notified to the
owners/occupiers of surrounding properties from 17th August 2005 until 31st
August 2005. No submissions were received.
It is noted however that during the course
of the assessment of this application Council has received representations from
the Kingswood Traders Association, who support this proposal.
Referrals
The following referrals were undertaken:
· Health and Building Surveyor
· Development Services Engineer
· Traffic Engineer
· Architectural Supervisor
· NSW Police
· Disability Access Committee
Generally no objections were raised, subject to recommended conditions. Where appropriate, comments received from these referrals are included within this report.
Statutory
Assessment
Relevant
planning instruments, zoning and permissibility
The site is zoned 3(A) General Business under
Penrith Interim Development Order No. 9, (IDO 9). The proposal comprises
activities defined as a shop, dwelling house and hotel,
which are permissible with consent. There are no other controls within IDO 9
relevant in the assessment of this application.
Other planning instruments, codes and polices
relevant in the assessment of this application are:
· State Environmental Planning Policy 55 – Remediation of Land
· Draft State Environmental Planning Policy 66 – Integration of Land Use
and Transport
· Sydney Regional Environmental Plan 20 – Hawkesbury Nepean River
· Development Control Plan 2000 – Controls for the Management and Minimisation of Waste
· DCP for Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design
· Section 94
Contributions Plan – Kingswood Neighbourhood Centre
State Environmental Planning Policy 55 – Remediation of Land
Clause 7 of this Plan provides that Council must not consent to the carrying out of any development on land unless:
(a) it has considered
whether the land is contaminated
(b) if the land is contaminated, it is satisfied that the land is
suitable in its contaminated state (or will be suitable, after remediation) for
the purpose for which the development is proposed to be carried out
(c) if the land requires remediation to be made suitable for the
purpose for which the development is proposed to be carried out, it is
satisfied that the land will be remediated before the land is used for that
purpose
From a review of Council’s records it is apparent that the site has not supported any land use of a type likely to have resulted in the contamination of the subject land. Accordingly it is concluded that the land is suitable for the activities proposed under this application.
Draft
State Environmental Planning Policy 66 - Integration of Land Use and Transport
The Draft SEPP aims to reduce the need for travel and the amount of reliance on private transportation. This is encouraged by the appropriate location and mix of development, and through the application of a variety of land use and transport measures. Examples to achieve this are encouraging trip generating developments in business centres, improving transport choice and reducing the dependence on private cars.
Clause 7(c) indicates that the Draft SEPP relates to hotels having a gross floor space of more than 1000 m2, and therefore is relevant in the assessment of this application.
Although the Draft SEPP is yet to be gazetted, the principles of the policy have been considered in the assessment of the development application. The hotel is located opposite the Kingswood Railway Station, is serviced by local bus and taxi services and includes appropriate provision of parking. As such, it is considered that the development is consistent with the principles of the Draft SEPP 66.
If the Draft SEPP is gazetted prior to the
determination of the application, transitional provisions apply [Clause 14(d)]
which allow the assessment of the application to progress, without the detailed
consideration of the provisions of the plan.
Sydney
Regional Environmental Plan 20 – Hawkesbury Nepean River
SREP 20 aims to protect the environment of
the Hawkesbury - Nepean River by ensuring that the impacts of future land uses
are considered in a regional context.
Of most relevance to the proposal is the requirement to assess the
development in terms of the impact of the development on water quality.
The proposal is not expected to have an
adverse cumulative impact on the Hawkesbury Nepean River system.
Waste Planning Development Control Plan
(2004)
A Waste Management Plan addressing disposal of materials associated with the demolition of the existing building, and construction of the new complex, accompanies the application. The information provided however is not sufficient, and accordingly a revised Plan is required. This minor matter is addressed by an appropriate condition in the consent notice.
Once the hotel is operational private contractors would be required to undertake waste services for the Hotel. In this regard the proposal includes a satisfactory garbage storage area, located within the loading dock. Council would however provide waste services for the Manager’s residence.
Development
Control Plan for Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED)
The CPTED DCP seeks to provide for safe and secure developments by reducing opportunities for crime through the consideration building design and place management. CEPTED employs four key strategies being natural surveillance, access control, territorial reinforcement and space management.
This proposal as lodged was generally consistent with the aims and objectives of this DCP. However following advice received from NSW Police it was apparent that further opportunities were available to improve the layout of the building to reduce opportunities for criminal or anti social behaviour.
Discussions with the applicant resulted in the plans therefore being amended to include the following matters:
· Increases in height of glass balustrade to restrict/prevent access to ground floor terraces from adjacent footpaths, and from first floor terraces onto the roof of the building
· Redesign of the main pedestrian entry foyer to increase natural surveillance of this area from within the Hotel, and also from the adjacent footpath areas
· Improved passive surveillance of various locations within the building
· Details of signage, lighting, alarms and cameras to enable clear and direct movement through the building, and monitor unauthorized access to non-public spaces
· Restrictions to limit access to staff/administration areas
These revised arrangements are satisfactory
and further ensure that this building accords with principles of this DCP.
Section
94 Contributions Plans
The site does fall within the land affected by the Kingswood Neighbourhood Centre Section 94 Plan. However that Plan does not require any contributions for commercial development.
Other Assessment Issues
Access.
Traffic and Transport
Access to the basement car park and loading dock is proposed via Wainright Lane. Council’s Traffic Engineer is satisfied with these arrangements. The quantity of traffic generated by this development, and its likely effect upon the local road network and levels of service at intersections has also been assessed as satisfactory.
The most significant issue for this proposal relates to the demand and provision for car parking. In summary the relevant points to note are:
· The existing hotel provides 8 parking spaces to support 547m2 of licensed floor space, plus 13 accommodation rooms
· The proposed hotel seeks to increase licensed floor space to a total of 1442m2, and on site parking to 36 patron spaces. The proposed building does not include any guest accommodation, but does have a 2 bedroom manager’s apartment
· Application of Council’s Parking Code requirements indicates that the additional floor space generates the need for 153 on site parking spaces. The proposal provides 36 spaces for patrons, and a further 2 spaces for staff (including 2 spaces for manager)
· Accompanying this application are two separate parking reports, providing justification for the shortfall in required on site parking. In support of the proposal to provide only 36 patron spaces these reports rely upon:
- Demand for parking based upon patron surveys
- Modal split for means of patron access to the Hotel (eg. The percentages of patrons who drive, walk, use public transport or other means to attend the Hotel)
- Availability of street parking, including at the railway station opposite the site, during the peak trading hours of the Hotel
Set out below is the advice received from Council’s Traffic Engineer regarding this matter:
The existing
hotel has a licensed floor area of 547m2 plus an additional accommodation
component of 13 single bedrooms and provides a total of 9 off street parking
spaces off Wainright Lane. The new hotel proposes to increase the licensed
floor area by 895m2 to 1442m2 however does not provide any accommodation.
Using the
proposed floor area increase of 895m2 and applying the lounge rate of 1 space
per 5.5m2 equates to 153 additional spaces being required less the 36 spaces
proposed off street equates to 118 spaces required on street.
The
consultants report concludes from an on street parking demand survey that there
is a total of 783 on street parking spaces available within the vicinity of the
hotel. The parking demand survey within an 800m radius was bounded by Parker Street
to the west, Great Western Highway to the north, Derby Street to the south and
Santley Crescent to the east however interestingly Santley Crescent and First
Street have been omitted from the survey results.
Following
recent discussions it was agreed that approx 400m was generally considered the
acceptable maximum walking distance from a vehicle parked on street to the
venue. On this basis the boundaries of the parking survey should be restricted
to Somerset Street to the west and not Parker Street.
From
interpolation of the data provided in the report and aerial photographs
including both Santley Crescent and First Street the amended area effectively
yields approx 450 available on street parking spaces within a 400m radius after
5:30pm.
On this basis
it is concluded that the expected demand for 118 on street parking spaces from
the proposed development can be accommodated within the surrounding street
network without significant adverse impact on the amenity of residents.
In view of this advice it is accepted that the provision of 36 on site parking spaces for Hotel patrons is acceptable, particularly given that the peak operating times of the Hotel would be at night and consequently there would be no real conflict with other potential users of on-street parking in the area (e.g. Staff/visitors to Nepean Hospital).
Noise
and vibration
The proposal is an existing hotel located within an established commercial precinct. However, the size, nature, and location of the site, which adjoins residential areas to the south, raises the concerns about potential impacts from noise associated with the construction of the building, and the likely impacts upon the occupiers of surrounding sites from the occupation and operation of the subject building.
It is accepted that the above concerns are capable of being resolved through either:
· Appropriate noise controls during construction
· Use of appropriate materials of construction to ensure appropriate internal noise levels are achieved
· Use of appropriate noise attenuation measures to ensure that the operations of plant and equipment within the building do not impact on surrounding sites
· Regulation of operating hours
From a search of Council’s records it is noted that there have been no noise complaints lodged in respect of the current Hotel. Also, the applicant is seeking to maintain the existing hours of operation being 5.00am until 3.00am, Monday – Saturday and 10.00am until 12 midnight on Sundays.
Nevertheless, relevant details for assessment of potential noise impacts can only accurately be established by way of an acoustic report.
This report therefore recommends the submission of such a report as a deferred commencement condition. (See Condition 2.1)
Site
design and internal design
Urban
design
The location of the development is important
as it is on the Highway at a key intersection, and is positioned centrally to
the Kingswood retail centre. Accordingly the urban design of the building as
shown on the plans originally lodged with this application, required
modifications to:
· Respond to the ‘gateway’ location
of the site
· Achieve a suitable height along
both street frontages
· Provide active facades to both
street frontages
· Address the potential for
improvements regarding energy efficiency
Amended plans were submitted which
essentially responded to these concerns. Nevertheless, continuing assessment of
the proposal, and discussions with the applicant, established that further
opportunities were available to modify the form and presentation of this
proposal. To this end the applicant agreed to introduce the following
additional design elements:
· The design treatment of the corner entry element addressing the intersection of the Great Western Highway and Bringelly Road has been strengthened. In this regard the glazed entry awning has been enlarged and reshaped. At roof level, a raised glazed skylight element has been added to provide greater visual distinction to the pedestrian entry and allow more natural light into both floor levels of the building
· The facades to Bringelly Road and the Highway have been provided with vertical design elements which break up the expanse of these walls so that the building more closely reflect the established built form and scale of the shopping centre, which is comprised of numerous small shop fronts which collectively provide variety and interest to the presentation of the commercial strip. These vertical elements in the façade will be highlighted at night by feature lighting
· The presentation of the western elevation of the building is improved by the introduction of ‘banding’ of brick and block work to add visual interest to this wall
Notwithstanding, some minor fine-tuning of the revised design is still required, but can be achieved by the application of conditions of approval. These alterations relate to:
· Revising the treatment of the Wainwright Lane/Bringelly Road corner elevation to restrict the height of metal louvers to 1.5m
· Minor changes to the floor plan of the manager’s unit to improve access from living rooms to the rear terrace
· Repositioning the advertising panel above the main entry point. This panel should be set closer to the awning so that any signage does not detract from, or compete with, the roof skylight which should be the main visual feature of the building
Subject to these further minor changes, it is considered that the scale, form and presentation of this building is now satisfactory, subject to conditions, and will make a significant, positive contribution to the Kingswood commercial centre.
External
finishes
This report recommends, by way of a deferred commencement condition, the submission of a sample board of all external materials of construction. (See Condition 2.3)
Residential
unit
Included on the first floor is a two-bedroom Managers residence. The location and design of this unit is acceptable noting that it includes a separate entry, has good solar access to living rooms and incorporates large, private outdoor recreation areas. To further improve the amenity of the apartment it proposed that the design be amended to improve access from living rooms to the rear terrace.
Roof top
structures
Mechanical equipment necessary for the operation of the hotel is to be located upon the roof of the building. The location of this plant is satisfactory in terms of it not being in prominent view from either the Highway or Bringelly Road.
Nevertheless it is desirable that this equipment be screened to ensure it would not be seen from the public domain. The applicant confirms their intention to provide such screening, but indicates that the design for the screen can only be finalized once the mechanical plant and equipment has been selected.
Consequently this matter is matter is addressed by a suitable condition. (See Condition 2.21)
Disability
Access Committee
The Disabled Access
Committee considered this matter at its meeting on 5 October 2005 and provided
the following comments:
· Ensure that disabled toilet facilities are provided with contrasting tiles with an appropriate luminance
· Provide templates to demonstrate ease of access from disabled parking spaces
· Ensure disabled parking spaces have dimensions of 5.4m x 3.2m, and with an overhead clearance of 2.5m
· The entry ramp grades being amended or for ease of access. Alternately provide a relief platform between the transitions in grade
· Provide portions of the bar service area at a lower height
The amended architectural plans received 14 October 2005 have modified the design of the building to comply with these requirements.
Tree removal
A stand of street trees along the Great Western Highway frontage of the site will be retained. However the remaining vegetation over the site be removed to accommodate the new building. The most significant of these is an English Elm located at the rear of the property towards the Bringelly Road boundary. Accompanying the application is an arborist’s report that supports the removal of this Elm tree given that it has a co-dominant trunk, has been previously lopped and is affected by decay. It is agreed that this tree is not significant and no objections are raised to its removal.
Accompanying the application is an arborist’s report that includes a Tree Management Plan to address the protection of these trees during the construction phase. This report recommends the implementation of that Tree Management Plan. (Standard Condition L010)
Given the proximity of the existing street trees to the proposed sunshades it is also appropriate, however, that a condition be imposed to ensure that these trees are protected.
Signage
It is expected that the building would include signage across the Bringelly Road and Highway elevations. Such signage would require careful consideration given the prominence of the site. Few details have been provided with this application regarding signage, and accordingly the recommendation to this report requires that all signage be the subject of a future separate development application. (Standard Condition A026)
Security
management
The CPTED DCP as discussed earlier deals with physical design elements within the building to reduce opportunities for criminal behaviour.
Separate to this however is the related matter of how the Hotel would be managed and operated to deal with anti-social or inappropriate behaviour. To this end it is appropriate for the applicant to prepare, and implement a Security Management Plan to enable potential off-site impacts to be managed. (eg, loitering, anti-social behaviour, noise etc). Council has previously required the preparation of a such a Plan when approving application for other Hotels in the municipality.
This matter is addressed by a deferred commencement condition. (See Condition 2.4)
Lot Consolidation
The development site comprises three separate allotments, which would be effectively consolidated by the construction of the proposed Hotel building. Consistent with BCA requirements this report recommends the formal consolidation of the allotments. (Standard Condition A014).
Construction
The size of this development, the location of the site, and the likely duration of construction are such that the successful management of the construction process is essential to safeguard the environment and amenity of the locality, ensure public safety and minimise impacts upon traffic movements.
To address this concern it is necessary for the applicant to provide a Construction Management Plan which would make arrangements for:
a) Demolition
b) Excavation
c) Construction
d) Employee parking
e) Plant/equipment delivery and storage
f) Materials delivery and storage
g) Traffic and pedestrian management
The matter is resolved by way of a deferred commencement condition. (See Condition 2.2)
Conclusion
This application seeks consent to demolish the existing hotel and construct a new hotel with basement parking. The site is significant by virtue of its corner location, and more importantly, its gateway position at the eastern entry to the Kingswood retail precinct.
While the primary issues to be resolved with this application could be summarised as relating to matters of urban design and the supply of parking, the significance of this site warranted extensive analysis.
The outcomes achieved from the assessment process reveal that this proposal satisfies relevant planning controls, and favourably responds to the constraints and opportunities presented by the site.
It is anticipated that the positive outcomes achieved through this proposal may serve as a catalyst for further renewal of the Kingswood retail precinct.
That: 1. The information contained in the report
on Development Application 04/0856 for the demolition of an existing hotel
and the construction of a new two storey hotel building over basement parking
at Part Lot 23 and Part Lot 24, Section 30, DP 1855 and Lot 25 DP 656834
(No. 180) Great Western Highway,
Kingswood be received 2. The information
contained in the report on Development Application 04/0856 for the
demolition of an existing hotel and the construction of a new two storey
hotel building over basement parking at Part Lot 23 and Part Lot 24, Section
30, DP 1855 and Lot 25 DP 656834 (No.
180) Great Western Highway, Kingswood be approved by granting a Deferred
Commencement consent, subject to the conditions in Schedule 1 and Schedule 2
below: Schedule 1 Conditions The consent shall not operate until Council is satisfied with the following additional information, which shall be submitted within 6 months of the date of the determination of this consent: 2.1 The submission of a satisfactory acoustic report to be approved by Council. The report, prepared by a suitably qualified person, shall address the following matters: a) The likely impacts upon adjacent and surrounding premises from noise associated with the construction of the building b) The likely impacts upon the occupiers of adjacent and surrounding sites from the occupation and operation of the subject building The report shall make recommendations regarding: i) Any appropriate noise controls to apply during construction ii) Noise attenuation measures necessary to ensure that the operation and occupation of the hotel, including associated mechanical plant and equipment, do not impact on any affected residential properties 2.2 Submission of satisfactory a Construction Management Plan to be approved by Council. The Plan shall detail arrangements for: a) Demolition b) Excavation and site works c) Construction d) Employee parking e) Plant/equipment delivery and storage f) Materials delivery and storage g) Traffic and pedestrian management 2.3 Submission of a satisfactory schedule of external materials and finishes for consideration and approval by Council 2.4 The submission of a satisfactory Security Management Plan to address the effective management of all off-site impacts. The Plan shall include any requirements of the Liquor Administration Board related to security, as well as advice provided by Penrith Police Crime Prevention Unit Schedule 2
Conditions Special conditions 2.5 All recommendations included in the acoustic report approved to satisfy Schedule 1 of this Notice shall be incorporated into any plans approved with a Construction Certificate 2.6 Compliance with Construction Management Plan approved to satisfy Schedule 1 of this Notice 2.7 The development shall be completed in accordance with schedule of finishes approved to satisfy Schedule 1 of this Notice 2.8 Other than for those times when the basement is being used, the roller shutters to the basement car park shall be closed at all times outside the operating hours of the Hotel 2.9 Other than for those times when the loading dock is being used, the roller shutter to the dock shall remain closed 2.10 To minimize vandalism, the garden beds shall not contain any material or objects that could be used as projectiles 2.11 All areas that are for ‘Staff Only’ shall be suitably identified by appropriate signage 2.12 All car parking and maneuvering must be in accordance with AS 2890 and Council’s requirements. Full details must be submitted with the Construction Certificate. Car parking space 14 must be widened by 0.3m to comply with the Australian Standard 2.13 Storm water disposal shall be completed generally in accordance with concept drainage plans prepared by Cardno BLH, Drawing No. N5361-01, Sheet Nos. 100, 200, 201, 202, 203, 204, 500 and 700, Revision 01, dated 25/5/04 2.14 The first floor apartment shall only be occupied in conjunction with the operation of the Hotel 2.15 A separate development application shall be submitted and approval granted by Penrith City Council prior to the occupation of the ground floor shop 2.16 The hours of operation of the Hotel are limited to 5.00am – 3.00am Mondays- Saturdays, and 10.00am – 12 midnight on Sundays. These hours shall not be extended without the prior consent of Council 2.17 Compliance with the Security Management Plan approved to satisfy Schedule 1 of this Notice. 2.18 Any ATM installed inside the building shall be located in a position, which is readily visible by Hotel staff. Details are to be included on any plans approved with a Construction Certificate 2.19 Mirrors shall be installed around the lift foyer in the basement, and within stairwells to improve visibility in these locations. Details are to be included on any plans approved with a Construction Certificate 2.20 Suitable measures shall be provided to reduce opportunities for direct access into first floor administration and staff areas, particularly from the adjacent bar area, and outdoor terrace. Details are to be included on any plans approved with a Construction Certificate 2.21 Full details of the design and construction of screening around roof top mechanical plant and equipment shall be included on any plans approved with a Construction Certificate 2.22 An Occupation Certificate shall not be issued until such time as the Principal Certifying Authority is provided with copies of all necessary licenses or permits from the Liquor Administration Board and any other relevant authority 2.23 Street trees along the Great Western Highway shall not be pruned to facilitate the construction of any part of the building without the prior approval of Council Standard conditions 2.24 A001 In this regard, the approved plans shall be further modified as follows: a) The signage panel above the main pedestrian entry from Great Western Highway/Bringelly Road shall be repositioned closer toward the entry awning. This is to ensure the sign does not visually compete with the roof top skylight design feature b) Metal louvers along the Bringelly Road and Wainright Lane elevations shall not extend more than 1.5m above ground level c) The floorplan of the manager’s residence shall be amended to achieve direct access from the living rooms to the rear terrace (Valge Architects, Drawing Nos. DA-01 –
DA-08, Issue D, dated 12/10/05) A011, A014, A19F, A026, A038, A039, A040,
A045 (delete last para), B002, B003, B004, B005, B006, D001, D014, D131,
D026, E01A, E002 (If it is proposed to license the premises as a Place of Public
Entertainment the relevant clauses of the Building Code of Australia shall be
addressed), E006, E008, E009, G002, G004, H001, H002 (a, b, c, d), H003,
H006, H022, H041, H025, I003 (b, e, g, h), I004, I003(f), K001 (delete first
sentence), K003, K025, K027 (36 spaces – 4 spaces, delete last para) L010
(December 2003 prepared by Tree Wise Men), Q001, Q006 (dot points 1, 4,9). |
1. View |
180
Great Western Highway, Kingswood |
3 Pages |
Appendix |
31 October
2005 |
|
The City as a Social
Place |
|
The City as a Social Place
4 |
Assistance
Towards Amateur Sportspersons and Representatives in the fields of Art,
Music, Culture - Overseas and Interstate Travel |
6016/1 Pt38 |
Compiled by: Diana
Tuckwell - Facilities Operations
Secretary
Authorised by: Gary Dean - Facilities Operations Manager
Strategic Program
Term Achievement: The City’s recreation and leisure
facilities and services meet its needs and are optimally used.
Critical Action: Ensure facilities and services reflect the City’s diverse current and
future recreation and leisure needs.
Purpose:
To inform Council
of donations made to amateur sportspersons and/or representatives in the fields
of art, music, culture for overseas and interstate travel for the
July-September 2005 quarter with a recommendation that the information contained
in the report be received.
Background
Council has a policy of providing assistance to amateur sportspersons
and representatives in the fields of Art, Music, Culture for the purpose of
encouraging participation in international or interstate events by residents or
by members of clubs based in the City of Penrith or students of schools and
educational establishments within the Penrith City area and who are
representing the country of Australia or the state of New South Wales. Those
requests Council has received and dealt with, for financial assistance in
accordance with the Policy for the period 1 July-30 September 2005 are listed
below:
OVERSEAS DESTINATIONS ($200 NZ or
$300 overseas)
1. |
a donation of $600.00 was made to Skate Australia with a request that $300.00 each be passed on to Michael and Jason Haynes of St Clair to help defray their travelling expenses when they competed in the World Inline Hockey Championships held in Paris, France during July 2005 and World Junior Cup & Junior Olympics held in New Orleans, USA during July-August 2005, respectively. |
2. |
a donation of
$300.00 was made to Swimming Australia with a request that it be passed on to
Peter Leek of St Marys to help defray his travelling expenses when he
competed in the 2005 USA Paralympic National Swimming Championships held in
Portland, Oregon, USA during July 2005. |
3. |
a donation of $1800.00 was made to NSW Junior Baseball League with a request that $300.00 each be passed on to Andrew Lewis & Mitchell Edwards of St Clair, Grant Piccoli of South Penrith, Bradley Walker of Penrith, Jessie Burnham of Emu Plains and Michael Margerison of Penrith to help defray their travelling expenses when they competed in the Baseball Goodwill Games held in St Louis, Missouri USA during August 2005; IBA Pan Pacific Tournament held in Manila, Philippines during August 2005 and the South Asian Tournament held in Singapore during October 2005. |
4. |
a donation of $600.00 was made to NSW Baseball League with a request that $300.00 each be passed on to Tate Dimech of Berkshire Park and Dean Hazell of South Penrith to help defray their travelling expenses when they competed in the International Baseball Tournament held in Beijing, China during August 2005. |
5. |
a donation of $300.00 was made to Gridiron Australia with a request that it be passed on to Mike Harvey of Kaleen, ACT (member of Penrith Outlaws Gridiron Team) to help defray his travelling expenses when he competed in the Gridiron World Games held in Duisburg, Germany during July 2005. |
6. |
a donation of $1200.00 was made to Australian Dragon Boat Federation with a request that $300.00 each be passed on to Fiona Gray of Erskine Park; Robin Griffiths of Woodford, Toni Smith of Hazelbrook and George Dimech of Cranebrook (members of Penrith Pendragon Panthers Dragon Boat Team) to help defray their travelling expenses when they competed in the World Dragon Boat Championships held in Berlin, Germany during August 2005. |
7. |
a donation of $300.00 was made to Skate Australia with a request that it be passed on to Kayd Anderson of Wallacia to help defray his travelling expenses when he competed in the ASA Inline Skating World Championships held in Sacramento, USA during September 2005. |
8. |
a donation of $300.00 was made to Coerver Coaching Oceania with a request that it be passed on to Shayne Ardle of Bidwill (student at Kingswood High School) to help defray his travelling expenses when he competes in the Coerver Coaching Oceania Soccer Tournament being held in the United Kingdom during January 2006. |
9. |
a donation of $300.00 was made to School Sport Australia with a request that it be passed on to Ben Gough of Glenmore Park to help defray his travelling expenses when he competes in the Australian Schoolboys Soccer Tour of UK and Ireland during January-February 2006. |
INTERSTATE DESTINATIONS ($100 QLD & VIC, $150 SA & TAS, $200 WA & NT)
10. a |
a donation of $150.00 was made to NSW Ice Hockey with a request that it be passed on to Gary Markowski of Glenmore Park to help defray his travelling expenses when he competed in the 2005 Ice Hockey National Championships held in Adelaide, South Australia during July 2005. |
11. |
a donation of $800.00 was made to NSW Gymnastics Association Inc with a request that $100.00 each be passed on to Aiden and Angela Thomas of Richmond; Gregory Clune of Blaxland; Owen Gilbert of Warragamba; Jacqueline Melvold of Glenbrook (members of DeRoos Tumbling and Trampoline Club, Penrith) and Kyle Russell of Werrington County, Melanie Wilson of St Clair and Dominique O’Driscoll of Glenmore Park to help defray their travelling expenses when they competed in the National Trampolining Championships held in Queensland during July 2005. |
12. |
a donation of $200.00 was made to Basketball NSW with a request that it be passed on to Ashlee Currey of Mt Riverview (member of Penrith Panthers Basketball Club) to help defray her travelling expenses when she competed in the Australian Under 18 Women’s Basketball Championships held in Perth, Western Australia during July 2005. |
13. |
a donation of $150.00 was made to State Volleyball NSW with a request that it be passed on to Peter Jeffrey of Glenmore Park to help defray his travelling expenses when he competed in the National Junior Volleyball Championships held in Adelaide, South Australia during July 2005. |
14. |
a donation of $250.00 was made to NSW Primary Schools Sports Association with a request that: $150.00 be passed on to Brendon Heather of Claremont Meadows to help defray his travelling expenses when he competed in the 2005 NSW PSSA Rugby League Team Tournament held in Adelaide, South Australia during July-August 2005 and; $100.00 be passed on to Taylah Clark of Cambridge Park when she competes in the Pacific School Games being held in Melbourne, Victoria during November-December 2005 |
15. |
a donation of $200.00 was made to NSW Association of Indoor Bowlers Inc with a request that $100.00 each be passed on to Jenny Hogan and Katrina Lafferty of Penrith to help defray his travelling expenses when they competed in the 2005 Australian Indoor Bowling Championships held in Echuca, Victoria during August 2005. |
16. |
a donation of $100.00 was made to Badminton NSW with a request that it be passed on to Sean Lim of St Clair to help defray his travelling expenses when he competed in the Australian Badminton Open Tournament held in Ballarat, Victoria during September 2005. |
17. |
a donation of $3800.00 was made to NSW Ice Skating with a request that $200.00 each be passed on to: Callum Bullard of Holsworthy; Laura Hedge of Lawson; Christina Levada of Blacktown; Bernice Phillips of Blaxland; Melanie Reed of Springwood; and Vikki-Marie Seymour of Bligh Park (all members of the Penrith Valley Figure Skating Club) and; Elyse Dymond of Orchard Hills; Erin Greentree of Cambridge Park; Brooke Jeal of Leonay; Michelle Kirk of Glenmore Park; Sarah Masters of St Clair; Samantha & Mitchell Oke of Emu Plains; Jessica Rowan of Kingswood; Sylvia Quinlan of South Penrith; Mark Webster of Glenmore Park; Nicholas Fernandez of Cranebrook, Lowanna Gibson of St Marys and Courtney Talbot of Cranebrook when they competed in the National Ice Skating Championships held in Perth, Western Australia during August 2005. |
18. |
a donation of $150.00 was made to NSW Combined High Schools Sports Association with a request that it be passed on to Charlotte Wilson of St Clair when she competed in the National Combined High Schools Cross Country Championships held in Adelaide, South Australia during August 2005. |
19. |
a donation of $400.00 was made to Skate NSW with a request that $100.00 each be passed on to Lilian Popovic of South Penrith; Rebecca & Kathryn Christensen of South Penrith and Yvette Colonna-Morrow of Lapstone (member of Penrith Team Skatel Artistic Roller Skating Club) when they competed in the 2005 Australian National Artistic Skating Championships which were held in Dandenong, Victoria during September 2005. |
That the information contained in the report on Assistance Towards Amateur Sportspersons and Representatives in the fields of Art, Music, Culture - Overseas and Interstate Travel be received. |
There are no attachments for
this report.
31 October
2005 |
|
The City as a Social
Place |
|
The City as a Social Place
5 |
Castlereagh
Crematorium and Cemetery Business Plan
|
1008/2 |
Compiled by: Tony
Jarrett - Neighbourhood Facilities Coordinator
Authorised by: Gary Dean - Facilities Operations
Manager
Strategic Program
Term Achievement: Effective responses are made to
the social impacts of growth, redevelopment and change.
Critical Action: Assess the social impacts of urban change in both new release and
established areas and develop planned responses.
Purpose:
To summarise the
Business Plan prepared for the proposed Castlereagh Crematoria and Cemetery, to
seek re-affirmation of 'in-principle' support for development of the Castlereagh
site, and to recommend formation of a Working Party to progress the project.
Background
In February 2004 Council endorsed development concepts for the Crown Reserve Portion 245 managed by Council in Church Street, Castlereagh for a crematoria and small cemetery. A Business Plan has been completed modelling the financial viability of the project. This crematoria project is significant as it suggests it is viable for Council to move into the cremation industry.
Work on the proposal thus far has not canvassed whether a new cemetery and crematorium could be located other than at Castlereagh. Given that the site is reserved for cemetery purposes, the focus has been on examining development potential for Portion 245.
Current Situation
Portion 245 is a 14.6 ha Crown Reserve site in Church Street, Castlereagh that was set aside as ‘Reserve for Cemetery Purposes’ in 1903. Council was appointed Trust Manager in 1995. It is adjacent to the small historic Castlereagh General Cemetery that is administered by the Cambridge Park Anglican Church Parish.
When the Trust management was assigned to Council, the then Cemeteries Operations Working Party identified the site as potentially suitable for expansion of Council’s cemetery services.
In 2001 a Flora and Fauna Study confirmed the strong environmental values of the site. In 2003 Council decided to examine the feasibility of constructing cemetery and crematorium facilities at the site and to consider potential development concepts. In 2004 Council accepted initial findings of general demand for crematorium facilities. Council also endorsed concepts for the development of Portion 245 for a crematoria and small cemetery.
There has been no formal use of the site since it was reserved in 1903, and the original bushland appears to be largely intact. The detailed flora and fauna survey indicates two distinct types of vegetation on the site:
· Castlereagh Scribbly Gum woodland, which is 10 to 15 metres in height with a one to two metre understorey and grass or sedge groundcover;
· Castlereagh Ironbark forest, which is over 20 metres in height with a dense shrubby understorey and grassy groundcover. No development will occur in this area.
The Castlereagh Business Plan
John Desmond and Associates (JDA) has completed an initial Business Plan for the project that indicates potential to deliver Council, the local community and the region a significant social asset. In developing the Business Plan, there is confidence that crucial local independent funeral directors will support this project. There is high confidence in the material upon which the viability of the project is based. The JDA Business Plan addresses the following;
· Management
It is assumed that the Castlereagh project will form part of the overall cemetery operations, and not be set-up separate to the existing operations. This integrated approach will bring management and operational efficiencies and enable an integrated marketing to emphasise the range of facilities available across all Council’s operating cemeteries.
While Council has strong examples of instituting alternate management models (company limited by guarantee, Co-operative) the relative value of other management models has not been examined.
· Market profile
and trends
Local and regional demographics and death rates have been used to establish an estimate of potential demand for cremation services, and thus income projections. There have been assumptions about variables (including proportions of population over 65, crude death rates, standardized death rates and median age of death) made in quantifying potential demand when projecting up to 30 years hence.
· Demand
Translating the targeted demand into effective demand will require carefully targeted marketing, comprising a mixture of public awareness, direct sale to the pre need market and the building of close links with independent funeral directors.
· Industry
structure
The funeral industry has a high degree of concentration and vertical integration. A major player provides an integrated service consisting of cemeteries, crematoria and funeral homes. The remainder of the industry is very fragmented. Most cemeteries and crematoria are managed by local councils, religious bodies or state government appointed trusts.
· Burials
Burials at Castlereagh will be on a small scale as sufficient burial sites are available at Penrith General Cemetery. This would also avoid taking the overall demand for sites from Penrith.
· Cremations and
memorialisation
The closest cremation facilities in the region are at Pinegrove (Eastern Creek). It could be expected that there would be significant demand for a new crematorium. Memorialisation packages of some kind will be offered, with the possible approaches to ashes memorialisation being small rock markers spread through the bush and large rock markers in a particular area, with ashes scattered.
· Chapel and
functions
A chapel (seating about 100 plus overflows) on site can increase the attractiveness of the total facility, as well as increasing the revenue per funeral. However it could have the potential to decrease the revenue to the funeral directors (who would otherwise arrange the service) and some flexibility in the approach to the market will be necessary. A small room may be provided for post-service gatherings.
· Fencing and
security of the site
Because of the site’s remote location the type of security systems in place will need to be carefully planned. Electronic monitoring and back to base alarms will be necessary, and consideration is being given to establishment of an on-site presence (caretaker’s cottage). The nature of the operations will also require that the site be fully fenced.
· Competitive and
operational risk
Existing operators in the region may competitively react to a new venture via pricing mechanisms, cremation capacity, or marketing initiatives – all of which will have the potential to impact upon the viability of the project.
· Financial
analysis and risks
The best estimates for the various revenue and cost items have been projected over a 30-year amortization period. This shows that the facility will incur a deficit in the initial years but that this can be repaid with interest and that if capital cost can be amortized over 30 years, the net cash flow to council will be positive from around Year 6.
Key issues that will affect the development
The Castlereagh Cemetery and Crematoria will be a significant local and regional project that will deliver social infrastructure for the use of current and future generations. A number of issues will require detailed consideration and study in the context of moving this project through development approvals and implementation.
Initial work on this proposal commenced in 2000 and at various times since the prospect of the site being developed as a cemetery and crematoria has been publicised. Given that the stage is being reached where the full extent of the proposal is now being shaped, there most certainly will be collective or individual community opinion directed to the crematoria project.
In line with Council’s Community Participation Policy a process of community engagement will be initiated at this early stage with the intention of being continued through design, approval, construction and operating phases. While the engagement tools may be flexible and develop over time, proven models such as community advisory groups or design reference groups are potentially appropriate. Certainly the approach will be inclusory.
Opportunities for long-term funding of
cemetery operations
The revenue streams predicted in the Business Plan will deliver surpluses above that needed for operational activities and maintenance. The Crown Reserve Trust arrangement under which the site would be managed presents the opportunity for Council to expand its involvement in cemeteries in the City and take the lead in preservation and conservation of these important social assets that are not currently in Council’s care. For example, seek Trusteeship of the historic Castlereagh Cemetery, direct support of preservation and conservation works in all cemeteries.
These revenue streams also mean that the current effective subsidy to current cemetery operations could be eliminated over time, thus freeing up recurrent General Revenue funds to be applied in other priority areas.
Design and sustainability principles
The development concepts seek to deliver crematorium facilities within a bushland environment. The vision seeks to go past just a burial and ceremonial place towards a place of lasting environmental and social value for Penrith with higher-order principles. This creates opportunity for designing and showcasing sustainability principles throughout the project.
Financial Services Manager’s comments
The feasibility study and concept plans developed by GeoLink Environment and Design and the financial analysis and Business Plan prepared by John Desmond and Associates have been reviewed.
The financial projections contained within the reports are considered appropriate. It is noted that the financial analysis of the project forecast positive operating revenues from the third year.
It is acknowledged that should Council provide in principle support for this project a comprehensive financial plan would be required to provide further more stringent confirmation of the financial projections across the life of the asset.
Extending the purpose of the Crown Reserve
Portion 245 is a Crown Reserve set aside for cemetery purposes, for which Council is the Trust Manager. For a mixed crematoria and cemetery development, the defined purpose of the Reserve would need to be extended. Recent amendments to the Crown Lands Act 1989 (under the Crown Lands Legislation Amendment Act 2005) provides for more flexibility in how Crown Reserves can be used for additional purposes.
While discussions are continuing with the Department of Lands, the legislation provides for additional purposes (of a crematoria) to be enabled under a Plan of Management for the reserve, or with an order of the Minister.
Next steps
This certainly is an innovative project that requires considerable work in examining in more detail the JDA Business Plan and the options to fund the project and to move from concepts to detailed development plans.
It is felt that Council should consider the formation of a Working Party comprising North Ward Councillors and relevant Council officers to examine proposed courses of action.
The Terms of Reference for the Working Party might be:
“To develop and report back to Council
on a plan for the development of the Castlereagh Cemetery and Crematorium, and
to oversee implementation of the plan, as adopted by Council.”
That: 1. The
information contained in the report on Castlereagh Crematorium and Cemetery
Business Plan be received 2. Council re-affirm its ‘in principle’ support for the
development of this land as a Crematoria and Cemetery; 3. A Working Party comprising North Ward Councillors and relevant
Council officers be formed. 4. The Terms of Reference of the Working Party be: “To develop and report back to Council on a plan for the development of the Castlereagh Cemetery and Crematorium, and to oversee implementation of the plan, as adopted by Council”. |
There are no attachments for
this report.
31 October
2005 |
|
The City as a Social
Place |
|
The City as a Social Place
6 |
Alterations and
Additions to Penrith Regional Gallery and Lewers Bequest (PRG & LB) |
38/143 |
Compiled by: Graham
Howe - Building Projects Co-Ordinator
Authorised by: Rod Wood - Building Services
Manager
Strategic Program
Term Achievement: The cultural assets of the City
have been integrated to establish its reputation as a creative place.
Critical Action: Finalise extensions for Penrith Regional Gallery and Joan Sutherland
Performing Arts Centre.
Purpose:
To advise Council
of the outcome of the Expression of Interest (EOI) process and to recommend
four (4) companies to tender on the proposed works at Penrith Regional Gallery
& Lewers Bequest. The report recommends
that the following companies be invited to Tender on the proposed works; Rapid
Constructions Pty Ltd, Brisland Pty Ltd, A & DR Illes (Sydney) Pty Ltd, AJ
Bristow & Sons Pty Ltd.
Background
Council received $1.65 million funding from the NSW Government for Council to undertake a program of activities at the Penrith Regional Gallery and Lewers Bequest. The major component of that program (and funding) was towards infrastructure upgrade, renovation and refurbishment of the various Gallery buildings. This program, when completed would revitalise the physical amenity, structure and operations at the Gallery.
Council has engaged specialist architectural services to provide guidance and advice to Council for this program of new works. These architects have prepared the Development Application and Construction Certificate documentation and Council has issued approval to both. These architects have recently completed the Tender documentation.
Current
Situation
Council advertised for Expressions of Interest, in the Penrith Press and Sydney Morning Herald on 6th September 2005. Expressions of Interest closed on 28th September 2005 and eight (8) submissions were received. After the closing time, one submission, Gondella Pty Ltd, was received late and was not considered further.
Submissions were received from the following companies:
· Brisland Pty Ltd
· A & D R Illes (Sydney) Pty Ltd
· Rapid Constructions Pty Ltd
· Safin Pty Ltd
· A J Bristow & Sons Pty Ltd
· Arenco (NSW) Pty Ltd
· Kane Constructions
· Inaphase
All submissions were assessed by the Tender Panel made up of Rod Wood – Building Services Manager, Gary Dean – Facilities Operations Manager, Graham Howe – Building Projects Coordinator, John Mullane – PRG & LB Board Member and Chairman of Heritage & Facilities Committee, Charles Glanville – Architect and Board Member of PRG & LB. The Expressions Of Interest were evaluated against the following criteria:
· Current & future capability to provide services described
· Financial Capacity
· Skills & experience of management & personnel
· Quality & availability of the back up, advisory and support service available
· Demonstrated ability to undertake work of a similar nature
i.) New Work
ii.) Heritage and conservation
iii.) Conduct work while business remains in operation
· References
· Quality Management Systems
· OH&S Systems
· ESD (Ecologically Sustainable Development)
· Ability to complete projects on time and on budget
The
submissions were evaluated and were ranked in the following order
1. Rapid Constructions Pty Ltd
2. Brisland Pty Ltd
3. A & DR Illes (Sydney) Pty Ltd
4. A J Bristow & Sons Pty Ltd
5. Arenco (NSW) Pty Ltd
6. Kane Constructions
7. Safin Pty Ltd
8. Inaphase
It was considered that these (4) companies should be invited to submit a tender.
1. Rapid Constructions Pty Ltd
2. Brisland Pty Ltd
3. A & DR Illes (Sydney) Pty Ltd
4. AJ Bristow & Sons Pty Ltd
A program has been prepared which is targeting Council’s meeting on 12th December 2005 for consideration of a report on the preferred builder. Subject to meeting that timetable, work is planned to commence in February 2006.
That: 1. The
information contained in the report on Alterations and Additions to Penrith
Regional Gallery and Lewers Bequest (PRG & LB) be received
2. That formal Tenders be invited from; a) Rapid Constructions Pty Ltd b) Brisland Pty Ltd c) A & DR Illes (Sydney) Pty Ltd d) A J Bristow & Sons Pty Ltd for the alterations and additions to Penrith Regional Gallery & Lewers Bequest 3. A further report be submitted to Council recommending a preferred builder. |
There are no attachments for
this report.
31 October
2005 |
|
The City as a Social
Place |
|
The City as a Social Place
7 |
Joan Sutherland
Performing Arts Centre (JSPAC) Extensions Project |
961/19 |
Compiled by: Gary
Dean - Facilities Operations Manager
Authorised by: Steve Hackett - Director City
Services
Strategic Program
Term Achievement: The cultural assets of the City
have been integrated to establish its reputation as a creative place.
Critical Action: Finalise extensions for Penrith Regional Gallery and Joan Sutherland
Performing Arts Centre.
Purpose:
To provide Council
with a final 'wrap up' report on the JSPAC Extensions Project. The report has a focus on the project budget
and recommends a source to address the minor funding shortfall and the approval
of the amended JSPAC Constitution.
The
Extensions Project
The JSPAC opened in March 1990 and has subsequently played a significant regional role in impacting upon and enhancing the culture of many thousands of people in outer Western Sydney.
It wasn’t too long after opening that the need for more space became apparent.
The Conservatorium of Music had been subjected to significant growth. How this growth was to be met was investigated by Council and specialist Architects during the latter 1990’s, when conceptual plans were prepared and funding sources for an extensions project canvassed. As a consequence of Council’s advocacy, the NSW Premier announced that $6.4 million would be provided to Council to help expand and upgrade the JSPAC. An important element of the government grant, was that the expanded JSPAC will include a new Q Theatre and accommodation for Railway Street Theatre Company (RST).
Council subsequently identified funding sources to meet the balance of the project which at that time, was approximately $13 million.
Council confirmed the continuing role of Suters Architects. Given funding was available the extensions project became a reality.
The Arts Project Working Party, which was formed to address operational issues at RST, had its brief expanded to include the extensions project. Council formed the ‘Project Definition’ and ‘Change Management’ Committees, which comprised representatives of JSPAC, RST, Ministry for the Arts and Council, to instruct the Architects in refining the physical elements of the project and to address all the management issues associated with the project. Councillor Sheehy chaired these Committees.
Suters Architects completed all the necessary documentation for the Development Application, which was approved by Council in December 2002. A Construction Certificate was subsequently issued and expressions of interest sought from suitably qualified and experienced builders.
Council had, since the opening of the JSPAC, provided an annual operating subsidy to the Centre. That subsidy was increased in 2001, at the time the management responsibilities for the Q Theatre, transferred to the JSPAC. Council acknowledged that an expanded Centre, with increased operational costs, would result in an increased subsidy from Council. Prior to commencing the extensions project Council engaged ‘Positive Solutions’ a consultancy group with considerable knowledge and experience in the operations of performing arts centres, to prepare a Business Plan for an expanded Centre. What became clear from that Business Plan, was that the level of Council’s financial support ultimately becomes an investment for a particular cultural outcome. The Business Plan clearly demonstrated that Council’s subsidy should increase. Council accepted those principles and annual budgets have reflected an increased level of subsidy. The Business Plan also addressed a new management structure.
Council considered a request from the JSPAC Board to include a ‘Recital Museum’ in the extensions. This would be achieved by converting part of the proposed conservatorium of music into that museum which would contain items from the “Dame Joan Sutherland Collection”. That opportunity was thoroughly examined by Council (and others), which lead to Council not proceeding with that opportunity within the extensions project. Council recognised that the extensions did include extensive display areas.
Council, in February 2004, selected Arenco Pty Ltd as its preferred builder for the extensions project. Work commenced in mid-March 2004, with practical completion achieved in July this year. The project was completed in two (2) stages, with stage 1 being occupied in February this year.
The Contract administration was done by Council, with Council’s Building Projects Coordinator being seconded for the period of the construction program.
Following occupation of stage 1, Council’s Facilities Operations Manager was seconded to the Centre to provide support to the existing staff and to facilitate introduction of the new management structure. A new Chief Executive Officer commenced in July this year.
The expanded JSPAC was officially opened by the NSW Premier and the Mayor on 3 September this year. The expanded Centre has received wide acclaim from regular users and the community at large. The first performance in the new Q Theatre was held on 7 October 2005. It is proposed to show an edited version of the Official Opening DVD to tonight’s meeting.
The Project Budget
Council accepted a ‘fixed lump sum contract’ of $12.29 million from Arenco Pty Ltd. In addition to this, Council agreed that allowances needed to be accommodated in the project costs to cover professional fees during construction, Council fees, construction allowance, secondment salary, legal fees and specialist fees.
The budget for the project in February 2004 (appointment of builder) was $14,219,300.
During the construction program variations to the original builders contract occurred. These variations were thoroughly considered by the Project Definition Committee before approval was granted for these works. In the main these variations (listed below) resulted from works not anticipated at the outset, additional work arising from changes or improvements that only became apparent during the construction phase. These variations included (but not limited to):
· modifications to sewer diversion (construction methodology) (major expense)
· alterations to theatre stage
· enhancements to air-conditioning
· building management systems upgrade
· structural steel changes
· various modifications to electrical/lighting layout
· improved signage
· various changes to fixtures and fittings
The fit-out of the new Q Theatre (sound, lighting and communication) was approved by Council in June 2005. The fit-out cost, whilst approved by Council, was higher than anticipated.
There was also an increase in the initial budget allocation for the official opening ceremony.
To date the overall cost to Council for the JSPAC extensions project is $14,467,721.
The financial aspects of the project are addressed below.
Acting Financial Services Manager’s
comments
The final projected cost of the extension indicates a project budget variance of $248,421 (1.74%). This is primarily the result of the Lighting & Audio variation and other higher than expected construction variations throughout the project including the sewer diversion modifications.
The additional lighting and audio equipment was approved by Council on 20 June 2005. At that stage it was anticipated that the cost of this equipment would be met from the existing project contingency. It was also anticipated that, should the project budget be exceeded, Section 94 funding would be increased.
As reported, the completion of the JSPAC Extension project and the accurate determination of the cost of the project could necessitate the re-exhibition of the S94 Cultural Facilities Plan. Due to the increased scope of the project additional s94 funding would be achieved by a re-exhibition of the plan containing the amended total project cost. This combined with the additional interest earned on the unspent grant funded proportion ($66,000) throughout the life of the project will provide the necessary funding for the shortfall.
Other issues
During the construction, the JSPAC Board also identified opportunities for changes / improvements within the Centre. These included preliminary fit-out of an area on level two shown as ‘void space’. This area, when completed at a time in the future will provide additional storage space. Further storage space has been achieved by creating access to an area under one of the stairs. The foyer display cabinet was modified to improve visibility. New workstations have been provided to the administration area. All these works ($70,300) have been funded by the JSPAC Board.
The new Chief Executive Officer commenced in July and has worked closely with Council officers in addressing other issues arising from the extensions project. These include completing the new Strategic Plan, finalising the 05/06 Business Plan, recruiting new staff identified in the expanded management structure and installing new operational practices commensurate with the expanded Centre.
A draft new Occupation Agreement (to reflect expanded Centre) has been prepared by Council officers and will be considered by the JSPAC Board in the near future. This new Occupation Agreement brings more definition to the responsibilities of the JSPAC Company and Council.
New JSPAC Constitution
The extensions project presented the ideal opportunity to review the Company’s Constitution that had been in place for some 15 years. Council’s Legal Officer has made certain changes, in consultation with the JSPAC Board, to reflect the contemporary document that applies to Council’s other controlled entities.
Another important change that has been made to the Constitution, at the request of the Board, has been in relation to the Joan Sutherland Foundation, which until this change, has been administered by Trustees.
The change now brings that responsibility to the Board (or sub-Committee of the Board) and makes all donations to the Foundation “ …eligible for tax deductibility…”.
A copy of the amended Constitution is included in the attachments. Council should approve this amended Constitution.
Conclusion
After years of investigations, the much needed JSPAC Extensions have been achieved, with significant funding from the NSW Government and the development of a funding strategy by Council for the balance of the project funds.
These additions will add to the Centre’s significant acclaim as a ‘Centre of Cultural Excellence’ and will broaden its appeal beyond the City.
The JSPAC extensions represented a major project for Council, second to that of the Civic Centre. The overall project has been completed in accordance with the agreed timeframe and effectively “within budget” – although, as indicated in this report, there has been a minor variation to the initial budget estimates. This budget increase is considered justified and the report has identified how the shortfall in funds can be covered.
The success of this major project can be attributed to Council’s innovative project management approach and ‘checks and balances’ that were put in place to monitor the project progress.
Next Steps
Council officers will continue to work with the JSPAC Chief Executive Officer in finalising those operational matters referred to above and any other matters that might arise from time to time.
Council is aware of the reformation of the Arts Project Working Party to address the issue of “… further integration of the City’s Cultural facilities..”. The JSPAC is included in that scope of work. The Working Party has met and the outcomes / actions from that meeting are now being addressed. Council will be advised of that in a future report.
That: 1. The
information contained in the report on Joan Sutherland Performing Arts Centre
(JSPAC) Extensions Project be received 2. Council endorse the budget variations as outlined in this report. 3. The Section 94 Cultural Facilities Plan be amended to reflect the actual Extensions Project costs and re-exhibited. 4. Council approve the amended Constitution of the Penrith Bicentennial Performing Arts Centre Limited. |
JSPAC
Constitution |
12
Pages |
Attachment |
31 October
2005 |
|
The City as a Social
Place |
|
The City as a Social Place
8 |
Section 96
Modification to Development Application 03/2954 for a proposed Rumpus Room at
Lot 5 DP 235175 (No. 145-175) Fairlight Road, Mulgoa Applicant: Andrew Soane and Heather Soane; Owner: Andrew Soane and
Heather Soane |
DA03/2954 |
Compiled by: Julie
Condon - Senior Environmental Health and Building Surveyor
Authorised by: Wayne Mitchell - Acting Building
Approvals and Environmental Protection Manager
Requested By: Councillor Jim Aitken
Councillor
Ross Fowler
Strategic Program
Term Achievement: Redevelopment of existing areas
contributes to safe, sustainable, affordable and satisfying living environments
and cohesive communities.
Critical Action: Work in partnership with the local community to foster understanding of
the reasons why established areas are redeveloping.
Purpose:
To provide
Councillors with information relating to the request for modification of the
original development consent for a rumpus room at 145-175 Fairlight Road,
Mulgoa, prior to its determination. The
modification to the development application is recommended for approval.
Background
In September 2001 a development application for the construction of a dwelling, shed and carport on the subject site was submitted to Council. The application was approved in October 2001 and the dwelling and shed were constructed on the property.
In November 2003 a development application was submitted to Council for the construction of a detached rumpus/games room. The proposed structure was to be 12m x 8m in size with a 2.5m wide attached verandah. The proposed structure was to be located 10m from the adjoining property boundary. As such, in accordance with Council’s Notification Policy, the application was not required to be notified to adjoining property owners. The development application was assessed against all the relevant criteria and determined by the granting of development consent subject to conditions.
On 4 August 2005 Council received a complaint regarding the building under construction and raising issues of non-compliance with the consent. The complaint was investigated and it was determined that there were departures from the consent relating to the proximity to the adjoining boundary, and the installation of additional windows and a doorway in the northern wall. The owner of the property was contacted and requested to stop work. He was also advised that if he wanted to retain the building, he must lodge a Section 96 application to seek approval for the variations to the original consent.
On 28 August, an application to modify the Development Consent was lodged. The amended plans indicated that the application was seeking approval for the structure to be located at a distance of 7.9m from the boundary to the adjoining property. Due to the reduced setback, the application was notified to the adjoining property owners and the Mulgoa Progress Association. In accordance with Council’s policy, the notification period closed on 13 September. Two submissions have been received. One from the adjoining property owner to the north and one from the Mulgoa Progress Association.
Assessment of the Application to modify the
consent
The issue for assessment and determination of the Section 96 application to modify the consent is do the proposed changes satisfy the criteria adopted when the original application was approved.
The original Development Application was assessed against the criteria prescribed in the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act), and the provisions of Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No 13 (SREP 13). The proposal was deemed to comply with the relevant requirements of the instruments and was approved subject to conditions.
The Section 96 application to modify the existing consent involved the following amendments to the original approved development:
· Relocation of the structure from a 10m setback to the northern boundary to a 7.9m setback
· The addition of a doorway, landing and steps to the rear (north) of the building
· The modification of windows including placement of an additional standard window and two highlight windows to the northern wall
· Addition of 2 standard and windows to eastern wall
· Relocation of standard window and addition of two highlight windows to the western wall
· Change incorrect dimension to correct on anomaly on siting of the building
The Sec 96 application is required to be assessed against the relevant provisions of the EP & A Act and SREP 13, to determine if the proposal remains within the criteria set for the original consent.
An assessment of the amended proposal against the provisions of SREP 13 does not identify any areas of non-compliance. SREP 13 does not prescribe any minimum setback requirements, or control the provision and location of windows. The proposed modifications to the development do not therefore contain any areas of non-compliance with the SREP.
Neighbour notification
It was considered that the proposal to seek approval for relocation of the structure to a setback of 7.9m from the adjoining property, and the interest in the proposal by the adjoining property owner, warranted notification of the application under the terms of Council’s Notification Policy. As already mentioned, two submissions were received as a result of this notification. The issues raised in these submissions are as outlined below:
· Obtrusive Building resulting
from non-compliance with regards to siting, the subfloor height of 1.5m, and
non-compliance of the roof colour
The proposed change to the setback of the approved structure from 10m to 7.9m is not considered to significantly increase the impact of the structure on the adjoining property. There is an existing dense landscaping screen between the properties, which will remain and is an effective means to partially screen and soften the appearance of the structure.
The subfloor height is not increased by the proposed amendments to the application. The slope is gentle and uniform in the area of the development. The structure has a maximum subfloor height of 1.3m. This measurement relates to one corner of the structure only and decreases from that point to the minimum 400mm required by the Building Code of Australia.
The roof colour of the structure is Colorbond “Shale Grey”. This is a medium grey colour and is the same colour as that approved for the construction of the existing dwelling and shed.
The colour of the roofing material is commonly accepted as suitable for use in rural areas. The new material has a plastic finish, which initially is quite reflective, however, it becomes much less reflective over time.
The Design and Management Guidelines attached to SREP 13 states that suitable materials for roofs include “corrugated iron and ribbed sheet metal”. The guidelines also provide examples of suitable colours for roofs including “unpainted iron, and Paynes Grey”. The nature and colour of the roof of the building meets these requirements and is considered to comply with the condition attached to the development consent. This condition requires that “The roof of the structure is to be of a non-reflective surface and colour”.
It is considered that use of this colour roofing material on the structure is not inappropriate as it integrates with all the developments on the site and does not compromise the requirements of the SREP or its Design and Management Guidelines.
· Non-compliance – high-pitched roof meaning building exceeds 6m
height shown on plans
The plans submitted with the original application and approved by Council, indicated a roof pitch of 30 degrees.
The section 96 application does not propose a change to the roof pitch. The SREP 13 Design and Management Guidelines prescribe that pitched roofs are preferable - recommending a minimum pitch of 30 degrees.
The application therefore complies with the SREP and the Development Consent with regards to its roof form.
SREP 13 does not contain any prescriptive requirements, which relate to building height, it only limits building height to 2 storeys. Clause 12 of SREP 13 requires that Council must be satisfied with the proposed bulk, scale, slope, size, height, density, design and external appearance of a development to ensure that it is appropriate for the rural character of Mulgoa Valley. The floor area is 126m˛, the height varies due to the slope across the land on which the building is located, and the building is a simple rectangular design and with corrugated metal sheeting and the design compliments that of the other developments on this property. It was considered that the original proposal satisfied these requirements. This modification does not alter the conclusions that were reached in the original assessment of the proposal. It is therefore appropriate for the rural character of the valley.
· Visual impact from adjoining property
The proposed amendments to the development consent do not result in any significant increase in the visibility of the structure from the adjoining property. The existing landscaping screen, which is to be retained and increased, serves to minimise any visual impacts of the building.
· Loss of privacy
The modifications to the development consent originally included a proposal to add a doorway, landing and steps and three additional windows to the northern elevation of the structure. The submission from the adjoining owners identifies a concern that this doorway and the windows will result in a significant loss of privacy to their premises.
The applicant was advised of these concerns and has agreed to remove the doorway, landing and steps from the proposal. The applicant proposes to install attached louvers, or privacy screens, to the outside of the two windows, which do not contain obscure glass.
The remaining highlight windows on the northern elevation have obscure glazing. It is also proposed that the single window in the western elevation be relocated and that and additional 2 highlight windows be installed. The proposal also includes that an additional 2 windows be installed in the eastern elevations. The attachments contain plans of the approved and proposed elevations. It was claimed that these additional windows were required to increase natural lighting to the building and as these windows are located on the northern elevation, they improve the energy efficiency of the building. While the clear glass windows would enable better lighting, the obscure glass highlight windows would only have a minimal effect. These highlight windows would enable a wet area to be installed without additional external changes. This modification does not include approval to install a wet area. These highlight windows are therefore not required. The remaining changes to the windows do not affect the privacy of adjoining neighbours. A condition requiring the removal of the doorway in the northern elevation and the highlights windows in the Northern and Western elevations has been including in the recommendations.
It is considered that with, the removal of the doorway, the screening of the remaining clear glass windows and the distance of separation between the structure and the dwelling on the adjoining site, that there will be no significant impacts on the privacy of the adjoining property resulting from the amendments to the original consent.
· Requirements of SREP 13 that no activity should occur if it impacts
on the “visual catchments of Fernhill The Cottage and St Thomas’s” the natural
landscape, and the compromising visual integrity of Fernhill SREP 13 states the
visual relationship between sites of the cottage and Fernhill should be
preserved and enhanced.,
The parts of the SREP 13, which addresses these issues, are contained in the Design and Management Guidelines. These guidelines include:
a) The visual relationship between the sites of The Cottage, St Thomas’s Church and Fernhill should be preserved and enhanced, and
b) Any development between the visual catchments of items of environmental heritage should pay special recognition to its siting in relation to the significance of the setting
c) Certain vistas of the main heritage items are key elements in the landscape and should be protected from any unsympathetic development
An assessment of the issue of impacts on the visual relationships, catchments, linkages and vistas of The Cottage, St Thomas’s and Fernhill requires that Council officers determine if this site is located within the areas identified in the diagrams in the Design and Management Guidelines. These diagrams are contained in the appendices and clearly demonstrate that the development site is located well outside the Historic Curtilages, and Vistas of Heritage Items in the valley. The site is also located well outside the view corridors between the items.
This proposal therefore remains within the criteria adopted for the original development consent.
· Visual impact of structure from Mulgoa Rd. The roof is visible
against the natural landscape, the development
intrudes into the skyline, and Development Consent Criteria in Clause 12 a,
b, c, and d of SREP 13 have been overlooked or ignored.
Clause 12 states that the consent authority shall not grant consent to an application to
carry out development for any purpose:
(a) if
any proposed building will be located on ridgetops or if it will intrude into
the skyline when viewed from road or other public places
(b) unless
it is satisfied that the proposed development will not adversely affect the
historic, scenic, cultural, social, archaeological, architectural, natural or
aesthetic significance of any item of environmental heritage in the valley
(c) if services, in particular arrangements
regarding the provision of water and disposal of effluent satisfactory to the
requirements of the Water Board, are not adequate or will not be provided in a
reasonable time
(d) unless it is satisfied that the proposed
form and siting of buildings, colours, landscaping, and building materials are
appropriate for the rural character of the valley and are consistent with the
Design and Management Guidelines or their intent
The structure is not located on a ridge top. The topography in the area of the proposed site is undulating and the slope continues significantly beyond the development site.
The structure does not intrude into the skyline. A significant part of the hillside continues upslope from the development, placing it well below the skyline.
While the structure is partially visible for a very short section of Mulgoa Rd, the visibility is minimal. Further, this visibility will decrease as the roofing material weathers. The extent of visibility from Mulgoa Rd is not considered to prejudice the view from the road. The impacts of visibility from Mulgoa Rd are not increased by the proposed amendments to the consent, and remain within the criteria adopted by the original consent.
Services such as water and effluent disposal are not required for the development.
It is considered that the development is compliant with the Design and Management Guidelines. This compliance is not altered by the proposed modifications. Other issues raised in the submissions include:
· Provision of wet areas and
impacts on catchment of dams.
The plans do not indicate any wet areas and therefore this approval does not permit such areas. The owner has been advised that if wet areas are proposed, he must submit a separate application. The objections received are based on the concern that effluent generated by the development may not be disposed of effectively, resulting in pollution or contamination of dams within the proximity. As no wet areas are proposed or approved in the building there is no risk of any pollution or contamination occurring from this source.
· Roof water disposal
Roof water is to be disposed of to rainwater tanks and is controlled by standard conditions of the development consent.
· Access for construction and delivery of supplies
The site has an access directly from Fairlight Rd and another over a right-of –carriageway over the adjoining property. The issue of choice of access for delivery of materials is a private matter subject to negotiation between the owners of the two properties.
· Future use
A development consent has been granted for the use of the structure as a rumpus/games room. A condition of consent has been applied regarding to regulate the use of the building. Any proposed changes to the use would be the subject of a separate Development Application.
· Building regulations – why 30m from dwelling when 15m stipulated in regulations.
The only regulation, which relates to the siting of buildings in this locality, is SREP 13 and the accompanying Design and Management Guidelines. The only requirement in these documents that relates to the relationship of buildings on a site is the section on Siting. This Section requires that developments “group buildings to form sunny sheltered areas and avoid visual confusion”.
The development approved complies with this requirement as the existing and proposed buildings on the property are in close proximity to the subject building. The proposed amendments do not impact on this compliance.
· Location of building 61m from bend in fence line.
The building as constructed is located a distance of approx 60m from the bend in the fence. The original approved plans contained an incorrect dimension. The building has been constructed in the same relationship to other buildings on the site as indicated on the approved plans and complies with the requirements of the SREP and Design and Management Guidelines with regards to siting.
The neighbours feel that the location of this building makes it more obtrusive. In effect the location has not been changed, only the dimension corrected.
· Comments on Development in the Mulgoa Valley.
The Mulgoa Progress Association have raised concerns regarding Council’s implementation of the Development Consent criteria in SREP 13. They are also concerned Council staff may not be familiar with the requirements of the SREP and need further training.
Council officers are committed to ensuring a high quality of development with the Mulgoa Valley and are well aware of the requirements of the relevant planning instruments.
The Building Approvals and Environment Protection department has a high awareness of the special development objectives in the Mulgoa Valley and have utilised experienced staff who are well aware of the requirements of the SREP. There is a continuing commitment to ensuring that all assessment officers who operate in this locality will receive comprehensive training in the intent and implementation of the SREP.
Compliance Action
There is no doubt that the approved plans were not complied with when this building was constructed. The owner felt that changes to the building were minor variations that did not need further approval. Once the owner was advised of his responsibilities, he ceased work and submitted this modification. Given these circumstances, it has been decided that it is appropriate to issue a Penalty Infringement Notice for failure to comply with the original development consent.
Conclusion
An assessment of the application to modify the existing development consent 03/2954, demonstrates that the proposed modifications are minor in nature, remain within the criteria adopted for the original approval and comply with the provisions of SREP 13 and accompanying Design and Management Guidelines.
That: 1. The information contained in the report
on Section 96 Modification to Development Application 03/2954 for a
proposed Rumpus Room at Lot 5 DP 235175 (No. 145-175) Fairlight Road, Mulgoa
be received 2. The application for Section 96
Modification to Development Application 03/2954 for a proposed Rumpus Room at
Lot 5 DP 235175 (No. 145 – 175) Fairlight Road, Mulgoa be approved subject to
the original conditions and the following additional conditions: 2.1 Additional landscaping is to be provided to the northern boundary of the site over the length of the subject building. The landscaping is to be comprised of indigenous species, native to the local area, as specified in the Design and Management Guidelines and capable of reaching a height of at least 5m on maturity. Details of the proposed landscaping are to be submitted to Council for consideration and approval prior to implementation of the plan 2.2 Permanent privacy screening is to be provided to the clear glazed windows on the northern elevation of the building, in accordance with that indicated on the approved plans 2.3 The door, doorway and landing in the northern elevations and the highlight window in the northern and western elevations be removed from the plans prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate for this modification. Windows and doorways must comply with the modified Construction Certificate prior to the issue of Occupation Certificate 3. The adjoining property owners and the Mulgoa Progress Association be advised, in writing of Council’s decision |
1. View |
145
Fairlight Road, Mulgoa |
6 Pages |
Appendix |