1 November 2006

 

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 6 November 2006 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 Stoneham

Acting General Manager

 

 

BUSINESS

 

1.           APOLOGIES

 

2.           LEAVE OF ABSENCE

 

3.           CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

Ordinary Meeting - 23 October 2006.

 

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

Penrith Valley Community Safety Partnership Meeting - 27 September 2006.

 

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



ORDINARY MEETING

 

Monday 6 November 2006

 

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.

 

 

 

 

 



MEETING CALENDAR

 

November 2006 - December 2006

 

 

TIME

NOV

DEC

Mon

Mon

Ordinary Meetings

7.00 pm

6

4

20 #

11

Policy Review Committee

7.00 pm

13

 

 

#  Meetings at which the Management Plan quarterly reviews are presented.

v Meeting at which the Draft Management Plan is adopted for exhibition

#+  General Manager’s presentation – half year and end of year review

*   Meeting at which the Management Plan for 2006/2007 is adopted

@  Strategic Program progress reports (only business)

ü  Meeting at which the 2005/2006 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 (Ordinary & Policy Review) of the Council.

Should you wish to address Council, please contact the Public Officer, Glenn McCarthy on 47327649.

 

 



UNCONFIRMED MINUTES

 OF THE ORDINARY MEETING OF PENRITH CITY COUNCIL HELD IN THE

COUNCIL CHAMBERS

ON MONDAY 23 OCTOBER 2006 AT 7:05 PM

NATIONAL ANTHEM

The meeting opened with the National Anthem.

STATEMENT OF RECOGNITION

His Worship the Mayor, Councillor Pat Sheehy AM, read a statement of recognition of Penrith City’s Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Cultural Heritage.

PRAYER

The Council Prayer was read by the Rev Neil Checkley.

PRESENT

His Worship the Mayor Councillor Pat Sheehy AM, Councillors Jim Aitken OAM, Kaylene Allison, David Bradbury (arrived at 7:37 pm), Lexie Cettolin, Kevin Crameri OAM (arrived at 7:51 pm), Greg Davies (arrived at 7:09 pm), Mark Davies, Ross Fowler, Karen McKeown, Susan Page, Garry Rumble, Steve Simat (arrived at 8:19 pm) and John Thain (arrived at 7:08 pm).

 

APOLOGIES

1116  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor John Thain seconded Councillor Greg Davies that apologies be accepted for Councillors David Bradbury, Kevin Crameri OAM and Steve Simat.

 

LEAVE OF ABSENCE

 

1117 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor John Thain seconded Councillor Karen McKeown that leave of absence previously granted to Councillor Jackie Greenow be extended to 23 October 2006 inclusive.

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES - Ordinary Meeting - 9 October 2006

1118  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ross Fowler seconded Councillor Garry Rumble that the minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of 9 October 2006 be confirmed.

 

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Councillor Jim Aitken OAM declared a pecuniary interest in Item 10 - Council Property - Sale of No 8 Coallee Place, South Penrith, as he is a director in one of the real estate companies listed in the report, and took no part in the debate or voting.

 

 

 

 

 MAYORAL MINUTE

 

1        Council Achieves Recognition at the NSW Local Government Aboriginal Network Conference Merit Awards

 

1119  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Pat Sheehy AM seconded Councillor Greg Davies that the Mayoral Minute on Council Achieves Recognition at the NSW Local Government Aboriginal Network Conference Merit Awards be received.

 

Reports of Committees

 

1        Report and Recommendations of the Local Traffic Committee Meeting held on 9 October 2006                                                                                                                                     

1120  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Karen McKeown seconded Councillor Kaylene Allison that the recommendations contained in the Report and Recommendations of the Local Traffic Committee meeting held on 9 October, 2006 be adopted.

 

2        Report and Recommendations of the Policy Review Committee Meeting held on 16 October 2006                                                                                                                                     

1121  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ross Fowler seconded Councillor Garry Rumble that the recommendations contained in the Report and Recommendations of the Policy Review Committee meeting held on 16 October, 2006 be adopted.

 

MASTER PROGRAM REPORTS

 

The City in its Broader Context

 

1        2007 International Dragon Boat Championships                                                              

1122  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Ross Fowler that the information contained in the report on 2007 International Dragon Boat Championships be received.

 

The City as a Social Place

 

3        Tender No. 08-06/07 - Provision of Graffiti Removal Services                                       

1123  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ross Fowler seconded Councillor John Thain

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Tender No. 08-06/07 - Provision of Graffiti Removal Services be received.

 

2.     The following companies are placed on the panel of approved suppliers for Graffiti removal for a period of 1 year with an option to extend for a further 1 year period: Sideshow Pty Ltd (T/A Graffiti Gone), Techni-clean Pty Ltd, TLC Graffiti Removal Services, Graffiti Eaters Pty Ltd, Wunderguard, Graffiti Off Australia Pty Ltd (GOA).

 

3.     The following companies are placed on the panel of approved suppliers for painting out graffiti for a period of 1 year with an option to extend for a further 1 year period: Sideshow Pty Ltd (T/A Graffiti Gone), Techni-clean Pty Ltd, TLC Graffiti Removal Services, Graffiti Eaters Pty Ltd, LR Hopkinson & DE Petersen (Graffiti Cops).

 

4.     The following companies are placed on the panel of approved suppliers for Graffiti Inspection Services for a period of 1 year with an option to extend for a further 1 year period: Techni-clean Pty Ltd, Graffiti Eaters Pty Ltd, LR Hopkinson & DE Petersen (Graffiti Cops), Wunderguard, Graffiti Off Australia Pty Ltd.

 

5        Variation of Restrictive Covenant applying to Lot 8 DP 1020587 (No. 2 - 4) South Street, Glenmore Park. Applicant: Innovation Planning Australia Pty Ltd;  Owner: T & K Schafer                                                                                                                           DA06/0661

1124  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ross Fowler seconded Councillor John Thain

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Variation of Restrictive Covenant applying to Lot 8 DP 1020587 (No. 2 - 4) South Street, Glenmore Park be received.

2.     The terms outlined in section (b) of the restriction on the use of land firstly referred to in the Section 88b Instrument of the Conveyancing Act 1919 applying to Lot 8 DP 1020587 (No. 2-4) South Street, Glenmore Park be varied as detailed in the report.

3.     The Common Seal of Penrith City Council be affixed to all necessary documentation to vary the covenant.

4.     The development application DA06/0661 for a garage at Lot 8 DP 1020587 (No. 2-4) South Street, Glenmore Park, be approved, subject to the following conditions:

Standard Conditions

4.1       A001 – Approved Plans

A008 – Works to BCA requirements

A009 – Residential Works DCP

A020 – Use of building

D001 – Erosion and sediment control measures

D009 – Coverage of waste storage areas

D014 – Plant and equipment noise

E001 – BCA compliance

F006 – Water tank and nuisance

H01F – Stamped plans and erection of site notice

H011 – Engineering plans and specifications

H041 – Hours of work

H030 – Roof finishes

K016 -  Stormwater

L008 – Tree preservation order

Q01F – Notice of commencement and appointment of PCA

Q05F – Occupation certificate

Special Conditions

4.2     Prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate for the development, the variation of the restriction on the use of land firstly referred to, section (b) in the Section 88B Instrument attached to Deposited Plan 1020587 shall be registered with Department of Lands.

The variation to the covenant shall be in the terms approved by Penrith City Council in the documentation submitted in support of the development application.

4.3     All landscape works are to be constructed in accordance with the stamped-approved plan.  Evidence that the landscaping has been implemented in accordance with the approved plan should be provided prior to the issue of Occupation Certificate.

 

Landscaping shall be maintained:

·        In accordance with the approved plan

·        In a healthy state

·        In perpetuity by the existing or future owners and occupiers of the property

 

If any of the vegetation comprising that landscaping dies or is removed, it is to be replaced with vegetation of the same species and, to the greatest extent practicable, the same maturity, as the vegetation, which died or was removed.

4.4     The shipping container on the subject site is to be removed as part of the approved work prior to the issue of an occupation certificate.

 

2        Western Sydney Area Assistance Scheme (WSAAS) 2006 Local Ranking Committee

1125  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Karen McKeown seconded Councillor Greg Davies

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Western Sydney Area Assistance Scheme (WSAAS) 2006 Local Ranking Committee be received.

 

2.     Council nominate Councillor Kaylene Allison to participate in the WSAAS Local Ranking Committee for a term of two years (2006 and 2007).

 

4        Fencing at Andrews Road Baseball Complex                                                                   

1126  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jim Aitken OAM seconded Councillor Ross Fowler

That:

 

1.             The information contained in the report on Fencing at Andrews Road                    Baseball Complex be received.

 

2.             A further report be prepared for consideration of Council regarding the cost of ongoing repairs to the playing surface and how the fencing would save these costs by preventing access by unauthorised vehicles.

 

 

The City Supported by Infrastructure

 

7        Linemarking and improved access to Kokoda Place carpark, St Marys                        

1127  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jim Aitken OAM seconded Councillor Karen McKeown

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Linemarking and improved access to Kokoda Place carpark, St Marys be received.

2.     Funding ($15,000) for the provision of linemarking, signage and additional vehicular entries for Kokoda Place car park be provided from the Car Parking/Traffic Facilities Reserve.

3.     The Rangers be authorised to regulate the conditions of signage installed within the car park.

 

8        Maintenance of RTA Road Network                                                                                

1128  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ross Fowler seconded Councillor Jim Aitken OAM

That:

1.             The information contained in the report on Maintenance of RTA Road                   Network be received.

2.             The Minister for Roads and the RTA be contacted, expressing Council’s concerns regarding the RTA owned roads in the Penrith City area, drawing their attention to the roads listed in the report, and in particular to the section of Cranebrook Road in the area between Nepean Street and Boundary Road.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

9        Penrith Road Safety Audit Report - Llandilo Area - Existing Roads                              

1129  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Kaylene Allison

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Penrith Road Safety Audit Report - Llandilo Area - Existing Roads be received.

2.     The list of remedial actions as listed in the Road Safety Audit, Appendix B, be endorsed.

3.     Those remedial actions, as listed in the Road Safety Audit, Appendix B, that require investigation, detailed survey, design, cost benefit analysis be included in a prioritised Implementation Program.

4.    The Implementation Program be reported to Council for approval.

5.     Linemarking in the Llandilo area be completed as soon as possible.

 

Leadership and Organisation

Having previously declared a pecuniary interest in Item 10, Councillor Jim Aitken OAM left the meeting, the time being 7:36 pm.

 

10      Council Property - Sale of No 8 Coallee Place, South Penrith                                         

1130  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor John Thain seconded Councillor Garry Rumble

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Council Property - Sale of No 8 Coallee Place, South Penrith be received.

2.     Council sell Lot 24 DP 249672 at No 8 Coallee Place South Penrith by public auction.

3.     Raine & Horne Residential Penrith be engaged to undertake the public auction of the property.

4.     A further report be presented to Council to determine the vendor’s reserve price to be made available to the auctioneer on the day of the auction.

5.     The Common Seal of the Council of the City of Penrith be placed on all necessary documentation.

6.     The $1,300 allocated by Council for the construction of a chainwire fence between Lots 7 and 8 Coallee Place be returned to South Ward Voted Works.

 

Councillor David Bradbury arrived, the time being 7:37 pm.

 

 

 

 

 

11      Summary of Investments & Banking for the period 29 August 2006 to 30 September 2006   

1131  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ross Fowler seconded Councillor Karen McKeown

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Summary of Investments & Banking for the period 29 August 2006 to 30 September 2006 be received.

2.     The Certificate of the Responsible Accounting Officer and Summaries of Investments and Performance for the period 29 August 2006 to 30 September 2006 be noted and accepted.

3.     The graphical investment analysis as at 30 September 2006 be noted.

4.     The Agency Collection Fees information as at 30 September 2006 be noted.

 

Councillor Jim Aitken OAM returned to the meeting, the time being 7:39 pm.

 

12      City Operations Directorate Report to end of September 2006                                      

1132  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor John Thain seconded Councillor Karen McKeown that the information contained in the report on City Operations Directorate Report to end of September 2006 be received.

 

13      Tender for Legal Services                                                                                                 

1133  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Ross Fowler

That:

1.             The information contained in the report on Tender for Legal Services be       received.

2.             A presentation be made by shortlisted tenderers to Councillors and Council officers, after the tenders have been received and assessed by Council officers.

3.             The tenders be further assessed by Council officers after the presentation, for report to Council.

Councillor Susan Page left the meeting, the time being 7:46 pm.

Councillor Susan Page returned to the meeting, the time being 7:48 pm.

 

14      Development of the Justice Precinct at Parramatta and the consequences for the Penrith District Court                                                                                                                      

1134  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Mark Davies seconded Councillor John Thain that the information contained in the report on Development of the Justice Precinct at Parramatta and the consequences for the Penrith District Court be received.

 

 

The City In Its Environment

 

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM arrived at the meeting, the time being 7:51 pm.

 

6        Drainage Impact Assessment for Properties in Cosgrove Cres, Morphett St, Millen St and Great Western Highway, Kingswood                                                                                

1135  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor David Bradbury seconded Councillor Karen McKeown

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Drainage Impact Assessment for Properties in Cosgrove Cres, Morphett St, Millen St and Great Western Highway, Kingswood be received.

2.     A Councillor Briefing be held after Councillors have had an opportunity to consider the consultant study for the local sub-catchment.

 

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

 

QWN 1      Trees - Great Western Highway, Colyton to St Marys                                          

Councillor Susan Page requested that the responsible authority be requested to trim or replace the poorly pruned trees on the Great Western Highway in the Colyton to St Marys area.

 

QWN 2      Explorers Memorial                                                                                                  

Councillor John Thain requested a Council report, concerning the records regarding James Burns, and other servants, that crossed the Blue Mountains with explorers Lawson, Blaxland and Wentworth, and that their names be recorded appropriately.

 

QWN 3      Llandilo Public School                                                                                               

Councillor John Thain requested that the Mayor write a letter to the Llandilo Public School, congratulating the school on its recent 140 Year celebrations.

 

QWN 4      Girls' Night In                                                                                                           

Councillor Karen McKeown requested that Council provide $315 from South Ward voted works for hall hire and decorations for a resident to host a Girls’ Night In, which is a fundraiser for the Cancer Council.

 

1136  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Karen McKeown seconded Councillor Jim Aitken OAM that the matter be brought forward and dealt with as a matter of urgency.

 

His Worship the Mayor, Councillor Pat Sheehy AM, ruled that the matter was urgent and should be dealt with at the meeting.

 

 

 

 

1137  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Karen McKeown seconded Councillor Jim Aitken OAM that Council provide $315 from South Ward voted works for hall hire and decorations for a resident to host a Girls’ Night In, which is a fundraiser for the Cancer Council.

 

QWN 5      Issues concerning University of Western Sydney and Sydney West Area Health Service      

Councillor Ross Fowler requested a report to Council concerning the situation with regard to the position of governance and control of the University of Western Sydney and Sydney West Area Health Service, as there has been concern for some time as to the commitment of these bodies to the ‘regional’ concept of Penrith. 

 

QWN 6      Recycling of Grey Water                                                                                          

Councillor Jim Aitken OAM requested a memo reply concerning Council’s policy and/or guidelines on the recycling of grey water for use on lawns and gardens.

 

Councillor Susan Page left the meeting, the time being 8:19 pm.

 

Councillor Steve Simat arrived at the meeting, the time being 8:19 pm.

 

QWN 7      Street Lighting - Mamre Road                                                                                 

Councillor Steve Simat requested a report to Council regarding the possibility of increasing the number of street lights on Mamre Road, from Erskine Park Road to Elizabeth Drive, and increasing the number of safety signs.

 

Councillor Susan Page returned to the meeting, the time being 8:21 pm.

 

QWN 8      Leonay Parade Park, Leonay                                                                                   

Councillor Mark Davies requested that Council provide an amount of $5,200 from South Ward voted works for upgrading of the park facilities, to include swings, benches and a ground surface under the play equipment.

 

1138  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Mark Davies seconded Councillor Karen McKeown that the matter be brought forward and dealt with as a matter of urgency.

 

His Worship the Mayor, Councillor Pat Sheehy AM, ruled that the matter was urgent and should be dealt with at the meeting.

 

1139 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Mark Davies seconded Councillor Karen McKeown that Council provide an amount of $5,200 from South Ward voted works for upgrading of the park facilities, to include swings, benches and a ground surface under the play equipment.

 

 

 

 

 

QWN 9      Penrith Parents' Directory                                                                                        

Councillor Mark Davies requested a Council report on the possibility of Council distributing this publication throughout its children’s services outlets in the local government area, to assist young parents in our community.

 

QWN 10    Reporting of Graffiti and Vandalism                                                                        

Councillor Mark Davies requested a report to Council on how a reward system can be implemented, regarding the reporting of graffiti and vandalism information leading to the conviction of such criminal behaviour.

 

Committee of the Whole

 

1140  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Susan Page seconded Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM that the meeting adjourn to the Committee of the Whole to deal with the following matters, the time being 8:26 pm.

 

1        Presence of the Public

 

CW1 RECOMMENDED on the MOTION of Councillor Susan Page seconded Councillor Kevin Crameri that the press and public be excluded from Committee of the Whole to deal with the following matters:

 

 

City as an Economy

 

2        Council Property - Lot 12 DP 710086 Jamison Road Penrith                                          

 

This item has been referred to Committee of the Whole as the report refers to information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business and discussion of the matter in open meeting would be, on balance, contrary to the public interest.

 

Leadership and Organisation

 

3        Legal Advice                                                                                                                       

 

This item has been referred to Committee of the Whole as the report refers to 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.

 

 

The meeting resumed at 8:29 pm and the General Manager reported that the Committee of the Whole met at 8:26 pm on Monday, 23 October 2006, the following being present

 

His Worship the Mayor Councillor Pat Sheehy AM, Councillors Jim Aitken OAM, Kaylene Allison, David Bradbury, Lexie Cettolin, Kevin Crameri OAM, Greg Davies, Mark Davies, Ross Fowler, Karen McKeown, Susan Page, Garry Rumble, Steve Simat and John Thain

 

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.

 

 

CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS

 

2        Council Property - Lot 12 DP 710086 Jamison Road Penrith                                          

RECOMMENDED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Kaylene Allison

CW2 That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Council Property - Lot 12 DP 710086 Jamison Road Penrith be received.

2.     The minor amendment be approved within the lease documentation to permit a 10-year lease with 3 (10-year) options as indicated in the report.

3.     That Council allow access to its land by the sub-lessee to complete the necessary works prior to the commencement of the lease between Council and Panthers.

4.     The Common Seal of the Council of the City of Penrith be placed on all necessary documentation.

 

3        Legal Advice                                                                                                                       

RECOMMENDED on the MOTION of Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM seconded Councillor Greg Davies

CW3 That the information contained in the report on Legal Advice be received.

 

ADOPTION OF Committee of the Whole

 

1141  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor John Thain seconded Councillor Karen McKeown that the recommendations contained in the Committee of the Whole and shown as CW1, CW2 and CW3 be adopted.

 

 

There being no further business the Chairperson declared the meeting closed, the time being 8:30 pm.

 



PENRITH CITY COUNCIL

 

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.

 

 

Glenn McCarthy

Public Officer

02 4732 7649                                                        October 2006

   


Reports of Committees

 

Item                                                                                                                                       Page

 

1        Report and Recommendations of the Penrith Valley Community Safety Partnership Meeting held on 27 September 2006 

 

 



Ordinary Meeting

6 November 2006

Leadership and Organisation

 

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE
 Penrith Valley Community Safety Partnership MEETING

HELD ON 27 September, 2006

 

 

 

PRESENT

 

His Worship the Mayor, Councillor Pat Sheehy AM, Councillors Karen McKeown, Kaylene Allison and Garry Rumble.

 

Kristy Williams, St Marys Local Area Command; Debbie Moore, St Marys Local Area Command; Tony Thomas, RailCorp; Mike Logue, RailCorp; Janet Mackenzie, Glenmore Park Action Group; David Jones, St Marys Local Area Command; Beth Stirton, St Marys Local Area Command; Laura Williams, Penrith Youth Interagency; Fiona Burgess, Penrith City Council; David Burns, Penrith City Council; Yvonne Perkins, Penrith City Council; Jeni Pollard, Penrith City Council; Jack McLeod, St Marys Town Centre Management; John Bongiorno, Penrith Local Area Command; Andrena Faletolu, RailCorp; Ben Feszczuk, Penrith Local Area Command; Paul Haines Penrith Local Area Command; Erin Davidson, Penrith City Council; Kylie Howard, Penrith City Council.

 

APOLOGIES

Terry McGivern, Penrith City Council; Lawrence Bonello, Penrith Local Area Command; Julie Passau, Penrith Local Area Command; Wendy Herne, St Clair – Erskine Park Community Safety Association; Ray Filewood, St Marys Local Area Command.

 

PVCSP 11    RECOMMENDED that apologies be received and accepted.

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES - Penrith Valley Community Safety Partnership Meeting - 29 June 2006

PVCSP 12  RECOMMENDED that the minutes of the Penrith Valley Community Safety Partnership Meeting of 29 June 2006 be confirmed.

 

 MASTER PROGRAM REPORTS

 

The City as a Social Place

 

1        Penrith Valley Community Safety Plan - Key Area Strategy Development and Project Updates

David Burns provided the Partnership with an update on projects Community Safety staff have been working on.

 

Penrith Citywide Graffiti Minimisation Strategy

David Burns advised the Partnership that the approval of the rate rise for the Asset Renewal and Established Areas Strategy would now provide the opportunity to explore the best way to utilise resources to remove graffiti throughout the Local Government Area.

 

Key actions that continue to be developed for the citywide graffiti removal strategy are:

 

·    Continued zero tolerance on all Council property (includes buildings, playgrounds, signage, drainage structures).

 

·    Investigating options for the equitable removal of graffiti from private property within or visible from the public domain.

 

·    Ongoing input into the Australian Graffiti Database Register.

 

·    Increased Council resources to form 2 x 2 person graffiti removal teams.

 

·    The tender has closed for the list of “preferred contactors” to remove graffiti on private property.

 

·    The Special Rates Initiative allocated an additional amount of funding for $250,000 for graffiti removal.

 

·    A funding grant from the Premier’s Department for removal of graffiti from Queen Street, St Marys to the sum of $20,000, and an additional $5,000 from Council.

 

·    An internal workshop which was conducted on 29 August at Council to map and plan a proposed way forward for the implementation of the graffiti removal strategy including:

 

·    Council property

·    Private Property

·    Government Authorities.

 

Community Safety Audit – Star Court Shopping Precinct, Cambridge Gardens

The Community Safety Audit for Star Court Shopping Precinct, Cambridge Gardens was conducted on 6 September 2006 in conjunction with St Marys and Penrith Police. Local residents and business representatives from Caltex Service Station, Coles Supermarket, McDonalds and the Overlander Hotel also attended the audit.

 

Extension of the Cranebrook Town Centre – Sharing the Public Domain Project

Applications are now closed for the two Youth Street Work Project Officer positions with over 20 requests for information packages to be sent out. The applications will be reviewed on Tuesday 3 October 2006. Workers are expected to be appointed by the end of October.

 

Operation Bounce Back

The Operation Bounce Back project was extended with the purchase of an additional 26 vouchers with funds.  Advertisements were placed in local papers encouraging residents of the Penrith Local Government Area, who were the owners of pre 1992 model vehicles, to register their interest for one of the limited number of vouchers.

 

The distribution of the 26 additional vouchers was determined by a draw, as the demand for vouchers exceeded the vouchers available.

 

In total 153 vouchers were given away. The National Motor Vehicle Theft Reduction Council has advised that the program is likely to be offered to Penrith again in 2007.

 

Park Smarter Kits

Penrith and St Marys Police conducted Park Smarter campaigns throughout August and September at various commuter car parks around Penrith, St Marys and Emu Plains between 6.00am and 8.00am. There were a total of approximately 1300 Park Smarter bags distributed to commuters.

 

PVCSP 13  RECOMMENDED that the information contained in the report on Penrith Valley Community Safety Plan - Key Area Strategy Development and Project updates be received.

 

2        Draft Second Penrith Valley Community Safety Plan                                                        

David Burns provided some background about the development of the first Community Safety Plan.

 

The aim of the initial plan was to introduce the concept of Community Safety to the wider LGA, as it was a relatively new function to Local Government. The plan focused on strategies across five key areas. The community was encouraged, through their own actions, to improve their own well-being and safety of their local community including reporting issues to Police, Council and public utilities.

Promotion and education was also a key element to the plan by advising the public how to:

·        Protect their vehicles

·        Host safer celebrations

·        Increase personal safety

·        Improve safety and security around the home.

 

A presentation on the development of the new Penrith Valley Community Safety Plan 2006 – 2009 followed.

Over the last 2 months there have been 36 focus groups and consultations conducted including the following groups:

·    Centrelink - Penrith

·    Gilgai Aboriginal Centre

·    Department of Community Services

·    Department of Health

·    Cawarra Women’s Refuge

·    Richmond Fellowship of NSW

·    Penrith Women’s Health Centre

·    Western Sydney Community Forum

·    Penrith Disabilities Resource Centre

·    Barnardos - Disabilities

·    Nepean Migrant Access

·    Western Sydney Institute of TAFE - youth

·    Barnardos - Family Support

·    Families First project SPYNS

·    Children’s Services PCC

·    Older Women’s Network

·    Health Promotion - Sydney West Area Health Service

·    Combined Pensioners and Superannuates Association

·    PCC - Disabilities & Seniors

·    Chamber of Commerce

·    North St Marys Neighbourhood Centre

·    Nepean Interyouth Services

·    Werrington Youth Services

·    Department of Housing

·    SPYNS

·    Youth Conferencing Penrith

·    PCC - Youth

·    PCC - Multicultural worker

There have been over 379 Community Safety surveys received from local businesses, schools, Council’s Open Day, community groups, libraries and local residents.

The draft Strategy Priority Issues identified from the collation of the surveys were:

·    Concerns for Safety

·    Domestic Violence

·    Assault (Other than Domestic Violence Related)

·    Malicious Damage

·    Harassment and Antisocial Behaviour

·    Steal from and Theft of a Motor Vehicle

Break and Enter Offences.

Yvonne Perkins provided a presentation to the Partnership on the draft key priority issues that were identified throughout the consultation period. The priority issues and objectives that were discussed are as follows:

Concern for Safety

Objective: To enhance community and personal safety to targeted groups in the Penrith LGA

 

Domestic Violence

Objective: To reduce, and raise awareness of, domestic violence in the Penrith LGA

 

Assault (Other than Domestic Violence related)

Objective: To improve the level of safety in targeted locations

 

Malicious Damage

Objective: To reduce malicious damage in the Penrith LGA

 

Harassment and Anti Social Behaviour

Objective: To promote responsible social behaviour in public spaces.

 

 

Steal from and Theft of a Motor Vehicle

Objective: To reduce the opportunity to benefit from the theft of or from a motor vehicle

Break and Enter Offences

Objectives: To reduce the risk and impact of break and enters across the city.

PVCSP 14  RECOMMENDED that the information contained in the report on Draft Second Penrith Valley Community Safety Plan be received.

 

Regular Items

a)       Police Statistics

 

Penrith Police

Actual Crime Statistics June - September 2006

 

Crime Category

June

July

Aug

Sept

Assault

90

95

98

92

Robbery

8

7

5

1

Break & Enter

72

99

102

81

Stealing

193

241

200

152

Steal Motor Vehicle

38

43

43

39

Malicious Damage

110

147

136

153

Drug Detection

11

10

19

18

Traffic Offences

608

612

566

452

Motor Vehicle Accident

96

73

89

80

 

St Marys

Actual Crime Statistics June - September 2006

 

Crime Category

June

July

Aug

Sept

Assault

83

95

96

95

Robbery

15

9

7

5

Break & Enter

108

103

97

60

Stealing

173

163

126

81

Steal Motor Vehicle

35

53

43

41

Malicious Damage

122

143

137

124

Drug Detection

23

11

19

16

Traffic Offences

513

473

485

461

Motor Vehicle Accident

89

62

64

63

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What’s in the Media:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


GENERAL BUSINESS

 

GB 1          Great Western Highway and River Road

 

Paul Haines raised the matter of overgrown vegetation on the corner of the Great Western Highway and River Road, Emu Plains.  The vegetation is on private property but overgrows onto the footpath area.  The vegetation is providing cover for offenders.   Council to investigate further.

 

GB 2          Kebab Shops

 

Ben Feszczuk also raised the issues of kebab shops trading till all hours of the morning on Fridays and Saturdays. He also asked if Council would be in the position to restrict their trading hours, which in effect would reduce the level of antisocial behaviour occurring in the CBD after all the pubs and clubs close.

 

The meeting was advised that, due to the current zoning in the CBD, Council is unable to restrict the trading hours of businesses in the CBD.  If premises change hands and no structural changes are carried out on the building, no development application is required.

 

GB 3          Rave Parties

 

Ben Feszczuk raised the issue of rave parties being held at unauthorised premises.  A discussion followed about Council and Police delegations to control such events or enter premises.  This issue to be further discussed between Council and Police.

 

GB 4          Methadone Clinic

                  

Councillor Kaylene Allison raised the issue of representations to her regarding issues related to gatherings at the Methadone Clinic in Queen Street, St Marys.  Beth Stirton advised that people who have concerns regarding suspect or antisocial gathering could raise them directly with St Marys Police. The meeting was also advised that Police regularly patrol this area, including the Clinic vicinity and the Railway Station.

 

GB 5          Operation Bounce Back

                  

 Councillor Rumble requested further information regarding the distribution of car immobiliser vouchers, such as age, suburb and vehicle details.  Yvonne Perkins advised that the suburb location and vehicle details would be provided at the December meeting, however the age of participants was not requested, although younger people were targeted during the first round of distribution, using Police data on stolen vehicles from the younger age group. 

 

 

There being no further business the Chairperson declared the meeting closed the time being 8:30 pm.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That the recommendations contained in the Report and Recommendations of the Penrith Valley Community Safety Partnership meeting held on 27 September, 2006 be adopted.

 

 

 



 

Item                                                                                                                                       Page

 

 

The City in its Broader Context

 

1        Queen Street Extension 

 

The City as a Social Place

 

2        Victoria Street Community Cottage - Annual General Meeting 

 

3        Formula 1 Superboat Series 

 

4        Options for designating Open Space, Parks and Ovals in Glenmore Park as Alcohol Free Zones 

 

5        Penrith Valley Community Safety Partnership-Application for membership

 

6        Secure Taxi Rank for Penrith Railway Station 

 

7        Fencing of Darcy Smith Cricket Oval, Emu Plains 

 

8        Variation of Restrictive Covenant applying to Lot 814 DP 106832 (No. 54-57) Belleview Avenue, Mount Vernon. Applicant: Mr R. Mattiuzzo c/o Douglas Design;  Owner: Josephine Mattiuzzo and Robert Mattiuzzo DA06/0775

   

The City Supported by Infrastructure

 

9        Tender 25-05/06 Asphalt Products & Services 

 

Leadership and Organisation

 

10      Council Meeting Calendar for 2007 

 

11      Council Property - Easement to Drain Water over Lot 3, DP 255380 Nepean Street, Emu Plains.  Owner:  Penrith Council - Applicant:  N.F. Billyard Pty Ltd 

 

 


 

 

 

 

THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT BLANK  INTENTIONALLY


The City in its Broader Context

 

Item                                                                                                                                       Page

 

1        Queen Street Extension 

 

 



Ordinary Meeting

6 November 2006

The City in its Broader Context

 

 

The City in its Broader Context

 

 

1

Queen Street Extension   

 

Compiled by:                Walter Sinnadurai, Transportation Planner

Authorised by:             Craig Ross, Design and Technical Advice Manager   

Strategic Program Term Achievement: A component of a Citywide land use and transport plan addressing St Marys Town Centre is being implemented.

Critical Action: Pursue with the relevant government agencies the delivery of road and transport infrastructure and services for St Marys Town Centre identified in the City Centres Review.

     

Purpose:

To inform Council of the findings of a preliminary investigation of extending Queen Street across the railway line to connect to Forrester Road.  The report recommends that the information be received.

 

Background

The St Marys Town Centre Strategy was reported to the Policy Review Committee meeting of 24 July 2006, and was formally adopted at the Ordinary Meeting of 7 August 2006.  Council, in adopting the report, requested a further report that identifies options for improving the connectivity of, and access to, Queen Street, and that identifies possible options for the funding of such improvements be brought to Council.  This was to include the possibility of extending Queen Street across the railway line to connect to Forrester Road.

Current Situation

Queen Street Extension

Currently, Queen Street is the main street for the retail/commercial district of St Marys CBD and has four lanes, of which two are travel lanes and two parking lanes.

 

Council carried out a volume survey in Queen Street, between Belar Street and Phillip Street, in August 2006.  A volume survey was also undertaken along Glossop Street, south of Debrincat Avenue, in June 2006.  The survey results of the vehicle volumes, showing a 5-day average daily traffic volume over a 24-hour period by direction, are depicted in the following charts.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The above charts indicate that Queen Street is carrying approximately 510 vehicles per hour, between 9am and 7pm, while Glossop Street, functioning as a Regional Road, carries approximately 1800 vehicles per hour, between 9am and 7pm (two-way traffic).

 

To assess the traffic impact on the proposed Queen Street extension, peak hour traffic modelling has been carried out.  The NETINAL traffic model used for the Arterial Roads Study (for the year 2016) was updated to include the Queen Street extension, by providing a theoretical link between Forrester Road and Queen Street.  The theoretical link was coded as two lanes, one lane in each direction.

The modelling has forecast peak hour traffic volumes along Queen Street, Glossop Street and Mamre Road as a result of this connection, as indicated below:

 

Northbound Direction

 

 

Without Queen Street Ext

With Queen Street Ext

 

AM

PM

AM

PM

Queen Street Ext

-

-

1186

1043

Queen Street

410

620

1253

1163

Glossop Street

1592

1362

988

1036

Mamre Rd South GWH

2019

2174

2378

2242

 

Southbound Directional

 

 

No Queen Street Ext

With Queen Street Ext

 

AM

PM

AM

PM

Queen Street Ext

-

-

745

1170

Queen Street

340

304

904

1232

Glossop Street

1142

1128

856

503

Mamre Rd South GWH

1878

2040

1993

2290

 

The introduction of the Queen Street extension provides a more direct route (shorter by 1 km) between the Mamre Road/Great Western Highway intersection and the Glossop Street/Forrester Road intersection.  This shorter route has attracted 90% of the through traffic to and from Mamre Road, south of the Great Western Highway. 

 

Modelling results indicate that Queen Street, with the extension, is expected to carry approximately 2200 vehicles per hour during peak periods.  It would be difficult for Queen Street to carry this volume, given the side friction with parking manoeuvres.  Significant congestion would occur, and the ability for pedestrians to cross the street mid-block would be compromised. 

 

Given the significant shorter route distance that the extension would provide, it would be difficult to discourage the through traffic volumes with traffic calming devices.

 

The attraction of through traffic within the town centre is contrary to Council’s adopted objectives for the St Marys Town Centre Strategy, Step 7: Managing Parking and Improving Access.  One of the objectives is to “ensure through-traffic is guided around the central core area and local town centre traffic is directed to major parking areas”.

 

The Queen Street extension is also inconsistent with the precincts of the St Marys Town Centre Strategy.  The Station Entry (Mixed Use) precinct has the following broad objectives:

 

This precinct provides a key focus to the revitalisation of St Marys; and becomes a safe and exciting place to be; it is well lit and heavily used by pedestrians; traffic flows are limited and upgrades to public infrastructure are provided and there is street art installed.  New development incorporates residential uses that overlook the street – the shopping centre increases its active frontages and provides better connectivity to Queen Street.  New buildings do not create overshadowing on the street.”

 

The Arterial Roads Study has identified the need to upgrade the GWH/Mamre/Queen Street intersection to accommodate the future release area growth in traffic in the area.  This will require additional turning lanes in both the GWH and Mamre Road.  This (upgraded) intersection will operate at a satisfactory level (LoS D) but with the Queen Street extension, deteriorated to an unsatisfactory level (LoS F).  Additional upgrading of the intersection will be required, which will involve additional property acquisition (land and building).

 

The extension of Queen Street could be accommodated by either a railway overpass/underpass type configuration.  In either case, the railway corridor will require widening from the present 40m to 50m, in order to accommodate the proposed future quadruplification of the existing railway lines and forecourt area.

 

There could be severe design limitations for north-south pedestrian accessibility, between Forrester Road and Queen Street, as a result of the proposed extension traversing the 50m wide railway corridor.

 

Preliminary Strategic Cost Estimate

Recently, Blacktown City Council has constructed a railway overpass, including a duplication of the railway bridge along Quakers Hill Parkway.  This overpass road has two travel lanes, and is approximately 500m long within a 20m wide road corridor.  Blacktown City Council advised that the construction cost was approximately $10M, but it is not clear whether any land acquisition was included in this cost.

 

The proposed Queen Street extension overpass would be in the vicinity of 900m in length, in order to traverse the proposed 50m wide railway corridor.  Based on Blacktown City Council’s railway overpass cost estimate, the proposed Queen Street extension could cost approximately $18M+.

 

The ramps, for either a bridge or underpass, would severely impact on the access to properties fronting Queen Street in proximity to the ramps.  The above cost does not make any allowance for access provisions. 

 

Other Access Options

Extension of Carinya Street

The option of extending Carinya Street over or under the railway line was also investigated.  The rail corridor adjacent Carinya Street is approximately 35m wide (narrower than at Queen Street), and would require a shorter bridge/underpass.  The Carinya Street road reserve is, however, only approximately 13m wide.  This would need to be widened by at least 7m, possibly encroaching on the West Lane car parks.  Acquisition of a privately owned property at the northern end of Carinya Street would also be required.  Similarly, with the Queen Street extension, access to the properties adjoining the overpass/underpass would need to be resolved.

 

North of the railway line, there is a Railcorp building that would require relocation.  Details of this building are not known, but it is assumed to be for signalling equipment and its relocation could be costly.

 

The road network model has been amended to provide a link from Carinya Street to Forrester Road.  The results of the modelling indicate that the link will attract a significant volume of through traffic in the pm peak.  This traffic will exceed the capacity of Queen Street, south of Charles Hackett Drive.  The pedestrian amenity issues impacts will be less for the northern end of Queen, but the southern end (south of Charles Hackett) will be compromised.

 

There will be geometry issues with the intersection of Carinya and Charles Hackett Drive and capacity issues (LoS E)with the Charles Hackett/Queen Street.  Further upgrading of the Queen/GWH/Mamre intersection will be needed as with the Queen Street extension.

 

Railway Overbridge between the Station and Glossop Street

Parsons Brinckerhoff, a consultant engaged on behalf of the then Department of Infrastructure Planning and Natural Resources (DIPNR), undertook the Glossop Street Bus Only Overpass Feasibility Study, in August 2004.  This study was undertaken to satisfy a requirement of the St Marys Development Agreement.  The completion of this study triggered a requirement in the Development Agreement that the RTA must decide whether or not to proceed with the construction of the Bus Only Overpass.  Following the investigations, the RTA, in consultation with other State Government Agencies, has determined not to proceed with the overpass, as the feasibility study recommended that the overpass is not viable.  Hence, as outlined in the St Marys Deed, the RTA has requested the developer to pay the Authority an agreed amount towards signalisation of the intersection of Harris and Glossop Streets (as recommended in the feasibility study) to improve bus service access over the railway line.

 

Whilst this study only looked at a bus link, it is assumed that a link for general traffic at the same location would also not be viable.  The location of the bridge was relatively close to Glossop Street, and the potential to attract traffic away from Glossop Street (to Queen Street) would be limited because of the circuitous nature of the route.

 

Funding Options

Two possible options for the funding of the Queen Street extension were explored. 

 

Option 1

Lobbying State Government: In order to lobby State Government, the Penrith Arterial Roads Study (PARS) was reviewed to ascertain the warrant of such a road link.  The PARS has not identified any road capacity deficiencies along Glossop Street to sustain future traffic growth from all the planned release areas within Penrith and Blacktown LGAs that would warrant the inclusion of the extension (to supplement the capacity of Glossop Street) in any contribution plans for the release areas.

 

Based on the above findings, it would be difficult to mount an argument to support a grant application.

 

Option 2

The St Marys Town Centre Development Contributions Plan (Section 94 Plan) funding mechanism could apply the appropriate levies.  The existing St Marys Town Centre Section 94 Plan does not provide for any roadworks upgrades within the town centre.  The existing Section 94 plan focuses on the provision of car parking within the town centre. 

 

Section 94 plans are required to establish a nexus for demand and supply of works or infrastructure.  Given the above findings, in terms of traffic and pedestrian implications, there may be some problems in establishing a nexus for the work. 

 

Conclusion

The proposed Queen Street extension is inconsistent with the St Marys Town Centre Strategy in terms of:

 

Through traffic - to “ensure through-traffic is guided around the central core area and local town centre traffic is directed to major parking areas”.

 

Pedestrian amenity – to “provide well defined and visually appealing pedestrian linkages…” and to “Improve the amenity and safety of pedestrian linkages”

 

The link will draw a considerable amount of through traffic to Queen Street that could compromise the Queen Street amenity, as well as the Queen Street/Mamre Road/Great Western Highway intersection.

 

The extension of Queen Street as a means to activate the town centre has significant traffic implications.  An alternative approach of providing the activation through a landuse solution is preferred.  This is consistent with the Town Centre strategy.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That the information contained in the report on Queen Street Extension be received.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.


The City as a Social Place

 

Item                                                                                                                                       Page

 

2        Victoria Street Community Cottage - Annual General Meeting 

 

3        Formula 1 Superboat Series 

 

4        Options for designating Open Space, Parks and Ovals in Glenmore Park as Alcohol Free Zones 

 

5        Penrith Valley Community Safety Partnership - Application for membership 

 

6        Secure Taxi Rank for Penrith Railway Station 

 

7        Fencing of Darcy Smith Cricket Oval, Emu Plains 

 

8        Variation of Restrictive Covenant applying to Lot 814 DP 106832 (No. 54-57) Belleview Avenue, Mount Vernon. Applicant: Mr R. Mattiuzzo c/o Douglas Design;  Owner: Josephine Mattiuzzo and Robert Mattiuzzo DA06/0775

 

 



Ordinary Meeting

6 November 2006

The City as a Social Place

 

 

The City as a Social Place

 

 

2

Victoria Street Community Cottage - Annual General Meeting   

 

Compiled by:                Margaret Streater, Neighbourhood Facilities Officer

Authorised by:             Gary Dean, Facilities Operations Manager  

Requested By:             Councillor Pat Sheehy AM

Strategic Program Term Achievement: Local centres, community meeting places and prominent meeting places are increasingly valued and recognised by communities as a focus of their neighbourhoods, or as a feature of the City.

Critical Action: Engage the City’s communities in identifying and creating community places that are valued and used.

     

Purpose:

To advise Council of new committee members at the Victoria Street Community Cottage and to seek endorsement of those people as committee members and reconfirm Councils delegated authority to the Committee.

 

Background

The Victoria Street Community Cottage was established in 1981 as a Committee of Council, comprising local residents with delegation, under the Local Government Act, for the care, control and management of this Council owned facility.

 

As occurs from time to time, there are changes to the Committee, and that transpired at the Annual General Meeting held on 15 August 2006.  It is timely to endorse and reconfirm Committee membership. It should be noted that the existing Committee had been delegated the care, control and management of the facility for many years, and had undertaken this in a capable and professional manner.

Current Situation

The Committee’s Annual General Meeting was held on 15 August 2006, at the Victoria Street Community Cottage. The Committee is made up of representatives from the various user groups at the Centre as well as community members.

 

The election of officers was held, with the following persons nominated:

 

Len Willis- President       (Spiritualist Church)

Angie Green – Secretary (Werrington Elderly Care)

Desmond Lucas – Treasurer     (Werrington Community Project Inc)

Betty Warren - Booking Officer (Community Member)

 

With the exception of the Treasurer, the Executive membership remained unchanged.  The following Committee members were elected:

 

 

Hans Schneider  (Community Member)

Betty Schneider (Community Member)

Christine McKinnon (Werrington Community Project Inc Management Committee)

Alison Stevens (Namatjira Before & After School Care)

Lauren Meredith (Namatjira Before & After School Care)

Barbara Read (Werrington Occasional Child Care)

Carmen Boserio (Werrington Community Project Inc)

 

At the following Management Committee meeting, held on Tuesday, 12 September 2006, the following additional nominations were received for inclusion of the Management Committee.

 

Margaret Breust (Thursday Night Meditation)

Avis Oakes (Thursday Night Meditation)

Maureen Romanowski (Thursday Night Meditation)

Amanda Jacobson (Werrington Occasional Child Care)

Jacqueline Holmes (Werrington Community Project Inc Management Committee)

Olive Magdi (Development Group)

Imelda Penny (Development Group)

Sue Tipton   (Werrington Elderly Care)

Ron Tipton (Werrington Elderly Care)

Noel Borland (Computer Group)

Margaret Borland (Computer Group)

Leonie Hannah (Spiritualist Church)

Jenny Green (Community Member)

 

On 19 September 2006, the Treasurer, Desmond Lucas, handed in his resignation as Treasurer. This was tabled at the following meeting of 10 October 2006, and Betty Schneider was nominated for the Treasurer’s position.  Two additional nominations as Committee members were also received:

 

Kimberley Culley (Werrington Occasional Child Care)

Jackie Van Dyk (Werrington Community Project Inc Management Committee)

Conclusion

Membership of Community Management Committees fluctuates regularly, however the influx of members to the Victoria Street Community Cottage Management Committee is unusual.  To give certainty to decisions made by the Committee, the need to endorse or reconfirm membership is important.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     Council, under Section 355 of the Local Government Act 1993, endorse the following persons to comprise the Management Committee for the Victoria Street Community Cottage at Werrington:

Len Willis - President

Angie Green - Secretary

Betty Schneider - Treasurer

Betty Warren - Booking Officer

 

Committee Members: Barbara Read, Alison Stevens, Lauren Meredith, Carmen Boserio, Hans Schneider, Desmond Lucas, Christine McKinnon,

Margaret Breust, Amanda Jacobson, Jacqueline Holmes, Maureen Romanowski, Olive Magdi, Sue Tipton, Noel Borland, Ron Tipton

Imelda Penny, Margaret Borland, Leonie Hannah, Avis Oakes

Jenny Green, Kimberley Culley, Jackie Van Dyk.

2.    Council delegate care, control and management of Victoria Street Community Cottage, under Section 377 of the Local Government Act 1993, to the Committee referred to in recommendation 1. above

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Meeting

6 November 2006

The City as a Social Place

 

 

The City as a Social Place

 

 

3

Formula 1 Superboat Series   

 

Compiled by:                Andrew Robinson, Recreation and Cultural Facilities Coordinator

Authorised by:             Gary Dean, Facilities Operations Manager   

Strategic Program Term Achievement: Local centres, community meeting places and prominent meeting places are increasingly valued and recognised by communities as a focus of their neighbourhoods, or as a feature of the City.

Critical Action: Facilitate regular community celebrations in the City’s prominent meeting places.

     

Purpose:

To advise Council of a request for sponsorship for a proposed Formula One Superboat Event on 11 and 12 November 2006 on the Nepean River, and to seek approval to close the boat ramp and area of Tench Reserve for the period of the event.  The report recommends that the Council receive the information contained in this report and support the Australian Formula One Superboat Series Inc request for financial assistance.

 

 Background

Event Content

The Formula One Superboat Series commenced in 1989, and is now held over seven rounds on the Australian eastern seaboard, attracting crowds of over 20,000 at major CBD venues. 

 

The event consists of two days of practice and racing, with boats competing in 5 different classes – Formula One, Formula 2000, Formula Three, Stock Mono Hulls, and Thundercats.  Formula One Superboats are approximately 5.5 metre tunnel hulls, are powered by V6 2-stroke race engines, capable of 360 horse power, reach top speeds in excess of 240KPH, and accelerate from 0-160KPH in under 3.5 seconds.  

 

In 2005, in addition to Penrith, the Series consisted of events in:

·     Taree, Manning River, Mid North Coast, New South Wales

·     Toukley, Central Coast, New South Wales

·     Hobart, Derwent River, Tasmania

·     Newcastle, Newcastle Harbour, New South Wales

·     Grafton / Port Macquarie, North Coast, New South Wales

·     Gold Coast, The Spit Marine Stadium, Queensland.

 

The 2005 event in Penrith attracted a crowd of 4,000, however crowd numbers were significantly affected by heavy rain during the weekend of racing. The event has also been held in Penrith in 2003 and 2004 (estimated attendance 8,000).

 

 

Council’s Contribution

In 2005, the President of the Superboats Series made a submission to Council regarding the event, and sought support from Council, both financially and ‘in kind’, to assist with the infrastructure required for the staging of the event. At the Ordinary Meeting of Council on 10 October 2005, it was resolved that:

 

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.”

 

In addition to the financial contribution, the ‘in kind’ support from Council, including provision of event infrastructure equipment, was a further $6,000 which was met through existing departmental budgets.

 

In return for this contribution, the event organisers estimated that the return to the City included:

 

·    a minimum 3 night stay by competitors in local accommodation

·    a minimum 2 night stay by visitors from outside the area in a local accommodation

·    a multiplier/economic ripple effect of $50 average spend per spectator attending the event.

 

The more tangible returns are those delivered through the sponsor benefits of being

associated with the event.  For the 2005 event, these included:

 

·    media advertising campaign on NBN television, Fox Sports, SBS Speedweek, print media and local radio coverage

·    televised coverage on SBS Speedweek, Fox Sports Inside Speed, and NBN.

 

Current Situation

Event Development Process

At the debrief for the 2005 event, the event organisers highlighted that the river has limitations for the growth and future sustainability of the event.  In particular, issues raised included:

·    The limited accessibility and visibility for spectators and sponsors;

 

·    The limited opportunity to develop the number and type of races as well as field size;

 

·    Despite fulfilling the requirements of NSW Maritime, and cooperating with other existing river users, the event organisers have, once again, expressed their desire to minimise any disruption that existing use of the river may cause;

 

·    The opportunity exists to bid for, and host, a stage of the World Championships, should a suitable venue be available. The World Championship is organised in a similar way to Formula One Grand Prix and has the potential to attract a crowd of over 50,000 people.

 

As a result of this debrief, it was agreed that discussion should take place with the Venue Managers of Sydney International Regatta Centre, to examine the possibilities of transferring the event to that venue, and for it to take place on 21 and 22 October 2006 (the only viable date in the 2006 Regatta Centre calendar).  Consequently, the event organisers were asked to present a proposal to the Venue Management Advisory Committee (VMAC) at Sydney International Regatta Centre (SIRC).

 

A formal application was subsequently made to the SIRC and considered by the VMAC.  Council’s Facilities Operations Manager is Council’s representative on that Committee.  When first considered, the Committee raised concerns about the risk factors associated with that sport.  Likely risk to spectators was principally the issue.  Also the Committee questioned the compatibility of this type of aquatic sport with the Olympic legacy.

 

The outcome of this initial consideration was that a full independent risk assessment be undertaken.  That was subsequently done, coordinated by the VMAC.

 

The VMAC met again to consider the Formula 1 event.  The risk assessment had identified certain qualified levels of risk, with options to mitigate those risk elements.  One risk was the environmental damage as a consequence of a submerged boat.  The VMAC accepted that this risk was manageable because of the nature of the safeguards installed on the boats.

 

The ultimate decision of the VMAC was the refusal of the application, citing again the unacceptable levels of risk and the sustainability / compatibility of the sport for that particular aquatic venue.  The Formula 1 Organising Committee was subsequently advised of the VMAC decision.

 

The VMAC is made up of a number of stakeholders including:

 

·    Department of Sport and Recreation

·    Penrith Lakes Development Corporation

·    Rowing and Canoeing Sporting representatives

·    Penrith Whitewater Stadium

·    Penrith Valley Economic Development Corporation

·    Penrith City Council

 

The purpose of this Committee is to determine the annual program of events at the Centre, including possible new events.

 

Having spent considerable time and investment in the development of the proposal to hold the event at SIRC, the event organisers had to re-evaluate their ongoing commitment to hosting the 2006 event in Penrith, as well as whether a suitable date would be available to be compatible with the series calendar, other events happening, availability of the river, and timescales to organise and fund the event.   Consequently, the event organisers have decided that they would like to run the event on the Nepean River once more in 2006, and continue to do so in Penrith for the foreseeable future, preferably at Sydney International Regatta Centre. 

 

Due to delays caused by the earlier attempts to host the event at the Regatta Centre, and the subsequent decision making process that the event organisers had to undertake, the earliest the event organisers could submit a proposal to hold the event on the Nepean River was the start of September for the 2006 event. This submission was made and requested sponsorship funds from Council for $12,000.

 

At the time of this submission, the event organisers still needed to obtain necessary permissions and licenses to hold the event, and to provide further detail about both the course, as there was a consideration to amend this slightly from previous years, as well as risk management and operational procedures. It was communicated to the event organisers that a decision, and report to Council, on sponsor funding could not be made until the additional information was provided.

 

Council officers have been working with the event organisers since this initial submission, and a further submission was presented by the event organisers on 12 October 2006.  Since this submission was made, it has been necessary to confirm all proposed arrangements internally and with the NSW Maritime.  Consequently, this report has been submitted at the earliest opportunity, despite being in the same week as the event. The event organiser has been kept fully informed of the process and is aware of the risk that Council may not wish to support this event.

 

Event Proposal

The proposal for the 2006 event outlines that the event will take place over 2 days, including practice and racing (the schedule is attached to this report), which will be 11 and 12 November.  Event infrastructure will be set up on 10 November, with removal on 12 November.  The event organisers have requested that Council endorse the closure of the boat ramp in Tench Reserve for this period, and that an area of Tench Reserve (as highlighted on the attached map) is fenced for the exclusive use of the event as a ‘pit’, event management control, and hospitality area.  Furthermore, approval is also requested for use of an area as a helicopter landing site (the same area as 2005 has been identified and is highlighted on the attached map).

 

In addition, the submission requests that Council provide support via the provision of $12,000 in financial cash support, or a financial contribution of $7,000, accompanied by ‘in kind’ support to provide the following infrastructure and services:

 

·      Temporary fencing (500 metres)

·      Security (Friday and Saturday, 5.00pm – 7.30am)

·      Public advertising of event and ramp closure

·      Garbage facilities for spectators

·      Portable toilets and servicing (9)

 

In return for this support, it is anticipated that the economic impact to the City will be similar to that in 2005, however should the weather remain fine, the event organisers are aiming to attract a crowd of 10,000–12,000, which should improve the returns to the City. In addition, the City will gain significant media profile and build brand awareness of Penrith Valley, especially the Nepean River. This will be achieved through:

 

·    NBN Free to view, 30 min stand alone program of the round (post produced)

·    SBS Speedweek Free to view integrated segment 30min (post produced)

·    Fox Sports 2 Pay to view 60 min stand alone program (post produced).  Inside Speed Pay to view 30 min integrated program (post produced)

·    International coverage in 15 European countries, also UK, USA, New Zealand, Asia and Middle East (Post produced programs). Potential viewing audience of over 20,000,000 viewers

A 60-90 second colour story/tourism postcard segment will also be included at the beginning of the television program.  This is valued at over $30,000 retail.  Further benefits will include:

 

·    Sponsor link and advertising on the official F1 web

·    Branding banners placed at prime TV locations at the event venue

·    Company recognition in race and event commentary by MC/commentator

·    Opportunity to have a promotional stall at the event.

 

Assessment of the Event

Development Services Manager

The event organisers are advised to consult with NSW Maritime as the consent authority for activities on the river.  Development consent is not required for use of Tench Reserve by spectators, which is consistent with the 6(d) Regional Open Space zoning of the land under LEP 1998. There are no objections, subject to the event organisers notifying the relevant authorities including the police and emergency services.

 

City Marketing Manager

The Formula One Superboat event has a great deal of potential as a City Marketing event, particularly if it can be transferred to Penrith Lakes in the near future.  The business plan, which the organisers have submitted, shows that the event meets the criteria for city marketing event sponsorship.  Discussions with the organisers indicate that sponsorship of $7,000 (equivalent to last year’s cash sponsorship) would be an acceptable contribution.

 

Parks, Construction and Maintenance Manager

Last year, the event organisers made a similar request for in-kind support. At that time, Council funding sources were available. That is not the case this year. The costs associated with advertising the closure of the boat ramp, waste management and provision of parra-webbing fencing (to enclose the helicopter landing area) can be funded from the relevant Department budgets, however, there are no resources to provide 500m of temporary fencing, the 9 portable toilets and security services which will have to be hired. The estimated cost for the provision of these items of event infrastructure and event services is $5,000.  There is currently no budget, identified within existing work programs, to accommodate the request for these elements of the in-kind support. Therefore, the event organisers will need to provide these items.

 

The usual practice is to advertise the closure of the boat ramp at least 2 weeks prior to the event. Not withstanding that Council has not approved of this event, an appropriate advertisement was placed in last weeks newspaper, which will appear again this week. A sign advertising closure will also be erected at the boat ramp. The boat ramp is scheduled to be closed from 3pm on Friday 10th November until 9am on Monday 13th November. 

 

The event organisers have consulted the other regular user groups of the river, and they have consented to accommodating the F1 Superboat races.

 

The organisers have not specifically addressed the environmental issues, other than to say the same applies as with the previous events in 2003, 2004 and 2005.  In this regard, environmental issues (in particular noise) were managed to the satisfaction of the consent authority, NSW Maritime, and the Department of Environment and Conservation. Representation has previously been made to Council, from some residents in River Road, regarding the noise levels of the event.  The event organisers will be notifying residents along the river course, by letter box drop, of the event.

 

As was the case at previous events, the event organisers will be instructed that clearing riparian vegetation for the purpose of spectator viewing will not be permissible. Furthermore, it will be a condition of hosting the event on the Nepean River, that measures will need to be implemented to ensure the protection of existing, and recently planted, new riparian vegetation. The event organisers have agreed to provide marshals to patrol the area concerned. In addition, Council officers will provide signage, and strategic access points will be defined. A further condition is that any  proposed helicopter landing area will need to be located a minimum of 40 metres from an environmentally sensitive area (i.e. the River). The event organisers satisfactorily complied with these conditions at last year’s event.

 

The event organisers, subject to Council approval of this report, will be required to formally submit a booking form, pay a refundable restoration bond of $1000 and supply a current copy of Public Liability Insurance documentation.

 

Facilities Operations Manager

The event organisers have demonstrated a strong commitment to continuing and growing the event in Penrith. Considerable effort was made to secure the Sydney International Regatta Centre, and this is an opportunity that, with a continued strategic approach, could still be pursued as an option.

 

Since the Regatta Centre was deemed as not available for this event, the event organisers have made every effort to retain the event in Penrith.  The endorsement, or otherwise, of the recommendations outlined in this report, will mean that the organisers will have considerable work to achieve in the short period before the event.  However, from past experiences, Council officers are confident that the event on the river (the races) will be organised professionally, safely and successfully. 

 

The event will generate noise, and representation from River Road residents has been made in the past. The event organisers have agreed that these residents, and residents in the surrounding streets, will be sent notification of the event taking place.

Conclusion

In 2003, 2004 and 2005, the Formula 1 Superboat Series did provide excellent spectator appeal and entertainment, and good marketing coverage for the City. 

The organisers will be required to provide all necessary approvals and licences for the event in 2006. Council’s support to the event is therefore recommended, subject to the conditions outlined in this report.

 

RECOMMENDATION

          That:

1.  The information contained in the report on Formula 1 Superboat Series be received.

2.  The Australian Formula One Superboat Series Inc be advised that Council is prepared to provide $7,000 sponsorship for the event, and is unable to provide the ‘in kind’ support for:

                        -   Temporary fencing

                        -   Security

                        -   Portable toilets.

                   3. Council’s support for the event is subject to the following conditions:

                        -   The provision of suitably qualified event crowd control personnel to patrol

                             the riverbank;

                        -   The helicopter landing area is to be suitably fenced to ensure protection of

                             persons in the area and is located a minimum of 40 metres from the    riverbank;

                        -   Submission of evidence of the required approvals from NSW Maritime;

                        -   Payment of a refundable restoration bond (in the amount of $1,000), and

                             submission of evidence of Public Liability Insurance.

 

 

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1. View

Formula 1 timetable

1 Page

Appendix

2. View

Formula 1 temporary fencing

1 Page

Appendix

 


Ordinary Meeting

6 November 2006

Appendix 1 - Formula 1 timetable

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

6 November 2006

Appendix 2 - Formula 1 temporary fencing

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

6 November 2006

The City as a Social Place

 

 

The City as a Social Place

 

 

4

Options for designating Open Space, Parks and Ovals in Glenmore Park as Alcohol Free Zones   

 

Compiled by:                Yvonne Perkins, Community Safety Coordinator

Authorised by:             David Burns, Asset Manager

Requested By:             Councillor Mark Davies

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 advise Council on the options available to designate Open Space, Parks and Ovals in Glenmore Park as alcohol free locations.  The report recommends that the information on the options available to designate Open Space, Parks and Ovals in Glenmore Park as alcohol free locations be received.

The report also recommends that Section 632 of the Local Government Act 1993 - Acting Contrary to Notices, be implemented to prohibit the consumption or possession of alcohol in locations across the City where it is determined that there is a need for such action.

 

Background

There are currently three ways in which the consumption of alcohol can be prohibited in NSW.  These are:

 

·    The establishment of an Alcohol Free Zone (Section 644 of the Local Government Act)

      Roads and Public Car Parks

 

·    Acting contrary to notices erected by councils (Section 632 of the Local Government Act )

            Public space not including roads and Public Car Parks

 

·    Police Powers - Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 – Sect 87C

Establish in an area within a public space – not exceeding 48 hours

 

Alcohol Free Zones

The Local Government Act 1993, Section 644, provides Council with the ability to create Alcohol Free Zones for the purpose of prohibiting the consumption of intoxicating liquor in certain areas. 

 

The Zones are established through consultation with the Police and community, for a maximum of three years.

 

An Alcohol Free Zone may only be established to include a public road or a public place that is a car park (private car parks, parks, reserves and private premises are not included).

 

Acting Contrary to Notices - Local Government Act 1993

Councils can erect signage prohibiting certain activities in public space that is not a public road (or part of a public road) or car park. The relevant section of The Act (Section 632) is outlined below.

Section 632. Acting contrary to notices erected by councils

(1) A person who, in a public place within the area of a council, fails to comply with the terms of a notice erected by the council is guilty of an offence.

Maximum penalty: 10 penalty units.

(2) The terms of any such notice may relate to any one or more of the following:

(a) the payment of a fee for entry to or the use of the place,

(b) the taking of a vehicle into the place,

(b1) the driving, parking or use of a vehicle in the place,

(c) the taking of any animal or thing into the place,

(d) the use of any animal or thing in the place,

(e) the doing of any thing in the place,

(f) the use of the place or any part of the place.

(2A) However, a notice:

(a) must not prohibit the drinking of alcohol in any public place that is a public road (or part of a public road) or car park, and

(b) must not prohibit or regulate the taking of a vehicle into, or the driving, parking or use of any vehicle in, any public place that is a road or road related area within the meaning of the  Road Transport (General) Act 2005.               

Note: A council may establish an alcohol-free zone under Part 4 of this Chapter for a public place that is a public road (or part of a public road) or car park (or part of a car park).

(3) The terms of a notice referred to in this section may:

(a) apply generally or be limited in their application by reference to specified exceptions or factors, or

(b) apply differently according to different factors of a specified kind,

or may do any combination of those things.

 

Emergency Powers – public disorder

Police Powers - Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 – Sect 87C

 

The NSW Parliament has introduced new laws aimed at helping police to prevent or control large-scale public disorder incidents.

 

Under the new powers, an emergency Alcohol Free Zone can be established by a Police Officer of or above the rank of Superintendent who may, by instrument in writing, establish in an area within a public space, an emergency alcohol free zone, if the police officer:

 

a) has reasonable grounds for believing that there is a large-scale public disorder occurring in the vicinity of the area or there is a threat of such a disorder occurring in the near future, and

 

b) is satisfied that the establishment of the zone will assist in preventing or controlling the public disorder.

 

The period for which an emergency alcohol free zone may be established in any area must not exceed the period that the police officer who established the zones considers reasonably necessary for the purpose for which it is established, but must not in any case exceed 48 hours.  The period for which the zone is established may be extended by a further instrument, but only if the total period that the zone is established in the area does not exceed 48 hours.

 

Current Situation

There are eighteen (18) Alcohol Free Zones across the Penrith Local Government Area, and they are due to expire on 1 October 2008.  The Police “Emergency Powers” were instigated as a result of the Cronulla riots, and can only be established by instrument, in writing, by the Police Superintendent or above rank. The establishment of an Alcohol Free Zone under these powers would only be acted upon in extreme circumstances.

 

Currently, sporting clubs may obtain temporary liquor licences to sell alcohol from grounds each season.  The sporting groups must make application to NSW Police for the licence.  The two Local Area Police Commands have advised that a number of temporary liquor licences are held, or have been held, by a number of sporting groups at venues across the City.

 

The extent to which people bring and consume alcohol (players and/or spectators) at sporting ovals, during the scheduled matches, is largely unknown across the LGA.  To date, there have been no representations made to Community Safety Staff, from either NSW Police or the community, regarding alcohol related issues during or following sporting events.

 

There are however, reports of antisocial behaviour and alcohol consumption late at night, or in the early hours of the morning, in some parks and reserves, but there is no evidence to associate this behaviour with sporting groups or clubs. 

 

Options available to designate Open Space, Parks and Ovals as Alcohol Free Zones

As stated earlier in this report, Alcohol Free Zones are only permitted in a public place that is a public road, or part of a public road or car park, and therefore are not an option in these locations.  The more appropriate option would be the use of Section 632 of the Local Government Act 1993 - Acting Contrary to Notices. 

 

It is possible to erect signage that would prohibit certain activities within an area identified on a sign.  Activities that could be prohibited include the consumption or possession of alcohol or any illegal substances.

 

It should be recognised that open space, parks and ovals cater for a wide range of organised community use events, including Carols by Candlelight and Community Festivals, etc.  There are also occasions where local communities utilise public space for small family orientated events, birthdays, mothers day, family gatherings etc.  These may include food and alcoholic beverages.  The consumption of alcohol at these events is generally considered socially acceptable by the wider community and signage should not prohibit this activity. 

 

Where there are situations of ongoing alcohol related antisocial activities, or minor crime related incidents, these are the locations that may be suitable for signage, prohibiting the consumption or possession of alcohol.  The signage may need to be time limited so as not to affect the consumption of alcohol at organised community events or informal social activities referred to above.

 

Any signage erected would be evidence based, and would depict the specific location within the open space, park or oval where alcohol is prohibited.  The time specified may vary from location to location, depending on the issues to be addressed.

 

The enforcement of signage erected for this purpose (generally after hours) would be largely reliant on NSW Police.  Acting contrary to signage could also be enforced by available, authorised Council staff.  This may be in conjunction with NSW Police, if deemed necessary.

 

Conclusion

It is recommended that Section 632 of the Local Government Act 1993 - Acting Contrary to Notices, be implemented to prohibit the consumption or possession of alcohol in locations across the City, where it is determined that there is a need for such action.  The need may be determined by:

 

·    Repeated reports of alcohol related antisocial behaviour and or malicious damage

·    Evidence of alcohol related paraphernalia eg broken bottles.

·    Police requests for signage.

 

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Options for designating Open Space, Parks and Ovals in Glenmore Park as Alcohol Free Zones be received.

2.     Section 632 of the Local Government Act 1993 - Acting Contrary to Notices, be implemented to prohibit the consumption or possession of alcohol in locations across the City where it is determined that there is a need for such action.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Meeting

6 November 2006

The City as a Social Place

 

 

The City as a Social Place

 

 

5

Penrith Valley Community Safety Partnership - Application for membership   

 

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 advise Council of the application from the Glenmore Park Action Group for membership of the Penrith Valley Community Safety Partnership, and to ratify the Penrith Youth Interagency's membership of the Partnership.  The report recommends that Glenmore Park Action Group and the Penrith Youth Interagency be approved as member organisations of the Penrith Valley Community Safety Partnership.

 

Background

The Penrith Valley Community Safety Partnership is made of up representatives from a wide range of services and organisations, from across the Penrith Local Government Area.  Current membership includes:

 

·    Council Representatives

·    Penrith & St Marys Local Area Commands

·    St Marys Town Centre Management Inc

·    Penrith City Centre Association

·    Penrith Valley Chamber of Commerce

·    St Clair Erskine Park Community Safety Association Inc

·    Penrith Valley Senior Citizens

·    Sydney West Area Health Service  

·    Workers in Neighbourhood Centres

·    RailCorp.

 

Current Situation

At the Partnership’s invitation, an application has been received from the Glenmore Park Action Group for membership of the Penrith Valley Community Safety Partnership (PVCSP).

 

The application meets the criteria outlined below for membership, and it is recommended that their application for membership be approved.

 

Selection Criteria

 The applicant:

 

·    is able to speak on behalf of their organisation and/or local community;

 

·    has an awareness of city wide existing and emerging community safety issues;

 

·    will be able to represent the broader community in strategic planning and direction;

 

·    is available to attend Partnership meetings, undertake training opportunities,  and participate in working parties.

 

The member previously representing Workers in Neighbourhood Centres (WINC) has changed organisations, and now wishes to formally represent the Penrith Youth Interagency.  As a recognised network representing young people in the Penrith LGA, the interagency is well placed to meet the abovementioned membership criteria. It is therefore recommended that the Penrith Youth Interagency be approved as a member of the PVCSP.

 

A new member representing WINC will be nominated by the December quarterly meeting.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Penrith Valley Community Safety Partnership - Application for membership be received.

2.     The Glenmore Park Action Group and the Penrith Youth Interagency be approved as members of the Penrith Valley Community Safety Partnership.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Meeting

6 November 2006

The City as a Social Place

 

 

The City as a Social Place

 

 

6

Secure Taxi Rank for Penrith Railway Station   

 

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: Inform the community on issues related to community safety.

     

Purpose:

To advise Council of the establishment of a Secure Taxi Rank at Penrith Railway Station for a three month trial period.  The report recommends that the information concerning the establishment of the Secure Taxi Rank be received.

 

Background

Council was approached by the Ministry of Transport, seeking support for the establishment of a Secure Taxi Rank at Penrith Railway Station, for a trial period of three months.  Meetings have been conducted with representatives of the Ministry of Transport, Penrith City Council, Penrith Police, the Taxi Advisory Committee and the major local Taxi Company.  All groups fully support the proposed trial.  Although RailCorp was not involved in the meetings, as owner of the land on which the Taxi Rank is situated, they were contacted by the Ministry of Transport and have also given their full support for the trial.

 

The trial will commence on 3 November 2006, and will operate between 10.30pm and 5.00am on Friday and Saturday nights, and is fully funded by the Taxi Advisory Committee.

 

Other trials have already successfully been carried out at Manly, Wagga Wagga, Griffith and Albury, and new ranks are being trialed at Orange and Tamworth.  

 

A news release by John Watkins MP, Minister for Transport, (Sunday, 6 June 2006) includes a quote from Manly Police as follows:

 

Security played a proactive role with all patrons by advising them of destinations, fares, multiple hiring, and directions to other transport location.  The general behaviour of patrons greatly improved.  The guards provided a type of ownership of the rank which influenced the behaviour of the patrons.”

 

Current Situation

The three-month trial will operate over the Christmas and New Year period.  The main aim of the program is to assist potential hirers in obtaining a taxi in an orderly manner, while ensuring that the safety of the travelling public and taxi drivers is preserved within the vicinity of the Taxi Rank.  Three security guards will be at the rank to help passengers obtain taxis and maintain a safe and secure environment for all.

Other key responsibilities of the security staff at the Secure Taxi Rank are to report any assaults involving the travelling public, or drivers of Taxis, to Penrith Police, and to coordinate with the local Taxi Network to arrange Taxis for waiting passengers.

 

Council, through its Community Safety Program, is supporting the trial through the preparation of information flyers to be distributed to a range of CBD evening and late night venues. These will include restaurants, theatres, hotels, nightclubs, cafes.

 

Conclusion

It is hoped that not only will the Taxi Rank provide an orderly, supervised method of moving late night/early morning patrons safely from the CBD, but that it will also allow people wishing to access licensed restaurants and the like to be able to utilise alternative transport home, which they feel safe and secure using.  This may encourage more patrons into the Penrith CBD at night contributing to the vibrancy of the city centre.

 

The trial will be closely watched by the Penrith Valley Community Safety Partnership, who are working on the development of a new Community Safety Plan for the City of Penrith.  A priority issue proposed for the draft plan will be to examine issues related to antisocial activities and assault within the city’s two major CBD locations. The draft Penrith Valley Community Safety Plan will be presented to Council at its Policy Review meeting of 13 November 2006.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Secure Taxi Rank for Penrith Railway Station be received.

2.     Council lend its support to the trial through the distribution of material to promote patronage of the Secure Taxi Rank.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Meeting

6 November 2006

The City as a Social Place

 

 

The City as a Social Place

 

 

7

Fencing of Darcy Smith Cricket Oval, Emu Plains   

 

Compiled by:                Lindsay Clarke, Parks Coordinator

Authorised by:             Raphael Collins, Parks Construction & Maintenance 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 advise Council of the outcome of the meeting with residents and representatives of the user groups, regarding the proposal by the Nepean District Cricket Association to construct a picket fence around the Darcy Smith Cricket Oval.  The report recommends that the proposal to construct a picket fence around Darcy Smith Cricket Oval not proceed.

 

Background

Council, at its meeting on 3 July 2006, considered a report on the perimeter picket fence for Darcy Smith Oval at Emu Plains.  It was resolved that “a further report be received detailing the cost of perimeter fence/bollards and a meeting be convened with representatives of Emu Plains Soccer Club Inc and the Nepean District Cricket Association.”

Current Situation

A meeting was held at the Emu Plains Community Centre on Monday, 18 September 2006, commencing at 5pm.  The then Mayor, Councillor John Thain, Councillors Pat Sheehy and Karen McKeown were in attendance.  Representatives of the Emu Plains Soccer Club, Nepean District Cricket Association and local residents also attended.

 

Mr Keith Hawkins, representing the Nepean District Cricket Association, addressed the meeting, and the following key points were raised:

 

·    A perimeter fence should not cause any conflict due to the different seasons for each sport (summer and winter)

·    Picket fence would keep village atmosphere

·    Double gate and several (say four) pedestrian gates to be provided and remain unlocked

·    The clubs using Darcy Smith Oval should work together

·    The fence would stop soccer balls going onto the road and keep families within the fence

·    Nepean District Cricket Association will contribute half the cost

·    The fields on Darcy Smith Oval are only used for junior soccer.

 

Mr James Warwick (President) and Mr Anthony Zammit, representing the Emu Plains Soccer Club, next addressed the meeting, and the following key points were raised:

 

·    The soccer fields at Emu Plains have been open to the public for over 40 years

·    The soccer club fear that soccer will be excluded from the Darcy Smith Oval

·    The proposed picket fence is too close to the sidelines of the soccer fields

·    There could be liability issues with children climbing over the fence to retrieve balls

·    Gates will be locked like Dukes Oval

·    Statistics given indicate that there are far more soccer games per year held at the ground than cricket matches

·    The club has a petition with over 500 signatures against the fencing proposal

·    Perimeter of the entire park still needs to be secured to prevent access by motor vehicles even if the picket fence is provided.

 

Several residents spoke about the proposal, and a summary of their comments is as follows:

 

·    Want to maintain access to the oval by schools, elderly residents and the community

·    All residents were against the construction of a picket fence

·    All residents were for a perimeter barrier around the entire park to prevent vehicle access

·    Once the picket fence is constructed, the Cricket Association would want to erect sightscreens and this would block vision of the park for residents

·    The large soccer field on the cricket oval is minimal size but is used for senior soccer games

·    The expenditure of over $80,000 on a fence cannot be justified when there is so much other work needed in the area, eg  resurfacing of roads, traffic calming devices

·    The cricketers using Darcy Smith Oval leave litter and do not use the amenities.  This does not happen with the soccer players

 

At the conclusion of the meeting, it was requested that a vote, by a show of hands by all present (over 30 in number), on the proposal to provide a picket fence around the cricket oval, be taken.  The voting was unanimous against the picket fence.  A vote on the provision of a vehicular barrier around the entire park was unanimous in the affirmative.

 

The perimeter of the park is currently partially secured by a combination of trees, barriers, bollards and drains.  To fully secure the perimeter, additional bollards and tree planting could be constructed at a cost of $15,000.  This would ensure that access by cars is prevented, access by the community is not limited, and the park remains visually attractive.  Perimeter fencing/bollards has been included in the Draft Open Space Action Plan for funding from future developer contributions.

Conclusion

The Nepean District Cricket Association supports a picket fence around the cricket oval, while the Emu Plains Soccer Club and the adjacent residents oppose the proposal.  Based on the number of players and spectators who use the soccer fields, the area within the proposed fence would become very congested during the soccer season, and the picket fence could become a hazard to players and spectators, and there are no identified funds in the current budget to provide Council’s half share of the picket fence.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Fencing of Darcy Smith Cricket Oval, Emu Plains be received.

2.     The proposal to construct a picket fence around Darcy Smith Cricket Oval not be approved.

3.     The provision of the perimeter fence/bollards estimated at $15,000 proceed, with funds advanced from the Open Space Action Plan, assuming that the Plan is adopted in its current form.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Meeting

6 November 2006

The City as a Social Place

 

 

The City as a Social Place

 

 

8

Variation of Restrictive Covenant applying to Lot 814 DP 106832 (No. 54-57) Belleview Avenue, Mount Vernon  Applicant:  Mr R. Mattiuzzo c/o Douglas Design;  Owner:  Josephine Mattiuzzo and Robert Mattiuzzo    

DA06/0775

Compiled by:                Julie Condon, Senior Environmental Health and Building Surveyor

Authorised by:             Paul Lemm, Development Services Manager   

Strategic Program Term Achievement: Council's planning approach to the provision of housing across the City addresses the supply, choice, affordability, economic, social diversity and workplace needs of the community.

Critical Action: Review the effectiveness of Councils Residential Strategy, ensuring that it addresses the current and emerging, supply, choice, affordability, and social and economic diversity needs of the City's communities.

     

Purpose:

To seek endorsement from Council to vary a restrictive covenant associated with a residential property and imposed on the subdivision.  The report recommends that this restriction be varied with the Common Seal of Penrith City Council being affixed to all necessary documentation.

 

Background

Council approved subdivision application DA 01/2345 for the creation of seventeen (17) new allotments for rural residential purposes in Belleview Ave Mt Vernon in June 2004.  As part of that approval, a restrictive covenant under Section 88B of the Conveyancing Act 1919 was imposed.

 

The restriction on the use of land, fourthly referred to in the subject deposited plan, states in section (b):

 

“ all development erected on the subject lots will be in accordance with the ‘Siting Plan including Landscape Plan’ as indicated on the Plan Reference Pittenridge Shinkfield Bruce numbered LO1E and dated 20th November 2002. The plan is held by Penrith City Council.”

 

Penrith City Council is nominated as the authority whose consent is required to release, vary or modify, the terms of the restriction.

 

The Siting Plan referred to in the restrictive covenant, nominates individual building envelopes for each site (see Appendix No 2). It was applied to the subdivision to maintain separation between buildings, and provide for preservation of established landscaping to the perimeters of the allotments. The building envelopes also sought to minimise excavation and filling by following the contours of the site.

 

The applicant has requested the above restriction be varied, proposing a new building envelope to remove the off set from the street frontage and place it parallel with the side boundaries of the site. The relocated envelope has been designed so that all development proposed for the lot will be erected within its confines and complies with the intent of the restriction to user (see Appendix Nos 4 & 5).

Site and Surrounds

The subject site is a 1ha allotment, situated in the semi-rural locality of Capitol Hill at Mount Vernon. The surrounding area is characterised by high quality rural/residential development in a parkland type setting. The site is relatively level, with a gentle slope toward the front north-eastern corner. Comprehensive landscaping, in the form of established trees, exists to the perimeter of the site. The remainder of the site is cleared and grassed.

 

The subdivision is a recent one and remains relatively undeveloped. Other than the dwelling, which exists from the parent allotment, all of the lots remain vacant. Development consents for the construction of a dwelling have been issued for Lots 815 and 810. A cul-de-sac provides the main access to the rural residential lots, which are characterised by gently sloping grassy sites, with significant landscaping, provided to the property boundaries. (See Locality Map in Appendix No. 1)

The Proposal

The proposed development includes the following aspects:

 

·    Construction of a single storey, five (5) bedroom brick veneer dwelling with attached four car garage

·    Construction of an in-ground swimming pool

·    Construction of a pavilion to the swimming pool area

·    Construction of a 96m2 brick freestanding shed

·    Landscaping and site improvements

·    Installation of an Onsite Sewerage Management System

 

The development application was accompanied by the following;

·    Statement of Environmental Effects

·    An Acoustic report

·    BASIX Certificate

·    Site and Soil Analysis

·    Submission of justification for variation of building envelope location

·    Waste Management Plan

 

Sites Plans of the proposed development are outlined in Appendix No. 5

Assessment of Issues Relating to Positive Covenant

The following table contains an outline of the requirements of the relevant planning controls, and a comparison of the existing and proposed building envelopes.

 

 

 

Existing Building Envelope

Proposed Building Envelope

LEP and DCP Setback Requirements

Front Setback 15m – 28m offset from street frontage

Front Setback 32.4m

Front setback 15m

Rear Setback 40m approximately

Rear Setback 37m – 57m

Rear setback 10m

Side Setbacks 7m and 10m

Side Setbacks17.6m and 15.6m

Side setback 5m

Area 2070.5m2

 

Area 1998m2

 

 

The above table demonstrates that the proposed building envelope complies with all of Council’s minimum requirements for building setbacks.

 

The proposed building envelope is smaller than the original one, and will result in a greater separation between buildings. The proposed building envelope will not impact on the existing landscaping or the requirement for its preservation.

 

The subject site is basically rectangular in shape, with a slightly curved frontage, and an offset rear boundary. Orientation of the proposed building envelope so that it faces the street will allow the front elevation of the dwelling to address the street frontage.

 

The intent behind the setback requirements and original building envelope requirement were to create and maintain a streetscape character conducive to the rural setting, allow for open space around the dwelling, and provide scope for comprehensive landscaping of developments. The building envelope as proposed is unlikely to be inconsistent with these key design principles.

 

The dwelling design proposed for the site demonstrates that excavation and filling will be less than 1m in depth. These plans comply with Council’s requirements, and the philosophy of the “Siting Plan”, to minimise site works on the allotment. The building incorporates stepped floor levels, and will use a dropped edge beam on the concrete slab to minimise excavation and filling, retaining earthworks within the building footprint.

 

The proposed building envelope is orientated more directly to the north, and the applicant proposes to take advantage of this by placing living rooms along the northern elevation of the building.

 

Due to the above issues, and the minor nature of the variation requested, it is considered that a variation of the building envelope, as proposed, would have minimal impacts, visually, or on the amenity or streetscape of the locality.

Assessment of Development Application

Planning Assessment

The development has been assessed in accordance with the matters for consideration, under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, and having regard to those matters, the following issues have been identified for further consideration.

1.   Section 79C(1)(a)(i) – Any Environmental Planning Instrument

Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 20 – Hawkesbury Nepean River (SREP 20)

The provisions of SREP 20 apply to the property as it falls within the Hawkesbury-Nepean River Catchment. 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 potential impact on water quality.

 

The development application does involve an onsite sewerage management system that is addressed in more detail in “The Likely Impacts of the Development”.  It is considered that there is ample area and the design and functionality of the system will have negligible impact on the receiving environment.

 

Part 3 section 11(17) of SREP 20 have been considered and it was determined that:

·    The development site is not capable of being connected to the Sydney Water sewerage system

·    The on-site sewerage disposal system is suitable to operate over the long term without causing significant adverse effects on adjoining properties

·    The on-site sewerage management system is not likely to have any adverse effects on any water body, wetland, groundwater or floodplain

·    The site is suitable for the reuse of effluent

·    Wet weather storage proposed is adequate

·    There will be no direct discharge of effluent downstream

·    Provision has been made for the ongoing monitoring of the system

 

The compliance of the proposal with the general planning considerations, specific planning policies, and recommended strategies specified in Sections 4, 5 and 6 of Part 2 of SREP 20, has been assessed, and it is considered that the development application for the construction of a dwelling and outbuildings and the installation of the proposed On Site Sewerage Management System meets these requirements.

 

The proposal is not expected to have an adverse cumulative impact on the Hawkesbury-Nepean River system and meets the requirements of SREP 20, subject to recommended standard conditions including those for sediment and erosion control measures.

Local Environmental Plan 201 – Rural Lands

The subject site is zoned No 1(c) Rural “C” Zone – Rural/Residential under LEP 201. The proposed development is defined as a dwelling house and associated structures, which are permissible with the consent of Council.

Zone Objectives

The objectives of the zone No 1(c) Rural “C” Zone – Rural/Residential are;

(a)       to provide the opportunity for the development of integrated rural/residential development: and

 (b)        to promote an innovative approach to rural/residential development; and

 (c)        to ensure that development is compatible with the environmental capabilities of the land and to encourage the conservation and enhancement of natural resources by means of appropriate land management techniques; and

(d)         to assist in meeting the demand for rural/residential development in Penrith where it is consistent with the conservation of rural, agricultural, heritage and natural landscape qualities; and

(e)         to ensure that attractive views from main roads and other vantage points are protected and enhanced; and

(f)          to ensure that adequate provision has been made for water and disposal of effluent; and

(g)         to ensure that development does not create unreasonable demands, now or in the future, for the provision or extension of public amenities or services: and

(h)         to ensure that traffic generating developments are suitably located so as not to be adversely affect the safety and efficiency of roads; and

(i)          to ensure that development will not lead to excessive soil erosion or run-off; and

(j)          to ensure that the form, siting and colours of buildings, building materials, and landscaping complement the natural scenic quality of these areas.”

 

The proposed development meets the objectives for the provision of rural residential development, which have been carefully considered in the construction of the subdivision. As such, adequate provision of services has been assured and the onsite disposal of effluent considered to be satisfactory. The development itself is consistent with the existing landscape qualities, and will not be visible from any main road.

 

The plans submitted with the application demonstrate that the development is sympathetic to the existing site attributes and will require minimal earth works for construction. The building design is in keeping with other development in the locality, the development site is comprehensively landscaped, and the proposed building design and materials are suitable to blend in with the natural setting.

 

The design of the development is sympathetic to its setting and in keeping with the existing rural/residential development in the locality. It will not increase the density of development from that approved by the subdivision and will not generate a requirement for the provision of any additional services or infrastructure. The development will not impair the suitability of land in the locality, for use for agricultural purposes.

 

The proposed development is considered to be in keeping with the objectives for development in the zone.

Development Standards

The site is located within the 20-25 Australian Noise Exposure Forecast contour line attached to the draft environmental impact statement for the Second Sydney Airport. As such, it is subject to the provisions of Clause 31 of the LEP, and the dwelling is required to be designed so that interior noise levels will meet Australian Standard 2021 “Aircraft Noise Intrusion – Building Siting and Construction”. A report, prepared by Acoustic Logic Consultancy, has been submitted in support of the application, and demonstrates that the dwelling will meet these requirements if constructed in accordance with the Acoustic Report. A condition of consent will be imposed requiring compliance with the stipulations of the Consultant’s Report

 

2.   Section 79C(1)(a)(iii) – Any Development Control Plan (DCP)

Penrith City Rural Development Control Plan

DCP Objectives

(a)       to provide a framework which will encourage development to observe sound environmental planning principles;

 (b)        to promote rural/residential development where it is consistent with the conservation of the rural, agricultural, heritage and natural landscape qualities of the area;

 (c)        to minimise the cost to the community of fragmented and haphazard development of rural land by ensuring that development does not create unreasonable demands for the provision or extension of public amenities and services now or in the future;

 (d)        to ensure that traffic generating developments are suitable located so that the safety and efficiency of roads is not adversely affected by development on adjacent land; and

 (e)        to control development in areas subject to flood hazard

 (f)         to maintain and improve water quality of the watercourses within and part of the catchment of the city.”

 

For reasons previously stated in respect to the zone objectives, the development is considered to satisfy these DCP objectives.

Design and Numerical Requirements

Front Setback – A minimum setback of 15m is required. The setback proposed is 32.4m, which complies, and is considered suitable for the site and locality.

 

Services – Reticulated water supply and electricity are available to the site. Effluent disposal is to be via an onsite sewerage management system.

 

Access – The proposed driveway onto and within the site will substantially follow the natural contours. Minimal additional site works will be required. The driveway is to be curved and will enhance the development of the site.

 

Tree Removal – Tree removal is not proposed to facilitate the development. Three trees are to be relocated to facilitate a new driveway entrance.

 

Car Parking – A four car garage under the main roof of the dwelling is proposed as part of the development.

 

Drainage – The site contains a 20,000 litre in-ground rainwater tank as a part of its infrastructure. This tank serves as onsite detention for the development. All roof water, overflow, and surface water, are to be directed into this rainwater tank.

 

Landscaping – The site contains existing landscaping to all boundaries. The development proposes to retain this landscaping. Additional landscaping is proposed in the areas adjacent to the dwelling, swimming pool and access driveway.

 

Building Design – The proposed dwelling and outbuildings are of a single storey design. The dwelling incorporates significant articulation of the walls, with design features to the front elevation. The roof design contains a number of variations in height and direction. The dwelling design is typical of a contemporary rural dwelling, and should integrate well into the landscape, complementing the existing development in the locality.

Rural Sheds Development Control Plan

DCP Aims and Objectives

(a)       to establish rationale and controls for environmentally appropriate rural development, and provided the basis for consultation and negotiation between applicants and Penrith City Council.

  (b)       To ensure that the siting, size, design, external appearance and uses of rural sheds do not detract significantly from the rural and environmental qualities of the locality.

  (c)       To ensure that rural sheds promote and support sustainable agriculture and other permissible land uses in the rural areas of the City.”

 

The proposed shed is sited behind the dwelling, is of a design and materials, which compliment the primary building on the site, and is consistent with the rural/residential use proposed for the site. It is generally consistent with the aims and objectives of the DCP.

 

Siting – The shed is proposed to be located behind the building line of the dwelling, and is to be sited with the narrowest elevation facing the street. Minimal site works are required to facilitate its construction and vegetation removal is not required. The proposal complies with the siting requirements of the DCP.

 

Size – The subject property has an area of 1ha. The cumulative footprint of sheds permitted by the DCP is 150m2. The proposed shed is to have a floor area of 96m2, complying with this requirement.

 

Height and Design – The DCP provides for sheds to be constructed with a maximum wall height of 3.6m and a height to ridgeline of 5m. The proposed shed has a wall height of 3.6m and an overall height of 5m. The roof proposed has a pitch of 17 degrees and complies.

 

Materials and Colour – The shed is to be finished in brick and tile in earth tone colours to complement the dwelling.

 

The proposed shed complies with all the design and numerical requirements of the DCP.

 

3.   Section 79C(1)(b) – The Likely Impacts of the Development

The likely impacts of the proposed dwelling, swimming pool, pavilion, shed entry gates and onsite sewerage management system are considered to be acceptable as follows:

 

·    The development has been designed to be responsive to the site. Site disturbance/excavation and filling are minimized and will not exceed 1m in depth. The dwelling incorporates stepped floor levels, and a dropped edge beam on the slab will retain filling within the building footprint.

 

·    No vegetation removal is proposed. Additional landscaping will be provided to the areas surrounding the dwelling, swimming pool and driveway.

·    The proposed dwelling and outbuildings are of a contemporary rural style and are in keeping with the character of the locality

 

·    Reticulated water, electricity and telephone services are available to the site. The development includes a proposal to capture and reuse rainwater on the premises. An Onsite Sewerage Management System is proposed (see below).

 

·    The proposal will have minimal impact on the local road system. Residential traffic only will be generated by the development.

 

·    Effluent Disposal - A satisfactory site and soil analysis has been prepared and submitted in support of the application. The site has a minimum size of 10,000m² and the proposed land application area complies with all specified minimum buffer distances. The proposed land application area of 1044m² is considered adequate for the development.

 

·    The proposed development will have minimal impact on the amenity of the area and is in keeping with the surrounding and adjacent land uses

4.   Section 79C(1)(c) – The Suitability of the Site for the Development

The proposed development fits the locality. The site is not nominated as bushfire prone and the site attributes are conducive to the proposal.

5.   Section 79C(1)(d) – Any Submissions made in relation to the Development

Community Consultation

In accordance with Council’s Advertising and Notification Development Control Plan, the proposed development was not required to undergo public notification processes.

Conclusion

Assessment of the application to vary the terms of Restrictive Covenant, fourthly referred to in the 88B Instrument attached to Lot 814, DP 1068323, has demonstrated that the proposal is unlikely to have any significant impacts on the achievement of the outcomes intended by the planning and subdivision controls for this property.

 

The proposed variation will not compromise the character or amenity of the locality, and will not cause a significant reduction in the spatial separation, and perceived setbacks of development on the streetscape.

 

The Development Application for the construction of a dwelling, in-ground swimming pool, pavilion, shed, entry gates, and installation of an on-site sewerage management system, is generally in accordance with Council’s policies for development in the locality. The proposed development is unlikely to have any adverse impacts on the streetscape or the amenity of the area.

 

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Variation of Restrictive Covenant applying to Lot 814 DP 106832 (No. 54-57) Belleview Avenue, Mount Vernon be received.

2.     The terms of clause (b) of Restrictive Covenant fourthly referred to in the 88B Instrument attached to Lot 814, DP 1068323, be varied as follows, as it applies to Lot 814 only:

(b)       All development erected on the subject lot will be in accordance with the proposed building platform indicated on the Survey Plan Prepared by Britten and Associates Pty Ltd, Drawing Number 11906/2, dated August 2006.

 

3.     The Common Seal of Penrith City Council be affixed to the necessary documentation.

4.     Development Application No 06/0775 for the construction of a dwelling, in-ground swimming pool, pavilion, shed and entry gates, and the installation of an on site sewerage management system, be approved subject to the proposed conditions of Development Consent as follows:

Standard Conditions

4.1       A008 – Works to BCA requirements

A009 – Residential Works DCP

A019 – Occupation Certificate

D001 – Sedimentation and Erosion Controls

D009 – Covering Waste Storage area

E001 – BCA compliance

E005 – Smoke Alarms

F010 – Septic distance from house

F014 – Aerated Irrigation

F015 – Aerated Service contract 

H001 – Stamped plans and erection of site notice

H011 – Engineering plans and specifications

H013 – Further details of building components

H014 – Slab design

H015 – Termite protection

H036 – Rainwater tank

H037 – Safe supply from catchment

H038 – Connection of rainwater tank supply

H039 – Rainwater tank pumps

H041 – Hours of work

H034 – Bushfire roof sarking

I003 – Roads Act approval

J001 – Excavated material removal

J002 – Fencing when water in pool

J004 – Pool fence residential

J009 – Backyard pool safety package

J010 – Pool board/sign

K017 – Stormwater and sewerage plan

L001 – General landscaping

L008 – Tree preservation order

Q001 – Notice of commencement and appointment of PCA

Special Conditions

4.2      The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans numbered 1399-06, 1 to 4, drawn by Douglas Design and dated 7th March 2006, the application form, the BASIX Certificate, and any supporting information received with the application, except as may be amended in red on the attached plans and by the following conditions

The on-site sewage management system shall be installed and implemented in accordance with the recommendations of The Onsite Wastewater Management Report prepared by EnviroTech, dated 7th May 2006. An operational licence for the system is to be sought from and issued by Penrith City Council before the on-site sewerage management system is commissioned/can be used, and an Occupation Certificate can be issued for the development

 

4.3     All boundary fences are to be low profile, open style and rural in character in accordance with the City of Penrith Rural Development Control Plan 1991

 

4.4     The shed shall not be used under any circumstances for any commercial, industrial or habitable residential activity

 

4.5     Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate for the development, the variation of the Restriction on the Use of land numbered 4(b) in DP 1068323, shall be registered with the Land and Property Information division of the Department of Lands

 

The variation to the covenant shall be in the terms approved by resolution of Penrith City Council

 

4.6     Cut and fill operations on the property are only permitted in conjunction with the building works and shall be strictly limited in depth and extent to that detailed on the approved plans and specifications

 

Before any fill material is imported to site, a validation certificate issued by an appropriately qualified person is to be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority. The validation certificate must demonstrate that the fill material is free from contaminants and weeds, that it is suitable for its intended purpose and land use, and that it will not pose an unacceptable risk to human health or the environment

 

          If Penrith City Council is not the Principal Certifying Authority, a copy of the validation certificate is to be submitted to Council for their reference

 

          {Note: Penrith Contaminated Land Development Control Plan defines an appropriately qualified person as “a person who, in the opinion of Council, has a demonstrated experience, or access to experience in hydrology, environmental chemistry, soil science, eco-toxicology, sampling and analytical procedures, risk evaluation and remediation technologies. In addition, the person will be required to have appropriate professional indemnity and public risk insurance.”}

 

4.7     All house sewer and plumbing work shall be carried out in accordance with Sydney Water's requirements or the Local Government (Water, Sewerage and Drainage) Regulation 1993

a)       Penrith City Council is both the consent authority and certifying authority for the installation of the On Site Sewage Management System (OSSM), otherwise known as a septic tank system. It is your responsibility to contact Council's Building Approvals and Environment Protection Department to organise all inspections required for the installation of the system. In this regard, the following will require inspection:

·     All internal and external drainage lines and septic tanks before they are backfilled/covered

·     On completion of the system's installation and prior to its commissioning, ensuring compliance with those conditions specific to the installation of the system

 

A copy of the satisfactory inspection reports carried out by Council shall be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority if Council is not the Principal Certifying Authority

 

i.        The septic tank, drainage lines and effluent disposal area shall not be altered without the prior approval of Council. In addition, the septic tank shall not be buried or covered

ii.       There shall be no effluent runoff from the subject property to adjoining premises, public places or reserves

iii.      There shall be available all year round, adequate water supply that is available to the property

 

4.8     The disposal area shall have a minimum area of 1044m2 and shall be prepared in accordance with the “Environmental and Health Protection Guidelines On Site Sewage Management for Single Households” and AS1547:2000

 

Prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate and the issue of an operational licence for the OSSM system by Penrith City Council, the effluent disposal area shall be:

·    Prepared/ landscaped in accordance with the stamped - approved plans

 

All stormwater and seepage shall be diverted away from the disposal area by using an agricultural drain or earthen bund and dish drain

 

4.9     Prior to the commencement of construction works:

(a)     Toilet facilities at or in the vicinity of the work site shall be provided at the rate of one toilet for every 20 persons or part of 20 persons employed at the site. Each toilet provided must be:

·    A standard flushing toilet connected to a public sewer, or

·    If that is not practicable, an accredited sewage management facility approved by the council, or

·    Alternatively, any other sewage management facility approved by council

 

4.10   The following matters are ancillary aspects of the development under Section 80A (2) of the Environmental Planning and       Assessment Act, 1979. Appeal provisions will apply to the           submission requirements regarding ancillary aspects of the development (see Sections 80A(3) and 97 of the Act)

(a)     External materials are to be earthy tones and match or complement the buildings natural setting. Details on achieving this requirement, including a schedule of external colours and finishes shall be submitted to Council for consideration and approval prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate

 

4.11   The recommended construction details to reduce aircraft noise intrusion to meet indoor design sound levels, as detailed in the report prepared by Acoustic Logic Consultancy and dated 12th May 2006 are to be undertaken during construction. As the recommended construction details are carried out and on completion of the       development, a qualified acoustic consultant shall certify that the        development has been constructed to meet the indoor design sound    levels in accordance with the approved acoustic report

 

4.12   The swimming pool is to be fitted with filtration equipment which does not require a backwash facility

 

4.13   Roof and surface water shall be disposed of in accordance with the    approved drainage design. Overflow from the existing in-ground rainwater tank is to be disposed of into the street gutter

 

4.14   The existing trees to the perimeter of the property, other than those nominated on the site plan to be relocated, shall be retained and duly protected during the construction of the development. Tree protection measures shall be installed before any works can commence on site including the clearing of site vegetation

 

4.15   An Occupation Certificate is to be obtained from the Principal Certifying Authority on completion of all works and prior to the occupation of the dwelling. The commitments listed in the BASIX Certificate are to be completed prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate

 

The Certificate shall not be issued if any conditions of this consent, but not the        conditions relating to the operation of the development, are outstanding. This       includes submitting the following documentation to the Principal Certifying Authority:

(a)     Written documentation or Compliance Certificate from Penrith City Council certifying to the satisfactory completion of works approved under the Roads Act 1993

(b)     Written documentation or certification attesting to the      satisfactory installation of, and the Licence to Operate the on site sewage management system issued by Penrith City           Council

(c)     Certification from a qualified acoustic consultant certifying that the development has been constructed in        accordance with the approved acoustic report/to meet the indoor design sound levels in accordance with the approved acoustic report

 

          A copy of the Occupation Certificate and all necessary documentation supporting the issue of the Certificate is to be submitted to Penrith City Council, if Council is not the Principal Certifying Authority.  In the event that a Compliance Certificate was issued by the Principal Certifying Authority certifying compliance that all conditions of the development consent required to be met has in fact been met as        well as any documentation stated above, shall be submitted to Penrith City Council if Council is not the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1. View

Locality Map

1 Page

Appendix

2. View

Site Plan

1 Page

Appendix

3. View

Original Superseded proposal

1 Page

Appendix

4. View

Current Proposal

1 Page

Appendix

5. View

Current proposal all structures within building envelope

1 Page

Appendix

6. View

Current elevations

1 Page

Appendix

 


Ordinary Meeting

6 November 2006

Appendix 1 - Locality Map

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

6 November 2006

Appendix 2 - Site Plan

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

6 November 2006

Appendix 3 - Original Superseded proposal

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

6 November 2006

Appendix 4 - Current Proposal

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

6 November 2006

Appendix 5 - Current proposal all structures within building envelope

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

6 November 2006

Appendix 6 - Current elevations

 

 

 

 


 

 

 

 

THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT BLANK  INTENTIONALLY


 

 

The City In Its Environment

 

 

There were no reports under this Master Program when the Business Paper was compiled


 

 

 

 

THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT BLANK  INTENTIONALLY


 

 

The City as an Economy

 

 

There were no reports under this Master Program when the Business Paper was compiled


 

 

 

 

THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT BLANK  INTENTIONALLY


The City Supported by Infrastructure

 

Item                                                                                                                                       Page

 

9        Tender 25-05/06 Asphalt Products & Services 

 

 



Ordinary Meeting

6 November 2006

The City Supported by Infrastructure

 

 

The City Supported by Infrastructure

 

 

9

Tender 25-05/06 Asphalt Products & Services   

 

Compiled by:                Mal Ackerman, Supply Co-ordinator

Hans Meijer, Asset Systems Engineer

Keith Fryer, Works Coordinator

Harry Brown, Supply Officer

Authorised by:             David Burns, Asset Manager   

Strategic Program Term Achievement: An asset management strategy is in operation for civil infrastructure that optimises its use and maintains it to agreed standards fit for its contemporary purpose.

Critical Action: An Asset Management Strategy for Civil Assets is developed, maintained and implemented.

     

Purpose:

To seek endorsement to proceed with the implementation of a panel Supply Agreement for the provision of Asphalt Products and Road Construction Services on an as required basis for a 1 year period with an option to extend the arrangements for a further 1 year period, subject to satisfactory performance.  The report recommends that offers from a number of suppliers for the nominated products and services be accepted as detailed in this report and the referenced attachments.

 

Background

The existing Supply Agreements for the provision of Asphalt Products and Road Construction Services expired at the end of October 2006.

 

Current situation

A new Request for Tender for Asphalt Products & Road Construction Services was issued for a period of one (1) year, with an option to extend the arrangements for a further one (1) year period on an ‘as required’ basis, with allowances for rise and fall provisions, and closed on Tuesday, 29 August 2006.

 

The Tender included the provision of the following products and services:

 

·    Asphaltic Concrete – Supply and Deliver

·    Asphaltic Concrete – Supply Ex-Bin

·    Sprayed Bituminous Surfacing

·    Asphaltic Concrete – Supply and Lay & other associated services

·    Asphalt Road Restoration & other associated services

·    Asphalt Pavement Rejuvenation

·    Stabilisation of Road Pavements

·    Foamed Bitumen

·    Asphaltic Concrete Mill and Fill & other associated services

·    Road Pavement Crack Sealing

 

Other associated services included were as follows:

 

o Disposal of Excavated Material

o Chase Cutting

o Additional Traffic Control

 

The initial agreement period has been minimised to one (1) year, pending a WSROC Group Tender for the same products and services. It is anticipated that the WSROC Group Tender will be issued to the market place in March 2007. The shorter period of this Tender will allow Penrith City Council the flexibility to move across to the new arrangements when they are implemented.

 

The terms and conditions of Tender were documented, using the previous format that was prepared, and utilising the assistance of Council’s Legal Officer.  Unit prices were requested for each category, in accordance with relevant RTA and AUSSPEC Specifications. In most categories, estimated quantities were also included. This enabled a more detailed evaluation of the impact of unit prices submitted by the Tenderers.

 

It was proposed, in the Request for Tender documents, that Council may select a number of Suppliers for each of the categories specified. These are to be ranked in order of preference, based on the selection criteria in the Tender Documents.

 

The first ranked Supplier will be given first option to supply the materials or carry out the required services. If they are unavailable to perform the work, or deliver within the time required, or default in their responsibilities under the agreement, then the second ranked Supplier will be selected and so on.

 

The delivery of products and services will be on an “as required basis”, with no commitment to purchase any specific quantity over the period of the agreement.

 

Tenderers were required to submit their Tender on a standard pro-forma sheet, which clearly set out a detailed set of questions relative to each of the evaluation criteria. This included a range of information that was required to demonstrate each of the Tenderer’s capabilities in meeting Council’s requirements.

Tender Evaluation

The tender evaluation committee consisted of Malcolm Ackerman (Supply Co-ordinator), Hans Meijer (AM Asset Systems Engineer) Harry Brown (Supply Officer-Contracts), and Keith Fryer (AM Works Co-ordinator – Construction and Resources).

 

The selection criteria advertised and used in selecting the successful Tenderers were as follows. A series of key questions relative to each of the criteria were required to be addressed by the Tenderers. All Tenders received were assessed against their response to the criteria.

 

 

 

 

Mandatory

·    Conforming Requirements

·    Conflicts of Interest

·    Insurance

·    Instrument of Agreement

·    Company Profile

·    Statement of Conformance

·    Price Schedules

 

Scope of Services

·    Demonstrated Ability

·    Compliance to Specified Requirements

·    Response Times

·    Conformance to Relevant Standards

 

Cost/Price

·    Rates and Unit Prices

 

Business Management

·    Financial Viability

·    Employees

·    Business Record

·    Safety Record

 

Business Administration

·    Company Resources – Personnel

·    Support Systems

·    Reporting Capabilities

·    Quality of Product/Services

·    Occupational Health & Safety Management

·    Environmental Considerations

Comments

Each of the evaluation criteria were given weightings by the evaluation panel, in accordance with the relative importance of each of the requirements in the Tender Documents.

 

Unless otherwise noted in the summary of tenders, each of the Tenderers demonstrated that they met all requirements of the Tender Documents.  Where there is a concern relating to past experience, references and additional comments are provided in the summary for each category.

 

On this basis, where Tenderers met requirements, and there were no concerns relating to past experience or references of the suppliers, price has been the main factor used in the selection of the preferred Tender.  In these cases, the companies that have submitted Tenders have either previously carried out the specified work, or supplied products for Council in a satisfactory manner, or are well known for the supply of products or services within their relevant industry.

 

 

There were no companies who submitted offers for all of the work categories listed. Table 1 below lists the responses received for each category of work.

 

Table 1-Tenders Received

 

 

Summary of Tenders by Category

For flexibility purposes, and to provide Council with options of material quality, unit prices were requested to comply with two alternate specifications as follows:

 

·     AUSSPEC 245

·     RTA Specification R116

 

The calculation of the annual cost for Asphalt Products and Road Construction Services was based on the tendered unit rates for material to Specification AUSSPEC 245.  This specification applies to the major portion of Products/Services used by Council. The summarisation of total costs for each category is based on the following:

 

·    Unit price submitted for each category, times the estimated annual usage and quantity ranges (either forecasted or historical). Each table shows the unit rate comparison for each Tenderer for the relevant quantity range. In some instances, estimated usages are unknown.  Where these occur, the full unit price tables have been included;

 

·    Any additional costs required in completing the service, such as Transport of Excavated Material, Chase Cutting and Additional Traffic Control Service, were requested in the Tender Documents. These items are ancillary to the main work services and, where appropriat,e an allowance has been made for these ancillary costs;

 

·    Cost comparison tables for each category have been prepared and are included in this section (Summary of Tenders).

 

Except where noted in the following summary of tenders, the lowest Tender price has been recommended for acceptance.

 

Asphaltic Concrete – Supply and Deliver

Annualised Cost Table-Units per tonne delivered

 

 

Comments

The offer received from FRH Group for supply and delivery of Asphaltic Concrete represents the best value for Council, followed by State Asphalt Services Pty Ltd, then Works Infrastructure Pty Ltd (formerly Emoleum Pty Ltd). The supply ex-bin price evaluation has been separated due to the impact of distance.

 

Asphaltic Concrete – Ex Bin

There are 2 separate tables included for Ex-bin supply of Asphaltic Concrete. When determining the most cost effective solution to Council, the issue of plant location is of high importance, due to travel time involved in collection of product.

 

Table 1A shows the tendered rates and total annual costs for supply ex-bin. Table 1B includes a cost component for travel and lost productivity.

Table 1A Supply Ex-Bin tendered rates per tonne

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 1B Supply ex-bin adjusted rates(unit per tonne) including distance component

 

 

Comments

Allstate Roads submitted the least competitive ex-bin rate and were therefore not included in the adjusted table.

 

The benchmark location used in calculating the distance differential was the depot, Kingswood. Below is a list of the various plant locations and the estimated travel times based on a round trip:

 

·    Pioneer Road plant location Wallgrove Road - travel time = 1 hour

·    State Asphalts plant location Prestons - travel time = 2 hours

·    FRH Group plant location Campbelltown - travel time = 2 hours

·    Works Infrastructure plant location Rosehill - travel time = 1½ hours

·    Boral Asphalt plant location Wetherill Park - travel time = 1½ hours

 

The adjusted rates included 2 components, the charge out cost of the truck and driver and the loss of productivity during the additional travel time.  

 

Based on the adjusted rates, the best value option for Council is to accept the offer submitted by Works Infrastructure (previously Emoleum Pty Ltd) for ex – bin supply of Asphaltic Concrete, followed by State Asphalt, then FRH Group.

 

Sprayed Bituminous Surfacing

 

 

Comments

Although the unit rate offered for One-Coat Seal by Pioneer Road Services was lower than that offered by Sami Road Services, the overall difference between both companies is minimal. Both Pioneer Road and Sami Road should be selected, and work allocated based on the best available rates commensurate with the work type. Both companies selected offered Fibredeck Seal, as requested in the Tender Documents.

 

Asphaltic Concrete – Supply and Lay and Asphalt Road Restoration

Note: To determine the best value for Council, both Asphalt Supply and Lay, along with Asphalt Road Restoration, have been assessed as a combined service.  In nearly all cases, both activities are performed jointly via a combined work program. From a management and supervision aspect, it is more cost effective to select the most viable combined tender(s).

 

Table 1A Supply and Lay - Companies Ranked 1 to 6 by price

 

 

Table 1B Supply & Lay- Companies Ranked 7-11 by price

 

 

Table 1 C Asphalt Road Restoration Companies Ranked 1-5 by price

 

 

Table 1 D Asphalt Road Restoration Companies ranked 6-11 by price

 

Table 1 D Combined total all Companies for Supply & Lay and Road Restoration

 

 

Comments

The lowest price combined offer was received from FRH Group, and on an annualised basis would offer the best value to Council. Reference checks previously carried out on this company have proven favorable (Campbelltown and Holroyd Councils). The next best offers received, in order of cost, were from Pioneer Road Services, State Asphalt Services and Bernipave, who all have proven capability to carry out this type of service.

 

Asphalt Pavement Rejuvenation

Unit rate comparison only - no annual volumes

 

 

Comments

Only two companies submitted offers for this service. Australian Pavement Maintenance Services submitted the lowest offer, followed by Sami Road Services. Both companies have a proven track record, and both offers are recommended for acceptance as they each offer different materials. The product offered and used by Sami Pty Ltd is more suitable for application to “aged asphalt surfaces”, and the product offered by APMS is suitable for application to “younger asphalt surfaces”. It is recommended that Council have both options available.

 

 

 

Stabilisation of Road Pavements

Unit rate comparison only -no annual volumes

 

 

 

Comments

The lowest unit rates for the work specified were submitted by Stabilised Pavements of Australia. Due to the anticipated low demand for this category of work, only one supplier is recommended for acceptance.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Foamed Bitumen Stabilisation

Unit rate table only-no annual volumes(M2)

 

Comments

The only company to respond to this request was Stabilised Pavements of Australia. The rates submitted are comparable to previous contracted rates.

 

Asphaltic Concrete Mill & Fill

 

Annualised cots table

 

 

 

Comments

The unit rate table is too detailed to include in this report. An annualised cost for each tenderer is shown, based on the historical volumes. The lowest unit rate was received from Pioneer Road Services, followed by State Asphalt Services. These two companies met all tender requirements and have proven capability to perform this type of work. The total calculated cost includes removal and transport of excavated material.

 

Road Pavement Crack Sealing

Unit rate table only-no annual volumes (units per M2)

 

 

Comments

The lowest unit rate was received from Australian Pavement Maintenance Systems, followed by Sami Road Services. These two companies met all of the Tender requirements and have proven capability to perform this type of work.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Tender 25-05/06 Asphalt Products & Services be received.

2.     The following companies are accepted and placed in order of preference on the panel of approved suppliers for the supply of products and services, as listed, for a period of one (1) year with an option to extend for a further one (1) year, subject to satisfactory performance:

              Asphaltic Concrete – Supply and Deliver

a)    FRH Group Pty Ltd

b)    State Asphalt Services Pty Ltd

c)    Works Infrastructure

                          Asphaltic Concrete – Supply Ex-Bin

a)    Works Infrastructure Pty Ltd (Previously Emoleum)

b)    State Asphalts Pty Ltd

c)    FRH Group Pty Ltd

 

                          Sprayed Bituminous Surfacing

a)    Sami Road Services and  Pioneer Road Services Pty Ltd

                          Asphaltic Concrete – Supply and Lay

a)   FRH Group Pty Ltd

b)   Pioneer Road Services Pty Ltd

c)   State Asphalt Services Pty Ltd

d)   Bernipave Pty Ltd

                          Asphalt Road Restoration

a)   FRH Group Pty Ltd

b)   Pioneer Road Services Pty Ltd

c)   State Asphalt Services Pty Ltd

d)   Bernipave Pty Ltd

                          Asphalt Pavement Rejuvenation

              a)   Australian Pavement Maintenance Services Pty Ltd &  Sami Road                         Services

             Stabilisation of Road Pavements

a)   Stabilised Pavements of Australia Pty Ltd

                          Foamed Bitumen

a)   Stabilised Pavements of Australia Pty Ltd

                          Asphaltic Concrete Mill and Fill

                          a)   Pioneer Road Services Pty Ltd

                          b)   State Asphalt Services Pty Ltd

                          Road Pavement Crack Sealing

a)   Australian Pavement Maintenance Systems Pty Ltd

              b)   Sami Road Services

                 

                           

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report


Leadership and Organisation

 

Item                                                                                                                                       Page

 

10      Council Meeting Calendar for 2007 

 

11      Council Property - Easement to Drain Water over Lot 3, DP 255380 Nepean Street, Emu Plains.  Owner:  Penrith Council - Applicant:  N.F. Billyard Pty Ltd 

 

 



Ordinary Meeting

6 November 2006

Leadership and Organisation

 

 

Leadership and Organisation

 

 

10

Council Meeting Calendar for 2007   

 

Compiled by:                Cristy Stevens, Acting Executive Services Officer

Authorised by:             Glenn McCarthy, Executive Officer   

Strategic Program Term Achievement: Council has reviewed its own role and operations and has adopted contemporary practices to best discharge its charter.

Critical Action: Review current structures and procedures supporting Council and Councillors responsibilities.

  

Previous Items:            Council Meeting Cycle - Policy Review Committee - 16 October 2006  

Purpose:

To propose a Meeting Calendar for Council for 2007.  The report recommends that the Meeting Calendar for 2007 be adopted.

 

Background

The Local Government Act Section 365 states that the Council is required to meet at least 10 times each year, each time in a different month.

As Councillors are aware, Council has adopted a three-week cycle for Ordinary and Policy Review Committee Meetings, with the third week in the rolling cycle being available for Councillor Briefings and Working Parties, if required.  The meeting cycle will commence with a Councillor Briefing on Monday 5 February 2007.  Further, Ordinary and Policy Review Committee Meetings will commence at 7:30pm.

A draft meeting calendar for 2007, based on a three-week cycle has been prepared based on the following assumptions:

·      Rolling three-week cycle:

o Week 1      -    Ordinary Meeting

o Week 2      -    Policy Review Committee

o Week 3      -    Councillor Briefing (if required)

·      The first Ordinary Meeting will be on the second Monday in February (to ensure an Ordinary Meeting falls on the first Monday in September (for presentation of the financial statements) and the last Monday in September (the election of the Mayor and Deputy Mayor)

·      Ends with an Ordinary Meeting on the second Monday in December

·      Provides for Management Plan Workshops in March and April, and Public Forum in May

·      The Ordinary Meeting and one Councillor Briefing in May are swapped to provide for public exhibition of the Management Plan and response to submissions before being reported to Council for adoption in June

·      The Ordinary and Policy Review Committee meetings in June are swapped to allow for adoption of the 2007-2008 Management Plan

·      Assumes Management Plan reviews and Strategic Program progress reports are submitted to the Policy Review Committee.

Care has also been taken to avoid known commitments such as the National General Assembly of Local Government, the Local Government Association of NSW Annual Conference and the Australian Local Government Women’s Association State Conference.  In addition, commitments to various boards and committees including WSROC, Westpool, the Hawkesbury River County Council and other scheduled Council-related commitments of Councillors and the organisation have been taken into account.

Conclusion

The draft Meeting Calendar for 2007 (set out overleaf) has been prepared in accordance with the Local Government Act and Council policy.

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.   The information contained in the report on Council Meeting Calendar for 2007 be received.

2.   The Draft Meeting Calendar for 2007 be adopted.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1. View

Council Meeting Cycle for 2007

1 Page

Appendix

 


Ordinary Meeting

6 November 2006

Appendix 1 - Council Meeting Cycle for 2007

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

6 November 2006

Leadership and Organisation

 

 

Leadership and Organisation

 

 

11

Council Property - Easement to Drain Water over Lot 3, DP 255380 Nepean Street, Emu Plains.  Owner:  Penrith Council - Applicant:  N.F. Billyard Pty Ltd   

 

Compiled by:                Bob Anderson, Property Officer - Valuation

Authorised by:             Brian Griffiths, Property Development Manager   

Strategic Program Term Achievement: Council provides adequate resources to deliver its program and has introduced measures to increase its capacity.

Critical Action: Implement a property development program that maximises the potential for sustainable additional revenue to support major projects and programs.

     

Purpose:

To obtain Council's agreement to the granting of an easement to drain water over Council's open space land described as Lot 3, DP 255380 in favour of Lot 2, DP 232928 at No. 38 Gough Street, Emu Plains.  The report recommends that Council grant the easement to drain water over its land in favour of Lot 2, together with the payment of compensation.

 

Background

Council is the owner of Lot 3, DP 255380, Nepean Street, Emu Plains, with an area of 3.962 hectares, which is an Open Space area incorporating drainage pipes to Jamison’s Creek.

 

Current Situation

The applicant, N F Billyard Pty Ltd, on behalf of the owner Finishing Touches Pty Ltd, has lodged a Development Application to construct a multi-unit development, comprising six (6) units, over Lot 2, DP 232928 at property No. 38 Gough Street, Emu Plains.  Whilst the Development Application has been lodged, the granting of the easement will be subject to consent being issued by Council at the appropriate time.

 

As part of the development, there is a requirement to drain water from property No. 38 Gough Street, through Council’s land, to join up with an existing drainage pit within Council’s land at Lot 3, DP 255380, as indicated on the attached plan.

 

The pipeline and easement will also be able to accommodate the future drainage of adjoining properties.  Council will retain the right to vary or modify the easement, once created, to include those additional properties in the future, subject to compensation.

 

Compensation payable to Council, in the amount of $5,000 plus GST, has been assessed, which represents the effect of creating the drainage easement over Council’s land.  The applicant is also responsible for all survey, legal and registration costs.

 

The effect of the easement will not reduce the value of the existing parcel in Council’s ownership, nor adversely affect the future use of the land as Public Reserve.

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Council Property - Easement to Drain Water over Lot 3, DP 255380 Nepean Street, Emu Plains.  Owner:  Penrith Council - Applicant:  N.F. Billyard Pty Ltd be received.

2.     Council grant an easement to drain water over Open Space land at Lot 3, DP 255380 Nepean Street, Emu Plains in favour of Lot 2, DP 232928 at No. 38 Gough Street, Emu Plains on the proviso that the Development Application is approved by Council.

3.     Payment of compensation by the applicant, in the amount of $5,000 plus GST, is required for the creation of the easement over Lot 3, DP 255380 Nepean Street, Emu Plains.

4.     The applicant be responsible for all survey, legal and registration costs associated with the creation of the easement.

5.     The Common Seal of the Council of the City of Penrith be placed on all necessary documentation to effect registration of the easement.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1. View

Council Property - Easement to Drain Water over Lot 3, D.P. 255380, Nepean Street, Emu Plains

1 Page

Appendix

 


Ordinary Meeting

6 November 2006

Appendix 1 - Council Property - Easement to Drain Water over Lot 3, D.P. 255380, Nepean Street, Emu Plains