Agenda of Policy Review Committee Meeting

UNCONFIRMED MINUTES

OF THE POLICY REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING OF PENRITH CITY COUNCIL HELD IN THE PASSADENA ROOM, PENRITH

ON MONDAY 16 OCTOBER 2006 AT 7:01PM

PRESENT

His Worship the Mayor Councillor Pat Sheehy AM, Councillors Jim Aitken OAM, Kaylene Allison, David Bradbury (arrived 7:40pm), Lexie Cettolin, Kevin Crameri OAM, Greg Davies, Mark Davies, Ross Fowler, Karen McKeown, Garry Rumble, and John Thain.

APOLOGIES

PRC 76 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ross Fowler seconded Councillor Mark Davies that apologies be received an accepted from Councillors Susan Page, Steve Simat and David Bradbury.

LEAVE OF ABSENCE

Leave of Absence was previously granted to Councillor Jackie Greenow for the period 4 October 2006 to 22 October 2006 inclusive.

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES - Policy Review Committee Meeting - 11 September 2006

PRC 77 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor John Thain seconded Councillor Kaylene Allison that the minutes of the Policy Review Committee Meeting of 11 September 2006 be confirmed.

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Councillor Jim Aitken declared a Pecuniary Interest in Item 1 – Werrington Enterprise Living and Learning (WELL) Precinct, as he owns land in the precinct area, and advised that he would leave the meeting for consideration of this item.

MASTER PROGRAM REPORTS

The City as a Social Place

Having previously declared a pecuniary interest in this item, Councillor Jim Aitken OAM left the meeting, the time being 7:02pm.

1 Werrington Enterprise Living and Learning (WELL) Precinct

PRC 78 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ross Fowler seconded Councillor Garry Rumble

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Werrington Enterprise Living and Learning (WELL) Precinct be received.

2. Council adopt the refined Concept Plan for the WELL Precinct.

3. Council report back to the community the current progress in the planning for the future development of the WELL Precinct and arrange an ‘open day’ information session for local residents.

4. Further reports be submitted to Council for considering advancement of the public exhibition of draft Local Environmental Plans, Development Control Plans and Contributions Plans for the South Werrington Urban Village and Caddens Release Area in early 2007.

5. Council write to the relevant Ministers and local Members regarding the lack of response to Council’s request for information on the University Railway Station.

2 Library Services Casual Staffing

PRC 79 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ross Fowler seconded Councillor Kaylene Allison

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Library Services Casual Staffing be received

2. Council endorse the increase of Library FTE positions across the various classifications by 2.5.

Leadership and Organisation

Councillor Jim Aitken OAM returned to the meeting, the time being 7:09pm.

3 Community Participation Manual

PRC 80 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM seconded Councillor John Thain

That:

1. The information contained in the report on the Community Participation Manual be received.

2. The Community Participation Manual be endorsed by Council as an organisational standard and be made available to the public.

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM left the meeting, the time being 7:26pm.

4 Service Specification Program

PRC 81 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Garry Rumble seconded Councillor Ross Fowler

That:

1. The information contained in the report on the Service Specification Program be received.

2. The specification for the Public Domain Maintenance Service be adopted.

3. The specification for the Environment Protection Service be adopted.

4. The specification for Customer Services be adopted.

5. The annual budget allocation for Public Domain maintenance be increased from 2007-2008 in line with the increase in the public domain asset base.

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM returned to the meeting, the time being 7:30pm.

5 Alignment of the Organisation

PRC 82 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jim Aitken OAM seconded Councillor Karen McKeown

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Alignment of the Organisation be received

2. The proposed changes to the alignment of Information Management and Information Technology functions and the restructuring of the Information Manager and City Librarian positions as detailed in the report be endorsed.

6 Council Meeting Cycle

PRC 83 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jim Aitken OAM seconded Councillor Garry Rumble

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Council Meeting Cycle be received

2. Council adopt a three-week rolling meeting cycle and calendar commencing from February 2007

3. Council adopt the later start time of 7.30pm for Ordinary and Policy Review Committee Meetings

4. Council adopt the draft Charter for Councillor Briefings attached to this report.

Councillor David Bradbury arrived, the time being 7:40pm.

7 2005-2009 Strategic Program Annual Review

PRC 84 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Karen McKeown seconded Councillor Ross Fowler that the information contained in the report on the 2005-2009 Strategic Program Annual Review be received.

8 Development Committees

PRC 85 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Kaylene Allison that the information contained in the report on Development Committees be received.

9 Position of Grants Support Officer following completion of a twelve-month trial

PRC 86 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ross Fowler seconded Councillor Karen McKeown

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Position of Grants Support Officer following completion of a twelve-month trial be received.

2. Council extend the temporary position of Grants Support Officer for an additional 12 months to October 2007.

3. A further report be brought to Council in approximately April 2007 on the progress of assistance in making grant applications. The report is to outline both successful and unsuccessful grant applications.

10 Proposed implementation of Direct Debit Facilities for Payment of Rates

PRC 87 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ross Fowler seconded Councillor John Thain

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Proposed implementation of Direct Debit Facilities for Payment of Rates be received

2. Council endorse the introduction of the Direct Debit payment method

There being no further business the Chairperson declared the meeting closed the time being 7:55pm.

*Policy Review Committee Meeting*	*13 November 2006*
*The City as a Social Place*

The City as a Social Place

Penrith Whitewater Stadium Ltd - Annual Report and Board of Directors

Compiled by: Gary Dean, Facilities Operations Manager

Authorised by: Steve Hackett, Director - City Services

Strategic Program Term Achievement: The City’s recreation and leisure facilities and services meet its needs and are optimally used.

Critical Action: Facilitate joint use of the City’s recreation and leisure facilities, including co-location of programs.

Presenters: Councillor Ross Fowler, Chairman - Penrith Whitewater Stadium Ltd - Chairman's Annual Report

Jack Hodge, Stadium Manager - Penrith Whitewater Stadium Ltd - Stadium Manager's Report

Purpose:

To provide details to Council following the eighth Annual General Meeting of Penrith Whitewater Stadium Ltd. The Chairman and the Stadium Manager will be making a brief presentation to this meeting. The report recommends that the information be received, that certain Directors be re-appointed, and that Council underwrite the operations of the Company for a further period of 12 months.

Background

Each year, following the Annual General Meeting of the Company, a report is presented to Council on the year’s activities, including the financial position. That Council report also includes the Chairman and Stadium Manager’s reports, which are extracted from the Company’s Annual Report.

Annual Report

The Eighth Annual General Meeting of the Company was held on 28 September 2006, for the period ended 30 June 2006.

The Chairman of the Board and Stadium Manager will be in attendance tonight to make a short presentation which will focus on:

· The Past Year

- Highlights

- Financial position

- Issues arising

· The Year Ahead

Following are their reports extracted from the Annual Report.

Chairman’s Report

It is with much pleasure that I present this report to the eighth Annual General Meeting of Penrith Whitewater Stadium Limited.

This year witnessed the holding of the 2005 Canoe Slalom World Championships. The event attracted a significant number of overseas athletes and, from the Sport’s point of view, and the Stadium’s point of view, was a great success.

Robin Bell was Australia’s first recipient of a gold medal in a World Championship event. Penrith Whitewater Stadium Staff excelled in their presentation of the venue, and in their assistance in organising and running the event on behalf of the Australian Canoe Federation and the Organising Committee. The event injected considerable funds into the local community, as athletes, coaches and families visited from throughout the world. Extensive media coverage locally, nationally and internationally helped further promote Penrith and its various attributes.

The event however did have a significant impact on the financial operations of the stadium. The exclusive use period by the sport, and the interruption to the normal operations of the stadium, contributed to a reduction in overall revenue, when compared with the previous year. Total revenue for the year was $2,581,337, a decrease of 2.3% on the 2005 year. The financial outcome for the year ended 30 June 2006 resulted in a surplus before depreciation, and borrowing costs of $254,151. This compares with $380,449 for the previous year. During the financial year, $158,704 was spent in capital improvements to the facility.

The immediate challenge for the new year is the appointment of a new Centre Manager to lead the organisation. The company also needs to position itself so that it participates fully in the planning of the adjacent residential land, so as to position the business to benefit and grow from that development.

The staff of Penrith Whitewater Stadium continue to show great dedication to the business, and the management team is to be congratulated for the efficient and effective operations of the business, and the manner in which the services are delivered and the facilities presented to the public. The enthusiasm and commitment of the staff is fundamental to the continuing success of the venue.

I take this opportunity to thank my fellow Directors for their continuing commitment and input to the operations of Penrith Whitewater Stadium. I also acknowledge and thank Penrith City Council for their assistance during the financial year. The Council’s original objective of providing a world class recreation facility, at minimum financial impost to the city, whilst providing an ongoing legacy to the sport of canoe slalom, continues to be achieved.

Stadium Manager’s Report

In 2005-2006, Penrith Whitewater Stadium (PWS) hosted the 2005 Canoe Slalom World Championships. Hosting the Championships honoured a commitment to the sport that was part of the original venue financing agreement. The “Worlds”, as paddlers refer to The World Championships, is second only to the Olympic Games in terms of prestige and importance to the sport. It was very pleasing to hear positive feedback from international teams concerning the improvements made to the venue in recent years. The event was televised live throughout Australia by SBS and around the world through various international networks. This, along with accompanying print advertising, provided a great deal of exposure for the sport, the venue, and the city of Penrith. However, hosting an event of this magnitude had a significant impact on PWS, and contributed to a reduction in profitability when compared to the previous year.

Total revenue decreased by 2.3% from $2,619,655 in 2004-2005 to $2,559,616 in 2005-2006, but still exceeded the target established in the 2003-2008 Business Plan of $2,200,447, by 16%. Total expenses increased by 3.8% from $2,474,741 to $2,567,668, resulting in a decrease in operating profit of 106% from $144,914 to -$ 8,052, and a decrease in net profit of 311% from $48,740 to -$102,651.

Participation in activities offered by PWS remained strong, but decreased overall compared to the very high levels achieved in the previous year. Slalom training was a notable exception, with an increase of 54%. This increase does not take into account training that took place during the 2 week exclusive period of the World Championships.

Whitewater rafting remains the most popular activity and the highest revenue earner for PWS. Although participation decreased by 12% from 30,546 to 26,841, participants for the year compared to the previous year, total revenue for rafting decreased by only 2.5% from $1,808,558 to $1,763,306, due to an increase in gift certificate sales from $259,085 to $322,901 and a rafting price increase from $66 to $72 per person.

The Whitewater Terrace Café had a rather unsettled year, with the absence of the Café Supervisor from October, and the subsequent loss of most of the regular staff members by February. A new Café Manager was appointed in April, and the quality and consistency of the food and service improved markedly. Total revenue for the Café decreased by 3.1% compared to the previous from $332,930 to $322,735.

‘Word of mouth’ continues to be the most effective form of promotion for PWS’s activities, which is evidence of the quality and consistency of customer service provided by the staff. To maximise the effectiveness of the marketing campaign, the budget was increased to allow more advertising in Sydney publications, as well as TV and radio, to achieve a more effective presence in the metropolitan area.

PWS maintained its strong support for the sport of canoe slalom. In addition to hosting the Canoe Slalom World Championships, the venue also hosted the Penrith Whitewater International Slalom Series, Australian Team Selection Series, NSW State Slalom Championships, NSW Southern Zone Slalom Championships, PWS Winter Slalom Series and the PWS Freestyle Classic. PWS facilitated over 600 hours of slalom training for Australian and International paddlers. This included 282 hours for the Australian team, as part of the Canoe Slalom National Centre of Excellence (NCE) Agreement between PWS, the Australian Institute of Sport (AIS), the New South Wales Institute of Sport (NSWIS) and Australian Canoeing. The value of PWS’s contribution to the agreement, less the AIS and NSWIS contribution, was approximately $88,500. PWS also sponsored access to training for the Western Sydney Academy of Sport (WSAS) Slalom Program to the value of $21,800.

PWS continued its support of various charitable and community organisations. This included the donation of 240 Gift certificates to the value of $17,280, and the provision of swiftwater awareness training for river restoration volunteers, to the value of $3,960.

Thank you to all PWS staff for the loyalty and perseverance they have shown in guiding the company through a challenging year. Thanks also to the PWS Board of Directors for their ongoing dedication and support. The successful operation of PWS relies upon the support of the general public and a network of companies and organisations. PWS would like to thank the general public, suppliers, venue stakeholders and neighbouring organisations for their support, and looks forward to working together more closely in the future to maximise the ongoing success of PWS and Penrith Lakes.

Board of Directors

The Articles of Association of the above company provide, in part, that:

1. To provide continuity the members of the Board shall resign on a rotating basis. At the First Annual General Meeting, three (3) Directors (including one (1) Councillor) shall resign. At the Second Annual General Meeting, three (3) members shall resign (including one (1) Councillor). Thereafter, the members of the Board, except the Council Officer, shall resign after they have served on the Board for three (3) years after appointment or re-appointment to the Board.

2. All retiring Directors shall be eligible for re-appointment.

Council should note that, as per the Articles of Association, Councillor Ross Fowler, Rebecca Wright and Conrad Ozog resigned at the Eighth Annual General Meeting of Penrith Whitewater Stadium Ltd held on 28 September 2006. Councillor Ross Fowler and Rebecca Wright nominated for re-appointment. Conrad Ozog did not seek re-appointment. It was resolved at the Eighth Annual General Meeting of Penrith Whitewater Stadium Limited that Penrith City Council be requested to endorse the appointment of Councillor Ross Fowler and Rebecca Wright as Directors of Penrith Whitewater Stadium Ltd.

A replacement for Conrad Ozog will be pursued by the Board.

Council’s Director of City Strategy, Mr Alan Stoneham, is the General Manager’s representative and Company Secretary.

Councillor Ross Fowler was re-appointed Chairman and Helen Brownlee, Deputy Chairman.

Financial Accountant – Entities Comment

Penrith Whitewater Stadium Limited posted a loss for the 2005-06 financial year of $102,651. This Loss followed two consecutive years of profit of $48,738 (2004-05) and $1,152 (2003-04). This loss was after providing for depreciation costs of $240,482 and borrowing costs of $116,320. Whitewater rafting, the largest revenue generator for the company decreased by $42,252, 2.5 % in monetary terms and the number of participants decreased by 3,705, 12.1 %.

The hosting of the 2005 Canoe Slalom World Championships, which honoured a commitment to the sport, part of the original venue financing agreement, had a significant impact on the profitability of the Company. The facility and Penrith gained considerable domestic and international exposure through SBS’s live television broadcast and from various international networks. The local economy benefited from the injection of considerable funds as athletes, coaches and families visited from throughout the world.

An advance to Australian Canoeing Incorporated of $107,000 for costs involved in staging the 2005 Canoe Slalom World Championships to be repaid over four years on a quarterly basis has placed the cash reserves of the company under some pressure. Council recently resolved to advance the Company $60,188 the amount programmed to be still outstanding at June 30 2007 to alleviate this pressure. Additionally the Company has called upon internal loan funding from Council of $65,000 to finance additional capital works during 2006/07.

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Penrith Whitewater Stadium Ltd - Annual Report and Board of Directors be received.

2. Councillor Ross Fowler and Rebecca Wright be appointed to fill vacancies that occurred at the Eighth Annual General Meeting of the Penrith Whitewater Stadium Ltd.

3. Council agree to underwrite the operation of the Penrith Whitewater Stadium Ltd until the presentation to Council of the Penrith Whitewater Stadium Ltd Annual Report for 2006/07.

4. Council congratulate the Board of the Penrith Whitewater Stadium Ltd on their success and achievements over the 12 months to the end of June 2006.

5. Council provide a letter of appreciation and recognition to Conrad Ozog for his contribution to the Board.

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.

*Policy Review Committee Meeting*	*13 November 2006*
*The City as a Social Place*

The City as a Social Place

City of Penrith Regional Indoor Aquatic and Recreation Centre Ltd - Annual Report and Board of Directors

Compiled by: Gary Dean, Facilities Operations Manager

Authorised by: Steve Hackett, Director - City Services

Strategic Program Term Achievement: The City’s recreation and leisure facilities and services meet its needs and are optimally used.

Critical Action: Facilitate joint use of the City’s recreation and leisure facilities, including co-location of programs.

Presenters: Councillor Ross Fowler - Chairman - Annual Report and Board of Directors

Geoff Yates - General Manager - Annual Report and Board of Directors

Purpose:

To provide Council with details following the twelfth Annual General Meeting of the City of Penrith Regional Indoor and Aquatic Recreation Centre Ltd. The Chairman of the Board & General Manager will make a short presentation. The report recommends that the information be received, that certain appointments be made to fill the vacancies, and that Council agree to underwrite the company for a further period of 12 months.

Annual Report

This report to Council follows the Twelfth Annual General Meeting of the Company, held on 17 October 2006, for the trading period 1 July 2005 to 30 June 2006.

The Chairman of the Board and General Manager will be in attendance tonight to make a short presentation which will focus on:

· The Past Year

- Highlights

- Financial position

- Issues arising

· The Year Ahead

Following are their reports extracted from the Annual Report.

Chairman’s Report

I am pleased to present the Chairman’s Report to the Twelfth Annual General Meeting of the City of Penrith Regional Indoor Aquatic and Recreation Centre Limited.

The 2005/2006 year again presented the Company with a number of challenges. The trading result and patronage levels have been disappointing, however the Board, with management, have been focused on improving viability. Patronage levels have decreased mainly in the Learn to Swim classes. However trading in the Fitness areas remains buoyant.

The Company recorded an operating loss of $1,051,805 after the transfer of the

Hydrotherapy Centre asset to Council. As a result of this transfer, the company sustained a loss of $938,780, and taking this into consideration, the trading loss for the year reduces to $113,025. This compares favourably with the loss sustained in 2005 of $316,769. Overall, income for the year of $3,032,980 increased 11.2%, when compared with 2005. The result was after providing for employee benefits of $1,957,077, and after expenditure of $118,389 on repairs and maintenance. Major plant issues continue to cause concern. The Centre, in conjunction with Council, have undertaken an audit of the condition of the facilities, to ascertain what necessary repairs need to be undertaken. Penrith City Council continues to be kept fully informed with regard to the financial position of the Centre and has agreed to continue to underwrite the Centre’s operations.

Water usage is an important community issue. Water wastage is a concern, and Council has been successful in obtaining funding to install a wastewater recycling plant (to treat pool filter backwash water), and a rainwater harvesting facility. These projects will substantially reduce the amount of water the Centre needs to draw from the mains supply.

The Hydrotherapy Centre income has improved. This reflects a concerted effort by staff in getting greater recognition of the Hydrotherapy Centre services with medical professionals and hospitals. A review of this section of the business will be undertaken in the first half of the new financial year to plan its future direction.

Meeting patrons’ expectations and keeping the facility attractive is to be a prime focus in the ensuing year. Planning is already underway to improve the amenity and functionality of parts of the main Centre to make it more attractive for patrons to visit.

I would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge the efforts of the General Manager, Geoff Yates and his Management Team, as well as all the staff, in continuing to deliver a community facility that remains a leader in the industry. Through their commitment and positive outlook, the Centre will continue to be acknowledged for its friendly, customer focused and professional management.

In conclusion, I would like to thank my fellow Directors for their contributions and efforts during what has been a difficult year.

Centre General Manager’s Report

I am pleased to present the General Manager’s Report for the year ended 30 June 2006. This year, a number of operational matters impacted the operations of the Centre. Most notably, the transfer of the Hydrotherapy Centre asset and loan to Council has relieved a large financial burden from the Company.

Patronage again has been lower than predicted targets. There was a significant drop in Learn to Swim participation levels. Customer surveys have indicated that the drop is due mainly to the current economic climate with tightening household expenditure. The Learn to Swim Team have embarked on restructure of the lessons so that parents will see results sooner and therefore see value for money.

Financial Overview

The Company posted a loss of $1,051,805, after accounting for the transfer of the Hydrotherapy asset to Council, depreciation provision of $103,963, and Repairs and Maintenance of $118,389.

Operating Revenue was $3,032,980, which was an increase of 10% on last year’s revenue. Membership Subscriptions were $722,883, with 1525 active members as at 30 June 2006.

Income from Hydrotherapy was $195,361, an increase of 9.5% on last year.

An issue which had a major impact on staff costs was the reintroduction of weekend penalty rates in October 2005. This had a flow on effect in staff cost areas including superannuation, payroll tax and leave liability costs.

A conscientious effort by all staff to keep costs under control saw savings occur in other operational areas, and I commend the staff for their undertakings.

Full financial details are contained in the accompanying accounts and notes to the Financial Statements.

Personnel

This year saw relative stability in staff with low turnover. We have been fortunate in being able to attract higher calibre staff, which is reflected in the standard of performance currently being experienced. The training of our staff to a higher level of competency than the industry standard will again be a focus over the next 12 months.

I would like to mention the excellent job that Mrs Ann Mathias, Learn to Swim Manager

performed in our Learn to Swim program over many years. Ann retired earlier this year to spend time with her husband. The Learn to Swim Manager’s role has been ably filled by Sally Philp, who has combined this with her Children’s Programs duties.

Achievements

Ripples, this year, won a number of awards, which reflects the great work our staff produce in the delivery of our services. They were:

· Winner Specialised Business Category

· Winner Best Health Facility The Business Awards

· 2nd Place – NSW Water Safety Awards

The Future

As a result of the recent Customer Satisfaction Survey, we will be focussing on improving the building asset in areas that were identified as being below expectations. Some works will be undertaken in conjunction with Council, whilst others will be the Centre’s responsibility.

Ripples has commenced a program to seek accreditation under the International Customer Service Standard. This program is aimed at improving our entire operations, including:

· Service Delivery

· Facilities

· Financial Performance

· Staff Development.

All staff will have an involvement in the process and will lead to a more focussed, competent and qualified workforce.

Acknowledgements

In conclusion, I would like to thank the Board of Directors for their support, guidance and encouragement during the year. I look forward to continuing this relationship in the year ahead.

Finally, to the staff, our greatest asset! I thank them for their support and hard work in what has been a tough year for all of us. With the continuing support of the Ripples Team we will meet the future challenges and see that Ripples remains

‘First in Fun Health and Fitness Everytime’

Board of Directors

The Articles of Association of the company provide, in part, that:

1. To provide continuity the members of the Board shall resign on a rotating basis. At the First Annual General Meeting, three (3) Directors (including one (1) Councillor) shall resign. At the Second Annual General Meeting, three (3) members shall resign (including one (1) Councillor). Thereafter, the members of the Board, except the Council officer, shall resign after they have served on the Board for three (3) years after appointment or re-appointment to the Board.

2. All retiring Directors shall be eligible for re-appointment.

Council should note that, as per the Articles of Association, Councillor Ross Fowler and Mr Alan Brown resigned at the Annual General Meeting of the Company, held 17 October 2006, and nominated for re-appointment. It was resolved at the Twelfth Annual General Meeting of the City of Penrith Regional Indoor Aquatic and Recreation Centre Ltd that Penrith City Council be requested to endorse the appointment of Councillor Ross Fowler and Mr Alan Brown as continuing Directors of the City of Penrith Regional Indoor Aquatic and Recreation Centre Ltd.

Council’s Director of City Planning, Mr Craig Butler, remains on the Board as Council’s General Manager’s representative and Company Secretary.

Councillor Greg Davies and Mr John Cottee were elected Chairman and Deputy Chairman respectively.

At the Ordinary Board Meeting on 17 October 2006 Councillor Steve Simat resigned as a Director. Council will need to nominate a replacement for Councillor Steve Simat.

Financial Accountant Entities – comment

The 2005-06 result for the City of Penrith Regional Indoor Aquatic and Recreation Centre Ltd continues the recent trend of operating losses for the Company. These operating losses had until this financial year been absorbed by prior year profits especially those generated from the recognition of grants and contributions funding the construction of the Hydrotherapy Centre. The reported loss for 2005-06 of $1,051,805 includes the impact of returning the Hydrotherapy Centre to Council, a loss of $938,780, providing a trading loss of $113,025 for the year. For the first time the Company was required to call upon the Council for a cash subsidy in 2005-06. Without this subsidy of $290,000 the trading loss for the company would have been $403,025 which followed a loss of $316,769 sustained in the 2004-05 financial year.

The transfer of the Hydrotherapy facility back to Council relieves the Company of the depreciation costs and debt servicing costs associated with that facility. The current economic climate has placed considerable strain on the availability of ‘discretionary spending’ for the leisure market, the market for which the Company is competing. The losses of recent years can mainly be attributed to decreasing patronage levels particularly in the ‘wet’ areas of the Centre. Both the Chairman and the General Manager have highlighted in their reports that the Company will focus on meeting patron expectations and making the Centre more attractive to patrons during the coming financial year. Council has agreed to provide a cash subsidy of $220,000 during the new financial year.

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1. The information contained in the report on City of Penrith Regional Indoor Aquatic and Recreation Centre Ltd - Annual Report and Board of Directors be received.

2. Councillor Ross Fowler and Mr Alan Brown be appointed to fill the vacancy that occurred at the Twelfth Annual General Meeting of the City of Penrith Regional Indoor Aquatic and Recreation Centre Ltd.

3. Council agree to underwrite the operations of the City of Penrith Regional Indoor Aquatic and Recreation Centre Ltd for 12 months to the end of June 2007.

4. Council congratulate the Board of the City of Penrith Regional Indoor Aquatic and Recreation Centre on their success and achievements over the 12 months to end of June 2006.

5. Council nominate a Councillor to replace Councillor Steve Simat on the Board.

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.

*Policy Review Committee Meeting*	*13 November 2006*
*The City as a Social Place*

The City as a Social Place

Penrith Performing and Visual Arts Ltd - Annual Report and Board of Directors

Compiled by: Gary Dean, Facilities Operations Manager

Authorised by: Steve Hackett, Director - City Services

Strategic Program Term Achievement: The cultural assets of the City have been integrated to establish its reputation as a creative place.

Critical Action: Further integrate the City’s principal cultural facilities to maximise community benefit.

Presenters: Mr Peter Anderson AM, Chairman - Joan Sutherland Performing Arts Centre - Annual Report

Councillor Pat Sheehy AM, Chairman - Penrith Regional Gallery and Lewers Bequest - Annual Report

Mr John Kirkman, CEO - Penrith Performing and Visual Arts Ltd - Annual Report

Purpose:

To provide details to Council following the first Annual General Meeting of Penrith Performing and Visual Arts Ltd. The Chairman and Chief Executive Officer will be making a brief presentation to this meeting. The report recommends that the information be received, that certain Directors be re-appointed, and that Council underwrite the operations of the Company for a further period of 12 months.

Background

For the period of July 2005 to June 2006, the Joan Sutherland Performing Arts Centre (JSPAC) and Penrith Regional Gallery and Lewers Bequest (PRG) operated as separate entities under the direction of their respective Boards and Staff Structures.

Concurrently with that, Council was also working towards the integration of both of these significant cultural facilities into a single entity. That work concluded in July this year. Council, at its meeting on 3 July 2006, adopted the Constitution of the new Company, ‘Penrith Performing and Visual Arts Ltd’, and approved the new Board members. The first meeting of that new cultural entity occurred on 9 August 2006.

This new company is effectively the continuation of the former JSPAC Company. Council’s actions rendered the PRG Company redundant, and decisions have now been taken by that Board to ‘wind-up’ the Company.

Notwithstanding Council’s actions in integrating the two separate entities, it is still necessary for Council to receive a report on each of those entities’ Annual Reports. It is also necessary under the Constitution of the new Company for it to hold its AGM in October, even though it has only been in operation for a short period.

The Chairman of each of the Boards and the Chief Executive Officer will be in attendance tonight to make a short presentation which will focus on:

· The Past Year

- Highlights

- Financial position

- Issues arising

· The Year Ahead

Following are their reports extracted from the Annual Reports

Joan Sutherland Performing Arts Centre

Chairman’s Report

This past year has been one of both anticipation and, to a lesser degree, trepidation as the long-awaited merger with the Penrith Regional Gallery and the Lewers Bequest moved towards its completion.

The official opening of the extensions by the Honourable Morris Iemma MP, Premier of NSW, was a joyous occasion for all who attended, and a fitting tribute to all those who had played a role in achieving this wonderful facility.

It has been a year of new initiatives and greater cooperation between the Joan, the Gallery and Railway Street Theatre Company. The finalisation of an agreement between the “merged” Joan and Railway Street remains a major priority for the year ahead.

Many people, including Board members and staff, have contributed to the success and standing of the Joan Sutherland Centre over the years, and it is appropriate that I pay tribute to them all for their contributions.

The continued support of the Penrith City Council and the NSW Ministry for the Arts is welcome and appreciated by all who support the concepts of equity and access.

The year ahead will provide us all with the opportunity to see this unique new entity commence a thrilling journey along the road to the fulfilment of its boundless potential.

CEO Report

2005-06 Overview:

The financial year 2005-06 (which includes the period immediate to the completion of capital upgrade of the Centre) has been a period of challenge, ‘teething’ and development for the Centre (particularly in the following areas) ie

1. Staff

2. Operations

3. Program and Partnership Development

4. Funding

5. Marketing and Promotion

6. Strategic Planning

7. Governance

8. Conservatorium.

It is my view that the Centre weathered a range of operational and resource challenges with relative ease, indicating the potentials for positive future outcomes and development. I would point out, however, that this has not always been easy, and has posed considerable pressure on staff and stakeholders. In particular, I would draw the Board’s attention to the following:

1. Staff:

Much work occurred after 1 July 2005, to scope out an iterim staff structure to take the Centre into its expanded operational role. It should be noted that, at 1 July 2005, it was found that extant staffing levels and structure were insufficient to cope with expanded levels of physical and program operations. The Centre was simply understaffed. Therefore, the following interim staffing structure was endorsed by the Board (with the intention that it would be further refined to accommodate the intended integrated cultural entities):

· CEO

· Director Conservatorium

· (Acting) Director of Drama

· Office Administrator

· Box Office Supervisor

· Education and Audience Development Officer (Music and Theatre)

· Production Co-ordinator (Technical)

· Front of House and Residency Manager

· Administrative Assistant (Conservatorium)

· Box Office Assistant (Casual)

· Front of House staff (Casual).

Under this structure, the following positions were made permanent (previously they had been part-time or contract positions):

· Box Office Supervisor

· Production Co-ordinator (Technical)

· Administrative Assistant (Conservatorium).

The following new positions were established:

· Education and Audience Development Officer (Music and Theatre). Co-funded Arts NSW

· Front of House Manager

· Margaret Farm Residency Coordinator. Funded ArtsNSW

· (Acting) Director of Drama. Advisory position courtesy Railway Street Company.

It should also be noted that, as intended, further work has continued regarding the development of a new staffing structure for combined entity Penrith Performing & Visual Arts Ltd (comprising JSPAC, PRG&TLB and RSTC).

One area of particular challenge has been the staffing function of the Centre’s financial management systems and operations. As of May 2006, following the resignation of the Office Manager, the Centre’s financial and administrative operations were tasked by Mrs Diane Crease (Railway Street Theatre Company), with assistance from Penrith City Council officers, Ms Tina Magdic (Margaret Farm Coordinator) and Mrs Jenny Allan (PRG&TLB Acting Office Manager). This has been a most onerous undertaking, completed successfully under great pressure. For this, I thank all concerned for their efforts and assistance. It should be noted that the work functions regarding the new entity’s financial and administrative operations have been analysed and re-scoped in preparation for the entity’s new staff and operational structure.

2. Operations:

With capital redevelopment, the Centre tripled its physical size, resulting in increased pressure on operational requirements, policies and procedures. Over the year, a great deal of work was committed to (and continues), regarding the review and updating of a number of extant operational policies and procedures, eg:

· Bookings (implementation of computer system)

· Front of House staff procedures and rosters

· Night supervision, security and set up

· Visitor and bookings statistics

· Cleaning.

With regard to the Centre’s physical and technical opertaion, it should also be noted that the new building took a number of months to settle in and ‘teethe’ (particularly with regard to air-conditioning). (Most areas of concern and dissatisfaction are now resolved).

It should also be mentioned that the Centre also had to bear the cost of a number of required capital items not covered in the Capital Works specification and/or program, or were required as long overdue capital maintenance or replacement eg:

· Stage door and access gate security and communication system

· Backstage CCTV communication system

· Dressing room fit out

· Q Theatre to FOH audience recall and communication system

· Fire door alarm signal systems (Levels 1 and 2)

· Replacement of sound and lighting equipment.

3. Program and Partnership Development:

Throughout 2005-06, much work was undertaken to review extant performance and education programs and partnerships, and to commence planning for 2006-07. Of particular focus were the following programs:

· Consolidation and redevelopment of the Morning Melodies program

· Concept planning for 2006 Six Sundays In Winter Program

· Concept planning and implementation of Hitler and Us program

· Concept planning for For Matthew & Others performance program

· Development of strategic links with Sydney Conservatorium of Music

· Development of strategic links with Campbelltown Arts Centre and Casula Powerhouse Arts Centres

· Commencement of Conservatorium Curriculum development

· Development of cross art-form performance and education programs.

4. Funding and Subsidy:

2005-06 was a positive year in terms of being able, for the first time, to adequately predict and determine the Centre’s cost of operation (including income and expenditure actuals). Whilst the Centre posted a loss of $197,477, this was below an estimated (and anticipated) loss of $250,000 and included large increases in depreciation ($28,000), utilities, backlog maintenance and equipment replacement. The deficit also underscored the efficacy of previous estimates that the Centre’s subsidy should be set at $750,000.

However, acknowledging that the improved physical infrastructure required increased resources to further maximise audience development and operational requirements, Penrith City Council increased annual subsidy to the Centre from $300,000 to $500,000 per anum (with a further commitment of $200,000 for marketing and audience development initiatives under consideration at the time of writing). This considerable and very concrete commitment underscored Council’s ongoing commitment to enabling the Centre to ‘grow its business’, and therefore fulfil Council’s and the community’s desire (and demand) for cultural programs and activities of excellence and resonance. For this I, the staff and the Centre’s stakeholders are most grateful to Council.

In 2005-06, the Centre also commenced application to state and federal funding agencies for program, staff and project support. The Centre has received the grants for the following projects:

· ArtsNSW: Funding of $110,000 to manage the Margaret Farm Residency Project. The funding includes a management fee budget allocation, which would allow the Centre to create a full time Front of House and Residency Manager position

· ArtsNSW: Funding of $38,000 for three years for an Education and Audience Development Officer (Music and Theatre) position

· NSW Department of Health: Funding of $25,000 for the For Matthew & Others project

· NSW Department of Housing: Funding of $25,000 for the For Matthew & Others project

· Penrith RSL: Funding of $8,000 for the For Matthew & Others project.

5. Marketing and Promotion:

In 2005-06, work commenced on the development of new strategically focused marketing and promotion strategies and planning. Of particular importance was the secondment of Dimity Mullane (Penrith Regional Gallery Marketing and Promotions Officer) to the Centre to undertake the following:

· Audit of extant JSPAC marketing and promotions activities, methodologies, budgets and collateral

· Comparative evaluation of similar cultural institutions, eg Parramatta Riverside re the development, methodology and resourcing of marketing and promotions activities

· JSPAC marketing and promotions needs analysis

· Opportunities for synergistic marketing and promotion across PCC cultural, educative and leisure entities

· Report to the CEO and Board re possible future JSPAC marketing and promotions strategic planning (including activities, methodologies, resources and collateral).

6. Strategic Planning:

During 2005-06, the following strategic planning programs were initiated:

· Development of Penrith Performing & Visual Arts Ltd Strategic Plan (ongoing)

· Preparation of 2005-06 Business Plan

· Preparation of 2006-07 JSPAC Business Plan

· Preparation of New Initiatives and Capital Replacement funding submissions

· Development of service specifications for JSPAC, Railway Street Theatre Company, Penrith Regional Gallery & The Lewers Bequest.

7. Governance:

Throughout the 2005-06 financial year, much work was completed to finalise the amalgamation of the JSPAC, PRG&TLB and RSTC into a single cultural entity. This has been a careful and considered process, involving staff from the three separate entities, the various Boards and Council. To date the process has been a successful and positive process.

8. Conservatorium:

Throughout 2005-06, programs at the Conservatorium increased with many teachers undertaking a more innovative approach. Work commenced on development of a comprehensive curriculum document.

In conclusion, I would like to express thanks and appreciation to the exemplary staffs of the JSPAC, PRG&TLB and RSTC – they have been magnificent in a sometimes character building year. In particular, I would like to especially thank the executive members of the team – Valda Silvy, Anne Loxley, Victoria Harbutt and David Hollywood.

It is my view that the new combined cultural entity, Penrith Performing & Visual Arts, has the basis for a strong and creative team with which to tackle the challenges that lay ahead. Together, we will continue to build for a strong, creative and sustainable future.

Lastly, I would like to thank the Chairman, Directors of the Board and Penrith City Council for their support and encouragement shown to staff, the Centre’s stakeholders and myself over the last 12 months. It has been most appreciated.

Penrith Regional Gallery and Lewers Bequest

Chairman’s Report

2005-06 has been a period of greater certainty for the Gallery. Particularly with the appointment of the Acting Gallery Manager Ms Anne Loxley and the commencement of capital works in March 2006.

With the appointment of Ms Loxley the Gallery was able to reclaim much programming momentum lost due to the delay of capital works. In particular, Ms Loxley was able to deliver, at very short notice, three excellent exhibition programs in the lead up to capital works. Staff of the Gallery have also been working most productively with their colleagues at the Joan Sutherland Performing Arts Centre in the development of cross artform and education programs.

The commencement of capital works necessitated the closure of the Gallery and transfer of staff to temporary accommodation at the Joan Sutherland Performing Arts Centre. It should be noted that staff continued to deliver off-site education (and limited exhibition programs), and concentrated on strategic planning and future programming activities.

It is envisaged that capital works will be completed by late November 2006.

(However, it should be noted that closure for capital works has had a serious effect on Gallery attendances and income. This will be reversed with re-opening and commencement of the exhibition and education programs).

The process of integration with Council's other cultural entities continued apace. This process was not without difficulty and challenge. However the Board's commitment to the fact and process of integration is complete and non negotiable. Similarly so proper corporate governance.

Penrith City Council's support of cultural facilities continues and Council's assistance and commitment to the Gallery is acknowledged - and much appreciated. The support of ArtsNSW has also been of particular assistance in recent years as well as the ongoing sponsorships from SITA Environmental Solutions.

It remains for me to express appreciation to the CEO, Acting Gallery Manager and staff, my Board colleagues, members of the Friends and other volunteers who continue to support the Gallery.

CEO Report

2005-06 Overview:

Due to the delay in capital works, 2005-06 was an uneven year in terms of the development and delivery of exhibition, education, audience development and education programs. Closure for capital works impacted negatively across all areas of operation (except Collection and garden management and conservation).

Performance indicators reveal the following in the key result areas:

1. Visitation fell from 43,786 to 30,515

2. Exhibitions presented fell from 33 to 30

3. Promotion valuation achieved was substantially reduced

4. Events/Workshops/Lectures fell from 660 to 410

5. Education Program participants fell from 8,2233 to 6,907.

It is anticipated that this trend will be reversed in 2007, following completion of capital works and Gallery re-opening in November 2006.

2005-06 Exhibition Program:

2005-06 exhibitions were as follows:

· Art is a Social Space – Western Front. (23 June-17 Jul 05)

Western Front showcased contemporary artists and curators engaged with Western Sydney in six simultaneous exhibitions

· Operation Art. (23 Jul-21 Aug 05). Children’s art from across NSW

· From the Collection. (1 May- 24 Jun 05)

Collection works showcasing modernist Australian art between 1940 to 1970 including the Lewers, Hinder, Klippel, Olsen, Laverty and Lynn

· Mini Works. (27 Aug-2 Oct 05).

Miniature works from ten Nepean Arts and Design Centre artists with a selection of Adolph Gustave Plate works from the Collection

· The Cherry Pickers. (27 Aug-27 Nov 05)

An exhibition of cancer awareness posters by TAFE graphic design students

· The Visitor. (27 Aug-27 Nov 05)

Photographic exhibition by cancer survivor, Evan Kallipolitis

· Deadly. (3 Dec 05-29 Jan 06)

Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander work from Campbelltown Art Centre including Robert Campbell Jnr, Lola Greeno, Emily Kame Kngwarreye, Kitty Kantilla, David Malangi, John Mawurndjal, Gloria Petyarre, Ken Thaiday

· Sculpted. (26 Nov 05-29 Jan 06)

Four intense approaches to hand-crafted sculpture - artists: Karen Coull, Cassandra Hard Lawrie, Haro (aka Prins) & John Nottage

· Between the Lines: 1995-200". (4 Feb 06-5 March 06)

First solo exhibition of Adam Cullen’s works on paper - ink, acrylic, watercolour, collage and etching

· Sheltered Life: Noel McKenna. (4 Feb 06-5 March 06).

Paintings and sculptures in a meditation on home and domesticity.

NB: Gallery closed for renovation on 6 March.

2005-06 Education Programs:

2005-06 Education Program outcomes included:

1. Delivering tailored education excursions including art appreciation, art making and site specific activities engaging with the heritage site

2. Provision of outreach services and art making activities ( including interactive language and literacy based workshop activities)

3. Presenting disability workshop programs (with particular focus on programs for visitors who have a vision impairment and people with an intellectual disability)

4. Kids and family based independent activities booklet for targeted exhibitions ie for the Deadly and Operation Art exhibitions

5. Presenting teacher development and enrichment programs for Operation Art

6. Holiday workshop programs

7. Public mural project with Indigenous artist/elder Elaine Russell

8. Vision impaired access initiatives, audio description available on all exhibitions and Braille for targeted exhibition (Sculpted)

9. Development and delivery of the Tea Cake Tour program, ie interactive lectures based on Gallery archive photographs, delivered offsite, eg Cowra in western NSW.

Curatorial Programs :

Much work was done in 2005-06 to develop long term curatorial planning and development. In particular, much emphasis was placed on major cross institutional (and art-form) projects, eg:

· For Matthew & Others: Journeys with Schizophrenia project with Campbelltown Arts Centre, Ivan Dougherty Gallery

· The ABC of Everything with the ABC Television (Arts and Entertainment) and Campbelltown Arts Centre

· 3CWest with the MCA and Casula Powerhouse Arts Centre.

Volunteers:

Throughout 2005-06, the Gallery continued to implement a range of 'volunteer' programs (including volunteers, interns and work for the dole). The program was invaluable in further developing community links, professional development and workplace training opportunities, garden conservation and archival programs, and visitor service initiatives.

Collection Management:

Major focus for 2005-06 was:

· the preparation and presentation of major elements of the Collection for exhibition at the JSPAC

· preparation, storage and/or protection of the Collection in anticipation of the capital works program

· conservation of outdoor elements of the outdoor Collection as part of the capital works program.

Garden Conservation:

Implementation of the comprehensive Heritage Garden Conservation Management Plan and Maintenance Schedule continued. It should be noted that in 2005-06 the heritage gardener received the following assistance: assistant heritage gardener (1 day per week) and monthly heritage/conservation advice. Advice and assistance was provided by Council’s Parks and Gardens staff.

Governance:

In 2005-06, much work was done to progress the process and planning for the the integration of Council's cultural entities (Penrith Regional Gallery, Joan Sutherland Performing Arts Centre and Railway Street Theatre Company). The process of integration was completed, with the processses regarding voluntary receivership nearing completion.

Marketing and Promotion:

In 2005-06 objectives were to:

1. Target and engage Western Sydney specific audiences

2. Create and promote community participation and involvement in the Arts

3. Create creative partnerships and resource, eg C3West project with Casula Powerhouse Arts Centre and Museum of Contemporary Art, and the For Matthew & Others project with Campbelltown Arts Centre and Ivan Dougherty Gallery

4. Continue to develop and maintain exhibition specific database networks for direct mail as well as electronic communication. The 2005-06 program also focused on community focused initiatives, eg The Cherry Pickers.

Revenue and Sponsorship:

The closing of the Gallery in March 2006 seriously impacted on the Gallery’s revenue stream. However, this will be reversed when the Gallery re-opens in late November 2006.

Staff:

Throughout 2005-6 the Gallery operated with a number of acting and/or relieving positions:

· Anne Loxley commenced work as Acting Gallery Manager in October 2005

· Jenny Allan commenced work as relieving (part-time) Office Manager in August 2005.

Marketing and promotion duties were subcontracted to More Publicity (on a project specific basis) following Dimity Mullane taking maternity leave on late 2 February.

Company Status

As indicated earlier in this report, steps are now being taken to ‘wind-up’ the Company. There are certain procedural steps involved and Council officers are assisting the Board. At its meeting on 14 August 2006, the Board, following consideration of the financial report, resolved to sign a ‘Declaration of Solvency’. The Board met again on 20 September 2006, and resolved that “Penrith Regional Gallery and Lewers Bequest Ltd be voluntarily wound-up and that Lower, Russell and Farr be appointed as liquidators for the purposes of winding-up the affairs of the Company.”

The matter is now with the liquidators. The Board will need to meet again (before year end) to receive a report from the liquidators. Formal de-registration of the Company then takes place.

Financial Accountant – Entities Comment

· Joan Sutherland Performing Arts Centre

The JSPAC recorded a loss of $197,472 for the 2005-06 financial year. Council’s subsidy to the company was $500,000, the same as 2004-05.

2005-06 saw the official opening of the expanded facility incorporating the Q theatre. With this expanded facility came increased costs, especially in relation to the revised staffing structure considered necessary to fully utilise the new facility and the merged entities into the future. Employee Costs increased by $201,401 or 64 %, depreciation expense increased by $21,971 or 51.2 % and other expenses increased by $76,389 or 10.4 %. Revenue not including Council’s subsidy increased by $183,869 or 40.2 %.

· Penrith Regional Gallery and Lewers Bequest

The trading result for the year ended 30 June 2006 was a surplus of $17,591 compared to a surplus of $10,440 for the year ended 30 June 2005. This surplus was achieved from revenues of $835,876 (2005 $1,067,129) and expenses of $818,285 (2005 $1,056,689).

Council’s subsidy to the PRG was $655,350, an increase of $17,010 or 2.7%. Grant Income of $107,698 from the Ministry for the Arts was utilised for programmes approved by the Ministry. This was a reduction of $150,600 or 58.3% of the total grants for the previous year. This reduction reflects both the inability to attract funding and the inability to complete projects due to the uncertainty over the timing of the building reconstruction works currently underway. Income from sales of goods and services and from other sources was $42,465 and $30,363, a reduction of 63.5% and 44.0% respectively. Employee costs decreased by $72,511 or 15.0%. These reduced costs are mostly attributable to the late replacement for the Gallery Manager following his appointment as Chief Executive Officer of the Penrith Bicentennial Performing Arts Centre limited and the non-replacement of the Office Manager following his resignation in late 2005. Other expenses reduced by $167,119 or 29.3%. The reduction to revenues and other expenses reflects the reduced exhibition program for 2006 and the fact that the gallery was effectively closed for the last three months of the financial year.

Responsibility for the operations of the Gallery passed from the Penrith Regional Gallery and Lewers Bequest Limited to the newly formed Penrith Performing and Visual Arts Ltd from 1 July 2006. The Penrith Regional Gallery and Lewers Bequest Limited has appointed a liquidator to undertake a voluntary liquidation to wind up the company.

Penrith Performing and Visual Arts Ltd – Board of Directors

The Articles of Association of the above Company provide, in part, that

1. To provide continuity the members of the Board of Directors, except for the General Manager or his/her nominee, shall retire on a rotating basis. At the first Annual General Meeting after 1 July 2006, five (5) directors shall retire (including one (1) Councillor). At the second Annual General Meeting after 1 July 2006 five (5) Directors shall retire (including one (1) Councillor). At the third Annual General Meeting after 1 July 2006 five (5) Directors shall retire. Thereafter the members of the Board of Directors, shall retire after they have served on the Board of Directors for three (3) years after appointment or re-appointment to the Board of Directors.

2. All retiring Directors shall be eligible for re-appointment.

Council should note that, as per the Articles of Association, Councillor Pat Sheehy, Councillor Ross Fowler, Gillian Appleton, John Mullane and Cathryn Jarman resigned at the first Annual General Meeting of Penrith Performing and Visual Arts Ltd held on 11 October 2006 and nominated for re-appointment. It was resolved, at the first Annual General Meeting of Penrith Performing and Visual Arts Ltd, that Penrith City Council be requested to endorse the appointment of Councillor Pat Sheehy, Councillor Ross Fowler, Gillian Appleton, John Mullane and Cathryn Jarman as Directors of Penrith Performing and Visual Arts Ltd.

Council’s Director-City Services, Mr Steve Hackett, is the General Manager’s representative and Company Secretary.

Peter Anderson was re-appointed Chairman and John Mullane as Deputy Chairman.

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Penrith Performing and Visual Arts Ltd - Annual Report and Board of Directors be received.

2. Councillor Pat Sheehy, Councillor Ross Fowler, Gillian Appleton, John Mullane and Cathryn Jarman be appointed to fill vacancies that occurred at the first Annual General Meeting of the Penrith Performing and Visual Arts Ltd.

3. Council agree to underwrite the operation of Penrith Performing and Visual Arts Ltd until the presentation to Council of the Penrith Performing and Visual Arts Ltd Annual Report for 2006/07.

4. Council congratulate the Board of Penrith Performing and Visual Arts Ltd on the success and achievements over the twelve months to the end of June 2006 at the Joan Sutherland Performing Arts Centre and Penrith Regional Gallery and Lewers Bequest.

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.

*Policy Review Committee Meeting*	*13 November 2006*
*The City as a Social Place*

The City as a Social Place

Castlereagh Cemetery and Crematoria Working Party meeting - 16 October 2006

Compiled by: Tony Jarrett, Neighbourhood Facilities Coordinator

Authorised by: Gary Dean, Facilities Operations Manager

Strategic Program Term Achievement: Effective responses are made to the social impacts of growth, redevelopment and change.

Critical Action: Assess the social impacts of urban change in both new release and established areas and develop planned responses.

Purpose:

To consider the notes and outcomes of the Castlereagh Cemetery and Crematoria Working Party meeting held on 16 October 2006. The report recommends that the Minister's approval be sought to extend the Reserve purpose to include 'crematoria', that a comprehensive Flora and Fauna study be undertaken, and funded from an Internal Loan, as the next steps in the potential development of the site.

Background

The Working Party met on 16 October 2006, to address the whole project to date, and current issues of interest and concern raised by Councillors, following the Working Party meeting of 31 July 2006, and subsequent consideration of that meeting’s outcomes at Council on 14 August 2006.

Copies of all reports and studies have been provided to Councillors as part of the Working Party meeting. It is worth reviewing the milestones achieved to date, which include:

1989 – examination made of potential for crematorium to be located at Penrith General Cemetery. Ultimately the site was not supported.

1989 – Conservation Plans prepared for all 13 cemeteries in the Penrith City Council area (by Don Godden and Associates). Recommendations made in relation to Council’s operational cemeteries regarding management, conservation, fees, additional services and long term maintenance.

1991 – Cemeteries Study Group convened to prioritise the Godden Report recommendations and prepare strategies to implement the recommendations.

1992 – Cemetery Enhancement Reserve established where annual surplus revenue over operational costs is applied to service enhancements and amenity improvements.

1993 – 67 of the 149 Godden recommendations affected Council’s cemeteries. Responsibilities, priorities and timing of actions were identified by the Working Party.

1994 – Council accepts recommendation of the Cemetery Operations Working Party to apply to the Department of Lands to take care, control and management of Crown Reserve Portion 245 site at Castlereagh and to consider development of the site within Council’s Major Project models.

1995 – Council appointed Trust Manager for Portion 245 site with the view to examine potential development at some future point.

Having resolved the significant management and operational priorities, identified by the Godden report, a focus was put onto the Castlereagh project in 2000.

2000 onwards - a number of investigations have been made and decision points reached, including Flora and Fauna study completed, decision made to examine potential development of the site, development concept plans and economic feasibility completed, Business Plan completed, Working Party established and met on 3 occasions.

Key issues at the Working Party meeting

Site sensitivity

The consultants’ initial Flora and Fauna report has confirmed the site’s ecological values. It is important to note that the proposal will impact on about 20% of the site, and will not destroy highly sensitive ecological communities. The long-term revenue stream from the project offers a unique opportunity to fund environmental rehabilitation and enhancement works at the site.

A full “7 part test” has not been completed to determine the full impact of the proposed development on threatened flora and fauna and how to appropriately manage those impacts. It is estimated that it would cost $20,000 for a consultant to do this further study.

Stewardship

From time to time, development on other sensitive sites evokes controversy and detailed examination of appropriate land use. Council has a number of roles and responsibilities related to this project. Council has established strong strategies and policies with regard to environmental issues and sustainability.

Business case and risk

In this project’s case, real risks relating to the commercial nature of the cemetery industry, and the potential for another crematorium to be constructed within our target area (Penrith and nearby region), have been clearly identified. The Business Plan delivered in October 2005 has been contemporised and the underlying assumptions confirm that Council has confidence in the Business Plan findings.

Do we need a crematorium?

Demand analysis supports the notion of a crematorium in outer western Sydney. A regional city like Penrith should provide a full range of facilities and services for its communities and a wider catchment area.

A decision not to proceed with any development

Council made a positive decision in 1994 to seek management of the site. Should Council decide not to proceed with development as a cemetery or crematoria, then it is no longer relevant to be Trust manager. Council should then relinquish the Trust, with management reverting back to the Department of Lands.

Burial space issues

Concept plans have limited potential burial sites to 2300. Any burials that would occur at Castlereagh would be premium priced ‘green’ burials – with natural materials, collective memorials etc, in keeping with the site’s sensitivity. Any availability of sites at Castlereagh is not expected to significantly impact on demand for Penrith General Cemetery.

An option is not to have burials at all at Castlereagh. While the viability of the Castlereagh site is not predicated on burials, burials and burial memorialisation certainly provide a niche market revenue stream.

Other issues

The possibility that tree renewal be included as part of a sustainable approach to any burials that might occur on the site was considered.

Future management options was discussed. Minimising financial risks for Council was a focus for that matter.

Developing partnerships was also addressed. It was suggested that given the regional focus, the adjoining Councils should be consulted.

Linking the historic cemetery has potential for tourism and marketing of Penrith Valley and adjoining areas.

Conclusions and proposed actions

The Castlereagh site is reserved for cemetery purposes, and Council obtained the Trust management with the intention of examining the site for development as a cemetery and crematorium. Studies including flora and fauna, economic feasibility, concept development and Business Plan, have been completed to bring the project to this key decision point.

The Castlereagh site is ecologically rich. The approach to appropriately developing the site within those ecological values is innovative, exciting and challenging. Issues of concern and interest to Councillors have been fully canvassed. Sufficient information has been compiled to enable informed decisions to be made about this innovative, complex and potentially controversial project. Risk factors have been identified.

The Working Party identified that the immediate way forward for this project is to seek the Minister’s approval to extend the purpose of the Cemetery Reserve from “cemetery” to “cemetery and crematoria”, and to undertake a detailed Flora and Fauna assessment (comparable to the “7-part test” required to accompany any Development Application) at an estimated cost of $20,000.

The completed comprehensive flora and fauna study would be reported to the Working Party and Council. Council would be better informed of the environmental issues of the site that will be crucial in any decision to move the project forward or not.

Should the project proceed the next stage would include steps associated with bringing the proposal to Development Application stage, over a 12 month period, initiating the Community Engagement program, finalising design of facilities and infrastructure, and undertaking various supporting studies, such as traffic management, waste management, stormwater, cultural heritage, Heritage Impact Statement etc.

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Castlereagh Cemetery and Crematoria Working Party meeting - 16 October 2006 be received.

2. The Minister’s approval be sought to extend the purpose of the Cemetery Reserve from “cemetery” to “cemetery and crematoria”.

3. A detailed Flora and Fauna assessment be undertaken (comparable to the “7-part test” required to accompany any Development Application), and the outcomes of that study be reported to the Working Party.

4. An Internal Loan be sought for $20,000 being the estimated cost for the Flora and Fauna assessment.

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1. View	Castlereagh Cemetery Map	1 Page	Appendix
2. View	Castlereagh Cemetery Photo	1 Page	Appendix

*Policy Review Committee Meeting*	*13 November 2006*
*The City as a Social Place*

The City as a Social Place

Glenmore Park Stage 2 Release Area Status - Owners: Stockland, Mulpha Norwest, Holicombe, Vienello, Mint Holdings

Compiled by: Mark Broderick, Release Area Unit Coordinator

Authorised by: Roger Nethercote, Environmental Planning Manager

Strategic Program Term Achievement: New release areas provide for a diversity of housing opportunities, including affordable housing, consistent with emerging community needs and which facilitates the development of diverse neighbourhoods.

Critical Action: Prepare and implement plans for each new release area in collaboration with the development sector and key Government agencies that provide a wide diversity and mix of housing types that meet current and emerging community needs.

Presenters: Roger Nethercote - PCC - Glenmore Park Stage 2

Purpose:

To provide Councillors with an update on the planning for the Glenmore Park Stage 2 Release Area. The report recommends that Council receive the information contained in the report and that a minor variation be made to the area over which the draft Local Environmental Plan is being prepared. A presentation will be provided to Council by the Environmental Planning Manager on the key matters raised in the report.

The Site

The Glenmore Park Stage 2 urban release area is a 168 hectare parcel of land located immediately to the south of the existing Glenmore Park. An aerial photo of the relevant area is provided at Appendix 1.

Background

In May 2001, Lensworth Glenmore Park Ltd, sought Council’s agreement to initiate urban planning investigations for the Bradley St quarry area which is located south east of the existing Glenmore Park estate. Subsequently in January 2002, Council held a Strategic Vision Workshop drawing together landowners, key stakeholders, government agencies, as well as council representatives. The purpose of the workshop was to develop principal strategic outcomes in which urban development could embrace the area.

In May 2002 Council called for tenders and appointed EDAW (Australia) Pty Ltd, to prepare a LES and make a submission to the State Government seeking inclusion of the site on the Metropolitan Development Program (MDP). The site was subsequently listed in the MDP in July 2003.

On 8December 2003, Council received a report relating to the findings of the Local Environmental Study (LES) that had been prepared for Glenmore Park Stage 2. At the time Council endorsed the recommendations and principles of the LES as the basis for advancing further planning for the area including a draft LEP, DCP and Section 94 Plan. Appendix 2 provides an extract of the structure plan that emerged from that LES process.

Council also resolved at that meeting that further investigation be undertaken to address the jobs deficit identified in the LES.

Since that time Council officers have been working with representatives of the Land Owners Group (LOG) to advance the development of those plans. The LOG has also changed in that period and is now comprised of the following:

· Stockland

· Mulpha Norwest

· Holicombe

· Vianello

· Mint Holdings

Current Situation

Resolving the range of issues arising from the planning for Glenmore Park Stage 2 has been a complex process, however the project is now at a point where significant resolution of most key matters has now been achieved.

The graphical representation of these matters in terms of land use and urban structure is represented at Appendix 3. This plan is now expected to deliver approximately 1,750 dwellings and a population of approximately 4,700.

These key matters associated with this plan and the planning outcomes that will deliver is discussed in greater detail in the following sections of this report.

Key Planning Matters

1. Regional Infrastructure Levy

The State Government has recently introduced a policy for Regional Infrastructure to be funded by developers of new urban release areas, to ensure that specific infrastructure crucial to the development is provided in a timely manner.

The Department of Planning (DoP) has indicated that the Glenmore Park Stage 2 will be subject to a Regional Infrastructure Levy to assist in the delivery of key infrastructure. The sum of this levy has not yet been determined, however indications suggest that it would be comparable with those to be charged for the North West and South West Growth Centres.

The LOG has proposed to the to DoP a package of facilities and works that the levy would deliver, including public transport initiatives, arterial road networks improvements, transfer of lands to State Government for an extension to the Mulgoa Nature reserve and surrender of the existing mining leases. It is also understood that funding for the construction of a new Primary School is being sought by Government. Further details of this package of facilities and works is provided in subsequent sections of the report.

2. Cumberland Precinct

The western areas of the study area (known as the Holicombe lands) present particular land use challenges including the presence of ecological communities, current mining leases, and a listing on the Australian Heritage Commission Register of National Estate.

These lands were not initially included in the proposed urban release area, however, at the time of the formal inclusion of the Glenmore Park Stage 2 release area in the Metropolitan Development Program (MDP) in July 2003, the extent of the release area was broadened by the Department of Planning to include that western precinct. The purpose of the inclusion of those lands was to ensure that the subsequent planning process resolve those key planning issues.

The LES subsequently identified those lands as the “Cumberland Precinct”, in recognition of its important ecological values. The planning process has progressed to the point that the LOG is now offering to transfer the ownership of the bulk of those lands (63.4 hectares) to the NSW Government. The extent of those lands is represented at Appendix 3.

The Commonwealth Department of Environment and Heritage has been involved in this process and has provided written advice to Council that it is satisfied with the outcome being put forward. The NSW Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC) has also been involved in the negotiations and has committed to taking ownership of the land which will form an extension to, and be managed as part of, the Mulgoa Nature Reserve adjacent.

The planning process has also resulted in a commitment from the LOG to surrender the current mining leases that operate on those lands by way of a Planning Agreement. Both of these matters represent excellent outcomes.

The value which will be assigned to the land as part of the Regional Infrastructure Levy is currently being examined by the DOP.

3. Riparian Corridor

The site accommodates two key riparian corridors, being the Mulgoa Creek and Surveyors Creek Corridor. The Mulgoa Creek Corridor is located entirely within the proposed 63.4 hectare extension to the Mulgoa Nature Reserve, which has been negotiated for environmental management by DEC. This signs off an acceptable planning outcome for that corridor.

The Surveyors Creek Corridor runs through the centre of the main proposed urban area of Glenmore Park Stage 2 and therefore presents more significant challenges to ensuring sustainable planning outcomes are realised. Strategically, this corridor is of even greater significance given it potentially provides a corridor and linkage between two of Western Sydney’s largest remnant Cumberland Plain Woodland communities, being the Mulgoa Nature Reserve and remnant woodland located on the Orchard Hills RAAF site.

The planning process has responded to the strategic value of this corridor by providing a 100m wide corridor along its entire length from the Mulgoa Nature Reserve to The Northern Road. It is intended that this corridor will ultimately come into the ownership of Council and will provide important ecological and recreational assets to Glenmore Park Stage 2.

The eastern extent of this corridor is actually an area beyond the exhibited LES boundary and therefore a new S54 resolution from Council is required to ensure its inclusion in the plan. This matter is discussed later in this report.

In addition, a further 40m corridor will be provided for a western tributary to Surveyors Creek located in the southern section of the site. The scale of these corridors has been negotiated with both DEC and the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and is considered to provide sustainable planning outcomes for the site.

These corridors will retain native vegetation and ultimately be rehabilitated as part of the development of Glenmore Park Stage 2. Stormwater from future urban development will be managed with Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) measures, including the use of water quality control facilities located off line and in the fringes of the corridor. These measures will ensure that stormwater quality leaving the site will meet Council’s standards. The existing Blue Hills wetland will be the receiving waters for that storm water. This wetland was engineered to accommodate the future urban development of Glenmore Park Stage 2 and therefore is able to adequately manage the volume of stormwater generated in the developed catchment, as well as providing additional water quality treatment.

4. Rural Precinct

The LES identified that the western developable extent of the site should be a rural-residential type precinct to provide a transition between the proposed residential densities to the east and Cumberland Precinct to the west. At the time there was also an expectation that the subject lands, which are located within the Mulgoa Creek Catchment would not be able to be sewered by Sydney Water.

However, Sydney Water has since advised that sewering of this area can now be achieved. As a result of this additional infrastructure availability, a higher dwelling yield format has been put forward by the LOG for that precinct which contemplates large lot residential subdivision with lots ranging approximately from 1000m² to 2000m².

An increased development yield from this precinct has also assisted in levering the transfer of the balance of the land as an extension of Mulgoa Nature Reserve. This arrangement is considered appropriate. However, the precinct will still be required to provide a transition between the urban and conservation precincts, and the final dwelling yields in this precinct and across the release area will be required to reflect this objective.

5. Transport and Access Management

A Transport Access and Management Plan (TMAP) for Glenmore Park Stage 2 has been prepared as part of the planning process. The objective of the TMAP was to recommend physical works and actions that when implemented would accommodate the traffic demands of the release area and facilitate a 10% increase in the modal share of public transport by future residents.

The TMAP was prepared through use of detailed survey analysis of existing traffic and transport conditions as well as application of Councils arterial rod traffic model. It also was prepared in consultation with representatives of Council, RTA, DOP, Ministry of Transport and Westbus.

The TMAP identifies a range of public transport initiatives that total over $9M, that would assist in achieving the identified modal shift to public transport. These initiatives are as follows:

· The early introduction of a new bus service between the Penrith Rail and CBD to and the Glenmore Park Town Centre via The Northern Rd and Glenmore Park Stage 2.

· The service would be express or have only limited stops within the South Penrith and Jamisontown area and operate over a 20 minute frequency in peak periods initially and then 15 minute frequency once Glenmore Park Stage 2 reaches 750 occupied dwellings.

· Subsidisation of the bus service ($6.27M which is part of the overall $9M package) over the initial 6 years.

· The urban form should ensure that all dwellings are within 400m of a bus stop.

· Introduce bus priority measures on The Northern Road at key intersections such as:

o Bradley St

o Glenmore Parkway

o Garswood Rd

o M4 Motorway

o Maxwell St

· Provide a rail ticket subsidy to a total value of $1000 for all new residences.

The TMAP also makes recommendations with regards to traffic network improvements that are necessary to accommodate the additional traffic that will be generated from the development of the Glenmore Park Stage 2 and other urban release areas within the LGA. Subsequently, it is proposed that the LOG be required to either fund or deliver select road network improvements adjacent to the Glenmore Park Stage 2. The recommended local road network improvements are outlined below:

· Signalisation of The Northern Rd + Bradley St Intersection

· Signalisation of The Northern Rd + Glenmore Parkway Intersection

· Creation of direct access to Penrith Golf Club from The Northern Rd (south bound)

· Intersection improvements at The Northern Rd and M4 (Bus Priority)

· Intersection improvements at The Northern Rd and Maxwell St (Bus Priority)

The estimated cost of these improvements is approximately $9.62M and are currently subject to endorsement by the RTA. When this sum is added to the public transport related initiatives identified in the TMAP, the TMAP recommends a total of $17.7M, of actions and infrastructure to meet its stated objectives. Importantly, the LOG are committing to providing the funds to meet this significant transport package.

6. Active Open Space

The current plan seeks to provide 6.9 ha of active open space in a central area located to the west of the Surveyors Creek corridor. This amount of open space exceeds the planning standards applied for the existing Glenmore Park area and is considered appropriate for the projected demands of the new community.

Initial planning for this area indicates that such an area can deliver:

· 2 full size football fields

· 1 x mini size football field

· 1 cricket field

· 1 x little Athletics field

· Amenities block

· Playground

· Walking and cycling facilities

· Car parking

The design for the active open space area would provide for a number of these opportunities to be overlaid depending on seasonal competitions. The final design arrangements and uses will be determined in liaison with local sporting groups and identified needs within Glenmore Park.

There is also an intention on behalf of the LOG to provide areas of passive open space including several small neighbourhood parks and walking and cycling trails along the fringes of the riparian corridor. The passive open space is located within a minimum 500m walk of all housing locations as well as in locations which will conserve existing copses of trees.

All open space land will be secured as part of local facility provisions included in a Section 94 developer contributions plan which is currently being prepared.

7. Retail Centre

The original planning for the Glenmore Park Estate contemplated the provision of a major retail / commercial centre to service the estate (currently established) and a second smaller scale centre located in the eastern area of the estate. To date, however, it has not been considered viable to advance the establishment of a further retail / commercial centre in the estate.

The LES for Glenmore Park Stage 2 similarly contemplated the opportunity of providing a small scale commercial / retail node which should co-locate with other community facilities including a primary school, active open space area and creek network with a higher degree of accessibility from Bradley Street.

Stockland has independently prepared a study that indicates that there is sufficient demand for the provision of a new retail facility, accommodating a 3,200m² supermarket and an additional 1,500m²of specialty stores within Glenmore Park Stage 2, in addition to the current and future development of the existing Glenmore Park Town Centre.

The centre is intended to contain a mix of retail and commercial activities and is centrally located adjacent to the major open space network off Bradley Street (see plan at Appendix 3). The centre will provide an important focal point and gathering area for the new community, sustain diverse housing options and would also at least partly address the employment demands of that incoming population.

The LOG is also examining opportunities to provide residential opportunities above the retail centre and live-work residential opportunities on lands opposite, which also presents good outcomes from both a community facility provision and housing diversity perspective.

8. Community Facilities

The LES identified the need to provide a primary school for Glenmore Park Stage 2. Discussions with the Department of Education and Training (DET) have confirmed its ongoing desire to build a primary school within the Stage 2 release. A preferred location for the school site is identified in the map at Appendix 3. The delivery of this element, both land acquisition and capital works, is currently proposed to be included in the Regional Infrastructure Levy contribution.

The LES also indicated that the development of Glenmore Park Stage 2 would generate the demand for other community facilities such as child care and neighbourhood meeting / activity space. However, recognizing that Council is already advancing the planning and delivery of a major new community facility within the Stage 1 Eastern Hamlets area to service the eastern area of the existing estate, it was prudent to examine the opportunity of expanding that planned facility to service the expected needs of the new community in the Stage 2 area as an alternative to the creation of a second new facility in this precinct.

That investigation has indicated that it would be more expeditious and economically viable to expand the proposed Eastern Hamlets facility to incorporate additional child care and neighbourhood meeting space to meet the needs of the Stage 2 community. Section 94 Contributions to facilitate the expanded facility will be required to be levied as part of the development of Glenmore Park Stage 2.

9. Urban From

The urban form of Glenmore Park Stage 2 is currently being finalised. The key planning elements are:

· Respond to natural features and topography of site

As discussed in previous section of this report, the broad structure of the urban form responds well to the natural features of the site as represented by the wide riparian corridors, and extension to the Mulgoa Nature Reserve. The perimeter of the site also aligns with the Surveyors Creek Catchment and therefore ensures that visual impacts of development will be contained within that catchment and not extend to viewsheds from The Northern Road.

In addition active open space areas are provided on the least sloping lands in the release area, thereby mitigating the need for land forming and passive open spaces will conserve copses of trees and integrate with natural features such as the riparian corridors.

Further, the provision of larger lots in the western precinct, responds well to the sites interface with that Mulgoa Nature Reserve and the adjoining rural landscapes.

· Creating a community hub

An important element of all urban planning is to create a civic heart or focal points to allow for regular community gathering and interaction.

The urban form for Glenmore Park Stage 2 seeks to provide such a place by co-locating the Primary School, Active Open Space and retail/commercial land uses centrally to the release area. These land uses are all the key activity centres within the release area and will combine to create a lively and active focus for the new community.

· Integrating transport and landuse

The co-location of key land use activities also serves the purposes of integrating land use and transport within Glenmore Park Stage 2. This assists in managing the volume of vehicle trips by facilitating multi-purpose trips, promotes public transport options and will also facilitate active transport options such as walking and cycling.

The street pattern for the release area will also be represented as a loop collector road that will serve as the bus route (See Appendix 3) and a rectilinear network of local and connector roads. This road network also promotes public transport use as all dwellings will be located within 400m of that bus route loop as well as promoting pedestrian movement within the release area by creating a clear, legible and permeable pathway between all destinations.

Further detail with regard to the urban form will be identified as part of the development of DCP and will be presented to Council at a future time.

10. Housing Diversity

Councils ‘Sustainability Blueprint for New Release Areas’ seeks to provide a diversity of housing options in new release area to respond to the increasing diverse housing composition and demands of its communities.

One of the measures for achieving, amongst other things, this diversity is reflected in the blueprints target of a minimum housing density in new release areas of 15 dwellings per hectare.

The LOG has urged the revisiting of this target on the basis of its perception that there is limited demand for the housing types and forms that would result as a consequence of meeting this target density. This issue has been the subject of extensive investigation and discussion with the LOG which has resulted in the LOG accepting a negotiated density of 14.4 dwellings per hectare.

While this result is slightly lower than the original target, the outcome will still achieve a high level of housing diversity which will deliver a variety of detached dwelling types as well as semi detached housing, studios, terraces, as well live-work opportunities located adjacent to the retail / commercial centre. This housing opportunity will be accommodated on a range of lot sizes and will provide substantial choice to meet a wide range of housing needs expected to generate from the future community. The housing typology that will ultimately be developed at Glenmore Park Stage 2 is currently being refined by the LOG and will be represented in the draft DCP.

Council’s Sustainability Blueprint also calls for 3% of housing to be provided as affordable housing to people on low income groups either through purchase or rental opportunities. The LOG is currently exploring a range of options for delivering this outcome which to date has focused on delivering affordable housing products in the rental and purchase markets which would be accessible to people on moderate, low and very-low incomes without placing them in added ‘housing stress’ (ie, more than 30% of household income spent on rent or house repayments).

However, our assessment of the options tabled to date is that whilst providing some of the identified housing product for rent or sale to moderate and to some extent the low income earner groups is an appropriate approach, it is unlikely this will deliver appropriate affordable housing opportunities for the very low income groups who are the most disadvantaged in the housing market. As a result, our discussions with the LOG have indicated that it would be appropriate to consider an element of the 3% housing allocation should include provision for subsidised rental accommodation for very low income earners.

Council officers are currently working through this issue with the LOG and the Centre for Affordable Housing. The outcomes of these negotiations will be incorporated in a draft Planning Agreement between the LOG and Council which will subsequently reported to Council once negotiations are completed.

11. Employment

Whilst identifying a range of potential employment opportunities, the LES process was not able to effectively resolve the delivery of both on-site and off-site employment opportunities for Glenmore Park Stage 2 which would meet Council’s policy objective of creation one new job for every workforce participate who would reside in the estate. At the time of endorsing the LES, Council raised concern over this aspect and resolved that further investigation be undertaken to address the jobs deficit identified in the LES.

The LOG has since provided some focus to this issue and has explored a number of opportunities to resolve the identified jobs deficit in a suitable manner. That investigation has indicated that it would not be economically viable to pursue the LES suggestions for a small scale business park or other targeted business activities in Glenmore Park Stage 2, other than the opportunities which would present from establishing the proposed retail / commercial centre and home-based business activities.

Therefore, the bulk of the job numbers required will need to be delivered off-site. This approach presents a significant challenge and has resulted in the LOG recently engaging the University of Sydney’s Planning Research Centre, led by Ed Blakely, to prepare a Business Investment Strategy for employment creation in Penrith. The principal purpose of the strategy is to define a range of employment creation initiatives in the City which can be assisted by financial contributions from both the Glenmore Park LOG and other residential developers within the City where new housing estates are not able to meet their quotient of jobs on site.

This approach also has the benefit of providing employment benefits beyond Glenmore Park Stage 2 by developing strategies for attracting employment to the broader LGA, inclusive of the City Centres.

A separate Councillor Workshop has been scheduled for Wednesday 15 November 2006 to present and discuss the initial findings and recommendations from the employment strategy investigations.

12. Statutory Framework

The statutory framework for Glenmore Park Stage 2 will include a LEP, DCP and S94 plan. However, recent changes to the EP& A Act and the DOP’s Planning Reform Program will require additional procedural matters to be addressed. These are identified below.

· LEP Template

The DoP has advised that the draft LEP for Glenmore Park Stage 2 should reflect the form and content of the LEP template. Accordingly, the draft LEP will have to introduce new zones types and plan overlays that will differ from those found in Council’s existing LEP’s

· Precinct Overlays

One of the zoning map overlays will include a division of Glenmore Park Stage 2 into a number of precincts, with a requirement for all development within that precinct to demonstrate that it achieves a minimum dwelling yield.

· Concept Plans

The opportunity will exist for developers to submit a Concept Plan as part of the first stage of the development of each precinct, which will outline in more detail, amongst other information, road networks, lot arrangements and distribution of housing types.

· Planning Agreement

Recent changes to the EP& A Act have formalized the process of brokering developer agreements for local facility provision. The Act now requires these Planning Agreements to be exhibited with the draft LEP. For Glenmore Park Stage 2 it is expected that a Planning Agreement between Council and the LOG would include the following matters:

o Surrender of mining licenses and approvals

o Employment strategy financial contribution

o Provision of affordable housing

Other contributions for elements such as community facilities, active open space, neighbourhood parks and drainage will be accommodated in a Section 94 developer contributions plan.

Statutory ‘Housekeeping’

Since Council’s initial resolution in December 2003, the planning process has identified the need to vary the geographical extent of the Glenmore Park Stage 2 lands to include an extension of the identified biodiversity corridor from the eastern edge of the LEP area through to The Northern Road. A diagram of the larger site extent is shown at Appendix 4.

The principal benefit in extending the LEP boundary to accommodate this land is that it provides substantial opportunity to provide a continuous biodiversity link from the Mulgoa Nature Reserve to the extensive Cumberland Plain Woodland located on the Orchard Hills Armaments Base to the east of The Northern Road. The LOG has indicated its preparedness to transfer that land to Council for it to be added to the Surveyor’s Creek biodiversity corridor.

The minor change to the draft LEP area necessitates a new resolution from Council as well as further consultation pursuant to the Act with government agencies. However, given the limited variation from the current LES and the identified environmental benefit in extending the biodiversity corridor, there is no necessity in our view to prepare a new LES. Recommendations to this affect have been included to formalise this procedure.

Next Steps

The following represents the remaining key steps in the planning, rezoning and development of the GPSRA Glenmore Park Stage 2.

· Resolve matters relating affordable housing and employment delivery.

· Complete Draft LEP, DCP, S94 Plan and Planning Agreement.

· Council resolve to exhibit Draft LEP and associated documentation .

· Public Exhibition of Draft LEP.

· Council’s adoption of Draft LEP and associated documentation and submit LEP to Minister for Planning for gazettal

It is expected that a report seeking Council’s consideration and endorsement of the draft plans will be submitted in early 2007.

Conclusion

The planning process for Glenmore Park Stage 2 since the completion of the LES has been complex and there have been extensive negotiations with the LOG and their principal consultants to arrive at acceptable outcomes for the key issues identified. The project is now at a stage where the key planning matters are largely resolved, therefore allowing finalisation of the rezoning plans to move forward.

It is noteworthy that the LOG has made substantial effort to collaborate with Council officers and to resolve the critical issues required to deliver a quality, sustainable new community in Glenmore Park Stage 2.

This report has identified the key planning outcomes that the development of Glenmore Park Stage 2 is required to deliver and demonstrates that these outcomes are largely consistent with Council’s Sustainability Blueprint for New Urban Release Areas in the City and the directions identified in the adopted LES.

Refinement and resolution of the outstanding matters raised in the report is advancing promptly and it is expected that a subsequent report will be presented to Council in early 2007, seeking Council’s consideration and support for the exhibition of a draft LEP and associated planning documents.

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1. The information outlined in the report on Glenmore Park Stage 2 Release Area Status be received

2. Pursuant to S.54 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act, 1979, and Regulation, Council prepare and exhibit a draft Local Environmental Plan for the lands identified at Appendix 4 to this report for the purposes of adding a biodiversity corridor to the eastern extent of the release area.

3. A Local Environmental Study is not required to be prepared for the draft Local Environmental Plan referred to in recommendation 2 above.

4. A further report be provided to Council in early 2007 seeking endorsement to the exhibition of a draft LEP, DCP, S94 Plan and Planning Agreement.

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1. View	Aerial Photo	1 Page	Appendix
2. View	Extract of the Structure Plan	1 Page	Appendix
3. View	Land Use and Urban Structure	1 Page	Appendix
4. View	Identified Lands for LEP	1 Page	Appendix

*Policy Review Committee Meeting*	*13 November 2006*
*The City as a Social Place*

The City as a Social Place

Establish a Policy for the use of Telecommunications Access Fees

Compiled by: Raphael Collins, Parks Construction & Maintenance Manager

Authorised by: Ray Moore, Director - City Operations

Strategic Program Term Achievement: The City’s recreation and leisure facilities and services meet its needs and are optimally used.

Critical Action: Facilitate joint use of the City’s recreation and leisure facilities, including co-location of programs.

Purpose:

To establish a policy for the Telecommunications Access Fees.

The report recommends that the income from the Telecommunications Access Fees be used on upgrading facilities at each of the reserves where the income was raised and then extended to projects in nearby reserves.

Background

At the Ordinary Meeting on Monday, 9 October 2006, Council considered a report concerning the proposed use of the Telecommunications Access Fee. The recommendation from that report was:

1. The information contained in the report on the proposed use of Telecommunications Access Fees be received;

2. Telecommunications Access Fees be utilised to upgrade facilities on the areas where the income was raised and this be extended to nearby reserves when the identified works are completed;

3. the floodlights at Potter Field be renewed;

4. A program of works be prepared for sporting venues where the Telecommunications Access Fee revenue is being received.

Since that meeting, inspections of the parks have been undertaken to determine a program of works. The projects within this program will take several years to complete considering there is only $15,000 received for each park per annum.

Following discussions with club officials, the following is a list of projects for each of the four sites has been prepared:

Ridge Park – Colyton Junior Rugby League Colyton

· Remove old wooden light poles from Eastern Field $ 4,500

· Install 100m of security fencing $15,000

· Provide concrete slab to players bench area $ 7,000

· Install new fence around players bench area $ 5,000

· Install seating around fields $10,000

· Seal car park in front of hall & access to amenities $25,000

Roper Rd Soccer Fields – Colyton

· Additional floodlighting $30,000

· Replace koppers log fence around car park
and southern end of building $10,000

· Extend irrigation system to mini field $ 4,000

· Reconstruct mod and mini fields
(staged over 2 years - $10,000 per year) $20,000

· Provide new seats to replace existing power poles $10,000

Mark Leece Soccer Fields – St Clair

· Replace fencing around car park $ 4,000

· Seal car park (eastern side of driveway) $40,000

· Renovate fields (staged over 3 years $15,000 per year) $45,000

· Renew lighting on main fields $25,000

· Provide bins and seating $10,000

Potter Field – St Marys Soccer

· Replace floodlights on eastern field $30,000

· Extend irrigation to eastern field $17,000

· Seating $ 5,000

· Construct drainage system on south west
Side of western field $ 5,000

Current Situation

When the above listed projects are completed for each park, the income will be extended to reserves identified in the PLANS Open Space Cluster zones. For example, when the projects listed for Ridge Park are completed (in 4 years at $15,000 per annum) works in other parks in the cluster of the open space network will be carried out.

It is proposed that the $60,136 currently being held from the Telecommunications Access Fee income be used on the following projects;

· Renew floodlighting at eastern end of Potter Field
(as resolved by Council) $30,000

· Renovate field No.1 at Mark Leece Soccer Field $15,000

· Install remaining span of security fencing at Ridge Park $15,000

Conclusion

The Telecommunications Access Fee income provides the opportunity to accelerate improvement works at the reserves where the income is derived. The proposed program of projects will take approximately three years to complete at which time, projects in nearby reserves will be attended to.

It is envisaged that other parks will eventually accommodate telecommunications antennae in the Penrith Local Government area. The fees generated from these installations will be utilised according to the same process as detailed in this report.

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Establish a Policy for the use of Telecommunications Access Fees be received

2. The Telecommunications Access Fee be utilised on the projects identified in the program listed for each sporting venue

3. The Mark Leece field renovations and security fencing at Ridge Park be carried out.

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.

*Policy Review Committee Meeting*	*13 November 2006*
*The City as an Economy*

The City as an Economy

Penrith Valley Economic Development Corporation- request for additional funding for the 2006-07 financial year

Compiled by: Bijai Kumar, Local Economic Development Program Manager

Authorised by: Bijai Kumar, Local Economic Development Program Manager

Strategic Program Term Achievement: The City’s business community, learning institutions and training institutions are working in an integrated way to strengthen and develop the City’s local economic base.

Critical Action: Support PVEDC in the development of the City's enterprises and self-supporting business networks

Purpose:

To provide Council with further information on Penrith Valley Economic Development Corporation's request for additional funding for the 2006-07 financial year. The report recommends that the second funding installment of $130,311 be endorsed and that Council consider providing additional funding of up to $22,500 for PVEDC's priority projects as part of the September 2006 financial review. The report also recommends that the Corporation be requested to provide a submission supporting additional recurrent funding for consideration in Council's 2007-08 budget.

Background

At its Policy Review Committee meeting on 24 July, Council considered the report to endorse funding for the Penrith Valley Economic Development Corporation (PVEDC) for the 2006-07 financial year. The PVEDC submission included a request for additional funding of $85,000 over and above the $260,623, which represents the amount raised from a special citywide rate initiative to fund the Corporation’s activities.

Council resolved that funding in the amount of $260,623, for the PVEDC for the 2006-07 financial year be endorsed, with half the amount paid in August 2006. Council further resolved that arrangements for the balance of funding be deferred until the 14 August Policy Review Meeting, to allow for a meeting between Council’s Chief Financial Officer and the PVEDC, to clarify the details of the requested additional funding, and to ascertain from the Corporation details of all grants applied for by the Corporation and the results of those applications.

A number of meetings were held between Council officers and representatives of the PVEDC to consider the issue of additional project and recurrent funding culminating in a meeting with the Board’s executive which was held at Council on 11 September 2006, and was attended by the then Mayor, Councillor John Thain, and Councillors Pat Sheehy, Greg Davies, Karen McKeown, Jim Aitken, and Kaylene Allison.

The meeting concluded that the Board be provided with the opportunity to present its report to Council at a briefing which was subsequently scheduled for 18 October 2006.

The briefing was attended by His Worship the Mayor, Councillor Pat Sheehy, and Councillors Karen McKeown, Greg Davies, Mark Davies, Steve Simat, Kaylene Allison, Ross Fowler, Garry Rumble and Kevin Crameri. The Corporation was represented by the Chairman, Steve Welsh, John Bateman, Steve Willingale, and Jane Holdsworth who led the presentation to Council.

The presentation by the Corporation focused, in the main, on its past activities and a number of programs it proposes to undertake in the current financial year. In respect of the request by the PVEDC for additional funding of $64,537, for a number of projects, it was noted that the request could be considered in the context of any surplus arising from Council’s quarterly review process. However, the PVEDC projects would need to compete with long standing and new project bids, made both by Councillors and Council staff. The Corporation was asked to provide Council with its priority list of projects, in the event that a surplus position emerged in the September 2006 or subsequent quarter reviews. Councillors further noted that such a process was unsustainable in the long term to meet the Corporation’s funding shortfall and reflective of a need for the PVEDC to reassess its operational capacity and funding requirements to support its expanded role and activities.

In presenting their request for project funding, the PVEDC representatives made reference to the submission by Council to the Minister of Local Government, for a citywide rate rise to fund the Corporation. In this submission, a reference value of $400,000 was used to argue the case for establishing the Corporation, but the actual value of the rate rise was $228,000, with the Corporation expected to set its budget using this base amount and any potential funding it would raise from external sources. Councillors agreed that a sum of $400,000 may represent an optimum value for such an organisation to operate effectively, and hence the imperative for the PVEDC to explore its long term financial sustainability, in light of its new strategic direction which includes a greater focus on the delivery of projects.

Current Situation

The Corporation has identified a number of activities and projects that will assist in the delivery of its strategic program. While a significant part of their current program delivery is within existing resourcing and capacity of the organisation, there is a shortfall to cover the cost of undertaking a number of key projects which the Corporation considers vital in meeting its strategic plan objectives.

According to the Corporation’s submission for funding for the current financial year, it expects to generate an income of $366,563 which includes $260,623 in Council funding. This level of funding is not sufficient to cover the Corporation’s projected expenditure of $377,000 required to manage the organisation and demonstrates a need to both re-evaluate the level of ongoing recurrent funding to support the Corporation and its capacity to generate external income to meet its expanded role.

At a meeting held on 30 October 2006 with the Corporation, Council officers including the Chief Financial Officer and the Financial Services Manager, the Corporation was requested to provide additional information regarding its project activities to further inform Council on its project priorities and phasing of activities associated with each project so that a determination could be made on funding requirement for the current financial year. It was agreed with the Corporation that the current request for additional funding pertains to the 2006-07 priority list of projects and would be treated separately from the need to reassess and submit to Council a detailed submission for additional recurrent funding which would, for example, consider PVEDC’s future accommodation needs. It was further agreed that the Corporation would provide its submission by the close of the 2006 calendar year so that the request could be accommodated in the 2007-08 budget planning process.

The Corporation provided on 2 November the following list of projects for the 2006-07 financial year in priority:

· PVEDC website maintenance and development $ 2,500

· Western Sydney Innovation Advisory Services Nil

· Moving Business Online $10,000

· Satellite Surveys $10,000

· International Trade support- exporters and importers workshops Nil

· CEO dinner and 2007 federal budget breakfast $ 2,500

· 25 year recognition dinner $11,000

· Education and Training module $ 3,000

Total Request $39,000

Further details of the PVEDC submission is provided in the Attachment. As part of its business plan the Corporation had originally submitted a request for additional project funding for $85,000 which was subsequently revised to $65,000 at the Councillor briefing held on 18 October. The current submission of $39,000 represents a major reduction in the request for additional funding by the PVEDC.

The projects proposed by the PVEDC are generally reflective of the Corporation’s strategic plan and are designed to support the growth and development of local enterprises. However, a number of projects such as the 25 year recognition dinner and CEO dinners could be conducted on a full cost recovery basis.

Council will note that the proposed “Satellite Surveys” project, listed as fourth priority and costing $10,000 consists of the following two surveys:

o New business attraction and local business networking

o Advantages and disadvantages of doing business in Penrith

The first survey relates partly to investment attraction activity which is a direct responsibility of Council and is already being explored as part of a major consulting exercise currently being conducted by Professor Ed Blakley and will be further explored as part of the proposed “Inward Investment Strategy” for which Council has provided funding. However, it is recognised that “local business networking” which also forms part of this survey remains a core activity of the Corporation. As far as the second survey is concerned, we are focused very much on the positive aspects of doing business in Penrith based on the attributes of the city, its economic character, its people and their diverse professions and skills, housing choices, Penrith’s regional city status and its expanding economic catchment, availability of industrial land particularly Erskine Park, business networks and our educational and recreational assets.

Comments from the Financial Services’ Manager

If Council agrees to support the request for additional project funding it can be made available from unallocated surplus funds identified in the September review. The results of the September review will be reported to the next Ordinary Meeting of Council and whilst there are surplus funds currently available there are also a number of pressures on the current budget and a number of matters still to be finalised. These will be discussed in more detail in the review document and report. Providing surplus funds remain the PVEDC bid can be considered as part of the September 2006 financial review together with current high priority project bids which still remain unfunded from 2006-07 management plan.

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Penrith Valley Economic Development Corporation- request for additional funding for the 2006-07 financial year be received.

2. The second funding instalment to the Corporation for $130,311 be endorsed

3. Additional funding up to a value of $22,500 be listed for consideration as part of the September 06 financial review to be submitted to the Ordinary Council meeting of 20 November 2006

4. The Corporation be requested to provide a detailed submission supporting additional recurrent funding to be considered as part of Council’s 2007-08 budget process and that the submission include plans for generating external sources of income.

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1. View

PVEDC Project Priorities for 2006 - 2007

3 Pages

Appendix

*Policy Review Committee Meeting*	*13 November 2006*
*Appendix 1 - PVEDC Project Priorities for 2006 - 2007*

Penrith Valley

Economic Development Corporation

Report to

Penrith City Council

Projects of the PVEDC 2006/2007

30 October 2006

Introduction

Further to our report to Penrith City Council on 17 July, October 18 and a subsequent meeting with Council’s Officers on Monday 29 October 2006, the Penrith Valley Economic Development Corporation (PVEDC) was requested to provide a list of projects planned for the 2006 to 2007 year listed in priority order, and a further list of projects that can be achieved prior to 30 June 2007.

Projects 2006/2007

Following projects planned for 2006 to 2007 in priority order.

1. PVEDC Website Maintenance/Development

2. Western Sydney Innovation Advisory Service

3. Buy Penrith Project (see below)

4. Moving Business On Line

5. Welcome to Penrith Business Pack (see below)

6. Satellite Surveys:
a. New Business Attraction & Local Business Networking
b. Advantages and Disadvantages of Doing Business in Penrith

7. International Trade Support – Exporters and Importers Workshops

8. CEO Dinners and 2007 Federal Budget Breakfast

9. 25 Year Recognition Dinner

10. Education & Training Module

11. Promotion of sponsors of new Penrith Visitor Information Centre

12. PVEDC Promotion Brochure (see below)

Projects Achievable November 2006 to June 2007

Between July and October 2006, some funds have been expended to progress certain projects as listed above. The following projects listed below remain, as planned, to be completed between November 2006 and June 2007. The shortfall of funding required to finalise these projects is $39,000 as shown.

1. PVEDC Website Maintenance/Development $2,500

2. Western Sydney Innovation Advisory Service NIL REQD

3. Moving Business On Line $10,000

4. Satellite Surveys: $10,000
a. New Business Attraction & Local Business Networking
b. Advantages and Disadvantages of Doing Business in Penrith

5. International Trade Support – Exporters and Importers Workshops NIL REQD

6. CEO Dinners and 2007 Federal Budget Breakfast $2,500

7. 25 Year Recognition Dinner $11,000

8. Education & Training Module $3,000

TOTAL FUNDS REQUIRED $39,000

Funding for Projects November 2006 to June 2007

In the report presented to Penrith City Council on 17 July, it was requested that an additional $85,000 be provided to the PVEDC to cover the shortfall in expected income of approximately $366,563 and expenditure of $454,300.

Since that time, the Welcome Pack has become a project of the Penrith Valley Chamber of Commerce (budgeted $20,700) and these funds will no longer be required. The PVEDC Brochure has also been completed (budgeted $2,500).

The Buy Penrith Program (budgeted $20,000) is seen as a long term project that is envisaged to provide future funding for the PVEDC, whilst supporting local business growth. The scope of the project will require in-depth research, planning and software development, with implementation over a two year period. Due to the extent of the project and its implications in assisting in the PVEDC to self-fund, this project will now commence in 2007-2008.

Funding Request

The Board of the Penrith Valley Economic Development Corporation requests Penrith City Council to provide additional minimum funding of $39,000 to support the above listed priority projects that can be fully achieved in the year July 2006 to June 2007.

*Policy Review Committee Meeting*	*13 November 2006*
*Appendix 1 - Summary of Parks Construction*

Appendix 1 – Executive Summary of Parks Construction

Summary of the Parks Construction Service Specification
1. Service Description	The Parks Construction Service co-ordinates and constructs the assets within the open space areas, provides arboriculture and horticultural construction services, development of open space Plans of Management, support to the community through sporting grants and other open space related works. This service encompasses a broad range of activities including: · Construction of new assets within the open space areas, such as playground equipment, sporting fields and car parks · Enhancement to existing open space facilities, such as increased play equipment with associated softfall at an existing play ground · Provision of arboriculture and horticultural construction services for other council service units, such as landscaping within road reserves · Development and implementation of Plans of Management for open space areas · Support to the community through sporting grants and the annual garden competition · Aquatic weed containment and harvesting · Specific urgent works
2. Link to Strategic Program	Issues	Term Achievements	Critical Actions
	Issue 9 Recreation and Leisure	TA 9.1 - The City’s recreation and leisure facilities and services meet its needs and are optimally used.	CA 9.1B - Ensuring facilities and services reflect the City’s diverse current and future recreation and leisure needs
	Issue 16 Natural Catchment Assets	TA 16.2 -The health of the river system is being improved through the implementation of a comprehensive catchment management strategy.	CA 16.2A - Develop and implement programs to deliver the recommendations of Council’s adopted Catchment Management Strategy.
	Issue 27 Buildings, Parks and Open Space Maintenance	TA 27.2 - A parks and open space maintenance strategy is in operation that maintains those assets to appropriate standards fit for their contemporary purpose and addresses the increased costs of maintaining additional areas.	CA 27.2A - Complete a register of assets and condition assessment of Council parks and open space areas.
3. Service Objectives	· Ensure equity and access of sporting and open space facilities in new and established areas · Ensure sporting and open space facilities in new and established areas to meet contemporary needs · Ensure the standard of the sporting field surfaces and facilities constructed meets the requirements and satisfaction of the user group · Ensure relevant assets designed and constructed to minimize “whole-of-life” assets costs, including depreciation, preventative and routine maintenance as well as possible potential vandalism costs and whilst minimising any future potential risk issues. · Support biodiversity conservation and protection of natural catchment assets
4. Scope of Service	In 2005-06, there were 48 projects of varying scope totalling $1.5million involving: 0.4 FTE on Administration and Management, 3.5 FTE on Construction and Enhancement activities · 2775 hours of plant and equipment utilisation · 65% to 80% of budget expenditure is on Section 94 works. Asset Construction within Open Space Areas – 19 Projects · Installation of new play equipment in 5 locations, including Clissold Park, Judges Park, Banks Drive. · Additional field lighting at 2 locations – Monfarville Fields and Emu No 2 field. · Fencing at 2 locations – Cec Blinkhorn and Shaw Park · An Amenity building constructed for Samuel Marsden Reserve. · Landscaping and improvement at Kennilworth Reserve and Schoolhouse Creek reserve. · Shade structure at Tench Reserve · Cricket Nets at Boronia Park Asset enhancements within Open Space Areas – 17 projects · Improvement to amenity Buildings at 3 locations – South Creek Park, Mark Leece and Jamison Park Netball. · Sealing of Car Park at Kingsway (North) · Additional Bore Water connections at 2 locations – Darcy Smith Dukes Oval and Andrews Road Rugby Field. · Improved field lighting at 2 locations – Parker Street Soccer Field and The Kingsway. · Landscaping, upgrading play equipment and playing field improvements. · South Creek bridge rehabilitation. Arboriculture / Horticulture Projects – 4 Locations · Tree planting, landscape embellishment and landscaping projects in Erskine Park. · Northern Road landscape embellishment · Mulgoa Road landscaping. One Works in Kind Project · None undertaken during 2005 – 2006. Aquatic weed containment and harvesting – 4 projects · Control of aquatic plants and waterway maintenance. · Weed harvesting on Nepean River · Control of weeds in Knapsack Creek.
5. Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)	Key Performance Indicators			Target for 2006-07
	Satisfaction rating of provision of sports grounds and playing fields with medium to high satisfaction. From Citywide Customer Survey 2003 survey = 88.8%, 2005 survey = 86.7%			87% for 2007 survey
	Satisfaction rating of provision of parks and playgrounds with medium to high satisfaction. From Citywide Customer Survey 2003 survey = 81.6%, 2005 survey = 81.5%			82% for 2007 survey
	Projects completed on time, within budget and to agreed standard, over the total approved projects.			80.0%

6. Service Funding

The budget allocation for 2006-07 is $1,678,041.

This allocation includes operational and capital expenditure.

The 2005-06 expenditure for the Parks Construction Service was $1,547,704 consisting of $1,514,751 for construction activities including developing Plans of Management, as well as $32,953 being the portion of Administration and Managements salary and associated vehicle costs for this Service.

Item	Service Components	2005 – 2006 Actual	2006 – 2007 Budget
1	Administration and Management	$ 62,308	$ 86,024
2.1	Asset Construction within Open Space Areas	$ 578,336	$ 884,864
2.2	Asset Enhancements within Open Space Areas	$ 595,542	$ 487,165
2.3	Arboriculture/ Horticulture Projects ~ Roads & Other Areas	$ 232,533	$ 74,988
2.4	Works-in-Kind Projects for Council	Nil	$ 100,000
2.5	Aquatic Weed Containment & Harvesting	$ 58,986	$ 25,000
2.6	Other Works	$ 20,000	$ 20,000
	Subtotal	$ 1,547,704	$ 1,678,041
Income funding sources
	S94 Contributions	($981,321)	($ 1,029,403)
	Other Contributions	($ 68,800)	($ 74,000)
	Grants	($ 79,533)	($ 360,004)
	Council Reserve	($103,807)	Nil
	Voted Works	($ 68,543)	Nil
	EEP	($ 41,687)	($ 60,000)
	Subtotal	($1,343,691)	($ 1,523,407)
	Net Service Cost	$ 204,013	$ 154,634

7. Service Summary Chart

*Policy Review Committee Meeting*	*13 November 2006*
*Leadership and Organisation*

Leadership and Organisation

Establishment of an Audit Committee

Compiled by: Glenn Schuil, Internal Auditor

Authorised by: Barry Husking, Chief Financial Officer

Strategic Program Term Achievement: A contemporary system of risk management and internal control is operating.

Critical Action: Develop and implement an internal audit program that reviews the effectiveness of Council’s risk management, compliance and internal control systems.

Purpose:

To consider the need for the establishment of an Audit Committee. The report recommends that the Committee be established.

Background

In the current Management Plan, one of the Term Achievements is that “Council has implemented leading practice ethical and corporate governance standards”. When the current Management Plan was being developed, it was envisaged that during the term of this Plan research would be undertaken on establishing an Audit Committee. The proposal to establish an Audit Committee has been under investigation for some time, but there has been a greater emphasis of late in researching establishing such a Committee.

It is common practice in the public and private sectors to have Audit Committees. This is seen as “best practice”. There has been a steady increase in recent times of local government establishing Audit Committees.

A number of publications have been issued over the last three years that suggest an Audit Committee is leading practice corporate governance. Essentially these publications are:

1) Excellence in Governance in Local Government by CPA Australia.

2) Audit Committees – A Better Practice Guide by Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu.

3) Governance Health Check – a self audit guide to good governance in local government, prepared in consultation by the LGMA, ICAC and other organisations.

4) Local Government Reform Program – Promoting Better Practice. Modules have been developed that relate to the assessment of a Council’s ability to meet minimum practice standards. The Department has recently undertaken a “Promoting Better Practice Review” of the Council and a recommendation has been made in the draft Report for the Council to establish an Audit Committee.

5) Guide to Compliance with ASX Principle 7: “Recognise and Manage Risk” – produced in association with Deloitte. Although this Principle is generally targeted towards public companies, the principles are still applicable to local government.

A Briefing Paper on the concept of establishing an Audit Committee was presented to the Council’s Finance Working Party on 21 August 2006. Essentially, the Paper before Councillors today is similar in content to the Paper that was presented to the Finance Working Party. At that Meeting, the Finance Working Party agreed in principle that a Report should be prepared and submitted to the Council’s next Policy Review Meeting to progress the establishment of an Audit Committee.

Objective of an Audit Committee

The objective of the Committee is to provide independent assurance and assistance to the General Manager and the Council on the Council’s risk, control and compliance framework, and its external accountability responsibilities.

Why should we establish an Audit Committee?

Audit Committees have been a key feature of corporate governance initiatives in many of the world’s leading financial markets, such as the United States, Canada and Singapore, with the aim of enhancing confidence in the integrity of the Organisation’s business processes and procedures.

The Audit Committee is an advisory Committee assisting Council to fulfil its oversight responsibilities.

An Audit Committee, as a crucial component of corporate governance, could include, but should not be restricted to the review of:

· Ensuring all key controls are operating effectively;

· Ensuring all key controls are appropriate for achieving corporate goals and objectives;

· Increasing confidence in the credibility and objectivity of financial statements and of the Council;

· Providing a forum for continuous review of internal control, including risk assessment;

· Adoption of the Internal Audit Plan;

· Signing off Audit Reports;

· Strengthening the quality of financial reporting;

· Financial performance.

Establishment of an Audit Committee

An Audit Committee would be guided by an Audit Charter that sets out the Committee’s purpose, authority, responsibilities and the resources available to it, as well as how the Committee is to be constituted, its membership including the Chairperson, the frequency of meetings, quorum, whether independent members on the Committee are remunerated and how they are appointed, and lastly what internal staff will assist with the administrative arrangements as well as providing support. It is considered that the Audit Committee can be administratively serviced by the Council’s Internal Auditor.

Attached to this Report is a draft Charter for the Audit Committee. This draft Charter has been prepared having regard to a number of Audit Charters existing in local government, including Newcastle City Council, Fairfield City Council, Sutherland Shire Council and Baulkham Hills Council.

In drafting the attached draft Audit Charter the Council’s external Auditor was consulted.

In respect of the membership of the Committee, it is recommended that it be comprised of the Mayor, three Councillors as determined by the Council, and two independent members. It is considered that the Independent members on the Committee must have a strong understanding of business processes and procedures. At the same time, all members of the Audit Committee should have a broad business background and bring with them a variety of skills.

In respect of the two independent members on the Committee, it is suggested that the University of Western Sydney and an accounting industry body, either CPA Australia or the Institute of CA are peak organisations that could make a significant contribution to the Council’s Audit Committee. Although a representative from either organisation would be acceptable, it is suggested that for the initial term of the Audit Committee that CPA Australia be asked to nominate a representative (who has some nexus to the Council’s area) to sit on the Audit Committee. It is considered that a representative from the UWS would bring leading practice business and financial input to the Committee, while a representative from the accounting profession would be able to provide a business management perspective.

One issue that will need to be determined as well, within the Charter of the Audit Committee, is the question of whether the independent members on the Audit Committee should be remunerated for attending meetings. In discussion with a number of councils that currently have Audit Committees, the majority do not provide any financial payments. Advice was sought from the Internal Audit Bureau (IAB) as to what may be the common practice within the industry regarding remuneration, and I was advised that it is common practice for external members to receive a small amount of remuneration per meeting (around $200 per meeting). Additionally, IAB has further advised that it is aware of one Council where the two independent members – a lawyer and an accountant, are paid a small amount per meeting. This Council has only four Audit Committee meetings per year.

I am also aware that Warringah Council has recently established an Audit Committee and two Independent members on that Committee each receive $400 for attending an Audit Committee Meeting.

It is considered that the two Independent members should receive a remuneration of $200 per meeting.

The work of an Audit Committee

Key responsibilities would include, but not be limited to, the oversight of the framework for:

1. Internal Control

2. Risk Management

3. Internal Audit

4. External Audit

5. The appropriateness of significant accounting policies

6. Responding to management needs - the Council may from time to time invite the Audit Committee to consider issues outside its normal scope of financial reporting, internal control and audit.

7. Reporting to the Council – the Committee should report to the Council on a regular basis. This should be addressed within the Audit Charter. It is usual for the Audit Committee Chairperson to present, at least annually, a Report to the Council that addresses the work and findings of the Audit Committee during the year.

Audit Committee Meetings

An Audit Committee should meet often enough to undertake its role effectively. The minimum number of meetings to be held each year should be included within the Audit Charter, but a review of a number of Council’s Audit Charters indicates that these are generally held once a quarter. In the Council’s draft Charter attached, it is recommended that the meetings be held every quarter.

Apart from the Mayor, three Councillors and two independent members, it is proposed that the Council’s General Manager, Chief Financial Officer and the Internal Auditor will be advisers to the Committee. Other staff may be requested to attend these meetings, from time to time, including the Council’s External Auditor, Financial Services Manager and the Legal Officer.

The Audit Committee meetings should follow an agenda to impose shape and discipline to the meetings. The Audit Committee Secretary should take minutes of the Audit Committee meetings. A copy of the minutes should be forwarded to the Council to ensure that it is aware of the proceedings of the Audit Committee.

The Audit Committee Chairperson

One of the keys to the success of an Audit Committee is the effectiveness of its Chairperson. The “best practice” publications suggest that the Mayor should not be the Chairperson of the Audit Committee so that the Committee can be seen to have some independence. It is recommended that the Chairperson should be appointed by the Council. Once the Independent members (which are to be recommended to the Council) are known, a further report will be presented to the Council.

Audit Committees within Local Government (NSW)

In July 2005, the Department of Local Government issued a Discussion Paper on Internal Audit. Councils were encouraged to make a submission by 31 August 2005. Within this Paper, the Department generally supported councils forming Audit Committees. In discussion with a Senior Investigations Officer from the Department of Local Government, I was advised that although no decision has been made by the Department at this stage about whether Audit Committees should be made compulsory for local government, the current thinking of the Department was that councils may be advised that if a Council wants to establish an Audit Committee, they should establish them in accordance with Guidelines provided by the Department.

The Department of Local Government undertook a “promoting Better Practice Review” of the Council in June 2006. A draft Report containing the findings of the review has recently been received from the Department. One of the recommendations that has been made in the Report is that the Council should establish an Audit Committee.

A number of councils in NSW operate Audit Committees, including Wyong, Fairfield, Newcastle, Baulkham Hills, Liverpool, Holroyd, Sydney City, Warringah, Sutherland, Port Macquarie-Hastings and Blue Mountains. The structures of the Committee vary from Council to Council. It is interesting to note that at least two Councils do not have councillor representation on this Committee (Fairfield and Sutherland), and that on a number of Committees the Mayor is the Chairperson.

Status of Audit Committees within councils throughout other States in Australia

In 2005, Western Australia amended the Local Government Act requiring all councils to establish an Audit Committee.

In South Australia, the Local Government Act has been amended to require councils to establish Audit Committees effective from 1 January 2007.

In Victoria, all councils are required to establish Audit Committees. The councils are required to follow Best Practice Guidelines established by the Government.

In Queensland, councils are not required by legislation to establish Audit Committees. However, the Queensland Local Government Finance Standard (LGFS) 2005 requires councils to have a policy about internal control. In May 2006 the Minister for the Environment, Local Government, Planning and Women released a Discussion Paper on the LGFS seeking submissions on whether councils should be required to establish an Audit Committee.

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Establishment of an Audit Committee be received.

2. Council establish an Audit Committee.

3. The draft Charter for the Audit Committee as attached to this Report be adopted.

4. A letter be forwarded to the UWS and CPA Australia seeking a representative to sit on the Council’s Audit Committee.

5. A further report be presented to the Council once the response from UWS and CPA Australia are received.

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1. View

Audit Committee Charter

3 Pages

Appendix

*Policy Review Committee Meeting*	*13 November 2006*
*Appendix 1 - Audit Committee Charter*

Penrith City Council

Draft Audit Committee Charter

1. Audit Committee Purpose

The Audit Committee is an independent advisory Committee assisting the Council to fulfil its oversight responsibilities. The primary duties and responsibilities of the Audit Committee are to assist the Council discharge its responsibilities relating to:

· Financial reporting practices

· Business ethics, policies and practices

· Management and internal controls

· Monitor the integrity of the Council’s financial reporting practices and finance and accounting compliance

· Review internal controls, key corporate risks and all audit related matters

· Encourage adherence to and continuous improvement of Council’s policies, procedures and practices at all levels.

· Adoption of the Internal Audit Plan.

2. Audit Committee Membership and Meetings

The Audit Committee shall be comprised of the Mayor, three Councillors, and two Independent external members representing an accounting industry body, either CPA Australia or the Institute of CA (the representative should have a nexus with the Council’s area), and a representative of the University of Western Sydney. Audit Committee members shall be appointed by the Council for the term of the Council. For the inaugural Committee, the Committee’s term will be for the period ending September 2008.

The Chairperson of the Audit Committee will be a matter for determination by the Council. The General Manager, Chief Financial Officer and the Internal Auditor will be advisers to the Committee. Other staff members may be requested to attend these meetings from time to time, including the Council’s External Auditor, Financial Services Manager and the Legal Officer.

The Committee shall meet at least four times a year. Additional meetings may be held as directed by the Chairperson. A quorum shall consist of a majority of the members, with at least one independent member being present. Meetings are to be rescheduled if there is not a quorum. The meetings should operate on a “consensus basis” and in accordance with the Council’s Code of Meeting Practice.

The Council’s Internal Auditor will minute proceedings of all meetings.

The Committee may seek advice from management or professional advisers, request their attendance at Committee meetings and consult with the auditors as deemed necessary in the performance of its duties.

The Committee will ensure that Committee members comply with Council’s policies regarding confidentiality, privacy and reporting. Committee members shall treat all information received as part of the Committee as confidential and only disclose the content to third parties with the consent of the other members of the Committee.

The Audit Committee shall, after every meeting, forward the minutes of that meeting to the next Ordinary meeting of the Council, including a report explaining any specific recommendations and key outcomes, if appropriate.

The Committee will report annually to the Council summarising the activities of the Committee during the previous year.

The Chairperson shall determine the agenda for the Committee in conjunction with Council staff, and circulating it to the members prior to each meeting.

The two independent members on the Committee should be remunerated for attending Audit Committee Meetings. The remuneration level shall be adopted by the Council.

Audit Committee Responsibilities and Duties

Review Function

The Audit Committee will:

1. In consultation with the management, the external auditors, and the internal auditor consider the integrity of the Council’s financial reporting processes and organisational controls.

2. Discuss significant financial and other key corporate risks and the steps management has taken to monitor, control and report such exposures.

3. Review significant findings reported by the external auditors and the internal auditor, together with management’s responses including the status of previous recommendations.

4. Review the effectiveness of the annual financial audit to determine whether emphasis is being placed on areas where the Committee, management or the Auditors believe special attention is necessary.

5. Review the Council’s annual financial statements with the General Manager, Chief Financial Officer and the external auditor prior to tabling at Council. The review should include discussion with management and external auditors of significant issues regarding accounting principles, practices and judgments.

6. Review and re-assess the adequacy of this Audit Committee Charter at least once per Council term.

Internal Audit

In regard to Internal Audit, the Audit Committee will:

1. Review and approve the Internal Audit Charter and any subsequent changes, to ensure that internal audit activities are in accordance with the Internal Audit Charter.

2. Review the 2 year Internal Audit Plan and approve any changes.

3. Discuss with the external auditor significant issues arising from the annual audit.

4. The Internal Audit function shall be responsible to the General Manager, but have a reporting responsibility to the Internal Audit Committee.

External Auditors

In regard to the External Auditors, the Audit Committee will:

1. Oversee Council’s compliance with the Local Government Act requirements for financial reporting and auditing.

2. Review the External Auditor’s management letter and management’s response to the recommendations.

3. Support the General Manager and Council in the appointment and evaluation of the external auditor in accordance with S 422 to 427 of the Local Government Act.

4. The Chairperson of the Committee is to liaise with the External Auditor of the Council to foster a co-operative and professional working relationship.

Other Audit Committee Responsibilities

The Audit Committee will:

1. Report annually to the Council.

2. Maintain minutes of meetings and periodically report to the Council on significant results of the Council’s audit activities.

3. Periodically review corporate risk issues reported by either the Council’s Internal Auditor and / or the Risk Management Co-ordinator.

4. Periodically review, discuss and assess audit committee performance as well as the Committee’s role and responsibilities, seeking input from senior management, the Council and others if needed.

*Policy Review Committee Meeting - Urgent Report*	*13 November 2006*
*The City in its Environment*

The City in its Environment

Penrith Overland Flow Flood "Overview" Study

Compiled by: Maruf Hossain, Engineering Stormwater Supervisor

Authorised by: Craig Ross, Design and Technical Advice Manager

Strategic Program Term Achievement: A floodplain management policy to protect the built environment is being implemented by Council consistent with Government guidelines.

Critical Action: Council’s Floodplain Management Policy is contemporary and is being implemented.

Purpose:

To advise Council of the status of the Penrith Overland Flow Flood 'Overview' Study prepared by Cardno Lawson and Treloar Consultants and seek Council's endorsement to advance to the next stage of the study process. The report recommends that the study be accepted, a community consultation program be developed, a Floodplain Risk Management Committee be re-established, S149(5) notations be applied to affected properties, and further reports be submitted to Council on prioritised sub-catchments and a review of Council's Flood Policy.

Background

A Councillor briefing on the Flood Study has been scheduled for November 8, 2006. The briefing paper provided to Councilors included a copy of this report.

The NSW Government’s Flood Policy is directed at providing solutions to existing flooding problems in developed areas, and ensuring that new developments are compatible with the flood hazard and do not create additional flooding problems in other areas. Under the Policy, the management of flood prone land remains the responsibility of local government. To facilitate this, the Government has published the NSW Floodplain Development Manual - April 2005 to provide guidance to councils in the implementation of the Policy, and provide funding in support of floodplain management programs.

A chronology of the development of flood planning issues in Penrith is attached to this business paper.

The 2005 manual is an update of the 2001 manual that gave greater emphasis to overland flow flooding problems rather than the traditional mainstream impacts.

Council holds a number of flood studies that cover the mainstream impacts throughout the LGA. The overland flow and major drainage impact are not so well defined. To respond to this issue, Council sought a grant from the then Department of Infrastructure, Planning & Natural Resources to undertake an analysis of the overland flow impacts for the LGA. This was a very large task, and the first stage involved the acquisition of contour information, together with ortho-rectified aerial photographs for the whole city.

The second stage involved a study to analyse the sub-catchment data across the city, for a range of storm events, further up into the tributaries to determine the overland flow extent and impacts. Because of the magnitude of this work, an Overview Study was carried out to broadly define the impacts, which would enable the sub-catchments to be prioritised for further, more detailed analysis.

Council engaged the consulting firm, Cardno Lawson and Treloar for this study, which is now complete.

The study area covers the LGA, and has been divided into the following three zones for the purpose of this study:

Zone 1 – ‘Central Urban’

Zone 2 – ‘Northern Rural’

Zone 3 – ‘Southern Rural’.

A number of areas in the LGA have been subjected to other detail flood studies, and therefore were excluded from the current study. These areas are:

· The Penrith Lakes Scheme

· St Marys Development site

· Glenmore Park Extension Area

· Erskine Park Employment Area

· Rivers and floodplains being assessed as part of the Nepean River Flood Study (in progress) and the South Creek Flood Study (in progress). The areas within the 100-year ARI flood extent for both the Nepean River and South Creek were excluded from this study.

Outcome of the Flood Study

The objective of the Study is to identify the relative magnitude of the flooding problems across the LGA. It has defined some forty (40) creeks and two hundred and forty nine (249) sub-catchments throughout the LGA that could be subject to major overland flooding. The results of the Overview Study provided a sound basis upon which to undertake a program of more detailed overland flow flood studies throughout the LGA.

The primary objectives of the study were to:

· Identify, validate and map all major overland flow paths within the Study Area

· Identify and map sub-catchments for all catchments within the Study Area

· Identify properties at risk of major overland flooding

· Define local flood behaviour in the Study Area by producing information on flows, flood levels, depth of flows and velocities for the 20 and 100 year ARI and PMF events, under existing catchment conditions

· Assess provisional flood hazard for properties at risk from flooding for the 20 and 100 year ARI and PMF events

· Prioritise the nominated sub-catchment areas in terms of severity of flooding for further investigations.

The above objectives were achieved through data collection, and the application of a 2-dimensional hydrological/hydraulic model analysis for the entire LGA. It should be noted that in this study, the drainage system (underground pipes) was not taken into consideration (other than some major elements). This decision was based on the lack of sufficient detail of the existing systems to be used for modelling purposes, and the relative additional cost to carry out such a comprehensive study of the whole LGA.

Floodplain Management Process

The Manual describes a floodplain risk management process comprising the following sequential stages:

Data Collection

Compilation of existing data and collection of additional data.

Flood Study

Defines the nature and extent of the flood problem.

Floodplain Risk Management Study

Evaluates management options for the floodplain with respect to both existing and future development.

Involves community consultation and formal adoption by Council of a plan of management for the floodplain.

Floodplain Risk Management Plan

Involves implementation of Plan, including any mitigation works and planning controls.

The above process is to be overseen by a Floodplain Risk Management Committee, established by Council, which includes representatives from community groups and state agencies.

The process here will be somewhat disjointed in as much as Council has already gone through this process previously, in establishing its current policy in the early 1980’s. The current process is one of review, and it was considered to be more productive to collect the necessary data and carry out the studies prior to the re-establishment of the Committee. The consultation process should facilitate the engagement of suitable community representatives for the committee.

The above process has advanced to a point where the Data Collection has been completed, and an overview Flood Study has been carried out for the overland flow flood extents.

The Risk Management Study and the Risk Management Plan are yet to commence, and are likely to determine any necessary planning/development controls, together with any mitigation options. These will provide input to future drainage improvement programs and policy documents.

The Plan Implementation will be through the application of development controls and completion of future drainage programs.

Current Situation

The proposed floodplain management process envisages the definition of mainstream, tributary and overland flow flood behaviour throughout the LGA for the full range of potential flood events up to and including the Probable Maximum Flood (PMF). The definition of mainstream and tributary flood behaviour has been previously identified, and is currently under review through a series of flood studies (including the Nepean River Flood Study and the South Creek Flood Study). In the next stage, overland flow behaviour for various groups of sub-catchments within the LGA would be defined by undertaking detailed flood studies.

Considering flood hazard and prioritisation of sub-catchments, as identified in the Overland Flood Flow Study “Overview” report, and development pressure within sub-catchments, a more refined catchment priority list for detailed flood studies can be prepared and reported to Council for endorsement. The detail studies will take into account all existing underground pipes and pits, including details of overland flow paths. The detailed studies will identify current drainage capacity deficiencies and upgrading requirements, to meet Council standards, and any other measures required to mitigate adverse impacts of flooding. It will also explicitly identify areas subject to various flood risks.

Rural Catchments

As indicated above, the Overland Flood Study did not account for any underground pipes in the hydraulic model. The majority of the rural sub-catchments do not have significant pipe networks. Therefore, the current data, for most purposes, would be intact and accurate. The risks associated with not undertaking a more detailed flood study for most of the rural sub-catchments, and relying on the current flood data, is considered minimal. This would enable most of this data to be used for subsequent stages of the flood planning process, including community consultation and engagement of a Floodplain Risk Management Committee.

Urban Catchments

Considering the extent of pipe network, the inclusion of the pipe system in the urban catchments would have an impact on the final extent of overland flow. Further analysis would need to be undertaken of these catchments, on a priority basis, to better define the flood extents.

There are a total number of 149 sub-catchments in the urban zone, and they will be grouped into a smaller number of catchments, based on their topographical position and contribution to the creek systems. Subject to availability of funding, detailed studies will be undertaken to better define the flood extents and impacts. This could extend over the next 5-10 years.

Community consultation will be undertaken, as part of the catchment studies, in line with the Floodplain Development Manual, and would involve the engagement of the Floodplain Risk Management Committee. The committee has an advisory role, and its principal objective is to assist Council in the development and implementation of a floodplain management plan for the area. The objective of the community consultation is to explain the outcome of the flood studies, and it is important that individuals recognise the extent of the flood risk and be aware of evacuation routes and procedures in the event of major flooding.

It is important that the community consultation be effectively managed, so that the studies and processes are not seen as having a direct nexus to property values. Blacktown Council recently engaged their community on a draft LEP amendment that had significant flood implications, which raised a great deal of community concern. This is because S149(2) notations were to be applied throughout the city, based on the PMF event. Fairfield Council, on the other hand, has carried out a similar process, but engaged the community early in the process, without the same concern for property value impact.

Funding

The total cost of the study was $116,750 (excluding GST). Financial assistance was obtained from the State Government under the 2005/2006 Floodplain Management Program. Council was required to match the funding on a 2:1 basis and Council’s share was $38,916.67 (excl. GST).

The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has indicated that financial assistance for the subsequent detail flood studies will be available under the State Government’s Floodplain Management Program as an “ongoing” project. Costing for detailed flood studies of prioritised catchments with a study program, and Council’s funding contribution, will be prepared and reported to Council at a later date.

Section 149(2) or 149(5) Notation

S149(2) notations are applied where a council has a policy that restricts development on a property because of flooding (and other matters). At the moment, Council’s policy applies to properties below the 1%AEP mainstream (rivers and streams) flood event (plus 0.5m freeboard). S149(2) notations are limited to properties in theses areas.

Properties affected by drainage related flooding issues are not covered by Council’s policy and notations are not applied. Council does have the ability however, to apply S149(5) notations to advise purchasers of any other flood information relevant to the property. Providing that Council “acts in good faith” in the provision of this information, the indemnity provisions of the Local Government Act would apply.

The arbitrary delineation of mainstream and overland flow flooding impacts has been a concern for many years, with differing councils taking differing positions on the matter.

The State Government’s Floodplain Development Manual has sought to address this issue by requiring councils to consider whether overland flow and major drainage impacts should be covered by their flood policy. Until such time as Council makes a formal decision on this matter, Council’s policy would not apply and S149(2) notations would also not apply.

It is pointed out that if a property is not affected by Council’s flood policy, Council is not restricted in applying any necessary development controls on the property. The application of the policy merely mandates that such controls be applied.

Notwithstanding this, it would be appropriate, in the interim, for a S149(5) notation to be applied to those properties affected by overland flow extents, where the flood data is considered to be relatively accurate, indicating that a study has been carried out that has identified affectation on the property. The Manual defines a floodplain (flood prone land) as the land that is subject to inundation from a PMF event. On this basis, it would be appropriate for the above S149(5) notation to be applied to the PMF affected properties. This notation is to provide advice on the existence of the study. It is not for development control purposes.

A similar S149(5) notation should also be applied to PMF affected properties, identified in the mainstream studies (Nepean River, South Creek/Ropes Creek), when they are completed.

Comment from Council’s Legal Officer

The issue of flood liability is one that a Council must take a responsible approach to. It is a balance between the Council being too conservative with their notations and devaluing land and the Council ensuring it has met it statutory obligations to notify and for the Council’s practices to be in accordance with the State Government’s Flood Manual. It is clear that at law a conservative approach resulting in notation under Section 149 (5) will not bring with it liability as a result of the devaluation of land as long as the notation is factual and accurate. This has been confirmed by recent discussions with Westpool and with a Solicitor from Phillips Fox.

It is also clear that if the Council has adopted a policy that restricts the development of land because of flooding then the Council is legally obliged to place a 149(2) notation on the s149 Certificate.

Accordingly it would seem where Council does not have a policy that restricts development, notations under s149(5) are discretionary. Despite this Council is being encouraged to inform interested persons of flood liability of land.

My understanding is that the new State Government Flood Manual is promoting that owners and interested parties of properties affected up to the Probable Maximum Flood (PMF) should be told of the potential flood liability of the land. The Minister for Planning the Hon Frank Sartor recently has rejected that development control should apply to land only affected by the PMF. Accordingly the Flood Manual is promoting s149 (5) notations. Also the Minister doesn’t think there should be any policy that restricts development on land only affected by a PMF event.

Section 733 of the Local Government Act provides Council with immunity from liability where it has provided flooding information and has acted in “good faith”. There has not been a great deal of court interpretation of this term. Recently the High Court has commented that these protections only apply where it relates to the function of a Council. The provision of flood information is within the domain of the Council. Also one thing certain is that to comply with the Flood Manual will allow the Council to rely on the “good faith” defence in the legislation.

It would seem prudent, from a legal point of view, to notate properties the subject of the flooding studies and found to be within a PMF event with a section 149(5) notation. I think that the notation should be comprehensive and explain that this does not necessarily mean that there will be development controls over the land as a result of the land’s flood liability.

Comment from Council’s Risk Manager

The process of review and consultation for the conduct of ongoing studies and development of a more comprehensive plan should help minimise community concerns on the implications of overland flooding. The process, as outlined in this report, is considered good management practice and is commendable. Notations on 149(5) certificates that studies are being carried out and/or have been completed will mitigate Council's potential risk exposure of negligence and/or failure to disclose information relating to properties.

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Penrith Overland Flow Flood "Overview" Study be received.

2. The “Penrith Overland Flow Flood ‘Overview Study’ prepared by Cardno Lawson Treloar Consultants be accepted.

3. A further report be submitted to Council on the prioritised sub-catchments for detailed flood studies.

4. A community consultation program be developed, initially for the rural areas, and for the urban areas as further studies are carried out.

5. Council proceed towards formulation of Floodplain Risk Management Committee in line with the NSW Floodplain Development Manual.

6. A further report be submitted to Council regarding a review of Council’s flood policy.

7. S149(5) notations be applied to affected properties as outlined in this report.

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1. View

Chronology of Development of Flood Policy

1 Page

Appendix

*Policy Review Committee Meeting*	*13 November 2006*
*Appendix 1 - Castlereagh Cemetery Map*

*Policy Review Committee Meeting*	*13 November 2006*
*Appendix 2 - Castlereagh Cemetery Photo*

*Policy Review Committee Meeting*	*13 November 2006*
*Appendix 1 - Aerial Photo*

*Policy Review Committee Meeting*	*13 November 2006*
*Appendix 2 - Extract of the Structure Plan*

*Policy Review Committee Meeting*	*13 November 2006*
*Appendix 3 - Land Use and Urban Structure*

*Policy Review Committee Meeting*	*13 November 2006*
*Appendix 4 - Identified Lands for LEP*

*Policy Review Committee Meeting*	*13 November 2006*
*Appendix 1 - Chronology of Development of Flood Policy*

*Policy Review Committee Meeting*	*13 November 2006*
*Appendix 1 - Draft Policy on the Payment of Expenses and Provision of Facilities to the Mayor, Deputy Mayor and Councillors*