2 May 2007

 

Dear Councillor,

In pursuance of the provisions of the Local Government Act, 1993 and the Regulations thereunder, notice is hereby given that an ORDINARY MEETING of Penrith City Council is to be held in the Council Chambers, Civic Centre, 601 High Street, Penrith on Monday 7 May 2007 at 7:30pm.

Attention is directed to the statement accompanying this notice of the business proposed to be transacted at the meeting.

Yours Faithfully

 

 

Alan Stoneham

Acting General Manager

 

BUSINESS

 

1.           APOLOGIES

 

2.           LEAVE OF ABSENCE

 

3.           CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

Ordinary Meeting - 23 April 2007.

 

4.           DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Pecuniary Interest (The Act requires Councillors who declare a pecuniary interest in an item to leave the meeting during discussion of that item)

Non-Pecuniary Interest

 

5.           ADDRESSING THE MEETING

 

6.           MAYORAL MINUTES

 

7.           NOTICES OF MOTION

 

8.           ADOPTION OF REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATION OF COMMITTEES

Penrith Valley Community Safety Partnership Meeting - 28 March 2007.

Policy Review Committee Meeting - 30 April 2007.

 

9.           MASTER PROGRAM REPORTS

 

10.         URGENT REPORTS (to be dealt with in the master program to which the item relates)

 

11.         QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

 

12.         COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE



ORDINARY MEETING

 

Monday 7 May 2007

 

table of contents

 

 

 

 

 

seating arrangements

 

 

meeting calendar

 

 

confirmation of minutes

 

 

report and recommendations of committees

 

 

master program reports

 


 

 

 

 

PRAYER

 

 

 

“Sovereign God, tonight as we gather together as a Council we affirm that you are the giver and sustainer of life.  We come together as representatives of our community to make decisions that will benefit this city and the people within it. 

 

We come not in a spirit of competition, not as adversaries, but as colleagues.  Help us to treat each other with respect, with dignity, with interest and with honesty.  Help us not just to hear the words we say, but also to hear each others hearts.  We seek to be wise in all that we say and do.

 

As we meet, our concern is for this city.  Grant us wisdom, courage and strength.

 

Lord, help us.  We pray this in the name of Jesus Christ our Lord.  Amen.”

 

 

 

 


 


Statement of Recognition of Penrith City’s

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Cultural Heritage

 

 

Council values the unique status of Aboriginal people as the original owners and custodians of lands and waters, including the land and waters of Penrith City.

 

Council values the unique status of Torres Strait Islander people as the original owners and custodians of the Torres Strait Islands and surrounding waters.

 

We work together for a united Australia and City that respects this land of ours, that values the diversity of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultural heritage, and provides justice and equity for all.

 

 

 

 


 


Council Chambers Seating Arrangements

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 


                                                        

 

 

Text Box: Public Gallery
Text Box: Managers
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Text Box: Press

Managers                           

 
   


 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MEETING CALENDAR

February 2007 - December 2007

 

 

TIME

FEB

MAR

APRIL

MAY

JUNE

JULY

AUG

SEPT

OCT

NOV

DEC

Mon

Mon

Mon

Mon

Mon

Mon

Mon

Mon

Mon

Mon

Mon

Ordinary Meetings

7.30 pm

12

5

 

7v

25*

2

 

3ü

 

 

 

 

26

23

28

 

23

13

24^

29

19

10

Policy Review Committee

7.30 pm

 

12

2@

 

4

9

 

10

 

 

3

19#+

 

30

21#

 

30

20#+

 

8@

5#

 

 

#    Meetings at which the Management Plan ¼ly  reviews are presented.

^     Election of Mayor/Deputy Mayor [only business]

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

@   Strategic Program progress reports [only business]

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

ü    Meeting at which the 2006/2007 Annual Statements are presented

*     Meeting at which the Management Plan for 2007/2008 is adopted

 

 

-                 Council’s Ordinary Meetings are held on a three-week cycle where practicable.

-                 Extraordinary Meetings are held as required.

-                 Policy Review Meetings are held on a three-week cycle where practicable.

-                 Members of the public are invited to observe meetings of the Council (Ordinary and Policy Review Committee).  All meetings start at 7:30pm.

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


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


UNCONFIRMED MINUTES

 OF THE ORDINARY MEETING OF PENRITH CITY COUNCIL HELD IN THE

COUNCIL CHAMBERS

ON MONDAY 23 APRIL 2007 AT 7:32PM

NATIONAL ANTHEM 

The meeting opened with the National Anthem.

STATEMENT OF RECOGNITION

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

PRAYER

The Council Prayer was read by the Executive Officer/Public Officer.

PRESENT

His Worship the Mayor Councillor Pat Sheehy AM, Councillors David Bradbury (arrived at 8:00 pm), Lexie Cettolin, Kevin Crameri OAM, Greg Davies, Mark Davies, Ross Fowler, Jackie Greenow, Karen McKeown, Susan Page, Garry Rumble, Steve Simat and John Thain.

 

APOLOGIES

113  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jackie Greenow seconded Councillor Karen McKeown that the apologies from Councillors David Bradbury, Kaylene Allison and Jim Aitken OAM be accepted.

 

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES - Ordinary Meeting - 26 March 2007

114  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor John Thain seconded Councillor Ross Fowler that the minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of 26 March 2007 be confirmed, subject to the amendment of part 2 of the resolution at Item 7 to now read:

 

                   “2.     Council adopt the Employment Planning Strategy, as attached to this report, with the site at Old Bathurst Road/Russell Street to be included in the Draft LEP as General Industrial, with all other issues to be assessed as part of a future Development Application.”

 

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM declared a non-pecuniary interest in Item 7 - Development Application DA06/1848 for the construction of a dwelling at Lot 244 DP2147 (No. 244) Seventh Avenue, Llandilo. Applicant: Innovation Planning Australia;  Owner: Mr Phillip Adams as he lives and owns land in the vicinity, and in view of his long association with the applicant’s family for many years.  Councillor Crameri reserved the right to comment during any debate, but stated that he would not vote on this matter.

 

 

Councillor Ross Fowler declared a non-pecuniary interest in Item 5 of the Committee of the Whole - Legal Matter - Penrith Whitewater Stadium as he is Chairman of Westpool, and a Director on the Board of Penrith Whitewater Stadium. 

 

Councillor Garry Rumble declared a non-pecuniary interest in Item 5 of the Committee of the Whole - Legal Matter - Penrith Whitewater Stadium as he is a Director on the Board of Penrith Whitewater Stadium.

 

Councillor Karen McKeown declared a non-pecuniary interest in Item 5 of the Committee of the Whole - Legal Matter - Penrith Whitewater Stadium as he is a Director on the Board of Penrith Whitewater Stadium.

 

His Worship the Mayor, Councillor Pat Sheehy AM, declared a non-pecuniary interest in Item 5 of the Committee of the Whole - Legal Matter - Penrith Whitewater Stadium as he is a Director on the Board of Penrith Whitewater Stadium.

 

SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS

115  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jackie Greenow seconded Councillor John Thain that Standing Orders be suspended to allow members of the public to address the meeting, the time being 7:39 pm.

 

Mr Robert McGuiness  

Item 7 - Development Application DA06/1848 for the construction of a dwelling at Lot 244 DP2147 (No. 244) Seventh Avenue, Llandilo. Applicant: Innovation Planning Australia;  Owner: Mr Phillip Adams

Speaking AGAINST the Recommendation

 

Mr McGuiness was representing Innovation Planning Australia Pty Ltd, and spoke against the recommendation for refusal of the development, stating that, as the proposal is for a single dwelling on a single lot, it will not reduce the opportunity for further agricultural development, as it will take up no more space on the 1 ha lot than a dual occupancy would on a 2 ha lot.  He also stated that the likelihood of any new agricultural pursuits being undertaken on a 2ha lot is very low, given the current state of rural industry.

 

RESUMPTION OF STANDING ORDERS

116  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jackie Greenow seconded Councillor Ross Fowler that Standing Orders be resumed, the time being 7:47 pm.

 

 

MAYORAL MINUTES

 

1        The Passing of Mr Dharma Sinniah

 

117  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Pat Sheehy AM seconded Councillor Karen McKeown that the Mayoral Minute on The Passing of Mr Dharma Sinniah be received.

 

2        Launch of Penrith Valley Home Based Business Website

 

118  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Pat Sheehy AM seconded Councillor Greg Davies that the Mayoral Minute on Launch of Penrith Valley Home Based Business Website be received.

 

3        Community Partnership with the NSW Cancer Council

 

Councillor David Bradbury arrived at the meeting, the time being 8:00 pm.

 

119  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Pat Sheehy AM seconded Councillor Mark Davies that the Mayoral Minute on Community Partnership with the NSW Cancer Council be received.

 

Dr Penman made a presentation on the Cancer Council’s partnership with Penrith City Council and how it was important, given the statistics relating to cancer.

 

4        Retirement of Information Technology Manager Richard Baczelis

 

120  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Pat Sheehy AM seconded Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM that the Mayoral Minute on Retirement of Information Technology Manager Richard Baczelis be received.

 

Leadership and Organisation

 

8        Presentation to Richard Baczelis                                                                                       

121  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Pat Sheehy AM seconded Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Presentation to Richard Baczelis be received.

2.     Council to recognise the long service and dedicated contribution made by Richard Baczelis in his 43 year long career with Penrith City Council, and extend its best wishes to Richard Baczelis and his family for a long and happy retirement.

 

His Worship the Mayor, Councillor Pat Sheehy AM, presented Richard Baczelis with a framed copy of the Mayoral Minute.

 

Reports of Committees

 

1        Report and Recommendations of the Local Traffic Committee Meeting held on 2 April 2007        

122  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Ross Fowler that the recommendations contained in the Report and Recommendations of the Local Traffic Committee meeting held on 2 April, 2007 be adopted.

 

2        Report and Recommendations of the Policy Review Committee Meeting held on 2 April 2007      

123  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ross Fowler seconded Councillor Garry Rumble that the recommendations contained in the Report and Recommendations of the Policy Review Committee meeting held on 2 April, 2007 be adopted.

 

MASTER PROGRAM REPORTS

 

The City in its Broader Context

 

14      Penrith Lakes Scheme                                                                                                       

124  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Mark Davies seconded Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM that the information contained in the report on Penrith Lakes Scheme be received.

 

The City as a Social Place

 

1        Assistance to Amateur Sportspersons and Representatives in the fields of Art, Music, Culture - Overseas and Interstate Travel                                                                                        

125  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM that the information contained in the report on Assistance to Amateur Sportspersons and Representatives in the fields of Art, Music, Culture - Overseas and Interstate Travel be received.

 

3        Naming of a Park in Algie Crescent, Kingswood                                                              

126  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Naming of a Park in Algie Crescent, Kingswood be received.

2.     Council endorse the naming of the park on Algie Crescent, Kingswood as ‘Samuel Foster Reserve’ and make application to the Geographical Names Board for the official gazetting.

 

5        Children's Services 2007/2008 Budget Overview and Fees and Charges                       

127  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM

          That:

1.      The information contained in the report on Children’s Services 2007/2008 Budget Overview and Fees and Charges be received.

2.      Council adopt the fees and charges for the operation of Children’s Services for inclusion in the Draft 2007/2008 Management Plan.

3.      Council’s draft 2007/2008 Management Plan include funding of $65,938 (operational deficit of $59,938 and $6,000 equipment allocation for Vacation Care services) towards service provision for the Children’s Services managed by Penrith City Children’s Services Co-operative.

4.      Council’s draft 2007/2008 Management Plan include provision for a $5,000 scholarship for Children’s Services.

5.      The proposed 2007/2008 fees and charges for Children’s Services be adopted with allowance for PCCSC, under certain criteria, to vary the fees and charges by up to 20%, having regard to a policy to be adopted by Council with regard to setting the fees and charges.

 

6        Londonderry Neighbourhood Project                                                                                

128  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Londonderry Neighbourhood Project be received.

2.     Council endorse the grant application to DOTARS.

3.     Council approve the $50,000 cash contribution from the following sources:

          . $20,000 for water saving measurers in building services
          . $18,000 from General Revenue
          . $12,000 advanced from the Sustainability Revolving Fund to be repaid
               over 5 years.

 

2        Community Safety & Security Conference 2007                                                              

129  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Garry Rumble seconded Councillor Karen McKeown

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Community Safety & Security Conference 2007 be received.

2.     Councillor Garry Rumble, and any other available Councillors attend the Conference and leave of absence be granted to those Councillors as appropriate.

 

4        Mosquito Vector Control Program                                                                                    

130  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Garry Rumble seconded Councillor Jackie Greenow

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Mosquito Vector Control Program be received.

 

2.     Council undertake a targeted information program about mosquitoes and arboviruses at the start of known risk periods.

 

7        Development Application DA06/1848 for the construction of a dwelling at Lot 244 DP2147 (No. 244) Seventh Avenue, Llandilo. Applicant: Innovation Planning Australia;  Owner: Mr Phillip Adams                                                                                                    DA06/1848

131  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ross Fowler seconded Councillor Steve Simat that consideration of this item be deferred until Councillor Jim Aitken OAM is able to be in attendance.

 

Leadership and Organisation

 

10      Westpool Study Tour - Public Risk and Insurance Managers Association (PRIMA)  Conference 2007  

132  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM seconded Councillor Susan Page that the information contained in the report on Westpool Study Tour - Public Risk and Insurance Managers Association (PRIMA)  Conference 2007 be received.

 

11      Grants Received                                                                                                                 

133  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM seconded Councillor Susan Page

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Grants Received be received.

2.     Council endorse the acceptance of $2 million for the Implement Ropes and South Creek Regional Open Space Strategic Management Plan and $1.1 million for the Sustainable Playing Fields project funded through the Environmental Trust’s Urban Sustainability Program.

 

3.     Council send letters of thanks to the Minister for the Environment and the Local Member for their support and pledged funds for the Urban Sustainability Program grants.

 

4.     Council endorse the acceptance of funding for the Great River Walk, Penrith Stage 1a and the Signage, Branding and Promotions Plan, offered under the Metropolitan Greenspace Program 2006/07.

 

5.     Council send letters of thanks to the Minister for Planning and the Local Member, and letters of congratulations to the Great River Walk Incorporated and Hawkesbury City Council for their support and pledged funds.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

12      Council Property - Land Consolidation - Penrith Regional Gallery & Lewers Bequest.  Owner:  Penrith City Council.  Applicant:  Penrith City Council                                                                 

134  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM seconded Councillor Susan Page

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Council Property - Land Consolidation - Penrith Regional Gallery & Lewers Bequest.  Owner:  Penrith City Council.  Applicant:  Penrith City Council be received.

2.     The Common Seal of the Council of the City of Penrith be placed on the Linen Plan of Consolidation that consolidates Lots 3 & 4 DP 504935 and Lot B1 DP 419667.

 

13      Summary of Investments for the period of 27 February 2007 to 31 March 2007           

135  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM seconded Councillor Susan Page

That:

1.   The information contained in the report on Summary of Investments for the period of 27 February 2007 to 31 March 2007 be received.

2.   The Certificate of the Responsible Accounting Officer and Summaries of Investments and Performance for the period 27 February 2007 to 31 March 2007 be noted and accepted.

3.   The graphical investment analysis as at 31 March 2007 be noted.

4.   The Agency Collection Fees information as at 31 March 2007 be noted.

 

9        2007 Australian Local Government Association (ALGA) National General Assembly of Local Government                                                                                                                        

136  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Jackie Greenow

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on 2007 Australian Local Government Association (ALGA) National General Assembly of Local Government  be received.

2.     Council nominate the Mayor, or his nominee, as its voting delegate for the 2007 National General Assembly of Local Government.

3.     Council nominate Councillors Jim Aitken OAM, Garry Rumble, Susan Page, and any other interested and available Councillor, to attend as observers at the 2007 National General Assembly of Local Government.

4.     Leave of Absence be granted to all Councillors attending the 2007 National General Assembly of Local Government to be held in Darwin from 26-29 November 2007.

 

 

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

 

QWN 1      Andrews Road, Cranebrook                                                                                     

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM requested a memo reply detailing what action will be taken to remedy the poor state of the surface of Andrews Road, Cranebrook, between Castlereagh Road and Greygums Road.

 

QWN 2      Mowing - Casuarina Circuit and Angophora Avenue, Kingswood                         

Councillor Mark Davies requested a memo reply addressing the concerns raised by residents with regard to recent mowing works carried out to the reserve bounded by Casuarina Circuit and Angophora Avenue, Kingswood.

 

QWN 3      Proposed Bridge to connect Penrith Lakes Scheme to the Northern end of Russell Street, Emu Plains        

Councillor Mark Davies submitted a petition from 60 residents of the Russell Street, Emu Plains area, and requested a memo reply addressing their concerns regarding a bridge proposed to be built to connect the Penrith Lakes Scheme to the northern end of Russell Street, Emu Plains.  The concerns mostly relate to the likely impact of the proposed bridge on the amenity of the area.

 

QWN 4      Mamre Road, St Clair                                                                                              

Councillor Steve Simat requested a report to Council, regarding the possibility of implementing a beautification program, including the planting of trees, in various areas on the eastern side of Mamre Road, St Clair, in and around the vicinity of Banks Drive and McIntyre Street, which would serve to enhance the view corridor along that strip.

 

QWN 5      Presentation of Rotary Award                                                                                  

Councillor Karen McKeown presented Council with a Bronze Sponsor award, from Rotary, for Council’s involvement in the ‘Police Officer of the Year’ Award.

 

QWN 6      Aussies for Orphans Ball                                                                                          

Councillor Karen McKeown requested that $300 be allocated from each of the three Wards’ voted works for Council to become a Gold Sponsor of the Aussies for Orphans Ball.

137  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Karen McKeown seconded Councillor Ross Fowler that the matter be brought forward and dealt with as a matter of urgency.

 

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

 

138  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Karen McKeown seconded Councillor Ross Fowler that $300 be allocated from each of the three Wards’ voted works for Council to become a Gold Sponsor of the Aussies for Orphans Ball.

 

 

Committee of the Whole

 

139  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Susan Page seconded Councillor Jackie Greenow that the meeting adjourn to the Committee of the Whole to deal with the following matters, the time being 8:53 pm.

 

1        Presence of the Public

 

CW1 RESOLVED on the motion of Councillor Susan Page seconded Councillor Jackie Greenow that the press and public be excluded from Committee of the Whole to deal with the following matters:

 

Leadership and Organisation

 

2        Commercial Matter - Council Property - Lease of Shops 10, 11 & 13 at Cranebrook Village Shopping Centre                                                                                                                 

 

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

 

Leadership and Organisation

 

3        Commercial Matter - Acquisition for Road Widening, Castlereagh Road/Jane Street, Penrith                                                                                                                                             

 

This item has been referred to Committee of the Whole as the report refers to commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed (i) prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it; or (ii) confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council; or (iii) reveal a trade secret and discussion of the matter in open meeting would be, on balance, contrary to the public interest.

 

4        Commercial Matter - Council Property - Dedication for Road Widening, Springwood Road, Agnes Banks                                                                                                                       

 

This item has been referred to Committee of the Whole as the report refers to commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed (i) prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it; or (ii) confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council; or (iii) reveal a trade secret and discussion of the matter in open meeting would be, on balance, contrary to the public interest.

 

5        Legal Matter - Penrith Whitewater Stadium                                                                    

 

This item has been referred to Committee of the Whole as the report refers to advice concerning litigation, or advice that would otherwise be privileged from production in legal proceedings on the ground of legal professional privilege and discussion of the matter in open meeting would be, on balance, contrary to the public interest.

 

The meeting resumed at 10:01 pm and the Acting General Manager reported that the Committee of the Whole met at 8:53 pm on Monday, 23 April 2007, following being present

 

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

 

and the Committee of the Whole excluded the press and public from the meeting for the reasons set out in CW1 and that the Committee of the Whole submitted the following recommendations to Council.

 

CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS

 

2        Commercial Matter - Council Property - Lease of Shops 10, 11 & 13 at Cranebrook Village Shopping Centre                                                                                                                                 

RECOMMENDED on the MOTION of Councillor Ross Fowler seconded Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM

CW2 That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Commercial Matter - Council Property - Lease of Shops 10, 11 & 13 at Cranebrook Village Shopping Centre be received.

2.     Council grant H.S. Enterprises Pty Ltd a five (5) year Lease, with a five (5) year Option, over Shops 10, 11 & 13 at Cranebrook Village Shopping Centre in accordance with the terms and conditions contained within the report.

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

 

3        Commercial Matter - Acquisition for Road Widening, Castlereagh Road/Jane Street, Penrith       

RECOMMENDED on the MOTION of Councillor Ross Fowler seconded Councillor Jackie Greenow

CW3 That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Commercial Matter - Acquisition for Road Widening, Castlereagh Road/Jane Street, Penrith be received.

2.     Council purchase Lot 1 DP 218028 at Nos 2277-2279 Castlereagh Road, Penrith in accordance with Conditions 1-7 as outlined in the report.

3.     The land be classified as “Operational” land.

4.     The Building Services Manager be authorised to demolish all structures after acquisition.

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

 

 

 

4        Commercial Matter - Council Property - Dedication for Road Widening, Springwood Road, Agnes Banks                                                                                                                                             

RECOMMENDED on the MOTION of Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM seconded Councillor Garry Rumble

CW4 That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Commercial Matter - Council Property - Dedication for Road Widening, Springwood Road, Agnes Banks be received.

2.     Council accept compensation from the Roads & Traffic Authority for the acquisition and dedication as road of approximately 960 square metres from Lot 2 DP 564321 Springwood Road, Agnes Banks in accordance with Conditions 1 – 5 as outlined in the report.

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

 

5        Legal Matter - Penrith Whitewater Stadium                                                                    

RECOMMENDED on the MOTION of Councillor David Bradbury seconded Councillor Steve Simat

          CW5 That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Legal Matter - Penrith Whitewater Stadium be received.

2.     The suggested action in the report be endorsed.

 

ADOPTION OF Committee of the Whole

 

140  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ross Fowler seconded Councillor Garry Rumble that the recommendations contained in the Committee of the Whole and shown as CW1, CW2, CW3, CW4 and CW5 be adopted.

 

 

 

There being no further business the Chairperson declared the meeting closed the time being 10:04 pm.

 



PENRITH CITY COUNCIL

 

Procedure for Addressing Meetings

 

Anyone can request permission to address a meeting, providing that the number of speakers is limited to three in support of any proposal and three against.

 

Any request about an issue or matter on the Agenda for the meeting can be lodged with the General Manager or Public Officer up until 12 noon on the day of the meeting.

 

Prior to the meeting the person who has requested permission to address the meeting will need to provide the Public Officer with a written statement of the points to be covered during the address in sufficient detail so as to inform the Councillors of the substance of the address and a written copy of any questions to be asked of the Council in order that responses to those questions can be provided in due course.

 

In addition, prior to addressing the meeting a person addressing Council or Committee will be informed that they do not enjoy any privilege and that permission to speak may be withdrawn should they make inappropriate comments.

 

It should be noted that speakers at meetings of the Council or Committee do not have absolute privilege (parliamentary privilege).  A speaker who makes any potentially offensive or defamatory remarks about any other person may render themselves open to legal action.

 

Prior to addressing the meeting the person will be required to sign the following statement:

 

“I (name) understand that the meeting I intend to address on (date) is a public meeting.  I also understand that should I say or present any material that is inappropriate, I may be subject to legal action.  I also acknowledge that I have been informed to obtain my own legal advice about the appropriateness of the material that I intend to present at the above mentioned meeting”.

 

Should a person fail to sign the above statement then permission to address either the Council or Committee will not be granted.

 

The Public Officer or Minute Clerk will speak to those people who have requested permission to address the meeting, prior to the meeting at 6.45pm.

 

It is up to the Council or Committee to decide if the request to address the meeting will be granted.

 

Where permission is to be granted the Council or Committee, at the appropriate time, will suspend only so much of the Standing Orders to allow the address to occur.

 

The Chairperson will then call the person up to the lectern or speaking area.

 

The person addressing the meeting needs to clearly indicate:

 

·     Their name;

 

·     Organisation or group they are representing (if applicable);

 

·     Details of the issue to be addressed and the item number of the report in the Business Paper;

 

·     Whether they are opposing or supporting the issue or matter (if applicable) and the action they would like the meeting to take;

 

·           The interest of the speaker (e.g. affected person, neighbour, applicant,        applicants spokesperson, interested citizen etc).

 

Each person then has five minutes to make their address.  Those addressing Council will be required to speak to the written statement they have submitted.  Permission to address Council is not to be taken as an opportunity to refute or otherwise the points made by previous speakers on the same issue. 

 

The Council or Committee can extend this time if they consider if appropriate, however, everyone needs to work on the basis that the address will be for five minutes only.

 

Councillors may have questions about the address so people are asked to remain at the lectern or in the speaking area until the Chairperson has thanked them.

 

When this occurs, they should then return to their seat.

 

 

Glenn McCarthy

Public Officer

02 4732 7649  

   


 

 

 

 

THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT BLANK  INTENTIONALLY


Reports of Committees

 

Item                                                                                                                                       Page

 

1        Report and Recommendations of the Penrith Valley Community Safety Partnership Meeting held on 28 March 2007

 

2        Report and Recommendations of the Policy Review Committee Meeting held on 30 April 2007

 

 



Ordinary Meeting

7 May 2007

Leadership and Organisation

 

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE
 Penrith Valley Community Safety Partnership MEETING

HELD ON 28 March, 2007

 

 

 

PRESENT

Councillor Garry Rumble; Councillor Kaylene Allison.

 

Tracey Leahy, Penrith City Council; Graham Welch, Penrith Youth Interagency; David Jones, St Marys Local Area Command; Ray Filewood, St Marys Local Area Command; Anthony Holton, St Marys Local Area Command; Jennie Hughes, Erskine Park Neighbourhood Development Team; Julie Passau, Penrith Local Area Command; Janet Mackenzie, Glenmore Park Action Group; Daniel Bailey, Penrith City Council; Terry McGivern, Penrith City Council; Kylie Howard, Penrith City Council; Jeni Pollard, Penrith City Council; Erin Davidson, Penrith City Council; Yvonne Perkins, Penrith City Council; David Burns, Penrith City Council; Marcello Scali, Penrith City Council; Gladys Reed, Penrith City Centre Association.

 

APOLOGIES

Councillor Karen McKeown; Kristy Williams, St Marys Local Area Command; Debbie Moore, St Marys Local Area Command; Jill Woods, Penrith Valley Chamber of Commerce; Julie Page & Felicity Sheaves, Needle and Syringe Program – Sydney West Health; Wendy Herne, St Clair Erskine Park Safety Association; Katerina Tahija, Penrith City Council

 

PVCSP 1  RECOMMENDED that apologies be received and accepted.

 

LEAVE OF ABSENCE

Leave of Absence was previously granted to Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM, for the period 19 March 2007 to 30 March 2007 inclusive, and to Councillors Jackie Greenow and Pat Sheehy AM, for the period 19 March 23007 to 31 March 2007 inclusive.

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES - Penrith Valley Community Safety Partnership Meeting - 7 December 2006

PVCSP 2  RECOMMENDED that the minutes of the Penrith Valley Community Safety Partnership meeting of 7 December 2006 be confirmed.

 

MASTER PROGRAM REPORTS

 

The City as a Social Place

 

1        Penrith Valley Community Safety Plan 2002-2006                                                           

The Penrith Valley Community Safety Plan 2002 – 2006 concluded in 2006.

 

During the life of the plan a number of key issues were addressed under the five key priority areas of:

 

1.   Personal Safety

2.   Antisocial Behaviour

3.   Fear of Crime

4.   Issues Affecting People and Places

5.   Theft of, or from a Vehicle.

 

A number of initiatives and programs developed during this time will continue as core business of Council’s Community Safety function.

 

There will be an evaluation conducted on the 2002 – 2006 plan and presented at the June Quarterly Meeting.

 

PVCSP 3  RECOMMENDED that the information contained in the report on Penrith Valley Community Safety Plan – 2002 – 2006 be received.

 

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

Yvonne advised that programs developed as part of the 2002-2006 Community Safety Plan will now be reported as ongoing initiatives. It is proposed that this report will be presented to the first meeting of the Partnership each calendar year. 

 

Nepean Domestic Violence Network

The annual Nepean Domestic Violence Network planning day was held on 22 March 2007 at Glenmore Park. The day was well attended by Network members.

 

Maria Losurdo from Losurdo Consulting, facilitated the day and developed an action plan for the Network to adopt at their next meeting. Key projects were also identified by the Network that are to be progressed throughout the year.

 

Cranebrook Town Centre – Sharing the Public Domain

Marcello advised that the Cranebrook Youth Streetwork Project has achieved some key milestones, including connecting with young people in the area, engaging with a number of service providers, and identifying the gaps that are present within the community.

 

Marcello also reported back on the Australia Day event. Local residents within the community had raised concerns that they would not be able to take part in celebrations, as transport was limited and their remote location to scheduled events. A free bus service was sourced as a trial within the Cranebrook area to connect local residents with Australia Day celebrations. The trial proved to be popular with local residents from the Cranebrook estate.

 

The first outreach and youth streetwork network meeting for Western Sydney was also held on Friday 16 March 2007, with workers from Katoomba to Parramatta attending. Workers identified issues around streetwork and outreach projects that were very different to centre activities, and the challenges involved with engaging young people. Workers agreed that this was a very beneficial meeting.

 

 

HOST’s Pack

A review of the HOST’s Pack is now complete with the addition of drink spiking material supplied by The Warehouse, Penrith. The artwork for the HOST’s Pack has also been updated. Event organisers will be encouraged to use the new drink cooler to promote the awareness of drink spiking.

 

Pedestrian Laneways

The Department of Lands is currently revising the guidelines for requests for laneway closures. To date, no advice concerning the guidelines has been received.

 

Star Court Shopping Centre Precinct – Community Safety Audit

David advised the Partnership that treatments and enhancements have been undertaken, as a result of the Community Safety Audit conducted at the Cambridge Gardens Precinct at Star Court. Works scheduled for completion include:

·        Lighting upgrades and the installation of additional lighting

·        Installation of bollards

·        Restoration works

·        Retaining walls

·        New signage

·        Sections of footpaths, including a pram ramp.

 

Secure Taxi Rank

The Secure Taxi Rank is still in operation and is undergoing an evaluation of the trial period.

 

PVCSP 4  RECOMMENDED that the information contained in the report on Penrith Valley Community Safety Plan – Key Area Strategy Development and Project Updates be received.

 

3        Penrith Valley Community Safety Plan 2007-2010                                                           

The new Penrith Valley Community Safety Plan was developed after wide community consultations with various key stakeholders. This plan was developed with a different approach and focuses on the following seven (7) key priority issues:

·        Concerns for Safety

·        Domestic Violence

·        Assault (Other than Domestic Violence)

·        Malicious Damage

·        Harassment and Antisocial Behaviour

·        Steal from and Theft of a Motor Vehicle

·        Break and Enter Offences.

 

 

 

The plan was placed on public exhibition for the period 24 November 2006 to 21 December 2006. One external submission was received from Anglicare discussing the complexities of domestic violence and how the plan could better support the priority issue, Domestic Violence.

 

The complexities of domestic violence, raised by Anglicare, were considered and, as a result, additions to the rationale and strategy for Domestic Violence were developed and included in the plan.

 

PVCSP 5  RECOMMENDED that the information contained in the report on Penrith Valley Community Safety Plan – 2007 - 2010 be received.

 

4        Penrith Citywide Graffiti Minimisation Strategy                                                              

To date, the graffiti contractors have removed over 42,000 square metres of graffiti from private property accessible from the public space in the Local Government Area. Audits within the LGA have revealed a low incidence of re-hits.

 

All graffiti removed to date has been mapped to identify hotspots.

 

Legislation regarding the display of spray cans, that now requires spray cans to be behind a locked screen, came into effect as of 1 February 2007. Penrith Police advised that all stores have now complied, and purchasers must ask for assistance when purchasing spray paint cans. With the introduction of this new legislation, concerns were raised that this may result in an increase in glass etching and graffiti with felt tip permanent markers.

 

Ray Filewood has received positive feedback from community members about the graffiti that has been removed in the Colyton and St Clair areas.

 

The graffiti hotline is now up and running. A list of phone calls received on the hotline from each suburb was compiled and distributed to the partnership.

 

Graffiti Hotline Reports by Suburb

 

Cambridge Gardens

1

Cambridge Park

19

Claremont Meadows

8

Colyton

10

Cranebrook

8

Emu Heights

1

Emu Plains

12

Glenmore Park

14

Jamisontown

4

Kingswood

15

North St Marys

6

Orchard Hills

2

Oxley Park

5

Penrith

52

Regentville

2

St Clair

17

St Marys

22

South Penrith

7

Werrington

4

Werrington County

6

Werrington Downs

2

 

There was an initial slow period of reporting to the hotline when it was first introduced, however the promotion of the hotline number through Council newsletters and the local newspapers has resulted in increased number of reportings.

 

As the removal of the backlog of graffiti across the city is nearing completion, resources are being directed to remove graffiti from the following priority areas:

 

1.   Graffiti Hotline – (the aim is to have graffiti removed within approx. 5 working days).

2.   Higher traffic roads across the LGA

3.   CBDs and Local Shopping Strips.

 

Community Safety staff are currently developing a pro forma on the Council website for the reporting of graffiti via the internet.

 

NSW Attorney General’s Grant

The Partnership was advised of a grant received from the NSW Attorney General’s Department for a CPTED and landscaping project in Glenmore Park.

 

The project involves the selection of two sites to enable the comparison of various treatments.  These sites are referred to as the “intervention” and “control” sites.  The intervention site is the sandstone retaining wall at Ched Towns Reserve. The reason this wall was selected was because it has been the subject of many graffiti attacks over the past few years and cannot withstand the high pressure graffiti removal process.  A CPTED landscaping project will assist in keeping this wall graffiti free.

 

A control site was also chosen as a requirement of the funding. The site is identified as a similar size and style retaining wall on the edge of a public footpath outside Woodlands Drive in Glenmore Park. This control site will be subject to graffiti removal in conjunction with the inspection and maintenance cycle determined from the Citywide Graffiti Minimisation Strategy.

 

Councillor Garry Rumble advised that the graffiti on the industrial properties at Jamisontown has still not been removed. He requested that this be given a high priority for removal.

 

In response to this request, David Burns advised that the graffiti was over a substantial area of walls and the cost of removal would be significant.  David also advised that an extensive landscaping project had been previously undertaken in this location.  It was proposed that the removal of this graffiti be deferred until the vegetation is further advanced, providing less of a target for future graffiti hits. 

 

PVCSP 6  RECOMMENDED that the information contained in the report on Penrith Citywide Graffiti Minimisation Strategy be received.

 

 

Regular Items

a)       Police Statistics

 

 

Penrith Police

Reported Crime Statistics December 2006 – February 2007

 

Crime Category

Dec 06

Jan 07

Feb 07

Assault

95

80

102

Robbery

8

12

6

Break & Enter

77

64

71

Stealing

237

181

162

Steal Motor Vehicle

45

36

47

Malicious Damage

153

159

140

Drug Detection

17

16

10

Traffic Offences

583

355

322

Motor Vehicle Accident

67

54

70

 

St Marys

Reported Crime Statistics December 2006 – February 2007

 

Crime Category

Dec 06

Jan 07

Feb 07

Assault

133

125

128

Robbery

10

5

13

Break & Enter

81

65

65

Stealing

90

116

118

Steal Motor Vehicle

33

32

45

Malicious Damage

154

137

124

Drug Detection

12

11

13

Traffic Offences

483

378

331

Motor Vehicle Accident

57

45

52

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What’s in the Media?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


GENERAL BUSINESS

 

GB 1          Alcohol Prohibited locations

Yvonne Perkins advised that a small working group would be convened in the next few weeks to commence examination of locations that would benefit by the establishment of “Acting Contrary to Notices” signs to prohibit alcohol from being consumed in non road, car park and footpath areas (as with Alcohol Free Zones).

 

Penrith Police advised that they would like to see more alcohol free zones established in certain areas around the LGA. Yvonne advised that this could also be considered at the small working group meeting. Council is reviewing the number and type of signage throughout the LGA to reinforce the current Alcohol Free Zones. Anthony Holton asked if Council halls could be included in the review, with a restriction to alcohol within certain times periods. Julie suggested that there be a map with the designated alcohol prohibited areas highlighted.  These issues can be considered by the small working group.

 

GB 2 CCTV – Gladys Reed

Gladys Reed advised that she would like to see consideration being given to the installation of CCTV throughout the Penrith CBD. Gladys considered that this would assist in the prevention of antisocial behaviour within the city.

 

GB 3          St Marys Police Station – Ray Filewood                                                                 

Ray Filewood updated the Partnership on the construction progress for the new St Marys Police Station. Ray advised that the construction is ahead of schedule and is due for completion in October 2007.  He also advised that the new station will also be a charge station, eliminating the need to use the Penrith Police Station facilities.

 

 

 

There being no further business the Chairperson declared the meeting closed the time being 7:45 pm.

 

 

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That the recommendations contained in the Report and Recommendations of the Penrith Valley Community Safety Partnership meeting held on 28 March, 2007 be adopted.

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

7 May 2007

Leadership and Organisation

 

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE
 Policy Review Committee MEETING

HELD ON 30 April, 2007

 

 

 

PRESENT

His Worship the Mayor Councillor Pat Sheehy AM, Councillors Jim Aitken OAM, Kaylene Allison, David Bradbury (arrived 7:59pm), Lexie Cettolin, Kevin Crameri OAM, Ross Fowler, Jackie Greenow, Karen McKeown, Garry Rumble, Steve Simat (arrived 8:05pm) and John Thain.

 

APOLOGIES

PRC 25  RECOMMENDED that apologies be accepted from Councillors David Bradbury, Greg Davies, Mark Davies, Susan Page and Steve Simat.

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES - Policy Review Committee Meeting - 2 April 2007

PRC 26  RECOMMENDED that the minutes of the Policy Review Committee Meeting of 2 April 2007 be confirmed.

 

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

 

There were no declarations of interest.

 

MASTER PROGRAM REPORTS

 

The City as a Social Place

 

Councillor David Bradbury arrived, the time being 7:59pm.

 

Councillor Steve Simat arrived, the time being 8:05pm.

 

5        Proposal for a Memorandum of Understanding with Sydney West Area Health Service        

Dr Glenn Close from Sydney West Area Health Service made a presentation.

PRC 27  RECOMMENDED

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Proposal for a Memorandum of Understanding with Sydney West Area Health Service be received

2.     A Memorandum of Understanding be developed between Council and Sydney West Area Health Service.

 

 

 

 

1        Penrith City Children's Services Co-operative Ltd                                                          

Mr Max Friend, Chairman of Penrith City Children’s Services Cooperative Ltd, made a presentation.

PRC 28  RECOMMENDED

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Penrith City Children's Services Co-operative Ltd be received

2.     Council continue to underwrite the operations of Penrith City Children’s Services Co-operative to 30 June 2008, subject to receipt of Annual Budgets

3.     Council write to thank the Board of Directors of Penrith City Children’s Services Cooperative, who give generously of their time each year to ensure a great service is provided to the community.

 

Councillor Jim Aitken OAM left the meeting, the time being 8:29pm.

 

Councillor Jim Aitken OAM returned to the meeting, the time being 8:30pm.

 

3        Review of the Immunisation Service                                                                                 

Mrs Beverley Bill, representing the Immunisation Clinic Nurses, made a presentation.

Mr Michael Edwards, CEO of the Nepean Division of General Practitioners, made a presentation.

PRC 29  RECOMMENDED

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on the Review of the Immunisation Service be received

2.     Council discontinue the clinical component of the Immunisation Service and focus resources on the enhanced promotion of childhood immunisation

3.     Discussions take place with Community Health within three (3) months to take up the services currently provided by Council.

PRC 30  An AMENDMENT was RECOMMENDED:

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on the Review of the Immunisation Service be received

2.     The clinical component of the Immunisation Service continue with a further review of the service to be undertaken in twelve (12) months.

On being PUT to the meeting, the AMENDMENT was CARRIED and on becoming the MOTION was also CARRIED.

 

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM left the meeting, the time being 9:17pm.

 

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM returned to the meeting, the time being 9:20pm.

 

Councillor John Thain left the meeting, the time being 9:31pm.

 

Councillor John Thain returned to the meeting, the time being 9:33pm.

 

Councillor Jim Aitken OAM left the meeting, the time being 9:41pm.

 

Councillor Karen McKeown left the meeting, the time being 9:41pm.

 

Councillor Karen McKeown returned to the meeting, the time being 9:43pm.

 

6        The future of the former Gipps Street Landfill site at Claremont Meadows                  

Mr Wayne Mitchell, Environmental Health Manager – Penrith City Council, made a presentation.

PRC 31  RECOMMENDED

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on The future of the former Gipps Street Landfill site at Claremont Meadows be received

2.     A project to fully complete the remediation of the site by providing the final topsoil layer to the western half of the site be included in the 2007/2008 Management Plan with funding to be provided from the Waste Reserve

3.     A review be undertaken of the future location of the SES depot on the site

4.     Formal consultation take place with the Claremont Meadows community regarding the future facilities on the site, specifically access across Gipps Street to the site and inclusive of local sporting groups.

 

2        Parent Friendly Facilities in Public Buildings                                                                    

PRC 32  RECOMMENDED

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Parent Friendly Facilities in Public Buildings be received.

2.     The current review of planning policies includes the adoption of appropriate requirements to parent friendly facilities in public buildings.

3.     Any new Development Application which falls within the types identified in this report, be required to address the issue of providing ‘parenting rooms’.

 

Councillor Jim Aitken OAM returned to the meeting, the time being 9:57pm.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4        Planning for an Ageing Community - Ageing Strategy Scoping Paper                            

PRC 33  RECOMMENDED

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Planning for an Ageing Community - Ageing Strategy Scoping Paper be received.

2.     The development of an ageing strategy for the City ‘Planning for an Ageing Community’ be undertaken in 2007-08.

3.     $60,000 be allocated for the development of an ageing strategy, ‘Planning for an Ageing Community’, in the 2007-08 Management Plan.

 

The City In Its Environment

 

7        Waste Performance Incentive Payments                                                                          

PRC 34  RECOMMENDED

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Waste Performance Incentive Payments be received.

2.     The proposal developed in this report be brought forward in the 2007/2008 budget process.

3.     The $50,000 received in 2006/2007 over the budgeted income be recommended to be transferred to a reserve as a part of the March quarterly review process.

 

The City as an Economy

 

8        Glenmore Park Stage 2 - Employment Development and Affordable Housing Strategies      

PRC 35  RECOMMENDED

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Glenmore Park Stage 2 - Employment Development and Affordable Housing Strategies be received

2.     Council agree in principle to the offer of $1.6 million from the Landowners Group for job creation activities in the City to be included in the proposed Glenmore Park Stage 2 Planning Agreement, the terms of which to be negotiated prior to Council’s formal endorsement 

3.     A further report be brought to Council outlining an approach to further investigating the options available to Council for delivering its economic and employment development programs

4.     Council agree in principle to the offer of $1M from the Landowners Group for the delivery of affordable, disability and community housing to be included in the proposed Glenmore Park Stage 2 Planning Agreement, the terms of which to be negotiated prior to Council’s formal endorsement

5.     A further report be brought to Council outlining a preferred process for the future delivery of affordable, disability and community housing

6.      A further report be brought to Council for formal consideration of the proposed Glenmore Park Stage 2 Planning Agreement.

 

 

Leadership and Organisation

 

9        Service Specification Program                                                                                           

PRC 36  RECOMMENDED

        That:

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

2.      The specification for Roads, Footpaths and Drainage Construction service be adopted

3.      The specification for Roads and Footpaths maintenance service be adopted

4.      The specification for Building Construction service be adopted

5.      The specification for Design service be adopted

6.      The Specification for Records and Document Management be adopted

7.      The annual budget allocation for Roads and Footpaths Maintenance Service be increased by the CPI in line with the increase in the Roads and Footpaths asset base starting in 2008-09.

 

There being no further business the Chairperson declared the meeting closed the time being 10:02pm.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That the recommendations contained in the Report and Recommendations of the Policy Review Committee meeting held on 30 April, 2007 be adopted.

 

 

 



 

Item                                                                                                                                       Page

 

 

The City as a Social Place

 

1        Responsible Companion Animal Ownership

 

2        8th International Cities, Town Centres and Communities Society Conference 2007

 

3        Development Control Plan Provisions for Bushfire Hazard Reduction in Conservation Zones 

 

4        Subdivision Application 07/0121 at University of Western Sydney Lot 1721 DP 864087 (No. 56) Second Avenue, Kingswood. Applicant: Whelans Planning;  Owner: University of Western Sydney DA07/0121

 

5        Development Application 06/1008 for proposed alterations and additions for St Clair Shopping Centre at Lot 1 DP 1018519 (No. 4) Endeavour Avenue, St Clair. Applicant: Planning Logic Pty Ltd;  Owner: Cambooya Properties Pty Limited DA06/1008

 

6        Development Application 06/1848 for the construction of a dwelling at Lot 244 DP 2147 (No. 244) Seventh Avenue, Llandilo. Applicant: Innovation Planning Australia;  Owner: Mr Phillip Adams DA06/1848

 

The City In Its Environment

 

7        Drainage Sub-Catchment Prioritisation

 

8        Rehabilitation of the former Jam Factory Site at Lots 1 - 3 DP 342275 Roper Road, Colyton

   

Leadership and Organisation

 

9        Draft 2007-2008 Management Plan

 

10      Occupational Health and Safety Certificate of Achievement Award

 

11      2007 Local Government Association Conference

 

12      CPA National Public Sector Convention 

 

13      Grants Officer - Activities 1 October 2006 - 31 March 2007

 

14      GST Compliance Certificate

 

 


 

 

 

 

THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT BLANK  INTENTIONALLY


 

 

The City in its Broader Context

 

 

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


 

 

 

 

THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT BLANK  INTENTIONALLY


The City as a Social Place

 

Item                                                                                                                                       Page

 

1        Responsible Companion Animal Ownership

 

2        8th International Cities, Town Centres and Communities Society Conference 2007

 

3        Development Control Plan Provisions for Bushfire Hazard Reduction in Conservation Zones 

 

4        Subdivision Application 07/0121 at University of Western Sydney Lot 1721 DP 864087 (No. 56) Second Avenue, Kingswood. Applicant: Whelans Planning;  Owner: University of Western Sydney DA07/0121

 

5        Development Application 06/1008 for proposed alterations and additions for St Clair Shopping Centre at Lot 1 DP 1018519 (No. 4) Endeavour Avenue, St Clair. Applicant: Planning Logic Pty Ltd;  Owner: Cambooya Properties Pty Limited DA06/1008

 

6        Development Application 06/1848 for the construction of a dwelling at Lot 244 DP 2147 (No. 244) Seventh Avenue, Llandilo. Applicant: Innovation Planning Australia;  Owner: Mr Phillip Adams DA06/1848

 

 



Ordinary Meeting

7 May 2007

The City as a Social Place

 

 

The City as a Social Place

 

 

1

Responsible Companion Animal Ownership   

 

Compiled by:                Barry Ryan, Waste and Community Protection Manager

Authorised by:             Barry Ryan, Waste and Community Protection Manager  

Requested By:             Councillor Greg Davies

Strategic Program Term Achievement: Strategies are in place to respond to the social and health needs of the community.

Critical Action: Undertake a program of activities to safeguard and improve the health of the community.

     

Purpose:

To advise Council of strategies to educate dog owners about the legislative responsibilities in regard to cleaning up after their dogs in a public place.  The report recommends that the information be received.

 

Background

The Companion Animals Act was introduced 1998 and replaced the Dog Act 1966 which was then repealed. With the introduction of this new legislation, additional offences were gazetted to deal with dogs in public areas. 

 

The offence “Fail to remove faeces” (penalty $220) was a new offence.  Introduced with the expectation of responsible dog owners removing their dogs' faeces from public areas, this would assist in preventing contaminates from washing into drainage areas and subsequently into local waterways.

 

This section of the Companion Animals Act is difficult to enforce as Rangers are required to observe the offence before taking action.

 

Current Situation

In an effort to minimise the problem, Council staff distribute biodegradable dog waste collection bags at Council’s Open Day and community events. The waste disposal bags are available from Council’s customer service staff.

 

Council provides waste disposal bags and dispensers at all dog off leash areas established within the LGA.

 

Due to the random acts of owners allowing their dogs to defecate in public areas, and the owners failing to remove the waste, an educational approach is the most successful strategy. 

 

Advertisements and information are placed in local newspapers to inform owners of their responsibilities in owning companion animals.

 

Additional signage, to remind animal owners of their responsibilities whilst in a public place, have been ordered and will be installed in the near future.

 

With the impact of amended legislation under the Companion Animals Act in 2006, and early 2007, animal services staff have focused on the control requirements for dangerous dogs and cross breed restricted dogs. An additional Companion Animals Officer is included as a “proposed funded project” in the 2007/08 Management Plan. Should this project be successful, it will enable an increased focus on the provision of information and education to members of the public in regard to responsible companion animal ownership.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That the information contained in the report on Responsible Companion Animal Ownership be received.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Meeting

7 May 2007

The City as a Social Place

 

 

The City as a Social Place

 

 

2

8th International Cities, Town Centres and Communities Society Conference 2007   

 

Compiled by:                Janelle Stanton, EP Secretary

Authorised by:             Ruth Goldsmith, Local Planning Manager   

Strategic Program Term Achievement: Penrith City Centre and St Marys Town Centre are appealing places to people seeking satisfying social and cultural experiences.

Critical Action: Develop and implement the social and cultural elements of the City Centres Review Strategies.

     

Purpose:

To inform Councillors of the 8th International Cities, Town Centres and Communities Society Conference to be held 26-29 June 2007 in Auckland, New Zealand. The report recommends that the information be received.

 

Background

Council has received an invitation from the International Cities, Town Centres and Communities (ICTC) Society to attend the 8th International Cities, Town Centres and Communities Society Conference, to be held from 26 to 29 June 2007 in Auckland, New Zealand.

 

The Conference theme this year is ‘Cities on the Edge’ and will cover topics such as:

·    Sustainability

·    Affordable Housing

·    Master Planned Communities

·    Branding and Destination Marketing

·    Community Building and Consultation

·    Infrastructure

·    Transport

·    Creating Liveable Neighbourhoods

·    Regional Strategic Planning

·    Place Making / Public Spaces

·    Energy Management / Environmental Challenges.

 

The keynote speakers for the Conference are:

·    David Feehan, President, International Downtown Association, New York, USA

·    Ethan Kent, Vice President, Project for Public Spaces, New York, USA.

 

A number of Councillors and Council officers have attended previous ICTC Conferences, and have found them to be a valuable resource in gaining knowledge and understanding of the issues involved in planning and developing liveable and sustainable cities.  Details of this Conference have been distributed to all Councillors, and there have been no nominations to attend.

 

The Local Planning Manager has accepted an invitation to present a paper at the conference on ‘The Making of a Regional River City’.  This clearly reflects Penrith’s now recognised status as a regional City, which is an important message to convey to an international audience.  The Director City Planning is also proposing to attend the conference.  The General Manager has approved their attendance, and funding is available from the professional training budget.

Conclusion

The Conference presents a good opportunity to hear from a number of internationally recognised practitioners in the fields of planning, development, sustainability and change.

 

The issues that will be canvassed by the speakers, and the developments which will be visited in the site tours, are quite relevant to the challenge we face in Penrith, particularly with our recent City Centres’ review and the challenges we face in implementing such a significant program.  The conference presents a valuable opportunity to learn from others.

 

The Director City Planning and the Local Planning Manager will ensure that the key messages from the forum are brought back and integrated into our future planning and implementation program.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.   The information contained in the report on 8th International Cities, Town Centres and Communities Society Conference 2007 be received.

2.   Council endorse the attendance of the Director City Planning and the Local Planning Manager at the conference, including making a presentation on ‘The Making of a Regional River City’.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Meeting

7 May 2007

The City as a Social Place

 

 

The City as a Social Place

 

 

3

Development Control Plan Provisions for Bushfire Hazard Reduction in Conservation Zones    

 

Compiled by:                Natasha Baker, Senior Environmental Planner

Authorised by:             Roger Nethercote, Environmental Planning Manager   

Strategic Program Term Achievement: Cohesive communities are formed based on sustainable, safe and satisfying living and working environments.

Critical Action: Prepare and implement plans for each new release area that deliver quality, sustainable living and working environments.

     

Purpose:

To provide information outlining the DCP provisions for bushfire hazard reduction in conservation zones that adjoin residential land. The report recommends that the information be received.

 

Background

Council, at its meeting of 4 December 2006, considered and adopted the draft amendment to the Claremont Meadows Stage 2 chapter of the Penrith Development Control Plan 2006. One of the recommendations emerging from consideration of that report, was that a “ further report be presented to Council, explaining DCP provisions for bushfire hazard reduction on conservation zones adjoining residential land”.

 

The adopted Claremont Meadows Stage 2 DCP includes the bushfire hazard reduction requirements in “Planning for Bushfire Protection”, developed by the NSW Rural Fire Service to guide development on bushfire prone land. This report explains those provisions, as well as, the recently revised version of “Planning for Bushfire Protection 2006” which took effect from 1 March 2007. The report concludes that the provisions included in the adopted DCP, in particular bushfire setback requirements, remain relevant to the new guidelines.

 

The document “Planning for Bushfire Protection 2006” is available on the NSW Rural Fire Services website at www.rfs.nsw.gov.au.

 

Current Bushfire Hazard Reduction Provisions in Claremont Meadows Stage 2

The NSW Rural Fire Service (RFS) guidelines require an Asset Protection Zone (APZ) to be established around buildings that are on land identified as Bushfire Prone Lands, on maps developed by Council in accordance with the RFS guidelines for mapping. The purpose of an APZ is to provide a fuel-reduced, physical separation between buildings and vegetation identified as a bush fire hazard.

 

The adopted APZ setback in the Claremont Meadows Stage 2 DCP is 35m and protects future residents from the bushfire hazard identified in the proposed Flora and Fauna Conservation Zones.

The Bushfire provisions in the DCP also provide for 10m of the APZ to be located within the Flora and Fauna Conservation Zones. The sharing of the APZ between the conservation zones and development zones was negotiated with the Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC) and Landcom (the previous owners of significant landholdings within the Claremont Meadows Stage 2 estate).  This arrangement preserves the current development potential, as well as achieving a positive biodiversity conservation outcome. If the full 35m APZ was required to be located within the residentially zoned land only, the overall lot yield of the area will significantly reduce, and some parcels of land may be rendered uneconomic to develop.

 

The proposed Flora and Fauna Conservation Zones will ultimately come into Council ownership and Council will bear the responsibility for the management of the 10m edge of the APZ within the public land. Comments provided by the RFS on recent DAs for subdivision in Claremont Meadows Stage 2 have advised that it has no objections to Council managing its portion of the APZ subject to a Plan of Management for the Council land that addresses the ongoing maintenance of the APZ.

 

DEC also provided a guideline called the Fire Management Manual which sets out policies and procedures for the preparation of fire management strategies and plans within public reserves. It emphasises the primary role of an APZ which is to protect life and property. It acknowledges that the only way to achieve effective protection of assets and life is to come to a negotiated position with neighbouring land holders in which each party accepts responsibility for fire protection. This has been the case with the development of the bushfire provisions in the Claremont Meadows Stage 2 DCP.

 

Bushland Reserve Management

The Fire Management Manual prepared by DEC sets out policies and procedures for the preparation of fire management strategies and plans within public reserves.  These guidelines essentially require a fire management strategy to be prepared for each conservation zone, as part of the Plans of management for the Council’s open space areas. The level of detail in the strategy will ultimately depend upon the nature of future adjoining development.

 

Council’s Parks Construction Maintenance Manager advises that, in relation to the management of the edges of bushland reserves where they interface with residential development, an approach is pursued whereby the management of APZs are based on risk management principles. Each open space area is treated on its merit, informed by the relevant plan of management. The current practice is to reduce fuel loads and undergrowth only within the APZ setbacks, using slashing techniques, when required.

 

In essence, these approaches require the careful management of edges of bushland reserves so that an effective buffer is maintained to achieve the protection of life and property on both public and private adjoining lands.

 

New Bushfire Planning Provisions

On 28 February 2007, the RFS introduced new bushfire planning provisions in its ‘Planning for Bushfire Protection 2006’, which replaced the previous guidelines for development within bushfire prone areas.

 

The key changes in the revised provisions is a more flexible approach to planning for bushfire protection in assessing development on an individual merit basis.   In addition to providing prescriptive measures, ‘acceptable solutions’ have been introduced to allow either the criteria to be adopted or another solution to be adopted that will satisfy the criteria. 

 

One of the revisions relate to the width of APZs.  In assessing acceptable solutions, a lesser APZ width may be applied, for example, where a higher standard of construction materials are used (Level 3 Construction).  Easements to accommodate APZs across adjoining lands may also be considered in certain circumstances.

 

Perimeter roads continue to be supported in new subdivisions as part of the APZ and this is being planned for in the City’s new urban release areas, including Claremont Meadows Stage 2.

 

The revised provisions could therefore allow a total APZ width of 20m, but only where the Level 3 Construction is applied to all future buildings in the adjacent subdivision.  Given the negotiated position of 10m of the APZ being located within the conservation zone in the Claremont Meadows example, this would leave a requirement for this type of construction of a 10m setback in the development zone.  Under the new requirements, this would see the reduced APZ in essence overlaying both the perimeter road reserve and the front building setback on each lot.

 

The adopted setbacks in the DCP are still considered relevant and applicable to the range of residential development planned for the estate.  The adopted road pattern and land use arrangements therefore remain unaffected. Each development application for residential development will continue to be assessed on a case by case basis against setback requirements in the DCP and the Planning for Bushfire Protection Guidelines.

 

Conclusion

Asset Protection Zones are implemented to provide proposed development with sufficient separation to identified bushfire impacts, and provide areas where reduced/maintained fuel loads ensure radiant heat levels at building locations are below critical limits and prevent direct flame contact with the building.  This assists in the protection of life and property in the event of a bushfire.

 

In the case of Claremont Meadows Stage 2, a 10m outer buffer of the APZ within the Flora and Fauna Conservation Zone was considered to be an appropriate outcome given the need to balance development opportunity with negotiated outcomes to secure tracts of remnant native bushland for biodiversity conservation purposes.  There is a need to effectively manage the edges of bushland reserves on both the private and public lands to ensure that suitable setbacks are achieved to protect life and property.

 

The revised Planning for Bushfire Protection guidelines still require effective arrangements for locating APZs for protecting development in the Claremont Meadows Stage 2 estate.  However, it is recognised that the opportunity exists under the new policy for reduced APZs to be considered.  That is appropriately done at the point where development applications for subdivision and building development are being advanced for Council’s consideration where a merit based approach under the guidelines would be available.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That the information contained in the report on Development Control Plan Provisions for Bushfire Hazard Reduction in Conservation Zones be received.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Meeting

7 May 2007

The City as a Social Place

 

 

The City as a Social Place

 

 

4

Subdivision Application 07/0121 at University of Western Sydney Lot 1721 DP 864087 (No. 56) Second Avenue, Kingswood  Applicant:  Whelans Planning;  Owner:  University of Western Sydney    

DA07/0121

Compiled by:                Gordon Williams, Environmental Planner

Authorised by:             Paul Lemm, Development Services Manager  

Requested By:             Councillor David Bradbury

Strategic Program Term Achievement: Redevelopment of existing areas contributes to safe, sustainable, affordable and satisfying living environments and cohesive communities.

Critical Action: Work in partnership with the local community to foster understanding of the reasons why established areas are redeveloping.

     

Purpose:

To report to Council a proposed subdivision of the existing lot containing the University of Western Sydney (Kingswood Campus) into two Torrens titled lots. The proposal has received substantial public interest and is reported to Council by request. The report recommends approval subject to conditions.

 

Introduction

Council is in receipt of a development application for a two lot Torrens title subdivision. The proposal is to create two lots, having areas of 5.815Ha and 55.96Ha. An assessment of the application has been undertaken, under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, and the following issues emerge:

 

·    Potential future use of the site

·    Werrington Employment Living and Learning (WELL) Precinct

·    Impact on the adjoining residential zone.

Site and Surrounds

The subject site is situated on the southern side of Second Avenue, bound by O’Connell Street to the east, and to the west low density residential dwellings with a frontage to Manning Street. The area to the south of the site is of a rural character.

 

The site has an area of 61.78ha and is currently occupied by The University of Western Sydney and associated building and facilities. It has an extensive area of natural tree cover extending along the eastern boundary and a dam in the north eastern corner. The remainder of the site has been landscaped as part of the site development and contains extensive lawn areas.

The Proposed Development

It is proposed to create two lots – proposed Lot 2 with an area of 55.96 Ha and proposed Lot 1   with an area of 5.815ha. The boundary between the proposed lots aligns with the proposed future “educational” and “residential” boundaries under the Werrington Enterprise Living and Learning (WELL) Precinct Concept Plan 2006, which is discussed later in this report. (See Subdivision Plan in Appendix No. 2)

 

The existing University, together with existing vegetation to the east of the site, are proposed to be contained on proposed Lot 2.  Proposed Lot 1 in the south west of the site is currently vacant, and comprises mostly open mown grass, interspersed with some scattered trees within the proposed lot and along the western and northern boundaries adjoining the neighbouring residential properties. Within proposed Lot 2 there is a drainage swale that runs in a westerly direction to Manning Street which then connects with Council’s drainage system.

 

The applicant was formally requested by Council to supply details of the likely future land use of the proposed Lot 2. The applicant advised that “at this stage we are not in a position to provide details in regard to future use or development of the proposed sale parcel, as the use and/or development of the site will be ultimately determined by the subsequent purchaser of the lot.”

 

The application was accompanied by the following report and documentation:

 

·    Statement of Environmental Effects (Whelans Planning)

·    Draft Plan of Subdivision (Whelans Planning)

Planning Assessment

The development has been assessed in accordance with the matters for consideration under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, and the following relevant considerations identified:

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

The site is zoned Zone No 5(a) Special Uses (Tertiary Education) under Penrith Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Urban Land) (LEP), and the proposed subdivision is permissible with consent in this zone. The current zoning permits limited uses with development consent of Council, namely Tertiary Education including ancillary development, utilities and installations. Housing for older people or people with disabilities is also permitted under State Environmental Planning Policy – Seniors Living. There are no minimum lot areas for subdivision of land zoned 5(a) Special Use in the LEP.

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

The application is for subdivision only and no site works or removal of vegetation is proposed. As such, it does not change the current interface with the existing public/private domain nor change the existing character of the locality. The current proposal would not have any foreseeable impacts on the community. Potential impacts of any proposal would need to be assessed on their merit at that time, and would be subject to a separate Development Application.

3.   Section 79C(1)(d) – The suitability of the site for the Development

The proposed subdivision is permitted in the zone, with proposed Lot 1 large enough in area to be used for uses permitted under the current zoning. The proposed lot configuration also aligns with the boundary between residential and educational boundaries proposed under the WELL Precinct Concept Plan 2006.

 

The potential impacts of any future development on the existing adjoining areas will be taken into account at that time.  The applicant was asked to elaborate on the potential future land use, but at this stage no information was provided.  Under the present zoning provisions, the choice of future land uses is limited to uses associated with the University or Seniors Living.

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

In accordance with Council’s Advertising and Notification Development Control Plan, the proposed development was notified to nearby and adjoining residents, and advertised in the local paper, between 20 Feburaty2007 and 6 March 2007. One hundred and thirty five (135) residences in the area were notified. A petition containing one hundred and forty nine (149) signatures and thirteen letters of objection were submitted in response.

 

Matters raised in submissions are summarised and addressed as outlined below:

 

·   Traffic and access to the site would have an adverse impact on the existing surrounding area and a traffic study needs to be conducted

 

The application is for subdivision only. Future land use proposals will need to address this issue.

 

·   The development of the site will result in a change in the outlook the existing views and these views will be lost from the dwellings

 

As the development does not involve any building or physical works, any future land use would be subject to a separate future application which amongst other matters would need to address this issue.

 

·   Property values will be adversely impacted on as a result of the development

 

This is not a planning consideration pursuant to the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act.

 

·   The residential development of the site will have an adverse impact on the existing area as a result of increased noise

 

The application does not propose any type of development or use of the site at this time.  Should this occur, then such issues will need to be considered as part of that assessment process.

 

·   The existing access to the rear of the properties will be denied as a result of the development

 

There is no legal access over the subject site for these properties.

 

·   The impact on vegetation and the loss of trees on the site as a result of the development

 

The application does not propose any works or vegetation removal as part of the submission. Future applications may result in the removal of some of the existing vegetation on proposed Lot 1.  This would be a matter for assessment at that time. 

 

·   The impact on the creek system that runs through the site

 

The drainage swale that exists over proposed Lot 2 has no works proposed near it or likely to impact upon it as part of this application.   The proposed development will have no impact on this drainage system.

 

Matters raised in submissions are not directly related to the subdivision application before Council, but rather the potential future use of the site. These matters are appropriate to consider at the time of preparation of future Development Applications for specific development proposals.

5.   Section 79C(1)(e) – Public Interest

The proposed subdivision is located on land within the Werrington Enterprise Living and Learning (WELL) Precinct, which is an area of approximately 670 hectares, bounded by the Western Railway and the Victoria Street/ Shaw Park precinct to the north, French Street/ O’Connell Street, the UWS Kingswood Campus and Kingswood residential area to the west, Caddens Road and the M4 motorway to the south, and the Claremont Meadows residential area and Werrington Road to the east. 

 

The planning for the WELL Precinct has been underway since 2002, encompassing the development of a WELL Precinct Strategy, which was adopted in November 2004 and endorsed by the key stakeholders, UWS, Landcom and TAFE. The refinement of the WELL Strategy 2004 concept plan was finalised and adopted in October 2006 and identifies future potential land uses with the WELL Precinct.

 

The proposed subdivision is not within a sub-precinct of WELL that is subject to a draft LEP and DCP in the near future (such as that of Caddens /Precinct Centre and South Werrington Urban Village). However, the subject land has been identified as having the potential future land use for residential and educational purposes, with the proposed subdivision boundary being consistent with the separation of land uses within the adopted Concept Plan for WELL. Any future land uses for those areas of WELL (such as the subject land), not part of a sub precinct, will be considered under the new Penrith Citywide Local Plan, where further community consultation regarding future land uses will be considered.

Conclusion

The proposed application is permitted under the zone, and the proposed lot is of an adequate area to ensure it would be suitable for a range of permitted uses now and in the future. The proposed lots align with proposed precinct boundaries under the WELL Precinct Concept Plan 2006. The subdivision will not change the current situation and any proposed development of the site will be subject to a future application.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Subdivision Application 07/0121 at University of Western Sydney Lot 1721 DP 864087 (No. 56) Second Avenue, Kingswood be received.

2.     DA07/0121 for Torrens Title Subdivision x 2 Lots, Lot 1721 DP864087 (No 56) Second Avenue Kingswood be approved, subject to the following conditions:

2.1       A001 Approved Plans

2.2       G001 Services

2.3       M008 Linen Plan

2.4       Q008 Subdivision Certificate

3.      Persons who have made submissions be notified of Council’s decision.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1. View

Subdivision Plan UWS

1 Page

Appendix

 


Ordinary Meeting

7 May 2007

Appendix 1 - Subdivision Plan UWS

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

7 May 2007

The City as a Social Place

 

 

The City as a Social Place

 

 

5

Development Application 06/1008 for proposed alterations and additions for St Clair Shopping Centre at Lot 1 DP 1018519 (No. 4) Endeavour Avenue, St Clair  Applicant:  Planning Logic Pty Ltd;  Owner:  Cambooya Properties Pty Limited    

DA06/1008

Compiled by:                Warwick Stimson, Development Assessment Co-ordinator - South

Authorised by:             Paul Lemm, Development Services Manager  

Requested By:             Councillor Jackie Greenow

Strategic Program Term Achievement: Redevelopment of existing areas contributes to safe, sustainable, affordable and satisfying living environments and cohesive communities.

Critical Action: Work in partnership with the local community to foster understanding of the reasons why established areas are redeveloping.

     

Purpose:

This report is presented to Council for determination as the applicant has commenced legal proceedings in the NSW Land and Environment Court in relation to a 'deemed refusal'. The report recommends that the Development Application be granted consent subject to conditions.

 

Introduction

This development application was lodged with Council on 29 June 2006, and seeks consent for alterations and additions to the existing St Clair shopping centre. The key issue to emerge from the assessment process relates to the provision of on-site car parking.  The proposal has been subject to negotiations in respect to car parking which resulted in modifications being proposed.  The proposal is now considered to satisfy concerns originally raised by Council in relation to car parking management.

 

On 27 December 2006, the applicant commenced proceedings in the Land and Environment Court on a 'deemed refusal' basis. Legal proceedings have progressed to the extent that the Court has listed the matter for an on-site hearing on 21 May 2007.

 

Site and Surrounds

The St Clair shopping centre is situated on the corner of Endeavour Avenue and Bennett Road, St Clair, on a site 29,145m² in area. It is currently developed by way of a single storey shopping centre of 8,663m² floor area, and 438 car spaces. Development surrounding the site comprises recreational fields to the north, St Clair Out of School Hours Care to the east, the Uniting Church and Community Centre to the south, and St Clair Primary and High Schools to the west. The location of the site is identified on the Locality Map in Appendix 1 to this report.

 

Both Bennett Road and Endeavour Avenue are key collector roads within St Clair, and provide easy and direct access for the surrounding catchment to visit the centre.

 

The centre was originally developed in 1981, altered and extended in the mid 1980's, and again in 1995. Occupants of the centre include Woolworths, 30 specialty shops (including Australia Post and Commonwealth Bank), RTA branch, Medical Centre and the St Clair Branch Library. Outside of the main centre, and located on the periphery of the subject site, is situated a Mobile Quix service station, Red Rooster take away restaurant, and McDonalds restaurant.

 

Vehicle access to the subject site is obtained from 2 driveways to Endeavour Avenue, and another to Bennett Road. Vehicle access is also available to a one way service lane adjoining the south of the centre (Botany Lane).

 

The Proposed Development

Development consent is sought for alterations and additions to the shopping centre, comprising 1,257m² of additional gross leasable floor space, internal alterations comprising the reconfiguration of several tenancies and alterations to the car parking and landscaping areas to complement the development.

 

The bulk of additional floor space is proposed on the northern side of the building. These additions are proposed to provide for a new 140 seat food court. A new pedestrian entrance is also proposed to the centre, as well as extensions to the bank and the creation of a new tenancy adjoining the existing Australia Post. Additional toilet and cleaner's storage facilities are also proposed. Tenancies with an external façade near the new entrance will be oriented to permit outdoor seating and greater activity facing the renewed colonnade on the northern side of the building.

 

Additions are also proposed to the rear (southern) side of the centre. In conjunction with some reconfigurations of existing tenancies in the vicinity of the Woolworths supermarket, and the removal of the centre management office, this space would be used by a medium sized fresh food retailer.

 

Other internal replanning of tenancies is proposed to augment the external additions. The centre management office would be relocated opposite the library, and new toilets and parents/baby care room are proposed.

 

The external appearance of the centre is proposed to be refurbished with a contemporary palette of materials and colours. A more pronounced entry to the centre would be complemented by a greater emphasis on external glazing and metal framing. This would open up the centre and contribute to reversing the predominantly inward looking retail design of the centre.

 

The reconfiguration of parts of the existing parking area have compensated for any loss of spaces that resulted from building additions.

 

Landscaping is proposed to be selectively renewed and updated to enhance the appearance of the building.

 

Appendices 2 through to 5 contain the site plans and elevations.

 

The application was accompanied by the following documentation:

 

    Statement of Environmental Effects by Planning Logic Pty Ltd

    Architectural Plans by Leffler Simes Architects

    Traffic Assessment by Transport and Traffic Planning Associates

    St Clair Shopping Centre Demographic Study by KPMG

    Community Safety Management Plan by Metwest Security Management Systems

    Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design Statement by Metwest Security Management Systems

    Building Code of Australia Assessment Report by Dix Gardner Pty Ltd.

 

Planning Assessment

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

 

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

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

SREP 20 seeks to integrate planning and catchment management, with the objective of protecting the Hawkesbury Nepean River system. The impact of future land use is to be considered in a regional context. Any development consent issued for the subject site would include conditions relating to specifically achieving the objectives of SREP 20.

 

The proposed development includes stormwater and drainage measures that seek to satisfy the assessment criteria of the SREP.

 

1.2     Penrith City Council Interim Development Order No. 75 (IDO 75)

Interim Development Order No 75 applies to the subject site. IDO 75 does not contain a zoning or land use table and so the subject site does not have a specified zoning. In essence, the IDO itself details the permissible uses on the land through Clause 3 of the IDO.

 

Clause 3 of IDO 75 permits any development:

 

"…only with the consent of the Council and the concurrence of the New South Wales Planning and Environment Commission (Department of Planning) for any purpose other than the following…"

 

"Shops" are not listed as being prohibited and as such, are a permissible land use with Council's consent.

 

Clause 9 of the IDO reiterates the need for concurrence from the Department of Planning by saying:

 

"Wherever in this Order the Council is required to obtain the concurrence of the New South Wales Planning and Environment Commission before consenting to any application for development a consent given without having obtained such concurrence shall be null and void."

 

Council received correspondence from the Department of Planning dated 16 April 2007 stating:

 

"The need for concurrence exists as the value of the development exceeds the $5 million maximum figure for assumed concurrence under Departmental Circular D4. For the purposes of clause 9 of Penrith IDO 75, the Director General of the Department of Planning, concurrence is given should Council resolve to approve this development application."

 

Clause 7 of IDO 75 lists six matters that must be considered in the assessment of development applications. A summary list of these and relevant comments are shown below.

 

Consideration

Comment

(a)   Any representations made by any statutory authority in relation to the application, the development of the area, and the rights and powers of that authority.

The proposal is not integrated development and so referrals to other statutory bodies were not required. Concurrence was required to be obtained from the Department of Planning and this has been done as described earlier in this report.

 

(b)   Any code, whether detailed or otherwise, adopted by resolution of the Council for the development of the locality.

No DCP or Code specifically addresses the St Clair shopping centre site. City wide DCP's applicable to the site are discussed later in this report.

 

(c)   Whether provision has been made for landscaping of the site.

Landscaping exists on the site, although it is poorly maintained and overgrown. A revised landscaping scheme has been submitted with the application.

 

(d)   The provisions of any development control plan adopted by the Council and approved by the New South Wales Planning and Environment Commission.

 

DCPs applicable to the site are discussed later in this report.

(e)   Whether any existing trees or shrubs on the site should be maintained.

 

No significant vegetation is proposed to be removed as a result of this application.

(f)    If the application relates to the erection of a building or a fence or to the carrying out of work or to the use of land within view of or adjacent to any road, public reserve or proposed reserve, the probable aesthetic appearance of that development or work when used for the proposed purpose and viewed from the road, public reserve or proposed reserve.

This application seeks consent for the upgrading and refurbishment of the exterior of the centre. As a result, it is considered that the development would be a positive visual element when viewed from the public domain.

 

Clause 7 of IDO 75 also refers to considerations of the matters listed in clause 5 of the Model Provisions (dated 1970). A summary list of these and relevant comments are shown below:

 

Consideration

Comment

(a)   The character of the proposed development in relation to the character of the development on the adjoining land and in the locality.

 

The proposal does not alter the existing retail and mixed use character of the centre, nor its relationship to nearby land uses.

(b)   The size and shape of the parcel of land to which the application relates, the siting of the proposed development and the area to be occupied by the proposed development in relation to the size and shape of the adjoining land and the development thereon.

 

The proposed additions are set well back from site boundaries. There are no likely impacts upon adjoining or nearby land uses as a result of the proposed development.

(c)   Any detailed plan or design adopted by resolution of the Council for the development of the locality.

 

There is no such plan applicable.

(d)   The existing and future amenity of the neighbourhood.

The site is well insulated from surrounding land uses and residential uses in particular. The proposed development is for alterations and additions that are intended to revitalise the interior and exterior of the centre. No operational changes are proposed as part of this application. It is considered that there would be no impact on the locality arising from the proposed development.

 

(e)   The circumstances of the case and the public interest.

The centre makes a positive contribution to the fabric of the local community. The public interest is served by development that maintains an attractive, vibrant, functional and successful retail centre, providing for the needs of the community.

 

(f)    The provisions of the Interim Development Order

 

Considered satisfactory.

(g)   To the extent to which they are not inconsistent with the provisions of the Interim Development Order, the provisions of the scheme in course of preparation.

 

No draft Environmental Planning Instruments apply to the site.

 

It is considered that the proposed development is consistent with the requirements of IDO 75.

 

 

 

2.       Section 79C(1)(a)(ii) – Provisions of any Draft Environmental Planning Instrument

There are no draft environmental planning instruments applicable to the site or relevant to the assessment of this proposal.

 

3.       Section 79C(1)(a)(iii) – Provisions of any relevant Development Control Plans

3.1     Penrith Development Control Plan 2006 (Part 2.2) – Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED)

This section of DCP 2006 aims to enhance and improve community safety, and promote crime prevention through design. The applicant submitted a Community Safety Management Plan that details:

 

·    Relevant background on criminal behaviour at the Centre

·    The physical and locational context of the Centre

·    The nature of the proposal

·    Current and future security measures warranted by the proposal.

 

The following key measures are proposed to enhance and improve community safety for Centre users and the public generally:

 

·    Extension of existing CCTV system to the new additions

·    Enhance external lighting in key areas particularly facing Botany Lane

·    The removal of overgrown landscaping in potential hiding spots in the vicinity of the rear exit door to the library and the western side of Woolworths (staff parking and waste storage area).

 

The application has been assessed by Council's Community Safety Coordinator who has recommended that the applicant provide a Management Plan that addresses: design of the food court; car park security; additional lighting; vegetation; public toilet design; commitment to the development and implementation of a shopping centre protocol.

 

It is considered that such a requirement can be required as a condition of consent and this is found at 2.2 in the list of Special Conditions at the end of this report.

 

3.2     Penrith Development Control Plan 2006 (Part 3.2) – Baby Care Rooms

This section of DCP 2006 aims to ensure that all appropriate development have baby care rooms where the personal needs of babies/toddlers can be attended to by carers. It requires that a room of at least 20m² be provided in developments proposing 1001-2000m² gross floor area. The subject proposal provides for a room of 30m² which exceeds this requirement.

 

Parent accessible facilities in public buildings have been recognised by Council as important.  In the case of this application, it is possible for a toilet accessible by either parent to be installed in the proposed baby change room. Accordingly, a condition of consent has been recommended to ensure this occurs.

 

 

 

 

3.3     Penrith Development Control Plan 2006 (Part 6.37) – St Clair

This section of DCP 2006 refers to a plan drawn indicating street and lot layout throughout the entire suburb of St Clair. There are no site specific controls pertaining to the subject site.

 

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

Economic and Social

To address the issue of economic and social impact on the locality arising from the proposed development, the applicant submitted a Demographic Study by KPMG, which also included an assessment of retail hierarchy in the locality.

 

The existing centre can be described as a large neighbourhood shopping centre, being anchored by a medium sized supermarket. Its catchment area is described as the residential suburbs of St Clair and Erskine Park, enclosed by the M4 motorway to the north, Mamre Road to the west, Erskine Park and Lenore Road to the south, and Ropes Creek to the east. The population of the catchment is dominated by a younger age profile with higher than average household incomes.

 

The KPMG report estimates that 41% of locally generated food spending, 85% of non-food spending, and 72% of retail services spending currently escapes the catchment area. The report recommends that to remain competitive, and serve its local community in the future, the St Clair shopping centre needs:

 

"1.     to reduce food expenditure escaping the catchment, principally by providing a new food court and enhanced food specialty provision (e.g. fruit and vegetable retailer)

2.       introduce late teen and 20-something fashion and specialty retailers

 

The subject development proposal is a direct response to 1 and 2, with additional floor area only devoted to the food court and a specialty food retailer in the vicinity of Woolworths. The reconfiguration of tenancy spaces elsewhere in the centre will provide opportunities for new retailers to come into the centre to address its growth market."

 

In terms of retail hierarchy, St Clair shopping centre is a large neighbourhood shopping centre of nearly 10,000m² in floor area, and is anchored by a medium sized chain supermarket of 3,800m² in floor area.

 

In relation to the subject development application, it is noted that:

 

·    The leasable floor area increase is not significant, being an increase of 14.5% (1,257m²)

·    The number of specialty retailers are increasing from 32 to 39

·    There are no new 'majors' or other new significant retailers proposed

·    The proposed food court would primarily complement existing retail journeys.

 

It is considered that the proposed development would not change the essential character of the shopping centre within the retail hierarchy. The objectives of the proposal are to provide an improved shopping experience in a higher quality environment, and therefore remain a viable community based retail centre.

 

Parking and Manoeuvring

The application was referred to Council's Local Traffic Committee and Council's Senior Traffic Engineer for comment.

 

Council's Car Parking Code stipulates that 1 parking space per 10m² of supermarket net retail floor area is to be provided, and 1 space per 26m² for other specialty stores. Based on this rate, and if the Code was strictly applied, the parking requirements for the existing centre would be 615 spaces on the subject site. There are currently 438 spaces accommodated onsite.

 

Council's Senior Traffic Engineer advises that the shopping centre at St Clair currently operates with spare parking capacity, and that strict application of these rates would be considered inappropriate. Furthermore, Council's Senior Traffic Engineer advises that the operating characteristics of neighbourhood shopping centres have changed over time, with extended shopping hours providing a wider range of times to base the peak parking demand on. When applying the rate of 1 space per 26m² only to the entire shopping centre site, including the proposed extensions, a requirement of 381 spaces are required.

 

The "RTA Guide to Traffic Generating Developments" offers a formula based on the type of trade that exists within a shopping complex to determine actual peak parking demand. The formula calculates car parking demand for the entire Centre by recognising the demand from the supermarket component and the specialty shops.  In relation to these activities for the subject site the RTA Guide suggests 160 and 275 car parking spaces to be provided for the supermarket and the specialty shops respectively.  A parking requirement of 435 spaces results for the entire facility.

 

The applicant has also identified that currently the car park is used by people not visiting the shopping centre. The applicant's traffic engineer has reported that:

 

"…parking surveys were undertaken during an entire day and the last four digits of vehicle number plates were recorded every hour. Using these results a spreadsheet was prepared to identify the level of long stay parking, which established that 122 vehicles were parked for more than three hours. This represents 31% of the parking capacity.

 

The surveys do not identify which of these vehicles are associated with the shopping centre, however it is possible to establish an accurate assumption based on the number of staff within the centre. The supermarket involves up to 40 staff being on site at any one time, the pharmacy has a peak of 7 persons, while the remaining 37 retail tenancies have an average of 1.5 staff per shop (55 persons). Based on these figures, the peak staff attendance within the centre would be 102 persons. A survey of staff undertaken by the Centre Management suggests that only 60% of these staff drive to the centre, while the remaining staff use public transport, walk or are collected by a family member or friend. This indicates that up to 62 parking spaces are being used for long stay parking by third party users."

 

The applicant has proposed a method of controlling third party users of the car park through the installation of boom gates. It is envisaged that management of the system will incorporate a number of free parking hours, after which a parking fee will be applicable. It is considered that approximately 60 car spaces could be made available to users of the shopping centre if entry and use of the car park was better managed by the centre owner.

 

In summarising his final assessment of the proposed development, Council's Senior Traffic Engineer has noted the following:

 

·    Based on a rate of 1 car space per 26m², a parking space requirement of 48 was derived for the 1257m² additional floor area. In subsequent meetings with the applicant, the following matters were addressed:

o 8 additional parking spaces are proposed, up from 0;

o Further details on the combined nature of food court multi trip use was provided to justify some reduction of the 40 space shortfall; and

o Boom gates to control third party use (possibly up to 60 all day spaces based on parking studies by the applicant) were proposed by the applicant.

 

·    Therefore:

o The proposal would meet the Council Parking Code across the entire site if the 1 space per 26m² rate were applied to both the supermarket and specialty store trade as described previously in this report;

o The RTA recommended parking rate would be met, based on application of the relevant formula to the type of trade proposed within the centre; and

o A rigorous assessment of the additional 1257m² floor area has indicated that the implementation of boom gates at key locations at the centre car park to control third party use appears to be satisfactory in principle, with a detailed proposal to be engineered to Council's satisfaction prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.

 

·    And in conclusion has stated:

 

"I therefore have no substantial objections to the proposal subject to the following conditions of consent being applied.

 

1.    Detailed design plans of the proposed parking control system shall be submitted to Council’s Senior Traffic Engineer for approval prior to the issue of a construction certificate.

2.    Two (2) bays for emergency vehicles shall be provided in close proximity to the entrance area to the centre (i.e. adjacent to entry area ‘A’) and shall be signposted and/or line marked accordingly.

3.    All loading and unloading to the site should be undertaken at the proposed dock areas with no delivery vehicles accessing the shopfronts."

 

It is considered that the issues discussed above have been addressed either throughout the assessment of the application, or through the imposition of Special Conditions 2.5 through to 2.8.

 

Access to the Centre

The application was referred to Council's Disability Access Committee for comment. Issues raised by the Committee included:

 

·    An access report written by an appropriately qualified access consultant is to be submitted to Council detailing how the development complies with the relevant Australian Standard;

·    A traffic management plan should be provided to ensure that there is no overflow of parking onto adjoining properties;

·    Internal traffic flow should be revised to eliminate any conflict between vehicular and pedestrian traffic as well as easy movement of motor vehicles;

·    A toilet facility should be provided to the parenting room;

·    The accessible toilet is to be provided with an adult change table and shown on the construction certificate drawings.

 

It is considered that these issues have been addressed either throughout the assessment of the application, or through the imposition of Special Conditions 2.3 and 2.4.

 

External Appearance

The centre currently looks dated and visually 'tired', which is considered to be a reflection of its external finishes and character. The proposed upgrade is to provide for:

 

·    Extensive glazed and active retail uses facing the exterior of the centre

·    A scheme of contemporary colouring, including highlighting entry areas

·    Projecting eye catching vertical elements of visual interest that signify the main entries to the centre.

 

It is considered that such measures would result in a significant visual improvement to the centre and how it presents to the public domain.

 

Waste Management

Additional waste storage is proposed to be provided commensurate with the waste generated by the additional tenancies. These measures can be accommodated within the existing waste bin area already provided at the centre. A Waste Management Plan was submitted with the application.

 

Construction Impacts

Management of the construction phase of the development, including site access control, working hours, noise, dust and the like can be addressed through standard conditions of consent.

 

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

The subject site is already occupied by a single storey shopping centre. The proposed development represents a small scale alteration and addition to the centre that will result in a significant improvement both visually, and operationally, for visitors to the centre. There are no negative impacts anticipated to arise as a result of the development and accordingly, the site is considered suitable for the development.

 

6.       Section 79C(1)(d) – Any submissions made

The application was referred to various stakeholders within, and external to, Council and their comments are as follows:

 

Stakeholder

Comment

Department of Planning

No objection – concurrence granted.

Department of Natural Resources

No objection raised.

Building Surveyor

No objection, subject to conditions.

Development Engineer

No objection, subject to conditions.

Disability Access Committee

Issues raised by the Committee have either been addressed throughout the assessment of the application, or through the imposition of conditions of consent.

Senior Traffic Engineer

No objection, subject to conditions – as described above.

Local Traffic Committee

No objection, subject to conditions.

Community Safety Coordinator

No objection, subject to a Management Plan being prepared to the satisfaction of Council. Condition has been imposed.   

 

The application was notified to 36 nearby and adjoining residents, between 12 July 2006 and 26 July 2006, and again between 3 April 2007 and 17 April 2007, when the “boom gates” where proposed as part of the development. No submissions were received by Council on either occasion.

 

7.       Section 79C(1)(e) – The Public Interest

The St Clair shopping centre is a key element in the community, providing a good level of services and retail functions to residents. The alterations and additions proposed as part of this application are intended to enhance the centre, serving existing shoppers better. Where these matters can be achieved without adverse impacts, the proposed development can be considered to be in the public interest.

 

Legal Officer’s Comment

This matter has been the subject of an appeal with the Land and Environment Court. The only significant issue has been the amount of car parking required to meet the increase in floor area. The comments in the report provide a detailed commentary on this issue. The Court has allocated an onsite hearing on 21 May 2007.

 

Conclusion

The applicant has demonstrated that the proposed alterations and additions of the St Clair shopping centre satisfy the requirements of Interim Development Order No 75 and the relevant parts of Penrith Development Control Plan 2006. The proposal is considered acceptable in regard to economic and social impacts.

 

Council's Senior Traffic Engineer and the Local Traffic Committee have considered the proposal and, through the installation of a satisfactory parking management system, it is considered that there is ample capacity within the proposed development to accommodate the expected car parking generation from the development.

 

The proposed alterations and additions would result is a substantial improvement for the community, and would greatly improve the layout of the centre, and the available options for visitors.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.      The information contained in the report on Development Application 06/1008 for proposed alterations and additions for St Clair Shopping Centre at Lot 1 DP 1018519 (No. 4) Endeavour Avenue, St Clair be received.

2.      DA 06/1008 for alterations and additions to St Clair Shopping Centre at Lot 1 DP 1018519 (No. 4) Endeavour Avenue, St Clair be granted consent, subject to the following standard and special conditions:

Standard Conditions

2.1         A001, A011, A012, A019, A021, A039, D001, D002, D009, D010, D014, E01A, E002 (An alternative fire solution in accordance with the recommendations of the Fire Safety Statement of Intent by Rawfire dated 6 November 2006 shall be provided by an accredited Fire Engineer prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate; and Approval in writing from the NSW Fire Brigades shall be obtained for the alternative solution in respect to perimeter vehicular access prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate), H001, H041, I003 (h), K001, K025, L001, L002, L008, P001, P002, Q001, Q006

Special Conditions

2.2         A Community Safety Management Plan is to be submitted to Council for written approval prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate. The Management Plan is to address the following issues:

2.2.1      Design of the Food Court is to ensure separation of vehicles and diners

2.2.2      Security of the car parking spaces to the rear of the building in Botany Lane (CCTV would not be effective unless monitored live by security staff or random controls being carried out during the night)

2.2.3      Lighting of all car parking areas should be provided to category P11

2.2.4      Luminaries used are to provide white light

2.2.5      Lighting should be consistent in order to reduce contrasts between shadows and illuminated areas, should be vandal resistant, and should be contained within the property boundary with no light being projected upwards

2.2.6      Vegetation proposed shall be revised and agreed to

 

2.2.7      The public toilets should be re-designed consistent with contemporary CPTED principles

2.2.8      Details on a commitment to the development and implementation of a shopping centre Protocol

2.3         An access report is to be prepared by a suitably qualified Access Consultant and submitted to Penrith Council prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate. The report is to detail compliance of the shopping centre with the relevant Australian Standard

2.4         An accessible toilet is to be provided in the Parenting Room. Details are to be provided to Council prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

2.5         Detailed design plans of the proposed parking control system shall be submitted to Council's Senior Traffic Engineer for approval prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate. The approved parking control system shall be implemented and operational prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate

2.6         Two (2) bays for emergency vehicles shall be provided in close proximity to the entrance area of the centre (i.e. adjacent to entry area 'A') and shall be signposted and/or line marked accordingly. Details to be provided to and approved by Council's Senior Traffic Engineer prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate

2.7         All loading and unloading to the site shall be undertaken at the proposed dock areas with no delivery vehicles accessing the shop fronts

2.8         All car parking and manoeuvring must be in accordance with AS2890 and Council's requirements. Full details are to be submitted to Council's Senior Development Engineer for approval prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate

2.9         Separate Development Applications are to be submitted to Council for the fit-outs of individual food court tenancies.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1. View

Locality Plan

1 Page

Appendix

2. View

Site Plan

1 Page

Appendix

3. View

Retail Plan

1 Page

Appendix

4. View

Elevations

1 Page

Appendix

5. View

Car Park Setout

1 Page

Appendix

 


Ordinary Meeting

7 May 2007

Appendix 1 - Locality Plan

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

7 May 2007

Appendix 2 - Site Plan

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

7 May 2007

Appendix 3 - Retail Plan

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

7 May 2007

Appendix 4 - Elevations

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

7 May 2007

Appendix 5 - Car Park Setout

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

7 May 2007

The City as a Social Place

 

 

The City as a Social Place

 

 

6

Development Application 06/1848 for the construction of a dwelling at Lot 244 DP 2147 (No. 244) Seventh Avenue, Llandilo  Applicant:  Innovation Planning Australia;  Owner:  Mr Phillip Adams    

DA06/1848

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

Authorised by:             Paul Lemm, Development Services Manager  

Requested By:             Councillor Jim Aitken OAM

Strategic Program Term Achievement: Redevelopment of existing areas contributes to safe, sustainable, affordable and satisfying living environments and cohesive communities.

Critical Action: Work in partnership with the local community to foster understanding of the reasons why established areas are redeveloping.

  

Previous Items:            Development Application DA06/1848 for the construction of a dwelling at Lot 244 DP2147 (No. 244) Seventh Avenue, Llandilo- Ordinary Meeting - 23 April 2007  

Purpose:

To enable Council to determine a development application and SEPP1 Objection that seeks to vary the minimum allotment size of a property at Llandilo and permit the construction of a dwelling on the property.  The report recommends that the application be refused.

 

On 5 August 2003, a development application, DA 03/1971, for the construction of a dwelling on Lot 244, DP 2147 Seventh Avenue, Llandilo was submitted to Council for consideration. The property is subject to the provisions of clause 12, and of Local Environmental Plan 201 – Rural Lands which limits the erection of a new dwelling-house to a minimum site area of 2 hectares.

 

Lot 244 has an area of 1.012 hectares, and therefore does not meet the requirements of the development standard. (Locality Plan see Appendix No. 1). The adjoining property, Lot 244A, is also owned by the owner of Lot 244. It has an area of 1.012 hectares and is therefore available for consolidation to achieve the necessary minimum 2 hectares to permit the construction of a dwelling on the property as required by the LEP. 

 

The applicant was advised that support for the proposal would not be granted given the opportunity of lot consolidation to comply with the 2 hectare requirement.  The applicant was advised that the 2 hectare requirement was a development standard and the provisions of State Environment Planning Policy No. 1 – “Development Standards” would apply to this proposal.

 

A SEPP 1 objection was submitted in support of the development application but was not supported. Subsequently the Development Application was refused on 28 June 2004.

 

In July 2005, a movable dwelling was installed on the subject property without consent and occupied by the owner. An On Site Sewerage Management System was also installed without the approval of Council. A Notice of Intention to Serve an Order to have the building removed was served. Since that time Council has been negotiating with the owner and his consultant to cease occupation of the building and remove the unauthorised development from the site. This action was held pending a resolution of the current development application which proposes the same development as the original one, but has been prepared by a different consultant and is supported by a more comprehensive SEPP 1 Objection.

The Proposal

On 1 December 2006, a second development application for the construction of a dwelling on Lot 244 Seventh Avenue, Llandilo was lodged. This application is accompanied by an objection under State Environmental Planning Policy No 1, requesting a variation to the minimum lot size development standard.

 

The proposal includes the following aspects:

 

·    Installation of a three bedroom prefabricated home

·    Connection of the dwelling to the existing unapproved onsite sewerage management system.

 

The development application was accompanied by the following:

 

·    An Objection under State Environmental Planning Policy No 1 to Clause 12 of Council’s Local Environmental Plan 201 – Rural Lands

·    Statement of Environmental Effects

·    Site and building plans (See Appendix No. 2 and No. 3).

Site and Surrounds

The subject site is a 1.012 Ha allotment situated in the rural locality of Llandilo.

 

The site is cleared and falls toward the street. There is an existing driveway and vehicular entrance which provides access to an unauthorised relocatable dwelling constructed on the site. Several old farm sheds exist on the site.

 

The property is surrounded by rural/residential development. The adjoining properties are being used for a variety of purposes including residential, market gardening and hobby farming.

 

The locality is comprised of rural land holdings, interspersed with pockets of remnant native vegetation. Built development is low density residential with associated farm buildings. The locality contains a variety of small and large scale agricultural uses which are set up around the predominantly older style and farm cottages. A locality plan is depicted in Appendix No. 1.

 

The topography is slightly undulating and the area as a whole falls significantly to the east. The development of smaller scale buildings together with distances between existing dwellings creates a low scale rural/residential character with ample landscape buffers.

Planning Controls for Llandilo

This locality includes the land bounded by Terrybrook Road, Ninth Avenue, Second Avenue and Mayo Road, Llandilo, being the land referred to in Schedule 1 of LEP 201 – Rural Lands. 

 

The subject property was created in the late 1800’s. When the County of Cumberland Planning Scheme was gazetted on 27 June 1951, the land was zoned as No 10 (Rural Area), allowing a “Country dwelling” to be erected. A Country Dwelling was defined as a dwelling-house with not less than 5 acres (2 hectares) of land within its curtilage, or a dwelling-house occupied in conjunction with not less than 5 acres of neighbouring land.

 

Subsequent planning instruments have all required a minimum 2 hectare lot size for a dwelling to be permissible.  The following table outlines the historic development of planning controls for this area.

 

PLANNING INSTRUMENT

AND DATE

ZONING

MINIMUM LOT SIZE FOR A DWELLING TO BE PERMITTED

County of Cumberland Planning Scheme

27 June 1951

 

No 10 (Rural Area).

Five Acres - 2 Hectares

Penrith Planning Scheme

 

18 March 1960

 

Zone No 1(Non-urban)

 

Five acres – 2 hectares

Interim Development Order No 73 –City of Penrith

16 December 1977

 

Schedule 1

 

 

2 hectares

Interim Development Order No 93 – Penrith

8 August 1980

 

Schedule 1

 

2 hectares

Penrith Local Environmental Plan No 201 – Rural Lands

12 July 1991 (Current)

 

Zone No 1(a)(Rural “A” Zone – General)

 

2 hectares

 

 

In September 2003, Council adopted its Rural Lands Strategy. It was a precursor to the new Local Environmental Plan for Council’s rural areas. The Strategy proposed that the Llandilo area maintain its 2 hectare minimum lot size for dwelling-houses.  It is intended to incorporate this standard into the Draft Local Environmental Plan for the rural areas.

 

Over the last 50 years, Council has consistently implemented the planning regimes requiring a minimum lot size of 2 hectares for the construction of a dwelling.

 

There have been some exceptions, being a small number of isolated undersize lots. In these instances, Council has consented to the construction of a dwelling on the isolated undersized lot where it has been clearly demonstrated there is no availability lot for consolidation.

 

Of the 353 lots within the Llandilo area, there are 18 lots that do not have consolidation opportunities with areas less than 1Ha. Of these, ten have dwellings constructed upon them and two have been developed as dual occupancies.

 

Assessment of Development Application

Planning Assessment

The development proposal is required to be assessed in accordance with the matters for consideration, under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. Having regard to those matters, the following issues have been identified for consideration.

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

Local Environmental Plan 201 – Rural Lands

Permissibility

The subject site is zoned No 1(a) (Rural “A” Zone – General) under LEP 201. The proposed development is defined as a dwelling house, which is permissible with the consent of Council subject to compliance with Clause 12 of the LEP.

 

Objectives

The aims and objectives of the LEP and Zone No 1(a)(Rural “A” Zone – General) which are relevant to the proposal are as follows:

 

(2)  The specific aims of this plan are to protect enhance or conserve:

(a)  the rural character and setting of the City of Penrith; and

(b)  the scenic quality and valuable landscape features of the rural areas; and

(c)  the productive agricultural and horticultural areas; and

 

(3)  The objectives, policies and strategies of this plan are;

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

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

 

Objectives of Zone No 1(a)(Rural “A” Zone – General)

 

(a)   to protect and enhance the scenic quality and rural character of the locality

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

(c)   to protect productive agricultural and horticultural land which supplies produce to the Sydney markets

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

(g)   to ensure that the form, siting and colours of buildings, building materials and landscaping complement the natural scenic quality of these localities

(h)   to ensure that views from main roads and the rural character of the locality will not be adversely affected.

 

These objectives relate principally to the preservation of rural character, the scenic qualities of the rural area and the preservation of the agricultural capabilities of land. The rural character and landscape qualities of the locality have been described previously and are summarised as consisting of low scale built development within an open landscape of varied agricultural uses.

 

This development would result in a further loss of existing agricultural land and in its place introduce additional built form. The visual impacts of additional development would undermine the primary zone objectives of the site.

 

The proposal seeks consent for a dwelling on an undersized lot, the consequence of this application being the creation of another undersized lot on the adjoining property. This lot will be landlocked and will result in a similar proposal thereby increasing the density of buildings in the locality and a reduction in the open nature of the landscape. This is likely to compromise the objectives by introducing a more compact form of development to the area, adversely impacting upon rural character and reducing the capability of the land to be used for agriculture purposes

 

The property is subject to the provisions of clause 12(2)(c) and (3), and the associated Schedule 1, of Council’s Local Environmental Plan 201 – Rural Lands, which states that:

 

“ 12(1)       This clause applies to land within zone 1(a), 1(b), 1(c), 5(d), or 7.

(2)       A dwelling house may, with the consent of council, be erected on vacant land to which his clause applies only where that land:

 

(c) in the case of land included in schedule 1 – is an allotment of not less than 2 hectares in area; or

 

(3)       The council shall not grant consent to the erection of a dwelling house on land included in Schedule 1 unless it imposes, as a condition of consent, a requirement that the land upon which the dwelling-house is to be erected is a single allotment or shall be consolidated into a single allotment.”

 

Lot 244 has an area of 1.012 hectares, and does not meet the requirements of the development standard to permit the erection of a dwelling on the site. The applicant has submitted an objection to this development standard in accordance with State Planning Policy No.1 – Development Standards.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No 1 – Development Standards

Aims and Objectives

“This Policy provides  flexibility in the application of planning controls operating by virtue of development standards in circumstances where strict compliance with those standards would, in any particular case, be unreasonable or unnecessary or tend to  hinder the attainment of the objectives stated in Sections 5(a)(i) and (ii) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act.”

 

These objectives of Sections 5(a)(i) and (ii)  the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 are to encourage:

(i)          the  proper management, development and conservation of natural and artificial resources, including agricultural land, natural areas, forests, minerals, water, cities, towns and villages for the purpose of promoting the social and economic welfare of the community and a better environment,

(ii)         the promotion and co-ordination of the orderly and economic use and development of land.

 

The applicants’ submission proposes that the development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstances as:

·    The subject property is large enough to accommodate the proposed development while not detracting from the rural character of the area

·    The proposed development will not will not cause any adverse environmental impacts

·    The proposal is compliant with all other provisions of the relevant LEP and DCP

·    There are precedents in the immediate locality

·    The density of development resulting from the proposal would be equitable to a dual occupancy on a 2Ha lot.

·    Many 1Ha lots are now in individual ownership

·    Council has previously approved dwellings on 1Ha lots

·    Agricultural activities are unlikely to be viable given the small lot sizes. Residential dwellings are the best use of the land

·    The existing lot is 1 Ha, is in separate ownership and will be suitable for no other rural use than a dwelling site.”

 

The position of the applicant is not supported as:

 

·    The development standard is not considered unreasonable given that the adjoining property is in the same ownership and available for consolidation.

·    The development standard prescribing a 2Ha lot size is considered necessary to meet the objectives for development specified by the LEP and the zone to preserve the rural character of the locality.

·    It is conceded that a dual occupancy is permissible and as such a density of one dwelling per hectare would result, however, where approval is given for the erection of a dwelling on a 1 Ha parcel of land any approval for dual occupancy on that land would result in a density of one dwelling per 5,000m2.  What has occurred over the 50 year period that this standard has been in place is that owners have consolidated land as a requirement of development consent.  The 2 Ha minimum lot size per dwelling house has been consistently applied and as such the resultant density for the Llandilo area has been maintained.  A departure from the 2 Ha requirement in circumstances where compliance can occur is considered inappropriate.  If the applicant’s objective is to secure an additional dwelling over the land then consolidation of the 2 lots into 1 should occur and a future application for two dwellings pursuant to the dual occupancy provisions could be pursued.  This would maintain the intent of the development standard that is in dispute by this development application.

·    Reduction in the minimum lot size will confirm the loss of the land as a potential agricultural resource.

·    The development will further isolate Lot 244A which is owned by the applicant.

 

The submission also proposes that refusal of the application would hinder the attainment of the objectives of Sections 5(a)(i) and (ii) of the EP&A Act as:

 

·    The proposed development provides a social and community benefit by providing a residence within the environmental capacity of the land, in an orderly manner (consistent with surrounding development). The dwelling will not cause a demand for additional services, but will economically support existing services provided to lots on each side.

·    The proposed residential development will support local shops and businesses and potentially schools and community facilities in an area that has a small base population.

·    The development standard is inconsistent with the nature of surrounding development in the same zone. There are around 35 lots of similar size to those proposed with dwellings.

·    The proposed subdivision is consistent with every objective of the LEP

·    Non-compliance with the standard raises no matter of significance for State or regional environmental planning.

·    There is no public benefit of maintaining the planning controls adopted by the environmental planning instrument. Compliance for compliance sake alone will hinder the attainment of the objects of the Act.

 

Again the position of the applicant is not supported, as:

 

·    Adherence to the 2Ha minimum lot size will ensure suitable management of the land and reflect the dominant position taken by Council over the last five decades in relation to residential development of land within Llandilo;

·    Variation to lot size would reduce agricultural viability of the land;

·    The numerical density defined by the development standard provides for the likelihood of dual occupancy development while limiting dwelling yield to a maximum of 1 dwelling/hectare. Retention of rural character and agricultural capability of land is provided for in these circumstances through specific siting and design controls;

·    Approval of the application may result in unreasonable expectations from other land owners that similar departures from the development standard would be favourably considered even though consolidation options are still available;

·    The submission has stated an intention to deal with this allotment and the residue parcel as separate entities making it reasonable to assume a similar application may be expected for the residue parcel. This is not considered to accord with the principal zoning objectives.

 

Department of Planning Circular No B1 specifies that other matters which should be considered by Council in its consideration of SEPP 1 objections include: the general appropriateness of the development standard, the likelihood of similar applications and their cumulative effect, and the extension of non-conforming development by more than 10%.

These matters are also addressed in the following sections of this report.

 

Likely Impacts of the Development and the Public Interest

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

The provisions of SREP 20 apply to the property as it falls within the Hawkesbury-Nepean River Catchment. SREP 20 aims to protect the environment of the Hawkesbury-Nepean River, by ensuring that the impacts of future land uses are considered in a regional context. Of most relevance to the proposal is the potential impact on rural residential development and water quality.

 

The objective of Part 2 (9) of Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No 20 states that “rural residential development should not reduce agricultural sustainability, contribute to urban sprawl or have adverse environmental impacts

 

Approval of the proposed development would result in a reduced lot size. This would further compromise the site’s ability to be used for agricultural purposes. If future applications on other sites, adopted the same rationale as put by the applicant, the character of the area would undergo a change and become more residential in character.

2.   Section 79C(1)(a)(ii)- Any Draft Environmental Planning Instrument

State Environmental Planning Policy (Application of Development Standards) 2004

This draft policy was prepared in 2004 and is required to be considered by Council in assessment of the development application as it relates to land that, under an environmental planning instrument, is identified as rural. Clause 8(2) specifies that a development application cannot be made which incorporates an application to vary a development standard on land zoned as rural, in respect of:

 

“(a) development of a kind that is permissible under environmental planning instrument (including development comprising subdivision) that is proposed to be carried out on a lot that is less than 90% of the minimum area specified for such a lot by a development standard.

(b) to achieve better outcomes for and from development in the circumstances addressed in this policy, and

(c) to promote good strategic planning practice by incorporating provisions allowing flexibility in local environmental plans.”

 

The application proposes a dwelling house on a lot that is 50% of the minimum area specified in the development standard.

 

The Department of Planning’s guidelines relating to the Draft SEPP, outline the intent of this draft legislation is to protect rural areas from further fragmentation and loss of rural character.

 

It states:

 

“undersized rural residential subdivision has contributed to the fragmentation of agricultural and environmentally sensitive lands, the intensification of land use conflicts, ongoing additional infrastructure and maintenance costs for local councils and the escalation of rural land values.”

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

Penrith Development Control Plan 2006 - Part 4.9 Rural Development.

DCP Objectives

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

These objectives are discussed in later sections of this report.

Design and Numerical Requirements

The proposed development is generally in accordance with the design and numerical requirements of the DCP as they relate to setbacks, provision of services, access, tree removal, parking, drainage and landscaping.

 

In terms of building design, the dwelling incorporates some articulation of walls and has verandahs to the front and rear. The design of the dwelling is not reflective of traditional or contemporary rural styles.

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

The likely impacts of the development are to be considered in terms of context and setting, relationship and compatibility of land uses, traffic, utilities and services, other land resources, flora and fauna, social impact in the locality, economic impact, and cumulative impacts.

 

A summary of these impacts as they relate to this application include:

 

1)   Smaller lot sizes increasing the density of development in the area would result in more compact development that will change the established character of the locality.  This area is identified as rural and is not one that is in transition  

2)   Loss of agricultural land and its viability due to the site area being taken up by the dwelling and associated infrastructure

3)   Potential conflict between incompatible land uses

4)   The Rural Lands Strategy proposes to maintain the 2Ha minimum lot size with the designation of Rural Living (Mixed Uses) 2 Ha, retaining the existing subdivision pattern and potential of the land as an agricultural resource;

5)   The intent of the 2Ha development standard is to establish the permitted density of development in the locality with the purpose of protecting the agricultural viability of the land. It also provides an alternative housing choice within the Penrith area. The applicant is seeking a 50% variation to this standard which affects not only the subject property, but has the same implications for the adjoining property

6)   Variation of the 2Ha lot size development standard would result in the planning objectives for the area being compromised. More compact development, in the form proposed, will compromise these objectives for the locality and result in additional pressure on their viability through subsequent requests  

5.   Section 79C(1)(c) The suitability of the site for development

Considerations for the suitability of the site for the development include transport availability, utilities and services, the agricultural capabilities of the land and the likelihood that the development will prejudice future agricultural production. These issues are discussed below and in the preceding section of this report.

 

1)      The type of development proposed, if approved will give rise to the potential a number of similar applications being made. The cumulative effects of further approvals would result in an increase in demand for services and facilities to be provided by Council and other authorities

 

2)      Reticulated sewerage is not available in the area. Reduced lot sizes would increase the likelihood of the disposal of effluent on to adjoining properties and the South Creek catchment

 

3)      The benefits of retaining minimum dwelling-house lot size requirements is that the land will be either maintained at that area or consolidated to achieve it and the resource remains preserved.

6.   Section 79C(1)(d) Any submissions made in relation to the development.

Community Consultation

In accordance with Council’s Notification and Advertising Development Control Plan, the proposed development was notified to the adjoining property owners. No submissions were received as a result.

7.   The Public Interest

Decisions that are made by Council need to be in the public interest and accord with existing policies relevant to the development at hand. These policies could represent all tiers of government. Such policies are important as they can provide an insight into Council’s present and future directions and provide a level of certainty as to how an area may be developed into the future. In relation to Llandilo, the following comments are made.

 

Relevant policy statements from Federal or State Government

State Government Strategies and Policies which confirm the value of maintaining the potential of the resource of viable agricultural land and avoiding its conversion to residential uses include the State Government’s Sydney Metropolitan Strategy 1999, the Shaping Western Sydney Strategy, the Strategic Plan for Sustainable Agriculture in the Sydney Basin 1998 and Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No 20.

 

Public Meetings and Inquiries

The preparation of the Rural Lands Strategy incorporated comprehensive consultation with the community through workshops held to identify the issues and actions for the city’s rural lands. These workshops, as they related to the Llandilo area, identified the following issues that relate to this proposal:

 

·    Subdivision planning should be consistent co-ordinated and uniform to provide a level of certainty for the future

·    A widespread desire to maintain rural character

·    Concern regarding problems with water, roads and the on-site treatment of sewerage

·    A fair and equitable zoning is needed for the area

·    A need for better services

·    Environmental quality, water quality, land degradation and the impact of effluent disposal (particularly odours) on adjoining land

·    Support for a position of no further subdivision and maintaining the minimum lot size of 2 hectares.

 

Other Issues of Public Interest

·    Council’s adopted Rural Lands Strategy proposes to maintain the 2Ha minimum lot size with the designation of Rural Living (Mixed Uses) 2 Ha, retaining the existing subdivision pattern and potential of the land as an agricultural resource.

·    The Rural Lands Strategy seeks to provide the residents of the rural areas with some certainty about the future of their area. Ad hoc variations to development standards and cumulative impacts of a more compact form of residential development will lead to a compromise of local identity and the sense of community that is present.

·    Approval of the proposed development would prejudice the interests of the majority of residents who have developed on 2 Ha lots.

Conclusion

The development application proposing the construction of a dwelling on Lot 244 Seventh Avenue, Llandilo is subject to a development standard which requires a minimum lot size of 2 hectares for a dwelling to be approved. The applicant relies upon an objection under State Environmental Planning Policy No 1 to request a variation of 50% to the minimum lot size development standard.

 

The proposed development has been assessed in terms of the objectives for development within Council’s Rural Lands LEP and the relevant zone, and is considered to be inconsistent with their intent. These objectives relate principally to the preservation of rural character, the scenic qualities of the rural area and the agricultural capabilities of the land. For reasons outlined in the report, it is believed that the objectives are not met by the proposal.

 

The development is considered to result in fragmentation of agricultural land and result in a more compact form of development. The increased built form would have impacts on the open nature and rural vistas which characterise the area.

 

The SEPP 1 Objection has not demonstrated that the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary or would hinder the attainment of the objectives stated in Sections 5(a)(i) and (ii) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act. The promotion and orderly use of land will not be benefited by ad-hoc variations to lot sizes which would reduce agricultural viability and impact significantly by undermining the predominant rural character of the locality.  

 

The development standard has been consistently applied by Council for some considerable time. Departures to the standard have been agreed to by exception and due to specific site constraints. No such constraints exist over the subject lot.  The applicant has been advised that the application could readily be amended to comply but remains insistent that the proposal be assessed in its current form.

 

Future planning directions proposed for the locality will maintain the minimum 2Ha lot size requirement. Under these circumstances, the granting of consent deviating from the standard, where it is possible to comply, is not in the public interest.

 

Approval of the application may result in unreasonable expectations from other land owners that similar departures from the development standard would be favourably considered even though consolidation options are still available. As well as the other identified issues of concern, it must be considered that approval of this application may be used as an indicator of the likely outcome of future applications.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Development Application 06/1848 for the construction of a dwelling at Lot 244 DP 2147 (No. 244) Seventh Avenue, Llandilo be received

2.     The SEPP 1 Objection not be supported.

3.     Development Application No 06/1848, for the construction of a dwelling at Lot 244, DP 2147, No. 244 Seventh Avenue, Llandilo, be refused for the following reasons:

3.1      The application is not satisfactory for the purpose of Section 79C (1)(a)(i) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 in that it does not meet the objectives of Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No 20- Hawkesbury Nepean River, Council’s Local Environmental Plan 201 – Rural Lands, and Part 4.9 of Council’s Development Control Plan 2006 – Rural Development

3.2      The application is not satisfactory for the purpose of Section 79C (1)(a)(i) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 in that is does not meet the development standard specified in clause 12 of Council’s Local Environmental Plan No 201 – Rural Lands as the land does not have a minimum area of 2 hectares

3.3      The Objection lodged under State Environmental Planning Policy No1 is not supported as it does not demonstrate that the standard would, in the particular case, be unreasonable or unnecessary or tend to hinder the attainment of the objectives stated in Sections 5(a)(i) and (ii) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, relating to the proper management of resources to promote the welfare of the community and environment, and, to promote the orderly and economic use of the development of the land

3.4      The application is not satisfactory for the purpose of Section 79C (1)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as the development is likely to have an adverse impact on the locality in terms of  the landscape, local amenity, viability of the land for agriculture, demand for services, land use conflicts and cumulative effects of similar developments

3.5      The application is not satisfactory for the purpose of Section 79C (1)(e) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 in that the proposal is not in the public interest as: it is not in keeping with regional and local planning policies (SREP 20, LEP 201), Council’s Rural Lands Study and Strategy and proposed planning policies, and the intent and prescriptive requirements of Draft SEPP (Application of Development Standards) 2004.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1. View

Locality Plan Lot 244 Seventh Avenue, Llandilo

1 Page

Appendix

2. View

Lot 244 Seventh Avenue - Site Plan

1 Page

Appendix

3. View

Lot 244 Seventh Avenue - Building Plan

1 Page

Appendix

 


Ordinary Meeting

7 May 2007

Appendix 1 - Locality Plan Lot 244 Seventh Avenue, Llandilo

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

7 May 2007

Appendix 2 - Lot 244 Seventh Avenue - Site Plan

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

7 May 2007

Appendix 3 - Lot 244 Seventh Avenue - Building Plan

 

 

 

 

 


The City In Its Environment

 

Item                                                                                                                                       Page

 

7        Drainage Sub-Catchment Prioritisation

 

8        Rehabilitation of the former Jam Factory Site at Lots 1 - 3 DP 342275 Roper Road, Colyton

 

 



Ordinary Meeting

7 May 2007

The City in its Environment

 

 

The City in its Environment

 

 

7

Drainage Sub-Catchment Prioritisation   

 

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 notify Council of a grant offer under the NSW Government Financial Assistance Program for the Penrith Overland Flow Flood Study under the Floodplain Management Program 2006/2007.  The report recommends that the offer be accepted and Council's matching contribution fund be allocated.

 

Background

A report was submitted to Council’s Policy Review Committee Meeting, on 13 November 2006, outlining the outcomes of the Penrith Overland Flow Flood ‘Overview’ Study.  The report explained limitations of the “Overview” Study as this study did not include the analysis of the pipe network and, as a result, further studies were required to address this infrastructure.  The report also explained the floodplain management process of the NSW Government’s Floodplain Development Manual, Council’s current position in this regard, and sought Council’s endorsement to advance to the next stage of the study process.  The Committee accepted the report and resolved that a further report be submitted to Council on the prioritised sub-catchments for detailed flood studies.

 

A further report was submitted to Council’s Ordinary Meeting, on 5 March 2007, outlining details of prioritisation of sub-catchments and sought Council’s endorsement for advancement of detailed flood studies and submission of grants applications under the Floodplain Management Program.  Council endorsed the prioritised sub-catchments for advancement of the detailed flood studies and the submission of grant applications under Floodplain Management Program.

 

Current Situation

Project briefs for three prioritised sub-catchments are being prepared and will be forwarded to the Department of Environment and Climate Change (former DNR) for review and comment.  Incorporating the Department’s comments, the study briefs will be forwarded to selected consultants inviting fee proposals for undertaking the studies.

 


Funding for the Flood Studies

In October 2006, Council received a grant offer of $50,000 under the 2006-07 State Assisted Floodplain Management Program with a funding ratio of 2:1 (State:Council).  This is to cover the costs of the current round of studies under this year’s program.  A report was submitted to Council on 11 December 2006 for acceptance of the grant offer.

 

A further grant assistance was sought from the Department for undertaking the detailed overland flood studies for the prioritised sub-catchments.  The Department has confirmed reallocation of an additional $100,000 grant assistance for undertaking the studies under the 2006/07 State Assisted Floodplain Management Program with a funding ratio of 2:1 (State:Council).  A funding allocation of $50,000 is required to match Council’s contribution to this grant offer.  A Service Level Adjustment bid has been submitted for Council’s consideration to allocate Council’s contribution to the studies.

 

Financial Services Manager’s Comments

The report to the Ordinary Meeting of 5 March 2007 foreshadowed that if the grant application was successful then matching funding from Council would be needed.  The Service Level Adjustment to provide the matching funding has been considered as part of the 2007-08 Management planning process, and at the first workshop it was recommended that the then matching amount of $45,000 be provided from the 2006-07 projected surplus.  As the confirmation that the grant application for $100,000 has been successful has now been received, it is proposed that an amount of $50,000 be made available from the current year’s budget.  As this is a two year project, and it is likely that grant funding will also be available the following year, a similar amount has been incorporated into the 2008-09 base budget and long term financial model.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Drainage Sub-Catchment Prioritisation be received.

2.     The State Assisted Floodplain Management Grant offer of $100,000 from the Department of Environment and Climate Change (former DNR) be accepted.

3.     Council’s matching contribution fund of $50,000 be allocated from the 2006-07 surplus.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Meeting

7 May 2007

The City in its Environment

 

 

The City in its Environment

 

 

8

Rehabilitation of the former Jam Factory Site at Lots 1 - 3 DP 342275 Roper Road, Colyton   

 

Compiled by:                Wayne Mitchell, Environmental Health Manager

Authorised by:             Wayne Mitchell, Environmental Health Manager  

Requested By:             Councillor Greg Davies

Strategic Program Term Achievement: Effective land use management policies, regulatory practices and controls are being implemented to protect the environment.

Critical Action: Develop and implement sustainable land use management strategies that protect the environment.

     

Purpose:

To provide Council with an update on the status of plans to rehabilitate land on Roper Road, Colyton known as the Old Jam Factory site.  The report recommends that a Strategic Task be added to the draft Management Plan for 2007/2008 to prepare detailed plans and commence the rehabilitation of the site, including the construction of new sporting fields.

 

Background

The site commonly called the Old Jam Factory site is located at Lots 1 – 3 DP342275 Roper Road, Colyton.  The site was acquired in 1977 by the NSW Department of Planning as a part of Ropes and South Creek Regional Open Space Corridor.

 

In 1978, Council entered into a lease for the site and it was initially used as a Community and Youth Activities Centre.  In April 1985, Council resolved to demolish the Centre due to vandalism and security problems.  The building was demolished soon after, but as a consequence the site became the target of illegal dumping activities.  A significant quantity of demolition waste was left on parts of the site.  Some soil from Council projects was also located on the site for future use.  Eventually, the site was fenced to protect it from further dumping activities.

 

In 1985, Council resolved to reserve the site for use by Colyton/St Clair Baseball Club for the construction of a baseball field.  This proposal did not proceed.

 

The site is within the Ropes and South Creek Regional Open Space Corridor managed by the Department of Planning.  In 2005, the Department completed a Strategic Management Plan for the corridor.  The Plan has the following vision:

 

“Ropes and South Creek will form a scenic and accessible parkland system, much valued by its community. With healthy waterways at their heart the parklands will be managed in an integrated and inclusive manner, balancing their cultural, recreational and environmental values.”

 

The Strategic Management Plan only has broad precinct zones and suggests the use of this site on Roper Road for Open Space recreational use.  Assistance with funding towards the implementation of this plan can be leveraged from the Department of Planning’s Greenspace Grants Program.

 

The site is adjacent to three existing Soccer Fields that are used by the St Marys Band Club Soccer Club.

Preliminary Contamination Assessment

A preliminary contamination assessment report was commissioned as a first step to understanding the current condition of the site and what remediation might be required.

 

Hayes Environmental Consulting Pty Ltd investigated the site in October/November 2006, and provided a detailed report, in December 2006, to Council.  The investigation followed appropriate NSW EPA guidelines and SEPP55 – Managing Land Contamination:  Planning Guidelines.

 

The investigation included soil sampling at 15 test pits in the western, filled section of the site.  The test pits confirmed that the soils in this area were varying in depth of between 0.5m to 2.5m.  The analysis of soil samples found elevated levels of lead, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and benzo(a) pyrene in one bore hole and asbestos fibres in three bore holes.  The remaining bore holes were found to comply with Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC) guidelines for parks, recreational open space and playing fields.

 

The report concluded that contamination in fill soils from the western section of the site was not widespread, but limited to localised areas containing dark grey ash material.  The report recommends that the remediation of this area could occur during the initial soil stockpiling and levelling of the site.  All contaminated fill must either be removed to an appropriate licensed landfill or contained on-site within a clay-lined containment cell.

 

The consultant has provided a proposal to prepare a remedial action plan (RAP) which would form the basis for a DA to rehabilitate the site and construct four new sporting fields.

PLANS Study

In 2002, Council undertook an extensive survey of the City’s residents.  This project, known as PLANS, sought to identify the aspirations of the local community for their area, with a particular focus on recreation and cultural services and facilities.

 

The PLANS Study did not identify this site as a priority for the development of significant additional sporting facilities.  A new draft Section 94 Open Space Plan has been prepared and exhibited. The draft plan identified the existing Roper Road fields as a local facility, and proposes work such as upgrading of the amenities building , sealing the car park, improved car park access, shade facilities, landscaping, tree planting , signage and seating.  The development of additional fields, possibly as only training fields, would require the recognition of this work in the draft Section 94 Plan. A report on the draft section 94 will be presented to Council shortly.

Design Options

A team has reviewed what design options are possible for the potential development of sporting fields on the site.  The two lots have sufficient area for either two full size fields or a full size field with two mini fields.  Details of the options are shown in Appendix No. 1.

 

The team also considered another option of adding the adjoining Lot 92 to the equation.  This lot is owned by the Department of Planning.  Initial inquiries have indicated that the Department is happy to give care and control of this lot also to Council.  This additional lot would provide for greater flexibility for long-term development of the sporting fields as it would provide space for two additional full fields, additional parking areas, and a significant wet detention basin for the harvesting of stormwater.

 

The three lots in total would provide a significant advantage for Council, as the area could provide an additional four full fields and significant stormwater storage capacity.  This water could potentially be used for the current fields, which would help to achieve water conservation commitments in Council’s adopted “Water Way” Plan.

Budget Estimate

The full cost of the project cannot be determined until detailed designs are prepared.  A budget of $30,000 is estimated for the preparation of detailed designs and all additional information required for a development application.  Council has an Environment Protection Reserve of funds which are sourced from polluters’ fine income and redirected back to the repair of pollution incidents. Funding for this initial design work could be made available from the Environment Protection Reserve, as it is a necessary component of the remediation of the contamination of the site. This work can commence immediately.

 

Estimated costs of the project are in the order of $400,000.  This would provide four full size training fields.  Parking and amenities are existing on the adjoining Roper Road fields and would not need to be expanded at this time.

 

Following completion of the detailed design and approvals, final budgets for the remediation and construction of the field can be prepared.  A further report back to Council at this time is proposed to seek approval of the construction budget.  Identified potential sources of funding for the project include Section 94 contributions, Greenspace grants, sport and recreation grants and the Sullage Reserve, which has been established with the savings from the 2004-05 special rate variation to provide environmental enhancements.

Conclusion

With limited funding from the Environment Reserve, there is an opportunity to prepare detailed designs and secure development consent for remediation and development of future additional sporting fields at the Roper Road site.  This would then provide Council with sufficient information to prepare detailed costings and budgets for Council’s further consideration later in the year.  A number of funding opportunities will be explored, but there is sufficient confidence that a funding solution can be determined to allow this project to be included in the Management Plan for 2007/2008.

 

The rehabilitation of this site will provide urgently needed training facilities for local sporting clubs.  In addition, it will deal with the illegal waste on the site and improve an important precinct of the Ropes and South Creek corridors.

 

The remediation of this site will also significantly improve the appearance of this Roper Road corridor which is an important entry point into the City.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Rehabilitation of the former Jam Factory Site at Lots 1 - 3 DP 342275 Roper Road, Colyton be received.

2.     A Strategic Task be added to the draft Management Plan for 2007/2008 to prepare detailed plans and commence the rehabilitation of Lots 1 to 3 and Lot 92 Roper Road, Colyton.

3.     A further report be prepared for Council, detailing potential funding options for the implementation of this project.

4.     $30,000 be provided for the detail design costs funded from the Environmental Protection Reserve.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1. View

Design Options

1 Page

Appendix

 


Ordinary Meeting

7 May 2007

Appendix 1 - Design Options

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

 

 

THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT BLANK  INTENTIONALLY


 

 

The City as an Economy

 

 

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


 

 

 

 

THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT BLANK  INTENTIONALLY


 

 

The City Supported by Infrastructure

 

 

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


 

 

 

 

THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT BLANK  INTENTIONALLY


Leadership and Organisation

 

Item                                                                                                                                       Page

 

9        Draft 2007-2008 Management Plan

 

10      Occupational Health and Safety Certificate of Achievement Award

 

11      2007 Local Government Association Conference

 

12      CPA National Public Sector Convention 

 

13      Grants Officer - Activities 1 October 2006 - 31 March 2007

 

14      GST Compliance Certificate

 

 



Ordinary Meeting

7 May 2007

Leadership and Organisation

 

 

Leadership and Organisation

 

 

9

Draft 2007-2008 Management Plan   

 

Compiled by:                Mark Andrews, Strategic & Management Planning Coordinator

Geraldine Brown, Budget Accountant

Authorised by:             Ross Kingsley, Corporate Development Manager

Vicki O’Kelly, Financial Services Manager   

Strategic Program Term Achievement: Council's operating culture is flexible, efficient, integrated and aligned to Council's strategic objectives and program delivery.

Critical Action: Prepare, implement and review Management Plans and processes aligned to and consistent with Council’s Strategic Plan and Program.

     

Purpose:

To present the Draft 2007-2008 Management Plan documents and accompanying information for Council's consideration and adoption to enable their public exhibition. The report advises Council of further details regarding public consultation on the draft Plan. The report recommends that the Draft Management Plan be adopted for public exhibition.

Due to the size of these documents, copies have been provided to Councillors under separate cover. Copies are also available to the public.

 

Background

The Draft 2007-2008 Management Plan provides for the delivery of the third instalment of Council’s program within its 2005-2009 Strategic Plan, Penrith City: the Competitive Edge.

 

Preparation of the draft Plan has involved extensive discussions with Council through a series of workshops and reports.

 

The draft documents presented tonight for Council’s consideration represent the culmination of Council’s discussions and resolutions over the last few months.

 

Enhancements to the Management Plan

In December 2006, Council endorsed the proposal to significantly enhance its already strong and well-established management planning model, through which the Strategic Plan and four year Strategic Program is translated into annual directions for the organisation. The intent of these changes is to lose nothing from Council’s strategic approach, but to more powerfully reflect both the objectives of a Sustainable City and the practical reality of specified services and budgets.

 

As reflected in the accompanying papers to tonight’s report, the draft Management Plan documents have accordingly been revised in three key aspects:

·    Formulating a strategic volume (including the full Strategic Program content and relevant 2007-08 Tasks as well as Service and Project links) shaped around the UNEP Principles for a Sustainable City which Council adopted in 2003 and Objectives derived from those principles;

·    Basing the operational volume of the Plan and Budget on the specified Services through which Council’s operations are conducted;

·    Reframing the Fees and Charges volume by Services in a more user-friendly format.

 

The new formats and status of the ‘Strategic’ and ‘Operational’ volumes are further discussed below. Achieving a comprehensive expression of both these aspects of Council’s leadership, and their correct relationship and balance in the Management Plan, is the essence of the approach which Council has authorised as a trial for the coming year.

 

The detailed content (in terms of Tasks, Key Performance Indicators and Service improvements as well as Budget allocations) proposed for the Management Plan is based on the requirements to most effectively deliver Council’s program for 2007-08.

 

Strategic Program Response and Sustainability Principles

The draft Management Plan brings together in a new framework (as endorsed by Council as a trial for 2007-08) two key adopted policy settings:

·    The complete content of Council’s Strategic Program 2005-09

·    The internationally-recognised United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) Principles for a Sustainable City, together with those Objectives which have been developed as a basis for Council’s particular response to the principles.

 

Without altering the content of Council’s program or losing any of its strategic force, it has been possible to overlay the adopted sustainability principles. The Master Program groupings of the Strategic Plan (which were themselves based on sustainability elements) have been realigned to a more explicit statement of Council’s objectives for a Sustainable City and organisation.

 

It is recognised that the initial trial of this new approach and the format will require further consideration and refinements are likely to be required. However, this will not in any way impede the Management Plan from providing an effective annual delivery of each component of Council’s Strategic Program.

 

The Strategic Overview volume details how each of Council’s selected outcomes for the City or the organisation (the Term Achievements) will be advanced in 2007-08 through the specified Services, Critical Actions, Strategic Tasks and approved Projects.

 

It also groups the City-focussed Term Achievements and Organisation-focussed Term Achievements which are most relevant to each particular Objective in the sustainability framework. This notional assignment is a key element of the trial approach, which will be further tested through the consultation process.

 

Operational Management Plan - Services and Budget

The program to specify each of Council’s 65 defined external and internal Services (including the controlled entities as distinct Services) is approaching completion. This has enabled the draft Management Plan to detail approved service requirements and allocated budgets. This will establish an even more effective base for accountability, performance reporting and communication to the community on Council’s program.

 

A ‘Service Profile’ containing key information drawn from each service specification and the proposed budget allocation for that Service in 2007-08 makes up the main section of  Part B ~ Operational Plan and Budget.

 

A number of further improvements to Service focus and delivery, which are being identified through an initial review of all of the specified Services, have also been incorporated in the draft Plan. This review and assessment of key findings by the Corporate Management Team is still in process and it is anticipated that further amendments will be pursued through the Management Plan exhibition period and submitted as part of the final Plan.

 

Sustainability Indicators are also for the first time being added to relevant Services, based on the service review findings and adopted sustainability plans. This information is not yet completed and will benefit from Council and public feedback in the exhibition process.

 

The Operational Plan volume includes the proposed Capital and Operating Projects for 2007-08, as endorsed through the Workshop process. The Projects are also presented in Services order, in keeping with the rest of the information in this volume.

 

Strategic Program Amendments

A report on the progress of Council’s 2005-2009 Strategic Program was presented to Council’s Policy Review Committee meeting of 2 April 2007. Arising from that discussion, and through the development of the Draft Management Plan, a number of proposed amendments to Term Achievements and Critical Actions in the Strategic Program have been identified. The purpose of these changes is to clarify Council’s current intent in its strategy or to respond more strongly to matters of clearly high priority. In each case, the purpose of the suggested change is to strengthen the implementation of Council’s selected Term Achievements.

 

These suggested amendments are detailed in the Attachment to this report, with an explanation of each. Pending Council’s endorsement tonight, these amendments have been incorporated into the draft Management Plan documents. The changes would take effect from 2007-08.

 

Strategic Tasks

Proposed Strategic Tasks for 2007-08 are included in Part A ~ Strategic Overview of the draft documents under the relevant Critical Actions. The proposed tasks are also referenced in the profile for each Service (in the Part B document), thus demonstrating the means and accountability for their delivery.

 

At its Management Plan Workshop of 16 April 2007, Council considered an initial list of the annual Strategic Tasks. The approach to these tasks, as previously discussed, has been to identify important elements of Council’s annual program which are not explicitly embodied in the Critical Actions and specified Services. Particular tasks are included for each Major Project to be advanced in 2007-08 and for key priorities identified in the recent Strategic Program review.

 

 

 

As foreshadowed at the Workshop, the draft annual program of tasks has since been further reviewed by Managers and Directors in light of the key issues recently discussed with Council. A number of amendments have been incorporated in the Draft Management Plan, mainly to reflect those considerations and Council’s determination of resourcing priorities through the Workshops and the Project Evaluation process.

 

Performance Assessment

The organisation’s performance in delivering the annual Management Plan is reviewed, under the Local Government Act, as part of quarterly and annual reviews of the Plan.

 

Performance will be measured principally by progress towards the achievement of the tasks and projects stated in the Draft Plan, as well as performance measures for ongoing services provided by Council.

 

Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) are stated for services and can be found within the relevant Service profile in Part B ~ Operational Plan and Budget.  They are generally expressed as quantifiable measures of output, efficiency or effectiveness, and provide an indication of how well a service is being delivered to the community against targets set by Council.

 

The inclusion of particular performance indicators, and the targets for each, have been initially reviewed by Managers against those included in service specifications and in the 2006-07 Management Plan. Further assessment will be carried out by the relevant management teams, and it is anticipated that some refinements in this area will be recommended to Council before the final Management Plan is adopted.

 

The 2007-2008 Management Plan Program

Council has previously confirmed the following key objectives that the Plan will seek to achieve. These are to:

·· address essential operating costs, including significant variations due to external factors

·· maintain existing service provision at current levels, except as may be directed by Council

·· maintain the priority given to asset management and continue to increase all