Agenda of Policy Review Committee Meeting

*Policy Review Committee Meeting*	*9 March 2009*
*The City as a Social Place*

The City as a Social Place

St Marys Release Area - Public Exhibition of draft Western and Central Precinct Plans

Compiled by: Tony Crichton, 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 (based on Council's Sustainability Blueprint for new Release Areas) for each new release area that deliver quality, sustainable living and working environments..

Purpose:

To provide Council with an assessment of submissions made to public exhibition of the draft Plans for the Western and Central Precincts of the St Marys Release Area. The report also advises on the gazettal of the SREP 30 Amendment No. 2 and the final amendments to that Plan. The report recommends adoption of the draft Western & Central Precinct Plans subject to the inclusion of all agreed and negotiated amendments with the proponent Delfin Lend Lease and that Council write to all public authorities, Blacktown City Council and other persons who made submissions to the public exhibition advising them of Council's decision.

Procedural note: Section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993 requires that a division be called in relation to this matter.

Executive Summary

Delfin Lend Lease (Delfin) is developing the St Marys Release Area, formerly known as the ADI site. Delfin is currently undertaking development of the Ropes Crossing precinct in Blacktown LGA for approximately 2,000 dwellings and a Precinct Plan has been approved by Penrith Council for a range of employment uses on the Dunheved Precinct.

In July 2008, Council resolved to publicly exhibit draft Precinct Plans for the Western and Central Precincts of the St Marys Release Area located in Penrith LGA. The plans provide for the delivery of approximately 3,400 new dwellings with neighbourhood shopping and commercial facilities, recreation and open space areas and a consolidated employment area of 38 ha located within the Central Precinct.

The draft Precinct Plans were publicly exhibited from 7 October to 17 November 2008 and 58 submissions were received. An assessment of the draft plans and our response to those submissions are outlined in this report.

Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No 30 – St Marys (SREP 30) is the principal planning and zoning document for the St Marys Release Area. The Minister for Planning in 2007 formally directed the preparation of a draft amendment to SREP 30 to principally rationalise and consolidate the employment zones. The amendment to SREP 30 was exhibited concurrently with the draft Precinct Plans by the Department of Planning (DoP). The draft Precinct Plans are consistent with the SREP 30 amendment, which has now recently been made by the Minister.

The report recommends adoption of the Western and Central Precinct Plans for the St Marys Release Area, subject to certain amendments arising from the submissions and our assessment.

Background

SREP 30 was gazetted on 19 January 2001 which zoned the land for urban development and related purposes. In June 2003, the Minister declared the Eastern, Dunheved North and Dunheved South Precincts to be the Stage 1 Release Areas for the St Marys Release. The Eastern Precinct Plan was subsequently adopted by Blacktown City Council in February 2004 and construction of that development, known as Ropes Crossing, is now well underway.

In April 2006, Amendment No 1 to SREP 30 was gazetted which primarily provided for an expanded, 900ha Regional Park. The Minister for Planning also declared the Western, Central and Ropes Creek Precincts to be release areas in accordance with SREP 30. This represented the final declaration of Stage 2 Release Areas for the St Marys Release in Penrith LGA. A precinct location plan is attached to the report.

An Employment Development Strategy (EDS) for the whole of the St Marys Release Area was completed in June 2003 and endorsed by the Minister for Planning in 2007. The EDS targets the delivery of 5,300 ongoing jobs both on and off the site over the life of the development. Of these, around 2,470 jobs were projected to be established on the site, and with multiplier effects, around 2,830 jobs are expected to be established off site in both Penrith and Blacktown LGAs. A total of approximately 3,460 jobs are intended to be created within the Penrith LGA, both on and off the site.

In 2007 the Department of Planning elected to support a further amendment to SREP30, initiated by Delfin, to consolidate the employment zones located within the Western, Central and Ropes Creek Precincts (BCC) in the Central Precinct. The Minister for Planning in December 2007 formally directed the preparation of a draft amendment to SREP 30, the principal aim of which was to rationalise and consolidate the employment zones in order to provide improved opportunities for employment generating development on the St Marys Release. The SREP amendment was exhibited by DoP concurrently with the Precinct Plans and has now been formally made by the Minister.

In April 2008, Delfin submitted draft Western and Central Precinct Plans to Council for its consideration. At its Policy Review Committee of 28 July 2008, Council resolved to publicly exhibit the draft Western & Central Precinct Plans in accordance with the provisions of SREP 30 and advise public agencies and landowners in the vicinity of the release area of the public exhibition.

Copies of the draft Precinct Plans have been distributed to Councillors.

Statutory Position

Clause 15 of SREP 30 permits Council to adopt a draft Precinct Plan either –

(i) in the form in which it was publicly exhibited;

(ii) with amendments as agreed to by the proponent, or as proposed by the proponent in response to submissions; or

(iii) with amendments not agreed to by the proponent, but only with the consent of the Minister.

Council cannot refuse to adopt a draft Precinct Plan unless it has obtained the agreement of the Minister to the refusal. Although a Council technically has 6 months in which to adopt a precinct plan, Delfin Lend Lease and Council agreed to extend the assessment period so that additional work could be carried out by consultants and submitted to Council for assessment.

As outlined above, the Minister for Planning previously directed the preparation of a draft amendment to SREP 30, which was exhibited concurrently with the public exhibition of the draft Precinct Plans for the Western and Central Precincts.

The draft amendment to SREP 30 proposes to relocate and consolidate the current Employment zones in the Western Precinct and Ropes Creek Precinct to within the Central Precinct Employment zone. The draft Western and Central Precinct Plans are based on this re-arrangement of zones. As such, it is necessary for the draft amendment to SREP 30 to be gazetted prior to adoption of the Western and Central Precinct Plans.

SREP 30 (Draft Amendment No 2) was gazetted on 27 February 2009. Council is now in a position to adopt the draft Western and Central Precinct Plans with the knowledge that the SREP 30 amendment is now in place.

The draft Western & Central Precinct Plans consist of two volumes containing the following documents:

· Volume 1 comprising draft Precinct Plan and draft Development Control Strategy; and

· Volumes 2a & 2b comprising the following supplementary reports:

o Water Soils & Infrastructure Report

o Biodiversity Assessment Report

o Survey Plans / Tree Survey

o Feral & Domestic Animal Management Strategy

o Weed Management Plan

o Bushfire Protection Assessment

o Traffic and Transport Report

o Archaeological Assessment of Indigenous Heritage Values

o Archaeological Assessment of European Heritage Values

o Community Plan

o Contamination Management Plan

o Open Space and Landscape Masterplan

o Landscape Maintenance and Handover Plan

The draft Plans and draft Development Control Strategies have included the required matters listed under SREP30. The draft Plan is also considered to have met the required performance objectives listed in the Environmental Planning Strategy (EPS).

The draft Western & Central Precinct Plans and draft Development Control Strategies have been assessed under the statutory planning framework comprising the following key documents:

· Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 30 (SREP 30) as amended;

· The St Marys Environmental Planning Strategy (EPS);

· The St Marys Development Agreement (The Deed).

Clause 11 of SREP 30 provides amongst other things, that a Precinct Plan must not be approved unless Council is satisfied that the Plan is consistent with the performance objectives, zone objectives and requirements prescribed by the SREP and the proposed development controls proposed in the St Marys Environmental Planning Strategy 2000 (EPS 2000). Council must also ensure that the Precinct Plan is substantially in accordance with the Structure Plan under SREP 30.

The draft Precinct Plans and draft Development Control Strategies together address the full range of issues required under the above provisions of SREP 30. The draft Plan is also consistent with the Structure Plan under SREP 30, as amended.

Public Exhibition of draft Western and Central Precinct Plans

Council publicly exhibited the draft Western and Central Precinct Plans, as well as an Outline Development Agreement (ODA) for an extended exhibition period of 42 days from 7 October to 17 November 2008. The DoP also publicly exhibited SREP 30 (Draft Amendment No 2) concurrently with the exhibition of the draft Precinct Plans.

Relevant exhibition material, including maps, the draft Western and Central Precinct Plans, supporting reports and the ODA, was displayed at the following venues: Penrith City Council foyer, Penrith Library, Penrith City Council’s St Marys Office and St Marys Library.

The exhibition of the draft plans and ODA was also advertised in local newspapers.

Notification letters were sent to landowners in residential areas surrounding the Western and Central Precincts. A comprehensive range of public authorities, Local Members, local community, business and environmental groups were notified in writing of the exhibition and invited to comment. A copy of the draft Western and Central Precinct Plans and ODA was also placed on Council’s website.

A total of 58 submissions were received. This included 13 from public authority agencies, 10 from interest groups and 35 individual submissions of which 12 were Penrith residents.

Assessment of Submissions

Set out below are the major issues arising from the submissions and our assessment of those matters. A complete set of submissions received by Council in response to the public exhibition have been provided separately to Councillors for information and are also tabled and available for viewing at tonight’s meeting. An outline of the issues raised in the submissions and our assessment comments are included in the attachments to the report.

Issues raised in Submissions from Public Authorities

Submissions were received from the public authorities listed below, none of which have objected to the draft Plans. The issues raised have now been addressed after discussion with Delfin and where necessary with the public authorities.

Integral Energy;

NSW Rural Fire Service (NSW RFS);

NSW Department of Primary Industries;

Centre for Affordable Housing (NSW Department of Housing);

Sydney West Area Health Service;

Sydney Water Corporation;

Department of Water and Energy;

Ministry of Transport (MoT);

Blacktown City Council;

Transgrid;

Department of Environment & Climate Change (DECC);

NSW Roads & Traffic Authority (RTA)

State Emergency Service (SES)

The responses of the public authorities are summarised below. Details of the submissions from the public authorities and our assessment comments appear in Attachment 1.

Integral Energy

Issues Raised:

· Supply to the Western Precinct will necessitate the establishment of a new Zone substation, together with associated transmission assets;

Comments:

· Agreement has been reached between Delfin and Integral Energy on infrastructure requirements.

NSW Rural Fire Service

Issues Raised:

· No objection subject to compliance with requirements;

· APZs and construction requirements for individual lots and houses will be determined when DAs are submitted;

Comments:

· Council has obtained an amendment to the draft Precinct Plans from Delfin that clarifies that a further assessment and referral to the RFS for final approval will be carried out at DA stage.

NSW Department of Primary Industries

Issues Raised:

· Issue raised concerning agricultural operations North of Ninth Ave;

Comments:

· The site is zoned for ‘Urban’ development and the issue can be satisfactorily addressed at DA stage.

Centre for Affordable Housing (NSW Department of Housing)

Issues Raised:

· It is requested that Section 4.2 bullet point 12 in both precinct plans be amended to state: “3% of all Residential Allotments developed be provided for the purpose of Affordable Housing which will be dispersed…;”

Comments:

· The Deed entered into between Delfin and the State Government provides for affordable housing contributions in the manner suggested. The request to amend Section 4.2 is supported and Delfin has agreed to this request.

Sydney West Area Health Service

Issues Raised:

· A wide range of issues raised including housing affordability, safety of pedestrian and cycle users, walkability and shade;

Comments:

· Issues have been addressed by the draft plans and detailed responses appear in Attachment 1.

Sydney Water Corporation

Issues Raised:

· Sydney Water has provided a detailed submission over a wide range of issues listed in Attachment 1 including water, sewer, Recycled Water Irrigation Potable and non-potable water;

Comments:

· Sydney Water has indicated that they are able to service the Western & Central Precincts with extensions to their existing networks. Water supply will be available from the existing Cranebrook Reservoir and sewer is able to be transferred from the Penrith Sewage Treatment Plant.

Sydney Water is yet to confirm availability of recycled water but is currently examining two options - a pipe from Penrith STP or a new reservoir at Cranebrook. Delfin is continuing negotiations with Sydney Water in accordance with this advice.

Delfin has committed to the laying of pipes for the delivery of recycled water to the site, even if Sydney Water confirmation is not received by the time construction commences.

Department of Water and Energy

Issues Raised:

· DWE has raised a wide range of issues including watercourse categories, riparian corridors and bushfire measures;

Comments:

· Council, DWE and Delfin have resolved a majority of matters discussed. One matter that has not been resolved relates to the request by DWE that flows that originate within the Precincts should provide water quality and quantity standards that are of a higher level than the receiving waters, such as South (Wianamatta) Creek and their riparian corridors. As the water quality of this creek is expected to be highly variable over time given the inflows from development upstream of the site, it is considered that it would be impractical to enforce this requirement.

In our view, the SREP 30 performance standards in relation to water cycle should be the relevant requirement which, amongst other things, indicate that the development is to incorporate stormwater management measures that ensure there is no adverse impact upon the water quality in the receiving creek system. This standard is consistent with Council’s own water quality and water quantity management policy and will be delivered by the Western and Central Precinct developments.

Ministry of Transport

Issues Raised:

· MoT has raised concern over the location of the proposed village centres not being centrally located and that the proposed location of the employment zone makes bus servicing difficult;

Comments:

· Village Centre locations are conveniently located and have been determined in the optimum location after detailed planning process. They are also consistent with the adopted SREP 30 Structure Plan. Bus servicing will be extended through the estate and can connect with the new, as well as the existing (Dunheved) employment areas.

Blacktown City Council

Issues Raised:

· Blacktown Council has suggested a number of transport initiatives and has also provided in principle agreement to the 7mm flood level increase provided that (1) the increase does not extend into any areas, within Blacktown LGA (2) there is no increase in the flood hazard and (3) that work-as-executed plans are provided to ensure that the fill level does not extend past that provided in the modelled proposal;

Comments:

· The suggestions relating to the transport initiatives are considered reasonable and will be considered as the development advances in conjunction with the relevant transport authorities. The requirements relating to the flood levels are consistent with the Precinct Plan proposals and have been agreed.

Transgrid

Issues Raised:

· Transgrid has no objections to the proposal;

Comments:

· Noted - Transgrid will be further consulted at DA stage in relation to development proposals affected by electricity easements.

DECC

Issues Raised:

· DECC has indicated that it will not accept management of the remnant farm dam adjoining the Western Precinct, due to concerns about the structural integrity of the dam and management issues associated with its proximity to the Urban zone;

· Residential development to the west of the dam is not supported due to lack of adequate bushfire asset protection zones (APZs), likelihood of flooding and issues associated with managing an open body of water close to an urban area. It is recommended land surrounding the dam be zoned open space;

· The APZs between the urban and regional park zones do not adequately reflect the future size of vegetation within the regional park. It is recommended that the width of the APZs be reassessed to reflect the future bushfire risk,

Comments:

· The farm dam has been zoned as Regional Park by DoP. As such, it was expected that DECC would accept ownership and management of this area along with the remainder of the Regional Park. This issue is considered to be a matter for DECC, DoP and Delfin in relation to the final management arrangements. The integrity of the dam wall can be assessed with appropriate geotechnical investigations when more detailed development proposals in the surrounding area are advanced.

· The area to the west of the farm dam is zoned for urban development. This was unaltered in the recent amendment to SREP 30. At this stage, there has not been decisions taken on what form of development, including lot sizes, would be appropriate in this location. Any residential development would of course need to observe Council’s flood policy and the requirements established in SREP 30 for development being above the 1:100 year event.

· The APZs nominated in the Precinct Plans are indicative at this stage, and will need to be confirmed and approved by the NSW Rural Fire Service when development proposals and subdivisions advance for land adjacent to the Regional Park. This aspect can be further discussed with DECC at that time.

NSW Roads & Traffic Authority (RTA)

Issues Raised:

· RTA has no objections to the proposal but RTA and the developer are yet to agree on the necessary trigger points or timetable of when these works are to be implemented. The requirement to deliver each component of these works is expected to be tied to the number of lots released as indicated as being required by the traffic modelling;

Comments:

· A framework is in place for Delfin to undertake and contribute to main road upgrades. Discussions are ongoing with RTA to resolve timing of the installation of these roadworks.

State Emergency Service

Issues Raised:

· SES had no objections to the proposed development.

Issues raised in Public Submissions

Set out below is a summary of the major issues arising from the submissions and our assessment of those matters. A detailed response to each of the issues raised by the general public is contained in the attachments to this report.

1. Biodiversity Issues

Issues Raised:

· The proposed development will result in the removal of important remnants of Cumberland Plain Woodland (CPW) (including rare and endangered flora species and habitat) located within the zoned urban areas. CPW has been nominated for listing as a Critically Endangered Ecological Community (CEEC) under the NSW Threatened Species Conservation (TSC) Act 1995 and Environmental Protection Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act 2000. SREP 30 must be amended to rezone this bushland from Urban to Regional Park;

· Plan is inconsistent with the creation of the Cumberland Conservation Corridor (CCC) which has been proposed and supported by the community, environment groups, the Commonwealth Environment Minister and the NSW Greens. It fractures the proposed CCC;

· DECC have released a working paper to inform a Recovery Plan for the vegetation of the Cumberland Plain. Plans must consider this imminent Recovery Plan;

· Wetland in south west corner of Western Precinct likely to be impacted by urban development zoning;

· The Plans state that over 20,000 trees have been surveyed and numbered. Are these trees to be removed? How many will be retained?

· Council should ensure Pimelea spicata population in the Western Precinct is not destroyed and that if it cannot be retained in situ that it be safely located away from the public;

· Seek re-classification of Regional Park to Nature Reserve;

· Proposed development will result in fragmentation of the Regional Park and degradation of native flora and fauna within the Park.

Comments:

Summary of Biodiversity Conservation Decisions

The planning process for the St Marys Release Area (formerly the ADI site) has been long and complex and commenced in 1990 when the Commonwealth Government determined the site to be surplus to their defence requirements. An extensive series of biodiversity and other environmental investigations has been carried out over a number of years by Delfin and State and Commonwealth environmental agencies. Council, as well as the Australian Heritage Commission, also sought independent peer reviews of the findings of these environmental studies.

In February 1999 the site was listed by the Australian Heritage Commission on its Register of the National Estate (RNE) which included an area of 830 ha of bushland in recognition of its environmental heritage and conservation value. Later that year, Senator Hill, the then Minister for Defence, advised the Commonwealth Government Environment, Communication, IT and the Arts Senate Committee that the Government’s position was that although some of the land on the site should be retained for conservation purposes, some of it should be sold to maximise the Commonwealth’s capital return. Implicit in this announcement is the Government’s decision that areas of the site would be available for development.

In December 1999 the State Government exhibited the draft SREP 30. This plan, whilst incorporating a regional park proposal, did not include all of the land registered on the National Estate in the conservation area. In February 2000, Council commissioned Michael Doherty of the CSIRO to undertake a review of the site’s biodiversity. That report identified additional bushlands, particularly in the north-western corner of the site, which were worthy of conservation.

Council continued to make submissions to both the Commonwealth and State Governments to expand the regional park. However, in January 2001 the SREP 30 was gazetted with a 630 ha regional park. This omitted 178 ha of bushland listed by the Australian Heritage Commission on the RNE and lands identified in the Doherty study.

Following continued lobbying by Council and community groups, an announcement was made by Senator Hill in the October 2001 Federal Election which resulted in an additional 250 ha of bushland, including all of the land listed on the RNE, being conserved in the proposed Regional Park. This position was strongly supported by Council and accompanied by sign-offs by State and Commonwealth Government environment agencies.

In April 2006, SREP 30 (Amendment No 1) was gazetted which formalised the creation of the expanded 900 ha Regional Park and facilitated the future declaration of the remaining release areas by the Minister, being the Western and Central Precincts. Implicit in this rezoning of the site is the principle that the remaining lands identified in the Western, Central, Dunheved, Ropes Creek and Eastern Precincts would be available for urban development.

Amendment No 2 to SREP 30 was made on 27 February 2009. This amendment did not incorporate any further extensions of the Regional Park nor provide any restrictions to development in the identified Western and Central Precincts.

Impact on biodiversity

The entire St Marys release has been previously given a site-wide sign-off from the Commonwealth Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts via the provisions within the EPBC Act.

The proposed Western and Central Precinct development areas are limited to land already zoned for urban development in SREP 30. The establishment of the 900 ha Regional Park (around two-thirds of the total site) represents a substantial conservation measure for threatened species and ecological communities on the site. Delfin has agreed with the State Government that it will dedicate all Regional Park land to DECC for their ownership and ongoing management.

The submission from DECC (NP&WS) did not mention nor object to the proposed SREP 30 zoning of the site nor did it seek any expansion of the Regional Park. It also does not make any reference to a working paper for any CPW Recovery Plan.

Delfin’s consultants have undertaken a comprehensive biodiversity assessment for the Western and Central Precincts which describes the flora and fauna present, predicts impacts from proposed developments within the Precincts and provides measures to mitigate those impacts. The study indicates that the site has experienced extensive tree clearance and pastoral activities prior to the 1940s when the Department of Defence use occurred and as a result, native vegetation is regenerating. Although some regrowth woodland has been identified as being of value to native fauna, similar and higher conservation value habitats will be conserved within the Regional Park. The study notes disturbed habitats such as those found in the Western Precinct, generally support populations of both native and exotic species that are common in urban/rural environments. The study also indicates the presence of a number of endangered ecological communities, including Cumberland Plain Woodland (CPW), however, much of the vegetation is highly degraded, and the majority of the ecological communities are represented by scattered regrowth indigenous tree cover.

It is noted development is likely to remove disparate, remnant patches of native vegetation, however, this expected loss of native vegetation is not considered will be of significant impact, particularly in considering the Regional Park will be managed for conservation purposes to ensure the long-term persistence of threatened species that occur elsewhere on the site. Other identified mitigation measures include using locally endemic species as road trees or in landscaping of public places. Also, significant stands of trees and vegetation, where practicable, should be retained within the development areas and opportunities created for their inclusion into public spaces, and buffers around sensitive conservation areas.

Despite the likely loss of native vegetation in the two Precincts, we believe that it is reasonable to conclude that this is more than balanced by the protection of significant areas (900 ha) of endangered bushland within the adjoining Regional Park. It is also reasonable to conclude that although the development of the Western and Central Precincts will result in the removal of scattered woodland, the development will not have a significant effect upon any threatened flora or fauna species.

TSC Act Listing

Although CPW has been nominated for listing as a ‘Critically’ Endangered Ecological Community (CEEC) under the TSC Act, the interim listing is preliminary and has not been finalised at this stage. Council has an obligation to consider the listing as a head of consideration under the EPA Act in relation to development proposals. Listings under the TSC Act in themselves do not afford a blanket prohibition on development. This matter has been assessed within the context of the proponent’s most recent environmental examinations, the extensive environmental studies which have underpinned the State and Commonwealth Government’s decisions in relation to the proposed Regional Park and the recently gazetted SREP 30 (Amendment No 2) zoning arrangement which does not nominate additional lands for biodiversity conservation purposes.

Delfin’s environmental consultants have indicated that the conclusions of their biodiversity assessment do not change and are considered to be valid for the preliminary listing of CPW as a CEEC. They indicate this is primarily because the loss of low quality CPW from the development Precincts is not considered to significantly impact on the local occurrence of the community given the difficulty in achieving its full recovery and large areas of high quality CPW are conserved in the adjoining Regional Park. This view is supported.

Any future development applications submitted for Council approval will need to be accompanied by relevant environmental ‘7 part tests’ where threatened species are present. That test, amongst other things, would in the case of an endangered ecological community consider whether the action proposed would have an adverse effect on its local occurrence, extent or composition to the point that it is placed at risk of extinction. This would include consideration of the CPW listing at the time and any Recovery Plan published by DECC.

Conservation Corridor

The Commonwealth Minister for the Environment, Peter Garrett, and the Member for Lindsay, David Bradbury, in the lead up to the Federal Election in November 2007 announced that a Rudd Government would work with the NSW Government, Local Councils, private land-owners and community groups to protect the threatened Cumberland Plain Woodland areas of Western Sydney. It was indicated the Government would invest up to $15M to secure a Western Sydney ‘Conservation Corridor’, including possible land acquisitions and proper management and preservation of the heritage listed areas of Commonwealth land at Orchard Hills and Shanes Park. The announcement did not refer to conservation of additional lands on the St Marys release site or identify other privately owned lands which might be considered for inclusion in the proposed corridor.

Since that time, Council has pursued Government environmental agencies in order to clarify the intended location of the corridor and which additional lands might be acquired to add to the reserve network in Penrith LGA. It is understood this initiative is the subject of ongoing discussions between the Commonwealth and State Governments who have as yet to identify a specific corridor proposal.

Council’s recently exhibited Stage 1 to Draft Penrith LEP 2008 has identified environmentally sensitive land outside of the national parks and nature reserves network which has the potential to create links between vegetation and water courses, or other significant vegetation. This land identification is intended to complement a network of biodiversity corridors linking with larger conservation areas in public ownership. The draft LEP identifies the opportunity for such a corridor to extend from the north-western corner of the St Marys Release, potentially providing links to the large tracks of bushland to the north in Londonderry and Llandilo. This approach would appear to be consistent with the principle of a Conservation Corridor, and also recognises that not all land which can contribute to conserving biodiversity in the City is able to be publicly owned and managed.

Remnant Farm Dam

Land adjoining the remnant farm dam located in the south-western corner of the Western Precinct is zoned Urban under SREP30 and therefore can potentially be developed once a Precinct Plan is approved. At this stage, the development outcome in this location is not determined. It is considered that the issues raised can be resolved at DA stage.

Other Biodiversity Issues

A population of two Pimelea spicata plants (listed as threatened under the TSC Act) is not proposed to be retained within the Western Precinct as representative plants within the Regional Park will be retained. However, Delfin has advised that options for re-location of the plants to a more appropriate site can be considered.

Wianamatta Regional Park was announced by the NSW Government as a ‘Regional’ Park in March 2007. It has not been planned as a Nature Reserve, given the opportunities for a range of recreation outcomes to be achieved in areas included in the Regional Park of low to moderate conservation value. Council supported this classification as it provides both a strong level of biodiversity protection and a range of recreational opportunities.

In relation to the ‘tagged’ tree issue, Delfin has undertaken an extensive tree survey in the Western and Central Precincts which has located and mapped trees of a trunk diameter of 200mm and greater. The survey recorded approximate trunk diameter, canopy spread, height and number of trunks. The survey was undertaken in order to establish the general location of existing vegetation and as an input into the site’s biodiversity assessment. The information would also be used in the formulation of subsequent development proposals and location of open space facilities, in which opportunities will be sought for trees to be retained.

2. Request for Environmental Investigations

Issues Raised:

· Nepean Greens have requested additional investigations into flood impacts and expansion to fill area, a new Flood Study, an EIS and a re-exhibition and deferral of SREP 30 amendments;

Comments:

A new flood study is, in our opinion, not required as extensive flooding and modelling investigations have been carried out for the Dunheved Precincts and again more recently for the Central Precinct Plan. The impacts of filling have been thoroughly assessed and we are satisfied that the flood modelling results show only a negligible increase in flooding. This issue is canvassed later in the report.

An EIS in our view is not required as extensive environmental investigations and studies have been carried out both by the proponent, State and Commonwealth Government environmental agencies.

SREP 30 (Amendment No. 2) was made on 27 February 2009.

3. Open Space Provision

Issues Raised:

· Western Precinct Plan fails to meet Council’s minimum baseline requirements for Open Space. Council’s total requirement as per the PCC 2007 Open Space Action Plan (for passive and active) is 19.46 ha and Delfin are only providing 15.63 ha resulting in a shortfall in open space provision of 3.83 ha. Areas of the Regional Park adjacent to the Western and Central Precincts should not be used to meet ‘quantum’ area requirement for passive open space.

Comments:

Council’s ‘2007 Open Space Action Plan’ provides a guideline for baseline open space provision. The baseline requirements for active open space (ie, playing fields) will be met with new facilities to be located in the Western Precinct and in the case of the Central Precinct, in the adjoining regional open space land.

In considering both the quantum and location of passive open space required to support the new community, recognition has been given to the proximity of the 900 ha Regional Park and the 40 ha Regional Open Space zone which adjoin the Precincts and the wide opportunity these areas present in a recreation setting. As indicated above, the Regional Park is intended to contain a range of passive recreation opportunities including walking trails, picnic areas, playground facilities and the like which could be potentially located in low conservation value areas adjacent to the residential neighbourhoods. Accordingly, the opportunity to locate approximately 3.8 ha of passive recreation uses associated with the Western Precinct in appropriate locations on the edge of the Regional Park is considered a reasonable approach and can, in our view, be advanced without compromising the conservation objectives or values of the Regional Park.

This option has been discussed with representatives of DECC who have advised that this approach has the potential to align local passive recreation facilities with those intended to be established within the Regional Park, thereby creating an enhanced recreation outcome for both local residents and park visitors alike. This opportunity will be further explored with Delfin and DECC.

4. Roads and Traffic

Issues Raised:

· Oppose roads that dissect the Regional Park. Plans should be amended so that each Precinct has its own separate road entry and so that the east west roads through the Regional Park are scrapped;

· Oppose any development along Ninth Avenue. This area should be conserved. We oppose any roads dissecting the current biodiversity corridor linking the Regional Park to the bushland adjacent to Xavier College;

· Delfin have not contributed enough to traffic infrastructure along the Northern Road - Sherringham Road traffic signals.

Comments:

SREP 30 has identified and zoned, amongst other things, the main east-west connector road which links the Western, Central, Dunheved and Eastern Precincts. The requested deletion of this road is not supported as this would result in significant accessibility shortcomings and disjointed communities who will require connection to facilities and services throughout the St Marys Release and beyond. The notion of each Precinct having its own limited road entry does not support these principles.

SREP30 (Amendment No 2) has now been gazetted as exhibited with the Ninth Avenue fronting portion of the site included for development. The issue of biodiversity conservation in relation to this area has been discussed above.

In relation to contributions for traffic infrastructure, Delfin has agreed to fund extensive upgrading including signalisation of key intersections and widening to four lanes along The Northern Road interface with the Release. These contributions have been accepted by the RTA, who are now discussing with Delfin the timing for implementation of the works.

5. Housing

Issues Raised:

· Proposed housing (6 storey apartments) constitutes an overdevelopment and will be out of character with the surrounding areas. Council must review the proposed housing densities and restrict building heights.

Comments:

A wide diversity in housing types for the site has been encouraged to meet the broadest range of housing needs. The exhibited draft plans nominate 4 storeys apartments. A 6 storey height limit may be considered on agreed key landmark sites, should residential development of this form become viable. The variety and scale of residential building forms is considered appropriate.

6. Development Within Bushfire Prone Land and Access to Central Precinct

Issues Raised:

· The entire ADI Site has been classified as Bushfire Prone Land. Concerns are raised at the recommendations that a 25 metre Asset Protection Zone (APZ) be applied to residential development adjoining the Regional Park. The APZ will protect nothing if there is an intense fire;

· Concern expressed that the Central Precinct allows urban development in locations which would be under a threat from bushfires. Delfin propose one road in and out the southern part of the Central Precinct. This area should not be developed. Council should call on this area to be added to the Regional Park.

· There is the potential for major traffic congestion getting to and from the Central Precinct;

· The Northern Road and Dunheved and Forrester roads are congested;

· Delfin should fund a new road east of Werrington County to access the Central Precinct.

Comments:

Delfin has sought a bushfire protection assessment and management plan to be undertaken for the Western and Central Precincts which has identified the principal bushfire risks and hazards relating to the vegetation types and their coverage in the area and other fire influencing factors. The principal bushfire hazard identified is the woodlands and open forest contained within the Regional Park zoned land. The bushfire management plan identifies a range of bushfire protection and mitigation measures, including perimeter roads and fire hydrant systems, as well as a range of variable width asset protection zones for development areas which interface with the Regional Park.

The draft Precinct Plans have been referred to the RFS who have not objected to the proposed development or to the proposed APZs nominated in the draft Plans. Delfin has also agreed to Council’s request to amend the precinct plans to clarify that a further assessment of bushfire risk and matters including APZ widths and referral to the RFS for final approval will be carried out at development application stage.

In relation to the issue raised concerning the proposed access to the southern part of the Central Precinct, it is noted the Traffic Study submitted in support of the draft Precinct Plans indicates that the proposed road system can readily and safely cope with the forecast traffic flows. In this respect, it is relevant to note that there are three road access points in and out of the Central Precinct. In addition, SREP 30 makes provision for a ‘bus only’ access point to the southern end of the Central Precinct at Leichhardt Avenue which is limited to buses and pedestrians. In its normal operation it would allow bus access but prevent car access. However, this link could be readily modified to enable its use by all traffic in the event that an additional emergency egress from the Central Precinct was required. This aspect can be further discussed with the RFS.

A submission raised the suggestion of a new north-south access road adjacent the eastern edge of Werrington County residential area, linking Dunheved Road to the Central Precinct. It is understood this option has been advanced to support the deletion of the east-west connector road which traverses the Regional Park, linking the Western, Central and Eastern Precincts. There are four access roads connecting to the Central Precinct (including the bus only link) currently proposed in SREP 30. The recent amendment to that Plan did not alter the access arrangements to the Central Precinct. The east-west connector road provides an important linkage between the proposed communities, facilities and services to be located in the release area, and connection to the surrounding road network. It also affords connection to the employment areas on and adjacent to the site. Given this important function, it is not considered appropriate for the east-west connector to be deleted.

The St Marys Development Transport Management Study 2007 proposes a number of future road network improvements which are designed to improve traffic flows along The Northern Road and facilitate access to the Western Precinct. These include installation of traffic signals and widening to 4 lanes.

8. Filling of the Floodplain

Issues Raised:

· Objection is raised to the filling of the South Creek floodplain and the loss of over 1 million cubic metres of much needed flood storage capacity. The importation of 2 million tonnes of fill will effect flooding up and downstream of the ADI Site.

Comments:

In 2006, the proponent was requested to undertake a rigorous flood modelling of the site to determine whether there would be any impacts from the proposed filling of the Dunheved as well as Central Precincts. This flood modelling showed that the maximum increase in the 100 year ARI flood level upstream (south) of the boundary of the site was 37mm and would be contained within the Dunheved Golf Course. The maximum increase downstream of the boundary of the site was 11mm. These flood impacts were reviewed by both Blacktown and Penrith City Councils as part of the Dunheved Precinct Plan process and the minor increase in peak flood levels was considered acceptable. This modelling was also the subject of a peer review by an independent consultant who supported the findings.

As the current proposal for the Central Precinct and the adjoining Regional Open Space Zone now identifies an education and village centre further to the north than was originally proposed, a change in fill area is now proposed. The primary Regional Open Space sports fields have therefore been moved from its previous location (in the southern portion of the Regional Open Space) to the northern portion of the Regional Open Space adjoining the education and village centre. This has the advantage of providing a filled area in close proximity to the adjacent school site. The fill volume has remained substantially the same as that previously endorsed by Council.

The flood modelling results, incorporating all of the previous modelling assumptions, for the amended filling proposal now advanced for the Central Precinct indicate that (a) the maximum increase in flood levels upstream (south) of the site in the 100 year ARI event would be an additional 7mm (44mm total) and this increase is limited to within the Dunheved Golf Course and (b) there would be no change in flood levels downstream (north) of the site (11mm increase) in the 100 year ARI event.

These results, whilst increasing the previous levels marginally, are still considered to be within acceptable limits and not likely to provide any significant off-site impacts.

8. Impact of Development

Issues Raised:

· Too much development and infrastructure not keeping pace. Concern about traffic increases on The Northern Road – proper planning should be given to transport and roads.

Comments:

Development of the site is consistent with the St Marys Planning Framework (SREP 30, EPS and St Marys Development Agreement), Metropolitan Strategy, draft North-West Subregional Strategy and Council’s Sustainability Blueprint for Urban Release Areas.

Both Precinct Plans have been supported by detailed Traffic Studies. Extensive contributions to traffic and transport improvements included in St Marys Development Agreement and St Marys Penrith Planning Agreement which was also based on extensive traffic modelling and assessment of public transport options at the time. These examinations have concluded that the level of development proposed for the St Marys Release can be effectively accommodated.

All other required infrastructure to support the development of the site has been identified in both State and local developer agreements. All utility services can be made available to the development.

9. Leichhardt Ave (Werrington County) & Billabong Glen (Werrington Downs)

Issues Raised:

· Concerned that the bus, pedestrian and bicycle only access point shown on the plans as exiting the Central Precinct at Leichhardt Avenue, Werrington County will become a thoroughfare for cars and trade vehicles as well as buses etc. Concerned that an unacceptable level of traffic will use John Bateman Avenue and cause problems for Werrington County Public School as well as the day care centre in Henry Lawson Avenue;

· Concerned that Billabong Glen will become an access road into the Central Precinct and result in traffic increase. How close will new buildings within the Central Precinct be allowed to approach existing properties? Will there be a buffer zone between new developments and existing houses? Presume that the boundary of the Central Precinct development will be well clear of the natural waterway that runs under the driveway of Number 1 Billabong Glen and discharges in the small creek (within the ADI land) immediately beside that property;

Comments:

SREP 30 provides a bus only, pedestrian and cycle connection to Leichhardt Avenue. This arrangement has been confirmed in the latest SREP 30 amendment. The bus only link can be designed in a way which excludes general vehicle use.

SREP 30 does not propose any access to Billabong Glen. Although it is likely that new residential development will adjoin the existing properties in Werrington County, the treatment of the narrow strip of urban zoned land between the Werrington County interface and the nearby Regional Park is not yet resolved. These issues will be further considered and resolved with detailed subdivision design required at DA stage.

10. Cycleways

Issues Raised:

· Supports the proposal - Suggest a network of cycleways linking this site to the Penrith Lakes Scheme;

Comments:

St Marys Development Agreement includes obligations requiring the Joint Venture developers to make future contribution of $100,000 to the RTA towards the construction of external cycleways. The location of these is yet to be determined.

11. Aboriginal Cultural Assessment

Issues Raised:

· Concerned that development within Council boundaries are going through the system without Aboriginal Cultural Heritage being assessed by traditional owners.

Comments:

The draft Precinct Plans were referred to Darug Custodian Aboriginal Corporation, Deerubbin Local Aboriginal Land Council and Darug Tribal Aboriginal Corporation. The draft Precinct Plans have appropriately addressed Aboriginal Heritage issues.

Other Key Issues

A number of issues have emerged from both consideration of the submissions raised during the public exhibition as well as from our assessment. The key matters are outlined below together with relevant commentary. It will be noted that in a number of instances, we have reached agreement with Delfin to amend the draft Precinct Plans. A detailed list of these amendments is provided in the attachments to this report.

1. Traffic and Transport Issues

As a result of changes to the Regional Park boundaries, the earlier configuration of road access points off The Northern Road has changed. The earlier concepts allowed for two full intersections and two left-in/left-out intersections off The Northern Road. The southern full intersection was to be opposite Sherringham Road. The amended proposal now places this intersection further north and it will now be a ‘T’ intersection.

The traffic demands for the estate development require The Northern Road to be upgraded to four lanes for the frontage of the site and extend to Andrews Road. There is now no requirement from this development to signalise the Sherringham Road intersection.

The Commonwealth Government has recently announced a funding allocation of $450,000 for the signalisation of the intersection of The Northern Road and Sherringham Road. This follows Council’s unsuccessful bid for funding from the State Government through the Federal Blackspot Program administered by the RTA. The RTA advised that the money currently available for the works ($450,000) was significantly less than their anticipated cost of signals (over $1m), notwithstanding that the initial estimate for the works was provided by the RTA.

On 15 October 2008, Delfin Lend Lease submitted a Housing Affordability Fund Application to the Commonwealth Government’s Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs. The submitted application included letters of support from Penrith City Council and the NSW Roads and Traffic Authority.

The purpose of the HAF funding was to part finance and accelerate the delivery of the Stage 1 Upgrade to the Northern Road from the intersection with Andrews Road to the intersection with Borrowdale Road. The funding also provides an opportunity to integrate other planned and funded works being the Sherringham Road intersection upgrade, interim Western Precinct entry and bus priority items. These works will facilitate the planned development of the Western Precinct.

The HAF application seeks funding for $4 million over the period from March 2009 to December 2010. The application has the potential to deliver approximately 270 dwellings to low to moderate income households over a four year period commencing late 2009. The proposal has the potential to deliver a saving of approximately $18,000 per dwelling for potential homebuyers which increases by $7,000 to $25,000 per dwelling if the purchaser qualifies for the first homebuyer’s grant. This represents a 5% saving per new dwelling. The target saving of $25,000 per dwelling, however, relies upon the baseline HAF contribution of $10,000 being increased to $15,000 to take account of the relatively high Sydney Metropolitan house prices and median income levels. Council supports this initiative.

This HAF Application was short-listed by the Commonwealth Government and on 30 January 2009 Delfin lodged the Stage 2 HAF Application for the section of The Northern Road north to Sherringham Road.

In relation to other transport initiatives, the St Marys Release has been planned to provide high accessibility by buses, pedestrians, cyclists and general traffic and create effective links into the surrounding regional road network and public transport system. This is achieved through a combination of external bus priority works, contributions towards external traffic works and an internal development and transport network that caters for all transport modes. Within the site a network of road, bus, pedestrian and cycle routes will be developed that will encourage the use of public transport and other sustainable modes, and reduce dependence on car travel.

2. Wianamatta Regional Park

DECC has recently advised that the Wianamatta Regional Park Plan of Management (PoM) Report is currently being finalised for submission to the National Parks Advisory Committee and Advisory Council. This process is expected to conclude in early 2009. DECC will also be shortly commencing the ‘masterplanning’ of the Regional Park and it is understood this can be undertaken concurrently with the PoM approval process. Council will be further consulted in the development of these plans.

DECC has indicated the view that a number of areas within the Regional Park, where previous site disturbance has occurred and where there are lower environmental values, have the potential to be more intensively developed for a range of recreation activities, such as playgrounds, picnic areas, and the like. These facilities are consistent with the statutory objectives of the Regional Park classification and are intended to be linked by a looped walking track system through the bushland areas of the Park. Opportunities will be explored to determine whether the final locations for these more intensive recreation sites can be located in close proximity to the Western and Central Precinct urban areas to afford further passive recreation opportunities to these communities.

The first section of Regional Park (63 ha) located in the eastern end of the site in Blacktown LGA was transferred to the State Government in April 2007. Guided wildflower tours are expected to commence in September/October this year in this gazetted section of the Park. The second section of Regional Park is expected to be transferred in approximately 12 months time and will include the lands to the west of the Ropes Crossing development in Blacktown LGA.

The transfer of the Regional Park lands in Penrith LGA is intended to be progressed in stages in future years once Precinct Plans are approved and development advances and key issues such as public access, park infrastructure and urban interface requirements are resolved, and DECC advance the required masterplans.

3. ‘Central Park’ Sports Precinct – Regional Open Space Zone

Delfin Lend Lease, in its commercial negotiations with the Commonwealth Government over the acquisition of the St Marys site, agreed to expend up to $6.8M on the development of a major central sports facility in the 40 ha Regional Open Space zone adjacent the Central Precinct intended to be transferred to the State Government’s ownership. Although it is intended that recreation opportunities would extend over most of the Regional open space land, the ‘open space hub’ is presently located at the northern end of the Regional Open Space zone due to potential benefits of co-locating in proximity to the proposed Village Centre and Education Hub.

Now that the Precinct Plan process is substantially finalised, it would be appropriate to continue with the more detailed planning for the central sports facility to determine its inclusions, sporting focus, management arrangements and the timeliness of its delivery. Delfin has indicated its intention to re-initiate these meetings after the adoption of the Precinct Plans.

4. Key Amendments to the Draft Western and Central Precinct Plans

A range of additional matters have been discussed with Delfin, most of a minor nature, which assist in clarification of elements identified in the Precinct Plans and related development control strategies. The following is a list of the matters where amendments are proposed to be made to the draft Western and Central Precinct Plans:

Framework Plan

Dwelling Yield Plan

Affordable Housing

Future Character Areas

Village Centre Character Area

Dwelling Density

Phasing of Development

Open Space Masterplan

Salinity and Groundwater

Infrastructure and Services

Inclusion of Concept Plans within Development Control Strategy

Residential Development Controls – Built Form Housing

Dwelling Types

Development Action Checklists

Appendix F – Water, Soils & Infrastructure

Appendix R – Landscape Maintenance& Handover Plan

A full summary of the key amendments made to the two draft Precinct Plans since the public exhibition held in October/November 2008 appear in Attachment 3. Where the amendments varied between the two precincts, the relevant precinct will be identified.

Implementation Phase

Phasing of Development

Should Council adopt the Western and Central Precinct Plans, Delfin propose to commence the development of the site in the south western corner and village centre area of the Western Precinct in mid 2009, with development expected to continue for up to 10 years. Filling works in the Central Precinct are expected to commence in 2009/10 with subdivision and development works commencing in 2012/13, and development expected to continue for an 8-10 year period.

Implementation Workshops

Joint implementation workshops will be held with Delfin and staff from Council’s Environmental Planning, Development Services, Community and Cultural Services and Design and Technical Advice Departments.

Submission of Concept Plans and Staged Development Applications

Delfin has agreed to a Council request to lodge a precinct ‘Concept Plan’ showing preliminary road layout, land uses etc. with the first subdivision DA for relevant ‘sub-precincts’ within the precinct.

Village Centre Concept Plan

A Village Centre Concept Plan will be lodged with the first relevant Village Centre DA. Delfin has proposed to involve Council in the first Village Centre Workshop.

The Northern Road

Delfin will continue to investigate with its noise consultants the range of treatment options and where they might apply along The Northern Road. Treatment options along The Northern Road interface will be addressed in the Landscape Master Plan to be submitted with the first subdivision DA.

Monitoring Process

A monitoring process will be established which includes a Dwelling Yield Plan which allows Council to monitor dwelling densities and dwelling numbers as the site develops.

Planning Agreement

At its Ordinary Meeting of 15 December 2008, Council resolved to endorse the finalisation, public notification and signing of a Deed of Variation to the St Marys Penrith Planning Agreement and to have the Deed signed in the appropriate manner following public notification. The Agreement is the principal means for identifying infrastructure requirements, facilities and services which will be delivered for the incoming community. As such, a Section 94 Development Contributions Plan is not proposed for the site, and accordingly the current Department of Planning review of local developer contributions does not at this stage apply, particularly given the total contributions outlined in the Agreement do not exceed the threshold nominated in the Government’s new contributions policy.

Delfin has signed the Deed of Variation and it was subsequently placed on public notification from 23 December 2008 to 30 January 2009. No submissions were received during that time.

Given the recent amendment to SREP 30 has now been formally made by the Minister for Planning, it would be appropriate for Council to sign the Deed following adoption of the Western and Central Precinct Plans.

Conclusion

The draft Western and Central Precinct Plans submitted by Delfin represent the final development Precincts within the St. Marys Release Area. This will provide well planned, sustainable urban communities with appropriate provision for the full range of community and other infrastructure required to support their establishment. The consolidated Employment Precinct within the Central Precinct will make a notable contribution to delivering new employment opportunities in conjunction with the nearby Dunheved employment Precincts.

The development will include well designed village centres, an appropriate urban structure and road network, a wide range of housing options required to create a diverse community and an open space master plan providing a distribution and quantum that will meet the needs of the new community. The development meets the objectives of Council’s Sustainability Blueprint for Urban Release Areas. The proposal would also be a notable contributor to the delivery of Council’s housing and jobs targets assigned under the State Government’s Metropolitan Strategy for Sydney and North West Subregional Strategy.

The public submissions made to the exhibition of the draft Western and Central Precinct Plans have been carefully assessed and it is considered that the issues raised have been effectively dealt with in relation to the proposals advanced by Delfin and the amendments proposed to be made to the draft Precinct Plans. The submissions received from the State Government authorities have also been appropriately addressed and the relevant aspects identified incorporated in the amended draft Precinct Plans.

The infrastructure requirements for the Western and Central Precincts have been finalised and signed off by Delfin and the Deed of Variation may now be signed by Council and entered into by Council.

Accordingly, it is recommended that Council adopt the Western and Central Precinct Plans with the amendments agreed to by the proponent as outlined in the report.

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1. The information contained in the report on St Marys Release Area - Public Exhibition of draft Western and Central Precinct Plans be received.

2. In accordance with the provisions of Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No 30 – St Marys, Council adopt the Western Precinct Plan and Central Precinct Plan with the amendments agreed to by the proponent, as outlined in the report.

3. Council write to all public authorities, Blacktown City Council and other persons who made submissions to the public exhibition for the draft Western and Central Precinct Plans advising them of Council’s decision.

4. Delfin Lend Lease be advised of Council’s decision.

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1.	St Marys Precinct Plan	1 Page	Attachment
2.	St Marys WCP framework plan	1 Page	Attachment
3.	Summary of Public Authority submissions	10 Pages	Attachment
4.	Summary of Public Submissions	15 Pages	Attachment
5.	Key Amendments to the Draft Western and Central Precinct Plans	4 Pages	Attachment

*Policy Review Committee Meeting*	*9 March 2009*
*The City as a Social Place*

The City as a Social Place

Caddens draft Local Environmental Plan and draft Development Control Plan

Compiled by: Anthony Milanoli, 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.

Purpose:

To outline the results of the public exhibition of the Caddens draft LEP and draft DCP and present amendments to the plan for consideration by Council. The report recommends that the amended versions of the draft plans be adopted by Council, that the draft LEP be forwarded for gazettal, that the draft DCP take effect upon gazettal of the LEP and that respondents to the exhibition be advised of Council's resolution.

Procedural note: Section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993 requires that a division be called in relation to this matter.

Executive Summary

On 5 May 2008, Council resolved to adopt for public exhibition the Caddens draft Local Environmental Plan and draft Development Control Plan. The draft plans are intended to guide development of the new urban area of Caddens. Caddens is located between Caddens Road and the University of Western Sydney, Kingswood and is a sub-precinct of the Werrington Enterprise Living and Learning (WELL) Precinct. Caddens will accommodate residential, recreation, commercial, water management and environmental conservation land uses.

The draft plans were exhibited between 23 September 2008 and 31 October 2008. In addition to this formal exhibition, a Community Information Day was held. In response to the public exhibition 21 submissions were received from the public and 4 from government agencies or institutions. The primary issues raised in submissions related to traffic and transport matters, clarifying selected development standards and achieving consistency between the Caddens draft plans and the provisions of State planning directions and the City-wide local environmental plan.

The review of submissions reveals that minor amendments are required to the exhibited plans to address some of the matters raised. None of the amendments proposed would require re-exhibition of the draft plans. New planning amendments introduced by the Department of Planning (DoP) since the exhibition of the draft plans may impact on outcomes within Caddens. These State planning amendments relate to Development Contributions and the new Housing Code for detached dwellings. Rather than deferring further progress on the draft plans whilst we await resolution of the impact of the new State initiatives (which may take a further 6 months) this report recommends progressing the draft LEP and draft DCP and carrying out amendments at a later stage if necessary. Subject to Council endorsement of the amended draft plans, the next step in the process involves forwarding the adopted Caddens LEP to the Department of Planning for gazettal and holding the adopted DCP in abeyance until gazettal, after which time development proposals may be received.

The proposed amended draft LEP and DCP as discussed in the report will be tabled at the meeting. Copies of the documents are also available at tonight’s meeting.

Background

Caddens Release Area is a sub-precinct of the Werrington Enterprise Living and Learning (WELL) Precinct and has been the subject of extensive planning for its urban development. Caddens will comprise around 1,247 new dwellings supported by a new local shopping centre, recreation facilities and required supporting infrastructure, along with an environmental conservation area along Werrington Creek and its tributaries.

On 5 May 2008, following consideration of a report seeking to publicly exhibit a draft Local Environmental Plan and draft Development Control Plan for Caddens, Council resolved that :

1. The information contained in the report on Caddens draft Local Environmental Plan and draft Development Control Plan be received.

2. In accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and associated Regulations, Council submit the draft Caddens Release Area Local Environmental Plan to the Director-General of the Department of Planning seeking the issue of a Section 65 certificate to enable the draft Plan to be publicly exhibited.

3. In accordance with the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act, 1979 and associated Regulations, a draft amendment to Penrith Development Control Plan 2006 to incorporate the development controls relating to Caddens Release Area be publicly exhibited.

4. Landcom and the other landowners within the Caddens Release Area be advised of Council’s decision and of the importance of achieving a suitable outcome for delivery of affordable housing across the whole of the release area.

In accordance with Council’s resolution, a section 65 Certificate to permit exhibition of the draft LEP was sought and subsequently authorised by the Department of Planning (DoP) on

1 August 2008.

Due to the local government elections in September 2008, the Department of Local Government advised that Council should not conduct any activity on major policy-related matters pre or post the election period. In response to this instruction, exhibition of the draft plans was deferred until late September 2008.

Exhibition of the draft LEP and draft DCP

The Caddens draft LEP and the draft DCP were exhibited between 23 September 2008 and 31 October 2008. The exhibition material was displayed at Council’s Penrith Civic Centre and the St Marys Queen Street Centre during this period. The exhibition material was also placed on Council’s website. Notice of the exhibition was provided by way of an advertisement in the local press and community notification by letter to 3,091 owners and occupiers in Kingswood, Orchard Hills and Claremont Meadows – neighbouring suburbs which may be impacted upon by development of land affected by the draft plans.

In addition to this formal notification, a Community Information Day was held on Saturday 18 October 2008 at the Claremont Meadows Community Centre between 10am and 4pm. Fifty three people attended the Community Information Day. Over the course of the exhibition twenty five phone calls regarding the draft plans were received, along with several counter inquiries.

In response to the public exhibition and Community Information Day, 21 (twenty one) written submissions were received from the general public and four from government agencies or institutions (Integral Energy, Sydney Water, the Deerubbin Aboriginal Land Council and Landcom).

Assessment of Submissions

Set out below is a summary of the major issues arising from the submissions and our assessment of those matters. A complete set of submissions received by Council in response to the public exhibition is tabled and available for viewing at tonight’s meeting. A detailed response to each of the issues raised by the general public is contained in the attachments to this report.

Traffic and transport related issues summary

· The existing road network and traffic management measures are inadequate to accommodate additional traffic and will impact on the amenity of existing neighbourhoods

· Caddens Road closures will adversely impact on existing resident access and future cycle access

· Uncertainty as to some access arrangements (is O’Connell Lane open ?)

· Potentially unsafe vehicle movement along Caddens Road (especially on crests) and at Angophora Rd intersection

· Bus routes proposed are inconsistent with those proposed by the Ministry of Transport

· Walking paths should be considered

· The Transport Management Accessibility Plan premises and conclusions are inappropriate

· Werrington Arterial is unconfirmed, Caddens should not proceed without it

· Caddens Release Area traffic should not be able to access Caddens Rd in order to limit impact

· Traffic modelling/studies are outdated or need to be more detailed

· Traffic accidents will increase due to extra traffic from new residents

· Additional parking demand will be created and more parking will be required

· Traffic calming and control measures are required (e.g. speed humps, speed limits, earth mounding)

· Development potential in Orchard Hills will be reduced due to the closure of Caddens Road

Comments

Council’s Transport Planner and Design and Technical Advice Department have reviewed the submissions. In summary, they advise that:

· The road pattern and transport management measures proposed in the draft Caddens LEP and DCP were determined following conclusion of a Transport Management Accessibility Plan for the WELL Precinct (of which Caddens is a sub precinct) and application of State and Council standards to the particular circumstances within Caddens.

· The traffic modelling indicates that the measures proposed in the LEP and DCP and the new traffic/transport infrastructure funded by the WELL Development Contribution Plan, will adequately accommodate even the worst case scenarios that were modelled for the road network.

· The TMAP for the estate has identified the need for the development of a section of the Werrington Arterial between the M4 and Dunheved Road. The TMAP has recommended an apportionment of the cost of those works to the estate. This apportionment will inform the State Infrastructure Contribution which has yet to be resolved by the Department of Planning.

Council has received a pre-election commitment from the Federal Government for an allocation of $7M towards a staged implementation of the above section of the Arterial. The RTA is currently developing concept plans for east facing ramps on the M4 and minimal upgrading of Gipps Street to the Highway as the initial works. The RTA is preparing a cost estimate for these works and Council is continuing negotiations with the Authority regarding the initial funding of the shortfall. These negotiations recognise that the estate will make contributions to the arterial road as it develops and further upgrades are required.

· The new traffic-related works proposed in and around Caddens will improve safety and not limit practical and reasonable vehicle access, including along Caddens Road.

· Regional and local roads that require upgrading as a result of development at Caddens and other release areas have been identified for future works to meet demand as it arises

· No road closures will limit through movement by bicycles or pedestrians.

· Bus routes proposed in the DCP do vary from those in the Ministry of Transport’s proposed new bus routes, however these MoT routes will ultimately be amended to reflect eventual development patterns in Caddens.

· All new roads through Caddens will incorporate footpaths.

· Land in Orchard Hills on the southern side of Caddens Road has for decades been included in the Regional Environmental Plan No 9 for conservation as agricultural land. It has also been identified in stage 1 of the city-wide Penrith Local Environmental Plan to continue its agricultural and rural-living role. The design limitations of Caddens Road mean that it is not intended that it be widened to carry more traffic, rather its role is to be restricted to permit only local access rather than enhanced through-traffic flow. This approach specifically addresses safety concerns.

Having reviewed all submissions - and on the basis of the analysis undertaken, growth in traffic projected and the new traffic and transport management measures proposed - Council’s Design and Technical Advice Department confirms no amendments to the draft LEP or draft DCP are necessary.

Summary of major planning-related issues and comments

Planning related issues raised in submissions have been summarised and grouped below, followed by staff comment on the matters:

Caddens-Orchard Hills relationship

· Integration or transition between rural Orchard Hills and suburban / residential Caddens is required through a 20m wide strip along Caddens Road from Heritage Court to Ulm Street

Comments:

· The visual transition between Orchard Hills and Caddens will be achieved through a requirement for compatible development (larger, wider lots with greater setbacks and increased landscaped areas, fence styles) and a landscaped loop road which will provide a visual break between the two areas.

Flood prone land

· The plans would permit development in flood prone areas (1:100 year event)

Comments:

· A small portion of the western precinct has a minor flood affection along an existing creekline. Development of the limited number of sites in flood prone areas will be above the 1 in 100 year flood event, consistent with Council flood policy requirements.

Precinct Centre implications

· The new shopping centre will impact on the economic viability of Claremont Meadows shops

· Limiting the size of the Precinct Centre will limit retail choice for consumers and related standards should be clearer

· built to the boundary requirements for the Precinct Centre should be amended to provide more flexibility in Precinct Centre design

Comments:

· An economic impact analysis was carried out for the proposed Precinct Centre. This analysis led to the limiting of the scale of the Centre to 10,000 sq.m in order to ensure its scale is consistent with Council’s adopted the Penrith City retail hierarchy. The analysis reveals the Claremont Meadows Shopping Centre will not be unreasonably impacted upon by the new Precinct Centre if the floorspace limit is applied.

· The economic impact analysis described above confirmed that a centre size of 10,000 sq.m would permit a full sized supermarket and complete range of supporting specialty shops (butcher, baker, chemist, hairdresser, newsagent, fruit shop, takeaway food stores, etc) along with space for commercial office suites. There is also scope for a secondary supermarket such as Aldi or IGA. This is considered to offer ample consumer access to a wide variety of retailers.

· Built to the boundary streetscapes are a traditional and successful built form for urban shopping centres and are an integral element in achieving coherent, active, legible streetscapes that define the public realm. This built form standard also minimises the extent to which setback areas are utilised for unattractive parking areas, unsafe/hidden areas and places where waste can collect. The control has however been amended to provide for the creation of public squares/piazzas to enhance the public domain and overall attractiveness of the precinct centre.

LEP aims, objectives, consistency with State planning standards

· The aims of the draft LEP require amendment to be more specific, more objective and not duplicate requirements of higher order planning instruments such as SEPPs.

· The land use table objectives in the LEP should be consistent with the intent of the zone

· Development standards for sustainability duplicate requirements of the NSW Building Sustainability Index (BASIX) and EP&A Act requirements and should be deleted from the LEP. Sustainability terminology should be replaced with “ecological sustainability”.

· The objective for the Land Use table for the Residential R1 zone in the LEP may be too restrictive and inconsistent with other objectives and should be amended to provide more flexibility.

Comments:

· For the sake of consistency , the aims and objectives contained in the Caddens draft LEP were largely modelled on those of recent comparable LEPs (including Glenmore Park Stage 2 and South Werrington Urban Village). With recent changes to the DoP template for local environmental plans and the looming Penrith City-wide stage 2 LEP (which will be presented to Council later in 2009 and which will apply to Residential zones), it is recognised that amendments to the Caddens LEP aims will be necessary. The draft LEP aims have therefore been amended to achieve the consistency and lack of duplication sought by the respondent.

· Since exhibition of the draft Caddens LEP, the city-wide LEP clause upon which the Caddens LEP sustainability clause was based has been amended. References to BASIX are now deleted. Additionally, the principles of sustainability listed in the Caddens LEP sustainability clause go beyond the residential-only building efficiency standards required by BASIX (e.g. adaptive re-use of buildings, reduction in car dependence). These principles are then used as the basis for “lifting the bar” provisions in the city wide DCP provisions which potentially offer variation in development standards if the applicant can demonstrate achieving a higher level of outcome on sustainability grounds. It is inappropriate to limit the plan to “ecological sustainability” as this fails to include economic and social sustainability, which Council has adopted as its vision for the city. The Caddens draft LEP sustainability clause will be amended to be consistent with the new city-wide clause only.

· We recognise that given the variety of dwelling types that may occur in the Residential R1 zone, the objectives need to be amended. Such amendment will still achieve the desired built form outcome irrespective of the dwelling type constructed. The draft LEP is proposed to be amended accordingly.

Salinity map

· A salinity map should be included in the LEP

Comments:

· An indicative salinity constraints map is included in the Caddens draft DCP, which is considered the more appropriate location for this data as it is contains more detailed salinity management controls than apply in the LEP.

Development Contributions

· Development Contributions for Caddens should be reasonable to reflect market realities and keep housing affordable

Comments:

· The draft LEP and draft DCP do not prescribe development contribution rates, however the rates in the adopted WELL Precinct Development Contributions Plan - which apply to Caddens - are based on extensive research, are reasonable, address the needs of new communities and have been endorsed by Caddens development proponents (Landcom and the University of Western Sydney).

Non-residential development in residential zones – heights and dwelling yields

· Draft LEP and DCP standards regarding building height should be amended so that the height of non-residential buildings is not unintentionally restricted

· The proposed dwelling yield in the DCP is too inflexible and should be redrafted to respond to potential non-residential development and reduce required yields in Precinct B of Caddens.

Comments:

· Height controls for non-residential land uses (e.g. churches) are likely to incorporate elements (such as church steeples or clock towers, etc) which will exceed the 9 metre limit. These features are traditional and expected elements in new estates. It is proposed to amend the LEP clause to incorporate an allowance for the particular requirements of these land uses.

· We recognise that non-residential land uses (such as schools or churches) may occupy some of the land zoned for residential, thereby limiting the Caddens’ sub-precinct’s ability to meet the minimum dwelling yields. In view of this possibility, it is considered that the DCP clause should be amended to require these yields on a pro-rata basis for the land being developed for residential purposes. The draft DCP has been amended accordingly

Zero lot line sites

· Controls in the DCP relating to minimum lot sizes, dwelling density and properties which may have zero lot lines need amending to be clearer and not reduce possible property values.

Comments:

· We consider it important to provide clear advice to purchasers regarding potential development outcomes (such as built to boundary walls) that may impact on a buyer’s perception of the enjoyment of their site. At the time of a house or lot purchase no proposals may exist for neighbouring sites – or indeed the intentions of owners of neighbouring sites may change across the life of the property. Accordingly, in the interest of full disclosure as to future possibilities, no amendment of the DCP is proposed

Noise and air pollution

· The new development will generate additional noise

· DCP noise pollution mounding controls for the western linear park should be amended to permit a combination of low mounding and low walls

· Properties in Kingscote Place are in a gully and the pollution from trucks, buses and cars using the new Caddens estate collector road will settle at this low point

Comments:

· The minor additional noise associated with traffic at the western perimeter of Caddens will be ameliorated through appropriate acoustic measures incorporated in the western linear parkland.

· Mounding in the linear parkway has been restricted in order to ensure there is sufficient area to accommodate recreation opportunities (street furniture, cycleway, plantings, play equipment, etc) and is perceived as safe. Mounding would preclude these positive outcomes. The draft DCP design controls for the parkland have been endorsed by Council’s Landscape Architect. It is not considered appropriate to amend these provisions of the DCP.

· No evidence of any localised air pollution was indicated in the Environmental Studies carried out for the WELL Precinct or for the Caddens estate. Council’s Environmental specialists have not indicated such an outcome is likely

Heritage

· The heritage significance of No.2 Caddens Road will be reduced by views of the new estate

Comments:

· No 2 Caddens Road is a farm house listed as a locally significant heritage item. The Council heritage specialist advises that the curtilage of the heritage item does not extend beyond its property boundary. There will be no reduction in the heritage significance of the house arising from the development of Caddens as it is already adjoined by other dwellings and extensions to the heritage listed farm house itself.

Miscellaneous issues

· There are typographic errors and inconsistencies in some of the standards in the DCP

Comments:

· Typographic errors and inconsistencies in the draft LEP and draft DCP have been corrected.

Public Agency responses to the exhibition

Submissions were received from Landcom, Integral Energy, Sydney Water and the Deerubbin Local Aboriginal Land Council. The issues raised by Landcom (the rezoning proponent) have been examined in the immediately preceding section of this report. The responses of other agencies are summarised below :

Integral Energy

Whilst existing electrical infrastructure is unable to supply the proposed development a new substation in Claremont Meadows to be commissioned in 2010 will provide supply. Prior to any Development Consent Integral Energy should be consulted to ensure power supply will be available at the appropriate time.

Sydney Water

Water and wastewater services are available to the site but minor amplification will be required prior to development to ensure water pressure meets requirements. Recycled Water schemes are currently being investigated for provision in the WELL Precinct. If any amplification or changes to service delivery arrangements are required these will be determined after the developer makes application for a section 73 Certificate from Sydney Water. Landscaping works should consider use of species that will limit damage to water pipes.

Deerubbin Local Aboriginal Land Council

The Land Council has no objection to the developer making an application to the Department of Environment and Climate Change (DECC) for a permit to excavate the sites. A condition of any permit for excavations should require Land Council participation in the excavation work and transfer of any cultural heritage material to the Australian Museum. Land Council representatives should also be present on site prior to any activity that will disrupt the soil.

Comments on Agency submissions

The matters raised in the responses from the government agencies and Aboriginal Land Council are standard requirements associated with development of new urban areas and do not affect the content of the draft LEP and draft DCP for Caddens.

Legislative changes that impact upon the draft plans

Since the exhibition of the draft plans two significant pieces of legislation have been released by the DoP which may impact upon the content of the Caddens plans. The amendments relate to the development contribution process and the release of a State Environmental Planning Policy regarding a new “Model Housing Code”. The implications of these new documents are detailed below:

Changes to the Development Contributions Planning Process

On 1 July 2008 Council adopted a Development Contributions Plan for the WELL Precinct. This Plan applies to Caddens, which is a sub-precinct of the wider WELL Precinct. Under the WELL Contributions Plan, the development contribution per additional lot in Caddens (depending upon the catchment) is between $44,905 and $48,749. On 23 January 2009 the DoP released a Circular and a Ministerial Direction which outlines an intention to limit development contributions to $20,000 per new lot or additional dwelling. Councils will have an opportunity to request variation from this contribution cap. Council has advised the DoP it will be seeking a variation to enable the WELL Contributions Plan to be maintained in order to ensure all the facilities essential to meet the basic needs of the new community will be met.

If Council is forced to limit contributions to $20,000 per new lot/dwelling there would be practical implications for both the Caddens draft LEP and the draft DCP. A $20,000 limit may mean some facilities funded under the Contributions Plan for which zones have been allocated (e.g. drainage or local open space) may need to be amended. This process may necessitate re-exhibition of the draft LEP to identify new requirements if changes arising from the contributions plans review have significant implications.

The concerns described above will be raised with the DoP in our forthcoming discussions with them regarding the new Contributions Policy.

Caddens Voluntary Planning Agreement

An issue related to the $20,000 development contributions cap is the matter of the Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA) Council has negotiated with Landcom. The VPA involved Landcom contributing $337,000 towards the provision of affordable housing and transferring to Council land it owns within the Environmental Conservation zone. The Caddens VPA with Landcom was adopted by Council on 1 December 2008 and placed on Notification between 16 December 2008 and 30 January 2009. Neither Council nor Landcom have yet signed the VPA.

The initial announcement from the DoP (on 23 December 2008) regarding the Contributions Plan review suggested that all contributions, including those relating to VPAs, would be considered when the DoP’s Contributions Plan Review Panel examined contributions. Since this announcement, Landcom (by letter dated 16 February 2009) has advised that whilst it intends to proceed with the VPA it has “resolved to act with caution to ensure that its dealings are consistent with the Minister’s directions on the matter”. Outlining its commitment to a contribution of $337,000 for affordable housing, Landcom states that “this commitment is subject to any direction by the Minister that might preclude Landcom from completing any commitment made in the VPA”. The letter further states that Landcom has recently written to Council outlining “its opposition to the mechanism of subsidising the provision of affordable housing through payment of a contribution”. A copy of Landcom’s letter regarding its commitment to the VPA is attached to this report.

The provision of affordable housing is a requirement of Council’s adopted Sustainability Blueprint, which guides consideration of the merit of rezoning new urban release areas. Consistent with the Blueprint requirements, Council’s resolution in relation to the exhibition of the draft LEP and draft DCP stated:

That Landcom and the other landowners within the Caddens Release Area be advised of Council’s decision and of the importance of achieving a suitable outcome for delivery of affordable housing across the whole of the release area.

In the case of Caddens, affordable housing for low and very low income households was to be achieved by both market provision (in the form of small new dwellings) and a financial contribution by Landcom. Accordingly, any failure by a rezoning proponent to ensure affordable housing for very low income households would represent a departure from the requirements of the Sustainability Blueprint. In light of this, it is appropriate that this matter be brought to Council’s attention prior to its final deliberation on the Caddens draft LEP and draft DCP.

The matter of affordable housing provision in Caddens remains unresolved until Landcom has signed the VPA. It is worth noting however, that in the case of the comparable recent LEP applying to Glenmore Park Stage 2, Council accepted the proponent’s written commitment to contribute towards the provision of affordable housing without actual signature of a VPA. On this basis, accepting Landcom’s letter of commitment to contribute to affordable housing would be consistent with its recent resolution in relation to Glenmore Park Stage 2.

The NSW Model Housing Code SEPP

On 27 February 2009 a new State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) entitled “NSW Housing Code – Guide to development for detached housing” came into force. This Code will apply to a large percentage of new dwellings that are constructed within Caddens (ie, those on lots over 450m²). The impact of the new Code for development within Caddens is that it will take precedence over the standards contained in the Caddens DCP for such housing. The new NSW Code will specify minimum standards which, if satisfied, will mean the development can be described as complying.

In general, the standards contained in the new NSW Housing Code will be consistent with those contained in the Caddens draft DCP. Several of the Code’s minimum standards however – particularly those relating to front setback, side setback and the principal private open space – are less than the Caddens draft DCP as it applies to lots fronting Caddens Road . These lots represent the transitional interface area between the new estate and the established non-urban Orchard Hills area. For example, lots fronting Caddens Road must have side setbacks of 2 metres under Council’s DCP but only 0.9 metres under the new NSW Code. Front setbacks under the Caddens DCP are 6 metres for lots fronting Caddens Road, but only 4.5 metres under the NSW Housing Code. The DoP has advised that councils may seek exclusion from the SEPP or variation from the standards applying to front and side setbacks and principal private open space. The higher standards mandated in the Caddens draft DCP for lots fronting Caddens Road are intended to achieve a better relationship between the newer urban areas and the established rural areas of Orchard Hills. This will be achieved via more spacious, landscaped settings for the new dwellings more akin to their rural neighbours than typical suburban subdivisions. The new NSW Housing Code also specifies different standards for front fences and does not require them to be setback and landscaped. This standard cannot be the subject of a variation request.

In light of the implications of the new NSW Housing Code on the new lots fronting Caddens Road, this report suggests that Council seek variation from the NSW standards applying to front and side setbacks and Principal Private Open Space. The DoP has advised that submissions for variations must be lodged by an as yet unspecified date in March 2009. Councils with DCPs achieving variations from the NSW Code standards described above will be announced around mid 2009. If Council endorses the draft Caddens DCP an application for the variation will be sought. In the meantime, it is considered prudent to continue progressing the draft DCP rather than await the determination of the variation request by the DoP.

Amendments to the exhibited draft plans

Having considered submissions made by the public, public agencies and Council staff and having reviewed the exhibited plans and recent legislative changes, a number of amendments to the plan are considered warranted. The proposed amendments are summarised below:

a. Typographic corrections and consistency amendments – these amendments relate to minor corrections to text to ensure grammatical accuracy and consistency in standards throughout the exhibited draft plans. These amendments include ensuring the DoP’s LEP template requirements are satisfied and consistency with the Penrith City-wide LEP and DCP provisions are achieved where appropriate. The date of the plan has also been amended to read “2009”.

b. Refining objectives for residential zones to respond to the variety of land uses permissible within the zone.

c. Amending height limitations in the Caddens draft LEP and DCP to accommodate traditional building features expected in non-residential land uses (such as schools and churches).

d. Revising the dwelling yield standards in the Caddens draft DCP to achieve compliance on a pro-rata, site area basis rather than being precinct wide, in recognition that non-residential land uses (such as churches) may occur in these precincts.

e. Precinct Centre design standard variations to enable the creation of setback areas for attractive public domain features such as piazzas.

f. Revising clauses and standards in the draft LEP applying to flood prone land to be consistent with the city-wide LEP

g. Including limitations in the draft LEP on the location of restricted premises

h. Updating definitions of land uses to reflect recent DoP LEP template changes

The amendments described above are not considered sufficiently significant as to warrant re-exhibition of the draft plans. If further amendments are required as a result of the recent planning legislation requirements described earlier, a further report will be presented to Council discussing the implications, including whether re-exhibition would be required.

The next steps in progressing these draft plans

If the amended draft LEP is endorsed by Council, the next steps in process involve forwarding it to the DoP for consideration, review by Parliamentary Counsel and the Minister and subsequent gazettal. Gazettal of the draft LEP is likely to take at least several months from the date it is referred to the DoP. In relation to the Caddens draft DCP, if the amended plan is adopted by Council it will be held in abeyance until gazettal of the draft LEP, after which time it will take effect.

In the period leading up to gazettal of the draft LEP, if the matters relating to development contributions, voluntary planning agreements or the NSW Model Housing Code are considered likely to adversely impact on the Caddens draft plans, a further report will be presented to Council to seek a resolution on further action.

Conclusion

Caddens has been earmarked by the State and Council as a future Urban Release Area for many years. The incorporation of Caddens into the WELL Precinct has enabled planning for the estate to be carried out in a holistic manner, consistent with the principles of Council’s Sustainability Blueprint for Urban Release Areas.

The development of Caddens will create a new community offering a variety of housing choice set in an environment providing high quality recreation, community, commercial, employment and ecological conservation opportunities with close connection to the University and TAFE. Progressing the Caddens draft LEP and draft DCP will not only provide clear guidelines to achieve desirable physical, social and economic outcomes, but also enable Council to meet its obligations to the State to accommodate envisaged local and metropolitan growth. Whilst there are some uncertainties relating to new State planning initiatives which may have implications for Caddens, there are considerably greater benefits in bringing to fruition a critical component of the WELL Precinct Concept Plan. In light of the above, this report recommends Council adopt the Caddens amended draft LEP and draft DCP.

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Caddens draft Local Environmental Plan and draft Development Control Plan be received.

2. The amended versions of the Caddens draft Local Environmental Plan and draft Development Control Plan, as tabled at the meeting, be adopted by Council in accordance with the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act (as amended) and Regulation.

3. In accordance with s68 (4) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 (as amended), the Caddens draft Local Environmental Plan be forwarded to the Department of Planning and the Minister for Planning be requested to make the plan.

4. In the event minor amendments to the Caddens draft Local Environmental Plan are required to be made by the Department of Planning’s review of the instrument, Council authorises such amendments.

5. The Caddens draft Development Control Plan take effect upon gazettal of the Caddens draft Local Environmental Plan.

6. Council seek variation from the operation of NSW Housing Code for lots within Caddens which front Caddens Road in order to achieve an appropriate transition between the new urban areas of Caddens and the established non urban area of Orchard Hills.

7. All those who made written submissions regarding the draft plans be thanked for their representations and advised of Council’s resolution.

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1.	Caddens draft LEP	71 Pages	Attachment
2.	Caddens draft DCP	97 Pages	Attachment
3.	Summary of Submissions	15 Pages	Attachment
4.	Landcom letter of 16-2-09	1 Page	Attachment
5.	Caddens draft LEP flood extent map	1 Page	Attachment
6.	Caddens draft LEP height of buildings map	1 Page	Attachment
7.	Caddens draft LEP land application map	1 Page	Attachment
8.	Caddens draft LEP land reservation acquisition map	1 Page	Attachment
9.	Caddens draft LEP land zoning map	1 Page	Attachment
10.	Caddens draft LEP lot size map	1 Page	Attachment

*Policy Review Committee Meeting*	*9 March 2009*
*The City as a Social Place*

The City as a Social Place

Penrith City Children's Services Co-operative Ltd

Compiled by: Janet Keegan, Children's Services Manager - Operations

Authorised by: Janet Keegan, Children's Services Manager - Operations

Strategic Program Term Achievement: Services are provided to meet the diverse needs of families and to support the development of children.

Critical Action: Provide support for the Penrith City Children's Services Co-operative (PCCSC) to deliver Council's Children's Services to meet the current and emerging needs of families and children.

Presenters: Max Friend - Chairperson, Penrith City Children's Services Co-operative Ltd - Report on Sixth Annual General Meeting of the Board

Purpose:

To provide details to Council following the Sixth Annual General Meeting of the Penrith City Children's Services Co-operative (PCCSC). The Chairperson will be making a brief presentation to this meeting. The report recommends that the information be received and that Council underwrite the operations of the PCCSC for a further period of 12 months.

Background

The PCCSC was formed in 2003 to manage Long Day Care, Pre School and Out of School Hours services sponsored by Council. The structure is a Board of 15 members including 7 parent representatives, 3 Councillors, 1 staff representative, 3 community representatives and a representative of the General Manager. The Board meets on a bi-monthly basis and operates under Council delegation as a non-trading Entity. The Board looks at broad policy matters, sets the direction for Children’s Services and makes major decisions that affect the provision of children’s services. Parent Advisory Committees at each service level provide valuable input into the operational aspects of individual services.

The sixth Annual General Meeting of the Board was held in November 2008. The Chairperson of the Board will be in attendance tonight to make a short presentation which will focus on:

· The past Year

- Highlights

- Financial position

- Issues arising

· The Year Ahead

Following are reports extracted from the Annual Report.

Chairperson’s Report

It is with much pleasure that I present the Chairperson’s report to the sixth Annual General Meeting of the Penrith City Children’s Services Co-operative Ltd.

The Co-operative, as a non-trading entity, has a delegated role to manage Council sponsored Children’s Services. The Co-operative consists of representation from parents, staff, Councillors, the community and Council officers.

Following on from the previous year’s financial outcome, this year Children’s Services has had to face many challenges which have included increased market competition. A further significant challenge has been the employment of qualified staff, especially Early Childhood trained Teachers which is a challenge faced not only in Penrith. In an effort to address some of the challenges, the Board, along with the leadership and management team, have focussed attention on initiatives which will be discussed in this report.

During the year, Children’s Services has strengthened its business model approach to the management of centres. Regular reviews of centre performance have been undertaken with swift rectification action as required, e.g. matching staffing with utilisation.

Streamlining of processes and policies has continued in the last 12 months to achieve consistency in practice, maintain and improve upon corporate governance and ultimately to achieve the Vision and Mission of the Penrith City Children’s Services Co-operative. There have been many highlights within Children’s Services in the last 12 months and a snapshot of these is provided in the body of this report.

The permanent appointment of a Senior Human Resource Officer dedicated to Children’s Services has enabled ongoing progress in streamlining and strengthening HR practices.

The Board is committed to ensuring that facilities are upgraded to enable the provision of safe and aesthetically pleasing environments for children, families, staff and visitors. Some of these upgrades are listed below:

· Tamara building upgrade

· St Marys building upgrade

· Carita playground upgrade

· Werrianda playground upgrade

· Yoorami playground upgrade

· Softfall testing

· Stepping Stones playground design

· Tandara playground upgrade

· Internal painting x 3 services

· External painting x 1 service

· Carpet and vinyl replacement x 8 services

· Bus Replacements x 2

· Whitegood replacements to various centres

The total costs of upgrades in this financial year equates to approximately $993,557 (excluding Tamara).

Children’s Services has continued to maintain strong partnerships with external bodies to add value and to ensure our centres remain contemporary and of high quality. Some of those Partnerships are:

· University of Western Sydney Nepean – Professional Experience

· Macquarie University –STaR Project

· Department of Community Services –Building Relationships

· Brighter Futures

· MASC Project – IT in Cranebrook Project

· Corporate Partners for Change

· Braddock Play Time – Braddock Primary School and Connecting Cranebrook

Acknowledgement of Quality Services has been received through the following mechanisms:

· National Accreditation

· NSW Licensing

These achievements are a reflection of the dedication and motivation of our professional and experienced teams of staff who strive to achieve excellence in care delivery and education to the children and families who access our services.

Financial Results

This annual report presents two sets of financials. The first, statutory reports present the operation of the Co-operative as a separate legal entity, which is a non-trading Co-operative. The second are management reports detailing the operations of those services managed on behalf of Council for the year ending 30 June 2008.

The services managed by the Co-operative had an operating surplus from Ordinary Activities of $191,000 (2006/07 $224,000 deficit) compared to a budgeted surplus of $192,000. The surplus for 2007/08 was achieved from expenses from ordinary activities of $13,285,000 (2006/07 $12,953,000) an increase of 2.6% and revenues from ordinary activities of $13,476,000 (2006/07 $12,729,000) an increase of 5.4%.

Expenses from Ordinary Activities

Employee costs of $11,522,000 (2006/07 $11,299,000) an increase of 2.0%. Employee costs, excluding those costs funded by Grant programs, were under budget by $58,000. Employee costs represented 86.7% of the total cost of operating the services.

Expenditure on materials and contracts and other expenses were $1,684,000 (2006/07 $1,574,000) an increase of 7.0%.

The Out of School Hours services also have commitments to repay Capital expenditure undertaken by Penrith City Council for the provision of buses needed by the services to deliver children to and from school. These buses are funded on a rolling replacement program, which sees each bus replaced every five years; two buses are generally programmed for replacement each year. The centres have an annual commitment of $8,100 per centre. Kindana OOSH is also repaying funds advanced for extensions to the centre undertaken a number of years ago at the rate of $6,700 per year. The combined cost of these commitments for 2007/08 was $79,000.

Revenues from Ordinary Activities

Charges to parents for the provision of care were $7,362,000 (2006/07 $7,322,000) an increase of 5.5%. Government funding for Child Care Benefit and Economic Needs Funding was $4,394,000 (2006/07 $3,815,000) an increase of 15.2%. Combined revenues for the provision of care was $11,756,000 (2006/07 $11,137,000) an increase of 5.6%. This was however $339,000 below budget expectations.

Government grants utilised for operational and specific programs expenditure was $1,584,000 (2006/07 $1,477,000) an increase of 7.2%.

Utilisation rates are the key driver to revenue generation and financial viability of the services. For each service type the utilisations achieved in 2007/08 is listed below compared to the utilisation anticipated in the budget deliberations and the utilisation achieved for the 2006/07 financial year.

Service Type	2007/08 Utilisation	2007/08 Budget	2006/07 Utilisation
Long day care	89%	92%	86%
Pre-school	58%	60%	56%
B&A Care	75%	72%	67%
Vacation Care	65%	54%	51%

Penrith City Council Contributions

In addition to their ordinary activities the services managed by the Co-operative entered into arrangements with Penrith City Council for funding global expenditure programs to be funded from centre operations or reserves established before the creation of the Co-operative. These arrangements fall into one of two categories.

Contribution to “pools” of money held on behalf of the services for future purposes. These pools are detailed in note 8 within the Annual Report. The Co-operative’s commitment to add to these pools for 2007/08 was $249,000 (2006/07 $227,000).

The second category provides expenditure of pre Co-operative reserves or fundraising reserves for specific projects or programs. For the year ended 30 June 2008 the amount of funds spent from these reserves was $56,000 (2006/07 $251,000).

Despite budgeting for a surplus from Ordinary Activities of $192,000 the commitment to provide pooled funding of $257,000 resulted in a budgeted deficit of $65,000 for the Co-operative for the year. Penrith Council agreed to support the Co-operative by providing funding for this shortfall of $65,000 (2006/07 $69,000) in recognition of the community obligation provided on its behalf by the centres.

Penrith City Council also resolved during 2007/08 to provide additional funding of $220,000 to the Co-operative to help offset the deficit accumulated by the Co-operative during 2006/07.

These commitments between the Co-operative and the Council are reflected in the items shown in the Income Statement below the Surplus from Ordinary Activities and convert a $191,000 surplus into a $171,000 surplus.

Pre Co-operative reserves of $56,000 specifically held to fund expenditures and net fundraising reserves of $1,000 have been utilised during 2007/08. The utilisation of these reserves increases the Surplus reported to $228,000. Discounting this revised figure by the $220,000 from Penrith City Council to finance part of the 2006/07 deficits for the services produces an $8,000 surplus for the services managed by the Co-operative for the 2007/08 financial year. This is a pleasing result considering the under budgeted utilisations of both Long Day Care and Pre School services.

Conclusion

Penrith City Children’s Services believes strongly in the provision of quality services and, to ensure that this is delivered, continues to staff its centres above the required benchmarks. However, this is becoming a challenge with the National workforce shortage of suitably qualified staff. Maintaining a balance between services that are affordable and financially viable is high on the Co-operative’s agenda.

Affordability continues to be the driving factor for utilisation levels across all service types. Lobbying and advocacy continues to be on the Board’s agenda in an attempt to ensure that issues related to children’s services, and particularly issues related to the not for profit sector, are raised and continue to have a high profile.

Our continued compliance with Licensing Regulations and Accreditation Standards is testament to the skill, motivation and dedication of our centre staff and the support provided by the Internal Co-ordination Unit.

The Board is under no illusion that the year ahead will hold many challenges as we strive to ensure our services remain viable within a climate of increased competition, legislation and regulation requirements and the maintenance of a skilled workforce. Some impending changes also include changes in the operational funding provided by the Department of Community Services, the introduction of a new Food Safety Standard affecting Long Day Care and a review of the Children’s Services Regulations.

In concluding, I would like to thank the centre parent advisory committees who work to support individual centres at the grass roots level and my Board Co-Directors for their valuable input to the continued operations of the Penrith City Children’s Services Co-operative.

Finally, I would like to acknowledge the support of centre staff and the officers of the co-ordination unit who enable us to strive for excellence in service delivery and ensure quality services are maintained.

Children’s Services Manager Operations Report

It is with pleasure that I present the Children’s Services Manager Operations Report to the sixth Annual General Meeting of the Penrith City Children’s Services Co-operative Ltd.

During the year, the staffing structure for the Children’s Services Department was reviewed and a revised structure adopted.. It was determined that the position of Children’s Services Manager Operations (CSMO) will oversee the management of the Department as a whole and the position of Children’s Services Business Co-ordinator was created with responsibility for operational matters to support the CSMO and specified tasks and projects, e.g. business planning, financial planning and management, marketing and promotions. The appointment of a Management Accountant for Children’s Services and the permanent appointment of a Senior Human Resource Officer dedicated to Children’s Services completes the internal management team.

Other workforce initiatives during the 2007/08 financial year have included:

· The trial of a rotational staff member attached to a geographical cluster of services for backfill for planned staff absences (e.g. RDOs, annual leave). Not only has this achieved significant cost savings but has resulted in greater continuity and consistency of staffing at the centre level.

· A continuous advertisement on Council’s web site for Early Childhood trained Teachers. This has resulted in increased interest in Teacher vacancies.

· The employment of 17 trainees (including an ATSI trainee). Following their traineeships, these staff often progress to securing positions within Children’s Services, some going on to further study at TAFE and University.

· The Children’s Services Tertiary Bonus scheme with four employees enrolling for tertiary study.

· Participation in University and TAFE Open Days, career expos and student presentations to maintain our profile as an employer of choice.

· Involvement in the Corporate Partners for Change program which offers opportunity for training and subsequent workforce participation.

· Planning for the children’s services staff conference and celebration.

· Succession planning and opportunity for staff to take on higher grade duties.

This year staff members have been supported to professionally develop through internal and external workshops, conferences and in-service training. With the support of Council’s Educational Assistance Program a number of children’s services staff undertook studies in the 2007/08 financial year, some of which included:

· Diploma of Child Studies – 5 staff

· Bachelor of Teaching (Early Childhood) – 4 staff

· Bachelor of Education (Early Childhood) – 3 staff

· Post Graduate Certificate in Special Education – 3 staff

· Bachelor of Indigenous Studies – 1 staff

Council hosted an Evening of Recognition in February 2008 to acknowledge achievements of staff completing traineeships or a qualification under the Educational Assistance Program.

Children’s Services strengthened its partnership with the University of Western Sydney (UWS) during this period in a number of ways. One innovative strategy has been the Professional Experience program whereby students undertaking Early Childhood tertiary study are assigned to individual services for practicum and come together with Teachers and mentors for discussion and reflection. These students have the opportunity to submit expressions of interest for employment in children’s services following their studies. An application for a Research Partnership Grant with the UWS has been successful. This research will investigate perceptions of quality in early childhood across Penrith and has synergy with the children’s services curriculum renewal program being progressed.

Other partnerships adding value to the quality of service provision have included:

· Braddock play session (Braddock school and SPYNS)

· Active After School program (NSW Department of Sport and Recreation)

· Child Care Links (Federal Department of Employment, Education and Workforce Relations)

· Munch & Move (South West Area Health Service)

· Intervention Support Program (NSW Department of Education and Training)

· SCAN (Supporting Children with Additional Needs) funding (NSW Department of Community Services (DoCS)

In 2006/07 the Board adopted the Children’s Services five year business plan which underpins the Board’s Strategic Plan and is aligned to Council’s Management Plan. The business plan addresses the four key areas of leadership, people, resources and quality. Aligned to these four key areas are the financial, customer, business processes and learning and growth perspectives. A total of 21 projects have been progressed and/completed from the business plan during the year.

A number of initiatives have been undertaken during the reporting period to consolidate service delivery.

· Cooinda Pre School (Erskine Park) reduced to operating 3 days a week in an effort to maximise enrolments and ensure viability.

· Tandara Children’s Centre (South Penrith) became a cluster site from July 2008 with Pre School, Before School, After School and Vacation Care under the one model.

· Gumbirra Children’s Centre (St Clair) became a cluster site from January 2008 with Pre School, Before School and After School Care coming under the responsibility of a Cluster Director.

· St Marys Occasional Care Service (SMOCC) came under the management of the Board (in January 2008) upon its co-location with St Marys Children’s Centre. It is hoped that this will enable both services to remain viable.

Operational advocacy and lobbying has continued during this period. Opportunity was taken during the lead up to the Federal election in 2007 to lobby on children’s services issues and Koala Corner and Jamisontown Children’s Centres hosted visits by Ms Jenny Macklin, then Shadow Minister for Families and Community Services and Indigenous Affairs and Reconciliation. A children’s services issues paper was submitted when Federal Cabinet visited Penrith in April 2008.

Support to improve access for children with additional needs has been provided by the Commonwealth funded Inclusion Support Agency (ISA) through Inclusion Support Subsidies (ISS). This program builds the capacity of services through the development of service support plans to include children with additional needs into mainstream services. Through ISS funding, our services have supported 71 children to access Long Day Care (LDC) and Out of School Hours (OOSH) and Occasional Care services. ISS funding enables services to engage an additional staff member but there is a significant shortfall in the funding received and the cost of employing additional staff.

The vision of the Penrith City Children’s Services Co-operative is a “commitment to ensure early childhood experiences have a positive and profound outcome for the current and future development of Penrith City citizens who form our social and intellectual capital”. Programs such as the Inclusion Support Agency support this vision. Although these types of services come at a cost, research shows that one dollar invested in the early years has a seventeen dollar return on investment.

As indicated in the Chairperson’s report, utilisation of our services determines income levels. This year has seen the affect of market forces as the Penrith LGA has experienced increased competition from other providers. A marketing and promotions plan has been implemented to ensure our ‘point of difference’ and ‘not for profit’ status is promoted.

The leadership team has been working with centres and the Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) team to ensure that we provide safe environments for staff,

children and families. To this end, daily safety checks are carried out at the centre level and OH&S inspections are conducted by members of the OH&S committee of Council. Children’s Services management hold regular meetings with Council’s OHS and Injury Management Co-ordinator on safety and risk matters. It is pleasing to note that there has been a reduction in the number of Children’s Services workplace injuries for the 2007/08 period. There has been a spike in the number of injuries related to children with challenging behaviour and managing this risk is a high priority.

The coming year will see a number of known challenges.

· Consolidation of the rollout of the Child Care Management System (a Federal initiative linking children’s attendance and fee relief paid to families).

· Federal initiatives related to the National Quality Standards and the Early Years Learning Frameworks.

· Changes to funding.

· The new Food Authority Standard affecting LDC services.

· Marketing and promotions

· Maintaining utilisation

The Internal Co-ordination Unit and support staff will need to keep abreast of emerging issues so that sound change management practices are adopted and the quality of service provision sustained.

The management team would like to extend its thanks to the Board for its commitment, vision and support over the last 12 months. With the Board’s ongoing support and enthusiasm Penrith City Children’s Services will continue to strive for excellence in leadership, quality and safety across all services.

In conclusion, special thanks and acknowledgement must be extended to the children’s services centre staff for their hard work and commitment over this period. Without the dedication of our staff the service provided would not be at the level that meets expectations or that the community has come to expect.

Challenges Ahead for the Penrith City Children’s Services Co-operative

Throughout the past year, the Board of Directors has considered information on the current issues facing children’s services and has responded accordingly through budget measures, system changes and direct action, such as lobbying Commonwealth and State Governments in relation to funding matters.

The Board has recognised that a number of substantial and fundamental challenges lie ahead in the management and delivery of children’s services in the years to come. It has undertaken significant work to address many of these, including:

· Continuation of facility maintenance and upgrades to ensure compliance with legislative and regulatory requirements

· Lobbying Commonwealth and State Governments in relation to planning matters, funding issues and affordable fees

· Realigning the leadership and management team

· Implementation of a business model for children’s services

· Increased marketing to profile Children’s Services in the Penrith LGA

· Monitored adherence to the fee payment and billing policy

· A review of supplier management

· Maintaining a skilled and responsive workforce

There is no doubt that these are challenging and changing times for children’s services. In addition to the work already undertaken by the Board to address the financial operations, the following has since been achieved or is under consideration:

· Realignment of Cooinda Pre School operations to a three day a week model

· Investigations of the operations of Koolyangarra Pre School from a traditional Pre School model to a child and family model. (Until such time as a more appropriate and viable model is found, Koolyangarra Pre School ceases to exist.)

· Consolidation of the co-location of St Marys Children’s Centre and St Marys Occasional Child Care Centre (SMOCC)

· Development of cluster sites

· Robust accountability systems put in place and funding streams clearly identified and monitored for income and expenditure

· Rotational relief staff system implemented with substantial cost savings

· Development of a working paper including current and future demographic data and a review of current service provision, which will identify viable and non-viable services, and inform the way forward

· Lobbying of Federal Government re shortfall in ISS funding

· Maximising opportunities to apply for external grants

· Investigation of further economies of scale and purchasing power

· Global contract for procurement of consumables and cleaning products

Board of Directors

No significant changes in the state of affairs of the company occurred during the financial year. Council should note that, at the sixth Annual General Meeting, as per the Rules of the Penrith City Children’s Services Co-operative, Max Friend, Councillor Kaylene Allison, Linda Newman, Linda Gosbell, Trina Horder, Jo Jacobson and Stephen Squassoni were endorsed as continuing Directors. Mr Max Friend was re-appointed Chairperson and Stacey Parker, Deputy Chairperson. Council’s Director-City Services, Mr Steve Hackett, is the General Manager’s representative and Company Secretary.

Comment By Financial Accountant – Entities To PCCSC Ltd report

The Services managed by the Penrith City Children’s Services Co-operative Limited achieved a net surplus from Ordinary Activities for the year ended June 30 2008 of $191,000. This compared very favourably to the loss of $224,000 incurred the previous year.

This result was mainly achieved by reducing the cost of relief staff to the services by closely monitoring staffing levels to utilisations and by introducing an innovative system of rotational staff to cater for the planned absences of permanent staff. These changes reduced the cost of relief staffing for the services from $1,321,000 in 2006-07 to $932,000 in 2007-08. As mentioned by the Children’s Services Manager Operations report the introduction of the rotational staff has not only achieved significant cost savings but it has also resulted in greater continuity and consistency of staffing for the children within the centres.

The financial viability of the services continues to be threatened by a number of factors.

Maintaining utilisation levels is vital to the financial well being of the services. In 2007-08 Long Day Care and Preschool services both achieved below budgeted utilisation targets of 89% (92%) and 58% (60%) respectively although these levels were higher than the levels achieved in 2006-07 86% and 56%. Before and After School Care and Vacation care Services were able to achieve above their budgeted utilisation targets of 75% (72%) and 65% (54%) respectively. Both these achievements were also above the 2006-07 levels 67% and 51%. The current global economic crisis will continue to place considerable strain on achieving the budgeted utilisations. To date for 2008-09 Long Day Care and Preschool services have been able to meet their targets whilst Before and After School and Vacation Care are below their targets.

The State Government has announced a revised funding model for Pre schools. This new model – Resource Allocation Model (RAM) will result in reduced funding for a number of Council’s pre schools. Although the Government has assured those services adversely effected by the revised model that they will continue to receive funding at their 2007-08 levels for 5 years this guarantee makes no allowance for CPI based increases and will place financial strain on the affected services especially from 2012-13 when the reduced funding is implemented.

RECOMMENDATION

That:

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

2. Council agree to underwrite the operation of Penrith City Children’s Services Co-operative Ltd until the presentation to Council of the Penrith City Children’s Services Co-operative Ltd Annual Report for 2008/09.

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.

*Policy Review Committee Meeting - Urgent Report*	*9 March 2009*
*The City as a Social Place*

The City as a Social Place

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

Compiled by: Glenn Schuil, Senior Governance Officer

Authorised by: Stephen Britten, Group Manager - Legal & Governance

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

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

Presenters: Mr Peter Anderson AM - Chairman - Penrith Performing & Arts Visual Arts Ltd - Annual Report

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

Mr John Reed - Chief Financial Officer (Consulting)- Penrith Performing & Visual Arts Ltd - Annual Report

Purpose:

To provide details to Council following the third Annual General Meeting of the Penrith Performing and Visual Arts Ltd. The Chairperson, the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer (Consulting) will be making a brief presentation to this meeting. The report recommends that the information be received and that Council underwrite the operations of the Company for a further period of 12 months.

Background

The Chairperson of the Board, Mr Peter Anderson AM, together with the Chief Executive Officer, John Kirkman and Mr John Reed, Chief Financial Officer (Consulting) will be in attendance tonight to make a short presentation that will focus on :

· The Past year- highlights, financial position and issues arising.

· The year ahead

The Chief Executive Officer has provided the following report outlining the performance and activities of the Board for the last financial year.

2007-08 was a year of review and consolidation for PP&VA. Major focus for the year included:

- Continued review and revitalisation of PP&VA cultural programs

- Review of PP&VA financial management and operations

- Q Theatre Company funding and program revitalisation

- Funding and resource acquisition initiatives

- Staffing.

In the main the year was most productive, with the PP&VA project tracking well.

Highlights for 2007-08 include:

- Working with Mr.John Reed re the review and overhaul of PP&VA financial mangement procedures, systems and resources. This was a most valuable and productive exercise, with a range of new policies and reporting procedures initiated.

- Continiung partnerships with a range of premier Australian arts organisations/instituitions e.g. Australian Ballet, ABD Classic FM, 2MBS FM, Campbelltown Arts Centre, Performing Arts Museum (Melbourne) and Museum of Contemporary Art (Sydney).

- M/s. Lynn Vernon working with staff as a pro bono Sponsorship and Corporate Partnership consultant. M/s. Vernon’s work enabled PP&VA to commence the development of focused sponsorship and stratgeic partnership initiatives. Sponsorship is a particularly fraught, difficult and competitive area of arts activity. However, the current work with M/s. Vernon gives PP&VA a very good start in what will be a long (and difficult) process.

- The PP&VA staffing structure is now complete with the following positions filled:

1. Director – Visual Arts (Ms. Anne Loxley)

2. Director – Performing Arts (Ms. Katrina Douglas)

3. Chief Financial Officer (Consulting) Mr. John Reed

4. Financial Officer (M/s. Shand Smith) plus Financial Assistant P/T (Mr. Brett Smith).

Two major issues were of concern throughout 2007-08 i.e.

1. Resolution of ArtsNSW funding for the Q Theatre Company.

2. Deteriorating Thursday night security situation outside the JSPAC.

2007-08 Financial Result

The PP&VA 2007-08 financial result improved on the previous year’s performnace. However, the entity still incurred a deficit of $192,444, compared with the original budgeted surplus of $202,518. During the year the Board closely monitored its financial position during monthly Finance and Resources Subcommittee Meetings to minimise the financial impact to the Board. The Board’s Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson and the CEO met with Council’s senior finance staff on 9 April 2008 to discuss issues affecting the Board, including the proposed budget deficits for 2007/08 and 2008/09. It should be noted that the loss included:

- $111,049 for Depreciation.

- Only $100,000 was accrued for the Railway Street Theatre Company (RSTC). The total grant received totalled $150,000.

The Consulting Chief Financial Officer for the PP& VA has advised that in addition to the above two factors, the two main reasons for the variation from the initial budget position were as follows:

1. There was a shortfall of some $200,000 in Government and agency grants, which it appears could have been due to over estimating the likelihood of success with bids to be made;

2. The Q Theatre Company came under the umbrella of PP & VA in the 2008 Financial year, at a time well into the period. The budgets for the Q Theatre were

· Prepared well before the beginning of the 2007/08 year;

· Similar to the budget for estimated grants for the “Joan”, the estimated grant income and ticket sales income for the Q Theatre were in excess of what was actually received; and

· The expenses incurred in productions were less than budgeted (there was a reduction in the number of performances held from 145 in 2006/07 to 78 during 2007/08.

Mr Reed has also advised that there was recognition by the Board’s management that there was a need for additional staff resources within the Finance Division after the additional Entities (Q Theatre & the PRG & LB) were added to the operations. The additional staff appointed has ensured that better management information is now available to the staff and the Board.

Further Mr Reed has advised that a summary of the results for the seven months to January 2009 (see attached as Appendix 1) indicate that a surplus of $85,244 will be achieved against a budgeted profit of $64,029. Mr Reed is of the opinion that as at June 2009 the result will be in excess of the forecast surplus of $42,097.

In 2007-08 PP&VA financial operations focused on the following core activities:

- New financial management staffing structure.

- Implementing and refining new financial systems and procedures.

- PP&VA Board and Sub committee financial reporting.

- JSPAC, PRG&TLB and Railway Street Theatre Company audits.

- Accounts, payroll, BAS and superannuation.

- Budget reports for all grant applications and acquittals.

- Overseeing Box Office and Conservatorium financial procedures.

2007- 08 PP&VA Highlights

- Resolution of Q Theatre Company funding agreement with ArtsNSW.

- Expanded PP&VA artistic and education programs.

- New PP&VA marketing initiatives.

- Increased levels of positive print and electronic media coverage.

Future PP&VA Challenges

- Uncertain ArtsNSW funding Western Sydney projects.

- Facility maintenance and capital replacement.

- Amount of subsidy required to maintain buildings.

Mr Reed has advised that it was recognised that the Budget for the year 2008/09 needed to be revised with the requirement that PP&VA needed to turn the losses of the past into a profit. To this end, Mr Reed has advised that:

· Officers of the organisation met for a complete budget meeting to contribute to the revision of the budget process.

· the accounting system and the management reporting system was completely overhauled, which has resulted in the timely and meaningful production of reports

Please find the following reports from the Entities. In Appendix 2 of this Report are the statistics for the Penrith Performing & Visual Arts Ltd activities.

1. Joan Sutherland Performing Arts Centre

2007-08 saw the continued expansion of JSPAC cultural and education programs. Particular focus was given to new marketing and promotion activities aimed at building new audiences.

2007- 08 JSPAC Performance Program Report

JSPAC presented performances, concerts and events across a range of repetoires, styles and arts practice, and:

- Provided focus for school students across a range of areas, including: music appreciation, choral music, Australian theatre practice, Shakespearean theatre, musical theatre, literacy development, and world history.

- Offered special matinee performances, education enrichment workshops and lectures, work experience opportunities, photographic exhibitions, tours and syllabus specific study materials.

- Assisted teachers via Professional Development Days and education kits.

- Produced music and drama festivals.

- Provided programs for Seniors and people with a Disability

- Provided school holiday workshop programs, particularly in the development of instrumental skills.

2007- 08 JSPAC Highlights:

- Elena Kats-Chernin and Ann Carr Boyd concert and education programs.

- Continued development of live broadcasts with ABC Classic FM and 2MBS FM.

- The Australian Ballet workshops and free performances for Primary students.

- High Schools Drama Festival and Hatched Festival performances

- Increased editorial in Penrith and regional print media.

Future JSPAC Challenges

- Prohibitive costs of presenting premiere orchestras e.g. Sydney Symphony.

- Limited facility maintenance programs.

- Need to replace RBCH air-conditioning and seating systems.

- Need to re-vamp the Richard Bonynge Concert Hall.

2007- 08 JSPAC Education Program Report

The JSPAC Education Program aims to enrich and enhance the performance program of both the Q Theatre, and the Joan Sutherland Performing Arts Centre, specifically in the art-forms of music, theatre, and dance.

Schools Programs:

The 2007-08 Program

- Provided focus for school students across a range of areas, including: music appreciation, choral music, Australian theatre practice, Shakespearean theatre, dance, musical theatre and literacy development.

- Offered special matinee performances, education enrichment workshops and lectures, work experience opportunities, photographic exhibitions, tours and syllabus specific study materials.

- Assisted teachers through the production and hosting of Professional Development Days and education kits.

- Produced music and drama festivals to enable the development of choral and theatrical skills, tied to syllabus outcomes.

Seniors Programs:

The 2007-08 Program

- Continued the development of the Penrith Seniors Choir.

- Provided regular performances via the ‘Morning Melodies’ program.

- Hosted Senior's Day.

Disability Programs:

The 2007-08 Program

- Hosted International Day for People with a Disability.

- Hosted disability workshops.

- Provided opportunities for tours of the Joan for disability groups.

- Provided additional access facilities for people living with disabilities.

Youth Programs:

The 2007-08 Program

- Provided weekly music and theatre skill development courses.

- Provided school holiday workshop programs

Future Challenges:

- Resourcing expanded school holiday programs.

- Resourcing expanded programs for people living with disabilities, indigenous programs and Q productions for education audiences

2007 - 08 JSPAC Operations and Facilities Report

In 2007-08 JSPAC operations focused on the following core activities:

- Implementation of the new ticketing system

- Audience analysis and Database building

- Digital marketing and promotion initiatives.

- Completion of new website.

In 2007-08 JSPAC facilities operations focused on the following core activities:

- Air-conditioning maintenance and repairs

- Plumbing maintenance and repairs

- Cleaning

- Security

2007- 08 Facilities Highlights

- Negotiation of draft Occupation Agreement

- Preparation of maintenance priority listing with PCC officers.

Future Challenges for Facilities Operations

- Venue security.

- Poor plumbing sewage systems.

- Need to replace RBCH air-conditioning system.

- Leaking roofs.

- Need to re-paint RBCH and replace seating.

2. 2007-08 Penrith Conservatorium of Music (PCoM)

Throughout 2007-08 the Penrith Conservatorium of Music focused on the following key areas:

- Extending PCoM teaching programs (particularly Early Childhood music programs)

- Developing teaching and performance partnerships

- Establishment of off-site performances for PCoM students and tutors.

2007-08 PCoM Highlights

- PCoM Disability and Early Childhood Music programs.

- PCoM student concerts.

- Increased use of JSPAC as HSC, AMEB and ANZCA exam centre.

Future Challenges

- Need to increase teaching and performance programs.

- Need industry standard percussion studio in JSPAC.

- No digital teaching facilities and program at JSPAC.

- Increased regional competition.

3. Penrith Regional Gallery & The Lewers Bequest

In 2007-08 PRG&TLB continued to develop and deliver excellent cultural and education programs.

2007-08 PRG&TLB Exhibition Report

Highlights of the 2007-08 exhibition program included:

- The Peter Upward retrospective exhibition

- Establishment of PRG&TLB Fair Days.

- Popularity of the Aliens exhibition and public programs

- Winning Museum Australia publication and design awards

- 2,300 people at the Operation Art opening.

The 2007-08 Exhibition program included the following exhibitions:

- Operation Art (30 June 2007 – 12 August 2007)

- Del Kathryn Barton (30 June 2007 – 12 August 2007)

- Brook Andrew: Eye to Eye (18 August 2007 – 14 October 2007)

- Zine Factory (18 August 2007 – 14 October 2007)

- Sue Pedley: Blue Jay Way (18 August 2007 – 14 October 2007)

- Teenagers Photographic Competition: Things You Don’t Do in Public (18 August 2007 14 October 2007)

- Frozen Gestures: The Art of Peter Upward (20 October 2007 – 2 December 2007)

- Penjing and the Sydney Rock Orchid: Works by Tony Lennon (20 October 2007 – 2 December 2007)

- Another Little Piece of my Heart (20 October 2007 – 2 December 2007)

- The Visitors: The Australian Response to UFOS and Aliens (8 December 2007 – 28 January 2008)

- Scenes from Still Life: Catherine Rogers and Margaret West (23 February 2008 – 20 April 2008)

- Meadmore & Meyer: Furniture and Musical Sculpture (23 February 2008 – 20 April 2008)

- Modernist Sculpture in Focus: Works from the Collection (23 February 2008 – 20 April 2008)

- The Modern Australian Home: Architectural Photography (23 February 2008 – 20 April 2008)

- MAN: Depicting Contemporary Masculinity (26 April 2008 – 29 June 2008)

- Gardens of Xicheng (26 April 2008 – 29 June 2008)

- Tony Lennon: Rock Orchid (26 April 2008 – 29 June 2008)

- Plus the rotating exhibition of works from the collection in the Loungeroom throughout 07/08.

2007-08 PRG&TLB Education and Public Programs Report

In 2007-08 PRG&TLB:

- Offered study days, curator led exhibition tours, forums and syllabus study packs.

- Assisted teachers in the classroom with syllabus specific education kits.

- Offered practical art making opportunities linked to the exhibition program.

- Offered art making workshops and tours for visitors with a Disability

- Offered school holiday workshop programs and creative arts workshops for the under 5s, infants and primary school children and teenagers

- Offered family events and programs including Playgroup mornings.

2007- 08 PRG&TLB Facility Operations Report

2007-08 PRG&TLB facility operations focused mainly on:

- Building and site maintenance

- Garden conservation and maintenance

- Air conditioning repairs and maintenance

- Lighting and security

- Maintaining the Gallery’s heritage gardens.

Future PRG&TLB Challenges

- Poor maintenance.

- Malfunctioning plumbing and drainage systems.

- Poorly maintained and substandard air conditioning systems

- Need to replace air conditioning systems to meet national industry standards

- Currently no significant Gallery signage on River Road.

- Poor parking amenity.

4. Q Theatre Company

The Q Theatre Company aims to

- Be a ‘flagship’ for professional performing arts in Penrith and western Sydney

- Celebrate and present performing arts excellence

- Inform and entertain through outstanding performing arts activity

- Create and present its own work

- Facilitate performing arts education programs

- Nurture cultural exchange

- Facilitate creative endeavour – accessible, resonant, vibrant, innovating, stimulating

- Engage with and celebrate our local and regional communities.

The major focus of 2007-08 was to:

- Resolve ongoing funding from ArtsNSW.

- Rejuvenate the Q’s program and operations following PP&VA integration.

- Appoint new Director of Performing Arts.

2007-08 Subscription Season:

- Take Two! Christine Dunstan Productions, July 6 2007

- Wilde Tales. Critical Stages, July 18-22 2007

- Macbeth. Bell Shakespeare, August 7-11 2007

- The Club. HIT Production, September 5-8 2007

- The Memory of Water. Critical Stages, September 25-29 2007

- The Wharf Review: Beware of Dogma. Sydney Theatre Company, October 26-27 2007

- A Local Man. Tony Barry Enterprises, February 20-24 2008

- You Talkin’ To Me? Ensemble Theatre, May 6-10 2008

- Death of a Salesman. Ensemble Theatre, June 10-14 2008.

Education Performances:

- Wilde Tales. Performance for secondary students, 19 July, 07

- International Battle of the Choirs. Performance event for primary students. 23 July, 07

- Macbeth. Performance for secondary students, 9 August, 07

- The Club. Performance for secondary students, 6 September, 07

- Australian Theatre of the Deaf. Performance for primary and secondary students and people living with disabilities, 19 September, 07

- You Talkin’ To Me? The Diary of an Olympic Cabbie. Performance for secondary students, 21 February, 08

- Death of a Salesman. Performance for secondary students, 8 May, 08

- The Happy Prince. Performances for primary students, 27-31 May, 08

Education Workshops:

- Wilde Tales. Workshop for secondary students, 19 July, 07

- Macbeth. Workshop for secondary students, 9 August, 07

- The Club. Workshop for secondary students, 6 September, 07

- Hatched Technical/Performance Workshops, 17-22 September, 07

- Flannofest Technical/Performance Workshops, Feb-Jun, 08

Future Challenges

- Uncertain ArtsNSW funding

- Strong local and regional entertainment competition.

- Impact of GFC on ticket sales.

In conclusion I would very much like to thank the PP&VA staff, PP&VA Board and Penrith City Council for their continued commitment to producing and presenting cultural and educational programs of excellence for the people of Penrith and the region.

Financial Accountant – Entities

Penrith Visual and Performing Arts Limited achieved an operating loss of $192,444 for the financial year ending 30 June 2008. This was a $96,525 improvement on the 2007 result of a $288,969 loss. This loss was made after receiving $1,421,727 from Penrith City Council. These figures highlight the strong reliance the Company has upon Council funding for its financial viability. Council has resolved to maintain this funding level plus a Consumer Price Index increase for 2008-09 ($1,461,518).

Within the Chief Executive Officer’s Report he addresses what action has occurred to ensure that future year’s operations do not continue in a deficit position. It also outlines that in the current year the PP&VA is trading favourably and is expecting a surplus as at June 2009.

The Company has also restructured its financial operations through a review conducted by an external consultant. This review resulted in changes in policy and reporting procedure which will serve the Company well into the future. The outcome of the review also resulted in an increased level of support to the Board through additional financial staff. The Company is now supported by the following internal staff, Chief Financial Officer (Consulting), Financial Officer and Part time Financial Assistant.

The Company has undergone significant upheaval over the past few years with the amalgamation of the Joan Sutherland Performing Arts Centre, Penrith Regional Gallery and the Railway Street Theatre Company. This process is now essentially completed and the Company needs to consolidate its operations going forward. The financial results for the previous few years have shown that to date the funding provided by Council has not been sufficient to adequately fund the operations of the facilities. The challenge remains for the new Company to generate enough income of its own to minimise the call upon the Council for financial support.

Penrith Performing and Visual Arts Ltd – Board of Directors

The Constitution of the above Company provides, in part, that

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

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

Council should note that, as per the Constitution, Peter Anderson AM, Tony Lackey and Barbara Magee resigned at the third Annual General Meeting of Penrith Performing and Visual Arts Ltd held on 22 October 2008 and nominated for re-appointment. It was resolved, at the third Annual General Meeting of Penrith Performing and Visual Arts Ltd, that Penrith City Council be requested to endorse the appointment of Peter Anderson AM, Tony Lackey and Barbara Magee as Directors of Penrith Performing and Visual Arts Ltd.

In addition, as the Council will recall the former Councillor Pat Sheehy AM resigned from his position as a Council nominated Director of the Company, and subsequently, Pat Sheehy AM was appointed as a member of the Board as a Community member during 2008. Councillor Robert Ardill has subsequently been appointed as a Director of the Company. Another change to the membership of the Board occurred during the year when Bruce McDonald resigned as a Director.

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

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

RECOMMENDATION

That:

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

2. Council agree to underwrite the operation of the Penrith Performing and Visual Arts Ltd until the presentation to Council of the Penrith Performing & Visual Arts Ltd Annual Report for 2008/09.

3. Peter Anderson AM, Tony Lackey and Barbara Magee be appointed to fill vacancies that occurred at the third Annual General Meeting of the Penrith Performing and Visual Arts Ltd.

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1. View	Entities Financial Statements for the period 1/7/08-31/1/09	1 Page	Appendix
2. View	PPVA Statistics	7 Pages	Appendix

*Policy Review Committee Meeting*	*9 March 2009*
*Attachment 3 - Summary of Public Authority submissions*

Summary of Public Authority Submissions & Council Assessment

Draft Western and Central Precinct Plans - St Marys Release Area – 9 March 2009

Authority	Issues Raised in Submission	Council Assessment of Submission
1. Integral Energy	Supply to the Western Precinct will necessitate the establishment of a new Zone substation, together with associated transmission assets. Consideration will need to be given to identifying a suitable Zone substation site and the appropriate line route corridors. The proposed site should be identified in the Masterplan, suitably buffered from any residential areas and provided to Integral Energy at no cost. It is expected that the Central Precinct will be serviced with electricity by extending the existing distribution infrastructure from the south of the site. Detailed design of the electrical infrastructure will be provided during the relevant subdivision DAs.	Agreement has been reached between Delfin and Integral Energy on infrastructure requirements. An indicative zone substation site agreed with Integral Energy and identified in Western Precinct Framework Plan. Discussions with Integral Energy continuing. Noted. Noted.
2. NSW Rural Fire Service	DAs for development on bush fire prone lands will be required to comply with section 79BA of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and/or section 100B of the Rural Fires Act 1997 depending upon the nature of the proposed development. In relation to future residential or Special Fire Protection Purpose developments on bush fire prone land, the requirements of Planning for Bushfire Protection 2006 should be considered in the planning stages. Asset protection zones and construction requirements for individual lots and houses will be determined when development applications are submitted. In relation to future commercial, industrial or other development uses on bush fire prone land, it is suggested that the aims and objectives of Planning for Bushfire Protection 2006 be considered in the planning stages of these developments.	Council will require that all relevant DAs will comply with legislative requirements. Notwithstanding the nominated APZs, Council has obtained an amendment to the draft Precinct Plans from Delfin that clarifies that a further assessment and referral to the RFS for final approval will be carried out at DA stage. Council will require that all relevant DAs will comply with legislative requirements.
3. NSW Department of Primary Industries	Agriculture: No assessment provided for the potential for land uses conflicts with agricultural operations North of Ninth Avenue. In particular there needs to be an assessment of the potential of odour from poultry farm(s) in Llandilo that could impact upon proposed residences in the Western Precinct. Fisheries: DPI supports the planned offline detention of stormwater and riparian buffer zones. DPA recommends that the water cycle management measures are implemented. These measures (such as rainwater tanks, recycled water etc) could be incorporated into the Development Control Strategy. The erosion and sediment controls in the Soil and Water Management Strategy must be implemented and the mitigation measures employed policed. Minerals: The subject area is located within Petroleum Exploration Licence (PEL) 2 held by Sydney Gas Operations Ltd. The area is identified as having moderate to high potential for coal seam methane. DPI requests that access for exploration for coal seam methane be maintained over as much of the subject area possible.	The site is zoned for ‘Urban’ development. Issue can be satisfactorily addressed at DA stage. Council and Delfin concur with this requirement. Delfin has committed to providing recycled water supply. These requirements have been incorporated into the Soil and Water Management Strategies. Sydney Gas/AGL have advised that they do not have any interest in this area.

Authority	Issues Raised in Submission	Council Assessment of Submission
4. Centre for Affordable Housing	The Development Joint Venture is required to provide the Minister 3% of all Residential Allotments developed for the purpose of providing Affordable Housing on the terms set out in clause 17. However in both the Draft St Marys Western and Central Precinct Plans references to the provision for affordable housing under Clause 4.2 Urban Structure and Major Land Uses states the ‘provision of affordable housing up to 3% of the total dwelling stock which will be dispersed throughout the development area and not be able to be differentiated from other dwellings.’ It is therefore requested that Clause 4.2 bullet point 12 in both the Draft Western and Draft Central Precinct Plans be amended to state: ‘that 3% of all Residential Allotments developed be provided for the purpose of Affordable Housing which will be dispersed….’ to accurately reflect the obligation as set out in the St Marys Development Agreement.	Request to amend Section 4.2 is supported and Delfin has agreed to this request.
5. Sydney West Area Health Service	*Urban Area / Neighbourhood Character* With regard to urban form, give consideration to increasing the proportion of integrated housing and apartments in both precincts, as higher density housing is associated with health benefits and greater access for lower socio-economic households. In order to address housing affordability as a social determinant of health, provide access to 15% social housing in the Western and Central Precincts. *Access and Movement and Landscape and Open Space Network* Safety issues should be adequately addressed, including safety of pedestrian and cycle users of shared paths, including provision of an integrated network of off-road cycle paths rather than a mix of one and off road cycle paths as currently proposed (Titze et al: 2008). Safety and pedestrian access along and across The Northern Road, which borders the Western Precinct, needs to be considered. Addressing chronic disease related to lifestyle factors by designing streets and open space in such a way as to encourage the update of the ‘walkability’ potential of the design, availability of active and passive recreational areas, and availability and access to nutritionally healthy foods is recommended. Detailed suggestions as to how this could be achieved are provided in the body of this submission. Consideration of the need for shade structures in open space and recreational areas, particularly children’s playgrounds, is required. *Water Cycle Management and Related Environmental Health Issues* Ensure that potential environmental health risks in relation to rainwater use and mosquito borne disease are addressed.	Issues raised on privacy, open space, housing choice & diversity and housing adaptability have been addressed in Precinct Plans/DCSs. Additional medium density was sought but could not be negotiated in the current housing market. The 3% affordable housing contribution is a legal requirement of the St Marys Development Agreement & the 15% request is outside of this State Government Agreement (St Marys Development Agreement). Housing adaptability and accessibility and proximity to transport, shops and recreational facilities has been addressed as a key principle of the precinct plans. DLL will work with Council, MOT and local bus operators to provide bus services to and from St Marys and Penrith railway stations. The Planning Agreement includes provision of a 12 seater community bus. Issues of surveillance, CPTED principles, pedestrian safety, mix of uses addressed in precinct plans and to be addressed in greater detail through relevant DAs. Footpath and cycleway widths comply with Council standards. An off-road network of shared pedestrian and cycle paths is proposed in each precinct. Both precinct plans address access to Regional Park and Regional Open Space and also identify Regional Park passive open space opportunities. Central Precinct Plan proposes co-location of Village Centre and Regional Open Space hub to promote the concentration of activity and accessibility to open space facilities. The Planning Agreement outlines the open space facilities to be provided. Shade structures will be provided in open space through the Planning Agreement process. The Community Development Worker will work with residents to ensure social integration and networks are established at the new development. A range of activities will be developed in consultation with the residents of the new community. Noted. Rainwater tanks will be installed and operated in accordance with relevant standards. Council will consult with Delfin regarding management of this matter at DA stage.
6. Sydney Water	Central Precinct Appendix – Water, Soils and Infrastructure Section 6.1 Proposed Infrastructure Sewer Figure 18 shows the development arrangements for the existing Werrington Downs Carrier that crosses the Central Precinct. Sydney Water recommends Council considers the following matters in relation to the carrier: 1. the impact of landfill imposing additional load on the carrier needs to be assessed to determine if realignment of the existing carrier is required 2. easement conditions and development will need to accommodate a possible change of the sewer carrier from currently being surrounded by open space to urban development including: · access for all Sydney Water operational and maintenance functions · easement width with increased landfill carrier depths · permitted distance between development and the carrier · raw sewage overflows 3. arrangements to make the carrier maintenance free may be warranted Water Sydney Water is currently carrying out servicing investigations for the area. The servicing strategy for the area has not yet been finalised. One possible option for providing potable water services to the area is, drawing supply from the Penrith North Reservoir into the Central Precinct from the south. However, Figure 18 indicates precinct access from the south as ‘potential bus, pedestrian and bicycle access only’. This may constrain the options for potable water services to the precinct. Further, an inter-precinct potable water connection main may be required to provide service continuity to the precinct. This may favour the proposed servicing option of the Precinct Plan. Central and Western Precincts Appendix – Water, Soils and Infrastructure Section 5.9 Management Measures Recycled Water Irrigation The Management Measures suggest that additional land capability assessment would be required and should be submitted with future development applications. Sydney Water acknowledges that salinity is a major problem for the area and further environmental assessment is required. However, Sydney Water believes that the impact of recycled water would be minimal due to the following: 1. the total dissolved solids (TDS) content of recycled water is low, at approximately 500mg/litre 2. irrigation is an acceptable end use of recycled water and has been successfully practiced in the Rouse Hill development area 3. recycled water treatment processes including ultraviolet radiation and superchlorination result in it being a benign product 4. efficient irrigation, supported by price increases, is directed at meeting needs at surface levels with little consequent waste to below ground flows and groundwater recharge Section 6.2 Design and Ecological Sustainable Development Initiatives Potable and non-potable water The Precinct Plans identify that potable water will be utilised for irrigation of the area. Sydney Water is currently investigating a recycled water scheme sourced by the Penrith Sewage Treatment Plant (STP). The Western and Central Precincts will be considered in the service area for this scheme. The scheme is intended to supply recycled water to residential and commercial developments for toilets and irrigation, to industrial developments for operational processes and irrigation and, for open space irrigation. In addition, to these end uses, Sydney Water supports the use of recycled water for cold water in washing machines. Sydney Water prefers that recycled water from this scheme be utilised for irrigation rather than potable water, as indicated in the Precinct Plans. Sydney Water Servicing Sydney Water will further assess the impact of future developments in the Precincts when developers apply for a Section 73 Certificate. This assessment will enable Sydney Water to specify any works required as a result of the development and to assess whether amplification and/or changes are applicable. Sydney Water requests Council continue to instruct developers to obtain a Section 73 Certificate from Sydney Water. Developers must fund any adjustments needed to Sydney Water infrastructure as a result any development. The developer should engage a Water Servicing Coordinator to get a Section 73 Certificate and manage the servicing aspects of the development. Details are available from any Sydney Water Customer Centre on 13 20 92 or Sydney Water’s website at www.sydneywater.com.au. Trade Waste All customers discharging trade waste into Sydney Water’s wastewater systems must have written permission from Sydney Water. The trade waste requirements help Sydney Water discharge or reuse wastewater while protecting the environment and meeting regulatory requirements. Sydney Water will either issue the customer a trade waste permit or enter into a trade waste agreement. A trade waste permit must be obtained before any discharge can be made to the sewer system. The permit is also needed for site remediation purposes. Applications for a trade waste permit can be made to Sydney Water at the Section 73 Certificate application stage. For further information refer to the Sydney Water’s website www.sydneywater.com.au.	Sewer Noted. Delfin will address this issue in Section 4.13 of precinct plan through the following additional sentences: “A further technical assessment of the Werrington Downs Carrier and a defined zone of influence will be undertaken by a suitably qualified expert at the time of the first relevant development application to assist the consent authority in determining the DA.” Water Noted. Water supply will be available from the existing Cranebrook Reservoir. Delfin is continuing negotiations with Sydney Water in accordance with this advice. *Central and Western Precincts* Appendix – Water, Soils and Infrastructure Section 5.9 Management Measures Recycled Water Irrigation Noted. This matter is satisfactorily addressed in Section 6.2 Design and Ecological Sustainable Development Initiatives (Volume 2a Appendix F) Potable and non-potable water Noted. Sydney Water is yet to confirm availability of recycled water but is currently examining two options - a pipe from Penrith STP or a new reservoir at Cranebrook. Delfin is continuing negotiations with Sydney Water in accordance with this advice. Delfin has committed to the laying the pipes for the delivery of recycled water to the site, even if Sydney Water confirmation is not received by the time construction commences. Sydney Water Servicing Noted Trade Waste Noted
7. Department of Water and Energy	Location of waterfront land · The precise location of waterfront land for both precincts needs to be surveyed and mapped at a suitable scale to clearly identify the waterfront land footprint within the precincts and, after endorsement by the Department, be made available to all interested parties. This will clearly demarcate when a proposal will require a CAA and thus be integrated development for the Department. · All other flowlines in these precincts are not rivers and do not require CAA. Watercourse categories · For both precincts there are no Category 1 watercourses. · For the Western Precinct the watercourse originating from the south western wetland and flowing in a general easterly direction and the watercourse from Ninth Ave are both Category 2 watercourses. The other watercourse is a Category 2. · For the Central Precinct the watercourse is a Category 2. · In all cases the riparian width can be wider if this is required for good urban design. · All other land within waterfront land (but not within riparian corridors) can be used for any planned purpose. However a CAA will still be required for that development. Environmental outcomes for all riparian corridor land The following environmental outcomes must be achieved for riparian corridor land and described within the precinct plans. · Outcome 1: Maintain, restore or emulate a stable natural watercourse and riparian area features and functions incorporating a stable natural/ised form with natural morphological features, ecological interactions, habitat, natural surface flows, protect water quality (and improve), and longitudinal and lateral hydrological and ecological connectivity, suitable to the watercourse category. · Outcome 2: Provide a continuous, viable CRZ which emulates the native vegetation communities in the area, for the movement of flora and fauna species and facilitates the stability of the watercourse. · Outcome 3: Provide protection of any remnant local native riparian vegetation and restore any riparian corridors disturbed or otherwise affected to a state that is reasonably representative of the natural state. · Outcome 4: Provide extensive habitat (and connectivity between habitat nodes) for terrestrial and aquatic fauna. · Outcome 5: Provide a protecting VB either side of the CRZ of category 1 and 2 watercourses. The VB is to protect the environmental integrity of the CRZ from weed invasion, micro-climate changes, litter, trampling and pollution by emulating the native vegetation communities in the area. · Outcome 6: provide water quality and quantity standards that are of a higher level than the receiving waters and their riparian corridors for those flows that originate within the precincts. · Outcome 7: any realigned/reconstructed watercourse must meet all the above outcomes. Development consistent with the Environmental Outcomes for riparian corridor land (a) The following uses are permissible with consent within riparian corridor land: · Creation of the riparian corridor land to remain or become vegetated with fully structured native vegetation. · Environmental protection works. · Drainage (this does not include any type of basin, rain garden or other water quality control structure and their access points) · Crossings (eg roads, service utilities, paths) (b) Any APZ or part of APZ must not be located within the riparian corridor land. The APZ must not result in any clearing/thinning etc of the riparian corridor land. All other uses (including exempt and complying development) will not be issued GTAs or a CAA within the CRZ and VB. Pedestrian and Cycle Network location in relation to riparian corridor land Any pedestrian and cycle network should be located beyond the riparian corridor land, except for direct crossings. Generally paths should be contained adjacent to or within the roadside edge where they are needed close to riparian corridor land. These development outcomes should be included in the precinct plans. Road Crossings Following road crossings are proposed: · Western Precinct: 3 crossings of the category 2 (N-S) watercourse and 2 crossings of the category 3 (E-W) watercourse. No crossing of the Ninth Ave watercourse. · Central Precinct: 2 crossings. DWE will support up to this number of road crossings if the crossings are of the following minimum design: As there is capacity for fauna and flora movements to occur around both precincts the usual requirement for a bridge crossing over any Category 2 watercourse will not be required. However, for all crossings over all watercourses, these are not be less than a box culvert design with adequate capacity for both water and fauna movements and have naturalized bases. Bushfire Measures It is noted that an APZ has not been identified adjacent to the riparian corridor land in either precinct in Fig 21, however a 10m APZ is suggested in Appendix F, except adjacent to the Regional Park and any SFPP development where a much greater width be required. Perimeter roads around the riparian corridor lands are recommended. This combines the road footprint and any potential APZ together to minimize any bushfire setback consideration that may be needed due to the Department’s riparian corridor land requirements. Water Cycle Management · Detention/wetland basins (including access) are not be located in riparian corridor land, or other structures relating to water quality and quantity control. · It is noted that some basins are not in logical locations (eg the S-E basin in the Western Precinct being on the south side of the watercourse) and a basin in the Central Precinct is both on-line and within the riparian corridor land. · A water licence may be required if the storage capacity for stormwater used for irrigation is greater than 21 Megalitres for the Western Precinct and 12 Megalitres for the Central Precinct. These volumes should be researched and verified by a licensing officer at pre DA stage. · Watercourses are to have sufficient space to cater for a 1:100 year flow. · Where a river needs to be redesigned, there must be a 1:5 year low flow channel and adequate floodplain for the 1:100 year flow. Top of bank (where the channel is redesigned) is the 1:5 year channel width. Where any channel is already in a good natural condition, then redesign will not be allowed. Where there is good natural vegetation, only stabilization of the channel will be considered. Soil and Water Management These performance are criteria need to be included in the precinct plans: · Any plan must ensure that no sediment laden water enters either the Regional Parks or South Creek. · No sediment should be entering any identified river from development outside the riparian corridor land.	Location of waterfront land · Council supports this process. Delfin has agreed to this process with DWE to identify which DAs will be IDAs. Process underway. · Agreed. Watercourse categories · Noted. · Classification of E-W watercourse in Western Precinct as Category 2 agreed. · Noted. · Noted. · Noted. Environmental outcomes for all riparian corridor land Noted. Delfin has agreed to add new subsection “Riparian and Drainage corridors” to Section 4.10 of each precinct plan to incorporate DWE recommendations, subject to comments/responses below: New section to generally incorporate DWE suggested outcomes, subject to consistency with the relevant performance objectives contained in clauses 24 and 28 of SREP 30 and the St Marys EPS (Note: These are listed in the SKM Water, Soils and Infrastructure reports at Appendix F). In relation to Outcome 6, as the water quality of this creek is expected to be highly variable over time given the inflows from development upstream of the site, it is considered that it would be impractical to enforce this requirement. In our view, the SREP 30 standards performance standards in relation to water quality should be the relevant requirement which indicate that the development is to incorporate stormwater management measures that ensure that there is no adverse impact upon the water quality in the receiving creek system. The standard is consistent with Council’s own water quality and water quantity management policy and will be delivered by the Western and Central Precinct developments. Development consistent with the Environmental Outcomes for riparian corridor land (a) Council has no objection to these requirements and Delfin has advised that these will be generally incorporated into new subsection in Section 4.10. Council does not object to the Delfin proposal to enable consideration of some drainage works and some pedestrian/cycle paths that may encroach on the riparian corridor land, provided that the specific proposals are addressed in detail by Council and DWE at the relevant DA stage. (b) Noted. Pedestrian and Cycle Network location in relation to riparian corridor land As per comment above in relation to pedestrian/cycle paths. Road Crossings Council has no objection to these requirements but notes that the number and locations of road crossings shown in each precinct plan is indicative only and subject to refinement at detailed design/DA stage. Bushfire Measures Section C.1 and D.1.1 of the Bushfire Protection Assessment discuss the potential to apply a 10 m APZ to the riparian and park areas should they pose a threat (based on location, size/width, and management) to the final development plan. These APZs will be confirmed at the subdivision stage when further detailed design has been undertaken and final landuses confirmed. Council has no objections to this. Notwithstanding this DWE recommendation, the precinct plans do not mandate perimeter roads around riparian corridors as there should be flexibility for other land uses (eg open space and residential incorporating any required APZs) to adjoin riparian corridors. Water Cycle Management · See previous comments regarding retaining flexibility to enable consideration of some drainage works within riparian corridors. · Noted. Delfin has agreed to amend the locations of basins accordingly. · Noted. Issue to be addressed at relevant DA stage. · Noted. Trunk drainage design will consider 1:100yr events. · Noted. Where the longitudinal grade of drainage is flat, provision of a low flow channel may not be possible in which case Delfin has agreed that alternate design solutions will be proposed. Efforts will be made to retain natural features where practicable. Soil and Water Management This has not been agreed by Delfin as it is inconsistent with SREP 30 performance objectives (clause 28). Noted by Council.
8. Ministry of Transport	· The Ministry recommends that pedestrian and cycle connections be provided to link residential peninsulas. · In both precincts, village centres are not centrally located. This increases the proportion of residents being located outside the desired 400m walking catchment of centres. · The proposed location of the employment zone makes bus servicing difficult, requiring lengthy route diversions. This will create a disincentive to the uptake of this mode for journey to work purposes. · Given the scale of development proposed, a TMAP is requested.	· Agreed. Precinct Plans both indicate pedestrian and cycle access to all parts of precincts. · Village Centre location determined after detailed planning process, which included consultation and participation with Council officers. Council officers concur that the Village Centre locations are optimally located and reflect a broad range of factors including site constraints, topography, future road access points, relationship to surrounding landuses (eg proximity to Employment zone and Regional Open Space in Central Precinct) and integration with community and open space uses. · Proposed location of Employment zone was agreed by Council, Delfin and DoP and endorsed through the EDS Committee. Council disagrees with this submission and considers that the proximity of Employment zone to Village Centre, Regional Open Space hub and Dunheved Precincts will assist bus servicing. A planned direct link to Christie Street will further assist bus servicing. · These comments are not supported as a TMS process applied. The procedures for investigating the impacts of the project on the State and local road network and public transport infrastructure requirements have been undertaken as part of the Transport Management Strategy process, formalised through the St Marys Development Agreement and Penrith Planning Agreement and are now being implemented.
9. Blacktown City Council	· No objections provided works are in accordance with previously approved flood studies and that flooding in the Blacktown LGA is not adversely affected. · Suggest the collector roads between the precincts should be consistent in final design. · While bus priority routes are generally supported, initiatives to promote alternative transport options could be investigated, such as a travel smart/travel wise campaign, providing travel information to the local community about car pooling, or providing free bus travel for residents for the two months of occupation. · In principle agreement provided to the 7mm flood level increase provided that (1) the increase does not extend into any areas, within Blacktown LGA, other than the recreation area mentioned, (2) there is no increase in the flood hazard and (3) that work-as-executed plans are provided to ensure that the fill level does not extend past that provided in the modelled proposal.	· Council acknowledges that flood studies are in accordance with previously approved flood studies (adopted Dunheved Precinct Plan and approved Dunheved EIS) and demonstrate no adverse impact. We have advised Blacktown Council that an amended filling proposal now indicates that the maximum increase in flood levels upstream (south) of the site in the 100 year ARI event would be an additional 7mm (44mm total) and this increase is limited to the Dunheved Golf Course. Blacktown Council has no objection to this minor increase. · Noted. Council will consult with Blacktown Council in the finalisation of Collector Road design. · Resident information kits, covering transport information, to be distributed to all new households and part of Planning Agreement commitments. Community bus provision included in draft Planning Agreement.
10. TransGrid	1. It is advised that transmission line easements are acquired by TransGrid to provide adequate working space along the route of the line for construction and maintenance work and also to ensure that no work or other activity is undertaken under or near the transmission line or the structures which could either by accident or otherwise create an unsafe situation either for persons of for the security of the transmission line. 2. All proposed activities within an easement area require written approval from TransGrid. 3. List of current general restrictions provided for information. This is not exhaustive and, where there is any doubt concerning a particular activity within the easement, advice should be sought from TransGrid.	1. Noted. Transmission line structures and easement accounted for in draft Precinct Plan (refer Sections4.2 and 4.4) 2. Noted. TransGrid to be further consulted at relevant DA stage 3. As above.
11. DECC	1. As noted in the draft plans, some areas of the regional park zone could be included in the passive local open space network. These areas would offset any rationalisation of the Urban and Regional Park zone boundaries which DECC will continue to seek to benefit future management of the Regional Park (and Urban zoned areas). 2. (a) DECC has indicated that it will not accept management of the remnant farm dam adjoining the Western Precinct, due to concerns about the structural integrity of the dam and management issues associated with its proximity to the Urban zone. (b) DECC supports proposed open space to east of the dam. (c) Residential development to west of the dam not supported due to lack of adequate APZs, likelihood of flooding and issues associated with managing an open body of water close to an urban area. It is recommended land surrounding the dam be zoned open space. 3. The APZs between the urban and regional park zones do not adequately reflect the future size of vegetation within the regional park. It has been assumed that the vegetation will remain woodland. However, the woodland currently present is at an early stage of regrowth and in the future will become forest. It is recommended that the width of the APZs be reassessed to reflect the future bushfire risk. 4. In relation to the watercycle assessment it should be acknowledged that the existing weeds along watercourses of the regional park which are the result of nutrient loads from existing urban (and other development) in the catchment will need to be appropriately managed. 5. The controls proposed to restrict domestic animal access to regional park are strongly supported. 6. DECC has been liaising with the proponent regarding Aboriginal archaeology for the precincts. The associated archaeological report has been reviewed and in relation to the Western Precinct DECC has had further discussions regarding the s90 process.	1. Council has held discussions with DECC and Delfin regarding passive open space opportunities within the adjoining Regional Park. It is considered these opportunities can be further considered where there is an alignment with the passive recreation facilities that will be advanced by DECC and local passive open space requirements. Further discussions on between Council, DECC, and Delfin regarding these opportunities are to be held. A boundary rationalisation will now not occur. 2. (a) The remnant farm dam was included in the land zoned as Regional Park by SREP 30 (Amendment No 1) and as such DECC has an obligation for the ownership and management of the land. On-going discussions will be held with DECC in accordance with the Regional Park transfer process and obligations under the St Marys Development Agreement. Issues relating to the structural integrity of the existing dam will be investigated and addressed as part of any DA for development of land adjoining and downstream of the dam. (b) Noted. (c) Land to west of the dam is zoned Urban under SREP 30 and zoning enables residential development. Issues relating to potential flooding, overland flow paths and drainage channels will be addressed as part of the DA process for future urban development. 3. A detailed Bushfire Assessment nominated various APZs for the Western and Central Precincts and did not raise objections to the proposed development. Notwithstanding the nominated APZs, Council has obtained the following amendment to the draft Precinct Plans that clarifies that a further assessment and referral to the RFS for final approval will be carried out at DA stage:-. “ Therefore, bushfire risk and matters including APZs, building construction standards, access and services will be further addressed at the DA stage and, depending on the type of DA, in accordance with the requirements to obtain Rural Fire Service approval or to consult with the Rural Fire Service. This will include further consideration of the APZ widths identified in this precinct plan.” 4. Weed management addressed in the Weed Management Strategy. 5. Noted. 6. Noted. Section 90 permit was granted on 13 February 2009.
12. RTA	1. RTA provides comments regarding amendments to map boundaries and to assist council in the preparation of the draft LEP. 2. RTA have accepted a package of works in kind as detailed in the state developer agreement and associated documents. However, RTA and the developer are yet to agree on the necessary trigger points or timetable of when these works are to be implemented. The requirement to deliver each component of these works is expected to be tied to the number of lots released as indicated as being required by the traffic modelling. The draft precinct plans appear generally consistent with the developer agreement. 3. Council is not to grant consent to the carrying out of development on any land within the area proposed for rezoning unless Council is satisfied that arrangements satisfactory to the RTA have been made for the carrying out of works in kind or making appropriate payments towards the upgrading of arterial roads and intersections to service that land. 4. It is noted that the developer has applied for a grant under the Federal Government’s Housing Affordability Fund (HAF) which would result in bringing forward stage 1 of The Northern Road widening to four travel lanes, signalising of the The Northern Road / Sherringham Road and signalising of The Northern Road / Western Precinct access road. RTA has been kept informed throughout this process and is in support of acceleration of these works. 5. The key design considerations in the PCAL’s “Designing Places for Active Living” guidelines should be taken into consideration when assessing the precinct plans. RTA’s NSW Bicycle Guidelines and the Department of Planning’s NSW Planning Guidelines for Walking and Cycling are useful technical documents when preparing cycling and pedestrian routes.	1. Consultation relates to draft precinct plans and not draft LEP/proposed rezoning. Land is already zoned for development. 2. NSWG transport contributions are provided under Clause 16 Part 2 of the St Marys Development Agreement. The Balance Roadworks (clause 16.4) have been determined by the Dept of Planning transport committee as detailed in the St Marys project Revised Transport Management Strategy. A preliminary draft amendment to provide for the revised TMS was provided to the RTA at a meeting Thursday 4 September 2008 and is awaiting RTA response to progress to the next stage of detail. 3. Refer 2. 4. Noted. 5. Draft precinct plans incorporate a broad range of urban design principles and characteristics that promote accessibility, walkability, cycling, recreation etc and are therefore consistent with guidelines.
13. SES	1. The SES has no existing information or experience with flooding in this area. With no detailed understanding of the nature of the flood risk for the proposed development, the SES cannot comment in any detail on the likely flood emergency management requirements for the site. Nor can the Service comment in detail on the impact of this new development on existing flood emergency arrangements. 2. It is critical that the design of the physical site for new areas such as St Marys incorporates reliable physical flood management considerations. This means that the new communities must be designed to be relatively self-managed in floods. 3. It is accepted by the Service that subdivision and building design cannot eliminate all flood risk. Therefore, once the development is physically implemented and populated, the SES will review the relevant SES flood plans for the area.	1. SES has no specific objections to the draft plans. 2. The flood modelling results, incorporating all of the previous modelling assumptions, for the amended filling proposal now advanced for the Central Precinct indicate that the maximum increase in flood levels upstream (south) of the site in the 100 year ARI event would be an additional 7mm (44mm total) and there would be no change in flood levels downstream (north) of the site (11mm increase) in the 100 year ARI event; 3. These results, whilst increasing the previous levels marginally, are considered to be within acceptable limits.

Authority

Issues Raised in Submission

Council Assessment of Submission

4. Centre for Affordable Housing

The Development Joint Venture is required to provide the Minister 3% of all Residential Allotments developed for the purpose of providing Affordable Housing on the terms set out in clause 17. However in both the Draft St Marys Western and Central Precinct Plans references to the provision for affordable housing under Clause 4.2 Urban Structure and Major Land Uses states the ‘provision of affordable housing up to 3% of the total dwelling stock which will be dispersed throughout the development area and not be able to be differentiated from other dwellings.’ It is therefore requested that Clause 4.2 bullet point 12 in both the Draft Western and Draft Central Precinct Plans be amended to state: ‘that 3% of all Residential Allotments developed be provided for the purpose of Affordable Housing which will be dispersed….’ to accurately reflect the obligation as set out in the St Marys Development Agreement.

Request to amend Section 4.2 is supported and Delfin has agreed to this request.

5. Sydney West Area Health Service

Urban Area / Neighbourhood Character

With regard to urban form, give consideration to increasing the proportion of integrated housing and apartments in both precincts, as higher density housing is associated with health benefits and greater access for lower socio-economic households.

In order to address housing affordability as a social determinant of health, provide access to 15% social housing in the Western and Central Precincts.

Access and Movement and Landscape and Open Space Network

Safety issues should be adequately addressed, including safety of pedestrian and cycle users of shared paths, including provision of an integrated network of off-road cycle paths rather than a mix of one and off road cycle paths as currently proposed (Titze et al: 2008). Safety and pedestrian access along and across The Northern Road, which borders the Western Precinct, needs to be considered.

Addressing chronic disease related to lifestyle factors by designing streets and open space in such a way as to encourage the update of the ‘walkability’ potential of the design, availability of active and passive recreational areas, and availability and access to nutritionally healthy foods is recommended. Detailed suggestions as to how this could be achieved are provided in the body of this submission.

Consideration of the need for shade structures in open space and recreational areas, particularly children’s playgrounds, is required.

Water Cycle Management and Related Environmental Health Issues

Ensure that potential environmental health risks in relation to rainwater use and mosquito borne disease are addressed.

Issues raised on privacy, open space, housing choice & diversity and housing adaptability have been addressed in Precinct Plans/DCSs. Additional medium density was sought but could not be negotiated in the current housing market.

The 3% affordable housing contribution is a legal requirement of the St Marys Development Agreement & the 15% request is outside of this State Government Agreement (St Marys Development Agreement).

Housing adaptability and accessibility and proximity to transport, shops and recreational facilities has been addressed as a key principle of the precinct plans.

DLL will work with Council, MOT and local bus operators to provide bus services to and from St Marys and Penrith railway stations. The Planning Agreement includes provision of a 12 seater community bus.

Issues of surveillance, CPTED principles, pedestrian safety, mix of uses addressed in precinct plans and to be addressed in greater detail through relevant DAs.

Footpath and cycleway widths comply with Council standards. An off-road network of shared pedestrian and cycle paths is proposed in each precinct.

Both precinct plans address access to Regional Park and Regional Open Space and also identify Regional Park passive open space opportunities.

Central Precinct Plan proposes co-location of Village Centre and Regional Open Space hub to promote the concentration of activity and accessibility to open space facilities. The Planning Agreement outlines the open space facilities to be provided.

Shade structures will be provided in open space through the Planning Agreement process.

The Community Development Worker will work with residents to ensure social integration and networks are established at the new development. A range of activities will be developed in consultation with the residents of the new community.

Noted. Rainwater tanks will be installed and operated in accordance with relevant standards. Council will consult with Delfin regarding management of this matter at DA stage.

6. Sydney Water

Central Precinct

Appendix – Water, Soils and Infrastructure

Section 6.1 Proposed Infrastructure

Sewer

Figure 18 shows the development arrangements for the existing Werrington Downs Carrier that crosses the Central Precinct. Sydney Water recommends Council considers the following matters in relation to the carrier:

1. the impact of landfill imposing additional load on the carrier needs to be assessed to determine if realignment of the existing carrier is required

2. easement conditions and development will need to accommodate a possible change of the sewer carrier from currently being surrounded by open space to urban development including:

· access for all Sydney Water operational and maintenance functions

· easement width with increased landfill carrier depths

· permitted distance between development and the carrier

· raw sewage overflows

3. arrangements to make the carrier maintenance free may be warranted

Water

Sydney Water is currently carrying out servicing investigations for the area. The servicing strategy for the area has not yet been finalised. One possible option for providing potable water services to the area is, drawing supply from the Penrith North Reservoir into the Central Precinct from the south. However, Figure 18 indicates precinct access from the south as ‘potential bus, pedestrian and bicycle access only’. This may constrain the options for potable water services to the precinct. Further, an inter-precinct potable water connection main may be required to provide service continuity to the precinct. This may favour the proposed servicing option of the Precinct Plan.

Central and Western Precincts

Appendix – Water, Soils and Infrastructure

Section 5.9 Management Measures

Recycled Water Irrigation

The Management Measures suggest that additional land capability assessment would be required and should be submitted with future development applications. Sydney Water acknowledges that salinity is a major problem for the area and further environmental assessment is required. However, Sydney Water believes that the impact of recycled water would be minimal due to the following:

1. the total dissolved solids (TDS) content of recycled water is low, at approximately 500mg/litre

2. irrigation is an acceptable end use of recycled water and has been successfully practiced in the Rouse Hill development area

3. recycled water treatment processes including ultraviolet radiation and superchlorination result in it being a benign product

4. efficient irrigation, supported by price increases, is directed at meeting needs at surface levels with little consequent waste to below ground flows and groundwater recharge

Section 6.2 Design and Ecological Sustainable Development Initiatives

Potable and non-potable water

The Precinct Plans identify that potable water will be utilised for irrigation of the area. Sydney Water is currently investigating a recycled water scheme sourced by the Penrith Sewage Treatment Plant (STP). The Western and Central Precincts will be considered in the service area for this scheme. The scheme is intended to supply recycled water to residential and commercial developments for toilets and irrigation, to industrial developments for operational processes and irrigation and, for open space irrigation. In addition, to these end uses, Sydney Water supports the use of recycled water for cold water in washing machines. Sydney Water prefers that recycled water from this scheme be utilised for irrigation rather than potable water, as indicated in the Precinct Plans.

Sydney Water Servicing

Sydney Water will further assess the impact of future developments in the Precincts when developers apply for a Section 73 Certificate. This assessment will enable Sydney Water to specify any works required as a result of the development and to assess whether amplification and/or changes are applicable. Sydney Water requests Council continue to instruct developers to obtain a Section 73 Certificate from Sydney Water.

Developers must fund any adjustments needed to Sydney Water infrastructure as a result any development. The developer should engage a Water Servicing Coordinator to get a Section 73 Certificate and manage the servicing aspects of the development. Details are available from any Sydney Water Customer Centre on 13 20 92 or Sydney Water’s website at www.sydneywater.com.au.

Trade Waste

All customers discharging trade waste into Sydney Water’s wastewater systems must have written permission from Sydney Water. The trade waste requirements help Sydney Water discharge or reuse wastewater while protecting the environment and meeting regulatory requirements.

Sydney Water will either issue the customer a trade waste permit or enter into a trade waste agreement. A trade waste permit must be obtained before any discharge can be made to the sewer system. The permit is also needed for site remediation purposes. Applications for a trade waste permit can be made to Sydney Water at the Section 73 Certificate application stage. For further information refer to the Sydney Water’s website www.sydneywater.com.au.

Sewer

Noted. Delfin will address this issue in Section 4.13 of precinct plan through the following additional sentences:

“A further technical assessment of the Werrington Downs Carrier and a defined zone of influence will be undertaken by a suitably qualified expert at the time of the first relevant development application to assist the consent authority in determining the DA.”

Water

Noted. Water supply will be available from the existing Cranebrook Reservoir. Delfin is continuing negotiations with Sydney Water in accordance with this advice.

Central and Western Precincts

Appendix – Water, Soils and Infrastructure

Section 5.9 Management Measures

Recycled Water Irrigation

Noted. This matter is satisfactorily addressed in Section 6.2 Design and Ecological Sustainable Development Initiatives (Volume 2a Appendix F)

Potable and non-potable water

Noted. Sydney Water is yet to confirm availability of recycled water but is currently examining two options - a pipe from Penrith STP or a new reservoir at Cranebrook. Delfin is continuing negotiations with Sydney Water in accordance with this advice. Delfin has committed to the laying the pipes for the delivery of recycled water to the site, even if Sydney Water confirmation is not received by the time construction commences.

Sydney Water Servicing

Noted

Trade Waste

Noted

7. Department of Water and Energy

Location of waterfront land

· The precise location of waterfront land for both precincts needs to be surveyed and mapped at a suitable scale to clearly identify the waterfront land footprint within the precincts and, after endorsement by the Department, be made available to all interested parties. This will clearly demarcate when a proposal will require a CAA and thus be integrated development for the Department.

· All other flowlines in these precincts are not rivers and do not require CAA.

Watercourse categories

· For both precincts there are no Category 1 watercourses.

· For the Western Precinct the watercourse originating from the south western wetland and flowing in a general easterly direction and the watercourse from Ninth Ave are both Category 2 watercourses. The other watercourse is a Category 2.

· For the Central Precinct the watercourse is a Category 2.

· In all cases the riparian width can be wider if this is required for good urban design.

· All other land within waterfront land (but not within riparian corridors) can be used for any planned purpose. However a CAA will still be required for that development.

Environmental outcomes for all riparian corridor land

The following environmental outcomes must be achieved for riparian corridor land and described within the precinct plans.

· Outcome 1: Maintain, restore or emulate a stable natural watercourse and riparian area features and functions incorporating a stable natural/ised form with natural morphological features, ecological interactions, habitat, natural surface flows, protect water quality (and improve), and longitudinal and lateral hydrological and ecological connectivity, suitable to the watercourse category.

· Outcome 2: Provide a continuous, viable CRZ which emulates the native vegetation communities in the area, for the movement of flora and fauna species and facilitates the stability of the watercourse.

· Outcome 3: Provide protection of any remnant local native riparian vegetation and restore any riparian corridors disturbed or otherwise affected to a state that is reasonably representative of the natural state.

· Outcome 4: Provide extensive habitat (and connectivity between habitat nodes) for terrestrial and aquatic fauna.

· Outcome 5: Provide a protecting VB either side of the CRZ of category 1 and 2 watercourses. The VB is to protect the environmental integrity of the CRZ from weed invasion, micro-climate changes, litter, trampling and pollution by emulating the native vegetation communities in the area.

· Outcome 6: provide water quality and quantity standards that are of a higher level than the receiving waters and their riparian corridors for those flows that originate within the precincts.

· Outcome 7: any realigned/reconstructed watercourse must meet all the above outcomes.

Development consistent with the Environmental Outcomes for riparian corridor land

(a) The following uses are permissible with consent within riparian corridor land:

· Creation of the riparian corridor land to remain or become vegetated with fully structured native vegetation.

· Environmental protection works.

· Drainage (this does not include any type of basin, rain garden or other water quality control structure and their access points)

· Crossings (eg roads, service utilities, paths)

(b) Any APZ or part of APZ must not be located within the riparian corridor land. The APZ must not result in any clearing/thinning etc of the riparian corridor land.

All other uses (including exempt and complying development) will not be issued GTAs or a CAA within the CRZ and VB.

Pedestrian and Cycle Network location in relation to riparian corridor land

Any pedestrian and cycle network should be located beyond the riparian corridor land, except for direct crossings. Generally paths should be contained adjacent to or within the roadside edge where they are needed close to riparian corridor land. These development outcomes should be included in the precinct plans.

Road Crossings

Following road crossings are proposed:

· Western Precinct: 3 crossings of the category 2 (N-S) watercourse and 2 crossings of the category 3 (E-W) watercourse. No crossing of the Ninth Ave watercourse.

· Central Precinct: 2 crossings.

DWE will support up to this number of road crossings if the crossings are of the following minimum design:

As there is capacity for fauna and flora movements to occur around both precincts the usual requirement for a bridge crossing over any Category 2 watercourse will not be required. However, for all crossings over all watercourses, these are not be less than a box culvert design with adequate capacity for both water and fauna movements and have naturalized bases.

Bushfire Measures

It is noted that an APZ has not been identified adjacent to the riparian corridor land in either precinct in Fig 21, however a 10m APZ is suggested in Appendix F, except adjacent to the Regional Park and any SFPP development where a much greater width be required.

Perimeter roads around the riparian corridor lands are recommended. This combines the road footprint and any potential APZ together to minimize any bushfire setback consideration that may be needed due to the Department’s riparian corridor land requirements.

Water Cycle Management

· Detention/wetland basins (including access) are not be located in riparian corridor land, or other structures relating to water quality and quantity control.

· It is noted that some basins are not in logical locations (eg the S-E basin in the Western Precinct being on the south side of the watercourse) and a basin in the Central Precinct is both on-line and within the riparian corridor land.

· A water licence may be required if the storage capacity for stormwater used for irrigation is greater than 21 Megalitres for the Western Precinct and 12 Megalitres for the Central Precinct. These volumes should be researched and verified by a licensing officer at pre DA stage.

· Watercourses are to have sufficient space to cater for a 1:100 year flow.

· Where a river needs to be redesigned, there must be a 1:5 year low flow channel and adequate floodplain for the 1:100 year flow. Top of bank (where the channel is redesigned) is the 1:5 year channel width. Where any channel is already in a good natural condition, then redesign will not be allowed. Where there is good natural vegetation, only stabilization of the channel will be considered.

Soil and Water Management

These performance are criteria need to be included in the precinct plans:

· Any plan must ensure that no sediment laden water enters either the Regional Parks or South Creek.

· No sediment should be entering any identified river from development outside the riparian corridor land.

Location of waterfront land

· Council supports this process. Delfin has agreed to this process with DWE to identify which DAs will be IDAs. Process underway.

· Agreed.

Watercourse categories

· Noted.

· Classification of E-W watercourse in Western Precinct as Category 2 agreed.

· Noted.

Environmental outcomes for all riparian corridor land

Noted. Delfin has agreed to add new subsection “Riparian and Drainage corridors” to Section 4.10 of each precinct plan to incorporate DWE recommendations, subject to comments/responses below:

New section to generally incorporate DWE suggested outcomes, subject to consistency with the relevant performance objectives contained in clauses 24 and 28 of SREP 30 and the St Marys EPS (Note: These are listed in the SKM Water, Soils and Infrastructure reports at Appendix F).

In relation to Outcome 6, as the water quality of this creek is expected to be highly variable over time given the inflows from development upstream of the site, it is considered that it would be impractical to enforce this requirement.

In our view, the SREP 30 standards performance standards in relation to water quality should be the relevant requirement which indicate that the development is to incorporate stormwater management measures that ensure that there is no adverse impact upon the water quality in the receiving creek system. The standard is consistent with Council’s own water quality and water quantity management policy and will be delivered by the Western and Central Precinct developments.

Development consistent with the Environmental Outcomes for riparian corridor land

(a) Council has no objection to these requirements and Delfin has advised that these will be generally incorporated into new subsection in Section 4.10. Council does not object to the Delfin proposal to enable consideration of some drainage works and some pedestrian/cycle paths that may encroach on the riparian corridor land, provided that the specific proposals are addressed in detail by Council and DWE at the relevant DA stage.

(b) Noted.

Pedestrian and Cycle Network location in relation to riparian corridor land

As per comment above in relation to pedestrian/cycle paths.

Road Crossings

Council has no objection to these requirements but notes that the number and locations of road crossings shown in each precinct plan is indicative only and subject to refinement at detailed design/DA stage.

Bushfire Measures

Section C.1 and D.1.1 of the Bushfire Protection Assessment discuss the potential to apply a 10 m APZ to the riparian and park areas should they pose a threat (based on location, size/width, and management) to the final development plan. These APZs will be confirmed at the subdivision stage when further detailed design has been undertaken and final landuses confirmed. Council has no objections to this.

Notwithstanding this DWE recommendation, the precinct plans do not mandate perimeter roads around riparian corridors as there should be flexibility for other land uses (eg open space and residential incorporating any required APZs) to adjoin riparian corridors.

Water Cycle Management

· See previous comments regarding retaining flexibility to enable consideration of some drainage works within riparian corridors.

· Noted. Delfin has agreed to amend the locations of basins accordingly.

· Noted. Issue to be addressed at relevant DA stage.

· Noted. Trunk drainage design will consider 1:100yr events.

· Noted. Where the longitudinal grade of drainage is flat, provision of a low flow channel may not be possible in which case Delfin has agreed that alternate design solutions will be proposed. Efforts will be made to retain natural features where practicable.

Soil and Water Management

This has not been agreed by Delfin as it is inconsistent with SREP 30 performance objectives (clause 28). Noted by Council.

8. Ministry of Transport

· The Ministry recommends that pedestrian and cycle connections be provided to link residential peninsulas.

· In both precincts, village centres are not centrally located. This increases the proportion of residents being located outside the desired 400m walking catchment of centres.

· The proposed location of the employment zone makes bus servicing difficult, requiring lengthy route diversions. This will create a disincentive to the uptake of this mode for journey to work purposes.

· Given the scale of development proposed, a TMAP is requested.

· Agreed. Precinct Plans both indicate pedestrian and cycle access to all parts of precincts.

· Village Centre location determined after detailed planning process, which included consultation and participation with Council officers. Council officers concur that the Village Centre locations are optimally located and reflect a broad range of factors including site constraints, topography, future road access points, relationship to surrounding landuses (eg proximity to Employment zone and Regional Open Space in Central Precinct) and integration with community and open space uses.

· Proposed location of Employment zone was agreed by Council, Delfin and DoP and endorsed through the EDS Committee. Council disagrees with this submission and considers that the proximity of Employment zone to Village Centre, Regional Open Space hub and Dunheved Precincts will assist bus servicing. A planned direct link to Christie Street will further assist bus servicing.

· These comments are not supported as a TMS process applied. The procedures for investigating the impacts of the project on the State and local road network and public transport infrastructure requirements have been undertaken as part of the Transport Management Strategy process, formalised through the St Marys Development Agreement and Penrith Planning Agreement and are now being implemented.

9. Blacktown City Council

· No objections provided works are in accordance with previously approved flood studies and that flooding in the Blacktown LGA is not adversely affected.

· Suggest the collector roads between the precincts should be consistent in final design.

· While bus priority routes are generally supported, initiatives to promote alternative transport options could be investigated, such as a travel smart/travel wise campaign, providing travel information to the local community about car pooling, or providing free bus travel for residents for the two months of occupation.

· In principle agreement provided to the 7mm flood level increase provided that (1) the increase does not extend into any areas, within Blacktown LGA, other than the recreation area mentioned, (2) there is no increase in the flood hazard and (3) that work-as-executed plans are provided to ensure that the fill level does not extend past that provided in the modelled proposal.

· Council acknowledges that flood studies are in accordance with previously approved flood studies (adopted Dunheved Precinct Plan and approved Dunheved EIS) and demonstrate no adverse impact. We have advised Blacktown Council that an amended filling proposal now indicates that the maximum increase in flood levels upstream (south) of the site in the 100 year ARI event would be an additional 7mm (44mm total) and this increase is limited to the Dunheved Golf Course. Blacktown Council has no objection to this minor increase.

· Noted. Council will consult with Blacktown Council in the finalisation of Collector Road design.

· Resident information kits, covering transport information, to be distributed to all new households and part of Planning Agreement commitments. Community bus provision included in draft Planning Agreement.

10. TransGrid

1. It is advised that transmission line easements are acquired by TransGrid to provide adequate working space along the route of the line for construction and maintenance work and also to ensure that no work or other activity is undertaken under or near the transmission line or the structures which could either by accident or otherwise create an unsafe situation either for persons of for the security of the transmission line.

2. All proposed activities within an easement area require written approval from TransGrid.

3. List of current general restrictions provided for information. This is not exhaustive and, where there is any doubt concerning a particular activity within the easement, advice should be sought from TransGrid.

1. Noted. Transmission line

structures and easement accounted

for in draft Precinct Plan (refer

Sections4.2 and 4.4)

2. Noted. TransGrid to be further

consulted at relevant DA stage

3. As above.

11. DECC

1. As noted in the draft plans, some areas of the regional park zone could be included in the passive local open space network. These areas would offset any rationalisation of the Urban and Regional Park zone boundaries which DECC will continue to seek to benefit future management of the Regional Park (and Urban zoned areas).

2. (a) DECC has indicated that it will not accept management of the remnant farm dam adjoining the Western Precinct, due to concerns about the structural integrity of the dam and management issues associated with its proximity to the Urban zone.

(b) DECC supports proposed open space to east of the dam.

(c) Residential development to west of the dam not supported due to lack of adequate APZs, likelihood of flooding and issues associated with managing an open body of water close to an urban area. It is recommended land surrounding the dam be zoned open space.

3. The APZs between the urban and regional park zones do not adequately reflect the future size of vegetation within the regional park. It has been assumed that the vegetation will remain woodland. However, the woodland currently present is at an early stage of regrowth and in the future will become forest. It is recommended that the width of the APZs be reassessed to reflect the future bushfire risk.

4. In relation to the watercycle assessment it should be acknowledged that the existing weeds along watercourses of the regional park which are the result of nutrient loads from existing urban (and other development) in the catchment will need to be appropriately managed.

5. The controls proposed to restrict domestic animal access to regional park are strongly supported.

6. DECC has been liaising with the proponent regarding Aboriginal archaeology for the precincts. The associated archaeological report has been reviewed and in relation to the Western Precinct DECC has had further discussions regarding the s90 process.

1. Council has held discussions with DECC and Delfin regarding passive open space opportunities within the adjoining Regional Park. It is considered these opportunities can be further considered where there is an alignment with the passive recreation facilities that will be advanced by DECC and local passive open space requirements. Further discussions on between Council, DECC, and Delfin regarding these opportunities are to be held.
A boundary rationalisation will now not occur.

2. (a) The remnant farm dam was included in the land zoned as Regional Park by SREP 30 (Amendment No 1) and as such DECC has an obligation for the ownership and management of the land. On-going discussions will be held with DECC in accordance with the Regional Park transfer process and obligations under the St Marys Development Agreement.

Issues relating to the structural integrity of the existing dam will be investigated and addressed as part of any DA for development of land adjoining and downstream of the dam.

(b) Noted.

(c) Land to west of the dam is zoned Urban under SREP 30 and zoning enables residential development. Issues relating to potential flooding, overland flow paths and drainage channels will be addressed as part of the DA process for future urban development.

3. A detailed Bushfire Assessment nominated various APZs for the Western and Central Precincts and did not raise objections to the proposed development.

Notwithstanding the nominated APZs, Council has obtained the following amendment to the draft Precinct Plans that clarifies that a further assessment and referral to the RFS for final approval will be carried out at DA stage:-.

“ Therefore, bushfire risk and matters including APZs, building construction standards, access and services will be further addressed at the DA stage and, depending on the type of DA, in accordance with the requirements to obtain Rural Fire Service approval or to consult with the Rural Fire Service. This will include further consideration of the APZ widths identified in this precinct plan.”

4. Weed management addressed in the Weed Management Strategy.

5. Noted.

6. Noted. Section 90 permit was granted on 13 February 2009.

12. RTA

1. RTA provides comments regarding amendments to map boundaries and to assist council in the preparation of the draft LEP.

2. RTA have accepted a package of works in kind as detailed in the state developer agreement and associated documents. However, RTA and the developer are yet to agree on the necessary trigger points or timetable of when these works are to be implemented. The requirement to deliver each component of these works is expected to be tied to the number of lots released as indicated as being required by the traffic modelling. The draft precinct plans appear generally consistent with the developer agreement.

3. Council is not to grant consent to the carrying out of development on any land within the area proposed for rezoning unless Council is satisfied that arrangements satisfactory to the RTA have been made for the carrying out of works in kind or making appropriate payments towards the upgrading of arterial roads and intersections to service that land.

4. It is noted that the developer has applied for a grant under the Federal Government’s Housing Affordability Fund (HAF) which would result in bringing forward stage 1 of The Northern Road widening to four travel lanes, signalising of the The Northern Road / Sherringham Road and signalising of The Northern Road / Western Precinct access road. RTA has been kept informed throughout this process and is in support of acceleration of these works.

5. The key design considerations in the PCAL’s “Designing Places for Active Living” guidelines should be taken into consideration when assessing the precinct plans. RTA’s NSW Bicycle Guidelines and the Department of Planning’s NSW Planning Guidelines for Walking and Cycling are useful technical documents when preparing cycling and pedestrian routes.

1. Consultation relates to draft precinct plans and not draft LEP/proposed rezoning. Land is already zoned for development.

2. NSWG transport contributions are provided under Clause 16 Part 2 of the St Marys Development Agreement. The Balance Roadworks (clause 16.4) have been determined by the Dept of Planning transport committee as detailed in the St Marys project Revised Transport Management Strategy. A preliminary draft amendment to provide for the revised TMS was provided to the RTA at a meeting Thursday 4 September 2008 and is awaiting RTA response to progress to the next stage of detail.

3. Refer 2.

4. Noted.

5. Draft precinct plans incorporate a broad range of urban design principles and characteristics that promote accessibility, walkability, cycling, recreation etc and are therefore consistent with guidelines.

13. SES

1. The SES has no existing information or experience with flooding in this area. With no detailed understanding of the nature of the flood risk for the proposed development, the SES cannot comment in any detail on the likely flood emergency management requirements for the site. Nor can the Service comment in detail on the impact of this new development on existing flood emergency arrangements.

2. It is critical that the design of the physical site for new areas such as St Marys incorporates reliable physical flood management considerations. This means that the new communities must be designed to be relatively self-managed in floods.

3. It is accepted by the Service that subdivision and building design cannot eliminate all flood risk. Therefore, once the development is physically implemented and populated, the SES will review the relevant SES flood plans for the area.

1. SES has no specific objections to the draft plans.

2. The flood modelling results, incorporating all of the previous modelling assumptions, for the amended filling proposal now advanced for the Central Precinct indicate that the maximum increase in flood levels upstream (south) of the site in the 100 year ARI event would be an additional 7mm (44mm total) and there would be no change in flood levels downstream (north) of the site (11mm increase) in the 100 year ARI event;

3. These results, whilst increasing the previous levels marginally, are considered to be within acceptable limits.

*Policy Review Committee Meeting*	*9 March 2009*
*Attachment 4 - Summary of Public Submissions*

Summary of Public Submissions & Council Assessment

Draft Western and Central Precinct Plans - St Marys Release Area – 9 March 2009

	Issues Raised in Submission	Council Assessment of Submission
1.	Important areas and wildlife corridors of the Cumberland Plain will be destroyed - the habitat, as well as rare flora and fauna. The claim that only 62ha of the Cumberland Plain will be utilised is highly questionable and needs to be verified for the public. The Pimelea spicata population in this area should be preserved. As well, propagation by taking cuttings should be considered so that new plants can be established in the Regional Park. The adjacent regional park would be affected as there appears to be insufficient plans for proper boundary fences that would clearly protect and separate the regional park. The soil is contaminated. This will cause health problems for future residents. Insufficient infrastructure will increase pressure on Penrith Hospital and other services, as well as roads. Suggest a light rail. Kangaroos on the site have been treated inhumanely.	Development areas limited to land already zoned for urban development in SREP 30. SREP 30 (Amendment No. 2) gazetted 27 February 2009. Both precinct plans include detailed flora and fauna assessments. Foremost mitigation measure for threatened species and ecological communities is the establishment of the 900 ha Regional Park. Additional mitigation measures are outlined in the Precinct Plans. Regional Park boundary fencing addressed in DECC managed Regional Park Plan of Management. Contamination Management Plans prepared and endorsed. Site Audit Statements issued for both precincts. The property has been remediated, audited and declared suitable for the intended landuses. A development agreement between the developer and State Government requires the developer to contribute towards provision of infrastructure as a consequence the development. Macrofauna Management Plan endorsed by State Government and is being implemented.
2.	Objects to the destruction of Cumberland Plain Woodland (CPW) and effect on native birds, feeding, resting or breeding in the greater Mt Druitt area. Concerned that trees are not replaced. Remnant CPW tree stands have ecological value and CPW will regenerate.	Development areas limited to land already zoned for urban development in SREP 30. SREP 30 (Amendment No. 2) gazetted 27 February 2009. Both precinct plans include detailed flora and fauna assessments. Foremost mitigation measure for threatened species and ecological communities is the establishment of the 900 ha Regional Park. Additional mitigation measures are outlined in the Precinct Plans. Future development will still be subject to environmental assessment under the Act.
3.	Concerned that the bus, pedestrian and bicycle only access point shown on the plans as exiting the Central Precinct at Leichhardt Avenue, Werrington County will become a thoroughfare for cars and trade vehicles as well as buses etc. The junction of Leichhardt and Henry Lawson Avenue is opposite a day care centre and is about 800 metres from Werrington County Public school. Concerned that an unacceptable level of traffic will use John Bateman Avenue and cause problems for Werrington County Public School as well as the day care centre in Henry Lawson Avenue.	SREP 30 (Amendment No. 2) gazetted 27 February 2009. This limits this access point to bus only access. Any future changes to access are unlikely but would be the subject of negotiations between DoP, Council and Delfin and would involve the local community.
4.	Supports the proposal - Suggest a network of cycleways not only within the precinct but to extend from the Penrith Lakes Scheme, along Andrews Rd and Dunheved rd to link up the Lakes Scheme with the Western and Central and Eastern Precincts and Cambridge Gardens, Werrington Downs, Werrington County, Werrington.	St Marys Development Agreement includes obligations requiring the Joint Venture developers to make future contribution of $100,000 to the RTA towards the construction of external cycleways.
5.	Supports the proposal – will bring additional shopping facilities to the North Ward.	Noted
6.	Proposal will ruin Australian Heritage listed site. Western Sydney is already struggling to support the amount of people moving out here now as it is. Concern about unknown toxic waste dumped on ADI site. Site should be preserved from development.	Land already zoned for urban development under SREP 30. The Regional Park zone incorporates all of the land listed by the Australian Heritage Commission on the Register of the National Estate. Western and Central Precincts declared release areas under SREP 30 by Minister for Planning in September 2006. SREP 30 (Amendment No. 2) gazetted 27 February 2009. Development of the site is consistent with the St Marys Planning Framework (SREP 30, EPS and St Marys Development Agreement), Metropolitan Strategy, draft NW Subregional Strategy and Council’s Sustainability Blueprint for Urban Release Areas.
7.	Too much development and infrastructure not keeping pace. Concern about traffic increases on The Northern Road – proper planning should be given to transport and roads. Loss of kangaroos, emus and other species.	Land already zoned for urban development under SREP 30. Western and Central Precincts declared release areas under SREP 30 by Minister for Planning in September 2006. SREP 30 (Amendment No. 2) gazetted 27 February 2009. Development of the site is consistent with the St Marys Planning Framework (SREP 30, EPS and St Marys Development Agreement), Metropolitan Strategy, draft NW Subregional Strategy and Council’s Sustainability Blueprint for Urban Release Areas. Both precinct plans include traffic reports. Extensive contributions to traffic and transport improvements included in St Marys Development Agreement and St Marys Penrith Planning Agreement.
8.	The exhibited SREP 30 amendments and Precinct Plans will result in the clearing of important remnants of Cumberland Plain Woodland a Federally and State Listed Endangered Ecological Community. SREP 30 should protect all of the Cumberland Plain Woodland found on the site. Currently hundreds of hectares of Cumberland Plain Woodland are zoned for urban development. SREP 30 must be amended to rezone this bushland from Urban to Regional Park.	Land zoned for urban development under SREP 30. Western and Central Precincts declared release areas under SREP 30 by Minister for Planning in September 2006. SREP 30 (Amendment No. 2) gazetted 27 February 2009. Development of the site is consistent with the St Marys Planning Framework, Metropolitan Strategy, draft NW Subregional Strategy and Council’s Sustainability Blueprint for Urban Release Areas. Both precinct plans include detailed flora and fauna assessments. Foremost mitigation measure for threatened species and ecological communities is the establishment of the 900 ha Regional Park. Additional mitigation measures are outlined in Section 4.7 of Precinct Plans.
9.	The exhibited SREP 30 amendments and Precinct Plans for the ADI Site will result in the clearing of important remnants of Cumberland Plain Woodland which is a Federally and State Listed Endangered Ecological Community. SREP 30 should protect all of the Cumberland Plain Woodland found on the site. Currently hundreds of hectares of Cumberland Plain Woodland are zoned for urban development. SREP 30 must be amended to rezone this bushland from Urban to Regional Park.	Land zoned for urban development under SREP 30. Western and Central Precincts declared release areas under SREP 30 by Minister for Planning in September 2006. SREP 30 (Amendment No. 2) gazetted 27 February 2009. Development of the site is consistent with the St Marys Planning Framework, Metropolitan Strategy, draft NW Subregional Strategy and Council’s Sustainability Blueprint for Urban Release Areas. Both precinct plans include detailed flora and fauna assessments. Foremost mitigation measure for threatened species and ecological communities is the establishment of the 900 ha Regional Park. Additional mitigation measures are outlined in Section 4.7 of Precinct Plans.
10.	The exhibited SREP 30 amendments and Precinct Plans will result in the clearing of important remnants of Cumberland Plain Woodland a Federally and State Listed Endangered Ecological Community. SREP 30 should protect all of the Cumberland Plain Woodland found on the site. Currently hundreds of hectares of Cumberland Plain Woodland are zoned for urban development. SREP 30 must be amended to rezone this bushland from Urban to Regional Park.	Land zoned for urban development under SREP 30. Western and Central Precincts declared release areas under SREP 30 by Minister for Planning in September 2006. SREP 30 (Amendment No. 2) gazetted 27 February 2009. Development of the site is consistent with the St Marys Planning Framework, Metropolitan Strategy, draft NW Subregional Strategy and Council’s Sustainability Blueprint for Urban Release Areas. Both precinct plans include detailed flora and fauna assessments. Foremost mitigation measure for threatened species and ecological communities is the establishment of the 900 ha Regional Park. Additional mitigation measures are outlined in Section 4.7 of Precinct Plans.
11.	The exhibited SREP 30 amendments and Precinct Plans will result in the clearing of important remnants of Cumberland Plain Woodland a Federally and State Listed Endangered Ecological Community. SREP 30 should protect all of the Cumberland Plain Woodland found on the site. Currently hundreds of hectares of Cumberland Plain Woodland are zoned for urban development. SREP 30 must be amended to rezone this bushland from Urban to Regional Park.	Land zoned for urban development under SREP 30. Western and Central Precincts declared release areas under SREP 30 by Minister for Planning in September 2006. SREP 30 (Amendment No. 2) gazetted 27 February 2009. Development of the site is consistent with the St Marys Planning Framework, Metropolitan Strategy, draft NW Subregional Strategy and Council’s Sustainability Blueprint for Urban Release Areas. Both precinct plans include detailed flora and fauna assessments. Foremost mitigation measure for threatened species and ecological communities is the establishment of the 900 ha Regional Park. Additional mitigation measures are outlined in Section 4.7 of Precinct Plans.
12.	Cumberland Plain vegetation is truly threatened and deserves its legislative protection. Many tiny remnants of Cumberland Plain vegetation around Penrith are being patched up by Council at considerable expense whilst Council is putting up no resistance to large scale clearing of a much larger area on the ADI Site.	Land zoned for urban development under SREP 30. Western and Central Precincts declared release areas under SREP 30 by Minister for Planning in September 2006. SREP 30 (Amendment No. 2) gazetted 27 February 2009. Development of the site is consistent with the St Marys Planning Framework, Metropolitan Strategy, draft NW Subregional Strategy and Council’s Sustainability Blueprint for Urban Release Areas. Both precinct plans include detailed flora and fauna assessments. Foremost mitigation measure for threatened species and ecological communities is the establishment of the 900 ha Regional Park. Additional mitigation measures are outlined in Section 4.7 of Precinct Plans.
13.	Australian Wildlife Protection Council Oppose any plan that allows 5,000 houses and the destruction of hundreds of hectares of Cumberland Plain Woodland which has been zoned to allow urban development. The exhibited SREP 30 amendments and Precinct Plans will result in the clearing of important remnants of Cumberland Plain Woodland a Federally and State Listed Endangered Ecological Community.SREP 30 should protect all of the Cumberland Plain Woodland found on the site. Currently hundreds of hectares of Cumberland Plain Woodland are zoned for urban development. SREP 30 must be amended to rezone bushland to Regional Park.	Land zoned for urban development under SREP 30. Western and Central Precincts declared release areas under SREP 30 by Minister for Planning in September 2006. SREP 30 (Amendment No. 2) gazetted 27 February 2009. Development of the site is consistent with the St Marys Planning Framework, Metropolitan Strategy, draft NW Subregional Strategy and Council’s Sustainability Blueprint for Urban Release Areas. Both precinct plans include detailed flora and fauna assessments. Foremost mitigation measure for threatened species and ecological communities is the establishment of the 900 ha Regional Park. Additional mitigation measures are outlined in Section 4.7 of Precinct Plans.
14.	The exhibited SREP 30 amendments and Precinct Plans for the ADI Site will result in the clearing of important remnants of Cumberland Plain Woodland. These are Federally and State Listed Endangered Ecological Community. SREP 30 should protect all of the Cumberland Plain Woodland found on the site. Currently hundreds of hectares of Cumberland Plain Woodland are zoned for urban development. SREP 30 must be amended to rezone this bushland from Urban to Regional Park.	Land zoned for urban development under SREP 30. Western and Central Precincts declared release areas under SREP 30 by Minister for Planning in September 2006. SREP 30 (Amendment No. 2) gazetted 27 February 2009. Development of the site is consistent with the St Marys Planning Framework, Metropolitan Strategy, draft NW Subregional Strategy and Council’s Sustainability Blueprint for Urban Release Areas. Both precinct plans include detailed flora and fauna assessments. Foremost mitigation measure for threatened species and ecological communities is the establishment of the 900 ha Regional Park. Additional mitigation measures are outlined in Section 4.7 of Precinct Plans.
15.	The exhibited SREP 30 amendments and Precinct Plans for the ADI Site will result in the clearing of important remnants of Cumberland Plain Woodland, a Federal and State Listed Endangered Ecological Community. SREP 30 should protect all the Cumberland Plain Woodland on that site. Currently, hundreds of hectares of Cumberland Plain Woodland are zoned for urban development. SREP 30 must be amended to rezone this bushland from Urban to Regional Park.	Land zoned for urban development under SREP 30. Western and Central Precincts declared release areas under SREP 30 by Minister for Planning in September 2006. SREP 30 (Amendment No. 2) gazetted 27 February 2009. Development of the site is consistent with the St Marys Planning Framework, Metropolitan Strategy, draft NW Subregional Strategy and Council’s Sustainability Blueprint for Urban Release Areas. Both precinct plans include detailed flora and fauna assessments. Foremost mitigation measure for threatened species and ecological communities is the establishment of the 900 ha Regional Park. Additional mitigation measures are outlined in Section 4.7 of Precinct Plans.
16.	The exhibited SREP 30 amendments and Precinct Plans for the ADI Site will result in the clearing of important remnants of Cumberland Plain Woodland, a Federal and State Listed Endangered Ecological Community. SREP 30 should protect all the Cumberland Plain Woodland on that site. Currently, hundreds of hectares of Cumberland Plain Woodland are zoned for urban development. SREP 30 must be amended to rezone this bushland from Urban to Regional Park.	Land zoned for urban development under SREP 30. Western and Central Precincts declared release areas under SREP 30 by Minister for Planning in September 2006. SREP 30 (Amendment No. 2) gazetted 27 February 2009. Development of the site is consistent with the St Marys Planning Framework, Metropolitan Strategy, draft NW Subregional Strategy and Council’s Sustainability Blueprint for Urban Release Areas. Both precinct plans include detailed flora and fauna assessments. Foremost mitigation measure for threatened species and ecological communities is the establishment of the 900 ha Regional Park. Additional mitigation measures are outlined in Section 4.7 of Precinct Plans.
17.	This site is part of "the lungs" of our densely developed city. The exhibited SREP 30 amendments and Precinct Plans for the ADI Site will result in the clearing of important remnants of Cumberland Plain Woodland a Federally and State Listed Endangered Ecological Community. SREP 30 should protect all of the Cumberland Plain Woodland found on the site. We are opposed to the hundreds of hectares of Cumberland Plain Woodland zoned for urban development. We ask that SREP 30 be amended to rezone this bushland from Urban to Regional Park and Penrith Council reject the Precinct Plans	Land zoned for urban development under SREP 30. Western and Central Precincts declared release areas under SREP 30 by Minister for Planning in September 2006. SREP 30 (Amendment No. 2) gazetted 27 February 2009. Development of the site is consistent with the St Marys Planning Framework, Metropolitan Strategy, draft NW Subregional Strategy and Council’s Sustainability Blueprint for Urban Release Areas. Both precinct plans include detailed flora and fauna assessments. Foremost mitigation measure for threatened species and ecological communities is the establishment of the 900 ha Regional Park. Additional mitigation measures are outlined in Section 4.7 of Precinct Plans.
18.	The exhibited SREP 30 amendments and Precinct Plans will result in the clearing of important remnants of Cumberland Plain Woodland a Federally and State Listed Endangered Ecological Community. SREP 30 should protect all of the Cumberland Plain Woodland found on the site. Currently hundreds of hectares of Cumberland Plain Woodland are zoned for urban development. SREP 30 must be amended to rezone this bushland from Urban to Regional Park.	Land zoned for urban development under SREP 30. Western and Central Precincts declared release areas under SREP 30 by Minister for Planning in September 2006. SREP 30 (Amendment No. 2) gazetted 27 February 2009. Development of the site is consistent with the St Marys Planning Framework, Metropolitan Strategy, draft NW Subregional Strategy and Council’s Sustainability Blueprint for Urban Release Areas. Both precinct plans include detailed flora and fauna assessments. Foremost mitigation measure for threatened species and ecological communities is the establishment of the 900 ha Regional Park. Additional mitigation measures are outlined in Section 4.7 of Precinct Plans.
19.	SREP 30 amendments on exhibition should definitely protect all of this ecological community. SREP 30 should be amended to rezone this pristine wilderness from Urban to Regional Park. Only a few percent of the original woodland remains. It will never be recovered once it is destroyed. It will be an internationally recognised achievement if this precious wonderland is protected and managed properly and an international disgrace if it is destroyed. This treasure is an asset to our community, not a liability. It is a beautiful forest that has enormous aboriginal value, it cleans the air and water we pollute and it provides habitat for thousands of native plants and animals. It is also therapeutic just looking at it and it is an educational/tourism gold mine.	Land zoned for urban development under SREP 30. Western and Central Precincts declared release areas under SREP 30 by Minister for Planning in September 2006. SREP 30 (Amendment No. 2) gazetted 27 February 2009. Development of the site is consistent with the St Marys Planning Framework, Metropolitan Strategy, draft NW Subregional Strategy and Council’s Sustainability Blueprint for Urban Release Areas. Both precinct plans include detailed flora and fauna assessments. Foremost mitigation measure for threatened species and ecological communities is the establishment of the 900 ha Regional Park. Additional mitigation measures are outlined in Section 4.7 of Precinct Plans.
20.	The exhibited SREP 30 amendments and Precinct Plans will result in the clearing of important remnants of Cumberland Plain Woodland a Federally and State Listed Endangered Ecological Community. SREP 30 should protect all of the Cumberland Plain Woodland found on the site. Currently hundreds of hectares of Cumberland Plain Woodland are zoned for urban development. SREP 30 must be amended to rezone this bushland from Urban to Regional Park.	Land zoned for urban development under SREP 30. Western and Central Precincts declared release areas under SREP 30 by Minister for Planning in September 2006. SREP 30 (Amendment No. 2) gazetted 27 February 2009. Development of the site is consistent with the St Marys Planning Framework, Metropolitan Strategy, draft NW Subregional Strategy and Council’s Sustainability Blueprint for Urban Release Areas. Both precinct plans include detailed flora and fauna assessments. Foremost mitigation measure for threatened species and ecological communities is the establishment of the 900 ha Regional Park. Additional mitigation measures are outlined in Section 4.7 of Precinct Plans.
21.	The exhibited SREP 30 amendments and Precinct Plans will result in the clearing of important remnants of Cumberland Plain Woodland a Federally and State Listed Endangered Ecological Community. SREP 30 should protect all of the Cumberland Plain Woodland found on the site. Currently hundreds of hectares of Cumberland Plain Woodland are zoned for urban development. SREP 30 must be amended to rezone this bushland from Urban to Regional Park.	Land zoned for urban development under SREP 30. Western and Central Precincts declared release areas under SREP 30 by Minister for Planning in September 2006. SREP 30 (Amendment No. 2) gazetted 27 February 2009. Development of the site is consistent with the St Marys Planning Framework, Metropolitan Strategy, draft NW Subregional Strategy and Council’s Sustainability Blueprint for Urban Release Areas. Both precinct plans include detailed flora and fauna assessments. Foremost mitigation measure for threatened species and ecological communities is the establishment of the 900 ha Regional Park. Additional mitigation measures are outlined in Section 4.7 of Precinct Plans.
22.	The exhibited SREP 30 amendments and Precinct Plans will result in the clearing of important remnants of Cumberland Plain Woodland a Federally and State Listed Endangered Ecological Community. SREP 30 should protect all of the Cumberland Plain Woodland found on the site. Currently hundreds of hectares of Cumberland Plain Woodland are zoned for urban development. SREP 30 must be amended to rezone this bushland from Urban to Regional Park.	Land zoned for urban development under SREP 30. Western and Central Precincts declared release areas under SREP 30 by Minister for Planning in September 2006. SREP 30 (Amendment No. 2) gazetted 27 February 2009. Development of the site is consistent with the St Marys Planning Framework, Metropolitan Strategy, draft NW Subregional Strategy and Council’s Sustainability Blueprint for Urban Release Areas. Both precinct plans include detailed flora and fauna assessments. Foremost mitigation measure for threatened species and ecological communities is the establishment of the 900 ha Regional Park. Additional mitigation measures are outlined in Section 4.7 of Precinct Plans.
23.	The exhibited SREP 30 amendments and Precinct Plans will result in the clearing of important remnants of Cumberland Plain Woodland a Federally and State Listed Endangered Ecological Community. SREP 30 should protect all of the Cumberland Plain Woodland found on the site. Currently hundreds of hectares of Cumberland Plain Woodland are zoned for urban development. SREP 30 must be amended to rezone this bushland from Urban to Regional Park.	Land zoned for urban development under SREP 30. Western and Central Precincts declared release areas under SREP 30 by Minister for Planning in September 2006. SREP 30 (Amendment No. 2) gazetted 27 February 2009. Development of the site is consistent with the St Marys Planning Framework, Metropolitan Strategy, draft NW Subregional Strategy and Council’s Sustainability Blueprint for Urban Release Areas. Both precinct plans include detailed flora and fauna assessments. Foremost mitigation measure for threatened species and ecological communities is the establishment of the 900 ha Regional Park. Additional mitigation measures are outlined in Section 4.7 of Precinct Plans.
24.	Hawkesbury Greens The exhibited SREP 30 amendments and Precinct Plans will result in the clearing of important remnants of Cumberland Plain Woodland a Federally and State Listed Endangered Ecological Community. SREP 30 should protect all of the Cumberland Plain Woodland found on the site. Currently hundreds of hectares of Cumberland Plain Woodland are zoned for urban development. SREP 30 must be amended to rezone this bushland from Urban to Regional Park.

Issues Raised in Submission

Council Assessment of Submission

Important areas and wildlife corridors of the Cumberland Plain will be destroyed - the habitat, as well as rare flora and fauna. The claim that only 62ha of the Cumberland Plain will be utilised is highly questionable and needs to be verified for the public. The Pimelea spicata population in this area should be preserved. As well, propagation by taking cuttings should be considered so that new plants can be established in the Regional Park.

The adjacent regional park would be affected as there appears to be insufficient plans for proper boundary fences that would clearly protect and separate the regional park.

The soil is contaminated. This will cause health problems for future residents.

Insufficient infrastructure will increase pressure on Penrith Hospital and other services, as well as roads. Suggest a light rail.

Kangaroos on the site have been treated inhumanely.

Development areas limited to land already zoned for urban development in SREP 30. SREP 30 (Amendment No. 2) gazetted 27 February 2009. Both precinct plans include detailed flora and fauna assessments. Foremost mitigation measure for threatened species and ecological communities is the establishment of the 900 ha Regional Park. Additional mitigation measures are outlined in the Precinct Plans.

Regional Park boundary fencing addressed in DECC managed Regional Park Plan of Management.

Contamination Management Plans prepared and endorsed. Site Audit Statements issued for both precincts. The property has been remediated, audited and declared suitable for the intended landuses.

A development agreement between the developer and State Government requires the developer to contribute towards provision of infrastructure as a consequence the development.

Macrofauna Management Plan endorsed by State Government and is being implemented.

Objects to the destruction of Cumberland Plain Woodland (CPW) and effect on native birds, feeding, resting or breeding in the greater Mt Druitt area.

Concerned that trees are not replaced.

Remnant CPW tree stands have ecological value and CPW will regenerate.

Concerned that the bus, pedestrian and bicycle only access point shown on the plans as exiting the Central Precinct at Leichhardt Avenue, Werrington County will become a thoroughfare for cars and trade vehicles as well as buses etc. The junction of Leichhardt and Henry Lawson Avenue is opposite a day care centre and is about 800 metres from Werrington County Public school.

Concerned that an unacceptable level of traffic will use John Bateman Avenue and cause problems for Werrington County Public School as well as the day care centre in Henry Lawson Avenue.

SREP 30 (Amendment No. 2) gazetted 27 February 2009. This limits this access point to bus only access.

Any future changes to access are unlikely but would be the subject of negotiations between DoP, Council and Delfin and would involve the local community.

Supports the proposal - Suggest a network of cycleways not only within the precinct but to extend from the Penrith Lakes Scheme, along Andrews Rd and Dunheved rd to link up the Lakes Scheme with the Western and Central and Eastern Precincts and Cambridge Gardens, Werrington Downs, Werrington County, Werrington.

St Marys Development Agreement includes obligations requiring the Joint Venture developers to make future contribution of $100,000 to the RTA towards the construction of external cycleways.

Supports the proposal – will bring additional shopping facilities to the North Ward.

Noted

Proposal will ruin Australian Heritage listed site.

Western Sydney is already struggling to support the amount of people moving out here now as it is.

Concern about unknown toxic waste dumped on ADI site.

Site should be preserved from development.

Land already zoned for urban development under SREP 30. The Regional Park zone incorporates all of the land listed by the Australian Heritage Commission on the Register of the National Estate. Western and Central Precincts declared release areas under SREP 30 by Minister for Planning in September 2006. SREP 30 (Amendment No. 2) gazetted 27 February 2009. Development of the site is consistent with the St Marys Planning Framework (SREP 30, EPS and St Marys Development Agreement), Metropolitan Strategy, draft NW Subregional Strategy and Council’s Sustainability Blueprint for Urban Release Areas.

Too much development and infrastructure not keeping pace.

Concern about traffic increases on The Northern Road – proper planning should be given to transport and roads.

Loss of kangaroos, emus and other species.

Land already zoned for urban development under SREP 30. Western and Central Precincts declared release areas under SREP 30 by Minister for Planning in September 2006. SREP 30 (Amendment No. 2) gazetted 27 February 2009. Development of the site is consistent with the St Marys Planning Framework (SREP 30, EPS and St Marys Development Agreement), Metropolitan Strategy, draft NW Subregional Strategy and Council’s Sustainability Blueprint for Urban Release Areas.

Both precinct plans include traffic reports. Extensive contributions to traffic and transport improvements included in St Marys Development Agreement and St Marys Penrith Planning Agreement.

The exhibited SREP 30 amendments and Precinct Plans will result in the clearing of important remnants of Cumberland Plain Woodland a Federally and State Listed Endangered Ecological Community.

SREP 30 should protect all of the Cumberland Plain Woodland found on the site.

Currently hundreds of hectares of Cumberland Plain Woodland are zoned for urban development.

SREP 30 must be amended to rezone this bushland from Urban to Regional Park.

Land zoned for urban development under SREP 30. Western and Central Precincts declared release areas under SREP 30 by Minister for Planning in September 2006.

SREP 30 (Amendment No. 2) gazetted 27 February 2009.

Development of the site is consistent with the St Marys Planning Framework, Metropolitan Strategy, draft NW Subregional Strategy and Council’s Sustainability Blueprint for Urban Release Areas.

Both precinct plans include detailed flora and fauna assessments. Foremost mitigation measure for threatened species and ecological communities is the establishment of the 900 ha Regional Park. Additional mitigation measures are outlined in Section 4.7 of Precinct Plans.

The exhibited SREP 30 amendments and Precinct Plans for the ADI Site will result in the clearing of important remnants of Cumberland Plain Woodland which is a Federally and State Listed Endangered Ecological Community.

SREP 30 should protect all of the Cumberland Plain Woodland found on the site.

Currently hundreds of hectares of Cumberland Plain Woodland are zoned for urban development.

SREP 30 must be amended to rezone this bushland from Urban to Regional Park.

Land zoned for urban development under SREP 30. Western and Central Precincts declared release areas under SREP 30 by Minister for Planning in September 2006.

SREP 30 (Amendment No. 2) gazetted 27 February 2009.

Development of the site is consistent with the St Marys Planning Framework, Metropolitan Strategy, draft NW Subregional Strategy and Council’s Sustainability Blueprint for Urban Release Areas.

10.

The exhibited SREP 30 amendments and Precinct Plans will result in the clearing of important remnants of Cumberland Plain Woodland a Federally and State Listed Endangered Ecological Community.

SREP 30 should protect all of the Cumberland Plain Woodland found on the site.

Currently hundreds of hectares of Cumberland Plain Woodland are zoned for urban development.

SREP 30 must be amended to rezone this bushland from Urban to Regional Park.

Land zoned for urban development under SREP 30. Western and Central Precincts declared release areas under SREP 30 by Minister for Planning in September 2006.

SREP 30 (Amendment No. 2) gazetted 27 February 2009.

Development of the site is consistent with the St Marys Planning Framework, Metropolitan Strategy, draft NW Subregional Strategy and Council’s Sustainability Blueprint for Urban Release Areas.

11.

The exhibited SREP 30 amendments and Precinct Plans will result in the clearing of important remnants of Cumberland Plain Woodland a Federally and State Listed Endangered Ecological Community.

SREP 30 should protect all of the Cumberland Plain Woodland found on the site.

Currently hundreds of hectares of Cumberland Plain Woodland are zoned for urban development.

SREP 30 must be amended to rezone this bushland from Urban to Regional Park.

Land zoned for urban development under SREP 30. Western and Central Precincts declared release areas under SREP 30 by Minister for Planning in September 2006.

SREP 30 (Amendment No. 2) gazetted 27 February 2009.

Development of the site is consistent with the St Marys Planning Framework, Metropolitan Strategy, draft NW Subregional Strategy and Council’s Sustainability Blueprint for Urban Release Areas.

12.

Cumberland Plain vegetation is truly threatened and deserves its legislative protection. Many tiny remnants of Cumberland Plain vegetation around Penrith are being patched up by Council at considerable expense whilst Council is putting up no resistance to large scale clearing of a much larger area on the ADI Site.

Land zoned for urban development under SREP 30. Western and Central Precincts declared release areas under SREP 30 by Minister for Planning in September 2006.

SREP 30 (Amendment No. 2) gazetted 27 February 2009.

Development of the site is consistent with the St Marys Planning Framework, Metropolitan Strategy, draft NW Subregional Strategy and Council’s Sustainability Blueprint for Urban Release Areas.

13.

Australian Wildlife Protection Council

Oppose any plan that allows 5,000 houses and the destruction of hundreds of hectares of Cumberland Plain Woodland which has been zoned to allow urban development.

The exhibited SREP 30 amendments and Precinct Plans will result in the clearing of important remnants of Cumberland Plain Woodland a Federally and State Listed Endangered Ecological Community.SREP 30 should protect all of the Cumberland Plain Woodland found on the site.

Currently hundreds of hectares of Cumberland Plain Woodland are zoned for urban development.

SREP 30 must be amended to rezone bushland to Regional Park.

Land zoned for urban development under SREP 30. Western and Central Precincts declared release areas under SREP 30 by Minister for Planning in September 2006.

SREP 30 (Amendment No. 2) gazetted 27 February 2009.

Development of the site is consistent with the St Marys Planning Framework, Metropolitan Strategy, draft NW Subregional Strategy and Council’s Sustainability Blueprint for Urban Release Areas.

14.

The exhibited SREP 30 amendments and Precinct Plans for the ADI Site will result in the clearing of important remnants of Cumberland Plain Woodland. These are Federally and State Listed Endangered Ecological Community.

SREP 30 should protect all of the Cumberland Plain Woodland found on the site. Currently hundreds of hectares of Cumberland Plain Woodland are zoned for urban development.

SREP 30 must be amended to rezone this bushland from Urban to Regional Park.

Land zoned for urban development under SREP 30. Western and Central Precincts declared release areas under SREP 30 by Minister for Planning in September 2006.

SREP 30 (Amendment No. 2) gazetted 27 February 2009.

Development of the site is consistent with the St Marys Planning Framework, Metropolitan Strategy, draft NW Subregional Strategy and Council’s Sustainability Blueprint for Urban Release Areas.

15.

The exhibited SREP 30 amendments and Precinct Plans for the ADI Site will result in the clearing of important remnants of Cumberland Plain Woodland, a Federal and State Listed Endangered Ecological Community.

SREP 30 should protect all the Cumberland Plain Woodland on that site. Currently, hundreds of hectares of Cumberland Plain Woodland are zoned for urban development.

SREP 30 must be amended to rezone this bushland from Urban to Regional Park.

Land zoned for urban development under SREP 30. Western and Central Precincts declared release areas under SREP 30 by Minister for Planning in September 2006.

SREP 30 (Amendment No. 2) gazetted 27 February 2009.

Development of the site is consistent with the St Marys Planning Framework, Metropolitan Strategy, draft NW Subregional Strategy and Council’s Sustainability Blueprint for Urban Release Areas.

16.

SREP 30 should protect all the Cumberland Plain Woodland on that site. Currently, hundreds of hectares of Cumberland Plain Woodland are zoned for urban development.

SREP 30 must be amended to rezone this bushland from Urban to Regional Park.

Land zoned for urban development under SREP 30. Western and Central Precincts declared release areas under SREP 30 by Minister for Planning in September 2006.

SREP 30 (Amendment No. 2) gazetted 27 February 2009.

Development of the site is consistent with the St Marys Planning Framework, Metropolitan Strategy, draft NW Subregional Strategy and Council’s Sustainability Blueprint for Urban Release Areas.

17.

This site is part of "the lungs" of our densely developed city.

The exhibited SREP 30 amendments and Precinct Plans for the ADI Site will result in the clearing of important remnants of Cumberland Plain Woodland a Federally and State Listed Endangered Ecological Community.

SREP 30 should protect all of the Cumberland Plain Woodland found on the site. We are opposed to the hundreds of hectares of Cumberland Plain Woodland zoned for urban development.

We ask that SREP 30 be amended to rezone this bushland from Urban to Regional Park and Penrith Council reject the Precinct Plans

Land zoned for urban development under SREP 30. Western and Central Precincts declared release areas under SREP 30 by Minister for Planning in September 2006.

SREP 30 (Amendment No. 2) gazetted 27 February 2009.

Development of the site is consistent with the St Marys Planning Framework, Metropolitan Strategy, draft NW Subregional Strategy and Council’s Sustainability Blueprint for Urban Release Areas.

18.

The exhibited SREP 30 amendments and Precinct Plans will result in the clearing of important remnants of Cumberland Plain Woodland a Federally and State Listed Endangered Ecological Community.

SREP 30 should protect all of the Cumberland Plain Woodland found on the site.

Currently hundreds of hectares of Cumberland Plain Woodland are zoned for urban development.

SREP 30 must be amended to rezone this bushland from Urban to Regional Park.

Land zoned for urban development under SREP 30. Western and Central Precincts declared release areas under SREP 30 by Minister for Planning in September 2006.

SREP 30 (Amendment No. 2) gazetted 27 February 2009.

Development of the site is consistent with the St Marys Planning Framework, Metropolitan Strategy, draft NW Subregional Strategy and Council’s Sustainability Blueprint for Urban Release Areas.

19.

SREP 30 amendments on exhibition should definitely protect all of this ecological community. SREP 30 should be amended to rezone this pristine wilderness from Urban to Regional Park.

Only a few percent of the original woodland remains. It will never be recovered once it is destroyed. It will be an internationally recognised achievement if this precious wonderland is protected and managed properly and an international disgrace if it is destroyed. This treasure is an asset to our community, not a liability. It is a beautiful forest that has enormous aboriginal value, it cleans the air and water we pollute and it provides habitat for thousands of native plants and animals. It is also therapeutic just looking at it and it is an educational/tourism gold mine.

Land zoned for urban development under SREP 30. Western and Central Precincts declared release areas under SREP 30 by Minister for Planning in September 2006.

SREP 30 (Amendment No. 2) gazetted 27 February 2009.

Development of the site is consistent with the St Marys Planning Framework, Metropolitan Strategy, draft NW Subregional Strategy and Council’s Sustainability Blueprint for Urban Release Areas.

20.

The exhibited SREP 30 amendments and Precinct Plans will result in the clearing of important remnants of Cumberland Plain Woodland a Federally and State Listed Endangered Ecological Community.

SREP 30 should protect all of the Cumberland Plain Woodland found on the site.

Currently hundreds of hectares of Cumberland Plain Woodland are zoned for urban development.

SREP 30 must be amended to rezone this bushland from Urban to Regional Park.

Land zoned for urban development under SREP 30. Western and Central Precincts declared release areas under SREP 30 by Minister for Planning in September 2006.

SREP 30 (Amendment No. 2) gazetted 27 February 2009.

Development of the site is consistent with the St Marys Planning Framework, Metropolitan Strategy, draft NW Subregional Strategy and Council’s Sustainability Blueprint for Urban Release Areas.

21.

The exhibited SREP 30 amendments and Precinct Plans will result in the clearing of important remnants of Cumberland Plain Woodland a Federally and State Listed Endangered Ecological Community.

SREP 30 should protect all of the Cumberland Plain Woodland found on the site.

Currently hundreds of hectares of Cumberland Plain Woodland are zoned for urban development.

SREP 30 must be amended to rezone this bushland from Urban to Regional Park.

Land zoned for urban development under SREP 30. Western and Central Precincts declared release areas under SREP 30 by Minister for Planning in September 2006.

SREP 30 (Amendment No. 2) gazetted 27 February 2009.

Development of the site is consistent with the St Marys Planning Framework, Metropolitan Strategy, draft NW Subregional Strategy and Council’s Sustainability Blueprint for Urban Release Areas.

22.

The exhibited SREP 30 amendments and Precinct Plans will result in the clearing of important remnants of Cumberland Plain Woodland a Federally and State Listed Endangered Ecological Community.

SREP 30 should protect all of the Cumberland Plain Woodland found on the site.

Currently hundreds of hectares of Cumberland Plain Woodland are zoned for urban development.

SREP 30 must be amended to rezone this bushland from Urban to Regional Park.

Land zoned for urban development under SREP 30. Western and Central Precincts declared release areas under SREP 30 by Minister for Planning in September 2006.

SREP 30 (Amendment No. 2) gazetted 27 February 2009.

Development of the site is consistent with the St Marys Planning Framework, Metropolitan Strategy, draft NW Subregional Strategy and Council’s Sustainability Blueprint for Urban Release Areas.

23.

The exhibited SREP 30 amendments and Precinct Plans will result in the clearing of important remnants of Cumberland Plain Woodland a Federally and State Listed Endangered Ecological Community.

SREP 30 should protect all of the Cumberland Plain Woodland found on the site.

Currently hundreds of hectares of Cumberland Plain Woodland are zoned for urban development.

SREP 30 must be amended to rezone this bushland from Urban to Regional Park.

Land zoned for urban development under SREP 30. Western and Central Precincts declared release areas under SREP 30 by Minister for Planning in September 2006.

SREP 30 (Amendment No. 2) gazetted 27 February 2009.

Development of the site is consistent with the St Marys Planning Framework, Metropolitan Strategy, draft NW Subregional Strategy and Council’s Sustainability Blueprint for Urban Release Areas.

24.

Hawkesbury Greens

The exhibited SREP 30 amendments and Precinct Plans will result in the clearing of important remnants of Cumberland Plain Woodland a Federally and State Listed Endangered Ecological Community.

SREP 30 should protect all of the Cumberland Plain Woodland found on the site.

Currently hundreds of hectares of Cumberland Plain Woodland are zoned for urban development.

SREP 30 must be amended to rezone this bushland from Urban to Regional Park.

# Meetings at which the Management Plan ¼ly reviews are presented	^ Election of Mayor/Deputy Mayor
#+ General Manager’s Presentation – Half year and end of year review	@ Strategic Program Progress reports [only business]
< Briefing to consider Draft Management Plan for 2009/2010	ü Meeting at which the 2008/2009 annual statements are presented
v Meeting at which the Draft Management Plan is adopted for exhibition	Y Management Plan Councillor briefings/public forum (June)
* Meeting at which the Management Plan for 2009/2010 is adopted

*Policy Review Committee Meeting*	*9 March 2009*
*Leadership and Organisation*

*Policy Review Committee Meeting*	*9 March 2009*
*Appendix 1 - Entities Financial Statements for the period 1/7/08-31/1/09*

*Policy Review Committee Meeting*	*9 March 2009*
*Appendix 2 - PPVA Statistics*

*Policy Review Committee Meeting*	*9 March 2009*
*Attachment 1 - St Marys Precinct Plan*

*Policy Review Committee Meeting*	*9 March 2009*
*Attachment 2 - St Marys WCP framework plan*