6 November 2009
Dear Councillor,
In pursuance of the provisions of the Local Government Act, 1993 and the Regulations thereunder, notice is hereby given that an ORDINARY MEETING of Penrith City Council is to be held in the Council Chambers, Civic Centre, 601 High Street, Penrith on Monday 9 November 2009 at 7:30PM.
Attention is directed to the statement accompanying this notice of the business proposed to be transacted at the meeting.
Yours faithfully
Alan Stoneham
General Manager
BUSINESS
1. LEAVE OF ABSENCE
2. APOLOGIES
3. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES
Ordinary Meeting - 12 October 2009.
4. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Pecuniary Interest (The Act requires Councillors who declare a pecuniary interest in an item to leave the meeting during discussion of that item)
Non-Pecuniary Conflict of Interest – Significant and Less than Significant (The Code of Conduct requires Councillors who declare a significant non-pecuniary conflict of interest in an item to leave the meeting during discussion of that item)
5. ADDRESSING THE MEETING
6. MAYORAL MINUTES
7. NOTICES OF MOTION
8. ADOPTION OF REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATION OF COMMITTEES
Penrith Valley Community Safety Partnership Meeting - 30 September 2009.
Access Committee Meeting - 7 October 2009.
Local Traffic Committee Meeting - 12 October 2009.
Policy Review Committee Meeting - 19 October 2009.
Policy Review Committee Meeting - 21 October 2009.
9. DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS
10. URGENT REPORTS (to be dealt with in the delivery program to which the item relates)
11. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE
12. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
Monday 9 November 2009
table of contents
seating arrangements
meeting calendar
confirmation of minutes
report and recommendations of committees
DELIVERY program reports
Statement of Recognition of Penrith City’s
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Cultural Heritage
Council values the unique status of Aboriginal people as the original owners and custodians of lands and waters, including the land and waters of Penrith City.
Council values the unique status of Torres Strait Islander people as the original owners and custodians of the Torres Strait Islands and surrounding waters.
We work together for a united Australia and City that respects this land of ours, that values the diversity of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultural heritage, and provides justice and equity for all.
PRAYER
“Sovereign God, tonight as we gather together as a Council we affirm that you are the giver and sustainer of life. We come together as representatives of our community to make decisions that will benefit this city and the people within it.
We come not in a spirit of competition, not as adversaries, but as colleagues. Help us to treat each other with respect, with dignity, with interest and with honesty. Help us not just to hear the words we say, but also to hear each others hearts. We seek to be wise in all that we say and do.
As we meet, our concern is for this city. Grant us wisdom, courage and strength.
Lord, help us. We pray this in the name of Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.”
For members of the public
addressing the meeting
Council
Chambers
Group Managers
Seating Arrangements
![]() |
|||||||
![]() |
|||||||
|
|||||||
![]() |
|||||||
![]() |
|||||||
![]() |
|||||||
![]() |
|||
![]() |
|||
Group Managers
2009 MEETING CALENDAR
February 2009 - December 2009
(adopted by Council 8/09/08 and amended by Council 6/4/09)
|
TIME |
FEB |
MAR |
APRIL |
MAY |
JUNE |
JULY |
AUG |
SEPT |
OCT |
NOV |
DEC |
Mon |
Mon |
Mon |
Mon |
Mon |
Mon |
Mon |
Mon |
Mon |
Mon |
Mon |
||
Ordinary Council Meetings |
7.30 pm |
2 |
|
6 |
4v |
|
20 |
3 |
7ü |
12 |
9 |
14 |
23 |
23 |
|
25 |
29* |
|
24 |
28^ |
|
30 |
|
||
Policy Review Committee |
7.30 pm |
|
9 |
|
|
15 |
13 |
|
14@ |
19 |
|
7 |
16#+ |
30@ |
27 |
18# |
|
27 |
17 |
|
21 |
16# |
|
# Meetings at which the Management Plan 1/4ly reviews are presented |
^ Election of Mayor/Deputy Mayor (meeting to commence at 7:00 pm) |
< Briefing to consider Draft Management Plan for 2009/2010 |
@ Strategic Program progress reports [only business] |
v Meeting at which the Draft Management Plan is adopted for exhibition |
ü Meeting at which the 2008/2009 Annual Statements are presented |
* Meeting at which the Management Plan for 2009/2010 is adopted. |
Y Management Plan Councillor Briefings/Public Forum (June) |
|
|
- Council’s Ordinary Meetings are held on a three-week cycle where practicable.
- Extraordinary Meetings are held as required.
- Policy Review Meetings are held on a three-week cycle where practicable.
- Members of the public are invited to observe meetings of the Council (Ordinary and Policy Review Committee). Should you wish to address Council, please contact the Public Officer, Glenn McCarthy on 4732 7649.
OF THE ORDINARY MEETING OF PENRITH CITY COUNCIL HELD IN THE
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
ON MONDAY 12 OCTOBER 2009 AT 7:38PM
NATIONAL ANTHEM
The meeting opened with the National Anthem.
STATEMENT OF RECOGNITION
His Worship the Mayor, Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM read a statement of recognition of Penrith City’s Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Cultural Heritage.
PRAYER
The Council Prayer was read by the Rev Neil Checkley.
PRESENT
His Worship the Mayor Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM, Councillors Jim Aitken OAM, Robert Ardill, Greg Davies, Mark Davies, Tanya Davies, Ross Fowler OAM, Ben Goldfinch, Jackie Greenow, Marko Malkoc, Karen McKeown, Kath Presdee and John Thain.
LEAVE OF ABSENCE
Leave of Absence was previously granted to Councillor Kaylene Allison for the period 29 September 2009 to 1 November 2009 inclusive.
320 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Karen McKeown seconded Councillor Jackie Greenow that Leave of Absence be granted to Councillor Prue Guillaume for 12 October 2009.
APOLOGIES |
There were no apologies. |
CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES - Ordinary Meeting - 28 September 2009 |
321 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ross Fowler OAM seconded Councillor John Thain that the minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of 28 September 2009 be confirmed. |
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Councillor Karen McKeown clarified that she was not related to the owners of the land in Item 1 – Council Property - Easement to Drain Water over Lot 3 DP 255380 Nepean Street, Emu Plains. Owner: Penrith City Council - Applicant: N F Billyard Pty Ltd.
Councillor Ross Fowler OAM declared a Pecuniary Interest in Item 1 – Council Property - Easement to Drain Water over Lot 3 DP 255380 Nepean Street, Emu Plains. Owner: Penrith City Council - Applicant: N F Billyard Pty Ltd as the applicant is one of his clients. Councillor Fowler OAM stated that he would take no part in discussion and debate on this matter and would leave the Chamber.
Councillor Ben Goldfinch declared a Pecuniary Interest in Item 1 – Council Property - Easement to Drain Water over Lot 3 DP 255380 Nepean Street, Emu Plains. Owner: Penrith City Council - Applicant: N F Billyard Pty Ltd as the applicant is one of his clients.
Councillor Ben Goldfinch also declared an interest in Item 12 - Expressions of Interest Reference 03-09/10 for Construction of Penrith Commuter Carpark and in Item 2 of Committee of the Whole - Commercial Matter - Expressions of Interest for Construction of Penrith Commuter Carpark as one of the tenderers is one of his clients. Councillor Goldfinch stated that he would leave the Chamber during consideration of these items.
SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS |
322 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jackie Greenow seconded Councillor Marko Malkoc that Standing Orders be suspended to allow members of the public to address the meeting, the time being 7:41 pm. |
Mr Paul Sims
Item 9 – Development Application DA08/0958 - Section 96 Modification - Alteration to Finished Landform - Lot 1 DP 542395, Lot 740 DP 810111 (No. 1725) Elizabeth Drive, Badgerys Creek. Applicant: SITA Australia Pty Ltd; Owner: SITA Australia Pty Ltd DA08/0958
Mr Sims, an affected neighbour, spoke in opposition to the proposed alterations, and stated that the proposed increase in contours would further exacerbate visual, odour and pollution issues.
323 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ross Fowler OAM seconded Councillor Karen McKeown that an extension of time be granted to Mr Sims, the time being 7:47 pm.
Mr Sims concluded by seeking Council’s deferral of consideration of the application to allow a meeting and mediation between SITA, Councillors and affected owners.
Mr George Khouri
Item 10 - Development Application DA09/0789 for a Multi-Unit Housing Development at Lots 16 & 17 DP 38919 (No. 76 - 78) Jones Street, Kingswood. Applicant: Amflo Pty Ltd; Owner: Luvamo Pty Ltd DA09/0789
Mr Khouri, the applicant, spoke in support of the proposed development, outlining the merits of the proposal. Mr Khouri then made himself available to answer any questions that Councillors may have had regarding the application.
RESUMPTION OF STANDING ORDERS |
324 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Robert Ardill seconded Councillor Jim Aitken OAM that Standing Orders be resumed, the time being 7:51 pm. |
Mayoral Minutes
1 Congratulations to our 2009 Wall of Achievement award recipients and Honoured Citizen of Penrith |
325 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM seconded Councillor Ross Fowler OAM that the Mayoral Minute on Congratulations to our 2009 Wall of Achievement award recipients and Honoured Citizen of Penrith be received. |
2 Deputy Mayor Ross Fowler OAM appointed Chair of United Independent Pools and reappointed Chair of Westpool |
326 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM seconded Councillor Greg Davies that the Mayoral Minute on Deputy Mayor Ross Fowler OAM appointed Chair of United Independent Pools and reappointed Chair of Westpool be received. |
3 Council congratulates Councillor McKeown |
327 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM seconded Councillor Tanya Davies that the Mayoral Minute on Council congratulates Councillor McKeown be received. |
Councillor Greg Davies left the meeting, the time being 8:26 pm.
Councillor Greg Davies returned to the meeting, the time being 8:30 pm.
4 Council receives a Westpool 2008-09 Local Government Risk Management Excellence Award |
328 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM seconded Councillor Ross Fowler OAM that the Mayoral Minute on Council receives a Westpool 2008-09 Local Government Risk Management Excellence Award be received. |
The Mayor, Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM reported to the Council on some functions that he had attended since being elected as Mayor.
DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS
Procedural Motion 329 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Robert Ardill seconded Councillor Greg Davies that Items 11 and 16 be considered concurrently. |
Procedural Motion 330 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor John Thain seconded Councillor Jackie Greenow that Item 12 be considered at the conclusion of confidential business. |
A Leading City
Councillors Mark Davies, Jim Aitken OAM, Ben Goldfinch and Ross Fowler OAM left the meeting, the time being 8:36 pm.
1 Council Property - Easement to Drain Water over Lot 3 DP 255380 Nepean Street, Emu Plains. Owner: Penrith City Council - Applicant: N F Billyard Pty Ltd |
331 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Tanya Davies That: 1. The information contained in the report on Council Property - Easement to Drain Water over Lot 3 DP 255380 Nepean Street, Emu Plains. Owner: Penrith City Council - Applicant: N F Billyard Pty Ltd be received. 2. Council grant an easement to drain water over Open Space land at Lot 3 DP 255380 Nepean Street, Emu Plains in favour of Lot 4 DP 232928 at No. 34 Gough Street, Emu Plains. 3. Payment of compensation by the applicant in the amount of $5,000 plus GST be required for the creation of the easement over Lot 3 DP 255380 Nepean Street, Emu Plains. 4. The applicant be responsible for all survey, legal and registration costs associated with the creation of the easement. 5. The Common Seal of the Council of the City of Penrith be placed on all necessary documentation to effect registration of the easement. |
Councillors Jim Aitken OAM, Ben Goldfinch and Ross Fowler OAM returned to the meeting, the time being 8:37 pm.
2 Pecuniary Interest Returns |
332 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Marko Malkoc that the information contained in the report on Pecuniary Interest Returns be received. |
6 Summary of Investments & Banking for the period 1 August 2009 to 31 August 2009 |
333 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Marko Malkoc That: 1. The information contained in the report on Summary of Investments & Banking for the period 1 August 2009 to 31 August 2009 be received. 2. The Certificate of the Responsible Accounting Officer and Summaries of Investments and Performance for the period 1 August 2009 to 31 August 2009 be noted and accepted. 3. The graphical investment analysis as at 31 August 2009 be noted. |
Councillor Mark Davies returned to the meeting, the time being 8:38 pm.
3 Action Taken on Resolutions of the 2008 Local Government Association Conference |
334 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Kath Presdee seconded Councillor Greg Davies That: 1. The information contained in the report on Action Taken on Resolutions of the 2008 Local Government Association Conference be received. 2. Council staff follow up the progress of Items 66, 83 and Late L37, with the Executive Committee of the Association. |
4 Deed of Agreement between Penrith City Council and Penrith Valley Economic Development Corporation |
335 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ross Fowler OAM seconded Councillor Jim Aitken OAM That: 1. The information contained in the report on Deed of Agreement between Penrith City Council and Penrith Valley Economic Development Corporation (PVEDC) be received. 2. Council endorse the Deed of Agreement and authorise the General Manager to execute the document. 3. Council provide funds to the PVEDC in accordance with the Deed of Agreement. 4. Clause 3.11 of the Deed of Agreement be replaced with a new clause requiring Council, in consultation with the PVEDC, to develop an investment policy. |
5 2008-2009 Financial Statements |
336 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ross Fowler OAM seconded Councillor Greg Davies That: 1. The information contained in the report on 2008-2009 Financial Statements be received. 2. Council Financial Services staff be congratulated for their efforts in preparing and submitting the 2008-2009 Financial Statements in a timely manner. |
A City of Opportunities
7 Penrith Community Development Support Expenditure (CDSE) Scheme 2009 Funding Round Outcomes |
337 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jackie Greenow seconded Councillor Kath Presdee that the information contained in the report on Penrith Community Development Support Expenditure (CDSE) Scheme 2009 Funding Round Outcomes be received. |
A Green City
8 Section 96 Application DA07/0742.01 for the modification of the existing development consent relating to the Place of Worship at Lot 912 DP 836641 (No. 86 - 90) Andromeda Drive, Cranebrook. Applicant: Corpus Christi Parish; Owner: Trustees Roman Catholic Church |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
338 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ross Fowler OAM seconded Councillor John Thain That: 1. The information contained in the report on Section 96 Application DA07/0742.01 for the modification of the existing development consent relating to the Place of Worship at Lot 912 DP 836641 (No. 86 - 90) Andromeda Drive, Cranebrook be received. 2. The Section 96 Application 07/0742.01 for modification of Condition No. 16 of the existing development consent relating to the Place of Worship at Lot 912 DP 836641 (No. 86 - 90) Andromeda Drive, Cranebrook, be approved subject to the following amended and additional conditions:
Amend Condition No. 16 to read:-
2.1 All windows and doors at the rear of the building used as the place of public worship that face dwellings in Pluto Place are to be closed when the P/A system is in use or when a band is playing
The following new conditions be added
2.2 Consent for the doors and windows on the western side of the building to be open during mass and other gatherings in the parish building at Corpus Christi Primary School is limited to a 6 month period from the date of the modified approval
The doors and windows to the western elevation shall only be open during the warmer months from September to March
All doors and windows are to be closed when the P/A system is in use or when a band is playing upon the expiration of the 6 month trial period. A further application may be lodged before the expiration date for Council’s consideration to further extend this period or amend this requirement
2.3 The live band is to operate as per the schedule submitted by the applicant in the following manner:
§ The youth band is rostered to play once a month on Saturday evenings during mass between 6.00pm to 7.00pm § The band would play for not more than a total of 30 minutes during mass § The 7:30am mass on Sunday mornings shall not play live music § The doors and windows to the western elevation would only be open during the warmer months ( September to March) § All windows and doors shall be closed during the band practice
2.4 Only windows and doors outlined in the Music Noise Compliance survey provided by Renzo Tonin and Associates dated 21 October 2008 are permitted to be open during the times when the P/A system is in use
3. The persons who made submissions in respect of the proposal be advised of Council’s decision in writing.
4. A further report be presented to Council after the 6 months trial period has elapsed.
In accordance with Section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993, a DIVISION was then called with the following result:
|
9 Development Application DA08/0958 - Section 96 Modification - Alteration to Finished Landform - Lot 1 DP 542395, Lot 740 DP 810111 (No. 1725) Elizabeth Drive, Badgerys Creek. Applicant: SITA Australia Pty Ltd; Owner: SITA Australia Pty Ltd DA08/0958 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
339 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jim Aitken OAM seconded Councillor Jackie Greenow that this item be deferred for consideration at Council’s Ordinary Meeting of 9 November 2009 to allow matters raised by affected neighbours to be considered and for mediation to occur between the parties. In accordance with Section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993, a DIVISION was then called with the following result:
|
10 Development Application DA09/0789 for a Multi-Unit Housing Development at Lots 16 & 17 DP 38919 (No. 76 - 78) Jones Street, Kingswood. Applicant: Amflo Pty Ltd; Owner: Luvamo Pty Ltd DA09/0789 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
340 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Tanya Davies seconded Councillor Greg Davies That: 1. The information contained in the report on Development Application DA09/0789 for a Multi-Unit Housing Development at Lots 16 & 17 DP 38919 (No. 76 - 78) Jones Street, Kingswood be received. 2. Development Application DA09/0789 for a Multi-Unit Housing Development at Lots 16 & 17 DP 38919 (No. 76 - 78) Jones Street, Kingswood be approved subject to the following conditions: Standard Conditions 2.1 A001 Approved plans A008 Works to BCA requirements A009 Residential works DCP A011 Engineering works DCP A014 Lot consolidation A019 Occupation Certificate A038 Lighting locations A039 Graffiti A043 Air conditioner A046 Obtain Construction Certificate before commencement of works C003 Uncovering relics D001 Implement approved sediment and erosion control measures D002 Spray grass D005 No filling without prior approval D006 Validation of fill material D007 Filling of land D009 Covering of waste storage area D010 Appropriate disposal of excavated or other waste D014 Plant and equipment noise E01A BCA compliance (Class 2-9) E002 BCA issues to be addressed E006 Disabled access and facilities E009 Annual fire safety F006 Water tank and nuisance G002 Section 73 G004 Integral Energy G005 Rainwater tank plumbing H001 Stamped plans and erection of site notice (Class 2-9) H002 Provision of site facilities prior to commencement of construction works H003 Traffic safety during construction H006 Implement waste management plan H011 Engineering plans and specifications H025 Construction of garbage rooms H033 Clothes drying facilities H036 Rainwater tank H037 Safe supply of water from catchment H038 Connection of rainwater tank supply H039 Rainwater tank pumps H041 Hours of construction work I003 Roads Act approval K001 Engineering Construction Certificate K002 WAE drawings and certificates K004 Easement creation K009 On-site detention K019 Connection to Council’s system K025 Pavement seal K027 Car parking K036 Performance bond K037 Maintenance bond L001 Approved landscaping plans L002 Landscaping construction L003 Landscaping report requirements L005 Planting of plant material L006 Australian Standard landscaping requirements L007 Tree protection measures L008 Tree preservation order N001 Section 94 contributions (Cultural Facilities) - $4,638 N003 Section 94 contributions (District Open Space) - $53,810 N004 Section 94 contributions (Footpath Construction) - $3,108 N005 Section 94 contributions (Local Open Space) - $19,435 N006 Section 94 contributions (Neighbourhood Centre) - $5,250 P001 Costs P002 Fees associated with Council land
Q001 Notice of commencement and appointment of PCA Q006 Occupation Certificate Q010 BASIX Certificate Special Conditions 2.2 Under the Roads Act 1993 the following works are to be approved by Penrith City Council before the Construction Certificate for the development is issued. Plans and inspection fees are to be lodged with Penrith City Council for the following works in the road: (a) Provision of kerb and gutter, drainage, road pavement, vehicle crossover and layback along with any ancillary works for the provision of a cul-de-sac head in Jones Street. All utility services affected by the proposed works are to be relocated to the satisfaction of the relevant utility provider. Any additional driveway works required to provide access to existing properties in Jones Street shall be shown on the engineering plans. New driveway works shall match with existing. All works are to be undertaken at no cost to Council Contact Penrith City Council’s Development Engineering Unit on (02) 4732 7777 to ascertain applicable fees All works are to be designed and constructed in accordance with Penrith Development Control Plan 2006, Part 2.3 Engineering Works, and the Guidelines for Engineering Works for Subdivisions and Developments, Part 1 – Design and Part 2 – Construction. The works are to be completed before an Occupation Certificate is issued for the development 2.3 A Construction Certificate for the provision of engineering works (on-site detention system) is to be approved by the certifying authority. Engineering design drawings are to be prepared strictly in accordance with Penrith Development Control Plan 2006, Part 2.3 Engineering Works and the Guidelines for Engineering Works for Subdivisions and Developments, Part 1 – Design 2.4 Land at the end of Jones Street is to be dedicated to Council, at no cost to Council, to accommodate the cul-de-sac head and verge/footway area 2.5 All car parking and manoeuvring areas associated with the subject development, including driveways, access ramp grades and widths, circulating roadways, turn paths, sight distance requirements, overhead clearances for people with a disability, aisle widths, parking bay grades and parking bay dimensions (allowing for full door opening) shall be in accordance with AS 2890.1-2004 and Council’s requirements. Full details demonstrating compliance must be submitted with the Construction Certificate 2.6 Submission of evidence of registration of a drainage easement over adjacent Lot 72 DP 241989 is to be provided prior to the issue of any Construction Certificate 2.7 Submission of a revised landscape plan is to be provided, consistent with Part 2, Section 2.6 of Penrith Development Control Plan 2006, and to the satisfaction of Council. The plan must also include notations identifying arrangements for the fencing of all boundaries of the site. This revised plan is to be provided prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate 2.8 Submission of an amended site design is to be provided which provides for an improved connection between the area of rear open space and the balance of the development. This may comprise alterations to Townhouse 12 to improve the visual and/or physical connection to this area, or otherwise improve communal access to this area. These plans are to be approved by Council prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate 2.9 All costs associated with construction of boundary fencing, as nominated on the approved landscape plan, shall be borne by the applicant 2.10 The bin storage enclosure shall have minimum internal dimensions of 6m wide x 2.8m deep. This modification shall be incorporated into the Construction Certificate plans for the development 2.11 The balconies of each first floor apartment in Block A shall have minimum areas of 10m2. This modification shall be incorporated into the Construction Certificate plans for the development 3. The individuals who made a submission be advised of Council’s decision and of the consideration given to their concerns.
In accordance with Section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993, a DIVISION was then called with the following result:
|
14 Penrith Recycled Water Project Stage 2 |
341 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor John Thain seconded Councillor Ross Fowler OAM That: 1. The information contained in the report on Penrith Recycled Water Project Stage 2 be received. 2. Council support the submission of the Penrith Recycled Water Project – Stage 2 proposal to the Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts to secure funding of up to $2.7M.
|
15 Development Application DA 09/746 Proposed Alteration and DA 09/0746 Additions to Existing Bulky Goods Retail Centre at Lot 10 & 11 DP 1046110 (No.13 -25) Pattys Place, Jamisontown - Supacentre Applicant: Pipven Pty Ltd: Owner: Pipven Pty Ltd. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
342 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Jim Aitken OAM that the information contained in the report on Development Application DA 09/746 Proposed Alteration and DA 09/0746 Additions to Existing Bulky Goods Retail Centre at Lot 10 & 11 DP 1046110 (No.13 -25) Pattys Place, Jamisontown - Supacentre Applicant: Pipven Pty Ltd: Owner: Pipven Pty Ltd. be received.
In accordance with Section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993, a DIVISION was then called with the following result:
|
A Liveable City
Councillors Karen McKeown, Kath Presdee and Mark Davies left the meeting, the time being 9:05 pm.
11 Bus Network Review - Approval of New Roads for Bus Routes Councillors Karen McKeown, Kath Presdee and Mark Davies returned to the meeting, the time being 9:11 pm. |
343 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jackie Greenow seconded Councillor Tanya Davies that the information contained in the report on Bus Network Review - Approval of New Roads for Bus Routes be received. |
16 Bus Network Review - Approval of New Roads for Bus Routes (Item 9 - Report to Local Traffic Committee, 12/10/2009) |
344 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jackie Greenow seconded Councillor Tanya Davies That: 1. The information contained in the report on Bus Network Review - Approval of New Roads for Bus Routes (Item 9 - Report to Local Traffic Committee, 12/10/2009) be received. 2. The new roads to be used as bus routes as listed in Table 1 be noted. 3. The new bus stops and bus zones listed in Table 2 be approved. 4. All residents who made submissions regarding bus stops be advised of Council’s resolution by Comfort Delgro Cabcharge. 5. Comfort Delgro Cabcharge be advised of Council’s Resolution. 6. This report be forwarded to Council’s Access Committee for information. |
13 Floodplain Management Authorities 50th Anniversary Annual Conference - 23 February 2010 to 26 February 2010 |
345 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Jackie Greenow That: 1. The information contained in the report on Floodplain Management Authorities 50th Anniversary Annual Conference - 23 February 2010 to 26 February 2010 be received. 2. Council nominate the Mayor, Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM, Councillor Jim Aitken OAM and Councillor Jackie Greenow and any other interested and available Councillors as its delegates to the 2010 Floodplain Management Authorities Conference and Workshop, to be held at Gosford from 23 February 2010 to 26 February 2010. |
QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE
QWN 1 St Clair Community Health Centre |
Councillor Tanya Davies requested a memo reply concerning the car parking area at the front of the St Clair Community Health Centre, with a view to providing a bitumen seal to the carpark, incorporating disabled car parking access to the Centre. |
QWN 2 Coomassie Community Centre, St Clair |
Councillor Tanya Davies requested a memo reply concerning the mowing of lawns at the Coomassie Community Centre at St Clair. |
QWN 3 Deciduous Trees on Camira Street, St Marys |
Councillor Tanya Davies requested a memo reply concerning deciduous trees in Camira Street , St Marys which are causing ongoing problems for many elderly residents, with gutters and drains blocking from falling leaves and the effect this has on the stormwater drain in Kalong Avenue. Councillor Tanya Davies also asked whether these trees could perhaps be replaced with trees that do not shed as many leaves or require as much trimming. |
Councillor Greg Davies left the meeting, the time being 9:18 pm.
QWN 4 Erskine Park Business Park |
Councillor Mark Davies requested a report to Council providing an update on the importance of the Erskine Park Business Park Biodiversity Corridor, in particular the Jacfin site. |
QWN 5 Dunheved Business Site |
Councillor Mark Davies requested a report to Council outlining the importance of developing a Master Plan for the Dunheved Business Site and investigating the cost and sourcing of funds for this Plan. |
QWN 6 Samuel Marsden Baseball Fields |
Councillor Robert Ardill requested a memo reply providing an update on the works undertaken at Samuel Marsden Baseball Fields and advising if these facilities are being utilised for the World Masters Games. |
QWN 7 Fencing of Backyard Swimming Pools |
Councillor Robert Ardill thanked Council officers for the memo he received relating to the fencing of backyard swimming pools. Councillor Ardill also requested a report to Council, investigating the potential implementation of a register for backyard pools, specifically relating to compliant fencing (and resuscitation signs), perhaps using a certificate based approach using sub-contractors to fulfil the inspection process. |
Councillor Greg Davies returned to the meeting, the time being 9:22 pm.
QWN 8 Women's Self Defence Seminar and Breast Cancer Fundraising Event |
Councillor Jim Aitken OAM requested that an amount of $250 (to be contributed equally from South, North and East Ward voted works) be allocated to the Women’s Self Defence Seminar and Breast Cancer Fundraising Event to cover the cost of hiring the Floribunda Community Centre hall for this event. |
346 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jim Aitken OAM seconded Councillor Karen McKeown that the matter be brought forward and dealt with as a matter of urgency.
His Worship the Mayor, Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM, ruled that the matter was urgent and should be dealt with at the meeting.
|
347 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jim Aitken OAM seconded Councillor Karen McKeown that an amount of $250 (to be contributed equally from South, North and East Ward voted works) be allocated to the Women’s Self Defence Seminar and Breast Cancer Fundraising Event to cover the cost of hiring the Floribunda Community Centre hall for this event. |
QWN 9 Mamre 100 Mile Dinner Under the Stars |
Councillor Jackie Greenow requested that an amount of $950 (to be contributed equally from South, North and East Ward voted works) be allocated to purchasing a table of 10 for the Mamre 100 Mile Dinner Under the Stars event.
|
348 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jackie Greenow seconded Councillor Jim Aitken OAM that the matter be brought forward and dealt with as a matter of urgency.
His Worship the Mayor, Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM, ruled that the matter was urgent and should be dealt with at the meeting.
|
349 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jackie Greenow seconded Councillor Jim Aitken OAM that an amount of $950 (to be contributed equally from South, North and East Ward voted works) be allocated to purchasing a table of 10 for the Mamre 100 Mile Dinner Under the Stars event. |
QWN 10 Proposed Red Rooster Development - Dunheved Road, Werrington |
Councillor John Thain requested that traffic issues surrounding the proposed Red Rooster development at Dunheved Road, Werrington be investigated by the Local Traffic Committee. Councillor Thain also requested the development application for the proposed development be submitted to Council for its consideration. |
QWN 11 Personal Matter - to be considered in Committee of the Whole |
Councillor John Thain requested that an item concerning a personal matter be referred to Committee of the Whole as the item refers to the personal hardship of a resident or ratepayer and discussion of the matter in open meeting would be, on balance, contrary to the public interest. |
QWN 12 Construction of Footpath - Trinity Drive, Cambridge Gardens |
Councillor Kath Presdee requested that an amount of $2,925 be allocated from North Ward voted works to the construction of a footpath from the corner of Trinity Drive and Huntingdon Parade, Cambridge Gardens to 41 Huntingdon Parade, Cambridge Gardens.
|
350 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Kath Presdee seconded Councillor Ben Goldfinch that the matter be brought forward and dealt with as a matter of urgency.
His Worship the Mayor, Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM, ruled that the matter was urgent and should be dealt with at the meeting.
|
351 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Kath Presdee seconded Councillor Ben Goldfinch that an amount of $2,925 be allocated from North Ward voted works to the construction of a footpath from the corner of Trinity Drive and Huntingdon Parade, Cambridge Gardens to 41 Huntingdon Parade, Cambridge Gardens. |
QWN 13 Coles Trolleys - Cambridge Gardens |
Councillor Kath Presdee requested a memo reply concerning the increase in the number of stray trolleys being discarded in streets surrounding the Coles supermarket in Cambridge Gardens. |
QWN 14 Council's Management Structure |
Councillor Greg Davies congratulated the General Manager and Council staff on the new management structure and the efficiency with which various matters have recently been resolved. |
Committee of the Whole
352 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jackie Greenow seconded Councillor Karen McKeown that the meeting adjourn to the Committee of the Whole to deal with the following matters, the time being 9:25 pm.
Councillor Ross Fowler OAM left the meeting, the time being 9:26 pm
Having previously declared a Pecuniary Interest in Item 2 – Commercial Matter - Expressions of Interest for Construction of Penrith Commuter Carpark Councillor Ben Goldfinch left the meeting, the time being 9:26 pm, and did not return.
1 Presence of the Public
CW1 RESOLVED on the motion of Councillor Jackie Greenow seconded Councillor Greg Davies that the press and public be excluded from Committee of the Whole to deal with the following matters:
A Liveable City
2 Commercial Matter - Expressions of Interest for Construction of Penrith Commuter Carpark
This item has been referred to Committee of the Whole as the report refers to commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed (i) prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it; or (ii) confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council; or (iii) reveal a trade secret and discussion of the matter in open meeting would be, on balance, contrary to the public interest.
3 Personal Matter
This item has been referred to Committee of the Whole as it refers to the personal hardship of a resident or ratepayer and discussion of the matter in open meeting would be, on balance, contrary to the public interest.
The meeting resumed at 9:44 pm and the General Manager reported that the Committee of the Whole met at 9:25 pm on 12 October 2009, the following being present
His Worship the Mayor Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM, Councillors Jim Aitken OAM, Robert Ardill, Greg Davies, Mark Davies, Tanya Davies, Ross Fowler OAM, Jackie Greenow, Marko Malkoc, Karen McKeown, Kath Presdee and John Thain
and the Committee of the Whole excluded the press and public from the meeting for the reasons set out in CW1 and that the Committee of the Whole submitted the following recommendations to Council.
CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS
Councillor Ross Fowler OAM returned to the meeting, the time being 9:32 pm.
2 Commercial Matter - Expressions of Interest for Construction of Penrith Commuter Carpark |
RECOMMENDED on the MOTION of Councillor John Thain seconded Councillor Jim Aitken OAM CW2 That the information contained in the report on Commercial Matter - Expressions of Interest for Construction of Penrith Commuter Carpark be received.
|
3 Personal Matter RECOMMENDED on the MOTION of Councillor John Thain seconded Councillor Jim Aitken OAM CW3 That the matter raised by Councillor John Thain in relation to a property in Cranebrook be received and that a further report be provided on the issues raised. |
ADOPTION OF Committee of the Whole
RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jackie Greenow seconded Councillor Marko Malkoc that the recommendations contained in the Committee of the Whole and shown as CW1, CW2 and CW3 be adopted.
12 Expressions of Interest Reference 03-09/10 for Construction of Penrith Commuter Carpark |
353 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ross Fowler OAM seconded Councillor John Thain That: 1. The information contained in the report on Expressions of Interest Reference 03-09/10 for Construction of Penrith Commuter Carpark be received. 2. The following contractors be invited to submit proposals for the Selective Tender for the Penrith Commuter Carpark construction: ADCO Constructions Pty Limited, Arenco (NSW) Pty Limited, Baulderstone Pty Ltd, Buildcorp Pty Limited, Hindmarsh Constructions Australia Pty Ltd, Lipman Pty Ltd, Richard Crookes Constructions Pty Limited & St Hilliers Contracting Pty Ltd.
|
There being no further business the Chairperson declared the meeting closed the time being 9:46 pm.
Procedure for Addressing Meetings
Anyone can request permission to address a meeting, providing that the number of speakers is limited to three in support of any proposal and three against.
Any request about an issue or matter on the Agenda for the meeting can be lodged with the General Manager or Public Officer up until 12 noon on the day of the meeting.
Prior to the meeting the person who has requested permission to address the meeting will need to provide the Public Officer with a written statement of the points to be covered during the address in sufficient detail so as to inform the Councillors of the substance of the address and a written copy of any questions to be asked of the Council in order that responses to those questions can be provided in due course.
In addition, prior to addressing the meeting a person addressing Council or Committee will be informed that they do not enjoy any privilege and that permission to speak may be withdrawn should they make inappropriate comments.
It should be noted that speakers at meetings of the Council or Committee do not have absolute privilege (parliamentary privilege). A speaker who makes any potentially offensive or defamatory remarks about any other person may render themselves open to legal action.
Prior to addressing the meeting the person will be required to sign the following statement:
“I (name) understand that the meeting I intend to address on (date) is a public meeting. I also understand that should I say or present any material that is inappropriate, I may be subject to legal action. I also acknowledge that I have been informed to obtain my own legal advice about the appropriateness of the material that I intend to present at the above mentioned meeting”.
Should a person fail to sign the above statement then permission to address either the Council or Committee will not be granted.
The Public Officer or Minute Clerk will speak to those people who have requested permission to address the meeting, prior to the meeting at 7.15pm.
It is up to the Council or Committee to decide if the request to address the meeting will be granted.
Where permission is to be granted the Council or Committee, at the appropriate time, will suspend only so much of the Standing Orders to allow the address to occur.
The Chairperson will then call the person up to the lectern or speaking area.
The person addressing the meeting needs to clearly indicate:
· Their name;
· Organisation or group they are representing (if applicable);
· Details of the issue to be addressed and the item number of the report in the Business Paper;
· Whether they are opposing or supporting the issue or matter (if applicable) and the action they would like the meeting to take;
· The interest of the speaker (e.g. affected person, neighbour, applicant, applicants spokesperson, interested citizen etc).
Each person then has five minutes to make their address. Those addressing Council will be required to speak to the written statement they have submitted. Permission to address Council is not to be taken as an opportunity to refute or otherwise the points made by previous speakers on the same issue.
The Council or Committee can extend this time if they consider if appropriate, however, everyone needs to work on the basis that the address will be for five minutes only.
Councillors may have questions about the address so people are asked to remain at the lectern or in the speaking area until the Chairperson has thanked them.
When this occurs, they should then return to their seat.
Glenn McCarthy
Public Officer
02 4732 7649
Mayoral Minutes
Item Page
1 Ripples awarded for excellence
2 Past Mayors and General Managers come together for forum
3 Wall Hanging Exchange Commemorates Anniversary of Penrith City
9 November 2009 |
|
A Liveable City |
|
Mayoral Minute
Ripples awarded for excellence
Strategic Objective: Our neighbourhood, recreation and leisure facilities and programs meet community needs
I am pleased to advise that Ripples Leisure Centre at St Marys, one of Council’s controlled entities, has been named 2009 NSW Medium Fitness Business of the Year at the Fitness Industry Awards of Excellence in September.
The annual awards are presented by Fitness Australia, the professional organisation representing the fitness industry across Australia. They recognise and reward businesses and individuals that are providing an outstanding service in the industry.
Ripples Leisure Centre has been operating for more than 14 years and has recently undergone extensive improvements including outdoor landscaping, refurbishment of the centre, new fitness programs and equipment, and a relaunch of the gym. There has also been an expansion of the Ripples Hydrotherapy Centre, with the appointment of a new Exercise Physiologist.
Ripples Leisure Centre will now be under consideration for a National Award of Excellence, which will be announced later this month.
I would like to thank the staff of Ripples Leisure Centre for their hard work and commitment, and congratulate them on this significant achievement.
Kevin Crameri OAM
Mayor
That the Mayoral Minute on Ripples awarded for excellence be received.
|
9 November 2009 |
|
A Leading City |
|
Mayoral Minute
Past Mayors and General Managers come together for forum
Strategic Objective: We work together to grow Penrith as a Regional City
It was my pleasure to welcome several of our past Mayors and our previous General Manager Alan Travers to the Nepean Room on Wednesday 4 November for a Mayors’ Forum. This was a rare and valuable opportunity to reflect on the past, present and future of Penrith in the company of some of our City’s strongest leaders and advocates.
General Manager Alan Stoneham presented an overview of the past five decades including highlights of the years served by each Mayor and General Manager. Director Craig Butler spoke about the current Strategic Plan and future directions for the City, and Chief Financial Officer/Director Barry Husking spoke about some of the future infrastructure challenges facing our Council and City.
So many people have helped shape Penrith into the City we know and love today. It was a fitting time for this group of past and present leaders to come together, in the month when we are celebrating 50 years as a City.
Kevin Crameri OAM
Mayor
That the Mayoral Minute on Past Mayors and General Managers come together for forum be received.
|
9 November 2009 |
|
A City of Opportunities |
|
Mayoral Minute
Wall Hanging Exchange Commemorates Anniversary of Penrith City
Strategic Objective: Our capacity and wellbeing is enhanced through the support of collaborative networks and partnerships
It is my pleasure to tonight unveil Penrith City Council’s quilted wall hanging, which will be given as an exchange gift to Lachlan Shire Council on Saturday, 14 November at the Civic Reception for the 50th Anniversary of Penrith City.
The idea for this wall hanging first came about at the 60th Anniversary of Penrith CWA, held at Council in July 2008.
Members of Penrith City and Lachlan Shire CWA branches decided they would embark on a collaborative project to celebrate both the anniversary of Penrith becoming a City, and the wonderful Friendship that exists between our two Councils.
It was decided that the branches would each design and create a quilted hanging to be exchanged at the Civic Reception, honouring our City and the community spirit we share.
Our wall hanging was designed and made by Robyn Hanstock of St Marys CWA and Margaret Pope of Penrith CWA. The quilt features iconic images of Penrith City, including Mamre Homestead, the Nepean Belle and our First Council Chambers.
The hanging will be displayed at the Civic Reception alongside Lachlan Shire’s wall hanging, which was designed and created by Sue Newham, Jeanette Manwaring, Terryll Cassidy, Gary White, Joan Wilcos and Colleen Helyar.
At the end of the evening we will exchange wall hangings; a wonderful testimony to the friendship ties between our two Councils.
I invite you all to inspect this remarkable wall hanging this evening.
Kevin Crameri OAM
Mayor
That the Mayoral Minute on Wall Hanging Exchange Commemorates Anniversary of Penrith City be received.
|
THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY
Reports of Committees
Item Page
1 Report and Recommendations of the Penrith Valley Community Safety Partnership Meeting held on 30 September 2009
2 Report and Recommendations of the Access Committee Meeting held on 7 October 2009
3 Report and Recommendations of the Local Traffic Committee Meeting held on 12 October 2009
4 Report and Recommendations of the Policy Review Committee meeting held on 19 October, 2009
5 Report and Recommendations of the Policy Review Committee meeting held on 21 October, 2009
9 November 2009 |
|
A Liveable City |
|
REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE
Penrith Valley Community
Safety Partnership MEETING
HELD ON 30 September, 2009
PRESENT
His Worship the Mayor Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM; Kristy Williams, St Marys Local Area Command; Kylie Chang, St Marys Local Area Command; Julie Passau, Penrith Local Area Command; Tracy Leahy, Penrith City Council; Linda Baumgartner, Penrith Local Area Command; Grant Healey, Penrith Local Area Command; Anthony Holton, St Mary Local Area Command; Ben Feszczuk, Penrith Local Area Command; Ray Filewood, St Marys Local Area Command; Jack McLeod, St Marys Town Centre; Gladys Reed, Penrith City Centre Association; Yvonne Perkins, Penrith City Council; David Burns, Penrith City Council; Erin Davidson, Penrith City Council; Murray Halls, Penrith City Council; Rachael Downie, Penrith City Council.
APOLOGIES |
Allison Kyriakakis, Penrith City Council; Councillor Karen McKeown; Councillor Kaylene Allison; Councillor Prue Guillaume; Alison Pearson, Penrith City Council; Jeni Pollard, Penrith City Council; Wendy Herne, St Clair- Erskine Park Community Safety Association Inc.; Felicity Sheaves, Wentworth Area Health Service; Julie Page, Wentworth Area Health Service. |
CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES - Penrith Valley Community Safety Partnership Meeting - 10 June 2009 |
The minutes of the Penrith Valley Community Safety Partnership Meeting of 10 June 2009 were confirmed. |
DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS
A Liveable City
Prior to the commencement of the meeting David Burns introduced Mayor Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM to the Partnership and congratulated him on being elected Mayor.
1 Penrith Valley Community Safety Plan 2007-2011 - Key Strategy Development |
Plate Safe Program
David Burns provided an update on the Plate Safe program which involves the installation of ‘Plate Safe’ anti theft screws to 1500 vehicles to residents within the Penrith Local Government Area.
Jane Street Car Park
Yvonne Perkins provided an update on the Jane Street Car Park Project. Funding will be spent on coordinating a number of CPTED treatments and physical upgrades to reduce the number of steal from motor vehicles and motor vehicle theft to the Jane Street car park in partnership with RailCorp.
RailCorp are currently finalising the tender process for the project. Work is expected to commence prior to the end of the year.
2. WSAAS - Western Sydney Area Assistance Scheme Funding - Domestic Violence Resource Project. Yvonne advised that Council was successful in obtaining $60,000 funding from the NSW Department of Community Services’ Western Sydney Area Assistance Scheme to coordinate the Domestic Violence Resource project.
The project is in response to recommendations from a number of forums held towards building an integrated approach to domestic and family violence in the Nepean region. The Domestic Violence Resource project will be conducted over twelve months and comprises of three components.
1. Assessment of training needs of local Non Government Organisations workers. 2. Provide and deliver training for identified needs to workers in Non Government Organisations. 3. Develop a resource kit that provides workers with a consistent referral process for clients that may present with Domestic Violence related issues. A copy of the kit will be made available on the Domestic Violence Help Penrith Region website at www.dvhelppenrithregion.nsw.gov.au
Tracy advised that an expression of interest will be advertised shortly seeking a consultant for the project.
3. Additional Alcohol Free Zones and Alcohol Free Areas Yvonne advised that the first round of Alcohol Free Zones and Alcohol Free Areas has now been implemented and signage installed across the Penrith Local Government Area.
The second round of Alcohol Free Zones and Alcohol Free Areas is now underway and currently undergoing consultation. 10 Alcohol Free Zones and 2 Alcohol Free Areas have been identified across the City through the recently completed Community Safety Audits.
David advised that Allison will review requests for new Alcohol Free Zones and Alcohol Free Areas on a quarterly basis. Requests to establish new Alcohol Free Zones and/or Alcohol Free Areas locations will be subject to data collection and recorded police statistics. Public Domain crews will also be required to record levels of alcohol and plastic bottles, rubbish and malicious damage at each location.
Ben Feszczuk asked if the Green space between the Joan Sutherland Performing Arts Centre and Westfield was going to be considered. David advised that this request has been noted and is being reviewed. Currently the Parks Maintenance crew is monitoring the location.
4. Closure of land between Diamantina Close and Reddington Avenue, St Clair Yvonne advised that Council received a report at its ordinary meeting 3 August 2009 proposing the closure of land located between Diamantina Close and Reddington Avenue, St Clair.
Council endorsed this recommendation and the parcel of land is currently in the process of being rezoned and investigated for potential subdivision. Whilst the parcel of land is undergoing investigations, temporary fencing and security gates will be installed to prevent access to this location. Council is currently awaiting consent from surrounding residents to install the fencing.
David also advised that signage will be erected at the location to notify the public of the closure.
5. Cranebrook Street Lighting Enhancement Project David Burns provided an update on the Cranebrook Street Lighting Enhancement Project to improve and upgrade street lighting along the area of Pendock Road, Cranebrook from Sherringham Road to Borrowdale Way and surrounding areas including public housing, pedestrian laneways and open spaces.
David further advised that a consultant has been engaged to develop detailed designs and specifications for tender.
The tender process will be complete by the end of the year, with the project completed by February 2010.
6. Penrith Senior Citizens Fencing Yvonne advised that it was identified from a Community Safety Audit conducted in October 2008 that patrons from surrounding licensed venues were gathering and loitering in the grounds. Recently the centre has had fencing installed to prevent loitering and provide territorial reinforcement at this location. This was funded by the Federal Government Local Community Infrastructure Program.
RECOMMENDED that the information contained in the report on Penrith Valley Community Safety Plan 2007-2011 - Key Strategy Development be received.
|
Regular Items
A) Police Statistics
PENRITH LOCAL AREA COMMAND
Reported Crime Statistics June 2009 – August 2009
Crime Category |
June |
July |
August |
Assault |
72 |
69 |
86 |
Robbery |
6 |
6 |
6 |
Break & Enter |
75 |
60 |
41 |
Stealing |
154 |
146 |
121 |
Steal Motor Vehicle |
50 |
43 |
40 |
Malicious Damage |
124 |
100 |
118 |
Drug Detection |
17 |
23 |
34 |
Traffic Offences |
665 |
497 |
222 |
Motor Vehicle Accident |
71 |
83 |
82 |
St Marys LOCAL AREA COMMAND
Reported Crime Statistics June 2009 – August 2009
Crime Category |
June |
July |
August |
Assault |
100 |
92 |
101 |
Robbery |
15 |
3 |
17 |
Break & Enter |
54 |
45 |
46 |
Stealing |
125 |
92 |
14 |
Steal Motor Vehicle |
56 |
44 |
30 |
Malicious Damage |
137 |
123 |
149 |
Drug Detection |
16 |
20 |
18 |
Traffic Offences |
806 |
566 |
215 |
Motor Vehicle Accident |
53 |
63 |
69 |
B) What’s In The Media
GENERAL BUSINESS
GENERAL BUSINESS
GB 1 Funding – Green space |
Yvonne advised that the funding application that was submitted to the Federal Attorney General’s Department for a project aimed at minimising antisocial behaviour and harassment in the green space located between the Joan Sutherland Performing Arts Centre and Westfield was unsuccessful. |
GB 2 Public Art – Public Utility Infrastructure |
Yvonne advised that the Graffiti Minimisation Program consists of three key components. These are Education, Prevention and Removal. At the time the program was being developed and established consideration was given to incorporating public art as a key component in the Program. Upon conducting research and field visits the practice was not sustainable or effective in reducing graffiti and was not adopted as a component in the strategy to minimise graffiti.
Since the implementation of the Graffiti Minimisation Program various requests from Councillors and the public have been received requesting mural art projects to be implemented in various locations across the City.
Yvonne advised that following these requests the idea is being investigated again. Council is investigating incorporating mural art designs in agreed locations and traffic signal boxes across the City as another element to the Graffiti Minimisation Program. It was discussed that an approval process would need to be implemented to maintain some form of control and consistency for murals on private property to ensure that the design is in line with Council’s Public Art Policy, which is currently being developed by Council’s Community and Cultural Development Department. |
GB 3 DefQon |
Ben Feszczuk advised that the DefQon1 dance party that was held at the Regatta Centre on September 26 went reasonably well.
Ben advised that there were many noise complaints throughout the day from Cranebrook, Werrington and Cambridge Pa rk. At the end of the event it only took event organisers forty (40) minutes to clear the venue.
Gladys Reed reported that there were no issues within the city centre.
Event organisers have had initial discussions regarding having the event held at the Regatta Centre next year, increasing the venue capacity to 25,000 persons. The event has previously operated in the Netherlands, Brazil and New Zealand. David advised they will have to go through the Development Application process again. |
There being no further business the Chairperson declared the meeting closed the time being 7:25pm.
That the recommendations contained in the Report and Recommendations of the Penrith Valley Community Safety Partnership meeting held on 30 September, 2009 be adopted.
|
9 November 2009 |
|
A City of Opportunities |
|
REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE
Access Committee MEETING
HELD ON 7 October, 2009
PRESENT
Councillor Jackie Greenow (Chair), Councillor Prue Guillaume, Councillor Robert Ardill, Michael Morris, Sherille Stephens, John Farragher, Denise Heath, Ronda Hopkins, Tricia Hitchen.
IN ATTENDANCE:
Graham Howe, Acting Building Projects and Maintenance Coordinator; Tracy Leahy, Acting Community and Cultural Development Manager; Ben Felten, Disability Access Officer; Joe Ibbitson, Community Programs Coordinator; Steve Barratt, Building Regulatory Services Coordinator; Greg Hall, Principal Planner; Mark Relf, Accessibility Solutions; Vanessa Walker, AMP; Schandel Jefferys, Principal Planner North; David Flintoft, Penrith Panthers (5.36pm); Andrew Robinson, Recreation Manager (5.36pm).
APOLOGIES |
Apologies were accepted from Vanessa Muscat, Erich Weller, Hans Meijer. |
CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES - Access Committee Meeting - 5 August 2009 |
The minutes of the Access Committee meeting of 5 August 2009 were confirmed. |
BUSINESS ARISING FROM PREVIOUS MINUTES
DA09/0654 Proposed Swim School at Lavin Crescent, Werrington County
Tricia Hitchen advised that the Swim School had already opened and asked if the changes recommended at the last meeting had been completed. Greg Hall replied that these changes were included in the consent and amended on the plans.
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Tricia Hitchen declared a Non-Pecuniary Conflict of Interest – Less than Significant in Item 3 – Development Application DA09/0901 Alteration to Existing Building as use as a Restaurant at Lot 21 Lavin Crescent, Werrington County.
DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS
A Green City
3 Development Application Referrals to the Access Committee DA09/0771 Glenmore Parkway, Glenmore Park – Extension to existing shopping centre with associated carparking
Vanessa Walker gave an overview of the proposal. Mark Relf described the accessibility features of the development.
The Committee discussed the following issues:
· height restriction of lower level parking · street parking on Luttrell Avenue · access to lower level cafes · bus stops · taxi drop off and pick up point · public rest seating.
Councillor Greenow thanked the presenters.
Vanessa Walker and Mark Relf left the meeting at 5.35pm.
Andrew Robinson and David Flintoft arrived at the meeting, the time being 5.36pm.
DA09/0747 Proposed Upgrade Works to Penrith Stadium and Howell Oval
David Flintoft described the proposals for the upgrade works to Penrith Stadium and Howell Oval as follows:
Accessible parking:
· in cricket mode there would be 26 carpark spaces and three accessible parking spaces · in football mode there are eight accessible parking spaces on the western gate, eight in the north eastern corner of the Panthers carpark – the stage three version of the masterplan does not include any additional spaces other than those in the southern area.
Seating for people in wheelchairs:
· in cricket mode there is a raised platform on the concourse for four wheelchairs to view the cricket game · in football mode – the southern grandstand scope is limited in this stage to the lower concourse · no additional seating is proposed in this version – it is under consideration whether access to each of the east and west stadiums can be provided from the southern end.
Issues discussed and considered by the Committee included:
· location of bus drop off points · possibility of using no standing zones as drop off points · modifying the kerb and pram ramp to access the footpath · heavy traffic on the roadways near the stadium · pedestrian management issues on game days · that the building is accessible but there is no accessible path of travel to other areas from this building · a continuous path of travel between the east and west grandstands · improved food and beverage facilities · displayed signage at the southern end explaining which areas are not accessible · inequity of undercover seating, which is only available in the grandstand · the difficulty of multiple people sitting together with a person in a wheelchair · 32 accessible seats, 11 under cover – carers can sit alongside each of these seats · it is possible to sit in front of the accessible seats · the accessible seats will be the last to be sold – they will be held up until the Friday before a game · there is no clear description on the website of accessibility, how to park, booking of tickets or how to travel to the ground.
David Flintoft explained that there had been a computer glitch with the ticketing system which has now been resolved.
David Flintoft undertook to speak with Panthers senior management regarding the pricing of tickets for accessible seating.
Other matters that were discussed included the redevelopment of Panthers. Specifically this related to:
· issues with the revolving doors at the main entrance to Panthers · pathway of travel from the accessible parking to the main entrance of Panthers.
David Flintoft offered an open invitation to anyone who wanted to come to Panthers and have a look.
Ben Felten enquired if Panthers would be available for Guides Dogs Australia to provide training for guide dogs and their handlers on using the revolving doors. David Flintoft replied that they were more than happy to accommodate this request.
David Flintoft and Andrew Robinson left the meeting at 6.10pm.
The meeting held a supper break at 6.10pm.
The meeting resumed at 6.20pm.
DA09/0886 Proposed Place of Worship – Milford Road, Londonderry
Greg Hall spoke to the development application for a proposed place of worship on Milford Road, Londonderry. It is anticipated that the Buddhist temple would have a congregation of approximately 80 people.
The committee discussed issues including:
· accessible carparking · accessible toilets · steps at main entry · access to the ramp · caretakers residence and overnight accommodation on the site · levels of rear entry
Greg Hall undertook to ask the developers for more detail for their proposal and provide an accessibility report.
DA09/0888 Chinese Restaurant, 467 High Street, Penrith
The development application is to convert the building to a restaurant with access from Allen Place and High Street.
Greg Hall advised that the back entry is an emergency exit, not an entrance door.
The Committee discussed the following issues:
· access to the restaurant when parking at the back of the building · the industrial waste bin located on the footpath at the rear of the premises.
DA09/0934 Approved Residential Flat Building to a Motel at 42-50 Union Road, Penrith
Greg Hall spoke to the development application referral and advised that an access report has not been provided at this stage.
The proposal is for a motel with 43 rooms, two of which will be accessible. There is basement carparking with lift access to the ground floor.
Issues addressed by the Committee included:
· policing of accessible carparking spaces · three out of the 69 carpark spaces will be accessible · provision of commode chairs and other accessible features · the size of bathrooms · ability to manoeuvre a wheelchair in the space provided · head height of the underground carpark is 2.8m.
Greg Hall stated that the access report is required to look at the units and show how they comply with the requirements. The access consultants should go through the BCA and Australian Standards for widths, etc.
The Mayor, Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM, and the Deputy Mayor, Councillor Ross Fowler, arrived at the meeting at 6.47pm. Councillor Greenow introduced the Mayor and Deputy Mayor to the committee.
The meeting resumed at 6.50pm.
The Committee also discussed the following:
· size of the doors · whether the accessible units would be kept aside for people with disabilities · the shortage of accessible units in the Penrith area · access to the terrace from the accessible units · crushed granite pathways are difficult for wheelchairs to traverse · the gradient of the drive down to the basement · the drop off zone is only one car wide.
Greg Hall advised he would discuss an increase in the number of accessible units with the developers.
Schandel Jefferys left the meeting at 6.58pm.
DA09/0901 Alteration to Existing Building as use as a Restaurant at Lot 21 Lavin Crescent, Werrington County
Tricia Hitchen declared a Non-Pecuniary Conflict of Interest – Less than Significant in Item 3 – Development Application DA09/0901 Alteration to Existing Building as use as a Restaurant at Lot 21 Lavin Crescent, Werrington County.
Greg Hall spoke to the application which is for a Red Rooster restaurant on Dunheved Road in a recently constructed shop development.
Three quarters of the building is for food preparation and storage. There will be limited seating in the front of the building plus a unisex toilet and unisex disabled toilet.
The Committee discussed the following issues:
· provision of unfixed seating · access to the restaurant from existing accessible carparking space on the site · the width of accessible carparking space · traffic flow within the complex and potential conflict · the height of the awning over the drive-thru.
Councillor Ardill left the meeting at 7.05pm.
DA08/1327 Demolition of Existing Shops and Erection of a Shopping Centre – 1 Park Road, Wallacia
Greg Hall advised that the development application involves extension to the existing Wallacia shopping centre, demolition of the existing shops, erection of 12 specialty shops as well as a supermarket plus basement and carparking areas.
The following issues were discussed by the Committee:
· the height of the basement to accommodate accessible parking · the grade of the accessible carpark spaces · access from area three to the shops for people with disability · accessible parking space for staff.
Greg Hall agreed to make sure that there was adequate headroom for the accessible carpark space underneath the building.
DA09/0737 Erection of a 56 Place Child Care Centre – Littlefields Road, Mulgoa
Greg Hall introduced the development application for a 56 place child care centre in Littlefields Road, Mulgoa. Greg Hall advised that the Access Audit Report is prepared by Farah Madon of Vista Design Architects Pty Ltd.
The Committee discussed the following issues:
· steps leading from the building to the playground area · accessible ramp 1:14 to outdoor play area · the sloping site · level access to the front of the building.
Councillor Greenow suggested that it would be a good idea to look at a more detailed floorplan of the building. Greg Hall agreed to source a more detailed internal layout plan and present back to the meeting.
DA09/0951 Alterations to the Existing Night Club (the Bloc) and Amalgamation of a Restaurant to the Night Club
Greg Hall spoke to the development application referral from Lush Nightclub for alterations to the existing Bloc nightclub and the integration of the Mojo Lounge located on the first floor. It is understood that a lift to the new facility will be provided from High Street.
The Committee discussed the following issues in relation to this proposal:
· accessible carparking spaces located at the back of the building · the carpark area is poorly lit · it is difficult to get onto the footpath and around to the lift at the front of the building from the rear carpark · possibility of changing one hour parking spaces on High Street to accessible parking spaces · people with disabilities exiting the building in the case of fire or emergency · access to the top seating area of the restaurant · direct link from restaurant to the nightclub – possibility of a ramp.
|
RECOMMENDED that the information contained in the report on Development Application Referrals to the Access Committee be received. |
A City of Opportunities
1 Penrith Inclusion Plan - People with Disability 2009-2013 Joe Ibbitson advised that the Penrith Inclusion Plan-People with Disability 2009-2013 had been adopted at Council’s Ordinary Meeting on 7 September 2009.
Greg Hall left the meeting at 7.32pm.
Six submissions from individuals and organisations were considered at the meeting. Some broader issues of concern regarding transport, housing and recreation were raised in the submissions. These issues are incorporated in the draft documentation.
Letters of thank you have been sent out to all the respondents and detailed responses will be sent at a later date.
The draft documentation is being prepared for final layout and printing. The key challenge is the implementation of the plan over the next four years. Regular progress reports on the implementation of the plan will be provided to the Committee and Council.
John Farragher left the meeting at 7.38pm. Graham Howe left the meeting at 7.38pm.
Michael Morris thanked Council officers on behalf of the Committee for producing the Penrith Inclusion Plan.
|
RECOMMENDED that the information contained in the report on Penrith Inclusion Plan - People with Disability 2009-2013 be received. |
2 2009 International Day of People with Disability Ben Felten informed the meeting that Council is working with the arts community this year to organise a series of arts and cultural activities to celebrate International Day of People with Disability (IDPwD). A schedule of events is contained in the report. The main events will be the official launch of IDPwD by the Mayor, Sizzle at Penrith Regional Gallery, as well as puppetry and music workshops. Golden Stave Music Therapy Centre will also be holding a performance. Kate Baker from the Australia Council for the Arts will be keynote speaker.
Graham Howe returned to the meeting at 7.41pm.
Ben Felten advised that the IDPwD celebrations are about capacity building and encouraging people to work together to build more opportunities.
Joe Ibbitson invited the Committee members to attend the official opening to be held 9.30am on Thursday 3 December at the Regional Gallery.
Ben Felten undertook to send out information on any of the activities if members required it.
Ronda Hopkins advised that there had been a good response for the “Colour My Ability” competition.
|
RECOMMENDED that the information contained in the report on 2009 International Day of People with Disability be received.
|
Greg Hall returned to the meeting at 7.45pm.
GENERAL BUSINESS
GB 1 2009 National Disability Awards |
Joe Ibbitson informed the Committee that a letter had been received from the Hon Jenny Macklin MP and the Hon Bill Shorten MP regarding the 2009 National Disability Awards. Joe Ibbitson congratulated Councillor Jackie Greenow who has been selected as one of the three finalists in the Local Government Award category. |
GB 2 Wall of Achievement |
Councillor Greenow congratulated Sherille Stephens who was a recipient of the 2009 Wall of Achievement awards. |
GB 3 Active Penrith Month 2009 - Activate |
The first Penrith City Youth Games were held today as well as a physical activity workshop for children 10-18 years. Tomorrow the indoor rugby will be held. Active Penrith month is a month of free activities and events from 1 October to 1 November 2009. |
GB 4 AFFORD Funathon |
Joe Ibbitson handed out a flyer for the AFFORD Funathon which is to be held on 13 November 2009 commencing at the Penrith Regatta Centre at 8.30am. |
GB 5 NSW Regional Meetings |
Joe Ibbitson handed out information which advised that the NSW National Regional meetings are commencing soon. Round 4 starts on 14 October and concludes on 30 October. |
GB 6 Official Opening of the Accessibility Facilities at the Quarterdeck |
Joe Ibbitson advised that the official opening of the Quarterdeck will be held at 9.30am on 10 October 2009. |
GB 7 Access Issues at Nepean Private Hospital |
Joe Ibbitson advised that Steve Barratt had sent out an email regarding the access issues at Nepean Private Hospital. |
GB 8 “Shut Out” Report of the National Arts and Disability Strategy Consultation |
Ben Felten advised that the final report and executive summary of the National Arts and Disability Strategy are available on the Accessible Arts website - www.aarts.net.au. |
GB 9 Accessible pdf files |
Michael Morris advised that he had sent Ben Felten an email with a link to accessible pdf files. |
GB 10 Penrith Valley Regional Sports Centre |
Steve Barratt advised that there has been a major fire upgrade program to the Penrith Valley Regional Sports Centre. Some of the stairs into the centre are to be removed and a ramp installed. The ground floor of the centre is accessible and the first floor level will also now be accessible. |
GB 11 St Marys Leagues Club |
Steve Barratt advised he had received a development application from St Marys Leagues Club for an extension to the outdoor area in front of the building. The plans were available if anyone wished to have a look. Steve Barratt advised that this is a matter which would normally be referred to the Committee. |
GB 12 Procedures for the Referral of Development Applications to the Access Committee |
Steve Barratt discussed how to manage the DA referrals to the Access Committee and agreed to present a report to a future meeting on this matter. |
GB 13 CDSE Grant to Gaels Club |
Denise Heath advised that the Gaels Club has received a CDSE Grant for $4,500 which supported six children to attend Little Athletics for the season. |
DA09/0737 Erection of a 56 Place Child Care Centre – Littlefields Road, Mulgoa
Greg Hall handed out copies of more detailed internal plans for the proposed child care centre on Littlefields Road, Mulgoa.
The committee raised and discussed the following issues regarding the proposal:
· provision of change facilities for larger and older children
· provision of a sluice
· the combined sick bay and sleeping room.
There being no further business the Chairperson declared the meeting closed, the time being 8.03pm.
That the recommendations contained in the Report and Recommendations of the Access Committee meeting held on 7 October, 2009 be adopted.
|
9 November 2009 |
|
A Liveable City |
|
REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE
Local Traffic Committee MEETING
HELD ON 12 October, 2009
PRESENT
Michael Alderton - Road Network Services Engineer (Chairperson), Councillor Jackie Greenow, Councillor Karen McKeown – Representative for the Member for Mulgoa, Pat Sheehy AM – Representative for the Member for Londonderry, Sergeant Natasha Crawford – Penrith Police, Senior Constable Mark Elliott – St Marys Police, James Suprain - Roads and Traffic Authority, David Yee – A/Design & Technical Advice Manager, Daniel Davidson – Road Safety Co‑ordinator, David Drozd – Senior Traffic Engineer, Wayne Mitchell – Group Manager – City Infrastructure, Peter Shahatit – Trainee Engineer.
IN ATTENDANCE
Ron Watson – Westbus, Paul Maynard – Ranger.
APOLOGIES |
Jason Roberts – Westbus, Ruth Byrnes - Senior Traffic Officer. |
CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES - Local Traffic Committee Meeting - 7 September 2009 |
The minutes of the Local Traffic Committee Meeting of 7 September 2009 were confirmed. |
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
There were no declarations of interest.
DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS
A Liveable City
1 Bennett Road, St Clair - Sight Distances at Stepping Stones Child Care Centre |
RECOMMENDED That: 1. The information contained in the report on Bennett Road, St Clair - Sight Distances at Stepping Stones Child Care Centre be received. 2. The current entry and exit points remain unchanged. 3. ‘No Stopping’ restrictions be instated, commencing 40m south from the entry point of Stepping Stones Child Care Centre, to the northern property boundary of the Child Care Centre. 4. Stepping Stones Child Care Centre management be advised of Council’s resolution.
|
2 Erskine Business Park, Erskine Park - Amended Provision of Heavy Vehicle On-Street Rest Areas |
RECOMMENDED That: 1. The information contained in the report on Erskine Business Park, Erskine Park - Amended Provision of Heavy Vehicle On-Street Rest Areas be received. 2. Recommendations from the LTC meeting on 6 April 2009 be amended to “‘Long or Heavy Vehicles Permitted to Stop Longer than 1 Hour 6pm to 6am Mon–Fri, All Day Sat-Sun & Public Holidays’ signs be installed on the eastern side of Templar Road, south of Lockwood Road for a length of about 150m; on the northern side of Lockwood Road, 100m east and 75m west of Kellet Close, for a length of about 175m; on the northern side of Sarah Andrews Close between the large 90° bend and 75m from the end of the road, for a length of about 150m.” The sign lettering shall be green in accordance with standard sign number R5-551. 3. The Roads and Traffic Authority be advised of Council’s resolution.
|
3 Bushman's Walk, Penrith - 17 to 19 November 2009 |
RECOMMENDED That: 1. The information contained in the report on Bushman's Walk, Penrith - 17 to 19 November 2009 be received. 2. The applicant fulfil the requirements of the Roads and Traffic Authority’s Guidelines for Special Events, Class 4, and all participants be required to utilise the footpath and grass areas along the route and not encroach onto the road carriageways unless crossing the roadway at a designated crossing point. 3. The organisers obtain separate Police approval. 4. The event organisers be advised of Council’s resolution. |
4 Second Avenue, Kingswood - Proposed Extension to Bus Zone |
RECOMMENDED That: 1. The information contained in the report on Second Avenue, Kingswood - Proposed Extension to Bus Zone be received. 2. The existing Bus Zone outside No. 59 Second Avenue, Kingswood, be extended across the frontage of No. 57 Second Avenue (requires removal of one marked parking space). 3. The Committee note consultation with the affected resident has been undertaken.
|
5 Woodlands Drive, Glenmore Park - Outcome of Community Consultation for Linemarking & Signage Improvements |
RECOMMENDED That: 1. The information contained in the report on Woodlands Drive, Glenmore Park - Outcome of Community Consultation for Linemarking & Signage Improvements be received. 2. The proposed linemarking near 18 Woodlands Drive be shortened to 60m and commence at the western side of the driveway of number 18 Woodlands Drive. 3. The residents who made submissions be advised of Council’s resolution.
|
6 Penrith City Centre Association - High Street Sunday Markets Traffic Management Plan |
RECOMMENDED That: 1. The information contained in the report on Penrith City Centre Association - High Street Sunday Markets Traffic Management Plan be received. 2. The Traffic Management Plan for the class 1 event, submitted by Penrith City Centre Association, High Street Sunday Markets be endorsed. 3. The Penrith City Centre Association be advised of Council’s resolution. 4. The Traffic Management Plan and Traffic Control Plan to be referred to the Roads and Traffic Authority’s Traffic Management Centre for approval. |
7 Evan Street/Macquarie Avenue & The Crescent, Penrith - Proposed Permanent Road Closure |
RECOMMENDED That: 1. The information contained in the report on Evan Street/Macquarie Avenue & The Crescent, Penrith - Proposed Permanent Road Closure be received. 2. Consultation be carried out with all affected residents, with any substantial objections brought back to the Local Traffic Committee. 3. The proposed road closure be advertised in local newspapers for a period of two weeks. 4. The eastbound movement on the western leg of The Crescent intersection with Macquarie Avenue/Evan Street be closed to through traffic. 5. A project for a road closure in The Crescent, Penrith be entered into Council’s Traffic Facility Prioritisation process and when the project receives priority against other listed sites, Council’s Design Co-ordinator be requested to prepare a design plan of the proposed facility, with a further report submitted to the Local Traffic Committee after public consultation for design plan finalisation and endorsement. 6. A Traffic Management Plan be prepared by Council and forwarded to the Roads and Traffic Authority. 7. David Bradbury MP and the 5th Combat Engineer Regiment be advised.
|
8 Bus Network Review - New Roads for Bus Routes & Approval of New Bus Stops |
RECOMMENDED That: 1. The information contained in the report on Bus Network Review - New Roads for Bus Routes & Approval of New Bus Stops be received. 2. The new roads to be used as bus routes as listed in Table 1 be endorsed. 3. The new bus stops and bus zones listed in Table 2 be approved. 4. All residents who made submissions regarding bus stops be advised of Council’s resolution by Comfort Delgro Cabcharge. 5. Comfort Delgro Cabcharge be advised of Council’s resolution. 6. The proposed new roads for bus routes be reported to Council’s Access Committee for information. These recommendations were reported to Council at its Ordinary Meeting on 12 October 2009 as an urgent report and Council resolved that: “1. The information contained in the report on Bus Network Review - Approval of New Roads for Bus Routes (Item 9 - Report to Local Traffic Committee, 12/10/2009) be received. 2. The new roads to be used as bus routes as listed in Table 1 be noted. 3. The new bus stops and bus zones listed in Table 2 be approved. 4. All residents who made submissions regarding bus stops be advised of Council’s resolution by Comfort Delgro Cabcharge. 5. Comfort Delgro Cabcharge be advised of Council’s Resolution. 6. This report be forwarded to Council’s Access Committee for information.”
|
9 Union Lane & Worth Street, Penrith - Request For 'Keep Clear' Line Marking & 'No Stopping' Extension |
RECOMMENDED That: 1. The information contained in the report on Union Lane & Worth Street, Penrith - Request For 'Keep Clear' Line Marking & 'No Stopping' Extension be received. 2. A Traffic Management Plan shall be submitted to the Roads and Traffic Authority for linemarking of the area at the intersection of Worth Street and Union Lane with ‘Keep Clear’ restrictions. 3. The existing ‘No Stopping’ zone on the south-western corner of the Worth Street and Union Lane intersection be increased to 22.5m from the existing 10m. 4. The affected business owner be notified of the proposed extension to ‘No Stopping’ restrictions and any substantial objections be referred back to the Local Traffic Committee. |
10 Penrith LGA - Introduction of School Zone 'Dragon Teeth' Markings |
RECOMMENDED That: 1. The information contained in the report on Penrith LGA - Introduction of School Zone 'Dragon Teeth' Markings be received. 2. Council note the information. |
GENERAL BUSINESS
GB 1 M4 Motorway, Kingswood – Fatal accident (Raised St Marys Police) |
The St Marys Police representative advised of a fatal accident where a pedestrian was hit by a vehicle on the M4 Motorway, 75 metres East of Kingswood Road. RECOMMENDED That the Committee note the information. |
GB 2 DEFQON1 – Music Festival, Sydney International Regatta Centre (SIRC) – Pedestrian Safety (Raised Penrith Police) |
The Penrith Police representative raised concerns on behalf of the Penrith Local Area Commander regarding pedestrian safety following the recent DEFQON1 event held at Penrith Lakes. Police advised that pedestrians were walking along Old Castlereagh Road after the event and requested that improved lighting and a concrete footpath be installed for similar events at the venue.
RECOMMENDED That the concerns be forwarded to Council’s Development Services Department for information and further action. |
GB 3 Old Bathurst Road, Emu Heights – Heavy Vehicles (Raised Penrith Police) |
The Penrith Police representative raised concerns regarding signage at Old Bathurst Road and advised that there have been two recent incidents where heavy vehicles have ignored the signs and caused a road closure. Council’s Road Network Services Engineer suggested that Penrith Police and Council officers conduct a joint site inspection to investigate improvement options. RECOMMENDED That the Committee note the information. |
GB 4 O’Connell Street, Claremont Meadows – Speed Enforcement (Penrith Police) |
The Penrith Police representative raised concerns regarding speed enforcement in O’Connell Street, Claremont Meadows and advised that speed enforcement taskings had not found an ongoing speeding issue. LTC Comment Council’s Road Network Services Engineer advised that Council has conducted speed surveys in O’Connell Street and found that the 85% speed is below the posted speed limit in the residential area on O’Connell Street while there was a speeding issue within the rural road area of O’Connell Street to the west of the residential area. RECOMMENDED That Council provide Penrith Police with a copy of the speed survey to assist in determining the appropriate time to conduct speed enforcement. |
There being no further business the Chairperson declared the meeting closed, the time being 10:45am.
That the recommendations contained in the Report and Recommendations of the Local Traffic Committee meeting held on 12 October, 2009 be adopted.
|
9 November 2009 |
|
A Leading City |
|
REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE
Policy Review Committee MEETING
HELD ON 19 October, 2009
PRESENT
His Worship the Mayor Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM, Councillors Jim Aitken OAM, Robert Ardill, Greg Davies, Mark Davies, Tanya Davies, Ross Fowler OAM, Ben Goldfinch, Jackie Greenow, Prue Guillaume, Marko Malkoc, Karen McKeown, Kath Presdee and John Thain.
LEAVE OF ABSENCE
Leave of Absence was previously granted to Councillor Kaylene Allison for the period 29 September 2009 to 1 November 2009 inclusive.
APOLOGIES |
There were no apologies. |
CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES - Policy Review Committee Meeting - 14 September 2009 |
The minutes of the Policy Review Committee Meeting of 14 September 2009 were confirmed. |
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
There were no declarations of interest.
DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS
A Leading City
3 Penrith City Council Customer Survey 2009 Management Planning Coordinator, Ken Lim introduced the report and Simon Pomfret from IRIS Research gave a presentation on the Customer Survey Results for 2009. |
RECOMMENDED that the information contained in the report on Penrith City Council Customer Survey 2009 be received.
|
A City of Opportunities
4 Penrith City Centre Association and St Marys Town Centre Association 2009-2010 Business Plans Acting City Centres Coordinator, Terry Agar introduced the report and invited Gladys Reed from Penrith City Centre Association and Peter Jackson – Calway from St Marys Town Centre Association who gave presentations on their achievements during 2008-2009 and Business Plans for 2009-2010. His Worship the Mayor, Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM left the meeting, the time being 8:30pm. His Worship the Mayor, Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM returned to the meeting, the time being 8:31pm. Councillor Kath Presdee left the meeting, the time being 8:43pm. Councillor Kath Presdee returned to the meeting, the time being 8:47pm. |
RECOMMENDED That: 1. The information contained in the report on Penrith City Centre Association and St Marys Town Centre Association 2009-2010 Business Plans be received 2. Funding for the Penrith City Centre Association and the St Marys Town Centre Association in the amounts of $296,814 and $222,670 be endorsed to be paid in four equal instalments at the beginning of each quarter. |
A Liveable City
8 New Region 1 Bus Network Acting Design & Technical Advice Manager, David Yee introduced the report and invited Adrian Dessanti from NSW Transport and Infrastructure and Steve Timbrell from Westbus to answer any questions, that Councillors may have with the New Region 1 Bus Network. Councillor Mark Davies left the meeting, the time being 8:52pm. Councillor Mark Davies returned to the meeting, the time being 8:54pm. His Worship the Mayor, Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM left the meeting, the time being 8:57pm. His Worship the Mayor, Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM returned to the meeting, the time being 9:03pm. Councillor Marko Malkoc left the meeting, the time being 9:23pm. Councillor Marko Malkoc returned to the meeting, the time being 9:27pm. |
RECOMMENDED that the information contained in the report on New Region 1 Bus Network be received. |
Councillor Greg Davies, left the meeting the time being 9:48pm.
Councillor Greg Davies, returned to the meeting the time being 9:49pm.
A Leading City
1 Annual Report 2008-09 Councillor Karen McKeown stated she thought the Annual Report was very user friendly, was a great link to sustainability and the officers involved in the compilation of the Annual Report have done an outstanding job. |
RECOMMENDED That: 1. The information contained in the report on Annual Report 2008-09 be received 2. The Annual Report be endorsed by Council and forwarded to the Department of Local Government as required under the Act.
|
2 "Celebrate Penrith City 09" Final Report Councillor Karen McKeown left the meeting, the time being 9:51pm. Councillor Karen McKeown returned to the meeting, the time being 9:52pm. |
RECOMMENDED that the information contained in the report on "Celebrate Penrith City 09" Final Report be received. |
Procedural Motion
RECOMMENDED that Item 5 be considered at the conclusion of Confidential Business. |
|
A Green City
6 Glenmore Park Shopping Centre - Draft DCP amendment to Glenmore Park Town Centre Chapter of the Penrith DCP 2006 Councillor Greg Davies left the meeting, the time being 9:57pm. Councillor John Thain left the meeting, the time being 9:59pm. Councillor John Thain returned to the meeting, the time being 10:03pm. Councillor Greg Davies returned to the meeting, the time being 10:03pm. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RECOMMENDED That: 1. The information contained in the report on Glenmore Park Shopping Centre - Draft DCP amendment to Glenmore Park Town Centre Chapter of the Penrith DCP 2006 be received 2. In accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and the Regulations 2000, the draft amendment to Penrith Development Control Plan 2006 Chapter 6 to incorporate planning controls relating to the Glenmore Park Town Centre as attached to this report, be publicly exhibited 3. A further report is presented to Council following public exhibition of the draft Development Control Plan 2006 amendment, advising of the outcomes of exhibition and making further recommendations relating to the adoption of the draft DCP amendment. 4. Local sporting groups be notified in writing of the Glenmore Park Shopping Centre - Draft DCP amendment to Glenmore Park Town Centre Chapter of the Penrith DCP 2006 In accordance with Section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993, a DIVISION was then called with the following result:
|
A Liveable City
7 Neighbourhood Facilities Management Service Review |
RECOMMENDED That: 1. The information contained in the report on Neighbourhood Facilities Management Service Review be received. 2. The Recommendations and Implementation Plan of the Neighbourhood Facilities Management Service Review as outlined in the report be adopted.
3. $50,100 and $32,000 to be allocated from the 2009/10 and 2010/11 Community Safety budgets and $10,000 from the 2009/10 Risk Management budget respectively for the engagement of Morrison Low Consulting Pty Ltd for the development of the Neighbourhood Facilities Policy, Service Level Agreements, Guidelines and Procedures and the new Pricing Model (Fees and Charges).
|
Councillor John Thain left the meeting, the time being 10:13pm.
Councillor Marko Malkoc left the meeting, the time being 10:13pm
Councillor Jackie Greenow left the meeting, the time being 10:13pm
Councillor Karen McKeown left the meeting, the time being 10:13pm
Confidential business
The meeting closed to consider Confidential Business, the time being 10:13pm
1 Presence of the Public
RECOMMENDED that the press and public be excluded from the meeting to deal with the following matters: |
|
Councillor Jackie Greenow returned to the meeting, the time being 10:15pm
Councillor Karen McKeown returned to the meeting, the time being 10:15pm.
Councillor John Thain returned to the meeting, the time being 10:15pm.
Councillor Marko Malkoc returned to the meeting, the time being 10:15pm.
A City of Opportunities
2 South Penrith Branch Library
This item has been referred to Committee of the Whole as the report refers to commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed (i) prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it; or (ii) confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council; or (iii) reveal a trade secret and discussion of the matter in open meeting would be, on balance, contrary to the public interest.
RESUMPTION OF BUSINESS IN OPEN COMMITTEE
The meeting moved out of confidential session at 10:22pm and the General Manager reported that after excluding the press and public from the meeting, the Policy Review Committee met in confidential session from 10:13pm to 10:22pm to consider Item 2 and 5.
The General Manager reported that while in confidential session, the Committee resolved the confidential business as follows:
CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS
2 South Penrith Branch Library |
RECOMMENDATION RECOMMENDED that the information contained in the report on South Penrith Branch Library be received. |
A City of Opportunities
5 South Penrith Branch Library |
RECOMMENDED That: 1. The information contained in the report on South Penrith Branch Library be received 2. Council not take up the option of the revised lease offer for the South Penrith Branch Library in the redeveloped Southlands Shopping Centre. 3. Other innovative options for decentralised delivery of library services be evaluated as part of the current longer term review planning process.
|
There being no further business the Chairperson declared the meeting closed the time being 10:27pm.
That the recommendations contained in the Report and Recommendations of the Policy Review Committee meeting held on 19 October, 2009 be adopted.
|
9 November 2009 |
|
A Leading City |
|
REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE
Policy Review Committee MEETING
HELD ON 21 October, 2009
PRESENT
His Worship the Mayor Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM, Councillors Robert Ardill, Greg Davies, Mark Davies, Tanya Davies, Ross Fowler OAM, Ben Goldfinch, Prue Guillaume, Marko Malkoc, Karen McKeown, Kath Presdee and John Thain.
LEAVE OF ABSENCE
Leave of Absence was previously granted to Councillor Kaylene Allison for the period 29 September 2009 to 1 November 2009 inclusive.
APOLOGIES |
Apologies were received for Councillors Jim Aitken OAM and Jackie Greenow. |
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Councillor Marko Malkoc declared a Non-Pecuniary Conflict of Interest – Significant in Chapters 1, 2 & 3 as his Uncle owns land in the Capitol Hill Estate.
Councillor Ben Goldfinch declared:
a Non-Pecuniary Conflict of Interest – Significant in Chapters 1, 2, 3, 4 & 5 as he has relatives who own property in the areas covered by the report. Councillor Ben Goldfinch stated he would leave the meeting and take no part during discussion on these Chapters in the item.
a Pecuniary Interest in Confidential Business Item 2 – Penrith Commuter Car Park as he has clients who have tendered for the construction of the Penrith Commuter Carpark. Councillor Ben Goldfinch stated he would leave the meeting and take no part during discussion on the item.
Councillor Robert Ardill declared a Non-Pecuniary Conflict of Interest – Less than Significant in Confidential Business Item 3 - Legal Matter - Class 4 Legal Proceedings - Development Application 08/1288 Chemist Warehouse - Shop 230 Patty's Place, Jamisontown as he works in the pharmaceutical industry and is required to make contact with his clients in this industry as a part of his employment.
Councillor Ross Fowler OAM declared a Pecuniary Interest in Chapters 1, 2, 3, 4 & 5 as he is a property owner or a shareholder in a property; a director or secretary of companies that are property owners; or an auditor or accountant for clients who are property owners in the areas under consideration. Councillor Ross Fowler OAM stated he would leave the meeting and take no part during discussion on these items. Councillor Ross Fowler OAM also stated that he reserved the right to speak and vote on Submission No. 486 as he has no Conflict of Interest, Pecuniary or otherwise, in the matter.
His Worship the Mayor Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM declared:
a Pecuniary Interest in Chapters 1, 2 and 3 as he owns property in an area covered by the report. His Worship the Mayor Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM stated he would leave the meeting and take no part during discussion on the item.
a Non-Pecuniary Conflict of Interest – Significant in relation to recommendation number 10 of Item 1 – Amendments to draft Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2008 in response to public exhibition in regard to the Llandilo fruit and vegetable store, as the operators of the shop are an acquaintance of his and any development of the shop could increase the value of his land. His Worship the Mayor Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM stated he would leave the meeting and take no part in the debate and discussion on the item.
Councillor Greg Davies declared a Pecuniary Interest in Submission No 401 in Chapter 5 (Heritage listing – 16 & 18 Pages Road, St Marys) – refer page 7 of Minutes.
SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS |
RECOMMENDED that Standing Orders be suspended to allow members of the public to address the meeting, the time being 8:02pm. |
The following speakers spoke in reference to Item 1 – Amendments to draft Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2008 in response to public exhibition.
Chapter 1
Mr Raymond Madden (Submission 273)
Mr Raymond Madden, a landowner, representing other landowners from Spinks, Doak and Dodford Roads, Llandilo spoke in support of the recommendation, however he expressed concerns at the State Government Department of Planning’s broad brush attitude to rural area planning which allows no latitude to protect the environmental tranquillity of small rural holdings.
Mr Gregory Allchin (Submission 623)
Mr Gregory Allchin, affected person spoke in support of the recommendation and stated that the recommendation to rezone the area in Stage 2 to rural small holdings is a positive move and reflects residents wishes and preserves land values in the area. Mr Allchin urged Councillors to accept the recommendations in the Business Paper.
Ms Mary Vella (Submission 353)
Ms Mary Vella, an affected resident spoke against the recommendation and raised concerns that the zoning in the Draft LEP will place unfair limitations on residents in the area and prevent them from being able to use their land for what they need it for. Ms Vella believes many residents did not receive documentation and were not aware of the process being undertaken. Ms Vella presented a petition from local residents and asked that Area 2 be deferred from the E4 zoning.
Chapter 2
Mr Marc Polese (Submission 209)
Mr Marc Polese, land owner spoke against the recommendation and stated that four working days notice of the proposed amended recommendations was inadequate. Mr Polese requested that due to the short notice that his item be deferred which allows the rest of the Plan to proceed, but also allows him to gain professional advice concerning his submission.
Mr Patrick Hurley (Submission 368)
Mr Patrick Hurley, applicant spokesperson, spoke against the recommendation and requested that Council reconsider the propsed RU2 zone and amend the Draft LEP to rezone the land RU4 with a minimum lot size of 2 hectares. Mr Hurley claimed that the land in this area has no special landscape or scenic qualities that would be affected if it were to be zoned RU4.
Councillor Mark Davies left the meeting, the time being 8.22pm.
Mr Patrick Kasso (Submission 417)
Mr Patrick Kasso, an applicant spoke against the recommendation and spoke on several issues concerning the nature and operation of the site, land use zoning, alternate uses and rural land. Mr Kasso concluded by stating that all these related issues are unique and complex and require more thorough evaluation and requested that their submission be removed from stage 1, to allow more time for better understanding and a site inspection of the site.
Councillor Mark Davies returned to the meeting, the time being 8.27pm.
Chapter 3
Mr Paul Sims (Submission 271, 446, 467)
Mr Paul Sims, affected person spoke against the recommendation and requested that the mapping of their land should be reviewed in light of information previously furnished. Mr Sims outlined that the western side of the land in question is completely screened by vegetation, the southern side is very narrow and obscured by the rising contour and the eastern side was obscured by mature vegetation. Mr Sims concluded by requesting Council to allow more time to review the matter in light of discussions held with Council Officers in September 2009.
Mr Ron Mulock (Submission 463)
Mr Ron Mulock, applicant spokeperson, spoke against the recommendation raising points concerning minimum lot sizes and dual occupancy. Mr Mulock stated that the property in question is in a unique position compared to other rural properties, and that agricultural use rights should be included in the LEP.
Mr Bob Meyer (Submission 463)
Mr Bob Meyer, an applicant, spoke against the recommendation and requested that existing use rights for agricultural purposes be included in Schedule 1 of the LEP and this course of action had been backed up by legal advice sought. Mr Meyer stated also that dual occupancy should be allowed on 1 hectare lots where the soil and slopes can be accommodated.
Mr Michael Milosevic (Submission 568, 605, 606, 608)
Mr Michael Milosevic, applicant spokesperson, spoke against the recommendation and in particular the LEP provisions for dual occupancy on 2 hectare lots, and requested that dual occupancy be permitted on 1 hectare lots at Capitol Hill. Mr Milosevic stated that when they bought the land it was zoned for dual occupancy and he would like this zoning to remain.
Chapter 4
No speakers
The following speakers (with the exception of Ms Phyllis Jones, Mr Stephen Joyce and Mr Bruce McGhee who spoke to Item 1) spoke in reference to Item 2 – Amendments to draft Amendment No. 1 to Penrith Local Environmental Plan 1991 Environmental Heritage Conservation in response to public exhibition.
Chapter 5
Mr Victor Brangwin (Submission 157)
Mr Victor Brangwin, affected person, spoke against the recommendation opposing the listing of 14 Pages Road, St Marys being on the heritage listing. Mr Brangwin concluded by stating that if his property is placed on the heritage listing, he would require financial assistance.
Ms Phyllis Jones (Submission 222)
Ms Phyllis Jones, affected person, spoke against the recommendation and the listing on the heritage register of the property. Ms Jones stated that the authenticity of the church has been considerably reduced over many years and that the property has been a residence longer than it was a church.
Mr Charles Abela (Submission 363)
Mr Charles Abela, affected person, spoke against the recommendation claiming that listing sites as heritage may require owners to grant access to property at certain periods of the year, infringing on owners privacy. Mr Abela also suggested that the north western corner of the township should be classed as original planned township rather than an archaeological site. Mr Abela concluded by requesting Council to clarify what was meant by the term “less onerous investigations” in the proposed amendment.
At this stage, the time being 8.56pm, Councillor John Thain foreshadowed that he proposed to ask some questions regarding this matter as part of the Council’s consideration of Chapter 5.
Mr Scott Greenow (Submission 401)
Mr Scott Greenow objected to the listing of the Greenow family properties (16 & 18 Pages Road, St Marys) in Local Environmental Plan 2008 – Heritage. These objections centre on the validity and accuracy of the heritage assessments and the consistency of the decision making process when Council officers recommend properties for listing or de-listing. Mr Greenow was of the opinion that Council’s heritage assessments are not completed to a sufficient standard to make an accurate assessment. The Greenow family request that Council remove both 16 & 18 Pages Road, St Marys from LEP 2008.
RECOMMENDED that in view of the fact that Brett Greenow and Darren Greenow will no longer be addressing this Policy Review Committee meeting, a three minute extension of time be granted to Mr Scott Greenow, the time being 9.03pm. |
Mr Scott Greenow then began asking Council a series of 22 questions, but as he had not completed asking all questions by 9.06pm, and as the questions had already been distributed to Councillors and staff, they were referred to Council officers for further consideration and response.
Mr Stephen Joyce (No Submission)
Mr Stephen Joyce, affected person, spoke against the recommendation and asked that Councillors defer proceeding with the Heritage Conservation Area in the Dunheved Industrial Estate until a Masterplan is completed for the Estate.
Councillor Marko Malkoc left the meeting, the time being 9.10pm.
Councillor Greg Davies left the meeting, the time being 9.11pm.
Councillor Ross Fowler OAM left the meeting, the time being 9.12pm.
Councillor John Thain left the meeting, the time being 9.14pm.
Councillor Robert Ardill left the meeting, the time being 9.14pm.
Councillor John Thain returned to the meeting, the time being 9.15pm.
Councillor Robert Ardill returned to the meeting, the time being 9.16pm.
Councillor Ross Fowler OAM returned to the meeting, the time being 9.16pm.
Mr Peter McGhee (No Submission)
Mr Peter McGhee, interested citizen, spoke against the recommendation on behalf of the Penrith Valley Chamber of Commerce and stated that the Dunheved Industrial area contains approximately 600 businesses and is a significant contributor to the Penrith economy. Mr McGhee identified that the Dunheved industrial area is a key employment area and further development is likely to be severely impacted by heritage provisions and asked for deferral of this item for further consideration.
Councillor Marko Malkoc returned to the meeting, the time being 9.19pm.
Councillor Greg Davies returned to the meeting, the time being 9.19pm.
His Worship the Mayor, Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM called for nominations from Councillors to Chair the Policy Review Committee meeting.
RECOMMENDED that Councillor John Thain Chair the meeting at this point, the time being 9.22pm. |
His Worship the Mayor Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM left the meeting, the time being 9.22pm.
Councillor Mark Davies left the meeting, the time being 9.22pm.
The following speakers spoke in reference to Item 1 – Amendments to draft Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2008 in response to public exhibition.
Chapter 3
Mr Roy Fabiano (Submission 336, 337, 338)
Mr Roy Fabiano, affected person, spoke against the recommendation as he does not believe the population of Llandilo has increased significantly to justify having two general stores within close proximity of each other.
Councillor Tanya Davies left the meeting, the time being 9.24pm.
Councillor Mark Davies returned to the meeting, the time being 9.24pm.
Councillor Tanya Davies returned to the meeting, the time being 9.26pm.
Councillor Greg Davies left the meeting, the time being 9.26pm.
Mr Tony Agostino (Submission 469, 485)
Mr Tony Agostino, a landowner, spoke in opposition to the recommendation. Mr Agostino claimed the current restriction on floor space is outdated and that Council should allow for expansion of the subject building in the LEP. Mr Agostino requested the decision be deferred to allow for further discussions with the Department of Planning.
Councillor Greg Davies returned to the meeting, the time being 9.28pm.
Mr Robert Montgomery (Submission 469, 485)
Mr Robert Montgomery, spokesperson for landowner, spoke against the recommendation and questioned whether Council wants to prevent the fruit and vegetable store from ever expanding in the future. Mr Montgomery requested that Council defer the decision regarding this site until stage 2 of the LEP process.
Mr Gavin Duane (Submission 469, 485)
Mr Gavin Duane, spokesperson for the landowner, spoke against the recommendation and stated he had undertaken a survey for the Agostino family to see where their customers come from for fruit and vegetables, and ascertained that it is from quite a substantial distance. Mr Duane also claimed that an economic analysis proves that floorspace can be expanded without impacting on other retail premises in the locality.
RESUMPTION OF STANDING ORDERS |
RECOMMENDED that Standing Orders be resumed, the time being 9.37pm. |
At this stage, the time being 9.37pm, Councillor John Thain, Chairperson, indicated that he had received representations from Councillor Ross Fowler OAM to bring forward consideration of Submission No 486 in Chapter 5 (23 Charles Street) relating to the Dunheved Industrial Estate.
RECOMMENDED that Submission No 486 in Chapter 5 (23 Charles Street) relating to the Dunheved Industrial Estate be brought forward. |
At this stage, the time being 9.40pm, Councillor Greg Davies declared a Pecuniary Interest in Submission No 401 in Chapter 5 (Heritage listing – 16 & 18 Pages Road, St Marys), as he had exchanged voting preferences with one of the property owners at the last Penrith City Council local government election. Councillor Greg Davies then left the meeting and took no part during discussion on this item.
Councillor Greg Davies returned to the meeting at 9.41pm.
RECOMMENDED That: 1. The proposed listing of the Dunheved High Explosives Conservation Area be deferred from draft Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2008 to allow for further consideration of its heritage values, and it be reviewed for inclusion in draft Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2010 (Stage 2). 2. The land that is the subject of the proposed Dunheved High Explosives Heritage Conservation Area listing be retained in draft Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2008, including all other relevant zone provisions and planning controls. |
Councillor Marko Malkoc left the meeting, the time being 9.44pm.
Councillor Ben Goldfinch left the meeting, the time being 9.44pm.
Councillor Ross Fowler OAM left the meeting, the time being 9.44pm.
At this stage, the time being 9.44pm, Councillor Kath Presdee raised a point of order and requested that a Division be called to vote on the resolution.
Councillor Marko Malkoc returned to the meeting, the time being 9.45pm.
Councillor Ben Goldfinch returned to the meeting, the time being 9.45pm.
Councillor Ross Fowler OAM returned to the meeting, the time being 9.45pm.
In accordance with Section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993, a DIVISION was then called with the following result:
For |
Against |
Councillor Robert Ardill |
|
Councillor Greg Davies |
|
Councillor Mark Davies |
|
Councillor Tanya Davies |
|
Councillor Ross Fowler OAM |
|
Councillor Ben Goldfinch |
|
Councillor Prue Guillaume |
|
Councillor Marko Malkoc |
|
Councillor Karen McKeown |
|
Councillor Kath Presdee |
|
Councillor John Thain |
|
Councillor Marko Malkoc left the meeting, the time being 9.46pm.
Councillor Ben Goldfinch left the meeting, the time being 9.46pm.
Councillor Ross Fowler OAM left the meeting, the time being 9.46pm.
DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS
A Leading City
1 Amendments to draft Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2008 in response to public exhibition |
RECOMMENDED that the information contained in the report on Amendments to draft Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2008 in response to public exhibition be received. |
In accordance with Section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993, a DIVISION was then called with the following result:
For |
Against |
Councillor Robert Ardill |
|
Councillor Greg Davies |
|
Councillor Mark Davies |
|
Councillor Tanya Davies |
|
Councillor Prue Guillaume |
|
Councillor Karen McKeown |
|
Councillor Kath Presdee |
|
Councillor John Thain |
|
RECOMMENDED that the recommendation in the Introduction to the Discussion paper as provided as Attachment 2 be adopted. |
In accordance with Section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993, a DIVISION was then called with the following result:
For |
Against |
Councillor Robert Ardill |
|
Councillor Greg Davies |
|
Councillor Mark Davies |
|
Councillor Tanya Davies |
|
Councillor Prue Guillaume |
|
Councillor Karen McKeown |
|
Councillor Kath Presdee |
|
Councillor John Thain |
|
RECOMMENDED That: 1. The recommendations contained in Chapter 1 of the Discussion Paper and the Addendum provided as Attachment 2 be adopted, with the exception of any land proposed to be zoned E3 Environmental Management or E4 Environmental Living in draft Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2008, which are to be deferred to a further briefing with Councillors. 2. Following the Councillor Briefing, the recommendations relating to the proposed E3 Environmental Management and E4 Environmental Living in draft Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2008, be presented to Council for its further consideration. |
In accordance with Section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993, a DIVISION was then called with the following result:
For |
Against |
Councillor Robert Ardill |
|
Councillor Greg Davies |
|
Councillor Mark Davies |
|
Councillor Tanya Davies |
|
Councillor Prue Guillaume |
|
Councillor Karen McKeown |
|
Councillor Kath Presdee |
|
Councillor John Thain |
|
RECOMMENDED That: 1. The recommendations contained in Chapter 2 of the Discussion Paper and the Addendum provided as Attachment 2 be adopted, with the exception of any matter relating to land proposed to be zoned E3 Environmental Management or E4 Environmental Living in draft Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2008, which are to be deferred until further consideration at a Councillor Briefing. 2. In relation to Submission No. 417, the landowner be encouraged to explore alternative land uses for this site, and present appropriate additional land uses for Council to consider including in draft Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2010.
|
In accordance with Section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993, a DIVISION was then called with the following result:
For |
Against |
Councillor Robert Ardill |
|
Councillor Greg Davies |
|
Councillor Mark Davies |
|
Councillor Tanya Davies |
|
Councillor Prue Guillaume |
|
Councillor Karen McKeown |
|
Councillor Kath Presdee |
|
Councillor John Thain |
|
RECOMMENDED that the recommendations in relation to Submission No. 455, contained in Chapter 3 of the Discussion Paper and the Addendum provided as Attachment 2 be adopted, with the following changes: 1. the land to the south of the flood planning level, adjacent to Old Bathurst Road, be retained in draft Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2008, and zoned IN2 Light Industrial 2. the land to the north of the flood planning level be deferred from draft Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2008 to allow for completion of the flood modelling, and appropriate zones reviewed for inclusion in draft Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2010 (Stage 2) 3. the flood planning level for the property as a whole be determined on completion of the Worley Parsons flood study. |
In accordance with Section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993, a DIVISION was then called with the following result:
For |
Against |
Councillor Robert Ardill |
|
Councillor Greg Davies |
|
Councillor Mark Davies |
|
Councillor Tanya Davies |
|
Councillor Prue Guillaume |
|
Councillor Karen McKeown |
|
Councillor Kath Presdee |
|
Councillor John Thain |
|
RECOMMENDED that the recommendations contained in Chapter 3 of the Discussion Paper and the Addendum provided as Attachment 2 be adopted, with the exception of: 1. any matter relating to land proposed to be zoned E3 Environmental Management or E4 Environmental Living in drfat Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2008, which is to be deferred for further consideration to a Councillor Briefing 2. the changes to the recommendations in relation to Submission No. 455, as previously resolved at Minute PRC 94 3. matters relating to Submission No. 418, specifically the proposed E2 Environmental Conservation zone and the proposed Scenic and Landscape values map, which are deferred for further consideration to a Councillor Briefing.
|
In accordance with Section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993, a DIVISION was then called with the following result:
For |
Against |
Councillor Robert Ardill |
|
Councillor Greg Davies |
|
Councillor Mark Davies |
|
Councillor Tanya Davies |
|
Councillor Prue Guillaume |
|
Councillor Karen McKeown |
|
Councillor Kath Presdee |
|
Councillor John Thain |
|
The Chairperson, Councillor John Thain adjourned the meeting for a short period, the time being 10.02pm, with the following being present:
Councillors Robert Ardill, Greg Davies, Mark Davies, Tanya Davies, Prue Guillaume, Karen McKeown, Kath Presdee and John Thain.
The meeting resumed with His Worship the Mayor, Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM in the Chair, the time being 10.23pm, with the following being present:
His Worship the Mayor Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM, Councillors Robert Ardill, Greg Davies, Mark Davies, Tanya Davies, Prue Guillaume, Marko Malkoc, Karen McKeown, Kath Presdee and John Thain.
Councillor Greg Davies left the meeting, the time being 10.25pm.
RECOMMENDED that the recommendations contained in Chapter 4 of the Discussion Paper and the Addendum provided as Attachment 2 be adopted. |
In accordance with Section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993, a DIVISION was then called with the following result:
For |
Against |
Councillor Robert Ardill |
|
Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM |
|
Councillor Mark Davies |
|
Councillor Tanya Davies |
|
Councillor Prue Guillaume |
|
Councillor Karen McKeown |
|
Councillor Marko Malkoc |
|
Councillor Kath Presdee |
|
Councillor John Thain |
|
RECOMMENDED that the recommendations contained in Chapter 5 of the Discussion Paper and the Addendum provided as Attachment 2 be adopted, with the exception of a matter relating to Submission No. 363, specifically the proposed listing of Castlereagh Township as an Archaeological Site, which is to be deferred for further consideration to a Councillor Briefing. |
In accordance with Section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993, a DIVISION was then called with the following result:
For |
Against |
Councillor Robert Ardill |
|
Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM |
|
Councillor Mark Davies |
|
Councillor Tanya Davies |
|
Councillor Prue Guillaume |
|
Councillor Karen McKeown |
|
Councillor Marko Malkoc |
|
Councillor Kath Presdee |
|
Councillor John Thain |
|
RECOMMENDED that the recommendations contained in Chapter 6 of the Discussion Paper provided as Attachment 2 be adopted. |
In accordance with Section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993, a DIVISION was then called with the following result:
For |
Against |
Councillor Robert Ardill |
|
Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM |
|
Councillor Mark Davies |
|
Councillor Tanya Davies |
|
Councillor Prue Guillaume |
|
Councillor Karen McKeown |
|
Councillor Marko Malkoc |
|
Councillor Kath Presdee |
|
Councillor John Thain |
|
Councillor Ben Goldfinch returned to the meeting, the time being 10.38pm.
Councillor Greg Davies returned to the meeting, the time being 10.39pm.
RECOMMENDED that the recommendations contained in Multiple Chapters in the Addendum provided as Attachment 2 be deferred for further consideration to a Councillor Briefing as they relate to land proposed to be zoned E3 Environmental Management or E4 Environmental Living in draft Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2008. |
In accordance with Section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993, a DIVISION was then called with the following result:
For |
Against |
Councillor Robert Ardill |
|
Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM |
|
Councillor Greg Davies |
|
Councillor Mark Davies |
|
Councillor Tanya Davies |
|
Councillor Ben Goldfinch |
|
Councillor Prue Guillaume |
|
Councillor Karen McKeown |
|
Councillor Marko Malkoc |
|
Councillor Kath Presdee |
|
Councillor John Thain |
|
His Worship the Mayor, Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM called for nominations from Councillors to Chair the Policy Review Committee meeting.
RECOMMENDED that Councillor John Thain Chair the meeting at this point, the time being 10.41pm. |
His Worship the Mayor Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM left the meeting, the time being 10.41pm and Councillor John Thain took the Chair.
Councillor Ross Fowler returned to the meeting, the time being 10.41pm.
Councillor Ross Fowler left the meeting, the time being 10:42pm.
RECOMMENDED that the recommendations relating to the Llandilo fruit and vegetable store and the Fernhill Estate contained in the report, and in the Discussion Paper and the Addendum provided as Attachment 2, be deferred further consideration to a Councillor Briefing. |
In accordance with Section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993, a DIVISION was then called with the following result:
For |
Against |
Councillor Robert Ardill |
|
Councillor Greg Davies |
|
Councillor Mark Davies |
|
Councillor Tanya Davies |
|
Councillor Ben Goldfinch |
|
Councillor Prue Guillaume |
|
Councillor Karen McKeown |
|
Councillor Marko Malkoc |
|
Councillor Kath Presdee |
|
Councillor John Thain |
|
His Worship the Mayor Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM returned to the meeting at 10.44pm and he resumed the Chair.
At this stage Councillor Greg Davies sought recommittal of the recommendations in respect of Chapter 6 of the Discussion Paper provided as Attachment 2, so that he could vote on this matter. His Worship the Mayor, Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM, ruled that he is not prepared to recommit this matter in view of the fact that the matter had already been considered and that Councillor Greg Davies intended to vote in the affirmative.
Councillor Greg Davies left the meeting, the time being 10.46pm.
2 Amendments to draft Amendment No. 1 to Penrith Local Environmental Plan 1991 Environmental Heritage Conservation in response to public exhibition |
RECOMMENDED That: 1. The information contained in the report on Amendments to draft Amendment No. 1 to Penrith Local Environmental Plan 1991 Environmental Heritage Conservation in response to public exhibition be received 2. The the recommendations relating to LEP 1991 Environmental Heritage Conservation contained in Chapter 5 of the Discussion Paper and the Addendum, provided as Attachment 2 in the Attachment Folder, be adopted 3. Matters relating to Submission Nos. 401 and 157, specifically the proposed listing of 14 and 16-18 Pages Road, St Marys, be deferred for further consideration to a Councillor Briefing 4. A further report be brought back to Council detailing the revised LEP 1991 Environmental Heritage Conservation 5. A further report be brought back to the Policy Review Committee exploring ways of providing greater assistance to owners of heritage listed properties, and opportunities to improve the heritage listing and assessment process.
|
In accordance with Section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993, a DIVISION was then called with the following result:
For |
Against |
Councillor Robert Ardill |
|
Councillor Mark Davies |
|
Councillor Tanya Davies |
|
Councillor Ben Goldfinch |
|
Councillor Prue Guillaume |
|
Councillor Karen McKeown |
|
Councillor Marko Malkoc |
|
Councillor Kath Presdee |
|
Councillor John Thain |
|
CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS
The meeting closed to consider Confidential Business, the time being 11.10pm.
Councillor G Davies returned to the meeting, the time being 11.10pm.
Councillor Ross Fowler OAM returned to the meeting, the time being 11.10pm.
Councillor Ben Goldfinch left the meeting, the time being 11.10pm.
Councillor John Thain left the meeting, the time being 11.10pm.
1 Presence of the Public
RECOMMENDED that the press and public be excluded from meeting to deal with the following confidential matters: |
A Liveable City
2 Commercial Matter - Penrith Commuter Carpark
This item has been referred to Confidential Business as the report refers to commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed (i) prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it; or (ii) confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council; or (iii) reveal a trade secret and discussion of the matter in open meeting would be, on balance, contrary to the public interest.
A Leading City
3 Legal Matter - Class 4 Legal Proceedings - Development Application 08/1288 Chemist Warehouse - Shop 230 Patty's Place, Jamisontown
This item has been referred to Committee of the Whole as the report refers to advice concerning litigation, or advice that would otherwise be privileged from production in legal proceedings on the ground of legal professional privilege and discussion of the matter in open meeting would be, on balance, contrary to the public interest.
The meeting moved out of confidential session at 11.37pm and the General Manager reported that after excluding the press and public from the meeting, the Policy Review Committee met in confidential session from 11.15pm to 11.37pm to consider a commercial matter and a legal matter.
The General Manager reported that while in confidential session, the Committee resolved the confidential business as follows:
CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS
2 Penrith Commuter Carpark |
RECOMMENDED That: 1. The information contained in the report on Penrith Commuter Carpark be received. 2. That Council endorse an open tender process for the Penrith Commuter Carpark project. |
Councillor John Thain returned to the meeting, the time being 11.13pm.
Councillor Ben Goldfinch returned to the meeting, the time being 11.27pm.
3 Legal Matter – Class 4 Legal Proceedings – Development Application 08/1288 Chemist Warehouse – Shop 230 Patty’s Place, Jamisontown |
RECOMMENDED that the information contained in the report on Legal Matter – Class 4 Legal Proceedings – Development Application 08/1288 Chemist Warehouse – Shop 230 Patty’s Place, Jamisontown be received and the actions be endorsed. |
There being no further business the Chairperson declared the meeting closed the time being 11.39pm.
That the recommendations contained in the Report and Recommendations of the Policy Review Committee meeting held on 21 October, 2009 be adopted.
|
Item Page
A Leading City
1 Council Property - Lease of Land in Harris Street, North St Marys to Transport Infrastructure Development Corporation for the Purpose of a Multi Deck Car Park
2 Council Property - Lease of Land in Victoria Street Werrington to Transport Infrastructure Development Corporation for the Purpose of a Constructed Car Park
3 Council Meeting Calendar for 2010
4 2009 Local Government Association Annual Conference
5 Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program Round 2 2009-10: Council's Allocation of $721,000
6 Summary of Investments & Banking from 1 September 2009 to 30 September 2009
URGENT
17 Council Property - Cranebrook Village Shopping Centre
A City of Opportunities
7 Community Builders Funding Program (formerly known as Western Sydney Area Assistance Scheme)
8 Glenmore Park Child and Family Centre - Operational Matters
A Green City
9 Landcare Mobilemuster grant
10 Waste and Sustainability Improvement Payments
11 Development Application DA09/0747 for Upgrade Works to Penrith Stadium in Penrith Park at Lot 2 DP 773983 (No. 143) Station Street, Penrith. Applicant: Penrith District Rugby League Football Club Ltd; Owner: Department of Land and Water Conservation DA09/0747
Procedural note: Section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993 requires that a division be called in relation to this matter.
12 Development Application No. 08/0958 - Section 96 Modification - Alteration to Finished Landform - Lot 1 DP 542395, Lot 740 DP 810111 (No. 1725) Elizabeth Drive, Badgerys Creek. Applicant: SITA Australia Pty Ltd; Owner: SITA Australia Pty Ltd DA08/0958
Procedural note: Section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993 requires that a division be called in relation to this matter.
13 Development Application DA09/0746 Proposed Alterations and Additions to Existing Bulky Goods Retail Centre at Lot 10 & 11 DP 1046110 (No. 13 - 23) Pattys Place, Jamisontown - Supacenta. Applicant: Pipven Pty Ltd; Owner: Pipven Pty Ltd DA09/0746
Procedural note: Section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993 requires that a division be called in relation to this matter.
URGENT
18 Development Application 08/0395 Proposed Child Care Centre located at Lot 216 DP 849247 (No. 88-94) Grays Lane, Cranebrook. Applicant: Cultured Stone Australia; Owner: Kieu To and Thi Noh Pham DA08/0395
Procedural note: Section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993 requires that a division be called in relation to this matter.
A Liveable City
14 Proposed Fees and Charges - St Marys Memorial Hall
15 Penrith Park and Howell Oval Redevelopment
A Vibrant City
16 Sponsorship Request for Australian Foundation for Disability Funathon
A Leading City
Item Page
1 Council Property - Lease of Land in Harris Street, North St Marys to Transport Infrastructure Development Corporation for the Purpose of a Multi Deck Car Park
2 Council Property - Lease of Land in Victoria Street Werrington to Transport Infrastructure Development Corporation for the Purpose of a Constructed Car Park
3 Council Meeting Calendar for 2010
4 2009 Local Government Association Annual Conference
5 Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program Round 2 2009-10: Council's Allocation of $721,000
6 Summary of Investments & Banking from 1 September 2009 to 30 September 2009
URGENT
17 Council Property - Cranebrook Village Shopping Centre
9 November 2009 |
|
A Leading City |
|
1 |
Council Property - Lease of Land in Harris Street, North St Marys to Transport Infrastructure Development Corporation for the Purpose of a Multi Deck Car Park |
|
Compiled by: Brian Griffiths, Property Development Manager
Craig Ross, Major Projects Manager
Authorised by: Vicki O’Kelly, Group Manager - Finance
Strategic Objective: We demonstrate leadership, and plan responsibly for now and the future
Strategic Direction: We deliver services for the City and its communities, and maintain our long term financial sustainability
Executive Summary
A report was presented to Council at its meeting of 15 December 2008 relating to a proposal put forward by RailCorp to construct a multi decked car park on the north side of St Marys Station at 32-52 Harris Street.
Council’s endorsement of the proposal was sought to enable negotiations with RailCorp with respect to the ownership and management of the car park with the preferred approach where Council retains ownership of the land, maintains the car park for a fee and manages industrial uses on the ground floor level.
The purpose of this report is to obtain Council’s approval to the “Deed of Agreement for Construction and Lease St Marys Site”. It is proposed to lease the land at a nominal consideration of $1.00 per annum with the documentation being executed under the Common Seal of the Council of the City of Penrith.
Background
Additional commuter car parking at St Marys railway station was instigated by the State Government’s Urban Transport Statement. In response to discussions in context with the study compiled by RailCorp, the total number of car parking spaces currently available is approximately 500.
A Deed of Agreement will need to be executed between Council and the Transport Infrastructure Development Corporation (TIDC) established pursuant to the Transport Administration Act 1988. This Deed agrees that TIDC will carry out the development on the land owned by Council and Council grants the leasehold interests in the land to TIDC. As part of the agreement, TIDC will also provide Council with a sub-lease over part of the improvements located at the western end of the car park development in the form of a shop or industrial facility for leasing purposes.
The short term option is to develop a four (4) level commuter car park on the western end of the existing Council at grade car park site, in providing approximately 500 additional new commuter parking spaces.
The multi-deck structure would be designed to accommodate up to two (2) additional floors (accommodating a further 400 spaces) if and when commuter parking demand warrants. An elevated connection from the car park to the station’s upper concourse is also proposed to provide direct station access for commuters using the car park as part of the second stage works.
Current Situation
The TIDC has been designated by the Minister of Transport as the responsible entity for the construction of the Development and the setting up of ongoing arrangements for its leasing, operation and maintenance.
It is to be agreed that TIDC will carry out the Development on the Land and the Council grants the leasehold interests in the Land to TIDC as indicated in the Deed.
TIDC will grant to the Council and the Council will accept the Sublease and the parties will enter into Operation and Maintenance Agreement as specified in the Deed. Following the completion of the construction of the Development, TIDC’s interest and obligation under this Deed, the Head Lease, the Sublease and the Operations and Maintenance Agreement will be assigned to RailCorp.
Whilst there will be a construction lease to commence with, the lease on the actual construction will cease from the date of practical completion and TIDC will come into affect a Head Lease with Council. A plan of the subject site is attached.
Head Lease
The following information is in accordance with the actual “Deed of Agreement for Construction and Lease St Marys Site” with respect to the lease conditions with TIDC and the provisions of a Sub-Lease to be approved by Council to implement the new car park facility:
Tenant: |
Transport Infrastructure Development Corporation |
Property: |
Lot A DP152452, Lot B DP152452, Lot C DP152452, Lot 1 DP1127305, Lot 2 DP1127305, Lot 195 DP 31912 and adjacent roadway. |
Use of Premises: |
Commuter Car Park Facility. |
Term: |
50 Years. |
Commencement Date: |
To be advised. |
Termination Date: |
To be advised. |
Option: |
10 Years. |
Commencement Date: |
To be advised. |
Rental: |
$1.00 per annum payable in full Term in advance. |
Rental Reviews: |
No rental reviews. |
Area: |
13,580 Square Metres (approximately). |
Outgoings: |
All outgoings to be met by TIDC during the term of the construction lease. |
Comments:
|
· TIDC will be responsible for the subdivision to create separate lots comprising the Car Park Land.
|
Sublease
The following information relates to the Sublease by Council from TIDC in having an area of approximately 150 square metres fronting Forrester Road to be leased as a corner shop or other facility in accordance with the permitted uses. This facility provides a commercial lease for the benefit of the local community and being part of the multi deck car park, provides some activation of the carpark and increases security.
Prior to the completion of the construction the premises advertising for a tenant for the premises will be sought. This will then be reported to an Ordinary Meeting of Council.
There may be some additional costs to undertake a fit-out of the premises to attract a suitable tenant. These funds would be provided from the Property Development Reserve.
Tenant: |
The Council of the City of Penrith |
Property: |
Par of Lot A DP152452 (subject to the final survey of the premises) |
Use of Premises: |
Commercial or Industrial Permitted uses. |
Term: |
49 Years and 11Months. |
Commencement Date: |
To be advised. |
Termination Date: |
To be advised. |
Option: |
Not Applicable |
Commencement Date: |
To be advised. |
Rental: |
$1.00 per annum payable in full Term in advance. |
Rental Reviews: |
No rental reviews. |
Area: |
Approximately 150 square Metres. |
Outgoings: |
All outgoings to be met by Council over the Sublease. |
Public Liability Insurance: |
To the value of $20 Million. |
To implement the process of constructing the multi-deck car park as a procedural matter, Council needs to agree in leasing the land to TIDC in general terms outlined in the “Head Lease” section. The added advantage in securing a rental income component along Forrester Road and located on the ground floor at footpath level is in accordance with the Sublease general terms and conditions.
The Operations and Maintenance Agreement is still being developed and once this is finalised, the agreement will be signed.
That: 1. The information contained in the report on Council Property - Lease of Land in Harris Street, North St Marys to Transport Infrastructure Development Corporation for the Purpose of a Multi Deck Car Park be received. 2. Council agree to the lease of the existing car park located at 32-52 Harris Street North St Marys described as Lot A DP152452, Lot B DP152452, Lot C DP152452, Lot 1 DP1127305, Lot 2 DP1127305, Lot 195 DP 31912 and adjacent roadway to Transport Infrastructure Development Corporation at a rental figure of $1.00 per annum plus GST. 3. Transport Infrastructure Development Corporation agree to a Sublease with Council over part Lot A DP152452 for a leased premises at a rental figure of $1.00 per annum plus GST. 4. The Common Seal of the Council of the City of Penrith be placed on all necessary documentation.
|
1. View |
Council Property - Lease of Land in Harris Street, North St Marys to Transport Infrastructure Development Corporation for the Purpose of a Multi Deck Car Park |
1 Page |
Appendix |
9 November 2009 |
|
Appendix 1 - Council Property - Lease of Land in Harris Street, North St Marys to Transport Infrastructure Development Corporation for the Purpose of a Multi Deck Car Park |
|
|
|
9 November 2009 |
|
A Leading City |
|
2 |
Council Property - Lease of Land in Victoria Street Werrington to Transport Infrastructure Development Corporation for the Purpose of a Constructed Car Park |
|
Compiled by: Brian Griffiths, Property Development Manager
Craig Ross, Major Projects Manager
Authorised by: Vicki O’Kelly, Group Manager - Finance
Strategic Objective: We demonstrate leadership, and plan responsibly for now and the future
Strategic Direction: We deliver services for the City and its communities, and maintain our long term financial sustainability
Executive Summary
Council has previously been advised to a proposal put forward by RailCorp to construct a car park on the north side of the Werrington Railway Station at 88-90 Victoria Street Werrington.
The purpose of this report is to obtain Council’s approval to the “Deed of Agreement for Construction and Lease Werrington Site”. It is proposed to lease the land at a nominal consideration of $1.00 per annum with the documentation to be executed under the Common Seal of the Council of the City of Penrith.
Background
Additional commuter car parking at Werrington railway station was instigated by the State Government’s Urban Transport Statement. The total number of commuter car parking spaces proposed for the north side of Werrington station is approximately 191.
Designs for the carpark have now been completed and TIDC are about to engage a contractor to carryout the construction.
A Deed of Agreement will need to be executed between Council and the Transport Infrastructure Development Corporation (TIDC) established pursuant to the Transport Administration Act 1988. This Deed agrees that TIDC will carry out the development on the land owned by Council and Council grants the leasehold interests in the land to TIDC. Approximately 50% of the total land currently has a bitumen surface. This will be upgraded as part of the construction. The other 50% will be fully constructed as a sealed car park. Lighting, fencing and CCTV will be installed for all of the car park. Whilst there will be some works carried out on the section of the car park adjacent Victoria Street (used by shoppers), this area will not form part of the lease.
A plan of the proposed car park is attached.
Current Situation
TIDC has been designated by the Minister of Transport as the responsible entity for the construction of the Development and the setting up of ongoing arrangements for its leasing, operation and maintenance.
It is to be agreed that TIDC will carry out the Development on the Land and the Council grants the leasehold interests in the Land to TIDC as indicated in the Deed.
TIDC will grant to the Council an Operation and Maintenance Agreement as specified in the Deed.
Following the completion of the construction of the Development, TIDC’s interest and obligation under this Deed and the Operations and Maintenance Agreement will be assigned to RailCorp. This agreement specifies the maintenance schedules for the car park and the funding responsibility. In general terms, Council will carry out the day-today maintenance of the carpark at RailCorp’s expense. The Operations and Maintenance Agreement is still being developed and once this is finalised, the agreement will be signed.
Initially, it is proposed that there will be a ‘construction lease’ between Council and TIDC in relation to the construction works on the land. The term of that lease will terminate from the date of practical completion. From the date of practical completion the terms of a Head Lease between Council and TIDC will come into effect in relation to TIDC’s continued occupation of the land as a tenant.
Lease
The following information is in accordance with the actual “Deed of Agreement for Construction and Lease Werrington Site” with respect to the lease conditions with TIDC to be approved by Council to implement the new car park facility – see attached plan subject to lease:-
Tenant: |
Transport Infrastructure Development Corporation |
Property: |
88-90 Victoria Street Werrington described as Part Lot 2 DP730041, Lot 1 DP913274 and Lot 1 DP114508 |
Use of Premises: |
Commuter Car Park Facility with Ancillary Usage |
Term: |
50 Years |
Commencement Date: |
To be advised |
Termination Date: |
To be advised |
Option: |
10 Years |
Commencement Date: |
To be advised |
Rental: |
$1.00 per annum payable in full Term in advance |
Rental Reviews: |
No rental reviews |
Area: |
An approximate area 6,868 square metres. |
Outgoings: |
All outgoings to be met by TIDC during the term of the construction lease |
Comments:
|
· TIDC will be responsible for the subdivision to create separate lots comprising the Car Park Land. · |
To implement the process of constructing the car park as a procedural matter, Council needs to agree to lease the land to TIDC in general terms outlined in the abovementioned table. A further report elsewhere at to-nights meeting relates to the leasing of land off Harris Street North St Marys to TIDC in similar fashion to the Werrington site.
That: 1. The information contained in the report on Council Property - Lease of Land in Victoria Street Werrington to Transport Infrastructure Development Corporation for the Purpose of a Constructed Car Park be received. 2. Council agree to the lease of the existing car park located at 88-90 Victoria Street described as Part Lot 2 DP730041, Lot 1 DP913274 and Lot 1 DP114508 to Transport Infrastructure Development Corporation at a rental figure of $1.00 per annum plus GST. 3. The Common Seal of The Council of The City of Penrith be placed on all necessary documentation. |
1. View |
Plan of Proposed Werrington Car Park |
1 Page |
Appendix |
2. View |
Locality Plan |
1 Page |
Appendix |
9 November 2009 |
|
A Leading City |
|
3 |
Council Meeting Calendar for 2010 |
|
Compiled by: Stephen Pearson, Executive Services Officer
Authorised by: Glenn Schuil, Acting Executive Officer
Strategic Objective: We demonstrate accountability, transparency and ethical conduct
Strategic Direction: We champion responsible and ethical behaviour
Executive Summary
The purpose of this report is to propose a Meeting Calendar for 2010. The report recommends that the Meeting Calendar be adopted.
Background
Section 365 of the Local Government Act 1993 states that the Council is required to meet at least 10 times each year, each time in a different month.
Council will have met 17 times in 2009, with one Ordinary Meeting held in the months of March, April, June, July, October and December, two Ordinary Meetings held in the months of February, May, August, September and November and one Extraordinary Meeting held in the month of March.
Draft 2010 Meeting Calendar
A draft Meeting Calendar has been prepared for 2010.
The draft Calendar is based on the following assumptions:
· the meeting cycle commencing with an Ordinary Council Meeting on the first Monday in February – i.e. 1 February 2010
· at least one Ordinary Council Meeting each month (except for January), with a minimum period between Council meetings of 2 weeks and a maximum period between Council meetings of 5 weeks
· the Mayoral Election being held on the fourth Monday in September
· meetings alternating so that there are not successive meetings of the same type from week to week
· the meeting cycle concluding with an Ordinary Council Meeting on the second Monday in December – i.e. 13 December 2010
This draft calendar has been discussed with the relevant Managers and all statutory and operating obligations are able to be met, including adherence to key dates for consideration of the Operational Plan for 2010-2011, Operational Plan Quarterly Reviews, Delivery Program Progress Reports and the 2009-2010 Financial Statements.
In compiling the Calendar, consideration has been taken to avoid:
1. Public Holidays
· 5 April 2010 – Easter Monday
· 26 April 2010 – Anzac Day
· 14 June 2010 – Queen’s Birthday
· 4 October 2010 – Labour Day
2. Other known commitments such as
· National General Assembly of Local Government, Canberra (15-17 June 2010)
· Local Government Ass’n of NSW Annual Conference, Albury (23-27 October 2010)
Councillor Briefings
Councillor Briefings are a non decision-making forum established to provide a mechanism for informing and advising Councillors of matters relevant to Council activities that would not otherwise be achieved effectively using the written word, plans or diagrams alone. Councillor Briefings may involve presentations by Council Officers, City stakeholders, other organisations and individuals at the invitation of the Council or Council Officers through the General Manager.
It is proposed to conduct a number of closed session Councillor Briefings throughout the course of the year to inform Councillors on a range of issues. The following dates have been identified as possible Councillor Briefing sessions for 2010: Mondays Feb 8, Mar 1 & 15, Apr 12, May 24, Jun 7, Jul 5 & 26, Aug 2 & 23, Sep 20, Nov 1 & 22, Dec 6.
Conclusion
The draft Meeting Calendar for 2010 (set out overleaf) has been prepared in accordance with the Local Government Act 1993 and Council policy. It incorporates at least one Ordinary Council Meeting for the months of February through to December.
15 Ordinary Council meetings, 11 Policy Review Committee meetings and 14 Councillor Briefing sessions are proposed for 2010.
A coloured draft Meeting Calendar for 2010, also incorporating proposed Councillor Briefing dates, has been circulated to Councillors under separate cover.
That: 1. The information contained in the report on Council Meeting Calendar for 2010 be received. 2. The draft Meeting Calendar for 2010 be adopted. |
1. View |
2010 Meeting Calendar - For Adoption by Council on 9 Nov 2009 |
1 Page |
Appendix |
9 November 2009 |
|
Appendix 1 - 2010 Meeting Calendar - For Adoption by Council on 9 Nov 2009 |
|
|
|
9 November 2009 |
|
A Leading City |
|
4 |
2009 Local Government Association Annual Conference |
|
Compiled by: Glenn McCarthy, Public Officer
Authorised by: Alan Stoneham, General Manager
Strategic Objective: We demonstrate accountability, transparency and ethical conduct
Strategic Direction: We champion responsible and ethical behaviour
Executive Summary
To provide details of the proceedings of the 2009 Local Government Association (LGA) Conference held in Tamworth from 24 – 28 October 2009.
Council submitted seven motions to the Conference with the following result:
· 2 motions were adopted
· 4 motions were referred to the Executive (one with a recommendation to adopt)
· 1 motion was withdrawn
The report recommends that the information be received.
Background
The Annual Conference of the Local Government Association of NSW is the forum at which the ongoing policies of local government in NSW are affirmed, amended and/or extended to address issues of concern for local government across the state. This year’s conference was held in Tamworth, from 24 to 28 October 2009. The theme of the conference was “Tough Times, Smart Solutions”.
Council’s delegates to the conference were His Worship the Mayor, Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM and Councillors Robert Ardill, Greg Davies, Ben Goldfinch, Karen McKeown, Marko Malkoc, Kath Presdee and Jackie Greenow (observer). Councillor Greenow also attended as a voting delegate on behalf of Hawkesbury River County Council.
The support team was led by the General Manager, Alan Stoneham; Public Officer, Glenn McCarthy; Public Domain Amenity and Safety Manager, Yvonne Perkins; Children’s Services Manager – Operations, Janet Keegan and Aboriginal Liaison Officer, Carolyn Gartside.
As in previous years, Council also sponsored the attendance of representatives of the Deerubbin Local Aboriginal Land Council (DLALC) at the conference. This year, Chairperson, Frank Vincent and Chief Executive Officer, Kevin Cavanagh attended as representatives of the DLALC.
Outcome of Motions submitted by Council
Council has a very successful track-record in past years at influencing the development of state-wide LGA policy, particularly in the areas of children’s services funding, planning, the environment, community planning, fire and emergency services, roads and transport, and rating policy.
This year, Council submitted seven (7) motions.
Four Category 1 Motions
(i.e. matters not covered by existing policy and matters involving change of policy)
Motion 2 - WITHDRAWN
This Motion was withdrawn at the Conference following discussions with representatives of the Deerubbin Local Aboriginal Land Council.
· That the Local Government Association seek to amend Rule 19 of the Local Government and Shires Association Constitution so as to provide for eighteen (18) of the twenty-seven (27) New South Wales Aboriginal Land Council delegates to the Conference to take out independent membership of the Local Government Association of NSW, based on representation from (2) two Local Aboriginal Land Councils within each of the nine (9) Regions, apart from the new South Wales Aboriginal Land Council (NSWALC) corporate membership of nine (9) delegates.
Executive Note
NSWALC have advised that this could create problems structurally for the NSWALC.
Motion 52 - ADOPTED
· That as part of negotiations for the next Local Government (State) Award, the Local Government Association support the introduction of three (3) weeks paid “short adoption leave” for an employee who is the primary care-giver of the adopted child, at the time of placement of the child with the employee.
Executive Note
The Local Government (State) Award 2007 already contains a provision for 1 week’s paid supporting parent leave which can be taken at the time the employee adopts a child, provided the employee has had 12 months continuous service the Council immediately prior to the commencement of such leave. The Award has provided access to this benefit since 2001.
Motion 78 – REFERRED TO EXECUTIVE, WITH RECOMMENDATION TO ADOPT
· That the Local Government Association request NSW Health to conduct its review of the Public Health Act 1991 in full consultative partnership with local government during both the review, development and implementation phases.
Motion 150 - ADOPTED
· That the Local Government Association approach the NSW Government with the view to increasing on the spot penalties for the dumping of waste, particularly for that waste that has been collected by a contractor under payment for removal, and the waste is then illegally disposed of.
One Category 2 Motion
(i.e. those matters that are reaffirmations of existing policy)
Motion 52 – REFERRED TO EXECUTIVE
· That the Local Government Association request the Minister for Planning to delay the further roll out of any new planning reforms until such time as further consultation has been undertaken with Local Government and key stakeholders about the growing complexity of the planning reforms and the need for a new Environmental Planning & Assessment Act.
Executive Note:
The Associations presented a detailed submission and appeared at a hearing before the Inquiry into the New South Wales Planning Framework by the Legislative Council Standing Committee on State Development. The submission called for a comprehensive review and revision of the NSW planning system and planning legislation to reflect the challenges and opportunities presented by the 21st century.
The Associations support an overhaul of the NSW land use planning system.
Two Late Motions
Late Motion L5 – REFERRED TO EXECUTIVE
· That the Local Government Association seek provision in the Director-General’s Guidelines issued in relation to the “Payment of expenses and provision of facilities to councillors” under section 252 of the Local Government Act 1993, to allow Councils to make a daily payment to Councillors attending conferences and training related to their civic duty to compensate them for loss of income due to their absence from work, with the daily payment being capped in terms of both amount and days per year.
Late Motion L17 – REFERRED TO EXECUTIVE
· That the Local Government Association request that the Department of Planning amend Section 121ZD of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act (EPAA) 1979 to require that the referral of reports from the Commissioner of the New South Wales Fire Brigades (NSWFB) under Section 118L of the Act only be tabled at and reported to Council for determination where the timeframes outlined in the EPAA to issue a notice have not been satisfied by Council Officers.
Other Motions
More than 150 new or amended items of policy were added to the LGA’s policy as a result of the deliberations of the conference. A full list of the outcomes of the Motions put before the conference will be provided to Councillors, under separate cover, when they become available from the LGA.
Conference Venue for 2011
Shoalhaven City Council was chosen by the Conference as the host for the 2011 Conference. The 2010 Conference will be hosted by Albury City Council.
Conclusion
Council was again successful in influencing NSW Local Government policy, and in advocating and lobbying for better outcomes that affect Penrith City and other local government areas across the State.
That the information contained in the report on 2009 Local Government Association Annual Conference be received. |
There are no attachments for this report.
9 November 2009 |
|
A Leading City |
|
5 |
Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program Round 2 2009-10: Council's Allocation of $721,000 |
|
Compiled by: Ray Richardson, Grants Support Officer
Authorised by: Vicki O’Kelly, Group Manager - Finance
Strategic Objective: We demonstrate leadership, and plan responsibly for now and the future
Strategic Direction: We deliver services for the City and its communities, and maintain our long term financial sustainability
Executive Summary
The Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program is delivered by the Federal government through the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government.
The Program was announced in November 2008 and Council was allocated $1.706 million for 23 projects in the first round.
A second round of funding has been announced and Council has been allocated $721,000 as a share of $100 million across Australia.
Council is required to submit proposals for approval by the Department by 20 November 2009.
This report provides Council with information on six projects that are considered to be eligible for funding that have been proposed by relevant Managers for development into applications for submission by the 20 November closing date.
Two additional projects are proposed as recommended by the Department, in the event that one or more of the nominated projects are deemed ineligible for funding.
Background
The Guidelines for the Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program include the following information:
Funds under the RLCIP $100 million will be provided directly to councils as a one-off payment. Eligible projects must be additional, ready to proceed, or additional stages of current projects. Additional projects are those which have not been included in the local government’s financial budget for 2009-10 and can be brought forward as a result of RLCIP funding. Projects that are ready to proceed are those that will begin construction within three months of signing the Funding Agreement (contract).
Councils are encouraged to include projects in their application that address the needs of the local indigenous population. Councils are also encouraged to consider environmental sustainability when preparing project proposals, and how their RLCIP activities will promote green building technologies, design practices and operations.
Funding will be provided to councils for community infrastructure, including new construction and major renovations or refurbishments of assets such as:
§ social and cultural infrastructure (e.g. art spaces, gardens);
§ recreational facilities (e.g. swimming pools, sports stadiums);
§ tourism infrastructure (e.g. walkways, tourism information centres);
§ children, youth and seniors facilities (e.g. playgroup centres, senior citizens’ centres);
§ access facilities (e.g. boat ramps, footbridges); and
§ environmental initiatives (e.g. drain and sewerage upgrades, recycling plants).
Projects must provide a clear and direct benefit to the local communities within a council’s jurisdiction. Examples of projects that are ineligible for this reason include those which support council operations (such as an upgrade of council offices), those which make a direct contribution to private businesses, or those which benefit specific individuals (such as the renovation of a caretaker’s residence).
Funding will not be approved to bolster funding for existing projects which have exceeded their original budget forecasts.
Funding cannot be used for artworks, or for Information Technology and Communications hardware and software.
Funding cannot be used for:
§ ongoing costs (e.g. operational costs and maintenance);
§ roads or related infrastructure covered by the Roads to recovery or Black Spots programs; and
§ project management costs.
The FAQ’s provide additional advice, including the following:
Local Governments are encouraged to submit a number of prioritised projects, the aggregate value of which exceeds their allocation. Should the Department find that a higher priority project is ineligible, a lower priority yet eligible project may be substituted in its place. Where the Department does not approve one or more of a local government’s projects, and the local government has not submitted any lower priority projects, the Department will allow the local government to submit a revised application. Local governments should be aware that this will lengthen the Department’s processing timelines significantly, and delay the payment of their allocation. Irrespective of any delays arising from this process, local governments are still required to complete their projects and expend all funding no later than 31 December 2010.
Improving employment opportunities and the job readiness of Indigenous Australians is crucial to building pathways out of disadvantage. In addition to providing infrastructure which addresses the needs of the local Indigenous population, local governments are encouraged to utilise RLCIP funding for projects which will employ Indigenous apprentices, trainees and workers.
Together with the states and territories through the Council of Australian Governments, the Australian Government has set specific and ambitious targets to address Indigenous disadvantage. The six key targets that form the Closing the Gap objective are to:
§ close the life expectancy gap within a generation;
§ halve the gap in mortality rates for Indigenous children under five within a decade;
§ ensure access to early childhood education for all Indigenous four years olds in remote communities within five years;
§ halve the gap in reading, writing and numeracy achievements for children within a decade;
§ halve the gap for Indigenous students in year 12 attainment or equivalent attainment rates by 2020; and
§ halve the gap in employment outcomes between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians within a decade.
Various departments were pressed to effectively deliver the 23 projects approved in Round 1 within the six month deadline.
For Round 2 a strategic decision has been made to submit fewer, but more substantial projects, for approval.
This will result in better outcomes for Council assets where projects are implemented, including measures to reduce consumption of potable water and savings on greenhouse emissions through improvements to lighting and air conditioning.
Recycled materials will be used for construction where practicable.
No Council contribution is required, but some minor additional works at selected sites may be scheduled to occur concurrently with the nominated works, to be resourced from relevant operational budgets.
The Federal Government’s priorities detailed in the Guidelines to the RLCIP Program will be drawn to the attention of contractors engaged to deliver the nominated works.
The following projects, which are not contained in the 2009-10 or 2010-11 program of works, have been prioritised and nominated for RLCIP funding in Round 2:
1. Berkshire Park Hall Precinct improvements
Project cost: $219,000
Berkshire Park Hall Improvements $158,470
This project aims to create and activate a sustainable community hub for the residents of Berkshire Park. Berkshire Park is an isolated rural area located on the fringe of the Penrith LGA. Council’s Rural Areas Community Development Officer is currently working with the residents of Berkshire Park to establish community programs and activities that are responsive to local need including people with disabilities, senior residents, young people and families with young children. The lack of access to the hall and the lack of playground facilities in Berkshire Park have been raised as a priority for the local community action group as well as the local play group.
Council’s contributions will include painting of hall, signage (including road signs), project management and coordination.
The submission will note that Council has just replaced the roof of the hall as part of our contribution.
The Berkshire Park Hall project has a sustainability and accessibility focus and includes the following elements:
· installation solar panels
· installation rain water tank (collection from roof)
· installation of temperature and timer controlled air conditioning
· installation of new internal energy efficient light fittings
· installation of an accessible toilet (includes minor modifications to existing women’s toilet)
· installation of storage space (existing storage space to be redesigned as accessible toilet)
· installation of an accessible ramp
· installation of an external shade structure for outdoor activities
· improved accessibility from the car park to the hall and to the adjoining Berkshire Park reserve
· sustainable landscaping
This project will be managed by the Public Domain Amenity and Safety Manager.
This project site is located in North Ward.
Berkshire Park Reserve Play Equipment $60,530
This project will deliver a new playground structure designed to meet the needs of the community. The facility will be accessible to all members of the community and be available to compliment activities undertaken in Berkshire Park Community Hall. The playground will have a rubberised softfall system that complies with Australian standards. The playground will have a shade structure erected to maximise use during the warmer parts of the day.
In addition to the playground works a number of complimentary works will be undertaken including the installation of park benches, a pathway to improve access from the adjacent car park and a new gate to improve access from the adjoining community hall.
No playground is currently located in Berkshire Park.
This project will be managed by the Parks Manager.
This project site is located in North Ward.
2. University of the Third Age access facilities
Project cost: $82,000
This project at the University of the Third Age will ensure that the target customers will be able to access the services and facilities provided by the organisation. The building in which it is housed currently presents access challenges for many of its clients.
Installation of an accessible ramp $34,000.
This will require the existing door landing to be topped to eliminate the step at the doorway, removal of an existing garden, reconstruction of the existing stairs, construction of new accessible ramp, installation of compliant handrails and tactiles and some minor landscaping.
Installation of accessible toilets $48,000.
Existing cubicles within the male and female toilets can be utilised to create compliant accessible toilets. Doorways leading into the toilets will be required to be widened and all new fittings will be compliant with current codes, including grab rails and new toilet partitioning. It is not intended to totally renovate the existing toilets. Drainage will also require alterations.
This project will be managed by the Public Domain Amenity and Safety Manager.
This project site is located in South Ward.
3. New and Replacement Park Play Equipment Program
Project cost: $145,000
Grassmere Street Reserve, South Penrith $50,000 South Ward
This project will enable a new playground to be installed on a site that had its playground equipment removed approximately five years ago as a result of non compliance with Australian Standards. There have been a large number of recent requests from the community for new equipment on this site. The playground will feature new equipment with rubberised softfall. The design and equipment will comply with current Australian standards.
Fantail and Whistler Reserve, Erskine Park $50,000 East Ward
This project will replace ageing playground infrastructure that has reached the end of its serviceable life. The playground will have new rubberised softfall installed replacing the current woodchip softfall. This change will reduce maintenance, improve safety for playground users and enhance the amenity of the park. The design and equipment will comply with current Australian standards.
Arundel Park Drive Reserve, St Clair $45,000 East Ward
This project will replace ageing playground infrastructure that has reached the end of its serviceable life. The playground will have new rubberised softfall installed replacing the current woodchip softfall. This change will reduce maintenance, improve safety for playground users and enhance the amenity of the park. The design and equipment will comply with current Australian standards.
This project will be managed by the Parks Manager.
4. Great River Walk Decks
Project Cost: $75,000
Water’s edge deck near Punt Road $28,000.
Water’s edge deck near M4 $47,000.
The staged implementation of the Great River Walk (GRW) is currently focused on the west bank, along River Road and its adjacent riparian embankment. The nominated deck and step-lookout elements are located along this 2.5km stretch. Construction of the shared pedestrian cycle path component is programmed to be staged consecutively over four years, pending other grant funding, following the River Road kerb and gutter program. The path will connect the proposed deck and step-lookout elements.
The decks are an important means of drawing people directly to and in contact with the water, an objective supporting a city principle of celebrating Penrith’s sense of place as a river city. Direct water access is only achieved at the boat ramp and associated with more active pursuits. The southern deck is proposed to be accessed via a ramp with grades complying with disability access standards.
The design of the lookout will provide easy access from the upper to lower bank areas. Its proximity to the Penrith Regional Gallery is expected to entice greater numbers of people onto the GRW. The lookout platform will be a feature on River Road and a further drawcard to the Walk.
In the short to medium term, the decks and step-lookout will be specific points of interest and attraction, whilst the focus of other grant expenditure will be focused along River Road in a more functional infrastructure sense.
This project will be managed by the Major Projects Manager.
This project site is located in South Ward.
5. Werrington Downs Fitness Trail Construction
Project cost: $60,000
This project will deliver a section of the planned Werrington Downs Fitness Trail through Werrington Park.
The portion included is the 0.4km off road component through Werrington Lakes. The shared pathway is 1.5m in width. It fits within the recreational facilities category of the RLCIP Program.
Should this project be approved and the NSW Community Building Partnership Program application for sections of this Trail be approved, a substantial portion of the Fitness Trail would be delivered by the end of 2010.
This project will be managed by the City Works Manager.
This project site is located in North Ward.
6. Children’s Services Playground Upgrades
Project cost: $140,000
Stepping Stones Playground Upgrade $50,000 East Ward
Stepping Stones, situated in St Clair, is a 40 place long day care service and began operations in 1986. It is well utilised by children aged 0-6 years, a number of whom have a disability. This project is to finalise the playground upgrade and includes provision for storage, shade, water tank and watering systems. The upgrade would enable the service to meet all regulatory requirements for outdoor space in addition to being accessible for children with a disability.
Emu Village OOSH Playground Upgrade $50,000 South Ward
Emu Village OOSH operates out of The Old School site in Lawson Street, Emu Plains. It is a 60 place facility. The building is heritage listed. The outdoor play space at this site does not currently meet regulatory requirements for out of school hours care. A recent audit of the outdoor play space identified that it was high risk and non-conforming to Australian Standards. Improvements to the external amenity of the facility includes rectifying issues with fixed play equipment, resolve issues caused by degradation of the footpaths, walkways, retaining walls and softfall and landscaping to remove trip hazards. The upgrade replaces aged infrastructure with contemporary equipment for use by the Emu Village community.
Strauss Road Playground Upgrade $40,000 East Ward
Strauss Road Children’s Centre is a 40 place long day care service that began operations in 1986. It is well utilised by children aged 0-6 years. This project is to address safety issues which require rectification. The site is a sloping aspect and difficult to address to meet regulatory requirements. A recent licensing monitoring visit identified issues with the fixed equipment and softfall at this site and this project would address these. The project will result in improved amenity and safety for the Strauss Road community.
This project will be managed by the Children’s Services Manager.
Total of all prioritised projects: $721,000
Additional projects
As recommended by the Department of Infrastructure, the following projects are suggested as additional to those prioritised above in the event that any prioritised project is not deemed to meet funding criteria.
A. Replacement Park Play Equipment Program
Project cost: $100,000
Gough and Lucas Reserve, Emu Plains $50,000 South Ward
Allsopp & Patterson Ovals, Cambridge Park $50,000 North Ward
The playgrounds will replace older equipment which is nearing the end of its serviceable life.
This project proposed by the Parks Manager.
B. Great River Walk deck and steps near Hunter Street
Project cost: $135,000
The project proposal includes a viewing deck, steps to the lower path, landscaping, a Geotech test and construction using sustainable materials.
It is part of a larger staged project to develop the GRW as a Regional walking trail. The Development Application has been approved.
This project can be built independently of other work on the GRW’s West Bank, yet designed to connect to a future road edge pedestrian cycle path that is being built in stages. If future State Government grants are successful, the section of road edge path that connects with the lookout will be constructed in 2011-12. This stage will also include roadside and car park adjacent to the Penrith Regional Gallery.
This project proposed by the Major Projects Manager.
This project site is located in South Ward.
That: 1. The information contained in the report on Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program Round 2 2009-10: Council's Allocation of $721,000 be received. 2. Council endorse the preparation and submission of six projects for the RLCIP: Berkshire Park Hall Precinct $219,000; New and Replacement Park Play Equipment Program $145,000; Great River Walk Decks $75,000; Werrington Downs Fitness Trail Construction $60,000; Children’s Services Playground Upgrades $140,000. 3. Council endorse the preparation and submission of two projects as additional nominations to the RLCIP: New and Replacement Play Equipment $100,000; Great River Walk Deck and Steps $135,000. |
There are no attachments for this report.
9 November 2009 |
|
A Leading City |
|
6 |
Summary of Investments & Banking from 1 September 2009 to 30 September 2009 |
|
Compiled by: Pauline Johnston, Expenditure Accountant
Authorised by: Vicki O’Kelly, Group Manager - Finance
Strategic Objective: We demonstrate leadership, and plan responsibly for now and the future
Strategic Direction: We deliver services for the City and its communities, and maintain our long term financial sustainability
Executive Summary
To provide a summary of investments for the period 1 September 2009 to 30 September 2009, a reconciliation of invested funds and Agency Collection Fees as at 30 September 2009.
Background
CERTIFICATE OF RESPONSIBLE ACCOUNTING OFFICER
I hereby certify the following:
1. All investments have been made in accordance with Section 625 of the Local Government Act 1993, relevant regulations and Council’s Investment Policy.
2. Council’s Cash Book and Bank Statements have been reconciled as at 30 September 2009.
Vicki O’Kelly
Responsible Accounting Officer
That: 1. The information contained in the report on Summary of Investments & Banking from 1 September 2009 to 30 September 2009 be received. 2. The Certificate of the Responsible Accounting Officer and Summaries of Investments and Performance for the period 1 September 2009 to 30 September 2009 be noted and accepted. 3. The graphical investment analysis as at 30 September 2009 be noted. 4. The Agency Collection Methods as at 30 September 2009 be noted |
ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES
1. View |
Summary of Investments |
4 Pages |
Appendix |
2. View |
Agency Collection Methods |
1 Page |
Appendix |
9 November 2009 |
|
Appendix 2 - Agency Collection Methods |
|
|
|
The following is an update of the methods to make payments to Council through various agencies.
A City of Opportunities
Item Page
7 Community Builders Funding Program (formerly known as Western Sydney Area Assistance Scheme)
8 Glenmore Park Child and Family Centre - Operational Matters
9 November 2009 |
|
A City of Opportunities |
|
7 |
Community Builders Funding Program (formerly known as Western Sydney Area Assistance Scheme) |
|
Compiled by: Vesna Kapetanovic, Community Projects Officer
Authorised by: Erich Weller, Community and Cultural Development Manager
Strategic Objective: We have access to what we need
Strategic Direction: Our City’s services and facilities are provided equitably, and can be accessed by those in need
Executive Summary
The report is to inform Council of the NSW State Government’s new regional community strengthening and capacity building funding program. The Community Builders funding program was formerly known as the Area Assistance Scheme (AAS), which in our region was the Western Sydney Area Assistance Scheme. The NSW State Government has reformed this program to ensure its ongoing sustainability. The reforms include streamlining the assessment and ranking process and related administrative efficiencies, as well as changes to the funding program focus and structure.
The Community Builders funding program will prioritise strategic, collaborative projects that are able to demonstrate evidence of local community consultation and leadership. Eligible applicants are able to apply for a 1, 2 or 3 year project. The minimum amount per year is $10,000 and the maximum is $100,000. The program opened on the 2 November and will close on Thursday 10 December.
Outline of Community Builders Funding Program and Process
The NSW State Government has recently launched their new regional funding program, Community Builders to replace the Area Assistance Scheme. This annual funding program aims to build strength and capacity within communities and enhance their ability to manage issues and respond to change. The three outcome areas, or service activity descriptors, are community capacity building, community skills development and community sector development.
The Community Builders funding program will prioritise strategic, collaborative projects that are able to demonstrate evidence of local community consultation and leadership.
For an organisation to be eligible to apply, they are required to be incorporated and not for profit, or be a for profit organisation that has a not for profit arm. Eligible applicants are able to apply for a 1, 2 or 3 year project. The minimum amount per year is $10,000 and the maximum is $100,000. The program opened on the 2 November and will close on Thursday 10 December.
The Community Builders funding program is administered by the Communities and Early Years Division as part of the Community Services Agency within the Department of Human Services NSW.
This funding program is only available to certain local government areas in six regions across NSW (Metro West, Metro South West, Illawarra, Central Coast, Hunter and North Coast). These are the areas previously covered by the AAS.
Submitted applications will be assessed by a Regional Assessment Panel for each of the above regions with each panel including up to seven community and government representatives. The panel will use a set of assessment criteria based on the eligibility criteria in order to recommend to the Minister of Community Services which projects should receive funding.
Organisations and projects that are successful in receiving funding will sign a contract which will incorporate a Service Agreement. In addition a Service Specification will be established after negotiation between the successful organisation and the NSW Community Services Agency. Organisations will be monitored by the Community Services Agency for compliance with their Service Agreement and Service Specifications under the Community Services Agency Performance Monitoring Framework.
In general the response by the community sector to the changes to the AAS and the new Community Builders Funding Program have been positive.
Changes to Council’s Involvement
The Community Builders program has evolved from the former State Government funding program, the Area Assistance Scheme (AAS). In Western Sydney the WSAAS funding program started in 1979 and played an important role in supporting new and rapid developing communities to address change and social disadvantage.
Local Government has had a valued involvement in the former WSAAS Program. The State Government has determined that Council involvement in this funding program be changed in focus. This includes Local Ranking Committees where Councillors and community members previously had input in the assessment and ranking of applications received for the Penrith LGA. The local rankings from participating LGAs in each region then were assessed and ranked by a regional assessment panel with recommendations for funding then going to the Minister for approval. This process, reproduced across over 30 LGAs and six regions in NSW, required significant administrative support.
In the past, two nominated Councillors served a two year term as participants on the Penrith WSAAS Local Ranking Committee. In 2008, Councillor Tanya Davies and Councillor Prue Guillaume participated in the Local Ranking Committee. This local approach to ranking will be superseded by the new Regional Assessment Panels. It is anticipated that this change to the ranking process will streamline the process and reduce the time in which applicants are notified of the outcome. Due to the changes to the funding program, Councillors will not be required to serve the second year of their nominated term.
The Director of Community Programs from the Community Services Agency forwarded correspondence (dated 10/08/09 and 10/09/09) to Council’s General Manager and Community and Cultural Development Department Manager to brief Council of the changes to the funding program and to thank Council for their ongoing participation and support for this funding program.
Council will maintain its role in assisting in the rollout of the Community Builders funding program. This includes promotion and providing support and expertise to community organisations in the Penrith LGA in project application development. Council’s Community Projects Officer’s role in the funding program has been modified and now involves a stronger focus on the application process rather than monitoring and administration of the funded projects. Council’s Community Projects Officer will be providing the Community Services Agency with information in regards to local social planning priorities for each funding round.
Conclusion
The NSW State Government has recently launched a new regional community strengthening and capacity building funding program. The Community Builders funding program was formerly known as the Area Assistance Scheme (AAS) and has undergone some changes to reflect a more contemporary approach to grants management and administration. The changes include the role of Council and local community participation in the assessment and ranking process, as well as changes to the funding program focus and structure. The Community Builders funding program provides the local community with access to NSW Government funding for strategic and collaborative community development projects that respond to emerging local and regional issues.
That:
1. The information contained in the report on Community Builders Funding Program (formerly known as Western Sydney Area Assistance Scheme) be received.
2. Councillors Tanya Davies and Prue Guillaume be acknowledged and thanked for their contribution to the 2008/09 WSAAS Local Ranking Committee.
|
There are no attachments for this report.
9 November 2009 |
|
A City of Opportunities |
|
8 |
Glenmore Park Child and Family Centre - Operational Matters |
|
Compiled by: Karen van Woudenberg, Children's Services Development Officer
Authorised by: Erich Weller, Community and Cultural Development Manager
Janet Keegan, Children's Services Manager Operations
Strategic Objective: We play an active role in our communities
Strategic Direction: Our capacity and wellbeing is enhanced through the support of collaborative networks and partnerships
Executive Summary
The purpose of this report is to provide Council with an update on the progress of the Glenmore Park Child and Family Precinct. The Precinct is made up of six key function areas, all of which are interrelated and make up the community hub. The key function areas include an adventure playground, an outdoor community meeting area, a child and family centre, a small coffee shop/corner store, car parking facilities and a ‘magnetic’ open space area.
The focus of this report is on the Glenmore Park Child and Family Centre.
Glenmore Park Child and Family Centre is a new community facility at the intersection of the Glenmore Parkway and Blue Hills Drive, Glenmore Park. The centre has been modelled on an integrated child and family centre model which seeks to encourage enhanced community service delivery by encouraging the formation of relationships between the centre’s children’s services and other services and facilities to be delivered at the site.
This facility is currently under construction and on target and is expected to open for operation in early 2010. Previous reports and memos to Council have provided details on the progress of the project.
This report includes an update on the management model for the Child and Family Centre, an update on the development of a business plan for the centre as well as on the expression of interest process for the professional community service rooms. The report also outlines the proposed fees and charges for the Child and Family Centre and associated spaces within the facility. The proposed fees and charges are provided at Attachment 1 to this report.
Background
The Glenmore Park Child and Family Centre is a new community facility located at the intersection of Glenmore Parkway and Blue Hills Drive, Glenmore Park. Councillors have been provided with regular update briefings on the progress of the Precinct including a detailed report to the Ordinary Meeting on 23 June 2008. Subsequent to this, memo updates have been provided as well as a report to Council on the selection of the preferred tender for the construction of the project in March 2009. Construction commenced in April 2009 and completion and handover is projected for mid December, weather conditions permitting. On 8 May 2009, Councillors and guests attended a turning of the sod ceremony led by the Mayor at the time Councillor Jim Aitken OAM to mark the commencement of construction.
Management of the Facilities within the Precinct
The management model of the overall precinct is currently being finalised with various management components remaining with the responsible departments. The Children’s Services Department internal management team will manage the Child and Family Centre for a period of two years before possible transition to the Children’s Services Cooperative (subject to negotiation with the Cooperative). The Public Domain Amenity and Safety Department will allocate a public domain unit to ensure regular cleaning, maintenance and mowing is undertaken around the centre, in the open space, as well as around the adventure playground. This unit will also monitor the requirement for any additional maintenance.
The Child and Family Centre
The design principles of the Child and Family Centre were intentionally drafted to facilitate integration between the different functions of the facility. It is expected that staff engaged in the children’s centre have the skills to facilitate this approach to holistic service delivery.
Concurrent to the construction of the building, Council Officers have continued to coordinate operational arrangements, subsequent sections of this report deal with these operational priorities. They are:
· The Child and Family Centre model of operations
· Staffing model
· Business planning for the Child and Family Centre including a marketing plan
· Expression of Interest for the Professional Community Rooms
· Fees and charges for the facility.
Rear of the Child and Family Centre – 22 October 2009
The Model of Operation of the Centre
As this is a different model of operation to previous child care and community centres, a new set of operational procedures and staff structures are required to ensure that staff can operate the facility collaboratively and with a family centred practice approach. The aim is to provide a best practice child and family centre and a facility that is responsive to community needs and requirements, and will build on Council’s experience in operating existing child care centres and community centres.
The functions of the centre are as follows:
· A 50 place long day care centre with provision for short day care and five occasional care places included to provide care for parenting groups and services operating at the site. As mentioned, the staff in this centre will be skilled in family centred practice to ensure a good understanding of working an integrated service model of child and family programs. Applications for licensing and accreditation have been made to the appropriate authorities for operation of this service.
· Two community meeting rooms available for hire with preference being given to activities sympathetic to the child and family support nature of the precinct - examples of user groups could include playgroups, new mothers groups, antenatal programs, healthy lifestyle programs , parenting groups, exercise groups, homework and after school programs, craft activities, etc.
· Two professional community service rooms for hire on a sessional basis for half day and full day sessions to practitioners who offer services to complement the child and family nature of the precinct. This may be health professionals such as speech therapists, occupational therapists, counselling services, parent and baby well-being clinicians, natural health practitioners, etc.
The bookings for these spaces will be managed by the administration officer at reception to the Child and Family Centre.
The Staffing Model and Coordinator Position Description
The recruitment of the Child and Family Centre staff has already commenced with an expression of interest going out to existing Council Children’s Services staff for transfer across to the Glenmore Park centre. This is intended to be followed by a series of orientation sessions to ensure staff can implement the family centred practice model of service provision. As the position of Centre Coordinator is a new position it is required to go to external advertising and recruitment and this is underway.
The Centre Coordinator will have responsibility to manage the operations of the centre including staff support and management. The Coordinator will also have responsibility for attracting services to the precinct, attracting programs and funding initiatives and managing relationships with health and other professionals using the facility requiring community engagement and development skills. Communication between the stakeholders in the precinct will be supported by an initial stakeholder reference group with all service providers to ensure clear communication and consistent service provision.
Business Planning for the Child and Family Centre
Budget modelling developed in the 2009/10 budget development process allowed for a Coordinator, and skeleton staff to establish the facility. It is anticipated that enrolments for the children’s centre will provide a large proportion of the income. Hire of the professional service rooms has been budgeted to contribute to salaries and upkeep but it is anticipated that the centre will not be able to operate on a cost recovery basis for the first 12-24 months. This is common when establishing a new centre.
There are currently no government grants available for the operation of this facility. Consequently the service will need to apply for different small funding grants for specific activities to build up the business of the facility. In the establishment phase (24 months) of operating, Council will maintain operational responsibility for the services to build community interest and commitment to the facility and ensure the full potential of the centre can be realised. As this is a unique model, in that it offers both child and family programs, consideration will need to be given to the ongoing management of the facility with a possible transition to the Children’s Services Cooperative at the end of the two year establishment phase.
A marketing plan for the facility includes advertising and notices in school and community newsletters over November and December informing residents of the new facility and promoting activities at the centre. Initial discussions with family program providers have indicated interest in providing activities at the centre in the New Year to encourage community use of the premises and surrounds. Community events, family fun activities and partnership with family programs will build a positive community perception of the facility and build community engagement with all aspects of the precinct.
Expression of Interest process for Professional Community Service Rooms
The two professional community rooms in the child and family centre provide an opportunity to enable child and family service professionals to facilitate sessional services at the site. This will also contribute some income to support the operations of the centre. An expression of interest document has been developed and is currently being circulated to professional bodies, agencies and services throughout the Penrith and Western Sydney Region to seek interested professionals. Two information sessions will also be held. At this stage, annual income of $16,000 has been budgeted to be received for the use of the two professional rooms. Fees and charges for the professional community rooms and the other operational spaces are summarised in the next section of this report.
Rear of Café/General Store – 22 October 2009
Framework for Setting Fees and Charges
Penrith City Council recognises that community facilities are an important and valuable community asset. A number of key principles have informed the approach to setting fees and charges for these facilities. The framework for setting fees and charges has been based on social justice principles of equity and access with a view to providing opportunities for a wide range of community groups and organisations to make use of the facilities. These principles form the basis of Council’s approach to providing community facilities for service delivery and community use. Council is highly aware of the need to set fees and charges which provide consistency across the LGA, while taking into account local community character, desires, needs and expectations.
A key element of creating sustainable community facilities is to encourage ongoing use. Council is aware of the multi-dimensional benefits that a highly visited site provides. Not only does it bring the community in, it also contributes to passive surveillance and improved opportunities for community exposure to new activities and services. There are opportunities for synergies to develop between services, activities and integrated programs at the site for mutual benefit. To support this goal Council seeks to set fees and charges which assist to maximise usage of the Glenmore Park Child and Family Precinct, while at the same time contributing to the operational costs of the facility.
Through extensive experience in managing neighbourhood facilities, Council officers are acutely aware of community expectations regarding community facilities. This staff experience has served to recognise that different communities have varying capacities and financial resources. Council staff also recognises that new facilities are generally very popular and are usually in high demand.
Children’s Services Fees at the Glenmore Park Child and Family Centre
Fees relating to the services provided on site by Penrith City Council’s Children’s Services are consistent with fees and charges for children’s services as endorsed in the current 2009/10 Operational Plan. This is appropriate to ensure equity across all services delivered by Council’s Children’s Services, including those managed on Council’s behalf by the Children’s Services Cooperative. The child care centre fee structure is provided at Attachment 1.
Fees for Community Rooms
In addition to the children’s services provided at the Glenmore Park Child and Family Centre, two community rooms will be available for hire. These community rooms will be available to the public in the same manner that Council currently provides rooms at other Council-managed community or neighbourhood centres. Both of these rooms have access to separate and secure outdoor terraces. The facility focus on child and family programs and services will not provide spaces for private functions such as birthday parties or other private functions. There is adequate provision for this type of function in the Surveyors Creek Community Centre and the Glenmore Park Town Centre Youth and Community Centre. The fee structure is provided at Attachment 1.
Fees for Professional Rooms
The professional service rooms in the Glenmore Park Child and Family Centre will be operated differently to the other spaces available for hire. These rooms have been developed to allow specialist community and community health services to be delivered at the centre. It is proposed that sessional hire be based on a half day or full day block to facilitate manageable administration and suitable hire sessions for professional service providers. The fees and charges set for the professional rooms accommodate the costs of additional services associated with the hire of these rooms including booking and management administration, utilities, cleaning, and selected furnishings purchase and replacement. Advice was received from Property Development to determine the fee structure for these rooms. The fee structure is provided at Attachment 1.
Exhibition of the Proposed Fees and Charges
Chapter 15 of the Local Government Act 1993 (LG Act) prescribes that Council is required to set its fees and charges annually and publish these in the Operational Plan for the following financial year, which undergoes a 28 day public consultation period before it is adopted by Council.
Accordingly, the draft fees and charges for the Glenmore Park Child and Family Centre must also undergo a 28 day public consultation period before they can be adopted by Council. Once adopted, the fees and charges will apply until they are reviewed as part of the 2010-11 Operational Plan process.
Acting Financial Services Manager Comment
The Local Government Act 1993 Section 610F (3) allows councils to propose new fees or amend fees if a new service is provided, or the nature or extend of an existing service is changed. Section 610F (3) also sets out that Council must give public notice (in accordance with section 705) for at least 28 days.
As the new facility was not included in Council’s original 2009-10 Operational Plan due to uncertainty about the operational date of the centre, Council will need to provide at least 28 days public notice of its determination of the proposed fees.
The proposed fees and charges are listed in the attachment to this report. The proposed fees and charges for the Children’s Services functions of the Centre are consistent with the current adopted fees and charges for Council’s other Long Day Care Centres. The proposed fees and charges for the Community Room hire appear appropriate when compared against other Council centres and in particular for centres located in Glenmore Park. The fees and charges for the professional community service rooms have been set following consultation with Council’s Property Development Manager.
Conclusion
Construction of the Glenmore Park Child and Family Centre is progressing to schedule. Operational matters need to be finalised including recruitment of staff, setting of fees and charges, marketing and licensing and accreditation of the children’s centre.
The fees and charges proposed at Attachment 1 for the different spaces in the facility must be placed on public exhibition for 28 days for public comment. A further report will be submitted to Council in December to consider any public comment and the adoption of the fees and charges.
That: 1. The information contained in the report on Glenmore Park Child and Family Centre - Operational Matters be received. 2. The proposed fees and charges in the attachments be endorsed for public exhibition. 3. A further report be presented to the Council after the public exhibition period presenting any public submissions received.
|
1. View |
Schedule of Fees |
3 Pages |
Appendix |
THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY
A Green City
Item Page
9 Landcare Mobilemuster grant
10 Waste and Sustainability Improvement Payments
11 Development Application DA09/0747 for Upgrade Works to Penrith Stadium in Penrith Park at Lot 2 DP 773983 (No. 143) Station Street, Penrith. Applicant: Penrith District Rugby League Football Club Ltd; Owner: Department of Land and Water Conservation DA09/0747
Procedural note: Section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993 requires that a division be called in relation to this matter.
12 Development Application No. 08/0958 - Section 96 Modification - Alteration to Finished Landform - Lot 1 DP 542395, Lot 740 DP 810111 (No. 1725) Elizabeth Drive, Badgerys Creek. Applicant: SITA Australia Pty Ltd; Owner: SITA Australia Pty Ltd DA08/0958
Procedural note: Section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993 requires that a division be called in relation to this matter.
13 Development Application DA09/0746 Proposed Alterations and Additions to Existing Bulky Goods Retail Centre at Lot 10 & 11 DP 1046110 (No. 13 - 23) Pattys Place, Jamisontown - Supacenta. Applicant: Pipven Pty Ltd; Owner: Pipven Pty Ltd DA09/0746
Procedural note: Section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993 requires that a division be called in relation to this matter.
URGENT
18 Development Application 08/0395 Proposed Child Care Centre located at Lot 216 DP 849247 (No. 88-94) Grays Lane, Cranebrook. Applicant: Cultured Stone Australia; Owner: Kieu To and Thi Noh Pham DA08/0395
Procedural note: Section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993 requires that a division be called in relation to this matter.
9 November 2009 |
|
A Green City |
|
9 |
Landcare Mobilemuster grant |
|
Compiled by: Janet Rannard, Bushland Management Officer
Authorised by: John Gordon, Parks Manager
Strategic Objective: Our natural habitats are healthy
Strategic Direction: The natural areas under Council’s responsibility are protected and conserved
Executive Summary
The purpose of this report is to advise Council of the success of a Landcare Mobilemuster grant application. The report recommends that the Council accepts the grant from Landcare Mobilemuster and write to the organisation thanking it for the grant.
Background
Council was successful in 2008-2009 in receiving a $20,000 grant from Landcare Mobilemuster for installing 10,000 local provenance plants throughout Penrith LGA.
A report to the Ordinary Meeting of Council on 24 August 2009 advised Council of the submission for a second grant application to Landcare Mobilemuster.
This report advises Council that Landcare has offered Penrith City Council a second grant contribution of $20,000 (pre GST). These funds will be utilised for:
· Purchase of local provenance plants
· Purchase of materials
The funds will be utilised to undertake works in several Council reserves including Hollier Reserve, Emu Plains; Bellbird Reserve, Emu Heights and at Werrington Creek, Werrington.
These plantings of local provenance species will assist in enriching the biodiversity with the Penrith Local Government Area.
That: 1. The information contained in the report on Landcare Mobilemuster grant be received. 2. Grant funding of $20,000 offered to Penrith City Council by Landcare Mobilemuster grant be accepted. 3. Council write to Landcare Mobilemuster accepting the grant and its conditions and thanking them for the opportunity to access important environmental funding. |
There are no attachments for this report.
9 November 2009 |
|
A Green City |
|
10 |
Waste and Sustainability Improvement Payments |
|
Compiled by: Barry Ryan, Waste and Community Protection Manager
Authorised by: Barry Ryan, Waste and Community Protection Manager
Strategic Objective: We use our resources wisely, and take responsibility for our levels of consumption
Strategic Direction: The City’s ecological footprint is reduced
Previous Items: Waste Performance Incentive Payments - Policy Review Committee - 30 April 2007
Executive Summary
This report is to provide Councillors with information on the Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water’s (DECCW) Waste and Sustainability Improvement Payments program and potential applications for this funding.
The Local Council Waste and Sustainability Improvement Payments (WaSIP) forms part of the City and Country Environment Restoration Program. This new program is an extension of the Waste Service Performance Improvement Payment (WSPIP) program that commenced in 2006-2007 and delivered some $25 million in Performance Improvement Payments to eligible councils in the initial three years of that Program.
Through the new WaSIP Program the NSW Government will invest some $256 million to assist councils in the regulated area to invest in actions and on programs that will improve waste avoidance, resource recovery, the use of secondary resources and waste management outcomes, and that will deliver improvements in environmental sustainability across their local government area. Of the $256 million total investment, $237.3 million will be available over seven years to eligible councils in the Sydney Metropolitan Area and the Extended Regulated Area who participated in the former WSPIP program and $19.1 million will be available over seven years to eligible councils in the Regional Regulated Area who will be entering the WaSIP program in July 2009.
The report recommends that projects identified in this report be submitted to DECCW as suitable projects to be funded under this program.
Background
In early 2006 the NSW Government introduced an additional $6 per annum to the waste levy for a five year period commencing 2006/07. The levy provided for funding for both the City and Country Environment Restoration Program ($3 per tonne) and WSPIPs ($3 per tonne).
Council has been successful in obtaining grant funding through the City and Country Environment Restoration program.
The WSPIPs were returned, on the basis that councils achieved the required criteria, and were distributed on a ratio of population in the local government area in comparison to other LGAs.
The criteria for meeting the WSPIPs included the auditing of waste and recycling bins, provision of recycling services to multi-unit developments, ongoing reporting of waste disposal and waste diversion to DECCW and the introduction of colour-coded bin lids that complied with the Australian Standard.
Council received the payments each year as DECCW’s requirements were, in the majority, already in place and in the case of bin lid changes, these were being planned for and that program has been recently implemented.
In a report to Council on 30 April 2007, it was recommended and agreed that these payments, given that the funding is sourced from the waste levy, should be utilised for initiatives that would further reduce the amount of solid waste being disposed at landfill, or contribute to the use of recycled waste in line with the State Strategy.
The WaSIPs have been utilised for parks and playing fields improvements using recycled organics, resource recovery of materials from street litter bins and litter bins located in parks and reserves, and Council’s contribution to the Western Sydney Regional Illegal Dumping Squad.
The report of 30 April 2007 identified additional programs that the funding could be utilised for, including:
· Waste education programs
· Introduction of recycling programs for various Council facilities
· Programs to prevent hazardous waste entering the general waste stream
In November 2008 the Minister for the Environment announced a further increase to the waste levy of $3 per tonne per annum effective from 1 July 2009 and concluding in 2016.
The waste levy in 2009/10 is $58.80 per tonne, increasing by $10 per annum plus CPI.
At the time of announcing the increase the Minister advised that approaches had been made to the Local Government & Shires Associations seeking to upgrade agreements that were made and determine how the increase in the levy would be returned to councils.
Current Situation
In July 2009 DECCW advised that the previous WSPIP program was being replaced by the WaSIP program and, whilst Council will be required to meet certain criteria each year, the funding received from this program must be tied to projects that will improve Council’s and the LGAs environmental bottom line that includes waste, biodiversity, water, energy, climate change, transport and sustainable purchasing actions.
To receive the payments for this year the requirements are that Council develops and adopts a Strategic Waste Action Plan that contains performance milestones that will contribute to Council reaching the 2014 Municipal Waste Target of a 66% reduction in waste to landfill and develop a sustainability action plan or policy of a similar nature.
Once again, Council will comply with these requirements with the waste management plan for the reduction of waste to landfill (being adopted in 2005) and various sustainability action plans, including:
· The Sustainable Penrith Action Plan
· Carbon Neutral – Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan
· Water Way – Water Conservation and Water Quality Action Plan
· Water Savings Action Plan
· Greenhouse Purchasing Action Plan
· Energy Savings Action Plan
that would comply with DECCW’s requirements.
DECCW has required that councils submit details of projects that they want to be funded under this program. DECCW will then confirm with council staff whether, in their opinion, the programs and activities nominated by council meet the WaSIP program’s guidelines and will enter into discussions to resolve any issues, if necessary.
Whilst DECCW has identified the broad areas for which the funding can be used, they have also specified that the funding can only be used for new projects that have not started and were not intended to be funded from another source; i.e., general revenue or grant funding, and enhanced projects where an existing program is going to be enhanced or extended, WaSIPs may be used to fund this portion of the project.
Whilst the areas in which the funding can be utilised are very broad, it is considered (given the funding is derived from the waste levy) that such funding should be primarily utilised for initiatives that will further reduce solid waste that will be disposed of at landfill or contribute to the use of recycled waste in line with the State Strategy.
The following table identifies proposed projects to be funded under this program in 2009/10. It has been developed in consultation with a number of Council staff including the Group Manager - City Presentation, Waste & Community Protection Manager, City Works Manager, Parks Manager and the Sustainability Coordinator.
Project Title |
Waste and /or Sustainability Initiative |
Funding Required |
Use of Compost on sporting fields yr 1/7 |
Topdressing 25 sporting fields with compost |
$80,000.00 |
Treatment - processing of street litter bin and parks waste through AWT |
Reduction of waste to landfill - use of new facility to process waste |
$80,000.00 |
Assessment of Council operational waste |
Assessment of current waste disposal practices, volumes, disposal, types of material |
$15,000.00 |
Install solar panels |
Increased use of renewable energy/return green energy to grid |
$90,000.00 |
Install solar/gas boosted hot water system |
Reduction in use of non-renewable energy |
$6000.00 |
Purchase of covers for public swimming pool |
Reduced water loss |
$60,000.00 |
Annual RID Squad contribution |
Reduction of illegally dumped waste |
$58,849.00 |
Review and update the ESD Criteria for Council Facilities and audit existing facilities for compliance |
Sets clear guidelines for future development |
$15,000.00 |
Purchase of specific recycling bins for sporting complexes |
Reduction in waste to landfill |
$10,000.00 |
Investigate the feasibility of a range of renewable energy generation technologies and their potential for application at Council facilities
|
Identify suitable renewable energy technologies for implementation across Council facilities
|
$20,000.00
|
Several of the abovementioned projects are stand alone and will not require ongoing or recurrent funding following implementation. The project to install solar panels (at the Penrith Senior Citizens Centre and the Rural Fire Service Zone Headquarters at Regentville) and installation of a solar/gas boosted hot water system at the Rural Fire Service Zone Headquarters should provide some long-term cost savings.
With respect to the project “Purchase of covers for public swimming pools”, these covers will be provided to pools at the Ripples Leisure Centre at St Marys and the Hydrotherapy Pool at St Marys.
Two projects are likely to result in the need for additional funding/expenditure – being the assessment of Council operational waste and the review and update of ESD criteria for Council’s facilities and auditing these facilities for compliance.
It is intended that on completion of the project relating to Council’s current waste disposal practices it will lead to initiatives that will result in a reduction of waste being sent to landfill and increased resource recovery. Implementation of these practices may be able to be funded from future WaSIPs.
With respect to the review of updating and auditing of ESD criteria for Council’s facilities, these may also be able to be funded through the WaSIP program, grant funding as it becomes available and Council’s Asset Management program.
Not all of the above projects are new or enhanced; e.g., the annual RID Squad contribution. However, it is proposed to request DECCW to permit funding of this contribution from WaSIPs on the basis that Council has recently signed a new three-year agreement to participate in the Western Sydney RID Squad and the funding was previously being sourced from the WSPIPs.
The purchase of compost to use on sporting fields is an integral part of Council’s organics collection and composting program. Whilst Council has used compost as a top dressing on parks in previous years with considerable success, this will be the first year of an expanded program. The majority of top dressing will be applied during spring (optimum time for applying top dressing) and therefore the compost for this year will not be obtained from Council’s organics collection and composting service, as it will in future years.
It is estimated that Council will receive $712,800 through the WaSIP program this year. The abovementioned projects identify expenditure of $434, 849, resulting in an unexpended amount of $277,951. It is proposed that the funding from the WaSIP program be transferred to a reserve to be used for the abovementioned projects and that the unexpended funding be used for future years projects, together with additional funding that will be received under this program.
Projects for future years (which are proposed to be funded through the WaSIP program) will be developed and presented to Council through the Delivery Program & Operational Plan process.
Acting Financial Services Manager’s Comments
The 2007-08 Management Plan was the first annual budget to include the use of $120,000 funding from the Waste Performance Incentive Payments (WSPIPs) for waste reduction and recycling projects. These payments were placed into the Waste Performance Incentive Reserve. Funding from the Reserve for these projects continued in 2008-09, and in 2009-10 the allocation from the Reserve grew to $218,849 with $178,849 of this amount replacing general revenue funding.
The Waste Performance Incentive Payments (WSPIPs) have now been replaced by the new Waste and Sustainability Improvements Payments (WaSIP) which has revised funding criteria. The report recommends transferring the three projects currently funded by WSPIP to now be funded through WaSIP. Should the Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water (DECCW) determine that these projects do not meet the WaSIP program guidelines, sufficient funding is available from the Waste Performance Incentive Reserve for 2009-10.
The remainder of the projects identified in this report that are to be funded by the new Waste and Sustainability Improvements Payments (WaSIP) are new projects and have no impact on general revenue in 2009-10.
Sustainability Coordinator’s Comments
The expansion of the funding criteria relating to the Waste and Sustainability Improvement Payments has presented Council with a significant opportunity to undertake a range of sustainability related projects that would not otherwise be able to be funded in the 2009-10 financial year, and provides the opportunity for additional projects in subsequent years.
The list of projects proposed to be funded for the current financial year will work towards improving the sustainability of the City in a number of areas, with the projects and activities consistent with the actions and priorities that are identified within our range of sustainability action plans.
The projects will also contribute to the development of a strategic and prioritised listing of future sustainability projects and activities for future resource allocation, particularly in the areas of facility upgrades and the installation of green technologies. It is anticipated that a number of these projects will be able to be funded through subsequent WaSIP funding in future years.
That: 1. The information contained in the report on Waste and Sustainability Improvement Payments be received. 2. The projects developed in this report be submitted to the Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water as identified projects that be funded from the Waste and Sustainability Improvement Payments. 3. Unexpended funding of $277,951 be transferred to a reserve for use in future years projects, together with additional Waste and Sustainability Improvement Payments received. |
There are no attachments for this report.
9 November 2009 |
|
A Green City |
|
11 |
Development Application DA09/0747 for Upgrade Works to Penrith Stadium in Penrith Park at Lot 2 DP 773983 (No. 143) Station Street, Penrith Applicant: Penrith District Rugby League Football Club Ltd; Owner: Department of Land and Water Conservation |
DA09/0747 |
Compiled by: Robert Craig, Senior Environmental Planner
Authorised by: Paul Lemm, Development Services Manager
Strategic Objective: We use our resources wisely, and take responsibility for our levels of consumption
Strategic Direction: We respond to the impacts of climate change, and support the principles of sustainability
Procedural note: Section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993 requires that a division be called in relation to this matter.
Executive Summary
Council is in receipt of a Development Application from Penrith District Rugby League Football Club Ltd for upgrade works to Penrith Stadium in Penrith Park at Lot 2 DP 773983, (No. 143) Station Street, Penrith. The proposed works include upgrades to the spectator amenities for the southern hill and western grandstand within Penrith Stadium. In recognition of Council’s participation in the delivery of the various stages of the Penrith Stadium redevelopment works, the Development Application is reported to Council for determination to ensure a transparent assessment and decision‑making process.
The site is zoned 6(d) Regional Open Space under Penrith Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Urban Land). The proposed development is defined as a “recreation area” and “recreational facility”, which are both permissible forms of development with the consent of Council. The proposed development has been notified to the owners and occupiers of adjoining and nearby properties. Council notified 212 property owners and occupiers in the area and received one submission in response to the proposal.
An assessment of the proposal, including the submission received by Council, under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 has been undertaken. The following key issues have emerged as a result of this assessment process:
· Accessibility.
· Flora and fauna.
· Parking and traffic impacts.
These matters are discussed in detail in the report.
Having regard for all of the relevant matters, it is considered that the proposed development is unlikely to have a negative impact on the surrounding environment. The concerns raised by the submitter are acknowledged, however, on balance, the proposed development is considered to be satisfactory and the grounds of objection are not considered sufficient to justify refusal of the Development Application.
The site is suitable for the proposal and the proposal is not considered to be contrary to the public interest. The proposal is therefore considered to be worthy of Council’s support.
This report therefore recommends that the application be approved subject to recommended conditions of consent.
Background
At its Ordinary Meeting held on 1 August 2005, Council adopted the Penrith Stadium Redevelopment Masterplan. As the total funding required for the master plan was not available for the redevelopment of Penrith Stadium at this time, it was decided that the master plan would be implemented in stages. Stages 1 and 2 of the master plan works were approved by Council via Development Application DA05/1384 at Council’s Ordinary Meeting held on 10 October 2005. Two subsequent Section 96 modifications to these works were approved by Council under Delegated Authority in Mach 2007 and March 2008. The Stage 1 and 2 works included major improvements to the eastern and western grandstands and the north-eastern and north-western forecourts, laying of a new playing surface and ground lighting maintenance works. These works have now been substantially completed.
The subject Development Application seeks approval for a third stage of master plan works. However it should be noted that although federal funding was specifically allocated toward the commencement of a double-sided southern grandstand for cricket use (Howell Oval) and football use (Penrith Stadium), the location of two rising sewer mains in this location means it would be cost prohibitive within the allocated budget. Hence alternative designs have been prepared for separate football facilities (which form the basis of the subject Development Application) and separate cricket facilities (which are subject to a separate Development Application to be reported to Council seperately).
Site and Surrounds
The subject site is known as Penrith Park and is bounded by Ransley Street to the north, Station Street to the east, Jamison Road to the south and Mulgoa Road to the west. Penrith Stadium (known as CUA Stadium) is located at the north-eastern corner of the site while Howell Oval occupies the southern portion of the site. A football training field is located to the west of the football stadium. Refer to the Locality Plan at Appendix No. 1 for further details.
Penrith Stadium is used as a venue for rugby league, rugby union and soccer games and is the home ground of the Penrith Panthers rugby league team. Howell Oval is used as a venue for cricket matches.
Surrounding land uses include the Penrith Showground to the north, the former Panasonic site to the east (now known as the Parkveiw site), residential land uses to the south and the Penrith Panthers Leagues Club to the west.
The Proposed Development
The proposed development includes the following aspects:
Southern Hill
· Demolition of the existing outbuildings, toilets and bar.
· Removal of the prefabricated temporary buildings.
· Retention of the existing scoreboard structure.
· Construction of a new football pavilion comprising a new entry gate and turnstiles, spectator food and beverage outlets and spectator toilets, including parent and accessible facilities.
· Re-alignment of the existing perimeter fence.
Western Grandstand
· Fit-out of spectator food and beverage outlets.
· Fit-out of additional spectator toilets.
Refer to Appendix No. 2 for copies of the site plan, floor plans and elevations submitted with the application. A3 copies of the plans are provided under separate cover to Councillors.
It should be noted that the application previously included proposed upgrade works to the adjoining Howell Oval site, including construction of a new cricket pavilion. However the applicant modified the subject application to exclude the proposed works relating to Howell Oval to facilitate separate construction contracts for the Penrith Stadium upgrade works (to be undertaken by Penrith District Rugby League Football Club) and the Howell Oval upgrade works (to be undertaken by Penrith City Council). The Howell Oval works are subject to a separate Development Application which will be reported to Council shortly.
Planning Assessment
The proposed development has been assessed against the relevant heads of consideration contained in Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, and having regard to those matters, the following issues have been identified for further consideration.
1. Section 79C(1)(a)(i) – The Provisions of any Environmental Planning Instrument
Penrith Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Urban Land)
The subject site is zoned 6(d) Regional Open Space under Penrith Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 1998 (Urban Land). The proposed development is defined as a “recreation area” and a “recreational facility”, which are both permissible forms of development with the consent of Council. These land uses are defined in the LEP as follows:
“recreation area” means an outdoor area which provides for social, recreational and leisure activities, and includes associated structures (playground equipment, boardwalks, cycleways and the like), but (in the development control table) does not include a building or place or land use specifically defined elsewhere in this Schedule.
“recreational facility” means a building or place used for indoor recreation (such as a table tennis centre, squash court, swimming pool, gymnasium, health studio or bowling alley), whether or not used for the purpose of gain, but (in the development control table) does not include a building or place specifically defined elsewhere in this Schedule.
The proposed development is consistent with the aims and objectives of the LEP. The particular objectives of the 6(d) Regional Open Space zone are as follows:
(i) to reserve land for regional open space; and
(ii) to ensure that development:
(a) is for a purpose that promotes or is related to the use and enjoyment of open space; and
(b) does not substantially diminish public use of or access to open space; and
(c) does not adversely affect the natural environment, any items or areas of heritage significance or the existing amenity of the area.
The proposed development satisfies each of the relevant objectives of the 6(d) Regional Open Space zone.
Under the provisions of the LEP there are no specific design criteria or numerical development controls for the site.
Clause 26 lists additional matters for consideration for development in the 6(d) Regional Open Space zone, including:
(a) The need for the proposed development on the land.
The applicant has identified the need to undertake the upgrade works to ensure Penrith Stadium will be a first-class sporting facility.
(b) The impact of the proposed development on the existing or likely future use and character of the land.
The impact of the proposed development will be positive for not only the subject sporting facility but also for the surrounding sporting precinct with an aesthetically pleasing design and improved facilities to result in a prominent sporting complex. The proposed development will be complementary to the existing Penrith Stadium, Howell Oval and surrounding open space.
(c) Whether any proposed building will be secondary and complementary to the existing or proposed use of the land as public open space.
The proposed upgrade works have been specifically designed to utilise as much of the existing facilities as possible, while providing an overall improvement. These improvements will result in a development that will remain complementary to current and future uses of the land as open space.
(d) Whether the proposal will substantially diminish public use of, and access to, open space.
The proposed upgrade works will not substantially diminish the public use of, or access to, open space.
(e) Whether the proposal is compatible with adjacent uses in relation to its height, bulk and noise generation and any other aspects that might conflict with surrounding land uses.
The design of the proposed development is consistent with existing development on the site and it will not result in a significant increase in noise generation.
(f) Whether the proposal is consistent with a plan of management applying to the land under Division 2 of Part 2 of Chapter 6 of the Local Government Act 1993.
Not applicable.
The proposed development will not create any adverse impacts on nearby or adjoining land uses as a result of the proposed building height, bulk and scale. The finished facility will continue to encourage, promote and facilitate recreational pursuits in the community involving organised and informal sporting activities and games. The upgrade works represent a positive design response and will result in a significantly improved sporting facility.
Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 20 – Hawkesbury-Nepean River (No. 2 – 1997)
Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 20 – Hawkesbury-Nepean River (No. 2 – 1997) (REP 20) integrates planning with catchment management to protect the Hawkesbury-Nepean river system, requiring the impact of future land use to be considered in a regional context. The plan covers water quality and quantity, environmentally sensitive areas, riverine scenic quality, agriculture and urban and rural-residential development. It controls development that has the potential to impact on the river environment. The plan applies to all parts of the catchment in the Sydney region (15 local government areas, including Penrith), except for land covered by Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 11 – Penrith Lakes Scheme. The REP is supported by an Action Plan, which includes actions necessary to improve existing conditions.
The proposed development is in accordance with the general planning considerations set out in Clause 5 of the REP and the relevant specific planning policies and related recommended strategies set out in Clause 6.
State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 – Remediation of Land
State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 – Remediation of Land (SEPP 55) aims to provide a framework for the assessment, management and remediation of contaminated land throughout the state. Clause 7(1) of SEPP 55 prevents Council from consenting to a development unless it has considered whether the land is contaminated, and is satisfied that the land is suitable in its contaminated state (or will be suitable, after remediation) for the purpose for which the development is proposed to be carried out.
It is understood that the subject land has not previously supported any activities which may have resulted in land contamination. This information is sufficient to conclude that a Stage 1 Preliminary Site Investigation is not warranted. Accordingly the provisions of SEPP 55 have been satisfied.
2. Section 79C(1)(a)(iii) – The Provisions of any Development Control Plan
Penrith Development Control Plan 2006
Section 2.1 Contaminated Land
This matter has been discussed earlier in this report.
Section 2.2 Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design
Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) aims to ensure development is appropriately designed to reduce the likelihood of crimes being committed. By introducing measures to achieve appropriate natural surveillance, access control, territorial reinforcement and space management, it is anticipated that this will assist in minimising the incidence of crime and contribute to perceptions of increased public safety.
Council’s Community Safety Coordinator has reviewed the proposed development with regard to community safety and CPTED principles and has provided the following comments in this regard:
The abovementioned application has been assessed with regard to Community Safety and Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles.
As highlighted by the applicant, by supporting higher patronage to the complex, the proposed development may increase levels of passive surveillance to the area during peak usage times.
It should however be noted that in times of low usage, the complex may be vulnerable to property crime such as malicious damage and break and enter offences, and it is therefore essential that appropriate safety and security measures are implemented (e.g. use of CCTV systems, back-to-base alarm system and the use of security personnel to minimise the risk of crime and enhance the safety of patrons and staff).
Council’s Community Safety Coordinator has provided conditions of consent that should be applied to the proposed development to promote safety for patrons and staff and to minimise the crime risk associated with the development. These conditions relate to matters such as site, building and landscape design, lighting, use of CCTV cameras, access control, graffiti and vandalism. Each of these matters are recommended to be suitably conditioned (see special Condition 2.2).
Section 2.7 Notification and Advertising
The proposed development was notified to the owners and occupiers of adjoining and nearby properties. The application was exhibited between 11 August and 25 August 2009. Council notified 212 property owners and occupiers in the surrounding area and received one submission in response to the proposal. The issues raised in the submission are summarised and considered later in this report.
Section 2.9 Waste Planning
A waste management plan has been provided with the application and it suitably describes the likely waste generation of the proposal and identifies appropriate actions to mange the generation, storage and disposal of wastes.
3. Section 79C(1)(a)(iv) – The Provisions of the Regulations
Council’s Building Surveyor has raised no objection to the proposed development regarding fire safety considerations as prescribed under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.
4. Section 79C(1)(b) – The Likely Impacts of the Development
(i) Context and Setting
The proposal is consistent with the existing character of other development in the precinct.
The proposal is compatible with the surrounding and adjacent land uses and will have no major impact on the amenity of the area. The proposal will have no adverse impacts on the natural environment.
(ii) Access, Parking and Traffic
The proposed development will not increase the existing spectator capacity of Penrith Stadium and therefore will have no impacts with regard access, parking and traffic considerations. Council’s Traffic Engineer has reviewed the proposed development with regard to access, parking and traffic considerations and is satisfied with these aspects of the proposal.
(iii) Stormwater Drainage
Stormwater run-off from the proposed development will be directed to Council’s existing stormwater drainage system. Council’s Development Engineer has reviewed the proposed development with regard to stormwater drainage and is satisfied with this aspect of the proposal.
(iv) Waste Management
This matter has been discussed earlier in this report.
(v) Safety, Security and Crime Prevention
This matter has been discussed earlier in this report.
(vi) Social and Economic Impacts
The proposed development represents significant improvements to Penrith Stadium which is one of the City’s major sporting venues. It is considered that the proposed development will not only provide a major benefit to the wider community but also to the various users of this sporting facility.
(vii) Site Design
Southern Hill Football Pavilion
The proposed southern hill football pavilion has been designed to complement the existing Penrith Stadium grandstands. It has also been designed to enable the possible future expansion at the southern end of the football stadium for a double-sided grandstand. The rear of the pavilion (southern elevation) is proposed to be clad with a “green screen” which will act as the secure fence line to the southern end of the football stadium. The green screen will comprise of a climber vine to reduce the visual impact of the proposed structure and to aid as a barrier to graffiti and vandalism. In order to ensure the green facade achieves the necessary growth and vigour to achieve the desired outcome, details of the proposed climber species and a maintenance plan will be required prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate. This matter is recommended to be conditioned accordingly (see special Condition 2.3).
Accessibility
The application has been accompanied by an Access Review prepared by Morris‑Goding Accessibility Consulting. This report provides advice and strategies to maximise reasonable provisions of access to the proposed development for people with disabilities in response to the accessibility requirements of the Building Code of Australia and the Commonwealth Disability Discrimination Act 1992. These requirements relate to matters such as ingress and egress, paths of travel and accessible amenities.
The Access Review recommends a series of measures to be incorporated into the detailed construction design plans for the proposal to ensure an appropriate degree of accessibility for the development. Each of the recommendations in the Access Review is capable of being incorporated into the detailed construction design plans for the proposal. This matter is recommended to be conditioned accordingly (see special Condition 2.4).
In addition, it should be noted that the application was referred to Council’s Access Committee for comment. The Access Committee considered the matter at its meeting held on 5 August 2009 and raised the following issues:
· Accessible parking.
· Accessible seating, including undercover seating areas for people in wheelchairs.
· Penrith Stadium drop-off points for people with disabilities.
· Continuous path of accessible travel between grandstands.
· Path of travel from the Leagues Club.
· Signage for the southern hill access point to Penrith Stadium (“accessible seating not available from this entrance”).
· Inequity with undercover disabled seating being only available in the grandstand which is an additional cost.
· Difficulty of multiple people sitting together with a person or a number of people in wheelchairs.
In response to these matters, several of which fall outside the scope of the subject application, the applicant submitted a supplementary statement addressing the matters raised. A summary of the applicant’s responses to the matters relevant to the subject application is detailed below.
Issues Raised |
Applicant’s Response |
Accessible Parking |
The parking area adjacent to the southern entry is not to be used for vehicular parking during a full house football event. This pavement area forms the southern entry pedestrian forecourt. Casual parking is available for a football event under a management arrangement, on the lawn areas to the south and west of Howell Oval. This parking on grass would not suit accessible patrons. It is therefore proposed, funding permitting, that future parking be established off the current driveway to the cricket pavilion for an additional 16 cars. These spaces can be designed and designated for accessible patrons. The scope of works for Stage 3 does not include these spaces. |
Accessible Seating |
The southern grandstand scope of works is limited to the replacement of the spectator toilets, food services, ticketing and security services. No additional seating is proposed within this stage. The area remains a lawn berm for viewing the game. |
Drop-Off Points |
Suitable kerbside space has previously been proposed and can be made available in both Ransley Street and Station Street adjacent the respective western and eastern entry points, under the guidance of day staff in event management operations. |
Signage |
Signage visible to patrons arriving at the southern entry can be installed informing that “accessible seating is not available from this entrance”. |
The supplementary statement was subsequently considered by the Access Committee at its meeting held on 7 October 2009. The Access Committee was satisfied with the responses provided to the matters previously raised. The signage is recommended to be conditioned accordingly (see Special Condition 2.5).
(viii) Flora and Fauna
There are two distinct groups of existing trees located in the vicinity of the proposed works. The first group of existing trees is located on the southern side of the existing scoreboard for Penrith Stadium and comprises three mature trees as detailed below:
· Tree 1 – Dropping Red Gum (Eucalyptus parramattensis).
· Tree 2 – Silky Oak (Grevillea robusta).
· Tree 3 – Dropping Red Gum (Eucalyptus parramattensis).
The second group of existing trees is located on the northern side of Howell Oval and comprises three mature trees as detailed below:
· Tree 4 – Spotted Gum (Eucalyptus maculata).
· Tree 5 – Spotted Gum (Eucalyptus maculata).
· Tree 6 – Spotted Gum (Eucalyptus maculata).
The application has been accompanied by an Arboricultural Assessment Report prepared by Lang Tree Management. The report concludes that consideration should be given to the removal of Trees 1, 2 and 3 due to the high level of risk posed by significant defects identified in Tree 1 (significant cambial loss and borer infestation) and Tree 3 (basal decay). Trees 4, 5 and 6 are reported as being retainable subject to the establishment of appropriate tree protection zones prior to the commencement of works.
Council’s Tree Maintenance Officer has reviewed the proposed development and submitted Arboricultural Assessment Report and has provided the following comments in this regard:
The 3 trees behind the scoreboard should be removed. The 3 trees near Howell Oval must be retained and protected. The recommendations in the arborist report (John Lang, Consulting Arborist - 31 July 2009) must be implemented. No construction activities including the storage of materials or parking of vehicles, are to be done under the canopy of any tree in the area.
The arborist report recommends the removal of the 3 trees behind the existing stadium scoreboard. The two Eucalyptus parramattensis are in poor condition. Tree 3 (western most tree) has fungal decay at the base. An investigation using an internal decay detection device (e.g. Resistograph) would be useful however the presence of this decay and proposed changes would make the retention of this tree highly questionable.
Tree 1 (the eastern most tree) has some significant damage to the cambium layer (growing part of the tree). There is damage in at least 3 areas on the main stem. This makes the tree weak and could result in large parts of the tree failing in strong winds. The tree would be compromised by the proposed construction and the increased pedestrian traffic under these trees would increase the risk. The middle tree (Silky oak) would be compromised by the removal of trees 1 and 3 and should be removed.
The 3 spotted gums near Howell Oval are in fair to good health and condition however the proposed construction of buildings and associated landscaping will have some detrimental effect to the trees. The 2 trees closest to the oval have suffered some bird damage to branch forks near the stem. The arborist has recommended further investigation which I believe would be prudent. The root system of these trees has been damaged (scalped by mowers and compacted). The trees may have had a girdled (pot bound) root system when planted.
The tree protection measures (chain wire tree protection fencing for the trees adjacent to Howell Oval) recommended in the arborist report must be implemented prior to construction commencing. Leaf mulch must be applied at 75mm thickness in tree protection areas.
I recommend the removal of the trees behind the CUA Stadium scoreboard and super advanced mature replacement trees be planted in the location.
The above recommendations of Council’s Tree Maintenance Officer are recommended to be conditioned accordingly (see special Conditions 2.6-2.8).
5. Section 79C(1)(c) – The Suitability of the Site for the Development
The site attributes are considered conducive to the development proposal. It is also considered that the proposal has been designed in a manner consistent with the character of the locality.
6. Section 79C(1)(d) – Any Submissions made in relation to the Development
Community Consultation
In accordance with Section 2.7 Notification and Advertising of Penrith Development Control Plan 2006, the proposed development was notified to the owners and occupiers of adjoining and nearby properties. The application was exhibited between 11 August and 25 August 2009.
Council notified 212 property owners and occupiers in the area and received one submission in response to the proposal. The issues raised in the submission are summarised and considered below.
Parking and Traffic Impacts
The proposed development will not increase the existing spectator capacity of Penrith Stadium and therefore will have no impacts with regard access, parking and traffic considerations. Council’s Traffic Engineer has reviewed the proposed development with regard to access, parking and traffic considerations and is satisfied with these aspects of the proposal.
As noted earlier, the applicant modified the proposed development to exclude the proposed upgrade works relating to Howell Oval. Consideration was therefore given to whether the modification to the application warranted re‑notification of the proposal. In relation to Council’s policy regarding the re-notification of amended development proposals, Clause B12 in Section 2.7 Notification and Advertising of Penrith Development Control Plan 2006 reads as follows:
…the amended development application will not be re-notified or re-advertised if, in the opinion of the responsible Council officer, the proposed amendment(s) to the development application is unlikely to prejudice:
(a) Any person(s) who were previously notified of the development application;
(b) Any person(s) who previously made a submission in respect of a development application; and
(c) Any matter(s) raised in the previous submission(s) in respect of the development application.
In view of the downscaling of the proposed works, it was considered that the modification to the application did not warrant re-notification of the proposal in accordance with Clause B12 in Section 2.7 Notification and Advertising of Penrith Development Control Plan 2006. In this regard, each of the relevant criteria outlined above have been satisfied.
Referrals
The table below summarises the results of internal referrals in relation to the proposal:
Referrals |
Comments |
Building Surveyor |
No objection, subject to conditions. |
Community Safety Coordinator |
No objection, subject to conditions. |
Development Engineer |
No objection, subject to conditions. |
Public Health |
No objection, subject to conditions. |
Traffic Engineer |
No objection, subject to conditions. |
Tree Maintenance Officer |
No objection, subject to conditions. |
7. Section 79C(1)(e) – The Public Interest
The site is considered suitable for the proposed development. Recreation areas and recreational facilities are permissible in the 6(d) Regional Open Space zone and the proposal meets the aims and objectives of the relevant environmental planning instruments. The proposed development is likely to improve the overall appearance of the site.
The properties in the immediate vicinity of the site were notified of the development proposal. In considering the issues raised in the submission received by Council, it is unlikely that the proposed development will adversely impact on adjoining properties, subject to recommended conditions of consent.
Section 94 Contributions
There are no Section 94 contributions applicable to the proposed development.
Conclusion
Having regard for all of the relevant matters, it is considered that the proposed development is unlikely to have a negative impact on the surrounding environment. The concerns raised by the submitter are acknowledged, however, on balance, the proposed development is considered to be satisfactory and the grounds of objection are not considered sufficient to justify refusal of the Development Application.
The proposed development has been assessed against the relevant heads of consideration contained in Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and has been found to be satisfactory. The site is suitable for the proposal and the proposal is not considered to be contrary to the public interest. The proposal is therefore considered to be worthy of Council’s support.
That: 1. The information contained in the report on Development Application DA09/0747 for Upgrade Works to Penrith Stadium in Penrith Park at Lot 2 DP 773983 (No. 143) Station Street, Penrith be received. 2. Development Application DA09/0747 for Upgrade Works to Penrith Stadium in Penrith Park at Lot 2 DP 773983 (No. 143) Station Street, Penrith be received be approved subject to the following conditions: Standard Conditions 2.1 A001 Approved plans A008 Works to BCA requirements A012 Food shop A019 Occupation Certificate A026 Advertising signs A039 Graffiti A046 Obtain Construction Certificate before commencement of works B001 Demolition of existing structures B002 Australian Standard for demolition and disposal to approved landfill site B003 Asbestos B004 Dust B005 Mud/soil B006 Hours of demolition work D001 Implement approved sediment and erosion control measures D005 No filling without prior approval D006 Validation of fill material D007 Filling of land D009 Covering of waste storage area D010 Appropriate disposal of excavated or other waste D014 Plant and equipment noise E01A BCA compliance (Class 2-9) E002 BCA issues to be addressed E006 Disabled access and facilities E009 Annual fire safety F001 Food shop construction and plans G002 Section 73 G004 Integral Energy H001 Stamped plans and erection of site notice (Class 2-9) H002 Provision of site facilities prior to commencement of construction works H006 Implement waste management plan H041 Hours of construction work L001 Approved landscaping plans L002 Landscaping construction L003 Landscaping report requirements L005 Planting of plant material L006 Australian Standard landscaping requirements L008 Tree preservation order L010 Tree protection measures L012 Retain and maintain existing landscaping P001 Costs P002 Fees associated with Council land Q001 Notice of commencement and appointment of PCA Q006 Occupation Certificate Special Conditions 2.2 The development shall comply with the following community safety and CPTED (Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design) matters: (a) All buildings within the complex should be fitted with a back‑to‑base alarm monitoring system. (b) A closed-circuit television (CCTV) system should be installed with coverage provided to key areas within the complex, including entry/exit points and ticket booths. (c) All doors and windows within the complex should be fitted with appropriate security locks and fittings to restrict access to unauthorised persons. (d) Toilet facilities should be securely locked when not in use. (e) Entrances to toilet blocks should be highly visible with minimal screening to avoid potential entrapment and/or concealment opportunities. (f) Toilet cubicle doors should open outward to allow access in an emergency. Doors should also have spring-opening hinges to allow doors to remain open when not in use. (g) The rear of toilet doors should have hooks located half-way down the door to ensure that handbags cannot be accessed over the top of the door. (h) There should be a gap between toilet doors and the floor and between toilet doors and the ceiling. (i) The creation of areas where items such as drug paraphernalia can be hidden should be avoided (e.g. suspended ceilings). (j) Toilet fittings should be flush with walls to avoid tampering or stashing of items. (k) All areas within the complex should be well lit in accordance with relevant Australian Standards. (l) All lighting should be vandal resistant where practical. (m) Lighting should be consistent to reduce contrast between shadows and illuminated areas. (n) Lighting should be contained within the property boundary and no light should be projected upwards. (o) In order to improve surveillance, provide clear lines of sight and avoid concealment areas in public areas, dense vegetation and shrubs with top to bottom foliage should be avoided. (p) Graffiti resistant paints/surfaces should be used on the external surfaces of the development to minimise opportunities for graffiti and vandalism. (q) Sturdy, vandal resistant materials should be used for fixtures such as lighting, seating and bins to reduce the risk for graffiti. (r) Any graffiti or malicious damage to the building should be reported to the Police and removed rapidly to discourage repeat incidents. 2.3 In order to ensure that the “green facade” to the southern elevation of the southern football pavilion achieves the necessary growth and vigour to reduce the visual impact of the building and to aid as a barrier to graffiti and vandalism, details of the proposed climber vine species and a maintenance plan shall be submitted and approved prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate. 2.4 Each of the recommendations relating to the development contained in the Access Review dated 30 July 2009 prepared by Morris-Goding Accessibility Consulting shall be incorporated into the Construction Certificate plans for the development. Certification from a suitably qualified accessibility consultant stipulating that the recommendations have been satisfied shall be submitted prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate. 2.5 Signage visible to patrons arriving at the southern entry to Penrith Stadium shall be erected advising that “accessible seating is not available from this entrance”. 2.6 Each of the recommendations contained in the Arboricultural Assessment Report dated 31 July 2009 prepared by Lang Tree Management shall be implemented at the relevant stages of the development works. Leaf mulch shall be applied at 75mm thickness in tree protection areas. 2.7 Approval is granted for the removal of Trees 1, 2 and 3 as identified in the Arboricultural Assessment Report dated 31 July 2009 prepared by Lang Tree Management. Super advanced mature replacement trees shall be planted in this location prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate. Trees 4, 5 and 6 shall be retained and protected. 2.8 No construction activities, including the storage of materials or parking of vehicles, are to be carried out under the canopy of any existing trees to be retained on the site. 2.9 All civil works shall be designed and constructed in accordance with Penrith City Council’s Design and Construction Guidelines and Construction Specification for Civil Works and applicable Australian Standards. 2.10 Any Construction Certificate issued by the Principal Certifying Authority or Certifying Authority shall incorporate plans and details for erosion and sediment control in accordance with the Department of Housing’s “Managing Urban Stormwater: Soils and Construction” 2004. 2.11 A Construction Certificate shall be issued by a Certifying Authority to include the following civil works: (a) Stormwater drainage. Civil drawings shall be prepared strictly in accordance with Penrith City Council’s Design and Construction Guidelines and Construction Specification for Civil Works and applicable Australian Standards. 2.12 Stormwater drainage shall be discharged to: (a) The existing site drainage system. The proposed stormwater drainage system shall be designed to ensure no adverse impact on adjoining properties by the diversion or concentration of stormwater flows. The proposed method of stormwater discharge shall be detailed in the Construction Certificate issued by the Certifying Authority. 2.13 Prior to the commencement of works on site, including approved clearing of site vegetation, erosion and sediment control measures shall be installed. The erosion and sediment control measures are to be installed in accordance with the approved erosion and sediment control plan(s) for the development and the Department of Housing’s “Managing Urban Stormwater: Soils and Construction” 2004. 2.14 Erosion and sediment control measures shall remain in place and be maintained until all disturbed areas have been rehabilitated and stabilised. 2.15 Prior to the connection of private drainage to Council’s drainage system, an inspection is to be carried out by Penrith City Council’s Development Engineering Unit. A fee will be charged in accordance with Council’s adopted fees and charges, and is to be paid prior to the inspection. 2.16 All filling shall be undertaken in accordance with Penrith City Council’s Design and Construction Guidelines and Construction Specification for Civil Works and Australian Standard 3798. 2.17 Prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority shall ensure that all civil works have been satisfactorily completed in accordance with the Construction Certificate, Penrith City Council’s Design and Construction Guidelines and Construction Specification for Civil Works and relevant conditions of the development consent. 2.18 Prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate, a checklist and supporting documentation shall be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority demonstrating that each condition of the development consent has been satisfactorily addressed. 2.19 The Occupation Certificate shall not be issued until all conditions of consent, except those relating to ongoing operational matters, have been completed. 2.20 The Food Handling Guidelines for Temporary Events must be complied with for all temporary food stalls. 2.21 An inspection from Council’s Environmental Health Department will be required prior to the operation of the development. The proprietor shall contact the Environmental Health Department at the appropriate time to organise an appointment for the inspection. 2.22 Details of the proposed perimeter fence re-alignment shall be submitted and approved prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate. 3. The individual who made a submission be advised of Council’s decision and of the consideration given to their concerns. |
1. View |
Locality Map |
1 Page |
Appendix |
2. View |
Location Plan, Site Plan, Floor Plans and Elevations |
6 Pages |
Appendix |
9 November 2009 |
|
A Green City |
|
12 |
Development Application No. 08/0958 - Section 96 Modification - Alteration to Finished Landform - Lot 1 DP 542395, Lot 740 DP 810111 (No. 1725) Elizabeth Drive, Badgerys Creek Applicant: SITA Australia Pty Ltd; Owner: SITA Australia Pty Ltd |
DA08/0958 |
Compiled by: Steven Chong, Senior Environmental Planner
Authorised by: Paul Lemm, Development Services Manager
Strategic Objective: We use our resources wisely, and take responsibility for our levels of consumption
Strategic Direction: We respond to the impacts of climate change, and support the principles of sustainability
Procedural note: Section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993 requires that a division be called in relation to this matter.
Executive Summary
Karl Berzins, of Berzins Environmental Planning Pty Ltd was engaged to undertake a review of the assessment process. It was considered appropriate that the application be independently assessed as Council currently utilises the land fill site for the disposal of waste.
Council is in receipt of a request from SITA Australia to modify development consent 451/89, enabling alterations to the finished landform of a waste facility at Lot 1 DP 542395 and Part Lot 74 DP 752022, (No. 1725) Elizabeth Drive, Badgerys Creek (see Locality Plan in Appendix No. 1). The proposed development seeks to rectify a discrepancy relating to the approved plans and condition 52 of the development consent which requires a slope of 5% for the finished landform of the land fill. The approved plan did not enable the 5% slope to be established. The amended plans now show a gradient of 5% over the entire site and thus accord with the requirements of condition 52. To achieve this 5% gradient, the finished height has increased from 65 metres AHD to 73 metres AHD.
The original proposal was determined at the Ordinary Council meeting of the 18th of September 1990. Subsequent amendment to the proposal was determined at the Ordinary Council meeting of the 5th of November 2001. In accordance with the provisions of the legislation the request to modify the development consent is reported to Council for determination.
The site is zoned 1(a) (Rural “A” Zone-General) under Penrith Local Environmental Plan No.201 (Rural Lands). The proposed development is defined as an “extractive industry”. The site is regulated by Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No.9- Extractive Industries (No 2) and the use is permissible under that instrument with the consent of Council. The proposed development has been notified to nearby and adjoining residents, with three (3) submissions received in response to the proposal.
An assessment of the proposal, including the submissions received by Council, under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 has been undertaken. The following key issues have emerged as a result of this assessment process:
· Noise impacts
· Visual impacts
· Water pollution
· Traffic impacts
These matters are discussed in detail in the report.
Having regard for all of the relevant matters, it is considered that the proposed development is capable of operating in such a manner as to present only minimal adverse impacts on the local community. The proposed development has been assessed against the relevant heads of consideration contained in Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and has been found to be satisfactory.
This report therefore recommends that the application be approved and that Condition 6 be amended to reflect the correct plan depicting final landform associated with the waste facility.
Background
Approval for landfill on the site was granted at Council’s Ordinary Meeting on 18 September 1990. The approved development involved extraction of materials for the brick and tile manufacturing industry and rehabilitation of the resultant void with non-putrescible waste.
The applicant estimated that a void space of approximately 13 million cubic metres would be available for waste disposal. The rehabilitation program proposed a stable, self-draining final landform reaching a height of RL 56m AHD, having average side slopes of 1%.
In 1993, the company submitted an application to Council to permit the disposal of putrescible waste on the site. A new rehabilitation plan prepared for the site foreshadowed utilisation of extracted resource as cover material for the operations and for the capping/vegetation layers.
The company proposed an increase in the waste disposal capacity of the development in excess of 17 million cubic metres and proposed a final landform height of RL 115m AHD. The proposed final level was some 56 metres above the highest existing point on the site and 6 metres above the highest landform (Mt Vernon) within a substantial radius. This application was refused by Council.
A subsequent appeal to the Land and Environment Court, in 1994, was dismissed on the basis that the Court considered amongst other things that, given the capacity of the site and the extent to which the surface would be, almost totally, taken up by the landfill itself, it would be inappropriate to approve the development in regard to adjoining land uses and potential land uses. Since the appeal the site has operated, in accordance with it’s consent, as an extractive industry and non-putrescible waste landfill.
In 2001, a Section 96 modification to Development Consent No. 451/89 was submitted to increase the side slopes of the finished landform to a grade of 5% with the result that the finished height of the landform increased from 56 m AHD to 65 m AHD. The rationale for the increase in side slope was to comply with industry best practice and the Environment Protection Agency’s (EPA) environmental guidelines for Assessment, Classification and Management of Non-Liquid Wastes.
At its Ordinary Meeting of 5 November 2001, Council resolved to approve the abovementioned modification subject to a number of conditions. One of the conditions (Condition 52) read as follows:
The finished landform shall have a minimum slope of 5% in accordance with the provisions of the Landfill Environmental Management Plan dated 1 January 1998 defined in EPA Licence No. 004585 dated 11 October 2000 as approved by Council the modification of this consent.
On 16 February 2007, an “enabling clause” to the current planning instrument was approved and gazetted to permit an “advanced waste treatment facility” to be a permissible land use on the subject land. SITA Environmental Solutions, the current operators of the site, subsequently obtained a Part 3A approval (issued by the Minister for Planning on 15 April, 2008) for the construction and operation of a facility to process 120,000 tonnes per annum (tpa) of waste and 14,400 tpa of biosolids.
Ordinary Meeting 12 October 2009
Council considered this application at the Ordinary Meeting of the 12 October 2009 and resolved
“That this item be deferred for consideration at Council’s Ordinary Meeting of 9 November 2009 to allow matters raised by the affected neighbours to be considered and for mediation to occur between parties”
In response to the resolution Council officers arranged a mediation meeting between Mr Sims and his planning consultant, representatives from SITA Australia and their planning consultant and Council. The meeting was held on Mr Sims property and the issues raised by Mr Sims in respect to visual impact, rubbish being blown on his property and odour was discussed.
During the meeting agreements were reached in respect to the above matters and SITA has confirmed in writing the agreements through their planning consultant.
The agreed outcomes to the matters are as follows:
· Visual Impact
“SITA undertakes to construct a timber fence on top of the existing earth bund wall, as indicated on the attached plan. The height of the fence will be either 1.8m or 2.0m following discussions between Mr Sims and SITA. SITA will undertake additional planting on the southern side of the bund wall, using similar species to those planted on the northern side of the bund wall”
The location of the fence has been agreed by Mr Sims and a suitable additional condition has been included in the recommendations.
· Windblown rubbish
“SITA will remove any windblown litter from the southern side of the bund wall as discussed on site”
SITA made a commitment to remove the litter from this area and also requested that if Mr Sims has a problem with litter from their operation he contacts the representatives from SITA and they will rectify the matter.
The existing Development Consent currently contains an existing condition that deals with the management of windblown rubbish which require regular littler patrols to be undertaken.
· Odour
“Mr Sims will notify SITA as to date and time of significance odour occurrences so that SITA can evaluate whether those odours are coming from the site”
Any odour that is occurring in the area could be from other sources and not the landfill site. SITA indicated that the material used in the landfill does not have the potential to cause odour and the landfill is covered every night. It was agreed that Mr Sims would note the time and date and contact a representative from SITA who if possible would meet Mr Sims on site so they can observe the odour and locate it’s potential source.
At the meeting SITA representatives advised that the landfill operation closest to Mr Sims boundary will be completed in about 6-12 months depending on the availability of suitable waste stream, with capping then to take place.
The existing Development Consent currently contains an existing condition that deals with offensive odours generated by the proposed development.
SITA has indicated that they will commence the undertakings as soon as possible.
Site and Surrounds
The subject site has a combined area of approximately 86 ha most of which is being used for extractive industry or landfill purposes. The office and maintenance buildings are located in the south-eastern corner of the site. The extreme western part of the land that adjoins Badgerys Creek has been retained as a natural buffer. There are numerous dams and watercourses located on the surrounding lands. The advanced waste treatment facility is located in the north-western corner of the site. The landscaped bund walls approximately 5 metres high have been constructed on the boundaries of the land.
The surrounding lands are used for rural and rural residential purposes. The Twin Creeks residential development is located 1 km to the north of the subject land.
The subject land has direct access to Elizabeth Drive.
The Proposal
Slope of fill batter
The first aspect of the proposal deals with a discrepancy between the approved plans and Condition 52. Condition 52 of the modified consent requires that a minimum slope of 5% be achieved over the extent of the finished landform. However, a detailed review of one of the stamped approved plans associated with the modified consent, depicting the final landform, indicates that certain sections of the site would not achieve the minimum 5% slope. The applicant has requested that the discrepancy be amended and has submitted revised plans that show a finished slope of 5% over the entire site.
The revised plans indicate that to achieve the 5% slope an increase of the finished landform height is required. This will increase the final landform from 65 metres AHD to 73 metres AHD, a difference of some 8 metres in certain sections, as compared to the modified consent issued in November 2001. It should be noted that all landfill experiences settlement and to achieve a final landform height of 73 metres it will be necessary to have a maximum interim or construction height of 79 metres AHD. As compared to the original consent issued in September 1990, the increase in final landform height equates to a difference of some 17 metres, from 56 metres AHD to 73 metres AHD. Prior to settlement this difference is some 23 metres.
The footprint of the proposed landform will not increase. There will be no change to the nature or location of sedimentation basins on the site. The fill will be capped and revegetated as per the conditions of the existing consent.
The increase in height will result in an additional 1.5 million cubic metres of fill being imported onto the site. This will extend the lifespan of the landfill component on the site by approximately 3-4 years.
Hours of Operation
The second aspect of the proposal relates to the hours of operation of the facility. The following table shows the approved operating hours of the quarry and landfill operation as well as the applicant’s proposed hours.
Existing Hours of Operation |
Proposed Hours of Operation |
a) Quarrying activities, waste receipt and compaction |
All activities |
Monday – Friday 7.00am – 6.00pm (with 15 trucks (waste receipts) permissible between 6.00am to 7.00am.) |
Monday – Friday 6.00am – 6.00pm Saturday 8.00am -5.00pm Sundays and Public Holidays 8.00am -4.00pm |
Saturday, Sunday and Public Holidays 8.00am – 4.00pm |
|
b) Other operations apart from those listed above |
|
Saturday 1.00pm -4.00pm Sundays and Public Holidays 8.00am -4.00pm |
|
Since notification of the proposal, the applicant has advised that the request to change the operating hours has been deleted from the proposed amendment. The operating hours are to remain as per the existing consent.
Statutory Assessment
Modification of consent
An applicant may seek Council’s consideration to a modification of development consent provided the development to which the consent as modified relates is substantially the same as the original consent. Council has the ability to refuse, or approve subject to conditions, a modification of an existing consent based on the merits of the proposal. In determining the merits, Council must have regard for submissions received after notification and consideration of relevant Section 79C(1) matters.
Also as the development is designated development, Clauses 35 & 36 in Schedule 3 of Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 are relevant. These clauses provide the heads of consideration for Council to form an opinion of whether the alterations and additions do not significantly increase the environmental impacts of the total development.
The proposed development, as modified, is substantially the same as approved. That is, the land uses are still extractive industry and disposal of non putrescible waste. The principal modification involves constructing the final landform with slopes that are in excess of 5% and are in accordance with current EPA requirements. The 5% gradient results in a surface that is not conducive to ponding and water infiltration is minimised. Moreover, the modification seeks to eliminate a discrepancy between condition 52 and the stamped approved plans. In doing so, the extractive industry will achieve compliance with condition 52 contained within the modified consent.
The modification will result in an additional 1.5 million cubic metres of fill to be transported onto the site. The original approval consented to approximately 13 million cubic metres of fill to be used in the formation of the final landform. The current modification increases the volume of non-putrescible fill to be disposed of on the site by 11%. It is likely that this will extend the life of the development by 3-4 years. The finished height of the final landform will increase from 56 metres to 73 metres, as compared to the original consent, but the footprint of the development will not change. The finished height of the final landform, as compared to the modified consent, will increase from 65 metres to 73 metres.
The proposed increased height of the land fill is varied over the final landform with the greatest increase in final landform height restricted to the south-eastern quadrant of the site. The maximum increase in height with respect to the existing approved plans, associated with the modified development consent, is 7 metres. As compared to the original consent the maximum increase in height is 17 metres. The site is bordered by vegetated bund walls which to a significant extent screen the landfill activities on the site from adjoining properties and public roads.
The proposed alterations to the final landform do not significantly increase the environmental impacts of the total development and the matter can be determined as a modification to the existing consent rather than Council requiring the lodgement of a new development application.
Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 9 - Extractive Industries (No. 2)
This planning instrument makes extractive industries a permissible land use on land identified in the REP, consequently overriding the current Penrith planning instrument, being Penrith Local Environmental Plan No.201. The REP identifies the subject land as containing clay/shale resources of regional significance. Consequently, extractive industries are a permissible use on this site.
The disposal of non-putrescible waste is also permissible under the relevant planning instruments as it is an industry or undertaking “which depends for its operation on the winning of extract material from the land upon which it is carried on”.
The site currently enjoys development consent for the continued extraction of clay/shale from the site and its rehabilitation by filling with non-putrescible waste. The current proposal seeks to modify the final landform and as a result several conditions of development consent. The requested modifications do not compromise or alter the permissibility of the development.
Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 20 - Hawkesbury/Nepean River (No. 2 - 1997)
The major issue of relevance is that of the cumulative environmental impact of the development proposal on the catchment. In particular, the need to ensure that water quality of the creeks near the site, and ultimately the river, is not adversely affected as a result of the proposed activities.
SREP 20 contains a policy designed to ensure that future development does not prejudice the achievement of the goals of use of the river for primary contact recreation (being recreational activities involving direct water contact, such as swimming) and aquatic ecosystem protection in the river system. If the quality of the receiving waters does not currently allow these uses, the current water quality must be maintained, or improved, so as not to jeopardise the achievement of the goals in the future.
Specifically, Council is required to quantify and assess the likely impact of any predicted increase in pollutant loads on receiving waters.
The application proposes changes to the landform in order to comply with an existing condition of development consent. The type and scale of works that are proposed are already occurring on the land and the proposed amendments do not result in the need to change the environmental safeguards with regard to minimising water pollution on receiving waters that are already in place.
The sediment basins have been designed to accommodate the higher discharge rate of potentially sediment laden surface waters from the steeper side slopes of the proposed final landform. The basins are strategically located with EPA licensed off-site discharge points. In addition to the sediment basins, the Landfill Environmental Management Plan includes a comprehensive surface and ground water sampling regime. This, combined with a strategy of minimising disturbed areas, combined with early vegetation establishment of exposed areas will ensure that there will be no unacceptable impact upon the water quality of nearby creeks. Therefore, the proposed modification satisfies the requirements of the SREP.
The likely impacts of the development
The proposed development has been assessed in accordance with the matters for consideration under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. In consideration of the request to modify the consent, the main issues that have arisen in the assessment relate to:
· Noise impacts
· Visual impacts
· Water pollution
· Traffic impacts
Noise impacts
A noise assessment was submitted with the application, which was reviewed by Council’s Senior Environmental Health Officer. Detailed discussions were also held between Council and the Department of Environment Climate Change and Water (DECCW). Comments provided have indicated that the DECCW are proposing to amend their licence issued for the site to require new provisions to incorporate mitigation measures identified in an acoustic report dated July 2009 and entitled ‘Elizabeth Drive SAWT & Landfill Cumulative Noise Assessment’ . Therefore the applicant will be required to comply with these new licensing provisions, relating to the emission of noise during capping activities, which are considered adequate is ensuring that noise impacts from the proposal are acceptable. The activity on the site can be undertaken with minimal disruption to the adjoining resident’s amenity given the licensing requirements implemented by the DECCW.
Visual Impacts
The proposed increase in height of the landform is not uniform. Over a considerable part of the site the increase is between 1 and 2 metres. In the south-eastern quadrant of the site the final landform is in parts 6 metres higher than the current approved maximum height. It should also be noted that there are temporary overburden stockpiles on the site that are higher than the final height of the landform.
The previous modification of consent issued in 2001 introduced the need for the 5% minimum slope requirements as part of the on-going management of the site. Since then parts of the landfill has been modified to comply. Consequently, there are already parts of the existing land form that exceed the 65m height level. It was necessary to do this to achieve the 5% slope requirement for proper environmental management and to comply with the relevant licensing requirements administered by the DECCW.
This modification request will not introduce in the landform the full extent of the change since parts of the site are already in excess of the 65m height level.
Site inspections reveal that the proposed landform will be screened from adjoining properties to a significant extent by the perimeter bund walls that contain established and establishing trees.
Water pollution
The stormwater draining from the proposed landform will be directed into sedimentation basins on the site, where velocities will be greatly diminished prior to discharge from the site. There is no need to augment or change the location of these basins as the footprint of the final land form will not change. Also this aspect of the proposal is licensed by DECC.
Traffic impacts
The proposal will increase the life span of the operation by 3-4 years. The number of daily truck movements will not increase significantly. The site is serviced by regional roads that have the capacity to accommodate any slight increase in truck numbers if such an increase eventuates.
Public Interest
Council is required to advertise, in accordance with its advertising policy, an application to modify a development where the original development application was advertised. Under the provisions of clause 14 of the Penrith DCP – Notification and Advertising, Council may dispense with notification and advertising requirements if the proposed modification is unlikely to prejudice:
a) any person(s) who were previously notified of the development application; and
b) any person(s) who previously made a submission in respect of the development application; and
c) any matter(s) raised in the previous submission(s) in respect of the development application.
The original application and subsequent amendments were advertised development and submissions were received from a broad spectrum of the local community. However, it appears unlikely that the current modification proposal would prejudice persons who previously made a submission.
Therefore, submissions were merely invited from adjoining owners, who are the persons most likely to be affected by this application.
In addition, submissions were received from:
· Department of Environment and Climate Change and Water
· Department of Water and Energy
Department of Environment, Climate Change, & Water (DECCW)
DECCW has no objections to the proposed modification and notes that the final landform will have slopes greater than 5% which comply with the primary environmental goals of Benchmark Technique 28 of the NSW EPA Environmental Guidelines: Solid Waste landfills (1996).
DECCW also has no objection to the proposed amendment and will take steps to ensure that the conditions of the environmental protection licence issued by the Department are the same as the noise conditions for the recently approved Advanced Waste Treatment Facility in the north-western corner of the site.
Department of Water and Energy
The Department recommends that any change of landform does not affect the riparian vegetation and its restoration.
The proposed new landform does alter the footprint of the existing approved development and as a result will not have a detrimental impact on the riparian corridor of Badgerys Creek.
Adjoining Owners
The application was notified to a total of seven (7) adjoining landowners from 22 September to 6 October 2008. Three (3) submissions objecting to the development have been generated from the surrounding landowners. These objections are summarised below and comments provided where appropriate.
Extension of hours
There will be significant adverse impacts upon the community as follows:
· Normal operating conditions for building sites are 7.00am. This opening time should apply to the proposal. A 6.00am opening time will result in significant truck movements in the locality.
· The hours of operation at the end of the day should also not be extended for the same reason.
· The increase in noise associated with the truck movements both in the morning and the afternoon will be substantial given the rural nature of the locality.
· The approval of the adjoining Advanced Waste Treatment Facility (AWTF) was based on the current landfill operation and was sufficient for the AWTF to be approved.
· The proposal is an industrial operation and not appropriate in a rural residential setting especially in regard to the negative impacts on adjoining residents’ amenity.
· There has been an incremental approach in developing the site with the result of significant impact on the neighbouring area. Council should have regard to these previous approvals and
· The applicant has not justified their statements that the proposal would be of assistance to the community.
Comment:
The adjoining owner’s concerns in regard to extended hours do not need to be addressed as the applicant has withdrawn their request to extend the hours of operation.
Changes to Existing Contours
· The proposal results in a considerable increase in the height of the landfill site.
· There will be an increase in dust, noise and odour.
· There is a requirement for a higher earth bund wall around the site as the adjoining residents can already see the stockpiles and trucks operating within the site.
· There is a risk of water runoff and contamination onto adjoining land.
· The operations would be more clearly visible from adjoining rural residential land and therefore have an impact on the use of that land.
· The proposal would restrict the development of housing on adjoining land and results in a devaluation of adjoining land.
· The difference in adjoining property levels (46-48 metres AHD to the finished contour level of 79 metres AHD) is too great and will severely impact the enjoyment and value of adjoining land and
· The proposal will result in an unacceptable visual impact in the rural locality.
Comment:
The proposed increase in height of the landform is not uniform. To achieve the required 5% slope over the entire site, there is variation in the required volume to achieve adequate height to enable the 5% slope. Accordingly, over a considerable part of the site the increase is between 1 and 2 metres from the landform approved in 2001 by the modified development consent. In the south-eastern quadrant of the site the final landform is in parts 6 metres higher than the current approved maximum height. It should also be noted that there are temporary overburden stockpiles on the site that are higher than the final height of the landform.
The proposed landform will be screened from adjoining properties to a significant extent by the perimeter bund walls that contain established and establishing trees. The land fill is seen from sections of Elizabeth Drive; however the separation distance of the landfill from the road means that it is difficult for an observer to notice a 6 metre increase in the height of the landform.
The shape of the final landform will, over time and with revegetation, appear natural and not out of character with hills in the locality (i.e. the hills to the west of Luddenham Road and the hills of Mt Vernon. It should be noted that these hills have a height of approximately 100 m AHD and are therefore higher by 25 metres than the proposed final landform.
The proposed amendments will result in an additional 3-4 years of operational life of the site. Current conditions of consent outline measures to be implemented to minimise the generation of dust. Such measures include dampening of unsealed roads and access paths, the implementation of erosion and sediment control measures, and the revegetation of portions of the site in instances where exposed materials are stockpiled for more than 6 months.
The proposed amendment will not significantly affect the amenity currently enjoyed by adjoining landowners.
Independent assessment of DA
· Penrith City Council uses the site for the disposal of its own rubbish and to avoid a conflict of interest, an independent assessment of the DA should be undertaken.
Comment:
The proposed amendment has been assessed and reported upon by Karl Berzins of Berzins Environmental Planning Pty Ltd (an independent planning consultant).
Effect on adjoining land
· The use of adjoining land for the purpose of horse training and agistment is being compromised in that animals are becoming frightened with a greater risk of injuring themselves.
· The consideration by Council of the extension of the landfill land use must take into account the zoning of surrounding land and
· The landfill site is incompatible with the future use of adjoining lands as employment generating lands. Extension of the timeframe of the consent and operating hours will be detrimental to the development of adjoining lands for employment generating uses.
Comment:
There is no evidence that the established landfill operation, which has been in existence for approximately 20 years, has had an adverse impact on adjoining land uses.
The additional 3-4 years of landfill operation will not compromise the development of surrounding lands for employment generating uses if the land in the locality is rezoned.
Complying with the 5% gradient
· The applicant’s justification for increasing the height of the fill is questioned in that the 5% gradient could be achieved with lower contours and
· The will be a negative impact on adjoining properties due to increased velocity of stormwater leaving the site. There will also be changes to the runoff direction from the site.
Comment:
The proposed amendments to the contours are an endeavour to resolve the conflict between the approved plans and Condition 52 of the existing consent. (The finished landform shall have a minimum slope of 5% in accordance with the provisions of the Landfill Environmental Management Plan dated 1 January 1998 defined in EPA Licence No. 004585 dated 11 October 2000 as approved by Council the modification of this consent.)
The proposed contours (i.e. final landform) comply with the requirements of Condition 52.
The stormwater draining from the proposed landform will be directed into sedimentation basins on the site, where velocities will be greatly diminished prior to discharge from the site. This aspect of the proposal is licensed by DECC.
Inappropriate zoning
· The SITA site is an industrial site. The proposed amendments make it more of an industrial site. It is inappropriate not to zone surrounding lands as employment lands within a short time frame (3-5 years).
Comment:
The future zoning of the subject land and adjoining lands is being investigated by the Department of Planning. Information contained on the Department of Planning website, dated 28 September 2009, outlined ‘The Department of Planning conducted detailed investigations into proposed employment lands at Badgerys Creek but ultimately did not release the land because of servicing and infrastructure constraints’. Detailed information on this matter is unavailable at present; however a request to rezone surrounding lands is beyond the scope of this application.
Conclusion
The proposed amendment will not change the nature of the present development nor will it create any significant additional impacts. Rather, the proposal reduces the risk of harm to the environment and provides a more contemporary and acceptable environmental outcome for the site in line with current environmental standards.
Council’s resolution of 12 October 2009 has been addressed through agreement between SITA and the adjoining land owner which is reflected in Special Condition 2.22.
As such, approval of the application to modify the consent in the terms outlined in this report is recommended.
See Appendix No. 2 for copies of the site plan and elevations submitted with the application, also A3 copies are provided under separate cover to Councillors.
That: 1. The information contained in the report on Development Application No. 08/0958 - Section 96 Modification - Alteration to Finished Landform - Lot 1 DP 542395, Lot 740 DP 810111 (No. 1725) Elizabeth Drive, Badgerys Creek be received 2. Development Application No. 08/0958 - Section 96 Modification - Alteration to Finished Landform - Lot 1 DP 542395, Lot 740 DP 810111 (No. 1725) Elizabeth Drive, Badgerys Creek be approved subject to the following: 2.1 Amended Condition No 6 to read:
Development is to take place as specified within the Environmental Impact Statement prepared on behalf of the applicant by R W Corkery and Co Pty Ltd and Planners North Pty Ltd and submitted to Council as part of the development application on Council's file D25050/13602 DA 2 except where amended or altered by these conditions or the Landfill Environmental Management Plan dated 1 January 1998 defined in EPA licence No 004585 dated 11 October 2000 as approved by Council in the modification of this consent or Drawing No. 21-17412-C005, dated 08.05.08 prepared by GHD and entitled “Proposed Landfill Contours Increase of Depth of Fill over DA Contours” or as directed otherwise by Council from time to time
2.2 Insert the following Special conditions:
2.21 The proposal is to operate in accordance with the license issued by the Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water at all times
Construction of a timber fence on top of the existing earth bund along the southern boundary in accordance with the plan stamped and approved with the section 96 application. The fence height is to be either 1.8m or 2.0m following discussions with the adjoining property owner to the south. The fence is to be constructed within 2 months from the date of the approved granted for the section 96 application.
Suitable landscaping is to be planted along the southern side of the bund wall along the southern property boundary in the vicinity of the timber fence required by the above condition. The species are to be similar to the other planting undertaken on the northern side of the bund wall. The landscaping is to be maintained at all times and any plantings that dies are to be replaced.
3. The applicant and those making a submission be informed of Council’s decision. |
1. View |
Locality Plan |
1 Page |
Appendix |
2. View |
Plans |
5 Pages |
Appendix |
9 November 2009 |
|
A Green City |
|
13 |
Development Application DA09/0746 Proposed Alterations and Additions to Existing Bulky Goods Retail Centre at Lot 10 & 11 DP 1046110 (No. 13 - 23) Pattys Place, Jamisontown - Supacenta Applicant: Pipven Pty Ltd; Owner: Pipven Pty Ltd |
DA09/0746 |
Compiled by: Steven Chong, Senior Environmental Planner
Authorised by: Paul Lemm, Development Services Manager
Strategic Objective: We use our resources wisely, and take responsibility for our levels of consumption
Strategic Direction: We respond to the impacts of climate change, and support the principles of sustainability
Procedural note: Section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993 requires that a division be called in relation to this matter.
Executive Summary
Development Consent No.07/1418 was issued for the two (2) stage redevelopment of the SupaCenta bulky goods retail centre at Jamisontown in July 2008. Works pursuant to that consent commenced, however Class 4 legal proceedings in the Land and Environment Court have been brought by an adjoining property owner which challenged the validity of the Development Consent. Works have since ceased pending the outcome of these legal proceedings.
Council is in receipt of a Development Application which proposes alterations and additions to an existing bulky good retail development known as the ‘SupaCenta.’
The subject Development Application proposes a single storey addition to the existing bulky goods retail centre of 6,468m2 Gross Floor Area (GFA). The proposed additions involve ten (10) separate tenancy units in a ‘mall’ style format. Separate Development Consent is proposed for the use and fitout of the individual tenants. The proposal includes 750 parking spaces, which would be located within the existing basement and at-grade parking areas. The proposed development is permissible in the zone.
Due to the scale of the proposal and the substantial public interest received, the subject Development Application is being reported to Council for determination.
The subject development site is part zoned 4(b) Special Industry under the Penrith Local Environmental Plan 1996 (Industrial Land) and Rural 1(a) (Rural “A” Zone General) under Penrith Local Environmental Plan No.201 (Rural Lands) for Lot 10 and Lot 11 respectively. The proposal development would accommodate bulky goods retail shops on Lot 10, which is consistent with the land use definition which permits shops trading principally in bulky goods and by virtue of Clause 23A of the Penrith Local Environmental Plan 1996 (Industrial Land). On this basis, the proposed development is permissible, only with Development Consent. Landscaping works proposed on Lot 11 is permissible in the 1(a) zone, only with Development Consent.
The Development Application had been placed on public exhibition from 25 August 2009 to 8 September 2009. A total of 59 submissions were received of which a total of six (6) submissions objected to various aspects of the proposal. The remaining submissions were in support of the proposal including one (1) petition containing 177 signatures. Key issues raised in objections of the proposal include: -
· Traffic, Parking and Access;
· Architectural Design;
· Economic Impact;
The above key issues as well as others raised in the submissions have been addressed and a summary of the submissions and submission responses can be found as Attachment 1 to the Business Paper. This attachment is referred to throughout this report.
The subject application was referred to the Sydney Regional Development Advisory Committee (SRDAC) and considered at its meeting on 27 August 2009 and 24 September 2009. The SRDAC raised a number of points relating primarily to traffic modelling and management which have been satisfactorily addressed and discussed later in this report. All matters raised by the SRDAC have been addressed and incorporated as a condition of consent where appropriate.
Council had engaged external consultants to undertake an Independent Peer Review of the subject Development Application with respect to the economic impact, traffic and parking and Council’s assessment process. HillPDA and AECOM were engaged respectively. The independent peer review for the economic and traffic aspects and assessment process of the proposal have been conducted with each consultancy concluding that the subject Development Application is satisfactory.
Pursuant to Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, an assessment of the subject application has been undertaken. Having regard to the matters discussed in this report and notwithstanding the issues raised in the submissions, the subject Development Application is considered satisfactory and is recommended for approval, subject to the imposition of conditions that are been appended to this report.
Site and Surrounds
The subject site is located to the north of the intersection of Mulgoa Road and the M4 Motorway with vehicular access to the site via Pattys Place and Wolseley Street.
The subject site has an area of 6.98 hectares and is occupied by single storey buildings comprising of 27,561m2 (GFA) of retail floor space occupied by bulky goods retail outlets. Current tenants within the SupaCenta include Anaconda, Spotlight, Bing Lee and Snooze. Adjoining the SupaCenta to the south and south east is Bunnings Warehouse and other bulky goods retailers including Harvey Norman and Domayne and associated car parking (SP 72448).
Part of the previous at-grade car park to the east of the existing centre has now been removed and replaced by drainage infrastructure and a partial concrete slab. These works reflect Development Consent No.07/1418. Currently, the total on-site parking for the SupaCentra is 695 parking spaces (532 and 163 in the basement and at-grade respectively).
Directly adjoining the site to the north west and north east is vacant land. Land to the north east of the site fronting Pattys Place and Mulgoa Road comprises a number of industrial and business uses including the PCYC. The nearest residential properties are located to the south east and east of the site on the opposite side of Mulgoa Road.
Background
The subject site and the adjoining Homemakers Centre have differing history of bulky good developments on the respective sites. The following list outlines the current approvals on the subject site and adjoining property: -
DA986035 – Harvey Norman Homemakers Centre
· Council at its meeting dated 14 December 1998 resolved to support the erection of a bulky good retail development with a gross floor area of 24,708m2, accommodating the Harvey Norman Homemakers Centre and other bulky goods retailers. Development Consent was issued on 14 January 1999.
· A total of 491 parking spaces were provided on the Harvey Norman site. The then Hardware House (now Bunnings) development located to the rear of that site maintained an additional 245 parking spaces (of which only 170 are associated for Hardware House). A total of 736 off street parking spaces are provided across the Harvey Norman and Hardware House sites.
· Condition No.29 was imposed as follows:
“A total of 736 off-street parking spaces, including bicycle and trailer parking spaces are to be provided on site and are to be made available to customers of both the Homemakers centre and the existing Hardware house development. Areas are to be set aside for bicycle and trailer parking. Details are to be submitted with the Construction Certificate.”
· Vehicular access into that site was permitted from Gibbs Street and Wolseley Street. A slip lane was approved along the Mulgoa Road frontage of the site for incorporation with the intersection of Mulgoa road and Wolseley Street.
DA01/0231 – SupaCenta
· Council at its meeting dated 2 July 2001 resolved to support in-principle the erection of a bulky goods centre comprising a total gross floor area of 27,278m2. This incorporated the existing 9000m2 of the Campbells Cash’n’Carry Warehouse. The proposal also included the re-subdivision of the existing lots, dedication of land for road purposes and consolidation into one (1) development lot of 6.972 hectares.
· Total parking provision for the SupaCenta was 1028 parking spaces including 583 spaces provided in the basement.
· Vehicular access to the development can be obtained from Blaikie Road and Pattys Place. Access to the SupaCenta from Mulgoa Road for vehicles travelling south is via a tunnel in that road, which connects to Wolseley Street. For vehicles travelling north access is available via the existing slip lane.
Section 96 Modification (DA986035 combined with DA01/0231)
The following conditions were required upon approval of this application.
· Provision of a right-turn and left-turn movement from the middle lane at the intersection of Mulgoa Road and Wolseley Street, which required the lid of the tunnel to be extended.
· A traffic island is to be constructed at the vehicle entry/exit point at the top of the tunnel to separate vehicle movements.
· A left turn slip lane is to be constructed from Gibbs Street,
· Condition 27 amended to enable the mid-lane at the intersection of Mulgoa Road and Wolseley Street to be used for both right and left turns. Condition 72 amended for similar purpose.
· Construction of an internal roundabout to service heavy vehicles to the bulky goods centre. (Provisions of heavy vehicle movement between the two sites and provision of a common turn around point for articulated vehicles through both sites)
· Extend car parking across the site boundary to maximise on-site parking.
Section 96 Modification (DA01/0231)
A modification application to Development Consent DA01/0231 was lodged in 2002 seeking consent for the creation of two rights of carriageway to allow a property owner to gain access to 95 Blaikie Road and adjacent properties.
DA07/1330 – Sprinkler Tank/Fire Protection Tank – SupaCenta
Consent was granted on 21 December 2007 for the construction of a sprinkler tank for fire protection. The development includes the following aspects:
· Construction of a sprinkler/fire protection tank to be located at the north section of the site, adjacent to the Pattys Place frontage. The tank will be installed the basement area, underneath the access driveway.
· The tank will have a capacity of 1,399m3, contains a sprinkler valve room and a fire control room.
· Works are preparatory to a major redevelopment proposal for the bulky goods retail development subject to DA07/1418.
DA07/1331 – Partial Demolition
Consent was granted on 7 December 2007 for the substantial demolition to slab level of the northern section of the building, being west of Pattys Place. Whilst minor works approved under DA07/1331 have been undertaken and the consent therefore remains operational, Council has been informed by representative from the applicant that there is no intention to implement the substantive demolition works proposed in the Consent.
DA07/1418 – Redevelopment of the SupaCenta Complex
Development Consent No.07/1418 was granted on 17 July 2008 under delegated authority for the redevelopment of the SupaCenta Complex which involved the following works: -
· Two (2) stage development with the construction of 48,958m2 over two (2) levels
· Refurbishment of the existing bulky goods centre including 5 major tenancies, 52 speciality tenancies, 6 kiosks which resulted in a total GFA
· 1068 car parking spaces provided at basement, ground level and 208 spaces on level 1 (1 space per 45m2).
· On-site stormwater detention details to be amended as per details approved pursuant to DA07/1330;
· Relocate existing roundabout at site entry to southern boundary; and
· Landscaping and rehabilitation of Lot 11.
The approved development was to be carried out in two (2) stages as follows: -
· Stage 1 - Completion of the eastern portion of the on grade development, together with required infrastructure (OSD, roundabout relocation; landscaping; and
· Stage 2 - First floor additions
Construction works have commenced pursuant to Development Consent No.07/1418 including site preparation works and the partial laying of the ground floor slab in the location of the proposed development subject to the current Development Application.
Presently, Development Consent No.07/1418 is subject to Class 4 Court proceedings pursuant to Section 20 of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979. These proceedings have been initiated by a third party who has contested the validity of Development Consent No.07/1418. Construction work associated to Development Consent No.07/1418 have since ceased on the site. The applicant has advised that should consent be granted for the subject Development Application, the applicant would surrender Development Consent No.07/1418.
Proposed Development
The subject Development Application involves the following aspects: -
Aspect |
Description |
Project Summary |
Alterations and additions to an existing bulky goods retail development |
Value of Development |
$7,000,000 |
Consent Authority |
Council |
Alterations and Additions |
· Erection of a single storey ground floor extension (comprising 6,468m2 GFA) of the existing bulky goods retail centre (bringing the total GFA on the site to 34,029m2). · Maximum building height range from 8.5 metres to 10.54 metres; · Main external materials are painted finished concrete panels and metal deck roofing. · Division of the new building into mall space and ten (10) tenancy units · Minor alterations to existing external walls and internal tenancy walls at the eastern end of the existing building, adjacent to the above described works. · Rooftop plant screened by louvered acoustic screens to match roof sheeting colour. |
Signage
|
· Centre signage describing the ‘SupaCenta Penrith’ with associated logo as an integrated part of the design of the eastern and southern facades of the building. · Tenancy signage zones located on the eastern and northern facades of the building to accommodate flush wall signs. Individual advertisements within the proposed signage zones will be the subject of separate applications. · Lifestyle graphics to be located on the eastern elevation of the building. |
Parking and Access |
· Alterations to the existing car parking and road layout internal to the site. · Total of 750 car parking spaces (532 basement spaces, 218 at-grade spaces). · Provision of new loading docks on the southern side |
Landscaping |
· Landscaping of the site in accordance with accompanying drawings and specification prepared by Site Image Landscape Architects |
The following reports have accompanied the subject Development Application and used throughout the planning assessment: -
· Statement of Environmental Effects, prepared by City Plan Services dated August 2009;
· Architectural plans prepared by Quattro Design dated August 2009;
· Landscape plans and statement prepared by Site Image dated August 2009;
· Civil plans prepared by Henry and Hymas dated August 2009;
· Structural adequacy statement prepared by Henry and Hymas dated August 2009;
· Economic impact statement prepared by Pitney Bowes dated August 2009;
· Transport and traffic report prepared by Colston Budd Hunt and Kafes dated August 2009, supplementary report dated the same;
· Environmental site assessment prepared by Napier Blakeley and Broxton dated April 2006 and July 2009;
· Access report prepared by MGAC dated August 2009;
· Hydraulic drawings prepared by Steve Paul and Partners dated August 2009;
· Cost assessment prepared by Davis Langdon dated August 2009;
· Design and compliance reports prepared by Broxton dated August 2009;
· Fire safety engineering report prepared by Scientific Fire Services dated August 2009;
· BCA statement prepared by McKenzie Group dated August 2009; and
· Waste management plan prepared by Broxton dated July 2009.
Statutory Assessment
The proposed development application has been processed and assessed in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW) and Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 (NSW). A detailed assessment against relevant planning considerations is found further in this report.
A matter that requires further discussion at this point is the ability of Council to determine the subject development application. Recent changes to the planning system have seen the implementation of Joint Regional Planning Panels as a determining body for certain development applications. Of most relevance to this application is the requirement, under State Environmental Planning Policy (Major Development) 2005, for development that has a Capital Investment Value of more than $10 million (Cap) to be determined by a Joint Regional Planning Panel.
The applicant provided a statement from a Quantity Surveyor indicating that the Capital Investment Value (CIV) was some $6.2 million, therefore enabling Council to determine the development application. However, Council has received a submission from the Solicitors for Calardu Pty Ltd, an adjoining property owner indicating that the CIV of the proposed development exceeds the $10 million ‘Cap’. This submission was supported by a detailed quantity survey. To ensure that Council can be satisfied of the CIV, a Quantity Surveyor was engaged by Council to provide an independent assessment of the estimated CIV associated with the proposal. The conclusion of that assessment provided that the estimated CIV is well below the $10 million Cap. The CIV is more consistent with the estimate of the applicant than Calardu Pty Ltd.
The large discrepancy in the CIV stemmed from the standard of construction to be applied to the extension of the Supa Centa. Council’s independent Quantity Surveyor has indicated that the cost of the construction of the building on a per square metre value was significantly less than the Calardu estimate because the latter assumed a higher standard of construction.
Council engaged an external consultant (AECOM) to conduct a procedural review of Council’s approach to processing the development application. This was to ensure that Council satisfied its obligations as a consent authority in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000. The report submitted from AECOM concluded:
“the environmental assessment carried out by PCC generally satisfies it’s obligations under the EP&A Act and associated Regulation subject to:
§ assessment in accordance with Clause 7 of SEPP 55 being carried out and detailed in the environmental assessment report
§ consideration of proposed erosion and sediment control measures in accordance with Section 2.4 of DCP 2006
§ confirmation that the content of the notification letter was consistent with that required under Subsection B7 of Section 2.7 of DCP 2006.
§ confirmation that the notification plan(s) were prepared in accordance with the requirements of Subsection B8 of Section 2.7 of DCP 2006
§ confirmation that the notification plan identified both Lots 10 and 11 in DP 1046110 as the subject site
§ confirmation that the notification recipient list was consistent with the notification map”
The matters detailed as ‘subject to’ are dealt with in turn:
§ An assessment against the provisions of SEPP 55 can be found further in this report, titled: State Environmental Planning Policy No.55- Remediation of Land.
§ Consideration of proposed erosion and sediment controls can be found as part of Attachment 9 to this report.
§ Discussion relating to the last four (4) points raised in relation to Council’s notification procedure can be found in the section entitled: Community Consultation.
Based on the conclusions of the procedural review, Council can be comfortable that it has discharged its obligations under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.
Detailed Planning Assessment
The following planning instruments have been considered in the planning assessment of the subject Development Application: -
· State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007;
· State Environmental Planning Policy No.55- Remediation of Land;
· State Environmental Planning Policy No.64 - Advertising and Signage;
· Penrith Local Environmental Plan (Industrial Land) 1996;
· Penrith Local Environmental Plan No.201 (Rural Lands);
· Penrith Development Control Plan 2006;
· Draft Penrith Local Environmental Plan
2008; and
Draft Penrith Development Control Plan 2008.
1. Section 79C(1)(a)(i) – Any Environmental Planning Instrument
(a) State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007
State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 (SEPP 2007) requires relevant development to be referred to public authorities.
Clause 104 of the SEPP 2007 applies to identified traffic generating development and provides in part as follows: -
“104 Traffic-generating development
(3) Before determining a development application for development to which this clause applies, the consent authority must:
(b) take into consideration:
(i) any submission that the RTA provides in response to that notice within 21 days after the notice was given (unless, before the 21 days have passed, the RTA advises that it will not be making a submission), and
(ii) the accessibility of the site concerned, including:
(A) the efficiency of movement of people and freight to and from the site and the extent of multi-purpose trips, and
(B) the potential to minimise the need for travel by car and to maximise movement of freight in containers or bulk freight by rail, and
(iii) any potential traffic safety, road congestion or parking implications of the development.
The subject application proposes a bulky goods retail development with a gross floor area of 6,468m2. Pursuant to Column 2 of Schedule 3 of SEPP 2007, an application for the purposes of a ‘shop’ which has total floor area in excess of 2,000m2 requires referral to the Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) for discussion at the Sydney Regional Development Advisory Committee (SRDAC) pursuant to Clause 104 of SEPP 2007.
The application was referred to the SRDAC on behalf of the Roads and Traffic Authority at its meeting on 27 August 2009 with representatives of the Applicant, RTA and Council Officers in attendance. Matters that were raised at this meeting primarily related to traffic modelling and management which required the submission of additional information from the Applicant.
The application together with the additional information was subsequently referred to the SRDAC for consideration at its meeting on 24 September 2009 with representatives of the applicant, RTA and Council Officers in attendance. All matters raised by the SRDAC have been satisfied and incorporated as a condition of consent where appropriate.
Accordingly, Clause 104 of SEPP 2007 has been satisfied.
(b) State Environmental Planning Policy No.55 – Remediation of Land
Clause 7(1) of State Environmental Planning Policy No.55- Remediation of Land (SEPP 55) provides that a consent authority must not grant consent to the carrying out of any development on land unless:
(a) it has considered whether the land is contaminated, and
(b) if the land is contaminated, it is satisfied that the land is suitable in its contaminated state (or will be suitable, after remediation) for the purpose for which the development is proposed to be carried out, and
(c) if the land requires remediation to be made suitable for the purpose for which the development is proposed to be carried out, it is satisfied that the land will be remediated before the land is used for that purpose.
By way of background, the development site was utilised for rural purposes prior to the consent issued for the original bulky goods precinct (DA01/0231). This triggered the provisions of SEPP 55 and a preliminary site investigation was conducted and submitted as part of the original development application. The report compiled as a result of the investigation concluded that no remediation work was required on the subject site. The current application proposes the placement of a building on the same allotment of land that was subject to the previous preliminary site investigation (in place of an existing carpark). Therefore the use will not change, and the findings of the previous preliminary site investigation remain accurate. Therefore, based on the provisions of SEPP 55, a further preliminary site investigation is not required as part of the current development application.
(c) State Environmental Planning Policy No.64 – Advertising and Signage
(i) Aims and Objectives of the Plan
Clause 3 of State Environmental Planning Policy No.64 – Advertising and Signage (SEPP No.64) outlines the aims and objectives of that policy as follows: -
3 Aims, objectives etc
(1) This Policy aims:
(a) to ensure that signage (including advertising):
(b) is compatible with the desired amenity and visual character of an area, and
(ii) provides effective communication in suitable locations, and
(iii) is of high quality design and finish, and
(iv) to regulate signage (but not content) under Part 4 of the Act, and
(c) to provide time-limited consents for the display of certain advertisements, and
(d) to regulate the display of advertisements in transport corridors, and
(e) to ensure that public benefits may be derived from advertising in and adjacent to transport corridors.
(2) This Policy does not regulate the content of signage and does not require consent for a change in the content of signage.
The proposal provides a signage scheme consistent with the relevant aims and objectives of SEPP No.64. The proposed signage scheme would be compatible with the existing signage scheme used throughout adjoining sites and would be sympathetic to the amenity and character of the bulky goods context of the surrounding area.
(ii) Applicability
The proposed signage scheme for tenancy signage and centre signage are considered to be business identification signage and building identification signage respectively, which are defined as follows: -
“business identification sign means a sign:
(a) that indicates:
(i) the name of the person, and
(ii) the business carried on by the person, at the premises or place at which the sign is displayed, and
(b) that may include the address of the premises or place and a logo or other symbol that identifies the business, but that does not include any advertising relating to a person who does not carry on business at the premises or place.”
and
“building identification sign means a sign that identifies or names a building, and that may include the name of a business or building, the street number of a building, the nature of the business and a logo or other symbol that identifies the business, but that does not include general advertising of products, goods or services.”
On this basis the proposed signage is not subject to Part 3 Advertisements. Clause 9 provides:
“9 Advertisements to which this Part applies
This Part applies to all signage to which this Policy applies, other than the following:
(a) business identification signs,
(b) building identification signs,
(c) signage that, or the display of which, is exempt development under an environmental planning instrument that applies to it,
(d) signage on vehicles.”
However, Part 2 of the Policy, Signage Generally, Clause 8 provides: -
“8 Granting of consent to signage
A consent authority must not grant development consent to an application to display signage unless the consent authority is satisfied:
(a) that the signage is consistent with the objectives of this Policy as set out in clause 3 (1) (a), and
(b) that the signage the subject of the application satisfies the assessment criteria specified in Schedule 1.”
Consideration of the aims and objectives of the policy and an assessment of the proposed signage scheme pursuant to Schedule 1 – Assessment Criteria has been made in this report.
Signage applicable for consideration pursuant to Part 3 – Advertisements of the Policy is outlined in Clause 9 - Advertisements below: -
(iii) Schedule 1 – Assessment Criteria
An assessment of the proposed signage scheme has been made pursuant to Schedule 1 – Assessment Criteria of SEPP No.64. The proposed development is considered to be consistent with the development standards stipulated in the SEPP and the assessment criteria set out in Schedule 1 (See Appendix No.7).
(d) Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No.20 – Hawkesbury/Nepean River
Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No.20 – Hawkesbury/Nepean River (SREP No. 20) applies to the subject land and stipulates that the consent authority shall not grant consent to an application unless it is of the opinion that the carrying out of the development is consistent with any relevant, general and specific aim of SREP No.20.
Consideration of the aims and objectives of the plan, planning strategies and policies have been made in respect to the proposed development and is satisfactory (See Appendix No.8).
Having regard to the above, it is considered that the proposed development is consistent with the provisions of SREP No.20.
(e) Penrith Local Environmental Plan 1996 (Industrial Land)
The Penrith Local Environmental Plan 1996 (Industrial Land) (PLEP 1996) applies to Lot 10 of the subject site.
Pursuant to Clause 9(2) of PLEP 1996, the following considerations are to be made: -
“9 Zone objectives and development control Table
2. Except as otherwise provided by this plan, the council must not grant consent to development of land to which this plan applies unless the council:
a. is satisfied that the carrying out of such development is consistent with:
(i) the aims of this plan, and
(ii) the objectives of the zone within which the development is to be carried out, and
b. has considered the objectives of any development control plans applying to the land.”
Consideration of the aims and objectives of the plan, the objectives of the zone and the relevant development provisions are outlined in this section.
(i) Aims and objectives of this plan
The aims and objectives of PLEP 1996 are as follows: -
“2 Aims and objectives of this plan
1. The aims of this plan are:
(a) to encourage a broad range of industrial land uses which will promote both the economic and employment growth of the City of Penrith, and
(b) to promote development which is consistent with the council’s vision for the City of Penrith contained in its strategic management plan, namely one of a harmony of urban and rural qualities with a strong commitment to environmental protection and enhancement, and
(c) to promote development which observes responsible and environmentally sound management practices to minimise any adverse environmental impact of that development on surrounding localities.
2. The objectives of this plan are:
(a) to consolidate and rationalise planning controls relating to industrial land, into a single plan, and
(b) to present the planning controls in a clear manner, and
(c) to provide a planning framework which allows development control plans to supplement the controls embodied in this plan, and
(d) to require development to be assessed in accordance with and observe sound environmental planning principles, and
(e) to preserve the amenity of any adjacent residential communities, and
(f) to ensure that development of land to which this plan applies does not significantly affect the function, efficiency and safety of the road network, particularly Castlereagh Road, the Great Western Highway, Mulgoa Road and Parker Street, and
(g) to promote the efficient development of industrial land, and
(h) to ensure the orderly provision of services and infrastructure to meet the needs of development, and
(i) to promote the development of an attractive and safe work place environment, and
(j) to restrict certain development to particular locations, where the development is likely to have an adverse environmental effect on adjoining land, and
(k) to ensure that outdoor advertising:
(i) conveys advertisers’ messages and images while complementing and conforming to both the building on which it is displayed and the character of the locality, and
(ii) does not adversely affect the locality in terms of appearance, size, illumination or overshadowing or in any other way, and
(iii) does not lead to visual clutter through the proliferation of signs, and
(l) to ensure that land considered by the council as likely to have been contaminated, or with a known history of contamination, is fully assessed and the need or otherwise for its remediation established, and
(m) to rationalise industry zone boundaries by zoning certain small areas of adjacent residential, rural, open space and special uses zoned land to industry.
3. The council must consider the aims and objectives of this plan in determining development applications. This plan also includes objectives for each zone, the importance of which is explained in Part 2.”
The proposal is a bulky goods retail development which proposes an expansion of the existing retail centre. The proposal is considered to assist in improving the existing centre’s economic viability and therefore contribute towards promoting economic and employment opportunities and growth for the city and the region.
The proposed development is located on an industrial zone that adjoins a rural area. It is considered that the urban design of the proposed development would have not have an adverse impact upon the adjoining rural land having regard to its siting and visual shielding from existing development. The proposed development has been assessed in relation to parking and traffic generation upon the surrounding street network and is considered satisfactory.
Water Management, Construction Management, and Waste Management Plans have been submitted and Section J requirements of the Building Code of Australia have been addressed to ensure that environmentally sound management practices are observed through construction and the life of the development.
The proposed development is therefore considered to be consistent with the aims and objectives of the PLEP 1996.
(ii) Permissibility
The subject development site is zoned 4(b) Special Industry under the Penrith Local Environmental Plan 1996 (Industrial Land). Pursuant to Clause 9 - Development Control Table, the proposal development would be suitably defined as follows: -
“shops trading principally in bulky goods which shops:
(a) have a gross floor area of not more than 1,000 square metres, and
(b) do not have frontage to a road referred to in clause 20”
Bulky goods are defined in LEP 1996 as:
“bulky goods means large goods which are, in the opinion of the council, of such a size and shape as to necessitate:
(a) a large area for handling, storage or display, and
(b) easy and direct vehicular access so as to allow for their collection by customers,
but does not include agricultural products, beverages, clothing, food, footwear, leisure goods, paper or stationery products, small electrical appliances, electronic goods or toys.”
Despite the provisions in Clause 9 of PLEP 1996, Clause 23A of PLEP 1996 enables the carrying out of bulky goods retail development upon the subject land without any restriction as to gross floor area
Clause 23A of the LEP states the following:
“Clause 23A - Development of land at Nos 13–23 Pattys Place, Jamisontown
(1) This clause applies to Lot 10, DP 1046110, Nos 13–23 Pattys Place, Jamisontown, as shown edged heavy black on the map marked “Penrith Local Environmental Plan 1996 (Industrial Land) (Amendment No 8)”.
(2) Despite any other provision of this plan, the council may grant consent to the carrying out of development on the land to which this clause applies for the purpose of shops principally trading in bulky goods without any restriction as to the gross floor area of any such shops.”
The use of the proposed tenancies would be subject to separate assessment and approval for their respective use for the purposes of consistency of the ‘bulky goods’ definition. Notwithstanding, the proposed tenancies have been designed to ensure consistency with the land use with respect to the layout of each tenancy allowing sufficient area for large areas for handling, storage and display of goods.
The proposed development is permissible on the site, only with Development Consent.
(iii) Objective of the 4(b) zone
The objectives of the zone as set out in Clause 9 are listed as follows: -
(i) to encourage a diversity of industrial and other employment generating activities, and
(ii) to promote development which observes responsible, and environmentally sound, management practices, and
(iii) to promote development which makes efficient use of industrial land, and
(iv) to permit development which serves the daily convenience needs of persons working within industrial areas, and
(v) to permit development for the purposes of recreational facilities, child care centres or community facilities to serve the needs of the workforce of the industrial areas and adjacent residential communities, and
(vi) to promote development of land with frontage to the M4 Motorway and Mulgoa Road which, by its architectural and landscape design, will enhance their gateway entry roles to the City of Penrith, and
(vii) to prohibit the development of land for any purpose if the development will:
(A) have direct vehicular access between that land and the Great Western Highway or Mulgoa Road, and
(B) significantly affect the function, efficiency and safety of the Great Western Highway or Mulgoa Road.
(viii) to prohibit certain industries which are likely to have an adverse effect on the use and enjoyment of adjoining localities, and
(ix) to permit the retailing of bulky goods from shops having a gross floor area of not more than 1,000m2.
The objectives of the 4(b) zone have been considered in respect to the proposed development and the following comments are offered: -
· The proposed development involves the alterations and additions to an existing bulky goods retail development which would facilitate the economic viability and contribution towards employment growth of the region.
· The proposed development is considered to have due regard to the natural and built environment having regard to drainage and landscaping as well as sympathy with the surrounding built form.
· The subject application is accompanied by a Water Management, Construction Management, and Waste Management Plans and Section J requirements of the Building Code of Australia have been addressed to ensure that environmentally sound management practices are observed through construction and the life of the development.
· The proposed development is considered to make efficient use of Industrial Land having regard to effective use of the building footprint with associated car parking and appropriate measures for management on the subject site. The subject application proposes the increase in floorspace while still providing sufficient car parking.
· The proposed development involves the erection of a building with up to ten separate units. Separate consent will be required for the fitout and use of each tenancy.
· The Traffic Impact Assessment prepared by Colston Budd Hunt and Kafes dated August 2009 and the supplementary report dated September 2009 together with the Independent Peer Review conducted by Maunsell AECOM confirm that the proposal would have minimal impact on the function, efficiency and safety of the surrounding street network including Mulgoa Road.
The proposed development is consistent with the provisions of Clause 23A of the LEP.
Having regard to the above, it is considered that the proposed development is consistent with the objectives of the 4(b) zone.
(iv) General Development Provisions
The following Development Provisions apply to the proposed development: -
Clause 10 - Environmental considerations
Clause 10 of LEP 1996 states that:
“In determining a development application, the council must consider such of the following matters as are of relevance to the proposed development:
(a) any adverse impact on the existing or likely future amenity of any adjoining residential or rural land likely to be caused by air, water, noise or any other pollution,
(b) the effect on the visual amenity of any adjoining residential land,
(c) the effect on water quality through particulate or chemical emissions or sedimentation and the measures proposed to control any such effect,
(d) the extent of likely air emissions and the measures proposed to control those emissions,
(e) the energy efficiency of the proposal in terms of building design, solar access, site layout, technology and the like,
(f) waste management needs and the adequacy of proposed waste management measures, including opportunities for recycling,
(g) the hazardous nature and quantities of any materials or substances to be used or stored,
(h) proposed ongoing monitoring procedures and management plans to mitigate any adverse environment effects,
(i) the need for, and adequacy of, any site restoration, rehabilitation or remediation measures for the land.”
Having regard to the above objectives the following comments are made: -
· The proposed development is unlikely to adversely impact upon the existing or likely future amenity of any adjoining residential or rural land in terms of air, noise, or any other pollution. Appropriate measures for stormwater disposal have been incorporated into the development including water quality devices and the like.
· The siting of the proposed development is within an area of predominant bulky goods retail shops. The bulk and scale of the proposed development is in keeping with the surrounding built form. It is of high quality and embellishes the built environment.
· During construction appropriate erosion and sediment control measures will be implemented.
· The proposed development has incorporated energy efficient design as required by Section J of the BCA.
· A Waste Management Plan has been submitted in support of the subject application to which is considered satisfactory.
· No hazardous materials or substances would be used or stored at the subject site.
Clause 11 - Drainage
Clause 11of LEP 1996 states that:
“The Council must not grant consent to development unless it has taken into consideration whether:
(a) satisfactory arrangements have been made with the council for the implementation of that part of any council trunk drainage and water quality management scheme to which the land drains, and
(b) the development conforms with the provisions of any council trunk drainage and water quality management scheme applicable to the area, and
(c) the development conforms with the provisions of any council water quality and quantity policy.”
Stormwater management plans and associated concept plans have been submitted with the subject application. These plans have been reviewed by Council’s Development Engineers who have supported the proposed drainage arrangements. The proposal has therefore demonstrated consistency with the provisions of Clause 11 of PLEP 1996.
Clause 23 - Bulky goods retailing within Zone No.4(b)
Clause 23 of PLEP 1996 states that:
“The council may grant consent to the carrying out of development for the purpose of a shop trading principally in bulky goods on land within Zone No 4 (b) only if it is satisfied that:
(a) the development would not be more suitably carried out in a business centre in the locality, and
(b) the development is unlikely to have an adverse effect on the viability of any other business centres in the locality, and
(c) the development is of a type which is appropriate to an industrial zone or to the general character of existing development within the locality.”
The proposed development is located within an existing bulky goods precinct. The proposed development is considered to be satisfactory in respect of its location and its character in its context.
An Economic Impact Assessment prepared by Pitney Bowes dated August 2009 has been submitted in support of the subject application. The report concludes in part:
“…substantial positive economic impacts will more than serve to offset the limited projected trading impacts that could be anticipated on existing and proposed trade area retailers. Further, these impacts are unlikely to threaten the viability of any of these retailers or centres, or inhibit likely other proposed future developments.”
The submitted report concludes that the proposed development is unlikely to have a significant adverse economic impact upon the surrounding area. The consideration of economic impact is discussed later in this report.
(f) Penrith Local Environmental Plan No.201 - Rural Lands
Penrith Local Environmental Plan No.201 - Rural Lands (PLEP No.201) applies to Lot 11 DP 1046110. The area along the boundary of Lots 10 and 11 are proposed to be rehabilitated and landscaped as part of the proposed development.
Pursuant to Clause 9 of PLEP No.201, the following considerations are to be made: -
“9 Zone objectives and development control table
(1) The objectives of a zone are set out in the Table to this clause under the heading “Objectives of zone” appearing in the matter relating to the zone.
(2) Except as otherwise provided by this plan, in relation to land within a zone specified in the Table to this clause, the purposes (if any) for which:
(a) development may be carried out without development consent, and
(b) development may be carried out only with development consent, and
(c) development is prohibited,
are specified under the headings “Without development consent”, “Only with development consent” and “Prohibited”, respectively, appearing in the matter relating to the zone.
(3) Except as otherwise provided by this plan, the council shall not grant consent to the carrying out of development on land to which this plan applies unless the council is of the opinion that the carrying out of the development is consistent with the objectives of the plan and the zone within which the development is proposed to be carried out.”
Consideration of the objectives of the zone, permissibility and the development provisions are made in this section.
(i) Permissibility
Lot 11 is zoned 1(a) (Rural “A” Zone - General) under the PLEP No.201. Landscaping works are not defined as prohibited development. Accordingly, the proposed works are permissible only with consent.
(ii) Aims and Objectives of the Plan
The aims and objectives of PLEP No.201 are as follows: -
2 Aims, objectives etc
(1) The general aim of this plan is to encourage the property management, development and conservation of valuable natural and man-made resources within the rural lands of the City of Penrith.
(2) The specific aims of this plan are to protect, enhance or conserve:
(a) the rural character and setting of the City of Penrith, and
(b) the scenic quality and valuable landscape features of the rural areas, and
(c) productive agricultural and horticultural areas, and
(d) areas of significance for nature conservation, and
(e) minerals, soils, water, creek systems and other natural resources, and
(f) areas needed to accommodate Sydney’s future growth, and
(g) areas needed to accommodate special uses such as public utilities.
(3) The objectives, policies and strategies of this plan are:
(a) to rationalise the existing planning controls by replacing them with a single up-to-date local environmental plan in a manner which is consistent with the aims specified in subclauses (1) and (2), and
(b) to provide a framework which will encourage development to observe sound environmental planning principles, and
(c) to promote rural/residential development where it is consistent with the conservation of the rural, agricultural, heritage and natural landscape qualities, and
(d) to minimise the cost to the community of fragmented and haphazard development of rural land by ensuring that development does not create unreasonable demands for the provision or extension of public amenities and services now or in the future, and
(e) to ensure that traffic generating developments are suitably located so that the safety and efficiency of roads is not adversely affected by development on adjacent land, and
(f) to control development in areas subject to flood hazard.
The proposed landscaping works occur on the rear portion of the site which is zoned 1(a) (Rural “A” Zone - General). The proposed building additions occur on land that is zoned 4(b) under the PLEP 1996. The proposed landscaping work are considered to be consistent with the aims and objectives of the plan in respect to ensuring satisfactory measures are made to provide a visual transition of the existing built environment to adjoining rural lands.
(iii) Objectives of 1(a) zone
The objectives of the 1(a) zone are as follows: -
“9 Objectives of zone
The objectives are:
(a) to protect and enhance the scenic quality and rural character of the locality, and
(b) to ensure that development is compatible with the environmental capabilities of the land and to encourage the conservation and enhancement of natural resources by means of appropriate land management techniques, and
(c) to protect productive agricultural and horticultural land which supplies produce to the Sydney markets, and
(d) to protect valuable deposits of extractive materials, and
(e) to ensure that development does not create unreasonable demands, now or in the future, for provision or extension of public amenities or services, and
(f) to ensure that traffic generating developments are suitably located so as not to adversely affect the safety and efficiency of roads, and
(g) to ensure that the form, siting and colours of buildings, building materials and landscaping complement the natural scenic quality of these localities, and
(h) to ensure that where development is to be located on or near ridgetops, it will not significantly intrude into the skyline or detract from the scenic amenity of the locality, and
(i) to ensure that views from main roads and the rural character of the locality will not be adversely affected, and
(j) to ensure that the development will not lead to excessive soil erosion or run-off.”
The proposed landscaping works will protect and embellish the scenic and rural quality of the rural lands. Moreover, the proposed landscaping works assist in screening the back of house section of the existing bulky good retail building when viewed from the rural area to the rear (west) and from the M4 Motorway corridor.
(iv) Special Provisions
The following clauses are applicable to the proposed development: -
20 Flood liable land
In considering an application to carry out development on land which is, in the opinion of the council, flood liable land, the council shall consider:
(a) the effect of the proposed development on the efficiency and capacity of the floodway to carry and discharge floodwaters, and
(b) the safety of the proposed development in time of flood, and
(c) whether the proposed development involves any possible risk to life, human safety or private property in time of flood.
The rear portion of the subject development site (Lot 10) is shown on the Flood Planning Map as being subject to ‘approx 1% AEP flood extent.’
The adopted standard flood level for the subject development site is 27.2m AHD. The proposed development is not within the flood impacted portion. The proposed site and floor levels are above the flood planning level. Notwithstanding, an updated flood evacuation plan would be required as a condition of consent so as to cater for the increased use of the proposed development (See Special Condition 2.34).
3. Section 79C(1)(a)(ii) – Any Draft Environmental Planning Instruments
Draft Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2008
The draft Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2008 (draft PLEP 2008) applies to the subject site. The subject site is proposed to be part zoned IN2 Light Industrial and RU4 Rural Small Holding in Lot 10 and Lot 11 respectively.
(i) Aims of the Plan
The aims of the draft PLEP 2008 are outlined as follows: -
Aims of Plan
(1) This Plan aims to make local environmental planning provisions for land in Penrith in accordance with the relevant standard environmental planning instrument under section 33A of the Act.
(2) The particular aims of this Plan are as follows:
(a) to promote development that is consistent with the Council’s vision for Penrith, namely, one of a sustainable and prosperous region with a harmony of urban and rural qualities with a strong commitment to environmental protection and enhancement,
(b) to ensure development incorporates the principles of sustainable development through the delivery of balanced social, economic and environmental outcomes,
(c) to encourage development to be designed in a way that assists in the mitigation of, and the adaptation to, the likely impacts of climate change,
(d) to protect items of environmental value, particularly mature vegetation and significant watercourses, significant buildings and gardens, and scenic landscapes and views,
(e) to provide for an urban environment that is active, attractive and safe for residents and visitors,
(f) to encourage development that promotes responsible and environmentally sound management practices and resource use, and is sustainable in the long term,
(g) to reinforce Penrith’s urban growth limits and promote a compact city by identifying and promoting the intrinsic rural values and functions of Penrith’s rural lands,
(h) to sustain healthy and diverse rural lands in Penrith by conserving their biodiversity, maintaining the integrity of their ecosystems, maintaining their natural capital and promoting the social well being of rural communities,
(i) to provide for rural living opportunities that are consistent with conserving the rural, agricultural, heritage, natural and scenic values of the rural lands,
(j) to promote a sustainable economic environment that fosters economically viable rural development, employment, transport and future investment opportunities,
(k) to promote development across Penrith that creates a range of business, employment, education and training opportunities, suitable to the needs and skills of the residents and the workforce,
(l) to protect the environmental heritage of Penrith including places of historic, aesthetic, architectural, natural, cultural, and Aboriginal significance.”
The proposed development is consistent with the draft PLEP 2008 in that it provides a contemporary designed development that is in keeping with the surrounding built environment. Management practices for vehicular access, traffic and parking, as well as drainage, which seek to minimise impacts to the surrounding area, have been incorporated into the proposed development.
(ii) Objectives of the IN2 zone
The objectives of the IN2 zone applicable to Lot 10 is outlined as follows: -
Objectives of zone
§ To provide a wide range of light industrial, warehouse and related land uses.
§ To encourage employment opportunities and to support the viability of centres.
§ To minimise any adverse effect of industry on other land uses.
§ To enable other land uses that provides facilities or services to meet the day to day needs of workers in the area.
§ To promote development that makes efficient use of industrial land.
§ To limit the impact of industrial development on adjacent residential areas, in terms of its built form, scale, acoustic and visual privacy and air quality.
The proposed bulky goods retail extension would be located on land proposed to be zoned “IN2 Light Industrial.” The proposed development is considered to be consistent with the objectives of the IN2 zone having regard to, the increased opportunities for employment generation, the efficient use of land with respect to its layout and provision of available parking spaces both at-grade and basement areas. The proposed development would provide a built form that is in keeping with existing development within the vicinity of the subject site.
(iii) Objectives of the RU4 zone
The objectives of the RU4 zone applicable to Lot 11 is outlined as follows: -
Objectives of zone
· To enable sustainable primary industry and other compatible land uses.
· To maintain the rural and scenic character of the land.
· To ensure that development does not unreasonably increase the demand for public services or public facilities.
· To minimise conflict between land uses within the zone and land uses within adjoining zones.
· To ensure land uses are of a scale and nature that is compatible with the environmental capabilities of the land.
· To preserve and improve natural resources through appropriate land management practices.
· To protect views and vistas from main roads and other vantage points.
· To ensure land uses do not adversely affect the amenity of existing residents and the locality.
The proposed landscaping works on lot 11 are considered to be consistent with the objectives of the RU4 zone.
(iv) Permissibility
The site is proposed to be part zoned IN2 Light Industrial and RU4 Rural Small Holdings and under draft PLEP 2008.
Notwithstanding the land use tables outlined in Part 2 “Permitted or Prohibited development” of draft PLEP 2008, Clause 2.5 stipulates the following: -
“2.5