1 February 2010

 

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 1 February 2010 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 - 14 December 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

 

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


 

ORDINARY MEETING

 

Monday 1 February 2010

 

table of contents

 

 

 

 

 

ADVANCE AUSTRALIA FAIR

 

 

STATEMENT OF RECOGNITION OF PENRITH CITY’S ABORIGINAL AND TORRES STRAIT ISLANDER CULTURAL HERITAGE

 

 

PRAYER

 

 

COUNCIL CHAMBER seating arrangements

 

 

meeting calendar

 

 

confirmation of minutes

 

 

PROCEDURE FOR ADDRESSING COUNCIL MEETING

 

 

MAYORAL MINUTES

 

 

report and recommendations of committees

 

 

DELIVERY program reports


 

ADVANCE AUSTRALIA FAIR

 

 

 

Australians all let us rejoice,

For we are young and free;

We’ve golden soil and wealth for toil;

Our home is girt by sea;

Our land abounds in nature’s gifts

Of beauty rich and rare;

In history’s page, let every stage

Advance Australia Fair.

 

In joyful strains then let us sing,

Advance Australia Fair.

 

Beneath our radiant Southern Cross

We’ll toil with hearts and hands;

To make this Commonwealth of ours

Renowned of all the lands;

For those who’ve come across the seas

We’ve boundless plains to share;

With courage let us all combine

To Advance Australia Fair.

 

In joyful strains then let us sing,

Advance Australia Fair.

 


 

 


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

Text Box: Lectern

Group Managers                          

                
          

 
Seating Arrangements

 

 

 

Director
Craig Butler

 

 

Director
Barry Husking

 

 

 

General Manager
Alan Stoneham

His Worship the Mayor
Councillor
Kevin Crameri OAM
North Ward

 

Acting Executive Officer
Glenn Schuil

 

 

Minute Clerk

 

 

 

 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 


                                                        

 

 

Text Box: Public Gallery
Text Box: Managers
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Group Managers                          

                
          

 
   


2010 MEETING CALENDAR

February 2010 - December 2010

(adopted by Council 9/11/09)

 

 

 

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 Meeting

7.30pm

1

 

 

3v

 

12

9#

6ü

11¨

8#

13

(7.00pm)

22#

22

19

24#

21*

 

 

27^

(7.00pm)

 

29

 

Policy Review Committee

7.30pm

15

8

 

10

 

 

16

13@

 

15

 

 

29@

 

 

28

19

30

 

18

 

 

Operational Plan Public Forum

 

6.00pm

 

 

 

31

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

v

Meeting at which the Draft Operational Plan for 2010/2011 is adopted for exhibition

*

Meeting at which the Operational Plan for 2010/2011 is adopted

#

Meetings at which the Operational Plan quarterly reviews are presented

@

Delivery Program progress reports

^

Election of Mayor/Deputy Mayor

ü

Meeting at which the 2009/2010 Annual Statements are presented

¨

Meeting at which any comments on the 2009/2010 Annual Statements are presented

-                 Extraordinary Meetings are held as required.

-                 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 Acting Executive Officer, Glenn Schuil.

 


CONFIRMED MINUTES

 OF THE ORDINARY MEETING OF PENRITH CITY COUNCIL HELD IN THE

COUNCIL CHAMBERS

ON MONDAY 14 DECEMBER 2009 AT 7:05PM

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, Kaylene Allison, Robert Ardill, Greg Davies, Mark Davies, Tanya Davies, Ross Fowler OAM, Ben Goldfinch, Jackie Greenow, Prue Guillaume, Marko Malkoc, Karen McKeown and John Thain.

 

LEAVE OF ABSENCE

Leave of Absence was previously granted to Councillor Kath Presdee for the period 13 December 2009 to 16 December 2009 inclusive.

 

APOLOGIES

There were no apologies.

 

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES - Ordinary Meeting - 30 November 2009

445  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jim Aitken OAM seconded Councillor Robert Ardill that the minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of 30 November 2009 be confirmed.

 

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Councillor Jim Aitken OAM declared a Non-Pecuniary Conflict of Interest – Less than Significant in Item 8 - Fire Safety Assessment of Centro Lennox, Lot 1 DP 610862 Pyramid Street Emu Plains.  Owner: CPT Custodian Pty Ltd as he is a Director of a company that leases a shop in Centro Lennox.

 

Councillor Greg Davies declared a Pecuniary Interest in Item 1 - Notice of Motion (Rescission), as it applies to Items 3 and 6 of the Ordinary Meeting of 30 November 2009, as he had exchanged voting preferences with one of the property owners at the last Penrith City Council local Government election.

 

Councillor Greg Davies declared a Non-Pecuniary Conflict of Interest – Less than Significant in Item 6 – Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program - Strategic Projects funding opportunity as he is the Chairperson on the Board that manages Ripples.

 

Councillor Greg Davies declared a Non-Pecuniary Conflict of Interest – Less than Significant in Item 12 - Tender Reference 28-09/10 Supply & Installation of Pool Water Heating Equipment as he is the Chairperson on the Board that manages Ripples.

 

Councillor Kaylene Allison declared a Pecuniary Interest in Item 1 - Notice of Motion (Rescission), as it applies to Items 3 and 6 of the Ordinary Meeting of 30 November 2009, as she had exchanged preferences with one of the property owners at the last local government election and also her Uncle owns land in Kemps Creek. 

 

Councillor Jackie Greenow declared a Pecuniary Interest in Item 1 - Notice of Motion (Rescission), as it applies to Items 3 and 6 of the Ordinary Meeting of 30 November 2009, as

she owns property in an area covered by the report.

 

Councillor Ross Fowler OAM declared a Pecuniary Interest in COW Item 2 - Commercial Matter - Leasing of Coffee Shop/General Store within Glenmore Park Child & Family Precinct as an applicant for this lease is a client of his.

 

Councillor Mark Davies declared a Non-Pecuniary Conflict of Interest – Less than Significant  in Item 1 - Decision Making Arrangements During the Christmas/New Year Council Recess as one of the applicants was a client of his.

 

Having previously declared an interest in Item 1 - Notice of Motion (Rescission), Councillors Jackie Greenow, Kaylene Allison and Greg Davies left the meeting, the time being 7:15 pm.

 

SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS

446  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor John Thain seconded Councillor Mark Davies that Standing Orders be suspended to allow members of the public to address the meeting, the time being 7:15 pm.

 

Mr Scott Greenow

 

Item 1 - Notice of Motion (Rescission)

 

Mr Scott Greenow, affected person, spoke in opposition to the Rescission Motion and reiterated his reasons for why 16 & 18 Pages Road, St Marys should not be heritage listed.  Mr Greenow questioned the accuracy of Heritage Reports that had been carried out on the property. 

 

RESUMPTION OF STANDING ORDERS

447  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Mark Davies seconded Councillor John Thain that Standing Orders be resumed, the time being 7:19 pm.

 

  Notice Of Motion

 

1        Notice of Motion (Rescission)                                                                                           

448  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jim Aitken OAM seconded Councillor Ross Fowler OAM that Item 3 of the 30 November 2009 business paper be rescinded and resubmitted for Council’s consideration.

 

In accordance with Section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993, a DIVISION was then called with the following result:

 

For

Against

Councillor Jim Aitken OAM             

Councillor Prue Guillaume

Councillor Ross Fowler OAM

Councillor Karen McKeown

Councillor Robert Ardill

Councillor John Thain

Councillor Mark Davies

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM

Councillor Ben Goldfinch

 

Councillor Tanya Davies

 

Councillor Marko Malkoc

 

 

Recommittal of Item 3 of 30 November 2009 business paper (Outstanding issues from the public exhibition of draft Amendment No. 1 to Penrith Local Environmental Plan 1991 (Environmental Heritage Conservation))

 

449  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Robert Ardill seconded Councillor Ross Fowler OAM

 

That:

 

1.      The information contained in the report on Outstanding issues for the public exhibition of draft Amendment No. 1 to Penrith Local Environmental Plan 1991 (Environmental Heritage Conservation) be received.

 

2.      House Numbers 14, 16 and 18 Pages Road, St Marys be retained in Schedule 1 of draft Amendment No. 1 to Penrith Local Environmental Plan 1991 (Environmental Heritage Conservation).

 

In accordance with Section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993, a DIVISION was then called with the following result:

 

For

Against

Councillor Jim Aitken OAM             

Councillor Prue Guillaume

Councillor Ross Fowler OAM

Councillor Karen McKeown

Councillor Robert Ardill

Councillor John Thain

Councillor Mark Davies

 

Councillor Ben Goldfinch

 

Councillor Tanya Davies

 

Councillor Marko Malkoc       

                            

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM

 

 

Councillor Jim Aitken OAM then declared a Pecuniary Interest in Item 6 of the 30 November 2009 Ordinary Meeting business paper (Proposed changes to draft Amendment No 1 to Penrith Local Environmental Plan 1991 (Environmental Heritage Conservation), as he owns/has an interest in property covered by the report.  Councillor Jim Aitken OAM then left the meeting, the time being 7:31 pm.

 

Councillor Ross Fowler OAM declared a Pecuniary Interest in Item 6 of the 30 November 2009 Ordinary Meeting business paper (Proposed changes to draft Amendment No 1 to Penrith Local Environmental Plan 1991 (Environmental Heritage Conservation)), 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 then left the meeting, the time being 7:31 pm.

 

450  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Robert Ardill seconded Councillor Mark Davies that Item 6 of the 30 November 2009 business paper (Proposed changes to draft Amendment No 1 to Penrith Local Environmental Plan 1991 (Environmental Heritage Conservation)),  be rescinded and resubmitted for Council’s 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 Prue Guillaume

Councillor Mark Davies

Councillor Karen McKeown

Councillor Ben Goldfinch

Councillor John Thain

Councillor Tanya Davies

 

Councillor Marko Malkoc

 

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM

 

 

Recommittal of Item 6 of 30 November 2009 business paper (Proposed changes to draft Amendment No 1 to Penrith Local Environmental Plan 1991 (Environmental Heritage Conservation))

 

451  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Mark Davies seconded Councillor Robert Ardill:

 

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Proposed changes to draft Amendment No 1 to Penrith Local Environmental Plan 1991 (Environmental Heritage Conservation) be received.

2.     The changes and corrections listed in this report be made to draft Amendment No.1 to Local Environmental Plan 1991 (Environmental Heritage Conservation).

3.     Following the changes, draft Amendment No.1 to Local Environmental Plan 1991 (Environmental Heritage Conservation), (except for any amendments arising from the changes to the Standard Instrument) be forwarded to the Department of Planning with a request that the Minister make the Plan. 

4.     That the comments of the Director be noted and should it be subsequently determined by the Director that further communication be required with applicants to a current native title claim then that communication be put in place and if required the matter be remitted back to Council.

 

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 Prue Guillaume

Councillor Mark Davies

Councillor Karen McKeown

Councillor Ben Goldfinch

Councillor John Thain

Councillor Tanya Davies

 

Councillor Marko Malkoc

 

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM

 

 

Councillors Kaylene Allison, Greg Davies, Ross Fowler OAM and Jim Aitken OAM  returned to the meeting, the time being 7:38 pm.

 

 

Reports of Committees

 

1        Report and Recommendations of the Penrith Valley Community Safety Partnership Meeting held on 25 November 2009                                                                                                

452  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jim Aitken OAM seconded Councillor Kaylene Allison that the recommendations contained in the Report and Recommendations of the Penrith Valley Community Safety Partnership meeting held on 25 November, 2009 be adopted.

 

2        Report and Recommendations of the Access Committee Meeting held on 2 December 2009

453  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Prue Guillaume seconded Councillor Jim Aitken OAM that the recommendations contained in the Report and Recommendations of the Access Committee meeting held on 2 December, 2009 be adopted.

 

3        Report and Recommendations of the Local Traffic Committee Meeting held on 7 December 2009                                                                                                                                     

454  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Karen McKeown seconded Councillor Greg Davies that the recommendations contained in the Report and Recommendations of the Local Traffic Committee meeting held on 7 December, 2009 be adopted.

 

 

 

 

 

4        Report and Recommendations of the Policy Review Committee meeting held on 7 December, 2009                                                                                                                                     

455  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ross Fowler OAM seconded Councillor Jim Aitken OAM that the recommendations contained in the Report and Recommendations of the Policy Review Committee meeting held on 7 December, 2009 be adopted.

 

 

DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS

 

A Leading City

 

Councillor Jackie Greenow returned to the meeting, the time being 7:39 pm.

 

1        Decision Making Arrangements During the Christmas/New Year Council Recess

Councillor Jackie Greenow left the meeting at 7:41 pm and did not return.

         

456  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Tanya Davies seconded Councillor Robert Ardill

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Decision Making Arrangements During the Christmas/New Year Council Recess be received.

2.     Development Applications which would normally warrant reporting to Council between 15 December 2009 and 31 January 2010 inclusive be determined under the General Manager’s delegation by the General Manager, after consultation with the Mayor.

3.     A report be presented to the Ordinary Council Meeting to be held on 1 February 2010 relating to the operations of the organisation during this period.

 

 

 

2        Preparations and Financial Settings for the 2010-2011 Operational Plan

Councillor Ross Fowler OAM complimented the Council’s staff on the report.

 

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

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Preparations and Financial Settings for the 2010-2011 Operational Plan be received.

2.     Council make initial identification of particular matters to be considered in the preparation of the Draft 2010-2011 Operational Plan.

3.     Preparation of the Draft 2010-2011 Operational Plan continue in the terms discussed in this report.

 

 

3        Sustainability Scholarship in Memory of Louise Petchell

Councillors Karen McKeown and Tanya Davies commented that the report was timely as an unveiling of a memorial plaque and a tree planting ceremony in honour of Louise Petchell was held on 11 December 2009.

         

458  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Karen McKeown seconded Councillor Tanya Davies

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Sustainability Scholarship in Memory of Louise Petchell be received.

2.     The Louise Petchell Learning for Sustainability Scholarship be established to commence in the 2010-11 financial year.

 

 

SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS

459  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Karen McKeown seconded Councillor Greg Davies that Standing Orders be suspended to allow a member of the public to address the meeting, the time being 7:52 pm.

 

Mr Bernard Proctor

 

Item 3 - Sustainability Scholarship in Memory of Louise Petchell

 

Mr Bernard Proctor, husband of the Late Louise Petchell, addressed the meeting with regard to the Learning for Sustainability Scholarship to be established by Council in Louise’s honour.  Mr Proctor thanked Council for the recent memorial service and tree planting which took place last Friday, 11 December 2009 on behalf of Louise’s family.  Mr Proctor also expressed his wish that Council establish an honour roll board in conjunction with this Scholarship, in order to recognise achievers in the field of Sustainability.

 

RESUMPTION OF STANDING ORDERS

460  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Karen McKeown that Standing Orders be resumed, the time being 7:54 pm.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4        Council Property - Electricity Easement over Three Separate Parcels of Land at Cranebrook, Glenmore Park and St Marys                                                                                            

461  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Jim Aitken OAM

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Council Property - Electricity Easement over Three Separate Parcels of Land at Cranebrook, Glenmore Park and St Marys be received.

2.     Council grant Integral Energy an Easement for Padmount Substation and Restriction as to User over Lot 404 DP 1135832 Centauri Circuit at Cranebrook, Lot 8100 DP 876748 Blue Hills Drive, at Glenmore Park and Lot 8 DP 974985 No 2-6 Mamre Road at St Marys.

3.     Compensation be paid by Integral Energy in the amount of $5,500 plus GST over Lot 404 DP1135832 Centauri Circuit at Cranebrook as well as all reasonable costs associated with the granting of the easement.

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

 

Councillor Karen McKeown left the meeting, the time being 7:55 pm.

 

5        Amendments to the Fees & Charges - St Marys Memorial Hall and Glenmore Park Child and Family Centre                                                                                                              

462  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ross Fowler OAM seconded Councillor Marko Malkoc

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Amendments to the Fees & Charges - St Marys Memorial Hall and Glenmore Park Child and Family Centre  be received.

2.     The amended fees as advertised be adopted.

 

6        Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program - Strategic Projects funding opportunity

Councillor Karen McKeown returned to the meeting, the time being 7:56 pm.

         

463  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor John Thain seconded Councillor Ross Fowler OAM

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program - Strategic Projects funding opportunity be received.

2.     Council endorse the submission of the Ripples Leisure Centre improvements as the preferred project for submission under the Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program – Strategic Projects funding opportunity.

3.     Council endorse the expenditure of $12,500 to Knox & Partners Landscape Architects from the Grants Reserve as outlined in the report.

 

 

7        Summary of Investments & Banking from 1 November 2009 to 30 November 2009    

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

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Summary of Investments & Banking from 1 November 2009 to 30 November 2009 be received.

2.     The Certificate of the Responsible Accounting Officer and Summaries of Investments and Performance for the period 1 November 2009 to 30 November 2009 be noted and accepted.

3.     The graphical investment analysis as at 30 November 2009 be noted.

 

 

A Green City

 

8        Fire Safety Assessment of Centro Lennox, Lot 1 DP 610862 Pyramid Street Emu Plains.  Owner: CPT Custodian Pty Ltd                                                                                         

465  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Ross Fowler OAM

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Fire Safety Assessment of Centro Lennox, Lot 1 DP 610862 Pyramid Street Emu Plains be received

2.     Council prepare Notices of Intention to Serve an Order No. 6 under Section 121B of the Act, incorporating all items identified by the Brigade and Council

3.     The Brigade be advised on the action taken by Council.

 

9        Site Compatibility Application under SEPP (Housing for Seniors or people with a Disability) 2004 for the Penrith Golf Club, The Northern Road , Penrith. Applicant: Cityscape Planning & Projects;  Owner: Penrith Golf Club                                                                                  

466  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ross Fowler OAM seconded Councillor Ben Goldfinch

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Site Compatibility Application under SEPP (Housing for Seniors or people with a Disability) 2004 for the Penrith Golf Club, The Northern Road, Penrith be received.

2.     Council advise the Department of Planning that it does not object in principle to the issue of a Site Compatibility Certificate for Seniors Housing on the site subject to any Certificate issued incorporating the following requirements:

2.1       Buildings not to exceed 4 storeys in height

2.2       Viewlines to the Blue Mountains escarpment are preserved

2.3       All buildings are setback a minimum of 80m from The Northern Road

2.4      The development not be designed in a way that creates an urban image or character as viewed from The Northern Road

2.5       Bus service enhancements for residents.

 

3.     The Department of Planning be advised that this decision does not in any way fetter Council’s ability to determine any subsequent development application on the site on its merits.

In accordance with Section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993, a DIVISION was then called with the following result:

 

For

Against

Councillor Kaylene Allison

 

Councillor Prue Guillaume

 

Councillor Karen McKeown

 

Councillor Greg Davies

 

Councillor John Thain

 

Councillor Jim Aitken OAM

 

Councillor Ross Fowler OAM

 

Councillor Robert Ardill

 

Councillor Mark Davies

 

Councillor Ben Goldfinch

 

Councillor Tanya Davies

 

Councillor Marko Malkoc

 

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM

 

 

10      Section 96 Application (DA03/2784.04) to modify condition 18 vary the release restriction on the use of land relating to building height at Lot 1041 - 1048 DP 1128253 Harold Bentley Way, Glenmore Park. Applicant: Proust & Gardner Consulting Pty Ltd;  Owner: Nergl Developments Pty Ltd                                                                                 DA03/2784.04

467  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor John Thain seconded Councillor Ross Fowler OAM

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Section 96 Application (DA03/2784.04) to modify condition 18 vary the release restriction on the use of land relating to building height at Lot 1041 - 1048 DP 1128253 Harold Bentley Way, Glenmore Park1128253 be received.

2.     The General Manager, in consultation with the Mayor, be given the delegated authority to determine the Section 96 Application No 03/2784.04 to modify Development Consent No 03/2784.

3.     Council authorise the Common Seal of Penrith City Council be affixed to all necessary documentation as prepared to reflect the findings of this assessment report.

In accordance with Section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993, a DIVISION was then called with the following result:

 

For

Against

Councillor Kaylene Allison

 

Councillor Prue Guillaume

 

Councillor Karen McKeown

 

Councillor Greg Davies

 

Councillor John Thain

 

Councillor Jim Aitken OAM

 

Councillor Ross Fowler OAM

 

Councillor Robert Ardill

 

Councillor Mark Davies

 

Councillor Ben Goldfinch

 

Councillor Tanya Davies

 

Councillor Marko Malkoc

 

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM

 

 

A Liveable City

 

11      Path paving construction request in Cambridge Park                                                      

468  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor John Thain seconded Councillor Ben Goldfinch:

That:

1.      The information contained in the report on Path paving construction request in Cambridge Park be received.

2.      The amount of $5,400 be allocated from North Ward voted works to the construction of a footpath along the frontage of St Pauls Anglican Church, Cambridge Park.

 

 

12      Tender Reference 28-09/10 Supply & Installation of Pool Water Heating Equipment  

469  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor John Thain seconded Councillor Marko Malkoc

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Tender Reference 28-09/10 Supply & Installation of Pool Water Heating Equipment be received.

2.     A Contract for the Supply and Installation of Pool Water Heating Equipment be awarded to Trisley's Hydraulic Services Pty Ltd for the lump sum fixed cost of $332,940 (ex GST) including the options for increased plant capacity.

 

 

 

 

A Vibrant City

 

13      Magnetic Places Community Cultural Grants Program 2009-2010                                 

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

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Magnetic Places Community Cultural Grants Program 2009-2010 be received.

2.     The recommended projects listed in Table 1 in this report be approved for funding.

 

 

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

 

Councillor John Thain left the meeting, the time being 8:04 pm.

 

QWN 1      Assistance to attend Special Olympics National Games - Adelaide 2010             

Councillor Tanya Davies requested that an amount of $150 be allocated from the Sporting Donation Vote, and an amount of $350 be allocated from East Ward voted works, to assist a St Clair resident to attend the Special Olympics National Games to be held in Adelaide in 2010. 

Councillor John Thain returned to the meeting, the time being 8:06 pm.

 

471  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Tanya Davies seconded Councillor Ross Fowler OAM that the matter be brought forward and dealt with as an urgent matter.

 

His Worship the Mayor, Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM, ruled that the matter was urgent and should be dealt with at the meeting.

 

 

472  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Tanya Davies seconded Councillor Ross Fowler OAM  that an amount of $150 be allocated from the Sporting Donation Vote, and an amount of $350 be allocated from East Ward voted works, to assist a St Clair resident to attend the Special Olympics National Games to be held in Adelaide in 2010. 

 

 

 

QWN 2      Hire of Castlereagh Hall for Charity Event                                                            

Councillor Ben Goldfinch requested that an amount of $400 be allocated from North Ward voted works to pay for the cost of hire of the Castlereagh Hall for a fundraising event for people dealing with depression.

 

473  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ben Goldfinch seconded Councillor John Thain that the matter be brought forward and dealt with as an urgent matter.

 

 

His Worship the Mayor, Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM, ruled that the matter was urgent and should be dealt with at the meeting.

 

 

474  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ben Goldfinch seconded Councillor John Thain that an amount of $400 be allocated from North Ward voted works to pay for the cost of hire of the Castlereagh Hall for a fundraising event for people dealing with depression.

 

 

QWN 3      Dilapidated condition of property in Glossop Street, St Marys                             

Councillor Mark Davies requested an inspection by Council officers and memo reply to all Councillors outlining the extend of health, contamination and illegal dumping issues at a property in Glossop Street, St Marys.

 

QWN 4      Pedestrian Access to Southlands Shopping Centre                                                 

Councillor Mark Davies requested a memo reply to all Councillors  regarding the provision of pedestrian access into Southlands shopping centre from Maxwell Street, South Penrith.

 

QWN 5      Uniting West Charity                                                                                                

Councillor Greg Davies requested a report be presented to the Policy Review Committee on the Uniting West charity, and that representatives of the charity be invited to make a presentation to the meeting.

 

QWN 6      Donations Policy                                                                                                       

Councillor Ross Fowler OAM requested a report be presented to the Policy Review Committee providing a review of the Support Policy for cultural and sporting donations, including the quantum of funds.

 

 

Committee of the Whole

 

475  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jim Aitken OAM seconded Councillor John Thain that the meeting adjourn to the Committee of the Whole to deal with the following matters, the time being 8:20 pm.

 

1        Presence of the Public

 

CW1 RESOLVED on the motion of Councillor Jim Aitken OAM seconded Councillor John Thain that the press and public be excluded from Committee of the Whole to deal with the following matters:

 

 

 

 

 

 

A Leading City

 

2        Commercial Matter - Leasing of Coffee Shop/General Store within Glenmore Park Child & Family Precinct                                                                                                                   

 

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        Commercial Matter - Assignment of Lease of Lakeview General Store at 3-4 Floribunda Avenue Glenmore Park                                                                                                      

 

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

 

4        Commercial Matter - Purchase of No.1 Collins Street, St Marys being Lot B DP 38643       

 

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

 

The meeting resumed at 8:26 pm and the General Manager reported that the Committee of the Whole met at 8:20 pm on 14 December 2009, the following being present

 

His Worship the Mayor Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM, Councillors Jim Aitken OAM, Kaylene Allison, Robert Ardill, Greg Davies, Mark Davies, Tanya Davies, Ross Fowler OAM, Ben Goldfinch, Prue Guillaume, Marko Malkoc, Karen McKeown 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

 

Having previously declared a Pecuniary Interest in COW Item 2, Councillor Ross Fowler OAM left the meeting, the time being 8:21 pm.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2        Commercial Matter - Leasing of Coffee Shop/General Store within Glenmore Park Child & Family Precinct                                                                                                                   

RECOMMENDED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Jim Aitken OAM

CW2 That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Commercial Matter - Leasing of Coffee Shop/General Store within Glenmore Park Child & Family Precinct be received.

2.     Council thank Jobquest Pty Ltd for their interest in submitting a tender concerning the first tender advertising process.

3.     Council grant a 10 year Lease with a 5 year option to Mr Charles Sentas in accordance with the terms and conditions as outlined in the report.

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

 

Councillor Ross Fowler OAM returned to the meeting, the time being 8:22 pm.

 

3        Commercial Matter - Assignment of Lease of Lakeview General Store at 3-4 Floribunda Avenue Glenmore Park                                                                                                      

RECOMMENDED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Marko Malkoc

CW3 That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Commercial Matter - Assignment of Lease of Lakeview General Store at 3-4 Floribunda Avenue Glenmore Park be received.

2.     Council grant an assignment of lease to Steven Williams and Michelle Kenny in accordance with the terms and conditions as outlined in the report.

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

 

4        Commercial Matter - Purchase of No.1 Collins Street, St Marys being Lot B DP 38643       

RECOMMENDED on the MOTION of Councillor Marko Malkoc seconded Councillor Ben Goldfinch

CW4 That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Commercial Matter - Purchase of No.1 Collins Street, St Marys being Lot B DP 38643 be received.

2.     Council purchase Lot B DP 38643 in accordance with Conditions 1-6 as outlined in the summary of the report.

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

 ADOPTION OF Committee of the Whole

 

476  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Tanya Davies that the recommendation contained in the Committee of the Whole and shown as CW1, CW2, CW3 and CW4 be adopted.

 

 

 

There being no further business the Chairperson declared the meeting closed the time being 8:29 pm.

 

 

I certify that these 16 pages are the Confirmed Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Penrith City Council held on 14 December 2009.

 

 

                                       ____________________                ______________

                                                Chairperson                                     Date

 

 

 

 


PENRITH CITY COUNCIL

 

Procedure for Addressing Meetings

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

It should be noted that persons who wish to address the Council are addressing a formal part of the Council Meeting. All persons addressing the Meeting should give consideration to their dress attire. Smart casual is a minimum that is thought to be appropriate when addressing such a forum.

 

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                                                       

   


 

 

 

 

THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT BLANK  INTENTIONALLY


Mayoral Minutes

 

Item                                                                                                                                       Page

 

1        2010 Australia Day celebrations

 

2        The passing of Peter Goodfellow

 

3        Three Bin Waste Service

 

 



Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

A Vibrant City

 

Mayoral Minute

2010 Australia Day celebrations

Strategic Objective: We encourage the wellbeing, creativity, inclusivity and diversity of our communities

           

 

Council’s Australia Day celebrations at the Sydney International Regatta Centre were again a great success. An estimated 25,000 people attended the event on Tuesday 26 January to enjoy an impressive program of high quality family entertainment and activities, from music and stunt shows to rides and displays. The fireworks spectacular was again a popular highlight.

 

We were honoured to be chosen once again as one of three NSW sites to host an Australia Day Premier’s Reception, testament to the calibre of our facilities and our commitment to celebrating this important day.

 

I’m pleased this year’s event reflected our commitment to sustainability. It was powered by GreenPower, thanks to our major sponsor Integral Energy ensuring the energy used at the event was purchased from accredited renewable energy sources. It was also a Waste Wise Event, with Council ensuring sound waste management and recycling services to divert as much as possible of the waste generated on the day away from landfill.

 

Our Australia Day Ambassadors - Olympic gold medallist yachtsman Nathan Wilmot and television personality and celebrity gardener Graham Ross made a great contribution to the day, and I thank them both.

 

I would like to express Council’s gratitude to our many generous sponsors and supporters, including Integral Energy; Penrith Lakes Development Corporation; NSW Communities, Sport and Recreation; Woolworths; Penrith Press; Blue Mountains Bus Company; Delfin Lend Lease; Mulgoa Quarries; O-I; Panthers World of Entertainment; SITA Environmental Solutions and Vintage FM as well as Channel Nine; Penrith City Star; Fusion FM; Hix Group; Western Weekender; Westfield Penrith and Tackle World St Marys.Thank you also to management and staff of the Sydney International Regatta Centre for again providing an excellent venue and outstanding service.

 

This successful celebration would not be possible without the enthusiasm and expertise of so many individuals and teams. So last, but certainly not least, a big thank you to the many volunteers and to all the Council staff involved in the organisation and smooth running of this major event. The dedication and hard work of staff, in particular the Events and Depot teams, were again remarkable. Congratulations to all on a job well done.

 

Kevin Crameri OAM

Mayor

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That the Mayoral Minute on 2010 Australia Day celebrations be received.

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

A City of Opportunities

 

Mayoral Minute

The passing of Peter Goodfellow

 

Council’s former Service Development Librarian Peter Goodfellow passed away peacefully, surrounded by family, in Nepean Hospital on Wednesday 21 January. He had been on long term sick leave since April 2009 due to a brain tumour.

 

Peter joined Council’s library staff in 1986 after serving at Blacktown Council’s Mt Druitt branch library for nine years. He quickly became an integral and popular member of the team responsible for making Council’s library service into one of the best in local government.

 

During his 23 years’ service, Peter planned a range of projects including conferences and came up with ideas to generate revenue for the library including room hire and holiday programs. Peter was also a long standing member of the Library’s Management Team. Perhaps one of Peter’s proudest achievements was introducing regular storytelling sessions at the library. He was a vivid and enthusiastic storyteller and helped foster a love of words in many people. He also helped transition the old library to the new building in 1994.

 

Peter recognised the value of promoting services to new audiences and devised promotional activities including events and publicity such as the Library’s What’s On newsletter. He constantly promoted innovation and change, for the benefit of Council and library patrons. He represented Council at the Local Government Managers Australia Challenge in 2001, and was a long standing member of Council’s Occupational Health & Safety Committee.

 

Peter was always looking to improve his skills and excelled in various external courses, including winning a Team Leadership award in 1998 and coming first in the state in Marketing at TAFE in 2000. He went on to share his knowledge as a part time TAFE teacher.

 

Peter was much loved by his colleagues, and his intelligence, dedication, and knowledge will be greatly missed by his peers and library patrons. Peter was also well known for his great sense of humour, and his delight in the absurd aspects of everyday life. He walked to work every day and was very fit, so his illness came as such a shock to his colleagues.

 

Peter’s passing is a sad loss to Penrith City, and on behalf of Council I would like to offer my deepest sympathy to his family, especially his wife Rose, daughter Elizabeth, and sons Richard and David, as well as Peter’s many friends and colleagues. While Peter will be keenly missed on a personal and professional level, his work has contributed to a leading library service for our City and that is a legacy that will live on.

 

 

Kevin Crameri OAM

Mayor

 

RECOMMENDATION

That the Mayoral Minute on The passing of Peter Goodfellow be received.

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

A Vibrant City

 

Mayoral Minute

Three Bin Waste Service

Strategic Objective: We will reduce our ecological footprint by using sustainable methods of production, consumption and technologies

           

 

As Councillors would be aware, there has been significant community concern about Penrith City Council’s three bin waste system, which has been in operation since August last year.

 

The situation has not been helped by substantial misinformation in media coverage, which has exacerbated confusion in the community.

 

Notably, Council has received positive support for the system, including NSW Keep Australia Beautiful CEO Peter McLean and former Planet Ark founder and NSW Australian of the Year 2010, Jon Dee.

 

Penrith’s three bin waste system was developed in response to the State Government’s Waste Strategy 2003, which mandated all businesses and local councils must increase the recycling of their waste to 66% by 2014. The system is also another example of Penrith City Council’s commitment to sustainability.

 

Under the new three-bin system, we are reducing the amount of material going to landfill, but will also turn our organic waste into high-quality compost that in trials, dramatically improved local sporting fields and parklands.

 

The State Government now charges a levy to send waste to landfill in an effort to encourage waste recycling and reduce the effect of greenhouse gas emissions. Any costs incurred by Council to dispose of waste are passed on to residents through the domestic waste charge. Residual waste costs around $160 per tonne to send to landfill, and this cost will continue to increase as landfill sites fill up. Clean organic waste will cost us about $90 per tonne to process.

 

Since August 2009 some 49,500 residents in single and dual occupancy properties in urban areas of the City have been asked to sort their household waste into three bins:

 

1)   Green lid: organics (garden and food waste) collected weekly

2)   Yellow lid: recycling collected fortnightly and

3)   Red lid: residual garbage collected fortnightly.

 

There has been significant concern in recent weeks that the standard service (140 litre residual bin and 240 litre recycling and organics bins) is inadequate for some households. Residents can choose a smaller service at a lower charge (140 litre residual bin and 140 litre organics bin) or a larger service at a higher charge (all bins 240 litre) if this better meets their needs. Additional recycling bins are also available for households who want them at a cost of 73 cents per week, or $38 per year. A temporary weekly collection is also available for families with children in nappies, or those with medical needs, for a cost of $50 a year. A large red bin collected fortnightly is also available for a cost of $50 per year.

 

A recent audit of the waste service found that approximately 46% of all organic waste was found in the red lidded bins instead of the green lidded organics bin. Additionally, 22% of dry recyclables were found in the red lidded bin instead of the yellow lidded bin. It is apparent that another education program is needed.

 

A significant amount of planning and consultation was involved in the implementation of the three bin waste system. Council engaged in extensive community consultation, and the planning process, which took place over four years, involved numerous assessments and audits.

 

I appreciate the change has been difficult to implement for some residents, particularly young families. A special workshop has been scheduled for February 8, where all of these issues will be brought before the Councillors. Detailed information will be circulated to all Councillors prior to this date. This information will contain analysis of a range of options in relation to cost and potential contractual issues. While this will not be a public meeting, steps have been taken to invite members of the community, representatives for SITA, Council’s Waste Consultant, Jon Dee and Sydney West Area Health Service to address Council on a range of issues.

 

The new service is a major change for householders who have been used to the old two bin service in operation since 1982 and it was inevitable that there would be some challenges.

 

I am confident that Council will continue to work with the community in the successful implementation of our waste strategy.

 

 

Kevin Crameri OAM

Mayor

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That the Mayoral Minute on Three Bin Waste Service be received.

 

 

  


DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS

 

Item                                                                                                                                       Page

 

 

A Leading City

 

1        Urban Development Institute of Australia National Congress 2010

 

2        Council Property - Dedication of Roadway and Lot Consolidation Charles Hackett Drive St Marys

 

3        Development Applications Determined during the Council's 2009-2010 Christmas/New Year Recess

 

4        Grants approved under the NSW Community Building Partnership Program

 

5        Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program Round 2 2009-10: Council's Allocation of $721,000

 

6        Electricity Update

 

7        Audit Committee

 

8        2010 Local Government Remuneration Tribunal Review

 

9        Pecuniary Interest Returns

 

10      Australian Local Government Women's Association 2010 NSW State Annual Conference

 

11      Summary of Investments for the period 1 December to 31 December 2009

 

A City of Opportunities

 

12      Grant Application - Community Builders Funding Program 2009/10

 

13      Tender Reference 04-09/10 for the provision of Cleaning Services to Child Care Centres

 

A Green City

 

14      Development Application DA09/0445 - Proposed Subdivision Lot 31 DP 772196 and Lot 1 DP 259360 (No. 102, 114 - 116) Factory Road, Regentville. Applicant: Mr J & Mrs H Wakeling;  Owner: Mr J & Mrs H Wakeling DA09/0445

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

 

15      Development Application DA08/1205 Proposed Educational Establishment (School) for 150 Students with Associated Agricultural Studies Area, Landscaping, Car Parking, Sewerage and Demolition of Existing Dwelling at Lot 227, 227A & 228 DP 2147 (No. 227) Seventh Avenue, Llandilo. Applicant: Stephen E Joyce;  Owner: Meadowbank Education Incorporated (MET) Kellyville Campus Pty Ltd DA08/1205

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

 

16      Development Application DA09/0901 for the operation of a Red Rooster restaurant at Lot 21 DP 1085064 (No. 21) Lavin Crescent, Werrington County. Applicant: Red Rooster Foods Pty Ltd;  Owner: Nicholas Kousparis and Christopher Kousparis DA09/0901

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

 

17      Development Application No. 09/0609 Alterations and Additions to Existing Restaurant at Lot 16 DP 583184 (No. 2/91) Great Western Highway Emu Plains. Applicant: Rob McGuinness;  Owner: Jim Aitken, Marlene Aitken, James Aitken and David Reeves DA09/0609

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

 

18      Partnership application between Blacktown City Council and Penrith City Council for Managed Aquifer Recharge Project Funding

 

19      Memorandum of Understanding between the Collaborative Research Centre for Irrigations Futures and Penrith City Council

   

 


A Leading City

 

Item                                                                                                                                       Page

 

1        Urban Development Institute of Australia National Congress 2010

 

2        Council Property - Dedication of Roadway and Lot Consolidation Charles Hackett Drive St Marys

 

3        Development Applications Determined during the Council's 2009-2010 Christmas/New Year Recess

 

4        Grants approved under the NSW Community Building Partnership Program

 

5        Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program Round 2 2009-10: Council's Allocation of $721,000

 

6        Electricity Update

 

7        Audit Committee

 

8        2010 Local Government Remuneration Tribunal Review

 

9        Pecuniary Interest Returns

 

10      Australian Local Government Women's Association 2010 NSW State Annual Conference

 

11      Summary of Investments for the period 1 December to 31 December 2009

 

 



Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

A Leading City

 

 

 

1

Urban Development Institute of Australia National Congress 2010    

 

Compiled by:                Brian Griffiths, Property Development 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

The Urban Development Institute of Australia National Congress is to be held in Sydney on 8-10 March, 2010.  The report recommends that the information be received and that Council nominate delegates to attend the Conference.

 

The Urban Development Institute has a major role to play in developing the social and cultural fabric of a community and that is why events such as the National Congress are extremely important in terms of discussing future directions.  The Congress is particularly relevant to the expansion of the Penrith and St Marys CBD areas.

 

Councillors have attended this Congress on a regular basis in the past and it would be appropriate for any delegates to be nominated at this meeting.

Background

Council, through the Property Development Department, is a member of the NSW Division of the Urban Development Institute of Australia.  The Institute has a yearly National Congress, which alternates around capital cities in Australia from year to year. The Congress provides hands-on experience with technical tours over prominent development sites within each City, enabling attendees to become more attuned to the modern forms of development within our environment.

 

Current Situation

Sydney is the host for the 2010 ( 38th ) National Congress, following Brisbane’s successful Congress in 2009.  The theme of the 2010 Congress is “The Ride of Your Life”, and it is to be held at the Sydney Convention and Exhibition Centre from 8-10 March, 2010.  The program has incorporated innovative and topical sessions and speakers and recognises the current challenges facing developers and regulators - “In challenging economic times, it is appropriate to work smarter.  But there are challenges, there are also great opportunities to be found – to truly make a difference”.

A strong group of guest speakers has been engaged in the areas of development, politics, finance, economics and business. The speakers will address:

·        The future of development in Sydney and Australia;

·        Opportunities and threats emerging from long-term trends in housing supply and demand;

·        Telecommunications in Australia in the next 20 years;

·        Redeveloping Sydney’s Waterfront at Barangaroo;

·       Infrastructure – innovative and cost effective ways of delivering infrastructure to create sustainable communities.

 

There are three on-site field trips available:

 

·        Tour 1 – “North West Tour to the UDIA NSW Award Winning the New Rouse Hill”

The Rouse Hill Regional Centre, a master planned community in Sydney’s North West, captures the best of old towns and reinterprets this in a 21st Century context.  It mixes land uses, locates civic uses at its heart and offers diverse housing choices in the form of land, completed homes or apartments.  Upon completion it will include up to 1800 dwellings as well as up to 200,000m2 of mixed use floor space in the Rouse Hill Town Centre and on land to the north, supporting transport and community infrastructure.  Underpinning the project is a drive for excellence in sustainability.

 

·        Tour 2 – “Tour of UDIA Award Winning Prince Henry at Little Bay”

Prince Henry at Little Bay is a redevelopment that is rejuvenating a former hospital site with a new residential and community precinct.  The redevelopment provides a model for redevelopment of similar heritage and environmentally sensitive sites. Natural ventilation, light and materials connect homes to the landscape and the unique coastal lifestyle.  Delegates will have the option of returning to the Sydney Convention and Exhibition Centre by coach or concluding the tour with a site visit of the UDIA NSW Award winning Lumiere Sydney, where extraordinary residences and iconic architecture combine to turn Sydney’s mid-town into a vibrant living quarter through the creation of Regent Place, Australia’s first vertical village.

 

·        Tour 3 - Sydney Harbour Cruise of UDIA Award Winning Development Projects

The Sydney Harbour cruise will examine Award winning development projects along the shoreline and highlight some of the underlying characteristics that give Sydney its sense of place.  This tour will provide a relaxing, yet informative, afternoon on Sydney Harbour with insights from leading development managers.

 

The Urban Development Institute has a major role to play in developing the social and cultural fabric of a community and that is why events such as the National Congress are extremely important in terms of discussing future directions.  The Congress is particularly relevant to the expansion of the Penrith and St Marys CBD areas.

 

Councillors have attended this Congress on a regular basis in the past and it would be appropriate for any delegates to this year’s Congress to be nominated at this meeting.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Urban Development Institute of Australia National Congress 2010 be received.

2.     Council nominate delegates to attend the National Congress of the Urban Development Institute of Australia in Sydney from 8-10 March, 2010 and grant leave of absence as appropriate.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

A Leading City

 

 

 

2

Council Property - Dedication of Roadway and Lot Consolidation Charles Hackett Drive St Marys   

 

Compiled by:                Brian Griffiths, Property Development 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

The purpose of this report is to formally dedicate sections of land as roadway over the title of Council’s land located in Charles Hackett Drive at St Marys opposite the St Marys Shopping Centre.

It also consolidates the remaining land into three separate parcels of property that is open space.  The Common Seal of the Council of the City of Penrith is required on the Linen Plan of consolidation as a requirement of the Land Titles Office.

Background

The main parcel of land concerned has been in Council’s ownership for at least 40 years and is described as lot 3 DP 851152. It is the linkage of Charles Hackett Drive from the Great Western Highway to Carinya Ave and has not yet been dedicated as a roadway.  Whilst not all the land is required as roadway the other sections will be dedicated as Public Reserve.

The purpose of this report is to formalise the road dedication and at the same time consolidate the other parcels of land in Council’s ownership.  

There are 5 separate parcels of land comprising the title of Council’s land that abuts the St Marys Shopping Centre.  The land is described as follows:-

 

Lot

Deposited Plan

Location

Area m2

3

851152

Lot 3 Kalang Ave

7,210

3

528849

Lot 3 Charles Hackett Drive

4

4

528849

Lot 3 Charles Hackett Drive

32

4

609430

21 Carinya Ave

4,942

303

609746

21 Carinya Ave

1,634

 

The total area of these parcels of land is 13,822 square metres and attached to the report is a plan that identifies the “Before” 5 parcels involved.

Current Situation

A development application was submitted in March 2009 for assessment and consent issued on 1 July 2009.  A new survey plan shows the “After” 3 parcels of land described as follows:-

Lot

Deposited Plan

Location

Area m2

1

To be created

Kungala Street

507.3

2

To be created

Carinya Avenue

8,404

3

To be created

Kalang Avenue

712.6

 

The total area of these three open space parcels of land is 9,623 square metres which leaves an area of 4,199 square metres to be dedicated as roadway.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Council Property - Dedication of Roadway and Lot Consolidation Charles Hackett Drive St Marys be received.

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

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1. View

"Before" Plan

1 Page

Appendix

2. View

"After" Plan

1 Page

Appendix

  


Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

Appendix 1 - "Before" Plan

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

Appendix 2 - "After" Plan

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

A Leading City

 

 

 

3

Development Applications Determined during the Council's 2009-2010 Christmas/New Year Recess   

 

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: As a City, we expect responsible and ethical behaviour

       

 

Executive Summary

It was reported to the Ordinary Meeting of Council on 14 December 2009 that there were seven (7) development applications which might need determinations to be made over the 2009/2010 Christmas/New Year Council Recess.

 

In accordance with Council’s policy adopted on 6 December 2004, the General Manager, in consultation with the Mayor, is able to determine development applications with the exception of applications where a Councillor has requested that the matter not be determined during the recess; where the proposed development is on land owned by Council; where the applicant is Council; where the applicant is a Councillor; or where the applicant is related to a Councillor.

 

Of the seven (7) development applications reported to Council on 14 December 2009, six (6) have been approved and one (1) is still in progress.

 

No other development applications were determined during the 2009/2010 Christmas/New Year recess that would have required reporting to Council in accordance with Council’s policy.

Background

During Council’s recess, the General Manager, in consultation with the Mayor, has extensive delegations to deal with issues that come before Council during the break, other than policy matters and those matters that cannot be delegated under the Local Government Act 1993. The role of the Mayor is, among other things, to exercise in cases of necessity, the policy-making functions of the governing body of the Council between meetings of the Council.

 

Council adopted a policy on the ‘Decision Making Arrangements in relation to development applications during Council’s Christmas/New Year Recess’ on 6 December 2004. A copy of the policy is appended to this report for Councillors’ reference.

 

Development Applications Requiring Determination

 

At the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on 14 December 2009, Council considered a report on ‘Decision Making Arrangements During the Christmas/New Year Council Recess’ (i.e. between 15 December 2009 and 31 January 2010 in which it was reported that the following development applications may need determinations to be made over this period:

.     

1.   DA09/1039 – 56 Nepean Ave Penrith – Two Storey Dwelling

Applicant: Daniel Briffa (Adan Creative Designs)

Owner: Mr V. and Mrs D. Lindeman

 

2.    DA09/1044 – 231 Jamison Rd Penrith – Two Storey Dwelling

Applicant: Metricon Homes

Owner: Mr Nameer Abdulla

 

3.    DA09/1055 – 54 Nepean Ave Penrith – Demolition of Existing and Construction of a Two Storey Dwelling

Applicant: Huxley Homes

Owner: Rosemary Lovell

 

4.    DA09/1109 – 18 Eddy Ave St Clair – Single Storey Dwelling

Applicant: S and A Gorej

Owner: S and A Gorej

 

5.    DA09/0804 – Lot 4330 DP 835330 (No. 19) Gagoor Close Claremont Meadows – Proposed Dual Occupancy and Strata Title Subdivision

Applicant: Joseph Berimballi

Owner: Joseph Berimballi & Rita Berimballi

 

6.    DA09/0680 – Lot 1 DP 234088 (No. 48a) Gidley Street St Marys – Proposed Multi Unit Housing x 4 & associated landscaping

Applicant: Cynstate Pty Ltd

Owner: Cynstate Pty Ltd

 

7.    DA09/0853 – Lot 59 DP 244894 (No. 10) Currawong Crescent Leonay – Proposed Dwelling Additions and Alterations

Applicant: Leesa C McIntosh

Owner: Leesa C McIntosh

 

Current Status of above Development Applications

.     

1.   DA09/1039 – 56 Nepean Ave Penrith – Two Storey Dwelling

Approved 07 January 2010

 

2.    DA09/1044 – 231 Jamison Rd Penrith – Two Storey Dwelling

Approved 07 January 2010

 

3.    DA09/1055 – 54 Nepean Ave Penrith – Demolition of Existing and Construction of a Two Storey Dwelling

Approved 09 January 2010

 

4.    DA09/1109 – 18 Eddy Ave St Clair – Single Storey Dwelling

Still in Progress

 

5.    DA09/0804 – Lot 4330 DP 835330 (No. 19) Gagoor Close Claremont Meadows – Proposed Dual Occupancy and Strata Title Subdivision

Approved 05 January 2010

 

6.    DA09/0680 – Lot 1 DP 234088 (No. 48a) Gidley Street St Marys – Proposed Multi Unit Housing x 4 & associated landscaping

Approved 08 January 2010

 

7.    DA09/0853 – Lot 59 DP 244894 (No. 10) Currawong Crescent Leonay – Proposed Dwelling Additions and Alterations

Approved 22 January 2010

 

No other development applications were determined during the 2009/2010 Christmas/New Year recess that would have required reporting to Council in accordance with Council’s policy.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That the information contained in the report on Development Applications Determined during the Council's 2009-2010 Christmas/New Year Recess be received.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1. View

Policy - Decision Making Arrangements During Council's Christmas/New Year Recess

2 Pages

Appendix

  


Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

Appendix 1 - Policy - Decision Making Arrangements During Council's Christmas/New Year Recess

 

 

 



Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

A Leading City

 

 

 

4

Grants approved under the NSW Community Building Partnership Program   

 

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 NSW Community Building Partnership Program was the subject of a report to Council on 3 August 2009. As a result, Council endorsed the submission of the applications to the NSW Government’s Community Building Partnership Program detailed in this Report, with the number one priority for each electorate as detailed in Council’s resolution below:

 

244 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Kevin

Crameri OAM

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Community Building Partnership applications from Penrith City Council be received.

2. Council endorse the submission of the applications to the NSW Government’s Community Building Partnership Program detailed in this Report, with the number one priority for each electorate as detailed below:

Penrith electorate - Jamison Park Shared Pathway, South Penrith

Londonderry electorate -Werrington Downs Walking Trail

Mulgoa electorate - Roper Road Soccer Field, Colyton

Smithfield electorate - Erskine Park Community Hall Kitchen

3. A further report be presented to Council should funding not be available in the revised District Open Space Developer Contribution Plan.

 

Work is not able to commence on any approved projects until official notification is received and contracts are formally accepted. The Premier advises that Letters of Offer and Agreements will be provided January/February 2010.

Background

Council submitted five applications to the Community Building Partnership:

·           Jamison Park Shared Pathway, South Penrith – Penrith electorate

·           Werrington Downs Walking Trail – Londonderry electorate

·           Roper Road Soccer Field, Colyton – Mulgoa electorate

·           Erskine Park Community Hall Kitchen - Smithfield electorate

·           Chameleon Drive Footpath, Erskine Park – Smithfield electorate

 

All Council applications required matching funding.

 

Several applications from community groups brought to Council’s attention at the August meeting were referred to local clubs to submit. These applications did not require matching funds.

 

Letters have been received advising of the success or otherwise of the Council applications and these are detailed below.  The report also includes information on the status of the Community applications made in the Penrith LGA.

 

Current situation – Council applications

Jamison Park Shared Pathway, South Penrith – Penrith electorate.

 

·    Requested $200,000; Council contribution $232,000 (District Open Space Plan; reallocation from 2010-2011 Path Paving Plan for any shortfall).

·    Approved: $134,700.

 

The original proposal was to construct a 3 metre width shared pathway along the southern, eastern and northern internal perimeter of the park at a total cost of $432,000. $200,000 was requested under the NSW Community Building Partnership program with the expectation of matching funds from the S94 District Open Space Plan.  However, the program has only approved a grant of $134,700 towards this proposal.

 

During this period, City Works has consulted with relevant departments and affected residents and reviewed the alignment and the width of the path to provide better facilities and to eliminate expensive service adjustments. The new alignment has provided closer access to the play field area and avoided unnecessary elimination of existing customer parking and removal of established trees.  With an expectation of the approval of the grant, City Works has constructed a 2.5 metre pathway along the southern end of the park at a total cost of $95,000. To construct the remaining section of the path, with the revised alignment and width, Council requires an amount of $54,700.

 

It is unfortunate the funding approved for the project does not provide the total amount originally required to complete the project as detailed in the report to the Ordinary meeting 3 August. Council officers are discussing the project with the grant making authority to ensure that the pathway already constructed along the southern boundary can form part of the overall project.  It was originally intended that the matching funding would be provided by the District Open Space s94 Plan however the plan is not in a position to provide this funding without going into deficit.  It is therefore suggested that the remaining funding of $54,700 is sourced from the budgeted available funds in the District Open Space s94 Plan of $35,000 with the balance, $19,700  provided from the  Road Resealing/Resheeting budget. 

 

Werrington Downs Walking Trail – Londonderry electorate.

·    Requested $161,300. Council contribution $45,000 (Local Open Space Plan); $116,300 District Open Space Plan (reallocation from 2010-2011 Path Paving Program for any shortfall).

Application not approved.

 

Roper Road Soccer Field, Colyton – Mulgoa electorate.

·    Requested $125,000. Council contribution $125,000 from Local Space Open Plan (borrowed against future balance).

Application not approved.

 

Erskine Park Community Hall Kitchen – Smithfield electorate.

·    Requested $30,000. Council contribution $30,000 from Neighbourhood Facilities Improvement Program.

Application not approved.

 

Chameleon Drive Footpath, Erskine Park – Smithfield electorate.

·    Requested $13,000. Council contribution $13,000 Path Paving Program.

·    Approved: $13,000.

 

Current situation – Community applications referred to in 3 August 2009 report

Penrith electorate:

Great Community Transport Inc: Council Depot refit, Kingswood.

·    $40,000 approved for relocation of office premises and secure vehicle garaging, Kingswood.

 

Londonderry electorate:

Penrith Valley Regional Sports Centre bid unsuccessful.

Penrith District Grade Cricket Club Rance Oval bid unsuccessful.

 

Mulgoa electorate:

Glenmore Park Junior Rugby League Club

·    Approved $100,000 for Glenmore Park High School sports field development.

 

Nepean District Soccer Football Association Inc

·    Approved $18,000 for installation of fencing at Mark Leece Oval, St Clair.

 

St Clair Junior Australian Football In

·    Approved $45,000 for upgrade of lighting at Cook Park, St Marys.

 

Nepean District Soccer bid for funding for seating at Cook Park, St Marys unsuccessful.

 

Panthers BMX request for funding for lighting at St Marys BMX track unsuccessful.

 

Current situation – additional community applications approved

Penrith electorate:

Anglican Church Property Trust Diocese of Sydney

·    $21,200 for Parish of Emu Plains, construction of a children’s playground.

 

Emu Plains Junior Rugby League Inc

·    $25,000 Upgrade seating and landscaping at Leonay Oval.

 

Police & Community Youth Clubs NSW Ltd

·    $41,003 for repairs and maintenance to club premises Penrith PCYC.

 

 

PRA WestClub

·    $10,516 for construction of a pergola at WestClub, Penrith.

Londonderry electorate:

Berkshire Park, Llandilo and Shanes Park Community Action group

·    $49,000 for installation of a playground at Berkshire Park. (This project was the subject of a Council application to Regional and Local Community Infrastructure program – Council Allocation. An alternate playground construction project will be nominated instead).

 

Cranebrook United Soccer Club

·    $27,500 to sink a bore to provide water for irrigation at Andromeda.

 

Llandilo Hall Committee

·    $25,950 for restoration of a 110 year old church building, Llandilo.

 

St Marys and District Historical Society Inc

·    $1,375 for hanging storage for historical costumes.

 

Mulgoa electorate:

Ability Options

·    $30,000 for construction of three nursery polyhouses, Working Options for people with a disability, St Clair.

 

Anglican Church Property Trust Diocese of Sydney

·    $50,627.50 for replacement of church hall roof at St Mary Magdalene Church, St Marys.

 

Mamre Plains Ltd

·    $30,000 for re-sealing of Mamre entrance road.

 

St Marys Band Club Rangers Soccer Group

·    $10,000 for installation of lighting on soccer fields, St Marys.

 

St Paul’s Lutheran Kindergarten

·    $14,000 for kindergarten paint rejuvenation, Mulgoa.

 

St Paul’s Lutheran Kindergarten

·    $15,620 for refurbishment of play area and wet weather play area, St Marys.

 

Conclusion

 

The NSW Community Building Partnership Program provides funding for a range of both Council and Community originated projects.  Unfortunately Council was not successful with all bids submitted however overall a range of projects to benefit the community will be delivered within the Penrith LGA.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Grants approved under the NSW Community Building Partnership Program be received.

2.     The additional matching funding required for the Jamison Park Shared Pathways project  be sourced  from the District Open Space s94 plan $35,000, and $19,700 from the Road Resheeting/Resealing budget.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

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

On 9 November 2009 Council received a report on the Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program (RLCIP) Round 2, under which Council was allocated $721,000.

 

At its meeting of 9 November 2009, Council resolved 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; University of the Third Age $82,000.

 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.”

 

The Department of Infrastructure has deemed one project (Werrington Downs Fitness Trail) and part of a second project (University of the Third Age) ineligible.


This Report is to advise Council of the response being made to the Department providing a revised project list based incorporating one of the reserve projects following the feedback received from the Department.

Background

Council has been advised by the Department of Infrastructure as follows:

 

Penrith-105: Construction of a Shared Pathway through Werrington Lakes Reserve

·  Under Q27 of the FAQs , it advises that “construction of a footpath is not an eligible project under the RLCIP $100 million funding”, unless they are “necessary for the appropriate completion of another eligible project” in which case they may be considered. Unfortunately the Council’s Penrith-105 project submission is therefore ineligible under the current round of RLCIP funding.

 

Penrith-108: Installation of accessible ramp and amenities at the University of the Third Age Building

·  As per our conversation, unfortunately this project is ineligible as per Q28 of the FAQs which addresses whether amenities blocks are eligible for RLCIP funding.

 

The clarification in the Department’s Frequently Asked Questions on pathways and amenities blocks was published in an update on 19 November 2009, the day prior to the deadline for submission of applications.

 

In addition, the Berkshire Park, Llandilo and Shane’s Park Community Action Group have received $49,000 under the Community Building Partnership program’s allocation to Londonderry electoral district for a playground, including seating, but no shade structure, at Berkshire Park.

 

Council had proposed $60,530 for a playground, seating and shade structure under the RLCIP allocation for this site.

 

Current Situation

Council is responding to the advice from the Department of Infrastructure that it will amend its proposed projects as follows:

 

Berkshire Park Playground

This project will be revised to install shade structure only to complement the playground funded from another source.

 

Project cost reduced from $60,530 to $26,000.

 

University of the Third Age

This project will be revised to remove the proposal to install new accessible amenities and to include energy and water efficiency upgrades at a cost of $2,530. The provision of an accessible ramp will remain.

 

Project cost reduced from $82,000 to $36,530.

 

Council will include in the 2010-11 Asset Renewal Budget funds to immediately improve access to the existing toilets and design costs for the future upgrading of the facility. It should be noted that the facility has accessible toilets, but they were built in accordance with standards that were applicable at the time.

 

Werrington Downs Fitness Trail

This project will be withdrawn.

 

Project cost reduced from $60,000 to $0.

 

The total savings on the above amendments to projects is $140,000.

 

 

Great River Walk Emu Plains Viewing Deck and Steps at Hunter Street

This project was nominated as a Reserve Proposal, but its priority will be upgraded to be a preferred project.

 

Project cost: $140,000.

 

The total request in grant funds from the RLCIP Program remains unchanged at $721,000.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

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 amendment of the projects for the Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program Round 2 2009-10 as follows: Berkshire Park Hall Precinct $184,470; University of the Third Age $36,530; New and Replacement Park Play Equipment Program $145,000; Great River Walk Decks $75,000; Children’s Services Playground Upgrades $140,000; Great River Walk Deck and Steps $140,000 – totalling $721,000.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

A Leading City

 

 

 

6

Electricity Update   

 

Compiled by:                Andrew Moore, Financial Services Manager

Brett Richardson, Acting Financial Accountant

Authorised by:             Vicki O’Kelly, Group Manager - Finance  

Requested By:             His Worship the Mayor, Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM

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

Since the corporatisation of the electricity market in NSW, Council’s electricity pricing has remained fairly consistent. The 2009-10 financial year has seen the first major increase in the cost of electricity since corporatisation. This increase has resulted from the need for increased spending to improve network reliability, increases in the cost of purchasing wholesale electricity, and rising demand. Penrith City Council is currently participating in a joint NSW Local Government tender for the provision of electricity for all major sites as well as for street lighting. A total of 15 Councils are participating in this tender which is expected to come in to operation on 1 July 2010, and is likely to realise an 8-10% saving over existing electricity charges.

 

Council continues to implement sustainability initiatives that are aimed at reducing the overall usage and cost of electricity for Council, and this forms part of Council’s overall sustainability program. The use of the Sustainability Revolving Fund to further these initiatives is an innovative approach with Council acknowledged as a leader in this area.   Other initiatives that Council has recently introduced include the installation of solar hot water systems at Council facilities which are 30% more efficient than traditional hot water systems, and the installation of energy-efficient light globes that are 43% more energy efficient than standard light globes.

 

The Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal (IPART) has reviewed the regulated retail tariffs for the financial years 2010-11 through 2012-13 and expects further increases of between 44% and 62% for households over this time. These increases are a result of increased network charges for improved network security and reliability, and from the Federal Government’s proposed Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS). The State Government has not yet committed to keeping prices regulated after 2013.

 

Background

In the late 1800’s, electricity became the preferred method for street lighting. It was not long after this that local councils in NSW became responsible for coordinating electricity supply and infrastructure. The Local Government Act 1919 gave local councils the power to establish, acquire, and conduct trading enterprises, including the supply of electricity. Local councils also had the power to delegate this authority to County Councils. By 1949 there were 157 electricity suppliers either generating or distributing electricity in NSW. In recognition of the lack of investment in infrastructure by these suppliers, the NSW Government created the Electricity Commission. The Commission’s role was to centralise new investment in generation and the interconnection of distribution networks. This centralised and monopolistic electricity supply model continued to function until the early 1990s.

 

The Prospect County Council was established in 1956 as a cooperative approach by five local councils in Western Sydney, including Parramatta, Fairfield, Holroyd, Baulkham Hills, and Blacktown to maintain and provide electricity within their region or 'county'. By 1960 Penrith, Liverpool, and Windsor had also joined the Council. Prospect County Council was reincorporated as Prospect Electricity in 1993.

 

In 1995 the State Government enacted the Electricity Supply Act, the Energy Services Corporatisation Act, and the Sustainable Energy Department Act. These Acts facilitated the introduction of a competitive wholesale and retail electricity market, and corporatised the power stations and distributors. Generators were broken into three competing firms, while the distributors were amalgamated into six State-owned companies.

 

Prospect Electricity ceased operations in 1995 when Integral Energy was formed as a merger between Prospect Electricity and Illawarra Electricity. Integral is now the second largest state owned energy corporation in NSW. In 1996 Energy Australia was formed as a merger between Orion Energy and Sydney Electricity. Following on from this in the year 2000, energy providers in NSW were corporatised. Reserves held by suppliers at this time, including those passed on to Integral from Prospect Electricity, were absorbed by the State Government. Country Energy was then formed in 2001 with the merger of Advance Energy, Great Southern Energy, and North Power. Country Energy is the largest state owned energy corporation in NSW.

 

Electricity Pricing

Electricity retailers play a buffering role between the supply and demand sides of the market. They buy wholesale electricity from generators through the national electricity market. The retailers also pay to transport electricity along the transmission and distribution networks to their retail customers. These, often variable costs, are then bundled together with other operating costs to determine the rates charged to customers.

 

As shown in the graph below, electricity prices paid by Council rose gradually between 2003-04 and 2005-06. For the period between 2006-07 and 2008-09, prices of electricity were fixed. This was the result of a tender through the Department of Commerce from which a contract was drawn that guaranteed a fixed price for electricity over a three year period. For 2009-10, there was a substantial price rise for Council of 45.77% for peak, 57.33% for shoulder and 24.01% for off peak electricity charges.

 

The increase in the cost of electricity for 2009-10 is attributed to the following:

 

·    Increased network and distribution charges to fund improvements in network reliability and to upgrade and renew the electricity delivery network and to ensure regulatory compliance by 2014.

·    Increased costs of purchasing electricity from power generators on the wholesale market.

·    Rising demand for electricity in terms of current household use, subdivisions, and new release area connection to the network.

 

Joint Tender for Provision of Electricity

Penrith City Council is participating in a joint NSW Local Government tender for the provision of electricity to all major sites and to Street Lighting. The tender is being managed by Local Government Procurement on behalf of NSW Councils.

 

This tender was only possible through the initial participation and commitment of a number of Western Sydney Council’s (including Penrith City Council). At the time of this report a total of 15 Councils are participating in the process. The tender is expected to be advertised during March 2010 with the view of commencing a new contract by 1 July 2010. Through this aggregated approach to the market it is expected that an 8-10% reduction in existing charges for the provision of electricity will be realised.

 

 

* Council’s peak electricity rate assuming an increase in CPI each year using the 2003-04 financial year as the base

 

The graph below shows the trend of household electricity prices for the past twelve years:

* Household (retail) electricity rate assuming an increase in CPI each year using the 2003-04 financial year as the base

 

The substantial increase in household electricity prices in 2006-07 was the result of an increase in the average wholesale price of electricity in New South Wales of 58 percent over the 2005-06 average. This was attributed to drought conditions at the time as well as record demand levels and capacity constraints.

 

Retail electricity billing consists of the following:

·    Usage Costs

o The calculation of usage costs can differ across households depending on the type of meter in use. If a time of use meter is in use there are three rates applicable - peak (1:00pm-8:00pm business days), shoulder (7:00am-1:00pm and 8:00pm-10:00pm business days, 7:00am-10:00pm weekends and public holidays), and off-peak (10:00pm-7:00am all days). If a time of use meter is not available, a set rate is charged for the first 1750kWh used in a quarter and an increased rate for any usage over this threshold.

·    The System Access Charge

o A fixed daily charge that reflects the daily fixed costs associated with maintaining electricity connection - such as maintaining poles, lines and substations right through to providing metering and customer services. The System Access Charge helps to cover some of the costs associated with making electricity supply available, regardless of whether electricity is actually used. The System Access Charge is currently approximately $0.48 per day (excl. GST) for residential customers without a time of use meter and $0.61 per day (excl. GST) for those with a time of use meter.

 

Setting of Prices

Electricity prices are set by the Australian Energy Regulator in consideration of submissions made by the individual electricity distributors Integral Energy, Energy Australia, and Country Energy. The prices are based on:

 

·    Customer usage trends:

o The network must be able to deal with extended load in peak periods due to an increased demand for household power requirements. Pricing calculations will reflect this demand.

o Additional demand as a result of subdivisions and new release areas.

·    Regional growth and changing land use:

o Land is increasingly moving from rural to semi-rural to urban and light commercial, putting further strain on the network, such as recent developments in the ADI site, Kellyville, and future developments at Oran Park.

 

In the recently completed IPART review of regulated retail tariffs and charges for electricity 2010-2013, it has been advised that the expected increase in retail tariffs over this period ranges from 44% to 62% depending on the electricity distributor. This is an estimate only as there are uncertainties in the market over this period. The State Government has only committed to keeping electricity prices regulated until 2013. After this time, it is possible that there will be further increases in the price of electricity, although significant increases are not necessarily expected.

 

Factors that will influence electricity prices from 2013-14 include:

 

·    Increased network charges to increase investment in infrastructure and improve network security and reliability.

·    The Federal Government’s proposed Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS). Australia’s electricity generation involves high carbon emissions. The CPRS is designed to reduce carbon emissions in Australia by setting an annual limit (or cap) on the total amount of carbon pollution that can be emitted. The cap will be gradually lowered, reducing the level of carbon pollution that Australia produces each year. Scheme caps for the years 2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15 will be announced before 1 July 2010. Scheme caps for each subsequent year will be made at least five years before the end of the relevant year.  For example, the scheme cap for 2015-16 will be made before 1 July 2011. Companies that emit carbon in their operations will need to purchase permits (or may be issued with permits) that represent the right to emit a specific amount of carbon pollution. The cost of the purchase of these permits is then expected to be passed on to the consumer.

 

The following graph represents the composition of a typical NSW electricity retail bill:

 

Reducing the cost of electricity

Electricity costs can be reduced for both Council and the community through investing in energy saving initiatives, by installing alternative electricity generation technology, or by switching to other fuels where this is possible. Council has been active with a number of initiatives including the use of the Sustainability Revolving Fund which was established in 2003 and provides a means to support projects and initiatives that will foster the sustainable use of resources and the adoption of best practices, the installation of solar panel hot water systems at Council facilities to both minimise the cost of electricity as well as to educate to the community on energy saving initiatives, as well as awareness campaigns and brochures aimed at providing information and awareness to the community.

 

Further details of these initiatives are outlined in the Sustainability and Planning Manager’s comments below.

 

Sustainability and Planning Manager Comment

In line with Council’s Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan-Carbon Neutral, and Energy Savings Action Plan, Council has undertaken a number of initiatives to improve the energy efficiency of Council owned facilities and reduce our demand on electricity. This has included improvements both externally and internally in the energy efficiency of Council owned facilities, including:

 

·    An Energy Performance Contract at the Civic Centre and St Marys Queen Street Centre,

·    Upgrades to internal and external lighting at a number of Council facilities,

·    Upgrades to heating and cooling systems at the Civic Centre,

·    Replacement of inefficient hot water systems with more efficient heat pump systems at a number of Council facilities,

·    Application of heat reflective paint on roof surfaces at the Civic Centre and Community Connections,

·    The installation of solar panels at a three community buildings, and

·    Upgrades and consolidation in the area of information technology.

 

This has resulted in a total reduction in electricity consumption of 13,777,358 kWh since 2002-03.

 

As Council continues to expand our services and facilities, energy consumption is likely to remain as one of our key operating costs. Significant reductions in Council’s electricity consumption will only be possible through the ongoing implementation of a number of energy efficiency improvement projects and the installation of appropriate renewable energy technologies to reduce our reliance on the electricity network.

 

It is worth noting that as electricity prices increase the installation of alternative technologies and generation facilities will become more economically viable with reduced payback periods.

 

Conclusion

Since the deregulation of the electricity industry in 2000, electricity prices have been gradually increasing, with a large increase in 2009-10. The State Government has committed to regulating prices until 2013. After this time, significant increases in costs are not necessarily expected. Council’s commitment to sustainability principles has resulted in initiatives to reduce electricity usage that are being deployed across Council’s facilities.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That he information contained in the report on Electricity Update be received

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

A Leading City

 

 

 

7

Audit Committee   

 

Compiled by:                Peter Browne, Internal Auditor

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

Strategic Objective: We demonstrate accountability, transparency and ethical conduct

Strategic Direction:  We champion responsible and ethical behaviour

       

 

Executive Summary

The report provides information on the 9 December 2009 meeting of the Council’s Audit Committee and recommends that the information be received.

Background

The Audit Committee is comprised of the Mayor, three other Councillors and three independent members appointed by Council, to advise on financial reporting, internal controls, corporate risks, business ethics, assurance and other matters as identified in its Charter.  The Audit Committee Charter was created by Council resolution on 13 November 2006 and has been amended by Council three times, the most recent being on 4 May 2009.

 

The NSW Local Government Internal Audit Guidelines (issued 14 October 2008) provide that:

 

An audit committee plays a pivotal role in the governance framework. It provides councils with independent oversight and assistance in the areas of risk, control, compliance and financial reporting.

Current Situation

The Audit Committee met on 9 December 2009 and adopted the draft minutes of the prior meeting (as provided to Council on 7 September 2009) without alteration.  The Committee re-elected Emeritus Professor Robert Coombes to Chair the Audit Committee for a further 2 years.  Reports on new audits were discussed and progress on the implementation of recommendations of older reports were briefly reviewed. 

 

In accordance with the Committee’s Charter, the draft minutes of the Audit Committee meeting of 9 December 2009 are appended to this report.  (The Council’s Fraud Control Policy referred to in the minutes was subsequently updated including the suggested change.)

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That the information contained in the report on Audit Committee be received.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1. View

Draft Minutes of Audit Committee Meeting 9 December 2009

3 Pages

Appendix

  


Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

Appendix 1 - Draft Minutes of Audit Committee Meeting 9 December 2009

 

 

 

UNCONFIRMED MINUTES

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

ON WEDNESDAY 9 DECEMBER 2009 AT 8:05AM

 

PRESENT

Robert Coombes (Chair), His Worship the Mayor Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM, Councillor Jim Aitken OAM, Councillor Ross Fowler OAM, Frank Gelonesi, Jayant Gulwadi and Councillor Kath Presdee; 

 

 

Barry Husking (Acting General Manager), Peter Browne (Internal Auditor),

(Stephen Britten (Group Manager Legal and Governance), Vicki O’Kelly (Group Manager Finance), Andrew Moore (Financial Services Manager) and  

Dennis Banicevic (External Auditor – PricewaterhouseCoopers)

 

 

 

APOLOGIES

There were no apologies for non-attendance by members.

His Worship the Mayor, Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM, advised he would need to leave at 9am for another meeting.  Alan Stoneham sent his apologies for non-attendance as an advisor.

 

 

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES - Audit Committee Meeting – 19 Aug 2009

Resolved on the motion of Councillors Ross Fowler OAM seconded Councillor Kath Presdee that the minutes of the Audit Committee Meeting of 19 August 2009 be confirmed.

 

 

 

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Nil

 

 

 

ELECTION OF CHAIR

The Internal Auditor conducted an election for Chair of the Audit Committee. 

Resolved on the motion of Councillor Ross Fowler OAM seconded Frank Gelonesi that the election be to a term of two years.

 

Robert Coombes was nominated for the position of Chairperson by Councillor Ross Fowler OAM.  No other nominations were received.  There being no other nominations Robert Coombes was elected.


DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS

 

1        Audit Committee Standing Items                                                                                       

Peter Browne provided a progress report on Internal Audit work including review of the Annual Report and recently completed audits.  Introductory comments on procedures documentation lead to discussions on the need for policies, procedures and related documentation.

 

Credit Cards
The review found no improper conduct by staff but identified a number of issues where security should be improved.  Some more junior officers have credit cards with low limits to allow small purchases if the situation in the field requires it.  The process is very cost efficient.  Improvements are needed to provide clearer instructions and to ensure more timely review of purchases made.  Of the 20 recommendations, 18 were agreed to by management, 1 modified and 1 considered to be more costly to implement than the benefit that would be achieved.

 

Developer Contributions
The report identifies that the system is working well however it relies on the skill and understanding of some key individuals.  No major changes are required however improved documentation and checking would reduce the risk of error and the risk of processes being lost if staff leave.  Of the 14 recommendations 10 were agreed to and 4 were considered to be more costly to implement than the value of the benefit to be achieved.

 

His Worship the Mayor Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM left the meeting at 8:58am.

 

Records Management
There is some disagreement between staff in different departments as to how records management should work.  The report identifies where the disagreement on strategy is occurring and outlines a way forward to resolve these issues.  The Audit Committee asked a number of questions aimed at determining if there is a significant problem or if the issue is relatively small.  A third party review of the Audit Report was requested.

 

Resolved on the motion of Jayant Gulwadi seconded Kath Presdee that 

1.     The information contained in the report on Audit Committee Standing Items be received.

2.     The dates for Audit Committee meetings in 2010 be as detailed in the report.

 

 

 


 


2        Progress on implementing Audit Recommendations                                                        

The Internal Auditor advised the Audit Committee of progress in implementing Audit Recommendations.

 

Stores
Recommendations have mostly been adopted and implemented.  Detailed procedures documents are being written.  Some matters relating to records for tools issued to staff are yet to be resolved. 

 

Payroll
A short discussion of the report occurred before the meeting determined that, with time running short, it would be more beneficial to defer this item to the next meeting.

 

 

 

3        Prevention of Theft and Fraud                                                                                           

Stephen Britten advised the Committee of some recent petty thefts that have occurred at the Civic Centre.  All matters were referred to the police.  Security is being improved and policies updated.  The draft update of Council’s Fraud Control Policy was provided to the Audit Committee.  One amendment to the tabled document was proposed.

 

Resolved on the motion of Kath Presdee seconded Frank Gelonesi that the information contained in the report on Prevention of Theft and Fraud be received.

 

 

 

GENERAL BUSINESS

No matters were raised.

 

 

There being no further business the Chairperson declared the meeting closed the time being 9:59am.

 


Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

A Leading City

 

 

 

8

2010 Local Government Remuneration Tribunal Review   

 

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: As a City, we expect responsible and ethical behaviour

       

 

Executive Summary

 

The Local Government Remuneration Tribunal (the Tribunal) was established under the Local Government Act, 1993 (the Act) to make an annual determination of the minimum and maximum fees payable to Mayors and Councillors for each category of council. The determination must be made by 30 April each year.

 

The Tribunal is also required to determine the categories of councils and mayoral offices at least once every three years. The Tribunal will next review the categories of councils again as part of the 2012 review.

 

The Tribunal is seeking submissions from Councils as to the quantum and/or structure of fees for the 2010 review.

 

It is proposed that Council seek a 3 per cent increase in the fees payable to Mayors and Councillors for 2010/2011 in line with the NSW Remuneration Tribunal and Commonwealth Remuneration Tribunal recent decisions.

 

Current Review

The Tribunal has commenced its review for the 2010 determination and any increase in fees applied will take effect from 1 July 2010.

 

The Tribunal has written to Council seeking submissions for the 2010 review. It would welcome a submission in regard to the quantum and/or structure of fees.

 

In accordance with Section 239 of the Act, the Tribunal is required to determine the categories of councils and mayoral offices at least once every three years. Categories of councils were last determined by the Tribunal in 2009. As outlined in that report and determination of 29 April 2009, the Tribunal found that there is no strong case to significantly alter the current categories of Mayoral offices and Councillor.

 

The Tribunal did however, decide to apply descriptive titles to each of the Categories rather than continuing with the existing numbering of Categories, which created the perception of a ranking system. It also outlined the characteristics of Councils within each of these groupings.

 

As a result, Penrith City Council was categorised as a ‘Metropolitan Major’ (instead of Category 1A), together with Blacktown City Council. A ‘Metropolitan Major’ is formally defined as “a Council that has a residential population greater than 250,000 or has another special feature of section 240 which the Tribunal considers distinguishes it from other Metropolitan Councils.”

 

The Tribunal has advised that it does not intend to undertake a further review of categories during the 2010 review. The Tribunal will review the categories of councils again as part of the 2012 review. Until then, the Tribunal would not expect to move councils within categories unless there is a significant change in the role and responsibilities of individual councils.

 

Local Government and Shires Associations of New South Wales Submission to the Tribunal

Each year the Local Government and Shires Associations (LGSA) makes a submission to the Tribunal, seeking fairer and more equitable fees for all NSW councillors. It is not expected that the LGSA’s 2010 submission will be made available to councils until after the closing date for submissions.

 

However, it is understood that the Associations will once again be seeking that Mayors and Councillors’ fees be benchmarked as a percentage of the salary of a State Member of Parliament. In respect of a ‘Metropolitan Major’ Council such as Penrith City Council, the Associations are proposing that the Mayor’s fee be fixed at 80% of a State MP’s salary and the Councillors’ fee be fixed at 50% of the Mayoral fee (being equivalent to 40% of a State MP’s salary).

 

Based on a current State MP’s salary of $130,540, the fees payable for Penrith City Council (if the LGSA’s proposal was accepted) would amount to:

·    Mayor (‘Metropolitan Major’ Council) $104,432

·    Councillor (‘Metropolitan Major’ Council) $52,216

 

Penrith City Council’s Current Situation

Penrith City Council is categorised as a ‘Metropolitan Major’ because of its regional significance in outer western Sydney.

 

For ‘Metropolitan Major’ Category Councils (Blacktown and Penrith), the Tribunal fixed the following fee ranges for 2009/2010:

 

Councillor Annual Fee

Minimum

$14,080

Maximum

$23,250

Mayor Additional Fee*

Minimum

$29,940

Maximum

$67,750

 * This fee must be paid in addition to the fee paid to the Mayor as a Councillor.

 

Penrith City Council adopted the maximum annual fees and its current fees paid to the Mayor and Councillors for the financial year ending 30 June 2010 are structured as follows:

 

1.   Councillors - $23,250

2.   Mayor - $23,250 + $54,200 (which is 80% of max Mayoral allowance) = $77,450

3.   Deputy Mayor - $23,250 + $13,550 (which is 20% of max Mayoral allowance) = $36,800

 

Proposed Submission on 2010/2011 Fees to Local Government Remuneration Tribunal

The last increase in the fees payable to Mayors and Councillors applied from 1 July 2009 and amounted to 2.5 per cent.

 

The NSW Remuneration Tribunal recently determined an increase of 3 per cent for all Senior Executive Service (SES) officers, effective on and from 1 October 2009. This increase also applies to general managers and senior staff of councils employed under the Department of Local Government’s Standard Contracts of Employment.

 

The Commonwealth Remuneration Tribunal recently determined the same general increase of 3 per cent for officers under its jurisdiction. This increase took effect from 25 November 2009.

 

It is proposed that Council seek a 3 per cent increase in the fees payable to Mayors and Councillors for 2010/2011 in line with the NSW Remuneration Tribunal and Commonwealth Remuneration Tribunal recent decisions.

 

If a 3 per cent increase is granted, the fees payable for a ‘Metropolitan Major’ Category Council (Blacktown and Penrith) would be:

 

Councillor Annual Fee

Minimum

$14,502

Maximum

$23,947

Mayor Additional Fee*

Minimum

$30,838

Maximum

$69,782

 * This fee must be paid in addition to the fee paid to the Mayor as a Councillor.

 

Financial Services Manager’s Comment

 

The development of the 2010-11 Operational Plan has commenced.  The current level of Councillor fees has been considered and the proposal outlined in this report has been allowed for when including Councillors fees in the 2010-11 budget.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on 2010 Local Government Remuneration Tribunal Review be received.

2.     Council write to the Local Government Remuneration Tribunal seeking a 3 per cent increase in the fees payable to Mayors and Councillors for 2010/2011 in line with the NSW Remuneration Tribunal and Commonwealth Remuneration Tribunal recent decisions.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

A Leading City

 

 

 

9

Pecuniary Interest Returns    

 

Compiled by:                Adam Beggs, Administration Officer - Policy and Council Support

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

Chapter 14 of the Local Government Act, 1993 (the Act) concerns “Honesty and Disclosure of Interests”, and requires all elected members and designated persons to complete an initial Pecuniary Interest Return, and every year thereafter an annual return.  Designated persons include the General Manager, other senior staff, and staff holding a position identified by the Council as a position of a designated person, because it involves the exercise of certain functions such as regulatory or contractual functions.  First returns have to be completed and lodged within three months of becoming a councillor or designated person. Annual returns have to be completed and lodged within three months of 30 June each year.

Current Situation

Section 450A of the Act regarding the registration and tabling of returns lodged by Councillors and designated persons is as follows:

 

 Register and Tabling of Returns
450A.


1. The General Manager must keep a register of returns required to be lodged with the General Manager under Section 449.

2. Returns required to be lodged with the General Manager under Section 449 must be tabled at a Meeting of the Council, being:

 

(a) in the case of a return lodged in accordance with section 449(1) - the first Meeting held after the last day for lodgement under that subsection; or

(b) in the case of a return lodged in accordance with section 449(3) - the first Meeting held after the last day for lodgement under that subsection; or

(c) in the case of a return otherwise lodged with the General Manager - the first Meeting after lodgement.

 

A register of all returns lodged by Councillors and designated persons, in accordance with Section 449 of the Act, is currently kept by Council as required by this part of the Act.

 

All returns lodged by Councillors and designated persons under Section 449 of the Act must be tabled at a Council Meeting as outlined in Sections 450A(2)(a), (b) and (c) above.

 

The following Section 449(3) first returns have been lodged:

 

Name

Position

Due Date

Date Lodged

Schandel Jefferys

Principal Planner

30 December 2009

27 October 2009

Paul Grimson

Sustainability & Planning Manager

2 February 2010

12 January 2010

Chris Hawkins

Environmental Health & Building Surveyor

29 January 2010

7 December 2009

Andrew Colusso

Environmental Health & Building Surveyor

1 March 2010

10 December 2009

 

The returns have been lodged prior to the due date for the receipt of the returns and are kept in a register held by the Acting Executive Officer. The Acting Executive Officer has the returns available in the Chamber.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That the information contained in the report on Pecuniary Interest Returns be received.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

A Leading City

 

 

 

10

Australian Local Government Women's Association 2010 NSW State Annual Conference   

 

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: As a City, we expect responsible and ethical behaviour

       

 

Executive Summary

The Australian Local Government Women’s Association (ALGWA) NSW State Annual Conference will be held in Moree from 4 to 6 March 2010.

 

Penrith City Council has six Councillor members of the ALGWA.

 

Presentations will be given at the Conference from key people involved in the community, local government and business.

 

Council should nominate its delegates to attend the Conference and grant leave of absence as appropriate.

Background

The Australian Local Government Women’s Association (ALGWA) was founded in 1951 with its principal aims and objectives being:

·   to assist in furthering women's knowledge and understanding of the function of local government;

·   to protect and enhance the interests and rights of women in local government;.

·   to take action in relation to any subject or activity of particular interest to women affecting local governing bodies and/or local government legislation;

·   to act in an advisory capacity to intending women candidates for local government elections;

·   to encourage women into professional careers in local government.

 

Councillor Membership of ALGWA

Penrith City Council has six Councillors who are members of the ALGWA (Councillors Allison, T Davies, Greenow, Guillaume, McKeown & Presdee), two of whom are currently serving on the ALGWA Executive being:

 

Cr Karen McKeown:               President

Cr Jackie Greenow:        Executive Member

57th Annual ALGWA NSW State Conference

The ALGWA 2010 NSW Annual Conference will be hosted by Moree Plains Shire Council, and is being held in Moree from 4 to 6 March 2010. The theme of the Conference is ‘Women Making a Splash’.

 

The Conference program has been prepared – refer to the Conference Brochure at http://www.mpsc.nsw.gov.au/content/view/734/152 , with presentations to be given from key people involved in the community, local government and business, namely:

·    The Hon. Linda Burney M.P. HonDEd DipEd, Minister for the State Plan, Minister for Community Services and Member for Canterbury

·    Jude Munro, Chief Executive Officer of the Brisbane City Council

·    Margaret Staib, Air Commodore Royal Australian Air Force and Director of Logistics Support Agency – Air Force and Director General Strategic Logistics, Joint Logistics Command.

·    Christine Weston, Direct Response Marketer

·    Dr Maree Smith, Laboratory Manager, Port Macquarie Hastings Council Environmental Laboratory

·    Penny Holloway, General Manager, North Sydney Council

·    Nerida Saunders, Executive Director for Aboriginal Affairs & Reconciliation Division of the Department for Premier and Cabinet

·    Jan Storm, Office of Regional Engagement, Southern Cross University

·    Kellie Mills, Managing Partner, Mills-Eaton Training

·    Kerry-Anne Walsh, Political Journalist in Print, Radio and TV and Media Consultant, K-A Communications

 

Other guest speakers invited may also include:

·    The Hon. Barbara Perry M.P. BA LLB, Minister for Local Government, Minister Assisting the Minister for Planning and Minister Assisting the Minister for Health (Mental Health)

·    The Hon. Jodi Leyanne McKay, MP, Member of the Legislative Assembly, Member for Newcastle, Minister for Tourism, Minister for the Hunter, Minister for Science and Medical Research and Minister for Women

 

It would be appropriate for delegates to be nominated at this meeting.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Australian Local Government Women's Association 2010 NSW State Annual Conference be received

2.     Council nominate its delegates to attend ALGWA’s 57th Annual NSW State Conference, to be held in Moree from 4 to 6 March 2010, and grant leave of absence as appropriate.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

A Leading City

 

 

 

11

Summary of Investments for the period 1 December to 31 December 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 December 2009 to 31 December 2009, a reconciliation of invested funds at 31 December 2009 and Agency Collection Methods as at 31 December 2009.  The report recommends that the information contained in the report be received.

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 31 December 2009.

Vicki O’Kelly

Responsible Accounting Officer

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Summary of Investments for the period 1 December to 31 December 2009 be received.

2.     The Certificate of the Responsible Accounting Officer and Summaries of Investments and Performance for the period 1 December 2009 to 31 December 2009 be noted and accepted.

3.     The graphical investment analysis as at 31 December 2009 be noted.

4.     The Agency Collection Methods as at 31 December 2009 be noted.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1. View

Summary of Investments

4 Pages

Appendix

2. View

Agency Collection Methods

1 Page

Appendix

  


Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

Appendix 1 - Summary of Investments

 

 

 





Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

Appendix 2 - Agency Collection Methods

 

 

 

 

 

 

The following is an update of the methods to make payments to Council through various agencies.

 

 

 


 

 

 

 

THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT BLANK  INTENTIONALLY


A City of Opportunities

 

Item                                                                                                                                       Page

 

12      Grant Application - Community Builders Funding Program 2009/10

 

13      Tender Reference 04-09/10 for the provision of Cleaning Services to Child Care Centres

 

 



Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

A City of Opportunities

 

 

 

12

Grant Application - Community Builders Funding Program 2009/10   

 

Compiled by:                Teresa Luk-Leung, Senior Social Planner

Authorised by:             Tracy Leahy, Acting Community & 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 seeks Council’s retrospective endorsement for a funding application submitted under the State Government’s Community Builders Program (formerly known as Western Sydney Area Assistance Scheme) 2009/10 for the Penrith Women Community Capacity Building Project. 

 

The project is proposed to fund the employment of a designated Women’s Services Community Development Officer within Council for a period of two years.  The funding application has been developed as a component of the implementation of the Action Plan in the Women’s Services Sector Advocacy Strategy adopted by Council on 23 February 2009.

 

The grant application was forwarded to the funding body by the due date of 15 December 2009.  This report seeks Council’s endorsement of the grant application for the Penrith Women Community Capacity Building Project under the State Government Community Builders Program.

Background

At the Ordinary Council Meeting of 23 February 2009, Council adopted the Women’s Services Sector Advocacy Strategy and endorsed the Women’s Services Sector Action Plan for implementation over the period 2009-2012.

 

Seeking funding for a designated Women’s Services Community Development Officer was agreed as a priority by the Penrith Women’s Services Network at its inaugural meeting of 29 September 2009.  The establishment of the Penrith Women’s Services Network is the first strategy in the Action Plan of the Women’s Services Sector Advocacy Strategy.

 

The Network, consisting of 15 representatives from both state government and community organisations, requested Council submit a funding application for the Women’s Services Community Development Officer under the State Government’s Community Builders Program (formerly known as the Western Sydney Area Assistance Scheme).  No individual community organisation was in a position to be the auspice for this project.

 

The request from the Network accords with the Action Plan in Theme 1 “A Viable and Effective Women’s Services Sector” which commits Council to explore funding opportunities for a designated Women’s Services Community Development Officer within Council.

 

Funding Application

The Penrith Women Community Capacity Building Project is proposed to fund the employment of a Community Development Officer for three days a week for a period of two years.

 

The project addresses the Community Builders funding priority which is building and strengthening communities.  The key objective of the Penrith Women Community Capacity Building Project is to promote a more inclusive community and enhance community well-being by contributing to the quality of life of women in Penrith particularly focusing on disadvantaged women.

 

To achieve the key objective of the project, the Women’s Services Community Development Officer will undertake a range of initiatives which include:

 

·    Undertake and document consultation and planning with service providers and women

·    Consolidate partnerships and facilitate links between partners

·    Develop advocacy statements and make representation to government agencies to achieve positive outcomes for women

·    Organise workshops and provide information on programs that support women in business

·    In partnership with local youth service providers, develop programs relating to mentoring, leadership and self esteem for young women

·    Establish a clearing house of research, policies, programs and resources for women

·    Implement a range of health and wellbeing initiatives with community partners relevant to women

·    Enhance the capacity of women to contribute to Council planning processes and decision making

 

The project will assist women of diverse backgrounds in Penrith to have access to services and resources available in the community.  It will contribute to women having increased opportunities to participate and consult on decisions affecting their lives.

 

It is anticipated that at the end of the project, a strong sustainable women’s network will be in place and it will continue functioning effectively to assist women in Penrith to build their capacity with the ongoing support of Council.

 

The project has been developed as a time limited two-year project within the Community Builders Community Capacity Building Program.  The budget for the project is $64,430 in the first year and $71,339 in the second year totalling $135,769.  The budget also includes a reasonable program budget to undertake joint initiatives and micro projects that build capacity within the women’s service sector and with women.  The funding application was submitted by the due date of 15 December 2009.

 

Council’s in kind contribution to the project will include:

 

·    Office accommodation

·    Supervision and support

·    Public Liability Insurance

·    Administrative support

·    Annual Financial audit

 

The project will also benefit considerably from the synergies of working on joint initiatives with Council Community and Cultural Development staff, other Council staff, as well as the broader Women’s Services Network.

 

Conclusion

Council’s Women’s Services Sector Advocacy Strategy has identified the issue of equity for women as a key challenge for Penrith.  The Penrith Women Community Capacity Building Project will implement a range of strategies to address the issues of equity facing women and will enable women to have improved access to services and resources available in the community.  The project will also contribute to a stronger and cohesive community through the opportunities for women to network and build social capital.

 

The funding application for the Penrith Women Community Capacity Building Project was forwarded to the funding body by the due date of 15 December 2009.  This report seeks Council’s endorsement of the submission.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Grant Application - Community Builders Funding Program 2009/10 be received.

2.     Council endorse the grant application for the Penrith Women Community Capacity Building Project for funding under the 2009/10 State Government Community Builders Program.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

A City of Opportunities

 

 

 

13

Tender Reference 04-09/10 for the provision of Cleaning Services to Child Care Centres   

 

Compiled by:                Mal Ackerman, Supply Co-ordinator

Jade Bradbury, Children's Services Business Co-ordinator

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

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

To advise Council on the outcome of a tender for the provision of ‘Cleaning Services for Child Care Centres’.

 

A total of 19 tender responses were received, and following assessment of the responses against the mandatory criteria, the list was reduced to six (6) prospective tenderers.  Following further evaluation of the tenders by the evaluation panel, a determination was made to short-list three (3) tenderers following the initial capability and cost assessment.  The companies short-listed were:

 

·    Four J’s Enterprises Trading Pty Ltd as Total Cleaning Services

·    Guardian Property Services Pty Ltd

·    Rapid Construction Pty Ltd

 

The three (3) short-listed tenderers were then subjected to a formal interview with the evaluation panel to further determine methodology and approach, staffing, wages and equipment to be allocated to the project and independent financial risk analysis and referee checks.

 

Independent referee checks indicated all three short-listed companies had a good to superior level of performance and customer satisfaction. The independent financial analysis checks on the three short-listed companies showed no adverse findings and all demonstrated satisfactory financial capacity to undertake the works required by the tender.

 

Based on the detailed evaluation, analysis of staffing to be allocated, interviews and independent risk analysis and best overall value for money, the evaluation panel is recommending that the contract for child care cleaning services be awarded to Four J’s Enterprises Trading as Total Cleaning Services  at a cost of $309,265.45 per annum for a contract period of two years with an option to extend the contract for a further one year period (with provision for rise & fall) subject to satisfactory performance.

Background

·    The existing service agreement for the provision of cleaning services for child care services expired on 13 November 2009. The current provider (Four J’s Enterprises Trading Pty Ltd as Total Cleaning Services) of the service has agreed to continue the arrangements on a month by month basis until a new tender is finalised.

 

Tenders for the provision of Child Care Cleaning Services for a two (2) year period with an option to extend for a further one (1) year period allowing for rise & fall provisions were advertised in the Penrith Press, Sydney Morning Herald and placed on the e-tendering web site on 6 October 2009 and closed on 4 November 2009.

 

Tender Documents

It was proposed in the tender documents that Council would select a preferred contractor capable of providing the required services.

 

All prospective tenderers were required to attend a mandatory pre-tender briefing. This included an on site inspection of  ‘like’ centres in design, size and layout to ensure that all prospective tenderers were given every opportunity to be fully familiarised with the scope of services required at each centre. This was held on Saturday 17 October 2009 to minimise disruption to services.

 

The scope of work specified in the tender documents included a detailed list of standard cleaning tasks required at regular intervals for each centre. Tenderers were required to submit a fixed weekly cost for each centre covering all listed tasks including daily, weekly, monthly, quarterly and annual tasks.

 

To ensure a consistent and high standard of cleaning services, in addition to the evaluation criteria, tenderers were required to meet a number of mandatory criteria. Tenderers failing to meet either of the mandatory criteria were excluded from the next phase of the evaluation process.

 

Tender Evaluation

Evaluation Panel

The tender evaluation panel comprised the following members:

Jade Bradbury (Children’s Services Business Coordinator), Denise Turner (Director Emu Plains Cluster) and Mal Ackerman (Supply Coordinator).

 

Evaluation Process

The process for the evaluation of tenders was as follows:

 

1.   Initial review of tenders to determine compliance with the mandatory criteria

2.   Initial review of tenders to determine capability in accordance with the evaluation criteria including the ability and experience in providing the services specified

3.   Assessment of costs based on the unit rates tendered including allocated hours of cleaning for each centre

4.   Determination of a short-list based on the best rankings from 2 & 3 above

5.   Further evaluation of the short-listed companies through:

·    Formal interviews

·    Financial Risk analysis

·    Referee Checks

 

Evaluation Criteria

The evaluation criteria specified in the tender documents included:

 

Mandatory Criteria

 

·    Quality assurance certification to ISO9000 or equivalent

·    Tenderers must demonstrate a history of cleaning multiple sites

·    Attendance at pre-tender briefing and site inspection

 

Tenderers’ capability

 

·    Proven ability and experience

·    Experience and qualifications of senior personnel

·    Relevant work history

·    Relevant overall industry experience

·    Details of equipment owned and or leased

·    Experience in the cleaning of multiple sites

·    Methods for engagement and management of sub contractors

·    Scope of requirements

·    Maintaining quality of workmanship

·    Establishment and response times

 

Management and Administration

 

·    Financial capacity

·    Office support systems

·    Environmental management system

·    Industrial relations

·    Occupational health and safety and public liability management

 

Tenders Received

A total of 19 responses were received. Of these, tenders received from ADZ Cleaning Services Pty Ltd and PDM Facilities Management Pty Ltd were deemed invalid as no prices were submitted.

 

The following table lists in alphabetical order the remaining 17 tenders received. Also indicated is the outcome of the initial assessment for each tenderer against the mandatory criteria. Tenderers that did not demonstrate compliance with one or more of the mandatory criteria did not progress to the next stage of the evaluation.

 

Tenderer

Mandatory Criteria

Attended Tender briefing

Quality Assurance Accreditation

Experience-Multiple Sites

AAD cleaning service

Yes

No

Yes

Access Group Solutions Pty Ltd

Yes

No

Yes

Challenger Cleaning

Yes

No

Yes

Charmax Property Maintenance

Yes

Yes

Yes

Clean Image Cleaning

Yes

No

Yes

Corporate Commercial Pty Ltd

Yes

No

Yes

EGroup

Yes

No

Yes

Four J's Enterprises Pty Ltd Trading as Total Cleaning Services

Yes

Yes

Yes

Guardian Property Services Pty Ltd

Yes

Yes

Yes

LPK Services Pty Ltd

Yes

No

Yes

NuCentury

No

Yes

Yes

Pickwick Group Pty Ltd

Yes

Yes

Yes

Rapid Construction Pty Ltd

Yes

Yes

Yes

Rogue Property Maintenance Pty Ltd

Yes

No

No

Site Group Pty Ltd

Yes

No

No

Stardel Total Services Pty Ltd

Yes

Yes

Yes

Statewide Quality Services Pty Ltd

Yes 

No

No

 

Evaluation of Remaining Tenderers

The following remaining tenderers were further assessed for capability and cost.

 

Charmax Property Maintenance

Four J's Enterprises Pty Trading as Total Cleaning Services

Guardian Property Services Pty Ltd

Pickwick Group Pty Ltd

Rapid Construction Pty Ltd

Stardel Total Services Pty Ltd

 

Capability

Following the capability assessment against the evaluation criteria it was determined by the evaluation panel that the tenders submitted by Four J's Enterprises Pty Trading as Total Cleaning Services, Guardian Property Services Pty Ltd and Rapid Construction Pty Ltd demonstrated a much higher level of ability than the offers submitted by Charmax Property Maintenance, Pickwick Group Pty Ltd & Stardel Total Services Pty Ltd. For the latter the particular areas of concern were lack of experience in cleaning of child care centres and overall industry experience. They also failed to demonstrate their capability to service the arrangements by not providing an outline of their proposed methodology.

 

Cost

The annualised cost for each of the remaining tenderers is shown in the following table (lowest to highest). Also included is the number of annual staff hours allocated to complete all cleaning tasks.

Tenderer

Annual Cost

Allocated staff Hours

Rapid Construction Pty Ltd

213,462.00

8564

Guardian Property Services Pty Ltd

218,993.67

8962

Stardel Total Services Pty Ltd

265,164.00

13937

Four J's Enterprises Pty Trading as Total Cleaning Services

309,265.45

13269

Charmax Property Maintenance Pty Ltd

324,858.00

11289

Pickwick Group Pty Ltd

701,198.70

13220

 

Comments

The number of hours allocated by both Rapid Construction Pty Ltd and Guardian Property Services Pty Ltd were substantially lower than the hours allocated for the remaining tenderers. Whilst Stardel Total Services Pty Ltd offered the highest number of allocated staff hours, the stated cost for the hours offered would not be sustainable when taking into account current Award rates. The cost submitted by Pickwick Group Pty Ltd is excessive in comparison to the other tendered prices and the evaluation panel determined that there was no advantage to Council in considering their tender further.

 

Short-listed Tenders

Following Phase 1 & 2 of the evaluation, the panel determined that the tenders received from Rapid Construction Pty Ltd, Guardian Property Services Pty Ltd and Four J's Enterprises Pty Ltd Trading as Total Cleaning Services, be short-listed for further evaluation including:

 

·    Formal interviews to further determine the tenderers’ understanding of the scope of the works required, details of their relevant experience and to ascertain the level of resources, including equipment that each company would allocate to this contract.

The interview process also sought further information on methodology, staffing and clarification of Awards utilised for payment of wages

·    Independent financial risk analysis

·    Independent referee checks

 

Profile of Short-listed Tenderers

Rapid Construction Pty Ltd

This company is based in Parramatta NSW and have been in operation since 1990. They operate primarily as a commercial and industrial building contractor as well as providing facilities maintenance services. Their cleaning services division has been in operation for a period of five (5) years. They have quality certification to ISO9001:2000, they are currently providing cleaning services to a number of government agencies although their experience in the cleaning of child care centres is very limited.

 

Guardian Property Services Pty Ltd

The company is based in Gladesville NSW and was incorporated in 1986. They have quality certification to ISO9001:2000 and is a provider of contract cleaning services for various government departments including a number of schools. They also provide cleaning services to a number of commercial facilities including over 30 aged care facilities. They currently provide cleaning services for two (2) child care facilities.

 

Four J's Enterprises Pty Trading as Total Cleaning Services

The company is based in Liverpool NSW and was established in 1996 to provide a range of cleaning services to professional and commercial premises throughout NSW. Over the past 13 years the business has developed to include both private organisations and various government agencies.  They have quality certification to ISO9001:2000 and have extensive experience in providing cleaning services to child care centres including 16 sites for Holroyd City Council (contracted since 2004) and 28 sites for Penrith City Council.

 

Interviews with Short-listed Tenderers

Following the interviews with the three (3) short-listed tenderers it was determined that Four J’s Enterprises Pty Ltd trading as Total Cleaning Services demonstrated a higher level of understanding of the requirements of the tender along with the resources and superior capability to deliver the level of service required.  The hours allocated by Four J’s Enterprises Pty Ltd trading as Total Cleaning Services are far in excess of the allocated cleaning time offered by both Rapid Construction Pty Ltd and Guardian Property Services Pty Ltd.

The significantly lower number of hours of work proposed by Rapid Construction Pty Ltd and Guardian Property Services Pty would not be adequate to ensure a high quality cleaning standard that is required at each of the centres. This was also reflected in the lower total annual cost.

                                                                                                                                

Rapid Construction Pty Ltd and Guardian Property Services Pty Ltd. did not demonstrate the level of knowledge required or adequately demonstrate the methodology to be used under this tender which was reflected in the level of resources to be allocated.

 

Financial Analysis

Third party financial analysis checks were conducted for all short-listed tenderers. There were no adverse finding and all tenderers demonstrated satisfactory financial capacity to undertake the works.

 

Referee Checks

Third party referee checks were carried out on all three (3) short-listed companies. In all cases reports indicate a good to very good level of performance and customer satisfaction.

 

Financial Services Manager’s Comments

The annual cost of child care cleaning services as tendered by Four J’s Enterprises Pty trading as Total Cleaning Services can be accommodated in the 2009-10 Operational Plan budget of $358,000 and will be incorporated into the 2010-11 Operational Plan.

 

Comment by Tender Advisory Group (TAG)

The Council’s Group Manager ~ Legal and Governance and the Legal Officer reviewed the Tender Report and were of the opinion that the methodologies, assessment and recommendations made were sound. Although the number of staff hours allocated to the job and the overall price of the preferred tenderer (Four J’s Enterprises Pty Ltd) are higher than the other conforming tenders, it is considered that the preferred tenderer demonstrated a greater level of understanding of the resources required to adequately perform the works.

Conclusion

Based on the detailed evaluation, analysis of staffing, interviews and independent risk analysis, the tender that represents the best overall value for money to Council was received from Four J's Enterprises Pty Trading as Total Cleaning Services and they are recommended for appointment by the evaluation panel. They demonstrated, through the interview and their tender, an excellent understanding of the scope of requirements and have provided a sound methodology for ensuring a high quality of service. They have a number of key supervisory staff in the immediate area that will be allocated to this project to ensure quality of service is maintained. Four J's Enterprises Pty Trading as Total Cleaning Services pay their staff in accordance with NSW State Award AN120123 - Cleaning Services. They are the incumbent provider of the service and their standard of performance has been satisfactory.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Tender Reference 04-09/10 for the provision of Cleaning Services to Child Care Centres be received.

2.     A contract for the provision of child care cleaning services for a period of two (2) years with an option to extend the agreement for a further one (1) year period (with provision for rise & fall) subject to satisfactory performance be awarded to Four J's Enterprises Pty Trading as Total Cleaning Services for the annual cost of $309,265.45.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.  


A Green City

 

Item                                                                                                                                       Page

 

14      Development Application DA09/0445 - Proposed Subdivision Lot 31 DP 772196 and Lot 1 DP 259360 (No. 102, 114 - 116) Factory Road, Regentville. Applicant: Mr J & Mrs H Wakeling;  Owner: Mr J & Mrs H Wakeling DA09/0445

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

 

15      Development Application DA08/1205 Proposed Educational Establishment (School) for 150 Students with Associated Agricultural Studies Area, Landscaping, Car Parking, Sewerage and Demolition of Existing Dwelling at Lot 227, 227A & 228 DP 2147 (No. 227) Seventh Avenue, Llandilo. Applicant: Stephen E Joyce;  Owner: Meadowbank Education Incorporated (MET) Kellyville Campus Pty Ltd DA08/1205

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

 

16      Development Application DA09/0901 for the operation of a Red Rooster restaurant at Lot 21 DP 1085064 (No. 21) Lavin Crescent, Werrington County. Applicant: Red Rooster Foods Pty Ltd;  Owner: Nicholas Kousparis and Christopher Kousparis DA09/0901

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

 

17      Development Application No. 09/0609 Alterations and Additions to Existing Restaurant at Lot 16 DP 583184 (No. 2/91) Great Western Highway Emu Plains. Applicant: Rob McGuinness;  Owner: Jim Aitken, Marlene Aitken, James Aitken and David Reeves DA09/0609

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

 

18      Partnership application between Blacktown City Council and Penrith City Council for Managed Aquifer Recharge Project Funding

 

19      Memorandum of Understanding between the Collaborative Research Centre for Irrigations Futures and Penrith City Council

 

 



Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

A Green City

 

 

 

14

Development Application DA09/0445 - Proposed Subdivision Lot 31 DP 772196 and Lot 1 DP 259360 (No. 102, 114 - 116) Factory Road, Regentville  Applicant:  Mr J & Mrs H Wakeling;  Owner:  Mr J & Mrs H Wakeling    

DA09/0445

Compiled by:                Aimee Lee, 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 seeking approval for the subdivision of two existing lots into three lots.  The site consists of No.102 Factory Road and No. 114-116 Factory Road is partly zoned 1(b) (Rural “B” – Smallholdings) and partly zoned 6(a) (Public Recreation) under the provisions of the Penrith Local Environmental Plan 201 (Rural Lands) (LEP 201).  Clause 10 of the LEP stated that subdivision requires development consent.

 

Clause 11(2)(b) of the LEP states that a minimum 2 hectare allotment size for subdivision is applicable in 1(b) Rural “B” – Smallholdings zones.  The proposed lease lot is 2623sqm and does not comply with Council’s minimum requirement.  The application is reported to Council as in accordance with Department of Planning Circular No. PS 08-014 as the variation to the minimum allotment size is greater than 10%.  The matter also requires the concurrence of the Director-General of NSW Department of Planning which has been granted.

 

The site is Bush Fire Prone Land which requires a Bush Fire Safety Authority under section 100B of the Rural Fires Act 1997 and as such an integrated development.  The site is flood prone and the adopted flood level for this location is RL 29.1m AHD.

 

The development application was advertised, neighbour notified and exhibited.  Council received four (4) submissions with one (1) respondent lodging two (2) submissions and the issues raised are discussed in Section 7 of the report. 

 

An assessment under Section 79C of EP&A Act has been undertaken and the application is recommended for approval.

Background

The site and operation of the commercial cruise boat (Nepean Belle) service has been the subject of a several applications and approvals over a number of years:

 

·   Development Application No. 47/79 – carparking and other facilities for paddle cruiser patrons

·   Development Application No. 960231 – animal breeding establishment (ostrich farm)

·   Development Application No. 960276 – detached dual occupancy

·   Development Application No. 02/1671 – three-lot subdivision

 

Development Application No. 02/1671 for a three (3) lot subdivision was approved by Council on 4 March 2003.  One of the lots proposed by this application was for lease purposes.  The plan of subdivision was not registered with the Department of Lands and the consent lapsed on 4 March 2005.

 

The current application Development Application No. 09/0445 is similar to Development Application No. 02/1671 except the current proposed lease lot 132 has been slightly altered to better integrate with the Nepean Belle infrastructure on the property.

Site and Surrounds

The development site consists of No. 102 Factory Road and No. 114-116 Factory Road.  The development site is located on the southwestern side of Factory Road (see Locality Plan in Appendix No. 1).  The site is approximately 105 metres east of the Nepean River, bounded by the M4 Motorway to the north, Mulgoa Road to the east and Nepean River to the west.  Developments in the area are predominantly rural/residential in nature.

 

No. 102 Factory Road (Lot 31 DP 772196) is a hatchet-shaped lot with a site area of 5.737 hectare.  Existing improvements on the site including a single dwelling, an office and outbuildings associated with the operation of Nepean Belle a commercial cruise boat service.  Access to the site is via an access handle off Factory Road.

 

No. 114-116 Factory Road is a standard lot with a site area of 2.58 hectare.  There is a dwelling house and outbuilding erected on the site.  Access to this site is via Factory Road.

 

The site is located in High-Medium Bush Fire Prone land and is subject to Council’s Interim Policy for the Development of Flood Liable Land.  The adopted flood level for the site is RL 29.1m AHD.

Proposed Development

The application seeks the following:

 

·   Subdivision of two existing lots into three lots

·   Proposed new allotment No. 132 will be used for lease purposes associated with the Nepean Belle

 

Details of the proposed lot size are as follows - see Appendix No. 2 for details of the proposed sizes (an A3 copy will also be provided to Councillors under separate cover):

 

Proposed lot

Proposed allotment size

Lot 131

5.7ha (existing – 5.737ha)

Lot 132 (lease lot) New Lot

0.2623ha

Lot 133

2.25ha (existing – 2.58ha)

 

The lease lot contains an outbuilding used in association with the operation of Nepean Belle.  The reasons for creating the lease lot is to facilitate continuous operation of Nepean Belle, a commercial cruise boat service should the business ownership being separated from the land ownership. 

 

Discussion with Council’s Legal Officer has confirmed that there is no maximum time limitation on a lease lot.

Statutory Assessment

The proposal has been assessed with due regard to the following relevant legislations and planning instruments: -

 

·   Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979

·   Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No.20 – Hawkesbury/Nepean River

·   State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards

·   State Environmental Planning Policy No.55 - Remediation of Land

·   Rural Fires Act 1997

·   Penrith Local Environmental Plan 201 (Rural Lands)

 

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

(a)     Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 20 – Hawkesbury – Nepean River (No. 2 – 1997)

The aim of the plan is to protect the environment of the Hawkesbury – Nepean River system by ensuring that the impacts of future land uses are considered in a regional context. 

 

Comment

The proposed subdivision would have minimal impact on the river, its tributaries and surrounds. 

 

(b)     State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards

The aim of this Policy is to provide flexibility in the application of planning controls operating by virtue of development standards in circumstances where strict compliance with those standards would, in any particular case, be unreasonable or unnecessary or tend to hinder the attainment of the objects specified in section 5 (a) (i) and (ii) of the EP&A Act as follows:

 

“5.    The objects of this Act are:

(a)     to encourage:

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

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

 

The applicant provided the following justifications in the SEPP 1 for the variation to the 2ha lot size requirement:

 

(a)     This application is similar to the previously approved Development Application No. 02/1671 except for the proposed lease Lot 132 which is predominantly located within No. 102 Factory Road. 

 

(b)     The proposed Lease Lot 132 contains associated infrastructure for the repair, servicing and support of the operations of two commercial tourist river crafts, the Nepean Belle Paddle Wheel Showboat and the Penrith Platypus Explorer.  It will not be used for residential purposes.

 

(c)     The operation of the commercial tourist river craft and the establishment of the onshore infrastructure have been approved by Penrith City Council.  These facilities provide a tourist focus of regional significance which allows tourists to enjoy the unique environs of the Nepean River.

 

(d)     The creation of the lease lot will facilitate the continuation of the business as well as ongoing maintenance and servicing of the river craft should the business ownership become separated from land ownership due to retirement.

 

(e)     The proposed lease lot will not undermine the zone objectives of 1(b) Rural “B” – Smallholdings.

 

(f)      The lease lot enables continuation of a local business for the operation of a cruise boat facility along the Nepean River and maintaining local employment.  This is consistent with the objects of the EP&A Act in relation to the proper management and development of resources for promoting the orderly and economic use and development of land and social and economic welfare of the community and a better environment.

 

The following table shows the lot of non compliance with the minimum allotment size.

 

 

Development Standard

Existing

Proposed

Compliance

Lot 131

2ha

5.737ha

5.7ha

Yes

Lot 132 (lease lot)

2ha

N/A

0.2623ha

No

Lot 133

2ha

2.58ha

2.25ha

Yes

 

The above justifications have been assessed against the relevant planning principles of the following court cases:

 

(a)     Winten Property Group Limited -v- North Sydney Council [2001] NSWLEC 46

(b)     Wehbe v Pittwater Council [2007] NSWLEC 827

 

This assessment has found that strict compliance with the development standard (2 ha minimum area) would be inconsistent with the aims of SEPP 1 in terms of maintaining flexibility in the application of planning controls and the objects under section 5(a)(i) and (ii) of the EP&A Act for the proper management and development of natural resources and promoting the orderly and economic use and development of the land for the following reasons:

 

(a)     The 2 ha minimum allotment size for subdivision in 1(b) (Rural “B” – Smallholdings) zone is a development standard to facilitate rural/residential developments.

 

(b)     This standard is not relevant to the proposal as the objectives of this development standard are:

·        To ensure the lot is sympathetic to the established subdivision pattern and a dwelling can be built on a sizable lot with services and amenities.

·        To minimise the potential risk to life and property associated with flooding by restricting developments in flood prone areas.

 

(c)     This proposal specifically the creation of a lease lot would enable the continuation of the operation of the commercial tourist river crafts.  There is no intensification of the existing use on the site and there is no new building works proposed.

 

(c)     Concurrence of the Director-General NSW Department of Planning

The matter was referred to the Director-General NSW Department of Planning for concurrence.  In a letter dated 21 August 2009, the Director-General confirmed their concurrence with the variation of the minimum lot size subject to a restriction being placed on the title specifying that a dwelling house cannot be built on the land and that the land cannot be used for residential purposes.  A condition is included in the recommendations.

 

(d)     State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 (SEPP No. 55)

Remediation of Land

Council may not consent to the carrying out of any development on land unless it has considered whether the land is contaminated, and 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.

 

Comment

The site is suitable for the proposed subdivision.

 

(e)     Rural Fires Act 1997

The Rural Fires Act nominates subdivision within bush fire prone area as ‘Integrated Development’.  Section 100B of the Rural Fires Act 1997 further states that a person must obtain a bush fire safety authority from the Commissioner for the subdivision of bush fire prone land for residential or rural residential purposes.

 

Comment

The application was referred to NSW Rural Fire Service who have issued a bush fire safety authority on 17 August 2009 and recommended conditions to be imposed in the consent which are included in the recommendation.

 

(f)      Penrith Local Environmental Plan 201 (Rural Lands) (LEP 201)

Permissibility

The site is partly zoned 1(b) (Rural “B” – Smallholdings) and partly zoned 6(a) (Public Recreation) under the provisions of the Penrith Local Environmental Plan 201 (Rural Lands) (LEP 201).  Clause 10 of the LEP states that subdivision requires development consent.

 

It is noted that a small portion to the southwest of No. 102 Factory Road is zoned 6(a) (Public Recreation).  This area is not affected by the proposed subdivision and the proposed lease lot.  Therefore Clause 23 and Clause 27 of the LEP do not apply to this application.

 

LEP Objectives

The proposed subdivision is consistent with the general aims of the LEP in relation to encouraging the proper management, development and conservation of valuable natural and man-made resources within the rural lands of Penrith.

 

The proposal is also consistent with the specific aims of the LEP to protect, enhance or conserve the rural character and setting of Penrith and the scenic quality and valuable landscape features of the rural areas.

 

The proposal is also consistent with the following LEP objectives: 

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

(b)     to control development in areas subject to flood hazard.

 

Zone Objectives

The proposal is consistent with the following objectives of 1(b) Rural “B” Smallholdings zone:

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

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

(c)     to provide and maintain land for recreational and community pursuits

 

Clause 11 Subdivision within Zones Nos. 1(a), 1(b), 1(c), 5(d) and 7

Subclause (2) states that Council may consent to the subdivision of land to which this clause applies subject to a minimum lot size of 2 hectares for land within Zone No. 1(b).

 

Comment

Issues related to variation to this development standard have been addressed previously in the report under SEPP 1.

 

Clause 20 Flood liable land

As stated earlier in the report, the site is subject to flooding and Council shall consider:

(a)     the effect of the proposed development on the efficiency and capacity of the floodway to carry and discharge floodwaters

(b)     the safety of the proposed development in time of flood

(c)     whether the proposed development involves any possible risk to life, human safety or private property in time of flood

 

Comment

Council’s Development Engineering Coordinator has reviewed the proposal and noted that the site is subject to Councils Interim Policy for the development of flood liable land.  Council’s adopted flood level for this location is RL 29.1m AHD.

 

The existing ground level at the location of proposed lot 132 for lease purposes ranges between 27.5m AHD to 28.5m AHD.  Although the proposed lot 132 site area is subject to medium to high hazard flood risk, this application can be supported for the following reasons:

 

(i)      The proposed subdivision would have minimal impact on the efficiency and capacity of the floodway to discharge floodwaters as works are not proposed on the site as part of this subdivision application.

(ii)      There is no intensification of the existing use on the site and there is no alteration to the natural ground level that would pose risk to life, human safety or private property.

(iii)     The purpose of this application is to continue the operation of the cruise business from a portion of land that it has always been operated from and would have minimal impact on the safety of the proposed subdivision.

 

Clause 21 Provision of services

This clause states that Council shall not grant consent to development unless evidence is furnished to the council’s satisfaction that adequate support services and utilities are or will be available within a reasonable time.

 

Comment

The site is connected to existing services.  The proposed subdivision and lease lot do not require additional services to be provided.  Therefore the proposed subdivision has satisfied the objective of this clause.

 

2.       Section 79C(1)(a)(ii) – Any Draft Environmental Planning Instruments

The site is affected by the draft Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2008 (draft LEP).  No. 102 Factory Road will be partly zoned RU4 Rural Small Holdings and partly zoned E2 Environmental Conservation.  No. 114-116 Factory Road will be zoned RU4 Rural Small Holdings.  Clause 2.6 of the draft LEP states that subdivision requires consent. 

 

The site is also affected by the draft LEP maps:

 

(a)     Minimum Lot Size Map

A minimum of 1000 hectares applies to the site except for the southwestern boundary of No. 102 Factory Road where a minimum of 40 hectares applies to E2 Environmental Conservation zone.

 

Issues related to the inconsistency with this requirement are addressed below. 

 

(b)     Flood Prone Land Map

The site is subject to the 1% Annual Exceedance Probability flood extent.

 

Issues related to flood affectation have been addressed previous in the report.

 

(c)     Scenic and Landscape Values Map

The site is identified to be land with scenic and landscape values except for the southwestern boundary of No. 102 Factory Road.

 

The proposed subdivision and additional lot would have minimal impact on the scenic and landscape values of the site.

 

Zone Objectives

The proposed subdivision and lease lot are consistent with the following objectives of RU4 Rural Small Holdings zone and E2 Environmental Conservation zone:

 

·        To maintain the rural character of the locality

·        To ensure development would not generate additional demand for services and facilities

·        To protect views from Nepean River

·        To minimise adverse impact on the amenity of existing residents and the locality

·        To allow for low impact passive recreational and ancillary land uses that are consistent with the retention of the natural ecological significance

 

Clause 4.1 Minimum subdivision lot size

The objectives of this clause are:

(a)     to ensure that lot sizes are compatible with the environmental capabilities of the land being subdivided

(b)     to minimise any likely impact of subdivision and development on the amenity of neighbouring properties

(c)     to ensure that lot sizes and dimensions allow developments to be sited to protect natural or cultural features including heritage items and retain special features such as trees and views

(d)     to regulate the density of development and ensure that there is not an unreasonable increase in the demand for public services or public facilities

(e)     to ensure that lot sizes and dimensions are able to accommodate development consistent with relevant development controls.

 

Comment

Although the lease lot is inconsistent with Council’s minimum allotment size for subdivision, Council can support the variation for the following reasons:

 

(i)      The proposed subdivision and lease lot are compatible with the environmental capabilities of the site and would have a negligible impact on the amenity of the neighbouring properties.

(ii)      The proposal would not generate additional demands on public services and facilities. 

(iii)     Proposed lot No. 132 is created for lease purposes to facilitate the operation of the commercial cruise.  As the lot is not created for residential development, it would not compromise application of development controls and the underlying objectives for residential developments in rural areas.

 

Clause 4.2 Rural Subdivision

Subclause (3) states that land may be subdivided for the purpose of primary production to create a lot of a size that is less than the minimum size shown on the Lot Size Map.  However, such a lot cannot be created if an existing dwelling would be situated on the lot.  It is further stated that a dwelling cannot be erected on such a lot.

 

The objective of this clause is to provide flexibility in the application of standards for subdivision in rural zones to allow land owners a greater chance to achieve the objectives for development in the relevant zone.

 

 

Comment

It is noted during the site inspection that there is no existing dwelling erected on the proposed lease lot except for an outbuilding.  The recommended condition restricting residential development is adequate to ensure compliance.  In this instance, the proposal is consistent with this clause.

 

Clause 4.6 Exceptions to development standards

It is stated that Council may grant consent to developments that would contravene a development standard imposed by this or any other environmental planning instrument provided the consent authority has considered a written justification from the applicant demonstrating that:

 

(a)     compliance with the development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstances of the case;

(b)     there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the development standard;

(c)     the development will be in the public interest because it is consistent with the objectives of the standard and the zone in which the development is proposed to be carried out; and

(d)     the concurrence of the Director-General has been obtained

 

Subclause (6) further states that consent must not be granted for a subdivision of land in Zones RU4 and E2 if:

(a)     the subdivision will result in 2 or more lots of less than the minimum area specified for such lots by a development standard, or

(b)     the subdivision will result in at least one lot that is less than 90% of the minimum area specified for such a lot by a development standard.

 

Comment

Although the proposed lot size does not comply with the minimum requirement of the draft LEP, Council can support this application for the following reasons:

 

(a)     A SEPP 1 objection has been submitted and the justifications for the variation to the minimum allotment size for subdivision are considered to be well-founded.

(b)     The Director-General’s concurrence has been obtained for the variation. 

(c)     The above assessment concludes that proposal is consistent with the objectives of the standard and the zone.

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

The site is affected by section 2.10 Flood Liable Land and Section 4.9 Rural Development of the Penrith Development Control Plan 2006

 

Section 2.10 Flood Liable Land

The overall aims and objectives of this section are:

(a)     To reduce the impact of flooding and flood liability on individual owners and occupiers

(b)     To limit the potential risk to life and property resulting from flooding

(c)     The potential for flood losses in all new developed areas shall be contained by the application of effective planning and development control

(d)     A “merit approach” to all development and building decisions, which takes account of social, economic and ecological as well as flooding considerations, shall be followed

(e)     To reduce the risk and implications of flooding to existing areas by flood mitigation works and other measures

(f)      To prevent the introduction of unsuitable land uses onto the land identified by council as being flood liable

 

Comment

The proposal is consistent with the aims of this section as all existing uses on the site and existing levels will be maintained.  There will be no unsuitable land uses or new structures being introduced to the site.  Therefore the proposal would not increase any risk to life and property or liability on any owners and occupiers.

 

Subsection 3.9 Subdivision

It is stated that

(a)     Council will not support the subdivision of any land located in floodway or high hazard areas.

(b)     Subdivision of flood liable land that either consolidates or does not create additional lots will be considered on its merits.

(c)     Subdivision of flood liable land in rural zones creating additional allotments will generally not be supported; however, where the applicant can demonstrate that the flood hazard is classified as “low” and for each allotment there is sufficient area of land (with a minimum of 1000 sqm) above the standard flood to allow for the erection of all buildings and ancillary works to be used in conjunction with development to be carried out on the allotment, then Council may consider a subdivision application.  Flood free access shall also be provided.

 

Comment

Council Development Engineering Coordinator reviewed the application and recommended that a restriction as to user be created over the proposed Lot 132 preventing the approval of buildings for habitable use.  Furthermore, the proposed subdivision for lease purposes shall lapse with the termination of the lease agreement for the slipway.  Accordingly, these conditions are imposed in the consent.

 

Section 4.9 Rural Development

The aims of this section are:

 

·        Allow subdivision which will maintain the rural character of the locality.

·        Ensure that allotments are compatible in size and shape with the physical nature of the land, adjoining land uses and the likely use of the land in the future.

·        Ensure satisfactory arrangements are made for access, servicing and landscaping.

·        Enhance opportunities for further subdivision if required in the future.

 

Comment

As stated earlier in the report, the site is partly zoned 1(b) (Rural “B” – Smallholdings) and partly zoned 6(a) (Public Recreation) under the provisions of LEP 201.  Developments in the area are rural/residential in character.  This character will be maintained by the RU4 Rural Small Holdings and E2 Environmental Conservation Rural zones under the provisions of the draft LEP.

 

Although the lot size and configuration of the proposed lease lot is not compatible with the existing subdivision pattern, its approval would have a negligible impact on the existing and future rural character of the locality having considered the intent of the proposal. 

 

The proposed lots 132 and 133 cannot be further subdivided except for Lot 131.  Any further subdivision will be subject to compliance with Council’s minimum allotment size requirement.

 

Access to No. 102 Factory Road including the Nepean Belle office and outbuilding is currently via the access handle of the property.  To formalise access arrangement to the proposed lease lot, a Right-of-Carriageway and Easement for Services of variable width is proposed along the existing access handle of No. 102 Factory Road and along the proposed southern boundary of No. 114-116 Factory Road.

 

The existing landscaping is adequate and the proposal does not require additional landscape provision.

 

Policies

·        Subdivision will only be permitted in accordance with Clause 11 of the Penrith Local Environmental Plan No.201 (Rural Lands).

·        Allotments should be designed to reflect the physical features of the site such as ridges, drainage lines, existing vegetation, views etc.

·        Long and narrow allotments should be avoided. A maximum of 4:1 depth to width ratio will be considered.

·        Existing vegetation and natural drainage lines should be retained and enhanced wherever possible.

·        Existing dams should be retained where possible.

 

Comment

Issues related to compliance with the minimum allotment size under the provision of Clause 11 of LEP 201 have been addressed earlier in the report.

 

The configuration of the lease lot and the proposed Right-of-Carriageway is satisfactory and would have minimal impact on the existing lots, the Nepean River and surrounding vegetation.

4.       Section 79C(1)(a)(iv) – The Regulations

This section is not applicable for the subject application.

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

The likely impacts of the proposed development upon the surrounding area are discussed as follows:

 

Privacy

The proposed subdivision would not impact on the visual and acoustic privacy of the surrounding developments.

 

View Corridors/View Sharing

The proposal would not give rise to view corridor obstruction and remains consistent with the principle of view sharing.

 

Traffic generation, parking and loading

As there is no intensification of the use of the site, it is not anticipated that the proposal will generate additional traffic that will impact on local traffic and parking conditions.

 

Streetscape and urban character

The proposed subdivision and lease lot would have a negligible impact on the rural character of the locality.

 

Intensity of Use

The proposed subdivision and lease lot would not intensify the use of the site. 

 

Social/Economic

The proposal would facilitate continuous operation of a commercial operation on the site and would be consistent with the objectives of proper development of natural resources.

 

Landscaping/Tree Removal

The proposal does not require removal of any existing vegetation or provision of additional landscaping.

 

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

In view of the above assessment, Council is satisfied that the proposed subdivision is suitable for the site subject to conditions.

 

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

Community Consultation

In accordance with Chapter 2.7 of the Penrith Development Control Plan for the City of Penrith 2006 – Notification and Advertising, Council advertised, neighbour notified and exhibited this application between 17 August 2009 and 7 September 2009.  Council received four (4) submissions with one (1) submitter lodging two (2) submissions.  The applicants had been advised of the issues raised by the respondents and provided a response. 

 

The application was re-advertised, re-notified and exhibited between 10 November 2009 and 24 November 2009.  Council received one (1) submission but the respondent did not raise any objection to the proposal.

 

The issues are addressed below:

 

Issue Raised

Comments

Council shall consult the community and provide information in plain English

The application was advertised and notified in accordance with section 2.7 Penrith Development Control Plan 2006 from 17 August 2009 to 7 September 2009 and 10 November to 24 November 2009.

 

Information submitted with the application including plan of subdivision, Statement of Environmental Effects, SEPP 1 objection and Bush Fire Report were made available for viewing by the general public.

This application does not have sufficient information as to the ramifications it would bring particularly the future use of the site

This application seeks approval for the subdivision of two existing lots into three lots.  The additional allotment (lease lot) facilitates the continuous operation of commercial cruise boat service for future change of business ownership. 

 

The proposal has assessed against relevant legislations and Council policies.  The assessment concludes that the proposal is consistent with the aims and objectives of the relevant legislations and Council policies.

 

The SEPP 1 objection was considered by the Director General of the Department of Planning who issued their concurrence subject to condition.

 

NSW Rural Fire Service reviewed the Bush Fire Report and issued a Bush Fire Safety Authority and recommended a condition to be imposed for separate application of Class 1, 2 and 3 buildings identified under the Building Code of Australia.

Increased traffic hazard associated with additional truck movement from using the driveway that was constructed at No. 114-116 Factory Road to access to the lease lot

The concern about a driveway that has been constructed on No. 114-116 Factory Road.  According to Council policies, consent is not required for the construction of a driveway except for the construction of the crossover.

 

To gain access from No. 114-116 Factory Road to the lease lot, a Right-of-Carriageway has to be created and registered on the title of the properties.  This matter has to be resolved prior to change of business ownership.

 

The plan of subdivision that accompanies Development Application No. 09/0445 shows that a Right-of-Carriageway is proposed along the northern and northeastern boundaries of No. 102 Factory Road servicing the lease lot. 

 

The applicant has advised that this proposed Right-of-Carriageway is for the purposes of separating any business activity from No.114-116 Factory Road and restrict any likely impacts to one lot.  The application would not increase the current traffic volume.

The applicant has lodged previous applications with Council including an ostrich farm and mini train attraction which would affect the quality of life and lifestyle of the neighbourhood

These previous applications are not matters for consideration in the assessment of Development Application No. 09/0445.

 

A site inspection noted that the ostrich farm has ceased operation.  The proposed mini-train attraction has never progressed.

A complaint was lodged two years ago regarding a road was constructed and land being raised by about 1 metre without Council permission and have no reply from Council

Council’s records show that a complaint was received in 2006 for earthmoving activities on No. 114-116 Factory Road.  An inspection was carried out in November 2006 and noted that a small dam being excavated by the owner and the excavated materials was used for the filling of land of about 25m x 25 between 0.5m to 1m high.

 

This matter has been investigated and the owner lodged a new DA for this work in the future.

The proposed subdivision would give permission for a separate driveway access to the lease lot which could affect the privacy of the surrounding properties and the environment

A Right-of-Carriage is proposed along the existing driveway to No. 102 Factory Road for about 200m and continues along the southern boundary of No. 114-116 Factory Road to facilitate access to the lease lot. 

The lease lot would remove the rural outlook of the land

The proposed subdivision and creation of a lease lot facilitates the continuation of an existing local business which has been operating from the site since 1982.  The actual land use ad activity will not change from the current usage and activities.  The above assessment concludes that the proposal is consistent with the existing and future rural characteristics of the locality.

The proposal would affect the existing wildlife habitat and flora and fauna

This application seeks approval for a subdivision and creation of a proposed lease lot.  There are no construction works being proposed and the existing structures remain unchanged.  It is not evident that the proposed subdivision and lease lot would affect any wildlife habitat or flora and fauna.

The proposal would result in losing an area being protected from excessive developments

As stated earlier in the report, the proposed lots cannot be further subdivided except for proposed Lot 131.  This will require a separate development application that demonstrates compliance with the relevant Council requirements, Planning for Bush Fire Protection 2006 and availability of flood free access.

 

Any intensification of the existing commercial cruise boat service including expansion of the existing docking and slipway facilities would require a development application pursuant to Clause 11(15) of the Sydney Regional Environmental Plan 20 – Hawkesbury Nepean River.  The applicant has to negotiate a new licence agreement with Penrith City Council and relevant authorities i.e. Department of Environment and Climate Change, Blue Mountains City Council, the National Parks and Wildlife Service and Sydney Catchment Authority regarding the use of the River and the accessing of these areas.

The impact of potential clientele, delivery vehicles and staff trespassing onto adjoining land and requested a rural style boundary fence be constructed along the common boundary

Boundary fence is a matter under the Dividing Fence Act and the applicant has stated his willingness to contribute to half the cost of a rural style dividing fence under the Dividing Fence Act.

 

The applicant will be advised that rural-style open fencing shall be constructed in accordance with Council’s Development Control Plan 2006.

 

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

The proposal is consistent with the objectives of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act in so far as it promotes the co-ordinated and orderly, and economic use and development of the land.  Furthermore, it complies with the objectives of the relevant legislation and Council’s policies.  As a result Council can be satisfied that the proposal subject to conditions will be in the public interest.

Section 94 Contributions

Section 94 contributions do not apply to the proposed development.

Conclusion

The proposed subdivision and creation of an additional lot for lease proposal is similar to a previous application that was approved by Council in 2003. While there is an additional lot proposed, it is to be used for lease purposes only and has no residential potential and the nexus for Section 94 Contributions is not established.

 

The proposed subdivision is appropriately located within 1(b) (Rural “B” – Smallholdings) zone and 6(a) (Public Recreation) zone under the provisions of the Penrith Local Environmental Plan 201 (Rural Lands) and is consistent with the aims and objectives of the Local Environmental Plan and Development Control Plan.

 

The variation under SEPP1 to the minimum allotment size is justified in this case for the reasons outlined in the report. The matters raised during the public exhibition period did not warrant refusal of the development application.

 

Furthermore, the development performs adequately in terms of its relationship to the surrounding built and natural environment, particularly in relation to likely impacts upon surrounding properties.  Consequently, the proposal is supported from an environmental planning perspective.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.      The information contained in the report on Development Application DA09/0445 - Proposed Subdivision Lot 31 DP 772196 and Lot 1 DP 259360 (No. 102, 114 - 116) Factory Road, Regentville be received

 

2.      The objection pursuant to State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 in relation to Clause 11(2)(b) for subdivision within zone 1(b) under the provisions of LEP 201 Rural Lands be supported

3.      The subject Development Application be approved, subject to the imposition of the following conditions:

 

Standard Conditions

2.1     A001 – Approved plans that are architecturally drawn

A015 – Site to be registered allotment

M008 – Linen plan

M009 – 88b instrument

M014 – Surveyor’s Certificate

Q008 – Subdivision Certificate

 

Special Conditions

 

2.2     This approval is granted for the subdivision of the land only.  Any further development application for Class 1, 2 and 3 buildings as identified by the Building Code of Australia must be subject to separate application under section 79BA of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 and address the requirements of ‘Planning for Bush Fire Protection 2006’

 

2.3     Lot 132 (the lease lot) shall only be used for the purposes of repair, servicing and support of commercial tourist river craft operation.  Lot 132 (the lease lot) cannot be used for residential purposes and a dwelling house cannot be erected on the lease lot

 

2.4     A current lease over the slipway located on the adjoining Council land (Lot 1 DP s566392) shall run concurrently with Lot 132 (the lease lot).  The linen plan of subdivision shall be supported by an 88B instrument creating a restriction as to user or easement in this regard.  Council shall be nominated as the only authority permitted to modify, vary or rescind this restriction as to user

 

2.5     A driveway, with a minimum 3.5m wide and sealed with a 2-coat hot bitumen seal, shall be provided along the access handle along the 5m Right-of-Carriageway and easement for services for the proposed lease lot 132

 

2.6     Prior to the Commencement of Works

 

Work on the subdivision shall not commence until:

 

(a)     A Construction Certificate (if required) has been issued, and

(b)     A Principal Certifying Authority has been appointed for the project, and

(c)     Any other matters prescribed in the development consent for the subdivision and the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act and Regulation have been complied with

 

A Notice of Commencement is to be submitted to Penrith City Council two (2) days prior to commencement of engineering works or clearing associated with the subdivision

 

2.7     Prior to the issue of a Subdivision Certificate, the following service authority clearances, stating that services are available to all development lots, shall be obtained and submitted to Penrith City Council:

 

·        Section 73 Compliance Certificate under the Sydney Water Act 1994 ; and

·        Notification of Arrangement from Integral Energy; and

·        Provisioning Certificate from the telecommunications service provider

 

2.8     Prior to the issue of the Subdivision Certificate the original subdivision plan and ten (10) copies shall be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority

 

All necessary easements, restrictions and covenants shall be included on the subdivision plan and accompanying 88B Instrument

 

The following information is to be shown on one (1) copy of the plan

 

·        The location of all buildings and/or other permanent improvements

·        The location of all services

 

2.9       Prior to the issue of a Subdivision Certificate an 88B instrument shall be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority with the subdivision plan.  The 88B instrument shall incorporate but not be limited to the following:

 

a)       Restriction as to user to the effect that no habitable building will be permitted on proposed lot 132

 

Details of non standard wording can be obtained from Penrith City Council’s Design and Construction Guidelines and Construction Specification for Civil Works

 

Council shall be nominated as the only authority permitted to modify, vary or rescind the above restrictions, covenants and easements

 

2.10     Prior to the issue of a Subdivision Certificate a Surveyors Certificate shall be submitted certifying that all services (including stormwater) are located wholly within the proposed lots or are within existing easements or proposed easements indicated on the subdivision plan

 

2.11     The Subdivision Certificate shall not be issued until all conditions of consent except those relating to ongoing operational matters, have been completed

 

4.     The applicant be advised of the issue raised by one of the submitters in relation to boundary fence and it shall be open-style rural nature in accordance with section 4.9 Rural Development Penrith Development Control Plan 2006.

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1. View

Locality Map

1 Page

Appendix

2. View

Proposed Subdivision

1 Page

Appendix

  


Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

Appendix 1 - Locality Map

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

Appendix 2 - Proposed Subdivision

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

A Green City

 

 

 

15

Development Application DA08/1205 Proposed Educational Establishment (School) for 150 Students with Associated Agricultural Studies Area, Landscaping, Car Parking, Sewerage and Demolition of Existing Dwelling at Lot 227, 227A & 228 DP 2147 (No. 227) Seventh Avenue, Llandilo  Applicant:  Stephen E Joyce;  Owner:  Meadowbank Education Incorporated (MET) Kellyville Campus Pty Ltd    

DA08/1205

Compiled by:                Allison Cattell, Environmental Planner

Authorised by:             Peter Wood, Acting 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 for a Proposed Educational Establishment (School) comprising three buildings (a single storey primary school building, a two storey secondary school building with basement level car parking and a single storey hall) with associated agricultural studies area, landscaping, car parking, sewerage and demolition of existing dwelling at 227 Seventh Avenue Llandilo.

 

The subject development application proposes use of three lots for the purposes of a private school catering for a maximum intake of 150 students. The site is currently zoned 1(A) – General Rural under Penrith Local Environmental Plan No.201 – Rural Lands and the proposed “educational establishment” is a permissible use in this zone subject to Council consent. Under Penrith draft Local Environmental Plan 2008, the site is proposed to be zoned RU4 – Rural Smallholdings with the proposed development being classified as a “school” which is a permissible use subject to Council consent.

 

A private sewer line is proposed to connect the site to the western side of The Northern Road. The proposed route of this infrastructure from the site is Third Avenue, Eighth Avenue, Terrybrook Road, Ninth Avenue and across The Northern Road. A Private Pipeline Agreement is to be entered into with Penrith Council to arrange for the precise location and management of this line.

 

The key issues raised throughout the assessment include provision of services, sewerage infrastructure and likely impacts pertaining to rural character, landscaping, heritage, the scale of the development, traffic and car parking, acoustic performance, privacy and the compatibility of the proposed development with the surrounding community. It has been demonstrated that the likely impacts will be mitigated to be reasonable.

 

In accordance with the following development assessment report, the application is recommended for approval, subject to recommended conditions of consent.

Background

A pre-lodgement meeting was held at Council on 6 May 2008 addressing permissibility, applicable planning instruments, rural character, consolidation of lots, proposed student intake, landscaping, traffic generation and parking, security and safety, waste management (both operations and construction), drainage and on site detention of stormwater, private sewerage, water quality, accessibility, and acoustic performance.

 

A further meeting was held 17 November 2008 for a review of plans and information in response to the above prior to the lodgement of a development application. This was to discuss the completeness of necessary documentation in response to identified issues.

Site and surrounds

The subject site is approximately 3.04 hectares in area and is situated on the northern side of Seventh Avenue, Llandilo (See Locality Plan - Appendix No.1). The three (3) subject lots are approximately 1.1 kilometres east of Terrybrook Road and approximately 50 metres east of the intersection of Third and Seventh Avenues, Llandilo.

 

Llandilo Public School is located on Seventh Avenue Llandilo, approximately 450 metres east of the proposed development. The surrounding area is characterised predominantly with rural land uses. Adjoining properties are approximately one (1) hectare in area with single detached cottages with associated outbuildings clustered in close proximity to each other and the road frontage.

The Proposed Development

The application proposes the following:

 

·    Use of the site as an educational establishment for a maximum of 150 students

·    Operating hours from 7am to 6pm Monday to Friday

·    Occasional evening use

·    Occasional Saturday use for daytime functions

·    Demolition of an existing cottage identified as having heritage significance within the Draft Local Environmental Plan 2008 (currently on exhibition)

·    Consolidation of three lots

·    Construction of three buildings comprising a separate primary (single storey) and secondary school (two-storey) building and a hall

·    Construction of a lift in the secondary school building for accessibility purposes

·    Basement level car parking for 27 spaces and outdoor car parking for 15 spaces in the front setback (each car park with an accessible space)

·    2.7 km of private sewerage from the subject site to an entry point to Sydney Water’s sewer main on the western side of The Northern Road (See proposed sewer location - Appendix No.2)

·    On Site Detention (OSD) of stormwater comprising four (4) tanks with three (3) being for re-use with the car parking tank being treated prior to release into Council’s existing stormwater system

·    Construction of a fence surrounding communal areas for acoustic purposes

·    Construction of boundary fencing comprising black cyclone mesh fence to a height of 1.8 metres with security fencing and gates along the street frontage

·    Use of remaining site for agricultural study purposes

·    Protection of majority of existing trees and additional landscaping.

 

The following reports and plans form part of the development application:

 

·    Statement of Environmental Effects prepared by PGH Environmental Planning (No. SEE 08-0284)

·    Preliminary Environmental Site Assessment prepared by Aargus Australia

·    Environmental Site Assessment prepared by Aargus Australia

·    Statement of Heritage Impact prepared by Archnex Designs

·    An opinion from a Heritage Consultant of NBRS (Noel Bell Ridley Smith) + PARTNERS

·    Noise Assessment prepared by RSA Acoustics, report No.3688

·    Acoustic Response prepared by RSA Acoustics

·    BCA details including Part J, referenced 4487bcadet, prepared by Dutaillis Architects

·    Accessibility Report prepared by Peter Simpson and associated clarifying document

·    Assessment of Traffic and Parking Implications prepared by Transport and Traffic Planning Associates, reference 07160

·    Proposed Car Parking Plan prepared by Dutaillis Architects

·    Asbestos Materials Assessment prepared by Aargus Australia

·    Plans of proposed drainage, file number 59118

·    Landscape plan numbered 1993, prepared by Monaco Designs

·    Detailed survey prepared by Freeburn Surveying reference 31150

·    Site plan, Basement Plan, Ground floor plan, first floor plan, elevations, sections, dimensioned plans and roof plan (4487-13-03 to 4487-13-12 respectively) prepared by Dutaillis Architects

·    Shadow diagrams (4487-11-02)

·    Feasibility Report by Sydney Water

·    Flora and Fauna Impact Assessment prepared by Keystone Ecological reference PCC 08/-213

·    Tree Survey Summary prepared by About Trees.

 

The sewer location, site, ground floor, first floor, basement and elevation plans are attached for reference (Appendix No.2 to Appendix No.7 – A3 copies will be provided to Councillors under separate cover).

Planning Assessment

The development has been assessed in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, and the following issues have been identified for further consideration:

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979

Section 5A – Significant effect on threatened species, populations or ecological communities, or their habitats

Existing stands of vegetation and associated understorey is proposed to be retained on the site with development being located on an existing cleared portion of the site within the proposed property boundaries of Lots 227, 227A and 228. Following review of the development application by Council’s Senior Environmental Health Officer, a Flora and Fauna Impact Assessment was requested to be provided to assess the significance of any flora and fauna along the proposed sewer line.

 

This was prepared by Keystone Ecological and included a ‘test of significance’ (7-Part Test) undertaken for relevant flora and fauna as established from literature review, guidelines and site survey. The survey of the site identified one endangered ecological community, Cumberland Plain Woodland and one threatened flora species, Grevillea juniperina subspecies juniperina within the subject site. However, the following conclusion and recommendations were made:

 

“The assessment of likely impact under the New South Wales TSC [Threatened Species and Conservation] Act (1995) concluded that a significant impact is not likely to occur upon any state listed threatened species, populations or endangered ecological communities. Therefore, a Species Impact Statement is not recommended to be prepared for the proposal”.

 

The report recommends actions to minimise impact upon the identified flora and likely fauna species and communities. This includes active control of weeds, avoidance of foreign soil within the sewerage trench, location of sewer line as close as possible to the road reserve and outside the drip line of trees, excavation methods during construction of the proposed sewer line, implementation of landscaping that is sympathetic to the locality and avoidance of nectar-producing plants.

 

Council’s Environmental Health Department reviewed the report and raised no objections subject to recommended conditions that adopt the recommendations of the report (Standard Condition A001 and Special Condition 2.2).

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

State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) No.55 – Remediation of Land

A consent authority must not grant consent to the carrying out of any development on land unless it has considered whether the land is contaminated, suitable for the proposed use and whether remediation is required.

 

In accordance with Table 1 of “Managing Land Contamination: Planning Guidelines SEPP 55 – Remediation of Land” the site is identified as having been used for farming purposes. As such, a preliminary environmental site assessment was submitted by the applicant upon lodgement of the development application. This report provided the following conclusion:

 

“It is recommended that a Phase 2 environmental site assessment (ESA) be undertaken to determine if contamination has occurred within the site…”

 

The applicant was requested to provide a detailed investigation given the conclusion within the preliminary environmental site assessment. The findings of the ESA include:

 

“Based on the results of this investigation it is considered that the risks to human health and the environment associated with soil contamination at the site are low in the context of the proposed use of the site as a school. The site is therefore considered to be suitable for the proposed use”.

 

Both the preliminary and the detailed environmental site assessment reports were referred to Council’s Environmental Health Department where no objection was raised to the proposed development, subject to recommended conditions (Special Condition 2.3).

State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) 2007 (Infrastructure)

This policy states that development for the purpose of educational establishments may be carried out with consent on land in a prescribed zone, which is the case for the subject site.

 

In accordance with Clause 104, this policy classifies the proposed development as ‘Traffic-Generating Development’ as the proposed school proposes more than fifty (50) students. The application was referred to the Roads and Traffic Authority’s (RTA) Sydney Regional Development Advisory Committee (SRDAC) and they have advised that the RTA have reviewed the development application and raise no objection to the proposed development subject to recommended conditions of consent (Special Condition 2.4).

 

In accordance with the policy, the following is noted:

 

·    The site is accessible for both required vehicles and pedestrians;

·    The need for travel by car to the site has been minimised through the provision of mini-bus pick-up and drop-off arrangements;

·    Traffic safety, road congestion and car parking has been assessed as satisfactory and conditions are recommended to provide for this outcome.

It is recommended that a copy of any determination made for this development application be sent to the Roads and Traffic Authority within 7 days.

Sydney Regional Environmental Plan (SREP) N0.20 – Hawkesbury/Nepean River

The aim of this policy is to “protect the environment of the Hawkesbury Nepean River system by ensuring that the impacts of future land uses are considered in a regional context”.

 

Clause 5 requires that consideration be given to the aims of the plan, the strategies listed in the Action Plan of the Hawkesbury Nepean Environmental Planning Strategy, whether there are any feasible alternatives to the development, the relationship between the different impacts of the development/proposal and the environment and how those impacts will be addressed and monitored.

 

A key strategy is to protect the environment of the Hawkesbury-Nepean River system by ensuring the impacts of future land uses are considered in a regional context. The proposal provides for planting of native vegetation of local provenance, retention and management of existing vegetation, stormwater management including reuse for irrigation purposes, and effluent disposal via a private sewer line as opposed to being applied to the land.

 

Although there is not an alternate site in which to construct the proposed development, alternative systems for environmental performance of the site were considered. Particularly, the private sewer line is above the minimum requirement for effluent disposal.

 

The applicant has confirmed that the areas shown to be used on plans for agricultural study purposes are not intended to be used intensively for this use advising that it is a permitted land use and does not require consent. Given the scale of the proposed school and based on the confirmation that the use will not be intensive, it is reasonable to conceive that ancillary agricultural studies will be of a small scale where consent is not warranted. To secure this intention, conditions of consent are recommended to provide for confirmation of the agricultural activities and associated management within an Operational Management Plan (OMP) (Special Condition 2.5).

 

The application is consistent with the general planning considerations (Clause 5), the specific planning policies and strategies (Clause 6), development controls (Clause 11) and the aim of the policy.

Penrith Local Environmental Plan No.201 (Rural Lands) (LEP 201)

The subject site is zoned 1(A) – General Rural zone under the provisions of Penrith LEP No.201. The proposal is defined as an ‘educational establishment’ which is permissible within the zone subject to development consent.

 

The relevant aims and objectives of both the LEP and the 1(A) – General Rural zone 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 following aspects of the proposal secure these objectives:

 

·    The site is to be landscaped in accordance with the landscape plan which provides for native planting and screening opportunities particularly along the southern (front) and eastern (side) boundaries of the property;

·    The existing vegetation on site will be retained and embellished. Conditions of consent are recommended to provide for their implementation, protection and maintenance (Standard Condition L001 to L003, L005 to L008 and L012);

·    There is a large proportion of the site that will not be subject to any building work. This land is not prevented from being used for horticultural activities subject to any necessary approvals and/or licenses for that use being obtained;

·    There are no known deposits of extractive materials on the site;

·    Public amenities and services are not required as a result of this application. A private sewer line is proposed to service the school to remove the need to dispose of effluent on the land. In response to questions pertaining to use of community facilities, the applicant has advised that “the school provides both outdoor and indoor areas for use by students for sporting and recreational activities. Should additional facilities be required it is anticipated that the school will access such external facilities (e.g. for swimming carnivals) and pay for the use of that facility”;

·    The proposed development was reviewed by the RTA’s SRDAC for traffic generating development purposes, RTA for works beneath a classified road, Council’s Traffic Engineer and Development Engineer with no objection being raised to the proposal subject to recommended conditions of consent (Special Condition 2.4 and 2.6);

·    The proposed school and associated structures are of a scale proportionate to the size of the lot. The built form will be sited to provide for adequate buffers to the road frontage and other boundaries of the property. Verandah and courtyard elements have been incorporated into the design to complement the existing rural character and established built form in the area. A mixture of vineyards and native screening are proposed along the elevations visible from the street which are sympathetic to the rural character.

·    Building materials such as concrete panel walls, colourbond roof, aluminium windows and powder-coated steel fencing have been nominated on the plans. The proposed colour selections are supported with natural beige and grey tones being proposed;

·    The proposed development will not be located on a ridge top;

·    The site will be more adequately landscaped than it is currently which will provide an effective vegetative buffer between the built form and the street frontage. A 1.8 metre high cyclone mesh fence is proposed around the property on the western, eastern and northern elevations.  The powder-coated security fence is proposed to be set back 15 metres from the southern property boundary which will allow for screen planting between the road and the fence.

·    Conditions of consent are recommended to reduce soil erosion and runoff and to adopt the satisfactory erosion plan provided (Standard Condition D001 and D002).

 

The site is not identified as being a scenic protection zone. The design of the building has responded to the topography and proposed a built form, selection of materials and building elements to reflect the existing rural character. It is currently vegetated along the north-western boundaries. The south-eastern, south-western and southern elevations propose screen planting as demonstrated in the landscape plan provided. This will protect and enhance the scenic quality of the site as viewed from surrounding properties and public road frontages. Although concern was raised suggesting that the proposed two-storey development is not consistent with the rural character of the area, this has been addressed in the design of the proposed development.

 

Based on the above, the proposed development is not inconsistent with the surrounding rural character and the proposed development is consistent with the aims and objectives of both the LEP and the zone itself.

 

Tree preservation (Clause 17)

The existing vegetation, for the most part will be retained. As previously discussed, conditions are recommended to provide for the retention, management and embellishment of existing vegetation.

 

Flood Liable land (Clause 20)

The site is not identified as being prone to flooding.

 

Provision of services (Clause 21)

This provision states that Council shall not grant consent to the carrying out of development on land to which this plan applies unless:

 

a)    evidence is furnished to the Council’s satisfaction that adequate support services and utilities are or will be available within a reasonable time; and

b)    where the Council thinks it is appropriate, arrangements satisfactory to the Water Board have been made for the amplification and reticulation of water services to the land unless no such arrangements are required.

 

The applicant advises arrangements will be made with service providers to arrange for electricity, telecommunications and gas services required for the proposed use of the site as a school.

 

A Feasibility Report issued by Sydney Water was submitted with the development application. This report advised the site can be serviced with water and sewerage subject to relevant approvals being sought and further applications to them being made. Given the proposed use and that sewerage services are not currently available in the location, upgrades to the existing water connection and a private sewer line will be necessary. Sydney Water has indicated that there is capacity to cater for the proposed development.

 

The private sewer line is 2.7km in length and the connection point of the proposed private sewer line is located on the western side of The Northern Road, Cranebrook.

 

Conditions of consent are recommended to provide for appropriate licensing and approvals to be obtained for required services at relevant times following the issue of any consent (Special Condition 2.7 and Standard Conditions A004, G002 and G004). It is recommended to stage the development such that the sewerage is approved, constructed and certified prior to other works being undertaken.

 

Waste disposal (Clause 33)

The proposed development includes the construction of a private sewer line to service the site. In consultation with officers from other Departments within Council, a Private Pipeline Agreement is to be submitted for consideration and approval by Council prior to the issue of any Construction Certificate. Conditions are recommended to secure these outcomes (Special Condition 2.8). It is recommended that Council’s Common Seal be affixed to the Private Pipeline Agreement once it has been submitted and assessed as satisfactory.

Section 79C(1)(a)(ii) – Any Draft Environmental Planning Instruments

Penrith Draft Local Environmental Plan 2008 (Draft LEP) applies to the site. At the time the application was submitted, this instrument had been publicly exhibited for community consultation in accordance with Section 65 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979.

 

Under the draft LEP, the site is proposed to be zoned RU4 – Rural Smallholdings with the proposed development being classified as a “school” which is a permissible use subject to Council consent.

 

There is a draft Development Control Plan 2008 proposed to accompany the Draft LEP 2008 however this has no status for consideration as part of this development application.

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

Penrith Development Control Plan 2006 for the City of Penrith

Chapter 2.1 – Contaminated land

Refer to SEPP 55 assessment.

 

Chapter 2.2 – Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED)

The application was referred to Council’s Community Safety Officer and the following comments were made:

 

“The application appears to address relevant CPTED principles, including surveillance, access control, space management, and territorial reinforcement measures.

 

Given the location of the school within a primarily rural area, the area may be isolated, particularly at night, which minimises opportunities for passive surveillance. It is therefore important that CPTED measures are conditioned on this development to reduce the risk of crime such as break and enter and malicious damage to property”.

 

To mitigate the potential for illegitimate access and opportunity for crime, conditions of consent relating to lighting, vegetation, access and surveillance, signage, fencing, security, the storage and removal of waste, management responsibilities and removal of graffiti are recommended (Special Conditions 2.9 to 2.16 inclusive and Standard Condition A039).

 

Chapter 2.5 – Heritage Management

There is an existing cottage located on Lots 227 and 227A of the subject site. It is not identified in any environmental planning instrument or development control plan as being of heritage significance. However the draft LEP 2008 proposes to list the cottage as an item of heritage significance.

 

A Statement of Heritage Impact prepared by a Heritage Consultant of Archnex Designs was submitted for consideration with the development application. The applicant also provided a Review of the Statement of Heritage Impact by NBRS Partners. Both the Statement and the Review find the cottage to have negligible heritage value and support the demolition of the cottage.

 

Both the Statement and the Review were referred to Council’s Heritage Advisor for comment with no objection being raised to its demolition subject to a recommended condition of consent requiring an archival recording being undertaken (Standard Condition C002).

 

Chapter 2.6 – Landscape

The landscape plan submitted with the development application demonstrates a distance of 2 metres from the eastern boundary that is clear of vegetation. It is reasonable that this area be increased to a minimum of five (5) metres from the drip line to the boundary of adjoining properties for maintenance purposes. The proposed species for planting between the building and property boundaries have a height at maturity between three (3) and five (5) metres with feature planting proposed intermittently at an estimated height exceeding ten (10) metres. It is reasonable to propose intermittent plantings not exceeding a height at maturity of seven (7) metres such as the fraxinus griffithii proposed.

 

The landscape plan provided proposes buffer vegetation along the eastern, southern and western elevations. However, the proposed citrus trees are inconsistent with the recommendations of the Flora and Fauna Report and more detail is required that specifies the species and expected height at maturity of vegetation.

 

It is therefore recommended that an amended landscape plan be provided prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate that is consistent with the recommendations of the Flora and Fauna Report as well as advice given by Council’s Community Safety Officer. Expected height at maturity is to be provided for the proposed species that achieves their nominated function.

A condition is recommended to provide for these outcomes (Special Condition 2.17) and previously recommended conditions will provide for implementation, maintenance and protection of existing and proposed vegetation.

 

Chapter 2.9 – Waste Planning

A Waste Management Plan (WMP) for the demolition, construction and the on-going use stages of the development providing for recycling opportunities was submitted and assessed as satisfactory subject to recommended conditions of consent that adopt the WMP and provide for management of waste during construction (Standard Conditions D009 and D010).

 

Chapter 2.11 – Car Parking

Council’s Car Parking Code does not specify car parking rates for the use of the site as a School. As such, the applicant provided an assessment of traffic and parking implications specific to the proposed development. This report used the criteria that one (1) car space is required for every full-time employee and one (1) car space for every ten (10) year 11 and 12 students.

 

Given there will be 18 full-time staff on the site at any one time and 25 students of driving age, a total car parking demand of 21 spaces is generated by the proposed development. A total of 43 parking spaces have been provided.

 

Additional to the car parking provided on site, it is proposed to have a total of four (4) minibus vehicles delivering students to school.

 

The application was referred to Council’s Traffic Engineer for assessment and referral to the RTA’s SRDAC was required. No objection was raised to the proposal on car parking or traffic grounds.

 

Chapter 2.12 – On site sewage management

The proposed development relies on the provision of 2.7 km of private sewerage pipeline to service the site. As such, an on-site sewage system of land application is not required. Refer to Section 79C(1)(a)(i) – Penrith LEP No. 201 (Services) for assessment.

 

Chapter 4.9 – Rural Development

The objectives of the DCP are the same as the aims and objectives of the Penrith Local Environmental Plan 201 (Rural Lands) which the proposal has been assessed to meet (refer to Section 79C(1)(a)(i) – Penrith LEP No.201 (Aims and objectives) for assessment). 

 

For the assessment of the development application against the applicable provisions of this chapter, refer to the compliance table Appendix No. 8.

Rural amenity, design, services and traffic development controls within Part E (Non-agricultural development) have been addressed earlier in this report.

Section 79C(1)(a)(iv) – The Regulations

The section is not relevant for this development application.

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

The following provides comments in relation to issues identified during the assessment process:

Roads Act 1993

The proposed development, for the most part, is within the boundaries of local roads. However, it has been indicated that the final destination of the proposed sewer line will be on the western side of The Northern Road, Cranebrook which involves tunnelling beneath the classified road.

 

Under this Act, a person must not erect a structure or carry out a work in, on or over a public road otherwise than with the consent of the appropriate roads authority. In accordance with Clause 7 (Roads Authorities) of this policy, Council is the roads authority for all public roads within the area, other than:

 

(a)  any freeway or Crown road, and

(b)  any public road for which some other public authority is declared by the regulations to be the roads authority.

 

Council remains the roads authority for the proposed development, subject to concurrence being obtained from the Roads and Traffic Authority in accordance with Section 138(2) of the Roads Act 1993.  This is due to the proposed construction of a private sewerage line under a section of The Northern Road (a classified road). The development application was referred to the Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) for review and has granted concurrence subject to Council’s approval of the development and the following requirements being met:

 

1.   The proposed sewer line under The Northern Road must be installed by road under boring and located at least a minimum depth of 1.2m below the Road.

2.   The proposed sewer line (and its installation) must most affect the existing traffic signal facility at the intersection of The Northern Road/Ninth Avenue.

3.   Prior to the commencement of the works associated with the under boring of The Northern Road the contractor for the works will be required to contact the RTA’s Project Engineer, External Works – Suppiah Thillai on Ph: 8849 2114 or Fax: 8849 2766 for a Road Opening Permit.

4.   Any proposed temporary/partial road closures will required the applicant to apply for a Temporary Road Occupancy License by contacting the Transport Management Centre’s Planned Incidents Unit on (02) 8396 1513 during office hours (8am to 4pm) or 131 700 after hours.

5.   All works associated with the sewer line installation as well as the proposed development are to be at no cost to the RTA.

 

It is recommended the above be conditioned to ensure the above concurrence terms are adopted and complied with during the planning and construction of the private sewer line (Special Condition 2.6).

 

Operational matters

Construction

Demolition of existing structures and construction of new building work is proposed. Conditions of consent are recommended to provide for requirements prior to, during and following construction (Standard Conditions A019, A046, B001 to B006, H001, H002, H011, H041, Q001 and Q006).

 

To mitigate damage that may occur as a result of any earthworks, a condition is recommended to provide for appropriate measures to preserve and protect buildings on adjoining land (Standard Condition H002). To minimise impacts during construction, the applicant has advised that sewerage pipes will be bored beneath driveway crossovers.

 

A report that addresses the requirements of the Building Code of Australia (BCA) and a document that reports on the findings of an Asbestos Material Assessment accompanied the development application. Conditions of consent are recommended to provide for the implementation of the actions and recommendations of these reports (Standard Condition A001) as well as compliance with relevant Australian Standards and BCA requirements (Standard Conditions E01A, E002, E006 and E009).

 

Staged development, as previously recommended, will provide for relevant authorities, approvals and agreements to be issued for the proposed private sewer line prior to the construction of the sewer and prior to the construction of the remaining works (the school) on the site (Standard Condition A004).

 

Operational Management Plan (OMP)

To provide for the ongoing operations of the site, it is recommended the applicant provide an OMP. This will detail responses to prevent impact arising from the accumulation of rubbish, nuisance lighting, after hour access and, emergencies and evacuations, surveillance, security, agricultural activities and general site maintenance. A condition is recommended to provide for this prior to the issue of any construction certificate (Special Condition 2.5).

 

Use

It is proposed that a total number of students of no more than 150 students in addition to full-time staff be on site at any one time. The consent authority can only consider the aspects of the development as proposed. Any change to that which is approved would require development consent and/or compliance action. A condition is recommended to permit the use of the building and the site for school purposes to cater for a maximum intake of 150 students and 18 full-time staff at any one time only (Special Condition 2.26). As a canteen component is proposed, a condition is recommended to provide for compliance with the requirements of the Food Act 2003 and Food Regulation 2004 (Standard Condition A012).

 

The hours of operation considered within the Noise Report include 7:30am to 4pm for students and 7am to 6pm for teachers. The Noise Report considers there will be four (4) parent teacher evenings each year and two (2) management meetings each month consisting of twelve (12) personnel held at night. A maximum of four (4) activities each year on a Saturday held between 8am and 4pm is consistent with the Noise Report. Use of the site on a Sunday will not occur. A condition of consent is recommended to provide for these hours of operation and provision of car parking on site (Special Condition 2.27).

 

It is also noted within the submission that it is not the intention to hold concerts in the hall. A condition of consent is recommended to provide for this outcome (Special Condition 2.28).

Compatibility and scale

There is adequate separation between the proposed buildings and adjoining properties. There is potential for screening of the teacher’s courtyard on the secondary school building and the applicant is willing to provide for this where necessary. There is also screening opportunity for the eastern elevation to have privacy treatment for windows on the ground floor level. Vegetation is proposed in these locations which will satisfactorily screen these areas and minimise cross-viewing opportunities.  The high windows on the first floor and the absence of windows from the proposed hall assist in minimising privacy concerns.

 

The basement drops in elevation which will provide screening from any headlights. The location of adjoining dwellings being set back from the street removes the opportunity of direct light from vehicles presenting a nuisance.

 

The applicant acknowledges surrounding intensive agricultural uses. There is nothing proposed in this development application that would impede the continuous use of surrounding sites for any approved use.

 

Although not identified as a scenic protection zone, the building are positioned on the south eastern portion of the site where the land is the lowest and the second storey component of the building is set back in excess of thirty (30) metres from the eastern boundary which increases the opportunity for any views of rural landscape.

Traffic

Refer to above Section 79C (1)(a)(i) – SEPP (Infrastructure) 2007 for traffic assessment.

Drainage

Refer above to Section 79C(1)(a)(iii) – Penrith DCP 2006 (Chapter 4.9 - Rural Development) assessment.

Vegetation

Refer above to Section 79C(1)(a)(iii) – Penrith DCP 2006 (Chapter 4.9 – Rural Development) assessment.

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

The three (3) hectare site area is adequate to accommodate the built form proposed with suitable buffers and separation distances to adjoining land uses. The applicant has advised the location of the proposed buildings was dependant upon site constraints, topography consideration of the surrounding land uses and relevant environmental planning policy. Specifically, the location of the hall is ideal as there will be no windows on the eastern elevation, there will be vegetation along the eastern elevation for screening purposes and there will be acoustic barrier treatment along the northern and southern elevations. The assembly hall prevents cross-viewing opportunity between the subject and the adjoining property to the east.

 

The proposed development complies with the relevant policy provisions. The proposal has satisfactorily demonstrated that the site can cater for its ongoing use as a school (as proposed) with operations being managed for minimal environmental impact.

 

Therefore, the site has been demonstrated to be suitable the proposed use as a school.

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

Referrals

The application was referred to the following Council Departments, Committees and Consultants for comment:

 

·    Deerubbin Local Aboriginal Land Council;

·    Traffic Engineers for assessment of traffic generation and possible referral to the NSW RTA and SRDAC;

·    Environmental Planning Department with respect to the implications of the draft Local Environmental Plan 2008 on the proposed development;

·    Health and Building Surveying for assessment of proposed building and construction;

·    Environmental Health for assessment including waste generation and treatment, acoustic performance, contamination and agricultural activities;

·    Development Engineers for assessment including drainage, stormwater, works in road reserves and car parking;

·    Disability Access Committee for receipt of proposed design and response to accessibility requirements;

·    Community Safety Unit for assessment for Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design; and

·    Heritage Advisor for advice on existing cottage dwelling given draft status of heritage significance as referred in draft LEP 2008.

 

Comments from the above officers and Departments have been integrated throughout this assessment report.

Community Consultation

The application was notified to residents and occupiers of properties fronting the proposed sewer line, located at the nearest intersection and those within 200 metres of the site. The proposed development was advertised in the Penrith Press and notified to surrounding land holders and occupiers with the exhibition period between 3 December and 17 December 2008 in accordance with Chapter 2.7 (Notification and Advertising) of the Penrith Development Control Plan 2006. A plan is attached for reference indicating the extent of notification (Appendix No.9).

 

Council notified 80 residences in the area and has received 6 submissions in response, one of which was made on behalf of a community group. Those making submission were advised on 19 August 2009 that the matter will be reported to Council whilst simultaneously being notified of additional information available for inspection. The application was re-exhibited between 24 August and 7 September 2009 with the original and additional information that had been submitted to support the development application. One (1) submission was received in response.

 

The following issues were raised in the submissions received and have formed part of the assessment:

 

Issue raised

Reference in report

 

Compatibility and scale

 

·    Loss of view

·    Future complaints against existing intensive agricultural uses

·    Potential for alternate locations of the proposed hall, screening treatments to the proposed teachers courtyard and along the windows and openings of the eastern and western elevations and mitigation of impacts resulting from use of the proposed driveway

·    Potential to relocate the proposed buildings further west

 

 

Section 79C(1)(b) – Compatibility and scale

 

Crime Prevention

 

·    Prevent illegitimate access between sites. 

 

 

Section 79C(1)(a)(iii) – Chapter 2.2 (CPTED

 

Community Consultation

 

·   Extent of neighbour notification

 

 

Section 79C(1)(d) – Community Consultation

 

Rural Development

 

·    Impact of two storey development upon the rural character

 

 

Section 79C(1)(a)(i) – Penrith LEP 201 (Rural Lands)

 

Operational matters

 

·    Concerns for expansion from 150 students in the future

·    Potential to restrict any further development of the site

·    Damage resulting from any proposed earthworks

·    Concern regarding maintenance of vegetation, rubbish and noise

 

 

Section 79C(1)(b) – Operational matters

 

 

Heritage

 

·    Impact upon existing buildings of heritage significance

 

 

Section 79C(1)(a)(iii) – Chapter 2.5 (Heritage) of Penrith DCP 2006)

 

 

Traffic

 

·    Potential traffic impact upon the local community

 

 

Section 79C(1)(a)(i) – SEPP 2007 (Infrastructure), Section 79C(1)(a)(iii) – Chapter 2.11 (Car parking) of Penrith DCP 2006 and Section 79C(1)(b) – Roads Act 1993

 

 

Stormwater

 

·    Proposed stormwater and drainage discharge not to collect or be directed to adjoining properties

 

 

Section 79C(1)(a)(iii) – Drainage section of Chapter 4.9 (Rural Development) of Penrith DCP 2006)

 

 

Development contributions, infrastructure and community benefit

 

·    Whether the school will serve the local community, the potential impact of the proposed development upon local services and recompense from the school for the use of funding and existing public facilities

·    Whether the intake of students can be restricted to a 10 kilometre radius

·    Upgrades to Wilson Park, Seventh Avenue and the intersection of Llandilo and Richmond Road and  provision of  pedestrian links to join all three nearby schools

·    Connection to proposed sewerage for properties adjoining the proposed line

 

 

Section 79C(1)(e) – Public Interest)

 

In response to queries as to whether applications for the same use have been made in the Ropes Crossing Area, the applicant advises they have no knowledge of any plans to have located the proposed school in that area.

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

Accessibility

The development application was supplemented by an Access Report that addresses the performance of the site against the relevant legislative requirements. Council’s Building Surveyor reviewed the development application and this report and raised no objection to the proposal, subject to recommended conditions of consent.

 

The development application was reported to Council’s Access Committee meeting of 3 December 2008 and the following concerns were raised:

 

a)   There appears not to be a ramp to the junior school covered outdoor learning area (COLA);

b)   The northern side of Lobby 2 will require a ramp of suitable grade given the change in grade.

 

The applicant was advised of the above concerns and provided an addendum to the original Access Report that provided clarification of the above issues. This advised that:

 

·    “the required accessible path of travel for a person with a disability to (and subsequently within) the junior school COLA is from the primary school building directly to the COLA area and then to the associated primary school areas in that location; and

·    changes to the finished floor levels at the entrance doorways is proposed to now meet the requirements of the applicable Australian Standard.”

 

Conditions of consent are recommended to ensure the application and resultant built form reflects these intentions (Standard Condition A001 and E006).

 

Development contributions and infrastructure

There is no requirement for the proposed development to provide community services or assets nor is there a requirement to contribute financially towards their provision or embellishment.

 

The applicant has advised that the site provides all necessary services and where required, the hire of facilities off-site will be arranged.

 

The proposed development does not trigger major infrastructure upgrades to address existing traffic or pedestrian conditions. Localised road widening and pavement provision have been recommended as conditions of consent where the proposed development has been assessed as having a direct impact (Standard Condition I004).

 

A private sewer line is proposed as the preferred method of effluent disposal. The responsibility and cost of installation, maintenance and repair is borne by the applicant (and not Council or Sydney Water). As such, it is not able to service other sites.

 

Community benefit

It is unnecessary and unreasonable to restrict the areas in which students are sourced. Equally, it is unnecessary and unreasonable to restrict local residents from attendance should they pursue this option with the operator.

 

The proposed school is a Christian-based school that has the potential to attract students, parents and teachers that contribute to the economy of the region. There will be employment opportunities involved during the planning, construction and on-going operations of the school.

 

Conclusion

The proposal has been assessed to be consistent with the aims, objectives and provisions of all relevant statutory planning instruments and policies. In particular, the proposal is consistent with the underlying general planning considerations pertaining to threatened species and within the Roads Act 1997, SEPP No.55 (Remediation of land), SEPP Infrastructure, SREP No.20 – Hawkesbury Nepean River, Penrith Local Environmental Plan 201 (Rural Lands) and Draft LEP 2008.

 

The site is suitable for use as a school at the scale proposed for reasons including the large amount of land available, adequate separation from adjoining rural residential uses and existing established vegetation providing visual and acoustic screening. The site provides satisfactory access and there is capacity in surrounding service roads to cater for the proposed use without the need for major infrastructure upgrades.

 

The proposal has been considered by State, Regional and Local authorities, all of whom have raised no objection to the proposal subject to recommended conditions of consent.

 

As outlined in the above assessment report and subject to the following recommended conditions of consent, the application is worthy of support.

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Development Application DA08/1205 Proposed Educational Establishment (School) for 150 Students with Associated Agricultural Studies Area, Landscaping, Car Parking, Sewerage and Demolition of Existing Dwelling at Lot 227, 227A & 228 DP 2147 (No. 227) Seventh Avenue, Llandilo be received.

2.     The development application be approved subject to the following conditions of consent:

Standard conditions

2.1     A001 – Approved plans and recommendations within listed reports

A004 – Staged Construction

§ Stage 1

a)    Written approval from water and electricity service providers

b)    Private Pipeline Agreement for the proposed private sewer line

c)    Roads Act Approvals and Engineering Construction Certificate for the private sewer line

d)    Construction and certification of the private sewer line

§ Stage 2

a)    Engineering Construction Certificate for drainage on the site of 227, 227A and 228 in DP 2147

b)    Construction Certificate for remaining works

c)    Construction and Certificate of development

          A011 – Engineering Works DCP

          A012 – Food shop (for the canteen component)

          A014 – Consolidation of Lot 227, 227A and 228 in DP 2147

          A019 – Occupation Certificate 

          A026 – Advertising 

A039 – Removal of Graffiti

          A046 – Obtain a Construction Certificate

A Construction Certificate is not to be issued for any work other than the construction of the private sewer line until the private sewer line construction is completed and certified as satisfactory

          B001 – Demolition of dwelling on Lots 227 & 227A DP 2147

          B002 – Demolition and disposal of approved landfill

          B003 – Asbestos

          B004 – Dust

          B005 – Mud/Soil

          B006 – Hours of work

          C002 – Archival Recording 

          D001 – Sediment and erosion control measures

          D002 – Spray grass

          D005 – No filling without prior approval

          D006 – No fill without validation certificate

          D009 – Covering of waste storage area

          D010 – Appropriate disposal of excavated or other waste

D013 – Acoustic Level (refer to Report No. 3688 prepared by RSA Acoustics as recorded on 24 October to 31 October 2009 and additional information provided by RSA Acoustics on the 29th of April 2009)

          D026 – Liquid wastes

          E01A – BCA compliance for Class 2-9

          E002 – BCA issues to be addressed

§ In the Senior School, there should not interconnection between 3 storeys in accordance with Clause D1.12 and there should be separation of ascending and descending flights in Stair 1 in accordance with Clause D2.4

§ Documentary evidence to indicate compliance with the energy efficiency provisions of Section J is required

          E006 – Disabled access and facilities

§ In this regard, disabled persons access must be provided between the Junior and Senior Schools and to the staff courtyards of the Senior School

          E009 – Annual Fire Safety

          G002 – Section 73 Certificate (Sydney Water)

          G004 – Integral Energy

          H001 – Stamped plans and erection of site notice

          H002 – All forms of construction

          H003 – Traffic Management

          H041 – Hours of work

          H011 – Engineering plans and specification

          H036 – Rainwater tanks

          H038 – Connection of rainwater supply

          H039 – Rainwater tank pumps

          I003 – Roads Act Approval 1

a)  Opening of the road reserve for the provision of services including stormwater and sewerage;

b)  Placing of hoardings, containers, waste skips, etc, in the road reserve

          I004 – Roads Act Engineering

a)   Provision of  heavy-duty vehicular footway crossings with minimum width to AS2890.2 for heavy rigid vehicles allowing for left turn movements to and from the site without crossing the nominal centreline in Seventh Avenue

b)   Provision for 2.5m road widening, kerb & gutter, drainage and verge regrading on the northern side of Seventh Avenue for a minimum of 90m west of the eastern boundary to allow for 5.5 m of pavement from the nominal centreline to the proposed face of kerb.  The pavement shall be designed for 5 x 105 ESA’s

c)   Provision of localised pavement widening to achieve a basic right turn treatment on the southern side of Seventh Avenue opposite the proposed entry driveway

d)   Provision of necessary upgrades and overlay to the full width of Seventh Avenue road pavement for 90m west of the eastern boundary for to achieve a pavement design life of 5 x 105 ESA’s and a uniform finish

e)   Provision of a concrete footpath 1.5m wide on the northern side of Seventh Avenue to correspond with the extent of proposed kerb and gutter works

f)   Provision of drainage tail-out and table drain regrading in Seventh Avenue

g)   Provision of line marking and kerbside restrictions subject to separate approval

K002 – Works-as-executed plans

K025 – Pavement Seal (sealed with bituminous pavement)

K027 – Car parking provision (43 car spaces)

§ Any disabled parking needs to be as close as possible to the main building and separate paths and pram ramps need to be provided to link the disabled bay to the main buildings

K036 – Performance Bond

K037 – Maintenance Bond

K039 – Road Safety Audit

K040 – Line marking and sign posting

L001 – Landscape Plan (refer to plan provided by Special Condition 2.17)

L002 – Landscape Construction

L003 – Report Requirement (Implementation and Maintenance)

L005 – Planting of plant material

L006 – Australian Standard

L007 – Tree Protection Measures

L008 – Tree Preservation Order

L012 – Existing landscaping to be retained and maintained

P001 – Costs

P002 – Fees associated with Council land (Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate)

Q001 – Notice of commencement and appointment of PCA

(delete last paragraph)

          Q006 – Occupation Certificate (delete after NSW Fire Brigades)

Special Conditions

2.2     The development is to comply with and implement any recommendations outlined in the Flora and Fauna Impact Assessment prepared by Keystone Ecological dated January 2009

2.3     The development is to comply with and implement any recommendations outlined in the Environmental Site Assessment prepared by Aargus Australia dated January 2009

2.4     The following is required in accordance with advice received from the Sydney Regional Development Advisory Committee:

a)   The layout of the proposed car parking areas associated with the subject development (including driveways, grades, turn paths, sight distance requirements, aisle widths, and parking bay dimensions) is to be in accordance with AS2890.1-2004 and AS2890.2-2002 fir heavy vehicles

b)   Bicycle parking and associated facilities need to be provided on the site

c)   The site should be able to cater for a 12.5m bus turning circle to cater for any sporting events, school excursions or for the public school bus system should the need arise in the future. This would also cater for waste removal should it ever need to occur on site

d)   A dedicated delivery area is to be provided on site catering for at least an 8.8m service vehicle. If the drop off area is to be used for this purpose then deliveries are to occur outside of school pick up and drop off times

e)   Clear signage is to be provided on site to adequately control the entry and exit points and to guide vehicles and pedestrians to appropriate locations throughout the site

f)    The required site lines to pedestrians or other vehicles in or around the car park or entrances are not to be compromised by landscaping, signage, fencing or display materials

g)   School zones must be installed along all roads with a direct access point (either pedestrian or vehicular) from the school. School Zones must not be provided along roads adjacent to the school without a direct access point

h)   The Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) is responsible for speed management along all public roads within the state of New South Wales. That is, the RTA is the only authorised organisation that can approve speed zoning changes and authorise installation of speed zoning traffic control devices on the road network within New South Wales

Therefore, the Developer must obtain written authorisation from the RTA to install the School Zone signs and associated pavement markings and/or remove/relocate any existing Speed Limit sings

To obtain authorisation the Developer must submit the following, at least six (6) weeks prior to student occupation of the site, for review and approval by the RTA:

A)  A copy of Council’s development conditions of consent

B)  The proposed school commencement/opening date

C)  Two (2) sets of detailed design plans showing the following:

§ School property boundaries

§ All adjacent road carriageways to the school property

§ All proposed school access points to the public road network and any conditions imposed/proposed on their use

§ All existing and proposed traffic control devices and pavement markings on the adjacent road network (including School Zone signs and pavement markings)

§ All existing and proposed street furniture and street trees

i)    School Zone signs and pavement marking patches must be installed in accordance with RTA’s approval/authorisation, guidelines and specifications

j)    All School Zone signs and pavement markings must be installed prior to student occupation of the site

k)   All School Zone signs and pavement markings are to be installed at no expense to the RTA

l)    The developer must maintain records of all dates in relation to installing, altering, removing traffic control devices related to speed

m)  Following installation of all School Zone signs and pavement marking the Developer must arrange an inspection with the RTA for formal handover of the assets to the RTA. The installation date information must also be provided to the RTA at the same time. Note: Until the assets are formally handed-over and accepted by the RTA, the RTA takes no responsibility of the School Zones/assets

n)   All works /regulatory signposting associated with the proposed development are to be at no cost to the RTA

2.5     An Operational Management Plan (OMP) is to be provided for Councils consideration and approval that details the following:

a)    After hour access, security and surveillance measures

b)    Response to emergencies including evacuation

c)    Small scale agriculture proposed on the site including numbers and types of animals and trees to be located on site

d)    Animal management practices including, but not limited to, care (particularly in times where the school is not operating), feeding, emergency response

e)    Site maintenance including rubbish collection

f)     Measures employed to reduce the impact from lighting

 

2.6     The following is required in accordance with the terms of concurrence issued by the NSW Roads and Traffic Authority:

a)    The proposed sewer line under The Northern Road must be installed by road under boring and located at least a minimum depth of 1.2m below the Road

b)    The proposed sewer line (and its installation) must most affect the existing traffic signal facility at the intersection of The Northern Road/Ninth Avenue

c)    Prior to the commencement of the works associated with the under boring of The Northern Road the contractor for the works will be required to contact the RTA’s Project Engineer, External Works – Suppiah Thillai on Ph: 8849 2114 or Fax: 8849 2766 for a Road Opening Permit

d)    Any proposed temporary/partial road closures will required the applicant to apply for a Temporary Road Occupancy License by contacting the Transport Management Centre’s Planned Incidents Unit on (02) 8396 1513 during office hours (8am to 4pm) or 131 700 after hours

e)    All works associated with the sewer line installation as well as the proposed development are to be at no cost to the RTA

 

2.7     Written confirmation is to be submitted to Council for consideration and approval prior to the issue of any Construction Certificate from relevant service providers including energy and water that confirms connection and capacity to cater for the proposed development

2.8     A Private Pipeline Agreement is to be entered into with Penrith Council. This is to include, but is not limited to, location of construction within Council’s road allocation, certification requirements, road opening permits, ongoing management and any other detail required by Council. The development and any agreements shall be at no cost to Council

2.9     Entrances/exits to all buildings, walkways, car park and the gated entry/exit must be well lit to clearly illuminate these areas that make up the public domain areas of the school

          Lighting must be:

a)   Consistent in order to reduce the contrast between shadows and illuminated areas

b)   Vandal resistant

c)   Contained within the property boundary and no light should be projected upwards

2.10   The following vegetation is to be avoided:

a)   Vegetation with top to bottom foliage. Low ground cover or high canopied vegetation is to be utilised as this type of planting allows clear lines of sight

b)   Medium height (under 2 metres) planting as it provides places of concealment

c)   Vegetation that hinders sightlines to car parks, walkways, playgrounds and playing fields.  Use low shrubs or ground covers

2.11   Teaching staff must have clear vision to the entry of all classrooms and the office staff must be able to have clear vision to the school entrance and car park areas.  Similarly, visitors to the school must be able to clearly identify the administrative office of the school

Entrances to all student/adult toilet blocks must be clear of all screening to allow surveillance by students and staff

2.12   Signage for the facility should be clearly identified to ensure easy location by emergency services

2.13   Fencing must be black and made of a material that is easy to see through to promote surveillance opportunities and secure the school after hours. Mesh fencing is not supported

2.14   The following security measures are to be implemented:

b)   All doors and windows must be fitted with security locks

c)   Rooms containing computer and other electronic equipment must have additional security treatments including security screens on windows and alarms

d)   After hours random security patrols must be conducted on a regular basis. Additional patrols are to be implemented during school holiday periods

e)   Sensor lights must be installed to detect movement around the property after hours

2.15   All waste must be secured within the property. Bins will need to be stored within a secure position and not at risk of vandalism

2.16   School Management will be available at a mutually convenient time, at the invitation of Penrith City Council and/or the NSW Police, to discuss and action agreed Community Safety and Security issues in conjunction with other local stakeholders in the area should the need arise

2.17   An amended landscape plan is to be provided prior to the issue of any Construction Certificate that demonstrates, to Council’s satisfaction, the following:

a)   Consistency between the recommendations within the Flora and Fauna Report referred in Standard Condition A001

b)   Compliance with Special Condition 2.10

c)   The drip-line of vegetation is to be setback a minimum of 5 metres from adjoining property boundaries

d)   The screen planting proposed between building and property boundary along the eastern elevation is to be amended to provide for plants not exceeding a height at maturity of three (3) to five (5) metres with intermittent feature plantings not exceeding a height at maturity of seven (7) metres

e)   The height at maturity and species of all proposed vegetation is to be nominated on the plan. Vegetation forward of the building line is not to include vegetation capable of attaining a height at maturity greater than one (1) metre

2.18   Prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate signage which is clearly visible from the public road shall be placed within the development site. The signage shall indicate that the western vehicular access is to be used for ingress purposes only and appropriately signposted "Entry Only".  The eastern vehicular access is to be used for egress purposes only and appropriately signposted "No Entry"

2.19   In the event of on-going noise complaints relating to the development being received by Council, the owner and/or occupier of the school and related development may be required by Council to obtain the services of a suitably qualified acoustic consultant to undertake a noise impact assessment on the development to address the concerns of the community

The noise impact assessment report is to be prepared and provided to Council within 45 days of being requested. The assessment report is to be approved by Council, with any recommendations being implemented in accordance with the approved assessment report

2.20   A Construction Certificate shall be issued by a Certifying Authority to include the following civil works

(b)   On-site detention system

(c)   Stormwater drainage

(d)   Stormwater pre-treatment system

(e)   Earthworks

(f)    Car park

(g)   Retaining walls

(h)   Paving works

(i)    Access roads

(j)    Linemarking and signage

 

Civil design 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

 

2.21   Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate the Certifying Authority shall ensure that the site drainage and on-site detention system has been designed generally in accordance with the concept plans lodged for development approval, prepared by Lean Lackenby & Hayward, drawing no. 59118 DR, rev C dated 4/06/2009 and drawing no. 59118 EW, rev B dated 4/06/2009 and Penrith City Council’s Design and Construction Guidelines and Construction Specification for Civil Works

The drainage system directing flows to the on-site detention system shall be designed to convey 1 in 100 year flows and to ensure the entrapment of gross pollutants prior to entry to the storage system

Engineering plans and supporting calculations for the site drainage and on-site detention system are to be prepared by a qualified Hydrologic/Hydraulic Engineer and shall accompany the application for a Construction Certificate

2.22   Prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate the Certifying Authority shall ensure that:

·   The on-site detention system has been constructed in accordance with the details approved by the Construction Certificate, Penrith City Council’s Design and Construction Guidelines and Construction Specification for Civil Works and conditions of development consent

·   Any variations to the approved design are satisfactory or that suitable remedial works have been undertaken

·   The on-site detention system will operate in accordance with the design intent and Penrith City Council’s Design and Construction Guidelines and Construction Specification for Civil Works

 

Details of the completed on-site detention system shall be provided as part of the works-as-executed drawings

 

2.23   Prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate a restriction as to user and positive covenant relating to the on-site detention system shall be registered on the title of the property.  The Restriction as to User and Positive Covenant shall be in Penrith City Council’s standard format as described in Penrith City Council’s Design and Construction Guidelines and Construction Specification for Civil Works

2.24   The water quality treatment system as indicated on the drainage concept plan prepared by Lean Lackenby & Hayward, drawing no. 59118 DR, rev C dated 4/06/2009 shall be operated and maintained in accordance with the manufacturers specifications

2.25   All verge areas are to be turfed for the full width from back of kerb to property boundary at the completion of the works

2.26   The use of the building and the site is for the use as a school to cater for a maximum intake of 150 students and 18 full-time staff at any one time only

2.27   The hours of operation are from 7:30am to 4pm for students and from 7am to 6pm for teachers Monday to Friday. A maximum of four (4) parent teacher evenings each year and two (2) management meetings each month consisting of twelve (12) personnel are permitted to be held at night only. A maximum of four (4) activities associated with the approved use of the site as a school are permitted each year on a Saturday and are to be held between 8am and 4pm. At these functions all vehicles are to be accommodated on site. Use of the site on a Sunday is not permitted

2.28   The assembly hall must not be used as a place of public entertainment, a place of entertainment or to hold concerts without the prior consent of Council

3.       Those making submissions and the Roads and Traffic Authority be notified of the decision within seven (7) days.

4.     Council affix the Common Seal to the Private Pipeline Agreement provided to accord with Condition 2.8 once submitted by the applicant and assessed as satisfactory.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1. View

Locality Map

1 Page

Appendix

2. View

Sewer connection

1 Page

Appendix

3. View

Site Plan

1 Page

Appendix

4. View

Ground floor plan

1 Page

Appendix

5. View

First floor plan

1 Page

Appendix

6. View

Basement floor plan

1 Page

Appendix

7. View

Elevations

2 Pages

Appendix

8. View

Compliance Table for Chapter 4.9 Penrith DCP 2006

4 Pages

Appendix

9. View

Extent of notification

1 Page

Appendix

  


Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

Appendix 1 - Locality Map

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

Appendix 2 - Sewer connection

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

Appendix 3 - Site Plan

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

Appendix 4 - Ground floor plan

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

Appendix 5 - First floor plan

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

Appendix 6 - Basement floor plan

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

Appendix 7 - Elevations

 

 

 



Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

Appendix 8 - Compliance Table for Chapter 4.9 Penrith DCP 2006

 

 

 

 

Penrith DCP 2006, Chapter 4.9 (Rural Development), Part B  – Development Issues

1. Setbacks

A fifteen (15) metre setback from a public road is required and has been provided to the commencement of the proposed front security fence. A total front setback of thirty-three (33) metres is provided from the front boundary to the building.

2. Services

The proposed water reuse reduces potential demand on water supply. Nevertheless, separate approval is required from service providers. The applicant has provided written correspondence from Sydney Water that confirms that:

Water

a)   The existing water main will serve the planned school; and

Sewer

b)   There is capacity to cater for the proposed development.

As previously discussed, the applicant states that provision of electricity to the site will be made with an energy provider and it is recommended that the proposed development is staged to ensure relevant authorities provide certain written approval for the provision of services to the site ahead of any works being undertaken.

This will provide for the construction of the proposed private sewer line as well as a Private Pipeline Agreement to be arranged prior to any other work associated with the proposed development. Conditions are recommended to provide for this outcome (Special Condition 2.7 and 2.8 and Standard Conditions A004 as staged, G002 and G004).

3. Flooding

The site is not identified as being prone to flooding.

4. Access

To provide a satisfactory level of service consistent with the volume and nature of traffic generated by the proposed development, conditions are recommended to provide for compliance with relevant Australian Standards, localised pavement widening, line marking, clear signage, school zones and pavement treatment (Standard Condition I004 and Special Condition 2.18).

5. Tree preservation

The proposal includes the removal of some minor and dead trees however the majority of existing native vegetation will be retained and maintained.

6. Aboriginal Archaeological Surveys

The development application was referred to the Deerubbin Local Aboriginal Land Council (DLALC) and an assessment of Aboriginal Cultural Heritage was undertaken by a DLALC representative.

No objection is raised to the proposed development on the grounds of Aboriginal cultural heritage.

7. Advertising

No advertising is proposed. It is recommended a separate application be lodged in the future for any advertising or directional signage (Standard Condition A026).

8. Car Parking

 Refer to above car parking discussion.

9.   Noise generation and control

A Noise Assessment was conducted for the site between the dates of 24 and 31 October 2008. A noise logger recorded noise between these dates which were then used to provide the basis for the background noise levels of the site. The potential noise sources were then identified primarily to be from children playing in the outdoor areas, vehicles entering and exiting outdoor car park and the basement, mechanical (such as air conditioning units) and traffic noise from any additional vehicle movements. These sources were then analysed and modelled using noise recordings during peak times from another existing school operated by the same client whom the applicant represents.

The report found that noise criteria would be achieved at the boundaries of the property without special construction requirement subject to:

“acoustic barriers being provided on the perimeter of the outdoor areas of the school so that these areas are enclosed on the east and western perimeters and with partial returns on the northern perimeter”.

The Noise Report has assumed particular days and hours of use of the site and a maximum intake of students and staff. The applicant has advised that teachers will be on site between 7am and 6pm Monday to Friday which is consistent with the Noise Report. Hours of operation that have not been considered in the Noise Report are not supported.

The Noise Report provided for the proposed development has been reviewed by Council’s Environmental Health Department. The information provided is satisfactory and no objections were raised to the report subject to recommended conditions of consent. These conditions provide for the adoption of recommendations within the Acoustic Report (Standard Condition D013) and on-going noise management (Special Condition 2.19).

By adopting the recommendations of the acoustic report, providing adequate setbacks to all boundaries and acoustic barriers as proposed, it is likely the noise from the site will be mitigated satisfactorily.

10. Drainage

The site has been surveyed and observed to have a natural high point around the mid-western portion of the site which falls to the rear, the west and the south-western corner of the site.

The drainage solution for stormwater that is derived from the building work is proposed to be directed into an underground water tank system. This water is proposed for irrigation and fire control purposes. Overflow from the proposed tanks is shown to be directed into a series of permanent level spreaders, stabilised swales and in some cases, the existing table drain. This drainage solution is shown to maintain the site to pre-development flows. A condition is recommended to provide for clean disposal of stormwater (Standard condition D026).

Given this and the scale of the proposed development, the application was referred to Council’s Development Services Engineers for comment where no objection to the proposal was raised subject to adequate service provision, consideration and inclusion of advice from SRDAC and conditions pertaining to rainwater tanks being included by other relevant Council departments.

Conditions of consent were then recommended for inclusion in any consent providing for construction guidelines (Standard Condition A011), consolidation of lots (Standard Condition A014), traffic management (Standard Condition H003), Roads Act approvals (Standard Condition I003 and I004), construction certificates (Special Condition 2.20), hydraulic design verification and executed plans (Special Conditions 2.21 and 2.22 and Standard Condition K002), positive covenant for the proposed on-site stormwater detention system (Special Condition 2.23), water quality treatment system (Special Condition 2.24), adequate treatment and provision of car parking areas (Standard Conditions K025, K027 and K040), road safety (Standard Condition K039) and payment of bonds and fees where appropriate (Standard conditions K036, K037, P001 and P002).

Council’s Building Surveyors have recommended conditions of consent pertaining to the installation, certification and maintenance of the water tanks proposed (Standard conditions H036 (amended), H038 and H039).

11. Landscaping

In addition to an amended landscape plan as previously referred, conditions of consent are recommended to provide for the retention, protection, implementation and maintenance of existing and proposed vegetation where relevant (Standard Conditions L001 to L003, L005 to L008 and L012).

12. Regional Environmental Plans (REP’s)

Refer to above referred assessment of SREP 20 – Hawkesbury Nepean River

13. Soil Erosion and Sedimentation

A Plan of Proposed Earthworks and Soil and Water Management accompanied the development application. Cut to an approximate depth ranging from between 2.5 and 4.7 metres is proposed to accommodate the basement level proposed for the high school building component of the development application. This is warranted and has been demonstrated to be adequate in this instance given the proposed use. Conditions of consent are recommended to provide for adequate treatment of cut and fill products (Standard Conditions D005 and D006) and verge areas to be turfed at the completion of works (Special Condition 2.25).

 


Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

Appendix 9 - Extent of notification

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

A Green City

 

 

 

16

Development Application DA09/0901 for the operation of a Red Rooster restaurant at Lot 21 DP 1085064 (No. 21) Lavin Crescent, Werrington County  Applicant:  Red Rooster Foods Pty Ltd;  Owner:  Nicholas Kousparis and Christopher Kousparis    

DA09/0901

Compiled by:                Deepa Randhawa, Senior Environmental Planner

Authorised by:             Peter Wood, Acting Development Services Manager  

Requested By:             Councillor John Thain

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 for the use of an existing retail unit to operate a Red Rooster restaurant. The proposal includes fitout of the existing unit, construction of a new driveway, a drive-through facility and associated signage.

 

The site is zoned 3(d) Special Business (Highway Service Area) under Interim Development Order No. 27 – City of Penrith. The proposed development is defined as a “refreshment room” which is a permissible form of development with the consent of Council. The proposed development was notified to the owners and occupiers of adjoining and nearby properties. Council notified 22 property owners and occupiers in the surrounding area and received six submissions including two petitions signed by 120 local residents. The issues raised in the submissions relate to traffic, parking and safety impacts, business viability and competition with other similar businesses in the complex.

 

The application was referred to the Local Traffic Committee to consider the traffic issues in relation to the whole retail complex. The Local Traffic Committee and Council’s Traffic Engineering Department have raised no objections to the approval of the development application subject to conditions.

 

An assessment under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 has been undertaken and found that the proposal is worthy of support subject to recommended conditions. The application is therefore recommended for approval.

 

Background

The applicant attended a pre-lodgement meeting on 20 May 2009 and the following key issues were identified by Council:

 

§ Visual Impact – The proposal will involve the removal of some of the landscape area along Lavin Crescent. The application will need to provide details to demonstrate that the visual impact caused by the loss of potential landscape area is acceptable. The remaining landscape area between the boundary and the drive-through access is to be provided with suitable landscaping to screen the access driveway and provide an appropriate streetscape.

 

§ Car Parking – The current building provided car parking at a rate of 1 space /26 m2 of floor area. The car park rate for a restaurant is 1 space for every 5.5m2 of seating area or 1 space for every 4 seats whichever is the greater. If the car parking requirement exceeds the spaces allocated to the existing shop, the applicant will need to demonstrate that the car parking on site is adequate for the proposed development and the other businesses operating in the centre.

 

§ Traffic – The proposed drive-through exit adjacent to the entry point for the site is to be designed to prevent vehicles turning left from the drive thru and having potential conflict with vehicles entering the site. Suitable traffic management devices such as kerbs are to be provided and shown on the plans to divert vehicles leaving the drive-thru to only turn right. Suitable signage should also be used and shown on the plans.

 

§ Building Code of Australia – If new lighting and air conditioning proposed the development must comply with section J energy efficiency provisions. Toilet facilities for employees to be provided separate to the toilets provided for the customers. Travel distances need to comply with the BCA.

 

§ Accessibility – The application is to be accompanied by an Access Report prepared by a qualified person and the matter will be referred to Council’s Access Committee for comments before the application is determined.

 

§ Signage - The proposed signage is to be provided with the application. A separate pylon sign will not be supported but any signage should be incorporated into the existing pylon sign along Dunheved Road.

 

The preceding key issues have been addressed as part of this Development Application, as outlined later in this report.

 

Site and Surrounds

The subject site is situated on the southern side of Dunheved Road in Werrington County, approximately 100m to the west of the intersection of Dunheved Road and Henry Lawson Avenue. The site is bounded by Lavin Crescent to the west and south and has an area of 4,059m2.

 

The site contains a retail unit complex containing 5 retail units with the provision of 49 car spaces. The subject retail unit complex is a relatively new development which was approved by Council in January 2005 and was completed in June 2006. The site has dual frontage and can therefore be accessed via either Dunheved Road or Lavin Crescent.

 

The surrounding area is characterised by a mix of land uses, including open space to the west, low density residential development to the north and south and recreational and retail uses to the east. (See Appendix No. 1 – Locality Plan).

 

The Proposed Development

The application seeks development approval to:

 

§ Fit out part of the existing building for a Red Rooster restaurant;

§ Provide a “drive thru” facility and;

§ Provide associated signage.

 

(See Appendix No. 2 – Site Plan, Floor Plan & Elevations)

 

Fit out:

 

Existing Building 1 has a gross floor area of 360.3m2 and will be divided into two (2) separate tenancies as follows:

 

Tenancy

Area

Tenant

1

227.6

Red Rooster

2

133.0

Vacant

 

It is not proposed to extend or increase the existing building footprint or the gross floor area.

 

Tenancy 1 will be modified both externally and internally to bring it in line with latest design concepts for all new red Rooster stores and will include:

 

§ Seating area for 36 persons;

§ Internal partitioning creating new servery, office, cool rooms (x2) freezer, dry store, staff room and preparation areas;

§ Two (2) new openings (windows) to the western wall to serve the drive- thru customers;

§ Combined toilets for staff and customers;

§ New “drive- thru” canopies at service windows.

 

Drive –Thru Facility

 

§ A 3 m wide drive thru facility is proposed to be provided in the existing western side setback from Lavin Crescent;

§ Existing landscape will be removed and new landscaping will be provided in the remaining area between the drive-thru and Lavin Crescent.

§ The drive- thru facility will provide two service windows and canopies will be provided over these service windows;

§ These canopies will be an extension of the existing fascia, approximately 2.5m wide and setback approximately 2m from Lavin Crescent boundary and supported by a feature screen with aluminium grill inset.

§ Vehicles entering the drive-thru will be directed to turn right by-

-      specially designed curbing and directional signage

-      directional signage

 

Associated Signage

 

Details of the associated signage include:

 

§ Extend the existing pylon sign to a total height of 7m with internally illuminated corporate logo sign of 2.92m in width x 1.7m in height;

§ Three (3) illuminated Red Rooster corporate signs to fascias of the existing building, the sizes vary as follows:-

-   6.75m wide x 1.5m high (Dunheved Road north fascia)

-   6.75m wide x 1.5m high (south elevation fascia)

-   4.05m wide x 0.9m high (internal side elevation)

§ Three (3) internally illuminated directional signs;

§ One(1) non-illuminated directional sign;

§ Two (2) external menu boards;

§ One(1) height clearance sign for the drive- through.

 

Business Operation & Management

 

§ The Red Rooster restaurant will be operated and managed by a franchisee owner

§ The expected number of staff include 4 full time employees, 10-15 casual and up to 10 part time staff

§ The proposed hours of operation are 9am to 12 am (midnight) seven days a week.

 

Planning Assessment

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

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

Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 20 – Hawkesbury-Nepean River (No. 2 – 1997) (SREP 20)

SREP 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 proposal will have minimal impacts and is considered to not compromise the water or scenic qualities of the river environment as no major constructions works are involved except minor site works including removal of landscaping and construction of a 3m wide concrete driveway. Conditions of consent have been recommended to ensure erosion and sediment control measures are employed prior to the commencement of any site works.

 

A waste management plan has been submitted to detail out the waste management objectives of the store including waste minimisation; waste separation at source, recycling and regular collection of litter in the car park and surrounding area. These measures will ensure that quality of water from the site has no adverse impact on the existing environment of the Hawkesbury-Nepean River system.

Interim Development Order No. 27 – City of Penrith (IDO 27)

 

The subject site is zoned 3(d) Special Business (Highway Service Area) under Interim Development Order No. 27 – City of Penrith. The proposed development is defined as a “refreshment room”, which is permissible with the consent of Council:

 

“Refreshment Room” means a restaurant, café, tea-room, eating-house or the like.

 

Clause 8 requires any development application for the consent of the Council to have consideration:-

 

(a)      to the carrying out of work or to the use of land within view of or adjacent to any road, public reserve or proposed reserve, the Council shall take into consideration the probable aesthetic appearance of such development or work when used for the proposed purpose and viewed from such road, public reserve or proposed reserve;

(b)      to the carrying out of any other development likely to cause increased vehicular traffic on any road in the vicinity thereof, the Council shall take into consideration whether, having regard to the proposed use of any such building or development has –

(i)       adequate vehicular exits and entrances to the site have been provided so that vehicles using such entrances and exits will not endanger persons and vehicles using any such road;

(ii)      space, sufficient to provide for the parking or standing of such number of vehicles as the Council may determine, is provided on the site or on land adjoining the site not being a public road;

(iii)     any representations made by the Police Department (Traffic Branch) and by the Department of Main Roads have been met; and

(iv)     adequate space has been provided within the site of the building or development for the loading, unloading and fuelling of vehicles and for the picking up and setting down of passengers.

 

The proposed development is to use an existing retail unit. The existing unit is part of a recently built contemporary building in a commercial complex which has been designed to integrate with the amenity and visual quality of the surrounding area and the Dunheved Road interface. No external works are proposed to this building except a 3m wide concrete driveway for the drive-through facility and signage.  It is not proposed to extend or increase the existing building footprint or the gross floor area.

 

The proposal is consistent with the existing character of other development in the locality and is consistent with the above aims and objectives.

 

There are no development standards under IDO 27 applicable to the proposed development.

2.   Section 79C(1)(a)(ii) – Any Draft Environmental Planning Instruments

 

There are no draft environmental planning instruments which are relevant to the subject site and/or the proposed development.

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

Penrith Development Control Plan (DCP) 2006

Section 2.1 Contaminated Land

The site was previously used as a service station from 1984 to 1998 and then as a car sales yard. Remediation and validation of the site was undertaken as part of DA03/1107 for the construction of the complex now on the site.

Section 2.2 Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design

The design of the development optimises safety and security, both internal to the development and from the public domain. Safety and security has been considered in accordance with Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles of surveillance, access, territorial reinforcement and space management. The safety of the public is enhanced by the design of the proposal which improves casual surveillance of the street during the day and night by orientating seating areas to each street frontage. The proposed car park areas maintain clear sight lines and will be well lit. The proposed hours of operation (up to midnight days a week) and active use of the site will further improve the safety aspects of the proposal.

Section 2.7 Notification and Advertising

In accordance with Section 2.7 Notification and Advertising of Penrith DCP 2006, the proposed development was notified to nearby residents and tenants of the other retail units in the subject retail complex with the exhibition period from 17 September to 1 October 2009.

Council notified 22 residents and tenants in total and in response received six (6) submissions including two (2) petitions letters signed by 120 residents. The issues raised in the submissions are discussed 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 manage the generation, storage and disposal of wastes.

Section 2.11 Car Parking

This matter is discussed later in this report.

 

Section 3.1 Advertising Signs

 

The proposed signs are compatible with the scale and proportion of the building and the subject site. The existing pylon sign is to be extended to 7m in height with internally illuminated corporate logo sign. The development also proposes three (3) illuminated Red Rooster corporate sign to fascias of existing building, one facing Dunheved Road a number of directional signs and menu boards.

 

The proposed signs are appropriate for the site and the illumination of the proposed signs will not result in unacceptable glare affecting the safety for pedestrians, vehicles or detract from the amenity of residences.

 

The proposed signage meets the objectives and is consistent with the provisions of the development Control Plan.

4.   Section 79C(1)(a)(iv) – The Regulations

 

Council’s Building Surveyor has raised no objection to the proposal regarding fire safety considerations.

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

Context and Setting

The proposal is consistent with the existing character of other development in the locality. The proposal is compatible with the surrounding and adjacent land uses. The proposal will have no adverse impacts on the natural environment. The proposal will involve the removal of some of the landscape area along Lavin Crescent. The proposed landscaping plan demonstrates that the remaining landscape area between the boundary and the drive thru access provides suitable landscaping to screen the access driveway and provide an appropriate streetscape.

Carparking

The entire complex includes a total of 49 on-site car spaces, which represents an overall surplus of 6 car spaces across the site based on the car parking requirements of Council’s DCP. The site is not strata titled and therefore the car spaces are not strictly allocated to each unit within the complex.

The application along with traffic report submitted with the application was referred to Council’s Senior Traffic Officer who has raised no objection to the proposed based on parking issues and provided the following comments:

 

“Penrith DCP 2006 requires an on-site car parking rate of 1 space per 5.5m2 or 1 per 4 seats, whichever is the greater. This equates to either 41 spaces as the greater calculations or 9 spaces based on 36 seats.

However for this particular takeaway restaurant, a more appropriate rate is contained within the Roads and Traffic Authority’s Guideline to Traffic Facilities which requires drive- through restaurants to provide parking at a rate of 1 space per 2 seats (internal and external), which equates 18 spaces.  A drive- through queuing facility is also required.

 

The proposal for Tenancy 1 provides 18 parking spaces, which satisfies the RTA guidelines. In addition, queuing for 4 cars is available from the ordering point.

 

This allows for 31 spaces available for the other 3 tenancies on site. Based on any future retail uses of these tenancies, parking will be available at a rate of 1 space per 26m2.

 

As the proposed use will not exceed the car parking are previously determined adequate for the site; the proposed car parking arrangements are satisfactory.”

It is therefore considered that existing car parking arrangements for the site will be adequate for the proposed use”.

Access and Traffic

The site has dual frontage and can therefore be accessed via either Dunheved Road or Lavin Crescent. The existing car parking on the site will be adequate for the development, as discussed earlier in this report.

 

Council’s Traffic Engineer has reviewed the proposed developments with regard to access, transport and traffic and has provided the following comments:

 

“Access into the car parking area of the existing retail complex is via the slip lane off Dunheved Road, or alternatively via Lavin Crescent (north). Exiting the car park is via Lavin Crescent (east). This arrangement was approved under the original DA for the complex and is satisfactory for this proposal.

 

The proposed 3m wide drive-through for the restaurant is proposed between the eastern side of the building and the boundary. Vehicles exiting the drive-through will turn right by specifically designed kerb and directional signage. Comments should be sought from Council’s Development Engineers regarding compliance with the AS2890.01-2004 for this arrangement.

 

Council’s Traffic section is aware of difficulty in right hand turn movements out of Lavin Crescent onto Dunheved Road during peak hour. Council’s Local Traffic Committee may need to consider installation of a right hand turn ban at this location at a future date.

 

Traffic Generation

 

The RTA’s Guide to Traffic Generating Development estimates that based on similar take away food chains, evening peak hour vehicle rates are expected to be 100 vehicles per hour/ average. This could vary from weekdays to weekends and be up to approximate 150vehicles/hour on weekdays.

 

It is therefore considered that the restaurant will produce an increase in local traffic flow during the restaurant operating hours. However, given the location of the restaurant on a regional road, no adverse traffic generation impacts are expected from the development and it is anticipated that the local road network had adequate spare capacity for this increase.”

 

The matters raised by Council’s Traffic Officer have been incorporated into suitable conditions.

 

Local Traffic Committee

 

At Council’s Ordinary Meeting of 12 October 2009, Councillor John Thain requested that the traffic issues surrounding the proposed Red Rooster development at Dunheved Road be investigated by the Local Traffic Committee for consideration.

 

The change of use for a Red Rooster Restaurant at Lavin Crescent did not require a referral to the Local Traffic Committee under State Environmental Planning Policy 2007 (Infrastructure) as Dunheved Road is not a classified road, but a regional road, under control/management of Council.

 

However, the matter was reported to the Local Traffic Committee to consider the traffic issues in relation to the whole retail complex and the feasibility of a “No Right Turn” restriction from Lavin Crescent into Dunheved Road.

 

The report took into consideration that the right hand turn manoeuvre from Lavin Crescent into Dunheved Road is difficult due to traffic volumes on Dunheved Road, traffic turning right into Lavin Crescent and the potential of pedestrians crossing.  The report therefore recommended that Council commence a Traffic Management Plan process to investigate the feasibility of a right hand turn ban at this intersection.

 

The investigation and the preparation a Traffic Management Plan will take into consideration the following:

 

§ Description or detailed plan of proposed measures

 

§ Identification and assessment of impact of proposed measures

 

§ Measures to ameliorate the impact of re-assigned traffic

 

§ Assessment of public transport services affected

 

§ Details of provision made for emergency vehicles, heavy vehicles, cyclists and pedestrians

 

§ Assessment of effect on existing and future developments with transport implications in the vicinity of the proposed measures

 

§ Public consultation process

 

The Traffic Management Plan will take into consideration the traffic impacts of the proposed development combined with the existing traffic generation from the complex to determine any upgrade to the intersection.

 

As discussed the proposed access arrangements, parking layout and the surrounding road network will be able to cater for the traffic generated by the proposed development.

 

The Traffic Management Plan process shall commence once the proposed development is operational to assess of traffic impacts of the development along with the other existing uses to determine measures required to ameliorate the impact of the re-assigned traffic.

Accessibility

The application was accompanied by an Accessibility Statement prepared by Bio-Building Design. The Accessibility Statement certifies that subject to the implementation of a series of recommendations, the proposal will meet the intent of Australian Standard 1428.1 for new building work. There is an existing accessible car space in the complex.

 

The proposal was reported to Council’s Access Committee at its meeting of 7th October 2009. At that meeting 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.

 

In response to these matters, the applicant submitted a supplementary statement addressing the matters raised:

 

§  The seating and tables in the booth area which is located immediately to the right hand side following entry to the restaurant is fixed (ie 3 tables & 6 seats);

§  All remaining tables are fixed but seating can be moved; and

§  The height clearance sign (refer signage plans) for the proposed drive-thru will be set at 2.5m clearance.

In addition standard and special conditions are recommended to address the issues raised by the Access Committee (see Special Condition No’s. 2.2, 2.4, 2.7, 2.8 and 2.9).

Noise Impacts

Any potential noise impacts from the proposed development are associated with mechanical plant/ equipment the drive-through and car park (people and vehicles). The closest dwellings are approximately 50m to the south and 60m to the north of the site. It is considered that the distance between the two land uses and proposed landscaping along the site boundaries including the drive-through driveway and the existing landscaping buffer provided to the south within the transmission easement will ameliorate any potential noise impacts from the development.

 

A standard condition has been recommended to ensure that noise from the mechanical plant / equipment shall not exceed 5dB (A) above the background noise, when measured at the boundary of the lot and that the provisions of the Environmental Protection Act 1997 apply to the development.

 

Subject to conditions, the proposal will not result in any significant noise impact to adjoining areas, in particular, the dwellings to the north and south of the site.

Social Impacts

The proposal poses no potential adverse social impacts. Community benefit will be provided through the provision of a drive –through restaurant to the local community.

Economic Impacts

The proposal poses no potential adverse economic impacts. Employment opportunities will be created for a total of 6-8 staff and the operation of the Red Rooster will assist to activate the overall complex which is currently only partially tenanted.

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

 

The proposal is considered to be compatible with the surrounding and adjacent land uses. The site attributes are considered conducive to the proposal.

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

Referrals

The application was referred to the following stakeholders and their comments have formed part of the assessment:

 

Referral Body

Comments Received

Building Surveyor

No objection, subject to conditions

Development Engineer

No objection, subject to conditions

Public Health

No objection, subject to conditions

Traffic officer

No objections raised

Community Consultation

In accordance with Section 2.7 Notification and Advertising of Penrith DCP 2006, the proposed development was notified to nearby residents and tenants of the other retail units in the subject retail complex. The application was exhibited between 17 September and 1 October 2009.

Council notified 22 residents and tenants in total and in response received six (6) submissions including two (2) petitions letters signed by 120 residents in response. The issues raised in the submissions relate to traffic, parking and safety impacts, including the business viability and competition with other similar business in the complex. These matters are addressed as follows:

 

§ Access and egress from Lavin Crescent to Dunheved Road

§ Pedestrian Safety within the car park

§ The determination of this application should be based on a Traffic Assessment which should be undertaken once the swim school is in operation

 

Council’s Traffic Officer has reviewed the traffic impacts, the access and egress and car parking arrangement on site and is satisfied with the traffic arrangement of the proposal as addressed under Section 5 of this report.

 

§ The development will directly compete with other take away business within the shopping centre and therefore could potentially jeopardise their viability.

 

The proposal for a restaurant is a permitted use under the zoning of the site and in this context this is not a valid planning consideration.

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

 

The site is suitable for the proposed development. Restaurants are permissible in the 3(d) Special Business (Highway Service Area) zone and the proposal meets the aims and objectives of the relevant environmental planning instruments. It is considered that improvements to competition could have positive flow-on effects for consumers through greater choice and competitive product prices. The development will promote a competitive business environment, for the consumer’s benefit and creation of jobs.

Section 94 Contributions

There are no Section 94 contributions applicable to the proposed development.

Conclusion

The proposal is consistent with the underlying planning considerations and intent of IDO No. 27- City of Penrith, SREP No.20 – Hawkesbury Nepean River and Penrith Development Control Plan 2006. It is compatible with the adjoining retail units in the commercial complex and is consistent with the objectives of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act in so far as it promotes the co-ordinated and orderly economic use and development of the land.

 

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. Matters raised in submissions have been addressed by recommended conditions and the resolution of the Local Traffic Committee, or are not justified. The site is suitable for the proposed development and the proposal is in the public interest. The proposal is therefore worthy of Council’s support.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Development Application DA09/0901 for the operation of a Red Rooster restaurant at Lot 21 DP 1085064 (No. 21) Lavin Crescent, Werrington County be received

2.     Development Application DA09/0901 for the operation of a Red Rooster restaurant at Lot 21 DP 1085064 (No. 21) Lavin Crescent, Werrington County 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

A021                    Business registration

A026                    Advertising Signs

A027                    Hours of operation

A039                    Graffiti

A046                    Obtain Construction Certificate before commencement of                  works

B002                    Australian Standard for demolition and disposal to          approved landfill site

D001          Implement approved sediment and erosion control          measures

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

o          Exit travel distances must comply with Clause D1.4; and

o The provision of sanitary facilities for patrons and

o staff must comply with Clause F2.3.

E006                     Disabled access and facilities

E009                     Annual fire safety

F022                     Commercial kitchens exhaust system

H001                    Stamped plans and erection of site notice (Class 2-9)

H002                    Provision of site facilities prior to commencement of                  construction works (a, b & d)

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

Q01F                    Notice of commencement and appointment of PCA

Q006                    Occupation Certificate

Special Conditions

2.2     Directional signage and pavement arrows are to be installed to ensure that all traffic exiting the drive- through lane turn right into the existing car park

2.3     A Construction Certificate shall be issued by a Certifying Authority to include the following civil works

(a)      Line marking and signage

(b)     Internal road way (drive thru lane)

(c)      Stormwater drainage

 

Civil design 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

 

2.4     Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate the Certifying Authority shall ensure that vehicular access, pedestrian access, carparking and manoeuvring areas associated with the subject development are in accordance with AS 2890.1, AS2890.2 and Penrith City Council’s Development Control Plan

 

2.5     Prior to commencement of works a Traffic Control Plan including details for pedestrian management, shall be prepared in accordance with AS1742.3 “Traffic Control Devices for Works on Roads” and the Roads and Traffic Authority’s publication “Traffic Control at Worksites” and certified by an appropriately accredited Roads and Traffic Authority Traffic Controller

 

Traffic control measures shall be implemented during the construction phase of the development in accordance with the certified plan.  A copy of the plan shall be available on site at all times

Note:

1.       A copy of the Traffic Control Plan shall accompany the Notice of Commencement to Penrith City Council

 

2.6     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

 

2.7     Prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate directional signage and           linemarking shall be installed indicating directional movements and        the location of customer parking to the satisfaction of the Principal        Certifying Authority

 

2.8     All car parking and manoeuvring shall be in accordance with AS         2890.1 (2004) and Council’s requirements. One accessible car space shall be located closest to the entrance to the building

 

2.9     Provision shall be made for unfixed seating accessible to and usable    by people with disabilities. Details of the seating arrangements are to     be provided prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate

 

2.10   All external plant and equipment is to be suitably screened with compatible materials and finishes. Details are to accompany the application for Construction Certificate.

 

2.11   Prior to the issue of a 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.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1. View

Locality Plan

1 Page

Appendix

2. View

Site Plan, Floor Plan & Elevations

3 Pages

Appendix

  


Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

Appendix 1 - Locality Plan

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

Appendix 2 - Site Plan, Floor Plan & Elevations

 

 

 




Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

A Green City

 

 

 

17

Development Application No. 09/0609 Alterations and Additions to Existing Restaurant at Lot 16 DP 583184 (No. 2/91) Great Western Highway Emu Plains  Applicant:  Rob McGuinness;  Owner:  Jim Aitken, Marlene Aitken, James Aitken and David Reeves    

DA09/0609

Compiled by:                Thomas Wheeler, Trainee Environmental Planner

Authorised by:             Peter Wood, Acting 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 for the conversion of the existing on-site car parking area at Jimmy’s Steakhouse into an alfresco dining area. The subject site is located on the Great Western Highway at Emu Plains, adjacent to the Council owned Billington Place car park. The site is currently occupied by a two unit commercial building, with a Real Estate office occupying the other unit.

 

Council granted development consent (DA04/0357) on 6 September 2004 for the demolition of an existing building and construction of two shops at Lot 16 DP 583184 (No. 91) Great Western Highway, Emu Plains. On 30 June 2005, Council received DA05/1065 for the use of shop one as a real estate agent, approval was granted on 17 August 2005. On 17 August 2005, Council received DA05/1320 for the use of shop two as a restaurant, approval was granted on 5 December 2005. The current development application proposes to convert the existing onsite car parking area into an alfresco dining area.

 

The major issue identified as part of the assessment of the application relates to the provision of on-site car parking. The current development provides 8 parking spaces, 18 short of Council’s requirement. The proposal seeks to remove these spaces for an alfresco dining area, and enter into a Voluntary Planning Agreement for the provision of spaces within Council’s Car park. Assessment of the application against relevant statutory requirements has found it to be acceptable subject to recommended conditions.

 

The Site

The site is a long narrow block 720m² in area. It comprises two constructed single storey shops, one being used as a real estate office and the other being a restaurant with a shared car park at the rear. The building is located amongst a small commercial/retail strip on the Great Western Highway. The shopping centre strip is a combination of restaurants, hotel, take away food shops, commercial and retail uses.

 

To the north the property are four adjacent blocks (2 vacant, 2 occupied by 2 residential dwellings used for commercial purposes. To the west the property shares boundaries with additional commercial premises with retail and office uses. The restaurant is within walking distance to Emu Plains Railway Station to the northwest and a public car park to the northeast of the site. Opposite the site across the Great Western Highway is residential development. Pedestrian access to each of the shops is provided from the rear car park and is also available from the Great Western Highway frontage.

 

A location map is included as Attachment A.

The Proposed Development

This application seeks consent for the conversion of the existing on-site car parking area at Jimmy’s Steakhouse into an alfresco dinning area.

 

The proposal involves:

 

§ Removal of 8 on-site parking spaces.

§ Formalise the existing vehicle entryway through construction of a brick archway.

§ Construction of a ‘vergola’ over the dining area, to allow weather protection.

§ Construction of a roofed, brick-walled garbage room with roller door access.

§ Provision of seating for an additional 24 patrons (total restaurant seating capacity of 116 patrons).

 

Planning Assessment

The development has been assessed in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, and the following key issues have been identified:

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

 

Interim Development Order No.2-City of Penrith (IDO2)

The site is zoned 3(a) General Business under IDO 2. Restaurants are a permissible use in the zone only with the consent of Council.

 

2.   Section 79C(1)(a)(ii) – Any Draft Environmental Planning Instruments

 

No draft planning instruments apply to the subject property.

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

Development Control Plan for Emu Plains Commercial Area 1993

 

This Development Control Plan (DCP) applies to land at Emu Plains bounded by Old Bathurst Road, the Great Western Highway, Lamrock Street and the Western Railway line.

 

The aims of this DCP are to provide:

 

§ Urban design guidelines for commercial and residential developments within the areas.

§ Guide future traffic management and parking within the area.

§ Ensure the enhancement of pedestrian access within the area and ensure the physical enhancement of the area through the provision of landscaping.

 

The majority of these aims have been address as part of the original development application for the construction of the building and for the fitout of the restaurant. Any further application of these provisions to this proposal are not required as it is behind the existing building and not impacting on the streetscape.

 

The relevant aims for this application are traffic management and parking. These matters are discussed below.

 

Traffic Management

 

The Development Control Plan requires vehicular access to the precinct to be provided via Billington Place and that:

 

§ All new development within the precinct shall be designed to provide satisfactory service vehicle access in accordance with the Plan.

§ All new development within the precinct shall contribute towards the cost of traffic management and pedestrian facilities identified within the Plan.

 

The development application for the building (DA04/0357) included provision for all vehicular access to the site through Council’s car park off Billington Place in accordance with the Development Control Plan. The proposed development will remove the current on-site car parking and therefore restrict access to the subject site to pedestrians only. Provision will remain in place to allow for vehicle access to the site through Billington Place for future uses to provide on-site car parking.

 

Services vehicles will be able to access the rear of the site and garbage storage area via the Billington Place car park.

 

Penrith Development Control Plan 2006, Part 2 Section 2.11 – Car Parking

 

The original consent DA04/0357 for the construction of two commercial units required 10 parking spaces based on Council’s parking code for commercial premises. In addition the development consent for Jimmy’s Steakhouse DA05/1320 required a further 18 parking spaces based on Council’s parking code for a restaurant of 1 space per 4 seats. The original consent provided 8 spaces on site with a deficiency of 2, with the subsequent restaurant consent providing 5 on site for the restaurant with a deficiency of 18. The consents were approved by Council with concessions given for the 20 deficient spaces based on the availability of parking in the adjoining public car parks.

 

No Section 94 Contributions were able to be levied as a condition of these consents as there were no Section 94 Development Contributions plans applicable to the site.

 

The Development Control Plan requires that development within the precinct shall provide on-site car parking in accordance with Council’s adopted Car Parking Code. Based on Council’s car parking codes for a restaurant at 1 space per 4 seats, the current restaurant requires 23 spaces. The addition of the proposed alfresco area, will increase the seating capacity to 116, and the parking requirement to 29 parking spaces.

 

The applicant’s statement of environmental effects notes that an additional 14 parking spaces (the 8 existing spaces, plus the 6 needed for the alfresco area) will be required to be absorbed into Council’s parking areas. A parking study was undertaken by the Applicant with surveys on 18th, 19th, 23rd and 24th January 2008. The parking report summarised:

 

§ The maximum occupation of the six surveyed car parks during the survey period was 83 out of 166 spaces, or 50%. This left an additional 83 car parking spaces available.

§ Over the four day survey period, an average of 38% of car parking spaces were utilized. This equates to 63 out of 166, leaving 103 spaces available.

 

The parking survey concluded that extra capacity was available in the surrounding parking areas including Council’s parking area at Billington Place located at the rear of the site. The applicant contends that existing car parking areas in proximity to the site are under utilised and have suitable capacity to accommodate the additional car parking generated by this development.

 

The parking areas surveyed included:

 

1)   Billington Place Council Car Park – West - This is a large car park located immediately behind the retail outlets fronting the Great Western Highway, to the west of Billington Place.

 

2)   Billington Place Council Car Park – East - This is a continuation of the western side car park, located immediately behind the retail outlets fronting the Great Western Highway, to the east of Billington Place.

 

3)   Billington Place Street Parking - Street parking is permitted on the eastern side of Billington Place.

 

4)   Great Western Highway Off-street Parking - A small off-street car parking area is located at the front of Lots 1, 2 and 3 DP 125676; 85 Great Western Highway (the retail outlets from immediately east of the proposed restaurant site to Billington Place), facing the Great Western Highway.

 

5)   Great Western Highway Street Parking - Street parking is permitted on the northern side of the Great Western Highway, from O’Donoghues Irish Pub to the Real Estate office.

 

Council’s Traffic Engineer confirmed that the car parking survey demonstrates that both the car parks and surrounding streets are under utilised and have more than sufficient spare capacity during the peak operating hours of the restaurant to cater for the 14 additional parked vehicles generated by the proposed development.

 

A primary concern with the proposal is the potential impact the development will have on the future growth of the Emu Plains commercial area and the capacity of the Billington Place car park. Council advised the applicant on 9 September 2009 that:

 

“While it is accepted that any increase in the car parking generated by the restaurant use can be accommodated within the existing public car park the removal of the existing 8 spaces from the site which are associated with staff parking cannot be supported.

 

The proposed development would provide no staff parking for both the real estate agent and restaurant, which would be normally provided on-site and will therefore be inconsistent with some of the other businesses in the commercial area of Emu Plains and create an undesirable precedent”.

 

Council’s own studies into the Emu Plains Commercial Area based on the current zoning for the area anticipated the following potential parking demand.

 

Parking Demand

High

Medium

Low

Spaces

509

196

126

 

The difference between the high, medium and low scales is dependant on the land use as deemed permissible by the current planning instrument (Commercial Premises, Shops, Supermarkets).The study confirms that while the current occupation of Billington Place may be low, future development capability in the area has the potential to place pressure on the provision of car parking within the Council car park.

 

In the absence of a Section 94 contribution plan, Council may not have the ability to cater for the addition spaces absorbed into the parking area and supply further spaces to meet potential growing demand as a result of the proposal and any future proposal. Council informed the applicant of its concerns and its intention to refuse the application. In response the applicant has proposed through a Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA) to replace the parking spaces lost on site as a result of the development within the Council car park at Billington Place.

 

Planning Agreement

The proposed development has sought to remove existing on site parking spaces (total of 8), to allow for the use of the space as alfresco dining for the existing restaurant. Council’s records indicate that these spaces are allocated between the two existing commercial tenancies and any such proposal within the Penrith City Centre would have required a Section 94 contribution.

 

Currently, no Section 94 contributions plan applies to the subject site, and as such Council is unable to levy for the loss of the parking spaces and the need to upgrade Billington Place to supplement the project. In response to these concerns the applicant volunteered a Draft Planning Agreement outlining a proposal to construct 8 spaces within the Billington Place car park to replace those lost as a result of the development.

 

Under a planning agreement a developer may dedicate land free of cost, pay a monetary contribution, or provide any other material public benefit, or any combination of them. In this case the applicant has sought to construct additional parking spaces within the Billington Place car park as designated by Council’s Technical Design Unit. The proposal is considered to provide “material public benefit” as prescribed by the legislation.

 

A planning agreement may be registered by the Register-General in relation to the land to which it applies and thereby bind successors in title to the land. Once entered into, a planning agreement becomes a statutory obligation. Any breach of a planning agreement would be a breach of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979.

 

Penrith Development Control Plan 2006, Part 2 Section 2.2 – Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design

 

The proposed alfresco area will be divided from the Billington Place car park by a new brick wall with metal gate for access purposes. The gate itself will be see-thru allowing for passive surveillance over the car park from the restaurant and from the car park into the alfresco area. The alfresco area itself will be sharing light from the restaurant, while also featuring its own external lights providing security.

 

The main entrance to the restaurant is currently off the Great Western Highway, as the rear gate will be required to remain open during operating hours it is considered important that access for customers is through both entrances. Both entrances will be required to be monitored by the operator for security purposes and this is best achieved by controlling access. This will allow for surveillance at the entrances and a general presence, thereby acting as a deterrent to anti-social behaviour. Special Condition No. 2.4 is recommended to achieve this.

4.   Section 79C(1)(a)(iv) – The Regulations

 

Part 4 Division 1A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulations 2000 applies to the subject proposal in the creation of a Voluntary Planning Agreement. The regulations govern the form, creation and process for implementing a planning agreement by the developer and Council.

 

The onus is on the developer under the Regulations and the Act to formulate a draft Voluntary Planning Agreement. Prior to acceptance the Draft Agreement is to be notified for no less then 28 days with a basic English explanatory note and be kept on a register by Council.

 

Special condition 2.2 recommends:

 

“A Draft Voluntary Planning Agreement is to be prepared, notified for 28 days and entered into in accordance with Section 93E of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, for the provision of 8 parking spaces prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.”

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

 

The proposed transformation of the car parking area into an outside dining area raises concerns in regards to noise and anti-social behaviour that may stem from the alfresco area during late operating periods. The restaurant is approved for the operating hours of 10am to 11pm, 7 days a week. The proposed alfresco area will maintain the existing operating hours. The rear of the property backs on to two vacant lots, and two residential dwellings with a separation of 30m from the alfresco area.

 

Predominantly the area is commercial, however, there are two small residential properties to the north of the development, and as such there is a need to minimise any potential impacts. A noise assessment was not requested due to the small nature of the proposal, however, it is recommended that with the following measures in place, any impact on these properties through noise would be minimal (See Special conditions 3.5, 3.6, 3.8):

 

·    Operating hours maintained at 11pm (no change to previous consent),

·    Outside dining area limited to 24 seats only,

·    Live entertainment is to be restricted to inside the restaurant, with music outside to be restricted to levels maintaining 5dBa at the property boundary.

 

Based on the provided parking study undertaken by the applicant, it is accepted that the local parking facilities provided at Billington Place and the surrounding sites are not at capacity. As such the transfer of spaces from the site to the parking areas would only result in a minor reduction in the availability of parking within close proximity.

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

 

The proposed alfresco area is located off an existing restaurant on a private property within a predominantly commercial area. The impact of the development on the local community would be minimal due to the nature of the proposal and the proximity to public parking which is significant in availability. The proposed development will require no upgrades in services to the area, and additional council facilities (Council car parking) will be provided to negate the on-site loss. These upgrades are at the developers expense and will benefit the community on a whole.

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

 

The development application was not notified in accordance with Clause A1 of Penrith Development Control Plan 2006 Part 2 Section 2.7, Notification and Advertising.

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

 

The assessment of parking and the subsequent allocation of spaces within Billington Place raised issues as to whether the proposal was in the public interest where Council and subsequently the community could not levy Contributions towards the upgrade of the parking facilities to meet the growing demand on parking in the area. As such, the Draft voluntary planning agreement is seen as an acceptable response to these concerns of public interest with the agreement providing a material benefit to the public.

 

Therefore, subject to the acceptance of the Draft Voluntary Planning Agreement, the proposed development is seen to be in the public interest.

 

Conclusion

The proposal for an expansion to the use of Shop No 2 as an alfresco area to the existing restaurant is permissible under IDO No. 2 and is consistent with the objectives of zone 3(a) General Business and the Development Control Plan for the Emu Plains Commercial Area.

 

The key issue associated with the use of the site as a restaurant is the shortfall in onsite parking to cater for the use. The proposed car parking for the development is adequate to cater for commercial or retail uses however it does not provide sufficient onsite parking for a restaurant.

 

The location of the site in close proximity to Council car parking facilities permits the consideration of using Council car parking were on-site parking is not provided. The justification for the shortfall in car spaces is acceptable given that the adjoining public car parking areas are not fully utilised. The use of the area as an alfresco addition to be restaurant will introduce a new dining experience for the community at this location.

 

The proposed additions are aimed at drawing more people to the restaurant and area, which will create a sense of vitality for the commercial area that extends into the evening. The site is suitable for the proposed use and will not have any adverse impacts on parking or traffic in the area subject to the recommended conditions and there being no net loss in parking. It is therefore recommended that application be approved subject to conditions.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

 

1.   The information contained in the report on Development Application 05/1320 for alteration and additions to Shop No. 2 at Lot 16 DP 583184 (No. 91) Great Western Highway, Emu Plains be received.

 

2.   Development Application 05/1320 for alterations and additions to Shop No. 2 at Lot 16 DP 583184 (No. 91) Great Western Highway, Emu Plains be approved subject to the following conditions :

 

Standard Conditions

 

                   2.1       A02F        Approved Fast Light Das

A008        (first sentence only), Works to BCA requirements

A012        Food Shop

A026        (application for adverting signs), Advertising sign

A029        (Monday to Sunday 11am to 10 pm), Hours of Operation and                    Delivery Times

A039        Graffiti

A046        Obtain Construction Certificate before commencement of works

D001        Implement approved sediment and erosion control measures

D009        Covering of waste storage areas

D014        Plant and equipment noise

E001        BCA Compliance

E002        BCA Issues to be addressed

·    - The external columns that are less than 3 metres from the side boundary should have an Fire Resistance Level as specified in Table 5 of Specification C1.1,

·    - Emergency lighting and illuminated exit signs are required in alfresco dining area in accordance with Clauses E4.2, E4.5 and E4.6;

·    - Fire Fighting equipment is required in accordance with Part E1; and

·    - A 1 metre wide clear path of travel is required from the rear exist door of the existing restaurant through the alfresco dining area in accordance with Clause D1.6.

E003        Structural Alterations

E006        (delete “and sanitary facilities”), Disabled access and facilities

H001        Stamped plans & erection of site notice

H002        All forms of construction

H011        Engineering plans and specifications

H022        (damp-proof course level), Survey

H025        Construction of garbage rooms

H041        Hours of work (other devt)

Q01F       Notice of Commencement and appointment of PCA2

Q006        (delete after NSW Fire Brigades). Occupation certificate for              class 2-9

 

Special Conditions

2.2   A Draft Voluntary Planning Agreement is to be prepared, notified for 28 days and entered into in accordance with Section 93E of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, for the provision of 8 parking spaces prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.

 

2.3   The building shall not be occupied until all the conditions of consent DA04/0357 dated 6 September 2004 and all conditions of this consent are satisfied.

 

2.4   Details of lights, alarms and cameras to enable clear and direct movement through the building and monitor unauthorised access to non-public spaces are required to be submitted prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate.

 

2.5   The applicant shall consult with Council to determine the type of lighting required to illuminate the public car parking area to the rear of the site. All lighting shall be installed at the applicants cost prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate

 

2.6   Live entertainment is to be restricted to the internal areas of the restaurant

 

2.7   Audio systems are to be monitored externally to maintain noises levels at a maximum of 5 dBa above natural background levels.

 

2.8   The entrance gate must always remain open at all times that the building is occupied to allow unimpeded egress from the building in the event of fire.

 

2.9   The alfresco are is restricted to a maximum of 24 patrons.

 

2.10 The 8 parking spaces constructed under the Voluntary Planning Agreement are to be constructed to Council’s satisfaction prior to issue of an Occupation Certificate.

 

2.11 The rear gate is to be opened for customer access to the restaurant during operating hours. The entrance is to be sign posted, lit and manned appropriately throughout business.

 

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1. View

Locality Map

1 Page

Appendix

2. View

Floor and elevation plan

1 Page

Appendix

  


Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

Appendix 1 - Locality Map

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

Appendix 2 - Floor and elevation plan

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

A Green City

 

 

 

18

Partnership application between Blacktown City Council and Penrith City Council for Managed Aquifer Recharge Project Funding   

 

Compiled by:                Graham Liehr, Environmental Health Manager

Authorised by:             Graham Liehr, Environmental Health Manager   

Strategic Objective: Our natural habitats are healthy

Strategic Direction: The City’s catchments are healthy

       

 

Executive Summary

Significant concerns are being raised in relation to the perceived gap between future demand and supply scenarios for water as the population of Western Sydney increases. This includes concerns about amount of water available to meet competing needs in the future. To mitigate these potential impacts Council has been investigating options for non potable water supply, in which Managed Aquifer Recharge (MAR) plays a significant potential opportunity.

 

MAR is defined as ‘the purposeful recharge of water to aquifers for the subsequent recovery or environmental benefit” The most common form of MAR is Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR) which involves the injection of water into a well for storage and later recovery. Usually, stormwater is captured, stored and then utilised predominantly for irrigation and industrial end-uses. ASR allows for the storage of water in an aquifer during periods of water availability with the recovery of the same water when required, thus providing a secure supply.

 

In December 2009 Penrith City Council was approached by the National Water Commission with an offer of funding to undertake a feasibility study into a MAR.  Following a review of Penrith’s proposal, submitted at short notice in December 2009, the NWC allocated funding to fast track the detailed feasibility investigations and these are now very close to completion.  The funding will assist Council in determining the feasibility of a technically feasible and economically viable pilot MAR scheme in Penrith.  The funding offer extended to include the feasibility of a MAR scheme in Blacktown City Council local government area.

 

Penrith and Blacktown City Council’s have been working collaboratively and have engaged Sinclair Knight Merz (SKM) to investigate the critical issues around supply and demand.  Investigations have been undertaken at two highly prospective sites where stormwater harvesting and managed aquifer recharge (MAR) may be adopted. The Penrith feasibility study was undertaken in the Leonay/Emu Plains area while Blacktown is looking to develop a scheme to secure a sustainable water supply for the Blacktown Olympic Site.

The outcomes from the draft feasibility study justify proceeding to apply for funding from the National Urban Water and Desalination Plan which is administered by the Department for the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts. This funding would progress the establishment and full commissioning of the stormwater harvesting and MAR schemes at the Penrith and Blacktown sites through a combined bid. The closing date for applications to the Federal Government is 10 February 2010.

 

The draft feasibility study and concept designs include two possible options for the establishment of the wetlands in the Emu Plains/Leonay area. These wetlands will be necessary to achieve the water quality improvements prior to injection to the aquifer through an injection bore and pump system. The water will then be recovered using recovery bores and pump systems. The proposed scheme has a capacity of 200ML/yr and would supply commercial customers and irrigation for Council sporting fields.

 

While the feasibility study is still to be finalised it indicates that the cost of the total scheme would be approximately $8.25M and that the portion of the project attributed to Penrith’s scheme would be in the order of $3.8M. The Federal funding requirements include a 1:1 contribution equating to an approximate $1.9M contribution by Penrith City Council. Approximately $1.3M of this figure would come in the form of already allocated catchment and related in-kind works and water quality improvement works. Approximately $627,000 will need to be secured for the project to go ahead. There is likely to be some potential capacity within existing funding streams to lower this figure.

 

The report recommends Council endorse the submission of the Manager Aquifer Recharge Feasibility funding to the National Water Commission (NWC) as well as support the submission of the Blacktown City Council and Penrith City Council Managed Aquifer Recharge Project proposal to the Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts to secure the funding offer.

Background

Alternative and more sustainable water supplies are needed, particularly when potable water supplies are limited during times of drought, and the cost of water is increasing. Harvested stormwater has been identified as a feasible alternative source for irrigation, toilet flushing and some industrial applications. Most forecasters are predicting that the restrictions and costs of water will increase into the future due to demand pressures from increased populations, irrigated horticulture, the environment and climate change. In order to meet these demand pressures multiple supply sources that include traditional sources, treated wastewater reuse and stormwater harvesting will need to be adopted. For non-potable uses and where conditions for capture, storage and recovery are favourable, stormwater harvesting represents the most cost effective ‘new’ water supply option. Currently, stormwater harvesting is not undertaken by metropolitan water authorities in New South Wales.

 

Council has been actively pursuing alternatives to the use of potable water supplies through the investigation of stormwater harvesting, recycled water and other opportunities for a number of years. Council’s Water Savings Action Plan, identifies a number of our sports fields that have high demands on potable supplies. There are also a number of other water intensive sectors of the community such as golf courses and industry. These high demand users would all benefit from alternatives to potable water.

 

Based on studies undertaken by the Sydney Catchment Authority into the fractured sandstone aquifer below Emu Plains, the potential for a Managed Aquifer Recharge project has been identified. This potential is further supported by the need to secure water supply surety for the Leonay Oval sporting fields and the Dukes Oval/ Emu Park area. Leonay Golf Course has also advised that their licence allocation to extract from the Nepean River falls significantly short of their needs and a there is additional potential to provide an alternative to potable demand for local industrial users.

 

In South Australia, the concept of Managed Aquifer Recharge (MAR) has developed significantly. The most common form of MAR is Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR) which involves the injection of water into a well for storage and later recovery. Usually, stormwater is captured, stored and then utilised predominantly for irrigation and industrial end-uses however, the water can be of a very high standard and in some instances it may be used to augment drinking water supplies. ASR allows for the storage of water in an aquifer during periods of water availability with the recovery of the same water when required, thus providing a secure supply.

Managed Aquifer Recharge Feasibility Study

 

Penrith City Council and Blacktown City Council have been working with the Cooperative Research Centre for Irrigation Futures on the feasibility investigation of MAR in Western Sydney. 

 

The National Water Commission (NWC) approached Penrith City Council with an offer to submit a detailed proposal for further desktop investigations. The offer by the NWC meant that the scope of the feasibility study could be extended substantially.  Following a review of Penrith City Council’s proposal, submitted at short notice in December 2009, the NWC allocated funding to progress the detailed feasibility investigations and these are now very close to completion.

 

Penrith and Blacktown Councils engaged Sinclair Knight Merz (SKM) to investigate the critical issues around supply and demand at two highly prospective sites where stormwater harvesting and managed aquifer recharge (MAR) may be adopted. The Penrith feasibility study was undertaken in the Leonay/Emu Plains area while Blacktown is looking to develop a scheme to secure a sustainable water supply for the Blacktown Olympic Site.

 

This feasibility study has been funded by both Council’s ($10,000 ea) and the National Water Commission (NWC) ($60,000) under the MAR in Urban Cities and Towns of Australia program, Stage 2. The Stage 1 investigations identified numerous cities and towns throughout Australia where conditions of demand, supply and aquifer characteristics were suitable for the establishment of stormwater harvesting and MAR schemes and the Penrith local government area was identified as being highly suitable.

 

Federal Funding – The National Urban Water and Desalination Plan

 

The outcomes from the feasibility study support a proposal to seek funding from the National Urban Water and Desalination Plan which is administered by the Department for the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts. This funding would progress the establishment and full commissioning of the stormwater harvesting and MAR schemes at the Penrith and Blacktown sites. Minimum funding requirements as set down by the Federal Government, and the efficiency of pooling resources have led to a collaborative approach in which it is intended that a combined project bid be put forward with Blacktown City Council as the lead organisation. The deadline for funding applications is 10 February 2010.

Emu Plains Feasibility Study

 

The scope of work carried out as part of the feasibility assessment has included:

·    collation and review of available hydrogeological data - much of which has come from extensive testing of the target aquifer undertaken by the Sydney Catchment Authority over the past four years;

·    characterisation of the target aquifer and its capability to store the harvested volumes of stormwater;

·    collation and review of available climate, and hydrological data,

·    confirmation of the volumes and quality of stormwater available for harvest;

·    confirmation that the proposed harvest volumes are likely to be accessible for the longer-term after allowing for environmental needs and potential impacts of climate change;

·    a summary of the state legislation and summary of the permits or other licensing requirements/approvals necessary to implement an MAR scheme in New South Wales;

·    identification of the potential demands for the harvested stormwater;

·    identification of a conceptual scheme for the site including wetland sizing, numbers of production and observation wells and spacing;

·    preparation of preliminary costs for the establishment of the conceptual scheme; and

·    preparation of a risk assessment for the implementation of the proposed schemes.

 

Scientific analysis

 

All available data was reviewed and the following key findings were made

·    The target aquifer has been extensively tested and it has been demonstrated that it possesses the appropriate qualities to be used for MAR. These include

o High porosity and yield, enabling efficient injection and extraction rates

o High water quality, enabling optimal treatment to supply ‘fit for purpose’ water to end-users

o No risk of interaction with the floodplain alluvial aquifer and connected river ecosystems

o No risk of interaction with the groundwater systems of the Blue Mountains

·    Stormwater captured in the Knapsack and Lapstone Creek catchments from developed areas will provide ample supply to the scheme

·    The runoff band within which stormwater flows will be captured, and the volumes captured, will not impact on environmental flows

·    Sufficient space is available to construct the necessary stormwater wetlands for  initial stormwater capture and water quality improvements before injection to the aquifer

·    There is sufficient capacity to design for the impacts of climate change.

 

Concept Design

 

The prioritisation of the potential MAR sites based on supply, demand, open space and aquifer suitability informed the development of the stormwater reuse scheme in the Leonay/Emu Plains area. There are two possible options for the establishment of the wetlands to achieve the water quality improvements prior to injection to the aquifer. Once treated in the wetlands, the stormwater will be injected into the aquifers through an injection bore and pump system. The water will then be recovered using recovery bores and pump systems for use when required. The water will pass through mechanical filters to improve turbidity and UV treatment to kill pathogens before being distributed for end-uses.  The scheme will be supported by surface and submerged monitoring instrumentation linked to telemetry controlled central monitoring system.

 

The first option is to modify the existing detention pond at Leonay Oval into a functional wetland to achieve the desired water quality improvements. Knapsack Creek alone cannot supply the estimated 200 ML/yr without impacting on some of the base flow therefore additional water is required to be sourced from the adjacent Lapstone Creek sub-catchment. To maximise the operational effectiveness of the scheme a detention pond is proposed to be constructed near Dukes Oval and water transferred to the wetland situated at Leonay Oval for pre-treatment and recharge.  A map indicating the location of the extraction/injection bore and the proposed pipeline is indicated in Appendix 1.

 

The second option requires a wetland (and associated MAR) to be established on land owned by Council at the bottom of the Lapstone Creek sub-catchment, below Wedmore Road, Emu Heights. The end use water would then be pumped to commercial customers and Council sporting fields. There is sufficient space and storm water runoff at this site to meet the wetland design requirements and identified demand. A map indicating the location of the extraction/injection bore and the proposed pipeline is indicated in Appendix 2.

 

It is estimated that the scheme will supply an average annual potable water substitution of 200 ML/yr, based on the anticipated harvestable volume and assuming that all of the recharge water is available for recovery. An existing annual average demand of approximately 150 ML/yr has been calculated however, the wetlands and harvestable volumes have been sized for a maximum predicted demand of 200 ML/yr.

 

Legislation and regulatory requirements

 

This will be the first scheme of its kind in NSW and as such there is no direct MAR policy or guidelines by which to implement the scheme. Despite this, at the National level the Australian Guidelines for water recycling: managing health and environmental risk phase 2 – managed aquifer recharge, 2009 provides a detailed framework by which to develop such a project. NSW legislation is sufficient to provide the regulatory framework within which to operate however, the project will be groundbreaking and will define the pathway for future projects of this type. Consultation has already begun with the appropriate State Agency stakeholders and there has been a willingness expressed in these consultations to progress the project. The consultation to date has included the Sydney Catchment Authority, The Office of the Hawkesbury Nepean, The Hawkesbury-Nepean Catchment Management Authority and the NSW Office of Water.

 

Strategic Alignment

 

In recognition of the need for sustainable water supply solutions, there are strong policy drivers for the implementation of a project of this type at all levels of government. Nationally, the National Water Initiative has a strong urban focus on improving ‘the reliability of water supply by using water from a range of supply options that are rainfall resistant and environmentally sustainable’. This is reflected in intergovernmental agreements and feeds into key State policy. Sitting below the State Plan, the Metro Water Plan aims to ensure a sustainable and secure water supply for greater Sydney. Within this plan targets are set for recycled water to provide 12% of Sydney’s water supply by 2015. Stormwater harvesting and MAR form an integral part of this target.

 

Council is also committed to the goals this type of project can deliver and this is reflected in our strategic planning and policy.

 

Business Case

 

Cost Estimate

 

An indicative capital cost estimate has been prepared, based on the preliminary design described above and SKM’s in-house estimating references. However, it has not been finalised and represents a maximum estimated cost which may be reduced. The costing needs to be taken in this context and is supplied to provide an indication of the scope of the scheme. The 10 February 2010 deadline for submissions to the Federal Government has dictated the timing of this report and a fully worked up cost of the scheme will be available shortly. Should the combined bid be successful in securing this funding opportunity, a further report will be brought back to Council providing details of the business case and reconfirming the project feasibility and the process for implementing the scheme.  After consideration of this report, Council will be in a position to decide to accept or not accept the grant for the MAR project.

 

According to the draft business case, the total cost of the Blacktown City Council and Penrith City Council Managed Aquifer Recharge Project is approximately $8.25M. Of this, the total cost for the Penrith component of the project (excluding GST) is estimated at $3,886,557 and includes the following:

 

·    Well construction and aquifer testing

·    Detailed design documentation

·    Construction

·    Commissioning

·    Resourcing

·    Contingency

 

Funding Sources

The funding for the project is still to be finalised; however the overall costs to Penrith City Council may be quantified in the following way subject to availability of funds and other opportunities.

 

1.   50% of the project cost will be funded by the Federal Government equating to $1,943,278.

2.   Existing allocated in-kind works and project management will make up a further $916,078.

3.   Enhanced Environmental Program may provide a further $400,000 for the water quality improvements needed for the project as this will benefit the overall catchment.

4.   According to the current estimates a further $627,000 will need to be sourced to fund the project. There is opportunity to reduce this estimate through the Waste and Sustainability Improvement Fund with the following observations:

a.   The project meets with the criteria for funding from this source.

b.   Funding from this source would not be required until 2011-2012 which provides forward notice and opportunity to plan.

 

The balance of the costs would need to be funded through a loan including potentially the Sustainability Revolving Fund.

 

The project is required to be completed by June 2013 in order to meet the requirements of the Federal Government. This means that Council’s contribution will be spread over three years with the bulk of expenditure in the middle of the project.

 

Demand and potential End-users

 

The scheme is designed to accommodate 200 ML per year and current estimates for usage of the scheme are estimated at approximately 145 ML/yr. This leaves significant room for expansion as new customers come on board. The table below lists potential customers, average demand and the existing source that could be replaced by the MAR supply.

 

Table 1 Potential End-users of MAR scheme

Organisation

Intended Uses

Estimated Average Demand (megalitres per annum)

Existing Source

Penrith City Council

Leonay Oval Irrigation

13.680 ML/yr

Use of Sydney Catchment Authority bore – ongoing access not secure

Penrith City Council

Dukes Oval Irrigation

6.75 ML/yr

Potable water

Penrith City Council

Emu Park(grounds)

13.085 ML/yr

Unreliable Alluvial Aquifer

Leonay Golf Course

Irrigation

100 ML/yr

River water (100ML/yr under allocation) likely to go potable

ROCLA

Boilers, Concrete batching and amenities

15 ML/yr

Potable water

 

Business Opportunities

 

While water needs have been estimated at 145ML/yr estimations of expected revenue have been conservatively reduced by 25ML/yr. The assumption has been made that ROCLA and Leonay Golf course will use approx 100 ML/yr from the scheme. Based on Sydney Water recycled water rates of $1.49KL Council would generate $149,000 in revenue from these customers. An estimate of a further 20 megalitres for irrigation of Council sporting fields equates to a further $29,800.

 

Ongoing operational costs are estimated to be $98,000 and an estimate of the total revenue generated, after annual operating costs are removed, is $81,119 annually. After the initial payoff period, the scheme has potential to generate revenue that could be potentially used to expand the scheme and/or subsidise Council cost in the use for irrigation of sporting fields.

 

Financial Services Comment

 

Whilst supportive of the grant submission the short time frame and pending completion of the feasibility study and business case means that appropriate funding models have not been developed. The report highlights a number of potential funding options for the $1.9m required to match the Federal Government grant however an unfunded shortfall is envisaged. The exact shortfall would be dependant on the appropriateness of the funding options mentioned earlier in the report.

 

While the submission is being considered and following the completion of the feasibility study and business case by Sinclair Knight Merz a proposed funding model will be developed and reported back to Council prior to any acceptance of the grant if successful.

 

Identification of Further Opportunity

 

The State government is committed through the National Water Initiative to undertake accurate water accounting. This is being funded through the Office of the Hawkesbury-Nepean and will result in all licensed users who are operating bores or extracting from the river to meter their extraction. It is anticipated that when this is implemented, users who have been exceeding their licence limits will need to reduce their water extraction in line with their licence allocations. Some of these users are likely to seek alternative supply opportunities to meet their needs.

 

Council has been briefed by the Office of Water in consultation workshops of the draft “Water Sharing Plan.” The draft plan will have impact on all water users resulting in significantly reduced amounts of available water from traditional sources when certain conditions arise. Users who extract directly, or have bores along the Nepean River, will have ‘cease to pump’ restrictions imposed upon them at during drought or when there is low base flow in the river, a time when irrigation may be essential.

 

Current industrial development in the Emu plains area is situated on the alignment of the proposed pipeline and could also be included in the scheme.

 

There is also a reasonable likelihood that potable water pricing will increase in the medium term as the costs of the desalination plant flow through to Sydney Water’s pricing structure. This would increase the value of MAR derived water and would be reflected in the financial viability.

 

Other Benefits

 

Functional stormwater reuse schemes, such as the proposed MAR scheme, result in a range of social and environmental benefits in addition to being financially viable. While the scheme’s financial viability is important, the value of the scheme to Penrith City Council is significantly more than financial analysis. This can be demonstrated through consideration of the additional social and environmental benefits which include:

 

·    Potable Water Savings: Estimates show that the scheme has the potential to reduce potable water consumption in excess of 100 million litres per annum;

·    Improved River Health: The Nepean River will benefit from reduced stormwater impacts from Emu Plains and reduced extractions by local irrigators. This will reduce the contaminant load on the river and help facilitate any future strategy to amend the licensing system for river extractions;

·    Improve Public Facilities: The scheme will offer a secure supply of water for irrigating a number of public playing fields, allowing them to be maintained at a level that achieves maximum availability and improved safety for community users;

·    Provide water security: The scheme will secure supply for Leonay Golf Course who do not currently have enough water to maintain their course;

·    Reduced carbon footprint: A ‘fit-for-purpose’, decentralised water scheme has a greatly reduced carbon footprint in comparison to potable water;

·    Creation of habitat and improved biodiversity: The development of wetlands will improve habitat and biodiversity values;

·    Increased social capital: The use of MAR water in prominent facilities and high use public areas will provide a means to educate the community about water conservation and stormwater management, and demonstrate the commitment by Federal Government and Penrith City Council to reduce potable water consumption and improve environmental health;

·    Forge a pathway: As the first schemes in the greater Sydney Metropolitan area, the Penrith and Blacktown schemes will have significant implications for the future management of Sydney’s water resources;

·    The city leads: The scheme will demonstrate our role as a sustainability leader and our status as a regional city;

·    Support local clubs and businesses: We will provide a cost effective alternative which supports a local club and fosters growth in local business

·    Water Security: The Office of the Hawkesbury Nepean have recently indicated that all water extraction licenses will in the future be required to be metered and that the cost of water drawn from the River could rise. The MAR scheme will ensure that groups who are drawing water from the River will have a long-term sustainable water supply, particularly in periods of drought and low River flows where suppliers are likely to be more restricted.

 

While it is not possible to easily quantify the extent of the above benefits in monetary terms, they should not be excluded from consideration in an analysis of the overall scheme benefits and will serve to further increase the benefit-cost consideration.

 

Risk Assessment

 

A detailed project assessment will be required under Part 5 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act in the form of a Review of Environmental Factors (or possibly an Environmental Impact Statement). However, the following details have been provided as a preliminary assessment of the public health and environmental issues associated with the project.

 

A risk assessment was undertaken for the proposed wetland and managed aquifer recharge scheme. The purpose of this assessment, undertaken according to ANZEC guidelines, was to identify the risks (hazards) related to the proposed MAR project that may potentially impact on water quality within the Hawkesbury Nepean River Catchment, and therefore, ultimately on the success of the wetland and MAR scheme.

 

The primary risk to public health from the proposed scheme will relate to human contact with pathogenic organisms. This will be adequately addressed through appropriate design, potentially including a UV disinfection system and implementing scheme controls to prevent misuse of the water. The risk is likely to be lower than that associated with traditional stormwater harvesting schemes and will be manageable.

 

Industrial customers will be required to conduct formal risk assessments to determine the adequacy of the water for their intended uses. Controls required for risk mitigation and any changes to procedures or facilities necessary to enable the utilisation of water may need to be undertaken. This process would need to occur during the next phase of design, after funding has been approved.

 

There have been no significant environmental impacts identified for the construction or operation of the scheme. However the risk register does identify a range of risks that will need ongoing management to ensure there are no adverse impacts arising from the project. These risks can all be adequately managed by operating the project in accordance with the appropriate national guidelines mentioned above.

Next Steps

The deadline for submissions to the Federal Government is 10 February 2010 and the completion date for projects is June 2013.

 

The following are identified as the next key steps to advance the recycled scheme:

 

·    Submit funding application to the Federal Government

·    After full completion of the concept designs and business case it will be necessary to identify exactly how Council’s component of the project will be funded 

·    Secure the grant funding offer

·    Report to Council to provide final business case and acquire authorisation to proceed with grant

·    Finalisation of customer commitments to participate in the MAR scheme

·    Finalise documentation and call tenders

·    Assessment of tenders and award contracts

·    Construction phase

·    Commissioning.

 

The indicative timeframe for these steps would see the funding commitments finalised by August 2010. Tenders for the design and construction phases would then follow. The 2010-11 financial year would be dedicated to developing detailed design documentation and obtaining the relevant approvals. Construction would begin in 2012 with the project fully commissioned by June 2013.

 

It is relevant to note that whilst the SKM investigations have indicated project feasibility sufficient to formalise a submission to the Federal Government to secure grant funding, there remains a number of key steps, as outlined above, which continue to build the project plan. Through this process there are a number of important review points where we will ensure that the project feasibility remains on track, before accepting federal funding should the grant be offered.

 

Blacktown City Council has received endorsement to proceed with lodgement of the application for the project.  It is important to note that whilst the project is aimed as a joint initiative between Penrith City Council and Blacktown City Council, the guidelines for the grant funding enable Blacktown City Council to proceed without Penrith as a partner.

Conclusion

Council has exercised significant leadership in previously resolving to join the ICLEI Water Campaign and endorsing the Water Conservation and Water Quality Action Plan 2005. This plan clearly identifies Council’s role in investigating stormwater harvesting and new technologies in order to reduce potable water demand in the city. There is also a clear policy direction to implement water sensitive urban design. This has fed into Council’s Strategic and Operational plans where water efficiency and the health of the Nepean River System feature strongly.

 

The proposed MAR scheme is a significant sustainability initiative and holds substantial benefits in relation to a more efficient use of water resources which will over time be subject to increasing demands and potentially more restrictive access. The scheme will also bring environmental benefits to local waterways through reduced pollution and other stormwater impacts. Council therefore has the opportunity to take a leading role in advancing the expansion of MAR into NSW. In doing so, Council will further demonstrate its commitment to sustainable long-term water resource management.

 

The implementation of MAR will help reduce potable water use and provide alternatives to the drawing of irrigation water from the Nepean River, which over time will be the subject of closer agency monitoring and expected increases in supply costs. Reducing reliance on extracting water from the Nepean River also has substantial environmental benefits for the River system, particularly in ensuring adequate environmental flows during dry periods.

 

The proposed Emu Plains MAR scheme therefore offers an exciting opportunity for cost effective stormwater harvesting and managed aquifer recharge in a local context. For a capital investment in the order of $3,800,000 (including in-kind offsets and federal contributions) the scheme can yield up to 200 million litres per annum of harvested stormwater through Managed Aquifer Recharge and recovery. This will ultimately result in the equivalent reductions in potable water use and extractions from the Nepean River.

 

For these reasons, it is recommended that Council support the submission of the Penrith and Blacktown Managed Aquifer Recharge Project proposal to the Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts to secure the opportunity for 50% grant funding of a combined total project up to the value of $8.25M.

 

Should the combined bid be successful in securing this funding opportunity, a further report will be brought back to Council following the completion of the business case and prior to accepting grant funding to advise on the final project feasibility and the process for implementing the scheme.


 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report Partnership Application between Blacktown City Council and Penrith City Council for Managed Aquifer Recharge Project Funding be received.

2.     Council endorse the submission of the Manager Aquifer Recharge Feasibility funding to the National Water Commission (NWC) for $60,000 under the MAR in Urban Cities and Towns of Australia program, Stage 2.

3.     Council support the submission of the Blacktown City Council and Penrith City Council Managed Aquifer Recharge Project proposal to the Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts to secure the opportunity for 50% of the $3.8M Penrith component and a combined total project of $8.25M.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1. View

Managed Aquifer Recharge Scheme Option 1

1 Page

Appendix

2. View

Managed Aquifer Recharge Scheme Option 2

1 Page

Appendix

  


Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

Appendix 1 - Managed Aquifer Recharge Scheme Option 1

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

Appendix 2 - Managed Aquifer Recharge Scheme Option 2

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

A Green City

 

 

 

19

Memorandum of Understanding between the Collaborative Research Centre for Irrigations Futures and Penrith City Council   

 

Compiled by:                Sam Innes, Senior Waterways Officer

Authorised by:             Graham Liehr, Environmental Health Manager   

Strategic Objective: Our natural habitats are healthy

Strategic Direction: The City’s catchments are healthy

       

 

Executive Summary

Over the past two and a half years Council has been a key stakeholder of the Water and Irrigation Strategy Enhancement through Regional Partnership (WISER).  The WISER project, run by the Cooperative Research Centre for Irrigation Futures (CRC IF), has a research focus on the total water cycle of the South Creek Catchment. Penrith Council has been actively involved as a member of the Project Steering Group and the Technical Advisory Group on the WISER project.

 

As a key stakeholder within the South Creek Catchment, Penrith City is in a strong position to derive positive outcomes from the WISER project. Council’s ability to derive these outcomes is enhanced by our close relationship with the WISER group and the role we have in guiding the direction of research to address our needs. In order to strengthen this relationship an individual Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) has been negotiated between each Council in the South Creek catchment and the CRC IF.

 

The purpose of the MOU is to facilitate research collaboration between the parties into planning, management and delivery of water for agriculture, commercial, environmental and domestic uses as well as other bulk water demand specifically within the South Creek catchment.

 

This report recommends that Council endorse the Memorandum of Understanding between the Cooperative Research Centre for Irrigation Futures and Penrith City Council.

Background

Future water supplies and the health of our catchments have long been a concern for the City of Penrith. Council has acted at many levels in order to protect and manage this vital resource. One such example has been our ongoing involvement with the CRC IF and the WISER Project.

 

Over the past two and a half years Council has been actively involved as a member of the Project Steering Group and the Technical Advisory Group on the WISER project. Through the WISER project the CRC IF are developing tools, based on sound science and research, to improve the management of water resources in the sub-catchment. The project has a social, environmental and economic focus and goes beyond irrigation research to include water cycle components such as potable water supplies, irrigation for agriculture and public open space, stormwater and water for environmental needs.

 

WISER was established to help stakeholders and agencies work from a common platform with a shared water vision. This is a vision which is matched to regional sustainability, jobs and prosperity and aims to help develop long-term solutions and strategies for total water cycle management with community engagement at all levels of the water cycle.

 

The project focuses on working with local government, state agencies, water cycle managers and community and business users. It aims to help them collectively optimise water management, investment decisions and risks within a triple-bottom-line framework. Ultimately the project looks forward to developing a generic model, processes and tools for integrated water resources planning and strategy development in a complex urban landscape. It is intended that the South Creek experience will be adaptable across urban Australia and beyond.

 

Recent outcomes as a result of our relationship with the WISER group include;

 

1)   In partnership with Penrith City Council the 2009 WISER Community Forum “Water in Western Sydney: A Vital Link for Health people and Healthy Places” was held in the Nepean Room at Penrith City Council on Saturday 7th November 2009

 

2)   The development of the Peri-Urban SIMple HYDrology Model. The Peri-Urban SIMHYD Model combines the modelling of daily rainfall-runoff with monthly potable water supply, waste water flows, and surface and ground water extractions to simulate the complete surface water cycle of a peri urban catchment.  The Peri-Urban SIMHYD Model has been calibrated to the South Street Catchment

 

3)   Contribution as part of a working group with Blacktown City Council and Penrith City Council exploring opportunity for Federal Government project funding available for Harvest and Reuse of Stormwater (Managed Aquifer Recharge (MAR) project).

 

Current Status

 

In order to strengthen our relationship with the CRC IF we have negotiated a Memorandum of Understanding. Liverpool, Blacktown and Hawkesbury City Councils are also partners to the WISER Project, each of the respective councils will commit to the project through individual MOU’s with the CRC IF.

 

The purpose of this MOU is to facilitate research collaboration between the parties into planning, management and delivery of water for agricultural, commercial, environmental and domestic uses as well as for other bulk water demands specifically within the South Creek Catchment.

 

The primary goal of the MOU is to formally establish this collaboration generally through the activities listed below and, where appropriate, jointly seek funding support for a series of discrete related research programs or projects from a range of organisations including, but not limited to, the Australian Research Council, state and federal agencies and the private sector.

 

The following is the summary of how the research outcomes of WISER will benefit Council:

 

1.   Assessment of medium to long-term future water security in the context of current and future developments / on-ground works in the South Creek Catchment

 

2.   Long-term impacts of employment lands on water quantity and quality in the part of the South Creek Catchment managed by Penrith City Council

 

3.   Quantify the effects of diverting St. Mary’s STP flows, into the Nepean (Sydney Water - Replacement Flows Project), on flows in the South Creek

 

4.   Examine the options for Penrith City Council’s key investments in water infrastructures and other on-ground works and identify the one(s) that will give the best value for the financial investment

 

5.   Understanding of broader regional impacts of local water management solution (e.g., BASIX, stormwater treatment, and effluent reuse)

 

6.   Access to the WISER databases (soil, vegetation, stream flow, potable water, ground water etc) and models by Council staff for their use in water cycle management

 

7.   Improved capacity Council staff to understand water issues now and into the future

 

8.   Development of a total water balance picture specific to the Penrith City Council.

 

Commitment

 

Each party to the MOU will be responsible for its own costs connected to participation in the research collaboration.  The costs associated with running the Project Steering Group, the newsletter and other administrative tasks for this current financial year will be shared equally by the members of the PSG.  Based on the current membership of the PSG, each member of the PSG will contribute $6,000 for this current financial year. Council may also assist with relevant projects from time to time (such as the hosting of the 2009 Community Forum). Funding for contribution to the MOU will be paid by the Environmental Health Department and has been included in this year’s budget.

 

Council’s Environmental Health Manager presently sits on both the Project Steering Group and the Technical advisory Group of WISER this commitment will continue under the MOU.

 

Signatories to the Agreement.

 

It is proposed that Mayor sign the agreement on behalf of Penrith City Council.

 

The CRC IF has planned a signing day for the 5th March 2010, proposing that the Mayors from all Council’s participating in the MOU attend with Minister Phillip Costa attending on the day.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1)   The information contained in the report on Memorandum of Understanding between the Collaborative Research Centre for Irrigations Futures and Penrith City Council be received.

2)   Council endorse the Memorandum of Understanding between Cooperative Research Centre for Irrigation Futures (CRC IF) and Penrith City Council.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1. View

WISER Memorandum of Understanding

11 Pages

Appendix

  


Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

Appendix 1 - WISER Memorandum of Understanding

 

 

 











 


 

 

A Liveable City

 

 

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


 

 

 

 

THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT BLANK  INTENTIONALLY


 

 

A Vibrant City

 

 

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



Committee of the Whole

 

DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS

 

CONTENTS

 

Pecuniary Interests

 

Other Interests

 

Monday February 1 2010

 

Item                                                                                                                                       Page

 

1        Presence of the Public                                                                                                          1

 

2        Commercial Matter - Leasing of Parts of "Community" Land under Council's Plan of Management

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

1 February 2010

A Leading City

 

 

 

 

1        Presence of the Public

 

Everyone is entitled to attend a meeting of the Council and those of its Committees of which all members are Councillors, except as provided by Section 10 of the Local Government Act, 1993.

A Council, or a Committee of the Council of which all the members are Councillors, may close to the public so much of its meeting as comprises:

 

(a)                the discussion of any of the matters listed below; or

(b)               the receipt or discussion of any of the information so listed.

The matters and information are the following:

 

(a)                personnel matters concerning particular individuals;

(b)               the personal hardship of any resident or ratepayers;

(c)                information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business;

(d)               commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed:

·                         prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it; or

 

·                         confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council; or

 

·                         reveal a trade secret.

 

(e)                information that would, if disclosed, prejudice the maintenance of the law;

(f)                 matters affecting the security of the Council, Councillors, Council staff or Council property;

(g)        advice concerning litigation, or advice that would otherwise be privileged from production in legal proceedings on the ground of legal professional privilege.

The grounds on which part of a meeting is closed must be stated in the decision to close that part of the meeting and must be recorded in the minutes of the meeting.

The grounds must specify the following:

(a)                the relevant provision of section 10A(2);

(b)               the matter that is to be discussed during the closed part of the meeting;

(c)                the reasons why the part of the meeting is being closed, including (if the matter concerned is a matter other than a personnel matter concerning particular individuals, the personal hardship of a resident or ratepayer or a trade secret) an explanation of the way in which discussion of the matter in open meeting would be, on balance, contrary to the public interest.

Members of the public may make representations at a Council or Committee Meeting as to whether a part of a meeting should be closed to the public

The process which should be followed is:

 

·        a motion, based on the recommendation below, is moved and seconded

·        the Chairperson then asks if any member/s of the public would like to make representations as to whether a part of the meeting is closed to the public

·        if a member/s of the public wish to make representations, the Chairperson invites them to speak before the Committee makes its decision on whether to close the part of the meeting or not to the public.

·        if no member/s of the public wish to make representations the Chairperson can then put the motion to close the meeting to the public.

The first action is for a motion to be moved and seconded based on the recommendation below.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That:

 

A Leading City

 

2        Commercial Matter - Leasing of Parts of "Community" Land under Council's Plan of Management

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.

 

 

 


 

 

 

 

THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT BLANK  INTENTIONALLY


 

ATTACHMENT       

 

 

 


Date of Meeting:  4th February 2008

 

Delivery Program:              

 

Program:                      Providing Capacity

 

Report Title:                 2007-2008 Voted Works