28 January 2011

 

Dear Councillor,

In pursuance of the provisions of the Local Government Act, 1993 and the Regulations thereunder, notice is hereby given that a POLICY REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING of Penrith City Council is to be held in the Passadena Room, Civic Centre, 601 High Street, Penrith on Monday 31 January 2011 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

Leave of absence has been granted to:

Councillor Ross Fowler OAM - 31 January 2011.

 

2.           APOLOGIES

 

3.           CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

Policy Review Committee Meeting - 22 November 2010.

 

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 TO RESCIND A RESOLUTION

 

8.           NOTICES OF MOTION

 

9.           DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS

 

10.         REQUESTS FOR REPORTS AND MEMORANDUMS

 

11.         URGENT BUSINESS

 

12.         CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS


POLICY REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING

 

Monday 31 January 2011

 

table of contents

 

 

 

 

 

 

meeting calendar

 

 

confirmation of minutes

 

 

DELIVERY program reports

 


2011 MEETING CALENDAR

January 2011 - December 2011

(Adopted by Council 29/11/10)

 

 

 

TIME

JAN

FEB

MAR

APRIL

MAY

JUNE

JULY

AUG

SEPT

OCT

NOV

DEC

Mon

Mon

Mon

Mon

Mon

Mon

Mon

Mon

Mon

Mon

Mon

Mon

 

Ordinary Council Meeting

7.30pm

 

7

 

 

2v

 

 

15#

5ü

10¨

7

12

(7.00pm)

 

28#

21

18

23#

27*

18

 

19^

(7.00pm)

 

21#

 

Policy Review Committee

7.30pm

 

 

14@

4

9

6

4

1

 

 

14

5

31

21

 

 

 

 

 

22

26@

31

 

 

Operational Plan Public Forum

 

6.00pm

 

 

 

 

30

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

v

Meeting at which the Draft Operational Plan for 2011/2012 is adopted for exhibition

*

Meeting at which the Operational Plan for 2011/2012 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 2010/2011 Annual Statements are presented

¨

Meeting at which any comments on the 2010/2011 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.

 



UNCONFIRMED MINUTES

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

ON MONDAY 22 NOVEMBER 2010 AT 7:31PM

PRESENT

His Worship the Mayor Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM, Councillors Jim Aitken OAM, Robert Ardill, Greg Davies, Mark Davies, Tanya Davies, Ross Fowler OAM, Ben Goldfinch, Jackie Greenow, Prue Guillaume, Marko Malkoc, Karen McKeown, Kath Presdee and John Thain.

 

LEAVE OF ABSENCE

Leave of Absence was previously requested by Councillor Kaylene Allison for the period 22 November 2010 to 27 November 2010 inclusive.

PRC 74  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Marko Malkoc seconded Councillor Robert Ardill that Leave of Absence be granted to Councillor Kaylene Allison for the period 22 November 2010 to 27 November 2010 inclusive.

 

 

APOLOGIES

There were no apologies.

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES - Policy Review Committee Meeting - 18 October 2010

PRC 75  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Robert Ardill seconded Councillor Marko Malkoc that the minutes of the Policy Review Committee Meeting of 18 October 2010 be confirmed.

 

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

 

Councillor Tanya Davies declared a Pecuniary Interest in Items 1-7 as she has interests in property located in some of the areas covered by the reports and her husband holds a Real Estate licence and works in the Real Estate industry in areas covered by the report. Councillor Tanya Davies stated her intention to leave the room for consideration of these items.

 

Councillor Jackie Greenow declared a Pecuniary Interest in Item 4 - Draft Planning Proposal for Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2012 (Stage 2) - St Marys as she has interests in properties located in St Marys which will be affected by the proposed zoning. Councillor Jackie Greenow indicated she would leave the room for consideration of this item.

 

Councillor Marko Malkoc declared a Pecuniary interest in Item 4 - Draft Planning Proposal for Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2012 (Stage 2) - St Marys as he has an interest in a property located in St Marys which will be affected by the proposed zoning. Councillor Marko Malkoc indicated he would leave the room for discussion of this item.

 

Councillor Kath Presdee declared a Non-Pecuniary Conflict of Interest – Less than Significant in Item 7 - Draft Planning Proposal for Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2012 (Stage 2) - Urban Areas except for the suburbs of St Marys, Leonay, Glenmore Park and Kingswood as she has an interest in properties located in Werrington Downs and Penrith, however the zonings proposed are similar to the current zonings. Councillor Kath Presdee indicated her intention to remain in the room for consideration of the item.

 

Councillor John Thain declared a Non-Pecuniary Conflict of Interest – Less than Significant in Item 7 - Draft Planning Proposal for Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2012 (Stage 2) - Urban Areas except for the suburbs of St Marys, Leonay, Glenmore Park and Kingswood as he has interest in properties located in North St Marys and Colyton, however the zonings proposed are similar to the current zonings. Councillor John Thain indicated his intention to remain in the room for consideration of the item.

 

Councillor Prue Guillaume declared a Non-Pecuniary Conflict of Interest – Less than Significant in Items 4,6 &7 as she has interests in properties located in St Marys, Glenmore Park and Emu Plains, however the zonings proposed are similar to the current zonings. Councillor Prue Guillaume indicated her intention to remain in the room for consideration of the items.

 

Councillor Greg Davies declared a Non-Pecuniary Conflict of Interest – Less than Significant in Item 7 - Draft Planning Proposal for Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2012 (Stage 2) - Urban Areas except for the suburbs of St Marys, Leonay, Glenmore Park and Kingswood as he has an interest in a property at St Clair, however the zoning proposed is similar to the current zoning. Councillor Greg Davies indicated his intention to remain in the room for consideration of the item.

 

Councillor Karen McKeown declared a Pecuniary Interest in Item 6 - Draft Planning Proposal for Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2012 (Stage 2) - Leonay and Glenmore Park as she has an interest in properties in Leonay. Councillor Karen McKeown indicated her intention to leave the room for consideration of the item. Councillor Karen McKeown also declared a Non-Pecuniary Conflict of Interest – Less then Significant in Item 7 - Draft Planning Proposal for Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2012 (Stage 2) - Urban Areas except for the suburbs of St Marys, Leonay, Glenmore Park and as she has interests in properties located in Emu Plains and South Penrith, however the zonings proposed are similar to the current zonings. Councillor Karen McKeown indicated her intention to remain in the room for consideration of the item.

 

Councillor Mark Davies declared a Pecuniary Interest in Items 1-7 as he has interests in property located in the areas covered by the reports and holds a Real Estate licence and works in the Real Estate industry in areas covered by the reports. Councillor Mark Davies stated his intention to leave the room for consideration of these items.

 

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM declared a Non-Pecuniary Conflict of Interest – Less than Significant in Item 7 - Draft Planning Proposal for Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2012 (Stage 2) - Urban Areas except for the suburbs of St Marys, Leonay, Glenmore Park and Kingswood as he has an interest in a property located in Cranebrook, however the zoning proposed is similar to the current zoning. Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM indicated he would remain in the room for consideration of this item.

 

Councillor Ross Fowler OAM declared a Pecuniary Interest in Items 4,5,6 & 7 as he is a Director of, Accountant for, Auditor for or owns a property in the areas that are the subject of the reports. Councillor Ross Fowler OAM indicated he would leave the room for consideration of the items.

 

Councillor Jim Aitken OAM declared a Pecuniary Interest in Items 1-7 as he has an interest in  properties located in areas that are the subject of the reports. Councillor Jim Aitken OAM indicated his intention to leave the room for consideration of these items, and requested to be excused by his Worship the Mayor, for the remainder of the meeting.

 

Councillor Jim Aitken OAM left the meeting, the time being 7:39 and did not return.

 

DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS

 

A Green City

 

9        Blacktown and Penrith Stormwater Harvesting and Managed Aquifer Recharge Scheme

Environmental Health Manager, Graham Liehr introduced the report and Colin Pitman Director City Projects, Salisbury Council, South Australia who gave a presentation on Managed Aquifer Recharge Scheme.

Councillor Kath Presdee left the meeting the time being 8:03pm.

Councillor Kath Presdee returned to the meeting the time being 8:06pm.

Councillor Karen McKeown left the meeting the time being 8:11pm.

Councillor Karen McKeown returned to the meeting the time being 8:13pm.

PRC 76  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Tanya Davies seconded Councillor Karen McKeown

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Blacktown and Penrith Stormwater Harvesting and Managed Aquifer Recharge Scheme be received

2.     Council support the submission for funding of up to $1,200,000 to the NSW Office of Water for Penrith Stormwater Harvesting and Managed Aquifer Recharge Scheme

3.     Council support the submission for funding of up to $1,000,000 to the NSW Office of Water for the extension of the Penrith Stormwater Harvesting and Managed Aquifer Recharge Scheme to link to the Penrith Recycled Water Scheme Stage 2

4.     Council staff develop the Funding Deed with the Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities on the basis of a grant and funding agreement incorporating:

a.   A first Stage allocation sufficient for Council to undertake the required detailed design, costing and risk assessment and

b.   A provision that the progression of a project to construction is subject to a favourable confirmation of costs and a satisfactory risk assessment being confirmed by Council.

5.     A report be brought back to Council on the results of the funding application to the NSW Office of Water and funding model for the project, prior to signing the funding agreement with the Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities.

 

 

A City of Opportunities

 

8        Penrith City Children's Services Cooperative Ltd

Children’s Services Manager, Janet Keegan introduced the report and Chairman Children’s Services Cooperative, Max Friend who gave a presentation on the Annual Report.                                  

PRC 77  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Kath Presdee seconded Councillor Tanya Davies

That:

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

2.     Council agree to underwrite the operation of Penrith City Children’s Services Cooperative Ltd until the presentation to Council of the Penrith City Children’s Services Cooperative Ltd Annual Report for 2010/2011.

3.     Council write to the Chairperson, congratulating the Board and all staff for another successful year, including managing internal issues and the views of the community.

 

A Liveable City

 

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

Councillor Greg Davies introduced the report and Erik Henricksen, General Manager of Ripples who gave a presentation on the Annual Report and Board of Directors.

Councillor Tanya Davies left the meeting, the time being 8:34pm.

Councillor Tanya Davies returned to the meeting, the time being 8:35pm.

Councillor Mark Davies left the meeting, the time being 8:45pm.

Councillor Mark Davies returned to the meeting, the time being 8:47pm.

Councillor Robert Ardill left the meeting, the time being, 9:08pm.

Councillor Robert Ardill returned to the meeting, the time being 9:10pm.                                  

PRC 78  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Karen McKeown seconded Councillor Marko Malkoc

That:

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

2.     Council agree to underwrite the operations of the City of Penrith Regional Indoor Aquatic and Recreation Centre Ltd until the presentation to the Council of the City of Penrith Regional Indoor Aquatic and Recreation Centre Ltd Annual Report for 2010/2011.

3.     Council congratulate, thank and write to the Board, General Manager and staff for another successful year.

4.     Council write to Mr Rodney Watson, thanking him for his contribution and hard work over many years on the Board of Ripples.

 

 

A Vibrant City

 

12      Penrith Performing and Visual Arts Ltd - Annual Report

His Worship the Mayor, Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM introduced and invited  the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of the Penrith Performing and Visual Arts Ltd, John Kirkman and John Reed who gave a presentation on the Annual Report and Board of Directors.

Councillor Greg Davies left the meeting, the time being 9:14pm.

Councillor Greg Davies returned to the meeting, the time being 9:14pm.                                   

PRC 79  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Ben Goldfinch

That:

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

2.     Council agree to underwrite the operation of the Penrith Performing and Visual Arts Ltd until the presentation to Council of the Penrith Performing and Visual Arts Ltd Annual Report for 2010/2011.

3.     Council write to the Board congratulating them, the management and staff on the continued success throughout the previous year.

 

A Leading City

 

1        Adoption of Amendment 5 and 6 to Penrith Development Control Plan 2006            

Having previously declared a Pecuniary Interest Councillors Mark & Tanya Davies left the meeting, the time being 9:51pm and did not return.

PRC 80  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Marko Malkoc seconded Councillor Ben Goldfinch

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Adoption of Amendment 5 and 6 to Penrith Development Control Plan 2006 be received.

2.     In accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and Regulations 2000, Council adopt Penrith Development Control Plan 2010, as tabled at Council’s Policy Review Committee Meeting of 22 November 2010.

3.     In accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulations 2000, Council give public notice of its decision in a local newspaper within 28 days, with the DCP amendments coming into effect immediately upon notification in the newspaper. 

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

For

Against

 

Councillor Jackie Greenow

 

Councillor Ben Goldfinch

 

Councillor Marko Malkoc

 

Councillor Robert Ardill

 

Councillor Kath Presdee

 

Councillor John Thain

 

Councillor Prue Guillaume

 

Councillor Greg Davies

 

Councillor Karen McKeown

 

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM

 

Councillor Ross Fowler OAM

 

 

 

 

2        Adoption of Penrith Development Control Plan 2010                                                   

 

PRC 81  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Robert Ardill seconded Councillor Kath Presdee

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Adoption of Penrith Development Control Plan 2010 be received.

2.     Council adopt the recommendations contained in Attachment 2: Outstanding Submissions relating to Draft Penrith DCP 2010.

3.     In accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and Regulations 2000, Council adopt Penrith Development Control Plan 2010, as tabled at Council’s Policy Review Committee Meeting of 22 November 2010 subject to the inclusion of objectives and controls in Chapter C7 ‘Culture and Heritage’, as contained in Attachment 2, for new development adjacent to the heritage listed Torin Building.

4.     In accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulations 2000, Council give public notice of its decision in a local newspaper within 28 days, with the DCP coming into effect immediately upon notification in the newspaper.

 

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

For

Against

 

Councillor Jackie Greenow

 

Councillor Ben Goldfinch

 

Councillor Marko Malkoc

 

Councillor Robert Ardill

 

Councillor Kath Presdee

 

Councillor John Thain

 

Councillor Prue Guillaume

 

Councillor Greg Davies

 

Councillor Karen McKeown

 

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM

 

Councillor Ross Fowler OAM

 

 

3        Penrith Urban Study and draft Penrith Urban Strategy                                              

 

PRC 82  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Prue Guillaume seconded Councillor Marko Malkoc

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Penrith Urban Study and draft Penrith Urban Strategy be received.

2.     Council endorse the public exhibition of Penrith Urban Study and draft Penrith Urban Strategy in a form consistent with any revisions of the document as tabled tonight.

3.     The matter be reported back to Council after consideration of submissions received as a result of community consultation.

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

For

Against

 

Councillor Jackie Greenow

 

Councillor Ben Goldfinch

 

Councillor Marko Malkoc

 

Councillor Robert Ardill

 

Councillor Kath Presdee

 

Councillor John Thain

 

Councillor Prue Guillaume

 

Councillor Greg Davies

 

Councillor Karen McKeown

 

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM

 

Councillor Ross Fowler OAM

 

 

 

 

 

 

4        Draft Planning Proposal for Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2012 (Stage 2) - St Marys                                                                                                                                                 

Having previously declared Pecuniary Interests, Councillors Ross Fowler OAM, Jackie Greenow and Marko Malkoc left the meeting, the time being 9.56pm.

PRC 83  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Karen McKeown seconded Councillor John Thain

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Draft Planning Proposal for Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2012 (Stage 2) - St Marys    be received

2.     Council endorse the Planning Proposal – draft Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2012 (Stage 2) to be forwarded to the Department of Planning to commence the LEP plan making process under s56 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act).

3.     Council undertake the required consultation with the Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water regarding critical habitat or threatened species, populations or ecological communities, or their habitats, and that the Planning Proposal be amended to reflect any comments received from DECCW prior to it being forwarded to the Department of Planning.

4.     Council seek approval from the Director-General of the Department of Planning for the Planning Proposal – Penrith LEP 2012 (Stage 2) to be publicly exhibited in accordance with the community consultation requirements under s57 of the EP&A Act, and in a form consistent with any revisions of the Planning Proposal directed by Council and the Minister as part of the s56 Gateway Determination.

5.     A public hearing in accordance with s29 of the Local Government Act and 57(6) EP&A Act be held in relation to the proposed reclassifications from ‘community land’ to ‘operational land’.

6.     The terms of the final Gateway Determination be reported 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 Ben Goldfinch

 

Councillor Robert Ardill

 

Councillor Kath Presdee

 

Councillor John Thain

 

Councillor Prue Guillaume

 

Councillor Greg Davies

 

Councillor Karen McKeown

 

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM

 

 

 

 

 

 

5        Draft Planning Proposal for Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2012 (Stage 2) - Kingswood   

Councillors Jackie Greenow and Marko Malkoc returned to the meeting, the time being 9:57pm.       

PRC 84  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ben Goldfinch seconded Councillor Marko Malkoc

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Draft Planning Proposal for Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2012 (Stage 2) - Kingswood    be received

2.     Council endorse the Planning Proposal – draft Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2012 (Stage 2) to be forwarded to the Department of Planning to commence the LEP plan making process under s56 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act).

3.     Council undertake the required consultation with the Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water regarding critical habitat or threatened species, populations or ecological communities, or their habitats, and that the Planning Proposal be amended to reflect any comments received from DECCW prior to it being forwarded to the Department of Planning.

4.     Council seek approval from the Director-General of the Department of Planning for the Planning Proposal – Penrith LEP 2012 (Stage 2) to be publicly exhibited in accordance with the community consultation requirements under s57 of the EP&A Act, and in a form consistent with any revisions of the Planning Proposal directed by Council and the Minister as part of the s56 Gateway Determination.

5.     A public hearing in accordance with s29 of the Local Government Act and 57(6) EP&A Act be held in relation to the proposed reclassifications from ‘community land’ to ‘operational land’.

6.     The terms of the final Gateway Determination be reported 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 Jackie Greenow

 

Councillor Ben Goldfinch

 

Councillor Marko Malkoc

 

Councillor Robert Ardill

 

Councillor Kath Presdee

 

Councillor John Thain

 

Councillor Prue Guillaume

 

Councillor Greg Davies

 

Councillor Karen McKeown

 

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM

 

 

 

 

6        Draft Planning Proposal for Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2012 (Stage 2) - Leonay and Glenmore Park                                                                                                           

Having previously declared a Pecuniary Interest, Councillor Karen McKeown left the meeting, the time being 10:00pm.

PRC 85  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Robert Ardill seconded Councillor Kath Presdee

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Draft Planning Proposal for Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2012 (Stage 2) - Leonay and Glenmore Park    be received

2.     Council endorse the Planning Proposal – draft Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2012 (Stage 2) to be forwarded to the Department of Planning to commence the LEP plan making process under s56 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act).

3.     Council undertake the required consultation with the Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water regarding critical habitat or threatened species, populations or ecological communities, or their habitats, and that the Planning Proposal be amended to reflect any comments received from DECCW prior to it being forwarded to the Department of Planning.

4.     Council seek approval from the Director-General of the Department of Planning for the Planning Proposal – Penrith LEP 2012 (Stage 2) to be publicly exhibited in accordance with the community consultation requirements under s57 of the EP&A Act, and in a form consistent with any revisions of the Planning Proposal directed by Council and the Minister as part of the s56 Gateway Determination.

5.     A public hearing in accordance with s29 of the Local Government Act and 57(6) EP&A Act be held in relation to the proposed reclassifications from ‘community land’ to ‘operational land’.

6.     The terms of the final Gateway Determination be reported 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 Jackie Greenow

 

Councillor Ben Goldfinch

 

Councillor Marko Malkoc

 

Councillor Robert Ardill

 

Councillor Kath Presdee

 

Councillor John Thain

 

Councillor Prue Guillaume

 

Councillor Greg Davies

 

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM

 

 

 

 

7        Draft Planning Proposal for Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2012 (Stage 2) - Urban Areas except for the suburbs of St Marys, Leonay, Glenmore Park and Kingswood

Councillor Karen McKeown returned to the meeting, the time being 10:01pm.

PRC 86  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Robert Ardill seconded Councillor Marko Malkoc

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Draft Planning Proposal for Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2012 (Stage 2) - Urban Areas except for the suburbs of St Marys, Leonay, Glenmore Park and Kingswood be received.

2.     Council endorse the Planning Proposal – draft Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2012 (Stage 2) to be forwarded to the Department of Planning to commence the LEP plan making process under s56 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act).

3.     Council undertake the required consultation with the Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water regarding critical habitat or threatened species, populations or ecological communities, or their habitats, and that the Planning Proposal be amended to reflect any comments received from DECCW prior to it being forwarded to the Department of Planning.

4.     Council seek approval from the Director-General of the Department of Planning for the Planning Proposal – Penrith LEP 2012 (Stage 2) to be publicly exhibited in accordance with the community consultation requirements under s57 of the EP&A Act, and in a form consistent with any revisions of the Planning Proposal directed by Council and the Minister as part of the s56 Gateway Determination.

5.     A public hearing in accordance with s29 of the Local Government Act and 57(6) EP&A Act be held in relation to the proposed reclassifications from ‘community land’ to ‘operational land’.

6.     The terms of the final Gateway Determination be reported 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 Jackie Greenow

 

Councillor Ben Goldfinch

 

Councillor Marko Malkoc

 

Councillor Robert Ardill

 

Councillor Kath Presdee

 

Councillor John Thain

 

Councillor Prue Guillaume

 

Councillor Greg Davies

 

Councillor Karen McKeown

 

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM

 

 

Councillor Ross Fowler OAM returned to the meeting, the time being 10:02pm.

 

A Vibrant City

 

11      Penrith Valley Cemeteries                                                                                                 

PRC 87  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Marko Malkoc seconded Councillor Ben Goldfinch

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Penrith Valley Cemeteries be received.

2.     The Penrith Valley Cemeteries Action Plan detailed in this report be adopted for implementation.

3.     The draft Penrith Valley Cemeteries management Policy be presented to Council at a future Policy Review meeting.

4.     An urgent report be brought back to the next Council meeting detailing the fencing and security issues at Castlereagh and John Jamison cemeteries.

 

CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS

 

The meeting closed to consider confidential business 10:08pm.

 

1        Presence of the Public

 

PRC 88 RESOLVED on the motion of Councillor Ross Fowler OAM seconded Councillor Marko Malkoc that the press and public be excluded from the meeting to deal with the following matter:

 

 

A Leading City

 

2        Penrith Football Stadium - Naming Rights Sponsor                                                      

 

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 moved out of confidential session at 11:06 pm and the General Manager reported that after excluding the press and public from the meeting, the Policy Review Committee met in confidential session from 10:08 pm to 11:06pm to consider a commercial matter.

 

The General Manager reported that while in confidential session, the Committee resolved the confidential business as follows:

 

 

CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS

 

2        Penrith Football Stadium - Naming Rights Sponsor

Recreation Manager, Andrew Robinson introduced the report and Ric Simpson, CEO of Penrith Panthers and Shannon Donato, Marketing Manager who gave a presentation.                           

 

PRC 89  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ross Fowler OAM seconded Councillor Marko Malkoc that the information contained in this report on Penrith Football Stadium - Naming Rights Sponsor be received.

 

There being no further business the Chairperson declared the meeting closed the time being 11:06pm.

 

 

    



DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS

 

Item                                                                                                                                       Page

 

 

A Leading City

 

1        North Penrith Urban Area

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

 

2        Proposed changes to State Environmental Planning Policy (Exempt and Complying Development) 2008 

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

  

A Green City

 

URGENT

 

3        NSW Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Strategy

   

 


 

 

 

 

THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT BLANK  INTENTIONALLY


A Leading City

 

Item                                                                                                                                       Page

 

1        North Penrith Urban Area

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

 

2        Proposed changes to State Environmental Planning Policy (Exempt and Complying Development) 2008 

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

 

 



Policy Review Committee Meeting

31 January 2011

A Leading City

 

 

 

1

North Penrith Urban Area    

 

Compiled by:               Paul Battersby, Senior Environmental Planner

Authorised by:            Paul Grimson, Sustainability & Planning Manager   

 

Objective

We plan responsibly for now and the future

Community Outcome

A Council that plans responsibly for a sustainable future (3)

Strategic Response

Build our City's future on the principles of sustainability (3.1)

 

Presenters:                   Paul Grimson - Sustainability and Planning Manager - North Penrith Urban Area     

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

 

Executive Summary

Landcom has prepared a Concept Plan for development of the North Penrith Urban Area. The Concept Plan is supported by a Project Application for Stage 1 of the development.  The applications are to be assessed by the Department of Planning and determined by the Minister for Planning as a Major Project under Part 3A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. 

The North Penrith Urban Area comprises 40 hectares of essentially flat undeveloped land strategically located adjacent to the main Western Rail Line, Penrith Station bus/rail interchange and Penrith Regional City CBD.  The site provides a unique opportunity to strengthen the role of Penrith as a Regional City. 

Council’s objectives for the site were developed through the preparation and adoption of a local environmental plan and development control plan in 2000.  Those strategic planning documents seek to promote a mixed use response on the site comprising high density housing with employment opportunities for job intensive uses such as education, research and technology.

The involvement of Landcom in the planning and development of the site is welcome given its particular abilities as a key government agency and its expertise and focus on providing superior development outcomes.

Landcom’s Concept Plan provides for a high quality urban environment with a variety of contemporary housing forms and a range of associated employment opportunities.  The proposal features a higher standard of public domain and open space embellishment than ordinarily seen in Penrith.  However, it is felt that the concept does not fully realise the strategic potential for the site in terms of its opportunity to deliver high rise residential development and higher order employment opportunities, both of which would assist Penrith’s evolution as a mature Regional City servicing North Western Sydney. 

Following recent discussions, Landcom has agreed to enter a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with Council that would identify future stages of the North Penrith Urban Area that could be targeted for high rise residential development and appropriate high density, higher order employment opportunities that complement but do not compete with the Penrith City Centre.  The MoU would also commit Landcom and Council to vigorously pursue key anchor developments and partners to catalyse the delivery of improved residential and employment outcomes for the site. 

Subject to minor modification of the subdivision pattern in Stage 1, the Project Application for that stage could proceed in advance of finalisation of the MoU between Council and Landcom.  It is the subsequent stages of the proposed development that offer the greatest potential for intensification of residential densities and higher order employment opportunities.

In addition to the above matters, a number of other strategic and technical issues have been identified through a detailed review of the proposal.  The report recommends that the Sustainability and Planning Manager be authorised to prepare and forward a submission to the Department of Planning raising the issues outlined in this report and any other matters raised by Council.

Background

Landcom has made application to the Minister for Planning, seeking:

·     A declaration for the site to be considered as a Major Project under Part 3A and the introduction of landuse zones and development controls (DCP) to facilitate and guide development of the site.

·     Approval of a Concept Plan for the site comprising a mixed use residential development, village centre with commercial, retail and community land uses, areas of open space, areas of industrial land use and conservation of European and Aboriginal heritage.

·     Approval of a Project Application for Stage 1 of the site’s development being subdivision, site preparation, remediation works, construction of infrastructure and road and drainage works.

 

At the time of preparation of this report, the site has yet to be transferred to Landcom by the Commonwealth Government. In this regard it is important to note that whilst much of the detail of the instrument of transfer is commercial in confidence, Landcom has indicated that a number of key elements are fundamental to the outcomes reflected in the Concept Plan. These include the setting of minimum dwelling and employment targets and, in particular, a very tight delivery timeframe for the development.

Landcom has engaged Council staff in developing their proposal through regular meetings and specific workshops.  The key aspects of their consultation included:

·     Participation by senior council officers in a visioning workshop for the site;

·     Input by council officers to the Department of Planning’s preliminary and final draft Director General’s Requirements (DGRs);

·     Council officer participation in detailed “Enquiry by Design” workshops. Council officers, Landcom and its specialist consultants (including planners, designers, architects and engineers) were involved in providing comments on the Concept Plan and progressing its design elements at this workshop;

·     Council officer involvement in the development of the multi faceted Environmental Assessment. The refined Concept Plan addresses some, but not all, of the issues and concerns canvassed by council officers at various meetings with Landcom;

·     Distribution of the first newsletter to residents in the areas adjacent to the North Penrith site by Landcom in October 2010.

Councillors were briefed on the proposal by staff and/or Landcom representatives on 1 November 2010, 17 November 2010 and 1 December 2010.  The Briefings provided detail of the proposal and identified the following issues that had emerged from our initial review of the Environmental Assessment and supporting documents:

Residential:          The proposal should take advantage of the site’s opportunity to achieve higher density through a larger component of strategically located quality high rise development.

Employment:       The proposal needs to fully realise the employment opportunities offered by the site with a particular emphasis on higher order employment sectors such as research, education and technology.

Transport:           Government commitment to the provision, location and timing for delivery of a north/south bus underpass needs to be confirmed at this time.

Drainage:            The storm water management regime must accommodate the quantum and quality of stormwater generated by the proposed development, responding to its role in the proposed urban environment.

Open Space:        The quantum and nature of open space, including the functionality of the former cricket oval, must satisfy the recreational needs of the incoming community.

Infrastructure:     The Statements of Commitments must address internal and external infrastructure demand generated by the development, provide adequate trigger points for the provision of facilities and the timely preservation of heritage items.

Other Issues:       There are a number of perceived gaps in the environmental assessment of the proposal.

 

At those Briefings, Councillors raised the following additional issues:

Zoning:                The proposed village centre should be zoned B2 Local Centre in lieu of B4 Mixed Uses.

Residential:          The design of high rise residential development adjacent to the railway line needs to address the negative visual impacts associated with balcony activities (clothes drying, random storage etc.).

Lot size:               The lot sizes shown on the Concept Plan need to be consistent with the proposed building height controls and reflect the high rise outcomes available under the planning framework. This is also relevant in ensuring development compatibility with adjacent heritage housing in Lemongrove.

Seniors Living:    Seniors living and aged care facilities need to be located in accessible and amenable areas of the site.

Thornton Hall:    Need to explore opportunities for optimum public use of this heritage item.

 

These issues are discussed in the following commentary section of the report.

The Proposal

The Concept Plan for the site proposes the following elements:

·     A mixed-use development of around 900-1,000 dwellings including 100 seniors living/aged care dwellings, 44 affordable dwellings and 44 adaptable dwellings accommodating a total projected population of 1,800 people;

·     A village centre comprising around 3,200m2 of retail and 9,300m2 of commercial uses;

·     7 hectares of open space including a new oval, water parks and pocket parks;

·     2 hectares of light industrial/warehouse uses;

·     Conservation of European and Aboriginal heritage located on the site;

·     Creation of 1,450 jobs comprising 786 on-site and 664 off-site jobs; and

·     A proposed statutory planning framework (including zoning, building heights etc.), governance arrangement and funding mechanism for infrastructure and public open space.

The Project Application for the first stage of development comprises the following elements:

·     Subdivision to create 106 residential lots, the village centre lot, an industrial lot and 6 super lots for future development;

·     Bulk earthworks, including site filing;

·     Roads and drainage infrastructure; and

·     Informative signage and landscaping.

The applications are accompanied by a raft of technical studies examining the social economic and environmental aspects of the proposal and supported by a Statement of Commitments identifying the facilities and services to be provided in development of the site.

Construction is expected to commence in 2011 and continue for approximately 10 years. Estate infrastructure will be delivered over the initial 5- 7 years.

The proposed Zoning Plan, Concept Plan, Staging Plan, Stage 1 Project Application Plan and Building Height Plan are separately enclosed for the information of Councillors.

Exhibition

The Department of Planning placed the proposal on public exhibition between 15 December 2010 and 7 February 2011.  The application(s) and supporting documentation are exhibited on the Department’s website, in the foyer of Council’s Civic Centre, Council’s St Marys Queen Street Centre and the Penrith and St Marys Libraries.

Submissions must reach the Department of Planning by close of business on 7 February 2011.

Commentary

1.       Strategic Context of the Site

In 2006, the State Government established the City Centre’s Taskforce to work with Council to develop a vision for Penrith City Centre. The vision document identifies North Penrith Urban Area as a supporting area for the broader Penrith Regional City.

At that time Council and the Department of Planning developed a set of strategic objectives to guide development of the site. Those objectives were incorporated in the draft North West Sub Regional Strategy and seek to promote a mixed use response on the site comprising high density housing (estimated at 1200-1500 dwellings ) with employment opportunities for job intensive uses such as education, research and technology.   It should be noted that at that time, these dwelling yields for the North Penrith site included the Multi User Depot (MUD) site and the site of the proposed commuter car park.  The strategy also recognises the potential for interim uses that could provide for major employment opportunities in the future.

The recently released Metropolitan Plan for Sydney 2036 clarifies the NSW Government’s position with respect to development of the site.  The Plan notes the site provides the opportunity to strengthen the role of Penrith as a Regional City through development of long term employment and high density housing opportunities.

The proposal provides for a denser living environment than that previously experienced in the City in a variety of contemporary housing forms and a quality urban environment.  However, additional focus needs to be placed on better realising the strategic residential and employment outcomes sought by the Metropolitan Plan for Sydney 2036.  These outcomes are necessary to assist Penrith’s evolution as a mature Regional City servicing North Western Sydney.

Recommendation:

1.1     The Minister be requested to ensure that the objectives of the Metropolitan Plan for Sydney 2036 will be met in determining the Concept Plan for the site, by requiring the delivery of high rise residential development and increased higher order employment opportunities on the site.

2.       Approval Process

The Minister for Planning will identify the statutory framework (landuse zones, development controls etc.) required to guide development of the site, the necessary services and facilities to be provided to meet the needs of the incoming population and the overall development concept for the site in the assessment and determination of the Concept Plan.

Landcom seeks to zone the land adjacent to the railway station and proposed commuter car park, B4 Mixed Uses.  This zone primarily facilitates retail, commercial & mixed use development.  Three distinct parcels of land along the northern perimeter of the site are proposed to be zoned IN2 Light Industrial.  The Thornton Hall site is proposed to be zoned R2 Low Residential.  The open space/recreation areas are proposed to be zoned RE1 Public Recreation. The majority of the site is proposed to be zoned R1 General Residential.

The Minister will also identify the specific subdivision and road layout for each stage, site infrastructure and necessary bulk earthworks, construction and embellishment of open space areas and the particular works required to conserve Thornton Hall in the assessment and determination of a series of staged Project Applications.  The Project Application for Stage 1 has been submitted in conjunction with the Concept Plan for the site.

All other development, primarily applications for specific buildings and associated works, will be subject to Part 4 of the Act and require Council’s approval. However, a significant proportion of the residential development on the site is likely to be classified as complying development and/or be controlled under the model housing code. In this case, Council will be able to influence the built form of residential development through participation on a proposed Design Review Panel to be established by Landcom.

It should be noted that Council will retain its normal role of Principal Certifying Authority for subdivision certificates.  This is important because it ensures that the facilities to be handed over for Council’s control, management and maintenance are of the required quality and standard.

Recommendation:

2.1     The Minister be requested to require the establishment of, and Council representation on, a Design Review Panel to facilitate efficient processing of development applications.

3.       Land Use Zones

Landcom proposes a B4 Mixed Use zone for the village centre.  Council adopted the Interim Penrith City Centres Hierarchy in March 2007, limiting the B4 zone to the highest order centres of Penrith CBD and St Marys Town Centre and has applied the B2 Local Centre zone to villages of the scale proposed within this site.

The retail/commercial component of the development has been referred to as a ‘village centre’ to reflect the level and scale of retail services expected to be provided on the site.  A scale normally associated with a B2 Local Centre zone.  However, that zone does not permit high rise residential or employment development, a form and scale of development considered appropriate in such close proximity to the bus/rail interchange and the Penrith City Centre.  In this regard, it is possible to schedule these additional uses as permissible within the B2 zone. Application of the B2 zone reinforces Council’s adopted retail hierarchy and, with the scheduling of additional uses, will enable delivery of the proposed Concept Plan.  The Minister should be requested to adopt the B2 Local Centres zone in lieu of the proposed B4 Mixed Uses zone.

The proposed zoning regime for the site, particularly the R1 General Residential and B2 Local Centre zones (with additional scheduled uses), provides the necessary flexibility to deliver high rise residential development and higher order employment outcomes on the site.  However, the likelihood of their delivery is constrained by:

·     a lack of zone objectives supporting such initiatives,

·     a Concept Plan underpinned  by small lot subdivision which limits the flexibility to accommodate changes in the high rise development market, and

·     a maximum building height of 12m in the R1 General Residential zone which precludes high rise (6+ storeys) development.

The Minister for Planning should be requested to insert statutory provisions to facilitate high rise residential development and higher order employment outcomes on the site.

The Concept Plan proposes lot sizes in the order of 400m2 adjoining the Lemongrove Heritage Conservation Area identified in Penrith Local Environmental Plan 1991 (Environmental Heritage Conservation).  Lots fronting Lemongrove Road are predominantly 560m2 or greater in area. The Minister should be requested to require the area of lots within the site located adjacent to the Lemongrove Conservation Area to be sympathetic with the predominant lot size in that area.

Recommendation:

The Minister be requested to:

3.1    Insert objectives in the R1 General Residential zone requiring the delivery of high rise residential development as a component of the Concept Plan.

3.2    Replace the proposed B4 Mixed Uses zone with a B2 Local Centres zone and schedule additional uses necessary to facilitate the delivery of the Concept Plan, in particular high rise residential development and higher order employment opportunities that support, but do not compete with the Penrith City Centre.

3.2    Insert objectives in the B2 Local Centre zone requiring the delivery of high rise residential development and higher order employment opportunities that support, but do not compete with the Penrith City Centre.

3.3    Ensure the subdivision layout and development controls facilitate high rise residential development and higher order employment outcomes on the site.   In particular, the Concept Plan and Project Application for Stage 1 should be modified to remove the notional small lot subdivision pattern in key areas where higher density outcomes are to be encouraged and to facilitate the creation of “super lots” to cater for this form of development.

3.4     Require the area of lots within the site located adjacent to the Lemongrove Conservation Area to be sympathetic with the predominant lot size in that area.

4.       Development Control Plan

The Concept Plan provides the planning and development framework for the site.  It is supported by a site specific Development Control Plan (DCP) that contains particular provisions with respect to urban design, transport and accessibility, housing and community facilities, heritage conservation and environmental goals.  The DCP also adopts relevant sections of Penrith Development Control Plan 2006.  

The DCP does not contain any provisions to guide the delivery of high rise residential development or higher order employment outcomes at this stage.  Given that these initiatives are an essential component of Council’s vision for the site, it is considered that the DCP should be amended to include such provisions.

It is also noted that the DCP does not contain any provisions to guide water management.  Penrith Development Control Plan 2010 contains the most contemporary provisions in this regard and the Minister should be requested to apply them to development of the site.

The development concept is specific to the site and accordingly some development controls (e.g. subdivision standards) vary from those applied elsewhere in the City.  However, the DCP is generally consistent with Penrith Development Control Plan 2006 and as such is considered capable of guiding delivery of the desired urban outcome.

Recommendation:

The Minister be requested to:

4.1     Amend the proposed Development Control Plan for the site to include provisions that guide the delivery of high rise residential development and higher order employment outcomes.

4.2     Apply Part C, Section C3- Water Management, of Penrith Development Control Plan 2010 to development of the site.

5.       Housing

Site development will provide 900 – 1,000 dwellings.  Whilst the proposed zoning provisions for the site accommodate higher rise/higher density development, Landcom’s proposal comprises predominantly semi-detached or attached dwelling typologies with a small proportion of detached dwellings. The Metropolitan Plan defines this development form as low rise medium density development. As stated above, the Metropolitan Plan promotes development of high density housing on the North Penrith site. 

Dwelling density is a measure of the number of dwellings per hectare.  Dwelling density can be increased by reducing allotment sizes or increasing the scale of development through the introduction of high rise living.  The overall number of dwellings proposed in Landcom’s Concept Plan is considered appropriate as a minimum baseline.  However, the Concept Plan accommodates the planned number of dwellings through, predominantly, small lot housing with allotment sizes as low as 125m2. This means that the majority of the development site is required to accommodate the planned number of dwellings.  Providing more dwellings in higher rise apartment form would increase residential density and free up land for additional employment generating opportunities.

Our preliminary analysis suggests that higher rise residential development would be best pursued as mixed use residential development in or surrounding the village centre.  Landcom have indicated, and recent analysis for the Penrith Business Alliance confirms that currently there is a limited market for higher rise (6+ storeys) mixed use residential development in or adjacent to the Penrith CBD.  Under these circumstances, it is necessary to demonstrate the amenity and attractiveness of higher rise living adjacent to the city centre and the bus/rail interchange, if the NSW Government’s strategic objectives for the site and Penrith’s role as a Regional City are to be realised.  Landcom, Government’s lead development agency, is the appropriate proponent to assist in encouraging, by demonstration, a greater acceptance by the market of this form of development in the City.

This issue has been discussed with Landcom who have agreed to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with Council.  The MoU would commit the parties to vigorous pursuit of additional opportunities in future stages for the provision of high rise (6+

storeys) residential development on the site.  The Minister should be requested to require such arrangements within any approval for the site.

It should be noted that, subject to recommendation 3.3 above, Stage 1 could be approved in advance of finalisation of the MoU between Council and Landcom as it is the subsequent stages of the proposed development that offer the greatest potential for intensification of residential densities and higher order employment opportunities (see commentary on employment below).  Therefore Stage 1 could proceed in the proposed form subject to any other recommendations raised in this report.

A MoU group comprising of senior officers from Council and Landcom has been established to develop the detail of the MoU. Any resulting MoU would be reported to Council for its consideration.

Recommendation:

5.1     The Minister be requested to require Landcom to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with Council to vigorously pursue additional opportunities for the provision of high rise development (6+ storeys) in future stages of the development.

6.       Employment

The Concept Plan makes provision for 9,300m2 of commercial space and 3,200m2 of retail space, to be located predominantly in the proposed village centre. A further 2 hectares of the site is to be used for light industrial/warehouse activities.  In combination, these uses will create 786 ongoing onsite jobs and around 664 off-site jobs, a total of 1,450 jobs.  The 786 onsite jobs are projected to comprise 372 office based jobs, 90 retail jobs, 229 industrial jobs, 70 jobs associated with the proposed aged care facility and 27 home based jobs.

The scale of retail development should be limited to that required to meet the daily needs of the incoming population.  The type of commercial development should be limited to that which will complement, and not compete with, the Penrith City Centre.  The Minister should be requested to reflect these limitations in any approval of the proposal.

Council’s Sustainability Blueprint for Urban Release Areas seeks to ensure that a quantum of new jobs (both on-site and off-site) is created with each new release area to match the number of incoming resident workforce participants.  That quantum is generally considered to be at least 1 job per new dwelling. At this rate, the proposal with up to 1,000 new dwellings would require up to 1,000 new jobs.  In this sense the proposal, with up to 1,450 jobs, exceeds Council’s normal expectation.  However, this site is not a standard residential release area and is of strategic significance to the development of Penrith as the Regional City for North West Sydney.  Its location adjacent to the Penrith CBD and the bus/rail interchange requires a higher employment generation than that expected of other urban release areas located in the City’s suburbs.  This has been recognised by the NSW Government in the Metropolitan Plan, which notes the site is “well suited to accommodate employment growth” and seeks to concentrate residential densities and employment opportunities around existing transit nodes, in and adjacent to centres.

Enhancing the employment opportunities on the site has been discussed with Landcom who have agreed to include this issue in the abovementioned MoU. The MoU would commit Landcom and Council to identify future stages (i.e. beyond Stage 1 of the Concept Plan forming part of Landcom’s Part3A application) of the site that could be targeted for appropriate higher order employment opportunities that will complement not compete with the Penrith City Centre. This agreement has been reflected in the Statement of Commitments for the development. 

The MoU will commit Landcom and Council to vigorously pursue key institutional or industry developments to locate on the North Penrith site and ‘anchor’ high order employment generation on the site, particularly targeting the education, research and technology sectors.  In this regard, it is considered imperative that Landcom and Council be assisted in this endeavour by those Government agencies with the charter, expertise and knowledge to source and negotiate key anchor developments for the site, specifically the NSW Department of Industry and Investment, the Department of Premier and Cabinet and, potentially the Department of Commerce and the proposed Metropolitan Development Authority.  The Minister should also be requested to reflect these aspects of the MoU in any approval of the proposal and to seek commitment of the abovementioned Government agencies to work with Council and Landcom to achieve the delivery of additional and appropriate high order employment outcomes on the site.

Recommendation:

The Minister be requested to:

6.1     Limit the scale of retail space to that nominated in the Concept Plan and the type of commercial development permissible on the site to that which will complement and not compete with the Penrith City Centre.

6.2     Require the Memorandum of Understanding with Council to specifically target appropriate high order employment opportunities that will complement, and not compete with, the Penrith City Centre, and to vigorously pursue key institutional or industry developments to locate on the North Penrith site, particularly targeting the research, education and technology sectors.

6.3     Seek the commitment of the NSW Department of Industry and Investment, the Department of Premier and Cabinet and, potentially the Department of Commerce and the Metropolitan Development Authority to work with Council and Landcom to source and negotiate key anchor developments for the site.

7.       Infrastructure Delivery

Internal allotment servicing (water, sewer, gas, electricity and telecommunications) is to be provided by Landcom.  It is interesting to note that the site will be serviced by optic fibre cabling, able to support ADSL, ISDN, ATM, Frame Relay and Virtual Private Network services.

Landcom has identified the local services and facilities required to meet the additional needs of the incoming population as parks and open space, roads and traffic facilities and community facilities.  It is intended to deliver and dedicate these facilities to Council with the staged rollout of the estate.

7.1     Local Open Space

Council requires the provision of 3.04 hectares of local open space per 1000 people in the delivery of new urban areas.  The proposal is expected to accommodate a population of 1,800 people.  On this basis, the proposal would require 5.5 hectares of local open space.

Approximately 7 hectares of local open space will be provided in 5 local parks, the largest being the oval (Smiths Paddock), 2 passive areas featuring water bodies, a number of pocket parks and a village square adjacent to the railway station.  The project also includes healthy living initiatives such as cycle ways, pedestrian networks, and fitness activity stations around the open space areas. The quantum of local open space is consistent with that required by Council for new urban release areas.

The detail of local open space embellishment will be included in the project applications for each stage.  In this regard the Project Application for Stage 1 provides details of the scale and embellishment of the oval (former cricket oval), to be known as Smiths Paddock and one other local park to be known as Belmore Green.

Smiths Paddock is the site of the former cricket ground on the site. Whilst the park retains the size of the former cricket ground, the ‘oval’ component is to be reduced in diameter from 130m to 120m.  Landcom intend Smiths Paddock (1.89 hectares) to provide the local community hub for passive and active recreation including provision of a community facilities building to be known as the Pavilion. The park will include the existing eucalypt trees that define the eastern edge of the existing oval along with a mix of evergreen and deciduous trees for increased amenity.

Council’s Recreation Manager has advised that:

·     The quantum of outdoor recreation space allocated in the Concept Plan will not support sustainable active recreation programs and competitions.  As such it will better serve as a passive and casual ‘village green’ recreation space for activities such as informal games, health and fitness trails, walking circuit and community events.

·     Current sports participation trends in the LGA, in association with the development and enhancement of other new and existing facilities in the City, and ongoing grounds maintenance and facility operation management improvements, are likely to ensure that active sport activities can be accommodated in the Local Government Area without the provision of an active recreation space at this site.

The scale, size and planned embellishment of Smiths Paddock is considered appropriate given that:

·     The quantum of local open space to be provided in the estate is consistent with that required by Council for new release areas

·     The intended function of the space is to provide a local community hub for passive and informal active recreation

·     Appropriate facilities are provided for organised sport in the surrounding locality, and

·     The heritage significance of the facility, particularly with respect to cricket, is acknowledged through the proposed Interpretation Strategy and a Public Art Strategy.

Belmore Green is intended to provide a landscape connection with Smiths Paddock. The park’s character will be in keeping with the surrounding streetscape and will incorporate large deciduous and evergreen trees.

7.2     District Open Space

Council’s adopted District Open Space and Cultural Facilities Plans would ordinarily apply to applications such as this proposal. The levy which would apply to 1,000 dwellings under the adopted, revised (but yet to be in force) version of these plans would be approximately $2.76 million.

Landcom do not propose to contribute towards District Open Space or Cultural Facilities Plans.  It would be inequitable to exclude new residents of the North Penrith Urban Area when other new residential development elsewhere in Penrith City is obligated to make those contributions.  The Minister for Planning should be requested to require a contribution towards district open space and cultural facilities in accordance with Council’s adopted development contributions plans.

 

 

7.3     Community Facilities

The proposed community facilities comprise a community centre (The Pavilion) to be located in the south western corner of Smiths Paddock. Landcom will construct the building as part of the Stage 1 works and use it as a sales centre until the first 400 dwellings are occupied, at which time it would be refitted by Landcom as a community facility.

Landcom will implement a community development program to assist with the settlement of the new population of North Penrith.  The program will include a welcome kit, a community worker and funds for community activities and programs.

It is proposed that a part time worker based on salary for a full time equivalent worker for 2 years will be employed within 12 months of occupation of the first dwelling for a maximum of 3 years.  A budget equivalent to 3 % of the facility building cost will be allocated for the community program activities and grants to support emerging groups and a variety of community initiatives for a period of 3 years.

The provision of this initial welcome program is an effective community building tool and will assist residents when they first move to a new area.  The provision of a high quality community facility and introduction of a community development program for the North Penrith Development Project is welcome.

7.4     Access & Public Transport

The estate is intended to be permeable for pedestrians, bicycles and vehicles.  The street network radiates from the village centre/railway station, with two access points to Coreen Avenue, one from The Crescent and one to Castlereagh Road.  All four roads are proposed to provide vehicular access to and from the estate.

Access Road 4 provides access to and from The Crescent.  Council is currently constructing a roundabout at the intersection of Macquarie Avenue and The Crescent.  That roundabout will preclude vehicles entering Macquarie Street from The Crescent.  Vehicles exiting the site and travelling to the City Centre via the rail overbridge to Evan Street would need to use Lemongrove Road and make a right hand turn into Macquarie Street.  The Lemongrove Road/Macquarie Avenue intersection is and cannot be designed to cater for vehicular flows greater than presently exist. As such Access Road 4 should be restricted to entry only.

The Transport Mobility and Accessibility Plan (TMAP) submitted with the application identifies road improvements within and at the interface of the site with the surrounding local road network.  The recommended local road layout and improvements need to be, but are not supported by a Road Safety Audit regime.

It is intended to retain the current left only turning movements at the intersection of the access road with Castlereagh Road opposite Peachtree Road.  It is considered that this intersection should be upgraded to allow all turning movements.  Upgrading this intersection would negate the need to upgrade the Coreen Avenue/Castlereagh Road roundabout identified in the TMAP, but not proposed to be undertaken as part of this application.

The access roads from Castlereagh Road and Coreen Avenue have been identified as collector roads.  An uncontrolled four way crossing is proposed at their intersection. Given the likely volume of traffic on these roads, specific treatment such as a roundabout is required to ensure road safety and the free flow of traffic.

The TMAP also identifies that traffic generated by the proposed development requires improvements to the Coreen Avenue/Parker Street/Richmond Road intersection, the Coreen Avenue/Coombes Drive intersection and the Coreen Avenue/Castlereagh Road intersection.  However, these intersection improvements are not proposed to be, but should be provided as part of this development.

Council prepared the Penrith Arterial Roads Study (PARS) in consultation with the Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) and Department of Planning.  This Study identified existing deficiencies in the road network across the Penrith LGA as well as future upgrades required to meet the planned growth of the City.  An apportionment model was developed to allocate responsibility for the necessary road improvements.  The Study identified that planned development of this site needs to contribute to specified improvements to the arterial road network, including improvements at the Jane Street/Castlereagh Road/ High Street, Parker Street/Coreen Avenue, Castlereagh Road/Peachtree Road and Coreen Avenue/Bel-Air Road intersections.  The Minister should be requested to ensure appropriate arrangements are in place to deliver the necessary arterial road improvements in a timely manner.

The TMAP acknowledges the likelihood of commuter parking within the residential street network and the proposed public car park in the village centre.  The TMAP suggests 2hr and 4hr parking limits be imposed to address this issue.  However, no specific streets have been nominated, nor is there any implementation plan and costing for this proposal.  It is also envisaged that ‘resident only’ or ‘resident permit’ parking will be required in those streets.  An on-street parking strategy should be prepared and implemented during construction of the estate.

Pedestrian footpaths will be provided along all streets to connect residential areas with recreation and open space facilities, the village centre and the railway station forecourt.  An on/off road bicycle network will provide access through the estate connecting the village centre, recreation facilities and the railway station/commuter car park to the external bicycle network.  However, the cycleway network does not distinguish between recreational and commuter cyclists. The Concept Plan should be supported by a clear cycleway strategy catering for both user groups.

Bicycle parking facilities will be provided within the village centre and are proposed in the decked commuter car parking facility.  The bicycle parking facilities should be designed and located so that they are safe, secure and encourage their use.

The TMAP has also analysed the adequacy of the existing pedestrian rail overpass to cater for pedestrian movements generated by commuters and residents of the estate and concludes that the rail station and pedestrian overpass have sufficient capacity to accommodate future pedestrian flows.

Public transport initiatives include provision of a bus corridor through the site from Coreen Avenue to the village centre and railway station, with provision for a future underpass connection to the bus/rail interchange on the southern side of the railway station.  Development of the site does not itself generate the need for the underpass however, commitment to its provision, location and timing for delivery need to be confirmed at this time.

In Stage 1 the bus route will circle Smiths Paddock (the oval) and return to Coreen Avenue. As part of Stage 2, the bus corridor will extend to the village centre and railway station.

It will be necessary to maintain safe pedestrian/cycleway access to the Station forecourt area during construction of Stage 1. These access arrangements should be co-ordinated with Council so that they can be integrated with access from the proposed commuter car park and the station forecourt area in the short term.

Council has been advocating for the construction of a bus transitway linking the St Marys development, Cranebrook, Waterside and the future urban development at Penrith Lakes and the Penrith bus/rail interchange.  Whilst the proposed subdivision pattern makes for a circuitous route to the bus/rail interchange on the southern side of the rail line, it is an appropriate response to the constraints in developing the site.

The Minister for Planning should be requested to address the abovementioned issues as part of any approval of the proposal.

7.5     Maintenance Costs

It is noted that the open space, community pavilion and public domain are intended to be of a higher quality than that generally dedicated to Council in other new release areas of the City.  Whilst this ‘above standard’ level of embellishment and public domain is welcome and reflects the strategic significance of the site, it brings with it a commensurate increase in maintenance costs.   The proposed water management regime will also incur higher maintenance costs due to the need for water level monitoring, pump facilities, water top up, water quality and aquatic vegetation management.  These facilities are intended to be dedicated to Council, so Council will bear the ongoing cost of their maintenance.  The indicative maintenance costs are not sufficiently comprehensive, and vary greatly between their lower and upper limit, to be of benefit in comprehending the exact financial commitment the development will impose on Council.  The Minister should be requested to require a more comprehensive and accurate analysis of these costs.  Council’s consideration and acceptance of the infrastructure should be subject to separate approval at a later stage.  The Minister’s approval needs to incorporate a mechanism to accommodate these arrangements.

The road network and water management infrastructure will be delivered by Landcom and rolled out with each stage of development. External road works are limited to connections in Coreen Avenue.  These matters are discussed in the following sections of this report.

7.6     Statement of Commitments

The application is accompanied by Statements of Commitments for the Concept Plan and the Project Application for Stage 1.

Council’s Legal Branch has previously confirmed that a Statement of Commitments is an enforceable mechanism for achieving delivery of the facilities described within the Statement, as they are subject to conditions of consent.  However, it should be noted that as with any consent, such conditions could be varied via s96 by the Minister.  Under these circumstances Council cannot be certain that facilities described in the Statement of Commitments will be provided and hence there is uncertainty as to whether the Statement is a desirable vehicle for infrastructure delivery. The preferred mode of ensuring delivery of facilities is via a Voluntary Planning Agreement between the parties.  The Minister should be requested to use voluntary planning agreements in lieu of the proposed statement of commitments.  Alternatively, the Minister should be requested to include safeguards within the approval that would require the engagement of Council in any request to reconsider the Statement of Commitments.

The Statement of Commitments details the various contributions, additional studies, applications and works the proponent commits to undertake in association with the project. With the exception of the proposed Community facility (the Pavilion), which is to be provided when 400 dwellings are occupied, the remaining commitments will be delivered with the relevant stage of the development.

 

Recommendation:

The Minister be requested to:

7.1         Require full contribution towards district open space and cultural facilities in accordance with Council’s adopted development contributions plans.

7.2         Implement a Road Safety Audit regime through the approvals process to ensure the local road network is designed and constructed in a safe and efficient manner.

7.3         Restrict Access Road 4 to entry only to ensure road safety and the efficient flow of traffic in the adjoining local street network.

7.4         Require upgrading of the Castlereagh Road/Peachtree Road/Road 3 intersection to provide a fully functioning 4 way intersection in lieu of the recommended improvements to the Castlereagh Road/Coreen Avenue roundabout.

7.5         Require appropriate traffic control arrangements, such as a roundabout, at the intersection of proposed Roads 3 and 6 to ensure the safe and efficient movement of vehicles.

7.6         Require the external intersection upgrades recommended in Table 29 of the TMAP accompanying the application.

7.7         Require a financial contribution towards the upgrade of the arterial road network as recommended by the Penrith Arterial Road Study.

7.8         Require the preparation and implementation of a cycleway strategy for the site that caters for both commuter and recreational cyclists.

7.9         Require the preparation of an on-street parking strategy to prevent conflict between commuter and resident parking in the local street network.

7.10       Provide a commitment to the provision, location and timing for delivery of a bus underpass from the northern side of the rail line to the bus/rail interchange on the southern side.

7.11       To require a comprehensive and accurate analysis of the costs of operating and maintaining the open space, recreation, water management, community facilities and pubic domain and Council’s capacity to meet that financial commitment, prior to determination of the Concept Plan; and

7.12       Provide the financial means for Council to meet any identified funding shortfall in maintenance and operating costs associated with the infrastructure to be dedicated to Council.

7.13       Utilise Voluntary Planning Agreements in lieu of  the proposed Statement of Commitments to provide certainty that the nominated facilities will be delivered and not subject to variation/deletion pursuant to the provisions of Section 96 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act.  Alternatively, the Minister include safeguards within the approval that would require the engagement of Council in any request to reconsider the Statement of Commitments.

8.       Heritage

The site contains and is adjacent to a number of local European and Indigenous heritage items.

Archaeological artefacts of Aboriginal cultural and scientific significance (No. 45-5-2491 on the Aboriginal Heritage Information Management System Database) are known to be located in the north east corner of the site. Field assessment also noted additional artefacts within a nearby stand of trees.  Landcom propose to retain the stand of trees thereby protecting elements of item no. 45-5-2491 and potential, but as yet undiscovered artefacts.

The site contains and is adjacent to a number of items of European heritage significance.  Thornton Hall and its setting, the remains of the former speedway and cricket oval and Combewood and its garden setting have been included in the Commonwealth Department of the Environment and Heritage ‘Australian Heritage Database’

Thornton Hall, Combewood and the Museum of Fire are also identified as items of environmental heritage in Council’s local planning instruments.  Combewood and the Museum of Fire are not located on, but are adjacent to, the site.

The Concept Plan is accompanied by an Interpretation Strategy and a Public Art Strategy which, among other things, are intended to publicly highlight the heritage aspects of the site.

Landcom intends to retain and conserve Thornton Hall in its landscape setting and provide view corridors that reinforce the relationship of the homestead with the various activities held on the site.  Clear views to the river and the Blue Mountains will be maintained.  The Concept Plan also locates additional embellished passive open space linking the current site boundary of Thornton Hall and the proposed local road to enhance both the view corridor to the oval and to allow a greater sense of connectedness with Thornton Hall for the community.

Landcom intend that Thornton Hall will be utilised as a private residence or for an appropriate business/commercial use.  However, it is not considered that opportunities for the adaptive reuse of Thornton Hall for a public purpose, following its restoration, have been adequately investigated.  The Minister should be requested to require Landcom to work with Council to identify appropriate and financially sustainable opportunities in this regard.  In any event, public access to Thornton Hall should be encouraged.

The Combewood residence is located to the north west of the site, however an area within the site and adjacent to the property is to be provided as a community garden, available to residents for the cultivation of vegetables and other produce.  The location of the garden is intended to interpret the former agricultural use of the property.

The Museum of Fire is located to the south west of the site, visually buffered to a significant degree by the proposed decked commuter car park adjacent to the railway line.  The scale, design and location of development within the site are not considered to unreasonably impact the heritage significance of this item.

The former speedway is being acknowledged and interpreted through the internal road network which has been designed to reflect the curve of the former speedway and the Public Art Strategy that incorporates ‘speedway text’ in the road pavement.

The former cricket oval is acknowledged and interpreted in its refurbishment as a local community hub for passive and informal active recreation. The area of land to be retained will be approximately 120m in diameter.  Landcom’s Public Art Strategy proposes to enclose the oval with a picket fence and identify the entries with appropriately scaled cricket bats.

The Concept Plan, Interpretation Strategy, Public Art Strategy and accompanying Statement of Commitments are considered to satisfactorily respond to, conserve and/or interpret the heritage significance of the site.  However, the Minister should require that any identified restoration, interpretation and other relevant works relating to the specific heritage items on the site are undertaken in association with the stage within which they are located and not unduly deferred.

 

Recommendation:

The Minister be requested to:

8.1     Require Landcom to work with Council to identify appropriate and financially sustainable opportunities for the adaptive reuse of Thornton Hall for a public purpose, following its restoration.

8.2     Require identified restoration, interpretation and other relevant works relating to specific heritage items on the site are undertaken in association with the stage within which they are located.

9.       Water Management

9.1     Flooding

It is proposed to re-contour the site to enable the site to drain adequately and raise a small portion of the site above the 1 in 100 year flood level.  Filling of up to 3.5m (1.5m in the vicinity of the railway station forecourt and the proposed commuter car park) will be required.  A small portion of the site will need to be filled to 0.5m above the 1 in 100 year flood level if the applicant does not want that land to be indicated on 149 Certificates as being subject to flood related development controls.

The technical reports accompanying the application do not address whether or not the proposed fill will increase flood levels, particularly with regard to the loss of flood storage and the cumulative impacts of filling, on the site and in the adjoining locality.  The proposal also does not identify the local floodway through the site. These matters need to be adequately addressed and resolved in determination of the application(s).

9.2     Stormwater

Landcom has prepared a Water Cycle Management Strategy for the site. It comprises an integrated stormwater management system comprising an interconnecting system of rainwater tanks, stormwater drainage lines (including water sensitive urban design swales, WSUD), a central detention canal (the principal feature of the Waterfront Park), and an artificially constructed wetland (the principal feature of the Wetland Park).

The Water Cycle Management Strategy principles are supported.  However, the technical reports accompanying the application do not confirm that post development flows at each discharge location do not exceed predevelopment flows at that location. The Minister should be requested to ensure this is the case in determining the application(s).

Recommendation:

The Minister be:

9.1     Advised that any land below the 1 in 100 flood level should be filled to 0.5m above the identified 1 in 100 flood level if the applicant does not want the land to be indicated on 149 Certificates as being subject to flood related development controls.

9.2     Requested to require further flood analysis to identify:

          (a)     whether or not the proposed fill will increase flood levels, particularly with regard to the loss of flood storage and the cumulative impacts of filling, on the site and in the adjoining locality; and

          (b)     the local floodway and associated hazard areas on the site.

9.3     Requested to require further stormwater analysis to confirm that post development flows do not exceed predevelopment flows at each location they enter Council’s drainage system.

10.     Environmental Matters

10.1   Site Contamination

Potential site contamination has been addressed through a report prepared by Geotechnique Pty Ltd.  This report reviewed the existing site audit statements (SAS) for the site and has provided recommendations for the on going management of factors such as unexploded ordnance, unexpected finds and further investigations after the removal of existing concrete slabs and other remnants of historical site activity.  They have recommended that this issue be addressed through the Construction Environmental Management Plan.  The report indicates that the site is suitable for its intended use.  A testing, remediation and validation regime has been recommended and included in the Statements of Commitments.

10.2   Odour

The Penrith Sewerage Treatment Plant is located approximately 380m to the north of the site.

The application is accompanied by an Odour Impact Assessment. The analysis concludes that odour impacts are unlikely to occur more than 50m from the boundary of the Penrith Sewerage Treatment Plant.

An on-site sewage pumping station is to be located in the site. Odours from the facility will be minimal, however it is recommended that it be provided with a reasonable buffer zone to residential development. 

10.3   Noise & Vibration

The main western rail line and traffic along Coreen Avenue are the principal noise and vibration sources.

The application is accompanied by a Noise & Vibration Assessment which indicates that parts of the site (those adjacent to the rail line and Coreen Avenue) are exposed to higher than acceptable noise and vibration levels.  The report makes a suite of recommendations to satisfactorily ameliorate these impacts and have been included in the Statement of Commitments.

Recommendation:

10.1   The Minister be requested to ensure the recommendations, remedial measures and monitoring regimes identified by the contamination, odour and noise and vibration technical reports are adequate and included in the Statement of Commitments. 

Conclusion

Landcom’s proposal will deliver higher density living in a variety of contemporary housing forms and a reasonable quantum of jobs within a high quality urban environment.  However, the North Penrith Urban Area is strategically significant to the development of Penrith as the Regional City for North Western Sydney.  Its location adjacent to the rail/bus interchange and the Penrith City Centre provides a valuable opportunity to deliver components of high rise living and a greater contribution to higher order jobs in the City, than would otherwise be expected of a new urban area in the suburbs. Landcom have agreed to vigorously pursue these initiatives in partnership with Council through the proposed MoU.

Subject to recommendation 3.3 above, Stage 1 could be approved in advance of finalisation of the MoU between Council and Landcom as it is the subsequent stages of the proposed development that offer the greatest potential for intensification of residential densities and higher order employment opportunities.

The next steps in the process in relation to the Part 3A application will be that Council officers will prepare a co-ordinated submission to the Department of Planning.  In the interim Council officers and Landcom representatives will progress development of the proposed MoU.

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on North Penrith Urban Area be received.

2.     Council’s Sustainability and Planning Manager be given the delegated authority to finalise and forward Council’s submission on the North Penrith Urban Area Part 3A application based on the comments outlined in the report.

3.     A copy of Council’s submission be provided to Councillors upon its completion under separate cover.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1.  

Zoning Plan

1 Page

Appendix

2.  

Concept Plan

1 Page

Appendix

3.  

Staging Plan

1 Page

Appendix

4.  

Subdivision Detail

1 Page

Appendix

5.  

Height Plan

1 Page

Appendix

  


Policy Review Committee Meeting

31 January 2011

Appendix 1 - Zoning Plan

 

 

 


Policy Review Committee Meeting

31 January 2011

Appendix 2 - Concept Plan

 

 

 


Policy Review Committee Meeting

31 January 2011

Appendix 3 - Staging Plan

 

 

 


Policy Review Committee Meeting

31 January 2011

Appendix 4 - Subdivision Detail

 

 

 


Policy Review Committee Meeting

31 January 2011

Appendix 5 - Height Plan

 

 

 


Policy Review Committee Meeting

31 January 2011

A Leading City

 

 

 

2

Proposed changes to State Environmental Planning Policy (Exempt and Complying Development) 2008    

 

Compiled by:               Allison Cattell, Environmental Planner

Authorised by:            Paul Lemm, Development Services Manager   

 

Objective

We plan responsibly for now and the future

Community Outcome

A Council that plans responsibly for a sustainable future (3)

Strategic Response

Build our City's future on the principles of sustainability (3.1)

      

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

 

Executive Summary

Amendments to the State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) – Exempt and Complying Development Codes 2008 (The Codes SEPP) come into effect on 25 February 2011. This will provide for a new Rural Housing, Demolition and General Development Code together with allowing ‘low-risk’ bushfire and flood-prone land to be considered as Complying Development.

 

Further amendments are currently on exhibition for public comment. These changes are referred to as “Stage 2”. Proposed changes in Stage 2 include allowing new commercial and industrial buildings and alterations and additions to these buildings from between 1,000 and 5,000m2 respectively to be considered as Complying Development.

 

Submissions for Stage 2 amendments are due by 21 February 2011 and this report recommends that a submission be made to the Department of Planning (DoP), the Minister of Planning, the Local Member and the Local Government and Shires Association expressing concerns with the proposed changes to Stage 2 of the Codes SEPP.

Background

The Codes SEPP – Exempt and Complying Development Codes 2008 provides for instances where consent was not required (referred to as ‘Exempt Development’) and provides development standards for certain developments to be certified in under 10 days if the applicant demonstrates them to have been met (referred to as ‘Complying Development’).

 

This SEPP, now referred to as “The Codes SEPP”, has grown to provide development that is exempt or complying in the following chapters:

 

·    General exempt development code;

·    General housing code (lots greater than 450m2 and wider than 12 metres)

·    Housing alterations code (internal only);

·    General commercial and industrial code

·    Subdivision code

Councillors were provided with a briefing on the first batch of changes on 11 May 2009 and further proposed changes on 2 August 2010.

Changes to come into effect next month (Stage 1)

The DoP announced further changes to this policy to commence 25 February 2011 including:

 

·   Expanded General Exempt Development Code to include hot water systems, some temporary structures and tennis courts in rural zones as exempt development (Appendix 1)

·   Amendments to the General Housing Code to allow complying development on small lots above 200m2 with a minimum lot width of 6 metres (Appendix 2). Walls are also permitted to be built to the boundary under certain circumstances

·   Introduction of a Rural Housing Code [NEW chapter] to allow new dwelling houses in rural areas to be processed as complying development (Appendix 3)

·   Expanding the existing Housing Alterations Code to allow minor external alterations as complying development (Appendix 4)

·   Introduction of a General Development Code [NEW chapter] to capture development types which do not fit within other codes  or local planning policies (such as Bed and Breakfasts) (Appendix 5)

·   Creation of a Demolition Code [NEW chapter] to consolidate existing provisions from other chapters (Appendix 6)

·   Allowing complying development in some instances within heritage conservation areas (Appendix 7)

·   Allowing complying development on some ‘low-risk’ bushfire or ‘low-risk’ flood-prone land (Appendix 8 and 9)

·   Extending the concurrent operation of Council’s local complying development provisions with the Codes SEPP until 1 September 2011.

A submission was made on 6 August 2010 to the DoP raising issues with the then proposed amendments. Issues were also raised with the Exempt and Complying Expert Panel referred to later in this report. In particular, objection was raised to the inclusion of land identified as bushfire-prone, flood-prone and as a heritage conservation area as Complying Development as these areas have significant environmental considerations requiring development assessment.

 

Key issues

Consultation

Representatives from Penrith Council’s Development Services Department have attended the DoP’s Exempt and Complying Expert Panels on several occasions since the inception of the Codes SEPP. These sessions forecast changes to the policy as well as provide discussion about submissions made in response to public exhibition documents.

 

It is accepted that change that simplifies the DA process is welcomed except where quality outcomes have not been properly considered along with the implications on Council’s management of the DA system.

 

 

Certification for high risk bushfire and flood prone land

 

‘Suitably qualified persons’ are now required to certify whether the lots are ‘high risk’ prior to the lodgement of a Complying Development Certificate. If Council has the expertise to perform these functions it can, however this change may require the applicant to seek the service from the private industry. In the case of ‘low risk’ bushfire-prone land, the Rural Fire Service will be available to undertake this service for the first 12 months of the policy.

 

Planning Certificates

 

Notations to reflect the changes in exempt and complying policy will need to be amended on 149 Certificates, particularly those currently advising the site is bushfire prone or flood liable land and therefore are unable to be considered under the Codes SEPP. This has been undertaken by the Planning Information Unit in preparation for the changes.

 

Public exhibition of further proposed changes (Stage 2)

Further amendments to the Codes SEPP have been planned and are currently available for public exhibition and comment. The proposed amendments include:

 

·   Adding a new General Development Code [Proposed NEW chapter]

This new chapter proposes to consolidate other exempt and complying development provisions located in SEPP 4 (Development without consent and miscellaneous exempt and complying development), SEPP 60 (Exempt and Complying Development) and SEPP (Temporary Structures) into the Codes SEPP.

 

·   Additional exempt development types not requiring consent

It is proposed that exempt development will be expanded to include amusement devices in retail premises, automatic teller machines, awnings and canopies over waste associated with child care facilities, charity bins, commercial use of footpaths and roadside stalls on Council land, 24-hour use of retail and bulky goods one week prior to Christmas, outdoor dining on footpaths and other Council land, road side stalls, waste storage containers in road reserves and other public places, and first use of the building or portion of a building where no building work is proposed.

 

·   Internal alterations and additions for non-residential buildings

It is proposed to allow internal alterations and additions to a building that is used as a bulky goods premises, commercial premises, premises for light industry or a warehouse or distribution centre to be complying development. This is subject to the use being lawful, compliant with relevant sections of the Building Code of Australia (BCA) and there being no increase to the gross floor area.

 

·   External alterations and additions to non-residential buildings

Mechanical ventilation systems, shopfront and awning alterations, skylights and roof windows are currently considered complying development for certain buildings used as bulky goods, commercial, light industry premises or warehouse or distribution centres. It is proposed to allow this to extend to all non-residential buildings except where the land is excluded because it has heritage significance or is bushfire prone.

 

·   Expanded change of use provisions

There are currently limitations restricting changing the use of a building to another from being considered as complying development. This includes where the building classification changes under the BCA or where compliance with development standards relating to hours of operation, landscaping and car parking cannot be achieved. It is proposed to either introduce certification of these matters or introduce development standards requiring compliance with the BCA.

 

It is proposed to introduce restrictions such that changes to uses to funeral chapels, garden supplies, markets, vehicles sales/hire premises, pubs and restricted premises are not to be complying development.

 

·   Allowing the first use of non residential buildings

It is proposed to allow the first use of a building to be complying development providing permission to occupy is obtained from the Certifier and it complies with the car parking, landscaping and hours of operation required in any overarching development consent for the building.

 

·   New industrial and additions to industrial buildings

It is proposed to allow the construction of a building with a gross floor area of 5,000m2 as complying development subject to the proposed use being permissible in the zone, not constituting certain intensive uses and not being located in a heritage conservation area. Where the existing building complies with Roads and Traffic Authorities guidelines and compliance with conditions of consent can be demonstrated, an additional 5,000m2 can be considered as complying development.

Compliance with development standards including site coverage, building height, setbacks, loading areas, landscaping, car parking, fencing, stormwater, BCA matters, waste storage, signage and Section 94 contributions is to be demonstrated.

 

·   Additions to commercial buildings

Currently, external alterations and additions cannot be considered as complying development. It is proposed to require an assessment of issues similar to those mentioned above under ‘New Industrial and additions to industrial buildings’. It is proposed to require any addition to be consistent in colour with the existing building.

Key concerns

The objective behind these changes is to simplify the DA process and remove some of the delays in undertaking minor developments. It is accepted that such change is a positive thing and will assist in making the DA process more accessible and understood by the wider community. The key in delivering these changes is to ensure that “quality outcomes” are not overlooked with a desire to improve on efficiency. Overall the suite of changes are minor and pose no substantial concern with the exception of those discussed below.

 

Additional development not requiring consent

 

The practicalities in allowing commercial use of footpaths and roadside stalls on Council land are questionable. The proposed development standards have limited scope and do not address issues such as permissibility, pedestrian safety and owners consent.

 

The first use of a building or portion of a building is required to be consistent with the development consent for the base building with regards to hours of operation, landscaping and car parking. This limits consideration of these provisions where consents have not specifically referred to them. This does not allow for consideration of references made within documentation supporting the base building application unless they are specifically referred to in the consent.

 

Additional complying development categories

 

It is proposed to allow new industrial buildings and additions to existing industrial buildings not exceeding 5,000m2 to be Complying Development. The criteria does not involve compliance with any acoustic or visual standards nor does it allow a consideration of environmental matters specific to any given use. There is little consideration of compatibility with any surrounding residential areas. This is similar for commercial buildings, where it is proposed to allow additions greater than 50% of the gross floor area of the existing building or 1,000m2 whichever is the lesser. This is a serious issue which, if allowed to be complying development, will undermine the development assessment process. That is, the assessment of land-based and merits-based issues as well as community consultation and negotiation for better outcomes will not be able to occur.

 

Development such as that found at Erskine Business Park would not ordinarily be considered complying development. However, there are areas of land on already developed sites that have been set aside for future development. These may be captured as complying development in the future if they are considered additions. This is a concern as on one hand the development is of regional significance requiring determination by the Joint Regional Planning Panel and on the other hand, may now require minimal assessment as complying development.

 

Next steps

Given the implications of the proposed amendments for all Councils and the underwhelming consultation experience staff have had throughout the drafting of the Codes SEPP, it is proposed to write to the Local Government and Shires Association, the Local Member and the Minister for Planning expressing our concerns.  A submission is then recommended to be made to the Department of Planning outlining concerns with the proposed amendments to the Codes SEPP outlined in the discussion paper.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Proposed changes to State Environmental Planning Policy (Exempt and Complying Development) 2008  be received

2.     A formal submission be made to the Department of Planning expressing concerns with the proposed changes to Stage 2 of the Codes SEPP (Industrial and Commercial Code).

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1.  

Fact Sheet 2 - Part 2 General Exempt Development Code

4 Pages

Appendix

2.  

Fact Sheet 3 - Part 3 General Housing Code

5 Pages

Appendix

3.  

Fact Sheet 4 - Part 3A Rural Housing Code

4 Pages

Appendix

4.  

Fact Sheet 5 - Part 4 Housing Alterations Code

2 Pages

Appendix

5.  

Fact Sheet 6 - Part 4A General Development Code

1 Page

Appendix

6.  

Fact Sheet 7 - Part 7 Demolition Code

2 Pages

Appendix

7.  

Fact Sheet 8 - Heritage conservation areas

2 Pages

Appendix

8.  

Fact Sheet 10 - complying development on bushfire prone land

4 Pages

Appendix

9.  

Fact Sheet 11 - Complying development on flood control lots

3 Pages

Appendix

  


Policy Review Committee Meeting

31 January 2011

Appendix 1 - Fact Sheet 2 - Part 2 General Exempt Development Code

 

 

 





Policy Review Committee Meeting

31 January 2011

Appendix 2 - Fact Sheet 3 - Part 3 General Housing Code

 

 

 






Policy Review Committee Meeting

31 January 2011

Appendix 3 - Fact Sheet 4 - Part 3A Rural Housing Code

 

 

 





Policy Review Committee Meeting

31 January 2011

Appendix 4 - Fact Sheet 5 - Part 4 Housing Alterations Code

 

 

 



Policy Review Committee Meeting

31 January 2011

Appendix 5 - Fact Sheet 6 - Part 4A General Development Code

 

 

 


Policy Review Committee Meeting

31 January 2011

Appendix 6 - Fact Sheet 7 - Part 7 Demolition Code

 

 

 



Policy Review Committee Meeting

31 January 2011

Appendix 7 - Fact Sheet 8 - Heritage conservation areas

 

 

 



Policy Review Committee Meeting

31 January 2011

Appendix 8 - Fact Sheet 10 - complying development on bushfire prone land

 

 

 





Policy Review Committee Meeting

31 January 2011

Appendix 9 - Fact Sheet 11 - Complying development on flood control lots

 

 

 



 


 

 

 

 

THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT BLANK  INTENTIONALLY


 

 

A City of Opportunities

 

 

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


 

 

 

 

THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT BLANK  INTENTIONALLY


A Green City

 

Item                                                                                                                                       Page

 

URGENT

 

3        NSW Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Strategy

 

 

 


 

 

 

 

THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT BLANK  INTENTIONALLY


 

 

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


 

 

 

 

THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT BLANK  INTENTIONALLY


Urgent Reports

 

DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS

 

CONTENTS

 

Item                                                                                                                                       Page

 

3        NSW Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Strategy

 

 



Policy Review Committee Meeting - Urgent Report

31 January 2011

A Green City

 

 

 

3

NSW Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Strategy   

 

Compiled by:               Geoff Brown, Waste Management Co-ordinator

Authorised by:            Tracy Chalk, Waste and Community Protection Manager  

 

Objective

We use our resources wisely, and take responsibility for our levels of consumption

Community Outcome

A City with a smaller ecological footprint (12)

Strategic Response

Respond to the impacts of climate change, by mitigating and adapting what we do (12.1)

       

 

 

Executive Summary

The Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Strategy was developed as a requirement of the NSW Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Act 2001.The major objective of the strategy is to reduce waste by 66% by 2014.

 

The Act requires that the strategy be reviewed each 5 years to examine its implementation and progress in achieving the required targets by 2014.

 

The Minister for Climate Change and the Environment, the Hon Frank Sartor MP, has commissioned a strategic review with the issue of a Discussion draft: Strategic Directions and Implementation Plan 2011-2015 for community comment. Written comments are to be forwarded to the Department of Environment and Climate Change and Water by Wednesday 2 February 2011.

 

Penrith Council developed and implemented a Domestic Waste Strategy in 2005 in line with the State Government’s Strategy. Council has implemented its strategy to achieve best practice outcomes and is well positioned to achieve the waste reduction target of 66% by 2014. Our current waste diversion rate is 60% with further initiatives currently being considered with the view of achieving and even exceeding the target by the due date.

 

This report will detail the issues raised in the Discussion draft and recommend that Council respond to the Sate Government’s review of the Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Strategy as outlined in this report.

 

Background

 

The NSW Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Strategy (the Waste Strategy) provides an essential framework for reducing waste generation and improving the efficient use of resources. This review is the third version of the Waste Strategy since the introduction of the Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Act 2001.The Waste Strategy sets waste avoidance and resource recovery goals and targets in four key result areas:

 

 

 

 

·   Preventing and avoiding waste

 

·   Increasing recovery and use of secondary materials

 

·   Reducing toxicity in products and materials

 

·   Reducing litter and illegal dumping.

 

The NSW State Plan and the Waste Strategy has set resource recovery targets, to be achieved by 2014, for three waste sectors: municipal, commercial and industrial (C&I) and construction and demolition (C&D). The waste reduction targets for these sectors are 66%, 63% and 76% respectively.

 

The achievements to date for each of these sectors are: municipal 44%, C&I 52% and C&D 73%. The overall achievement is 59%.

 

In its strategic review the State Government advises that in order to achieve the strategy targets, NSW needs a viable and mature recycling industry, establishing and maintaining alternative waste treatment infrastructure and ensuring strong community engagement.

 

To ensure NSW is positioned to meet the 2014 waste targets the State Government advises that there is a need to focus on specific waste types, collection systems and infrastructure needs.

 

The NSW Government will develop sub targets for each of the 2014 waste targets to avoid waste generation and increase resource recovery of certain material types. Sub-targets for specific waste materials such as food and organics, and paper and cardboard will support industry and community efforts to avoid waste and recycle these materials.

 

The NSW Government’s review of progress towards achieving the 2014 waste targets highlighted specific themes for governments, industry and the community to ensure the right actions are taken to achieve the targets.

 

 Five new focus areas are proposed which are as follows:

 

1.   Making it easier for households to manage their waste

2.   Making it easier for businesses to manage their waste

3.  Reducing or removing problem wastes from the waste streams to ensure that resource recovery is cost effective and produces environmentally safe materials

4.   Facilitating investment in waste infrastructure

5.   Reducing litter and combating illegal dumping

 

The five new focus areas are fully detailed below with the inclusion comments and council’s position in relation to each item.

 

 

 

 

NSW Waste Avoidance and Resource Strategy

 

Discussion draft: Strategic Directions and Implementation Plan 2011 – 2015 (December 2010)

 

Refocussing our efforts to achieve the Waste Strategy targets

 

Focus Area 1: Making it easier for households

 

Strategy

 

To better match waste separation practices with the technology that recovers and treats waste, by:

 

1.1

Encouraging councils to adopt best practice models of household collection bins, with a minimum three-bin system with separate bins for (i) dry recyclables (glass, plastics, paper and cardboard) to move towards a 75% best practice recovery rate; (ii) garden/ food waste, where the waste does not go to alternative waste treatment plants; and (iii) residual waste. Careful analysis will need to be undertaken with councils to ensure that the bin capacities and collection frequencies for householders to recycle are sufficient and that effective education is provided.

 

Comment

Penrith City Council implemented the best practice model for household waste collection in August 2009 with the introduction of a third bin for the weekly collection of garden and food organics.  The residual waste bin was reduced in size and collection frequency to comply with best practice as identified by the Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water NSW (DECCW).  Recycling services remain on a fortnightly collection program with the availability of additional bins at a reduced price.  Council provides variable bin options and collection frequencies to cater for the differing needs of the community.  Our recovery rate of dry recyclables for the urban area achieves the 75% best practice recovery rate identified by DECCW.

 

1.2

Promoting the separation of food waste by funding the use of Australian Standard compostable bags for the collection of household food waste (where the waste does not go to alternative waste treatment plants) and encouraging collection of mixed food and garden wastes for composting or energy production in major population centres.

 

Comment

Council currently promotes the separation of food waste by the community through the provision of compostable bags.  Bags are being provided in packs of 80 on a quarterly basis until September 2011.  The cost to provide these bags is substantial and funding through the State Government for the ongoing supply of these bags would allow the continued provision of these bags to residents.

 

1.3

Supporting home composting in council areas where there is no access to alternative waste treatment plants or food/ garden waste composting facilities.

 

Comment

Council provides home compost bins and worm farms at cost price to the community to further encourage waste avoidance and reuse of organic material on site.  The provision of this service is further enhanced through community education programs. Council supports the opportunity to further encourage home based composting to all residents.

 

1.4

Using targeted education, communication and partnerships to improve resource recovery by households, for example by conducting a series of targeted media and education campaigns to help households recycle their waste – ‘what to put in what bin’.

 

Comment

Council provides a comprehensive school and community education and communication program to encourage and improve waste avoidance and resource recovery practices within households.

 

The opportunity to provide a uniform consistent message to all residents and communities is considered a valuable education tool to promote increased positivity toward resource recovery in all waste streams.

 

1.5

Aligning future waste and sustainability performance payments to facilitate councils transitioning to best practice models.

 

Comment

It is recommended that Council support the aligning of future Waste and Sustainability Performance (WaSIP) payments to facilitate councils transitioning to best practice models.  This will encourage other councils to follow Penrith’s lead in the recovery and reuse of the three major components found in the domestic waste stream - dry recyclables, food and garden organics and residual waste. Council would look to a consultation process in any proposal to re align WaSIP payments.

 

1.6

Funding trials with major retailers, cling wrap producers and nappy manufacturers for the use of compostable materials instead of plastics. Two year trials to commence by 2011.

 

Comment

It is recommended that Council support this activity to encourage the development and manufacture of compostable products in lieu of non-recyclables. Council understands this would require the support of business, commercial and technology stakeholders and looks to the lead of State and Federal Governments to ensure success and uptake of such initiatives.

 

1.7

Expanding the number of municipal waste collection centres.

 

Comment

Further discussion/clarification would be required to adequately comment on this initiative, however Council agrees that sorting, processing and reuse of waste is preferable to landfilling.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Focus Area 2: Making it easier for businesses to manage their waste

 

Strategy

 

To the unique barriers that stand in the way of small and large businesses improving recycling performance by:

2.1

Encouraging large businesses to move to a best practice model of source separated materials and / or alternative waste treatment by 31 December 2012.

 

Comment

Council agrees that the unique nature of these barriers are such that the development of strategies and initiatives in this area are best advanced by business and state government working together.

 

2.2

Facilitating councils to provide isolated Commercial and Industrial (C&I) businesses, such as corner or individual shops, with similar kerbside waste collection services as their residential customers, in order to increase recycling rates, including consideration of appropriate regulatory changes to be effective by July 2012.

 

Comment

Council currently provides domestic waste services to small commercial operations that operate from an existing dwelling and adjoin other residential properties.  These businesses generally include doctor and dental surgeries, legal offices, etc. however corner shops as such have not been included.

 

Increasing the level of this service to include neighbourhood shopping centres and the like under the umbrella of the domestic waste service could contravene the provisions of the Local Government Act in relation to the provision of domestic waste services. Income generated from the development and provision of domestic waste services cannot currently be used to cross-subsidise the provision of non-domestic services. 

 

2.3

Encouraging other small/ medium businesses to move to a best practice model of a two-bin system and/ or alternative waste treatment.

 

Comment

The two bin waste system is available to small/ medium business through the commercial waste collection industry. It is recommended that Council support further opportunity for the uptake of such services through the focus area initiatives outlined in this discussion paper.

 

2.4

Investigating the development of place-based or precinct solutions for small to medium C& I businesses, and potentially also for larger businesses. Industry groups (e.g. local chambers of commerce) or local councils could contract waste services on behalf of local businesses in the same way that regional organisations of councils do for councils. It should be more efficient for one contractor to service all the buildings in a precinct rather than several trucks going to the same destination. Waste could be ‘bundled’ so that innovative source separation solutions could be implemented.

 

 

Comment

It is recommended that this is an area best initiated by the state government in conjunction with industry groups - building on such successful examples as the development of recycling collection contracts to service government and local government premises. An extension of this system to include small to medium industry would seem a strong base to commence consultation as it would be managed and controlled by a central body.

 

2.5

Examining regulatory changes which may be required to enable the changes in section 2.4 to be effective by 1 July 2013.

 

Comment

Regulatory changes would be required for the implementation of the changes proposed in 2.4. (and 2.2).

 

2.6

Developing and implementing planning guidelines requiring best practice waste infrastructure to increase resource recovery from large commercial businesses, such as shopping centres and office buildings by 31 December 2011.

 

Comment

This initiative is one where consultation with councils and the relevant business sectors would provide valuable specifications and operational guidelines to such an initiative if led by the government so as to ensure uniformity and consistent uptake throughout the state.

 

2.7

Using targeted education, communication and partnerships to improve resource recovery by businesses, for example, by conducting a series of targeted education campaigns ‘to promote recycling at work as well as at home’.

 

Comment

It is recommended that Council strongly supports such a government led campaign. As stated in response comment 1.4, the opportunity to provide a uniform consistent message to all is a valuable education tool to promote increased positivity toward resource recovery in all aspects of our lives.

.

2.8

Aligning future grants to facilitate businesses transitioning to best practice waste management by 1 July 2011.

 

Comment

Subject to adequate research and consultation, it is considered that this is an appropriate criteria in future grant programming.

 

2.9

Supporting the development of new facilities to maximise recovery of materials from mixed C&I wastes.

 

Comment

As per comment 2.1.

 

 

Focus Area 3: Reducing or removing problem wastes from the waste streams to ensure that resource recovery is cost effective and produces environmentally safe materials.

 

(Problem wastes – gas bottles, lead acid batteries, e-waste, mattresses, plastic bags, sharps, tyres, medicine residues, pesticides, paint residues, oils, and mercury containing lamps)

 

Strategy

 

To extract ‘problem’ wastes from waste streams so they do not impair mainstream recycling by:

 

3.1

Continuing to drive action nationally to introduce extended producer responsibility (EPR) schemes to tackle priority wastes identified in the National Waste Policy. At the November 2010 meeting of Environment Ministers, the NSW Minister for the Environment and Climate Change proposed EPR schemes, in addition to the priority television and computer schemes, to tackle new priority wastes including paints, batteries (including lead-acid and hand held batteries) and timber.

 

Comment

This initiative is currently led through DECCW to the Federal Government. It is recommended that Council support Federally adopted initiatives for the extraction of problem waste.

 

3.2

Ensuring that, in the absence of substantive progress nationally, NSW will implement producer responsibility arrangements and action by State level by 1 July 2013.

 

Comment

Should this be the decision of the DECCW, funding sources would need to be identified and any actions required of local government subject to consultation and mutual agreement.

 

3.3

Subsidising the recovery of particular problem wastes, with five-yearly reviews to ensure the subsidies are sufficiently predictable to support industry, but reviewed to ensure that the economic needs remain valid.

 

Comment

As comment 3.2.

 

3.4

Aligning future waste and sustainability infrastructure grants to subsidise the capital costs of progressively providing permanent local collection depots for problem wastes to supplement the existing annual collection events.

 

Comments

As comment 3.2.

 

3.5

Implementing prohibition on problem wastes (i.e. e-waste, batteries, paints), once EPR schemes and more collection and drop-off facilities are in operation, including prohibitions on the disposal to landfill of recyclables that have been aggregated or source-separated for resource recovery (i.e. paper, plastics, glass, garden waste, and cardboard etc) by 2015.

 

Comments

As comment 3.2.

 

3.6

Introducing measures to reduce the use of non-biodegradable plastic bags to commence by 1 July 2014.

 

Comments

It is recommended that such an initiative be supported by Council. It is also recommended that this program should be implemented earlier and in consultation with the development of Action 1.2.

 

 

Focus Area 4: Facilitating investment in waste infrastructure

 

Strategy

 

To increase support to expand waste infrastructure by:

 

4.1

Developing a resource recovery infrastructure needs assessment to outline NSW’s resource recovery requirement assumptions and projections and necessary lead times for infrastructure construction by 1July 2011.

 

4.2

Developing clearer land-use planning guidelines for waste and resource recovery facilities by 31 December 2011.

 

4.3

Actively promoting and assisting new entrants to the waste infrastructure market, as is done for other major developments. Taking a ‘case management’ approach should help new players understand and negotiate government regulations and planning processes and promote innovative waste infrastructure solutions.

 

4.4

Immediately removing the 2013 expiry date for the use of alternative waste treatment (AWT) derived compost on agricultural land, and developing an agreed trial program to assess the impacts of physical contaminants in AWT compost by 31 December 2014.

 

4.5

Establishing expert panels to provide DECCW with independent advice on complex resource recovery issues and the technical, commercial and regulatory hurdles to increased resource recovery via AWT by 1 July 2011.

 

4.6

Releasing an updated energy from waste policy for stakeholder consultation by 1 July 2011.

 

4.7

Using the powers of the Protection of the Environment Operations Waste Regulation to require all waste recyclers and reprocessors to provide annual waste and recycling data to the Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water (DECCW) via simple on-line reporting by 30 December 2011.

 

4.8

Establishing a regular high-level government and industry forum to identify and solve important waste issues by 1 May 2011.

 

 

Summary comment Focus Area 4

 

Council believes facilitating investment in waste infrastructure is best led by State and Federal Government in all of the initiatives outlined above.

 

However with regard to 4.5, it is recommended that Council support the appointment of a suitably qualified local government delegate to any expert panel to provide DECCW with advice in regard to increased resource recovery by AWT.

 

Focus Area 5: Reducing litter and combating illegal dumping

 

Strategy

 

To focus on enforcement and education by:

 

5.1

Re-establishing the litter reduction taskforce by 1 May 2011.

 

Comments

It is recommended that Council support the re-establishment of the litter reduction taskforce and support such litter reduction measures.

 

5.2

Implementing a renewed public education campaign about littering (Don’t be a tosser).

 

Comments

In line with Councils comment of 1.4 and 2.7, Council supports waste education and resource recovery education campaigns to ensure consistent messaging.

It is recommended that Council support a renewed “Don’t be a tosser” campaign subject to mutually agreeable funding.

 

5.3

Conducting training programs and support for enforcement officers for littering offences (councils, DECCW, Sydney Catchment Authority, NSW Police).

 

Comments

It is recommended that Council supports the opportunity for these training programs to ensure initiatives such as those outlined in 5.2 continue.

 

5.4

Reviewing the options to permit the issuing of fines for littering from third party reports by 1 July 2011.

 

Comments

Generally authorised officers within their jurisdictional region are permitted to issue fines for littering. Should this review lead to a third party actioning littering incidents, it is recommended that council indicates initial support to the concept subject to further information and consideration.

 

5.5

Implementing a series of litter reduction grants to councils to target litter hotpots, such as major roads and shopping centres.

 

Comments

Council welcomes the opportunity to access further litter reduction grants.

5.6

Conducting at least 15 high profile waste compliance and enforcement campaigns targeting illegal waste dumping each year.

 

Comments

Penrith City Council is the host of a very successful RID Squad and would support increased assistance to all illegal waste dumping initiatives.

 

5.7

Conducting at least four major targeted enforcement campaigns each year, in partnership with local councils around fast food outlets near major roads such as F3 and M4.

 

Comments

Subject to the adequate provision of all resources i.e.: staff, funding and stakeholder partnerships, it is recommended that Council supports this initiative.

 

5.8

Funding greater public place collection infrastructure and clean up of hotspots to discourage further littering.

 

Comments

It is recommended that Penrith City Council support this initiative subject to further consultation and adoption of mutually agreeable guidelines by both levels of government.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on NSW Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Strategy be received

2.     The Waste and Community Protection Manager provide a written response to the Department of Environment and Climate Change and Water within the terms of the comments made in this report.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.