2 February 2011

 

Dear Councillor,

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

 

2.           APOLOGIES

 

3.           CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

Ordinary Meeting - 13 December 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 COUNCIL

 

6.           MAYORAL MINUTES

 

7.           NOTICES OF MOTION TO RESCIND A RESOLUTION

 

8.           NOTICES OF MOTION AND QUESTIONS ON NOTICE

 

9.           ADOPTION OF REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATION OF COMMITTEES

 

10.         DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS

 

11.         REQUESTS FOR REPORTS AND MEMORANDUMS

 

12.         URGENT BUSINESS

 

13.         COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE


ORDINARY MEETING

 

Monday 7 February 2011

 

table of contents

 

 

 

 

ADVANCE AUSTRALIA FAIR

 

 

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

 

 

PRAYER

 

 

COUNCIL CHAMBER seating arrangements

 

 

meeting calendar

 

 

confirmation of minutes

 

 

PROCEDURE FOR ADDRESSING COUNCIL MEETING

 

 

MAYORAL MINUTES

 

 

report and recommendations of committees

 

 

DELIVERY program reports


 

ADVANCE AUSTRALIA FAIR

 

 

 

Australians all let us rejoice,

For we are young and free;

We’ve golden soil and wealth for toil;

Our home is girt by sea;

Our land abounds in nature’s gifts

Of beauty rich and rare;

In history’s page, let every stage

Advance Australia Fair.

 

In joyful strains then let us sing,

Advance Australia Fair.

 

Beneath our radiant Southern Cross

We’ll toil with hearts and hands;

To make this Commonwealth of ours

Renowned of all the lands;

For those who’ve come across the seas

We’ve boundless plains to share;

With courage let us all combine

To Advance Australia Fair.

 

In joyful strains then let us sing,

Advance Australia Fair.

 



Statement of Recognition of Penrith City’s

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Cultural Heritage

 

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

 

 

PRAYER

 

 

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

 

 

 

 


For members of the public addressing the meeting

 
Council Chambers

Text Box: Lectern

Group Managers                          

                
          

 
Seating Arrangements

 

 

 

Director
Craig Butler

 

 

Director
Barry Husking

 

 

 

General Manager
Alan Stoneham

His Worship the Mayor
Councillor
Kevin Crameri OAM
North Ward

 

Acting Executive Officer
Glenn Schuil

 

 

Minute Clerk

 

 

 

 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 


                                                        

 

 

Text Box: Public Gallery
Text Box: Managers
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Group Managers                          

                
          

 
   


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 ORDINARY MEETING OF PENRITH CITY COUNCIL HELD IN THE

COUNCIL CHAMBERS

ON MONDAY 13 DECEMBER 2010 AT 7:09PM

NATIONAL ANTHEM 

The meeting opened with the National Anthem.

STATEMENT OF RECOGNITION

His Worship the Mayor, Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM read a statement of recognition of Penrith City’s Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Cultural Heritage.

PRAYER

The Council Prayer was read by Rev. Neil Checkley.

PRESENT

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

 

APOLOGIES

There were no apologies.

 

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM declared a Non-Pecuniary Conflict of Interest – Significant in Item 12 -  Development Application DA10/0275 - Proposed 2 Lot Torrens Title Subdivision at Lot 200 DP 811535 (No. 28 - 30) Grays Lane, Cranebrook. Applicant: Freeburn Surveying;  Owner: Lexie and Giovanni Cettolin of the Confirmation of Minutes - Ordinary Meeting - 29 November 2010 as he exchanged preferences with one of the owners at the last local government election.

 

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM also declared a Non-Pecuniary Conflict of Interest – Less than Significant in Committee of the Whole Item 4 – Personnel Matter - Communication Protocol as the matter indirectly concerns an individual who voluntarily handed out election material for Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM. Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM indicated he would leave the room for discussion of the item.

 

Councillor Robert Ardill declared a Pecuniary Interest in Item 3 - Development Application Referrals to the Access Committee, DA09/0779 Lot 1 DP 781405 (No. 241-245) High Street, Penrith – Part demolition of the existing building and construction of a new building for a Medical Centre of the Report and Recommendations of the Access Committee Meeting held on 1 December 2010 as the medical centre are a client of his.  Councillor Ardill indicated he would leave the room for consideration of this item.

 

 

Councillor Ben Goldfinch declared a Pecuniary Interest in Item 12 - Development Application DA10/0275 - Proposed 2 Lot Torrens Title Subdivision at Lot 200 DP 811535 (No. 28 - 30) Grays Lane, Cranebrook. Applicant: Freeburn Surveying;  Owner: Lexie and Giovanni Cettolin of the Confirmation of Minutes - Ordinary Meeting - 29 November 2010 as he exchanged preferences with one of the owners at the last local government election.

 

Councillor Ross Fowler OAM also declared a Pecuniary Interest in Item 12 - Development Application DA10/0275 - Proposed 2 Lot Torrens Title Subdivision at Lot 200 DP 811535 (No. 28 - 30) Grays Lane, Cranebrook. Applicant: Freeburn Surveying;  Owner: Lexie and Giovanni Cettolin of the Confirmation of Minutes - Ordinary Meeting - 29 November 2010 as the owners are a client of his.

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES - Ordinary Meeting - 29 November 2010

435  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ben Goldfinch seconded Councillor Marko Malkoc that the minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of 29 November 2010 be confirmed with the exception of Item 12 - Development Application DA10/0275 - Proposed 2 Lot Torrens Title Subdivision at Lot 200 DP 811535 (No. 28 - 30) Grays Lane, Cranebrook. Applicant: Freeburn Surveying;  Owner: Lexie and Giovanni Cettolin

 

Having previously declared Pecuniary Interests in Item 12  of the confirmed minutes His Worship the Mayor, Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM and Councillors Ross Fowler OAM and Ben Goldfinch left the room, the time being 7:16pm.

 

Deputy Mayor, Councillor Jim Aitken OAM took the chair for consideration of Item 12 - Development Application DA10/0275 - Proposed 2 Lot Torrens Title Subdivision at Lot 200 DP 811535 (No. 28 - 30) Grays Lane, Cranebrook. Applicant: Freeburn Surveying;  Owner: Lexie and Giovanni Cettolin of the Confirmation of Minutes - Ordinary Meeting - 29 November 2010.

 

Councillor Marko Malkoc put forward that a case in support of the Development Application was attached to a Memorandum issued to all Councillors by the Council’s Group Manager – Legal & Governance and that it is proper for Council Officers to forward that document to the Department of Planning in support of Resolution number 417.

 

436  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Marko Malkoc seconded Councillor John Thain that Item 12 - Development Application DA10/0275 - Proposed 2 Lot Torrens Title Subdivision at Lot 200 DP 811535 (No. 28 - 30) Grays Lane, Cranebrook. Applicant: Freeburn Surveying;  Owner: Lexie and Giovanni Cettolin of the Confirmation of Minutes - Ordinary Meeting - 29 November 2010 be confirmed with the document that supports the case of the Development Application being forwarded to the Department of Planning.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mayoral Minutes

 

1        The passing of Pat Singh                                                                                                   

437  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM seconded Councillor Jim Aitken OAM that the Mayoral Minute on The passing of Pat Singh be received.

         Councillors Jim Aitken OAM, Jackie Greenow and Greg Davies spoke in support of the Mayoral Minute.

 

2        Council recognised for commitment to gender equity                                                    

438  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM seconded Councillor Jim Aitken OAM that the Mayoral Minute on Council recognised for commitment to gender equity be received.

       Councillors Jim Aitken OAM and Karen McKeown spoke in support of the Mayoral Minute.

 

3        2010 National Disability Awards                                                                                      

439  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM seconded Councillor Jim Aitken OAM that the Mayoral Minute on 2010 National Disability Awards be received.

       Councillors Jim Aitken OAM and Jackie Greenow spoke in support of the Mayoral Minute.

 

4        James Courtney wins V8 Supercar Championship                                                        

440  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM seconded Councillor John Thain that the Mayoral Minute on James Courtney wins V8 Supercar Championship be received.

       Councillors John Thain and Jim Aitken OAM spoke in support of the Mayoral Minute.

 

Councillor John Thain left the meeting, the time being 7:45pm.

 

5        Retirement of Panthers Director Barry Walsh OAM                                                    

441  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM seconded Councillor Jim Aitken OAM that the Mayoral Minute on Retirement of Panthers Director Barry Walsh OAM be received.

       Councillor Jim Aitken OAM spoke in support of the Mayoral Minute.

 

 

 

Reports of Committees

 

1        Report and Recommendations of the Penrith Valley Community Safety Partnership Meeting held on 24 November 2010                                                                                 

442  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Karen McKeown seconded Councillor Mark Davies that the recommendations contained in the Report and Recommendations of the Penrith Valley Community Safety Partnership meeting held on 24 November, 2010 be adopted.

 

Having previously declared a Pecuniary Interest in Item 3 of the Report and Recommendations of the Access Committee Meeting held on 1 December 2010, Councillor Robert Ardill left the meeting, the time being 7.48pm.

 

Councillor John Thain returned to the meeting, the time being 7:48pm.

 

2        Report and Recommendations of the Access Committee Meeting held on 1 December 2010                                                                                                                                             

443  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jackie Greenow seconded Councillor Prue Guillaume that the recommendations contained in the Report and Recommendations of the Access Committee meeting held on 1 December, 2010 be adopted with an amendment to Councillor Robert Ardill’s declaration of interest in Item 3, to be a Pecuniary Interest.

 

Councillor Robert Ardill returned to the meeting, the time being 7:48pm.

 

3        Report and Recommendations of the Waste Services Committee Meeting held on 2 December 2010                                                                                                                   

444  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Marko Malkoc seconded Councillor Kath Presdee that the recommendations contained in the Report and Recommendations of the Waste Services Committee meeting held on 2 December, 2010 be adopted.

 

Procedural Motion

445  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Jackie Greenow that the Report and Recommendations of the Waste Services Committee Meeting held on 2 December 2010 be moved to Committee of the Whole to consider a:

Personnel matter

As this item refers to personnel matters concerning particular individuals and discussion of the matter in open meeting would be, on balance, contrary to the public interest.

 

Note:  A further resolution on this matter is included at Minute No. 458 of these Minutes, when the matter was recommitted for consideration of Council.

 

4        Report and Recommendations of the Local Traffic Committee Meeting held on 6 December 2010                                                                                                                   

446  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Karen McKeown seconded Councillor John Thain that the recommendations contained in the Report and Recommendations of the Local Traffic Committee meeting held on 6 December, 2010 be adopted.

 

 

DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS

 

A Leading City

 

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

447  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Marko Malkoc seconded Councillor Karen McKeown

That:

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

2.     Development Applications which would normally warrant reporting to Council between 14 December 2010 and 6 February 2011 inclusive be determined under the General Manager’s delegation by the General Manager, after consultation with the Mayor.

3.     A report be presented to the Ordinary Council Meeting to be held on 7 February 2011 relating to the operations of the organisation during this period.

 

3        Summary of Investments & Banking for the period 1 November 2010 to 30 November 2010                                                                                                                                             

448  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Marko Malkoc seconded Councillor Karen McKeown

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Summary of Investments & Banking for the period 1 November 2010 to 30 November 2010 be received.

2.     The Certificate of the Responsible Accounting Officer and Summaries of Investments and Performance for the period 1 November 2010 to 30 November 2010 be noted and accepted.

3.     The graphical investment analysis as at 30 November 2010 be noted.

 

1        Public Exhibition of the Wianamatta Regional Park draft Masterplan                       

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

That:

1.   The information contained in the report on Public Exhibition of the Wianamatta Regional Park draft Masterplan be received.

2.   Council endorse a submission to DECCW that indicates general support for the draft Masterplan, and outlines the matters addressed in this report.

 

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

For

Against

 

Councillor Kaylene Allison

 

Councillor Prue Guillaume

 

Councillor Karen McKeown

 

Councillor Kath Presdee

 

Councillor Greg Davies

 

Councillor John Thain

 

Councillor Jackie Greenow

 

Councillor Jim Aitken OAM

 

Councillor Ross Fowler OAM

 

Councillor Robert Ardill

 

Councillor Mark Davies

 

Councillor Ben Goldfinch

 

Councillor Tanya Davies

 

Councillor Marko Malkoc

 

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM

 

 

A City of Opportunities

 

4        Advocacy Program                                                                                                            

450  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ben Goldfinch seconded Councillor Marko Malkoc

That:

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

2.     Council endorse the Advocacy Program as a platform to lobby for the City’s current and future needs.

 

 

5        Development Application DA10/0802 Proposed boundary adjustment, construction of a new dwelling, installation of an on-site sewage management system and landscaping at Lot 6 DP 258484 & Lot 5 DP 258484 (No. 70 - 72) Church Lane, Cranebrook. Applicant: PreTech Pty Ltd;  Owner: Mr Terence & Mrs Jacqueline Brown                               

451  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Robert Ardill seconded Councillor Jim Aitken OAM

That:

1.      The information contained in the report on Development Application DA10/0802 Proposed boundary adjustment, construction of a new dwelling, installation of an on-site sewage management system and landscaping at Lot 6 DP 258484 & Lot 5 DP 258484 (No. 70 - 72) Church Lane, Cranebrook be received.

 

2.      The submitted SEPP 1 objection to Clauses 11(2)(b) and 12 (2)(a) be supported.

3.      Development Application DA10/0802 be referred to the Department of Planning for concurrence.

4.      Upon receipt of concurrence from the Department of Planning, Development Application DA10/0802 be determined under delegated authority by way of approval.

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

For

Against

 

Councillor Kaylene Allison

 

Councillor Prue Guillaume

 

Councillor Karen McKeown

 

Councillor Kath Presdee

 

Councillor Greg Davies

 

Councillor John Thain

 

Councillor Jackie Greenow

 

Councillor Jim Aitken OAM

 

Councillor Ross Fowler OAM

 

Councillor Robert Ardill

 

Councillor Mark Davies

 

Councillor Ben Goldfinch

 

Councillor Tanya Davies

 

Councillor Marko Malkoc

 

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM

 

 

A Liveable City

 

6        Penrith Commuter Carpark - Tender 15-10/11 Selection                                              

452  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jim Aitken OAM seconded Councillor John Thain

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Penrith Commuter Carpark - Tender 15-10/11 Selection be received.

2.     Tender 15-10/11 for the construction of the Penrith Commuter Carpark be awarded to Denham Constructions Pty Ltd for a Fixed Lump Sum of $10,845,101 (excluding GST), once:

(i) the carpark site has been transferred to Council;

(ii) the State and Federal funding agreements have been executed; and

(iii) the carpark construction plans have been approved by TNSW and RailCorp.

3       The General Manager be authorised to execute the funding agreements.

4       The Council seal be affixed to any necessary documentation.

5.      A letter be sent to the Federal Member for Penrith, thanking him for his personal efforts in securing funding for the car park.

 

 A Vibrant City

 

7        2011 Seniors Week Grants Program                                                                                

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

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on 2011 Seniors Week Grants Program be received.

2.     Council approve Seniors Week grants to fourteen (14) local community organisations to the value of $6,473 as outlined in this report for activities to celebrate Seniors Week 2011.

 

 

Councillor Robert Ardill left the meeting, the time being 8:05pm.

 

REQUESTS FOR REPORTS AND MEMORANDUMS

 

RR 1          Reopening of Riley Street to Buses                                                                         

Councillor John Thain requested a report to the Local Traffic Committee and a meeting with Westfield and Westbus concerning the reopening of Riley Street to buses and how this can be achieved.

 

Councillor Robert Ardill returned to the meeting, the time being 8:06pm.

 

RR 2          Shadlow Crescent, St Clair - Speeding Issues                                                        

Councillor Tanya Davies has received petitions concerning 2 zones outside of 6 & 47 Shadlow Crescent, St Clair where speeding is a major concern. Councillor Tanya Davies requested that the speeding in these areas be investigated and measured and a report brought back to the Local Traffic Committee.

 

Councillor John Thain left the meeting, the time being 8:09pm.

Councillor John Thain returned to the meeting, the time being 8:10pm.

 

RR 3          Walkers Lane, St Clair - Motorbike traffic                                                           

Councillor Tanya Davies requested a report to the Local Traffic Committee and investigation on Walkers Lane to explore all options available to prevent motorbike access through this laneway.

 

 

RR 4          Purchase of Cat Traps                                                                                             

Councillor Tanya Davies requested a report to Council concerning the option of purchasing 10 cat traps from East Ward voted works to be loaned to a  resident of St Clair.

 

RR 5          Woodstock House, Plumpton - Heritage                                                                

Councillor Jackie Greenow requested a report to Council outlining Blacktown City Council’s purchase of Woodstock house and the restoration plans and why Penrith City Council cannot do the same with similar heritage properties.

Councillor John Thain left the meeting, the time being 8:14pm.

Councillor John Thain returned to the meeting, the time being 8:14pm.

 

RR 6          Placement of Speed Reduction Devices                                                                  

Councillor Mark Davies requested a memorandum to all Councillors outlining the policy or procedure for the placement of speeding barriers.

 

URGENT BUSINESS

 

UB 1          Solander Road, St Clair - Amenities Block                                                            

Councillor Greg Davies requested that an amount of $8,000 for repairs to the amenities block at Solander Road, St Clair ( Peter Kearns Reserve) be allocated from East Ward Voted works and that attempts to complete the work are made prior to the commencement of the fields for training in 2011.

 

454  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Jackie Greenow that the matter be brought forward and dealt with as an urgent matter.

 

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

 

455  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Jackie Greenow that that an amount of $8,000 for repairs to the amenities block at Solander Road, St Clair ( Peter Kearns Reserve) be allocated from East Ward Voted works and that attempts to complete the work are made prior to the commencement of the fields for training in 2011.

Committee of the Whole

 

456  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Marko Malkoc seconded Councillor Jackie Greenow that the meeting adjourn to the Committee of the Whole to deal with the following matters, the time being 8:16pm.

 

 

1        Presence of the Public

 

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

 

 

A Leading City

 

2        Commercial Matter - Property - High Street, Penrith                                                    

 

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.

 

3        Commercial Matter - Council Property - Lease Assignment of Shop 6 at Cranebrook Village Shopping Centre                                                                                                                

 

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

 

4        Personnel Matter - Communication Protocol                                                                  

 

This item has been referred to Committee of the Whole as the report refers to personnel matters concerning particular individuals and discussion of the matter in open meeting would be, on balance, contrary to the public interest.

 

5        Personnel Matter - Report and Recommendations of the Waste Services Committee Meeting held on 2 December 2010

 

This item has been referred to the Committee of the Whole as the report refers to personnel

matters concerning particular individuals and discussion of the matter in open meeting would be, on balance, contrary to the public interest.

 

The meeting resumed at 8:52pm and the Acting General Manager reported that the Committee of the Whole met at 8:16pm on 13 December 2010 the following being present

 

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

 

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

 

CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS

 

2        Commercial Matter - Property - High Street, Penrith                                                    

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

CW2 That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Commercial Matter - Property - High Street, Penrith be received.

2.     Negotiations commence with the owner’s agent as outlined in the valuers letter.

3.     A further report be presented to Council as to the outcome of this matter.

 

 

 

3        Commercial Matter - Council Property - Lease Assignment of Shop 6 at Cranebrook Village Shopping Centre                                                                                                   

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

CW3 That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Commercial Matter - Council Property - Lease Assignment of Shop 6 at Cranebrook Village Shopping Centre be received.

2.     Council grant an Assignment of the Lease from Mr John Lui to Mr Zafar Ali over Shop 6 at Cranebrook Village Shopping Centre in accordance with the terms outlined in the report.

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

 

 

 

5        Personnel Matter - Report and Recommendations of the Waste Services Committee Meeting held on 2 December 2010                                                                                   

CW5 RECOMMENDED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Kath Presdee that the information contained in the Report and Recommendations of the Waste Services Committee Meeting held on 2 December 2010 be received.

 

 

 

Having previously declared a Non-Pecuniary Conflict of Interest – Less than Significant in Committee of the Whole Item 4 – Personnel Matter - Communication Protocol and his intention to leave the room for discussion of the matter, Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM left the meeting, the time being 8:31pm.

 

Deputy Mayor, Councillor Jim Aitken OAM took the Chair for consideration of Item 4 – Personnel Matter – Communication Protocol the time being 8:32pm.

 

4        Personnel Matter - Communication Protocol                                                                  

RECOMMENDED on the MOTION of Councillor Ross Fowler OAM seconded Councillor John Thain

CW4 That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Personnel Matter - Communication Protocol be received.

2.     The recommendations in the report be adopted.

3.     That as the Mayor, Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM has declared a Conflict of Interest in this Item, Council appoint the Deputy Mayor, Councillor Jim Aitken OAM subject to the Division of Local Government raising no objection, to investigate the matters referred to in this report.

 

 

His Worship the Mayor, Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM, returned to the meeting the time being 8:51pm, and resumed the Chair.

 

ADOPTION OF Committee of the Whole

 

457  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Ross Fowler OAM that the recommendation contained in the Committee of the Whole and shown as CW1, CW2, CW3,CW4 and CW5 be adopted.

 

 

Recommittal of Report and Recommendations of the Waste Services Committee Meeting held on 2 December 2010

 

458  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Kath Presdee that the recommendations contained in the Report and Recommendations of the Waste Services Committee meeting held on 2 December, 2010 be adopted with a sentence in General Business to now read “Discussion ensued about social media activities”.

 

 

There being no further business the Chairperson declared the meeting closed the time being 8:55pm.

 


PENRITH CITY COUNCIL

 

Procedure for Addressing Meetings

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

The Public Officer or Minute Clerk will speak to those people who have requested permission to address the meeting, prior to the meeting at 7.15pm.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

The person addressing the meeting needs to clearly indicate:

 

· Their name;

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Glenn McCarthy

Public Officer

02 4732 7649                                                     


 

 

 

 

THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT BLANK  INTENTIONALLY


Mayoral Minutes

 

Item                                                                                                                                                Page

 

1        Councillor Karen McKeown elected to Local Health Network

 

2        Locals recognised with Australia Day Honours

 

3        The Success of the 2011 Australia Day Celebrations

 

 



Ordinary Meeting

7 February 2011

A Vibrant City

 

Mayoral Minute

Councillor Karen McKeown elected to Local Health Network

Strategic Objective: A City that promotes health and wellbeing (21)

           

 

I would like to congratulate Councillor Karen McKeown on her appointment to the Nepean Blue Mountains Local Health Network Governing Council last month.

 

The Network is one of 18 in NSW to replace Area Health Services. It is part of Commonwealth-State health reforms to strengthen local decision-making and community involvement in health service delivery.

 

Cr McKeown is one of nine members appointed to the Governing Council who bring a broad range of skills and an impressive depth of experience to their role. Together they will contribute to the governance and oversight of the Nepean Blue Mountains Local Health Network and represent the interests of the local community.

 

The Governing Council will work closely with Nepean, Hawkesbury, Springwood, Lithgow and Blue Mountains District ANZAC Memorial hospitals and the Portland Tabulam Health Centre.

 

I know the Penrith community will be well represented by Cr McKeown, who has a strong understanding of local issues and is involved in a wide range of community, regional and state committees and bodies.

 

In stepping into this important role Cr McKeown has once again demonstrated her commitment to Penrith and its communities.

 

 

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM

Mayor

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That the Mayoral Minute on Councillor Karen McKeown elected to Local Health Network be received.

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

7 February 2011

A Vibrant City

 

Mayoral Minute

Locals recognised with Australia Day Honours

Strategic Objective: A City with opportunities to engage, participate and connect (23)

           

Three people from the City of Penrith were honoured in the 2011 Australia Day Honours List, announced on Wednesday 26 January. Congratulations to Patricia Gillett, John Boccanfuso and Lionel Clough who received Order of Australia Medals (OAM).

 

This year’s recipients bring to 105 the total number of citizens from Penrith City to receive the nation’s highest honour.

 

Patricia Joy Gillett OAM of Glenmore Park, known as Joy, was recognised for her service through Rotary International. Joy is the chief executive officer of Australian Rotary Health.

 

John Boccanfuso OAM of Kingswood has been raising funds for the not-for-profit disability organisation House with No Steps since the 1970s.

 

Lionel Clough OAM of Jamisontown, known as Don, is director of the Penrith Harness Racing Club and was recognised for his service to the industry.

 

I’d also like to congratulate former Penrith High School captain and current Governor of Queensland Penny Wensley on being appointed a companion (AC) of the Order of Australia.

 

Five local residents were also honoured in the 2011 Penrith City Australia Day Citizens Awards, a further reflection of our extremely talented, generous and active community.

 

Community Award Recipient Margaret Dwyer was recognised for her work with the sick and frail through her church and various community groups.

 

Community Award Recipient Jill Huber, who is blind, has made a lasting contribution to Penrith City making it a better place for people with a disability.

 

Community Award Recipient James Tiberi has, for many years, tutored our City’s senior residents in a range of subjects as diverse as bonsai, computers and Italian.

 

Young Citizen of the Year Steven Rae suffers from Type 1 Diabetes. He is Youth Ambassador for the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation.

 

Young Sports Achievement Award recipient Charlotte Wilson gave a record-breaking performance in the Steeple Chase at the State Combined High Schools Athletics Carnival.

 

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM

Mayor

 

RECOMMENDATION

That the Mayoral Minute on Locals recognised with Australia Day Honours be received.

 


Ordinary Meeting

7 February 2011

A Vibrant City

 

Mayoral Minute

The Success of the 2011 Australia Day Celebrations

Strategic Objective: A City with opportunities to engage, participate and connect (23)

           

 

Council’s 2011 Australia Day celebrations at the International Regatta Centre on Wednesday 26 January were again well attended and well received. The event was a resounding success and concluded spectacularly with a visual extravaganza of fireworks and artistic water performances on the main lake.

This year’s event continued our commitment to sustainability. It was powered by GreenPower through our major sponsor Integral Energy and was also a Waste Wise Event. Council ensured sound waste management and, through our recycling services, diverted as much waste as possible away from landfill.

Our Australia Day Ambassadors – Ensemble Theatre Director Sandra Bates and Rugby League legend Mario Fenech made a great contribution to the day and I thank them both.

I would like to express Council’s gratitude to our many generous sponsors and supporters and to the Sydney International Regatta Centre team for again providing an excellent venue and outstanding service.

This successful celebration would not be possible without the enthusiasm and expertise of so many individuals and teams. A big thank you must go to the many volunteers and to all the Council staff involved in the organisation and smooth running of this major event. The dedication and hard work of staff, in particular the Events and Depot teams, was again remarkable.

 

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM

Mayor

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That the Mayoral Minute on The Success of the 2011 Australia Day Celebrations be received.

 

 

  


Reports of Committees

 

Item                                                                                                                                                Page

 

1        Report and Recommendations of the Policy Review Committee, held on 7 February 2011

 

 



Ordinary Meeting

7 February 2011

A Leading City

 

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE
 Policy Review Committee MEETING

HELD ON 31 January, 2011

 

 

 

PRESENT

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

 

LEAVE OF ABSENCE

Leave of Absence was granted to Councillor Ross Fowler OAM for 31 January 2011.

APOLOGIES

There were no apologies.

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES - Policy Review Committee Meeting - 22 November 2010

The minutes of the Policy Review Committee Meeting of 22 November 2010 were confirmed.

 

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

 

There were no declarations of interest.

 

DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS

 

A Leading City

 

1        North Penrith Urban Area                                                                                               

Kerry Robinson, General Manager – Development, Landcom and Matthew White – Development Director, Landcom gave a presentation on North Penrith Urban Area.

          Councillor John Thain left the meeting, the time being 8:26pm.
          Councillor John Thain returned to the meeting, the time being 8:27pm.

          Councillor Tanya Davies left the meeting, the time being 8:51pm.
          Councillor Tanya Davies returned to the meeting, the time being 8:53pm.

RECOMMENDED

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.

4.     Council seek information from Hornsby Council and bring back a further report on the history, challenges and uptake of the newer high rise developments in and around Hornsby train station.

5.     A further report be prepared which details the traffic facilities and calming devices in the stage 1 proposal especially around the three cross intersections.

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

For

Against

Councillor Greg Davies

 

Councillor Tanya Davies

 

Councillor John Thain

 

Councillor Robert Ardill

 

Councillor Ben Goldfinch

 

Councillor Marko Malkoc

 

Councillor Jackie Greenow

 

Councillor Karen McKeown

 

Councillor Prue Guillaume

 

Councillor Kath Presdee

 

Councillor Mark Davies

 

Councillor Jim Aitken OAM

 

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM

 

Councillor Kaylene Allison

 

 

 

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

Development Services Manager, Paul Lemm introduced the report on Proposed changes to State Environmental Planning Policy (Exempt and Complying Development) 2008

RECOMMENDED

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).

 

 

 

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

For

Against

Councillor Greg Davies

 

Councillor Tanya Davies

 

Councillor John Thain

 

Councillor Robert Ardill

 

Councillor Ben Goldfinch

 

Councillor Marko Malkoc

 

Councillor Jackie Greenow

 

Councillor Karen McKeown

 

Councillor Prue Guillaume

 

Councillor Kath Presdee

 

Councillor Mark Davies

 

Councillor Jim Aitken OAM

 

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM

 

Councillor Kaylene Allison

 

 

A Green City

 

3        NSW Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Strategy                                             

RECOMMENDED

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.

 

 

There being no further business the Chairperson declared the meeting closed the time being 9.23pm.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That the recommendations contained in the Report and Recommendations of the Policy Review Committee meeting held on 31 January, 2011 be adopted.

 

 

  



DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS

 

Item                                                                                                                                                Page

 

 

A Leading City

 

1        Audit Committee

 

2        Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program Round Three Funding

 

3        2010 NSW Community Building Partnership Program Funding

 

4        Urban Development Institute of Australia National Congress 2011

 

5        Summary of Investments & Banking and Agency Collection Fees as at  1 December to 31 December 2010

 

6        "Funding Our Future" Program

 

A City of Opportunities

 

7        Proposed Exhibition of Council's revised Resource Strategy and Community Engagement Strategy

 

8        Development Application DA09/0609 Final Voluntary Planning Agreement for 2/91 Great Western Highway, Emu Plains. Applicant: J A Aitken, J W Aitken, M R Aitken & D J Reeves;  Owner: Innovation Planning Australia Pty Ltd

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

 

9        Development Application DA10/0664 Proposed Dwelling Addition at  Lot 268 DP 240525 (No. 34) Kilkenny Road, South Penrith. Applicant: H R Ovenden & K J Ovenden;  Owner: H R Ovenden & K J Ovenden

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

 

10      Development Application DA10/1184 Proposed Single Storey Dwelling & Inground Swimming Pool at Lot 1050 DP 1128253 (No. 8 - 10) Crestwood Avenue, Glenmore Park. Applicant: B.A.C. Design Pty Ltd;  Owner: P Tzirkas & L Tzirkas

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

 

A Green City

 

11      Managed Aquifer Recharge Project 

 

 

A Liveable City

 

12      Provision of Animal Pound Services

 

A Vibrant City

 

13      Magnetic Places Community Cultural Grants Program 

 

14      Youth Week 2011- Proposed Activities and Funding

 

 


A Leading City

 

Item                                                                                                                                                Page

 

1        Audit Committee

 

2        Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program Round Three Funding

 

3        2010 NSW Community Building Partnership Program Funding

 

4        Urban Development Institute of Australia National Congress 2011

 

5        Summary of Investments & Banking and Agency Collection Fees as at  1 December to 31 December 2010

 

6        "Funding Our Future" Program

 

 



Ordinary Meeting

7 February 2011

A Leading City

 

 

 

1

Audit Committee   

 

Compiled by:               Peter Browne, Internal Auditor

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

 

Objective

We demonstrate accountability, transparency and ethical conduct

Community Outcome

A Council that behaves responsibly and ethically (5)

Strategic Response

Base our decisions on research, evidence, and our responsibility to anticipate harm before it occurs (5.2)

       

 

Executive Summary

This report provides information on the meeting of the Council’s Audit Committee held on
8 December 2010.  The Audit Committee was advised of an Audit of Penrith Swimming Centre, changes to legislation concerning Developer Contributions, as well as discussing routine items such as progress on audit recommendations. 

Background

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

 

The NSW Local Government Internal Audit Guidelines (issued September 2010) provide that:

 

An audit committee plays a pivotal role in the governance framework.  It provides councils with independent oversight and monitoring of the council’s audit processes, including the council’s internal controls activities.

Current Situation

The Audit Committee met on 8 December 2010 and adopted the draft minutes of the prior meeting (as provided to Council on 8 November 2010) without alteration. 

 

The Committee’s Charter requires the draft minutes of each Audit Committee meeting to be reported to Council and a copy of the draft minutes of 8 December 2010 are attached to this report. 

Penrith Swimming Centre

An audit of Penrith Pool concluded that customer service and safety were being well managed at the pool. Some opportunities for improving efficiency and reducing risks associated with financial matters were identified.

Developer Contributions

The Group Manager Leadership briefed the Audit Committee on the current situation in regard to changes to the Developer Contributions (s94).  For many years s94 has been used to pool funds from developers in specific locations to pay for the shared infrastructure requirements of the location.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

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

 

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1.  

Draft Minutes of Audit Committee Meeting  8 Dec 2010

3 Pages

Attachment

  


Ordinary Meeting

7 February 2011

A Leading City

 

 

 

2

Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program Round Three Funding   

 

Compiled by:               Ray Richardson, Grants Support Officer

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

 

Objective

We demonstrate accountability, transparency and ethical conduct

Community Outcome

A Council that manages its finances, services and assets effectively (4)

Strategic Response

Deliver services for the City and its communities, and maintain our long term financial sustainability (4.1)

       

 

Executive Summary

The purpose of this report is to advise Council that the Department of Regional Australia, Regional Development and Local Government has approved $724,000 towards nine projects submitted to the Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program (RLCIP) Round Three, in accordance with Council’s recommendation made on 19 July 2010.

Background

At the Australian Council of Local Government meeting on 18 June 2010, the Prime Minister announced additional funding of $100 million for the allocated component of the Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program. The funding round closed on 30 July 2010.

 

Council was initially advised that the funding available to it would be the same as for Round two: $720,000. However, in August, Council was advised that the allocation would be $724,000.

 

The approved projects are:

 

Roper Road Sporting Field lighting installation $73,000.

East Ward; Lindsay electorate (City Parks).

 

Castlereagh Hall refurbishment $200,000.

North Ward, Lindsay electorate (Public Domain Amenity and Safety).

 

Erskine Park High School playing field floodlighting $50,000.

East Ward, McMahon electorate (City Parks).

 

Penrith Swim Centre Concourse replacement $176,000.

South Ward, Lindsay electorate (Recreation).

 

St Clair Branch Library refurbishment $70,000.

East Ward, McMahon electorate (Library Services).

 

Shade structures and associated audits at Penrith Children’s Centres $80,000.

23 centres across all Wards and both Federal electorates (Children’s Services).

 

Ripples Leisure Centre St Marys Outdoor Pool Filtration Pump replacement $30,000.

East Ward, Lindsay electorate (Recreation).

 

Penrith Playground seating and shade installations $23,000.

Nine locations to be confirmed (City Parks).

 

Jamison Park South Penrith Off-leash Dog Area fence $22,000.

South Ward, Lindsay electorate (City Parks).

 

All projects must be completed by 31 December 2011.

 

In addition to the approved projects listed above (Council’s “A” priority projects), two additional applications were made as Council’s “B” priority projects:

 

Great River Walk interpretation $90,000.

South Ward, Lindsay electorate.

 

Ripples Leisure Centre Outdoor Pool Shade $113,000.

East Ward, Lindsay electorate.

 

These two projects were not approved.

 

The $724,000 in RLCIP funding for Round Three brings the total received via direct Council allocations for Penrith City to $3,150,000 over the three rounds.

 

Council will recall that motions to thank the Minister and to support lobbying for the continuation of this funding stream were adopted by the Policy Review Committee on Monday 12 July 2010.

 

Current Situation

 

In regard to the $80,000 allocated for shade structures and associated audits at Penrith Children’s Centres, Council is advised that all of Council’s Children’s Services will have shade audits conducted and rectification works completed to ensure full compliance with regulatory requirements.

 

For the purposes of the RLCIP grant, the following 23 services have been identified as those that will benefit directly from the Federal funds:

 

East Ward:

Cook Parade, Erskine Park, Gumbirra, Kindana, Koala Corner, Ridge-ee-Didge, St Marys, Stepping Stones, Strauss Road (all of these are in the Lindsay electoral district except for Erskine Park, Gumbirra, Stepping Stones and Strauss Road, which are in the McMahon electorate):

 

North Ward:

Blue Emu, Emu Plains, Grays Lane, Rainbow Cottage, Tamara, Wattle Glen, Werrianda, Werrington County, Yoorami.

 

South Ward:

Carita, Glenmore Park OOSH, Jamisontown, Tandara, Platypus.

 

The implementation of the shade audits and completion of rectification works at Council’s other centres will be resourced from Children’s Services Pooled Funds.

 

The nine sites selected for installation of seating and shade adjacent to playgrounds in Council’s parks are all in the Lindsay electoral district, except for Banks Drive Reserve which is in McMahon electorate:

 

East Ward:

Margaret Porter Reserve, Desborough Rd, St Marys

Adelaide Street Reserve, Adelaide Street, St Marys

Banks Drive Reserve, Banks Drive, St Clair

 

North Ward:

Jim Anderson Reserve – Brookfield Avenue, Werrington Downs

Belair Rd Reserve, Bel-Air Rd, Penrith

Allsop and Patterson Reserve, Oxford Street, Cambridge Park

 

South Ward:

Grassmere Reserve, South Penrith

Gough and Lucas Reserve, Lucas Street, Emu Plains

Mazepa Ave and Hilliger Rd Reserve, South Penrith

 

The majority of RLCIP Round 3 grant funds will be expended within the current financial year, but funding for some projects, including the refurbishment of Castlereagh Hall, may extend into the next financial year.

 

The scheduling of closing of public facilities such as the St Clair Branch Library and Castlereagh Hall to enable works to be completed in an efficient manner will have implications for completion dates. Penrith Pool works will be scheduled for the winter months to minimise inconvenience for patrons.

 

Works on each approved project must commence within six months of the execution of the Agreement on 9 December 2010. The works funded through the RLCIP Round 3 grants are expected to be completed and the grant funds fully expended by 31 December 2011 as required by the Agreement.

 

RLCIP Round 2 Projects

 

Council is advised that all but two RLCIP Round 2 projects were completed by 31 December 2010.

 

Two projects suffered delays as a result of inclement weather during the period October to December.

 

These were the Upgrades along Great River Walk Emu Plains to install two decks at river level and Construction of a Lookout along Great River Walk.

 

The substantial work of installing the decking and lookout structures were completed by 31 December, but landscaping, installation of a seat and an interpretive sign were expected to be completed by the end of January 2011.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program Round Three Funding be received.

2.     Council accept the grant funds totalling $724,000 for the nine projects approved by the Department of Regional Australia, Regional Development and Local Government as described in this report.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Meeting

7 February 2011

A Leading City

 

 

 

3

2010 NSW Community Building Partnership Program Funding   

 

Compiled by:               Ray Richardson, Grants Support Officer

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

 

Objective

We demonstrate accountability, transparency and ethical conduct

Community Outcome

A Council that manages its finances, services and assets effectively (4)

Strategic Response

Deliver services for the City and its communities, and maintain our long term financial sustainability (4.1)

        

 

Executive Summary

Council has been advised that the following four projects submitted for funding under the 2010 NSW Community Building Partnership Program, as endorsed by Council at its meeting on 12 July 2010, have been approved;

 

Werrington Walking Trail through Werrington Creek Reserve $30,000

 

St Marys Senior Citizens Centre refurbishment of the common area and toilet $45,000

 

Cranebrook Neighbourhood Centre refurbishment of kitchen and toilets $43,419

 

Erskine Park Childcare Centre upgrade of kitchen and bathroom $35,000

 

Each project requires matching funding from Council, as advised in the previous Report.

Background

Council was advised in the report of 12 July 2010 to the Policy Review Committee that the NSW Government had allocated $35 million to the 2010 NSW Community Building Partnership Program, to be distributed by State electoral district.

 

Penrith and Mulgoa were allocated $300,000 each; Londonderry and Smithfield $400,000 each.

 

On 24 October 2010, the Premier announced that an additional $23.4 million was being allocated to the program, substantially increasing the allocation to each electoral district “in response to the overwhelming community demand, and the high quality of applications which have been received”.

 

As a result, the allocation to Penrith and Mulgoa was increased to $500,000 each and to Londonderry and Smithfield to $700,000 each.

 

This increase has no doubt assisted in achieving the 100% success rate Council achieved in this second round of Community Building Partnership funding.

 

The approved projects are:

 

Werrington Walking Trail through Werrington Creek Reserve $30,000 (North Ward, Londonderry electoral district).  Council’s contribution of $30,000 drawn from the 2010-11 City Works Operational Budget, plus $1,000 in-kind for project management.

 

St Marys Senior Citizens Centre refurbishment of the common area and toilet $45,000 (East Ward, Mulgoa electoral district). The project budget varies from the $90,000 reported to Council on 12 July 2010, to $92,742 in the application. The scope of works required to be undertaken at the Centre was re-evaluated during the process of preparing the application and costs were modified following receipt of quotations for certain items. Council’s contribution includes $40,000 from the 2011-12 Building Asset Renewal Program. All additional costs are resourced from the 2011-12 Neighbourhood Facilities Improvements Program.

 

Cranebrook Neighbourhood Centre refurbishment of kitchen and toilets $43,419 (North Ward, Penrith electoral district). Council’s contribution of $43,420 drawn from the 2010-11 Building Asset Renewal Program.

 

Erskine Park Childcare Centre upgrade of kitchen and bathroom $35,000 (East Ward, Smithfield electoral district). Council’s contribution of $35,000 drawn from the Children’s Services Pooled Funds.

 

All projects were funded to the amount requested, with the exception of Cranebrook Neighbourhood Centre, which requested $43,419.50.

 

All projects must be completed and grant funds expended by 31 December 2011.

 

Current situation

 

At the time of preparing this Report, no contracts for the approved projects had been received. Communities NSW had advised that contracts were expected to be issued by the end of January 2011, but the large number of grants approved across the State has possibly caused delays to the advertised deadlines.

 

No requests for clarification of projects have been received.

 

Community projects funded by the Community Building Partnership in Penrith LGA:

 

Londonderry

Applicant

Project description

Funding

Cambridge Park Cranebrook Junior Rugby League Football Club

Upgrade ground and facilities at Allsopp Patterson ovals

$52,291

Llandilo Hall Committee

Upgrade and repair of Llandilo Hall

$8,621

Nepean District Cricket Association Inc

Installation of sun shelters

$1,470

Penrith City Council

Construction of the Werrington Walking Trail missing link through Werrington Park in Penrith

$30,000

Penrith Valley Regional Sports Centre

Upgrade sports hall flooring

$150,000

Sunnyfield

Installation of ramp and pergola, landscaping

$35,328

Mulgoa

Applicant

Project description

Funding

Anglican Church Property Trust Diocese Of Sydney

Construction of a Christian education building, re-roofing of the church, installation of solar power, extension of car park, upgrade of kitchen facilities, lighting, child play area and fencing

$50,000

Anglican Church Property Trust Diocese Of Sydney

Construction of a children’s playground and landscaping at St Clair & Erskine Park Anglican Church

$28,300

Anglican Church Property Trust Diocese Of Sydney

Replacement of kitchen at St Marys Anglican Church

$55,951

Fusion Australia Ltd

Kitchen refurbishment at imagine community centre, St Marys

$65,025

Glenmore Park Football Club

Floodlighting sports field

$80,000

Harold Wheen Preschool

Renewal of surfaces for 2011 football season at Mallabulla Sporting Complex

$10,000

Nepean District Cricket Association Inc

Provision of sun shelters

$4,413

Nepean Food Services Inc

The installation of solar grid system

$35,916

Penrith City Council

Interior and exterior upgrade of St Marys Seniors Citizen Centre

$45,000

Penrith Panthers BMX Club Inc

Floodlight installation at Blair Oval BMX Track

$83,722

Scouts Australia NSW 1st St Marys Group

Upgrade fire door

$2,000

St Paul's Lutheran Kindergarten

Replace all internal fluorescent light with recommended energy efficient single tube lights

$4,893

St Paul's Lutheran Kindergarten

Replacing cabinets and the floor covering in food preparation areas

$16,569

St Paul's Lutheran Kindergarten

Create an all weather outdoor play space

$28,030

 

Penrith

Applicant

Project description

Funding

AFL NSW/ACT

Installation of an irrigation system and additional lights to existing poles at Greygums Reserve, Cranebrook

$33,000

Anglican Church Property Trust Diocese Of Sydney

Major repairs and restoration of church and surrounds At St Stephens, Penrith

$33,000

Brothers Penrith Junior Rugby Leagues Club

Provision of shelter, storage and bbq facilities at Hickeys Lane, Penrith

$40,000

Jamison Little Athletics Centre Inc

Upgrade to long jump and discuss facilities at Jamison Park

$13,565

Jobquest

Construction of a community garden at Kingswood Park

$15,000

Pendragon Panthers Dragon Boat Club

Purchase of a Dragon Boat

$10,170

Penrith City Council

Upgrade of kitchen and toilet facilities at Cranebrook neighbourhood centre

$43,419

Penrith District Netball Association Inc

Upgrade of netball complex meeting rooms at Jamison Park

$40,000

Penrith Police Community Youth Club

Repairs to floors in the main hall at Penrith PCYC

$86,870

Penrith Symphony Orchestra Inc

Provision of percussion instruments and security storage at Joan Sutherland Performing Arts Centre

$3,370

Scouts Australia NSW

Kitchen upgrade at scout hall, South Penrith

$11,700

The Trustees of the Rock Ministries Inc

Provision of a cool room and storage area at the Church of the Rock, Kingswood

$80,000

 

Smithfield

Applicant

Project description

Funding

Erskine Park High School P & C Association

Shaded cover over a community courtyard constructed at Erskine Park High School

$17,700

Penrith City Council

Kitchen and bathroom upgrade at Erskine Park Child Care Centre

$35,000

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on 2010 NSW Community Building Partnership Program Funding be received

2.     The Premier and Local Members be thanked for approving the Council’s four grants detailed in the report

3.     Council endorse the acceptance of the approved funds, providing the contracts when issued do not require a substantial reassessment to the scope or budget of any project

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Meeting

7 February 2011

A Leading City

 

 

 

4

Urban Development Institute of Australia National Congress 2011   

 

Compiled by:               Brian Griffiths, Property Development Manager

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

 

Objective

We demonstrate accountability, transparency and ethical conduct

Community Outcome

A Council that manages its finances, services and assets effectively (4)

Strategic Response

Deliver services for the City and its communities, and maintain our long term financial sustainability (4.1)

       

 

Executive Summary

The Urban Development Institute of Australia National Congress is to be held in Adelaide on 28-31 March, 2011.  Councillors have attended this Congress on a regular basis in the past and it would be appropriate for Council to nominate Councillors interested in attending the Congress.

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

Background

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

Current Situation

Adelaide is the host for 2011 (39th) National Congress, following Sydney’s successful Congress in 2010. The theme of the 2011 Congress is “Where Ideas Take Flight”, and will be held at the Adelaide Convention Centre from 28-31 March, 2011. The program has incorporated innovative and topical sessions and speakers and recognises the current challenges facing developers and regulators. The theme “Where Ideas Take Flight” – “promises that this Congress will be the breakthrough we’ve all been waiting for.  Acknowledging that the industry desires inspirations to move forward into a brighter future, a program is being developed to rejuvenate delegates, reigniting innovation within our community”.

 

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

 

·         The finance industry’s response to the growing need for finance to underwrite development projects to meet the demand for housing from Australia’s increasing population.

 

·         Population change in Australia and its affects on demand for land supply for residential housing.

 

·         Link between planning reform, economic activity and infrastructure delivery and the expanding role of the Federal Government in the urban development agenda.

 

·         What makes a city great, successful, attractive and/or liveable; how Australian cities compare with the great cities of the world and what we could do better or differently to be an even better place in which to live, work and play.

 

·         Creation of valuable partnerships between developers, councils and not-for profit organisations to deliver social and affordable housing.

 

·         What do people want, what are the trends in our society and what factors are affecting the gap between supply and demand for housing, together with suggested remedies?

 

There are a number of on-site field trips available all day on Wednesday 30 March, 2011:

 

A.       Affordable Housing – As the media profile and Government focus on Affordable Housing continues to grow, developers are becoming more adept at providing excellent solutions to meet the requirements and demand. This tour will include a review of the activity within Adelaide’s Northern suburbs, including renewal, infill and Greenfield developments.

 

B.       Branding and Marketing – The overall success of a project can often be attributed to its branding, marketing and positioning. The director of South Australia’s preeminent project marketing group takes participants on a tour of branding excellence in South Australia.

 

C.       Retirement Living – The development of retirement living solutions Australia-wide are raising the bar on preconceived ideas of what used to constitute quality solutions. One of the leading minds in planning and consulting on retirement living solutions takes participants through a number of the benchmark projects within the State.

 

D.       Wetlands, Water and Sustainability – Wetlands and waterways are proving to be much more than just a feature of developments, and now provide sustainable, environmentally sensitive outcomes across South Australia. A range of experts will provide insights into the long term outcomes already being achieved.

 

E.       Project Design and Engineering – Development of significant projects can often involve vast additional works and engineering challenges.  This tour brings participants up close and personal with benchmark projects which includes facets such as seaside living, waterways and marinas with an iconic Adelaide development consultant.

 

F.       Mixed Use and Density Living – With an initial tour of the city and surrounds, this tour will take a behind the scenes look at City Living, Fringe Living and Place Making.  It will be guided by one of South Australia’s leading experts in planning and delivering major mixed use and density living.

 

G.       The Diversity of City Living – This tour is a journey from one end of the city precinct to the other, from one end of the budget scale to the other.  It will include a review of Government funded affordable dwelling, student accommodation, apartments, hotel and blue-chip city living.  A real tale of “rags to riches”.

 

H.       Urban Renewal – Whilst the demand of housing continues to outweigh the supply of suitable options, Urban Renewal has become an ever increasing catch-cry in both the public and private sector.  The tour will include a selection of the diverse renewal developments and their place within the 30 Year Plan for Greater Adelaide.

 

I.        Defence – South Australia boasts a significant array of Defence programs and has thus experienced a great deal of activity driven by the demand for housing, jobs and infrastructure.  The tour will include an overview of these projects and surrounding development, hosted by Defence SA.

 

J.        Development Opportunities in Adelaide CBD – Ideal for developers.  This tour is hosted by Adelaide City Council and will visit several opportunities for residential and commercial development in the CBD, and consider partnership opportunities for future development with ACC.

 

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

 

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

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Urban Development Institute of Australia National Congress 2011 be received.

2.     Council nominate delegates to attend the National Congress of the Urban Development Institute of Australia in Adelaide from 28-31 March, 2011 and grant leave of absence as appropriate.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Meeting

7 February 2011

A Leading City

 

 

 

5

Summary of Investments & Banking and Agency Collection Fees as at  1 December to 31 December 2010   

 

Compiled by:               Pauline Johnston, Expenditure Accountant

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

 

Objective

We demonstrate accountability, transparency and ethical conduct

Community Outcome

A Council that manages its finances, services and assets effectively (4)

Strategic Response

Deliver services for the City and its communities, and maintain our long term financial sustainability (4.1)

       

 

Executive Summary

The purpose of this report is to provide a summary of investments, a reconciliation of invested funds and Agency Collection Fees for the period 1 December 2010 to 31 December 2010.  The report recommends that the information contained in this report be received.

Background

CERTIFICATE OF RESPONSIBLE ACCOUNTING OFFICER

I hereby certify the following:

 

1.   All investments have been made in accordance with Section 625 of the Local Government Act 1993, relevant regulations and Council’s Investment Policy.

2.   Council’s Cash Book and Bank Statements have been reconciled as at 31 December 2010.

 

Vicki O’Kelly

Responsible Accounting Officer

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.      The information contained in the report on Summary of Investments & Banking and Agency Collection Fees as at  1 December to 31 December 2010 be received.

2.      The graphical investment analysis as at 31 December 2010 be noted.

3.      The Certificate of the Responsible Accounting Officer and Summaries of Investments and Performance for the period 1 December 2010 to 31 December 2010 be noted and accepted.

4.      Agency Collection Fees be noted.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1.  

Agency Collection Methods

1 Page

Attachment

2.  

Summary of Investments

4 Pages

Attachment

  


Ordinary Meeting

7 February 2011

A Leading City

 

 

 

6

"Funding Our Future" Program   

 

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

Andrew Moore, Financial Services Manager

David McIllhatton, Acting Financial Services Manager

Authorised by:            Alan Stoneham, General Manager   

 

Objective

We demonstrate accountability, transparency and ethical conduct

Community Outcome

A Council that behaves responsibly and ethically (5)

Strategic Response

Base our decisions on research, evidence, and our responsibility to anticipate harm before it occurs (5.2)

       

 

Executive Summary

 

Council’s budget reflects the service levels asked of it by the community. Successive surveys, forums and workshops have shown that our community expects the current service levels to at least continue, and in many cases to increase. Roads, footpaths, parks, community buildings and public amenities are core local government services that consistently rate as high priority. But the expectations on Council now also extend to providing more effort in areas such as environmental protection, neighbourhood renewal, economic development and CBD improvements.

 

Many of the services Council provides are able to attract government grants, fees etc to assist their delivery but 43% of their overall cost needs to be met from rates. The pressure to maintain services and match calls for improved services is significant when you consider we have an asset base valued at over $1billion that needs to be responsibly managed now and for the future and that we are a regional city with aspirations and significant growth ahead of us.

 

Efficiency gains over recent years are valued at over $3m annually. These range across new technologies, group purchasing and new contracts, better staffing structures and taking advantage of opportunities such as new workers compensation options. There are numerous examples of minor changes that have been made to more effectively deliver within budget constraints. In some cases this has involved outsourcing and today around a third of Council’s expenditure is contracted out. Additional revenue generated through property development activity has contributed to major projects, most recently the St Marys Corner project, and to annual building asset renewal budgets.

 

Council’s financial position is sound, with adequate levels of working capital and liquidity. This has been achieved by making sure each annual budget starts in a balanced position and is carefully monitored throughout the year. Debt is managed in a way that ensures the amount of revenue devoted to servicing loans doesn’t hinder our ability to fund current programs into the future. A balanced budget is achieved by making the savings and service reductions at the start of the year and not resorting to high levels of borrowing that prop up expenditure now at the expense of future years.

 

Despite this the task of preparing a balanced budget each year is proving to be more and more difficult. The long-term financial model predicted 2009-10 and beyond would present Council with challenges if existing services were to be maintained. There is no doubt that the global financial crisis has added to this challenge, particularly as a result of development downturn, unexpected increased employer superannuation contributions and smaller investment returns.

 

One-off savings cuts of around $1m were needed to balance each of the last two years budgets. These included reduced spending on roads, kerb and gutter and drainage, areas where Council has lifted spending over many years so that these assets can be properly maintained. Because of this past commitment the allocations to these areas have been restored in the draft 2011/12 budget, and forward years’ projections. Newly identified service cuts and efficiencies will save $0.5 million annually and these have also been included in budget projections. Unfortunately there still remains an average annual forecast deficit of $1.3 million over the next five years.

 

Council is being asked to consider presenting a case to the community to increase rates beyond the 2.8% allowed by Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal (IPART) for 2011-12. If supported by the community and approved by IPART the increase would ensure maintenance of existing services (including addressing the projected $1.3 million deficit as well as renewal of buildings and parks assets), more spending on shared pathways, neighbourhood renewal, public domain and amenities and a substantial boost to infrastructure provision in the Penrith and St Marys CBDs.

 

Without the increase the new assets and service enhancements won’t happen unless cuts are made elsewhere. As well, Council will need to consider which services will be reduced, as it has done the last two years, in order to maintain a balanced budget. It may also lead to deferred expenditure on asset maintenance and renewal where the consequences are both short and long-term.

 

The CBD improvements would lift the standard of presentation in both town centres and should encourage more development interest. The Penrith Civic Improvement Plan (2006), incorporated these improvements in a Section 94 Plan, however the pace of development is not matching the need for this infrastructure and this has given rise to the inclusion of CBD works in this rating proposal.  The proposal envisages kick-starting the works with borrowings of $2m in each of the first two years and, by year four (2014/15), an allocation around $2.5m would be available – a level of funding that can make a significant difference to the look of both CBDs.

 

The increase is proposed to be phased over four years. After assuming a 3.0% pegged IPART increase for years 2 to 4 (year 1 is known – 2.8%) the total rate increase in each of the next four years would be 6.3%, 6.0%, 5.5% and 5.0%. Another way to look at it is that the proposed program of works to come from a special rate variation would add 11.0%, before compounding, to the increase that would be applied by way of IPART CPI-based increases over the next four years.

 


The actual increase varies depending on property value and the impact of partially replacing the Enhanced Environmental Program in year 2 with a flat stormwater levy. The average  residential property would see an increase in rates next year of about $57, of which $29 is attributable to the special rate variation (SRV). Each of the following three years would see an increase above what would normally apply through the IPART rate-pegged increase. After 4 years the total rates for the average residential property would increase by $213 of which the SRV increases have contributed $100, or $1.92 per week.

 

IPART will look closely at the reasonableness of the SRV as well as efficiency measures that the Council has and intends to introduce. Community support must also be demonstrated. The planned community consultation program is by far more comprehensive than that used for previous SRV proposals, reflecting contemporary practice as well as new IPART guidelines.

 

The intention to apply for an SRV has been lodged with IPART in accordance with its guidelines and with the endorsement of Council’s Finance Working Party. The report seeks confirmation of this action and commencement of the community consultation process.

 

Dialogue with the community will commence immediately to confirm the level of investment and the priority areas. The consultation strategy is discussed further both in this report and in Attachment 3

 

This report recommends that Council commence the process to prepare a submission to the IPART for a Special Rate Variation in 2011-12 subject to extensive community consultation to confirm the priorities for the City.

 

Background

 

On 29 June 2010, Council endorsed the draft Strategic Plan and 4 Year Delivery Program. The Strategic Plan is Council’s principal policy document, guiding its leadership of the City for the next ten years and beyond.  The Strategic Plan identifies the priorities of the City’s communities and the Council, and outlines long term strategies for achieving these goals.

 

The 4 Year Delivery Program supports the Strategic Plan, and covers the years from 2009 through to 2013. The Delivery Program sets out in more detail the actions and activities Council will undertake to contribute to the long term strategic directions. The Delivery Program contains information on all of Council’s programs and responsibilities, related services, key actions and their direct links back to the Strategic Plan.

 

The 2010-2011 budget was again developed on the basis of continuing existing service levels, adding new projects (most notably the inclusion of $350,000 for the redevelopment of Council’s on-line presence with its web page), and adjusting for expected changes in costs.  As presented to the Finance Working Party Meetings and Councillor Briefings held between January and April 2010 significant challenges were faced in producing a balanced budget for 2010-2011. As a result of intensive scrutiny of Council’s budget this resulted in adjustments to a number of programs, items of expenditure and funding sources.

 


Since the adoption of the Budget a series of information sessions have been held with Council to continue the dialogue commenced in the first half of the year. 

 

One of these sessions was the Finance Working Party (FWP) was held on 6 October 2010. As discussed in the report to that meeting and in the presentation by the Financial Services Manager there are still a number of challenges facing Council both to continue to deliver current services and service levels and address infrastructure backlogs.  Financial modelling shows that there are a number of years with significant deficits based on current service levels.  Additional allocation of funding for asset maintenance and renewal is unable to be provided from the existing and forecast budgets whilst maintaining the current service levels and service activities. 

 

At that meeting further information was considered on Council’s financial position and capacity and this is summarised in Attachment 2. The suggested savings were discussed at a Briefing held on 15 November 2010 and are included in this document in summary form.

 

One of the constraining issues for increasing the revenue base for Councils in New South Wales is that the State Government, through the Minister for Local Government, which has up until the current year set the maximum amount by which rates can increase each year. Historically this has often been less than the Consumer Price Index which places pressures on Councils’ budgets to maintain existing services where costs have increased and limited their ability to provide additional or enhanced services.

 

Current Situation

 

Over the last 10 years, Council’s Strategic, Management and Operational Plans have reflected a strong commitment to providing best value services for the Community through a continuous improvement service review culture.

 

The Organisation has responded accordingly by conducting services reviews in various forms with the view to achieving:

§  better equity outcomes

§  better sustainability outcomes

§  a reduction in operating and capital costs

§  a safer workplace

§  increased productivity

§  improved customer satisfaction

 

A brief history of Service Review initiatives since 2002 is provided below:

§  Functional Reviews  from 2003 to the present for Children's Services, Development Assessment and Building Approvals Services, Libraries, Printing, and Governance. These were carried out by both external Consultants and internal teams.

§  Organisational Capacity Reviews in February 2002 and December 2005 Management examined 6 review areas (i.e. longer term financial capacity, systems, assets, workforce development strategy, Revenue policy and an overall scan of the external environment). The results from each exercise were incorporated into the following year’s Management Plans.

§  Service Specifications Development from 2002 to 2007 delivered a quantifiable capacity baseline document for every service adopted by Council to which past and current service level adjustments are now based.

§  Service Improvement and Review in 2006-2007 involved desktop reviews of all Council services focusing on 7 key areas: strategic alignment, customer focus, financial efficiency, sustainability, access and equity, risk management and people and systems.

§  Services Review for 2009-2010 involved 5 key strategies: Group Manager led Service Reviews, Re-examination of employee vacancies across the organisation, Strategies to reduce Employee Leave Entitlements liabilities, a comprehensive review of Fees and Charges and a number of externally conducted Service Reviews (i.e. Neighbourhood Facilities Management, Library Services Review, Sportsground Management Strategy and Asset Management Improvement Plan).

§  An Information, Communication and Technology (ICT) Productivity Diagnostic began in July 2010 and was completed in September last year. This project involved an external assessment of the ICT needs of Council’s operations and staff by telecommunication experts over the 3 month period. The aim of this project was to identify opportunities for significant productivity improvements.  A priority implementation plan and supporting business cases are currently being developed.

 

Following the 6 October 2010 Finance Working Party recommendations Council officers once again reviewed opportunities for service cuts and efficiencies. The detailed analysis is now complete and the following additional adjustments were agreed upon at the Councillor Briefing of 15 November 2010.


2011-12 Initiatives previously agreed (by Council/Management)

Service

Initiative

Type of Initiative

Variation ($)

Children’s Services

Vacation Care co-ordination

Efficiency

78,000

City Planning

Resourcing opportunities (ED)

Service Reduction

25,000

Community & Cultural Development

Reduction of Subsidies to bands, orchestra and performance groups

Service Reduction

8,000

Community & Cultural Development

Resourcing Opportunities

Service Reduction

30,000

Development Applications

Building Design Awards

Efficiency

5,000

Environmental Health

Immunisation

Disengagement

1,000

Financial Services

Motor Vehicle Fleet

Efficiency

100,000

Marketing

Review of supply, design, printing and distribution of community newsletter

Efficiency

15,000

Marketing

Review of current events

Efficiency

78,000

Recreation & Facilities Management

Penrith Swimming Centre Squad coach

Disengagement

20,000

Recreation & Facilities Management

Reducing water temperature for Penrith Swimming Centre Pool by 1 degree

Efficiency

10,000

Recreation & Facilities Management

Reduction of travel assistance/sports donations

Service Reduction

10,000

Regional Planning & Advocacy

Penrith Business Alliance

 

90,000

Workforce  Development

Employment Advertising

Efficiency

50,000

TOTAL

 

 

520,000

 

Council has recently received advice from the Local Government Superannuation Scheme regarding Council’s employer contribution requirements for 2011-12 in respect of those employees who are members of the defined benefits division of Local Government Super.  The advice has seen the introduction of a new calculation method for the additional contribution required which in essence requires Council to continue to pay contributions based on the “long term” or “notional” rate to finance new benefits, plus a fixed amount to finance the deficit.

 

Initial investigations have indicated that Council’s additional contribution would decrease from its current estimate of $1.5m to around $900,000 per annum. Council officers consider it financially prudent to allocate these estimated savings towards Council’s budget allowance for retirements / resignations which is currently budgeted at $1m however actual expenditure over the last few years has averaged around $1.8m. Modelling indicates that this trend will continue at current or increased levels. 

 

Council is a dynamic organisation continually evolving and improving procedures and processes and seeking alternative methods of delivery and opportunities for costs savings. This will continue in years to come.

Long-Term Financial Model (LTFM)

 

The use of a ten-year financial model is a key factor in the planning for the achievement of a sound long-term financial position for Council and is now a requirement under the Division of Local Government’s Integrated Planning and Reporting Guidelines.  Council's LTFM forms part of the Resource Strategy adopted by Council with the suite of Strategic Planning documents in June 2010.  These documents have been significantly enhanced and updated and are the subject of a separate report to tonight’s meeting.

 

The model extrapolates the current year base budget, incorporates recurrent projects, future capital projects and associated recurrent costs, debt servicing, rates projections, and has the capacity for a number of budget variables to be applied. The LTFM is a key tool in assisting Councillors to ensure that the organisation has sufficient capacity to deliver its programs and assess the impact on future years’ forecasts of the decisions made by Council in the current environment. The below forecast has been prepared in line with the assumptions outlined in the updated Resource Strategy and includes the reinstatement of the one off reductions in the 2010-11 Operational Plan and the cuts agreed to at the 15 November 2010 Councillor Briefing (discussed later). Any small variations to the assumptions of the model, particularly to either Rates Income or Employee Costs can have a significant impact on the estimates in the model. 

 

This forecast indicates future budgets over the next 5 years have an average deficit of $1.3m.

 

The continuing practice of identifying one off savings to balance each year’s budget is considered unsustainable without impacting on the delivery of these programs.

 

 

Key Unfunded Themes

Investigations by management in consultation with Councillors over the last two years, has identified a number of un

funded priorities in the current Delivery Program. The details of these priorities are provided below.

 

1.       Maintaining existing assets and service levels, including

§            Parks and sporting fields

§            Libraries

§            Childcare centres

§            Building assets

§            Public amenities

§              Sustainability and Environmental Initiatives

§              Penrith Business Alliance

 

2.       Enhanced services

§            Public domain maintenance

§            Neighbourhood renewal

§            Shared pathways

 

3.       City centres upgrades and renewal for Penrith and St Marys

 

Extensive work has been done in an effort to be able to adequately address these priorities within Council’s existing capacity and has been discussed earlier in this report. Many of these priorities need to be addressed as soon as possible to ensure that the asset condition does not deteriorate to such an extent that extensive and expensive rectification is required in the future.  The most appropriate and timely funding solution is through a Special Rate Variation phased in over a 4 year period.

 

Proposed Special Rate Variation

 

As discussed in this report a number of forums have been held with Councillors over the last two years to discuss the financial challenges facing Council in maintaining existing service levels into the future.  In addition these forums have highlighted a number of priorities that have emerged from the Community Strategic Plan and Delivery Program that remain unfunded in the Long Term Financial Plan.

 

To address these challenges and emerging priorities a SRV is proposed. The proposed rate increases and programs of works are shown below. Information on each of the programs is provided after the table. The proposed SRV has a series of increases above the assumed rate peg amount for a period of 4 years. At the end of the 4 years these increases are included in the base rate. The table below also includes a fast tracking of the City Centres renewal works by way of loan funding of $2m in each of the first two years to be repaid subsequently from the SRV.

 

 

The following outlines the works to be undertaken in the programs that are the subject of the SRV.

 

Maintaining existing Assets and Service Levels

 

Parks Asset Renewal Program

 

The Parks Asset Renewal Program commenced in 2008-2009 to address the renewal of a wide range of fixed parks assets. As with the development of the Roads and Buildings Asset Renewal Strategies, all Parks fixed assets needed to undergo a condition assessment and have appropriate standards determined for each asset classification. Fixed parks assets include playground equipment, fencing, lighting, irrigation systems, signage, park furniture, seating and playing surfaces. The recurrent replacement value of these assets is approximately $13m.

 

The program also includes an annual amount for the maintenance of the City’s street tree assets to address the effectiveness of the public domain lighting and risk management issues related to dead and decaying tree branches.

 

The Parks Program in the 4-Year Delivery Program has the following Activities and Priorities linked to the asset renewal program:

§  Manage and maintain sports grounds, parks and open space to meet community needs

§  Implement an Parks and Open Space Maintenance Strategy that maintains those assets to agreed standards for their contemporary purpose

§  Implement the ten-year Parks Asset Renewal Program. This program is identified as a priority in the Delivery Program 2009-2013.

 

The recently completed Draft Sportsground Management Strategy highlighted risks associated with the current management, provision and operation of sports grounds and recommends a number of strategies to address these, including the following related to sports ground infrastructure:

§  Provide a consistent level of infrastructure on each ground to maximise use and flexibility

§  Provide a range of infrastructure to support sports use of Council grounds that is consistent with peak bodies requirements and Australian Standards, and that protects community access

§  Amenities will be fit for purpose, designed to meet sports codes and accessibility standards, located on prominent sites and maintained long term in good condition (this will be addressed through the Building Asset Renewal Program)

§  Provide lights on all local, district or regional playing fields to a quality that meets Australian Standards and the operational requirements of Council, sport and users (the estimated additional cost to upgrade the existing lights is approximately $2.2m).

 

In 2008 the Parks Asset Renewal Program was costed at approximately $6.55m. This program was recognised as a priority and allocated $250,000 p.a. in 2008-09, 2009-10 and 2010-11. At the same time it was recognised that this was an interim measure. The current estimated cost of the asset renewal required for fixed parks assets is $6.3m in today’s dollars.  The issues identified in the Draft Sportsground Management Strategy add an additional $2.2m. This would enable Council’s existing sports ground assets to be upgraded to meet community requirements.

 

Buildings Asset Renewal

 

As discussed above, recognition of the need to increase the commitment for Buildings Asset Renewal was endorsed by Council when building asset renewal formed part of the AREAS Special Rate Variation in 2006-07.

 

The on-going development of Council’s asset management systems has included detailed condition audits of building assets and the development of service standards that will ensure all buildings are fit for purpose and consider future needs. These service standards will ensure a greater emphasis on sustainability, compliance, risk management and meeting community expectations, such as accessibility.

 

This improved level of data confidence has identified additional works required to a range of facilities beyond those originally expected. Some urgent major upgrades such as Ripples and Penrith Indoor Sports Stadium also emerged after the establishment of this program. In addition the recent Neighbourhood Facilities Management Services Review has recommended significant additional upgrades and enhanced maintenance requirements to ensure these facilities are performing satisfactorily and meeting customer demands.

 

An increase in the budget for building asset renewal will see the significant backlog of works reduced in a more appropriate timeframe.

 

Public Amenity/ Toilet Replacement Program

 

The Public Amenity Replacement Program was adopted by Council in the 2008-2009 Management Plan but with limited funding. At this time the program was estimated to cost $2.7m.

 

The Program identified the need to replace 21 stand-alone public toilets, of various sizes, throughout the Council’s area. By 30 June 2011 toilets will have been rebuilt at Werrington Lakes, Weir Reserve, Fowler Reserve and Kokoda Park replacement will be in progress. This leaves a further 17 toilet blocks to be replaced.

 

Funding of $150,000 p.a. was allocated in the 2008-09, 2009-10 and 2010-11 budgets leaving a balance of approximately $2.4m adjusted to today’s dollars.

 

The condition of public toilets continues to rate high importance and low satisfaction in recent Community Surveys. It has been rated with the lowest satisfaction rating in the last three surveys. This program is identified as a priority in the Delivery Program 2009-13.

 

Maintain other existing services

 

The revised Long Term Financial Model has been adjusted to include $350,000 for library collections which was previously funded through Section 94 Contributions. The model now forecasts that an average of $1.3m is required over the next 5 years after implementation of the recently agreed changes/service disengagements totalling $520,000 as outlined previously in order to maintain the current services and service levels.

 

Maintaining all of the above existing Asset Renewal Programs and service levels would require a special rate variation of 5.5% phased in over the next 4 years.

 

Enhanced Services and Service Levels

 

Enhanced Public Domain Maintenance

 

Enhanced Public Domain Maintenance was included as a high priority unfunded program in the development of the 2008-09 Management Plan. Additional resources are required to provide enhanced service levels in locations such as CBD car parks and commuter car parks, high activity city locations and precincts, industrial areas (including the new Erskine Park industrial precinct) and to address the emerging issue of litter throughout the Council’s area. It is proposed that litter would be addressed similar to Council’s successful Graffiti Minimisation Strategy i.e. a three-pronged strategy based around education, enforcement and removal.

 

Two additional 2-person public domain maintenance units is required to assist in addressing the issues referred to above at an estimated cost of $485,000 in the first year, due to the need to purchase plant and equipment, and $343,000 p.a. thereafter.

 

The provision of enhanced levels of service to high activity areas and addressing the emerging issue of litter throughout the Council’s area is identified as a priority in the Delivery Program 2009-13.

 

Neighbourhood renewal

 

The Neighbourhood Renewal Program has proven very successful in revitalising and connecting communities in established suburbs and areas of the City. Improvements to assets and infrastructure within the neighbourhoods are being identified and there are difficulties accommodating some of these identified improvements within existing programs.  There are five Neighbourhood Action Plans (NAP) now endorsed and a growing range of capital infrastructure projects and place - making initiatives that require implementation. The Neighbourhood Action Plans identify resident priorities drawn from extensive engagement with local communities. There will be a number of additional Neighbourhood Action plans to be developed in the next 4 years and some infrastructure priorities from these will also be implemented by the additional resources.

 

Additional funding is required to deliver a range of infrastructure elements. Examples include:

 

Pedestrian safety in key locations in South St Marys and Kingswood:

§  Traffic calming devices in Adelaide Street, Oxley Park

§  Bus shelters and seating in areas of identified usage by older residents in Kingswood Park and Kingswood

§  Enhanced signage for local shopping strips in Oxley Park, South St Marys, Kingswood Park

§  Enhanced lighting in Londonderry

§  Support for the ongoing enhancement and activation of community places e.g.; place-making initiatives, Magnetic Places program.

 

The Neighbourhood Renewal Program has been highly successful in building positive relationships, developing community capacity, opening opportunities for creative expression in communities and positive engagement with Council. These relationships have developed through collaborative planning and will be further enhanced by the timely delivery of recommendations, including physical infrastructure, within the NAPs for each community. An amount of $300,000 per annum has been identified to meet the requirements of the NAPs for neighbourhood renewal areas.

 

Enhancement to shared pathways program

 

The current footpath program is primarily focussed on missing links in the existing network available to pedestrians. This funding was reduced to $150,000p.a. in 2009-10 with the balance of the previous funding allocated to finance the loan repayments that funded the accelerated $4m Footpath Program completed in 2008-09.

 

It is apparent that there is a growing demand from the community for a broader network of shared pathways that will provide a dual service for both pedestrians and cyclists. Such a network would encourage active movement around the City and help connect communities. This network would achieve many of Council’s health and sustainability goals as well as responding to recommendations of the PLANS (People’s Lifestyle Aspirations and Needs Study) and the Integrated Transport & Land Use Strategy (PITLUS).

 

An audit by expert consultants of shared path and cycling infrastructure was reported to Council earlier last year. This study identified the need for significant new infrastructure and the modification and improvement of existing infrastructure in accordance with current standards. The review identified a number of priority routes that will have maximum benefit in increasing the uptake of cycling and walking as alternative modes of transport. Key elements of the suggested priority network include:

§  A focus on connections with the City centres of Penrith and  St Marys

§  Provide good access to railway stations

§  Maximise the length of off-road facilities

§  Provide routes that are as direct as possible

 

A strategy that addresses the recommendations of the audit and details options for the future development of a shared path network is currently being prepared and will be reported to Council later in the year. This strategy will also recognise the recently released NSW Bikepaths Plan that provides significant opportunities for the City. Under the NSW Plan specific funding is available for “River Cities” under the Sydney Metropolitan Strategy which will fund up to 75% of the cost of paths along State Roads such as the Great Western Highway and Mulgoa Road.  These key linkages throughout the City are closely aligned to the expected priorities of our strategy that is being developed.

 

City Centres Improvements Penrith and St Marys

 

The Civic Improvement Plan has identified significant works that will contribute to the recognition of Penrith as a Regional City.  Whilst a number of the key improvements will be covered by developer contributions, there is a real opportunity to fast track the delivery of some of the key infrastructure and stimulate the further development of both City Centres.

 

A program of civic infrastructure improvements for the Penrith and St Marys City Centres has been prepared to support their growth and development.  These improvements aim to upgrade the public domain throughout the Centres over time and create high quality public spaces that provide the centres with their own unique identities.  The improvements will provide a catalyst to encourage economic growth and support new investment.

 

The implementation of these special projects is integral to the successful revitalisation and growth of both Centres.

 

The Civic Improvement Plan for Penrith City Centre is a tool for assisting in achieving the vision of a high quality urban design response and a distinctive public domain character. It sets principles and incorporates design strategies for the public domain needed to support growth and development in the City Centre integral for its revitalisation over the next 20 years.

 

The improvements identified aim to strengthen the regional position of Penrith City Centre as a multi- functional and innovative Centre that encourages employment and economic growth.

 

Research currently being undertaken by the Penrith Business Alliance identified that Penrith City Centre currently lacks a civic meeting place, a substantial outdoor eating precinct, a large civic park and associated urban infrastructure.  It also flags the goal for a high amenity centre and suggests a significant portion of Penrith’s civic improvements be forward funded by Council to attract and support new development.  The option of a SRV provides the opportunity for this approach.

 

Key projects in Penrith for the SRV program include the upgrade of Memory Park, the upgrade of segments of High, Station, Henry and Riley Streets with high quality kerbs, paving, lighting, trees and street furniture including strategic footpath widening for outdoor dining. 

 

The draft DCP for St Marys Town Centre encourages high quality activation of all building frontages and a continuation of a building line setback along Queen Street.  The generous building line set backs in many parts of Queen Street currently provides the setting for the creation of a vibrant and diverse street life culture.

 

A range of public domain improvements are being developed which will see Queen Street and key public spaces upgraded to create an attractive Centre and support investment.

 

Key projects for the SRV program include the upgrade to Coachmans Park, the upgrade of Queen Street with high quality kerbs, paving, lighting, trees and street furniture. 

 

How could this program be funded?

 

Section 508A of the Local Government Act allows for multiple annual percentage increases to a council’s general income for between two and seven years. Discussion with both the DLG and IPART have confirmed that while these increases are time limited in the Local Government Act a practice has now been established in line with the IPR reforms that these increases can now be granted indefinitely.

 

Under a s508A variations, council identifies the amount of additional income it requires over the phase in period of the proposed variation, calculated as a percentage. It would then determine the annual percentage increases it requires over the period to match this total amount. These percentages, which will include the rate peg for each year, may be different from year to year.

 

The additional revenue generated over the period of a s508A special variation will be permanently added to the council’s notional general income. It is important to note that the increases for each year under a s508A variation are cumulative and compounding.

 

Under a s508A variation, a council is able to phase in a potentially significant rate increase over a number of years, rather than substantially increase rates in one year, as would be the case under a s508(2) variation.

 

In the event of an approved percentage being lower than the rate peg percentage determined in a particular year, the rate peg limit would apply for that year so that the council is not disadvantaged. This is consistent with section 508A(6)(a) of the Act.

 

The DLG guidelines state that it is expected that councils would seek annual percentage increases over a maximum of four years to align to their Delivery Program and the council electoral cycle.  The preferred four year increase timeframe was clarified in a discussion held with IPART and the DLG on 23 December 2010.

 

Council officers explained that an alignment to the Delivery Program and electoral cycle would result in a two or six year phasing in and that the preferred given time phase-in of over 4 years, which better balances the impact on ratepayers and the ability to deliver outcomes, was agreed by both IPART and the DLG as a preferred way forward, despite the non alignment.

 

New role for the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal (IPART)

 

In June 2010, the Premier announced a new role for the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal (IPART) in the regulation of rate revenue for local government in New South Wales.

 

As a result of the IPART Review of Revenue Framework for Local Government the State Government established a more transparent process for rate setting through an IPART determination. IPART will now determine the rate peg having regard to a publicly reported Local Government Cost Index. To assist in the construction of the Local Government Cost Index (LGCI) IPART conducted a survey in September 2010 of the costs incurred by NSW councils. The survey is intended to determine the weights for the cost categories in the Index.

The process for determining the rate peg will include the following:

§  conducting a survey of all NSW local councils to seek financial information for determining the relative weights for the cost items in the LGCI

§  determining appropriate inflators to calculate the annual change in the cost items

§  calculating the annual change in the cost index

§  calculating an appropriate productivity adjustment factor, and

§  calculating the rate peg for the relevant financial year.

 

IPART will also determine special rate variation requests by councils, including variations for essential and community infrastructure.

 

In relation to rate setting, IPART will determine the allowable annual increase in local government general income, commencing with the 2011-12 financial year. The rate peg is determined by IPART having regard to the annual change in the LGCI and an annual productivity factor. The productivity adjustment factor will be determined by IPART separately from the index. 

 

In December 2010 IPART announced that the LGCI for 2011-12 was 3% after allowing a productivity adjustment factor of .02%, the Rate Peg increase for 2011-12 was set at 2.8%.

 

Special Rate Variation Process

 

The SRV process is now a two stage process. The first step is to lodge an “intention to Apply” letter with IPART and the second is the formal application which must be made to IPART by 25 March 2011. Should Council wish to proceed with the SRV, all SRV applications will be assessed by the Tribunal and announced by 10 June 2011.

 

Intention to Lodge a SRV Application

 

Once a council has made a final decision to proceed with consulting on the proposed SRV application, it must advise IPART in writing of its intention to submit an application. This notification, to be received by Friday 28 January 2011, must briefly address the following:

 

§  Nature of the request: A brief statement outlining the purpose of the special variation.

 

§  Proposed increase: Details of the proposed increase, both in percentage and dollar terms, for each year of the variation. (If this is not yet finalised by Council, an estimate may be provided)

 

The Finance Working Party, held on 27 January 2011, endorsed the lodgement to IPART of a letter advising Council’s intention to submit an application for a Special Rate Variation.  This letter does not bind Council to make such an application but rather foreshadows that Council will consult and engage with the Community to confirm the priorities for the City and the financial capacity to respond to these agreed priorities including consideration of a SRV as a funding source.

 

The formal application needs to be lodged with IPART by the 25 March 2011 should the community support the current proposal. IPART will assess any application against the following SRV criteria:

 

1 - Demonstrated need for the rate increases

 

Council is a group 1 IP&R Council and in June 2010 adopted the Community Strategic Plan, 4-year Delivery Program and Resource Strategy in line with the DLG’s IP&R guidelines.   Over the last 2 years continued budget pressures and emerging priorities have identified a long term funding gap for the implementation of the Community Strategic Plan. Council’s Resource Strategy, being considered in another report tonight quantifies the funding shortfall and outlines a proposed SRV to address the City’s needs.

 

2 - Demonstrated Community Support for the SRV

 

The DLG has provided guidelines for the community engagement by councils seeking a Special Rate Variation. Key requirements include evidence of extensive community and ratepayer engagement, provision of complete information and demonstration by Council that the majority of the community supports the proposed variation.

 

There are a wide variety of strategies and approaches available to facilitate community engagement and many resources to guide and inform practitioners. When selecting or assessing tools and approaches to use it should be noted that methodologies will differ according to the issue being dealt with, the degree of ratepayer involvement required (information, consultation or engagement) the size of the Council and available resources. Other factors to consider include what strategies were employed by other previously successful Councils, which strategies best encourage informed community input and which strategies reach the right number and variety of residents and ratepayers that would be representative of the whole population.

 

The revised Community Engagement Strategy, reported separately to tonight’s meeting has provided the principles and methods that informed the development of the Community Engagement Program for the proposed SRV.

 

In summary, the strategy outlines a number of tools Council could use to enable the SRV message to be clearly communicated to, and understood by residents, ratepayers and other stakeholders.

 

Some of these engagement tools proposed for use in this program include:

 

§  Letter to households

§  Printed and on-line Facts and FAQ sheets (for residents, ratepayers, media, other stakeholders)

§  Community Newsletter

§  Community forums

§  Newspaper and radio Advertising

§  “ Listening posts” at Shopping centres

§  Meetings with Business and Community representative groups

§  Media releases/briefings

§  On-line forums

§  Council News page and Mayoral Message and Speeches

§  Council Reports

§  Social media (Twitter, Facebook)

§  Ratepayer deliberative survey (approx 600 residents)

§  Staff email, briefing and newsletter

 

It is important the range of community engagement methods implemented clearly illustrates Council’s commitment to seek community feedback on this important issue.

 

To ensure Council is engaging in the most effective way possible three focus groups of 20 participants each (total 60) reflecting a wide cross section of the City’s population were held on 19 January 2011.  The attendees represented a wide spread of the community and included male and female participants from 15years – 65+ years.

 

The groups were conducted to explore resident views on methods of community engagement in the lead up to discussion with the community on its financial position and proposal to apply for a special rate variation.

 

Key outcomes were

§  A letterbox drop with a personal letter,

§  Through the newspaper, via Council’s regular community newsletter, and

§  Public exhibition at various locations around the Penrith LGA.

 

They advised that letterboxed information should be in Plain English, to the point and simple, it should include all relevant information in a concise format, be in brochure style, bigger than a flyer, suggested maximum 4 pages (or DL).  Information would include a short survey (with a  reply paid envelope) and a website address to complete the survey online.

 

It was also recommended by participants that Council ‘saturate residents with information” through

§  information stalls at events

§  Senior Council officers attending meetings of local community groups

§  Council’s website

§  Local radio stations

§  Emails

§  Telephone calls – provision of a dedicated number

§  Third party (through existing community groups, user groups to include information in newsletter to members)

 

This feedback has been invaluable to creating a targeted communications plan for the community.

 

Initial high level consultation has been held with Penrith Business Alliance, Penrith Valley Chamber of Commerce, Penrith City Centre Association, St Marys City Centre Association and the Penrith Valley Sports Foundation to gauge in principle acceptance and acknowledgement of the need for, and intent of, the proposed SRV.

 

These groups were selected based on their existing partnership with Council, their similar goals for the future of the City as well as their ability to represent the views of a large number of stakeholders. The feedback from these meetings has been very positive and letters of support have been received from each of the organisations.

 

The planned engagement and consultation has been developed to meet the DLG guidelines, ensure comprehensive information provision to the community and to provide Council with the feedback required to ascertain whether the proposed special rate variation has met with community support.

 

3 - Reasonable impact on ratepayers

 

Council’s average residential rate for 2010-11 is $941 excluding the domestic waste charge which once added brings the average rate notice to $1,190.  When compared to our surrounding Councils it is below the average of $1,216 and nearly $300 less than the Blue Mountains where the average rate notice is $1,479.

 

From that base council officers have modelled the impact of the proposed SRV to illustrate the increase in rates in each of the four years of the SRV, and the cumulative impact and these effects on residential ratepayers.  To date the domestic waste charge for 2011-12 has not be calculated however the modelled average rate in 2011-12 following a 6.3% increase as proposed by the SRV and combined with the 2010-11 domestic waste charge would provide a total rate notice of $1,246.  It is noted that without applying any increases to the Councils in the table below Penrith’s overall position in the table would remain unchanged.

 

The total increase over the four years of the SRV would be $213.20 which is an average of $53.30 per year or $1.03 per week with the SRV component contributing a total of $100.25 over the four years with an annual average increase of $25.06 or $0.48 cents per week.

 

 

The impact of the proposed SRV on residential properties, by property valuation ranges, has been modelled for each year and the impact on ratepayers is summarised on the following page. A 2.8% Rate Peg for 2011-12 has been announced and included in the modelling and an estimated Rate Peg amount in years 2, 3 and 4 of 3% has been assumed for the forecasts.  The additional percentage increase requested under this scenario is 3.5%, 3%, 2.5% and 2% respectively for the four years giving a total increase for each of the four years of 6.3%, 6%, 5.5% and 5%.

 

The details of the impact of the proposed SRV on Urban Residential properties includes the introduction of a Stormwater Levy in year 2 in lieu of components currently included in the Enhanced Environmental Program SRV. This table shows that for 54,730 of all urban residential properties, (96%) which have a land value up to  $300,000, and the average annual increase over the four years would be no more than $63.40 or $1.21 per week with the SRV contributing only $29.34 per annum or $0.56 per week of this increase. 

 

For those 15,886 properties on minimum rates with a land value up to $188,483, the average increase over the four years would be $41.95 per annum or $0.81 per week with the SRV contributing only $20.49 per annum or $0.39 per week of this increase.

 

 

During year 2 when an increase of 6% has been proposed, as a result of the expiry of EEP, the ‘real’ increase for the average residential rate is only 4.7% including the introduction of a Stormwater component in lieu of the current EEP SRV. In the rural areas, where a Stormwater levy is not charged, many properties have in fact, after discounting for the rate peg would in year 2, had a reduction in ‘real’ rates.  Further discussion will be held with Council to determine the final application of the levy prior to its introduction.

 

Attachment 1 of this report provides an indication of the impact on the average rate by suburb for each year of the proposed SRV.

 

4 - Sustainable financing strategy consistent with the principles of intergenerational equity

 

The proposed SRV is about positioning the City for its Regional role and addressing asset renewal and maintenance to ensure that Council’s infrastructure backlog is responsibly addressed to guarantee that an increased burden is not simply deferred to future generations. The proposed SRV also includes an element of borrowings to bring forward some key improvements.

 


5 - Productivity improvements

 

In addition to the above savings a number of efficiencies from both technology and process improvements together with joint purchasing arrangements have also contributed in maintaining a balanced budget over recent years and some of these are listed below.

 

Efficiencies

               $

Transitioning Business Paper to IPads

30,000

Review of printing technologies

152,000

Investment in new combination mower technologies

350,000

Changes to Relief Staffing Structure in Children Services

470,000

Group purchasing and tender arrangements

550,000

Changes to Light Vehicle Fleet Management

700,000

Workers Compensation Transition to Burning Cost Model

700,000

 

These productivity improvements currently provides over $3m in savings annually.

 

6 - Implementation of IP&R Framework

 

In June 2010 council implemented the IP&R Framework and has since received the DLG’s comments and any suggestions for enhancement have been included in the Resource Strategy being presented to tonight’s meeting.

 

Previous Special Rate Variations

 

Council currently has two substantive Special Rate Variations in place.  They are colloquially known as EEP and AREAS. A summary of the services provided by these SRVs is below.

 

Enhanced Environmental Program

 

The Enhanced Environmental Program Special Rate Initiative introduced a range of new programs for the Council and commenced in 2002-03.  In 2010-11 it provides funding for:

§  The Enhanced Environmental Program                        $2.3m

§  Community Safety and Neighbourhood Renewal       $326,000

§  Economic Development                                               $297,000

 

Consideration should also be given to what happens when EEP expires in June 2012.  Many of the works and programs currently funded under this Special Rate Variation, environmental initiatives and Economic Development, are important programs and should probably continue. The Community Safety & Neighbourhood Renewal Program as developed in 2002 has now been completed and ongoing program’s are funded from general revenue. 

 

It has been agreed by Council that we would return to the Community and ask for this SRV to continue however since the introduction of EEP the NSW Government has introduced a Stormwater Levy that Councils are able to charge without getting special permission from the Minster providing all the guidelines are met.  Some of the works currently being funded by EEP would qualify for the Stormwater Levy and Council officers are currently clarifying what the proceeds would be from such a Levy and which projects are able to be included and the impact across the City.  Further information will be brought to Council in the near future.  

 

This would leave the balance of the current EEP programs, including the funding for the Penrith Business Alliance, should it be agreed that they continue to be incorporated into this SRV application at no additional cost to ratepayers.

 

AREAS

 

The Asset Renewal and Established Areas Strategy was introduced in 2005-06 and currently provides funding of  $3.4m towards important programs that total $4.9m.

§ Road Asset Renewal                                   $2.1m

§ Building Asset Renewal                         $903,000

§ Established Areas Revitalisation                 $1.9m

 

General Manager’s comment

 

Residents and businesses of Penrith City are justifiably proud of their City and expect that as a Council we responsibly manage the assets and the finances of the City.  Council is responsible for the oversight of over a billion dollars in assets and an annual budget of approximately $180 million.  This is a significant responsibility and decisions should not be taken without careful consideration and deliberation.

 

There have been a number of opportunities for Councillors to discuss the financial challenges over the past few months at the Mid Term Review, the October Finance Working Party and the November Councillor Briefing.  A report to the Ordinary Meeting 29 November flagged the opportunity to consult with the community about the priorities and the use of a Special rate Variation as the most appropriate funding source.

 

At the Finance Working party held 27 January 2011 Councillors endorsed the lodgement of a letter with the IPART advising them of Council’s intention to lodge an application for a SRV in March 2011 following extensive consultation with the community over the next 6 weeks.

 

There is now an opportunity for Council to make a decision about the way forward.  Simply put there are a number of priorities for the City that are unlikely to be met from the current funding sources as demonstrated by the Long Term Financial Model.  Consequently the key priorities for the proposed SRV are:

§  Continuation of agreed existing service levels (LTFM deficit)

§  Regional City Infrastructure

§  Service Enhancements and

§  Asset Renewal

 

In the event that Council decide not to proceed with a SRV or if the Variation is not approved by IPART then significant cuts will need to be made to current services, services levels and or programs unless economic conditions vary considerably compared to those assumptions in the LTFM.  A range of suggested adjustments are discussed in the following section and there is an opportunity to canvass the Community’s preferred areas of change through the community consultation process.

 

Council now has the choice to proceed with asking the Community for a Special Rate Variation to fund additional allocations to these priorities or make decisions about reducing current service/ service levels/programs.  Neither of these options will be particularly popular however it is the opinion of Council officers that the application of funds proposed would be received favourably by the Community. In the event of significant Community opposition arising from the Community Engagement, Council no doubt would seek to review its position of the SRV prior to the SRV application closing date of 25 March 2011.

 

Proposed actions if no additional funding through a Special Rate Variation

 

At the Councillor Briefing of 15 November 2010 a range of cuts/amendments/ variations to current service levels and programs totalling $520,000 were proposed and have been discussed earlier in this report. 

 

These cuts are a significant contribution towards addressing the predicted deficit. Council is a dynamic organisation continually evolving and improving procedures and processes and seeking alternative methods of delivery and opportunities for costs savings however should Council decide that a Special Rate Variation is not appropriate further pressure will be placed on the current services provided by Council and their current agreed service levels.  It will require a major change in current budget allocations of at least $1m per annum in addition to those identified at the November 2010 Councillor Briefing.  Previous years’ “one off” adjustments discussed earlier in this report that were necessary to produce balanced budgets focussed on key asset program areas.  Cuts in these areas are unable to be sustained over the long term without adversely affecting asset condition.

 

Areas that can be further considered for service level or program adjustment or disengagement have been considered by management and indicated below.  It should be noted that approximately $750k of cuts are required for 2011-12 and an average of $1.3m over the next 5 years.

 

Council officers have identified the following cuts and savings for 2011-12

 

Project/program                                                                                                               $

§ Reduction in library resources previously funded by s94 contributions                 350,000

§ Disengagement from Lemongrove Retirement Village                                             39,000

§ Reserve funded Tree replacement program re directed to other projects                194,000

                                                                                                                                    $583,000

Additional suggestions for addressing the predicted deficits remaining of approximately $167,000 in 2011-12 and $700,000 for the following years can be considered from the following areas and these will be discussed in more detail with Council during the development of the Operational Plan, and should the SRV assessment continue then with the Community during the community consultation process:

§ Changes to some of the existing service levels provided including staffing

§ Some reduction in Council financial support to external bodies and groups

§ Additional outsourcing of some services

 

It is suggested that the community consultation around the potential cuts is done as broad generic themes as discussed above and that we canvass the community’s areas of preferred cuts using a mixture of on line (Bang the Table) and hard copy surveys as well as feedback through the community listening posts.

 

As well as cuts or disengagements to services and programs there are significant ramifications for the condition of a range of Council assets in the future should additional funding not be made available.  The Asset renewal programs detailed in the Appendices to the Resource Strategy address a prioritised and comprehensive program of works that will ensure there is not an accelerated decline in the condition of assets that would require significant rectification or reconstruction works in the future and that they remain fit for contemporary community needs.

 

For example the enhanced building asset renewal program includes compliance works required in child care centres and canteens used by the many sporting clubs throughout the Penrith LGA. The enhanced building asset renewal program will assist in implementing a prioritised program to address these compliance issues as well as addressing a backlog of renewal works so that the buildings remain contemporary. The replacement of the Ripples Roof at St Marys is also included in the enhanced building asset renewal program. Should the enhanced building asset renewal program not proceed then funds allocated to scheduled building maintenance programs such as childcare centre upgrade works would need to be re-directed to address the compliance issues or some facilities may no longer be able to fully function until compliance issues are addressed.

 

The Parks Asset Renewal Program is required to address the renewal of a wide range of fixed parks assets. These assets include playground equipment, fencing, lighting, irrigation systems, signage, park furniture, seating and playing surfaces.

 

If the additional funding is not provided there will be a decline in the condition of these assets and infrastructure failure e.g floodlighting, irrigation systems, quality of playing surfaces and quality and safety of playgrounds to name a few. Replacement of aged, damaged / vandalised assets such as playground equipment components, irrigation systems would not be funded and this could result in the closure of some playgrounds and reduction in availability of some sporting facilities.

 

A recently completed Sportsground Management Strategy recommended a number of strategies to address  sports ground infrastructure:

 

§ Provide a consistent level of infrastructure on each ground to maximise use and flexibility

§ Provide a range of infrastructure to support sports use of Council grounds that is consistent with peak bodies requirements and Australian Standards, and that protects community access

§ Amenities will be fit for purpose, designed to meet sports codes and accessibility standards, located on prominent sites and maintained long term in good condition (this will be addressed through the Building Asset Renewal Program)

§ Provide lights on all local, district or regional playing fields to a quality that meets Australian Standards and the operational requirements of Council, sport and users (the estimated additional cost to upgrade the existing lights is approximately $2.2m).

 

These strategies cannot be addressed without the additional funding.

 

The cut to library resource funding should a SRV not be pursued will affect the quality and relevance of the library collection.  The Library service presently has a collection of 290,000 items.  To replace 10% of the collection i.e.  to purchase 29,000 items, requires a funding allocation of $969,890, comprised of $791,700 for print items and $178,190 for e-resources.

 

The age and condition of library stock is a critical factor in stock turnover, visits and borrowings.  Evidence has shown that loans are dominated from the stock added within the most recent three year period. Loans on an item decrease each year following addition to the collection to a point where items older than seven years have a small to nil turnover.  Media items, e.g. DVDs have a smaller ‘lifespan’ than print items. It follows, and it has been the Penrith Library experience prior to 2000, that if the proportion of stock added in the most recent three year period declines, then loans and other associated library activities will also decline.  This is demonstrated below by the low levels of loans as a result of the lower level of funding.

 

Loans prior to the establishment of the S94 Contribution levy 2000-2001 673,313.

 

Loans supported by the S94 contribution and associated increased Council funding

2009-2010 903,951

 

If the library was unable to reinstate the $350,000 previously allocated from the S94 Library Contribution Levy, in the 2014 financial year, it would result in a significant reduction in resource borrowings, patronage and indeed all library activities. 

 

Conclusion

 

Community support and understanding of the proposed Special Rate Variation is fundamental to progressing an application to IPART for their consideration.

 

Council has presented the community with many opportunities to shape the growth and future of the City through previous consultation and they have actively participated in these opportunities.

 

As economic challenges have arisen from development downturn, unexpected superannuation contributions and the global financial crisis, Council has risen to these challenges by making one-off expenditure cuts and realising significant efficiency gains (valued at over $3million annually) to balance recent budgets.

 

However long term financial modelling shows that an ongoing deficit of $1.3million is forecast over the next  five years to maintain existing service levels.

 

There are a number of priorities for the City that are unlikely to be met from the current funding sources and these have been identified as the following:

 

§   Maintaining existing asset and service levels

§   Service enhancements and

§   City Centres’ renewal and improvements

 

In keeping with Council’s commitment to the community to work together to shape the future of our City, it is imperative that a comprehensive communications campaign is undertaken to explain  the reasons behind the need for a Special Rate Variation and to gauge community support or otherwise for an application to IPART.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on "Funding Our Future" Program be received

2.     That the community consultation about the potential use of a Special Rate Variation commence immediately

3.     A further report be provided on the outcomes of the community consultation to the Ordinary Meeting of Council on 21 March 2011.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1.  

Attachment 1: Average Rates by Suburb

3 Pages

Appendix

2.  

Attachment 2: Financial Position

4 Pages

Appendix

3.  

Attachment 3: Consultation  Process

3 Pages

Appendix

  


Ordinary Meeting

7 February 2011

Appendix 1 - Attachment 1: Average Rates by Suburb

 

 

 




Ordinary Meeting

7 February 2011

Appendix 2 - Attachment 2: Financial Position

 

 

 

 

 

Attachment 2 - Financial Position

 

For a number of years Council’s Long Term Financial Model (LTFM) has been foreshadowing that the period commencing 2009-10 onward would present Council with challenges if existing service levels were to be maintained. The 2009-10 budget required a number of one off reductions to commence the year with a balanced budget and a number of additional allocations were required throughout the year including $560,000 for the St Marys Corner and $399,000 to reimburse Penrith Whitewater Stadium for additional Workers Compensation Premiums arising from it being considered part of the wider Penrith City Council Group for premium calculation purposes.

 

Council’s 2009-10 financial results, summarised below, reflect the current economic challenges that Council is facing and as reported to Council, a budget deficit of $1.4m was confirmed. Although the budget result was a deficit position it was largely made up of non-cash items (ie increase in employee leave entitlements which are paid out in the future) and Council’s short term financial position, as detailed by the indicators below, remains sound however these indicators will deteriorate if Council continues a number of deficit results.

 

All figures are in $'000 unless otherwise stated

Item

2009-10

2008-09

% Change

Revenue (Including capital)

162,081

163,983

(1.2%)

Operating Expenditure

167,946

153,105

9.7%

Net Surplus/(Deficit)

(5,865)

10,878

(153.9%)

Operating result before capital

(10,340)

(1,190)

768.9%

Capital Grants and Contributions

4,475

12,068

(62.9%)

Total Assets

1,432,980

1,152,361

24.4%

Total Equity at 30 June

1,323,126

1,049,932

26.0%

Total Borrowings (excluding bank overdraft)

69,662

65,035

7.1%

Cash and Investments

58,746

63,066

(6.8%)

Unrestricted Current Ratio

1.03

1.17

(11.9%)

Rates Outstanding Ratio

5.67%

4.96%

14.3%

Debt Service Ratio

7.82%

7.45%

5.0%

 

Council’s operating result above includes a number of unfunded (non-cash) items that are not included in the budget result. While the budget result contributes to the operating result, the 2009-10 operating deficit of $5.9m is primarily the result of increased depreciation of $10m as a result of the movement towards fair valuing of assets and the continued refinement of assessing the condition of Council’s building and infrastructure assets.

 

The Unrestricted Current Ratio of 1.03:1 is below Council’s targeted minimum of 1.25:1 and below the revised Division of Local Government’s benchmark of 1.5:1. The unrestricted current ratio declined 11.9% compared to the previous year (1.17:1). This ratio is constrained each year by Council’s practice of forward funding s94 works in advance of contributions by borrowing against internal reserves. For 30 June 2010 these borrowings amounted to $6.2m. Excluding these borrowings from the calculation would give an Unrestricted Current Ratio of 1.30:1.

 

Working Capital - an internal liquidity measure - has remained relatively stable at $3.3m (2009-10 - $3.6m), and remains well above Council’s adopted target of $2m despite the deficit being recorded.

 

The outstanding loan liability increased, in line with expectations, to $69.7m. The amount of operating revenue committed to servicing this debt has increased as a result of the increases in Council’s loan liability to 7.82%, however this level of debt remains well within the DLG target of 10%.

 

2010-11 budget decisions

 

The 2010-11 budget was again developed on the basis of continuing existing service levels, adding new projects and adjusting for expected changes in costs.  As presented to the Finance Working Party Meetings and Councillor Briefings held between January and April 2010 significant challenges were faced in producing a balanced budget for 2010-11.  As a result of intensive scrutiny, Council’s budget saw adjustments to a number of programs, items of expenditure and funding sources. After extensive consultation with management and Councillors the following ‘one off’ reductions and changes to funding sources were included in the 2010-11 Operational Plan.

 

 

Project/Service Description

 

 

2010-11 Savings

$

 

Comment

Roads Resealing/Resheeting

301,204

One-off decrease to projects 2010-11

Deferral of projects in 2010-11

Community Safety NH Renewal

27,193

Library Resources

25,000

Community & Civic Events

22,400

Children’s Week

4,000

Artfiles

2,000

Kerb & Gutter

175,000

Urban Drainage

100,000

Additional Playground Equipment

37,000

Credit Rating Standard & Poors

40,000

Landscape Character Strategy

20,000

Companion Animals Act Education

10,000

Skills & Knowledge Assessment

10,000

Ongoing reduction in line with actual costs

Investment Portfolio Management

20,000

Membership of External Organisations

7,000

Rural Intersection Mowing

40,000

Library Computer Facilities

23,000

Provided in operational budget

Children’s Services Scholarship

5,000

Transferred to CS Cooperative

Total Savings

868,797

 

 

In addition to these reductions the following items did not receive CPI indexation in 2010-11:

 

§  Materials for Maintenance budgets for the Depot, Parks, Car Parks, Bus Shelters, Skate Parks, Public Toilets, Buildings, Plant, Drains, Roads and Street Sweeping

§  International Links project, Civic Events, Subsidies to Cricket associations and Voted Works.

§  Subsidies to the Penrith Performing and Visual Arts and Ripples were maintained at 2009-10 levels.

Infrastructure Backlog

Council is the custodian of assets with a carrying value of over a billion dollars, $914.9 million of which requires regular investment to ensure that it is fit for purpose.

 

Asset Class

Carrying Value
$m

Infrastructure Backlog

$m

Buildings

207.0

7.7

Plant & Equipment

17.1

 

Office Equipment & Furniture

7.1

 

Roads, bridges & footpaths

451.0

44.9

Stormwater drainage

227.0

0.4

Library books

3.2

 

Other

2.5

 

 

914.9

53.0

 

Some of the infrastructure backlog specifically buildings and footpaths referred to in the table above is included in the information further in this report on key themes for a proposed SRV.

 

Key findings of the Inquiry into the financial Sustainability of Local Government in NSW commissioned by the LGSA in 2006 (commonly referred to as the Percy Allan Inquiry) identified significant backlogs of asset renewal across the State in the vicinity of $6.3b.  Penrith’s estimates of identified asset renewal backlog are shown above. Special Schedule 7 (SS7) in the annual financial statements at 30 June 2010, identified that a total of $53m is required to bring all assets to a satisfactory standard.

 

The challenge of how we fund and address the infrastructure backlog has been a priority for Council prior to the LGSA Inquiry. Recent increases to asset program budgets means that of the estimated annual maintenance requirement of $16.0m the current budget has allocated $15.3m (a shortfall of 0.7m).  This increased expenditure has been the result of strategic increases in General Revenue, particularly for Roads and additional asset renewal included in the 2006-07 AREAS Special Rate Variation. Council’s commitment to accurately measuring and confronting the infrastructure backlog was always seen as a strength by Standard & Poors during their assessments and contributed to our overall rating of AA+, when last assessed in May 2008. 

 


The bulk of the backlog is in the area of Roads, Bridges and Footpaths.  Council Officers believe that the current level of road maintenance is appropriate and in fact is above average for most Councils across the Country.  The enhanced level of funding over the last several years has already meant the re-sheeting or reconstruction of 35% of our road network. The annual program is now at about 5% of the network which would see all roads in the City completed within the next 13-15 years at the current level of funding.  A fully reconstructed road would have an expected life span of 30-40 years.

 

The pavement management system used by Council is quite sophisticated and prioritises road maintenance based on current condition data.  Roads like Derby Street and Swallow Drive have been deliberately staged over a longer period as the cost benefits indicate a much better value in a broader preventative maintenance program on our local roads at a significantly lower cost ($7m2 for reseal or $15m2 for a re-sheet versus $60 to $100m2 for reconstruction).  This system is now showing a gradual annual improvement in the road condition index across the City.

The listed backlog for drainage maintenance/repairs primarily relates to the kerb inlet pits and grates throughout the road network. These are currently addressed under the road maintenance program which has traditionally had the capacity to include these repairs. It is our standard practice before we re-sheet or reconstruct a section of road to first repair all the associated inlet pits, kerb and guttering as this is the most efficient time to do so.

 


Ordinary Meeting

7 February 2011

Appendix 3 - Attachment 3: Consultation  Process

 

 

 

Attachment 3: Consultation Process

 

Week 1

Consultation/Engagement

Media Campaign

Information Campaign

Target groups

 

Penrith Valley Chamber of Commerce members meeting at PCC  (8 February)

 

Ratepayer deliberative survey commences

(600 participants)

 

Media briefing re program

 

Media releases (on-going as required through consultation process)

 

Information on PCC  website

 

Set up on line forums

 

 

§ Business

 

§ Ratepayers

 

§ Community

 

Penrith CBD Association

 

Draft advertisements for local press

 

Draft advertisements for local radio

 

Letter, information kit and feedback opportunities sent to all ratepayers

 

Letters, information kits, posters and feedback opportunities to:

 

Mulgoa Progress Association

Luddenham Progress Association

Wallacia Progress Association

Berkshire Park Progress Association

Orchard Hills Residents Association

Glenmore Parks Residents Association

 

§ Business

 

§ Ratepayers

 

§ Community Residents/Progress Associations

 

Penrith Business Alliance

 

Mayoral Column in local press

 

Council page in local press - information re feedback opportunities

 

On line survey available on PCC website

 

Letter, information kit and feedback opportunities sent to:

·     Neighbourhood Centres

·     Childcare Centres

·     Youth Centres

 

§ Business

 

§ Community  (includes ratepayers and non ratepayers)

 

§ Community Services Users

 

 

Penrith Valley Sports Foundation

 

 

Letters and information kit and feedback opportunities sent to selected CALD groups eg:

 

·     Pilipino

·     Italian

·     Maltese

 

Public exhibition of material begins

 

§ Sports Groups

 

§ CALD communities

Listening Post at Glenmore Park shopping centre

 

Kingswood Family Fun Day

 

 

§ Community

 

§ Ratepayers

 


Week 2

Consultation/Engagement

Media Campaign

Information Campaign

Target groups

St.Marys City Centre Association

Radio campaign Vintage FM commences

 

Static displays /posters/information at selected venues

§ Business

 

§ Community(includes ratepayers and non ratepayers)

 

Penrith Valley Chamber of Commerce

 

 

§ Business

 

Consultation with CALD group

Council page information re feedback opportunities

Special Community newsletter re public consultation (Western Weekender)

§ CALD communities

Consultation with Seniors

 

 

§ Seniors

Listening Post St.Clair Shopping Centre

 

Listening Post Lennox Shopping Centre

 

 

§ Community

 

§ Ratepayers

 

 

Week 3

Consultation/Engagement

Media Campaign

Information Campaign

Target groups

Consultation with CALD group

Advertisements in all local press re consultation times/public exhibition and feedback opportunities

 

§ CALD communities

§ Community (includes ratepayers and non ratepayers)

 

Listening post at Penrith Markets

 

 

§ Community (includes ratepayers and non ratepayers)

 

Consultation with ACCESS groups

 

 

§ Access and special needs groups

 

Listening post at St.Marys shopping centre/main street

 

 

§ Community (includes ratepayers and non ratepayers)

 

 


Week 4

Consultation/Engagement

Media Campaign

Information Campaign

Target groups

Deliberative survey ends

 

 

 

Consultation with CALD group

Advertisements in all local press re consultation times/public exhibition and feedback opportunities

 

§ CALD communities

Listening post at Penrith Markets

 

 

§ Community (includes ratepayers and non ratepayers)

 

Listening post at Londonderry Post Office

 

Penrith Farmers Markets

 

 

§ Rural community (includes ratepayers and non ratepayers)

 

 

Week 5

Consultation/Engagement

Media Campaign

Information Campaign

Target groups

Consultation with CALD group

 

 

 

Community newsletter (reminder of public exhibition and feedback opportunities)

§ CALD communities

§ Community (includes ratepayers and non ratepayers)

 

Listening Post Cranebrook Shopping Centre

 

 

§ Community (includes ratepayers and non ratepayers)

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

 

 

THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT BLANK  INTENTIONALLY


A City of Opportunities

 

Item                                                                                                                                                Page

 

7        Proposed Exhibition of Council's revised Resource Strategy and Community Engagement Strategy

 

8        Development Application DA09/0609 Final Voluntary Planning Agreement for 2/91 Great Western Highway, Emu Plains. Applicant: J A Aitken, J W Aitken, M R Aitken & D J Reeves;  Owner: Innovation Planning Australia Pty Ltd

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

 

9        Development Application DA10/0664 Proposed Dwelling Addition at  Lot 268 DP 240525 (No. 34) Kilkenny Road, South Penrith. Applicant: H R Ovenden & K J Ovenden;  Owner: H R Ovenden & K J Ovenden

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

 

10      Development Application DA10/1184 Proposed Single Storey Dwelling & Inground Swimming Pool at Lot 1050 DP 1128253 (No. 8 - 10) Crestwood Avenue, Glenmore Park. Applicant: B.A.C. Design Pty Ltd;  Owner: P Tzirkas & L Tzirkas

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

 

 



Ordinary Meeting

7 February 2011

A City of Opportunities

 

 

 

7

Proposed Exhibition of Council's revised Resource Strategy and Community Engagement Strategy   

 

Compiled by:               Wendy  Connell, Planner (Engagement)

Authorised by:            Paul Grimson, Acting Group Manager - Leadership   

 

Objective

We have a say in our future

Community Outcome

A Council that involves, informs and responds (10)

Strategic Response

Engage our communities by creating opportunities for participation, listening, provide information, and responding (10.1)

       

 

Executive Summary

§  Council adopted the current Community Strategic Plan, Delivery Program, Community Engagement Strategy, Resource Strategy and Operational Plan on 21 June 2010.

§  The Resource Strategy and Community Engagement Strategy have now been revised to ensure they respond to recent Division of Local Government (DLG) comments on our strategic planning documents, and to comply with the DLG’s newly issued guidelines.

§  It is recommended that the revised documents be exhibited for community feedback.

§  A report will be presented to Council on the outcomes of the exhibition process.

Background

The Local Government Amendment (Planning and Reporting) Act 2009 required all councils to prepare an integrated set of strategic planning documents.  A comprehensive program of engagement, involving a range of workshops, briefings with Councillors, key stakeholders and partners through the ‘City Futures’ Forum, and a staff survey, guided the development of these key strategic planning documents.  On 21 June 2010, Council adopted the Community Strategic Plan 2031, Delivery Program 2009-2013, Community Engagement Strategy 2010, Resource Strategy 2010-2020 and Operational Plan 2010-2011.

 

The Division of Local Government (DLG) has since reviewed the strategic planning documents from all councils that were part of the first group to comply with the legislation.  The DLG provided very positive comments about our strategic planning framework and how effectively the documents worked together.  It commented that, overall, the plans were clearly based on extensive community consultation, and provide good linkages between the documents.  They demonstrate how Council intends to address identified community aspirations, and evidence of financial resource considerations.  The DLG was also impressed by the format and presentation of the strategic planning documents on Council’s website.

 

Some of the DLG comments relate to guidelines that have been issued since last June, when our documents were finalised and adopted.  We have therefore taken this opportunity to revise the Resource Strategy and the Community Engagement Strategy to ensure they comply with the recent guidelines, and respond to the DLG feedback.

Revised Resource Strategy and Community Engagement Strategy

1.    Resource Strategy 2011-2021

Council’s Resource Strategy includes three key elements – an Asset Management Plan, a Workforce Plan, and a long-term Financial Plan.  The revised Resource Strategy 2011-2021 with all appendices, including the Asset Management Plans, has been forwarded under separate cover to Councillors.  A copy of the full document will be tabled at tonight’s meeting.

 

Preparing the revised Resource Strategy has involved further consideration of Council’s existing services, current priorities, and capacity.  It includes information about Council’s long term financial standing, the sustainability of its workforce, and an understanding of how assets will be managed in the long term.  The revised Resource Strategy now also includes five detailed Asset Management Plans that have been prepared over the last year.

 

Assets

The Asset Management Plan provides information about the state of our assets and the expenditure that will be required to maintain them.  The key message which has emerged so far is the need to ensure that assets are maintained in a financially responsible manner, and that a balance needs to be found between community expectations and available resources.

 

Good asset management is essential to any city’s long term viability.  It is becoming a key element on which a council’s performance is assessed, and against which grant applications are considered.  The Asset Management Plans (Transport, Buildings, Drainage, Fleet and Plant, and Parks) are based on an Institute of Public Works Engineering Australia (IPWEA) template, and follow the International Infrastructure Management Manual (IIMM).  The Asset Management Plans, including levels of service and future demand, will be regularly reviewed as part of the Resource Strategy.

 

People

The Workforce Plan identifies key actions that Council needs to update to ensure its Delivery Program can be resourced and implemented. Current challenges include attracting and retaining staff, skills shortages (in areas such as planning, engineering and early childhood teaching) and an ageing workforce.  It outlines actions to address these issues, as well as responding to changing workforce needs now and in the future.

 

Finance

The long term Financial Plan is supported by the long-term financial model. Three scenarios are presented – conservative, planned and optimistic. These scenarios form part of the sensitivity and risk analysis relating to the outcomes of the model. Council’s financial status is monitored regularly, and the long term model provides an opportunity for Council to identify potential financial issues at an early stage and gauge their effect in the longer term.  It is one of the key tools by which long term community aspirations are tested against financial reality. At times, alternative ways of delivering those aspirations may be needed.

 

 

 

 

2.    Community Engagement Strategy 2011

The DLG indicated that the Community Engagement Strategy could be enhanced by defining how Council will engage with its communities, the principles it will apply, and the methods to be used in community engagement activities. The revised Community Engagement Strategy has been forwarded under separate cover to Councillors. A copy of the full document will be tabled at tonight’s meeting.

 

The revised Community Engagement Strategy 2011 outlines how Council has engaged with its communities and relevant stakeholders in its consultations and engagement processes over the past ten years. It references Council’s strategic planning processes (preparing the Community Strategic Plan 2031), and outlines Council’s framework and policy for continuing community engagement.

 

It is intended that over the next two years, the Community Engagement Strategy will continue to be enhanced by incorporating a longer term and regular consultation and engagement program with our communities.

Exhibition of revised documents

Council’s adopted Resource Strategy and Community Engagement Strategy have been revised to respond to the recent guidelines issued by the DLG. Whilst not required by the DLG, it is recommended that the revised documents are exhibited for community feedback.  There are two impending opportunities for exhibition of these documents:

§  if Council decides to endorse a community engagement process for the proposed Special Rate Variation (a separate report in tonight’s Business Paper), the revised Resource Strategy and Community Engagement Strategy will be exhibited concurrently, to support the information regarding the Special Rate

§  if Council decides not to pursue the proposed Special Rate Variation, the revised Resource Strategy and Community Engagement Strategy will be exhibited concurrently with the draft Operational Plan 2011-2012, which is scheduled in April 2011.

The revised documents, together with feedback from our communities, will be reported to Council following the conclusion of the exhibition period.

 

It is intended that after adoption the Resource Strategy 2011-2021, including the five detailed Asset Management Plans, and the Community Engagement Strategy 2011, will be made available on Council’s website.  This will assist our communities in understanding how Council is managing its assets and the level of service they can expect, and how community engagement processes will be implemented.

Conclusion

Council’s adopted Resource Strategy and Community Engagement Strategy have been revised to ensure they reflect the contemporary guidelines issued by the Division of Local Government and its recent advice. The revised documents should now be exhibited for public feedback, and then reported to Council for adoption.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Proposed Exhibition of Council's revised Resource Strategy and Community Engagement Strategy be received.

2.     That the revised Resource Strategy and Community Engagement Strategy be exhibited for community feedback.

3.     That the outcomes of the public exhibition be reported to Council.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Meeting

7 February 2011

A City of Opportunities

 

 

 

8

Development Application DA09/0609 Final Voluntary Planning Agreement for 2/91 Great Western Highway, Emu Plains  Applicant:  J A Aitken, J W Aitken, M R Aitken & D J Reeves;  Owner:  Innovation Planning Australia Pty Ltd    

 

Compiled by:               Peter Wood, Development Assessment Co-ordinator

Authorised by:            Paul Lemm, Development Services Manager   

 

Objective

We have access to what we need

Community Outcome

A City with a strong local economy and access to jobs (6)

Strategic Response

Facilitate a diverse economy, sustainable businesses and secure employment base (6.1)

      

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

 

Executive Summary

Council’s approval for alterations and additions to “Jimmy’s Steakhouse” at Emu Plains was subject to conditions reflecting the applicant’s offer to enter into a Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA) for the provision of additional parking spaces within Council’s existing car park. A draft VPA has been prepared, publicly notified and it is recommended that the VPA now be entered into.

Background

Council at its Ordinary meeting of 1 February 2010 approved Development Application No.09/0609 for alterations and additions to the existing restaurant known as “Jimmy’s Steakhouse.” A major consideration of the assessment related to the provision of on-site parking and the proposal sought to enter into a Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA) for the provision of parking spaces within Council’s car park adjoining. Council resolved to grant consent subject to a further report to Council.

Content of Draft Voluntary Planning Agreement

The Draft VPA requires the developer to pay the Council the sum of $12,000 to construct eight (8) car parking spaces on land within the existing Billington Place car park. This amount has now been paid to Council. The spaces are to be constructed within twelve (12) months of payment of the contribution. It provides that the deed commences from the date it is signed by all parties and that the road work land being the area where the spaces are constructed remains in the ownership of Council.

 

The Draft VPA also sets out a number of general and specific provisions for definitions and interpretation, operation and application, excluding application of Section 94 (EP& A Act, 1979), dispute resolution, GST and warranties of capacity. It is also accompanied by an explanatory note. A copy of the Draft VPA is attached to this report. Council’s Legal Officer has reviewed the Draft VPA and found it to be satisfactory.

Statutory Considerations

The Draft Voluntary Planning Agreement was prepared and public notice given for 28 days in accordance with Section 93E of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 with the exhibition period from 15 October 2010 to 12 November 2010. The VPA can now be entered into when signed by all parties to the agreement, namely Council and the developer, in accordance with Clause 25C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000. It is recommended that the VPA be executed by affixing the Council Seal.

 

Councils are required to facilitate public inspection of planning agreements in accordance with Clause 25F of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 by keeping a register and making this available for public inspection, together with copies of all planning agreements and related explanatory notes.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Development Application DA09/0609 Final Voluntary Planning Agreement for 2/91 Great Western Highway, Emu Plains be received.

2.     The Voluntary Planning Agreement be endorsed and Council’s Common Seal be placed on all necessary documentation.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1.  

Draft Planning Agreement

14 Pages

Appendix

  


Ordinary Meeting

7 February 2011

Appendix 1 - Draft Planning Agreement

 

 

 















Ordinary Meeting

7 February 2011

A City of Opportunities

 

 

 

9

Development Application DA10/0664 Proposed Dwelling Addition at  Lot 268 DP 240525 (No. 34) Kilkenny Road, South Penrith  Applicant:  H R Ovenden & K J Ovenden;  Owner:  H R Ovenden & K J Ovenden   

 

Compiled by:               Christopher Hawkins, Environmental Health & Building Surveyor

Authorised by:            Paul Lemm, Development Services Manager  

 

Objective

We have access to what we need

Community Outcome

A City with lifestyle and housing choice in our neighbourhoods (8)

Strategic Response

Encourage housing that provides choice, achieves design excellence, and meets community needs (8.1)

      

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

 

Executive Summary

Council is in receipt of a development application for construction of a dwelling addition. The application seeks to vary the 50% landscape requirement restriction in the Penrith Local Environmental Plan 1998 Urban Lands. The application is supported by an objection under the State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1.

 

The existing development is a single storey, 4 bedroom brick veneer dwelling with an attached carport. The proposed application for development comprises of the construction of a garage, walk-in robe, front entrance and addition to the existing bedroom.

 

The application was notified and no submissions were received.

 

The SEPP 1 objection has demonstrated that full compliance with the minimum landscape area requirement is unreasonable due to the existing dwelling on site, and the precedence set by other similar developments in that area. The variations and the proposed dwelling are unlikely to have any significant impacts on the amenity of the locality.

 

In accordance with the reporting procedures required by the Department of Planning, the matter is forwarded to Council for determination. As such, it is recommended the SEPP 1 objections be supported and the development application be approved subject to conditions.

 

The Site

The subject site is rectangular shaped with a total site area of approximately 641.03 square metres. The site has a frontage to Kilkenny Road of 18.288m and a depth of 33.052m. (See Appendix No. 1 - Locality Plan).

 

Neighbouring properties in the locality are a mix of single and two storey residential dwellings. Existing development on the site consists of a single storey brick veneer dwelling with a concrete tiled roof. The rest of the site is free of any other structures.

 

The site does not include vegetation of any significance. The building area is clear of any existing vegetation.

 

The Proposed Development

The proposed development involves alterations and additions to the front of the dwelling, including extending two existing bedrooms, a new entry and double garage.

 

The proposal will be constructed using timber framed floor and brick veneer walls. The garage shall be double brick on a concrete slab. The external finish will be cement render and concrete roof tiles with gutters to match existing. (See Appendix No. 2 Site Plan and Elevations).

 

The development application was accompanied by:

·    An objection under the State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 to Clause 12 of Council’s Local Environmental Plan 1998 Urban Land and Part 4 section 4.2 of Penrith Development Control Plan 2006.

·    Statement of Environmental Effects

·    Site/ Elevation plans

·    BASIX certificate

·    Waste Management Plan

 

Planning Assessment

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

 

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

State Environmental Planning Policy No 1—Development Standards

SEPP 1 seeks to provide flexibility in the application of planning controls where strict compliance with those standards would, in any particular case, be unreasonable or unnecessary or tend to hinder the attainment of the objectives stated in Section 5 (a)(i) and (ii) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act. These objectives relate to the proper management of resources to promote the welfare of the community and environment, and, to promote the orderly and economic use of development of the land.

 

The applicant seeks to vary the development standard relating to the minimum landscape area. The extent of the variation being sought is outlined below

 

 

Minimum required under LEP

Current Landscape area

Proposed Landscaped  Area

Landscape Area

50% (320m²)

42.822% (274m²)

41.886% (268.5m²)

 

 

Variation of Landscape Area

The SEPP 1 objection has been lodged in relation to the provisions of Clause 12 of Council’s Local Environmental Plan 1998 – Urban Lands, and in particular the provisions of Clause 12(3). The relevant clause states:

 

The council must not grant consent to development that involves the erection of a building in Zone No. 2(a1), 2(a), 2(b), 2(c), 2(d) or 2(e) unless the building is wholly within the building envelope, and does not contravene the maximum external wall height or minimum landscaped area.

 

The SEPP 1 objection seeks approval for the construction of a dwelling addition which proposes a landscaped area 41.8%. The minimum landscape area required is 50%. This variation proposes a departure of 16.40% from the development standard.

 

Assessment of SEPP 1 Objections

1) Development Standard

The SEPP 1 objection is required to demonstrate that compliance with the aims and objectives of the relevant planning instrument and zone can still be achieved regardless of the variation to the development standard.

 

The objectives for Zone 2(b) Residential (Low Density) are as follows: 

 

(i)to reinforce the importance of natural landscape settings and areas with heritage conservation value.

 

The proposed design responds appropriately to the site and is consistent and compatible with adjoining development; whilst not detracting from the landscape character of the street or amenity of the area. No trees are required to be removed as part of the work. The site is not identified as being in a Heritage Conservation Area.

 

“(ii) to promote the established urban and landscape character of traditional residential subdivisions by limiting the range of permissible uses.”

 

The existing allotment size is consistent with surrounding properties. A dwelling is a permissible land use.

 

“(iii) to allow a limited range of compatible non-residential uses.”

 

The proposed development does not include further non-residential uses.

 

The objectives for Section 12 of LEP 1998 Urban Lands are as follows:

 

(a)  Achieve site-responsive development at a scale which is compatible with existing housing in the locality by controlling visual impacts relating height and bulk.

(b)  Minimise the impact of loss of privacy, overshadowing and loss of views.

(c)  Achieve an appropriate separation between buildings and site boundaries and preserve private open space corridors along rear lines.

(d)  Protect and enhance the environmental features, which are characteristic of each of the residential zones, by requiring sufficient space on-site for effective landscaping and on-site stormwater detention.

 

The proposed development will satisfy these objectives even with a variation to the minimum landscaped area.

 

The dwelling addition is considered to be compatible with the existing dwelling on the subject lot. The proposal is considered to be site responsive and is likely to have minimal impact to the streetscape due to the prominent landscaping to the front yard. The overall height of the dwelling will not be increased. The proposed finished dwelling will be of a similar size to other developments in the immediate vicinity.    

 

There will be minimal loss of views and privacy due to the existing dwelling and proposal being single storey.

 

The dwelling allows for adequate side setbacks from the site boundaries and appropriate separation between the neighbouring dwellings. The rear yard will maintain a private open space corridor of greater than 10m to the rear boundary. 

 

As the development results in the provision of 41.8% landscaped area which is 6m2 more than what currently exists. These are similar rear setback to adjoining dwellings and the environmental characteristics of Kilkenny Road will be maintained.

 

The SEPP 1 objection is considered suitable on the premise that the development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary on the following basis:

 

·    The proposed development does not hinder the attainment of the objectives of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act;

·    The proposed dwelling is reasonable development for the site;

·    The extent of the landscaping and proposed rear setback is consistent with the surrounding area;

·    A rear landscape corridor is maintained and minimal loss of privacy is likely to occur.

 

It is considered that the minimum landscape area provision retains its validity and is consistently applied and enforced on greenfield sites across the Council area. As such, it is recommended the SEPP 1 objections be supported and the development application be approved subject to conditions.

 

Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No 20—Hawkesbury-Nepean River

The provisions of SREP 20 apply to the property as it falls within the Hawkesbury-Nepean River Catchment. SREP 20 aims to protect the environment of the Hawkesbury-Nepean River, by ensuring that the impacts of future land uses are considered in a regional context. Of most relevance to the proposal is the potential impact on residential development and water quality. The proposed development will have minimal impacts on the total catchment management, water quality and water quantity. No heritage items are located on the site. The dwelling addition will not be visible from the riverine corridor. Stormwater will be controlled and directed to the existing stormwater system. The proposal is in keeping with the objectives of the SREP.

 

Penrith Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Urban Land)

Under the terms of Penrith Local Environmental Plan 1998 Urban Land the land is zoned as Zone No 2(b) Residential Low Density. The proposed development is defined as a dwelling, which is permissible with the consent of Council.

 

The proposed development meets the objectives of the zone as described in the above SEPP 1 assessment.

 

Development Standards

Section 12 of Penrith Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Urban Lands) provides requirements for building envelopes, heights of buildings, landscape areas and rear boundary setbacks for development that requires consent.

 

Building Envelope and Maximum External Wall Heights

Under Clause 12(3) of the LEP, a building is required to be constructed within the building envelope and maximum external wall heights being 6.5m.

 

The proposed dwelling complies with the maximum external wall heights.

 

Landscaped Area

The minimum landscape area non-compliance has been addressed above in the assessment of the SEPP 1 objection.

 

Rear Boundary Setback

Under Clause 12(3) of the LEP the building is to be setback 4 metres from the rear boundary. The proposed addition will comply.

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

Penrith DCP 2006 Part 4 Section 4.2 – “Residential Single Dwellings” is applicable to the current development application. Appendix 2 shows the relevant standards and how the dwelling satisfies the requirements of Penrith DCP 2006.

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

The development generally complies with the objectives of the planning controls and the impacts of the development are expected to be minimal.

 

Stormwater is to be directed to the existing stormwater system minimising impacts on adjoining properties.

 

Appropriate conditions are to be included relating to site management during construction. A waste management plan has been provided. Hours of work and construction noise will also be subject to consent conditions.

 

The proposed dwelling is located and designed to make the most economic use of the site and provides minimal adverse impacts to the subject site and adjoining properties.

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

The site is suitable for the construction of a new residential addition. The proposal is considered to address and satisfy the objectives of the relevant planning documents.

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

Community Consultation

In accordance with Chapter 2.7 of the Penrith Development Control Plan for the City of Penrith 2006 – Notification and Advertising, the proposed development was notified to nearby and adjoining residents. No submissions were received.

Conclusion

The subject development application seeks approval to construct a new residential dwelling addition and is supported by SEPP 1 objection which seeks a variation of the minimum landscape area. The development is considered satisfactory under the heads of consideration of Section 79(C) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act.

 

Whilst the proposed development application requires variations to minimum landscape areas it is considered to comply with the objectives of the relevant planning instruments as outlined above.

 

As such, it is recommended the SEPP 1 objections be supported and the development application be approved subject to conditions.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Development Application DA10/0664 Proposed Dwelling Addition at  Lot 268 DP 240525 (No. 34) Kilkenny Road, South Penrith be received.

2.     The SEPP 1 objections relating to landscape area be supported.

3.     DA10/0664 for a dwelling addition at 34 Kilkenny Road, Penrith be approved subject to the attached conditions:

Standard Conditions

3.1       A008 – Works to BCA requirements

A019 – Occupation Certificate

A046 – Construction Certificate required

D001 – Sediment and Erosion Control

D009 – Covering Waste Storage area

D010 – Waste disposal

E001 – BCA compliance

H001 – Stamped plans and erection of site notice

H041 – Hours of work

K016 – Stormwater

L008 -  Tree Preservation Order

L012 – General landscaping

P002 - Fees

Q01f – Notice of commencement and appointment of PCA

Q05f -  Occupation Certificate

Special Conditions

3.2      The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans drawn by Wayne Ryan, Drawing Number 10-19 pages 1- 6, dated 21.6.10, the application form, the BASIX Certificate, and any supporting information received with the application, except as may be amended in red on the attached plans and by the following conditions

3.2      In accordance with the requirements of clause 94 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation, you are required to install a hard wired smoke detector in the existing dwelling. This detector is to comply with the requirements of AS3786 and must be located in accordance with.7.2 of the Housing Provisions. A certificate from a Licensed Electrician attesting to the installation of the smoke detector is to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate

3.3      The external finishes of the dwelling addition are to compliment and blend with the established streetscape and amenity of the area.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1.  

Locality Plan

1 Page

Appendix

2.  

Site Plan and Elevations

1 Page

Appendix

3.  

Landscape Calculation Plan

1 Page

Appendix

4.  

DCP Compliance Table

2 Pages

Appendix

  


Ordinary Meeting

7 February 2011

Appendix 1 - Locality Plan

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

7 February 2011

Appendix 2 - Site Plan and Elevations

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

7 February 2011

Appendix 3 - Landscape Calculation Plan

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

7 February 2011

Appendix 4 - DCP Compliance Table

 

 

 

Appendix 4

 

 

 

Objective

Comments

Clause 4.4 Preferred Configurations for New Dwellings

 

The objective is to ensure new dwellings adopt key features of established suburban design. These include entrances, windows to main living rooms, private courtyards facing the street or the rear boundary, and garages architecturally integrated within building forms.

The development is considered to comply with these objectives and will also maintain a green corridor along the rear boundary.

Clause 5.2 Urban Form

 

The objective is to ensure new buildings show characteristics of established suburban neighbourhoods. Dwellings should be oriented to face the street, building forms should be stepped or articulated and relate to the shape of their surrounding garden areas.

The proposed addition keeps the existing roof line of the dwelling to provide a quality outcome. The addition will be finished to match and compliment that of the existing dwelling.

 

Clause 5.3 Front, Side and Rear Setbacks

 

The objective is to ensure setbacks reflect the character of established garden suburbs, and provide for development of flora and fauna corridors.

 

Mandatory Controls-

3(a) Front walls are either average the setbacks of the immediate neighbours; or adopt a 5.5m minimum whichever is greater. In addition front setbacks are to provide extensive landscaping according to 6.5 Garden Design and fences.

 

The proposed garage is setback 6.4m, a variation of 2m compared to the average of the adjoining properties. The streetscape is characterised by single storey detached dwellings with established gardens within the front setback. There are a number of carports that extend forward of the front building line; however, they don not dominate the streetscape.

 

The proposed garage addition whilst reducing the front setback maintains a distance of 6.4m which is capable of parking a motor vehicle forward of the building line, however still within the property boundary. The established landscaping on either side boundary provides an effective screen from both street approaches and would not detract from the established streetscape or effect the sight lines of adjoining residences.

Clause 5.4 Landscaped Area and Parking

 

The objective is to retain a reasonable proportion of each site for landscaped garden areas, conserve significant existing vegetation, and provide reasonable separation between neighbouring dwellings.

 

A landscaped area of 41.7% is proposed and adequate parking areas are provided.

Clause 5.5 Solar Planning

 

The objective is to improve the energy efficiency of dwellings and achieve a high standard of residential amenity. Due to the orientation of the lot and the development being single storey construction the dwelling will meet the acceptable solar standards.

 

The applicant has demonstrated that the dwelling meets acceptable solar standards and that addition will have minimal impacts 

 

Clause 6.1 Significant Landscapes

 

The objective is that in areas of particular significance to natural conservation or high environmental character, new development should demonstrate detailed design measures to protect that conservation significance or character.

In this regard the existing dwelling maintains natural topography and environmental character.

Clause 6.3 Building Design

 

Dwellings be surrounded by private gardens, their facades should display a variety of materials and shading structures and garages should be integrated within the overall architectural form and design.

 

Mandatory Controls-

a. Maximum permitted external wall height 6.5m

b. Maximum permitted overall height above natural ground 6.5m

c. Garages should have two doors separated by a pier or column

d. Garages should be setback further than the front setback of the dwelling.

e. Lowest floor level shall be no higher than 1 metre above natural ground level

f. Cut and fill is restricted to a maximum of 1m

 

The objective of this control is to ensure the built form doesn’t dominate the streetscape. In regards to point (c) and (d) above, whilst the proposed garage sits forward of the residence it is predominately obscured by established landscaping. The addition is also integrated into the design of the dwelling and occupies only 40% of the front façade.

 

The client is proposing a single panel lift door contrary to the DCP requirements due to the width of the existing garage. The existing garage if separated by a pier or column would be less than 2.5m wide and too narrow for a car. As the existing garage has a 900mm setback it is not possible to further increase the width of the garage. It is considered that a single panel door will not result in a development contrary to the objectives of the clause.

 

Clause 6.4 Energy Efficiency

 

Dwellings shall be configured and constructed to minimise the energy required for space heating, cooling or lighting

The development proposal is compliant with the requirements of the BASIX certificate.

 

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

7 February 2011

A City of Opportunities

 

 

 

10

Development Application DA10/1184 Proposed Single Storey Dwelling & Inground Swimming Pool at Lot 1050 DP 1128253 (No. 8 - 10) Crestwood Avenue, Glenmore Park  Applicant:   B.A.C. Design Pty Ltd ;  Owner:  P Tzirkas & L Tzirkas   

 

Compiled by:               Christopher Hawkins, Environmental Health & Building Surveyor

Authorised by:            Paul Lemm, Development Services Manager  

 

Objective

We have access to what we need

Community Outcome

A City with lifestyle and housing choice in our neighbourhoods (8)

Strategic Response

Encourage housing that provides choice, achieves design excellence, and meets community needs (8.1)

      

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

 

Executive Summary

Council is in receipt of a development application for construction of a dwelling. The application seeks to vary the 4m rear setback requirement of Penrith Local Environmental Plan 188. The application is supported by an objection under the State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1.

 

The proposed development is comprised of the construction of a single storey, 4 bedroom brick veneer dwelling and in-ground swimming pool.

 

The objectives of the Local Environmental Plan 188 are to provide a flexible framework for the promotion of growth and development in South Penrith. More detailed guidelines for land use are provided in the Development Control Plan for Glenmore Park.

 

The dwelling achieves these objectives by providing an innovative and site responsive development that compliments the surrounding area and minimises impacts on adjoining properties.

 

The application was notified, with no submissions received.

 

In accordance with the reporting procedures required by the Department of Planning, the matter is forwarded to Council for determination. The report recommends that the SEPP1 objections be supported and the development application be approved.

 

The Site

The subject site is located on Crestwood Avenue, Glenmore Park with a South Westerly aspect. The subject site is an irregular triangular shape with a total area of 995.80m². The site falls approximately 3m from the  rear boundary to the street kerb along the northern boundary. The proposed pad of the dwelling will require an approximate excavation of 1m. Fill will also be required which gradually reduces towards the Southern frontage to approximately 500mm. The established surrounding development consists of a combination of single and two storey residential dwellings. See Locality Plan Appendix No. 1.

 

Proposed Development

The proposed development includes the following aspects:

·    Construction of a single storey, four bedroom, theatre room, brick veneer dwelling with alfresco area.

·    Construction of an in-ground swimming pool and shade sail.

·    A proposed double garage providing (2) two parking spaces for the dwelling with dimensions of 5.790 metres x 6.720 metres.

·    A driveway 5000 metres wide at the property boundaries.

·    Building setbacks of;

o 4.011 metres to the front porch

o 6.142 metres to the patio left hand side

o 5.616 metres to garage

o 2.031 metre rear setback to main building and alfresco

(See Appendix No. 2 Site Plan and Elevations)

 

The development application was accompanied by:

·    An objection under the State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 to Clause 16 of Council’s Local Environmental Plan 188.

·    Dwelling and pool plans

·    Engineers details for the proposed pool and dwelling

·    Development Specification

·    Road Reserve Permit

·    Statement of Environmental Effects

·    Site/ Elevation Plan

·    BASIX certificate

·    Waste Management Plan

 

Planning Assessment

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

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

State Environmental Planning Policy No 1—Development Standards

 

SEPP 1 seeks to provide flexibility in the application of planning controls where strict compliance with those standards would, in any particular case, be unreasonable or unnecessary or tend to hinder the attainment of the objectives stated in Section 5 (a)(i) and (ii) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act. These objectives relate to the proper management of resources to promote the welfare of the community and environment, and, to promote the orderly and economic use of development of the land.

 

The applicant seeks to vary the development standard relating to the minimum rear setback requirement. The extent of the variation being sought is outlined below.

 

 

Minimum required under LEP

Proposed variation

Rear Setback

4m

2.03m (49%) to 2.52m (37%)

 

Variation of Rear Setback

 

The SEPP 1 objection has been lodged in relation to the provisions of Clause 16 of Council’s Local Environmental Plan 188 and in particular the provisions of Clause 16(a). The relevant clause states:

 

“The council must not consent to the erection of a dwelling on land in Zone No 2 (Urban Zone) that is shown hatched on the map unless:

 

(a)  a rear building setback of 4 metres minimum is achieved – in the case of a single storey dwelling

 

The SEPP 1 objection seeks approval for the construction of a dwelling which proposes a rear setback which varies between 2.03m to 2.52m. The minimum rear setback required is 4 metres. This variation proposes a maximum departure of 49% from the development standard.

 

Assessment of SEPP 1 Objections

 

1) Development Standard

 

The SEPP 1 objection is required to demonstrate that compliance with the aims and objectives of the relevant planning instrument and zone can still be achieved regardless of the variation to the development standard.

 

The objectives for Zone 2 (Urban Zone) are as follows: 

 

(a)     to provide a flexible framework for the promotion of growth and development in the South Penrith Urban Release Area;

(b)     to enable the council to provide more detailed guidelines about preferred land use distribution and development issues in a development control plan; and

(c)     to ensure that development is carried out in a manner which achieves appropriate provision of or funding for major infrastructure works that are a necessary prerequisite for urban development generally in the area.

 

Whilst Penrith LEP 188 does not provide any specific objectives in relation to the standard, Section 5.3 of Penrith Development Control Plan 2006 sites the following objectives for front, side and rear setbacks, as follows:

 

Setbacks are to reflect the character of established garden suburb, and provide for development of flora and fauna corridors.

 

As indicated earlier the subject site is an irregular triangular shape, with a long street curved frontage to Crestwood Ave and a relatively shallow depth between the front and rear boundary ranging between 24.75m at the northern end to zero at the southern end.

 

The proposed dwelling has been sited towards the northern end of the site (the widest section) and has been designed to address the required setback from Crestwood Ave. The resultant built form is a long slender dwelling with two distinct private open spaces – a courtyard at the northern end of the site which will operate as a serviced yard with clothes drying facilities and air conditioning unit; and a designated recreational area incorporating a swimming pool and grassed area at the southern end of the site where the site tapers to a zero point.

 

The proposed alfresco area is an open sided structure which provides a weather protected transition between the internal development. This will satisfy the objectives even with a variation to the minimum rear setback requirement.

 

The fall of the land necessitates cut and fill across the site in order to create a level building platform. This platform would also require the construction of a retaining wall approximately 900mm in height along the length of the eastern property boundary.

 

There will be minimal loss of views and privacy due to the existing dwelling and proposal being single storey.

 

As the development maintains a landscaped area greater than 50% and a similar rear setback to dwellings in the immediate vicinity, the environmental characteristics of Crestwood Avenue will be maintained.

 

The SEPP 1 objection is considered suitable on the premise that the development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary on the following basis:

 

·    The proposed development does not hinder the attainment of the objectives of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act.

·    The proposed dwelling is reasonable development for the site.

·    The extent of the landscaping and proposed rear setback is consistent with the surrounding area.

·    A rear landscape corridor is maintained and minimal loss of privacy is likely to occur.

 

It is considered that the minimum rear setback provision retains its validity and is consistently applied and enforced on greenfield sites across the Council area. As such, it is recommended the SEPP 1 objections be supported and the development application be approved subject to conditions.

Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No 20—Hawkesbury-Nepean River

The provisions of SREP 20 apply to the property as it falls within the Hawkesbury-Nepean River Catchment. SREP 20 aims to protect the environment of the Hawkesbury-Nepean River, by ensuring that the impacts of future land uses are considered in a regional context. Of most relevance to the proposal is the potential impact on residential development and water quality. The proposed development will have minimal impacts on the total catchment management, water quality and water quantity. No heritage items are located on the site. The dwelling will not be visible from the riverine corridor. Stormwater will be controlled and directed to the existing stormwater system. The proposal is in keeping with the objectives of the SREP.

 

Penrith Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Urban Land)

Under the terms of Penrith Local Environmental Plan 188 the land is zoned as Zone No 2 (Urban Zone). The proposed development is defined as a dwelling, which is permissible with the consent of Council.

 

The proposed development meets the objectives of the zone as described in the above SEPP 1 assessment.

 

Development Standards

 

Section 16 of Penrith Local Environmental Plan 188 provides requirements for building rear setbacks and restricts the use of the land for development that requires consent.

 

Rear Boundary Setback

 

Under Clause 16(a) of the LEP, a building is required to achieve a 4m minimum setback in the case of a single storey dwelling.

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

 

Penrith DCP 2006 Part 4 Section 4.2 – “Residential Single Dwellings” is applicable to the current development application. The table in Appendix 2 details the relevant sections of compliance to the DCP. The development is considered to satisfy the DCP provisions.

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

 

The development generally complies with the objectives of the planning controls and the impacts of the development are expected to be minimal.

 

Stormwater is to be directed to the existing stormwater system minimising impacts on adjoining properties.

 

Appropriate conditions are to be included relating to site management during construction. An appropriate waste management plan has been provided. Hours of work and construction noise will also be subject to consent conditions.

 

The proposed dwelling is located and designed to make the most economic use of the site and provides minimal adverse impacts to the subject site and adjoining properties.

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

The site is suitable for the construction of a new residential dwelling. The proposal is considered to address and satisfy the objectives of the relevant planning documents.

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

Community Consultation

In accordance with Chapter 2.7 of the Penrith Development Control Plan for the City of Penrith 2006 – Notification and Advertising, the proposed development was notified to nearby and adjoining residents. No submissions were received.

Conclusion

The subject development application seeks approval to construct a new residential dwelling and is supported by SEPP 1 objection which seeks a variation of the minimum rear setback. The development is considered satisfactory under the heads of consideration of Section 79(C) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act.

 

Whilst the proposed development application requires variations to minimum rear setback the proposal complies with the objectives of the relevant planning instruments as outlined above.

 

As such, it is recommended the SEPP 1 objections be supported and the development application be approved subject to conditions.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Development Application DA10/1184 Proposed Single Storey Dwelling & Inground Swimming Pool at Lot 1050 DP 1128253 (No. 8 - 10) Crestwood Avenue, Glenmore Park be received.

2.     The SEPP 1 objections relating to landscape area be supported.

3.     DA10/1184 for a dwelling at 8-10 Crestwood Avenue, Glenmore Park be approved subject to the attached conditions:

Standard Conditions

3.1       A008 – Works to BCA requirements

A019 – Occupation Certificate

A046 – Construction Certificate required

D007 – Filling of Land

D009 – Covering of Waste Storage Area

D010 – Appropriate disposal of excavated waste

E001 – BCA Compliance

H001 – Stamped Plans and Site Notice

H002 – All forms of Construction

H009 – Cut/Fill details

H036 – Rainwater Tank

H037 – Safe supply of water from catchment

H038 – Connection of rainwater tank supply

H039 – Rainwater tank pump

I003 – Roads Act approval 1

J001 – Excavated material removal

J002 – Fencing when water in pool

J004 – Pool fence residential

J007 – Boundary fencing

J010 – Pool board/sign

K016 – Stormwater

K026 – Stabilised access

L008 – Tree prevention order

P002 – Fees associated with Council land

Q01F – Notice of Commencement & Appointment of PCA

Q05F – Occupation Certificate

Special Conditions

3.2      The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans drawn by Wayne Ryan, Drawing Number 10-19 pages 1- 6, dated 21.6.10, the application form, the BASIX Certificate, and any supporting information received with the application, except as may be amended in red on the attached plans and by the following conditions

3.3      Erosion and sediment control measures shall be installed prior to the commencement of works on site including approved clearing of site vegetation. The erosion and sediment control measures are to be maintained in accordance with the approved erosion and sediment control plan(s) for the development and the Department of Housing's “Managing Urban Stormwater: Soils and Construction” 2004

The approved sediment and erosion control measures are to be installed prior to and maintained throughout the construction phase of the development until the landscaping, driveway and on-site parking areas have been completed for the development. These measures shall ensure that mud and soil from vehicular movements to and from the site does not occur during the construction of the development

3.4      The operating noise level of the swimming pool filter and equipment shall not exceed 5dB(A) above the background noise level when measured at the boundaries of the premises. The provisions of the Protection of the Environment and Operations Act 1997 apply on the development, in the terms of regulating offensive noise

3.5      The building shall be set out by a registered surveyor.  A Survey Certificate shall be undertaken and submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority when the building is constructed to ground floor slab level and frame stage with eaves and gutters installed

3.6      The external finishes of the dwelling are to compliment and blend with the established streetscape and amenity of the area

3.7      No earthworks including cut and fill or building works including a retaining wall, garden shed or other structures of the like are permitted within the easement. The easement is to remain at natural ground level at all times.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1.  

Locality Plan

1 Page

Appendix

2.  

Site Plan & Elevations

2 Pages

Appendix

3.  

Penrith DCP 2006 Compliance Table

2 Pages

Appendix

  


Ordinary Meeting

7 February 2011

Appendix 1 - Locality Plan

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

7 February 2011

Appendix 2 - Site Plan & Elevations

 

 

 



Ordinary Meeting

7 February 2011

Appendix 3 - Penrith DCP 2006 Compliance Table

 

 

 

Appendix 3

 

 

Objective

Comment

Clause 4.4 Preferred Configurations for New Dwellings

 

 

 

 

 

The objective is to ensure new dwellings adopt key features of established suburban design. These include entrances, windows to main living rooms, private courtyards facing the street or the rear boundary, and garages architecturally integrated within building forms.

 

The development is considered to comply with these objectives and will also maintain a green corridor along the rear boundary.

 

Clause 5.2 Urban Form

 

The objective is to ensure new buildings show characteristics of established suburban neighbourhoods. Dwellings should be oriented to face the street, building forms should be stepped or articulated and relate to the shape of their surrounding garden areas.

 

The proposed dwelling is single storey in construction and proposes a cut of 1m to reduce height above natural ground level and the potential for privacy impacts to adjoining properties.

 

Clause 5.3 Front, Side and Rear Setbacks

 

The objective is to ensure setbacks reflect the character of established garden suburbs, and provide for development of flora and fauna corridors.

 

Mandatory Controls-

3(a) Front walls are either average the setbacks of the immediate neighbours; or adopt a 5.5m minimum whichever is greater. In addition front setbacks are to provide extensive landscaping according to 6.5 Garden Design and fences.

(b) Verandahs and pergolas are permitted to encroach 1.5 beyond the adopted setback

 

The proposed dwelling has a range of setbacks to the street providing an articulated façade to the streetscape.  Existing development in the area is characterised by single and two storey detached dwellings with established gardens within the front setback.

 

The proposed dwelling incorporates a patio entry feature which is permitted to encroach 1.5m forward of the required front setback. Landscaping and the stepped façade will result in the structure having minimal impacts on the established streetscape of Crestwood Avenue.

 

Clause 5.4 Landscaped Area and Parking

 

The objective is to retain a reasonable proportion of each site for landscaped garden areas, conserve significant existing vegetation, and provide reasonable separation between neighbouring dwellings.

 

 

A landscaped area greater than 50% is proposed and adequate parking areas are provided.

Clause 5.5 Solar Planning

 

The objective is to improve the energy efficiency of dwellings and achieve a high standard of residential amenity. Due to the orientation of the lot and the development being single storey construction the dwelling will meet the acceptable solar standards.

 

The applicant has demonstrated that the dwelling meets acceptable solar standards and that dwelling will have minimal impacts 

 

Clause 6.1 Significant Landscapes

 

The objective is that in areas of particular significance to natural conservation or high environmental character, new development should demonstrate detailed design measures to protect that conservation significance or character.

 

In this regard the existing dwelling maintains natural topography and environmental character.

Clause 6.3 Building Design

 

Dwellings be surrounded by private gardens, their facades should display a variety of materials and shading structures and garages should be integrated within the overall architectural form and design.

 

Mandatory Controls-

a. Maximum permitted external wall height 6.5m

b. Maximum permitted overall height above natural ground 6.5m

c. Garages should have two doors separated by a pier or column

d. Garages should be setback further than the front setback of the dwelling.

e. Lowest floor level shall be no higher than 1 metre above natural ground level

f. Cut and fill is restricted to a maximum of 1m

 

The objective of this control is to ensure the built form doesn’t dominate the streetscape. The proposed garage is located approximately 1.5m behind the front building line of the dwelling and the dwelling complies with the maximum external wall heights.

 

The cut and fill for the development will be restricted to 1m. The proposed retaining wall will be deigned to engineers details to ensure structural integrity.

 

The client is proposing a single panel lift door contrary to the DCP requirements due to the width of the existing garage. The existing garage if separated by a pier or column would be less than 2.5m wide and too narrow for a standard vehicle. It is considered that a single panel door will not result in a development contrary to the objectives of the clause.

 

Clause 6.4 Energy Efficiency

 

Dwellings shall be configured and  constructed to minimise the energy

The development proposal is compliant with the requirements of the BASIX certificate.

 

 

 

 


A Green City

 

Item                                                                                                                                                Page

 

11      Managed Aquifer Recharge Project 

 

 



Ordinary Meeting

7 February 2011

A Green City

 

 

 

11

Managed Aquifer Recharge Project    

 

Compiled by:               Graham Liehr, Environmental Health Manager

Authorised by:            Graham Liehr, Environmental Health Manager   

 

Objective

Our natural habitats are healthy

Community Outcome

A City with healthy waterways and protected natural areas (11)

Strategic Response

Work with others to protect and conserve the River, waterways and catchments, and natural environments (11.1)

       

 

Executive Summary

In September 2010, Senator The Hon Penny Wong, the then Minister for Climate Change and Water, advised of the Australian Government’s commitment to provide funding of up to $4,193,500 for the proposed Blacktown and Penrith Stormwater Harvesting and Managed Aquifer Recharge Scheme under the “Water for the Future – National Urban Water and Desalination Plan”.  As part of the funding offer, up to $1,981,000 is allocated to work in Penrith City Council for the Managed Aquifer Recharge Scheme.

 

Previous reports have been provided to Council regarding the grant and the proposed Managed Aquifer Recharge (MAR) Project at its Ordinary Meeting on 1 February 2010 and Policy Review Committee on the 22 November 2010.  In summary, the reports introduced the project, the grant and a further funding opportunity through the NSW Office of Water (NOW) which would provide additional funding from the State Government to support this project.

 

The application for additional funding totalling $2.2M was submitted to the NOW in December 2010. Announcements are yet to be made of the determination of the application. 

 

The Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (DSEWPC) has requested Council to finalise the grant funding offer as soon as possible. This report recommends that Council finalise the Funding Deed with DSEWPC and support acceptance of a first stage allocation to undertake the required detailed design, costing and risk assessment subject to Council receiving the full $2.2M additional funding from NOW. The report also recommends progression of the Penrith Stormwater Harvesting and Managed Aquifer Recharge Scheme being subject to confirmation of the project costs falling within the grant allocation.

Grant Status

In September 2010, Senator The Hon Penny Wong, the then Minister for Climate Change and Water, advised of the Australian Government’s commitment to provide funding of up to $4,193,500 for the proposed Blacktown and Penrith Stormwater Harvesting and Managed Aquifer Recharge Scheme under the “Water for the Future – National Urban Water and Desalination Plan”. As part of the funding offer, up to $1,981,000 is allocated to work in Penrith City.

 

Following the decision by Penrith City Council in November 2010 to seek additional funding for the project through the NOW, Council Officers have been negotiating with Blacktown City Council and DSEWPC to administratively separate grant funding of the Penrith component of the project from the Blacktown City Council project.  This enabled Blacktown to proceed with their project while Penrith City Council seeks the additional funding through NOW.  Council is yet to receive written confirmation from DSEWPC that the separating of the funding for the project from Blacktown City Council has been approved although Council Officers have been verbally advised from DSEWPC that the separation should be acceptable.

 

The funding agreement from DSEWPC outlines a two staged funding arrangement. The first stage allows for detailed design, costing and risk analysis confirming project viability and the second stage includes construction and commissioning. Council’s acceptance of the remaining funds to enable construction of the project would be subject to a favourable confirmation of costs and a satisfactory risk assessment.

 

In the original proposal for the MAR project, Blacktown City Council was the nominated lead organisation and was required to coordinate negotiations with DSEWPC. Blacktown City Council was to sign the funding agreement with DSEWPC (as the lead Council). As part of the funding arrangement, a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) was to be developed between the two Councils.  Should DSEWPC approve our request to separate the grant funding from Blacktown, we will not require a MoU.

 

In December 2010, the application for additional funding for the Penrith Stormwater Harvesting and Managed Aquifer Recharge Scheme was submitted to NOW. The application consisted of two funding applications. The first application seeks to secure funding in addition to the funding offer from DSEWPC for the project on the Emu Plains side of the Nepean River. An additional funding source would significantly reduce Council’s financial contribution. The second application sought to secure funding to extend the MAR network across the Nepean to Penrith to support the Penrith Recycled Water Scheme.

 

DSEWPC has requested the funding deed be finalised as soon as possible.  Additionally, commencement of the project is required as soon as practical to allow sufficient time to complete the project within the funding timeframe of June 2013. 

Scheme Benefits

Functional stormwater reuse schemes, such as the proposed Managed Aquifer Recharge (MAR) scheme, result in a range of social and environmental benefits in addition to being financially viable. While the scheme’s financial viability is important, the value of the scheme to Penrith City is significant. This can be demonstrated through consideration of the additional social and environmental benefits which include:

 

·    Potable Water Savings: Estimates show that the scheme has the potential to reduce potable water consumption in excess of 100 million litres per annum;

·    Improved River Health: The Nepean River will benefit from reduced stormwater impacts from Emu Plains and reduced extractions by local irrigators. This will reduce the contaminant load on the river and help facilitate any future strategy to amend the licensing system for river extractions;

·    Improve Public Facilities: The scheme will offer a secure supply of water for irrigating a number of public playing fields, allowing them to be maintained at a level that achieves maximum availability and improved safety for community users;

·    Provide water security: The scheme will secure supply for Leonay Golf Course which does not currently have enough water to maintain its course;

·    Reduced carbon footprint: A ‘fit-for-purpose’, decentralised water scheme has a greatly reduced carbon footprint in comparison to potable water;

·    Creation of habitat and improved biodiversity: The development of wetlands will improve habitat and biodiversity values;

·    Increased social capital: The use of MAR water in prominent facilities and high use public areas will provide a means to educate the community about water conservation and stormwater management, and demonstrate the commitment by Federal Government and Penrith City Council to reduce potable water consumption and improve environmental health;

·    Forge a pathway: As the first schemes in the greater Sydney Metropolitan area, the Penrith and Blacktown schemes will have significant implications for the future management of Sydney’s water resources;

·    The city leads: The scheme will demonstrate our role as a sustainability leader and our status as a regional city;

·    Support local clubs and businesses: We will provide a cost effective alternative which supports a local club and fosters growth in local business

·    Water Security: The Office of the Hawkesbury Nepean has recently indicated that all water extraction licenses will in the future be required to be metered and that the cost of water drawn from the River could rise. The MAR scheme will ensure that groups who are drawing water from the River will have a long-term sustainable water supply, particularly in periods of drought and low River flows where suppliers are likely to be more restricted.

 

While it is not possible to easily quantify the extent of the above benefits in monetary terms, they should not be excluded from consideration in an analysis of the overall scheme benefits and will serve to further increase the benefit-cost consideration.

 

Council has been briefed on the experiences and benefits of Managed Aquifer Storage schemes operated by local government in South Australia. In November 2010 Colin Pittman, Director of City Projects from City of Salisbury Council presented to Penrith Councillors on the success and benefits of the City of Salisbury scheme. Colin Pittman has offered to provide assistance and guidance to Penrith Council should Council develop our project.

Potential Customers

Leonay Golf Course and ROCLA have provided in principle support for the project. There may be additional opportunity in the Emu Plains industrial precinct to offer an alternative water supply.

 

A preliminary feasibility study and costing of a linkage pipeline between the Scheme at Emu Plains and the Stage 2 Recycled Water Project east of the River has been prepared for Council. The extension of the network from Emu Plains to Penrith would enable opportunity for recycled water to a more diversified and reliable customer base such as to the Landcom North Penrith residential development. The feasibility study concludes that the pipeline link is both physically and commercially feasible. The report also recommends further investigations should be undertaken to confirm end user water quality and quantity requirements and investigations into the reticulation design and placement.

 

An alternative water supply has been demonstrated to attract industry where MAR schemes have been introduced. We will continue to discuss opportunities with these and any other organisations that show interest in the scheme.

 

Project Funding

The estimated project cost is $3,962,000. The funding for the project is still to be finalised, however the overall costs to Penrith City Council may be quantified in the following way subject to availability of funds and other opportunities.

 

1.   50% of the project cost will be funded by the Federal Government equating to $1,981,000 for the Penrith Stormwater Harvesting and Managed Aquifer Recharge Scheme.

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

3.   Contribution of $781,000 from Penrith City Council made up of contribution in-kind and direct funding. The funding model is yet to be finalised, however, sufficient funding has been identified through Council’s Enhanced Environmental Program and Waste and Sustainability Improvement Program.

 

Additionally, to extend Penrith Stormwater Harvesting and Managed Aquifer Recharge Scheme to link to the Penrith Recycled Water Scheme Stage 2, a further $1,000,000 funding has been sought from the NSW Office of Water.

 

Waste and Community Protection Comments

The Aquifer project is suitable for funding consideration under the Waste and Sustainability Improvement Payments. Council has committed the WASIP funds until 2012 to a number of approved projects/initiatives However, the Aquifer project may be listed for consideration in the 2012/2013 allocation.

Financial Services Manager’s Comments

The total capital cost of the Managed Aquifer Fund (MAR) project is estimated at $3,962,000. Current funding of $1.981M has been allocated from the Federal Government and the report highlights the potential for additional funding of up to $1,200,000 to be sourced through the NSW Office of Water (NOW). If the grant application with the NSW Office of Water is successful, combined with the $1,981,000 from the Federal Government, this would bring the total available funding to $3,181,000, leaving an unfunded shortfall of $781,000. The report details that the shortfall could be funded from a combination of the Enhanced Environmental Program and the Waste and Sustainability Improvement Program. It is proposed that a funding solution would be further clarified in conjunction with the detailed design, costing and risk assessment phase of the project.

 

The capital cost of the expansion of the MAR scheme to link to the Stage 2 Recycled Water Project is estimated at $1,000,000 and a grant application has also been submitted for funding to the NSW Office of Water.

 

Consultants Sinclair Knight Merz have indicated that the annual maintenance cost for this type of facility is in the order of $123,000. An amount would also need to be included for administration support for billing while it would also be prudent for an additional amount to be allocated for asset renewal.

 

The scheme has the ability to supply 200ML of water per year and Council has reached in principle agreements with Leonay Golf Course and Rocla for supply from this scheme. Indicative figures have indicated that Leonay Golf Course and Rocla would demand a combined 100ML of water per year. If Council was to sell this water at a comparable price to the current Sydney Water Charge for recycled water ($1,609 per ML), this would generate income of $160,900.

 

Should the extension of the scheme be deemed viable and Council is successful is securing funding from NOW, it would generate the potential for a greater client base with the North Penrith Landcom site being an example.

 

Given the abovementioned figures, the scheme could be viable provided that:

·    The cost of water supplied from the scheme is charged at the above rate of $1,609 per ML,

·    The indicative annual maintenance cost including administration support and a provision for asset renewal and replacement is not substantially greater than the estimated $123,000; and

·    The proposed clients agree to long term contracts for the proposed demand.

 

In the event that Council is the only user of the scheme, based on the estimated future demand of the Council facilities that could utilise the scheme, a cost of $40,000 would otherwise be incurred to irrigate these facilities meaning that the potential cost benefit would not be sufficient to offset the annual maintenance cost of the Scheme.

 

Following the completion of Stage 1 of the project, which includes a detailed design, costing and risk assessment, Council Officers will further assess the financial sustainability of the project and a further report will be provided to Council on the proposed funding model for the construction cost and the ongoing financial sustainability, including a provision for asset renewal & replacement of the project before committing Council to Stage 2.

Steps to Progress Project

The following are identified as the next key steps to advance the Penrith Stormwater Harvesting and Managed Aquifer Recharge Scheme:

 

1.   If Council is successful in the application to NOW for funding, accept the grant funding of $2,200,000

2.   Subject to approval of the grant funding from the NOW of $2,200,000, Council support the acceptance of the grant from DSEWPC on the basis of the grant and funding agreement incorporating a two stage process:

·    Stage 1  includes detailed design, costing and risk analysis confirming project viability

·    Stage 2 includes construction and commissioning

3.   Continue negotiations with potential customers.

Conclusion

Council has exercised significant leadership in previously resolving to join the ICLEI Water Campaign, endorsing the Water Conservation and Water Quality Action Plan 2005 and more recently supporting the Penrith Recycled Water Project Stage 2. Council’s Water Conservation and Water Quality Action Plan clearly identifies Council’s role in investigating stormwater harvesting and new technologies in order to reduce potable water demand in the City. There is also a clear policy direction to implement water sensitive urban design. This has fed into Council’s Strategic and Operational plans where water efficiency and the health of the Nepean River System feature strongly.

 

The proposed MAR scheme is a significant sustainability initiative and holds substantial benefits in relation to a more efficient use of water resources which will over time be subject to increasing demands and potentially more restrictive access. The scheme will also bring environmental benefits to local waterways through reduced pollution and other stormwater impacts. Council therefore has the opportunity to take a leading role in advancing the expansion of MAR into NSW. In doing so, Council will further demonstrate its commitment to sustainable long-term water resource management.

 

The implementation of MAR will help reduce potable water use and provide alternatives to the drawing of irrigation water from the Nepean River, which over time will be the subject of closer agency monitoring and expected increases in supply costs. Reducing reliance on extracting water from the Nepean River also has substantial environmental benefits for the River system, particularly in ensuring adequate environmental flows during dry periods.

 

The proposed Penrith MAR scheme therefore offers an exciting opportunity for cost effective stormwater harvesting and managed aquifer recharge in a local context. The scheme can yield up to 200 million litres of per annum of harvested stormwater through Managed Aquifer Recharge and Recovery. This will ultimately result in the equivalent reductions in potable water use and extractions from the Nepean River.

 

Council is well placed to advance such a significant project in NSW as the Penrith Stormwater Harvesting and Managed Aquifer Recharge Scheme and it offers significant sustainability outcomes and has capacity for future growth.

 

The progression of a detailed design, costing and risk assessment is considered essential as a next step to ensure the Penrith Stormwater Harvesting and Managed Aquifer Recharge Scheme can be delivered within the grant funds being offered by the Australian Government and to adequately assess the risks to Council in relation to the ownership and operation of the proposed Scheme.

 

A further report will be brought back to Council at the completion of the Stage 1 design, cost and risk assessment.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Managed Aquifer Recharge Project  be received

2.     Subject to grant funding of $2,200,000 through the NSW Office of Water, Council support the acceptance of the grant from DSEWPC on the basis of the 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 progression of the project to construction is subject to a favourable confirmation of costs and a satisfactory risk assessment being confirmed by Council

3.     Subject to approval by NSW Office of Water of the application for grant funding of $2,200,000, Council accept that grant funding subject to the favourable detailed design, costing and risk assessment to be undertaken in Stage 1 of the project

4.     The Common Seal of the Council of the City of Penrith be affixed to any necessary documentation.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.  


 

 

 

 

THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT BLANK  INTENTIONALLY


A Liveable City

 

Item                                                                                                                                                Page

 

12      Provision of Animal Pound Services

 

 



Ordinary Meeting

7 February 2011

A Liveable City

 

 

 

12

Provision of Animal Pound Services   

 

Compiled by:               Tracy Chalk, Waste and Community Protection Manager

Authorised by:            David Burns, Group Manager - City Presentation   

 

Objective

Our public spaces encourage safe and healthy communities

Community Outcome

A City with safe, inviting parks and public spaces (18)

Strategic Response

Provide safe, well-maintained public spaces and parks (18.1)

       

 

Executive Summary

Council has had an agreement with Hawkesbury City Council (HCC) to operate animal pound services for companion animals on behalf of Penrith City Council since 2002.  In February 2011 this agreement will expire.  To assess the most cost-effective option for the provision of this service, tenders were called in May 2010.  Only two submissions were received.  Both showed no benefit to Council over the current service with HCC.  As a result, Council officers commenced negotiations for a new agreement with HCC.  Council is now in receipt of correspondence from HCC proposing a new agreement for the continuation of animal impound services by HCC.

 

This report will recommend that Council staff continue the provision of animal pound services with Hawkesbury City Council.

 

Background

As the agreement with Hawkesbury City Council was due to expire in February 2011, Council called tenders to assess the most cost-effective option for the provision of animal impounding services to Council.

 

A tender for the provision of animal pound services was advertised in the Sydney Morning Herald, Penrith Press, Hawkesbury Courier and the e-Tendering website on 18 May 2010, closing Thursday, 17 June 2010.  The tender criteria included:

 

1.   Hours of Operation

2.   Pound Maintenance

3.   Sick and Injured Companion Animals and Livestock

4.   Feeding of Companion Animals and Livestock

5.   Sale or Donation of Unclaimed Companion Animals

6.   Euthanasia of Companion Animals

7.   Disposal of Cadavers

8.   Fees and Charges (including Sustenance Fees for Companion Animals and Livestock and Surrender Fees)

9.   Administration Services

10. Veterinary Service

 

The Request for Tender was an initial period of five (5) years, with an option to extend a further three (3) x one (1) year periods, subject to satisfactory performance and mutual agreement.

 

A total of two (2) submissions were received from the following respondents:

 

Business Name

Address

Transpet Australia P/L

406 Bringelly Road

Austral NSW 2179

The Lost Dogs Home

2 Gracie Street

Nth Melbourne VIC 3051

 

Evaluation Criteria in the Conditions of Tendering

 

The following evaluation criteria were required to be addressed in the tenderers’ proposals.  These have been used as the basis of the evaluation process.

 

·  General Criteria-tender profile and contact details

·  Commercial Requirements-critical assumptions, conforming requirements, conflict of interest, insurance, instrument of agreement, required declaration response, compliance statements and business references

·  Business Category-safety record and financial viability

·  Capability-facilities / site details, demonstrated ability, compliance to specified requirements, establishment & response times and conformance to relevant standards Cost / Price Category-unit rates and rise & fall

·  Management & Administration-reporting requirements, quality assurance, environmental management, industrial relations and Occupational Health & Safety

 

Discussion

 

The Lost Dogs Home (Victoria) tender was determined to be non-conforming and failed to satisfy Council’s criteria.  The Lost Dogs Home (LDH) is a welfare organisation that was willing to establish pound services at Francis Street, Bringelly.  The proposal requested that Council provide an initial investment to establish the impound facility.  It was also noted on the tender response that LDH could not guarantee the required service and resource level to the emergency service.  

 

Transpet Australia Propriety Limited provided a tender submission across the criteria;  however, no further benefit could be demonstrated when compared to the current service provided by Hawkesbury City Council.  Euthanasia and microchipping fees are comparable with an approximate 10% difference (Transpet being higher);  however, there are substantial savings in the housing rate charged by HCC for companion animals (HCC - $11.60 per dog/cat per day;  Transpet - $23 per dog/cat per day).  The highest usage of HCC’s animal shelter for Penrith is for the impounding of companion animals.  Approximately 1,600 companion animals are impounded each year, which would equate to a cost saving of approximately $18,000 between HCC and Transpet.

 

A number of reservations were also noted with regard to both tender submissions and additional information would need to be sought to complete the Agreement as outlined within the tender.  No submission was considered superior to Council’s service agreement with Hawkesbury City Council.  As a result, there is no benefit to Council in proceeding with an alternative service provider.  As such, the tender process will be finalised and the appropriate correspondence forwarded.

 

Under the Local Government Act 1993, councils are not required to submit to the tender process in order to be eligible to provide a service.

 

HCC has provided Council with confirmation of a proposal to continue the provision of animal pound services.  Accordingly, Council’s Waste & Community Protection staff commenced the necessary discussions to secure a continuation of mutually suitable arrangements for the perpetuation of the service.

 

Costing for the continuing services offered by HCC is shown in Appendix 1.  The costs are most competitive and when combined with proximity, established communications, knowledge and experience of Council functions, obligations and requirements under the relevant legislation provides a service most beneficial to Council.  Any subsequent agreement will be subject to review and mutually agreeable timeframes.

 

The adoption of an inter Council agreement with HCC is recommended as the most efficient, effective and convenient service to Council at this time.

 

Legal Officer Comment

 

Under the Local Government Act contracts between two councils are not required to be tendered. In these circumstances the Council has considered tenders from private providers. After consideration of these tenders and a submission from HCC, it is recommended that Council enter into a contract with HCC. It is considered that this is the most advantageous outcome for Council.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Provision of Animal Pound Services be received.

2.     The Waste & Community Protection Manager be authorised to prepare an inter Council agreement with Hawkesbury City Council for the provision of Animal Pound Services.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1.  

Hawkesbury Animal Shelter Schedule of Fees

1 Page

Appendix

  


Ordinary Meeting

7 February 2011

Appendix 1 - Hawkesbury Animal Shelter Schedule of Fees

 

 

 

 


A Vibrant City

 

Item                                                                                                                                                Page

 

13      Magnetic Places Community Cultural Grants Program 

 

14      Youth Week 2011- Proposed Activities and Funding

 

 



Ordinary Meeting

7 February 2011

A Vibrant City

 

 

 

13

Magnetic Places Community Cultural Grants Program     

 

Compiled by:               Cali Vandyk-Dunlevy, Cultural Development Officer

Jeni Pollard, Acting Community & Cultural Development Manager

Authorised by:            Erich Weller, Community and Cultural Development Manager   

 

Objective

We play an active role in our communities

Community Outcome

A City with opportunities to engage, participate and connect (23)

Strategic Response

Enhance community strengths and capacity by supporting collaborative networks and partnerships (23.1)

       

 

Executive Summary

This report is to inform Council of the successful outcomes of the 2009-10 Magnetic Places Community Cultural Grants Program and minor changes to the 2010 -11 program. The report further recommends funding of 5 projects to be undertaken in the 2010-11 program.

 

Since 2007, the Magnetic Places Community Cultural Grants Program has made funds available to local community groups to support the development of creative activities and events in community meeting places across the Penrith Local Government Area. This has resulted in the delivery of twenty innovative and highly successful projects celebrating creativity, diversity, culture and pride in established neighbourhoods across the City.

 

The 2009-10 activities and events built on the success of previous years, bringing public places to life in innovative ways, making a valuable contribution to the health and wellbeing of residents and communities across the Penrith LGA. These outcomes have been award winning and continue to position Penrith City as an innovator in collaborative community place making in Western Sydney.

 

As the program has evolved, so has an awareness of the need to deliver a funding program which enables local residents to lead and generate localised activities that build cohesion and wellbeing in local communities.

 

For 2010/11 the Magnetic Places program has been amended and structured into two funding streams to incorporate both the creative, cultural and place making focused projects as well as smaller, community events.  This proposed change will support local residents to initiate and play a vital role in building healthy connected communities and places across the established areas. The program has been renamed the Magnetic Places Neighbourhood Renewal Grants Program to reflect these changes.

 

In 2010-2011 funds totalling $27,354 are available for distribution.  Following extensive advertisement a range of high quality applications were received with an emphasis on place making and community engagement.  After careful consideration against the grants program criteria, five projects have been recommended for funding.

 

The report recommends that

 

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

2.     The five recommended projects listed in Table 1 in this report be approved for funding to the value of $27,354.

Background

As part of the larger Neighbourhood Renewal Program the Magnetic Places Community Cultural Grants Program was initiated in 2007-08 as a pilot with the objective to enable community partners or groups to develop projects, programs and activities that would activate local places. Funds were made available to local community groups to develop activities and events in their local communities to enliven, enrich and invigorate community meeting places across the Penrith Local Government Area.

 

Over the three years of the program to date, 20 innovative and highly successful projects have been funded, each celebrating creativity, diversity, culture and pride in established neighbourhoods across the City. These outcomes have generated a high level of interest from local communities, the community sector, the arts and cultural sector of Western Sydney, Sydney, as well as State and Federal arts and cultural agencies.

 

In 2010 the Magnetic Places Program was recognised by the Local Government and Shires Association of NSW at its annual Cultural Awards. Penrith City Council won first place in the Integrated Cultural Development category for the Magnetic Places Program.

 

Councillor Karen McKeown, Cali Vandyk-Dunlevy and local artist Dante Barcoma received an award in the category of Integrated Cultural Policy Implementation at the LGSA Cultural Awards 2010

 

Magnetic Places has also been showcased at the 2010 launch of the Empty Spaces project, an initiative by UTS Shopfront, University of Technology. For further information on the Empty Spaces project visit http://emptyspaces.culturemap.org.au/page/creative-carvings.

 

Magnetic Places has been an important catalyst in assisting local cultural activity to be more visible and enabling the local ‘character’ and the diverse voices of the community to be heard. Project evaluations have demonstrated that participants have made new friends, found new confidence, and have learned new skills. It has brought public places to life in innovative ways developing pride in place. Public spaces have been transformed into magnetic, creative and meaningful places making a valuable contribution to the health and wellbeing of residents and communities.

 

The current framework for the Magnetic Places Community Cultural Grants Program is provided by Penrith City Council’s Strategic Plan 2031 - A Vibrant City, and the Penrith City Cultural Framework and Cultural Development Action Plan 2007 – 2011. 

 

In synergy with this, the Magnetic Places initiative operates within the Neighbourhood Renewal Program, focussed on the delivery of a program of renewal for selected neighbourhoods to contribute to a sense of community identity and cohesiveness.  Funds allocated under the Magnetic Places initiative continue to prioritise projects in neighbourhood renewal communities. However, projects in other suburbs or neighbourhoods within the Penrith LGA are also considered if they are of strong merit and meet the essential criteria.

 

The Magnetic Places Program in 2009-10

In 2009-10, the Magnetic Places Community Cultural Grants Program provided financial support to not for profit, non-government community organisations delivering programs of benefit to residents in the Penrith Local Government Area. Particular focus was given to the development of innovative projects in partnership with local residents which celebrated culture and pride in established neighbourhoods across Penrith city.

 

Clr Ross Fowler OAM cuts the ribbon on the new equipment at the Berkshire Park Hall

 

In 2009-10 funding of $35,000 was available to further develop and activate community spaces and meeting places. A total of 5 projects were funded and are listed below:

 

·    Activating Berkshire Park (Berkshire Park) auspiced by Nepean Migrant Access (NMA),

·    Koori Kids (Cranebrook) auspiced by Information Cultural Exchange (ICE),

·    Namatjira Annex Reconciliation Project (Werrington) auspiced by Werrington Community Project,

·    Queerdom (St Marys) auspiced by Philippine Australian Community Services Inc (PACSI),

·    A Touch of Heritage (St Marys) auspiced by Philippine Language and Cultural Association of Australia Inc (PLCAA).

 

Projects have been well represented in the local press, the above article appeared in the Penrith Press 17 December 2010

 

Magnetic Places generated a significant positive profile in 2010 with several articles appearing in the local press.  An upcoming article is to be published in the next edition of The National Indigenous Times on the Namatjira Annex Reconciliation Mural.  A DVD has been developed by new media artist Vanna Seang showcasing the process and outcomes from these five projects, for further information see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KlIrM8_oWaA .

 

This DVD will be embedded into the map of the established areas on the Neighbourhood Stories website at www.neighbourhoodstories.net.au in the next stage of the project in 2011.

 

One of the participants working on the Namatjira Annex Reconciliation Mural Project

 

 

Magnetic Places Neighbourhood Renewal Grants Program 2010 -11

In 2010 – 2011 the existing grants program has been slightly amended and is titled the Magnetic Places Neighbourhood Renewal Grants Program. This will support the delivery of a refined and more responsive Magnetic Places program which builds on the strengths of the pilot program to date.  The funds will also support implementation of community priorities identified within Neighbourhood Action Plans.

 

In 2010-2011 Magnetic Place Neighbourhood Renewal Grants Program has $27,354 in funds available for program delivery and place-making.

 

In 2010-2011 the program has been redeveloped into two funding streams:

 

·    Stream 1 - The first stream focuses on initiatives that offer creative solutions to issues in local communities. Priority will be given to proposals which address issues identified in existing Council endorsed Neighbourhood Action Plans developed by the Neighbourhood Renewal Program. Projects that are proposed in communities where a NAP does not exist will be asked to provide evidence of community collaboration. Project funding will be for amounts of $500 and up to $1,500. 

 

·    Stream 2 – The second stream focuses on initiatives that activate and bring to life public spaces, gathering spaces and meeting places in local communities through quality creative and cultural engagement processes. Project funding will be for amounts of $5,000 and up to $8,000.

 

In 2010-2011, the program will continue to promote collaboration between artists, communities and other community partners. Projects which demonstrate leadership and decision making process that are led by, or with, communities will be further encouraged.

 

The Magnetic Places Neighbourhood Renewal Grants Program – Stream 1 responds to a need identified in the established areas for small ‘seeding’ funds to be accessible to residents and groups committed to generating activities that provide creative solutions to local issues.

 

Stream 1 will support communities to take leadership and responsibility in building capacity in their communities in direct response to local issues identified in the Neighbourhood Action Plan (NAP) for that area. It is anticipated that Stream 1 activities may include programs such as Family Fun Days, local festivals or school holiday activities.  Activities that promote the use of community meeting places such as parks, neighbourhood centres and schools as local meeting places have also been encouraged.

 

Stream 2 will continue to support high quality, creative and cultural engagement projects with a focus on place making. Stream 2 applicants are required to engage a professional artist on their project to ensure high quality processes and clear cultural outcomes.

 

Funding in both Stream 1 and 2 is not intended to provide ongoing funding or make up for a shortfall in core funding for services or administration. Funds are provided to build capacity, developing the creative and community reach of programs or seeding new ideas and initiatives.

 

The revised Magnetic Places Neighbourhood Renewal Grants Program Funding criteria are included in Appendix 1.

 

An online application form was piloted for the first time this year using Smarty Grants. A PDF of the program guidelines and application form were also available on Council’s website as well as hardcopy forms at Council’s front counter and all library branches across Penrith. All applications received in the current funding round were submitted online through the Smarty Grants program demonstrating applicants’ preference for the online medium.

 

Promotion

The Magnetic Places Neighbourhood Renewal Grants Program 2010-11 was extensively promoted to artists, organisations and residents across Penrith and wider Western Sydney in a cross promotional strategy commencing in November through to January 2011.

 

The promotional strategy included:

 

§ several articles appeared in the local press including “Grants Create Spark” ( Penrith Press), “Getting Creative” (Mt Druitt-St Marys Standard)  and “Artistic flair funding” ( Penrith Press),

§ a feature article appeared in Artfiles News,  an online bulletin produced by Information & Cultural Exchange distributed extensively to artists across wider Western Sydney,

§ other cultural sector e-bulletins,

§ the Penrith Local Artist Network and the Blacktown Artist Network,

§ local social service networks such as Penrith Youth Interagency and Migrant Interagency,

§ the Artist + Community Toolkit Workshops, and

§ online through Penrith City Council’s website.

 

As previously mentioned application forms were available online on Council’s website as well as hardcopy, and meetings were also held with prospective applicants.

 

Assessment of 2010-2011 Applications

A total of 7 applications were received in the 2010- 2011 Magnetic Places Neighbourhood Renewal Grants Program Funding round.

 

Applications have been assessed against a set of criteria developed to support the effective assessment of applications. The funding guidelines and criteria originally endorsed by Council in 2007 have been slightly amended to reflect the proposed changes to the Magnetic Places Neighbourhood Renewal Grants Program.  As indicated above the criteria for the assessment of applications is provided at Appendix 1.

 

Projects that are developed and located in areas that are identified through the Neighbourhood Renewal Program will be prioritised for funding through the Magnetic Places Neighbourhood Renewal Grants Program. However as with previous years, projects in other suburbs or neighbourhoods within the Penrith Local Government Area have been considered. 

 

All applications have been assessed against the Magnetic Places Neighbourhood Renewal Grants Program 2010-11 criteria for eligibility, examining their demonstrated capacity to deliver the Program objectives. 

 

Applicants have been requested to submit letters of support from community partners and at least two names and contact details for local residents involved in project proposals. This criteria is considered important to demonstrate that the project has strong support within the community.

 

To assist the selection process and support good practice assessment procedures, an external representative with expertise in Community Cultural Development (CCD) from the arts and cultural sector was invited to participate in the assessment process. Dr David Sudmalis, Manager - Strategic Development and Evaluation of Community Partnerships at the Australia Council for the Arts, contributed to an Assessment Meeting with Neighbourhood Renewal Program staff on Monday 17 January 2011. David brought an independent view and a high level of expertise in the evaluation of arts and community submissions.

 

Applications Recommended for Funding

As indicated above a total of 7 applications were received.  The applications assessed requested a total of $46,429.70 in funds, an increase on the previous year.  Of the 7 applications, 5 have been recommended for funding for an adjusted amount in light of the merit of the project and the total funds available.  Table 1 below is a summary of the 5 projects recommended for funding to an amount equivalent to the available budget of $27,354. 

 

Table 1 - Recommended List

 

Recipient

Project Name

Project Summary

Funds Allocated

Stream 1:

 

 

 

Werrington Community Project Inc.

 

Hip Hop Home

This project will promote the creative work undertaken by young people during hip hop music workshops run at Werrington Youth Centre by producing a professionally designed and produced CD.

 

$1,500

Stream 2:

 

 

 

CuriousWorks

Corner Interactive

This project will conduct video storytelling workshops with residents of St Marys and surrounding suburbs to bring to the surface the rich tapestry of stories from the area. Videos will be showcased at St Marys Corner Piazza.  

$7,000

Information and Cultural Exchange (ICE)

 

Koori Story Exchange

Proposes a capacity building program using multimedia for community engagement and space activation for community workers and educators in Cranebrook, to work with local residents.

This project builds on the Koori Stories project funded in 2009-2010 with a training element for local workers.

 

$7,000

Sunnyfield

Amplify Art

The project aims to give a voice to people living with intellectual disability by supporting them to tell their stories through art guided by artist David Capra and by exhibiting this sculpture for a period at St Marys Corner to create a unique sense of space.

 

$6,854

St Marys Area Community Development Project Inc.

Sustaining the Meadow

An amended project to fund the scoping, feasibility, space activation and community engagement towards a proposed community vegetable garden in which community members can come together to garden, learn about the process of growing their own food and share knowledge and skills.  This project will be based in Claremont Meadows.

$5,000

 

Total

$27, 354

 

Appendix 2 to this report provides further detail to accompany this table, with a detailed summary of each project and a summary of how the projects address the criteria.  

 

Applications not recommended for Funding

Two of the seven applications assessed have not been recommended for funding as applicants failed to meet all of the essential criteria. Details are provided in Appendix 3 with the rationale for not recommending funding. Council officers have had a number of discussions with the unsuccessful applicants to explore opportunities to modify their project proposal in light of the assessment criteria but both have declined at this time. Further feedback will be provided to the projects including suggestions for further development and where possible, alternative funding sources.

 

Conclusion

The Magnetic Places initiative has been further refined and developed into the Magnetic Places Neighbourhood Renewal Grants Program to reflect the minor changes outlined in this report.

 

In 2010-2011 the program has been refined into two funding streams:

 

·    Stream 1 – making available project funding from $500 and up to $1,500,

·    Stream 2 – making available funding from $5,000 and up to $8,000.

 

This will achieve the delivery of a responsive Magnetic Places program which builds on the strengths and learning from the pilot program to date. The further development of this award winning program will continue to support the delivery of creative projects and place-making activities across the diverse communities of Penrith.

 

In 2010-2011 the Magnetic Places Neighbourhood Renewal Grants Program has $27,354 in funds available for program delivery.  Several high quality applications were received in regard to place making and community engagement.  The proposals will provide significant opportunity for employment of local artists and creative engagement of residents and communities in the Neighbourhood Renewal areas.

 

After careful consideration against the grants program criteria, five projects totalling $27,354 have been recommended for funding.

 

The further development of Magnetic Places will continue to position Penrith City as a leader in community cultural engagement and collaborative place-making with local communities in Western Sydney and beyond.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

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

2.       The five recommended projects listed in Table 1 in this report be approved     for funding to the value of $27,354.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1.  

Appendix 1 - Magnetic Places Neighbourhood Renewal

2 Pages

Appendix

2.  

Appendix 2 - Magnetic Places Neighbourhood Renewal

4 Pages

Appendix

3.  

Appendix 3 - Magnetic Places Neighbourhood Renewal Grants Program 2010-2011

3 Pages

Appendix

  


Ordinary Meeting

7 February 2011

Appendix 1 - Appendix 1 - Magnetic Places Neighbourhood Renewal

 

 

 



Ordinary Meeting

7 February 2011

Appendix 2 - Appendix 2 - Magnetic Places Neighbourhood Renewal

 

 

 





Ordinary Meeting

7 February 2011

Appendix 3 - Appendix 3 - Magnetic Places Neighbourhood Renewal Grants Program 2010-2011

 

 

 

 

No

Project Name

Recipient

 

Project Summary

Place and site of proposed project

Amount Requested

Recommendation

1

Penrith in Love

Filigree Films Pty Ltd

The project aims to collaborate with older local residents who live within the Penrith Neighbourhood Renewal program suburbs to produce a multi media work portraying the love stories of elderly residents. Residents will be interviewed on high quality video format with local backgrounds significant to them inserted behind them.

 

Interviews will be edited into short films of between 3- 6 mins and will be distributed via

a.   a specially designed website

b.   screenings in local community centres and nursing homes.

Various neighbourhoods across Penrith LGA including; Colyton, Cambridge Gardens, Penrith Suburb and St Marys Corner.

$8,000

Not recommended for funding.

 

Not eligible given the applicant is not a non for profit organisation

 

Does not meet all essential criteria.

 

Insufficient demonstration of:

·    public liability insurance,

·    placemaking.

 

2

2011 Production of the Shoe Horn Sonata

Emu Heights Productions Incorporated

Production of the play “The Shoe-Horn Sonata” by John Misto, at the Q Theatre, Penrith, 4th – 7th May 2011. This play is part of the Higher School Certificate English curriculum. Currently students in the Penrith and Western Sydney region must travel to Sydney to see a production of this splay, which places them at a disadvantage to city students.

The Q Theatre, Joan Sutherland Performing Arts Centre.

$5,000

Not recommended for funding.

 

Does not meet all essential criteria.

 

Insufficient demonstration of:

·    public liability insurance,

·    placemaking

·    and resident participation in Neighbourhood Renewal identified areas.

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

7 February 2011

A Vibrant City

 

 

 

14

Youth Week 2011- Proposed Activities and Funding   

 

Compiled by:               Tracy Leahy, Community Programs Co-ordinator

Katerina Tahija, Youth Development Officer

Authorised by:            Erich Weller, Community and Cultural Development Manager   

 

Objective

We play an active role in our communities

Community Outcome

A City with opportunities to engage, participate and connect (23)

Strategic Response

Enhance community strengths and capacity by supporting collaborative networks and partnerships (23.1)

       

 

Executive Summary

National Youth Week 2011 will be celebrated between Friday 1 and Sunday 10 April. Youth Week is an opportunity to celebrate the contributions of young people in the community. Youth Week is funded jointly by Community Services NSW and local councils. The budget available for Youth Week 2011 in Penrith City is $6,150.

 

The theme for 2011 is “Own It”. Organisations applying for funds to hold a Youth Week activity are asked to incorporate the theme into their funding application.

 

The 2011 Youth Week funding opportunity is promoted widely across Penrith City, with organisations and community groups invited to apply.

 

Youth Week aims to provide opportunities for participation from a diverse range of young people, and organisations are required to outline how they will promote their proposed activity.

 

This report provides information on six applications received for the 2011 Youth Week funding round.  Five applications are recommended for funding while one project has not been recommended for funding because it duplicates already existing programs available. The report recommends that Council receive the report and approve the 2011 Youth Week grants to the five recommended projects and funding amounts to the total value of $6,150 as outlined in this report.

Background

National Youth Week is an opportunity to celebrate young people in the local community. Youth Week activities and events are jointly funded by the NSW Government and local councils.  Activities funded are provided in the community with the opportunity to focus on the positive contributions that young people make and can make to society. In 2011 Youth Week will be held between 1 and 10 April.

 

Program initiatives can be broad whilst still maintaining the theme and objectives as outlined by the NSW Government.  The range of activities encourages a large cross section of young people and the community to be involved.

 

Youth Week targets young people aged 12 to 24 years of age and is designed to offer a range of activities that focus on the issues and concerns of young people in the local area. The theme for Youth Week 2011 is “Own It”.

 

This year, Council received $3,075 (excluding GST) from the Community Services NSW for Youth Week. As a requirement of receiving these funds, Council matches the amount on a dollar for dollar basis.  The total budget for 2011 Youth Week activities is $6,150.

 

Youth Week Grants Program

Council allocates funds each year, through the Youth Week Grants Program, to community-based groups (including youth and community groups, churches, social/interest groups, training and employment agencies), to assist with organising activities, events and programs in conjunction with young people across the LGA.

 

The Youth Week aims will be achieved through young people’s active involvement in activities which:

 

·    Raise issues, ideas and concerns of young people

·    Develop strategies to address the issues important to young people

·    Increase the community’s awareness of young people and the issues which are important to them

·    Promote young people’s contribution to the community

·    Demonstrate the involvement of young people in the planning of activities

·    Demonstrate access to activities from a broad range of young people.

 

For Youth Week 2011, organisations are required to demonstrate what strategies they will employ to address any transport issues, and how the proposed activity will be advertised and promoted to a diverse range of young people. The NSW Government guidelines encourage involvement of a broad and diverse range of young people including:

 

·    Young Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people

·    Young people with disabilities

·    Young people that are geographically isolated

·    Young people from non-English speaking backgrounds

·    Young people disadvantaged by their socio-economic background

·    Young people who have left school early or are at risk of leaving school early

·    Young women

·    Young offenders

·    Young gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered people.

 

Organisations are also asked to demonstrate how young people will be involved in planning and implementing the activities.

 

Organisations have again been asked this year to be aware of the Penrith Youth Services Code of Practice.  Local youth services and Penrith City Council developed the Code in 2002 and it outlines best practice for organisations that work with young people.  The Code has been subsequently reviewed and confirmed as leading practice.

 

Successful applicants are required to acknowledge Penrith City Council and Community Services NSW as funding contributors on any promotional material.

 

Successful applicants are required to submit an evaluation report to Council following their event or activity.

 

The opportunity to apply for Youth Week funds in 2011 was widely advertised, including through Penrith Youth Interagency, the Mayoral column, Council’s website and through extensive email networks.

 

Funding Applications for 2011

Council has received funding applications from a broad range of organisations, with three organisations applying for the first time.

 

A total of six applications have been received from 6 separate organisations, with the requested amount totalling $14,228.60 including GST. Applications totalling $6,150, the 2011Youth Week budget, have been recommended for funding. Five applications are recommended for part funding.  One application is not recommended as the proposal duplicates already existing programs.

 

Table 1 - Youth Week 2011 Recommended Activities and Funding Amounts

 

Applicant

Organisation

Activity

Description

Funding

Requested

Funding Recommended

1    Fusion Western Sydney

Penrith Youth Interagency (PYI) Youth Event

$5,000.00

$3,850.00

2    Imagine Nations Youth

Own It Youth Festival

$3,800.00

$900.00

3    Philippine Language and Cultural Association of Australia

A Rigodon Affair and Launch of Arts and Culture Program of Penrith Filipino Youth group

$908.60

$600.00

4    Hawkesbury Community Services

Londonderry Own It

$620.00

$400.00

5    PATH Inc 

Sporting and Community Participation Awards for Children and Young People with a Disability

$2,500.00

$400.00

6    Westcare Community Services

Own It

$1,400.00

Not recommended because it duplicates existing programs

 

 

Total Requested

$14,228.60

Total Recommended

$6,150.00

Excluding GST

 

 

Applications Recommended for Funding

1.          Fusion Western Sydney – Penrith Youth Interagency (PYI) Youth Event

 

A youth event promoting and celebrating youth week with free activities for young people in Penrith aged 12-24 years. The event will provide opportunities for young people from diverse groups to engage in a wide variety of free activities and entertainment such as local live bands, DJ, skate comps, bucking bull, air tattooist, food, drinks, sporting activities and access to local service information. A video booth on the day will also enable young people to share their ideas, concerns and views with interviews being facilitated by experienced youth workers. There is a commitment from 6 local youth services to planning and implementing this youth week event.

 

Transport to the event will be provided on a pre-booked basis through arrangements with youth services.

 

Proposed Event Details:  Saturday 2 April 11am - 4pm - Jamison Park and Jamison Skate Park

 

Funding amount requested:$5,000

Recommendation: $3,850

 

2.          Imagine Nations Youth- Own It Youth Festival

 

An afternoon festival of young people in our community celebrating the diversity and potential of young people in our community. Activities include Battle of the Bands, sports workshops, carnival rides, gaming rooms, vintage op shop and a night concert with youth performers.

 

Proposed Event Details:  Wednesday 6 April 3-7pm Imagine Nations Church, Penrith

 

Funding amount requested: $3,800

Recommendation: $900

 

3.          Philippine Language and Cultural Association of Australia -  A Rigodon Affair and Launch of Arts and Culture Program of Penrith Filipino Youth group

 

Through learning traditional Philippine dance, Rigodon de Honor, young people will have an opportunity of networking, reflecting on cultural heritage, promoting culture and developing an arts and culture youth program.

 

Proposed Event Details:  Monday 4 April - St Marys Senior Citizen Centre Hall

 

Funding amount requested: $908.60

Recommendation: $600

 

4.          Hawkesbury Community Services – Londonderry Own It

 

A night of entertainment for young people in Londonderry. There are a range of activities including video games, sports, free barbecue, slushy machine and services information stands. The night will finish off with a local band.

 

This event provides an opportunity for young people living in the Penrith Northern Rural areas to participate in a local event. Buses will be organised to provide transport as required.

 

Proposed Event Details:  Tuesday 5 April, 5-8pm at Londonderry Community Centre

 

Funding amount requested: $620

Recommendation: $400

 

5.          PATH Inc – Sporting and Community Participation Awards for Children and Young People with a Disability

 

The project will recognise the achievements of young people with a disability in the sporting and community arena. An awards presentation ceremony of nominated youth and their families will be held and all participants will receive recognition by guest sporting achievers in the area of disabilities.

 

Since the application was submitted, the venue location and quotes for catering have been renegotiated. A greatly reduced funding amount has been recommended following this new information.

 

Proposed Event Details:  Saturday 9 April, 2pm - 4pm at Xavier College, Llandilo

 

Funding amount requested: $2,500

Recommendation: $400 (after renegotiated quotes)

 

Not Recommended for Funding

 

6.          Westcare Community Services - Own It

 

The goal is to run seminars in six local high schools targeting a range of issues such as bullying, health, relationships, leadership, homelessness and cybercrime/party safe programs. 

 

It is noted that while this is a good program, a number of similar programs exist. There are a range of local youth services that receive core project funding to run programs focusing on issues relevant to young people within schools. There are also a range of existing networks and forums that can assist services to establish partnerships with schools to deliver these types of program.

 

Organisations that offer such comparable programs and/or are experts in their field of work and work with schools include Family Planning Australia - The Warehouse Youth Health Service, Fusion Western Sydney, Nepean Community and Neighbourhood Services, NSW Police Force - Penrith Local Area Command and the Nepean Youth Accommodation Service.

 

Funding amount requested: $1,400

Recommendation: Not recommended due to similar programs already operating.

 

Youth Week Program Promotion

One of the key strategies to a successful Youth Week program is promotion and advertising.  A detailed program of events for 2011 will be developed and promoted once all arrangements for events and activities are finalised.  Promotional material will be distributed throughout neighbourhood and community centres, local schools, shopping centres and local media. 

 

The program will also be posted on Council’s website. The Youth Week program will incorporate a range of activities including those outlined above as well as activities organised by other services and youth organisations.

 

Council will also hold a Youth Week cheque presentation for the successful applicants.

 

Summary

National Youth Week 2011 is an opportunity to celebrate the contributions of a diverse range of young people in our community. The theme for Youth Week 2011 is ‘Own It’. In 2011 Council received $3,075 from Community Services NSW to fund Youth Week activities.  Council is required to match this contribution. The funding round is promoted to a broad range of services, organisations and groups. A total of $6,150 is available for distribution to eligible community organisations.

 

The report recommends part-funding for five of the six applications received.  One application duplicates an existing program already operational in local schools.

 

Council will develop a calendar of events and other material to assist in promoting Youth Week events. Council will also hold a cheque presentation for successful applicants.

 

Successful applicants are required to acknowledge Penrith City Council and Community Services NSW as funding contributors and submit a final evaluation report of their event to Council in May 2011.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Youth Week 2011- Proposed Activities and Funding be received.

2.     Council endorse the five recommended projects and funding amounts to the total value of $6,150 as outlined in Table 1 of this report.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.  



Committee of the Whole

 

DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS

 

CONTENTS

 

Pecuniary Interests

 

Other Interests

 

Monday February 7 2011

 

Item                                                                                                                                       Page

 

1        Presence of the Public                                                                                                        1

 

2        Acquisition of Open Space, Caddens Road, Claremont Meadows

 

3        Property Matter - Acquisition of No. 18 Carinya Avenue, St Marys

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

7 February 2011

A Leading City

 

 

 

 

1        Presence of the Public

 

Everyone is entitled to attend a meeting of the Council and those of its Committees of which all members are Councillors, except as provided by Section 10 of the Local Government Act, 1993.

A Council, or a Committee of the Council of which all the members are Councillors, may close to the public so much of its meeting as comprises:

 

(a)                the discussion of any of the matters listed below; or

(b)               the receipt or discussion of any of the information so listed.

The matters and information are the following:

 

(a)                personnel matters concerning particular individuals;

(b)               the personal hardship of any resident or ratepayers;

(c)                information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business;

(d)               commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed:

·                          prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it; or

 

·                          confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council; or

 

·                          reveal a trade secret.

 

(e)                information that would, if disclosed, prejudice the maintenance of the law;

(f)                matters affecting the security of the Council, Councillors, Council staff or Council property;

(g)        advice concerning litigation, or advice that would otherwise be privileged from production in legal proceedings on the ground of legal professional privilege.

The grounds on which part of a meeting is closed must be stated in the decision to close that part of the meeting and must be recorded in the minutes of the meeting.

The grounds must specify the following:

(a)                the relevant provision of section 10A(2);

(b)               the matter that is to be discussed during the closed part of the meeting;

(c)                the reasons why the part of the meeting is being closed, including (if the matter concerned is a matter other than a personnel matter concerning particular individuals, the personal hardship of a resident or ratepayer or a trade secret) an explanation of the way in which discussion of the matter in open meeting would be, on balance, contrary to the public interest.

Members of the public may make representations at a Council or Committee Meeting as to whether a part of a meeting should be closed to the public

The process which should be followed is:

 

·         a motion, based on the recommendation below, is moved and seconded

·         the Chairperson then asks if any member/s of the public would like to make representations as to whether a part of the meeting is closed to the public

·         if a member/s of the public wish to make representations, the Chairperson invites them to speak before the Committee makes its decision on whether to close the part of the meeting or not to the public.

·         if no member/s of the public wish to make representations the Chairperson can then put the motion to close the meeting to the public.

The first action is for a motion to be moved and seconded based on the recommendation below.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That:

 

A Leading City

 

2        Acquisition of Open Space, Caddens Road, Claremont Meadows

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

 

3        Property Matter - Acquisition of No. 18 Carinya Avenue, St Marys

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

 

 

 


 

 

 

 

THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT BLANK  INTENTIONALLY


 

ATTACHMENTS   

 

 

Date of Meeting:         Monday 7 February 2011

Delivery Program:     

Issue:                            Base our decisions on research, evidence, and our responsibility to anticipate harm before it occurs (5.2)

Report Title:                Audit Committee

Attachments:               Draft Minutes of Audit Committee Meeting  8 Dec 2010



Ordinary Meeting

7 February 2011

Attachment 1 - Draft Minutes of Audit Committee Meeting  8 Dec 2010

 

 

 

UNCONFIRMED MINUTES

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

ON WEDNESDAY 8 DECEMBER 2010 AT 8:00AM

PRESENT

His Worship the Mayor, Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM, Deputy Mayor, Councillor Jim Aitken OAM, Councillor Ross Fowler OAM, Frank Gelonesi (Deputy Chair), and Jayant Gulwadi.

Alan Stoneham (General Manager), Peter Browne (Internal Auditor), Barry Husking (Director), Stephen Britten (Group Manager Legal and Governance), Vicki O’Kelly (Group Manager Finance), Ruth Goldsmith (Group Manager Leadership), Anthony Milanoli (Senior Planner) and Denis Banicevic (PricewaterhouseCoopers)

Due to the absence of the Audit Committee Chairman, the meeting was chaired by Frank Gelonesi.

 

APOLOGIES

Apologies for non-attendance were received from Robert Coombes and Councillor Kath Presdee. 

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES - Audit Committee Meeting - 6 October 2010

RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ross Fowler OAM seconded Jayant Gulwadi that the minutes of the Audit Committee Meeting of 6 October 2010 be confirmed.

 

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

 

Nil

 

DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS

 

A Leading City

 

1        Penrith Swimming Centre                                                                            

Peter Browne advised the Audit Committee of the recent audit of Penrith Swimming Centre.  The review follows a review of operational and safety issues by the Royal Life Saving Society of Australia (RLSSA).  It was noted that the pool scored quite well on safety in the RLSSA review.  Some minor improvements had been recommended.  The internal audit found that the centre had quite rightly prioritised patron safety and comfort, but that some administrative issues needed to be attended to. Twenty four recommendations for improvements were made. After the audit was completed, a staff member was relocated from the Civic Centre to the pool in order to improve administrative efficiency and risk management at the pool. 

The Audit Committee discussed the report and noted that the facility is ageing and will soon reach the point where some renovation will be required.  Council has applied for grants to assist in that process.

RESOLVED on the MOTION of Jayant Gulwadi, seconded Councillor Ross Fowler OAM that the information contained in the report on Penrith Swimming Centre be received.

 

2        Developer Contributions (s94)                                                                   

Ruth Goldsmith advised the Audit Committee of the current situation in regard to s94.  In June 2010, the State Government placed a $20,000 per lot cap on the collection of s94 contributions.  In August 2010, this was modified so that most established areas had a $20,000 cap, Greenfield urban release areas had a $30,000 cap, while existing plans that were well advanced were exempted from the new limits. Ruth Goldsmith highlighted that while this might be workable in established areas, Greenfield sites frequently require more than $30,000 per lot just to construct roads and drainage. She indicated that we are returning to a system where infrastructure needs are assessed block by block and integrated responses cannot be organised because it cannot be determined when the works on the neighbouring land might be connected.  

His Worship the Mayor Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM left the meeting at approximately 9:10am.

Examples of the reduced funding compared to the previous arrangements were noted.  It is estimated that Glenmore Park (Stage 2) would receive $16m less than previously planned and the WELL Precinct $48m less. Council has considered how the cost of constructing the necessary infrastructure in new areas can be funded.  It has been concluded that there are no viable means of raising the funds other than where the developers agree to voluntarily contribute. Various legal options exist where this can be achieved, but unless a formal “Voluntary Planning Agreement” is created pursuant to the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, the obligation would not move with the land if it is sold. A Voluntary Planning Agreement for Glenmore Park Stage 2 (5 landowners) has progressed to the point where the agreed legal documents require formal approval. There is no real hope of a similar outcome for the WELL Precinct, as there are 31 landowners with different intentions and timeframes.

At present, Council’s policy is not to approve developments where the funding of the infrastructure required cannot be determined and any associated risks mitigated to Council’s satisfaction. Some developments are being allowed to commence where the funding is planned, but the legal guarantees are not finalised. There is a small risk associated with this process.

The Audit Committee was concerned about the potential impacts if development occurs without properly planned and financed infrastructure. The risks are both financial and social.  s94 is to be a recurrent item on the Audit Committee agenda.

Deputy Mayor, Councillor Jim Aitken OAM left the meeting at approximately 9:30am.

 

3        Audit Committee Standing Items                                                        

Peter Browne provided a report to the Audit Committee on recent events and progress in Internal Audit. Stephen Britten provided a report on governance.

The Audit Committee Chair sent a letter to DLG (the Division of Local Government, Department of Premier and Cabinet) advising that he disagreed with some of the recommendations in the latest Audit Guidelines. Peter Browne advised the Committee that he had been in contact with DLG and the Audit Committee Chair concerning the letter.   

Discussion with DLG officers has indicated that the response will be that the guidelines are considered better practice in most circumstances and will not be changed, however DLG does recognise that the broad guidelines may not be the best option in all circumstances. DLG will be advising it is happy for individual Councils to disagree provided they espouse the reasons.

RESOLVED on the MOTION of Jayant Gulwadi, seconded Councillor Ross Fowler OAM that the information contained in the report on Audit Committee Standing Items be received. 

 

4        Progress on implementing Audit Recommendations                             

Peter Browne provided an overview of progress on implementing Audit Recommendations.  It was noted that it has only been a short time since the last Audit Committee meeting and progress update. Alan Stoneham advised the Audit Committee that it is his usual practice to meet with the Group Managers and the Internal Auditor to discuss progress in between Audit Committee meetings but that this had not occurred on this occasion.

RESOLVED on the MOTION of Jayant Gulwadi seconded Councillor Ross Fowler OAM that the information contained in the report on Progress on implementing Audit Recommendations be received.

 

GENERAL BUSINESS

 

 The date for the next meeting was discussed.  There was no other general business.

 

 

 

There being no further business the Chairperson declared the meeting closed the time being 9:50am.

 



 

ATTACHMENTS   

 

 

Date of Meeting:         Monday 7 February 2011

Delivery Program:     

Issue:                            Deliver services for the City and its communities, and maintain our long term financial sustainability (4.1)

Report Title:                Summary of Investments & Banking and Agency Collection Fees as at  1 December to 31 December 2010

Attachments:               Agency Collection Methods

                                      Summary of Investments



Ordinary Meeting

7 February 2011

Attachment 1 - Agency Collection Methods

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

7 February 2011

Attachment 2 - Summary of Investments

 

 

 

 




 


 

ATTACHMENT       

 

 

 


Date of Meeting: 

 

Delivery Program:       A Leading City   

 

Program:                      Corporate Finance

 

Report Title:                 2009-2010 Voted Works