27 April 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 2 May 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

 

Craig Butler

Acting General Manager

 

BUSINESS

 

1.           LEAVE OF ABSENCE

 

2.           APOLOGIES

 

3.           CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

Ordinary Meeting - 11 April 2011.

 

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

Penrith Valley Community Safety Partnership Meeting - 30 March 2011.

 

10.         DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS

 

11.         REQUESTS FOR REPORTS AND MEMORANDUMS

 

12.         URGENT BUSINESS

 

13.         COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE


ORDINARY MEETING

 

Monday 2 May 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
Barry Husking

 

 

 

Acting General Manager
Craig Butler

Deputy Mayor
Councillor
Jim Aitken OAM
South Ward

 

Senior Governance Officer
Glenn Schuil

 

 

Minute Clerk

 

 

 

 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 


                                                        

 

 

Text Box: Public Gallery
Text Box: Managers
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Group Managers                           

                
          

 
   


B&WHORIZ

2011 MEETING CALENDAR

January 2011 - December 2011

(adopted by Council on 29 November 2010, amended by Council on 28 February 2011, revised March 2011)

 

 

 

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

 

11v

2

 

 

15#@

5ü

10

7

12

(7.00pm)

 

28#@

21

 

30#*

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

 

 

 

 

Wed

4

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 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 Senior Governance Officer, Glenn Schuil.

 


UNCONFIRMED MINUTES

 OF THE ORDINARY MEETING OF PENRITH CITY COUNCIL HELD IN THE

COUNCIL CHAMBERS

ON MONDAY 11 APRIL 2011 AT 7:35PM

NATIONAL ANTHEM 

The meeting opened with the National Anthem.

STATEMENT OF RECOGNITION

The Deputy Mayor, Councillor Jim Aitken OAM read a statement of recognition of Penrith City’s Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Cultural Heritage.

PRAYER

The Council Prayer was read by the Rev. Neil Checkley

PRESENT

Deputy Mayor Councillor Jim Aitken OAM, Councillors Kevin Crameri 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.

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES - Ordinary Meeting - 21 March 2011

74  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Marko Malkoc seconded Councillor Ben Goldfinch that the minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of 21 March 2011 be confirmed.

 

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Councillor Ross Fowler OAM declared a Pecuniary Interest in Item 9  - 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 & Giovanni Cettolin as the applicants are a client of his accounting firm. Councillor Fowler OAM indicated he would leave the room for discussion of this item.

 

Councillor Ben Goldfinch declared a Pecuniary Interest in Item 9  - 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 & Giovanni Cettolin as he exchanged preferences with one of the owners at the last local government election. Councillor Goldfinch indicated he would leave the room for discussion of this item.

 

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM declared a Non-Pecuniary Conflict of Interest – Significant in Item 9  - 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 & Giovanni Cettolin as he exchanged preferences with one of the owners at the last local government election. Councillor Crameri OAM indicated he would leave the room for discussion of this item.

 

Councillor Tanya Davies declared a Non-Pecuniary Conflict of Interest – Less than Significant in Item 9  - 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 & Giovanni as one of the owners assisted her in her recent State Government election campaign.

 

Councillor Mark Davies declared a Non-Pecuniary Conflict of Interest – Less than Significant in Item 9  - 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 & Giovanni Cettolin as one of the owners assisted his wife in her recent  State Government election campaign.

 

Councillor John Thain declared a Non-Pecuniary Conflict of Interest – Less than Significant in Item 9  - 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 & Giovanni as one of the owners handed out election material for him at the recent State Government Elections.

 

Councillor Marko Malkoc declared a Non-Pecuniary Conflict of Interest – Less than Significant in Item 4 of the Personal Trainer and Commercial Fitness Group Draft Policy in the Policy Review Committee meeting minutes of 4 April 2011 as he has worked in the Personal Training industry.

 

Reports of Committees

 

1        Report and Recommendations of the Local Traffic Committee Meeting held on 4 April 2011                                                                                                                                     

75  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Karen McKeown seconded Councillor Greg Davies that the recommendations contained in the Report and Recommendations of the Local Traffic Committee meeting held on 4 April, 2011 be adopted.

 

 

2        Report and Recommendations of the Policy Review Committee meeting, held on 4 April, 2011                                                                                                                                     

76  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Ross Fowler OAM that the recommendations contained in the Report and Recommendations of the Policy Review Committee meeting held on 4 April, 2011 be adopted.

 

 


 

DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS

 

A Leading City

 

7        Summary of Investments and Banking and an Agency Collection Methods for the period of 1 March to 31 March 2011                                                                                                

77  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Marko Malkoc seconded Councillor Kaylene Allison

That:

1.       The information contained in the report on Summary of Investments and Banking and an Agency Collection Methods for the period of 1 March to 31 March 2011 be received.

2.       The Certificate of the Responsible Accounting Officer and Summaries of Investments and Performance for the period 1 March 2011 to 31 March 2011 be noted and accepted.

3.       The graphical investment analysis as at 31 March 2011 be noted.

4.       An Agency Collection Method as at 31 March be noted.

 

 

1        Public Exhibition of the draft Operational Plan 2011-2012                                           

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

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Public Exhibition of the draft Operational Plan 2011-2012 be received.

2.     In accordance with the Local Government Act 1993 and Local Government (General) Regulation 2005, Council endorse the draft Operational Plan 2011-12 including any amendments made at tonight’s meeting, for public exhibition.

3.     In accordance with the Local Government Act 1993 and Local Government (General) Regulation 2005, the draft Operational Plan 2011-12 be placed on public exhibition for 30 days, commencing on Friday 15 April 2011 and closing on Monday 16 May 2011.

4.     Submissions from the public on the draft Operational Plan 2011-2012 be invited and the public consultation arrangements as detailed in this report be implemented, including a public meeting and forum to be held on Wednesday 4 May 2011 in the Civic Centre.

 

 

2        Councillor Karen McKeown honoured with a Minister's Award for Women in Local Government                                                                                                                        

79  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jackie Greenow seconded Councillor Marko Malkoc that the information contained in the report on Councillor Karen McKeown honoured with a Minister's Award for Women in Local Government be received.

 

 

3        Passing of Steve Hyland                                                                                                    

80  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jackie Greenow seconded Councillor Prue Guillaume that the information contained in the report on Passing of Steve Hyland be received.

 

 

4        Awarding of the Louise Petchell Learning for Sustainability Scholarship                  

81  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Karen McKeown seconded Councillor Tanya Davies that the information contained in the report on Awarding of the Louise Petchell Learning for Sustainability Scholarship be received.

 

 

5        Audit Committee                                                                                                                

82  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ross Fowler OAM seconded Councillor Kath Presdee that the information contained in the report on Audit Committee be received.

 

 

6        Australian Local Government Women's Association 2011 NSW State Annual Conference

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

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Australian Local Government Women's Association 2011 NSW State Annual Conference be received

2.     Council nominate Councillors Kaylene Allison, Prue Guillaume, Karen McKeown, Kath Presdee and Jackie Greenow to attend ALGWA’s 58th Annual NSW State Conference, to be held in Rooty Hill from Thursday 26 to Saturday 28 May 2011.

 

 

A City of Opportunities

 

8        Results of the exhibition of the revised Resource Strategy and Community Engagement Strategy                                                                                                                               

84  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Marko Malkoc

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Results of the exhibition of the revised Resource Strategy and Community Engagement Strategy be received.

2.     Council adopt the revised Resource Strategy 2011-2021 and Community Engagement Strategy 2011.

 

 

The Deputy Mayor, Councillor Jim Aitken OAM spoke in support of the National Growth Area Alliance and commended it for its achievements so far.

 

10      National Growth Areas Alliance - March to December 2010 Update                           

85  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Marko Malkoc

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on National Growth Areas Alliance - March to December 2010 Update be received.

2.     Council endorse and forward the report to all local Federal and State Members of Parliament, with the offer of a briefing about the outcomes the NGAA is seeking for Australia’s growth areas like Penrith.

 

 

Having previously declared their interests Councillors Ross Fowler OAM, Kevin Crameri OAM and Ben Goldfinch left the meeting, the time being 8:44pm.

 

9        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 & Giovanni Cettolin                                                                                  

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Development Application DA10/0275 - Proposed 2 Lot Torrens title Subdivision at Lot 200 DP 811535 (No. 28 - 30) Grays Lane, Cranebrook be received.

2.       That DA10/0275 for 2 Lot Torrens title Subdivision at Lot 200 DP 811535 (No. 28 – 30) Grays Lane, Cranebrook, be approved subject to the attached conditions:

                Standard Conditions

2.1     A001 – Approved Plans

G001 - Services

G002 – Section 73

G004 – Integral Energy

L008 – Tree Preservation

L012 – Existing Landscaping

M003 – Statutory Boundary Clearances

M008 – Linen Plan

M014 –Surveyors Certificate

Q008 – Subdivision Certificate

Special Conditions

2.2       This condition is imposed in accordance with Penrith City Council’s Section 94 Contributions Plan(s) for Cultural Facilities. Based on the current rates detailed in the accompanying schedule attached to this Notice, $336.00 is to be paid to Council prior to a Construction Certificate being issued for this development (the rates are subject to quarterly reviews). If not paid within the current quarterly period, this contribution will be reviewed at the time of payment in accordance with the adopted Section 94 plan. The projected rates of this contribution amount are listed in Council’s Fees and Charges Schedule

Council should be contacted prior to payment to ascertain the rate for the current quarterly period. The S94 invoice accompanying this consent should accompany the contribution payment

The Section 94 Contributions Plan for Cultural Facilities may be inspected at Council’s Civic Centre, 601 High Street, Penrith

2.3       This condition is imposed in accordance with Penrith City Council’s Section 94 Contributions Plan(s) for District Open Space. Based on the current rates detailed in the accompanying schedule attached to this Notice, $5,131.00 is to be paid to Council prior to a Construction Certificate being issued for this development (the rates are subject to quarterly reviews). If not paid within the current quarterly period, this contribution will be reviewed at the time of payment in accordance with the adopted Section 94 plan. The projected rates of this contribution amount are listed in Council’s Fees and Charges Schedule

Council should be contacted prior to payment to ascertain the rate for the current quarterly period. The S94 invoice accompanying this consent should accompany the contribution payment

The Section 94 Contributions Plan for District Open Space may be inspected at Council’s Civic Centre, 601 High Street, Penrith

2.4       Prior to the issue of a Subdivision Certificate a copy of the geotechnical report indicating the soil classification for all lots shall be submitted to Penrith City Council

2.5       Prior to the issue of a Subdivision Certificate or Occupation Certificate a checklist and supporting documentation shall be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority demonstrating that each condition of the development consent has been satisfactorily addressed

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

3.     The Department of Planning be given a copy of the “Notice of Determination”.

 

 

Councillors Ross Fowler OAM, Kevin Crameri OAM and Ben Goldfinch returned to the meeting, the time being 8:45pm.

 

Councillor Prue Guillaume left the meeting, the time being 8:46pm.

 

A Liveable City

 

11      Outcome of the Review of the State Emergency and Rescue Management Act 1989 

86  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM seconded Councillor John Thain

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Outcome of the Review of the State Emergency and Rescue Management Act 1989 be received.

2.     The General Manager (or the General Manager’s nominee) be appointed to the Penrith Local Emergency Management Committee.

 

 

Councillor Prue Guillaume returned to the meeting, the time being 8:48pm.

 

REQUESTS FOR REPORTS AND MEMORANDUMS

 

RR 1          Phillip Street, St Marys - Pedestrian Crossing                                                       

Councillor Marko Malkoc requested a report to the Local Traffic Committee concerning a potential Pedestrian Crossing on Phillip St, St Marys out the front of the Coles Shopping Centre.

 

RR 2          Ninth Avenue - Clean Up                                                                                        

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM requested a memo reply regarding a clean up on Ninth Avenue, Llandilo to remove bushes, cement, foam boxes, bricks and a pile of dirt.

 

 

RR 3          Request for Flood Maps                                                                                          

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM requested a memo reply regarding obtaining a copy of flood maps for the eastern side of Londonderry.

 

RR 4          Slip Lane - Northern Road                                                                                      

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM requested a memo reply concerning the slip lane on the Northern Road and the Roundabout with Cranebrook Road. Councillor Crameri OAM asked that a give way sign coming back onto the Northern Road be considered.

 

RR 5          Footpath - Barber Avenue                                                                                      

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM requested a memo reply requesting that Barber Avenue be added to the footpath program.

 

RR 6          7th Avenue - Footpath                                                                                             

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM  requested a memo reply requesting that 7th Avenue be added to the footpath program.

 

RR 7          Trucks using Derby Street                                                                                      

Councillor John Thain requested a memo reply concerning the number of trucks using Derby Street at all hours of the day.

 

RR 8          Roundabout - Lemongrove Bridge                                                                         

Councillor John Thain requested a report to the Local Traffic Committee concerning the roundabout at Lemongrove bridge, particularly for buses.

 

RR 9          Coachmans Park, West Lane and Carinya Avenue Improvements                    

Councillor Greg Davies requested that his previously requested report on the section of land at West Lane and Carinya Avenue be included when investigating improvements to Coachmans Park

 

There being no further business the Chairperson declared the meeting closed the time being 8:59pm.

 


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


Reports of Committees

 

Item                                                                                                                                                Page

 

1        Report and Recommendations of the Penrith Valley Community Safety Partnership Meeting held on 30 March 2011

 

 



Ordinary Meeting

2 May 2011

A Liveable City

 

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE
 Penrith Valley Community Safety Partnership MEETING

HELD ON 30 March, 2011

 

 

 

PRESENT      

Councillor Karen McKeown; Councillor Kaylene Allison; Julie Passau, Penrith Local Area Command; Gina Field, Penrith Valley Chamber of Commerce; Ray Filewood, St Marys Local Area Command; Gladys Reed, Penrith City Centre Association; Glenn Cooper, University of Western Sydney; Marcello Scali, Penrith Youth Agency; Ben Feszczuk, Penrith Local Area Command; Julie Page, Nepean Hospital Needle and Syringe Program; Yvonne Perkins, Penrith City Council; David Burns, Penrith City Council; Olivia Kidon, Penrith City Council; Allison Kyriakakis, Penrith City Council; Ken Ennis, Glenmore Park Action Group; Darryl Jobson, St Marys Local Area Command; Trudy Grant, Penrith City Council; Katerina Tahija, Penrith City Council; Erin Davidson, Penrith City Council; Lauren Fletcher, Penrith City Council

 

LEAVE OF ABSENCE

Leave of Absence was granted to Councillor Ben Goldfinch for the period 28 March 2011 to 31 March 2011 inclusive.

Leave of Absence was granted to Councillor Jim Aitken OAM for the period 28 March 2011 to 31 March 2011 inclusive.

Leave of Absence granted to Councillor Marko Malkoc for the period 28 March 2011 to 31 March 2011 inclusive.

APOLOGIES

Kylie Chang, St Marys Police; Tracy Leahy, Penrith City Council; Murray Halls, Penrith City Council; Jeni Pollard, Penrith City Council.

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES - Penrith Valley Community Safety Partnership Meeting - 24 November 2010

The minutes of the Penrith Valley Community Safety Partnership Meeting of 24 November 2010 were confirmed.

 

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

 

There were no declarations of interest.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS

 

A Liveable City

 

1        Penrith Valley Community Safety Plan 2007-2011 - Key Strategy Development

1.   NSW Attorney General’s Department Funded Projects

Plate Safe Program

Since the commencement of the Program in April 2010, five public fitting sessions and six private fitting sessions have been delivered at alternative locations with a total number of 342 vehicles fitted with the anti theft number plate screws.

 

The program has experienced ongoing difficulties in meeting the 1500 vehicle quota as community interest in the program has been lower than anticipated. Extensive promotion of the program has been undertaken through advertisements in local papers, banners, electronic notice boards, and the distribution of flyers to promote each fitting session at key locations.

 

Despite best efforts by staff and volunteers the Plate Safe Program will be discontinued due to difficulties experienced in meeting the quota of fitting 1500 vehicles with the anti theft screws.

 

Following preliminary discussions with the Department of Justice and Attorney General, it has been agreed that remaining funding can be diverted to an anti theft awareness program regarding reinforcement of messages about leaving valuables in vehicles. This signage is similar to the Park Smarter signage that is currently installed throughout car parks in the Local Government Area.  The majority of new signage will replace Park Smarter signage that is faded or damaged.

 

2.   Local Government Amendment (Confiscation of Alcohol) Act 2010

 

The Partnership was advised that there has been a legislative change regarding Alcohol Free Areas.

 

Alcohol Free Areas are now legislated under the new Section 632A of the Local Government Act and are referred to as Alcohol Prohibited Areas.

 

Under the new Section 632A of the Act, Council can declare any public space or part of a public space as an Alcohol Prohibited Area, except those spaces that are designated Alcohol Free Zones – Section 644. Current Alcohol Free Area signage already erected prior to the amendment can still be enforced and will continue to be enforced by Police.

 

The new amendment to the Act also increases Police powers enabling them to confiscate and tip out alcohol in Alcohol Prohibited Areas. Prior to the amendment Police only had power to confiscate and tip out alcohol in designated Alcohol Free Zones. This current amendment allows for consistency between Alcohol Free Zones and Alcohol Prohibited Areas. A report highlighting changes to Council’s Alcohol Free Public Spaces Policy will be submitted to Council shortly.

 

3.   Domestic Violence Projects

Western Sydney Area Assistance Scheme (WSAAS) Funded Domestic Violence Resource Project

A project worker has been appointed to coordinate Part 2 of the Project, the delivery of training activities for non government community service providers in the Penrith Local Government Area in the identification and response to domestic and family violence.

 

The first training session has been held at St Marys Memorial Hall for Childcare workers. This training has been developed around the findings of Part 1 of the project, the training needs analysis.

 

Towards Safer Relationships Out West – SOAAR forum

A community forum was held in the Joan Sutherland Performing Arts Centre on Thursday 17 March 2011 and was funded as part of the Domestic Violence Resource Project. The forum focused on meeting the specific needs of diverse sexuality and gender in greater Western Sydney.

 

The forum was hosted by Speaking Out Against Abuse in Relationships (SOAAR). An estimated 90 people attended the forum.

 

Community Safety Stand

 A new Community Safety notice board has been installed in Westfield Penrith Plaza on the lower level, next to the Commonwealth Bank ATM. This new stand is wall mounted and replaces the previous stand that was placed on the upper level of the Plaza.

 

4.   Cranebrook Street Lighting Enhancement Project

The installation of lighting in identified locations in Cranebrook under the Cranebrook Street Lighting Enhancement Project is now complete. Lighting was switched on in January this year.

 

5.    Citywide Graffiti Minimisation Strategy

Warner Group Graffiti Education Program

The delivery of the Warner Group Graffiti Education program has commenced for 2011. 21 primary schools and 16 secondary schools are booked to receive the program during the first quarter of the year.

 

Feedback continues to be positive as the delivery of the program has commenced its fourth year. It is anticipated that students who previously received the program in year five will now be receiving the program for a second time in year eight, reinforcing the anti graffiti message.

 

E-nose Graffiti Sensor 

The three month E-nose trial is now complete. The device detects paint, aerosol, solvents and marker fumes. When the device detects these fumes it sends a notification via SMS to Council’s security provider for follow up action.

 

During the three month trial there were some teething problems experienced regarding false alarms which returned mixed results.

 

An extension of the trial is due to commence in the near future at one of the locations in conjunction with a portable CCTV camera trial.

 

Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) Graffiti Project

Four sites have now been selected by the Department of Justice and Attorney General under the CPTED Graffiti Project. The project will involve landscape screening at the sites in an attempt to reduce and deter the incidence of graffiti vandalism.

 

The project is expected to be completed within twelve months with data being collected throughout this period.

 

6.    Pedestrian Laneways

 

Pedestrian Laneways Under Review

Three additional requests for closure of laneways have been received by Council. These include:

 

·    Peachtree Lane, Penrith;

·    Carlyle Lane, Cambridge Gardens; and

·    Short Lane, Emu Plains

 

Representations have also been received regarding requests to re-open Morning Bird Lane in St Clair.

 

A report will be submitted to Council’s Ordinary meeting on 2 May 2011.

 

New Bollard Trial

A bollard design change that incorporates a sloping rail to minimise opportunities for gaining access over fences, is to be trialled at pedestrian laneway locations. The new design will be installed at Grange Lane, Cambridge Gardens. If successful, the new design feature will be incorporated into installations at other laneways across the City.

 

7.    Solar Lighting Project

Council is seeking quotes for the supply and installation of solar lighting at three locations in the Penrith Local Government Area.

 

These locations include two laneways and one amenity building.

·    Daphne Lane, Kingswood

·    Todd Lane, St Clair

·    The amenities building at Ched Towns reserve, Glenmore Park

 

The aim of the trial is to ascertain if solar lighting is more economical and sustainable, particularly in locations where CPTED lighting treatments are required.

 

It is anticipated that final quotes will be received in two weeks.

 

8.    Federal Attorney General’s Department Safer Suburbs Plan Funding

Under the Federal Governments Safer Suburbs funding it has been confirmed that $200,000 has been allocated for an extension of CCTV coverage and the implementation of youth engagement strategies within the Civic Arts Space between the JSPAC and the Civic Centre. A project proposal is being prepared and will be submitted by 11 April 2011.

 

9.    Portable CCTV Camera Trial

Quotes are currently being sought for the provision of mobile CCTV Cameras that will be trialled at three locations within the Local Government Area. These areas include:

·    Amenities building at Ched Towns Reserve, Glenmore Park

·    Cambridge Park Hall, Cambridge Park

·    Amenities building at Leonay Oval, Leonay

 

The advantages of this technology means that the unit is wireless and can be transferred to other hot spot locations as required and video footage can be accessed remotely through the 3G network.

 

10.  Operation Bounce Back

Council has been approached by the National Motor Vehicle Theft Reduction Council (NMVTRC) to host Operation Bounce Back. The program is aimed at promoting theft prevention and raise awareness of vehicle theft.

 

The program also incorporates the installation of car immobilisers to older model vehicles. Council will be issued with 100 vouchers, redeemable for the installation of a car immobiliser to the value of $200 each. These vouchers are then distributed to residents with older model vehicles allowing the immobilisers to be fitted by a nominated installer.

 

11.  Red Cross Park Bollard Lighting Project

This project has experienced delays associated with the connecting of a low voltage power supply to the site. Once designs for the power supply are received from the design contractor, they will be submitted to Integral Energy for approval. This project also serves as a trial for the use of bollard lighting in public spaces.

 

12.  Additional Alcohol Free Zones and Alcohol Prohibited Areas

Since the last Partnership meeting an additional two requests have been received for the establishment of Alcohol Prohibited Areas. These include:

 

·    Joseph Street Reserve, Kingswood

·    The extension of Alcohol Prohibited Area at Werrington Creek, Werrington to 24 hours.

 

One request has been received for the establishment of an Alcohol Free Zone at the area of Pendock Road from Progress Way to Kington Place, Cranebrook.

 

These locations will be added to the list of locations currently being monitored.

         

RECOMMENDATION

RECOMMENDED that the information contained in the report on Penrith Valley Community Safety Plan - Key Strategy Development 2007-2011 be received.

 


Regular Items

 

A)  Police Statistics

 

Penrith Local Area Command Crime Statistics

 

November 2010 – February 2011

 

Crime Category

Nov

Dec

Jan

Feb

Assault

91

97

72

83

Robbery

3

8

6

2

Break & Enter

46

42

75

56

Stealing

163

167

148

141

Steal Motor Vehicle

27

31

31

27

Malicious Damage

122

95

112

89

Drug Detection

35

28

23

20

Traffic Offences

689

503

497

560

Motor Vehicle Accident

82

81

48

65

 

 

 

Penrith Crime Statistics – October and November 2010

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

St Marys Local Area Command Crime Statistics

 

November 2010 – February 2011

 

Crime Category

Nov

Dec

Jan

Feb

Assault

124

102

131

115

Robbery

3

5

7

8

Break & Enter

46

48

72

50

Stealing

129

89

91

127

Steal Motor Vehicle

34

31

46

21

Malicious Damage

115

109

141

88

Drug Detection

29

25

21

16

Traffic Offences

804

756

593

609

Motor Vehicle Accident

49

64

58

73

 

 

 

St Marys Crime Statistics – October and November 2010

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

B) What’s in the Media?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

GENERAL BUSINESS

 

GB 1 St Marys Police Mobile Command Bus

Ray Filewood advised that St Marys Police now have a new mobile command bus similar to the bus utilised by Penrith Police.

GB 2 White Ribbon Ambassador  - Domestic Violence Awareness Initiative

After attending a breakfast hosted by Parliament House Sydney, Councillor Karen McKeown advised that Penrith Panthers players Luke Lewis and Petro Civoniceva are both now White Ribbon Day Ambassadors.

 

Penrith Panthers Rugby League team have also adopted white jerseys for the season. For every white jersey that is sold, $10 will be donated to the White Ribbon foundation raising awareness about the issue of domestic violence.

 

GB3 Review of Community Safety grant funding received.

David Burns advised the Partnership that since the commencement of the Community Safety Service in 2000, the value in grant funding sought and received predominately from state and federal funding bodies is approximately $950,000.

 

There being no further business the Chairperson declared the meeting closed the time being 8.15pm.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That the recommendations contained in the Report and Recommendations of the Penrith Valley Community Safety Partnership meeting held on 30 March, 2011 be adopted.

 

 

  


DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS

 

Item                                                                                                                                                Page

 

 

A Leading City

 

1        Annual GST Compliance Certificate

 

2        Council Property - Dedication as Road - Volume 855 Folio 183, Lot 6-10 DP 234163, The Northern Road, Cranebrook

 

3        Council Property - Electricity Easements over Public Reserve - Lot 1150 DP 259016, Pasturegate Avenue, Werrington Downs

 

4        Transfer of Land from Landcom to Council - Lot 101 DP 700213, No. 2b Brookfield Avenue, Werrington Downs

 

A City of Opportunities

 

5        Tender Reference 12-10/11, Provision of Supply and Delivery of Child Care Food Services

 

6        Development Application DA10/1240 existing awning at Lot 235 DP 815531 (No. 8) Mulloo Place, Cranebrook. Applicant: Anthony Farrugia;  Owner: Anthony Farrugia

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

 

A Green City

 

7        Tender for the Design & Risk Assessment Consultancy Service for the Penrith Recycled Water Project

 

8        Management of Gipps Street Reserve Lot 2 DP81099 (No. 34 - 102) Gipps Street, Claremont Meadows 

 

A Liveable City

 

9        The naming of a walking track at Blair Oval

 

10      Green Cover Demonstration Design Project - Successful Project Application

 

11      Pedestrian Laneways

 

A Vibrant City

 

12      The Foundation for Creative Enterprise - Nepean Creative Embroiderers Art Needlework Project

 

 


A Leading City

 

Item                                                                                                                                                Page

 

1        Annual GST Compliance Certificate

 

2        Council Property - Dedication as Road - Volume 855 Folio 183, Lot 6-10 DP 234163, The Northern Road, Cranebrook

 

3        Council Property - Electricity Easements over Public Reserve - Lot 1150 DP 259016, Pasturegate Avenue, Werrington Downs

 

4        Transfer of Land from Landcom to Council - Lot 101 DP 700213, No. 2b Brookfield Avenue, Werrington Downs

 

 



Ordinary Meeting

2 May 2011

A Leading City

 

 

 

1

Annual GST Compliance Certificate   

 

Compiled by:               Brett Richardson, Acting Financial Accountant

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

 

Objective

We demonstrate accountability, transparency and ethical conduct

Community Outcome

A Council that behaves responsibly and ethically (5)

Strategic Response

Champion accountability and transparency, and responsible and ethical behaviour (5.1)

       

 

Executive Summary

Annually, each Council is required to provide a GST Compliance Certificate to the Division of Local Government (DLG). In providing this certification Council must consider the adequacy of the internal controls and GST Management Systems that are in place to ensure compliance with the GST legislation.

 

Every second year Council commissions an external review by Council’s Auditor. For 2011, an internal review was conducted and no GST non-compliance events were identified.

 

The 2010-11 certificate covers the period 1 May 2010 to 30 April 2011, and this report recommends that the certificate be signed by the Deputy Mayor Councillor Jim Aitken OAM, Councillor Ross Fowler OAM , General Manager and Group Manager Finance / Responsible Accounting Officer and be lodged with the DLG.

Current Situation

Council’s GST compliance is continuously monitored by Council officers. The monthly Business Activity Statement (BAS) is lodged with the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) and undergoes rigorous testing and verification prior to lodgement. No instances of non-compliance have been identified by Council officers for the period covered.

 

Although not a requirement for completing the GST compliance process, Council has committed to undergo an external review by Council’s Auditor every second year.  This review further considers the adequacy of the internal controls and GST Management Systems. The review last conducted in 2010 did not find any inadequacies. The GST Management Systems have not changed since that review.

Compliance Certificate

The certificate requires Council to attest that: 

§   Voluntary GST has been paid by Penrith City Council for the period 1 May 2010 to 30 April 2011,

§   Adequate management arrangements and internal controls were in place to enable the Council to adequately account for its GST liabilities and recoup all GST input tax credits eligible to be claimed, and

§   No GST non-compliance events were identified by, or raised with, the Australian Taxation Office.

 

The due date for the lodgement of the 2011 GST Compliance Certificate with the DLG is 1 June 2011. Council officers are confident that all requirements have been met, and that it is appropriate for the certificate to be signed and forwarded to the DLG.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Annual GST Compliance Certificate be received.

2.     The Deputy Mayor Councillor Jim Aitken OAM, Councillor Ross Fowler OAM, General Manager and Group Manager - Finance / Responsible Accounting Officer sign the 2011 GST Compliance Certificate.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Meeting

2 May 2011

A Leading City

 

 

 

2

Council Property - Dedication as Road - Volume 855 Folio 183, Lot 6-10 DP 234163, The Northern Road, Cranebrook   

 

Compiled by:               Bob Anderson, Property Officer - Valuation

Authorised by:            Brian Griffiths, Property Development Manager

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 obtain Council’s concurrence to the formal dedication as Public Road of the residue in Certificate of Title Volume 855 Folio 183.  Council is the owner of this land which is a residue comprising road that has never been formally dedicated.

 

The land had been identified in a road widening plan as Lots 6-10 DP 234163 containing a total area of approximately 379 square metres but had not been formally dedicated or vested as public road.

 

The Lots 1-5 DP 234163, being the remainder of Lots 55-59, were included in an adjoining residential subdivision DP 260272 with part included in residential lots and part dedicated as further road widening as a buffer strip between the residential lots and The Northern Road.

 

The subject land is located within the existing road reserve for The Northern Road, as shown on the attached plan.

 

The report recommends the dedication of the residue in Volume 855 Folio 183 as public road by notice in the Government Gazette.

 

Background

 In approximately June 1885, a subdivision of land which now forms part of Cranebrook was registered as DP 1613.  In 1978 Council became the registered proprietor of Certificate of Title Volume 855 Folio 183, being Lots 55-59 Section Ten DP 1613.

 

A road realignment plan in accordance with the Main Roads Act 1924 had been registered as DP 234163 in 1968 that included Lots 55-59 and delineated Lots 6-10 DP 234163 for road widening from Lots 55-59 but they were specifically excluded from the realignment.

 

After acquisition of Lots 55-59, Lots 1-5 DP 234163 were subsequently included in a re-subdivision of the land in DP 1613 and new titles were issued.  Volume 855 Folio 183 was cancelled except for the road.

 

The residue in Volume 855 Folio 183 comprises road, however it has never been formally dedicated as public road.

 

Current Situation

The land being residue in title, Certificate of Title Volume 855 Folio 183, being further identified as Lots 6-10 DP 234163 is totally located within the road reserve for The Northern Road.

 

As part of the development of Jordan Springs, The Northern Road is being widened to dual carriageway.  This construction will include the land in Certificate of Title Volume 855 Folio 183.

 

All other parts of the road reserve for The Northern Road in this area have been either formally dedicated or vested as public road.

 

Whilst the land delineated as Lots 6-10 DP 234163 being the residue in Certificate of Title Volume 855 Folio 183 is held as road, it needs to be formally dedicated as public road.

 

Under Section 10 of the Roads Act 1993 Council may, by notice published in the Gazette, dedicate any land held by it as a public road.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Council Property - Dedication as Road - Volume 855 Folio 183, Lot 6-10 DP 234163, The Northern Road, Cranebrook be received.

2.     Lots 6-10 DP 234163, being the residue in Volume 855 Folio 183 be formally dedicated as public road by notice in the Government Gazette under Section 10 of the Roads Act 1993.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1.  

Council Property - Dedication as Road - Volume 855 Folio 183, Lot 6 DP 234163, The Northern Road, Cranebrook

1 Page

Appendix

  


Ordinary Meeting

2 May 2011

Appendix 1 - Council Property - Dedication as Road - Volume 855 Folio 183, Lot 6 DP 234163, The Northern Road, Cranebrook

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

2 May 2011

A Leading City

 

 

 

3

Council Property - Electricity Easements over Public Reserve - Lot 1150 DP 259016, Pasturegate Avenue, Werrington Downs   

 

Compiled by:               Bob Anderson, Property Officer - Valuation

Authorised by:            Brian Griffiths, Property Development Manager

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 obtain Council’s concurrence to the granting of easements for electricity purposes to Integral Energy in conjunction with the provision of upgraded services within Cambridge Gardens/Werrington Downs.

 

Council owns Lot 1150 DP 259016 that is a dedicated public reserve incorporating drainage pipes and an open drainage swale.

 

Integral Energy needs to install a new padmount substation to upgrade electricity services in the area of Huntington Parade/Pasturegate Avenue.  Several alternative locations were investigated however the proposed site is the optimum position to resolve the electricity supply problem.

 

The report recommends Council grant Integral Energy easements for a Padmount Substation and associated underground cable together with the acceptance of compensation in the amount of $6,050 plus GST.

 

Background

Council is the owner of Lot 1150 DP 259016 Pasturegate Avenue, Werrington Downs that is dedicated public reserve containing approximately 1.564 hectares plus adjoining land that incorporates an open drainage swale from drainage pipes under Pasturegate Avenue.

 

Integral Energy needs to upgrade electricity supplies within the residential area of Huntington Parade/Pasturegate Avenue with the proposed installation of an additional padmount substation with underground connecting cables.

 

Current Situation

Integral Energy proposes to install a new padmount substation with connecting cable within the Public Reserve owned by Council.  An Easement for Padmount Substation 2.7 x 5.5 metres is required to protect the works as indicated on the attached plan.

 

Integral has proposed to locate the padmount substation at the southern end of the public reserve at Pasturegate Avenue as it is the optimum position to resolve the electricity supply problem.

 

The location of the padmount substation has been determined by Integral in conjunction with Council’s City Parks Department.  Environmental considerations were addressed in determining the locations, particularly with respect to Council drainage facilities, existing trees and the residential dwellings near the site plus future access to the site.  The easement is a minimum of 3 metres from the rear boundary of the closest residence.

 

Consultation letters were delivered by Integral Energy to adjoining residents on 26 November, 2010.  Integral has not advised of any replies.

 

Council notification letters with the proposed location were sent on 6 January, 2011 to the owners adjacent to the proposed site with no enquiries or replies being received.

 

Council’s land is classified as “Community” land under the Local Government Act 1993 and the easements will have little detrimental effect on the use as public reserves.

 

Compensation has been offered by Integral Energy in the amount of $6,050 (excluding GST) which is a 10% increase on the previously agreed amount based on valuations by an independent valuer of similar sites in other local government areas.  The increased amount is considered to be fair and reasonable.

 

Integral Energy will be responsible for all reasonable costs associated with the creation of the easement such as survey and legal expenses.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Council Property - Electricity Easements over Public Reserve - Lot 1150 DP 259016, Pasturegate Avenue, Werrington Downs be received.

2.     Council grant Integral Energy an Easement for Padmount Substation 2.75 x 5.5 metres over Lot 1150 DP 259016 Pasturegate Avenue, Werrington Downs.

3.     Council accept the compensation in the amount of $6,050 plus GST for the easement.

4.     Integral Energy bear all reasonable costs associated with the granting of the easements.

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

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1.  

Council Property - Electricity Easements over Public Reserve Lot 1150 DP 259016, Pasturegate Avenue, Werrington Downs

1 Page

Appendix

  


Ordinary Meeting

2 May 2011

Appendix 1 - Council Property - Electricity Easements over Public Reserve Lot 1150 DP 259016, Pasturegate Avenue, Werrington Downs

 

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

2 May 2011

A Leading City

 

 

 

4

Transfer of Land from Landcom to Council - Lot 101 DP 700213, No. 2b Brookfield Avenue, Werrington Downs   

 

Compiled by:               Bob Anderson, Property Officer - Valuation

Authorised by:            Brian Griffiths, Property Development Manager

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 obtain Council’s concurrence to the transfer of land at 2b Brookfield Avenue, Werrington Downs from Landcom to Penrith City Council for Open Space purposes.

 

Landcom is the owner of the property, Lot 101 DP 700213 at No. 2b Brookfield Avenue, Werrington Downs which is zoned 2(b) under LEP 1998 (Urban Land).  The land contains approximately 4,000 square metres and is surrounded by Council owned open space.

 

Several years ago this residential land was going to be placed on the market however, due to representations by local residents and Council, the land has now been offered to Council for use as open space at the cost of $5,886 being the reimbursement of rates paid since 2002.

 

The report recommends that Council accept the transfer of the land from Landcom for use as open space at a cost of $5,886 and be classified as “community” land.

 

Background

The property known as 2b Brookfield Avenue, Werrington Downs (Lot 101 DP 700213) is owned by Landcom.  The property is surrounded by Council owned Open Space.  It is a residue allotment left over from the original subdivision and development of the area.  A plan of the site is attached.

 

The land is currently zoned 2(b) Residential (Low Density) under LEP 1998 (Urban Land).  Under this LEP and zone, the land has a potential for subdivision into five residential allotments.  Those allotments could be developed with single dwellings or dual occupancies.

 

In approximately 2002, Council constructed a basketball half court on the open space that also encroached onto the Landcom land.

 

In 2005, Landcom approached Council and offered to sell the property to Council at market value.  They indicated that if Council was not interested in purchasing the site, then it would be sold on the open market.

 

At its meeting of 10 October, 2005 Council received a report relating to Landcom’s offer to Council.  The report outlined that there were other higher priority needs for the community and recommended against the allocation of funds from either the Property Development Reserve or Section 94 for purchase of the property.

 

Council advised Landcom that it did not intend to take up the offer.  The basketball half court was removed.

 

Landcom manages its property portfolio in a commercial manner and so, in light of Council’s decision, moved to sell the land.  This included fencing it which forecast to the community its intention.  This brought considerable opposition to the sale from within the community immediately surrounding the site.

 

Council officers continued negotiations with Landcom. This had culminated in Landcom agreeing to enter into a Planning Agreement with Council.  This Agreement provided for the Brookfield Avenue land to be transferred to Council if its value was recovered by rezoning and value uplift of one of Landcom’s other properties in the City.  Significantly, the Agreement specifically provided that the value uplift would only eventuate if proper planning analysis supported the rezoning.

 

The property proposed for rezoning in the Planning Agreement was described as Lot 2, DP 771656.  This is located at the south-eastern corner of the Great Western Highway and Gipps Street, Claremont Meadows. 

 

At its meeting of 26 March, 2007 Council received a report outlining the proposed planning agreement and resolved to enter into the planning agreement with Landcom that dealt with Lot 101 being transferred to Council and the future of Great Western Highway/Gipps Street, Claremont Meadows land being considered for rezoning.

 

The Agreement proposed that Landcom transfer ownership of the Brookfield Avenue property to Council.  The Agreement allowed for Landcom to then bring forward to Council an application for rezoning of the Claremont Meadows property to a business related zoning.  The advancement of such a rezoning application was opportune, as it could be dealt with in conjunction with the consolidation of the City’s planning controls which is now occurring in developing the Local Plan.  This is the vehicle by which outdated planning controls, applying to lands such as Landcom’s Claremont Meadows site are being updated.  Stage One of the new LEP was adopted and commenced in late 2010.

 

Whilst Council and Landcom had agreed on the terms of the planning agreement, the actual agreement was never executed as the proposed rezoning has since been included in the normal processes of consolidating Council’s planning controls.  The proposed rezoning of Landcom’s land at Claremont Meadows is included in Stage Two of the new LEP that is proposed to go to community consultation by the end of the year.

 

Current Situation

Advice has been received that the Landcom Board has resolved to transfer Lot 101 Brookfield Avenue, Werrington Downs to Penrith City Council.

 

The offer is subject to the land’s exclusive use as a public reserve and Council reimbursing the rates Landcom has paid since the construction of a playing court encroaching on Lot 101 in about 2002. These rates total some $5,886 since 2002.

 

Landcom proposes to structure the transaction by way of a Contract of Sale of Land with special conditions relating to the use of the land and the consideration being equivalent to the rates paid.

 

The offer from Landcom to transfer the land to Council is considered to be reasonable however it is proposed that the consideration for the sale be $1 and the rates be reimbursed as a separate condition of the purchase.

 

Funding for the acquisition of the land, including the reimbursement of the rates, is to be provided from the Property Development Reserve.

 

As the land is to be used exclusively as public reserve it is appropriate that the land be classified as “community” land under the Local Government Act 1993.

 

Summary

Lot 101 DP 700213 be transferred to Council for use as Open Space for the consideration of $1 plus the reimbursement of rates in the amount of $5,886.

 

Landcom’s offer is generous and greatly appreciated.  It was their prerogative to have sold it at market value.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Transfer of Land from Landcom to Council - Lot 101 DP 700213, No. 2b Brookfield Avenue, Werrington Downs be received.

2.     Council accept the transfer of Lot 101 DP 700213 from Landcom for Open Space on the terms outlined in the summary.

3.     The land be classified as “community” land.

4.     A letter of appreciation be forwarded to the Chairman of Landcom conveying his appreciation for their offer to transfer this land to the community at minimum cost.

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

 

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1.  

Transfer of Land from Landcom to Council - Lot 101 DP 700213, No. 2b Brookfield Avenue, Werrington Downs

1 Page

Appendix

  


Ordinary Meeting

2 May 2011

Appendix 1 - Transfer of Land from Landcom to Council - Lot 101 DP 700213, No. 2b Brookfield Avenue, Werrington Downs

 

 

 

 

 


A City of Opportunities

 

Item                                                                                                                                                Page

 

5        Tender Reference 12-10/11, Provision of Supply and Delivery of Child Care Food Services

 

6        Development Application DA10/1240 existing awning at Lot 235 DP 815531 (No. 8) Mulloo Place, Cranebrook. Applicant: Anthony Farrugia;  Owner: Anthony Farrugia

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

 

 



Ordinary Meeting

2 May 2011

A City of Opportunities

 

 

 

5

Tender Reference 12-10/11, Provision of Supply and Delivery of Child Care Food Services   

 

Compiled by:               Jade Bradbury, Children's Services Business Co-ordinator

Laura Schuil, Supply Officer - Contracts

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

 

Objective

We have access to what we need

Community Outcome

A City with equitable access to services and facilities (7)

Strategic Response

Base the provision of services and facilities on principles of social justice and equity (7.1)

       

 

Executive Summary

A tender for the provision for supplying food services for child care on the basis of a “Standing Offer” contract on an “as required” basis, was advertised on 26 November 2010 and closed on 21 December 2010.

This report advises Council of the outcome of the tender process and recommends that the tender from ABCOE not be accepted and the tender process be discontinued.  The tender submission showed no benefit to Council based on the price and non price information provided over the current service and therefore offers no value for money.

After consideration of the tender received it is recommended that Council research how value for money can be obtained and invite fresh tenders at a later stage. It is considered that this approach is the most advantageous outcome for Council.

Background

The Council’s child care centres do not currently have a central provider for a range of products, and it was considered appropriate to test the market to see whether economies of scale could be achieved through a bulk tender, instead of the current arrangement where purchases are made by individual centres.

 

Tenders were advertised in the Sydney Morning Herald on 30 November 2010, the Western Weekender and the e-Tendering website on 26 November 2010 for the Provision of supplying food services for child care centres for a period of two (2) years, with an option to extend for a further one (1) year period and closed on 21 December 2010.

It was proposed in the tender documents that Council would select one approved primary contractor and up to a further two secondary approved contractors to perform the services.

The highest ranked supplier (preferred contractor) would be given first preference to carry out the works. In the event that they are unavailable or do not have the capacity to perform the work the second ranked supplier will be requested to complete the work, and so on.

The purpose of this request for tender was to seek suppliers with the proven ability to deliver Council’s requirements for a range of products which included but were not limited to the following:

 

·    General Groceries

·    Meat Products

·    Fruit and Vegetable Products

·    Dairy Products

·    Bakery Products

All prospective tenderers were requested to attend a pre-tender briefing on Friday 3 December 2010. This included a briefing at Council where all prospective tenderers were given every opportunity to be fully familiarised with the scope of services required at each child care centre.

The scope of work specified in the tender document included a detailed list of food products required at the child care centres. Tenderers were required to complete a price schedule setting out the unit rates for each item.

 

This tender follows the successful implementation of the contract to supply and deliver consumables to Council’s child care centres.  The includes the provision of general cleaning accessories, personal protection and first aid products, sanitary products and cleaning chemicals and equipment that commenced in early 2010. This contract has resulted in savings, based on the unit prices achieved, of approximately 11%.

 

Tender Evaluation Committee

 

The Tender Evaluation Committee consisted of Jade Bradbury, Children's Services Business Co-ordinator, Deone White, Children's Services Co-ordinator, Ben Rodwell, Acting Supply Coordinator and Laura Schuil, Acting Supply Officer.

 

Tender Evaluation Criteria

The selection criteria advertised and used in assessing the tenders were:

Scope of Requirements

·  Demonstrated ability in the supply and delivery of the specified products to multiple sites

·    Delivery times and product distribution

·    Material requirements

·    Product environmental requirements

·    Ordering methods

Cost/Price Category

·    The unit rates offered

·    Rise and fall provisions

·    Minimum order values

Management and Administration

 

·    Reporting capability

·    Industrial relations

·    Occupational Health and Safety and Public Liability Management

·    Quality assurance systems

·    Environmental management

Summary of Tenders Received

·  Only one (1) response was received to the advertised tender.

 

Evaluation of the tender received from ABCOE Distributors Pty Ltd

The tender was fully assessed against the evaluation criteria based on the written submission. The Evaluation Committee determined that the tenderer did not fully comply with all of the criteria and had not adequately demonstrated capability against all the selection criteria to a satisfactorily level.

ABCOE Distributors Pty Ltd submission did not have the depth of detail the Committee was seeking, specifically in the cost/price category and Management and administration.

Price Evaluation

Prices were requested for the supply and delivery of food services. Tenderers were requested to provide unit prices for:

General Groceries

·    Meat Products

·    Fruit and vegetable products

·    Dairy products

·    Bakery products

 

Based on the prices submitted, ABCOE submitted a higher rate than the current rate paid for by the individual centres. As a result, there appears to be no financial advantage, at this stage for the Council to accept the tender submitted by ABCOE.

 

Conclusion

This report advises Council of the outcome of the tender process and recommends that the tender from ABCOE Distributors Pty Ltd not be accepted and the tender process be discontinued.

 

The tenderer’s proposal was not considered superior to the Council’s current supply arrangement.  As a result, there is no benefit to Council in proceeding with this process. Following considerable market research it is considered that there is scope to tender specific food groups and as such it is proposed to re-tender for the provision of products to the child care centres in the near future. It is considered that this may provide a more efficient outcome with respect to the purchase of general groceries in the categories indicated in the report.

 

Tender Assessment Group (TAG)

 

The Council’s Tender Assessment Group (TAG) comprising of the Council’s Group Manager ~ Legal and Governance, Stephen Britten and the Senior Governance Officer, Glenn Schuil met to review the tender process. Further enquiries were made with the Council’s Children’s Services Coordinator on matters relating to the tender and following satisfactory responses, the TAG supports the recommendation of the Evaluation Committee.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Tender Reference 12-10/11, Provision of Supply and Delivery of Child Care Food Services be received.

2.     The tender process for the Provision of Supply and Delivery of Child Care Food Services be discontinued and that Council calls for fresh tenders as set out in this report.

 

3.     ABCOE Distributors Pty Ltd be thanked for their participation in this tender and be advised of the outcome of this process and of the Council’s intention to call for fresh tenders as set out in this report.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Meeting

2 May 2011

A City of Opportunities

 

 

 

6

Development Application DA10/1240 existing awning at Lot 235 DP 815531 (No. 8) Mulloo Place, Cranebrook  Applicant:  Anthony Farrugia;  Owner:  Anthony Farrugia    

 

Compiled by:               Matt Shahidi, Graduate Environmental Health & Building Surveyor

Authorised by:            Colin Wood, Acting 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 an existing unauthorised awning extension to an existing approved garage. The application seeks to vary the minimum rear boundary setback and landscaped area requirements of Penrith Local Environmental Plan No.1998 (Urban Land). The application has been supported by an objection under the State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 to the development standard.

 

The existing awning is attached to an approved garage and comprises two steel posts and colorbond roof. The site is located towards the end of a cul-de-sac on Mulloo Place.

 

The development is unauthorised as consent had not been sought prior to the erection of the awning or the construction of extensive paving to the rear of the site. This report seeks to regularise the unauthorised works with some modification and also recommends the issue of a penalty notice for completing development without the prior consent of Council.

 

In accordance with the reporting procedures required by the Department of Planning, the matter is forwarded to Council for determination as the variation to the rear setback and landscaping both exceed 25%. The report recommends that the development application be approved. 

Site and Surrounds

The subject site is located on the eastern side of Mulloo Place. The site has a total area of 520m² and accommodates a single storey dwelling. The subject site falls approximately 3m from the street kerb to the rear boundary. The surrounding area is characterised by a mixture of single and two storey dwellings of varying scale. The site backs onto a nature reserve.

The Existing Development

The existing developments include the following:

 

1.   Single storey brick veneer dwelling

2.   An approved garage is located 900 mm from the northern boundary and a varying width of 1.0 m to 2.1 metres to the eastern boundary.  The garage is accessed from the southern side of the site.

3.   A 3.5m x 7.0m x 3.54m awning extension has been attached to the southern side of the existing garage.  This awning consists of two steel posts and colorbond roof.

4.   Retaining walls 

 

The development application was accompanied by:

 

1.   An objection under the State Environmental Planning Policy No.1 to Clause 12 of Council’s Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Urban Land)

2.   A Statement of Environmental Effects

3.   A Site and Building Plans

Chronology of Events

This site has a history including previous unauthorised retaining walls requiring regulatory action and an approval of the rear garage which highlighted the need for certain landscape requirements. The owner of the premises has disregarded those requirements and constructed the awning and pavement in contravention of the LEP and without Council consent. A chronology of events is outlined in Appendix No. 5.

 

Planning Assessment

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 standards relating to the minimum rear setback to a non-habitable building and the minimum landscaped area requirements. The extent of the variation being sought is outlined below:

 

 

Minimum required under LEP

Proposed

Clause 12(3)

Landscaping

50% of the site

Approx 22% of the site

Clause 12(4)

Rear setback

4 metres

2.115 metres

 

The proposal is inconsistent with Clause 12(3) and (4) of the LEP due to the reduction of landscaped area and variation to the rear setback.  Variations have been supported in the form of a SEPP 1. 

 

 

 

Variation of rear setback

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(4). The relevant clause states:

 

“The council must not grant consent to development that involves the erection of a building unless:

 

(a)        that building is set back at least 6 metres from the rear boundary of the site or, in the case of a single storey building in Zone No. 2(a) at least 4 metres from the rear boundary of the site; and

(b)        the land within the rear boundary setback is used for the purposes of landscaped area only”.

 

The SEPP 1 objection specifies a rear setback which varies between 2.115m to 2.3m to the existing awning extension. The minimum rear setback required is 4 metres. This variation proposes a maximum departure of 47% from the development standard.

 

The objectives of Clause 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 to 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 purpose of the rear setback is to achieve appropriate separation between buildings for privacy and allow adequate area for landscaping purposes. The existing awning will satisfy these objectives even with a variation to the minimum rear setback and landscaped area requirements.

 

The existing awning is considered to be a minor extension to the existing garage. The rear of the allotment adjoins a road reserve as part of the Northern Road. For these reasons, no additional impact on privacy to adjoining properties will occur with the reduction in rear setback.

 

The overall height of the garage has not been increased. Screen landscaping along the Northern Road reserve behind the existing awning adequately screens the structure. Suitable distance between the awning and the rear boundary allows further plantation of screening plants which will reduce the visual impact on the Northern Road.

 

Variation of minimum landscaped area

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

 

Clause 12(3):

 

“The council must not grant consent to development that involves the erection of a building in Zone No. 2(a) unless:

 

a)   the building is wholly within the building envelope, and does not contravene the maximum external wall height or minimum landscaped area, for the zone calculated in accordance with Table 4 below:

 

Zone No.

Building envelope

specified height at

side boundary

 

Maximum external wall height

Minimum landscaped area

2(a)

 

Complies

Complies

            50%

 

The SEPP 1 objection does not specify the minimum landscaped area provided and considers the paved driveway area to be exempt development. It only specifies the reduction of landscaped area associated with the awning which equates to 21m2 which would result in a departure to the minimum development standard of 4%.

 

The paved area at the rear of the site must be considered in this assessment.  Whilst Council Officers agree the paving and driveways to the garage are exempt under the SEPP (Exempt and Complying Development Codes) 2008, the owner has paved the majority of the rear yard and this is excessive. 

 

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: 

 

“(a)     to reinforce the importance of natural landscape settings and areas with heritage conservation value;

 (b)       to protect landscapes and urban areas with identified conservation value by limiting the range of permissible uses and requiring larger residential allotments;

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

 

The existing awning and associated driveway leading to the garage are considered minor developments for the site. Even though the minimum landscaping ratio for the site has not been achieved, a driveway leading to the garage is considered necessary for the intended use of the garage.

 

The site is not identified as being in a Heritage Conservation Area.

 

The site is not identified as having conservation values.  

 

The existing awning and driveway leading to the garage do not include further non-residential uses.

 

The SEPP 1 objections are suitable and the development standard is considered unreasonable and unnecessary on the following basis:

 

1.   The existing awning and associated driveway does not hinder the attainment of the objectives of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act.

2.   The awning extension and associated driveway is reasonable development for the site.

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

4.   Minimal loss of privacy is likely to occur as there is no immediate residential allotment or structure at the rear and the adjoining properties contain similar rear setbacks.

 

The SEPP1 objection states that “development consent is not required by Council for paving and concreting of a site that is associated with paving or driveway”. In this regard the following points are made:

 

State Environmental Planning Policy (Exempt and Complying Development Codes) 2008, subdivision 14 “Driveways” part 2.27 and 2.28 state the specified development and standards relating to development for driveway as follows:

2.27   Specified development

The construction or installation of a driveway associated with access to an open hard stand space, a carport or garage is development specified for this code if it is not constructed or installed on or in, or in relation to, a heritage item or a draft heritage item in a heritage conservation area or a draft heritage conservation area or on land in a foreshore area.

2.28   Development standards

The standards specified for that development are that the development must:

(a)  be for domestic purposes only, and

(b)  be constructed so that any surface water is disposed of without causing a nuisance to    adjoining owners, and

(c)  not require cut or fill more than 600mm below or above ground level (existing), and

(d)  not be wider than the open hard stand space, carport or garage with which it is associated, and

(e)  be constructed in accordance with Australian Standard AS 2890.1—1993, Parking facilities—Off-street car parking, and

(f)  be constructed in accordance with the relevant road authority’s policy and specifications on vehicle and driveway crossings, and

(g)  have the consent of the relevant road authority under the Roads Act 1993 for each opening of a public road required for the development.

 

A preliminary water flow assessment was conducted on site by Council Officers.  This revealed water travelling from the top of the paved area is directed towards the neighbouring property boundary being No.9 Mulloo Place. As such, point “b” of above development standards is not satisfied. The removal of paved area along the side boundary and providing landscaping will minimise the flow of water towards the neighbouring property’s boundary. This will form part of the consent conditions.

 

The paved driveway leading to the garage does not comply with point “d” as the paved area is wider than the garage width. In consultation with the owner, it is proposed to remove unnecessary paved areas leading to the garage in order to ensure the driveway development complies with the exempt policy and the landscaped area of the site is maximised.

 

The removal of 36m2 of the paved area is proposed along the eastern and southern boundaries. This will result in the removal of all paving to the east of a line with the existing awning to the southern boundary and the removal of a 1.0 metre clear width along the southern property boundary with No.9 Mulloo Place. This will form part of the consent conditions and will be marked in “red” on the approved plans.

1.   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 No.3 details the relevant sections of compliance to the DCP. The development is considered to satisfy the DCP provisions. 

2.   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.

Assessment of the application against the objectives of the LEP 1998 (Urban Land) revealed that the unauthorised developments will not diminish the natural character of the area.

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

The site is suitable for the existing awning and the associated driveway is deemed necessary to gain access to the garage. Whilst there are a number of variations required for the proposed development, the proposal is considered to address and satisfy the objectives of the relevant planning documents.

 

4.   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.

 

One objection was received. The objection is related to loss of views and concerns regarding the intended use of the garage. Correspondence was forwarded to the objector outlining that the awning has minimal adverse impacts on the loss of views. 

 

Conclusion

The subject development application seeks approval to retain the unauthorised awning extension to the garage.

 

The unauthorised work complies with the objective of Penrith LEP 1998 (Urban Land) and is deemed to have minimal impact on the subject site and neighbouring properties.

 

The applicant has been served with infringement notices previously regarding unauthorised work. The applicant was made aware of the requirement to seek approval for the work. In this regard, a second infringement notice is to be issued to the owner of the premises regarding the development carried out without the prior consent of Council.

 

Similar structures do exist in the rear yard of residential areas within Penrith LGA and in the surrounding locale. Similar developments within the immediate street must be noted at the rear yards of number 5 and 16 Mulloo Place. The awning is therefore considered to be in keeping with the neighbouring setbacks and amenity of the area. The development is considered to be in keeping with the scale of neighbouring developments.

 

The development is considered satisfactory under the heads of consideration of Section 79(C) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act.

 

The minimum rear setback and minimum landscaped area variations are not likely to have significant impacts on the amenity of the locality.

 

As such, it is recommended the application be approved and the owner of the premises be issued with an infringement notice.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Development Application DA10/1240 existing awning at Lot 235 DP 815531 (No. 8) Mulloo Place, Cranebrook be received.

2.     The owner be issued with a $750.00 penalty notice for erecting the awning without development consent.

3.     The SEPP 1 objection relating to landscaped area and rear setback be approved.

4.     DA10/1240 for existing awning at 8 Mulloo Place, Cranebrook be approved subject to the following conditions:

Standard Conditions

4.1       A001 – Approved Plans

4.2       E001 – BCA Compliance

 

                  Non-Standard Condition

 

4.3      As marked in red on the approved plans, an area of 1m x 12.8m on the side boundary and 2.8m to 2m x 9.8m of paved area along the rear boundary to be removed. The area to be landscaped with native plants and vegetation.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1.  

Locality Map

1 Page

Appendix

2.  

Site Plan

1 Page

Appendix

3.  

DCP Compliance Table

1 Page

Appendix

4.  

Photo of structure

1 Page

Appendix

5.  

Chronology of Events

1 Page

Appendix

  


Ordinary Meeting

2 May 2011

Appendix 1 - Locality Map

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

2 May 2011

Appendix 2 - Site Plan

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

2 May 2011

Appendix 3 - DCP Compliance Table

 

 

 

 

 

Objective

Comment

Clause 5.2 Urban Form

 

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

 

Similar structures exists within the neighbouring locale. The awning is not visible from Mulloo place and adequately screened from the Northern Road.

 

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.

 

The area between the awning and rear boundary and the removal of 36m2 of paved area will allow for development of adequate plantation.

 

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.

Additional landscaping will form part of consent’s conditions to provide adequate plants along the side and rear boundary. No significant vegetation exists onsite. Reasonable separation between the neighbouring dwellings has been preserved.

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 measure to protect that conservation significance or character.

 

In this regard, no significant landscapes exists onsite.  

6.3 Building Design

The objective is that 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.

 

In this regard, the removal of paved area will allow private gardens to be provided along the rear and side boundary.

 


Ordinary Meeting

2 May 2011

Appendix 4 - Photo of structure

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

2 May 2011

Appendix 5 - Chronology of Events

 

 

 

Chronology of Events

 

08/01/2010      A development application (DA10/0013) was lodged for an 81.2m2 garage at the rear of the property.

 

14/01/2010      During a site inspection of the premises Council officers noticed unauthorised development at the rear of the property. This unauthorised development comprised retaining walls.

 

29/01/2010      As a result an infringement notice of $750 was issued regarding the unauthorised retaining walls.

 

29/01/2010      Council’s assessing officer requested the development to be reduced due to concerns about the excessive size of the garage and potential impacts on the adjoining properties.

 

26/02/2010      The proposed development was amended to a 49m2 garage and consent was granted.

 

04/08/2010      Council assessing officer carried out a final inspection of the development and noted it complied with the DA consent and the Construction Certificate.

 

04/08/2010      Council officer issued an Occupation Certificate for the garage.

 

10/10/2010      Council received a complaint regarding the unauthorised work.

 

30/10/2010      Council officer inspected the premises and noted the construction of a 7m x 3m awning attached to the rear garage. The awning is 3.5m high. Council officer also noted the rear yard had been concreted.

 

16/11/2011      A Notice of Intention to Serve and Order was issued by Council directing the owner of the premises to demolish the structure and restore the land to its original condition.

 

30/11/2011      A development application was lodged to seek approval for the existing awning. 

 

17/12/2010      A stop the clock letter was sent to the owner advising of the non-compliance issues with landscaping and rear setbacks with Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Urban Lands).

 

10/01/2011      Council received a letter from the owner justifying the reasons for non-compliance with the LEP’s requirements.

 

31/01/2011      Council officers sent the owner a letter requesting a formal submission under the State Environmental Planning Policy No.1.

 

15/02/2010      The owner lodged a State Environmental Planning Policy No.1 Objection.

 


 

 

 

 

THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT BLANK  INTENTIONALLY


A Green City

 

Item                                                                                                                                                Page

 

7        Tender for the Design & Risk Assessment Consultancy Service for the Penrith Recycled Water Project

 

8        Management of Gipps Street Reserve Lot 2 DP81099 (No. 34 - 102) Gipps Street, Claremont Meadows 

 

 



Ordinary Meeting

2 May 2011

A Green City

 

 

 

7

Tender for the Design & Risk Assessment Consultancy Service for the Penrith Recycled Water Project   

 

Compiled by:               Ari Fernando, Major Projects & Design Co-ordinator

Authorised by:            Wayne Mitchell, Group Manager - City Infrastructure

Craig Ross, Major Projects 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

Council has formally entered into an agreement with the Australian Government, represented by and acting through the Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities for grant funding to undertake the detailed design and risk assessments and possible implementation for the Penrith Recycled Water Project.  The formal agreement was signed with the Department in late February 2011 and allocated funding for design and risk assessment.  The project construction stage is subject to the satisfactory outcome of the concept design and risk assessment and approval to proceed.

 

Council Officers have now called for public tenders to undertake the concept design, risk assessment and detailed design for the Penrith Recycled Water Project.

 

Three conforming tenders were received from following design consultants;

 

GHD Pty Ltd

SMEC Australia Pty Ltd

NSW Public Works –NSW Water Solutions

 

A non-conforming tender was received from Henry & Hyme Consulting Engineers Pty Ltd via email.

 

This report provides an assessment of the design tender submissions received and recommends that a contract be awarded to the NSW Public Works (NSW Water Solutions).

 

Background

In August 2008 Senator, The Hon Penny Wong, Minister for Climate Change and Water, advised Council of the Australian Government’s commitment to provide funding of up to $2.7 million for the proposed Penrith Recycled Water Scheme under the “Water for the Future – National Water Security Plan for Cities and Towns”.


 

Previous reports have been provided to Council regarding the grant and the proposed Penrith Recycled Water Scheme at Ordinary Meetings on 12 October 2009, 19 April 2010 and 19 July 2010.  Details were also provided regarding negotiations with Sydney Water, potential customers and the need to undertake further detailed design, costing and risk assessments prior to finalising the funding agreement for the implementation of the scheme.

 

The resolution from the meeting on 19 April 2010 included that Council formally request the former Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (DEWHA) and now the Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities to structure the grant and funding agreement to allow a first stage allocation of $250,000 to undertake the detailed design and risk assessments. 

 

The progression of a detailed design, costing and risk assessment is considered essential as a next step to ensure the project 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.  Accordingly, a clause within the grant funding agreement has also been requested where progression of the project is subject to costs being confirmed within the grant allocation of $2.7 million and a satisfactory risk assessment being achieved.

 

The formal agreement was signed with the Department in late February 2011 and the allocated funding for design and risk assessment is now $225,000.

Current Status

The project construction stage is subject to the satisfactory outcome of the concept design and risk assessment stage to the satisfaction of the Department.  A milestone budget of $2,475,000 is provided in the signed agreement for this stage and will require a further resolution of Council to continue. Construction of the pipeline will be subject to a further public tender.

 

Public Tenders have been called to undertake the concept design, risk assessment and detailed design for the Penrith Recycled Water Project.  The tenders were called to comply with the National Code of Practice for the Construction Industry (Code) and compliance with the Australian Government Implementation Guidelines for the Code, which are prerequisites to the funding agreement.

 

To speed up the process of investigation, Council engaged soil assessment consultants to identify surface and ground water conditions and assess the suitability of irrigation, benefit and risks from the long term use of recycled water for the identified potential Council owned fields.  This report is now completed and is available for the design consultant’s risk assessment.

 

The Request for Tender (RFT 18-10/11) was advertised in the Western Weekender (Council Page & Mayoral Message) on 25 March 2011 and 1 April 2011 and in the Sydney Morning Herald on 29 March 2011 and 5 April 2011.  The Tender was also placed on the e-Tendering web site and the tender closed at 10.00 am on Tuesday, 20 April 2011.

 

Prospective design and risk assessment consultants were required to submit tender submissions on a standard pro-forma sheet, which clearly identified the required response against each of the evaluation criteria.

 

Tender Evaluation

A Tender Evaluation Panel was formed to evaluate the submissions against the established selection criteria.

 

The Tender Evaluation Panel consisted of the following personnel: Craig Ross (Major Projects Manager), Ari Fernando (Major Projects & Design Coordinator), and Kumar Kumareswaran (Senior Design Engineer).  Ben Rodwell (Acting Supply Coordinator) provided administrative assistance as well as overseeing the evaluation process.

Evaluation Process

The process of evaluating all valid responses included the following;

 

·    Compliance with the pro-forma submission requirements

·    Capability assessment based on the tender evaluation criteria

·    Risk assessment including referee checks & check on insurance policies of design consultants

Evaluation Criteria

Prior to the advertising of the tender, evaluation criteria and weighting were established by the Tender Evaluation Panel.  The criteria considered relevant to the selection process and specified in the RFT document included:

 

·    List of similar projects completed satisfactorily within the last 10 years,

·    Current commitment on design and risk assessment projects,

·    Experience and competency of the persons nominated by the main consultant for the project,

·    Experience and competency of the persons nominated as sub- consultant for the project,

·    Details of the Insurance Policies,

·    Provision of detailed project program,

·    Tender pricing for each stage of activity

·    Methodology proposed by the consultants

·    Compliance commitment to Sydney Water requirements for investigation of existing Sydney Water assets

 

As part of the project proposal it was proposed to consider utilising an existing disused 225mm cast iron sewer pipe for either carrying treated water from the Sewerage Treatment Plant of Sydney Water to the southern side of the Railway line or to consider inserting an additional 150 mm pipe to minimise the cost of construction of the project.  This option may eliminate the need for Railcorp approval to excavate under the rail crossing for pipe installation.  Should this be the option to be considered, it is intended that the ownership of this existing pipeline be transferred to Penrith City Council.  To this end, Sydney Water requires Council to enter into an agreement before the CCTV investigations are commenced.

 

However, if this 225 mm pipe cannot be utilised, a new reticulation pipe will need to be considered and the consultants were required to consider this option as part their submissions.

 

Summary of Responses Received

The design consultants were invited to submit tender prices for each stage of work including the prices from sub-consultants on a Fixed Lump Sum price for:

 

·    Site investigation, preliminary concept plan & risk assessment

·    Detailed Design, Review of Environmental Factors and Construction Specifications

·    Construction stage support and supervision (but not to act as Superintendent)

 

Three submissions were received from the following design consultants (excluding GST):

 

Main Design Consultant

 

Fixed Lump Sum

Design & Risk Assessment Stage

Fee for

Construction Stage

 

Concept & Risk Assessment

Detailed Design, REF & Tender Document

Sub-Total

GHD Pty Ltd

$92,000

$160,000

$252,000

$8,000

SMEC Australia Pty Ltd

$87,028

$133,909

$220,937

$6,422

NSW Public Works

$44,706

$112,486

$157,192

$4,605

 

As part of the Risk Assessment, an investigation of the disused 225 mm sewer pipe will be undertaken.  If it is found to be in a condition to be reused, the following reduced prices were provided by two of the design consultants as the scope would be reduced;

 

Main Design Consultant

 

Fixed Lump Sum

Design  & Risk Assessment Stage

Fee for

Construction Stage

 

Concept & Risk Assessment

Detailed Design, REF & Tender Document

Sub-Total

SMEC Australia Pty Ltd

$87,028

$98,399

$185,427

$6,422

NSW Public Works

$44,706

$86,614

$131,320

$4,605

 

A further tender price was received from Henry & Hyme Consulting Engineers Pty Ltd via email.

Evaluation of Tender Responses

The tenders from GHD, SMEC and Public Works were submitted before tender closing time of 10.00am on 20 April 2011 and provided the required tender submission documents appropriately completed and evidence provided as requested.

 

The tender documents specifically noted that emailed tenders will not be accepted.  The design tender price received from Henry & Hyme Consulting Engineers Pty Ltd via email did not comply with this requirement and was also not received before the tender closing time.  As such, it was non-conforming and not considered for assessment.

 

NSW Public Works

 

The NSW Public Works is an Engineering and Project Management focused office within the newly formed NSW Department of Finance & Services.

 

The tender response from the NSW Public Works addressed all submission criteria and provided satisfactory evidence of similar project completed.

 

The NSW Public Works has offered the lowest price for design and risk assessment, either by using the existing disused 225 mm pipe ($131,320) or for a new pipe design ($157,192).

 

They have completed investigations and conceptual design for Ballina & Lennox Head Recycled Water Scheme ($11M), and Young Shire Reclaimed Water Scheme ($7.5M) and are currently undertaking the design and documentation of Balling Recycled Water Distribution and Storage System.

 

During the course of the evaluation, references were checked with Ballina Shire Council and Lachlan Shire Council and they both confirmed satisfactory design performance of this consultant.

 

SMEC Australia Pty Ltd

 

This company has offered the second lowest bid for the design and risk assessment, either by using the existing disused 225 mm pipe ($185,427) or for a new pipe design ($220,937).

 

This company had a number of similar projects completed to their credit. The pricing provided exceeds the available budget.

 

GHD Pty Ltd

 

This company’s price is the highest price of all three submissions and they did not offer a reduced cost, should the existing disused 225 mm cast iron pipe be utilised.

 

GHD Pty Ltd undertook the initial feasibility study in October 2009, and the estimated design cost at the time was in the vicinity of $210,000.  Their submitted tender price is well over this estimation.

 

This company had also completed a number of similar projects. The pricing provided exceeds the available budget.

 

Financial Services Manager’s Comments

The design and risk assessment of the Recycled Water Project will be funded through a Federal Government grant.

 

The submitted design tender price by The NSW Public Works for design and risk assessment, excluding construction stage support service is $157,192.  To date Council’s current expenditure for investigation and soil assessment is $26,000 and the remaining works for this element of the project, the design and risk assessment, are proposed to be completed by this tender.  The tender price by The NSW Public Works is within the available budget.

 

Tender Assessment Group (TAG)

The Council’s Tender Assessment Group comprising of the Group Manager Legal and Governance, Stephen Britten and the Senior Governance Officer, Glenn Schuil met to discuss the proposed tender for the design and risk assessment consultancy services for the Penrith Recycled Water Project.

After reviewing the report and the recommendations, the TAG are of the view that the findings and recommendations made by the Tender Evaluation Panel are fair and the recommended tenderer is a good outcome for the Council as it is the lowest tender submitted.

To ensure the integrity of the recommended tenderer is maintained, it is important that all prospective tenderers follow guidelines for submitting electronic tenders and Council will be legally unable to consider the tender submitted by Henry & Hyme Consulting Engineers Pty Ltd as it was not submitted to the electronic tender box.

Conclusion

The Tender Evaluation Panel has assessed the submissions against the evaluation criteria and consideration was also given to the information provided in the reference checks.

In view of the information provided and the assessment within the report, the Evaluation Panel considers that Council will obtain best value and a lower risk in engaging the NSW Public Works to undertake the design and risk assessment for the Recycled Water Project.  A decision on the acceptance of their optional detailed design component will be taken after the completion of the Risk Assessment.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1       The information contained in the report on Tender for the Design & Risk Assessment Consultancy Service for the Penrith Recycled Water Project be received

2       The tender be awarded to the NSW Public Works to undertake concept design and risk assessment for the amount of $ 44,706.

3       Subject to the acceptance of risk assessment report, the NSW Public Works be further engaged to undertake the detailed design and Review of Environmental Factors for the amount of up to $112,486.

4       A further report be presented to Council on completion of the concept design and risk assessment.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Meeting

2 May 2011

A Green City

 

 

 

8

Management of Gipps Street Reserve Lot 2 DP81099 (No. 34 - 102) Gipps Street, Claremont Meadows    

 

Compiled by:               Adrian Estreich, Team Leader (Environment)

Authorised by:            Anthony Price, Acting 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

Gipps Street Reserve is a 34 hectare site located at Gipps Street, Claremont Meadows. The site adjoins South Creek and is a former landfill that has been rehabilitated by Council. As part of the site rehabilitation a treatment system was constructed to collect and treat leachate from the former landfill. The system comprises underground trenches, collection wells, pumps and a series of wetland treatment cells. Council is required to manage this system to meet its environmental protection and public health obligations.

 

Works currently occurring on the site are associated with the intended future use as a sporting and recreation field. Council adopted a Masterplan for the future development of the reserve in December 2007. The Masterplan aspires to maximise the opportunities at the site for active and passive recreation.

 

This report seeks Council’s support for the allocation of funds from the Environment/Sullage Reserve and the Waste Reserve for maintenance and monitoring performance of the leachate treatment system and the final site validation and site audit.

Background

Gipps Street Reserve is a 34 hectare site located at Gipps Street, Claremont Meadows. The site adjoins South Creek and is a former landfill that has been rehabilitated by Council. Works currently occurring on the site are associated with the intended future use as a sporting and recreation field. Council adopted a Masterplan for the future development of the reserve in December 2007. The Masterplan aspires to maximise the opportunities at the site for active and passive recreation including:

 

·    Four senior sporting fields and two mini fields

·    A skate plaza

·    A universal playground

·    Amenities building

·    A loop road and parking area

·    Shared pathways and pedestrian pathways

·    Picnic areas with shade structures and managed lawn areas

 

As part of the site rehabilitation a treatment system was constructed to collect and treat leachate from the former landfill. The system comprises underground trenches, collection wells, pumps and a series of wetland treatment cells. Council is required to manage this system to meet its environmental protection and public health obligations.

 

Maintenance of the Leachate Treatment System

Most of the work at the site to date has been in relation to completing the rehabilitation and more recently preparing the site for the future sporting and recreation fields. Funds have been allocated for monitoring the performance of the leachate treatment system, although funds have not specifically been allocated for ongoing maintenance needs. A review of current and future maintenance needs has recently been undertaken and demonstrates that further funds will be required to ensure the system operates satisfactorily.

 

The maintenance needs are as follows:

 

·    Restoration of the northern treatment cells

·    Clean-up and restoration of the wetland

·    Electrical system maintenance

·    Inspection and maintenance of pumps and pumping lines

 

A number of other works are required to manage the leachate treatment system. These include:

 

·    Installation of a telemetry system to monitor the system’s performance

·    Installation of a backup irrigation system

·    Installation of security cameras

·    Construction of a small site shed

 

The estimated cost of these maintenance and management works is $147,200. It is proposed to fund this work from Council’s Environment/Sullage reserve. Works may need to be staged depending on the availability of these funds.

 

Monitoring Leachate Treatment System Performance

At present the leachate monitoring budget is $55,000 per year and is funded through the Waste Reserve. To date this budget has been used to monitor system performance and for some maintenance work. It is proposed to increase this budget to $70,000 per year to meet future performance monitoring and maintenance needs including:

 

·    Leachate sampling and reporting

·    Inspection and maintenance of infrastructure eg leachate pumps, treatment cells, pond and wetlands

·    Regular electrical checks and maintenance

·    Emergency maintenance or repairs

 

Site Audit Statement and Validation

Development Consent DA02/0256 requires that a Site Audit Statement is issued by an EPA accredited site auditor for the rehabilitation of the landfill site prior to the site being used by the public. The Site Audit Statement and report cannot be issued until the current filling work being undertaken for the sporting and recreational field ceases.

 

A site validation report must also be submitted to the site auditor to demonstrate that the land is suitable for the intended land use. The cost for undertaking the report is estimated to be $20,000.  In addition it is estimated that $20,000 is needed for Environ Pty Ltd to finalise the Site Audit Statement and Report.

 

It is proposed to allocate $40,000 from the Environment/Sullage Reserve to meet the validation and site auditor costs.

 

Financial Comments

This report proposes that the required works be funded from the Environmental/Sullage Reserve. The current predicted closing balance of the Environment/Sullage Reserve as at 30 June 2012 is $105,844.  This proposal will allocate a total of $187,200 from the Environment/Sullage Reserve to this project over 2010-11 and 2011-12, bringing the Reserve into a projected deficit position of $81,356 as at 30 June 2012. However, forward projections based on planned allocations from the Reserve indicate that it will return to a positive balance of $63,721 as at 30 June 2013. The allocation of funds from the Environment/Sullage Reserve for the management of the Gipps St Reserve falls within the parameters established for projects to be eligible for funding from the reserve.

 

The Monitoring of the Leachate Treatment System Performance ($55,000 p.a.) is funded from the Waste Reserve.  The Waste Reserve is currently predicted to have a balance of $1,826,773 as at 30 June 2012, and as such is able to fund the proposal of an additional $15,000 p.a. for annual leachate monitoring and maintenance increasing the allocation from $55,000 to $70,000 p.a. from 2011-12 onwards.

Conclusion

Ongoing maintenance and management works are required at the Gipps Street Reserve to meet Council’s environmental protection and public health obligations. These works are also essential to ensure that the sporting and recreational field development can proceed.

This report seeks the allocation of $187,200 from the Environment/Sullage Reserve for required maintenance and management works and the final site validation and site audit.  An increase of $15,000 from the Waste Reserve is also needed for ongoing monitoring and maintenance associated with the leachate treatment system.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in this report on Management of Gipps Street Reserve Lot 2 DP81099 (No. 34 - 102) Gipps Street, Claremont Meadows  be received.

2.     $187,200 be allocated from the Environment/Sullage Reserve for leachate treatment system maintenance and management works and the final site validation and site audit as detailed in this report.

3.     The annual leachate monitoring budget funded through the Waste Reserve be increased from $55,000 per year to $70,000 per year as detailed in this report.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.  


 

 

 

 

THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT BLANK  INTENTIONALLY


A Liveable City

 

Item                                                                                                                                                Page

 

9        The naming of a walking track at Blair Oval

 

10      Green Cover Demonstration Design Project - Successful Project Application

 

11      Pedestrian Laneways

 

 



Ordinary Meeting

2 May 2011

A Liveable City

 

 

 

9

The naming of a walking track at Blair Oval   

 

Compiled by:               Lyndall Ryman, Parks Secretary

Authorised by:            John Gordon, Parks Manager   

 

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

Penrith City Council received a petition from the Nepean Amateur Athletic Club asking Council to consider renaming the athletics track within the Blair Oval Sporting Complex, St Marys as the Kevin Stone Athletic Field. This request was made following the passing of Mr Stone, and in recognition of the outstanding contribution made by Mr Stone over a 38 year period to the development and support of the sport of athletics and in the development of junior athletes across the City. Mr Stone’s achievements have been previously recognised by Council through his inclusion on Council’s Wall of Achievement.

 

Investigations into this proposal were undertaken with the Geographical Names Board (GNB), who investigated the origins of the current name of the site. Blair Field was gazetted on 13 August 1976, recognising the last Mayor of St Marys (1948) before the Council was amalgamated. The name of the ground was then amended to Blair Oval on 20 June, 2003.

 

On the basis of this information, ongoing discussions have been held with Mr Stone’s family and athletic club representatives to find an alternate, appropriate site to recognise Mr Stone’s achievements. Following consideration of a number of options it was requested that “The Kevin Stone Memorial Walk” be considered by Council. This walk recognises the route (see attachment)  used by Mr Stone’s athletes for training and warm up activities and would be signified by means of a sign, garden and directional signage at the commencement of the ‘walk’ where athletes conduct stretching and warm up activities. 

 

 It is recommended that Council support the naming of an informal walking track around Blair Oval Athletics Oval, Creek Road, St Marys as “The Kevin Stone Memorial Walk”.

Background

 

Council received a petition from 103 members of the Nepean Amateur Athletic Club to name an informal walking track around Blair Oval in recognition of the contribution made to the community by Kevin Stone, who recently passed away.

 

The naming of public parks and reserves can generally be undertaken in one of two ways. The first of these is through the Geographical Names Board (GNB), who requires naming proposals to meet the following criteria:

 

·    The use of a persons name for park names should normally only be given posthumously;

·    Names of Aboriginal origin or with a historical background are preferred;

·    Council agrees to the proposed name;

·    If considered appropriate, the names of eminent persons may be perpetuated, particularly those of early explorers, settlers, naturalists.

 

The second option enables Council (by Council resolution) to endorse the name of a park or area informally and signpost the park.

 

Investigations into this proposal were undertaken with the Geographical Names Board (GNB), who investigated the origins of the current name of the site. Blair Field was gazetted in on 13 August 1976, recognising the last mayor of St Marys (1948) before the Council was amalgamated. The name of the ground was then amended to Blair Oval on 20 June, 2003.

 

The GNB advised that it was unlikely to support a name change given the history associated with the name and the original gazettal process. It was suggested that a building or other component of the site could be named in his honour.

 

On the basis of this information, ongoing discussions have been held with Mr Stone’s family and athletic club representatives to find an alternate, appropriate site. Following consideration of a number of options it was requested that “The Kevin Stone Memorial Walk” be considered by Council. This walk recognises the route (see attachment) use by Mr Stones athletes for training and warm up activities and would be signified by means of a sign, garden and directional signage at the commencement of the ‘walk’ where athletes conduct stretching and warm up activities. 

 

Proposed Name

 

Mr Kevin Stone was a long term St Marys resident, associated with the Nepean District Athletics Club for over thirty years. He dedicated approximately 38 years of his life towards the nurturing and development of junior athletics from across NSW in his role as a coach.

 

Mr Stone was a life member and integral part of the Nepean Athletic Club. He held numerous positions on various committees such as President and Championships Officer. He coached young athletes in race walking, long and middle distance running. Kevin’s passion for race walking was sparked by his son’s involvement – Tim & Clark, who still hold records in walking.

 

At Blair Oval on any given day Kevin could be spotted there, rain, hail or shine with his stopwatch in hand doing what he did best and loved most. Kevin helped many children achieve their dreams through his commitment and perseverance to athletics coaching. Kevin had coached thousand of athletes and believed in them all.

 

Mr Stone’s achievements throughout his career included:

 

·    Australian Sports Medal to recognise his continual involvement in developing sport and athletes in Penrith City

·    Penrith City Council Wall of Achievement for services to Sport

·    Numerous nominations for Coach of the Year

·    NSW State Coach

·    Coaching eight athletes who went on to represent Australia

 

Mr Stone was a highly respected local identity not only with the Nepean District Athletics Club but throughout the Penrith Local Government Area. The club believe that it would be a fitting tribute to Mr Stone to name the walking track where he coached so many athletes in his honour.

 

Should Council support this proposal, it is proposed to recognise Mr Stone’s achievements through the installation of a sign – outlining his achievements and link to the walk, a small garden and a directional sign. A club member, who is a commercial metal sign fabricator, has kindly offered to produce a sign to Council’s specifications at no cost. The club have indicated that they would like to arrange a dedication ceremony.

 

Conclusion

 

Given the contribution made by Kevin Stone to the local sporting community of Penrith and his timeless efforts coaching athletes at Blair Oval it is considered appropriate to name the informal walking track around Blair Oval in his honour. Extensive consultation has been undertaken with Mr Stone’s family in relation to this proposal. They are supportive of this proposal.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on The naming of a walking track at Blair Oval be received

2.     That Council endorse the naming of the informal walking track at Blair Oval “The Kevin Stone Memorial Walk”

3.     That a sign reflecting the name of the walk be installed.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1.  

Aerial - The Kevin Stone Memorial Walk

1 Page

Appendix

  


Ordinary Meeting

2 May 2011

Appendix 1 - Aerial - The Kevin Stone Memorial Walk

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

2 May 2011

A Liveable City

 

 

 

10

Green Cover Demonstration Design Project - Successful Project Application   

 

Compiled by:               John Gordon, Parks Manager

Authorised by:            John Gordon, Parks Manager  

 

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

Penrith City Council was invited to submit a number of project sites for consideration as part of the NSW Government’s Green Cover Design project. This project builds on the Green Street Program that Council supported in 2010. This project provides the successful applicants with –

 

1.   An innovative functional design for a green cover site.

2.   A case study or ‘write-up’ of the project to demonstrate how to initiate and implement green cover projects, including general principles for designing green cover for adaptation.

3.   Preliminary scoping of Phase Two which would outline the required steps to transition to the construction phase, including potential funding avenues.

 

Penrith City Council was successful with its application, with Jamison Park being selected as the project site.  An initial meeting has been held with the NSW Government’s Architects Office and a project team established comprising representatives of Council’s Sustainability Unit, Major Projects Unit and Parks Department.  

Background

The Impacts and Adaptation Section of the Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water (DECCW) were proposing to deliver a demonstration project of green cover design in a Western Sydney local government area.

 

Urban “green cover” can include bushland, private gardens, parks, greenways and corridors, street trees, and green roofs and walls. Green cover is an effective way to manage heat impacts in cities, store carbon, improve attractiveness and encourage walking and cycling. Large-scale green cover is a priority for the NSW Government, as set out in the Metropolitan Plan for Sydney 2036 (the “Metro Plan”).

 

The Metro Plan builds on existing initiatives, such as Housing NSW’s Green Street Program. This program aims to beautify public housing areas and reduce temperatures by creating shady streets. Over three years, 9,000 trees will be planted in Sydney. Penrith City Council participated in this program in 2010, with 4.1 kilometres of street trees being planted in Cranebrook.

 

Objective

 

The objective of this project is to develop a demonstration green cover project by identifying one or more sites in Western Sydney and developing designs for green cover that can potentially be implemented by the local council (with funding assistance). The project will demonstrate leading practice landscape design of green cover for managing heat in Sydney.

 

The project will demonstrate to NSW councils how to go about initiating and implementing green cover projects, including general principles for designing green cover for climate change adaptation.

 

Green cover site and design selection criteria

 

Criteria were developed by DECCW, DOP and Government Architect’s Office to assist in the selection of a site for the project. Potential sites were assessed according to how they perform against the defined selection criteria.

 

These criteria include:

 

Mandatory criteria

 

The design for the project should:

1.   contribute to the reduction to the impacts of extreme heat events

2.   be completed by 30 June 2011 (design phase, not implementation phase).

3.   align with the Department of Planning strategic planning and priorities in the Metropolitan Plan for Sydney 2036.

4.   be able to be replicated in other urban local government areas

5.   be readily able to be transitioned to the construction phase

 

Desirable criteria

 

The design should:

1.   relate to a site that is within the walking catchment (2km) of a metro plan regional city or priority urban renewal area, and in western Sydney.

2.   demonstrate how the design can be incorporated into strategic/statutory planning frameworks (eg. Development Control Plans, Local Environment Plans).

3.   be technically straightforward to deliver and visually accessible

4.   maximise co-benefits such as health benefits from reduced heat and air pollution, and amenity value.

5.   be of educational value to other local government areas

 

Steering Group

 

·    Impacts and Adaptation Section, DECCW (Project lead)

·    Department of Planning

·    Sustainability Programs Division, DECCW

·    Government Architect’s Office

·    Local Government and Shires Associations (LGSA)

·    Selected councils

 

 

Additional Stakeholders

 

·    NSW Health

·    Housing NSW

 

Expert Review

 

The Australian Institute of Landscape Architects (AILA) will act as an expert reviewer of the green cover design. The AILA Climate Change Adaptation Working Group will review the project design twice – once at the project inception stage (when a site has been selected) and once when the project design is in the final design phase.

 

Timing

 

The project would be completed by 30 June 2011.

 

Outcomes

 

The project will result in:

1.   An innovative functional design for green cover for a site in Western Sydney.

2.   A case study or ‘write-up’ of the project to demonstrate how to initiate and implement green cover projects, including general principles for designing green cover for adaptation.

3.   Preliminary scoping of Phase Two which would outline the required steps to transition to the construction phase, including potential funding avenues.

 

Current Situation

 

Councils in Western Sydney were invited to submit sites or projects that met the project criteria. A short time frame was provided to submit applications. Two sites were nominated by Penrith City Council. These were –

 

·    Jamison Park

·    Council’s Civic Centre

 

The Jamison Park proposal submitted by Penrith City Council to the DECCW Green Cover Demonstration Design project was successful.

 

Council was advised that the Jamison Park site was successful due to aligning with priorities identified in the Sydney Metropolitan Plan 2036 and as a site common to other local government areas, presenting a platform for developing general principles for green cover design that can be applied to other local government areas. The park is a site of diverse community use, presenting the opportunity for a wide range of co-benefits and is also within the regional city walking catchment.

 

 

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Green Cover Demonstration Design Project - Successful Project Application be received

2.     That the project team comprising representatives of Council’s Sustainability Unit, Major Projects Unit and Parks Department work with the Government Architects Office in the delivery of the project.

3.     That the completed design project be presented to Council at a future Policy and Review Committee meeting.  

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Meeting

2 May 2011

A Liveable City

 

 

 

11

Pedestrian Laneways   

 

Compiled by:               Allison Kyriakakis, Community Safety Co-ordinator

Authorised by:            Yvonne Perkins, Public Domain Amenity and Safety Manager   

 

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

As a community safety initiative, pedestrian laneways may be monitored across the Local Government Area to address issues of concern raised by residents in local neighbourhoods.  Three (3) laneways have been the subject of a six (6) month monitoring period following representations to Council’s Community Safety staff requesting closure of these laneways.

 

The laneways are: Peachtree Lane, Penrith; Carlyle Lane, Cambridge Gardens; and Short Lane, Emu Plains.

 

In addition to the abovementioned laneways, since the approved physical closure of Morningbird Lane, St Clair, at the Ordinary Meeting of 21 June 2010, Council Officers have received a petition from local residents requesting that the laneway be re-opened. A subsequent petition was also received requesting that the laneway remain closed. As a result, consultations were recommenced with local residents to determine levels of local support for the laneway to remain closed or be re-opened.

 

This report will outline the results of the investigations undertaken against the Assessment Procedures for Requests for Closure of Pedestrian Laneways and in the case of Morningbird Lane, requests for re-opening.

 

The report recommends that the information contained in the report on Pedestrian Laneways be received; Peachtree Lane, Penrith and Carlyle Lane, Cambridge Gardens be physically closed through the installation of suitable fencing and gates and given the initial interest shown, the option of sale to adjoining property owners be pursued; Short Lane, Emu Plains remains open and Morningbird Lane St Clair, remains physically closed.

 

Background

The Penrith Local Government Area has 327 pedestrian laneways, the majority of which provide safe and convenient access for local communities. In some laneways however, requests are received for closure, predominantly from adjacent property owners, as a result of ongoing incidents of antisocial behaviour, malicious damage and other issues impacting negatively on their property.

 

Before a laneway is considered for physical closure, residents are advised that a monitoring period is required before formally investigating a laneway for physical closure. Residents are advised to report all incidents to local Police, including malicious damage and antisocial behaviour, so that accurate data can be gathered on the nature and frequency of incidents occurring in the laneway.  Due to the high number of laneways across the Local Government Area, a monitoring period of six (6) months has been introduced.  This practice endeavours to establish whether there is a continuing antisocial behaviour/crime trend or a “one off” event. 

 

The information gathered over a six (6) month period can assist in substantiating a recommendation for the physical closure of a laneway, particularly where incidents have been substantiated by Police.  However intermittent events and perceived concerns for safety by residents who live directly next door to laneways can have a negative social impact on the well being of families. This impact is not able to be clearly demonstrated or measured like the other assessment criteria, e.g., pedestrian counts, distance to an alternative pedestrian route or reports to Police.  However this social impact identified in feedback from residents requesting closure needs to be considered in the overall assessment process.

 

In some cases where the issues relate more to noise complaints (e.g. trail bikes) investigations are conducted regarding suitability of community safety and Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) treatments to deter illegitimate activity from occurring in the laneway. This may include the placement of contemporary bollard systems to deter motorbike and trail bike access to a laneway. The new style bollards also include signage to indicate the name of the laneway and provide emergency contact details to assist residents and pedestrians to report incidents in the laneway to local Police. The new-style bollards, designed to accommodate motorised wheel chairs and prams, have now been installed in a number of pedestrian laneways. Consultation with neighbouring residents has indicated that bollards have been effective in enhancing pedestrian safety and reducing noise in local neighbourhoods.

 

Other CPTED treatments to laneways remaining open include the installation of lighting which may improve visibility for pedestrians and deter illegitimate activity such as malicious damage, antisocial behaviour and drug use by enhancing passive surveillance.  Solar lighting trials at two (2) pedestrian laneways will commence shortly.

 

Whilst measures such as bollards and lighting can be effective in minimising issues at some pedestrian laneways, other laneways continue to be the subject of ongoing representations. For these laneways, further investigations are required regarding the suitability of the laneway for the potential physical closure, in accordance with Council’s adopted procedures.

 

Assessment Procedures for request for closure of Pedestrian Laneways

The adopted procedure for assessing pedestrian laneways for physical closure involves the gathering of a significant amount of data including:

 

-     Total daytime pedestrian usage;

-     Age range of users including school age children;

-     Determination of peak usage times of the laneway;

-     Measurement of the length of detour if the laneway was to be closed;

-     Determination of the presence of an overland drainage flow path;

-     Presence of utility services, including lighting.

-     Direct consultation with adjoining property owners, including request to report all negative events to the local police;

-     Consultation with neighbourhood stakeholders including a letter to residents, to measure the level of support or otherwise for the closure of the laneway;

-     Consultation with the police to retrieve any relevant statistics concerning events associated with the laneways. 

 

Based on the results of the above assessment, the laneway can:

 

-     Be physically closed through the installation of appropriate security gates and fencing;

-     Remain open and continue to be treated with the appropriate Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) initiatives via consultation with adjoining owners, including the option of constructing low level side fences along the laneway boundary between the building frontage and property boundary;

-     Following physical closure, the option of legal closure and sale be left open and subject to initiation by adjoining property owners.

 

Laneways currently under review

As mentioned earlier in this report, an assessment has been conducted at the following three (3) pedestrian laneways to determine their suitability for physical closure:

 

-     Peachtree Lane, Penrith (linking Peachtree Road with dense vegetation and Peachtree Creek)

-     Carlyle Lane, Cambridge Gardens (linking Carlyle Crescent with open space)

-     Short Lane, Emu Plains (linking Short Street and Watt Place)

 

Council has also received a petition from local residents requesting that Morningbird Lane, St Clair (linking Snowdrift Court and Morningbird Close, St Clair) be re-opened after it was endorsed by Council for closure at the Ordinary Meeting on 21 June 2010. As a result, consultation was again undertaken with local residents to determine levels of support for the laneway to be opened or remain physically closed. A counter-petition was later received from residents requesting that the existing closure remain in place.

 

Maps showing the location of each laneway are attached to this report. Colour copies of each map have been issued to Councillors under a separate cover.

 

As mentioned earlier in this report investigations have been in progress for Carlyle Lane and Short Lane for the past six (6) months. This has required the gathering of a significant amount of data, including conducting pedestrian counts at each of the identified laneways over two (2) half-day periods; distribution of letters to local residents to determine their support or otherwise for the proposed closure of the laneway; and a request to local Police for data to ascertain the nature and frequency of incidents reported in the laneway. 

 

In the case of Peachtree Lane, which is not located in a residential location and pedestrian access to services is not a consideration, investigation procedures were limited to consultation with businesses in the locality.  

 

Investigations for each of the abovementioned laneways have now been completed and findings are outlined below.

 

1)   Peachtree Lane, Penrith

(Refer to Peachtree Lane, Penrith in Attachment 1)

 

Peachtree Lane enables pedestrian access from Peachtree Road to dense vegetation and Peachtree Creek and is located between two business premises within an industrial area.

 

A request to close this laneway was prompted by representations to Council from a business operating next door to the laneway, advising that the laneway provided an opportunity to illegally gain access to their property.  The owner has also indicated that should the laneway be closed they would be interested in purchasing the laneway.

 

The laneway is located within an industrial area and does not provide access to any key local services or transport, but rather has the potential to provide a vulnerable entry point to adjacent business properties, increasing their risk of malicious damage and break and enter offences.  

 

Given that this laneway is not located within a residential area and does not enable access to any key services or transport links, investigation procedures were limited to consultation with businesses in the locality.   This laneway is unique in that it basically provides access to an area that is inaccessible due to heavy vegetation and therefore does not serve any legitimate pedestrian purpose.

 

Letters were sent to local businesses within the area in November 2010, regarding their support or otherwise for the proposed closure of Peachtree Lane.  Comments were invited on any likely impacts on their business activities. Due to the unique nature of this laneway referred to above, a public notice was also published in the local paper in January 2011 seeking comments from local businesses and community members regarding the proposed closure.

 

No responses were received from local businesses opposing the proposed closure and two (2) telephone calls were received in support of the closure. No responses were received in response to the public notice.

 

Given the support from local businesses to have this laneway closed and the lack of opposition to the proposed closure, it is therefore recommended that Peachtree Lane be physically closed through the installation of suitable fencing and gates and in this case given the interest shown, the option of sale to adjoining property owners be pursued. 

 

Due to significant time delays experienced in past legal closures, as Council is required to seek permission from the Land and Property Management Authority (formerly known as the Department of Lands) it is proposed to physically close the laneway and should a legal closure be pursued, the gates and fences can be relocated for use elsewhere at a later date.  

 

2)   Carlyle Lane, Cambridge Gardens

(Refer to Carlyle Lane, Cambridge Gardens, in Attachment 2)

 

Carlyle Lane provides pedestrian access from Carlyle Crescent to public open space and a network of walkways behind Star Court Shopping Centre, Cambridge Gardens.  The laneway has a footpath and while it currently has older style bollards, the post and rail design installed does deter illegitimate access by trail bikes and motorbikes.

 

Representations have been received from neighbouring property owners who have reported incidents of malicious damage in the laneway and to neighbouring properties. This includes reports of egg and rock throwing, damage to fences, graffiti and other forms of vandalism.  One of the neighbouring property owners has expressed interest in purchasing the laneway.

 

A request was made to St Marys Local Area Command for Police data for Carlyle Lane and Carlyle Crescent, Cambridge Gardens, over the three (3) year period from January 2008 to December 2010. According to this data, a total of 23 incidents were reported to Police during this period for Carlyle Crescent. Of the incidents reported, five (5) were malicious damage to property (which included damage to fences neighbouring the laneway) and one (1) incident was malicious damage to a vehicle in a property next to the laneway. Other incidents were related to noise, antisocial behaviour, traffic infringements and domestic violence, although these were not related to the laneway.    

 

Letters were sent to approximately 139 properties inviting representations for their support or otherwise for the laneway to be physically closed. Only a small number of responses were received and they included two (2) written responses in support of the closure received from the neighbours on both sides of the laneway, and two (2) written responses against the closure from Grange Crescent.

 

In addition, one (1) phone call was also received by a resident in support of the closure from Carlyle Crescent.

 

Reasons for support for closure were due to ongoing incidents of malicious damage and antisocial behaviour and the impact on the properties next door to the laneway.

 

The residents opposed to the closure were from households in Grange Crescent. Reasons for opposing the closure were expressed as being due to the inconvenience caused to residents who use the laneway on a regular basis.

 

Pedestrian counts were undertaken in the laneway over two (2) half-day periods, with the first counts conducted on a Tuesday morning between 8.00am and 1.00pm and the second counts conducted on a Thursday afternoon between 1.00pm and 5.00pm. The weather was fine on both days. The pedestrian counts indicated that usage of Carlyle Lane is moderate, with twelve (12) people observed using the laneway during the morning session and eighteen (18) people observed using the laneway during the afternoon session.

 

On the day of the pedestrian counts the majority of people observed using Carlyle Lane were walking to and from the Shopping Centre. Only one person was observed walking to Grange Lane from Carlyle Lane on each day that the counts were undertaken.

 

The walking distance from the start of the laneway at Carlyle Crescent to the driveway entrance of Star Court Shopping Centre Car Park is approximately 340 metres (this includes the length of the Carlyle Lane). The alternative route to the Shopping Centre using Carlyle Crescent and the connecting footpath through the reserve (instead of using the laneway) is 325 metres, which is actually shorter than the route via the laneway. If Carlyle Lane was to be physically closed the alternative walking route to the Shopping Centre, via Carlyle Crescent, is shorter by 15 metres.

 

The walking distance from the start of the laneway at Carlyle Crescent to the end of Grange Lane at Grange Crescent is 230 metres (this includes the length of both Carlyle Lane and Grange Lane). The alternative route to Grange Lane is along Carlyle Crescent and via the connecting footpath through open space, which is a walking distance of 403 metres. If Carlyle Lane was to be physically closed the alternative route would add a further distance of 173 metres for pedestrians walking from Carlyle Crescent to Grange Crescent.  As stated above, only one person was observed using this route on each day that the counts were undertaken.

 

Although there is moderate usage of this laneway, due to the fact that the alternative route from Carlyle Crescent to the Shopping Centre is shorter than the route using the laneway, and the relatively short added distance required for the small number of pedestrians walking from Grange Crescent to Carlyle Crescent, it is recommended that Carlyle Lane, between Carlyle Crescent and open space behind the Star Court Shopping Centre, Cambridge Gardens, be physically closed using appropriate gates and fencing and given the interest shown, the option of sale to adjoining property owners be pursued. 

 

As in the case of Peachtree Lane, it is proposed to physically close the laneway and should a legal closure be pursued, the gates and fences can be relocated for use elsewhere at a later date.  

 

3)   Short Lane, Emu Plains

(Refer to Short Lane, Emu Plains, in Attachment 3)

 

Short Lane provides pedestrian access from Short Street to Watt Place, Emu Plains. The laneway has a footpath and new style bollards to deter illegitimate access by trail bikes and motorbikes. The laneway is wide and open with clear lines of sight throughout.  Pram ramps have also been installed at each end of the laneway to assist access for people with prams and the elderly.

 

Short Lane was previously considered for closure in 2004, however it was determined to remain open due to substantial use by school aged children and adults. (Total pedestrian usage over a one day count taken between 7am and 6pm was 45, including 31 school aged children). 

 

In 2008, an option was proposed to install a light at the midway point of the lane in an effort to minimise resident advised antisocial behaviour, however, adjoining residents neighbouring the lane opted against this proposal due to privacy concerns.

 

Due to recent and ongoing representations from a neighbour next door to the laneway in relation to antisocial behaviour and malicious damage (including graffiti) investigations into the suitability of this laneway for physical closure were once again commenced in 2010.

 

A request for Police data for Short Lane revealed that only one (1) event had been reported to Police in the three year period from January 2008 to December 2010 regarding disturbances in the laneway. 

 

Letters were sent to approximately 100 residents in the area inviting their support or otherwise for the proposed closure. Eight (8) responses were received, with two (2) residents in support of the closure and six (6) against. Two (2) of the residents who support the closure live in properties directly next to the laneway, one of whom made the initial request for closure.

 

Of the residents opposed to the closure, two (2) live directly next to the laneway, one (1) lives directly opposite the laneway, and three (3) live within the immediate vicinity of the laneway.

 

Support for closure was prompted by resident advice of ongoing incidents of malicious damage, theft from motor vehicle, discarded needles and syringes (although not recently), items dragged along fences setting dogs barking,  litter and antisocial behaviour (day time and night time) impacting on the properties next door to the laneway.  One resident supporting closure stated that Council has provided pedestrian pathways along Gardenia, Short and Lawson Streets that provide a “safe access route to the shopping centre and afar” and that there are no pedestrian pathways on Watt Place.

 

The residents opposed to the closure were from households in Watt Place and Short Street. Reasons for opposing the closure were expressed as being due to the fact that they used the laneways to access Dukes Oval; the inconvenience caused to residents (adults and children) who use the laneway on a regular basis including accessing Doctor’s Surgery and shops at the Lennox Centre; access to schools; longer length of walking for the elderly; one resident stated that “my carer lives in Watt Place almost opposite that end of the laneway.  Therefore the laneway is important to my well being as it is frequently used when urgency is necessary.” Feedback provided by residents in letters to Council Officers also indicated that the laneway has high use by families with children and older residents to provide access to the nearby shopping centre and community facilities.

 

Of the residents opposed to the closure, they stated that they had never experienced any antisocial behaviour in or around the laneway.

 

Pedestrian counts were undertaken in the laneway over two (2) half-day periods, with the first counts conducted on a Wednesday morning between 8.00am and 1.00pm and the second counts conducted on a Thursday afternoon between 1.00pm and 5.00pm. Weather was fine on both days. The pedestrian counts indicated that usage of Short Lane is moderate, with ten (10) people observed using the laneway during the morning session and fourteen (14) people observed using the laneway during the afternoon session.  Feedback from a resident using the laneway during the pedestrian counts indicated to Council staff that the laneway usage is often more frequent on weekends.

 

During the pedestrian counts, it was observed that the laneway was primarily used by local residents to access the nearby Centro Lennox Shopping Centre. This included older residents and parents with small children in prams.

 

The distance from the start of the laneway in Short Street to the Centro Lennox Shopping Centre via Watt Place is approximately 230 metres (including the length of Short Lane). It should be noted that there is no footpath in Watt Place.

 

Should Short Lane be physically closed, the shortest alternative route to the Shopping Centre would be via Short Street and Lawson Street which is a walking distance of 406 metres. This would add a distance of 176 metres for pedestrians walking to the Shopping Centre.

 

Given the low level of incidents reported to the police, levels of community objection against the closure, and the moderate levels of usage, it is recommended that Short Lane remain open.

 

Request to re-open Morningbird Lane, St Clair

 

(Refer to Morningbird Lane, St Clair in Attachment 4)

 

At Council’s Ordinary Meeting of 21 June 2010, it was resolved to physically close Morningbird Lane, which is located between Snowdrift Court and Morningbird Close, St Clair.

 

Gates were subsequently installed to restrict public access and since this time the laneway has remained closed.

 

The closure of Morningbird Lane followed ongoing representations by neighbouring residents regarding ongoing incidents of malicious damage, graffiti and antisocial behaviour. Investigations carried out in 2009 indicated that day time mid-week usage of the laneway was quite low and alternative routes were available within a minimal walking distance.

 

Prior to the recommendation for closure, pedestrian counts were conducted over two (2) days and showed that only three (3) people (two school aged) used the lane on the first day and two (2) people (one school aged) on the second day.   The counts also indicated an adjacent pedestrian route via the pathway connecting Starlight Place with Snowdrift Court.  62 people were observed using this adjacent route on the first day of the counts (including 32 school aged) and 73 people were observed using this route on the second day of counts (including 26 school aged). 

 

Since the closure of this laneway, a petition has been received by Council requesting that the laneway be re-opened. The petition was received on 15th December 2010 comprising thirty-one (31) signatures from twenty-one (21) households. Of those households represented, thirteen (13) were households on Morningbird Close, one (1) was from Starlight Place, two (2) were from Snowdrift Court, two (2) were from Bennett Road, one (1) was from Autumnleaf Parade, and two (2) did not reside in the Penrith LGA. None of the households represented by this petition are next door to the laneway.

 

Following receipt of this petition, consultation was recommenced to gauge levels of support for Morningbird Lane to remain closed or be re-opened. In February 2011, letters were sent to approximately fifty (50) households in the immediate vicinity of the laneway to advise them that a petition had been received by Council and to invite their individual responses on the issue.

 

A counter petition was later received requesting that the laneway remain closed. This included fourteen (14) signatures from six (6) households. Of the households represented, four (4) were on Starlight Place, one (1) was on Snowdrift Court, and one (1) was from Morningbird Close. Three (3) of these households represented by the counter petition are located directly next door to the laneway, thus representing all three houses immediately next door to the laneway.

 

One (1) individual submission was also received to support the laneway remaining closed from a household on Morningbird Close. Two (2) of the households adjoining the laneway also provided individual submissions in support of the laneway remaining closed.

 

The above findings represent mixed community attitudes towards the re-opening of Morningbird Lane. Of the households from Morningbird Close, Starlight Place and Snowdrift Court, 7 (seven) responses were in favour of the laneway remaining closed, and 14 were in favour of re-opening. Whilst there are a number of households in support of having the laneway re-opened, a number of these are not located in the immediate vicinity of the laneway, and none are located next door to the laneway. 

 

While the counter petition contains a smaller number of households opposed to the re-opening of the laneway, it included the properties directly next door to the lane that were reporting incidents of ongoing malicious damage and antisocial behaviour prior to the laneway closure. There was no Police data available for this laneway.

 

The total number of responses contained in both petitions need to be considered in conjunction with the low pedestrian usage of Morningbird Lane, three (3) on day one and two (2) on day two.  The number of signatories on the petitions are not reflective of the usage pattern of the laneway.

 

The predominate pedestrian movement in this location is via the open space between Starlight Place and Snowdrift Court (62 on day one and 73 on day two) and indicates that Morningbird Lane is not a common route for people accessing the St Clair Shopping Centre, schools and Mark Leece sporting complex. The closure of Morningbird Lane does not disadvantage people accessing these locations.

 

Given the low usage patterns and the alternative route available via Starlight Place, it is recommended that Morningbird Lane between Snowdrift Court and Morningbird Close remain physically closed.

 

New Requests for Laneway closures

Since investigations were commenced regarding the above laneways, a request has also been made for the closure of Maurice Lane, St Clair, linking Maurice Street to Francis Greenway Avenue and Chateau Crescent.

 

Representations have been made to East Ward Councillors regarding alcohol-related antisocial behaviour, trail bike use, malicious damage and graffiti.

 

This laneway has recently had new bollards installed to minimise trail bike use, and is also under investigation for the suitability of lighting treatments to enhance the safety of this laneway and minimise antisocial behaviour, particularly at night. However, in response to new requests for closure, this laneway will be monitored to determine suitability for formal investigations for physical closure.

 

Council staff will continue to monitor any new requests for closure (including Maurice Lane) on an ongoing basis and will encourage residents to report incidents to the Police so that accurate data can be obtained to determine the suitability of the laneway for closure. Council staff will also continue to assess each laneway for other suitable treatments (such as the placement of bollards and lighting in the laneway) to deter illegitimate use and minimise the adverse impact of the laneway on neighbouring properties.

 

Should sufficient evidence be gathered to support a case for closing the laneway, the adopted assessment procedures for the closure of laneways will be implemented.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Pedestrian Laneways be received

2.     Peachtree Lane, Penrith and Carlyle Lane, Cambridge Gardens be physically closed through the installation of suitable fencing and gates and given the initial interest shown, the option of sale to adjoining property owners be pursued. 

3.     Short Lane, Emu Plains remains open.

4.     Morningbird Lane St, Clair remains physically closed.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1.  

Peachtree Lane, Penrith

1 Page

Appendix

2.  

Carlyle Lane, Cambridge Gardens

1 Page

Appendix

3.  

Short Lane, Emu Plains

1 Page

Appendix

4.  

Morningbird Lane, St Clair

1 Page

Appendix

  


Ordinary Meeting

2 May 2011

Appendix 1 - Peachtree Lane, Penrith

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

2 May 2011

Appendix 2 - Carlyle Lane, Cambridge Gardens

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

2 May 2011

Appendix 3 - Short Lane, Emu Plains

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

2 May 2011

Appendix 4 - Morningbird Lane, St Clair

 

 

 

 


A Vibrant City

 

Item                                                                                                                                                Page

 

12      The Foundation for Creative Enterprise - Nepean Creative Embroiderers Art Needlework Project

 

 



Ordinary Meeting

2 May 2011

A Vibrant City

 

 

 

12

The Foundation for Creative Enterprise - Nepean Creative Embroiderers Art Needlework Project   

 

Compiled by:               Karen Harris, Senior Cultural Development Officer

Authorised by:            Erich Weller, Community and Cultural Development Manager   

 

Objective

We build on our strengths, value our heritage, celebrate our cultural diversity, and foster creativity

Community Outcome

A City with people and places that are inclusive, foster creativity, and celebrate diversity (20)

Strategic Response

Support cultural initiatives that meet local needs, and attract regional interest (20.2)

       

 

Executive Summary

The Foundation for Creative Enterprise, Inc. is a local community organisation which over many years has sponsored a number of cultural initiatives in the Penrith LGA, under the direction and leadership of Mavis Reynolds OAM.   The Foundation for Creative Enterprise was established by Mavis Reynolds OAM in 1994/95.

The Foundation for Creative Enterprise mission statement has been ‘to awaken, encourage and support the creative richness of our region’. This mission statement has achieved its aims with many creative projects contributing to the cultural life and identity of Penrith.  For example works completed by the Nepean Creative Embroiderers are installed within a number of civic spaces in Penrith City including the City Library, the Civic Centre and the Joan Sutherland Performing Arts Centre. The Foundation auspices the work of the Nepean Creative Embroiderers.

Other projects undertaken by the Foundation include eight Penrith Valley Video Festivals with Panthers, Hoyts and UWS Media as partners, the funding of 10 scholarships to graduates of Fine Arts from UWS and Werrington TAFE as well as a number of exhibitions with a range of City partners.

The Foundation for Creative Enterprise – Nepean Creative Embroiderers is currently working on their final project which will be completed and launched in late August this year. The project is titled “Birds of the Waterways” and has been designed to be installed in the Penrith Library.  The City Library has supported this cultural program by providing continuing assistance with the use of the lower level of the Library for the embroiderer’s workshops on Tuesday each week over many years.

On the completion and installation of this latest embroidery the “Birds of the Waterways”, Mavis Reynolds OAM has indicated in writing to Council that the Foundation for Creative Enterprise, Inc. will also be farewelled.

 

There is no available budget for this project.

 

This report recommends the information be received.

 

 

Background

 

Since 1995 the Foundation for Creative Enterprise – Nepean Creative Embroiderers has completed a number of works that hang in the Civic Centre, the Joan Sutherland Performing Arts Centre and Penrith City Library.

 

These major works include:

 

·    Flora and Fauna of the Cumberland Plain – hanging in Penrith City Library

·    Contributions made by women in the Penrith District over the last 200 years – in Penrith City Library

·    If these lakes could speak – in the Nepean Room, Civic Centre.

 

Other projects undertaken by the Foundation include eight Penrith Valley Video Festivals with Panthers, Hoyts and UWS Media as partners, the funding of 10 scholarships to graduates of Fine Arts from UWS and Werrington TAFE as well as a number of exhibitions with a range of City partners.

Current Situation

 

Mavis Reynolds OAM from the Foundation for Creative Enterprise and Dell White from the Nepean Creative Embroiderers Art Needlework group met with the Mayor, Cr Kevin Crameri OAM in September 2010 to speak about their current project, Birds of the Waterways and to seek financial support from Council for its completion. More recently the Deputy Mayor Cr Jim Aitken OAM has been briefed on the Birds of the Waterways project.

The work has been progressing since August 2008 and is expected to be completed in August 2011 with an official launch occurring on 30 August 2011.  The Foundation has been successful in securing Ian MacNamara from the ABC Radio program, Australia All Over, to speak at the launch.

The Embroiderers group has been meeting in the Penrith City Library on two mornings each week to complete this work.

The total estimated cost of completion of the project is $15,000. 

The $15,000 includes the following items:

 

·    Embroidery designer fee ($2,500)

·    Mistress of Embroidery fee ($2,000)

·    Framing and hanging system ($3,085.53)

·    Embroidery materials - reimbursement

·    Installation

·    Plaque and legend

·    Invitations and certificates – design and printing

·    Small gifts for Embroidery volunteers

·    Minor miscellaneous expenses

·    Launch/reception.

 

The estimated funding required is similar to the cost in completing the work “If these lakes could speak”, now installed in the Nepean Room.

The estimated volunteer hours spent by the embroiderers completing the work is valued by the Foundation at over $80,000.

 

In mid 2010 the Foundation applied for an Active Ageing Grant of $5,000 from the NSW Government to contribute towards the costs of the project.  In December 2010 Council was informed this application was unsuccessful.

 

It is also proposed that the launch of the “Birds of the Waterways” piece will provide an opportunity for Council and the City to acknowledge the contribution of Mavis Reynolds OAM and the Foundation to the cultural fabric of the City.

 

Conclusion

This will be the last of a series of embroidery artworks that the Foundation for Creative Enterprise - Nepean Creative Embroiderers has undertaken, under the leadership of Mavis Reynolds OAM.   It is expected that the launch of this project will also provide an opportunity to formally acknowledge the work that Mavis Reynolds OAM has undertaken with the Foundation on behalf of the City. 

 

The Foundation for Creative Enterprise has informed Council that after completion of this Birds of the Waterways piece, the Foundation will cease operation.  During 2010 the Foundation vacated its office/store area at Emu Plains Library. At this stage it is expected the embroiderers will continue to informally meet in the City library.

 

Financial Services Manager’s comments

 

Council considered the draft 2011-12 Operational Plan at the Ordinary meeting held 11 April 2011 and this document is currently on exhibition.  No additional capacity has been identified in the 2011-12 budget to include this project and capacity does not exist for this to be accommodated within current operational budgets.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That the information contained in the report on The Foundation for Creative Enterprise - Nepean Creative Embroiderers Art Needlework Project be received.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.  



Committee of the Whole

 

DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS

 

CONTENTS

 

Pecuniary Interests

 

Other Interests

 

Monday May 2 2011

 

Item                                                                                                                                       Page

 

1        Presence of the Public                                                                                                        1

 

2        Council Property - Lease Assignment of Shop 6 at Cranebrook Village Shopping Centre

 

3        Council Property - Lease of Shop 3, 32-52 Harris Street, North St Marys within the North St Marys Commuter Car Park

 

4        Council Property - Lease of Shop 1, 144 Henry Street, Penrith 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

2 May 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        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 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        Council Property - Lease of Shop 3, 32-52 Harris Street, North St Marys within the North St Marys Commuter Car Park

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.

 

4        Council Property - Lease of Shop 1, 144 Henry Street, Penrith 

This item has been referred to Committee of the Whole as the report refers to commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed (i) prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it; or (ii) confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council; or (iii) reveal a trade secret and discussion of the matter in open meeting would be, on balance, contrary to the public interest.


 

 

 

 

THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT BLANK  INTENTIONALLY


 

ATTACHMENT       

 

 

 


Date of Meeting: 

 

Delivery Program:       A Leading City   

 

Program:                      Corporate Finance

 

Report Title:                 2009-2010 Voted Works