Agenda of Policy Review Committee Meeting

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

Ordinary Council Meeting

7.30pm

11v

15#@

5ü

10∞

(7.00pm)

28#@

30#*

19^

(7.00pm)

21#

Policy Review Committee

7.30pm

Operational Plan Public Forum

6.00pm

Wed

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

ON MONDAY 4 APRIL 2011 AT 7:30PM

PRESENT

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

APOLOGIES

PRC 19 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ross Fowler OAM seconded Councillor Ben Goldfinch that an apology be received for Councillor Tanya Davies.

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES - Policy Review Committee Meeting - 14 March 2011

PRC 20 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Jackie Greenow that the minutes of the Policy Review Committee Meeting of 14 March 2011 be confirmed.

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

There were no declarations of interest.

DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS

A Leading City

1 2011 Australian Local Government Association (ALGA) National General Assembly of Local Government Motions

PRC 21 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM seconded Councillor Ross Fowler OAM

That:

1. The information contained in the report on 2011 Australian Local Government Association (ALGA) National General Assembly of Local Government Motions be received

2. The Motions detailed in the report on ‘Financial assistance for ageing populations’, ‘Accessibility information for tourist accommodation’ and ‘Compliance with accessibility requirements for bus stops’ be submitted for inclusion in the 2011 Australian Local Government Association National General Assembly business paper.

3. An additional item c be added to the Motion -Financial assistance for ageing populations to read:

“c) Any increase in pensioner rebates to be fully funded by state and federal governments.”

A City of Opportunities

2 Proposed "Jordan Springs" Suburb Name in the St Marys Release Area

PRC 22 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Marko Malkoc

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Proposed "Jordan Springs" Suburb Name in the St Marys Release Area be received

2. Council endorse the name “Jordan Springs” as the proposed suburb name for the area being developed in the Western Precinct of the St Marys Release Area

3. Council endorse the proposed boundary of the new “Jordan Springs” suburb as detailed on the plan at Appendix No. 2 to this report

4. The Geographical Names Board be advised of Council’s decision regarding the proposed “Jordan Springs” suburb name and boundary

5. A further report be provided to Council advising of the decision of the Geographical Names Board regarding the proposed “Jordan Springs” suburb name and boundary following public exhibition of the proposal

6. The proponent meet the cost for rectification of existing street name signs referencing Llandilo should gazettal of the “Jordan Springs” suburb proceed

7. The proponent be advised of Council’s decision.

3 Adoption of the Draft Amendments to Chapter 6.11 - Glenmore Park Town Centre within the Development Control Plan 2006

PRC 23 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Marko Malkoc seconded Councillor Prue Guillaume

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Adoption of the Draft Amendments to Chapter 6.11 - Glenmore Park Town Centre within the Development Control Plan 2006 be received

2. Council adopt the draft Amendments to Chapter 6.11 - Glenmore Park Town Centre within the Development Control Plan 2006

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

4. Council provide the Director-General with a copy of the plan, within 28 days of making a development control plan.

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

For	Against
Councillor Prue Guillaume
Councillor Karen McKeown
Councillor Greg Davies
Councillor John Thain
Councillor Kaylene Allison
Councillor Kath Presdee
Councillor Jackie Greenow
Councillor Robert Ardill
Councillor Mark Davies
Councillor Ben Goldfinch
Councillor Ross Fowler OAM
Councillor Jim Aitken OAM
Councillor Marko Malkoc
Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM

A Liveable City

4 Personal Trainer and Commercial Fitness Group Draft Policy

PRC 24 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Marko Malkoc seconded Councillor Kaylene Allison

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Personal Trainer and Commercial Fitness Group Draft Policy be received.

2. The draft Personal Trainer and Commercial Fitness Group Policy be placed on public exhibition between 11 April – 16 May 2011.

3. The proposed fees and charges for use of sportsgrounds and reserves by Personal Fitness Trainers and Commercial Fitness Groups be exhibited as part of Council’s public exhibition of it’s 2011 – 2012 Fees and Charges.

4. A further report be presented to Council providing details of the public exhibition of the draft Policy and of the fees and charges outcomes.

A Vibrant City

5 Penrith and St Marys Centres Management Review

PRC 25 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Marko Malkoc

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Penrith and St Marys Centres Management Review be received

2. The Penrith and St Marys Centres’ Management Review consultant brief incorporate the changes outlined in the report

3. The review be funded in accordance with the proposal outlined in the report

There being no further business the Chairperson declared the meeting closed the time being 8:07pm.

*Policy Review Committee Meeting*	*9 May 2011*
*A Leading City*

Review of Development Contributions Plans

Compiled by: Anthony Milanoli, Senior Environmental Planner

Authorised by: Paul Grimson, Sustainability & Planning Manager

Objective	We plan responsibly for now and the future
Community Outcome	A Council that plans responsibly for a sustainable future (3)
Strategic Response	Build our City's future on the principles of sustainability (3.1)

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

Executive Summary

This report details the conclusions of a preliminary review of the 17 existing development contributions plans that apply to the City of Penrith. In summary, the review reveals that:

· Fourteen of the contributions plans need to continue to apply in their existing or amended forms for the foreseeable future;

· The Erskine Park Residential and Mount Vernon Estate Plans are largely concluded. With expenditure of minor remaining funds these plans can be rescinded

· The St Marys Town Centre Plan should be reviewed and consideration given to alternative infrastructure funding options including a flat rate plan as an interim option whilst investigation of the longer term infrastructure needs of the Centre is conducted and if necessary, a new Development Contributions Plan prepared;

· The Penrith City Centre Plan should be reviewed to examine the implications of proposed Public Domain works and to review the existing facilities list based on growth projections;

· The Glenmore Park Stage 1 Plan (which is the subject of a separate report) requires expenditure of remaining contributions and rescission upon that expenditure;

· The Footpaths in Established Areas Plan and the Local Open Space Plan require amendments so that future facilities even more closely correspond to areas of growth and the application of the plans incorporate previous urban release areas which are now established suburbs;

· All contributions plans would benefit from more detailed review of facilities descriptions and costs

· In the longer term, all development contribution plans should be consolidated into a single document.

Rescinding contributions plans for selected areas will mean new development in those areas is subject to the same contributions applying to other established areas (which fund open space, footpaths and cultural facilities).

Potential legislative amendments to the Environmental Planning and Assessment (EP&A) Act’s development contribution planning provisions may impact on the review of our plans and result in an alternative section 94 plan work program for the remainder of 2011 and through 2012.

Background

In December 2009, the then Department of Planning (DoP) advised that all Development Contributions Plans would be required to be reviewed following enactment of expected new legislation applying to Section 94 of the EP&A Act. Throughout 2010 staff undertook a review of the 18 Development Contributions Plans that applied at that time to determine the status and need for the plans. The consequences of this review included:

· Council adopting revised contributions plans for District Open Space, the WELL Precinct and Glenmore Park Stage 2, which significantly reduced the contribution rates (by up to 50%);

· Council confirming the suitability of the Cultural Facilities Plan and its rates; and

· Council rescinding the North Cranebrook Release Area Plan (which took effect in December 2010), thereby reducing to 17 the number of contributions plans which currently apply in Penrith City.

Since the DoP’s announcement in December 2009, subsequent Ministerial Directions have capped new infill residential development at $20,000 per lot/dwelling and new greenfield urban release areas at $30,000 per lot/dwelling. Glenmore Park Stage 1 and Claremont Meadows Plans were exempted from these caps (in a process known as grandfathering). The Glenmore Park Stage 2 Plan is now also subject to a proposed Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA) between Council and all landowners subject to the Plan.

Given the nature of the Ministerial Directions in the past six months, expectations that all existing plans are to be reviewed within 12 months of the enactment of new legislation applying to Section 94 are now uncertain. In spite of this uncertainty, it was considered prudent to continue the s94 Plans’ review process. The merit of this approach is greater preparedness to meet review deadlines when the s94 amendments are enacted and regular review of plans ensures necessary infrastructure is delivered in a timely and efficient manner and contribution rates are appropriate. The regular review of contributions plans is prudent and responsible planning practice.

Existing Development Contributions Plans

There are currently 17 development contributions plans that apply within the City of Penrith. The plans apply either across the City as a whole or in a more localised capacity. The list of current plans is as follows:

· Claremont Meadows

· Cultural Facilities

· Erskine Business Park

· Erskine Park Residential

· Footpath Construction in Established Areas

· Glenmore Park Stage 1

· Glenmore Park Stage 2

· Kingswood Neighbourhood Centre

· Lakes Environs (Waterside)

· Lambridge Industrial Estate North Penrith

· Library Facilities (Amendment No.1)

· Mount Vernon Estate

· Penrith City Centre Civic Improvement Plan

· Penrith City District Open Space Facilities

· Penrith City Local Open Space

· St Marys Town Centre

· Werrington Enterprise Living and Learning (WELL) Precinct.

Review of Development Contributions Plans

As outlined above, the review of our existing contributions plans included review of those plans subject to the Ministerial cap on residential development. These Plans have been the subject of numerous reports and memos to Councillors and will not be examined again in this report. On this basis, plans relating to Claremont Meadows, the WELL Precinct, Cultural Facilities, Glenmore Park Stage 2 and District Open Space Facilities are excluded from this report. A separate report on the WELL Precinct Plan was presented to Council at its Policy Review meeting of 21 February 2011.

The findings of our audit of existing contributions plans are discussed below:

· The nature of development being levied – contributions are overwhelmingly levied on greenfield residential development, however significant contributions were received from recent large scale industrial development, particularly at Erskine Business Park.

· The range and cost of facilities funded by the plan – contributions largely fund transport, recreation and drainage facilities, with land always a very significant cost component.

· The financial status of each plan – plans are considered to be prudently managed, with no major financial exposure other than those plans which would be subject to the Ministerial cap on residential development (those being the WELL Precinct, District Open Space and Cultural Facilities Plans).

· Works completed – the extent of works completed varies according to the scale of development that has progressed. Facilities in some plans for established areas (such as the Kingswood Neighbourhood Centre) have been completed in advance of the development they serve, as the need for the facility primarily relates to existing residents and is largely financed by non-s94 funds.

· Works remaining – Facility construction varies according to each plan, however no facilities are behind the plan’s projected delivery timeframes and/or thresholds.

· Issues likely to impede plan completion – The extent of infill development in established areas is occurring more slowly than projected in some plans and thus financing of infrastructure is delayed – as a consequence however, the need for those facilities is similarly delayed.

· Facility costing verification and facility description – almost all plans, particularly the more mature plans – would benefit from review of the facility costs incorporated in the plans. This would involve engaging quantity surveyors to review the cost of facilities contained in the plan and measuring the plan’s facility costs against established construction cost guides. An essential component in this review needs to be accurate and sufficiently detailed descriptions of the facilities proposed in all plans.

· Growth Projections – the growth projections contained in plans associated with residential development in established areas and the Penrith City Centre require review. Many of these plans were prepared at a time when Penrith City was growing at a faster rate than has occurred in the past several years. Confirmation of the reasonableness of the growth rates will strengthen the robustness of the plan and hence its legal defensibility.

· Suggested future actions in relation to management of the plan – mature plans are more likely to need rescinding or amending (most notably Glenmore Park Stage 1, St Marys Town Centre and Footpath Construction in Established Areas). Ultimately, all plans should be consolidated into a single document using the same format.

A table summarising the plans and their status is attached to this report.

The reviewed plans can be divided into a number of categories, generally reflecting their age the extent of development which has occurred and their currency (as a result of recent Ministerial Directions). The plan categories are as follows:

· Recent Plans;

· Mature Plans;

· Ongoing Plans; and

· Potentially superseded plans.

Plans are discussed within these categories below.

Recent Plans

Recent Plans are those that have been adopted within the past several years or which have only recently been implemented due to impediments in the development environment. Due to their contemporary nature, these plans are unlikely to need major amendment or rescinding. Recent Plans identified in the audit are as follows:

· Erskine Business Park – site of large scale, recent industrial development, with the Plan funding predominantly roadworks. The estate is currently about 60% developed.

· Lakes Environs (Waterside) – most facilities identified in this plan were funded as works in kind and completed in advance of dwellings, 150 of which were completed or under construction by late 2010.

· Lambridge Industrial Estate – significant road and drainage works have been completed in advance of industrial development and will be repaid via contributions as new development occurs. The estate is approximately 40% developed at this stage.

· Penrith City Centre Civic Improvement Plan – this plan was made by the Minister for Planning in 2008. No contributions are currently held in the plan account due to limited development in the City Centre in the past few years. The descriptions and costing of the facilities contained in the plan need to be reviewed to ensure their suitability. The competitiveness and comparability of this plan should also be reviewed in the context of other Regional Cities contributions plans – e.g. Liverpool, Wollongong and Parramatta – all of which impose contributions on a flat rate levy basis (e.g. 1 – 3 % of development cost). Flat rate levies provide flexibility in allocating funds collected.

Additionally, the Plan requires review to examine the implications - and potential s94 funding - of works proposed for the City Centre public domain intended to be financed by a Special Rate Variation. These proposed works include public park infrastructure, street furniture and footpaths and kerbs.

Mature Plans

Mature Plans are those which have been in operation over extended periods – up to 20 years, but are likely to have been amended and updated several times during that period to meet evolving needs of new developments/residents and legislative changes. Mature Plans identified in the review are as follows:

· Erskine Park Residential Release Area – This suburb commenced development over 18 years ago and all infrastructure listed in the Plan’s works schedule has been completed with the exception of 1 drainage facility at Ashwick Circuit, St Clair. Only approximately 15 - 20 further dwellings are projected to be developed within the Erskine Park area.

Council’s Engineering staff are currently investigating funding required for the drainage facility. Remaining and projected contributions available under this plan may not be sufficient to pay for the stormwater detention basin and land acquisition required to fund the remaining drainage works proposed in the plan. A possible means of funding the shortfall may be sale of land no longer required for road work at the intersection of Ashwick Circuit and Chatsworth Road. If combined funds are still not sufficient to fund both acquisition and basin construction, it may be necessary to either fund the shortfall through general revenue or to modify works to achieve improvement in the drainage situation in light of available funds.

In the longer term, upon receipt of projected funds the Plan should be rescinded. Once the Plan is rescinded, any future development in Erskine Park would immediately be subject to contributions for District Open Space and Cultural Facilities. In the medium term, new development will contribute towards Local Open Space and Footpaths in Established Areas Plans when the boundaries within which these plans apply is amended and the facilities lists updated.

· Glenmore Park Stage 1 – This Plan was adopted over 15 years ago and has been subject to minor amendments over that period. Only minor works (bus shelters) remain to be completed from the Plan’s works schedule. Approximately $1.4 million remains in the plan accounts – or is projected to be received - for expenditure. This Plan and funding expenditure options are proposed to be the subject of a separate briefing of Councillors.

· Mount Vernon Estate – this Plan applies to a large-lot residential estate developed over more than a decade. Almost all works funded by the Plan have been completed – save for minor roadworks. Although not all development projected under the Plan has occurred, even with the completion of that development there will be no need for any further, locally specific facilities (such as roadworks or parks). On that basis, under the provisions of s94 it is not possible for Council to continue levying locally specific contributions for the Mount Vernon Estate and it should be rescinded. Once the Plan is rescinded, any future development in Mount Vernon would immediately be subject to contributions for District Open Space and Cultural Facilities. In the medium term, new development will contribute towards Local Open Space and Footpaths in Established Areas Plans when the boundaries within which these plans apply is amended and the facilities lists updated.

· St Marys Town Centre – Originally adopted by Council in 1993, this plan levies new non-residential development in the town centre to pay for the acquisition of land for construction of additional, at-grade car parking. Due to minimal development in St Marys over the past 20 years limited funds were collected and have been utilised to repay loans for carpark land and construction, as identified in the Contributions Plan. The Plan currently has a nil balance. Limited non-residential growth is expected in the next 5 years.

The Plan in its current form needs to be replaced as it is no longer necessary to continue levying for car parking without demonstrated demand. Additionally the contribution rates currently levied would be insufficient to acquire land for parking. Investigation of the longer term development infrastructure needs for the Town Centre should be conducted. This investigation may result in preparation of a new plan to meet projected needs. In the interim, a flat rate levy plan (provided for under s94A of the EP&A Act) may be prepared and applied, enabling flexible expenditure of contributions on a variety of facilities. This report recommends preparation of a flat rate levy plan and upon its commencement, the rescission of the current St Marys Town Centre Plan. The flat rate levy may also be complemented by a Voluntary Planning Agreement (as recently occurred for car parking at Emu Plains) if required by specific development proposals.

Flat rate levies were designed to collect contributions in circumstances where limited or uncertain development is expected (which is analogous with the development scenario in St Marys Town Centre at present). The levy may be up to 3% (with Ministerial approval). By way of example, a 3% flat rate levy would yield $300,000 on a $10 million development and could be spent on facilities including public domain embellishment, car parking, open space, community facilities, drainage works, footpaths, etc.

Ongoing Plans

Ongoing Plans are those which are likely to need to continue applying in current or amended form for the foreseeable future. Typically these plans address essential but lower capital cost needs of new communities. Ongoing Plans identified in the review are as follows:

· Footpath Construction in Established Areas – this plan levies infill residential development an apportioned amount towards Council’s City-wide footpath fund. All funds in the plan have been expended. Upon completion of a new City-wide footpaths works program the current s94 plan can be amended and continue to apply. The Plan’s boundaries also need to be amended to include Glenmore Park Stage 1 and Erskine Park, which are now established suburbs rather than release areas.

· Kingswood Neighbourhood Centre – adopted seven years ago, this Plan partially funds repayment of the loan taken out to build the local neighbourhood centre on Bringelly Road. Whilst funds collected under the plan to date have been minimal, Kingswood has been identified as a growth node in the recently endorsed Urban Study and Strategy. Several large scale residential developments have been approved or proposed within the Plan’s Kingswood catchment. This anticipated growth is expected to generate contributions sufficient to fund the remaining debt for the centre apportioned to new development under the Plan. Continuation of the plan in its current form is warranted.

· Penrith City Local Open Space – This Plan levies new residential development in established areas for the embellishment of existing open space. Review of this Plan reveals that contributions are mainly collected from selected localities (i.e. Kingswood, St Marys, Penrith and Colyton). As continuing infill development is expected in established areas and existing parks will need to “work harder” to accommodate additional residents’ recreation needs, the plan will need to continue in an amended form for the foreseeable future. The Plan will need to reflect more precisely areas where additional local open space is required and will also need to be widened in its area of application to include Glenmore Park Stage 1 and Erskine Park, as these are no longer release areas.

Potentially superseded plans

Library Facilities Plan

The recent Ministerial Direction on development contributions also restricted councils from levying for acquiring additional library books for new residents. This matter was reported to Council in 2009 and since that time Council has not levied any additional contributions under the Library Facilities Plan.

Although the Library Facilities Plan can no longer be applied to new development consents to acquire books, several hundred thousand dollars in contributions had already been levied on consents when the plan was active. The requirement for payment of these contributions as a condition of consent remains valid. The Plan describes library acquisition intentions relating to these sizeable, yet to be received contributions. Given there is always a potential for legal challenge to contribution provisions or requests for amended conditions of consent relating to the Plan’s provisions, it is considered prudent not to rescind the Plan.

Whilst a library facilities plan cannot apply to book acquisitions, it can still apply to “capital works”. These works may include facilities such as additional desks, computers, lockers and increases to the physical floorspace of the library – all works which address additional demand for library facilities arising from a growing residential population. On this basis, it may be desirable to amend the Library Facilities Plan to apply to non-book capital works such as those described above. This issue will be investigated in the next 12 months.

Next Steps

The next steps in auditing and reviewing our development contributions plans involve :

· Expending remaining funds in the Erskine Park Residential Plan for drainage works (including land acquisition) and rescinding the plan. Future contributions would then be levied for open space, footpaths and cultural facilities;

· Expending remaining funds in the Mount Vernon Estate Plan for minor road widening and rescinding the plan. Future contributions would then be levied for open space, footpaths and cultural facilities;

· Determining expenditure of remaining and projected funds in Glenmore Park Stage 1 (which is the subject of a separate report to Council);

· Reviewing the Penrith City Centre Plan to assess potential funding for public domain works and to review the existing project list;

· Preparing amendments to the Footpath Construction in Established Areas Plan and the Local Open Space Plan;

· Considering rescinding the Library Facilities Plan and its replacement with a capital works plan;

· Examining alternatives for future contributions for St Mary Town Centre (including a flat rate levy as an interim position);

· Reviewing the description and costing of facilities contained in all plans and engaging quantity surveyors to update proposed facility costs.

In the longer term, there may be merit in consolidating the individual plans into a single, City-wide Contributions Plan which incorporates all the locality or issue-specific plans and adopts a common language and format for ease of understanding and application.

Conclusion

The seventeen development contributions plans that apply to Penrith City are largely achieving their objectives of delivering the infrastructure required to meet the needs of additional residents or land uses. Facilities are mostly being provided within the envisaged timeframes and at the projected costs and standards. Reviewing all plans has highlighted the broader range of public facilities now included in s94 plans but which were previously either not addressed or were the responsibility of developers to provide. This is in part a reflection of rising community expectations and new legislative requirements.

With the passage of time it is necessary for several of the s94 plans to be wound up and for several others to be subject to significant review. In some instances existing plans may need to be replaced with more appropriate infrastructure delivery mechanisms, such as flat rate contributions plans or Voluntary Planning Agreements. Most plans would benefit from more refined descriptions of works and independent costing of proposed facilities by Quantity Surveyors. In the longer term, all plans should be consolidated into a single format.

Review of the plans to date - combined with a work program for the next 18 months - will help ensure our plans are current and deliver necessary infrastructure in an affordable and timely fashion.

Legislative changes associated with development contributions may impact on our plans’ review process, but continued active analysis and amendment of the plans will ensure we are in a strong position to respond to new initiatives from the State Government.

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Review of Development Contributions Plans be received

2. Upon expenditure or relevant allocation of restricted funds in the Mount Vernon Estate and Erskine Park Residential Development Contributions Plans, Council authorises staff to rescind these plans in accordance with the requirements of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act and Regulations, 1979.

3. The Penrith City Centre Plan be reviewed and a report be presented to Council.

4. A Development Contributions Plans in accordance with s94A of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act (a “flat rate levy plan”), be prepared for the St Marys Town Centre and a report on the matter be presented to Council.

5. The Footpath Construction in Established Areas Plan and the Local Open Space Plan be reviewed and a report on the draft amended plans be presented to Council.

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

Status Report on existing s94 plans

3 Pages

Appendix

*Policy Review Committee Meeting*	*9 May 2011*
*Appendix 1 - Status Report on existing s94 plans*

ATTACHMENT 1

Penrith City Development Contributions Plans –

Status Report, May 2011

Plan Name, predominant development type & area affected	Facility Costs outlined in Plan ($)	Funds Expended ($)	Future Actions
*Claremont Meadows*, residential, local	17,939,711	6,242,864	Review facility description and costs. Plan to continue.
*Cultural Facilities*, residential, City-wide	4,556,237	4,556,237	Facilities completed by means of loan funding. Plan to continue in current form.
*Erskine Business Park*, industrial, local	49,979,335	22,265,728	Plan to continue in current form.
*Erskine Park Residential Release Area*, residential,	27,083,056	26,698,056	Resolve drainage expenditure then rescind plan
*Footpath Construction in Established Residential Areas*, residential, city-wide	287,932	287,932	Amend the Plan to revise the works schedule listing footpaths to be part funded.
*Glenmore Park Stage 1*, residential, local	98,094,055	97,833,260	Prepare schedule of works for expenditure under current plan and as an alternative, alternative works which could be funded under an amended plan. Report to Council.
*Glenmore Park Stage 2, residential, local (Current Plan not Revised)*	43,600,450	336,429	VPA for selected plan works being negotiated with all affected landowners. No action required.

Plan Name, predominant development type & area affected	Facility Costs outlined in Plan ($)	Funds Expended ($)	Future Actions
*Kingswood Neighbourhood Centre*, residential, local	143,637	143,637	Facilities completed by means of loan funding. Plan to continue in current form.
*Lakes Environs (Waterside Green)*, residential, local	5,791,788	245,971 Majority of facilities being delivered as Work in Kind (WIK).	Plan to continue in its current form - requires only minor amendment of plan boundaries
*Lambridge Industrial Estate North Penrith*, industrial, local	3,889,802	3,889,802	Facilities completed by means of loan funding. Plan to continue in current form.
*Library Facilities (Amendment No.1)*, residential, City-wide	1,957,600	1,945,533	Discuss amendment of the Plan to incorporate non-book capital works. Plan to continue incorporating existing books works program to address issue of any s96 applications or legal challenge.
*Mount Vernon Estate*, residential, local	704,000	644,000	Expend remaining road works funds required. Upon expenditure determine if amended plan required for potential additional growth, if not, rescind plan.
*Penrith City Centre Civic Improvement Plan*, residential, retail, commercial, local	114,500,000	343,270	Review of facility description and costs required. Comparison with other Regional city s94 plans required. Consider adoption of flat rate levy. Prepare assessment of merit of flat based levy.

Plan Name, predominant development type & area affected	Facility Costs outlined in Plan ($)	Funds Expended ($)	Future Actions
*Penrith City District Open Space Facilities, residential, City-wide (Current Plan not Revised)*	63,478,300	1,008,303	Achieve either making of the Plan by the Minister or action the plan in accordance with DoP or Ministerial requirements (may require exhibition of revised plan)
*Penrith City Local Open Space*, residential, local	10,048,137	1,594,972	Review Plan works, possible re-exhibition of plan then required.
*St Marys Town Centre*, commercial, retail	1,950,000	576,676	Rescind Plan. Prepare flat rate levy plan as an interim measure. Analyse growth projections and needs and determine whether conventional s94 plan has merits and which facilities could be funded.
*Werrington Enterprise Living and Learning (WELL) Precinct* , residential, commercial, retail, education, local (Current Plan not Revised)	101,284,419	5,552	Seek Ministerial exemption from $30,000 cap. If exemption not achieved, redraft plan to delete roads and drainage elements and require these facilities to be required under conditions of consent.

N.B. – All totals reflect adopted and current plan facility costs. Expenditure is valued at the date of plan adoption.

12 January 2010

*Policy Review Committee Meeting*	*9 May 2011*
*A City of Opportunities*

Updated Precinct and Village Centre Concept Plans for the Western Precinct in the St Marys Release Area (Jordan Springs Estate)

Compiled by: Robert Craig, Senior Environmental Planner

Authorised by: Paul Lemm, Development Services Manager

Objective	We have access to what we need
Community Outcome	A City with lifestyle and housing choice in our neighbourhoods (8)
Strategic Response	Encourage housing that provides choice, achieves design excellence, and meets community needs (8.1)

Presenter: Arthur Illias - Lend Lease - Jordan Springs Village Centre

Executive Summary

Lend Lease has submitted to Council a refined concept plan for the land contained in the Western Precinct of the St Marys Release Area, otherwise known as the Jordan Springs estate. The updated concept plan was lodged concurrently with three Development Applications for residential subdivision proposals including a total of 346 proposed residential lots in Stage 2 of the estate. The updated concept plan includes greater detail beyond the Stage 1 subdivisions previously approved by Council and is consistent with the Western Precinct Plan requirements. This report recommends that Council adopt the updated Western Precinct Concept Plan.

Lend Lease has also recently submitted to Council a refined Jordan Springs Village Centre Concept Plan. The updated concept plan includes greater detail than that previously provided to Council and urban design guidelines. The updated Village Centre Concept Plan is consistent with the Western Precinct Plan requirements. This report recommends that Council adopt the updated Village Centre Concept Plan.

Background

The St Marys Release Area forms part of the former St Marys ADI (Australian Defence Industries) site, with the balance of the former ADI site contained in the Blacktown local government area. The site was previously used as a munitions factory by the Commonwealth Government. The majority of the site munitions manufacturing operations ceased by 1994.

The Western Precinct of the St Marys Release Area, otherwise known as the Jordan Springs estate, is 229 hectares in area inclusive of the Xavier College site located at the north-western corner of the precinct fronting Ninth Avenue (Llandilo). The Western Precinct is bordered by Ninth Avenue and rural-residential development in Llandilo to the north, The Northern Road and residential development in Cranebrook to the west and regional parkland to the south and east. Refer to the Locality Plan at Appendix No. 1 for further details.

The Western Precinct is zoned entirely for urban purposes and is intended to accommodate primarily residential uses, with limited non-residential uses in the future village centre such as local retail and commercial uses. The estate is anticipated to comprise a maximum of 2,500 dwellings and a resident population of approximately 6,400. The estate developer is Maryland Development Company which is a joint venture company comprising St Marys Land Ltd (the land owner) and Lend Lease Development Pty Ltd.

Major Development Approvals

The first series of Western Precinct residential subdivision proposals, being Stage 1A, Stage 1B and Stage 1C including a total of 109 residential lots, were approved by Council at its Ordinary Meeting on 30 November 2009. Subdivision Certificates for these initial stages were issued by Council on 2 December 2010 and registration of the subdivisions occurred on 20 December 2010.

The Stage 1D residential subdivision including a further 18 residential lots was approved by Council under delegated authority on 9 March 2010. Engineering works associated with this subdivision have been completed although a Subdivision Certificate has not been issued to date. Other development approvals issued by Council under delegated authority include public domain landscaping works, real estate signage, village centre works (including a sales and information centre, town square and main street providing public road access through the hub of the future village centre) and use of the Stage 1D lots as an exhibition village.

The Stage 1E residential subdivision proposal including a total of 98 residential lots was approved by Council at its Ordinary Meeting on 11 October 2010. The Stage 1F residential subdivision including a further 25 residential lots was approved by Council under delegated authority on 14 December 2010. The Stage 1G residential subdivision including a further 17 residential lots was approved by Council under delegated authority on 25 January 2011. On 24 February 2011, the Sydney West Region Joint Planning Panel approved a stormwater management basin for the estate which will capture and treat rainfall and stormwater flows from urban development in the Western Precinct.

There are currently three Development Applications under assessment by Council officers for further residential subdivisions, as detailed below.

· Stage 2A (DA11/0015) – Residential subdivision consisting of 174 residential lots, a public reserve (Eastern Pocket Park), 4 residue lots for future development and new public roads. This proposal has a capital investment value in excess of $10 million and will therefore be determined by the Sydney West Region Joint Planning Panel.

· Stage 2B (DA11/0100) – Residential subdivision consisting of 66 residential lots, a residue lot for future development and new public roads. Council will be the consent authority for this proposal as the capital investment value in less than $10 million.

· Stage 2C (DA11/0101) – Residential subdivision consisting of 106 residential lots, a residue lot for future development and new public roads. Council will be the consent authority for this proposal as the capital investment value in less than $10 million.

Updated Western Precinct Concept Plan

The Western Precinct Plan requires Lend Lease to prepare an indicative urban structure concept plan (or master plan) for the Western Precinct. The initial Western Precinct Concept Plan was lodged concurrently with the first series of residential subdivision proposals for the estate. The concept plan was reported to Council’s Ordinary Meeting on 30 November 2009 as part of the Stage 1A, Stage 1B and Stage 1C residential subdivision proposals. The concept plan was reported for information purposes to provide the broader context for the initial Development Applications. Refer to Appendix No. 2 for a copy of the initial Western Precinct Concept Plan.

The Western Precinct Concept Plan is intended to be a “working plan” which is subject to change as the detailed design process for the estate evolves. Lend Lease has subsequently refined the concept plan and has submitted to Council an updated Western Precinct Concept Plan concurrently with three Development Applications for residential subdivision proposals including a total of 346 proposed residential lots in Stage 2 of the estate. The updated concept plan includes greater detail beyond the Stage 1 subdivisions previously approved by Council. Refer to Appendix No. 3 for a copy of the updated Western Precinct Concept Plan.

The purpose of the concept plan is to provide an indicative urban structure for the estate so that the subsequent Development Applications can be assessed in accordance with this framework. Adoption of the concept plan by Council will enable the Development Applications to be determined in accordance with the concept plan by either the Sydney West Region Joint Planning Panel, Council or Council officers under delegated authority.

Precinct Plan Requirements

The updated Western Precinct Concept Plan has been assessed as follows in accordance with the information requirements contained in Section 5.5 (Concept Plans) of the Western Precinct Plan.

(a) Road layout and subdivision pattern

The indicative road layout provides for a permeable modified grid street system and is conducive to a subdivision pattern which will provide for housing diversity and mix. Potential medium-density housing locations have been identified in the village centre character area to further provide for future housing diversity and mix.

Street types to be provided within the Western Precinct were adopted as part of the estate’s Development Control Strategy which forms part of the Western Precinct Plan. Refer to Appendix No. 4 for an extract from the Development Control Strategy detailing the road carriageway width requirements for each street type.

(b) Pedestrian and cycle network

The collector road and principal pedestrian and cycle shared network will link key community facilities, services, parks and the village centre and will also link to pedestrian and cycle networks beyond the site.

(c) Open space network

The open space network provides for the delivery of a district park (5.5 hectares), neighbourhood park (2.5 hectares), local park (1 hectare), four pocket parks (3.1 hectares) and four riparian corridors (3.53 hectares). The riparian corridors will provide potential for additional recreational and open space provision.

(d) Location and type of non-residential uses

Identified non-residential uses include retail, education, trunk drainage and utility infrastructure uses. Further detail regarding the village centre uses is contained in the updated Village Centre Concept Plan discussed later in this report.

(e) Development staging

Stage 1 is currently in the process of being delivered on the site. Stage 2 is the subject of the current Development Applications under assessment by Council officers. It is anticipated that Stage 3 will form the basis of the next serries of Development Applications. The remanning development staging remains fluid. Refer to Appendix No. 5 for further details regarding development staging and anticipated dwelling yield across the estate.

The overall net neighbourhood density target for the St Marys site is 15 dwellings per hectare. The subdivision proposals approved to date and those currently under assessment are in accordance with this density target and provide for future housing diversity and mix. Unlike other release areas where actual dwelling numbers and types are required as part of the concept plan, in this case the delivery of a diverse residential release area is achieved through the assessment of the subdivision proposals for the estate.

In summary, the updated Western Precinct Concept Plan is consistent with the Western Precinct Plan requirements. It is recommended that Council adopt the updated Western Precinct Concept Plan.

St Marys Penrith Planning Agreement

The St Marys Penrith Planning Agreement is in place between Lend Lease and Council. The Planning Agreement is the principal means for identifying infrastructure requirements, facilities and services which will be delivered for the incoming community in the Western and Central Precincts. The Planning Agreement identifies proposed work schedules, delivery timing and required contributions.

The required works and contributions are being progressively provided as the Western Precinct is developed. All works to date have been carried out in accordance with the requirements of the Planning Agreement. The works and contributions relevant to the Western Precinct include:

· Delivery of a district park (5.5 hectares), neighbourhood park (2.5 hectares), local park (1 hectare), four pocket parks (3.1 hectares), four riparian corridors (3.53 hectares) and a pedestrian and cycle path network. These facilities will be delivered concurrently with the relevant stage subdivision works (e.g. Western Pocket Park in Stage 1).

· Delivery of a multi-purpose community resource centre prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate for the 1,200th dwelling. To date, no dwelling Occupation Certificates have been issued for the estate.

· Delivery of a temporary neighbourhood centre within 18 months after the issue of the first dwelling Occupation Certificate.

· Payment of a library contribution ($1,350,400) as part of the required multi‑purpose community resource centre prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate for the 1,200th dwelling.

· Establishment of a community initiatives fund ($56,295) to support emerging community groups and initiatives, commencing 12 months after the issue of the first dwelling Occupation Certificate.

· Payment of funding for a part-time community development worker for two years, commencing 18 months after the issue of the first dwelling Occupation Certificate.

· Provision of a 12 seater community bus within two years after the issue of the first dwelling Occupation Certificate.

· Undertaking of works and payment of a contribution to a combined value of $11,705,850 for the establishment of district open space in accordance with Penrith City Council’s adopted City-wide District Open Space Development Contributions Plan. This plan identifies the opportunity for the establishment of a multi-sports facility located adjacent to the Central Precinct for which the applicant will contribute works to the value of $6,834,000 for the establishment of this facility.

This will be required within 12 months from the issue of development approval for the 500th residential lot in the Central Precinct. The balance of the funds, which will be in the form of a monetary contribution, can potentially be available for the establishment of district open space facilities elsewhere in the City. The initial component of this contribution ($1,400,000) will be required following development approval of the 1,000th lot in the Central and Western Precincts combined.

To date, Council has approved a total of 267 residential lots with a further 346 residential lots proposed via the three current Development Applications under assessment by Council officers.

· Payment of a contribution of $486,400 for cultural facilities development in accordance with Penrith City Council’s adopted City-wide Cultural Facilities Development Contributions Plan. The initial component of this contribution (50%) is due for payment upon the issue of the Occupation Certificate for the 1,000th dwelling. The balance of the contribution is due for payment upon the issue of the Occupation Certificate for the 2,000th dwelling.

· Payment of a contribution of $20,000 towards studies to determine characteristics, needs and preferences of the community to be provided as required depending on progression of community population growth.

St Marys Development Agreement

The St Marys Development Agreement dated 13 December 2002 is also in place between Lend Lease and the State Government. This Development Agreement relates to the entire St Marys site and includes provisions for works, dedications and contributions regarding the regional parkland, regional open space, regional transport and road infrastructure and affordable housing. Once again, these works and contributions are being progressively provided as the overall St Marys site is developed. All development consents are conditioned with advisory conditions reinforcing Lend Lease’s obligations under this Development Agreement. Enforcement of compliance with these obligations rests with the NSW Department of Planning.

Updated Village Centre Concept Plan

The future village centre of the Western Precinct is located approximately 400m to the east of The Northern Road and will be accessed via the southern entry collector road (i.e. Jordan Springs Boulevard which has been partially dedicated as a public road) and/or the future central entry collector road. The Western Precinct Plan requires Lend Lease to prepare an indicative urban structure concept plan (or master plan) for the village centre.

Prior to Council’s adoption of the Western Precinct Plan on 23 March 2009, Lend Lease argued that the concept plan should be viewed as a framework plan where a high degree of flexibility was retained which would prevent future development from being unnecessarily constrained and allow detailed design to be formulated as the development evolved. However, Council officers required a greater degree of detail to be provided with the initial Development Applications when these were later submitted.

The initial Village Centre Concept Plan was lodged concurrently with the first series of residential subdivision proposals for the estate. The concept plan was reported to Council’s Ordinary Meeting on 30 November 2009 as part of the Stage 1A, Stage 1B and Stage 1C residential subdivision proposals. The concept plan was reported for information purposes to provide the village centre context for the initial Development Applications. Refer to Appendix No. 6 for a copy of the initial Village Centre Concept Plan.

Similar to the overarching Western Precinct Concept Plan, the Village Centre Concept Plan is intended to be a “working plan” which is subject to change as the detailed design process for the estate evolves. Lend Lease has subsequently refined the concept plan and has recently submitted to Council an updated Village Centre Concept Plan. The updated concept plan includes greater detail than that previously provided to Council and urban design guidelines. Refer to Attachment No. 7 for a copy of the updated Village Centre Concept Plan.

Precinct Plan Requirements

Section 4.3 (Future Character Areas) of the Western Precinct Plan requires the Village Centre Concept Plan to outline the following aspects:

· Urban structure and public domain elements.

· Dwelling yield and types.

· Road network and car parking arrangements.

· Pedestrian and cycle network.

· Staging of development.

The following discussion details the key components of the concept plan in response to the Precinct Plan parameters outlined above.

Key Components of the Concept Plan

Village Centre Vision

The vision for the village centre is enunciated as follows:

The Jordan Springs Village Centre will be activated day and night by a mix of retail, education, community, residential and recreation activities. People will move easily and safely between activities, enjoying the intimacy and social interaction of a local community based on the qualities of traditional main street centres.

From its early establishment, the centre will grow with its community of residents, workers and visitors to meet their retail, education, lifestyle, business, living and recreational aspirations. The Village will exemplify sustainability in its delivery of built form, social infrastructure, learning and enterprise opportunities and in the connection to the Regional Park.

Key Physical Characteristics

The key physical characteristics envisaged for the village centre are as follows:

· Traditional main street character.

· Village lake (stormwater management basin) and water as a focal point.

· Pedestrian and cycle links to the regional parkland.

· Integrated education and learning hub.

· Accessible and walkable.

· Town square as a focal point.

Public Domain

The open space structure in the village centre is focused on the town square as the focal point for activity. The town square will be located along the main north-south axis of the main street and will link with the village lake along an east-west pedestrian axis. A plaza on the western side of the main street opposite the town square will balance the open space on the main street axis.

The pedestrian and cycle network in the village centre will be integrated with the overall estate network of trails and paths. This includes pedestrian and cycle paths along key road links, recreation connections around the village lake and along riparian corridors and local street footpaths. The wide main street footpaths, signalised intersections at each end of the main street and marked mid-point pedestrian crossings will support this network to ensure walkability is maximised.

Public art in the village centre will focus on the theme of “water at the urban edge”. The type of public artworks in the village centre will integrate with the major public areas and the built form. Other public artwork opportunities may also include innovative shelter structures, markers and water elements in the town square and along the village lake edge.

Built Form

The key built form considerations detailed for the village centre are as follows:

· Street activation – Street activation will be achieved through generous footpaths, shop fronts, space for on-street dining and on-street parking. Where required, secondary frontages of built form will be required to address internal car parking areas through a range of options including the use of office or shop fronts, building articulation, varied external building materials and landscaping.

· Scale and height – Building height in the village centre will generally range from 2 to 4 storeys. Key sites have been identified in the village centre where higher built form could contribute to a sense of scale and identity for the village centre. While the village centre will be a neighbourhood centre, the built form may include iconic buildings to create a gateway at the terminus of Jordan Springs Boulevard. This will reinforce the arrival experience and identity of the village centre. It is intended for the key sites to utilise scale and height (2 to 6 storeys) of built form to assist with defining the main street and broader village centre area.

· Medium density residential sites and interface – Potential medium-density housing locations have been identified in the village centre to provide for future housing diversity and mix.

· Parking, access and servicing – Parking will be provided in a number of locations to distribute traffic and increase flexibility while assisting to distribute pedestrian movements. The service and loading area is envisaged at the northern end of the major retail site with access from the central collector road via a four-way signalised intersection. Landscape buffers to parking areas will assist to reinforce the landscape and public domain character of the village centre while minimising impacts on visual amenity.

The preceding built form considerations are further detailed in the Village Centre Design Guidelines which are appended to the concept plan.

Strategic Planning Comments

Council’s Strategic Planning Team which managed the preparation of the Western Precinct Plan has undertaken a review of the updated Village Centre Concept Plan. In summary, the Strategic Planning Team is satisfied that subject to minor amendments the updated Village Centre Concept Plan is consistent with the Western Precinct Plan requirements. It is therefore recommended that Council adopt the updated Village Centre Concept Plan.

Conclusion

The updated Western Precinct Concept Plan is consistent with the Western Precinct Plan requirements. It is recommended that that Council adopt the updated Western Precinct Concept Plan.

The updated Village Centre Concept Plan is consistent with the Western Precinct Plan requirements. It is recommended that Council adopt the updated Village Centre Concept Plan.

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Updated Precinct and Village Centre Concept Plans for the Western Precinct in the St Marys Release Area (Jordan Springs Estate) be received.

2. The updated Western Precinct Concept Plan be adopted by Council.

3. The updated Village Centre Concept Plan be adopted by Council.

4. Lend Lease be advised of Council’s decision.

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1.	Locality Plan	1 Page	Appendix
2.	Initial Western Precinct Concept Plan	1 Page	Appendix
3.	Updated Western Precinct Concept Plan	1 Page	Appendix
4.	Western Precinct Street Types	1 Page	Appendix
5.	Development Staging and Dwelling Yield	1 Page	Appendix
6.	Initial Village Centre Concept Plan	1 Page	Appendix
7.	Updated Village Centre Concept Plan	28 Pages	Appendix

*Policy Review Committee Meeting*	*9 May 2011*
*A Liveable City*

Amendments to the Alcohol Free Public Spaces Policy.

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

In December 2010 the NSW Parliament passed the Local Government Amendment (Confiscation of Alcohol) Act 2010.

The new legislation will impact on the enforcement of Alcohol Free Areas in the Penrith Local Government Area (LGA). These areas will now be referred to by the new legislation under Section 632A of the Local Government Act as ‘Alcohol Prohibited Areas’. This requires amendments to Council’s Alcohol Free Public Spaces Policy to align with the new legislation.

The purpose of this report is to outline the changes to the legislation and recommends that the information contained in the report on amendments to the Alcohol Free Public Spaces Policy be received and the amended Alcohol Free Public Spaces Policy be adopted.

Background

Penrith City Council currently has thirty-seven (37) Alcohol Free Zones and twenty-four (24) Alcohol Free Areas established across the LGA. These have been established in consultation with local Police and relevant community stakeholders to minimise alcohol-related antisocial behaviour and provide safe, well-utilised public spaces. Additional requests for Alcohol Free Zones and Alcohol Free Areas are also reviewed on a quarterly or six-monthly basis if required.

‘Alcohol Free Zones’ have been implemented and enforced under Section 644 of the Local Government Act, and prohibit the consumption of alcohol on identified roads, footpaths and car parks.

‘Alcohol Free Areas’ have been implemented and enforced under Section 632 of the Local Government Act (Acting Contrary to Notices), to prohibit the consumption of alcohol in other public spaces, for example parks and reserves.

As a result of new legislation, public spaces which have been established by Council as ‘Alcohol Free Areas’ will now be enforced under Section 632A, explained further in this report.

Overview of the Amendments

Section 632 and 632A Notices

Prior to the new legislation, implementation of Section 632 – Acting Contrary to Notices, prohibited the “doing of anything in the place” such as, dogs off leash, motor bike riding, hitting of golf balls, etc. Section 632 was also implemented by Councils to prohibit the consumption of alcohol in a public place, other than a road, footpath or car park which is dealt with by Section 644 – Alcohol Free Zones.

The prohibiting of alcohol in a place (other than a road, footpath or car park) is now addressed by the introduction of the new legislation, Section 632A - Confiscation of alcohol in certain public and other places, which deals exclusively with the prohibiting of alcohol in the place. Under the new legislation, public and other places are referred to as “Alcohol Prohibited Areas”.

Under the new legislation, notices erected by councils prohibiting the consumption of alcohol will now be made under the new Section 632A, rather than Section 632.

Under the Act, existing signage erected prior to these changes can still be enforced. Given that Council has recently established 24 Alcohol Free Areas under previous provisions contained under Section 632 of the Act, these Alcohol Free Areas will continue to be enforceable until the current expiry date of 30 June 2013. Should the Alcohol Free Areas be reinstated at this time they will be implemented as Alcohol Prohibited Areas under Section 632A - Confiscation of alcohol in certain public and other places.

Duration of alcohol-prohibited areas

Under the Act, public places or parts of places (that are not roads, car parks or footpaths) may be declared alcohol prohibited at all times, or only for specific days, times or events. This enables Council to be flexible in prohibiting alcohol in an area, so that it may be enforced for a particular event or for an extended period, in response to the issues identified in that particular area.

Offences and penalties – Tip-out and confiscation powers

Whilst Alcohol Free Zones (legislated under Section 644 of the Act) already provide for confiscation and tip-out powers with regard to alcohol, these are restricted to being established over a public road or part of a public road, or a public place that is a car park or part of a car park.

In Alcohol Free Areas however (established in other public space areas such as parks and reserves), previous laws only allowed police to issue infringement notices for acting contrary to notices erected by Council. Police officers did not have the power to confiscate and tip out alcohol, unless the area is part of a community liquor accord precinct (none of which have previously applied in the Penrith LGA).

As a result of recent amendments, Police and authorised Council enforcement officers can now confiscate and tip out alcohol in both alcohol free zones and alcohol prohibited areas.

Where a person does not cooperate with a request by Police or authorised Council officers to hand over or tip-out alcohol in a alcohol prohibited area or alcohol free zone, they can be charged with obstruction under the Local Government Act 1993, which carries a maximum penalty of $2,200.

The new Act will assist local police to adopt a more consistent approach to the enforcement of alcohol-free signage across the Penrith LGA, by removing the confusion around powers to respond to incidents whether they may occur in a car park, road, footpath or other public space such as a park or reserve.

The spirit of the legislation is not to force police to confiscate alcohol from responsible adults, but rather empower them to protect public safety and community amenity where it is deemed to be in the public interest.

Definition of ‘Public Space’ to include open space on public housing land

The Amendment Act also specifies that for the purposes of establishing an alcohol-prohibited area under the new Section 632A, a ‘public place’ also includes any land comprising open space on public housing land. However this can only be established if:

o The open space is adjacent to an existing alcohol prohibited area or alcohol free zone

o The open space is a common area that is available to the public housing tenants

o People can readily gain access to the open space from the adjacent alcohol prohibited area or alcohol-free zone, and

o The NSW Land and Housing Corporation has approved of the open space being established as an alcohol prohibited area.

Conclusion

Council’s Alcohol Free Public Spaces Policy has been amended (refer attachment) to incorporate the recent legislative changes. The Policy has been amended to replace the references to “Alcohol Free Areas” implemented under Section 632 of the Local Government Act (Acting Contrary to Notices) with “Alcohol Prohibited Areas” implemented under Section 632A “Confiscation of Alcohol in Certain Public and other Places” of the Local Government Act.

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Amendments to the Alcohol Free Public Spaces Policy be received.

2. The amended Alcohol Free Public Spaces Policy be adopted.

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

Alcohol Free Public Spaces Policy

5 Pages

Appendix

*Policy Review Committee Meeting*	*9 May 2011*
*Appendix 1 - Alcohol Free Public Spaces Policy*

ALCOHOL FREE PUBLIC SPACES POLICY

Responsible Department: Public Domain Amenity & Safety

Responsible Section: Community Safety

OBJECTIVE:

To provide a policy for the implementation and/or suspension of designated areas within the Penrith Local Government Area (LGA) where the consumption and possession of alcohol is prohibited, thereby promoting responsible social behaviour in designated public spaces.

INFORMATION:

Designated locations within the Penrith LGA may be established as areas where it is illegal to consume or possess alcohol.

This can be enacted as an Alcohol Free Zone, created in accordance with Section 644 of the Local Government Act 1993, on public roads and public car parks.

In other areas (e.g. parks, reserves and other public spaces) Council can make it illegal to consume or possess alcohol by erecting a notice in accordance with Section 632A of the Local Government Act 1993. These areas will be known as Alcohol Prohibited Areas.

POLICY:

1. ESTABLISHMENT OF AN ALCOHOL FREE ZONE OR ALCOHOL PROHIBITED AREA IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1993

1.1 Penrith City Council shall establish Alcohol Free Zones on public roads and car parks, within the Penrith LGA, in accordance with Section 644 of the Local Government Act 1993.

1.2 Penrith City Council shall establish Alcohol Prohibited Areas on other public land, within the Penrith LGA, in accordance with Section 632A of the Local Government Act 1993.

1.3 An Alcohol Free Zone or Alcohol Prohibited Area may only be established by resolution of Council.

1.4 When Alcohol Free Zones and/or Alcohol Prohibited Areas are established or reviewed by Council, the following information shall be provided.

· Reasons supporting the implementation of the Alcohol Free Zone or Alcohol Prohibited Area;

· Locations of Alcohol Free Zone or Alcohol Prohibited Area;

· Expiration date of an Alcohol Free Zone or Alcohol Prohibited Area;

· Times of day that the Alcohol Prohibited Area will apply;

· List of stakeholders consulted during the implementation process.

2. SUSPENSION OR CANCELLATION OF AN ALCOHOL FREE ZONE OR ALCOHOL PROHIBITED AREA TO ACCOMMODATE A SPECIFIC COMMUNITY EVENT

2.1 Request for the suspension of an Alcohol Free Zone or Alcohol Prohibited Area

2.1.1 All requests for the suspension of an Alcohol Free Zone or Alcohol Prohibited Area, or part thereof, shall be forwarded to Council in writing at least 30 days prior to the proposed suspension period;

2.1.2 All requests for suspension of an Alcohol Free Zone or Alcohol Prohibited Area, shall detail the following information:

· The organisation or individual requesting the suspension;

· The reason for the suspension;

· The section of Alcohol Free Zone or Alcohol Prohibited Area to be suspended;

· The date and timeframe for the suspension;

· Estimated number of people attending the community event;

· The proposed security and control measures to be implemented;

· Council may request a copy of the risk management plan for publicly advertised events.

Council has a standard form available for such requests to be submitted.

2.1.3 Insurance

An applicant seeking approval to suspend an Alcohol Free Zone or Alcohol Prohibited Area, shall provide relevant certificates in respect of a minimum $10 million public liability insurance cover.

2.2 Request for the cancellation of an Alcohol Free Zone or Alcohol Prohibited Area

2.2.1 All requests for the cancellation of an Alcohol Free Zone or Alcohol Prohibited Area, or part thereof, shall be forwarded to Council in writing.

2.2.2 All requests for the cancellation of an Alcohol Free Zone or Alcohol Prohibited Area, shall detail the following information:

· The organisation or individual requesting the cancellation;

· The reason for the cancellation;

· The section of Alcohol Free Zone or Alcohol Prohibited Area to be cancelled;

Council has a standard form available for such requests to be submitted.

3 DETERMINATION OF APPLICATION FOR SUSPENSION OR CANCELLATION OF ALCOHOL FREE ZONES OR ALCOHOL PROHIBITED AREAS

3.1 Suspension or cancellation of an Alcohol Free Zone shall be as per Section 645 of the Local Government Act 1993, requiring a valid resolution of the Council to suspend a Zone.

3.2 Suspension or cancellation of an Alcohol Prohibited Area shall be determined under delegated authority by the Public Domain Amenity & Safety Manager.

3.3 An application to suspend or cancel an Alcohol Free Zone or Alcohol Prohibited Area shall be forwarded to the Local Police Force for comment;

3.4 An application to suspend or cancel an Alcohol Free Zone or Alcohol Prohibited Area shall be assessed under the following criteria:

3.4.1 Suspension:

· Consideration of comments by the Local Police Force;

· The nature of the event;

· The proposed number of people attending the event;

· The security and control measures to be instigated;

· The timeframe proposed for the suspension of the zone/area;

· Perceived benefits or otherwise to the broader community interests;

· Traffic Management Plan and Event Management Plan if required by Council;

· Insurance coverage;

· Council may undertake any other consultation with relevant stakeholders that it considers necessary.

3.4.2 Cancellation:

· Consideration of comments by the Local Police Force;

· Perceived benefits or otherwise to the broader community interests;

· Council may undertake any other consultation with relevant stakeholders that it considers necessary.

3.5 Suspension of an Alcohol Free Zone, or an Alcohol Prohibited Area for an event in one year, does not apply to the event in subsequent years. Separate applications shall be submitted as required in line with this policy.

3.5.1 Suspension of an Alcohol Free Zone, or an Alcohol Prohibited Area for multiple events, can be made on an annual basis, but does not apply to multiple events in subsequent years. Separate annual applications shall be submitted in line with this policy.

3.6 Following determination of the suspension of an Alcohol Free Zone and the appropriate resolutions of Council, the suspension shall be advertised as per Section 645 of the Local Government Act 1993, and the local Police Force advised.

3.7 Following determination of the suspension of an Alcohol Prohibited Area and the appropriate resolutions of Council, the suspension shall be advertised in a relevant local newspaper, and the local Police Force advised.

3.8 Should the application to suspend an Alcohol Free Zone or an Alcohol Prohibited Area not be successful, the applicant shall be advised in writing, and the local Police Force notified.

4 ENFORCEMENT OF ALCOHOL FREE ZONES AND ALCOHOL PROHIBITED AREAS

4.1 Alcohol Free Zones shall be enforced as per Sections 642, 644, 645 and 648 of the Local Government Act 1993. The Police are responsible for enforcing Alcohol Free Zones.

4.2 Alcohol Prohibited Areas shall be enforced as per Section 632A of the Local Government Act 1993. The Police are responsible for enforcing Alcohol Prohibited Areas.

5 SIGNAGE DENOTING ALCOHOL FREE ZONE OR ALCOHOL PROHIBITED AREA

5.1 Alcohol Free Zones and/or Alcohol Prohibited Areas shall be indicated by the erection of signage in accordance with the Ministerial Guidelines on Alcohol-Free Zones and the relevant Sections of the Local Government Act. ie, Sections 644 Alcohol Free Zones and Section 632A Confiscation of Alcohol in certain public and other places.

POLICY ADOPTED …………………………………………............

POLICY TO BE REVIEWED …………………………………………

*Policy Review Committee Meeting*	*9 May 2011*
*A Liveable City*

Penrith Shuttle Bus Feasibility Study

Compiled by: Walter Sinnadurai, Transportation Planner

Authorised by: Adam Wilkinson, Engineering Services Manager

Objective	Our physical infrastructure is adaptable, and responds to changing needs
Community Outcome	A City with interconnected, safe public transport (15)
Strategic Response	Lobby State and Federal Government to ensure the City has an effective public transport network (15.1)

Executive Summary

The purpose of this report is to outline the findings of the recently completed Penrith Shuttle Bus Feasibility Study, which investigated options to promote a sustainable transport future within the CBD. The report outlines five bus route options with (potential future) combined park-and-ride facilities on the periphery of the CBD. Recommended Option 4A is considered to be effective in serving the CBD core and focuses on Henry and High Streets, and also serves Centro, Penrith Station and Westfield.

The report recommends Council endorse the findings of the Feasibility Study and utilise same as the basis for on-going discussions with the Department of Transport about the Free Shuttle Bus Service for Penrith. The report further seeks to support on-going partnerships with the Chamber of Commerce, Penrith Business Alliance and Penrith City Centre Association in the promotion of the service.

Background

Council’s Delivery Program 2009-2013 has identified the need to undertake a feasibility study for the introduction of a free shuttle bus service in the Penrith City Centre. One of the key actions identified in the Penrith Integrated Transport and Land Use Strategy for the Penrith City Centre is to provide a free shuttle bus service.

A draft of the Penrith Shuttle Bus Feasibility Study was presented at the Councillor Briefing on 1 December 2010. The presentation includes the study findings, route options and the recommendation of the Penrith Shuttle Bus Feasibility Study. At this meeting, it was requested that the Study further investigate opportunities to extend the recommended route service through to the Civic Centre and Library.

Penrith Shuttle Bus Feasibility Study

Parsons Brinckerhoff (PB) Australia Pty Limited was engaged in November 2009 to undertake the Penrith Shuttle Bus Feasibility Study. A full copy of the Feasibility Study will be provided to Councillors under separate cover.

This Study took into consideration a range of contributing factors including potential travel demand and patronage, land use, route options, potential park-and-ride locations, capital and operational costs and potential funding sources. It reviewed existing services being operated within other Regional Cities and overseas and also examined the Penrith City Centre Association’s existing Christmas shuttle service which operates in Penrith.

Given the timing of this study in relation to the recently introduced Free Shuttle Bus service to the Penrith CBD, the Parsons Brinckerhoff report does not make reference to the prevailing service.

The Feasibility Study included consultation with a range of stakeholders including Penrith Chamber of Commerce, Penrith City Centre Association, Panthers Leagues Club, Westbus and (the then) NSW Transport and Infrastructure.

The Study also incorporated consultation in the form of a customer survey which sought input from workers, shoppers, residents and visitors.

Objectives

The objective of the shuttle bus service is to provide free, accessible transport to CBD visitors and workers along a designated route to reduce reliance on cars and improve accessibility around the City. Ideally, it would be supported by peripheral car parking so that CBD visitors and workers would be encouraged to park and ride using the shuttle bus to access the CBD, as an alternative to parking in increasingly constrained CBD parking facilities. The shuttle bus would also have a role in helping to distribute visitors and shoppers around the CBD to assist and support CBD retailers in High Street and elsewhere.

Shuttle Bus Success Factors

Successful shuttle bus services have the following elements:

· Frequent operation - operate every 10 minutes on weekdays to maximise convenience. At this frequency, intending passengers don’t need to have or memorise a timetable, they are encouraged to ‘turn up and go’.

· Minimum six days per week operation, with seven days preferable to maximise convenience.

· Hours of operation that match users’ needs.

· A route that takes people where they want to go.

· A distinctive delivery to provide high visibility and distinction from other public transport.

· Fare-free to encourage use.

· If operating a loop, a two-way loop is superior to a one-way loop as it increases legibility and directness.

Interview Surveys

The Study involved a survey of 340 workers, shoppers, residents and visitors. The survey found that there is overall strong support for the idea of a shuttle bus in the Penrith CBD with 70% of respondents believing that a shuttle bus would help to meet their travel needs within the CBD. The survey results are:

Frequency of Visits to Penrith CBD

The number of people visiting the CBD once a day were 32%, 25% were twice a week, 20% were once a week, 9% were once a month, 8% were less than once a month and 5% unspecified.

CBD Parking Locations

Overall, almost 70% of car drivers reported parking in Westfield or Centro car parks and around 18% park on-street, while some 10% use other off-street car parking.

Parking Behaviour of CBD Workers

The results were analysed for CBD workers as a sub-set. The analysis indicates that Westfield and Centro are parking locations for some 50% of CBD worker respondents, while ‘Other Parking’ represents off-street spaces largely intended for shoppers. It should be noted that Westfield maintains a limited supply of parking spaces for staff.

Areas Visited

The survey shows that an overwhelming majority nominated the Westfield and Centro shopping centres. High Street shops and ‘other shops’ were also popular destinations. As the survey focused on “areas visited” by those accessing the CBD, other areas in and around the CBD, including Penrith Hospital, Panthers, the Library and RSL were less significant in terms of them being a destination.

What Areas Should a Shuttle Bus Serve?

The map below shows the results graphically of the destinations most visited by respondents.

Preferred shuttle bus service area

Source: Penrith Shuttle Bus Feasibility Study – August 2010 by Parsons Brinckerhoff

Potential Shuttle Bus Patronage

Based on survey results, estimated potential shuttle bus patronage would potentially be some 1,574 per day, with most users being drawn from car drivers and car passengers (see Table 1 below).

Table 1
Potential Shuttle Bus Patronage

Type of trip	Car/Passenger	Bus	Train	Walk	Total
Commercial worker trips	100	3	9	9	121
Commercial visitor trips	12	7	19	39	77
Retail worker trips	137	1	3	3	144
Retail visitor trips	423	67	184	558	1,232
Total trips	672	78	215	609	1,574

Shuttle Bus Route Options

Five (5) shuttle bus route options were developed to meet the needs of the potential users as indicated by interview surveys and stakeholder consultation, as shown in Attachment 1, Figures 1-4.

Option 1- Current Christmas Shuttle

Route Option 1 will mimic the current Christmas shuttle bus route. This route option operates in one direction only (counter-clockwise). It has the advantage of being an established bus route, designed to facilitate shopper movements at times of great demand and it covers the core area of the CBD including High Street. However, its limitations include:

· one-direction only

· limited function in terms of peripheral park-and-ride – much of the route is close to existing CBD parking.

Option 2 - Modified Christmas Shuttle Route

Route Option 2 is a modified Christmas shuttle route that aims to provide improved access to both the proposed park-and-ride locations (refer to Attachment 1, Figures 1-4) and existing car parks, to enable this route to provide more of a park-and-ride function.

The modification of the route to give it more of a peripheral park-and-ride function complements its retail-supporting function. In this option, the shuttle bus would not serve High Street directly and the additional length is likely to reduce potential convenience ridership.

Option 3 - Variation of Option 2

Route Option 3 is a variation of Option 2 and removes the western diversion to Mulgoa Road to provide for a shorter, more efficient route while still providing access to important destinations and peripheral car parking options. This option would provide access to peripheral car parking areas to serve most approach corridors and connect to Centro, Nepean Hospital, Penrith RSL, Library, Westfield and Penrith Station. This option retains the possibility of utilising the area around Ransley Street/Mulgoa Road for peripheral parking.

Option 4 A– Core Shuttle Route

This route option concentrates on servicing the core CBD locations and this option is designed to be effective in serving the CBD core; moving workers and visitors around the City Centre. The proposed route focuses on Henry and High Streets, whilst also servicing Centro, Penrith Station and Westfield.

This route option would help CBD users move around the main destinations, however it would not necessarily serve wider CBD destinations. The shorter route would limit a peripheral car parking scheme being established in the short-term.

Option 4 B– Core shuttle bus route with library extension

At the Councillor Briefing on 1 December 2010, it was requested that the study further investigate opportunities to modify Option 4A, providing access to the library and Civic Centre. Like option 4A, this option is focused on serving the CBD core locations that interviewees report visiting; in addition this option also extends to the library and Civic Centre. The complexity of the route in this option may create potential legibility issues for users especially at the library stop as it will be unclear which direction the service is running at any given time from this common set down, pick up point. Furthermore, survey results indicate that limited patronage would be generated through the extension of the service to the library and Civic Centre at this time.

This option would be effective as a CBD shuttle, but would not be effective in establishing or supporting a peripheral car parking scheme. Like Option 4A this route would help CBD users move around the main destinations, but it would not serve wider CBD destinations and would not allow a peripheral car parking scheme to be established in the short-term.

Penrith CBD Shuttle Bus Operational Parameters

The Feasibility Study recommends that for the Shuttle Bus service to be effective at changing travel behaviour, its weekday operating hours should be extensive enough to allow CBD workers to park-and-ride before and after work. That being;

· Monday to Friday 7:00am to 7:00pm

· Saturday 8:30am to 4:00pm.

Estimated Costs

The Feasibility Study has made a number of assumptions when undertaking the cost calculations for the proposed service options. The initial cost of buses was assumed to be $500,000 per vehicle and the bus operating unit cost is approximately $3.50 per kilometre. The $3.50 per kilometre rate incorporates fuel, labour, maintenance, and overhead costs.

It is important to note that the cost estimates shown above are based on the assumption that the service is introduced as an independent service, as opposed to the model used to underpin the recently introduced service which is based on contractual arrangements between Department of Transport and Westbus.

Summary of Route Options

Table 2 below summarises the shuttle bus route options assessment in terms of the scale of the bus routes (length, round trip travel time, number of buses) and the costs involved (capital and operating costs and net present value).

Table 2 - Cost Summary

Route Option	Length	Travel Time Round Trip	Bus Requirement	Capital Cost*	Operating Cost per annum	Net Present Value**
Option 1	3.84km	11.5 min	3	$1.07M	$0.63M	$4.50M
Option 2	7.23km	26 min	6	$3.07M	$1.30M	$9.23M
Option 3	7km	23 min	6	$3.07M	$1.29M	$9.19M
Option 4A	3.3km	13 min	4	$2.07M	$0.88M	$6.23M
Option 4B	5.2km	25 min	5	$2.58M	$1.14M	$7.96M

*Capital cost based on bus purchase option

**Assuming a five-year operating life

Route Recommendation

The Feasibility Study is recommending that Council initially consider a shuttle bus which serves the core CBD and is primarily designed to facilitate the movement of workers, shoppers and other CBD visitors around the core CBD. Route Option 4A is considered the most feasible shuttle bus route. This service can be extended to wider parts of the CBD depending on usage and customer feedback, but should remain compact and legible.

Current Free Shuttle Bus Service for Penrith

On 14 March 2011, TNSW introduced a free shuttle bus service for Penrith as “Route 787” and it is presently operated between 9.00am and 2.30pm on weekdays and 9.00am and 5.30pm on weekends with a 15 minutes frequency. This services operates a one-way loop (clockwise direction), with two buses connecting City Centre locations including Penrith Station, Centro Nepean, Penrith Panthers and Penrith Showground as shown in Attachment 2.

The recent introduction of a free shuttle bus service to the Penrith CBD is very much welcomed. Council, the Association and Chamber have long been advocating for such a service.

Whilst there are obvious differences between the current service and that recommended through the feasibility study, it is important that we support and monitor the prevailing service. It is intended to work with the Department of Transport to review and modify the operational parameters if/when required to ensure its long term viability, and to meet the needs of all stakeholders.

Conclusion

Council has finalised its investigations into the feasibility of introducing a free shuttle bus service to the Penrith CBD. These investigations revealed that the Option 4A route shuttle bus within the core CBD is the preferred option as it will more efficiently and effectively facilitate the movement of shoppers and other CBD visitors around the core CBD. Whilst this service is the “smallest” (in terms of travel), it can readily be extended to wider parts of the CBD depending on patronage and customer feedback, but should remain compact and legible.

Whilst acknowledging and welcoming the recently introduced Free Shuttle Bus service, it is imperative that Council seek to work closely with the Department of Transport to ensure the success and long term viability of a free shuttle bus service within the CBD. This warrants close monitoring and review of the current service to ensure it meets the needs of all stakeholders.

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Penrith Shuttle Bus Feasibility Study be received.

2. Council support the findings of the Penrith Shuttle Bus Feasibility Study and endorse the recommended Option 4A, and associated operational parameters, as the preferred route service in the short-term.

3. Council write to the State Government welcoming the recently introduced free shuttle bus service for Penrith, and seek to establish a partnership with the Department of Transport to monitor and review the service to ensure its long term viability.

4. Council write to the Member for Penrith, the Chamber of Commerce, the Penrith Business Alliance and the Penrith City Centre Association, seeking their support to ensure the long term viability of a free shuttle bus service for the Penrith CBD.

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1.	Appendix 1 - Penrith Shuttle Bus Feasibility Study Options	1 Page	Appendix
2.	Appendix 2 - Current Shuttle Service Map	5 Pages	Appendix

*Policy Review Committee Meeting*	*9 May 2011*
*A Vibrant City*

Adoption of Penrith City Council Heritage Program for 2011-2014

Compiled by: Josephine Maejiirs, Environmental Planner

Authorised by: Paul Lemm, Development Services Manager

Objective	We build on our strengths, value our heritage, celebrate our cultural diversity, and foster creativity
Community Outcome	A City with design excellence that respects our local identity (22)
Strategic Response	Promote good design, sustainable buildings, and development that enhances our City (22.1)

Executive Summary

The Heritage Program has been prepared to meet the requirements of the NSW Heritage Office. The Heritage Office is part of the Office of Environment and Heritage in the Department of the Premier and Cabinet. The Heritage Program provides for a 3 year funding agreement to support local government heritage management in NSW.

Penrith City Council has been offered funding assistance for the Heritage Advisory Service for the current financial year 2010/2011 and the next three financial years. The purpose of the Heritage Program is to guide heritage management from 1^st July 2011 to 30^th June 2014.

The Heritage Program is a compilation of Council’s existing heritage activities and has been prepared in consultation with Council’s Heritage Advisor, Mr Otto Cserhalmi with support and endorsement from Council’s Heritage Advisory Committee. This matter was presented as an information report to the Heritage Advisory Committee at its meeting on Thursday 5^th May 2011.

The Heritage Program will be reviewed at the conclusion of the 3 year cycle to assist and guide future directions for heritage management in the Penrith Area. The Heritage Program needs to be endorsed by Council to secure the funding.

Background

Funding is available across the State to support local councils that have a well developed local government heritage management programme. This funding assistance will support the implementation and delivery of local council heritage programmes.

Currently, Council provides a budget of $20,000 per financial year for the Heritage Advisory Service. Council has successfully secured a claim for reimbursement for the Heritage Advisory Service for the current financial year up to $7,000 on the basis of $1 for every $2 Council spends.

The next three year performance agreement will be based on the implementation of the “Penrith City Council Heritage Program for 2011 – 2014” (refer attachment No.1). The funding assistance offered to Council is on the basis of:

· $1 for every $3 grants up to $7,500 for the payment of Heritage Advisors.
This means that every $3 Council spends, the NSW Heritage Office will provide $1 in funding up to a total amount of $7,500. For example if Council spends its $20,000 budget, the NSW Heritage Office will provide $6,667 in funding.

Council’s success in obtaining this grant funding from the Heritage Council is contingent on Council’s fund of $20,000 not being reduced. The additional funds from the Heritage Council are required to be directed towards Council’s ongoing Heritage Program. These activities will be overseen by the Heritage Advisor and may include community education, regional initiatives and contribution to the development of the revised Penrith Development Control Plan. A further report will be forwarded to the Heritage Advisory Committee on receipt of the funds from the Heritage Council.

Heritage Program

The Heritage Program has been prepared in accordance with the new standard guidelines developed by the NSW Heritage Office.

The eight (8) recommendations of the NSW Heritage Office, publication ‘Recommendations for Local Council Heritage Management’ have been reviewed and utilised in the preparation of this Heritage Program. These are as follows:

1. Continue Council’s Heritage Advisory Committee to promote heritage conservation and assist with Council’s heritage programme.

2. Continue the Heritage Advisor Service to assist Council, the community and owners of the heritage listed items.

3. Continue to identify and list heritage items in the Penrith LEP.

4. Continue the Heritage Assistance Fund Programme to encourage heritage property owners in the maintenance of their heritage properties.

5. Manage local heritage in a positive and proactive manner.

6. Promote sustainable development as a tool for heritage conservation.

7. Present educational & promotional programmes.

8. Lead by example by properly managing Council owned heritage places.

The draft Heritage Program is attached to this report. This draft Heritage Program needs to be adopted by Council to secure the State Government funding.

Conclusion

Penrith City Council through its heritage management commitment for the City has initiatives and commitments in place to support and manage its current heritage assets whilst providing leadership and positive stewardship for the City’s heritage.

We now seek Council’s approval to adopt the draft Heritage Program and secure the funding to support local government heritage management in Penrith.

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Adoption of Penrith City Council Heritage Program for 2011-2014 be received

2. Council adopt the Heritage Program for 2011 – 2014 so that Council can secure funding to support local government heritage management in Penrith.

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

Penrith Heritage Program 2011-2014

6 Pages

Appendix

*Policy Review Committee Meeting*	*9 May 2011*
*Appendix 1 - Penrith Heritage Program 2011-2014*

PENRITH CITY COUNCIL

HERITAGE PROGRAM

2011 – 2014

Prepared by

Penrith City Council
Development Services Department
601 High Street, PENRITH NSW 2750

In association with

Otto Cserhalmi – Council’s Heritage Advisor
24 Ferry Road, GLEBE NSW 2037

Introduction

The Heritage Program has been prepared in accordance with the new standard guidelines developed by the NSW Heritage Office, within the Office of Environment and Heritage, Department of Premier and Cabinet. The eight recommendations of the NSW Heritage Office, publication ‘Recommendations for Local Council Heritage Management’ have been reviewed and utilised in the preparation of this Program.

The purpose of the Heritage Program is to guide heritage management for the next 3 financial years from 2011-2014.

Penrith Council has initiatives and commitments in place to support and manage its current heritage assets whilst providing leadership and positive stewardship for the City’s heritage. These include the following:

1. Continue Council’s Heritage Advisory Committee to promote heritage conservation and assist with Council’s heritage program.

Penrith Council’s Heritage Advisory Committee was established in 1998 to promote heritage conservation in Penrith. The committee consists of a wide range of representatives designed to achieve a balance between political, community and professional interests supporting the heritage management in the LGA.

Aim:

§ Increased community participation, awareness and appreciation of heritage in the Penrith LGA.

Actions:

§ Continue to promote community awareness of the City’s rich heritage assets and to assist Council on heritage management policy.

§ Continue to provide advice and input to Council through recommendations on Local Heritage Funding and nominations and deletions of items on the Local Environmental Plan.

§ Increase public awareness and involvement in the committee’s promotional activities such as Photographic Competition, Exhibition & Displays, etc.

2. Continue the Heritage Advisor Service to assist Council, the community and owners of heritage listed items.

The Heritage Advisory Service was established in 1995 to help manage Council’s heritage program and provide free heritage advice to all heritage property owners.

Aim:

§ Develop strong relationships with the local community, local heritage groups, owners, developers and council.

§ To increase community participation, awareness and appreciation of heritage in the Penrith LGA.

§ To increase proactive heritage and urban design management

Actions:

§ Continue the Heritage Advisor Service – pre application advice, general advice, assess applications relating to heritage items, places and areas.

§ Continue to provide advice and input to Council through recommendations on Local Heritage Funding.

§ Continue to provide advice and input to Council on the nominations and deletions of
Items in the Local Environmental Plan.

§ Assist in the review and preparation of the Stage 2 Citywide DCP ‘Heritage Chapter’ and Penrith LEP 2012.

§ Continue to participate in Council’s Heritage Advisory Committee.

§ Encourage the opportunity for heritage seminars for Council Staff, Councillors, and owners of heritage buildings.

§ Encouragement of educational programs for Heritage Advisory Committee members, and Local Heritage or Historical Societies.

3. Continue to identify and list heritage items in the Penrith LEP

Penrith Council has completed a review of the 2007 Heritage Study.

It is intended that the Planning Proposal (Penrith LEP 2012) will include a number of additional heritage items, heritage conservation areas and archaeological sites which were either deferred items from Penrith LEP 2010, Penrith LEP (Environmental Heritage Conservation) 2010 or new items recommended from the Heritage Study.

Aim:

§ To identify and protect all buildings, places, and areas that are considered to be of heritage significance and list these in the Penrith LEP 2012.

Actions:

§ Implement the recommendations of the Penrith LEP 2012 in listing the additional heritage items, heritage conservation areas and archaeological sites.

§ Continue to update electronic heritage layers and databases in Council’s systems to ensure accurate heritage information.

§ Continue to offer current incentives to owners of heritage items to encourage the conservation of their assets.

4. Continue the Heritage Assistance Fund Program to encourage heritage property owners in the maintenance of their heritage properties

Council’s Heritage Assistance Fund was established in 2007 (ongoing) to financially assist the owners and lessees of domestic scale heritage items such as buildings, houses and archaeological sites. It offers a grant for repair and maintenance work to heritage listed properties.

Aim:

§ Assisting the owners, lessees and not-for-profit organisations of domestic scale heritage items and heritage conservation areas in preparing documentation by way of a Conservation Management Plan (CMP) or Heritage Report and lodging a development application to carry out works;

§ To encourage the repair and maintenance of domestic scale heritage items and promote a positive community attitude to heritage conservation;

§ Provide a mechanism to achieve the conservation of specific elements that are considered important to an area such as streetscapes, building fabric and facade, and physical evidence of heritage items located within the Penrith Local Government Area (LGA);

§ Promote a greater awareness, understanding and appreciation of heritage within Penrith City.

Actions:

§ Continue to offer $30,000 per year to encourage and assist the owners, lessees and not-for-profit organisations of domestic scale heritage items undertake maintenance and conservation works.

§ Seek appropriate projects which demonstrate best practice conservation.

§ Ensure the funding assists a wide cross section of the community.

§ Promotion of completed projects through local newspapers and or Council’s website to encourage others to take up the offer of funding.

5. Manage local heritage in a positive and proactive manner.

Aim:

§ Promote the conservation and maintenance of Penrith’s heritage.

§ Provide policies and plans appropriate to the assessment of applications within conservation areas or to places of heritage significance.

Actions:

§ Continue to offer the Heritage Advisor Service in the Penrith LGA.

§ Continue to encourage the use of the Heritage Incentive Clause under the Penrith Heritage LEP 1991 which provides potential additional land uses to be permitted on a site, which contains a heritage item.

§ Continue to refund development application (DA) fees for heritage related applications as per Heritage DCP.

§ Develop DCP level controls that have both urban design and heritage components which maintain and promote heritage values.

§ Continue to update Heritage Property Inventory to assist people in researching their heritage properties.

§ Promote successful heritage developments through local newspapers and or Council’s website to encourage positive impact on property values.

§ Continue to include ‘Heritage Places’ category in the next Penrith Excellence in Design Awards Scheme.

6. Promote Sustainable Development as a tool for heritage conservation

Aims:

§ Encourage proactive heritage and sustainable development.

Actions:

§ Ensure heritage management is embedded in the development of Penrith Council’s Sustainability Strategy.

§ Encourage appropriate change of use for heritage buildings to ensure the ongoing use and maintenance of heritage buildings.

7. Present Educational & Promotional Programs

Council is instigating additional positive initiatives.

Aim:

§ Raise community awareness and appreciation through education on heritage issues and management within the Penrith LGA.

§ Promote cultural heritage and museum development opportunities.

Action:

§ Develop appropriate training for Council staff to equip them with the skills and understanding to plan for and manage Penrith’s heritage.

§ Provide opportunities to Council staff to attend relevant training courses.

§ Further education through a heritage seminar for Councillors.

§ Further education through a heritage seminar for owners of heritage buildings.

§ Encouragement of educational program attendees by Heritage Advisory Committee members, and Local Heritage or History Societies.

§ A regular heritage news column under the Mayor’s Column in the local newspapers, and also on Council’s website.

§ Continue to liaise with and involve community groups on issues affecting heritage conservation in Penrith.

8. Lead by example by property managing Council owned heritage places

Penrith Council has continued to provide positive leadership, facilitate and educate heritage property owners and provide them with guidelines and the technical know how, as well as demonstrating positive stewardship in maintaining and conserving their heritage assets.

Penrith City Council currently owns and manages, conserves and maintains 21 heritage listed items. There are conservation management plans and allocated funding currently in place for their continuing conservation and management.

Aim:

§ Increase community participation and proactive conservation and management of heritage places and assets.

§ Maintain Penrith Heritage listed items and maintain appropriate plans to conserve those items into the future.

Action:

§ Ensure Council is aware of the heritage places under its control and recommend action plans for maintenance and conservation.

§ Continue to manage and maintain Council’s heritage items in accordance with its Conservation Management Plans.

*Policy Review Committee Meeting*	*9 May 2011*
*Appendix 1 - Locality Plan*

*Policy Review Committee Meeting*	*9 May 2011*
*Appendix 2 - Initial Western Precinct Concept Plan*

*Policy Review Committee Meeting*	*9 May 2011*
*Appendix 3 - Updated Western Precinct Concept Plan*

*Policy Review Committee Meeting*	*9 May 2011*
*Appendix 4 - Western Precinct Street Types*

*Policy Review Committee Meeting*	*9 May 2011*
*Appendix 5 - Development Staging and Dwelling Yield*

*Policy Review Committee Meeting*	*9 May 2011*
*Appendix 6 - Initial Village Centre Concept Plan*

*Policy Review Committee Meeting*	*9 May 2011*
*Appendix 7 - Updated Village Centre Concept Plan*

*Policy Review Committee Meeting*	*9 May 2011*
*Appendix 1 - Penrith Shuttle Bus Feasibility Study Options*

*Policy Review Committee Meeting*	*9 May 2011*
*Appendix 2 - Current Shuttle Service Map*