12 August 2011

 

Dear Councillor,

In pursuance of the provisions of the Local Government Act, 1993 and the Regulations thereunder, notice is hereby given that an ORDINARY MEETING of Penrith City Council is to be held in the Council Chambers, Civic Centre, 601 High Street, Penrith on Monday 15 August 2011 at 7:30PM.

Attention is directed to the statement accompanying this notice of the business proposed to be transacted at the meeting.

Yours faithfully

 

Alan Stoneham

General Manager

BUSINESS

 

1.           LEAVE OF ABSENCE

 

2.           APOLOGIES

 

3.           CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

Ordinary Meeting - 18 July 2011.

 

4.           DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Pecuniary Interest (The Act requires Councillors who declare a pecuniary interest in an item to leave the meeting during discussion of that item)

Non-Pecuniary Conflict of Interest – Significant and Less than Significant (The Code of Conduct requires Councillors who declare a significant non-pecuniary conflict of interest in an item to leave the meeting during discussion of that item)

 

5.           ADDRESSING COUNCIL

 

6.           MAYORAL MINUTES

 

7.           NOTICES OF MOTION TO RESCIND A RESOLUTION

 

8.           NOTICES OF MOTION AND QUESTIONS ON NOTICE

 

9.           ADOPTION OF REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATION OF COMMITTEES

Local Traffic Committee Meeting - 1 August 2011.

Policy Review Committee Meeting - 1 August 2011.

 

10.         DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS

11.         REQUESTS FOR REPORTS AND MEMORANDUMS

12.         URGENT BUSINESS

13.         COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE


ORDINARY MEETING

 

Monday 15 August 2011

 

table of contents

 

 

 

 

ADVANCE AUSTRALIA FAIR

 

 

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

 

 

PRAYER

 

 

COUNCIL CHAMBER seating arrangements

 

 

meeting calendar

 

 

confirmation of minutes

 

 

PROCEDURE FOR ADDRESSING COUNCIL MEETING

 

 

MAYORAL MINUTES

 

 

report and recommendations of committees

 

 

DELIVERY program reports


 

ADVANCE AUSTRALIA FAIR

 

 

 

Australians all let us rejoice,

For we are young and free;

We’ve golden soil and wealth for toil;

Our home is girt by sea;

Our land abounds in nature’s gifts

Of beauty rich and rare;

In history’s page, let every stage

Advance Australia Fair.

 

In joyful strains then let us sing,

Advance Australia Fair.

 

Beneath our radiant Southern Cross

We’ll toil with hearts and hands;

To make this Commonwealth of ours

Renowned of all the lands;

For those who’ve come across the seas

We’ve boundless plains to share;

With courage let us all combine

To Advance Australia Fair.

 

In joyful strains then let us sing,

Advance Australia Fair.

 



Statement of Recognition of Penrith City’s

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Cultural Heritage

 

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

 

 

PRAYER

 

 

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

 

 

 

 


For members of the public addressing the meeting

 
Council Chambers

Text Box: Lectern

Group Managers                          

                
          

 
Seating Arrangements

 

 

 

Director
Craig Butler

 

 

Director
Barry Husking

 

 

 

General Manager
Alan Stoneham

Deputy Mayor
Councillor
Jim Aitken OAM
South Ward

 

Senior Governance Officer
Glenn Schuil

 

 

Minute Clerk

 

 

 

 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 


                                                        

 

 

Text Box: Public Gallery
Text Box: Managers
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Group Managers                          

                
          

 
   


B&WHORIZ

2011 MEETING CALENDAR

January 2011 - December 2011

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

 

 

 

TIME

JAN

FEB

MAR

APRIL

MAY

JUNE

JULY

AUG

SEPT

OCT

NOV

DEC

Mon

Mon

Mon

Mon

Mon

Mon

Mon

Mon

Mon

Mon

Mon

Mon

 

Ordinary Council Meeting

7.30pm

 

7

 

11v

2

 

 

15#@

5ü

10

7

12

(7.00pm)

 

28#@

21

 

30#*

27

18

 

19^

(7.00pm)

 

21#

 

Policy Review Committee

7.30pm

 

 

14

4

9

6

4

1

 

 

14

5

31

21

 

 

 

 

 

22

26

31

 

 

Operational Plan Public Forum

 

6.00pm

 

 

 

 

Wed

4

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 v

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

 *

Meeting at which the Operational Plan for 2011-2012 is adopted

 #

Meetings at which the Operational Plan quarterly reviews are presented

 @

Delivery Program progress reports

 ^

Election of Mayor/Deputy Mayor

 ü

Meeting at which the 2010-2011 Annual Statements are presented

 

Meeting at which any comments on the 2010-2011 Annual Statements are presented

-           Extraordinary Meetings are held as required.

-           Members of the public are invited to observe meetings of the Council (Ordinary and Policy Review Committee).

Should you wish to address Council, please contact the Senior Governance Officer, Glenn Schuil.

 


UNCONFIRMED MINUTES

 OF THE ORDINARY MEETING OF PENRITH CITY COUNCIL HELD IN THE

COUNCIL CHAMBERS

ON MONDAY 18 JULY 2011 AT 7:34PM

NATIONAL ANTHEM 

The meeting opened with the National Anthem.

STATEMENT OF RECOGNITION

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

PRAYER

The Council Prayer was read by the Rev Neil Checkley.

PRESENT

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

 

LEAVE OF ABSENCE

Leave of Absence was previously granted to Councillor Ben Goldfinch for the period 17 July 2011 to 26 July 2011 inclusive.

Leave of Absence was previously granted to Councillor Karen McKeown for the period 9 July 2011 to 24 July 2011 inclusive.

APOLOGIES

There were no apologies.

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES - Ordinary Meeting - 27 June 2011

162  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ross Fowler OAM seconded Councillor Marko Malkoc that the minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of 27 June 2011 be confirmed.

 

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Nil.

 

Reports of Committees

 

1        Report and Recommendations of the Access Committee Meeting held on 1 June 2011       

163  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jackie Greenow seconded Councillor Kaylene Allison that the recommendations contained in the Report and Recommendations of the Access Committee meeting held on 1 June, 2011 be adopted.

 

2        Report and Recommendations of the Penrith Valley Community Safety Partnership Meeting held on 29 June 2011                                                                                          

164  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Kaylene Allison seconded Councillor Jackie Greenow that the recommendations contained in the Report and Recommendations of the Penrith Valley Community Safety Partnership meeting held on 29 June, 2011 be adopted.

 

 

3        Report and Recommendations of the Local Traffic Committee Meeting held on 4 July 2011                                                                                                                                             

165  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Marko Malkoc seconded Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM that the recommendations contained in the Report and Recommendations of the Local Traffic Committee meeting held on 4 July, 2011 be adopted.

 

 

DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS

 

A Leading City

 

1        Congratulations to recipients of Queen's Birthday Honours                                         

166  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Marko Malkoc seconded Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM that the information contained in the report on Congratulations to recipients of Queen's Birthday Honours be received.

 

 

4        Remuneration Tribunal Determination for Mayor and Councillors for 2011/2012    

167  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Marko Malkoc seconded Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Remuneration Tribunal Determination for Mayor and Councillors for 2011/2012 be received.

2.     The fees payable to the Mayor and Councillors for 2011/2012 be set at the maximum level permitted.

 

 

5        Pecuniary Interest Returns                                                                                               

168  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Marko Malkoc seconded Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM that the information contained in the report on Pecuniary Interest Returns be received.

 

 

 

7        Loan Borrowing Program                                                                                                

169  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Marko Malkoc seconded Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM that the information contained in the report on Loan Borrowing Program be received.

 

8        Summary of Investments & Banking for the period 1 June 2011 to 30 June 2011 and Agency Collection Methods                                                                                              

170  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Marko Malkoc seconded Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Summary of Investments & Banking for the period 1 June 2011 to 30 June 2011 and Agency Collection Methods be received.

2.     The Certificate of the Responsible Accounting Officer and Summaries of Investments and Performance for the period 1 June 2011 to 30 June 2011 be noted and accepted.

3.     The graphical investment analysis as at 30 June 2011 be noted.

 

3        Draft Penrith City Centre Car Parking Strategy                                                           

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

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Draft Penrith City Centre Car Parking Strategy be received.

2.     The Draft Penrith City Centre Car Parking Strategy be placed on public exhibition for a period of 28 days.

 

6        2011 Local Government Association Conference                                                           

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

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on 2011 Local Government Association Conference   be received.

2.     Council nominate Councillors Prue Guillaume, Greg Davies, Marko Malkoc, Ross Fowler OAM, Kevin Crameri OAM, Jim Aitken OAM and Ben Goldfinch  as  its voting delegates to attend the 2011 LGA Conference to be held in Shoalhaven from 23 - 26 October 2011.

3.     Council nominate Councillor Jackie Greenow as an observer to attend the 2011 LGA Conference.

4.     Council sponsor up to three (3) Aboriginal observers, nominated by the Deerubbin Local Aboriginal Land Council, to attend the 2011 LGA Conference.

 

2        Commemorating Penrith City Council's 140th anniversary celebrations                    

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

That:

1.      The information contained in the report on Commemorating Penrith City Council's 140th anniversary celebrations be received.

2.      The officer responsible for preparation of this report be thanked for their efforts in researching and preparing the material contained in the report.

 

 

A City of Opportunities

 

9        Progress Report - Bicentenary of the First Crossing of the Blue Mountains - 2013    

174  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor John Thain seconded Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM that the information contained in the report on Progress Report - Bicentenary of the First Crossing of the Blue Mountains - 2013 be received.

 

10      Variation of 88b restriction and approval of Development Application DA11/0132 for proposed inground swimming pool at Lot 27 DP 270417 (No. 52) Portrush Crescent, Luddenham Applicant: Better Pools and Spas;  Owner: J & M Walsh and M Macri and L Delaney

         

175  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jackie Greenow seconded Councillor Robert Ardill

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Variation of 88b restriction and approval of Development Application DA11/0132 for proposed inground swimming pool at Lot 27 DP 270417 (No. 52) Portrush Crescent, Luddenham be received

2.     The restriction on the use of the land relating to the rear setback at Lot 27 DP 270417 (No.52) Portrush Crescent, Luddenham is varied to allow construction of an inground swimming pool in the location shown on plans and the Common Seal of Penrith City Council be affixed to all necessary documentation

3.     Any future requests for a setback variation for lots backing onto the golf course be given Council’s Common Seal under the following circumstances:

3.1       The applicant demonstrates the proposed location of pool is necessary to encroach within the rear setback

3.2       The proposed pool maintains a minimum setback of 4.0m from the rear boundary

 

3.3       The applicant can adequately demonstrate that the pool can be integrated into the landscaping/golf course interface in an acceptable manner

3.4       The application is notified to the adjoining property owners

4.     The application for the swimming pool be approved subject the following conditions:

4.1       A001 – Approved Architecturally Drawn Plans

A008 – Works to BCA requirements

A019 – Occupation Certificate

A046 – Construction Certificate Prior to Building Works

D009 – Covering of Waste Storage Areas

D014 – Plant and Equipment Noise

E001 – BCA Compliance

F006 – Water Tank & Nuisance

H001 – Stamped Plans & erection of Site Notice 1

H041 – Hours of Work

H038 – Connection of Rainwater Tank Supply

H039 – Rainwater Tank Pumps

J001 – Excavated Material Removal

J002 – Fencing When Water In Pool

J004 – Pool Fence - Residential

J007 – Boundary Fencing

J010 – Pool Board Sign

L008 – Tree Preservation Order

P002 – Fees Associated With Council Land

Q01F – Notice of Commencement & Appointment of PCA2

Q05F – Occupation Certificate (Class 10) & Earthworks.

Special Conditions

A Special: Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate for the development, the variation of the restriction on the use of land fourteenthly referred to in the Section 88b Instrument shall be registered. The variation shall be in accordance with the terms approved by Penrith City Council.

L Special: “Landscaping is to be provided along the entire rear boundary in association with the swimming pool development in order to provide appropriate screening from the golf course interface. This shall be in the form of a mixture of suitable species including or similar to Leptospermum, Grevillea, Melaleuca and Banksia. All planting shall be at a minimum height of 1.2m when planted and must be maintained at a minimum height of 1.5 metres. A detailed landscape plan shall be submitted to Council for consideration and approval prior to the Construction Certificate being issued”

J Special: “Pool fencing shall be constructed of see-through glass panel fencing or similar. Details are to be provided prior to the issue of a construction certificate”.

 

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

 

For

Against

 

Councillor Kaylene Allison

 

Councillor Prue Guillaume

 

Councillor Kath Presdee

 

Councillor Greg Davies

 

Councillor John Thain

 

Councillor Jackie Greenow

 

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM

 

Councillor Ross Fowler OAM

 

Councillor Robert Ardill

 

Councillor Mark Davies

 

Councillor Tanya Davies

 

Councillor Marko Malkoc

 

Councillor Jim Aitken OAM

 

 

 

A Green City

 

11      Tenders for the Processing, Treatment and/or Disposal of Garbage - Tender No 06-10/11 

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

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Tenders for the Processing, Treatment and/or Disposal of Garbage - Tender No 06-10/11 be received.

2.     The contracts for the Processing, Treatment and/or Disposal of Garbage – Tender No 06-10/11 and the Disposal of Garbage – Tender No 06-10/11 be awarded to SITA Environmental Solutions for the terms outlined in the report and documentation be prepared for signing under the Common Seal of the Council of the City of Penrith.

 

 

 

 

A Liveable City

 

14      Tender Reference 21-10/11, Roof Replacement and Rectification at Ripples Aquatic Centre                                                                                                                                             

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

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Tender Reference 21-10/11, Roof Replacement and Rectification at Ripples Aquatic Centre be received.

2.     A contract be entered into with a delayed starting date between Bilas Knight Pty Limited and Penrith City Council.

 

12      Pathway construction along Haynes Street, Penrith from No. 17-25 to Thurston Street      

178   A MOTION was moved by Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM seconded Councillor Ross Fowler OAM

That:

1.      The information contained in the report on Pathway construction along Haynes Street, Penrith from No. 17-25 to Thurston Street be received.

2.      The amount of $24,000 be allocated from North Ward voted works to fund pathway construction along Haynes Street, Penrith from No. 17-25 to Thurston Street.

3.      A report be presented to the next Ordinary Meeting of Council detailing the location of existing path paving and missing links within Lemongrove and North Penrith area.

 

13      Pathway construction along Barber Avenue, Penrith                                                    

179  A MOTION was moved by Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM seconded Councillor Ross Fowler OAM

That:

1.      The information contained in the report on Pathway construction along Barber Avenue, Penrith be received.

2.      The amount of $44,000 be allocated in equal amounts from North, South and East Wards’ voted works to construct a concrete footpath along the southern side of Barber Avenue, Penrith from Colless Street to Parker Street, given the benefit to all residents who utilise the hospital.

 

An AMENDMENT was moved by Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor John Thain

That:

1.      The information contained in the report on Pathway construction along Barber Avenue, Penrith be received.

 

2.      Council defer the report to the next Council Ordinary meeting and write to the Local Member for Penrith, Mr Stuart Ayres MP, advising him of the cost of this work and seeking State funding to assist in construction of this footpath.

The Mover and Seconder agreed to the AMENDMENT and withdrew their MOTION.

The AMENDMENT became the SUBSTANTIVE MOTION.

The MOTION was PUT.

The MOTION was CARRIED.

 

15      Nation Building Black Spot Program 2011/2012 - Funding Confirmation                  

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

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Nation Building Black Spot Program 2011/2012 - Funding Confirmation be received.

2.     Council accept grant funding of $870,000 offered for the five successful Black Spot Projects shown in Table 1, under the 100% Federally Funded Nation Building Black Spot Program for the 2011/2012 financial year.

3.     Council write to the Federal Member for Lindsay, Mr David Bradbury MP, thanking him for the level of funding and continued support of road safety improvements.

 

 

REQUESTS FOR REPORTS AND MEMORANDUMS

 

RR 1          Civic Reception to Honour Sporting Achievements of Jake Stein                       

Councillor Tanya Davies requested that, given the extraordinary sporting achievement of Jake Stein of Luddenham, at the IAAF World Youth Octathlon in July 2011, a civic reception be held in his honour.

 

RR 2          Leave of Absence                                                                                                     

Councillor Robert Ardill requested Leave of Absence for the following periods:

8 August 2011 to 12 August 2011 inclusive; and

20 November 2011 to 21 December 2011 inclusive.

 

RR 3          Penrith Baseball Club - Funding Request                                                             

Councillor Ross Fowler OAM requested a report to Council on options for funding to assist in providing infrastructure at the Penrith Baseball Club.

 

 

 

RR 4          Penrith Business Alliance                                                                                        

Councillor John Thain requested a report to the Policy Review Committee detailing the Penrith Business Alliance’s core business and achievements.

 

RR 5          Children's Services Co-operative - Financial Position                                          

Councillor Prue Guillaume requested a report to Council, reassuring the community of the strong financial position of the Children’s Services Co-operative.

 

RR 6          Establishment of a Men's Shed in the Penrith LGA                                             

Councillor Prue Guillaume requested a memo reply to all Councillors on grant opportunities that may be available for use by the local committee recently formed to establish a Men’s Shed in the Penrith Local Government Area.

 

RR 7          Impact of Carbon Tax on Penrith LGA                                                                

Councillor Mark Davies requested a report to Council regarding the impact upon Council and the residents of the Penrith Local Government Area of the proposed Carbon Tax.

 

There being no further business the Chairperson declared the meeting closed the time being 8:25 pm.

 



PENRITH CITY COUNCIL

 

Procedure for Addressing Meetings

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

The person addressing the meeting needs to clearly indicate:

 

·     Their name;

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Glenn McCarthy

Public Officer

02 4732 7649                                                     


 

 

 

 

THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT BLANK  INTENTIONALLY


Notices Of Motion

 

Item                                                                                                                                                Page

 

1        Request for Councillor Prue Guillaume to provide an unreserved written public apology

 

 



Ordinary Meeting                                                                                                15 August 2011

 

1          Request for Councillor Prue Guillaume to provide an unreserved written public apology            

 

 

Councillor Mark Davies TO MOVE:

 

“That Council request Councillor Prue Guillaume to provide an unreserved written public apology to Councillor Robert Ardill, Councillor Mark Davies and the Member for Mulgoa, Councillor Tanya Davies regarding the inaccurate and irresponsible comments made to the media (Penrith Press, 15/7/2011) titled ‘Libs urged childcare cut claim’.”

 

 

  


 

 

 

 

THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT BLANK  INTENTIONALLY


Reports of Committees

 

Item                                                                                                                                                Page

 

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

 

2        Report and Recommendations of the Policy Review Committee Meeting held on 1 August 2011

 

 



Ordinary Meeting                                                                                                15 August 2011

A Liveable City

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE
 Local Traffic Committee MEETING

HELD ON 1 August, 2011

 

 

 

PRESENT

Michael Alderton - Road Network Services Engineer (Chairperson), Wayne Mitchell – Group Manager - City Infrastructure, Adam Wilkinson – Engineering Services Manager, Councillor Karen McKeown, David Lance - Roads and Traffic Authority, Constable Bill Pearson – Penrith Police, Senior Constable Mark Elliott – St Marys Police, Mark Holmes – Representative for the Member for Mulgoa, Ross Grove – Representative for the Member for Penrith, Daniel Davidson – Road Safety Co‑ordinator, David Drozd – Senior Traffic Engineer, Ruth Byrnes - Senior Traffic Officer.

 

IN ATTENDANCE

Steven Purvis – Senior Ranger.

 

APOLOGIES

Apologies were accepted from Councillor Jackie Greenow, Mr Bart Bassett - Member for Londonderry, Jacob Strong – Trainee Engineer.

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES - Local Traffic Committee Meeting - 4 July 2011

The minutes of the Local Traffic Committee Meeting of 4 July 2011 were confirmed.

 

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

 There were no declarations of interest.

 

DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS

 

A Liveable City

 

1        Barber Avenue, Kingswood - Proposed Provision of Timed Parking Restrictions at Nepean Public and Private Hospital                                                                                              

LTC Comment

Councillor McKeown requested that investigations be undertaken to consider the removal of one of the pedestrian phases at the signalised intersection of Parker Street/Derby Street, Kingswood.  Councillor McKeown raised concerns regarding traffic delays for westbound traffic in Derby Street as pedestrians crossed Parker Street.

RECOMMENDED

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Barber Avenue, Kingswood - Proposed Provision of Timed Parking Restrictions at Nepean Public and Private Hospital be received.

2.     Consultation be conducted with Nepean Public Hospital, Nepean Private Hospital and affected businesses in Barber Avenue regarding the provision of “2P 8:30am–6pm MON-FRI” in Barber Avenue, Kingswood.  Any substantial objections to be referred back to the Local Traffic Committee for consideration.

3.     Subject to no substantial objections from the notification period, all unrestricted parking spaces on Barber Avenue, Kingswood, to the east of the intersection of Parker Street, be changed to “2P 8:30am–6pm MON-FRI”.  

4.     Consultation be conducted with NSW Police, affected businesses and stakeholders regarding investigations into providing timed parking restrictions, possibly 2P on Derby Street (northern side between Parker Street and Somerset Street), Somerset Street (western side between Derby Street and Great Western Highway), Great Western Highway (south side between Somerset Street and Parker Street), and Parker Street (eastern side between Great Western Highway and Derby Street), and a further report be submitted back to the Local Traffic Committee advising of the outcomes of the investigations.

5.     The General Manager of Nepean Private Hospital and the Chief Executive Officer of Nepean Public Hospital be advised of Council’s resolution.

6.     Council investigate the signals at Parker Street/Derby Street, Penrith, in regard to options for improvements and discuss the findings with the Roads and Traffic Authority.

 

2        Council Car Parks - Blanket Approval for Provision of Accessible Car Parking Spaces    

RECOMMENDED

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Council Car Parks - Blanket Approval for Provision of Accessible Car Parking Spaces be received.

2.     Delegated authority be granted to Council’s Road Network Services Engineer for the upgrade of accessible off-street car parking spaces and associated signage within all Council’s car parks, in accordance with Australian Standard AS2890.6-2009 “Off-street parking for people with disabilities” as the car parks are resurfaced and/or re-linemarked.

3.     The subsequent increase in accessible parking spaces and loss of standard car parking spaces within Council’s car parks be acknowledged as part of these upgrade works.

 

3        Quarry Road, Erskine Park - Proposed Installation of "No Stopping" Signage        

RECOMMENDED

That:

1.         The information contained in the report on Quarry Road, Erskine Park - Proposed Installation of "No Stopping" Signage be received.

 

2.     Parking restrictions be introduced at the bend to improve delineation and reduce the instances of corner cutting.  Restrictions to include:

a.   “No Stopping (L)” sign (R5-400) be installed in line with the commencement of the BB linemarking, north of the main entrance to 2-26 Quarry Road

b.   the existing “No Stopping (L & R)” sign (easternmost) be replaced with a “No Stopping (R)” sign (R5-400)

c.   “No Stopping (R)” and “No Stopping (L)” signs (R5-400) be installed on the northern side of Quarry Road, between the two driveways to 15-23 Quarry Road, Erskine Park

d.   the “No Stopping (L & R)” sign on the northern side of Quarry Road, Erskine Park be removed.

3.     The staff member from 2-26 Quarry Road, Erskine Park and business operators of 15-23 Quarry Road, Erskine Park be advised of Council’s resolution.

 

 

4        Marrett Way, Cranebrook - Request for Provision of Traffic Calming Measures     

RECOMMENDED

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Marrett Way, Cranebrook - Request for Provision of Traffic Calming Measures be received.

2.     The project for mid-block traffic calming improvements in Marrett Way, Cranebrook be entered into Council’s Traffic Facility Prioritisation Process.  When the project receives priority against other listed sites, Council’s Design Co-ordinator be requested to prepare a design for the location, with a further report submitted to the Local Traffic Committee for design plan consideration.

3.     Councillor Crameri OAM and the resident be advised of Council’s resolution.

 

5        Carpenter Street & Bennett Road, Colyton - Proposed Signage & Linemarking Changes at Intersection                                                                                                                         

RECOMMENDED

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Carpenter Street & Bennett Road, Colyton - Proposed Signage & Linemarking Changes at Intersection be received.

2.     Consultation be undertaken with the business located on the corner of Carpenter Street and Bennett Road, Colyton and all affected residents, with regard to the proposed sign and linemarking amendments, and any substantial objections be referred back to the Local Traffic Committee.

3.     Subject to no substantial objections, changes to signage and linemarking at the Carpenter Street & Bennett Road, Colyton intersection be implemented as follows:

a.   20m “No Stopping” be provided on all approaches and departures, with the exception of the departure side on Carpenter Street for the eastbound lane, in which 10m “No Stopping” followed by 10m “No Parking” be provided

b.   a separation line (S1) be provided south of the intersection on Bennett Road for the southbound lane

c.   the parking lanes (E1) on all departures at the intersection be aligned with the proposed “No Stopping” restrictions.

4.     The Roads and Traffic Authority be advised of Council’s resolution.

5.     Council remove the unauthorised “No Parking” signs currently outside number 90 Carpenter Street, Colyton and advise the adjoining resident accordingly.

 

 

6        Glenmore Parkway, Glenmore Park - 2011/2012 Nation Building Black Spot Road Safety Improvements                                                                                                                    

RECOMMENDED

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Glenmore Parkway, Glenmore Park - 2011/2012 Nation Building Black Spot Road Safety Improvements be received.

2.     Improvements to the bend in Glenmore Parkway 200m west of The Northern Road, Glenmore Park, including all associated linemarking and signage as per Plan No. AG 138 Amendment A be finalised and endorsed, subject to separate Roads and Traffic Authority approval of the transverse markings, with funding available under the 2011/12 Nation Building Black Spot Program.  This plan supersedes Plan AG 138 that was previously endorsed.

 

 GENERAL BUSINESS

 

GB 1          Ninth Avenue, Llandilo – Xavier College Walkathon on Friday 16 September 2011  (Raised Council)                                                                                                                           

The Xavier College in Ninth Avenue, Llandilo has submitted an application for approval to hold its annual walkathon on Friday, 16 September 2011, commencing from the school in Ninth Avenue, Llandilo and using the footpaths and nature strip, then proceeding through Cranebrook and back to the school.

 

The school has advised that it is anticipated that 900 students will be taking part in the walkathon, commencing at 9:30am and returning to the school by 1:00pm.  The school will stagger the commencement of groups by ages to ensure there is no sudden and large influx of students on the proposed route.  There will also be 16 supervision points along the route in addition to staff walking with the students.

The proposed route is:

 

·    left out of the school on Ninth Avenue,

·    cross The Northern Road at the traffic signals, turn right and proceed to Andromeda Drive,

·    turn left into Andromeda Drive and proceed to Vincent Road,

·    turn left at Vincent Road and proceed to Grays Lane,

·    turn left into Grays Lane and proceed to Hindmarsh Street,

·    turn left into Hindmarsh Street and proceed to Andromeda Drive,

·    turn left into Andromeda Drive and complete a second circuit of the course, and return back to the school grounds via The Northern Road and Ninth Avenue.

 

It is expected there will be minimal disruption to traffic in the area as all students will be walking on footpaths and nature strip areas only, outside normal peak hours.

 

The school also intends to inform all residents on the route by letterbox drop in the week leading up to the walkathon.

 

The event has been held in previous years with no issues raised by the Police, Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) or residents.

 

According to the RTA Guidelines for Special Events Version 3.4 August 2006, this type of event is considered a Class 3 Special Event which requires that the applicant notify the Emergency Services of the event.

 

LTC Comment

 

The Penrith Police representative advised that the application has been received and approved by the Police.

 

RECOMMENDED

 

That:

1.   The event applicant be advised that this is a Class 3 Event under the Roads and Traffic Authority’s (RTA) “Guide to Traffic and Transport Management for Special Events”, and that all conditions and requirements specified in the Guide must be complied with prior to the event.

2.   The Traffic Management Plan submitted by the event applicant, detailing the proposed event route to be held on Friday 16 September 2011, be endorsed.

3.   The event applicant submit to Council a copy of Public Liability Insurance (usually a Certificate of Currency) of minimum $10 million.  In addition, the event applicant indemnify Council in writing against all claims for damage and injury which may result from the proposed event.

4.   The event applicant obtain separate approval from the NSW Police and submit a Schedule 1 Form under the Summary Offences Act to the NSW Police.  A copy of the NSW Police approval be submitted to Council prior to the event.  The organiser ensure that participants obey all Police directions and road rules during the event.

5.   Where Traffic Controllers are to be used, all Traffic Controllers have current Roads and Traffic Authority certification.

6.   The event applicant deliver an information letterbox drop and personal communication to all business proprietors, property owners/tenants, residents and other occupants in the affected streets two weeks prior to the event.  Any concerns or requirements must be resolved by the applicant or referred back to Council for consideration.  Should a matter not be able to be resolved, the event may be postponed.

7.   The event applicant notify private bus companies of the proposed event and submit a copy of this notification to Council, prior to the event.

8.   The event organiser notify ambulance and fire brigade (NSW Fire Brigade and RFS) and SES of the proposed event and submit a copy of this notification to Council, prior to the event.

9.   The applicant be advised of Council’s resolution.

 

GB 2          Explorers Way, St Clair – Speeding Vehicles  (Raised Representative for the Member for Mulgoa)                  

The Representative for the Member for Mulgoa raised concerns on behalf of a resident concerning vehicles speeding in Explorers Way, St Clair, between Denver Road and Erskine Park Road.

RECOMMENDED  that Council investigate the matter.

 

GB 3          Littlefields Road, Mulgoa – Enforcement of Speeding Vehicles  (Raised Penrith Police)      

The Penrith Police representative advised that Police have investigated Council’s request for enforcement of speeding vehicles on Littlefields Road, Mulgoa, and that the location is unsuitable for both LIDAR and stationary radar.  This advice has been referred to Council.

RECOMMENDED that the Committee note the information.

 

GB 4          Henry Street, Penrith – Pedestrian Safety  (Raised Penrith Police)                     

The Penrith Police representative advised that Police have investigated Council’s concerns about pedestrian safety at the pedestrian crossing in Henry Street, Penrith, outside the Tax Office, and that this location is currently rostered for enforcement on a regular basis.

 

GB 5          Vincent Road/The Northern Road, Cranebrook – Traffic Issues  (Raised        

                   Councillor Crameri OAM)                                                                                     

Council’s Group Manager ~ City Infrastructure raised concerns on behalf of Councillor Crameri OAM regarding vehicles turning right from Vincent Road onto The Northern Road, Cranebrook, and travelling in the opposing traffic lane due to the existing “No Right Turn” restrictions and median.  In addition, vehicles turn left from Vincent Road into The Northern Road, Cranebrook and then U-turn at Seventh Avenue to travel south on The Northern Road.

RECOMMENDED that Council investigate the matter.

 

 

 

There being no further business the Chairperson declared the meeting closed, the time being 10:10am.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That the recommendations contained in the Report and Recommendations of the Local Traffic Committee meeting held on 1 August, 2011 be adopted.

 

 

 


Ordinary Meeting                                                                                                15 August 2011

A Leading City

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE
 Policy Review Committee MEETING

HELD ON 1 August, 2011

 

 

 

PRESENT

Deputy Mayor Councillor Jim Aitken OAM, Councillors, Kaylene Allison, Robert Ardill (arrived 7.32pm), Kevin Crameri OAM, Greg Davies (arrived 7.33pm), Mark Davies, Ross Fowler OAM, Ben Goldfinch, Jackie Greenow, Prue Guillaume, Marko Malkoc, Karen McKeown, Kath Presdee and John Thain.

 

APOLOGIES

An apology was received for Councillor Tanya Davies.

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES - Policy Review Committee Meeting - 6 June 2011

The minutes of the Policy Review Committee Meeting of 6 June 2011 were confirmed.

 

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

 

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM declared a Non Pecuniary Conflict of Interest – Less than Significant in Item 3, as he resides in one of the suburbs subject to the report.

 

DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS

 

A City of Opportunities

 

3        Neighbourhood Renewal Program - Llandilo Neighbourhood Action Plan

Jeni Pollard, Neighbourhood Renewal Programme Coordinator and Katerina Tahija, Acting Community Engagement Officer gave a presentation on the Neighbourhood Renewal Program.

Councillor Karen McKeown left the meeting, the time being 7:53pm.                                        

RECOMMENDED

That:

1.                The information contained in the report on Neighbourhood Renewal     Program - Llandilo Neighbourhood Action Plan be received

2.                Council endorse the Neighbourhood Action Plan for Llandilo as provided in   Attachment 2 to this report.

3.                Council staff be thanked for their efforts in driving a successful program.

                   4.       A letter of thanks be sent to the Principal of Llandilo Public School,                                  thanking Colleen Williams for her assistance throughout the program.

 

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

 

A Leading City

 

1        Mount Vernon Development Contributions Plan                                                           

RECOMMENDED

That:

1.     The information contained in the report regarding the Mount Vernon Development Contributions Plan be received

2.     Upon allocation of remaining funds in the Plan for traffic measures at the intersection of Kerrs Road and Mount Vernon Road (as described in this report), Council authorise staff to rescind the Mount Vernon Development Contributions Plan in accordance with the requirements of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act and Regulations.

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

For

Against

 

Councillor Kaylene Allison

 

Councillor Prue Guillaume

 

Councillor Kath Presdee

 

Councillor Greg Davies

 

Councillor Karen McKeown

 

Councillor John Thain

 

Councillor Jackie Greenow

 

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM

 

Councillor Ross Fowler OAM

 

Councillor Robert Ardill

 

Councillor Mark Davies

 

Councillor Ben Goldfinch

 

Councillor Marko Malkoc

 

Councillor Jim Aitken OAM

 

 

2        2011 Local Government Association of NSW Annual Conference                               

RECOMMENDED

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on 2011 Local Government Association of NSW Annual Conference be received.

2.     The seven motions detailed in the report including the amendment to Motion 6 with the addition of the words “per lot/cap” be submitted for inclusion in the 2011 Local Government Association NSW Conference Business Paper.

3.     Councillor Karen McKeown be nominated as an observer to attend the 2011 LGA Conference.

 

 

 

 

A Vibrant City

 

4        Place Making and Public Art Policy                                                                                

RECOMMENDED

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Place Making and Public Art Policy be received.

2.     Council support the placing of the draft Place Making and Public Art Policy on 28 day public exhibition.

 

There being no further business the Chairperson declared the meeting closed the time being 7:59pm.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That the recommendations contained in the Report and Recommendations of the Policy Review Committee meeting held on 1 August, 2011 be adopted.

 

 

  


DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS

 

Item                                                                                                                                                Page

 

 

A Leading City

 

1        2010-2011 Operational Plan - June Quarter and Year End Review

 

2        Audit Committee

 

3        Council Property - Leasing of Part of Tench Reserve for Provision of a Mobile Food Unit (Kiosk)

 

4        Social and Economic Benefits of Visitors to the City of Penrith

 

5        Success for Penrith in Greater Sydney Tourism Awards

 

6        City Marketing Event Sponsorship Proposals

 

7        Summary of Investments and Banking for the period 1 July to 31 July 2011

 

URGENT

 

25      Authority to expel persons from Council meetings 

 

A City of Opportunities

 

8        No Boundaries Project: Grant Applications - Arts NSW and Australia Council for the Arts

 

9        Erskine Business Park - Southern Link Road Network Strategic Transport Assessment

 

10      Development Application DA11/0025 Proposed Health Facility Lot 2 DP 157408 (No. 26) Gidley Street, St Marys Applicant: Savills Project Management;  Owner: State Property Authority

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

 

11      Development Applications DA11/0511, DA11/0512, DA11/0514, DA11/0515, DA11/0516, DA11/0517 for Subdivision of the Western Precinct, St Marys Release Area (Jordan Springs) Lot 1036 DP 1149525 (No.1070 - 1170) The Northern Road, Llandilo Applicant: Maryland Development Company Pty Ltd;  Owner: St Marys Land Ltd

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

 

 

 

A Green City

 

12      Council Wins 2011 Waste Minimisation Award                                                            165

 

13      Penrith Stormwater Harvesting and Managed Aquifer Recharge Project - Public Tender for Design & Investigation

  

 

A Liveable City

 

14      Path paving in the Lemongrove / North Penrith area

 

15      Provision of bubblers, seating and lighting at Jamison Park Dog Off Leash Area

 

16      Tender Reference 25-10/11 for the provision of Grave Digging Services

 

17      Memory Park Improvement Project

 

18      Proposed Development of Andrews Road Baseball Facility

 

19      Draft Sportsground Management Strategy

 

20      Parks and Leisure Association Conference

 

21      Federal Government 2012/13 'Nation Building Blackspot Program' Nominations

 

22      RTA 2011/12 Road Funding Grants

 

23      Local Government Road Safety Program - Roads & Traffic Authority Grant Funding 2011-2012

 

A Vibrant City

 

24      Healthy Communities Grant Application

 

 


A Leading City

 

Item                                                                                                                                                Page

 

1        2010-2011 Operational Plan - June Quarter and Year End Review

 

2        Audit Committee

 

3        Council Property - Leasing of Part of Tench Reserve for Provision of a Mobile Food Unit (Kiosk)

 

4        Social and Economic Benefits of Visitors to the City of Penrith

 

5        Success for Penrith in Greater Sydney Tourism Awards

 

6        City Marketing Event Sponsorship Proposals

 

7        Summary of Investments and Banking for the period 1 July to 31 July 2011

 

URGENT

 

25      Authority to expel persons from Council meetings

 

 



Ordinary Meeting                                                                                                15 August 2011

A Leading City

 

 

1

2010-2011 Operational Plan - June Quarter and Year End Review   

 

Compiled by:               Geraldine Brown, Budget Accountant

Ken Lim, Management Planning Co-ordinator

Andrew Moore, Financial Services Manager

Authorised by:            Barry Husking, Director   

 

Objective

We demonstrate accountability, transparency and ethical conduct

Community Outcome

A Council that behaves responsibly and ethically (5)

Strategic Response

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

       

 

Executive Summary

In accordance with the Local Government Act 1993 and the Integrated Planning and Reporting guidelines, Council must prepare a report on the progress on the:

·        Delivery Program 2009-2013, in respect to principal activities, planned timeframes and budgets, every six months and

·        Operational Plan 2010-11, in respect of the service activities and tasks in every 3 months.

This report focuses on the June end of year review of the 2010-11 Operational Plan. It covers 12 months of progress from 1 July 2010 to 30 June 2011 and forms part of the fourth and final instalment of the second year of the Council’s 4 Year Delivery Program 2009-2013. The Delivery Program report for the 6 month period from 1 January 2011 to 30 June 2011 will be reported separately to the Ordinary Meeting of Council on 5 September 2011.

 

Tonight’s report is divided into two sections:

 

Section 1:   June End of Year Review of the 2010-11 Operational Plan covering the performance summary of Council’s 45 services, completed tasks and projects and exception reporting.

Section 2:   A review of Council’s Financial Position as at 30 June 2011 including revised estimates and revotes identified in the recommended budget.

 

A brief executive summary of the results in each area is provided below.  Attachment 1 – 2010-11 Operational Plan, Services Performance and Financial Review Summary, (attached separately) provides detailed information on all three sections mentioned above, and is also available on Council’s website.  Councillors will receive copies of the Services Performance and Financial Review Summary report under separate cover as an enclosure to this Business Paper.

 


 

June End of Year Review - Services Performance Summary

The combined effort of Council’s 45 services for the year ended 30 June 2011 has resulted in a 90% achievement of the yearly requirement as required in the adopted 2010-11 Operational Plan, and is 10% below target.

 

Council’s Performance Planning System indicates that of Council’s 568 Tasks, Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and Capital and Operating Projects, 527 were either ‘on target’ or ‘completed’ by 30 June 2011.  Details of the remaining 41 items and the challenges they are facing have been included in Attachment 1 – 2010-11 Operational Plan, Services Performance and Financial Review Summary.

 

The cumulative budget result for the year as at June 2011 is a surplus of $58,764.  This result comprises both positive and negative variations to the original budget, with the most notable for the quarter being additional employee costs relating to end of year on-cost balancing to reflect increased superannuation, and changes to the net movement in Employee Leave Entitlements (ELE). In addition to these adjustments there are also projects proposed to be revoted into 2011-12 as they are not expected to be completed in the current financial year. 

 

This report recommends that the revised budget estimates identified in the report and detailed in Attachment 1 – 2010-11 Operational Plan, Services Performance and Financial Review Summary be adopted.

 

How is Progress Measured?

 

Progress for the Operational Plan is expressed through the use of actual results versus target expressed as percentages and ‘traffic light’ indicators.  The rating scales and parameters for each ‘traffic light’ are explained below.

 

Table 1: Guidelines for ‘Traffic Light’ Status Indicators

*

[Green]

On Target

90%+

A task, project, budget, or KPI is within 10% of targeted performance for that YTD period.

*

[Amber]

Attention Required

75-89%

A task, project, budget or KPI is within 11%-25% of targeted performance.  It is at risk of non-completion, and may be the subject of a proposed carry over or partial revote of works.  A comment is required about the issue, the focus required, and what will be done to address it.

[Red]

Not Delivered

<75%

A task, project, budget or KPI is more than 25% off its targeted performance and/or is the subject of a proposed revote of works.  A comment is required about the issue, the focus required, and what will be done to address it.

C

Completed

100%

Completed (usually applies to Capital & Operating Projects and Tasks with defined target dates).  Represents 100% completion.

 

 

 

 

Section 1: March Quarter Review – 2010-11 Operational Plan

The Operational Plan progress report for the period ending 30 June 2011 is the fourth and final quarterly review of Council’s 2010-11 Operational Plan, which in turn contributes to the achievement of Council’s Delivery Program 2009-13.

 

Each quarter, all Managers are required to report progress on each of their services, based on service activities, service budgets, tasks, Key Performance Indicators (KPIs), capital and operating projects as set out in the adopted 2010-11 Operational Plan. The results for the June end of year Quarter Review are as follows:

 

1.       Overall Services Performance Summary

Council’s Performance Planning System indicates that the combined effort of all services for the twelve month period ending 30 June 2011 has resulted in a 90% achievement of the yearly requirement as required under the adopted 2010-11 Operational Plan. Although this is 10% below the expected target for year, is it still a significant achievement to have delivered 90% of such a considerable program of works and services. This small shortfall highlights a number of challenges faced particular in delivering some of the larger dollar value capital projects, thus resulting in revote. A list of revotes and accompanying explanations are provided later in this report.

 

The contributing factors to this result are also summarised in the table below.

 

Table 2: Service Performance Summary

 

SERVICE PERFORMANCE SUMMARY

Completed

GREEN

(On Target)

AMBER

(Requiring Attention)

RED

(At Risk)

Totals

SERVICES OVERALL (excluding Controlled Entities)

 

45

(100%)

-

-

45

 

·     Tasks

140

(88%)

13

(8%)

5

(3%)

2

(1%)

160

·     Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)

 

131

(95%)

4

(3%)

3

(2%)

138

·     Capital Projects

122

(74%)

25

(15%)

14

(9%)

3

(2%)

164

·     Operating Projects

88

(83%)

8

(8%)

6

(6%)

4

(4%)

106

Totals

350

177

29

12

568

 

Analysis of Results

 

Table 2 shows that overall, all 45 Council services performed well. The key contributing factors to this positive result are :

·        96% of Tasks Completed or On Target

·        95% of KPIs were On Target

·        89% of Capital Projects were Completed or On Target, and

·        91% of Operating Projects were Completed or On Target.

 

2.       Highlights

On a positive note there were a number of highlights in the June quarter which are worthy of mention. These included:

 

·        Funding our Future – Council’s funding source to ensure the ongoing maintenance of existing assets and service levels as well as enhanced services in the areas of public domain maintenance, neighbourhood renewal, shared pathways and renewal of the Penrith and St Marys City Centres has been assured with IPART approving the Special Rate Variation following a very extensive community consultation program to gauge support for the variation, 7,346 responses from the community were received. Based on this feedback, Council lodged its application on 25 March 2011 and on 10 June, IPART approved Council's application at a reduced level resulting in the following rate increases over the next 4 years; 5.8% in 2011-12 (Year 1), 5.5% in 2012-13 (Year 2), 5% in 2013-14 (Year 3) and 4.5% in 2014-15 (Year 4). In total spread over 4 years, this is 9% above the approved and forecast CPI based rate peg.

·        Children’s Services - High levels of enrolment across Council’s Childcare services were achieved with annual target utilisation rates for Council’s Occasional Care Centres (OCC), Long Day Care (LDC) Centres and Before School Care (BSC) programs achieved or exceeded.

·        Civic and Community events - A comprehensive program, showcasing the City, was delivered this year including 71 civic receptions and events and 8 citizenship ceremonies. Highlights included the 10-year celebration of the Sydney 2000 Olympics, the annual primary and secondary school leaders’ receptions, the Australia Day celebrations and a ‘Thank You’ reception for Australia Day volunteers.

·        Cultural Development Award - The Neighbourhood Stories St Marys project, an initiative of Council's Neighbourhood Renewal Program, won an award at the NSW LGSA Cultural Awards at Parliament House in May 2011 recognising excellence in cultural development, resident participation, and capacity building.

·        Community satisfaction with Council services and facilities – the 2011 Community Survey conducted in May-June this year, revealed that :-

o   80% of residents were satisfied with Council’s overall performance compared with 9% dissatisfied (66% of residents rated satisfaction as ‘high’)

o   75% of residents were satisfied with the performance of Council staff compared with 17% dissatisfied (71% of residents rated satisfaction as ‘high’)

o   58% of residents were satisfied with the value they receive from their rates  compared with 19% dissatisfied (45% of residents rated satisfaction as ‘high’)

o   Penrith City Council outperformed comparable NSW councils in terms of resident satisfaction with overall council performance by 8% in 2011.

A full report on the results of the 2011 Community Survey will be presented to Council at the Policy Review Committee Meeting on 22 August 2011

·        Development Approvals (DA) median processing time at the end of June was 28 days improving on the projected target of 35 days. This result can be attributed to a high number of faster DA determinations compensating for the large number of older DAs being determined.

·        Footpath Construction - 2 kilometres of footpath were constructed this year exceeding the projected target of 1.5 kilometres.

·        Information Communications and Technology (ICT) Productivity Assessment completed – The external assessment carried out by Telstra identified 13 recommendations to improve productivity. 70% of the implementation plan was completed at the end of June identifying over 1,000 hours in staff time savings to be realised this year. Trials of new technology solutions are proving very successful.

·        Outstanding Visitors Information Centre - Council won the gold award for the best visitor information centre in Greater Sydney at the Greater Sydney Tourism Awards.

·        Penrith Station Commuter Car park - Construction began on the 1,000-space multi-level commuter carpark north of Penrith station in June. After more than two years of negotiations, the Defence Department and Landcom exchanged contracts of sale for the north Penrith army land including transferring the site to Council ownership. The car park is expected to be operational in April 2012.

·        Promoting Sustainability - Specific achievements included

o   The Garage Sale Trail event promoted a sense of ‘community’ encouraging reuse, recycling and resource conservation.

o   The inaugural year of the Louise Petchell Learning for Sustainability Scholarship where two staff awarded funding to further their knowledge and skills in the area of sustainability.

o   14 staff members complete their Certificate IV in Carbon Management.

o   8 free sustainability workshops held in May on topics such as composting, eco-renovating and green cleaning.

o   The launch of the Sustainable Schools Hub on Council’s website in June.

o   Council adopted a ‘Sustainable Events’ Policy in June

o   Reactivated the Sustainable Penrith Steering Group. This group will play an active role in driving the sustainability agenda within Council, and in elevating sustainability as a key corporate issue incorporating the quadruple bottom line.

·        Road resealing/resheeting program was completed on time and within budget with a total of 33 kilometres (170,000 sq m) of the road network resurfaced this year.

·        Waste Management – At the end of June, 61% of the City’s domestic waste had been diverted from landfill. Council is therefore on track to meet the NSW State Government’s target of 66% by 2014. A total of 79,109 tonnes of domestic waste was collected from Penrith households this year including 31,647 tonnes of organic waste, 20,317 tonnes of recyclables and 27,144 tonnes of residual garbage. The organics and recyclable components represented an increase of 9.5% and 2.5% respectively compared to 2009-10 whereas the residual garbage total reduced by 1% compared to last year.

More detailed commentary on each of these highlights are provided in Attachment 1.

 

3.       Completed Tasks and Projects

Another positive result coming from Table 2 is the identification of 350 tasks, capital and operating projects that were completed in the year ending 30 June 2011 of which 241 were completed within the fourth quarter.

 

Some of the key projects and tasks completed in the June quarter include

 

·        Bushland Management - The rehabilitation of Peachtree Creek completed and 13% increase in volunteers currently playing an active role in bushland management (Current number of volunteers is 264).

·        The annual Cancer Council Relay for Life 24-hour event was successfully held on 30 April and 1 May 2011 at Howell Oval, Penrith

·        Draft City Wide Strategy for Children completed

·        Childcare Centre Playground upgrades during the quarter occurred at Carita Childcare Centre, Grays Lane and Gumbirra Pre-Schools. Werrington County Childcare Centre playground design was also completed.

·        Community Services for Men – In March, Council organised the Men’s Space Forum attended by over 50 service providers, community and government agency representatives. In June Council promoted Men's Health Week where an information stall was set up at a local hardware centre to distribute men's health related information.

·        Disability Access Improvements including the construction of an accessible toilet at the Civic Centre, an update and reprint of the Penrith City Centre Access Map, the purchase of a wet wheelchair and accessories for the Penrith Swimming Centre and the installation of six sets of Tactile Ground Surface Indicators (TGSIs) across the City.

·        Graffiti Minimisation Strategy - 2,024 graffiti removal jobs were completed in 2010-11 (425 in the June quarter) and the Warner Graffiti Awareness Education Program successfully delivered 41 sessions to primary schools and 41 sessions to secondary schools. Feedback from participating schools has been positive. Also, $100,000 in grant funding was secured for the delivery of the Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) Graffiti Project.

·        Heritage Program – Funding secured from the NSW Heritage Office for continuation of Council’s Heritage Advisory Service and Heritage Assistance Fund (HAF). Through the HAF nine projects were awarded funding, all of which were completed on time and within budget and all have shown positive results.

·        Library Events – The School holiday program for 2010-11 continued to attract sell out crowds at the 30 events advertised. 96% of sessions were sold out with a greater proportion of events focused on teenagers to encourage greater library use from this demographic. Other events in the quarter included, Penrith library hosting the author and social researcher, Hugh Mackay, as part of the Sydney Writers’ Festival. Over 250 people attended coming from all over NSW. Also, the inaugural Higher School Certificate (HSC) Forum was held in June where over 80 students participated and library staff promoted the library's online resources, including the ‘Your Tutor’ service, which offers students on-line homework help.

·        Lobbying to improve catchment and biodiversity health – Council secured a $2 million funding offer from the Federal Government and $2.2 million funding offer from the NSW Office of Water (NOW) to support the Stormwater Harvesting and Managed Aquifer Recharge Scheme (MAR)\

·        Neighbourhood Centres & Community Hall Improvements were carried out at St Marys and Surveyors Creek Community Centres and at Cambridge Park, Erskine Park and Harold Corr Halls during the June quarter.

·        A new public toilet facility was completed at Fowler Reserve, Wallacia in this quarter

·        PC Rollout and Server Technology supporting sustainability - The 2011 rollout of 281 desktop PCs and 58 notebooks throughout Council highlighted the introduction of new ‘green’ PCs which are more compact, faster and use 55% less power compared to conventional PCs. Also by deploying new technology and consolidating server hardware through virtualisation, substantial reductions in energy consumption and server maintenance costs, while increasing the efficiency, utilisation, and flexibility of existing assets was achieved.

·        Rural Roads Resealing and Urban Drainage annual programs were completed. Works included Second Avenue, Llandilo and Georgina Road Mt Vernon which were resurfaced and completed drainage construction works in Belmore Street Carpark, Doonmore Street and John Street.

·        Supporting Cultural Development, Place-making and Creative Enterprise - There was considerable focus on the development of creative partnerships to raise the profile of the City as well as provide new opportunities and experiences for local residents (eg Sydney Festival 2012 season - Inside Out Festival)

·        Traffic Management and Road Safety - This quarter identified a 20% downward trend in casualty accidents at the sites where improvements are being implemented with the Traffic Program. The Penrith City Centre High Pedestrian Activity 40km Area Scheme received an IPWEA Engineering Excellence Award in May 2011.

·        WSAAS Domestic Violence Resource Project - 13 training sessions have been delivered in the June quarter to 315 participants representing workers across a broad range of services.

·        The Western Sydney Carpool (WSC) project was launched within Council in May 2011.  The project aims to reduce single car occupancy in Western Sydney, reduce demand for parking, reduce road congestion, reduce environmental impacts, and to save money for motorists.

 

More detailed commentary on each of these tasks and projects are provided in the Services Performance and Financial Review Summary attachment to this report.

 

4.       Exception Reporting

The Service Performance Summary in Table 2 identified that that a total of 41 Tasks, KPIs and Projects in 18 services were also identified as ‘requiring attention’ (Amber’ traffic light) or were at  ‘at risk’ and were not delivered this quarter’ (Red’ traffic light).  A complete listing, sorted by individual service, is provided with commentary also provided in Attachment 1 – 2010-11 Operational Plan, Services Performance and Financial Review Summary. The progress of all exceptions will continue to be monitored and remedial action taken to return these to a “Green” traffic light “On Target” status where possible.

Section 2: Financial Position for the June Year End

The financial position of Council for the quarter is expressed by providing information on:

·        Budget Position (whether balanced/surplus/deficit)

·        Significant Variations

·        Identified Revotes

·        Funding Summary

·        Reserve Movements for the quarter, and

·        the Capital and Operating Budget Projects list for the quarter

 

Budget Position

                                                                                                                 $000’s

Original Budget Position

(18.3)

 

Variations – Surplus/(Deficit)

 

 

September Quarter Variations        

(89.3)

 

December Quarter Variations

147.7

 

March Quarter Variations

77.1

 

June Quarterly Review Proposed Variations

(58.4)

 

Revised YTD Surplus/(Deficit)

58.8

 

 

The predicted budget result being reported for 2010-11 is a surplus of $58,764 after the recommended variations for the quarter; this is compared to a deficit of $1.4m in 2009-10.

Commentary is provided below on some of the more significant issues in the review with further details together with all proposed minor variations, revotes, and reserve movements detailed in Attachment 1 – 2010-11 Operational Plan, Services Performance and Financial Review Summary.  

 

All actual figures are subject to end-of-year adjustment, audit checking and confirmation. The 2010-11 Financial Statements are currently being completed and will be presented to Council in September 2011 and will include a detailed explanation of Council’s financial position. 

Net Employee Costs

The delivery of Council’s 45 services places a high reliance on Council’s workforce and accordingly employee costs are a major component of the annual budget.  Across any year there will also be occasions when there is a delay in filling vacancies and some savings originated from these occurrences. As has been the experience in the past few years the actual costs relating to the retirement/resignation of a number of long serving staff has affected the total employee costs budget.  As in previous years these additional costs have been partly offset by savings in other employee costs, however there has been less opportunity to do this in 2010-11 with a lower number of vacancies held.  Total salary savings identified in the first three quarters of 2010-11 was $674,303 with the terminations budget being allocated $44,624 and the balance of savings returned to general revenue.

 

A comparison of the final results for the June quarter against the original budget estimates indicates additional employee costs over the year of $968,500 (1.3%) from a total employee costs budget of $72.1m.  As mentioned above this area was again impacted by the movement in employee leave entitlements and the resignation/retirement of a number of long serving employees. Obviously this is a difficult area to accurately predict however modelling of the available data suggests that this trend will continue for the next few years.

 

Council policy is to maintain an amount of 20%, averaged over three years, of leave entitlements (excluding annual leave) in the ELE Reserve. Analysis of employee leave entitlements for known and probable retirements resulted in the development of a strategy to bring the reserve back to the agreed 20% by 2010-11 and includes an increased annual transfer of $300,000 to the Reserve in the 2010-11 and 2011-12 base budgets. At the end of 2010-11 the Reserve holds $4.5m or the equivalent of 19.48% of entitlements, slightly below the target of 20% by this time.  To reach the 20% target an additional transfer of $120,000 is required.  This can be sourced from salary savings in the first quarter of the 2011-12 financial year and coupled with the $300,000 already included in the 2011-12 budget will give a projected reserve balance of 21.8% at 30 June 2012.

 

Superannuation costs for 2010-11 were $699,907 over original budget. This increase (9.1%) in superannuation reflects two issues.

 

·        The June 2011 Superannuation payments that would normally have been made in the 2011-12 financial year being made in the 2010-11 financial year. These payments were made on 29 June 2011 to allow the LGSS to allocate payments to 2010-11 contributions instead of the next financial year's contributions as has traditionally been done. While the majority of the June expense has traditionally being recognised in June each year the change to the process has resulted in approximately $275,000 of additional expenditure in recognising the earlier payment of Defined Benefits contributions. From the 2011-12 onward year there will be 12 monthly payments made to Superannuation accounts each financial year.

·        In addition to the timing adjustment above the further increase in superannuation costs is for greater than budgeted contributions for those members in the Defined Benefits Scheme (DBS). Council has 169 employees that are members of this scheme which requires members to contribute a percentage of their salary to superannuation. This percentage is reviewed and varied by the employees on an annual basis. Council’s contribution is calculated based on the percentages nominated by employees. An increase in the percentages nominated by employees has resulted in this increase in superannuation costs. This increase is in addition to the increased contribution required by the scheme, which commenced in 2009-10. The LGSS has since advised that a flat annual fee of approximately $850,000 will by payable by Penrith City Council from 2011-12 for the foreseeable future to cover the increased contribution, representing a decrease of approximately $900,000 that has been built into the ongoing base budget from 2011-12.

 

The final expected Workers Compensation Costs was $52,988 over budget (6.3%) with the additional cost funded from the Workers Compensation Reserve established in 2010-11 and relates to a final adjustment to the 2009-10 premium, an adjustment to the estimated premium costs for 2010-11 (final premiums are adjusted after 2 years to allow for maturation of the claims) and other costs related to the implementation of the Burning Cost Model.  The volatility of the premiums under the traditional Workers Compensation Model was one of the reasons that Council endorsed a move to the “Burning Cost” model for Workers Compensation insurance commencing in 2010-11.  Under the “Burning Cost” model only actual claims costs form part of the premium calculation.  Participation in WorkCover’s Burning Cost Scheme provides additional incentive and reward for improvements in safety and injury management as it delivers significant monetary savings if current claims history is maintained or improved. Estimated savings of approximately $700,000 in the first year (2010-11) were transferred to the Reserve to provide funding for any adjustments to the premium in years 2-5 thus insulating Council from the effects of premium changes that were experienced in 2009-10.

 

AREAS Initiatives - $194,956 F (4.2%)

A number of projects that are funded by the AREAS special rate variation have provided savings.  These savings relate to the downward trend in graffiti removal and successful graffiti awareness campaigns that have reduced project costs and have been used to offset the $222,000 General Revenue contribution to AREAS projects.

 

Enhanced Public Domain Team- $175,166 F (4.9%)

The delivery of the Public Domain Service for the year was achieved under budget at the same time all elements of the service were substantially completed. General savings and efficiencies in materials and contractor costs have contributed to this result and allowed these funds to be returned to general revenue.

 

The service is undergoing a comprehensive review which is expected to be finalised in August and includes a review of service levels and expenditure.  The review also includes Public Amenity Cleaning and the security cost elements of the previous Building Operations Service Specification that require budget adjustments to address current security service needs across the organisation.  

 

Light Vehicle Fleet Maintenance- net $133,550 F

Motor Vehicle fleet maintenance has net savings of $134,000 reflecting the first full year since the implementation of a light fleet management policy with extended changeover periods. The changes to the light vehicle fleet management strategy came into effect on 1st January 2010 and have resulted in savings in the operational budget for this area, with lower than expected costs associated with mechanical repairs and tyre replacements. Overall expenditure is $162,000 (12%) under budget and income is $29,000 under budget (1.5%).

Other variations with no impact on Available Funds and proposed revotes

A number of other variations are proposed as part of this review that do not have an impact on the available funds.  Details of these adjustments are provided in Attachment 1.  In addition to these adjustments a total of $3.8m of planned capital works and operating projects are proposed for revote this quarter and a full listing can also be found in Attachment 1. The total value of revotes for the year (including the proposed revotes) is $7.5m compared to $12.8m for 2009-10.

What’s Next?

The Delivery Program 2009-2013 sets out the principal activities Council will undertake over the four year period in response to the Community Strategic Plan.  A series of eight Progress Reports will chart the delivery of Council’s programs and activities.

 

As mentioned earlier, the Delivery Program report for the six month period from 1 January 2011 to 30 June 2011 will be reported separately to the Ordinary Meeting of Council on 5 September 2011.  This report will include a summary of the progress of all programs and service activities over the past year, information on the highlights achieved and challenges faced by each program in the last six months, and the status of Delivery Program indicators.  Budget information for each program will also be provided.

Conclusion

The review indicates substantial achievement in meeting Council’s challenging annual program. The opportunity is available for Council tonight to seek clarification or elaboration on particular matters in any section of the report.

 

The budget results reflect the strong financial management of Council despite the challenges in developing the 2010-11 budget and the current economic climate and the reporting of a surplus of $58,764 is considered an excellent result.

 

The review document will be placed in full on Council’s website, as well as being made available to the public in hard copy on request.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on 2010-2011 Operational Plan - June Quarter and Year End Review be received.

2.     The 2010-11 Operational Plan June End of Year Review as at 30 June 2011, including the revised estimates identified in the recommended budget outlined in this report and detailed in Attachment 1 – 2010-11 Operational Plan, Services Performance and Financial Review Summary , be adopted.

 

 

3.       Council revote the works as detailed in the Recommended Revoted Works Lists, detailed in Attachment 1 – 2010-11 Operational Plan, Services Performance and Financial Review Summary,  for inclusion in the 2011-12 Operational Plan.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report


Ordinary Meeting                                                                                                15 August 2011

A Leading City

 

 

2

Audit Committee   

 

Compiled by:               Peter Browne, Internal Auditor

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

 

Objective

We demonstrate accountability, transparency and ethical conduct

Community Outcome

A Council that behaves responsibly and ethically (5)

Strategic Response

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

       

 

Executive Summary

This report recommends reappointment of the three existing Independent Members of the Audit Committee.

Background

The Audit Committee is comprised of three Councillors, the Mayor and three Independent Members appointed by Council to advise on financial reporting, internal controls, corporate risks, business ethics, assurance and other matters as identified in its Charter.  On 25 June 2007, Council appointed the Independent Members to the first audit committee.  On 7 September 2009 Council resolved to reappoint the existing members for a further two years.

 

The Audit Committee Charter provides that:

 

Independent members shall be appointed for a period of two years or such other term as the Council may resolve.  Members will be encouraged to serve multiple terms and to plan for an orderly rotation of members so that experienced members will always be serving.  The Audit Committee should make recommendations to Council on membership.

Current Situation

Councillor members of the Audit Committee are appointed for the duration of the Council (4 years) and the Mayor is likewise a member for the duration of the Mayoral term.  At the time of establishing the Audit Committee there was discussion on the appropriate term for the Independent Members.  Stability in membership so that there is always a majority of experienced members was seen as beneficial.  It was hoped that a short (two year) term would allow the Audit Committee to arrange its affairs so that not more than one independent member retired at any one time.  The Charter reflects this sentiment by providing that members should be encouraged to serve multiple terms. 

 

Council Officers have consulted the existing Independent Members and all have put themselves forward for a further term.  Council Officers are of the view that the Audit Committee is running well and are unaware of any reason to seek to replace any Independent Members at this time.  If reappointed for a further two years, the term of the new appointments would be 18 September 2011 to 17 September 2013. 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

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

2.     Robert Coombes, Frank Gelonesi, and Jayant Gulwadi be appointed to Council’s Audit Committee for a further term of two years.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Meeting                                                                                                15 August 2011

A Leading City

 

 

3

Council Property - Leasing of Part of Tench Reserve for Provision of a Mobile Food Unit (Kiosk)   

 

Compiled by:               Peter Blazek, Property Officer - Management

Authorised by:            Brian Griffiths, Property Development Manager

Vicki O’Kelly, Group Manager - Finance  

 

Objective

We demonstrate accountability, transparency and ethical conduct

Community Outcome

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

Strategic Response

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

       

 

Executive Summary

In 2002, Council enhanced the appeal of Tench Reserve to the public by allowing an operator to sell a range of foods and drinks from a Mobile Food Unit (Kiosk) on weekends and public holidays.

 

Council leased part of Tench Reserve located at the southern end of the Reserve, bordering the public boat ramp area and the boat trailer carpark, as marked on the attached map, for this purpose.

 

Since the proposed land to be leased is located within Tench Reserve, Regentville on “Community” land under Council’s Plan of Management, it was imperative that this process was in accordance with Section 47A of the Local Government Act 1993, pertaining to the occupation through leases and licences in respect of “Community” land - terms less than 5 years.

 

The most recent operator, Dragan Nestorovic’s Occupation Agreement ended in 31 January, 2011 and it was decided to retender this future leasing opportunity to the public as there had been a number of enquiries from potential operators.

 

At the end of the tender advertising process, Council received three applications. Following the evaluation process it is recommended that Council approve a 5 year Licence Agreement to Mr & Mrs Maples to operate a Mobile Food Unit (Kiosk) as per the terms and conditions set out in the report.

 

Background

Sweet Events Pty Ltd was selected by a public tender process in mid 2002 to carry out the sale of a minimum range of food and drinks from a Mobile Food Unit at Tench Reserve.  Unfortunately, due to poor winter patronage and competition from unauthorised visiting mobile food units, including ice cream vans, it ceased operations within two months.

 

Council had undertaken a review of mobile food vans selling their goods without authorisation within Tench Reserve.  In accordance with the results of this survey, Council notified all unauthorised mobile food unit operators that they could not sell their goods within Tench Reserve “Community” land without a valid Council Licence Agreement.

 

Council again advertised to the public for an Expression of Interest in 26 August 2003 with a view to expand the range of foods and drink that could be sold from a mobile kiosk following a reduction of competition from other mobile operators in this area.

 

At Council’s meeting of 15 December 2003, it was resolved to allow Dragan Nestorovic to operate a mobile kiosk under an annual Occupation Agreement to determine its future viability.

 

Mr Nestorovic has successfully traded since this date on annual Occupation Agreements in accordance with Section 47A of the Local Government Act 1993 – short term leases less than 5 years.

 

The Property Development Department has received several enquiries from the public over the past two years relating to possible future leasing applications for a kiosk at Tench Reserve. 

 

As a result of the public interest, and in line with Council policy, it was agreed when Mr Nestorovic’s lease term ended in January 2011 Council would terminate the Licence Agreement and undertake a public Expression of Interest to tender for this kiosk at Tench Reserve. 

 

Tender Evaluation Committee

The Tender Evaluation Committee consisted of Brian Griffiths (Property Development Manager), Peter Blazek (Property Management Officer) and Ben Rodwell (Acting Supply Coordinator).

 

Tender Evaluation Criteria

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

 

Commercial requirements

 

Conforming requirements

 

Site description

 

Services available

 

Health requirements

 

Trading compliance

 

Environmental requirements

 

Rental offers

 

 

Summary of Tenders Received

A total of three submissions were received from the following respondents listed in alphabetical order:

 

 

Mobile Food Unit (Kiosk) Tender Details

 

 

 

Name of Tender

Food Compliant

Vehicle Compliant

Tender Compliant

Tender Amount

1

Dragan Nestorovic

No

No

No

$4,000pa

2

Colin & Keri Maples

Yes

Yes

Yes

$7,800pa to $9,000pa

3

Tucker Van

Yes

No

No

$5,000pa

 

It should be noted that the tender from Mr and Mrs Maples indicated in their response “we therefore anticipate outgoings (rent payment) in the vicinity of $7,800 to $9,000 plus GST per annum, to be paid in advance by equal instalments.  We believe this range to be appropriate for the position and are willing to enter into negotiations with Council with regards to this matter.” 

 

A set figure from the tenderer needed to be addressed and they have confirmed and accepted a figure of $8,600 plus GST per annum, which is their firm tender figure in accordance with the proposed Licence Agreement.

 

Evaluation of Tenders

Following a detailed analysis of all completed responses, each tender was evaluated against the evaluation criteria.  Input was also provided by staff from Council’s Environmental Health Department in the evaluation criteria areas of health, waste and environment criteria.

 

Dragan Nestorovic’s tender was a one page hand written note outlining that he was the previous operator and that Council already had his details.  Unfortunately, this did not comply with the tender specifications as it did not address the current tender terms.

 

Mr & Mrs Maples’ tender was for a Mobile Food Unit which was on wheels as required and would be brought on site and taken away on a daily basis.  This would be self sufficient and would not require expansive water, electricity or waste removal services.

 

The Tucker Van tender indicated that its van would not be a Mobile Food Unit in the true sense as it would not be on wheels but would be able to be transported on the back of a truck and left on site on a more permanent basis.  In their view, this would partially meet the Mobile Food Unit terms as it could be taken away off site during emergencies with a couple of hours notice.

 

Unfortunately, as Tench Reserve was deemed to be in a flood prone zoning it was Council’s intent to have a Kiosk which would be removed on a daily basis.

 

The Environmental Health Department evaluated the two tenders for compliance with the Health Acts and commented that the Tucker Van tender did not comply with the terms as it was not a Mobile Food Unit.  The staff interpreted that a Mobile Food Unit not on wheels could not be classed as a Mobile Food Unit.

 

Additionally, if Council selected the Tucker Van and it was to be left on site on a more permanent basis, it would need to comply with more stringent and additional health requirements including periodic pest proofing, permanent water connection, permanent electricity connection, waste water connection to sewer or pump out services and regular maintenance due to vandalism.  In our view, this was not the intention of the tender and therefore the Tucker Van tender did not meet its compliance requirements.

 

Accordingly, it is recommended that a new Licence Agreement be approved by Council to Mr Colin Maples & Mrs Keri Maples as per the terms set out below:

 

Tenant:

Colin Maples & Keri Maples

Premises:

Part of Tench Reserve, Regentville as shown marked on map

Use of Premises:

Mobile Food Unit (Kiosk)

Licence Term:

Section 47 A of the Local Government Act 1993 – Short Term Leases less than 5 years

Licence Commencement Date:

1 September, 2011

Licence Termination Date:

31 August, 2016

Rental:                     Base:

$8,600.00 per annum

                                 GST:

$   860.00 per annum

                         Total Rent:

$9,460.00 per annum GST inclusive

Rent Review Dates:

Annually on each anniversary of Lease Commencement Date: - 1 September 2012, 1 September 2013, 1 September 2014, 1 September 2015.

Method of Rent Review:

Annually by CPI (All Group Indexes Sydney March Quarters)

Area:

 Concrete slab at Tench Reserve as marked on the plan

Lessee Responsibility:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

§ Lessee submit a Development Consent to Council

§ Lessee agree to conditions of  Development Consent

§ Trade within the agreed daily hours and special events

§ Register with Council’s Environmental Health Department

§ To comply with National Code for Food Vending Vehicles

§ Any other health regulations pertaining to operation of a Mobile Food Vending Unit

§ Trade within the designated area as marked on the plan

§ Supply and offer the agreed minimum foods and drinks to the public

§ Environmental compliance and method of waste disposal

§ Lessee will not sub-let or assign without Council approval

Lessor Responsibilities:

§ Supply concrete slab for daily parking and trading of the vehicle

§ Supply electrical power connection for vehicle

§ Maintain site to a reasonable standard

 

Tender Assessment Group

The Tender Assessment Group (TAG) consisting of the Group Manager, Legal & Governance and the Acting Senior Governance Officer has reviewed the tender for the lease of part of Tench Reserve. Based on the information provided by the three tenderers, the TAG supports the methodologies and the preferred tenderer as recommended by the Tender Evaluation Committee.

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Council Property - Leasing of Part of Tench Reserve for Provision of a Mobile Food Unit (Kiosk) be received.

2.     Council grant a new Licence Agreement to Colin and Keri Maples in accordance with the terms and conditions outlined in the report.

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

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1.  

Council Property - Leasing of Part of Tench Reserve for Provision of a Mobile Food Unit (Kiosk)

1 Page

Appendix

  


Ordinary Meeting                                                                                                                15 August 2011

Appendix 1 - Council Property - Leasing of Part of Tench Reserve for Provision of a Mobile Food Unit (Kiosk)

 

 


Ordinary Meeting                                                                                                15 August 2011

A Leading City

 

 

4

Social and Economic Benefits of Visitors to the City of Penrith   

 

Compiled by:               Paul Page, City Marketing Supervisor

Authorised by:            Barbara Magee, Manager - Corporate Communications & Marketing  

Requested By:             Councillor Greg Davies

Councillor Kath Presdee

 

Objective

We demonstrate leadership, foster resilience and tenacity, and encourage innovation

Community Outcome

A Regional City that provides our jobs, education, services and entertainment (1)

Strategic Response

Demonstrate our leadership, and encourage innovation (1.1)

       

 

Executive Summary

Penrith is an important regional city set in a unique and attractive location.  It has a diverse range of visitor attractions, events and regional services that attract visitors from outside the city.  These visitors generate valuable social and economic benefits. 

 

Published figures for the year ended 2007 show that Penrith attracts an estimated 925,000 visitors who spend $128 million dollars per annum.  With an average spend of $88 per trip Penrith has approximately 751,000 daytime domestic visitors per year. 162,000 domestic overnight visitors spend approximately $298 per trip.  International visitors numbering 12,000 per year spend $1,178 each per trip. 

 

Penrith has established a strong reputation for events as a result of the development of World Class facilities for the Year 2000 Olympic Games.  The Premier’s recent announcement that the Government wants to move event activity from central Sydney to Western Sydney represents an opportunity to expand the size and range of events held in Penrith.

 

Council’s City Marketing program promotes Penrith as a place to live, work, visit and invest.  The largest component of the program is directed to attracting visitors and capitalising on the benefits that visitors provide to the city. 

 

This report responds to requests from Councillor Greg Davies and Councillor Kath Presdee for information about the social and economic benefits of certain events and how they are promoted. 

 

It also takes the opportunity to provide broader information to Council on

·    the overall size and nature of visitation to Penrith for all purposes including events;

·    the social and economic benefits that visitation brings to the city;

·    a new statistical analysis tool that has been acquired to help to measure the benefits of visitation and particular events;

·    how Council promotes Penrith as a place to visit. 

Report Background

In late 2010 Councillor Greg Davies requested “information on the economic benefit of international rowing and canoeing training squads and events utilising the International Regatta Centre and on a formula which may be used to calculate the economic benefit to the City”.  In May 2011 he requested that discussions be held with Blue Mountains Tourism on the promotion of the Yulefest event and a report on “methods we can adopt to assist our City’s promotions”.

 

In February 2011 Councillor Kath Presdee requested a report on the “economic benefits of international, national and state level sporting events at the Penrith Whitewater Stadium and International Regatta Centre”.

How many people visit Penrith?

Published figures from Tourism Australia for the year ended 2007 show that Penrith attracts approximately 925,000 visitors who spend approximately $128 million dollars per annum. 

 

With an average spend of $88 per trip Penrith has approximately 751,000 daytime domestic visitors per year.

 

162,000 domestic overnight visitors spend approximately $298 per trip.

International visitors numbering 12,000 per year spend $1,178 each per trip. 

 

The 2008 figures were estimates derived from national data.  The domestic component is based on responses to the National Visitor Survey which is a national annual telephone survey of 120,000 households.  The figures for international visits are based on the International Visitor Survey cards which international visitors complete prior to departure from Australia. 

 

The federal government provides good statistical data for domestic and international visitation at the national, state and larger regional level but reliable timely information is not generally available at the LGA level.  This deficiency was noted in the federal government’s white paper on tourism published in 2004 but it has still not yet been adequately addressed. 

 

Penrith City Council was part of a lobbying effort that did result in some figures at the LGA  level being published in 2008 but no data has been published since then. 

 

The complete document containing these estimates can be found on the web at http://www.ret.gov.au/tourism/Documents/tra/local%20government%20area%20profiles/Penrith%20LGA.pdf

 

Given the inadequacy of official figures we are developing our own capacity to analyse visitation and its benefit to the City.  The deed of agreement between Council and the Penrith Business Alliance requires the Penrith Business Alliance to provide economic data about the city.  In order to do this, the PBA has acquired a licence for REMPLAN, an econometric analysis tool. 

 

An add-on tourism module is available for this product which can be used to analyse the benefit of visitation, especially of events and the multiplier benefits they provide to the economy.  We have recently acquired this module and once we have been trained in this system and have loaded the relevant data we will be able to work with the Penrith Business Alliance to develop a better understanding of the economic benefits of the various events that we support and a better understanding of the return on investment of those that we sponsor. 

International Training Benefits

Penrith Whitewater Stadium reports that during the 2009-10 training season about 200 athletes from the national teams of Great Britain, Slovakia, Canada, Austria, New Zealand, Slovenia, Czech Republic, Italy, Croatia and Japan trained at Penrith as well as individual members of the teams of France, USA, Brazil, Spain, The Netherlands, Ireland, Russia, China, Kazakhstan, Ukraine, Switzerland. In October 2009 we also had 80-90 senior athletes training for the Sydney World Masters Games.

 

Based on the multiplier for international visitors in the Tourism Australia 2008 figures of $1,178 per visit, international athlete training at Penrith Whitewater Stadium contribute about $250,000 to the local economy each year. 

 

The length of stay varied with most staying for at least three weeks.  About half will stay for five to six weeks and about 25 will stay for two months or more.  Most stay in self-contained accommodation as it is important that they can prepare their own food.  The venues providing this style of accommodation are the first to be booked out and include Nepean Shores, the cabins at the Emu Plains Caravan Park and Astina Apartments.  Some longer term athletes rent a house through real estate agents.  The Log Cabin is preferred when hotel accommodation is required. 

 

Further analysis of the community benefit of international training activities at Penrith Whitewater Stadium and the International Regatta Centre will be available when the REMPLAN system is fully operational. 

City Marketing Events Strategy

Our proactive response to the opportunities presented by the major events hosted over the past few years has established some high expectations for Penrith Valley as an events destination but with the conclusion of the World Masters Games in late 2009 the parade of major events of the past decade has come to a pause. 

 

To maintain the momentum, a City Marketing Events Strategy was put in place in October 2010.  The strategy recognises an opportunity for the venues and businesses in Penrith Valley that benefit from events to be working together to attract new events and increase the value of existing events to the city through better marketing and communication.  Council has a role in facilitating the bringing of these parties together and co-ordinating the implementation of its strategies. 

 

The strategy therefore recommended that a Penrith Valley Events Network be formed to bring together the venue operators and accommodation and related service providers to work together to promote Penrith Valley as a place to host events. 

 

The network was established in November 2010.  A Penrith Valley events prospectus is being developed as a tool to market Penrith Valley as a destination for events.  The prospectus will showcase all of our key venues and the benefits of holding an event in Penrith Valley.

 

In discussing the Blue Mountains Yulefest event with Blue Mountains Tourism it was confirmed that Yulefest is a promotion initiated by the Blue Mountains restaurant and accommodation sector which Blue Mountains Tourism uses in its marketing of the destination. 

 

The private sector in Penrith has not yet developed such a promotion, however, the Events Network that Council has initiated provides a framework for such a promotion to develop. 

Premier’s statement on moving more events to Western Sydney

On 9 April the Sydney Harbour Bridge was closed for the triathlon world championships.  This caused severe traffic congestion in central Sydney and led the Premier, who is also Minister for Western Sydney, to announce that he would instruct Events NSW to avoid allowing future major events in the CBD and would talk to Western Sydney councils about staging more events in places like Penrith and the lower Blue Mountains. 

 

This was followed up with the Premier and Minister for Tourism and Events through the Member for Penrith, Mr Stuart Ayres MP.  Information about the availability of quality event venues and current event activity in Penrith was forwarded to Mr Ayres.  Council has offered to host familiarisation tours for the minister and ministerial and departmental staff who may not be aware of what Penrith has to offer as an event destination. 

 

After receiving this information Mr Ayres made a Private Member’s Statement in Parliament on Thursday 5 May.  He noted the many successful and high profile events held in Penrith and the number of excellent and versatile venues.  He also noted the International Regatta Centre and especially the DefQon dance event and Australia Day.  He mentioned the Ulysses AGM, the Olympics, the Canoe Slalom and Dragon Boat World Championships and the Sydney Festival. 

 

Mr Ayres’ statement can be viewed on the Parliament House web site at

http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/parlment/hansart.nsf/V3Key/LA20110505045

What is a visitor?

A visitor is defined as someone who comes from outside the city for any purpose other than regular employment and who experiences some aspect of the services, facilities, culture or lifestyle of the city.  People who drive through on their way somewhere else (eg along the M4) or people who come to work in Penrith each day are therefore not defined as visitors. 

Why do people visit Penrith?

Penrith attracts visitors because of its status as a regional city and the unique mix of services, facilities, culture and lifestyle that it offers. 

 

Visitors to Penrith come for shopping, entertainment, health, education, sport and recreation.  Many of these visits occur in the context of an event but many also attend retail and cultural facilities.  They also come to access professional and metropolitan services that are not available in their local area. 

 

These are the major visitor market segments that we have identified.

 

·    Retail

·    Recreation

·    Attractions

·    Health

·    Education

·    Sport

·    Metro services

·    Base for Greater Sydney activities eg Royal Easter Show

·    Visiting Friends & Relatives

Using events to market Penrith as a place to visit

All over the world events are becoming an increasingly important means of attracting visitors.  Compared with other forms of destination marketing, such as advertising, events have the advantage of

 

·    bringing tangible and measurable economic benefits;

·    contributing to the brand identity and profile of the destination;

·    enriching the lifestyle of local residents and make local people feel good about where they live;

·    attracting people to a place that they would not otherwise see a reason to visit as an events can have a theme that is unrelated to the natural assets or man made attractions of a place. 

 

Over the past 10 years Penrith has developed a growing profile as an event destination due to the range of excellent event venues, including Panthers, Centrebet Stadium, the Showground / Paceway, Mamre Homestead and the Museum of Fire.  The Year 2000 Sydney Olympics added several World Class venues, including Penrith Whitewater Stadium and the International Regatta Centre which is now Penrith’s leading event venue. 

 

These new venues have allowed Penrith to host some very major events.  These include the World Canoe Slalom Championships (2005), the World Dragon Boat Championships (2007), the Sydney World Masters Games (2009), the Ulysses AGM (2009) and the DefQon Dance Festival (annually from 2009) to name just a few.  These sit alongside long established high profile annual events such as the Truck Show and the Doll & Craft Show held at the Museum of Fire and the Nepean Disability Expo and Caravan and Camping shows held at Panthers. 

 

Events like these have been of great direct economic benefit to the Penrith community.  They contribute to the development of a positive image of Penrith Valley and are of great social and economic benefit to the people of Penrith Valley. 

 “Iconic” Event

There has much discussion over the years about developing an “iconic” event that would define the identity of Penrith Valley in the way that the Country Music festival defines Tamworth. 

 

Various proposals for such an event have been made with varying degrees of success.  Currently our most iconic event is DefQon, the annual dance music festival which has been held in September 2009 and September 2010 and has DA consent to operate for a further four years. 

 

With 25,000 attendees coming mostly from outside of Penrith Valley, this is our biggest City Marketing event.  Apart from the direct economic benefits, it also exposes the finest and most attractive of our assets to people who would generally have little knowledge of Penrith Valley or what it has to offer. 

 

The event is self funding.  Over time it has the potential to develop a market for this type of large scale musical event at the Regatta Centre.  It also has the potential for value to be added through such activities as packaging outdoor activities which has been incorporated into the promotion of the event for 2011. 

Marketing of Penrith Valley as a place to visit

As mentioned earlier, marketing Penrith Valley as a place to visit, is a central focus of Council’s City Marketing program.  The following components of the annual city marketing activity plan contribute to attracting visitors. 

 

Brand Strategy:  This project will provide a roadmap for refreshing the way that the city is presented as a place to visit. 

 

Visitor Information Centre:  Its purpose is to extend the stay and increase the expenditure of visitors.  Our award winning centre provides visitors with detailed information tailored to their specific needs and interests, not only face to face, but over the phone and by email.  They work with our marketing officers to gather the information that is published in key city marketing programs including the Penrith Valley web site, the Penrith Valley Experience visitor guide and many other promotional materials and marketing campaigns.  They also generate much of the content for our expanding social media marketing program. 

 

What’s On: The visitor centre co-ordinates the collection of information about the whole range of events taking place throughout the city.  The information is distributed through the web site, the local media, in printed leaflets, in response to enquiries and through our social media marketing programs. 

 

Penrith Valley Experience:  The annual visitor guide is widely distributed throughout Australia and within Penrith.  Its role is to both attract interest in visiting and facilitate the use of local services, facilities and attractions once visitors arrive.  Its importance is reflected by the fact that over 50 local businesses advertise each year. 

 

Penrith Valley web site: This site is separate from the Council web site and provides comprehensive information about attractions, accommodation, what’s on and other information about visiting Penrith.  Its address is featured on all city marketing promotional materials and advertising. 

 

Regional Campaigns:  With the co-operative marketing funding that is now available from Visit NSW we have been running campaigns to attract visitors from regional New South Wales.  In March we ran a campaign to encourage families to visit during the school holidays both to enjoy our local attractions and as a base for visiting the Royal Easter Show.  The Chifley Hotel contributed to the campaign which generated 250 room nights. 

 

Promotional materials and advertising:  We advertise in key publications such as Discover Greater Sydney.  During 2010 we published a promotional book featuring our natural assets targeted at our international partners.  In March we published a revised edition of the Penrith Valley Heritage Drive leaflet.  In 2010 the photo collection was updated with new images which are used to keep the image of Penrith Valley projected in our marketing activities fresh and inviting. 

 

Event Co-ordination & Development:  We work closely with event organisers providing advice and information on choice of venue, local service providers and liaison with with other parts of Council on matters such as traffic management and rubbish collection.  An event application form which provides a one stop shop for event organisers to deal with Council is currently being introduced. 

 

Part of the City Marketing budget is allocated to event sponsorships.  Event organisers seeking sponsorship submit a business plan demonstrating how the City will benefit from the event and how Council sponsorship funds are proposed to be used.  The business plan is presented to Council for approval at an Ordinary Meeting.  Such events have recently included the Formula One boats, Junior Rugby League event, the Mamre 100 Mile Dinner and the Sydney Festival.  Sponsorship funds can contribute to either event operations or marketing.  The event sponsorship policy will be revised soon in line with the community benefit analysis that we will be able to undertake once we have REMPLAN up and running. 

 

As mentioned earlier we have initiated the formation of the Penrith Valley Events Network which brings venue operators and accommodation and other service providers together to work on attracting events and maximising the benefits of events.  A Penrith Valley event prospectus is currently being developed as a tool to market Penrith as a destination for events. 

 

Event Promotion:  The most important promotional tool is the What’s On service which is co-ordinated by the visitor information centre. The centre compiles the information and distributes it in electronic and printed form to local and metro media, customers of the visitor centre and to an extensive network of regular email subscribers.  It is also published on the Penrith Valley and Visit NSW web sites and in the FYI supplement in the Western Weekender

 

The metro media, especially the Daily Telegraph, often pick up events mentioned in the What’s On information that we send them every week.  The printed leaflet is distributed to a number of offices and businesses around the city, including the libraries and other Council buildings, accommodation houses and other visitor facilities and to a number of shops and offices which display it for their customers to pick up. 

 

Significant events are promoted on the Council news page, in media releases and through signs and promotional displays in Council buildings, in the community newsletter, the staff newsletter and at civic events and citizenship ceremonies. 

Conclusion

In 2007 Penrith attracted almost a million visitors who contributed $128 million dollars to the local economy. 

 

The City Marketing team has a robust program to increase visitation and leverage visitation for the social and economic benefit of the City. 

 

The REMPLAN econometric program will provide us with more reliable information on the value and benefit of visitation to Penrith Valley. 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Social and Economic Benefits of Visitors to the City of Penrith be received.

2.     A further report be presented to Council with analysis of the social and economic benefit of athlete training at Penrith Whitewater Stadium and the International Regatta Centre once the REMPLAN econometric analysis system is fully operational.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Meeting                                                                                                15 August 2011

A Leading City

 

 

5

Success for Penrith in Greater Sydney Tourism Awards   

 

Compiled by:               Paul Page, City Marketing Supervisor

Authorised by:            Barbara Magee, Manager - Corporate Communications & Marketing   

 

Objective

We demonstrate leadership, foster resilience and tenacity, and encourage innovation

Community Outcome

A Regional City that provides our jobs, education, services and entertainment (1)

Strategic Response

Demonstrate our leadership, and encourage innovation (1.1)

       

 

Executive Summary

Penrith City achieved a very high profile at the recent Greater Sydney Tourism Awards which were held at the Waterview Function Centre at Bicentennial Park on Thursday 28 July 2011. 

 

For the second year, the Penrith Valley Visitor Information Centre won the category of Visitor Information and Services.  This award recognises the value that the centre adds to the City’s economy and reputation and winning it two years in a row against other visitor centres in Greater Sydney demonstrates the quality of service which we provide.  In their feedback the judges stated that “This is clearly a well-run and professional organisation”.

 

The Chifley Hotel, Penrith was highly commended in the Deluxe Accommodation category.  Council is a member of Hawkesbury Harvest which won the Tourism Marketing category. 

 

Following 25 years working in the tourism industry, Paul Page, Council’s City Marketing Supervisor, was presented with an award of recognition for his services to the tourism industry in Greater Sydney. 

Background

The Greater Sydney Tourism Awards are one of the regional awards which a number of regional tourism organisations have established under the umbrella of the state and national tourism awards. 

 

The state and national tourism awards were established in the 1980s.  They continue to be very competitive and success in the awards is highly coveted.  There is great rivalry between the states for success in the national awards. 

 

All levels of the awards, whether regional, state or national, follow the same 30 categories covering the many segments of the tourism industry and are all judged according to the same criteria. 

 

The awards are judged on business performance in customer service, business planning, marketing, and risk management.  Assessment is based on a 30 page written submission supported by a site visit.  Three judges assess each submission independently and an independent auditor oversees each stage of the judging process. 

 

Greater Sydney Tourism Inc. is the peak body for tourism promotion in Greater Sydney.  It represents a number of local government bodies which work together on co-operative marketing activities.  It also represents the interests of the region to government and industry bodies. 

 

Greater Sydney Tourism initiated the Greater Sydney awards in 2010 in order to draw attention to the extent of tourism activity in Greater Sydney and to lift the standard of tourism services and experiences in the region. 

Contribution of the Penrith Valley Visitor Information Centre

The Visitor Information Centre is a key component of Council’s City Marketing program.  Its purpose is to extend the stay and increase the expenditure of visitors.  Our staff provide visitors with detailed information tailored to their specific needs and interests.  Service is provided face to face as well as by phone and email. 

 

The visitor centre staff work with our marketing officers to gather the information that is published in key city marketing programs including the Penrith Valley web site, the Penrith Valley Experience visitor guide and many other promotional materials and marketing campaigns.  They also generate much of the content for our expanding social media marketing program. 

 

Our visitor centre is accredited by Visit New South Wales (previously Tourism New South Wales).  Accredited visitor centres are audited every three years and are required to follow high standards in documenting their processes and providing reliable information and quality customer service. 

 

The centre has two permanent staff, Susan Hamilton and Stacey Martin, who operate the centre seven days a week, 363 days per year.  A panel of casual staff is available to be engaged as required and 22 volunteer Penrith Valley Ambassadors provide valuable assistance in the centre and at major events such as Australia Day. 

 

Staff and volunteers alike demonstrate great passion for promoting Penrith Valley to visitors.  They make a valuable contribution to projecting Penrith Valley as a preferred place to live, work, visit and invest.  This award recognises the value that the centre adds to the City’s economy and reputation and winning it two years in a row against other visitor centres in Greater Sydney such as Parramatta and Manly demonstrates the quality of our service. 

Recognition for Council’s City Marketing Supervisor

Paul Page, Council’s City Marketing Supervisor, has worked in the tourism industry for the past 25 years.  He joined Council in 1991 and recently achieved 20 years service in this role. 

 

He has always taken the opportunity to promote the interests of Penrith by maintaining a high profile among his colleagues in local government tourism and representing Penrith’s interests to state and federal governments through industry bodies.  For many years, he has contributed as a director and chairman of the NSW Council of Tourist Associations, the NSW Tourism Industry Council and Greater Sydney Tourism. 

 

He is currently Chairman of Greater Sydney Tourism, the body which initiated the Greater Sydney Tourism Awards.  In recent years, Greater Sydney Tourism has successfully made representations to the New South Wales government for better recognition of tourism activity in Greater Sydney.  This has led to the provision of dollar for dollar tourism marketing funds being made available to councils in Greater Sydney.  Under this scheme, Penrith has accessed almost $40,000 to market Penrith Valley in regional New South Wales over the past two years. 

NSW State Awards

As a category winner, the Visitor Information Centre automatically qualifies as a finalist in the New South Wales tourism awards.  Closing date is 30 August which gives us the opportunity to further improve the submission and increase our chance of success.  The New South Wales Tourism Awards will be held on Thursday 18 November 2011 at the Sydney Convention & Exhibition Centre. 

Other winners

The Chifley Penrith is Penrith’s leading accommodation provider and its highly commended award in the Deluxe Accommodation category is a plus for the marketing of the City. 

 

Hawkesbury Harvest won the Tourism Marketing category.  Council’s membership of Hawkesbury Harvest supports our program to attract visitors to the City interested in fresh food experiences.  It is also supports Council’s goal of maintaining the rural component of our “harmony of urban and rural lifestyles”.

Conclusion

Penrith’s success in the Greater Sydney Tourism Awards reflects the standing that Penrith enjoys as a place to visit in Greater Sydney. 

 

An opportunity exists for other organisations which service visitors to Penrith to enter and succeed in the awards.  It is proposed that a strong campaign be initiated next year to encourage more participation in other categories of the Greater Sydney Tourism Awards. 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Success for Penrith in Greater Sydney Tourism Awards be received.

2.     Council write to all winners associated with Penrith Valley congratulating them on their success..

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Meeting                                                                                                15 August 2011

A Leading City

 

 

6

City Marketing Event Sponsorship Proposals   

 

Compiled by:               Paul Page, City Marketing Supervisor

Authorised by:            Barbara Magee, Manager - Corporate Communications & Marketing   

 

Objective

We demonstrate leadership, foster resilience and tenacity, and encourage innovation

Community Outcome

A Regional City that provides our jobs, education, services and entertainment (1)

Strategic Response

Share aspirations and work together to grow Penrith as a Regional City (1.2)

       

 

Executive Summary

Council has received three applications from event organisers seeking sponsorship under the City Marketing Event Sponsorship Policy.  The report recommends that the applications be supported with funding to come from the City Marketing and Event Sponsorship budget. 

Background

The City Marketing Event Sponsorship policy requires that applicants present a business plan demonstrating how the event will benefit the City and how the proposed Council sponsorship will add value to the event.  The business plans for the sponsorship proposals discussed in this report are published as attachments to this report.

 

The event sponsorship policy is available on the Penrith Valley web site at

http://www.penrithvalley.com.au/index.asp?id=107

Penrith Valley Nepean Triathlon

The Nepean Triathlon was established in 1982 and is now the oldest continuously operating triathlon in Australia.  In its 30 year history it has developed into a most successful event for Penrith Valley, attracting over 1,300 competitors, made up of 400 local and 700 visiting competitors over the two days of the event.  Most competitors also bring friends, spouses and families.  Council recognised the value and success of the Nepean Triathlon five years ago when a Mayoral reception was held to celebrate its 25th anniversary. 

 

The main triathlon is held on Sunday of the race weekend with several short introductory “enticer” races held on Saturday.  In the early years, the event was held on the Nepean River, however it is now held at the International Regatta Centre.  This venue is ideal for triathlons and no doubt contributes to the prestige and attractiveness of the event to so many visitors. 

 

The Nepean Triathlon is organised by the Nepean Triathlon Committee, a non profit organisation.  It is partly funded through registration fees and partly through commercial sponsorship. 

 

Council has supported this event for many years.  Council’s support increased after 2007 when Panthers, which had supported the event for 27 years since it began, withdrew its sponsorship. 

 

The 2011 event is to be held over the weekend of 12 and 13 November.  The Nepean Triathlon Committee has provided a business plan which meets the requirements of the City Marketing Event Sponsorship policy.  The Committee is seeking $8,000 which is available in the City Marketing & Event Sponsorship budget.  In addition to this proposed cash contribution, Council will continue to provide assistance with road closures and traffic management. 

Australian Formula Powerboat GP

Council has received a request for sponsorship of a Formula One boat racing event to be held at the International Regatta Centre on the weekend of 27 and 28 August. 

 

For several years prior to 2008, Penrith hosted an annual F1 Superboat event which was held on the Nepean River.  The final event in September 2008 was held on a trial basis at the International Regatta Centre at Penrith Lakes.

 

While the trial use of the Regatta Centre was successful, the promoter was unable to stage the event in 2009.  In 2010, a group of Formula One boat owners formed a non-profit association and held a series of races at five venues in NSW and Victoria, with the final event being held in Penrith on 28-29 August 2010.  Council provided $10,000 sponsorship for the 2010 event. 

 

The 2010 event was quite successful with the new organisers providing good exposure to us as sponsors although the attendance of approximately 1,000 over the weekend was less than anticipated.  The organisers are aiming for an attendance of at least 2,500 this year and this will be monitored in the post event analysis. 

 

Formula One boat racing is an exciting and spectacular sport which attracts good media coverage which enhances the impact of the direct attendance.  The request for sponsorship of $5,000 can be funded from the City Marketing and Sponsorship budget and it is therefore recommended that the request be supported.  

NSW RL U16 Youth Development Cup

Council has received a request from the NSWRL Western Sydney Academy for sponsorship support for the 2010 Under 16 Youth Development Cup. 

 

The NSW Rugby League Western Sydney Academy has been established to increase participation in Western Sydney’s junior leagues, establish new clubs, increase the participation of Pacific and indigenous communities and acquire new playing fields.

 

The Youth Development Cup will be held on 8 October at St Marys Leagues Stadium with games between teams of indigenous, Lebanese, Tongan, Maori, Italian, Samoan, Fijian and Cook Island origin.  It will promote cultural diversity within Rugby League and the wider community.  It is also intended to encourage and promote healthy lifestyle choices and broaden the Junior Rugby League participation base for under 16s.

 

In previous years, the tournament has attracted over 6,000 spectators, players and officials from regions across NSW, including Dubbo, Kempsey, Griffith and the Illawarra. 

 

The Academy’s business plan for the event notes the economic benefit for the city in hosting this event.  The Academy is seeking $2,000 in sponsorship to contribute to the running and marketing of the event.  

Revisions to the City Marketing Event Sponsorship Policy

The City Marketing events sponsorship policy was established in 2001 and last revised in 2003.  With the recent acquisition of the tourism module of the REMPLAN econometric program we will be in a better position to analyse the benefit of sponsoring particular events.  It is therefore proposed that the policy be amended to increase the emphasis on quantifying the economic benefit of events for which sponsorship is being considered.  This will be the subject of a report to a Policy Review Committee meeting in the near future. 

Promotion of these events

These events will be extensively promoted.  The most important promotional tool is the What’s On service which is co-ordinated by the visitor information centre. The centre compiles the information and distributes it in electronic and printed form to local and metro media, customers of the visitor centre and to an extensive network of regular email subscribers.  It is also published on the Penrith Valley and Visit NSW web sites and in the FYI supplement in the Western Weekender

 

The metro media, especially the Daily Telegraph often pick up events mentioned in the What’s On information that we send them each week.  The printed leaflet is distributed to a number of offices and businesses around the city, including the libraries and other Council buildings, accommodation houses and other visitor facilities and to a number of shops and offices which display it for their customers to pick up. 

 

Significant events are promoted on the Council news page, in media releases and through signs and promotional displays in Council buildings, in the community newsletter, the staff newsletter and at civic events and citizenship ceremonies. 

Conclusion

These proposals conform to the event sponsorship policy and the funds to support them are available in the City Marketing budget.  It is recommended that these requests be approved.  

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on City Marketing Event Sponsorship Proposals be received.

2.     Sponsorship of the Australian Formula Power Boat GP ($5,000), the Penrith Valley Nepean Triathlon ($8,000) and the NSW RL U16 Youth Development Cup ($2,000), to be funded from the City Marketing & Event Sponsorship budget, be approved. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1. View

Penrith Valley Nepean Triathlon

5 Pages

Attachment

2. View

Formula Power Boats Event Sponsorship Plan 2011

13 Pages

Attachment

3. View

Under 16 Rugby League Cup Business Plan

3 Pages

Attachment

  


Ordinary Meeting                                                                                                15 August 2011

A Leading City

 

 

7

Summary of Investments and Banking for the period 1 July to 31 July 2011   

 

Compiled by:               Pauline Johnston, Expenditure Accountant

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

 

Objective

We demonstrate accountability, transparency and ethical conduct

Community Outcome

A Council that behaves responsibly and ethically (5)

Strategic Response

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

       

 

Executive Summary

The purpose of this report is to provide a summary of investments for the period 1 July 2011 to 31 July 2011 and a reconciliation of invested funds at 31 July 2011. The report recommends that the information contained in the report be received.

Background

CERTIFICATE OF RESPONSIBLE ACCOUNTING OFFICER

I hereby certify the following:

 

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

2.   Council’s Cash Book and Bank Statements have been reconciled as at 31 July 2011.

 

Vicki O’Kelly

Responsible Accounting Officer

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.  The information contained in the report on Summary of Investments and Banking for the period 1 July to 31 July 2011 be received.

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

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

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1.  

Summary of Investments

4 Pages

Appendix

  


Ordinary Meeting                                                                                                                15 August 2011

Appendix 1 - Summary of Investments

 

temp


temp


temp


temp

 


 

 

 

 

THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT BLANK  INTENTIONALLY


A City of Opportunities

 

Item                                                                                                                                                Page

 

8        No Boundaries Project: Grant Applications - Arts NSW and Australia Council for the Arts

 

9        Erskine Business Park - Southern Link Road Network Strategic Transport Assessment

 

10      Development Application DA11/0025 Proposed Health Facility Lot 2 DP 157408 (No. 26) Gidley Street, St Marys Applicant: Savills Project Management;  Owner: State Property Authority

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

 

11      Development Applications DA11/0511, DA11/0512, DA11/0514, DA11/0515, DA11/0516, DA11/0517 for Subdivision of the Western Precinct, St Marys Release Area (Jordan Springs) Lot 1036 DP 1149525 (No.1070 - 1170) The Northern Road, Llandilo Applicant: Maryland Development Company Pty Ltd;  Owner: St Marys Land Ltd

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

 

 



Ordinary Meeting                                                                                                15 August 2011

A City of Opportunities

 

 

8

No Boundaries Project: Grant Applications - Arts NSW and Australia Council for the Arts   

 

Compiled by:               Robyn Brookes, Disability Services Officer

Joe Ibbitson, Community Programs Co-ordinator

Authorised by:            Erich Weller, Community and Cultural Development Manager   

 

Objective

We have access to what we need

Community Outcome

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

Strategic Response

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

       

 

Executive Summary

This report provides information about the implementation of strategies in the Penrith Inclusion Plan – People with Disability 2009-2013 that will encourage and support the participation of the people with disability in arts and cultural activities. This work has included special events and workshops at both the Joan Sutherland Performing Arts Centre and the Penrith Regional Gallery and The Lewers Bequest to celebrate International Day for People with Disability (IDPwD). 

 

The No Boundaries project is a large scale projection art project that will enhance and extend inclusive arts practice and experience for people with disability. It will also present the unique experience of people living with disability in the Penrith and Western Sydney region through the creation of a high quality, innovative multi-media and digital art projection onto the walls of the Joan Sutherland Performing Arts Centre.

 

The report identifies that substantial resources will be required to fund the high cost of the technical and multi-media equipment and support required to implement this project. All funding will be from external sources.

 

This project is a complex, cross sectoral collaboration between various community partners and will take up to a year to complete if the funding applications summarised in this report are successful.

 

The report recommends that the information on the No Boundaries Project: Grant Applications - Arts NSW and Australia Council for the Arts be received and that Council provide retrospective endorsement for a funding application that was made to Arts NSW in June 2011.  The report also recommends that a proposed application to the Australia Council for the Arts to assist in the delivery of the No Boundaries project be endorsed.

Background

The ‘Penrith Inclusion Plan – People with Disability 2009-2013’ is Council’s primary strategy to promote a more inclusive and accessible City. Council’s Access Committee provided overall guidance and direction for the development of the plan which presents over eighty actions and strategies under five priority areas to be implemented over the period 2009-2013.

 

Priority Area 1: ‘City Leadership, Promotion and Strategic Partnerships’ identifies the following strategy to encourage the participation of people with disability in arts and cultural activities:

 

“Develop partnerships with relevant groups and organisations to promote the inclusion of people with disability in cultural and arts programs and activities” (page 22, Penrith Inclusion Plan).

 

The Commonwealth Government’s National Arts and Disability Strategy also highlights the importance of collaboration between the arts and disability sectors and non government organisations in supporting, encouraging and promoting participation in the arts by people with disability.

 

Over the past few years, Council officers have been working with local disability and arts organisations to provide opportunities for people with disability to engage in arts and cultural development programs and activities. This work has included special events and workshops at both the Joan Sutherland Performing Arts Centre and the Penrith Regional Gallery and the Lewers Bequest to celebrate International Day for People with Disability (IDPwD). 

 

For the 2009 IDPwD celebrations, a ‘Disability, Arts and Culture Forum’ was held at the Regional Gallery in collaboration with the Sylvanvale Foundation and Accessible Arts NSW. The forum was facilitated by the Australia Council for the Arts and attended by around fifty (50) representatives from local and regional disability and arts organisations. The theme of the forum was ‘how do we create inclusive and accessible arts practice for people with disabilities?’ The forum presented some examples of innovative disability and arts practice and considered options to progress local projects and initiatives. A working group was set-up to progress these matters and the following developments are the key outcomes since the forum:

 

·    The establishment of the Penrith Disability Arts and Culture Network

·   A mapping workshop, facilitated by Dr Helen Armstrong from the UWS Centre for Cultural Research, held in July 2010

·   IDPwD 2010 ‘A Light and Sound Celebration’ – launch of CD and video produced by people with disability.

 

More information about these initiatives is available at the following link to the Accessible Arts Western Sydney webpages:

 

http://www.aarts.net.au/westernsydney/penrith-disability-arts-and-culture-network/

 

Through this innovative work, Council officers have consolidated strong community partnerships with many local and regional disability and arts organisations including:

 

·    Sylvanvale Foundation

·    Accessible Arts NSW

·    Nordoff-Robbins Music Therapy Centre

·    University of Western Sydney

·    Sunnyfield Independence

·    Nepean Area Disabilities Organisation (NADO)

·    Flintwood Disability Services

 

The broad aim and objective of this work has been around the ‘capacity building’ of individuals with disability and local groups to participate and engage in a diverse range of arts and cultural development activities. 

No Boundaries Project

Based on this strong, collaborative partnership work, a proposal was developed, in late 2010, for a large scale art projection project to present high quality artwork produced by artists and people with disability. The No Boundaries project will enhance and extend inclusive arts practice and experience for people with disability. It will also present the unique experience of people living with disability in the Penrith and Western Sydney region through the creation of a high quality, innovative multi-media and digital art projection. It is proposed that the final artwork will be projected onto the walls of the Joan Sutherland Performing Arts Centre. The project will also incorporate a focus on the use of social media to encourage broad community participation and inclusion.

 

The project is the result of continuing collaboration between Council officers, the Sylvanvale Foundation and Accessible Arts NSW. The project will be implemented with the support of Cindi Drennan from Illuminart Productions which specialises in illuminated audiovisual environments and projection art.  Ms Drennan has worked on similar projects in South Australia including The Ribbon and most recently Port Inhabited for the upcoming Port Adelaide festival in October 2011.

 

Additional partners and collaborators on this project include the Penrith Performing and Visual Arts Ltd, Westfield and the University of Western Sydney as well as disability organisations NADO, Sunnyfield Independence, Northcott Disability and the Penrith Disability, Arts and Culture Network. Local and regional artists with disability will also be invited as facilitators and mentors on the project.

 

An initial project plan for this innovative project has identified the need for substantial resources as a result of the high cost of the technical and multi-media equipment and support required. The final budget for the project is likely to be approximately $100,000 with the majority of funds to be provided by grant support from the Commonwealth and State Governments.  Some funds or in-kind support may also be sought from media/arts industry partners.

 

This project is a complex, cross sectoral collaboration between various community partners and will take up to a year to complete once the funding has been made available.

Funding Applications – Arts NSW and Australia Council for the Arts

Through Arts NSW funding programs, the NSW Government seeks to promote:

 

·    A creative and diverse arts and cultural sector

·    Sustainable arts and cultural organisations, services and infrastructure across NSW

·    Increased access to arts and cultural activities across NSW.

 

Areas highlighted by Arts NSW include opportunities for people with disability to participate fully in arts and cultural activities and support their artistic aspirations, achievements and activities in Western Sydney. The Creation and Presentation funding category is available to support any stage in the creative development and public presentation of arts and cultural work. The closing date for submissions was 20 June 2011 and Council officers applied for approximately $60,000 to support the creation and presentation of the No Boundaries project.

 

It is proposed that Council also apply for funds to the Australia Council for the Arts’ Community Partnership funding program under the Projects with Public Outcomes category. These grants provide funding for one-off community arts and cultural development projects that must have a public outcome and involve collaborations with a range of cross-sectoral partners. People with disability are identified by the Australia Council for the Arts as one of the key priorities for Community Partnerships funding.  This grant application will be approximately $40,000.

 

The closing date for funding submissions for Projects with Public Outcomes is 7 September 2011.

 

Conclusion

Council officers have been pursuing strong collaborations with Council’s community partners around the inclusion of people with disability in arts and cultural activities to progress the implementation of the Penrith Inclusion Plan. As the next stage in this development, the No Boundaries project is a large scale art projection project to be produced by people with disability and shown on the walls of the Joan Sutherland Performing Arts Centre. The project will require substantial resources and may take up to a year to complete.

 

A funding application has been submitted under the Arts NSW 2011-2012 Funding Program for the proposal and a further application for funding is proposed to be made to the Australia Council for the Arts on 7 September 2011. The No Boundaries project will assist in the implementation of the Penrith Inclusion Plan.

 

The report seeks retrospective endorsement of the funding application to Arts NSW in June 2011 and approval to proceed with an application to the Australia Council for the Arts in September 2011.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on No Boundaries Project: Grant Applications - Arts NSW and Australia Council for the Arts be received.

2.     Council provide retrospective endorsement for the application to Arts NSW to fund the No Boundaries project as outlined in the report.

3.     The proposed application to the Australia Council for the Arts for funds to assist in the delivery of the No Boundaries project be endorsed.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Meeting                                                                                                15 August 2011

A City of Opportunities

 

 

9

Erskine Business Park - Southern Link Road Network Strategic Transport Assessment   

 

Compiled by:               Walter Sinnadurai, Transportation Planner

Authorised by:            Adam Wilkinson, Engineering Services Manager   

 

Objective

We have a say in our future

Community Outcome

A Council that speaks out for Penrith and our region (9)

Strategic Response

Advocate for the employment, transport, and infrastructure to ensure the region is sustainable (9.1)

       

 

Executive Summary

The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s endorsement of a submission to the Department of Planning and Infrastructure (DP&I) in relation to their exhibition of the Southern Link Road Network Strategic Transport Assessment Final Report.  The report recommends that the information be received and the Engineering Services Manager be authorised to finalise the submission and forward it to the DP&I.

 

On 6 July 2011 the State Government placed on public exhibition the Southern Link Road Network Strategic Transport Assessment Final Report (SLRNSTA) and has invited submissions by 17 August 2011.  The report relates specifically to the proposed strategic road network associated with the Western Sydney Employment Area (WSEA) and in particular the lands immediately south of the Sydney Water pipeline.  The SLRNSTA outlines the preferred route alignment options for the Southern Link Road Network, which will connect with the Erskine Park Link Road, Mamre Road, Wallgrove Road and will provide access to the Westlink M7 for the WSEA.

 

The report outlines the key elements of the SLRNSTA and provides comments on the issues that need to be resolved in developing an integrated transport and land use plan for Western Sydney, in particular, how this affects the planning, funding of transport infrastructure and services required to support these employment lands and more generally the development of Penrith in its role as a regional city.  The comments outlined in the report will form the basis of Council’s submission to the State Government.

Background

Erskine Park Link Road

On 11 August 2009, the former NSW State Government announced that it had approved the Erskine Park Link Road Network Concept Plan and that up-front funding would be provided to build the $80 million project.  On 16 November 2010, it announced that planning approval had been obtained and tenders called for construction of the Link Road.

 

On 25 May 2011, the NSW Premier Barry O’Farrell and Roads Minister Duncan Gay announced that the Government had awarded the contract to construct the Erskine Park Link Road.  Pre-construction work has now begun and major construction work is scheduled to commence in September 2011.  Full road construction is expected to be completed in 2013.

 

This Link Road (located to the north of the Sydney Water pipeline) will establish a much needed strategic east-west transport connection that will facilitate development within the Erskine Park Employment Lands.

 

Southern Link Road Network and Strategic Transport Assessment

In June 2010 Council, together with Blacktown City Council, Fairfield City Council and the Roads and Traffic Authority, was invited to participate as part of a broader working group to assess the various proposed road alignments for the planned Southern Link Road Network (SLRN).

 

In November 2010, Council was provided with an initial (confidential) copy of the then draft Report into the Western Sydney Employment Area (WSEA) Southern Link Road Network Strategic Transport Assessment prepared by consultant AECOM on behalf of the DP&I.  The three respective Councils conferred with each other in a collaborative position culminating in the key issues for an individual Council submission letter.  A preliminary submission was prepared and sent to the Department of Planning on 6 January 2011 which focused on key issues such as the restrictive scope of the study area, strategic relationships, connectivity, route alignment, funding, implementation, road status and land acquisition.

 

Council staff participated and contributed advice in various workshops/meetings which were conducted by AECOM consultants on behalf of the NSW DP&I.  Council officers have advised on the key issues identified above.

 

More recently Council staff, together with Blacktown City Council, Fairfield City Council and the Roads and Traffic Authority, participated in a meeting with the DP&I on 25 July 2011.  At this meeting, issues related to limitation of the study area, modelling data, and connectivity to the M7 were again raised.

Current Situation

On 6 July 2011, the State Government placed on public exhibition the Southern Link Road Network Strategic Transport Assessment (SLRNSTA) Final Report and has invited submissions by 17 August 2011.  It is understood that the DP&I have liaised directly with the relevant land owners within the precinct.

 

The Southern Link Road Network will provide the road infrastructure required to accommodate travel demand generated by employment areas south of the Sydney Catchment Authority (SCA) water supply pipeline.

 

The Southern Link Road Network comprises:

 

·  an east-west route (“Southern Link Road” as an extension of Bakers Lane) providing access to the proposed development lots and potential connection to Wallgrove Road and link to the M7 interchange at Old Wallgrove Road;

·  eastern and western north-south link roads (Old Wallgrove Road and “N-S Link” respectively) connecting the Southern Link Road to the northern precincts and beyond to the M4

·  no direct (additional) connection to the M7; access will be via existing Wallgrove Road either to the north or south and connection to the M7 at the interchanges of Old Wallgrove Road or Horsley Drive.

 

AECOM consultants have undertaken a multi-criteria analysis methodology in assessing the route selection and Appendix 1 shows some of the highest ranking route alignments.  The preferred and recommended route alignment is shown in Appendix 2.  Appendix 2 also shows an alternative link connecting to Wallgrove Road approximately 460m south of the Sydney Water pipeline.

 

Council’s Submission to DP&I

 

The Study Area

The State Environmental Planning Policy (Western Sydney Employment Area) 2009 will provide more than 2,200 hectares of employment land that will support approximately 40,000 jobs for the people of western Sydney.  The precinct south of the Sydney Water pipeline is located within the Penrith and Fairfield LGAs, and is bounded by Mamre Road in the west, the Sydney Water pipeline in the north, Westlink M7 to the east, and existing residential development to the south.  The northern precincts are located to the north of the Sydney Water pipeline within the Blacktown and Penrith LGAs, with access requirements serviced by the proposed Erskine Park Link Road Network.

 

Comments

The restrictive scope of the study has not allowed for broader development and transport considerations.  The study area should have been widened to a larger area to include assessment of the transport impacts of the WSEA (Potential Expansion (formerly known as Western Sydney Employment Lands Investigation Area)) which is identified in the Metropolitan Plan for Sydney 2036, and mooted intermodal freight terminal which was included in the Infrastructure Australia Updated Submission by the NSW Government 2010, and other external issues such as M4 congestion and the area to the east of the M7.  This would have identified other transport network constraints which would have a bearing on the current road network proposal’s route alignment of the Southern Link Road Network (SLRN).

 

It is recognised that the SLRN needs to fulfil the role of an overflow route from the north of the Sydney Water pipeline, as the intersections of Erskine Park Link Road (Old Wallgrove Road) with M7 WestLink will not cope with the projected traffic volumes.

 

Alignment

The preferred route alignment outline in the Final Report connects to the west at Mamre Road.  The east-west route alignment traverses immediately south of Bakers Lane, then continues north-east and provides a connection to the Erskine Park Arterial.  The route then continues in an easterly direction with a direct link to the proposed Archbold Road extension, and then continues north-easterly to connect to Wallgrove Road south of the Sydney Water pipeline which connects to the Wallgrove Road and M7 interchange.  The preferred alignment is illustrated in Appendix 2.

 

Comments

The Final Report does not propose or support an additional connection to the M7, however no evidence has been produced to support this assessment.  It is critical to provide an additional connection to the M7 to accommodate existing, proposed and future transport demands of the WSEA and surrounding region.

 

Given the constraints that the existing Sydney Water pipeline creates in terms of proximity, it is critical that connection to the east is located away from the pipeline in order to facilitate future connectivity to the M7.  In regard to this, should the preferred alignment (connection to Wallgrove Road immediately to the south of the Sydney Water pipeline) be adopted as proposed, it will most likely preclude any future connection to the M7.  Adopting the proposed alignment would be considered short-sighted transport planning and is a decision which we could not support.

 

Further, Bakers Lane (to the west) should not take the role of an arterial road and should be retained as a service road only to provide separate and appropriate access to the existing developments with connection onto the northern side of Bakers Lane.  The arterial road alignment should be promoted as a separate alignment immediately to the south, providing a connection to Bakers Lane, but separating the distinct functions of the existing road and the proposed arterial road.

 

Strategic Bus Corridors

The proposed Southern Link Road Network Strategic Study has not considered any future strategic bus corridors on their route selection assessment.  However, the final report acknowledges that subsequent concept and detailed design will be undertaken in consultation with Transport NSW to ensure that strategic bus corridors can be facilitated by the proposed network if required.

 

Comments

The Metropolitan Transport Plan identifies future Strategic Bus Corridors connecting to and through this region, however there is no mention of this in the draft report, nor does it appear to have been accommodated.  The provision of an adequate, effective, efficient and attractive public transport network is essential to the promotion of alternate modes of access to employment in this region, as well as promoting regional bus connections.

 

Connectivity

The main features of the Southern Link Road Network include:

 

· an east-west route (“Southern Link Road” as an extension of Bakers Lane) providing access to the proposed estate lots and potential connection to Wallgrove Road or the M7 interchange

· eastern and western north-south link roads (Old Wallgrove Road and “N-S Link” respectively) connecting the Southern Link Road to the northern precincts.

 

The preferred route alignment and/or alternative links are proposed such that they do not have a direct connection to the M7.  Appendix 2 shows an alternative link connecting to Wallgrove Road approximately 460m south of the Sydney Water pipeline, and provides access to the M7 (to the south) at the Horsley Drive interchange.

 

Comments

It is considered essential to provide an additional connection to the M7 to accommodate existing, proposed \and future transport demands of the WSEA and surrounding region, as well as relieving pressures on the existing two interchanges at Old Wallgrove Road and Horsley Drive.

 

To the north, there are no details on the provision of an interchange for Archbold Road with the M4 motorway.  The planning for the Erskine Park Link Road identified that this interchange is critical in reducing the impact on the M7/Old Wallgrove Road interchange to acceptable levels.  Clearly, this interchange should be included on all planning networks and future works programs for this region.

 

The lack of transport modelling figures has made it impossible to determine whether the proposed strategic road network will be adequate to accommodate future transport demand.  Despite officers’ best endeavours, this information has not been provided.  The functionality in terms of transport demand is the key driver above all other considerations, yet the underpinning data has not been released for consideration.

 

External Road Network Improvements

Previous strategic traffic modelling associated with the full development of the SEPP of Western Sydney Employment Area in the horizon year 2031 has previously identified essential road infrastructure required to accommodate travel demand generated by these employment lands.  These road network improvements are summarised in Table 1.

 

TABLE 1

External Road Network Improvements Identified in
Erskine Park Link Road Assessment

 

Location

Assumed Upgrade

External road improvement for SEPP (Western Sydney Employment Area) Erskine Park, Ropes Creek and Eastern Creek

Mamre Rd – bridge over M4

Duplication and ramp upgrade

Archbold Rd – Great Western Highway to M4

Reconstruct two lanes including intersection with GWH

Mamre Rd – M4 to Bakers Lane

Reconstruct Mamre Rd to four lanes divided

Erskine Park Rd – Coonawarra Dr to Mamre Rd

Complete construction to four lanes divided

M4 – Archbold Rd

Interchange with east facing ramps only

Archbold Rd – Great Western Highway to M4

Reconstruct to four lanes

Mamre Rd intersection with Great Western Highway

Intersection upgrade

External road improvement for development SEPP (Western Sydney Employment Area) south of the Warragamba Pipeline

M7 – between M4 and Old Wallgrove Rd

Additional two southbound lanes and one northbound lane including widening of access ramps to and from Wallgrove Rd at Old Wallgrove Rd

 

Notwithstanding the previously identified required upgrades, during the SLRNSTA, areas of congestion and limited capacity were identified within the network under full development of the SEPP (WSEA) 2009.  Key bottlenecks were identified on Wallgrove Road, Mamre Road, Horsley Drive and the Western Motorway (M4).  To mitigate adverse impacts associated with the heavy demand on the road network at 2031, the additional recommended road upgrades at key locations are summarised in Table 2.

 

TABLE 2
External Road Network Improvements Recommended by
Southern Link Network Strategic Transport Assessment

 

Location

Assumed Upgrade

External road improvement for SEPP (Western Sydney Employment Area) Erskine Park, Ropes Creek and Eastern Creek

Wallgrove Rd – between Old Wallgrove Rd and Horsley Dr

Reconstruct Wallgrove Rd to four lanes divided

Mamre Rd – between Bakers Lane & Elizabeth Dr

Reconstruct Mamre Rd to four lanes divided

Horsley Dr – M7 to Ferrers Rd

Provide two eastbound lanes

M4 - M7 to Erskine Park Rd

Provide additional lane in each direction

 

Comments

It appears that strategic traffic modelling has assumed that the Erskine Park Link Road Assessment identified road infrastructure upgrades are in place, however the State Government has not committed any funding or an implementation timeline.  The report has not provided any commentary on this and it is critical that this is addressed.

 

The various studies clearly identify additional infrastructure upgrades and provision as critical to supporting the development of the strategic Western Sydney Employment Lands.  There is an absolute need to identify an appropriate funding and delivery mechanism to achieve same.

 

Implementation (Funding and Timing)

The Final Report provides commentary that construction of the Southern Link Road Network would not be undertaken as a single project.  An implementation strategy would need to be developed to determine the order in which sections of the preferred option are delivered.

 

Source of funds or investment strategies for the proposed works have not been identified in the Final Report.

 

Comments

The construction and staging does not provide details on when the works will commence and/or be completed, nor is there a direction on the source of funds that can deliver the necessary infrastructure.  It is a concern that the delays in the delivery of this link will create unacceptable demands on the existing transport network north of the pipeline, therefore all roadworks that have been proposed need to be included in the State Government’s future works programme.

 

The Final Report touches on return on investment issues, however it is not clear what is meant and intended by this approach.

 

Council seeks clarification on when a final determination in terms of funding and implementation strategy will be developed for all proposed developments within the WSEA.

 

Road Status and Acquisition

The Final Report has not addressed the road classification and/or any land acquisition required for the proposed road network.

 

Comments

All proposed roads shall be State Roads not local roads and need to be classified as State Roads under the care, control and responsibility of the RTA.

 

Property acquisition issues need to be clearly identified right at the very start and should be pursued as a priority to ensure there are no delays with implementation.  All costs for service relocation, road widening, etc, should be borne by the proponent and not local Councils.

Conclusion

The report outlines the key elements and findings of the WSEA Southern Link Road Network Strategic Transport Assessment and provides comments on the issues that are considered necessary to support the development of these employment lands, and indeed, of Penrith in its role as a Regional City.  The matters identified within this report will form the basis of Council’s submission to the DP&I.

 

The report seeks Council’s endorsement of a submission on behalf of Council to the WSEA Southern Link Road Network Strategic Transport Assessment.  The report recommends that the information be received and the Engineering Services Manager be authorised to finalise the submission and forward it to the DP&I.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Erskine Business Park - Southern Link Road Network Strategic Transport Assessment be received.

2.     Council’s Engineering Services Manager be authorised to finalise Council’s submission on the Southern Link Road Network Strategic Transport Assessment and forward to the DP&I.

3.     Council write to the Local Member for Smithfield, as well as Fairfield and Blacktown City Councils, seeking their support in relation to Penrith Council’s submission.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1.  

Erskine Business Park - Southern Link Road Network Strategic Transport Assessment

1 Page

Appendix

2.  

Erskine Business Park - Southern Link Road Network Strategic Transport Assessment

1 Page

Appendix

  


Ordinary Meeting                                                                                                                15 August 2011

Appendix 1 - Erskine Business Park - Southern Link Road Network Strategic Transport Assessment

 

temp


Ordinary Meeting                                                                                                                15 August 2011

Appendix 2 - Erskine Business Park - Southern Link Road Network Strategic Transport Assessment

 

temp


Ordinary Meeting                                                                                                15 August 2011

A City of Opportunities

 

 

10

Development Application DA11/0025 Proposed Health Facility Lot 2 DP 157408 (No. 26) Gidley Street, St Marys  Applicant:  Savills Project Management;  Owner:  State Property Authority    

 

Compiled by:               Schandel Jefferys, Principal Planner

Deepa Randhawa, Senior Environmental Planner

Authorised by:            Paul Lemm, Development Services Manager   

 

Objective

We have access to what we need

Community Outcome

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

Strategic Response

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

  

Previous Items:            Development Application DA11/0025 Proposed Health Facility Lot 2 DP 157408 (No. 26) Gidley Street, St Marys - Ordinary Meeting - 30 May 2011   

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

 

Executive Summary

Council is in receipt of an application from Savills Project Management on behalf of Sydney West Area Health Service for change of use to an existing building for the purposes of Health Services Facility including building works.

 

Pursuant to Section 88 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the Sydney West Area Health Service is defined as a “prescribed authority” for the purposes of the Crown. Accordingly, the subject Development Application is identified as a ‘crown development’.

 

The site is currently zoned 2 (d) Residential (Medium Density) pursuant to LEP 1998 - Urban Land.  The proposed use is a permissible development by virtue of the provisions of the State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 (SEPP 2007).

 

Key issues to emerge as a result of the assessment process are:

 

·    The applicant’s SEPP 1 (State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards) objection seeking a variation from Council’s development standards relating to:

o maximum external wall height,

o minimum landscaped area and

o rear setback requirements

·    Access, parking and traffic

 

These matters are discussed in detail in the report.

 

 

The subject application was reported to Council’s Ordinary Meeting on 30 May 2011.  Council resolved that the matter be deferred and Council write to the Minister for Health and all Local Members outlining that Council will not support the application until the parking and accessibility issues are satisfactorily resolved.

 

A letter from the Hon Melinda Pavey MLC, Parliamentary Secretary for Regional Health, has been received on behalf of the Minister for Health.  The applicant has also submitted additional information and amended plans in response to the issues raised.  A copy of the letter is appended for reference (See Appendix No. 1 – Letter from the Minister).   

 

Amended plans have been provided which seek to reduce the gross floor area proposed and address all accessibility requirements (See Appendix No. 2 – Revised Architectural Plans).    The amendments do not alter the nature or function of the development as originally proposed.  Details of these amendments are discussed in detail under the headings of car parking and accessibility.

 

The social benefits resulting from the proposal outweigh the policy departures being applied for and it is recommended that the application be supported subject to conditions of consent.

 

Site and Surrounds

The site is located on the south-east corner of Gidley Street and Chapel Street, St Marys. The total area of the site is approximately 950m2. The site is located on the eastern side of Gidley Street, halfway between King Street (to the south) and Phillip Street (to the north). The eastern side of Gidley Street is predominantly characterised by residential dwellings, with the western side consisting of predominantly open at-grade parking areas mix together by large single storey commercial/bulky goods premises. St Marys Railway Station is located at a distance of 600m from the site with the Great Western Highway approximately 360m to the south (See Appendix No. 3 - Locality Plan).

 

The existing building was previously used as a community welfare centre.  The site is surrounded by a mixture of land uses including commercial development, open space and residential development. 

 

The Proposed Development

The application seeks approval for following works and use.

 

Proposed Use

The subject site has been identified by Sydney West Area Health Service for consolidating related health services/facilities within the one location. Services to be provided from the subject site will cover:

 

· Primary Care & Community Health;

· Community Mental Health; and

· Community Drug and Alcohol.

 

These services are currently being carried out in the St Marys community at Shop No. 5 Corner of Phillip & East Lane St Marys and 42 Gidley St, St Marys and that no additional service is proposed.

 

Proposed Works

·      Refurbishment and upgrade of internal areas at ground floor and first floor level;

·     Addition at ground floor level involving the extension of an existing single storey element at the rear of the building;

·     Minor addition at first floor level to accommodate new access arrangements between levels (i.e. new lift and stairs) to meet BCA and Disability

·      Discrimination Act 1992 access requirements;

·      Infill of ground floor window along northern elevation;

·     New egress fire door to existing rear brick fence;

·     Removal of planted rear courtyard area to accommodate ground floor extensions;

·     Provision of seven (7) onsite car spaces including an accessible parking space; and

·     The proposed hours of operation are 8:30am to 5:30pm Monday to Friday.

 

See Appendix No.4 –Architectural Plans (30 May 2011 Council meeting).

 

The applicant has described the proposed use as follows:

 

St Marys Community Health Centre (CHC) will be a multi-function centre offering a range of centre-based ‘outreach’ and ‘inreach’ programs designed to improve or maintain the health and wellbeing of the community served. Key service providers to be accommodated will be Primary Care & Community Health, Community Mental Health and Drug & Alcohol Services.

 

These services will provide a core range of community services for people of all ages including assessment and treatment services (such as Child & Family Health nursing, allied health and counselling services), health promotion, prevention, and early detection and intervention services.

 

Community Mental Health services includes the provision of core ambulatory and home-based mental health services (including acute management) for children and adolescents, adults and aged people.

 

Services provided include:

 

·        regular appointments in the centre, in the client’s home or in the community as arranged psychological interventions for specific issues

·        medical interventions including prescription and administration of psychotropic medications and medical reviews

·        provision of information about and referral to community services and non-government organisations

·        group rehabilitation activities

·        support, information and/or education for families, friends or carers

·        skills training

 

The Area Mental Health Service is responsible for the delivery of the bulk of community mental health services including those for children and adolescents, adults and all ages. Child and Youth Mental Health services Specialised Mental Health Services for Older People will be located at the Penrith CHC with outreach to St Marys CHC. Other specialist services will be provided through St Marys as an outreach from Penrith CHC and Nepean Hospital.

 

Drug and Alcohol Services will be delivered from the St Marys Community Hub to provide evidenced-based management of consumers with substance misuse problems. These services will provide a core range of community services for people of all ages – either directly or indirectly affected by substance use issues – including on site assessment and counselling services, as well as linkages to other appropriate services within the Drug and Alcohol Network, other Networks, and NGO Services as required.

 

The Drug and Alcohol services to be provided represent only a small component of the proposed integrated community health facility being proposed. To remove any doubt and dispel any misunderstandings, the Drug and Alcohol services to be provided will not involve any drug dosing or drug administration. The nature of the Drug and Alcohol Services is generally non-invasive and will primarily involve counselling of patients and support in becoming a contributing member of society. 

 

The following reports have accompanied the subject development application and used throughout the planning assessment: 

 

·     Traffic and Parking Impact Assessment

·     Stormwater and Sediment and Erosion Control report

·     Arboricultural Impact Assessment

·     Accessibility Review

·     BCA Assessment Report

·     Social Impact Assessment Report

 

Planning Assessment

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

 

1.   Section 79C(1)(a)(i) – The Provisions of any Environmental Planning Instrument

State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 (SEPP 2007)

Division 10 of the State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 relates specifically with ‘health services facilities’ and in accordance with clause 57(1) development for the purpose of ‘health services facilities’ may be carried out by any person with consent on land in a prescribed zone. The proposal, which involves establishing a health services facility within an existing building that is located on land in a prescribed zone, is accordingly permissible subject to Council consent.

A health service facility is defined under the Infrastructure SEPP as:

‘...a facility used to provide medical or other services relating to the maintenance or improvement of the health, or the restoration to health, of persons or the prevention of disease in or treatment of injury to persons, and includes the following:

 

(a)   day surgeries and medical centres,

(b)   community health service facilities,

(c)   health consulting rooms,

(d)   facilities for the transport of patients, including helipads and ambulance facilities,

(e)   hospitals.’

 

The proposed use of the existing building is considered to fall within the above definition, in particular as community health service facilities. Under clause 57(1) of the SEPP 2007, development for the purpose of ‘community health services facilities’ may be carried out by any purpose with consent on land in a prescribed zone. The subject site is located within zone No 2 (d) Residential (Medium Density) under the Penrith Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Urban Land), which equates to the R3 Medium Density Residential ‘prescribed zone’ under the Infrastructure SEPP. Accordingly, as the proposed use of the building is for a community health services facility and the site is located on land in a prescribed zone, the proposed development is classified as ‘development permitted with consent’.

 

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

Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 20 aims to protect the environment of the Hawkesbury-Nepean River system by ensuring that the impacts of future land uses are considered in a regional context. Relevant to the proposal is the requirement to assess potential impacts on water quality. There will be a requirement for suitable sedimentation and erosion controls to be in place prior to any site work commencing. This will provide adequate guarantee that water quality leaving the site is suitable for its receiving environment. The provisions of the SREP 20 are therefore considered to be satisfied.

 

Penrith Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Urban Land)

LEP and Zone Objectives

The proposed development is consistent with the aims and objectives of the LEP. The particular objectives of the 2(d) Residential (Medium Density) zone are as follows:

 

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

(ii)     to protect the character of traditional cottage development and streetscapes, and

(iii)    to consolidate population and housing densities, and

(iv)    to expand housing choices by allowing multi-unit housing up to a two storey appearance, and

(v)     to promote a variety of housing types or forms upon each site, and

(vi)    to allow a range of compatible non-residential uses. 

 

The zoning allows for a range of compatible non residential land uses. The objectives of the plan are to ensure that non-residential development is planned and designed according to principles of traditional suburban design with the intent to protect the amenity of neighbouring properties, as well as to the neighbourhood character.

 

It is considered that the proposed use is in keeping with the existing character of the area and is a compatible non-residential use consistent with the above relevant objectives

 

 

 

 

 

Development Standards

The proposed development has been assessed against the relevant development standards contained in the LEP relating to multi-unit housing and development generally in the 2(d) Residential (Medium Density) zone, as detailed below.

 

 Development Standards

Requirement

Compliance

Clause 12(3) – Building Envelope

1.8m from property boundary and 45o height plane.

No: Both the existing and proposed additions to the rear do not comply with the Building Envelope development standards. Refer to discussion regarding SEPP No. 1 objection.

Clause 12(3) – External Wall Height

6.5m

No: 10m –Refer to discussion regarding SEPP No. 1 objection.

Clause 12(3) – Landscaped Area

40%

No: Existing 3%, Proposed zero percentage. Refer to discussion regarding SEPP No. 1 objection.

Clause 12(4) – Rear Setback

6m for 2 storey and 4m for single storey.

No: Part of the existing building has zero setbacks to the rear boundary and part has a 6m rear setback. The resulting development does not involve alterations or extensions that encroach within 6m of the rear boundary; however the rear setback area will continue to be used for access purposes and not as a landscaped area.

 Refer to discussion regarding Clause 12(7) and SEPP No. 1 objection.

Clause 13(2) – Solar Access

§ 3 hours direct sun to   living areas.

§ 3 hours direct sun to neighbouring living areas.

The proposed additions and alterations do not result in any additional overshadowing impacts on the adjacent residential dwellings.

 

Clause 12(7) - Rear setback requirement

Clause 12 (7) states that Council may consent to the erection of a related non-habitable structure which is not compliant with the required rear building setback provided it will only have minimal adverse impact on the site and any adjoining land. In this regard, the existing a section of the covered car park has a zero setback to the rear boundary where as the open car parking area is setback more than 6m.  The proposed alterations or extensions do not encroach within 6m of the rear boundary or result in any new/additional impacts on the neighbouring properties and therefore is considered compliant with the requirement of this clause.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards

The proposed development does not comply with Council’s development standards relating to the maximum external wall height of a building and the minimum landscaped area of a site. In this regard, Clause 12(3) of Penrith Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 1998 (Urban Land) stipulates that in the 2(d) Residential (Medium Density) zone the maximum allowable external wall height of a building is 6.5m and the minimum required landscaped area of a site is 40%. The proposed development includes a maximum external wall height of 10m (both existing and proposed extensions) and a no landscaped area, representing proposed variations from the relevant development standards of 35% and 100% respectively.

 

The application was accompanied with a written objection to the development standards contained in Clause 12(3) of Penrith LEP 1998 (Urban Land) under the provisions of State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards (SEPP 1). SEPP 1 enables councils to consider development proposals that do not comply with a particular development standard where in the circumstances of the case the applicant can demonstrate compliance with the standard to be unreasonable or unnecessary.

 

Section 4(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment 1979 defines development standards as follows:

 

development standards means provisions of an environmental planning instrument or the regulations in relation to the carrying out of development, being provisions by or under which requirements are specified or standards are fixed in respect of any aspect of that development, including, but without limiting the generality of the foregoing, requirements or standards in respect of:

 

(c)   the character, location, siting, bulk, scale, shape, size, height, density, design or external appearance of a building or work,

(f)    the provision of public access, open space, landscaped space, tree planting or other treatment for the conservation, protection or enhancement of the environment

 

Based on this definition, Council’s requirements relating to the maximum external wall height of a building and the minimum landscaped area of a site can be categorised as development standards. Council is therefore able to consider the SEPP 1 objection submitted by the applicant.

 

External Wall Height

The applicant’s SEPP 1 objection in relation to the non-compliance with the maximum allowable external wall height of a building (6.5m) in the 2(d) Residential (Medium Density) zone is summarised below.

 

“In this instance strict compliance with height development standards pursuant to Clause 12 of the Penrith (Urban Land) LEP is unnecessary and unreasonable in that the proposal:

 

·    Provides for the adaptive re-use of an existing vacant building, which will enable a health services facility to be established on the site; and

 

In the context of existing siting and massing of development on the site and the minor alterations and additions proposed (which are contained within the profile of the building and do not encroach upon the existing ‘rear’ boundary setback), there is not likely to be any adverse impact to existing views or outlook experienced from the adjoining residential property.

 

The proposed minor additions and alterations do not result in any additional overshadowing impacts on adjacent residential dwellings

 

The proposed works will not cause any additional undue overlooking or privacy issues for surrounding residential dwellings. It is unlikely that surrounding residents will notice any change between the proposed use of the building as a health services facility and the previous use of the building by the Department of Community Services.

 

Given there are no significant changes proposed to the key visible facades of the existing building, there will accordingly be no change to the existing building’s contribution to the streetscape or character of the area.

 

Furthermore, the application of residential built form outcomes on the subject site is considered unreasonable in the context of the existing commercial form of development on the site, as well as adjoining the site. Similarly to achieving compliance with the height controls would be for the existing building to be demolished and a significantly smaller building erected on the subject site. Such a solution is not reasonable, practical, or financially feasible and would not in any event provide the health services facility with the necessary floor area to support the integrated health care model sort to be achieved.

 

In conclusion, the proposed development will not adversely affect the existing level of amenities currently enjoyed by neighbouring residents.”

 

Clause 12(2) of Penrith LEP 1998 (Urban Land) defines the external wall height of a building as follows:

 

“external wall height” of a building means the vertical distance measured between natural ground level at any point at which the building is sited and the topmost point of any external or enclosing wall within the development site, but excluding the sides and faces of any dormer windows…

 

In this regard, the height of the proposed extensions to the rear is compatible with existing building as the height and bulk and will achieve only minimal impact on adjoining properties in terms of loss of privacy and views. The shadow diagrams submitted with the application indicate there will be no additional impacts on adjoining properties in terms of overshadowing. (See Appendix No. 5 - Shadow Diagrams). 

 

Landscaped Area

The applicant’s SEPP 1 objection in relation to the non-compliance with the minimum landscaped area of a site in the 2(d) Residential (Medium Density) zone is reproduced below.

 

“Compliance with the minimum landscaped area pursuant to Clause 12 of the Penrith (Urban Land) LEP is unnecessary and unreasonable in that the proposal:

 

·      Relates to an existing site where compliance is not achieved;

·   Involves alterations and additions to an existing commercial building, which has significantly different landscaping requirements than a residential dwelling;

·   Will not affect the existing commercial character of the site or its contribution to the area;

·      Is located in close proximity to expansive parkland areas;

·      Relates to a site which is devoid of environmental features; and

·      Will not affect existing on-site stormwater arrangements on the site.

 

The landscaping controls that apply to the subject site reflect outcomes consistent with its ‘residential’ zone. The site’s ‘residential’ zoning does not however give an accurate portrayal of the current development on the site, which is a large two storey brick building that has in the past been used for non-residential purposes. The proposed development seeks to continue the site’s historic non-residential use, through establishing a health services facility together with minor alterations and additions.

 

The only way for a health services facility to be established on the site which complies with the relevant landscaping controls would be if the existing building were demolished and a new significantly smaller building erected on the site with a site coverage of only 60% enabling 40% of the site to be dedicated for landscaping.

 

The requirement to provide at least 40% of the site as a landscaped area is at significant odds with actual requirements for the proposed health services facility. Whilst beneficial for workers and visitors to have access to an outdoor landscaped area, it is not considered reasonable for 40% of the site to be dedicated as a landscaped area. The landscape/private open space needs of staff/visitors for a health services facility are very different to that of residents.

 

Further, whilst not provided on-site, staff and visitors will have access to a large and expansive parkland area only metres away across Chapel Street, with an even larger park (Bennett Park) located to the south less than 150m away.

 

The subject site does not contain visible environmental features which are characteristic of the surrounding residential zone (e.g. the site does not contain landscaped front or rear gardens). As noted, the site contains a relatively large non-residential building and hardstand areas occupying the majority of the site. The retention and re-use of the existing building, together with confining the majority of proposed external works to the rear and least visible side of the site, will not therefore undermine the continued protection of the broader environmental features found throughout the surrounding residential area.”

Clause 12(2) of Penrith LEP 1998 (Urban Land) defines the landscaped area of a site as follows:

 

“landscaped area”, of a site, means that part of the site not occupied by a building and which is predominantly landscaped with gardens, lawns, shrubs and trees and is available for the use and enjoyment of the occupants of the site. It does not include areas used for driveways, parking areas, garbage storage areas or any area less than 2 metres wide, except a verge at least 1 metre wide that is located next to a driveway and landscaped with trees and shrubs, but may include a verandah associated with a landscaped area.

 

The applicant’s objection is well founded and is consistent with the aims of the SEPP outlined in Clause 3 in that compliance with the standard would be unreasonable and unnecessary in this case as it’s an existing non compliance.  On site detention is not required and there is very little increase in hardstand areas.  Stormwater will be connected into the existing system.

   

The SEPP 1 objection has adequately addressed the matters prescribed in State Environmental Planning Policy No.1 – Development Standards, and has demonstrated that compliance with the prescribed maximum external wall height  and minimum landscaped area would be unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstances of the case.

 

2.   Section 79C(1)(a)(iii) – The Provisions of any Development Control Plan

Penrith Development Control Plan (DCP) 2006

Section 2.2 Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design

Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) aims to ensure development is appropriately designed to reduce the likelihood of crimes being committed. By introducing measures to achieve appropriate natural surveillance, access control, territorial reinforcement and space management, it is anticipated that this will assist in minimising the incidence of crime and contribute to perceptions of increased public safety.

 

The proposal involves a new use and minor alterations and additions to an existing building therefore there are limited opportunities to improve the buildings existing contribution to minimising and reducing crime.

 

The existing building is built to boundary along the Chapel Street and Gidley Street boundaries therefore limiting any potential for landscaping and concealed areas. The public (pedestrian) access to the building is from Chapel Street. This entry is via steps and a ramp accessed at the front façade of the building into the reception area which will ensure that people entering the building can be clearly monitored. Existing windows to the Chapel Street and Gidley Street façade positioned along the building’s facade will also support casual surveillance of the street during working hours.

 

Access to the rear courtyard/parking area is available from either Chapel Street through a roller door. The use of active security systems, such as CCTV and electronic security access will also be in place to provide further capacity for staff to oversee the premises. See Special Condition No. 3.3.

 

 

 

Section 2.4 Erosion and Sediment Control

The proposed development includes provision for appropriate strategies to manage and minimise erosion and sedimentation during the course of the development works.

 

Section 2.6 Landscape

The subject site has limited opportunity for landscaping, with an existing large two storey commercial building occupying a large proportion of the site, with the remaining area of the site predominately consisting of a hardstand courtyard.

 

In order to accommodate the proposed minor additions, the existing small garden area (including feature planted trees) will be removed.

 

Three trees are to be removed as a result of the developments which are located within the rear courtyard area.  An Arboricultural Impact Assessment Report is submitted in support of the proposed additions and extensions.

 

An assessment of their significance has been undertaken in the Arboricultural Impact Assessment Report which concludes that whilst the trees would be a mix of high and low significance under normal conditions, due to their low visual amenity within an enclosed courtyard they are of moderate significance. In summary, the report concludes that the trees to be removed are not sustainable within the context of the proposed development.

 

Section 2.9 Waste Planning

The application has been accompanied by a waste management plan and it suitably describes the likely waste generation of the proposal and identifies appropriate actions to manage the generation, storage and disposal of wastes.

 

Section 2.11 Car Parking

No specific parking rates for community health centres are listed in Penrith DCP 2006.  The DCP requires that in the absence of specific requirements relevant to particular developments, the provisions of the RTA’s Guide to Traffic Generating Developments and Australian Standard AS2890.1-2004 should be referred to as a guide.

 

The development proposes a gross floor area (GFA) of 1007m2 comprising both the office use and the medical centre use. The entire first floor area is for office and administration use as demonstrated on the plans submitted with the application and it is considered to be appropriate in this case to use parking rates for office use.  

 

The RTA’s Guide to Traffic Generating Developments requires parking for medical centres at a rate of 4 spaces per 100m2 gross floor area (GFA) and a 1 car space per 40m2 gross floor area for office use.

 

The car parking requirement for the development is calculated as follows:

 

Medical Centres                                        540m2 = 21.6 spaces

 

Admin/ Office                                           467m2 = 11.7 spaces

 

Total car spaces required                           33 spaces

 

The applicant has provided a Traffic and Parking Impact Assessment Report in support of the application based on the above requirements.

 

The Traffic Report shows the following calculation:

 

Medical Centres and Offices                         540m2 = 16.3 spaces (reduced as per the car travel rates in St Marys)*

 

Office                                                             467m² = 11.7 spaces

 

Total car spaces required                                28 spaces

 

(* reduced as per car travel rates in St Marys is applied based on the travel modes of people employed in the St Marys area, i.e. only 39-53% people travel to work by car).

 

The applicant has provided the following justification for the reduction in car parking rates.

 

Availability of public transport

 

·    There are a number of regular public bus services with stops close to the site.

·    Bus services provide connections in all directions of travel, including St Marys,

Penrith and Mt Druitt train stations.

·    The site is located within a 600 m walk from the St Marys train station. This is within the station's catchment area, typically considered to be of 800 m radius.

·    Service frequencies are approximately 10 to 20 minutes in each direction during the commuter peak periods. The site is well services by rail transport.

·    No dedicated bicycle paths are provided around the site. Cyclists use vehicular roadways and footpaths.

·    The area topography around the site allows for convenient bicycle connections.

·    Paved footpath connections are provided between the site and public transport stops.

·    The area topography around the site allows for convenient pedestrian connections.

 

Public car parks nearby

 

·      There are over 350 vacant spaces within close walking distance from the site.”

 

Council’s Senior Traffic Officer has reviewed the application including the applicant’s traffic report and has provided the following comments:-

 

·        Availability of public transport is acknowledged

·        Walking/cycling options is acknowledged, however, bike parking/end of trip facilities not noted on plans.

·        Public car parks nearby is acknowledged, however not appropriate for clients with reduced mobility/parents with prams.

·        Availability of on-street parking; - The subject lot does not benefit from on-street parking being a corner lot at a roundabout intersection.  1 hour on-street parking is available adjacent to and opposite the proposal in Gidley Street, however, adjacent parking is frequently used by clients to the adjacent premises. 

·        The previous use of the building on the subject lot has been by Department of Youth and Community Services, for which 17 spaces were paid for in contributions which justified the shortage on-site.

·        The reduced rate assessed as per car travel rates in St Marys is not considered in   parking calculations, as the parking rate for a business area considers car travel rates.

 

It is noted that the St Marys Town Centre S94 Contributions Plan does not apply to this site.

 

The traffic report estimates that 53 vehicle trips (in/out - 26 vehicles) in the morning and afternoon peak periods will be generated by the development. The potential traffic generated by the development in peak hours will not have an adverse effect on current traffic operations in the City Centre locality.  

 

Justification provided for the shortage is acknowledged in part, however the shortfall is substantial with no S94 contributions applicable in this case.

 

The extent of reduced car travel rates applied by the applicant is not agreed.

 

The proposal provides for 7 on site car parking spaces, however as  discussed in the Traffic Officer’s comments, a consent dated 24 October 1985 was approved for the construction of a two-storey commercial office building to be used Department of Community Services on the subject site, where by 17 car spaces were paid for in Section 94 contributions.

 

The parking demand for the use of the building was then calculated to be 29 spaces, 12 of which were provided on site and the remaining 17 spaces were public car spaces paid for by contributions.

 

The payment of the sum of $67,150 for acquisition and construction of car parking facilities for the 17 car spaces was on 12 June 1987 to Council. The site therefore has credit of 17 car spaces in the public car park.

 

It is noted that the St Marys Town Centre S94 Contributions Plan does no longer apply to this site and even if these contributions were applicable to the site, Council is unable to levy Section 94 contributions for Crown development in accordance with the Department of Planning Circular D6.

 

Circular D6 was introduced in 1993 by the former Department of Urban Affairs and Planning ('DUAP') and updated in 1995. The circular provides policy direction regarding appropriate conditions of consent, in particular, the limitations on imposition of levies on Crown Developments where an application proposes a public service or a facility that leads to significant benefits for the public in terms of essential ‘community service’ and employment opportunities.

 

Furthermore, the proposed development will centralise the services that are already provided and relied upon by the community in one location. The parking arrangements in the existing two existing community health facilities are as follows:

 

1.   No. 42 Gidley Street (converted dwelling house) provides 8 off-street parking spaces. Any additional parking demand is met on-street or within the large public car parks to the west.

 

2.   Shop 5 (corner of Phillip St and East Lane) does not provide any specific off-street parking spaces. Any parking demand associated with the facility (bearing in mind its proximity to the train station) is met through on-street parking or within the surrounding public car parks.

 

In summary the parking arrangement is similar to the two existing facilities operating in the area, which is highly reliant on public transport and availability of public car parking. 

 

Revised plans have been submitted since the application was reported to the meeting of 30 May 2011.  There are no changes to the onsite provision of car parking however; the revised plans reduce the proposed gross floor area by approximately 30m² from 943.7m² to 912m².  This relates directly to the car parking assessment which is calculated based on the proposed gross floor area. 

 

Further consideration of the likely car parking generation has been undertaken following Council’s resolution of 30 May 2011.  The subject site is located just outside of the St Marys Town Centre area where parking controls under DCP 2010 apply.  The site is not technically assessed under the controls within DCP 2010, being outside the area to which it applies. These unique circumstances however, with an existing commercial building within this adjoining residential area, mean that the controls contained within DCP 2010 are more relevant to the current parking demand. 

 

DCP 2010 nominates rates for health services facilities (which are included under the definition of a business premises) within the St Marys town centre as requiring at least one car parking space for every 60m². Based on a gross floor area of 912m², the car parking demand generated by the revised footprint is 16 car parking spaces. 

 

The proposed development provides for seven car spaces on site and, as previously demonstrated, credit must also be given for 17 car spaces in the adjoining public car park. These were contributed to by the developer under consent No. 313/85 when consent was granted for the Department of Community Services to occupy the building in accordance with the applicable Section 94 Plan. 

 

Therefore, the number of parking spaces provided totals 24 which exceed Council’s requirements if considered under the more contemporary controls of DCP 2010.    

 

3.         Section 79C(1)(a)(iv) – The Provisions of the Regulations

 There are no regulations applicable to the proposed development.

 

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

 Context and Setting

 The subject site is a corner site and is located on the fringe of a mix of low to medium density residential development to the north and south-east of the site and the land to the west of the site has been developed for commercial uses.

 

The development has two separate road frontages to Chapel Street and Gidley Street to the north and the western side of the site and the site abuts a two storey commercial building to the south. This location limits the number of residences which directly abut the site, thereby limiting the impacts such as privacy, over looking and over shadowing on the adjoining buildings.

 

(i)        Social Impacts

 The proposed development is intended to offer an integrated approach to meet the health services of the community with particular focus on families, children, the youth and the disadvantaged.

 

The key service providers to be accommodated will be Primary Care & Community Health Centre (CHC), Community Mental Health and Drug & Alcohol Services.

 

The Area Mental Health Service is responsible for the delivery of the bulk of community mental health services including those for children and adolescents, adults and all ages. Children and youth mental health services, specialised mental health services for older people will be located at the Penrith CHC with outreach to St Marys CHC. Other specialist services will be provided through St Marys as an outreach from Penrith CHC and Nepean Hospital.

 

Drug and Alcohol Services will be delivered from the St Marys Community hub to provide evidenced-based management of consumers with substance misuse problems. These services will provide a core range of community services for people of all ages – either directly or indirectly affected by substance use issues – including on site assessment and counselling services, as well as linkages to other appropriate services within the Drug and Alcohol Network, other Networks, and NGO Services as required.

 

A condition is recommended to ensure the nature of the Drug and Alcohol Services is non-invasive and no drug dosing or drug administration takes place in the centre. See Special Condition No.3.2.

 

Council’s Social Planner (Community and Cultural Development Team) has reviewed the proposed development with regard to social impacts and has provided the following comments in this regard:

 

“The community profile (of St Marys) as it is presented and the statistics published by the Sydney West Area Health as referred in the Social Impact Assessment Report, it is believed that a Health Facility as proposed will be of benefit to the local community though the facility itself will have a much wider catchment area.

 

In terms of the social impact of the proposed facility on the area, it is believed that it will not pose a major adverse impact on the area as it involves an amalgamation of two existing health services which are currently operating in the area.  The integrated service model delivery as proposed is worth supporting as it will deliver a better outcome for the patients and the community at large.”

 

The provision of the above services in one central location will assist with improving access and convenience for users and make a positive impact to the quality and quantum and spectrum of health services available to the wider community.

 

Accessibility

The application was accompanied by an Access Report prepared by Accessibility Solutions. This report provides advice and strategies to maximise reasonable provisions of access to the proposed development for people with disabilities. These requirements relate to matters such as ingress and egress, paths of travel, circulation areas and accessible toilets.

 

The Access Report recommends a series of measures to be incorporated into the detailed construction design plans for the proposal to ensure an appropriate degree of accessibility for the development. Each of the recommendations in the Access Report is capable of being incorporated into the detailed construction design plans for the proposal. This matter can be conditioned accordingly.

 

In addition, the application was referred to Council’s Access Committee for comment. The Access Committee considered the matter at its’ meeting held on 2 February 2011 and raised the following issues: 

 

·    Safe path of travel from car park

·    Wheelchair accessible car park spaces

·    The grade of the ramp off Chapel Street into the building

·    Vehicular entry via the roller door

·    Lack of parking

·    The first floor accessible toilet does not comply

·    Handrails at entry stairs should not protrude out of the property boundary

 

It should be noted that the Commonwealth’s Disability (Access to Premises - Buildings) Standards (the Premises Standards) made under the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (DDA) that applies to all new building work and to “affected parts” of existing buildings came in force from 1 May 2011.

 

The proposal does involve works to an existing building, however as the application was lodged prior to the commencement of this code and as there are there are no transitional provisions that apply to the introduction of the new Disability (Access to Premises – Buildings) Standards 2010, the news works are not captured by this legislation.

The Premises Standards, which establish new requirements for access to buildings, are incorporated into the Building Code of Australia (BCA), also from 1 May 2011.

 

The applicant has submitted amended plans following the 30 May 2011 Council meeting, to be compliant with Australian Standard 1428 – Design for Access and Mobility.  The applicant has provided an amended access report and amended plans to address the accessibility issues raised in the Council meeting of 30 May 2011. The amended plans reflect the changes listed below:

 

These revisions and the access report provided have been revised by Council’s Building Approvals Co-ordinator who has confirmed that the development complies with AS1428.1, AS1428.2, AS1735.12, the BCA (Parts D3, F2.4 and E3.6) and the DDA Premises Standards. 

 

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

The zoning allows for a range of compatible non residential land uses. The neighbourhood character comprises of a mix of residential and commercial/retail uses including health facilities. The site is located on the border of a high residential density zone with commercial/ retail uses on the opposite side, west of Gidley Street. Gidley Street acts as the eastern edge to the St Marys commercial/ retail precinct with predominately residential dwellings located beyond Gidley Street to the east.

 

A number of non residential uses located on the eastern side of Gidley Street (residential zone) including a two storey commercial office building south of the subject site which currently accommodates tax accountant’s office and the Nepean area Disability Organisation (NADO).  Several other non- residential uses in the zone along Gidley Street is the St Marys Community Mental Heath Centre at No. 42 Gidley and Mission Australia – Child and Family Centre at No. 50 Gidley Street.

 

The proposed use is to operate from an existing building previously approved for the Department of Community Services a similar non residential land use. It is considered that the proposed use is in keeping the existing character of the area and is a compatible non residential use consistent with the above relevant objectives.

 

The neighbourhood character comprises of a mix of residential and commercial/retail uses including health facilities. A number of non residential uses are located on the eastern side of Gidley Street including a two storey commercial office building south of the subject and several other similar types of non- residential uses such as the St Marys Community Mental Heath Centre and Mission Australia – Child and Family Centre are also established in the area.

 

The subject site has previously been used for the purposes of a community facility. This form of development is considered particularly suited to the site given it has two separate road frontages which limits impacts on residential neighbours. The site attributes are therefore considered conducive to the development proposal. It is also considered that the proposal has been designed in a manner consistent with the character of the locality.

  

 

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

Community Consultation

In accordance with Section 2.7 Notification and Advertising of Penrith Development Control Plan 2006, the proposed development has been advertised in the local newspapers and notified to nearby and adjoining residents. The application was advertised between 25 March and 8 April 2009. A site notice was also placed on the site.

 

Council received 2 submissions with 4 signatories in response to the proposal. The issues raised in the submissions are summarised and considered below.

 

Lack of onsite parking

This matter has been discussed earlier under Section 3 of this report.

 

Negative Social Impacts

The proposal involves the consolidation of two existing health services in St Marys to one central location. Council is not aware on any negative social impacts arising from the two existing centres in the area.

 

Drug Dosing on site

A condition is recommended to ensure the nature of the Drug and Alcohol Services is non-invasive and no drug dosing or drug administration takes place in the centre. See Special Condition No.3.2.

 

Referrals

 

Internal referrals made

Comments

Building Surveyor

No objection, subject to building upgrade for fire resistance/egress and energy efficiency.

Development Engineer

No objection, other than lack of parking spaces

Community & Cultural Development

No objection, other than lack of parking spaces

Access Committee

Amended plans required

Traffic Officer

Justification provided for the shortage is acknowledged.

 

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

Community facilities are permissible in the 2(d) Residential (Medium Density) zone and the proposal meets the aims and objectives of the relevant environmental planning instruments. The proposed development is likely to improve the overall appearance of the site.

 

The properties in the immediate vicinity of the site were notified of the development proposal. In considering the issues raised in the resident submissions, it is unlikely that the proposed development will adversely impact on adjoining residents, subject to recommended conditions of consent.

 

Conclusion

 The proposal involves the consolidation of two existing health services in St Marys to one central location. The proposal will be a multi-function centre offering a range of centre-based ‘outreach’ and ‘inreach’ programs designed to improve or maintain the health and wellbeing of the community. Key service providers to be accommodated will be Primary Care & Community Health, Community Mental Health and Drug & Alcohol Services.

 

The major issue of this development proposal is the provision of on site car parking requirements. The proposal provides a public benefit in terms of providing an essential ‘community service’. It is considered that the social benefits resulting from the proposal justify the car parking departures.

 

In terms of the social impacts of the proposed facility on the area, it is believed that it will not pose a major adverse impact on the area as it involves an amalgamation of two existing health services which are currently operating in the area. The subject site has previously been used for the purposes of a community facility. The site is considered particularly suited to the site given it has two separate road frontages which limits impacts on residential neighbours.

 

The proposal offers an integrated service delivery model that will assist in improving access and convenience for users and make a positive impact to the quality and quantum and spectrum of health services available to the wider community. The integrated service model delivery as proposed is worth supporting as it will deliver a better outcome for the patients and the community at large.

 

The proposed development will lead to significant benefits for the public in terms of providing an essential ‘ community service’ and socio economic benefits that the proposed development will provide to the local and regional community are considered to outweigh with respect to the minor non compliance in the car parking numbers. When assessed against the more contemporary and relevant parking controls of DCP 2010 the parking provided, including that contributed to under Section 94, is compliant.

 

Having regard for all of the relevant matters, the proposed development is capable, subject to the enforcement of conditions, of operating in such a manner as to present only minimal adverse impacts on the local community. The concerns raised by the submitters are acknowledged, however, on balance, the proposed development is satisfactory and the grounds of objection are not considered sufficient to justify refusal of the Development Application.  The proposed development is therefore considered worthy of support. 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Development Application DA11/0025 Proposed Health Facility Lot 2 DP 157408 (No. 26) Gidley Street, St Marys be received.

2.     The objection pursuant to State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards to the minimum landscaped area and maximum external wall height provisions under Clause 12(3) of Penrith Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Urban Land) be supported.

3.     The information contained in the report on Development Application DA11/0025 Proposed Health Facility Lot 2 DP 157408 (No. 26) Gidley Street, St Marys be approved subject to the following conditions:

Standard Conditions

3.1      A001          Approved plans

A029          Hours of operation and delivery times

A039          Graffiti

D001          Implement approved sediment and erosion control measures

D009          Covering of waste storage area

E003           Structural alterations

E006           Disabled access and facilities

E009           Annual fire safety – essential fire safety (Class 2-9 buildings)

E01A          BCA compliance for Class 2-9

G002          Section 73

G004          Integral Energy

H001          Stamped plans and erection of site notice (Class 2-9)

H002          Provision of site facilities prior to commencement of construction works

H003          Traffic safety during construction

H006          Implement waste management plan

H041          Hours of construction work

K221          Access car parking and manoeuvring

Q001          Notice of commencement and appointment of PCA

Special Conditions

3.2      The Drug and Alcohol Services is to be non-invasive and no drug dosing or drug administration (methadone) in relation to the Drug and Alcohol Service shall take place in the centre. Medication may be administered as part of the Mental Health and Community Health Services

3.3      A closed circuit television (CCTV) system shall be installed at the entrance/exit to the Health Services Facility prior the occupation of the building

3.4      Automatic gates or roller door to be installed at the entrance to the car park area and shall be kept locked outside of normal business hours and/or controlled by a swipe card system (or similar)

4.     The individuals who made a submission be advised of Council’s decision and of the consideration given to their concerns.

 


 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1.  

Letter from Health Minister

1 Page

Appendix

2.  

Revised Architectural Plans

6 Pages

Appendix

3.  

Locality Plan

1 Page

Appendix

4.  

30 May Architectural Plans

5 Pages

Appendix

5.  

Shadow Diagrams

3 Pages

Appendix

  


Ordinary Meeting                                                                                                                15 August 2011

Appendix 1 - Letter from Health Minister

 

temp


Ordinary Meeting                                                                                                                15 August 2011

Appendix 2 - Revised Architectural Plans

 

temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


Ordinary Meeting                                                                                                                15 August 2011

Appendix 3 - Locality Plan

 

temp


Ordinary Meeting                                                                                                                15 August 2011

Appendix 4 - 30 May Architectural Plans

 

temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


Ordinary Meeting                                                                                                                15 August 2011

Appendix 5 - Shadow Diagrams

 

temp


temp


temp


Ordinary Meeting                                                                                                15 August 2011

A City of Opportunities

 

 

11

Development Applications DA11/0511, DA11/0512, DA11/0514, DA11/0515, DA11/0516, DA11/0517 for Subdivision of the Western Precinct, St Marys Release Area (Jordan Springs) Lot 1036 DP 1149525 (No.1070 - 1170) The Northern Road, Llandilo  Applicant:  Maryland Development Company Pty Ltd;  Owner:  St Marys Land Ltd    

 

Compiled by:               Steven Chong, 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)

      

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

 

Executive Summary

Council is in receipt of six (6) separate Development Applications which involve the residential subdivision of land at the Western Precinct of the St Marys Release Area known as ‘Jordan Springs.’ Each application represents an individual staging of Villages 2 and 3 land at Jordan Springs of which a total of 653 lots are to be created as result of these applications.

 

This report assesses all six (6) Development Applications having regard to the inter-relationship of each development site and the common issues associated with each proposal.

 

The land is zoned ‘Urban’ under the provisions of State Environmental Planning Policy No.30 – St Marys (SREP 30). Subdivision is permitted with consent pursuant to Clause 45 of SREP 30.

 

In accordance with State Environmental Planning Policy (Major Development) 2005, the capital investment value (CIV) of each application does not exceed $10 million or exceed a threshold of 250 lots. In this regard, Penrith City Council is the consent authority for each of these applications. 

 

The applications were accompanied with a Species Impact Statement (SIS) that was prepared in accordance with the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 and the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. The SIS which accompanied the applications was subject to an independent peer review that was conducted by Dr. Trevor Hawkeswood of TJ Hawkeswood Scientific Consulting.

 

Dr. Hawkeswood concluded in his review that the existing ecological communities have been high degraded within the development site and therefore, the proposed residential subdivisions are acceptable with regard to the existing ecological value within the Wianamatta Regional Park. The regional park is to be situated within the St Marys Release Area and would provide for an acceptable offset towards the impact to existing ecological communities within the development site.

 

The above applications were placed on public exhibition and notified to the owners and occupiers of adjoining and nearby properties in accordance with Penrith Development Control Plan 2010. The public exhibition period commenced on 6 June 2011 and concluded on 6 July 2011. A total of four (4) submissions were received in response to the proposal. The key issues raised in these submissions include: -

 

·    Impact on Cumberland Plain Woodland;

·    Regional Park offset;

·    Adequacy of the Director General’s Requirements;

·    Public Interest and transparency of Council’s Planning Assessment; and

·    Impact of development.

 

The above key issues as well as others raised in the submissions have been addressed with consideration of the issues raised in Attachment No. 1 and throughout this report.

 

In accordance with the NSW Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995, Council is required to form an opinion as to whether a proposed development has a ‘significant impact’ to existing vegetation on the site. Should Council come to this conclusion, the relevant application(s) would need to be referred to the Director General of the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage for their concurrence. 

 

Based on the assessment of the independent ecological consultant the proposed subdivisions would not have a significant impact on Cumberland Plain Woodland (CPW) within the development site and therefore, the applications do not require concurrence from the Director General of the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage.

 

Copies of the Species Impact Statement prepared by Cumberland Ecology, the Independent Peer Review report by Dr Trevor Hawkeswood and the ‘Threatened species assessment guidelines’ prepared by the then Department of Environment and Climate Change dated 2007 will be provided to Councillors under separate cover.

 

The applications have been assessed with respect to the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995, Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000. Having regard to the relevant statutory provisions and notwithstanding the submissions received, the applications are considered satisfactory and are recommended for approval, subject to the imposition of conditions. 

 

Background

The following outlines the current approvals that have been issued for the site: -

 

·    Stage 1A, Stage 1B and Stage 1C were the first series of Western Precinct residential subdivision proposals. A total of 109 residential lots were approved by Council at its Ordinary Meeting on 30 November 2009.

 

·    Stage 1D consisting of 18 residential lots was approved under delegated authority on 9 March 2010.

 

·    Stage 1E comprising a total of 98 residential lots were approved by Council at its Ordinary Meeting on 11 October 2010.

 

·    The Stage 1F residential subdivision including 25 residential lots was approved by Council under delegated authority on 14 December 2010.

 

·    The Stage 1G residential subdivision including 17 residential lots was approved under delegated authority on 25 January 2011.

 

Sales and Info Centre (DA09/1317) - Approved 20 August 2010

·    A Sales and Information Centre to be constructed to the East of Main Street on a building pad proposed by this DA and Temporary car park

 

Main Street & Entry Collector Boulevard (DA 10/0208) - Approved 14 July 2010

·    Subdivision to create a road allotment for the Main Street serving the future Village Centre and the entry collector boulevard,

·    Subdivision to create a retail residue lot in the future Village Centre and a residential residue lot; and

·    Earthworks to grade the retail residue lot and create a building pad for the Sales and Information Centre

 

Builders’ Display Village Operations DA (DA 10/0371) - Approved 24 August 2010

·    Use of allotments within the Stage 1D subdivision area for a Builders’ Display Village, temporary car park in a residue lot

 

Town Square, Main Street, and Southern Entry Boulevard Landscaping and Embellishment (DA10/0680) - Approved 25 January 2011

·    Landscaping and construction works involved in the provision of the Town Square, and

·    Landscaping and streetscape works to road verges and medium strips along Main Street and south entry Boulevard (east section)

 

Village Lake (DA10/0851) - Approved 24 February 2011

·    Works involved in the construction of a stormwater detention basin which will also function as a recreational resource in the form of a lake

 

Demolition (DA11/0022) - Approved 4 March 2011

·    Demolition of roads, buildings and other structures.

 

Site and Surrounds

The Western Precinct, which is referred to as ‘Jordan Springs’ is bounded by Ninth Avenue to the north, The Northern Road and residential development in Cranebrook to the west, and land zoned for Regional Park to the south and east. The precinct has a total area of approximately 229 hectares (see Appendix No. 1 - Locality Plan). 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 St Marys ADI site was endorsed by the NSW Government for inclusion on the Urban Development Program (UDP) in 1993. On 19 January 2001, Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 30 – St Marys (SREP 30) was gazetted. SREP 30 rezoned 1,535 hectares of land on the site to permit a range of urban uses and a large area of regional parkland and regional open space. The overall site comprises six development precincts, including the Western Precinct, Central Precinct and South Dunheved Precinct in the Penrith LGA and the Eastern Precinct, Ropes Creek Precinct and North Dunheved Precinct in the Blacktown LGA.

 

On 29 September 2006, the Minister for Planning declared the Western Precinct to be a “release area” under the provisions of SREP 30. Since that time, the Western Precinct Plan (WPP) and an accompanying Development Control Strategy (DCS) has been prepared to guide the future development of the Western Precinct. The WPP and DCS were adopted by Council at its Ordinary Meeting on 23 March 2009. The adopted WPP and DCS together act much like a Development Control Plan (DCP) in the assessment of Development Applications for the precinct.

 

It is anticipated that once fully developed Jordan Springs will accommodate approximately 2,450 dwellings with a residential population in the order of 6,400 people.

 

The proposed Stage 2 land is located centrally within the precinct and is situated to the immediate east of land within Village1. Stage 3 is located to the immediate north of Village 1 land. The development site which encompasses all six (6) Development Applications covers an approximate area of 55.39 hectares.

 

The site comprises cleared pastures with stands of trees and scattered vegetation. The plant communities that predominantly occur on the subject site include patches of regenerating Cumberland Plain Woodland (CPW) and exotic dominated grassland which is derived from past historic clearing of CPW referred to as ‘derived native grassland.’ There are minor occurrences of three other communities on the subject site, being River flat Eucalypt Forest (RFEF), planted (non-indigenous) trees, and freshwater wetlands.

 

The Western Precinct was previously used for ammunition storage bunkers which existed across the area in until the 1990s. The Western Precinct was intensively mown and heavily grazed by kangaroos while it was used as a Defence site. Since the change in ownership, the storage bunkers have been removed and mowing has been limited to the perimeter of the Regional Park and the boundaries of the release area.

 

Proposed Development

Details of each Development Application are outlined as follows:

 

Application

Location

Proposed Development

DA11/0511

‘Stage 3A’

Central western portion of Jordan Springs and has an approximate area of 14.7 ha.

 

·    Subdivision of residue Lot 3 to create 139 residential lots, public roads, seven (7) residue lots, creation of right of access and easement for services;

·    Design and construction of proposed internal minor roads, including the roadway, pedestrian walkways, road reserve landscaping, services and stormwater drainage infrastructure;

·    Construction of a temporary sediment and detention basin;

·    Provision of temporary piping/ channelling connecting the permanent stormwater infrastructure to the temporary sediment and detention basin;

·    Bulk earthworks in the grading of residential lots and roads; and

·    Associated tree removal, earthworks, and landscaping.

DA11/0512

‘Stage 3B’

Central northern portion of Jordan Springs and has an approximate area of 9.4ha.

 

·    Subdivision of proposed residue Lot 2994 to create 138 residential lots, public roads, three (3) residue lots, and dedication of future park as a reserve;

·    Design and construction of proposed internal minor roads, including the roadway, pedestrian walkways, road reserve landscaping, services and stormwater drainage infrastructure;

·    Construction of a public reserve;

·    Enlargement of temporary sediment and detention basin;

·    Provision of temporary piping/ channelling connecting the permanent stormwater infrastructure to the temporary sediment and detention basin;

·    Bulk earthworks in the grading of residential lots and roads; and

·    Associated tree removal, earthworks, and landscaping.

DA11/0514

‘Stage 2A’

Central eastern portion of Jordan Springs, with one section of the site adjoining the future Regional Park to the east. The site has an approximate area of 9.03ha.

·    Subdivision of residue Lot 2 to create 75 residential lots, public roads, five (5) residue lots, and dedication of future park as a reserve;

·    design and construction of proposed internal minor roads, including the roadway, pedestrian walkways, road reserve landscaping, services and stormwater drainage infrastructure;

·    construction of a public reserve;

·    design and construction of a combined pedestrian and road crossing over a future watercourse;

·    construction of a temporary water and sediment detention basin and provision of temporary piping/ channelling connecting the basin to permanent stormwater infrastructure;

·    relocation of an existing temporary water and sediment detention basin;

·    bulk earthworks in the grading of the residential lot and roads; and associated tree removal, earthworks, landscaping, and channelling.

DA11/0515

‘Stage 2B’

Central southern portion of Jordan Springs and has an approximate area of 6.6ha.

·    Subdivision of Residue Lot 1997 to create 70 residential lots, public roads, and two (2) residue lots (future Stage 2C and ‘living street’);

·    Design and construction of proposed internal minor roads, including the roadway, pedestrian walkways, road reserve landscaping, services and stormwater drainage infrastructure;

·    Provision of temporary piping/ channelling connecting the permanent stormwater infrastructure to a temporary sediment and detention basin;

·    Bulk earthworks in the grading of residential lots and roads; and

·    Associated tree removal, earthworks, landscaping.

DA11/0516

‘Stage 2C’

Central eastern portion of Jordan Springs and has an approximate area of 9.03ha.

·    Subdivision of residue Lot 2147 (from proposed Stage 2B) to create 111 residential lots, public roads, and one (1) residue lot (future ‘living street’);

·    Design and construction of proposed internal minor roads, including the roadway, pedestrian walkways, road reserve landscaping, services and stormwater drainage infrastructure;

·    Provision of temporary piping/ channelling connecting the permanent stormwater infrastructure to a temporary sediment and detention basin;

·    Bulk earthworks in the grading of residential lots and roads; and

·    Associated tree removal, earthworks, and landscaping.

DA11/0517

‘Stage 2D’

Central eastern portion of Jordan Springs, with two sections of the site adjoining the future Regional Park to the north and east. The site has an approximate area of 6.63ha.

·    Subdivision of residue Lot 1998 to create 102 residential lots and public roads;

·    Design and construction of proposed internal minor roads, including the  roadway, pedestrian walkways, road reserve landscaping, services and stormwater drainage infrastructure;

·    Provision of temporary piping/ channelling connecting the permanent stormwater infrastructure to a temporary sediment and detention basin;

·    Bulk earthworks in the grading of residential lots and roads; and

·    Associated tree removal, earthworks, and landscaping.

 

See Appendix No.2 for subdivision plans for each stage as outlined in the above table.

 

Statutory Situation

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979

 

Clause 5 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 outlines the procedures for advertised developments. The subject applications were categorised amongst other things as ‘Threatened Species Development’ and was therefore considered to be ‘other advertised development’ for the purposes of the Regulation. In accordance with Clause 89(3) of the Regulation, ‘Threatened Species Development’ required the public exhibition of the applications for a minimum thirty (30) days, of which had been exhibited for that period.

 

Pursuant to Section 5A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, an assessment must be made as to whether a development proposal is likely to have a ‘significant effect’ on any threatened species, populations or ecological communities or their habitats. This is determined through an assessment of significance referred to as a ‘seven-part test’ as identified in Section 5A(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

The applicant had prepared a ‘Species Impact Statement’ in accordance with the Director General’s Requirements from the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage.

 

Pursuant to Section 91 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the applications were defined as ‘Integrated Development,’ and ‘Nominated Integrated Development.’ Concurrence pursuant to the applicable legislation was sought from the following authorities: -

 

·    NSW Office of Water - Water Management Act 2000;

·    NSW Rural Fire Service –Rural Fires Act 1997; and

·    Department of Primary Industries – Fisheries Management Act 1994.

 

Concurrences/General Terms of Approval from the NSW Office of Water, NSW Rural Fire Services and the Department of Primary Industries have been received in response to each proposal.

 

In accordance with Clause 104 of State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007, the applications were referred to the Sydney Regional Development Advisory Committee (SRDAC) chaired by the Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA). The SRDAC reviewed the applications and raised no objection in respect to traffic and vehicular access. Conditions were provided which requires the applicant to provide for signalised treatment of the intersection for the northern and southern approaches of The Northern Road prior to the occupation of dwellings in the proposed Stages 2 and 3.

 

In accordance with Clause 13B of State Environmental Planning Policy (Major Development) 2005, the following is noted in part: -

 

“13B   General development to which Part applies

(1)  This Part applies to the following development:

(a)  development that has a capital investment value of more than $10 million,

………

(f)  subdivision of land into more than 250 lots.”

 

The capital investment value (CIV) of each application does not exceed $10 million nor do the lots proposed for subdivision exceed a threshold of 250 lots. In this regard, Penrith City Council is the consent authority for each of the subject applications. 

 

Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999

The Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act 1999 focuses on the protection of matters of National Environmental Significance (NES). Development proposals that are likely to have a significant impact on matters of NES (“controlled actions”) must be assessed and approved under the EPBC Act by the Commonwealth Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities. On 9 December 2009, CPW was up-listed under the EPBC Act from an ‘endangered’ ecological community to a ‘critically endangered ecological community’ which is defined as an extremely high risk of extinction in the wild in the immediate future.

 

CPW is the main native vegetation community occurring within the Western Precinct. The ecological community was also redefined from CPW to ‘Cumberland Plain Shale Woodlands and Shale Gravel Transition Forest’. This change reflects its key location and vegetation structure and more clearly reflects its relationship with two threatened ecological communities listed under the NSW Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 (i.e. CPW and Shale Gravel Transition Forest in the Sydney Basin Bioregion).

 

Assessment of development proposals relating to the St Marys site is not required under the EPBC Act. Assessment and approval under Commonwealth environmental law was granted to the entire St Marys development under the former Environment Protection (Impact of Proposals) Act 1974, prior to the gazettal of the EPBC Act. This position was confirmed in writing by the former Commonwealth Minister for Environment Protection, Heritage and the Arts in a letter dated 31 March 2010 to the Western Sydney Conservation Alliance (WSCA).

 

Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995

In January 2011, Council received three (3) separate Development Applications for Stages 2A, 2B and 2C for the subdivision of Stage 2 land within Jordan Springs. Those applications were accompanied with a ‘seven-part test’ which made an assessment of flora and fauna within the development site.

 

An Assessment of Significance for these applications concluded that a Species Impact Statement (SIS) was warranted given the status of Cumberland Plain Woodland (CPW) as Critically Endangered Ecological Community (CEEC) which occurs on the site. The SIS would enable an accurate assessment of vegetation and quantify the expected impacts.

 

Consequently, the applicant liaised with the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage in respect to the preparation of an SIS. The Director-General Requirements which outlined the relevant matters to be addressed in an SIS was issued to the applicant on 2 May 2011.

 

The site is situated on land which is characterised with threatened species and is therefore categorised as ‘Threatened Species Development’ for the purposes of Section 78A(8)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. In this respect, the subject Development Applications were accompanied with an SIS prepared by Cumberland Ecology dated May 2011. The SIS was prepared in accordance with Part 6 Division 2 of the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995.

 

Species Impact Statement

A Species Impact Statement (SIS) was prepared by Cumberland Ecology dated May 2011 in support of the subject applications. The SIS was prepared in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 and the Director General’s Requirements which were issued by the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage.

 

 

The SIS concluded the following in respect to its assessment:

 

“The proposed development of the subject site and subject land will remove a large area of habitat for CPW (specifically ‘regenerating CPW’ and ‘derived native grassland’). However, and with due consideration of the restricted distribution of this CEEC in the region, the proposed development is not likely to have a significant impact on CPW such that the large and viable representatives in the Regional Park would be placed at risk of extinction. The large and continuous remnants present in the Regional Park will be protected and enhanced through a range of mitigation measures identified and retained in perpetuity.

 

The major affected (C)EECs/species impacted by the proposed development include G.

juniperina subsp juniperina, P. parviflora, P. spicata and the Cumberland Land Snail). The young regenerating CPW on the subject land provides an area of habitat for the threatened plants, animals and communities mentioned above. However, when directly compared with the habitats of the Regional Park, these areas of habitat are considered to be degraded and of a lesser importance due to the increased level of disturbance, sparse nature and is comparatively small in size. Therefore, the loss of this habitat in the subject site and subject land is not considered to be significant.

 

The impact of the proposal will be more than balanced by the major conservation outcome resulting from of the creation of the 900ha Regional Park. The Regional Park comprises CPW of quality and scale in a consolidated land holding, to be transferred into public ownership and subject to a Plan of Management.

 

When weighed against the conservation benefits, both direct and indirect, that will be derived from the 900ha Regional Park, together with the various mitigation measures afforded by the management strategies for weeds, feral and domestic animals and macrofauna, the relatively small areas of natural and semi-natural vegetation to be cleared as a result of the proposal are considered to be of minor consequence. The proposal is unlikely to result in any threatened species or ecological community becoming extinct. Known occurrences of threatened flora and fauna within the SMP are predicted to be secure in the long term as a result of the creation of the 900ha Regional Park and numerous supporting mitigation measures that are enshrined in the legal, statutory planning framework.”

 

The SIS was undertaken in accordance with the Guidelines produced by the Department of Environment and Climate Change (now the Office of Environment & Heritage). The key element to the SIS was the ability to trade off the Regional Park as a mitigating measure against the loss of Cumberland Plain Woodlands. As Council would be aware, this site has had a planning history that goes back more than a decade and the issue of endangered, ecological communities has been in the public arena for some considerable time. The SIS concludes that preservation of some 900ha of quality vegetation is an adequate compensation for the subsequent loss of vegetation required to facilitate the proposed development. The planning process which resulted in the Sydney Regional Environmental Plan 30 recognised this land as suitable for urban development on the basis that a large amount of Cumberland Plain Woodland would be reserved in perpetuity by virtue of the Regional Park.

 

In response to the submitted SIS, Council engaged the services of a suitably qualified consultant to conduct an independent peer review of the report.

 

 

Independent Peer Review

Dr. Trevor Hawkeswood of T.J Hawkeswood Scientific Consulting was formally engaged by Council Officers to conduct an independent peer review of the submitted SIS which accompanied the applications

 

Dr Hawkeswood has concluded the following in respect to the subject applications:

 

“a.  The proposed development will clear 59 ha of CPW. However, this area is mostly composed of introduced grasslands with weedy grasses and other weeds. the site has had a long history of agricultural and military uses as well as grazing by large populations of kangaroos and invasions by feral animals. Most of the CPW within the development area is actually scattered and fragmented CPW trees with some regenerating saplings. There appear to be no extensive forest/woodlands as occurring in the Regional Park. Therefore the CPW which will be removed is highly degraded and extremely depauperate in plant and animal species. All species which occur within the proposed development area also occur more abundantly in the Regional Park. From an ecological perspective, the area proposed to be cleared for the development is highly depauperate CPW and does not resemble anything like the original vegetation at the time of white settlement. Its value as a functioning ecological community is very low. Only common vertebrate species can be supported due to the almost total breakdown of the natural food chain and other ecological attributes.

 

b.  The Regional Park is obviously in better condition vegetatively and with a higher biodiversity. The Plan of Management indicates that a large proportion of the Park will be conserved for restoration and scientific activities. A large number of conservation and other strategies are outlined in the Plan of Management (Section 11), including threatened species, aboriginal cultural heritage and historical heritage.

 

c.  The Regional Park is a trade-off for the proposed development. In this regard and noting the poor quality of vegetation within the proposed development area and the depauperate nature of the wildlife and weed infestation, the loss of habitat is not significant.

 

d.  Although the Regional Park is to be managed by the NSW Government, there are recommendations given in the Cumberland Plain Woodland Recovery Plan for the Penrith City Council which are relevant to this development and restoration/conservation of the Regional Park.”

 

With respect to the above conclusion, the following comments are made in response to the applications: 

 

·    Dr Hawkeswood was engaged by Council to conduct an Independent Peer Review of the SIS prepared by Cumberland Ecology submitted in support of the subject applications. Dr Hawkeswood inspected the site on 24 June 2011 to assist in his review.

 

·    The applications have met all requirements as outlined in the Director General’s Requirements and the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 in respect to the preparation of the SIS and its consideration of flora and fauna within the development site.

 

·    The SIS has considered the matters of consideration listed under Section 5A of the Environmental Planning Assessment Act and Section 94A of the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 which refers to the ‘Threatened species assessment guidelines’ prepared by the then Department of Environment and Climate Change dated 2007.

 

·    The applications for subdivision do not have a ‘significant effect’ on threatened species, population or an ecological community and therefore, do not require the concurrence from the Director-General of the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage.

 

·    Dr. Hawkeswood has concluded in his review that the existing ecological communities are highly degraded within the development site and therefore, the proposed residential subdivisions are acceptable.

·    The 900ha Wianamatta Regional Park is to be situated within the St Marys Release Area and would provide for an acceptable offset towards the impact of existing ecological communities within the development site.

 

·    A Plan of Management (PoM) has recently been gazetted in relation to the Wianamatta Regional Park. Amongst other things, the PoM outlines a number of zones within the regional park relative to its ecological value and the potential recreational use. The recommendation by Dr Hawkeswood in respect to identifying and maintaining areas of high ecological value is consistent with those already identified in the PoM.

 

In this regard, the proposed subdivisions are satisfactory in respect to the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 and the statutory requirements which apply to the site.

 

Planning Assessment

The following planning instruments are considered in the assessment of the proposed development:

 

§ State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007;

§ Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No.30 – St Marys;

§ Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No.20 - Hawkesbury-Nepean River (No.2 -1997);

§ Penrith Development Control Plan 2010; and

§ Western Precinct Plan (WPP) and the Development Control Strategy (DCS).

 

The proposed development has been assessed against the relevant heads of consideration contained in the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, and based on this assessment, the following issues have been identified for further consideration.

 

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

 

(a) State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007

State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 (ISEPP 2007) provides direction for proposed development to be considered by relevant public authorities for those listed in the schedules and any representation required in respect to the proposed development.

 

Clause 104 of the ISEPP 2007 provides for traffic generating development and provides in part as: -

 

“104   Traffic-generating development

(1)  This clause applies to development specified in Column 1 of the Table to Schedule 3 that involves:

(a)  new premises of the relevant size or capacity, or

(b)  an enlargement or extension of existing premises, being an alteration or addition of the relevant size or capacity.

 

The total number of lots as a result of the proposed subdivision of land warranted the referral of the applications to the Sydney Regional Development Advisory Committee (SRDAC) at the Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) pursuant to Column 2 of Schedule 3 of ISEPP 2007. The applications were reported to its meeting on 15 June 2011.

The SRDAC provided their comments in respect to the proposal and raised no objection subject to conditions. Amongst other things, the following comments were noted as follows: -

 

§ The ultimate signalised treatment of the intersection of The Northern Road/South Entry Boulevard is to be implemented prior to the release of the first Occupation Certificate for Stage 2A, 2B, 2C and 2D.

 

§ The treatment of the intersection of The Northern Road/Borrowdale Way shall be constructed to the satisfaction of the RTA and Council prior to the release of the first Occupation Certificate for Stage 3A and 3B.

 

The above comments will require the applicant to make provision for signalised intersection treatments to both north and south intersections of The Northern Road into Jordan Springs. These matters will be imposed as a condition of consent.

 

Clause 102 of the SEPP is outlined in part as follows: - 

 

“102   Impact of road noise or vibration on non-road development

…………………

 (3)  If the development is for the purposes of a building for residential use, the consent authority must not grant consent to the development unless it is satisfied that appropriate measures will be taken to ensure that the following LAeq levels are not exceeded:

(a)  in any bedroom in the building—35 dB(A) at any time between 10 pm and 7 am,

(b)  anywhere else in the building (other than a garage, kitchen, bathroom or hallway)—40 dB(A) at any time.

 

The clause requires the consideration noise impact to development near a road which amongst other things is likely to be adversely affected by road noise or vibration.

 

With regard to the close proximity of The Northern Road, the Stage 3A Development Application (DA11/0511) was accompanied with a Traffic Noise Impact Report prepared by Sinclair Knight Merz (SKM). The report concluded the following: -

 

“The assessment has predicted noise levels a residential locations based on terrain information and traffic data for The Northern Road adjacent to the site. The predicted external noise levels were converted to approximate internal noise levels by subtracting the estimated Weighted Sound Reduction Index of specific acoustically treated building elements such as roofs and windows.

 

The assessment indicates that with consideration of acoustic treatments, the night time internal noise goals outlined in the Development near rail corridors and busy roads – interim guideline (DoP, 2008), would be met for the most affected properties adjacent to the road. The predicted noise levels for properties behind the first row of houses are lower due to the shielding from the intervening buildings and therefore do not require the same level of acoustic treatment. Home owners of properties past the first row of buildings may also wish to consider higher acoustic specification building products at their own discretion.”

 

Traffic noise was considered in the Stage 1 development application for land of Jordan Springs with a number of recommendations to be carried out as part of that development. The report makes an assessment of road traffic noise impacts on future residential dwellings within the Stage 3A development and builds on the previous recommendations for noise mitigation from The Northern Road. The assessment considered existing noise levels and potential future noise levels based on projected increases in traffic volumes to 2021.

 

The design of Stage 3A has given due consideration to its interface with The Northern Road and the special requirements that come with siting new dwellings along a highly trafficked roadway. Aligning a proposed local road parallel to The Northern Road enables dwellings to be sited sufficient distance such that physical noise barriers are not required, which in turn ensures that the visual amenity and driving experience along The Northern Road is not adversely affected by the proposed development. Dwellings adjacent The Northern Road are also proposed to incorporate acoustic attenuation treatments in order to achieve compliance with recommended internal noise levels. It is further noted that an acoustic wall is to be erected along some properties directly adjoining The Northern Road.

 

The report recommends a number of mitigation measures in the form of building design and construction to ensure that future dwellings satisfy the relevant noise control guidelines: -

 

·    Building orientation and layout;

·    Building elements;

·    Walls;

·    Roof and ceiling;

·    Windows and doors; and

·    Ventilation.

 

The recommended technical construction measures will need to be tailored to individual dwelling designs. Incorporating the roadway parallel and positioning dwellings with frontage to the roadway and The Northern Road prevents the need for noise barriers to be introduced, which would have potentially affected the amenity of the dwellings private open space as well as the visual qualities of development along The Northern Road. It should be noted however that proposed Lot 3122 directly adjoins The Northern Road and therefore is proposed with a three (3) metre high acoustic wall to mitigate any acoustic issues. This wall maintains a consistent approach for noise mitigation along The Northern Road as carried out in Stage 1 land. 

 

The linen plans of subdivision will be required to be supported by a positive covenant in accordance with Section 88B of the Conveyancing Act 1919 requiring that future dwellings on Lots 3122, 3123, 3124, 3139, 3090, 3091 and 3092 be designed with regard to the mitigation measures summarised in the report and outlined in detail in the report.

 

Council’s Environmental Health Department reviewed the proposed developments with regard to noise impacts and is satisfied with the findings and recommendations of the Traffic Noise Assessment and concluded that recommendations are satisfactory. A condition would be imposed which requires the inclusion of a restriction to applicable lots by virtue of a Section 88B Instrument.

 

As outlined in the accompanying Traffic Noise Assessment carried out in Stage 1, once The Northern Road achieves 2021 traffic volumes i.e. an annual average daily traffic volume increase of 14,000 vehicles, low mounding on the eastern side of The Northern Road and a three (3) metre high acoustic barrier wall on the western side of The Northern Road will be required. As such, these additional noise attenuation measures will not be required until the upgrade of The Northern Road has been undertaken.

Accordingly, the proposal is consistent with the provisions of ISEPP 2007.

 

(b) State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 – Remediation of Land

State Environmental Planning Policy No.55 – Remediation of Land (SEPP 55) provide aims to promote the remediation of contaminated land for the purpose of reducing the risk of harm to human health or any other aspect of the environment.

Council must consider Clause 7 of SEPP 55 as follows: -

 

“7  Contamination and remediation to be considered in determining development application

(1) A consent authority must not consent to the carrying out of any development on land unless:

(a)  it has considered whether the land is contaminated, and

(b)  if the land is contaminated, it is satisfied that the land is suitable in its contaminated state (or will be suitable, after remediation) for the purpose for which the development is proposed to be carried out, and

(c)  if the land requires remediation to be made suitable for the purpose for which the development is proposed to be carried out, it is satisfied that the land will be remediated before the land is used for that purpose.”

 

Clause 7(1) of SEPP 55 prevents Council from consenting to a development unless it has considered whether the land is contaminated and is satisfied that the land is suitable in its contaminated state (or will be suitable, after remediation) for the purpose for which the development is proposed to be carried out.

 

The St Marys site has been subject to extensive contamination investigations and where necessary remediation works throughout the 1990s. The objectives of the investigation and remediation program were to assess the nature and degree of chemical contamination and/or identify any potentially explosive ordnance to allow the remediation of the site to a level where it was suitable for redevelopment for a variety of uses. The former Environment Protection Authority (EPA), now the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) has been involved throughout this process and an EPA accredited Site Auditor has issued Site Audit Statements for the St Marys site under the Contaminated Land Management Act 1997. The majority of the site has now been validated for residential and other sensitive land uses through these Site Audit Statements.

 

For the purposes of the remediation and validation, the St Marys site was divided into nine sectors. The Western Precinct includes the following sectors and associated Site Audit Statements (SASs):

 

·    Part Western Sector – SAS CHK001/1.

·    Part Southern West Sector – SAS CHK001/1, SAS CHK001/6 and SAS CHK001/7.

 

The information presented in the remediation and validation reports for these sectors has been used to develop a Contamination Management Plan (CMP) for the Western Precinct. The majority of the Precinct has been assessed by the Site Auditor to pose a negligible risk to the public or the environment with regard to chemical contamination or explosive ordnance. Areas under retained roads and building footprints which have not yet been addressed by the SASs will require future investigation and assessment. There no areas within this category contained within the site.

 

The CMP aims to ensure the appropriate management of any sub-surface contamination that may be encountered during works in the Western Precinct. The CMP was adopted by Council as part of the Western Precinct Plan. The CMP outlines the measures to be undertaken should contamination and/or explosive ordnance material be uncovered during the proposed works. The development proposal will be carried out in accordance with the procedures set out in the CMP and the conditions and procedures set out in the Site Audit Statements relating to the Western Precinct. This matter will be suitably conditioned.

 

(c) Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 30 – St Marys

The Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 30 – St Marys (SREP 30) is the main statutory planning framework document for the entirety of the St Marys Release Area. The overarching aim of SREP 30 is to provide a framework for the sustainable development and management of the entire St Marys site.

 

SREP 30 is accompanied by the St Marys Environmental Planning Strategy 2000 (EPS) which identifies the aims for the future use and management of the St Marys site and sets out specific performance objectives and strategies to address key planning issues, including conservation, cultural heritage, water and soils, transport, urban form, energy and waste, human services, employment and remnant contamination risk. The EPS identifies actions to be undertaken by local and State governments, as well as the obligations of developers.

 

The Precinct Plan and Development Control Strategy (DCS) for the Western Precinct address the requirements of the St Marys EPS and incorporate development objectives and typical planning and design principles and guidelines for the Western Precinct, as discussed later in this report.

 

(i) Permissibility

The subject development site is zoned Urban under SREP 30. Roads and drains are permitted in the Urban zone pursuant to Clause 40(2) of the plan. The proposed subdivision is permissible only with consent in accordance with Clause 45.

 

(ii) Objectives of the Urban Zone

Clause 40 sets out the objectives of the Urban zone as outlined in the following: -

 

(a)  to ensure that buildings and works within the zone are primarily used for residential purposes and associated facilities, and

(b)  to limit the range and scale of non-residential uses to ensure that they are compatible with residential amenity and primarily serve local residents, and

(c)  to provide for local retailing and related services, including supermarkets, which will complement established centres in the Blacktown City and Penrith City local government areas and not have a significant adverse effect on the viability of established retail centres, and

(d)  to provide for medium density residential development in locations which provide optimum access to employment, public transport and services, while ensuring residential amenity, and

(e)  to promote home based industries where such activities are unlikely to adversely affect the living environment of neighbours, and

(f)  to ensure that development adjacent to the Regional Park zone does not have a negative impact on biodiversity or conservation within that zone.

 

In respect to the objectives of the zone, the following comments are made: -

 

§ The proposed development is in accordance with the ecologically sustainable development of the land, as prescribed by the WPP;

§ The proposed subdivision works will not result in adverse impacts to air quality, with appropriate management measures to be incorporated during construction;

 

§ Proposed works are confined to the Urban Zone, with the conservation significance of the Regional Park accordingly being protected;

 

§ The proposed works will result in the disturbance to heritage items.

 

§ The proposal represents a further stage in creating a new residential community within the Western Precinct, which will be serviced by a full range of infrastructure;

 

§ The future dwellings within the proposed subdivision will have convenient access to a range of open space and recreation areas, including The Northern Road Oval (subject of a separate DA), the future Village Park to the north-east, the Village Oval to the south-east, and the Regional Park beyond to the east;

 

§ The interim and long term Stormwater Management Systems to be implemented ensure appropriate water cycle management in relation to the proposal;

 

§ The road layout of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the design and street hierarchy established within the WPP, linking into the approved surrounding road network;

 

§ The proposal contributes towards the provision of an attractive and safe built environment which satisfies a diverse range of community needs; and

 

§ The development supports the provision of a range of building types and forms within Jordan Springs, in close proximity to public transport, community and recreation facilities, and retail.

 

As outlined above, the proposed development satisfies each of the relevant objectives of the Urban zone.

 

(iii) Development Provisions

A number of applicable Development Provisions contained in SREP 30 seek to control development on the site. The following provisions are applicable to the proposal and are considered as follows:

 

Clause 20 - Development consent restrictions

The St Marys EPS contains performance objectives for future development of the St Mary’s Release Area. Council must ensure such a plan is consistent with the aims and objectives of the St Marys EPS.

 

Matters relating to conservation particularly in relation to the natural values within the regional park, cultural heritage, transport, urban form, energy and waste, flora and fauna, human services, soil salinity and contamination have been addressed in the Western Precinct Plan which applies to the proposal. Performance objectives for water and soils would be satisfied through the implementation of measures set out in the Interim Stormwater Management Plan, and implementation of recommendations within the Salinity Review Statement. The Waste Management Plan at will promote the minimisation of waste and maximisation of reuse and recycling both on and off site as far as practicable, consistent with performance objectives for energy and waste

 

The Western Precinct Plan and Development Control Strategy are treated in the same manner as a Development Control Plan that is to be used by Council in its assessment of Development Applications. These documents provide a guide to future development within Jordan Springs to ensure the achievement of the performance objectives of SREP 30 as well as those contained in the St Marys EPS.

 

The proposed development satisfies the relevant development objectives, planning and design principles for the Western Precinct. The key planning and design principles relevant to the development proposal are considered below: -

 

Section 4.3 Future Character Areas

The development proposal extends across two different character areas: the Urban Area/Neighbourhood Character Area and The Northern Road Interface. The vision for these character areas is summarised below: -

 

“Urban Area/Neighbourhood Character Area

The Urban Area will have the characteristics of a well designed residential neighbourhood based on the traditional neighbourhood structure of a public space or neighbourhood park at its heart. The quality of the public realm with tree lined streets and a diverse range of housing types will also help define the characteristics of the Urban Area. This character will respond to the natural attributes of the site and in particular, through the layout of streets and parks, will have a strong connection to the regional parkland.

 

The street structure will be a modified grid form with a clear hierarchy expressed through street and verge widths, landscaping and the level of pedestrian amenity. Indigenous and cultural tree planting will be a key characteristic in streets and parks while links (physical and visual) to riparian corridors and the regional parkland will ensure the landscape characteristics of the site are drawn into the neighbourhoods.”

 

and

 

“The Northern Road Interface

The Northern Road Interface will partially comprise residential development which may require alternate design solutions subject to detailed noise assessment at DA stage. The results of such assessment may require solutions for landscape treatment, setbacks, road layout, frontages, lot sizes, acoustic attenuation both on the lot and dwelling and potential measures such as earth mounding/acoustic barriers. This area will comprise a range of attached, semi-detached and detached dwellings, one to two storeys in height. The area is also proposed to contain open space uses.

 

Key considerations will be the visual qualities along The Northern Road corridor and of the proposed subdivision, pedestrian connectivity and connections to surrounding residential areas and potential views from The Northern Road into the site. The interface with existing residential development along The Northern Road in Cranebrook will also be considered, as will the identification of clear and logical entry points to the site.”

 

Based on the various components of the development proposal as discussed in this report, the development proposal is in accordance with the preceding character area visions.

 

Section 4.4 Subdivision Layout Principles

The development proposal is in accordance with the desired subdivision layout principles, including provision of a permeable modified grid street system and a subdivision layout which provides for housing diversity and mix.

 

Section 4.5 Dwelling Density

As prescribed in Section 4.5 and Clause 30(6) of SREP 30, the overall net neighbourhood density target for the St Marys site is to achieve at least 15 dwellings per hectare.

 

Stage

Lot Numbers

Dwellings Per Hectare

Stage 2A

75

16.22

Stage 2B

70

15.77

Stage 2C

111

17.90

Stage 2D

102

17.77

Stage 3A

139

17.38

Stage 3B

138

17.97

 

The proposed subdivisions are in accordance with this density target which achieves a dwelling density of ranging from 15.77 up to 17.97 dwellings per hectare. The proposal in total will achieve the net neighbourhood density.

 

 

Section 5.2 Street Types

The proposed road types and cross-sections are in accordance with the minimum provisions of the Development Control Strategy. Council’s Development Engineer is satisfied with this aspect of the proposed subdivision.

 

Section 5.5 Concept Plans

The subdivision proposal is substantially in accordance with the updated Western Precinct Concept Plan which was reported to Council’s Policy Review Meeting on 9 May 2011.

 

The concept plan is intended for information purposes only to provide the broader context for each Development Application. The concept plan is a ‘working plan’ which is subject to change as the detailed design process for the estate evolves.

 

Section 5B Built Form and Housing

Each of the allotments in the proposed subdivision is in accordance with the minimum criteria for subdivision under the Development Control Strategy. The following table is provided as a summary of the proposed subdivision in respect to dwelling yield and proportion for dwelling stock: -

 

Stage

Cumulative Total Lot Yield

Detached Housing

Lots 270m2 to 500m2 (Target 60-70%)

Detached Housing

Lots 501m2 to 999m2

(Target 20%-25%)

Stage 2

625

77.38%

22.10%

Stage 3

971

79.51%

20.49%

 

The targets identified above provide for a variety of housing choice to ensure that the net neighbourhood density prescribed in SREP 30 is achieved. The proposed subdivision achieves the net neighbourhood density of minimum 15 dwellings per hectare prescribed in Clause 30(6) of SREP.

 

Residential allotments range in size from 300m2 to 636m2 however some land will be identified for future parkland housing. The proposed lot depths are typically 30m and the proposed lot widths range in size from 10m to 16m. Future dwellings on narrower allotments will be constructed with a zero side setback on one side boundary.

 

Clause 51 - Salinity and highly erodible soils

Salinity has been well documented in the Western Precinct. A review of previous salinity investigations undertaken and reports prepared by others for the Western Precinct has been undertaken by Geotech Testing Pty Ltd

 

Geotech Testing conclude that based on the investigations undertaken to date, the moderately saline conditions encountered on site are typical of the area in general. Further, Geotech Testing acknowledge that the implementation of a Soil and Water Management Plan is imperative to maintain current conditions. In this regard, a Soil and Water Management Plan has accordingly been prepared and will be implemented.

 

The measures and recommendations outlined by Geotech Testing (consistent with subdivision stages 1A, 1B, 1C, and 1D) are proposed to be adopted and implemented as part of the proposed development and ultimate construction of future dwellings. These measures will complement/update the Soil and Water Management Strategy (prepared by SKM/EIS) that forms part of the Western Precinct Plan.

 

Clause 52 – Tree Preservation

The proposed subdivision forming part of Stages 2 and 3 would necessitate the removal of a number of existing trees on the site. Discussion on the basis of impact and mitigation in relation to flora and fauna has been discussed previously in this report. It is considered that the extent of proposed tree removal is considered negligible relative to the extensive tracts of high quality bushland that will be conserved within the regional parkland.

 

Council’s Landscape Architect has reviewed provisions of street trees throughout the proposed development site and is satisfied with the type of species to be used.

Clause 60 – Services

Consultation with relevant utilities service providers was undertaken in the preparation of the Western Precinct Plan and by the applicant in relation to previous DAs for the subdivision of the Western Precinct for urban land uses. From these consultations, it is concluded that the site is serviceable with water, sewer, electricity and telecommunications, subject to extensions/augmentation of utilities infrastructure as part of the future development of the Western Precinct.

 

In terms of electricity, the proposed development involves the creation of the future Integral Energy substation site. The dimensions of the lot have been have been determined in consultation with Integral Energy and will enable a future suitably sized substation facility to be developed.

 

The proposal satisfies the relevant provisions of Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No.30 – St Marys.

 

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

Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 20 – Hawkesbury-Nepean River (SREP 20) integrates planning with catchment management to protect the Hawkesbury-Nepean river system, requiring the impact of future land use to be considered in a regional context. The plan covers water quality and quantity, environmentally sensitive areas, riverine scenic quality, agriculture and urban and rural-residential development. It controls development that has the potential to impact on the river environment.

 

SREP 20 is supported by an Action Plan, which includes actions necessary to improve existing conditions.

 

The development proposal is in accordance with the general planning considerations set out in Clause 5 of SREP 20 and the relevant specific planning policies and related recommended strategies set out in Clause 6. In particular, provision is made for adequate erosion and sediment control measures to ensure sediment as a result of the development are not deposited in the Hawkesbury-Nepean River via the stormwater system.

 

A detailed analysis of the existing drainage characteristics of the Western Precinct is contained in the Water, Soils & Infrastructure Report (2009) prepared by SKM that forms part of the WPP. The report concludes that the entire Jordan Springs is outside of the Probable Maximum Flood (PMF) level of South Creek. As such, it is not at risk of flooding in the 100 year annual recurrence interval (ARI) storm event.

 

The following works are proposed in respect to stormwater drainage:

 

·     Adjoining to the south of the site is the ‘category 2’ east-west watercourse (one of three watercourses identified within the Western Precinct Plan). The site’s existing drainage patterns will be modified by the proposed subdivision and associated civil works, such that stormwater will be piped and channelled to an interim detention basin south- east of the site (proposed under Stage 2A) until such time as a more permanent basin is established in the location. – Stage 2 development;

 

·     The site’s existing drainage patterns will be modified by the proposed subdivision and associated civil works, such that stormwater will be piped and channelled to an interim detention basin south of the site (proposed under stage 3A) until such time as the future Village Lake is operational. The location of the interim sediment and detention basin proposed under stage 3A (which will also serve stage 3B) coincides with the northern end of the future ‘category 3’ north-south watercourse (one of three watercourses identified within the WPP);

 

·     An existing east-west drainage line which runs through the southern portion of the subject site is to be filled in and form part of the proposed development. This particular east-west drainage line is not classified under the WPP as a watercourse/river (as confirmed by the then Department of Water and Energy) and accordingly is able to be developed.

 

Council’s Development Engineer has reviewed the development proposal with regard to stormwater drainage and is satisfied with the stormwater quality and quantity aspects of the proposal. Council’s Development Engineer has provided conditions that should be applied to the development proposal in relation to all aspects of the proposed civil engineering works, including stormwater quality and quantity matters.

 

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

The development proposal is in accordance with the relevant provisions of Penrith Development Control Plan 2006. Not all provisions of this DCP are applicable to the Western Precinct based on overriding provisions contained in the Precinct Plan and Development Control Strategy. The relevant provisions have previously been considered in this report in discussions relating to the applicable environmental planning instruments.

 

3.  Section 79C(1)(a)(iiia) – Any Planning Agreement

 

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 are to 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 653 residential lots proposed via the current Development Applications under assessment.

 

·     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.

 

The proposed subdivisions do not activate any of the above requirements. Contributions outlined in the various Planning Agreements and Development Contributions Plans which apply to the development are to be reconciled at time of which the trigger points are activated. A condition is to be imposed to ensure that the applicant is reminded of their obligations under the agreements discussed above and the trigger points on which they activated.

 

St Marys Development Agreement

The St Marys Development Agreement dated 13 December 2002 is in place between Lend Lease and the NSW 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.

 

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

 

Clause 5 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 outlines the procedures for advertised developments. The subject applications are categorised amongst other things as ‘Threatened Species Development’ and is therefore considered to be ‘other advertised development’ for the purposes of the Regulation. In accordance with Clause 89(3) of the Regulation, ‘Threatened Species Development’ requires the public exhibition of the applications for a minimum thirty (30) days, of which has been exhibited for that period.

 

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

 

Context and Setting

The development proposal is consistent with the existing character of other development in the surrounding suburbs. The proposal is compatible with the surrounding and adjacent land uses and will have no major impact on the amenity of the area. The proposal will have no adverse impacts on the natural environment.

 

 

 

Access and Traffic

Vehicular access to the proposed subdivision will initially be through local roads constructed in Stage 1. Access will ultimately be provided via the intersection of The Northern Road and the southern entry collector road recently constructed as part of Stage 1 connection. Interim connection to Stage 3 land will utilise the southern collector road until such time the northern entry point to The Northern Road has been constructed. This is subject to a separate Development Application (DA11/0792).

 

The applications had been accompanied by a Traffic Impact Assessment Report prepared by Halcrow dated May 2011 and related to Stages 2 and 3 lands respectively. The report summarises the following points:

 

·    The temporary signals would also address the RTA’s safety issues relating to pedestrians crossing The Northern Road.

·    Village 2 includes the construction of internal roads and intersections. Traffic modelling indicates that the Road 8 and Main Street intersection would operate with a good level of service as a priority intersection. In addition, Road 8 and Road 25 intersection would also operate satisfactorily as a roundabout.

·    The intersections within the subdivision are proposed to be either tee intersections or priority four way intersections.

·    The road system layout is permeable and would discourage high vehicle speeds through limiting road lengths.

·    Pedestrian, bus and cycle facilities are proposed within the subdivision which is consistent with the Development Control Strategy.

·    The development of the St Marys site and Western Precinct within it has been the subject of numerous studies which have broadly defined the development yield and internal road system.

·    A Development Control Strategy was developed which addresses streets types, public transport, pedestrian and cycle facilities and traffic management within the Western Precinct.

·    Village 1, 2, Stage 3A and 3B combined would generate an AM and PM peak hour of 829 trips per hour while the Saturday peak hour equates to 781 trips per hour.

·    Traffic modelling indicates that the signalised seagull arrangement at The Northern Road and Southern Entry Boulevard intersection would operate satisfactory to cater for estimated traffic flow of Village 1, Village 2, Stage 3Aand 3B combined.

·    Stage 3 includes the construction of internal roads and intersections. Traffic modelling indicates that the internal intersections would operate with a good level of service.

·    The proposed road cross sections are generally consistent with the typologies set out in the ‘Western Precinct Development Control Strategy’, as developed with Penrith City Council.

 

Halcrow concludes that traffic modelling indicates that the interim intersection of the Southern Entry Boulevard and The Northern Road would operate satisfactorily upon the occupation of Villages 1, 2, Stage 3A and 3B of Jordan Springs.

 

In accordance with previous advice from the Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) it will be necessary that the ultimate (permanent) treatment of the intersection of The Northern Road and the southern entry collector road is satisfactorily completed prior to the issue of a Subdivision Certificate.

 

Written correspondence from the RTA dated 12 May 2011 provides that the interim signalised intersection of the southern collector road and The Northern Road would need to be constructed and operation by 1 December 2011. It should be noted that a permanent intersection would be constructed during the upgrade of The Northern Road of which such details are currently on placed on public exhibition. The applicant has been required to forward a bond to the RTA for these works prior to the release of the Subdivision Certificate for Stages 1D, 1E and 1F for security should the timeframe not be met.  The bond would be used towards construction by the RTA in that scenario.

 

Council’s Traffic Engineer has reviewed the proposed development with regard to access and traffic considerations and has provided the following comments: -

 

“The design of the subdivision and road layout appears consistent with the Western Precinct Framework Plan within the Western Precinct Plan, and other previous detailed planning documents prepared by Halcrow MWT.

 

The traffic report indicates that Traffic volumes on the internal roads are expected to be up to 829 vehicles per hour within the subject stages.   Road intersections will either be T-intersections or four way intersections, requiring give way controls etc.  Threshold treatments are proposed to reinforce the traffic priority at the intersections.   Sight distances should be reviewed to identify locations which may require ‘stop’ or ‘give way’ controls.”

In light of the above, the proposals are satisfactory in respect to access and traffic.

 

Heritage

The management of Aboriginal archaeology on the site is to be undertaken in accordance with approvals that have been issued by the then Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water (DECCW). An Aboriginal Heritage Impact Permit (No. 10996059) has been issued by the then DECCW under Section 90 of the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974. The permit covers the subject site which identifies 39 archaeological sites across the Western Precinct.

 

An Indigenous Heritage Assessment report prepared by Jo McDonald Cultural Heritage Management Pty Ltd was submitted in support of the proposal within Stages 2 and 3 lands.

 

The report for Stage 2 and 3A have concluded that no further salvage works as required in the permit have been completed. However, it is noted that a salvage location identified within the permit is situated on land within proposed Stage 3B. Salvage excavation work is required in this area and as such, salvage work is to be conditioned prior to any construction work.

Bushfire Risk

The land in the Western Precinct of the St Marys Release Area is bushfire prone. The application has been accompanied by a Bushfire Protection Assessment prepared by Eco Logical Australia Pty Ltd. The Bushfire Protection Assessment provides a review of the subdivision proposal in relation to the measures contained in the Bushfire Protection Assessment adopted by Council as part of the Western Precinct Plan.

 

 

The NSW Rural Fire Service (RFS) has assessed the development proposal and has issued a Bush Fire Safety Authority for the proposal pursuant to the Rural Fires Act 1997, subject to General Terms of Approval (GTAs). Specific recommendations have been to each of the proposed stages of subdivision and are summarised below. The conditions would ensure that the proposed subdivision is compliant with Section 100B of the Rural Fires Act 1997, Clause 44 of the Rural Fires Regulation 2008, and ‘Planning for Bushfire Protection 2006’ (RFS 2006):

 

·    Temporary/Asset protection zones are to be provided to the proposed subdivision

·    Asset protection zone landscaping is to comply with the NSW Rural Fire Service document ‘Planning for Bushfire Protection 2006’ inner protection area requirements as listed in Appendix 2. Section A2.2 of PBP and guided by the fuel management principles listed in Section 4 of this report.

·    Landscaping across the subdivision is to comply with the principles of ‘Planning for Bushfire Protection 2006.’

·    A hydrant water supply should be installed in accordance with Australian Standard AS 2419.1.

·    Public roads are to comply with the NSW Rural Fire Service document ‘Planning for Bushfire Protection 2006’

·    Electrical services should be underground and if overhead lines are used, overhanging branches should be trimmed according to “Vegetation Safety Clearances” issued by Energy Australia (NS179, April 2002).

·    Gas services are to be installed and maintained in accordance with AS/NZS 1596:2008 (Standards Australia 2008).

·    Adequate bushfire emergency procedures will be the responsibility of future occupants.

·    Temporary overland trails are to be relevantly provided.

 

The conditions outlined in the bush fire safety authority are to form part of the conditions of Development Consent.

 

Social and Economic

The proposed developments represent a significant commencement toward the creation of a new greenfield master planned estate in Penrith. The proposed developments would provide major social and economic benefits to the wider community to the future residents of the area.

 

The development of land zoned urban for residential purposes provides for a variety of housing choice within Penrith. This will be complemented with education and community services, public transport as well as parks and open spaces which are positive outcomes for a new release area. The development framework established under SREP 30 would continue to deliver economic development and employment opportunities for the local community.

 

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

The site attributes are conducive to the development proposals. The proposals have been designed in a manner consistent with the character of the locality. The site forms part of a planned estate with many of the suit suitability and capability opportunities being resolved in the earlier planning of the St Marys Release Area. The land has been identified for exactly this purpose and to deliver urban development conducive to both state and local government considerations.

 

The proposed development is located within land that is zoned for urban purposes under SREP 30. The zoning of the land has been made after consideration of a number of issues throughout the planning stage of the St Marys Release Area and reflected in the Western Precinct Plan, Development Control Strategy and SREP 30. The subdivision of land is permitted in the zone.

 

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

(a)     External Referrals

The following authorities were consulted as per the relevant legislation as follows: -

·    NSW Office of Water - Water Management Act 2000;

·    NSW Rural Fire Service –Rural Fires Act 1997

·    Department of Primary Industries – Fisheries Management Act 1994.

 

Concurrences from these authorities have been received in response to each proposal.

 

With respect to Clause 104 of State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007, the applications were referred to the Sydney Regional Development Advisory Committee which was chaired by the Roads and Traffic Authority. No objections were raised by the committee, subject to conditions.

 

(b)     Public Submissions

The applications were placed on public exhibition and notified to the owners and occupiers of adjoining and nearby properties in accordance with Penrith Development Control Plan 2010.

 

The public exhibition period commenced on 6 June 2011 and concluded on 6 July 2011. A total of four (4) submissions were received in response to the proposal. The key issues raised in these submissions were: -

 

·    Impact on Cumberland Plain Woodland;

·    Regional Park offset;

·    Adequacy of the Director General’s Requirements;

·    Public Interest and transparency of Council’s Planning Assessment; and

·    Impact of development.

 

The above key issues as well as others raised in the submissions have been addressed with consideration of the issues raised in Appendix No. 3 and throughout this report. The issues raised do not warrant refusal of the subject Development Application.

 

(c)     Internal Referral

The table below summarises the results of internal referrals in relation to the proposals:

 

Referrals

Comments

Building Surveyor

No objection, subject to conditions.

Development Engineer

No objection, subject to conditions.

Environmental Health

No objection, subject to conditions.

Community Safety

No objection, subject to conditions.

Parks Construction and Maintenance

No objection, subject to conditions.

Traffic Engineer

No objection, subject to conditions.

 

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

The site is suitable for the proposed developments. Subdivision is permissible in the Urban zone and it has been demonstrated that the proposals meet the aims and objectives of the environmental planning instruments which applies to the site. The proposed subdivision is considered to be site responsive and is in the spirit of the planning framework which has been envisioned for the Western Precinct.

 

The properties in the immediate vicinity of the site were notified of the development proposals. In considering the issues raised in the submissions, it is unlikely that the proposed developments would adversely impact on adjoining properties, subject to recommended conditions of consent.

 

Section 94 Contributions

The St Marys Penrith Planning Agreement includes provisions relating to works and contributions which off-set the payment of Section 94 contributions under the above contributions plans. These works and contributions will be provided as the Western Precinct is progressively developed. Refer to the Planning Assessment section of this report for discussion on this matter (See Section 3).

 

Conclusion

The proposed developments have met the requirements outlined in legislation and planning provisions which apply to the site. The provisions outlined in the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 and the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 have been met has demonstrated throughout this report.

 

The statutory framework for the Western Precinct has been in place for a number of years and has anticipated urban development on the subject site. The proposed subdivision maintains consistency with the zoning of the site and its design and function is in accordance with the precinct plan and guidelines as outlined in the Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No.30 – St Marys, Western Precinct Plan and Development Control Strategy.

 

The applications for subdivision does not have a ‘significant effect’ on threatened species, population or an ecological community and therefore, does not require concurrence from the Director-General of the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage.

 

The proposed developments are unlikely to have a negative impact on the surrounding environment. The concerns raised by the submitters are acknowledged, however, on balance, the proposed developments are considered to be satisfactory and the grounds of objection are not considered sufficient to justify refusal of the Development Applications.

 

The proposed developments represent a significant commencement toward the creation of a new greenfield master planned estate in the City of Penrith. The proposed developments will not only provide major social and economic benefits to the wider community but also to the future residents of the estate. The site is suitable for the proposed developments and the proposals are in the public interest.

 

On balance, the application is considered satisfactory and having regard to the matters discussed in this report and notwithstanding the submissions received, the proposal is recommended for approval, subject to the imposition of conditions.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.    The information contained in the report on Development Applications DA11/0511, DA11/0512, DA11/0514, DA11/0515, DA11/0516, DA11/0517 for Subdivision of the Western Precinct, St Marys Release Area (Jordan Springs) Lot 1036 DP 1149525 (No.1070 - 1170) The Northern Road, Llandilo be received

 

2.    That Council form the opinion that the subject applications do not have a ‘significant effect’ on threatened species, population or an ecological community as concluded in the Independent Peer Review carried out by Dr Trevor Hawkeswood and discussed throughout this report

 

3.    Development Application DA11/0511 for Subdivision of the Western Precinct, St Marys Release Area (Jordan Springs) – Lot 1036 DP 1149525, (Nos. 1070 - 1170) The Northern Road, Llandilo be approved subject to the following conditions:

 

3.1     A001        Approved plans

A005        Integrated approval authority’s consent

A042        Asset protection zones in bush fire areas

A044        Compliance with NSW Rural Fire Service GTAs

A046        Obtain Construction Certificate before commencement of works

B004        Dust

B005        Mud/soil

C003        Uncovering relics

D001        Sediment and erosion control measures

D002        Spray grass

D005        No filling without prior approval

D06A       Validation of fill material

D009        Covering of waste storage area

D010        Appropriate disposal of excavated or other waste

D013        Traffic noise and acoustic report

D014        Plant and equipment noise

G001        Installation of services and service clearances

G002        Section 73

G004        Integral Energy clearance

H01F       Stamped plans and erection of site notice

H002        Provision of site facilities prior to commencement of construction works

H012        Site classification

H041        Hours of construction work

K101        Works at no cost to Council

K201        Sediment and erosion control

K202        Roads Act

K205        CC for subdivision works

K206        Road design criteria table

K301        Sediment and erosion control - installation

K304        Matters to be addressed prior to commencement of subdivision works

K401        Erosion and sediment control – during construction

K404        Services underground

K405        Street lighting

K406        Drainage connection

K407        Major filling

K408        Soil testing

K504        Restriction as to user and positive covenant

K507        Line marking and signage

K510        Street signs

K511        Bond for final wearing course

K513        Maintenance bond

K514        Subdivision compliance documentation

L001        Approved landscaping plans

L002        Landscaping construction

L003        Landscaping report requirements

L005        Planting of plant material

L006        Australian Standard landscaping requirements

L007        Tree protection measures

L008        Tree Preservation Order

L009        Tree preservation order

M001       Prior to subdivision work

M007       Street lighting

M008       Linen plan

M009       88B Instrument

M011       Soil testing

M013       Street trees

M014       Surveyors Certificate

P001        Costs

P002        Fees associated with Council land

Q001        Notice of commencement and appointment of PCA

Q008        Subdivision Certificate

 

 

3.2     The following aspect in relation to Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CTPED) principles should incorporated into the development:

 

Lighting

·   All street lighting shall be designed in accordance with Council’s Public Domain Lighting Policy, and in accordance with Integral Energy standards and requirements.

·   All pedestrian and cycle networks and bus stops shall be well lit in accordance with the abovementioned standards.

·   Lighting should take into account all vegetation and landscaping that may act as an entrapment spot or obscure the effectiveness of the lighting.

·   Lighting should be consistent in order to reduce the contrast between shadows and illuminated areas.

·   Lighting should have a wide beam of illumination, which reaches the beam of the next light, or the perimeter of the site or area being traversed.

 

Landscaping

·   Street Tree planting and planting along pedestrian / cycle pathways should promote passive surveillance and clear lines of sight. Any trees should have a high canopy so as not to provide concealment opportunities. Dense shrubs and heavy undergrowth should be avoided along the pathways.

·   The pedestrian / cycle pathways will be marked and signposted to clearly delineate which portion of the pathway should be used by pedestrians, and which should be used by cyclists.

·   Trees within public reserve areas must also have a high canopy and minimal undergrowth to enable passive surveillance, promote clear lines of sight and reduce entrapment spots. Dense shrubs must be avoided.

 

3.3     The soil salinity management measures outlined within the Western Precinct Plan must be implemented during construction.  The measures and recommendations outlined by Geotech Testing Pty Ltd in their correspondence dated 8 March 2010 (Ref: 7508/23-AA Final Revised) are also to be adopted and implemented as a part of the development.

 

3.4     The development shall be carried out in accordance with the procedures set out in the Western Precinct Contamination Management Plan and the conditions and procedures set out in the Site Audit Statements relating to the Western Precinct.

 

3.5     Dust suppression techniques are to be employed during construction to reduce any potential nuisances to surrounding properties.

 

3.6     All soil material stockpiled for future use on the site is to be stored in such a manner so as to minimise dust.

 

3.7     For development within Stage 3A, noise levels from or in the premises shall not exceed the relevant noise criteria detailed in ‘Lend Lease Stage 3 Development Jordan Springs: Noise Impact Assessment’ prepared by Sinclair Knight Merz (SKM) and dated 19 July 2011. The recommendations provided in the above-mentioned acoustic report shall be implemented and incorporated into the design and construction of future dwellings on the site and (where relevant) shall be shown on plans accompanying the Construction Certificate application. 

 

The provisions of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 apply to the development, in terms of regulating offensive noise.

 

3.8     Prior to the issue of a Subdivision Certificate, a positive covenant is to be registered against the new land titles for lots 3122, 3123, 3124, 3139, 3090, 3091 and 3092, that:

 

(a)     refers to the ‘Lend Lease Stage 3 Development Jordan Springs: Noise Impact Assessment’ prepared by Sinclair Knight Merz (SKM) and dated 19 July 2011

(b)     stipulates the noise criteria as outlined in the above document and ensures that it be achieved

(c)     provides advice on the mechanisms required for that lot to meet the criteria.

 

3.9     Corner lots need to be designed to ensure that the driveway is located a minimum of 6 metres from the tangent point of the intersection to comply with the Australian Standards 2890.

 

3.10   All sites are to be benched in the subdivision to limit cut and fill to be minimal on the site and negate the need for retaining walls.

 

3.11   Those proposed lots will zero allotments need to be identified in the 88b instrument. The lots need to be benched to ensure that no earthworks are required within the easement so that access for maintenance is not hindered by varying ground level. Alternatively, the dwellings need to be designed with dropped edge beams to contain the cut and fill and ensure that the easement remains at a natural ground level after the construction of a dwelling at zero allotment.

 

3.12   All RTA conditions are to be applied received from the SRDAC reference ID 09M1255v10-11, ID 09M1255 v6-9 and ID 09M1255 vol 2 –SYD09/00603.

 

3.13   Pedestrian, bus and cycle facilities are to be consistent with the Development Control Strategy.

 

3.14   All bicycle path construction is to be in accordance with the relevant provisions of the RTA’s NSW Bicycle Guidelines and AUSTROADS Guide to Traffic Engineering Practice – Part 14 Bicycles.

 

3.15   The conditions outlined in the Bush Fire Safety Authority issued by the NSW Rural   Fire Services dated 22 June 2011, shall be incorporated into the development where applicable.

 

3.16   The conditions outlined in the Bush Fire Safety Authority issued by the NSW Rural   Fire Services dated 22 June 2011, shall be incorporated into the development where applicable.

 

3.17   The conditions outlined in the General Terms of Approval from the NSW Department of Primary Industries – Fisheries shall be adhered to where appropriate.

 

3.18   Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate, documentary evidence from a suitably qualified archaeological consultant shall be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority (PCA) confirming satisfactory completion of any required archaeological salvage works on the site. A copy of the precinct-wide Section 90 consent previously issued by the Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water (DECCW) shall also be submitted to the PCA prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.

 

          Should any archaeological relics be uncovered during the course of the works, no further work shall be undertaken until further directed by Penrith City Council or the NSW Heritage Office.

 

          The applicant is advised that depending on the possible significance of the relics, an archaeological assessment and an excavation permit under the Heritage Act 1977 may be required before any further work can be recommenced in that area of the site.

 

3.19   All works/regulatory signposting associated with the proposed development are to be at no cost to the Roads & Traffic Authority.

 

3.20   All demolition and construction vehicles are to be contained wholly within the site and vehicles must enter the site before stopping.  A construction zone will not be permitted on The Northern Road.

 

3.21   Temporary on-site detention and erosion and sediment control basins shall be provided generally on accordance with the concept plans lodged for the development approval prepared by J Wyndham Prince, reference number 9115, sheets DA01 – DA17, revision D, dated 11/05/2011.

 

Engineering plans and supporting calculations for the on-site detention system are to be prepared by a qualified Hydrologic/Hydraulic Engineer and shall accompany the application for a Construction Certificate.

 

An operation and maintenance manual shall be approved by the Certifying Authority as part of the Construction Certificate documentation.

 

3.22   Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate the Certifying Authority shall ensure that the on-site detention system has been designed in accordance with Penrith City Council’s Design and Construction Guidelines and Construction Specification for Civil Works.

 

3.23   Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate a Construction Traffic Management Plan detailing construction vehicle routes, number of trucks, hours of operation, access arrangements and traffic control shall be submitted to Penrith City Council.

 

3.33   Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate the Certifying Authority shall ensure that the design of the roundabout at the intersection of Road No’s 9 & 25 complies with Austroads guidelines.  The roundabout is to incorporate pedestrian refuge facilities and bicycle crossing facilities.  The provision of irrigation and drainage for landscaping is also to be incorporated.

 

3.34   Prior to the issue of a Subdivision Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority shall ensure that all works relating to the utility service lead in works within public road reserves have been inspected and approved by Penrith City Council.

 

3.35   Prior to the issue of the Subdivision Certificate street trees are to be planted in accordance with the street tree plans numbered WP V3a STP Issue C dated 19/05/2011 & WP V3a STP2 Issue C dated 19/05/2011.

 

Prior to the planting of street trees, the street tree plan, plant species and location are to be approved by Penrith City Council.  In this regard, please contact Council’s Development Services Unit on 4732 7777.

 

3.36   Prior to the issue of a Subdivision Certificate the treatment of the intersection of The Northern Road / Borrowdale Way shall be constructed to the satisfaction of the Roads & Traffic Authority and Penrith City Council.

 

3.37   Prior to the issue of a Subdivision Certificate the proposed traffic signals at the intersection of Road No’s 8, 20 & 21 are to be implemented to the satisfaction of the Roads & Traffic Authority and Penrith City Council.

 

3.38   The temporary on-site detention system and erosion and sediment control system shall be maintained by the person with the benefit of the development consent until development runoff is diverted into the ultimate water quality / detention system and the temporary system has been decommissioned.  A minimum 12 month maintenance period will apply to the ultimate water quality / detention system when completed.

 

3.39   The site is subject to the provisions of the St Marys Penrith Planning Agreement, as amended. The applicant is reminded of the obligations under the Planning Agreement with regard to the delivery of certain infrastructure and services as part of the development of the Western Precinct. All works shall be carried out in accordance with the requirements of the St Marys Penrith Planning Agreement, as amended.

 

3.40   The site is subject to the provisions of the St Marys Development Agreement. The applicant is reminded of the obligations under the Development Agreement with regard to the delivery of certain infrastructure and services as part of the development of the Western Precinct. All works shall be carried out in accordance with the requirements of the St Marys Development Agreement, as amended. The provision of affordable housing lots shall be made to the Centre for Affordable Housing in accordance with Clause 17 of the Development Agreement.

 

3.41   An arborist report relating to the trees proposed to be retained shall be submitted and approved prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.  The arborist report shall include consideration of the proposed extend of cut and fill works to confirm whether the trees can be retained on the site.  The report should also specify tree protection measures to ensure that the trees proposed for retention have the best possible chance of surviving the proposed works.  

 

3.42   The existing tree schedule (attached to the Tree Plan) provided with this application is to be updated to include justification to substantiate the proposed removal of all trees.  These further details must be submitted to Council for consideration and approval prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate. 

 

4.    Development Application DA11/0512 for Subdivision of the Western Precinct, St Marys Release Area (Jordan Springs) – Lot 1036 DP 1149525, (Nos. 1070 - 1170) The Northern Road, Llandilo be approved subject to the following conditions:

 

4.1     A001        Approved plans

A005        Integrated approval authority’s consent

A042        Asset protection zones in bush fire areas

A044        Compliance with NSW Rural Fire Service GTAs

A046        Obtain Construction Certificate before commencement of works

B004        Dust

B005        Mud/soil

C003        Uncovering relics

D001        Sediment and erosion control measures

D002        Spray grass

D005        No filling without prior approval

D06A       Validation of fill material

D009        Covering of waste storage area

D010        Appropriate disposal of excavated or other waste

D013        Traffic noise and acoustic report

D014        Plant and equipment noise

G001        Installation of services and service clearances

G002        Section 73

G004        Integral Energy clearance

H01F       Stamped plans and erection of site notice

H002        Provision of site facilities prior to commencement of construction works

H012        Site classification

H041        Hours of construction work

K101        Works at no cost to Council

K201        Sediment and erosion control

K202        Roads Act

K205        CC for subdivision works

K206        Road design criteria

K207        Road safety audit

K213        Water quality

K224        Inter-allotment drainage

K225        Bus stops

K301        Sediment and erosion control - installation

K304        Matters to be addressed prior to commencement of subdivision works

K401        Erosion and sediment control – during construction

K404        Services - underground

K405        Street lighting

K406        Drainage connection

K407        Major filling

K408        Soil testing

K503        Stormwater compliance

K504        Restriction as to user and positive covenant

K507             Line marking and signage

K510        Street signs

K511        Bond for final wearing course

K513        Maintenance bond

K514        Subdivision compliance documentation

L001        Approved landscaping plans

L002        Landscaping construction

L003        Landscaping report requirements

L005        Planting of plant material

L006        Australian Standard landscaping requirements

L007        Tree protection measures

L008        Tree Preservation Order

L009        Tree preservation order

M001       Prior to subdivision work

M007       Street lighting

M008       Linen plan

M009       88B Instrument

M011       Soil testing

M013       Street trees

M014       Surveyors Certificate

P001        Costs

P002        Fees associated with Council land

Q001        Notice of commencement and appointment of PCA

Q008        Subdivision Certificate

 

4.2     The following aspect in relation to Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CTPED) principles should incorporated into the development:

 

Lighting

·   All street lighting shall be designed in accordance with Council’s Public Domain Lighting Policy, and in accordance with Integral Energy standards and requirements.

·   All pedestrian and cycle networks and bus stops shall be well lit in accordance with the abovementioned standards.

·   Lighting should take into account all vegetation and landscaping that may act as an entrapment spot or obscure the effectiveness of the lighting.

·   Lighting should be consistent in order to reduce the contrast between shadows and illuminated areas.

·   Lighting should have a wide beam of illumination, which reaches the beam of the next light, or the perimeter of the site or area being traversed.

 

Landscaping

·   Street Tree planting and planting along pedestrian / cycle pathways should promote passive surveillance and clear lines of sight. Any trees should have a high canopy so as not to provide concealment opportunities. Dense shrubs and heavy undergrowth should be avoided along the pathways.

·   The pedestrian / cycle pathways will be marked and signposted to clearly delineate which portion of the pathway should be used by pedestrians, and which should be used by cyclists.

·   Trees within public reserve areas must also have a high canopy and minimal undergrowth to enable passive surveillance, promote clear lines of sight and reduce entrapment spots. Dense shrubs must be avoided.

 

4.3     The soil salinity management measures outlined within the Western Precinct Plan must be implemented during construction.  The measures and recommendations outlined by Geotech Testing Pty Ltd in their correspondence dated 8 March 2010 (Ref: 7508/23-AA Final Revised) are also to be adopted and implemented as a part of the development.

 

4.4     The development shall be carried out in accordance with the procedures set out in the Western Precinct Contamination Management Plan and the conditions and procedures set out in the Site Audit Statements relating to the Western Precinct.

 

4.5     Dust suppression techniques are to be employed during construction to reduce any potential nuisances to surrounding properties.

 

4.6     All soil material stockpiled for future use on the site is to be stored in such a manner so as to minimise dust.

 

4.7     Corner lots need to be designed to ensure that the driveway is located a minimum of 6 metres from the tangent point of the intersection to comply with the Australian Standards 2890.

 

4.8     All sites are to be benched in the subdivision to limit cut and fill to be minimal on the site and negate the need for retaining walls.

 

4.9     Those proposed lots will zero allotments need to be identified in the 88b instrument. The lots need to be benched to ensure that no earthworks are required within the easement so that access for maintenance is not hindered by varying ground level. Alternatively, the dwellings need to be designed with dropped edge beams to contain the cut and fill and ensure that the easement remains at a natural ground level after the construction of a dwelling at zero allotment.

 

4.10   All RTA conditions are to be applied received from the SRDAC reference ID 09M1255v10-11, ID 09M1255 v6-9 and ID 09M1255 vol 2 –SYD09/00603.

 

4.11   Pedestrian, bus and cycle facilities are to be consistent with the Development Control Strategy.

 

4.12   All bicycle path construction is to be in accordance with the relevant provisions of the RTA’s NSW Bicycle Guidelines and AUSTROADS Guide to Traffic Engineering Practice – Part 14 Bicycles.

 

4.13   The conditions outlined in the Bush Fire Safety Authority issued by the NSW Rural Fire Services dated 22 June 2011, shall be incorporated into the development where applicable.

 

4.14   Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate, documentary evidence from a suitably qualified archaeological consultant shall be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority (PCA) confirming satisfactory completion of any required archaeological salvage works on the site. A copy of the precinct-wide Section 90 consent previously issued by the Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water (DECCW) shall also be submitted to the PCA prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.

 

          Should any archaeological relics be uncovered during the course of the works, no further work shall be undertaken until further directed by Penrith City Council or the NSW Heritage Office.

 

          The applicant is advised that depending on the possible significance of the relics, an archaeological assessment and an excavation permit under the Heritage Act 1977 may be required before any further work can be recommenced in that area of the site.

 

4.15   All works/regulatory signposting associated with the proposed development are to be at no cost to the Roads & Traffic Authority.

 

4.16   All demolition and construction vehicles are to be contained wholly within the site and vehicles must enter the site before stopping.  A construction zone will not be permitted on The Northern Road.

 

4.17   Temporary on-site detention and erosion and sediment control basins shall be provided generally on accordance with the concept plans lodged for the development approval prepared by J Wyndham Prince, reference number 9115, sheets DA30 – DA41, revision B, dated 13/05/2011.

 

Engineering plans and supporting calculations for the on-site detention system are to be prepared by a qualified Hydrologic/Hydraulic Engineer and shall accompany the application for a Construction Certificate.

 

An operation and maintenance manual shall be approved by the Certifying Authority as part of the Construction Certificate documentation.

 

Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate the Certifying Authority shall ensure that the on-site detention system has been designed in accordance with Penrith City Council’s Design and Construction Guidelines and Construction Specification for Civil Works.

 

4.18   Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate a Construction Traffic Management Plan detailing construction vehicle routes, number of trucks, hours of operation, access arrangements and traffic control shall be submitted to Penrith City Council.

 

4.19   Prior to the issue of a Subdivision Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority shall ensure that all works relating to the utility service lead in works within public road reserves have been inspected and approved by Penrith City Council.

 

4.20   Prior to the issue of the Subdivision Certificate street trees are to be planted in accordance with the street tree plan numbered WP V3b STP Issue A dated 19/05/2011.

 

Prior to the planting of street trees, the street tree plan, plant species and location are to be approved by Penrith City Council.  In this regard, please contact Council’s Development Services Unit on 4732 7777.

 

4.21   Prior to the issue of a Subdivision Certificate the treatment of the intersection of The Northern Road / Borrowdale Way shall be constructed to the satisfaction of the Roads & Traffic Authority and Penrith City Council.

 

4.22   Prior to the issue of a Subdivision Certificate all subdivision works in Village 3A are to be completed to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

4.23   The temporary on-site detention system and erosion and sediment control system shall be maintained by the person with the benefit of the development consent until development runoff is diverted into the ultimate water quality / detention system and the temporary system has been decommissioned.  A minimum 12 month maintenance period will apply to the ultimate water quality / detention system when completed.

 

4.24   No earthworks are to occur within the proposed park and all earthworks within the park will be the subject of a separate development application.  The park shall not be dedicated to Council until works within the park are complete. 

 

4.25   The site is subject to the provisions of the St Marys Penrith Planning Agreement, as amended. The applicant is reminded of the obligations under the Planning      Agreement with regard to the delivery of certain infrastructure and services as part of the development of the Western Precinct. All works shall be carried out in accordance with the requirements of the St Marys Penrith Planning Agreement, as amended.

 

4.26   The site is subject to the provisions of the St Marys Development Agreement. The applicant is reminded of the obligations under the Development Agreement with regard to the delivery of certain infrastructure and services as part of the development of the Western Precinct. All works shall be carried out in accordance with the requirements of the St Marys Development Agreement, as amended. The provision of affordable housing lots shall be made to the Centre for Affordable Housing in accordance with Clause 17 of the Development Agreement.

 

4.27   An arborist report relating to the trees proposed to be retained shall be submitted and approved prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.  The arborist report shall include consideration of the proposed extend of cut and fill works to confirm whether the trees can be retained on the site.  The report should also specify tree protection measures to ensure that the trees proposed for retention have the best possible chance of surviving the proposed works.   

 

4.28   The existing tree schedule (attached to the Tree Plan) provided with this application is to be updated to include justification to substantiate the proposed removal of all trees.  These further details must be submitted to Council for consideration and approval prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate. 

 

5.    Development Application DA11/0514 for Subdivision of the Western Precinct, St Marys Release Area (Jordan Springs) – Lot 1036 DP 1149525, (Nos. 1070 - 1170) The Northern Road, Llandilo be approved subject to the following conditions:

 

5.1     A001        Approved plans

A005        Integrated approval authority’s consent

A042        Asset protection zones in bush fire areas

A044        Compliance with NSW Rural Fire Service GTAs

A046        Obtain Construction Certificate before commencement of works

B004        Dust

B005        Mud/soil

C003        Uncovering relics

D001        Sediment and erosion control measures

D002        Spray grass

D005        No filling without prior approval

D06A       Validation of fill material

D009        Covering of waste storage area

D010        Appropriate disposal of excavated or other waste

D013        Traffic noise and acoustic report

D014        Plant and equipment noise

G001        Installation of services and service clearances

G002        Section 73

G004        Integral Energy clearance

H01F       Stamped plans and erection of site notice

H002        Provision of site facilities prior to commencement of construction works

H012        Site classification

H041        Hours of construction work

K101        Works at no cost to Council

K201        Sediment and Erosion Control

K202        Roads Act

K205        CC for Subdivision Works

K206        Road Design Criteria Table

K207        Road Safety Audit

K213        Water Quality

K224        Inter-allotment Drainage

K225        Bus Stops

K301        Sediment & Erosion Control - Installation

K304        Matters to addressed prior to commencement of Subdivision Works

K401        Erosion and Sediment Control

K404        Services - Underground

K405        Street Lighting

K406        Drainage Connection

K407        Major Filling

K408        Soil Testing - Subdivisions

K503        Stormwater Compliance

K504        Restriction to User and Positive Covenant

K507        Line marking & Signage

K510        Street Signs

K511        Bond for Final Wearing Course

K513        Maintenance Bond

K514        Subdivision Compliance Documentation

L001        Approved landscaping plans

L002        Landscaping construction

L003        Landscaping report requirements

L005        Planting of plant material

L006        Australian Standard landscaping requirements

L007        Tree protection measures

L008        Tree Preservation Order

L009        Tree preservation order

M001       Prior to subdivision work

M007       Street lighting

M008       Linen plan

M009       88B Instrument

M011       Soil testing

M013       Street trees

M014       Surveyors Certificate

P001        Costs

P002        Fees associated with Council land

Q001        Notice of commencement and appointment of PCA

Q008        Subdivision Certificate

 

5.2     The following aspect in relation to Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CTPED) principles should incorporated into the development:

 

Lighting

·    All street lighting shall be designed in accordance with Council’s Public Domain Lighting Policy, and in accordance with Integral Energy standards and requirements.

·    All pedestrian and cycle networks and bus stops shall be well lit in accordance with the abovementioned standards.

·    Lighting should take into account all vegetation and landscaping that may act as an entrapment spot or obscure the effectiveness of the lighting.

·    Lighting should be consistent in order to reduce the contrast between shadows and illuminated areas.

·    Lighting should have a wide beam of illumination, which reaches the beam of the next light, or the perimeter of the site or area being traversed.

 

Landscaping

·    Street Tree planting and planting along pedestrian / cycle pathways should promote passive surveillance and clear lines of sight. Any trees should have a high canopy so as not to provide concealment opportunities. Dense shrubs and heavy undergrowth should be avoided along the pathways.

·    The pedestrian / cycle pathways will be marked and signposted to clearly delineate which portion of the pathway should be used by pedestrians, and which should be used by cyclists.

·    Trees within public reserve areas must also have a high canopy and minimal undergrowth to enable passive surveillance, promote clear lines of sight and reduce entrapment spots. Dense shrubs must be avoided.

 

Village Park

·    DA 11/0514 for the Stage 2A subdivision indicates that the layout of Village Park ensures that opposite/adjoining buildings overlook it. This is supported as this will enable increased casual surveillance of these areas.

 

5.3     The soil salinity management measures outlined within the Western Precinct Plan must be implemented during construction.  The measures and recommendations outlined by Geotech Testing Pty Ltd in their correspondence dated 8 March 2010 (Ref: 7508/23-AA Final Revised) are also to be adopted and implemented as a part of the development.

 

5.4     The development shall be carried out in accordance with the procedures set out in the Western Precinct Contamination Management Plan and the conditions and procedures set out in the Site Audit Statements relating to the Western Precinct.

 

5.5     Dust suppression techniques are to be employed during construction to reduce any potential nuisances to surrounding properties.

 

5.6     All soil material stockpiled for future use on the site is to be stored in such a manner so as to minimise dust.

 

5.7     Corner lots need to be designed to ensure that the driveway is located a minimum of 6 metres from the tangent point of the intersection to comply with the Australian Standards 2890.

 

5.8     All sites are to be benched in the subdivision to limit cut and fill to be minimal on the site and negate the need for retaining walls.

 

5.9     Those proposed lots will zero allotments need to be identified in the 88b instrument. The lots need to be benched to ensure that no earthworks are required within the easement so that access for maintenance is not hindered by varying ground level. Alternatively, the dwellings need to be designed with dropped edge beams to contain the cut and fill and ensure that the easement remains at a natural ground level after the construction of a dwelling at zero allotment.

 

5.10   All RTA conditions are to be applied received from the SRDAC reference ID 09M1255v10-11, ID 09M1255 v6-9 and ID 09M1255 vol 2 –SYD09/00603.

 

5.11   Pedestrian, bus and cycle facilities are to be consistent with the Development Control Strategy.

 

5.12   All bicycle path construction is to be in accordance with the relevant provisions of the RTA’s NSW Bicycle Guidelines and AUSTROADS Guide to Traffic Engineering Practice – Part 14 Bicycles.

 

5.13   The conditions outlined in the Bush Fire Safety Authority issued by the NSW Rural   Fire Services dated 22 June 2011, shall be incorporated into the development where applicable.

 

5.14   All works/regulatory signposting associated with the proposed development are to be at no cost to the Roads & Traffic Authority.

 

5.15   Temporary on-site detention and erosion and sediment control basins shall be provided generally on accordance with the concept plans lodged for the development approval prepared by J Wyndham Prince, reference number 9111, sheets DA0 – DA16, revision B, dated 17/05/2011.

 

Engineering plans and supporting calculations for the on-site detention system are to be prepared by a qualified Hydrologic/Hydraulic Engineer and shall accompany the application for a Construction Certificate.

 

An operation and maintenance manual shall be approved by the Certifying Authority as part of the Construction Certificate documentation.

 

Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate the Certifying Authority shall ensure that the on-site detention system has been designed in accordance with Penrith City Council’s Design and Construction Guidelines and Construction Specification for Civil Works.

 

5.16   Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate a Construction Traffic Management Plan detailing construction vehicle routes, number of trucks, hours of operation, access arrangements and traffic control shall be submitted to Penrith City Council.

 

5.17   Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate the Certifying Authority shall ensure that the design of the roundabout at the intersection of Road No’s 8 & 25 complies with Austroads guidelines.  The roundabout is to incorporate pedestrian refuge facilities and bicycle crossing facilities.  The provision of irrigation and drainage for landscaping is also to be incorporated.

 

5.18   Structural design certification by a suitably qualified engineer – NPER (Structural) of the bridge structure shall accompany any construction certificates issued for civil works.

 

5.19   Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate detailed plans of the proposed culvert structure on Road No 8 are to be submitted to Penrith City Council.

 

5.20   Prior to the issue of a Subdivision Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority shall ensure that all works relating to the utility service lead in works within public road reserves have been inspected and approved by Penrith City Council.

 

5.21   Prior to the issue of the Subdivision Certificate street trees are to be planted in accordance with the street tree plan numbered WP V2a STP Issue C dated 06/05/2011.

 

Prior to the planting of street trees, the street tree plan, plant species and location are to be approved by Penrith City Council.  In this regard, please contact Council’s Development Services Unit on 4732 7777.

 

5.22   Prior to the issue of a Subdivision Certificate the ultimate signalised treatment of the intersection of The Northern Road / Jordan Springs Boulevard (refer to RTA correspondence reference ID 09M1255 Vol 2 – SYD09/00603 dated 12 May 2011) is to be implemented to the satisfaction of the Roads & Traffic Authority.

 

5.23   Prior to the issue of a Subdivision Certificate the timing for the delivery of the proposed traffic signals at the intersection of Road No’s 8, 20 & 21 is to be formally agreed to by Penrith City Council.  Any interim intersection arrangement is to be approved by the Local Traffic Committee.

 

5.24   The temporary on-site detention system and erosion and sediment control system shall be maintained by the person with the benefit of the development consent until development runoff is diverted into the ultimate water quality / detention system and the temporary system has been decommissioned.  A minimum 12 month maintenance period will apply to the ultimate water quality / detention system when completed.

 

5.25   The site is subject to the provisions of the St Marys Penrith Planning Agreement, as amended. The applicant is reminded of the obligations under the Planning Agreement with regard to the delivery of certain infrastructure and services as part of the development of the Western Precinct. All works shall be carried out in accordance with the requirements of the St Marys Penrith Planning Agreement, as amended.

 

5.26   The site is subject to the provisions of the St Marys Development Agreement. The applicant is reminded of the obligations under the Development Agreement with regard to the delivery of certain infrastructure and services as part of the development of the Western Precinct. All works shall be carried out in accordance with the requirements of the St Marys Development Agreement, as amended. The provision of affordable housing lots shall be made to the Centre for Affordable Housing in accordance with Clause 17 of the Development Agreement.

 

5.27   An arborist report relating to the trees proposed to be retained shall be submitted and approved prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.  The arborist report shall include consideration of the proposed extend of cut and fill works to confirm whether the trees can be retained on the site.  The report should also specify tree protection measures to ensure that the trees proposed for retention have the best possible chance of surviving the proposed works.  

 

5.28   The existing tree schedule (attached to the Tree Plan) provided with this application is to be updated to include justification to substantiate the proposed removal of all trees.  These further details must be submitted to Council for consideration and approval prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate. 

 

6.    Development Application DA11/0515 for Subdivision of the Western Precinct, St Marys Release Area (Jordan Springs) – Lot 1036 DP 1149525, (Nos. 1070 - 1170) The Northern Road, Llandilo be approved subject to the following conditions:

 

6.1     A001        Approved plans

A005        Integrated approval authority’s consent

A042        Asset protection zones in bush fire areas

A044        Compliance with NSW Rural Fire Service GTAs

A046        Obtain Construction Certificate before commencement of works

B004        Dust

B005        Mud/soil

C003        Uncovering relics

D001        Sediment and erosion control measures

D002        Spray grass

D005        No filling without prior approval

D06A       Validation of fill material

D009        Covering of waste storage area

D010        Appropriate disposal of excavated or other waste

D013        Traffic noise and acoustic report

D014        Plant and equipment noise

G001        Installation of services and service clearances

G002        Section 73

G004        Integral Energy clearance

H01F       Stamped plans and erection of site notice

H002        Provision of site facilities prior to commencement of construction works

H012        Site classification

H041        Hours of construction work

K101        Works at no cost to Council

K201        Sediment and erosion control

K202        Roads Act

K205        CC for Subdivision Works

K206        Road design criteria table

K207        Road Safety Audit

K213        Water quality

K224        Inter-allotment drainage

K225        Bus stops

K301        Sediment and erosion control - installation

K304        Matters to be addressed prior to commencement of subdivision works

K401        Erosion and sediment control – during construction

K404        Services - underground

K405        Street lighting

K406        Drainage connection

K407        Major filling

K408        Soil testing

K503        Stormwater compliance

K504        Restriction as to user and positive covenant

K507        Line marking and signage 

K510        Street signs

K511        Bond for final wearing course

K513        Maintenance bond

K514        Subdivision compliance documentation

L001        Approved landscaping plans

L002        Landscaping construction

L003        Landscaping report requirements

L005        Planting of plant material

L006        Australian Standard landscaping requirements

L007        Tree protection measures

L008        Tree Preservation Order

L009        Tree preservation order

M001       Prior to subdivision work

M007       Street lighting

M008       Linen plan

M009       88B Instrument

M011       Soil testing

M013       Street trees

M014       Surveyors Certificate

P001        Costs

P002        Fees associated with Council land

Q001        Notice of commencement and appointment of PCA

Q008        Subdivision Certificate

 

6.2     The following aspect in relation to Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CTPED) principles should incorporated into the development:

 

Lighting

·    All street lighting shall be designed in accordance with Council’s Public Domain Lighting Policy, and in accordance with Integral Energy standards and requirements.

·    All pedestrian and cycle networks and bus stops shall be well lit in accordance with the abovementioned standards.

·    Lighting should take into account all vegetation and landscaping that may act as an entrapment spot or obscure the effectiveness of the lighting.

·    Lighting should be consistent in order to reduce the contrast between shadows and illuminated areas.

·    Lighting should have a wide beam of illumination, which reaches the beam of the next light, or the perimeter of the site or area being traversed.

 

Landscaping

·    Street Tree planting and planting along pedestrian / cycle pathways should promote passive surveillance and clear lines of sight. Any trees should have a high canopy so as not to provide concealment opportunities. Dense shrubs and heavy undergrowth should be avoided along the pathways.

·    The pedestrian / cycle pathways will be marked and signposted to clearly delineate which portion of the pathway should be used by pedestrians, and which should be used by cyclists.

·    Trees within public reserve areas must also have a high canopy and minimal undergrowth to enable passive surveillance, promote clear lines of sight and reduce entrapment spots. Dense shrubs must be avoided.

 

6.3     The soil salinity management measures outlined within the Western Precinct Plan must be implemented during construction.  The measures and recommendations outlined by Geotech Testing Pty Ltd in their correspondence dated 8 March 2010 (Ref: 7508/23-AA Final Revised) are also to be adopted and implemented as a part of the development.

 

6.4     The development shall be carried out in accordance with the procedures set out in the Western Precinct Contamination Management Plan and the conditions and procedures set out in the Site Audit Statements relating to the Western Precinct.

 

6.5     Dust suppression techniques are to be employed during construction to reduce any potential nuisances to surrounding properties.

 

6.6     All soil material stockpiled for future use on the site is to be stored in such a manner so as to minimise dust.

 

6.7     No work associated with this development is to be undertaken in the vicinity of the existing bitumen road located in the south east of the site until such time as an EPA Accredited Site Auditor has issued a Site Audit Statement for the area, it has been deemed suitable for its intended use, and the Site Audit Statement has been submitted to Council.

 

6.8     Corner lots need to be designed to ensure that the driveway is located a minimum of 6 metres from the tangent point of the intersection to comply with the Australian Standards 2890.

 

6.9     All sites are to be benched in the subdivision to limit cut and fill to be minimal on the site and negate the need for retaining walls.

 

6.10   Those proposed lots will zero allotments need to be identified in the 88b instrument. The lots need to be benched to ensure that no earthworks are required within the easement so that access for maintenance is not hindered by varying ground level. Alternatively, the dwellings need to be designed with dropped edge beams to contain the cut and fill and ensure that the easement remains at a natural ground level after the construction of a dwelling at zero allotment.

 

6.11   All RTA conditions are to be applied received from the SRDAC reference ID 09M1255v10-11, ID 09M1255 v6-9 and ID 09M1255 vol 2 –SYD09/00603.

 

6.12   Pedestrian, bus and cycle facilities are to be consistent with the Development Control Strategy.

 

6.13   All bicycle path construction is to be in accordance with the relevant provisions of the RTA’s NSW Bicycle Guidelines and AUSTROADS Guide to Traffic Engineering Practice – Part 14 Bicycles.

 

6.14   The conditions outlined in the Bush Fire Safety Authority issued by the NSW Rural   Fire Services dated 22 June 2011, shall be incorporated into the development where applicable.

 

6.15   All works/regulatory signposting associated with the proposed development are to be at no cost to the Roads & Traffic Authority.

 

6.16   Temporary on-site detention and erosion and sediment control basins shall be provided generally on accordance with the concept plans lodged for the development approval prepared by J Wyndham Prince, reference number 9111, sheets DA20 – DA27, revision E, dated 17/05/2011.

 

Engineering plans and supporting calculations for the on-site detention system are to be prepared by a qualified Hydrologic/Hydraulic Engineer and shall accompany the application for a Construction Certificate.

 

An operation and maintenance manual shall be approved by the Certifying Authority as part of the Construction Certificate documentation.

 

Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate the Certifying Authority shall ensure that the on-site detention system has been designed in accordance with Penrith City Council’s Design and Construction Guidelines and Construction Specification for Civil Works.

 

6.17   Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate a Construction Traffic Management Plan detailing construction vehicle routes, number of trucks, hours of operation, access arrangements and traffic control shall be submitted to Penrith City Council.

 

6.18   Prior to the issue of a Subdivision Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority shall ensure that all works relating to the utility service lead in works within public road reserves have been inspected and approved by Penrith City Council.

 

6.19   Prior to the issue of the Subdivision Certificate street trees are to be planted in accordance with the street tree plan numbered WP V2b STP Issue C dated 19/05/2011.

 

Prior to the planting of street trees, the street tree plan, plant species and location are to be approved by Penrith City Council.  In this regard, please contact Council’s Development Services Unit on 4732 7777.

 

6.20   Prior to the issue of a Subdivision Certificate all subdivision works in Village 2A are to be completed to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

6.21   Prior to the issue of a Subdivision Certificate the ultimate signalised treatment of the intersection of The Northern Road / Jordan Springs Boulevard (refer to RTA correspondence reference ID 09M1255 Vol 2 – SYD09/00603 dated 12 May 2011) is to be implemented to the satisfaction of the Roads & Traffic Authority.

 

6.22   The temporary on-site detention system and erosion and sediment control system shall be maintained by the person with the benefit of the development consent until development runoff is diverted into the ultimate water quality / detention system and the temporary system has been decommissioned.  A minimum 12 month maintenance period will apply to the ultimate water quality / detention system when completed.

 

6.23   The site is subject to the provisions of the St Marys Penrith Planning Agreement, as amended. The applicant is reminded of the obligations under the Planning Agreement with regard to the delivery of certain infrastructure and services as part of the development of the Western Precinct. All works shall be carried out in accordance with the requirements of the St Marys Penrith Planning Agreement, as amended.

 

6.24   The site is subject to the provisions of the St Marys Development Agreement. The applicant is reminded of the obligations under the Development Agreement with regard to the delivery of certain infrastructure and services as part of the development of the Western Precinct. All works shall be carried out in accordance with the requirements of the St Marys Development Agreement, as amended. The provision of affordable housing lots shall be made to the Centre for Affordable Housing in accordance with Clause 17 of the Development Agreement.

 

6.25   An arborist report relating to the trees proposed to be retained shall be submitted and approved prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.  The arborist report shall include consideration of the proposed extend of cut and fill works to confirm whether the trees can be retained on the site.  The report should also specify tree protection measures to ensure that the trees proposed for retention have the best possible chance of surviving the proposed works.  

 

6.26   The proposed street tree planting plan is to be revised to incorporate an informal street tree arrangement.  Details are to be submitted and approved prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate. 

 

6.27   The existing tree schedule (attached to the Tree Plan) provided with this application is to be updated to include justification to substantiate the proposed removal of all trees.  These further details must be submitted to Council for consideration and approval prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate. 

 

7.    Development Application DA11/0516 for Subdivision of the Western Precinct, St Marys Release Area (Jordan Springs) – Lot 1036 DP 1149525, (Nos. 1070 - 1170) The Northern Road, Llandilo be approved subject to the following conditions:

 

7.1     A001        Approved plans

A005        Integrated approval authority’s consent

A042        Asset protection zones in bush fire areas

A044        Compliance with NSW Rural Fire Service GTAs

A046        Obtain Construction Certificate before commencement of works

B004        Dust

B005        Mud/soil

C003        Uncovering relics

D001        Sediment and erosion control measures

D002        Spray grass

D005        No filling without prior approval

D06A       Validation of fill material

D009        Covering of waste storage area

D010        Appropriate disposal of excavated or other waste

D013        Traffic noise and acoustic report

D014        Plant and equipment noise

G001        Installation of services and service clearances

G002        Section 73

G004        Integral Energy clearance

H01F       Stamped plans and erection of site notice

H002        Provision of site facilities prior to commencement of construction works

H012        Site classification

H041        Hours of construction work

K101        Works at no cost to Council

K201        Sediment and erosion control

K202        Roads Act

K205        CC for subdivision works

K206        Road design criteria table

K207        Road safety audit

K213        Water quality

K224        Inter-allotment drainage

K225        Bus stops

K301        Sediment and erosion control - installation

K304        Matters to be addressed prior to commencement of subdivision works

K401        Erosion and sediment control – during construction

K404        Services - underground

K405        Street lighting

K406        Drainage connection

K407        Major filling

K408        Soil testing

K503        Stormwater compliance    

K504        Restriction to user and positive covenant

K507        Line marking and signage

K510        Street signs

K511        Bond for final wearing course

K513        Maintenance bond

K514        Subdivision compliance documentation

L001        Approved landscaping plans

L002        Landscaping construction

L003        Landscaping report requirements

L005        Planting of plant material

L006        Australian Standard landscaping requirements

L007        Tree protection measures

L008        Tree Preservation Order

L009        Tree preservation order

M001       Prior to subdivision work

M007       Street lighting

M008       Linen plan

M009       88B Instrument

M011       Soil testing

M013       Street trees

M014       Surveyors Certificate

P001        Costs

P002        Fees associated with Council land

Q001        Notice of commencement and appointment of PCA

Q008        Subdivision Certificate

 

7.2     The following aspect in relation to Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CTPED) principles should incorporated into the development:

 

Lighting

·    All street lighting shall be designed in accordance with Council’s Public Domain Lighting Policy, and in accordance with Integral Energy standards and requirements.

·    All pedestrian and cycle networks and bus stops shall be well lit in accordance with the abovementioned standards.

·    Lighting should take into account all vegetation and landscaping that may act as an entrapment spot or obscure the effectiveness of the lighting.

·    Lighting should be consistent in order to reduce the contrast between shadows and illuminated areas.

·    Lighting should have a wide beam of illumination, which reaches the beam of the next light, or the perimeter of the site or area being traversed.

 

Landscaping

·    Street Tree planting and planting along pedestrian / cycle pathways should promote passive surveillance and clear lines of sight. Any trees should have a high canopy so as not to provide concealment opportunities. Dense shrubs and heavy undergrowth should be avoided along the pathways.

·    The pedestrian / cycle pathways will be marked and signposted to clearly delineate which portion of the pathway should be used by pedestrians, and which should be used by cyclists.

·    Trees within public reserve areas must also have a high canopy and minimal undergrowth to enable passive surveillance, promote clear lines of sight and reduce entrapment spots. Dense shrubs must be avoided.

 

7.3     The soil salinity management measures outlined within the Western Precinct Plan must be implemented during construction.  The measures and recommendations outlined by Geotech Testing Pty Ltd in their correspondence dated 8 March 2010 (Ref: 7508/23-AA Final Revised) are also to be adopted and implemented as a part of the development.

 

7.4     The development shall be carried out in accordance with the procedures set out in the Western Precinct Contamination Management Plan and the conditions and procedures set out in the Site Audit Statements relating to the Western Precinct.

 

7.5     Dust suppression techniques are to be employed during construction to reduce any potential nuisances to surrounding properties.

 

7.6     All soil material stockpiled for future use on the site is to be stored in such a manner so as to minimise dust.

 

7.7     No work associated with this development is to be undertaken in the vicinity of the existing bitumen road located in the south east of the site until such time as an EPA Accredited Site Auditor has issued a Site Audit Statement for the area, it has been deemed suitable for its intended use, and the Site Audit Statement has been submitted to Council.

 

7.8     Corner lots need to be designed to ensure that the driveway is located a minimum of 6 metres from the tangent point of the intersection to comply with the Australian Standards 2890.

 

7.9     All sites are to be benched in the subdivision to limit cut and fill to be minimal on the site and negate the need for retaining walls.

 

7.10   Those proposed lots will zero allotments need to be identified in the 88b instrument. The lots need to be benched to ensure that no earthworks are required within the easement so that access for maintenance is not hindered by varying ground level. Alternatively, the dwellings need to be designed with dropped edge beams to contain the cut and fill and ensure that the easement remains at a natural ground level after the construction of a dwelling at zero allotment.

 

7.11   All RTA conditions are to be applied received from the SRDAC reference ID 09M1255v10-11, ID 09M1255 v6-9 and ID 09M1255 vol 2 –SYD09/00603.

 

7.12   Pedestrian, bus and cycle facilities are to be consistent with the Development Control Strategy.

 

7.13   All bicycle path construction is to be in accordance with the relevant provisions of the RTA’s NSW Bicycle Guidelines and AUSTROADS Guide to Traffic Engineering Practice – Part 14 Bicycles.

 

7.14   The conditions outlined in the Bush Fire Safety Authority issued by the NSW Rural   Fire Services dated 22 June 2011, shall be incorporated into the development where applicable.

 

7.15   All works/regulatory signposting associated with the proposed development are to be at no cost to the Roads & Traffic Authority.

 

7.16   Temporary on-site detention and erosion and sediment control basins shall be provided generally on accordance with the concept plans lodged for the development approval prepared by J Wyndham Prince, reference number 9111, sheets DA40 – DA48, revision F, dated 17/05/2011.

 

Engineering plans and supporting calculations for the on-site detention system are to be prepared by a qualified Hydrologic/Hydraulic Engineer and shall accompany the application for a Construction Certificate.

 

An operation and maintenance manual shall be approved by the Certifying Authority as part of the Construction Certificate documentation.

 

Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate the Certifying Authority shall ensure that the on-site detention system has been designed in accordance with Penrith City Council’s Design and Construction Guidelines and Construction Specification for Civil Works.

 

7.17   Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate a Construction Traffic Management Plan detailing construction vehicle routes, number of trucks, hours of operation, access arrangements and traffic control shall be submitted to Penrith City Council.

 

7.18   Prior to the issue of a Subdivision Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority shall ensure that all works relating to the utility service lead in works within public road reserves have been inspected and approved by Penrith City Council.

 

7.19   Prior to the issue of the Subdivision Certificate street trees are to be planted in accordance with the street tree plan numbered WP V2c STP Issue D dated 20/05/2011.

 

Prior to the planting of street trees, the street tree plan, plant species and location are to be approved by Penrith City Council.  In this regard, please contact Council’s Development Services Unit on 4732 7777.

 

7.20   Prior to the issue of a Subdivision Certificate all subdivision works in Village 2A &2B are to be completed to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

7.21   Prior to the issue of a Subdivision Certificate the ultimate signalised treatment of the intersection of The Northern Road / Jordan Springs Boulevard (refer to RTA correspondence reference ID 09M1255 Vol 2 – SYD09/00603 dated 12 May 2011) is to be implemented to the satisfaction of the Roads & Traffic Authority.

 

7.22   The temporary on-site detention system and erosion and sediment control system shall be maintained by the person with the benefit of the development consent until development runoff is diverted into the ultimate water quality / detention system and the temporary system has been decommissioned.  A minimum 12 month maintenance period will apply to the ultimate water quality / detention system when completed.

 

7.23   The site is subject to the provisions of the St Marys Penrith Planning Agreement, as amended. The applicant is reminded of the obligations under the Planning Agreement with regard to the delivery of certain infrastructure and services as part of the development of the Western Precinct. All works shall be carried out in accordance with the requirements of the St Marys Penrith Planning Agreement, as amended.

 

7.24   The site is subject to the provisions of the St Marys Development Agreement. The applicant is reminded of the obligations under the Development Agreement with regard to the delivery of certain infrastructure and services as part of the development of the Western Precinct. All works shall be carried out in accordance with the requirements of the St Marys Development Agreement, as amended. The provision of affordable housing lots shall be made to the Centre for Affordable Housing in accordance with Clause 17 of the Development Agreement.

 

7.25   An arborist report relating to the trees proposed to be retained shall be submitted and approved prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.  The arborist report shall include consideration of the proposed extend of cut and fill works to confirm whether the trees can be retained on the site.  The report should also specify tree protection measures to ensure that the trees proposed for retention have the best possible chance of surviving the proposed works. 

 

7.26   The proposed street tree planting plan is to be revised to incorporate an informal street tree arrangement.  Details are to be submitted and approved prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate. 

 

7.27   The existing tree schedule (attached to the Tree Plan) provided with this application is to be updated to include justification to substantiate the proposed removal of all trees.  These further details must be submitted to Council for consideration and approval prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate. 

 

8.    Development Application DA11/0517 for Subdivision of the Western Precinct, St Marys Release Area (Jordan Springs) – Lot 1036 DP 1149525, (Nos. 1070 - 1170) The Northern Road, Llandilo be approved subject to the following conditions:

 

8.1     A001        Approved plans

A005        Integrated approval authority’s consent

A042        Asset protection zones in bush fire areas

A044        Compliance with NSW Rural Fire Service GTAs

A046        Obtain Construction Certificate before commencement of works

B004        Dust

B005        Mud/soil

C003        Uncovering relics

D001        Sediment and erosion control measures

D002        Spray grass

D005        No filling without prior approval

D06A       Validation of fill material

D009        Covering of waste storage area

D010        Appropriate disposal of excavated or other waste

D013        Traffic noise and acoustic report

D014        Plant and equipment noise

G001        Installation of services and service clearances

G002        Section 73

G004        Integral Energy clearance

H01F       Stamped plans and erection of site notice

H002        Provision of site facilities prior to commencement of construction works

H012        Site classification

H041        Hours of construction work

K101        Works at no cost to Council

K201        Sediment and erosion control

K202        Roads Act

K205        CC for subdivision works

K206        Road design criteria

K207        Road safety audit

K213        Water quality

K224        Inter-allotment drainage

K225        Bus stops

K301        Sediment and erosion control - installation

K304        Matters to be addressed prior to commencement of subdivision works

K401        Erosion and sediment control – during construction

K404        Services - underground

K405        Street lighting

K406        Drainage connection

K407        Major filling

K408        Soil testing

K503        Stormwater compliance

K504        Restriction to user and positive covenant

K507        Line marking and signage

K510        Street signs

K511        Bond for wearing course

K513        Maintenance bond

K514        Subdivision compliance documentation

L001        Approved landscaping plans

L002        Landscaping construction

L003        Landscaping report requirements

L005        Planting of plant material

L006        Australian Standard landscaping requirements

L007        Tree protection measures

L008        Tree Preservation Order

L009        Tree preservation order

M001       Prior to subdivision work

M007       Street lighting

M008       Linen plan

M009       88B Instrument

M011       Soil testing

M013       Street trees

M014       Surveyors Certificate

P001        Costs

P002        Fees associated with Council land

Q001        Notice of commencement and appointment of PCA

Q008        Subdivision Certificate

 

8.2     The following aspect in relation to Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CTPED) principles should incorporated into the development:

 

Lighting

·    All street lighting shall be designed in accordance with Council’s Public Domain Lighting Policy, and in accordance with Integral Energy standards and requirements.

·    All pedestrian and cycle networks and bus stops shall be well lit in accordance with the abovementioned standards.

·    Lighting should take into account all vegetation and landscaping that may act as an entrapment spot or obscure the effectiveness of the lighting.

·    Lighting should be consistent in order to reduce the contrast between shadows and illuminated areas.

·    Lighting should have a wide beam of illumination, which reaches the beam of the next light, or the perimeter of the site or area being traversed.

 

Landscaping

·    Street Tree planting and planting along pedestrian / cycle pathways should promote passive surveillance and clear lines of sight. Any trees should have a high canopy so as not to provide concealment opportunities. Dense shrubs and heavy undergrowth should be avoided along the pathways.

·    The pedestrian / cycle pathways will be marked and signposted to clearly delineate which portion of the pathway should be used by pedestrians, and which should be used by cyclists.

·    Trees within public reserve areas must also have a high canopy and minimal undergrowth to enable passive surveillance, promote clear lines of sight and reduce entrapment spots. Dense shrubs must be avoided.

 

8.3     The soil salinity management measures outlined within the Western Precinct Plan must be implemented during construction.  The measures and recommendations outlined by Geotech Testing Pty Ltd in their correspondence dated 8 March 2010 (Ref: 7508/23-AA Final Revised) are also to be adopted and implemented as a part of the development.

 

8.4     The development shall be carried out in accordance with the procedures set out in the Western Precinct Contamination Management Plan and the conditions and procedures set out in the Site Audit Statements relating to the Western Precinct.

 

8.5     Dust suppression techniques are to be employed during construction to reduce any potential nuisances to surrounding properties.

 

8.6     All soil material stockpiled for future use on the site is to be stored in such a manner so as to minimise dust.

 

8.7     Corner lots need to be designed to ensure that the driveway is located a minimum of 6 metres from the tangent point of the intersection to comply with the Australian Standards 2890.

 

8.8     All sites are to be benched in the subdivision to limit cut and fill to be minimal on the site and negate the need for retaining walls.

 

8.9     Those proposed lots will zero allotments need to be identified in the 88b instrument. The lots need to be benched to ensure that no earthworks are required within the easement so that access for maintenance is not hindered by varying ground level. Alternatively, the dwellings need to be designed with dropped edge beams to contain the cut and fill and ensure that the easement remains at a natural ground level after the construction of a dwelling at zero allotment.

 

8.10   All RTA conditions are to be applied received from the SRDAC reference ID 09M1255v10-11, ID 09M1255 v6-9 and ID 09M1255 vol 2 –SYD09/00603.

 

8.11   Pedestrian, bus and cycle facilities are to be consistent with the Development Control Strategy.

 

8.12   All bicycle path construction is to be in accordance with the relevant provisions of the RTA’s NSW Bicycle Guidelines and AUSTROADS Guide to Traffic Engineering Practice – Part 14 Bicycles.

 

8.13   The conditions outlined in the Bush Fire Safety Authority issued by the NSW Rural   Fire Services dated 22 June 2011, shall be incorporated into the development where applicable.

 

8.14   All works/regulatory signposting associated with the proposed development are to be at no cost to the Roads & Traffic Authority.

 

8.15   Temporary on-site detention and erosion and sediment control basins shall be provided generally on accordance with the concept plans lodged for the development approval prepared by J Wyndham Prince, reference number 9111, sheets DA50 – DA56, revision B, dated 17/05/2011.

 

Engineering plans and supporting calculations for the on-site detention system are to be prepared by a qualified Hydrologic/Hydraulic Engineer and shall accompany the application for a Construction Certificate.

 

An operation and maintenance manual shall be approved by the Certifying Authority as part of the Construction Certificate documentation.

 

Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate the Certifying Authority shall ensure that the on-site detention system has been designed in accordance with Penrith City Council’s Design and Construction Guidelines and Construction Specification for Civil Works.

 

8.16   Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate a Construction Traffic Management Plan detailing construction vehicle routes, number of trucks, hours of operation, access arrangements and traffic control shall be submitted to Penrith City Council.

 

8.17   Prior to the issue of a Subdivision Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority shall ensure that all works relating to the utility service lead in works within public road reserves have been inspected and approved by Penrith City Council.

 

8.18   Prior to the issue of the Subdivision Certificate street trees are to be planted in accordance with the street tree plan numbered WP V2d STP Issue B dated 20/05/2011.

 

Prior to the planting of street trees, the street tree plan, plant species and location are to be approved by Penrith City Council.  In this regard, please contact Council’s Development Services Unit on 4732 7777.

 

8.19   Prior to the issue of a Subdivision Certificate all subdivision works in Village 2A are to be completed to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

8.20   Prior to the issue of a Subdivision Certificate the ultimate signalised treatment of the intersection of The Northern Road / Jordan Springs Boulevard (refer to RTA correspondence reference ID 09M1255 Vol 2 – SYD09/00603 dated 12 May 2011) is to be implemented to the satisfaction of the Roads & Traffic Authority.

 

8.21   The temporary on-site detention system and erosion and sediment control system shall be maintained by the person with the benefit of the development consent until development runoff is diverted into the ultimate water quality / detention system and the temporary system has been decommissioned.  A minimum 12 month maintenance period will apply to the ultimate water quality / detention system when completed.

 

8.22   The site is subject to the provisions of the St Marys Penrith Planning Agreement, as amended. The applicant is reminded of the obligations under the Planning Agreement with regard to the delivery of certain infrastructure and services as part of the development of the Western Precinct. All works shall be carried out in accordance with the requirements of the St Marys Penrith Planning Agreement, as amended.

 

8.23   The site is subject to the provisions of the St Marys Development Agreement. The applicant is reminded of the obligations under the Development Agreement with regard to the delivery of certain infrastructure and services as part of the development of the Western Precinct. All works shall be carried out in accordance with the requirements of the St Marys Development Agreement, as amended. The provision of affordable housing lots shall be made to the Centre for Affordable Housing in accordance with Clause 17 of the Development Agreement.

 

8.24   An arborist report relating to the trees proposed to be retained shall be submitted and approved prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.  The arborist report shall include consideration of the proposed extend of cut and fill works to confirm whether the trees can be retained on the site.  The report should also specify tree protection measures to ensure that the trees proposed for retention have the best possible chance of surviving the proposed works.  

 

8.25   The existing tree schedule (attached to the Tree Plan) provided with this application is to be updated to include justification to substantiate the proposed removal of all trees.  These further details must be submitted to Council for consideration and approval prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate. 

 

9.    Those who made a submission be advised of Council’s decision.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1.  

Locality Plan

1 Page

Appendix

2.  

Subdivision Plans

6 Pages

Appendix

3. View

Response to submissions

18 Pages

Attachment

  


Ordinary Meeting                                                                                                                15 August 2011

Appendix 1 - Locality Plan

 

temp


Ordinary Meeting                                                                                                                15 August 2011

Appendix 2 - Subdivision Plans

 

temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp

 


A Green City

 

Item                                                                                                                                                Page

 

12      Council Wins 2011 Waste Minimisation Award                                                            165

 

13      Penrith Stormwater Harvesting and Managed Aquifer Recharge Project - Public Tender for Design & Investigation

         

 

 



Ordinary Meeting                                                                                                15 August 2011

A Green City

 

 

12

Council Wins 2011 Waste Minimisation Award    

 

Compiled by:               Aisha Poole, Waste Education Officer

Authorised by:            Tracy Chalk, Waste and Community Protection Manager   

 

Objective

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

Community Outcome

A City with a smaller ecological footprint (12)

Strategic Response

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

       

 

Executive Summary

Penrith City Council has won the 2011 Keep Australia Beautiful Sustainable Cities Award for Waste Minimisation.  This prestigious award program further recognises the Penrith community’s leadership in resource recovery from the domestic waste stream.

 

The award joins others previously received from the Waste Management Association of Australia, Australia’s peak waste industry association and the Local Government Managers Association.

Background

Penrith City Council was announced the 2011 winner of the Waste Minimisation Award at this year’s Sustainable Cities Awards night. The awards, run by Keep Australia Beautiful, were held on Thursday, 28 July 2011 at the Pennant Hills Golf Club. Penrith City Council was represented by Waste and Community Protection Manager, Tracy Chalk and Waste Education Officer, Amanda Morahan.

 

OzHarvest was awarded the Runner Up prize in this category for their work rescuing excess food from businesses and delivering it to people in need. Randwick City Council was awarded a Highly Commended award for their ‘Compost Revolution’ backyard composting program.

 

Council won this award in recognition of the high volume of organic waste diverted from landfill and recycled into compost and subsequent community ‘awakening’ to the waste issue resulting from the introduction of the three bin waste service.  Council’s Waste Services and the full organics collection, composting and reuse program has been previously recognised by the Waste Management Association of Australia in 2007, winning the “Most innovative use of compost in local government operations” and again in 2009, winning the “Most progressive recycled organics purchasing policy program” award.  Council was awarded Highly Commended at the 2010 Local Government Managers Association Awards with a High Commendation in the “Excellence in Sustainability” category for the 3-bin waste service.

 

Penrith Council is viewed as a leading Council in domestic resource recovery and is also in the running for awards at the Compost Australia Leadership Awards being announced on 26 August 2011.

 

Council continues to work with the community to meet the ongoing challenges of resource recovery.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That the information contained in the report on Council Wins 2011 Waste Minimisation Award be received.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Meeting                                                                                                15 August 2011

A Green City

 

 

13

Penrith Stormwater Harvesting and Managed Aquifer Recharge Project - Public Tender for Design & Investigation   

 

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

Craig Ross, Major Projects Manager

Authorised by:            Wayne Mitchell, Group Manager - City Infrastructure   

 

Objective

Our natural habitats are healthy

Community Outcome

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

Strategic Response

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

       

 

Executive Summary

Council previously supported the submission of the Blacktown City Council and Penrith City Council Managed Aquifer Recharge Project proposal to the Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts to secure the opportunity for 50% funding of the $3.8M Penrith component and a combined total project of $8.25M.

 

Council officers have been successful in negotiating with the Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (DSEWPC) (Formally Department Environment Water Heritage and the Arts) to consider releasing funding in the amount of $1,981,000 for the works within the Penrith.

 

Council Officers have also been successful in securing a further grant funding offer through the NSW Office of Water (NOW) for additional funding from the State Government to support this project. With a co-contribution from Council of $781,000, a total project budget of $3,962,000 is expected to be available for the proposed Penrith Stormwater Harvesting and Managed Aquifer Recharge Scheme.

 

To accelerate the achievement of milestones as noted in the funding agreements Council Officers have concurrently called for public tenders to undertake the site investigation, concept design, risk assessment and detailed design for the Stormwater Harvesting and Managed Aquifer Recharge Project.

 

Four conforming tenders were received from following design consultants;

 

MWH Australia Pty Ltd

SMEC Australia Pty Ltd

Kellogg Brown & Root Pty Ltd

Brown Consulting (NSW) Pty Ltd

 

The report provides an assessment of the design tender submissions received and recommends that a contract be awarded to the Kellogg Brown & Root Pty Ltd as detailed in the report.

Background

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

 

Previous reports have been provided to Council regarding the grant and the proposed Managed Aquifer Recharge (MAR) Project at its Ordinary Meeting on 1 February 2010, Policy Review Committee on the 22 November 2010 and Ordinary Meeting on 7 February 2011.  In summary, the reports introduced the project, the grant and a further funding opportunity through the NSW Office of Water (NOW) which would provide additional funding from the State Government to support this project.

 

Council’s Ordinary Meeting on 7 February 2011 adopted the recommendations that:

 

1.     The information contained in the report on Penrith Stormwater Harvesting and Managed Aquifer Recharge Project - Public Tender for Design & Investigation be received

2.     Subject to grant funding of $2,200,000 through the NSW Office of Water, Council support the acceptance of the grant from DSEWPC on the basis of the grant and funding agreement incorporating:

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

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

3.     Subject to approval by NSW Office of Water of the application for grant funding of $2,200,000, Council accept that grant funding subject to the favourable detailed design, costing and risk assessment to be undertaken in Stage 1 of the project

4.     The Common Seal of the Council of the City of Penrith be affixed to any necessary documentation.

 

The funding agreement with the DSEWPC has been developed and ready for execution by DSEWPC.   The agreement incorporates first stage funding allocation to undertake the required, site investigation, detailed design, costing and risk assessment and second stage provision of funding for progression of the project to construction stage subject to a favourable confirmation of costs and a satisfactory risk assessment being confirmed by Council.

 

The funding agreement with the NOW was developed and returned for execution.  Following changes in the administrative structure within the NOW, the funding agreement was returned to Council with the funding agreements now required to be with the Department of Finance and Services (DFS).  The updated funding agreement has been reviewed returned to the DFS and we are waiting on their execution of the funding agreement. 

 

Current Status

The Request for Tenders (RFT 24-10/11) was called to undertake the test drilling and pumping tests, and report on the aquifer viability in the first instance together with report on the risks assessment. Prices for concept design and the detailed design were requested for the next stage with appropriate environmental assessments. The tenders were called to comply with the National Code of Practice for the Construction Industry (Code) and compliance with the Australian Government Implementation Guidelines for the Code, which are prerequisites to the Commonwealth funding. The tender procedures contained in the Local Government Act 1993 were also complied with.

 

The project construction stage is subject to the satisfactory outcome of the site investigation, concept design and risk assessment stage to the satisfaction of the DSEWPC.  Initial drilling and pumping investigations are subject to the approval conditions of the NSW Office of Water. A milestone budget of $564,000 was considered in the draft Business Case submitted to the DSEWPC for this investigation.

 

Next stage design component was budgeted to be $440,000, which includes the concept design and construction documentation. Construction of the stormwater harvesting scheme and aquifer storage and recovery component will be subject to a further public tender.

 

The Request for Tender (RFT 24 -10/11) was advertised in the Western Weekender (Council Page & Mayoral Message) on 10 June 2011 and in the Tender Section of Sydney Morning Herald on 14 June 2011 and 21 June 2011. The Tender was also placed on the e-Tendering web site and the tender closed at 10.00 am on Tuesday, 12 July 2011.

 

Prospective design and risk assessment consultants were required to submit tender submissions on a standard pro-forma sheet, which clearly identified the required response against each of the evaluation criteria. Four submissions were received from the following design consultants with prices (excluding GST) shown in the table below.

 

 

Main design consultant

 

 

Fixed Lump Sum for each stage

without construction supervision

Construction

stage cost & provisional items.

Total price with provisional items (Ex GST)

 

 

Test drilling, pumping tests & reporting

Survey, concept design, REF & business case

Detailed design & tender document

MWH Australia Pty Ltd

$492,200

$300,900

$405,000

$179,300

$1,377,400

SMEC Australia Pty Ltd

$380,786

$163,375

$234,474

$142,825

$921,460

Kellogg Brown & Root Pty Ltd

$367,897

$173,978

$127,192

$249,954

$919,021

Brown Consulting (NSW) Pty Ltd

$239,390

$217,200

$158,470

$335,000

$950,060

Note: Prices reflect a 30 day pump test other than Brown Consulting which has a 1 day test.

Tender Evaluation

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

 

The Tender Evaluation Panel consisted of Ari Fernando (Major Projects & Design Coordinator), Ben Gibbons (Civil Designer), Ben Rodwell (Acting Supply Coordinator) and Tim Gowing (Senior Water Management Officer).  Graham Liehr (Environmental Health Manager) represented the Client and ensured that the appropriate evaluation process was followed.

Evaluation Process

The process of evaluating all valid responses included the following;

 

·    Compliance with the pro-forma submission requirements

·    Relevant experience on similar projects including aquifer recharge projects

·    Organisational capability  assessment based on the tender evaluation criteria

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

Evaluation Criteria

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

 

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

·    Current commitment on similar projects,

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

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

·    Details of the Insurance Policies,

·    Provision of detailed project program,

·    Tender pricing for each stage of activity

·    Methodology proposed by the consultants

·    Corporate knowledge of the companies on aquifer recharge and recovery projects

Responses Received for each Project Component

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

 

·    Site investigation, preliminary concept plan & risk assessment

·    Detailed Design, Review of Environmental Factors and Construction Specifications

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

Evaluation of Tender Responses

The tender assessment panel assessed the four tenders that were submitted before tender closing time of 10.00am on 12 July 2011. All four submissions contained the required tender submission documents appropriately completed and evidence provided as requested. Where the submitted methodology was not clear, additional information wa