5 April 2012

 

Dear Councillor,

In pursuance of the provisions of the Local Government Act, 1993 and the Regulations thereunder, notice is hereby given that an EXTRAORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING of Penrith City Council is to be held in the Council Chambers, Civic Centre, 601 High Street, Penrith on Wednesday 11 April 2012 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 - 26 March 2012.

 

4.           DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

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

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

 

5.           ADDRESSING COUNCIL

 

6.           MAYORAL MINUTES

 

7.           NOTICES OF MOTION TO RESCIND A RESOLUTION

 

8.           NOTICES OF MOTION AND QUESTIONS ON NOTICE

 

9.           ADOPTION OF REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATION OF COMMITTEES

 

10.         DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS

 

11.         REQUESTS FOR REPORTS AND MEMORANDUMS

 

12.         URGENT BUSINESS

 

13.         COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE


EXTRAORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

 

Wednesday 11 April 2012

 

table of contents

 

 

 

 

ADVANCE AUSTRALIA FAIR

 

 

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

 

 

PRAYER

 

 

COUNCIL CHAMBER seating arrangements

 

 

meeting calendar

 

 

confirmation of minutes

 

 

PROCEDURE FOR ADDRESSING COUNCIL MEETING

 

 

MAYORAL MINUTES

 

 

report and recommendations of committees

 

 

DELIVERY program reports


 

ADVANCE AUSTRALIA FAIR

 

 

 

Australians all let us rejoice,

For we are young and free;

We’ve golden soil and wealth for toil;

Our home is girt by sea;

Our land abounds in nature’s gifts

Of beauty rich and rare;

In history’s page, let every stage

Advance Australia Fair.

 

In joyful strains then let us sing,

Advance Australia Fair.

 

Beneath our radiant Southern Cross

We’ll toil with hearts and hands;

To make this Commonwealth of ours

Renowned of all the lands;

For those who’ve come across the seas

We’ve boundless plains to share;

With courage let us all combine

To Advance Australia Fair.

 

In joyful strains then let us sing,

Advance Australia Fair.

 



Statement of Recognition of Penrith City’s

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Cultural Heritage

 

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

 

 

PRAYER

 

 

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

 

 

 

 


For members of the public addressing the meeting

 
Council Chambers

Text Box: Lectern

Group Managers                          

                
          

 
Seating Arrangements

 

 

 

Director
Craig Butler

 

 

Director
Barry Husking

 

 

 

General Manager
Alan Stoneham

His Worship the Mayor
Councillor
Greg Davies
East Ward

 

Senior Governance Officer
Glenn Schuil

 

 

Minute Clerk

 

 

 

 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 


                                                        

 

 

Text Box: Public Gallery
Text Box: Managers
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Group Managers                          

                
          

 
   


B&WHORIZ2012 MEETING CALENDAR

January 2012 - December 2012

(adopted by Council on 21 November 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

 

6

5

11&

 

 

9

20#@

3ü

15∞

5

10

(7.00pm)

 

20#@

26

23v

21#

25*

23

 

24^\

(7.00pm)

 

19#

 

Policy Review Committee

7.00pm

 

 

 

 

7

4

2

13

 

 

 

3

 

13

19

16

 

 

30

 

 

8

12

 

Operational Plan Public Forum

 

6.00pm

 

 

 

 

Wed

28

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 v

Meeting at which the Draft Operational Plan for 2012-2013 is endorsed for exhibition

 *

Meeting at which the Operational Plan for 2012-2013 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 2011-2012 Annual Statements are presented

 

Meeting at which any comments on the 2011-2012 Annual Statements are presented

\

The opportunity may be taken to move this meeting to the 17 September 2012, should the election result be declared early.

&

Extraordinary Meeting

 

The Ordinary Council Election will be held on 8 September 2012

-            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 26 MARCH 2012 AT 7:36PM

NATIONAL ANTHEM 

The meeting opened with the National Anthem.

STATEMENT OF RECOGNITION

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

PRAYER

The Council Prayer was read by Rev. Neil Checkley.

PRESENT

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

 

LEAVE OF ABSENCE

Leave of Absence was previously granted to Councillor Jim Aitken OAM for the period 19 March 2012 to 7 April 2012 inclusive.

57  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ross Fowler OAM seconded Councillor John Thain that Leave of Absence be granted to Councillor Jim Aitken OAM for the period 16 April 2012 to 11 May 2012 inclusive.

 

APOLOGIES

58  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ross Fowler OAM seconded Councillor Mark Davies that an apology be received from Councillor Robert Ardill.

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES - Ordinary Meeting - 5 March 2012

59  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ross Fowler OAM seconded Councillor Marko Malkoc that the minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of 5 March 2012 be confirmed.

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

There were no declarations of interest.


  Mayoral Minutes

 

1        Congratulations on successful Working Truck Show 2012

60  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Jackie Greenow  that the Mayoral Minute on Congratulations on successful Working Truck Show 2012 be received.

 

Reports of Committees

 

1        Report and Recommendations the Access Committee Meeting held on 8 February 2012    

61  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jackie Greenow seconded Councillor Prue Guillaume that the recommendations contained in the Report and Recommendations of the Access Committee meeting held on 8 February, 2012 be adopted.

 

2        Report and Recommendations of the Local Traffic Committee Meeting held on 5 March 2012                                                                                                                                     

62  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Karen McKeown seconded Councillor Marko Malkoc that the recommendations contained in the Report and Recommendations of the Local Traffic Committee meeting held on 5 March, 2012 be adopted.

 

3        Report and Recommendations of the Policy Review Committee Meeting held on 19 March 2012                                                                                                                                     

63  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ben Goldfinch seconded Councillor Mark Davies that the recommendations contained in the Report and Recommendations of the Policy Review Committee meeting held on 19 March, 2012 be adopted.

 

DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS

 

A Leading City

 

1        Property Matter - Proposed Sale of the Former Scrap Metal Yard 141-151 High Street, Penrith                                                                                                                                

64  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Mark Davies seconded Councillor Ben Goldfinch

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Property Matter - Proposed Sale of the Former Scrap Metal Yard 141-151 High Street, Penrith) be received.

2.     Prominent Real Estate Agents be appointed in accordance with Council’s Procurement Policy to call an “Expression of Interest” over the sale of the former Scrap Metal Site and adjoining site.

3.     A further report be presented to Council following the “Expression of Interest”.

 

5        2011-12 Borrowing Program                                                                                            

65  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Mark Davies seconded Councillor Ben Goldfinch

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on 2011-12 Borrowing Program be received.

2.     Council borrow the amount of $8,263,000 on a 10 or 15 year repayment schedule.

3.     Council’s General Manager be given delegated authority to negotiate the loans in accordance with this resolution.

4.     The Common Seal of the Council of the City of Penrith be affixed to those documents that are necessary to finalise these borrowings.

5.     The final terms and conditions of the borrowings be reported to Council upon completion of the contracts.

 

 

6        Summary of Investments and Banking for the period 1 February to 29 February 2012     

66  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Mark Davies seconded Councillor Ben Goldfinch

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Summary of Investments and Banking for the period 1 February to 29 February 2012 be received.

2.     The Certificate of the Responsible Accounting Officer and Summaries of Investments and Performance for the period 1 February 2012 to 29 February 2012 be noted and accepted.

3.     The graphical investment analysis as at 29 February 2012 be noted.

 

 

2        Panthers Planning Proposal                                                                                             

67  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ben Goldfinch seconded Councillor Ross Fowler OAM

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Panthers Planning Proposal be received.

2.     Council endorse the changes made to the Panthers Penrith Planning Proposal as shown in Attachment 3.

3.     The General Manager be granted delegation to make any necessary minor changes required to the Planning Proposal before submitting it to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure.

4.     The Panthers Penrith Planning Proposal, as amended and attached (Attachment 4 provided separately to Councillors on CD and available on Council’s website ), be forwarded to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure after a Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA) for the provision of State road infrastructure and a separate VPA for the ongoing management of the outlet centre is signed by the proponent with a request that:

a)        the Minister consider the changes made to the Planning Proposal in response to the public exhibition, and

b)        make a determination as to whether the Planning Proposal is to be re-exhibited in accordance with s58 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

5.     The Minister be requested to make the plan in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, should he determine that re-exhibition and/or independent review and referral of the Planning Proposal to the Planning and Assessment Commission is not required.

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

For

Against

 

Councillor Kaylene Allison

 

Councillor Prue Guillaume

 

Councillor Karen McKeown

 

Councillor Kath Presdee

 

Councillor Greg Davies

 

Councillor John Thain

 

Councillor Jackie Greenow

 

Councillor Marko Malkoc

 

Councillor Ross Fowler OAM

 

Councillor Ben Goldfinch

 

Councillor Mark Davies

 

Councillor Tanya Davies

 

 

3        Funding Options to Provide Suitable Cover for Housing Council's Bennett Wagons

68  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jackie Greenow seconded Councillor Ross Fowler OAM

That:

1.    The information contained in the report on Funding Options to Provide Suitable Cover for Housing Council's Bennett Wagons be received.

2.    A further report be presented to Council at a future Policy Review Committee meeting detailing potential housing options for Council’s Bennett Wagons taking into account any study undertaken regarding the South Creek Corridor Precinct.

 

 

4        Audit Committee                                                                                                                

69  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Kath Presdee seconded Councillor Ross Fowler OAM

That:

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

2.     A letter be sent to Professor Robert Coombes thanking him for his contribution as Chair of the Audit Committee.

3.     Council acknowledge and welcome the appointment of Frank Gelonesi as the new Chairperson of the Audit Committee and Jayant Gulwadi as the new Deputy Chairperson of the Audit Committee.

 

 

A City of Opportunities

 

7        Development Application DA11/1057 for a Secondary Dwelling at Lot 20 DP 258357 (No. 20) Thomas Street, St Marys Applicant: Willco Consulting;  Owner: Allen Greenwood     

70  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ross Fowler OAM seconded Councillor Ben Goldfinch

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Development Application DA11/1057 for a Secondary Dwelling at Lot 20 DP 258357 (No. 20) Thomas Street, St Marys be received.

2.     The SEPP 1 objection for the variation to the rear set back not be supported as the submission was not consistent with the policy.

 

3.     DA11/1057 for a Secondary Dwelling at 20 Thomas Street, St Marys be refused for the following reasons:

 

3.1     The application is not satisfactory for the purpose of Section 79C(1)(a)(i) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 as the proposal does not comply with the following provisions of Penrith Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Urban Land):

 

Clause 6 - The proposed development is inconsistent with the following objectives:

·    to promote the community’s desired character by ensuring that future development in all residential localities reflects features or qualities of traditional detached houses that are surrounded by private gardens

·    to enhance the essential character and identity of established residential areas

·    to promote development which safeguards the residential amenity of the area

·    to provide for high levels of residential amenity, particularly acoustic and visual privacy, accessibility to services, climatic comfort of the indoor environment and safety and security

Clause 9 - The proposed development is inconsistent with the following objectives of the 2b) Low Density:

·    to reinforce the importance of natural landscape settings and areas with heritage conservation values

Clause 12 (3) - The proposal does not demonstrate a     minimum of 50% landscaped area on the site.

Clause 12 (3) - The proposal does not provide a 4 metre rear setback, cannot demonstrate that the rear setback is used for the purposes of landscaped areas and the submitted objection to this standard is not in the required form and is not well founded pursuant to State Environmental Planning Policy No.1 Development Standards (SEPP 1).

 

Clause 14 - The proposal is inconsistent with the following design principles:

·    reflection of the forms, features or qualities of traditional residential neighbourhoods across Penrith local government area,

·    consistency or compatibility with the scale, design and amenity of neighbouring development,

·    provision for contemporary standards of amenity within each dwelling and the associated private open space.

3.2     The application is not satisfactory for the purpose of Section 79C(1)(a)(i) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 as the proposal is not consistent with the provisions of State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 Development Standards.

 

3.3     The application is not satisfactory for the purpose of Section 79C(1)(a)(iii) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 as the proposal does not comply with the following provisions of  Penrith Development Control Plan 2006 – Section 4.3 Residential – Dual Occupancy:

 

Clause 5.3 – the proposal does not comply with the 4m rear setback requirement, there are encroachments within the setback and extensive landscaping has not been incorporated into the design.

 

Clause 5.5 – the proposal has not demonstrated compliance with the landscaping requirements.

 

Clause 6.7 – the proposal has not demonstrated compliance with the garden design requirements.

 

3.4     The application is not satisfactory for the purpose of Section 79C(1)(c) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 as it has not been demonstrated through compliance with the relevant provisions that the site is suitable for the proposed development.

 

3.5     The application is not satisfactory for the purpose of Section 79C(1)(e) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 as the proposal would have a negative impact on the surrounding character of the area and would set an undesirable precedent for non-compliant dual occupancy developments in the locality. Therefore the proposal is not in the public interest.

 

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

For

Against

 

Councillor Kaylene Allison

 

Councillor Prue Guillaume

 

Councillor Karen McKeown

 

Councillor Kath Presdee

 

Councillor Greg Davies

 

Councillor John Thain

 

Councillor Jackie Greenow

 

Councillor Marko Malkoc

 

Councillor Ross Fowler OAM

 

Councillor Ben Goldfinch

 

Councillor Mark Davies

 

Councillor Tanya Davies

 

 

8        Development Application DA11/1095 for a Dan Murphy's Liquor Store at Centro Lennox Shopping Centre Lot 1 DP 610862 Pyramid Street, Emu Plains Applicant: McKenzie Group Consulting;  Owner: CPT Custodian Pty Ltd                                  DA11/1095

71  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Kath Presdee seconded Councillor Marko Malkoc

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Development Application DA11/1095 for a Dan Murphy's Liquor Store at Centro Lennox Shopping Centre Lot 1 DP 610862 Pyramid Street, Emu Plains be received

2.     Development Application DA11/1095 for a Dan Murphy's Liquor Store at Centro Lennox Shopping Centre Lot 1 DP 610862 Pyramid Street, Emu Plains be approved subject to the following conditions:

          Standard Conditions

2.1     A001     Approved plans

A019     Occupation Certificate

A038     Lighting locations

A039     Graffiti

A046     Obtain Construction Certificate before commencement of works

D009     Waste storage

E01A          BCA compliance

E002      Fire exits

E006      Access and sanitary facilities

Special Conditions

2.2     The development is to be carried out and operated in accordance with the documentation contained in the attachment to the Statement of Impact (see Appendix No. 4) lodged with Council addressing the following Strategies as referred to in the document:

1)       Surveillance and Lighting

2)       Territorial Reinforcement

3)       Space/Activity Management

4)       Access Control

2.3     Store management must be available at a mutually convenient time, at the invitation of Penrith City Council and/or the NSW Police, to discuss and take action on any agreed Community Safety, Security or other issues in conjunction with other local stakeholders in the areas should the need arise

2.4     In accordance with the requirements of Clause 94 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000, the following works are to be completed to upgrade the fire safety of the existing building:

(i)         A Fire Hydrant system is to be provided to serve the building in accordance with E1.3 of the BCA and AS 2419.1. A report from a Hydraulic Engineer is to be provided to confirm the suitability of the existing system or whether the street hydrant is sufficient

 

2.5     A Waste Management Plan is to be submitted and approved by Council prior to issue of the Construction Certificate, addressing the following matters:

a)       The types and volumes of wastes and recyclables likely to be generated as a result of the development;

b)      How wastes and recyclables will be stored and treated on site;

c)       How wastes and recyclables are to be disposed of;

d)      How ongoing waste management will operate once the development is complete

 

2.6     The operating hours and delivery and service activities associated with the development are to restricted to from 9 am to 9pm Mondays to Sundays

2.7     The applicant is to submit to Council plans and details for approval of the proposed pedestrian customer /trolley paths from the premises particularly addressing the issue of eliminating pedestrian/ vehicular conflict on the adjacent driveway. The plans are to be submitted and approved prior to issue of the Construction Certificate for the development and are to be implemented as part of the overall development

3.     The individuals who made a submission be advised of Council’s decision and of the consideration given to their concerns.

 

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

For

Against

 

Councillor Kaylene Allison

 

Councillor Prue Guillaume

 

Councillor Karen McKeown

 

Councillor Kath Presdee

 

Councillor Greg Davies

 

Councillor John Thain

 

Councillor Jackie Greenow

 

Councillor Marko Malkoc

 

Councillor Ross Fowler OAM

 

Councillor Ben Goldfinch

 

Councillor Mark Davies

 

Councillor Tanya Davies

 

 

A Liveable City

 

9        Coachmans Park Improvement Project                                                                          

72  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jackie Greenow seconded Councillor Marko Malkoc that consideration of this matter be deferred to a further Ordinary Meeting of Council subject to Council Officers providing additional information regarding the colouring of the bitumen and access issues.

 

A Vibrant City

 

10      Progress on the Implementation of the Women's Services Sector Advocacy Strategy 2009 - 2012                                                                                                                                     

73  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Karen McKeown seconded Councillor Jackie Greenow that the information contained in the report on Progress on the Implementation of the Women's Services Sector Advocacy Strategy 2009 - 2012 be received.

 

Councillor Mark Davies left the meeting, the time being 8:02pm.

Councillor Mark Davies returned to the meeting, the time being 8:03pm.

 

 

REQUESTS FOR REPORTS AND MEMORANDUMS

 

RR 1          ALGWA Conference appointments to the Executive Committee                       

Deputy Mayor, Councillor Jackie Greenow reported to Council that she had been elected to the Executive Committee at the ALGWA Conference and she also congratulated Councillor Karen McKeown and Council Officers Bev Spearpoint and Helen Copper who were also elected to the Executive Committee. Councillor Greenow also advised that Julie Griffiths had been elected as the ALGWA NSW Branch President.

 

RR 2          Footpath construction at William Howell Drive, Glenmore Park                        

Councillor Prue Guillaume requested that the construction of the footpath at William Howell Drive at Glenmore Park be deferred pending a memorandum to South Ward Councillors detailing the background to the issues relating to the construction of the footpath.

 

RR 3          Feasibility of holding a 'New Residents Night'                                                      

Councillor Prue Guillaume requested that a report be presented to Council regarding the feasibility of holding ‘New Resident Nights’ in Penrith. 

 

RR 4          Traffic concerns on Mulgoa Road, Regentville                                                     

Councillor Prue Guillaume requested that a report be presented at a future Local Traffic Committee meeting detailing what the State Government is doing to address the traffic created on Mulgoa Road , Regentville near Spencer Street, as a result of the drivers turning right southbound into the service station.

 

URGENT BUSINESS

 

UB 1          Leave of Absence request                                                                                        

Councillor Kath Presdee requested a Leave of Absence from 22 April 2012 to 27 April 2012 inclusive.                                                                                                                                                                       

74 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Karen McKeown seconded Councillor Jackie Greenow that the matter be brought forward and dealt with as an urgent matter.

 

His Worship the Mayor, Councillor Greg Davies, ruled that the matter was urgent and should be dealt with at the meeting.

 

75  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Karen McKeown seconded Councillor Jackie Greenow that Councillor Kath Presdee be granted Leave of Absence from 22 April 2012 to 27 April 2012 inclusive. 

 

 

Councillor Prue Guillaume left the meeting, the time being 8:09pm.


 

Committee of the Whole

 

1        Presence of the Public

 

CW1 RESOLVED on the motion of Councillor Jackie Greenow seconded Councillor Marko Malkoc that the meeting be closed to the press and the public to discuss Confidential Business as recommended in Item 1 of the report to Committee of the Whole.

 

Councillor Prue Guillaume returned to the meeting, the time being 8:12pm.

 

A Leading City

 

2        Legal Matter - Land and Environment Court ruling, North Western Surveys Pty Ltd v Penrith City Council                                                                                                          

 

This item has been referred to Committee of the Whole as the report refers to advice concerning litigation, or advice that would otherwise be privileged from production in legal proceedings on the ground of legal professional privilege and discussion of the matter in open meeting would be, on balance, contrary to the public interest.

 

 

A Vibrant City

 

3        Legal Matter - Development Application DA10/0402 - Proposed Rural Industry at Lot 18 DP 30265 (No. 1247-1253) Mamre Road, Kemps Creek - Land and Environment Court Proceedings 10943 of 2011  Applicant: Innovation Planning Australia Pty Ltd;  Owner: Eagle Refrigerated Transport Pty Ltd                                                                     DA10/0402

 

This item has been referred to Committee of the Whole as the report refers to information that would, if disclosed, prejudice the maintenance of law and discussion of the matter in open meeting would be, on balance, contrary to the public interest.

 

4        Commercial Matter - Penrith Brand Strategy                                                                

 

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

 

 

The meeting resumed at 8:20pm and the General Manager reported that the Committee of the Whole met at 8:10pm on 26 March 2012, the following being present

 

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

 

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

 

CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS

 

2        Legal Matter - Land and Environment Court ruling, North Western Surveys Pty Ltd v Penrith City Council                                                                                                          

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

CW2 That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Legal Matter - Land and Environment Court ruling, North Western Surveys Pty Ltd v Penrith City Council be received.

2.     Council endorse the actions as described within the report.

3.     Council Officers be congratulated on their actions which led to the outcome.

 

 

3        Legal Matter - Development Application DA10/0402 - Proposed Rural Industry at Lot 18 DP 30265 (No. 1247-1253) Mamre Road, Kemps Creek - Land and Environment Court Proceedings 10943 of 2011  Applicant: Innovation Planning Australia Pty Ltd;  Owner: Eagle Refrigerated Transport Pty Ltd                                                          DA10/0402

RECOMMENDED on the MOTION of Councillor Ross Fowler OAM seconded Councillor Ben Goldfinch

          CW3 That the information contained in the report on Legal Matter - Development Application DA10/0402 - Proposed Rural Industry at Lot 18 DP 30265 (No. 1247-1253)    Mamre Road, Kemps Creek - Land and Environment Court Proceedings 10943 of 2011          be received.

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 John Thain

Councillor Prue Guillaume

 

Councillor Karen McKeown

 

Councillor Kath Presdee

 

Councillor Greg Davies

 

Councillor Jackie Greenow

 

Councillor Marko Malkoc

 

Councillor Ross Fowler OAM

 

Councillor Ben Goldfinch

 

Councillor Mark Davies

 

Councillor Tanya Davies

 

 

4        Commercial Matter - Penrith Brand Strategy                                                                

RECOMMENDED on the MOTION of Councillor Ross Fowler OAM seconded Councillor Ben Goldfinch

CW4 That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Commercial Matter - Penrith Brand Strategy be received.

2.     Council endorse the actions as described within the report.

 

 

ADOPTION OF Committee of the Whole

 

76 RESOLVED on the MOTION Councillor Kath Presdee seconded Councillor Jackie Greenow that the recommendation contained in the Committee of the Whole and shown as CW1, CW2, CW3 and CW4 be adopted.

 

 

 There being no further business the Chairperson declared the meeting closed the time being 8:22pm.

 



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                                                     


DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS

 

Item                                                                                                                                                Page

 

 

A City of Opportunities

 

1        Jordan Springs Development Proposals DA11/0514, DA11/0515, DA11/0516 and DA11/0517 Lot 1127 DP1158660 (formerly Lot 1036 DP1149525) (No. 1070 - 1170) The Northern Road,
Jordan Springs (formerly 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.

 

2        Suburban Jobs Program

  

A Liveable City

 

3        Tender Reference 11/12-12 - Roof Replacement and Rectification at Ripples Aquatic Centre

  

 


 

 

 

 

THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT BLANK  INTENTIONALLY


 

 

A Leading City

 

 

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


 

 

 

 

THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT BLANK  INTENTIONALLY


A City of Opportunities

 

Item                                                                                                                                                Page

 

1        Jordan Springs Development Proposals DA11/0514, DA11/0515, DA11/0516 and DA11/0517 Lot 1127 DP1158660 (formerly Lot 1036 DP1149525) (No. 1070 - 1170) The Northern Road,
Jordan Springs (formerly 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.

 

2        Suburban Jobs Program

 

 



Extraordinary Council Meeting                                                                              11 April 2012

A City of Opportunities

 

 

1

Jordan Springs Development Proposals DA11/0514, DA11/0515, DA11/0516 and DA11/0517 Lot 1127 DP1158660 (formerly Lot 1036 DP1149525) (No. 1070 - 1170) The Northern Road,
Jordan Springs (formerly Llandilo)  Applicant:  Maryland Development Company Pty Ltd;  Owner:  St Marys Land Ltd
   

 

Compiled by:               Karl Berzins, Consultant 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 at its Ordinary Meeting of 15 August 2011 resolved to approve six (6) separate Development Applications which involved the residential subdivision of land at the Western Precinct of the St Marys Release Area known as ‘Jordan Springs.’  Each application represented an individual stage of Villages 2 and 3 at Jordan Springs.  The location of the subdivision stages is shown in Attachment No. 1.  The development applications contained plans showing a total of 635 residential lots. 

 

On 22 September 2011 the Western Sydney Conservation Alliance Incorporated (WSCA) lodged Class 4 proceedings with the Land & Environment Court.  The WSCA sought a declaration of invalidity of Development Consent Nos. DA11/0514, DA11/0515, DA11/0516 & DA11/0517 and sought to restrain the land owner from undertaking work pursuant to these consents.  The WSCA challenged the consents in the Land & Environment Court on the following four points:

1.   The Council failed to consider or take into account the Recovery Plan when determining the development applications as it was required to do by s 69(2) of the TSC Act and s 79C of the EPA Act;

2.   The Council failed to consider whether the Development was consistent with the implementation of measures included in the Recovery Plan;

3.   The Council failed to consider what measures should be taken to implement the

Recovery Plan and;

4.   The Council failed to notify the Director-General of departures from the Recovery Plan.

 

In regard to Point  1 above, the Court ruled that Council had failed to consider, in the relevant legal sense, a matter it was required to consider (the details of the Recovery Plan) and this failure, has resulted in the development consents (DA11/0514, 0515, 0516 & 0517) issued by Council being invalid.

 

The Court ordered that the operation of the consents be suspended and that the applications be reconsidered by Council having regard to the details of the Recovery Plan.  The Court ordered that the consents will be validated upon Council having regard to the details of the Recovery Plan.

 

In regard to Points 2, 3, and 4 the Court ruled that these points assumed the applicability of Section 69 and following provisions of the Threatened Species Conservation Act (TSC Act) to the facts of this case.  The Court also ruled that these provisions have no application and it is unnecessary to consider these points further.

 

Council received a revised Species Impact Statement (SIS) from the applicant’s ecological consultants, Cumberland Ecology on the 17th February 2012.  The revised SIS contained a new chapter entitled “Consistency of the Proposal with the Objectives of the Cumberland Plain Recovery Plan”.  Council also received an Addendum Report, dated 17th February 2012, to the original SIS which dealt with the consistency of the proposal with the objectives and actions of the Cumberland Plain Recovery Plan (CPRP). 

 

Council re-advertised the amended Species Impact Statement, the Addendum Report and accompanying documentation from 17 February 2012 to 21 March 2012. 

 

Council has received submissions from sixteen (16) residents/individuals, one submission from the Western Sydney Conservation Alliance, one submission from the Nepean Greens, one submission from the Hills greens and one submission from the Honourable Cate Faehrmann, MLC (The Greens).

 

Dr. Trevor Hawkeswood of T.J Hawkeswood Scientific Consulting was formally engaged by Council to conduct an independent peer review of the revised SIS and the Addendum Report as well as providing comments on the submissions to these documents.  Dr Hawkeswood found that:

 

“The SIS represents an adequate and realistic account of the flora and flora of the

developmental areas and the Regional Park. I have been fortunate to study a section of these areas and agree as to the condition of the vegetation. The Regional Park will be important in conservation and of educating the public regarding environmental matters etc. The SIS and Addendum by Cumberland Ecology as well as the Management Plans also provided by Cumberland Ecology provide a solid base for the continuation in perpetuity of the Cumberland Plain Woodland community and its biological constituents.”

 

Dr Hawkeswood’s comments in regard to the public submissions confirmed that the revised SIS was satisfactory and the Addendum Report addresses all matters as outlined in the Cumberland Plain Recovery Plan that are relevant to the Jordan Springs Development.

 

The Addendum Report concludes that the proposed development is consistent with the actions in the Cumberland Plain Recovery Plan because the largest and best areas of high quality biodiversity in lands covered by Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 30 – “St Marys” (SREP 30) will be conserved within the proposed Regional Park, adding to the protected area network with opportunity to deliver best practice management. The area of habitat for threatened biodiversity proposed to be cleared is comparatively small and of lower biodiversity value compared to that of the Regional Park.

 

This conclusion is supported, as Council has for twenty years participated in a regional planning process.  This planning process which responded to the site being placed on the State’s Urban Development Program has delivered a Regional Park of 900ha and associated areas that are capable of urban development. A fundamental planning principle associated with the development of the Western Precinct of SREP 30 lands was that the largest and best areas of high quality biodiversity in lands covered by SREP 30 will be conserved within the proposed Regional Park.  The smaller land parcels to the west, south and east of the Regional Park were identified as having lower quality or degraded examples of Cumberland Plain Woodland and associated flora and fauna species, populations and ecological communities and as such were earmarked for urban development.

 

The current planning assessment based on the latest documentation, with regard to the interrelationship between the proposed developments and the CPRP has shown that these are  not inconsistent with the objectives and actions of the CPRP.  The planning assessment that was undertaken in regard to the proposed development and reported to Council’s Ordinary Meeting of 15 August 2011 is still valid and thoroughly addresses matters as required by Section 79C of the EPA Act.

 

The proposed developments are unlikely to have a negative impact on the surrounding environment.  The proposals are not inconsistent with the objectives and actions of the CPRP.  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 applications are considered satisfactory and having regard to the matters discussed in this report (including the report to Council of 15 August 2011)  and notwithstanding the submissions received, the proposal is recommended for approval, subject to the imposition of conditions.

 

Background

Council at its Ordinary Meeting of 15 August 2011 resolved to approve six (6) separate Development Applications which involved the residential subdivision of land at the Western Precinct of the St Marys Release Area known as ‘Jordan Springs.’  Each application represented an individual stage of Villages 2 and 3 at Jordan Springs.  The location of the subdivision stages is shown in Attachment  No. 1.  The development applications contained plans showing a total of 635 residential lots. 

 

The development applications were accompanied with a Species Impact Statement (SIS) prepared by Cumberland Ecology for Delfin Lend Lease and prepared in accordance with the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 (TSC Act) and the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EPA Act). 

 

The SIS considered the impact of the development on the following threatened species:

 

1.   Juniper-leaved Grevillia;

2.   Pultenaea parviflora;

3.   Cumberland Plain Land Snail;

4.   River-flat Eucalyptus Forest; and

5.   Cumberland Plain Woodland.

 

Council engaged an independent flora and fauna expert, Dr. Trevor Hawkeswood of TJ Hawkeswood Scientific Consulting to advise Council on the adequacy of the SIS.

 

In accordance with the EPA Act, Council was required to form an opinion as to whether a proposed development(s) has or may have a ‘significant impact’ on threatened species, populations or ecological communities or their habitat 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 and recommendations of the independent ecological consultant, Council was of the view that the proposed subdivisions would not have a significant impact on Cumberland Plain Woodland (CPW) or other known ecological communities or threatened species within the development site and therefore, the applications did not require concurrence from the Director General of the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage.

 

Development Consents DA11/0511, DA11/0512, DA11/0514, DA11/0515, DA11/0516 & DA11/0517 for the 635 residential lots were issued on the 26th August 2011.

 

Cumberland Plain Recovery Plan

 

In January 2011 the Minister for Climate Change and the Environment, being the Minister administering the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995, approved the Cumberland Plain Recovery Plan (CPRP) under Part 4 of the TSC Act and it was gazetted on 18 February 2011.  The CPRP was gazetted before Council approved the six development applications.

 

The purpose of the CPRP is to provide for the long-term survival and protection of seven threatened species, four endangered populations and nine threatened ecological communities listed on the NSW Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 that are found on the Cumberland Plain.

 

The CPRP has the following objectives:

 

1.       To build a protected area network, comprising public and private lands, focused on the priority conservation lands

2.       To deliver best practice management for threatened species, populations and ecological communities across the Cumberland Plain, with a specific focus on the priority conservation lands and public lands where the primary management objectives are compatible with conservation

3.       To develop an understanding and enhanced awareness in the community of the Cumberland Plain’s threatened biodiversity, the best practice standards for its management, and the recovery program

4.       To increase knowledge of the threats to the survival of the Cumberland Plain’s threatened species, populations and ecological communities, and thereby improve capacity to manage these in a strategic and effective manner.

 

The CPRP identifies priority conservation lands which represent the best remaining opportunities in the region to maximise long-term biodiversity benefits for the lowest possible cost, including the least likelihood of restricting land supply.  The Wianamatta Regional Park located immediately to the east of Jordan Springs has been identified as priority conservation lands.  The CPRP also focuses on threatened species, populations and ecological communities that are endemic to the Cumberland Plain or are primarily distributed on the Cumberland Plain and not necessarily located within the priority conservation lands.  Even though the land subject to Development Applications 11/0514-17 is not designated as priority conservation lands under the CPRP, the recovery plan nevertheless identifies as a responsibility of, in this case, the Council, the promotion and adoption of best practice standards for bushland management on private land.  These best practice standards are set out in Appendix No. 2 of the CPRP.

 

Pursuant to Section 5A of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act (1979), the consent authority (Council) must take into account whether the proposed development is consistent with the objectives or actions of a Recovery Plan in deciding whether there is likely to be a significant effect on threatened species, populations or ecological communities, or their habitats. 

 

Court Proceedings

On 22 September 2011 the Western Sydney Conservation Alliance Incorporated (WSCA) lodged Class 4 proceedings with the Land & Environment Court.  The WSCA sought a declaration that Development Consent Nos. DA11/0514, DA11/0515, DA11/0516 & DA11/0517 were invalid and sought orders to restrain the land owners from undertaking work pursuant to these consents.  The WSCA challenged the consents in the Land & Environment Court on the following four points:

1     The Council failed to consider or take into account the Recovery Plan when determining the development applications as it was required to do by s 69(2) of the TSC Act and s 79C of the EPA Act;

2     The Council failed to consider whether the Development was consistent with the implementation of measures included in the Recovery Plan;

 

3   The Council failed to consider what measures should be taken to implement the

Recovery Plan and;

 

4     The Council failed to notify the Director-General of departures from the Recovery Plan.

 

Court Judgement

In regard to point 1 above, the Court ruled that Council did not have before it "details of the Recovery Plan" as it applied to flora and fauna other than Cumberland Plain Woodland.  More specifically, the consideration of the Recovery Plan in late 2009 was not directed to the particular circumstances of the Juniper-leaved Grevillia and the Pultenaea parviflora as vulnerable and endangered flora species, the Cumberland Land Snail as an endangered fauna species, the River-flat Eucalyptus Forest as an endangered ecological community and the Cumberland Plain Woodland as a critically endangered community. As a result, Council failed to consider, in the relevant legal sense, a matter it was required to consider (the details of the Recovery Plan) and this failure, has resulted in the development consents (DA11/0514, 0515, 0516 & 0517) issued by Council being infected by error..  The Court ordered that the operation of the consents be suspended and that the applications be reconsidered by Council having regard to the details of the Recovery Plan. The Court ordered that the suspended consents will be validated upon Council having regard to the details of the Recovery Plan and Council requesting the Court to lift the suspension order and to confirm the granting of development consent.

 

It should be noted that as part of the judgement, Justice Moore stated that:

 

“The consideration by the Council of the particular development applications to which these proceedings relate occurred against a background in which the environmental effects of the development of the ADI site had been addressed, as a planning matter, for over two decades.

 

This is not a case in which Council's eyes were viewing for the first time the environmental effects of a particular development but partially blinded by a failure to consider a specific matter where that failure could, potentially, radically alter the picture which would emerge from the Council's deliberative processes. In my opinion, on the facts of this case, there is a real prospect that were Council to consider the details of the Recovery Plan as part of a reconsideration of the applications it would lead to the same result, approval on the same basis as before.”

 

In regard to points 2, 3, & 4, the Court ruled that these points assumed the applicability of Section 69 and following provisions of the TSC Act to the facts of this case.  The Court also ruled that these provisions have no application and it is unnecessary to consider these points further.

 

Revised Species Impact Statement and Addendum Report

 

Council received a revised Species Impact Statement (SIS) from the applicant’s, ecological consultants, Cumberland Ecology on 17 February 2012.  The revised SIS contained a new chapter entitled “Consistency of the Proposal with the Objectives of the Cumberland Plain Recovery Plan”.  Council also received an Addendum Report, dated 17th February 2012,  to the original SIS which dealt with the consistency of the proposal with the objectives and actions of the Cumberland Plain Recovery Plan. 

 

The objectives of the CPRP have been listed above and are structured so as to improve the conservation of the communities of the Cumberland Plain and protect significant remnants in the long-term.  The findings of the revised SIS and the Addendum Report  (when read with the original SIS) are that the responsibility for the implementation of these objectives is with OEH (formerly DECCW).  However, the proposed development of the subject site and the Western Precinct in general is consistent with these objectives.  The proposed Wianamatta Regional Park has been designated as priority conservation lands and will therefore address Objectives 1 and 2.  The community awareness of the Cumberland Plain's threatened biodiversity is enhanced through the creation of this Regional Park. This will assist in achieving Recovery Objective 3.  The Regional Park also allows for the continued increase of knowledge of threats to the threatened biodiversity of the Cumberland Plain, and therefore assists in the implementation of Recovery Objective 4.

 

The Addendum Report also indicates that the responsibilities imposed upon the Council in regard to the implementation of actions contained in the Recovery Plan are as follows:

 

·    Action 1.4 requires the Council to have regard to Priority Conservation Lands in

identifying areas for inclusion into environment protection and regional open space

zones. This has been achieved by Council through the making of SREP 30 by the Minister for Planning and the reservation of the proposed Regional Park, as discussed above and in Chapter 7 of the SIS (Cumberland Ecology, May 2011);

·    Action 1.5 is directed to "circumstances where impacts on the threatened

biodiversity listed in Table 1 (of the Recovery Plan) are unavoidable, as part of any

consent, approval or license that is issued, ensure that offset measures are

undertaken within the priority conservation lands where practicable ... " It is noted

that Council is not listed as a responsible authority for this action. However, the

above action has been included for completeness. In any event, any loss of

ecological communities on the subject site is overcome by the offset measures

proposed by the proposed Regional Park, as discussed in detail in Chapter 7 of the

SIS (Cumberland Ecology, May 2011);

·    Action 2.2 requires that Council support and promote the adoption of best practice

standards for bushland management and restoration (as specified in Appendix 2 of

the Recovery Plan) on public and private lands within the Cumberland Plain. The

best practice standards are set out in Appendix 2 of the Recovery Plan. 

 

The Addendum Report identifies a number of management plans, (in addition to the Wianamatta Regional Park Plan of Management) that adopt these best practice standards for bushland management.  These management plans  include the following which have been approved and adopted by Council as part of the statutory planning framework:

 

Ø Weed Management Plan (WMP) (Cumberland Ecology 2008);

Ø Feral and Domestic Animal Management Strategy (FDAMS) (Cumberland Ecology 2008);

Ø Bushfire Hazard Reduction Plan (BES 2008);

Ø Landscape Management Plan (Riparian Restoration) (Environmental Partnership 2008); and

Ø A Plan of Management for Eastern Grey Kangaroos, Red Kangaroos and Emus (Referred to as a Macrofauna Management Plan - MMP) (Cumberland Ecology2005).

 

The MMP relates to all the lands covered by SREP 30, including the proposed Wianamatta Regional Park, and was approved by DEC (2005) and stipulates the humane management of macrofauna across the SMP.

 

The other management plans listed above were prepared as part of the planning for the Western Precinct Plan which Council adopted in April 2009.  These management plans, where relevant, have provided a framework for the more detailed planning with respect to road and lot layouts as defined in the development applications for subdivision lodged for Village 2.  The plans are consistent with relevant best practice guidelines for the management of bushland and were prepared in consultation with relevant government departments.

 

In summary, the Addendum Report findings with respect to the application of the CPRP to the proposal are that the main actions proposed in the Recovery Plan include:

 

•     Building the protected area network;

•     Delivering best practice management;

•     Promoting awareness, education and engagement; and

•     Enhancing information, monitoring and enforcement.

 

The proposed development is consistent with these actions because:

 

1.    The largest and best areas of high quality biodiversity in all the lands covered by SREP 30 will be conserved within the proposed Regional Park, adding to the protected area network with opportunity to deliver best practice management;

2.    The area of habitat for threatened biodiversity proposed to be cleared is comparatively small and is of lower biodiversity value compared to that of the

Regional Park; and

3.    Management plans regulating the development of lands within the City of Penrith covered by SREP 30 have been approved and adopted and are consistent with the objectives and requirements of the Recovery Plan.

 

Advertising of the Revised Species Impact Statement and Addendum Report

 

As part of the re-advertising of the SIS, Council advised the public that the Addendum was submitted by the applicant following the Judgment of Justice Moore in the matter of Western Sydney Conservation Alliance v Penrith City Council [2011] NSWLEC 244. The original Species Impact Statement was also made available for inspection.

 

Council re-advertised the amended Species Impact Statement, the Addendum Report and accompanying documentation from 17 February 2012 to 21 March 2012. 

 

Council has received submissions from sixteen (16) residents/individuals, one submission from the Western Sydney Conservation Alliance, One submission from the Nepean Greens, one submission from the Hills greens and one submission from the Honourable Cate Faehrmann, MLC (The Greens).

 

Independent Assessment of Revised SIS, Addendum Report and Submissions

 

Dr. Trevor Hawkeswood of T.J Hawkeswood Scientific Consulting was formally engaged by Council to conduct an independent peer review of the revised SIS and the Addendum Report as well as providing comments on the submissions to these documents.  Dr Hawkeswood’s review of the revised SIS and the Addendum Report is attached as Attachment 2.

 

In regard to the revised SIS and the Addendum Report Dr Hawkeswood has provided the following comments:

The Addendum lists the endangered ecological communities and endangered species listed in the Recovery Pan but not all of these are relevant to the present development.

 

The Addendum addresses the compliance of the Proposed Development with the objectives of the Final Recovery Plan for the Cumberland Plain. The Addendum addresses the Objectives of the Final Recovery Plan, the Sections or responsibilities imposed on the Council in the implementation of the Recovery Plan, outlines the Guidelines of the Recovery Plan in relation to 3 types of bushland on the Cumberland Plain (i.e. bushland on public lands- 2 types and bushland on private lands), outlines Management Plans Regulating Development of the St Marys Property, outlines the Assessment of Threatened Species, Populations and Ecological Communities. These threatened biodiversity have been outlined in the SIS (sections indicated in the Addendum). A detailed Compliance Table is provided as Appendix A of the Addendum.

 

The most important aspect of the Addendum is consideration of the application of the

Recovery Plan to the proposal. The main actions proposed within the Recovery Plan include:

 

•     Building the protected area network, delivering the best practise management,

•     Promoting awareness, education and engagement and enhancing the information,

•     Monitoring and enforcement.

 

The Addendum and SIS note that the Proposal is consistent with these actions because:

 

1. The largest and best areas of high quality biodiversity in the St Marys Property will

be conserved within the proposed Regional Park, adding to the protected area network with opportunity to deliver the best practice management.

2. The area for habitat for threatened biodiversity proposed to be cleared is comparatively small and is of lower biodiversity value compared to that of the Regional Park, and

3. Management plans regulating the development of the St Marys Property have been approved and adopted that are consistent with the objectives and requirements of the Recovery Plan.

 

It is my opinion, that the revised SIS and Addendum by Cumberland Ecology now fully addresses all matters as outlined in the Recovery Plan that are relevant to the Jordan's Springs Development. By addressing the Recovery Plan in detail the SIS and Addendum now satisfy all omissions identified by the LEC 2011 as outlined above.

 

The SIS represents an adequate and realistic account of the flora and flora of the

developmental areas and the Regional Park. I have been fortunate to study a section of these areas and agree as to the condition of the vegetation. The Regional Park will be important in conservation and of educating the public regarding environmental matters etc. The SIS and Addendum by Cumberland Ecology as well as the Management Plans also provided by Cumberland Ecology provide a solid base for the continuation in perpetuity of the Cumberland Plain Woodland community and its biological constituents.

 

Dr Hawkeswood has also tabulated the concerns raised in the submissions received from residents and interested individuals as well as the concerns expressed by the Western Sydney Conservation Alliance in regard to the revised SIS and Addendum Report.  A table of Dr Hawkeswood’s response to submissions received is outlined in Attachment No. 3.

Dr Hawkeswood’s comments are noted and endorsed as they relate to the adequacy of the revised SIS and Addendum Report to addresses all matters as outlined in the Cumberland Plain Recovery Plan that are relevant to the Jordan's Springs Development.

It is important to note that Dr Hawkeswood confirms that the Addendum Report lists the relevant endangered ecological communities and endangered species listed in the Cumberland Plain Recovery Plan as well as providing a consideration of the application of the Recovery Plan to the proposal.  That is the revised SIS and Addendum Report take into account the Juniper-leaved Grevillia and the Pultenaea parviflora as vulnerable and endangered flora species, the Cumberland Land Snail as an endangered fauna species, the River-flat Eucalyptus Forest as an endangered ecological community and the Cumberland Plain Woodland as a critically endangered community.

 

The details of the Cumberland Plain Recovery Plan as it applies to the above mentioned flora and fauna have been addressed in detail by the SIS and the Addendum Report.  These reports address the specific concern of the Land & Environment Court that the Council did not have before it "details of the recovery plan" as it applied to flora and fauna other than Cumberland Plain Woodland.  These details have been provided in the SIS and Addendum Report and Council’s expert (Dr Hawkeswood) has supported the revised SIS and Addendum Report and offered no new conditions of development consent in response to this new information.

 

Planning Assessment

The Environmental Planning & Assessment Act (1979) provides the statutory framework for consent authorities to determine development applications.  Section 78A 8(b) of the EPA Act states that:

 

(8)        A development application (other than an application in respect of State significant development) must be accompanied by:

(b)     if the application is in respect of development on land that is, or is a part of, critical habitat or is likely to significantly affect threatened species, populations or ecological communities, or their habitats—a species impact statement prepared in accordance with Division 2 of Part 6 of the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995.

 

Also Section 5A of the EPA Act deals with significant effect on threatened species, populations or ecological communities, or their habitats,  Section 5A (f) requires a consent authority to assess whether the action (i.e. development) proposed is consistent with the objectives or actions of a recovery plan or threat abatement plan.

 

In the circumstances of this case, the applicant has submitted a revised SIS and an Addendum Report (when read with the original SIS)  that documented, inter alia, the consistency of the proposal with the objectives and actions of the Cumberland Plain Recovery Plan.  These reports list the threatened biodiversity identified in the CPRP (refer to Table 1.2 in the Addendum Report).  The management and recovery objectives for the flora and fauna species, populations and ecological communities listed in Table 1.2 are addressed in Appendix E (Actions Prescribed by the Final Recovery Plan for the Cumberland Plain) in the revised SIS.

 

The Addendum Report concludes that the proposed development is consistent with the actions in the CPRP because the largest and best areas of high quality biodiversity in lands covered by SREP 30 will be conserved within the proposed Regional Park, adding to the protected area network with opportunity to deliver best practice management. The area of habitat for threatened biodiversity proposed to be cleared is comparatively small and is of lower biodiversity value compared to that of the Regional Park.

 

This conclusion is supported as Council has for twenty years participated in a regional planning process that has delivered a Regional Park of 900ha and associated areas that are capable of urban development and have been recognised as such as being placed on the Urban Development Program.  A fundamental planning principle associated with the development of the Western Precinct of SREP 30 lands was that largest and best areas of high quality biodiversity in lands covered by SREP 30 will be conserved within the proposed Regional Park.  The smaller land parcels to the west, south and east of the Regional Park were identified has having lower quality or degraded examples of Cumberland Plain Woodland and associated flora and fauna species, populations and ecological communities and as such were earmarked for urban development.

 

More specifically the CPRP identifies recovery actions and ascribes government agencies including local councils to implement these actions.  The following table provides a summary of the recovery actions that are linked to Penrith City Council and a comment on how each action relates to the current proposal.

 

Recovery Action

Comment

Action 1.4 Local councils will have regard to the priority conservation lands in identifying areas for inclusion in environment protection and regional open space zones.

This has been achieved through the making of SREP 30 by the Minister for Planning and the reservation of the proposed Regional Park which has been identified in the CPRP as priority conservation lands.

Action 2.2 Support and promote the adoption of best practice standards for bushland management and restoration (as specified in Appendix No. 2) on public and private lands within the Cumberland Plain

 

The proposed subdivision will result in the provision of a central open space in Village 2 (see Attachment No. 1).  This land will be dedicated to Council and this outcome will be covered as a condition of development consent.  It would be prudent to include an additional condition of development consent that protects any remnant vegetation on this land.  Such a condition would accord with best practice standards in Appendix No. 2 of the CPRP, for bushland management on public lands outside the priority conservation lands where conservation is not a primary management objective.

 

In regard to the remainder of land within Village 2 (i.e. private land), the proponent has prepared a Feral and Domestic Animal Management Strategy (FDAMS) which is a management plan that addresses the management of threatened biodiversity and is consistent with the recovery plan.  This management plan also has relevance to the Regional Park.

 

Action 2.5 Local government will manage to best practice standards (as specified in Appendix No. 2) any lands which are under their ownership or for which they have care, control and management, which:

contain any of the threatened biodiversity listed in Table 1

are located within the priority conservation lands or, if located outside these lands, have conservation as a primary management objective.

Penrith City Council has no lands in its care control and management that are affected by the proposed development (i.e.DAs 11/0514-0517).

Action 3.4 Work collaboratively with local government authorities and other organisations to inform communities about the value and role of remnant vegetation on the Cumberland Plain, the best practice standards for its management, and any opportunities to participate in the recovery program.

Council has adopted a Biodiversity Action Plan that includes education and community involvement programs.  It should be noted that this action is not directly related to the determination of the development application for subdivision.

Action 3.5 Work with Aboriginal communities, landowners, community groups, and students to deliver best practice management in the priority conservation lands, and to identify other opportunities for involvement in the recovery program.

See Above

Action 3.7 Develop interpretive programs for key local reserves that contain examples of the threatened biodiversity addressed in the recovery plan.

See Above

Action 4.3 DECCW will encourage local councils to prepare or review biodiversity strategies to be consistent with the recovery plan that guide protection, management and strategic investment in threatened biodiversity, both within and outside of the priority conservation

lands.

See Above

Action 4.4 DECCW will work collaboratively with local councils to enhance the compliance and enforcement program with regard to the unauthorised clearing of bushland on the Cumberland Plain

 

See Above

 

In conclusion, the planning assessment has shown that the proposal is not inconsistent with the objectives and actions CPRP.  Also it is proposed to condition the consent so that remnant vegetation is protected on land that will be dedicated to Council as open space within Village 2.

 

The proposed development is not considered to have a ‘significant effect’ on threatened species, populations or an ecological communities and therefore, does not require concurrence from the Director-General of the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage.

 

The planning assessment that was undertaken in regard to the proposed development and reported to Council’s Ordinary Meeting of 15 August 2011 is still valid and thoroughly addresses matters as required by Section 79C of the EP7A Act.  This planning assessment has been attached in its original form as Attachment No. 4  and forms part of the current planning assessment.

 

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 as documented in this report and in the assessment report reported to 15 August 2011 Ordinary Council meeting.  Both this assessment and the assessment report of the 15th August need to be considered as one report for the proposed development applications, with this reports recommendation and conditions taking precedence.

 

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 do not have a ‘significant effect’ on threatened species, population or an ecological community and therefore, do 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 proposal is not inconsistent with the objectives and actions CPRP.  The concerns raised by the submitters are acknowledged, however, on balance, the proposed developments are considered to be satisfactory and the points 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 Jordan Springs Development Proposals DA11/0514, DA11/0515, DA11/0516 and DA11/0517 Lot 1127 DP1158660 (formerly Lot 1036 DP1149525) (No. 1070 - 1170) The Northern Road, Jordan Springs (formerly Llandilo) be received.

2.    Development Application DA11/0514 for Subdivision of the Western Precinct, St Marys Release Area (Jordan Springs) – Lot 1127 DP1158660 (formerly Lot 1036 DP1149525), (Nos. 1070 - 1170) The Northern Road, Llandilo be approved subject to the following conditions:

 

2.1     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

 

2.2     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.

 

2.3     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.

 

2.4     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.

 

25      Dust suppression techniques are to be employed during construction to reduce any potential nuisances to surrounding properties.

 

2.6     All soil material stockpiled for future use on the site is to be stored in such a manner so as to minimise dust.

 

2.7     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.

 

2.8     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.

 

2.9     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.

 

2.10   All RMS (formerly the 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.

 

2.11   Pedestrian, bus and cycle facilities are to be consistent with the Development Control Strategy.

 

2.12   All bicycle path construction is to be in accordance with the relevant provisions of the RMS (formerly the RTA) NSW Bicycle Guidelines and AUSTROADS Guide to Traffic Engineering Practice – Part 14 Bicycles.

 

2.13   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.

 

2.14   All works/regulatory signposting associated with the proposed development are to be at no cost to the Roads & Maritime Services (formerly the RTA).

 

2.15   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.

 

2.16   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.

 

2.17   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.

 

2.18   Structural design certification by a suitably qualified engineer – NPER (Structural) of the bridge structure shall accompany any construction certificates issued for civil works.

 

2.19   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.

 

2.20   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.

 

2.21   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.

 

2.22   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.

 

2.23   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.

 

2.24   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.

 

2.25   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.

 

2.26   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.

 

2.27   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 extent 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.  

 

2.28   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. 

 

2.29   No remnant vegetation shall be removed from the land to be dedicated as Open Space without the prior approval of Penrith City Council

 

3.    Development Application DA11/0515 for Subdivision of the Western Precinct, St Marys Release Area (Jordan Springs) – Lot 1127 DP1158660 (formerly Lot 1036 DP1149525), (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

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

 

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     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.

 

3.8     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.

 

3.9     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.

 

3.10   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.

 

3.11   All RMS (formerly the 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.

 

3.12   Pedestrian, bus and cycle facilities are to be consistent with the Development Control Strategy.

 

3.13   All bicycle path construction is to be in accordance with the relevant provisions of the RMS’ (formerly the RTA)  NSW Bicycle Guidelines and AUSTROADS Guide to Traffic Engineering Practice – Part 14 Bicycles.

 

3.14   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.

 

3.15   All works/regulatory signposting associated with the proposed development are to be at no cost to the Roads & Traffic Authority.

 

3.16   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.

 

3.17   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.

 

3.18   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.

 

3.19   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.

 

3.20   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.

 

3.21   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.

 

3.22   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.

 

3.23   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.

 

3.24   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.

 

3.25   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 extent 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.  

 

3.26   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. 

 

3.27   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. 

 

3.28  No remnant vegetation shall be removed from the land to be dedicated  as Open Space without the prior approval of Penrith City Council

 

 

 

 

4.    Development Application DA11/0516 for Subdivision of the Western Precinct, St Marys Release Area (Jordan Springs) – Lot 1127 DP1158660 (formerly Lot 1036 DP1149525), (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 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

 

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     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.

 

4.8     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.

 

4.9     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.

 

4.10   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.

 

4.11   All RMS (formerly the 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.

 

4.12   Pedestrian, bus and cycle facilities are to be consistent with the Development Control Strategy.

 

4.13   All bicycle path construction is to be in accordance with the relevant provisions of the RMS’ (formerly the RTA) NSW Bicycle Guidelines and AUSTROADS Guide to Traffic Engineering Practice – Part 14 Bicycles.

 

4.14   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.

 

4.15   All works/regulatory signposting associated with the proposed development are to be at no cost to the Roads & Traffic Authority.

 

4.16   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.

 

4.17   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.

 

4.18   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.

 

4.19   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.

 

4.20   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.

 

4.21   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.

 

4.22   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.

 

4.23   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.

 

4.24   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.

 

4.25   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 extent 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. 

 

4.26   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. 

 

4.27   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. 

 

4.28  No remnant vegetation shall be removed from the land to be dedicated  as Open Space without the prior approval of Penrith City Council

 

 

5.    Development Application DA11/0517 for Subdivision of the Western Precinct, St Marys Release Area (Jordan Springs) – Lot 1127 DP1158660 (formerly Lot 1036 DP1149525), (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

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

 

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.

 

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 RMS (formerly the 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 RMS’ (formerly the RTA) 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 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.

 

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 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.

 

5.18   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.

 

5.19   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.

 

5.20   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.

 

5.21   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.

 

5.22   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.

 

5.23   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.

 

5.24   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 extent 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.  

 

5.25   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. 

 

5.26   No remnant vegetation shall be removed from the land to be dedicated as Open Space without the prior approval of Penrith City Council.

 

6.     Those who made a submission be advised of Council’s decision.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1. View

Locality Plan showing stages 2a, 2b, 2c, 2d, 3a & 3b

1 Page

Attachment

2. View

Dr Hawkeswood's Assessment of the Revised SIS and Addendum Report dated February 2012 from Cumberland Ecology with respect to Jordan Springs Development at Penrith NSW

3 Pages

Attachment

3. View

Dr Hawkeswood’s Comments on Submissions Received

5 Pages

Attachment

4. View

Previous Council Report dated 15 August 2011

61 Pages

Attachment

  


Extraordinary Council Meeting                                                                              11 April 2012

A City of Opportunities

 

 

2

Suburban Jobs Program   

 

Compiled by:               Paul Battersby, Senior Environmental Planner

Authorised by:            Paul Grimson, Sustainability & Planning 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 University of Western Sydney (UWS), the Penrith Business Alliance (PBA) and Council have formed a consortium to apply for funding under the Australian Government’s Suburban Jobs Program.  UWS (the applicant) is committing $14 million in funding for a $28 million employment development on their South Werrington campus and is seeking $14 million in funding from the Suburban Jobs Program.

The project involves development of 7,000m2 of employment space and associated infrastructure works that will facilitate 350 – 400 jobs and is the catalytic project in establishing ‘Werrington Park’, a comprehensive business park on the University’s North Werrington campus, with a capacity for 4,500 – 6,000 jobs.

Background

Council is a member of the National Growth Areas Alliance (NGAA), an organisation that represents the interests of 24 of Australia’s fastest growing local government areas. The NGAA seeks to inform Australian Government policy on the needs and opportunities in growth areas and to achieve more equitable provision of infrastructure and services so growth area communities are more sustainable.

Establishment of the Suburban Jobs Program is testament to the advocacy initiatives of the NGAA, in particular their collaboration with the Government’s Major Cities Unit on employment initiatives and executive representation on the advisory panel for the development of the Government’s Sustainable Australia - Sustainable Communities Strategy. The NGAA was also requested to assist the preparation of the application guidelines for the Suburban Jobs Program.

The Australian Government announced the Suburban Jobs Program, as a measure under the Sustainable Australia - Sustainable Communities Strategy, in the 2011-12 Budget.

The objective of the Suburban Jobs Program is to assist State and Local Governments to plan for and provide enduring employment opportunities in the growing outer suburbs of major capital cities.

The Program funding will contribute to a small number of substantial proposals led by local governments or state authorities or state business enterprises that integrate the delivery of public good infrastructure with other outcomes in areas such as planning, research, community engagement, communications, data collection and/or the demonstration of the opportunities presented by the digital economy.

Projects will be selected through a competitive merit-based funding round and are expected to be completed by 30 June 2015.

Councillors will recall $100 million was initially allocated to this program, however that has subsequently been reduced to $45 million in the Government’s mid-year fiscal review of the Budget.  This is disappointing and the NGAA is approaching the Federal Government to secure the outstanding funds for this Program.

 

The Program Guidelines indicate the Government intends to make a significant financial contribution of $10-$25 million to a small number of large, integrated projects that provide for increased local employment opportunities in major capital city locations.

 

A joint review of local employment opportunities with the Penrith Business Alliance (PBA) identified the best opportunity to enhance the quantum and typology of employment opportunities in the City within the context of the Suburban Jobs Program, rests with initiation of the Penrith Health and Education Precinct, specifically, the establishment of a Health Industry Business Education and Research Park on the University of Western Sydney (UWS) campus.  The University agreed and has led the preparation of an application with the support of Council and the PBA.

 

The Hon David Bradbury, Federal Member for Lindsay; Tanya Davies, State Member for Mulgoa; Stuart Ayres, State Member for Penrith; the Western Sydney Region Organisation of Councils; Regional Development Australia, Sydney; Landcom; the NSW Department of Planning and Infrastructure; The NSW Department of Trade & Investment and the Sydney West and Blue Mountains Priority Employment Area have provided letters of support for the proposal.

 

Applications closed on 17 February 2012.  Councillors were advised of the program and our intentions to support the application in a memo dated 18 January 2012.

The Proposal

The application proposes the construction of a 3 part 4 level building on the southern side of the Great Western Highway, at the eastern end of the UWS South Werrington Campus.  The building will provide 7,000m2 of employment space and associated infrastructure that will create 350 – 400 jobs in the research, education, health & wellbeing and digital communication sectors.  The building is the catalytic project for ‘Werrington Park’, a 58 hectare employment park located immediately opposite on the UWS North Werrington campus, which will deliver between 4,500 and 6,000 jobs. Werrington Park is a key employment component of the Penrith Health and Education Precinct, which will provide a total of 12,000 – 13,000 jobs.

 

UWS (the applicant) is committing $14 million in funding for this $28 million development and is seeking $14 million in funding from the Suburban Jobs Program.

 

Artist impressions of the building concept are appended to the report.

Conclusion

Past and planned growth within Western Sydney and Penrith in particular has meant that 30% of the region’s workforce travels outside Western Sydney and 63% of Penrith’s resident workforce travel outside Penrith to work.  These workers spend an estimated 1 hour and 50 minutes travelling to and from work each day to jobs with an over reliance on declining employment sectors such as manufacturing.  A fundamental challenge for Western Sydney is how to transform from a region reliant on manufacturing and retailing, to one globally integrated into new growing forms of high value, job-rich, specialised sectors of the future such as health & wellbeing and digital communication.  The Penrith Health and Education Precinct and Werrington Park in particular address this issue by creating necessary local infrastructure and seed activities to directly assist this transformation.

 

The University of Western Sydney and the Penrith Business Alliance should be congratulated on their initiative and leadership in preparing this application.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

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

2.     Council endorse participation in a consortium with the University of Western Sydney and the Penrith Business Alliance in making application to the Australian Government’s Suburban Jobs Program for funding to develop employment space on University land at Werrington.

3.     Council express its appreciation to the University of Western Sydney and the Penrith Business Alliance for their initiative and leadership in preparing the application to the Australian Government’s Suburban Jobs Program.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1.  

Artist impressions of the building concept

2 Pages

Appendix

  


Extraordinary Council Meeting                                                                                             11 April 2012

Appendix 1 - Artist impressions of the building concept

 

temp


temp

 


 

 

A Green City

 

 

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


 

 

 

 

THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT BLANK  INTENTIONALLY


A Liveable City

 

Item                                                                                                                                                Page

 

3        Tender Reference 11/12-12 - Roof Replacement and Rectification at Ripples Aquatic Centre

 

 



Extraordinary Council Meeting                                                                              11 April 2012

A Liveable City

 

 

3

Tender Reference 11/12-12 - Roof Replacement and Rectification at Ripples Aquatic Centre   

 

Compiled by:               Michael Jackson, Major Projects Manager

Authorised by:            Wayne Mitchell, Group Manager - City Infrastructure   

 

Objective

Our physical infrastructure is adaptable, and responds to changing needs

Community Outcome

A City with infrastructure that responds to community needs (17)

Strategic Response

Provide well-maintained community buildings (17.1)

       

 

Executive Summary

The replacement of the roof at Ripples along with other associated asset renewal works at the facility have been identified as a priority within the Building Asset Renewal Program. The recent Special Rate Variation provided additional ongoing funding to this program that sees over $2m of works completed annually.  This report advises Council on the outcome of the tender process for the roof replacement and rectification works at Ripples Aquatic Centre, corner of Creek Road and the Kingsway, St Marys.

 

It is recommended that the tender from Bermagui Constructions Pty Ltd for the provision of roof replacement and rectification works at Ripples Aquatic Centre be accepted as the successful tenderer.

Background

Council called for tenders for partial roof replacement in April last year and the successful tenderer was reported to Council in July 2011. In November 2011 it was reported to Council that the then lowest tenderer, Bilas Knight Pty Ltd had indicated that they could not comply with Council’s request for a delayed start due to an increase in the cost of materials and subsequently withdrew their tender.

 

The withdrawal by Bilas Knight Pty Ltd required a new tender to be called.  As reported to Council this provided an opportunity to expand the scope of works and include the resurfacing of the concourse area, the relocation of the lighting above the pool and the retiling and re-grouting of the pool surface.  These changes were incorporated into the new tender specifications.

 

The revised scope of works is restricted to the main pool hall area only and impacts operation of the adjacent gym in areas which fall under the same section of roof.  The intent is for the front of the centre and main outdoor pool to remain open save for limited periods where access to the outdoor pool is compromised to allow for concourse works to be completed. 

 

The tendered scope is as follows:

 

-     Replacement of pool hall roof sheeting, purlins and roof flashings

-     Anti corrosion treatment and repainting of existing structural steelwork

-     Replacement of ceilings to male and female change rooms, lagoon room and marshalling area.

-     Removal and replacement of external wall sheeting & gutter to part of the southern elevation,

-     Limited tiling and complete re-grouting works to the pool

-     Relocation of lighting above the pool

-     Resurfacing of pool concourse

 

As the pool and structural steel are existing and have been only partially investigated prior to calling of this tender due to the inability to drain the pool and remove all roof sheeting, an estimate of the extent of works required has been made.  Whilst these scope estimates are based on the best information available, variations are possible once a thorough assessment is undertaken.

 

Tenders were advertised in the Western Weekender and the e-Tendering website on 30 December 2011 and the Sydney Morning Herald on 3 January 2012 for the provision of roof replacement and rectification works at the Ripples Aquatic Centre. Tenders closed on 2 February 2012.

 

Tenderers were required to submit their tender on a standard pro-forma sheet, which clearly identified the required response against each of the evaluation criteria. Tenderers were also required to complete a price schedule.

Tender Evaluation Process

The tender evaluation committee consisted of 4 Council Officers and was chaired by Michael Jackson (Major Projects Manager).  The selection criteria advertised and used in assessing the tenders received were:

 

General Criteria

·    Tenderer Profile

·    Contact details

 

Commercial Requirements

·    Critical Assumptions

·    Conforming Requirements

·    Conflict of Interest

·    Insurance

·    Instrument of Agreement

·    Required Declaration Response

·    Compliance Statements

·    Business References

 

Scope of Requirements

·    Demonstrated Ability

·    Compliance to Specified Requirements

·    Construction Program

·    Conformance to Relevant Standards

 

Cost/Price Category

·    Unit Rates

·    Financial viability

·    Management and Administration

·    Employment Policies (Apprenticeships)

·    Quality Assurance Systems

·    Environmental Management Systems

·    Occupational Health and Safety

 

Following the assessment of the tenders in line with these Evaluation Criteria and the completion of financial assessments, the shortlisted tenderers were interviewed and references checked.

 

Initial Tender Review

A full listing of the tenders received and considered is following, with the responses provided below in price order (ex GST):

 

Company

Tendered Price

Bermagui Constructions Pty Ltd

$1,490,892.05

Bilas Knight Pty Ltd

$1,705,000.00

Murphy’s Group Services Pty Ltd

$1,965,931.60

Time Cost & Quality

$2,119,997.00

CV Watton Pty Ltd

$2,124,634.00

Kinsley Constructions Pty Ltd

$2,278,554.25

BTF Projects Pty Ltd

$2,496,590.00

 

Following a detailed analysis of all completed responses, each tender was evaluated against the above evaluation criteria to determine an initial ranking.  Consideration was then given to each of the tenderer’s price schedules to determine the best value for money solution and the three lowest priced tenders, with acceptable capacity scorings, were further analysed with a view to assessing suitability for short listing.

 

Following the initial assessment and clarification, the three lowest tenders from Bermagui Constructions Pty Ltd, Bilas Knight Pty Ltd and Murphy’s Group Services Pty Ltd were considered by the Tender Evaluation Committee to be suitable for short listing and further analysis. 

 

During the analysis process Bilas Knight Pty Ltd were placed into external administration and accordingly were not considered further by the Committee.

 

The subsequent analysis of the tender from Bermagui Constructions Pty Ltd, the lowest priced tender received, identified that while the other remaining submission shortlisted had been provided in line with Council’s desire to have elements of the facility remain open, the tender response from Bermagui Constructions Pty Ltd was on the basis that the entire facility was closed.  Given that the tender documents were not explicit on this issue, and Council’s preference would be for the facility to remain partly open, further information was sought from Bermagui Constructions Pty Ltd as to their ability to complete the works with the facility partly open, consistent with the tender from Murphy’s Group Services Pty Ltd.  In light of the relative experience of Bermagui Constructions Pty Ltd, which is still within the establishment and growth phase, Council Officers also took the opportunity to explore if additional financial security for the contract would be provided by the company.

 

Based on the information received from Bermagui Constructions Pty Ltd a variation of $146,000 (ex GST) has been added to the Bermagui Constructions Pty Ltd’s price bringing the total adjusted price to $1,636,892.05.  This adjustment has allowed comparison and consistent assessment of the two remaining tenders from Bermagui Constructions Pty Ltd and Murphy’s Group Services Pty Ltd.

 

Evaluation of Shortlisted Tenders

The shortlisted tenderers were subjected to an independent financial evaluation. 

 

The financial evaluation recommended that further security be sought from Bermagui Constructions Pty Ltd given the company’s relative youth.  As detailed above and in the Financial Services Manager’s Comment, later in this report, this issue has been resolved to the satisfaction of Council Officers.

 

Murphy’s Group Services Pty Ltd received a positive financial evaluation.  Murphy’s demonstrated a comprehensive understanding of the project scope.

 

A construction programme for approximately 20 weeks is being targeted; however this will be refined in consultation with Ripples Management and the appointed tenderer. Due to the expected construction period and the foreseeable impact this would have on Ripples operations, discussions were held with Ripples Management and it was agreed the proposed work should commence in May 2012 to minimise the impact of the work on Ripples operations and the community over the summer period.

 

The recommended company, Bermagui Constructions Pty Ltd, was selected based on their compliance to the tender evaluation criteria, their demonstrated ability to meet Council’s requirements and competitive price for the services offered with their tender being $329,039.55 cheaper than Murphy’s Group Services Pty Ltd, even after allowing for the variation resulting from the Centre remaining open.

 

Bermagui Constructions Pty Ltd is a construction company which was incorporated in 2009.  Prior to that the Principals had extensive experience in another large construction firm. Bermagui has projects experience with values ranging from $2m to $7m.  Bermagui has experience in similar projects across Sydney with the following clients:

 

·    Campbelltown City Council – Construction of new $7.2m Youth Centre

·    FJP Manufacturing – Replacement of an asbestos roof and associated works ($1.1m)

·    Jands Electronics – Construction of new $2.5m factory

·    Department of Defence – Refurbishment of facility ($800,000)

 

Reference checks completed by Council Officers with Campbelltown City Council, FJP Manufacturing and Jands Electronics indicated that all were satisfied with the performance of Bermagui Constructions Pty Ltd. 

 

 

Financial Services Manager’s Comment

Included in the assessment of tenders was the commissioning of independent reference checks, financial analysis and performance analysis. These checks were completed by Corporate Scorecard Pty Ltd and have been reviewed by Financial Services. Based on this review and the assessment by Financial Services it was considered prudent to seek additional financial security from the preferred tenderer, Bermagui Constructions Pty Ltd.  The additional security proposed by Bermagui Constructions Pty Ltd, in the form of additional bank guarantees, is considered to provide adequate additional protection to mitigate the risks associated with the relative youth of the company. 

 

The Roof Replacement and associated works have been included in the Building Asset Renewal Program, phased across 2011-12 and 2012-13. The recommended tender of $1,636,892.05 (ex GST) from Bermagui Constructions Pty Ltd can be accommodated within the available budget established for this project.

 

Tender Advisory Group (TAG) Comment

The Tender Advisory Group (TAG) comprising the Group Manager Legal and Governance, Stephen Britten, Group Manager City Infrastructure, Wayne Mitchell and the Senior Governance Officer, Glenn Schuil met to consider the report for the tender (RFT 11/12-12) for the Roof Replacement and rectification at ripples Aquatic Centre.

 

The assessment of this tender has identified that the project specification had not included sufficient detail to enable tenders to be submitted on a like basis, however it is noted that Council’s established Tender Assessment Procedures included steps that identified and resolved this issue through the normal assessment process.

 

There has been discovered an area within the tender documents that has created room for tenderers to take different positions regarding the methodologies of how the proposed work would be undertaken (keeping parts of the Centre operational during construction). This issue has been dealt with and resolved within this report.

 

Regard has been made with respect to the window of opportunity to close the Centre and undertake the proposed work. If the work cannot be undertaken in this particular window this would delay the project by up to twelve months.

 

The TAG agrees on the basis of advice by Major Projects that the documentation has been reviewed by appropriately qualified Council Officers and that the tender specifications and tender submission provided by Bermagui Constructions Pty Ltd are able to form an effective and enforceable construction contract.

 

Based on the information contained within the report, the TAG agrees with the methodologies used by the Tender Evaluation Committee and supports the recommended tender submitted by Bermagui Constructions Pty Ltd, inclusive of the identified variation for the Centre to remain open.

 

 

 

 

 

Conclusion

The Tender Evaluation Committee are of the opinion that Bermagui Constructions Pty Ltd has provided the most advantageous tender and it is recommended that the company be awarded the contract based on their original tender submission and the identified variation to enable the Centre to remain partly open, as outlined in this report, for a contract sum of $1,636,892.05 (ex GST).

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Tender Reference 11/12-12 - Roof Replacement and Rectification at Ripples Aquatic Centre be received.

2.     A contract be entered into between Bermagui Constructions Pty Ltd and Penrith City Council for the roof replacement and rectification works at Ripples Aquatic Centre for a sum of $1,636,892.05 (ex GST).

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.  


 

 

A Vibrant City

 

 

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



 

ATTACHMENTS   

 

Date of Meeting:         Wednesday 11 April 2012

Delivery Program:      A City of Opportunities

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

Report Title:                Jordan Springs Development Proposals DA11/0514, DA11/0515, DA11/0516 and DA11/0517 Lot 1127 DP1158660 (formerly Lot 1036 DP1149525) (No. 1070 - 1170) The Northern Road,
Jordan Springs (formerly Llandilo)

Attachments:               Locality Plan showing stages 2a, 2b, 2c, 2d, 3a & 3b

                                      Dr Hawkeswood's Assessment of the Revised SIS and Addendum Report dated February 2012 from Cumberland Ecology with respect to Jordan Springs Development at Penrith NSW

                                      Dr Hawkeswood’s Comments on Submissions Received

                                      Previous Council Report dated 15 August 2011


Extraordinary Council Meeting                                                                                             11 April 2012

Attachment 1 - Locality Plan showing stages 2a, 2b, 2c, 2d, 3a & 3b

 

temp


Extraordinary Council Meeting                                                                                             11 April 2012

Attachment 2 - Dr Hawkeswood's Assessment of the Revised SIS and Addendum Report dated February 2012 from Cumberland Ecology with respect to Jordan Springs Development at Penrith NSW

 

temp


temp


temp


Extraordinary Council Meeting                                                                                11 April 2012

Attachment 3 - Dr Hawkeswood’s Comments on Submissions Received

 

Dr Hawkeswood’s Comments on Submissions Received

 

 

Resident’s / Individuals Issues

Comment

Excessive removal of vegetation

The area for development has vegetation in the poorest condition (native trees in particular) in that it is mostly grassland (of introduced weed and grass species) with scattered clumps of Eucalyptus trees. The Regional Park (900 hectares) has very large trees and vegetation (including native shrub and herb layers) in much better condition and of greater biodiversity than is being removed.  The density of trees is much greater and this can be clearly seen by aerial photography (see e.g. Fig. 2.2 of the revised SIS). Within the development area there will be areas of open space and other areas for trees to be retained. Therefore there is not excessive vegetation removal occurring. Within the 900 ha Park there should be areas for revegetation/vegetation enhancement to occur.

Destruction of habitat

There will be of course some destruction of habitat but this habitat is of extremely poor quality and very low biodiversity. This has been determined by detailed field work by biologists over 20 years. The data obtained for most fauna species indicates that the biodiversity has declined rapidly over the years before any development has occurred.

Request for a site action plan or management plan to address threatened biodiversity and consistency with the Cumberland Plain Recovery Plan

The revised SIS (as well as the previous version) has already addressed threatened biodiversity and the Addendum in my opinion has addressed all matters of the Recovery Plan. A number of management plans have been provided by Cumberland Ecology (see Compliance Table, Appendix A in the Addendum) 

Request for development to comply with DEC guidelines for conserving flora and fauna.  DEC guidelines include ten recommendations including at least 30% of the total area should comprise local native vegetation, at least 10% of the area should be managed for wildlife.  The 30% of local native vegetation retained should be in larger patches or linkages 25-30m wide.  Other management issues should be considered including retaining a range of tree ages and understorey.  There is no plan or guideline for the subject site. 

The DEC Guidelines are only recommendations, many of which may or may not be applicable or feasible on any particular property. The 900 ha Regional Park easily satisfies all of these recommendations in any case.

No intact bushland is being retained. 

This is incorrect. The Regional Park (900 hectares) has very large trees and trees of all ages and has vegetation in much better condition and of much greater biodiversity than is being removed from the development areas.  The density of trees is much greater and this can be clearly seen by aerial photography (see e.g. Fig. 2.2 of the revised SIS). SREP30 allocates the most intact remnants of the CPW vegetation on the St Marys property to the 900 ha Regional Park and identifies zones for development within the more disturbed areas. Within the development areas there will also be areas of open space and other areas for trees to be retained. Therefore intact vegetation is being retained.

The Regional Park cannot be used as an off set to the proposed development.

According to the SIS, the primary statutory planning instrument for the subject site is SREP30, which established the principle of the 900 ha Regional Park as the major outcome for the property. The SIS regards the Regional Park as including the major occurrences of the CPW and other communities within the property.  (See e.g. Executive Summary of the revised SES).

The Cumberland Plain Recovery Plan has not been addressed by Lend Lease. 

This issue has been addressed by Cumberland Ecology in their revised SIS and Addendum.

CPW has high biodiversity has been confirmed by Cumberland Ecology in their revised SIS and Addendum, it keeps temperatures stable, it cleans pollutants from the air, it filters water, it prevents soil water and salt from rising to the surface, aboriginal culture, it maintains erosion and provides us with scientific data”.

 

The CPW of the Jordan's Springs development area is low in biodiversity as the area has been highly disturbed and totally altered from its original condition. There is better vegetation within the Regional Park although some areas of this can be enhanced biologically. The site area compared to the rest of NSW or even Australia, is very tiny and insignificant and as such would not have any effect in keeping temperatures stable. Vegetation is important in air pollution filtering but air pollution in the Penrith area has not really been a problem as far as I am aware. Vegetation does prevent soil water and salt rising to the surface but there has not been this problem in the Penrith area as far as I am aware and the soils and parent material are not high in salt concentrations. As far as I am aware no aboriginal artefacts have been located from the Jordan’s Springs Development area.  The 900 ha Regional Park will suffice for education and opportunities for rehabilitation in areas where they may be required.

The Species Impact Statement and Addendum Report have not been independently reviewed and SIS should have been reviewed by a member of the Ecological Consultants Association of NSW

 

The SIS and the Addendum have been reviewed by Dr Trevor J. Hawkeswood, an independent practising ecologist.

Due consideration should be given to the values of CPW on the subject site.  There is no discussion identifying or evaluating these values on the subject site. 

 

The SIS in a number of sections details the values of the CPW on the site. (see e.g. section 5.3 of the revised SIS).

 

 

Western Sydney Conservation Alliance, Hills Greens, Nepeans Greens Issues

Comment

Should Council implement the Cumberland Plain Recovery Plan to conserve additional bushland

 

In my scientific opinion, I believe there is no need for any additional "bushland" to be conserved. Most of the vegetation outside the Regional Park is highly degraded and highly altered/modified vegetation which is excessively infested with weeds and exotic grasses, not to mention highly toxic plants. It would cost billions of dollars and at least require a century of intensive management and revegetation to return it to pre-settlement conditions. All efforts should be aimed to the 900 ha Regional Park to be environmentally managed and sustained/revegetated in some areas etc. and for a education plan for the public to be put in place. Land care groups should be involved as well to provide advice and to assist in the management of the Regional Park in terms of the vegetation and fauna. 

 

Best bushland management guidelines should be implemented

 

This has been addressed in Cumberland Ecology's Feral and Domestic Animal Management Strategy (FDAMS) and their Weed Management Plan (WMP).

 

Destruction of critically endangered Cumberland Plain Woodland

 

The condition of the so called "bushland" of the development site is generally extremely poor. Most of it is non-native grassland comprised of introduced weeds and grasses. The site has patches of regrowth trees which are relatively young. The whole site is highly altered and severely modified from its original condition. The site will not return naturally to its original condition as the whole ecology has been destroyed long ago in the past. It would cost billions of dollars and at least require a century of intensive management and revegetation to return it to pre-settlement conditions and then it would be no where near what it was like during the time of Aboriginal invasion 40,000 years ago. The fauna aspects are also totally modified, such that only common species exist there. The conservation value of these non-native grasslands and vegetation patches is very low.

 

Does not agree that the regional park off set is acceptable

 

There is 900 ha set aside as Regional Park compared to less than 100 ha of land to be used for urban development in the proposed 2nd and 3rd stage developments.

 

Reservation of the 900 Ha regional park was not considered as part of the NSW Planning process when SREP 30 was being considered

 

Incorrect. According to the SIS, the primary statutory planning instrument for the subject site is SREP30, which established the principle of the 900 ha Regional Park as the major outcome for the property.

 

Lend Lease has not provided an off set to the clearing of CPW within it’s land

 

The offset is mostly the 900 ha Regional Park

 

To comply with the Recovery Plan best practice standards there should be a site action plan or management plan that addresses threatened biodiversity and consistency with the Recovery Plan.  There is no such plan. 

 

This has been addressed in Cumberland Ecology's Feral and Domestic Animal Management Strategy (FDAMS). Their Macrofauna Management Plan (MFMP) and their Weed Management Plan (WMP). The SIS has also provided various management proposals for threatened fauna and flora (see Chapters 6, 7 and 8). There is also a Landscape Master Plan provided by Environmental Partnerships (2009).

 

 

DEC guidelines include ten recommendations including at least 30% of the total area should comprise local native vegetation, at least 10% of the area should be managed for wildlife.  The 30% of local native vegetation retained should be in larger patches or linkages 25-50m wide.  Other management issues should be considered including retaining a range of tree ages and understorey and having 30-50m wide buffer zones along creeks. 

 

These are only recommendations which may or may not be applicable or feasible on any particular property. The 900 ha Regional Park easily satisfies all of these recommendations in any case.

The CPRP has not been addressed by Lend Lease. 

 

It has been addressed by Cumberland Ecology in their revised SIS and Addendum.

Weed and feral and domestic animal plans have never been implemented in the Western Precinct. 

 

This has been addressed in Cumberland Ecology's Feral and Domestic Animal Management Strategy (FDAMS) and their Weed Management Plan (WMP)

 

No intact bushland is being retained

900 ha of "bushland" is being retained in the Regional Park. Other open space areas with trees will be retained within the proposed development and streetscape areas will retain or restore some native trees (as per the SIS)

 

Due consideration should be given to the values of CPW on the subject site.  There is no discussion identifying or evaluating these values on the subject site.

 

The SIS in a number of sections details the values of the CPW on the site. (see e.g. section 5.3 of the revised SIS).

The Species Impact Statement and Addendum Report have not been independently reviewed and SIS should have been reviewed by a member of the Ecological Consultants Association of NSW

The SIS and the Addendum have been reviewed by Dr Trevor J. Hawkeswood, an independent practising ecologist.

Council have allowed Lend Lease to plant large date palms. This will allow Indian Mynah Birds to proliferate.

 

 

The date palms may be eaten by rare bat species flying through in the area at irregular times, e.g. the Grey-headed Flying Fox (Pteropus poliocephalus, Pteropodidae). The indian Mynah birds are unlikely to proliferate due to lack of suitable habitat within the residential areas.

 

The protection and management of large intact remnants is more effective and efficient than smaller, fragmented remnants.

 

 

This is true, that is why the 900 ha Regional Park will be conserved.

 

 

Honourable Cate Faehrmann, MLC (The Greens) Issues

Comment

Excessive removal of vegetation

The area for development has vegetation in the poorest condition (native trees in particular) in that it is mostly grassland (of introduced weed and grass species) with scattered clumps of Eucalyptus trees. The Regional Park (900 hectares) has very large trees and vegetation (including native shrub and herb layers) in much better condition and of greater biodiversity than is being removed.  The density of trees is much greater and this can be clearly seen by aerial photography (see e.g. Fig. 2.2 of the revised SIS). Within the development area there will be areas of open space and other areas for trees to be retained. Therefore there is not excessive vegetation removal occurring. Within the 900 ha Park there should be areas for revegetation/vegetation enhancement to occur.

Does not agree that the regional park off set is acceptable

According to the SIS, the primary statutory planning instrument for the subject site is SREP30, which established the principle of the 900 ha Regional Park as the major outcome for the property. The SIS regards the Regional Park as including the major occurrences of the CPW and other communities within the property.  (see e.g. Executive Summary of the revised SIS).

 


Extraordinary Council Meeting                                                                                             11 April 2012

Attachment 4 - Previous Council Report dated 15 August 2011

 

temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp


temp