Agenda of Ordinary Meeting

UNCONFIRMED MINUTES

OF THE ORDINARY MEETING OF PENRITH CITY COUNCIL HELD IN THE

COUNCIL CHAMBERS

ON MONDAY 22 JULY 2013 AT 7:33PM

NATIONAL ANTHEM

The meeting opened with the National Anthem.

STATEMENT OF RECOGNITION

His Worship the Mayor, Councillor Mark 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 Mark Davies, Deputy Mayor, Councillor Ross Fowler OAM and Councillors Jim Aitken OAM, Bernard Bratusa, Prue Car, Kevin Crameri OAM, Marcus Cornish, Greg Davies, Maurice Girotto, Ben Goldfinch, Jackie Greenow OAM, Tricia Hitchen, John Thain and Michelle Tormey.

LEAVE OF ABSENCE

Leave of Absence was previously granted to Councillor Karen McKeown for the period 19 July 2013 to 11 August 2013 inclusive.

APOLOGIES

There were no apologies.

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES - Ordinary Meeting - 24 June 2013

177 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ben Goldfinch seconded Councillor Marcus Cornish that the minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of 24 June 2013 be confirmed with the amendment to Item 5 – Local Government NSW Annual Conference 2013, adding the names of Councillor Ross Fowler OAM and Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM and removing the names of Councillor Maurice Girotto and Councillor John Thain.

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM declared a Non-Pecuniary Conflict of Interest – Less than Significant in Item 7 – Proposed Concept Plan for a Mixed Use Development and Stage 1 works for Construction of a Masters Store by Parkview Penrith Pty Ltd at 164 Station Street, Penrith as his wife works for Woolworths who own Masters stores.

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM declared a Non-Pecuniary Conflict of Interest - Significant in Item 8 – Federal Government 2014/15 'Nation Building Black Spot Program' Nominations and Funding Acceptance of Projects under the 2013/14 ' State 50/50 Black Spot Program' as some of the works will be occurring on Ninth Avenue, Llandilo which runs down the side of his property.

Councillor Ben Goldfinch declared a Pecuniary Interest in Item 7 – Proposed Concept Plan for a Mixed Use Development and Stage 1 works for Construction of a Masters Store by Parkview Penrith Pty Ltd at 164 Station Street, Penrith as his family is involved in the hardware business. Councillor Goldfinch indicated he would leave the room for consideration of the matter.

Councillor Mark Davies declared a Pecuniary Interest in Item 3 – Development Application 10/0725.21 Proposed modification to a dwelling design on Lot 13 (No. 6) Coachwood Drive, Claremont Meadows from Type B (2 storey) to Type D (Single storey) as he is one of the owners of the property. Councillor Davies indicated he would leave the room for consideration of the matter.

Councillor Mark Davies declared a Pecuniary Interest in Item 7 – Proposed Concept Plan for a Mixed Use Development and Stage 1 works for Construction of a Masters Store by Parkview Penrith Pty Ltd at 164 Station Street, Penrith as he has a commercial agreement with Masters stores. Councillor Davies indicated he would leave the room for consideration of the matter.

Councillor Bernard Bratusa declared a Non-Pecuniary Conflict of Interest – Less than Significant in Item 12 – NSW Government Office of Communities - Sport and Recreation Participation and Facility Program as the funding offered comes from the Minister’s Portfolio of which he is employed. Councillor Bratusa indicated he would leave the room for consideration of the matter.

Councillor Bernard Bratusa declared a Non-Pecuniary Conflict of Interest – Less than Significant in Item 20 – 2013 Community Building Partnership Program as the potential funding being offered comes from the Minister’s Portfolio of which he is employed. Councillor Bratusa indicated he would leave the room for consideration of the matter.

Councillor Jim Aitken OAM declared a Non-Pecuniary Conflict of Interest – Significant in Committee of the Whole Item 3 - Commercial Matter - Station Street, Penrith (Lot C DP 158845) as he is a part of a syndicate which may be interested in the purchase of this property.

SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS

178 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jackie Greenow OAM seconded Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM that Standing Orders be suspended to allow members of the public to address the meeting, the time being 7:40pm.

Adam Uszynski

Item 6 - Development Application 12/0989 Residential attached dual occupancy (No.46) Ironbark Drive, Cranebrook

Mr Uszynski, an affected person, spoke in opposition to the recommendation for approval of the development application. Mr Uszynski stated that he does not believe the proposal fits in with the existing amenity of the area which is mostly compromised of single level dwellings and that he is concerned about the value of his property should this development be approved. Mr Uszynski raised concerns about the dual access of this property which he believes could have a significant affect on the availability of street parking in the area. Mr Uszynski concluded by stating that a number of residents in the area are concerned with the proposal.

Rod Burndred

Item 6 - Development Application 12/0989 Residential attached dual occupancy (No.46) Ironbark Drive, Cranebrook

Mr Burndred, an affected person raised concerns with the proposal and in particular the management of the property and subsequent safety of people in the area particularly children and senior citizens. Mr Burndred suggested that the management of this property in the past has been poor, with a number of safety issues, police intervention and threats of violence. Mr Burndred acknowledged that he understood that the structure itself may comply with regulations, however expressed reservations about the management of the property and the doubling of the occupancy and the associated anti-social issues it may raise for surrounding residents.

RESUMPTION OF STANDING ORDERS

179 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jackie Greenow OAM seconded Councillor Greg Davies that Standing Orders be resumed, the time being 7:58pm.

Mayoral Minutes

1 Australasian Reporting Awards

Deputy Mayor, Councillor Ross Fowler OAM and Councillor John Thain spoke in support of the Mayoral Minute.

180 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Mark Davies seconded Councillor Ross Fowler OAM that the Mayoral Minute on Australasian Reporting Awards be received.

2 UWS Internship Award

Deputy Mayor, Councillor Ross Fowler OAM spoke in support of the Mayoral Minute.

181 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Mark Davies seconded Councillor Ross Fowler OAM that the Mayoral Minute on UWS Internship Award be received.

3 Australian Organics Recycling Award

Deputy Mayor, Councillor Ross Fowler OAM spoke in support of the Mayoral Minute.

182 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Mark Davies seconded Councillor Ross Fowler OAM that the Mayoral Minute on Australian Organics Recycling Award be received.

Reports of Committees

3 Report and Recommendations of the Access Committee Meeting held on 12 June 2013

183 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jackie Greenow OAM seconded Councillor Tricia Hitchen that the recommendations contained in the Report and Recommendations of the Access Committee meeting held on 12 June, 2013 be adopted.

1 Report and Recommendations of the Local Traffic Committee Meeting held on 1 July 2013

184 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Marcus Cornish that the recommendations contained in the Report and Recommendations of the Local Traffic Committee meeting held on 1 July, 2013 be adopted.

2 Report and Recommendations of the Policy Review Committee Meeting held on 8 July 2013

185 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Marcus Cornish seconded Councillor Ross Fowler OAM that the recommendations contained in the Report and Recommendations of the Policy Review Committee meeting held on 8 July, 2013 be adopted with the exception of Item 1 - Outcomes of public exhibition of draft amendment to Development Control Plan 2010 to include Panthers Penrith Precinct.

186 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Marcus Cornish seconded Councillor Ross Fowler OAM that Item 1 - Outcomes of public exhibition of draft amendment to Development Control Plan 2010 to include Panthers Penrith Precinct in the Report and Recommendations of the Policy Review Committee Meeting held on 8 July 2013 be adopted.

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

For	Against
Councillor Greg Davies
Councillor John Thain
Councillor Maurice Girotto
Councillor Michelle Tormey
Councillor Jackie Greenow OAM
Councillor Ross Fowler OAM
Councillor Ben Goldfinch
Councillor Tricia Hitchen
Councillor Bernard Bratusa
Councillor Jim Aitken OAM
Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM
Councillor Marcus Cornish
Councillor Mark Davies
Councillor Prue Car

187 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ross Fowler OAM seconded Councillor Jim Aitken OAM that Items 3 and 7 be considered first.

DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS

Outcome 2 - We plan for our future growth

Having previously declared a Pecuniary Interest in Items 3 and 7, His Worship the Mayor, Councillor Mark Davies, vacated the Chair and left the meeting, the time being 8:12pm.

Councillor Ben Goldfinch left the meeting, the time being 8:12pm.

Deputy Mayor, Councillor Ross Fowler OAM took the chair for consideration of Items 3 and 7 the time being 8:12pm.

3 Development Application 10/0725.21 Proposed modification to a dwelling design on Lot 13 (No. 6) Coachwood Drive, Claremont Meadows from Type B (2 storey) to Type D (Single storey).

188 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jim Aitken OAM seconded Councillor Marcus Cornish

That:

1. The report on the proposed modification to Development Consent 10/0725 for an integrated housing development for a 21-lot Torrens Title subdivision and construction of dwellings on Lot 159, 160 and 161 DP 1108846 at 18-22, 28-30 & 41-43 Central Park Drive, Claremont Meadows NSW 2747 be received.

2. The application for the proposed modification to Development Consent 10/0725 for an integrated housing development for a 21-lot Torrens Title subdivision and construction of dwellings on Lot 159, 160 and 161 DP 1108846 at 18-22, 28-30 & 41-43 Central Park Drive, Claremont Meadows NSW 2747 be approved as follows:

Amend Condition No.1 of DA10/0725 to read as follows:

1. The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the following plans stamped approved by Council, the application form, Statement of Environmental Effects prepared by Cityscape Planning + Projects, BASIX Certificates and any supporting information received with application, except as may be amended in red on the attached plans and by the following conditions.

a) Subdivision and Dwellings on Lots 1-3, 5-12, and 14-21

Drawing Title	Plan No.	Prepared By	Date
Plan of Proposed Subdivision	32272-DETAIL	Matthew Freeburn land, Engineering & Mining Surveyors	08-06-2010
Site layout and streetscape analysis	Sheet 1 Revision A	Hotondo Homes	13.9.10
Lot 1 Site plan, ground floor plan, first floor plan, Section & Basix and elevations	Job No.210055 Sheet 1 to Sheet6 Issue A	Zac Homes	21.03.11
Lot 1 Landscape plan
Lot 2 Site plan, floor plan and elevations	Sheet 1 to Sheet 4	Hotondo Homes	6.10
Lot 2 Landscape plan
Lot 3 Site plan, floor plan and elevations	Sheet 1 to Sheet 4	Hotondo Homes	6.10
Lot 3 Landscape plan
Lot 5 Site plan, floor plan and elevations	Sheet 1 to Sheet 4	Hotondo Homes	13.9.10
Lot 5 Landscape plan
Lot 6 Site plan, floor plan and elevations	Sheet 1 to Sheet 4	Hotondo Homes	6.10
Lot 6 Landscape plan
Lot 7 Site plan, floor plan and elevations	Sheet 1 to Sheet 4	Hotondo Homes	6.10
Lot 7 Landscape plan
Lot 8 Site plan, floor plan and elevations	Sheet 1 to Sheet 4	Hotondo Homes	6.10
Lot 8 Landscape plan
Lot 9 Site plan, floor plan and elevations	Sheet 1 to Sheet 4	Hotondo Homes	6.10
Lot 9 Landscape plan
Lot 10 Site plan, floor plan and elevations	Sheet 1 to Sheet 4	Hotondo Homes	13.9.10
Lot 10 Landscape plan
Lot 11 Site plan, floor plan and elevations	Sheet 1 to Sheet 4	Hotondo Homes	13.9.10
Lot 11 Landscape plan
Lot 12 Site plan, floor plan and elevations	Sheet 1 to Sheet 4	Hotondo Homes	6.10
Lot 12 Landscape plan
Lot 14 Site plan, Ground floor plan, Section & Basix, Elevations and Site Analysis	Job No.210068 Sheet 1 to Sheet 5 Issue B	Zac Homes	26.10.11
Lot 14 Landscape plan	Job No.210068 Sheet 1 Issue B	Zac Homes	26.10.11
Lot 15 Site plan, floor plan and elevations	Sheet 1 to Sheet 4	Hotondo Homes	6.10
Lot 15 Landscape plan
Lot 16 Site plan, floor plan and elevations	Sheet 1 to Sheet 4	Hotondo Homes	6.10
Lot 16 Landscape plan
Lot 17 Site plan, floor plan and elevations	Sheet 1 to Sheet 4	Hotondo Homes	6.10
Lot 17 Landscape plan
Lot 18 Site plan, floor plan and elevations	Sheet 1 to Sheet 4	Hotondo Homes	6.10
Lot 18 Landscape plan
Lot 19 Site plan, floor plan and elevations	Sheet 1 to Sheet 4	Hotondo Homes	6.10
Lot 19 Landscape plan
Lot 20 Site plan, floor plan and elevations	Sheet 1 to Sheet 4	Hotondo Homes	6.10
Lot 20 Landscape plan
Lot 21 Site plan, floor plan and elevations	Sheet 1 to Sheet 4	Hotondo Homes	6.10
Lot 21 Landscape plan

(b) Lot 4 Dwelling Plans

Drawing Title	Plan No.	Prepared By	Date
Site Plan	Job No. 210058, Sheet. 1 (Issue C)	ZAC Homes	14.11.12
Site Analysis & Shadow Diagrams	Job No. 210058, Sheet. 1A (Issue C)	ZAC Homes	14.11.12
Site Management & Stormwater	Job No. 210058, Sheet. 1B (Issue C)	ZAC Homes	14.11.12
Landscape Plan	Job No. 210058, Sheet. 1C (Issue C)	ZAC Homes	14.11.12
Floor Plan	Job No. 210058, Sheet. 2 (Issue C)	ZAC Homes	14.11.12
Elevations (1 & 2)	Job No. 210058, Sheet. 3 (Issue C)	ZAC Homes	14.11.12
Elevations (3 & 4)	Job No. 210058, Sheet. 4 (Issue C)	ZAC Homes	14.11.12
Sections & Details	Job No. 210058, Sheet. 5 (Issue C)	ZAC Homes	14.11.12
External Colour Finishes	-	ZAC Homes	-
BASIX Certificate	456379S	-	22 November 2012

Drawing Title	Plan No.	Prepared By	Date
Site Plan (as amended in red)	Job No. 210067, Sheet. 1 (Issue A)	ZAC Homes	1.05.13
Site Analysis & Shadow Diagrams	Job No. 210067, Sheet. 1A (Issue A)	ZAC Homes	1.05.13
Stormwater Plan and Waste Management Plan	Job No. 210067, Sheet. 1B (Issue A)	ZAC Homes	1.05.13
Landscape Plan	Job No. 210067, Sheet. 1C (Issue A)	ZAC Homes	1.05.13
Floor Plan	Job No. 210067, Sheet. 2 (Issue A)	ZAC Homes	1.05.13
Elevations (1 & 2)	Job No. 210067, Sheet. 3 (Issue A)	ZAC Homes	1.05.13
Elevations (3 & 4)	Job No. 210067, Sheet. 4 (Issue A)	ZAC Homes	1.05.13
Sections & Details	Job No. 210067, Sheet. 5 (Issue A)	ZAC Homes	1.05.13
External Colour Finishes	-	ZAC Homes	-
BASIX Certificate	480845S_02	-	21 May 2013

Amend Condition No.50 of DA10/0725 to read as follows:

50. The commitments listed in the relevant BASIX Certificates for the Dwellings on Lots 1-21 form part of the development consent, and are to be maintained during the life of the dwellings. Where the commitments require replacement, the replacement must be identical to or is at a higher star rating to that listed in the BASIX Certificate.

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

For	Against
Councillor Greg Davies
Councillor John Thain
Councillor Maurice Girotto
Councillor Michelle Tormey
Councillor Jackie Greenow OAM
Councillor Ross Fowler OAM
Councillor Tricia Hitchen
Councillor Bernard Bratusa
Councillor Jim Aitken OAM
Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM
Councillor Marcus Cornish
Councillor Prue Car

7 Proposed Concept Plan for a Mixed Use Development and Stage 1 works for Construction of a Masters Store by Parkview Penrith Pty Ltd at 164 Station Street, Penrith

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

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Proposed Concept Plan for a Mixed Use Development and Stage 1 works for Construction of a Masters Store by Parkview Penrith Pty Ltd at 164 Station Street, Penrith be received.

2. Council make another submission strongly objecting to the amended proposal.

3. Council write to the State Member for Penrith, Stuart Ayres, the NSW Premier, Minister for Western Sydney, the Hon Barry O’Farrell MP and the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure, Minister Assisting the Premier on Infrastructure NSW, the Hon Brad Hazzard MP strongly opposing the development and seeking a response on the prohibited development and why the development is being dealt with under Part 3A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

4. Council staff write to Parkview Penrith Pty Ltd seeking further meetings and reaffirming Council’s commitment to work together towards a mutually beneficial solution.

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

For	Against
Councillor Greg Davies
Councillor John Thain
Councillor Maurice Girotto
Councillor Michelle Tormey
Councillor Jackie Greenow OAM
Councillor Ross Fowler OAM
Councillor Tricia Hitchen
Councillor Bernard Bratusa
Councillor Jim Aitken OAM
Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM
Councillor Marcus Cornish
Councillor Prue Car

His Worship the Mayor, Councillor Mark Davies, returned to the meeting and took the chair, the time being 8:45pm.

Councillor Ben Goldfinch returned to the meeting, the time being 8:45pm

190 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Marcus Cornish that Item 6 be dealt with next.

6 Development Application 12/0989 Residential attached dual occupancy (No.46) Ironbark Drive, Cranebrook

191 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ben Goldfinch seconded Councillor Jim Aitken OAM

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Development Application 12/0989 Residential attached dual occupancy (No.46) Ironbark Drive, Cranebrook be received.

2. The matter be deferred until such time that a meeting can be arranged between Council, the Department of Housing, the Member for Londonderry, Bart Bassett MP and residents to allow for clear protocols to be put in place should future issues arise, and a copy of those protocols be included when the matter is brought back to Council.

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

For	Against
Councillor Greg Davies
Councillor John Thain
Councillor Maurice Girotto
Councillor Michelle Tormey
Councillor Jackie Greenow OAM
Councillor Ross Fowler OAM
Councillor Ben Goldfinch
Councillor Tricia Hitchen
Councillor Bernard Bratusa
Councillor Jim Aitken OAM
Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM
Councillor Marcus Cornish
Councillor Mark Davies
Councillor Prue Car

Councillor Maurice Girotto left the meeting, the time being 8:48pm.
Councillor Ben Goldfinch left the meeting, the time being 8:49pm.

Outcome 1 - We can work close to home

1 Tender Reference 12/13-16, Provision of Childcare Cleaning Services

192 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ross Fowler OAM seconded Councillor Marcus Cornish

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Tender Reference 12/13-16, Provision of Childcare Cleaning Services be received

2. The matter be deferred to allow for further information to be obtained.

Councillor Maurice Girotto returned to the meeting, the time being 8:50pm.
Councillor Ben Goldfinch returned the meeting, the time being 8:50pm.

Outcome 2 - We plan for our future growth

2 Erskine Park Residential s94 Plan

193 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Prue Car seconded Councillor Jackie Greenow OAM

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Erskine Park Residential s94 Plan be received

2. Contributions remaining in the Erskine Park Residential Release Area Development Contributions Plan be allocated to projects either described in the relevant tables of this report or as determined by Council, consistent with the legal and State Government limitations applying to development contributions

3. The Erskine Park Residential Release Area Development Contributions Plan be rescinded.

4. If any further contributions are paid in relation to existing development consents, these be allocated to additional park improvements (including accessible play equipment, seating, lighting and paths), or floodlighting of Peppertree Reserve.

5. Land at the rear of No.s 94-100 Explorers Way, Erskine Park no longer be acquired and the owner of that land be notified accordingly.

6. Council examine the futures of community facility land at Chameleon Drive and drainage land at Explorers Way, Ashwick Circuit and Fullers Place as part of the Property Department’s overall assets review and be subject to the “Planning Proposal for Reclassification and Rezoning of Certain Lands” if appropriate.

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

For	Against
Councillor Greg Davies
Councillor John Thain
Councillor Maurice Girotto
Councillor Michelle Tormey
Councillor Jackie Greenow OAM
Councillor Ross Fowler OAM
Councillor Ben Goldfinch
Councillor Tricia Hitchen
Councillor Bernard Bratusa
Councillor Jim Aitken OAM
Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM
Councillor Marcus Cornish
Councillor Mark Davies
Councillor Prue Car

4 NSW Fire & Rescue Safety Report

194 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jim Aitken OAM seconded Councillor Ben Goldfinch

That:

1. The information contained in the report on NSW Fire & Rescue Safety Report be received.

2. Council continue to monitor all properties as part of its Fire Safety Audit Programme.

5 Development Application 12/0433 - Demolition of existing structures and construction of a 6 storey mixed use building containing 2 commercial units and 35 apartments with basement parking at Lots 100 & 102 DP128213 (No.167-171) Queen Street, St Marys Applicant: Padom Investments & Metropolitan Investments; Owner: Sondow & Co Pty Ltd

195 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Jackie Greenow OAM

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Development Application 12/0433 - Demolition of existing structures and construction of a 6 storey mixed use building containing 2 commercial units and 35 apartments with basement parking at Lots 100 & 102 DP128213 (No.167-171) Queen Street, St Marys be received.

2. Development Application DA12/0433 for the demolition of existing structures and construction of a 6-storey mixed use building containing 2 commercial units and 35 apartments with basement parking at Lots 100 & 101 D128213 (No.167-171 Queen Street, St Marys) be approved subject to the following conditions:

Standard Conditions

2.1 A001 Approved plans that are architecturally drawn

A014 Lot consolidation

A017 DA for use

A019 Occupation Certificate

A037 Positive covenants

A039 Graffiti

A043 Air conditioner for existing dwelling

A046 Obtain Construction Certificate before commencement of works

B001 Demolition of existing structures

B002 AS for demolition and disposal to approved landfill site

B003 Asbestos

B004 Dust

B005 Mud/Soil

B006 Hours of work

D001 Implement approved sediment & erosion control measures

D005 No filling without prior approval

D06A No filling without prior approval (bulk earthworks/major filling)

D009 Covering of waste storage area (Applies to building works/demolition)

D010 Appropriate disposal of excavated or other waste

D026 Liquid wastes

E01A BCA compliance for Class 2-9

E006 Disabled access and facilities

E008 Fire safety list with Construction Certificate

E009 Annual fire safety-essential fire safety (Class 2-9 buildings)

G002 Section 73 Certificate

G004 Integral Energy

H001 Stamped plans & erection of site notice 1 (Class 2-9)

H002 All forms of construction

H003 Traffic safety during construction or subdivision works

H011 Engineering plans & specifications

H022 Survey

H024 Glass installations AS1288

H041 Hours of work (other devt)

K202 Roads Act – Minor roadworks

K203 S138 Roads Act – roadworks requiring approval of civil drawings

K207 Car parking

K209 Stormwater Concept Plan

K211 Stormwater Discharge – Basement Car parks

K221 Access, Car Parking and Manoeuvring – General

K501 Roads Authority clearance

L001 General landscaping (Applies to most building works, not fitouts)

L002 Landscape construction

L003 Report requirement

L004 Bond for landscape works

L005 Planting of plant material (Applies to most building/subdivision, not fitouts)

L006 AS requirements (Applies to most building/subdivision, not fitouts)

L007 Tree protection measures–no TMP with DA (for minor development)

L008 Tree Preservation Order

N003 Section 94 Contributions - Cultural Facilities

N004 Section 94 Contributions - District Open Space

N005 Section 94 Contributions - Footpaths

N006 Section 94 Contributions – Local Open Space

N007 Section 94 Contributions – St Marys Town Centre -carparking

P001 Costs

P002 Fees associated with Council land (Applies to all works, add K019)

Q01F Notice of Commencement & Appointment of PCA2

Special Condition

2.2 The aapplicant shall implement upgrading of the public domain up to the building facade of the development approved herein in accordance with Council's Streetscape Improvement Plan at their own cost. The public domain includes but not limited to street furniture, street trees and public domain pavement materials in Queen Street, St Marys.

The applicant shall liaise with Council's Landscape Architecture Supervisor in relation to the detailed design of the public domain.

For the long term maintenance of the public domain and up to the building facade, a positive covenant shall be registered over the property prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate.

Documentation and associated legal paperwork shall be forwarded to Penrith City Council for consideration and endorsement which notes Council's interest in the positive covenant before the positive covenant is registered with Land and Property Information division of the Department of Lands.

2.3 Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate detail is to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority confirming that measures are to be implemented to ensure the development is not impacted by salinity.

2.4 The loading bay and associated bollards are to be deleted, with amended plans to accompany the construction certificate application that demonstrate the removal of the bollards and loading bay. The setback, footpath and verge are to be treated with a compatible design and material to the Crana Street setback, footpath, and verge.

2.5 A dilapidation report detailing the condition of public infrastructure and adjoining development within 20m of the subject site is to accompany the application for a construction certificate. Prior to the issue of an occupation certificate a final dilapidation report is to be prepared, with any damage identified to be repaired at full cost the developer.

2.6 An access door from Retail tenancy 1 to the service areas/garbage area is to be provided to enable access to the lift core and waste storage areas.

2.7 The ramp leading to the garbage storage room must have a gradient no steeper than 1:14 and a width not less than 1.2m.

A personal access point is to be provided to the loading dock area that connects to the waste storage area, with the access point to be accessible using Councils Abloy locking system to enable domestic waste collection to occur. The locking system is to be installed and maintained at the owners' expense.

2.8 The landscape concept plans are to be revised as follows:

(a) Species selection is to be revised to provide for species that are appropriate for the Western Sydney climate.

(b) Street trees are to be provided on Crana Street with the final species selection to be agreed with Councils Landscape section.

2.9 A Phase 2 Detailed Site Investigation for contamination is required to be carried out prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate. This investigation is to consider the requirements of the relevant NSW Environment Protection Authority Guidelines and be prepared by a suitably qualified environmental consultant. The associated report needs to establish whether the site is suitable for its intended use and is to be submitted to Council for approval. If Penrith City Council is not the certifying authority, the assessment is still required to be submitted to Council for approval.

Should it be identified in the Phase 2 investigation that remediation works are required to be undertaken on the site, a separate development application is to be submitted to Council for this work. No work on the current development is to proceed until such time as this new application has been approved by Council, and Council has approved the Validation Report associated with the remediation works.

2.10 Prior to the issuing of the Construction Certificate a noise and vibration impact assessment is to be provided to Penrith City Council for approval. The assessment is to be prepared by a suitably qualified consultant and is to assess the noise and vibration impacts during construction, any potential impacts after the completion of the development and recommend mitigation measures which are to be implemented.

At minimum the assessment is to be provided and address the following:

· Vibration impacts on surrounding properties associated with the construction of the basement carpark. The vibration impacts must be assessed and comply with the relevant standards and guidelines.

· The impact of construction noise (including excavation into bedrock) on surrounding properties. Construction noise is to be assessed and comply with the relevant EPA guidelines and standards

· Assess the potential impact of road traffic noise on the residents in accordance with the EPA ‘Road Traffic Noise Policy’ and the projected traffic increase as noted in the Traffic Report prepared by Varga (dated 4/4/2012);

· Determined whether any noise is being produced by the on-site substation and any impact this may have on residents. Noise from the substation must comply with the Industrial Noise Policy.

· Address any potential impact from the proposed and existing commercial uses on the residential units. Noise from commercial activities are to comply with the provisions of the Industrial Noise Policy

· Any air conditioning units proposed for the development. Noise from air conditioning units are to comply with the provisions of the Industrial Noise Policy.

2.11 Any noise mitigation works required by the Noise Impact Assessment to ensure compliance is to be undertaken.

2.12 Prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate, the applicant shall submit plans to Penrith City Council and approved by the Local Traffic Committee for the provision of a loading zone in West Lane.

Notes:

1. Contact Penrith City Council’s Development Engineering Unit on (02) 4732 7777 for further information on this process.

Allow eight (8) weeks for approval by the Local Traffic Committee.

2.13 The stormwater system, including any on-site detention or water quality treatment devices, shall be operated and maintained for its lifetime.

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

For	Against
Councillor Greg Davies
Councillor John Thain
Councillor Maurice Girotto
Councillor Michelle Tormey
Councillor Jackie Greenow OAM
Councillor Ross Fowler OAM
Councillor Ben Goldfinch
Councillor Tricia Hitchen
Councillor Bernard Bratusa
Councillor Jim Aitken OAM
Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM
Councillor Marcus Cornish
Councillor Mark Davies
Councillor Prue Car

Outcome 3 - We can get around the City

Having previously declared a Pecuniary Interest Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM left the meeting, the time being 9:05pm.

8 Federal Government 2014/15 'Nation Building Black Spot Program' Nominations and Funding Acceptance of Projects under the 2013/14 'State 50/50 Black Spot Program'

196 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Marcus Cornish seconded Councillor Prue Car

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Federal Government 2014/15 'Nation Building Black Spot Program' Nominations and Funding Acceptance of Projects under the 2013/14 'State 50/50 Black Spot Program' be received.

2. Council endorse the five projects listed in Table 1 of this report for submission to the Roads and Maritime Services for funding under the Federal Government’s 2014/15 ‘Nation Building Black Spot Program’.

3. The Roads and Maritime Services be requested to investigate traffic safety on roads under its jurisdiction at locations indicated in Table 2 of this report.

4. Council write to the RMS and Minister for Roads requesting that higher consideration be given to the Road Safety Impact index for the prioritisation of future road safety projects (including the Black Spot Program) as ranking projects by this index gives Council and the community the greatest casualty and fatality accident prevention over the life of a project.

5. Council accept grant funding of $165,000 offered for the successful Projects shown in Table 3, under the ‘State 50/50 Funded State Black Spot Program’ for the 2013/14 financial year.

9 Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) 2013/14 Road Funding Grants

197 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Marcus Cornish

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) 2013/14 Road Funding Grants be received.

2. The RMS 2013/14 Program Funding Block Grant of $1,071,000 be accepted.

3. Council accept the grant of $250,000, offered under the 2013/14 Roads and Maritime Services REPAIR Program, for the reconstruction of Roper Road, Colyton from Hewitt Street to Carlisle Avenue.

4. Council accept the grant of $50,000, offered under the 2013/14 Roads and Maritime Services REPAIR Program, for the reconstruction of Dunheved Road, Werrington County from John Batman Avenue to 300m east.

5. The Supplementary Road component be allocated to the resurfacing of Llandilo Road, Berkshire Park (between Sixth Road and Richmond Road).

6. The Common Seal of the Council of the City of Penrith be affixed to the “Agreement for Block Grant Assistance to Council for Regional Roads 2013/14”.

Outcome 4 - We have safe, vibrant places

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM returned to the meeting, the time being 9:13pm.

10 Establishment of Alcohol Free Zones and Alcohol Prohibited Areas

198 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jim Aitken OAM seconded Councillor Marcus Cornish

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Establishment of Alcohol Free Zones and Alcohol Prohibited Areas be received.

2. Council support the establishment of Alcohol Free Zones and Alcohol Prohibited Areas at each of the locations proposed for the four (4) year period from 1July 2013 to 30 June 2017.

3. A further report be prepared for a future Policy Review Committee or Councillor Briefing providing information on the number of liquor outlets in the City.

11 Request for funding for All-Abilities Playground at Jordan Springs

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

That:

1. The information in relation to the construction of an All Abilities Playground at Jordan Springs be received.

2. Council support the allocation of $150,000 sourced from the Telecommunications Access Fund towards the construction of the All Abilities Playground at Jordan Springs

3. Council’s Access Committee continues to be consulted through the design and development stages of this project.

Having previously declared a Non Pecuniary Interest Conflict of Interest – Less than Significant, Councillor Bernard Bratusa left the meeting, the time being 9:18pm.

20 2013 Community Building Partnership Program

200 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM

That:

1. The information contained in the report on 2013 Community Building Partnership Program be received.

2. Council endorse the submission of the following eight projects to the 2013 Community Building Partnership Program:

Londonderry:

1. Installation of new floodlights and field drainage embellishment to

upgrade safety and capacity of fields at Andromeda Drive reserve.

Project cost estimate: $125,000

Grant Request: $25,000

Council Contribution: $100,000 from Parks Asset Renewal Program

2. Tobruk Reserve, North St Marys – Playground replacement

Project cost estimate: $75,000

Grant Request: $37,500

Council Contribution: $37,500 from Parks Asset Renewal Program

Mulgoa:

1. Upgrades at Kevin Dwyer Fields (Roper Road) including the completion of floodlight and canteen projects, upgrade of fields and provision of building security.

Project cost estimate: $235,000

Grant Request: $50,000

Council Contribution: $185,000 combined from Telecommunications Access Fund, Building Asset Renewal and Parks Asset Renewal.

2. Upgrades to Saunders Park Athletics facility including Proposed work the reconstruction of the 100m sprint track utilising recycled organic material, replacement of two synthetic grass long jump pits and the construction of two new shot putt circles

Project cost estimate: $30,000

Grant Request: $15,000

Council Contribution: $15,000 from Telecommunications Access

Fund:

3. Automated Floodlight controls at six locations in the Mulgoa District.

Project cost estimate: $28,000

Grant Request: $14,000

Council Contribution: $14,000 from Telecommunications Access Fund:

Penrith:

1. Hunter Field, Emu Plains Floodlight Upgrade

Project cost estimate: $40,000

Grant Request: $20,000

Council Contribution: $20,000 from Parks Asset Renewal Program.

2. Hickeys Lane field drainage improvements

Project cost estimate: $70,000

Grant Request: $35,000

Council Contribution: $35,000 from Parks Asset Renewal Program.

Smithfield:

1. Erskine Park Hall, Erskine Park door upgrades

Project cost estimate: $12,000

Grant Request: $6,000

Council Contribution: $6,000 from Building Asset Renewal Program

Outcome 6 - We're healthy and share strong community spirit

12 NSW Government Office of Communities - Sport and Recreation Participation and Facility Program

201 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Jackie Greenow OAM

That:

1. The information contained in the report on NSW Government Office of Communities - Sport and Recreation Participation and Facility Program be received.

2. The sum of $4,250 is allocated from the Recreation Reserve for the purpose of implementing the ‘In to Tennis Program’.

3. A further report be prepared for the next Policy Review Committee meeting on the shortfall in funding for the St Clair Comets JRLFC project in relation to the storage containers located next to the amenities building, and detailing any potential funding options from Council. In addition a further report be prepared on the funding shortfall for a project for the St Marys Leagues Netball Club.

Councillor Bernard Bratusa returned to the meeting, the time being 9:25pm.

13 Donations to Amateur Sportspersons and Representatives in the fields of Art, Music, Culture - Interstate and Overseas Travel

202 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Maurice Girotto

That the information contained in the report on Donations to Amateur Sportspersons and Representatives in the fields of Art, Music, Culture - Interstate and Overseas Travel be received.

14 Access Committee - Appointment of Community Member

203 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Prue Car seconded Councillor Jackie Greenow OAM

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Access Committee - Appointment of Community Member be received.

2. Emma Husar be appointed as a community member to Council’s Access Committee.

15 NSW Government Transport - Roads and Maritime Services Better Boating Program - Grant Application

204 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM seconded Councillor Marcus Cornish

That:

1. The information contained in the report on NSW Government Transport - Roads and Maritime Services Better Boating Program - Grant Application be received

2. Council allocate $75,000 from the Grant Reserve, subject to the grant application being successful, for the purpose of submitting a NSW Government Transport – Roads and Maritime Services Better Boating Program grant application to:

- Develop concept designs, cost estimates and construction documentation to upgrade and extended the boat ramp at Tench Reserve with associated new road access.

- Design and construct light water craft launching platforms.

Councillor Greg Davies left the meeting, the time being 9:30pm.

16 Sportsground Use Agreements

205 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Bernard Bratusa seconded Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM that the information contained in the report on Sportsground Use Agreements be received.

Outcome 7 - We have confidence in our Council

18 2012-13 Loan Borrowing Program

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

That:

1. The information contained in the report on 2012-13 Loan Borrowing Program be received

2. Council be advised when the outcome of round 2 LIRS is announced

19 Summary of Investments & Banking for the period 1 June 2013 to 30 June 2013

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

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Summary of Investments & Banking for the period 1 June 2013 to 30 June 2013 be received.

2. The Certificate of the Responsible Accounting Officer and Summaries of Investments and Performance for the period 1 June 2013 to 30 June 2013 be noted and accepted.

3. The graphical investment analysis as at 30 June 2013 be noted.

4. The Agency Collection Methods be noted

Councillor Jackie Greenow OAM left the meeting, the time being 9:33pm.

Councillor Greg Davies returned to the meeting, the time being 9:34pm

Councillor Jackie Greenow OAM returned to the meeting, the time being 9:36pm.

17 Constitutional Recognition Update

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

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Constitutional Recognition Update be received

2. Council reaffirm its position on Constitutional Recognition and support a ‘Yes’ Vote on the referendum through the Communication Plan detailed in Appendix 1 to the report.

REQUESTS FOR REPORTS AND MEMORANDUMS

RR 1 Rail Corridor - Penrith and East Richmond

Councillor Marcus Cornish requested a report to Council on land which would be best suited for a rail line between Penrith and East Richmond or Clarendon Station.

RR 2 Glenmore Park Loch Lighting

Councillor Marcus Cornish requested a report to Council on lighting options for lights around the Loch at Glenmore Park.

RR 3 Traffic Count and Information - High Street to Henry Street, Penrith

Councillor Jim Aitken OAM requested a copy of hourly traffic counts of vehicles entering Henry Street, Penrith. Councillor Jim Aitken OAM also requested a report to Council on the effects of traffic movements created because of the closing off of High Street, Penrith and a list of the benefits created by this closure and who it might benefit.

RR 4 Street Sign Maintenance

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM requested that the street signs on Andromeda Drive and Goldmark Crescent, Cranebrook be turned the correct way and that in future Council look into installing self tapper screws to stop the turning of the signs by vandals.

RR 5 Sealing of Water Street, Werrington

Councillor John Thain requested a report on the costing of sealing Water Street, Werrington given the new Kurrambee School and Werrington Arterial Road, left of the Great Western Highway.

RR 6 Traffic Issues - Northern Road and Andromeda Drive, Cranebrook

Councillor John Thain requested a memo reply concerning the new give way rules at the Northern Road and Andromeda Drive, Cranebrook and requested the Local Traffic Committee investigate this issue.

URGENT BUSINESS

RR 7 Leave of Absence

Councillor Jackie Greenow OAM requested leave of absence from 25 July 2013 to 4 August 2013 inclusive.

209 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Prue Car that the matter be brought forward and dealt with as a matter of urgency.

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

210 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Prue Car that Councillor Jackie Greenow OAM be granted leave of absence from 25 July 2013 to 4 August 2013 inclusive.

Committee of the Whole

211 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM seconded Councillor Ross Fowler OAM that the meeting adjourn to the Committee of the Whole to deal with the following matters, the time being 10:00pm.

1 Presence of the Public

CW1 RESOLVED on the motion of Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM seconded Councillor Ross Fowler OAM that the press and public be excluded from Committee of the Whole to deal with the following matters:

Outcome 2

2 Log Cabin Hotel Site

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.

Outcome 7

3 Commercial Matter - Station Street, Penrith (Lot C DP 158845)

The meeting resumed at 10:44pm and the General Manager reported that the Committee of the Whole met at 10:00pm on Monday, 22 July 2013 the following being present

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 Log Cabin Hotel Site

RECOMMENDED on the MOTION of Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM seconded Councillor Marcus Cornish CW2 that the information contained in the report on Log Cabin Hotel Site be received and the matter be advanced as outlined in the report.

Having previously declared a Non Pecuniary Conflict of Interest – Significant, Councillor Jim Aitken OAM left the meeting, the time being 10:25pm and did not return.

3 Commercial Matter - Station Street, Penrith (Lot C DP 158845)

Councillor Prue Car left the meeting, the time being 10:30pm and did not return.

Councillor Trish Hitchen left the meeting, the time being 10:37pm and did not return.

RECOMMENDED on the MOTION of Councillor Ross Fowler OAM seconded Councillor Marcus Cornish

CW3 That:

1. The information contained in the report on Commercial Matter - Station Street, Penrith (Lot C DP 158845) be received.

2. Council endorse the proposal outlined in this report and hand out.

3. A further report be presented to Council on the outcome of the contents of the report.

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

ADOPTION OF Committee of the Whole

That the recommendation contained in the Committee of the Whole and shown as CW1, CW2 and CW3 be adopted.

There being no further business the Chairperson declared the meeting closed the time being 10:46pm.

Ordinary Meeting 26 August 2013

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE
Local Traffic Committee MEETING

HELD ON 5 August, 2013

PRESENT

Michael Alderton – Road Network Services Engineer (Chairperson), Adam Wilkinson – Engineering Services Manager, Councillor Cornish, Councillor Hitchen – Representative for the Member for Penrith, Sergeant Matthew Shirvington – Penrith Police, Senior Constable Mark Elliott – St Marys Police, James Suprain – Roads and Maritime Services, Daniel Davidson – Road Safety Co‑ordinator, David Drozd – Senior Traffic Engineer, Ruth Byrnes - Senior Traffic Officer, Martin Warda – Trainee Engineer, Bernie Meier – Acting Engineering Co-ordinator

IN ATTENDANCE

Darrell Boggs – Ranger

APOLOGIES

Apologies were accepted from Councillor Greenow OAM, Councillor McKeown, Wayne Mitchell – Executive Manager Environment & City Development, Mark Fittock – Westbus, Noel Fuller – Co-ordinator, Ranger Services.

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES - Local Traffic Committee Meeting - 1 July 2013

The minutes of the Local Traffic Committee Meeting of 1 July 2013 were confirmed.

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

There were no declarations of interest.

DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS

Outcome 3 - We can get around the City

1 Town Terrace, Glenmore Park - Proposed Implementation of "No Stopping" Restrictions

RECOMMENDED

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Town Terrace, Glenmore Park - Proposed Implementation of "No Stopping" Restrictions be received.

2. Full-time “No Stopping” restrictions be provided on the western side of Town Terrace, Glenmore Park, 4.5 metres from the driveways of the car park exit and the drive-through exit.

3. Councillor Goldfinch and the Glenmore Park Residents’ Group be notified of Council’s resolution.

4. Council’s Rangers be notified of Council’s resolution.

2 Ninth Avenue, Llandilo - Xavier College Walkathon

RECOMMENDED

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Ninth Avenue, Llandilo - Xavier College Walkathon be received.

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

3. The Traffic Management Plan submitted by the event applicant, detailing the proposed event route to be held on Friday 13 September 2013, be endorsed, subject to conditions.

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

b) The event applicant submit a copy of the Traffic Management Plan to NSW Police for endorsement prior to the event. A copy of the NSW Police endorsement be submitted to Council prior to the event. The organiser ensure that participants obey all Police directions and road rules during the event.

c) Where Traffic Controllers are to be used, all Traffic Controllers have current Roads and Maritime Services certification.

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

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

f) The event organiser notify ambulance and fire brigade (NSW Fire Brigade and Rural Fire Services) and State Emergency Services of the proposed event and submit a copy of this notification to Council prior to the event.

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

3 Castle Road & Ulm Road, Orchard Hills - Proposed Provision of ''Give Way" Signage

RECOMMENDED

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Castle Road & Ulm Road, Orchard Hills - Proposed Provision of ''Give Way" Signage be received.

2. “Give Way” signage and associated TB hold lines be provided on Ulm Road at the intersections of Ulm Road and Castle Road, and Ulm Road and Caddens Road, Orchard Hills.

3. Double-barrier centre linemarking be provided on Ulm Road for 10m from the intersections of Ulm Road and Castle Road and Ulm Road and Caddens Road, Orchard Hills.

4. Councillor Cornish be advised of Council’s resolution.

4 Andrews Road, Penrith - Request for Provision of "No Parking" Restrictions & "Bus Zone" Signage

RECOMMENDED

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Andrews Road, Penrith - Request for Provision of "No Parking" Restrictions & "Bus Zone" Signage be received.

2. A 20m “Bus Zone” be provided for a length of 10m either side of the existing power pole on the southern side of Andrews Road, Penrith, approximately 160m west from The Northern Road intersection.

3. “No Parking” restrictions be provided on the southern side of Andrews Road, Penrith, for a length of 40m on the approach to the “Bus Zone” and 50m on the departure.

4. The resident be advised of Council’s resolution.

5 "Leonay Loop Fun Run" - Saturday 21 September 2013 - Traffic Management Plan

RECOMMENDED

That:

1. The information contained in the report on "Leonay Loop Fun Run" - Saturday 21 September 2013 - Traffic Management Plan be received.

3. The Traffic Management Plan submitted by the event applicant be endorsed, subject to the following conditions:

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

(b) The event applicant submit a copy of the Traffic Management Plan to NSW Police for endorsement prior to the event. A copy of the NSW Police endorsement be submitted to Council prior to the event. The organiser ensure that participants obey all Police directions and road rules during the event.

(c) A detailed Traffic Control Plan be prepared by a qualified and certified professional and submitted to Council, the Roads and Maritime Services and NSW Police prior to the event. The Traffic Control Plan shall detail how a minimum 4.0m emergency lane is maintained at all times during the event.

(d) The event applicant arrange to place barricades and provide Roads and Maritime Services accredited Traffic Controllers where required by the endorsed Traffic Management Plan. Where the Traffic Management and Traffic Control Plans indicate Traffic Controllers are to be used, all Traffic Controllers must have current Roads and Maritime Services certification.

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

(f) The event applicant notify private bus companies of the proposed event and submit a copy of the notification to Council prior to the event. Bus companies shall be requested to advertise the changed route for affected buses at least one week prior to, and during, the event.

(g) Should the consultation process resolve to temporarily relocate bus stops or bus routes that were not indicated in the original Traffic Management Plan, a further report will be required to be submitted to the next available Local Traffic Committee meeting.

(h) The event applicant shall ensure that noise control measures are in place as required by the Protection of the Environment Operations (Noise Control) Regulation 2000.

(i) The event organiser notify ambulance and fire brigade (NSW Fire Brigade and Rural Fire Services) and State Emergency Services of the proposed event and submit a copy of the notification to Council prior to the event.

4. The event applicant be advised of Council’s resolution

6 "Tom Tom Runner Western Sydney Marathon" - Saturday 5 October 2013

RECOMMENDED

That:

1. The information contained in the report on "Tom Tom Runner Western Sydney Marathon" - Saturday 5 October 2013 be received.

2. The applicant consult with NSW Department of Planning and/or Penrith Lakes Development Corporation with regard to access in Old Castlereagh Road, (near its termination) for the event route, due to imminent mining of the area. Any substantial change to the event route will be required to be documented in the Traffic Management Plan.

3. Subject to no objections from NSW Department of Planning, approval be given for the temporary closure of Old Castlereagh Road, from SIRC Gate B to near its termination, from 5.00am to 1.00pm on Saturday 5 October 2013 for the marathon and half marathons of the “Tom Tom Runner Western Sydney Marathon”, subject to the following conditions:

a. The event applicant be advised that this is a Class 2 Event under the “Guide to Traffic and Transport Management for Special Events”, and that all conditions and requirements specified in the Guide must be complied with prior to the event.

b. A Traffic Management Plan including a Risk Management Plan be lodged by the event applicant with the Roads and Maritime Services for approval, prior to the event. A copy of the Roads and Maritime Services approval must be submitted to Council prior to the event.

c. The event applicant submit a copy of the Traffic Management Plan to NSW Police for endorsement prior to the event. A copy of the NSW Police endorsement be submitted to Council prior to the event. The organiser ensure that participants obey all Police directions and road rules during the event.

d. The event applicant submits to Council a copy of Public Liability Insurance (usually a Certificate of Currency) of minimum $10 million, 30 days prior to the event. In addition, the event applicant indemnifies Council, in writing, against all claims for damage and injury which may result from the proposed event.

e. A detailed Traffic Control Plan be prepared by a qualified and certified professional and submitted to Council, the Roads and Maritime Services and NSW Police prior to the event. The Traffic Control Plan shall detail how a minimum 4.0m emergency lane is maintained at all times during the event.

f. The event applicant arrange to place barricades and provide Roads and Maritime Services accredited Traffic Controllers where required by the approved Traffic Management Plan. Where the Traffic Management and Traffic Control Plans indicate Traffic Controllers are to be used, all Traffic Controllers must have current Roads and Maritime Services certification.

g. The event applicant provides advice to Council prior to the event that the event complies with the NSW Occupational Health & Safety Act 2000 and the NSW Occupational Health & Safety Regulations 2001.

h. The event applicant advertise the proposed temporary road closure in local newspapers a minimum of two weeks prior to the event, and provide variable message signs (VMS) in appropriate locations a minimum of one week prior to the event, with the locations of the VMS boards submitted to Council for endorsement prior to their erection. VMS boards should be located in accordance with the Roads and Maritime Services Technical Direction TDT2002/11c.

i. The event applicant notifies Ambulance (Ambulance Service of NSW) and Fire Brigade (NSW Fire Brigade and Rural Fire Service) and State Emergency Services of the proposed event and submits a copy of the notification to Council prior to the event.

j. The event applicant notifies private bus companies of the proposed event and submits a copy of the notification to Council prior to the event. Bus companies shall be requested to advertise the changed route for affected buses at least one week prior to, and during, the event.

k. Should the consultation process resolve to temporarily relocate bus stops or bus routes that were not indicated in the original Traffic Management Plan, a further report be required to be submitted to the next available Local Traffic Committee meeting.

l. The event applicant ensures that noise control measures are in place as required by the Protection of the Environment Operations (Noise Control) Regulation 2000.

m. Any affected properties along the event route be advised of the proposal by the applicant.

4. All works as part of this approval be conducted at no cost to Council.

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

7 Sarah Andrews Close, Erskine Park - Proposed Implementation of "No Stopping" Restrictions

RECOMMENDED

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Sarah Andrews Close, Erskine Park - Proposed Implementation of "No Stopping" Restrictions be received.

2. Full-time “No Stopping” be provided on the northern side of the Linfox Logistics car park driveway in Sarah Andrews Close, Erskine Park, for a distance of approximately 25 metres.

3. Linfox Logistics, Access Industries and Mr John Robertson MP, Member for Blacktown be advised of Council’s resolution.

8 Coombes Drive, Penrith - Request for Provision of 25m B-Double Route

RECOMMENDED

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Coombes Drive, Penrith - Request for Provision of 25m B-Double Route be received.

2. Coombes Drive, Penrith be approved for 25m B-double use.

3. The Roads and Maritime Services be advised of this matter accordingly, and be requested to publish a notice in the Government Gazette in accordance with the “Route Assessment Guidelines for B-Doubles and Road Trains”, indicating approval to use the aforementioned road as a 25m B-double route.

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

9 St Marys Indoor Shooting Centre "Try Shooting Day" - Saturday 12 October 2013

RECOMMENDED

That:

1. The information contained in the report on St Marys Indoor Shooting Centre "Try Shooting Day" - Saturday 12 October 2013 be received.

3. The Traffic Management Plan submitted by the event applicant be endorsed, subject to the following conditions:

(a) A Traffic Control Plan be prepared by a qualified and certified professional and submitted to Council and NSW Police a minimum 30 days prior to the event. Where the Traffic Management and Traffic Control Plans indicate Traffic Controllers are to be used, all Traffic Controllers must have current Roads and Maritime Services certification.

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

(c) The event organiser notifies ambulance and fire brigade (NSW Fire Brigade and Rural Fire Services) and State Emergency Services of the proposed event and submits a copy of the notification to Council a minimum of 30 days prior to the event.

4. The event applicant be advised of Council’s resolution.

10 Carinya Avenue, St Marys - Proposed Changes to Public Car Park

RECOMMENDED

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Carinya Avenue, St Marys - Proposed Changes to Public Car Park be received.

2. Six spaces in Carinya Avenue, Penrith, immediately adjacent to the Lifestart Co-operative Centre, be signposted as “Private Parking” spaces.

3. A “Condition of Entry” sign be installed under the Local Government Act (Section 670) at the entrance to the car park.

4. All costs associated with supply and installation of new signage be funded from Council’s Property Development Department.

5. Council’s Rangers and the Lifestart Co-operative Centre be notified of Council’s resolution.

11 Major Traffic Facilities Program 2013/14

RECOMMENDED

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Major Traffic Facilities Program 2013/14 be received.

2. Chapel Street (project rank 2) and Gipps Street (project rank 3) both for pedestrian facilities be removed from Traffic Section’s Project Priority Listing due to justification outlined in the report.

3. Projects listed in Table 2 ”Projects Proposed for Construction 2013/14” be forwarded to Council’s Design Co-ordinator to finalise design and construction estimates, with a Design Endorsement Report for each project submitted to the Local Traffic Committee as these are finalised.

4. If the detailed cost estimates for projects are higher than listed in Table 2, the lower ranked projects be deferred to future programs.

5. A project for Glossop Street at Hobart Street, St Marys for kerb realignment at both kerb returns be allocated with the project cost of $40,000 utilised from Council’s Urgent Traffic Facilities Program for the 2013/14 financial year.

12 Sunflower Drive, Gipps Street & Fowler Street, Claremont Meadows - Proposed Provision of "Stop" Signage

RECOMMENDED

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Sunflower Drive, Gipps Street & Fowler Street, Claremont Meadows - Proposed Provision of "Stop" Signage be received.

2. “Stop” signage and associated linemarking be provided on Sunflower Drive and Fowler Street at Gipps Street, Claremont Meadows.

3. The Roads and Maritime Services Speed Management Unit be advised of Council’s resolution.

13 Sydney & Canberra Streets, Oxley Park - Design Plan Endorsement

RECOMMENDED

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Sydney & Canberra Streets, Oxley Park - Design Plan Endorsement be received.

2. Design Plan AC 264 (dated 22/07/13) for a Median Island Stop Treatment (MIST) at the intersection of Sydney and Canberra Streets, Oxley Park be endorsed for construction.

3. Affected residents be notified of the proposed Median Island Stop Treatment at the intersection of Sydney and Canberra Streets, Oxley Park, and any substantial objections to be referred to the Local Traffic Committee.

4. Council’s Public Domain Amenity & Safety Department be requested to conduct a lighting assessment for the proposed Median Island Stop Treatment.

14 North Penrith Commuter Car Park Access Road Closure - Traffic Management Plan

RECOMMENDED

That:

1. The information contained in the report on North Penrith Commuter Car Park Access Road Closure - Traffic Management Plan be received.

2. The Traffic Management Plan submitted by the applicant be endorsed, subject to the following conditions:

(a) The detailed Traffic Control Plan submitted to Council for the proposed traffic control measures be implemented by the applicant, UrbanGrowth NSW. Should the traffic controllers be required for a longer time period than the Traffic Control Plan proposes, Council has the right to request UrbanGrowth NSW to reinstate these accordingly.

(b) UrbanGrowth NSW notify all affected parties of the proposed diversions as per the communication strategy presented in this report.

(c) The event organiser notify ambulance and fire brigade (NSW Fire Brigade and Rural Fire Services) and State Emergency Services of the proposed diversion.

3. The applicant, UrbanGrowth NSW, be advised of Council’s resolution.

15 Trinity Drive, Cambridge Gardens - Options for Addressing Safety at Existing Flagged "Children's Crossing" near Cambridge Gardens Public School

RECOMMENDED

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Trinity Drive, Cambridge Gardens - Options for Addressing Safety at Existing Flagged "Children's Crossing" near Cambridge Gardens Public School be received.

2. Option 1 be endorsed and that Council write to the Principal seeking their continued support for the installation of flags at the school crossing on Trinity Drive, near Merton Avenue, Cambridge Gardens.

3. In the event that the Principal does not support Option 1, then Option 2 be implemented and community consultation be undertaken regarding the proposed removal of the raised pedestrian threshold on Trinity Drive, Cambridge Gardens, near the intersection with Merton Avenue.

4. The NSW Department of Education and Communities be advised of Council’s resolution.

5. Cambridge Gardens Public School and Cambridge Gardens Public School P&C Association be advised of Council’s resolution.

GENERAL BUSINESS

GB 1 Carinya Avenue, St Marys – Parking Access & Configuration (Raised Councillor Cornish)

Councillor Cornish raised concerns about parking access and configuration in the existing car parks on Carinya Avenue between Charles Hackett Drive and Crana Street, St Marys.

Councillor Cornish requested that the access arrangements be investigated, as car parks in this area are only accessible from Carinya Avenue rather than West Lane like other similar car parks in the area.

RECOMMENDED

That the matter be investigated.

GB 2 Union Road/Worth Street & Worth Street/High Street, Penrith – Traffic Signals & Pedestrian Safety (Raised Councillor Hitchen, Representative for Member for Penrith)

Councillor Hitchen, representative for the Member for Penrith, raised concerns regarding the traffic signals at the intersections of Union Road/Worth Street and Worth Street/High Street, Penrith. Councillor Hitchen advised that the Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) had advised the Member for Penrith that Council is responsible for upgrading traffic signals at local road intersections and the matter of pedestrian safety at the intersection of Union Road/Worth Street and Worth Street/High Street that was raised by a local business is still outstanding.

LTC Comment

The RMS representative advised that the RMS does not get involved in traffic flow issues on local roads regardless of whether they are signalised. The RMS representative also advised that if there is an issue at an intersection of two local roads, the responsibility is for the relevant Council to investigate the matter.

Council’s Road Network Services Engineer advised that he is preparing a report for Council regarding the responsibility shift between Council and the RMS and the unreasonable changes which have taken place in recent years. In addition, Council’s Road Network Services Engineer advised that Council had requested the RMS to consider the installation of additional pedestrian warning signs at the intersections, as Council has no delegation to amend traffic signals or signage at traffic signals and only the RMS can approve and install such signage. A response has not been received from the RMS at this time.

RECOMMENDED

That the Committee note that the intersections of Union Road/Worth Street and Worth Street/High Street, Penrith are still under review and Council has written to the Roads and Maritime Services regarding suggested signage. Council is awaiting a response from the Roads and Maritime Services regarding their position.

There being no further business the Chairperson declared the meeting closed, the time being 11:00am.

RECOMMENDATION

That the recommendations contained in the Report and Recommendations of the Local Traffic Committee meeting held on 5 August, 2013 be adopted.

Ordinary Meeting 26 August 2013

Tender Reference 12/13-16, Provision of Childcare Cleaning Services

Compiled by: Jade Bradbury, Children's Services Business Coordinator

Authorised by: Janet Keegan, Children's Services Manager

Outcome	We can work close to home
Strategy	Provide access to education and training to improve residents ability to take advantage of current and future employment opportunities
Service Activity	Deliver high quality children's services

Previous Items: 1- Tender Reference 12/13-16, Provision of Childcare Cleaning Services- Ordinary Meeting- 22 July 2013

Executive Summary

A tender for the provision of Childcare Cleaning Services was advertised on 12 and 16 April 2013 and closed on 9 May 2013.

A report on this matter was included in the Business Paper for the Ordinary Meeting of Council on 22 July 2013. At the meeting, the report was deferred pending the provision of further information which is included in tonight’s report.

This report advises Council of the outcome of the tender process and recommends that the tender from Academy Services (NSW) Pty Ltd be accepted for the provision of Childcare Cleaning Services on an as required basis for a period of three (3) years, with an option to extend for a further two (2) x one (1) year periods, subject to satisfactory performance.

Background

Tenders were advertised in the Western Weekender and the e-tendering website on 12 April and in the Sydney Morning Herald on 16 April and closed on 9 May 2013 for the reliable and cost effective performance of Childcare Cleaning Services on an as required basis.

Tenderers were required to submit their tender either by using the APET 360 online Portal or a hard copy 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 setting out the unit rates for the provision of cleaning the childcare centres.

All prospective tenderers were invited to attend a pre-tender briefing on 18 April 2013. This briefing included an online demonstration on Council’s electronic tendering portal, and provided an opportunity for prospective tenderers to seek clarification of the specifications required to perform the tender.

Tender Evaluation Panel

The Tender Evaluation Panel consisted of Jade Bradbury (Children’s Services Business Coordinator), Kylie Brennan (Glenmore Park Child and Family Centre Coordinator) and Laura Schuil (Supply Officer - Contracts).

Evaluation Process

The process for the evaluation of tenders was as follows:

1. Initial review of tenders to determine compliance with the tender evaluation criteria, including the ability of tenderers to provide the full range of services specified;

2. Assessment of costs based on the unit rates tendered and the allocated staff to perform the services, and determination of a short-list based on the best rankings from (1) above.

3. A meeting with key staff from shortlisted companies regarding the content of their tender.

Tender Evaluation Criteria

The criteria and scope of requirements advertised and used in assessing the tenders was:

· Demonstrated ability

· Cost/price category

· Resources and personnel

· Quality assurance

· Environmental management

· Industrial relations

· Work health and safety

Summary of Tenders Received

A total of 18 tenders were received including one late tender (from Advanced National Services). The respondents (listed in alphabetical order) to the advertised tender are provided in the table below.

Tenderer	Location of the business
Academy Services (NSW) Pty Ltd	Unit 7/20 Barcoo Street Roseville NSW 2069
Advanced National Services	30 Telford Circuit, Yatala Qld 4207
ADZ Cleaning Services Pty Ltd	Unit 3 159 Arthur St Homebush West NSW 2140
AMC Commercial Cleaning	7/56 Church Avenue Mascot NSW 2020
ARSK Aust Pty Ltd	1/80 Haldon St Lakemba NSW 2195
Cleanjay	5 Halsley Street Hassall Grove NSW 2761
Four J's Cleaning Services	583 The Horsley Drive Smithfield NSW 2164
GAVS HOLDINGS Pty Ltd as trustee for the GAVS Trust trading as Clean Business Services	Suite 1 , 1215 Botany Road Mascot NSW 2034
Jamm Corp Pty Ltd trading as iClean Operations	PO Box 960 Brookvale NSW 2100
JEJ Australia Pty Ltd T/as KidSafe Cleaning	2/25 Oxford St Epping NSW 2121
Jonao Group Pty Ltd	78 Dongola Circuit Schofields NSW 2762
Kalloza Environmental Services	3/16 Clifford Street Mosman NSW 2088
Northern Contract Cleaning Pty Ltd	142/2-18 Buchanan Street Balmain NSW 2041
Solution Cleaning Services Pty Ltd	Unit 5D, 16 Mars Rd Lane Cove NSW 2066
Star Property Maintenance NSW Pty Ltd	6 Twenty Seventh Ave West Hoxton NSW 2171
Statewide Quality Services Pty Ltd	74 Railway Parade Canley Vale NSW 2166
The Sparkle Team Pty Ltd trading as TST Property Services	3/77 Newton Road Wetherill Park NSW 2164
VDG Pty Ltd	22/31 Governor Macquarie Drive Chipping Norton NSW 2170

The tender received from Advanced National Services was not considered by the Tender Evaluation Panel because it was received after the close of tenders.

Price Evaluation

Prices were requested for the following type of services:

· Weekly cleaning cost as per cleaning schedule

· Additional costs including establishment fee

· Minimum or additional charges applicable for providing any of the services

· Total average staff hours allowed per clean per day

· Number of staff allocated per centre per clean

· Supervisory hours/quality inspections per week

· Total weekly cost.

The table below ranks the tenders received from lowest to highest.

Tenderers	Price
ARSK Aust Pty Ltd	$18,324.00
The Sparkle Team Pty Ltd trading as TST Property Services	$206,711.00
Northern Contract Cleaning Pty Ltd	$281,120.00
Statewide Quality Services Pty Ltd	$309,400.00
Academy Services (NSW) Pty Ltd	$349,843.20
AMC Commercial Cleaning	$389,550.00
Solution Cleaning Services Pty Ltd	$393,987.50
VDG Pty Ltd	$439,830.00
Four J's Cleaning Services	$453,354.20
Kalloza Environmental Services	$464,330.00
ADZ Cleaning Services Pty Ltd	$511,016.00
Star Property Maintenance NSW Pty Ltd	$550,500.00
Jonao Group Pty Ltd	$561,645.00
GAVS HOLDINGS Pty Ltd as trustee for the GAVS Trust trading as Clean Business Services	$646,839.90
JEJ Australia Pty Ltd T/as KidSafe Cleaning	$650,000.20
Jamm Corp Pty Ltd trading as iClean Operations	$947,076.00
Cleanjay	$1,279,460.00

Criteria Evaluation

Following the evaluation of the seventeen (17) tenders, the Tender Evaluation Panel determined that the tender provided by ARSK Aust Pty Ltd specified an insufficient number of cleaning hours to undertake the work and their tender was not considered any further. The costs submitted by ADZ Cleaning Services Pty Ltd, Star Property Maintenance NSW Pty Ltd, Jonao Group Pty Ltd, GAVS Holdings Pty Ltd (as trustee for the GAVS Trust trading as Clean Business Services), JEJ Australia Pty Ltd (as KidSafe Cleaning) Jamm Corp Pty Ltd (trading as iClean Operations) and CleanJay are excessive in comparison to the other tendered prices and the Tender Evaluation Panel determined that there was no advantage to Council in considering their tenders any further.

The remaining nine tenderers were then assessed for capability and cost.

Sparkle Team Pty Ltd trading as TST Property Services

Northern Contract Cleaning Pty Ltd

Statewide Quality Services Pty Ltd

Academy Services (NSW) Pty Ltd

AMC Commercial Cleaning

Solution Cleaning Services Pty Ltd

VDG Pty Ltd

Four J's Cleaning Services

Kalloza Environmental Services

Capability

Following the capability assessment against the evaluation criteria the Tender Evaluation Panel determined that the tenders submitted by Academy Services Pty Ltd, Solutions Cleaning Services Pty Ltd and AMC Commercial Cleaning demonstrated a much higher level of ability against the evaluation criteria than the offers submitted by Sparkle Team Pty Ltd trading as TST Property Services, Northern Contract Cleaning Pty Ltd, VDG Pty Ltd, Four J's Cleaning Services and Kalloza Environmental Services. For the latter tenderers, the particular areas of concern are listed below:

· Sparkle Team Pty Ltd trading as TST Property Services: Allocation of staff to cleaning hours was not adequate given the time constraints.

· Northern Contract Cleaning Pty Ltd: Allocation of staff to cleaning hours was not adequate given the time constraints.

· Four J’s Cleaning Services: Information was not provided for staff recruitment, training and development and equal employment opportunity. Information was also not provided to demonstrate the use of cleaning products and chemicals that are non-toxic and safe for the environment.

· Kalloza Environmental Services: Allocation of staff to cleaning hours was not viable based on time constraints.

Cost

The annualised cost for each of the remaining tenderers is shown in the following table. Also included is the number of annual staff hours allocated to complete all cleaning tasks:

Tenderer	Annual Cost	Allocated Staff Hours for a Year (not including supervisory hours)
The Sparkle Team Pty Ltd trading as TST Property Services	$206,711.00	6892
Northern Contract Cleaning Pty Ltd	$281,120.00	9625
Statewide Quality Services Pty Ltd	$309,400.00	13000
Academy Services (NSW) Pty Ltd	$349,843.20	12910
AMC Commercial Cleaning	$389,550.00	11525
Solution Cleaning Services Pty Ltd	$393,987.50	11500
VDG Pty Ltd	$439,830.00	15125
Four J's Cleaning Services	$453,354.20	15125
Kalloza Environmental Services	$464,330.00	15000

Comments

The number of staff hours allocated by both Northern Contract Cleaning Pty Ltd and The Sparkle Team Pty Ltd trading as TST Property Services were substantially lower than the hours allocated for the remaining tenderers. The Panel was of the opinion that the hours allocated were insufficient to undertake the work to be performed in the tender to a high standard. Accordingly, the tenders for these two companies were not considered further by the Panel. The cost submitted by VDG Pty Ltd, Four J’s Cleaning Services and Kalloza Environmental Services are higher in comparison to the other tendered prices and the Tender Evaluation Panel determined that there was no advantage to Council in considering those tenders further.

Referral of the Tender to the Children’s Services Cooperative Board

At the Board’s Meeting on 27 June 2013, the Council’s Children’s Services Business Coordinator advised on the progress of the tender for the cleaning of child care centres and indicated that interviews were progressing well with the tenderers.

Shortlisted Tenderers

Following phases one and two of the evaluation process the Tender Evaluation Panel determined that the following tenderers were the most advantageous to Council and were shortlisted for further evaluation:

· Academy Services PTY LTD

· Statewide Quality Services Pty Ltd

· Solutions Cleaning Services Pty Ltd

· AMC Commercial Cleaning

Interviews with Prospective Tenderers

The Tender Evaluation Panel conducted interviews with each of the shortlisted tenderers to meet with key staff and to further evaluate their capability in regard to the following criteria:

· Understanding of the scope of the works required, including equipment that each company would allocate to this contract; and

· Information on methodology, staffing and clarification of Awards utilised for payment of wages.

Comments on Interviews

Academy Services (NSW) Pty Ltd

Academy Services (NSW) Pty Ltd is located at Unit 7/20 Barcoo Street, Roseville, NSW, 2069 and has been in operation since April 2012. Shareholders are Glen E Browne- 65% and Paul A R Rowse - 35%. The registration date of the parent company, Academy Services Pty Ltd, was July 1985 and the company has offices in every major capital city in Australia. Academy Services (NSW) provides contract cleaning services for various government departments including a number of schools. They have quality certification to ISO9001:2008. Academy Services Pty Ltd has had the contract for cleaning services to 20 SDN (formerly known as Sydney Day Nurseries) Children’s Services sites across NSW since June 2011. This contract was transferred to Academy Services (NSW) Pty Ltd in June 2012.

Solution Cleaning Services Pty Ltd

Solution Cleaning Services Pty Ltd is located at Unit 5D, 16 Mars Rd, Lane Cove, NSW, 2066 and the business owner is Andres Angel Soldado. They have quality certification to ISO9001:2008 and currently clean multiple site facilities including 30 X-ray/Ultra Sound Clinics for I-Med Network in Sydney and Canberra. They do however have limited experience in cleaning childcare facilities.

AMC Commercial Cleaning

AMC Commercial Cleaning is located at 7/56 Church Avenue, Mascot, NSW, 2020 and Stephen Coade, Hemant Jamnadas and James Han are on the board of directors. With over 20 years experience they operate primarily as a commercial cleaning service. They have quality certification to ISO9001:2008 and are currently providing cleaning services to 22 childcare facilities across NSW.

Statewide Quality Services Pty Ltd

Statewide Quality Services Pty Ltd is located in Canley Vale and has been operating since 1998. They provide cleaning services to a number of business sectors including, shopping centres and government buildings. They are accredited with ISO9001:2008 and are currently cleaning the administration building of Liverpool City Council; however they have limited experience with childcare facilities.

Preferred Tenderer

Each tenderer shortlisted was assessed against the tender evaluation criteria and the individual unit rates submitted. The assessment process showed that all shortlisted tenderers were capable of providing the service required. However, Statewide Quality Services Pty Ltd and Academy Services (NSW) Pty Ltd offered the best annual prices based on their allocation of staffing hours to clean the sites.

Statewide Quality Services Pty Ltd offered the most competitive price; however the Tender Evaluation Panel had concerns over the number of supervisory hours that were allocated to manage cleaning quality control at each of the sites. The company allocated 13 hours per week to supervise and manage the cleaning of 27 sites. The company indicated the allocation of a supervisor currently managing contracts in the Western Suburbs of Sydney, Newcastle and the Blue Mountains area to manage the Council’s sites.

The issue relating to the amount of supervision provided by Statewide Quality Service Pty ltd was raised with the representative of the company during the interview process. The Tender Evaluation Panel was advised that if additional hours were required to supervise the Council’s services, the nominated supervisor would undertake this work, in addition to their pre-existing workload. The Panel was concerned that this approach to supervising the cleaning of centres may adversely impact on the hygiene of the childcare centres.

In an industry like Children’s Services, where disease and illness can spread quickly, the cleaning quality must be managed and maintained to a high level at all times. The limited number of supervisory hours indicated by Statewide Quality Services Pty Ltd was a concern to the panel, particularly given that the supervisor nominated for this contract has a number of other contracts that are remote from the Penrith LGA.

Academy Services (NSW) Pty Ltd, allocated 28.5 supervisory hours per week which provided a better representation and understanding of the different sites, their size and number of rooms. The company advised that it would allocate a supervisor that was directly responsible for the Penrith Council’s Children’s Services Contract. Additionally, the company provided extensive details on their quality control processes including an on-line checklist reporting system submitted electronically to a centre. This process is an enhanced mechanism to measure cleaning performance at the centres.

Referee checks for both companies were undertaken, with Academy Services (NSW) Pty Ltd being superior in quality control and management. Statewide Quality Services Pty Ltd did not provide any specific information in their tender documents to address the qualitative criteria specified within the tender requirements. At the interview stage, Statewide Quality Services Pty Ltd was requested to provide additional information to clarify documentation submitted in their original tender. The company provided only minimal additional information and did not include a range of specific details, or provide responses to the qualitative criteria that was included in the original document.

Performance Targets and Monitoring of Successful Tenderer

At the commencement of the cleaning contract and on each anniversary (subject to option to extend being taken up by Council), Council and the contractor will agree on the performance target for the coming year. Generally, these targets broadly fit into customer service, complaints, cooperation with stakeholders, quality of service and materials, safety and environmental performance. Council will also review the Company’s past performance targets, provide the contractor with written feedback and allow the contractor the opportunity to respond. Continued poor performance may result in the contractor’s services being terminated early.

During the term of the agreement, the contractor will maintain the agreed staffing levels and will be required to complete each of the cleaning tasks on the agreed schedule for the average staffing hours allocated to each of the premises cleaned. The staff hours allocated for each site will be monitored utilising the alarm activation and de-activation times. Where the hours actually worked are less than the allotted hours, a penalty will apply equal to the proportion of time worked and the calculated penalty deducted from the contractor’s invoice. (It is worth noting that payments to the contractor are made following the service being performed).

If the contractor becomes bankrupt or goes into liquidation or make default in any of the following respects, via: (a) if the contractor wholly suspends the work before completion, or (b) if the contractor fails to proceed with the service with reasonable diligence or in a competent manner, or (c) if the contractor commits any breach hereof, then Council may, by notice in writing, terminate this contract. If the matter relates to a defect or the manner in which the work is being undertaken, Council can only terminate the contract after giving notice of such a defect or an acceptable manner in which the work is being engaged and allow seven (7) days in which to rectify the matter. Such determination shall not prejudice any right of Council to recover from the contractor damages for any breach otherwise recoverable under the agreement.

Council may also, at any time by giving thirty (30) days written notice, cancel all or part of the services performed under the contract. In this instance Council will be liable only for payments under the payment provisions of the contract for services rendered before the effective date of cancellation, and any reasonable costs incurred by the contractor and directly attributable to the cancellation.

Where, in the opinion of Council’s Children’s Services Business Coordinator or Council’s Authorised Officer, the service to be provided under this contract has not been carried out in a satisfactory manner, a direction to provide further services will be given. In the event of work not being carried out as directed, payments to be made under this contract will be withheld until such time as the service is properly provided or agreement is reached with Council in terms of an appropriate course of action under this contract.

Notwithstanding the conditions detailed within the RFT (Request For Tender), Children’s Services Centre Directors will conduct weekly meetings with the supervisor of Academy Services (NSW) Pty Ltd onsite to review the daily and weekly cleaning regime. Any issues or concerns raised regarding the cleaning contract by the Centre Director will also be addressed directly with the supervisor of Academy Services (NSW) Pty Ltd by the Children’s Services Business Coordinator. The Children’s Services Business Coordinator, in conjunction with Council’s Supply Coordinator will also conduct six monthly reviews with Academy Services (NSW) Pty Ltd to review and monitor their contract.

The documents provided by Academy Services (NSW) Pty Ltd indicate that the price for the contract is fixed for 12 months unless statutory obligations vary or Award rates increase. On each anniversary of the contract, any increases will be based on annual CPI adjustments.

Conclusion

Based on the detailed evaluation, analysis of staffing levels provided, compliance requirements, quality control and cost rankings, the tender that represents the most advantage to Council was received from Academy Services (NSW) Pty Ltd and they are recommended for appointment by the Tender Evaluation Panel. The company demonstrated through their tender, interview process and reference checks that they have an excellent understanding of the scope of requirements and have provided a sound methodology for ensuring a high quality of service.

The allocation of a supervisory staff member by Academy Services (NSW) Pty Ltd responsible for managing this contract to ensure that the quality of service is maintained is highly regarded by the Tender Evaluation Panel. The Panel is cognisant that the recommended tenderer is not the cheapest but the Panel is confident that the company will provide effective cleaning of the childcare centres at a cost that is lower than the amount paid in 2012/13 to the current contractor. Academy Services (NSW) Pty Ltd pays its staff in accordance with NSW State Award AN120123 – Cleaning Services.

Financial Services Manager’s Comments

Included in the assessment of the tender was the commissioning of independent reference checks, financial analysis, and performance analysis on Academy Services (NSW) Pty Ltd. These checks were completed by Corporate Scorecard Pty Ltd and have been reviewed by Financial Services. The preferred tenderer has been in operation since April 2012, and a formal rating was not provided by Corporate Scorecard. Based on the review by Financial Services, no issues were raised as to the ability of Academy Services (NSW) Pty Ltd to perform the services described. A positive referee check was provided within Corporate Scorecard’s report. Given the type of contract, there would be minimal risk to Council as any financial exposure would be limited to payments outstanding for services performed.

The tendered cost of $349,843 by Academy Services (NSW) Pty Ltd is covered in the 2013/14 Operational Plan allocation for Childcare Cleaning Services.

Tender Advisory Group (TAG) Comment

The Tender Advisory Group (TAG) consisting of the Chief Governance Officer, Stephen Britten and Senior Governance Officer, Glenn Schuil, met to consider the tender for the Provision of Childcare Cleaning. The TAG made a number of enquiries with the Tender Evaluation Panel regarding the evaluation of the shortlisted tenders, in particular the level of supervision being allocated by both companies. Taking into account the additional information provided in the report the TAG maintains its support for the methodology used with the assessment of tenders and the recommended tenderer contained within this report.

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Tender Reference 12/13-16, Provision of Childcare Cleaning Services be received.

2. A contract for the provision of childcare cleaning for a period of three (3) years, with an option to extend for a further two (2) by one (1) year periods, subject to satisfactory performance, be awarded to Academy Services (NSW) Pty Ltd for the annual cost of $349,843.20.

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.

Ordinary Meeting 26 August 2013

Development Application 12/0721 Childcare centre at Lot B DP389004 & Lot A DP389004 (No.168-170) Stafford Street, Penrith Applicant: Nor'side Investments Pty Ltd; Owner: Nor'side Investments Pty Ltd

Compiled by: Gurvinder Singh, Senior Environmental Planner

Authorised by: Peter Wood, Development Assessment Co-ordinator

Outcome	We plan for our future growth
Strategy	Facilitate development that encourages a range of housing types
Service Activity	Delivery timely assessment, regulation and certification of development and building work in accordance with statutory requirements

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

Executive Summary

Council is in receipt of a development application for the demolition of two existing dwellings on-site and construction of a child care centre. The land is zoned 2(c) Residential (Low-Medium Density) under Penrith Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Urban Land) and a child care centre is permissible in the zone with Council’s consent. The application is reported to Council due to the extent of submissions.

The key matter relating to the proposed development is economic impact on an existing child care centre located around 16m east of the site at No.164 Stafford Street, Penrith. This matter is addressed in detail in this report.

The development application was placed on public exhibition from 20 August to 3 September 2012 and twenty five submissions were received. A petition signed by seventy eight residents was also received. The concerns raised in those submissions and petition are addressed in this report.

The application is accompanied by an objection under State Environmental Planning Policy No.1 - Development Standards, regarding the minimum landscaped area required for the proposed development. The objection is addressed in this report.

The application was reported to Council’s Ordinary meeting of 27 May 2013 where it was resolved that consideration of the item be deferred to allow for an on-site meeting and discussion of a number of issues including car parking, access and vacancy numbers.

An on-site meeting was held on 24 June 2013 between Councillors, Council Officers and concerned residents. A number of matters including traffic, parking, access and vacancy numbers were raised by the residents. The matters raised are addressed in this report.

An assessment of the proposed development has been undertaken under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. Council’s Community, Engineering, Traffic, Health and Environment Sections have been consulted and the development application is recommended for approval.

Background

The applicant attended a pre-lodgement meeting with Council Officers prior to the lodgement of the Development Application (DA). The applicant responded to the advice given at that meeting and included information required with the DA. After preliminary assessment of the proposed development and submissions received during public exhibition of the DA, Council Officers sent a letter to the applicant that required them to demonstrate the need for child care services in the local area and further address acoustic impacts on the neighbouring properties and traffic impacts on the road network. These matters were adequately responded to by the applicant and they are addressed in this report. The applicant reduced the number of children to be cared from 70 to 62 to address parking matters. In response to concerns raised at the public meeting and conveyed to the applicant, the applicant has submitted plans that show two additional car spaces and turning areas with respect to car and emergency vehicles manoeuvring.

Site and Surrounds

The site is located to the south of Stafford Street around 45m west of its intersection with Doonmore Street, Penrith. It comprises two allotments at Nos. 168 and 170 Stafford Street, Penrith. The site is irregular in shape and it has an area of 1593sqm. The site falls from east to west and it also gently falls to the rear of the site. Two single storey dwellings exist on the site. Twelve trees and seven palms exist on the site.

A child care centre exists around 16m to the east of the site at No. 164 Stafford Street, Penrith. The surrounding area is established residential having mainly single storey dwellings. Shops are located on Stafford Street around 300m west of the site. A locality plan is included as Appendix 1.

The Proposed Development

The proposed development involves demolition of two existing dwellings and construction of a single storey building to be used as a child care centre for 62 children. The age group and number of children to be cared for will be as follows:

Age Number of Children

0 - 2 Years 16 Children

2 - 3 Years 16 Children

3 - 5 Years 30 Children

The proposed hours of operation are 7:00am to 6.00pm Monday to Friday. Access to the child care centre is proposed via a two way driveway from Stafford Street. Nineteen on-site car parking spaces will be provided. Refer to Appendices No. 2 to 4 for copies of the site plan, floor plans and elevations.

The Development Application was accompanied by the following documents:

a) Statement of Environmental Effects prepared by Building Environments Pty Ltd

b) Site plan, floor plans and elevations prepared by Building Environments Pty Ltd

c) Landscape concept plan prepared by Urban Landscape Planners P/L

d) Traffic Impact Statement prepared by Traffic Solutions

e) Acoustic Report prepared by Acoustic Logic

f) Waste Management Plan

g) Arboriculture Impact Assessment Report prepared by Urban Landscape Planners P/L.

Planning Assessment

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

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

Penrith Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Urban Land)

The subject site is zoned 2(c) Residential (Low-Medium Density) under Penrith Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 1998 (Urban Land). The proposal is defined as a ‘Child Care Centre’ which is permissible in the zone with development consent.

The proposal has been assessed having regard to the zone objectives as follows:

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

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

(iii) To consolidate population and housing densities, and

(iv) To expand housing choices by allowing multi-unit housing with a single storey appearance, and

(v) To promote a variety of housing types or forms upon the site of each proposed development, and

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

The surrounding area is characterised by single dwelling houses with established landscaping and gardens. It does not fall under heritage conservation. The proposed development is single storey and it will maintain the character of the surrounding residential streetscape. A child care centre is a non-residential use however the scale of the proposed childcare centre is compatible with that of the existing single storey neighbouring dwellings.

The proposal is consistent with the objectives of the zone.

The relevant development standards under the plan are addressed in the following table:

DEVELOPMENT STANDARD	REQUIREMENT	PROPOSED	COMPLIANCE
Cl.12 (3) – Building Envelope	1.8 metres from side boundary and 45^oheight plane	The proposed building envelope is within the required measurement.	Yes
Cl.12 (3) & (5) – External Wall Height	3.5m under Clause 12(3)	External wall height will vary from 2.7m to 3.5m.	Yes
Cl.12 (3) – Landscaped Area	40%	38.6% landscaped area is proposed.	No (See SEPP1)
Cl.12 (4) – Rear Setback	4 metres	The proposed rear setback will vary from 4.04m to 5.6m.	Yes
Cl.14 – Design Principles	§ Protect local topography, streetscape and character. · Compatible with scale and design of neighbouring development.	· The proposal is a single storey building. It will protect the local topography and setting and maintain the existing streetscape. · Height of the proposed building is consistent with the existing neighbouring dwellings. Scale is not excessive for the area. Design of the building is compatible with the existing neighbouring dwellings and will not detract from the existing streetscape.	Yes

Clause 28 – Tree Preservation

The application seeks approval to remove twelve existing trees located on site. The proposed tree removal is supported by an Arboriculture Impact Assessment Report prepared by Urban Landscape Planners P/L. This report is an assessment of all (19) trees in and around the site. The report concludes that the trees are an introduced species and only two trees are of moderate to low retention value. This report was checked by Council’s Tree Management Officer who has advised that there is no objection to the removal of the trees except for three trees and at least six trees must be planted on site to compensate for those removed. A condition has been imposed to retain three trees and plant six new trees in accordance with the Officer’s recommendation. (See condition number 3.34)

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards (SEPP1)

The proposed development does not comply with Council’s development standard relating to the minimum landscaped area of the site. Clause 12(2) of Penrith LEP 1998 (Urban Land) defines the landscaped area of a site as follows:

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

Clause 12(3) of Penrith Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 1998 (Urban Land) stipulates that in the 2(c) Residential (Low-Medium Density) zone the minimum required landscaped area of a site is 40%. The proposed development includes a landscaped area of 38.6% representing a proposed variation from the relevant development standard of 1.4%.

The application was accompanied by a written objection to the landscaped area development standard under the provisions of State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards (SEPP 1). SEPP 1 enables Council to approve a development that does not comply with a particular development standard where in the circumstances of the case the applicant can demonstrate compliance with the standard to be unreasonable or unnecessary.

The applicant’s SEPP 1 objection in relation to the non-compliance with the landscaped area development standard is reproduced in part below:

The development will meet the underlying objectives of the control despite the variation. The proposal provides adequate deep soil landscaping and building setbacks.

Deep soil planting to Stafford Street and the side boundary is allowed for landscaping such that the built form will not dominate.

To require compliance would be unreasonable and unnecessary given that adequate on site landscaping and satisfactory building line setbacks and building separations are provided. This development standard is specific for multi-unit housing and not the alternate building form and use permissible with consent.

Strict compliance would compromise a practical and logical development outcome.

The objectives of the minimum landscape area are to achieve an appropriate separation between buildings, preserve private open space corridors, minimise the impact of loss of privacy, overshadowing and loss of views by requiring sufficient space on-site for effective landscaping. The proposal maintains an open space corridor along the rear fence line in keeping with the adjoining properties. The applicant’s objection is consistent with the aims of the SEPP. The SEPP 1 objection has adequately addressed the matters prescribed in State Environmental Planning Policy No.1 – Development Standards, and has demonstrated that compliance with the prescribed minimum landscaped area would be unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstances of the case.

Sydney Regional Environmental Plan (SREP) No. 20 – Hawkesbury-Nepean

SREP No. 20 applies to the subject land and stipulates that the consent authority shall not grant consent to a development application unless it is of the opinion that the carrying out of the development is consistent with any relevant, general and specific aim of SREP 20. The general aims and objectives of the plan are directed towards improving the amenity of the river and protecting the lands within the river valley, including scenic quality.

The proposal will have minimal impacts on the river environment as it will not compromise the water or scenic qualities of the river given the satisfactory drainage arrangements and erosion and sediment control measures to be installed during construction. Council’s Development Engineering Section has reviewed the proposed development with regard to stormwater drainage and is satisfied with this aspect of the proposal.

Section 79C(1)(a)(ii) – Any Draft Environmental Planning Instruments

No draft environmental planning instruments are relevant to the proposed development.

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

Penrith Development Control Plan 2006

Section 2.2 Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design

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

The proposed development provides opportunities for natural surveillance to access points and car parking areas from the windows of the office and staff room. In order to ensure that a safe environment is provided for the child care centre including the car parking and outdoor play areas, conditions are recommended to enhance the safety and security of all users of the development and to minimise the crime risk associated with the development. These conditions relate to matters such as securing the premises, landscape design and provision of lighting (see condition number 3.2).

Section 2.9 Waste Planning

The application was accompanied by a Waste Management Plan (WMP). The WMP has adequately addressed management of waste generated during construction of the building and the ongoing use by the proposed child care use. The design and location of the waste disposal and recycling bin storage area at the rear of the site and its collection at the street is appropriate. In order to ensure that the odour from the waste generated from the childcare centre is managed adequately, it is recommended that the childcare centre have a weekly collection of the waste organised via a private contractor (see condition number 3.3).

There is potential for the proposed construction works to generate significant levels of dust. The following conditions (see condition number 3.36) are recommended to control dust:

a) Trucks entering and leaving the site carrying construction materials that may generate dust shall be covered.

b) Stockpiles of soil or other materials shall be covered or sprayed with water on a regular basis, particularly during dry or windy conditions.

Section 3.3 Child Care Centres

The relevant development controls under this section are addressed in the following table:

*Development Controls*	*Requirement*	*Compliance*
Amenity	§ Purpose designed and built if catering for 15 or more children. § Lot width 22m § Scale and character compatible with surrounding residential development.	§ Yes. § Yes. Lot width is 46.62m. § Addressed under The Likely Impacts in a further section of this report. Design responds to scale and character.
Location	§ No adverse traffic impacts.	§ Addressed under Access, Traffic and Parking. No substantial traffic impacts expected on local road network.
Vehicle Access and Parking	§ 1 car space per 4 children (15.5 car spaces). § 1 additional car space per staff member where staff members catering for younger or special needs children.	§ Yes. Nineteen car spaces are proposed. This matter is addressed in detail in a further section of this report.
Noise	§ Acoustic fencing.	§ Yes. Acoustic fence to rear and side boundaries is proposed. Addressed under The Likely Impacts in a further section of this report.
Shade	§ Shade to 50% of outdoor play area.	§ Yes
Toilet Facilities	§ 1 water closet fixture per 8 children (8 w.c.). § 1 water closet fixture and wash basin per 20 female staff (1 w.c. and a wash basin).	§ No. (7 w.c.). However it complies with the requirements under the National Construction Code. § Yes (1 w.c. and a wash basin).
Floor Space	§ 3.25m² indoor play space per child (201.5m²). § 7m² outdoor play space per child (434m²).	§ Yes (268m²) § Yes (505m²)

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

Council’s Building Section has raised no objection to the proposed development subject to conditions of consent regarding fire safety as prescribed under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

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

Social and Economic Impact and Community Need

A Child Care Centre known as ‘Bright Stars Kindergarten’ is located at No. 164 Stafford Street, Penrith. Concerns were raised by the centre during public exhibition of the development application that the proposed development:

· does not address the economic impacts on the immediate locality and the broader Penrith LGA community

· would generate unacceptable traffic impacts on Stafford Street and surrounding street network

· would generate unacceptable noise impacts on the surrounding residents and occupants of the locality

· when assessed in conjunction with existing surrounding uses would generate unacceptable cumulative amenity impacts on surrounding residents, including noise and traffic impacts

· does not adequately provide for car parking and the management of traffic

· would not be in the public interest.

The matter relating to economic impact and related community need is addressed below. Other matters are addressed in a further section of this report.

The applicant was advised by Council Officers that the development application does not demonstrate a need for child care services in the local area and that a community needs analysis shall be prepared and submitted to Council for consideration. Unmet demand in the community could be assessed through waiting lists of centres in surrounding areas, a comparison of the number of children aged 0-5 recorded in the census for the area and the number of child care places available.

The applicant’s response to the above matter is partly reproduced below:

The proposed child care centre is located in a residential precinct bounded by High Street, Woodriff Street, Jamison Road and Parker Street, Penrith. This residential precinct has mixed residential zonings that permit substantial increase in residential density. The predominant development residential zone is 2(c) Residential (Low-Medium Density). A typical residential parcel of land having the 2(c) zoning generated a two fold increase in density.

This entire precinct is undergoing residential growth by way of re-development.

There are seven child care centres located in this residential precinct. Of the seven Child Care Centres in this residential precinct, Pasadena Pre- School, Bright Star Kindergarten and Little Learners Pre-School do not offer care for children in the 0-2 Year age range. Of the remaining 4 centres, the large facilities such as Spunkey Monkies and High Street Pre-School offer 0-2 Years accommodation but have no vacancies. Vacancies for 0-2 Year are available at both Nepean Tiny Tots and Penrith Early Learners. Both these centres are smaller cottage based and located in Woodriff Street on the fringe of the residential precinct.

Centres that are larger based have greater flexibility and opportunity to allow for multiple age group enrolments for families. That is a family with 0-2 and 2-3 years and 4 year olds are more likely to find bulk enrolments for all siblings on the same days at the same centre.

The smaller centres due to their size have limited flexibility in this regard. The medium to large centres which offer 0 – 2 year old care have no vacancies and have waiting lists.

The proposed development at No. 168 Stafford Street offers care accommodation for 0-2 Years, 2-3 Years & 3-5 Years. Our neighbour Bright Star Kindergarten at No. 164 Stafford Street does not offer 0 – 2 year care. There is no conflict with regard to the provision of competing services in this instance. The geographical relationship between the proposed development and the neighbouring pre-school in our view should not be considered as detrimental as each centre is unique in its character and services offered. The three Pre-Schools in Woodriff Street; Little Learners, Nepean Tiny Tots and Penrith Early Learners are grouped together within 6 residential lots with both Nepean Tiny Tots and Penrith Early Learning being neighbours. These child cares centres have co-existed for many years in this geographical relationship and continue to operate.

There is a trend towards large based centres which offer a wide range of services and learning options providing opportunities for bulk enrolments for families in all age groups.

The proposal is justifiable and meets the objectives with respect to unmet need due to the following:

· The continuous increase of residential densities in the nominated precinct

· The increased population densities generating families which will require community based services

· The clear need for Child Care facilities for 0-2 Year olds

· The lack of 0-2 Year accommodation in the existing pre-schools within the eastern sections of the residential precinct

· The need for larger centres that offer a full range of Child Care services

· The need to provide multiple enrolments for siblings in the same centre.

The application was referred to Council’s Community Services Section for advice on community need for the proposed child care centre and related social and economic impacts on the locality particularly any impacts on ‘Bright Stars Kindergarten’. The Section provided a commentary which is reproduced in part below:

Unmet Need

From a social planning perspective, the proposed child care centre does meet some of the unmet child care needs of Penrith. It is a well known fact that there is an acute shortage of 0-2 child care places in the Penrith Local Government Area. The proposed centre will provide 16 places for the age group 0-2.

The argument put forward by the applicant that a larger centre will provide greater opportunity to allow multiple age group enrolments for families is a valid one.

The Child Care Centre at No. 164 Stafford Street Penrith does not offer 0-2 year care.

Nature of Child Care Industry & Impacts of the Proposed Development in its Locality

The submission received during public exhibition of the DA argued that the establishment of another child care centre next door would have a detrimental economic impact on the community as child care centre is a “community facility” and child care centres should not be considered as a private business as they do serve important community functions.

Privately owned child care centres are private businesses that provide a specific service for the customers with fees attached. Similar to other private businesses, the bottom line for each privately owned child care operator is to make a profit for the business to sustain. It is acknowledged that privately owned child care centres provide essential services for families who require child care. However they are not different from other private businesses such as doctors’ surgery, pharmacy, bakery, retail stores which all provide specific services required by the local community with fees attached.

In terms of economic impact in the locality, it is important to take a broader approach instead of merely focusing its likely impact on the existing businesses. The proposed development will deliver some positive impact for the local community. By accessing quality child care, it will assist some parents to enter/re-enter the workforce. The proposed child care centre will provide additional employment opportunities for the local residents. The presence of a number of child care centres in the vicinity will provide parents with a choice as each centre is unique in its services offered and the fees charged by each centre vary.

Current Supply of Child Care

The submission claimed that “there has been a proliferation of Child Care Centres in Penrith LGA to the detriment of the community at large. The following figures were quoted:

· 16 Centres in the suburb of Penrith, including South Penrith

· 68 Centres within a 5 kilometre radius

· 78 Centres with a 10 kilometre radius

· 129 centres within a 15 kilometre radius

It is not clear how these figures were obtained as there is no reference to the source of the information. According to the “Marketing Plan Children’s Services” prepared by Council’s Children Services Department, at present, there are a total of 112 child care services operating in the Penrith LGA. The centres offer the following services: Long Day Care, Before School Care, After School Care and Vacation Care.

A “Viability Report” was presented to Council as part of the submission prepared by the consultant representing Bright Stars Kindergarten 164 Stafford Street Penrith. The report argued that there is currently an oversupply of child care centres in the Penrith LGA. The conclusion is based on the data available on federal government website (www.mychild.gov.au).

There are serious shortcomings in using the vacancy number appearing on this website to conclude there is an oversupply of child care services in certain area. The figures shown on my child website is based on the number self reporting by individual centres. The information on the website has caused confusion to parents because centres are not required to say whether they have waiting lists.

Vacancy Numbers

Vacancy numbers were sought from Council’s Community Services Section in response to Councils previous resolution and concern raised regarding the accuracy of relying on waiting lists as an indicator of demand. Community Services have advised that there is no Council run child care centre operating at Stafford Street, however there are three Council run child care centres nearby whose recent vacancy rates are as follows:

Name of Centre	Address	Vacancy as at 15-8-13
Jamisontown Children’s Centre	70 Glenbrook St Jamisontown	0-2 years 4 2-3 years 0 3-5 years 5
Carita Children’s Centre	Lot 99 Trent St South Penrith	0-2 years 1 2-3 years 2 3-5 years 4
Platypus Playground Children’s Centre	61 Wardwell Drive, South Penrith	0-2 years 0 2-3 years 0 3-5 years 1

The above table indicates that there may be unmet demand for 0-2 years and 2-3 years places whilst there is available supply for 3-5 years. It should be noted that vacancy rates can also fluctuate day by day.

Based on the above findings, the following comments from Council’s Community Services Department as outlined in the original report to Council remain relevant:

From a social planning perspective, the proposed development will meet some of the child care needs of the Penrith area. Currently, there is a serious shortage of 0-2 care. Census 2011 figures indicated that there were increase of the babies and pre-school age groups (0-4) since 2006. The waiting list compiled by Council confirmed there is a need for more child care places for Penrith.

It is understandable the proposed development has drawn strong objections from the owners of the Bright Stars Kindergarten who are concerned of the direct competition from the proposed development. The matter relating to direct competition is not a relevant matter in the assessment of the development application.

Access, Parking and Traffic

Access to the site is proposed from Stafford Street through a 6m wide driveway. Council’s Senior Traffic Officer has reviewed the subject application in respect of parking, traffic generation and access arrangements and concludes the following:

· The traffic movements into/out of the site would yield some 53 additional movements per peak hour (two-way). Although the proposal does produce a minor consistent increase in local traffic flow, no adverse traffic generation impacts are expected from the development and it is anticipated that the local road network has adequate spare capacity to cater for this increase.

· The parking requirements for the site based on Council’s DCP. As 19 spaces have been provided, the requirements of the Parking DCP are met. A condition is recommended to ensure that all car parking and manoeuvring is in accordance with AS2890.1-2004; AS2890.6-2009 (see condition number 3.4).

· Sight distance and access arrangements are acceptable for both directions of travel in Stafford Street.

The site is 46.62m wide which can accommodate additional 7 on-street car parking spaces. Any on-street parking that may occur would be during peak periods drop-off/pick-up periods for the centre and given that Stafford Street is a 50km/hr local road speed zone with ample sight distances some on-street parking is acceptable.

Car Parking Calculation

Car parking has been calculated in accordance with Penrith DCP 2006 and compared to that required under the ‘RTA’s Guide to Traffic Generating Developments’ and ‘Penrith DCP 2010’ as follows:

a) Penrith DCP 2006

The above DCP requires that:

‘Car parking spaces shall be provided on site at the rate of 1 car parking space for every 4 children.

One parking space shall also be provided for each additional staff member where

child care centres are catering for younger children, or children with special

needs, and the ratio of staff to children is increased.’

Calculation

One space for four children equates to 15.5 spaces.

Children (Education and Care Services) Supplementary Provisions Regulation 2012 requires the ratio of primary contact staff to children as:

i) 1:4 in respect of all children who are under the age of 2 years

ii) 1:8 in respect of all children who are 2 or more years of age but under 3 years of age

iii) 1:10 in respect of all children who are 3 or more years of age but under 6 years of age.

Number of staff required is calculated as follows:

Age Bracket	No. of Children	Staff per children	No. of Staff
0-2	16	1 for 4	4
2-3	16	1 for 8	2
3-6	30	1 for 10	3
TOTAL	62		9

Younger children are considered under the age bracket of 0-2.

One space for 4 children rate is determined on the basis of 1 staff member for 9 children (average) in the 2-6 age bracket. If all children were in this age bracket then 62 children will require 6.9 staff i.e 62/9. Say 7 staff.

So additional staff required = 9 – 7 = 2.

Total car spaces required = 15.5 + 2 = 17.5 spaces.

Nineteen on site car spaces are now provided. Seven additional on-street spaces are also available. There are 26 car spaces available (on-site plus on-street) which is satisfactory.

b) RTA’s Guide to Traffic Generating Developments

This Guide requires that:

‘Off-street parking must be provided at the rate of one space for every four children in attendance.

Given the short length of stay (the RTA's surveys found an average length of stay of 6.8 minutes), parking must be provided in a convenient location, allowing safe movement of children to and from the centre.

Consideration could be given to reducing the parking required if convenient and safe on-street parking is available (e.g. indented parking bays), provided that the use of such parking does not adversely affect the amenity of the adjacent area.’

Calculation

One space for four children equates to 15.5 spaces.

Nineteen on site car spaces are provided which is satisfactory.

c) Penrith DCP 2010

The above DCP requires car parking spaces as follows:

‘One per 10 children as a drop-off and pick-up parking area for visitors plus one per employee plus provision for any dwelling.

Note: Where a child care centre / preschool is not located in or immediately adjoining a residential area, a submission to vary the above parking rates will be considered.’

Calculation

One space for 10 children equates to 6.2 spaces.

Number of staff required = 9

Total number of car spaces required = 9 + 6.2 = 15.2

Nineteen on site car spaces are provided which is satisfactory.

Noise Impacts

The application was accompanied by an acoustic report prepared by Acoustic Logic which provided a review of the potential noise impacts from the proposed child care centre. Council Officers reviewed that report and found some shortcomings. Council Officers wrote to the applicant and advised them that ‘the report stated that a maximum of 8 children between the ages of 3-5 would be in the outdoor play area at certain times, which indicated that a child of this age group would only be allowed outside for half an hour in a given day. Eighteen 2-3 year olds would all have to be outside between 11 and 12 noon for 15 minutes each. This seemed quite unlikely and further explanation was needed regarding this aspect.’

The applicant submitted a revised acoustic report that included recommendations to mitigate acoustic impacts. The key recommendations of this report are provided below.

· Install a minimum 2.2m high acoustic screen along the eastern and southern boundaries of the playground.

· Install a minimum 2.2m high acoustic screen along the western and southern boundaries of the carpark.

· The age groups of children have been spilt with sixteen (16) 0-2 year olds and sixty (60) 3-5 year olds. The use of the outdoor play area is limited to sixteen 0-2 year olds and groups of twenty 3-5 year olds.

· The doors for internal play areas shall be closed when children are playing indoors, unless the indoor play period is a substitute for outdoor play.

· Signs reminding staff and visitors to minimise noise at all times shall be installed at

ingress/egress points from the child care centre.

· Management is to ensure children are supervised at all times to minimise noise generated by the children whenever practical and possible.

Council’s Environment Section has checked the acoustic report and recommended further conditions to mitigate noise impacts from the child care centre. These conditions include:

· The use of the outdoor play areas associated with the Childcare Centre is only permitted to be used between 11:00am and 3:00pm.

· A maximum of sixteen (16) children aged between 0-2 years and twenty (20) children aged between 3-5 years are allowed to play outside in any one time.

· The use of a PA system or amplified music is not permitted to be used in the outdoor play area. The use of amplified music within the building shall not be audible from residential boundaries.

· In order to ensure that all noise related aspects for construction and operational phases are managed a Noise Management Plan (NMP) is to be prepared and submitted to Penrith City Council for consideration and approval prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.

· Within 12 months from the date of issuing the Occupation Certificate, a compliance report is to be prepared by a suitably qualified acoustic consultant to ensure that noise levels from and inside the development meet the noise emissions criteria set in the Noise Report (see condition number 3.16).

Built form and Character

The proposed development is considered to be in keeping with the existing residential character of the area which has predominantly older style single storey dwellings. The proposed single storey child care centre will blend into the streetscape as it has a built form compatible with single dwellings. A front building setback varying from 5.5m to 6.5m will be provided which is consistent with the streetscape. As such, impacts to the streetscape, local topography and character of the area will be minimal. Landscaping in the form of low shrubs and grass will be carried out in appropriate locations to ensure the green corridor that exists in the immediate area will not be affected in the long term.

Privacy

As the new building will be single storey there are limited opportunities for overlooking from the windows of the building to the neighbouring properties. The 2.2m high fence to the east, west and south of the site will curtail any views to the neighbouring properties. The land is relatively flat and cutting/filling will generally be less than 500mm, which will not impact on privacy matters.

Sunlight Access to Neighbouring Properties

Sunlight access to private courtyards of the neighbouring properties will not be impacted as a translucent fence component is proposed above 1.8m high solid fence.

Asbestos Handling and Disposal

A standard condition of consent has been imposed that any demolition works that require removal of asbestos shall only be carried out by a licensed asbestos removal contractor who has a current Workcover Asbestos License and all asbestos laden waste must be disposed at a tipping facility licensed by the Environmental Protection Authority to receive asbestos waste.

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

The subject site is within an established residential area that is zoned for low-medium density housing development. The site is not affected by any overland flows, landslip or movement. It is located close to public transport. Local shops on Stafford Street are located less than 400m from the site. The proposed development has been designed to minimise and mitigate any adverse amenity impacts on the neighbouring properties. By adopting the recommendations of the Acoustic Report and subject to recommended conditions, the site is suitable for a childcare centre of this scale.

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

Community Consultation

In accordance with Penrith Development Control Plan 2006, the proposed development was notified to nearby and adjoining residents/owners and advertised in local newspapers with submissions invited from 20 August to 3 September 2012. Twenty five submissions and a petition signed by seventy eight residents were received in response. An on-site meeting was held on 24 June 2013 between Councillors, Council Officers and concerned residents. Overall the following concerns were raised:

a) Traffic congestion and safety along Stafford Street and surrounding streets.

b) Pedestrian safety during drop-off and pick-up from “Bright Stars Kindergarten” given the proximity of the proposed development.

c) The number of child care centres is extremely high. A Viability Report is provided that notes the high vacancy rates in most centres in Penrith. ‘Location’ provisions of Council’s DCP for Child Care Centres and express concern that the above matter is not included within those controls. For the purposes of assessing this application, and perhaps also to assist in amending Council’s DCP, we would therefore like to refer to the equivalent DCP controls in neighbouring Councils. The Blacktown approach of not allowing Child Care Centres within one (1) kilometre of other child care centres provides clear direction for potential proponents of child care centre developments.

d) The proposal is for 70 children and Council’s basic requirement is 1 space per 4 children. This equates to a total of 18 spaces. We note though, that clause 10 provides that “1 additional space shall be provided for each additional staff member where child care centres are catering for younger children...” We assume that this means that the “1 space per 4 children” rate is determined on the basis of 1 staff member for 10 children in the 3-6 age bracket. If all the children were in this age bracket, then the 70 children would equate to 7 staff. So by our calculations, the requirement is for 22 spaces. The applicant proposes 17 spaces, a shortfall of 5 spaces.

e) Noise Impacts - We have already mentioned the noise impacts on other local residents arising from traffic congestion and from children and refer to the assessment of noise impacts in the SEE. We have attached an assessment of noise impacts carried out by our consultants that confirms that there are number of matters were either addressed:

· noise from mechanical plant was not addressed

· four (4) children (age 2-3) or eight (8) children (age 3-5) playing outdoor at any time is not considered realistic for a child care centre with up to 54 children age 2-5

· children (age 2-3) playing outdoor for 12 minutes a day and children (age 3-5) playing outdoor for 24 minutes a day is not considered realistic, considering children age 0-2 are allowed to play outdoor for two (2) hours a day

· vehicle movements in the car-park, adopted for the noise assessment are not considered representative of vehicle movements during the peak hours

· given the levels of noise our opinion is that it would not be feasible to reduce noise from the proposed child care centre at 168-170 Stafford Street, Penrith to within the assessment objectives under normal operating conditions.

f) The proposed Development Application does not comply with Sun Safety Regulations for children. For the 3-6 age groups – there are 36 children in that group. The applicant has indicated the children will go out in groups of 8 to reduce noise impact. This means the children will go out in a minimum of 5 groups again. If you divide the 5 groups into the designated 2hr block, this only allows 24 minutes of outdoor play for each child per day in the 3-6 year age group. The applicant’s allocated time for children to play outdoors is not appropriate for child development.

g) Asbestos removal during demolition.

The above concerns have been addressed in this report under the headings of ‘Penrith Development Control Plan 2006’ and ‘Section 79C(1)(b) – ‘The Likely Impacts of the Development’. A condition of consent recommends that the child care centre shall comply with the requirements of the Children’s Services Regulation 2004 and shall be appropriately licensed by NSW Community Services prior to the commencement of operation.

Referrals

The table below summarises the results of internal referrals in relation to the proposal:

Referral	Comments
Building Surveyor	No objection, subject to standard conditions.
Development Engineer	No objection, subject to standard conditions and special conditions.
Environmental Officer	No objection, subject to standard conditions and special conditions.
Health Officer	No objection, subject to standard conditions.
Traffic Engineer	No objection, subject to standard conditions and special conditions.
Tree Management Officer	No objection, subject to standard conditions and special conditions.

Section 79C(1)(e) – The Public Interest

A childcare centre is permissible in the 2(c) Residential (Medium Density) zone and the proposal meets the aims and objectives of the Penrith Local Environmental Plan -1998 (Urban Land). The proposed childcare centre will provide community benefits by providing a service for 0-5 year olds. Employment opportunities will be increased during construction of the centre. Subject to the recommended conditions, the proposal is unlikely to have a negative impact on the surrounding environment and it is considered to be in the public interest.

Section 94 Contributions

There are no Section 94 contributions applicable to the proposed development.

Conclusion

The proposed child care centre has been assessed against the relevant heads of consideration under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. It is consistent with the requirements of the relevant planning instruments and development control plan and is a permissible land use in a 2(c) Residential (Low- Medium Density) zone under the provisions of the Penrith Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Urban Land). In addition to Council’s development controls, the proposal will need to comply with the Children’s Services Regulation 2004. NSW Community Services will determine compliance with this regulation as part of the licensing requirements for the facility based on children and staff numbers.

The key issue relating to the proposed development raised in submissions is the impact on an existing child care centre located at No. 164 Stafford Street, Penrith. Council’s Community Services Section has reviewed this matter and has advised that the proposed development will meet some of the child care needs of the Penrith area. Currently, there is a serious shortage of 0-2 care. Census 2011 figures indicated that there was an increase of the babies and pre-school age groups (0-4) since 2006. The waiting list compiled by Council confirmed there is a need for more child care places for Penrith. The geographical relationship between the proposed development and the neighbouring pre-school may not be considered as detrimental as each centre is unique in its character and services offered.

Noise impacts from the proposed centre will be reduced by carrying out acoustical treatment of the boundary fences as recommended in the acoustic report submitted with the development application. The site is suitable for the proposed development. Subject to the recommended conditions, the proposal is unlikely to have a negative impact on the surrounding environment and it is considered to be in the public interest.

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Development Application 12/0721 Childcare centre at Lot B DP389004 & Lot A DP389004 (No.168-170) Stafford Street, Penrith be received.

2. The objection pursuant to State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards regarding landscaped area development standard under Clause 12(3) of Penrith Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Urban Land) be supported.

3. Development Application 12/0721 Childcare centre at Lot B DP389004 & Lot A DP389004 (No.168-170) Stafford Street, Penrith be approved subject to the following conditions:

Standard Conditions

3.1 A001 Approved plans

A008 Works to BCA requirements

A009 Residential works DCP

A011 Engineering works DCP

A012 Food shop

A019 Occupation Certificate

A020 Use of building

A021 Business registration

A023 Limit number of children (24)

A026 Advertising sign

A029 Hours of operation

A039 Graffiti

A043 Air conditioning unit

A046 Obtain Construction Certificate before commencement of works

B002 Australian Standard for demolition and disposal to approved landfill site and Occupational Hygienist clearance report prior to Occupational Certificate.

B003 Asbestos disposal

B004 Dust suppression

B005 Mud/Soil

B006 Hours of work

D001 Implement approved sediment and erosion control measures

D005 No filling without prior approval

D009 Covering of waste storage area

D010 Appropriate disposal of excavated or other waste

D014 Plant and equipment noise

E001A BCA compliance (Class 2-9)

E002 BCA issued to be addressed

E006 Disabled access and facilities

E009 Annual fire safety – essential fire safety (Class 2-9 buildings)

F022 Commercial kitchens

G002 Section 73 (not for single dwellings)

G004 Integral Energy

H001 Stamped plans and erection of site notice

H002 Provision of site facilities prior to commencement of construction works

H006 Implementation of waste management plan

H013 Further details of building components

H024 Glass installations to comply with AS 1288

H041 Hours of construction work

K101 Works at no cost to Council

K202 Roads Act- Minor Works

K203 S138 – Roads Act

K210 On site detention

K213 Water quality

K221 Access car parking and manoeuvring

K501 Roads Authority Clearance

K502 Works as executed plans

K503 Stormwater compliance

K504 Restriction as to user

L001 Approved landscaping plans

L003 Landscaping report requirements

L005 Planting of plant material

L006 Australian Standard landscaping requirements

L007 Tree protection measures

L008 Tree preservation order

Q01F Notice of commencement and appointment of PCA

Q006 Occupation Certificate

Special Conditions

3.2 The development shall comply with the following community safety and CPTED (Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design) matters:

(a) All gates shall be lockable.

(b) The landscaping in the form of shrubs to the front of the car parking area shall be low in height. Dense vegetation with concentrated top to bottom foliage shall be avoided. The use of low vegetation will improve surveillance, provide clear lines of sight and avoid concealment areas along the frontage of the site.

(c) The external lighting facing the driveway area shall have a wide beam of illumination which reaches to the beam of the next light, or the perimeter of the area being traversed (i.e. the car parking area)

(d) Lighting shall be directed towards access/egress routes to illuminate potential offenders as well as the areas where people are most vulnerable

(e) Lighting shall be contained within the property boundary and no light shall be projected upwards

(f) Where appropriate, movement sensitive and diffused lights shall be used

(g) All lighting shall be vandal resistant where practical.

3.3 Waste Management Plan for the development shall be in accordance with the relevant provisions of Section 2.9 (Waste Planning) of Penrith Development Control Plan 2006 and the childcare centre component must have as a minimum a weekly collection of the waste organised via a private contractor.

3.4 All car parking and manoeuvring must be in accordance with AS2890.1-2004; AS2890.6-2009 and Council's requirements.

Appropriate sight lines shall be maintained from the driveway in accordance with AS 2890.1 (2004)

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

3.6 The hours of operation for the centre are 7:00am to 6.00pm Monday to Friday. The centre is not to operate on weekends or public holidays. Staff are not to generate noise that can be heard from an adjacent premises before 7am. Deliveries and waste removal are to occur between 7.00am and 6.00pm Monday to Friday, excluding public holidays.

3.7 A maximum of sixty two (62) children are permitted in the centre at any one time.

3.8 The use of the outdoor play areas associated with the Childcare Centre are only permitted to be used between 11:00am and 3:00pm.

3.9 A maximum of sixteen (16) children aged between 0-2 years are allowed to play outside at any one time and twenty (20) children aged between 3-5 years are allowed to play outside at any one time.

3.10 The use of a public address system or amplified music is not permitted to be used in the outdoor play area. The use of amplified music within the building shall not be audible from residential boundaries.

3.11 The windows and doors of the indoor play rooms are to be kept closed when children are playing indoors.

3.12 Noise levels from the premises shall not exceed the relevant noise criteria detailed in the “Noise Assessment” by Acoustic Logic (dated 31/1/2013, refer 20120617.1/3007A/R1/JZ, revision 1). The recommendations provided in the above-mentioned documents are to be implemented and incorporated into the design and construction of the development, and shall be shown on plans accompanying the Construction Certificate application.

3.13 A report is to be obtained from a qualified acoustic consultant certifying that the development meets the relevant noise criteria and conditions of this consent. This report is to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority and Council prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate. The provisions of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 apply to the development, in terms of regulating offensive noise.

3.14 A noise barrier is to be provided along all boundaries as recommended in the acoustic report entitled “Noise Assessment” by Acoustic Logic (dated 31/1/2013, refer 20120617.1/3007A/R1/JZ, revision 1). The noise barrier is to be 2.2 metres in height, of construction certified by the acoustic consultant.

3.15 Detailed plans and specifications of the sound barrier walls are to be submitted to Council prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate. The walls are to be satisfactorily completed prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate.

3.16 Within 12 months from the date of issuing the Occupation Certificate, a compliance report is to be prepared by a suitably qualified acoustic consultant to ensure that noise levels from and inside the development meet the noise emissions criteria set in the “Noise Assessment” by Acoustic Logic (dated 31/1/2013, refer 20120617.1/3007A/R1/JZ, revision 1).

A Compliance Report on this testing is to be prepared using the test data and it is to determine whether the noise emissions criteria for the development are being complied with and whether any mitigation works are required.

This report is to be prepared and provided to Council within sixty days of the testing. The report is to be approved by Council, with any recommendations being implemented in accordance with the approved report within twenty-one days from the direction of Council unless otherwise specified by Council. If Council is not the certifying authority for this development, the report is required to be provided to Penrith City Council for approval.

3.17 A Noise Management Plan (NMP) is to be prepared and submitted to Penrith City Council for consideration and approval prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate. The NMP shall be prepared by a suitably qualified consultant and may need to be amended to include the any comments provided by Council. The NMP is to:

a) address all noise related aspects of the development's construction and operational phases, including:

i) how the restriction on the number of children playing outside will be managed; and

ii) a schedule describing the times of outdoor play for each group of children; and

iii) the management of visitors in the carpark attending the site picking up/dropping of children.

b) Address the relevant conditions of this consent

c) Recommend any systems/controls to be implemented to minimise the potential for any adverse noise impact(s).

d) Incorporate a program for ongoing monitoring and review to ensure that the NMP remains contemporary with relevant environmental standards.

The approved Noise Management Plan is to be implemented and complied with at all times.

3.18 Appropriate signage is to be provided to the carpark and entrance of the centre requesting patrons to minimise noise and protect the amenity of the surrounding neighbourhood. Prior to the issue of an occupation certificate a suitable signage plan is to be submitted to Council for approval. The signage plan is to provide details on the location, sizing and wording of the proposed signs. The signs are to be erected prior to the issue of an occupation certificate.

3.19 A public contact number is to be displayed on the childcare centre signage and this phone line must be operational during business hours. A complaint register is to be maintained and must include complaint details and any actions taken to address those complaints. A copy of the complaint register is to be provided to Council upon request.

3.20 In the event of on going noise complaints relating to the development being received by Council, the owner and/or occupier of the development maybe required by Council to obtain the services of a suitably qualified acoustic consultant to undertake a noise impact assessment on the development to address the concerns of the community. The noise impact assessment report is to be prepared and provided to Council within 45 days of being requested. The assessment report is to be approved by Council, with any recommendations being implemented in accordance with the approved assessment report.

3.21 Prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate, a lighting system shall be installed for the development to provide uniform lighting across common areas and driveways.

Exterior lighting shall be located and directed in such a manner so as not to create a nuisance to surrounding landuses. The lighting shall be the minimum level of illumination necessary for safe operation. The lighting shall be in accordance with AS 4282 “Control of the obtrusive effects of outdoor lighting” (1997).

3.22 A designated hand wash basin must be supplied within the food preparation area for hand washing only. It must be supplied with warm water through a common spout in compliance with AS 4674- 2004 and Food Safety Standard 3.2.3. The hand wash basin must also be supplied with soap and paper towel. The hand wash basin must be hands free as required by AS 4674-2004. If there is a separate bottle preparation area within the Centre then it must also be supplied with an additional hand wash basin supplied with warm water through a common spout.

3.23 The garbage area must be constructed and maintained in accordance with the requirements of Food Safety Standard 3.2.3 and the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997. Specifically, external garbage storage areas are to be paved, graded, drained to a waste disposal system and provided with a hose tap to facilitate cleaning.

3.24 If the Centre wishes to utilize a dishwasher to sanitise food utensils and equipment, it must be capable of reaching 80^oC for 2 minutes, 75^oC for 10 min or 70^oC for 15 min in the rinse cycle as required by A S4674-2004.

3.25 As required by AS 4674-2004, mechanical ventilation shall be provided in accordance with AS1668 Parts 1 & 2 to the dishwasher if it vents steam into the surrounding area to the extent that there is, or likely to be, condensation collecting on walls and ceilings. If required, the installer of the exhaust system shall certify and submit appropriate documentation to Council prior to the issuing of the Occupation Certificate that the system has been installed in accordance with AS1668.

3.26 All floors within the food business are to be constructed, finished and appropriately coved in accordance with AS 4674 – 2004.

3.27 All walls within the food business are to be of solid construction and finished in accordance with AS 4674 – 2004.

3.28 The ceiling is to be constructed in accordance with AS 4674 – 2004. Please note drop-in panels are not permitted.

3.29 The premise is to be proofed against the entry of pests in accordance with AS 4674 – 2004.

3.30 In addition to the hand wash basin located in the food preparation area, a hand wash basin with warm water through a common spout in compliance with AS 4674-2004 and Food Safety Standard 3.2.3 must be installed within or immediately adjacent to the toilet. This hand wash basin must also be supplied with soap and paper towel.

3.31 Wastewater generated from mop buckets, cleaning mops and other cleaning activities must be disposed of in a cleaner’s sink or other approved facility.

3.32 A food business notification reference number shall be obtained from the NSW Food Authority prior to commencement of business operations and a copy of the notification shall be submitted to Council. Notification can be completed on the NSW Food Authority’s Food Notify website at www.foodnotify.nsw.gov.au.

3.33 A satisfactory inspection from Council’s Environmental Health Department will be required prior to the issuing of the Occupation Certificate and operation of the business. The occupier is to contact the department to organise an appointment.

3.34 The recommendations of the Arboriculture Impact Assessment Report prepared by Urban Landscape Planners P/L shall be complied with. The trees required to be retained in accordance with this report shall be retained and at least 6 trees shall be planted on site to compensate for those removed.

3.35 The child care centre shall comply with the requirements of the Children’s Services Regulation 2004 and shall be appropriately licensed by NSW Community Services prior to the commencement of operation.

3.36 Trucks entering and leaving the site carrying construction materials that may generate dust shall be covered. Stockpiles of soil or other materials shall be covered or sprayed with water on a regular basis, particularly during dry or windy conditions.

4. Those who made submissions be advised of Council’s decision.

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1. View	Location Map	1 Page	Appendix
2. View	Site & Floor Plan	1 Page	Appendix
3. View	Elevation Map	1 Page	Appendix

Ordinary Meeting 26 August 2013

Development Application 13/0339 Proposed 2 Storey dwelling over garage and front fence at Lot 2 D1165374 (No.127) River Road, Emu Plains Applicant: Gregory and Crystal Lloyd; Owner: Gregory and Crystal Lloyd

Compiled by: Stephen Krimmer, Environmental Health and Building Surveyor

Authorised by: Peter Wood, Development Assessment Co-ordinator

Outcome	We plan for our future growth
Strategy	Facilitate development that encourages a range of housing types
Service Activity	Delivery timely assessment, regulation and certification of development and building work in accordance with statutory requirements

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

Executive Summary

Council is in receipt of a development application for the construction of a multi level dwelling and front fence at No. 127 River Road, Emu Plains The application is supported by the submission of an objection under State Environmental Planning Policy No.1 and seeks a variation to the minimum landscaped area, building envelope and the maximum external wall height requirements.

The proposed development consists of a two storey dwelling over a basement floor plan consisting of a garage, storage and sub-floor area. A front fence is also proposed and this is incorporated into a retaining wall. The land has a significant fall towards the front boundary. The Nepean River is located opposite the front of the allotment.

The site is Zoned No. 2(a) Residential (Urban and Landscape Protection) under the Penrith Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 1998 Urban Land. Under the objectives of the LEP, development is required to reinforce the importance of natural landscape settings, protect landscapes and urban areas with identified conservation value and allow a limited range of compatible non-residential uses.

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

The SEPP 1 objection has demonstrated that full compliance with the minimum landscaped area, building envelope and maximum external wall height requirement is unreasonable due to flood related development controls and site constraints. The variations to planning controls associated with the proposed dwelling are unlikely to have any significant impacts on the amenity of the locality.

In accordance with reporting procedures provided by the Department of Planning and Infrastructure, the matter is forwarded to Council for determination as the proposed variations exceed 25%. This report recommends the SEPP1 objection be supported and the development application be approved.

Background

The development application for the construction of a multi level dwelling and front fence at Lot 2 DP 1165374, No 127 River Road Emu Plains, was lodged on 17 April 2013. Various meetings were held with the applicant to discuss issues relating to non-compliances with planning requirements and flooding issues. Further information was requested and has been submitted to address these matters.

Site and Surrounds

No. 127 River Road (Lot 2 DP 1165374) was recently created from a boundary adjustment of two existing lots (DA09/1101). Lot 1 in the same deposited plan is located to the south and is currently vacant (see Locality Plan Appendix 1). The site is 695m² in area, 13.71m wide and 50.648m in depth. The site is rectangular in shape and has a fall from the rear to the front boundary.

The site is currently vacant and relatively clear of vegetation. A retaining wall approximately 1m in height exists along the front boundary. The surrounding area is characterised by residential development comprising a mix of single, two storey and multi level dwellings.

The Proposed Development

The proposed development includes the following aspects (refer Architectural Plans Appendices 2-5):

· Construction of a multi level dwelling including double garage

· Construction of a retaining wall and front fence

· Demolition of an existing retaining wall

· Associated landscaping

The development application was accompanied by:

· An objection under State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 to Clause 12 of Penrith Local Environmental Plan 1998 Urban Land.

· Statement of Environmental Effects

· Site and Building Plans

· BASIX certificate

· Waste Management Plan

Planning Assessment

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

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

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 (SEPP 1) – Development Standards

A State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 (SEPP1) objection has been lodged in support of the development application seeking to vary the minimum landscaped area, building envelope and maximum external wall height requirements outlined in Penrith LEP 1998 Urban Land.

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

The SEPP 1 objection has been lodged in relation to the provisions of Clause 12 of Penrith LEP 1998 Urban Land, and in particular the provisions of Clause 12(3). The relevant clause states:

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

The dwelling application proposes the following variations:

Relevant Clause 12(3) requirements	Requirements for Zone No. 2 (a)	Proposal	Extent of variation
Building envelope	Dwelling to be located wholly within a 45 degree angle measured 1.8m in height at side boundaries	A portion of the first and second storey of the dwelling encroaches the building envelope	30%
Maximum external wall height	6.5m	9.6m	48%
Minimum landscaped area	50%	45%	10%

1) Development Standard

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

The objectives for Zone 2(a) Residential (Urban and Landscape Protection) are as follows:

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

The proposed dwelling is sited so as to minimise the amount of vegetation required to be removed and to utilise the existing land levels. The site is not identified as being in a Heritage Conservation Area.

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

The proposed development is considered to be designed in a manner which is responsive to the site. The proposed development is compatible with surrounding land uses.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The proposed development is considered site responsive. Flood related development controls and site constraints have influenced the location and design of the dwelling. Visual and privacy impacts are minimised in the design of the dwelling by:

· Articulating the building to incorporate smaller upper floor areas which are stepped in to provide increasing setbacks from the side boundaries. This configuration also serves to reduce overshadowing impacts on adjoining properties.

· Minimising windows and glazed areas in the side elevations of the dwelling.

· Installing privacy screening to balconies.

· Adequate separation between site boundaries is provided and this is consistent with surrounding development. The existing open space corridor along the rear boundary line is retained.

· Existing environmental features will be protected by minimising vegetation removal. Appropriate stormwater disposal to the street frontage is proposed.

In response to the SEPP 1 submission the following comments are made:

Landscaped Area

A landscaped area of approximately 45% is proposed. This is a variation of 10% to the development standard of 50% landscaped area.

The overall deficiency in site landscaping area is considered to be minimal and full compliance with the numerical standard would not significantly change the outcome of the development on site.

The landscaped area calculation excludes all areas that are less than 2m in width and hardstand areas in accordance with the LEP definition. As such, the area of land excluded from the landscaped area includes the following:

· The area of land less than 2m in dimension along the sides of the dwelling (approximately 34m2)

· The northern side driveway verge (approximately 27m2).

Including the areas of soft landscaping less than 2m in dimension would therefore result in an additional 61m2 of landscaping. This would achieve a 49% landscaped area.

The driveway area and front stairs/paving is large due to the increased front setback for the proposed dwelling (approximately 106m2). This setback is due to flood related development controls requiring the dwelling to be located towards the rear of the property. The smaller available lot width also impacts on the landscaped area calculation.

Considering the site attributes and flood planning impacts, the development is still considered to be site responsive at a scale which is compatible with existing housing in River Road and similar structures in the locality. The reduction in landscaped area does not exacerbate the developments scale, height or bulk and the considerations under the objectives of Section 12 of the LEP are considered to be satisfied with the smaller landscaped area.

Maximum External Wall Height

The maximum external wall height permitted is 6.5m. The external wall height on the North eastern elevation extends to a height up to the skillion roof of approximately 9.6m. The external wall height on the South western elevation is approximately 8m. A variation is considered suitable for the following reasons:

· In order to comply with Council’s requirements for flood prone land, the dwelling has been designed on a basement floor level so as to achieve the required habitable floor level of RL28.7m AHD. The minimum habitable floor level requirement increases the overall height above the 6.5m requirement.

· The bulk and appearance of the proposed dwelling is considered to be suitable due to the low roof pitch and stepped design. The upper floor level walls are stepped in towards the middle of the dwelling and appropriate window and screen treatment has been provided so as to soften the appearance and reduce the visual impacts of the development.

· The use of a variety of building materials to the external walls reduces the scale and bulk appearance of the proposed dwelling.

Building Envelope

The proposed dwelling encroaches on the required building envelope.

A variation is considered suitable for the following reasons:

· The building envelope non compliance results from the site being impacted by flood related development controls and the small width of the allotment. The flood related development control requires the habitable floor levels of the dwelling to be raised above natural ground level. The allotment is 13.716m in width and 50.65m in length. The narrow lot width was approved under a SEPP1 objection in the original subdivision approval (DA09/1101).

· The bulk, scale and appearance of the proposed dwelling is considered suitable. External walls are staggered from the side boundaries on the ground floor level. The upper floor level walls are stepped and appropriate window and screen treatment has been provided so as to soften the appearance and reduce the visual impacts of the development.

· The use of a variety of building materials to the external walls reduces the scale and bulk appearance of the proposed dwelling.

2) Section 5 - Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979

Assessment of the SEPP 1 objection also needs to be considered against the objectives stated in Section 5(a) (ii) of the EP&A Act which is as follows:

(ii) the promotion and co-ordination of the orderly and economic use and development of land

It is considered the proposed development will ensure attainment of the objectives of section (ii) and refusal would be unreasonable due to the following:

· The proposed development meets the objectives of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act.

· The proposed development is reasonable development for the site.

· The proposed development satisfies the objectives of the zone.

· The proposed development has been designed to be site responsive and achieves the setback requirements from the adjoining dwellings.

3) Department of Planning Circular No. B1

The Department of Planning’s Circular No. B1 specifies other matters which should be considered by Council in its consideration of SEPP 1 objections including:

1) Clause 8 – is the Development standard inappropriate in general terms and should Council review its planning controls? Draft instruments may also be impacted upon if SEPP 1 is repeatedly used on a clause which may be affected.

2) Clause 9 – the likelihood of similar applications being made and the cumulative effect of similar approvals.

3) Clause 11 – dealing with applications to extend non-conforming development by more than 10%.

It is considered the minimum landscaped area, building envelope and maximum external wall height provisions retain their validity and are consistently applied and enforced on greenfield sites across the Council area.

The SEPP1 objection has demonstrated full compliance with the minimum landscaped area, building envelope and maximum external wall height requirements is unreasonable. The variations and the proposed dwelling are unlikely to have any significant impacts on the amenity of the locality.

Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No 20.

The provisions of SREP 20 apply to the property as it falls within the Hawkesbury-Nepean River Catchment. SREP 20 aims to protect the environment of the Hawkesbury-Nepean River, by ensuring that the impacts of future land uses are considered in a regional context. Of most relevance to the proposal is the potential impact on residential development and water quality.

The proposed development will have minimal impacts on the total catchment management of water quality and water quantity. No heritage items are located on the site. The dwelling is located on a cleared area with minimal tree removal required. The dwelling is considered to have minimal adverse impact on visibility from the riverine corridor and its scenic quality. The proposed dwelling is consistent with surrounding development.

Stormwater will be connected to the street gutter at the front of the property and a condition is recommended for erosion and sediment control (D001).

The proposal is therefore in keeping with the objectives of the SREP.

Penrith Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Urban Land)

Under the terms of Penrith Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Urban Land) the land is zoned 2(a) Residential (Urban and Landscape Protection). The proposed development is defined as a dwelling, which is permissible with the consent of Council.

Under the objectives of Penrith LEP 1998 Urban Land, development is required to reinforce the importance of natural landscape settings, protect landscapes and urban areas with identified conservation value, and to allow a limited range of compatible non-residential uses.

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

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

Penrith DCP 2006 Part 4 Section 4.2 – “Residential Single Dwellings” is applicable and the following sections are relevant to the assessment process.

Section 3.4.1 Hazard and risk – flooding

The objective of this clause is to ensure that residents and their property are not exposed to unacceptable risk or damage from flooding during peak storm events. The proposed dwelling was referred to Council’s Development Services Engineer and the final dwelling proposal was found to be satisfactory in relation to flood related development controls.

Section 4.4 Preferred Configurations for New Dwellings

The objective is to ensure new dwellings adopt key features of established suburban design including entrances, the windows to main living rooms and private courtyards face the street or the rear boundary, and garages are architecturally integrated within building forms. The development is considered to comply with these objectives.

Section 5.2 Urban Form

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

Section 5.3 Front, Side and Rear Setbacks

The objective is to ensure setbacks reflect the character of established garden suburbs, and provide for development of flora and fauna corridors. The proposed 19.792m front setback is in line with adjoining dwellings and is necessary as a result of flood related development controls. The 9.616m rear setback to the dwelling and approximately 6.0m rear setback to the rear alfresco is considered satisfactory. The proposed side setbacks are consistent with surrounding development.

Section 5.4 Landscaped Area and Parking

The objective is to retain a reasonable proportion of each site for landscaped garden areas, conserve significant existing vegetation, and provide reasonable separation between neighbouring dwellings. Landscaped area is addressed in the SEPP1 discussion above. Adequate parking areas are provided and conditions will be included to ensure driveway grades are in accordance with AS2890.1.

Section 5.5 Solar Planning

The objective is to improve the energy efficiency of dwellings and achieve a high standard of residential amenity. Due to the existing orientation of the lot, some overshadowing impacts are inevitable. The adjoining lot on the South Western side boundary is vacant and no current development applications have been lodged. However, the applicant has demonstrated the dwelling meets acceptable solar standards and existing neighbouring and proposed private open spaces could receive appropriate solar access.

A satisfactory BASIX certificate has also been submitted to demonstrate adequate energy and water efficiency measures are incorporated into the dwelling.

Section 6.1 Significant Landscapes

The objective is that in areas of particular significance to natural conservation or high environmental character, new development should demonstrate detailed design measures to protect that conservation significance or character. In this regard the dwelling design and location maintains natural topography.

Section 6.3 Building Design

The objective is that dwellings be surrounded by private gardens, their facades should display a variety of materials and shading structures and garages should be integrated with the overall architectural form and design. The proposed development is considered to comply with these objectives.

Site-works including cut and fill are generally contained within the building footprint and are considered suitable based on flood related development controls and the minimal impacts on adjoining properties.

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

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

The impact of the development on streetscape will be minimal as the street appearance will be a two storey dwelling above a garage.

Stormwater is to be directed to the Council outlet at the front of the property, creating minimal impact on adjoining properties.

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

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

Whilst there are many limitations resulting from the site constraints such as flooding, slope and narrow frontage, these have been addressed by a suitable dwelling design.

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

Referrals

The application was referred to Council’s Development Engineer and they had no objection to the proposal subject to conditions.

Community Consultation

In accordance with Chapter 2.7 of the Penrith Development Control Plan for the City of Penrith 2006 – Notification and Advertising, the proposed development was notified to nearby and adjoining residents from 24 April 2013 and 6 May 2013. No objections were received. Council also notified nearby and adjoining residents of the amended plans on 8 July 2013 and advised of the date of the Council meeting in which the application is to be determined.

Conclusion

Under the objective of Penrith Local Environmental Plan 1998 Urban Land, development is required to reinforce the importance of natural landscape settings and areas with heritage conservation value, protect landscapes and urban areas with identified conservation value by limiting the range of permissible uses and requiring larger residential allotments, and to allow a limited range of compatible non-residential uses.

The subject development application seeks approval to construct a dwelling and front fence. The application is supported by a SEPP 1 objection seeking a variation to the minimum landscaped area, building envelope and maximum external wall height requirements.

The SEPP 1 objection is supported as it has demonstrated full compliance with the minimum landscaped area, building envelope and maximum external wall height requirements are unreasonable in this case and that the attainment of the objectives of Clause 5(a) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act will not be hindered by the proposal.

The SEPP1 variations and the proposed development are unlikely to have any significant impacts on the amenity of the locality.

The SEPP1 variations and proposed development are considered to comply with the objectives of the relevant planning instruments as outlined above and a site responsive dwelling is considered to have been achieved.

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

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Development Application 13/0339 Proposed 2 Storey dwelling over garage and front fence at Lot 2 D1165374 (No.127) River Road, Emu Plains be received

2. The SEPP 1 variations relating minimum landscaped area, building envelope and maximum external wall height be supported.

3. DA13/0339 for a multilevel dwelling consisting of three storeys at 127 River Road EMU PLAINS NSW 2750, be approved subject to the attached conditions:

3.1 A001 Approved plans that are architecturally drawn

A008 Works to BCA requirements

A019 Occupation Certificate

A046 Obtain a Construction Certificate

D001 Implement approved sediment & erosion control measures

D007 Filling of land

D009 Covering of waste storage area

D010 Appropriate disposal of excavated or other waste

E001 BCA compliance

F006 Water tank & nuisance

H001 Stamped plans

H002 All forms of construction

H009 Cut/fill details

H022 Survey

H030 Roof finishes

H036 Rainwater tank

H037 Safe supply of water from catchment

H038 Connection of rainwater tank supply

H039 Rainwater tank pumps

H041 Hours of Work

K202 Road act

K208 Stormwater

K215 Flooding

K217 Flooding

K218 Flooding

K402 Flooding

K403 Flooding

K501 Roads Authority

L008 Tree Preservation Order

P002 Fees associated with Council land

Q01F Notice of Commencement of Appointment of PCA

Q05F Occupation/Compliance Certificate

Special Conditions

3.2 Privacy (ground floor terrace) - The North eastern side and South western side of the ground floor terrace are to be provided with a fixed timber louvre privacy screen, angled so as to prevent downward viewing into adjoining dwellings and adjoining private open spaces. Screening shall be constructed to a minimum height of 1.8m above finished floor level of the terrace. Details are to be provided prior to the issue of a construction certificate

3.3 Privacy (ground floor alfresco) – To reduce impacts on privacy and overlooking from the rear alfresco, appropriate measures are to be installed to prevent viewing from the alfresco into adjoining dwellings and adjoining private open spaces. These measures may include fixed privacy screening, mature landscaping or a combination of both. Details are to be provided prior to the issue of a construction certificate.

3.4 Privacy (first floor balcony) - The first floor balcony is to be provided with a fixed timber louvre privacy screen, angled so as to prevent downward viewing into adjoining dwellings and adjoining private open spaces. Screening must be located on the South west elevation and shall be constructed to a minimum height of 1.6m above finished floor level of the balcony. Details are to be provided prior to the issue of a construction certificate.

3.5 Privacy (first floor terrace) - The North eastern and South western elevations of the first floor terrace are to be provided with a fixed timber louvre privacy screen, angled so as to prevent downward viewing into adjoining dwellings and adjoining private open spaces. Screening shall be constructed to a minimum height of 1.6m above finished floor level of the terrace. Details are to be provided prior to the issue of a construction certificate.

3.6 Privacy (living room windows) - To reduce impacts on privacy and overlooking into adjoining properties, the living room windows on the North Eastern elevation shall be provided with fixed obscure glazing up to 1.5m above finished floor level.

3.7 Vehicular access - Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate the Certifying Authority shall ensure that vehicular access and driveway gradients are in accordance with AS 2890.1 and Penrith City Council’s Development Control Plan.

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1. View	Locality Plan	1 Page	Appendix
2. View	Site Plan	1 Page	Appendix
3. View	Elevation Plan	1 Page	Appendix
4. View	Landscape Plan	1 Page	Appendix
5. View	Shadow Diagram and Fence Details	1 Page	Appendix

Ordinary Meeting 26 August 2013

Development Application 13/0310 Proposed Community Facility 90 Place Child Care Centre and Hall (No.38-40) Bangalla Parade, Glenmore Park Applicant: Hazzouri Melham; Owner: Lensworth Glenmor Park Pty Ltd

Compiled by: Gurvinder Singh, Senior Environmental Planner

Authorised by: Peter Wood, Development Assessment Co-ordinator

Outcome	We plan for our future growth
Strategy	Facilitate development that encourages a range of housing types
Service Activity	Delivery timely assessment, regulation and certification of development and building work in accordance with statutory requirements

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

Executive Summary

Council is in receipt of a development application for the construction of a single storey building to be used as a child care centre for 90 children. A separate hall for recreational and after school care programs for an additional 30 children is also proposed. The land falls under Zone No 2 (Urban Zone) under Penrith Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 188. Child care centre and associated hall are permissible in the zone with Council’s consent. The application is reported to Council due to the extent of submissions.

The key matters relating to the proposed development is its location within the residential area predominantly single to two storey dwellings, adverse traffic and amenity impacts and public interest. These matters are addressed in detail in this report.

The development application was placed on public exhibition from 29 April 2013 to 30 May 2013 and extended to 13 June 2013 due to representations from the public. Over sixty submissions were received. Various representations were made to Councillors in addition to these submissions. The concerns raised in those submissions are addressed in this report.

A public meeting was held at Council’s Office on 7 August 2013 where over 100 concerned residents voiced their concerns to the Mayor, Councillors, Council’s staff and applicant. These concerns are addressed in this report.

An assessment of the proposed development has been undertaken under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and the development application is recommended for refusal.

Background

The applicant attended a pre-lodgement meeting with Council Officers prior to the lodgement of the Development Application (DA). The applicant was advised amongst other matters that:

a) Location

The control for location of childcare centres under Section 3.3 of The Penrith Development Control Plan 2006 requires that child care centres shall be located in close proximity to other community activities and facilities, such as schools, neighbourhood halls, churches, larger formal public reserves and local shopping centres. The site shall not be located in a cul-de-sac, at an intersection, or on a minor residential road where additional vehicles associated with the child care centre may create traffic conflict or an adverse impact on the amenity of the locality.

The site is not in close proximity to activities/facilities as required under this control. It is located at an intersection of Bangalla Parade and Bradley Street. Access to the site is only available from Bangalla Parade which is a minor road. Vehicles associated with the child care centre may create traffic conflict and an adverse impact on the amenity of the quiet residential locality. The application will need to demonstrate that the additional traffic movements generated by the development will not impact on the amenity of the area. Generally the location of a child care centre on the subject site is not supported.

b) Car Parking

The required rate for car parking is 1 car parking space for every 4 children. One parking space shall also be provided for each additional staff member where child care centres are catering for younger children, or children with special needs and the ratio of staff to children is increased. Car parking for the associated hall shall also be provided. Carparking rate is not available for the associated hall however carparking requirements determined by NSW Roads and Maritime Service, if applicable, can be used to determine the carparking for the associated hall. Otherwise it shall be based on merit. A traffic report/statement prepared by a traffic consultant shall accompany the DA.

The application shall be supported by vehicle turning paths in accordance with AS 2890 clearly demonstrating satisfactory manoeuvring on-site and forward entry and exit to and from the street.

c) Built Form

The building form as shown from Bradley Street is not acceptable. It shall incorporate a variety of architectural features to minimize elongated façade. The building can be divided into separate wings with a deep indentation located centrally in the long façade or a central garden courtyard. Building form can be stepped or articulated and integrated with the shape of surrounding garden areas with facades incorporating a variety of materials and shading structures.

d) Noise

A noise impact assessment shall be submitted with the application detailing potential noise sources and proposed mitigation measures to manage potential noise impacts. The assessment shall consider the proposed hours of operation of the child care centre. Recommendations of the noise impact assessment must be shown on all architectural plans.

e) Public Health Matters

Plans and details of the kitchen fit-out are to be provided. The plans and details shall demonstrate compliance with the relevant provisions of the Food Act 2003, Food Regulation 2010 and Australian Standard 4674-2004: Design, Construction and Fit-Out of Food Premises.

These matters were not adequately responded to by the applicant and they are addressed in this report.

Site and Surrounds

The site is located to the south of Bangalla Parade at its intersection with Glengarry Drive, Glenmore Park. The site comprises two allotments at Nos. 38 and 40 Bangalla Parade, Glenmore Park. It has frontage to Bradley Street for around 100m. The site is irregular in shape and it has an area of 2678sqm. The site falls considerably from south to north and it also gently falls from west to east. The site is currently vacant. No trees exist on the site. The surrounding area is newly built residential having mainly single to double storey dwellings. A locality plan is included as Appendix 1.

The Proposed Development

· The proposed development involves construction of a single storey building to be used as a child care centre. A separate hall for recreational and after school care programs is proposed. The Statement of Environmental Effects indicates that the centre will be for 90 places (0-5yr old) and 13 staff; whilst the Traffic Report indicates that the Hall (130m²) will cater for after- school care for an additional 30 children and 3 staff.

The age group and number of children to be cared for in the child care centre is proposed as follows:

Age Number of Children

0 - 2 Years 20

2 - 3 Years 20

3 - 5 Years 50

The centre is proposed to have 13 staff. The proposed hours of operation are 7:00am to 6.00pm Monday to Saturday.

The proposal includes a detached hall for recreational and after school care programs in the peak periods of the child care centre. This will accommodate an additional 30 children as stipulated in the Traffic Report submitted with the development application. The peak hours of operation will occur after 4pm. Proposed hours of operation for the hall are 7am to 9pm Monday to Friday and 7am to 4pm Saturday. Three staff are proposed for the hall.

Access to the child care centre and hall is proposed from Bangalla Parade. Twenty three (23) on-site car parking spaces are proposed.

Refer to Appendices No. 2 to 4 for copies of the site plan, floor plan and elevations.

The Development Application was accompanied by the following documents:

a) Statement of Environmental Effects prepared by Think Planners Pty Ltd

b) Site plan, floor plan, sections and elevations prepared by Bureau SRH Architecture

c) Landscape concept plan prepared by Carmichael Studios

d) Traffic and Parking Assessment Report prepared by Varga Traffic Planning Pty Ltd

e) Acoustic Report prepared by BGMA Pty Ltd

f) Access report prepared by PSE Access Consulting

g) Waste Management Plan.

Planning Assessment

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

Penrith Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 188

The land falls under Zone No 2 (Urban Zone) under Penrith Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 188. Child care centre and associated hall are permissible in the zone.

The zone objectives are as follows:

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

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

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

The above objectives do not relate directly to the proposed child care centre. However, the proposed development will provide for growth and development in the South Penrith Urban Release Area.

Clause 12 Land use arrangement

(1) Subject to this clause, the council shall not consent to any development on land to which this plan applies unless the type and location of development is generally in accordance with any development control plan applying to the land.

The location of the proposed development is not in accordance with Penrith Development Control Plan 2006. This matter is addressed in detail in a further section of this report.

In accordance with the above clause Council shall not consent to the proposed development.

Sydney Regional Environmental Plan (SREP) No. 20 – Hawkesbury-Nepean

The proposal will have minimal impacts on the river environment as it will not compromise the water or scenic qualities of the river given the satisfactory drainage arrangements and erosion and sediment control measures to be installed during construction. The matters regarding satisfactory drainage can be appropriately conditioned.

Section 79C(1)(a)(ii) – Any Draft Environmental Planning Instruments

Draft LEP 2013 applies to the land and proposes to zone it R2 Low Density Residential. Child Care Centres are permissible with consent in the zone. The Draft LEP proposes a maximum building height of 15m to which the proposal complies. There are no other relevant provisions.

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

Penrith Development Control Plan 2006

Section 2.2 Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design

The proposed development provides opportunities for natural surveillance to access points and car parking areas from the windows of the office and staff room. In order to ensure that a safe environment is provided for the child care centre including the car parking and outdoor play areas, conditions can be recommended to enhance the safety and security of all users of the development and to minimise the crime risk associated with the development.

Section 3.3 Child Care Centres

The relevant development controls under this section are addressed in the following table:

*Development Controls*	*Requirement*	*Compliance*
Amenity	§ Purpose designed and built if catering for 15 or more children. § Lot width 22m § Scale and character compatible with surrounding residential development.	§ Yes. § Yes. Lot width is more than 22m. § Addressed under The Likely Impacts in a further section of this report.
Location	§ Addressed under Background in a previous section of this report.	§ No. Addressed under Background in a previous section of this report.
Vehicle Access and Parking	§ 1 car space per 4 children § 1 additional car space per staff member where staff members catering for younger or special needs children.	§ No. Addressed under Access, Traffic and Parking. Substantial traffic impacts expected.
Noise	§ Acoustic report is provided.	§ There are gaps in the report. Conclusion of that report refers to various assumptions made for the operation of the development. Addressed under The Likely Impacts in a further section of this report.
Shade	§ Shade to 50% of outdoor play area.	Yes.
Toilet Facilities	§ 1 water closet fixture per 8 children (8 w.c.). § 1 water closet fixture and wash basin per 20 female staff (1 w.c. and a wash basin).	§ No. Eleven closet fixtures are required whereas 8 are proposed. The applicant has argued that the provision of 8 closet fixtures complies with Children Services Regulation.
Floor Space	§ 3.25m² indoor play space per child (292.5sqm). § 7m² outdoor play space per child (630sqm).	§ Yes. Indoor play space of 309sqm and outdoor play space of 841sqm is proposed.

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

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

Parking, Access and Traffic

Council’s Traffic Section has reviewed the subject application and the traffic report submitted in respect of parking, traffic generation and access arrangements and they have provided the following advice:

Parking

· Parking is calculated in accordance with Penrith DCP 2006 for Child Care Centre, including OOSH care. DCP 2006 provides that:

‘Car parking spaces shall be provided on site at the rate of 1 car parking space for every 4 children.

One parking space shall also be provided for each additional staff member where child care centres are catering for younger children, or children with special needs, and the ratio of staff to children is increased.

Car parking spaces for the OOSH care shall be provided in accordance with the requirements of Section 2.12 (Car Parking) of the Penrith DCP 2006 and shall be in addition to the parking area for the existing child care centre.’

One space for four children equates to 30 spaces for 120 children.

Age Bracket	No. of Children	Staff per children	No. of Staff
0-2	20	1 for 4	5
2-3	20	1 for 8	2.5 (say 3)
3-6	50	1 for 10	5
3-6 (in hall)	30	1 for 10	3
TOTAL	120		16

Younger children are considered under the age bracket of 0-2.

One space for 4 children rate is determined on the basis of 1 staff member for 9 children (average) in the 2-6 age bracket. If all children were in this age bracket then 120 children will require 13.3 staff i.e 120/9. Say 14 staff.

So additional staff required = 16 -14 = 2.

Total car spaces required = 30 + 2 = 32 spaces.

· The plans provide 14 staff spaces and 9 visitors spaces = 23 spaces which is insufficient for the scale of the centre.

· The DCP parking rates are based on the premise that parents drive and drop-off/pick-up multiple children on their way to/from work/home. Child care centres are usually in a residential area but distant to a place of work, hence the high parking demands generated and the parking rates are based on the likelihood of multiple children (1/4). The traffic report describes this and the suggestion that many parents will walk as being factors to accept a reduction in the amount of required parking is not acceptable. As a greenfield site rather than infill development, full compliance with the DCP for parking should be achieved.

· The design/location of the main child care entry and the design/location of the after school hours hall will encourage on-street parking for drop-off/ pick up in Bradley Street which is not available. The design addressing Bradley Street will encourage parents to park illegally and the Traffic Section will receive ongoing complaints due to parents parking illegally around drop-off/pick up times.

Access and Circulation

· Vehicular access to/from the centre is proposed via left in/left out only access from Bangalla Parade to Glengarry Drive.

· Access for emergency vehicles is not nominated.

· The site plan does not show a path/pedestrian access to the Hall. This will further encourage parents to pick up/drop off children from the road frontage.

· The aisle width is insufficient for vehicles to turn when the car park is full. No turning bay is provided.

Traffic Generation

The traffic report submitted with the application estimates that based on the RMS Guide to Traffic Generating Developments the proposal could generate approximately 72 vehicle trips in the morning peak and 84 vehicle trips in the afternoon peak hours.

The RMS traffic generation rates are based on the premise that parents drive and drop-off/pick-up multiple children on their way to/from work/home. The traffic report describes this as being a factor to reduce the amount of traffic generation which is misleading.

Noise Impacts

The application was accompanied by an acoustic report prepared by BGMA Pty Ltd which provided a review of the potential noise impacts from the proposed child care centre. This report has concluded that:

· The site is a greenfield site, and as such, certain assumptions have had to be made as to potential future local environmental noise levels, potential future traffic noise levels and the locations of relevant receivers

· The site is likely to be impacted by traffic noise emissions

· Traffic movement and the sounds of children in the external activity areas are likely to be audible to local residents

· Alternate criterion has been provided for consideration by Council for car park noise emissions

· The major noise emissions from the childcare Centre are likely to be activities occurring in the "external activity area- between the childcare centre building and the north-eastern "residential boundary

· How they impact on residence to the north will be dependent on the design and layout of the residence, to the north east

· Provided the recommended acoustic measures indicated within this report are implemented, the proposed Childcare Centre will be protected from external noise intrusion

· Vehicle movement noise emissions from within the car park should be within required limits

· The impact of early morning noise level from car park and noise emissions from the eastern "external activity area" will be dependent on the design and layout of residential building to the north of the site.

Council’s Environment Section has reviewed the acoustic report and provided the following comments:

· It does not appear the Rating Background Level (RBL) has been calculated in accordance with the NSW Industrial Noise Policy (INP) 2000. The report has provided background noise levels based on estimations from the Australian Standard (AS1055.3) for noise measurement. The RBL should be calculated based on 7 days of site specific noise monitoring in accordance with the INP. Without an accurate RBL, it is difficult to appropriately measure the impact of noise from the proposed centre.

· The Acoustic Assessment states that the centre will operate from 6:30am to 6:30pm with Page 6 stating that staff would arrive from 6:15am. This is inconsistent with the hours of operation in the Statement of Environmental Effects which state that the child care centre will operate from 7am to 6pm and the hall to be used until 9pm. The report has not adequately addressed the ‘night time’ criteria for staff arriving on the site before 7am or the use operating until 9pm.

· The potential impact from road traffic noise has not been adequately calculated. The report states that 36 Vehicle Trips per Hour (VTPH) in the morning and up to 32 VTPH in the evening would result from the proposed development based on the RTA “Guide to Traffic Generation.” However, the Traffic Report (prepared by Varga, ref 13101 dated 2/4/2013) prepared for the development has calculated that 72 VTPH in the morning and 84 VTPH in the evening would result from the proposed development. The impact to noise from the traffic generated from the development is therefore underestimated. The traffic report states different hours of operation for the hall.

· The report discusses sleep disturbance from traffic and use of the carpark. The report states that “sleeping areas” along the southern side of Bradley Street exceed the sleep disturbance criteria under Section 5.4 of the NSW Road Noise Policy and require noise reduction construction methods to meet the required internal noise level to not impact on sleep disturbance. If these dwellings have not been constructed yet and do not form part of this application, it is difficult to implement such a noise mitigating strategy.

· The report discusses the use of the Outdoor Play areas. The consultant has acknowledged the requirements contained in the Technical Guideline for Child Care Centre Noise Assessment by AAAC dated May 2008. The report notes that 10 children (3-5 years) would result in a sound pressure level of up to 62dB(A) at a distance of 10m. The report has not provided calculations for the proposed fifty 3-5 year old children that could be utilising this area. Notwithstanding, the report concludes that 2.2m fence along the northern boundary would not achieve the required noise level for second story windows for dwellings adjoining this boundary.

The report has not calculated the noise level generated from the use of the outdoor play area by the 20 children in the 2-3 year old group.

There are a number of inconsistencies with the proposed operating hours of the child care centre and the associated hall. Without the appropriate calculation of the rating background level, it is difficult to determine the extent of the noise impacts from traffic generation and use of the outdoor play areas on the nearest residence and sleep disturbance and therefore if the proposed mitigation measures would be sufficient. The report relies on dwellings on adjoining sites being acoustically constructed and concludes that even with a 2.2m high acoustic wall along the northern boundary; residents would experience noise impact from the proposal. The Environment Team does not support the application in its current form.

Built form

The proposed development was considered by Council’s Urban Design Review Panel. The Panel advised that the design of the building does not reflect its corner location and that the building does not address Bradley Street. The location of the proposed hall is too close to the residential lots which may cause amenity issues for future residents at those lots. The design of the carparking area needs to be revised as it could be unsafe for pedestrians. The location of the waste storage area close to the intersection of Bangalla Parade and Bradley Street is

inappropriate.

Privacy

The subject land has a slope from west to east. The properties to the east of the site will be adversely affected in terms of privacy as the proposed hall will be located in close proximity to the rear boundaries of those properties.

Section 79C(1)I – The Suitability of the Site for the Development

The site is unsuitable for the proposed child care centre due to the adverse impacts it would have on the immediate locality in terms of traffic, parking, noise and privacy.

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

Community Consultation

In accordance with Penrith Development Control Plan 2006, the proposed development was notified to nearby and adjoining residents/owners and advertised in local newspapers with submissions invited from 29 April 2013 to 30 May 2013 and extended to 13 June 2013 due to representations from the public. Over sixty submissions were received. Various representations were made to Councillors in addition to these submissions. The concerns raised in those submissions are summarised as follows:

a) Traffic congestion along Bangalla Parade and surrounding streets.

b) Pedestrian safety during drop-off and pick-up

c) Car Parking

d) Noise impacts

e) Security of premises

f) Location

g) Design

h) Location of waste bins

Referrals

The table below summarises the results of internal referrals in relation to the proposal:

Referral	Comments
Building Surveyor	No objection, subject to standard conditions.
Development Engineer	Objection to aisle widths and layout of carparking
Environmental Officer	Not satisfactory
Health Officer	No objection, subject to standard conditions.
Traffic Engineer	Not satisfactory

Section 79C(1)(e) – The Public Interest

The proposed childcare centre is inconsistent with the requirements of the planning instruments and development control plan. It is likely to have a negative impact on the surrounding environment and it is not considered to be in the public interest.

Conclusion

The proposed child care centre has been assessed against the relevant heads of consideration under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. It is inconsistent with the requirements of the relevant planning instruments and development control plan. The proposed development will have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of the neighbourhood in terms of noise and privacy. The design/location of the main child care entry and the after school hours hall will encourage on-street parking for drop-off/ pick up of children. This may compromise the safety of pedestrians. Significant public opposition has been received to the proposal. The proposal is likely to have a negative impact on the surrounding environment and it is not considered to be in the public interest.

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Development Application 13/0310 Proposed Community Facility 90 Place Child Care Centre and Hall (No.38-40) Bangalla Parade, Glenmore Park be received.

2. Development Application 13/0310 Proposed Community Facility 90 Place Child Care Centre and Hall (No.38-40) Bangalla Parade, Glenmore Park be refused for the following reasons:

1 A) The application is not satisfactory for the purpose of Section 79C(1)(a)(i) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act as the proposal is inconsistent with the following provisions of Penrith Local Environmental Plan 188:

Clause 12 Land use arrangement

The location of the proposed development is not in accordance with Penrith Development Control Plan 2006.

2 B) The application is not satisfactory for the purpose of Section 79C(1)(a)(iii) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act as the proposal is inconsistent with the following provisions of Penrith Development Control Plan 2006:

i) The application has not satisfied Council with respect to the requirements for location criteria, car parking and amenity of residents of the neighbouring properties.

3 C) The application is not satisfactory for the purpose of Section 79C(1)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 as it has not been demonstrated the likely impacts of the development can be satisfactorily mitigated. These impacts particularly relate to traffic, vehicle parking, noise and privacy.

4 D) 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.

5 E) The application is not satisfactory for the purpose of Section 79C(1)(e) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act as the proposal is not in the public interest.

3. Those making submissions to be advised of Councils decision.

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1. View	Locality Plan	1 Page	Appendix
2. View	Site Plan	1 Page	Appendix
3. View	Floor Plan	1 Page	Appendix
4. View	Elevation Plan	1 Page	Appendix

Ordinary Meeting 26 August 2013

Development Application 13/0595 residential alterations and additions - ground floor addition at Lot 775 DP 717440 (No. 4) Fernview Place, Cranebrook Applicant: Darren and Melissa Scott; Owner: Darren and Melissa Scott

Compiled by: Stephen Krimmer, Environmental Health and Building Surveyor

Authorised by: Peter Wood, Development Assessment Co-ordinator

Outcome	We plan for our future growth
Strategy	Facilitate development that encourages a range of housing types
Service Activity	Delivery timely assessment, regulation and certification of development and building work in accordance with statutory requirements

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

Executive Summary

Council is in receipt of a development application for the construction of a ground floor addition to the existing single storey dwelling at No. 4 Fernview Place, Cranebrook. The application is supported by the submission of an objection under State Environmental Planning Policy No.1 and seeks a variation to the rear setback requirement.

The site is zoned 2 (b) Residential (Low Density) under the Penrith Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 1998 Urban Land. Under the objectives of the LEP, development is required to reinforce the importance of natural landscape settings, protect landscapes and urban areas with traditional residential character and to allow a limited range of compatible non-residential uses.

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

The SEPP 1 objection has demonstrated that full compliance with the rear setback requirement is unreasonable due to the existing dwelling encroachment, irregular shape of the lot and similar developments in the locality. The variation to the planning control associated with the proposed addition is unlikely to have any significant impacts on the amenity of the locality.

In accordance with reporting procedures provided by the Department of Planning and Infrastructure, the matter is forwarded to Council for determination as the variation exceeds 25%. The report recommends the SEPP1 objection be supported and the development application be approved.

Background

A development application for the construction of a dwelling addition at Lot 775 DP 717440, No. 4 Fernview Place, Cranebrook was lodged on 18 June 2013 (DA13/0595).

Site and Surrounds

The site is 842m² in area and is relatively flat. The site is irregular in shape and located at the end of a cul-de-sac. The northern side of the site is bounded by a reserve.

An existing dwelling and associated structures exist on site.

The surrounding area is characterised by residential development comprised of a mix of single and two storey dwellings.

The Proposed Development

The proposal is to construct a new bedroom to the north west corner of the existing dwelling with a setback of 1.8m from the rear boundary. The addition will be of single storey appearance, constructed of matching brick and tiles to complement the existing dwelling.

The development application was accompanied by:

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

· Statement of Environmental Effects

· Site and building plans

· Specification of building works

Planning Assessment

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

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

Penrith Local Environmental Plan 1998 (Urban Land)

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

The proposed development is a site responsive development, compatible with surrounding residential development. The design is compatible with the existing housing in the locality.

Assessment of SEPP 1 Objection

A State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 (SEPP1) objection has been lodged in support of the development application.

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

The SEPP 1 objection has been lodged in relation to the provisions of Clause 12 of Council’s LEP 1998 Urban Land, and in particular the provisions of Clause 12(4). The relevant clause states:

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

a) That building is setback at least 6 metres from the rear boundary of the site or, in the case of a single storey building in Zone No 2 (a), 2 (b), 2 (c), 2 (d) or 2 (e), at least 4 metres from the rear boundary of the site, and

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

The dwelling addition application proposes the following variations:

Relevant Clause 12(4) requirements	Requirements for Zone No. 2 (b)	Proposal	Extent of variation
Rear setback	4m	1.8m	55%

1) Development Standard

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

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

The proposed dwelling addition is sited so as to minimise the amount of vegetation required to be removed. The site is not identified as being in a Heritage Conservation Area.

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

The proposed development is designed in a manner which is responsive to the site. The proposed development is compatible with surrounding land uses.

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

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

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

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

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

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

The proposed dwelling addition has been designed to make the most of the site constraints by remaining consistent with the established rear setback of the dwelling. Due to the irregular shape of the lot, it is considered the setback achieved is appropriate and will not have an adverse impact on the subject site or surrounding sites. The adjoining dwelling to the rear of the property has similar encroachments. The existing dwelling layout and window locations would require substantial modifications if the proposed additions were located towards the middle of the dwelling.

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

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

· The dwelling is reasonable development for the site considering the existing dwelling encroachments, irregular shape of the lot and similar development in the locality.

2) Section 5 - Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979

Assessment of the SEPP 1 objection also needs to consider against the objectives stated in Section 5(a) (ii) of the EP&A Act which is as follows:

“(ii) the promotion and co-ordination of the orderly and economic use and development of land”

It is considered that the proposed dwelling addition and associated rear setback will ensure attainment of the objectives of section (ii) and refusal would be unreasonable in this regard for the following reasons:

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

· The proposed dwelling addition is reasonable development for the site.

· The proposal satisfies the objectives of the zone.

· The dwelling addition has been designed to be site responsive

3) Department of Planning Circular No. B1

The Department of Planning’s Circular No. B1 specifies other matters which should be considered by Council in its consideration of SEPP 1 objections including:

2) Clause 9 – the likelihood of similar applications being made and the cumulative effect of similar approvals.

3) Clause 11 – dealing with applications to extend non-conforming development by more than 10%.

It is considered that the rear setback requirements retain their validity and are consistently applied across the Council area.

The SEPP1 objection has demonstrated that full compliance with the rear setback requirement is unreasonable. The variations and the proposed dwelling addition are unlikely to have any significant impacts on the amenity of the locality.

Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No 20.

The proposed development will have minimal impacts on the total catchment management, water quality and water quantity. No heritage items are located on the site. No tree removal is required as part of this development. The dwelling addition is considered to have minimal adverse impact on visibility from the riverine corridor and its scenic quality. The proposed dwelling addition is consistent with surrounding development.

The proposal is in keeping with the objectives of the SREP.

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

Penrith DCP 2006 Part 4 Section 4.2 – “Residential Single Dwellings” is applicable to the current development application and the following sections are relevant to the assessment process.

Section 5.3 Front, Side and Rear Setbacks

The objective is to ensure setbacks reflect the character of established garden suburbs, and provide for development of flora and fauna corridors. The proposed development does not comply with the 4.0m rear setback requirements and proposes a rear setback of 1.8m. This is addressed in the SEPP1 discussion above. The proposed front and side setbacks do not extend closer than the setbacks of the existing dwelling.

Section 5.4 Landscaped Area and Parking

The objective is to retain a reasonable proportion of each site for landscaped garden areas, conserve significant existing vegetation and provide reasonable separation between neighbouring dwellings. The proposed development complies with the 50% minimum landscaped area requirement.

Section 5.5 Solar Planning

The objective is to improve the energy efficiency of dwellings and achieve a high standard of residential amenity. The applicant has demonstrated the dwelling meets acceptable solar standards and that existing neighbouring and proposed private open spaces receive a minimum of 3 hours sunlight between 9am and 3pm on 21^st June.

Section 6.3 Building Design

The objective is that dwellings be surrounded by private gardens, their facades should display a variety of materials and shading structures and garages should be integrated with the overall architectural form and design. The addition will be of single storey appearance, constructed of matching brick and tiles to complement the existing dwelling.

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

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

Stormwater is to be directed to the Council outlet at the front of the property, creating minimal impact on adjoining properties.

Appropriate conditions are recommended relating to site management during construction. Hours of work and construction noise will also be subject to recommended consent conditions.

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

The site is suitable for the construction of a dwelling addition. Whilst there are many limitations resulting from the irregular shape of the site, these issues have been addressed to ensure a suitable design has been proposed in keeping with the objectives of the relevant planning documents.

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

Community Consultation

Conclusion

Under the objectives of Local Environmental Plan 1998 Urban Lands, development is required to reinforce the importance of natural landscape settings and areas with heritage conservation value, protect landscapes and urban areas with identified conservation value by limiting the range of permissible uses and requiring larger residential allotments and to allow a limited range of compatible non-residential uses.

The subject development application seeks approval to construct a dwelling addition and is supported by a SEPP 1 objection seeking a variation to the required rear setback.

The SEPP 1 objection is supported as it is demonstrated that the rear setback requirement is unreasonable in this case and that the attainment of the objectives of Section 5(a) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act will not be hindered by the proposal.

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

The proposed dwelling addition is unlikely to have any significant impacts on the amenity of the locality.

The proposed dwelling addition is considered to comply with the objectives of the relevant planning instruments as outlined above and a site responsive development is achieved.

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Development Application 13/0595 residential alterations and additions - ground floor addition at Lot 775 DP 717440 (No. 4) Fernview Place, Cranebrook be received.

2. The submitted SEPP 1 be supported.

3. DA13/0595 for a Development Application 13/0595 residential alterations and additions - ground floor addition at Lot 775 DP 717440 (No. 4) Fernview Place, Cranebrook NSW be approved subject to the attached conditions:

3.1 A001 Approved plans that are architecturally drawn

A008 Works to BCA requirements

A019 Occupation Certificate

A046 Obtain a Construction Certificate

D001 Implement approved sediment & erosion control measures

D007 Filling of land

D009 Covering of waste storage area

D010 Appropriate disposal of excavated or other waste

E001 BCA compliance

E005 Smoke detector (amended)

F006 Water tank & nuisance

H001 Stamped plans

H009 Cut/fill details

H022 Survey

H030 Roof finishes

H041 Hours of Work

K016

K041 Bond

L008 Tree Preservation Order

P002 Fees associated with Council land

Q01F Notice of Commencement of Appointment of PCA

Q05F Occupation/Compliance Certificate

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1. View	Locality Map	1 Page	Appendix
2. View	Site Plan, Floor Plan and Elelvation Plan	1 Page	Appendix

v	Meeting at which the draft corporate planning documents (Community Strategic Plan, Delivery Program, Operational Plan, Resource Strategy) are endorsed for exhibition
*	Meeting at which the draft corporate planning documents (Community Strategic Plan, Delivery Program, Operational Plan, Resource Strategy) are adopted
#	Meetings at which the Operational Plan quarterly reviews (March and September) are presented
@	Meetings at which the Delivery Program progress reports (including the Operational Plan quarterly reviews for June and December) are presented
^	Election of Mayor/Deputy Mayor
ü	Meeting at which the 2012-2013 Annual Statements are presented
∞	Meeting at which any comments on the 2012-2013 Annual Statements are presented
+	Meeting at which the Annual Report is presented

*Year*	*Bicycle Infrastructure*	RMS Funding $
2010/11	SUP along Memorial Ave and High St, between Memorial Ave and Worth St, Penrith (1km)	852,496
2011/12	SUP along Castlereagh Rd and Mulgoa Rd, between Jane St to Batt Street, Penrith (2km)	1,053,244
2012/13	SUP along Mulgoa Rd, between Batt St, Jamisontown and Glenmore Parkway, Glenmore Park (2km) and SUP Great Western Highway, between Bringelly Road and Queen St, St Marys (1.7km constructed to date)	1,500,000 Additional 1,200,000
Total	6.7km	$4,605,740

*Year*	*Bicycle Infrastructure*	RMS Funding $
2013/14	SUP Great Western Highway, between Parker St, Kingswood to Queen St, St Marys	1,000,000

Outcome	We can get around the City
Strategy	Provide a safe, efficient road network supported by parking
Service Activity	Manage programs and initiatives that improve road safety, efficiency, and the parking network

Outcome	We have safe, vibrant places
Strategy	Improve our public spaces and places
Service Activity	Manage and maintain the City's sports grounds, parks and open space

Outcome	We care for our environment
Strategy	Protect and improve our natural areas, the Nepean River and other waterways
Service Activity	Contribute to the protection and enhancement of the City's natural environment