4 December 2013

 

Dear Councillor,

In pursuance of the provisions of the Local Government Act, 1993 and the Regulations thereunder, notice is hereby given that a POLICY REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING of Penrith City Council is to be held in the Passadena Room, Civic Centre, 601 High Street, Penrith on Monday 9 December 2013 at 7:00PM.

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

Yours faithfully

 

 

Alan Stoneham

General Manager

 

BUSINESS

 

1.           LEAVE OF ABSENCE

 

2.           APOLOGIES

 

3.           CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

Policy Review Committee Meeting - 11 November 2013.

Policy Review Committee Meeting - 18 November 2013.

 

4.           DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

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

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

 

5.           ADDRESSING THE MEETING

 

6.           MAYORAL MINUTES

 

7.           NOTICES OF MOTION TO RESCIND A RESOLUTION

 

8.           NOTICES OF MOTION

 

9.           DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS

 

10.         REQUESTS FOR REPORTS AND MEMORANDUMS

 

11.         URGENT BUSINESS

 

12.         CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS


POLICY REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING

 

Monday 9 December 2013

 

table of contents

 

 

 

 

 

 

meeting calendar

 

 

confirmation of minutes

 

 

DELIVERY program reports

 


Council_Mark_POS_RGB2013 MEETING CALENDAR

January 2013 - December 2013

(adopted by Council 19/11/12)

 

 

 

TIME

JAN

FEB

MAR

APRIL

MAY

JUNE

JULY

AUG

SEPT

OCT

NOV

DEC

Mon

Mon

Mon

Mon

Mon

Mon

Mon

Mon

Mon

Mon

Mon

Mon

 

Ordinary Council Meeting

7.30pm

 

4

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

23^ü

(7.00pm)

 

 

16

(7.00pm)

 

25@

25

29v

27#

24 *

22

26@

30

21

25#+

 

Policy Review Committee

7.00pm

 

11

11

15

13

17

8

12

9

14

11

9

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

18

 

 

 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

-            Extraordinary Meetings are held as required.

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

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


UNCONFIRMED MINUTES

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

ON MONDAY 11 NOVEMBER 2013 AT 7:02PM

PRESENT

His Worship the Mayor, Councillor Ross Fowler OAM, Deputy Mayor, Councillor Jim Aitken OAM and Councillors Marcus Cornish, Greg Davies, Mark Davies, Maurice Girotto, Ben Goldfinch, Jackie Greenow OAM, Karen McKeown, John Thain and Michelle Tormey.

 

APOLOGIES

PRC 70  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor John Thain seconded Councillor Jim Aitken OAM that apologies be received for Councillors Tricia Hitchen, Bernard Bratusa and Prue Car.

 

LEAVE OF ABSENCE

Leave of Absence was previously requested by Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM for 11 November 2013.

PRC 71  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor John Thain seconded Councillor Jim Aitken OAM that Leave of Absence be granted to Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM for 11  November 2013.

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES - Policy Review Committee Meeting - 14 October 2013

PRC 72  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jim Aitken OAM seconded Councillor Karen McKeown that the minutes of the Policy Review Committee Meeting of 14 October 2013 be confirmed.

 

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

 

Councillor Jim Aitken OAM declared a Pecuniary Interest in Item 1 - Planning Proposal for Penrith Local Environmental Plan - Outcomes of Public Exhibition (Chapter B1 – E4 Rural Lands, Castlereagh and Cranebrook) as he owns 3 properties in the area which are subject to the proposed zoning changes.

 

His Worship the Mayor, Councillor Ross Fowler OAM read the following statement:

 

In accordance with Section 451 of the Local Government Act, 1993 Special Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest Forms were received and tabled for the purposes of the meeting by:

 

·                Councillor Michelle Tormey in respect of 62 Joseph Street, Kingswood.

·                Councillor Marcus Cornish in respect of 13/21 Haynes Street, Penrith.

·                Councillor Jackie Greenow OAM in respect of 16,18 & 20 Pages Road, St Marys.

·                Councillor Maurice Girotto in respect of 92 Victoria Street, Werrington.

·                Councillor Karen McKeown in respect of Unit 3, 57 Regentville Road, Jamisontown.

·                Councillor Mark Davies in respect of Unit 2/155-157 Derby Street, Penrith.

·                And I have also submitted a Form in respect of my properties and associations as


Policy Review Committee Meeting                                                Monday 11 November 2013

detailed in my pecuniary interest form, for the period ending 30 June 2013.

 

His Worship the Mayor, Councillor Ross Fowler OAM, gave a brief overview of the process involved in the preparation of the Planning Proposal for the Penrith LEP, before introducing the Strategic Planning Manager, Paul Grimson to provide additional information.

 

The Strategic Planning Manager, Paul Grimson then  introduced  Item 1 - Planning Proposal for Penrith Local Environmental Plan – Outcomes of Public Exhibition and gave a background of the work undertaken by the Council over a number of years and an overview of the substantial process which has been followed during this time.

 

 

ADDRESSING THE MEETING

 

Ms Mary Vella

 

Item 1 - Planning Proposal for Penrith Local Environmental Plan – Outcomes of Public Exhibition

 

Ms Vella, an affected person, spoke in support of the recommendations.  Ms Vella represented herself and other residents of Hinxman Road who support the zoning of RU4 Primary Production Small Lots for the area.  Ms Vella detailed her history as an active member of the community, before outlining her concerns with the proposed application of the E4 Environmental Living zone to certain areas.

 

PRC 73  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Marcus Cornish seconded Councillor Jim Aitken OAM that an extension of time be granted to enable the speaker to complete her address, the time being 7:18 pm.

 

Ms Vella highlighted some of the land use conflicts already being experienced in the area and that agricultural land is being lost.  Ms Vella then concluded by stating that she supports the application of the RU4 Primary Production Small Lots zone for the Hinxman Road area and the E4 Environmental Living zone for the Castlecrest Estate.

 

Ms Norah Elias

 

Item 1 - Planning Proposal for Penrith Local Environmental Plan – Outcomes of Public Exhibition

 

Ms Elias, an affected person, spoke in support of the recommendations,  in particular the areas proposed to be zoned E4 Environmental Living.  Ms Elias highlighted that the land is not useful for farming because of the quality of soil. Ms Elias indicated that she believed that the majority of properties are family homes with rural usage is limited to the minority of properties in the area. Ms Elias stated that she believed the changes would have little impact on existing properties, allow for ecologically sustainable use of the land, and economically enhance the properties in the area.

 

Ms Elias concluded by highlighting that existing government investment in infrastructure in Cranebrook Road would support the proposed E4 Environmental Living zone and that any potential development in the area would be supported by the area’s close proximity to the Penrith City Centre.

 

Mr John Sweeney

 

Item 1 - Planning Proposal for Penrith Local Environmental Plan – Outcomes of Public Exhibition

 

Mr Sweeney, an affected person, spoke in opposition to the recommendation, in particular the proposal to zone the western end of Hinxman Road as RU4 Primary Production Small Lots. Mr Sweeney indicated that the dynamics and characteristics of the western end of Hinxman Road are changing with the building of executive homes and young families taking up residence. Mr Sweeney indicated that a group of 6-8 residents had met recently and voiced their strong opposition to the RU4 Primary Production Small Lots zone and that a number of residents from the Castlecrest Estate supported this view.

 

PRC 74  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Jim Aitken OAM that an extension of time be granted to enable the speaker to complete his address, the time being 7:31pm.

 

Mr Sweeney went on to state that he did not oppose the existing businesses already operating lawfully in the western end of Hinxman Road, however he is concerned about the kind of businesses that could be permitted under the RU4 Primary Production Small Lots zone which he believed could seriously threaten the things they have worked hard to achieve. Mr Sweeney concluded by urging Council to rezone all of Hinxman Rd as E4.

 

Ms Michelle Martin

 

Item 1 - Planning Proposal for Penrith Local Environmental Plan – Outcomes of Public Exhibition

 

Ms Martin, an affected person, spoke in opposition to the proposal to zone the western end of Hinxman Road as RU4 Primary Production Small Lots and wanted it to be zoned E4 Environmental Living.  Ms Martin outlined her concerns with impacts that agricultural uses were having on her property and in the local area. 

 

PRC 75  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor John Thain seconded Councillor Karen McKeown that an extension of time be granted to enable the speaker to complete her address, the time being 7:38pm.

 

In concluding, Ms Martin stated that water salinity in the area was an issue and that roads and drainage in the area are struggling with the current demand.

 

Mr Peter Schweinsberg

 

Item 1 - Planning Proposal for Penrith Local Environmental Plan – Outcomes of Public Exhibition

 

Mr Schweinsberg, an affected person, spoke in opposition to the recommendations.  Mr Schweinsberg welcomed the E4 Environmental Living zoning for the Castlecrest Estate, but stated that the proposed zoning of RU4 Primary Production Small Lots at the western end of West Hinxman Road was inconsistent.  Mr Schweinsberg raised concerns with the petitions that had been lodged with Council on this matter.

 

PRC 76  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Mark Davies seconded Councillor Greg Davies that an extension of time be granted to enable the speaker to complete his address, the time being 7:48pm.

 

In concluding, Mr Schweinsberg stated that he believed that there was a lack of notification of Council’s proposal for this area.

 

Ms Theresa Kotja

 

Item 1 - Planning Proposal for Penrith Local Environmental Plan – Outcomes of Public Exhibition

 

Ms Kotja, an affected person, spoke in opposition to the recommendations and raised a number of specific questions regarding the planning proposal.  His Worship the Mayor, Councillor Ross Fowler OAM, advised Ms Kotja that the purpose of addressing the meeting was to advise Councillors of any issues she may have regarding the planning proposal.  Ms Kotja advised of her and the local resident’s concerns regarding social and traffic impacts from the Glossop Street proposal.

 

Councillor Maurice Girotto left the meeting, the time being 7:57pm.

 

Councillor Maurice Girotto returned to the meeting, the time being 7:59pm.

 

Ms Dani Robinson

 

Item 1 - Planning Proposal for Penrith Local Environmental Plan – Outcomes of Public Exhibition

 

Ms Robinson, representing Penrith Lakes Development Corporation, spoke in opposition to the recommendations and suggested that the Penrith Lakes Scheme should be deferred from the Council’s planning proposal and the existing local planning documents applying to the Penrith Lakes Scheme be retained.

 

Mr Stephen Moran

 

Item 1 - Planning Proposal for Penrith Local Environmental Plan – Outcomes of Public Exhibition

 

Mr Moran, an affected person, spoke in opposition to the recommendations and stated that the proposed zoning controls applying to his property were left out during the public exhibition process.  Mr Moran raised concerns that he is being prevented from constructing a dwelling on each of his seven lots because of flooding.  In concluding, Mr Moran suggested that Option C be considered by Council to allow him to lodge a development application.

 


Mr Colin Fragar

 

Item 1 - Planning Proposal for Penrith Local Environmental Plan – Outcomes of Public Exhibition

 

Mr Fragar, Town Planner for an affected owners, spoke in opposition to the recommendation.  Mr Fragar detailed that the exhibited planning proposal allowed for the development of three lots in Castlereagh (Discussion Paper Chapter C37).  Mr Fragar advised that after the public exhibition, Council’s staff advised that there was an error in the exhibited material and that additional dwellings were not  allowed on the lots.  Mr Fragar advised that his client was only provided two weeks to respond to this change in exhibited planning controls.  Mr Fragar highlighted that due process had failed.

 

PRC 77  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jim Aitken OAM seconded Councillor Maurice Girotto that an extension of time be granted to enable the speaker to complete his address, the time being 8:07pm.

In conclusion, Mr Fragar suggested the alternative option of OC37(a) as opposed to the exhibited OC37(b).   Mr Fragar described how the blocks can accommodate an effluent disposal system, relying on a geotechnical report, and that the area has the character of a rural village.


Mr Warwick Stimson

 

Item 1 - Planning Proposal for Penrith Local Environmental Plan – Outcomes of Public Exhibition

 

Mr Stimson, Consultant for a landowner, Endeavour Holdings, spoke in opposition to the recommendation.  Mr Stimson advised that the property was a residue piece of land from the delivery of Dunheved Road.  Mr Stimson then advised of a proposed new business venture for the site that the Council officers may not have been aware of at the time of writing the report for this site.  Mr Stimson stated that this new business for the area would not affect other retail centres and that it would provide benefits to users of the existing retail centre.  In concluding, Mr Stimson proposed that the zoning of the site should be in accordance with option OC39(d), namely a B2 Local Centre zone.

 

Mr Vince Hardy

 

Item 1 - Planning Proposal for Penrith Local Environmental Plan – Outcomes of Public Exhibition

 

Mr Hardy, an owner’s Planning Consultant for the Werrington Signals Site, spoke in opposition to the recommendation. 

 

Councillor Marcus Cornish left the meeting, the time being 8:19pm.

Councillor Marcus Cornish returned to the meeting, the time being 8:21pm.

 

Mr Hardy raised concerns regarding the B7 Business Park zones applied to part of the Penrith Health and Education Precinct to implement the WELL Precinct Strategy, the maximum building heights and the urban zone boundary (the draft LEP has introduced an expanded E2 Environmental Conservation zone over the site, which is inconsistent with recently approved residential lots).

 

In concluding, Mr Hardy requested that the proposed zoning of E2 Environmental Conservation and that building heights be reviewed to reflect the recent development consent and existing developments in the WELL Precinct.  Mr Hardy also requested a review of the suite of  business zones for the land to which the proposed B7 Business Park zone applies.

 

Mr Con Bouzianis

 

Item 1 - Planning Proposal for Penrith Local Environmental Plan – Outcomes of Public Exhibition

 

Mr Bouzianis, an owner of property in Dharug Close, Mulgoa spoke in support of the recommendation affecting his property and wanted to express his support to the Council.

 

Procedural Motion

78  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Mark Davies seconded Councillor John Thain that the meeting adjourn until 8:45pm to enable discussion of the matters before the Council.

 

The meeting reconvened at 8:45pm to discuss the Planning Proposal.

 

DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS

 

Outcome 2 - We plan for our future growth

 

Planning Proposal for Penrith Local Environmental Plan - Outcomes of Public Exhibition

 

*Chapters A1-A4

 

PRC 79  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jackie Greenow OAM seconded Councillor Greg Davies that the recommendations relating to Chapters A1-A4 as detailed in Attachment 5 be endorsed.

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 Karen McKeown

 

Councillor Michelle Tormey

 

Councillor Jackie Greenow OAM

                                                        

Councillor Maurice Girotto                      

 

Councillor Jim Aitken OAM

 

Councillor Mark Davies

 

Councillor Ben Goldfinch

 

Councillor Marcus Cornish

 

Councillor Ross Fowler OAM

 

*(Please refer to minute number 315 of the Minutes of the Ordinary Council Meeting held on 25 November 2013 for amendments to the DIVISION).

 

Councillor Jim Aitken OAM declared a Pecuniary Interest in Chapter B1 – E4 Rural Lands, Castlereagh and Cranebrook as he owns 3 properties in the area which are subject to the proposed zoning changes. Councillor Jim Aitken OAM left the room for consideration of this matter, the time being 8:48pm.

 

*Chapter B1

 

PRC 80  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor John Thain seconded Councillor Marcus Cornish that the recommendation relating to Chapter B1 as detailed in Attachment 5 be endorsed.

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 Karen McKeown

 

Councillor Michelle Tormey

 

Councillor Jackie Greenow OAM

                                                        

Councillor Maurice Girotto                      

 

Councillor Mark Davies

 

Councillor Ben Goldfinch

 

Councillor Marcus Cornish

 

Councillor Ross Fowler OAM

 

 

*(Please refer to minute number 316 of the Minutes of the Ordinary Council Meeting held on 25 November 2013 for amendments to the DIVISION).

 


*Chapter B2

 

PRC 81  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jackie Greenow OAM seconded Councillor Marcus Cornish that the recommendation relating to Chapter B2 as detailed in Attachment 5 be amended to read that:

a.              Amend the zone boundaries of Glossop Street Precinct to limit the area to be zoned R4 High Density Residential to the west of Glossop Street and to the north of Chapel Street.

b.             That the land to the east of Glossop Street and south of Chapel Street be zoned R3 Medium Density Residential with a maximum building height of 8.5 metres. 

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 Karen McKeown

 

Councillor Michelle Tormey

 

Councillor Jackie Greenow OAM

                                                        

Councillor Maurice Girotto                      

 

Councillor Mark Davies

 

Councillor Ben Goldfinch

 

Councillor Marcus Cornish

 

Councillor Ross Fowler OAM

 

 

*(Please refer to minute number 317 of the Minutes of the Ordinary Council Meeting held on 25 November 2013 for amendments to the DIVISION).

 


*Chapters B3,B4 & B5

 

PRC 82  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Mark Davies seconded Councillor Greg Davies that the recommendations relating to Chapters B3,B4 & B5 as detailed in Attachment 5 be endorsed.

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 Karen McKeown

 

Councillor Michelle Tormey

 

Councillor Jackie Greenow OAM

                                                        

Councillor Maurice Girotto             

 

Councillor Mark Davies

 

Councillor Ben Goldfinch

 

Councillor Marcus Cornish

 

Councillor Ross Fowler OAM

 

 

*(Amended at minute number 318 Ordinary Meeting 25 November 2013).

 

Councillor Jim Aitken OAM returned to the meeting, the time being 8:55pm.

 


*Chapter C37

 

PRC 83  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor John Thain seconded Councillor Mark Davies that the recommendation relating to Chapter C37 as detailed in Attachment 5 be deferred until the next Ordinary Council meeting to allow for further examination and discussion.

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 Karen McKeown

 

Councillor Michelle Tormey

 

Councillor Jackie Greenow OAM

                                                        

Councillor Maurice Girotto                      

 

Councillor Jim Aitken OAM

 

Councillor Mark Davies

 

Councillor Ben Goldfinch

 

Councillor Marcus Cornish

 

Councillor Ross Fowler OAM

 

 

*(Please refer to Item 6 of the Minutes of the Ordinary Council Meeting held on 25 November 2013).

 


*Chapter C39

 

PRC 84  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Mark Davies that the recommendation relating to Chapter C39 be amended to read:

That the B2 Local Centre zone be applied to Lot 2 Dunheved Road, Werrington County (Lot 2 DP 616032) and the RE1 Public Recreation zone be applied to 2 John Oxley Avenue, Werrington County (Lot 141 DP 245373 and Lot 10 DP 778605).

 

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 Jim Aitken OAM

Councillor John Thain

 

Councillor Karen McKeown

 

Councillor Michelle Tormey

 

Councillor Jackie Greenow OAM

                                                        

Councillor Maurice Girotto                      

 

Councillor Mark Davies

 

Councillor Ben Goldfinch

 

Councillor Marcus Cornish

 

Councillor Ross Fowler OAM

 

 

*(Please refer to minute number 319 of the Minutes of the Ordinary Council Meeting held on 25 November 2013 for amendments to the DIVISION).

 


*Chapter C43

 

PRC 85  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor John Thain seconded Councillor Marcus Cornish that the recommendation relating to Chapter C43 as detailed in Attachment 5 be deferred until the next Ordinary Council meeting to allow for further examination and discussion.

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 Karen McKeown

 

Councillor Michelle Tormey

 

Councillor Jackie Greenow OAM

                                                        

Councillor Maurice Girotto                      

 

Councillor Jim Aitken OAM

 

Councillor Mark Davies

 

Councillor Ben Goldfinch

 

Councillor Marcus Cornish

 

Councillor Ross Fowler OAM

 

*(Please refer to Item 7 of the Minutes of the Ordinary Council Meeting held on 25 November 2013).

 

*Chapters C1- C48 (Excluding Chapters C37, C39 and C43)

 

PRC 86  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Mark Davies that the recommendations relating to Chapters C1- C48 (Excluding Chapters C37, C39 and C43) as detailed in Attachment 5 be endorsed.

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 Karen McKeown

 

Councillor Michelle Tormey

 

Councillor Jackie Greenow OAM

                                                        

Councillor Maurice Girotto                      

 

Councillor Jim Aitken OAM

 

Councillor Mark Davies

 

Councillor Ben Goldfinch

 

Councillor Marcus Cornish

 

Councillor Ross Fowler OAM

 

*(Please refer to minute number 320 of the Minutes of the Ordinary Council Meeting held on 25 November 2013 for amendments to the DIVISION).

 

*Chapters D1-D34

 

PRC 87  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Karen McKeown seconded Councillor Ben Goldfinch that the recommendations relating to Chapters D1-D34 as detailed in Attachment 5 be endorsed.

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 Karen McKeown

 

Councillor Michelle Tormey

 

Councillor Jackie Greenow OAM

                                                        

Councillor Maurice Girotto                      

 

Councillor Jim Aitken OAM

 

Councillor Mark Davies

 

Councillor Ben Goldfinch

 

Councillor Marcus Cornish

 

Councillor Ross Fowler OAM

 

 

*(Please refer to minute number 321 of the Minutes of the Ordinary Council Meeting held on 25 November 2013 for amendments to the DIVISION).

 


Outcome 2 - We plan for our future growth

 

*1      Planning Proposal for Penrith Local Environmental Plan - Outcomes of Public Exhibition                                                                                                                                             

PRC 88  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Mark Davies seconded Councillor Marcus Cornish

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Planning Proposal for Penrith Local Environmental Plan - Outcomes of Public Exhibition be received.

2.     Council endorse the Planning Proposal for Penrith Local Environmental Plan, as attached (Attachment 1 provided separately to Councillors and available on Council’s website), amended in accordance:

a.   Attachment 2 (Post Exhibition Changes to the Planning Proposal covering document for Penrith LEP) (excluding Chapters C37 & C43);

b.   Attachment 3 (Post Exhibition Changes to the draft Local Environmental Plan statutory instrument) (excluding Chapters C37 & C43); and

c.   Attachment 4 (Post Exhibition Changes to the Local Environmental Plan Maps) (excluding Chapters C37& C43);

d.   The recommendations of each Chapter in Attachment 5 (excluding Chapters B2, C37, C39 & C43).

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

4.     Council endorse the Planning Proposal for Penrith Local Environmental Plan to be forwarded to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure with a request that the Minister consider the changes made to the Planning Proposal in response to the public exhibition, and make a determination as to whether the Planning Proposal is to be re-exhibited in accordance with s58 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

5.       The Minister be requested to make the plan in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, should he determine that re-exhibition is not required.

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

For

Against

 

Councillor Greg Davies

 

Councillor John Thain

 

Councillor Karen McKeown

 

Councillor Michelle Tormey

 

Councillor Jackie Greenow OAM

                                                        

Councillor Maurice Girotto                      

 

Councillor Jim Aitken OAM

 

Councillor Mark Davies

 

Councillor Ben Goldfinch

 

Councillor Marcus Cornish

 

Councillor Ross Fowler OAM

 

 

*(Amended at minute number 322 Ordinary Meeting 25 November 2013).

 

Councillor Jim Aitken OAM stated that he had a matter concerning Fernhill and a Property Investor Article that he wished to be considered in a confidential session of the committee.

 

confidential business

 

1        Presence of the Public

 

PRC 89  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Jim Aitken OAM seconded Councillor Jackie Greenow OAM that that the press and public be excluded from the meeting to deal with the following matter the time being 9:28pm.

 

Outcome 2

 

2        Fernhill and Property Investor Article                                                                            

 

This item has been referred to committee of the whole as the report refers to personnel matters concerning particular individuals and discussion of the matter in open meeting would be, on balance, contrary to the public interest.

 

The meeting moved out of confidential session at 9:40pm and the General Manager reported that after excluding the press and public from the meeting, the Policy Review Committee met in confidential session from 9:28pm to 9:40pm to consider a Personnel matter.

 

The General Manager reported that while in confidential session, the Committee resolved the confidential business as follows:

 

CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS

 

2        Fernhill and Property Investor Article                                                                            

PRC 90  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Mark Davies seconded Councillor Marcus Cornish

CW2 That the information on the Fernhill and Property Investor Article be received.

 

There being no further business the Chairperson declared the meeting closed the time being 9:44pm.


UNCONFIRMED MINUTES

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

ON MONDAY 18 NOVEMBER 2013 AT 7:04 PM

PRESENT

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

 

 

APOLOGIES

PRC 91  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor John Thain seconded Councillor Marcus Cornish that apologies be accepted from Councillors Bernard Bratusa and Michelle Tormey for their non-attendance at the meeting.

 

 

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

 

Nil.

 

 

DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS

 

Outcome 4 - We have safe, vibrant places

 

3        St Marys Town Centre Corporation Triennial Business Plan

Place Manager, Jeni Pollard introduced the report and invited Steve Perry, Chairperson of the St Marys Town Centre Limited to give a presentation.                                                                                          

PRC 92  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Marcus Cornish

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on St Marys Town Centre Corporation Triennial Business Plan be received.

2.     Council write to the St Marys Town Centre Limited advising that Council supports is draft Triennial Business Plan.

3.     The Council Seal be affixed to the Deed of Agreement referred to in this report.

 


 

Outcome 1 - We can work close to home

 

1        Penrith City Children's Services Cooperative Ltd

Children’ Services Manager, Janet Keegan introduced the report and invited Max Friend, Chairperson of Penrith City Children’s Services Cooperative Ltd to give a presentation.

PRC 93  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Prue Car seconded Councillor Jackie Greenow OAM

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Penrith City Children's Services Cooperative Ltd  be received.

2.     Council agree to underwrite the operation of Penrith City Children’s Services Cooperative Ltd until the presentation to Council of the Penrith City Children’s Services Cooperative Ltd Annual Report for 2013-14.

3.     The Penrith City Children’s Services Cooperative Ltd undertake a survey on the effectiveness of the current tender for child care consumables, and provide a report on the outcomes of this survey to a future Policy Review Committee meeting.

 

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

 

6        Penrith Aquatic & Leisure Limited (Formerly known as City of Penrith Regional Indoor Aquatic & Recreation Centre Ltd) - Annual Report and Board of Directors

Executive Manager – Environment and City Development, Wayne Mitchell introduced the report and spoke on behalf of Alan Brown, Chairman of Penrith Aquatic and Leisure Limited, who was unable to attend the meeting, and then invited Greg Crawford, General Manager of Ripples to give a presentation.               

PRC 94  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM seconded Councillor Maurice Girotto

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Penrith Aquatic & Leisure Limited (Formerly known as City of Penrith Regional Indoor Aquatic & Recreation Centre Ltd) - Annual Report and Board of Directors be received.

2.     Council agree to underwrite the operations of the Penrith Aquatic & Leisure Limited for 30 months from 1 July 2013.

 

 


 

Outcome 2 - We plan for our future growth

 

2        Penrith City Centre - Car Parking Rates

Development Services Manager, Paul Lemm introduced the report.

Councillor John Thain left the meeting, the time being 8:20pm.

Councillor John Thain returned to the meeting, the time being 8:21pm.

Councillor Mark Davies left the meeting, the time being 8:25pm.                                               

PRC 95  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Marcus Cornish

That:

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

2.   Council adopt a minimum commercial parking space rate of 1 space per 100m2 Gross Floor Area (GFA) as an interim policy until such time as a new parking rate is adopted in a new DCP and removed from the current LEP.

 

 

Outcome 4 - We have safe, vibrant places

 

4        Queen Street, St Marys Streetscape Improvement Plan

Major Projects Manager, Michael Jackson introduced the report.

Councillor Karen McKeown left the meeting, the time being 8:27pm.

Councillor Karen McKeown returned to the meeting, the time being 8:30pm.                            

PRC 96  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor John Thain seconded Councillor Ben Goldfinch

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Queen Street, St Marys Streetscape Improvement Plan be received.

2.     The Final Queen Street Streetscape Improvement Plan be endorsed for the staged implementation of works,

3.     The first project implemented is to be the Pedestrian lighting scheme.

 

Councillor Mark Davies returned to the meeting, the time being 8:32pm.


 

5        Our River

Major Projects Manager, Michael Jackson introduced the report.

Councillor Greg Davies left the meeting, the time being 8:35pm.

Councillor Greg Davies returned to the meeting, the time being 8:40pm.

PRC 97  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Mark Davies seconded Councillor Karen McKeown

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Our River be received.

2.     The Final ‘Our River’ Nepean River Master Plan be endorsed for the staged implementation of works.

 

 

 

There being no further business the Chairperson declared the meeting closed the time being 8:45pm.

    


DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS

 

Item                                                                                                                                       Page

 

 

Outcome 2 - We plan for our future growth

 

1        Planning Proposal for Penrith Local Environmental Plan

Procedural note: Section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993 requires that a division be called in relation to this matter.                                                                                       1

 

2        Rescission of Footpath Construction Development Contributions Plan

Procedural note: Section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993 requires that a division be called in relation to this matter.                                                                                       5

 

3        Amendments to Council's Bushfire Prone Land Map                                                        9

 

4        IPART Draft Report on Local Infrastructure Benchmark Costs                                     16

 

5        Sydney Science Park                                                                                                        19

   

Outcome 5 - We care about our environment

 

6        Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) Policy                                                               37

  

Outcome 7 - We have confidence in our Council

 

7        Local Infrastructure Renewal Scheme - Round 3                                                            45

 

8        Penrith Whitewater Stadium - Annual Report and Board of Directors                           49

 

9        Penrith Performing and Visual Arts Ltd - Annual Report                                               53

 

 

 


 

 

 

 

THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT BLANK  INTENTIONALLY


 

 

Outcome 1 - We can work close to home

 

 

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


 

 

 

 

THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT BLANK  INTENTIONALLY


Outcome 2 - We plan for our future growth

 

Item                                                                                                                                       Page

 

1        Planning Proposal for Penrith Local Environmental Plan

Procedural note: Section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993 requires that a division be called in relation to this matter.                                                                                       1

 

2        Rescission of Footpath Construction Development Contributions Plan

Procedural note: Section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993 requires that a division be called in relation to this matter.                                                                                       5

 

3        Amendments to Council's Bushfire Prone Land Map                                                        9

 

4        IPART Draft Report on Local Infrastructure Benchmark Costs                                     16

 

5        Sydney Science Park                                                                                                        19

 

 



Policy Review Committee Meeting                                                                   9 December 2013

 

 

 

1

Planning Proposal for Penrith Local Environmental Plan   

 

Compiled by:               Abdul Cheema, City Planning Coordinator 

Authorised by:            Paul Grimson, Strategic Planning Manager   

 

Outcome

We plan for our future growth

Strategy

Protect the City's natural areas, heritage and character

Service Activity

Maintain a contemporary framework of land use and contribution policies, strategies and statutory plans

      

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

 

Executive Summary

Over the past few years Council has been developing a single comprehensive Local Environmental Plan (LEP) for Penrith in two stages.  Stage 1 (Penrith LEP 2010) generally covers the rural areas, industrial areas, heritage items and the St Marys Town Centre.  Stage 1 of the LEP was made by the Minister for Planning on 22 September 2010.  Stage 2 (Planning Proposal for Penrith LEP) generally covers all residential areas and local retail/commercial centres except St Marys Release Area which incorporates Jordan Springs.

 

At its Ordinary Meeting of 19 November 2012, Council endorsed the Planning Proposal for Penrith LEP to be submitted to the Department of Planning and Infrastructure for a revised Gateway Determination under Section 56 of the Act. Council received a final Gateway Determination dated 23 April 2013 authorising Council to publicly exhibit the Planning Proposal for Penrith Local Environmental Plan. Subsequently, the Planning Proposal was exhibited from Monday 13 May to Friday 5 July 2013. 

 

During this public exhibition period, a total of 4,630 enquiries were received resulting in a total of 819 submissions.  There were 766 submissions received from the community and 53 submissions received from 34 public authorities.

 

At its Ordinary Meeting of 25 November 2013, Council considered recommendations relating to all submissions received during exhibition of the Planning Proposal for Penrith LEP. All recommendations were endorsed except for one matter where further investigation was requested. Whilst Council resolved all matters except one, it also resolved to not forward the Planning Proposal delivering Stage 2 of the City-wide Local Environmental Plan to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure until after its February 2014 Ordinary Meeting in order to analyse the outstanding matter.

 

The Acting Deputy Director General of the Department of Planning & Infrastructure has now requested Council to forward the adopted Planning Proposal to the Minister. He has also advised that the outstanding matter will most likely catch up with the rest of the LEP before it is made. It is therefore recommended that Council forward the Planning Proposal for Penrith LEP to the Minister with a request to make the plan in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, should he determine that re-exhibition is not required.

Background

Council has been undertaking a major planning exercise to prepare a new City-wide LEP.  The new City-wide LEP must comply with the Government’s LEP template.

 

At its Ordinary Meeting of 10 October 2005, Council resolved to prepare a comprehensive LEP for the City, which has been brought forward in 2 stages as follows:

 

§  Stage 1 generally covers the rural areas, industrial areas, St Marys Town Centre and heritage items.  Stage 1 of the Local Environmental Plan was made by the Minister for Planning on 22 September 2010.

§  Stage 2 primarily covers the residential, local/neighbourhood centres, and release areas.  Stage 2, known as Planning Proposal for Penrith LEP also incorporates a number of specific rezoning proposals.

 

At its Ordinary Meeting of 19 November 2012, Council endorsed the Planning Proposal for Penrith LEP to be submitted to the Department of Planning and Infrastructure for a revised Gateway Determination under Section 56 of the Act. Council received a final Gateway Determination dated 23 April 2013 authorising Council to publicly exhibit the Planning Proposal for Penrith Local Environmental Plan. Subsequently, the Planning Proposal was exhibited from Monday 13 May to Friday 5 July 2013.

Public Exhibition

The Gateway Determination required the Stage 2 Planning Proposal to be exhibited for a minimum period of 28 days (4 weeks).  However, Council resolved on 19 November 2012, to extend the exhibition period to 8 weeks. The submissions received during the exhibition period for the Planning Proposal are summarised in the Table below. 

 

 Submission Summary

Submission Summary

Type of Submission

Number

E4 Lands in Castlereagh and Cranebrook

120*

Glossop Street Precinct St Marys

569

Other

77

Community Submissions

(766)

Public Authority Submissions

53

Total Submissions

819

* This includes 6 petitions with 146 signatures.

Council Endorsement of the Planning Proposal for Penrith Local Environmental Plan

At its Ordinary Meeting of 25 November 2013, Council considered recommendations relating to all submissions received during exhibition of the Planning Proposal for Penrith LEP. All recommendations were endorsed (some with amendments) except for one matter where further investigation was requested. Whilst the minutes are yet to be confirmed, Council resolved that:

 

a.   Council delay a decision on the land within the Penrith Health and Education Precinct proposed to be zoned B7 Business Park. 

b.   Council not forward the Planning Proposal delivering Stage 2 of the City-wide Local Environmental Plan to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure until after its February 2014 Ordinary Meeting in order to analyse the outstanding matters relating to the zone proposed for this land.

c.   Council organise a stakeholder meeting involving Councillors, Council officers, relevant land holders, the Penrith Business Alliance and representatives of the Department of Planning and Infrastructure to investigate and test an alternative selection of appropriate land use zones.

Council also requested that officers seek advice from the Department of Planning & Infrastructure on how Council’s resolution can be facilitated through the current Gateway process. A letter was sent to the Department of Planning and Infrastructure on 28 November 2013 seeking advice on this matter in accordance with Council’s request.

 

The Acting Deputy Director General of the Department of Planning & Infrastructure has requested that Council forward the bulk of the Planning Proposal that has been adopted by Council to the Minister for Planning to minimise delays in processing the Planning Proposal and preparing the associated Local Environmental Plan. The Acting Deputy Director General has also indicated support for Council’s intent to review the zones that have been applied to the Business Park component of the Penrith Health and Education Precinct. He also notes that any material change to the exhibited zones will require re-exhibition for the minimum period of 2 weeks. This will enable this matter to catch up with the rest of the LEP while the Department progresses the LEP.  Council officers are awaiting this advice in writing. 

 

Next Steps

Should Council endorse the recommendation tonight and confirm that endorsement at an Ordinary Meeting of Council, the following steps will occur in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979:

1.      Council officers will continue to update the Planning Proposal, written instrument and associated maps based on the policy direction endorsed by Council.

2.      Council officers will forward the Planning Proposal to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure to make the plan.

3.      Council officers will liaise with the Department of Planning and Infrastructure and negotiate any changes sought by the Department in the lead up to the writing of the instrument by Parliamentary Counsel.

4.      Council officers will liaise with Parliamentary Counsel in writing the instrument and do any mapping changes required.

5.      The Minister for Planning and Infrastructure will make the plan.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Planning Proposal for Penrith Local Environmental Plan be received.

2.       The Planning Proposal for Penrith Local Environmental Plan endorsed at the Ordinary meeting of 25 November 2013 be forwarded to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure (once written advice on the outstanding B7 Business zone matter is received from the Department of Planning & Infrastructure) with a request that the Minister consider the changes made to the Planning Proposal in response to the public exhibition, and make a determination as to whether the Planning Proposal is to be re-exhibited in accordance with s58 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

3.       The Minister be requested to make the plan in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, should he determine that re-exhibition is not required.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.


Policy Review Committee Meeting                                                                   9 December 2013

 

 

 

2

Rescission of Footpath Construction Development Contributions Plan   

 

Compiled by:               Anthony Milanoli, Senior Environmental Planner

Authorised by:            Paul Grimson, Strategic Planning Manager   

 

Outcome

We plan for our future growth

Strategy

Ensure services, facilities and infrastructure meet the needs of a growing population

Service Activity

Maintain a contemporary framework of land use and contribution policies, strategies and statutory plans

      

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

 

Executive Summary

Over the past 10 years the Footpath Construction Development Contributions Plan has funded delivery of more than 3.6 kilometres in additional pathways across Penrith City. Since all the contributions projected under the Plan have now been paid and the associated works completed, it is appropriate that the Plan be rescinded. This report discusses these issues.

 

The Footpath Construction Development Contributions Plan (the Plan) took effect in May 2001 and applies to established residential areas.  The Plan levies contributions to provide additional footpaths required to meet the needs of population increases arising from additional residential development.

 

The s94 Plan projected that approximately $288,000 in contributions would be raised from additional residential development towards the cost of delivering more than $6 million (from a range of funding sources) in new footpaths across Penrith City. Over the past twelve years all the projected contributions have been paid, making rescission of the Plan appropriate. If any further contributions are received under the Plan (such as through older development consents yet to be acted upon), these contributions will be used on further extending footpaths described in the Plan.

 

Proposed changes to the NSW planning system suggest councils will not be able to levy contributions for footpaths. Accordingly, it would be inefficient - and potentially confusing for the community - to allocate resources to prepare a new Footpaths Contributions Plan, until greater certainty on the issue is provided with the enactment of the new Planning Bill in early 2014.

 

If Council resolves to rescind the s94 Plan, the rescission will take effect upon relevant notices appearing in the local newspaper, which could be concluded by February 2014.

Background

Since commencing the review of our s94 contributions plans in 2009, five of the 18 plans have been rescinded (Erskine Park Residential, Glenmore Park Stage 1, Library Facilities, Mount Vernon and North Cranebrook).  In September 2013 Council also resolved to rescind the Erskine Business Park, and Glenmore Park Stage 2 s94 Plans, with rescission expected to take effect shortly. The conclusion of these plans has led to the allocation of more than $2.3 million on additional facilities across the City, utilising contributions remaining in the Plans. Moreover, the recent review of the District Open Space s94 Plan resulted in a further

$7 million in contributions being allocated to recreation facilities described in that Plan. In terms of our contributions processes, we have also adopted a new Works in Kind policy to clarify procedures for stakeholders and completed a development contributions register.

 

While we reviewed our s94 plans and processes, the Department of Planning and Infrastructure (DP&I) undertook the same exercise at the State level. Since 2009, new DP&I  processes have required councils to review their plans; mandated that new or amended s94 plans be approved by DP&I; and capped residential contributions. More recently, DP&I revealed proposed changes to development contributions in the White Paper on the NSW Planning System. The changes included restricting the local infrastructure councils would be permitted to fund through development contributions. Footpaths were not included among the local infrastructure for which councils could levy. The implications of this proposed change are discussed later in this report.

 

Footpath Construction Development Contributions Plan

The Footpath Construction Development Contributions Plan was adopted by Council on 7 May 2001. The Plan required additional residential development in established areas to pay a contribution towards the provision of extending footpaths across all wards of Penrith City. Payment of the contributions recognises the additional demand for pathways that arises from growing populations. The Plan describes a long list of locations where footpaths may be constructed, according to Council priorities. This provides Council with flexibility as to how funds are spent. It was not intended that every path listed in the Plan be constructed.

 

The Plan projected an additional 2,000 new dwellings in established suburbs would occur across its lifespan, representing 4.4% of the number of existing dwellings in our City. Accordingly, the Plan apportioned 4.4% of the cost of new footpath construction to additional residential development. New urban areas were not subject to this contribution as development in these areas is required to deliver footpaths under development consents.

 

Since the s94 Plan took effect in May 2001, the projected contributions (being $288,000, as indexed quarterly) have been collected. All contributions collected have now been spent on additional footpaths described in the Plan. With an average footpath construction cost of approximately $80 per lineal metre, the Contributions Plan has funded 3.6 kilometres of additional pathways across our City. These additional footpaths have been constructed in suburbs varying from Cambridge Park to Erskine Park, from St Clair to St Marys and from Cranebrook to Werrington.

 

Given that all the projected contributions have now been collected and spent in accordance with the s94 Plan, it is timely and legally appropriate that it be rescinded. All contributions plans need to be reviewed regularly to ensure they are complying with – and not exceeding – the provisions of the Plan and relevant legislation, DP&I Best Practice Guidelines and legal precedents. A key principle underpinning contributions planning practice is reasonableness. It would be unreasonable for the existing Footpaths Construction s94 Plan to continue applying now that projected contributions have been paid.

 

If any further contributions are received under the s94 Plan (through older development consents yet to be acted upon), these contributions will be used on yet to be built footpaths described in the Plan. This approach is consistent with legal advice and Council’s position regarding other rescinded s94 plans.

 

The reduction in s94 Plan funding for footpath resources will amount to an average of approximately $28,000 per year. While any reduction in footpath funding is undesirable, the City Works Manager advises that since adoption of the Footpath Construction Plan in 2001, several other sources of path funding have arisen, including:

-            more than  $1 million per annum from the Roads and Maritime Services for shared pathways;

-            approximately $250,000 per year for footpaths from general revenue;

-            approximately $30,000 per annum for footpaths as part of neighbourhood      renewal; and

-            approximately $200,000 in Great River Walk grants from the NSW government.

 

These more recent sources of funding for pathways across Penrith City are now more than 50 times the annual income generated by the Footpath Construction s94 Plan.

 

Future Footpaths Contributions Plan

Typically, when a contributions plan arrives at the end of its programmed life and has delivered its projected infrastructure, it is reviewed to determine whether a new plan should be prepared. In a very large LGA such as Penrith City, where many streets in established suburbs are without pathways, it would normally be the case that a revised version of the current Footpaths Construction s94 Plan is prepared and adopted. However, recent changes to the NSW Planning System outlined in the White Paper, indicate that upon release of the new Planning Bill council’s will no longer be able to apply contributions towards the provision of footpaths. Given that the new Planning Bill is expected to be enacted by early 2014, it would be inefficient and inappropriate to spend resources preparing a new Footpaths s94 Plan until DP&I have confirmed whether councils will retain their ability to impose contributions for additional footpaths.

 

Senior Legal Officer’s referral

Council’s Senior Legal Officer has reviewed the merits of rescinding the Footpaths Construction s94 Plan and confirms that the rescission is appropriate and would not expose the Council to unreasonable legal risk.

 

City Works Manager

Council’s City Works Manager coordinates the delivery of new footpaths in areas affected by the Footpath Construction s94 Plan and has ensured that contributions have been spent in accordance with the Plan’s provisions. The City Works Manager raises no objections to rescinding the current Footpath Construction s94 Plan nor to delaying preparation of a new Plan until release of the new Planning Bill.

 

Next Steps

If Council resolves to rescind the Footpath Construction Contributions Plan, the next step in the process would be to display two notices in the local newspaper advising the community firstly of Council’s resolution and in the second notice, the date on which the rescission takes effect. The s94 Plans would be rescinded on the date that the second notice appears in the newspaper.

 

Conclusion

Over the past 12 years, additional residential development in established areas has generated a need to extend footpaths to meet the demands of the growing population. The cost of delivering these additional paths has been funded by contributions under the Footpath Construction s94 Plan. Now that contributions projected under the s94 Plan have been fully paid and the required paths delivered, this report recommends that the Plan be rescinded.

With this rescission, the essential local infrastructure described in 45% of all our plans will have been successfully completed and the associated plans repealed.

 

Until the new Planning Bill is enacted and offers certainty as to whether councils can levy contributions for footpaths, it would be inefficient and inappropriate to allocate resources to the preparation of a new Footpath Construction s94 Plan. This report recommends we defer preparation of any new Footpaths s94 Plan until the new Planning Bill is enacted.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Rescission of Footpath Construction Development Contributions Plan be received.

2.     Council resolve to rescind the Footpath Construction Development Contributions Plan.

3.     Notices appear in the local newspaper advising the community of the rescission of the Plan, in accordance with the requirements of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act and Regulations, with rescission taking effect upon appearance of the second Notice.

4.     If any further Footpath Construction Contributions Plan contributions are received in relation to existing development consents, these be allocated to additional path construction, consistent with those locations described in the Plan.

5.     Review of the need for a new Footpath Construction s94 Plan be deferred until after the release of the new NSW Planning Bill.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.


Policy Review Committee Meeting                                                                   9 December 2013

 

 

 

3

Amendments to Council's Bushfire Prone Land Map   

 

Compiled by:               Julie Condon, Development Enquiry Unit Coordinator

Authorised by:            Paul Lemm, Development Services Manager  

 

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

       

 

Executive Summary

In 2002 legislation was introduced to enhance bushfire protection measures implemented during the development assessment process. This legislation required all Council’s to map their bush fire prone lands (BPL), with maps to be reviewed every five (5) years. Council’s map was reviewed in 2006 and Council officers have just concluded the process of reviewing it again in partnership with the Rural Fire Service (RFS).

 

Due to further changes in legislation which require that grasslands be mapped, in addition to other vegetation, the revision of the map incorporates additional land as being bushfire prone from the 2006 version. Some areas which have been subject to development are now removed from the map. The finalised version of the map requires the endorsement and certification of the Commissioner of the RFS.

 

Mapping of land provides a trigger for an assessment of the risk to a property to be carried out when a development is proposed for the site.

 

Legal advice has been received which confirms that there is no risk to Council from claims that mapping land as bushfire prone will reduce its value or increase insurance costs. The advice recommended that the map be advertised to the community and stakeholders after it has been adopted and certified by the Commissioner of the RFS.

 

The draft amended BPL map was presented at the 2 December Councillor Briefing. It is now recommended that the amended map be referred to the Commissioner of the Rural Fire Service along with a letter from Council formally requesting that the map receive the Commissioner’s endorsement and certification.

 

Background

On 1 August 2002 the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act) and the Rural Fires Act 1997 (RF Act) were both amended to enhance bush fire protection through the development assessment process.

 

The legislation required all Councils to prepare a Bushfire Prone Land (BPL) Map. The Commissioner of the Rural Fire Service (RFS) designates what constitutes BPL and how it is to be mapped. In 2002, Council prepared a map in accordance with the guidelines and submitted it to the Rural Fire Service (RFS) for approval by the Commissioner. These maps are required to be updated every 5 years. Council’s map was last revised in 2006.

 

A revised BPL map has been prepared in consultation with the Local Community Safety Officer of the RFS, and Council Officers which has assessed the lands in the Local Government Area. A draft of the revised map has been prepared. This map is required to be adopted by Council before it is presented to the Commissioner of the RFS for endorsement and certification.  Appended are the current BPL Map and the draft of the revised map (Appendix 1 & Appendix 2).  Provided to Councillors under separate cover are A3 copies of maps.

 

Legislative Requirements for Bushfire Prone Land Maps

The Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 contains the legislation requiring Councils to prepare BPL maps and to consider the risk from bushfire to development during the assessment process. The guiding document called up by the legislation, Planning for Bush Fire Protection (PBP), applies to all “development applications” on land that is classified as BPL and identified on Council’s BPL map as required by Section 79BA.

 

A bushfire prone area is an area that can support a bushfire or is likely to be subject to bushfire attack. Generally they are found on land containing, or within 100m of a high or medium bushfire hazard. Research has shown that 85% of houses lost in a fire are located within the area 100m from bushland, and that ember attack is a significant form of attack on properties.

 

The map is prepared based on the vegetation present on and surrounding a site and for the purpose of the mapping can be nominated as being high/medium or low risk, or in a buffer zone.

 

The BPL map is used to inform the public that the land is bush fire prone for the purposes of Section 149 of the EP&A Act. BPL maps act as a trigger mechanism for the development of land within bushfire prone areas to be assessed to ensure appropriate bush fire safety provisions are incorporated into the development. The same assessment process is undertaken regardless of the risk level nominated on the map.

 

Once a development is proposed and an assessment of the site has been undertaken a Bushfire Attack Level or BAL is nominated for the development and the Bushfire Protection Measures (BPM) required can be determined. These may include building the structure to meet the requirements of Australian Standard AS 3939, provision of an asset protection zone or cleared area, securing a fire fighting water supply and providing safe access and egress from the property. More often than not, a combination of these is used to ensure the development is safe for the occupants and fire fighters.

 

If the development proposal is for an outbuilding or a minor addition to a dwelling, the assessment focuses on the new building or addition. There is no requirement for an existing dwelling to be upgraded unless the works proposed to it are significant enough to affect more than 50% of the volume of the existing dwelling.

 

      If the development proposed is for subdivision of bush fire prone land for residential or rural residential purposes, or is for a special fire protection purpose including;  a school, a child care centre, a hospital,  a hotel, motel, or tourist accommodation, seniors housing,  a group home, or a retirement village, it will require an Integrated Development Approval from the RFS.

 

It is appropriate that people living or purchasing property in bushfire prone areas are advised of the status of any bushfire risk to the property. The mechanism for this is for the information to be included on a Planning Certificate under section 149 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. The certificate will detail matters relating to the land as listed in schedule 4 of the EP&A Regulation which identifies bush fire prone land (or any part of the land) as being a relevant matter that should be notified within the section 149 Planning Certificate.

 

Proposed Changes to the BPL Map

Since the last revision of the BPL map in 2006 there have been significant changes to the vegetation in a number of areas in the Penrith Local Government Area. These include:

 

1.   Large bushland areas which have transitioned into residential subdivisions including Jordan Springs, Claremont Meadows and Glenmore Park and are no longer bushfire prone.

 

2.   Regeneration of bushland surrounding existing subdivisions meaning some areas which are not currently identified as bushfire prone now need to be considered as being bushfire prone.

 

In addition to this; following the 2009 Victorian Bushfires, significant changes were made to Australian Standard 3959 “Construction of buildings in Bushfire Prone areas” and the ability of grassland areas to convey bushfires into areas of residential development was recognised. The adoption of AS3959-2009 on 1 May 2012 required Councils to consider the impacts of grasslands on any new developments as well as incorporate grassland when updating their bushfire prone land maps.

 

The definition of grassland incorporates all forms of vegetation including shrubs and trees where the canopy cover is less than 10% and the surface vegetation exceeds a height of 100mm. This includes areas of pasture and cropping lands which were not previously mapped and as a result has significantly increased the extent of Bushfire Prone areas required to be mapped within the Penrith LGA.

 

The revised map now also includes consideration of the bushfire prone nature of land in adjoining Council areas. For example, buffer zones have been extended along the interface with Blue Mountains Council and Hawkesbury Council. Likewise Blacktown Council has been asked to include consideration of the BPL adjacent to the Penrith LGA.

 

Communication Strategy

Council has sought advice regarding informing the community of the changes to the BPLM. The advice received from DLA Piper Solicitors considers Council’s risks/obligations with regards to notification of the amended map as follows;

 

·    Case law confirms there have been no successful claims against a Council decision to identify a property as being bushfire prone resulting in a reduction of the value of a property or limiting its development potential.

 

·    Neither have there been any successful challenges to a decision by a Council to identify property as being bush fire prone which may serve to increase insurance premiums for property owners. 

 

·    The other potential liability risk is in an alleged failure to identify land as bush fire prone in the mapping process. For example, an allegation by a landowner that the failure to map a property as bush fire prone resulted in damage as specific controls to limit bush fire risk were not applied and the property was later destroyed by fire.

 

Defence against all the above considerations are dependant on Council having a reasonable degree of satisfaction that the mapping is accurate. As such, any public exhibition/notification of the mapping should include an appropriate disclaimer.

 

The advice received indicates that notification of the BPL map should occur following approval by the RFS. This endorsement and certification by the Commissioner will provide a form of verification as to the appropriateness of the mapping.

 

The EP&A Act provides for the BPL map to be available for public inspection at the offices of the Council.  Apart from this statutory requirement there is no legal obligation to publicise the new mapping. However, it is in Council's interests to do so in order to keep stakeholders informed as to matters affecting the control of development.

 

It is therefore proposed that, once certified, the amended BPL map is notified to the community and rate payers via advertisements in the Mayoral Column and Western Weekender with a display on Council’s web page and hard copies of the map available for viewing at Council’s Penrith and St Marys offices.

 

Section 149(2) of the EP&A Act, requires Council to include notification on a planning certificate if any part of the land the subject of the certificate is bush fire prone. Any changes resulting from the changes to the mapping will be included on 149 Certificates once the mapping is approved by the Commissioner of the RFS.

 

Next Steps

The BPL map is required to be adopted by Council and will then be forwarded to the Commissioner of the Rural Fire Service for Certification and is then returned to Council.

 

Once the BPL map is certified, information regarding the amendments to the mapping will be communicated to the community via Council’s website and the Local Press.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Amendments to Council's Bushfire Prone Land Map be received.

2.     The amended bushfire prone map be adopted by Council.

3.     The adopted map be referred, with an accompanying letter, to the Commissioner of the Rural Fire Service requesting its endorsement and certification.

4.     Once the map has been certified by the Commissioner of the Rural Fire Service, the communication strategy outlined in the report be implemented.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1. View

Current Bush Fire Prone Land Map

1 Page

Appendix

2. View

Amended Bush Fire Prone Land Map

1 Page

Appendix

  


Policy Review Committee Meeting                                                                                   9 December 2013

Appendix 1 - Current Bush Fire Prone Land Map

 


Policy Review Committee Meeting                                                                                   9 December 2013

Appendix 2 - Amended Bush Fire Prone Land Map

 


Policy Review Committee Meeting                                                                   9 December 2013

 

 

 

4

IPART Draft Report on Local Infrastructure Benchmark Costs   

 

Compiled by:               Wayne Trew, Project Coordinator Development Contributions

Mark Broderick, Planning Projects Co-ordinator

Authorised by:            Paul Grimson, Strategic Planning Manager  

 

Outcome

We plan for our future growth

Strategy

Facilitate development that encourages a range of housing types

Service Activity

Plan for and facilitate delivery of release areas and urban renewal in the City

       

 

Executive Summary

This report seeks Council’s endorsement to make a submission to the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal (IPART) regarding its draft report on local infrastructure cost benchmarks.

 

On 25 November 2013 IPART released a draft report on local infrastructure benchmark costs and sought public comment. This draft report was prompted by the Government’s recently published White Paper reforms to the NSW planning system.  These reforms include revised arrangements for infrastructure contributions.  IPART’s report establishes proposed benchmark costs for particular ‘standard’ infrastructure items described in the Planning White Paper.  The deadline for submissions is 17 January 2014, which occurs within the period of Council’s recess. 

 

We are currently examining the draft report with a view to making a submission by the due date.  However, the document runs to 166 pages and will require extensive interrogation and comparison of costings by officers from across the organisation.  There has been insufficient time available to complete this review and present a submission to Council ahead of the Christmas recess.

Background

The Government recently published a White Paper on reforms to the NSW planning system.  These reforms include revised arrangements for paying for growth infrastructure.  As part of these reforms, the Government has decided to remove the cap that previously applied to the infrastructure contributions that developers pay to local councils.

 

In the new system, councils will be able to levy an uncapped contribution towards the efficient cost of local roads and transport facilities, local open space, community facilities and stormwater management works.  The White Paper proposed that the costs of items included in Local Infrastructure Plans will be standardised in accordance with benchmarks agreed by the Infrastructure Contributions Taskforce.  There is therefore a need to develop relevant benchmarks.

 

IPART was requested to assist the Department of Planning and Infrastructure (DP&I) by investigating local infrastructure cost benchmarks or appropriate processes that councils can use to estimate the efficient costs of local infrastructure.  As part of this work, matters such as regional cost variations, how to value land and how to keep costs up to date, were examined.  IPART has prepared a draft report with input from stakeholders including local councils. 

IPART’s Draft Infrastructure Benchmark Report

A draft report titled Local Infrastructure Benchmark Costs: Costing infrastructure in Local Infrastructure Plans was released by IPART on 25 November 2013.  Written comments have been invited and submissions are due by 17 January 2014.

 

In undertaking the exercise IPART engaged engineering and construction experts, Evans & Beck.  They also consulted a number of stakeholders including the Infrastructure Task Force, councils, developers and other industry experts.  On 7 November 2013 Council officers provided very detailed input to questionnaires sent to each council by IPART regarding the costs, methodology, apportionment, etc, for our current and past contributions plans in the lead up to the draft report.

 

The Infrastructure Task Force provided IPART with a list of around 80 infrastructure items to benchmark. Benchmarked items are grouped under the following headings:

·    Roads & traffic facilities

·    Stormwater management

·    Open Space

·    Other Items

 

Of those 80 items, they have not, to date, provided benchmark cost for 14 items as they considered that the scope of the items could vary significantly and have requested submissions on these items as to the usefulness of developing benchmark cost.

 

IPART’s draft Local Infrastructure Cost Benchmarking report describes a facility (eg, multi purpose community facility), describes its components (eg, floorspace, inclusions such as fitout details) and elements the costing does not include (eg, contamination remediation). A facility cost per unit (eg, price per square metre) is then described. The cost benchmarks will then be applied by Council and the DP&I when development contributions plans – and the facilities they include are being developed or reviewed. If councils wish to prepare development contributions plans which vary from these benchmarks they will need to provide justification to the DP&I. 

 

Until council officers have been able to fully analyse the report, the impact that it could have on Penrith City Council and its community will not be known.

Council considerations

IPART’s draft report has been referred to relevant Council specialists for analysis and comment. This staff review will inform and shape our submission. 

 

Given that the deadline for submissions (17 January 2014) will occur outside Council’s 2014 meetings schedule, this report seeks Council endorsement for staff to make a submission on its behalf.  While the impact on Council of the draft benchmark costs cannot be quantified at this stage, the tenor of our response will seek to continue Council’s consistent position of advocating for flexibility in providing essential local infrastructure that meets the needs of our particular community and is financially sustainable for us to maintain. 

Conclusion

The benchmarking of local infrastructure items has the potential to have a significant impact on our local community, the achievement of our strategic goals and sustainable financial management.  Given these implications, it is imperative that we make a submission on IPART’s draft benchmark report.  Council endorsement of a staff submission on Council’s behalf will ensure we continue to advocate for the delivery of affordable and appropriate local infrastructure.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on IPART Draft Report on Local Infrastructure Benchmark Costs be received.

2.     Council endorse the making of a submission by staff regarding IPART’s draft Report on Local Infrastructure Benchmark Costs by 17 January 2014.

3.     A copy of the submission forwarded to IPART be provided to Councillors at the end of the Christmas recess period.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.


Policy Review Committee Meeting                                                                   9 December 2013

 

 

 

5

Sydney Science Park   

 

Compiled by:               Schandel Jefferys, Senior Planner 

Authorised by:            Paul Grimson, Strategic Planning Manager   

 

Outcome

We plan for our future growth

Strategy

Protect the City's natural areas, heritage and character

Service Activity

Maintain a contemporary framework of land use and contribution policies, strategies and statutory plans

       

 

Executive Summary

E.J Cooper and Son Pty Ltd (EJC) is owned by the Baiada family group of companies and is one of Australia’s largest privately owned companies.  EJC has an annual turnover of approximately $2 billion, employs over 6,000 and is based in Western Sydney. 

EJC’s vision is to develop the Sydney Science Park which is a unique development for Australia.  The Sydney Science Park seeks to create a higher order employment centre integrating research and development, employment, education, student accommodation and office space.  The land is predominantly within the boundaries of the Broader Western Sydney Employment Area (BWSEA). 

A detailed draft Planning Proposal is due to be lodged with Council before Christmas. It is recommended that Council resolve to commence a Gateway process for the purpose of considering the detailed Planning Proposal.

 

Background

On 1 August 2013 the proponent of the Sydney Science Park, E. J. Cooper and Son Pty Ltd (EJC), formally met with Council officers to present their Planning Proposal which sought to rezone land at Luddenham Road, Luddenham for mixed use employment, science, technology and residential development.   

 

EJC is owned by the Baiada family group of companies, which owns a significant landholding in the Broader Western Sydney Employment Area (BWSEA).  EJC employs over 6,000 staff, has an annual turnover of approximately $2 billion and is based within Western Sydney. 

 

EJC’s vision is to develop the Sydney Science Park which is a unique development in Australia.  Initially the proposal sought to rezone 413 hectares of land to create a higher order employment centre, integrating research and development, employment, education and a residential precinct.  The residential component was to comprise approximately 3,000 new dwellings in a traditional residential subdivision pattern as shown in the concept plan in attachment 1.  The vast majority of the residential component that was originally proposed falls outside the boundary of the BWSEA. 

 

Some significant concerns regarding the residential component of the development were raised by Council officers, based on Council’s previous responses and submissions on the State Government’s Landowner Nominated Housing Opportunities Program, including:

·    Council’s current release areas are adequate for 10-15 years

·    the ad hoc and isolated nature of the proposals for housing

·    the potential to establish undesirable precedents in the City’s rural lands, and

·    infrastructure costs/requirements.

 

Since the initial discussions and, more recently, key meetings with the Department of Planning and Infrastructure (DP&I), the components of the Planning Proposal have been revised as described below. 

 

Description of Proposed Development

EJC’s total landholding at Luddenham Road, Luddenham is approximately 413 hectares with half of this land located within the BSWEA.  The revised proposal incorporates only the development of approximately 250 hectares on the eastern side of, and within, the BWSEA boundary.  The traditional residential component outside of the BWSEA has now been deleted from the proposal.

 

The proposal is for a research and development centre specialising in the food, health and energy sectors.  EJC’s vision is the delivery of higher order employment uses in the form of a fully integrated science park including education, research and development, commercial/office space, centre based residential, student housing, retail and town centre uses. 

 

The built form will deliver high quality design with complementary landscape features in a range of 5 to 8 storey buildings. EJC have recently announced they are relocating the Baiada Australian headquarters, Baiada National Food Science Laboratories and Research Facility and University of Sydney Poultry Research Foundation to the site in their initial stage of development.  This commitment will bring 400 to 500 jobs to Penrith with the first development applications.  Further details of the proposal are provided by EJC and included in attachment 2. 

 

Relationship to the Broader Western Sydney Employment Area

The Planning Proposal now comprises 250 hectares of land within the BWSEA as shown in attachment 3.  Attachment 4 includes the draft indicative masterplan.  EJC have put forward a written request seeking Council’s support to commence a Gateway process that is required to ultimately rezone the land for the intended purpose.  A copy of this letter is included in attachment 5.  A formal, more detailed Planning Proposal, to be submitted prior to Christmas, will include draft zones, a detailed masterplan and Voluntary Planning Agreement.   

 

The final BWSEA draft Structure Plan has not yet been published but is likely to come into effect early in 2014.  At present, the DP&I are working through the submissions received during the recent public exhibition and further visual impact analysis.  The BWSEA Structure Plan will then move into a staged detailed precinct planning phase with Stage 1 starting at the north eastern corner with an extension to the existing employment area. 

 

EJC would like to progress their development ahead of the staging outlined in the BWSEA draft Structure Plan.  They have approached Council to consider a Planning Proposal to permit their development ahead of the State Government process. Although the proposal is out-of-sequence this approach has the support of the DP&I.  

 

 

 Planning Proposal

A detailed Planning Proposal is due to be submitted in the coming weeks.  A wide range of technical studies/reports will also accompany and support the Planning Proposal as set out in the following table: 

 

 

Technical report/studies

 

 

Consultant

Hyrdology/engineering analysis               

JWyndham Prince

 

Infrastructure Analysis                                 

JWyndham Prince

 

Master Planning                                              

Design IQ and Rice Daubney Architects

 

Ecology  

 

Cumberland Ecology

Indigenous Heritage                                      

Kelleher Nightingale

 

Environment/Contamination                     

JBS

 

Social Planning                                                 

Eltons

 

Statutory Planning                                          

APP

 

Transport Analysis                                          

GTA

 

Transport Analysis (mesoscopic modelling)          

GHD

 

Economic and Retail  Analysis                    

Hill PDA

 

                                                   

Various meetings with DP&I, Council staff and other stakeholders are scheduled for the coming months.  The DP&I are in the process of establishing a committee of the major service providers to assess the major infrastructure requirements and delivery of this proposal. 

 

Conclusion

The EJC proposal offers an exciting, robust and unique opportunity to set the tone of future development in the BWSEA in terms of the density and nature of the employment proposed and the intended quality an integration of the development. 

 

It is recommended that Council resolve to commence a Gateway process through the DP&I to allow the next stages of planning to progress with confidence.  It should be noted however, that such a resolution does not lock Council into an ultimate decision on the rezoning of the site.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Sydney Science Park be received.

2.     Council commence a Gateway process for the ultimate consideration of a Planning Proposal for the Sydney Science Park in accordance with the requirements of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1. View

Sydney Science Park Indicative Masterplan

1 Page

Appendix

2. View

Sydney Science Park Detailed Development Description

4 Pages

Appendix

3. View

Sydney Science Park and Broader Western Sydney Employment Area Overlay

1 Page

Appendix

4. View

Sydney Science Park Draft Masterplan

1 Page

Appendix

5. View

Sydney Science Park Letter

1 Page

Appendix

  


Policy Review Committee Meeting                                                                                   9 December 2013

Appendix 1 - Sydney Science Park Indicative Masterplan

 


Policy Review Committee Meeting                                                                                   9 December 2013

Appendix 2 - Sydney Science Park Detailed Development Description

 





Policy Review Committee Meeting                                                                                   9 December 2013

Appendix 3 - Sydney Science Park and Broader Western Sydney Employment Area Overlay

 


Policy Review Committee Meeting                                                                                   9 December 2013

Appendix 4 - Sydney Science Park Draft Masterplan

 


Policy Review Committee Meeting                                                                                   9 December 2013

Appendix 5 - Sydney Science Park Letter

 

 


 

 

Outcome 3 - We can get around the City

 

 

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


 

 

 

 

THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT BLANK  INTENTIONALLY


 

 

Outcome 4 - We have safe, vibrant places

 

 

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


 

 

 

 

THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT BLANK  INTENTIONALLY


Outcome 5 - We care about our environment

 

Item                                                                                                                                       Page

 

6        Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) Policy                                                               37

 

 



Policy Review Committee Meeting                                                                   9 December 2013

 

 

 

6

Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) Policy   

 

Compiled by:               Tim Gowing, Senior Water Management Officer

Authorised by:            Graham Liehr, Environmental Health Manager   

 

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

       

 

Executive Summary

The health of the Nepean River and creeks within the City has long been considered an important issue to both Council and the community. Urban development has the potential to significantly increase surface runoff flow rates and volumes leading to impacts on stream stability, receiving water ecology and flooding. These pressures continue to present a threat to the health of the Nepean River and creeks within the City. New urban development and redevelopment present both a risk to existing waterways as well as an opportunity to implement best practice water management measures. In conjunction with the State Government, Council has a role in planning, guiding and regulating urban development.

 

In response to this issue a Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) Policy has been prepared to respond to growth and improve water conservation, quality and quantity in new development. The policy serves as a guide and provides developers with certainty when addressing merit based assessment criteria as part of the development process.

 

The draft policy was presented at Council’s 12 August 2013 Policy Review Committee Meeting (report is included as an attachment). The policy was subsequently placed on public exhibition from Monday 2 September to Friday 11 October 2013 to allow comment from the community and relevant industry.

 

During the public exhibition period, two submissions were received from industry groups. The comments made in the submissions were generally supportive of the policy and were of a technical nature. Comments from a number of internal Council Departments were also received and have been incorporated into the final version (attached).

 

The purpose of this report is to advise Council of the outcomes of the public exhibition period and to seek the adoption of the policy.

 

Background

The Hawkesbury-Nepean River system is recognised as an important ecological, hydrological and recreational resource and Council’s City Strategy 2013 recognises urban and rural development is placing increasing pressure on the River. Urban development results in significant modification to soils, catchment imperviousness and vegetation.  Surface runoff volumes and pollutant concentrations from urbanised catchments are typically elevated above natural conditions and convey elevated pollutant loads to receiving waters.  Urban development also has the potential to significantly increase surface runoff flow rates and volumes leading to impacts on stream stability, receiving water ecology and flooding. These pressures continue to present a threat to the health of the Nepean River and creeks within the City.

 

New urban development and redevelopment present both a risk to existing waterways as well as an opportunity to implement best practice water management measures. In conjunction with the State Government, Council has a role in planning, guiding and regulating urban development. As such, it is important that Council’s policies reflect the expectations of the community. The Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) policy is intended to respond to growth and improve water conservation, quality and quantity in new development.

 

Overview of the Public Exhibition of the Draft Policy

The report presented at Council’s Policy Review Committee meeting of 12 August 2013 is attached and includes additional details on the importance and need for the policy. Council resolved at that meeting to place the draft Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) policy on public exhibition for 30 days to seek comment from the Community and relevant industry groups.

 

Consequently, the draft policy was placed on public exhibition from Monday 2 September to Friday 11 October 2013 to allow comment from the community and relevant industry. The policy was made available on Council’s website, and in Council’s administration centres and libraries in Penrith and St Marys.

 

A fact sheet summarising the policy and inviting comment was also emailed to over 70 developers and consultants who regularly engage with Council. The policy was also distributed to relevant Council staff within the City Works, Parks, Development Services, Major Projects, Strategic Planning, Engineering and Environmental Health departments.

 

Outcomes of the Public Consultation

During the public exhibition period, only two submissions were received from industry groups, one of which was a supplier of stormwater treatment devices and the other a civil infrastructure engineering firm. Both submissions were supportive of the objectives of the policy. The issues raised were considered to be relatively minor and related to the technical aspects of the policy. Where appropriate the matters raised have been incorporated into the final version of the policy.

 

As discussed, the draft document was developed in close consultation with a range of Council departments including City Works, Parks, Major Porjects, Engineering Services, Development Services, Strategic Planning and Environmental Health. This was done through a series of meetings and a workshop.

 

As a result of the consultation, some minor changes to the technical aspects of the policy have been made. The changes made to the policy increase its flexibility so as to ensure the policy does not limit Council’s ability to impose different conditions in respect to a particular development or Council project, having regard to potential site restrictions and best practice.

 

In response to the comments received, the policy has been changed into two separate documents, the Policy and the associated WSUD Technical Guidelines. The Policy (copy attached) sets out the objectives and outlines the performance criteria for the different development types. The associated WSUD Technical Guidelines provides guidance for industry on how to comply with the Policy. The WSUD Technical Guidelines will be regularly reviewed and updated to reflect changes within the industry and best practice.

 

In summary, the submissions made during the public exhibition period were generally supportive. The Policy will provide Council and developers with consistency and certainty in relation to meeting water quality and quantity outcomes.

 

Financial Considerations

An overview of the cost implications of the Policy is included in the attached report from the 12 August 2013 Policy Review Committee meeting. The costs associated with implementing the policy are expected to be outweighed by the long term benefits which include improved stormwater runoff, avoided waterway rehabilitation costs, prolonged life of stormwater conveyance systems, enhanced biological values, reduced nutrients in receiving waters and increased amenity and property values.

 

Financial Services Manager’s Comment

The annual budget preparation process includes consideration of the impact of assets that have been dedicated to Council as a result of development.  This process includes the provision of additional funding for the maintenance of new assets which is based on rates that have been calculated for specific asset types, with these rates reviewed annually in consultation with the relevant Council Officers.

 

As outlined in the 12 August Policy Review Committee meeting report, the estimated cost for the maintenance of assets related to WSUD can vary. The average annual maintenance costs for a variety of WSUD measures is estimated to range from around $2 per square metre to $12 per square metre per annum following the establishment period. For this reason it is important that a policy is developed to provide guidance on this issue, and that Council Officers are involved in the assessment of these assets during the development process. This will ensure that the best outcome is achieved for both the WSUD aspirations of the development, and also Council’s resource allocation in terms of the impact on long-term maintenance obligations.

 

Parks Manager

The implementation of a Water Sensitive Urban Design Policy will provide the opportunity for significant improvement in water quality and the associated enhancement of a range of natural areas across the City. The short and long term maintenance of these assets is important from a functional and aesthetic perspective. The provision of appropriate resources as described in the comments provided by the Financial Services Manager is critical to ensure the ongoing viability and presentation of these assets.

 

Conclusion

A Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) policy is needed to respond to growth and improve water conservation, quality and quantity in new development. The policy serves as a guide and provides Council and developers with consistency and certainty in relation to meeting water quality and quantity outcomes.

The policy clarifies which developments are required to incorporate stormwater treatment measures and builds on the many education programs and environmental projects that have been completed by Council over recent years. Importantly, the Policy reflects community expectations identified by the City Strategy and demonstrates Council’s leadership in regard to water management.

 

The costs associated with implementing the policy are expected to be outweighed by the long term benefits which include improved stormwater runoff, avoided waterway rehabilitation costs, prolonged life of stormwater conveyance systems, enhanced biological values, reduced nutrients in receiving waters and increased amenity and property values.

 

The draft policy was placed on public exhibition from Monday 2 September to Friday 11 October 2013 to allow comment from the community and relevant industry groups. Two submissions were received from industry groups and they were generally supportive, with only minor technical amendments needed. The previous draft document has now also been separated into a Policy document and associated WSUD Technical Guidelines. This is to improve ease of use and to ensure the technical guidelines can be reviewed and updated as necessary to remain contemporary and reflect industry best practice.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) Policy be received.

2.     Council adopt the policy and advise the relevant industry groups of the new requirements with regards to the policy.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1. View

Penrith City Council's Draft Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) Policy Report PRC 12 August 2013

6 Pages

Attachment

2. View

Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) Policy December 2013

11 Pages

Attachment

3. View

WSUD Technical Guidelines Dec 2013.pdf

26 Pages

Attachment

   


 

 

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

 

 

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


 

 

 

 

THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT BLANK  INTENTIONALLY


Outcome 7 - We have confidence in our Council

 

Item                                                                                                                                       Page

 

7        Local Infrastructure Renewal Scheme - Round 3                                                            45

 

8        Penrith Whitewater Stadium - Annual Report and Board of Directors                           49

 

9        Penrith Performing and Visual Arts Ltd - Annual Report                                               53

 

 



Policy Review Committee Meeting                                                                   9 December 2013

 

 

 

7

Local Infrastructure Renewal Scheme - Round 3   

 

Compiled by:               Brett Richardson, Financial Accountant

Andrew Moore, Financial Services Manager

Authorised by:            Barry Husking, Assistant General Manager   

 

Outcome

We have confidence in our Council

Strategy

Ensure our finances and assets are sustainable and services are delivered efficiently

Service Activity

Manage Council's financial sustainability and meet statutory requirements

       

 

Executive Summary

The NSW Government in its 2011-12 budget provided a total of $70m over five years for the implementation of the local infrastructure backlog policy. In its 2012-13 budget the continuation of the Local Infrastructure Renewal Scheme (LIRS) was announced, providing a further $30m. The funding is to support an interest rate subsidy for loan borrowings by Local Government that address identified infrastructure backlogs.

 

Council submitted two existing projects funded by borrowings to be considered for Round 1 of the scheme in early 2012 - Asset Renewal and Established Areas Strategy (AREAS) for $913,000, and City Centres Upgrade and Renewal Program (Penrith and St Marys) for $1.6m. Council was successful obtaining the subsidy for the AREAS project.

 

For Round 2 Council again submitted two applications for planned borrowing relating to Asset Renewal and Established Areas Strategy (AREAS) for $913,000, and City Centres Upgrade and Renewal Program (Penrith and St Marys, including stage one of the Mondo) for $4.2m. Council was successful with both of these applications.

 

The Division of Local Government (DLG) has announced that Round 3 of the scheme is now open, with applications due to close on 31 December 2013. A total of $30m is provided for subsidies under Round 3.

 

Council officers have reviewed Council’s existing infrastructure renewal programs, and with consideration to the assessment criteria, identified two applications that have established and sustainable funding sources within the 2013-14 Operational Plan and the Long Term Financial Plan.

 

This report recommends that Council lodge applications to Round 3 of the LIRS for the general revenue funded borrowings for AREAS ($913,000) and for an accelerated CBD drainage program ($7m). Applications for Round 3 close on 31 December 2013.

Round 3 of the Scheme

The NSW Government committed an additional $30m to the scheme in its 2013-14 Budget to support a third round. A total of $93m has been provided to date for eligible projects. Round 3 applications are now available to support both backlog infrastructure projects as well as projects providing infrastructure for new housing developments. The third round of the scheme will provide a 3% (3% in Round 2, and 4% in Round 1) interest subsidy on loans taken out to undertake these projects.

 

Applications for Round 3 of the scheme close 31 December 2013.

 

Any local council in NSW which meets the eligibility requirements and agrees to the conditions of LIRS assistance is eligible to apply. A council may submit an application (and may be eligible to receive a LIRS subsidy) for a maximum of two separate projects/programs. The projects/programs for which a council proposes to incur borrowings to be subsidised under the LIRS should be identified as part of Council’s infrastructure backlog or should enable the provision of new housing.

 

In considering projects for Round 3, borrowings must be for identified infrastructure backlogs and that while the interest rate subsidy is a significant attractor, a funding source for the repayment of the loan principal and the remaining interest not covered by the subsidy, would need to be identified with Council’s existing capacity.

Projects identified for Round 3

Following the announcement of Round 3, Council Officers have reviewed work programs and backlog projects to identify eligible projects for this program. Feedback was also sought to ensure that all eligible funded projects were considered. The projects discussed below are the priorities based on LIRS eligibility criteria and preparedness. Each recommended project has a sustainable funding source for the borrowings proposed.

 

Project

2013-14 Planned Borrowings

Additional Borrowings

Total Project Cost

General  Revenue Component of AREAS

$913,000

-

$913,000

CBD Drainage Program

-

$5.7m

$7m

 

General Revenue Component of AREAS

In 2006-07 Council gained approval from the community and the DLG for an SRV to implement the Asset Renewal and Established Areas Strategy (AREAS). The SRV built on contributions from Council programs and established an additional contribution from general revenue of $293,000 in the first year and $913,000 per annum thereafter to fully fund the strategy. Each year since the implementation of the program Council has borrowed the General Revenue component. It is proposed that the $913,000 borrowing included in the 2013-14 Operational Plan for this program be submitted for Round 3 of the LIRS.

 

CBD Drainage Program

Two stages of the CBD Drainage Program have been identified as being appropriate to include in the Round 3 LIRS application. These stages are (1) from above the RSL Club to Judges Carpark in Woodriff Street, and (2) from Woodriff Street through to the Swimming Pool Channel. The combined value of these stages is approximately $7m. The Stormwater Service Management Charge Levy provides approximately $550,000 annually for the Urban Drainage Program. If this full allocation were to be directed towards servicing a loan, a total of $5.7m could be borrowed over a 12 year term. In the 2013-14 Operational Plan, there is a total allocation of $748,000 for the Urban Drainage Program, which includes a revote from 2012-13. This $748,000, combined with the $5.7m loan, and the $550,000 annual allocation would provide a total amount available of $7m in 2014-15.

 

Based on taking the recommendation and outcome of this strategy to a Policy Review Committee meeting in February 2014, the program could then be adopted at the Ordinary Meeting of Council in March 2014. The design and tender processes would result in a construction contract awarded by the end of 2013-14, and construction to start in the first quarter of 2014-15.

Other projects considered

The two projects below were also considered for Round 3, however due to the reasons detailed, were deemed to be ineligible under the application criteria.

 

Dunheved Link Road

The Dunheved Link Road is a key priority for stimulating the expansion of the Dunheved Business Park and the new industrial areas on the former ADI site. The road will open up additional employment lands and provide a catalyst to help create an additional 1,660 jobs in the area and revitalise the existing Dunheved Business Park.

 

Council estimates that the Dunheved Link Road will cost in the order of $8m, based on preliminary concept designs, this figure will need to be refined.  Funds will be generated over time for the construction of the road through the sale of Council and Lend Lease land that is serviced by it.  This funding arrangement will be secured through a Deed of Agreement between the parties and this is currently being finalised. The development and sale of this land will take considerable time and therefore the road’s construction will be delayed.

 

For Round 3 this project would not be eligible due to the road designs and project costing not being available by close of application, the Deed of Agreement still to be finalised which provides the guarantee of being able to pay back the loan and construction will unlikely be able to commence in the required timeframe. However, this project would be a good contender for the next round should there be one available.

 

Penrith Valley Regional Sports Stadium

A report was presented to an Ordinary meeting of Council on 24 June 2013 on the loan and building works at the Regional Sports Stadium. This report was to seek endorsement that Council provide a guarantee on a loan to allow completion of the final stages of building works at the stadium. These building works were considered as an application under Round 3 of the LIRS, however due to the nature and value of the project, it was deemed to be an ineligible project under the LIRS guidelines.

Conclusion

Council officers have reviewed relevant projects for Round 3 of the LIRS. The eligible projects that are recommended to be included in Round 3 of the Scheme include the AREAS General Revenue component ($913,000), and the CBD Drainage Program ($5.7m). It is noted that a maximum of two applications can be made by Council and that projects with a value of over $1m are preferred. Applications must be received by 31 December 2013.

 

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Local Infrastructure Renewal Scheme - Round 3 be received.

2.     Applications be made under LIRS Round 3 for the General Revenue component of AREAS ($913,000), and for the CBD Drainage Program (borrowings of $5.7m, total project cost of approximately $7m).

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.


Policy Review Committee Meeting                                                                   9 December 2013

 

 

 

8

Penrith Whitewater Stadium - Annual Report and Board of Directors    

 

Compiled by:               Adam Beggs, Governance Officer

Authorised by:            Glenn Schuil, Senior Governance Officer   

 

Outcome

We have confidence in our Council

Strategy

Demonstrate transparency and ethical behaviour

Service Activity

Ensure that the organisation promotes ethical behaviour, risk management, transparent decision making and meets contemporary governance standards

 

Presenter:                    Jack Hodge - Stadium Manager - Penrith Whitewater Stadium  - Stadium Manager’s Report      

 

Executive Summary

Each year, following the Annual General Meeting of the Company, a report is presented to the Council on the year’s activities of the Penrith Whitewater Stadium (PWS), including the financial performance.

 

The reports from both the Chairman and the Stadium Manager highlight the major activities of the Stadium over the last year. The venue has continued throughout the year to attract professional athletes, sporting championships and casual users, the participation rates in each activity are detailed in the report.

Annual Report

The Fifteenth Annual General Meeting of the Company was held on 19 September 2013 for the period ended 30 June 2013.

 

The Stadium Manager will be in attendance tonight to make a short presentation which will focus on:

 

·    The Past year – highlights, financial position and issues arising; and

·    The Year ahead.

 

The following reports have been extracted from the Annual Report of Penrith Whitewater Stadium Limited (PWS):-

 

Chairman’s Report

 

It gives me much pleasure to present the Chairman’s Report to the Fifteenth Annual General Meeting of Penrith Whitewater Stadium Limited.

Patronage for whitewater rafting and canoeing based activities remains healthy. Revenue for the year was $1,655,949 which is 8% less than $1,803,785 for 2012. The financial outcome for the year ended 30 June 2013 resulted in a surplus before depreciation, amortisation and interest of $49,752, a decrease of 52% when compared to the surplus achieved in 2012 of $102,650.  During the year some $79,209 was spent on capital improvements. 

 

The Stadium continues to contribute to the overall Penrith economy and to the advancement of the sport of canoe slalom both locally and internationally.

 

Penrith Whitewater Stadium continues to generate a great deal of publicity both nationally and internationally, adding to its reputation as one of the world’s premier sporting facilities. Again the venue has successfully hosted both international and local competitions and has continued to attract a significant number of athletes who see the Stadium as their preferred off-season training venue.

 

I would like to take this opportunity to thank Venue Manager, Jack Hodge and his management team (Simonetta, Jeff, and Vicki) for leading the organization throughout the year.  Penrith Whitewater staff continues to show great dedication and commitment to the business. The underlying enthusiasm and commitment of staff is fundamental to the venue’s continuing success.

 

I would also like to thank my fellow directors for their continuing commitment and input to the operations of Penrith Whitewater Stadium.  This year sees the appointment of Councillor Marcus Cornish and the retirement of George Dodds.  George has been a director for over 6 years and his expertise and experience has been highly valued in the development of the business.

 

Finally, I would like to take the opportunity to congratulate the members of the Australian Canoe Slalom Team and coaches on their results throughout the year.

 

Stadium Manager’s Report

 

Overall participation in the activities offered by PWS declined in 2012-13.  Rafting decreased by 19% and Canoe/Kayak by 39%.  Swiftwater Rescue courses increased by 127%.

 

Whitewater rafting remains the most popular activity and the highest revenue earner for PWS.  Rafting participation decreased from 14,786 to 12,048.  Total revenue for rafting decreased by 16% from $1,210,305 to $1,013,348. 

 

Total PWS income decreased by 8% from $1,803,785 in 2011-12 to $1,655,949.  Total expenses decreased by 4% from $1,829,920 to $1,760,075 resulting in a decrease in operating profit from -$26,134 to -$104,126.  Net loss increased from -$99,721 to -$137,789 due to decreases in rafting and slalom income. 

 

PWS maintained its strong support for the sport of canoeing throughout the year.  The venue hosted the Australian Canoe Slalom Open, Australian Youth Olympic Festival, NSW Slalom Championships and NSW Southern Zone Championships.  PWS facilitated over 323 hours of slalom training and competitions for Australian and International paddlers.  This included 209 hours for the Australian team as part of the Canoe Slalom National Centre of Excellence (NCE) Agreement between PWS, the Australian Institute of Sport (AIS), the New South Wales Institute of Sport (NSWIS) and Australian Canoeing.  The value of PWS’s contribution to the agreement was approximately $84,000.

 

PWS continued its support of various charitable and community organisations.  This included hosting the annual Rotary Club Duck race and the donation of 455 gift certificates to the value of $42,770.

 

Thanks to all PWS staff for their assistance during the year.  Thanks also to the PWS Board of Directors for their ongoing dedication and support. The successful operation of PWS relies upon the support of the general public and a network of companies and organisations.  PWS would like to thank the general public, suppliers, venue stakeholders and neighbouring organisations for their support and looks forward to working together more closely in the future to maximise the ongoing success of PWS and Penrith Lakes.

 

Board of Directors

 

The Constitution of the Company provides, in part, that:

 

1.   To provide continuity the members of the Board shall resign on a rotating basis. At the First Annual General Meeting, three (3) Directors (including one (1) Councillor) shall resign. At the Second Annual General Meeting, three (3) members shall resign (including one (1) Councillor). Thereafter, the members of the Board, except the Council Officer, shall resign after they have served on the Board for three (3) years after appointment or re-appointment to the Board.        

2.   All retiring Directors shall be eligible for re-appointment.

 

Council should note that the positions of Chairman, Deputy Chairman and Company Secretary were declared vacant. Elections were held for the vacant positions at the Fifteenth Annual General Meeting.

 

Councillor Ross Fowler OAM was re-appointed to the position of Chairman, Helen Brownlee OAM was re-appointed to the position of Deputy Chair and the Council’s Executive Manager City Assets, Mr David Burns was re-appointed to be the Council’s General Manager’s representative and Company Secretary on the Board.

 

It was resolved that Penrith City Council be requested to endorse the reappointment of Amanda Walmsley as a continuing Director of Penrith Whitewater Stadium Ltd and note the resignation of George Dodds.

 

Acting Business Support Accountant’s Comments

 

Penrith Whitewater Stadium Limited reported a net deficit of $137,789 for the 2012-13 financial year. This is an increase of 38.2% on their 2011-12 deficit of $99,721. Revenue in 2012-13 decreased by $147,836 from 2011-12, a decrease of 8.2%. Council did not provide Penrith Whitewater Stadium Limited with a direct subsidy in 2012-13.

 

Notwithstanding the consecutive losses in the last two financial years, the Total Equity of the Company as at 30 June 2013 was $175,347.

 

 

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Penrith Whitewater Stadium - Annual Report and Board of Directors  be received.

2.     Council agree to underwrite the operation of the Penrith Whitewater Stadium Limited for 30 months from 1 July 2013.

3.     Council note and support the appointment and re-appointment of the persons named in the report to the Board of Directors of Penrith Whitewater Stadium Ltd.  

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.


Policy Review Committee Meeting                                                                   9 December 2013

 

 

 

9

Penrith Performing and Visual Arts Ltd - Annual Report   

 

Compiled by:               Adam Beggs, Governance Officer

Authorised by:            Glenn Schuil, Senior Governance Officer   

 

Outcome

We have confidence in our Council

Strategy

Demonstrate transparency and ethical behaviour

Service Activity

Ensure that the organisation promotes ethical behaviour, risk management, transparent decision making and meets contemporary governance standards

 

Presenters:                   Ms Hania Radvan - CEO  - Penrith Performing and Visual Arts Ltd  - Annual Report

                                      Mr Peter Anderson - Chairman - Penrith Performing & Visual Arts Ltd - Annual Report        

 

Executive Summary

This report details the performance of the Penrith Performing and Visual Arts Ltd (PP&VA) for the financial year 1 July 2012 – 30 June 2013.

 

The report recommends that the information be received and the Council agree to underwrite the operation of the Company for a further period of 30 months from 1 July 2013.


Background

Penrith Performing & Visual Arts (PP&VA) established in 2007, brought together Penrith’s leading cultural organisations, individually operating since the sixties, eighties and nineties. Operating on two sites, spanning the Nepean River, PP&VA brings together the production and presentation of performing and visual arts all underscored by education and access programs, including the Penrith Conservatorium of Music.

2012/13 was a year of challenge and change. In September 2012, a new Gallery Director Dr Lee-Anne Hall was appointed and commenced work. Shortly thereafter PP&VA’s inaugural CEO, Mr John Kirkman resigned to take up his new position at the Information and Cultural Exchange in Parramatta.

The consulting Chief Financial Officer stepped in as the Acting CEO whilst an exhaustive national recruitment process was undertaken. Ms Hania Radvan commenced as CEO in mid April 2013, coming to the position from the Northern Territory and a background in government and private sector arts and venue management, most immediately as Director, Arts NT.

In the face of an imminent funding application deadline for Arts NSW, the company undertook a strategic planning process led by consultant Jennifer Lindsay. Whilst Arts NSW announced a review of Funding Programs and Policy, and an extension of funding for PP&VA, the planning process itself, being undertaken at a time of change in leadership, and after a long period of stability within a changing operating context, was very opportune. The Board considered the Strategic Plan at its August 2013 meeting, endorsing it to guide the company’s operation for 2013/14.

 

Highlights for 2012/13 include:

 

§ Q Theatre production of Lachlan Philpott’s critically acclaimed Truck Stop was nominated for four Sydney Theatre awards and won two. The production was also listed in the Sydney Morning Herald’s top 10 for 2012 and was named second best of 2012 in the SYP Review Blog. Following this success, Truck Stop won an AWGIE as the Best New Work for Young Audiences in 2013.

§ Delivery of fifteen new exhibitions at the Penrith Regional Gallery & The Lewers Bequest.

§ The trial of a new approach to visual arts education through the establishment of the Lewers Learning Centre – an immersive, interactive exhibition at Lewers House with a focus on families, early childhood and primary.

§ Introduction of biannual market days to activate the Gallery gardens and encourage new visitation

§ Successful introduction and take up of new membership categories for PCOM and The Joan

§ Presentation of 56 seasons and a total of 102 PP&VA presented performances attracting 23,186 attendances and $623,352 in gross box office.

§ Delivery of 441 performing arts workshop classes with 10,471 attendances attracting $145,721 in fees. An additional 15,960 music tutorials were delivered through the Penrith Conservatorium of Music.

§ Ongoing partnership in the delivery of the Mondo Project involving the activation of the Civic Space on Thursday evenings.

§ Ongoing Lachlan Shire Council cultural partnership and programs- On the Road, also supported by the Vincent Fairfax Family Foundation.

§ Continuing partnerships with a range of premier Australian arts organisations/institutions e.g. ABC Classic FM and the Museum of Contemporary Art (Sydney).

§ Delivery of Dance Hall Days, an original devised work with six performances across three venues from St Marys and Springwood to Condobolin.

 

The following major issues were of concern throughout 2012/13

1.    Maintenance Works and Capital Replacement. The need to maintain and replace essential capital items across PP&VA continued to impact heavily on the annual budget – in particular the older parts of the building are beginning to show their age – and the need for a future-focussed capital vision was raised at our strategic planning meeting. Increasing public amenity and the flow of incidental traffic through a hospitality offering at The Joan continues to be a consideration for management.

2.    Access issues - ensuring access by families with prams and strollers as well as patrons in wheelchairs, and frames continues to be a concern across both sites where a lack of automatic doors is a daily challenge to entry.

3.    Instruments and artistic assets – of particular concern is the age of the grand pianos which are nearing the end of their practical life.

4.    Utilities Costs.  Costs for utilities – electricity, water rates and telephone charges continue to increase – rising almost 28% in this period over the previous financial year. However market forces determine that a consequential increase in hire rates would not be accepted by community hirers putting increased pressure on operational margins for PP&VA. Nonetheless some consideration of increases will occur for 2014.

4.    Operational, HR and business systems – old and outdated ticketing and event systems are restricting capacity to perform business functions. A lack of a collection management system is a significant obstacle to digital access, academic research and appropriate collection development. The company structure is largely historical and due for a comprehensive review in order to ensure a level of equity and appropriate professionalism into the future.

5.    Funding. The funding environment for NSW is increasingly competitive with the NSW Government introducing restrictions on additional (project) grant availability to existing clients. This is unlikely to change into the near future and the Reviews currently underway are yet to determine future priorities.

      

2012/13 Financial Result

The financial year of 2012/13 incurred a deficit of $26,370 as compared to a deficit of $15,754 in 2011/12. This is a reflection of the extraordinary cancellation of a Q Theatre co-production and Season 2013 presentation which was written off as an expense at the very end of the financial year. Aside from this extraordinary loss a small profit of around $10,000 had been the expected result for the period.

 

Total revenue was up by 9.55%, from $3,252,581 to $3,563,136. However the total expenditure for the period was up by a corresponding 10.19%, increasing from $3,268,335 to $3,601,346. All main areas of revenue were up on the previous year with the exception of interest which fell slightly to $36,681 and ‘other’ which fell by $7,418.

 

It is pointed out employment costs accounted for 52.6% of the total expense budget in the period; however total expenditure on employment costs increased by $220,403 over the previous year, despite the six month absence of a full time CEO. In part, the increase was funded by additional project funding which included a staffing component.

 

PP&VA has a primary brief and responsibility to the development and delivery of innovative artistic productions. This year an examination of processes around artistic decision-making and investments was commenced, with a greater focus on a business case rationale factoring in artistic and community drivers as well as estimated box office returns. 

 

A process of identifying all internal costs and operational overheads has commenced, as a detailed understanding is considered fundamental in ensuring informed business and artistic decisions into the future. It is proposed that transition will occur throughout 2013/14 with a revised system in place for 2014/15.

 

The organisation is considered by the CEO to be at a point where it has outgrown previous structures and systems and is in need of significant internal re-investment and systems re-design. This will be undertaken largely throughout 2013-14 and may result in a decrease in the profits of revenue streams in the shorter term, with longer term positive results.

 

 

 

 

Acting Business Support Accountant’s Comments

 

Penrith Performing and Visual Arts Limited (PP&VA) reported a net deficit of $26,370 for the 2012-13 financial year, after accounting for Council’s subsidy of $1,506,518. This is an increase of $10,616 or 67.4% on their 2011-12 result, a $15,754 deficit after accounting for Council’s subsidy of $1,461,518.

PP&VA relies on contributions and grants to assist in funding its operations.  Government Grants to the company increased by 2.8% in 2012-13 to $517,211 from $503,155 in 2011-12.

 

Revenue from PP&VA’s own funding sources increased in 2012-13 to $1,551,247 from $1,287,908 in 2011-12. This increase in revenue of $263,339 or 20.4% is mainly due to an increase in Ticket sales (31.7%), Venue Hiring Fees (29.1%), Bar Sales (32.7%) and Booking Fees (21.0%). 

 

PP&VA Board of Directors

The Constitution of the above Company provides, in part, that:

 

1.       To provide continuity the members of the Board of Directors, except for the General Manager or his/her nominee, shall retire on a rotating basis. At the first Annual General Meeting after 1 July 2006, five (5) Directors shall retire (including one (1) Councillor). At the second Annual General Meeting after 1 July 2006 five (5) directors shall retire (including one (1) Councillor). At the third General Meeting after 1 July 2006 five (5) directors shall retire. Thereafter, the members of the Board of Directors shall retire after they have served on the Board of Directors for three (3) years after appointment or re-appointment to the Board of Directors.

 

2.         All retiring Directors shall be eligible for re-appointment.

 

Council should note that, as per the Constitution, John Mullane, and Councillors Jackie Greenow OAM and Karen McKeown retired in accordance with the Constitution at the seventh Annual General Meeting of Penrith Performing and Visual Arts Ltd held on 30 October 2013 (John Mullane, and Councillors Jackie Greenow OAM and Karen McKeown all nominated for re-election). It was resolved, at the Seventh Annual General Meeting of Penrith Performing and Visual Arts Ltd that Penrith City Council be requested to endorse the appointment of John Mullane, and Councillors Jackie Greenow OAM and Karen McKeown as Directors of Penrith Performing and Visual Arts Ltd.

 

The Board reaffirmed the resolution to maintain ten Directors on the Board as an appropriate size. 

 

Council’s Executive Manager – City Planning & Community, Ruth Goldsmith is the General Manager’s representative and was re-elected Company Secretary.

 

The Hon Peter Anderson AM was re-appointed Chairman and Mr John Mullane was re-appointed as Deputy Chairman.

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.     The information contained in the report on Penrith Performing and Visual Arts Ltd - Annual Report be received.

2.     Council agree to underwrite the operation of the Penrith Performing and Visual Arts Ltd for a further period of 30 months from 1 July 2013.

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.  



 

ATTACHMENTS   

 

 

Date of Meeting:         Monday 9 December 2013

Delivery Program:      Outcome 5

Service Activity:         Contribute to the protection and enhancement of the City's natural environment

Report Title:                Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) Policy

Attachments:               Penrith City Council's Draft Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) Policy Report PRC 12 August 2013

                                      Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) Policy December 2013

                                      WSUD Technical Guidelines Dec 2013



Policy Review Committee Meeting                                                                                   9 December 2013

Attachment 1 - Penrith City Council's Draft Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) Policy Report PRC 12 August 2013

 







Policy Review Committee Meeting                                                                                   9 December 2013

Attachment 2 - Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) Policy December 2013

 












Policy Review Committee Meeting                                                                                   9 December 2013

Attachment 3 - WSUD Technical Guidelines Dec 2013