Council_Mark_POS_RGB

9 March 2016

 

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 14 March 2016 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

Leave of absence has been granted to:

Councillor Jackie Greenow OAM - 13 March 2016 to 25 March 2016 inclusive.

Councillor Jim Aitken OAM - 7 March 2016 to 19 March 2016 inclusive.

 

2.           APOLOGIES

 

3.           CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

Policy Review Committee Meeting - 15 February 2016.

 

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 14 March 2016

 

table of contents

 

 

 

 

 

 

meeting calendar

 

 

confirmation of minutes

 

 

DELIVERY program reports

 


Council_Mark_POS_RGB2016 MEETING CALENDAR

January 2016 - December 2016

(Adopted by Council -  23 November 2015)

 

 

 

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

 

8

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5

 

 

 

19

(7.00pm)

 

29@

21

18v

23#

27*

25

22@

26^ü

(7.00pm)

24

28#+

 

Policy Review Committee

7.00pm

 

15

14

11

9

20

11

8

 

10

14

12

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 v

Meeting at which the draft corporate planning documents (Delivery Program and Operational Plan) are endorsed for exhibition

 *

Meeting at which the draft corporate planning documents (Delivery Program and Operational Plan) 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 December and June) are presented

 ^

Election of Mayor/Deputy Mayor

 ü

Meeting at which the 2015-2016 Annual Statements are presented

 

Meeting at which any comments on the 2015-2016 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 Acting Senior Governance Officer, Adam Beggs.

 


UNCONFIRMED MINUTES

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

ON MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2016 AT 7:04PM

PRESENT

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

 

LEAVE OF ABSENCE

Leave of Absence was previously granted to Councillor Tricia  Hitchen for the period 1 February 2016 to 28 February 2016 inclusive.

APOLOGIES

PRC 1  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Maurice Girotto seconded Councillor Jackie Greenow OAM that an apology be received for Councillor Prue Car MP.

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES - Policy Review Committee Meeting - 30 November 2015

PRC 2  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ross Fowler OAM seconded Councillor Mark Davies that the minutes of the Policy Review Committee Meeting of 30 November 2015 be confirmed.

 

 

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

 

 There were no declarations of interest.

 

 

DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS

 

Outcome 4 - We have safe, vibrant places

 

1        Our River - Regatta Park Plan of Management

Design and Projects Manager, Michael Jackson introduced the report and made a presentation.

         

PRC 3  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Mark Davies seconded Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM

That:

1.    The information contained in the report on Our River - Regatta Park Plan of Management be received

2.    The Our River Draft Regatta Park Plan of Management be endorsed for Public Exhibition.

 

 

 

 

 

 

2        Compliance and Enforcement Policy and Guidelines

Executive Manager – Environment and City Development, Wayne Mitchell introduced the report and invited Environmental Health Coordinator, Anthony Price to give a presentation.     

PRC 4  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM seconded Councillor Greg Davies

That:

1.    The information contained in the report on Compliance and Enforcement Policy and Guidelines be received.

2.    Council adopt the attached Compliance and Enforcement Policy.

 

 

3        Review of the Penrith City Council Public Spaces CCTV Program Code of Practice                                                                                                                                             

PRC 5  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greg Davies seconded Councillor Mark Davies

That:

1.    The information contained in the report on Review of the Penrith City Council Public Spaces CCTV Program Code of Practice be received.

2.    Council support the amendments to the Penrith City Council Public Spaces CCTV Program Code of Practice and support the exhibition for public comment.

 

 

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

 

4        Keeping of Animals Local Orders Policy                                                                       

PRC 6  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Marcus Cornish seconded Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM

That:

1.    The information contained in the report on Keeping of Animals Local Orders Policy be received.

2.    Council adopt the Keeping of Animals Local Orders Policy.

 

Outcome 7 - We have confidence in our Council

 

5        Draft Policy on Unsolicited Requests to Purchase Council Owned Land                 

PRC 7  RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ross Fowler OAM seconded Councillor Greg Davies

That:

1.    The information contained in the report on Draft Policy on Unsolicited Requests to Purchase Council Owned Land be received.

2.    The report be deferred for further consideration to develop an improved communication mechanism for engaging with Councillors.

 

 

 

 

REQUESTS FOR REPORTS AND MEMORANDUMS

 

RR 1           Intersection Andromeda Drive and the Northern Road, Cranebrook      

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM requested that the possibility of placing a roundabout at the intersection of Andromeda Drive and Northern Road, Cranebrook as well as lowering the speed limit to 60kph between Andromeda Drive and Borrowdale Way, Cranebrook be referred to the Local Traffic Committee for consideration; and that Council oppose the installation of Stop Signs at the intersection of Andromeda Drive and Northern Road, Cranebrook.

 

 

 

There being no further business the Chairperson declared the meeting closed the time being 8:26 PM.

    



DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS

 

Item                                                                                                                                       Page

 

 

Outcome 1 - We can work close to home

 

1        Implementation of the "Scores on Doors" Program under Council's existing Food Safety Program                                                                                                                              1

 

Outcome 2 - We plan for our future growth

 

2        Sydney Science Park Planning Proposal - Outcomes of Public Exhibition    

Procedural note: Section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993 requires that a division be called in relation to this matter.                                                                11

 

3        Proposed M12 Motorway - Council's Submission                                                           20

 

 

Outcome 4 - We have safe, vibrant places

 

4        Neighbourhood Renewal Program update on pilot project in Colyton                             35

 

 


 

 

 

 

THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT BLANK  INTENTIONALLY


Outcome 1 - We can work close to home

 

Item                                                                                                                                       Page

 

1        Implementation of the "Scores on Doors" Program under Council's existing Food Safety Program                                                                                                                              1

 

 

 



Policy Review Committee Meeting                                                                   14 March 2016

 

 

 

1

Implementation of the "Scores on Doors" Program under Council's existing Food Safety Program   

 

Compiled by:               Michael Middleton, Health Team Leader

Authorised by:            Peter Wood, Acting Development and Environmental Health Manager  

 

Outcome

We can work close to home

Strategy

Support agriculture and local food production as a significant contributor to the region's economy

Service Activity

Contribute to the health and wellbeing of the City's community

      

 

Executive Summary

The NSW Food Authority is actively encouraging local government to promote and introduce the “Scores on Doors” Program. There are currently 53 Councils and 2 Local Government Areas where the NSW Food Authority is acting as the appropriate enforcement agency participating in the program. A further 14 Councils are working towards introducing the program in their area. Combined, these areas represent almost 60% of all high and medium risk retail food businesses in NSW.

 

The “Scores on Doors” Program not only provides a positive way for local food businesses to promote themselves, but allows our community and visitors to know how well food businesses are complying with health, hygiene and food safety requirements. It is also a great opportunity for Council to support those food businesses in our community that are operating at a high standard and to encourage all food businesses to raise their standards.

 

The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s support to implement the “Scores on Doors” Program under Council’s existing Food Safety Program.

Background

The “Scores on Doors” Program is part of the Food Regulation Partnership between the NSW Food Authority and local government. Currently the “Scores on Doors” Program is a voluntary NSW state-wide program involving the display of results of food business inspections for health, hygiene and food safety at retail food businesses.

 

South Australia are continuing the state-wide rollout of their “Scores on Doors” Program which is largely based on the NSW model. In addition, the NSW Food Authority have been contacted by Councils in Western Australia and Queensland who are interested in adopting the Program.

 

According to the NSW Food Authority’s website, many metropolitan Councils are currently participating in the “Scores on Doors” Program. Six (6) of these Councils are Western Sydney Regional Organisation of Council (WSROC) members, leaving Auburn, Fairfield, Blue Mountains and Penrith as the WSROC members not participating in the program. Blue Mountains are considering joining the Program and are in discussions with the NSW Food Authority.

 

Council trialled the Program in 2010 along with 40 local food businesses. After the trial period, Council gave feedback to the NSW Food Authority. The feedback from Council related to a word rating system being used at the time. It was a concern that a food business could lose up to 15 points for various non-compliances with the food safety legislation and still receive a rating of ‘Good’ under the trial scheme.

 

Council recommended to the NSW Food Authority that the word rating system be reviewed and a comprehensive community awareness program be undertaken so that consumers and food business owners fully understand the rating system.

 

Following feedback from councils and food industry stakeholders, a few elements of the program were enhanced to encourage participation. The meaning of the ratings is now easier to understand, Certificates can be issued on a pro-active basis, the implementation of some aspects of the program can now be tailored to an individual Councils needs and food businesses are no longer asked to sign a legal agreement to participate.

 

The NSW State Government has requested the NSW Food Authority to intensify its efforts in working with councils to identify any remaining obstacles to the state-wide rollout of the "Scores on Doors" Program. In this regard, the NSW Food Authority wrote to the General Manager in January 2015 seeking Council’s cooperation to implement the "Scores on Doors" Program. The NSW Food Authority was advised that Council would investigate participation in the Program.

 

Previously, Council has been approached by local food business proprietors seeking a "Scores on Doors" Certificate following their routine inspection, with the most recent request being received on 16 February 2016 indicating support to participate in the "Scores on Doors" Program from local food business.

Assessment of the Program

Assessment of the Program has focussed on the following Legal and Operational matters with a significant level of consultation.

 

Procedural Fairness

 

Council’s Legal Section have indicated they have no concerns with Council’s participation in the "Scores on Doors" Program or the rating program if procedures are developed to address requests by food businesses for a rating review.

 

The NSW Food Authority advised when developing the “Scores on Doors” Program, a working group was created consisting of key stakeholders including, but not limited to, Local Government NSW, Environmental Health Australia, NSW Food Authority including their legal representatives, various industry groups and representatives, Pubs and Clubs NSW and the Australian Food & Grocery Council. The NSW Food Authority noted that various industry groups from the major food franchises/chains also had their legal representatives present. It was this working group that developed the current points and rating system.

 

The methodology used was to look at the primary reasons/causes of food borne illness and allocate a rating based on risk. The “Scores on Doors” program is reviewed three (3) times a year by the working group and the NSW Food Authority advises the scoring system has not been challenged.

 

Operation

 

The NSW Food Authority has previously introduced measures to inform consumers about the performance, in particular the poor performance, of food businesses through their Name and Shame Register. The NSW Food Authority has advised that this has generated great interest from consumers. The “Scores on Doors” Program is being promoted to acknowledge the other spectrum of food businesses, informing consumers about good performance.

 

The program assists in providing a balance with informal social media reviews and empowers the community and visitors to engage with local food businesses in a continuous improvement process for food safety, health and hygiene standards. Currently there are a variety of informal social media reviews that provide a rating score for food businesses based on customers dining experiences such as Google, TripAdvisor, Facebook, Yelp, Zomato and eKomi. These reviews are created by customers based solely on their experience visiting the food business without the knowledge of whether the food business is complying with their legislative obligations in regard to health, hygiene and food safety. The NSW Food Authority’s “Scores on Doors” Program provides a consistent, informed rating of the food business based on the ‘back of house’ conditions.

 

Scores on Doors also makes the results of Council’s existing inspections visible to consumers and creates more consistency for inspections across NSW because participating councils use a standardised inspection checklist. It is important to note Council is currently using the standard Food Premises Assessment Report (FPAR) for all food business inspections completed. A beneficial outcome of this is that food businesses that operate in multiple local council areas are becoming familiar with the FPAR and its checkpoints.

 

Whilst the concept around the “Scores on Doors” Program is consistent across the State, the application from council to council can be tailored to suit the host council’s needs.

 

The “Scores on Doors” Program generally operates as follows:

 

Food Businesses

The “Scores on Doors” Program is specifically intended for food businesses that include:

·    restaurants;

·    pub bistros;

·    hotels;

·    cafes;

·    bakeries;

·    clubs; and

·    takeaway outlets.

 

The “Scores on Doors” Program is not intended for:

·    supermarkets;

·    delicatessens or greengrocers;

·    low risk food businesses or businesses that serve pre-packaged food such as service stations and convenience stores;

·    temporary markets, mobile food vending vehicles; or

·    food businesses that hold a NSW Food Authority licence and are separately audited such as butchers.

 

Having regard to the above information, the NSW Food Authority were approached to discuss the possibility of Council including all retail food businesses (excluding mobile and temporary food operators) in our area. The NSW Food Authority has no objection to this option advising that councils issuing certificates to food businesses who would not normally be eligible should consider having a written procedure before doing so.

 

This procedure will be created if Council wish to include all food businesses (excluding mobile and temporary food operators) in the Program.

Inspections

Inspections undertaken as part of the “Scores on Doors” Program would be completed by Council’s Environmental Health Officers as part of Council’s current Food Safety Program. During an inspection, food businesses are assessed against a standardised food safety checklist and assigned a star rating reflecting their performance. The assessment of food businesses is based on a standardised Food Premises Assessment Report (FPAR) provided by the NSW Food Authority with points accumulating for non-compliances with food safety and hygiene standards. The initial grade applied will result from an unannounced routine inspection and food businesses would be asked to display the certificate they are awarded, showing their score (A copy of the FPAR is attached to this report which indicates how the points are calculated). Some breaches of non-compliance to the Food Safety Standard receive higher points. This is due to the high risk nature of the non-compliance in regards to food safety.

 

Rating System

The rating system is based on the accrual of points (effectively demerits) where food safety breaches are identified. Therefore, the lower the points accrued, the higher the food businesses rating will be. The FPAR takes into consideration food handling controls, health and hygiene, cleaning and sanitising, animals and pests, design and construction, and maintenance issues.

 

The rating focuses on the positive aspects of Council’s inspection and is as follows:

 

SCORE

DEFINITION

Excellent (0-3 points)

 

The highest expected level of hygiene and food safety practices.

Very Good (4-8 points)

Very good hygiene and food safety practices.

Some minor areas need to be addressed to get a higher result.

Good (9-15) points

 

Good general standard of hygiene and food safety. Some non-critical areas need attention to get a higher result.

No Grade

(>15 points or any critical 8 point food safety failure)

A business with hygiene and food safety issues requiring significant improvement does not get a certificate to display. Depending on the issue, businesses can be issued with warning or Improvement Notice directing them to make improvements. If they don’t, they can be issued with a Penalty Notice and appear on the NSW Food Authority’s Name & Shame Register. In the worst cases a food business can be closed under a Prohibition Order.

 

Businesses not participating in the “Scores on Doors” program also have no certificate.

 

Certificates

After Council’s Environmental Health Officer completes the FPAR inspection checklist, the points received by the food business are tallied and based on the total score, a food safety rating is assigned. Certificates should be displayed in a prominent position, usually the front window or door or inside the business. Food businesses assessed with critical breaches or numerous lesser breaches would not be awarded a grade or certificate. Certificates would show an expiry date of 12 months after they are issued. Importantly, the rating certificate carries an explanation of the rating and a disclaimer from liability for Council. The certificate rating reflects the performance and condition of the food business at the time of Council’s inspection. The NSW Food Authority provides the Certificates free of charge to councils for each of the three ratings. It is proposed that these Certificates will be co-branded with the NSW Food Authority and Penrith City Council logos.

 

Some participating councils are currently publishing the ratings for food businesses on their council website. Council invests resources for staff to undertake inspections of retail food businesses in our area, however, without an initiative such as the “Scores on Doors” Program, local consumers have little way to see or be aware of this work. It is proposed initially to publish the ratings of local food businesses on Council’s website. By publishing the results of the inspections on Council’s website combined with the display of the Certificate by a food business, it is a reminder that Council is actively working to maintain and promote high standards of hygiene and food safety in our community.

 

As with the rating review, this is another area of the program that can be fine-tuned to suit Council’s objectives for the program. The NSW Food Authority advises it remains optional for councils to decide whether to publish the results of their inspections on their website. Council has been advised by the NSW Food Authority that they are in the process of reviewing whether a central platform (similar to Name and Shame) should be developed coordinated by the NSW Food Authority for all participating Councils to use. Should such a central platform be coordinated by the NSW Food Authority, it would be more appropriate to publish results through this option.  

 

Reinspection and Request for Review

Another area of the program that can be tailored relates to inspections and request for subsequent inspections where a proprietor aims to receive a higher grade or does not agree with the result of the initial inspection.

 

The NSW Food Authority has advised that Council’s should develop their own procedure to address this option. Currently, the NSW Food Authority advises it remains optional for councils to decide whether to make reinspections available. It is proposed that a reinspection of a food business can be requested at any time after the original inspection, subject to the payment of the appropriate reinspection fee. These types of requests will be limited to one request per financial year. The review including a further unannounced inspection would be undertaken within 3 months. Food businesses would be advised of this process if they were seeking a review of their rating.

 

Certain Instances May Result in the Removal of a Certificate

Environmental Health Officers often undertake inspections outside of the routine inspection program due to complaints and other circumstances. In these circumstances, a new score will be calculated if the inspection is unannounced and a full inspection was undertaken (a completed FPAR). If this results in a change to the food businesses’ rating, the previous Certificate would be removed (even if it has not yet expired) and a new Certificate issued. In the event that a pass mark is not achieved the food businesses’ original Certificate will be invalid and would need to be returned (as certificates remain the property of Council).

 

Promotion of Positive Standards

Joining the “Scores on Doors” Program would benefit Council’s existing Food Safety Program. Council’s Environmental Health Officers already undertake food business inspections to assess whether food businesses are operating in accordance with the Food Safety Standards. By Council participating in this program, there is an incentive to food businesses to improve and maintain their results, leading to improved levels of food safety. It is envisaged that some food businesses on the cusp of a higher rating may seek to have a review completed once they addressed the outstanding items thereby increasing the health, hygiene and food safety standards of our local food businesses.

 

Improving food safety levels would allow Council’s Health Officers more time to dedicate to those food businesses that require the most attention. Additionally, although Council already invests resources for Council’s Food Safety Program, consumers have little way to be aware of this work. Joining the program is a way of changing this.

 

Consultation

 

A question was asked whether other local councils already participating in the program had been consulted. Council’s Health Team Leader participates in a “Scores on Doors” User Forum each month. The forum assists local councils and the NSW Food Authority to promote the program effectively, using a collaborative approach to sharing information and developing resources. So far, the observations of the forum have been that all member councils report a positive experience in implementing “Scores on Doors”. The forum was originally scheduled to finish at the end of 2015 although due to the popularity and success of local councils being able to share experiences and learning outcomes, it was decided to extend the forum into 2016.

 

In the preparation of this report, consultation was undertaken with the NSW Food Authority, and other local councils participating in the Scores on Doors User Forum.  Councillors were also consulted at a Councillor Briefing on 2 November 2015.

 

Before joining the “Scores on Doors” Program, feedback would be sought from the public, key stakeholders and local food business owners. It is also intended to discuss the program with the Penrith CBD Corporation and St Marys Town Centre Management.

 

Public consultation options include placing notices in the local newspapers for a period of 28 days inviting submissions. Information would also be placed on Council’s website, in social media and in a Newsletter sent to all local food business owners. Council’s Environmental Health Team also propose a series of drop in sessions, both at the Civic Centre and St Marys Library Office at designated times where local food businesses can attend without appointments to discuss the program.

 

Any submissions will be addressed and where possible the Program tailored to accommodate the feedback received, prior to implementation under Council’s existing Food Safety Program.

 

Conclusion

 

The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s support to implement the “Scores on Doors” Program into Council’s existing Food Safety Program.

 

It is recommended that Council implement the “Scores on Doors” Program. The program would deliver the following benefits:

·    the “Scores on Doors” Program rewards food businesses that do the right thing by their customers;

·    the program provides food businesses throughout the area with a public incentive to raise standards;

·    potentially higher standards in food businesses should result in fewer consumer complaints; and

·    it will help provide our community with clean and healthy food products and services, which positively showcases the Council’s many communities and culinary attractions.

 

Research undertaken on the “Scores on Doors” Program so far has identified many positive outcomes from participating in the initiative as outlined above. The Program provides opportunities to reward food businesses who do the right thing and provides an incentive to raise food safety standards and enhance Council’s existing Food Safety Program.

 

Subject to any major objections and after any submissions have been satisfactorily addressed, it is proposed to implement the “Scores on Doors” Program under Council’s existing Food Safety Program from 1 July 2016.

 

It is important to note that the model adopted by Council to participate in the “Scores on Doors” Program would be reviewed after the first year and then on an as needs basis, with any necessary amendments made to ensure the most efficient operation of Council’s Food Safety Program.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.    The information contained in the report on Implementation of the "Scores on Doors" Program under Council's existing Food Safety Program be received.

2.    Council support the implementation of the “Scores on Doors” Program under Council’s existing Food Safety Program.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1.  

Food Premises Assessment Report

1 Page

Appendix

  


Policy Review Committee Meeting                                                                                 14 March 2016

Appendix 1 - Food Premises Assessment Report

 

PDF Creator

 


Outcome 2 - We plan for our future growth

 

Item                                                                                                                                       Page

 

2        Sydney Science Park Planning Proposal - Outcomes of Public Exhibition  

Procedural note: Section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993 requires that a division be called in relation to this matter.                                                                11

 

3        Proposed M12 Motorway - Council's Submission                                                           20

 

 

 

 



Policy Review Committee Meeting                                                                   14 March 2016

 

 

 

2

Sydney Science Park Planning Proposal - Outcomes of Public Exhibition   

 

Compiled by:               Alison Butler, Planner

Authorised by:            Paul Grimson, City 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

In late 2013, Council received a Planning Proposal seeking to rezone 287 hectares of land at Luddenham to enable the development of the Sydney Science Park, a centre specialising in clustering leading science based businesses, tertiary institutions, and research and development providers in the one location to advance innovation around the important principles of food security, energy and health.

 

This report provides a summary of the results of the public exhibition of the Planning Proposal and presents a review of the submissions received. The review of the Planning Proposal, including the supporting planning documents, technical studies, and the public submissions is now complete. This review concludes that the suite of planning documents adequately identify, assess and propose solutions to manage the potential impacts of the rezoning.

 

The Planning Proposal is supported by a new site specific chapter to be included in Penrith Development Control Plan (DCP) 2014 along with a Local and State Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA).

 

The Planning Proposal, supported by the site specific DCP chapter and VPA, is considered to provide an appropriate master planned approach that will provide a positive outcome for the Penrith region. It represents a significant investment in an identified strategic growth area, and has the potential to exceed the expectations of the NSW Government with regard to job creation in Western Sydney.

 

The NSW Government are yet to release the proposed corridor options for both the Outer Sydney Orbital and the South West Rail Link Extension. The potential impact of these corridors on the Sydney Science Park has been acknowledged since the beginning of the process, with proposed land uses being located to provide flexibility to accommodate future transport corridors.

 

There appear to be no constraints to progressing the Planning Proposal to the next stage of the rezoning process, that is, the drafting and publication of the amendment to Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2010. It is therefore recommended that the Sydney Science Park Planning Proposal be forwarded to the Minister for Planning and Environment after a VPA for the delivery of local facilities and services is signed by the proponent.

 

It is noted that gazettal of the ultimate LEP amendment is unlikely to occur until a separate VPA for the provision of State level infrastructure is finalised between the proponent and the Department of Planning and Environment (the Department). 

Background

The Broader Western Sydney Employment Area (BWSEA) is the NSW Government’s proposal to expand the existing 1,800 hectares of employment land within the Western Sydney Employment Area to provide an additional 8,900 hectares of employment land. The regional significance of this area was further acknowledged with the release of the Western Sydney Priority Growth Area (WSPGA) in October 2015. The WSPGA has been identified in order to investigate opportunities for new jobs, homes and services around the Western Sydney Airport at Badgerys Creek. The Sydney Science Park is the first catalyst development proposal located within the BWSEA.

 

In August 2013 the proponent of the Sydney Science Park, landowner and developer Celestino Pty Ltd (formerly known as EJC Cooper & Sons Pty Ltd), 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.

 

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 6,400 dwellings. 3,000 of these dwellings were proposed in the form of a traditional residential subdivision pattern outside the boundary of the BWSEA. 

Significant concerns were raised by Council officers regarding the residential component of the development outside of the BWSEA, which resulted in a revised proposal.

The Current Proposal

The revised Planning Proposal was received by Council on 18 December 2013 and saw the land to be included in the rezoning reduced to 287 hectares and relating only to land within the BWSEA.

The total number of dwellings within the current proposal is capped at 3,400. The dwellings will be fully integrated comprising student housing associated with the university campus/es, urban housing in a variety of densities, and a modest component of executive housing.

A Master Plan is included in the Planning Proposal, which represents the overall planning framework and preferred outcome for the Sydney Science Park. The Master Plan includes:

 

·    Approximately 340,000m2 of research and development floor area;

·    Approximately 100,000m2 of education floor area and associated student accommodation;

·    A Town Centre comprising up to 30,000m2 of retail space;

·    3,400 dwellings;

·    A primary school site;

·    New roads and infrastructure; and

·    Landscaped open space, sporting fields and parks.

 

 

 

 

The Proposed LEP Amendments

 

The Planning Proposal, prepared to deliver the proposed rezoning will, if endorsed, introduce new zoning, development standards and specific local provisions into Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2010.

 

The specific amendments to LEP 2010 will rezone the site from RU2 Rural Landscape to B7 Business Park, B4 Mixed Use and RE1 Public Recreation. The amendments will also establish a number of development controls to guide future development on the site including minimum lot sizes for residential development and maximum height of buildings development standards.

 

The Planning Proposal also introduces a site specific local provision that links the quantum of residential uses that can be developed on the site to the construction of non-residential uses, specifically for research and development, employment and education land uses. The objective of this clause is to ensure that employment is the primary use on the site.

 

Supporting Documents

 

The Planning Proposal is supported by a new site specific chapter to be included in Penrith Development Control Plan (DCP) 2014 as Section E16, which will apply to the entire Sydney Science Park site. Section E16 contains site specific development controls that focus on achieving high quality design, a high quality public domain, and support the integrated nature of the Sydney Science Park.

 

One of the key elements of Section E16 is the requirement for a Precinct Plan. Prior to granting consent for any future development of the site, a precinct plan is to be submitted and approved by Council. The Precinct Plan provides a greater level of detail than that provided in the DCP and includes, inter alia, the following key elements:

 

·    The proposed site layout including an indicative road layout;

·    Pedestrian, vehicular and cycle access and circulation networks, traffic management facilities and car parking;

·    An urban design strategy;

·    A landscape and fencing strategy;

·    The location and function of open space;

·    An infrastructure strategy; and

·    A public art strategy.

 

Celestino has indicated a willingness to enter into a local Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA) to secure the transfer and embellishment of land to Council as public open space, local roads and streetscape works, water cycle management works, the provision of a community centre, and all applicable development contributions. Celestino has submitted a formal ‘Letter of Offer’ to enter into a local VPA on the basis of these works. Should Council accept this offer, a local VPA will be developed and signed by Celestino prior to the revised Planning Proposal being submitted to the Minister for the making of the proposed LEP.

 

Celestino has engaged ARUP to conduct a traffic modelling in accordance with the requirements of Transport for NSW as indicated in Transport for NSW’s response to agency consultation. This modelling will be based on inputs from Roads and Maritime Services for the Broader Western Sydney Employment Area. The results of the modelling study will underpin the negotiations and schedule of works for the VPA between the NSW Government and Celestino for provision of State infrastructure.

 

Council officers are currently negotiating the basis of the local VPA with Celestino. A separate report containing the draft local VPA, and further detail of the full package of works included within it will be reported to Council prior to placing the draft local VPA on public notification.

 

Gateway Determination

 

The Department issued a Gateway Determination on 18 June 2014. While most of the conditions of the Gateway were agreeable, one condition required an amendment to the clause drafted to control the roll out of housing relative to employment floor space. The required amendment would see a reduction in the number of dwellings permitted in the first stage of development from 749 dwellings to 200 dwellings. The Department cited concerns that, being located within the BWSEA, the primary focus for the site should be on employment generating land uses.

 

The proposed reduction to the quantum of residential development in the critical first stages of the development would significantly impact the viability of the Sydney Science Park and its capacity to attract high end business investment and education providers to Western Sydney. Providing this early critical mass is also vital to establish a vibrant town centre. 

 

Accordingly, Council requested a revised Gateway Determination on 3 September 2014, which contained further detail and justification around the dwelling targets and staging contained within the Planning Proposal. To provide a further level of justification, a supplementary Economic and Planning Report was prepared by consultants APP, Hill PDA and Rice Daubney. Council also engaged economic consultant Michael Collins and Associates to undertake an independent review of the Economic and Planning Report and provide recommendations. 

 

The Economic and Planning Report proposed a revised clause 7.25, which increased the provision of non-residential floor space in the first stage of development from 10,000m2 to 35,000m2, but retained the original dwelling production of 750.

 

The independent review further recommended the adoption of a more refined residential staging, to give the Department further comfort and to ensure employment uses are the primary future land use within the Sydney Science Park. This would see a minimum of 10,000m2 of non-residential floor space having been constructed prior to the approval of any residential development.

 

The Economic and Planning Report, accompanied by the independent economic review, was sent to the Department on 10 April 2015. The Department issued a Revised Gateway Determination, reflecting the amended staging information as presented in the independent economic review, on 9 July 2015.

 

Public Exhibition

 

In accordance with the requirements of the Gateway Determination, Council exhibited the Planning Proposal for a period of four weeks from 16 November to 14 December 2015.

 

Fifteen (15) community submissions were received together with submissions from fifteen (15) public agencies. The matters raised in the submissions can be grouped under the following four categories:

 

1.   Gates Road

2.   Traffic and Transport

3.   Infrastructure Servicing; and

4.   Aboriginal Heritage

 

A detailed review of each of the submissions is provided as Attachment 1 of this report. The key matters arising from consideration of the submissions are discussed below.

 

1.   Gates Road

 

One of the primary matters raised in the community submissions is the proximity of Gates Road to the Sydney Science Park and the BWSEA, and the potential impact of future land use in this area on the residential properties on Gates Road. 

 

The following specific issues are raised in the submissions:

 

·    Once development begins the developer will seek access to the site via Gates Road.  No road, pedestrian or construction access to the Science Park should be provided via Gates Road as this would cause noise, pollution and disruption to the residents of Gates Road.

·    Gates Road is not fit to sustain traffic that would be expected from a main road. The road is narrow enough and is not safe for high volumes of traffic.

·    All access to the Science Park should be via Luddenham Road.

·    A boundary change has occurred resulting in Gates Road being changed from employment to non-employment. The State government should change the zoning of Gates Road to employment so that these residents may be part of the growth and expansion of the area.

 

Vehicular access to the Sydney Science Park will be provided from up to four access points along Luddenham Road. The current Planning Proposal, as well as the supporting traffic modelling, does not propose any vehicular access from Gates Road. Any potential consideration of this matter in the future would be subject to a separate detailed assessment process that would include further community consultation.

 

The boundary change referred to above is in regard to the BWSEA boundary identified in the draft Structure Plan prepared by the Department in 2013, which identified future land uses and a vision for the area. At the time, the draft Structure Plan indicated the study area boundary of the BWSEA to include land along the Sydney Water Pipeline to the Northern Road which included Gates Road, with the Gates Road area identified for Non-Employment uses.

 

Further to this, the WSPGA outlines an investigation area that appears to include some of the land in Gates Road, however at this stage the type of land uses that may be considered, and timeframes within which the land may be investigated, and released for rezoning, are unknown. The Department has advised that this investigation area is indicative only, and may change as a result of future studies. 

 

The Department is currently preparing a Land Use and Infrastructure Strategy for the WSPGA. Further detail regarding the types of future land uses within the WSPGA, including Gates Road, will be considered as part of this Strategy.

 

2.   Traffic and Transport

 

Transport for NSW (TfNSW) made a submission to the Planning Proposal. A summary of the key traffic and transport issues that were raised is provided below:

 

·    TfNSW is finalising options for the Outer Sydney Orbital (OSO) and the South West Rail Link Extension, both of which have potential implications for the planning of the Sydney Science Park.

·    The traffic report accompanying the Planning Proposal was prepared in 2013, prior to the announcement of the Badgerys Creek Airport and associated infrastructure. The identification of transport needs and associated infrastructure required to support the development needs to be reviewed.

·    There are a number of assumptions relating to the travel demand characteristics of the proposal that are either not agreed or are now outdated:

The discounting applied to traffic flows in the development at peak periods is too high

The traffic report assumes that peak period retail traffic is exclusively internal traffic. The advised floor space for the retail component is 30,000m2 which could generate substantial traffic external to the Science Park.

 

The proposed corridor options for both the Outer Sydney Orbital and the South West Rail Link Extension are yet to be released by the State Government. The potential impact of these corridors on the Sydney Science Park has been acknowledged since the beginning of the process, with proposed land uses being located to provide flexibility to accommodate future transport corridors.

 

Celestino is currently working with its traffic consultants and TfNSW to undertake detailed traffic modelling to determine the transport needs and associated infrastructure required to support the Sydney Science Park. The outcomes of this work will help to inform the terms of the State VPA, which will be negotiated between Celestino and the State Government. It is expected that the ultimate LEP amendment will not be gazetted until the State VPA has been signed.

 

Infrastructure Servicing

 

Sydney Water made a submission to the Planning Proposal. The key issues are summarised below:

 

·    Sydney Water has no servicing strategy for the area, and servicing of the area will be subject to the Government’s Contestability Assessment Guidelines. Sydney Water makes no commitment to service the area.

·    The proponent is required to prepare an integrated water management plan to allow Sydney Water to determine the impact of the proposed project on its existing services and determine infrastructure required to service the proposed site.

·    The costs of planning, and subsequent design and delivery of required infrastructure will be borne by the proponent with no reimbursement of costs from Sydney Water.

·    The proposed development is within the natural catchment/service area of Sydney Water’s Cecil Park Water Delivery System.

·    The proposed development is outside the existing St Marys Wastewater system boundary.

 

The above comments were made in September 2015. The proponent has since held discussions with Sydney Water regarding the strategic planning activities for the Science Park, and on the 16 December 2015 received correspondence from Sydney Water stating “we would be happy to be the provider of water related services for the future development under appropriate commercial terms.”

 

The proponent has now agreed to enter into a joint strategic planning exercise with Sydney Water that will allow the detailed servicing concepts for the site to be finalised prior to the construction phase of the project.

 

In addition to the above, the site is proposed to be mapped as an Urban Release Area in

LEP 2010, to which clause 6.3 of the LEP will apply. Clause 6.3 prohibits development on land in an urban release area, unless the Council is satisfied that any public utility infrastructure that is essential for the proposed development is available, or that adequate arrangements have been made to make that infrastructure available when it is required.

 

Aboriginal Heritage

 

The Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) made two submissions to the Planning Proposal. While most of the comments did not object to the proposed rezoning, there were issues raised with regard to the Aboriginal heritage assessment exhibited with the Planning Proposal. These issues are summarised below:

 

·    The Aboriginal heritage assessment does not provide sufficient detail to support a planning proposal

·    The level of assessment undertaken to date is insufficient to determine if the archaeology at the site does not pose a constraint to development

·    The rezoning will affect the Aboriginal heritage items, as the rezoning will allow development to proceed and the development will harm the objects.

·    Further assessment should take place prior to the rezoning with the aim of avoiding harm and allowing in situ conservation where possible, with appropriate mitigation measures where conservation is not possible.

 

The above comments were provided to the consultant that prepared the original Aboriginal heritage assessment in 2013, Kelleher Nightingale Consulting, who reiterated that no impact to Aboriginal objects will occur as a result of rezoning.

 

Any disruption to Aboriginal objects requires an Aboriginal Heritage Impact Permit (AHIP). The AHIP application process includes the preparation of an Aboriginal cultural heritage assessment report (ACHAR), which includes additional consultation with the Aboriginal community and further assessment to identify appropriate management and mitigation measures. This process is to be undertaken in accordance with OEH guidelines and the relevant legislative requirements.

 

The consultants confirmed OEH’s comments that additional consultation with the Aboriginal community and further assessment to identify management and mitigation measures will occur prior to any harm to Aboriginal objects on the site, however as this impact will not occur until the development stage of the project, the assessment of harm and appropriate management will be conducted at the development application stage and not at the rezoning stage. It is also noted that it is not general planning practice to apply specific zones in response to potential Aboriginal archaeological significance. Rather, this is dealt with as a constraint to development at DA stage.

 

It is considered that the abovementioned process contains adequate protections for the future assessment and management of Aboriginal heritage items on the site. Rezoning land does not, in itself, immediately allow development to occur. Before any works are able to commence on the site, development applications will need to be prepared and assessed with due regard to the relevant legislation. To ensure additional protection, the requirement to undertake further assessment of the potential impact to the Aboriginal archaeological sites, identified in the Aboriginal heritage assessment, will be included as a control in DCP 2014, which will seek to alert future applicants and assessing officers of these requirements at the DA stage.

 

Post-exhibition changes to the Planning Proposal

 

A fundamental consideration in the Gateway process is the nature and extent of any changes made to the Planning Proposal in response to, or following, public exhibition, and whether such changes are material to the operation and outcomes of the LEP. Where potential changes are deemed to be material to the operation and outcomes of the LEP, it needs to be re-exhibited to ensure that the community can comment on the amended Planning Proposal.

 

In accordance with s58(2) and (3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, further community consultation is not required unless the Minister makes that direction in a revised Gateway Determination. However, Council should provide an initial view on any specific changes that it feels may warrant consideration for re-exhibition.

 

Changes to the Sydney Science Park Planning Proposal and DCP, in response to the consideration of submissions, are identified in Attachment 1 and 2 of this report. It is considered that, on balance, these changes would not alter the operation and outcome of the future LEP or DCP, and therefore do not warrant re-exhibition. The only exception may be the proposed additions to the Schedule 1 to incorporate innovative infrastructure uses. Whilst it is considered that the addition of these land uses would not require re-exhibition of the Planning Proposal, it is recommended that in Council’s correspondence to the Minister it is made clear that should these changes result in re-exhibition, that they not be adopted and the Planning Proposal proceed without the inclusion of that particular use.

 

The amended Planning Proposal and DCP is provided to Councillors under separate cover, is available on Council’s website and is tabled tonight for Councillor’s consideration.

 

Conclusion

 

The review of the Planning Proposal, including the supporting planning documents, technical studies and public submissions is complete. This review concludes that the suite of planning documents adequately identify, assess and propose solutions to manage the potential impacts of the rezoning, including the proper management of Aboriginal archaeological sites, future transport and traffic impacts, and infrastructure servicing.

 

The Planning Proposal, supported by the Development Control Plan Chapter and Voluntary Planning Agreement is considered to provide an appropriate master planned approach that will provide a positive outcome for this significant site. The outcomes of the LEP amendment will help facilitate a catalyst development which has the potential to provide a range of innovate employment and education opportunities not previously offered in Western Sydney.

 

There appear to be no constraints to progressing the Planning Proposal to the next stage of the LEP amendment process, that is, the drafting and publication of the amendment to Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2010. Council’s endorsement of the Planning Proposal will mean that it can work with the Department and Parliamentary Counsel’s Office on the publication of the required amendments to LEP 2010.

 

Council also needs to adopt the draft DCP chapter to ensure that it takes effect on the publication of the amendments to LEP 2010 and enter into the proposed Voluntary Planning Agreement. Both of these documents need to be formalised to ensure that the proposed rezoning and eventual development of the Sydney Science Park are delivered in a coordinated manner. 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.    The information contained in the report on Sydney Science Park Planning Proposal - Outcomes of Public Exhibition be received.

2.    Council endorse the changes made to the Planning Proposal for the Sydney Science Park as shown in Attachment 2.

3.    The General Manager be delegated authority to make any necessary minor changes required to the Planning Proposal before submitting it to the Minister for Planning and Environment.

4.    Subject to 3 above, the Planning Proposal for the Sydney Science Park (provided to Councillors under separate cover and tabled tonight), be forwarded to the Minister for Planning and Environment after a Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA) for the provision of local facilities and services commences public notification with a request that the Minister make the plan in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

5.    The General Manager be delegated authority to make any necessary minor changes required to “Chapter E16 – Sydney Science Park” of Development Control Plan 2014 as a result of VPA negotiations and any other changes identified in consideration of transport and traffic matters before the Planning Proposal is submitted to the Minister for Planning and Environment.

6.    Subject to 5 above, Council adopt the amendment to Development Control Plan 2014 to include Chapter E16 – Sydney Science Park (Appendix I to the Planning Proposal), so that it takes effect on the publication of the amendments to Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2010.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1.  

Discussion Paper

19 Pages

Attachments Included

2.  

Post Exhibition Changes to the Sydney Science Park Planning Proposal and DCP

3 Pages

Attachments Included

  


Policy Review Committee Meeting                                                                   14 March 2016

 

 

 

3

Proposed M12 Motorway - Council's Submission   

 

Compiled by:               Elizabeth Hanlon, Senior Planner

Authorised by:            Paul Grimson, City Planning Manager  

 

Outcome

We plan for our future growth

Strategy

Protect the City's natural areas, heritage and character

Service Activity

Undertake priority planning projects and statutory processes that contribute to Penrith's role as a Regional City

      

 

Executive Summary

Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) is seeking feedback on eight route options for the proposed M12 Motorway that will provide access to the new Western Sydney Airport and the Western Sydney Priority Growth Area (WSPGA).  The M12 Motorway is an east-west motorway that extends about 15 - 17km (depending on the route option) between the M7 Motorway at Cecil Hills and The Northern Road at Luddenham.

 

To assist in assessing the eight options and informing Council’s submission, a number of principles have been identified.  These principles relate to providing effective access to the WSPGA; ensuring the selected route does not diminish the future economic use and development of land within the WSPGA; avoiding, where possible, and minimising potential adverse environmental, economic and social impacts; and actively engaging with landowners, the community and stakeholders on the planning and design for the M12 Motorway.  A number of more detailed recommendations are also proposed for inclusion in Council’s submission.

 

RMS will be carrying out additional investigations to assess and compare the eight route options.  It is considered that a recommendation on the preferred option cannot be made until these additional investigations are completed.  It is recommended that Council’s submission request the opportunity to be involved in a further stakeholder workshop to discuss the relative benefits of each route option.

 

RMS is also seeking feedback on a preliminary design and access strategy for The Northern Road Upgrade Stage 4 at Luddenham.  However, as this strategy relates only to the southern section of Stage 4, which is within the Liverpool Local Government Area (LGA), it is not proposed to make a submission on the strategy.

 

Background

At the Councillor Briefing of 22 February 2016, representatives from Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) updated Councillors on the status of road projects under the $3.6 billion Western Sydney Infrastructure Plan (WSIP).  In particular, RMS advised that it is seeking feedback on a short list of route options for the M12 Motorway and on a preliminary design and access strategy for The Northern Road Upgrade Stage 4 at Luddenham.

 

While feedback is being sought until 11 March 2016, Council officers have written to RMS requesting an extension to enable Council to consider and endorse a submission at this meeting and Council’s Ordinary meeting of 21 March 2016.  At the time of writing, RMS had not provided any advice on this extension.

 

 

M12 Motorway

The M12 Motorway is an east-west motorway that extends about 15 - 17km (depending on the route option) between the M7 Motorway at Cecil Hills and The Northern Road at Luddenham.  $1.25 billion has been allocated to build the M12 Motorway, which will provide access to the proposed Western Sydney Airport and the Western Sydney Priority Growth Area (WSPGA).  It will include the following features:

·    A four lane motorway (with capacity for a future six lanes) with a central median to separate opposing traffic flows;

·    Grade separated interchanges at The Northern Road and at the Western Sydney Airport;

·    A motorway-to-motorway interchange at the M7 Motorway; and

·    An off-road shared path for pedestrians and cyclists.

 

In the early planning stage for the M12 Motorway, RMS established a general study area and presented this to the public in July 2015.  The key concerns arising from community and stakeholder feedback at that time included:

·    Impacts on existing properties:

Noise, air quality, property values and construction impacts;

Direct impacts on operating farms and commercial properties including farm dams and access to properties;

Property acquisition;

·    Preservation of the Kemps Creek shopping centre;

·    Impacts on the Western Sydney Parklands and the Mountain Bike Trail;

·    Preservation of vegetation and threatened species;

·    Inclusion of a dedicated cycleway or shared paths;

·    Prioritisation of safety;

·    Design of the M12 Motorway to be compatible with the Western Sydney Airport’s operational requirements; and

·    Upgrading Elizabeth Drive rather than build the M12 Motorway.

 

After considering feedback and investigating a range of environmental, social and engineering constraints, a list of fifteen route options was developed.  This was refined to a short list of the eight most feasible options based on assessment criteria that included project delivery, land use impacts, community impacts, environment and heritage impacts, connectivity and ease of use of the motorway.  Further details of the assessment criteria are provided in Attachment 1.  The eight options, which are the subject of this current consultation process, are shown in Attachment 2. 

 

All options have a 300 metre wide corridor.  The final width of the motorway, however, is expected to be significantly less.  All options pass through the Western Sydney Parklands including sections of the Mountain Bike Trail.  All options travel to the north of the Kemps Creek village on the northern side of Elizabeth Drive.  All options cross Kemps, South, Badgerys and Cosgroves Creeks.  All options provide direct access to the proposed Western Sydney Airport at the intersection of Badgerys Creek Road and Elizabeth Drive.  In all options, the western end of the M12 corridor is dependent on planning for the future road network in this area, including The Northern Road Upgrade Stage 4 and the proposed Outer Sydney Orbital.  The documentation indicates that the State Government will have more information about this area by mid-2016.

 

As the eight route options are based on desktop investigations of constraints and opportunities, RMS will be carrying out additional investigations to assess and compare the eight options.  These will be considered in conjunction with community and stakeholder feedback and preliminary costings.  The additional investigations will include:

·    Biodiversity assessment and field investigations targeting threatened flora and fauna species, and threatened ecological communities;

·    Aboriginal heritage assessment and field investigations targeting moderate to high sensitivity Aboriginal heritage items and cultural landscapes, and review of known Aboriginal heritage sites;

·    Non-Aboriginal heritage assessment and field investigations targeting known and potential non-Aboriginal heritage items, and assessment of the Western Sydney Parklands historical planning issues;

·    Contamination study and field investigations;

·    Social assessment including consideration of noise, amenity and property impacts;

·    Hydrology and flooding studies including further flood modelling, consideration of hydrology impacts of the options, and identification of bridge and/or culvert structures required;

·    Landscape character assessment; and

·    Land use and planning assessment including review of current land uses and future regional planning, and consideration of the impacts on special land uses such as the Western Sydney Airport and the Western Sydney Parklands.

 

RMS will select a preferred route, which is expected to be by mid-2016.  The preferred route will then be refined during the concept design and detailed design stages, and will be subject to a comprehensive environmental impact assessment under Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

Assessment of Route Options

To assist in assessing the eight options and informing Council’s submission, a number of principles have been identified.  They include:

·    Provide effective access to both the proposed Western Sydney Airport and the Western Sydney Priority Growth Area (WSPGA).

·    Ensure the route of the M12 Motorway does not diminish the future potential economic use and development of land within the WSPGA.

·    Ensure the route of the M12 Motorway is informed by an integrated road network plan that considers all existing and proposed motorways and main roads in the region including The Northern Road, Mamre Road and the proposed Outer Sydney Orbital.

·    Minimise potential adverse impacts on the regionally important Western Sydney Parklands.

·    Avoid, where possible, and minimise potential adverse environmental, economic and social impacts, including:

Impacts on threatened species, ecological communities and biodiversity corridors;

Impacts on the South Creek sub-catchment;

Impacts on Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal heritage;

Noise impacts.

·    Actively engage with landowners, the community and stakeholders on the planning and design for the M12 Motorway.

 

The supporting documentation exhibited by RMS provides further information on the characteristics, constraints and opportunities of the M12 study area.  This information is summarised below and comments provided, where appropriate, on the likely relative impact of the eight route options.  Proposed recommendations for inclusion in Council’s submission are also suggested.

 

Landscape and Land Uses

 

The landscape in and around the study area consists of rolling hills and small valleys between generally north–south ridge lines.  In the east and west of the study area, the topography is gently undulating, flattening out in the middle of the study area, where the floodplains associated with Cosgrove Creek, Oaky Creek, Badgerys Creek, South Creek and Kemps Creek occur.  The undulating topography of the study area means there are some wide-ranging views of pastoral landscapes.  In the western part of the study area, as it rises to meet The Northern Road, there are views west to the Mulgoa Valley and the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area.

 

Most of the study area has been cleared or modified due to development for agricultural, rural residential, commercial and industrial land uses. The remaining large stands of vegetation are either connected to riparian corridors or in parks and reserves primarily to the south of Elizabeth Drive and the Western Sydney Parklands.

 

There are 1,416 properties in the study area, of which around 290 properties are in the Penrith Local Government Area (LGA).  The land use in the study area is a mix of rural residences, agriculture, commercial and industrial properties.  Features include the Elizabeth Drive landfill site, quarries and farm dams.  To the east of the study area, the suburbs of Kemps Creek, Cecil Park and particularly Mount Vernon contain smaller rural residential lots.  These areas are characterised by urban and village features such as schools and local retail/commercial outlets.  The study area also has various utility installations and facilities.  A more detailed description of the land uses in the study area is included in Attachment 3.

 

All eight route options have significant impacts on the landscape character and land uses of the study area.  The descriptions of the eight options in Attachment 2 highlight some of these land uses.  For example, all options affect a number of commercial properties fronting Elizabeth Drive and Mamre Road including the Hi Quality Group head office, as well as rural agricultural and residential properties in Kemps Creek.  The aqua, blue, pink and purple options affect larger industries including a quarry site and wholesale nursery along Elizabeth Drive.  These options also potentially affect access from Elizabeth Drive for the landfill facility.  The yellow, white, orange and green options are potentially beneficial because they provide a buffer between the incompatible uses of the landfill facility and the Twin Creek estate.  Model Park, owned and operated by the Sydney Society of Model Engineers, is affected by the aqua, pink, green and white options, while Luddenham Raceway (go karting and paintball centre) is affected by the blue, purple, orange and yellow options.

 

As previously indicated, RMS will be undertaking additional investigations to assess and compare the eight route options in relation to current land use and property impacts and on landscape character.  It is recommended that Council’s submission support these additional investigations and request that RMS actively engage with landowners to minimise impacts on current land uses and properties.

 

In relation to the Western Sydney Parklands, while it is noted that all options pass through the Parklands, the northern options in this location (i.e. yellow, white, purple and pink options) would have a lesser environmental impact than the southern options (i.e. orange, green, blue and aqua options) as the northern options generally travel along the same alignment of Elizabeth Drive to the Mamre Road intersection.  It is recommended that Council’s submission indicate a preference for the northern route options through the Parklands to minimise impacts on these regionally important lands.

 

Council’s submission will obviously acknowledge that future land use will be different to current land use in and around the study area, with the development of the WSPGA, the proposed Western Sydney Airport, other road projects under the Western Sydney Infrastructure Plan and the proposed corridors for the Outer Sydney Orbital and northern section of the South West Rail Link extension.  A fundamental change to the landscape character of the area will also be acknowledged.

 

The Department of Planning and Environment (DP&E) is working with Penrith and Liverpool Councils to prepare a draft Land Use and Infrastructure Strategy for the WSPGA.  The draft Strategy, however, is not expected to be delivered until June 2017.

 

As the M12 Motorway is proposed to be a controlled access motorway (i.e. it will have limited access points), with Elizabeth Drive continuing to cater for local trips, it will be important that its route does not diminish the future potential economic use and development of land within the WSPGA.  In this regard, there is no clear preferred route option.  The route options located in the south of the study area are more central to the WSPGA and provide closer access to the airport site.  However, the route options located in the north of the study area provide an east-west connection across the WSPGA further north of Elizabeth Drive, which may help to stimulate development in this location, particularly if a future interchange is permitted.  (This issue is further discussed below).  While the location of the preferred route should ideally be informed by the draft Land Use and Infrastructure Strategy for the WSPGA, as well as the proposed corridor for the Outer Sydney Orbital, it is recommended that Council’s submission support RMS’s additional investigations on the future planning for the WSPGA, including ongoing discussions with the DP&E.

Proposed Recommendations:

1.       The additional investigations to assess and compare the eight route options in relation to current land use and property impacts and on landscape character be supported and RMS be requested to actively engage with landowners to minimise impacts on current land uses and properties and optimise future development potential.

2.       Where the M12 Motorway passes through the Western Sydney Parklands, preference be indicated for the northern route options (i.e. yellow, white, purple and pink options) to minimise impacts on these regionally important Parklands.

3.       The additional investigations to assess and compare the eight route options on the future planning of the WSPGA be supported, including ongoing discussions with the DP&E.  In particular, the preferred route must not diminish the future potential economic use and development of land within the WSPGA.

 

Road Network

 

There are a number of motorways, main arterials and sub-arterials that traverse the study area.  These include the M7 Motorway, The Northern Road, Elizabeth Drive, Mamre Road and Wallgrove Road.  Other main roads include Badgerys Creek Road, Devonshire Road and Luddenham Road.  The proposed M12 Motorway will need to cater for all traffic generated by the proposed Western Sydney Airport as well as increased development within the WSPGA and regional traffic.  The M12 Motorway will have provision for three interchanges to cater for this traffic.  These are proposed to be at The Northern Road, the airport access road and the M7 Motorway.  The supporting documentation states that the M12 Motorway would not preclude an interchange at Mamre Road should one be required in the future due to traffic numbers.

 

Prior to the announcement of the WSPGA, structure plans for the former Broader Western Sydney Employment Area (BWSEA) and the former South West Growth Centre (SWGC) were released, which included road network plans.  These plans showed a proposed deviation of Mamre Road to connect to Devonshire Road (in the Liverpool LGA) at Elizabeth Drive to provide a north-south connection between the BWSEA and the SWGC.  The other main north-south connections identified were:

·    Badgerys Creek Road, which would be extended north of Elizabeth Drive (identified in the BWSEA Transport Planning – Preliminary Analysis, June 2013); and

·    Lawsons Road (west of Devonshire Road), which would be extended north of Elizabeth Drive (instead of Badgerys Creek Road) (identified in the SWGC Integrated Transport and Land Use Planning, July 2015).

 

With the development of the proposed airport and the connection of the M12 Motorway to Badgerys Creek Road, the supporting documentation suggests that it is unlikely that the option to use Badgerys Creek Road as a main arterial through the WSPGA would be feasible.  As such, it is more likely that Lawsons Road will be the other main north-south arterial road. 

 

While RMS is continuing to consult with the DP&E in relation to the road network, it is recommended that Council’s submission request the inclusion of an interchange at Mamre Road in the planning and design for the M12 Motorway.  This would provide more direct access to Erskine Business Park and the Western Sydney Employment Area, and connect to the M4 Motorway.  It is also likely to help stimulate development in the WSPGA, which the motorway is intended to support.  Further, a future connection to the west between Mamre Road and The Northern Road should also be considered.   

Proposed Recommendation:

4.       The planning and design of the M12 Motorway include an interchange at Mamre Road to provide more direct access to Erskine Business Park and the Western Sydney Employment Area, to connect to the M4 Motorway, and to help stimulate development in the WSPGA.

5.       A future connection to the west between Mamre Road and The Northern Road be considered. 

 

Biodiversity

 

Due to past clearing, the majority of remnant native vegetation in the M12 study area is classified as threatened under the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) or the NSW Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 (TSC Act).  Attachment 4 outlines the ecological communities identified in the study area and their general location.  The ecological communities within the Penrith LGA are:

·    Cooks River/Castlereagh Ironbark Forest in the vicinity of the quarry and wholesale nursery, and on land between the landfill facility and Elizabeth Drive;

·    Cumberland Plain Woodland in areas of Mount Vernon;

·    River-flat Eucalypt Forest along the creek lines that intersect the study area, including South, Kemps, Badgerys and Cosgroves Creeks; and

·    Castlereagh Shale Gravel Transition Forest in and around Kemps Creek.

 

Attachment 4 also outlines the threatened fauna and flora species which have either been recorded or are known to occur in the study area.  Within the Penrith LGA, the threatened fauna species of potential concern are the Varied Sittella (a small songbird), Cumberland Plain Land Snail and Grey-headed Flying-fox.  There are also a number of threatened flora species of potential concern, particularly Persoonia nutans.

 

While there are no ‘priority conservation lands’ (identified in the Cumberland Plain Recovery Plan) in the study area within the Penrith LGA, there are ‘priority investment areas’ that have been identified on the State Government’s Cumberland Subregion Biodiversity Investment Opportunities Map (BIO Map).  These priority investment areas include regional corridors that link the priority conservation lands.  Within the Penrith LGA, they are generally located along South and Kemps Creeks, corresponding with land zoned E2 Environmental Conservation under Penrith Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 2010.  They also include vegetated areas between these two creeks to the north of the quarry site.

 

The State Government has clearly stated that “the BIO Map is for use in guiding investment decisions through grant and incentive programs.  BIO Map was not developed to inform land-use planning or development applications, and it is not intended to be used for land-use planning purposes.  A finer scale of assessment than that provided by BIO Map is required to support statutory planning processes and decisions”.  While this is acknowledged, it is noted that all of the eight route options traverse the regional corridors to some extent, and no single option stands out as being a preferred option for this reason.  RMS will be undertaking additional biodiversity assessment and field investigations to assess and compare the eight route options, targeting threatened flora and fauna species, and threatened ecological communities.  It is recommended that Council’s submission support these additional investigations and indicate that the preferred route minimise its impact on these regional corridors.

Proposed Recommendation:

6.       The additional biodiversity assessment and field investigations, targeting threatened flora and fauna species, and threatened ecological communities, be supported and the preferred route minimise its impact on threatened species and the regional corridors/priority investment areas identified on the State Government’s Cumberland Subregion Biodiversity Investment Opportunities Map (BIO Map).

 

Hydrology and Flooding

 

The study area generally comprises fairly flat or gently undulating topography across the western half, with some low, rolling hills to the east near Mt Vernon and the Western Sydney Parklands.  The lowest lying areas are in the middle of the study area, which is dissected by the natural system of creeks that flow from south to north.  The major creeks are South Creek, Kemps Creek, Badgerys Creek, Cosgroves Creek and Oaky Creek.  There are also a number of smaller unnamed tributaries, most of which have been modified as a result of development, mainly through the construction of farm dams.

 

The areas around South Creek, Kemps Creek and Badgerys Creek are subject to localised flooding.  The supporting documentation indicates that, according to the Updated South Creek Flood Study (Worley Parsons, 2015), flooding depths for a 100-year annual recurrence interval (ARI) event, across the floodplains for all these creeks, are estimated to be between 0.5 and 2.5 metres.

 

All of the eight route options traverse South Creek, Kemps Creek, Badgerys Creek and Cosgroves Creek, and there is no clear preferred option in terms of hydrology or flooding impacts.  RMS will be undertaking additional hydrology and flooding studies to assess and compare the eight route options, including further flood modelling, consideration of hydrology impacts, and identification of required bridge and/or culvert structures.  It is recommended that Council’s submission support these additional studies.

Proposed Recommendation:

7.       The additional hydrology and flooding studies including further flood modelling, consideration of hydrology impacts, and identification of required bridge and/or culvert structures, be supported.

 

Heritage

 

The supporting documentation identifies 39 Aboriginal heritage items/recordings in the M12 study area and six Aboriginal heritage items/recordings in the immediate vicinity of the study area.  In the Penrith LGA, these are generally within close proximity of the creeks, particularly South and Badgerys Creek and an unnamed tributary in the north west of the study area.  Given all of the eight route options traverse the creeks (but not the unnamed tributary referred to above), there is no clear preferred option in this regard.  RMS will be undertaking additional Aboriginal heritage assessment and field investigations to assess and compare the eight route options.  It is recommended that Council’s submission support these additional investigations and recommend that the Deerubbin Local Aboriginal Land Council be invited to be involved in these investigations.  It is also recommended that Council’s submission indicate that the preferred route avoid, where possible, or minimise its impacts on any Aboriginal objects and places.

 

In terms of non-Aboriginal heritage, there are ten heritage items within the study area and eight near the study area.  In the Penrith LGA, these are:

Within the study area:

·    The Luddenham Road alignment

all route options traverse Luddenham Road;

·    The (Sydney University) McGarvie-Smith Farm, 1793-1951 Elizabeth Drive, Badgerys Creek

the aqua, blue, pink and purple options traverse this site both in an east-west alignment and a north-south alignment to provide a connection to the airport site;

the yellow, white, orange and green options also traverse this site in a north-south alignment to provide a connection to the airport site;

·    The site of the former Fleurs Radio Telescope, 885(a) Mamre Road, Kemps Creek

the yellow, white, orange and green options also traverse this site.

Near the study area’s northern boundary:

·    Bayley Park house, 919-929 Mamre Road, Kemps Creek;

·    Brick farmhouse, 282 Aldington Road, Kemps Creek; and

·    Gateposts to Colesbrook, 269-285 Mamre Road, Kemps Creek.

 

These heritage items are not located near any of the route options.

 

All of the above heritage items are listed in Schedule 5 of Penrith LEP 2010 as having local significance.  The supporting documentation, however, indicates that additional non-Aboriginal heritage assessment and field investigations will be undertaken, including assessing the significance of the site of the former Fleurs Radio Telescope.  The documentation suggests that this item may be of greater historical significance.  Until these investigations are undertaken, there is no single option that stands out as being a preferred option on heritage grounds.   

 

It is recommended that Council’s submission support these additional investigations and indicate that the preferred route avoid, where possible, or minimise its impacts on any non-Aboriginal heritage items.

Proposed Recommendations:

8.       The additional Aboriginal heritage assessment and field investigations be supported and the Deerubbin Local Aboriginal Land Council be invited to be involved in these investigations. 

9.       The preferred route avoid, where possible, or minimise its impacts on any Aboriginal objects and places.

10.     The additional non-Aboriginal heritage assessment and field investigations be supported and the preferred route avoid, where possible, or minimise its impacts on any non-Aboriginal heritage items.

 

Noise

 

There are 170 noise sensitive receivers (residences and schools) in the study area, predominately found around the township of Kemps Creek and Mount Vernon.  Given the eight options generally follow the same alignment where they cross Elizabeth Drive near the existing Mamre Road intersection between Mount Vernon and Kemps Creek, there is no clear preferred option from a noise perspective.  RMS will be undertaking additional social assessment, which will include consideration of noise impacts to assess and compare the eight route options.  It is recommended that Council’s submission support this additional work and indicate that the preferred route minimise noise impacts on sensitive receivers.  Council’s submission should also indicate that provision be made in the final designs for appropriately designed noise barriers to ameliorate noise impacts for existing and likely future sensitive receivers.

Proposed Recommendation:

11.     The additional assessment in relation to noise impacts be supported and the preferred route minimise noise impacts on sensitive receivers.

12.     Provision be made in the final designs for the M12 Motorway for appropriately designed noise barriers to ameliorate noise impacts for existing and likely future sensitive receivers.

 

Preferred Route Option

Without the additional investigations to assess and compare the eight route options for the M12 Motorway, it is considered that a definitive recommendation on the preferred option is not able to be made at this stage.  It is therefore proposed that Council’s submission provide a set of guiding principles and recommendations to assist with the selection of a preferred option.

 

For that section of the motorway to the east of the Mamre Road/Elizabeth Drive intersection, it is proposed to indicate a preference for the northern route options (i.e. yellow, white, purple and pink options) to minimise impacts on the Western Sydney Parklands.  For the section of the motorway to the west of the Mamre Road/Elizabeth Drive intersection, there are positive and negative impacts, which need to be informed by RMS’s additional investigations and discussions with landowners.

 

The supporting documentation indicates that once the additional investigations are completed, they will be considered in conjunction with the community feedback and preliminary costings.  A “value management workshop” will be held to obtain stakeholder input into the relative benefits of each route option before a preferred route is chosen.  It is recommended that Council’s submission request the opportunity to be involved in the value management workshop.

Proposed Recommendation:

13.     Council request the opportunity to be involved in the value management workshop proposed to be held to obtain stakeholder input into the relative benefits of each route option.

 

The Northern Road Upgrade Stage 4

In addition to the eight route options for the M12 Motorway, RMS is seeking feedback on a preliminary design and access strategy for the southern section of The Northern Road Upgrade Stage 4.  Stage 4 covers about 11km between Mersey Road, Bringelly and Littlefields Road, Luddenham and proposes to divert The Northern Road because the existing road is on land required for the proposed Western Sydney Airport. 

 

Stage 4 includes the following features:

·    Diverting The Northern Road to the east of the Luddenham town centre, close to the boundary of the airport site;

·    Widening from two lanes to a six lane divided road (two general traffic lanes and a kerbside bus lane in each direction), with a wide median to allow for eight lanes if required in the future;

·    Providing kerbside bus lanes, bus priority lanes at traffic lights and indented bus bays, where required;

·    Providing a continuous bypass to access the Luddenham town centre;

·    Installing new traffic lights and turning lanes at some intersections;

·    Providing a new shared path for pedestrians and cyclists on the western side of the road and a new footpath on the eastern side of the road;

·    Installing new street lighting, particularly at intersections;

·    Providing for a future connection with the proposed M12 Motorway; and

·    Upgrading drainage.

 

As the preliminary design and access strategy relates only to the southern section of Stage 4, between Mersey Road and a point just north of Adams Road, which is within the Liverpool LGA, it is not proposed to make a submission on this strategy.  It is noted, however, that there will be a service entry to the airport site from the new alignment of The Northern Road.

 

In terms of the northern section of Stage 4, the documentation states that there are other projects that need to be considered and more time is required to ensure that an integrated road network plan is developed.  These other projects include the M12 Motorway and the proposed corridor for the Outer Sydney Orbital.  RMS has indicated that more information will be available on the northern section of Stage 4 in mid-2016.

 

Next Steps

Subject to Council’s endorsement of the principles and proposed recommendations in this report and any other issues identified by Councillors, it is intended to make a submission to RMS on the route options for the M12 Motorway.

 

As previously indicated, once RMS has undertaken the additional investigations to assess and compare the eight options, the investigations will be considered in conjunction with community and stakeholder feedback and preliminary costings.  RMS will then select a preferred route, which is expected to be by mid-2016.  A preliminary design and access strategy will be prepared and community and stakeholder feedback sought.  The preferred route will then be refined and be subject to an environmental impact assessment.  Community and stakeholder feedback will again be sought on the road design and environmental assessment.

 

Council will be kept informed as this process develops and further opportunities for feedback occur.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.    The information contained in the report on Proposed M12 Motorway - Council's Submission be received.

2.    Council endorse the principles and proposed recommendations contained in this report and any other additional issues identified by Councillors, as the basis for a submission to Roads and Maritime Services.

3.    Council’s submission be forwarded to Roads and Maritime Services and a copy be forwarded to all Councillors.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1.  

Assessment Criteria for Evaluating Route Options

1 Page

Attachments Included

2.  

Route Options for M12 Motorway

8 Pages

Attachments Included

3.  

M12 Study Area - Land Uses

1 Page

Attachments Included

4.  

M12 Study Area - Biodiversity

2 Pages

Attachments Included

   


 

 

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

 

Item                                                                                                                                       Page

 

4        Neighbourhood Renewal Program update on pilot project in Colyton                             35

 

 

 



Policy Review Committee Meeting                                                                   14 March 2016

 

 

 

4

Neighbourhood Renewal Program update on pilot project in Colyton     

 

Compiled by:               Heather Chaffey, Neighbourhood Renewal Coordinator 

Authorised by:            Jeni Pollard, Place Manager  

 

Outcome

We have safe, vibrant places

Strategy

Grow and revitalise our centres and neighbourhoods

Service Activity

Engage the community in identified priority established areas of the City

 

Presenters:                  Heather Chaffey - Penrith City Council - Neighbourhood Renewal Program progress in Colyton and proposed next areas      

 

Executive Summary

This report provides an update to Council on the activities of the Neighbourhood Renewal Program including progress of the collaborative community project, Team Colyton. The report also provides an update on other initiatives and activities of the Neighbourhood Renewal Program such as the Magnetic Places Grants Program and the Penrith Mayoral Challenge.

 

This report recommends Council endorse a planned approach in 2016 and 2017 which would see a roll out of the collaborative community model of Neighbourhood Renewal in North St Marys in 2016 and Kingswood in 2017.  The report foreshadows that the northern rural areas are an area for future activity in 2018.

 

There are two attachments to this report, Attachment 1 is the Colyton Community Action Plan 2016 developed by Team Colyton. Attachment 2 are the actions for Council’s consideration as a Service Partner in the delivery of the Community Action Plan.

Background

The Neighbourhood Renewal Program has been in place since 2006 when it was funded through the AREAS Special Rate Initiative and a coordinator was appointed. The program developed with the addition of a Community Engagement Officer and Cultural Development Officer in 2007 and later a part-time Local Enterprise and Employment Officer.

 

Neighbourhood Renewal supports positive change by working with people where they live to enhance the wellbeing of their neighbourhood as a healthy, safe and vibrant place. Since 2007 the program has led approximately 150 community engagement events, activities and programs. It is estimated that more than 10000 residents have participated in various activities and approximately 1000 have made direct submissions which contributed to the 12 Neighbourhood Action Plans endorsed by Council between 2007 and 2014. Of 369 actions listed in these Neighbourhood Action Plans over 70% had been completed or were underway when Neighbourhood Renewal reported on the progress of the program in June 2015. 

 

The Neighbourhood Renewal Program provides an integrated model of community engagement, community cultural development and programs supporting access to employment across identified disadvantaged neighbourhoods in Penrith. The program responds to Council’s long standing commitment to resourcing older established neighbourhoods and operates within a social justice and strengths based framework.

Update on Progress | Team Colyton

 

In 2015 the Neighbourhood Renewal Program undertook an extensive literature review and workshop process with the Australian Centre for Excellence in Local Government, University of Technology Sydney. This process has provided a framework for the Place Management Department to critically review the outcomes of the Neighbourhood Renewal Program to date, reflect on industry innovations and to identify strategies for strengthening our contribution to social and economic change in priority neighbourhoods.

 

On 22 June 2015 Council endorsed the pilot of a new approach to Neighbourhood Renewal in Colyton.

 

Clr Jackie Greenow OAM and Clr Prue Car with Neighbourhood Renewal staff members at the Team Colyton Launch event

 

 

Building Team Colyton has been a significant undertaking involving many stakeholder meetings, grass roots promotional activities and a launch event. To date 69 residents have signed up to become members of Team Colyton. A total of 11 meetings have been held since the launch of the program in August 2015 with an average of 15-20 adults attending each fortnightly meeting.

 

The pilot program in Colyton was launched in August 2015 and has since made significant progress; establishing the local team known as Team Colyton, building a structure for the local team and collaboratively developing a Community Action Plan (found in Attachment 1). Team Colyton has strongly demonstrated the positive impacts of participatory projects at the level of local democracy. The opportunity for increased participation by residents in actively shaping a vision for their neighbourhood and taking action themselves to work towards that vision is having demonstrable positive effects just 6 months into the project.

 

Team Colyton has progressed well and residents are already taking action to build the community they want to live in by organising events, such as the Colyton Carols event they hosted in late 2015 which attracted an estimated 500 residents. The carols event was organised as a partnership between Colyton Church and Team Colyton and the success of the event significantly boosted the esteem of the residents involved and inspired their motivation to continue to work collaboratively. Many residents who attended on the night spoke about how great it was to come to such a large gathering in their own community and to catch up with neighbours.

 

In addition to the success of this event, and other smaller events, Team Colyton has now established a social walking group and a local book club. The team is actively pursuing ideas around shared gardening, street trees and future events.

 

The Structure of Team Colyton

A structure has been developed for Team Colyton through research and discussion. The structure was influenced by the experience and management structures of other collective impact projects such as The Hive in Mt Druitt and examples from local government such as Burnie Works, Burnie City Council Tasmania.

The community is positioned as central to the structure of Team Colyton. This is an important acknowledgement of the focus of the project, which is the vision created by local residents and the residents who actively volunteer their time to build on this vision.

There are 69 members of Team Colyton to date and a core group of around 20 residents that regularly attend. Team Colyton supports open membership in order to ensure the greatest possible diversity of resident views are heard. This can make the process complicated at times with regard to managing group planning processes and ensuring the efficiency of meetings. Skilful facilitation is required.

The Backbone Agency and Steering Group play very important roles; they keep Team Colyton healthy - ensuring that administration, planning and evaluation are tracking in line with the Community Action Plan.

 

Team Colyton Structure

 

Council has undertaken the role of Backbone Agency until such time as a community organisation is able to transition into this role. Community Junction has agreed in principle to take on the “Backbone” role in the first half of the 2016-17 financial year. The Backbone Agency holds the group together, it is responsible for supporting the group to develop and to deliver action according to the Colyton Community Action Plan 2016. The Backbone Agency holds responsibility for providing public liability insurance and other governance aspects of administration. 

A Steering Group has been formed and is currently developing volunteer roles for residents who wish to be involved in the administration and management of Team Colyton. Steering Group meetings occur on a monthly basis and provide team members with opportunities to participate in develop agendas, facilitating segments of meetings, and get involved in the ‘mechanics’ of Team Colyton. Steering Group members also attend a quarterly ‘health check’ meeting coordinated by the Backbone Agency along with community service providers who are members of Team Colyton.

 

Colyton Community Action Plan 2016

 

A planning session was held on Saturday 14 November 2015 with strong attendance by a core group of actively involved residents. This event supported Team Colyton to finalise the themes and key actions which contribute to the residents’ vision for Colyton. These themes and actions have been further developed into the Colyton Community Action Plan 2016.

 

This is a notable change in the way the Neighbourhood Renewal Program works across Council to support action by various departments in priority neighbourhoods. Previous Neighbourhood Action Plans included detailed resident requests and actions carefully negotiated with individual managers. In this way Neighbourhood Action Plans were plans of Council, for which it held sole responsibility.

 

The Community Action Plan is a plan for the community of Colyton and Council is a service partner agreeing to support this resident led vision for the neighbourhood. The Colyton Community Action Plan includes actions for residents themselves, local community services, and Council as a service partner.

 

Actions which name Penrith City Council as the lead agency within the Colyton Community Action Plan 2016 will be coordinated by the Place Management Department. They are broad actions related to coordinating and supporting various Council Departments to participate in the delivery of this community owned plan as appropriate.

 

 

  

Team Colyton meetings

 

The Colyton Community Action Plan 2016 has been developed by Team Colyton over a series of meetings and planning days between August and December in 2015. The plan includes 5 themes and subsequent goals which reflect Team Colyton’s vision for the neighbourhood. 

 

Themes and Aim

Goals

 

Theme 1: Connecting and Strengthening the Community

 

Goal 1: We have strong supported families

 

Goal 2: We know our neighbours

 

Theme 2: Celebrating Colyton

 

Goal 1: Our community spirit is strong

 

Goal 2: We celebrate the people and history of Colyton

 

Theme 3: Perceptions of Colyton and Safety

 

Goal 1: Colyton feels friendly and inviting

 

Goal 2: We feel safe in our neighbourhood

 

Theme 4: Local Environment

 

Goal 1: Colyton is clean and litter free

 

Goal 2: Colyton feels dynamic and energetic

 

 

 

Theme 5: Youth and the Future is excluded from attachments to this report as local youth workers, Colyton Trade High School and the Neighbourhood Renewal Team continue to develop the relevant actions in collaboration with local young people. Team Colyton felt strongly about ensuring young people were included in a meaningful process of developing youth focussed actions.

 

Members of Team Colyton have expressed their desire to see greater opportunities for young people locally in education and employment and noted the links between programs supporting families and the stability and success of local young people in later life.

 

Team Colyton Working Groups

 

To support the delivery of the Colyton Community Action Plan 2016, Team Colyton has formed three working groups to oversee work and communication across the 5 themes.

 

 

The Community Working Group, led by Community Junction, will oversee actions relating the Theme 1 (Connecting and Strengthening the Community) and 2 (Celebrating Colyton). The Place Working Group, led by the Neighbourhood Renewal Program, will oversee actions related to Theme 3 (Perceptions of Colyton and Safety) and 4 (Local Environment). Finally a Youth Working Group, led by Community Junction and St Marys Area Community Development, will be formed to support actions in Theme 5 (Youth and the Future).

 

Social Media

 

Team Colyton has developed its own social media presence utilising Facebook to promote local events and Team Colyton meetings and activities. Councillors may be interested in following Team Colyton on social media for regular updates on activity.

 

 

Next steps in Colyton

 

The Neighbourhood Renewal Team are currently developing a Community Leadership Training package which will be offered in Colyton between April and June. Pending its success and feedback from residents this training may be offered a second time in Colyton and will also be offered in North St Marys in 2017. Residents who are members of Team Colyton are actively supporting the development of this training by reviewing the topics and objectives, suggesting things they would find helpful and residents will present on their own areas of specialist knowledge such as community group financial management.

 

Various Council departments are also assisting with the development and delivery of sections of this training including Community and Cultural Development and Corporate Communications and Marketing. Workshops led by Council staff will include Event and Risk Management, Marketing for a Local Community, Grant Writing and Understanding Community Statistics.

 

The Community Leadership Training has been designed to hand over knowledge and tools to the community which will support them to continue to advocate for their neighbourhoods autonomously of Council and other community service partners. This addition to the “Tool Kit” of the Neighbourhood Renewal Program aims to increase the sustainability of Councils impact in priority areas.

 

Team Colyton Working Groups are currently focussed on several projects including events to celebrate Colyton’s 174th Birthday and ideas for multicultural projects in 2016. The Place Working Group is interested in developing a local street tree initiative and work has commenced on developing the relevant partnerships within Council to discuss how this might be achieved. Members of Team Colyton are interested in hosting a traffic forum in 2016 where they can make representations to Council officers regarding various concerns about traffic management and pedestrian safety.

 

The Neighbourhood Renewal Program is working closely with Community Junction, a local not-for-profit community service to plan the handover of the Backbone Agency role. This transition will allow the Neighbourhood Renewal team to take up the Backbone Agency role in the next priority neighbourhood. Community leadership training will also support Community Junction with the transition to the role of Backbone Agency.

 

 

    

Over 500 local residents participated in the Colyton Carols Event in December 2015

 

Next Areas

 

Whilst census data is now reaching the end of its ‘lifespan’ the data is still consistent with our feedback from services and local residents that a number of communities are experiencing considerable disadvantage, and in some instances disharmony.

 

Based on this information, it is proposed that the Neighbourhood Renewal Program will prioritise North St Marys for the roll out of the new, collaborative approach in 2016 and in the suburb of Kingswood in 2017.

 

North St Marys and Kingswood were among the most socio-economically disadvantaged neighbourhoods within Penrith in the 2011 Census. While Neighbourhood Action Plans were developed for both of these areas there are compelling and different reasons to return to these neighbourhoods to support a more collaborative and sustained response to the entrenched issues that are facing these communities.

 

North St Marys:

·    Entrenched socio-economic disadvantage

·    Current focus for FACS and Community Junction

·    Feedback from services and the school regarding conflict and growing anti-social behaviour

 

Kingswood:

·    Changing physical and economic environment

·    Increasing diversity – culturally and economically

·    Supported by community engagement involved with Penrith Mayoral Challenge

 

As this new, collaborative model of Neighbourhood Renewal runs on a three year cycle it is important to balance the resources available including staff time and funding for social and economic programs across the three neighbourhoods. The community engagement work of this approach is primarily resourced by the Community Engagement Officer and supported by the whole Neighbourhood Renewal team. It is important to note that other initiatives such as #Magnetic Places, economic participation and cultural initiatives continue in addition to the community engagement work in the proposed neighbourhoods.

 

The Northern Rural areas continue to be on the radar for the Neighbourhood Renewal Program and will be considered as staff resources become available.

 

The table below aims to provide an estimate of how this transition of human and other resources across the neighbourhoods will flow over the next three years.

 

Percentage of community engagement resources across neighbourhoods 2016-201

Other Neighbourhood Renewal Initiatives

 

Penrith Mayoral Challenge

 

The Penrith Mayoral Challenge 2015 involved twenty five students from Bennett Rd Public School and Colyton Trade High School in the creation of a new playground design for Barr and Bass Reserve in Colyton. The students worked together from May to July 2015 to plan a new space for the Colyton community, and presented their concept plan to Council in August 2015.

 

Mayor Clr McKeown led some of the students who had participated in the Penrith Mayoral Challenge 2015 in a final inspection of Barr and Bass Park

 

Construction of the playground and picnic area commenced following Council’s endorsement of the students’ concept plan, with works completed in February 2016. The young people are currently helping to plan the launch of Barr and Bass Reserve which will be officially opened by the Mayor Clr Karen McKeown at a public celebration on Friday 1 April, 3pm – 6pm at Barr and Bass Reserve.

 

For the Penrith Mayoral Challenge 2016, students from Kingswood Public School will create a new design for the existing playground area in Chapman Gardens on Second Avenue, Kingswood. Students from Year 6 will work together over a series of workshops to be held from May to June 2016. A greater number of young people are expected to be involved in the Kingswood project, and they will be developing their leadership and community engagement skills as part of the design process.

 

#Magnetic Places

 

Six exciting projects were funded for delivery in 2016 through the Council's place making grants program, #Magnetic Places. Projects are at various stages of implementation and one project is complete.

 

The Meet St Marys project led by Fusion Western Sydney celebrated the treasures of St Marys; its people, its places and residents’ memories. Meet St Marys, which is now complete, produced projections and video clips which were launched by the Mayor, Clr Karen McKeown, on Saturday 13 March in Coachman’s Park. Over 200 people attended this family-friendly event which included free sausage sizzle, performances and a free screening of the Disney Pixar film, Inside out.

 

Project workshops are currently underway for billycart construction and design with Community Junction in Werrington and North St Marys; upcycling and creating temporary gardens with Wentworth Community Housing in Cranebrook; and photographic skills workshops and paste-up exhibitions led by artist Lisa Cross in St Marys. 

 

#Magnetic Places has been an initiative of Penrith City Council since it was piloted in 2007 and since that time has grown to become an important piece of the city’s creative presence. #Magnetic Places has now funded over 80 local community cultural development projects which might not have otherwise been created.

 

These projects have important cultural outcomes as the stories and passions of local residents are brought forward. Similarly, social outcomes are generated as residents connect with one another across the spectrum of health, age, culture and ability. #Magnetic Places creates projects that foster connection, creativity and collaboration across priority neighbourhoods in Penrith. 

 

Aboriginal Pacific Arts Project

 

Working with the Australian Museum and Thelma Thomas (aka MC Trey), this project connected Council with young people of Aboriginal and Pacific heritage, as well as their families. The Colyton Trade High School students from a number of suburbs including St Marys, Colyton and Oxley Park connected with culture through interactions with culturally significant artefacts which inspired the creation of new artworks.

 

This project fostered new connections with students whose families might not have been represented in the audiences of previous Council engagement activities in Colyton. Underpinned by strong participatory creative engagement that responded to the ideas of participants, the project included introductory workshops in dance, weaving, textile design and song making as well as a visit to the private Pacific and Aboriginal collections of the Australian Museum.

 

The partnership between Council and the Australian Museum in developing and delivering this project provide an important access point for participants to artefacts and cultural practices which they do not have ready access to, and which support a positive sense of identity and connection to culture. The value of this partnership was significant.

 

Participants from the APAOP program 2015 during their excursion to the Australia Museum.

 

A celebration event was held at Colyton High School on 15 December 2015 in the schools Auto Shop Café, exhibiting the t-shirt and boomerang designs printed and painted by participants and featuring a performance of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander dances performed by students and artist facilitator Majeda Beatty.


The Aboriginal Pacific Arts Project program was so successful that the Neighbourhood Renewal team have made a submission to the Multicultural NSW Unity Grant for a second project Barefoot Beats. This proposal focuses on working with this group of young Aboriginal, Torres Strait Islander and Pacific young people through dance. Council has not yet been advised of the outcome of this funding submission.

 

Play Learn Work Action Group

 

As part of its focus on economic participation the Neighbourhood Renewal team consulted with young people and parents and carers regarding their experiences seeking employment and vocational training throughout 2015.

 

The results of this work were then shared with a collective of community services, education and training providers, in two workshops in late 2015. As a result a new collective impact project, led by United Way and Community Junction, called the Play Learn Work Action Group was established. The group are working on collaborative projects focussed on the delivery of education and training to residents of all ages, supporting positive steps towards further education and/ or paid employment.

 

 

 

Cranebrook Access Project

 

In the 2014 Cranebrook Neighbourhood Action Plan a cluster of pedestrian access and safety concerns regarding the intersections of Sherringham Rd and McHenry Rd and Sherringham Rd and Pendock Rd were identified. Councillors may be aware that the social housing estate in Cranebrook is home to a diverse range of residents, including a high percentage of residents with various disability and mobility concerns. This cluster of pedestrian access issues creates significant further disadvantage and has thus been a high priority for the Neighbourhood Renewal Program.

 

The Cranebrook Access Project is an ongoing collaboration of Place Management, Engineering Services and City Works teams. Several site visits led to the development of a concept plan which was reported to the Local Traffic Committee with recommendations in February and approved at the Ordinary Meeting of Council on 8 February 2016.

 

 

Recent maintenance work undertaken ensured a number of pram ramps along Pendock Road are now meeting accessibility standards

 

Since that time the City Works Department has undertaken maintenance work, including a number of pathways and pram ramps along Sherringham Rd and Pendock Rd. Other elements will be completed by September 2016 including an accessible bus shelter on McHenry Rd and a pedestrian refuge nearby on Sherrinham Rd. Further to this work negotiations are underway to fund two further pedestrian refuges and a raised pedestrian crossing in 2017 and 2018.

 

These improvements will vastly improve accessibility for residents with mobility restrictions, will slow traffic along Sherringham Rd and will provide a safe crossing option for children on their way to school.

 

Conclusion

 

This report has detailed the implementation of a pilot program in Colyton which has strongly demonstrated the positive impact of a collaborative approach in established neighbourhoods. The report recommends the continuation of this collaborative three year process in North St Marys in 2016-17 and Kingswood 2017-18.

 

When the 2016 Census data becomes available further recommendations will be made to Council regarding a schedule for the Neighbourhood Renewal Program. All projects are subject to the continuation of the SRV in 2016 and beyond.

 

Team Colyton has provided a great opportunity for Councils Neighbourhood Renewal Program to step into a new role, that of a Backbone Agency, supporting a community to plan for and be part of delivering local solutions to local concerns. It is a powerful model, reaping notable results just six months into the pilot phase.

 

Team Colyton has quickly established a structure, developed a Community Action Plan, organised and delivered its own events, set up a social media presence, connected neighbours, fostered friendships, and perhaps most importantly is creating opportunities for residents to develop new skills and practice community leadership. The process is rich and is described as a collaboration rather than a partnership or a consultation. 

 

Council retains its service provider role as the Place Management Department will facilitate connections between Team Colyton and other departments as appropriate for the delivery of the Colyton Community Action Plan 2016.

 

This more collaborative model adds value to our role as a service provider. Team Colyton is building the connection between residents and Council. It is building their understanding of the scope of work that Council, other levels of Government and community service providers are responsible for, and deliver in their neighbourhood. It is building their knowledge of how to advocate for the services they need, from Council and other service providers. It is supporting them as community leaders to create the neighbourhood they want to live in, with their own skills and the resources available to them as residents.

 

In addition to this work, the Neighbourhood Renewal Program continues to seed place making initiatives through #Magnetic Places, to innovate in the place making field and to push for change in the economic stability of priority neighbourhoods by working in collaboration with local training and education providers across the city.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.    The information contained in the report on Neighbourhood Renewal Program update on pilot project in Colyton  be received.

2.    Council endorse Penrith City Council as a Service Partner in the delivery those actions of the Colyton Community Action Plan 2016 included in Attachment 2.

3.    A further report be submitted to Council profiling the Youth and Future theme of the Colyton Community Action Plan 2016 in June 2016.

4.    A further report on the progress of implementation of the Colyton Community Action Plan and a schedule of areas be brought to Council for consideration following the release of the 2016 Census data.

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1.  

Colyton Community Action Plan 2016-2018

15 Pages

Attachments Included

2.  

Actions for PCC from Colyton Community Action Plan 2016-2018

10 Pages

Attachments Included

   


 

 

 

 

THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT BLANK  INTENTIONALLY


 

 

Outcome 5 - We care about our environment

 

 

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


 

 

 

 

THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT BLANK  INTENTIONALLY


 

 

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

 

 

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



 

ATTACHMENTS  

 

 

Date of Meeting:     Monday 14 March 2016

Report Title:            Sydney Science Park Planning Proposal - Outcomes of Public Exhibition

Attachments:           Discussion Paper

                                Post Exhibition Changes to the Sydney Science Park Planning Proposal and DCP



Policy Review Committee Meeting                                                                                 14 March 2016

Attachment 1 - Discussion Paper

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Policy Review Committee Meeting                                                                                 14 March 2016

Attachment 2 - Post Exhibition Changes to the Sydney Science Park Planning Proposal and DCP

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

ATTACHMENTS  

 

 

Date of Meeting:     Monday 14 March 2016

Report Title:            Proposed M12 Motorway - Council's Submission

Attachments:           Assessment Criteria for Evaluating Route Options

                                Route Options for M12 Motorway

                                M12 Study Area - Land Uses

                                M12 Study Area - Biodiversity



Policy Review Committee Meeting                                                                                 14 March 2016

Attachment 1 - Assessment Criteria for Evaluating Route Options

 

PDF Creator


Policy Review Committee Meeting                                                                                 14 March 2016

Attachment 2 - Route Options for M12 Motorway

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Policy Review Committee Meeting                                                                                 14 March 2016

Attachment 3 - M12 Study Area - Land Uses

 

PDF Creator


Policy Review Committee Meeting                                                                                 14 March 2016

Attachment 4 - M12 Study Area - Biodiversity

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

ATTACHMENTS  

 

 

Date of Meeting:     Monday 14 March 2016

Report Title:            Neighbourhood Renewal Program update on pilot project in Colyton 

Attachments:           Colyton Community Action Plan 2016-2018

                                Actions for PCC from Colyton Community Action Plan 2016-2018



Policy Review Committee Meeting                                                                                 14 March 2016

Attachment 1 - Colyton Community Action Plan 2016-2018

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Policy Review Committee Meeting                                                                                 14 March 2016

Attachment 2 - Actions for PCC from Colyton Community Action Plan 2016-2018

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator