Agenda of Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 26 October 2020

UNCONFIRMED MINUTES

OF THE ORDINARY MEETING OF PENRITH CITY HELD REMOTELY USING AUDIO VISUAL LINKS AND AUDIO STREAMED ON THE COUNCIL WEBSITE ON MONDAY 28 SEPTEMBER 2020 AT 7:04PM

WEBCASTING STATEMENT

His Worship the Mayor, Councillor Ross Fowler OAM read a statement advising that Council Meetings are recorded and webcast.

STATEMENT OF RECOGNITION

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

PRAYER

The Council Prayer was read by the Rev. Neil Checkley.

PRESENT

His Worship the Mayor, Councillor Ross Fowler OAM, Deputy Mayor, Councillor Karen McKeown OAM, and Councillors Jim Aitken OAM, Bernard Bratusa, Todd Carney, Brian Cartwright, Robin Cook, Marcus Cornish, Kevin Crameri OAM, Greg Davies, Mark Davies, Aaron Duke, Tricia Hitchen, Kath Presdee and John Thain.

APOLOGIES

There were no apologies.

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES - Ordinary Meeting - 24 August 2020

186 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Kath Presdee seconded Councillor Bernard Bratusa that the minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of 24 August 2020 be confirmed.

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

His Worship the Mayor Councillor Ross Fowler OAM declared a Pecuniary Interest in Item 21 – Penrith Valley Regional Sports Centre – Request for Funding, as he is an auditor for the Penrith Valley Regional Sports Centre.

Councillor John Thain declared a Non-Pecuniary Conflict of Interest – Less than Significant in Item 21 – Penrith Valley Regional Sports Centre – Request for Funding, as he is a Director on the Board on Council’s behalf.

SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS

187 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Brian Cartwright seconded Councillor Kath Presdee that Standing Orders be suspended to allow members of the public to address the meeting, the time being 7:10pm.

Mr Peter Magnisalis

Item 4 – Winter Sporting Facility proposed DCP and VPA

A Council staff member read out Mr Peter Magnisalis’ application to address the Ordinary Meeting and outlined his reasons for supporting the recommendation as follows:

Mr Magnisalis expressed his support in relation to the planning proposal for the Winter Sporting Facility and outlined the various social and economic benefits for Penrith such as increased employment, tourism and ongoing investment. He also expressed his appreciation for Council’s contribution and stated that he is eager for the project to proceed to public exhibition. However, he also highlighted his concern of having to undergo a design competition, which may lead to significant delays in the project.

Ms Elaine Talbert

Item 9 – Penrith Rising Strong – COVID-19 Recovery Plan

A Council staff member read out Ms Elaine Talbert’s application to address the Ordinary Meeting and outlined her reasons for opposition to the recommendation as follows:

Ms Talbert expressed her concerns regarding the gender imbalance in both taskforces and stated that gender stereotyping and segregation should not be permitted and may lead to disempowerment in Local Government. She specifically highlighted the male imbalance in the economic taskforce and the female imbalance in the social taskforce.

Karen Taylor

Item 19 – 2019-20 Draft Financial Statements

Karen Taylor, Director, Financial Audit Services at the Audit Office of New South Wales addressed Council on the Draft 2019-20 Financial Statements, and advised that she would be issuing an unqualified audit report, noting that there were no material misstatements and that the Statements present fairly.

RESUMPTION OF STANDING ORDERS

188 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Kath Presdee seconded Councillor Karen McKeown OAM that Standing Orders be resumed, the time being 7:25pm.

Mayoral Minutes

1 Mayoral Retrospective

189 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ross Fowler OAM seconded Councillor Karen McKeown OAM that the Mayoral Minute on Mayoral Retrospective be received.

Reports of Committees

1 Report and Recommendations of the Access Committee Meeting held on 12 August 2020

190 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Tricia Hitchen seconded Councillor Robin Cook that the recommendations contained in the Report and Recommendations of the Access Committee meeting held on 12 August, 2020 be adopted.

2 Report and Recommendations of the Local Traffic Committee Meeting held on 7 September 2020

191 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Karen McKeown OAM seconded Councillor Marcus Cornish that the recommendations contained in the Report and Recommendations of the Local Traffic Committee meeting held on 7 September, 2020 be adopted.

Procedural Motion

192 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor John Thain seconded Councillor Karen McKeown OAM that Item 19 be addressed before Item 1 and that Item 13 and Item 14 be addressed after Item 21.

DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS

Outcome 7 - We have confidence in our Council

19 2019-20 Draft Financial Statements

193 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Kath Presdee seconded Councillor Karen McKeown OAM

That:

1. The information contained in the report on 2019-20 Draft Financial Statements be received.

2. Pursuant to s413(2)(c) it is the Council's opinion that:

a. The Financial Statements and schedules have been drawn up in accordance with the Local Government Act 1993 and Regulations, the Local Government Code of Accounting Practice and Financial Reporting, the Local Government Australian Infrastructure Management Guidelines, and Australian Accounting Standards. The Statements comply with Australian Statements of Accounting Concepts.

b. The Financial Statements present fairly the Council's financial position as at 30 June 2020 and the operating result for the year then ended.

c. The statements are in accord with Council's accounting and other records.

3. Pursuant to the Local Government Code of Accounting Practice and Financial Reporting and Section 215 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 it is the Council's opinion that:

a. The accompanying Special Purpose Financial Report has been drawn up in accordance with the Local Government Act 1993 and Regulations, the Local Government Code of Accounting Practice and Financial Reporting and the requirements of National Competition Policy. The Code requires the inclusion of various charges and subsidies which are not actually paid or payable.

b. The Special Purpose Financial Report is a special purpose report and is not required to comply with Australian Accounting Standards. The above legislative requirements differ from Australian Accounting Standards and hence the report does not comply with Australian Accounting Standards.

c. The Special Purpose Financial Statements present a modelled scenario for comparative purposes. They do not report an actual result.

4. The Statements be forwarded to Council's Auditors.

5. The Financial Statements be placed on public exhibition.

6. A further report be presented to Council following the public exhibition period.

Outcome 2 - We plan for our future growth

1 Castlereagh Connection Advocacy Update

194 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Marcus Cornish seconded Councillor John Thain that the information contained in the report on Castlereagh Connection Advocacy Update be received.

2 Submission to NSW Productivity Commission Review into Infrastructure Contributions

195 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Todd Carney seconded Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Submission to NSW Productivity Commission Review into Infrastructure Contributions be received

2. Council endorse the Submission provided as Attachment 2 to be forwarded to NSW Productivity Commission for their consideration.

3 Submission to exhibition of Draft Housing Diversity State Environmental Planning Policy

196 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Karen McKeown OAM seconded Councillor John Thain

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Submission to exhibition of Draft Housing Diversity State Environmental Planning Policy be received

2. The information contained within this report form the basis of the final submission to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment in relation to the draft Proposed Housing Diversity State Environmental Planning Policy.

3. The final submission is forwarded to Local Government NSW for further advocacy.

4. The report be contained in the submission.

4 Winter Sporting Facility proposed DCP and VPA

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

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Winter Sporting Facility proposed DCP and VPA be received.

2. Council endorse the draft DCP for the Winter Sporting Facility for public exhibition, as provided at Attachment 1.

3. Council endorse the VPA offer for the Winter Sporting Facility for public exhibition, as provided at Attachment 2.

4. Council publicly exhibit the draft DCP and VPA offer concurrently with Planning Proposal for the Winter Sporting Facility.

5. A report be presented to Council following completion of the public exhibition of the draft DCP, VPA offer and Planning Proposal.

6. The General Manager be granted delegation to make minor changes to the draft DCP and VPA offer prior to public exhibition.

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

For	Against
Councillor Kath Presdee
Councillor Robin Cook
Councillor Greg Davies
Councillor Todd Carney
Councillor Aaron Duke
Councillor Karen McKeown OAM
Councillor John Thain
Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM
Councillor Jim Aitken OAM
Councillor Mark Davies
Councillor Brian Cartwright
Councillor Tricia Hitchen
Councillor Bernard Bratusa
Councillor Marcus Cornish
Councillor Ross Fowler OAM

Outcome 3 - We can get around the City

5 Transport for NSW (TfNSW) Regional Road 2020/21 REPAIR Program (Rehabilitation) Funding Grants

198 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Marcus Cornish seconded Councillor Brian Cartwright

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Transport for NSW (TfNSW) Regional Road 2020/21 REPAIR Program (Rehabilitation) Funding Grants be received.

2. Council accept the grant of $300,000, offered under the 2020//21 Transport for NSW (TfNSW) Regional Road REPAIR Program, for the pavement reconstruction works on Andrews Road, Cranebrook from Greygums Road to Laycock Street.

3. Council write to the State Government formally thanking them for the REPAIR Program Grant Funding.

6 Acceptance of Funding under the NSW Government's Local Government Road Safety Behavioural Program

199 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM seconded Councillor Kath Presdee

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Acceptance of Funding under the NSW Government's Local Government Road Safety Behavioural Program be received.

2. Council accept the grant offered by Transport for NSW under its Local Government Road Safety Behavioural Program, totalling $15,500, as outlined in the report.

3. Council write to Transport for NSW and Local State Members thanking them for their continued support for road safety initiatives within the Penrith Local Government Area.

7 Australian Government Blackspot Program and NSW Safer Roads Program 2021/22 Nominations

200 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Karen McKeown OAM seconded Councillor Jim Aitken OAM

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Australian Government Blackspot Program and NSW Safer Roads Program 2021/22 Nominations be received.

2. Council note the nine projects listed in Table 1 of this report for funding application to the Roads and Maritime Services under the Australian Government Blackspot Program and NSW Safer Roads Program 2021/22 to the value of $1,330,000.

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

Outcome 4 - We have safe, vibrant places

8 RFT20/21-01 Civic Centre Ground Floor Refurbishment - Stage 1

201 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Brian Cartwright seconded Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM

That:

1. The information contained in the report on RFT20/21-01 Civic Centre Ground Floor Refurbishment - Stage 1 be received

2. Hunter Mason Pty Ltd be awarded the contract subject to the execution of a formal agreement for Civic Centre Ground Floor Refurbishment – Stage 1, for an amount of $1,277,434.91 excluding GST.

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

9 Penrith Rising Strong - COVID-19 Recovery Plan

202 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Karen McKeown OAM seconded Councillor Tricia Hitchen

That:

1. The information contained in the Penrith Rising Strong - COVID-19 Recovery Plan be received

2. Council endorse the Penrith Rising Strong, COVID-19 Recovery Plan

Outcome 6 - We are healthy and share strong community spirit

10 Youth Action Plan 2020-2025

203 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Aaron Duke seconded Councillor Robin Cook

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Youth Action Plan 2020-2025 be received.

2. Council endorse the Youth Action Plan 2020-2025.

11 ReAnimate Penrith 2020

204 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Bernard Bratusa seconded Councillor Kath Presdee that the information contained in the report on ReAnimate Penrith 2020 be received.

12 Great River Walk, Nepean Ave Shared Path

205 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Tricia Hitchen seconded Councillor Karen McKeown OAM

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Great River Walk, Nepean Ave Shared Path be received

2. Funding of $2.5m be allocated to the delivery of the Nepean Avenue shared path and lighting upgrades from the District Open Space Contributions Plan.

Outcome 7 - We have confidence in our Council

15 Local Government NSW Annual Conference 2020 and Updating Council Meeting Calendar 2020

206 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Robin Cook seconded Councillor John Thain

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Local Government NSW Annual Conference 2020 and Updating Council Meeting Calendar 2020 be received

2. The Motion detailed in the report be submitted for inclusion in the 2020 Local Government NSW Annual Conference Business Paper.

3. The updated Council meeting calendar be adopted.

16 RFT2021-05 Digitisation of Council Application Records

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

That:

1. The information contained in the report on RFT2021-05 Digitisation of Council Application Records be received

2. Grace Records Management (Australia) Pty Ltd be approved as the preferred tenderer to undertake the digitisation services for Council Application records based on the Schedule of Rates submitted and in accordance with this report.

3. Approval be given to take up the optional service offered by Grace Records Management (Australia) Pty Ltd for the automatic registration of scanned records into the Information Management System.

4. Approval be given for the Governance Manager to enter into a formal agreement with Grace Records Management (Australia) Pty Ltd subject to satisfactory agreement of terms as outlined in this report.

5. The Common Seal of the Council of the City of Penrith be placed on relevant documentation if necessary.

17 Lot Consolidation of Colyton Neighbourhood Centre - 30 Jensen Street, Colyton (Amendment)

208 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Aaron Duke seconded Councillor Mark Davies

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Lot Consolidation of Colyton Neighbourhood Centre - 30 Jensen Street, Colyton (Amendment) be received

2. Council approve the consolidation of Lot 7 DP241128 and Lot 8 DP 244431.

3. The Common Seal of the Council of the City of Penrith be affixed to any necessary documentation.

18 2020-21 Financial Assistance Grant

209 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Karen McKeown OAM seconded Councillor Brian Cartwright

That:

1. The information contained in the report on 2020-21 Financial Assistance Grant be received.

2. The Budget be adjusted to reflect the revised Financial Assistance Grant as part of the September 2020 Quarterly Review.

20 Summary of Investment & Banking for the Period 1 August 2020 to 31 August 2020

210 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Todd Carney seconded Councillor Bernard Bratusa

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Summary of Investment & Banking for the Period 1 August 2020 to 31 August 2020 be received.

2. The certificate of the Responsible Accounting Officer and Summary of Investments and Performance for the Period 1 August 2020 to 31 August 2020 be noted and accepted.

3. The graphical Investment Analysis as at 31 August 2020 be noted.

21 Penrith Valley Regional Sports Centre - Request for funding

211 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor John Thain seconded Councillor Todd Carney

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Penrith Valley Regional Sports Centre - Request for funding be received.

2. PVRC be offered a loan, rather than a grant of up to a maximum value of $1,091,686, plus GST to repair fire management systems to meet standards.

3. That Council delegate to the General Manager, to agree to terms and conditions of the loan with the PVRC, a project control group be established, consisting of Council Officers and the General Manager to the PVRC to oversee the installation of the fire management system and that the value for money for the project is achieved.

4 Council write to PVRC to ensure effective and compliant fire management and inspection maintenance processes are developed.

5. Council review the lease terms and conditions to ensure the roles and responsibilities of the lease are clearly understood by all parties.

13 Election of Mayor

212 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor John Thain seconded Councillor Marcus Cornish

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Election of Mayor be received

2. In the event of more than one Councillor being nominated, Council determine to use the Open Voting method of election for the Office of Mayor.

His Worship the Mayor, Councillor Ross Fowler OAM handed over to the Returning Officer, (General Manager) Warwick Winn, to conduct the election of the Mayor.

The Returning Officer indicated that he had received two (2) nominations for the position of Mayor and asked whether there were any other nominations. No other nominations were forthcoming.

The Returning Officer stated that the following nominations were in order:

Councillor Karen McKeown OAM

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM

The Returning Officer then asked for voting by way of a show of hands, with the following result:

Councillor Karen McKeown OAM – 12 votes

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM – 3 votes

The Returning Officer declared Councillor Karen McKeown OAM duly elected as Mayor for the 2020/2021 Term.

14 Election of Deputy Mayor

213 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor John Thain seconded Councillor Marcus Cornish

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Election of Deputy Mayor be received

2. Council consider the Election of a Deputy Mayor.

3. In the event of more than one Councillor being nominated, Council determine the Open Voting method of election for the Office of Deputy Mayor.

4. The term of Office of the Deputy Mayor be for one year up to when the Local Government elections are held on 4 September 2021.

The Returning Officer, General Manager, Warwick Winn indicated that he had received two (2) nominations for the position of Deputy Mayor and asked whether there were any other nominations. No other nominations were forthcoming.

The Returning Officer stated that the following nominations were in order:

Councillor Tricia Hitchen

Councillor Marcus Cornish

The Returning Officer then asked for voting by way of a show of hands, with the following result:

Councillor Tricia Hitchen – 12 votes

Councillor Marcus Cornish – 3 votes

The Returning Officer declared Councillor Tricia Hitchen duly elected as Deputy Mayor for the 2020/2021 Term.

REQUESTS FOR REPORTS AND MEMORANDUMS

RR 1 Rezoning of 38 Hectares in St Marys

Robin Cook requested that Council write to the Planning Minister, Rob Stokes with regard to the rezoning of 38 hectares in St Marys from employment to residential land, in support of Council’s previous submission to keep this land as an employment area.

RR 2 Re-classification of Dunheved Road

Councillor Robin Cook requested a memo regarding an update on the re-classification of Dunheved Road as a State Road.

RR 3 Conduct of Drivers on Muswellbrook Close, Glenmore Park

Councillor Todd Carney Councillor Todd Carney that Council Officers re-investigate the reckless conduct of drivers on Muswellbrook Close, Glenmore Park and that the matter be referred to the Local Traffic Committee.

RR 4 Parking at Victoria Park, St Marys

Councillor Tricia Hitchen requested that Council investigate the removal of parking on the eastern side of Pages Road near Victoria Park and reinstate sufficient parking to allow easy access to Victoria Park for the elderly, infirm and disabled members of the community.

RR 5 Naming of a Reserve in Caddens

Councillor Tricia Hitchen requested that Council support Mr Darren Whitton’s request to the Geographical Names Board to have a reserve in Caddens named as John Gandell Reserve, in honour of one of Penrith’s early settlers.

RR 6 Rates Assistance for Kemps Creek Residents

Councillor Bernard Bratusa requested that Council consider offering financial support and rates assistance to the 147 residents in Kemps Creek.

RR 7 Unsolicited Proposals

Councillor Bernard Bratusa requested a memo regarding the total process and what Councillors are entitled to know in relation to unsolicited proposals.

RR 8 Congratulating of Penrith Panthers NRL Team

Councillor Bernard Bratusa requested that Her Worship The Mayor, Councillor Karen McKeown OAM write on behalf of Council to the Penrith Panthers NRL team and management to formally thank and congratulate them for their achievements this premiership season.

RR 9 Digital Photo Cards

Councillor Marcus Cornish requested information regarding the implementation of a digital photo card trial in Penrith by Service NSW, and if this concept will be mandatory for all residents of Penrith.

RR 10 Online Graffiti Report

Councillor Mark Davies requested that Council Officers re-activate the online Graffiti Report Form on Council’s website for residents to use.

RR 11 Unsolicited Proposals Received by Council

Councillor Greg Davies requested a memo to all Councillors regarding the unsolicited proposals received by Council in the last 6 months.

RR 12 150 Years of Penrith as a Municipality

Her Worship the Mayor, Councillor Karen McKeown OAM requested a report regarding any activities or celebrations that will be held to mark the 150 years of Penrith as a municipality.

Committee of the Whole

214 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Brian Cartwright seconded Councillor Aaron Duke that the meeting adjourn to the Committee of the Whole to deal with the following matters, the time being 9:13pm.

1 Presence of the Public

CW1 RESOLVED on the motion of Councillor Brian Cartwright seconded Councillor Aaron Duke that the press and public be excluded from Committee of the Whole to deal with the following matters:

Outcome 7

2 Jordan Springs East

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

The meeting resumed at 9:56pm and the General Manager reported that the Committee of the Whole met at 9:13pm on 28 September 2020, the following being present

Her Worship the Mayor, Councillor Karen McKeown OAM, Deputy Mayor, Councillor Tricia Hitchen, and Councillors, Jim Aitken OAM, Bernard Bratusa, Todd Carney, Brian Cartwright, Robin Cook, Marcus Cornish, Kevin Crameri OAM, Greg Davies, Mark Davies, Aaron Duke, Ross Fowler OAM, Kath Presdee and John Thain.

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

CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS

2 Jordan Springs East

RECOMMENDED on the MOTION of Councillor Ross Fowler OAM seconded Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM.

CW2 That:

1. The information contained in the report on Jordan Springs East be received.

2. Notations be applied to planning certificates pursuant to section 10.7(5) of the EPA Act to the properties identified in this report and in form identified in the memorandum to all Councillors dated 25 September 2020 titled Jordan Springs East.

3. The General Manager be authorised to add, amend, vary or revoke notations on planning certificates as to the terms and geographical application, should advice be received from Council’s geotechnical consultant’s or lawyers advising the amendment, variation or revocation of notations on planning certificates.

4. Letters be sent to owners of the relevant properties to advise them that a notation will be applied to planning certificates for their property pursuant to section 10.7(5) of the EPA Act.

5. Where a person applies for a planning certificate pursuant to section 10.7(2) of the EPA Act for a property that has the above notation, then the information pursuant to section 10.7(5) is to be included on the certificate when issued to that person.

ADOPTION OF Committee of the Whole

215 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ross Fowler OAM seconded Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM that the recommendations contained in the Committee of the Whole and shown as CW1 and CW2 be adopted.

There being no further business the Chairperson declared the meeting closed the time being 9:57pm.

Ordinary Meeting 26 October 2020

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE
Local Traffic Committee MEETING

HELD ON 12 October, 2020

(Note: due to prevailing public health crisis, and related COVID-19 protocols, the Local Traffic Committee Business Paper and reports were referred to members and a formal meeting held via on-line Zoom platform).

PRESENT

Mayor, Councillor Karen McKeown OAM (Council Representative), Deputy Mayor, Councillor Tricia Hitchen (Representative for the Member for Penrith), Councillor Robin Cook (Representative for the Member for Londonderry), Wayne Mitchell - Director Development and Regulatory Services (Chair), Mario Dizon - Transport for NSW (TfNSW).

IN ATTENDANCE

Councillor Marcus Cornish, Steve Grady - Busways, David Drozd – Traffic Engineering Coordinator, Graham Green – Senior Traffic Engineer, Kablan Mowad – Senior Traffic Engineer, Anthony Baradhy – Traffic Engineering Officer, Wendy Read – Road Safety Officer, Isaac Mann - Trainee Engineer. Kristy Johnson – Secretary, Engineering Services, Jasmin Toro – Traffic Administration Officer, Dominic Stellino McConnell Dowell.

APOLOGIES

Sergeant Matthew Shirvington - Nepean Police Area Command (PAC), Brana Ravichelvan - Transport for NSW (TfNSW), Adam Wilkinson – Engineering Services Manager, Daniel Davidson – Senior Traffic Engineer, Andrew Peirce – Coordinator Ranger and Animal Services, Bernie Meier – Signs and Lines Marking Supervisor.

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES - Local Traffic Committee Meeting - 7 September 2020

The minutes of the Local Traffic Committee Meeting of 7 September 2020 were confirmed.

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Mayor, Councillor Karen McKeown OAM (Council Representative) declared an interest in Item 7 - River Road and Leonay Parade, Leonay – Provision of Double Barrier Centre Line, Edge Line Marking, Shoulder Medians and Signage, as she owns a property on one of these roads.

DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS

Outcome 3 - We can get around the City

1 Ridgetop Drive, Glenmore Park - Endorsement of Design Plan TS0041 for the Installation of Signage, Line Marking and Embellishments

Councillor Marcus Cornish enquired about whether there is a 40km/hr School Zone on Ridgetop Drive, Glenmore Park and if the traffic volumes and speed counts revealed that drivers were exceeding the School Zone speed limit.

Wendy Read – Road Safety Officer confirmed that there are 40km/hr School Zone signs with flashing lights on Ridgetop Drive, Glenmore Park.

Isaac Mann – Trainee Engineering advised that the traffic and speed counts revealed that majority of vehicles were travelling within the 40km/hr School Zone posted speed limit.

David Drozd – Traffic Engineering Coordinator advised that the curvature of the roadway combined with the narrowed laneway due to parked vehicles on Ridgetop Drive, Glenmore Park can create a perception of speeding when in fact it is not the case.

Councillor Marcus Cornish requested that Nepean Police Area Command be requested to conduct patrols and enforcement of the signage and line marking changes following installation.

RECOMMENDED

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Ridgetop Drive, Glenmore Park - Endorsement of Design Plan TS0041 for the Installation of Signage, Line Marking and Embellishments be received.

2. Consultation be undertaken with affected properties and Fernhill School regarding the proposed signage, line marking and embellishments on Ridgetop Drive, Glenmore Park between Glenmore Parkway and Bluestone Drive as shown in the signage and line marking plan TS0041 dated August 2020 (Appendix 1).

3. Subject to no substantial objections being received, the signage and line marking plan TS0041 dated August 2020 as shown in Appendix 1 be endorsed for installation.

4. The resident(s) who raised the matter and Ms Jackie Hicks, Road Safety Education Officer School Services of The Department of Education be advised of Council’s resolution.

5. Council’s Traffic Engineers request Nepean Police Area Command to conduct patrols and enforcement of the signage and line marking changes following installation.

2 Kalang Avenue, Camira Street and Carinya Avenue, St Marys - Proposed 'Trucks Prohibited - Vehicles Under 12.5m Excepted' Restrictions

Councillor Marcus Cornish enquired about whether there is an access point to the railway tracks near the St Marys Railway Station on the northern side of Carinya Avenue, St Marys and if longer service vehicles will be impacted on the proposed restrictions.

David Drozd – Traffic Engineering Coordinator advised that service vehicles are generally 10-11 metres in length and will be excluded from the proposed 'Trucks Prohibited - Vehicles Under 12.5m Excepted' Restrictions.

In addition, David Drozd also advised that the NSW Road Rules permit long vehicles (and heavy vehicles) from accessing a road where there is a length restriction (or load limit) if the driver has a legitimate point of destination on that road and there is no other road that can be used to access the point of destination. The proposed 'Trucks Prohibited - Vehicles Under 12.5m Excepted' Restrictions will prevent general through access for long vehicles and prevent future damages to the kerb and gutter due to the narrow bends and limited movements for longer vehicles.

RECOMMENDED

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Kalang Avenue, Camira Street and Carinya Avenue, St Marys - Proposed 'Trucks Prohibited - Vehicles Under 12.5m Excepted' Restrictions be received.

2. Consultation be undertaken with affected residents regarding the proposed ‘Trucks Prohibited - Vehicles Under 12.5m Excepted' restriction signage on Kalang Avenue, Camira Street and Carinya Avenue, St Marys as show in Appendix 1.

3. The proposed ‘Trucks Prohibited - Vehicles Under 12.5m Excepted' restriction signage be advertised in the local newspaper in accordance with the Roads Act.

4. Subject to no substantial objections being received, results of the consultation (if any) and proof of the newspaper advertisement be forwarded onto Transport for NSW seeking approval to proceed with the installation of the proposed ‘Trucks Prohibited - Vehicles Under 12.5m Excepted' restriction signage on Kalang Avenue, Camira Street and Carinya Avenue, St Marys as shown in Appendix 1.

5. The resident who reported the matter, Council’s Rangers and Nepean Police Area Command be advised of Council’s resolution.

3 Bradley Street, Glenmore Park - Proposed Installation of a Bus Zone

Steve Grady of Busways advised that the bus stop was originally fronting 86 Bradley Street, Glenmore Park, however, due to the presence of the pram ramp, the bus stop was subsequently relocated to the shared property boundary of 86 & 88 Bradley Street, Glenmore Park. As such, no additional on-street parking was removed from the frontage of 88 Bradley Street as it was always prohibited in accordance with the NSW Road Rule number 195 which indicates that parking is not permitted on 20 metres on approach and 10 metres on the departure side of a bus stop.

Steve Grady confirmed that the proposed Bus Zone signage at the bus stop at the shared property boundary of 86 & 88 Bradley Street, Glenmore Park will assist bus ingress and egress from the bus stop.

RECOMMENDED

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Bradley Street, Glenmore Park - Proposed Installation of a Bus Zone be received.

2. Bus Zone signage be installed at the existing westbound bus stop fronting 88 Bradley Street, Glenmore Park (TSR 2745229) as shown in Appendix 1.

3. Busways, Council’s Ranger Services department and the residents that objected to the proposed Bus Zone signage be advised of Council’s resolution.

4 Parkwood Grove, Emu Heights - Proposed Installation of Double Barrier Line Marking and C3 Yellow Edge Line Marking

Councillor Marcus Cornish enquired about whether there are 40km/hr School Zone signs with flashing lights on Parkwood Grove, Emu Heights.

Wendy Read – Road Safety Officer advised that there are standard 40km/hr School Zone signs, ‘40’ pavement markings as well as ‘dragons teeth’ on Parkwood Grove, Emu Heights. At the frontage of the school on Wedmore Road, Emu Heights there are 40km/hr School Zone signs with flashing lights.

Councillor Marcus Cornish enquired about Council’s decision to start using C3 yellow edge line marking in the Penrith Local Government Area.

David Drozd – Traffic Engineering Coordinator advised that Council Officers went through a process of benchmarking against other Councils and considered the advantages and disadvantages of implementing C3 yellow edge line marking compared to signage. Approximately 6 months ago, there was an agreement to trial C3 yellow edge line marking in certain areas in our Penrith Local Government Area as it seeks to reduce signage clutter. David Drozd also advised that Council Officers have considered the lifecycle, maintenance and enforcement of using C3 yellow edge line marking at certain areas in our Local Government Area.

Mario Dizon of Transport for NSW (TfNSW) advised that after discussions with his colleague Brana Ravichelvan, they feel that the proposed C3 yellow edge line marking may not be appropriate at this location as it is generally reserved for special circumstances or instances where a larger sections of parking removal is required. Mario Dizon requested that only double barrier line marking be installed on the bend and Council continue to monitor parking behaviour.

Steve Grady of Busways advised that CDC Bus NSW operate a bus route on Parkwood Grove, Emu Heights. Steve Grady also advised that if only double barrier line marking was installed on the bend of Parkwood Avenue, motorcycles would still be permitted under the NSW Road Rules to park on the bend as they will not be parked within three metres of the double barrier line marking. As such, Steve Grady advised that this would still present a safety issue for buses negotiating the bend and he feels that this would be a special circumstance where C3 yellow edge line marking is justified.

David Drozd - Traffic Engineering Coordinator advised that there can be ambiguity for motorists about whether they are parked within the 3 metres of the double barrier line markings. The C3 yellow edge line marking would clarify the ‘No Stopping’ restriction at the double barrier line marking on the bend of Parkwood Grove.

Mario Dizon of Transport for NSW agreed that this is a special circumstance and advised that he agrees in principle with Council’s proposal to install C3 yellow edge line marking on the bend of Parkwood Grove.

RECOMMENDED

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Parkwood Grove, Emu Heights - Proposed Installation of Double Barrier Line Marking and C3 Yellow Edge Line Marking be received.

2. Consultation be undertaken with affected properties and Emu Heights Public School regarding the proposed double barrier line marking and C3 yellow edge line marking on the bend of Parkwood Grove as shown in Appendix 1.

3. Subject to no substantial objections being received, the proposed double barrier line marking and C3 yellow edge line marking be installed for a length of 25 meters on the bend of Parkwood Grove, Emu Plains as shown in Appendix 1.

4. Council’s Rangers and the resident who reported the matter be advised of Council’s resolution.

5 Sydney Street and Canberra Street, Oxley Park - Endorsement of Design Plan AS245 for a Single Lane Roundabout and Street Lighting

Kablan Mowad – Senior Traffic Engineer advised that the Design Plan AS245 dated September 2020 attached to the report has since been updated. Design Plan AS245 dated October 2020 was presented before the Committee and shows a painted island on the western leg of the roundabout of Sydney Street and Canberra Street, Oxley Park instead of a physical concrete island.

Kablan Mowad – Senior Traffic Engineer advised that a physical concrete island could not be accommodated as works involving the relocation of services and adjustments of the kerb and gutter would be required.

Deputy Mayor, Councillor Tricia Hitchen (Representative for the Member for Penrith) enquired about whether there are pram ramps on the legs of the proposed roundabout.

Kablan Mowad – Senior Traffic Engineer confirmed that pram ramps will be provided on all the legs of the proposed roundabout.

Councillor Marcus Cornish enquired about whether the proposed roundabout will be a mountable roundabout to assist heavy vehicles with turning movements.

Kablan Mowad – Senior Traffic Engineer and David Drozd – Traffic Engineering Coordinator confirmed that the proposed roundabout will be mountable and there will not be a raised anulus in the centre.

Mario Dizon of TfNSW enquired about whether the pram ramps on the western leg of the proposed roundabout will be maintained as there may be safety issues for pedestrians crossing at the painted island as it is not a physical concrete island.

David Drozd – Traffic Engineering Coordinator confirmed that the pram ramps on the western leg will be maintained. David Drozd also advised that Sydney Street is the predominant leg and it is not uncommon for pedestrians to cross a minor local road in one crossing movement, rather than waiting in the centre of splitter islands. David Drozd also advised that there is sufficient sight lines for pedestrians and motorists at this intersection and the other legs of the intersection that will have physical concrete splitter islands are where the predominant pedestrian movements occur.

Mario Dizon of TfNSW enquired about the ‘No Stopping’ zone lengths on each of the legs of the proposed roundabout. Mario Dizon requested that the ‘No Stopping’ lengths be increased to 10 metres.

David Drozd - Traffic Engineering Coordinator and Kablan Mowad – Senior Traffic Engineer advised that Council Officers will review the design plan against the Technical Directions and will amend the ‘No Stopping’ zones as appropriate.

RECOMMENDED

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Sydney Street and Canberra Street, Oxley Park - Endorsement of Design Plan AS245 for a Single Lane Roundabout and Street Lighting be received.

2. Consultation be undertaken with affected properties and surrounding businesses regarding the proposed provision of a single lane roundabout and street lighting at the intersection of Sydney Street and Canberra Street, Oxley Park as shown in Design Plan AS245 dated October 2020.

3. Subject to no objections being received, Design Plan AS245 dated October 2020 be endorsed for construction, subject to amendments of the ‘No Stopping’ zones in conjunction with Transport for NSW, with funding provided from the Nation Building Black Spot and Safer Roads Program.

4. A street lighting assessment be conducted in accordance with Council’s Public Domain Lighting Policy (August 2004) to ensure compliance with the relevant lighting category.

6 Mulgoa Road, Penrith - Intersection Upgrades from Union Road to Museum Drive - Presentation Update

Dominic Stellino of McConnell Dowell advised the Committee of information regarding the Mulgoa Road Upgrade from Union Road to Museum Drive, Penrith.

Councillor Marcus Cornish enquired about when this section of works will be completed.

Dominic Stellino of McConnell Dowell advised that the works for this section of Mulgoa Road is expected to be completed in March 2021.

Mayor, Councillor Karen McKeown OAM (Council Representative) thanked Dominic Stellino for providing regular updates to Council on the Mulgoa Road Upgrade.

RECOMMENDED

That the information contained in the report on Mulgoa Road, Penrith - Intersection Upgrades from Union Road to Museum Drive - Presentation Update be received.

Mayor, Councillor Karen McKeown OAM (Council Representative) left the meeting at 9:58am.

7 River Road and Leonay Parade, Leonay – Provision of Double Barrier Centre Line, Edge Line Marking, Shoulder Medians and Signage

Mayor, Councillor Karen McKeown OAM (Council Representative declared an interest in Item 7 - River Road and Leonay Parade, Leonay – Provision of Double Barrier Centre Line, Edge Line Marking, Shoulder Medians and Signage, as she owns a property on one of these roads.

Councillor Marcus Cornish enquired about the type of footpath that will be constructed along River Road, Leonay.

Graham Green – Senior Traffic Engineer advised that on the residential side of River Road, Leonay, there most likely will be a concrete path constructed from property 183 River Road, Leonay. Graham Green also advised that there is an asphaltic path that has recently been constructed on the eastern side of River Road, Leonay.

RECOMMENDED

That:

1. The information contained in the report on River Road and Leonay Parade, Leonay – Provision of Double Barrier Centre Line, Edge Line Marking, Shoulder Medians and Signage be received.

2. Consultation be undertaken with affected properties and businesses regarding the proposed double barrier centre line marking, edge line marking, shoulder medians and signage on River Road and Leonay Parade, Leonay as shown in Appendix 1.

3. Subject to no substantial objections being received, the proposed double barrier centre line marking, edge line marking, shoulder medians and signage on River Road and Leonay Parade, Leonay as shown in Appendix 1 be installed (with the exception of the proposed TfNSW repeater 50 km/hr speed zone signs).

4. The proposed TfNSW repeater 50 km/hr speed zone signs on River Road and Leonay Parade, Leonay as shown on Appendix 1 be referred to TfNSW for their assessment and installation if accepted by TfNSW.

5. The resident petition group and other residents who reported the matter be advised of Council’s resolution.

GENERAL BUSINESS

GB 1 Cranebrook Road at its Intersections with Church Lane and Tadmore Road, Cranebrook - Request for Turning Lanes

Councillor Marcus Cornish indicated that previously during the 7 September 2020 Local Traffic Committee Meeting, he advised that southbound motorists on Cranebrook Road, Cranebrook often wait to turn right at the intersection into Church Lane. As a result, approaching southbound motorists on Cranebrook Road often have to drive onto the dirt shoulder to pass waiting vehicles.

Subsequently during the previous Local Traffic Committee meeting, Councillor Marcus Cornish requested that Council Officers investigate passing opportunities for southbound motorists on Cranebrook Road such as providing bitumen on the eastern side of Cranebrook Road (adjacent to the southbound lane). This will assist southbound motorists on Cranebrook Road with passing motorists waiting to turn right into Church Lane.

Council Marcus Cornish re-highlighted this matter during this Local Traffic Committee meeting and further to the abovementioned intersection, he also requested that Council Officers investigate similar passing opportunities for southbound motorists on Cranebrook Road at its intersection with Tadmore Road.

RECOMMENDED

That:

1. Council’s Traffic Engineers investigate the traffic movements at the intersections of Cranebrook Road & Church Lane, and Cranebrook Cranebrook & Tadmore Road, Cranebrook particularly southbound motorists on Cranebrook Road turning right at these two intersections.

2. Council’s Traffic Engineers liaise with Council’s Asset Management Officers about the potential of providing bitumen on the eastern side of Cranebrook Road adjacent to the southbound lane at the two intersections, in order to assist southbound motorists on Cranebrook Road with passing motorists waiting to turn right into Church Lane and Tadmore Road.

3. Councillor Marcus Cornish be advised of the outcome.

GB 2 The Northern Road, Londonderry - Request for Police Presence and Enforcement of Posted Speed Limit

Councillor Marcus Cornish advised the Committee that the Police conducted Random Breath Testing (RBT) on the weekend on The Northern Road, Londonderry near the Northern Auto Wreckers business at 557 The Northern Road.

Councillor Marcus Cornish also advised that during the week in peak hours, motorists tend to exceed the posted speed limit and tailgate other motorists on The Northern Road, Londonderry near the Northern Auto Wreckers business. Subsequently, Councillor Marcus Cornish requested Police presence and enforcement of the posted speed limit during the morning and afternoon peak hours on The Northern Road, Londonderry.

RECOMMENDED

That:

1. Council’s Traffic Engineers request Nepean Police Area Command to have a Police presence on The Northern Road, Londonderry near the Northern Auto Wreckers business at 557 The Northern Road and conduct enforcement of the posted speed limit.

2. Councillor Marcus Cornish be advised of Council’s request to Nepean Police Area Command.

GB 3 Fourth Avenue, Llandilo - Concerns about Trucks Volumes

Councillor Marcus Cornish advised the Committee that he has been contacted by a constituent raising concerns about truck volumes on Fourth Avenue, Llandilo and has subsequently requested Council to investigate the possibility of implementing a load limit on this road.

RECOMMENDED

That:

1. Council’s Traffic Engineers conduct traffic volume counts on Fourth Avenue, Llandilo to determine truck volumes.

2. Council’s Traffic Engineers investigate the appropriateness of introducing a load limit on Fourth Avenue, Llandilo to prevent large trucks travelling on this road.

3. Councillor Marcus Cornish be advised of the outcome.

GB 4 Tench Reserve Boat Ramp - Traffic Conflicts for Vehicles with Trailers

Councillor Marcus Cornish advised the Committee that during the October long weekend, there were traffic conflicts between vehicles with trailers trying to use the new boat ramp at Tench Reserve at Nepean River. Councillor Marcus Cornish advised that vehicles approaching the new boat ramp had instances where motorists were unable to reverse into the boat ramp due to approaching vehicles with trailers coming around the bend and blocking them, causing vehicle queuing outside of the car park and onto the road and preventing other motorists with trailers from reversing to allow manoeuvrability.

Councillor Marcus Cornish also advised that he will be bringing this matter up in the next Council Ordinary Meeting however at this stage, he requested if Council Officers could investigate the site when it is in use on the weekends and investigate any potential signage to make it more efficient.

Wayne Mitchell - Director Development and Regulatory Services (Chair) advised that the new boat ramp at Tench Reserve was designed by Council in consultation with the Maritime Team of Transport for NSW and in accordance with their specifications. Wayne Mitchell - Director Development and Regulatory Services (Chair) advised that the relevant parties will be requested to review the new boat ramp and its traffic operation and functionality now that it is in use.

RECOMMENDED

That:

1. Council’s Traffic Engineers request Council’s Major Projects team to liaise with all the relevant parties regarding the design of the new boat ramp at Tench Reserve and investigate its functionality and traffic operation when in use, particularly on weekends, for long term improvements including signage to make it more efficient.

2. Councillor Marcus Cornish be advised of the outcome.

GB 5 Kurrajong Road and Glossop Street, North St Marys - Traffic Accidents and Speeding Vehicles at the Intersection

Councillor Robin Cook (Representative for the Member for Londonderry) advised the Committee that she had been contacted by a constituent raising concerns about a number of traffic accidents that have occurred at the intersection of Kurrajong Road and Glossop Street, North St Marys due to speeding.

Councillor Robin Cook (Representative for the Member for Londonderry) also advised that the business at the corner of the subject intersection being Allcott Hire recently had damages to their property’s fence as a result of a traffic accident and this is not the first time it has happened.

Subsequently, Councillor Robin Cook (Representative for the Member for Londonderry) requested that the relevant Officers investigate this intersection for any potential traffic improvement measures such as a red light speed camera or similar.

RECOMMENDED

That:

1. Council’s Traffic Engineers review available speed count data and traffic accident data history at the intersection of Kurrajong Road and Glossop Street, North St Marys.

2. Council’s Traffic Engineers liaise with Transport for NSW about the potential for traffic improvements at the signalised intersection of Kurrajong Road and Glossop Street, North St Marys such as the installation of a red light speed camera or similar to reduce vehicle speeds.

3. Councillor Robin Cook (Representative for the Member for Londonderry) be advised of the outcome.

There being no further business the Chairperson declared the meeting closed the time being 10:12am.

RECOMMENDATION

That the recommendations contained in the Report and Recommendations of the Local Traffic Committee meeting held on 12 October, 2020 be adopted.

Ordinary Meeting 26 October 2020

Draft Aerotropolis Development Contributions Plan

Compiled by: Natalie Stanowski, Principal Planner

Authorised by: Natasha Borgia, City Planning Manager

Kylie Powell, Director - City Futures

Outcome	We plan for our future growth
Strategy	Ensure services, facilities and infrastructure meet the changing needs of our City
Service Activity	Ensure our policies, strategies and plans provide for the services and infrastructure our City needs

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

Executive Summary

The purpose of this report is to provide Council with an overview of the preparation of a local infrastructure planning framework and resulting draft development contributions plan to support future development within the Aerotropolis. Collaborative work has been undertaken between Penrith and Liverpool Councils to prepare a draft contributions plan and supporting background report to ensure both Councils can collect development contributions to provide for much needed local infrastructure within the area, as development occurs. A similar report is being presented to Liverpool City Council.

Draft Section 7.12 Aerotropolis Development Contributions Plan was prepared using land use and built form assumptions based on the Western Sydney Aerotropolis Plan. As detailed information of development outcomes is not yet finalised for the Aerotropolis, we have sought to prepare a plan based on the information available and industry accepted standards and benchmarks. This has enabled Councils to prepare a plan that can be approved once precinct plans have been finalised and will support the immediate delivery of local infrastructure. A 7.12 plan (percentage rate levy) was chosen as it allows Councils greater flexibility for infrastructure delivery, which is important until final development outcomes have been determined.

Our work on the plan has put the total cost of local infrastructure to meet the needs of the initial precincts of the Aerotropolis for both Penrith and Liverpool Councils at $2.6bn.

Using industry accepted costings, a percentage rate levy of 6.5% is proposed for the plan. This is needed to generate sufficient contributions from future development to meet the total cost of local infrastructure and will ensure that there will be minimal cost to Council in the provision of local infrastructure for the Aerotropolis. This levy rate is comparable to other greenfield industrial precinct contributions plans.

A Council resolution is sought to enable the plan to be publicly exhibited. As the rate for the draft land is proposed to be is greater than 1%, the final making of the Plan is subject to the approval of the Minister for Planning and Public Spaces.

Background

In December 2019, the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE) released for comment the Draft Western Sydney Aerotropolis Plan (WSAP). The WSAP detailed the vision and planning approach for the Aerotropolis, including the provision of state and some local infrastructure to service the area.

The WSAP presents a once in a lifetime opportunity to transform the landscape of the Western Parkland City through the catalyst of city shaping infrastructure, such as the Western Sydney Airport (Nancy Bird Walton Airport) and the north-south rail link. We have a global opportunity for economic investment, to create a thriving aviation based business and residential communities.

The scale, scope and importance of this area requires a planning approach not previously seen before. This includes mechanisms for the delivery of local and regional infrastructure funding. Infrastructure to support this new community is vital to the success of the Aerotropolis specifically, and the Western City more generally. Council seeks to ensure that we take every opportunity to collect development contributions for the provision of public amenities and services.

The planning package for the Aerotropolis, comprising a State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP), first stage Development Control Plan (DCP) and a supporting amendment to the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000 (The Regulation) came into effect on 1 October 2020. As such, it is important for both Penrith and Liverpool Councils to plan for the local infrastructure needs of this new development and minimise potential delays in the approvals process.

The SEPP enables the determination of development applications (DA) after the precinct plans are made, and as such this will be a trigger for the payment for development contributions. The Regulation amendment has specific provisions in relation to contributions plans for the Aerotropolis, requiring development applications within the Aerotropolis are not to be determined unless a contributions plan has been approved for the land. The Regulation however notes that a contributions plan is not required if the development is of a minor nature or the applicant has entered into a Planning Agreement (VPA) with Council for works that would be subject to a contributions plan. It is therefore important that Council delivers a plan for the Aerotropolis to coincide as closely as possible to the making of the precinct plans.

Council has been proactive in the preparation of a contributions framework to support the aerotropolis. This will ensure infrastructure delivery better aligns with development assessment, prevents unnecessary delays to development approvals due to a lack of infrastructure planning. It also has enabled Councils to have a strong understanding of our baseline infrastructure needs to be able to effectively negotiate planning agreements where required.

Planning in the Aerotropolis

The Aerotropolis SEPP represents the first step of the planning framework to deliver the vision of the WSAP. The SEPP implements WSAP and guides development within the Western Sydney Aerotropolis, through zoning, strategic objectives and planning controls.

The SEPP defines and zones the initial precincts within the Aerotropolis. The zoning of these precincts are as follows:

Precinct	Land Use Zone	Future Land Uses
Northern Gateway	Enterprise Mixed Use Environment and Recreation	Employment, business, professional services, residential and accommodation Environmental & cultural protection, conservation, recreation
Agribusiness	Agribusiness Zone Environment and Recreation	Agribusiness related land uses including food production, supply chain industries and processing. Environmental & cultural protection, conservation, recreation
Wianamatta - South Creek	Environment and Recreation	Environmental & cultural protection, conservation, recreation
Badgerys Creek	Enterprise Environment and Recreation	Employment, business, professional services residential and accommodation Environmental & cultural protection, conservation, recreation
Aerotropolis Core	Enterprise Mixed Use	Employment, business, professional services residential and accommodation Environmental & cultural protection, conservation, recreation

Infrastructure funding in the Aerotropolis

The WSAP details the mechanisms that will enable the funding of infrastructure in the aerotropolis:

· Special Infrastructure Contributions (SIC) - State development contributions.

· Local Infrastructure Contributions - s7.11 or s7.12 Contributions.

A SIC is being prepared by DPIE and will assist with funding state and regional infrastructure. The Place-based Infrastructure Compact (PIC) currently being finalised by the Greater Sydney Commission (GSC) will assist in identifying state and regional infrastructure and services needed to support growth and estimates the costs of this infrastructure. The SIC will also provide a charging mechanism for land within station catchments for the Sydney Metro Western Sydney Airport, to support infrastructure and place shaping outcomes to be delivered by the Metro.

Given the scale and scope of infrastructure included in the PIC and apportionment of these, it is likely that the SIC will only fund a portion of the total cost of the infrastructure, with other funding sources being available to the State Government. This differs significantly from local infrastructure contributions, as Council is only able to fund infrastructure from new growth where the full cost of this is met completely by local infrastructure contributions, or rate base (i.e. existing rate payers)

Penrith and Liverpool Councils are responsible for the identification and planning for local infrastructure needs in the area and the preparation of development contributions plans to collect funds to deliver this infrastructure. A key consideration of both Councils in undertaking this work is to ensure we had an infrastructure framework for the precinct and an informed position on the cost of local infrastructure to provide an understanding of the cumulative impact of contributions

Council has been working with both the GSC and DPIE in relation to our local infrastructure framework. Attempts have been made to ensure that all the necessary infrastructure is identified in only one contributions plan (i.e. no double dipping) and that no infrastructure is omitted. At the time of drafting this report, we have only had access to limited information regarding the extent of works proposed in the SIC. It is our understanding that the draft SIC, along with draft Precinct Plans are to be exhibited in late October. It is our intention to exhibit our plan to coincide as closely as possible with the public exhibition of the draft precinct plans and SIC. It is noted that once the SIC is exhibited, further information will be provided to Council and further work on reconciliation between the plans can then be undertaken.

Two specific areas within the Aerotropolis, the Mamre Road precinct and Sydney Science Park, are not proposed to be included in the Draft Aerotropolis Contributions Plan. The Mamre Road precinct and associated rezoning was completed prior to the Aerotropolis SEPP and DPIE have advanced the planning to a point which has enabled Council to prepare a separate draft Section 7.11 Development Contributions Plan for the precinct. This plan is subject to a separate report.

Land that forms part of the Sydney Science Park is currently subject to a Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA). This VPA includes the provision of a range of local infrastructure including roads, drainage, open space, community facility and library. The VPA excluded the application of 7.11/7.12 development contributions and is thus excluded from this plan. If the opportunity to incorporate this area into the broader aerotropolis contributions plan arises in the future, this will be considered. In the instance where further development uplift is provided for the site or land in the same ownership adjacent to the Science Park, an amended VPA or site-specific contributions plan would be sought.

Council’s existing Citywide Section 7.12 Development Contributions Plan for non-residential development currently applies to the land, however this plan does not deliver the infrastructure required to adequately support the now zoned area. Given the intention to implement a specific contributions plan for the Aerotropolis, it is proposed that this plan is amended to no longer apply to the land.

Coordinated approach between Councils

We have sought to work closely with Liverpool City Council to prepare an infrastructure needs assessment and a development contributions plan for the Aerotropolis to ensure a consistent application of the framework.

A unified approach between Councils has enabled a strong understanding of the needs of our future residents and workers and strength in discussing our needs with other stakeholders. It will also enable a consistent approach for infrastructure delivery, which will create efficiencies during the development process. Notwithstanding, the plan has been prepared in such a way that it can be split between Councils at any time.

To support Councils, the following specialists were sought to assist in the development of the plan:

· Stormwater/roads

· Contributions planning

· Community and open space planning

Needs Assessment and Plan Making

Penrith City Council has managed the preparation of this work and the following work has been undertaken as part of this project:

· Needs assessment of future local and regional infrastructure to support the objectives of the area

· Recommendations on necessary local and regional infrastructure for the area.

· Advice and justification on a levy percentage that would be necessary to apply in order to deliver the required infrastructure.

· Preparation of a Section 7.12 Development Contributions Plan, including suitable arrangements for a cross LGA boundary Plan.

Background work to inform the development contribution plans was prepared ahead of the making of the SEPP and exhibition of the Precinct Plans in order to ensure that Council would be able to support new development with local infrastructure as soon as possible. In order to do so, a range of informed assumptions and benchmarking has been undertaken to determine future infrastructure needs. The process of how this was undertaken is listed in the table below and is provided in more detail in the background report (Attachment 1).

Process	Methodology
Land Use Assumptions	· The exhibited WSAP was used to determine land use zoning extents for the initial precincts. · Further refinements were undertaken when Mamre Road Precinct update to the WSEA SEPP was gazetted. · Development typologies for each zone were established to determine the construction profiles in each zone and required building, pavement, public roads and landscaped areas. · Assumptions on constrained land were applied.
Population + Employment Forecasts	· Population forecasts were taken from WSAP · Projects were used to determine the approximate number of dwellings for the precinct and the density of the dwellings. · Employment numbers from the WSAP were used to cross check the development typology assumptions in each precinct.
Baseline Assessment of existing Infrastructure	· A baseline analysis of existing road, stormwater drainage and social infrastructure was undertaken. · Assumptions were made as to the classification of future infrastructure as local (delivered by the plan) or State (delivered by SIC or otherwise)
Identification and Assessment of infrastructure required	· Benchmarking was used to determine the quantum of collector roads, stormwater facilities and social infrastructure, including land. · Existing development sites, industry best practice, Western Sydney Street Design Guidelines and Council policy was used to determine rates and extents
Cost identification	· Costs were identified using industry contractor rates, IPART assessments, and similar demonstrated developments. · Capital investment value of future development at the Aerotropolis is established.
Percentage calculation	· Using the established costs of future development and future infrastructure works, a percentage rate was established.

A detailed breakdown of the quantum of local infrastructure that will be needed throughout the Aerotropolis initial precincts is detailed in the table below.

Type	Deliverables
Roads	· 65,521m of collector roads
Stormwater	· 974,683m³ stormwater detention · 649,787m² water quality
Open space and recreation	· 11 local parks (residential) (0.5ha) · 4 Local Parks (industrial) (0.5ha) · 5 District parks (residential) (5ha) · 2 District parks (industrial) (5ha) · 1 Citywide park (residential) (20ha) · 1 Citywide park (industrial) (20ha) · 2 district sportsgrounds (10ha) · 2 multipurpose outdoor courts · 12 play spaces · Outdoor fitness stations · Youth precinct · 6 Water Play · Indoor leisure centre including: 50m pool, learn to swim pool, 25m pool, indoor courts, change facilities, toddler pool, youth area, picnic area, meeting rooms (3,000m²)
Social	· District multi-purpose community hub that may include: library, community hall, meeting space, cultural production facility, community kitchen, recording studio spaces, office space, childcare centre and public space (minimum 2,000m²) · 4 Council owned childcare centres (one in each precinct)

It is noted that as further planning work is completed by Western Sydney Planning Partnership (WSPP), the specific location of the infrastructure detailed above will be identified, facilitating delivery. In compliance with the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act, 1979 and Regulations, the plan identifies infrastructure at a precinct level.

Costs and Levy Rate

Costs for infrastructure in the initial precincts across both Penrith and Liverpool Council areas were determined including both land and works. In order to determine what percentage levy would be required for the plan. The industry benchmarks were used to determine the cost of the infrastructure works. The cost of land was provided by WSPP through their feasibility analysis work, and this aligns directly with the land costs to be included in the SIC. The cost to deliver the infrastructure enabled Council to determine what percentage levy would be required for the plan. Specific costs by infrastructure type are provided below.

Infrastructure	Cost
Roads & Stormwater	$726,846,560
Social, open space & recreation	$203,161,243
Land	$1,624,098,812
Total	$2,554,106,616

In order to determine a percentage rate levy, the cost of future development was determined in order to calculate the capital investment value (CIV). Using the WSAP and industry benchmarks and standards it was determined that the total cost of development in the initial precincts of the Aerotropolis is approximately $39bn.

Based on the above, a 6.5% levy on the cost of development would be needed in the plan to deliver the local infrastructure needed for the Aerotropolis area.

Contributions Framework and Approvals

We have chosen to prepare a Section 7.12 Development Contributions Plan to be able to collect for any immediate development in the area, and plan can be found in Attachment 2. The information needed in order to be able to prepare a section 7.11 plan is not yet available. A section 7.12 plan is a fixed levy plan based on the cost of development works. It is a flexible plan that does not require an established nexus between development. As the precinct plans and development control plan have not been finalised and final locations of infrastructure have not been determined, a section 7.12 plan is appropriate to implement to facilitate development.

Currently Councils are permitted to make section 7.12 plans with a 1% levy. For levies above this, the Minister for Planning and Public Places is required to approve an amendment to the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000 (The Regulation) to support a higher rate levy. At least 7 other Councils have had a plan approved for a higher rate levy, however these plans have all been for town centres. The maximum rate provide by the Minister to date is 4%.

We are in a unique situation, where the plan is proposed for a greenfield precinct surrounding an airport, with no existing local infrastructure and the quantum and value of land to be purchased is much greater than in non-greenfield situations. To support our application to the Minister, the background report responds to criteria in DPIE’s recently released discussion paper “Criteria to request a higher s7.12 percentage”. We are able to demonstrate compliance with all 11 criteria.

In addition, we have compared our plan against similar contributions plans for predominately industrial/employment areas across Western Sydney. The rate per net developable hectare is comparable between these plans, as seen in the table below:

Area	LGA	Contribution Rate
Aerotropolis	Penrith & Liverpool	$705,970
Box Hill Industrial	The Hills	$540,000-$960,000*
Marsden Park Industrial	Blacktown	$589,000-$905,000*
Eastern Creek Stage 3	Blacktown	$219,000-$385,000*

* ranges based on the provision of stormwater infrastructure

Engagement with DPIE and Planning Partnership

Penrith and Liverpool Councils have worked with both DPIE and the WSPP throughout the preparation of the background report and contributions plan. We have liaised with consultants working on behalf of the WSPP on feasibility testing within the Aerotropolis in order to understand land values.

A draft copy of the background report and contribution plan has been provided to DPIE for feedback and assessment. Feedback received from DPIE has been incorporated in the final documents. It is hoped that this early engagement will lead to a more accelerated process of the final approval of the plan by the Minister for Planning and Public Spaces.

We will continue to work with DPIE and WSPP to coordinate the delivery of local infrastructure in the Aerotropolis, particularly in relation to the integration of the SIC and local contributions.

Amendment to Penrith Citywide s7.12 Plan for non- residential development

At present, the Citywide s7.12 Contributions Plan for non-residential development applies to land within the Aerotropolis. The extent of development and infrastructure considered under the plan is significantly different from the expected development of the Aerotropolis.

In conjunction with the commencement of the planning package to support the Aerotropolis, an amendment was made to the Regulation that requires development within the Aerotropolis cannot be determined unless a contributions plan has been approved for the land to which the application relates. When the precinct plans are made and development applications can be approved, unless the new aerotropolis plan is in force, we may have to collect contributions under the Citywide s7.12 (1% rate). This is significantly less than is needed to provide suitable infrastructure. It is our preference to remove this plan from applying to the land and allow development to remain undetermined, until the Aerotropolis contributions plan comes into force.

To ensure that only the Aerotropolis plan will apply to this land, an amendment to the Citywide s7.12 is proposed so that it no longer applies to land within the Aerotropolis. This minor amendment will include changes to section 1.2 of the plan “Land the plan applies to” and the associated Figure 1, to simply remove the land from the map.

Due to the urgent and minor nature of this amendment, it will be sought that the General Manager is provided the delegation to make the amended Plan, after exhibition.

Plan Approval and next steps

Both Councils will need to seek Ministerial approval in order to make a section 7.12 plan with a higher levy rate than 1%. In order to seek approval, the draft plan is required to be publicly exhibited by both Councils. It is therefore required that both Councils endorse the plan for exhibition. We have coordinated reporting to ensure that the draft plan will also be reported to Liverpool City Council during the same week as this report.

Whilst every intention will be made to work collaboratively with Liverpool Council to initially place the plan on public exhibition and make representations to the Minister for Planning and Public Spaces, where this is not possible to be achieved, we will recommend to Council to continue to pursue a s7.12 contributions plan applicable to the Aerotropolis within the Penrith LGA.

We have commenced discussions with DPIE to determine the process and timeframes to make these plans. DPIE has advised the plans will require endorsement and exhibition by Council, prior to the Ministers consideration for a high levy rate. It is then important to align the timing of the exhibition of the contributions plan with the making of the precinct plans to ensure they are not delayed.

Exhibition

In accordance with the Act and Regulations the Plan is required to be publicly exhibited in order to be made by the Minister. We are proposing to jointly exhibit the Plan and background report with Liverpool Council. Where possible, we will seek to coordinate the exhibition of the Plan with the precinct plans and SIC, although the dates for these exhibitions are not known at the time of drafting this report.

It is intended that the plan be exhibited for a minimum of 28 days. The plan would be advertised through Councils website, the Western Weekender newspaper and Councils social media pages.

We will seek to work with key stakeholders such as landowners, DPIE, WSPP and other state agencies throughout the exhibition period to receive their feedback. Industry associations such as UDIA and Property Council will also be notified.

Future Coordination with Liverpool Council

A joint contributions plan will coordinate infrastructure across both Council areas. This will also require appropriate collaboration between both Councils to manage delivery and financial management. Upon the adoption of the Plan it is recommended that a working group is established with key staff from both Councils to deliver the outcomes of the plan.

Each council collects development contributions and delivers items or enter into a works in kind or voluntary planning agreements. Working group would facilitate ongoing coordination between Councils and the delivery mechanisms available to developers.

Implementation of the Plan

The Plan will apply to all development with a capital investment value (CIV) over $200,000. A levy of 6.5% is calculated based on the CIV. A cost summary report will be required for all development and this report sets out the proposed cost of carrying out the development. A condition of consent will be imposed on the development to pay contributions as required by the plan. Contributions are payable at different times, depending on the development:

(a) For development where no further approvals area required (i.e. Complying Development) – before the development consent is issued.

(b) For development involving subdivision – the contribution must be paid prior to the release of the subdivision certificate (linen plan).

(c) For development not involving subdivision, but where a construction certificate is required, the contribution must be paid prior to the release of the construction certificate for any works authorising construction above the floor level of the ground floor.

The condition of consent can be satisfied by developers in a number of ways including:

· Cash contribution,

· Works in Kind Agreement (WIKA)- developer constructs certain infrastructure as per the contributions plan, and

· Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA)- developer constructs infrastructure by agreement with Council.

Financial Implications

The financial implications of this report are as follows:

1. If the plan is not made by at the rate sought, Council does not have the finances available to deliver the required infrastructure.

2. Any potential future income that may be received if Council is to proceed with making the s7.12 Plan. Once this plan has been exhibited and finalised this income will be factored into the current operational budget.

Risk Implications

There are a number of identifiable risks associated within the plan making process:

1. If the Aerotropolis plan is not made this may lead to a shortfall in the funding of local infrastructure to support future development.

2. Due to the levy rate sought, the plan has to be approved by the Minister for Planning and Public Spaces. In the situation where the Minister does not make the plan, Council is unable to find other means of delivering infrastructure.

3. The timing of the approval of the plan by the Minister is out of Councils control. Where there is a delay to the making of this plan, this could hold up the approval of development applications.

Conclusion

Both Penrith City Council and Liverpool City Council have sought to work collaboratively to ensure that we are proactive in understanding and planning for local infrastructure in the Aerotropolis. We have engaged expert consultants to assist in preparing a high level needs assessment of future local infrastructure needs, based on the information known to date about land use and population projections in the area.

The needs assessment has determined at a fixed rate levy of 6.5% is necessary to deliver this infrastructure. A section 7.12 development contribution plan has been prepared in order to deliver this infrastructure.

In order to make the plan, Council is required to publicly exhibit the plan. This report seeks Councils endorsement to undertake this exhibition jointly with Liverpool Council. A further report would be presented to Council after the exhibition to assess any submissions received.

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Draft Aerotropolis Development Contributions Plan be received.

2. Council endorse the draft Section 7.12 Plan Development Contributions Plan for the Aerotropolis with a levy rate of 6.5% and the associated background report for public exhibition.

3. The plan be exhibited in accordance with the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act, 1979 and Regulations for a minimum of 28 days.

4. A copy of the draft plan and background report be forwarded to the Minister for Planning and Public Places to commence the process of seeking Ministerial approval to make the plan.

5. At the conclusion of the exhibition period, a further report is provided to Council on the submissions received during the exhibition period.

6. Penrith Citywide s7.12 Development Contributions Plan for non- residential development be amended to no longer apply to the Aerotropolis, and that this amendment is publicly exhibited in accordance with the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act, 1979 and Regulations.

7. After the exhibition of an amended Penrith Citywide s7.12 Development Contributions Plan for non-residential development, which removes the Aerotropolis from applying to Plan, that delegation is provided to the General Manager to finalise and make this amendment, in accordance with the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act, 1979 and Regulations.

8. Where Liverpool City Council does not resolve to exhibit the joint s7.12 Plan, that Council proceed to exhibit an amended s7.12 contributions plan for the Aerotropolis, applicable to Penrith Local Government Area only and a copy of this would be forwarded to the Minister for Planning and Public Spaces.

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1. ⇩	Background Report- Aerotropolis Local Contributions Plan	61 Pages	Attachments Included
2. ⇩	Aerotropolis Local Contributions Plan	36 Pages	Attachments Included

Ordinary Meeting 26 October 2020

Voluntary Planning Agreement for 33-43 Phillip Street, St Marys

Compiled by: Natalie Stanowski, Principal Planner

Madison Foster, Planner

Authorised by: Natasha Borgia, City Planning Manager

Kylie Powell, Director - City Futures

Outcome	We plan for our future growth
Strategy	Ensure services, facilities and infrastructure meet the changing needs of our City
Service Activity	Ensure our policies, strategies and plans provide for the services and infrastructure our City needs

Previous Items: Planning Proposal 33-43 Phillip Street, St Marys - Ordinary Meeting - 23 Mar 2020

Executive Summary

The purpose of this report is to present the outcomes of the notification of a Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA) relating to 33-43 Phillip Street, St Marys. The VPA seeks to deliver a range of infrastructure as a result of a planning proposal sought for the site.

The infrastructure proposed to be delivered through the VPA include traffic infrastructure works, Affordable housing, a Public Plaza (including embellishment and maintenance) and cash contribution towards the upgrade of Bennett Park. The total value of the above works, (excluding traffic works and affordable housing) is approximately $2.8 million.

The draft VPA and explanatory note were publicly notified in accordance with the requirements of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act, 1979 (The Act) and Regulations. No submissions were received on this matter.

Despite the site now being identified for acquisition for the North South Rail, it is recommended that the VPA is endorsed by Council and executed so that any future development of the site that utilises the increased height and floor space ratio (FSR) standards obtained through the planning proposal, will be subject to delivery of the infrastructure as set out in the VPA.

Background

A Planning Proposal seeking to amend the Penrith Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 2010 by increasing the maximum building height from 32 to 61 metres and increasing the floor space ratio for the site from 3.5:1 to 5.5:1 for the subject site has previously been considered by Council.

The planning proposal included the submission of a letter of offer to enter into a Voluntary Planning Agreement with Council to deliver a range of infrastructure and other public benefits as a result of the proposal including:

· Traffic infrastructure works – signalised intersection of Phillip and Blair Streets capacity improvements to Glossop and Chapel Streets.

· Provision of 9 Affordable housing apartments (3% of the total uplift floor space)

· Dedication of Public Plaza of 1,316sqm at no cost to Council;

· Embellishment of the Public Plaza to Councils’ specifications and standards;

· A 5-year maintenance period of the Public Plaza; and

· A $655k cash contribution towards the upgrade of open space facilities at the nearby Bennett Park.

The total value of the above works, excluding traffic works and affordable housing is approximately $2.8 million.

A VPA was deemed the most suitable means for achieving local infrastructure delivery to meet the needs of St Marys. Council does not currently have a development contributions plan that collects for road infrastructure upgrades in St Marys Town Centre, such as those needed as a result of this planning proposal. The dedication and embellishment of a public plaza will provide a publicly accessible link between Phillip Street and St Marys transport interchange, which is identified under Penrith DCP 2014. The contribution towards works at Bennett Park will deliver several planned upgrade works identified under the draft Penrith Sport and Recreation Strategy (currently unfunded) and will support facilities for a growing St Marys population. It also recognises the need for public space and pedestrian connections to the St Marys Interchange, a significant precinct, to be further built upon by the North/South rail link.

At its Ordinary meeting of 23 March 2020, Council resolved to endorse the Planning Proposal, subject to a VPA being, prepared, notified and signed.

In accordance with that resolution, a draft VPA and explanatory note was prepared in accordance with the submitted letter of offer. The draft VPA was prepared with input from Councils Engineering Department (traffic and transport), Assets Department, Community Facilities and Recreation Departments and Legal Services Manager. A copy of the draft VPA and explanatory note is provided as Attachment 1 and 2.

Public Notification and Submissions

The draft VPA and explanatory note were publicly notified from Thursday 3 September 2020 to Thursday 1 October 2020. It was advertised on Councils website, in the Western Weekender and on Councils social media pages. A copy of the draft VPA and explanatory note was available for viewing on Councils website. Council did not receive any submissions during this period.

Implications of North South Rail Link Land Acquisition

Council should note that the ownership of the subject site is expected to change, as it is identified for acquisition by Metro for the construction of the North-South Rail Link. It is unknown at this time what the future use or function of this site will be in association with the rail link. It is further noted that no objection was provided by Sydney Metro in relation to the planning proposal for the site.

This VPA includes a provision requiring the property owner to register the VPA against the title of the property (within 20 Business Days of executing the VPA). Therefore, the VPA will run with the land and bind any future owner. Should any further owner seek to develop the site, the VPA sets triggers that when reached, require the landowner to either pay monetary contributions, dedicate land or carry out infrastructure to support the development.

If a future landowner seeks to revise or renegotiate the agreement, this would be reported to Council for consideration.

Financial Implications

The VPA delivers over $2.8m towards public open space and community infrastructure, in addition to required traffic works (estimated $1.3m) and affordable housing ($4m), in addition to any other development contributions that are applicable to the land.

Risk Implications

There are no identified risk implications associated with this report.

Conclusion

A draft VPA and explanatory note were prepared for Station Plaza St Marys, to deliver infrastructure and public benefits associated with the Planning Proposal for this land. The draft VPA and explanatory note were publicly notified in accordance with the Act and Regulations. No submissions were received during the notification period on this matter.

While the site is identified for acquisition as part of the North- South Rail Link, Councils planning proposal, when gazetted, will continue to apply to the land. It is important that the VPA be executed to enable the delivery of infrastructure associated with the planning proposal.

It is recommended that the VPA be executed and signed. This will enable the Planning Proposal to be progressed to the next stage of the Gateway process, being to make the amendment to the Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2010. Council has been given delegation to be the plan making authority for the proposal, and as such will liaise with DPIE to make the plan.

Next Steps

If Council adopts the proposed recommendations below, the following next steps will be undertaken:

1. The VPA be executed and signed by the General Manager and executed by the proponent.

2. VPA is registered on the title of the land.

3. Council’s VPA register and website will be updated with a record of the agreement.

4. DPIE will be notified of the signing of the VPA.

5. The Planning Proposal will be finalised in order to make the amendment to Penrith LEP 2010.

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Voluntary Planning Agreement for 33-43 Phillip Street, St Marys be received.

2. Council endorse the draft Voluntary Planning Agreement and explanatory note for 33-43 Phillip Street, St Marys for execution.

3. Council authorise the General Manager to finalise and sign the VPA and make any minor amendments where necessary to ensure its legality (e.g. typographic errors, dates, etc.).

4. The Common Seal of the Council of the City of Penrith be affixed to the legal document.

5. The Department of Planning, Industry and Environment be notified of the signing of the VPA and Council’s register of VPAs and website be updated to record the Agreement.

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1. ⇩	Draft Voluntary Planning Agreement 33-43 Phillip Street St Marys	50 Pages	Attachments Included
2. ⇩	Explanatory Note	5 Pages	Attachments Included

Ordinary Meeting 26 October 2020

Draft Mamre Road Development Contributions Plan

Compiled by: Natalie Stanowski, Principal Planner

Authorised by: Natasha Borgia, City Planning Manager

Kylie Powell, Director - City Futures

Outcome	We plan for our future growth
Strategy	Ensure services, facilities and infrastructure meet the changing needs of our City
Service Activity	Ensure our policies, strategies and plans provide for the services and infrastructure our City needs

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

Executive Summary

The Mamre Road Precinct has recently been rezoned under State Environmental Planning Policy Western Sydney Employment Area (WSEA). The rezoning of the precinct is set to bring significant employment related development to Penrith Local Government Area.

The precinct does not currently have access to local infrastructure to support the intended future land uses and as development occurs, a significant amount of infrastructure will be required to be delivered.

The Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE) has determined future servicing arrangements through work on a site specific Development Control Plan (DCP) for the precinct. This detailed work has enabled Council to prepare a Section 7.11 Development Contributions Plan for the precinct that will provide for the delivery of local infrastructure. This will include certain roads, drainage and open space. The total value of this infrastructure is over $530 million.

A Council resolution is sought to publicly exhibit the plan. It is proposed that the plan is exhibited concurrently with the exhibition of the draft DCP for the Mamre Road Precinct. As the plan is a s7.11 Plan there is no requirement for the plan to be approved by the Minister for Planning and Public Spaces or IPART.

Background

The Mamre Road Precinct (the precinct) is located within the Western Sydney Employment Area (WSEA) and the Western Sydney Aerotropolis. The Western Sydney Aerotropolis Plan (WSAP) identified the intended planning outcomes for the Mamre Road Precinct as a warehousing and logistics precinct, as it is connected to the proposed Western Sydney Freight Line, affected by aircraft noise and is not suitable for noise sensitive land uses.

In June an amendment was made to WSEA that rezoned land within the Mamre Road Precinct. This rezoning resulted in approximately 850 hectares of industrial land which could provide about 5,200 construction jobs and 17,000 ongoing jobs when fully developed. The rezoning of the precinct preserves land for environmental conservation and open space and protects a site for a potential Western Sydney freight intermodal terminal.

Status of Planning in the Precinct

Planning in Mamre Road Precinct is further accelerated than in the Aerotropolis, with a number of state significant development applications currently under assessment by DPIE. This makes the need to have an operating development contributions plan for the precinct critical in order for contributions to be levied on this development.

To support the rezoning and future development outcomes of the precinct, a draft Development Control Plan (DCP) has been prepared by DPIE. The draft DCP will provide detailed design controls and the intended infrastructure servicing for the precinct, including road hierarchy, drainage and stormwater detention. The DCP has been developed from a number of expert studies. As the land within the precinct is greenfield and does not contain existing infrastructure that is suitable to support the intended future land uses, a significant amount of local infrastructure will be required in order to support the precinct.

The preparation of the draft DCP has enabled Council to use the proposed servicing arrangements to develop a contributions plan. At the time of the preparation of this report, the draft DCP did not have a date set for its exhibition and had not been publicly released.

The background technical report supporting the draft development contributions plan contains information from the draft DCP that has not yet been publicly released. DPIE has requested this information to remain confidential until such time as the draft DCP is placed on public exhibition. As such the draft contributions plan and background report has been provided to Council confidentially under separate cover.

Infrastructure funding in the Mamre Road Precinct

The WSAP details mechanisms that will enable the funding of infrastructure in the aerotropolis:

· Special Infrastructure Contributions (SIC) - State development contributions.

· Local Infrastructure Contributions - s7.11 or s7.12 Contributions.

Given the scale and scope of infrastructure included in the PIC and apportionment of these, it is likely that the SIC will only fund a portion of the total cost of the infrastructure, together with other funding sources being available to the State Government. This differs significantly from local infrastructure contributions, as Council is only able to fund infrastructure from new growth where the full cost of this is met completely by local infrastructure contributions, or rate base (i.e. existing rate payers)

Council is responsible for the identification and planning for local infrastructure needs in the area and the preparation of development contributions plans to collect funds to deliver this infrastructure. A key consideration is to ensure we had an infrastructure framework for the precinct and an informed position on the cost of local infrastructure to provide an understanding of the cumulative impact of contributions.

Under the provisions of Environmental Planning & Assessment Act Regulations 2000 (The Regulations), development may receive approved in the Mamre Precinct where a development contributions plan applies to the land. Council’s existing Citywide Section 7.12 Development Contributions Plan for non-residential development currently applies to the land, however this plan does not deliver the infrastructure required to adequately support the now zoned area. Given the intention to implement a specific contributions plan for the Mamre Road Precinct, it is proposed that this plan is amended to no longer apply to the land. This is discussed further later in this report.

Infrastructure to be delivered

The development of the contributions plan is based on the delivery of the following local infrastructure that has been identified and planned for by DPIE to support the Mamre Road Precinct:

Type	Deliverables
Roads	· As mapped by DPIE including: · 17 km of collector roads · 9 roundabouts
Stormwater	· As mapped by DPIE including: · 361,660m² trunk drainage channels
Open space and recreation	· 282,083m² zoned RE1 land · Site works/turfing · Tree planting · 5 Outdoor fitness stations

WSEA nominates Council as the acquisition authority for all land zoned RE1 in the precinct. This land is located along the south creek corridor. At this time, the future use of this RE1 has not been determined, however, in order to enable the land to provide recreation use to future works in the precinct, outdoor fitness stations with tree canopy and basic landscaping has been included in the plan.

As provided by the expert reports prepared for DPIE, on site detention systems will be delivered by individual landowners and will not form part of the development contributions plan and are not proposed to be owned by Council.

Costs and Levy Rate

Costs were determined for land and works in order to determine a contribution rate per net developable area (NDA). Industry benchmarks were used to determine the cost of the infrastructure works. The cost of land was provided by WSPP through their feasibility analysis work, and this generally aligns with the land costs to be included in the SIC. Specific costs by infrastructure type are provided below.

Infrastructure	Cost
Roads & Stormwater	$119,429,600
Open space & recreation	$23,166,640
Land	$380,312,400
Total rate (inc. plan admin 1.5%)	$698,596 per NDA

The total cost of the plan by infrastructure category, is broken down as below:

Road works – 36.1%

Stormwater – 36.8%

Open Space – 25.6%

Plan Administration – 1.5%

Contributions Framework and Approvals

We have chosen to prepare a Section 7.11 Development Contributions Plan to be able to collect for development in the area. A section 7.11 plan is a nexus based plan correlating the future development in an area with the infrastructure needed to support that development. We have been able to prepare this type of contributions plan due to the work undertaken by DPIE for the draft DCP. This work has established the infrastructure need and specific locations of the infrastructure to be provided. The costs have been determined from work already undertaken through the Aerotropolis Contribution Plan.

The key benefit of implementing a section 7.11 plan as opposed to a section 7.12 plan (fixed rate levy) for the Mamre Road Precinct is that there are no requirements for the plan to be approved by the Minister for Planning or Public Spaces. There is also no requirement for the plan to be assessed by IPART. This means that the plan can come in force after being adopted by Council. This is critical as development can already be approved in the precinct.

We have compared the draft plan against similar contributions plans for predominately industrial/employment areas across Western Sydney. The rate per net developable hectare is comparable between these plans, as seen in the table below:

Area	LGA	Contribution Rate
Mamre Road Precinct	Penrith	$698,596
Box Hill Industrial	The Hills	$540,000-$960,000
Marsden Park Industrial	Blacktown	$589,000-$905,000
Eastern Creek Stage 3	Blacktown	$219,000-$385,000

* ranges based on the provision of stormwater infrastructure

Amendment to Penrith Citywide s7.12 Plan for non- residential development

At present, the Citywide s7.12 Contributions Plan for non-residential development applies to land within the Mamre Road Precinct. The extent of development and infrastructure considered under the plan is significantly different from the expected development in the precinct under the amended WSEA.

The regulations state that development cannot be approved in the Mamre Road Precinct unless a contributions plan has been approved for the land to which the application relates. Unless the new Mamre Road Development Contributions Plan is in force, we may have to collect contributions under the Citywide s7.12 (1% rate). This is significantly less than is needed to provide suitable infrastructure. It is our preference to remove this plan from applying to the land and allow development to remain undetermined, until the Mamre Road Precinct contributions plan comes into force.

To ensure that only the Mamre Road Precinct plan will apply to this land, an amendment to the citywide s7.12 is proposed so that it no longer applies to land within the Mamre Road Precinct. This minor amendment will include changes to section 1.2 of the plan “Land the plan applies to” and the associated Figure 1, to simply remove the land from the map.

Due to the urgent and minor nature of this amendment, it will be sought that the General Manager is provided the delegation to make the amended Plan, after exhibition.

Exhibition

In accordance with the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act, 1979 and Regulations, the plan is required to be publicly exhibited. It is intended that the plan be exhibited for a minimum of 28 days. The plan would be advertised through Councils website, the Western Weekender newspaper and Councils social media pages.

Implementation of the Plan

The Plan will apply to all development within the net developable area of the precinct. This excludes land to be acquired for open space, roads, drainage and transport investigation areas. A condition of consent will be imposed on the development to pay contributions as required by the plan. Contributions are payable at different times, depending on the development:

· DAs involving subdivision works: payment to be made prior to release of a Subdivision Certificate (linen plan).

· DAs involving building works: payment to be made prior to the release of a Construction Certificate.

· Complying Development works: payment to be made prior to the works authorised in a Complying Development Certificate commencing.

The condition of consent can be satisfied by developers in a number of ways including:

· Cash contribution,

· Works in Kind Agreement (WIKA) - developer constructs certain infrastructure as per the contributions plan, and

· Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA) - developer constructs infrastructure by agreement with Council.

Financial Implications

The financial implications of this report are as follows:

1. If the plan is not made by at the rate sought, Council does not have the finances available to deliver the required infrastructure.

2. Any potential future income that may be received if Council is to proceed with making the s7.11 Plan. Once this plan has been exhibited and finalised this income will be factored into the current operational budget.

Risk Implications

Until such time as the existing Penrith Citywide s7.12 Development Contributions Plan for non-residential development is removed from applying to the land, development may be approved and this may result in a shortfall of funding for local infrastructure. It is critical that the citywide s7.12 plan is removed from applying to the precinct, and that Council seeks to secure funding for local infrastructure through the proposed draft section 7.11 Development Contributions Plan for the Mamre Road Precinct.

Conclusion

The rezoning of Mamre Road Precinct in WSEA has led to a significant amount of local infrastructure needing to be delivered in order to support employment related growth. In order to deliver this infrastructure a s7.11 development contributions plan has been prepared. This plan enables the delivery of road, drainage and open space infrastructure identified by DPIE and Council. We have sought to work collaboratively with DPIE to have a contributions plan prepared as development is approved.

It is proposed that Council publicly exhibit the plan in accordance with the requirements of the Act and Regulations. A further report would be presented to Council after the exhibition to assess any submissions received.

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Draft Mamre Road Development Contributions Plan be received

2. Council endorse the draft Section 7.11 Plan Development Contributions Plan for the Mamre Road Precinct and background report (under separate cover) for public exhibition.

3. The plan be exhibited in accordance with the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act, 1979 and Regulations for a minimum of 28 days.

4. At the conclusion of the exhibition period, a further report be provided to Council on the submissions received during the exhibition period.

5. Penrith Citywide s7.12 Development Contributions Plan for non- residential development be amended to no longer apply to the Mamre Road Precinct, and that this is publicly exhibited in accordance with the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act, 1979 and Regulations.

6. After the exhibition of an amended Penrith Citywide s7.12 Development Contributions Plan for non-residential development, which removes the Mamre Road Precinct from applying to Plan, that delegation is provided to the General Manager to finalise and make this amendment, in accordance with the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act, 1979 and Regulations.

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report

Ordinary Meeting 26 October 2020

RFT20/21-06 Construction of Caddens Road upgrade between Gipps Street and Heaton Avenue

Compiled by: Wasique Mohyuddin, Major Projects Coordinator

Matthew Buckley, Major Projects Coordinator

Authorised by: Michael Jackson, Design and Projects Manager

Brian Steffen, Director - City Services

Outcome	We can get around our City
Strategy	Provide a safe and efficient road and pathway network
Service Activity	Manage the delivery of Council’s major transport infrastructure projects

Executive Summary

RFT20/21-06 Construction of Caddens Road upgrade between Gipps Street and Heaton Avenue was advertised online through Apet360 on 30 July 2020. The tender closed on 11 September 2020.

Once upgraded, Caddens Road between Gipps Street and Heaton Avenue will provide two traffic lanes in each direction with a new roundabout at the White Cedar Road and Caddens Road intersection. The upgrade will also provide new streetlights, bus stop shelters and drainage infrastructure.

This report advises Council of the outcome of the tender evaluation process and recommends that the tender received from Quickway Constructions Pty Ltd be accepted for the full scope of works outlined in RFT20/21-06 Construction of Caddens Road upgrade for the amount of $5,209,904 (excluding GST).

Background

The Australian Government is funding a $200 million Local Roads Package (LRP) as part of the Western Sydney Infrastructure Plan (WSIP). Funding has been allocated from round three for Council to upgrade Caddens Road between Gipps Street and Heaton Avenue to improve road safety and traffic flow efficiency. From WSIP round three, funding has also been allocated for the design development of a number of future Jamison Road and Coreen Avenue intersections upgrade.

Other projects previously funded through WSIP program includes the upgrade of The Northern Road Intersections at Derby Street and the Great Western Highway in Penrith, a new roundabout at Bringelly Road and Caddens Road intersection in Kingswood and the upgrade of Erskine Park Road in Erskine Park.

Tender Evaluation Process

The Tender Evaluation Committee consisted of Major Projects Coordinator Matthew Buckley, Major Projects Coordinator Wasique Mohyuddin, Major Projects & Design Coordinator Ari Fernando and was chaired by Design and Projects Manager Michael Jackson. The Tender Evaluation Committee was supported by Procurement Business Partner Allyce Langton and the probity advisor was Procurement and Contract Management Specialist Bill Stanley.

As a condition of funding, all tenderers were required to hold current accreditation under federal workplace & construction schemes from The Office of the Federal Safety Commissioner (OFSC).

The tenders we received were assessed using the advertised evaluation criteria of:

· Work Health & Safety

· Works method and program

· Demonstrated ability

· Business references

· Financials

· Employment policies and details (direct labour and sub-contractors)

· Local Business Preference

· Quality Assurance and Environmental Management Systems

· Value for money

Initial Tender Review

A full listing of the tenders received is detailed below in price order (ex GST).

Company	Tendered Price	Company Location	Directors
J K Williams Contracting Pty Ltd	$3,892,977.00	39-53 Jack Williams Drive Penrith NSW 2750	Leigh David Hartog Scott Andrew Hartog Lauren Dallas Pervan Glenn Peter Hartog
Burton Contractors Pty Ltd	$4,395,302.00	11-21 Underwood Rd Homebush NSW 2140	Paul Burton Chris Burton
EzyPave Pty Ltd	$4,475,575.38	6a Jellicoe Street Lidcombe NSW 2141	Kassem Khalil
Downer EDI Works Pty Ltd	$5,061,779.00	1 Unwin Street Rosehill NSW 2142	Grant Fenn
Quickway Constructions Pty Ltd	$5,209,904.00	Unit 40, 2 Slough Avenue Silverwater NSW 2128	Derek Mullally David Tan Peter Wilkinson
Ertech Pty Ltd	$5,368,675.00	118 Motivation Drive Wangara WA 6065	James Giumelli Gavin Miller Michael Unger Jim Giumelli
State Asphalt Services Pty Ltd	$5,602,946.00	90 Jedda Road Prestons NSW 2170	John Kypreos

EzyPave Pty Ltd and J K Williams Contracting Pty Ltd did not hold the required federal safety commission accreditation at the time of tender assessment. Compliance with the Office of the Federal Safety Commissioner (OFSC) accreditation is a condition of the funding agreement and is triggered by the total funding amount, as opposed to a contractors tender price. The total funding agreement amount includes design fees, utilities charges and other costs, as well as a project contingency. The total funding amount is well over the threshold that triggers this requirement and engaging a contractor who is not accredited would put Council in clear breach of the funding agreement. The accreditation requirement was stated in the tender documents and clarified further in an addendum.

State Asphalt Services Pty Ltd did not submit a conforming tender. These three tenders were considered non-compliant and couldn’t be considered by the Tender Committee for further assessment.

The remaining four tenders from Burton Contractors Pty Ltd, Downer EDI Works Pty Ltd, Quickway Constructions Pty Ltd and Ertech Pty Ltd were evaluated in detail against the weighted evaluation criteria to determine an effectiveness rating. Consideration was then given to the tenderer’s price schedules, exclusions and qualifications to determine the best value for money solution with competency in technical aspects of the tender.

Evaluation of the Preferred Tender

The tender received from Quickway Constructions Pty Ltd was considered by the Tender Evaluation Committee to be providing the highest value for money compared to the next on the ranking list in terms of both effectiveness and price.

The recommended company, Quickway Constructions Pty Ltd, was selected based on their:

1) Compliance with the tender evaluation criteria,

2) Demonstrated ability to meet Council’s requirements,

3) Compliance with accreditation and prequalification requirements; and

4) Competitive price for the services offered.

The Tender Evaluation Committee thoroughly reviewed the information provided pertaining to past experience of the proposed tenderer and conducted reference checks.

Clarifications were requested from Quickway Constructions Pty Ltd prior to finalising the committee’s recommendation. These clarifications are factored into the tender evaluation and do not represent a risk to project budget.

Quickway Constructions Pty Ltd has delivered numerous projects of similar nature and value on behalf of other local Councils. Council’s Project Management team is satisfied with their performance in relation to community safety and environmental management and reference checks have also returned with positive feedback.

Financial Implications

Included in the assessment of tenders was the commissioning of independent reference checks, industry analysis, financial analysis, and performance analysis on Quickway Constructions Pty Ltd. These checks were completed by Corporate Scorecard Pty Ltd and have been reviewed by Financial Services. No concerns were raised as to the ability of Quickway Constructions Pty Ltd to perform the works described. The total tendered price by Quickway Constructions Pty Ltd of $5,209,904 (excluding GST) is within the available budget.

Funding for the proposed construction works will be covered by the Australian Government via the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Cities and Regional Development under the previously accepted third round of the Western Sydney Infrastructure Plan Local Roads Package grant.

Tender Advisory Group (TAG) Comment

The objective of the Tender Advisory Group (TAG) is to support the Council to achieve fair and equitable tender processes. The TAG, consisting of Brian Steffen - Director City Services, Glenn McCarthy - Governance Manager and Neil Farquharson – Financial Services Manager were briefed by the Design & Projects team about the background and the process followed.

The TAG considered the recommendations in relation to the tender for the construction of Caddens Road Project noting that Quickway Constructions Pty Ltd demonstrated their ability to meet Council’s requirements and their proposal was considered to be the most advantageous to Council. The TAG reviewed the evaluation process outlined within the report and is satisfied that the selection criteria have been correctly applied in making the recommendations.

Risk Implications

The tender process outlined in this report includes controls regarding probity and ensuring value for Council, overseen by the Tender Advisory Group. The successful tenderer holds current accreditation under federal workplace & construction schemes from The Office of the Federal Safety Commissioner (OFSC).

Conclusion

The Tender Evaluation Committee is of the opinion that Quickway Constructions Pty Ltd provided the most advantageous tender and it is recommended that the Company be awarded the contract for a contract sum of $5,209,904 excluding GST.

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1. The information contained in the report on RFT20/21-06 Construction of Caddens Road upgrade between Gipps Street and Heaton Avenue be received.

2. Quickway Constructions Pty Ltd be awarded the Contract subject to the execution of a formal agreement for the Construction of the Caddens Road Upgrade for an amount of $5,209,904 excluding GST.

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

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.

Ordinary Meeting 26 October 2020

Transport for NSW - Emu Plains At-Grade Commuter Car Park

Compiled by: Walter Sinnadurai, Transportation Planner

Authorised by: Michael Alderton, Acting Engineering Services Manager

Wayne Mitchell, Director - Development and Regulatory Services

Outcome	We can get around our City
Strategy	Provide parking to meet the needs of the City
Service Activity	Provide technical advice on parking issues and plan for the delivery of parking infrastructure

Executive Summary

Information was provided to Council at a Councillor Briefing on Monday, 19 October 2020 regarding the proposed new at-grade commuter carpark and pedestrian footbridge to service Emu Plains Railway Station. This report provides a summary of the technical review of the proposal by Council Officers and draft points of response to Transport for NSW regarding the proposal and consultation.

Background

The NSW Government has committed to delivering additional commuter parking at Emu Plains as part of its Commuter Carpark Program. Under this program, Transport for NSW (TfNSW) proposes to build a new at-grade commuter carpark and pedestrian footbridge west of Emu Plains Railway Station.

Formal consultation under clauses 13 and 15 of the State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 has been received by Council, seeking our feedback by 28 October 2020.

Announcements were made in the lead up to the last NSW State Election that the NSW Government would deliver up to 800 extra commuter car spaces at Emu Plains. This would double to current parking capacity at the station and help address the increasing demand for parking due to the growth in patronage on the Sydney Train network. The proposal at that time was to convert the existing carpark to the north side of the station to a multi-storey facility, with five levels including the ground floor to create 800 new spaces. This followed on from the additional 260 spaces constructed in 2011.

TfNSW has advised that they have carried out an extensive Options Assessment Process and as a result, have identified a site on the southern side of Old Bathurst Road as the most suitable location for new car parking spaces. The proposed concept includes a new ground level carpark north-west of the station, providing up to 750 additional parking spaces. A new pedestrian bridge over Old Bathurst Road is also proposed, which will provide safe access to and from the new carpark and the station.

Current Proposal

The key design features of TfNSW’s Proposal include the following:

· An at-grade car park with up to 750 commuter car parking spaces, located on Old Bathurst Road

· A pedestrian footbridge over Old Bathurst Road to provide pedestrian access between the car park and the station

· A new ‘T’ Give-Way intersection on Old Bathurst Road to allow vehicle entry and exit to the car park

· Transport Park & Ride infrastructure, providing public transport user customers with up to 18 hours of parking

· Accessible parking spaces

· Motorcycle parking bays

· Pedestrian pathway upgrades on Mackellar Street

· Closed circuit television (CCTV), lighting and wayfinding signage for improved safety and security

· Provision for future electric vehicle charging spaces

· Ancillary works including services diversion and/or relocation, drainage works, fencing and landscaping.

TfNSW advised that the longer term benefits of the Proposal include provision of additional commuter parking spaces, improved accessibility to the station and improved interchange facilities.

Subject to planning approval (assessment currently underway), construction is expected to

commence in early-2021 and is expected to be complete in early-2022.

TfNSW is currently undertaking community consultation of this proposal which has included a letterbox drop to local residents and businesses, signage at the station and a dedicated web page for feedback. The consultation period concludes at 5:00pm on Wednesday, 28 October 2020.

Review by Council

Council Officers have assessed the proposal and prepared a draft response to Transport for NSW.

Three major issues have been identified in Councils review, being traffic and access including the integration with the existing intersection of Old Bathurst Road and Smith Street, the suitability of the site with regard to flooding and overland flow, pedestrian bridge design

Traffic and Access

It is essential that this project includes the long-needed signalisation of the Smith Street intersection. The safety and congestion at this intersection has been a long-held concern that has been amplified in recent years as commuter patronage has increased significantly. It was our position in 2010 when the carpark was expanded that the intersection required signalisation at that time. This view has been advocated consistently to TfNSW during preliminary discussions about this current proposal. The proposal as prepared by TfNSW does not propose to align the new carpark exit with Smith Street, nor signalise of improve the intersection.

It is also essential that TfNSW undertake traffic modelling to assess the impact to the local road network. The modelling shall include background traffic growth (2% growth rate for 10 years without the proposed car park) and with the completion of the new carpark (say in 10 years), and then the traffic growth 10 years after the completion date. A network SIDRA assessment shall include the flowing;

· Old Bathurst Road/Great Western Highway

· Old Bathurst Road/Smith Street

· Old Bathurst Road/new carpark access

· Old Bathurst Road/Russell Street

· Old Bathurst Road Emu Plains Correctional Centre

Ay traffic assessment shall include an accessibility assessment assessing paths of travel and accessible parking space assessment.

Flooding and Overland Flow

Currently floodwaters run through the site and pond to a significant depth at the downstream end of the site, near Old Bathurst Road. Overland flow in smaller storm events (2-year flood event) inundate the site. TfNSW have advised that mitigation measures during the design will include a drainage channel. Council officers are concerned about the proposed mitigation measures and the suitability of the site with regard to flood free access for vehicles and pedestrians.

Bridge Assessment

Currently the proposed pedestrian bridge is on the western side of the railway line. The current location does not cater for the high volume of pedestrians that catch the train to and from Nepean Creative and performing Arts High School. It is imperative that this is included. The bridge must be designed to cater for future growth in the city. As such any bridge structure shall maintain a minimum 21m between supporting structures.

Additionally, any bridge structure must be attractive with architectural features to complement the city. The current bridge design must be improved.

There are several matters including those above that Council will bring to the attention of TfNSW which are listed below.

The preliminary high-level submission is listed below:

1. The commuter car park design should be best practice in line with other recent commuter car park developments such as Schofield and that considers its interface with the future land uses will improve the connectivity and accessibility of the car park along with the liveability of the future town centre.

2. It is essential that this project includes the long-needed signalisation of the Smith Street intersection. The safety and congestion at this intersection has been a long-held concern that has been amplified in recent years as commuter patronage has increased significantly.

3. The establishment of the proposed ingress/egress will preclude a future signalised upgrade of Old Bathurst Road/Smith Street.

4. The existing northern commuter carpark accessed via the Smith Street/Old Bathurst Road intersection is in closer walking proximity to Emu Plains Station, and as such, this carpark will likely reach capacity before the proposed new carpark. Once the existing carpark reaches capacity, motorists attempting to find a space will be forced to backtrack to access the proposed new carpark, thus increasing the effective movements at the Smith Street/Old Bathurst Road intersection. This redistribution of trips must be considered in the traffic assessment. It is our view, that any increase in parking in or around Emu Plains Station would require an accompanying signalised intersection at Smith Street/Old Bathurst Road.

5. The proposed new entry/exit from the carpark on Old Bathurst Road is a poor location. We are yet to see the modelling and safety audit for the proposed “seagull” intersection ingress/egress to the carpark. On face value, sight distances appear problematic.

6. Council requests a four-way signalised intersection with Smith Street, aligned further west to line up with a new access point to the proposed car park.

7. It is recommended that TfNSW undertake traffic modelling to assess the impact to the local road network. The modelling shall include background traffic growth (2% growth rate for 10 years without the proposed car park) and with the completion of the new carpark (say in 10 years), and then the traffic growth 10 years after the completion date. A network SIDRA assessment shall include the flowing;

· Old Bathurst Road/Great Western Highway

· Old Bathurst Road/Smith Street

· Old Bathurst Road/new carpark access

· Old Bathurst Road/Russell Street

· Old Bathurst Road Emu Plains Correctional Centre

8. It is requested that the SIDRA assessment result tables provide details in identifying the worst approach, worst approach Level of Service (LOS), the queue lengths, delay time, and include the overall LOS for the intersection. This needs to be done to identify mitigation measures. Also determine the traffic redistribution from all existing car parks to the proposed new car park.

9. The site is affected by the mainstream flooding from the Nepean River as well as by the local overland flow flooding from the Emu Plains catchment. Currently there is a culvert beneath the rail line, located midway along the southern boundary of the proposed carpark that is part of the flow-path which runs from south to north direction (i.e. from the Nepean Creative and Performing Art High School through the site towards Old Bathurst Road before joining Lapstone Creek). Any flow restriction through this culvert or through the flow-path may result in adverse flooding, including ponding of flood waters behind the railway line and diverting flows to nearby areas.

10. Currently floodwaters (Overland flow) run through the site and pond to a significant depth at the downstream end of the site, near Old Bathurst Road. The proposed development can potentially change this flow path and ponding behaviour, and result in downstream impacts, including overtopping of Old Bathurst Road in more frequent events. The recently completed Emu Plains Overland Flow Flood Study (BMT, 2019) shows the following results for the site.

#	Flood Event	Depth of Flooding (m)	Floodwater Velocity (m/s)
1	PMF	Up to 2m (approximately)	Varies from 1.0 to 1.7
2	100 - year	Greater than 1m	Varies from 0.5 to 0.9
3	20 - year	Up to 1m (approximately)	Varies from 0.4 to 0.5
4	10 - year	Up to 1m (approximately)	Varies from 0.4 to 0.5
5	2 - year	Up to 1m (approximately)	Varies from 0.3 to 0.4

11. The site also starts flooding from the Nepean River in the 1 in 100 AEP event. The flood data for Nepean River flooding is presented below. This data is sourced from the Nepean River Flood Study (Advisian, 2018).

#	Design Flood	Depth of Flooding (m)	Floodwater Velocity (m/s)
1	PMF	Up to 7m (approximately)	Varies from 1.3 to 2.0
2	100yr	Up to 1m (approximately)	Varies from 0.1 to 0.4

During the 1 in 100 AEP or larger flood events, a flood runner of the Nepean River begins from Jamison Creek confluence, runs through the Emu Plains residential areas and Hunter Fields, cuts Great Western Highway and then runs through Lion Park and Dukes Oval and then mainly through the drainage channel located between McAuley Crescent and Hartigan Avenue.

Once the flood runner reaches the railway line, the flood waters pond behind the rail line and run through two culverts. One of the culverts is located midway of the southern boundary of the proposed carpark site. When these culverts capacities are exceeded, floodwaters run further east along the southern side of the railway line and then run through the Old Bathurst Road underpass. As one of the culverts is just located at the southern boundary, large quantities of flood waters pass through the site. Further during a PMF event, the whole site will be under flood waters up to 7m deep.

12. The likely issues are:

- Adverse impact of the proposed development on the existing flood behaviour, with likely increase in flood levels for surrounding properties.

- Likely increase in frequency of flooding on Old Bathurst Road.

- The carpark site could pond significantly. Potential floating of the parked cars with the raised water level and risk to ongoing traffic on Old Bathurst Road and other surrounding properties.

- Risk to commuters during a flood event.

- The concept plan of the proposed carpark includes a drainage channel in the south – north direction to allow flood waters to flow. Several bridges/culverts need to be built to allow vehicles to cross. These crossings will impact the flood flow.

- Impact on water quality.

13. The plan provided by TfNSW provides a schematic of the proposal, but it is considered inadequate to provide detailed comments. Council requires a design drawing with details of footbridge and locations.

14. The proposed pedestrian bridge may not be the best solution in terms of also resolving the long-term concern about the safety of students crossing from the station to Nepean Performing Arts School. This has not been addressed in the TfNSW design.

15. Alignment of the footbridge should not obstruct the Flooding sign at this location. Consideration should be given for upgrade.

16. It is request that the footbridge, including all supporting structures, is owned/ maintained and under the care and control of TfNSW.

17. Any bridge structure shall maintain a minimum 21m between supporting structures. Structural integrity of the Crib Wall must be investigated for the location of the footbridge and its foundation.

18. Any bridge structure must be attractive with architectural features to complement the city. The current bridge design must be improved.

19. Kerb & Gutter and stormwater drainage is required along Old Bathurst Road as part of this development to address the drainage and parking issues.

20. Any Construction Management plan must address how a road closure during construction might impact our emergency maintenance work on the existing underpass drainage pit.

21. Provide a walkability assessment/study to determine the distance from the furthest western-most point of the proposed carpark. How many minutes would a pedestrian take to circumnavigate the car park and reach the platform?

22. Provide details to Council on the heat island effect of the large expanse of concrete vs a small multideck footprint.

23. Proposed car park access is through a give way control within a 70Km/hr speed zone. This does not appear to have been supported with a traffic report. The majority of the catchment to this car park is from south west area. Consideration should be given to signalizing entry/exit to car park at this location to improve safety.

24. Required to address the pedestrian safety measures along Old Bathurst Road and Smith Street.

25. Design vehicle access and thoroughfares to promote safe speeds.

26. Locate and design set down areas, disabled spaces, pedestrian thoroughfares to reduce conflicts between pedestrians and vehicles.

27. Proposed changes to the road circulation and regulatory parking restrictions require approval of the Local Traffic Committee.

28. We understand, stormwater from under the Railway Bridge is discharged through to this area. The Proposal shows a landscaped drainage channel back to Old Bathurst Road where this does not flow anywhere. If this is the proposal to drain the car park, sub-surface drainage should be constructed through to the drainage channel next to self-storage business. Alternatively, drainage channel or subsurface drainage at the southern boundary of the car park should be continued to the open channel at the southern end of David Road.

29. Existing trees of value to be identified and retained - particularly in boundary setbacks and street plantings in verges. Identify, retain and protect existing trees and their rootzones along western boundary (possibly on adjacent property)

30. Consultation and Heritage should be considered in the design of any signage located in the vicinity of the railway station itself

31. Signage associated with the carpark should consider the local context and be sized and designed appropriately.

32. Canopy trees:

a. ensure canopy and cooling is a driver for the design

b. streetscape - tree planting required to reinforce Great Western Highway in line with Council's plans for this road corridor

c. side setbacks to be wider to accommodate large canopy trees and substantial visual screening from adjacent properties and rail line

d. internal tree planting shall include large canopy trees for maximum cooling effect - this part of the LGA has recorded the highest temperatures due to lack of canopy and other cooling

e. tree canopy to be evaluated against CCTV and lighting constraints - the latter shall not preclude the necessary quantity and quality of tree planting

f. large pot sizes preferred to ensure maximum height and clearance of lighting and CCTV

33. Perimeter pedestrian path to be tested for safety - internal pedestrian corridors that are generous, shaded and pleasant to walk along will attract activity and therefore increase safety, which is preferred

34. Provide WSUD and maximise runoff into garden bed areas eg. slotted or flush kerbs

35. Any retaining walls to be designed so their visual impact is minimised

36. Test path alignments to ensure they reflect logical pedestrian desire lines

37. Bridge design

a. designs from concept phase onwards to be provided to Council for design input and feedback as this is a key gateway to the city location.

b. Minimise tree removal and replace trees where possible

c. connection north into the station - existing trees to be retained and an enhanced and cooled public domain is required. There are significant trees here that should be retained.

d. Trees at Highway edges to be assessed prior to bridge alignment being established in detail - minimise removals.

e. Potential to align bridge under overhead power lines

38. Document quantity of trees and area extent of canopy removed and provide offset planting and canopy details to Council

Financial Implications

There are no financial implications for Council associated with this report.

Risk Implications

We have considered all of the risks involved and have provided a detailed list of matters to be considered by TfNSW as part of the process.

Conclusion

The proposed concept includes a new at-grade carpark west of the station, providing up to 750 additional parking spaces. A new pedestrian bridge over Old Bathurst Road is also proposed, which will provide safe access to the new carpark and the station. The improvements and upgrade are supported in principle as it will provide important additional commuter carparking for the City.

However, TfNSW should be informed that Council does not support the access arrangements in their current form and that a 4-way signalised intersection should be created at the Smith Street/Old Bathurst Road intersection for access to the site. The other key issues identified within the body of this report will be included in Council’s submission to TfNSW and Council Officers will continue to work with TSNW to ensure that the future upgrade delivers appropriate outcomes for all stakeholders.

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Transport for NSW - Emu Plains At-Grade Commuter Car Park be received.

2. Council’s Engineering Services Manager be authorised to finalise a submission, based on this report, to Transport for NSW by 6 November 2020.

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.

Ordinary Meeting 26 October 2020

Tender Reference RFT 14/15-31 Provision of Grave Digging Services

Compiled by: Andrew Robinson, Community Facilities and Recreation Manager

Lynda Lowe, Cemeteries Supervisor

Authorised by: Brian Steffen, Director - City Services

Outcome	We have safe, vibrant places
Strategy	Make our public places safe and attractive
Service Activity	Manage Council’s cemeteries

Executive Summary

The purpose of this report is to advise Council of the outcome of the Tender for the ‘Provision Grave Digging Services’ for a period of three (3) years, with an option to extend for a further two (2) x one (1) year periods, by mutual agreement and subject to satisfactory performance.

A total of three (3) tender responses were received. Following a review of the tenders by the Tender Evaluation Panel a determination was made to short-list one (1) tenderer that represented the best value to Council.

Based on detailed evaluation, independent risk analysis and best overall value, the Tender Evaluation Panel is recommending that the contract for the provision of Grave Digging Services within the Penrith Local Government Area be awarded to L J Follington Constructions Pty Ltd, for an initial period of three (3) years, with an option to extend for a further two (2) x one (1) year periods subject to satisfactory performance and mutual agreement and allowing for rise and fall provisions.

Background

Tenders were advertised on Council’s website, AEPT360 website and e-Tendering website on 12 June 2020, for the ‘Provision of Grave Digging Services’ for a period of three (3) years, with an option to extend for a further two (2) x one (1) year periods subject to satisfactory performance and mutual agreement and allowing for rise and fall provisions. The Tender closed on 19 August 2020.

It was proposed in the tender documents that Council would select one (1) company to perform the services specified. The services comprised the provision of grave digging services for Council cemeteries located at Kingswood, St Marys and Emu Plains. Funeral Directors contact Council Officers regarding the need for a burial to occur and Council staff then coordinates the provision of the grave digging service with the contractor.

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

Tenderers were also required to complete a price schedule setting out the unit rates for a range of grave digging services e.g. single depth grave site; double depth grave site; grave sites with or without monuments; reopening of grave sites; grave sites in lawn and monumental sections.

Tender Evaluation Committee

The Tender Evaluation Committee consisted of the Community Facilities & Recreation Manager, Andrew Robinson, the Cemeteries Supervisor, Lynda Lowe, the Cemetery Operations Team Leader – Paul Whiteman. Allyce Langton from Council’s Procurement team performed the role of tender administration and probity officer for this tender.

Evaluation process

The process for the evaluation of tenders was as follows:

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

2. Assessment of costs based on the unit rates tendered and the allocated staff to perform the services;

3. Determination of a short-list based on the best rankings from 1 and 2 above;

4. Further evaluation of the short-listed companies through:

- Independent Financial Risk Analysis

- Independent Referee Checks

Tender Evaluation Criteria

The tenders submitted were initially assessed in accordance with the evaluation specified in the tender documents. The selection criteria advertised and used in selecting the successful tenderers were as follows:

· Methodology

· Demonstrated Ability

· Environmental Management

· Quality Assurance Systems

· Workplace Health and Safety; and,

· Conformance to the Conditions.

Summary of Tenders received

A total of three (3) submissions were received for the Tender. No tenders were received from local suppliers in the Penrith LGA.

Submissions were received from the following respondents (listed in alphabetical order) in response to the advertised tender:

Tenderers Name	Location of the Business	Names of Business Owners and/or Names of the Board of Directors
Douglas Park Earthmoving PTY LTD	52 Station Street Douglas Park NSW 2569 Australia	Sole Director - Sean Connell,
Field Services Group PTY LTD	41/59 Halstead Street South Hurstville NSW 2221 Australia	John Vines - Executive Director
L J Follington Constructions Pty Ltd	907 East Kurrajong Rd East Kurrajong NSW 2758 Australia	Larry and Robyn Follington are Directors and owners of LJ Follington Constructions P/L

As mentioned above, the tenderers were requested to complete a unit price schedule for a number of pre-determined burial types.

The unit rates submitted by each of the tenderers were annualised based on the actual quantities for each burial type in the 2019/2020 financial year. The table below shows the annualised cost for each tenderer from lowest to highest.

Year	Tenderers Name	Annualised Cost (excl.GST)
2019/2020	L J Follington Construction Pty Ltd	$177,000.00
	Field Services Group PTY LTD	$455,312.25
	Douglas Park Earthmoving PTY LTD	$553,000.00

Evaluation of tenders

An initial review of all tenders received identified that two (2) tenderers did not adequately address or supply suitable written responses to the tender criteria. The annualised cost for each tenderer was also high, the two tenderers were;

· Douglas Park Earthmoving PTY LTD

· Field Services Group PTY LTD

The remaining tender, L J Follington Construction Pty Ltd was assessed against the evaluation criteria and based on its written submission, all the specified requirements were met.

Shortlisted Tenderer

L J Follington Constructions Pty Ltd

L J Follington Constructions Pty Ltd (LJFC) in its tender submission stated that it is a small family business which is registered as a Proprietary Company. The company has been in the grave digging and funeral servicing industry for 20 years. The company provides grave digging services in cemeteries for the following Councils: Hawkesbury, Blacktown, Penrith, The Hills, Camden, Picton, Wollondilly, Randwick and Hornsby. The company is also increasingly servicing private cemeteries, all over the Sydney region. For example, its expertise is utilised in Castlebrook Memorial Park, where it is called upon to dig limited access, wet and extremely difficult graves. The company has stated that it has reached a level of digging, and servicing, in excess of 650 graves per year. With its quality and calibre of staff, and quantity of equipment, the company does do not have any problems doing multiple burials at the same cemetery or multiple cemeteries on the same day.

The tender received from L J Follington Constructions Pty Ltd was further evaluated, including independent financial analysis and referee checks conducted by Corporate Scorecard.

Financial Implications

"The Tender Evaluation Panel recommend L J Follington Constructions Pty Ltd for Grave Digging Services at a projected cost of $770,000 for a period of three years, with an option to extend for a further two (2) x one (1) year periods, by mutual agreement and subject to satisfactory performance.

Councils 2020-21 Operational Plan includes a budget of $187,000 for Grave Digging Services. All Cemetery expenditure is funded from Councils Cemetery Reserve which has a projected 30 June 2021 closing balance of $678,745.

"Tender Advisory Group (TAG) Comments

The objective of the Tender Advisory Group (TAG) is to support Council to achieve fair and equitable tender processes. The TAG, consisting of Brian Steffen - Director – City Services, Glenn McCarthy - Governance Manager, Neil Farquharson – Financial Services Manager and Chris Lawrence – Supply Coordinator, were briefed by the Cemetery Operations team about the background and the process followed. The TAG considered the recommendations in relation to the tender for Grave Digging Services noting the company has demonstrated their ability to meet Council’s requirements and their proposal was considered to be the most advantageous to Council. The TAG reviewed the evaluation process outlined within the report and is satisfied that the selection criteria have been correctly applied in making the recommendations.

Risk Implications

The tender process outlined in this report includes control regarding probity and ensuring value for Council, overseen by the Tender Advisory Group. The recommended tenderer has demonstrated quality assurance, safety and environmental systems in place and has experience operating within occupied premises.

Conclusion

Based on the detailed evaluation and independent risk analysis, the tender that represents the best overall value to Council was received from L J Follington Constructions Pty Ltd. The company has been Council’s grave digging contractor for the last thirteen (13) years and have provided an excellent level of service, and it is recommended for appointment for the provision of Grave Digging Services for a period of three (3) years, with an option to extend for a further two (2) x one (1) year periods, by mutual agreement and subject to satisfactory performance.

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Tender Reference RFT 14/15-31 Provision of Grave Digging Services be received

2. The tender from L J Follington Pty Ltd be accepted for the provision of Grave Digging Services for a three (3) year period, with an option to extend for a further two (2) one (1) year periods subject to satisfactory performance and mutual agreement and allowing for rise and fall.

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.

Ordinary Meeting 26 October 2020

RFT20/21-07 Leonay Oval Amenities

Compiled by: Mitchell Sammut, Project Supervisor

Authorised by: Michael Jackson, Design and Projects Manager

Brian Steffen, Director - City Services

Outcome	We have safe, vibrant places
Strategy	Make our public places safe and attractive
Service Activity	Implement the Building Asset Renewal Program

Executive Summary

A tender for the construction of Leonay Oval Amenities Stage 2, 3 and 4, Emu Plains was advertised on 10 August 2020 on Apet360 and e-tendering websites and closed on Tuesday 8 September 2020 at 11.00am.

The project will see the completion of the Leonay Oval Upper Amenities upgrade which includes construction and installation of; canteen, canteen storeroom, storeroom, BBQ preparation space and awning area.

This report advises Council of the outcome of the tender process and recommends that the tender from Coverit Building Group Pty Ltd, for the amount of $322,940.00 (excluding GST) be accepted for Leonay Oval Amenities Stage 2, 3 and 4, Emu Plains.

Background

Emu Plains Junior Rugby League Football Club, the sporting club based at Leonay Oval, approached Council in 2012 for an amenities block aimed at servicing the upper area of Leonay Oval as the location of the lower amenities block at Leonay didn’t provide sufficient provision to the upper reserve mod and mini fields. Council worked with the club and designed plans for an upper sporting amenities block. Architectural drawings were produced at the time that included four stages of works. Leonay Oval Stage 1 Upper Amenities was constructed and completed in 2013 which included toilets and storage room.

The funding for the project is through the NSW Government Sport Election Commitments Program 2019-2023 which will fully fund the remaining 3 stages of works. The final stages of the project includes canteen, canteen store room, additional storeroom, BBQ preparation space and awning area.

Tender Evaluation Panel

The Tender Evaluation Panel consisted of Architectural Supervisor Rosemarie Canales, Project Supervisor Mitchell Sammut and was chaired by Design and Projects Manager Michael Jackson. Allyce Langton from Council’s Procurement team performed the role of tender administration and probity officer for this tender.

Tender Evaluation Criteria

Tenderers for the project were required to submit their tender using the Apet360 tendering software, which clearly defined the response required against each of the evaluation criteria.

The tenders we received were assessed using the advertised evaluation criteria of:

• Company Profile

• Conformance, Acceptance and Declaration

• Business References

• Completion of Forms Tender Price submitted

• Compliance Statement

• Demonstrated Ability

• Works Method and Program

• Local Business Preference

• Financials

• Employment Policies

• Quality Assurance Systems

• Environmental Management Systems

• Work Health and Safety

Summary of Tenders Received

A total of seventeen (17) tenders were received by the closing date of the advertised tender and are listed below in price order (ex GST).

Company	Tendered Price	Company Address	Owners/Directors
Cook Constructions Pty Ltd	$313,682.30	Unit 3, 87 Railway Rd North, Mulgrave NSW 2756	Daniel Cook
RBF Constructions Pty Limited	$314,520.00	5/31 Governor Macquarie Dr, Chipping Norton NSW 2170	Robert Francis
Regional West Constructions Pty Ltd	$315,816.20	75A Corporation Avenue, Robin Hill NSW 2795	Shakeel Karim, Alex Bechara, Jason Farrar & Christian Gladdish
Coverit Building Group Pty Ltd	$322,940.00	Unit 18 37/47 Borec Road, Penrith NSW 2750	Shane Comans
Westbury Constructions Pty Ltd	$335,212.00	13 Keene St, Baulkham Hills NSW 2153	Darren Price & Shakeel Karim
Phillip Mcnamara t/a Cranebrook Constructions	$356,643.00	97 Taylor Road, Cranebrook NSW 2749	Phil McNamara
Glenstone Group Pty. Ltd. t/a Glenstone Constructions	$377,986.42	1/124 Russell Street, Emu Plains NSW 2750	Dominic Hogan & Paul Smyth
Odyssey Interiors (NSW) Pty Ltd t/a Odyssey Construction & Fitout	$393,676.00	Suite 1E, Level 1, 1345 The Horsley Drive, Wetherill Park NSW 2164	Caterina Cannavo & Carmelo Stillisano
Every Trade Building Services Pty Limited	$399,952.00	5 Lennox Pl, Wetherill Park NSW 2164	Francois Tarabay
Alliance Project Group Pty Ltd	$403,903.79	Unit 31, 11-21 Underwood Road, Homebush NSW 2140	Rouad Elayoubi
Pelenoy Group Pty Ltd	$415,124.48	137 Parsonage Rd, Castle Hill NSW 2154	Bradley Waud
Austfield Pty Ltd	$425,335.00	316/33 Lexington Drive, Bella Vista NSW 2153	Anwar Menashi
Frontier Projects Pty Ltd	$447,000.00	6 Deloraine Close Hinchinbrook NSW 2168	Vince Pellegrini
Programmed Facility Management Pty. Ltd. t/a Programmed Building Projects	$499,978.00	Unit C, 255 Rawson Street, Auburn NSW, 2144	Glenn Thomson
Assett Group Services Pty Ltd	$544,409.48	2/552-560 Church St, North Parramatta NSW 2151	Joe Puccio
N. Mina Constructions Pty Ltd	$628,000.00	30 Horton St, Yagoona NSW 2199	Nazih Mina
Ikodome Pty Limited	$818,306.00	19a George Street, Eastlakes NSW 2018	Georgia Zeritis

Short Listed Tenderers

Seven tenders were initially shortlisted based on available budget and then assessed against the evaluation criteria, these are listed below.

• Cook Constructions Pty Ltd

• RBF Constructions Pty limited

• Regional West Constructions Pty Ltd

• Coverit Building Group Pty Ltd

• Westbury Constructions Pty Ltd

• Phillip McNamara t/a Cranebrook Constructions

• Glenstone Group Pty. Ltd. t/a Glenstone Constructions

The remaining tenders were beyond the available budget so were not consider further.

Evaluation of the Preferred Tender

All seven tenders were assessed against the evaluation criteria.

On assessment Cook Constructions Pty Ltd, RBF Constructions Pty limited and Regional West Constructions Pty Ltd (the three lowest prices) did not demonstrate any substantive experience in sporting amenities or community facilities and scored poorly in Demonstrated Ability on that basis. Coverit Building Group Pty Ltd submitted the fourth best price at $322,940.00 excl. GST only $9,257.70 off the lowest submitted price of the tender. The panel determined that Coverit Building Group Pty Ltd provided the best value for Council on the responses provided, clearly demonstrating their suitability to undertake the project.

Coverit Building Group Pty Ltd have completed several sporting amenities and community facilities building construction projects for Council and currently hold the current tender with Council for Building Maintenance and Construction Works carrying out repairs and refurbishments on community and sporting facilities.

The recommended company, Coverit Building Group Pty Ltd was selected based on their:

1) Compliance with the tender evaluation criteria,

2) Demonstrated ability to meet Council’s requirements; and

3) Competitive price for the services offered.

Financial Implications

Included in the assessment of tenders was the commissioning of independent reference checks, financial analysis, and performance analysis on Coverit Building Group Pty Ltd. These checks were completed by Equifax Australasia Credit Ratings Pty Ltd. Financial Services have reviewed the financial information provided by the tenderer and have not identified any reason why the contract should not be awarded.

Funding for the proposed construction works will be covered by the Penrith Sporting Infrastructure Project - 2019 Election Commitments from the Office of Sport.

Tender Advisory Group Comments

The TAG considered the recommendations in relation to the tender for the Construction of RFT20/21-07 Leonay Oval Amenities Stage 2, 3 and 4 noting that, while the recommended tender was not the lowest price, the company has demonstrated their ability to meet Council’s requirements and their proposal was considered to be the most advantageous to Council. The TAG reviewed the evaluation process outlined within the report and is satisfied that the selection criteria have been correctly applied in making the recommendations.

Risk Implications

The tender process outlined in this report includes controls regarding probity and ensuring value for council, overseen by the Tender Advisory Group. The works will be undertaken in accordance with Work Health & Safety systems.

This project will add new facilities onto the back of an existing recreation structure with public safety a key part of the construction methodology and project plan.

Conclusion

Seven tenders were initially shortlisted based on available budget and then assessed against the evaluation criteria. Coverit Building Group provided the best price that also meet the tender evaluation criteria to undertake the project. It is recommended that the proposal and lump sum price from Coverit Building Group Pty Ltd, for the amount of $322,940.00 (excluding GST) be accepted for Construction of RFT20/21-07 Leonay Oval Amenities Stage 2, 3 and 4, Emu Plains.

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1. The information contained in the report on RFT20/21-07 Leonay Oval Amenities be received

2. The proposal and lump sum price from Coverit Building Group Pty Ltd, for the amount of $322,940.00 (excluding GST) be accepted for Leonay Oval Amenities Stage 2, 3 and 4, Emu Plains.

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

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.

Ordinary Meeting 26 October 2020

Tender Reference 19/20-41 Manufacture and/or Distribution of Compostable Bags

Compiled by: Aisha Poole, Resource Recovery Coordinator

Authorised by: Tracy Chalk, Waste and Resource Recovery Manager

Brian Steffen, Director - City Services

Outcome	We care for our environment
Strategy	Support our community to use resources wisely
Service Activity	Manage resource recovery and waste collection services

Executive Summary

The purpose of this report is to advise Council of the outcome of the Tender for the ‘Manufacture and/or Distribution of Compostable Bags’ RFT19/20-41 for a period of three (3) years, with an option to extend for a further two (2) x one (1) year periods, by mutual agreement and subject to satisfactory performance. The tender was advertised on 12 May 2020 and closed on 19 August 2020.

A total of twelve tender responses were received. Following an evaluation of non-price components by the Tender Evaluation Panel, a short-list of three tenders was made. The Tender Evaluation Panel then considered the pricing schedule and determined one (1) tenderer that represented the best value to Council which included both Manufacture and Distribution components.

The preferred tenderer is the incumbent and has performed well in the current contract with consistently high quality product and service levels. The independent financial analysis check showed no adverse findings and demonstrated a satisfactory capacity to undertake the requirements of the tender.

Based on detailed evaluation, independent risk analysis and best overall value, the Tender Evaluation Panel is recommending that the contract for the Manufacture and Distribution of Compostable Bags be awarded to Cardia Bioplastics (Australia) Pty Ltd for a period of three (3) years, with an option to extend for a further two (2) x one (1) year periods, by mutual agreement and subject to satisfactory performance.

Background

At the Extraordinary Meeting of 15 February 2010, Council resolved to improve the three bin domestic waste service system through a series of recommendations, including the provision of compostable bags that conform to the requirements of Australian Standard AS 4736 – 2006 to households receiving the organics collection service. Bags conforming to this Standard fully compost through commercial composting facilities. It is also important that the inks and dyes used in the manufacture of the bags do not cause any adverse effect on microbiological organisms in the composting process or when the compost is applied to land. In this regard, an earthworm eco-toxicity test must be conducted and certification provided as part of the tender.

Current Situation

It is necessary that the compostable bags be readily identifiable. These bags are coloured green with Council identification and are the only bags allowed in the green lidded organics bin for the composting process. The compostable bags assist households with the storage of food waste and other organic waste prior to placement in the organics bin.

The tender for the Manufacture and/or Distribution of Compostable Bags RFT19/20-41 also sought the provision of green compostable bags supplied in rolls for distribution in Council’s parks bag dispensers for collection of dog excrement. This will allow for continued standardisation of compostable bags across the City and reinforce positive resource recovery messages.

Tender Evaluation Committee

A Tender Evaluation Committee was developed to consider and evaluate the tenders and to ensure high probity levels were maintained throughout the process. The Tender Evaluation Committee comprised of the Waste & Resource Recovery Manager, Tracy Chalk; Resource Recovery Coordinator, Aisha Poole; Senior Waste & Resource Recovery Officer, James Creer; Resource Recovery Officer, Mia Ecob; Customer Experience Team Leader – Counter, James Hale (independent); and Procurement Business Partner, Allyce Langton.

Tender Components

Tenderers had the option of tendering for manufacturing of bags, distribution of bags or both manufacturing and distribution of bags. In the case that the two components were awarded to different tenderers, it is the responsibility of the successful Manufacturer tenderer to deliver the compostable bags to the successful Delivery tenderer as required for distribution quarterly.

Summary of Tenders Received

Twelve tenders were received in total. Nine tenders were received for both Manufacture and Delivery of bags, one tender for Manufacture only and one tender for Delivery only. One tender submitted did not complete information for supply or distribution. One tenderer was excluded from evaluation as they did not correctly submit pricing.

No tenders were received from local businesses in the Penrith LGA.

The tenderers and their selected tender options are listed in the following table.

Tenderer	Address	Manufacture of bags	Delivery of bags
The Trustee for De Saumarez Group Unit Trust	103-119 Gipps St Collingwood VIC 3066	Yes	Yes
Source Separation Systems Pty Ltd	108 Munibung Rd Boolaroo NSW 2284	Yes	Yes
E-Bisglobal Pty Ltd	7 Reliance Dr Tuggerah NSW 2259	Yes	Yes
Cardia Bioplastics (Australia) Pty Ltd	Level 3 302 Burwood Hwy Hawthorn VIC 3122	Yes	Yes
The Trustee for the Rollspack Group Unit Trust	157-161 Woodlands Dr Braeside VIC 3195	Yes	Yes
Advertising & Printing Australia Pty Ltd	1/7-9 Percy St Parramatta NSW 2124	No	Yes
Vexel Pty Ltd	201 Jackson Rd Sunnybank Hills QLD 4109	Yes	No
Holoworld Pty Ltd	Shop 3 330 Wattle St Ultimo NSW 2007	Yes	Yes
BIOPAK Pty Ltd	Suite 202 Level 2 59-75 Grafton St Bondi Junction NSW 2022	Yes	Yes
Ausindo Triple A Pty Ltd	327 Centre Rd Bentleigh VIC 3204	No	No
K & Q International Pty Ltd	102 Airds Rd Minto NSW 2566	Yes	Yes
Wilmot Harvey Pty Ltd	500 Neerim Rd Murrumbeena VIC 3163	Yes	Yes

Tender Evaluation Criteria

The evaluation criteria advertised and used in assessing the tenders received included the following:

• Evaluation of each tender against the evaluation criteria

• Financial risk analysis

• Referee checks

The non-price evaluation criteria for each component were as follows:

Manufacture of bags (both packets of 60 bags for households and rolls of 100 bags for use in parks dispensers for collection of dog excrement)

· Capability to comply with quality assurance standards

· Demonstrated ability for the manufacture and supply of bags

· Response times

· Management and administration

· Resources and personnel

· Environmental management

· Work Health and Safety

Distribution of Bags to households

• Demonstrated ability for the distribution of bags

• Delivery and response times

• Management and administration

• Resources and personnel

• Environmental management

• Work Health and Safety

Evaluation of Tenders

Non-price evaluation was initially undertaken resulting a short-list of three (3) tenders. Cardia Bioplastics (Australia) Pty Ltd, Source Separation Solutions Pty Ltd and The Trustee for De Saumarez Group Unit Trust.

The following table provides a summary of conforming tender prices as received:

	Annual Bag costs (packet 60 each quarter)	Annual Delivery costs	Annual Dog Bag costs (based on 10,000 rolls, 100 bags per roll)	Total Annual cost
Advertising & Printing Australia Pty Ltd		$98,009		$98,009
E-Bisglobal Pty Ltd	$725,595		$42,710	$768,305
The Trustee for Rollspack Group	$928,014		$40,800	$968,814
Vexel	$965,384		$42,600	$1,007,984
Biopak	$971,612		$45,600	$1,017,212
Cardia Bioplastics (Australia) Pty Ltd	$887,530	$145,695	$39,400	$1,072,626
The Trustee for De Saumarez Group Unit Trust	$962,270	$114,343	$35,700	$1,112,313
Source Separation Systems Pty Ltd	$1,108,634	$174,217	$57,400	$1,340,252
K & Q International Pty Ltd	$1,276,798	$68,062	$46,000	$1,390,860
Holoworld	$2,055,333	$326,695	$81,500	$2,463,529

Note: the shaded tenders are the highest ranked in the non-price evaluation.

E-Bisglobal Pty Ltd submitted the lowest price tender for the Manufacture of Compostable Bags component and did not tender for the distribution component. The tender responses provided by E-Bisglobal Pty Ltd did not demonstrate understanding of the requirements of the tender. E-Bisglobal Pty Ltd was not considered good value as they did not demonstrate relevant experience in manufacture of similar bags and provided examples of previous retail supply of non-compostable bags and in smaller quantities than the requirements of this tender.

Cardia Bioplastics (Australia) Pty Ltd was selected as the preferred tenderer by the Tender Evaluation Panel for the Manufacture and Delivery of Compostable Bags. They demonstrated that their product complied with necessary requirements and demonstrated reliability and value for money. Their tender includes a subcontract to Adpost Group for the delivery component, which also demonstrated reliability and value for money. It is recommended that Cardia Bioplastics (Australia) Pty Ltd be the preferred tenderer for the Manufacture and Delivery of Compostable Bags.

Financial Implications

Included in the assessment of tenders was the commissioning of independent reference checks, financial analysis, and performance analysis on Cardia Bioplastics (Australia) Pty Ltd. These checks were completed by Equifax Australasia Credit Ratings Pty Ltd. Financial Services have reviewed the financial information provided by the tenderer and have not identified any reason why the contract should not be awarded.

Council’s 2020-21 Operational Plan includes a budget of $1.5M for Biodegradable Bags purchase and delivery. This expenditure is funded from Council’s Waste Reserve.

Tender Advisory Group (TAG) Comments

The objective of the Tender Advisory Group (TAG) is to support the Council to achieve fair and equitable tender processes. The TAG, consisting of Brian Steffen - Director – City Services, Glenn McCarthy - Governance Manager, Neil Farquharson – Financial Services Manager and Chris Lawrence – Supply Coordinator, were briefed by the Waste & Resource Recovery Manager about the background and the process followed. The TAG considered the recommendations in relation to the tender Manufacture and/or Distribution of Compostable Bags noting the company has demonstrated their ability to meet Council’s requirements and their proposal was considered to be the most advantageous to Council. The TAG reviewed the evaluation process outlined within the report and is satisfied that the selection criteria have been correctly applied in making the recommendations.

Risk Implications

The tender process outlined in this report includes probity control measures and ensuring value for Council, overseen by the Tender Advisory Group. The recommended tenderer has demonstrated quality assurance, safety and environmental systems and has experience in manufacture of compostable bags that meet the necessary requirements for composting, as well as experience in distribution of bags to households.

Conclusion

Based on the detailed evaluation and independent risk analysis, the tender that represents the best overall value to Council was received from Cardia Bioplastics (Australia) Pty Ltd. The company has provided these products and services for the last four (4) years and has provided reliable high quality product that meet the required composting standards and distribution services. The Tender Evaluation Committee recommends that Cardia Bioplastics (Australia) Pty Ltd be awarded the contract for Manufacture and/or Distribution of Compostable Bags for a period of three (3) years, with an option to extend for a further two (2) x one (1) year periods, by mutual agreement and subject to satisfactory performance.

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Tender Reference 19/20-41 Manufacture and/or Distribution of Compostable Bags be received

2. The tender from Cardia Bioplastics (Australia) Pty Ltd be accepted for the provision of Manufacture and Distribution of Compostable Bags for a three (3) year period, with an option to extend a further two (2) one (1) year periods subject to satisfactory performance and mutual agreement and allowing for rise and fall.

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.

Ordinary Meeting 26 October 2020

Investigation into access to shop fronts in Penrith City Centre and St Marys Town Centre

Compiled by: Melissa McSeveny, Social Planning Coordinator

Craig Squires, Building Certification and Fire Safety Co-ordinator

Authorised by: Peter Wood, Development Services Manager

Jeni Pollard, City Activation, Community and Place Manager

Kylie Powell, Director - City Futures

Wayne Mitchell, Director - Development and Regulatory Services

Requested By: Councillor Marcus Cornish

Outcome	We are healthy and share strong community spirit
Strategy	Provide opportunities for our community to be healthy and active
Service Activity	Deliver programs and work with government and community organisations to improve the capacity and social wellbeing of the community

Executive Summary

This report responds to a request from Councillor Cornish at the July ordinary meeting to investigate the viability and estimated cost of subsidising the installation of automatic doors and eliminating steps to shop fronts in the Penrith and St Marys CBDs.

Access and inclusion for people of all abilities across the city is of the highest priority for Council and is an organisational responsibility. During the planned public domain works in Queen Street, St Marys and then High Street, Penrith, Council endeavoured to improve accessibility not only to the streetscape but also to individual businesses where possible. Prior to this, Council sought to improve access by working with individual businesses and property owners through the All Welcome Project in the Penrith City Centre.

Currently Council is improving accessibility in the city by working with Council’s Access Committee, reviewing the Development Control Plan and aiming to improve accessibility standards in property modifications when a Development Application is received. Council also works closely with the Penrith CBD Corporation and St Marys Town Centre Corporation to address issues of concern in the centres.

Ramps and automatic doors to shopfronts are one component of the solution for improving accessibility, but these are not viable solutions for every property. There are over 400 shopfront properties in Penrith and St Marys alone and without an access audit of each one, the proportion of shop fronts that require physical access improvements and the extent of the works required to the front access alone are not known.

To give an accurate estimated cost of the proposed subsidy program, further consideration would need to be given to the scope of the program and the challenges associated with the viability and extent of access solutions for different properties.

This report outlines some of the challenges and considerations for such a program.

It is recommended that Council receive the information in this report.

Background

There are approximately 36,000 residents identified as living with disability in our city, including over 11,000 with a profound or severe disability who need assistance with daily activities. Penrith’s growing ageing population will also experience the challenges associated with increasing frailty, including mobility issues, hearing loss and vision impairment. Penrith City Council is recognised as a Local Government leader in access and inclusion for people of all abilities.

Improving physical accessibility and inclusion in our centres requires changes to both public and privately-owned land. The most recent upgrades to the public domains in Penrith and St Marys aimed to improve accessibility to shops, ensuring entrances were flush to footpaths where possible. However, not all shops entrances could achieve this outcome with a range of challenges including footpath design being restricted by road alignments, buildings being raised due to flood risk, and the conservation of heritage buildings.

In 2012, Council’s “All Welcome” project supported property owners with advice on accessibility requirements for buildings and waived fees for Complying Development Certificates, Development Applications and Construction Certificates for the period of the initiative. Whilst extensive promotion of this initiative was undertaken and a number of property owners expressed interest in the program, only one participated. The owner of the “Millers” building at 507 High Street was supported to provide an access ramp.

Ramp installed at entrance of 505, High St Penrith as an outcome of the All Welcome project in 2012

In the evaluation of All Welcome it was found that waiving Council approval fees is not enough of a financial subsidy for property owners to increase accessibility through building modifications. Although businesses (who are mostly tenants in privately owned buildings) would potentially benefit from an increase in customer numbers after access improvements, the property owners would still be responsible for the cost of building modifications, and there would be limited return on that investment for them.

Current Situation

Currently, Development Services and the City Activation, Community and Place Department (CACP) work with property owners and businesses, in consultation with Council’s Access Committee when required, to improve accessibility to properties when opportunities arise.

Improving accessibility into and inside businesses and services in our centres is assessed on a case-by-case basis so that the best solution can be found, considering such issues as road/footpath alignment, flooding, heritage status, impost on private land when building ramps that don’t fit within the public domain, changes required to the internal fit out to accommodate sliding doors and making alterations to a reinforced concrete slab which may affect its structural performance, etc.

When a Development Application is received by Council for a new building or additions to an existing building, accessibility requirements can be assessed and enforced in line with the Building Code of Australia and the Disability (Access to Premises - Buildings) Standards 2010. However, for existing buildings Council’s level of influence over accessibility, both into the property and around the property, is more limited.

Eradicating steps and installing sliding doors are 2 potential solutions that could improve accessibility to some shops and services. There are some good examples of sliding doors and ramps working well to improve accessibility in the Penrith City Centre, such as the ANZ building on High Street.

ANZ building, 504-532 High St, Penrith

However, there are also many cases where sliding doors and ramps would not be viable or offer the best accessibility solution. Many shops in High Street have a step up of over 150mm, and this means that a compliant ramp into the shop would potentially be in excess of 2m long. As many shops are quite narrow and small in floor area the ramp would potentially impact the functionality of the shop by reducing usable floor space. Additionally, the reinforced concrete slab would need to be cut to allow for the ramp, which means the structural adequacy of the slab will also be potentially diminished.

The 2 photos above show shopfronts where non-compliant ramps have been provided. The owners have made an effort to install an accessible ramp but they do not comply with the requirements of AS1428.1

City Planning is currently revising Council’s Development Control Plan (DCP), and the Access Committee has recently had the opportunity to provide feedback on the project and offered to continue to work with City Planning in an advisory role to ensure best practice outcomes related to accessibility for all developments.

CACP also works closely with the Penrith CBD Corporation and the St Marys Town Centre Corporation to support inclusion in our centres. Access was a high priority in the most recent upgrades to the Penrith City Centre and St Marys Town Centre. Currently the Corporations are focused on supporting businesses through the economic challenges caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and Council is consulting with them among other stakeholders on the best ways to do that through the Economic Recovery Taskforce.

Council has a Disability Access Inclusion Program, a fund to improve accessibility for Council facilities and services. There is no existing budget to subsidise improvements on privately owned land.

Estimated Costs of Subsidising Shopfront Property Owners to Improve Accessibility

There are 400+ street frontage shops and services in the St Marys and Penrith centres combined, but it is not known how many of those property owners would need or be able to modify their building to improve accessibility.

The total estimated cost of installing both automatic doors and a ramp, including council fees, varies from business to business but would range up to $30,000 per property. This estimated cost includes:

· Installation of automatic glass sliding doors, roughly $10,000 depending on type of door and size of doorway

· Installation of a compliant accessibility ramp, $5-15,000 depending on the type of ramp needed and the works required to install the ramp

· Design advice, installation of tactile ground surfacing and rails,

· Fees for Complying Development Certificates, Development Applications and Construction Certificates. These costs depend on the cost of the works being undertaken.

Before a more accurate estimate of cost could be given for Council to subsidise shopfront property owners in the centres to improve accessibility, consideration would need to be given to a number of factors relating to the scope of such a project and the challenges that may be encountered by property owners. These factors include:

· A complete audit with independent technical advice and drawings by an access consultant for each individual shop front

· Whether only ramps and automatic doors would be eligible for subsidy, or whether other solutions would also be considered,

· The proportion of the total costs to each property owner that would be appropriate to subsidise,

· Whether subsidies would only be provided to Penrith and St Marys centres, or also to the other suburban shopping centres or village shops,

· Whether ground floor properties would only be considered,

· Whether a subsidisation program would provide a social return on investment, (improving outcomes for residents of Penrith) that would add to Council’s current multi-pronged approach to improving accessibility.

The complete audit of 400 or more properties with independent technical advice in itself a considerable undertaking and is currently unfunded.

Legal Services Manager Comment

The Disability (Access to Premises – Buildings) Standards 2010 provides criteria which ensure access to buildings, facilities, and services within buildings are provided for people with a disability. For commercial premises, the Standards will be triggered where a development application (or complying development certificate) is lodged seeking consent for a building alteration or extension. The Standards will require upgrades to any new part of the building, and to the principal pedestrian entrance of the existing building.

Financial Implications

Consideration would need to be given to the scope of the program and the challenges associated with the viability of accessibility solutions for different properties before the cost of the proposed subsidy program can be estimated.

Risk Implications

This report is for information only, and so there are no risk implications at this stage.

Conclusion

Improved accessibility is a priority for Council and automatic doors and eliminating steps are some of the solutions private property owners can implement, but are not always viable or the best solutions for people with disability or the amenity of our centres, for a range of reasons outlined in this report.

Council currently has a multi-pronged approach to improving accessibility in the city and is recognised as a Local Government leader in access and inclusion for people of all abilities.

To give an accurate estimated cost of the proposed subsidy program, further consideration would need to be given to the scope of the program and the challenges associated with the viability of accessibility solutions for different properties. This report outlines some of the challenges and considerations for such a program.

RECOMMENDATION

That the information contained in the report on Investigation into access to shop fronts in Penrith City Centre and St Marys Town Centre be received.

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.

Ordinary Meeting 26 October 2020

NSW Government Grants - Everyone Can Play - Project Nominations

Compiled by: Lila Kennelly, Neighbourhood Renewal Coordinator

Virginia Tuckerman, Community Facilities and Recreation Planning and Projects Coordinator

Matthew Hill, Recreation and Community Facilities Planner

Authorised by: Brian Steffen, Director - City Services

Outcome	We are healthy and share strong community spirit
Strategy	Provide opportunities for our community to be healthy and active
Service Activity	Plan for the provision of and facilitate the delivery of community, sport and recreation facilities

Executive Summary

This report provides detail about NSW Government’s Everyone Can Play (ECP) grant program and proposes that grant applications to upgrade three playspaces are submitted in the 2020 round of the program. The proposed projects, included in Council’s Sport and Recreation Strategy five-year program, are:

- Spence Park, Penrith (2020 Mayoral Challenge)

- David Currie Playspace, Banks Drive, St Clair

- Brooker and Day Street Reserve, Colyton

$490,000 is currently allocated to these projects through existing budget programs, a further $225,000 will be sought in grant funds.

The deadline for grant applications is Tuesday 3 November 2020, and successful projects must be completed within 18 months from the date that the funding contract is accepted.

The report recommends that Council endorse grant applications for the three nominated playspaces seeking a total of $225,000 in funding. It also recommends that a contribution of $490,000 is allocated from existing Council budgets to enable the submissions of these grant applications.

Background

ECP supports Councils to renew, renovate and build inclusive playspaces across NSW. The ECP grant program was established in 2018 and will be in operation for a five-year period. The program is administered by NSW Department of Planning, Industry & Environment.

Three ECP guideline principles encourage strategic thinking around how to create more inclusive playspaces. The three ECP principles to consider when designing or improving playspaces are:

Can I get there?

Consider location, layout, signage, wayfinding and accessibility to ensure everyone can find their way to, in and around the playspace.

Can I play?

The play experience, including the equipment and surfacing, should enable everyone to experience a variety of challenging and engaging play opportunities in a way that suits them.

Can I stay?

Consider safety, facilities, landscape and the wider environment to ensure everyone can stay at the playspace for as long as they would like.

ECP applications must include a tree planting provision of 1 tree per $5000 of requested grant funds.

Projects will be assessed against alignment to program objectives. The ECP grant requires existing and ongoing consultation with the community, as well as the consideration of the needs and expectations of targeted groups. Councils must also clearly outline that they are able to deliver the project within the required 18-month delivery program.

The ECP application deadline closes on Tuesday 3 November 2020. Applications will be assessed between November 2020 and January 2021. Successful projects will be announced in January 2021, with formal funding agreements to be administered by NSW Department of Planning, Industry and Environment.

Current Situation

Council Officers have identified three projects that meet the ECP grant program guidelines which are also included in Council’s Sport and Recreation Strategy five-year program. The proposed projects for ECP Grant applications for 2020/21 are:

- Spence Park, South Penrith (Mayoral Challenge)

As part of the 2020 Penrith Mayoral Challenge, Council Officers from the Neighbourhood Renewal team are working with students from Penrith Primary School to create a new design for Spence Park. The co-design process is currently underway. Early priorities shared from the students and local residents include improving the accessibility of the park.

Council has an existing budget of $200,000 to deliver park upgrades including, accessible pathway connections, new play equipment, shade structure, new seating and some tree planting and landscaping.

An application to Everyone Can Play grant of $75,000 is proposed to deliver improved accessibility and creative elements within Spence Park and further enhance the impact of the Penrith Mayoral Challenge project.

- David Currie Playspace, Banks Drive, St Clair

Council Officers have identified the need for playground enhancements, accessible pathways and shade improvements for Banks Drive (David Currie) playspace. The existing playspace has no formalised access from Banks Drive to the play equipment, is exposed to direct sunlight and seating within the reserve is limited.

Council has an existing budget of $170,000 to deliver new play equipment, accessible path connections, shade, seating and some tree planting. Council funds will deliver shade, seating, upgraded play equipment and pathway connections. Council officers will apply for an ECP grant of $75,000.

If the ECP grant is successful, the project would deliver enhanced accessible pathway connections to the existing playspace, an accessible shade shelter, additional seating, upgraded play equipment and complete tree planting to the north of the play equipment.

- Brooker and Day Street playspace, Colyton

Council has an existing budget of $120,000 to deliver new play equipment, accessible path connections, shade and some tree planting at Brooker and Day Street playspace. Council Officers have identified the need to deliver additional inclusive play equipment, accessible seating throughout the reserve, and improved tree coverage and shade within the reserve. An ECP grant application of $75,000 would allow the identified full scope of work to be realised.

Financial Implications

This report proposes that a total Council contribution of $490,000 be included in the applications for the 2020-21 Everyone Can Play grant program including; Parks Asset Renewal, Neighbourhood Renewal Program, Shade Over Playspace program, Telecommunication Access Fund, Footpath Delivery program and the Sport and Recreation Plan budgets.

Should the grant applications be successful, the upgraded facilities will be required to be incorporated into future asset renewal programs and a provision for ongoing maintenance will also be necessary in Council’s annual budget.

Risk Implications

The Community Facilities and Recreation Risk Register identifies risk associated with providing unsafe facilities and contractor performance. Controls have been established in relation to facility provision and contractor management which means the risk rating is low.

The play facility upgrades will ensure compliance to current playspace standards and this will be sustained through a regular playspace inspection and maintenance program.

Conclusion

It is proposed that Council Officers submit three Everyone Can Play grant applications for the identified playspaces at Spence Park (Mayoral Challenge), David Currie, and Brooker and Day Street. Each project will address the ECP principles of Can I get there, Can I play, and Can I stay.

The identified upgrades for each playspace have been identified through consultation with the community and will provide accessible, inclusive and new play and recreation opportunities.

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1. The information contained in the report on NSW Government Grants - Everyone Can Play - Project Nominations be received

2. Council endorse the allocation of existing budgets as contributing funds to enable grant applications for improvements to Spence Park, Banks Drive, and Brooker and Day Street.

3. Council endorse the submission of grant applications to the NSW Government’s Everyone Can Play program for the following projects:

- Spence Park, Penrith (2020 Mayoral Challenge)

- David Currie Playspace, Banks Drive, St Clair

- Brooker and Day Street Reserve, Colyton

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.

Ordinary Meeting 26 October 2020

RFT2021-03 Kingswood Commuter Carpark - Project Management

Compiled by: Allan Ouma, Development Manager

Authorised by: Amanda McMurtrie, Program Manager

Nathan Ritchie, Property Development Manager

Andrew Moore, Director - Corporate Services

Outcome	We have confidence in our Council
Strategy	Manage our money and our assets to be sustainable now and into the future
Service Activity	Realise the potential of land and property assets by focusing on operational and commercial sustainability of Council’s Property Portfolio

Executive Summary

During the Federal election in May 2019, significant commitments were made to commuter car parks in the Penrith LGA. This included $40m (St Marys $20m and Kingswood $20m) for the construction of two carparks on Council owned land, subject to approach land holdings being identified in the two locations.

Council’s existing at grade car park at 6 Cox Avenue Kingswood, adjoining the train station, was identified as an appropriate location to deliver the Kingswood commuter car park. This site was supported for further investigation by Councillors at the Briefing held 11 November 2019.

The concept design and Business Case were presented at the Councillor Briefing 21 September 2020. The design highlighted the opportunity to develop a 446 space multi deck car park that incorporated sustainability features, an opportunity for income generation, improved place activation and amenity improvement for Council and its residents. The Federal Government have now reviewed the Project Proposal Report (PPR) and confirmed that the total project cost of $20m will be fully funded by the grant being provided by the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications for the development of the Cox Avenue Car Park project.

The proposal has been reviewed and supported by Council’s Property Development Advisory Panel. Federal funding for the development, has been secured and feasibility studies have been undertaken to confirm the project’s viability. The project delivery team will be supported by the project management services that are the subject of this tender report.

This report advises Council of the outcome of the RFT process and recommends that Root Partnerships PTY LTD be engaged to provide the Project Management services and also that Council accept the grant funding being offered by Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications for the development of the Cox Avenue project

Background

Council Officers have been working with the Federal Government to develop a draft business case on the Cox Avenue, Kingswood site (site map attached) to confirm the site is suitable for conversion from an at grade car park facility to a multistory car park facility.

6 Cox Avenue is located at the intersection of Richmond and Cox Avenue, Kingswood. The 3,340sqm site is close to the Kingswood Train station. The site currently serves as an at grade car park for commuters using the Kingswood station to access rail transport. The current project proposes that the current at grade car park could be converted to a modern multistorey facility, comprising both commercial space and car parks.

This Council owned site in has been assessed as having enough potential to deliver the following key outcomes;

· provide commuters with increased parking amenity (446 car spaces), via the conversion of the current at grade car park, to a modern multistorey facility, comprising both commercial space and car parks,

· meet the criteria that qualifies it as a recipient site for federal funding, under the Urban Congestion Fund initiative; thus, securing full federal funding and support for the project,

· contribute to Council’s Cooling the City Initiative, via the integration of sustainable technologies and features to the proposed multistorey car park,

· act as a show case project to the industry and market, through which Council can demonstrate the feasibility of sustainable building design and construction,

· activate the locality and ultimately contribute to the objectives outlined in the Penrith City Council Community Plan 2017, and

· the site is well placed to deliver on these aspirations and has an area of 3,340 sqm and currently services the users of the Kingswood Train Station.

Sustainability will be a key defining feature of this project. In accordance with the project vision stated in the Business Case that has been endorsed by Council’s Property Development Advisory Panel. Council intends to achieve sustainability through an industry leading design and construction process, competitive project team procurement process and best industry project management practices.

Due to the nature and complexity of the project, it is proposed that an external project manager be engaged to provide additional support and add value to the project by assisting Council to steering delivery of the project. Securing an external project manager on the site will also provide Council officers with the opportunity to build on our own internal risk and project management processes.

Consistent with the above direction, Council undertook a formal RFT (Request for Tender) process with a view to sourcing and possible engagement of the external project manager. The scope of the proposed contract relating to the RFT, encompasses a whole of life project management of the project, beginning from design phase through to construction delivery, and operations.

To enable the assembly of a project delivery team, a selective tender (RFT 20/21-02) for project management services for project delivery was issued to Council’s pre-qualified Development Manager and Project Manager Panel. Panel members who were prequalified for Type C Projects ‘single building developments where Council is the developer and the head contract value exceeds $20m’ were invited to respond. The Request for Tender (RFT) was open from 14 August 2020 – 3 September 2020.

Details regarding the tender evaluation process can be found in subsequent sections of this report.

Tender Evaluation

The Tender Evaluation Panel (TEP) consisted of:

· Nathan Ritchie - Property Development Manager (Chair)

· Amanda McMurtrie – Program Manager, Property Development

· Allan Ouma - Development Manager, Property Development

Laura Stott, Procurement Business Partner, fulfilled the role of tender administrator.

A total of three complying tender submissions were received, as outlined in the table below

Legal Entity Name	Price (ExGST)	Address	Director/s
APP Corporation Pty Ltd	$208,000	L7, 116 Miller Street, North Sydney NSW 2060	Paul Chapple
Savills Project Management Pty Ltd	$315 359	1 Farrer Place Sydney NSW 2000	Marcus Paget Wilkes
Roots Partnerships Pty Ltd	$237 650	Level 19, 9 Hunter Street Sydney NSW 2000	Chris Crick

The evaluation criteria used to assess submissions is outlined below:

- Key Personnel and Availability

- Past Project Performance

- Methodology and Demonstrated Understanding

- Local Supplier Preference

The evaluation panel undertook and independent review of each tender, scoring them objectively against the qualitative criteria, prior to viewing the price component of submissions. Based on the qualitative review, all three submissions were found to be high quality with all firms demonstrating their capability and expertise to perform the works.

Once the evaluation panel convened and considered price, assumptions and risk; Roots Partnerships Pty Ltd were deemed the most favourable tenderer, with a lump sum fee proposal of $237,650 exclusive of GST.

It was noted that even though APP’s price was marginally lower than that of Roots Partnership’s, Roots Partnerships offered a better value for money proposition and deep understanding of the projects methodology to achieve the project’s deliverables. This was in addition to suggesting innovative approaches and bespoke solutions to potential project risks.

A Standard Financial Performance Assessment has been undertaken on Roots Partnerships Pty Ltd with results being found to be satisfactory. Further details can be found in the financial implications sub-heading of this report.

Tender Advisory Group

The objective of the Tender Advisory Group (TAG) is to support the Council to achieve fair and equitable tender processes. The TAG, consisting of the Director Corporate Services – Andrew Moore, Governance Manager - Glenn McCarthy and Financial Services Manager - Neil Farquharson, were briefed by the Property Development team about the background and the process followed.

The TAG noted that the recommended tenderer not only provides best value for money but also provided strong evidence of their ability to meet Council’s requirements through their compliance with the tender evaluation criteria.

The TAG considered the recommendations in relation to the tender for RFT2021-03 Kingswood Commuter Carpark - Project Management. TAG then reviewed the evaluation process outlined within the report and is satisfied that the selection criteria has been correctly applied in making the recommendations.

Financial Implications

Included in the assessment of tenders was the commissioning of independent reference checks, financial analysis, and performance analysis on Root Partnerships Pty Ltd. These checks were completed by Equifax Australasia Credit Ratings Pty Ltd. Financial Services have reviewed the financial information provided by the tenderer and have not identified any reason why the contract should not be awarded. The report recommends acceptance of the tender by Root Partnerships Pty Ltd.

The engagement of the project manager and associated project sub-consultants will initially be funded by the property development reserve and is within the available budget. These costs will be reclaimed/recouped following approval and Council’s receipt of Federal funding. The engagement of the project manager and other consultancies is therefore within the identified budget.

Following the Federal election, Council was contacted by the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications (DITRDC) in August 2019 notifying that the funding was allocated under the Urban Congestion Fund.

Risk Implications

Conclusion

The Tender Evaluation Panel is of the opinion that, Roots Partnerships Pty Ltd provided the most advantageous tender and demonstrated significant experience in executing projects of a similar nature. It is recommended that Roots Partnerships Pty Ltd be awarded the contract for a contract sum of $237,650 exclusive of GST.

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1. The information contained in the report on RFT2021-03 Kingswood Commuter Carpark - Project Management be received.

2. The proposal and total fee from Roots Partnerships Pty Ltd for the amount of $237,650 (excluding GST) be accepted.

3. The engagement of the project manager and associated project sub-consultants is currently being forward funded by the property development reserve fund under the 2020-21 capital expenditure budget.

4. That Council accept the funding offer from Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications for the development of the Cox Avenue project, reimbursing forward funding cost back to the reserve.

5. Following approval and Council’s receipt of Federal funding, a project code will be established to reallocate project management and sub-consultancy. These costs will be reclaimed/recouped against the new project.

6. Council write to Minister for Population, Cities and Urban Infrastructure and the Local Federal Member acknowledging the funding support for the project.

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

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1. ⇩

Location map: 6 Cox Ave, Kingswood

1 Page

Appendix

Ordinary Meeting 26 October 2020

Pecuniary Interest Returns 2019 - 2020

Compiled by: Avanthi Fernando, Governance Officer

Authorised by: Glenn McCarthy, Governance Manager

Stephen Britten, Chief Governance Officer

Outcome	We have confidence in our Council
Strategy	Be open and fair in our decisions and our dealings with people
Service Activity	Promote ethical behaviour through awareness and advice and manage investigations of alleged corruption, maladministration or breaches of the Code of Conduct

Executive Summary

According to Clause 4.21 of the Model Code of Conduct for Local Councils in NSW 2020 “a Councillor or designated person must make and lodge with the General Manager a return in the form set out in Schedule 2 of the Code, disclosing the interests specified in Schedule 1 of the Code within three months after becoming a Councillor or designated person, and 30 June each year and the Councillor or designated person becoming aware of an interest they are required to disclose under Schedule 1 that has not been previously disclosed…”.

Designated persons include the General Manager, other senior staff, and staff holding a position identified by the Council as a position of a designated person because it involves the exercise of certain functions such as regulatory or contractual. As set out in Clause 4.21 first returns must be completed and lodged within three months of becoming a Councillor or designated person while annual returns must be completed and lodged within three months of 30 June each year.

Current Situation

Part 4 of the Model Code of Conduct regarding the registration and tabling of returns lodged by Councillors and designated persons is as follows:

Clause 4.24 - The General Manager must keep a register of returns required to be lodged with the General Manager under Clause 4.21, using the form set out in Schedule 2 of the Code.

Returns required to be lodged with the General Manager under Clause 4.21 must be tabled at a Meeting of the Council.

A register of all returns lodged by Councillors and designated persons, in accordance with Clause 4.21 of the Code of Conduct, is currently kept by Council as required by this part of the Code.

The following Clause 4.21 (b) returns have been lodged:

Councillor	Return Period	Date Lodged
Councillor Aaron Duke	01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020	28 September 2020
Councillor Bernard Bratusa	01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020	22 September 2020
Councillor Brian Cartwright	01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020	10 August 2020
Councillor Greg Davies	01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020	4 August 2020
Councillor Jim Aitken OAM	01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020	28 September 2020
Councillor John Thain	01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020	30 September 2020
Councillor Karen McKeown OAM	01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020	19 August 2020
Councillor Kath Presdee	01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020	20 August 2020
Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM	01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020	10 August 2020
Councillor Marcus Cornish	01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020	22 September 2020
Councillor Mark Davies	01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020	28 September 2020
Councillor Robin Cook	01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020	10 August 2020
Councillor Ross Fowler OAM	01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020	31 August 2020
Councillor Todd Carney	01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020	12 August 2020
Councillor Tricia Hitchen	01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020	15 September 2020

Name	Position Title	Return Period	Date Lodged
Adam Wilkinson	Engineering Services Manager	01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020	25 August 2020
Andrew Moore	Director – Corporate Services	01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020	24 August 2020
Andrew Robinson	Community Facilities and Recreation Manager	01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020	18 August 2020
Brian Steffen	Director – City Services	01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020	7 August 2020
Carlie Ryan	City Deals Manager	01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020	6 August 2020
David Parry	Customer Experience Manager	01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020	28 September 2020
Glenn McCarthy	Governance Manager	01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020	24 August 2020
Gowry Gowrythasan	Acting Manager Civil Works, Workshop and Fleet Operations	01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020	24 August 2020
Greg McCarthy	Environmental Health & Compliance Manager	01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020	5 August 2020
Jade Bradbury	Children’s Services Manager	01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020	7 August 2020
Jane Howard	ICT Operations Manager	01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020	5 August 2020
Jeni Pollard	City Activation, Community and Place Manager	01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020	28 September 2020
Johannes Meijer	City Assets Manager	01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020	5 August 2020
John Gordon	City Presentation Manager	01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020	10 August 2020
Joshua Fayle	Acting People and Culture Manager	01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020	5 August 2020
Kylie Powell	Director – City Futures	01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020	2 September 2020
Linda Ross	Manager - People and Children	01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020	12 August 2020
Matthew Bullivant	Legal Services Manager	01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020	6 August 2020
Michael Jackson	Design & Projects Manager	01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020	5 August 2020
Natasha Borgia	City Planning Manager	01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020	28 August 2020
Nathan Burbridge	Economic Initiatives Manager	01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020	4 September 2020
Nathan Ritchie	Property Development Manager	01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020	29 September 2020
Neil Farquharson	Financial Services Manager	01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020	27 August 2020
Peter Wood	Development Services Manager	01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020	28 August 2020
Rebecca Hackney	Communications Manager	01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020	5 August 2020
Sandy Davies	Director - Community and People	01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020	22 September 2020
Sarah Dean	Library Services Manager	01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020	5 August 2020
Stephen Britten	Chief Governance Officer	01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020	5 August 2020
Tracy Chalk	Waste & Resource Recovery Manager	01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020	28 September 2020
Warwick Winn	General Manager	01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020	16 September 2020
Wayne Mitchell	Director – Development and Regulatory Services	01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020	25 August 2020

The following Clause 4.21 (a) first returns have been lodged:

Name	Position Title	Start Date	Date Lodged
Jacklin Abdel Messih	Business Transformation Manager	1 July 2020	10 August 2020
Kamil Janji	Acting Business Transformation Manager	1 July 2020	25 September 2020
Rob Tweddle	Manager - Ripples	1 July 2020	05 August 2020

Financial Implications

There are no financial implications for Council associated with this report.

Risk Implications

Councillors and designated persons in particular are prescribed to disclose pecuniary interests listed in Schedule 1 in accordance with Clause 4.21 of the Model Code. The disclosures of pecuniary interests are expected to uphold Councillors’ and designated persons’ honest and responsible conduct while executing their duties and to minimise possible breaches of pecuniary interest obligations set out in the Code. The management of Council’s pecuniary interest returns are one of a series of measures implemented to manage risks associated with decision making throughout the organisation.

Conclusion

The returns were completed and lodged prior to the due date for the receipt of the returns and are kept in a register held by the Governance Department.

Returns will be available on Council’s website subject to redaction where permitted in accordance with public interest principles and applicable guidelines.

RECOMMENDATION

That the information contained in the report on Pecuniary Interest Returns 2019 - 2020 be received.

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.

Ordinary Meeting 26 October 2020

Outcomes in Recent Legal Proceedings

Compiled by: Matthew Bullivant, Legal Services Manager

Authorised by: Stephen Britten, Chief Governance Officer

Outcome	We have confidence in our Council
Strategy	Be open and fair in our decisions and our dealings with people
Service Activity	Provide dispute resolution and litigation services to Council

Executive Summary

This report provides an update on recent legal proceedings determined in the Land and Environment Court of NSW. Council was a party to 14 matters decided in 2020.

In accordance with past practice, finalised matters are reported at Council’s Ordinary Meeting to ensure transparency and accountability.

All litigated matters (ongoing and complete) are also reported in Council’s Annual Report each year.

Update on Matters

Bulk Resources Management Pty Limited – 1725 – 1743 Elizabeth Drive, Badgerys Creek

This matter related to an appeal against the terms of a development control order issued to the operator of a resource management facility at 1725 – 1743 Elizabeth Drive, Badgerys Creek.

Council served a development control order on the operator of the site on 25 September 2019. The order required Bulk Resources Management Pty Limited to cease using the site for an unlawful use and to restore the land. Council officers held concern that the site was being used without development consent and in an environmentally harmful manner due to the extent of filling of the site.

The parties agreed to extend the time for compliance with the order until 1 June 2020. The extension of time served to allow the operators enough time to reinstate the land.

The Court made orders in accordance with that agreement on 13 March 2020.

Angelo & Rima Militano – 52-58 Church Lane, Cranebrook

This appeal related to a deemed refusal of a development application seeking consent for a dual occupancy at 52-58 Church Lane, Cranebrook.

The application was subsequently approved by Council officers and the appeal withdrawn on 27 March 2020.

Designcorp Architects Pty Limited – 32-36 Hope Street, Penrith

This matter related to the Local Planning Panel’s refusal of a development application seeking approval of a 45-unit six-storey residential flat building.

The Local Planning Panel refused the matter based on incompatibility with the character of the local area and an inadequate written request to vary a building height development standard.

The matter was listed for hearing on 2 and 3 April 2020. The Applicant amended the application by reducing the number of apartments to 41 and redesigning the top floor. The Local Planning Panel gave Council officers instructions to enter a section 34 agreement to resolve the matter.

On 21 April 2020, the Court upheld the appeal and granted development consent. Council was awarded its costs of $9,000.

Principal Healthcare Finance Pty Limited - 5-7 Floribunda Avenue, Glenmore Park

This matter related to the Sydney West City Planning Panel’s refusal of a development application which sought consent for a 142-bed residential aged care facility.

The development application was refused based on incompatibility with the character of the Glenmore Park area, unacceptable impacts on adjoining properties, and breach of a development standard relating to bulk and scale.

The parties engaged in a conciliation conference on 21 May 2020. The Applicant agreed to amend the design of the proposal by reducing the bulk of the proposal to be predominantly one and two-storeys, increasing setbacks to neighbouring properties from 7 to 15 metres, increasing landscaping, and relocating a parking area away from residences.

The Sydney West City Planning Panel gave Council officers instructions to enter a section 34 agreement to resolve the matter based on the amended design.

On 29 May 2020, the Court upheld the appeal granting development consent. Council was awarded its costs of $5,000.

Evacorp Pty Limited – 170 Canberra Street, St Marys

This matter related to a development application refused by Council officers seeking approval of seven two-storey townhouses at 170 Canberra Street, St Marys.

The application was refused based on incompatibility with local character, poor driveway and landscape design, and residential amenity for future occupants.

The parties engaged in a conciliation conference on 29 April 2020. The Applicant agreed to amend their development application reducing the number of townhouses to six, increasing landscaping, and amending the internal design of units to increase liveability.

On 24 July 2020, the Court upheld the appeal and granted development consent. Council was awarded its costs of $6,200.

Mark Cohen - 880 Londonderry Road, Londonderry

This appeal related to the refusal of a development application seeking consent for the construction of a dwelling, pool and agricultural shed.

Council officers refused the development based largely on unsatisfactory impacts on a critically endangered ecological community on the site, being Cooks River/ Castlereagh Ironbark Forest.

Prior to the commencement of the hearing, the Applicant amended the application to reposition the structures outside of the vegetation and to incorporate a vegetation management plan being registered of the title of the land.

On 29 July 2020, the Court upheld the appeal granting development consent.

Alpha Engineering & Development Pty Limited – 159 Jamison Road, Penrith

This matter related to a development application seeking consent for a 21-room boarding house at 159 Jamison Road, Penrith. The development application was refused by the Local Planning Panel on 10 July 2019.

The application was refused based on incompatibility with the local character of the area, the removal of trees, proposal internal amenity to occupants, and inadequate setbacks to adjoining residences.

On 15 July 2020, the parties engaged in a conciliation conference. The Applicant agreed to amend their design to reduce the number of boarding rooms from 21 to 16, increase landscaping coverage on the site including five street trees, increase side setbacks, and change materials to ensure compatibility with the local area.

On 12 August 2020, the Court upheld the appeal approving the development application. Council was awarded $4,000 in costs.

Kohler Bros Property Pty Limited - 71-73 Second Avenue, Kingswood

This matter related to a development application refused by Council officers seeking approval of a 28-room boarding house across two lots at 71-73 Second Avenue, Kingswood.

The application was refused based on incompatibility with the local character, inadequate residential amenity from parking and boarding room design, insufficient landscaping, excessive bulk and scale, and environmentally unsustainable design.

The parties engaged in a conciliation conference on 18 September 2019 but did not reach agreement.

The matter was listed on 11, 12 and 20 May 2020 for a hearing.

On 14 August 2020, the Court refused the development application on the basis that the proposal was not compatible with the character of the area and that the front setback is inadequate. As the Court cannot approve a development application made under that State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 if it is incompatible with the local area, no further contentions were considered.

Worldmark Investments Pty Limited – 37 Great Western Highway, Kingswood

This appeal relates to Council officer’s deemed refusal of a development application seeking consent for the construction of a 12-room boarding house at 37 Great Western Highway, Kingswood.

Council contended the development application should be refused based on incompatibility with local character, excessive bulk and scale, poor residential amenity, and acoustic impacts of the Great Western Highway on the proposal.

Following a conciliation conference on 19 August 2020, the Applicant agreed to amend the design by reducing the number of boarding rooms to eleven, incorporating further landscaping, and providing acoustic attenuation measures to reduce in the impact of the Great Western Highway.

On 21 August 2020, the Court approved the development application as amended. Council was awarded costs of $3,000.

Newton Development Pty Limited – 9-11 Gibson Avenue, Kingswood

This appeal formed the first of two joint appeals in the Land and Environment Court.

The first appeal related to the refusal of a development application seeking approval of the construction of 13 townhouses at 9-11 Gibson Avenue, Werrington.

The application was refused by Council officers based on not satisfying zone objectives, providing poor residential amenity to future occupants, insufficient landscaping, and water not being able to be legally drained from the land.

The Applicant amended their design during a conciliation conference by reducing the number of townhouses to 12 and increasing landscaping. A condition of consent was imposed to deal with the stormwater drainage issue.

The Court upheld the appeal on 20 August 2020 and approved the development application.

Council was awarded $2,500 in costs.

The second appeal sought to impose an easement over Council-owned land to enable the development at 9-11 Gibson Avenue, Werrington. On 22 September 2020, the Court imposed the easement, awarded Council $35,000 in compensation and $10,444 in costs.

GMKA Pty Limited – 31 Second Avenue, Kingswood

This appeal relates to Council officer’s refusal of a development application seeking consent for an 18-room boarding house with basement car parking at 31 Second Avenue, Kingswood.

Council refused the development application based on incompatibility with the local character, poor internal amenity, unacceptable impacts on adjoining land uses (a childcare centre), and unacceptable traffic impacts.

The Court heard the matter on 7-8 July and 25 August 2020.

The Court formed the view that the proposal was compatible with the desired future character of the Kingswood area. The Court noted the proposal is orientated towards the street and has side setbacks with landscaped planting. The Court formed the view that the other issues could be dealt with by conditions of consent and imposed those conditions.

The Court upheld the appeal and granted development consent on 21 September 2020.

Settlers Estate Pty Limited and Statewide Planning Pty Limited – Major Tomkins Parade, Werrington

In this appeal, Council sought to require an applicant to comply with the terms of its subdivision approval at Major Tomkins Parade, Werrington (known as Settlers Estate). At the same time, Council sought orders from the Court requiring the applicant to stop works until other breaches were rectified.

The main dispute in the appeal was whether a drainage line, culvert and channel were constructed outside of the approved location and, therefore, contrary to the subdivision approval.

On 4 September 2020, the Court determined that the works were outside of the approved location, confirming Council’s position.

The Court awarded Council costs.

The Land and Environment Court judgment has now been appealed to the NSW Court of Appeal.

Hallani Constructions Pty Limited – 33 Jones Street, Kingswood

This appeal relates to Council officer’s refusal of a development application seeking consent for the construction of six townhouses at 33 Jones Street, Kingswood.

The applicant was refused due to insufficient information accompanying the application relating to stormwater drainage, poor internal design, and a lack of landscaping.

After participating in a conciliation conference on 4 August 2020, the Applicant amended its application by reducing the number of townhouses to five, increasing landscaping, and providing an adequate stormwater drainage system.

The Court upheld the appeal on 14 October 2020 and approved the amended development application.

Council was awarded $5,500 in costs.

Financial Implications

There are no financial implications for Council associated with this report. Income from Costs awarded are receipted to Councils Legal Services Department.

Risk Implications

There are no risk implications for Council associated with this report.

RECOMMENDATION

That the information contained in the report on Outcomes in Recent Legal Proceedings be received.

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

There are no attachments for this report.

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 2019- 2020 Annual Statements are presented
∞	Meeting at which any comments on the 2019-2020 Annual Statements are adopted
+	Meeting at which the Annual Report is presented

Premises	Fire and Rescue NSW Comments	Council Work Required
114-116 Station Street, Penrith	FRNSW received correspondence in relation to faults in the fire indicator panel. An inspection from FRNSW officers revealed several issues with the hydrant system, a fault in the Fire Indicator Panel, materials placed in the fire isolated stair, inadequate penetration protection and exposed steel in the basement ceiling.	Inspection undertaken by Council officers. Issues identified by FRNSW confirmed. An Emergency Fire Safety Order No.1 was issued by Council officers to the owner for rectification of the fire hydrant non compliances. A fire safety audit of the building was also undertaken by Council officers. The hydrant system has been rectified and is operational to the satisfaction of FRNSW. Council officers will continue to pursue the owners to other non-compliances within the building.

Outcome	We can work close to home
Strategy	Provide access to lifelong learning to maximise opportunities for our community
Service Activity	Deliver high quality children’s services