Agenda of Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 28 June 2021

UNCONFIRMED MINUTES

OF THE ORDINARY MEETING OF PENRITH CITY COUNCIL HELD REMOTELY USING AUDIO VISUAL LINKS, AUDIO STREAMED ON THE COUNCIL WEBSITE AND IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS ON MONDAY 24 MAY 2021 AT 7:02PM

NATIONAL ANTHEM

The meeting opened with the National Anthem.

WEBCASTING STATEMENT

Her Worship the Mayor, Councillor Karen McKeown OAM read a statement advising that Council Meetings are recorded and webcast.

STATEMENT OF RECOGNITION

Her Worship the Mayor, Councillor Karen McKeown 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 Christine Bayliss Kelly.

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, Ross Fowler OAM, Kath Presdee and John Thain.

LEAVE OF ABSENCE

80 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor John Thain seconded Councillor Todd Carney that Leave of Absence be granted to Councillor Aaron Duke from 24 May 2021 to 7 June 2021 inclusive.

APOLOGIES

There were no apologies.

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES - Ordinary Meeting - 26 April 2021

81 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM seconded Councillor Jim Aitken OAM that the minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of 26 April 2021 be confirmed.

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Councillor Marcus Cornish declared a Pecuniary Interest in COW Item 3 – Claim for Reimbursement of Legal Costs as he is the subject of the reimbursement claim.

Councillor Bernard Bratusa declared a Non-Pecuniary Conflict of Interest – Less than Significant in Item 9 – Acceptance of Grant funding - Greater Sydney Crown Land Open Space Activation Program and categorisation of Crown Reserves, and Item 10 - Acceptance of Grant Funding - NSW Public Spaces Legacy Program, City Park as he is employed by the State Government. Councillor Bratusa stated that he would remain in the meeting but not participate in the debate or voting on these matters.

Councillor Mark Davies declared a Non-Pecuniary Conflict of Interest – Less than Significant in Item 7 - Tender RCL 202101 - Residential Builder Partnering Panel as a friend of his works for one of the companies listed in this tender report. Councillor Mark Davies stated that he would remain in the meeting but not participate in the debate or voting on these matters.

SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS

82 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Ross Fowler OAM seconded Councillor Kath Presdee that Standing Orders be suspended to allow members of the public to address the meeting, the time being 7:07pm.

Mr Damon Ausling

Item 1 – Proposed Winter Sporting Facility at 2 Tench Avenue, Jamisontown.

Mr Ausling, representing Hometown, owner of the Nepean Shores site, spoke in support of the recommendation to refuse the proposal. Mr Ausling provided background on the tenancy of residents at Nepean Shores and noted that this community has been in place for approximately 40 years. Mr Ausling noted that overshadowing from the proposed development would be detrimental to the amenity of numerous residents of the residential community at this location, and that there would likely be financial ramifications for the affected residents.

Procedural Motion

83 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Marcus Cornish seconded Councillor Todd Carney that an extension of time be granted to enable the speaker to conclude his address, the time being 7:12pm.

Mr Ausling concluded by stating that the proposed development would impact negatively on home owners in the Nepean Shores community and that it would be unreasonable to expect the burden of the resulting loss of amenity to be borne by Hometown and the residents of Nepean Shores.

Mr Peter Magnisalis

Item 1 – Proposed Winter Sporting Facility at 2 Tench Avenue, Jamisontown.

Mr Magnisalis, the applicant, spoke in opposition to the recommendation for refusal of the proposed development. Mr Magnisalis outlined the advantages of the proposed development of an indoor skiing facility which would the only one in Australia and noted that this development would be surrounded by other recreational facilities in the area, which would encourage visitors to the Penrith LGA. Mr Magnisalis went on to state his commitment to resolving the overshadowing issue to ensure all permanent dwellings in Nepean Shores received full winter sun exposure, and requested that Council support the continuation of the planning process to support the establishment of a world class facility.

Mr Tone Wheeler

Item 1 – Proposed Winter Sporting Facility at 2 Tench Avenue, Jamisontown.

Mr Wheeler, Architect for the proponent, spoke to the recommendation and outlined why the site in Tench Avenue had been selected for the proposed development. Mr Wheeler stated that the development needed to be located in a financially viable area and that the site is suitable for the length of the indoor ski slope which would be provided. Mr Wheeler went on to specify that the planning proposal is for an envelope, not a specific building and that adjustments could be made, however some overshadowing would still occur.

Ms Amy Sutherland

Item 1 – Proposed Winter Sporting Facility at 2 Tench Avenue, Jamisontown.

Ms Sutherland, the applicant’s Town Planner, spoke in opposition to the recommendation for refusal of the planning proposal. Ms Sutherland provided details on solar access issues and outlined the significant economic benefit of the proposed development for the Penrith area, which would include stimulus to the local economy as well as increased ongoing employment. Ms Sutherland concluded by asking Council to support the proposed development.

RESUMPTION OF STANDING ORDERS

84 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Todd Carney seconded Councillor Jim Aitken OAM that Standing Orders be resumed, the time being 7:56pm.

Mayoral Minutes

1 150th Anniversary of Penrith's proclamation as a municipality

Councillor Todd Carney left the meeting, the time being 7:57pm.

Councillor Todd Carney returned to the meeting, the time being 7:59pm.

85 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Karen McKeown OAM seconded Councillor Tricia Hitchen that the Mayoral Minute on 150th Anniversary of Penrith's proclamation as a municipality be received.

2 7News Young Achiever Award Winner Larissa Moore

86 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Karen McKeown OAM seconded Councillor Kath Presdee that the Mayoral Minute on 7News Young Achiever Award Winner Larissa Moore be received.

3 Baker and Provan 75th Anniversary

87 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Karen McKeown OAM seconded Councillor Ross Fowler OAM that the Mayoral Minute on Baker and Provan 75th Anniversary be received.

Questions on Notice

1 Power of Entry

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM ASKED:

As I understand council cannot enter a property without consent of the owner or with a court order. When did this come into force and is there any other reason that it can happen?

Council Response:

Powers of entry exist under a variety of acts such as the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, Protection of the Environment Operations Act and Local Government Act.

Council officers exercising relevant functions under those acts can enter on any property. Before entering onto a property, Officers are required to provide written notice, unless there is an emergency situation (i.e. imminent danger to health and safety), or the owner has given consent or by Order of a Court.

Officers are not able to enter any portion of the premises used as a residence. Either a Court order, warrant, or consent of the owner is required to enter any part of the premises used as a residence.

These powers were introduced with the introduction of each of the Acts (being 1979, 1993, and 1997). Prior to that, the Local Government Act 1919 provided similar powers.

Councillor Mark Davies left the meeting, the time being 8:17pm.

Councillor Todd Carney left the meeting, the time being 8:17pm.

Councillors Mark Davies and Todd Carney return to the meeting, the time being 8:19pm.

2 Civil Works Plan

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM ASKED:

That council allow councillors to see the Civil Works Plan for Judd street.

Response from Council:

A memo response to Councillors which deals with this request was sent to all Councillors on 18 May 2021. The memo detailed that due to copyright reasons a copy of the plan cannot be provided, however Councillors are welcome to come and inspect the plan at Council by request.

Reports of Committees

1 Report and Recommendations of the Access Committee Meeting held on 14 April 2021

88 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 14 April, 2021 be adopted.

2 Report and Recommendations of the Local Traffic Committee Meeting held on 3 May 2021

89 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Robin Cook seconded Councillor Marcus Cornish that the recommendations contained in the Report and Recommendations of the Local Traffic Committee meeting held on 3 May, 2021 be adopted.

DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS

Outcome 2 - We plan for our future growth

2 Public Exhibition of Draft Employment Lands Strategy

90 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Bernard Bratusa seconded Councillor Tricia Hitchen

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Public Exhibition of Draft Employment Lands Strategy be received.

2. Council approve the Draft Employment Lands Strategy to be placed on public exhibition for a period of at least 8 weeks together with supporting documents including the Penrith Industrial Precincts Technical Report 2021, Mecone North-South Corridor Study 2021, and HillPDA Penrith Employment Lands Use Study and Addendum 2020, provided as a separate enclosure to this report.

3. Delegation be granted to the General Manager to make minor changes to the draft Employment Lands Strategy and supporting documents prior to exhibition, if required.

4 Submissions to Various State Government Planning Reform Matters on Exhibition

91 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Bernard Bratusa seconded Councillor Tricia Hitchen

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Submissions to Various State Government Planning Reform Matters on Exhibition be received.

2. Council endorse the attached submissions to be forwarded to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment for their consideration.

1 Proposed Winter Sporting Facility at 2 Tench Avenue, Jamisontown

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

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Proposed Winter Sporting Facility at 2 Tench Avenue, Jamisontown be received

2. Council endorses the Planning Proposal presented in this report and which has been provided to Councillors as a separate enclosure and is publicly available on Council’s website.

3. Council prepares, publicly notifies and executes a Planning Agreement reflecting the terms presented in the Voluntary Planning Agreement offer provided at Attachment 4.

4. Council endorses the draft amendment to the Penrith Development Control Plan 2014 provided at Attachment 3.

5. The Planning Proposal is to be submitted to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment after a Planning Agreement that supports the Planning Proposal in respect to provision of a traffic contribution has been publicly notified and executed.

6. The draft amendment to the Penrith Development Control Plan 2014 provided is to take effect upon making of the LEP amendment sought by the Planning Proposal.

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 John Thain
Councillor Ross Fowler OAM
Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM
Councillor Jim Aitken OAM
Councillor Mark Davies
Councillor Brian Cartwright
Councillor Tricia Hitchen
Councillor Bernard Bratusa
Councillor Marcus Cornish
Councillor Karen McKeown OAM

3 Public Exhibition of Draft Green Grid Strategy

93 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Mark Davies seconded Councillor Kath Presdee

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Public Exhibition of Draft Green Grid Strategy be received

2. Council endorse the draft Green Grid Strategy, to be publicly exhibited for a period of at least 8 weeks.

3. Delegation be granted to the General Manager to make minor changes to the draft Green Grid Strategy prior to exhibition, if necessary.

Outcome 4 - We have safe, vibrant places

5 RFT20/21-27 Harold Corr Athletics Track Upgrade

94 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Tricia Hitchen seconded Councillor Greg Davies

That:

1. The information contained in the report on RFT20/21-27 Harold Corr Athletics Track Upgrade be received

2. Polytan Asia Pacific Pty Ltd be awarded the contract subject to the execution of a formal agreement for the RFT20/21-27 Harold Corr Athletics Track Upgrade, Cambridge Park, for an amount of $3,920,020 excluding GST.

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

Outcome 6 - We are healthy and share strong community spirit

6 RFT 20/21-25 Landscape Construction for Regatta Park

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

That:

1. The information contained in the report on RFT 20/21-25 Landscape Construction for Regatta Park be received

2. Glascott Landscape & Civil Pty Ltd be awarded the Contract subject to the execution of a formal agreement for the RFT20/21-25 Regatta Park Landscape Construction for an amount of $8,687,902.82 excluding GST

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

Councillor Bernard Bratusa requested that his name be recorded as having voted against the recommendations.

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM left the meeting, the time being 8:59pm.

Councillor Mark Davies left the meeting, the time being 8:59pm.

Outcome 7 - We have confidence in our Council

7 Tender RCL 202101 - Residential Builder Partnering Panel

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

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Tender RCL 202101 - Residential Builder Partnering Panel be received.

2. The Recognised Contractor List be established for the provision of the following construction project types for a three (3) year term with two (2) x one (1) year extension options:

(a) Single low-density residential building developments where Council is the developer and the head contract value is less than $20m.

(b) Multi low density residential building developments where Council is the developer and the head contract value is less than $20m.

3. Council appoint the following firms to the RCL panel:

i. Beechwood Homes Constructions Pty Limited

ii. Simonds Homes NSW Pty Ltd

iii. Eden Brae Holdings Pty Limited

iv. Hudson Homes Pty Ltd

v. The Trustee for Metricon Homes Unit Trust

8 The Straight Road Mulgoa - Permanent Partial Road Closure

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

That:

1. The information contained in the report on The Straight Road Mulgoa - Permanent Partial Road Closure be received

2. The Endeavour Energy electrical infrastructure located within the section of road reserve to be closed, be removed prior to gazettal.

3. Part The Straight Road Mulgoa, as identified within the report, be permanently closed in accordance with the Roads Act 1993

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

5. The parcel of closed road, once registered and vested in Council, be classified as Operational Land.

9 Acceptance of Grant funding - Greater Sydney Crown Land Open Space Activation Program and categorisation of Crown Reserves

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

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Acceptance of Grant funding - Greater Sydney Crown Land Open Space Activation Program and categorisation of Crown Reserves be received

2. Council accept the grant funding of $1,500,000 offered under the Greater Sydney Crown Land Open Space Activation Program and delegate authority to the General Manager to enter into the funding agreement with the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment.

3. Council acknowledge the appointment of Crown Land Manager of Crown Reserves 90020 and 69111 and delegate authority to the General Manager to make the necessary applications to progress the initial categorisation of the Crown land parcels for General Community Use.

4. Council write to the Minister for Planning, the Hon Rob Stokes MP and the Local Member, the Hon Stuart Ayres MP, thanking them for grant funding.

5. The Common Seal of the Council of the City of Penrith be affixed on any documentation as necessary.

10 Acceptance of Grant Funding - NSW Public Spaces Legacy Program, City Park

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

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Acceptance of Grant Funding - NSW Public Spaces Legacy Program, City Park be received

2. Council accept the funding amount of $4million under the Department of Planning Industry & Environment, NSW Public Spaces Legacy Program for the City Park, Penrith project.

3. Council allocate $4 million to replace Council funding to repay the COVID-19 internal loan.

4. Letters of thanks be sent to the Minister for Planning, the Hon Rob Stokes MP, and the Local Member, the Hon Stuart Ayres MP.

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

11 Organisational Financial Review - March 2021

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

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Organisational Financial Review - March 2021 be received.

2. The Organisational Financial Review - March 2021 as at 31 March 2021, including the revised estimates outlined in this report and detailed in the Organisational Report – March 2021, be adopted.

12 Local Government Remuneration Tribunal Determination for Mayor and Councillors for 2021-2022

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

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Local Government Remuneration Tribunal Determination for Mayor and Councillors for 2021-2022 be received.

2. The fees payable to the Mayor and Councillors for 2021-22 be set at the maximum level permitted.

13 Summary of Investment & Banking for the Period 1 April 2021 to 30 April 2021

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

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Summary of Investment & Banking for the Period 1 April 2021 to 30 April 2021 be received.

2. The certificate of the Responsible Accounting Officer and Summary of Investments and Performance for the Period 1 April 2021 to 30 April 2021 be noted and accepted.

3. The graphical Investment Analysis as at 30 April 2021 be noted.

Councillor Kath Presdee left the meeting, the time being 9:03pm.

Councillor Marcus Cornish left the meeting, the time being 9:03pm.

REQUESTS FOR REPORTS AND MEMORANDUMS AND URGENT BUSINESS

RR 1 Passing of Frank Lawton

Councillor Todd Carney advised that Frank Lawton had recently passed away and conveyed his condolences to the family, and then highlighted the significant contribution that Frank had made to the St Marys community and in particular the St Marys Sub Branch of the RSL.

Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM returned to the meeting, the time being 9:04pm.

Councillor Mark Davies returned to the meeting, the time being 9:04pm.

Councillor Kath Presdee returned to the meeting, the time being 9:05pm.

Councillor Marcus Cornish returned to the meeting, the time being 9:07pm.

RR 2 Wallacia

Councillor Bernard Bratusa acknowledged the efforts of Council staff regarding parks and recreation facilities in the LGA, as well as those of the Member for Mulgoa, Tanya Davies MP, and Councillor Ross Fowler OAM, in opposing the establishment of a cemetery in Wallacia. Councillor Bratusa also thanked Council staff for providing updates regarding this matter.

UB 1 Live sites for 2021 Olympics

Councillor Tricia Hitchen requested that an equal allocation be made from all three Wards’ voted works to pay for Olympic Live sites to be located in the Mondo at Penrith and also at Coachman’s Park in St Marys.

103 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Tricia Hitchen seconded Councillor Ross Fowler OAM that the matter be brought forward and dealt with as a matter of urgency.

Her Worship the Mayor, Councillor Karen McKeown OAM, ruled that the matter was urgent and should be dealt with at the meeting.

104 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Tricia Hitchen seconded Councillor Ross Fowler OAM that an equal allocation be made from all three Wards’ voted works to pay for Olympic Live sites to be located in the Mondo at Penrith and also at Coachman’s Park in St Marys.

RR 3 Wallacia Golf Course

Councillor Ross Fowler OAM commended Councillor Bernard Bratusa on his efforts regarding this matter and requested that Council begin to investigate that in the likely event that the cemetery doesn’t proceed, Council and the leadership team put in place a plan for Council to take over interim control of the course until it returns to full operation again, with the objective to secure a large piece of critical recreational space in the southern part of the LGA.

Committee of the Whole

105 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM seconded Councillor Tricia Hitchen that the meeting adjourn to the Committee of the Whole to deal with the following matters, the time being 9:11pm.

Councillor Marcus Cornish left the meeting at 9:11pm and did not return.

Councillor Mark Davies left the meeting at 9:11pm and did not return.

1 Presence of the Public

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

Outcome 7

2 Council Property - Lease Agreement - Shop 1, 114-116 Henry Street, Penrith

This item has been referred to Committee of the Whole as the report refers to information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business and discussion of the matter in open meeting would be, on balance, contrary to the public interest.

3 Claim for Reimbursement of Legal Costs

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 9:25pm and the General Manager reported that the Committee of the Whole met at 9:11pm on 24 May 2021, 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, Kevin Crameri OAM, Greg Davies, 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 Council Property - Lease Agreement - Shop 1, 114-116 Henry Street, Penrith

RECOMMENDED on the MOTION of Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM seconded Councillor Kath Presdee

CW2 That:

1. The information contained in the report on Council Property - Lease Agreement - Shop 1, 114-116 Henry Street, Penrith be received

2. Council approve the proposed new lease agreement under the terms and conditions listed within the report.

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

3 Claim for Reimbursement of Legal Costs

A MOTION was moved by Councillor Kevin Crameri OAM seconded Councillor Jim Aitken OAM

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Claim for Reimbursement of Legal Costs be received.

2. Councillor Cornish be reimbursed his legal costs outlined in the report.

A FORESHADOWED MOTION was moved by Councillor John Thain seconded Councillor Ross Fowler OAM:

CW3 That:

1. The information contained in the report on Claim for Reimbursement of Legal Costs be received.

2. Councillor Cornish is not to be reimbursed his legal costs outlined in the report, for the following reasons:

(a) Council is not satisfied that when Councillor Cornish carried out his functions as a Councillor at meetings held on 24 November 2014 and 8 December 2014, those functions were carried out in good faith;

(b) In addition, and in relation to his claim for reimbursement of his legal costs of the investigation of Ms Thane, the findings in that matter were not substantially favourable to Councillor Cornish.

Upon being PUT to the meeting, the MOTION was LOST.

Upon being PUT to the meeting, the FORESHADOWED MOTION was CARRIED and on becoming the SUBSTANTIVE MOTION was also CARRIED.

ADOPTION OF Committee of the Whole

106 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Brian Cartwright seconded Councillor John Thain that the recommendations contained in the Committee of the Whole and shown as CW1, CW2 and CW3 be adopted.

There being no further business the Chairperson declared the meeting closed the time being 9:26 pm.

Ordinary Meeting 28 June 2021

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE
Local Traffic Committee MEETING

HELD ON 7 June, 2021

(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), 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

Steve Grady - Busways, Michael Alderton - Acting Engineering Services Manager, David Drozd - Traffic Engineering Coordinator, Graham Green - Senior Traffic Engineer, Kablan Mowad - Senior Traffic Engineer, Anthony Baradhy - Traffic Engineering Officer, Caleb O’Reilly - Trainee Engineer, Kristy Johnson - Engineering Services Secretary, Kylie Thornley - Traffic Administration Officer, Tiana Dickson - Business Administration Trainee, Lalaine Malaluan - Traffic Engineering Officer, Wendy Read - Road Safety Officer, Kiera Murphy - Senior Ranger, Marco De Stefanis - Major Projects Coordinator.

APOLOGIES

Deputy Mayor, Tricia Hitchen (Representative for the Member for Penrith), Councillor Marcus Cornish, Adam Wilkinson - Engineering Services Manager, Daniel Davidson, Senior Traffic Engineer, Sergeant Matthew Shirvington - Nepean Police Area Command (PAC).

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES - Local Traffic Committee Meeting - 3 May 2021

The minutes of the Local Traffic Committee Meeting of 3 May 2021 were confirmed.

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Nil.

DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS

Outcome 3 - We can get around the City

1 Cullen Avenue and Lakeside Parade, Jordan Springs - Proposed Parking and Road Safety Improvements at Jordan Springs Public School

Steve Grady – Busways suggested to the Committee, a recommendation to remove the bus stop on Cullen Avenue near the turn into Water Gum Drive and utilise the bus zone further north outside the school instead. Steve Grady advised the Committee that this option still meets the catchment obligations and guidelines. Mayor, Councillor Karen McKeown OAM (Council Representative) confirmed her support for this option.

Mario Dizon - Transport for NSW (TfNSW) queried the detour that drivers would need to make to access the turning bay which will be to either approach from the east, utilise on-street parking or conduct a loop and turn around up further where it is safe to do so.

The Committee supported that Recommendation 2 be amended to reflect an amendment to Appendix 2 to include the removal of the bus stop and utilisation of the existing bus zone.

The Committee supported that Recommendation 3 be amended to add wording ‘from designated turning bay’.

RECOMMENDED

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Cullen Avenue and Lakeside Parade, Jordan Springs - Proposed Parking and Road Safety Improvements at Jordan Springs Public School be received.

2. Consultation be undertaken with Jordan Springs Public School and directly affected residents and businesses regarding the proposed signage and line marking as shown in Appendices 1, 2 (amended to include removal of the existing bus stop and utilisation of the existing bus zone) and 3.

3. Council refer a Traffic Management Plan to Transport for NSW for the approval of the ‘No Right Turn from Designated Turning Bay’ restriction to traffic on Cullen Avenue, Jordan Springs.

4. Subject to no substantial objections being received and Transport for NSW approval of the Traffic Management Plan, the installation of the signage and line marking as shown in Appendix 3 be endorsed for installation.

5. Subject to Transport for NSW approval of the Traffic Management Plan, detailed design be undertaken of the raised concrete median at the bay entry and exit. This project will be listed to Council’s Major and Minor Traffic Facilities Program as well as grant applications to the NSW Government be considered to expiate construction of this treatment.

6. Subject to no substantial objections being received regarding the pedestrian fencing the project be listed to Council’s Major and Minor Traffic Facilities Program as well as grant applications to the NSW Government be considered to expiate construction of these devices.

7. Provide a written update to agency stakeholders outlining the recommendations including Department of Education; Jordan Springs Public School; Nepean Police Area Command; Transport for NSW; Centre for Road Safety; and Council’s Rangers.

2 Laimbeer Place, Penrith - No Parking Restrictions at Turning Head

RECOMMENDED

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Laimbeer Place, Penrith - No Parking Restrictions at Turning Head be received.

2. Consultation to be undertaken with affected properties regarding the proposed installation of ‘No Parking’ restrictions in the turning head at the end of Laimbeer Place, Penrith as shown in Appendix 1.

3. Subject to no substantial objections being received, ‘No Parking’ restrictions be installed in the turning head at the end of Laimbeer Place, Penrith as shown in Appendix 1.

4. Council’s Waste Services Department and Ranger Services Department be advised of Council’s resolution.

3 Ninth Avenue, Llandilo - Proposed Speed Humps

Wayne Mitchell - Director Development and Regulatory Services (Chair) recommended to the Committee that a further letter be sent to the residents to keep them informed.

Michael Alderton - Acting Engineering Services Manager questioned the Committee on whether drivers would drive around the speed humps and drive on the shoulders of the road. Graham Green - Senior Traffic Engineer advised the Committee that if this were to occur, then we would consider putting in guide posts to discourage this behaviour.

Mario Dizon - Transport for NSW (TfNSW) questioned whether traffic counts have been conducted since the installation of the 60 km/h signage and if driver behaviour had changed. Graham Green advised that he had done timed, point to point checks and he had spoken to residents and the driver behaviour was still continuing.

Mario Dizon advised the Committee that consideration be given to putting in street lighting as it is very dark at night. Mario Dizon also requested that Council look at the spacing of the speed humps as the standards are no less than 180 metres and some on this plan were less than the recommended spacing. Graham Green advised Mario that these locations were picked due to the power poles and lighting already in place.

RECOMMENDED

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Ninth Avenue, Llandilo - Proposed Speed Humps be received.

2. The proposed speed humps on Ninth Avenue, Llandilo be installed as shown in Appendix 1.

3. The proposed speed humps on Ninth Avenue, Llandilo project be funded from Council’s 2020/2021 Traffic Facilities Budget.

4. The residents who previously raised this matter be notified of Council’s resolution.

5. 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.

4 Cosgrove Crescent, Kingswood - Proposed Installation of 'No Stopping' Signage and Separation Line Marking

The Committee agreed that Recommendations 1 and 2 to be amended to change the word “Separation” (i.e. separation line) to “Continuation” (i.e. continuation line).

RECOMMENDED

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Cosgrove Crescent, Kingswood - Proposed Installation of 'No Stopping' Signage and Continuation Line Marking be received.

2. The ‘No Stopping’ Signage and the continuation lines be installed on Cosgrove Crescent as shown in Appendix 1.

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

5 IRONMAN 70.3 - Sunday, 26 September 2021 at Sydney International Regatta Centre

RECOMMENDED

That:

1. The information contained in the report on IRONMAN 70.3 - Sunday, 26 September 2021 at Sydney International Regatta Centre be received.

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

3. As per Attachment 1 and Attachment 2, approval be given for the temporary closure of the following roads:

· McCarthys Lane - Pipe Gate to Castlereagh Road

· Castlereagh Road - Between Andrews Road and Springwood Road

· Brooks Lane - Between Castlereagh Road and Wilshire Road

· Wilshire Road - Between Brookes Lane and Jockbett Road

· Jockbett Road - Between Wilshire Road and The Driftway

· The Driftway - Between Castlereagh Road and Londonderry Road

· Old Castlereagh Road - Between SIRC and Castlereagh Road

· Leland Street - Between Lugard Street and Old Castlereagh Road

· Lugard Street - Between Camden Street and Leland Street

· Borec Road - Between Cassola Place and Lugard Street

· Cassola Place - From Borec Road

from 4.30am to 3.00pm on Sunday, 26 September 2021.

4. The Traffic Management Plan for the “Ironman 70.3 – Western Sydney” be endorsed, subject to the following conditions:

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

b) The event applicant liaises with NSW Police prior to the event and obtain any approvals if required.

c) The applicant delivers an information letterbox drop and personal communication to all business proprietors, property owners/residents/tenants in the affected streets four weeks prior to the event. Arrangements are to be made for residents who require essential access to/from their properties during the event.

d) The event applicant submits to Council a copy of Public Liability Insurance (usually a Certificate of Currency) of minimum $20 million, 30 days prior to the event. In addition, the event applicant indemnifies Council in writing against all claims for damage and injury which may result from the proposed event.

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

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

g) The event applicant provide advice to Council prior to the event that the event complies with the NSW Work Health and Safety Act 2011 & Work Health and Safety Regulation 2017.

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

i) The event organiser notifies the Ambulance Service of NSW and Fire brigades (Fire & Rescue NSW and NSW Rural Fire Service) and NSW State Emergency Services of the proposed event and submit a copy of the notification to Council prior to the event.

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

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

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

m) The event applicant advises competitors to obey road rules and Police directions during the event.

5. Any proposed speed limit reductions are subject to the separate approval of the Roads and Maritime Services.

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

7. As a requirement of the RMS “Guide to Traffic and Transport Management for Special Events 2006” this approval endorsing the Traffic Management Plan is to be considered as Council’s authorisation to regulate traffic on Council’s roads.

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

6 St Marys Spring Festival and Parade - Saturday, 4 September 2021

The Committee agreed that Recommendations 1 and 2 to be amended. The wording is to be changed to ‘on a Saturday during the month of September 2021’ instead of a specific date as the proposed date of Saturday, 4 September 2021 clashes with the Local Government Election and the organisers have since advised the date will be changed.

Kablan Mowad - Senior Traffic Engineer advised that detours may have to be amended due to the Metro Project but they will liaise direct with St Marys Town Centre.

RECOMMENDED

That:

1. The information contained in the report on St Marys Spring Festival and Parade – On a Saturday During the Month of September 2021 be received

2. The Traffic Management Plans for the Class 2 and Class 4 Special Events pursuant to Roads and Maritime Services “Guide to Traffic and Transport Management for Special Events 2006” for the St Marys Spring Festival on a Saturday in September 2021 be endorsed, subject to the following conditions:

a. Approval be given for the temporary road closures listed in Appendix 1.

b. A Traffic Management Plan and Traffic Control Plan detailing each event, including a Risk Management Plan, be lodged by the event applicant with Transport for NSW for approval and NSW Police for information prior to the events. A copy of the Transport for NSW approval must be submitted to Council prior to the events. The Traffic Control Plan shall detail how a minimum 4.0m emergency lane is maintained at all times during the events.

c. The event applicant submits to Council a copy of Public Liability Insurance (usually a Certificate of Currency) of minimum $20 million, prior to the events. In addition, the event applicant indemnifies Council in writing against all claims for damage and injury which may result from the proposed events.

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

e. The event applicant must provide advice to Council prior to the events that the event addresses all requirements of the NSW Occupational Health & Safety Act 2000 and the NSW Occupational Health & Safety Regulations 2001.

f. The event applicant advertises the proposed temporary road closures in local newspapers a minimum of two weeks prior to the events, and provide Variable Message Signs (VMS) in appropriate locations a minimum of one week prior to the events, with the locations of the VMS boards submitted to Council for endorsement prior to their erection. VMS boards should be located in accordance with the Roads and Maritime Services Technical Direction TDT2002/11c.

g. The event applicant deliver an information letterbox drop and personal communication to all business proprietors, property owners/tenants, residents and other occupants in the affected streets two weeks prior to the events. Any concerns or requirements must be resolved by the applicant or referred back to Council for consideration. Satisfactory arrangements must be made to address such concerns to allow the events to proceed.

h. Signposting advising the date and time of all closures be provided and erected by the event organiser two weeks prior to the events (the applicant to liaise with the Roads and Maritime Services regarding size of sign and text height).

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

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

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

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

m. The event applicant is to request participants to obey road rules and Police directions during the events.

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

4. As a requirement of the RMS "Guide to Traffic and Transport Management for Special Events 2006”, this approval endorsing the traffic management plans be considered as Council’s Authorisation to regulate traffic on Council roads.

7 John Batman Avenue, Werrington County - Proposed Installation of Bus Zones and Changing Existing Bus Zone From Part Time During ‘School Days Only’, to Full Time

RECOMMENDED

That:

1. The information contained in the report on John Batman Avenue, Werrington County - Proposed Installation of Bus Zones and Changing Existing Bus Zone from Part Time During ‘School Days Only’ to Full Time. be received.

2. Installation of Bus Zones at the existing bus stops (ID: 2747442, 2747443) as shown in Appendices 1 and 2 be implemented.

3. Changes to the Existing Bus Zone from Part Time During ‘School Days Only’ to Full Time (ID:2747441) on John Batman Avenue as shown in Appendices 1 and 2 be implemented.

4. Busways and Council’s Ranger Services department be advised of Council’s resolution.

8 Phillip Street & Lethbridge Street, St Marys - Endorsement of Design Plans for Changes to Roundabout and Installation of Wombat Crossing

Steve Grady - Busways questioned the Committee on whether this would impact the St Marys Spring Festival or the Metro Project. Steve Grady was advised, as per the report, that the major work for the Metro Project is not due to commence until the 2nd quarter of 2022.

Michael Alderton - Acting Engineering Services Manager raised concerns to the Committee that pedestrian crossings constructed near roundabouts in the past had been removed and questioned if a road safety audit had been done.

RECOMMENDED

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Phillip Street & Lethbridge Street, St Marys - Endorsement of Design Plans for Changes to Roundabout and Installation of Wombat Crossing be received.

2. Design Plans DS2021/000076 (dated 18.05.2021) for the proposed raised wombat crossings and amendments to the roundabout at the intersection of Phillip Street & Lethbridge Street be endorsed for construction subject to:

a. A street lighting assessment be conducted by Sydney Metro Western Sydney Airport in accordance to ensure compliance with the relevant lighting category at the intersection and pedestrian crossing locations.

b. If the street lighting assessment identifies that current street lighting at the crossings and intersection do not meet the relevant lighting category Sydney Metro Western Sydney Airport undertake any necessary works required to ensure compliance with the relevant lighting category at the intersection and pedestrian crossing locations.

c. Consultation be undertaken by Sydney Metro Western Sydney Airport with affected residents in Phillip Street and Lethbridge Street via a letterbox drop including plans of the proposal and subject to no objections being received the proposal be approved for construction.

d. Any other supporting works required for the proposed raised wombat crossings and amendments to the roundabout at the intersection of Phillip Street & Lethbridge Street, St Marys be undertaken by Sydney Metro Western Sydney Airport.

GENERAL BUSINESS

GB 1 Western Sydney Marathon, Sydney International Regatta Centre - Sunday, 27 June 2021

Executive Summary

The purpose of this report is to consider a request from the Sydney International Regatta Centre (SIRC) to hold the “Western Sydney Marathon” on Sunday, 27 June 2021. The report recommends that the Traffic Management Plan (TMP) for the event be endorsed, subject to conditions relevant to a Class 3 Event.

Background

Council has received a request from the SIRC for approval to hold the “Western Sydney Marathon” on Sunday, 27 June 2021. The event has been held for many years at the SIRC with minimal adverse impact.

The event is considered as a Class 3 Event under the “Guide to Traffic & Transport Management for Special Events”.

The event start time is 07.00am, with set up from 4.30am and the car parks opening at 5.00am. The marathon will commence at 7.00am, the half marathon at 7.30am, the 10km run will commence at 10.00am, 5km run at 11.00am and the 2km run at 12.00pm. The event will finish at 1.00pm, with pack up until 2.00pm.

After starting within SIRC, the marathon and half marathon will again proceed to Old Castlereagh Road, Castlereagh, exiting at Gate A, then to the Castlereagh Christian Conference Centre, then return to Gate B and re-enter the venue at Gate A. The 10km and 5km fun runs will be held within the SIRC.

It is anticipated that 1,500 participants will attend, along with 500 spectators, consisting of family and community groups. The event will include food stalls, music, and a health and fitness expo. Ample parking is available on-site. Shuttle buses will operate from Penrith Railway Station from 5.00am.

The event has proven to be successful in the past, with minimal traffic impacts.

Approval is requested to temporarily close Old Castlereagh Road to traffic for the marathon and half marathon runs. The section of Old Castlereagh Road that is proposed to be temporarily closed to traffic is the section between Gate B and the termination of Old Castlereagh Road, generating minimal traffic impact.

Traffic entering the site will be managed by SIRC staff, with traffic controllers positioned on Old Castlereagh Road at Gates B and C. Variable message sign boards will be placed at the roundabout intersection of Old Castlereagh Road, Castlereagh Road and Andrews Road, and also near Gate D, to assist in directing vehicle and pedestrian movements.

SIRC has notified surrounding businesses, bus companies and emergency services of the event.

RECOMMENDED

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Western Sydney Marathon, Sydney International Regatta Centre – Sunday, 27 June 2021 be received.

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

3. Approval be given for the temporary closure of Old Castlereagh Road, between the SIRC Gate B and the termination of Old Castlereagh Road, Castlereagh from 4.30am to 2.00pm on Sunday, 27 June 2021.

4. The Traffic Management Plan for the Western Sydney Marathon at the Sydney International Regatta Centre on Sunday, 27 June 2021 be endorsed, subject to the following conditions:

(a) The event applicant obtains separate approval from the NSW Police with a copy of the NSW Police approval must be submitted to Council prior to the event.

(b) Any affected properties along the event route, including the Castlereagh Christian Conference Centre, be advised of the proposal by the applicant.

(c) The event applicant submits to Council a copy of Public Liability Insurance (usually a Certificate of Currency) of minimum $20 million, 30 days prior to the event. In addition, the event applicant indemnifies Council, in writing, against all claims for damage and injury which may result from the proposed event.

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

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

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

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

(h) The event applicant notifies the Ambulance Service of NSW, fire brigades (Fire & Rescue NSW and NSW Rural Fire Service) and NSW State Emergency Service of the proposed event and submits a copy of the notification to Council prior to the event.

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

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

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

(l) The event applicant ensures that competitors are advised to obey road rules and Police directions during the event.

5. Any proposed speed limit reductions are subject to the separate approval of the Roads and Maritime Services.

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

7. As a requirement of the RMS “Guide to Traffic and Transport Management for Special Events 2006” this approval endorsing the Traffic Management Plan is to be considered as Council’s authorisation to regulate traffic on Council’s roads.

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

GB 2 Sydney Street, Oxley Park - Timed Parking at Oxley Park Shopping Precinct

Councillor Robin Cook (Representative for the Member for Londonderry) raised concerns about cars overstaying the 2-hour time restriction at the Oxley Park Shopping Precinct on Sydney Street, Oxley Park.

RECOMMENDED

That Council’s Rangers be requested to consider enforcement at this location.

GB 3 Glossop Street, St Marys - Speeding Trucks

Councillor Robin Cook (Representative for the Member for Londonderry) raised concerns about trucks speeding along Glossop Street, St Marys near the BP Service Station.

RECOMMENDATION

LTC 48 That Council’s Traffic Officers write to Nepean Police Area Command and request enforcement at this location.

GB 4 Dunheved Road, Werrington – Update on Project

Councillor Robin Cook (Representative for the Member for Londonderry) questioned the Committee about the progress on the upgrade of Dunheved Road and an approximate time of when this project will be completed.

RECOMMENDED

That Council’s Traffic Officers write to Councillor Robin Cook and provide an update on this project.

GB 5 Lawson Street, Penrith – Culvert Installation & Connecting into Existing

Marco De Stefanis - Major Projects Coordinator provided a presentation to the Committee on a Council project regarding “Lawson Street, Penrith – Culvert Installation & Connecting into Existing”.

Steve Grady - Busways advised the Committee that two (2) bus services could be diverted up Henry Street, Penrith as long as Busways is provided with 21-days’ notice.

RECOMMENDED

That the information be noted.

GB 6 Lakeside Parade, Jordan Springs – Vehicles Parking in Bus Zones at Bus Stops

Steve Grady - Busways raised concerns about vehicles parking in bus zones at the 2 bus stops on Lakeside Parade, Jordan Springs after hours when the Rangers aren’t on duty.

Kiera Murphy - Senior Ranger advised there are 2 night shifts per month and the Rangers can include this location on the list to patrol.

RECOMMENDED

That Rangers be requested to conduct enforcement at this location between 5pm and 8pm on a weekday.

GB 7 Phillip Street, St Marys – Parking Concerns

Mayor, Councillor Karen McKeown OAM (Council Representative) advised she had received a complaint from the podiatrist on Phillip Street, St Marys regarding a lack of on-street parking at the front of his practice. Some of his elderly customers are having trouble parking on the street due to the amount of construction happening nearby and subsequent parking of construction-related vehicles outside his practice for up to 8 hours a day.

Madam Mayor advised that in the past, temporary time restriction parking had been implemented at other locations in the Penrith LGA and requested that a similar approach be investigated at this location.

RECOMMENDED

That Council’s Traffic Engineers consider the installation of temporary timed parking restrictions at this location.

GB 8 Wayne Mitchell - Retirement

Wayne Mitchell - Director of Development and Regulatory Services (Chair) advised the Committee that this was his last meeting as he will be retiring on 2 July 2021. Wayne Mitchell thanked the members of the Committee for their input and support over the time he has been Chair of the Local Traffic Committee.

RECOMMENDED

That the information be noted.

There being no further business the Chairperson declared the meeting closed the time being 10:21am.

RECOMMENDATION

That the recommendations contained in the Report and Recommendations of the Local Traffic Committee meeting held on 7 June, 2021 be adopted.

Ordinary Meeting 28 June 2021

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE
Heritage Advisory Committee MEETING

HELD ON 15 June, 2021

PRESENT

Peter Wood (PCC), James Heathcote (PCC), Abby Younan (PCC), Erin Higgins (PCC), Nathan Ritchie (PCC), Amanda McMurtrie (PCC), Jessica Gadd (PCC), Clr Marcus Cornish (Chair), Stephen McKenzie, Jennine Leonarder Collins, Wendy Herne, Richard Ward, Beth Moore, Norma Thorburn.

APOLOGIES

The apology from Councillor Brian Cartwright was accepted.

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES - Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting – 16 February 2021

The minutes of the Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting of 16 February 2021 were confirmed.

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Richard Ward is a declaration of interest (non-pecuniary) for the presentation on 129-133 Henry Street Penrith as his organisation previously resided in the building.

DELIVERY PROGRAM REPORTS

Outcome 2 - We plan for our future growth

1 Heritage Assistance Funding 2021-2022

James Heathcote (Development Assessment Planner) presented to the committee with the 21 heritage assistance funding applications received by Council from the recent grant funding round that ran during May 2021. James briefed the committee of each individual application and the suggestion of granting to be made after review by Council and Council’s Heritage Advisor.

James advised that there is a recommended total of $75,529.55 to be issued out for 18 supported applications and the budget allows for $98,983.00. Council’s Heritage advisor suggested that the remainder of funds, being $23,453.45, be invested in heritage education for the community, including general enquiries, fact sheets and the like, for the general public.

The Committee queried the age of the red brick home on 24 Hemmings Street, asking whether this should be heritage listed and said that just because the properties are listed in a conservation area does not mean the heritage assistance money should go toward fixing such buildings.

The Committee were advised that this site is listed as part of the Lemongrove Conservation area under Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2010 and Council’s Heritage Advisor reviewed the site as having heritage significance. The concerns raised by the Committee members were noted, however, the final resolution has included the funding to this site.

The Chair queried where the carry over funding from last year has gone and if this money was carried into this year’s budget. The Chair believes that there should be an additional $50,000 in the budget available.

Peter Wood (Development Services Manager) advised that the usual funding amount is $30,000 and it is his understanding that Council’s previous resolution was to increase the funding up to $100,000, subject to the applications made to Council. Peter also advised that if applicants have not completed the works, it may mean the money may still be sitting with Council until the applicant has completed the works which can require a revote for budgeting in the new financial year. To stop this occurring in the future, a reserve could be created.

The Chair asked Peter Wood for a copy of the resolution of the meeting which stipulated additional funding in the Heritage Assistance Grant and this was agreed to

The Chair does not want the remainder of the funds ($23,453.45) to spent on educational pamphlets and stated that the additional money should go to the applicants who have applied this year for assistance. He added that Council should be contacting the applicants and suggesting they amend their applications to increase the amount of assistance that they have requested. The Chair advised that the information regarding what can be applied for should be done when the notification letters are sent to the applicants. An additional page of FAQS should be sent to the owners at the same time. The Chair believes that funding for education should be looked at separately and not from this funding.

The Chair does not support item four of the recommendation and asks the committee whether they agree with this. The committee agreed with the Chair’s recommendation.

Peter Wood advised that if item four is removed, that the money will be moved into future funds unless the committee recommend topping up some applications that they’ve applied for this year.

The Committee asked whether Council can approach the owners of other heritage listed buildings to see if they are interested in being funded for restoration works. The Chair said that whilst this is a good idea, this would be a more appropriate consideration for next year’s funding round.

The Committee discussed whether its required to give additional money to the applications if they haven’t requested it, but noted that the CMP funding application should receive additional funding.

It was also discussed that the leftover funding should be distributed amongst the supported funding applications. The Chair put forward a motion that Recommendation 4 be amended to this effect which was unanimously supported by all Committee members.

RECOMMENDED

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Heritage Assistance Funding 2021-2022 be received

2. The recommendations to grant heritage funding (and not to grant funding) be endorsed as outlined within this report

3. The persons who made an application for heritage assistance be notified of the outcome and the reasons for support / non-support (as applicable)

4. Surplus of funds be spent on remainder of applications rather than education.

5. The remaining funding within the HAF budget be re-distributed proportionately amongst the supported funding applications for the 2021-2022 Heritage Assistance Funding round.

2 13 April 2021 Heritage Advisory Meeting

RECOMMENDED

That:

1. The information contained in the report on 13 April 2021 Heritage Advisory Meeting be received.

2. The business paper and notes compiled from the discussion with available members of the Heritage Committee from the 13 April 2021 meeting be noted and received.

Outcome 7 - We have confidence in our Council

3 150 years of Penrith Council

Jessica Gadd (Digital, Design and Corporate Events Coordinator) advised the committee that the 16th July will be a community celebration day. Council will be closing down Station Street to have a small event with food and entertainment for families. The library staff have also put together a display case of historical items. Jessica also presented to the committee with a program of activities which will be open to the community. Jessica asked the Committee for any feedback.

The Chair requested that the invite to the dinner is extended to each committee member. Jessica said she will extend the invite to the committee members. The Committee expressed their appreciation for the hard work and passion from Jessica and the Committee believe this is a great opportunity for the community. The Chair asked Jessica whether the Mulgoa Progress association have been contacted for this celebration and Jessica said she will reach out to them.

Jessica will keep the Committee up to date with event details.

Jessica left the meeting at 5:25pm.

RECOMMENDED

That the information contained in the report on 150 years of Penrith Council be received.

GENERAL BUSINESS

GB1 129-133 Henry Street - Redevelopment of former Council Chambers site

Nathan Ritchie (Property Development Manager) presented to the Committee regarding the redevelopment project at 129-133 Henry Street involving the former Penrith Council Chambers, which was previously presented to the Committee back in October 2020 and is reaching out for further feedback from the Committee.

The design for the new proposal was sought from an architectural design competition and Nathan showed the Committee concept images of what the design would look like. Nathan advised that there is a heritage consultant on board who will be working on the development application, the heritage impact statement and heritage interpretation strategy. Nathan advised that the design that Council’s property team is considering has not been finalised, however, the proposal will demolish the existing heritage listed building (Item No. 189, Sch.5 of Penrith LEP 2010). However, Nathan noted that there are items that they wish to preserve in the new building, including the terrazzo tiling, recycling existing bricks into landscaping, some of the brick façade and treatment.

When the development application is lodged, the Committee will have an opportunity to formally respond. However, Nathan would like feedback and early consultation with Committee members prior to the DA being lodged. Nathan invited the committee members to a workshop in upcoming weeks’ time to discuss elements of design and heritage on the site and what the Committee would like to input.

The Chair asked whether this would be face to face workshop or online. Nathan advised that it will be whatever is easiest for those who would like to attend.

The Committee asked if the building is cantilevered of the street, Nathan advised that the design is to cantilever to the boundary but this design is still conceptual and changes will be made. The Committee further asked if there is a 3D model and Nathan advised that it is not yet at that stage.

The Committee asked how pulling down the building is considered preserving heritage.

Nathan advises that it is done by design interpretation strategies and elements within the design and how it is best documented, and this not necessarily in a physical form.

The Chair stated that a site visit and workshop should be incorporated together and would like as many committee members to attend as possible.

The Chair stated that he likes to retain the old buildings but also understands that it is considered a prime site which needs to be viable for development. The Chair likes the idea of the building cantilevering and believes the design is unique and would like to know if there is underground parking. Nathan Ritchie confirmed that there will be basement carparking in the best way possible for cost, design and access.

The Chair asked if the building can be named something with heritage reference that links back to where it originally came from to retain heritage significance. The Committee believes that this would be a good idea. Nathan advised this is something that can be discussed in the workshop by giving the building a name and notes there is also an indigenous history to the site.

Nathan advised that they would like this building to create a benchmark standard for what design should look like in the Penrith CBD.

Nathan asked people to register their interest through Abby Younan if they would like to be a part of the workshop to which some members of the Committee stated they would like to be involved in consultation.

Nathan will reach out in around 2-3 weeks’ time regarding this workshop.

Nathan, Amanda and Erin left the meeting at 5:55pm.

GB2 Future Meeting Format (Online vs Face to Face)

The Committee asked when the meetings will be going back to face to face rather than online meetings. Peter Wood advised that the decision should be made with respect to ongoing COVID changes. Peter advised that there could be potential for hybrid meeting or face to face for the next meeting and asked if the Committee would like to make a recommendation to meet face to face.

Members of the Committee said that the Committee can use their private residence for the next meeting if needed, and also stated that they don’t mind face-to-face meetings, but added that they also don’t mind online Zoom meetings either as they are just as productive.

Peter stated that either way it could be organised, however, the requirements for a Committee quorum also must be considered.

The Chair suggested a hybrid meeting moving forward to which the Committee agreed.

RECOMMENDED

That the meetings will be in a hybrid format moving forward.

The Committee also agreed that the next meeting date should occur after the elections. The Chair requested that Peter looks at a date at the end of September.

GB3 Street Naming in Penrith LGA

The Chair discussed the renaming of the Northern Road which was changed by the State Government with no consultation with Council. The Chair asked whether road names or streets or plazas can be heritage listed and also asked that the committee think about future road naming and how the Committee are notified and what they would like to see in the future.

James stated that some roads/alignments in Penrith LGA are already heritage listed and that such suggestions could come in the form of future heritage listing recommendations from the Committee.

The Chair advised that this is the last meeting together with the re-election coming up and thanked the Committee for their commitment to Penrith and contribution to heritage in Penrith. The Chair would like to advise the Committee that regardless of whether he is chairing or not, he is still supportive of the Committee and Penrith’s Heritage.

There being no further business the Chair declared the meeting closed, the time being 6:56pm.

RECOMMENDATION

That the recommendations contained in the Report and Recommendations of the Heritage Advisory Committee meeting held on 15 June, 2021 be adopted.

Ordinary Meeting 28 June 2021

Exhibition of Penrith Lakes Draft Development Control Plan - Stage 1

Compiled by: Abdul Cheema, City Planning Coordinator

Authorised by: Natasha Borgia, City Planning Manager

Carlie Ryan, Acting Director - City Futures

Outcome	We plan for our future growth
Strategy	Facilitate development in the City that considers the current and future needs of our community
Service Activity	Plan for and facilitate development in the City

Executive Summary

The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s endorsement of the submission to the draft Penrith Lakes Development Control Plan Stage 1 (draft DCP Stage 1). The draft DCP Stage 1 has been prepared by the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE) as the planning authority, for existing zoned land under State Environmental Planning Policy (Penrith Lakes Scheme)1989 (Penrith Lakes SEPP). The exhibition closed on 19 May 2021.

Councillors were briefed at the meeting of 15 March 2021 by DPIE on the draft DCP Stage 1 ahead of it going on public exhibition. Councillors were further briefed on Council’s proposed submission at the 31 May 2021 Councillor Briefing. Council officers have had input into the draft DCP Stage 1. However, this does not preclude Council from making a submission during the exhibition.

The majority of the draft DCP Stage 1 aligns with Council’s technical officers’ comments provided during the preparation of the plan, apart from stormwater, site coverage and floor space ratio controls. There is also a need for more information on the flood response guidelines which have not been released and inform some planning controls. These issues have been included in our submission.

The submission is provided as Appendix 1 to this report for Council’s endorsement.

Background

In 1987, the NSW Government and the Penrith Lakes Development Corporation (PLDC) entered into a deed of agreement to implement the Penrith Lakes Scheme. Council has not seen the deed but understands that it covers sand and gravel extraction on the site, as well as the provision of water-oriented facilities for Western Sydney.

Planning for the Penrith Lakes site is not managed by Council. The existing planning controls for the site are dictated by the State government and set out in the Penrith Lakes SEPP. As a result, Council’s role from a strategic perspective is largely one of advocacy to the State government on what our community would like to see realised for the site.

Despite Council’s limited control over the site, Council recognises the recreational opportunity that the Penrith Lakes site presents for our community. This is reflected in the Local Strategic Planning Statement that identifies the PLDC as a key partner, and the Penrith Lakes site as an opportunity site and a priority corridor for our green and blue grid.

The Penrith Lakes is also part of the important East West Corridor. The Interim Centres Strategy for the East West Corridor, endorsed by Council in April 2020, includes an action to work with PLDC to maximise opportunities at Penrith Lakes.

In July 2020, an amendment was made to the Penrith Lakes SEPP which provided for zoning of the land to facilitate the delivery of the Nepean Business Park in the south of the site. A submission to this amendment was endorsed by Council at its meeting of 25 May 2020. The amendment expanded the Employment Zone by 13 hectares, rezoned an additional 12 hectares to Environment and made changes to a number of other clauses including contributions, geotechnical assessment and plans of management.

Current Situation

Penrith Lakes presents a significant opportunity for the community and our City. Although Council does not own nor manage the planning for the site, officer’s sought engagement from DPIE on the proposed DCP. Council has continually articulated the importance of Penrith Lakes as part of the broader strategic planning work for the LGA and therefore has negotiated with DPIE to undertake the preparation of the DCP in two stages:

· Stage 1 – Objectives and controls to apply to existing zoned land under the Penrith Lakes SEPP.

· Stage 2 – Vision, structure plan, objectives and controls for the broader unzoned land that will be subject to further work with key stakeholders including Council, DPIE and the PLDC. The DCP Stage 2 will be reported to Council when the vision and structure plan is further progressed for the broader Penrith Lakes area.

Clause 36 of the Penrith Lakes SEPP requires a DCP to be prepared ahead of granting development consent on the existing zoned land. As there have been a number of development proposals submitted to DPIE recently, it is necessary to have a DCP in place to facilitate development on existing zoned land and particularly for areas such as Nepean Business Park which will support job growth within the LGA.

The Penrith Lakes DCP - Stage 1 was exhibited until 19 May 2021. The aim of the draft DCP Stage 1 is to:

· provide a framework to guide development in Employment and Tourism zones at Penrith Lakes; and

· identify requirements and build upon the Penrith Lakes SEPP by providing detailed objectives, considerations and controls for land in the Employment and Tourism zones.

The Draft DCP applies to the existing Tourism and Employment zoned land, and provides guidance on landscaping, visual amenity, tree canopy cover, flood planning, stormwater management, movement, access and parking requirements, urban design and built form controls. The Draft DCP along with the Penrith Lakes SEPP, includes strong considerations for flood management and response.

Submission

Council’s full submission is provided as Appendix 1 to this report. The submission recommends amendments to the proposed controls that we believe will ensure that the DCP will facilitate the desired development outcomes for each of the precincts. Some of the key considerations are provided below.

Consistency with Council’s DCP (Penrith Development Control Plan 2014)

The controls in the exhibited DCP relating to setbacks, landscaped area, minimum lot size, Lot Frontage, FSR, and Site Coverage are inconsistent with Penrith Development Control Plan 2014 (Penrith DCP 2014). They need to be consistent with Penrith DCP 2014 for a similar development. The site already adjoins an existing and established industrial precinct developed under Council planning controls. Council staff have been raising this consistently during our consultation with DPIE.

Building Design Controls

This section is too broad, and consideration should be given to developing precinct-based controls to ensure that the controls respond to the type of development that will be occurring within a precinct. The controls as they stand would place unnecessary cost on development within the employment precinct.

Design Excellence Strategy

As the employment precinct adjoins an existing industrial estate, there is no need for the masterplan to be reviewed by the State Design Review Panel. The master planning controls contained in this DCP should address the key issue of screening industrial development from the sensitive activities along the Nepean River and in the Tourism precincts.

Landscaped Area

The landscaped area control of 15% is greater than currently prescribed and has the potential to impact on development feasibility. It is recommended that the DCP be amended to reflect the Penrith DCP 2014 rate of 10%.

Parking Strategy

The controls in this section are too broad and do not acknowledge the difference in development typologies of tourism and industrial development. Car parking rates for the employment precinct should be sourced from Council’s Development Control Plan not the Road and Maritime Services’ Guide to Traffic Generating Development.

Public art and design

This is an overly onerous control to be applying to the employment precinct and associated industrial developments and is likely to add unnecessary cost to development for little public benefit.

Site coverage and floor space ratio controls

The site coverage control of 60% conflicts with the maximum FSR control of 0.8:1 and essentially imposes a FSR control of 0.6:1 or less on development. Industrial and light industrial development is mainly single storey development that require a FSR of 0.8:1 to achieve development feasibility. This should also be considered in the context of landscaping requirements. It should be noted that Penrith DCP 2014 has no FSR or site coverage controls. These are assessed on merits along with required setbacks.

The setbacks along with FSR, site coverage and operational requirements make the development footprint quite restricted. These controls need to be tested to ensure they can be delivered on the site.

Flood Response Guideline

Council officers have not seen the Penrith Lakes Flood Response Guideline. We are unable to provide feedback on any DCP controls that reference this Guideline. Furthermore, we understand that the DCP and SEPP are not going to be finalised until this Guideline is finalised which sets out additional details relating to evacuation. We recommend that the timing of all three documents be aligned to enable council to consider how they interrelate.

Subdivision

The DCP does not allow for Torrens title subdivision. It only allows for strata or community title subdivision. The reason included in the DCP is to facilitate the administration of the site evacuation system established in accordance with the Penrith Lakes Flood Response Guideline which we have not seen. We are unable to provide feedback on this requirement without having seen this Guideline.

Staging

The requirement to have a staging plan for subdivisions or development applications over 5000sq.m in the employment precinct is unnecessary as the masterplan for the site should determine the staging of the subdivision.

Employment precinct masterplan controls

An additional control should be included to provide screening along Old Castlereagh Road to assist in mitigating the impact of neighbouring tourism development. The masterplan should include a control to provide a perimeter road along the boundary with land that adjoins the Nepean River. This road should be planted to provide screening of the industrial development. This road would also provide access to the Great River Walk.

Stormwater Strategy

It would have been preferable that the Stormwater Strategy for the development was completed prior to the finalisation of the DCP. The stormwater strategy should ultimately have informed the requirements for stormwater treatment and provided details of how proposed measures would be delivered, for the various sections / catchments of the precinct.

In the absence of an overarching stormwater strategy, each development will need to develop their own stormwater strategy for each development proposal as no broader stormwater strategy was finalised to support the DCP. Each strategy will need to demonstrate compliance with the DCP as well as address other matters such as proposed ownership.

The main issue that needs to be addressed relates to the proposed treatment in the catchments draining to the Southern Wetlands. In the case that they are not constructed before developments are proposed, it may be necessary to include a control in the DCP to ensure that an interim treatment solution (or alternative approach) must be provided, until such time the Southern Wetlands are completed.

Heritage

Clause 5.2.8 – Heritage of the Penrith Lakes DCP seeks to protect Longs House based on its heritage significance. Furthermore, the setback controls in the DCP also seek to establish a heritage curtilage and setback to Long’s House which is currently not listed as a Heritage Item in any Planning Instrument. This control should be removed from the DCP. Alternatively, consideration should be given to list Long’s House as a Heritage Item in State Environmental Planning Policy (Penrith Lakes Scheme) 1989. We acknowledge that the GML 2012 Conservation Management Plan establishes that Long‘s House has sufficient integrity to meet the requirements for heritage listing. However, any listing should be based on a more contemporary management plan exhibited along with an amendment to the SEPP.

Financial Implications

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

Risk Implications

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

Conclusion

DPIE has prepared a draft DCP for Penrith Lakes for existing zoned land within the Lakes Scheme to facilitate development and progress early activation and job creation for Penrith. DPIE are preparing the DCP in stages, with Stage 1 exhibited until 19 May 2021.

Although Council’s technical officers have participated in the preparation of the DCP for exhibition and most controls are generally supported, there are still a number of matters that need to be raised in a submission. Specifically, around the testing of the controls to minimise any impact on deliverability and having all the information to make informed comments.

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Exhibition of Penrith Lakes Draft Development Control Plan - Stage 1 be received.

2. Council endorse the submission provided in Appendix 1 to this report and forward it to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment for their consideration.

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1. ⇩

Submission to Penrith Lakes Draft DCP Stage 1

4 Pages

Appendix

Ordinary Meeting 28 June 2021

Resilient Penrith Action Plan

Compiled by: Belinda Atkins, Sustainability and Resilience Lead

Authorised by: Andrew Moore, Director - Corporate Services

Outcome	We care for our environment
Strategy	Minimise risks to our community from natural disasters and a changing climate
Service Activity	Identify actions that can be taken to increase the resilience of Penrith (including the implementation of the Cooling the City Strategy)

Previous Items: 4- Draft Resilient Penrith Action Plan 2021-2030- Councillor Briefing- 15 Mar 2021 7:00PM

3- Update - Draft Resilient Penrith Action Plan- Resilience Committee- 19 May 2021 6:00PM

Executive Summary

The Resilient Penrith Action Plan has been developed to align closely with the overarching Resilient Sydney Strategy 2018 which established the foundations for building resilience at a regional level. The Strategy enables Councils within Greater Sydney to make the commitment to build resilience in the local context.

The Resilient Penrith Action Plan aims to build awareness, preparedness and enhance the capability of Council and the community to adapt and build resilience to risks, shocks and stresses. It applies the five directions of the Resilient Sydney Strategy, and identifies localised outcomes, action areas and actions over the short to long-term to assist in building a resilient Penrith. It has been informed by research into key challenges, shocks and stresses, a climate change risk assessment and vulnerability mapping process, a review of the Cooling the City Strategy actions, as well as community and stakeholder engagement.

Following engagement with Council’s Resilience Committee and Councillors earlier this year, the Draft Resilience Action Plan was place on exhibition in March 2021. The feedback has been further considered by the Resilience Committee and the Resilient Penrith Action Plan (Attached) is presented tonight for adoption. The next stage in the process will be to embed the Resilient Penrith Action Plan into the Integrated Planning and Reporting Framework including the development of a monitoring and evaluation plan and a resource plan.

Background

Resilience is our ability to cope through tough times and emergencies including natural disasters. It can be defined as the capacity of individuals, communities, institutions, businesses, and systems within a city to survive, adapt and thrive in the face of chronic stresses and acute shocks they experience.

The Penrith Local Government Area is a growth area of the future with pressure for increased housing, green space, transport, infrastructure, and services to cater for a growing population. Western Sydney is also impacted on by a changing climate. Council and the community must be prepared to face these challenges together, to adapt together and to respond and recover together to form a stronger more resilient community.

The Resilient Sydney Strategy: A Strategy for City Resilience 2018, was developed in collaboration with State Government, Local Councils within the Greater Sydney area and the community, applying the cities resilience framework of the global resilience network (formally 100 resilient cities). The Resilient Sydney Strategy ‘sets the direction we must take to strengthen our ability to survive, adapt and thrive in the face of global uncertainty and shocks and stresses’. To achieve the outcomes in the Resilient Sydney Strategy, Greater Sydney Councils are empowered to manage risks and impacts from identified shocks and stresses within a localised context and make the ‘city resilience commitment’.

Council, as a Resilient Sydney Ambassador, is committed to working collaboratively with Resilient Sydney to assist in building the resilience of Greater Sydney through involvement in the implementation of the Resilient Sydney Strategy. Council is also committed to achieving the outcomes of this Strategy at a local level through the development of this Resilient Penrith Action Plan.

The Resilient Penrith Action Plan builds on previous and existing Council policies, plans and strategies, including the Cooling the City Strategy 2015 and the Local Strategic Planning Statement, as well as the programs and initiatives of Council. Council’s Local Strategic Planning Statement recognises the importance of building the resilience of our city and community and specifically identifies the preparation of a resilience strategy/plan as an immediate action under Planning Priority 21.

Current Situation

The Resilient Penrith Action Plan has been developed to:

· Ensure that Penrith develops as a sustainable, efficient, liveable, and resilient city, through the application of strategic directions, practices, and actions

· Demonstrate leadership, innovation, and collaboration in building the resilience of council and the community

· Identify and implement actions to build and strengthen the resilience of infrastructure, assets, and ecosystems within the Penrith LGA

· Adopt a resilience approach to proactively respond to the challenges of a changing climate and other existing and emerging shocks and stresses

· Build awareness and capability of Council and the Community to prepare, adapt, respond, and recover from shocks and stresses.

The Resilient Penrith Action Plan has been informed by the following:

1. Background Research and Assessment:

· Research and background studies on key challenges, shocks, and stresses

· Mapping and review of Council policies, strategies, and plans

· Review of relevant regional, state, national and international documents

· Conducting a climate change risk assessment

· Development of a web-based vulnerability mapping tool

2. Community and Stakeholder Engagement:

Engagement was undertaken throughout October-December 2020 to involve the community and better understand and identify community needs, vulnerabilities, challenges and perspectives on local risks, shocks, and stresses. Engagement included a community survey, community, stakeholder and staff workshops, youth workshop, focus group (CALD community), key stakeholder interviews and engagement sessions with relevant committees including the Resilience Committee and Local Emergency Management Committee.

Through the engagement process we heard from the community and relevant stakeholders that to be more resilient we need:

· Greater connection between residents at a neighbourhood level

· Reliable and equal access to services and information

· Safe, accessible, and green public spaces

· A reliable, diverse economy

· Sustainable environmental practices

· Information and a plan to respond to emergencies

· Increased capacity to adapt to extreme heat

3. Reporting:

The information, data and input received through the community and stakeholder engagement process was analysed and translated into opportunities and actions in an engagement outcomes report. The Resilient Penrith Action Plan was developed based on the findings and outcomes of the community engagement as well as the background research, and assessments. The Resilient Penrith Action Plan was reported to Council’s Senior Leadership Team, and Councillors at the briefing in March 2021.

4. Feedback:

The Resilient Penrith Action Plan was presented to committees and groups for feedback including; Council Managers and relevant staff from across Council departments, the Local Emergency Management Committee, both the Community and Economic Taskforce, the Access Committee, the Sustainability Committee of the Nepean Blue Mountains Local Health District and Resilient Sydney.

The Resilient Penrith Action Plan was distributed to community service providers and relevant stakeholders and was provided on Council’s Your Say page for community feedback from mid-March to mid-April 2021.

The response to the Resilient Penrith Action Plan has been positive and supportive, acknowledging that there is a need to build resilience through collaboration and connecting as a community. Extremely positive feedback was provided by Resilient Sydney, acknowledging the close alignment with the Resilient Sydney Strategy, and recognising the Resilient Penrith Action Plan as a fantastic example of a pragmatic, succinct, engaged and well researched local resilience plan.

5. Final document:

The Resilient Penrith Action Plan applies the five directions of the Resilient Sydney Strategy, with each direction aligning to relevant United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, the Resilient Sydney outcome, and the localised Penrith outcome to recognise resilience on a local to global context. Under each direction, key action areas have been identified based on the outcomes and identified needs of the community, and these action areas also reflect and align with the priority areas as identified by Council’s Resilience Committee.

The Resilient Penrith Action Plan identifies actions to be implemented over the short to long-term. These actions are either council led, a collaborative effort working with other organisations / stakeholders, or advocacy initiatives that will result in a greater awareness and capacity of Council and the community to build resilience, to adapt and respond to, and more quickly recover from risks, shocks and stresses facing Penrith now and in the future.

Financial Implications

The Resilient Penrith Action Plan is a 9 year plan commencing 2021 to 2030. The proposed implementation of the plan utilises existing staff and Operational Budgets as funding. The development of the Resourcing Plan will identify potential funding mechanisms, funding sources and external funding opportunities including grant funding. This resource plan will be embedded within the Integrated Planning and Reporting Framework and will align with Council’s Resource Strategy for the Community Plan, Delivery Program and Operational Plan, as well as departmental Business Plans.

Risk Implications

It is acknowledged that the Resilient Penrith Action Plan has been developed amid a major disease pandemic with various stresses accumulating from this shock, and that as a result a COVID-19 lens may have influenced community perceptions, needs and priorities identified through engagement with the community during this time. In recognition of this risk the Resilient Penrith Action Plan has been carefully developed based on well informed research on the key challenges, shocks and stresses facing Penrith, local assessments and previous community priorities, and also aligns with the five directions of the Resilient Sydney Strategy and the UN Sustainable Development Goals which ensure that the included actions have addressed the priority challenges and will achieve the desired outcomes. Additionally, community engagement will be undertaken over the life of the plan to identify any emerging challenges or changes in community needs to build resilience.

The Resilient Penrith Action Plan has been designed to be flexible and adaptive enabling changes to be built into the plan. Expected timeframes for delivery of actions are included within the plan. There is a risk that some of these actions may not meet expected timeframes. The Resilient Penrith Action Plan itself provides some flexibility with a delivery timeframe of 2021-2030, as well as the ability to monitor and review the progress of the action plan in alignment with the Community Plan, Delivery Program and Operational Plan review cycles.

The Resilient Penrith Action Plan is to be embedded into all aspects of the Integrated Planning and Reporting Framework to ensure that resilience is a key function of Council and that the identified actions are appropriately costed, budgeted, implemented, measured, monitored, and reported.

Conclusion

Penrith City Council will be the second Council within the Greater Sydney region, after the City of Ryde, to formally adopt a localised resilience action plan demonstrating Council’s leadership and commitment to building a cooler, more liveable and resilient city and community.

An evaluation and monitoring plan, resource plan, and a process to embed the Resilient Penrith Action Plan into the Integrated Planning and Reporting Framework will be undertaken to ensure resilience actions are embedded into the Community Plan, Delivery Program and Operational Plan over the short, medium and long-term.

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Resilient Penrith Action Plan be received

2. The Resilient Penrith Action Plan 2021-2030 be adopted.

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1. ⇩

Resilient Penrith Action Plan

40 Pages

Attachments Included

Ordinary Meeting 28 June 2021

Adoption of Delivery Program 2017-22 and 2021-22 Operational Plan

Compiled by: Neil Farquharson, Financial Services Manager

Geraldine Brown, Strategic Finance Coordinator

Craig Shepherd, Acting Business Transformation Manager

Matthew Saunders, Rates Coordinator

Holly Watson, Corporate Planner

Matthew Bullivant, Legal Services Manager

Authorised by: 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	Support financial sustainability through financial planning and budget management

Executive Summary

Council is required to prepare and adopt the 2021-22 Operational Plan and Fees & Charges by 30 June 2021. The Operational Plan is a sub-set of the Delivery Program and is the final annual plan to be adopted as part of the 2017-22 Delivery Program, which has been extended by one year due to the delay in the Local Government elections.

As part of preparing its annual Operational Plan, Council must also review the Delivery Program to ensure it is still moving in the right direction and adjust any necessary changes in service delivery or operational priorities. Changes for 2021-22 included updates to the organisational performance indicators, along with updates to activities and other minor changes required to keep the Delivery Program consistent with the organisational structure.

The 2017-22 Delivery Program, and 2021-22 Operational Plan and Fees and Charges were presented to Council on 26 April 2021 and were placed on exhibition from 3 to 31 May 2021 under Section 405(2) of the Local Government Act 1993. Sixty-four submissions were received during the exhibition.

There were a small number of budget adjustments required to be made to the 2017-22 Delivery Program (incorporating the Operational Plan 2021-22) such as the inclusion of the March 2021 revotes, and the fine-tuning of a number of budget assumptions and allocations that have been confirmed during the exhibition period. The more significant budget adjustments are detailed later in this report and a complete list is provided in Attachment 1. A balanced budget is proposed for 2021-22 after incorporating these adjustments.

This report seeks Council’s adoption of the 2017-22 Delivery Program including the 2021-22 Operational Plan (Attachment 3), and 2021-22 Fees & Charges (Attachment 4), approval for the expenditure of the budget outlined in this report, and endorsement for the Making of the Rates and Charges for 2021-22 under Section 535 of the Local Government Act. Additionally, the report recommends that the Council agree to underwrite the operations of Penrith Whitewater Stadium Limited and Penrith Performing and Visual Arts Limited until the presentation of the respective Annual Reports for 2021-22.

Public Exhibition of the 2021-22 Operational Plan and Fees and Charges

The 2017-22 Delivery Program incorporating the 2021-22 Operational Plan and the 2021-22 Fees and Charges was exhibited from 3 May to 31 May 2021.

The public exhibition process provided stakeholders across Penrith LGA an opportunity to view and provide feedback on the documents before they are officially adopted by Council.

The documents were available electronically through Council’s engagement portal www.yoursaypenrith.com.au/draftoperationalplan2021-22 , and in hard copy at:

· Penrith City Library

· Civic Centre

· St Marys Library

· St Marys Office

· St Clair Library

The public exhibition was promoted through printed and electronic media. This included:

· Facebook posts 3, 18, 26 May

· Instagram posts 3, 18, 26 May

· Radio Ads week commencing 3, 17 May

· Media release 5 May

· Mayoral Column 13 May

· EDM (email to yoursay users) 5 May

· Corporate News Page top page Ad 13 May

· Corporate News Page briefs 29 April, 2, 20, 27 May

· Posters at various Council buildings and childcare centres

Council’s online engagement portal recorded the following activity:

· Pageviews 613

· Unique pageviews 556

· 963 views on FAQs

· 67 surveys completed

· 37 downloads on 2021-22 Draft Fees and Charges

· 8 downloads on 2021-22 Draft Fees and Charges - Children Services

· 12 downloads on 2021-22 FAQ

· 38 downloads on 2021-22 Operations Plan Summary

· 35 downloads on Draft Operational Plan 2021-22

· 17 downloads on Rates FAQs for 2021-22

Compared with last year, the number of formal submissions increased marginally (58 last year, 64 this year).

Suburb representation increased this year; while most submissions again came from a single rural area the exhibition received submissions from stakeholders in 13 different suburbs this year, compared with 7 last year.

The table below summarises the number of times a topic was raised in a submission and indicates where commentary can be found in this report. Submissions categorised as “no objection” were either requests for more information, comments regarding service standards or unclear. All submissions are responded to, with follow up undertaken where necessary and more specific detail provided where appropriate.

Topic	No.	For commentary, see section
Rates	47	The making of rates and charges for 2021-22
Fees and charges	3	Changes to fees and charges
Operational Plan	6	Issues raised regarding the Operational Plan
No objection	8
Total Submissions	64

Issues raised regarding the Operational Plan:

1. Request to focus on cycling infrastructure particularly on Factory Rd, highlighting that cobblestone crossings are dangerous to cyclists.

Council has allocated significant resources over the past 6 years to plan for and implement many shared paths throughout our LGA. The Strategy can be viewed at;

https://www.penrithcity.nsw.gov.au/images/documents/resources-documents/documents/Penrith_Accessible_Trails_Hierarchy_Strategy_PATHS.pdf

2. Request for a large water play park in Penrith LGA. Suggestion that residents are required to travel to other LGAs for this type of facility.

Council is proposing a large water play park within the Regatta Park upgrade in Emu Plains. There are splash parks available at our Ripples Aquatic Centres at St Marys and Penrith (for a small entrance fee). There are also water play facilities at Livvis Place in Jordan Springs, Phoenix Reserve Erskine Park and Werrington Lakes. Splash pads (fountains only) exist at Thornton and Triangle Park, Penrith. Council’s Sport and Recreation Strategy identifies potential future sites for water play with installation being considered as part of the development of Gipps Street Reserve and Jordan Springs East as part of the Regional Open Space.

3. Request to change the development application approval process. Suggest option to withdraw/resubmit with changes as required.

Council is obliged to make decisions following the assessment of a proposal under a development application in a timely manner and in accordance with the provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act. Allowing applications that have already been substantially assessed to be withdrawn, then resubmitted with additional or amended information without additional fees would ultimately result in a significant cost burden to the community.

4. Request to improve the path at Castlereagh School due to mud in wet weather

Castlereagh Public School currently has approximately 170 metres of kerbed road and footpath that fronts the primary school. Council has recently reviewed this matter in response to a community request. It has been determined that Council will grade and seal the road shoulder for approximately 40 meters on either side of the school pedestrian crossing. This work has been programmed to be undertaken in the next 10 weeks, weather permitting.

5. Request to improve stormwater drains and flooding in rural areas, request for access to flood studies and maps.

Request to improve access to information during disasters.

Council provides table drains and culverts to appropriately manage overland flow paths in rural areas, however rural overland stormwater flows are complex, and it is difficult (often impossible) to manage them so there is no impact on surrounding properties. This means that many rural areas are unfortunately impacted by flooding. Information on flood affectation is available to those properties.

All adopted flood studies and flood risk management plans are accessible via Council’s web site. Ref https://www.penrithcity.nsw.gov.au/services/other-services/Floodplain-Management. Council is currently looking at ways to provide greater on-line public access to more detailed flood mapping.

Council’s role in any emergency event is to support incident control agencies such as the State Emergency Service and Rural Fire Service. Council is only able to advise residents to visit the SES website as the SES is the legislated authority to manage and control flood incidents, Council is not authorised to provide independent information about disaster response.

Council is working with SES NSW on implementation of an emergency dashboard which is being rolled out to Councils to address the communication issues. The emergency dashboards are currently only being used by two councils and are not available to every Council at this time. When they are implemented, they will provide live information to residents during any emergency incident by linking all agency sites to the one website. This will provide a single source of information.

6. Request to focus on solar energy, panels on council buildings, leadership, funding, future programs, and targets.

Request to plant trees; replace one thousand spotted gum trees (15 m to 20 m high) removed from the whole LGA prior to 2012, plant thirty thousand missing street trees in front of each urban residence, and plant 500,000 trees via an environmental levy.

Council now has rooftop solar systems installed on 42 council/community facilities with a combined capacity of approximately 408 kilowatts, saving an estimated 410 tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions annually. Solar panel installation is included as a consideration for all new buildings.

Council has a target of 10% of electricity supplied from low carbon sources by 2030, and alongside solar installations is purchasing between 10-20% Greenpower. At present Council also has an existing target of a 40% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 based on 2010-11 levels. Council has reduced its greenhouse gas emissions by 38% on its baseline year. Over the next 12 months Council will be reviewing its targets and will consider setting a new net zero emissions target by 2050 and a pathway to achieve this, to align with the NSW government net zero emissions plan.

Council is implementing other energy efficiency projects including streetlighting upgrades, as streetlighting is a significant proportion (almost half) of our energy consumption. A program to upgrade bulbs to energy efficient LEDs was completed in December 2020. In total 6,317 streetlights were replaced with efficient LEDs with an estimated cost saving of $443,700 and a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions of 1,976 tonnes each year.

Energy efficiency and renewable energy projects including solar installations are funded through Council’s internal Sustainability Revolving Fund, with energy savings from these projects going back into the fund to enable continued funding of future projects.

Council has drafted a Green Grid Strategy which will provide a framework for tree planting and build a green network in a considered and strategic way across the whole Penrith region. Over the past 5 years 185,000 trees and other plants have been planted in reserves across Penrith, with another 5,500 given away to residents to plant in their own gardens, A key part of Council’s work to plant more trees across our region is undertaking significant upgrades to our nursery, with sustainability being a key consideration. Council is currently reviewing its DCP/LEP to incorporate principles on cooling the city including tree planting and is also advocating to the State Government for more stringent provisions in the planning system to ensure greening in new developments/state projects.

Recommended changes to the Delivery Program and Operational Plan

Changes post exhibition

Some changes have been made to Actions and Service Activities post exhibition, including:

· Service Activity 2.3.1 transferred from City Economy and Marketing to City Strategy function.

· Changes to actions to better reflect the work to be undertaken by City Economy and Marketing over the coming year.

o 1.1.1c Develop an Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Plan

o 1.1.1d Through the Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Plan, explore a range of opportunities to best support growth and development of advanced manufacturing

o 1.1.2a Through the Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Plan, explore a range of opportunities to build skills capacity within the Penrith LGA

o 1.1.4b Develop an activation plan for the new City Park

o 6.3.1c Finalise the international partnerships review
6.3.1d Include our International Partners in the new City Park by incorporating cultural representation into the Park’s design

An additional function and associated service activity will be included in the plan, to better reflect the role of Council’s nursery and bush care operations in contributing to planting and reduction of urban heat. This will appear in Outcome 5 as follows:

· Strategy 5.3

Service Activity 5.3.6 ‘Contribute to increasing the number of trees in public spaces to reduce the impact of heat’

Responsible function - ‘Nursery and Bush care’

Changes to Operational Plan - Budget Adjustments

The financial estimates included in the exhibited revised 2017-22 Delivery Program (incorporating the 2021-22 Operational Plan) were based on information that was available at the time. During the Exhibition period, further budget adjustments have been required as a result of Council decisions and additional information that has been received.

The exhibited draft 2017-22 Delivery Program (incorporating the 2021-22 Operational Plan) presented a balanced budget. During the Exhibition period adjustments have been made and a balanced budget will still be achieved should Council choose to adopt all the proposed recommendations contained within this report.

At the Ordinary Meeting on 24 May 2021, Council adopted the March 2021 Quarterly Review which included revotes totalling $13.2m for capital works and operating projects which have now been incorporated into the 2021-22 Budget.

Some of the more significant changes during the exhibition period impacting the bottom line include:

· Emergency Services Levy – advice now received for 2021-22 contribution resulting in $311,360 decrease in levy to be paid.

· Employee Costs – budgets now updated to reflect the most current information and project funding resulting in a net decrease of $269,139.

· RID squad – updated budget for 2021-22 including review of overheads charged to member Councils which has resulted in additional recovery of costs of $95,334

A number of budgets have also been adjusted to reflect the latest phasing for multi-year projects and revised schedule of works. Finally, previous Council decisions impacting 2021-22 have been incorporated in to the final 2021-22 Budget.

Within the balanced budget presented for 2021-22 it is also proposed to allocate funds to a number of reserves including:

· Transfer to Asbestos Reserve - $500,000

· Transfer to Legal Reserve - $850,000

· Transfer to Workers Compensation Reserve - $300,000

As a result of some major projects being included in the final 2021-22 Budget loan borrowings have also been updated. Major projects including Soper Place, Regatta Park and City Park have commenced and will require new borrowings in the next few years. Ongoing analysis and monitoring of forward rates and yield curves will continue to ensure that opportunities to borrow at current historically low rates for the significant infrastructure projects can be achieved.

Anticipated borrowing levels for the next few years are shown in the following table:

New Money Borrowings	2020-21 $m	2021-22 $m	2022-23 $m	2023-24 $m
City Park	-	4.0	4.0	-
Multi-Deck Car Park	-	20.0	15.0	18.0*
Regatta Park	-	-	4.0	-
Soper Place Commercial	-	-	27.7	-
Property Development	-	-	30.0	-
Total	0	24.0	80.7	18.0

* Investigating other co-funding sources such as S7.11 for this project

Provided in Attachment 1 is a complete list of all budget changes that have occurred during the exhibition period.

Changes to Fees and Charges

During the exhibition period the following changes have been proposed to the draft 2021-22 Fees and Charges:

· The Office of Local Government Circular 21-04 announced maximum Interest Rate on overdue rates and charges decreased by 1% from 7% to 6%.

· Minor changes in some of Neighbourhood Facilities Management’s fees - most amendments are of ‘cosmetics’ in nature. The adjustments are for purpose of consistency within the fee structure of the unit.

· To be consistent with the newly developed Road Closure Process, resulting from business improvement review recently undertaken; the fee names, conditions and order of ‘Road Closure’ fees were updated.

· Due to a Legal Services’ review of the proposed fee ‘Permission to install infrastructure over Council land’, it is considered to be unlawful in its current form to introduce the charges. Therefore, this section is removed from 2021-22 Fees and Charges.

· The Office of Local Government Circular 20-27 released amendments to Companion Animal Regulations 2018 resulting to change in Council’s fee structure for Animal Registration Fees.

Attachment 2 provides a list of these proposed changes.

The Making of Rates and Charges for 2021-22

Council is required to endorse the Making of the Rates and Charges for 2021-22 under Section 535 of the Local Government Act before rates can be levied.

Submissions from Ratepayers during the Draft 2021-22 Operational Plan exhibition period about council rates

Council advertised the proposal to introduce a lower rural rate as part of the exhibition of the 2021-22 Draft Operational Plan. The plan was advertised on Council’s website which included a FAQ section that provided information specifically around the rates component of the Draft Plan. Following the release of the Draft Plan, The Western Weekender newspaper also ran a story on 30 April 2021 about Council’s rates proposal headlined “Rates relief on the horizon, Rural ratepayers poised for big win, but the rest of us will be paying for it”.

During the exhibition period Council received 47 formal submissions to the Draft Operational Plan in relation to rates. Out of the 47 submissions there were:

· 3 responses that opposed rates and rates increases in general, although there were no specific submissions that mentioned the plan to increase urban rates to fund a lower rural rate;

· 44 submissions from rural property owners in support of Council’s plans to introduce a lower rural rate.

Rates for 2021-22

For 2021-22 Council proposed a lower Residential rate for our rural owners, subject to the legislative changes being passed by the NSW Government that will allow this to occur for 2021-22. The legislation was passed on 13 May 2021 in time for the legislation to be used by Council from 1 July 2021.

The plans include a gradual reduction for Residential properties in rural areas phased in over four years with an eventual discount of 30% by the fourth year. The discount in the first year will be around 4.5% from the amount paid in 2020-21. The discounted rural rate will be funded by other property owners (excluding property owners on the minimum rate such as apartment and townhouse owns) who will pay an additional 2% annual levy on top of the annual rate peg increase. To avoid a sudden increase for the other owners the rural discount needs to be gradually phased in over time, subject to the annual review of Council’s Rate Structure.

Rating Increase - IPART Rate Peg

From 2011-12 onwards the responsibility for determining and announcing the rate peg has been transferred from the Minister for Local Government to the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal (IPART). Under this new regime IPART developed a Local Government Cost Index (LGCI) that formed the basis of the rate peg. IPART announced the 2021-22 Rate peg as 2% on 8 September 2020.

The 2% rate peg for 2021-22 was calculated by taking the increase in the Local Government Cost Index (LGCI) to June 2020 of 1.8%, setting the productivity factor to 0.0%, and adding an adjustment of 0.2% for the costs of the 2021 local government elections.

Council will adopt the 2% rate increase for 2021-22.

Rates Income

Ordinary Rates

Each year Council must determine a Rating Policy for the next financial year. The Local Government Act 1993 provides for a number of rating structures so that councils have the flexibility to develop a structure that best provides equity for their Local Government Area.

Council currently applies a rate structure in which rate assessments are based on property valuations (Ad Valorem) with a Minimum Amount. This means that rates are predominantly based on the land value of the property as determined by the NSW Valuer-General.

Council currently charges rates on three types of Land Categories:

a. Residential

b. Farmland

c. Business – with the following sub-categories

i. Penrith CBD

ii. St Mary’s Town Centre

The maximum rate revenue for the next financial year is calculated by:

a. Taking last year’s revenue and adding an inflation adjustment announced by IPART or an approved SRV amount;

b. Adding rates on new properties created by subdivision, and on new strata-titles; and

c. Adding income lost due to valuation objections.

The current differentiation between Rating Categories and Sub-categories is:

• the rate in the dollar for all Residential properties are the same*, subject to a Minimum Amount; (* this is subject change if a rural Residential sub-category is brought in for 2021-22).

• the Farmland rate is 50% of the Residential rate;

• all Business Minimum Amounts the same; and

• two Business rating sub-categories for Penrith CBD and St Marys Town Centre which have different Ad Valorem rates to the Ordinary Business category.

Every three years Council receives updated valuations for all properties in the Local Government Area. The Valuer General provided the General Valuation of land for the LGA with a Base Date 1 July 2019 and these were first used for rates purposes from 1 July 2020. These land valuations will again be used for the assessment of rates in 2021-22.

Rate structures

NSW councils have three options with the way that rates are structured. Under each option, the total amount of rates collected by Council is the same, however the rates are shared differently among property owners. Under any of these options Council can use different rates for different rate categories and sub-categories to distribute the rates between all property owners. These are the rate structure options:

1. Ad Valorem (only) -Land value multiplied by a rate.

2. Ad Valorem with a Minimum Rate (Council’s current method) - Land value multiplied by a rate, but properties under a certain land value threshold subject to a minimum rate.

3. Base Rate plus Ad Valorem - Combination of a part Base (fixed) amount plus Part land value multiplied by a rate.

The Ad Valorem only method (Option 1) is not usually supported by Council as the removal of the minimum rates would result in greater increases for higher value properties and in particular rural property owners.

Under the existing rate structure (Option 2) all properties would increase in 2021-22 by the 2% rate peg.

Changing to a Base Rate scenario (Option 3) has always proved unfair for Penrith City Council’s mix of properties due to the severely adverse impact it would have on the majority of owners. The impacts of the Base Rate method showed the following adverse impacts for 2021-22 if this structure is used (when compared to continuing with the current method of Ad Valorem with a Minimum Rate):

• More than 30,000 property owners with rates increases greater than $200.

• 4,000 more pensioners with rates increases greater than $200.

• Average rates increase for pensioners of 10% (compared to 2% under current method).

• 60% of properties would pay greater than $100 rates increase (compared to only 10% under current method).

Due to these adverse impacts, particularly the impacts on pensioners, Council was unable to support a change to this rating structure.

Why hasn’t Council brought in a lower rural rate previously?

Over the years rural owners have been making representations to Council about their high rates and lower service in rural areas from Council. Despite genuinely trying to find a fair way of reducing rates for rural owners, there have not been any viable and fairer options to change from the existing rates structure that has been in place for many decades.

Up to now (before the legislative changes) the rating legislation only allowed for limited Residential sub-categorisations that would allow for different rates for Residential properties in Rural areas.

One of these options only allowed a specific Rural-Residential sub-category for properties that were between 2 and 40 hectares in size and had a dwelling on them. If Council was to adopt this sub-category previously, less than 50% of properties would have been eligible to receive a discount, and the other ineligible rural owners would suffer even higher rates increases to fund the discount for the eligible owners. This sub-category therefore could not be supported.

The only other Residential sub-category option was a sub-category based on “centres of population” which unfortunately for most councils in the Sydney Metropolitan areas including Penrith City Council don’t exist due to the contiguous nature of Residential suburbs.

With the absence of being able to use sub-categorisation to provide lower rates for rural owners, the only other option was introducing a base rate structure. All previous modelling of a change to this structure has indicated an unfair impact on a majority of property owners, particularly the most vulnerable owners including approximately 40% of all pensioners if Council was to adopt this structure.

Council has therefore been making attempts to have the legislation changed to allow further options. Council has been making representations on behalf of rural owners to the NSW Government for many years including providing feedback to the IPART Rating Inquiry, and making direct representations to Local Members of Parliament, the NSW Premier and the Local Government Ministers.

Changes to rating legislation

The changes to legislation were passed by the NSW Parliament on 13 May 2021 and provided for further options for Council to sub-categorise Residential properties based on differences between areas in relation to access to or demand for, or the cost of providing, services or infrastructure. It is this new legislative change that Council intends to use to provide a lower rate for Residential properties in rural areas.

The legislative changes came about following a review of the rating legislation that has been under review since 2015 when the NSW Government directed IPART to review the rating legislation. IPART delivered their Final Report to the Government in December 2016. The Final Report was released by the NSW Government on 21 June 2019 and the Draft changes to the legislation were released in December 2020. The Draft legislation was introduced to Parliament on 16 March 2021 and were passed on 13 May 2021.

Why a lower rate for Residential owner in rural areas is proposed

Currently Residential property owners in rural areas contribute around 15% of rates income but only represent 6% of properties. Over the years the urban sprawl in the Sydney Metropolitan area has decreased the supply of acreages available and therefore pushed up land valuations in rural areas. As the land valuations in our rural areas have increased, so has the level of rates, despite there being no significant changes to the levels of service from Council. There are also some services provided to urban properties that are not provided in rural areas including street lighting, kerb and guttering and drainage however despite receiving no direct benefit the rural owners’ rates help fund the cost of maintenance of these services.

Whilst land rates are a type of property tax and aims to tax owners of higher valued land more than owners of lower valued land in line with “ability to pay” taxation principles, there are other taxation principles that are of similar importance such as a “benefit received” principle where beneficiaries of any services should help contribute a fair amount towards those services. Council believes that by readjusting the contribution of rates by rural owners the mix of revenue collected between different areas can better reflect a balance between these two competing taxation principles.

Lower rate planned for Residential properties in rural areas

The plans for rates from 2021-22 include a gradual reduction for Residential properties in rural areas phased in over four years with an eventual discount of 30% by the fourth year. The discount in the first year will be around 4.5% from the amount paid in 2020-21.

The total amount of rates that Councils can collect is a fixed amount each year adjusted by a rate peg. Where councils reduce a rate for a specific group of property owners, the reduction in rates revenue caused by this reduction needs to be countered by increases to other properties elsewhere in the council area, so that the council can collect the set fixed amount of rates and continue to provide the same levels of service expected by the community.

Council is proposing that the discounted rural rate be funded by all other property owners with the exception of property owners on the minimum rate such as apartments and townhouses. As it will impact these other owners, Council doesn’t believe it is fair to impose a large and sudden increase on these other owners all in one go, and therefore a discounted rate for rural properties needs to be done gradually over a period of time.

Council proposes that the other owners will pay an additional 2% annual levy on top of the annual rate peg increase each year for four years, with the funds raised from this annual levy proportioned over the rural properties. Whilst the additional 2% levy will be a fixed amount each year, the exact impact on the level of discount on rural properties each year is not ascertainable. This is because the number of urban properties that will contribute to the discount will increase over time, and the number of rural properties will decrease as well (as some properties near the airport are developed, and some lands are rezoned for planned urban expansion areas). With an increasing pool of funds each year to be shared over a diminishing number of rural properties each year, and along with the compounding impact of the annual 2% levy on other properties, the expected discount for Rural properties will be around 30% by the fourth year.

Rural properties

A differential rate for rural properties will require Council to create two separate rural sub-category rates that will be subject to a lower rate, in addition to the general rate that will apply to all other properties. This is because there will be two separate ways that Council will need to identify whether a property meets the criteria as a rural property for rating purposes under two separate sub-category clauses in the legislation.

One of the sub-category clauses in the new legislation requires where Council wants to sub-categorise between rural and urban areas that it be done by whole suburbs, until Regulations are released that may allow different way to separate between urban and rural residential areas. Because of this Council is only able to include the predominantly rural suburbs of Agnes Banks, Badgerys Creek, Berkshire Park, Castlereagh, Kemps Creek, Llandilo, Londonderry, Luddenham, Mount Vernon, Mulgoa, Orchard Hills and Wallacia as rural suburbs for rating categorisation purposes in a sub-category to be identified as “Residential - Rural Area”.

Rural properties outside of these predominantly rural suburbs will be included in a separate rural sub-category to be identified as “Residential – Rural 2 to 40 hectares” that will receive the lower rural rate as well, but only if the land is between 2 and 40 hectares in size and contains a dwelling (due to strict legislative restrictions). Any property that is not contained in one of the deemed rural localities above, or is below 2 hectares in size, will unfortunately not be able to be included as a rural property for rating purposes for 2021-22.

Once the Regulations are released, subject to Council’s annual review of its rating structure for 2022-23, it is anticipated that the anomaly of urban Village properties being included in the rural area will be able to be corrected, resulting in the removal of the discount in 2022-23. In addition, it is further anticipated that the smaller rural properties that would be excluded from the rural rate in 2021-22 will be able to be addressed and included from 2022-23, subject to the Regulations being released and allowing for the inclusion.

The following criteria will apply for Residential properties that will determine whether or not a property is considered Rural for rating categorisation purposes:

Residential – General

All Residential properties unless included in either of the two sub-categories.

Residential - Rural Area

All Residential properties located within the suburbs of Agnes Banks, Badgerys Creek, Berkshire Park, Castlereagh, Kemps Creek, Llandilo, Londonderry, Luddenham, Mount Vernon, Mulgoa, Orchard Hills, Wallacia.

Residential – Rural 2 to 40 hectares

Any Residential land between 2 to 40 hectares in size, that contains a dwelling and is zoned for non-urban purposes (land that fits this criteria but is situated in a Rural Locality sub-category will be categorised as “Residential - Rural locality”).

Impact on rates for 2021-22

The following impacts on rates are predicted for 2021-22 if the preferred option of a lower rural Residential rate is adopted:

Urban Residential properties:

· Due to legislation restricting the increase of minimum rates higher than the rate peg increase, properties on the minimum rate such as apartments and townhouses will not be subject to the additional 2% levy to fund the rural discount and will therefore only increase by the 2% rate peg. The Minimum rate will increase by $22.65.

· Other urban Residential properties outside the rural area boundary (yet to be decided) will pay a 4% increase (2% rate peg increase plus an additional 2% levy to fund the rural discount).

· The average increase for the urban properties in 2021-22 will be around $57 ($13.50 per instalment).

Rural Residential properties

· Rural properties on the minimum rate will continue to pay the minimum rate with a 2% rate peg increase of $22.65.

· Non-minimum rate properties will receive an approximate 4.7% decrease from rates payable in 2020-21.

· The Average decrease will be around $192.

· The suburb of Mount Vernon for example will decrease by around $197 and Llandilo properties will decrease by around $266.

Farmland properties

· Farmland properties on the minimum rate will continue to pay the minimum rate with a 2% rate peg increase of $22.65.

· Farmland properties will only increase by the rate peg of 2%. They will not be required to pay the additional 2% levy to fund the rural discounts as they are located in rural areas.

· Farmland properties are currently receiving a 50% lower rate than Residential properties so no further discounts will be applied to these properties.

· The average Farmland increase will be $174.

Business properties

· Business properties on the minimum rate will continue to pay the minimum rate with a 2% rate peg increase applied ($27.60 increase).

· Non-minimum Business properties will pay a 4% increase (2% rate peg increase plus an additional 2% levy to fund the rural discount).

· The average Business increase will be $315.

Business – Penrith CBD properties

· Business – Penrith CBD properties on the minimum rate will continue to pay the minimum rate with a 2% rate peg increase applied ($27.60 increase).

· Non-minimum Business – Penrith CBD properties will pay a 4% increase (2% rate peg increase plus an additional 2% levy to fund the rural discount).

· The average Business – Penrith CBD increase will be $313.

Business – St Marys Town Centre properties

· Business – St Marys Town Centre properties on the minimum rate will continue to pay the minimum rate with a 2% rate peg increase applied ($27.60 increase).

· Non-minimum Business – St Marys Town Centre properties will pay a 4% increase (2% rate peg increase plus an additional 2% levy to fund the rural discount).

· The average Business – St Marys Town Centre increase will be $165.

Rates Revenue for 2021-22

Council currently has 77,504 rateable properties contributing approximately 45% of Council’s total revenue. It is expected that both the Penrith CBD Corporation and the St Marys Town Centre Corporation will request a continuation of Business Sub-category rates to fund their respective activities. A total of $477,798 will be raised from Penrith CBD rates and $363,659 will be raised from St Marys Town Centre rates.

Council provides eligible pensioners a pensioner subsidy. Council’s policy provides for a 50% rebate of rates and domestic waste charges to a maximum of $250. In addition, pensioners are given an additional rebate equivalent to the Stormwater Management Service Charge (applies to urban properties only).

The Draft 2021-22 Budget includes initial estimates for rates income with a net increase of $3.8m for Rates Income over the original estimate for 2020-21 included. This includes the 2% rate peg announced for 2021-22. Also factored into estimates is a prediction for growth of both Residential and Non-Residential rates.

PROPOSED 2020-21 RATES LEVY INCOME

Rate Category	Ad Valorem Rate in $	MINIMUM RATE		Total Anticipated Gross Revenue $’000s	Number of Properties
Rate Category	Ad Valorem Rate in $	2021-22 $	Increase $	Total Anticipated Gross Revenue $’000s	Number of Properties
Residential	0.0033666	1,155.65	22.65	88,412	68,759
Residential – Rural Area	0.00309145	1,155.65	22.65	19,344	4,728
Residential – Rural 2 to 40 Hectares with dwelling	0.00309145	1,155.65	22.65	815	200
Farmland	0.0016833	1,155.65	22.65	3,044	329
Business	0.00544757	1,408.80	27.60	24,023	2,852
Business - Penrith CBD Rate	0.00763477	1,408.80	27.60	3,320	407
Business - St Marys Town Centre Rate	0.00819996	1,408.80	27.60	1,005	229
Total				$139,963*	77,504

*N.B. The revenues identified in this section represent the gross anticipated revenues from the Rates Levy on 1 July 2021 prior to the application of Pensioner Subsidies, Part year growth, Provision for Doubtful debts, and other subsidies and abandonments. These rates presented are indicative only and are subject to change before the formal rates are adopted at the 28 June 2021 Ordinary Meeting, due to supplementary valuations, categorisation changes and valuation objections processed to 30 June 2021.

Stormwater Charges

The Stormwater Management Service charge proposed to be applied on all urban residential and urban business land is outlined below. This is in accordance with Council’s Policy outlined in the 2021-22 Operational Plan and Fees & Charges (except land which is exempt from the Stormwater Management Services charge as outlined in Section 496A of the Local Government Act 1993).

For the 2021-22 year, the Stormwater Management Service charges will remain unchanged from 2020-21:

· Residential non-strata properties	$25 per annum
· Residential strata properties	$12.50 per annum
· Urban business properties	$22.80 plus an additional $22.80 for each 350 square metres or part of 350 square metres by which the area of the parcel of land exceeds 350 square metres.

Domestic Waste Charges

Domestic Waste Service charges are proposed to be applied to each parcel of rateable land and each occupancy for which the service is available, including vacant land, in accordance with Section 496 of the Local Government Act 1993. The charges will be at the amounts specified in the 2021-22 Operational Plan and 2021-22 Fees & Charges.

Effluent Charges

It is proposed that the annual charges for effluent removal services are applied to each residential occupancy with a single or shared pump out septic tank system at the rates specified in the 2021-22 Operational Plan and 2021-22 Fees & Charges.

Interest on Overdue Rates and Charges

For the purpose of calculating the interest on overdue rates and charges in accordance with Section 566(3) of the Local Government Act 1993, it is proposed that an interest charge of 6.0% per annum apply as permitted by the Minister for Local Government be used for 2021-22.

Pension Rebate

Council will provide a mandatory pension rebate to a maximum of $250 for eligible pensioners in accordance with Section 515 of the Local Government Act 1993. In addition to the mandatory pensioner rebate, it is proposed that Council will continue a voluntary rebate under Section 582 of the Local Government Act 1993. The voluntary rebate will be equivalent to the annual stormwater charge applicable to the property. Properties that do not receive a Stormwater Management Service Charge will not receive a voluntary rebate. Pro-rata calculations will be applied to rebates that start or cease within the financial year according to Sections 575 and 584 of the Local Government Act 1993.

Rates Hardship

Council’s Rates team will continue to deal with everyone experiencing hardship with compassion by accepting payment arrangements and extensions for ratepayers to suit their individual circumstances

Insurance Premiums – Civic Risk

Council is a founding member of CivicRisk Mutual (formerly Westpool, United Independent Pools / UIP).

CivicRisk Mutual facilitates insurance cover for Public Liability / Professional Indemnity, Industrial Special Risk (Property), comprehensive motor vehicle, Management Liability and minor ancillary cover. It currently has 24-member councils.

Services provided to members through CivicRisk Mutual (e.g. broking, claims management, legal and actuarial) are periodically market tested.

Background of the hard market

The current hard insurance market is reportedly the worst the world has experienced in CivicRisk Mutual’s history. The reason for the hard market is a combination of factors some foresaw while others were unexpected. The insurance market has emerged from an extended ‘soft market’ period where competition was high and excellent opportunities were on the table. CivicRisk Mutual benefitted from the soft market with its cheap CGU property deal, while Swiss Re offered a Public Liability/Professional (PL/PI) Indemnity buy down solution that is protecting against the impact of the hard market. In addition, successful negotiations resulted in the inclusion of many new members without any increase to PL/PI excess insurance.

The market started to see a sharp shift in 2018 with Lloyds initially directing their syndicates to increase profit and reduce risk. This resulted in increased premiums across the world and insurers refusing to cover certain types of risk. Large claim development like the Grenfell Tower, bushfires in Australia, storm events and more recently COVID-19 and flooding has resulted in sharp increases across the board and reduced capacity. Reduced capacity is evident in several ways. For instance, insurers may reduce the percentage of cover they are willing to write or decide to drop certain types of risk/clients all together.

This issue is widely reported in the business media and other brokers are reporting on it too.

How has the hard market impacted CivicRisk Mutual?

Brokers predicted this ‘soft market’ could not last and fortunately the Mutual is well placed to manage its way through the tough times. The actions of the members over the past 10 years to build capital, increase self-insured strategies and restructure the organisation has it well placed to take advantage of this hard market and emerge in a stronger position. However, insurance costs are increasing, especially in respect of property. The Mutual has additional challenges caused by competition that has strategically captured local markets reducing its options, forcing it to consider more expensive alternate international markets and increasing self-insured layers. Insurance costs represent about 60% of the CivicRisk budget so higher costs must be factored into and allocated to members based on the member designed contribution formula which considers a mix of council size, assets and claims experience. The current year is performing well in PL/PI, motor, management liability and crime/cyber, but Property has been impacted by the significant floods in the Nepean Valley.

Current position

· Full coverage of Council’s risks is still maintained, whilst others (such as Universities) are unable to get insurance for all risks and or limits.

· CivicRisk Mutual doesn’t make a profit from the members, so increases in contributions are directly driven by increases in insurance costs. By utilising the shared knowledge of risk management, claims costs are mitigated and provides savings, which members retain.

· The Board of Directors considered the below three options to smooth the impact of market increases and recommended option 2 to members at the March Board meeting. All analysis figures shown below are based on this option:

1) Fully fund insurance costs + capital contributions as per the ICAAP policy

2) Cover costs and delay capital contributions

3) Use existing capital in liability to subsidise further the market increases in property

· Members reviewed the preferred option 2 for the 2021/22 contributions at the Member Assembly meeting on 26 March 2021. After consultation with the Members, the Board of Directors then formally adopted the contributions at the Board of Directors meeting on 28 April 2021.

· The increase for Penrith is +$513k or +23% from $2.19mil in 2021 to $2.7mil in 2022. This is mainly due to an expensive insurance market and the $71mil increase in insurable assets.

· Apart from ISR/Property impacted by expensive insurance and increases in insurable assets, the other lines of cover have remained steady over the last 10 years.

Comments by protection type (all figures ex GST)

Public Liability and Professional Indemnity Contributions:

Also includes cover for Community Support, Corporate Travel, Personal Accident.

2020/21 (current year)	2021/22 (next year)	Change
$918,000	$1,030,000	+$112,000 (+12%)

Contributions up for most members because of insurance cost up 12% (the negotiated rate with SwissRe at 31 October 2020 is +5% but the excess layers have been more expensive at +36%). Penrith also had an increase of 7% in OPEX which is part of the allocation in the contribution formula.

Property (Industrial Special Risk / ISR) Contributions:

CivicRisk Mutual’s Property insurance provides cover for physical loss, destruction of and/or damage to all property (including loss of revenue).

2020/21 (current year)	2021/22 (next year)	Change
$867,000	$1,198,000	+$331,000 (+38%)

Cost for 2021/22 per $1mil of property is $1,850 p.a. compared with retail market of $2,500-$3,000 per $1mil of assets. Main cost increase here is higher cost of buying insurance in the worldwide market, Penrith added $71mil of insurable assets over the last 2 years and this year had a 23% increase in the claims used in the data set for contribution calculations.

Since 2016, Council has had the following significant claims paid out (i.e. above excess of $20,000):

Location	Date of Loss	Cause	Cost
Various Council facilities	30/01/2016	Storm damage	$56,000
Various Council facilities (incl. Luddenham RFS & Samuel Marsden Road Riding Facility)	04/06/2016	Storm damage	$402,000
Civic Centre (Print Room)	09/06/2017	Fire	$1,099,666
St Marys Library	15/12/2017	Water damage	$759,389
Various Council facilities	02/02/2020	Storm damage	$59,170
Various Council facilities	7-9/02/2020	Storm damage	$580,590
			$2,956,815

At this stage it is considered appropriate to continue with the excess of $20,000.

Motor Vehicle Contributions:

2020/21 (current year)	2021/22 (next year)	Change
$249,000	$259,000	+$10,000 (+4%)

Cost for 2021/22 is $593 p.a. per vehicle including heavy plant which is mainly a result of the Mutual taking a higher self-insured retention instead of paying a premium increase. If the self-insured retention is not all used members and amounts left over back in surplus.

Management Liability Contributions:

Includes cover for Councillors, Directors & Officers (management liability and investigations), Statutory Liability (defence costs, fines/penalties) and Employment Practices Liability (wrongful acts relating to the employment of an employee).

2020/21 (current year)	2021/22 (next year)	Change
$117,000	$159,000	+$42,000 (+36%)

Cost increase because of higher insurance costs in the market. Our increase was lower than many in the market experiencing 150-200% increases.

Crime (Fidelity Guarantee) and Cyber Contributions:

2020/21 (current year)	2021/22 (next year)	Change
$38,000	$56,000	+$18,000 (+47%)

Cost increases are a result of increased cyber insurance premium. It is worth noting that in 20/21 the cost of this cover was reduced so the 21/22 increase just brings it back to the average of earlier years.

Flood Cover:

The flood insurance sub-limit equates to $4m per Council A recent flood risk quantification study carried out by actuaries engaged by CivicRisk Mutual’s found the sub-limit of $4m would be exceeded by $3m in a 1 in 200 year event, and $16.6m in a 1 in 500 year event.

Council officers have been making enquiries with CivikRisk’s broker regarding the feasibility of obtaining a flood insurance policy specific to Penrith City Council. This would be in addition to the existing cover of $4m included in the Property/ISR policy. The latest advice is that following the recent floods Insurers are simply not prepared to consider additional cover until they get accurate figures on their own losses as well as industry losses in total. We understand this is going to take some time, and that our brokers are already in discussions for renewal at possible increased cover.

Change to the Special Purpose Financial Statements – National Competition Policy

Council currently prepares ten Special Purpose Financial Statements each financial year for its declared business activities. A recent review of these activities was undertaken regarding the materiality and nature of the activities declared against the intended purpose of Special Purpose Financial Reporting. Following an assessment by Council staff and discussions with the Audit, Risk & Improvement Committee and Councils external auditors, it is recommended that Council un-declare six of these services as business activities for the purpose of special purpose financial reporting and declare the following only as the remaining business activities:

· Penrith Performing and Visual Arts

· Penrith Whitewater Stadium

· Property Development

· Children’s Services

Financial Implications

This report and attachments include information regarding the financial position for the final 2021-22 Budget that is presented tonight for Council’s approval.

The financial estimates included in the exhibited revised 2017-21 Delivery Program (incorporating the 2021-22 Operational Plan) were based on information that was available at the time. During the Exhibition period, further budget adjustments have been required as a result of Council decisions and additional information that has been received.

The Budget preparation and setting process aims to deliver a balanced or surplus Budget that funds the service level needs of the community, with a balanced budget position now established for the final 2021-22 Budget.

Council’s 10-year Long Term Financial Plan (LTFP) has been updated as part of the development of the Annual Budget and is included in the final 2021-22 Operational Plan The aim of the LTFP is to ensure that Council identifies financial issues at an early stage and reviews their effect on future activities. The LTFP must also be reviewed in detail as part of the four-yearly review of the Community Strategic Plan.

Risk Implications

In developing the Annual Budget, Council is required to comply with two important pieces of legislation, i.e. the Local Government Act 1993, and the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005.

Section 405 of the Local Government Act 1993 has been temporarily modified in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Councils are not required to have copies of the plan physically available provided the document is published on the website and made available in electronic from. Additionally, an extension has been granted of one month for adoption of the Operational Plan. Other requirements which are still in place are:

· A Council must have a plan (its "Operational Plan") that details the activities to be engaged in by the Council during the year as part of the Delivery Program covering that year.

· An Operational Plan must include a statement of the Council’s Revenue Policy for the year covered by the Operational Plan. The Statement of Revenue Policy must include the Statements and particulars required by the regulations.

· A Council must prepare a draft Operational Plan and give public notice of the draft indicating that submissions may be made to the Council at any time during the period (not less than 28 days) that the draft is to be on public exhibition. The Council must publicly exhibit the draft Operational Plan in accordance with the notice.

· In deciding on the final Operational Plan to be adopted, a Council must consider any submissions that have been made concerning the draft plan.

· The Council must post a copy of its Operational Plan on the Council’s website within 28 days after the Plan is adopted.

As part of the Operational Plan, Clause 201 of the LG Regulation states that a statement of Council’s Revenue Policy be produced each year including:

· Estimated income and expenditure

· Ordinary rates and special rates

· Proposed fees and charges

· Council’s proposed pricing methodology

· Proposed borrowings.

The Long Term Financial Plan has been reviewed and updated as part of the Annual Budget process to ensure that forward projections reflect the most current assumptions. Long term forecasting minimises financial risk by supporting financial sustainability, transparency, and accountability.

Conclusion

This report seeks Council’s adoption of the final 2021-22 Operational Plan (with proposed changes outlined in this report and the associated attachments), following Council’s consideration of the submissions and the budget variations proposed for 2021-22.

Once Council adopts the revised Delivery Program 2017-22 (incorporating the 2021-22 Operational Plan and Fees & Charges), the adopted Plan will be available on Council’s website within 28 days as outlined in the Local Government Act 1993 section 405(6).

The documents provide a clear commitment to a shared vision for our City’s future and provide a solid foundation that will be built upon in subsequent reviews.

This report also recommends that that Council make the Rates and Charges for 2021-22 as required under Section 535 of the Local Government Act 1993, as detailed in this report. Additionally, that Council agree to underwrite the operations of Penrith Whitewater Stadium Limited and Penrith Performing and Visual Arts Ltd until the presentation of the respective Annual Reports for 2021-22.

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1. The information contained in the report on Adoption of Delivery Program 2017-22 and 2021-22 Operational Plan be received

2. In accordance with the Local Government Act 1993 under section 405, Council adopt Council's Delivery Program 2017-22 and 2021-22 Operational Plan, including proposed changes outlined in this report, any amendments made at tonight’s meeting; and any additional corrections to responsibilities for delivery of agreed actions.

3. Council agree to underwrite the operations of Penrith Whitewater Stadium Limited and Penrith Performing and Visual Arts Ltd until the presentation of the respective Annual Reports for 2021-22.

4. Council adopt the following to make the Rates and Charges for 2021-22:

a. Ordinary Rate: Council make its Residential, Business and Farmland rates for 2021-22 in accordance with Section 535 of the Local Government Act 1993 such rate to be as follows:

Category	Minimum Amount	Ad Valorem
Residential	$1,155.65	0.0033666
Residential – Rural Area (A new Residential sub-category to apply to any property categorised as Residential, and located within the suburbs of Agnes Banks, Badgerys Creek, Berkshire Park, Castlereagh, Kemps Creek, Llandilo, Londonderry, Luddenham, Mount Vernon, Mulgoa, Orchard Hills, Wallacia	$1,155.65	0.00309145
Residential – Rural Residential 2 to 40 Hectares (A new Residential sub-category to apply to any property categorised as Residential, between 2 and 40 hectares in size, contains a dwelling and is zoned for non-urban purposes)	$1,155.65	0.00309145
Farmland	$1,155.65	0.0016833
Business	$1,408.80	0.00544757
Business – Penrith CBD	$1,408.80	0.00763477
Business – St Marys Town Centre	$1,408.80	0.00819996

b. Stormwater Charges: Council make its Stormwater Management Service charge to be applied on all urban residential and urban business land as outlined in the report.

c. Domestic Waste Charges: Council make its Domestic Waste Service charge in accordance with Section 496 of the Local Government Act 1993 and the 2021-22 Operational Plan and 2021-22 Fees & Charges.

d. Effluent Charges: Council make its annual charge for effluent removal services as outlined in the report and the 2021-22 Operational Plan and 2021-22 Fees & Charges.

e. Interest: Council make the interest charge for overdue rates of 6.0% per annum under Section 566(3) of the Local Government Act 1993.

f. Pension Rebate: Council provide a mandatory pension rebate in accordance with Section 575 of the Local Government Act 1993 and in addition provide a voluntary rebate under Section 582 of the Local Government Act 1993. The voluntary rebate will be equivalent to the annual stormwater charge applicable to the property, and includes pro-rata calculations according to Sections 575 and 584 of the Local Government Act 1993.

5. Council un-declares the following business activities for the purpose of Special Purpose Financial Reporting;

Council pools, tennis, cemeteries, contestable services, halls, St Clair Recreation Centre and declares the following as business activities for the purpose of Special Purpose Financial Reporting;

Penrith Performing and Visual Arts, Penrith Whitewater Stadium, Property Development and Children’s Services.

ATTACHMENTS/APPENDICES

1. ⇩	2021-22 Operational Plan - Changes on Exhibition	4 Pages	Attachments Included
2. ⇩	2021-22 Fees and Chages - Changes on Exhibition	11 Pages	Attachments Included
3. ⇩	2021-22 Operational Plan	134 Pages	Attachments Included
4. ⇩	2021-22 Fees and Charges	78 Pages	Attachments Included

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 and end of term reports (including the Operational Plan quarterly reviews for December and June) are presented
^	Election of Mayor/Deputy Mayor
ü	Meeting at which the 2020-2021 Annual Statements are presented
∞	Meeting at which any comments on the 2020-2021 Annual Statements are adopted
+	Meeting at which the Annual Report is presented

Item	Cost	Note
Investigation and development of Scheme	$50,000	Engage consultant to investigate and develop scheme (policy, specification, forms, stickers, etc)
Consultation	$10,000	Consultant with all residents (assume 3 times)
Signage	$50,000	Install all new signage throughout Thornton Estate
Administration (set up)	$50,000	Establish systems, forms, data base, stickers, fees, etc
Resourcing (on-going)	$72,000	Equivalent to 1.0 EFT
Parking Ranger (on-going)	$75,000	Equivalent to 1.0 EFT
Total	$307,000

Company	Tender Revenue	Company Location	Directors
Claude Outdoor	$0.05/pa	Level 2 Suite 2, 60 Pacific Highway, St Leonards, NSW, 2065	Andrew Gibson, Benjamin Kuffer

Company Owners/Directors	Company Address	Owners/Directors
ASG Group Limited (Infrastructure Managed Services – Marval)	Level 11 MLC Centre 19 Martin Place Sydney NSW 2000	Hajime Ueda
Barhead Solutions Australia Pty Ltd	Level 6, 222 Pitt Street Sydney NSW 2000	John Orrock & Kenneth Srtuthers
Deloitte Consulting Pty Ltd t/a Deloitte	Grosvenor Place, 225 George St Sydney NSW 2000	Tom Imbesi
Dialog Pty Ltd	Level 5 107 Mount Street North Sydney NSW 2060	Alan Key & Robert Tisdall
Empower IT Solutions Pty Ltd	Level 6, 1 Wentworth Street, Parramatta NSW 2150	Salim Sukari & Chaker Khabbaz
Fujitsu Australia Ltd	118 Talavera Rd Macquarie Park NSW 2113	Graeme Beardsell
Nexon Asia Pacific Pty Ltd	60-70 Parramatta Road Summer Hill NSW 2130	Barry Assaf
Orion Enterprise Business Solutions Pty Ltd	L3 83-97 Kippax Street Surry Hills NSW 2010	Bill Cotis
PNP Solutions Pty Ltd	Level 9, Suite 12 100 Walker Street North Sydney NSW 2060	Patrick Northcott
HCL Australia Services Pty Ltd	Level 8 1 Pacific Highway North Sydney NSW 2060	Glenn Merchant
Velrada Capital Pty Ltd t/a Velrada Capital Pty Ltd	Level 18, 197 St. Georges Terrace Perth WA 6000	Rob Evans

Company	Estimated Cost
Barhead Solutions Australia Pty Ltd	$15,760
HCL Australia Services Ltd	$14,775
Deloitte Consulting Pty Ltd t/a Deloitte	$11,238
Dialog Pty Ltd	$11,820

1. ⇩	Submission from Penrith City Council for the Proposed Natural Hazards Package	6 Pages	Appendix
2. ⇩	DPIE Draft Planning for a more Resilient NSW	45 Pages	Attachments Included
3. ⇩	DPIE Toolkit for draft Planning for a more resilient NSW	12 Pages	Attachments Included

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

Outcome	We have safe, vibrant places
Strategy	Help make our major centres and important community places safe and attractive
Service Activity	Support the revitalisation of Penrith City Centre and St Marys Town Centre

Outcome	We are healthy and share strong community spirit
Strategy	Help build resilient, inclusive communities
Service Activity	Conduct and support events that include all members of our community

Company	Tendered Price (over 4 years, unless otherwise stated)	Company Australian Address	Directors
RIB Technologies Pty Ltd	$448,050	Level 3, Toowing Tower, 9 Sherwood Road, Toowing QLD 4066	Christine Reilly
The trustee for EPM Partners Unit Trust	$451,200	Level 6, 50 Margaret Street, Sydney, NSW 2000	Stuart Penny Laith Adel Dan Stopher
InEight Pty Ltd	$497,730	Level 3, 332 St. Kilda Road, Melbourne, VIC, 3006	APAC Region Directors: Dan Hicks Rob Bryant
Eredox Pty Ltd	$617,400	198A South Street, Centenary Heights, QLD, 4350	Alfonso Delli Fiori Dylan Curtis
HKA Global Pty. Ltd	$828,401 (over 5 years) $662,720 (~4yr)	Level 1, I Hickson Road, The Rocks NSW 2000	Renny Borhan Dafydd Wyn Owen Alistair Stephen Mein
Bentley Systems Pty Ltd	$780,000	Charlemont Exchange, 5th Floor, Charlemont Street, Dublin 2, Ireland	Australian Directors: Greg Bentley Fleur Borton Brian Middleton
Infotech ANZ Pty Ltd	$1,038,631	Level 30, 35 Collins Street, Melbourne, VIC, 3000	Syed Ahmed Bilal Nirmal Bilal
FINAO Pty Ltd	Not provided	Suite 1.07, 150 Pacific Highway, North Sydney, NSW 2060	Terry Down
Procore Technologies Pty Ltd	Not provided	12/255 Pitt Street, Sydney NSW 2000	Not provided