PENRITH CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS PAPER

Skate Park Sod Turning on 4 June 2002 York Road, Jamison Park Pictured above Mr Peter Walker, Director of SK8CON and His Worship the Mayor, Councillor Pat Sheehy š Ordinary Meeting 17 June 2002 Penrith City Council ______A COUNCIL COMMITTED TO PROVIDING THE HIGHEST QUALITY SERVICE TO ITS CUSTOMERS 12 June 2002 Dear Councillor, In pursuance of the provisions of the Local Government Act, 1993 and Regulations thereunder, notice is hereby given that an ORDINARY MEETING of Penrith City Council is to be held in the Council Chambers, Civic Centre, 601 High Street, Penrith on Monday 17 June, 2002 at 7.00pm. Attention is directed to the statement accompanying this notice of the business proposed to be transacted at the meeting. Yours faithfully

Alan Travers General Manager B U S I N E S S 1. APOLOGIES 2. LEAVE OF ABSENCE 3. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES Ordinary Meeting – 3 June 2002 4. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST Pecuniary Interest (The Act requires Councillors who declare a pecuniary interest in an item to leave the meeting during discussion of that item) Other Interest 5. ADDRESSING THE MEETING 6 MAYORAL MINUTE 7. NOTICE OF MOTION 8. ADOPTION OF REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATONS OF COMMITTEES Local Traffic Committee Meeting – 3 June 2002 9. MASTER PROGRAM REPORTS 10. URGENT REPORTS (to be dealt with in the master program to which the item relates) 11. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 12. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE

Enquiries regarding this Business Paper should be directed to the Public Officer, Peter Huxley on (02) 4732 7649 PRAYER

“Almighty God, we acknowledge that you are sovereign over the nations of the World and in the lives of individuals. Our destiny is in your hands. Help us who are gathered here in this Council Meeting to seek your way and the welfare of the people we represent.

Guide us, we pray in our deliberations, in our differing opinions, to listen to each other with respect and interest. Help us to be fair in our judgements, wise in our actions, endeavouring to keep a spirit of harmony and peace, so that our city may prosper and our people live in contentment. In the name of Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.” COUNCIL CHAMBERS SEATING ARRANGEMENTS

Councillor Councillor PRESS Councillor FOWLER AITKEN OAM Councillor BRADBURY SIMAT MANAGERS Councillor Councillor O’NEILL BAILEY Councillor Councillor DAVIES EVANS Councillor Councillor BATEMAN THAIN Councillor Councillor GREENOW O’TOOLE Deputy Mayor Councillor Councillor

MANAGERS PALUZZANO KHAN MINUTE CLERK

Chief

Officer Financial DIRECTOR – DIRECTOR – PUBLIC His Worship GENERAL DIRECTOR – DIRECTOR – CITY CITY OFFICER MANAGER CITY CITY PLANNING STRATEGY/ The Mayor OPERATIONS SERVICES DEPUTY COUNCILLOR GENERAL SHEEHY MANAGER PENRITH CITY COUNCIL MEETING CALENDAR June 2002 – December 2002

TIME JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC Mon Mon Mon Mon Mon Mon Mon Ordinary Meetings 7.00 pm 3 1 5 2 11 2

*17 15 19# ^16 14 18# 16

30

Policy Review Committee 7.00 pm 24 22 26 23 21 25 9

Council has two Ordinary Meetings per month where practicable. Extraordinary Meetings are held as required. Policy Review Meetings are held monthly. Members of the public are invited to observe at meetings of the Council. Should you wish to address Council, please contact The Public Officer, Peter Huxley on 47327649. # Meetings at which the Management Plan quarterly review is tabled and discussed. * Meeting at which the Management Plan for 2002/2003 is adopted ^ Mayoral Election UNCONFIRMED MINUTES OF THE ORDINARY MEETING OF PENRITH CITY COUNCIL HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, PENRITH ON MONDAY 3 JUNE 2002 AT 7.02PM

PRAYER The meeting opened with the National Anthem and the Prayer read by Reverend Neil Checkley. PRESENT His Worship the Mayor Councillor Pat Sheehy, Councillors J Aitken, D Bailey, J Bateman D Bradbury, G Davies, G Evans, R Fowler, J Greenow, A Khan, C O’Neill, C O'Toole (arrived at 7.03PM), K Paluzzano, S Simat (arrived at 7.28PM), and J Thain. APOLOGIES 903 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Paluzzano seconded Councillor Greenow that apologies be received and accepted from Councillors O’Toole and Simat. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES Ordinary Meeting – 20 May 2002 904 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Paluzzano seconded Councillor Evans that the minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of 20 May 2002 be confirmed. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST No declarations of interest.

Councillor O’Toole arrived the time being 7.03PM. SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS 905 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greenow seconded Councillor Evans that Standing Orders be suspended to allow Mr Geoff Brown to address the meeting, the time being 7.03PM. Mr Geoff Brown, representing ADI residents, addressed Council on Item 12 - Representations about Council's Issuing of Development Consent for an Educational Establishment (Xavier College) on Part Lot 2 DP 803832 Ninth Avenue, Llandilo, Applicant: Catholic Education Office, Diocese of Parramatta, Owner: ComLand. Mr Brown suggested that significant information was omitted from the report regarding flora and fauna on the site. He said that Cumberland Plain Woodland was not mentioned in the report. Mr Brown invited the Mayor, Director of City Planning and any interested Councillors to a public forum on 13 June 2002 to discuss the development of the ADI site.

This is Page No 1 of the Unconfirmed Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Penrith City Council held in the Council Chambers, Penrith on Monday 3 June 2002 Ordinary Meeting 3 June 2002

Councillor Bradbury asked Mr Brown if he believed that there should be no development of the ADI site at all. Mr Brown said his objection was to Cumberland Woodland being left out of the report. Councillor Bradbury asked Mr Brown whether he was familiar with the reports that have been done over the years such as the Perkins Report, Gunninah Report, the Doherty Report and the Biosis Report and the findings of the S22 Committee. Councillor Bradbury asked which of those reports he mentioned has findings that are inconsistent with Council’s consent or state that the site should not be developed. Mr Brown said that most of the reports identify Cumberland Woodland as existing on the north-west corner of the site. Councillor Bradbury asked Mr Brown which of the reports are inconsistent with the approvals given. Mr Brown said that the Perkins report said that the matter needed further investigation and the Doherty report said that the area had been understudied. Councillor Bradbury stated that Mr Brown was passionate about the ADI site and that he had ridden his trail-bike near the ADI site when he was younger. Councillor Bradbury asked Mr Brown what qualifications he has in this field. Mr Brown said he does not hold any qualifications in botany or bush regeneration but that he had an interest in the protection of bushland. Councillor Bradbury asked Mr Brown what reports were available. Mr Brown referred to a four page submission given to the Building Approvals and Environment Protection Manager. He said that the submission was done on findings that were done two weeks after the development application was approved. Mr Brown stated that the submissions on the development application were not rigorous and that ADI RAG have learned that the area is Cumberland Plain Woodland. Councillor Bradbury asked Mr Brown if ADI RAG is taking this matter to the Land and Environment Court. Mr Brown said the matter was pending. Councillor Thain asked Mr Brown who he was representing, whether he was representing a political party or the residents group. Mr Brown said that he was representing the Residents Action Group. Councillor Thain asked who had paid for the rally held on 4 November 2001 at the Joan Sutherland Performing Arts Centre. Mr Brown said the ADI Residents Action Group paid for it and that unused funds from Council had been returned.

RESUMPTION OF STANDING ORDERS 906 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Davies seconded Councillor Fowler that Standing Orders be resumed the time being 7.20PM.

This is Page No 2 of the Unconfirmed Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Penrith City Council held in the Council Chambers, Penrith on Monday 3 June 2002 Ordinary Meeting 3 June 2002

Mayoral Minute - Karen O'Donnell of Economic Development & City Marketing Department Wins University Medal for Tourism Degree

907 RESOLVED on the MOTION Councillor Sheehy seconded Councillor Bradbury that the information on Karren O’Donnell receiving the University Medal for Tourism Degree be accepted and Karren be congratulated on her achievement. Councillor Bradbury passed on his congratulations on behalf of the Councillors and himself.

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

Disability Access Committee – 7 May 2002 908 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greenow seconded Councillor Bailey that the recommendations DAC6 to DAC9 contained in the Minutes and Report of the Disability Access Committee Meeting of 7 May 2002 be adopted. Councillor Greenow thanked Council for giving the presentation on the Management Plan, in particular Mick Fell, and everyone involved in its preparation.

Economic Development and Employment Committee – 21 May 2002 909 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Bateman seconded Councillor Fowler that the recommendations EDEC5 to EDEC10 contained in the Minutes and Report of the Economic Development and Employment Committee Meeting of 21 May 2002 be adopted, with the following amendment: Councillor Bailey was not present at the meeting. Councillor Aitken was not present at the meeting.

Policy Review Committee – 27 May 2002 910 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Bateman seconded Councillor Fowler that the recommendations PR44 to PR51 contained in the Minutes and Report of the Policy and Review Committee Meeting of 27 May 2002 be adopted, with the following amendment: Councillors Bradbury, Thain and Bailey had Leave of Absence for the meeting.

Councillor Simat arrived the time being 7.28PM.

This is Page No 3 of the Unconfirmed Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Penrith City Council held in the Council Chambers, Penrith on Monday 3 June 2002 Ordinary Meeting 3 June 2002

MASTER PROGRAM REPORTS

THE CITY IN ITS ENVIRONMENT

1 Variation to 'Restriction as to User' Requirement, Lot 17 DP 1013818, 84-88 Cherrybrook Chase, Londonderry

911 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Paluzzano seconded Councillor Bateman That: A. Penrith City Council being the prescribed authority entitled to enforce the covenants under DP 1013818 agree to vary the ‘restriction as to user’ fifthly referred to in the ‘Instrument Setting Out Terms of Easements and Restrictions on the Use of Land’ registered over Lot 17 in the Deposited Plan. B. The Common Seal of Council of the City of Penrith be affixed to all documentation to release the covenants in accordance with this report. C. The owner is advised that all costs involved in modifying the covenant to the property be borne by them.

2 Grant from Department Land and Water Conservation 5013/8 pt 4

912 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Paluzzano seconded Councillor Bateman that the information concerning the success of the grant application for funding of $88,000 for the ‘Nepean Riverbank Restoration Project at Cassola Place’ be received.

12 Representations about Council's Issuing of Development Consent for an Educational Establishment (Xavier College) on Part Lot 2 DP 803832 Ninth Avenue, Llandilo, Applicant: Catholic Education Office, Diocese of Parramatta, Owner: ComLand DA01/1563

913 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Bradbury seconded Councillor Fowler that the report on the representations received regarding Council’s issuing of development consent for an educational establishment (Xavier College) on Part Lot 2 DP 803832 Ninth Avenue, Llandilo be received and that Council express its satisfaction in the way that the officers had dealt with the application.

This is Page No 4 of the Unconfirmed Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Penrith City Council held in the Council Chambers, Penrith on Monday 3 June 2002 Ordinary Meeting 3 June 2002

THE CITY AS A SOCIAL PLACE

17 Joan Sutherland Performing Arts Centre 961/19

914 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor O’Neill seconded Councillor Evans That: 1. Council accept: (a) the $1.9 million funding offer under the 2002 Western Sydney Capital Infrastructure Program subject to conditions 1 – 12 with the qualifications contained in this report. (b) the $4.5 million funding offer from the Department of Education and Training. 2. The Premier be thanked for providing funding to the amount of $6.4 million to Penrith City Council for the JSPAC Extensions project. Councillor O’Toole left the meeting the time being 7.38PM.

3 Naming of the Kingswood Park Soccer facility 3003-1

915 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Paluzzano seconded Councillor Davies that Council endorses the re-naming of Kingswood Park Oval to ‘Doug Rennie Field’.

Councillor Bailey left the meeting the time being 7.40PM.

4 The John MacLean Foundation K4K - 2002 ##

916 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greenow seconded Councillor Davies that the John MacLean Foundation be advised that Council’s involvement in the fund raising event will comprise a civic luncheon on 18 June 2002 and a donation totalling $3,000 to be contributed equally from each ward. Councillor Bailey returned to the meeting the time being 7.44PM. Councillor O’Toole returned to the meeting the time being 7.45PM.

This is Page No 5 of the Unconfirmed Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Penrith City Council held in the Council Chambers, Penrith on Monday 3 June 2002 Ordinary Meeting 3 June 2002

5 Aquatic Plant Harvesting in the Nepean River xx

917 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Paluzzano seconded Councillor O’Toole That: 1. A one-day free trial be provided by Freshwater Environment Management. 2. A further report be prepared investigating the level of interaction (recreationally) we have with sections of Nepean River. 3. Council write to the Hawkesbury/Nepean River Management Forum informing them of these issues. 4. A further report be prepared examining the implications for Penrith City Council regarding aquatic weed control in the Penrith Lakes/Penrith Lakes Environment. 5. Hawkesbury River County Council address a future Policy Review Meeting.

6 Community Assistance Programme 6016/36

918 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greenow seconded Councillor Simat that Council approve the allocation of $700 towards the costs of conducting a pilot sailing programme for people with disabilities, to the NSW Sports Council for People with Disabilities.

7 Neighbourhood Coordination Project -Cranebrook 1040/27

Councillor O’Neill said that the working party had spent a lot of time and resources on the Neighbourhood Coordination project at Cranebrook to improve the area and bring it up to standard. Councillor O’Neill thanked staff at Council who have supported the project. Councillor Davies also passed on his congratulations.

919 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor O’Neill seconded Councillor Davies that the information in this report regarding the Neighbourhood Coordination Project - Cranebrook be received.

8 Tandara Before and After School Care Centre - Bus Issue 1324/4

920 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Paluzzano seconded Councillor O’Toole That Council: This is Page No 6 of the Unconfirmed Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Penrith City Council held in the Council Chambers, Penrith on Monday 3 June 2002 Ordinary Meeting 3 June 2002

1. receive the information contained in the report on Tandara B&A; 2. provide a 6 year interest free loan to Tandara B&A Centre for the purchase of a commuter bus as outlined in this report. 3. Further report on B & A care services that don’t have buses investigating the options available for the provision of buses.

13 St Clair Tennis Centre 2043/2

921 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Davies seconded Councillor Greenow That 1. the information relating to the repairs required to St Clair Tennis Courts be received; 2. an amount of $70,000 be allocated from the Recreation Reserve to allow for the repairs to be undertaken to the St. Clair Tennis Court Complex as outlined in the report. 3. Council investigate costs for the possible sealing of the carpark outside the tennis courts and investigation of access to the tennis courts.

THE CITY AS AN ECONOMY

14 Austrade Tradestart Program 1133/27

922 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Davies seconded Councillor Paluzzano that the report on the Federal Government’s Austrade, Tradestart Program be received.

THE CITY SUPPORTED BY INFRASTRUCTURE

9 National Roads Congress ##

923 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Greenow seconded Councillor Davies that Council agree to the attendance of Councillors’ Aitken and Simat at the ALGA National Roads Congress in Toowoomba on 29 and 30 July 2002.

This is Page No 7 of the Unconfirmed Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Penrith City Council held in the Council Chambers, Penrith on Monday 3 June 2002 Ordinary Meeting 3 June 2002

COUNCIL’S OPERATING ENVIRONMENT

11 Local Government Remuneration Tribunal 753/7

924 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Bateman seconded Councillor Aitken that the Report on the Local Government Remuneration Tribunal 2002 determination of Fees for Mayors and Councillors be received and fees at the maximum level permitted be included in the 2002/2003 Management Plan

15 LGMA National Congress and Expo 75/3

925 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Bateman seconded Councillor Aitken that Council receive the report regarding the 2002 LGMA National Congress and Expo held in Sydney in May 2002.

10 Penrith Whitewater Stadium 2988/12 Part 2

926 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor O’Toole seconded Councillor Bateman That the common seal of the Council of the City of Penrith be affixed to the lease documentation between the Council and Planning New South Wales for the Penrith Whitewater Stadium.

16 Provision for Payment to Council through the Internet. 32/1 Pt 2

Councillor Evans left the meeting the time being 8.08PM. Councillor Evans returned to the meeting the time being 8.10PM. 927 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Davies seconded Councillor Fowler That: 1. Council approve the payment of Council Rate and Sundry Debtor accounts over the internet; 2. the offer from Australia Post, for expanded agency payment facilities (including Internet facilities), be accepted and a new agency agreement signed. 3. A review of payments be reported to Council at the close of each installment showing method of payment and cost of collections.

This is Page No 8 of the Unconfirmed Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Penrith City Council held in the Council Chambers, Penrith on Monday 3 June 2002 Ordinary Meeting 3 June 2002

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Councillor Bailey left the meeting the time being 8.15PM. QWN1 Councillor Greenow requested a report to Council on the type of bus shelters used by Parramatta City Council. 9001/3 Pt 12 QWN2 Councillor Greenow requested a report to Council on the funding for Penrith Eisteddfod. 1034/12

Councillor Bailey returned to the meeting the time being 8.16PM. QWN3 Councillor Bailey requested a memo regarding the driveway width of the development opposite O’Donohoes at Emu Plains and how it complies with the DCP. Councillor Bateman left the meeting the time being 8.16PM. QWN4 Councillor Bradbury thanked staff for rearranging the ‘no parking’ at St Marys station. 1129/4 Pt 6 Councillor Bateman returned to the meeting the time being 8.17PM. QWN5 Councillor Bradbury congratulated staff on the planting of trees in Gipps Street, Claremont Meadows but also advised that the trees had been uprooted and removed. 1129/4 Pt 6 QWN6 Councillor O’Toole requested a report to Council on the status of the health of the Nepean River. The report is to also outline the different government agency programs, policies and activities to improve the health of the river and what Council can do in conjunction with government agencies to improve the health of the Hawkesbury Nepean. 5013/5 Pt 6 QWN7 Councillor Paluzzano requested a report to Council on a Streetscape Development Control Plan. QWN8 Councillor Paluzzano requested a report to Council on Egeria Dlensa and whether it was classified as a noxious weed. The report is to include how the plant can be categorised as a noxious weed. 7025/2 Pt 8 QWN9 Councillor Paluzzano requested a report to Council on Penrith City Council’s Environmental Education Program. The report is to outline the long term education outcomes and investigate the use of suitable icons. 1019/55

His Worship the Mayor, Councillor Sheehy advised Councillors of ‘the turning of the first sod’ ceremony acknowledging the commencement of work on the site of the new Skatepark at Jamison Park at 1.00PM on Tuesday 4 June 2002.

This is Page No 9 of the Unconfirmed Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Penrith City Council held in the Council Chambers, Penrith on Monday 3 June 2002 Ordinary Meeting 3 June 2002

COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE

928 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Davies seconded Councillor Evans that the meeting adjourn to the Committee of the Whole to deal with the following matters, the time being 8.30PM.

1 Presence of the Public

CW1 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Davies seconded Councillor Evans that the press and public be excluded from Committee of the Whole to deal with the following matters

Council's Operating Environment

2 Staff Matter 909/91

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

The meeting resumed at 8.31PM and His Worship the Mayor, Councillor Sheehy reported that the Committee of the Whole met at 8.30PM on Monday 3 June 2002, the following being present His Worship the Mayor Councillor Pat Sheehy, Councillors J Aitken, D Bailey, J Bateman D Bradbury, G Davies, G Evans, R Fowler, J Greenow, A Khan, C O’Neill, C O'Toole, K Paluzzano, S Simat, and J 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 Staff Matter 909/91

RECOMMENDATION CW2 RECOMMENDED on the Motion of Councillor Davies seconded Councillor Evans that the recommendation of the Senior Staff Recruitment / Review Committee be adopted.

This is Page No 10 of the Unconfirmed Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Penrith City Council held in the Council Chambers, Penrith on Monday 3 June 2002 Ordinary Meeting 3 June 2002

Adoption of Committee of the Whole 929 RESOLVED on the MOTION of Councillor Davies seconded Councillor Evans that the recommendation contained in the Committee of the Whole and shown as CW1 to CW2 be adopted.

There being no further business the Chairperson declared the meeting closed the time being 8.31PM. Confirmed Chairperson

This is Page No 11 of the Unconfirmed Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Penrith City Council held in the Council Chambers, Penrith on Monday 3 June 2002 Ordinary Meeting 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

Addressing the Meeting of Council

Stephen Waldon of Leslie Court, Werrington County, has requested permission to address Council on: Laneway between Fawkener Place and Leslie Court, Werrington County

RECOMMENDATION That Standing Orders be suspended for the addressing of Council.

Local Government PENRITH CITY COUNCIL

Procedure for Addressing Meetings

Anyone can request permission to address a meeting, providing that the number of speakers is limited to three in support of any proposal and three against.

Any request about an issue or matter on the Agenda for the meeting can be lodged with the General Manager or Public Officer up until the time of the meting, that is 7.00pm.

The Public Officer or Minute Clerk will speak to those people who have requested permission to address the meeting, prior to the meeting at 6.50pm, to advise them of the procedure to be followed.

It is up to the Council or Committee to decide if the request to address the meeting will be granted.

Where permission is to be granted the Council or Committee, at the appropriate time, will suspend Standing Orders to allow the address to occur.

The Chairperson will then call the person up to the lectern or speaking area.

The person addressing the meeting needs to clearly indicate:

· Their name;

· Organisation or group they are representing (if applicable);

· The issue or matter to be addressed;

· Whether they are opposing or supporting the issue or matter (if applicable) and the action they would like the meeting to take.

Each person then has five minutes to make their address. The Council or Committee can extend this time if they consider if appropriate, however, everyone needs to work on the basis that the address will be for five minutes only.

Councillors may have questions about the address so people are asked to remain at the lectern or in the speaking area until the Chairperson has thanked them.

When this occurs, they should then return to their seat.

Peter Huxley Public Officer 02 4732 7649 July 2000 Ordinary Meeting 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

Mayoral Minute - Queen's Birthday Honours

Among the people recognised in Queen’s Birthday Honours that were announced last week were five of our local citizens who have made very significant and valuable contributions to our community. Ken Buttrum has worked in the field of juvenile justice for thirty years and was the director- general of the NSW Department of Juvenile Justice from 1995 to 2000. Ken has received the Member of the Order of Australia (AM) for service to youth through the juvenile justice system, and the introduction of programmes aimed at breaking the juvenile crime cycle and assisting young people to integrate more successfully into the community. Dr.William Cammack has lived and worked in the Penrith area since 1947 and has given 52 years of service as a general practitioner to the community. He was for many years an honorary medical officer at Nepean hospital and served as chairman of the hospital medical board there. With his wife, Eileen, a former Councillor and Mayor of Penrith, he established Penrith’s first private hospital at Jamison. Dr Cammack has been a first aid instructor for Australian Red Cross volunteer aid detachment, and also an active member of the Nepean District Historical Society. Dr Cammack has been awarded the Medal of the Order of Australia (OAM) for service to medicine and to the community of Penrith as a general practitioner. Mavis Reynolds set up the Foundation for Creative Enterprise to promote visual and performing artists in Western Sydney and to help young people get a start in their creative careers. Mavis also set up the Volunteer Centre in Penrith, and helped to establish the Older Women’s Theatre Workshop, the Penrith Disabilities Centre and the University of the Third Age. Mavis has been awarded the Medal of the Order of Australia (OAM) for service to the community of Penrith, especially through the initiation and organisation of arts projects, and for service to other volunteer groups. Jean Stevens has dedicated much of her life to volunteering for the community, particularly through the Red Cross, of which she has been a member for thirty one years. She is an active member of the Nepean District and Hawkesbury historical societies and has done volunteer work at the museum of local history at Windsor for many years. In 1993 she received the Distinguished Service Award from the Red Cross, and in 1998 was named Penrith’s Citizen of the year. Jean has been awarded the Medal of the Order of Australia (OAM) for service to the community of Hawkesbury-Nepean, especially through the Australian Red Cross and local history, church and health groups. Keith Redman was a resident of Mulgoa for thirty two years until he retired to Yamba two years ago. As NSW Rural Fire Service Penrith District group captain, Keith led three teams of firefighters in the Penrith and Sydney region. He was district training coordinator and set up training programs for all brigades in the district during the 1980s. Keith was also a member of the Mulgoa Volunteer Rural Fire Brigade, the Mulgoa Progress Association, the Mulgoa Hall and Tennis Club Committee, and the Mulgoa Public School and Nepean High School Parents and Citizens Associations.

Local Government Ordinary Meeting 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

Keith has been awarded the Medal of the Order of Australia (OAM) for service to the Mulgoa and Penrith Communities, particularly through rural fire service organisations. On behalf of Council and the people of Penrith, I would like to offer congratulations to these distinguished citizens. They can be justly proud of their awards, and we thank them all for their wonderful contributions to our community.

RECOMMENDATION That Queen’s Birthday 2002 Australian Honours recipients be sent letters of congratulation on their awards.

Councillor Pat Sheehy Mayor

Local Government REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE LOCAL TRAFFIC COMMITTEE MEETING OF PENRITH CITY COUNCIL HELD IN THE OSBORNE ROOM, PENRITH ON MONDAY 3 JUNE 2002 AT 9.00 AM

PRESENT David Burns – Asset Manager (Chairperson), Senior Constable Bob Tengdahl – St Marys/Regentville Police, Wal Balak - Roads and Traffic Authority, Senior Constable Stephen Hales – Penrith Police IN ATTENDANCE Ron Watson – Westbus, Rosemarie Barretto – Senior Traffic Engineer, Stephen Barnes – Traffic Engineer, Elizabeth O’Neill & David Boylan – Western Area Health Service (part-time) APOLOGIES Councillor Greenow, Cathy Edwards – Road Safety Supervisor CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES Local Traffic Committee Meeting – 6 May 2002 The minutes of the Local Traffic Committee Meeting of 6 May 2002 were confirmed. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST No declarations of interest.

MASTER PROGRAMME REPORTS

1 Maxwell Street, Penrith - Request for Pedestrian Crossing Facility (MA/01 Pt 2)

RECOMMENDATION LTC72 That: 1. a pedestrian crossing facility in Maxwell Street near Grandview Street not be provided; 2. the existing position of the pedestrian crossing in Maxwell Street just east of the roundabout not be relocated; 3. the situation be reviewed in 12 months’ time.

This is Page No 1 of the Report and Recommendation of the Local Traffic Committee of Penrith City Council held on Monday 3 June 2002 Local Traffic Committee Meeting 3 June 2002

2 Derby Street, Penrith - Proposed Additional Access near Nepean Hospital (for Needle & Syringe Programme Facility)(DE/05 Pt3 & 232732 Pt5)

Elizabeth O’Neill and David Boylan from Western Area Health Service addressed the meeting and tabled a plan for the location of the proposed Needle & Syringe Programme facility near Nepean Hospital, showing the existing driveway to the hospital staff car parking area. RECOMMENDATION LTC73 That: 1. approval be given for the widening of the existing staff entry/exit driveway in Derby Street, subject to the Wentworth Area Health Service providing Council with a detailed design layout of the revised entry and carpark; 2. the existing “No Standing” zone in Derby Street from Somerset Street to the west of the staff carpark driveway be replaced with a “No Stopping” zone and extended by approximately two car lengths (ie, 12m long) further to the west of the proposed driveway extension, with the supply and installation of the “No Stopping” zone signs to be met by the applicant at no cost to Council.

3 Russell Street, Emu Plains - Proposed Road Closure (3011/1 & RU/01 Pt4)

RECOMMENDATION LTC 74 That: 1. the installation of the gate at Russell Street at the entrance to the dirt road near Palomino Road be implemented; 2. Council’s Parks Construction & Maintenance Manager be advised and requested to issue keys as required by the property manager of Lot 4 Russell Street. 3. Council’s Parks Construction & Maintenance Manager be requested to install an advisory sign at the gate closure for the information of the public regarding the use and availability of keys in order to gain access to this section of Russell Street; 4. emergency authorities be contacted by the Parks Construction & Maintenance Manager and issued with keys if required in order to gain access to this section of Russell Street.

This is Page No 2 of the Report and Recommendation of the Local Traffic Committee Meeting of Penrith City Council held on Monday 3 June 2002 Local Traffic Committee Meeting 3 June 2002

4 Eighth Avenue, Llandilo – Request for Load Limit (9011/10 Pt 3 & 9003/2 Pt 6)

RECOMMENDATION LTC75 That a 3-tonne load limit be installed on Eighth Avenue between Third Avenue and Terrybrook Road, subject to the affected residents in the area being notified prior to implementation. Comments from the affected residents to be referred back to the Local Traffic Committee for consideration.

5 Riley Street, Penrith - Parking Restrictions (RI/06 Pt 2)

RECOMMENDATION LTC76 That: 1. the Roads and Traffic Authority be requested to provide the following:

· existing “No Parking” zone (10m long) on the western side of Riley Street immediately north of the Australia Post box be changed to “No Parking - Emergency Service Vehicles Excepted”; · the existing “No Standing” zone on the western side of Riley Street immediately north of the pedestrian crossing be changed to “Loading Zone”(approximately 7m long); · the remaining section of “No Standing” zone between the proposed “Loading Zone” and existing “Bus Zone” be changed to a “No Parking” zone; · the remaining section of the existing “No Standing” zone on both sides of Riley Street in the vicinity of the pedestrian crossing and at the intersection of Henry Street be changed to “No Stopping”; 2. the applicants for the above restrictions be advised.

6 GENERAL BUSINESS 6.1 Links Road, St Marys – Request for Approval to Block Access (Raised Council) (LI/04 Pt 2)

Council has received a letter from the Secretary Manager of Dunheved Golf Club Ltd, requesting approval to block access to the end of Links Road, St Marys, at the entrance to the Golf Club. The applicant advised that Links Road ends at the golf course and would only need to be accessed by visitors to the Golf Club, however recently the road has been used for illegal dumping and other activities. The applicant is seeking approval to block off access to the end of Links Road at the entrance to the Dunheved Golf Club.

This is Page No 3 of the Report and Recommendation of the Local Traffic Committee Meeting of Penrith City Council held on Monday 3 June 2002 Local Traffic Committee Meeting 3 June 2002

RECOMMENDATION That in accordance with the Roads Act, the installation of a closure at the entrance to Dunheved Golf Club in Links Road, St Marys to be advertised in local newspapers for a 28 day period and signs to be displayed near the club. Following the advertising period, a further report to be submitted to the Local Traffic Committee, including any comments received regarding this matter.

6.2 Great Western Highway, Emu Plains – Request for Parking Restriction (Raised Council) (GR/31 Pt 10)

At the Local Traffic Committee meeting on 3 March 2002, Penrith Police requested, on behalf of the Principal of Nepean High School, provision of a parking restriction in the busbay at the front of the school on the Great Western Highway, Emu Plains (western side) to stop vehicles entering the busbay and being parked near the median strip. The Committee recommended that “provision of a parking restriction (part-time “No Stopping” zone) along the median strip (within the busbay) and a “No Entry – Buses Excepted” sign would prevent vehicles from entering and parking in the busbay. Council’s resolution for this matter was incorrect indicating that “the Roads and Traffic Authority be requested to provide a part-time “No Stopping (8.00am-9.30am & 2.30pm-4.00pm School Days)” zone on the median strip (within the busbay) adjacent Nepean High School”. The recommendation should be amended as follows: “that the Roads and Traffic Authority be requested to provide a part-time “No Stopping (8.00am-9.30am & 2.30pm-4.00pm School Days)” zone on the median strip (within the busbay) and a “No Entry – Buses Excepted” sign adjacent Nepean High School”. Instruction will be forwarded to the Roads and Traffic Authority shortly for implementation of the works. RECOMMENDATION LTC77 That the Roads and Traffic Authority be requested to provide a part-time “No Stopping (8.00am-9.30am & 2.30pm-4.00pm School Days)” zone on the median strip (within the busbay) and a “No Entry – Buses Excepted” sign adjacent Nepean High School.

6.3 Church Street, Cranebrook – Traffic Safety Issues at Intersection with Smeeton Road (Raised Council) (CH/13)

At the Local Traffic Committee meeting on 6 May 2002, the Committee considered a report regarding safety at the intersection of Church Street and Smeeton Road, Cranebrook. The Committee commented that this location does not meet the warrant for a “Give Way” sign and holding line, although this is considered to be the safest option. Alternatively, This is Page No 4 of the Report and Recommendation of the Local Traffic Committee Meeting of Penrith City Council held on Monday 3 June 2002 Local Traffic Committee Meeting 3 June 2002 provision of linemarking (edge lines and centre lines) to a distance of approximately 30m on either side of the intersection would be appropriate. At its meeting on 20 May 2002, Council resolved, on the recommendation of the Committee, that the matter be deferred for a site inspection with the Roads and Traffic Authority and Police. A site inspection was held on Thursday, 30 May 2002 between Council officers and representatives of the Roads and Traffic Authority and Penrith Police. It was recommended that the following works be carried out to improve safety at the intersection:

· a “Give Way” sign and associated holding lines be installed at the intersection; · the existing chevron board be removed and replaced with an oversize sign, to be placed higher than the existing; · double barrier centre linemarking, including edge lines, be provided on Smeeton Road to a distance of 30m on either side of the intersection; · an advance T-intersection warning sign be installed on Church Street; · the turning radius at the intersection be reduced to control the turning movement at the intersection. A plan of the intersection, showing the proposed turning radius including signposting and linemarking, should be submitted to the RTA as soon as possible for implementation. RECOMMENDATION LTC78 That: 1. the Roads & Traffic Authority be requested to carry out the following works at the intersection of Church Street and Smeeton Road:

· a “Give Way” sign and associated holding lines be installed at the intersection; · double barrier centre linemarking, including edge lines, be provided on Smeeton Road to a distance of 30m on either side of the intersection; · an advance T-intersection warning sign be installed on Church Street. 2. the existing chevron board at the intersection be removed and replaced with an oversize sign, to be placed higher in the middle of the intersection; 3. the layout of the intersection be adjusted to conform with a rural standard T-intersection.

6.4 Borrowdale Way, Cranebrook – near Hosking Street (Raised Council) (BO/04)

Council has previously received a request for provision of a marked pedestrian crossing in Borrowdale Way, between Hosking Street and Sherringham Road, Cranebrook, and results of investigations indicated that it did not meet the Roads and Traffic Authority warrant. At its meeting on 17 December 2001, Council resolved, on the recommendation of the Local Traffic Committee, that “a marked pedestrian crossing not be provided in Borrowdale Way, This is Page No 5 of the Report and Recommendation of the Local Traffic Committee Meeting of Penrith City Council held on Monday 3 June 2002 Local Traffic Committee Meeting 3 June 2002 between Hosking Street and Sherringham Road, Cranebrook, and provision of a ‘centre-ped’ refuge island be further investigated”. A concept plan for the ‘centre-ped’ refuge island was tabled at the Local Traffic Committee meeting on 6 May 2002. The Committee was requested to consider removal of the bus stop, which would be affected by the compulsory parking regulation at the facility, and the Westbus representative indicated that the bus stop near Hosking Street is not well used and could be removed. There is an alternative bus stop located approximately 60 metres to the west, which is more utilised that this bus stop. Council resolved, on the recommendation by the Committee, that “Westbus be requested to remove the existing bus stop near Hosking Street and retain the bus stop near Sherringham Road, Cranebrook”. The final design plan for the facility is now complete for Committee consideration and the cost of the facility is estimated to be approximately $12,500. The Committee was requested to endorse the plan for construction, subject to availability of Local Traffic Committee funds. At this location, there is an existing pedestrian underpass. The Committee questioned the need for the refuge, given the existence of the under pass. It was recommended that this matter be deferred pending a site inspection to determine the suitability of the underpass for the use of school children and to determine current usage and pedestrian desire lines. The Committee was advised that a Community Safety Audit of this area was to be undertaken on 12 June 2002, where the suitability of the underpass could be assessed. Community consultation is not required, as the facility is located near a reserve. RECOMMENDATION LTC79 That: 1. this matter be deferred pending the outcome of a Community Safety Audit to be conducted on 12 June 2002, and pedestrian counts at the subject location; 2. a further report to be submitted to the Committee for consideration.

6.5 Brisbane Street and Sydney Street, St Marys – Proposed Roundabout (Raised Council) (BR/03 & SY/02)

At its meeting on 22 April 2002, Council considered the design plan for the proposed roundabout at the intersection of Brisbane Street and Sydney Street, St Marys. Council resolved, on the recommendation of the Committee, that: 1. “the existing pedestrian crossing be relocated to a distance of approximately 20m to the east of its current location, as shown on the modified plan; 2. the affected residents and shop owners be consulted regarding the proposed roundabout and relocation of the pedestrian crossing”.

This is Page No 6 of the Report and Recommendation of the Local Traffic Committee Meeting of Penrith City Council held on Monday 3 June 2002 Local Traffic Committee Meeting 3 June 2002

The affected residents and shop owners were consulted on 2 May 2002, and only one resident raised an objection to the proposal and has requested that parking within the vicinity of the shops be provided instead of the roundabout. The resident was advised that the parking issue is a separate matter and would need to be dealt with separately by Council. The proposed roundabout is to be constructed to improve safety and traffic flow efficiency at the intersection. The Committee is requested to endorse construction of the roundabout. RECOMMENDATION LTC80 That construction of the roundabout at the intersection of Brisbane Street and Sydney Street, St Marys be carried out according to the modified plan.

6.6 Glengarry Drive, Glenmore Park (Raised St Marys/Regentville Police) (GL/17)

A representation has been received from the Police regarding vehicles being parked each weekend on both sides of Glengarry Drive, near the soccer field between Saddler Way and Windorra Avenue, Glenmore Park, creating traffic safety problems along this section of the road. It was requested that a “No Stopping” zone be provided on one side of the road to allow passing traffic. The road width on this section of Glengarry Drive between Saddler Way and Windorra Avenue is approximately 8.1m and provision of a “No Stopping” zone on the eastern side is considered appropriate in order to improve traffic flow at the location in question. RECOMMENDATION LTC81 That the Roads & Traffic Authority be requested to provide “No Stopping” zone restrictions on the eastern side of Glengarry Drive, between Saddler Way and Windorra Avenue, Glenmore Park.

6.7 Schoolhouse Road/Spencer Street/Mulgoa Road, Regentville – Request for Pavement Arrows (Raised St Marys/Regentville Police and Council) (SC/01 Pt3 & SP/07)

St Marys/Regentville Police made representation on behalf of a resident concerning a request for provision of “green” turning arrows and investigation of phasing at the signalised intersection in Schoolhouse Road/Spencer Street/Mulgoa Road. This matter was previously considered by the Local Traffic Committee with a recommendation that the Roads and Traffic Authority be requested to investigate the concerns raised by the residents.

This is Page No 7 of the Report and Recommendation of the Local Traffic Committee Meeting of Penrith City Council held on Monday 3 June 2002 Local Traffic Committee Meeting 3 June 2002

RECOMMENDATION LTC82 That the Roads and Traffic Authority be requested to investigate the operation of the traffic control signals at the intersection of Mulgoa and Schoolhouse Roads, Regentville, taking into consideration the issues raised and correspondence received by Council.

6.8 Thurwood Avenue, South Penrith - Request for Provision of “Kiss and Ride” Zone (Raised St Marys/Regentville Police) (TH/03)

St Marys/Regentville Police advised that they have received a request from the Principal of Jamisontown Public School for provision of a “Kiss and Ride” zone and Bus Zone for before and after school buses in Thurwood Avenue, South Penrith. RECOMMENDATION LTC83 That the matter be deferred for further investigation.

There being no further business the Chairperson declared the meeting closed, the time being 11.25am.

Confirmed Chairperson

This is Page No 8 of the Report and Recommendation of the Local Traffic Committee Meeting of Penrith City Council held on Monday 3 June 2002 ORDINARY MEETING MONDAY 17 JUNE 2002 TABLE OF CONTENTS

SEATING ARRANGEMENTS

MEETING CALENDAR

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF COMMITTEES

MASTER PROGRAM REPORTS MASTER PROGRAM REPORTS

Item Page THE CITY IN ITS REGION

1 Western Sydney Orbital (9011/49) 1

THE CITY AS A SOCIAL PLACE

2 Hydrotherapy Treatment Centre 2986/35 7 3 Surveyors Creek Community Centre - Proposed Use By Penrith Valley Concert Band 1002/11 9 4 Identification Of Obligations And Funding Needs Of Community Organisations 1117/18,1117/1 16 5 Community Assistance Programme 6016/36 21

THE CITY SUPPORTED BY INFRASTRUCTURE

6 City Operations Directorate Report To End May 2002 153/2 23

COUNCIL'S OPERATING ENVIRONMENT

7 Scholarships At The University Of Western Sydney 1026/11 37 8 Insurance Premium Public Liability 2002/03 6011/1 Part 7 39 Ordinary Meeting 17 June 2002 The City in Its Region

The City in Its Region

1 Western Sydney Orbital (9011/49)

Compiled by: Walter Sinnadurai, Transportation Planner Authorised by: Craig Ross, Design & Technical Advice Manager

Management Plan 4 Year Outcome (Page 13): A Strategic Access and Transport Plan, integrated with land use planning, is developed and being implemented. 01/02 Critical Action: Lobby to secure the early construction of the Werrington Arterial, Western Sydney Orbital and improvements to identified major road intersections.

Purpose The purpose of this report is to inform Council of the features and benefits of the approved Western Sydney Orbital for the Penrith LGA, and to seek Council’s endorsement of a submission by Council on the project. Background

On 5 March 2002 the Minister for Planning, Dr Andrew Refshauge, gave planning approval (subject to 223 separate conditions of approval) for the Western Sydney Orbital (WSO) motorway. It is expected that the motorway will be open to traffic by 2007.

The proposed Western Sydney Orbital is 40km of motorway with a dual carriageway, to be constructed between the M5/Hume Highway at Prestons and the M2 at West Baulkham Hills. The approved WSO motorway network is shown in Figure 1. The proposed motorway will have connection to the existing motorways (M5, M4 and M2) and will aim to improve traffic flow to all western parts of Sydney, including the major employment and residential areas. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on the project was prepared and exhibited from 8 January 2001 to 5 March 2001. As a result of community input and further work since the EIS, three significant enhancements have been made to the original project. These are: § The motorway has been moved approximately 400m to the west between Hoxton Park Airport and Elizabeth Drive to reduce the impact on the local community. § The interchange with the M4 has been redesigned to improve safety and traffic performance. § A high quality off-road cycleway will be provided (subject to further environmental assessment). The project is identified in Council’s current Management Plan and Council has supported the Orbital for a number of years.

Current Situation Features of the Proposed Road The WSO motorway corridor will range in width from 65 metres to 150 metres, allowing for four traffic lanes, a wide central median, cut and fill batters, landscaping, drainage structures, environmental mitigation measures, and grade separated intersection and interchanges. The

Access and Transport Page 1 Ordinary Meeting 17 June 2002 The City in Its Region

WSO will provide for an on-road bus service between Richmond Road and the M2. The wide central median could accommodate additional traffic lanes or dedicated bus operations or light/heavy rail in the future. There are fifteen interchanges along the length of the proposed WSO at the following locations: § M5 Motorway/Hume Highway § Bernera Road, Prestons § Cowpasture Road, Hoxton Park § Elizabeth Drive, Cecil Park § Old Wallgrove Road, Eastern Creek § The Horsley Drive, Horsley Park § M4 Motorway, Eastern Creek § Great Western Highway, Eastern Creek § Power Street, Glendenning § Richmond Road, Dean Park § Quakers Hill Parkway, Quakers Hill § Sunnyholt Road, Kings Langley § Norwest Boulevard, Glenwood § Old Windsor Road, Kings Langley § M2 Motorway, Baulkham Hills. The Old Wallgrove Road, Eastern Creek interchange will provide access to Australia’s Wonderland and the SEPP 59 Employment Lands (in Blacktown LGA). Previously Council has made representation for the project to make provision for a link to the Erskine Park Employment Area (through the SEPP 59 lands). Toll Charges Use of the Motorway by private vehicles will be through a toll based on where the vehicles enter and exit the motorway. A maximum of $5.00 (inclusive of GST) is proposed and the table below shows different toll charges for the proposed sections of the route.

TOLL FROM TO CHARGE F5/M5 Bernera Rd $0.80 Bernera Rd Cowpasture Rd $0.60 Cowpasture Rd Elizabeth Dr $1.30 Elizabeth Dr The Horsley Dr $1.00 The Horsley Dr Old Wallgrove Rd $0.90 Old Wallgrove Rd M4 Motorway $0.30 M4 Motorway Woodstock Ave $1.20 Power St Richmond Rd $0.50 Richmond Rd Sunnyholt Rd $0.60 Quakers Hill Pkwy Sunnyholt Rd $1.00 Sunnyholt Rd Norwest Blvd $0.50 Old Windsor Rd M2 Motorway $0.40

Note: Toll charge based on 2001 estimates and subject to finalisation of construction contract. The toll charge is based on an estimated 25c per km and will result in a cost of $4.90 for a trip from the M4 to the M5 and $4.20 for the M4 to the M2. It is proposed that the toll would be electronically collected.

Access and Transport Page 2 Ordinary Meeting 17 June 2002 The City in Its Region

Cycleway The project includes provision of a cycleway facility for the 40 km between Prestons and West Baulkham Hills. An on-carriageway cycleway will be provided within the shoulders of the WSO, as well as an off-carriageway cycleway. Safe crossing will be provided at all intersections, making it suitable for all riders. The details of this cycleway will be determined during the detailed design and will be subject to separate environmental assessment and approval. Construction Programme Construction is proposed to commence in the early part of 2003 and be completed in 2007. The construction details are not known at this stage, however, it is expected that some sections of the WSO will be open prior to 2007. Funding The WSO motorway is estimated to cost $1.25 billion and is being partly funded by the Commonwealth Government. The private sector has been invited to submit proposals to finance the remainder of the project under a BOOT (build, own, operate, transfer) scheme.

Benefits for the Sydney Region

The WSO will increase the potential for employment in western Sydney (which is currently about half the rate of jobs in eastern Sydney). Around 1,200 jobs will be created in the construction stage. The WSO would make it easier to travel in western Sydney, will provide improved north-south road connections within Sydney, and complete the missing link in Sydney’s orbital road network, as shown in Figure 1. In doing so, it will attract new activities and facilities to the Greater Western Sydney region. The WSO will provide opportunity for stronger economic growth within western Sydney by encouraging further investment in the area due to potential savings in transport costs. It will reduce the number of heavy vehicles using local roads, resulting in better air quality and less noise in key residential areas. Benefits for the Penrith LGA The project is not expected to have a direct environmental impact on the Penrith LGA and is likely to have only marginal impact on traffic flow on the Penrith arterial road network. The WSO project will, however, increase the potential for jobs in western Sydney and improve access to the employment and activity centres in northern and north-west Sydney. The project will improve strategic road links to the Penrith LGA and will also enable the establishment of other strategic links such as the Werrington Arterial and the link to the Erskine Park Employment Lands. Both of these strategic links require the development of the WSO to satisfy their full potential. Council has previously lobbied the Minister for these connections and, to date, no firm commitment for their development has been received. The submission to the Minister proposed the staged development of the Werrington Arterial with the first sage connecting the M4 to the Great Western Highway. The WSO will enable the Arterial to connect to the

Access and Transport Page 3 Ordinary Meeting 17 June 2002 The City in Its Region

M2 and provide strategic connection to the employment areas in the northern section of Sydney. Submission by Council The Roads and Traffic Authority’s decision to proceed with the project, and the report of the Director-General of Planning and the Authority’s Representation Report were on exhibition until 17 May 2002 at various locations for information. Whilst the Authority did not invite public comments on the project, Council forwarded a submission prior to the 17 May 2002 end of exhibition date. A copy of that submission is attached. Since the submission was lodged, advice has been received from the Western Sydney Regional Council of Australian Business Ltd., that, as the Werrington Arterial affects more than one thousand of its members, it has ranked the Arterial in the top ten regional transport priorities. They propose a campaign to progress the development of the Arterial. Summary The advice from Australian Business Ltd is welcomed. Given this information, it would be appropriate for a formal submission to be made to Australian Business Ltd. formally seeking their support for the Arterial and also for the Erskine Park Employment Lands connection to the WSO. The support of the Greater Western Sydney Economic Development Board should also be pursued. RECOMMENDATION That: 1. Council note the information on the approved Western Sydney Orbital; 2. Council endorse the submission dated 7 May 2002; 3. support from Australian Business Ltd. and the Greater Western Sydney Economic Development Board be sought for the progression of the Werrington Arterial and the link to the Erskine Park Employment lands.

2

Access and Transport Page 4 Ordinary Meeting 17 June 2002 The City in Its Region

Access and Transport Page 5 Ordinary Meeting 17 June 2002 The City in Its Region

WS:km 9011/49 Pt 2 Walter Sinnadurai (02) 4732-7721 7 May 2002

Mr Paul Forward Roads & Traffic Authority Western Sydney Orbital Sydney Region DX 8120 BLACKTOWN

Dear Mr Forward WESTERN SYDNEY ORBITAL MOTORWAY I refer to your letter dated 24 April 2002, advising that the Minister for Planning, Dr Andrew Refshauge, has given planning approval for the Western Sydney Orbital motorway and it is expected that the motorway would be open to traffic by 2007. Council agrees that the project will increase the potential for jobs in Western Sydney and improve access to the employment and activity centres in northern and north-west Sydney. Council thus supports the project as part of arterial road improvements in the Greater Western Sydney Region. The project would improve strategic road links to the Penrith LGA, however it is expected to have a marginal impact on traffic flow on the arterial road network in the Penrith LGA. To gain full benefit of the project, Council considers that direct arterial road links to the Erskine Park Employment Area (from the proposed roundabout at Old Wallgrove Road) and the northern residential areas of the LGA (from near the proposed Richmond Road Interchange) would be desirable. Council requests the RTA to advance the planning for such links. Should you wish to discuss the issues raised in this submission, you may contact me on 4732-7573 or Council’s Transportation Planner on 4732-7721. Council would also appreciate being kept informed of the assessment of the project and the timetable for planning of the links to the Erskine Park Employment Area and the northern residential areas of the LGA. Yours faithfully

Craig Ross Design &Technical Advice Manager

Access and Transport Page 6 Ordinary Meeting 17 June 2002 The City as a Social Place

The City as a Social Place

2 Hydrotherapy Treatment Centre 2986/35

Compiled by: Gary Dean, Facilities Operations Manager Authorised by: Ray Moore - Director City Operations

Management Plan 4 Year Outcome (Page 46): Community recreation facilities and services in new and established areas meet contemporary needs. 01/02 Critical Action: Provide in partnership with others an agreed plan for delivery of recreation facilities and services based on available resources.

Purpose:

Request from Ripples – St Marys Leisure Centre regarding repayment of the loan for the construction of the new Hydrotherapy Treatment Centre and distribution of project cost savings. The report recommends a preferred approach.

Background The Hydrotherapy Treatment Centre was officially opened on 3 November 2001 and will provide a range of much needed facilities for our community and beyond. Construction of the Centre was facilitated by funds from both Local and State Government. Council arranged a loan of $1.4 million for Ripples on the basis that repayment would be made on an agreed plan. Several options were developed by Council staff and submitted to the Board of Ripples for consideration and subsequent advice. Each of the three options proposed the same six monthly repayments on the loan, the only difference being the commencement dates ie. 31st March 2001, 1st November 2001 or 1st April 2002. Earlier this year the following letter was received from the General Manager of Ripples: ‘I have been requested by the Board to write to Council regarding the repayment schedules for the loans drawn for the construction of the Hydrotherapy Centre. As all financial details are still to be finalised for the project the board has requested that in the spirit of co-operation that any potential or actual savings in the budgeted costs be applied to the loan drawings in the first instances. Similarly the Board has advised that the first 6 monthly repayment be made as at April 2002 as per the 3rd repayment option presented by Melissa Eather. So that I can advise the Board accordingly, I would appreciate your response on the above.’ At the time of receipt of this request, the final savings figure could not be determined as a result of three main outstanding matters which could have had a significant impact on that final figure. Notwithstanding these considerations, savings were anticipated.

Recreational and Cultural Equity Page 7 Ordinary Meeting 17 June 2002 The City as a Social Place

The original project budget was $2.54 million. Through careful management and budget control the project has achieved savings as outlined below. As delays were likely to occur in finalising this figure, the matter of the repayment plan was dealt with separately. A meeting was held between Council officers and Ripples Board representatives. Council officers agreed with Ripples request to adopt the Option 3 repayment schedule. Comment from the Chief Financial Officer Early last year Council provided the Ripples Board with a number of options in regard to the repayment of the loan for the construction of the new Hydrotherapy Treatment Centre at St Marys Leisure Centre. The three options submitted at that time varied only by the date at which repayments were to commence and the consequent interest variations. The repayment options supplied at that time were indicative of the projected cashflow as provided by the Department of Public Works (DPWS). Actual payments varied significantly from those originally projected by the DPWS. Interest earnt on unexpended loan funds has been offset against interest paid on the loans. The difference has been added to the total contribution required from Ripples and resulted in $1,469,000 outstanding at 31 March 2002. This amount is exclusive of their $22,000 contribution to the project and any variations that they have requested and agreed to fund during the development of the project. In regard to final project costs it is suggested that any savings against the original estimate should be shared between Council and Ripples in the proportion of their contributions to the project i.e. $441,000 and $1,422,000 respectively. This reduces the amount owed by Ripples by $61,200. Loan funds borrowed but now not required amount to $80,243 (project savings against budget) and will be offset against future borrowing requirements. RECOMMENDATION That: 1. Council endorse the actions of its officers in agreeing to the revised repayment schedule (option 3) which commenced in April 2002. 2. The Ripples Board be advised that Council will apply the savings of $80,243 from the Project between Council and Ripples in the proportion of their contributions to the project, this resulting in a $61,200 reduction to the amount required to be repaid by Ripples.

Recreational and Cultural Equity Page 8 Ordinary Meeting 17 June 2002 The City as a Social Place

The City as a Social Place

3 Surveyors Creek Community Centre - proposed use by Penrith Valley Concert Band 1002/11

Compiled by: Tony Jarrett, Neighbourhood Facilities Co-ordinator Authorised by: Gary Dean, Facilities Operations Manager

Management Plan 4 Year Outcome (Page ##): Social Services and facilities are established and operating to meet community needs. 01/02 Critical Action: Provide well-managed and optimally-used Council-owned facilities, to support local communities.

Purpose:

To consider the request of Penrith Valley Concert Band to be the primary user of Surveyors Creek Community Centre, and to consider management of the facility.

Background

The Penrith Valley Concert Band (PVCB) is currently located at the Penrith Museum of Fire and utilises a number of venues around the City. Their tenancy at the Museum of Fire ceases on 30 June 2002. Representatives of the Band met with His Worship the Mayor about a Council owned venue as a base for meetings, rehearsals and storage. The Mayor suggested exploration of halls and community centres. Potential venues such as Emu Heights Community Centre and Arthur Neave Hall have been viewed. PVCB prefers Surveyors Creek Community Centre (SCCC) as the venue provides adequate rehearsal space, superior acoustics, and greater storage. PVCB also has offered to manage the facility. PVCB initially proposed to use the Centre for 25 hours per week. They would be the primary user of the Centre. For some time PVCB has been pressing Council to build a purpose built music Centre. This report addresses an alternate to that. Current Situation The Surveyors Creek Community Centre is one of Council’s 31 neighbourhood facilities, and one of 3 facilities in Glenmore Park. The SCCC opened in 1998, and since opening has been directly managed by Council. The facilities include a large function space (Main Hall) that can seat 120 people and three meeting rooms, and an office. The facility is used for 28.25 hours (on average) per week in School Terms, and 77.75 hours per week in School holidays by Regular Users. This equates to around 15.1% and 34.5% utilisation respectively.

Social Justice Page 9 Ordinary Meeting 17 June 2002 The City as a Social Place

Meeting Room 2 is not available for hire. Until the opening of the Glenmore Park Youth and Community Centre, the Family Liaison Service utilised Meeting Room 2 exclusively. The room is now used to store the Glenmore Park Equipment pool. The Main Hall is regularly used for functions on Friday and Saturday nights. The proposal to use the SCCC by PVCB requires three particular issues to be addressed: the extent of use by PVCB; use of Meeting Room 1 for storage; and ongoing management of the facility. The extent of proposed use The initial proposal has been amended to using the Main Hall for 16 hours per week which would make the PVCB the primary user of the facility. The use would increase utilisation and certainly enhance weekend activity through increased physical presence both Saturday and Sunday. A schedule of current regular bookings and the times proposed for use by PVCB are included as Appendix 1. The request by PVCB is different to any other application for regular use of the SCCC. Regular users of any Centre do not normally gain a right for permanent use of time or space within a facility, as is intended by PVCB in establishing Surveyors Creek as a base. The PVCB is a regional cultural group, meeting the requirements of participants not just from Glenmore Park and Penrith, but from outside the Penrith City. This regional base must be considered in the context of the basic purpose of the SCCC being to meet the needs of Glenmore Park community and having been funded through Section 94 contributions. Notwithstanding these key considerations, the PVCB application could be supported given resolution of certain specific issues outlined below.

Impact on current regular users

Consultations and negotiations will need to occur with regular users. Some users may be directly affected by the proposal; for example the use of Meeting Room 1 by the Ensemble on Monday evenings may not be compatible with the existing Yoga group in the Main Hall. Vacation Care use the Main Hall for extended hours in School holidays. On Thursdays during school holidays, the proposed use of the Main Hall by PVCB will not be possible, and the use of Meeting Room 1 may be incompatible with Vacation Care. Meeting Room 1 is currently used once per week. This use would require relocation as Meeting Room 1 is proposed to be used exclusively by PVCB for equipment storage.

Additional noise impact on local residents

The Centre was not constructed for the purpose of holding music activities and is not sound proofed. Patrons of the facility generate noise of various sorts, particularly at functions on Friday and Saturday nights. The Centre is in close proximity to a couple of dozen houses. The use of the Centre for band activities on four evenings and one morning will potentially have a different impact on the local amenity. Consultation with neighbours will be required regarding the potential for noise impacts. Some assessment of noise levels may need to be made.

Social Justice Page 10 Ordinary Meeting 17 June 2002 The City as a Social Place

Use of Meeting Room 1 for storage requirements

Storage is at a premium at most neighbourhood facilities, particularly those that have a number of groups using the facility. The PVCB proposal includes utilising Meeting Room 1 permanently and exclusively for band storage and small group requirements. Meeting Room 1 is currently an active meeting room, although with only one regular hirer. This Room can be allocated to the PVCB for storage and office requirements subject to the successful negotiation with the current user to move to the Main Hall. Ideally, some form of external storage provided at the cost of PVCB would ensure that the Meeting Room remains available for general use. The allocation of a Meeting Room or other space to a single user in a neighbourhood facility does not generally occur. Where it does occur, it is primarily office space for community development project workers or for management group offices. While no rooms have been set aside in similar circumstances to the proposal for Meeting Room 1, at this time Meeting Room 1 is used only once when Meeting Room 3 is also being used. As such, the proposed removal of Meeting Room 1 from general use to exclusive PVCB use could be supported. The storage cupboards and areas within the SCCC are all in use by existing groups. The front office is not used, however there is some potential for this space to be taken up by a community development or project worker in the future and should not be allocated for a specific group on other than temporary arrangements. Meeting Room 3 is an active meeting room with an externally fenced area and is an ideal room for holding of children’s groups and activities. This room is not suitable for dedicated storage. Meeting Room 2 is currently used for storage of various items of equipment as part of the Glenmore Park Equipment Pool. It is not available for any other use. Utilisation and financial performance of neighbourhood facilities Community centres, neighbourhood centres and halls have been constructed for the community over many decades, either via Section 94 contributions from local development or under capital works programs. Their primary purpose is providing a venue for community services to be delivered, groups and activities to occur, and functions held. Of course, an underlying target is to generate enough income to match operating expenditures. However, how well a neighbourhood facility meets its community purposes should not be measured by the extent of any surplus alone. Financial performance can be influenced by the type of users (community groups versus commercial groups), capacity to hold functions, local community size, alternate venues, features of the facility, capacity of the community to pay hire fees, and utilisation rates.

Hire fees associated with the use by PVCB

The fee (2002/03) for using the Main Hall SCCC is $13.00 per hour for community groups. Income from hire would be around $8,000 annually, taking into account school holidays. The exclusive use of Meeting Room 1 would be valued up to $4,000 in ‘opportunity’ income that could be obtained from general hire. A more realistic value may be around $2,000 which is equivalent to a 50% utilisation.

Social Justice Page 11 Ordinary Meeting 17 June 2002 The City as a Social Place

Immediate needs of PVCB

The PVCB is required to vacate the Museum of Fire on 30 June and is keen to progress the proposal for Surveyors Creek. Prior to permanent arrangements being established, PVCB may well hire available time and space at Surveyors Creek at current hire fees. PVCB has a low income base and has relied, in part, on a very low space rental at the Museum of Fire and other venues to maintain financial viability. It is anticipated that PVCB would seek to negotiate with Council a reduction or full waiver of hire fees for use of SCCC as a base for the band. This does give rise to a significant issue for Council to consider in the context of general increases in hire fees across most facilities, a consequence of which is that some groups are expressing concern about their capacity to meet such fee increases. In the short term, any hire fees associated with casual use of the Centre by PVCB will be paid at normal rates. PVCB is willing to consider management of the facility in return for use of the facility without cost.

Management of Surveyors Creek Community Centre

Council’s preferred model for management of neighbourhood facilities is by way of a Licence Agreement that ensures management of the facility will be through community organisations whose objectives are consistent with Council’s objectives for neighbourhood facilities. Policies and procedures would accompany the licence. The Centre is currently managed directly by Neighbourhood Facilities Team in the Facilities Operations Department. When the Centre first opened, some interest was held by the Softball Association as well as community representatives to manage the facility. Neither approach ultimately proceeded.

Management under Licence

It is untested whether there is current interest within the community (from individuals and groups) to be part of a management group. Opportunities may arise to create partnerships for management. Council may wish to invite Expressions of Interest in managing the Centre under Licence. The Expression of Interest documents would give Council discretion to consider a range of issues in a management agreement, including fees. The benefits of management under Licence include:

· Clearly defined operating arrangements, accompanied by policies and procedures · Community representation · Increased site presence of management representatives · Often more timely response to issues out of work hours · Greater flexibility in attending to operational and maintenance requirements · No direct management costs · Locally managed key pick ups and other access arrangements · Finite period and provisions for monitoring and review of performance

Management directly by the Neighbourhood Facilities Team

Community based management will free up Facilities Operations Department resources from undertaking the direct management of the Centre. Such resources could be applied to other

Social Justice Page 12 Ordinary Meeting 17 June 2002 The City as a Social Place tasks. Currently, the direct cost of providing the management support to the SCCC equates to around $4,000 annually. If direct management is retained, with PVCB as a regular hirer, the nett increase in income would be around $10,000. This income could be applied to, amongst other things, funding of staff resources to ‘better manage’ this and the other 31 Council facilities. The benefits of management directly by Council include:

· Capacity to deal with matters affecting many or all facilities, not just individual · Scale of services contracts can provide financial benefits · Greater access to Council professional and physical services and resources · Full availability in business hours · Management expertise developed across multiple facilities

Community Development Manager’s comments

Recent experiences indicate that this centre is becoming more popular and that more community groups are requesting usage. The current usage rate identified in this report indicates that 71 % of available daytime hours are used. When combined with out of hours utilisation the rate appears much lower. I agree with the principle of a single organisation managing a local centre, even if it is not local. It should be noted however, that it should not be assumed that the management organisation should have priority of access to meeting rooms. To ensure equity of access it is essential to have booking policies in place that apply to the management organisation as well as to other users. Care should be taken to ensure that access is maximised for local residents both now and in the future. I suggest that the following actions be taken as part of a management strategy for this facility. That:

· Consultations be undertaken with nearby residents regarding the noise and amenity of the PVCB proposal. · Consultations be held with other user groups of the Centre. · A Booking Policy and Access Policy be developed and adopted by Council. · The management organisation be required to keep a record of all applications for the use of space in the facility as part of monitoring demand. This will ensure that the needs of future local users can be taken into account. · The Management Licence agreement be further developed. · An Expression of Interest process for management of the Centre be undertaken. · Any management arrangement be subject to a set timeframe and regular review.

Any management Licence - operating policies and procedures

The Glenmore Park Youth and Community Centre opened early in 2002 with a comprehensive set of operating policies and procedures. The Surveyors Creek Community Centre does not have any such policies or procedures. As part of any Licence Agreement, a set of policies and procedures is required. Those for Surveyors Creek would be based on the Glenmore Park example. Should the PVCB be successful in obtaining the Licence, some specific requirements would need to be included so as to maintain the principle purpose of the Centre as a community venue. For example,

· The need to retain functions on Fridays and Saturday nights;

Social Justice Page 13 Ordinary Meeting 17 June 2002 The City as a Social Place

· Maintaining principles of Access and Equity in determining allocation of times for new users; · Maintaining community functionality of the Centre; · Maintaining available times for casual and occasional bookings; · A definite period for the Licence to be reviewed and renewed; · Delineation of costs and responsibilities; · Conditions of use for Meeting Room 1; · The annual booking process, including establishing a Bookings Committee separate to Centre management.

Conclusions

The proposal of the Penrith Valley Concert Band to use the Surveyors Creek Community Centre on a regular basis with normal fee payment requires some further consultations and negotiations. Assuming favourable resolution, the proposal can be supported, including the use of Meeting Room 1 exclusively by PVCB. PVCB intend to use the Centre immediately, and would be required to pay normal hire fees. From discussions with PVCB, they have indicated that the viability of their organisation is reliant on reduction or waiving of hire fees associated with their use of the Centre. While the interest in managing the Centre from the PVCB is important, the opportunity for the community generally to participate in the management of the Surveyors Creek Community Centre has not been provided thus far. Exploring the interest in the community in managing the Centre is recommended. The management of the Surveyors Creek Community Centre and the Glenmore Park Youth andCommunity Centre could be offered concurrently. While the proposal by PVCB has merit, the views of the community need to be canvassed regarding management of the Centre. The issue of fees can be dealt with in a later report.

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1. Consultations occur with regular users regarding the use by Penrith Valley Concert Band of Surveyors Creek Community Centre as a regular hirer;

2. Assessments be made of the impact of noise on the adjoining residential properties;

3. Council invite Expressions of Interest for the management under Licence of the Surveyors Creek Community Centre and Glenmore Park Youth and Community Centre.

4. Operating Policies and Guidelines for the Centre be prepared prior to any Licence Agreement be finalised.

1

Social Justice Page 14 Ordinary Meeting 17 June 2002 The City as a Social Place

Appendix 1

Proposed use of Surveyors Creek Community Centre By Penrith Valley Concert Band

Time Space Current User + PVCB Monday 9:30am – 11:30am Main Hall Playgroup 3:30pm – 6:00pm Main Hall Dancing 6:15pm – 9:15pm Main Hall Yoga 8:30am – 3:00pm Meeting Room 3 Mobile Pre-School during School Terms 7:00am – 6:00pm Meeting Room 3 Vacation Care during School Holidays 7:30pm – 9:00pm Meeting Room 3 Softball Association once Monthly, twice in May 6:30pm - 9:30pm Meeting Room 1 PVCB Ensemble Note – this use may not be compatible with Yoga in Main Hall. Tuesday 10:00am – 12:00pm Main Hall Playgroup 10:00am – 12:00pm Meeting Room 1 Care Pair & Nursing Mothers. Usually first and third week. Note – this Room will no longer be accessible. 10:00am – 12:00pm Meeting Room 3 Care Pair & Nursing Mothers. Usually first and third week on month 7:00am – 6:00pm Meeting Room 3 Vacation Care during School Holidays Wednesday 10:00am – 12:00pm Main Hall Playgroup 6:00pm – 7:30pm Main Hall Girl Guides 6:00pm – 7:00pm Meeting Room 3 Girl Guides third week in month 7:00am – 6:00pm Meeting Room 3 Vacation Care during School Holidays Thursday 10:00am – 12:00pm Main Hall Playgroup 10:00am – 12:00pm Meeting Room 3 Playgroup 7:00am – 6:00pm Meeting Room 3 Vacation Care during School Holidays 3:30pm to 5:30pm Main Hall PVCB Training Band 5:30pm to 7:00pm Main Hall PVCB Intermediate Band 7:00pm to 10:30pm Main Hall PVCB Concert Band Friday 10:00am – 12:00pm Meeting Room 3 Playgroup 7:00am – 6:00pm Meeting Room 3 Vacation Care during School Holidays 6:30pm – 10:30pm Meeting Room 1 PVCB Management first week of month Saturday 8:30am to 11:30am Main Hall PVCB Training Band Sunday 6:30pm to 10:00pm Main Hall PVCB Stage Band

Social Justice Page 15 Ordinary Meeting 17 June 2002 The City as a Social Place

The City as a Social Place

4 Identification of Obligations and Funding Needs of Community Organisations 1117/18,1117/1

Compiled by: Mick Fell, Community Programme Co-ordinator Authorised by: Carol Joyce, Community Development Manager

Management Plan 4 Year Outcome (Page 75): Social Services and facilities are established and operating to meet community needs. 01/02 Critical Action: Support local community programs to meet identified community needs.

Purpose: This report explains the processes used for the identification of the obligations and financial needs of community based organisations providing social services in the Penrith Local Government Area. It also addresses the current status of the action taken following Council’s resolutions from the report on the SACS award.

Background

A report on the NSW Government's response to implications of the recent determination of wage levels under the Social and Community Services (SACS) Award was presented to Council at the Ordinary Meeting of 4th February, 2002. At this meeting Council resolved that: 1 The report on the NSW Government’s response to the recent determination of wage levels under the Social and Community Services Award be noted and a letter expressing thanks be forwarded to the relevant Minister; 2. Council write to the Federal Members for Prospect, Chifley and Lindsay seeking their support in requesting that the Commonwealth Government increase subsidies to community based organisations to enable them to meet their obligations under Social and Community Services Award; 3. Penrith City Council pursue the development of clear guidelines with DUAP and DOCS in relation to the use of Section 94 community facilities for the provision of services; 4. Penrith City Council seek support from local State Members of Parliament in relation to the development of the guidelines for use of Section 94 community facilities for the provision of services. Council also resolved that a further report be prepared on what processes would need to be followed to establish the obligations and financial needs of community organisations for funding over the next five years.

Social Justice Page 16 Ordinary Meeting 17 June 2002 The City as a Social Place

Identification of Obligations and Funding Needs Council is regularly involved in consultations with the community sector in the local area. This consultation process takes place in partnership with government departments, government-funded organisations, and volunteer groups. Some of the mechanisms through which this consultation takes place include:

· Home and Community Care Planning (HACC) Forums · Community Profile consultations · Management Plan Forums · Social Planning consultations · Interagency meetings, including Youth Interagency, Migrant Interagency · Nepean Consultative Committee, which includes Department of Community Services, local agencies and community representatives · Liaison with umbrella organisations, such as Workers in Neighbourhood Centres (WINC). Formal consultations are also a key feature of the Western Sydney Area Assistance Scheme (WSAAS) funding process and the identification of local needs as part of the Community Development and Support Expenditure Scheme (CDSE). The analysis of Census and other demographic data by Council staff complements this extensive consultation and can be used to identify current needs and trends and the likely impact of future changes. Through its own Community Assistance Program (CAP), its involvement in the planning processes for several major funding programs, and its partnership in the WSAAS and CDSE schemes, Council is able to assist in meeting the changing needs of the local communities and the organisations which serve them. Funding The local community based organisations that manage community-based services typically form when a like-minded group of people, sharing a common concern, decide to address an identified need in their local community. The need for the particular services is usually identified through the planning and research processes of the funding body rather than by the local organisation. The organisation may then seek funding through one of the many programs available through the State and/or Federal government. The State and Federal Government funding bodies are now moving towards a purchaser/provider model whereby the funding body buys a range of specified services from the community based organisation. They are specified as to type, number and quality in a contract. The continuation of funding depends on the extent to which the local group satisfies the criteria determined by the funding body. If local needs change, costs rise, or the organisation wishes to provide services outside the terms of the funding contract, they must find alternative sources of funding. It is possible that organisations finding themselves in this position may approach Council seeking funds. The number of such requests, and the amounts sought, will depend on each service's assessment of its financial position and options at any particular time. The information released after each Census highlights the speed and extent of demographic change in our society. Changes in government, or in government policy, at the State and Federal level, affect the availability of funding and the conditions attached to it. Cost rises affect the viability of services and new technology offers new avenues for service delivery. These factors, and others, make the forecasting of the future financial needs of community

Social Justice Page 17 Ordinary Meeting 17 June 2002 The City as a Social Place based organisations extremely difficult. This is reflected in the time lag between the identification of needs and the availability of appropriate funding programs to meet them. While it is extremely difficult to predict the future funding needs of community based organisations, Council's consultative processes monitor the current situation and can detect the trends which may affect the short term funding situation. As circumstances change, Council can lobby other levels of government to ensure that they are aware of the changing needs and the effects of this at a local level. Small, short-term financial needs are often met by Council itself, through the Community Assistance Program, for instance.

Obligations Community based organisations that receive State and/or Federal funding are required to satisfy increasingly stringent accountability requirements. These include business planning, reporting on progress and monitoring and evaluation of service outcomes. A formal funding agreement, signed by both parties, spells out the obligations of the community organisation. Apart from those accountability requirements outlined above, the services to be provided are itemised, the client groups are defined, the expected number of clients is identified, the qualifications needed by staff, and the broad policies to be followed are set out. The frequency and required format of reports to the funding body are also detailed. The funding body monitors the operation of funded services, for example, through the Home & Community Care (HACC) standards and accreditation processes, and failure to meet these obligations may result in the withdrawal of funding. In extreme cases, legal action may be taken by the funding body against an organisation which fails to meet its obligations.

Social & Community Services (SACS) Award Implications – Current Situation As reported in February, the NSW Government increased its funding to community organisations to enable them to meet the increased wage obligations arising from the SACS Award determination in November 2001. While the community sector welcomed this response, the lack of a similar commitment from the Federal government is still a matter of concern. The vast majority of the organisations providing services for the aged, people with disabilities, homeless people, young people, women and families in need rely entirely on government funding to operate. While some of these services are solely State Government- funded, the major funding programs are partly or wholly the responsibility of the Federal Government. These programs include:

· Supported Accommodation and Assistance Program (SAAP) which funds crisis accommodation, youth refuges and women’s refuges.

· Home and Community Care Program (HACC) which funds services for the frail aged, people with disabilities and their carers. Services such as Meals-on-Wheels, Community Aged Care Packages, the Home Care Service of NSW , respite services, centre-based day care and some forms of community transport are funded through this program.

Social Justice Page 18 Ordinary Meeting 17 June 2002 The City as a Social Place

· Commonwealth-State Disability Agreement through which a wide range of services is provided for people with disabilities and their families, including residential services. While the range of services funded under these programs is quite disparate, one common factor is the fact that wage costs make up, on average, eighty percent of their total annual budgets. The recent Award wage increases threaten many services, with some being forced to consider cutting staff, cutting services or, in the worst cases, simply closing. Council has made representations to the Federal Government urging it to match the NSW Government's response to the Award increases. To date, no such commitment has been given. In their efforts to remain viable, and to continue to provide an acceptable level of service to local communities, services are seeking alternative sources of funding. It can therefore be expected that Council will receive an increasing number of requests for funding assistance from services in this position. The number of such requests, and the amounts sought, will depend on each service's assessment of its financial position and options. S94 Funding – Current Situation The need for the development of clear guidelines in relation to the use of S94 for the provision of community facilities and services has been referred to the appropriate State Government Ministers. Acknowledgement of Council’s correspondence on this matter has been received. Voluntary Groups A large number of voluntary organisations provide a wide range of services, usually at the "grass roots" level in local communities. Apart from meeting local needs, these groups offer a valuable opportunity for local residents to contribute to their community, to develop networks and to increase the level of social capital. Hundreds of such groups exist in the Penrith area alone, as demonstrated in the "Year of the Volunteer" recently. While their members are generous in their donation of commitment, skill and time, these groups are often limited in their access to the funds necessary for their effective operation. The reasons for this vary - "donation fatigue", the identification of some causes as being more popular or "worthy", the skills of the committee in raising funds, etc. as with other community organisations, these voluntary groups often approach Council for funding. The number, and scale, of such requests is unpredictable. Each request must be, and is, considered on its merits. The volunteer groups are often valuable partners with Council in meeting local needs and Council has traditionally acknowledged their value in its support for them. Summary It is extremely difficult to predict the future financial needs of local community organisations, particularly given a climate of rapid social change, a dependence on State and Federal Government policies and changing perceptions regarding the "worth" of various causes. Through regular demographic analysis and an extensive on-going consultation process, Council is able to keep informed of the changing needs of local services and to respond to them appropriately.

Social Justice Page 19 Ordinary Meeting 17 June 2002 The City as a Social Place

The present processes are adequate in terms of identifying the needs of local organisations and identifying strategies to meet them. Organisations funded to provide social services are required to demonstrate to their funding bodies that they have met the obligations contained in their funding agreements. RECOMMENDATION That the report on the identification of the funding needs of community organisations be noted.

Social Justice Page 20 Ordinary Meeting 17 June 2002 The City as a Social Place

The City as a Social Place

5 Community Assistance Programme 6016/36

Compiled by: Mick Fell, Community Programme Co-ordinator Authorised by: Carol Joyce, Community Development Manager

Management Plan 4 Year Outcome (Page 48): Social Services and facilities are established and operating to meet community needs. 01/02 Critical Action: Support local community programs to meet identified community needs.

Purpose:

To inform Council about community requests for a donation from the Community Assistance Programme.

Background Through the Community Assistance Programme, Council makes small grants to non-profit organisations and community based groups to meet local community needs. The maximum grant is $1,000. There are three eligibility criteria endorsed by Council, which are:

· Non-profit organisations providing one-off activities · Direct benefit to and participation from Penrith residents · Projects and project management in line with Council’s Access and Equity Policy Fundraising programmes or organisations whose main job is to fundraise are not eligible. The total annual budget for the programme is $32,500 and this is allocated through three components. Planned Component Community groups are encouraged to plan major events or projects to coincide with this annual funding process. Community groups are able to access funds by application, within the advertised time period. The funding round for the 2001/2002 planned funding component opened on 31st July, 2001 and closed on 31st August, 2001. Cheques were distributed to 24 community projects in December, 2001. Rolling Component Recognising that not all needs for funding can be foreseen, the Rolling Component allows for one-off requests to be brought before Council at any time during the year. This provides a flexible supplement to the Planned Component of the programme.

Social Justice Page 21 Ordinary Meeting 17 June 2002 The City as a Social Place

Reimbursement Component This provides for the rates and sullage on community run non-Council owned rural halls. It can also be used to meet requests for reimbursement of hire fees for halls used for one-off events. Budget Allocation and Expenditure

Allocated Expenditure Committed Available to date Total annual funds $32,500.00 $30,844.17 0 $1,655.83 Planned $16,600.00 $16,600.00 0 0 Rates/Sullage $4,400.00 $4,400.00 0 0 Rolling Component $11,500.00 $9,844.17 0 $1,655.83

Rolling Component Current Requests Penrith Women's Health Centre Penrith Women's Health Centre is a not for profit community service which provides free medical and low cost counselling and complementary health services to around 3,500 women in the Penrith LGA each year. The service is arranging a working bee to establish scented, herb and native gardens around the Centre. This will not only produce long-term benefits for clients, but will also be a community building activity, involving clients, members of the organisation and “Friends of the Women's Health Centre". The service is seeking $400 towards the cost of garden materials (manure, mulch, potting mix, tubestock and plants), refreshments and removal of a stump. Recommend $400, as requested towards the costs of the Penrith Women's Health Centre Garden Beautification Day. RECOMMENDATION That Council approve the allocation of $400 towards the costs of the Penrith Women's Health Centre Garden.

Social Justice Page 22 Ordinary Meeting 17 June 2002 The City Supported by Infrastructure

The City Supported by Infrastructure 6 City Operations Directorate Report to end May 2002 153/2

Compiled by: Nicole Green, Asset Manager's Secretary Authorised by: Ray Moore, Director of City Operations

Management Plan 4 Year Outcome (Page ##): A register of all significant assets, their condition and standards determined and a plan for their maintenance is operating. 01/02 Critical Action: Prepare and implement a prioritised asset management plan.

Purpose:

To report to Council on the progress of works of the City Operations Directorate.

Asset Management Department

Construction Section Path Paving – Completed works since last report are Jamison Road, Parker Street (Coreen to Glebe) and Parker Street (Great Western Highway to Glebe) and Forrester Road. Budget Estimate: $600,000 Expenditure to Date: $441,800 Werrington Road (Rail overbridge to The Kingsway) Reconstruction – Stabilising work using foamed bitumen has been carried out. The road is due for asphalt week commencing 11/6/02. Budget Estimate: $250,000 Expenditure to Date: $205,000 Grass Pollutant Traps – Work is in progress on grates for Panthers, Links Road and Buckland Road. Budget Estimate: $122,000 Expenditure to Date: $103,600 Dunheved Circuit (Seven St to Vallance St) Reconstruction – Kerb and gutter work is underway. Asphalt work is due on 11 June 2002. Budget Estimate: $1,567,000 Expenditure to Date: $956,666 The Northern Road (Homestead Rd to Glenmore Parkway) Widening – This work continues. Currently subgrade work is underway on North bound carriageway. Contract Value: $1,900,000

Asset Management Page 23 Ordinary Meeting 17 June 2002 The City Supported by Infrastructure

Skateboard Ramp – Work started on 3 June 2002. Contract Value: $147,875 Wiltshire Road Flood Evacuation – Survey work is underway, prior to cleaning and chipping. Stock Avenue Drainage – This work is approximately 85% complete. Budget Estimate: $370,000 Expenditure to date: $268,600 Hunter Field Car Park – This work is complete. Traffic Facilities St Clair Avenue - Traffic calming work is complete Budget Estimate: $32,000 Expenditure to date: $22,726 Cycleway in Surveyors Creek – This work is in progress. Asphalt laying is due week commencing 11 June 2002. Vincent Road Closure – This partial closure of Vincent Road the Northern Road is completed. Budget Estimate: $23,456 Expenditure to date: $16,238 Glossop Street Reconstruction – The section between Phillip and Brisbane Streets on the South bound carriageway has been reconstructed by a contractor. Budget Estimate: $100,000 Expenditure to date: $81,700 High Street Triangle – This work on refurbishing the area in High Street opposite Grace Bros is currently underway. Budget Estimate: $215,000 Expenditure to date: $13,463 Coachmans Park Refurbishment – Demolition of the old structures is underway. Budget Estimate: $189,500 Expenditure to date: $4,411

Drainage Tamarra C.C.C – The work is currently underway to relieve the drainage problems at the C.C.C. Budget Estimate: $53,000 Expenditure to Date: $1,303 Komirra Avenue – Work to drain Komirra Avenue down Grays Lane is currently underway.

Asset Management Page 24 Ordinary Meeting 17 June 2002 The City Supported by Infrastructure

Budget Estimate: $50,000 Expenditure to date: $6,772 Maintenance Section Road Maintenance areas are concentrating on priority work in the various precincts within the City. Priorities have been set, as a result of precinct inspections and intervention levels adopted. The Drainage Maintenance staff and contractors recently completed an overhaul of the pump system at the Old Bathurst Road underpass. A pump failure and consequent electrical problem resulted in water over the road at the underpass during a recent storm. Both pumps have now been overhauled, the electrical gear repaired and the whole system checked. The backup warning signs with flashing lights were activated successfully. Major work on Fifth Avenue, Llandilo has been carried out by the Rural Maintenance crew. A further section of this unformed road has been prepared to receive recycled road material from a number of Road Reconstruction Projects. Concrete Maintenance resources are being further stretched due to a number of Public Utility Restorations requiring urgent work. The recently purchased mechanical footpath sweepers for the Penrith and St Marys CBD’s have been performing very well. Staff in these areas have been receiving positive feedback from businesses. The leaf-fall in Queen Street can now be handled better than it could be previously. As well as improving the quality of footpath sweeping in these areas, the extent of service has been widened to include footpath not previously swept due to the limitation of resources. Plant Replacement Program The new Rural Fire Services Bus has been delivered. Arrangements have been made for sign writing in consultation with Panthers, the co-sponsor of the bus. The bus will be handed over the RFS at a Panthers home game, Penrith Stadium on Saturday 22 June 2002. The two trucks to be delivered to finalise the program have been delayed at the body builder and are now having pressurised emulsion tanks fitted. The company carrying out this final work has assured Council that they will be completed and delivered this month. Asset Systems Section Roads to Recovery Programme – 2001/2002 The road network assessment by ARRB is complete. The analysis and digital images from ARRB will be made available in mid June.

Road Resheeting/resealing Programme Marking out of kerb & gutter and heavy patching for the 2002/2003. Resurfacing Programme has commenced. Since the previous report the following road has been resurfaced with asphaltic concrete: Dunheved Road, Werrington (John Oxley Avenue to 200m west).

Asset Management Page 25 Ordinary Meeting 17 June 2002 The City Supported by Infrastructure

Asphalt Rejuvenation Rejuvenation has is complete in Claremont Meadows, with 40,000 sqm laid. A total of 110,000 sqm of asphalt rejuvenation has been applied this financial year. Audits/Inspections Detailed inspections of all of Council’s kerb and gutter is currently being undertaken to determine the extent of repairs. Detailed path paving inspections are currently underway. Any ‘trip hazards’ greater than 20 mm are being temporarily repaired with asphalt.

Development Services Unit Accepted the following developer constructed assets: - Precinct 4P, Glenmore Park – 205 Metres of new road - Precinct 8M1, Glenmore Park – 315 metres of new road Construction certificates were issued for the engineering works associated with the following developments: - Precinct 8N, Glenmore Park – road and drainage works associated with a residential subdivision Inspections were carried out on the engineering works for the following developments: - Precinct 8N, Glenmore park – road pavement and drainage construction - Precinct 8L, Glenmore Park – road pavement and drainage construction - Blaikie Road/Pattys Place, Penrith – drainage and road pavement construction - Augusta Place/Explorers Way, St Clair – road pavement and drainage construction - Wolseley Street Penrith – road pavement construction Traffic Section The Local Traffic Committee at its meeting on 6 May 2002 considered sixteen Items on traffic and safety issues and Council at its ordinary meeting on 20 May 2002 adopted the report and recommendations of the Local Traffic Committee. Investigation and analysis of other traffic and safety issues received including determination of speed profile in nominated locations are continuously being carried out. In addition, traffic impact on development application referrals received from the Development Services Unit are also being investigated and assessed. Pages Road/John Street, St Marys – Traffic Calming A public meeting with the East Ward Councillors and the affected residents is scheduled to be held on Thursday, 13 June 2002 to discuss amended proposal as outlined in the Design and Technical Advice Manager’s report which was considered by Council at its ordinary meeting 18 February 2002. Copeland Street, Penrith – Traffic and Pedestrian Safety in the vicinity of the St Dominic’s College, Burger King Development and Council Depot

Asset Management Page 26 Ordinary Meeting 17 June 2002 The City Supported by Infrastructure

An on-site meeting with the North Ward Councillors, RTA and Penrith Police representatives is scheduled to be held on Monday, 24 June 2002 to discuss the safety issues in the vicinity of the St Dominic’s College, Burger King Development and Council Depot and to assess the works planned in the area. Status of projects funded under the 2001/2002 RTA Local Network Services are as follows:

· Jamison Rd/Racecourse Rd, South Penrith – Roundabout. RTA approval received for provision of “shielded right-turn bay”. Final design plan as modified completed. Affected residents have been consulted and advised regarding the proposed works. · Brisbane St/Sydney St, St Marys – Roundabout. Final design plan completed. Affected residents and shop owners at the intersection of Brisbane Street and Sydney Street have been consulted regarding the proposal. A resident (shop owner) raised an objection to the proposal and has requested that parking within the vicinity of the shops be provided instead of the roundabout. The resident was therefore advised that the parking provision issue near the shops is a separate matter and that the proposed roundabout is to be constructed to improve safety and traffic flow efficiency at the intersection. · St Clair Ave, St Clair – Route Traffic Calming. Works completed. · P.A.M.P Implementation. Works on the project list are currently being assessed and implemented. · Debrincat Avenue, St Marys – Roundabout at Maple Street. Design plan in progress. Public meeting to be held with residents on 13 June 2002. · Surveyors Creek, South Penrith – Off Road Cycleway Works on this project commenced.

Parks Construction & Maintenance Landscape Construction

· Werrington Creek Rehabilitation The civil works in Werrington Creek between the Weir and Burton Street are nearly complete. The contractors have provided rock stabilisation to the sections of the creek embankments. The next stage of the project is planting the area out with provenance plant material. Over 8,000 plants including native grasses and trees will be planted. Works will continue through July.

· Werrington Lake Improvements The improvements to Werrington Lake mainly applied to three tasks:

· More pedestrian track further away from Lake (western end of Lake). · Construct new headwall near path to improve drainage. · Provide a fountain in the middle of the Lake. · Replant unhealthy trees at northern side of Lake. The budget for the project was $30K. Work will be completed within the allocated budget by the end of June.

Asset Management Page 27 Ordinary Meeting 17 June 2002 The City Supported by Infrastructure

City Beautification

· St Marys Floral Display Soil material is being deposited on the corner of Charles Hackett Drive and the Great Western Highway for a floral display. The soil material is being supplied and delivered to the site at no charge to Council. The mound will be completed by the end of June.

· Woodriffe Garden Floral Display The brick wall around the floral display has been completed. The mound will now be extended into the wall.

· Panthers Stadium Precinct The landscape improvements between Howell Oval and Panthers Stadium are nearly complete. All the planting and path paving is now finished. The remaining work involves turfing which will be undertaken in the next couple of weeks.

· Chameleon Drive, Erskine Park Over a thousand trees have been planted in the basin area (west of the netball courts).

· Kingswood Rail Corridor Landscape enhancement of the rail station precinct has been completed. The work involved a clean up of the area and tree planting.

· Mulgoa Road/M4 Interchange – ‘Bookends’ Landscape improvements have been undertaken in the on and on and off ramp area.

· Castlereagh Road Median Strip Replacement of trees has been carried out. The RTA has subsidised the replacement of a number of sick and dying Poplar trees with Crepe Myrtles.

· Cook Park, St Marys Tree planting has taken place in and around the area of Cook Park soccer complex. Parks Improvement Program

· Parker Street Soccer Field Lighting: The poles and light fittings have been installed and cabling will be carried out next week.

· South Creek Recreational Precinct: Following a meeting with the user groups in the precinct, we have commenced work on the gate relocation. In addition, the sewer from the tennis courts has been re-laid in PVC. The road link between Blair Oval and tennis courts will be commenced next week. The budget of this project was $25K

Asset Management Page 28 Ordinary Meeting 17 June 2002 The City Supported by Infrastructure

Tree Preservation The summer storms and bushfires contributed to an increase in applications to have trees removed. Most applications are approved, however some unjustified fears in regard to trees remain. Advice and education are an important part of the administration of the Order. To date 833 applications have been received in 2002. The Tree Preservation Order process is being amended to deliver a more efficient application of resources. Expert advice is also being given to other Council departments and the public in regard to tree matters. Bushcare A Greencorps Team has commenced restoration works on sections of Werrington Creek which are highly degraded. The eleven-member team will carryout bush regeneration activities four days per week for fourteen weeks over a six month period. Their activities include weed removal, revegetation and bank stabilisation. Penrith Enviro Adventure was held again this year at Werrington Lakes. A bushcare display and talk was given to the year 3 & 4 students from local schools, who took part in the days activities.

Building Construction & Maintenance Penrith Regional Gallery Workshop & Storage Facilities Work is progressing well at the site with the frames erected on both buildings and one building now at lock up stage where interior fitout is nearing completion. The builder, SC Clifford Constructions is predicting the project to be completed in early July 2002. Regentville Hall Alterations are underway to upgrade facilities for disabled persons using the hall. Ramps and a unisex disabled persons toilet are being constructed. Cambridge Park Hall The external ramp to the main hall is being altered to provide easier access for wheelchairs. Werrington Youth Centre Quotations have been accepted for the addition of a storage room to the building. Bus Shelter Construction – Glenmore Park Fifteen of the twenty planned shelters for Glenmore Park in this year’s program are due to be erected prior to the end of June. Consultation is continuing on suitable locations for the remaining five shelters.

Asset Management Page 29 Ordinary Meeting 17 June 2002 The City Supported by Infrastructure

Copeland Street Depot Repairs and repainting of store and workshop building continues as part of the general upgrading of depot buildings.

MAINTENANCE WORKS FOR MAY 2002

The BCM department received 261 maintenance requests (not including graffiti) for May 2002.

Graffiti Removed by Council Staff Council staff removed graffiti from buildings on 217 occasions during the month of May 2002. This involved visiting 87 sites. The most frequented locations for graffiti during the month were: 22 hits Judges Place Carpark 20 hits Mt Pleasant Shopping Centre Precinct 8 hits Jamison Park West 7 hits Emu Plains Library 6 hits Glenmore Park Amenities 2 various bus shelters Graffiti was removed from 2,452 sites during the past twelve months. Department of Juvenile Justice – Young Offenders Program The Department of Juvenile Justice are assisting Council to paint out graffiti on colourbond fencing. Work was completed at the following sites during May 2002.

· Dunheved Road near Public Reserve, Cambridge Park · Maldon Street, South Penrith · McCauley Crescent, Emu Plains The sites where work has already commenced are checked regularly by the Department’s staff for any further graffiti attacks prior to commencing new sites. The Department completed 200 hours of work during May using Council supplied paint.

Waste & Community Protection Department Ranger and Animal Services Four Parking Patrol Officers from the NSW Police Service will be transferred to Penrith Council early in July 2002. The Parking Patrol Officers will be employed as “Rangers”, and whilst they will be required to have a focus on carparking duties, they will enhance Council’s ability to respond to issues. A minimum of three Rangers will be based at the Queen Street, St Marys Centre. The enforcement program for the month of May was on A-frame signs in the LGA resulting in a reduction of the number of signs placed on footpaths, particularly in the Penrith and St Marys CBD's.

Asset Management Page 30 Ordinary Meeting 17 June 2002 The City Supported by Infrastructure

Thirty-one abandoned motor vehicles were removed from the City’s streets and reserves during this period, with the reduced figure resulting from increased patrols of identified areas by Rangers. Pole posters continue to be removed as soon as practicable after detection, with the ongoing program of removal by Rangers, assisted by the Anti-Litter Patrol, showing a marked reduction in posters at major intersections. Council's child care centres have been targeted as part of a continuing operation to assist the development of community safety, with Rangers conducting random patrols of child care centres located in their areas of operation. Proactive enforcement of parking regulations within Council's free car parks continues. Discussions are underway to take over responsibility for parking enforcement of disabled parking spaces in the Penrith Plaza shopping centre. Penrith Rural Fire Service During May the Penrith Rural Fire Service attended 73 incident calls. These were as follows:

· Structural fires - 3 · False alarms - 7 · Automatic fire alarms – 11 · Car accidents – 15 · Car fires – 9 · No brigade action - 5 Throughout May there have been a number of training courses conducted within the District, this involved 30 volunteer personnel from the Brigades that attended. The courses that were conducted included:

· Advance Fire-fighter · Chainsaw – Specialist Course · Crew Leader – Wildfire · Crew Leader – Village, currently still in progress. On 5 May 2002 we had a field day event, with Castlereagh Brigade being winners overall. Approximately 1,000 people turned out to this successful event. Two new replacement Category 1 Fire Tankers (Value $200,000 each) were provided to both Castlereagh and Regentville Brigades. Penrith SES May has been another quiet operational month for Penrith State Emergency Service but a big month for our community awareness activities. The usual training activities and maintenance activities continued as scheduled during the month. On 7 May 2002 a community information night was held at the Council Chambers to inform the public of the dangers of flooding in the area. This is part of the Hawkesbury Nepean Floodsafe campaign being conducted in the Western Sydney region. This was attended by 35 persons, which was taken to be an indication of the level of awareness of the dangers from flooding in the Penrith area.

Asset Management Page 31 Ordinary Meeting 17 June 2002 The City Supported by Infrastructure

On Sunday, 19 May 2002 we received a call from a resident of Pyramid Street, Emu Plains who had a tree from the adjoining park fall on their garage and washing line. Penrith State Emergency Service attended, removed the tree from the garage roof and made temporary repairs to the roof. The Rescue Expo 2002 was conducted at Hawkesbury Showground on 24, 25 & 26 May. This featured rescue units from all around the country and New Zealand competing in a competition for road accident rescue. Also, there were commercial displays. The State Emergency Service featured a display of the functions of the State Emergency Service which won the award for the best outdoor exhibit. This exhibit was supported by several State Emergency Service units including the Penrith unit which had two vehicles on display. On 28 May 2002 we again conducted a community information night as part of the Hawkesbury Nepean Floodsafe program at the Emu Plains Community Hall. This was well attended by 78 persons. Again, this may be an indication of the higher awareness of the flooding problem in the Emu Plains area. The total operational hours for May were 8 hours. The total hours this month was 658 hours, including training, meetings, maintenance and community events. Waste Management Domestic Waste Service Issues Meetings were held with Council’s garbage and recycling contractors and the following matters were addressed: Rethmann

· Development of a schedule of services for the “collect and return” garbage service for multi-unit housing developments due to commence on 1 July 2002.

· Development of a schedule of services for the general garbage service taking into account future growth of the City.

· Development of a schedule of services for the enhanced clean-up service. · Discussion on the scheduling of waste delivery to the proposed Pre-Treatment Facility to be developed at South Windsor.

· Discussion on best practice outcomes and service performance. · Discussion on future technology for the treatment and disposal of waste. Cleanaway

· School and community education programs for 01/02 were considered and draft programs for 02/03 are being prepared.

· Finalised the service schedule for the “collect and return” recycling service due to commence on 1 July 2002.

· Discussed the performance incentive within the terms of the Recycling Service Contract and the manner in which application is made to Council.

Asset Management Page 32 Ordinary Meeting 17 June 2002 The City Supported by Infrastructure

· New recycling calendars have been prepared and will be delivered to residents throughout the City in the near future.

· Discussed process for the delivery of bins for new residents and the retrieval of bins for cancelled services.

· A general audit of recyclables collected will be conducted in June. · The recycling contract service price has been reviewed with the release of the March Quarter Transport CPI. The new price of $1.527 per service fortnightly has been set for 02/03. Waste Education Promote Clean Environments in Local Communities

· Began production of a litter and stormwater demonstration model for use in school lessons and displays. · Investigating the production of storyboards to accompany the demonstration model based on “Avoid, Reuse, Recycle, Litter, Composting, Air & Noise Pollution”. Education and Promotion

· Engaged McGregor Environmental Services to conduct a waste audit in the Library and Civic Centre. · Collating materials to place on display in the Civic Centre Foyer advertising Council’s Waste Services, particularly the small 140-litre bin. Ordered portable display board. Began designing Garbage Collection Services brochure. · Recycling education program continuing in schools with Cleanaway. Attended Cleanaway educational excursion with St Paul’s Grammar School (Yr 4 on 8/5/02) and Cleanaway recycling talk with Claremont Meadows Public School (Yr 4 on 10/5/02). · Recycling calendars for July 02 to June 03 printed and awaiting distribution. · Steel Can Recycling & Schools Competition. · Promotion of St Marys North Community Garden Project in St Marys Standard. · Talks presented: Kingswood High School – Waste Management (23 & 27 May); Orchard Hills Primary School – Worm Farming (27/5/02). · Talks booked: Penrith View Club (27/6/02). Home Composting and Worm Farms

· Compost bins and worm farm sales = 62 worm farms since 1 July 2001 76 compost bins since 1 July 2001

Encourage Household Waste Reduction

· Conducted a random waste service survey of 500 residents – awaiting return of surveys. · 29 surveys from St Paul’s Grammar Junior School collated. Conduct School and Community Education and Promotional Activities

· Planning a school education program for Terms 3 & 4 in conjunction with Cleanaway’s Community Education Officer (including Earthworks modules for high schools). · Planning Earthworks community education program in modules.

Asset Management Page 33 Ordinary Meeting 17 June 2002 The City Supported by Infrastructure

· Promoting the Cleanaway steel can recycling competition. Letter and posters sent to all schools, placed posters in libraries, shopping centres and in Council administration buildings. Full page advertisement in Penrith Press on 21 May 2002. Contacts Initiated: · Sue Lucock, St Marys North Community Group · Steve Etheridge, Penrith Lakes Environmental Education Centre · Jenny Dibley, Community Education Co-ordinator, EPA.

Property Development Department

Allen Arcade – Penrith The former Butcher Shop located at the rear of the Allen Arcade has been refurbished to accommodate office space and a new tenant, Benchmark Resources, who have commenced occupation of the premises. Former Council Chambers Site Following Council’s submission concerning the “Expression of Interest” by the Department of Public Works and Services for a State Government Office block in Penrith, consultation has occurred with officers of the Department who conducted the Selection Panel at the end of May 2002. The interview with the Selection Panel also included other interested parties in accommodating the proposal. At the time of this report, no decision has been made by the Department of Public Works and Services relating to the accepted applicant. Mulgoa Road Industrial Site A Draft Development Control Plan has been forwarded to Council’s Building Approvals and Environment Protection Department that covers the site in dealing with the protection and preservation of significant vegetation over the land. Once examined in detail, normal advertising will commence and a further report will be presented to Council. Gaymark Lane Property Following the purchase of the Gaymark Lane commercial/retail property on the corner of Henry Street and Gaymark Lane, the property was upgraded in terms of new guttering, external painting and general maintenance. All work has now been completed. Woodriff Street Site Preliminary discussions with the Landcom Corporation have occurred with a possible interest in the site encompassing commercial and residential development. A Feasibility Study to be examined by Landcom in determining the viability of residential.

Asset Management Page 34 Ordinary Meeting 17 June 2002 The City Supported by Infrastructure

Property Management

· All rental reviews have been completed on Council property for the month of May. · Council approved the Lease arrangements with Benchmark Resources in occupying the refurbished space at the rear of the Allen Arcade.

Facilities Operations Department

Community Safety Housing, Crime & Stronger Communities Conference This conference was held in Melbourne on the 6th & 7th May. Highlights of the conference included an address by the Reverend Tim Costello speaking on Youth Homelessness, Crime in the City. Another highlight was speaker Mr Warwick Heine, Chief Executive Officer of the City of greater Dandenong. Mr Heine talked about the vision for Greater Dandenong, getting back to basics and re-connecting local neighbourhoods. Community Safety Audits/Safety Assessments Conducted in May: -Safety assessment of the Judges Place Car Park. To be conducted June 12th: Community Safety Audit- Hosking Street Precinct, Cranebrook. Community Safety Audit reports presented to the Penrith Valley Community Safety Partnership: -St Marys CBD Community Safety Audit Program report. A series of Community Safety Audits were conducted in the St Marys CBD from April to September 2001. The full report has just been presented to the May meeting of the Penrith Valley Community Safety Partnership. The Community Safety Audit program was promoted in a positive spirit of partnership and co-operation on the heels of the Queen Street Improvement Program. The series of audits were co-facilitated by Council and St Marys Police. Participants included: § Penrith City Council § St Marys Local Area Command § NSW Fire Brigades § City Rail § St Marys Community Health Centre § Needle & Syringe Program- Wentworth Area Health § St Marys Town Centre Management Inc. § St Marys Area Community Development Association § St Marys Historical Society § Queen Street Retailers § Local Residents

Asset Management Page 35 Ordinary Meeting 17 June 2002 The City Supported by Infrastructure

The five audits were planned several weeks apart, with a newsletter between audits to provide updates on progress and information on the next audits to be conducted. Some of the issues highlighted during the audits included: Street lighting maintenance required. Under awning lighting not working or not turned on. High levels of graffiti. Increased cyclical maintenance required. Overgrown vegetation impeding street lighting and hindering clear lines of sight. Damage to signage Footpaths and guttering requiring repairs. Implementation of works required have been undertaken using funds allocated from this years budget.

RECOMMENDATION That the report concerning City Operations Directorate Report to end May 2002 be received.

Asset Management Page 36 Ordinary Meeting 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

Council's Operating Environment

7 Scholarships at the University of Western Sydney 1026/11

Compiled by: Peter Huxley, Executive Officer Authorised by: Steve Hackett, Director-City Services

Management Plan 4 Year Outcome (Page 157): Effective communication occurs throughout the organisation, with the community, and among major city organisations. 01/02 Critical Action: Coordinate and support civic events and functions.

Purpose:

Since 1990, Council has awarded scholarships to local students studying Engineering, Arts or Early Childhood at the University of Western Sydney. This report provides details about the recipients of the 2002 Council Scholarships.

Background

Council commenced its Scholarship program for students at the University of Western Sydney in 1990. This is the thirteenth consecutive year that Scholarships have been awarded to students studying at the University. In all, during this period a total of 30 scholarship have been awarded. The necessary deliberations between Council and the University have now concluded and Council is in a position to award scholarships to three students this year. The Mayor will present scholarships to the successful students during tonight's meeting. Each scholarship recipient receives the sum of $1,000 per year for the duration of their full- time undergraduate studies at the University, subject to the conditions described in the award provisions. The 2002 Scholarship Recipients The University of Western Sydney has advised that the following persons have been selected by the University as the recipients of scholarships provided by Penrith City Council. Engineering The recipient of the 2002 Penrith City Council Scholarship in Engineering is: Jimmy D’Alessio In recommending Jimmy to receive a Council scholarship, the University stated that Michael has completed his first year of Bachelor of Engineering (Mechatronics) with a distinction grade point average of 6.857.

Management of the Organisation Page 37 Ordinary Meeting 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

Jimmy, who lives in Kingswood, is the best performed student in 2001 whose place of residence is within the Penrith City Council area. Contemporary Arts The recipient of the 2002 Penrith City Council Scholarship in Contemporary Arts is: Caitlin Procter In recommending Caitlin to receive a Council scholarship, the University stated that Jennifer has completed her first year of the Bachelor of Arts (Performance) with a distinction grade point average of 6.50. Caitlin, who lives in Kingswood, is the best performed student in 2001 whose place of residence is within the Penrith City Council area. Teaching - Early Childhood The recipient of the 2001 Penrith City Council Scholarship in Teaching - Early Childhood is: Clare Belcher In recommending Clare to receive a Council scholarship, the University stated that Clare has completed her first year of the Bachelor of Education (Early Childhood) with a distinction grade point average of 6.00. Clare, who lives in Emu Plains, is the best performed student in 2000 whose place of residence is within the Penrith City Council area. Family members of scholarship recipients are present in the gallery at tonight's meeting to join Council in celebrating their achievements. Representatives of the University of Western Sydney Some representatives from the Penrith College of the University of Western Sydney are present in the Council Chambers to join with Council in awarding the 2002 Penrith City Council Scholarships to students from the University.

RECOMMENDATION That Council congratulate Jimmy D’Alessio, Caitlin Procter and Clare Belcher for their achievements in 2001 and for being selected as the recipients of Penrith City Council Scholarships.

Management of the Organisation Page 38 Ordinary Meeting 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

Council's Operating Environment

8 Insurance Premium Public Liability 2002/03 6011/1 Part 7

Compiled by: Ken Muir, Risk Management Co-ordinator Authorised by: Barry Husking, Chief Financial Officer

Management Plan 4 Year Outcome (Page 108): Effective risk management is practiced. 01/02 Critical Action: Incorporate appropriate risk exposure assessment in the organisation's decisions and activities.

Purpose:

The purpose of this report is to select the appropriate public liability excess and premium structure to apply in 2002/03.

Background Westpool provides: § insurance coverage for public and professional indemnity liability; § comprehensive motor vehicle insurance cover; § a forum for the management of insurance claims; § a forum for the exchange of best practice for prevention and minimisation of risk; § training for member councils to help minimise risk, and § a platform to pursue legislative change. As a result of the HIH Group collapse and the removal of non-feasance public liability, premiums were increased from $650,000 in 2000/01 to $872,000 in 2001/02. Unstable corporate performance (in Australia and overseas), the tragedy of 11 September 2001 and natural disasters have significantly added pressure to all classes of insurance cover. Premium 2002/03 Premiums for all organizations are increasing. For the forthcoming year, Council has an option of minimising its premium increase by adopting a higher deductible (excess). Premium options are:

Excess Options $20,000 $30,000 $50,000 Premium $1,031,000 $963,000 $826,000 Historical Excess Expenditure $230,000 $317,000 322,000 Total $1,261,000 $1,280,000 $1,148,000

Management of the Organisation Page 39 Ordinary Meeting 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

Taking the highest excess will place a greater emphasis on the management of claims by Council but has the potential to result in a net benefit. In the event that the Civil Liability Bill 2002 is passed in its proposed format the potential benefit obtained from the selection of the higher excess is reinforced. Proposal It is proposed to select $50,000 as the excess for Public Liability claims for 2002/03. Budget Implications Provision has been made in the 2002/03 budget for premium increase RECOMMENDATION That Council selects an excess of $50,000 as its public liability excess with Westpool.

Management of the Organisation Page 40 ATTACHMENT

Date of Meeting: 17th June 2002

Master Programme: Council’s Operating Environment

Issue: Finance

Report Title: 2001-02 Voted Works 2001-02 VOTED WORKS as at 17th June 2002

Item Meeting Amount of Actual/Committed No Description of Allocation Approved Allocation Balance Expenditure Responsible Manager

$ $ $

EAST WARD 53,000 Revoted from 2001 35,976 Amount Available for 2002 88,976 ***** Reimbursement of 2000/1 items 18,570 Adjusted amount available 2002 107,546

1 Mamre Homestead site improvements **** 2-Jul-01 0 107,546 0 AM 2 Nursing Mothers Assn Hall hire costs 16-Jul-01 300 107,246 300 FOM 3 Nepean Hockey Assn Stage hire costs 16-Jul-01 101 107,145 101 FOM 4 St Marys Arts & Crafts Hall hire costs 16-Jul-01 250 106,895 250 FOM 5 Donation to Nepean District Tennis Assn 17-Sep-01 1,666 105,229 1,666 FOM 6 Cricket Club floor restoration 22-Oct-01 2,000 103,229 2,000 BCMM 7 Alternate Energy Solar Boat Race 4-Feb-02 1,666 101,563 1,666 FOM 8 Local Area Firefighting Effort 4-Feb-02 5,000 96,563 5,000 FOM 9 Youth Week activities - Erskine Park 8-Apr-02 600 95,963 600 CDM 10 Cancer Council Relay for Life sponsorship 22-Apr-02 1,000 94,963 1,000 FOM 11 Fund-raiser- Penrith Valley Sports Foundation 20-May-02 666 94,297 0 PCMM 12 Donation to John MacLean Foundation K4K 3-Jun-02 1,000 93,297 0 FOM 14,249 93,297

NORTH WARD 53,000 Revoted from 2001 59,615 Amount Available for 2002 112,615

1 Nepean Hockey Assn Stage hire costs 16-Jul-01 101 112,514 101 FOM 2 Weir Reserve Wedding Pavilion 6-Aug-01 6,000 106,514 5,174 BCMM 3 Penrith Senior Citizens' Centre lighting **** 20-Aug-01 1,477 105,037 1,477 BCMM 4 Cranebrook Soccer Club perimeter fence 3-Sep-01 4,400 100,637 4,400 PCMM 5 Donation to Nepean District Tennis Assn 17-Sep-01 1,667 98,970 1,667 FOM 6 Kingswood Park Community Centre Flagpole 22-Oct-01 300 98,670 300 FOM 7 Upgrade long jump runs at Harold Corr Oval 17-Dec-01 5,000 93,670 4,792 PCMM 8 Alternate Energy Solar Boat Race 4-Feb-02 1,667 92,003 1,667 FOM 9 Local Area Firefighting Effort 4-Feb-02 5,000 87,003 5,000 FOM 11 Pathway at Rance Oval 18-Feb-02 7,200 79,803 395 AM 12 Hickey's Lane fencing (see note below) ******* 18-Mar-02 10,000 69,803 10,000 PCMM 13 Cancer Council Relay for Life sponsorship 22-Apr-02 1,000 68,803 1,000 FOM 14 Fund-raiser- Penrith Valley Sports Foundation 20-May-02 667 68,136 0 PCMM 15 Donation to John MacLean Foundation K4K 3-Jun-02 1,000 67,136 0 FOM 45,479 67,136 2001-02 VOTED WORKS as at 17th June 2002

Item Meeting Amount of Actual/Committed No Description of Allocation Approved Allocation Balance Expenditure Responsible Manager

SOUTH WARD 53,000 Revoted from 2001 47,373 Amount Available for 2002 100,373 ***** Reimbursement of 2000/1 items 10,500 Adjusted amount available 2002 110,873

1 Nepean Hockey Assn Stage hire costs 16-Jul-01 101 110,772 101 FOM 2 Jamison Park traffic control/directory board 6-Aug-01 5,000 105,772 5,000 AM 3 Penrith Senior Citizens' Centre lighting **** 20-Aug-01 1,477 104,295 1,477 BCMM 4 Donation to Nepean District Tennis Assn 17-Sep-01 1,667 102,628 1,667 FOM 5 Breastfeeding Assn hall hire costs 22-Oct-01 165 102,463 165 FOM 6 Mulgoa Senior Citizens Christmas luncheon 19-Nov-01 1,000 101,463 1,000 CDM 7 Alternate Energy Solar Boat Race 4-Feb-02 1,667 99,796 1,667 FOM 8 Local Area Firefighting Effort 4-Feb-02 5,000 94,796 5,000 FOM 9 Kingswood Oval fencing improvements 18-Mar-02 8,932 85,864 8,932 PCM 10 Peppermint Reserve gravel pathway 18-Mar-02 4,750 81,114 4,750 PCM 11 Cancer Council Relay for Life sponsorship 22-Apr-02 1,000 80,114 1,000 FOM 12 Fund-raiser- Penrith Valley Sports Foundation 20-May-02 667 79,447 0 PCMM 13 Donation to John MacLean Foundation K4K 3-Jun-02 1,000 78,447 0 FOM 32,426 78,447

Committed 92,154 Uncommitted 238,880 TOTAL VOTE 331,034

**** In accordance with Council minutes, the amounts advanced last year from the Voted Works allocation for the path paving and parks improvement programs have been repaid. Project savings identified during Management Plan reviews are adjusted so that amounts may be reallocated at Council's discretion. $3,000 (funded equally from each ward) allocated to Glenmore Park Bushfire Benefit Committee available for reallocation as function did not take place due to inclement weather. ******Funds provided for this project are to be reimbursed to North Ward Voted Works in the 2002/2003 budget from the Parks Improvement Program ORDINARY MEETING URGENT REPORT CONTENTS

MASTER PROGRAM REPORTS

Item Page

COUNCIL'S OPERATING ENVIRONMENT

9 Summary Of Investments & Banking - 1 May To 28 May 2002 6021/4 41 Ordinary Meeting - Urgent Report 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

Council's Operating Environment 9 Summary of Investments & Banking - 1 May to 28 May 2002 6021/4

Compiled by: Peter Lennon, Expenditure Accountant Authorised by: Barry Husking, Chief Financial Officer

Management Plan 4 Year Outcome (Page 112): Maintain a sound financial position and liquidity. 01/02 Critical Action: Ensure the timely provision of financial advice and information to support Council's decision making processes.

Purpose: This report contains a summary of investments for the period 1 May 2002 to 28 May 2002, and a Statement of General fund balances at 28 May 2002.

CERTIFICATE OF RESPONSIBLE ACCOUNTING OFFICER

I hereby certify the following:

1. All investments have been made in accordance with Section 625 of the Local Government Act, and the relevant regulations.

2. Council’s Cash Book and Bank Statements have been reconciled as at 28 May 2002.

Barry Husking Responsible Accounting Officer

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1. the Certificate of the Responsible Accounting Officer, Statement of General Fund Bank Balances as at 28 May 2002 and the Summary of Investments for the period 1 May 2002 to 28 May 2002 be noted and accepted;

2. the graphical investment analysis as at 28 May 2002 be noted.

5

Finance Page 41 Ordinary Meeting - Urgent Report 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

Summary of Investments 30 April 2002 to 28 May 2002

Balance as at Investments Withdrawals/ Balance as at Term 30-Apr-02 for this period Maturities 28-May-02 $ $ $ for period $ $ IMB Call 1,200,000 1,200,000 0 1,200,000 LGFS Call 1,300,000 1,600,000 2,900,000 1,650,000 1,250,000 St George Call 0 0 0 0 0 Westpac Call 200,000 0 200,000 0 200,000 CBA Call 0 0 0 0 0 Suncorp Metway Call 0 0 0 0 0 Citibank Call 0 0 0 0 0 Bank West Fixed 7,400,000 1,000,000 8,400,000 0 8,400,000 ANZ Fixed 1,000,000 1,000,000 2,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 CBA Fixed 6,573,237 3,636,365 10,209,602 3,863,637 6,345,965 Citibank Fixed 10,400,000 4,400,000 14,800,000 4,400,000 10,400,000 Colonial State Fixed 0 0 0 0 0 IMB Fixed 4,500,000 5,500,000 10,000,000 2,000,000 8,000,000 Greater Bld Society Fixed 0 0 0 0 0 LGFS Fixed 7,500,000 3,000,000 10,500,000 1,500,000 9,000,000 NAB Fixed 0 0 0 0 0 St George Fixed 0 0 0 0 0 Suncorp Metway Fixed 0 0 0 0 0 Westpac Fixed 988,712 0 988,712 0 988,712 TOTAL 41,061,949 20,136,365 61,198,314 14,413,637 46,784,677 217,257 Add: General Fund Bank Balance 262,434 41,279,206 47,047,111

* Period Ending Reconciliation of Invested Funds * Period Ending 30-Apr-02 28-May-02 $41,279,206 Invested Funds Held as at 28 May 2002 $47,047,111 Represented by: Externally Restricted Assets 16,767,570 Section 94 Developer Contributions 16,480,907 1,401,008 Restricted Contributions for Works 1,348,207 880,649 Unexpended Grants 2,797,275 19,049,227 20,626,389 Internally Restricted Assets for funding of operations: 50,599 Unexpended Loan Funds 50,599 1,645,894 Sinking Funds 1,645,894 19,679,016 Internal Reserves 18,532,831 1,716,763 Security Bonds and Deposits 1,596,646 23,092,272 21,825,970 0 Restricted Assets Utilised in Operations 0 (862,293) Unrestricted Invested Funds 4,594,752 $41,279,206 Invested Funds held as at 28 May 2002 $47,047,111

Finance Page 42 Ordinary Meeting - Urgent Report 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

Statement of General Fund Bank Balances as at 28 May 2002

Cash account balances as at 30 April 2002 ($718,906.91) Receipts for period ended 28 May 2002 $16,291,926.41 $15,573,019.50

Payments for Period Ended 28 May 2002 ($17,129,660.38) Cash account balances as at 28 May 2002 ($1,556,640.88)

General Fund Operating Bank Account Balance as at 28 May 2002 $262,433.99

Limits of overdraft arranged with Bank $600,000.00 GENERAL

Limits of overdraft authorised by Auditors Cert. $40,249,000.00 GENERAL

INVESTING GUIDELINES (FROM COUNCIL’S INVESTMENT POLICY 26 MAY 1995 as amended 8 May 2000)

· Minimum acceptable S & P Australian ratings are A (long term) and A-1 (short term) - not more than 20% of Council’s portfolio permitted at these ratings. Building Societies are not rated by S & P. Appendix D of Council’s Investment Policy specifies conditions to be met. · Short term ratings < 1 year. Long term ratings > 1 year. · Term of investments may not exceed three years. · Investments exceeding one year’s duration must be limited to 20% of the average total portfolio. · The average weighted days to maturity of Council’s investment portfolio must not exceed 548 days. · No institution will hold more than 25% of Council’s total investments when the investment was first made.

Finance Page 43 Ordinary Meeting - Urgent Report 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

Investment Portfolio as at 28 May 2002

By Type IBD 57%

Call 6%

NCD 19% B/A Bills 18%

· NCD Negotiable Certificates of Deposit · B/A Bills Bank Accepted Bills · Call Overnight Funds · IBD Interest Bearing Deposits

Ratings By Institution Hierarchy in Descending LGFS (A/A-1) IMB 21% Order 20% Long Term AAA Westpac (AA-/A-1+) 3% AA+ AA ANZ (AA-/A-1+) AA- 2% A+ Commonwealth (AA-/A-1+) A 14% A- Short Term A-1+ A-1 Citibank (AA-/A-1+) A-2 22%

Bank West (A/A-1) 18%

· LGFS Local Government Financial Services · IMB Illawarra Mutual Building Society

Note: While technically outside Council’s Investment Policy in respect of the Rating A (Long Term) and A- 1 (short Term), it has been the practice to treat the LGFS (owned equally by the Local Government Association and the Shire’s Association of NSW) outside the rating consideration.

Finance Page 44 Ordinary Meeting - Urgent Report 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

Investments as at 28 May 2002 Total Investment Portfolio $70m 1999 2000 2001 2002 $60m

$50m

$40m

$30m

$20m

$10m

$0m Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May

Spread of Investment Maturities

$25m May-01 May-02

$20m

$15m

$10m

$5m

$m Cash at 0-30 Days 31-90 Days 91-180 181-365 1-2 Years 2 Years & Call Days Days More

Note: Term investments exceeding one year's duration as a percentage of average portfolio for the preceding twelve months = 0%.

Finance Page 45 Ordinary Meeting - Urgent Report 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

Weighted Average Interest Rate (Comparison of PCC’s Portfolio Interest Rate to WBC 90 Day Bank Bill Rate) Interest Rate 7

6.5 .0013 difference 6

5.5

5

4.5

4 Jun- Jul-01 Aug- Sep- Oct-01 Nov- Dec- Jan- Feb- Mar- Apr-02 May- 01 01 01 01 01 02 02 02 02 Portfolio Int. 90 Day Bill Rate

The WBC 90 Day Bank Bill Rate previously based on the rate at the end of the reporting period is now based on the average bill rate for the month. This will reflect a more relevant comparison of the weighted average interest rates.

Weighted Average Term to Maturity Days 200

180

160

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

0 Jun- Jul-01 Aug- Sep- Oct-01 Nov- Dec- Jan- Feb- Mar- Apr-02 May- 01 01 01 01 01 02 02 02 02

Finance Page 46 ORDINARY MEETING URGENT REPORTS CONTENTS

MASTER PROGRAM REPORTS

Item Page

THE CITY IN ITS ENVIRONMENT

10 Development Application For Narrow Gauge Railway And Associated Amenity Buildings On Lot 1 DP 791299 The Great Western Highway, Werrington; Applicant: Bishop Austrans; Owner: University Of Western Sydney, Penrith (Werrington North) Campus DA02/0972 47 Ordinary Meeting - Urgent Report 17 June 2002 The City in Its Environment

The City in Its Environment

10 Development Application for Narrow Gauge Railway and Associated Amenity Buildings on Lot 1 DP 791299 The Great Western Highway, Werrington; Applicant: Bishop Austrans; Owner: University of Western Sydney, Penrith (Werrington North) Campus DA02/0972

Compiled by: Margaret Barrett, Environmental Planner Authorised by: Craig Butler, Building Approvals & Environmental Protection Manager

Management Plan 4 Year Outcome (Page 21): Development enhances the City's living and working environments. 01/02 Critical Action: Work in partnership with environment and development groups to promote quality development in the City.

Purpose:

The purpose of this report is to enable Council to determine a development application for a narrow gauge railway and associated amenity buildings on the University of Western Sydney, North Werrington Campus.

Background The applicant, Bishop Austrans, is an Australian engineering company which develops innovative transport systems and their components, so that they may be operated in the commercial marketplace. Bishop Austrans is currently developing a low cost and low impact automated rail system that provides a safe, convenient and comfortable alternative public transport within residential, commercial and industrial areas. Currently based at the Chullora Railyards, Bishop Austrans is looking to relocate as their lease will shortly expire. The development is proposed to be located on the north-eastern portion of the University of Western Sydney, Penrith, North Werrington Campus. The University of Western Sydney, Penrith (UWS Penrith) is establishing the North Werrington Campus as a research and development precinct. A number of companies are currently utilising the research facilities at the North Werrington Campus, including Integral Energy. The co-operative research agreement established between the UWS, Penrith and Bishop Austrans will provide Bishop Austrans with land to continue the research and testing of the Austrans transportation technology, and the UWS Penrith with research and educational opportunities for both staff and students. These opportunities include joint research projects with university schools, students work experience, scholarships, and research opportunities. The development will also promote Western Sydney as an alternative location for companies to establish themselves. The Site The site for the proposed railway is bound by the Western Railway line to the north, residential area to the north-east, the Sydney Water Board depot to the south-east, and

Urban Environment Page 47 Ordinary Meeting - Urgent Report 17 June 2002 The City in Its Environment

Cobham Remand Centre to the south. The Great Western Highway runs along the southern boundary, and UWS campus buildings are located to the west of the proposed facility. The site falls away to the east and north, with the proposed location of the railway line located in a lower portion of the site. The area where the facility will be constructed is surplus land on the university campus. The area is currently being used by Werrington Park Model Aeroplane Club. No formal lease exists between the club and the university, and the club will cease their activities on the site should the application be approved. The Proposal The applicant proposes to develop a testing facility for a new and innovative transport system on the northern side of the UWS Penrith, North Werrington campus. The proposal is a collaborative initiative between Bishop Austrans and the University of Western Sydney. The development will be built in two stages. During the first stage a smaller test track will be constructed, and all civil works and infrastructure will be developed. The second stage will extend the track by relocating the first loop to the end of the line. The complete development will consist of 2.35km long twin rail track, and incorporates two loops at either end of the track. The proposed track is a lightweight, electronically powered system. The facility will take up approximately 2.15 hectares. Key features of the facility include:

· Two automated vehicles, accommodating 9 passengers each, with the provision for one wheelchair passenger where required; · The track will be elevated at the north-western end to provide grade climb testing of up to 20%; · Maximum power of 120 kilowatts per vehicle; · High speed turns and switches; and · Associated buildings, including workshop, office and amenities. The maximum speed of the carriages will be 100km/hr, with an average cruising speed of 70km/hr. The speed of the vehicles through the elevated track will be 15km/hr. The western turnaround point will have a radius of 30m, and the southern turnaround point will have a radius of 8m. Two test vehicles will complete a maximum of 60 circuits per day. The speed through the 8m radius loop will be less than 20km/hr , and the speed on the 30m radius loop will be less than 50km/hr. Power to the facility will be provided via underground cables which will connect into the university’s upgraded power network. Telecommunications will also be provided through an underground connection from Chancellery Hill. The water supply will be connected to the Sydney Water pipeline, located within 100m of the vehicle sheds. Waste water disposal will be via a connection to the existing sewerage system located north of the site. The associated buildings to be located next to the rail include a 360m² storage shed, incorporating a site office, storage area and staff amenities, and a 110m² (approximately) vehicle maintenance shed, which will expand in the future to 140m² to allow the garaging of a second vehicle.

Urban Environment Page 48 Ordinary Meeting - Urgent Report 17 June 2002 The City in Its Environment

A cyclone type fence will be provided around the development for security purposes and an acoustic fence will be erected on the northern side of the facility to mitigate against potential noise generated from the test track. Access to the facility will be provided via an unsealed access driveway from the western end of Chapman Street. The construction period will last 18 months. During Stage 1, 1.6km of track and the first loop will be constructed, as well as the security fence and amenities buildings. Stage 1 will take 8 months to complete. Stage 2 will see the remaining 0.75km of the track being built over 6 months. There will be a four month break between the two construction stages. Approximately 20 persons will be employed during the construction phase. Once the facility is in operation, staff of 2 to 10 persons will operate between the hours of 8am to 5pm Monday to Friday. Weekend and after hours operation will occur occasionally for promotional and media purposes. These promotional activities will be to potential investors, systems purchasers, government representatives and the media. Following successful testing and finalisation of the narrow gauge railway line, Bishop Austrans intends to make the technology commercially available. It is proposed that the test track will operate on the site for a period up to 10 years. Community Consultation The proposal was notified to adjoining property owners for a 14-day period from 3 to 20 May in accordance with Council’s Notification & Advertising Development Control Plan. A total of 7 individual submissions were received, as well as one petition signed by 27 residents. The main concerns of the residents included:

· Vehicular and pedestrian access to the site. · Traffic issues. · Construction time and noise impacts. · The impact of the development on adjoining properties in terms of visual amenity, lighting and loss of open space. · Drainage and flooding. · Safety and security. · Flora and fauna. As a result of the public interest generated during the notification period, a public meeting was held on 29 May 2002 to allow the applicant to discuss the proposal with local residents. Representatives from Bishop Austrans, their consultant (Environmental Resources Management Australia), Council officers and 13 members of the public attended the meeting. The issues raised in the submissions and at the public meeting are discussed later in the report. Assessment of the Proposal The application has been assessed in accordance with the requirements of Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 and the following key issues have emerged: (1) Statutory Penrith Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 1998 – Urban Land

Urban Environment Page 49 Ordinary Meeting - Urgent Report 17 June 2002 The City in Its Environment

The site is zoned 5(a) Special Uses (Tertiary Education) under Penrith Local Environmental Plan 1998 – Urban Land. The objective of the zone is: “To facilitate certain development on land which is, or is proposed to be, used by public authorities, institutions, organisations or the council to provide and protect services, utilities or transport facilities and associated activities.” The proposal is consistent with the objective of the zone as the site has been zoned for tertiary education where research and development is promoted. The proposal is considered to be ancillary to the university, in that it is an activity which will promote research and testing, and encourage staff and students to actively participate in the engineering process. Sydney Regional Environmental Plan (SREP) No. 20 – Hawkesbury – Nepean (No. 2-1997) The site falls within the Hawkesbury-Nepean catchment and as such is subject to Sydney Regional Environmental Plan (SREP) No. 20 – Hawkesbury – Nepean (No. 2-1997). That Plan provides overall direction for planning in the river catchment to protect the environment of the river. The site is not located within the riverine corridor, nor does it contain environmental areas of local, regional or state significance as identified under SREP No. 20. The proposal is consistent with the relevant specific planning policies and strategies nominated in the Regional Plan. (2) Major Issues of the Proposal Vehicular and Pedestrian Access The applicant proposes to gain vehicular access during the construction and operation stages from the western end of Chapman Street, Werrington. The local residents are opposed to the use of the Chapman Street as access to the facility. The residents consider that the existing traffic volumes in the area are already too high as there are a number of multi-unit housing developments in the area. The possibility of an alternative access route from Walker Street was raised at the public meeting. The applicant has considered this alternative, however they feel that access from Chapman Street is more appropriate for the following reasons:

· The Chapman Street location is a gently sloping area and would result in minimal disturbance to the existing ground; · The alternative access road from Walker Street would be 50% longer than that from Chapman Street; · The Walker Street access would be across a low-lying area where drainage is a problem. To overcome the existing drainage problem, and to maintain reasonable access to the development site during and after heavy rainfall, the Walker Street access road would be required to be built up on an embankment. This would make the facility more visually intrusive. The embankment may also turn into a drainage barrier and increase the ponding on the site. The applicant is to undertake construction works in Chapman Street, including construction of kerb and gutter, drainage and road pavement on the southern side of Chapman Street from the end of the existing pavement to the western end of the road reserve (see condition 1).

Urban Environment Page 50 Ordinary Meeting - Urgent Report 17 June 2002 The City in Its Environment

Another issue raised was the informal pedestrian paths used to access the campus buildings and Cobham Remand Centre from Chapman Street and Walker Street respectively. The proposed alignment of the narrow gauge railway will cross both of the informal tracks preventing pedestrian access. The UWS Penrith raises no objection to these informal tracks being blocked as they are considered inappropriate to use due to safety issues, in that no lighting or paving is provided. These access routes are on land owned by the University, and not on public land. The development of this facility over the informal access paths is therefore considered reasonable. Traffic-Related Issues Bishop Austrans will have independent access to the site via a gate on Chapman Street, Werrington during both the construction and operational phases. It is estimated that during construction there will be approximately 60 daily trips for construction vehicles between the hours of 6am and 6pm, based on a maximum of 20 construction personnel being on-site at any one time. During the operation phase, there will generally only be passenger vehicles coming to and going from the site. The traffic generated during operation is expected to consist of between 10 and 20 trips per day, based on a maximum operating staff of 10 persons. Vehicles will arrive at the site between the 7.30am and 8.00am, and depart from the site between 5.00pm and 5.30pm Monday to Friday. The operational traffic is expected to have a negligible impact on the local road network. A condition of consent will be imposed restricting operating times to 8am to 5pm Monday to Friday. Weekend and after-hours operation for promotional and media purposes will be infrequent. For these occasions the applicant is to submit to Council a Management Plan outlining the anticipated number of weekend and after-hours events and the times these will run (see condition 12(a)). Noise and Vibration An acoustic report has been submitted as part of the application. The potential for acoustic impacts from the development are likely to result from both the construction and operational phases. As the facility is currently in operation at the Chullora Railyards, the potential for noise and vibration impacts can be readily determined. Access to the site during construction and operation of the facility will be via a gate on Chapman Street, Werrington. The properties that are likely to be the most affected by the proposal in terms of noise and vibration are the residential dwellings to the north-east and Cobham Remand Centre to the south. In order to assess the potential for noise impacts, the existing background levels were determined. The background noise levels measured for the closest, and therefore most affected, residences in Impala Avenue and Chapman Street, Werrington was 36dB(A). The criteria as set by the NSW Environment Protection Authority (EPA) requires that noise levels from newly introduced sources do not exceed the existing background noise levels by more than 5dB(A). Given these levels, it was determined that the maximum noise levels from construction activities should not exceed 41dB(A) at residences in Impala Street and Chapman Street, Werrington. The loudest emissions from the construction stage would result from the

Urban Environment Page 51 Ordinary Meeting - Urgent Report 17 June 2002 The City in Its Environment operation of concrete trucks and vibrators and otherwise from impulsive events such as steel tracks being unloaded or hammering from fixing the track to the foundation. The acoustic report has been assessed by Council’s “in-house” acoustic specialist, who has considered the acoustic impact on not only the closest residential areas, but also the Cobham Remand Centre, and recreational and commercial sites. Condition 2 has been imposed to ensure that the facility does not exceed the maximum noise levels for these land uses during the construction and operation stages of the development. The EPA’s Environmental Criteria for Road Traffic Noise recommends that the maximum noise level calculated for the peak traffic hour should not exceed 55dB(A) during the daytime (7.00am to 10.00pm) and 50dB(A) during the night time (10.00pm to 7.00am). (Condition 13). The consent will be conditioned to ensure that a temporary noise barrier will be provided during the construction stage to reduce noise levels. Details of this temporary fence, including location and size, are to be provided prior to the commencement of works (condition 12(b)). The mitigation measures, as detailed in the Statement of Environment Effects prepared by ERM, will also be implemented during the construction stage (condition 3). These measures include the maintenance and monitoring of all equipment to ensure noise levels are not exceeded, placing residential class mufflers on all equipment, and preparation of a noise management plan to ensure all staff understand noise control measures The applicant will also develop a communications program to keep the community informed of activities. This will include local newsletters, leaflets, newspaper advertisements and community notice boards. Local residents in close proximity to works will be notified prior to expected commencement of work adjacent their property. A 24 hour contact telephone number will be provided for the public to seek information or make a complaint. A complaints register will be maintained and acted upon (condition 4). Hours of construction will be limited to 7am to 6pm Mondays to Fridays, 8am to 1pm Saturdays, and no work permitted on Sundays or Public Holidays (condition H004). The major noise source from the operation of the facility will be from the wheel/rail rolling interaction. A 2m high lapped and capped timber acoustic fence will be provided along the northern side of the facility to reduce the noise emissions to the adjoining residential area. This fence will shield both the main straight and loop sections of the track (see condition 12(b)). As the proposed track is a lightweight, electronically powered system, it will not result in significant noise emissions or vibration impacts on the ground. A condition will be imposed ensuring that a qualified acoustic consultant certifies that the operation of the facility is in accordance with the recommended noise mitigation measures as detailed in the Statement of Environmental Effects prepared by ERM, dated 22 April 2002 (condition 5). Visual Amenity The facility will require the installation of a rail track, associated buildings, security and acoustic fencing. The two ancillary buildings will be constructed so they are low scale and unobtrusive. The vehicle maintenance shed will be single storey with a height of 7.2m. A small extension from the building over the railway line to garage a second vehicle will be provided at a later date. The second building, consisting of a storage shed and site office, will also be single storey.

Urban Environment Page 52 Ordinary Meeting - Urgent Report 17 June 2002 The City in Its Environment

The buildings will be screened to an extent by existing vegetation. A 2m high lapped and capped timber acoustic barrier will also provide screening from the residential area. The selection of the building materials and colours will be sympathetic to the surrounding landscape so as to minimise the visual impact of the buildings. The remainder of the land within the eastern portion of the university will retain its current open space, rural character. As previously discussed, a condition of consent will be imposed stating that the applicant is to provide details on the type, sound reduction capability, maintenance and location of the both the temporary and permanent noise barriers to Council for approval prior to the commencement of works (condition 12(b)). Drainage and Flooding The topography of the site affected by the proposed development falls away to the east and north. There is a flat lying area of existing poorly drained swampy ground near the south- eastern end of the site. The site drains in a north-east direction into Claremont Creek, located approximately 300m east of the site. The proposal requires minimal cut and fill to be undertaken, which will result in no significant change to the topography. Council’s Development Services Engineers have assessed the proposal and raise no objection to the development subject to conditions of consent. The proposed development will have a minor impact on the existing overland flow path in the north-eastern section of the site. To address this the proposal includes the provision of cross drainage pipes. Information on any fill material to be imported to the site will be required to be submitted to Council in accordance with Section 12.2 of Council’s Contaminated Land Development Control Plan prior to works commencing. The required volume of fill material is also to be provided (condition 7). Soil erosion and sediment controls will be implemented during the construction phase. Drainage facilities will be installed at the start of works and exposed areas will be progressively revegetated. Dust suppression and the tracking of mud/soil will be controlled by way of conditions of consent (conditions 8 & 9). Conditions of consent will be imposed to ensure that all drainage works will be in accordance with Council’s Policies and Codes (conditions A011, D001, K001, K002). The water quality and quantity of surrounding waterways will therefore not be affected.

Safety and Security The proposed development is separated from the University buildings and common areas and will be designed to deter any members of the public, including unauthorised University students, gaining access to the facility. The safety provisions to be imposed include:

· The erection of a wire mesh fence (with 3 strands of barbed wire around the top of the fence) surrounding the railway enclosure, with lockable gates and vehicle entry points; and · Locked security doors to the storage shed and site office.

Urban Environment Page 53 Ordinary Meeting - Urgent Report 17 June 2002 The City in Its Environment

The facility will only be in use while authorised and trained staff are on the site. Given that this facility will be located within the UWS Penrith, North Werrington grounds, existing University security personnel will keep surveillance on the facility. During the construction stage, a site Occupational Health and Safety Plan will be prepared by the contractor to prevent and manage hazard and risk to construction workers. Environmental risks will be managed/mitigated through an Environmental Management Plan. This is to include details of environmental controls for the maintenance shed, such as bunding, chemical storage and disposal, and waste oil/water treatment and disposal (condition 10). Flora and Fauna Environmental Resources Management Australia (ERM), as the consultant for the applicant, has determined that the likely impacts of the proposed development would be threatened species and ecological communities listed under the New South Wales Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 (TSC Act), and the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Act 1999 (EPBC Act). ERM undertook searches of the National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS) Wildlife Atlas for threatened species and the Birds Australia database for a 10km radius around the site. Site inspections were also conducted and notes taken on the vegetation communities and habitat types in the site. Targeted surveys were undertaken for rare and threatened plants by traversing the path of the proposed rail track and the remnant native vegetation in the vicinity of the track. All flora and fauna observed during the field surveys were recorded and a detailed habitat assessment was undertaken. The university site has largely been cleared and consists predominately of grassland that is dominated by exotic plant species. However, some Cumberland Plain Woodland, which is an endangered ecological community listed by both the TSC Act and EPBC Act occurs on the site. A large strip of Cumberland Plain Woodland is located along the northern boundary of the site and smaller, less intact remnants are scattered across the east of the site. The forested area along the northern boundary of the site consists of Grey Box (Eucalyptus molucanna), Forest Red Gum (Eucalyptus tereticornis), and an understorey of Blackthorn (Bursaria spinosa) and Black Wattle (Acacia parramattensis). The proposed development has been designed to ensure that remnant native and scattered vegetation are protected. The location of the track avoids the Cumberland Plain Woodland along the northern boundary of the site. Scattered trees occur on either side of the proposed track, however, these trees have also been avoided in selection of the track location. An eight-part test was undertaken in accordance with Part 5A of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act, 1979, to assess the impacts of the proposal on threatened species. As the area of remnant Cumberland Plain Woodland to the north of the proposed track and the scattered trees directly adjacent to the track will not be impacted by the proposed development, it is unlikely that a significant area of known habitat will be modified or removed. The following measures will be implemented to avoid affecting the remnant native vegetation and to protect the scattered trees that grow adjacent to the proposed track:

· A temporary barrier will be erected around the bases of all trees within 20m of the proposed track to prevent damage by heavy vehicle movement. Fencing will include an area equal to the diameter of the tree canopy; · Stockpiling of materials will not be permitted within the temporary barrier;

Urban Environment Page 54 Ordinary Meeting - Urgent Report 17 June 2002 The City in Its Environment

· Contractors will be briefed on the need to protect the trees adjacent to the track and keep out of all areas of remnant native vegetation; · Trees are to be lopped instead of removed where possible; and · A qualified tree surgeon will undertake lopping activities. The eight-part test concluded that the proposed development is not likely to have a significant impact upon the endangered ecological community known as Cumberland Plain Woodland, and as such a Species Impact Statement is not required. The applicant is to submit to Council details of the trees to be removed, including the number and location. Protection zones are to be provided around the trees that are to be retained and located within the construction area. All fences are to be located outside the drip line of the trees (condition 12(c)). Fauna habitats along the proposed railway alignment are extremely limited due to the predominately introduced and managed grasslands. Species that were identified during the site assessment include Willie Wagtails, Galahs, Australian Ravens and Australian Magpies. These species are generally widespread and the proposal is not likely to impact these species. The proposed development will not remove potential habitat for listed migratory species listed under the EPBC Act, and assessment under this Act is not considered to be necessary. As such, no referral to Environment Australia is required. Heritage The UWS Penrith, North Werrington Campus does not have any heritage items on-site that are identified in any Heritage Registers, including Penrith Local Environmental Plan 1991 (Environmental Heritage Conservation). One item found on the site, Frogmore House, is identified in the Penrith Heritage Study. Frogmore House is an historic residence located within the UWS grounds, on Chancellery Hill. It is presently being used as the Chancellor’s Office by the University. Given the location of the proposed facility on the lower portion of the site, and its distance from Frogmore House, it is considered that the proposal will have minimal impact on the heritage item. Summary of Conditions Issue Condition Upgrade of Vehicular Access Special Condition 1 Operational Hours Special Condition 12(a) Noise and Vibration Controls H004, Special Conditions 2, 3, 5, 12(b), Visual Amenity A039, H028, Special Condition 12(b) Drainage and Flooding (Engineering) A011, D001, K001, K002, Special Conditions 7, 8, 9 Safety and Security Special Condition 10 Flora and Fauna Special Condition 12(c)

Conclusion The proposed development of a narrow gauge railway testing facility at the University of Western Sydney, Penrith (North Werrington Campus) will provide an opportunity to develop and test an alternative transport system for the future. The railway system is one that will be able to be implemented throughout the urban system. Once the facility has been appropriately tested, it will make available technology for a mass transit transport system that will eventually be capable of providing a comfortable and safe alternative to private transport.

Urban Environment Page 55 Ordinary Meeting - Urgent Report 17 June 2002 The City in Its Environment

The development of the facility will benefit both the applicant and the UWS, Penrith. The facility will provide research opportunities for students and staff, while providing a suitable site which offers minimal environmental disturbance. Imposition and compliance with the recommended conditions will ensure the proposal does not adversely affect the amenity or security of the neighbourhood.

RECOMMENDATION

(A) That Development Application No. 02/0972 for a narrow gauge railway and associated amenities buildings on Lot 1 DP 791299 The Great Western Highway, Werrington be approved subject to the following conditions: Standard Conditions A001 (approved plans); A011 (Engineering Works DCP); A026 (Advertising signs); A039 (graffiti); D001 (soil erosion and sediment controls); E001 (BCA compliance); H004 (Hours of Construction); H028 (roof finishes); K001 (Engineering Works DCP); K002 (works-as- executed drawings); K025 (bituminous pavement); K036 (maintenance bond); P001 (costs);

Special Conditions 1. Under the Roads Act, 1993 the following works in Chapman Street are to be approved by Penrith City Council before the Construction Certificate for the development is issued: (a) The construction of kerb and gutter, drainage and road pavement on the southern side of Chapman Street from the end of the existing pavement to the western end of the road reserve.

2. Noise during construction and operation of the facility measured as Leq15 shall not exceed the levels detailed in Table 4.4 on page 36 of the Statement of Environmental Effects prepared by ERM dated 22 April 2002. 3. The following noise mitigation measures, as listed in the Statement of Environment Effects prepared by ERM, are to be implemented during construction: · Residential class mufflers on all equipment · Proper maintenance to ensure noise source levels are not exceeded · Preparation of a noise management plan by the contractor prior to construction to ensure all staff understand noise control measures. This plan is to be submitted to Council for consideration and approval prior to the commencement of works · Monitoring of equipment regarded by the site superintendent as being excessively noisy. If monitoring exceeds specified sound power levels, the contractor will be instructed to modify the equipment or remove it from the site. · A communications program will be developed to keep the community informed of activities. This will include local newsletters, leaflets, newspaper advertisements and community notice boards. · Local residents in close proximity to works will be notified prior to expected commencement of work adjacent their property. · A 24 hour contact telephone number will be provided for the public to seek information or make a complaint. A complaints register will be maintained and acted upon. · Construction activities should be carried with reference to AS 2436-1981 “Guide to Noise Controls on Construction Maintenance and Demolition Sites”. · Utilisation of temporary noise barriers where appropriate.

Urban Environment Page 56 Ordinary Meeting - Urgent Report 17 June 2002 The City in Its Environment

4. Further to Condition 3, during the construction and operation of the facility, a complaints register shall be maintained. Details of an appropriate contact person shall be provided to Council and surrounding residents prior to the commencement of any works. Complaint details shall be provided to Council upon request. 5. Prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate, and 6 months after operation of the facility has commenced, a qualified acoustic consultant shall certify that the development has been completed (or is operating) in accordance with Conditions 2, 3, 4, 12(a), 12(b) and H004. This certification shall be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority. A copy of the certification, together with the Occupation Certificate, shall be submitted to Council if obtained from an accredited certifier. 6. The provisions of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 apply to the construction and operation of this facility in terms of regulating offensive noise. 7. Information on any fill material to be imported to the site will be required to be submitted to Council in accordance with Section 12.2 of Council’s Contaminated Land Development Control Plan prior to works commencing. The required volume of fill material is also to be provided. 8. Dust suppression techniques are to be employed during construction to reduce any potential nuisances to surrounding residences. 9. The tracking of mud and soil deposits from the site shall not occur during construction works. 10. Details of environmental controls/Waste Management Plan to be implemented for the Vehicle Maintenance Shed is to be submitted to Council prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate. This includes details of bunding, chemical storage and disposal, and waste oil/water storage and disposal. If wastewater is to be discharged to the sewer, then a Trade Waste Agreement with Sydney Water is required. 11. Access and sanitary facilities for persons with disabilities are to be provided in accordance with the requirements of the Building Code of Australia and Penrith City Council’s Access Policy for Persons with Disabilities. 12. (a) Operating times are restricted to 8am to 5pm Monday to Friday. For weekend and after-hours operation for promotional and media purposes, the applicant is to submit to Council a Management Plan outlining the anticipated number of weekend and after-hours events and the times these will operate. (b) Details on the type, sound reduction capability, maintenance and location of permanent and temporary noise barriers shall be provided to Council for approval prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate. (c) Details of the trees to be removed, including the number and location are to be submitted to Council. For trees to be retained and within the construction area, protection zones are to be provided around the trees. All fences are to be located outside the drip line of the trees. (d) A colour schedule for the associated amenity buildings is to be submitted to Council for approval. The submission of the above matters before a Construction Certificate can be issued are ancillary aspects of the development under Section 80A (2) of the Environmental Planning

Urban Environment Page 57 Ordinary Meeting - Urgent Report 17 June 2002 The City in Its Environment and Assessment Act, 1979. Appeal provisions will apply to the submission requirements regarding ancillary aspects of the development (see Sections 80A (3) and 97 of the Act). 13. The maximum noise level calculated for the peak traffic hour is not to exceed 55dB(A) during the daytime (7.00am to 10.00pm) and 50dB(A) during the night time (10.00pm to 7.00am), in accordance with the EPA’s Environmental Criteria for Road Traffic Noise.

(B) That all persons who made submissions to Council be informed of the determination.

3

Urban Environment Page 58 Ordinary Meeting - Urgent Report 17 June 2002 The City in Its Environment

Urban Environment Page 59 Ordinary Meeting - Urgent Report 17 June 2002 The City in Its Environment

Urban Environment Page 60 Ordinary Meeting - Urgent Report 17 June 2002 The City in Its Environment

Urban Environment Page 61 ORDINARY MEETING URGENT REPORTS CONTENTS

MASTER PROGRAM REPORTS

Item Page

THE CITY AS A SOCIAL PLACE

11 2002 Wall Of Achievement Awards 959/89 63 Ordinary Meeting - Urgent Report 17 June 2002 The City as a Social Place

The City as a Social Place

11 2002 Wall of Achievement Awards 959/89

Compiled by: Diana Tuckwell, Facilities Operations Manager's Secretary Authorised by: Gary Dean, Facilities Operations Manager

Management Plan 4 Year Outcome (Page 63): The City's cultural profile has been raised. 01/02 Critical Action: Promote the City as a centre of cultural excellence.

Purpose:

To advise of number of nominations received and recommend Councillors involvement in selection process set down for Thursday 27 June 2002.

Background The Wall of Achievement Awards is a process whereby Council and the community in general can formally recognise the significant achievements taking place across the community. Nominations from the community for the 2002 Penrith City Council Wall of Achievement closed on 31 May 2002. A total of 19 nominations were received, the majority being nominated in the Community Services category. Announcements of successful candidates are made by the Mayor at the Wall of Achievement Awards presentation evening which has been set down for Thursday 29 August 2002. Names, photographs and citations for nominees accepted into each category are placed on a database of public information as part of the Penrith Regional Library Collection. The successful nominees framed photographs are displayed at Penrith and St Marys Libraries for the twelve month period. It is suggested that a small Working Party of Councillors to further consider those nominations received. That Working Party will meet on Thursday 27 June 2002 at 6:00pm. Last year Councillors Davies, Greenow, Sheehy, O’Neill and Fowler formed that Working Party. RECOMMENDATION That Council nominate five Councillors to form the 2002 Wall of Achievement Awards Working Party.

Recreational and Cultural Equity Page 63 ORDINARY MEETING URGENT REPORTS CONTENTS

MASTER PROGRAM REPORTS

Item Page

COUNCIL'S OPERATING ENVIRONMENT

12 Making of Rates And Charges For 1 July 2002 To 30 June 2003 6503/4 65 Ordinary Meeting - Urgent Report 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

Council's Operating Environment

12 Making of Rates and Charges for 1 July 2002 to 30 June 2003 6503/4

Compiled by: Stuart Benzie, Acting Chief Rates Clerk Authorised by: Barry Husking, Chief Financial Officer

Management Plan 4 Year Outcome (Page 107): Effective corporate governance has been maintained. 01/02 Critical Action: Ensure statutory obligations are performed and observed.

Purpose:

Making of Rates and Charges for 2002/03.

Background Council has made application to the Minister for Local Government for a special increase to its Notional General Income for 2002/03 by 8.1%. Further to adopting the Management Plan, Council is required to make the Rates and Charges for 2002/03 under Section 535 of the Local Government Act 1993. The following resolutions need to be formally adopted by Council to make the Rates and Charges for 2002/03. The Ordinary Rates recommended for adoption are subject to ministerial approval. Should the Minister not approve Council’s application for a special variation, the matter would need to be considered further by Council.

RECOMMENDATION That: Subject to the Minister for Local Government approving a special variation to the rate of 8.1%, the rate be as follows: 1. Ordinary Rate In accordance with Section 535 of the Local Government Act 1993, an ordinary rate named Residential ordinary in accordance with Section 543(1) of point five four four seven (.5447) cents in the dollar being ad valorem amount on the land value of all rateable land in the City categorised as residential under Section 493 and that an ordinary rate name Farmland ordinary of point four six two nine (.4629) cents in the dollar on the land value of all rateable land in the City categorised as Farmland and that an ordinary rate named Business ordinary of one point one six five one (1.1651) cents in the dollar on all rateable land in the City categorised as business and that an ordinary rate being a subcategory of Business rate named Penrith CBD Rate of one point two seven two nine (1.2729) cents in the dollar and that an ordinary rate being a subcategory of Business rate named St Marys Town Centre Rate of one point five six zero eight (1.5608) cents in the dollar be now made for the period 1 July 2002 to 30 June 2003 subject to a minimum rate under Section 548(5) of five hundred and seven dollars and eighty cents ($507.80) in

Management of the Organisation Page 65 Ordinary Meeting - Urgent Report 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

respect of each separate parcel of land categorised as Residential and Farmland and that each separate parcel of land categorised as Business or as a subcategory of Business be subject to a minimum rate under Section 548(5) of the Local Government Act, 1993 of six hundred and sixty dollars and five cents ($660.05). 2. Service of Rate Notices The rate or charge for the 2002/03 rate year be levied on the land specified in a rates and charges notice by the service of that notice and the General Manger be and is hereby authorised to prepare and serve such notice for and on behalf of Council. 3. Charges The charges attached to the report to the Ordinary meeting on 17 June 2002 titled Making of Rates and Charges for 1 July 2002 to 30 June 2003 be made (see attachment). 4. Interest For the purpose of calculating the interest on overdue rates and charges in accordance with Section 566(3) of the Local Government Act, 1993 Council make the interest charge for 2002/03 nine (9.0) percent per annum. 5. Pension Rebate All eligible pensioners under Section 575 of the Local Government Act, 1993 be granted a rebate of 50% of the ordinary rate and domestic waste management service up to a maximum of $250.00 under Section 575(3) of the Local Government Act, 1993,

5

Management of the Organisation Page 66 Ordinary Meeting - Urgent Report 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

Making of Rates and Charges for 1 July 2002 to 30 June 2003

The council for period 1 July 2002 to 30 June 2003 set the following charges for Domestic Waste Management Services and Waste Management Services.

· In respect of vacant land within the Council area where a domestic waste management service is available, then a charge of $15.30 per annum or $0.29 per week is levied. Domestic Waste Without Effluent Removal (240L bin)

· In respect of land that is not vacant land and is not levied any other domestic waste charge. - Where not more than one service (being a 240L waste bin and a recycling collection) is prepared on a property, a charge of $221.50 per annum or $4.26 per week (called Domestic Waste Service). - Where more than one service is provided, as per table for annual charge. - Where more than one recycle service is provided, as per table for annual charge.

No. of No. of Recycling Effluent Services Charge Name Amount ($) Putrescible Services Waste Services Vacant Land Vacant Land Vacant Land Vacant Land 15.30

<2 <2 None Domestic Waste Service 1 221.50 <2 2 None 1 Domestic Waste 2 Recycling 272.75 2 <3 None Domestic Waste Service 2 443.00 2 3 None 2 Domestic Waste 3 Recycling 494.25 2 4 None 2 Domestic Waste 4 Recycling 545.50 3 <4 None Domestic Waste Service 3 664.50 4 <5 None Domestic Waste Service 4 886.00 5 <6 None Domestic Waste Service 5 1,107.50 6 6 None Domestic Waste Service 6 1,329.00 7 7 None Domestic Waste Service 7 1,550.50 8 8 None Domestic Waste Service 8 1,772.00 9 9 None Domestic Waste Service 9 1,993.50 10 10 None Domestic Waste Service 10 2,215.00 11 11 None Domestic Waste Service 11 2,436.50 12 12 None Domestic Waste Service 12 2,658.00 13 13 None Domestic Waste Service 13 2,879.50 14 14 None Domestic Waste Service 14 3,101.00 15 15 None Domestic Waste Service 15 3,322.50 16 16 None Domestic Waste Service 16 3,544.00 17 17 None Domestic Waste Service 17 3,765.50 18 18 None Domestic Waste Service 18 3,987.00 19 19 None Domestic Waste Service 19 4,208.50 20 20 None Domestic Waste Service 20 4,430.00

Management of the Organisation Page 67 Ordinary Meeting - Urgent Report 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

No. of No. of Recycling Effluent Services Charge Name Amount ($) Putrescible Services Waste Services 21 21 None Domestic Waste Service 21 4,651.50 22 22 None Domestic Waste Service 22 4,873.00 23 23 None Domestic Waste Service 23 5,094.50 24 24 None Domestic Waste Service 24 5,316.00 25 25 None Domestic Waste Service 25 5,537.50 26 26 None Domestic Waste Service 26 5,759.00 27 27 None Domestic Waste Service 27 5,980.50 28 28 None Domestic Waste Service 28 6,202.00 29 29 None Domestic Waste Service 29 6,423.50 30 30 None Domestic Waste Service 30 6,645.00 31 31 None Domestic Waste Service 31 6,866.50 32 32 None Domestic Waste Service 32 7,088.00 33 33 None Domestic Waste Service 33 7,309.50 34 34 None Domestic Waste Service 34 7,531.00 35 35 None Domestic Waste Service 35 7,752.50 36 36 None Domestic Waste Service 36 7,974.00 37 37 None Domestic Waste Service 37 8,195.50 38 38 None Domestic Waste Service 38 8,417.00 39 39 None Domestic Waste Service 39 8,638.50 40 40 None Domestic Waste Service 40 8,860.00 41 41 None Domestic Waste Service 41 9,081.50 42 42 None Domestic Waste Service 42 9,303.00 43 43 None Domestic Waste Service 43 9,524.50 44 44 None Domestic Waste Service 44 9,746.00 45 45 None Domestic Waste Service 45 9,967.50 46 46 None Domestic Waste Service 46 10,189.00 47 47 None Domestic Waste Service 47 10,410.50 48 48 None Domestic Waste Service 48 10,632.00 49 49 None Domestic Waste Service 49 10,853.50 50 50 None Domestic Waste Service 50 11,075.00 51 51 None Domestic Waste Service 51 11,296.50 52 52 None Domestic Waste Service 52 11,518.00 53 53 None Domestic Waste Service 53 11,739.50 54 54 None Domestic Waste Service 54 11,961.00 55 55 None Domestic Waste Service 55 12,182.50 56 56 None Domestic Waste Service 56 12,404.00 57 57 None Domestic Waste Service 57 12,625.50 58 58 None Domestic Waste Service 58 12,847.00 59 59 None Domestic Waste Service 59 13,068.50 60 60 None Domestic Waste Service 60 13,290.00 61 61 None Domestic Waste Service 61 13,511.50 62 62 None Domestic Waste Service 62 13,733.00 63 63 None Domestic Waste Service 63 13,954.50 64 64 None Domestic Waste Service 64 14,176.00 65 65 None Domestic Waste Service 65 14,397.50 66 66 None Domestic Waste Service 66 14,619.00

Management of the Organisation Page 68 Ordinary Meeting - Urgent Report 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

No. of No. of Recycling Effluent Services Charge Name Amount ($) Putrescible Services Waste Services 67 67 None Domestic Waste Service 67 14,840.50 68 68 None Domestic Waste Service 68 15,062.00 69 69 None Domestic Waste Service 69 15,283.50 70 70 None Domestic Waste Service 70 15,505.00 71 71 None Domestic Waste Service 71 15,726.50 72 72 None Domestic Waste Service 72 15,948.00 73 73 None Domestic Waste Service 73 16,169.50 74 74 None Domestic Waste Service 74 16,391.00 75 75 None Domestic Waste Service 75 16,612.50 76 76 None Domestic Waste Service 76 16,834.00 77 77 None Domestic Waste Service 77 17,055.50 78 78 None Domestic Waste Service 78 17,277.00 79 79 None Domestic Waste Service 79 17,498.50 80 80 None Domestic Waste Service 80 17,720.00

Domestic Waste Without Effluent Removal (140L bin)

· In respect of land that is not vacant land and a domestic waste management service consisting of 140L waste bin collection and recycling collection of a property available (called the service): - Where not more than one service is prepared on a property, a charge of $195.00 per annum or $3.75 per week (called Domestic Waste Service). - Where more than one service is provided, as per table below. - Where more than one recycle service is provided, as per table for annual charge (below).

No. of Putrescible No. of Recycling Effluent Services Charge Name Amount ($) Waste Services Services (120L) <2 <2 None 140L Dom. Waste Service 1 195.00 <2 2 None 1x140L Dom. Waste 2 Recycling 246.25 2 <3 None 140L Dom Waste Service 2 390.00 3 <4 None 140L Dom Waste Service 3 585.00 4 <5 None 140L Dom Waste Service 4 780.00 5 <6 None 140L Dom Waste Service 5 975.00 6 <7 None 140L Dom Waste Service 6 1,170.00 7 <8 None 140L Dom Waste Service 7 1,365.00 18 <19 None 140L Dom Waste Service 18 3,510.00

· In respect of land that is not vacant land and a domestic waste management service consisting of 140L waste bin and 240L waste bin collection and recycling collection of a property available (called the service):

Management of the Organisation Page 69 Ordinary Meeting - Urgent Report 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

- Where not more than one service is prepared on a property, a charge of $416.50 per annum or $8.00 per week (called Domestic Waste Service).

Domestic Waste with Fortnightly Effluent Removal

· In respect of land having a Domestic Waste Management Service consisting of effluent collection well(s) and removal of domestic effluent fortnightly and a waste bin collection domestic waste service. - Where there is a single dwelling a charge of $688.20 (240L bin for Domestic Waste) & $661.70 (140L bin for Domestic Waste) per annum (fortnightly sullage, Domestic Waste). - Where more than one recycle service is provided as per table for annul charge.

No. of Putrescible No. of Recycling Effluent Charge Name Amount ($) Waste Services Services Services (120L) <2 <2 Fortnightly 140L Dom. Waste Ftn Sullage 1 661.70 <2 <2 Fortnightly Domestic Waste Ftn Sullage 1 688.20 <2 2 Fortnightly 1 Waste 2 Rec Ftn Sullage 712.95 <2 2 Fortnightly 1 Waste 2 Recycle Ftn Sullage 739.45 2 <3 Fortnightly Domestic Waste Ftn Sullage 2 1,376.40 2 3 Fortnightly 2 Waste 3 Recycle 2 Ftn Sullage 1,427.65 2 4 Fortnightly 2 Waste 4 Recycle 2 Ftn Sullage 1,478.90

Domestic Waste with Weekly Effluent Removal

· In respect of land having a Domestic Waste Management Service consisting of effluent collection well(s) and removal of domestic effluent fortnightly and a waste bin collection domestic waste service. - Where there is a single dwelling a charge of $1,154.90 (240L bin for Domestic Waste) and $1,128.40 (140L bin for Domestic Waste) per annum (the charge to be called Domestic Waste Weekly Sullage). - Where there are multiple flats or dwellings on a property, as per table for annual charge. - Where more than one recycle service is provided as per table for annual charge.

No. of Putrescible No. of Recycling Effluent Charge Name Amount ($) Waste Services Services Services (120L) <2 <2 Weekly 140L Dom. Waste Wkly Sullage 1 1,128.40 <2 <2 Weekly Domestic Waste Wkly Sullage 1 1,154.90 <2 2 Weekly 1 Waste 2 Rec Wkly Sullage 1,179.65 <2 2 Weekly 1 Waste 2 Recycle Wkly Sullage 1,206.15 2 <3 Weekly Domestic Waste Wkly Sullage 2 2,309.80 2 3 Weekly 2 Waste 3 Recycle 2 Wkly Sullage 2,361.05

Management of the Organisation Page 70 Ordinary Meeting - Urgent Report 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

No. of Putrescible No. of Recycling Effluent Charge Name Amount ($) Waste Services Services Services (120L) 2 4 Weekly 2 Waste 4 Recycle 2 Wkly Sullage 2,412.30 3 <4 Weekly Domestic Waste Wkly Sullage 3 3,464.70 4 <5 Weekly Domestic Waste Wkly Sullage 4 4,619.60 5 5 Weekly Domestic Waste Wkly Sullage 5 5,774.50 6 6 Weekly Domestic Waste Wkly Sullage 6 6,929.40 7 7 Weekly Domestic Waste Wkly Sullage 7 8,084.30 8 8 Weekly Domestic Waste Wkly Sullage 8 9,239.20 9 9 Weekly Domestic Waste Wkly Sullage 9 10,394.10 10 10 Weekly Domestic Waste Wkly Sullage 10 11,549.00

Extra Effluent Service

Where an extra effluent removal collection is provided by Council, there is a charge of $17.95 Charges Under Section 611 Local Government Act.

Charge Name Rate Telecommunication Other Cables $550 per km Telecommunication Overhead Cables $1,100 per km Gas Supply Based on pipeline length and volume of sale

Management of the Organisation Page 71 ORDINARY MEETING LATE REPORTS CONTENTS

COUNCIL'S OPERATING ENVIRONMENT

13 2002-2003 Management Plan 36/36 73 Ordinary Meeting - Late Report 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

Council's Operating Environment

13 2002-2003 Management Plan 36/36

Compiled by: Barry Husking, Chief Financial Officer, Helen Lowndes, Corporate Development Manager, Peter Browne, Senior Corporate Accountant and Ross Kingsley, Strategic Planning and Research Co-ordinator Authorised by: Alan Travers, General Manager

Management Plan 4 Year Outcome (Page 107): Effective corporate governance has been maintained. Critical Action: Prepare, implement and review strategic and management plans and processes.

Purpose:

Exhibition of the Draft 2002-2003 Management Plan closed on Friday 7 June 2002. The purpose of this report is to:

· Identify matters arising during the exhibition of the draft plan · Recommend certain responses and actions be endorsed and where required, incorporated into Council’s Management Plan 2002-2003 · Make recommendations with regard to the adoption of the Management Plan. Background This Management Plan is Council’s third instalment of its four year Strategic Plan ‘Penrith City 2000+’. The master programs, issues, longer term goals and four year outcomes contained in the plan form Council’s principal activities up to the year 2004. Listed tasks provide details of actions required of the organisation in the 2002-2004 period. The Plan The Management Plan comprises three documents. These are: Part A ~ a Summary of the Management Plan Part B ~ the Operational Plan providing a complete list of the two-year tasks for the period 2002-2004 (including those two-year tasks scheduled to commence in 2003-04) and a detailed operating and capital budget for 2002-2003 including projects and works programs to be undertaken. Part C ~ the Revenue Policy which includes a complete listing of Council’s fees and charges for 2002-2003, information about rates, charges, borrowing and the basis for pricing.

Management of the Organisation Page 73 Ordinary Meeting - Late Report 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

Focus of the Plan A number of key focus areas were identified by Council in the preparation of the Plan. They include Maintaining Existing Services; addressing Asset Management; a Healthy Environment; Older Established Areas; Creating Jobs and A City To Be Proud Of. Public Consultation An extensive process of public consultation was undertaken for the Draft Management Plan. This included : 1. Public Notification of the Draft Management Plan This included : · Advice in Council’s Quarterly Community Report (March) distributed to all households; · A flyer direct mailed to all households from 3 May advertising the Exhibition and the consultation opportunities; · A 4-page brochure containing details of the Draft Management Plan including budget and rating proposals, and advertising the Public Meeting, direct mailed to all households and businesses in the City from 21 May; · A notice on the homepage of Council’s Website. · Two half-page advertisements in each local newspaper; Copies of the exhibition documents were forwarded to Penrith and St Marys Chambers of Commerce, Penrith City Centre Association, St Marys Town Centre Management Group, as well as representatives of the Economic Development and Employment Committee. 2. Public Exhibition Exhibition documents were publicly exhibited at a total of 75 locations for 29 days from Friday 10 May to Friday 7 June. These comprised Penrith Civic Centre, St Marys Queen Street Centre (business office and library), Central Library, Branch Libraries (South Penrith, St Clair and Emu Plains), all 19 Post Offices in the Penrith Local Government Area including rural post offices at Londonderry, Llandilo, Mulgoa, Wallacia, Kemp’s Creek and Luddenham, all of Council’s Children’s centres and all Neighbourhood and Community centres. In addition, copies of the documents were provided to the Visitor Information Centre, recreation and cultural centres, youth centres and other centres. Copies of the document in printed form and on CD-Rom could be obtained by the public from both the Penrith Civic Centre and the Queen Street Centre, and were available at each of the public meeting and consultative forums as well as by request. 3. Public Meeting Council through advertisements in all local newspapers and two direct mailouts to all households invited residents, ratepayers and interested parties to a public meeting held at the Civic Centre at 7.30pm on Thursday 30 May 2002, which was attended by 35 members of the public (compared to 12 attendees at this event in 2001). 4. Special Interest Forums Representatives from local environment, business and social/cultural organisations were invited to special interest forums held in the Civic Centre as follows. These meetings were also notified to the general public by newspaper and direct mail advertising, as outlined above.

Management of the Organisation Page 74 Ordinary Meeting - Late Report 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

· The Environment Group Consultation (145 invitees) held at 7.00pm on Monday 13 May 2002 was attended by 18 community representatives (compared to 11 in 2001); · The Social/Arts & Cultural/Community Safety Group Consultation (175 invitees) held at 7.00pm on Wednesday 15 May May 2001 was attended by 27 community representatives (compared to 25 in 2001); · The Economic Group Consultation (220 invitees) held at 7.00am on Tuesday 21 May 2002 was attended by 17 business and community representatives (compared to 8 in 2001). In addition to these formal consultations, a number of information presentations on the Draft Management Plan were made. These included: · presentation of the draft Parks Improvement Program to the Penrith Valley Sports Foundation meeting in February 2002. The draft Program was supported; · information on the Draft Management Plan presented to Council's Disability Access Committee meeting on 7 May 2002. The Committee was pleased to note the commitment made to the Disability Discrimination Action Plan project; · meetings with the Penrith City Centre Association and St Marys Town Centre Management Inc. in early May 2002 on the proposed programs for the Town Centres. The respective programs were supported; · briefings on the Draft Management Plan were provided to the State Members for Mulgoa, Penrith and Londonderry in late May/early June.

Results of Consultation A total of 197 submissions were received, as follows - 28 written submissions, 144 verbal submissions at consultative meetings, 12 e-mail/internet submissions and 13 telephone submissions. One petition signed by 36 residents was also received. This compares to a total of 65 submissions and one petition received in regard to last year’s exhibition of the 2001-2002 Draft Management Plan. A summary of the matters raised in all these submissions to the Draft Management Plan has been provided in Attachment A to this report. Any submissions received after the closing date will be reported to Council in a supplementary report to tonight’s meeting. All people who made submissions and all consultative meeting attendees were sent acknowledgement letters and those people who raised issues were also sent an initial response by the relevant managers to the matters raised. The Environment and Social/Arts & Cultural/Community Safety Consultative Forums included a number of Workshops which discussed issues relevant to these programs. Due to the format of these discussions and the range of issues covered, all the attendees at these two Forums were sent a summary of the forum and workshop discussions, rather than letters responding to individual submissions. The Economic Forum followed a single meeting format and particular matters raised have been responded to as individual submissions. The Workshops held at the Environment and Social Forums were felt to be a very positive and useful part of the consultation process, which may be repeated in future. As a large number of significant matters were discussed in the Workshops, a copy of the issues and responses are included in this report for Council’s consideration as Attachments D and E. All operational matters raised regarding Council’s existing policies and services, requests for specific actions or requests for further information have already been responded to. In some cases, further actions by relevant officers will be undertaken. Other key matters raised in submissions or issues requiring Council’s consideration are included in this report.

Management of the Organisation Page 75 Ordinary Meeting - Late Report 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

Budgetary Matters The exhibited Draft Management Plan contained financial estimates based on information available at the time. Additional information continued to be received during the public exhibition period and will continue to be received during the 2002-03 year. Amendments to the Management Plan Budget are processed at each quarterly review when new information impacts on the estimates in the budget or leads to Council changing the details of its priorities. Where this information is adequately quantified it is appropriate to amend the budget now rather than wait for future quarterly reviews. Items where revised information is now available and proposed to be included into the draft management plan include: S611 Gas Mains Levy - The NSW Government passed legislation to stop Councils from levying this charge and as a consequence, the item has not been included in the base budget. It is now clear that the legislation will not be proclaimed and hence an amount will continue to be received each year. It is proposed to include $53,000 of income into the draft budget. The amount is less than prior years based on the current trend of falls in the amount received. The LGSA has advised that it did not seem efficient to challenge AGL's application of the current levying structure when the provision was about to be abolished by statute. With the changed government position, the LGSA now advises that Councils proceed under the current arrangements and that the matter should be reviewed after final court decisions are reached on the telecommunications levies under s611. The Local Government Remuneration Tribunal has handed down its determination for 2002-03. At its meeting of 3 June 2002, Council adopted the determination in full including the reclassification of Penrith to a higher category. Based on the new schedule an additional $52,800 should be added to budgeted expenditure. S94 Contributions - The expected timing of contributions from developers (under Section 94 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act) has been revised by Council Officers. The revised estimates see a slower collection of contributions but do not impact on the spending of S94 funds. The revised S94 details are included in Attachment C to this report. Fire Service Levy - Advice has been received from the NSW Fire brigade that the Fire Service Levy for Councils will increase by an average 13.3%. Further advice is that Penrith’s contribution will be increasing by slightly more than the average. The LGSA is pursuing the matter which is seen as an unreasonable impost on Local Government. It is recommended to increase budgeted expenditure by $65,900 in response to this information. Financial Assistance Grant - Preliminary advice form the Department of Local Government indicates that the draft budget underestimates the increase in the Financial Assistance Grant. It is recommended that the draft figures provided by the Department be incorporated into the budget. In accordance with Council’s policy of allocating the Roads component to Roadwork, it is recommended that $73,300 be allocated to Road Resealing, leaving a net improvement of $122,400. The net affect of these changes, if adopted, is that the 2002-2003 Budget will start the year with an estimated surplus of $56,700 to be generated from the year's activities.

Management of the Organisation Page 76 Ordinary Meeting - Late Report 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

Key Matters arising from the Public Exhibition Matters arising from the public exhibition process have been identified as either : · Responses to the Proposed Rate Increase; · Master Program Matters; or · Fees, Charges and Budgetary Matters. These are addressed in the following sections of this report. Responses to the Proposed Rate Increase Council is seeking a Special Variation to General Rate Income of 4.8% in addition to the statutory rise of 3.3%. This revenue is to be used for the three Special Initiatives to enhance Council’s programs for: · Environmental Management; · Community Safety Development and Neighbourhood Renewal; and · Economic Development. Of the total of 197 submissions and one petition received on the exhibited Draft Management Plan, 7 submissions expressed opposition to Council’s proposed rate rise. At the public meeting and special interest forums, 2 attendees out of 97 expressed opposition to the Rate variation. 1 attendee expressed support. All three special interest forums demonstrated general support for the direction of the programs proposed in the Draft Management Plan. Three other submissions received specifically supported the Rate variation for the purposes proposed. The Rates section also answered a small number of enquiries about the effect of the proposed 2002-03 Rates on individual properties.

Master Program Matters The City in its Region

No key issues were identified in this Master Program for this section of the report. Responses to various other issues relating to this Master Program and details of submissions made are included in the Attachments.

The City in its Environment

Local Biodiversity Conservation Strategy Matter : Feedback from the Environment Consultative Forum and consideration by officers has indicated that a clearer approach should be taken to the development and implementation of a Local Biodiversity Conservation Strategy.

Management of the Organisation Page 77 Ordinary Meeting - Late Report 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

Response by the Environmental Planning Manager : It is recommended to combine the two draft tasks: 7.9 “Progress the preparation of a Local Biodiversity Conservation Strategy and implement initiatives” and 7.10 “Provide comprehensive technical information and mapping systems that support the development of a Local Biodiversity Conservation Strategy”. The proposed combined task is worded “Complete and implement a Local Biodiversity Conservation Strategy, that is supported by comprehensive technical information and mapping systems”. This more clearly commits Council to the finalisation of the Biodiversity Conservation Strategy, and developing appropriate technical responses and Action Plans for its implementation. These tasks were the subject of discussion in the Environment Consultative Forum, where there were clear messages from bushcare groups, and others involved in environmental management, that Council should be focussing on strategic biodiversity conservation – delivering the Biodiversity Conservation Plan, Action Plans and Plans of Management that provide guidance for continuing implementation activities. Recommended Actions : 1. That the recommended amendment to tasks 7.09 and 7.10 be approved. 2. Advice on this matter be forwarded to participants in the Environment Consultative Forum.

Bushland Management Officer Matter : The consensus of participants in one Workshop of the Environment Consultative Forum was that Council should create a position of Bushland Management Officer. It was suggested that this position would provide greater inhouse expertise and a more strategic approach to protection of the City’s natural areas, including preparation of Plans of Management. Several neighbouring Councils have an equivalent position. It was noted that this proposal has been consistently put forward in previous consultation with bushcare/landcare groups. Response by the Parks Construction and Maintenance Manager : Council has employed a Bushcare Officer for some years. This position is very active in supporting voluntary bushcare groups and leveraging community resources, actions and programs. this role will expand under the enhanced Environmental Management Program proposed in this Management Plan. In particular, the education element of the role will be expanded. It is recognised that natural areas management is integral to successful environmental outcomes. While not specifically contained within the originating two years of the Environmental Program, this deserves to be reviewed at the conclusion of that phase. Recommended Actions : 1. That the employment of a Bushland or Biodiversity Management Officer be reviewed at the completion of the first two years of Council’s expanded Environmental Management Program.

Management of the Organisation Page 78 Ordinary Meeting - Late Report 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

2. Advice on this matter be forwarded to participants in the Environment Consultative Forum and the Penrith Bushcare Network.

Medium Density Development Matter : A submission was received by a Cambridge Park resident raising concerns over increased medium density development, particularly in Barlow St, Cambridge Park. It was requested that Council place limits on over-development in established areas and clearly define the difference between zoning for two storey and attic-style developments. Further submissions were also received raising more general concerns over the limits to medium density development in the City.

Response by the Environmental Planning Manager : Council, in its considerations for the strategic direction of the City, has emphasised the need to ensure Penrith remains a place with a distinct character and identity. It has also recognised that indiscriminate urban development, without a clear planning framework, will threaten that attraction. The Residential Strategy was prepared in response to a State Government Policy which, in 1995, directed all Metropolitan Councils to prepare residential strategies that would address both local housing needs as well as contributing to the metropolitan objectives. The Penrith Residential Strategy adopted in 1997 established an approach to managing population growth and housing needs for the City over the next 25 years, in a sustainable manner. Part of that approach was locating multi-unit housing within established residential areas, which are centrally located and near transport and other services and facilities. The new Residential Plan reflecting this strategy reforms a number of older residential zoning controls, which allowed multi-unit housing across 95% of all residential zones in the City, including Cambridge Park. The old plan allowed for two-storey townhouses across wide areas of the City. The new multi-unit housing zones now comprise about 25% of all residential zones and were substantially reduced in the Cambridge Park area. Only part of Cambridge Park allows villa style housing of a single storey appearance. Cambridge Park, is predominantly zoned 2(b) Residential (Low Density) except for part of Barlow Street and the small precinct to the west, centred on the public reserve in College Street, which is zoned 2(c) Residential (Low – Medium Density), which only allows villa style housing of a single storey appearance. An issue emerging from the Residential Strategy was that, in recent years, growth in some of the older suburbs, such as Cambridge Park and St Marys, has declined. Locating some villa- style development in appropriate localities within these suburbs would not only provide a wider choice of housing, but also arrest the declining population numbers, thereby supporting the established social and physical infrastructures, such as shops, public parks, schools, and community centres. Given the limited number of lots zoned for villa style development in the street, the overall impact on the streetscape and traffic is considered to be within acceptable limits, and is not therefore considered to be an over-development of the street or the locality. Further, each of the new developments is required to provide landscaping (including street tree planting and other civic improvements), and attracts specific developer contributions towards local services and facilities, including open space improvements.

Management of the Organisation Page 79 Ordinary Meeting - Late Report 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

These submissions have prompted consideration of how these changes might be more fully explained to concerned communities. A further report will be provided examining that shortly. Recommended Actions : 1. A further report be provided to Council on effective communication to the community on issues regarding medium density development. 2. Advice on this matter be forwarded to those residents who made submissions on the issue.

Heritage Issues Matter : In comment at the Public Meeting and and written submissions, concerns have been raised regarding Council’s support for heritage conservation and the status of heritage issues in the City. Particular issues raised included: · Concern that heritage is a low priority for Council; · Preservation of Council owned heritage buildings; · Suggested heritage drive for Aboriginal sites; · Need to complete the second part of the City’s history; · Suggested incentives for heritage owners; · Adequacy of restoration and maintenance of cemeteries including two of the oldest NSW cemeteries; · Request to improve Arms of Australia Inn museum building, including upgrade of security; · Concern that current funding is not sufficient to carry out the work of Nepean District Historical Society’s work; · Request to accelerate review of Council’s Heritage Conservation LEP; · Justification for $1.65m funding for Penrith Regional Gallery when Arms of Australia only receives a low level of funding; · Lack of authority of Council’s Heritage Advisory Committee. Response by the Environmental Planning Manager : Council’s Strategic Plan specifically acknowledges the importance of heritage, and one of Council’s longer term strategic goals identifies the need to ‘preserve the value of the City’s heritage’. The Strategic Plan (2000–2004) aims to encourage the community to appreciate and conserve the ‘City’s cultural and environmental heritage values’. Council’s commitment to heritage has been demonstrated through the establishment of the Heritage Committee, and its continuing funding of the Heritage Advisory Service, that provides free advice and guidance to those involved in the ownership and management of the City’s heritage buildings and places. The participation of residents in heritage conservation, and particularly contributions to the Heritage Committee are gratefully acknowledged. The Heritage Committee has been previously encouraged to develop specific proposals for Council funding that may be directed to promoting heritage within the City. Council is prepared to consider any detailed funding proposal that is submitted as part of its annual Management Plan process. It is recognised that there were approaches to development in the past that may have been managed differently in the light of today’s knowledge and understanding. The Heritage Committee and local heritage groups have all contributed by providing comments on specific

Management of the Organisation Page 80 Ordinary Meeting - Late Report 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

developments, and broader urban release projects, thus assisting Council to ensure that the City’s heritage is managed and protected. Council has recently developed and publicly exhibited a draft Heritage Management Development Control Plan (DCP), that provides a system for identifying places of potential heritage significance, introduces an archival heritage recording policy, and other relevant provisions. Council also supports an ongoing program that provides specific heritage training to appropriate staff. The importance of this will continue to be stressed in keeping staff abreast of Heritage issues. Looking at the present and to the future however, there are significant responses emerging in this next year’s Management Plan which will provide both Council and the community with a more comprehensive information base for ensuring the City’s heritage continues to be protected. The last Heritage Study was undertaken in 1987, which is now 15 years ago. Council has recognised for some time the need for a new audit of the City’s heritage. A new Heritage Study and Heritage Strategy process is to be commenced in July 2002. The new Strategy will provide clarity and direction for further refining and improving Council’s controls and guidelines for development in the vicinity of, and on, heritage buildings and places. It is important to recognise, however, that having legislative controls and regulations in place does not provide the only means of managing and protecting the City’s heritage buildings and places. The current draft Heritage Management Plan will also provide provisions and advice to guide the appropriate recognition of potential heritage items, that are not included in Penrith’s Heritage Conservation LEP. Council has in recent years been successful in negotiating appropriate solutions in cases where heritage buildings were not included in our current planning instruments. Council certainly recognises the importance and value of encouraging the interest, of visitors to and residents of the City, in our local heritage. The recently-completed Penrith Valley Heritage Drive visits many historic sites in the City such as the Museum of Fire, Upper Castlereagh Village, Minnaville, Nepean Park, Hadley Park, Landers Inn, Castlereagh Cemetery, Cranebrook Village and St Thomas’s Church, Mulgoa. The suggestion of incentives for heritage owners is one that can be included in the Heritage Study and Strategy development. Opportunities for a Heritage Drive for Aboriginal sites in the City will require further assessment. Response by the Facilities Operations Manager : The $1.65M funding for Penrith Regional Gallery is grant monies provided by the State Government. The majority of this funding will be directed towards restoration works on the historic components of the Regional Gallery and gardens included as items of local heritage significance in Council’s Heritage LEP. Over the last few years approximately $54,000 has been spent by Council on renovations to the Arms of Australia Inn Museum. This has included replacement of the main shingle roof, replacement of the perimeter fence and replacement of the rear administrative building roof. Recent renovation works at other historic Council buildings include Emu Plains Old School, Melrose Hall and the Castlereagh Hall. Council officers are assisting the management committee of the Arms of Australia Inn Museum in making applications for grant funds for further work on the site. With regard to Council’s heritage cemeteries, work to restore and maintain the areas is ongoing. Council officers are also seeking grant funding to assist these programs.

Management of the Organisation Page 81 Ordinary Meeting - Late Report 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

Response by the Information Manager : A major component of Council’s Library service is the provision of Local History resources and services to the community, particularly support for research and local history initiatives. The Library also undertakes or coordinates various history projects for the area. A recent example is the oral history project for Dunheved and workers on the former St Marys Munitions Factory site. It has not been possible to progress the second part of the History of Penrith due to the substantial costs involved and other funding priorities. Opportunities for external grant funding may provide a means of advancing this project in the future. Recommended Actions : 1. That the 2002-03 Heritage Study include assessment of incentives for heritage owners. 2. The opportunity for a Heritage Drive for Aboriginal sites in the City be further assessed. 3. Advice on these matters be forwarded to the residents who made submissions.

The City as a Social Place

Support for Penrith Valley Concert Band Matter : Penrith Valley Concert Band has made a request for Council for additional support and assistance in finding new premises, as the Band’s current base at the Museum of Fire will no longer be available.

Response by the Facilities Operations Manager : This matter is addressed by a separate report in tonight’s Business Paper. Recommended Actions : Advice on this matter be forwarded to Penrith Valley Concert Band.

Accessibility of Council Services to Rural Area Residents Matter: A number of concerns were raised by participants at the Social/Arts and Cultural/Community Safety Consultative Forum Workshops and in written submissions regarding the needs of residents living in rural and more isolated areas of the City. Particular matters raised included: · Many of Council’s core services are not readily available in the rural areas; · Need for improved dissemination of information on Council services, programs, What’s On and Community information newsletters to the rural areas. Residents in these areas are often not aware of what is happening in Penrith;

Management of the Organisation Page 82 Ordinary Meeting - Late Report 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

· Needs of youth in more isolated and rural areas. For example transportation and recreational activities; · Needs of the elderly in more isolated areas; · Concerns about Council’s plans for rural lands (apart from the Rural Lands Study); · Concern that needs of the rural community are not addressed in the Draft Management Plan and that rural residents are disadvantaged in comparison to urban residents.

Response by Director - City Strategy: Council has recognised the issue of rural residents having an expectation of receiving services similar to those received in the urban and more readily serviced parts of the City. Examples of Council’s responses to these issues include the sealing of all rural roads in the City, extension of waste collection services to rural areas and provision of home library and other services. This issue is one needing more assessment before specific measures are taken. This will involve the assessment of equity, feasibility and the practicality of providing services of equal extent and quality across urban and rural areas. Further investigation of these matters needs to occur.

Recommended Actions : 1. A further report be provided to Council on the matters raised. 2. Advice on these matters be forwarded to those residents who made the submissions.

The City as an Economy

Erskine Park Employment Area Matter : A resident of Emu Plains raised concern as to why Council is providing funds for Erskine Park Employment Area when there are properties for lease in Dunheved Industrial Area and vacant industrial zoned land remaining along Castlereagh Road. It was suggested that Council needs to put more effort into maintaining and upgrading established industrial estates. A resident of Leonay also raised concerns as to why Council is pursuing the development of Erskine Park Employment Area on the basis that it will benefit private developers not the interests of ratepayers. Response by Local Economic Development Program Manager : Erskine Park Employment Area represents one of the major opportunities to enlarge the employment base of the City with the potential to deliver up to 10,000 job suited to the skills of our local workforce. Given Council’s emphasis on achieving a balance between the availability of jobs and those in the local workforce the development of Erskine Park is seen to be central that objective. There are a number of Critical Actions and Tasks within the Draft Management Plan that promote development of and encourage take-up of existing zoned employment lands (Tasks

Management of the Organisation Page 83 Ordinary Meeting - Late Report 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

19.01 to 19.05) as well as the implementation of improvements to services and infrastructure for those areas (Tasks 18.12, 18.14 and 18.12). Funding for identified improvements to Council infrastructure in these areas is provided through annual asset management and other programs. Recommended Actions : Advice on these matters be forwarded to the residents who made the submissions.

The City Supported by Infrastructure

No key issues were identified in this Master Program for this section of the report. Responses to various other issues relating to this Master Program and details of submissions made are included in the Attachments.

Council’s Operating Environment

Organisational productivity gains and cost savings

Matter : A resident of Emu Plains objected to the rate rise on the basis that the Draft Management Plan does not include details of any cutting of costs or increases in productivity achieved by the organisation to justify the proposed rate increase.

Response by Chief Financial Officer and Corporate Development Manager:

Over recent years there have been significant gains in productivity and efficiency as well as cost savings achieved by the organisation. This has included: · Implementation of medium to long term financial strategies to maximise income and reduce expenditure. Examples include debt servicing initiatives and innovative procurement practices; · Contracting of service delivery where that approach is more effective. (approximately $14.0 million of services per annum); · Introduction of more efficient work practices to improve productivity and efficiency. Examples include workplace agreements, an extensive and structured program of training and skill development for the workforce, innovative and flexible responses to industry requirements; · Improved alignment and continual adjustment of Council’s organisation structure to match its strategic programs; · Introduction of more effective systems and procedures to support work outputs. Examples include the development of specifications for all Council services to improve service level definition and delivery and enable more informed decisions regarding funding priorities; · Successful applications for grants totalling millions of dollars to construct and upgrade community assets and support community services;

Management of the Organisation Page 84 Ordinary Meeting - Late Report 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

· Significant investment in IT systems which enhance our productivity; · Improved customer services; · Implementation of various Asset Management Systems to identify, quantify and assess the condition of civil assets; · Extensive use of recycled materials in construction works. As well as productivity and efficiency gains Council has also been required to absorb various increased non-discretionary costs during the same period. For example: · The expansion of Council services required to meet the needs of population growth that has taken place in new and established urban areas as well as employment growth in industrial and commercial areas; · An expanded quantity of assets eg. roads, drainage (including water quality) and parks; · Greater devolvement of responsibilities from other levels of government; · More complex assessment processes for development applications resulting from the introduction of further changes to environmental legislation; · Increasingly prescriptive directives from other levels of government with greater reporting requirements on Council’s programs and performance in meeting community needs and expectations; · Increasing focus on risk management in response to legislative requirements, cost of insurance and litigation; · Conformity to ESD principles, as a means of better managing the community’s resources and improving total quality of life; · Greater community expectations regarding service provision, community consultation and communication. While Council has absorbed these costs, staff numbers (excluding child care) required to deliver the growing program of annual activities has stayed approximately the same from 1998 to 2001 (now 882 permanent staff). Staff costs as a percentage of Council’s total budget have remained at approximately 42% over this period. Due to the extent of improvements to productivity and cost efficencies achieved by the organisation over recent years it is proposed to present a more comprehensive report to Council on this matter as part of Council’s end of year review of the current year’s Management Plan. Recommended Actions: 1. That a further report be provided to Council on productivity and efficiency gains and cost savings achieved by the organisation over recent years as part of Council’s end of year review of the 2001-2002 Management Plan. 2. Advice on this matter be forwarded to the resident who made the submission.

Notification of Public Meeting and Consultative Forums

Matter : An Emu Plains resident who attended the public meeting raised concern that the 4 page Management Plan information brochure was received on the day of the public meeting. He noted that the brochure also referred to three special interest forums that had already been held in the preceding 2 weeks. He questioned the adequacy of Council’s notification to residents.

Management of the Organisation Page 85 Ordinary Meeting - Late Report 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

Response by the Corporate Development Manager: The information brochure was the final component of an expanded notification program that Council endorsed for the 2002-2003 Management Plan exhibition. The main purpose of the program was to encourage residents and ratepayers to view the exhibition material, contact Council for more information if needed and to make comment on the Draft Plan through various ways before the end of the exhibition period. Options for obtaining more information and making submissions included the special interest forums and public meeting. The total notification program included the following: 1. Community Newsletter - Initial advice to residents of the upcoming Draft Management Plan in Council’s February edition of its Community Newsletter. 2. Ist Direct Mail-out to residents between May 1 to May 3. This was an A5 size leaflet providing notice of the upcoming exhibition and locations, special interest forums and public meeting, opportunity for public comment/submissions and contact details for more information; 3. Penrith City Council News Page - Information regarding the draft Management Plan was placed regularly through the exhibition period in the Council’s Mayoral news section of 3 weekday papers. The first occurred in all 3 papers from Tuesday 7th May to Friday 10th May. 4. Media Articles - Council provided regular media releases regarding components of the Draft Plan and reminders for the community about how they could have their say. Articles on the Draft Management Plan appeared regularly in the major local newspapers from Friday May 3rd. 5. Local Newspaper Advertisements - Notification of the community through half-page advertisements twice in all local newspapers starting in the week that the exhibition commenced. The notices included a summary of the content of the Draft Plan, revenue policy, consultative forums and Public Meeting dates and opportunities for the community to make submissions on the Draft Plan. 6. Exhibitions Locations – the Management Plan was placed on public exhibition at 75 locations throughout the City. These included Council’s Administrative Centres in Penrith and St Marys, all Libraries, all Post Offices, Neighbourhood Centres and Halls and Council’s Child Care Centres. The draft Plan was also placed on Council’s web-site where 24-hour access can be obtained. 7. 2nd Direct Mail-out to residents – a 4 page leaflet summarising Council’s proposed 2002/03 Management Plan program as well as similar information to the first mail-out on the consultative forums and public meeting. This mail-out was also extended to all business post office boxes and business street addresses in the City (over 5,000 additional copies). As the content of the brochure could not be finalised until after Council adopted the draft Plan for exhibition on May 6th printing could not commence until later that week. While the bulk of the mail-out occurred between May 17th to May 24th some areas unfortunately extended over to the following week. This included Emu Plains. Reference to the first two special interest forums on May 13th and 15th in the brochure was unintentional in view of the earlier timetabling of these meetings this year. Recommended Actions :

Management of the Organisation Page 86 Ordinary Meeting - Late Report 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

Advice on this matter be forwarded to the resident who made the submission. Fees and Charges for 2002-2003 Arising from the exhibition of the Draft Management Plan, certain alterations to the Part C ~ Revenue Policy/Fees and Charges are required. Recommended changes to those Fees and Charges exhibited in the Draft Plan are detailed in Attachment B to this report. The reasons for these amendments are discussed in the matters detailed below.

The City in its Environment

Minor Adjustments to exhibited Fees Matter : A number of minor adjustments and clarifications by way of explanatory notes are required within the Environment Master Program fees and charges under the headings Development Applications, Public Notification, Sewage Management, Domestic Waste and Miscellaneous matters. These recommended adjustments are detailed in Attachment B. Response by the Senior Corporate Accountant: These minor amendments are to bring fees into line with recent Council resolutions or to clarify the nature of the charge which is levied. Recommended Actions : That corrections to the draft 2002-2003 Fees for The City in its Environment as detailed in Attachment B to this report be adopted.

The City as a Social Place

Corrections to exhibited Children’s Services Fees Matter : A number of corrections are required in the proposed 2002-2003 fees for Children’s Services due to changes in administrative procedures and technical errors.

Response by the Children’s Services Manager: This matter has previously been advised to Councillors by memo and by written information provided to all users of the services affected. This advice included information on the amended fees which would be proposed through this report. No objections have been received in response to the information provided to users. These corrections are not relevant to any of the submissions discussed elsewhere in this report which objected to proposed increases in Children’s Services Fees. Recommended Actions : 1. That corrections to the draft 2002-2003 Fees for Children’s Services as detailed in Attachment B to this report be adopted.

Management of the Organisation Page 87 Ordinary Meeting - Late Report 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

2. Further advice on this matter be forwarded to the users of those centres affected.

Emu Village Before & After School Care Centre Fees Matter : A petition signed by 36 parents of children using the centre was received, objecting to the proposed increase in fees for 2002-2003. The petition and a covering letter state the difficulties that parents would experience with the level of fee increase and the potential impact on the utilisation of the Emu Village Children’s Centre.

Response by the Children’s Services Manager : The setting of Children’s Services fees always requires considerable planning and thought to consider the impact on families. Council has been particularly concerned in developing the draft 2002-03 fees to look at equity for all the families using our services across the whole City. This year we have experienced some significant increases in costs which have a direct impact on fees. As we need an income that will meet the costs of providing the service all centres are experiencing fee increases. However, as we also understand the constraints felt by families we have paid particular attention to the range of fee levels across the City and are gradually adjusting our fee levels in centres so that wherever families live in the City they can expect a similar level of service at a similar fee. This year we have commenced a process to draw fee levels in different centres closer together. Consideration will be given to the suggestion made by the petitioners that the process to achieve a similar fee level across the City be phased in gradually. However, the fee increase for Emu Village B&A is approximately 43 cents a day more than the average fee increase and no greater than other services in the same fee range. Our calculations indicate that at this rate of increase it could take up to 10 years to equalise the fees across the City. The proposed fee for the Emu Village Children’s Centre remains the lowest proposed fee for both morning and afternoon services, being $2.05 less than the highest fee in the morning and $4.05 less than the highest fee in the afternoon proposed for Council’s services. The level of the proposed fee increase is consistent with other OOSH services also in the lowest fee bracket. A comparison has also been made with other service types and the increases are also in line with those proposed for Long Day Care and other Vacation Care Services. We have just received notification from the Department of Family and Community Services of the new Child Care Benefit rates and these indicate that more families will be eligible for increased rebate. Whilst this may not assist all families with the increase in fees we hope that it will minimise the impact felt for the majority. Recommended Actions : Advice on this matter be forwarded to the parents who submitted the petition and to other users of Emu Village B&A Centre.

Increases to Children’s Services Fees and Equity Issues Matter : Several written and verbal submissions were received from parents of children using Council’s Children’s Services Centres objecting to the fee increases in the services as proposed in the Draft Management Plan. The following key points were made in the submissions:

Management of the Organisation Page 88 Ordinary Meeting - Late Report 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

(i) Will Council supply each Centre with same computer resources. (ii) Staff training and Award increases is budgeted every year, it is nothing new. (iii) Great concern over increasing fees at some Centres to assist other Centres running at a loss. (iv) Why were non-viable Centres allowed to run at a deficit, why have these issues not been acted on sooner? Parents should not have to pay for Council’s lack of action. Council should absorb the deficit not pass them on to parents. (v) Why are some Centres in the same area charging different fees - those with higher fees will suffer. (vi) Why were Centres asked to prepare a budget to a certain amount then told the figure per child per day after this was completed. Original budgets would have been sufficient as in the past.

Response by the Children’s Services Manager : In the forthcoming year Council plans to implement a change process to a more equitable way to financially manage Children’s Services. This new process more accurately reflects the true costs of running the total provision of Children’s Services. This follows extensive investigations into how Council can best support children to reach their potential, wherever they live and attend Children’s Services in the City. Specific comment is made below to the main points of concern raised in the submissions received. (i) Information Technology Resources Each centre over past years has been informed of Council’s requirement for Information Technology and has had in place the hardware and software required for the computerised systems which are currently in use. Therefore, it is expected that they have the appropriate resources to meet their current needs. In the future, resource requirements and replacements will be identified and funding options prioritised to provide these. A centralised fund is being generated in the 2003/03 budget to fund Information Technology requirements. (ii) Absorption of Training Costs into the Budget Mandatory staff training requirements have increased training costs. The cost of relief to release staff to attend training has increased also. Centres have economised on provision for staff training in the past creating differences in staffing conditions. This is rectified in the 2002-03 budgets to ensure equity of access to training for staff in all services. It is agreed that award provisions for staff salaries are implemented automatically, however these do increase next year’s costs at a higher rate than CPI. In the next budget year there are additional costs to previous years, such as 9 weeks paid maternity leave for permanent and relief staff. This is a high cost to children’s services with a young female workforce. In addition the superannuation compulsory charge has increased for 8% to 9%. (iii) Use of Centre Fee Income Previously Managed by S377 Committees and the Setting of Fees for 2002-03 S377 parent management committees are committees of Council. The funds that have been managed by centre committees are Council funds. Council sees Children’s Services as a total service. The new system more clearly identifies the expenditure and income of the total service rather than centres as discrete individual units. There has been an assurance given that where centres have allocated funds for approved projects these funds will be preserved for this purpose. The total provision of Children’s Services continues to have an operational surplus. All centres contribute income to this service. Budget for expenditure is distributed accordingly. The change to a centralised financial system is providing a more transparent and accurate picture of the sources of income and expenditure. The fees recommended for 2002-03 are the minimum possible to provide equitable increases in fees across the City. If we did not do this

Management of the Organisation Page 89 Ordinary Meeting - Late Report 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

parents using some centres would face unreasonable fee increases with no relativity to fee increases in other centres. (iv) Concerns about the Management and Viability of Centres Council has made a commitment to support families and children across the whole City. This means that resources may need targeting towards different centres in different years (as has been evident over the past 6 years) if all children using our centres are to have the chance to reach their potential. There has been significant and substantial action by Council in the management of services. Management by individual committees and monitoring by Council Officers has been effective. When judging management consideration must be given to the circumstances and variables of each centre. Centres in deficit were and continue to be monitored on a monthly basis. Council officers identify the variables that cause these deficits and develop strategies with centres to address these issues. Many centres in deficit in the past are now returning operational surpluses. In regard to financial viability, utilisation is a key factor in two ways. For example, each vacant place generates a loss of approximately $9,000 per annum in Long Day Care. This can move a centre from a surplus to deficit position very quickly. The number of places available in each suburb and population growth affects utilisation levels. This differs between suburbs. Conversely some centres that have had full utilisation and consistent staffing in past years are finding that as they cannot increase utilisation for the next budget they have little ability to absorb increased costs compared to those who can increase the estimated utilisation levels. In regard to the proposal that Council should absorb any deficits, Council has established a Children’s Services reserve and this continues to support the operations of Children’s Services. This does not have unlimited capacity to absorb deficits. As with any budget the use of this reserve is subject to careful consideration of all relevant factors, including alternative income generated from fees. Any other subsidy to the operations of Children’s Services flows through as a cost to ratepayers. Council has a policy that mainstream Children’s Services operate on a break – even basis. Council achieves this through the grant funding it receives and sufficient fee income to meet expenditure. This is a consideration when recommending fee levels. Fee levels are then set at the cost of providing Children’s Services. (v) Concerns about the Differences in Fee Levels Across the City The difference in fee levels is due to historic factors such as those of utilisation identified above. Other factors include staffing costs that vary between centres, the age of the building and levels of maintenance and past needs to upgrade facilities. In previous years fees have been set at the levels recommended by S377 parent management committees. It is our aim to bring fees to similar levels across all suburbs of the City. This is a priority and will need to be phased in over a number of years. Some movement has been made with Pre-schools and Before and After School Services to bring fees to similar levels as part of the current budget development process. Simultaneously, our other priority this year was to minimise fee increases given the significant increases in costs. With Long Day Care (which involves the high costs of baby care) it was not possible to reduce the difference in fees between centre without disadvantaging families using some centres. This would have meant some families experiencing approximately $60.00 a week fee increase. Our prime objective in this situation has been to introduce a similar range of fee increases across the City of between $20.00 per week or $4.00 per day. The situation of fee differences has existed since Council began operating Children’s Services. Strategies are in place to rectify these differences but will take a number of years to phase in.

Management of the Organisation Page 90 Ordinary Meeting - Late Report 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

(vi) Concerns about the Budget Development Process A new system for developing budget was introduced for the 2002-03 budgets. This was explained at the budget training meeting and in information packages. A transitional process was put in place to capture specific requirements of centres (facilitating centre input) and to standardise provisions in the budget where possible to move towards improved equity across services. Centres were asked to provide information based on accurate operating costs. They were also asked to submit any variations they recommended. This enabled us to identify the true cost of running each individual service. Centres were advised that their recommendations would enable us to consider individual requirements and also the requirements for the total provision of children services. The result of the information that was gathered was then used to develop individual budgets for centres to work from in 2002-03. It also allowed us to determine the most reasonable fee level possible across all centres. As indicated before the use of the original budgets or as we call them “true cost budgets” would have resulted in unreasonable fee increases in other centres as explained above. It was identified in the training and information packages that committees and staff would have input into the budget process, but would not be making the final recommendations. It was also identified that the final budget recommendation would be relayed to centres by Council Officers. Recommended Actions : Advice on this matter be forwarded to the parents who made submissions.

Neighbourhood Facilities Fees and Charges A complete review of all fees and charges for Council’s directly managed centres was undertaken in 2001-02. As part of that review community-based centre committees were also asked to review their fees and charges to reflect any increased costs associated with the running of the centres and contemporary market hire charges. All regular users of Council’s directly managed centres were advised of proposed fee changes in the draft 2002-2003 Management Plan affecting their centres. Some users and representatives of users have expressed concern about those changes in submissions. Those matters are addressed below. As reported to Council during the preparation of the Draft 2002-2003 Management Plan the approach to the setting of fees for functions at directly managed facilities is proposed to be changed from flat rates to hourly rates. Further, fees for casual use, where possible, have been made relatively equal across similar centres. Many fees in the directly managed centres have not changed since 1998-99, and some have remained the same even longer. The Facilities Operations Department recognises that many centres require additional attention being paid to operational and minor maintenance matters that impact upon the community to enjoy the use of our facilities. Over the next year, concerted efforts will be made to attend to these issues in all centres. The Draft Management Plan proposes increased allocations by Council to improvements in and maintenance of Neighbourhood Facilities. Where fee decreases are recommended there will have no impact on revenue as it is intended to meet income budgets via a combination of other fees increases and better utilisation as a consequence of marketing and other initiatives. Responses to submissions and recommendations arising are detailed in the following matters.

Management of the Organisation Page 91 Ordinary Meeting - Late Report 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

Emu Plains and Emu Heights Community Centres Matter : Submissions were received from CM Dance Co. and Emu Community Project Inc. regarding the proposed changes to fees for these centres.

Response by the Facilities Operations Manager : The commercial group fee was proposed to increase from $6.60 to $11.00 per hour and from $7.70 to $13.00 per hour respectively for the small and large meeting rooms at these centres. This fee was last changed in 1998/99. The fees for use of Emu Heights Community Centre are relatively low, and the increase was meant to more appropriately reflect fees charged at equivalent centres. CM Dance submit that the viability of their activity will be affected by the increase in fees. The submission highlights the impact a 60% increase in fees would have on this user and probably others. The Emu Community Project disagrees with the fee increases proposed for both centres. The Project operates a number of activities in the Centres and these increases will force increased costs to their participants. They submit that user fees should be kept to a minimum so that no resident is disadvantaged. While the need for the fees to better reflect costs and comparable charges at other centres remains, assessment of the submission suggests that it would be reasonable to phase in fee increases. This also applies to the large meeting room at Emu Plains Community Centre. It is recommended that lower increased fees of $10.00 and $9.00 be applied in 2002/2003 subject to further reviews the following year. The Project also submits that the 2 hour minimum use for Emu Heights does not affect the centre. This minimum was an error in the compilation of the Schedules and was not meant to apply. Reference to the minimum should be deleted from the Fees and Charges. Recommended Actions : 1. That the draft 2002-2003 fees for Emu Heights Community Centre be amended as follows: Large Meeting Room - Commercial Groups $10.00 per hour Small Meeting Room - Commercial Groups $9.00 per hour Small Meeting Room - 2 Hour Minimum Delete 2. That the draft 2002-2003 fees for Emu Plains Community Centre be amended as follows: Large Meeting Room - Commercial Groups $10.00 per hour 3. Advice on this matter be forwarded to CM Dance Co., Emu Community Project Inc. and other users of these centres.

Vacation Care Hiring Fee at Namatjira Neighbourhood Centre Matter : A submission was received from Werrington Community Project regarding the non-profit Namitjira Before and After School Care Service that is auspiced by the Project. The B&A is charged $22.00 a day for using the Centre, and this fee is not proposed for increase. The same fee applies to a B&A service operating at Londonderry Neighbourhood Centre. Both these

Management of the Organisation Page 92 Ordinary Meeting - Late Report 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment fees equate to around $3.00 per hour, which is well below hire fees for other users of both facilities. The Namitjira B&A has just commenced a vacation care service, and intends to offer this service in the future. The initial program was charged at $30.00 per day or around $3.00 per hour. Under the general charging regime proposed, an hourly rate of $7.50 would be charged, totalling $82.50 per day for the vacation care service. The Project has requested that the fees for this service be waived. Response by the Facilities Operations Manager : In support of its submission, the Project submits that such a fee would prohibit the service being offered; centres are not generally booked in holidays and that there would be no loss to Council; presence of users in holidays would help to minimise vandalism; continued staff and parent support to maintenance activities. The use of the centre in holidays is worth encouraging. The continued support of the parents and friends of the B&A service as well as the project is acknowledged and appreciated. Vacation Care services are also operating at Surveyors Creek Community Centres and Coowarra Cottage, with the current charges of $6.60 and $5.50 per hour changing to $7.50 per hour in 2002/03. As this vacation care service is in the early establishment phase, as compared to the other two services , it is considered reasonable to apply a lower fee of $3.00 per hour consistent with the initial program fee. Recommendation: 1. That a fee of $3.00 per hour be applied to the Namatjira Vacation Care Service at this point. 2. Advice on this matter be forwarded to Werrington Community Project Inc.

South Penrith Neighbourhood Centre - Security Bonds Matter : This centre is managed by South Penrith Youth and Neighbourhood Services Inc. The Committee has requested an increase in security bonds at the centre from the present $100.00 to $500.00 for 16th – 21st birthday parties and to $200.00 for other functions on the basis that the centre has experienced events where damage has exceeded the bond amount. It is noted that the Committee did not request a change to the 2001/02 $100.00 fee structure for the centre at the time of preparing the Draft Management Plan. This request was submitted as a result of the public exhibition of the draft plan. Response by the Facilities Operations Manager : All functions have a potential for damage to occur and a single bond level is preferred. Most facilities now have a bond of $250.00 for functions and this is considered appropriate to be applied to all centres. Booking forms include information on the hirer’s responsibility for the conduct of their guest’s behaviour. All hirers are responsible for ensuring that damage does not occur. Recommended Actions : 1. That the Security Bond at South Penrith Neighbourhood Centre in 2002-2003 be increased from the proposed $100.00 to $250.00. 2. Advice on this matter be forwarded to South Penrith Youth and Neighbourhood Services Inc.

Management of the Organisation Page 93 Ordinary Meeting - Late Report 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

Cook Parade Neighbourhood Centre Matter : A submission has been received from Anthony Darling, a regular user of the Cook Parade Neighbourhood Centre regarding the proposed increase in fees from $9.90 to $11.00 per hour. This fee was last changed in 1998/99. Mr Darling indicates that he is required to clean the hall prior to his use. His public liability costs have also risen and the viability of his activity may be threatened.

Response by the Facilities Operations Manager : There should be no need for the Centre to be cleaned prior to its use. In addition to programmed cleaning by Council, each user is expected to clean up after their use, so the next user receives a clean venue. The cleaning regimes will be improved and user cleaning monitored to ensure all users receive a clean and usable venue. The fee increase to $11.00 per hour is considered reasonable in the context of increasing costs and comparable market charging rates . Public liability costs for local businesses and community groups is an issue of which Council is keenly aware, but which cannot reasonably be addressed within our neighbourhood facilities fees.

Recommended Actions : 1. Advice on this matter be forwarded to Mr Anthony Darling.

Cambridge Park Hall Meeting Room Fees Matter : Submissions have been received from regular hirers of the meeting room, Liz Veneri and Chi-Chinese Healing College contending that the proposed commercial group fee increase from $7.70 to $11.00 per hour will make it difficult for them to meet the increase with their relatively small client base. Response by the Facilities Operations Manager : As this fee was last changed in 1998/99, an increase in fees is considered reasonable to better reflect increased costs and comparable charges elsewhere. Given concerns over similar changes at Emu Plains and Emu Heights, as discussed above, the change is recommended to be limited to $10.00 per hour. Recommended Actions : 1. That the draft 2002-2003 fees for Cambridge Park Hall be amended as follows: Meeting Room - Commercial Groups $10.00 per hour 2. Advice on this matter be forwarded to Ms Liz Veneri, Chi-Chinese Healing College and other users of the centre.

Management of the Organisation Page 94 Ordinary Meeting - Late Report 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

Werrington Downs Neighbourhood Centre Fees Matter : The Co-ordinator of the Koala Kids Playgroup has raised concern regarding the fee increase on the basis that while the venue is ideal for playgroups, the condition of the centre has deteriorated due to a number of factors. The playgroup has operated at the centre for 15 years. A submission has also been received from Sandra Fleetons Productions that the increases in commercial group fees will not be able to be borne by their small dance class operation. These classes are supported by volunteers. Many children do a number of dance classes, and the increases in fees may result in the loss of customers thus making the classes unviable.

Response by the Facilities Operations Manager : Concerns about operational and maintenance matters raised in the Playgroup’s submission will be dealt with in consultation with the playgroup and other users. The matters raised included recovering the shade structure; cover for the sandpit; and cleaning regimes for inside the centre. We are presently working through a program of improvements where required for Council’s centres. The issues raised above and any others will be addressed through a priority list of works by Council officers. The community group fees for Werrington Downs Neighbourhood Centre are proposed to be increased from $7.15 and $6.05 per hour to $7.50 per hour for Activity Room 1 and Activity Room 2. The commercial group fees are proposed to increase from $8.25 and $7.15 per hour for Activity Room 1 and Activity Room 2, to $11.00 per hour for either room. Fees were last changed in 1998/99 and the increases are proposed to better reflect cost rises and comparable charges elsewhere Similar to the approach recommended for Emu Plains and Emu Heights, assessment of the submissions suggests that it would be reasonable to phase in fee increases. It is recommended that lower increased fees of $10.00 per hour be applied in 2002/2003 subject to further revue in the following year. Recommended Actions : 1. That the draft 2002-2003 fees for Werrington Downs Neighbourhood Centre be amended as follows: Activity Room 1 - Commercial Groups $10.00 per hour Activity Room 2 - Commercial Groups $10.00 per hour 2. Advice on this matter be forwarded to Koala Kids Playgroup, Sandra Fleetons Productions and other users of the centre.

Melrose Hall Fees Matter : In reviewing the draft 2002-2003 Fees it was identified that the Melrose Hall Religious meeting fee is currently $77.50 for 5 hours hire. This is well above the equivalent hourly hire fee. Response by the Facilities Operations Manager : All community groups using the centre for meetings should be charged the same rate, which is proposed to be $7.50 per hour in 2002-03. A special rate for religious meetings is no longer

Management of the Organisation Page 95 Ordinary Meeting - Late Report 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment required given that we have amended our hall charges from a flat rate to an hourly rate. This change will result in an overall decrease in cost to religious groups holding meetings in halls. Recommended Actions : 1. That the draft 2002-2003 fees for Melrose Hall be amended as follows: Main Room - Religious Meetings Delete 2. Advice on this matter be forwarded to relevant users of the centre.

The City Supported by Infrastructure

Rounding of Fees Matter : Review of Part C of the documents has identified that the Infrastructure section was printed with some charges shown prior to rounding.

Response by Senior Corporate Accountant : These fees and charges are normally rounded to reflect common pricing points. It is proposed to amend the amounts in the Infrastructure section where necessary by rounding to the nearest even dollar amount. In all instances where items are rounded up, the increase will be less than 1% of the exhibited fee.

Recommended Actions : That those 2002-2003 fees in The City Supported by Infrastructure detailed in Attachment B be amended by rounding to the nearest dollar.

Management of the Organisation Page 96 Ordinary Meeting - Late Report 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

Amendments to Draft Management Plan 2-Year Tasks Further examination of the documents during the exhibition process has identified a number of tasks which require amendment. These corrections are detailed in Table A below. Most of these changes arise from a further review of the proposed tasks relating to the Environmental Management Program special initiative. A number of refinements are suggested in response to public submissions on the Draft Management Plan and to further clarify the actions proposed within the first two years of the program. Table A : Amendments to Part B – Master Program Tasks

Mgt Plan Task Proposed Amendment Reason Ref.

Part B Tasks 7.09 and Combine these two tasks with the To more clearly commit Page 26 7.10 wording “Complete and implement a to the finalisation of the Local Biodiversity Conservation Biodiversity Conservation Strategy, that is supported by Strategy, and developing comprehensive technical information appropriate technical and mapping systems.” responses and Action Plans for its implementation. Commentary on this issue is included elsewhere in this report. Part B Task 8.11 Amend the wording of the task to ~ To reflect that the Page 29 “Develop and implement an enhanced program will enhanced litter reduction program, include the removal of including street sweeping, targeting both litter and sediment the ‘high litter’ areas.” from public places and infrastructure. Part B Task 8.12 Amend the wording of the task to ~ To provide direction for Page 29 “Conduct an audit of the City, to the amended Task 8.11 in determine the ‘high litter’ areas.” delivery of the enhanced Place this task before the above task program in high litter 8.11. areas.

Part B Task 8.14 Amend the wording of the task to ~ To clarify the intent of the Page 29 “Provide additional support for task and to be consistent ‘Clean Up Australia’ Day to reduce with the wording of Task pollution at identified ‘high litter’ 8.12 (as amended). areas in the City.”

Part B Task 9.28 Amend the wording of the task to ~ To clarify the action Page 33 “Investigate management options for required by the task. the rehabilitation of Knapsack Creek, through Leonay Oval.”

Part B Task 9.29 Amend the wording of the task to ~ To clarify the action Page 33 “Promote aquatic biodiversity by required by the task. restocking waterways and wetlands with native fish.”

Management of the Organisation Page 97 Ordinary Meeting - Late Report 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

Mgt Plan Task Proposed Amendment Reason Ref.

Part B Task 9.31 Amend the wording of the task to ~ To specify the creeks that Page 33 “Develop plans of management for will be the subject of Werrington Creek and Mulgoa plans of management Creek.” preparation in 2002-2004.

Part B Task 9.33 Amend the wording of the task to ~ To clarify that Council Page 33 “Develop and implement a program can only reduce, not to reduce domestic animal waste in control, domestic animal public areas.” waste in public areas.

Part B Task 22.06 Amend the wording of the task to ~ To bring the task wording Page 79 “Implement the agreed into line with similar recommendations of the Tourism tasks. Infrastructure Investment Study.”

Part B Task 26.01 Amend the wording of the task to ~ To remove unnecessary Page 94 “Identify and adress deficiencies in wording. the traffic flow network.”

Part B Task 31.16 The task is “Examine opportunities This was a 2-Year Task Page113 to fund: catchment management for 2000-2002, which has requirements, emergency services, been fulfilled in the economic development and tourism present year. The task has and local shopping strip been completed through improvement and safety.” the adoption of the 2002- This task can be Deleted. 03 Management Plan.

Recommended Action : That the task amendments listed in Table A be incorporated into the 2002-2003 Management Plan, and that the draft Task list be renumbered accordingly.

Adjustment to Environmental Management Program One adjustment is proposed to the detailed elements of the Environmental Management Program included in Part A of the Draft Management Plan. This is an amendment to the allocations within the program and does not affect the overall allocation to the program or the budget position. $25,000 per annum for two years (a total of $50,000) is allocated in the Draft Management Plan to the program to “Reduce domestic animal waste in public areas”. The Waste and Community Protection Manager has indicated that only $15,000 over two years is required to effectively deliver this task, as there is an opportunity for external funding. It is therefore recommended that the balance of $35,000 be transferred to the “Enhanced litter reduction” program, making a total allocation to that program of $80,000 over two years. Recommended Action : That the proposed amendment to allocations within the Environmental Management Program be approved and the detailed elements of the first year of the program be incorporated as projects in the 2002-2003 Management Plan.

Management of the Organisation Page 98 Ordinary Meeting - Late Report 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

Projects carried forward from 2001-2002 During the exhibition period of the Draft Management Plan, the March Quarter Review of the current year’s Management Plan approved a number of revotes or carryovers to 2002-03. Following Council’s adoption of its 2002-2003 Management Plan, these projects will therefore be added to Council’s program and budget for 2002-2003. The Making of Rates and Charges This matter is addressed in a separate Report in tonight’s business paper. Application for Special Variation to General Rate Income The Draft Management Plan as exhibited contained specific programs dependent upon a proposed Special Variation to rate income. Following Council’s adoption of its 2002-2003 Management Plan, if the Plan adopted includes those programs, a formal application to the Minister for Local Government will be made seeking approval for Council’s proposed variation of General Rate Income.

Conclusion The consultation process for the Draft 2002-2003 Management Plan has resulted in a wide range of feedback and submissions from the community. After consideration of the submissions made in respect to the Draft Management Plan and of the proposed variations, Council needs to adopt its Management Plan and Revenue Policy for 2002-2003, including such variations to that originally exhibited as it decides on, to comply with the legislative requirements under the Local Government Act 1993.

RECOMMENDATION That 1. the recommendations which relate to variations to the exhibited plan as detailed in the report be adopted and incorporated into the Management Plan; 2. the 2002-2003 Management Plan as amended be formally adopted; 3. an application be made to the Minister for Local Government for a Special Variation to General Rate Income of 8.1% for 2002-2003; 4. Council subject to the Minister for Local Government approving a special variation to the rate of 8.1% approve for expenditure the budget as detailed in the 2002-2003 Management Plan and on that basis formally vote these funds for the 2002-2003 financial year; 5. the responses and proposed actions contained in Attachment D Environment Forum Workshops and Attachment E Social Forum Workshops be endorsed; 6. those individuals and organisations who made submissions on Council’s Management Plan be thanked for their input and advised of Council’s decision;

Management of the Organisation Page 99 Ordinary Meeting - Late Report 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

7. those projects in the 2001-2002 Management Plan which were approved by Council in the March Quarter Review to be carried forward be added to the adopted Management Plan and Budget for 2002-2003.

Management of the Organisation Page 100 ATTACHMENT

Date of Meeting: 17 June 2002

Master Programme: Council's Operating Environment

Programme: Management of the Organisation

Report Title: 2002-2003 MANAGEMENT PLAN

ATTACHMENT A: SUBMISSIONS ON DRAFT MANAGEMENT PLAN Attachment A

Draft 2002-2003 Management Plan: Submissions Received

Written Submissions Name / Organisation Summary of Matters Raised 1. Ms Liza Buckley · Objection to the rise in child care fees which will lead to (South Penrith resident) some centres subsidising less efficient centres · Concern that non-viable services have not been previously identified and appropriate action taken · Request for an explanation of variations in the levels of fees at different centres · Request for an explanation regarding preparation of budgets by centres before fees were advised. Ms Buckley’s centre can be run at a surplus without raising fees · Request that Council find an alternative means to absorb deficits without increasing fees. · Concern that differences in computer equipment purchased by child care centres will impact on the equality of accessibility · Queried allocation of funding for staff training 2. Mr Lee Chadwick · Request for details on funding for bushland mapping (Penrith resident) · What resources are to be provided to enhance bushcare/landcare initiatives? · How will Council use GIS data collected and implement in the vegetation monitoring? 3. Mr Anthony Donley · Supports rise in rates if funds are spent wisely (Emu Plains resident) · Suggestion to let out mowing and maintenance of the River and foreshores to private contractors as a more efficient approach · Requests weed reduction in the river and improvements to picnic and park lands around it be high on the list of the proposed environment program 4. Ms Susan Dunn · Request construction of footpath along Bulu Drive (Glenmore Park resident) 5. Ms Carolyn Duval · Request for a residential strategy providing diverse (Penrith resident) housing for all community groups including aged and disabled, retaining local character and diversity · Concern about overdevelopment of older established areas Written Submissions Name / Organisation Summary of Matters Raised · Concern about the potential impact of SEPP5 development 6. Ms Lesley Edwards · Suggested employment of a Bushland Management (Nepean Greens) Officer to complete and implement environmental management plans, secure grants to fund works, provide a genuine commitment from Council and align work practices with recommended bushland management outcomes · Suggested mapping of endangered flora and fauna rather than duplicating bushland mapping exercise · Suggested employment of a Weeds Officer to tackle infestations threatening endangered species, to be funded from fines to owners harbouring weeds · Requests moratorium on development on ADI site and revocation of SREP30 · Concern about impact of unrestrained population growth in LGA · Suggested partnership schemes for unemployed, disadvantaged and isolated members of the community to learn about environmental issues · Suggested community is encouraged to join new bush care groups by proposed Bushland Management Officer 7. Mr Steve Etheridge · Congratulates Council on its move toward a more (Penrith Lakes Environmental sustainable Penrith Education Centre) · Suggested a sustainable schools/communities strategy to develop a team approach with Council to address common environmental issues · Suggested development of an ongoing promotional and educational program built around an icon (a platypus) to focus on issues and promote messages about water, pollution and habitats at risk 8. Ms Roseanne Feeney · Objection to the rise in child care fees which will lead to (Cranebrook resident) some centres subsidising less efficient centres · Concern that non-viable services have not been previously identified and appropriate action taken · Request for an explanation of variations in the levels of fees at different centres · Request for an explanation regarding preparation of budgets by centres before fees were advised. Ms Feeney’s centre can be run at a surplus without raising fees · Request that Council find an alternative means to absorb Written Submissions Name / Organisation Summary of Matters Raised deficits without increasing fees. · Concern that differences in computer equipment purchased by child care centres will impact on the equality of accessibility · Queried allocation of funding for staff training 9. Ms Roseanne Feeney · Concern that a response to her earlier letter of complaint (Mt Pleasant resident) in relation to child care fees rising had been hand delivered prior to the public meeting and not drawn to her attention, depriving her of a better informed contribution to that meeting · Request that procedures for responding to correspondence be revised 10. Ms Brenda Fowler · Objection to rise in fees to be charged for hire of centre (Emu Community Projects) · Objection to singling out this centre for a minimum booking fee 11. Mr Ray Gallagher · Concern that no additional support is identified for local (Penrith resident) music organisations · Concern that funding for JSPAC does not assist, as the Centre is not affordable for community groups 12. Mr Michael & Ms Denise · Objection to rise in child care fees Gibbons (Werrington Downs residents) 13. Ms Joanne Grange · Objection to rise in child care fees (Cranebrook resident) 14. Ms Traci Hall · Objection to rise in child care fees (Glenmore Park resident) 15 Mr Zhang Hao · Objection to increased fees for hire of Cambridge Park (Chi Chinese Healing College) Hall 16 Ms Sandra & Mr Steven Hope · Objection to increase in child care fees (Mount Druitt residents) 17 Ms Marilyn Jones · Concern that the Penrith City Council Heritage (Londonderry resident, Committee has no power or authority, inadequate funding member of Heritage and is ignored by Council Committee) · Concern that nuclear waste has been stored on the ADI site and that litigation could ensue if development is permitted · Concern that Penrith Lakes Development will result in degraded environment, cost to the community and litigation · Request to defer further development in Penrith until salinity is addressed Written Submissions Name / Organisation Summary of Matters Raised · Request for action on roadside dumped rubbish · Request for Council to oppose SREP 9 · Request to defer development in greenspace until air and water pollution can be alleviated · Request for development of roads to meet increased traffic · Concern that additional development will result in difficulties implementing evacuation plans during future floods 18 Mr Bob Matthews · Request for construction of footpath on Great Western (Emu Plains resident) Highway (Grey to Russell Sts) 19. Mr David Morris · Request for Council to ban all wood burning stoves (Emu Plains resident) 20. Ms Melinda Morrison · Objection to rise in child care fees (Colyton resident) 21. Mr Tony Perri · Request for details of Council expenditure on Kemps (Kemps Creek resident) Creek · Request for information on: ~ When was the last bulky rubbish pick-up in Kemps Creek? ~ What arrangements have been made with Liverpool regarding mowing and maintenance of Anderson Reserve? ~ How is Council promoting use of rural land for agriculture; is there an Agricultural Officer? ~ How is Council implementing its policies and meeting the practical needs of residents? ~ What are Council’s plans for rural lands (apart from the Rural Lands Study)? ~ Why are residents required to pay for flora and fauna studies? ~ Concern that needs of the rural community are not addressed in Draft Plan and that rural residents are disadvantaged in comparison to urban residents 22. Ms Carrie Seymour · Objection to rise in child care fees (Kingswood resident) 23. Mr Craig Silver · Request to review parking restrictions in Barber Avenue (Mayne Health) 24. Ms J M de Szell · Objection to increases in child care fees at Emu Village (Castlereagh resident) B&A School Care Centre 25. Ms Wendy Thirlwell · Objection to increases in child care fees (Emu Plains) 26. Mrs J Whalen · Objection to the rise in rates and its impact on pensioners (Kingswood resident) · Request to exempt pensioners from rate increases, or pay a proportion of increases · Request to reduce funding to Joan Sutherland Performing Arts Centre as Mrs Whalen cannot afford to attend events there · Request to reduce funding spent on mowing 27. Ms Heather Williams · Objection to increases in child care fees (Cambridge Gardens resident)

28. Ms Liz Venneri · Objection to increases in hire fees for Cambridge Park (Kingswood resident) Community Hall Meeting Room which will put the viability of her business at risk · Requests consideration for a smaller rate of increase

Petitions Name / Organisation Summary of Matters Raised 1. Petition signed by 36 residents · Objection to the level of fee increases for B&A and Vacation Care at Emu Village B&A School Care Centre

Telephone Submissions Name / Organisation Summary of Matters Raised 1. Ms Lisa Cahill · Concern regarding dangerous corner at Dunheved Road (Werrington Downs resident) and Greenbank Drive, Werrington Downs · Concern that despite expenditure on road resealing and footpath construction, there is still a safety issue 2. Mr John Chantler · What drainage works are planned in the vicinity of Hilltop (Penrith resident) & Arakun Streets 3. Ms Jenny Clissold · Request for information on location of proposed footpath (Kingswood resident) paving on Bringelly Road · Request to upgrade footpath at Peppermint Reserve 4. Mr Nick Ecker · Suggested the information brochure should contain a right (Mt Pleasant resident) of reply form 5. Ms Collete Godefroy · Why was French was excluded from the multilingual (No detail provided) information provided by Council? 6. Mr Chris Ilojdellis · Objection to rate increase (Cambridge Park resident) · Suggestion to sell Council property to raise required funds and not purchase properties · Request for details of properties owned by Council · Concern at number of shops being opened at the expense of business ratepayers while small shopping centres and factories close · Concern that rates and taxes are too high 7. Mr Leigh Jones · Request for information on the rate rise impact on his (Cambridge Park resident) property 8. Mr Timo Koski · Concern that lighting of laneways is not addressed in the (St Clair resident) Plan · Request for improved lighting in lane between Coonawarra Drive and Lexington Avenue to avert further burglaries and improve visibility of bollards 9. Mrs Langereis · Requested clarification about Jamison Park skate park (Penrith resident) development’s omission from 2002-03 Management Plan 10. Mr Ray Radford · Objection to rate rise (St Marys resident) · Concern over the level of remuneration to senior staff and Mayor 11. Mr Peter Ray · Concern about rubbish being dumped outside houses by (Cranebrook resident) residents of the housing commission area 12. Mrs Anne Robertson · Request for advice on Council’s ability to provide some (Penrith resident) Before & After care for children and young adults with disabilities · Advised of interest in contributing to Council’s Disability Action Plan project, particularly to provide additional social and recreational opportunities for people with disabilities · Advised of inequity in range of concessions for people with different disabilities · Concern as to why Jipp Street had not been fully paved, disadvantaging elderly and disabled residents · Request for advice as to whether Panthers had contributed to construction of footpaths outside Penrith Stadium and Howell Oval · Request for advice on why access to Jamison Road from Hornseywood Road had been half closed and concern regarding the level of community consultation in this decision 13. Ms Gwen Turnbull · Objections to rate rise as she is a single pensioner paying (Penrith resident) the same rate as a large household · Concerns that: ~ Rates rose last year ~ Council has withdrawn a subsidy to pensioners ~ Pensioners receive little benefit from Council, which favours young people and the Arts ~ No footpath has been provided outside her house ~ Poor parking facilities in Penrith ~ Free pool entry for pensioners has been withdrawn ~ Increasing costs of refuse disposal ~ No response was received from her previous letter

E-mail & Internet Submissions Name / Organisation Summary of Matters Raised 1. Ms Jenny Clissold · Request to pave eastern side of Bringelly Road to cater for (Kingswood resident) school children · Request to pave footpath at Peppermint Reserve · Request to pave area of Bringelly Road at the pedestrian refuge near Smith Street · Concern that a letter written by her daughter last year had not received a response 2. Mr Jim Cuthill · Support for Council’s rate rise to support maintenance of (Emu Plains resident) parks and gardens · Support for more mowing and footpaths/cycle tracks and play equipment · Suggested a footpath/cycle track at the back of River Chase estate to link with existing tracks and to mow the reserve more often 3. Ms Cristen Driene · Objection to rise in hire charges for Emu Heights (CM Dance Co) Community Centre 4. Mrs Nadia Dunkley · Objection to rise in child care fees (Lapstone resident) 5. Mr Nick Ecker · Objection to the increase in rates so soon after the (Mt Pleasant resident) previous increase above permitted rise · Request for Council to be more financially responsible 6. Mr Friedrich Gruber · Asked whether Council has considered tapping methane (Allianz Securities) gas generated at Gipps Street tip site to convert to electricity to sell to the power grid? 7. Ms Jacqueline Holmes · Objection to rise in fees to be charged for use of centre (Namatjira B&A School Care Service) · Request to waive fees for future B&A Vacation Care programs 8. Mr Graham Linnert · Concern regarding extent of residential development in (Oxley Park resident) LGA tending towards smaller blocks · Queried if Oxley Park is to be rezoned to accommodate this style of development? 9. Mr Vance Lowe · Concern regarding number of approvals for townhouses (Oxley Park resident) and villas · Request for ratio of houses to townhouses/villas planned for the area · Concerns regarding adequate planning for traffic, drainage, open space, community centre and foot paths 10. Mr John Phillips · Request to ensure planning instruments preserve (Richmond resident) affordable land and blocks appropriate for providing a family friendly environment · Request to limit apartments and townhouses further than 1 km from railway stations · Request to limit population growth to avoid environmental degradation and adverse social impacts · Request to save entire ADI site · Request for incentives to encourage more agricultural development to retain rural environment 11. Mr Andrew Rios · Request to improve Arms of Australia Inn museum (Jamisontown resident) building, including upgrade of security · Concern that current grant is not sufficient to carry out the work of Nepean District Historical Society’s work · Request to explain why grants have not been allocated to the Museum, but to the Penrith Regional Gallery · Request to review Council’s Heritage Conservation LEP 12. Ms Vanessa Simmonds · Objection to rise in fees to be charged for hire of centre (Koala Kids Playgroup) · Request for improvements to facilities, including replacement of shade cloth, cubby house, sand pit cover and clean sand (or removal), maintenance and cleaning of facility Verbal Submissions [speakers at Public Meeting and Consultative Forums] Name / Organisation Summary of Matters Raised 1. Mr Gil Kommer · Queried who is going to manage and maintain Penrith (All Metal Products) Whitewater Stadium and the Sydney International Regatta Stadium facilities? · Queried the timetable for the development of the Lakes Scheme and when will housing development commence? 2. Ms Lily Lawrenson · Raised concern regarding the health of the median trees in (Glenmore Park resident) Northern Road · Concerned that the Bird of Paradise plants in Mulgoa Road median strip are dead or dying? 3. Mr Phil Morehead · Queried if the tourism centre is to be located on the (Thomas Marsden Carpenter site? Advertising) 4. Mulgoa Progress Association · Request for more footpaths to be paved and better lighting in Mulgoa · Request to mow strips on footpaths until paving is completed 5. Penrith Women’s Health · Advised that disabled access to their building (Council Service owned) is inadequate - requests it be included in Council’s Disabled Access Program 6. Mr Emged Rizkalla · Queried the timeframes for the ADI site and when will (Geotechnique P/L) development commence? 7. Mr Craig Silver · Concern about parking arrangements around Nepean (Mayne Health) Private Hospital 8. Mr David Trist · Sought information on what will happen to the kangaroos (St Marys resident) on the ADI site? 9. Mr Peter Batten · Concern that the rate increase for his property is 50% in (Cambridge Park resident) two years 10. Ms Liza Buckley · Objection to increase in child care fees (South Penrith resident) 11. Mr Kevin Dwyer · Congratulated Council on the Gipps Street rehabilitation, (St Marys resident) community safety program and general cleaning of the City · Suggested use of Carpenter Site for tourist information, trade centre and City identity site – action required following February meeting · Request for Council to investigate contract options for supply of electricity and other services · Suggested Council lobby relevant local Councils to support construction of M4 City West Link – important for future of St Marys and Penrith · Requested Council to be better prepared to clean up after public holidays (eg Tench Reserve, Anzac Day) · Suggested lobby to locate State works Department on Belmore & Station Streets site · Requested Council to pursue urgent improvements to Luddenham Road 12. Ms Roseanne Feeney · Objection to increase in child care fees (Mt Pleasant resident) (and letter) · Request for explanation as to how centres are permitted to run at a loss and why losses were not revealed in audits · Request for explanation for fee rise 13. Ms Denise Gibbons · Objection to increase in child care fees (Werrington Downs resident) · Request for explanation of fee rise · Objection to the fees paid subsidising a less well-run centre 14. Mr Max Harrison · Requested Council to mark the commencement of (Kingswood Traders & construction of Kingswood Neighbourhood Centre with a Citizens Association) ceremony · Thanked Council for clean up of Saintley Crescent bins · Requested explanation of fee imposed for inspection of food premises 15. Mr Matt Hazell · Request to place limits on over development in (Cambridge Park resident) established areas · Request to explain the difference between zoning for two storey and attic-style developments 16. Mr Tim Hennessy · Suggestion to design footpaths to be friendlier to people (Cranebrook resident) with disabilities (Henry Street for sight impaired; The Northern Road for wheelchairs) · Request to ban jet skis on Nepean River (Task required in Management Plan) · Request to save ADI site as buffer against increasing population 17. Mr Graham Keogh · Concern that Council’s policy regarding development of (Leonay resident) Erskine Park favours developers, not ratepayers 18. Mr Reg Menz · Queried justification for $1.65m funding for Penrith (Nepean District Historical Regional Gallery when Arms of Australia only receives a Society) low level of funding · Queried when the Arms of Australia Inn would be restored 19. Mr Tony Napoli · Request for clarification of the level of Council’s debt (Orchard Hills Action Group) · Concern that lower rated properties are subsidising rates paid by wealthier people · Request for information on the Rural Lands Study 20. Ms Lorna Parr · Concern that history is a low priority for Council (Nepean District Historical Society) · While noting the proposed Heritage Study and funding provided to the Arms of Australia museum, concerns were raised and Council was requested to consider the following: ~ Preservation of Council owned heritage buildings ~ A heritage drive for Aboriginal sites ~ Completion of the second part of the City’s history ‘Dharug to Dungaree’ ~ Incentives for heritage owners ~ Restoration and maintenance of cemeteries including two of the oldest NSW cemeteries 21. Mr Andrew Rowinski · Request for better policing of parking around Nepean (Kingswood resident) Hospital · Concern that his rates have doubled in ten years and that this trend will continue 22. Ms Tracy Sorensen · Request for information on expected additional insurance (Penrith City Star) costs and the likely effect on community events 23. Mr Peter Spurr · Sought advice as to whether all the $13.7 million (Emu Plains resident) allocated to garbage go to the contractor? · Sought advice on Council’s debt? · Objected to rate rise as there is no cutting of costs or increase in productivity mentioned in the Draft Plan. Indicated that there was evidence of incompetence and inefficiency and questioned Council’s proposed 8.1% rise in rates. · Queried why Council is putting funds into Erskine Park Employment Area when there are commercial properties for lease in Dunheved? Suggested Council seek utilisation of vacant industrial zoned land in Castlereagh Road and put more effort into maintaining and upgrading established industrial estates. · Raised concern regarding budget overruns of 200% on some jobs without apparent accountability. · Queried why Council’s information brochure on the Draft Management Plan was received after the dates of the special interest forums and on the day of the public meeting. 24. Mr Mike Tierney · Request to review 15 minute and 3 hour parking zone (Top end High Street time limits and policing of illegal parking in and around Newsagency proprietor) the top end of High Street 25. Mr David Roberts · Queried information on average and minimum rates and if (Emu Plains Bushland Trust) there was a maximum residential rate · Queried Council’s policy on mowing near watercourses, concern with environmental effects of mowing right up to creek banks · Queried when a Plan of Management for Crossman Reserve would be finalised, as a task to complete POMs had been set in the Management Plan two years ago · Queried Council’s level of expenditure on weeding of natural areas 26. Mr John Murphy · Considered that Penrith Council was well ahead of some (CHANGE) neighbouring Councils on environmental issues and moving in the right direction 27. Ms Marilyn Jones · Objected to the funding of the Environment Program by a (Friends of Nepean) Rate rise. Advised that ratepayers should not have to contribute to the cost of fixing problems caused by developers

Consultative Forum Workshops Forum Summary of Matters Raised in Workshops Environment Forum, Included in this report as Attachment D are the discussions held 13/5/02 held at the three Workshops within this Forum and the responses of Managers to the issues raised Total number of issues raised as submissions: 72 Social/ Arts & Cultural/ Included in this report as Attachment D are the discussions Community Safety Forum, held at the four Workshops within this Forum and the held 15/5/02 responses of Managers to the issues raised Total number of issues raised as submissions: 45 ATTACHMENT

Date of Meeting: 17 June 2002

Master Programme: Council's Operating Environment

Programme: Management of the Organisation

Report Title: 2002-2003 MANAGEMENT PLAN

ATTACHMENT B: RECOMMENDED AMENDMENTS TO DRAFT FEES AND CHARGES ATTACHMENT B: RECOMMENDED AMENDMENTS TO DRAFT FEES AND CHARGES

Details Draft Fee Amended Fee Explanation The City In its Environment Development Applications Modification of Consent for minor $500 or 50% of $500.00 or 50% Additional of comments building design alterations under s96(1a) original fee of original fee or to clarify fee structure of the Environmenmtal Planning and whichever is $101.00 Assessment Act (page 1) lesser (professional service fee) per hour, whichever is the lesser Public Notification (Advertising) Notification additional to adjoining $10.00 per per property Additional of comments properties for items C1 to C6 (page 4) property (max whose owners are to clarify fee structure $500) notified (max $500) Sewage Management Systems Application to operate a Sewage $30.00 $29.00 To be consistent with Management System (page 11) Council resolution 6 May 2002 Inspection of a Sewage Management $85.00 $70.00 To be consistent with System (page 11) Council resolution 6 May 2002. Miscellaneous 1. Professional & Administration fees Administration New fee (Page 13) fee for document copying $12.00 per fifteen minutes plus $2.00 per sheet copied (where permitted under Local Govt Act) Annual Domestic Waste Management Charge Domestic Waste Service 1 (No effluent $15.31 $15.30 Rounding services) (Page 15) Notes (Page 16) Each property is Each property is Clarification of intent entitled to the entitled to the equivalent of one equivalent of one 240 litre bin for 240 litre bin for each standard each standard putrescible or putrescible or recycling service recycling service provided. provided, except for properties that are provided with a “collect and return” waste collection service, in which case bins will be allocated on a shared basis.

Recommended Amendments to Draft Fees and Charges page 2 of 6 ATTACHMENT B: RECOMMENDED AMENDMENTS TO DRAFT FEES AND CHARGES

Details Draft Fee Amended Fee Explanation The City as a Social Place Neighbourhood Facilities Cambridge Park Hall (page 20) Meeting Room Meeting Room Response to consultation Commercial Commercial as reported groups groups $11.00 per hour $10.00 per hour Emu Heights Community Centre Large Meeting Large Meeting Response to consultation (page 24) Room Room as reported Commercial Commercial groups $13.00 per groups $10.00 per hour hour Emu Heights Community Centre Small Meeting Small Meeting Response to consultation (page 24) Room Room as reported Commercial Commercial groups groups $11.00 per hour $9.00 per hour Two hour Delete Not required minimum Emu Heights Community Centre Small Meeting Small Meeting (page 24) Room Room Two hour Delete Not required minimum Emu Plains Neighbourhood Centre Large Meeting Large Meeting Response to consultation (page 24) Room Room as reported Commercial Commercial groups $13.00 per groups $10.00 per hour hour South Penrith Neighbourhood Centre Bond $100.00 Bond $250.00 Response to consultation (page 30) as reported Werrington Downs Neighbourhood Activity Room 1 Activity Room 1 Response to consultation Centre (page 31) Commercial Commercial as reported Groups $11.00 Groups $10.00 per hour per hour Werrington Downs Neighbourhood Activity Room 2 Activity Room 2 Response to consultation Centre (page 31) Commercial Commercial as reported Groups $11.00 Groups $10.00 per hour per hour Melrose Hall (page 38) Religious Meeting Delete charge Not required $7.50 for 5 hours hire Children’s Services Blue Emu Children’s Centre (page 55) Weekly Weekly Correction of error $229.15 $229.25 Occas Care Full Occas Care Full Day $33.15 Day $45.85 Carita Children’s Centre (page 55) Late Fee $1.00 Late Fee $2.00 Correction of error per per minute minute thereafter thereafter Emu Plains Kids’ Place (page 56) 6 hour short 6 hour short Correction of error session fee N/A session fee $35.00 Ridge-ee-Didge Children’s Centre Late fee $10.00 Late fee $10.00 Correction of error (page 59) per 5 minutes or per 15 minutes or part thereof part thereof

Recommended Amendments to Draft Fees and Charges page 3 of 6 ATTACHMENT B: RECOMMENDED AMENDMENTS TO DRAFT FEES AND CHARGES

Details Draft Fee Amended Fee Explanation Wattle Glen Children’s Centre (page 60) Late fee $1.00 for Late fee $10.00 Correction of error the first 10 for the first 10 minutes minutes and $1.00 per minute thereafter Yoorami Children’s Centre (page 61) Hire of hat (per Hire of hat (per Correction of error yr) yr) $2.00 $6.00 Use of sunscreen Use of sunscreen (per yr) (per yr) $6.00 no cost Hire of sheet (per Hire of sheet (per day) yr) N/A $2.00 Gumbirra B&A (page 63) Bus hire full day Bus hire full day Correction of error $27.00 $55.00 Bus hire half day Bus hire half day $55.00 $27.00 Occas care Occas care afternoon afternoon $10.00 $13.30 Rainbow Cottage B&A (page 63) Occas after school Occas after school Correction of error care care $14.00 $14.25 Cooinda Children’s Centre (page 64) Full day Full day Correction of error $29.90 $29.40 Half day Half day $14.95 $14.70 Grays Lane Children’s Centre (page 64) Full day Full day Correction of error $29.00 $28.00 Half day Half day $14.50 $14.00 Rainbow Cottage Children’s Centre Full day Full day Correction of error (page 64) $12.25 $29.00 Half day Half day $14.25 $14.50 Late fee $5.00 per Late fee $10.00 15 minutes or part per 15 minutes or thereof part thereof Occasional care Occasional care hourly rate $1.00 hourly rate $5.50 St Marys Children’s Centre (page 64) Occasional care Occasional care Correction of error daily fee daily fee $48.00 $24.00

Recommended Amendments to Draft Fees and Charges page 4 of 6 ATTACHMENT B: RECOMMENDED AMENDMENTS TO DRAFT FEES AND CHARGES

Details Draft Fee Amended Explanation Fee The City Supported by Infrastructure Road and Footpath restorations Heavy Duty Road Pavements (Regional roads) (page69) Asphaltic Concrete/Hotmix, Sprayed Bitumen Surface and Cement Concrete/Interlocking Block pavement on all types of base. (Min 1 Sq.m) $320.10 $320.00 Adjustment to rounding Unsealed shoulder (Min 1 Sq.m) $119.90 $120.00 Adjustment to rounding Medium/Light Duty Road Pavements (Local Roads) (page69) Asphaltic Concrete/Hotmix, Sprayed Bitumen Surface and Cement Concrete/Interlocking Block pavement on all types of base. (Min 1 Sq.m) $214.50 $215.00 Adjustment to rounding Earth/gravel/or unsealed shoulder $119.90 $120.00 Adjustment to rounding Footpaths(page69) Asphaltic concrete/hotmix on all types of $149.60 $150.00 Adjustment to rounding base (Min 1 Sq.m) Cement Concrete (Min 1 Sq.m) $149.60 $150.00 Adjustment to rounding Block/Brick paving on Concrete Base $269.50. $270.00 Adjustment to rounding (Min 1 Sq.m) Block/Brick paving on all other bases $149.60 $150.00 Adjustment to rounding (Min 1 Sq.m) Earth/Gravel footpath (Min 1 Sq.m) $85.80 $86.00 Adjustment to rounding Turf (Min 1 Sq.m) $104.50 $105.00 Adjustment to rounding Disabled / Pram Ramp (each) $449.90 $450.00 Adjustment to rounding Concrete Crossing (page69) Residential - Single Dwellings (100mm thick) reinforced (Min 1 Sq.m) $180.40 $180.00 Adjustment to rounding Industrial and all other residential dwellings (200mm thick reinforced) (Min 1 Sq.m) $255.20 $255.00 Adjustment to rounding Kerb and Gutter (page69) Kerb Inlet Slab or Lintel on Gully Pit $424.60 $425.00 Adjustment to rounding Saw-Cutting (page69) Saw-cutting, concrete and asphalt, for $13.20 $13.00 Adjustment to rounding restoration

Recommended Amendments to Draft Fees and Charges page 5 of 6 ATTACHMENT B: RECOMMENDED AMENDMENTS TO DRAFT FEES AND CHARGES

Details Draft Fee Amended Explanation Fee Sundry Income Signs (page 71) Provision of Street or direction sign $224.40 $224.00 Adjustment to rounding Erection of blade on existing post $139.70 $140.00 Adjustment to rounding Erection of blade on new post $152.90 $153.00 Adjustment to rounding Accreditation Fee (page 71) Building Waste Containers on Footpaths $125.40 $125.00 Adjustment to rounding and Carriage ways Public Works Layback Construction (page 72) Restore road pavement as a result of $81.40 $81.00 Adjustment to rounding layback construction Vehicular Crossing Construction (page 72) 100mm thick full width reinforced with $81.40 $82.00 Adjustment to rounding F72 mesh 200mm thick full width reinforced with $125.40 $125.00 Adjustment to rounding F82 mesh Other Works (page 72) Cutting Kerb to Provide 100mm Storm $129.80 $130.00 Adjustment to rounding water outlet Saw-cut kerb for crossing $129.80 $130.00 Adjustment to rounding Storm water piping to 100mm diameter $74.80 $75.00 Adjustment to rounding sewer pipe Saw-cut for road pavement $13.20 $13.00 Adjustment to rounding Driveway Crossing Inspections Footpath Crossing Application (page 73) Single Residence, Dual Occupancy $83.60 $84.00 Adjustment to rounding Commercial, Industrial $177.10 $177.00 Adjustment to rounding Additional inspection fee $41.80 $42.00 Adjustment to rounding

Recommended Amendments to Draft Fees and Charges page 6 of 6 ATTACHMENT

Date of Meeting: 17 June 2002

Master Programme: Council's Operating Environment

Programme: Management of the Organisation

Report Title: 2002-2003 MANAGEMENT PLAN

ATTACHMENT C: RECOMMENDED AMENDED RESERVE MOVEMENTS 2002/2003 Reserve Movements Budget Estimates for period ended 30th June 2003 Reserve Opening Budgeted Budgeted Closing Balance Transfers to Transfer from Balance Internal Reserves Employee's Leave Entitlements 3,668,626 200,000 - 3,868,626 Cemetery Reserve 193,000 103,124 111,000 185,124 Legal Reserve 26,000 - - 26,000 Election Reserve 267,780 115,000 - 382,780 Insurance Reserve 467,755 - 250,000 217,755 Telecommunications - - - - Printing Office Machinery 1,133 - - 1,133 Aerial Photography Reserve 5,000 5,000 - 10,000 Asset Construction Reserve 738,925 - 429,095 309,830 Lewers Gallery 37,224 - - 37,224 Lewers Gallery Building Project Reserve 9,770 11,060 - 20,830 Recreation Reserve 212,892 64,547 - 277,439 Plant & Motor Vehicle Replacement Res. 244,555 37,600 14,000 268,155 Dharug & Dungaree 2,396 - - 2,396 Computer Laboratory 3,704 - - 3,704 Salary System Training & Development Res 238,182 325,000 510,000 53,182.000000000 Environmental Protection 24,285 - 20,000 4,285 Loan Repayments - (Sinking Funds) 1,645,894 178,100 610,000 1,213,994 Olympics/Centenary Reserve 138,128 - 87,867 50,261 Community Safety Street Lighting Reserve 248,442 - 150,000 98,442 Property Development Reserve 3,554,637 5,215,983 5,482,337 3,288,283 Computer Replacement Reserve 488,300 1,448,784 1,648,250 288,834 Childrens Services Reserve 143,628 - - 143,628 Revote Reserve 1,299,280 - 184,400 1,114,880 Voted Works 104,516 159,000 - 263,516 Internal Loans Cemetery Improvements - Internal Loan (100,000) - - (100,000) Gumbirra/Grays Lane B&A Bus (10,000) 7,000 - (3,000) Kindana B&A Upgrade (3,441) - - (3,441) Queen Street, St Marys - Lighting (70,000) 10,000 - (60,000) Whitewater Canoe Slalom - Internal Loan (770,194) 295,668 93,150 (567,676) Hydro-therapy Pool Debt Servicing (105,321) 144,134 130,615 (91,802) Purchase Yoorami B&A Bus (12,791) 6,666 - (6,125) St Marys Precinct 308,899 - - 308,899 Total Internal Reserves 13,001,204 8,326,666 9,720,714 11,607,156 2002/2003 Reserve Movements Budget Estimates for period ended 30th June 2003 Reserve Opening Budgeted Budgeted Closing Balance Transfers to Transfer from Balance External Reserves Section 94 Plans North Cranebrook S94 2,118,483 280,080 411,500 1,987,063 Glenmore Park S94 8,681,839 310,144 347,898 8,644,085 Library Facilities S94 3,414 125,946 60,000 69,360 Penrith Town Centre S94 145,098 432,283 430,983 146,398 St Marys Town Centre S94 114 - - 114 Mt Vernon S94 153,000 42,366 - 195,366 St Clair S94 (931) - - (931) Emu Heights 3,102 - - 3,102 Claremont Meadows S94 2,003,970 1,650,488 - 3,654,458 Erskine Pk Residential Area S94 2,130,984 344,426 200,000 2,275,410 Penrith LGA S94 (9,147) - - (9,147) Nth Penrith S94 1,336,901 47,759 27,133 1,357,527 Sth Penrith S94 12,396 443 - 12,839 Orchard Hills S94 2,264 85 - 2,349 Erskine Pk Employment Zone (159,815) - - (159,815) Open Space - Existing Residential Areas S94 99,664 232,619 350,000 (17,717) Kingswood Neighbourhood Centre S94 (45,682) - 59,414 (105,096) Foothpath Construction (683) - - (683) Total Section 94 Reserves 16,474,971 3,466,639 1,886,928 18,054,682 Other External Reserves Waste Disposal Reserve 3,722,952 13,736,751 16,936,109 523,594 Lemongrove Donor Reserve 142,946 44,305 20,000 167,251 Lemongrove Accumulated Surplus Reserve 64,367 10,499 20,970 53,896 Unexpended Grants 295,165 5,732,965 5,565,821 462,309 Unexpended Contributions 911,970 191,800 159,359 944,411 Total Other External Reserves 5,137,400 19,716,320 22,702,259 2,151,461 Total External Reserves 21,612,371 23,182,959 24,589,187 20,206,143 Grand Total of Reserves 34,613,574 31,509,625 34,309,901 31,813,298 Controlled Entity/Committee - Whitewater Reserve (Surplus) - 158,000.00 - - Joan Sutherland PAC Reserve (Surplus) - (6,000.00) - - Ripples Reserve (Surplus) - 95,000.00 - - Other (Committes) - 76,759.00 - Total Controlled Entity Reserve Movements - 323,759 - - RESERVE MOVEMENTS PER BUDGET 34,613,574 31,833,384 34,309,901 31,813,298 ATTACHMENT

Date of Meeting: 17 June 2002

Master Programme: Council's Operating Environment

Programme: Management of the Organisation

Report Title: 2002-2003 MANAGEMENT PLAN

ATTACHMENT D: ENVIRONMENT CONSULTATIVE FORUM WORKSHOPS HELD 13/05/02 Attachment D: ENVIRONMENT CONSULTATIVE FORUM WORKSHOPS

WORKSHOP 1: RIVER HEALTH

Task/ WATER MANAGEMENT Issue Task 9.27 On-site Detention/Reuse - concern regarding on-site retention of 1st flush of stormwater and later reuse. Response by Design & Technical Advice Manager: On-site detention (OSD) is a strategy used to control stormwater quantity at an individual property level. In new release areas quantity is managed in large regional detention systems with an interconnecting drainage network. However, in accordance with Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) principles, it is possible to incorporate stormwater reuse with OSD systems to better manage the total water cycle at an individual property level. WSUD is a central theme throughout all the Stormwater Management Plans and its principles and concepts are being introduced into the development approval processes of Council. Some of the principles being considered at present include, bio-retention swales, minimisation of impervious area, conservation site design and water reuse (greywater and stormwater). Design guidelines for these are being investigated and will be prepared in the near future. Issue: Inappropriate use of water (cleaning) – bad management practices in the City (part of program - education) Response by Building Approvals & Environment Protection Manager: The management plan includes a four year outcome to develop and implement water conservation strategies. Water conservation will also be a priority area for the proposed enhanced environmental education program, as indicated in task 9.04 of the Draft 2002-2003 Plan. Issue: Need for water balance in planning of new areas Response by Design & Technical Advice Manager: A water balance investigation is not just limited to rainfall and runoff relationships, but it also requires a knowledge of environmental flows in the waterways, deep and shallow infiltration and the impact of infiltration on groundwater resources and salinity. These investigations are being carried out in all new release areas to allow a determination on the appropriate amount of reuse that can be tolerated without adversely impacting on environmental flows and groundwater resources. Issue: Economic use of water – evaporation of water bodies Evaporation factor at Penrith lake – 32ml/day Need for issue to be addressed in future planning (sustainability) - overall strategy.

Environment Consultative Forum on Draft 2002-2003 Management Plan, 13/5/02 page 2 of 19 Attachment D: ENVIRONMENT CONSULTATIVE FORUM WORKSHOPS

Response by Design & Technical Advice Manager: All these issues are related to a total watercycle management approach to WSUD and this has been incorporated into the planning and design of new release areas in the city. A comprehensive water balance of all waterbodies proposed as either recreational facilities or water pollution control ponds is required to determine their long-term viability. This has been a major concern for the Penrith Lakes system where evaporation can be as high as 10 mm per day over the entire waterbody during summer. A water top up scheme has been allowed for in the management of the lakes and the Lakes Scheme has a licence to take water out of the Nepean River only during periods of flows in excess of 170 ML/day over Penrith Weir. The Local Government Act (LGA 1993 s.8(1)) requires each Council charter to include a responsibility to “properly manage, protect, restore, enhance and conserve the environment of the area for which it is responsible, in a manner that is consistent with and promotes the principles of ecologically sustainable development”. In fulfilling this charter Penrith City Council ensures that each development application is assessed in accordance with the principles of Ecologically Sustainable Development.

Environment Consultative Forum on Draft 2002-2003 Management Plan, 13/5/02 page 3 of 19 Attachment D: ENVIRONMENT CONSULTATIVE FORUM WORKSHOPS

Issue: Reducing the amount of impervious areas on allotments – over development / small lots. Response by Design & Technical Advice Manager: The minimum lot size is established within the Local Environment Plan for each estate. Council has control, at the development consent stage, over the set back from the front, rear and side boundaries and has a maximum site coverage for the house on each allotment. However, the paving of the yards does not require consent from Council and, if carried out to excess, can significantly limit the amount of impervious area on each allotment. The amount of impervious area impacts on the ability of the site to infiltrate stormwater and can have adverse affects on the level and salt content of the groundwater. Provision for larger lots sizes conflicts with other State government and Council objectives for new developments in as much as it will compromise affordable housing and the efficient provision of public transport (air quality impacts) to those areas. Issue: Silting up of lakes – what are we doing in the future. Response by Design & Technical Advice Manager: The deposition of silt is a pollutant of waterways and drainage systems, and the Environmental Management Program has a number of specific actions aimed at reducing the silt load in drainage systems. The buildup of silt in waterbodies has been identified as an issue of concern within the Stormwater Management Plans and each waterbody/water quality control pond will be de-silted as the need arises or as identified within the Management Plan for that particular waterbody.

Task/ AQUATIC PLANTS Issue Task 9.30 What plants are to be targeted. Response by Design & Technical Advice Manager: Council is required under the Noxious Weeds Act to remove and/or control all noxious weeds. Terrestrial weeds, which have been declared as noxious, will be given priority in any control programmes. In the aquatic environment, however, a plant that has not been declared noxious could pose a risk for flooding (blockage of conveyance capacity) or restriction of the recreational use of a waterbody (excessive growth of aquatic plants). In these instances the plants responsible for the loss of amenity will be targeted within a prioritised aquatic plant management program.

Environment Consultative Forum on Draft 2002-2003 Management Plan, 13/5/02 page 4 of 19 Attachment D: ENVIRONMENT CONSULTATIVE FORUM WORKSHOPS

Task/ RIPARIAN ZONES Issue Issue: Buffers at drainage reserve edges – riparian zones. Policy for No Mowing Zones? – balancing concerns with environment and residents. Re-vegetation of areas close to creeks. Response by Parks Construction & Maintenance Manager and Design & Technical Advice Manager: Penrith City Council liaises closely with the Department of Land and Water Conservation, National Parks and Wildlife Service and NSW Fisheries in determining the appropriate vegetation management strategies for creeks and waterways. The outcomes from these negotiations are reflected in the development conditions placed on developers, the management plans for the creek systems and the width of the Drainage Reserves. Council will shortly be adopting broad Plans of Management for bushland areas and will be looking to examine and include appropriate standards for maintenance and embellishment of these natural areas. The development of specific Plans of Management for Werrington Creek and Mulgoa Creek is proposed under the enhanced Environment Management Program. Many actions within the Environmental Management Program are related to the rehabilitation and re-vegetation of waterways. These actions will be implemented in accordance with their priority within the program. 1. Buffers at Drainage Reserve Edges We are currently undertaking work along Werrington Creek between the Lake and Burton Street. The work includes extensive planting in the riparian zone on either side of the creek. Planting has also been undertaken along the Nepean River at Tench Reserve. 2. No Mowing Zones At present, there is not a policy but a practice. Although there is no set distance crews are instructed to mow what they can get to but maintain a balance between usable space and retaining the areas along the creek lines. Having NO MOW Zones along creek banks has a number of advantages for Council’s operations including reducing the amount of area that has to be regularly mowed, giving council substantial savings in the mowing budget. However, many residents back onto the Drainage Reserves and insist on the area being mowed to control vermin and weeds and to allow an unimpeded view of their children while they play in the reserve. Finding a balance between the ecological and public safety issues is a constant concern and a compromise between the two does not fully meet the objectives of each management strategy. 3. Re-vegetation of areas close to creeks We are currently working towards this at several locations. Two current areas being worked on Bushcare groups are along Ropes Creek and an area of Cassola Place adjacent to the Nepean River.

Environment Consultative Forum on Draft 2002-2003 Management Plan, 13/5/02 page 5 of 19 Attachment D: ENVIRONMENT CONSULTATIVE FORUM WORKSHOPS

Task/ SALINITY Issue Issue: Council must address salinity – Small lots/less trees/lakeside developments. Can this be addressed in future developments/release areas - Land Use Planning Response by Building Approvals & Environment Protection Manager: Task 9.16 in the Draft Management Plan requires the development of a strategy to respond to the emerging evidence of urban salinity in the City. Council is participating with other Western Sydney Councils and State Agencies to develop a code of practice for the management of salinity. This code is currently being trialled for adoption by Council. Salinity hazard and management is already a key area of consideration in current environmental studies for new release areas. Salinity management will also be a focus of future environmental education programs, which will be enhanced under the proposed Special Initiative. Issue: Salinity problem affecting road structure – Cranebrook Rd./Tadmore Road– road failure. Response by Design & Technical Advice Manager: Cranebrook Road is a State Arterial Road under the control of the Roads and Traffic Authority and is not subject to Council’s pavement design standards. We will however pursue this matter with the RTA.

Task/ INDUSTRIAL AREAS Issue Issue: Need to audit existing Industrial Zones Response by Building Approvals & Environment Protection Manager: Council has a commitment to ensuring compliance by all development including industrial development. Development control officers undertake an extensive program of compliance inspections for a range of development types. A detailed audit program of industrial development is envisaged for the near future, but is not included in the current plan.

Task/ EDUCATION Issue Issue: Must tie Education to Dept of Education New School Program Response by Design & Technical Advice Manager: An environmental education team exists within the Council. The members of this team are aware of the need to ensure that any education program targeting school children complies with the requirements of the school curriculum. Issue: Use of symbols/characters that kids can relate to. Response by Design & Technical Advice Manager: An icon to promote the education program is important and efforts will be made to develop one that is both relevant to the environmental issues and representative of the City of Penrith. Issue: Education – increase signage & stencils (for messages) for schools

Environment Consultative Forum on Draft 2002-2003 Management Plan, 13/5/02 page 6 of 19 Attachment D: ENVIRONMENT CONSULTATIVE FORUM WORKSHOPS

Response by Design & Technical Advice Manager: It is important to positively reinforce the “Drain is Just For Rain” program developed by the NSW EPA. Consistent messages, stencils and literature are available at little or no cost through this program. However, there is a need to keep any such program locally relevant and this could be achieved through a symbol/character/icon.

Environment Consultative Forum on Draft 2002-2003 Management Plan, 13/5/02 page 7 of 19 Attachment D: ENVIRONMENT CONSULTATIVE FORUM WORKSHOPS

Issue: School involvement – importance of child education Response by Design & Technical Advice Manager: Council has recognised the need to involve the schools in any environmental program and has a number of cooperative hands-on programs with the schools. The Penrith Enviro Adventure is one such program and its success is dependent upon the involvement of the local schools. Issue: Schools have programs this year - School Environmental Management Plan (SEMP) - suggest co-operative program. Good support. Response by Design & Technical Advice Manager: Council is happy to be involved in such programs and will, wherever possible, provide resources to support the schools in preparation and operation of their SEMPs. Given the number of schools in the City, it will be necessary for us to to carefully manage our involvement.

Task/ AUDITS Issue Issue: Audit schools waste disposal, environment and pollution. Response by Design & Technical Advice Manager: The Environment Management Plan has identified a significant amount of funding for education programs and audits of industry and pollution “hot spots”. Consideration will be given for the of audits of the local schools and their inclusion into the “hot spot” program with resources supplied to “value add” to the SEMPs. Issue: Use of Council’s resources to educate/advise schools/establishments of inappropriate practices as non-threatening SWAT Team Response by Design & Technical Advice Manager: There are some real opportunities for Council, which has the expertise, to align itself closely with the schools as part of an “extension program”. This would allow Council to play a more pro-active role in environmental management rather than a purely reactive role. Issue: Audit of Dunheved/Commercial areas. Response by Design & Technical Advice Manager and Building Approvals & Environment Protection Manager: The Stormwater Management Plans have identified the need to audit and develop a Plan of Management for areas with high pollutant load potential. These areas tend to be the high use commercial sites, shopping malls, new developments and sporting venues. Dunheved has been listed as one such area and has been targeted in the first 2 years of the implementation of the proposed Environmental Management Plan. A detailed audit program of industrial developments is envisaged in the near future, but is not included in the current plan. Development control and environmental officers respond to a number issues in these areas each year. Issue: Use of authorised officers with power of entry. Response by Building Approvals & Environment Protection Manager: Council has a number of authorised officers who are able to respond to any incidents or issues that are raised with Council.

Environment Consultative Forum on Draft 2002-2003 Management Plan, 13/5/02 page 8 of 19 Attachment D: ENVIRONMENT CONSULTATIVE FORUM WORKSHOPS

Task/ FISH STOCKS Issue Issue: Discussion on stocking of native fish – need for balance - advice of fisheries – (no./type/habitat of fish) Response by Design & Technical Advice Manager: Stocking of the waterways within the city with native fish has been identified as a priority action within the Environmental Management Plan. NSW Fisheries have indicated that there is a possibility to receive 1:1 funding to assist in carrying out an approved re-stocking program and Council will make application to NSW Fisheries to be included in the program. Provision has been made in the Environmental Management Program for this to occur. It is necessary, however, to cooperate with NSW Fisheries to determine the appropriate species, numbers and locations into which native fish can be seeded.

Task/ LITTER CONTROL Issue Issue: What funding for increased street sweeping? Response by Waste & Community Protection Manager: In addition to Council’s current street sweeping services in the City, the enhanced Environmental Management Program for 2002/2003 makes provision for “Audit high litter areas - $4,650” together with “Enhanced street sweeping program, focussing on ‘hot spot areas’ - $25,000”. A further $20,000 has been targeted in 2003/2004 to enhance the current street sweeping program, focusing on problem areas. Issue: Has Council looked at sponsorship for highway clean-ups? Response by Waste & Community Protection Manager and Building Approvals & Environment Protection Manager: No sponsorship of clean-ups of highways is presently proposed, however Council will investigate opportunities for sponsorship. Consideration will need to be given to existing policies about advertising structures and posters. Council’s current efforts are focussed on: 1. Carrying out our direct responsibilities; 2. Lobbying the RTA to improve the cleanup of major roads. A litter crew patrol provides collection of street litter on Council roads, whereas the RTA collect waste on major arterial roads, highways and the M4 motorway.

SPECIFIC REGULATION ISSUE Issue: Westbus Depot ~ reported disposal of oil in washbay. Response by Building Approvals & Environment Protection Manager: This matter will be followed up by Council’s environmental health officers.

Environment Consultative Forum on Draft 2002-2003 Management Plan, 13/5/02 page 9 of 19 Attachment D: ENVIRONMENT CONSULTATIVE FORUM WORKSHOPS

WORKSHOP 2: LAND USE AND PARTNERSHIPS

Task/ URBAN ENVIRONMENT Name Issue Task Council’s adopted Residential Strategy needs to be Peter McGhee 5.01 reviewed constantly – need to ensure the monitoring is effective and the strategy continues to be relevant Response by Environmental Planning Manager: The Residential Study and the Residential Strategy were undertaken to identify the City’s residential / urban needs for the next twenty years. It also assisted Council in clarifying its approach to managing urban growth in the City and identifying its geographic limits. It is agreed that a regular review of the Strategy to ensure its continuing relevance, and to monitor its effectiveness, would assist Council in managing future urban growth. Council is currently developing its technical databases, to provide the mechanisms for those monitoring activities which would best inform a regular review process. Task The Task is very general – does it refer to more specific Kerry Brew 5.08 activities and should there be a cross-referencing system? Response by Environmental Planning Manager: This task recognises the resourcing required in responding to the management of planning processes for the City’s future urban release areas, and delivering best practice environmental outcomes. We will convene further discussions with DLWC on this and other issues, to better clarify the intent of relevant tasks. Task What was intended in meeting our Plan First Kerry Brew 5.12 obligations, and – again – is there an opportunity to provide some cross-referencing (clarity/relevance of the task when read in isolation)? Response by Environmental Planning Manager: This task recognises the activities that will be undertaken over the next two years to work towards consolidating and updating Council’s planning documents. It specifically relates to a focus on rationalising Penrith’s current suite of IDOs, LEPs, DCPs, and other plans and policies. Further clarification of the activities involved in this task will emerge when the PlanningNSW guidelines are available. Issue: Concern re submissions (not just Management Plan, Marilyn Jones more general) getting lost in the system and there are no specific responses provided. Response by Corporate Development Manager: Council’s Draft Management Plan consultation process is designed to ensure that all submissions from the public in response to the Draft Plan are recorded, responded to in writing by the appropriate officer and reported to Council for its consideration before adoption of the final Management Plan for the coming year. There have not been any reported instances of failure to meet this required standard. In regard to more general correspondence, the organisation is required and committed to observe standards of record keeping and responses to public correspondence. Any particular concerns in this regard are being investigated by Council officers.

Environment Consultative Forum on Draft 2002-2003 Management Plan, 13/5/02 page 10 of 19 Attachment D: ENVIRONMENT CONSULTATIVE FORUM WORKSHOPS

Task The Task has convoluted wording and doesn’t relate to Kerry Brew 5.17 the Critical Action Response by Building Approvals & Environment Protection Manager: The wording of the Task has been reviewed and is proposed to be changed to “Identify and act upon opportunities to improve upon the quality of development.” This will clarify the intent or understanding of the task, particularly in relation to the Critical Action. Issue: Rubbish being dumped in The Driftway and not being Marilyn Jones cleaned up. Should be able to tip at Hawkesbury (check re reciprocal arrangement) Response by Waste & Community Protection Manager: Council has one litter crew patrolling the whole of the Local Government Area, to collect orphan waste and litter. Patrols of The Driftway are provided, but on an infrequent basis. Council Rangers have been requested to provide patrols of this area. Hawkesbury Council do not permit residents of other Local Government Areas to tip at the Hawkesbury Council tip.

Task/ THE LOOK OF THE CITY Name Issue Task Reference ‘high quality’ if that is the intent of the Kerry Brew 8.01 requirement for landscaping the high profile areas (explain it more) Response by Parks Construction & Maintenance Manager: Over the last couple of years, Council has embarked on a substantial City Beautification program, drawing on our experience of the Olympic Games period and seeking to maintain similar high levels of presentation. There have been a number of landscape projects carried out in high profile sites in the city such as roadsides, roundabouts, prestige parks and City entrances. These beautification projects have been partly subsidised by a levy on Telstra to occupy the road reserves. The City Beautification program for 2002-03 will mainly focus on landscape improvements along the Northern Road (near the Parker Street sporting fields). Landscape design plans for Victoria Park, St Marys will also be undertaken. Task Add ‘public art’ to the task. Peter McGhee 8.01 Response by Parks Construction & Maintenance Manager and Facilities Operations Manager: While Council supports the inclusion of art installations in public spaces in the City, focus over the last few years has necessarily been on landscape beautification works of key sites. Issues that need to be considered with regard to public art include the identification of appropriate locations, durability and maintenance of materials used, design features, potential vandalism and other costs. Examples that Council has implemented include the topiaries on Castlereagh Rd and art works in the Penrith Civic Precinct Subject to resourcing availability, opportunities for public art will be assessed and pursued.

Environment Consultative Forum on Draft 2002-2003 Management Plan, 13/5/02 page 11 of 19 Attachment D: ENVIRONMENT CONSULTATIVE FORUM WORKSHOPS

Task Has the Council looked at sponsorship for Peter McGhee 8.02 maintenance? Response by Asset Manager: Council has no plans at present to investigate the use of sponsorship as a means of funding maintenance. Task Is there subsidisation involved? Task should reference Kerry Brew 8.06 ‘working with the owners’ and also reference the partnership involved in the Council working on adjacent lands Response by Design & Technical Advice Manager: There are no funds allocated for subsidies. The intent of this task is to develop urban design/public domain guidelines for the key sites that will assist property owners who are developing their land. Consultation with the community will be part of the guideline development. Issue: Message isn’t getting through well about ‘working with John Murphy the community’ and not just on public land (Maybe partly picked up in 8.07?) Should 8.06 be moved to be with 8.07? Response by Parks Construction & Maintenance and Design & Technical Advice Manager: It is agreed that more needs to be done to get this message through and achieve effective results, which is the purpose of these two tasks. Task 8.06 involves the development of landscape guidelines that will assist landowners in any improvements to their property. Task 8.07 relates to strategies to engage the stakeholders in the implementation of the improvements. New Support the environment groups in lobbying for John Murphy Task: ‘container rebate’ legislation (proposed new task). Response by Waste & Community Protection Manager: Local Government including Penrith City Council is strongly committed to the introduction of Container Deposit Legislation (CDL). Lobbying activities are principally conducted through the Local Government and Shires Associations of NSW, which is vigorously pursuing CDL with the State Government. As such, this is seen as an existing lobbying effort rather than a new task for Council.

Task/ HERITAGE Name Issue Task Heritage LEP review – will it take the two years? Need Marilyn Jones 11.01 the legislation in place. Response by Environmental Planning Manager: The review of Council’s Heritage LEP will involve a comprehensive audit of existing and potential heritage items. A new Local Environmental Plan and accompanying development controls will then be developed. There will also be broad and full consultation forums with the City’s communities, at appropriate times during the process. The timeframe is likely to extend beyond a one year project.

Environment Consultative Forum on Draft 2002-2003 Management Plan, 13/5/02 page 12 of 19 Attachment D: ENVIRONMENT CONSULTATIVE FORUM WORKSHOPS

Issue: Cemeteries – not enough maintenance works. Marilyn Jones Response by Facilities Operations Manager: Council is committed to a program of physical improvements in all its cemeteries. Over the last few years there have been road and drainage improvements, tree planting, new perimeter fencing as well as expanded maintenance programs. In additional to funds generated by the cemeteries’ revenue, Council has been successful in securing grant funding for improvement works. We currently have two applications before Government for grants which if secured will be directed to Monument restoration at St Stephens Cemetery. During 2001-02, monument restoration has been carried out by Council at the historic Castlereagh Cemetery. Issue: Aboriginal groups don’t view heritage and cultural John Murphy values in the same way and those areas/ items/ issues can’t be treated in the same way. Response by Environmental Planning Manager and Community Development Manager: This point is very valid. However, it is important also to note that Aboriginal groups are not a single entity in their views and do not necessarily have a consensus view on heritage and cultural values. In the Penrith LGA we have at least 20 traditional or tribal groups. Each has its own observances, traditions and customs in the context of their views about Heritage or Cultural Values. This diversity must be recognised when appropriate consultation and acknowledgement of Aboriginal groups’ views are carried out. The need for sensitivity to these issues and expertise in responding to them is recognised in Council’s employment of an Aboriginal Liaison Officer to provide specialist advice and maintain appropriate contacts with the community. Issue: Need to engage Aboriginal groups specifically in the Kerry Brew Environmental Management Tasks and activities. Response by Environmental Planning Manager and Community Development Manager: Council is aware of this need, and it will be considered and incorporated in our approach to relevant tasks. This bears on not only environment management in the context of flora & fauna, biodiversity, clean air and waterways etc. but also Heritage. In this context, Council must be aware that Aboriginal views of Heritage and Culture do not necessarily separate these values from ‘Environment’ in the sense the term is often used in government. This also relates to the question of which groups are to be engaged on any particular issue. Sensitivity to these considerations is required from Council. As noted above, Council is given given expert guidance in this area by our Aboriginal Liaison Officer. Issue: Can’t find anything on riparian corridors – Marilyn Jones maintenance, recognition of importance (link & tasks). Needs to be recognised as a separate specific issue. Response please see the commentary in Attachment 1 the ‘River Health’ Workshop for various issues relevant to this matter.

Environment Consultative Forum on Draft 2002-2003 Management Plan, 13/5/02 page 13 of 19 Attachment D: ENVIRONMENT CONSULTATIVE FORUM WORKSHOPS

Task Heritage awareness – needs to be provided via specific Marilyn Jones 11.02 heritage training. Response by Environmental Planning Manager: Council agrees with this view and specific heritage training is being provided to appropriate staff in an ongoing program. The importance of this will continue to be stressed in keeping staff abreast of Heritage issues. Task Heritage Committee – needs funding for promotional Marilyn Jones 11.03 activities, research, etc. Response by Environmental Planning Manager: It is acknowledged that providing financial assistance to the Heritage Advisory Committee may assist it in terms of worthwhile activities. However, it is appropriate that the Committee develop an activity plan in the first instance, so that it can demonstrate a solid case for receiving funding. This priority may be required to compete with other Heritage initiatives and other Council programs for funding. A clear demonstration of the need and value of proposed activities is therefore important. Issue: Preservation of the Darug language – community Peter McGhee responsibility needed to encourage this so the language isn’t lost. Response by Community Development Manager: This is a very complex issue. Since colonisation Aboriginal people have been subjected to a number of Government policies which resulted in the loss of many aspect of their lives. The loss of Language was a contributing factor in the dismantling of Aboriginal social structure. Over the years academics/researchers have undertaken many studies on Aboriginal languages. In many cases Aboriginal groups have protested this practice (and/or other ‘research’ about Aboriginal people) because they are of the belief that it is their language and if any research and preservation of language is to be undertaken it has to be initiated by them and undertaken by them and for them. The use of Darug words which are currently used by Aboriginal organisations such as the Deerubbin Local Aboriginal Land Council and the Daruk Aboriginal Medical Service is a way that language can be/is preserved (Council's also has a meeting room named the Daruk room). However, this is something that individual organisations need to consider for themselves and this needs to be done sensitively in consultation with the appropriate people and groups. The matter raised is not seen as a responsibility of Council and/or the general community. The responsibility for preservation of language lies primarily with the people who assert a Darug identity.

Environment Consultative Forum on Draft 2002-2003 Management Plan, 13/5/02 page 14 of 19 Attachment D: ENVIRONMENT CONSULTATIVE FORUM WORKSHOPS

WORKSHOP 3: BIODIVERSITY

Name / ISSUE / QUESTION Answered by Q: What additional resources will be provided for Bushcare Lee Chadwick with the additional money? A: Contract Bushcare regenerators, educational and PCMM promotional material, plant material for Council’s bushcare sites, fencing. Q: Will the $30,000 for this year be continued next year? What David Roberts is the actual amount for Bushcare next year? A: The $30,000 allocation for bushcare will be continued. In PCMM addition, $25,000 will be provided to enhanced bushcare services. The amount for next year is $ 55,000. There are 15 active bushcare sites currently in the City. We will be expanding these and also doing more at these sites. Three of the sites are by bushcare contractors and the rest are managed by community groups. We may employ more contractors. Q: Was there any program of rehabilitation work after the David Roberts bush fires? Was there any post fire weeding? A: There was no direct rehabilitation program after the PCMM bushfires on Council owned land. Council has however made requests to the RTA to regenerate fire affected land on RTA property. There was no post fire weeding. Council does not have the resources to address these rehabilitation works because of the extensive amount of weeds in the City. Q: What will the $30,000 in 2002-03 be spent on for the Lee Chadwick mapping and GIS system? Isn’t the mapping information available from National Parks for only a few hundred dollars? This project should cost no more than $5,000. A: $80,000 over the first two years of the Environment BAEPM Management Program is proposed to be allocated to bushland mapping to support Council’s Local Biodiversity Conservation Plan. The mapping data currently available for the City is out of date and needs extensive upgrading. A lot of work will be involved in doing surveys and ground truthing to set up and upgrade the necessary data bases. Data storage capacity will also need to be expanded. Digital terrain mapping of the City will also be explored. Q: $30,000 for aquatic plants and weeds. Is this additional to David Roberts what we pay to the Hawkesbury River County Council? Who will be doing this work? Do you have preferred contractors? A: It is additional money under the proposed enhanced PCMM environmental program. Penrith Council will be doing the work, not the County Council. The work will probably be done by contractors. Funds are to be used primarily on the control of aquatic weeds at Surveyors Creek, Knox Street, Glenmore Loch, and other detention ponds. Specialised contractors will be used.

Environment Consultative Forum on Draft 2002-2003 Management Plan, 13/5/02 page 15 of 19 Attachment D: ENVIRONMENT CONSULTATIVE FORUM WORKSHOPS

Name / ISSUE / QUESTION Answered by Discussion covered possible areas and types of ponds etc where this type of work is required.

Environment Consultative Forum on Draft 2002-2003 Management Plan, 13/5/02 page 16 of 19 Attachment D: ENVIRONMENT CONSULTATIVE FORUM WORKSHOPS

Q: What is the purpose of the GIS system? David Roberts A: To control unauthorised clearing and development, to assist BAEPM Council in determining the potential environmental impact of development decisions, to monitor vegetation loss, to identify locations of threatened species. Q: There should be a lot more threatened species mapping. Shane Grundy A: The importance of threatened species mapping is recognised. BAEPM This forms one element of the proposed Special Initiative for Environmental Management. In the Draft Management Plan, $80,000 is proposed to be spent on enhanced Bushland mapping over the next two years. This is reflected in Task 7.10 “Provide comprehensive technical information and mapping systems that support the development of a Local Biodiversity Conservation Strategy”. Q: What is the role of the County Council? Do they issue Shane Grundy weeds notices? Will their role be enhanced? Noxious weeds are not being dealt with effectively. I have seen blackberry and other weeds on the same property for years. They don’t seem to be doing anything on private land. They seem to mainly concentrate on the river. A: The County Council is responsible for the control of noxious PCMM weeds within the City, both on public and private land. They do issue weed control notices. Hopefully their role will be enhanced. Q: What about employing a weeds officer like Blue Mountains Lesley Edwards Council? I believe that it is cost neutral through fees raised from notices. This person also has a strong education role. A: Blue Mountains City Council is totally responsible for weeds PCMM management as it is not a member of the Hawkesbury River County Council. Penrith City Council contributes approximately $60,000 per annum to the County Council to undertake this work. Q: Are you training your staff about invasive weeds species? Geoff Brown A: Yes to selected staff , but it is limited. We need and intend PCMM to do more. Q: What about weed identification charts for staff? They are Shane Grundy cost effective. A: A number of charts have already been distributed to staff. PCMM Q: Is Council about to inherit Glenmore Park (parks and David Roberts reserves). How much will that cost Council?? A: A significant hand over of land will occur in mid 2003. PCMM These will include Bluehills reserve and the wetland. Q: Will that also include wetlands and bushland? Shane Grundy A: Yes, provision has been made for maintenance of these PCMM areas. Q: Shaw Park- there are conditions about rehabilitation of the David Roberts vegetation on the DA. What has happened? A: The condition required a plan of management which was BAEPM provided and approved. The plans of management were prepared in consultation with neighboring residents.

Environment Consultative Forum on Draft 2002-2003 Management Plan, 13/5/02 page 17 of 19 Attachment D: ENVIRONMENT CONSULTATIVE FORUM WORKSHOPS

Q: Will you be employing a Bushland Manager to prepare Lesley Edwards plans of management for the various parks and reserves? A: Council will probably use consultants for this task. PCMM Q: What happened to the Plans of Management for the various David Roberts parks. They were meant to be done three years ago. What happened to the money? A: A number of reserves have been prioritized as requiring a PCMM specific plan of management. Examples include Tench Reserve, Werrington Lake, Weir Reserve and Glenmore Loch.. Funding that was available for plans of management was used on generic plans for community lands. Q: You need a Bushland Management Officer. Why don’t we David Roberts have the same expertise as surrounding Councils? Blue Mountains, Hawkesbury, and Baulkham Hills all have Bushland Managers. A: Hawkesbury City Council has only one Natural Areas PCMM Manager and has just recently appointed a Bushcare Officer. Blacktown City Council does not have a bushcare officer. Liverpool City Council has just appointed their first bushcare officer. Q: If you had a Bushland Management Officer you would have Bill Dixon a far greater level of community participation. You need someone to drive it. A: At this stage it is considered that actual field work in PCMM selected bushland reserves is far more important. Bushcare work that is being done by contractors and community groups is having a greater impact, There was discussion amongst the group and a strong consensus about the need for a Bushland Management Officer Response: This matter is being considered under the proposed Environmental Management Program. Q: Have you considered incentive programs to protect Bill Dixon biodiversity? It has proved successful n other areas. A: Council is considering this option as part of the current rural BAEPM lands study for the City, which is currently underway. Q: You seem to have a very low level of external funding Shane Grundy compared to the Blue Mountains? A: Additional staffing resources will allow grants and other BAEPM value added funding to be pursued. Council has been successful in several grant applications. Q: How will the environmental program be monitored? Will Bill Dixon there be indicators? A: We will be setting milestones for the program and we will be BAEPM reporting on them to the community. Environmental indicators have been developed but more work is required in this area for certain environmental issues. Council’s annual State of the Environment Report (SOE) will also report on achievements.

Environment Consultative Forum on Draft 2002-2003 Management Plan, 13/5/02 page 18 of 19 Attachment D: ENVIRONMENT CONSULTATIVE FORUM WORKSHOPS

Q: Will there be a community reference group to help monitor Bill Dixon the program? A: Council is proposing to develop a community reference group BAEPM as part of its Sustainable Penrith initiatives. It is anticipated that this group will have input into the State of the Environment Report (SOE) which will be a key reporting mechanism on Council’s environmental program. Q: Are you going to take a hard line on sediment control? David Roberts A: Council is already taking a strong regulatory role in relation BAEPM to erosion and sediment control. We do concede though, that this still needs to be further expanded. There is a proposal for a comprehensive, long term audit of development sites will ensure improved compliance. Q: I think the street sweeping is a great idea. It should be Shane Grundy expanded further. It would have a very positive effect. How exactly will the street sweeping money be spent? A: The street-sweeping program will be expanded to address Wayne Mitchell areas of high litter or sediment load like where there is active development sites. The same equipment will be used, but additional staff or staff time will be provided. Q: When will the plan of management for Crossman Reserve David Roberts be completed? It was meant to be done two years ago. What happened to the funds? A: A plan of management for Crossman Reserve was prepared PCMM by consultants on behalf of the Wallacia Landcare Group. However, the group did not proceed with their NHT funding grant application and the project was abandoned. Q: How much does Council spend on weed control in natural David Roberts areas? A: Weed control in natural areas is confined to bushcare work PCMM which is being done by contractors and community groups. Q: Details requested of the 15 sites we work on, who pays, list David Roberts of preferred tenderers. A: The sites that have been identified for future bushcare PCMM work include: Ropes Creek (Dunheved), Cassola Place (Penrith), Clissold Reserve (Emu Heights), Crossman Reserve (Wallacia), Denver Rd & Colorado Dr (St Clair), Dorothy Radford Reserve (St Clair), Forrest Red Gum Reserve (Glenmore Park), Huntington Reserve (Emu Plains), Kanangara Reserve (Penrith), Tench Reserve(Penrith), Peppermint Reserve (Orchard Hills), Weir Reserve (Penrith) and Werrington Creek (three sites).

Environment Consultative Forum on Draft 2002-2003 Management Plan, 13/5/02 page 19 of 19 ATTACHMENT

Date of Meeting: 17 June 2002

Master Programme: Council's Operating Environment

Programme: Management of the Organisation

Report Title: 2002-2003 MANAGEMENT PLAN

ATTACHMENT E: SOCIAL/ARTS & CULTURAL/COMMUNITY SAFETY CONSULTATIVE FORUM WORKSHOPS HELD 15/5/02 Attachment E: SOCIAL/ARTS & CULTURAL/COMMUNITY SAFETY CONSULTATIVE FORUM WORKSHOPS

COMMUNITY SAFETY AND NEIGHBOURHOOD RENEWAL PROGRAM FOCUS GROUP

Facilitator: Yvonne Perkins Recorder: David Burns

Question: After reviewing Council’s proposed community safety and neighbourhood renewal program, please provide feedback on the proposal to partly fund the implementation of the program by a rate increase?

Feedback:

· If rate rise funds of $250,000 are to be spent on community safety and neighbourhood renewal then let do it. · This is a positive step. · The Penrith City Centre Association advised the group that they are already looking to adopt items from the Penrith Valley Community Safety Plan independently as well as in partnership with other stakeholders. · The proposed program will instill community ownership and pride. · Renewal works will send a clear message to the community that Council is meeting expectations.

Response by Facilities Operations Manager: The significance of the concept of ownership and responsibility for public and private space by the community is being adopted and led by key stakeholder across the City and this is very encouraging. The positive feedback from the Workshop confirms the relevance of tasks to be undertaken outlined in the Management Plan, particularly under the two issues 13. Community Safety 15. Older Established Areas Facilities and Services Through the proposed Special Initiative for Community Safety Development and Neighbourhood Renewal, Council intends to not only increase funding but increase the focus of its own efforts on these key issues.

Question: In what ways should the Partnership seek ongoing feedback from the community on real and/or perceived emerging community safety issues?

Feedback:

· Seek feedback from established community groups, forums and organisations. · Take it to the people – visit established groups, particularly groups such as playgroups as they are in touch with their local community. · Speak to other community organisations, community development groups, etc. · Seek feedback using the Mayor’s column. · Talk to other government agencies.

Response by Facilities Operations Manager: There was useful information gathered regarding this issue. This feedback will assist in identifying methods to be used to monitor the effectiveness of strategies and actions outlined in the Penrith Valley Community Safety Plan..

Social Consultative Forum on Draft 2002-2003 Management Plan, 15/5/02 page 1 of 10 Attachment E: SOCIAL/ARTS & CULTURAL/COMMUNITY SAFETY CONSULTATIVE FORUM WORKSHOPS

Question: How should Council and the Penrith Valley Community Safety Partnership involve local communities in the implementation of strategies and actions in specific neighbourhoods?

Feedback:

· Need to attract people – make it interesting for them. · Social activities to promote community action. · Provide “feel good” community activities that promote community ownership. · Identify the needs of each particular group. · Approach “grass roots” groups such as playgroups, women’s groups.

Response by Facilities Operations Manager: Feedback from this question is particularly useful in determining the real issues in local communities and strengthening opportunities for partnership development. This information will be very beneficial to Council during implementation of the relevant Management Plan tasks.

Question: To what extent does the presentation of general amenity of neighbourhoods contribute to the perceptions of community safety and usage of public space including local shopping strips?

Feedback:

· It has a huge impact on how people feel. · It instills community pride. · There was particular interest in the concept of street cafes/outside dining which attract people to public space. · Need for improved lighting especially in public areas and footpaths.

Response by Facilities Operations Manager: This feedback reinforces Council' s resolve to continue to implement strategies that contribute to improved public amenity and increased levels of maintenance. The Workshop discussion generally mirrors findings from recent extensive Community Safety consultations and Council's involvement in a Neighbourhood Coordination pilot project in Cranebrook. Relevant tasks are included in the Management Plan under the Issues referenced above, 13. Community Safety and 15. Older Established Areas Facilities and Services.

General Discussion:

· Need to be smarter about tree planting in areas that are prone to vandalism, could be a cost saving exercise in the end. · Need to develop a strategy to present vacant shops in a manner that doesn’t look like the area has been abandoned. (This is a community safety strategy) · Need for improved ongoing maintenance after initial enhancement. · Emphasis on community ownership and participation.

Response by Facilities Operations Manager: Priorities outlined in the Workshop feedback are included in: ~ actions outlined in the Penrith Valley Community Safety Plan and

Social Consultative Forum on Draft 2002-2003 Management Plan, 15/5/02 page 2 of 10 Attachment E: SOCIAL/ARTS & CULTURAL/COMMUNITY SAFETY CONSULTATIVE FORUM WORKSHOPS

~ tasks to be implemented by Council under the Management Plan issue for Older Established Areas Facilities and Services.

ARTS AND CULTURE FOCUS GROUP

Facilitator: Gary Dean Recorder: Jeni Pollard

Question: What do you think about the relationships that exist between Council and the various arts and cultural groups across the City?

Feedback:

· The interest of the Council has been most positive/helpful. · Security of tenure for premises has been an issue. · Council could take a stronger role in promoting arts in the area.

Response by Facilities Operations Manager: The Workshop feedback was very positive. The group reinforced the importance of Council's commitment to assist and support wherever possible the various community groups across the city. It is important to note that many community groups now occupy Council premises which were originally acquired for a range of future land use options, eg road widening. Those groups are aware of their temporary occupancy and that in such cases Council would assist in locating alternative premises (not necessarily Council-operated premises) when required.

Question: Do you consider Council provides adequate support to Arts and Cultural groups? If not, in what ways could that be improved?

Feedback:

· Council could assist in promoting cultural/arts groups. · Portraiture prize could be expanded to other areas.

Response by Facilities Operations Manager: Reference was made to "Art files" - the Arts directory for Western Sydney. The group was advised that Council's draft budget provides $7000 for our contribution to this publication. These funds will be utilised by Council to market and broaden the existence of the various arts/culture/community groups. The Draft Management PLan contains a task to investigate the introduction of a City Portrait Prize. Council Officers will include consideration of widening the range of such a prize.

Social Consultative Forum on Draft 2002-2003 Management Plan, 15/5/02 page 3 of 10 Attachment E: SOCIAL/ARTS & CULTURAL/COMMUNITY SAFETY CONSULTATIVE FORUM WORKSHOPS

Question: The presentation identifies Council’s priorities for Arts and Cultural issues. Do you agree with these issues?

Feedback:

· St Marys arts precinct will be a welcome cultural asset. · There could be greater funding priority to arts/culture in the Management Plan.

Response by Facilities Operations Manager: The feedback was positive. An outline of Council's program for next year for the Penrith Valley Community Arts Precinct at St Marys was given, also the funds to be allocated to the project. Council has a strong commitment to arts and culture programs at both the grassroots and regional level. However these funding priorities will always compete against other recreation and leisure needs and other programs across Council’s range of services. Development of City-wide strategies for Recreation and Cultural Needs in the coming year will provide a strong platform for advancement of these issues.

Other Issues:

· Council to promote the use of facilities in the St Marys precinct. · Insurance is an issue for community organisations. · Relationship to Council’s Arts Policy – “it can take time to find the right person”. · More exhibitions of local artists in the foyer/library area. · How will Memorial Hall look when it is finished? · Funding for performance groups. · Some of the halls/facilities in our rural areas could be used for arts and cultural exhibitions. · Signage of buildings could be improved.

Response by Facilities Operations Manager: Most of the additional matters raised in the Workshop are operational (rather than comments on the Management Plan or Council policies) and will be addressed by the appropriate Manager through the year. Insurance and Public Liability costs are recognised as a critical issue, albeit one beyond Council’s control and which is impacting strongly on Local Government as well as the community sector. Participants are encouraged to contact the relevant Council officers for further information on these matters, including: Arts policy and Facility issues - Facilities Operations Manager, Gary Dean 4732 7720 Insurance issues/advice - Risk Management Co-ordinator, Ken Muir 4732 7692

Social Consultative Forum on Draft 2002-2003 Management Plan, 15/5/02 page 4 of 10 Attachment E: SOCIAL/ARTS & CULTURAL/COMMUNITY SAFETY CONSULTATIVE FORUM WORKSHOPS

SOCIAL JUSTICE FOCUS GROUPS

Facilitators: Erich Weller and Carol Joyce Recorders: Judy Cobb, Bonny Cheleski and Jenny Gillespie

Question: What are the most significant current social and community issues for people living in the Penrith LGA?

Feedback:

General Community

· The rise in public liability insurance costs is impacting on local service providers and activities. Funding for non-government services has not been increased to cope with the increase in insurance fees. Many activities and/or programs are under threat. The public liability crisis has had a big impact on large community events, disability services and youth services. These types of activities are considered high risk. · Many of Penrith Council’s core services are not available in the rural areas. (e.g. no library provisions, no before and after school care provisions, etc.) · People are short of money, hungry, unable to pay bills. The minimum wait for Centrelink is three weeks and this causes hardship. · Services have limited resources to deal with the high demand.

Young People

· More programs for young people. Many of the local youth services are only funded to operate on a part- time basis. · Better co-ordination of existing non-government youth organisations. Most local youth services lack adequate funding and management support to effectively meet the needs of young people in the Penrith area. · There are large numbers of young people in St Marys and many of them have trouble managing their finances. It is also a transient population, moving between St Marys and country areas. · There needs to be better information on services to young people. · Services often give young runaways the cold shoulder.

Homeless People

· There are so many homeless people and the situation is getting worse. Some people are “double dipping” into available resources from different organisations. · Many of the homeless people are Aboriginal. · Affordable housing is needed. · Frequent change over of staff in services, especially Centrelink, is a problem.

Social Consultative Forum on Draft 2002-2003 Management Plan, 15/5/02 page 5 of 10 Attachment E: SOCIAL/ARTS & CULTURAL/COMMUNITY SAFETY CONSULTATIVE FORUM WORKSHOPS

People with Disabilities

· More opportunities and programs for people with disabilities including education programs, recreational programs, and social programs are needed. There are very few services in the Penrith area that focus on the needs of people who have an intellectual disability. · People with disabilities and the elderly are isolated and require assistance to get out of their homes – transport issues, carer issues, appropriate programs. · Better information is needed for people with a disability.

Older People

· Transport for group activities (e.g. senior groups). In particular large groups require more than one bus for an activity. It is difficult to hire more than one bus for the same activity.

Women

· Violence against women.

Question: To what extent does the direction of Council’s Management Plan address these issues?

General Community

· Community Safety program is much needed. Community education (e.g. syringe collection) is an ongoing process that should not be limited to sports groups. · Council’s promotional strategy needs to include strategy for disseminating information to the rural/isolated areas. People living in the rural areas and other isolated residents are not aware of what is happening in Penrith. What’s On newsletter needs to be distributed to groups and residents living in rural areas. · Council could look at information dissemination. · The phone numbers/contacts for emergency social services could be more readily available. · Council could lobby and advocate on behalf of local residents and local services. · Commitment to neighbourhood co-ordination program needs to continue. There is a lack of services available in the Cranebrook area (e.g. no youth service for young people aside from part-time program in the Department of Housing estate). Extra worker hours are also required for the community development position based at Mt Pleasant Neighbourhood Centre. · Commitment to Department of Housing Community Renewal Scheme needs to continue. The community development work undertaken in the estate has been highly recognised and needs to continue. Council’s support is essential.

Response by Community Development Manager: Council is very much aware of the crisis in public liability insurance. Information on the effect it is having on the local community is being documented and being investigated in conjunction with Council’s insurer. Task 14.03 “Investigate strategies to improve social capital in the less advantaged areas of the City” will include the older areas and the rural areas. Although the populations in some areas may not be sufficient to warrant the provision of new services, the accessibility of existing services can be investigated. The need for additional hours for services is well recognised and is part of Council’s continuing lobbying role with other levels of government. Task 14.11 “Lobby the State Government for the provision of adequately funded community based workers to meet the needs of residents” reflects this.

Social Consultative Forum on Draft 2002-2003 Management Plan, 15/5/02 page 6 of 10 Attachment E: SOCIAL/ARTS & CULTURAL/COMMUNITY SAFETY CONSULTATIVE FORUM WORKSHOPS

The provision of information about community services is a key role for Council and community directories are reflected in task 14.14 “Provide Community Directories.” Directories are provided for Youth Services, Aged Services and a General Community Directory. The latter is on the Internet and will soon be produced in hard copy. Commitment to the Cranebrook area and the Community Renewal Scheme continues with support for the Cranebrook Neighbourhood Advisory Board included in task 14.13. This area will also be a principal focus in tasks relating to the Neighbourhood Renewal Program. These are task 13.01 “Implement the agreed program of strategies of the Penrith Valley Community Safety Plan” and task 13.04 “Resource and support the partnership of relevant stakeholders to implement prioritised actions from the community safety strategies.”

Young People

· Commitment to the skate park in Jamison Park is to be commended. However, funding must be secured for a mobile skate park so that the needs of isolated young people in the outer suburbs and the rural areas are also met. · No mention in draft Management Plan regarding plans to address the needs of young people living in rural areas.

Response by Community Development Manager: Council has been focusing on the needs of young people over the last two years and has conducted a wide ranging consultation process with young people through the Youth Needs Audit. Task 4.09 in the Draft Management Plan is “Work with Youth Interagency and others to implement the recommendations from the Penrith Youth Needs Audit including investigating funding opportunities.” There were some young people from rural areas involved in the consultations and their main issue of transport is included in the recommendations. The Regional Skate Park in Jamison Park is expected to be completed in July and the need for an additional mobile facility will be assessed from an analysis of the usage patterns of this new facility. The need for more and better-coordinated programs for young people is recognised by Council. Although some are Federal, most are State funded and included in the scope of task 4.11 “Lobby the State Government for the provision of adequately funded community based workers to meet the needs of residents.”

Homeless People

Response by Community Development Manager: Council has become increasingly aware of the need to address the issues of homelessness and availability of affordable housing. While Federal and State policy and resources have a significant impact, Council has a role in the control of housing development and to research and advocate for the needs of local residents suffering housing stress. Relevant tasks in the Draft Management Plan include task 5.01 “Undertake strategic research on housing issues affecting Penrith and develop a residential development monitoring system”, task 5.03 “Plan for a diverse housing choice in our release areas” and task 5.04 “Work with the development industry to provide housing choice and diversity, including infill and CBD housing.” From consultation last year with Indigenous residents the issue of Indigenous homelessness was raised as a high priority. As a result Council has secured funding from the State government for a two-year action research project on indigenous Homelessness in the Penrith area.

Social Consultative Forum on Draft 2002-2003 Management Plan, 15/5/02 page 7 of 10 Attachment E: SOCIAL/ARTS & CULTURAL/COMMUNITY SAFETY CONSULTATIVE FORUM WORKSHOPS

People with Disabilities

· Commitment to Disability Discrimination Action Plan is much needed. However it will focus on Council services. There also needs to be a focus on lobbying for better service provision in the community for people with disabilities. · Physical improvements to Mt Pleasant Neighbourhood Centre are also essential. · Provide suitable facilities for recreation programs for people with disabilities. · Promotion of disability services and recreation activities.

Response by Community Development Manager: Although the principal responsibility for the delivery of services for people with a disability lies with the other levels of government, Council has an advocacy role. In addition Council provides subsidised accommodation to the service providers, primarily through the Community Connection building in Henry St, Penrith. Researching and responding to the needs of people with disabilities is included in a number of tasks in the Draft Management Plan. These include task 14.04 “Participate in social planning partnerships with other levels of government and the community, including the Department of Community Services, Department of Aging, Disability and Home Care” and task 14.05 “Consult with all mandatory target groups.” The Disability Discrimination Action Plan to be developed will be aimed at more than Council services. Its goal is to set the directions for the future of the City of Penrith so that it will be free from discrimination and barriers to access for people with a disability. In addition to providing services, Council has significant regulatory and advocacy functions that affect the whole community. Council provides many community facilities across the City and there has been an ongoing program for a number of years to make these facilities accessible for people with disabilities. This action is continued in the 2002-03 Management Plan.

Older People

· No mention in draft Management Plan regarding plans to address the needs of isolated elderly residents.

Response by Community Development Manager: Services to isolated elderly residents are generally the responsibility of the joint Federal/State Home and Community Care Program (HACC) which provides funding for community based services in the local area. Most of the HACC services in Penrith are located in the Community Connection building. In addition, Council staff consult about the needs of older people as indicated in tasks 14.05 and 14.06 referenced above. Council’s role is one of advocacy to the funding bodies in the event of any identified gaps in service provision.

Women

· Issues relating to violence against women could also be addressed by this plan.

Response by Community Development Manager: There are services funded by the other levels of government to deal with the issue of violence against women. Once again, Council’s role in this regard is one of advocacy should gaps in the provision of services be identified. This is part of Council’s social planning process of ongoing research and consultation with the mandatory target groups, one of which is women.

Social Consultative Forum on Draft 2002-2003 Management Plan, 15/5/02 page 8 of 10 Attachment E: SOCIAL/ARTS & CULTURAL/COMMUNITY SAFETY CONSULTATIVE FORUM WORKSHOPS

Question: Are there any other high priority social issues that could be addressed or that could be addressed in a different way?

· Council’s promotional strategy needs to be extended to rural areas.

Response by Economic Development & City Marketing Manager: Council produces a range of community information that is distributed to households across the City, including an Annual Report and Quarterly Community Reports. This material is letterbox dropped and Council is committed to ensure that every household receives the information. We are currently undertaking discussions with the distributors to ensure that this is the case.

· Outreach services (e.g. library services) should be provided in rural area. A mobile library was suggested.

Response by Information Manager: Mobile Libraries are expensive to set-up and operate. They can only provide a very limited but high cost service. Council provides two extensive central Libraries in Penrith and St Marys. Both are in highly accessible locations and opened extended hours over 7 days. They provide a comprehensive range of services including internet access. The Library also provides an extensive Home Library Service for those not physically capable of getting to a library. This service presently provides deliveries to a number of customers in rural/outlying areas of the City including Londonderry, Llandilo, Berkshire Park, Mulgoa, Wallacia, Orchard Hills and Luddenham. Note that this service has eligibility criteria.

· Isolated residents in rural area (elderly and youth) need transport to services/programs/ activities offering in the CBD. Public transport is not adequate. (Frequency and times)

Response by Community Development Manager: Young people from the rural areas of the City were included in the recent Youth Needs audit conducted by Council. A recommendation of the audit is that “Council work with local youth workers to develop a transport plan together with local bus companies for young people to better access regional after hours and weekend activities such as festivals and community events.” There is a task in the Draft 2002-2003 Management Plan to implement the recommendations of the Youth Needs Audit. Transport for isolated older people has only been raised previously in relation to special transport for frail older people and for access to medical appointments. The Nepean Community Transport Service is funded through the Home and Community Care Program to provide services for this target group. In addition, Council has two buses for hire at a subsidised rate to non-profit community groups. One of these buses has disability access. Council also hosts a Community Transport Forum where issues about public transport services can be raised with the service providers.

Social Consultative Forum on Draft 2002-2003 Management Plan, 15/5/02 page 9 of 10 Attachment E: SOCIAL/ARTS & CULTURAL/COMMUNITY SAFETY CONSULTATIVE FORUM WORKSHOPS

· Significant resources are required for services for children aside from traditional child care services. Range of programs required (e.g. weekend and vacation activities organised by library staff need to be extended to outer areas). Support programs are required for parents with children with difficult behaviours.

Response by Children’s Services Manager, Community Development Manager and Information Manager: In terms of Council’s provision of Children’s Services, it is not part of the current funding agreement to provide services at weekends and to outlying areas. Any extension of our formal service provision would require research and negotiation with stakeholders and funding bodies. Weekend and vacation activities organised by the Library, including the Community Toy Library, are essentially designed to be provided at our central and branch libraries as part of the total range of services available, rather than as an isolated outreach service. Support programs for parents with children with difficult behaviours are the responsibility of the State Government. Although the need for additional services has not thus far been identified through Council’s planning and research processes, if there was a significant demand for additional services in the Penrith Local Government Area Council could have an advocacy role.

· Council needs to consider other means of promoting local events/interests, etc. Suggestions included using local churches, local radio stations, etc.

Response by Economic Development & City Marketing Manager: Local events are advertised through Council information columns and by news stories in local newspapers in the City and often on local radio stations. They are also included in the ‘What’s On’ column that appears in local newspapers. To have an event included on the ‘What’s On’ list or to be included on the distribution list for the ‘What’s On’ column, any event organiser is welcome to contact the Visitors Information Centre on 4732 7671.

Question: If Council follows this direction what difference will be made for the future for the City?

Feedback:

· Less vandalism. · A healthier, happier society. · A great reputation for Penrith City – everyone will want to live here. · Less housebound people.

Social Consultative Forum on Draft 2002-2003 Management Plan, 15/5/02 page 10 of 10 Ordinary Meeting - Urgent Report 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

Council's Operating Environment

14 Late Submissions on Draft 2002-2003 Management Plan 36/36

Compiled by: Ross Kingsley, Strategic Planning and Research Co-ordinator Authorised by: Helen Lowndes, Corporate Development Manager

Management Plan 4 Year Outcome (Page 107): Effective corporate governance has been maintained. Critical Action: Prepare, implement and review strategic and management plans and processes.

Purpose:

To inform Council of matters raised in submissions on the Draft 2002-2003 Management Plan which were received after the notified closing date for the exhibition and submissions of 7 June 2002.

Background Exhibition of the Draft 2002-2003 Management Plan closed on Friday 7 June 2002. Three submissions were received after the closing date. Each submission will receive a response letter with all questions and issues raised addressed by the appropriate Manager, including where relevant Council determination of issues considered by tonight’s meeting. New key matters raised in late submissions are discussed below and matters which have already been dealt with by preceding submissions are covered in Item 13 the “2002-2003 Management Plan” report on tonight’s agenda. All other remaining matters are considered either operational matters or requests for more information and will be dealt with directly by the Manager responsible. The three late submissions and the issues which they raise are listed in Attachment A to this report, in the same format as that employed in the report under Item 13.

Key Matters for Council Consideration

The City in its Environment Over-development of Cambridge Park

Matter : The group Concerned Residents of Cambridge Park raised a number of issues regarding over-development of Cambridge Park, the effects on the area of the ADI development and the adequacy of developer contributions.

Management of the Organisation Page 101 Ordinary Meeting - Urgent Report 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

Response by the Environmental Planning Manager : Most of the matters raised in the submission are discussed in the main Management Plan report which is included as Item 13 on tonight’s agenda. The issues raised by the new Concerned Residents group will be appropriately addressed in detail in the further report proposed to be provided to Council, as recommended under Item 13. It is also worthy of note that the issue of a comprehensive Section 94 Plan for established areas of the City is being addressed in 2002-03 through the Recreation, Cultural, Infrastructure, Facilities and Services Needs Study.

Recommended Actions :

Advice on this matter be forwarded to the Concerned Residents of Cambridge Park.

Heritage Issues

Matter : A resident of Emu Plains raised concerns about a number of aspects of Heritage preservation, including some matters already discussed in the report under Item 13 on tonight’s agenda. Additional issues raised in the submission included: · Suggestion to increase fines for destruction of heritage · Suggestion to preserve certain historic sites at Emu Plains Additional Response by the Environmental Planning Manager : The review of Council’s Heritage Conservation LEP to be undertaken in the coming year will consider the appropriate processes for preservation of heritage items, including fine regimes. The issues raised can be incorporated in the review. The heritage properties referred to at Emu Plains appear to be the former Union Inn and the Old Post Office. The Union Inn property has recently been sold. Council is not currently aware of any specific proposals for its development. Although the building itself has not survived, Council is pursuing the available heritage measures, namely · an interpretative strategy · preservation of the garden remnants · archival recording of the heritage values.

The Old Post Office is a Council-owned property, for which a Conservation Management Plan is being prepared. Access to the property and parking are particular issues, as suggested in the submission. In this regard, the Dept of School Education which owns adjoining land has been approached to investigate the possibility of securing better access and parking, possibly by a land swap. Such an arrangement would improve the viability of conservation and reuse of the site.

Recommended Actions :

Management of the Organisation Page 102 Ordinary Meeting - Urgent Report 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

1. A further report be presented to Council, at an appropriate time depending on the progress of these investigations, on the status of the Old Post Office site. 2. Advice on the matters raised be forwarded to the resident who made the submission.

Protection of Mulgoa Valley and Rural Lands

Matter : The Mulgoa Progress Association raised concerns over the preservation of the rural nature and environment of Mulgoa Valley and suggested means by which Council could pursue these issues. The group suggested an Environmental Levy be introduced in rural areas of the City to fund an education/awareness program. Concerns were expressed about the impact of the proposed southern expansion of Glenmore Park on Mulgoa Valley.

Response by the Environmental Planning Manager : Council is committed to a strategy to preserve the distinctive character of the City’s rural lands and to secure recognition of the appropriate limits to urban growth. Through the Strategy being developed in response to the findings of the Rural Lands Study, Council will seek to protect the City’s natural environment, establish clear limits to the urban growth of the residential areas, protect our viable agricultural lands and activities, and encourage more sustainable land management. Recognition by government of the limits to growth continues to be actively pursued meanwhile. In relation to the suggestion for an environmental rate levy in rural areas, Council is pursuing a special rate increase which will see, if approved by the Minister, $1.7M annually being directed into an enhanced environmental management program. This opportunity will see a wide range of environmental initiatives being undertaken in both urban and rural areas across the city in coming years. A feature of the program will be to expand our environmental education and awareness programs to the community, business and other stakeholders. The Minister for Planning, in his December 2000 announcement outlining the Government’s 15 year ‘blueprint’ for meeting Sydney’s growing housing needs, indicated that the southern expansion of Glenmore Park in the Bradley Street quarry area was suitable for inclusion on the State Government’s Metropolitan Development Program. This area has been extensively modified as a result of the extractive industry activities over the years. The quarry is in its final stages and extensive site rehabilitation is nearing completion. Council has been requested to undertake a local environmental study for the site with a view to determining the land’s capability for a range of urban development purposes. A consultant team to assist Council in the environmental examinations will soon be appointed to undertake the study. Consultation will occur with community, including the Association, and other stakeholder interests during the study process. The Association’s views on the implications for the Mulgoa Valley rural area are understood and the establishment of an appropriate edge and buffer zone to the rural area to the south and west of the site will be an important element examined in the study..

Management of the Organisation Page 103 Ordinary Meeting - Urgent Report 17 June 2002 Council's Operating Environment

Recommended Actions : Advice on this matter be forwarded to the Mulgoa Progress Association.

The City as a Social Place

Moruya House Before and After School Care Centre

Matter : A resident of Emu Plains raised concerns regarding the condition of Moruya House, a Council-owned building in Woodriff St, Penrith located on a site identified for future development. The building is used by Community Aid for the provision of a B&A service. The resident considers the present condition of the building unsuitable for this purpose.

Response by the Property Development Manager : The B&A service is the subject of negotiations with Community Aid, regarding its relocation to an alternative location. Further information will be presented to Council on this matter.

Recommended Actions :

3. A further report be presented to Council regarding Moruya House. 4. Advice on this matter be forwarded to the resident who made the submission.

RECOMMENDATION

That the actions recommended in this report be incorporated in the actions to be implemented under Item 13 on tonight’s Business Paper, 2002-2003 Management Plan.

Management of the Organisation Page 104 ATTACHMENT

Date of Meeting: 17 June 2002

Master Programme: Council's Operating Environment

Programme: Management of the Organisation

Report Title: LATE SUBMISSIONS ON THE DRAFT 2002-2003 MANAGEMENT PLAN

ATTACHMENT A: LATE SUBMISSIONS Attachment A

Draft 2002-2003 Management Plan: Late Submissions Received

Written Submissions Name / Organisation Summary of Matters Raised 1. Concerned Residents of · Concern that Cambridge Park is being over-developed, Cambridge Park particularly through medium density development and services will be inadequate · Concern that developers are not putting enough back into the community · Concern at effect of ADI development on Cambridge Park 2. Ms Sue Breeze · Concern over cost of rebuilding Glenmore Park B&A (Emu Plains resident) Centre · Concern at unsuitable condition of Moruya House for B&A Centre · Objection to the rise in Minimum Rates as inequitable · Concerns over preservation of local history and heritage and the adequacy of Council’s Heritage Listing · Suggestion that more attention be paid to the tourism benefits of heritage attractions · Suggestion to increase fines for destruction of heritage · Suggestion to preserve more historic sites at Emu Plains 3. Mulgoa Progress Association · Support for Council’s Special Initiatives in the Draft Management Plan · Requested ongoing support by Council and strengthening of SREP13 - Mulgoa Valley · Suggestion to introduce an Environmental Rate Levy in Rural Areas to fund an education/awareness program · Concern that the southern expansion of Glenmore Park will impact adversely on Mulgoa Valley · Concerns over subdivision and land clearing

Page 1 of 1