PART TWO

CAMPBELLTOWN CITY COUNCIL

Agenda Summary

Planning and Environment Committee Meeting to be held at 7.30pm on Tuesday, 6 December 2011. APOLOGIES

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF LAND

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Pecuniary Interests

Non Pecuniary – Significant Interests

Non Pecuniary – Less than Significant Interests

ITEM TITLE PAGE

PART ONE

1. WASTE AND RECYCLING SERVICES

1.1 Quarterly Statistical Report - First Quarter 2011-2012

2. ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING

2.1 Georges River Combined Councils' Committee - Riverkeeper Program Report Card 2011

2.2 Future Planning Directions for the East Edge Scenic Protection Lands

2.3 Minutes of the Heritage Protection Sub Committee Meeting Held on 20 October 2011

2.4 Menangle Park Urban Release Area

2.5 Draft Macarthur Precinct Development Control Plan

2.6 Gateway Determination - Campbelltown (Urban Area) Local Environmental Plan 2002 - Amendment No. 24

2.7 Submission on the application for the installation of a proposed additional gas extraction well at Menangle Park

3. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES

3.1 Development Services Section Statistics - November 2011

3.2 No. 34 Carlisle Street, Ingleburn - Construction of a single storey commercial building and associated car parking

ITEM TITLE PAGE

PART TWO

3.3 Concept Plan Application for the Airds Bradbury Renewal Project

3.4

Lot 40 DP 270152 Macquarie Links Drive, Macquarie Links - Modification to amend the description of development from 'hotel' to 'motel' including the deletion of the northern access road and a new development application for a 46 room motel

3.5 Lot 10 DP 1022204, Racecourse Avenue, Menangle Park - Construction of horse stalls, parade ring, landscaping and other site works

3.6 Racecourse Avenue, Menangle Park - Construction of landscaping works, drainage and advertising signage

4. COMPLIANCE SERVICES

4.1 Legal Status Report

4.2 Operation of Council's Animal Care Facility

5. GENERAL BUSINESS

18. CONFIDENTIAL ITEMS

18.1 Confidential Information relating to items on the Planning and Environment Agenda 6 December 2011

Minutes of the Planning and Environment Committee held on 6 December 2011 Present Councillor R Kolkman (Chairperson)

Councillor J Bourke Councillor G Greiss Councillor P Hawker Councillor M Oates Councillor R Thompson General Manager - Mr P Tosi Director Planning and Environment - Mr J Lawrence Manager Environmental Planning - Mr P Jemison Manager Development Services - Mr J Baldwin Manager Compliance Services - Mr A Spooner Manager Waste and Recycling Services - Mr P Macdonald Manager Community Resources and Development - Mr B McCausland Manager Financial Services - Mrs C Mears Senior Development Assessment Planner - Mr A Coburn Executive Planner - Mrs C Puntillo Strategic Environmental Planner - Mr M Egan Corporate Support Coordinator - Mr T Rouen Executive Assistant - Ms B Buckley

Apology (Greiss/Hawker)

That the apology from Councillor Matheson be received and accepted. CARRIED

Acknowledgement of Land An Acknowledgement of Land was presented by the Chairperson Councillor Kolkman. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Declarations of Interest were made in respect of the following items: Pecuniary Interests

Nil Non Pecuniary – Significant Interests

Nil Non Pecuniary – Less than Significant Interests Councillor Bourke - Planning and Environment - Item 2.2 - Future Planning Directions for East Edge Scenic Protection Lands - Councillor Bourke advised that her partner is involved with local koala research.

3.3 Concept Plan Application for the Airds Bradbury Renewal Project

Reporting Officer

Manager Development Services

Attachments

1. Project Location (provided under separate cover) 2. Existing Land Ownership (provided under separate cover) 3. Proposed Masterplan (provided under separate cover) 4. Existing Road Network (provided under separate cover) 5. Proposed Road Network (provided under separate cover) 6. Existing Council Open Space (provided under separate cover) 7. Proposed Public Open Space (provided under separate cover) 8. Detailed Planning Assessment Report (provided under separate cover) 9. Draft Conditions of Consent for Concept Plan

Purpose

The purpose of this report is to assist Council in its assessment of a concept Plan (Masterplan) for the Airds/Bradbury Renewal Project Property Description Airds/Bradbury public housing estate

Application No 1007/2011/DA-MP

Applicant NSW Land and Housing Corporation

Owner NSW Land and Housing Corporation

Provisions Campbelltown Local Environmental Plan (Urban Area) 2002

Campbelltown Development Control Plan (Sustainable City) 2009

State Environmental Planning Policy (Major Development) 2005

Date Received 7 June 2011

History

The Airds estate was developed on Radburn planning principles, primarily between 1979-1981. The Radburn style of town planning, which was first developed in the United States of America, has proven to be a poor model of residential development in Australian public housing estates. This is primarily due to the “back the front” design of the housing, poorly connected and isolated walkways and open space areas and the prevalence of super lots throughout the estate. The renewal project seeks to de-Radburnise the estate and incorporate contemporary and sustainable planning principles. The renewal strategy for Airds is based on the same principles that have been utilised for other successful urban renewal projects, such as “One Minto” and Bonnyrigg (Bonnyrigg is located in the Fairfield Local Government Area). These principles are based on the Government’s Living Communities Model, which is a model of estate renewal that pursues three distinct aims: Improve the housing and public spaces Improve services and provide residents with better opportunities Support the local community to build its strengths, skills and overall capacity.

Report

Introduction This report provides an overview of the proposed Airds/Bradbury Renewal Project and identifies key issues for Council’s consideration. The Airds/Bradbury Renewal Project has been lodged by the NSW Land and Housing Corporation (formerly Housing NSW) as a Part 3a Concept Plan (or Masterplan) application with the Department of Planning and Infrastructure (DoPI). The DoPI have delegated the planning assessment of the Concept Plan to Council. Whilst the application is technically referred to as a ‘Concept Plan’, the proposal in essence provides a Masterplan for the Airds/Bradbury housing estate, which identifies land uses, indicative built forms and the provision of physical and social infrastructure to support redevelopment. Attached to this report (Attachment 8) is a further detailed planning assessment which has been prepared in accordance with Part 3a of the Act and the DoPI guidelines. This report seeks Council’s support for the Airds/Bradbury Renewal Project and the endorsement of the attached planning assessment report for referral to the DoPI for final determination. Site Location The site is located 2.5km south east from the Campbelltown CBD and adjoins the suburbs of Ruse to the north and St Helens Park to the south. The project area has a physical boundary to the north being the Georges River Road and St Johns Road and Smiths Creek corridor to the west. The Georges River Parkway corridor acts as the eastern boundary to the project area.

Airds/Bradbury is an established suburban precinct having been originally developed as a public housing estate in the late 1970s. It benefits from the provision of existing infrastructure with access to arterial and sub-arterial roads and shopping centres such as Macarthur Square and other retail destinations within the Campbelltown CBD. The site itself contains a small neighbourhood shopping centre, several schools and a range of community facilities. Campbelltown Hospital, Campbelltown Private and Macarthur Private Hospitals are all located less than 2.5km from the site area. Further to the west is the University of Western Sydney and the South Western Sydney Institute of TAFE. The project location is shown in Attachment three. The Airds/Bradbury Renewal Project as shown above covers an area of approximately 200 hectares. Within this area there are 1,451 public housing dwellings and 94 properties in private ownership. No development is proposed on private sites and they do not form part of the land to which the Part 3a Masterplan application relates. The Airds/Bradbury Renewal Area is referred to as “the site”. The project location is illustrated in Attachment 1. Land Ownership The site comprises the properties contained within Attachment 2, excluding private properties that are edged in red. Within this area there are a number of sites in private ownership or owned by the Tharawal Aboriginal Corporation. The Proposal The NSW Land and Housing Corporation (former Housing NSW) proposes to undertake a significant urban renewal project within the Airds/Bradbury Housing estate, which will create a new urban form with new lots and the redevelopment of existing dwellings. The development will increase the number of dwellings within the project area from 1,542 to 2,104, including the retention of 880 dwellings on separate allotments. Of the 880 retained dwellings, 262 will be held by NSW Land and Housing Corporation and 527 dwellings will be sold to private occupiers. The development will ultimately consist of 70% private housing and 30% public housing. The project will include new or upgraded urban infrastructure such as pathways, lighting, open space, community facilities, drainage and a series of new interconnecting public roads. Also included in the project is the delivery of new and improved community facilities and open space areas. The existing town centre is proposed to be updated and expanded to accommodate additional land uses and services for residents. The overall project vision promoted by the NSW Land and Housing Corporation is to make the Airds/Bradbury Renewal Area:

“a great place to live, a place with good amenity, services and facilities in a socially mixed community offering opportunities for residents to realise their goals.”

Further project objectives include: Long term (15 years) urban rejuvenation of the Airds/Bradbury public housing

estate Increase in the number of dwellings from 1,542 to 2,104 including the provision

of a mix of housing types and tenures Integration of a new urban structure to improve vehicle and pedestrian

connectivity within the estate and with the adjoining locality Provision of public spaces and community facilities that integrate with and

complement adjoining land uses An expanded and reconfigured town centre that improves the provision of retail

and community services to the community A socially diverse community containing 30% public housing and 70% private

housing dwellings. The proposed concept plan is contained within Attachment 3 to this report. 1. Vision Campbelltown 2025 Looking Forward ‘Campbelltown 2025 Looking Forward’ is a statement of broad town planning intent for the longer term future of the City of Campbelltown that:

Responds to what Council understands people want the City of Campbelltown to look, feel and function like

Recognises likely future government policies and social and economic

trends Sets down the foundations for a new town plan that will help achieve that

future. The document establishes a set of strategic directions to guide decision making and development outcomes. These directions are broad in nature and form a prelude to a new statutory town plan for the City. The strategic directions relevant to this application are:

Growing the Regional City Building a distinctive Campbelltown sense of place

Creating employment and entrepreneurial opportunities.

The Airds/Bradbury renewal project is consistent with these directions. The development contributes to the growth of the regional city of Campbelltown with increased residential development and expansion and renewal of the existing town centre. The development promotes positive social and economic outcomes with the introduction of a greater social mix of public and private housing. Some of the relevant desired outcomes of the strategic directions included in Campbelltown 2025 include:

Urban environments that are safe, healthy, exhibit a high standard of design, and are environmentally sustainable

An impression of architecture that engages its environmental context in a

sustainable way Development and land use that matches environmental capacity and

capability. The proposed project has been assessed having regard to Campbelltown 2025 Looking Forward. It is considered that the Masterplan is consistent with the Vision's desired outcomes and promotes the revitalisation of the suburb into a contemporary residential estate with associated improvements to infrastructure, community facilities and the public domain. Whilst further development applications will be required for dwellings within the project area, the Masterplan sets the framework for the delivery of sustainable built outcomes. 2. Planning Provisions i. State Environmental Planning Policy (Major Development) (MDSEPP) State Environmental Planning Policy (Major Development) 2005 outlines the types of development declared a 'Major Project' for the purposes of Part 3A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act (EP&A Act). For the purposes of the MDSEPP certain forms of development may be considered a major project if the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure (or his delegate) forms the opinion that the development meets the criteria within the MDSEPP. The Minister declared that the proposal was a major project under Part 3A of the EP&A Act because it is development for the purpose of residential commercial or retail development with a construction investment value of more than $100m, pursuant to Clause 13, Schedule 1 of the Major Development SEPP. The Minister also authorised the submission of a concept plan. ii. State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 – Remediation of Land SEPP 55 promotes the remediation of contaminated land for the purpose of reducing the risk of harm to human health or any other aspect of the environment. The Policy states that land must not be developed if it is unsuitable for a proposed use because it is contaminated.

The environmental assessment contains a preliminary investigation on soil contamination on the site. The report found limited traces of contamination within the site area and where present the affected areas are able to be effectively remediated as part of the construction process. Further detailed assessment of contamination will be undertaken at the development application stage for subdivision works, with any remediation works to be supervised and tested by an appropriately qualified site auditor. iii. Draft SEPP 66 – Integration of Land Use and Transport This draft SEPP 66 aims to ensure that urban structure, building forms, land use locations, development designs, subdivision and street layouts help achieve the following planning objectives: (a) Improving accessibility to housing, employment and services by walking,

cycling, and public transport (b) Improving the choice of transport and reducing dependence solely on cars for

travel purposes (c) Moderating growth in the demand for travel and the distances travelled,

especially by car (d) Supporting the efficient and viable operation of public transport services (e) Providing for the efficient movement of freight. The majority of the site is within walking distance of the Airds town centre and a local bus service which provides access to Campbelltown train station. The Masterplan delivers integrated transport and land use development, including public transport, and a network for pedestrian and bicycle transport. iv. Draft SEPP 44 – Koala Habitat SEPP 44 aims to aims to encourage the proper conservation and management of areas of natural vegetation that provide habitat for koalas to ensure a permanent free-living population over their present range and reverse the current trend of koala population decline. SEPP 44 applies to the site as it is located in a local government area listed in Schedule 1 of the SEPP. The supplementary ecological assessment in the applicants Preferred Planning Report considers the relevant sections of SEPP 44 and considers in further detail likely ecological communities that are considered potential habitat for koalas. The ecological assessment provided in the Environmental Assessment report finds that some patches of vegetation within the subject site contain Koala ‘feed tree species’ and are likely to constitute ‘potential koala habitat’ under SEPP 44. However the site is not considered to represent a ‘Core Koala Habitat’ and therefore development can proceed without the need for a plan of management under the provisions of SEPP 44. v. State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2004 (ISEPP) State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2004 sets out requirements for referrals for ‘traffic generating development', and for development adjacent to the south west rail link corridor. The ISEPP also sets out requirements for noise impacts adjacent to busy roads and rail corridors.

The Masterplan is considered to be ‘traffic generating development’ for the purposes of the ISEPP and as such the proposal was referred to the Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) (previously the RTA). The proposal was also referred to Transport NSW. Both the RMS and Transport NSW raised no objection to the development, subject to certain matters, such as bus and pedestrian network being adequately provided. vi. Greater Metropolitan Regional Environmental Plan No 2—Georges River

Catchment The REP applies to the Georges River Catchment and sets out planning principles to be considered in consideration of rezoning and development applications. Relevant principles relate to acid sulphate soils, bank disturbances, flooding, urban stormwater, vegetated buffer areas and water quality. The Masterplan includes appropriate water sensitive urban design infrastructure, management of flood hazard, and protection of riparian corridors which will ensure consistency with the principles of the REP. vii. State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009

(ARHSEPP) State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 promotes the development of new affordable rental housing in New South Wales by providing development and design controls that assist with the delivery of housing stock for low and low/middle income earners, the homeless and other disadvantaged people who may require support services, including group homes and public housing provision. The Masterplan is consistent with the provisions of this Policy with elements of the development permissible with or without consent. Development that may be carried out without consent by NSW Land and Housing Corporation prescribed by clause 40 of the ARHSEPP, include the construction of up to 20 dwellings up to 8.5m high on one allotment and the demolition of existing dwellings. There are consultation requirements under the provisions of the SEPP should NSW Land and Housing Corporation propose to carry out development without consent under this Policy. viii. Campbelltown (Urban Area) Local Environmental Plan 2002 The existing predominant zone within the site is 2(b) – Residential ‘B’ which covers the residential areas of the site. Other zones include the 10(c) Local Comprehensive Zone which covers the existing town centre and adjoining Airds High School, 6(a) Local Open Space and a number of special uses zones for the school sites (primary schools), bus depot, juvenile justice centre and transport corridor lands. The provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and the Regulation allow prohibited development to be approved as part of a Concept Plan. There are some areas of the site where residential development is proposed, but presently prohibited, such as the Smiths Creek Corridor land and open space areas that are proposed to be compulsory acquired by the proponent. Whilst presently prohibited it is intended that the zoning will be amended as part of Campbelltown’s Comprehensive LEP process to make such residential development permissible.

In the meantime it is likely that the Minister of Planning and Infrastructure will make a determination to the effect that approval to carry out subsequent stages of the project is to be the subject of Part 4 (development applications) of the Act. If this determination is made, the Minister may direct that a provision of an environmental planning instrument prohibiting or restricting the carrying out of the project under Part 4 does not have effect. This will enable early stages of the project to be approved prior to any housekeeping amendment to the LEP to reflect a land use zoning consistent with the Masterplan as approved. 3. Planning Assessment Proposed Masterplan Assessment The key issues which are relevant to Council’s consideration of the proposed Masterplan include: 1. Road network and extension of Campbellfield Avenue – (east west road link) 2. Upgrading of the Airds town centre 3. Provision of community facilities and services (social infrastructure) 4. Open space provision and embellishment 5. Biodiversity Whilst a detailed assessment of the above issues is included in the attached Part 3A Concept Plan assessment report, a summary of the key issues is provided below. Road Network and Extension of Campbellfield Avenue – (east west road link) The NSW Land and Housing Corporation proposes the creation of a new east-west road link from the Airds town centre connecting with Campbellfield Avenue. This will provide a direct route between Airds and Bradbury. Historically this connection has been severed due to the location of the Smiths Creek Corridor, which has now been identified as being redundant by the Department of Planning and Infrastructure. In essence Airds has an existing internalised street system that does not integrate well with adjoining areas. The existing road network is depicted in Attachment 4. The NSW Land and Housing Corporation has identified several benefits of the proposed east-west link road, which include: A more interconnective street system that would integrate Airds with the

surrounding area and complement the social integration that will be achieved by the renewal program

Improved access to Campbelltown via Campbellfield Road which continues to

The Parkway and provides a more efficient bus link from Airds-Bradbury to Campbelltown compared to which currently exists

The proposed redeveloped town centre would be located at the junction of two

major intersecting roads with more public land uses located towards the intersection

The proposed new street will provide important vistas into Airds when travelling

from the west and through to the town centre, providing a point of entry and gateway and enhanced way-finding. This gateway would function as a point of arrival for the Airds town centre.

The proposed new east-west link road (Campbellfield Avenue extension) is shown in Attachment 5. 3. Planning Assessment Proposed Masterplan Assessment The key issues which are relevant to Council’s consideration of the proposed Masterplan include: 1. Road network and extension of Campbellfield Avenue – (east west road link) 2. Upgrading of the Airds town centre 3. Provision of community facilities and services (social infrastructure) 4. Open space provision and embellishment 5. Biodiversity. Whilst a detailed assessment of the above issues is included in the attached Part 3a Concept Plan assessment report, a summary of the key issues is provided below. Road Network and Extension of Campbellfield Avenue – (east west road link) The NSW Land and Housing Corporation proposes the creation of a new east-west road link from the Airds town centre connecting with Campbellfield Avenue. This will provide a direct route between Airds and Bradbury. Historically this connection has been severed due to the location of the Smiths Creek Corridor, which has now been identified as being redundant by the Department of Planning and Infrastructure. In essence Airds has an existing internalised street system that does not integrate with adjoining areas. The existing road network is depicted in Attachment 4. The NSW Land and Housing Corporation has identified several benefits of the proposed east-west link road, which include: A more interconnective street system that will integrate Airds with the

surrounding area and complement the social integration that will be achieved by the renewal program

Improved access to Campbelltown via Campbellfield Road which continues to

The Parkway providing a more efficient bus link from Airds/Bradbury to Campbelltown

The proposed redeveloped town centre will be located at the junction of two

major intersecting roads with more public land uses located towards the intersection

The proposed new street will provide important vistas into Airds travelling from

the west and to the town centre providing a point of entry and gateway and enhance way-finding. This gateway will function as a point of arrival at Airds.

The proposed new east-west link road (Campbellfield Avenue extension) is shown in Attachment 5. The extension of Campbellfield Avenue into the Airds estate provides a direct linkage into the town centre and the future community facilities and open space areas. The new road network would also provide improved security and safety with increased movement of people, circulation and greater passive surveillance around the shops and public open space areas. Strategically, the east-west road linkage provides a direct connection to the outside of the estate, as illustrated in Attachment 5, with connection onto Campbellfield Avenue providing further linkages to ‘The Parkway’ which in turn connect with the Campbelltown City Centre and Macarthur Square retail precinct. The east-west and other interconnecting roads will also assist with health and amenity benefits for residents; with a better connected neighbourhood which will encourage persons to travel within the 400m walkable distance of the town centre. The east-west road link is critical to the success of the project being a connected destination, as well as providing direct benefits to the town centre and further ease of connectivity across the estate. The project aims to expand and improve the viability of the town centre, which is important in creating a ‘sense of place’, where the newly developed Airds is recognised as a vibrant and well connected destination that people will wish to visit. Upgrading of Airds Town Centre The Airds shopping centre caters primarily for the convenience of nearby residents with its main role to provide ‘top up’ and convenience needs to the local community. The shopping centre is conveniently located within the geographical centre of the Airds estate, making it accessible to most residents. The extension of Campbellfield Avenue into the town centre would increase its accessibility to residents within Bradbury, making it a more viable centre. Whilst the central location of the town centre is an advantage, there are several constraints that have discouraged further investment and other opportunities for enhancement, to date. One of the key problems is that the existing town centre is currently fragmented, with the community facilities dispersed and each of the services and activities within the existing town centre precinct physically separated. The shopping centre also has a poor presentation to the street, which is somewhat exacerbated by its location being situated at a lower level than that of the current street level and that the design of the centre itself is inward orientated, rather than facing the street.

The Masterplan shows an ultimate intention to upgrade and expand the town centre through the introduction of new land uses such as the provision of new community facilities (longer term) and open space areas and the new Campbellfield Avenue extension. Benefits associated with the reconfiguration and activation of the town centre as proposed in the Airds/Bradbury Renewal Project include the recognition of the town centre as a central focus point of Airds and its local community; and the reinforcement of the positive image that the urban renewal process is seeking to create within Airds. The provision of new community facilities within the town centre precinct would ultimately make it a strong centre, with a mixture of activities serving the needs of the community. This in turn would complement and encourage private investment in the town centre in order to improve the design and the range of available services in the town centre. Provision of Community Facilities and Services The provision of community services and the social impacts of the Renewal Project have been the subject of an Integrated Social Sustainability and Health Impact Assessment and Plan submitted with the Masterplan. Since exhibition of the Masterplan, the NSW Land and Housing Corporation have continued discussions with Council, service providers and the community regarding the community facilities to be provided under the concept plan and as part of a proposed Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA). The NSW Land and Housing Corporation has proposed to retain existing community services and facilities, namely the Airds Youth Centre, Campbelltown Child and Family Centre, Neighbourhood Centre and the Amarina Child Care Centre. These facilities will be moderately embellished and retained for a period of up seven years. After seven years the NSW Land and Housing Corporation would construct a new multipurpose community facility and child care centre, both located within the town centre. This matter would need to be considered further by Council at the appropriate time. The provision of new and upgraded community facilities is considered an important component of the rejuvenation of the Airds/Bradbury precinct. The delivery, design and scope of the community facilities have been included within a draft VPA, which will be formalised once the concept plan has been determined by the Department of Planning and Infrastructure. Furthermore the NSW Land and Housing Corporation will be responsible for developing a Strategic Social Plan, which is to be developed in collaboration with local residents, Non-Government Organisations (NGOs) and government agencies. This Plan will effectively deal with the transitional issues that will invariably arise as the concentration of public housing tenants decrease and the number of new private residents increases. It is important that during this transitional period that existing services are still provided and their specialised needs are adequately addressed.

Open Space Provision and Embellishment Airds/Bradbury contains approximately 21 reserves and parks totalling approximately 18ha of public open space. There are five distinct parks including Deane Park, Riley Park, Kevin Wheatley VC Reserve, Baden Powell Reserve and Merino Reserve. A long corridor of public open space located at the eastern extent of the study area comprises Peppin Park, River Reserve, Georges Parkway Reserve, Greengate and Hagan Reserves. There is also a range of other smaller open spaces that act as neighbourhood parks or existing internalised open space networks that are remnants of the estate’s Radburn design. The range of existing open space areas are identified in Attachment 6. The Masterplan includes the redistribution and embellishment of the open space networks across the site. The open space to be provided includes a range of active and passive parks and bushland reserves resulting in an equivalent total area of 18ha. The range of public open space and associated improvement works to be provided as part of the Renewal Project include: The creation of a new town centre feature park around the existing pond The embellishment of Riley Park The embellishment of Merino Park The relocation of Kevin Wheatley VC fields to a new location adjacent to the

shopping centre Transfer of Hagan Reserve to Council Transfer of Georges River Parkway Reserve to Council Protection, embellishment and hand over to Council of upgraded remnant

bushland in the vicinity of the Smith’s Creek Corridor. The location of the above works is shown in Attachment 7 – Proposed Open Space Distribution. Active and passive parks have been located so as to be generally within walking distance for most residents. An important element of the public domain is the proposed interconnective street system with a network of pathways and cycleways designed to augment the parks as a recreational resource and facilitate healthy living by encouraging walking and cycling. The provision of parks is included in the draft VPA which identifies, to a considerable level of detail, the facilities and services to be provided. This will ensure the timely provision of parks and greater community certainty as to the facilities that are to be provided. Biodiversity The proposed development will have some adverse impact upon Cumberland Plain Woodland (CPW) and Shale Sandstone Transitional Forest (SSTF) ecological communities.

The existing CPW on the site is currently in poor condition, highly degraded and subject to significant edge impacts from urban development. Three hectares of CPW, which is located northwest of the existing Airds Shopping Centre, is proposed to be retained and rehabilitated, whilst approx 1.2 hectares would be cleared. Rehabilitation of the CPW would be undertaken through the removal and control of weeds, rationalisation of existing tracks, controlled pedestrian and bike access, and supplementary tree and understorey plantings. These actions are set out within a draft Bushland Management Plan that has been recently submitted to Council as part of the Masterplan. The Management Plan recommends that trees and shrubs cleared from areas of CPW within the Airds/Bradbury site would be replaced at a ratio of four trees/shrubs planted to one tree/shrub removed. Planting would occur primarily within the retained three hectare patch of CPW adjacent to the town centre and be of endemic species reflective of Cumberland Plain Woodland species. It is intended that when the draft Bushland Management Plan is finalised, that the long term protection of this bushland be subject to a legal agreement between Council and the NSW Land and Housing Corporation, which is likely to be included within the VPA. The concept plan also includes the removal of approximately four hectares of SSTF. Similar to the CPW, the SSTF is currently in a poor and degraded condition. Notwithstanding this, the proponent proposes to rehabilitate existing or retained patches of SSTF and provide biodiversity off-setting to compensate for the loss of SSTF. A compensation ratio of one hectare of SSTF cleared per four hectares of revegetated SSTF is recommended to compensate for impacts of development. On this basis an estimated loss of 4.41 hectares of SSTF would require revegetation of 17.74 hectares of land (comprising land along Smiths Creek within the Airds/Bradbury site, and land adjacent to the Georges River at Riverside Reserve). This would be subject to final approval of a biodiversity off-set package by the Director General of the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage. The Masterplan proposes a Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA) whereby biodiversity values would be maintained and/or improved and guaranteed in perpetuity. It is considered that these measures are sufficient to offset any impacts on the biodiversity qualities of the site. 4. Public Participation NSW Land and Housing Corporation Consultation The NSW Land and Housing Corporation have conducted significant community consultation over the course of the design and planning phases for the Airds/Bradbury Renewal Project. During this period a community reference group was formed and they were involved in design workshops and briefings on development within Airds/Bradbury. Broader community consultation started with the renewal project being relaunched in 2009 and was referred to as “Airds outLOUD”. This was attended by 1500 people. Further consultation was conducted later in 2009 as part of the outLOUD process where bus trips for residents were undertaken to other renewal project locations.

Community consultation then moved to a more detailed phase as part of the Design OutLOUD workshops held from 20-22 May, 2010. These were “hands on” workshops (similar to the “enquiry by design” format) and were attended by at least 300 persons over three days, which included residents, government agencies, service providers and other relevant stakeholders. Since then, the NSW Land and Housing Corporation have continued to communicate with residents of the Airds/Bradbury area, which has included methods such as the frequent distribution of newsletters. The NSW Land and Housing Corporation, in conjunction with Council officers and Landcom representatives held four public information sessions whilst the current Masterplan was on public exhibition. These sessions were held on 9 and 10 August 2011. Public Exhibition The Masterplan was publicly exhibited from 15 June 2011 until 18 July 2011 (32 days) on the Department’s and Council’s website and at the Department of Planning and Infrastructure, Information Centre (Bridge Street, Sydney), Campbelltown City Council administration offices, HJ Daley Library (Campbelltown) and on-site at the NSW Land and Housing Corporation office at Airds. Council extended the advertising period for a further 28 days until 15 August 2011 given concerns raised by members of community in respect to viewing the Environmental Assessment (EA) and accompanying Masterplan documentation. The application was also advertised in the Sydney Telegraph on 18 June 2011 and an advertisement was placed weekly during the exhibition in the Macarthur Chronicle and residents as well as, local and relevant State and government authorities were notified directly in writing. Council received 37 submissions during the exhibition of the EA – eight submissions from public authorities and 29 submissions from the general public and special interest groups. Of the 29 submissions received from members of the public, 22 raised objection to the development in part or whole and seven submissions did not object to the proposal, but nonetheless raised concerns or some issues for further consideration. Included in the 22 submissions objecting to the development was a petition, which in accordance with the Instrument of Delegation dated 28 September 2011 by the Minister, is counted as one submission. A summary of the key issues raised in submissions is provided below: Impacts on native vegetation and ecological communities Displacement of existing residents as part of the renewal project The location of new roads and the adverse impact upon the amenity and safety

of residents Provision of suitable community facilities and public open space areas, Impact of the development on aboriginal heritage, and Impact of the development on the Reiby Juvenile Justice Centre and

appropriate mitigation measures. These matters are addressed within this report and in further detail within the attached concept plan assessment.

5. Conclusion The key objective of the Airds/Bradbury Renewal Project, which is also vital for the successful long term rejuvenation of the precinct, includes the success of the town centre as a vibrant well connected destination. Critical to the success of the town centre and the revitalisation of the suburb is the extension of Campbellfield Avenue as an important east-west link road. New community facilities within the town centre in the longer term will provide an ideal opportunity to create an integrated town centre with a variety of services and facilities. The NSW Land and Housing Corporation has offered to retain and moderately embellish existing community facilities for a period of up to seven years, after which a purpose built child care and community centre would be built within the town centre to address future community needs. The open space network within the estate will be redistributed and embellished to provide safe and active recreation opportunities that are easily accessible. Included with the open space plan is the protection and embellishment of the majority of existing Cumberland Plain Woodland, at a ratio of four new trees planted for each tree removed. The NSW Land and Housing Corporation have also offered an off-setting strategy as part of the Project, which would compensate for the loss of Shale Sandstone Transitional Forest as part of the Project. This offset provides for up to 17 hectares of land adjoining Georges River Parkway Reserve and Smiths Creek Corridor to be rehabilitated. The design and delivery of the community facilities and public open space areas is contained within a draft Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA). The VPA will be finalised once the Masterplan has been determined and will be presented to Council for endorsement prior to it taking effect. The Airds/Bradbury Renewal Project will result in the displacement of up to two thirds of existing tenants in the precinct. This is an inevitable outcome of the Government’s mandate to provide a greater social mix within public housing estates, with 70% private and 30% public dwellings. The original development of the Airds/Bradbury precinct based on incompatible Radburn principles has proven unsuccessful and has left a poor planning legacy. Given this and the age and condition of public housing within the area, the precinct is well placed for, and in critical need of redevelopment and it is recommended that Council support the proposed Masterplan.

Officer's Recommendation

That Council:

(i). Support the approval of the concept plan (Masterplan) for the Airds/Bradbury Renewal Project and endorse the attached planning assessment report.

(ii). Receive a further report on the terms and conditions of the draft

Voluntary Planning Agreement on the Airds/Bradbury Renewal Project. (iii). Notify in writing, once the determination of the application has been made

by the Department of Planning and Infrastructure, those persons who made a submission in respect to the Airds/Bradbury Renewal Project.

Committee Note: Mr Bensley, Ms Bradbury, Ms Carn, Mr Hawes and Ms Hierzer addressed the Committee in opposition to the application. Committee’s Recommendation: (Bourke/Kolkman) That the Officer's Recommendation be adopted. CARRIED Voting for the Committee's Recommendation were Councillors: Bourke, Greiss, Hawker, Kolkman and Oates. Voting against the Committee's Recommendation was Councillor Thompson. Council Meeting 13 December 2011 (Kolkman/Bourke) That the Officer's Recommendation be adopted. Amendment: (Kolkman/Matheson) That Council:

(i) Support approval of the concept plan (master plan) for the Airds/Bradbury Renewal Project and endorse the attached planning assessment report except the area of the master plan currently occupied by Baden Powell Reserve.

(ii) Request the Department of Planning to defer determination of that

part of the master plan applying to the land occupied by Baden Powell Reserve pending further discussions between Council, NSW Housing and Landcom concerning land ownership issues.

(iii) Notify in writing, once the determination of the application has been

made by the Department of Planning and Infrastructure, those persons who made a submission in respect to the Airds/Bradbury Renewal Project.

Addendum: (Bourke/Kolkman)

(iv) That Council request the Department of Planning as part of its project determination to require that a landscape buffer of endemic species be planted along the perimeter of the project area along Georges River Road through to the intersection with the Georges River Parkway reservation to effectively screen rear fences and discourage graffiti.

Council Resolution Minute Number 265 That the Amendment incorporating the addendum be adopted.

ATTACHMENT 9 Recommends Conditions for Airds/Bradbury Concept Plan MP10_0186 SCHEDULE 2 PART A – ADMINISTRATIVE CONDITIONS 1.1 The Proponent shall carry out the Concept Plan generally in accordance with

the:

a) Concept Plan Application MP10_0186; b) State Significant Site Study and Environmental Assessment –

Airds/Bradbury Renewal Project concept plan and State significant site listing, prepared by BBC Consulting Planner dated May 2011,

c) Preferred Project Report – Airds/Bradbury and Concept plan, prepared by BBC Consulting Planners dated October 2010;

d) Airds/Bradbury Development Control Guidelines, and e) this approval.

1.2 In the event of an inconsistency between:

a) the modifications of this approval and any document listed from condition

1.1a) to 1.1c) inclusive, the conditions of this approval shall prevail to the extent of the inconsistency, and

b) any document listed from condition 1.1a) to 1.1c) inclusive, the most recent document shall prevail to the extent of the inconsistency.

Determination of Future Applications 1.3 The determination of future applications for development on the Site is to be

generally consistent with the terms of this approval. PART B – MODIFICATIONS TO THE CONCEPT Urban design and built form Building setbacks 1.1 The proposed Masterplan shall be amended to reflect the provision of a 8m

rear building setback to properties that adjoin the Reiby Juvenile Justice Centre. The Development control guidelines and approved concept for Airds/Bradbury shall be amended to reflect the above amendment.

Fencing strategy 1.2 The proponent is to submit to the Department a fencing strategy for the

project site prior to the lodgement and approval of the stage one development application.

Traffic and transport 1.31 Revised plans and further details are to be provided illustrating the retention

of vehicle access to the Busways Depot and Endeavour Energy substation that are located adjacent to Smiths Creek Corridor. The plans shall detail how vehicle access will be provided over the various stages of the development and the eventual cessation of College Street at the junction of the project site.

1.32 No development shall be permitted to have direct access onto Georges River

Road. PART C – FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT REQUIREMENTS Built form and urban design 1.1 Each subsequent subdivision application is to demonstrate consistency with

the development control guidelines to be prepared under Part A, condition 1.1(d).

Traffic and transport 1.21 Any future application which proposes additional intersections with Georges

River Road is to be supported by an traffic analysis prepared by an appropriately qualified person.

1.22 Any future application for the Airds Town Centre must be supported by a

detailed traffic and transport study. 1.23 Any future application for development within 25m of the Georges River

Parkway must identify and mitigate any impacts on the Parkway, in consultation with Roads and Maritime Services.

Development contributions 1.31 The subsequent subdivision applications shall make an offer to enter into a

voluntary planning agreement for payment of local infrastructure contributions, with the details of the contributions, and the nature of any land dedications or works in kind to be negotiated with the Council.

Bushfire hazard 1.41 Future subdivision applications must demonstrate compliance with the

bushfire management measures outlined in the concept plan, and be in accordance with Planning for Bushfire Protection 2006.

1.42 Future subdivision applications are to demonstrate that the APZs are located

outside any area of public open space, unless agreed to by council, and outside the retained bushland area.

Biodiversity Off-set Package 1.50 Prior to determination of any future application for any aspect of the concept

plan the draft bio-diversity off-sett package is to be approved by the Director General of the Office of Environmental and Heritage. The strategy is to be implemented prior to the removal of affected bushland and ecological communities.

Bushland management 1.60 The draft bushland management is to be finalised and approved by Council

prior to determination of any subsequent subdivision applications under the approved concept plan. The final plan is to be implemented prior to the removal of affected bushland.

Heritage 1.71 Prior to the commencement of stage 3 of the development an Archaeological

Management Plan is to be submitted identifying works proposed within the high sensitivity zone and appropriate mitigation measures.

1.72 Future applications are to identify how the detailed design has responded to

opportunities to further mitigate impacts on Aboriginal archaeological heritage. 1.73 Any future subdivision or development applications within the vicinity of Briar

Cottage are to be accompanied by a Statement of Heritage Impact prepared by a suitably qualified heritage conservation practitioner in accordance with the NSW Heritage Office guideline Statements of Heritage Impact (2002) which assesses potential impacts of proposed works on heritage items and their settings.

Site filling and disposal 1.80 Any future applications are to provide details of the nature and extent of any

cut and fill that is required to be undertaken. Compliance with the relevant council’s requirements (as relevant to cut and fill) should also be demonstrated.

Flooding 1.90 Any future applications are to demonstrate compliance with the flood

management measures outlined in the Part 3A Concept Plan, Water Cycle Management Study and Flooding Analysis prepared by Storm Consulting, March 2010. Compliance with Campbelltown City Council requirements (as relevant to flooding) should also be demonstrated.

Water quality and riparian corridors 2.11 Any future applications are to provide details on the proposed water sensitive

urban design infrastructure, to the satisfaction of the consent authority.

2.12 Any future applications for residential lots adjacent to Smiths Creek are to

demonstrate that the lot layout and dwelling locations can accommodate an adequate riparian corridor and associated buffer.

Future Development 2.21 Any future applications for construction of buildings and associated structures

(that are not defined as exempt or complying development) within the Site shall: a) include an assessment of construction impacts, including noise, traffic,

soil and erosion (including acid sulphate soils where relevant), waste, and dust, and identify the mitigation and management measures that would be implemented to address these impacts;

b) demonstrate compliance with the Water Sensitive Urban Design

principles established in the concept plan; c) where applicable, demonstrate compliance with the commitments and

management procedures detailed in the Vegetation Management Plan, including the strategy for retention of trees on site;

d) demonstrate that habitable floor levels are located above the 100 year ARI flood level plus 500mm freeboard, and that appropriate flood evacuation can be provided for dwellings located below the probable maximum flood level;

e) demonstrate compliance with the Planning for Bushfire Protection 2006; and

f) demonstrate that ESD measures have been incorporated into the design of the buildings to reduce water and energy consumption in accordance with State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004.

2.22 Noise assessments are required for future dwellings and subdivision

applications that are likely to be affected by traffic noise from the future Georges River Parkway. Details of any noise mitigations measures are to be included in the subsequent development applications.

2.23 Noise assessments are required for future dwellings and subdivision

applications that are likely to be affected by noise emanating from the Endeavour Energy substation. Details of any noise mitigations measures are to be included in the subsequent development applications.

Demolition 3.11 Prior to commencement of demolition work on the site, the Proponent shall

prepare to the satisfaction of the Council or the Department (where relevant) a demolition management plan, which shall include (but not limited to): a) demolition noise and mitigation; b) management of air quality and dust; c) a soil and water management plan, prepared in accordance with

Landcom’s Managing Urban Stormwater: Soils and Construction guidelines;

d) a vegetation management plan; e) a waste management plan; f) a construction traffic management plan; g) a complaints management

plan detailing the procedures that would be implemented to receive, handle, respond to and record any complaints that are received;

g) Hazardous Building Materials Plan, and h) an archaeological management plan which provides for the monitoring

of works and contingency plans should previously unidentified archaeological deposits be discovered.

Site fencing restricting public access shall be maintained throughout the duration of the demolition works. Prior to the commencement of work, the Proponent shall submit a copy of the approved plan (including all relevant sub-plans) to the Department and Council. 3.12 Demolition shall be undertaken in accordance with the requirements of the

Australian Standard AS 2601 – 2001: The demolition of Structures which is incorporated into the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000 administered by WorkCover NSW.

3.13 Where unexpected contamination is identified on non-certified lands, or lands

proposed under the concept plan to offset clearing of non-certified lands, details of the proposed remediation works are to be provided to the Department or Council for approval prior to commencement. This is to include details of methods to limit impacts on native vegetation, and may require preparation of a vegetation rehabilitation plan, to demonstrate how any areas to be cleared would be revegetated to an appropriate standard.

PART C – ADVISORY NOTES Requirements of Public Authorities for Connection to Services The applicant shall comply with the requirements of any public authorities (e.g. Integral Energy, Endeavour Energy, Sydney Water, Telstra Australia, NBN Co., AGL etc.) in regard to the connection, relocation and/or adjustment of the services affected by the development. Any costs in the relocation, adjustment or support of services shall be the responsibility of the applicant. Details of compliance with the requirements of any relevant public authorities are to be submitted to the satisfaction of the Certifying Authority prior to the issue of a subdivision certificate.

3.4 Lot 40 DP 270152 Macquarie Links Drive, Macquarie Links - Modification to amend the description of development from 'hotel' to 'motel' including the deletion of the northern access road and a new development application for a 46 room motel

Reporting Officer

Manager Development Services

Attachments

1. Recommended reasons for refusal for 3215/2008/DA-S/B 2. Recommended reasons for refusal for 486/2011/DA-C 3. Locality plan 4. Plans of proposed motel

Purpose

The purpose of this report is to assist Council in its determination of a modification application to a staged development consent (DA 3215/2008) and a development application for a 46 room motel (DA 486/2011). Property Description Lot 40 DP 270152, Macquarie Links Drive, Macquarie

Links

Application No 3215/2008/DA-S/B and 486/2011/DA-C

Applicant Jessica Investments Pty Ltd

Owner Jessica Investments Pty Ltd

Statutory Provisions Local Environmental Plan 112 - Macquarie Field House

Development Control Plan No. 63 - Macquarie Field House

Campbelltown Sustainable City Development Control Plan 2009

Heritage Act 1979

Environmental Assessment Model Provisions 1980

Date Received 23 March 2011

History

Macquarie Links Estate has been subject to several development applications for various stages of development, consisting of a golf course, club house, pro shop, retail shops, hotels, recreation facilities, reserves, landscape works and residential subdivision, dwelling houses and apartment buildings.

The Macquarie Links Estate is guided by a Masterplan adopted by Council pursuant to Local Environmental Plan No. 112 – Macquarie Field House, and Development Control Plan No. 63 – Macquarie Field House. The Plans also relate to the Ingleburn Gardens site, Macquarie Field House and land north of Macquarie Field House adjoining properties owned by the NSW Department of Education. An initial masterplan was prepared in 1991 and has subsequently been amended to reflect desired future outcomes for land to which it applies. Amendment 3 (1999) stipulates controls for the subject site (the expressed development intent being a hotel/conference centre with associated residential lodges). The subject site is located near to the northwest boundary of the “Estate” adjoining the terminus of Governors Way, the “Peak Apartments” and golf course. The site is currently vacant and slopes to the south east, down from the Freeway to the golf course and the recent stage of residential subdivision. The subject site has had three development applications approved, the most recent being DA 3215/2008 for a staged development comprising 48 (which was subsequently amended to 47 lots) residential allotments within stage one and a future hotel site within stage 2. The hotel site is the subject of the current application and has an area of 7120 sqm. Whilst the applicant took proceedings in the Land and Environment Court in respect to this application, the Council ultimately approved the development at its meeting on 25 August 2009. Stage 2 of the development, being the future hotel was subject to vehicle access being provided from a northern access road connecting to Campbelltown Road. The second consent relates to DA 5416/2004 for the construction of a hotel, apartments and golf lodges, which was approved by Council in 2005. The proposal was for a part 4/5 storey hotel building with up to 153 rooms, conference facilities, restaurants and other ancillary facilities. The hotel building was proposed in the location where the current residential subdivision has been completed. The consent also allowed for 15 golf lodges and a part 3/4 storey residential apartment building containing 66 units. Vehicular access to the site under this DA was also via a northern access road from Campbelltown Road. The third consent, DA 504/2001 was issued in March 2002 for hotel, conference centre with associated recreation facilities and accommodation, golf lodges, landscaping and car parking (generally within the same location as per the second consent). That approval provided for a cluster of buildings; a part 2/3 storey hotel/conference centre, lounge bar and restaurant; five linked three-storey guest room buildings incorporating a total of 90 rooms and 16 x two-storey golf lodge buildings (each with four dwellings).

Report

Introduction Council is in receipt of a development application from Jessica Investments Pty Ltd for a 46 suite motel at Macquarie Links Drive (Lot 40 DP 270152), Macquarie Links. The site is located at the end of Macquarie Links Road, which is immediately to the north of the existing Macquarie Links estate and adjacent to the Hume Highway.

The motel application proposes the construction of a managers dwelling, commercial tenancy, kitchen, dining room and associated landscaping and car parking. The motel suites are proposed to be located within 5 x 2 storey buildings spread across the property, with car parking provided at grade in front of the motel suites. They are designed as self contained suites, comprising 40 x 2 bedroom and 6 x 3 bedroom suites, with each suite containing a bathroom (some with ensuite), kitchen, laundry and balcony/s. The size of the proposed motel suites ranges from 70 sqm for a two bedroom suite up to 106 sqm for a three bedroom suite. As part of the current motel proposal, a simultaneous application has been submitted to modify the 2009 staged consent (3215/2008) to delete the northern access road that was previously required as part of that consent and amend the stage two description from a hotel to a motel. The motel is proposed to be accessed from Macquarie Links Drive, which is an internal road within the estate. This report will deal with both the modification application and development proposal for a motel together, as the staged consent issued for a future hotel site in 2009 must be amended prior to the determination and approval for a motel of this site. Furthermore, whilst they have been submitted as two separate applications, they essentially relate to the one development proposal. Plans of the proposed motel are contained within Attachment 4. The Site The land subject of the current application (Lot 40 DP 270152) is located near to the north-western boundary of the Macquarie Links Estate, adjoining the terminus of Governor’s Way, the 'Peak' apartments and the golf course. The 7120 sqm site slopes down from the Freeway to the golf course generally within a natural valley extending along a south-west/north-east alignment and is irregular in shape. The land is bounded to the north-west and north-east by vacant pasture. Macquarie Field House is situated to the east of the site and is an item of heritage listed on the State Heritage Register. The highest part of the site is at 66m Australian Height Datum (AHD). The remainder of the site slopes downwards to the golf course which is at 45m AHD. The 'Peak' apartments located to the west/south-west of the subject land, presents as the tallest ridge height of development on the western side of the valley. These apartments have a ridge height of 71.15m AHD. The 47 residential allotments approved as part of the 2009 approved staged consent (DA3215/2008) directly adjoin the site to the south. 1. Vision The development has been assessed in accordance with the heads of consideration prescribed under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, and having regard to those matters, the following issues have been identified for further consideration.

Campbelltown 2025 - Looking Forward ‘Campbelltown 2025 Looking Forward’ is a statement of broad town planning intent for the longer term future of the City of Campbelltown that:

Responds to what Council understands people want the City of Campbelltown to look, feel and function like

Recognises likely future government policies and social and

economic trends Sets down the foundations for a new town plan that will help

achieve that future. The document establishes a set of strategic directions to guide decision-making and development outcomes. These directions are broad in nature and form a prelude to a new statutory town plan for the City. The strategic directions relevant to the Project Application are:

Protecting and enhancing the City’s key environmental assets Growing the Regional City

Building a Distinctive Campbelltown Sense of Place Creating employment and entrepreneurial opportunities.

Some of the relevant desired outcomes of the strategic directions included in Campbelltown 2025 include:

Development and land use matches environmental capacity and capability

Match the type, scale and intensity of new land use and

development within the capability of the local environment to sustain that land use/development

A working desire to create a range of sustainable and high quality

lifestyle opportunities across a framework of liveable neighbourhoods

An impression of architecture that engages its environmental

context in a sustainable way.

Comment: The Applicant has not addressed Campbelltown 2025 Looking Forward in their Statement of Environmental Effects. The proposal is not consistent with the statements contained in the Campbelltown Vision in that the proposal is considered to be excessive in height and it would have an adverse relationship with nearby residential properties adjoining the site to the south. The relative scale of the 9m high two storey motel buildings, which are proposed to be setback 5.6m from the adjoining residential properties is excessive and would result in a poor visual relationship between the two land uses. Furthermore there are insufficient opportunities for landscape screening between the site and Macquarie Fields House to the east and the Hume Highway to the west. The proposed motel would be clearly visible from the Hume Highway, particularly when travelling in a northerly direction. Whilst the proposal would have some positive economic impact upon the Campbelltown Local Government Area, it is not as significant as that which would have occurred under the original approved Masterplan. This consent envisaged the site being more significantly developed, with landmark buildings and land uses that establish the site as a tourist and entertainment destination. 2. Planning Provisions Heritage Act 1977 The Heritage Act 1997 includes a range of provisions for identifying and protecting items of environmental heritage. In addition to the establishment of the State Heritage Register (SRH) (a list of items assessed as having State heritage significance), these provisions also include Interim Orders, Orders to stop work, heritage conservation registers and relics provisions. The proposed development does not directly affect any place on the State Heritage Register but is located in the vicinity of Macquarie Field House which is listed on the State Heritage Register. No part of the site is subject to an Interim Heritage Order. A report by Heritage Consultants Godden MacKay Logan dated June 2011 and lodged in support of the development application, indicated that the proposed subdivision would not impact upon the heritage item, subject to the development being restricted in terms of height control which is described in more detail in Section 3 below. Local Environmental Plan 112 - Macquarie Field House (LEP 112) LEP 112 was gazetted on 14 January 1991 and was subsequently amended later through LEPs 135, 176 and 204. The LEP 112 provides the land use zoning for the subject site. The objectives of the LEP are:

a) To control the uses to which the land to which this plan applies may be put;

b) To conserve the environmental heritage of the land to which this

plan applies;

c) To protect and enhance the role of the land to which this plan

applies in providing a clearly perceived break between urban development in the City of Campbelltown and that in the City of Liverpool by preserving the visual character and landscape quality of that land;

d) To protect and enhance the role of the land to which this plan

applies in providing a rural backdrop to the residential areas of Glenfield, Macquarie Fields and Ingleburn;

e) To protect the quality and nature of the view from the South

Western Freeway where it passes through the land to which this plan applies;

f) To protect that part of the major urban drainage system for the City

of Campbelltown situated on the land to which this plan applies; g) To control, by means of a development control plan, the siting,

height, bulk, scale and density of any buildings to be erected on the land to which this plan applies to achieve the objectives stated in paragraphs (c), (d), (e) and (f);

h) To guide, by means of a development control plan, the future

landscaping of the land to which this plan applies to achieve the objectives stated in paragraphs (c), (d), (e) and (f).

Comment: The proposed motel is not consistent with the objectives of the LEP above, most notably objectives (c) and (e) that protect the quality and view of the site from the Hume Highway and visual character and landscape of the land. The site is proposed to be at a similar height of ‘Peak apartments’, with a finished height of 71.5m AHD. The motel site is situated within the highest point of the Macquarie Links estate and the 2 storey height and large scale of the buildings proposed would be visually prominent from Hume Highway, and penetrate the skyline. The motel proposal includes two x 2 storey motel buildings built adjacent to the boundary of the site with the Hume Highway, with each of the two motel buildings being 40m in length and 8m in height. Whilst there have been previous approvals for hotels and other similar buildings and land uses on the land, they have generally been constrained to the lower sections of the site, in the location where the recently completed 47 lot subdivision was completed. In any event, each development application should be assessed on its own individual merits. Clause 8 of LEP 112 Clause 8 of LEP 112 nominates a wide range of uses that are permissible with development consent on the land, including the following uses applicable under the Masterplan: Dwelling houses (used in conjunction with development for other permissible

purposes) Drainage

Motels Hotels Planting of trees or shrubs for re-afforestation Silviculture or landscaping Recreational areas Residential flat buildings (used in conjunction with development for other

permissible purposes) Roads.

Campbelltown LEP 112 is structured in such a way that development which is not listed within clause 8 of the LEP, is prohibited development. Therefore the proposed development is required to meet the definition of a motel or another applicable land use listed within clause 8 of the LEP, for it to be permissible development. Campbelltown LEP 112 adopts the land used definitions contained within the “Environmental Planning and Assessment Model Provisions 1980”, which defines a motel as:

Motel means a building or buildings (other than a hotel, boarding-house or residential flat building) substantially used for overnight accommodation of travellers and the vehicles used by them whether or not the building or buildings are also used in the provision of meals to those travellers or the general public.

The proposed development is not considered a motel as it has been designed as self contained accommodation, that is not intended to substantially cater for overnight accommodation for travellers. The size, configuration, function and location of the proposed motel does not render it suitable for use as a bona fide motel, as defined above. Each of the proposed motel suites are self contained and are of a size, .i.e. ranging from 70 sqm to 106 sqm, that are attributable to either serviced apartments (tourist accommodation) or a residential flat building. The nature of motels is that they are located on arterial roads or locations where there is a high degree of passing traffic. Motel generally cater for persons travelling from one destination to another. The subject site is not located on a major road and instead proposes to gain access from the internalised road system of Macquarie Links estate. The applicant in their response to Council officers concerns in respect to the permissibility of the development, have provided a further submission to Council that indicates that the proposed motel would cater for a range of business travellers and tourists, particularly those who are golf enthusiasts. The following is an extract from the Applicants submission to Council:

“The application lodged with Campbelltown City Council is for a 46 room motel on the subject site. Monarch’s research indicates that there is a shortage of accommodation for business travellers including business teams and individuals. Furthermore, there is a tourist demographic that travels from golf course to golf course and seeks to obtain accommodation in close proximity to these golf courses. In addition, there is a growing demand for business conferences, seminars, meetings etc. which in this case use the golf course and clubhouse for that facility but needs accommodation which will be provided by the motel.

The proposed motel suites have been designed to accommodate business associates and groups that use the golf club to stay within the same motel suite but within 2 different rooms.”

In respect to the motel suites being provided as self contained suites, the applicant’s submission further states that they intend on catering for those travellers who wish to prepare and make their own meals. The following is an extract of the Applicant’s submission in this respect:

“The motel suites provide a kitchen area that enables meals to be prepared which is particularly demanded by mature golf tourists where market research indicates a high percentage of persons in this demographic seek to save money by preparing meals themselves especially when travelling with a group of friends.

The motel provides a kitchen, motel dining, reception and pool. The motel kitchen and motel dining ensures that guests have access to meals prepared on-site that can either be eaten in the motel dining area or from a room service.

The definition of ‘motel’ stated above states that the buildings will be substantially used for overnight accommodation of travellers and the vehicles used by them. Substantial has a number of meanings in the Macquarie Dictionary, however the most pertinent is as follows:

“of ample or considerable amount, quantity, size etc.”

Despite the applicants submission, the form, function and design of the development is that which is not a motel. The ‘Model Provisions’ contain a range of other land use definitions which are relevant to the consideration of this application. They relevantly include residential flat buildings, commercial premises and tourist facilities. Each of these definitions are considered below in respect to the proposed development, with residential flat building defined as:

residential flat building means a building containing two or more dwellings.

Whilst the application does not propose a residential flat building, the proposed motel suites are designed as being self contained, that would render them suitable as being used as a separate domicile. The floor area of the proposed motel suites range from 70 sq m to 106 sq m, which would provide sufficient size for the suites to be used as a dwelling. The car parking layout would not however comply with Council’s development control requirements for residential apartments. Consideration would also be required to other applicable development standards, such as open space, solar access and other similar amenity issues. Whilst the design of the building may render it suitable for use as a residential flat building, the intended use of the premises for paid accommodation purposes makes the use fall outside this definition. The next applicable land use category to consider is tourist facilities, which are defined in the ‘Model Provisions’ as:

tourist facilities means an establishment providing for holiday accommodation or recreation and may include a boat shed, boat landing facilities, camping ground, caravan park, holiday cabins, hotel, house boat, marina, motel, playground, refreshment room, water sport facilities or a club used in conjunction with any such activities.

The proposed development meets the definition of tourist facilities as the suites (an establishment) are designed in such a way that renders them most suitable as holiday accommodation, as per the above definition. This is acknowledged in the applicant’s submission in that “….tourist demographic that travels from golf course to golf course…” which is clearly geared towards holiday or recreational accommodation. The Macquarie Dictionary defines “holiday” as:

“a trip taken for recreation: to book a holiday in New Zealand” and “to take a holiday: to holiday on the Gold Coast.”

The definition of holiday contained in the Macquarie Dictionary encapsulates recreational or holiday type accommodation. Whilst there is likely to be short term or overnight elements of tourist or business travellers utilising the proposed motel, the dominant use of the development is more aligned to that of tourist facilities. The design of the suites are more suitable to holiday accommodation, rather than traditional motel accommodation, where the rooms are open plan, do not usually contain a kitchen, bedrooms and do not include other facilities such as a laundry. A motel is short term or overnight accommodation only and is not intended for longer term stays as that which is contemplated under the tourist facilities definition. The proposal could also be considered to meet the definition of commercial premises. However this would only occur if the use was not defined as a motel, hotel, residential flat building or a tourist facility. The commercial premises definition includes:

commercial premises means a building or place used as an office or for other business or commercial purposes, but does not include a building or place elsewhere specifically defined in this clause or a building or place used for a purpose elsewhere specifically defined in this clause

On the basis that the proposed development is most accurately defined as tourist facilities, the proposal is unlikely to be defined as a commercial premise. However in the event that the use is not defined as tourist facilities, then the use could fall within the definition of commercial premises. The nature of the definition of commercial premises, is that it is a “catch all” type definition, in that it captures development that may not be separately defined but is a land use or activity which is operated for commercial purposes. The above consideration of the definition and use of the proposed development has found that the application refers to the development that is defined as tourist facilities and is prohibited development under clause 8 of LEP 112. On this basis the application must be refused and Council cannot consent to the development in its current form. Clause 13 of LEP 112 Clause 13 requires that Council must not grant consent to the carrying out of development on the land unless satisfactory measures to protect buildings or works against bushfires are provided. A previous bushfire Report by Bushfire Protection Planners dated 10 June 2009 indicates that the site is not bushfire affected. The Campbelltown Bushfire Prone Map identifies that the site is not bushfire prone land. Clause 17 of LEP 112 Clause 17 relates to development to be undertaken within the vicinity of a heritage item. There are no items of environmental heritage on the subject site; however Macquarie Field House is located to the south east of the land. Between the subject site and Macquarie Field House are dwellings fronting Jane Jarvis Way and Macquarie Links Drive. There are other dwellings located between the subject site and Macquarie Field House. The construction of the motel should not have an adverse impact on the heritage significance of Macquarie Field House. Development Control Plan No. 63 – Macquarie Field House (DCP 63) The purpose of DCP 63 is to provide more detailed provisions than are contained within LEP 112. The DCP does not contain any additional specific objectives. Clause 2.1 makes provision for geotechnical investigation of land within identified “moderately steep” or “very steep” areas. The subject site is located in both these areas and as a result if the application were to be approved then a geotechnical report would be required prior to issue of a construction certificate.

Clause 3.2 relates to the siting of buildings. Building height controls are confined to the “Significant Distant View from the Freeway over Study Area" and "Corridors of Visual Significance" as nominated on Map B of the DCP 63 Plan. The subject site is located within a visually prominent location, being the highest point within the estate. The scale, height and bulk of the buildings proposed will be visually prominent from Hume Highway. The motel proposal includes two x 2 storey motel buildings built adjacent to the boundary of the site with the Hume Highway, with each of the two motel buildings being 40m in length and 8-9m in height. Clause 4 of the DCP requires Council’s development consent for landscaping. A landscape concept plan has been prepared for this application. The landscape plan is deemed insufficient in that it provides a level of landscaping that is considered inadequate and not of a standard that would satisfactorily screen the proposed motel. Clause 5 of the DCP states that Council can only approve development that is in accordance with an adopted Masterplan. The existing Masterplan, (Amendment 3) adopted by Council on 7 December 1999, nominates a hotel/conference centre with associated accommodation and recreation facilities on the land. Notwithstanding this, Council has approved a previous consent in 2009 (DA 3215/2008) for a staged consent that permitted a hotel to be built on the site. This consent has had the effect of amending the originally approved 1999 Masterplan. The proposed development further compromises the original vision contained in the Masterplan and that approved by Council in 2009. The proposal is now for a motel, which contemplates a completely different land use and function from that of a hotel that was previously approved. Clause 5 of DCP 63 provides guidelines for preserving two view corridors across the area from the east. The intention of the DCP is to protect the rural nature of the area surrounding Macquarie Field House as viewed from these general locations. The east-west corridor across Macquarie Links Golf Course is not affected by the proposed development. It is considered that the construction of the motel will have a detrimental impact on the more northerly view corridor. This corridor identifies the view from Seddon Park and Glenfield railway station. The application has failed to demonstrate through a detailed visual analysis, the impacts of the motel on this view line. Sub-Clause 5.3.1 of the DCP seeks to protect the identified views through the limiting of building heights so that protrusion above the horizon is avoided or minimised in order to protect the rural nature of the area surrounding Macquarie Field House. The proposed development fails to meet this objective, with the building proposed to be built at 71-72m AHD in height, which is the same or similar height to ‘Peak Apartments’ and Macquarie Field House. Given the large scale of the proposed motel, it is expected to dominate the horizon and detrimentally affect the scenic character of the area.

The concerns relating to the bulk and scale of the development relate principally to design and location on the site. The proposed building is sited in the highest point of the site and it does not respond to the existing landform and its scenic attributes. Former proposals whilst being more significant in scale were designed over a larger development footprint, with more significant buildings located away from the highway elevation. 3. Planning Assessment Staged consent – Section 83(d)(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act The applicant is seeking an amendment to the staged consent to change the second stage reference from hotel to motel. Section 83(d)(2) of the Act requires subsequent stages of a ‘staged consent’ to be consistent with the original consent. Section 83(d)(2) states:

83(d)(2) While any consent granted on the determination of a staged development application for a site remains in force, the determination of any further development application in respect of that site cannot be inconsistent with that consent.

Therefore if the application to modify the original development consent is not granted, then subsequent development applications, such as the proposed motel application (DA 486/2011) cannot be approved, as they would be inconsistent with the original staged consent. Modification provisions under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP & A Act 1979) The EP & A Act 1979 provides that a consent can be modified by way of an application made under Section 96 of the Act. This Section provides a number of different modification types of which the current application before Council (DA3215/2008) proposes a section 96(2) modification, that is considered a more significant modification to the originally approved development. Section 96(2) of the Act contains restrictions on the scale and degree of modification sought as part of an application to modify a consent. It prohibits modifications or amendments which if approved, would result in a substantially different development to that originally approved. Section 96(2) of the Act states:

96(2) A consent authority may, on application being made by the applicant or any other person entitled to act on a consent granted by the consent authority and subject to and in accordance with the regulations, modify the consent if: (a) it is satisfied that the development to which the consent as modified relates is substantially the same development as the development for which consent was originally granted and before that consent as originally granted was modified (if at all).

The key changes sought as part of the section 96 application to modify DA 3215/2008 for a staged consent relate to the amendment to the wording of the second stage of the consent form a hotel to a motel and to delete any reference to the northern access road and instead propose access internally from Macquarie Links Drive. Change from ‘hotel’ to ‘motel’ The change in the intended use of the second stage of the consent from a hotel to a motel introduces a different land uses definition. The characterisation of a hotel, its form, function and character is entirely different to that of a motel. Hotels by definition are licensed premises with accommodation usually included as part of the broader hotel operations. Hotels also include additional facilities for receptions, conferences, gyms, crèches and the like. A motel is a land use which is primarily centred on providing overnight accommodation for the travelling public. They are uniquely different in operation and function to that of hotel, and whilst they may contain a restaurant, they are not required to provide meals. Deletion of the northern access road The existing staged development consent included the construction of an access road from the motel, linking with Campbelltown Road to the north of the site. The application seeks to amend the staged DA by deleting this road and allowing all traffic to the proposed motel to gain access via Macquarie Links Drive. Currently Macquarie Links Drive ends at a cul-de-sac head adjacent to the north western end of the Macquarie Links Estate. The proposed deletion of the northern access road is expected to result in a substantially different form of development to that originally approved. Instead of vehicle movements accessing the site from the northern access road, considerable traffic movements from the 46 room motel will traverse Macquarie Links Drive. This is expected to place additional traffic demands on Macquarie Links Drive and the localised traffic network. The traffic impacts of the development are considered further in section 8 of this report. Despite the likely traffic impacts from the deletion of the access road, the deletion of the northern access road results in a material difference to the character of the original development. The use of the stage two land, whether for the purpose of a hotel or motel, becomes uniquely different when the access is internalised through the Macquarie Links Estate, particularly considering the amenity and safety impacts that are likely to be experienced from this amendment. The form, function and character of a hotel is materially different from a motel, where as the internalisation of traffic from the development will also change the envisaged function and operation of stage two of the original staged consent. One of the most significant differences is that motels are not intended for tourist or longer stay accommodation and they are normally located within more prominent locations with ready and easy access for the travelling public.

On the basis of the above the proposed section 96 application to modify the original staged consent should be refused because the proposed modification is considered substantially different to that originally approved or modified. Traffic The traffic report which accompanied the application suggests that the proposed motel will generate only seven vehicle trips per hour in the morning and afternoon peak periods. A trip is defined as one movement, for example an ‘in’ and ‘out’ movement would be considered two trips. This calculation is considered low and would appear to include inaccurate assumptions on the number of traffic movements and the intended occupancy of the motel development. Considering the development is a 46 room motel, with conference rooms, restaurant and a number of staff likely to be employed, the expected traffic to be generated by the development is likely to considerably higher than that estimated by the applicant's traffic consultant. When Macquarie Links is fully developed, Macquarie Links Drive is expected to generate approximately 253 vehicle trips in the morning peak and 315 vehicle trips in the afternoon peak. Additional traffic generated by the proposed motel gaining direct access from Macquarie Links Drive, is expected to have an adverse impact upon the efficiency of Macquarie Links Drive. Whilst this impact is not likely to be significant to affect its overall operation and safety, it is expected to result in additional traffic delays at localised intersections. Whilst it is considered that the local road system has capacity to accommodate the additional traffic generated from the motel, it would result in a reduction in amenity to that which residents currently enjoy. Furthermore the traffic generated by the motel is expected to result in additional local traffic movements throughout the estate and adjoining the Macquarie Fields area, where as if access was maintained from the north, then traffic movements would have been contained to arterial roads such as the Hume Highway and Campbelltown Road. Impacts on Natural and Built Environment The principal matters for consideration of these impacts are dealt with in considering the provisions of LEP 112 and DCP 63. The design and built form of the proposed development is considered to be out of character with that which is expected for the area. The visual impact of the development as viewed from the Hume Highway has also been considered and has found that given the siting of the development as well as the bulk, scale and height of the development it would be prominently viewed from the Hume Highway. The development would extend into and dominate the skyline. The development is likely to result in a poor relationship with the recently approved residential subdivision to the south. If approved, the motel would be located 5.6m from the rear boundaries of the future southern residences, which is likely to give rise to significant overshadowing from the motel building onto those dwellings.

As discussed in Section 4 of DCP 63, the applicant has reviewed the relative ridge heights of the Freeway mounding, 'Peak' apartments and Macquarie Field House. The proposed development would be viewed from the Hume Highway as the mound is of variable height. The break in the Freeway mounding to the north of the Macquarie Links estate allows some visual access to the site whilst travelling north along the Freeway, and minimum visual access when travelling in a southerly direction. The constraints of the site together with the scale and density of the development provides limited opportunities for effective screen landscaping. A recommendation of Council’s Heritage and Landscape Consultant is that advanced dense screen planting (utilising endemic species) be carried out alongside the northern and western sides of the development. This would provide a landscaped barrier for the motel site when viewed from Macquarie Field House and the Hume Highway. Social and Economic Impacts The resident submissions have noted that their particular attraction to the Macquarie Links estate is that it is a safe and secure community. The introduction of non-resident vehicle access through the site to the proposed motel may erode the community’s sense of safety and security and compromise the distinct character of the estate. This may result in an adverse social impact upon residents, whether it be from a real or perceived lack of security. In terms of economic impact, the applicant has not indicated a specific number of jobs created through construction and on-going operation of the development. Additional staff would be required by the motel operator at the time the motel commenced operation. However there would be an ‘opportunity cost’ associated with the development of the site for a motel, as opposed to that if the site was developed for a hotel. It is considered that the Macquarie Links precinct would have difficulty in attracting large events (particularly golf tournaments) with an economic loss for the Campbelltown community. The development of the site for a motel would present a lost opportunity and it is not consistent with the original vision of the Masterplan which sought to develop the site as a place of destination, that would complement the existing Macquarie Links Estate, but also provide a tourist and entertainment venue for Campbelltown. Site Suitability The principal matters for consideration concerning site suitability have already been discussed previously in this report relating to LEP 112, DCP 63 and the traffic, economic and social and built/natural impacts of the proposed development. On the basis of the issues raised the site is not considered suitable for the proposed motel.

4. Public Participation Submissions The application was publicly exhibited from 27 April 2011 to 11 May 2011 in accordance with the requirements of DCP 87 - Public Notification and Public Exhibition Policy. Two submissions were received during the notification period. Submissions were received from the Macquarie Links Community Association and one resident of the Macquarie Links Estate. The issues raised in the two submissions include: The nature of the proposed development is not a motel and should remain as a

hotel, Response: This matter has been addressed within Section 3 of this report and the assessment finds that the development as proposed is not a motel and is instead a ‘tourist facility’ which is prohibited in the zone. The developer is trying to get serviced apartments built and approved on the

site and had previously written unsuccessfully to the Community Association seeking their consent to proceed.

Response: Section 3 of this report addressed whether the use is appropriately defined as a motel or other land uses, including a residential flat building. The physical design and configuration of the building is generally capable of supporting its use as a residential flat building. However the proponent has indicated in the application that use of the premises is intended for a motel. The adverse traffic impacts associated with the deletion of the northern access

road and internalisation of traffic within Macquarie Links. Response: the traffic impacts of the development were considered within Section 8 of this report and it found that the development if approved, would result in additional traffic impacts upon the locality. Whilst the development would not necessarily result in an adverse impact on the overall safety and efficiency of local road network, it would result in a reduction in ambience/amenity to that which residents currently enjoy. That residents chose and moved into the estate because that felt safe and

secure and that the motel with internal access roads would compromise these characteristics of the estate.

Response: This point is addressed in Section 10 of this report and it found that there may be an adverse social impact upon residents. This is due to a real or perceived lack of safety and security given the additional non-local traffic movements in the area. That Council has previously committed to retaining the Masterplan with the

hotel and northern access road.

Response: Council is required to consider each application on its own individual merits. Notwithstanding this, should the modification application be refused then Council cannot approve the application for a motel, because it would be inconsistent with the original staged consent. That ‘Peak Villas’ question the need for a cart path accessing the golf course. Response: if approved the proposed golf cart path is not expected to result in adverse amenity impacts upon residents. The Public Interest The public interest is an overarching requirement, which includes the consideration of the matters discussed above. Implicit in the term public interest is the achievement of future built outcomes adequately responding to and respecting the desired future outcomes expressed in LEPs and DCPs. Furthermore the views and concerns raised from the Macquarie Links Community Association can reasonably be taken to be representative of the residents and interested parties of the estate. Consistent within the assessment report is that the development does not uphold the built form objectives of relevant planning controls and that the proposal represents a departure from the vision for the use of the site which was reflected in the original Masterplan. It is clear that the development proposal is considerably different to the previously approved development for the hotel site and is not substantially the same development to that previously approved. On the above basis and for reasons already identified in the assessment report, the proposed development is not considered to be in the public interest. 5. Conclusion This report deals with two development applications, the first being the Lot 40 DP 270152 Macquarie Links Drive, Macquarie Links - Modification to amend the description of development from 'hotel' to 'motel' including the deletion of the northern access road and a new development application for a 46 room motel. Both applications must be considered together, as without the approval to modify the original staged consent, the proposed motel application cannot be approved because it will be inconsistent with the original staged consent. Firstly it is recommended that the modification application should be refused by Council as the proposed amendments to the original consent (deletion of the northern access road and the amendment of the stage 2 description from a hotel to a motel), would result in a substantially different development to that originally approved. Irrespective of the merit considerations of this amendment, the provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 restrict substantial amendments to a development being made through the modification provisions of the Act. The applicant should instead lodge a new application addressing the proposed changes and their vision for the site. Without this occurring, the original vision of the site will be further compromised as incremental applications and approvals loose sight of the original vision sought for the site.

Secondly, should Council refuse the modification application then in accordance with the staged provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the proposed motel application should be refused because it is inconsistent with the original staged consent. That is upon refusal, the original staged consent is retained which refers to a hotel being built on the subject site, as opposed to the proposed motel. Thirdly, this report has found that the proposed development is not a motel and is instead a tourist facility, which is prohibited under the terms of Campbelltown LEP 112. The proposed motel is of a design, form and function that are more attributable to that of a tourist facility which caters for holiday and recreation accommodation. This view has been formed based on the size and layout of the proposed motel suites, which are designed as self contained apartments. Lastly, the merit assessment of proposed motel also raises significant concerns regarding traffic impacts, non compliance with the view lines and view sheds depicted in the Macquarie Field House DCP 63, adverse social and economic impacts and that the development is not in the public interest. On this basis, it is recommended that both the application for the modification to the staged consent and application for a motel be refused by Council.

Officer's Recommendation

That Council:

(i) Refuse the subject application to modify development consent 3215/2008 for the subdivision of 47 torrens title allotments and one residual lot for a hotel – in two stages at former Lots 1, 23, 24 and 26 DP 270152 (presently identified as Lot 40 DP 270152) Macquarie Links Drive, Macquarie Links, subject to the reasons for refusal in Attachment 1,

(ii). Refuse development application 486/2011 for the construction of a

motel consisting of 46 rooms and managers dwelling at Lot 40 DP 270152, Macquarie Links Drive, Macquarie Links, subject to the reasons for refusal in Attachment 2, and

(iii). Notify persons in writing who made a submission in respect to the

development application, advising them of the outcome of the application/s.

Committee’s Recommendation: (Bourke/Kolkman) That the Officer's Recommendation be adopted. CARRIED Voting for the Committee's Recommendation were Councillors: Bourke, Greiss, Hawker, Kolkman, Oates and Thompson. Voting against the Committee's Recommendation: Nil

Council Meeting 13 December 2011 (Kolkman/Matheson) That the Officer's Recommendation be adopted. Council Resolution Minute Number 268 That the Officer's Recommendation be adopted. Voting for the Council Resolution were Councillors: Borg, Bourke, Chanthivong, Dobson, Glynn, Greiss, Hawker, Kolkman, Lake, Matheson, Oates, Rowell, Rule, Thomas and Thompson. Voting against the Council Resolution: nil.

ATTACHMENT 1 Recommended reasons for refusal of an application to modify development consent 3215/2008 for subdivision of 47 torrens title allotments and one residual lot for a hotel – in two stages at former Lots 1, 23, 24 and 26 DP 270152 (presently identified as Lot 40 DP 270152) Macquarie Links Drive, Macquarie Links, as follows: 1. Not substantially the same development - Pursuant to the provisions of Section

96(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the development to which the modification relates is not substantially the same development as the development for which the consent was originally granted and before that consent as originally granted was modified.

2. Adverse Social Impact - Neighbourhood Amenity - Pursuant to the provisions of

Section 79C(1)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, it is considered that the proposed development would have an adverse traffic impact on the local road network and would result in an unacceptable amenity impact upon the locality.

3. Adverse Social Impact - Residents - Pursuant to the provisions of Section

79C(1)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, it is considered that the proposed development would have an adverse social impact upon residents within the vicinity of the proposed development, having regard to the increased traffic and the vehicle access arrangements proposed as part of the development.

4. Site Not Suitable For Development - Pursuant to the provisions of Section

79C(1)(c) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, it is considered that the site is not suitable for the proposed development, having regard to the likely increased traffic and the vehicle access arrangements to the site, which are likely to result in adverse amenity impacts upon residents within the locality.

5. Not In The Public Interest - Pursuant to the provisions of Section 79C(1)(e) of

the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, it is considered that in the circumstances of the case, having regard to the extent of modification proposed and the adverse amenity impacts resulting from the development, approval would set an undesirable precedent for similar inappropriate development and is therefore not in the public interest.

ATTACHMENT 2 Recommended reasons for refusal for development application 486/2011 for the construction of a motel consisting of 46 rooms and managers dwelling at Lot 40 DP 270152, Macquarie Links Drive, Macquarie Links, as follows: 1. Prohibited development - Pursuant to the provisions of Section 79C(1)(a)(i) of

the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the proposed development is prohibited development in accordance with Clause 8 of Campbelltown Local Environmental Plan 112 – Macquarie Fields House.

2. Inconsistency with the objectives of the applicable environmental planning

instrument - Pursuant to the provisions of Section 79C(1)(a)(i) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the proposed development is not consistent with clause 2 – the objectives of the plan of Campbelltown Local Environmental Plan 112 – Macquarie Field House, specifically the following:

(c) to protect and enhance the role of the land to which this plan applies in

providing a clearly perceived break between urban development in the City of Campbelltown and that in the City of Liverpool by preserving the visual character and landscape quality of that land, and

(e) to protect the quality and nature of the view from the South Western

Freeway where it passes through the land to which this plan applies. 3. Inconsistent with applicable Development Control Plan - Pursuant to the

provisions of Section 79C(1)(a)(ii) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the proposed development is inconsistent with Development Control Plan No. 63 – Macquarie Field House (DCP 63), specifically:

Clause 3.2 - the siting of buildings, Clause 4 - site landscaping, Clause 5 – consistency with adopted Masterplan, and Clause 5.3.1 – protection of view lines over the horizon.

4. Impacts of the development - Pursuant to the provisions of Section 79C(1)(b) of

the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, it is considered that the proposed development would result in an unacceptable impact upon adjoining residential properties, specifically in respect to privacy, overshadowing and visual impacts.

5. Traffic Impacts of the development - Pursuant to the provisions of Section

79C(1)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, it is considered that the proposed development would result in an unacceptable impact upon the local traffic network and would result in an adverse amenity impact upon residents in the locality.

6. Site Not Suitable For Development - Pursuant to the provisions of Section

79C(1)(c) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, it is considered that the site is not suitable for the proposed development as it is not compatible with the character of the residential area in terms of its built form, scale and density, relative to the adjoining low density residential development.

7. Not In The Public Interest - Pursuant to the provisions of Section 79C(1)(e) of

the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, it is considered that in the circumstances of the case, having regard to the reasons for refusal identified above, and the resident submissions received, approval would set an undesirable precedent for similar inappropriate development and is therefore not in the public interest.

ATTACHMENT 3

ATTACHMENT 4

3.5 Lot 10 DP 1022204, Racecourse Avenue, Menangle Park - Construction of horse stalls, parade ring, landscaping and other site works

Reporting Officer

Manager Development Services

Attachments

1. Recommended conditions of consent 2. Locality plan 3. Site plan 4. Ground floor plan 5. Elevations 6. Landscaping plan

Purpose

The purpose of this report is to assist Council in its determination of the subject development application in accordance with the provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. Property Description Lot 10 DP 1022204, Racecourse Avenue, Menangle Park

Application No 1612/2011/DA-C

Applicant Michael Brown Planning Strategies

Owner NSW Harness Racing Club Limited

Statutory Provisions Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 20 - Hawkesbury-Nepean River

Interim Development Order No. 15

Campbelltown Local Environmental Plan No. 193

Campbelltown (Sustainable City) Development Control Plan 2009

Development Control Plan No. 83 - Heritage Policy

Other Provisions Campbelltown 2025 - Looking Forward

Date Received September 2011

History

The subject site has been used as a venue for harness racing since 1953. Several development applications have been received and determined since the early 1970s at the subject site that relate to its use as a harness racing track, the site for Campbelltown Show, Menangle Markets and for sand extraction works. Council's earliest record of a development application at the site is D73/173 for extensions and renovations to a paceway, which was approved in 1973. Since that time, various development applications for additional stables, shedding and amenities have been received for the paceway track and surrounds. Applications in 1982, 1990 and 1991 provided for the covered areas at the site that are presently used to host the Campbelltown Show and Menangle Markets. Council issued two major development consents for the excavation and removal of sand and soil from the site in 1984 and 2001. The sand extraction authorised by the 1984 consent has been completed to the immediate west and south west of the existing paceway track. The work under the 2001 consent is currently being carried out to the north west of the existing track, with plant and vehicles relating to the sand extraction presently located on the property. The sand extraction and site rehabilitation permitted by the most recent development consent was completed by mid 2008. In December 2006, Council granted its development consent for a major redevelopment of the harness racing track itself, which involved the construction of a 1,400 metre long oval track and associated site works, including some flood mitigation earthworks. More recent development consents have also been issued at the site for works such as track lighting, installation of an elevator in one of the grandstands and most recently, construction of new offices for use in conjunction with the track and the management of Harness Racing NSW.

Report

Introduction An application has been received to construct a new horse stalls building, harness racing supplies store, parade ring, landscaping and associated site works at Tabcorp Park Menangle (as the Menangle Park Paceway is now known). The building would be used to accommodate horses for preparation during race meetings and would allow for visitors to the track to view the animals prior to racing. The building would be located adjacent to an existing and aging stalls building, near to the existing grandstand and track facilities at the harness racing track.

The Site

The site is known as Lot 10 DP 1022204, Racecourse Avenue, Menangle Park and is located to the west of the Menangle Park township. The site is bounded to the east by the Main Southern Railway and to the west by the Nepean River. To the north of the site is property under the control of Landcom, known as the National Equestrian Centre and to the south is land owned by Council. The subject property is owned by the NSW Harness Racing Club Limited. The site has an area of approximately 106.1 hectares and is accessed via an existing road that runs parallel to Racecourse Road on the eastern side of the Main Southern Railway. The site is accessed via a single point, under an elevated railway bridge to the south west of the Menangle Park village, which also serves as a means to direct overland flow waters during periods of flooding. The property's entrance road is sealed to the existing stables area and undercover car parking area, which was previously used for the Menangle Markets on Sundays and Campbelltown Show around Easter each year. Existing structures on the property include a large covered area, used for car parking during harness racing meetings; existing grandstand buildings; race day stalls for horse preparation; and associated small shedding. The 1,400 metre prepared gravel track is located to the west of grandstand buildings and a training track is located in the south east corner of the site. The property also contains a dwelling to the north and a small airstrip used by model aircraft enthusiasts located in its north western corner. Sand extraction has occurred on the site since the mid 1980s, generally along the Nepean River to the west of the existing track and facilities. The extraction has resulted in a reduction in ground levels along the western portion of the site of between 3 and 6 metres in some parts (compared to the natural ground level on which the existing track/facilities are located). Regular harness race meetings are held at the site, particularly following the closure and sale of Harold Park Paceway at Forest Lodge (Glebe). Tabcorp Park Menangle, as the site is commercially known, is now the premier harness racing venue in Sydney, in terms of its on and off-track facilities, the number of meetings and it is also the headquarters of the NSW Harness Racing Club.

The Proposal

The development application includes the following works: Construction of a new building containing 107 horse stalls, horse washing

areas, driver/trainer amenities, veterinary assessment areas and overhead walkways which would allow track visitors to view the horses from above prior to racing;

Construction of a new harness racing supplies store, including equipment fitting

area;

Construction of a new parade ring where horses are lead for display

immediately prior to racing; Landscaping and tree planting around the new building and parade ring; and Site works including roof/surface water capture infrastructure, sewage capture

and treatment infrastructure, roadways (vehicle and horse) and 8 car spaces The horse stall building, which is the major component of the development, would allow for public access to the animals prior to racing. The increased level of access is a favoured option for many visitors as they are able to personally view the demeanour and physical condition of the racing animals prior to them entering the track. Such viewing areas are commonplace throughout Asia and are becoming more common at Australian horse racing venues. The building would feature a small elevator to allow for equitable access to the upper viewing platform inside the building. The horse stall building would be finished in an attractive array of materials and has a design that complements its equine-related purpose – with a high centre roofline and large gables at each end. The varying depth of roof panelling also provides an opportunity for the integration of ventilation louvring, which would assist in keeping the building near the desired temperature. The building would be approximately 96.5 metres in length and 50 metres in width, bringing the floor area (at ground level) to approximately 4,800 square metres. 1. Vision Campbelltown 2025 - Looking Forward ‘Campbelltown 2025 Looking Forward’ is a statement of broad town planning intent for the longer term future of the City of Campbelltown that:

Responds to what Council understands people want the City of Campbelltown to look, feel and function like;

Recognises likely future government policies and social and

economic trends; and Sets down the foundations for a new town plan that will help

achieve that future. The document establishes a set of strategic directions to guide decision making and development outcomes. These directions are broad in nature and form a prelude to a new statutory town plan for the City. The strategic directions relevant to this application are:

Growing the Regional City,

Building and maintaining quality public infrastructure;

Building a distinctive Campbelltown sense of place; and Creating employment and entrepreneurial opportunities.

The proposed development has been considered in accordance with these strategies and is consistent with these directions. Further to Campbelltown 2025 - Looking Forward, Council has undertaken significant investigations relating to the Menangle Park Urban Release Area. This work suggests that there may be potential for approximately 3,500 residential allotments, although this figure is subject to further refinement. 2. Planning Provisions The development has been assessed in accordance with the matters for consideration under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. Section 79C(1)(a) requires Council to consider the provisions of relevant environmental planning instruments and development control plans. The relevant planning instruments are discussed below. Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 20 - Hawkesbury-Nepean River (No. 2

1997) Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 20 - Hawkesbury-Nepean River (No. 2 1997) (SREP 20) applies to the site. The Plan aims to "to protect the environment of the Hawkesbury-Nepean River system by ensuring that the impacts of future land uses are considered in a regional context". Part 3, Clause 11 of SREP 20 contains development controls for certain land uses occurring on land to which the Plan applies. The application is consistent with one of the land uses, which requires Council's consent in order to occur. It is detailed in the extract below:

(14) Recreational facilities Definition: Development for the purpose of a building, work or place used (whether or not for commercial gain) for sporting activities, recreation or leisure activities, being a building, work or place that is situated within the river or on land:

(a) that adjoins the river or a tributary of the river, or (b) that is flood prone land.

Consent required.

The Plan lists several objectives and policy directions for matters such as water quality, catchment management, flora and fauna management and riverine scenic quality. The development is not likely to affect the matters detailed for further policy and strategic planning under the SREP due to its nature and size.

The proposal is consistent with the controls detailed in the Plan and its objectives for development in the vicinity of the Hawkesbury-Nepean system. Interim Development Order No. 15 The subject property is within land affected by the provisions of Interim Development Order No. 15 (IDO 15). Under IDO 15, the site is zoned 1 - Non Urban (40 hectare minimum). Under Clause 4 of the IDO the development of the site as proposed is not specifically prohibited, and is therefore permissible with Council's consent. Several additional clauses of the IDO relate to the application. They are discussed below. Clause 6 Clause 6(a) requires Council to take into consideration the probable aesthetic appearance of a development when it is viewed from a waterway, main road, railway or public reserve. The subject site is adjacent to the Nepean River and the Main Southern Railway. The development would be screened from the River, given the variations in ground level and water level as well as the existing riparian vegetation present along the majority of the property's western boundary, as well as the track and grandstands. The proposed building and associated works would be visible from the Main Southern Rail Line, which is located a short distance away. The appearance of the new development is not considered to be out of character with the existing structures at the site and features an attractive material and colour palette. The development is not considered to pose a loss of aesthetic appeal from relevant vantage points of the Nepean River or Main Southern Railway. Clause 6(c) requires Council to consider whether:

(i) adequate areas are provided on site for the parking of vehicles, (ii) adequate vehicular entry and exit points are provided to ensure that

persons or vehicles accessing the site are not endangered, and (iii) adequate space has been provided on site for the loading and unloading

of vehicles. The horse stall building and associated works are not considered likely to significantly increase the amount of visitors to the site, over and above that number which presently attend. In considering recent applications at the site (such as the 2006 track extension and more recent track lighting and grandstand upgrade proposals), Council’s staff have assessed the development’s cumulative impact, in terms of traffic and access. To this end, it is considered that vehicles relating to the site’s use as a harness racing facility could be accommodated on the site, with horse floats parked around the existing stalls to the north of the track.

Further, Council’s Property Services staff are presently in continued negotiation with the NSW Harness Racing Club to secure a secondary access to the site (as required by Council’s development consent for the extended track in 2006). The secondary access point would be provided across land presently owned by Council to the south of Tabcorp Park Menangle, and would access Menangle Road near the Nepean River overbridge on the border with Wollondilly Shire Council. Clause 13 Clause 13 relates to tree preservation on land subject to the provisions of IDO 15. The development requires the removal of three existing trees on the site, which are identified on the site plan (Attachment 3). The trees are not considered to be significant native vegetation given their minimal contribution to landscape character, flora diversity and wildlife corridor potential. The application does not propose to remove vegetation from the two large remnant stands currently present on the site. Clause 19 Clause 19 relates to the protection of environmental heritage. Further discussion of the site's heritage significance is contained within the sections of the report discussing Campbelltown Local Environmental Plan No. 193 and Development Control Plan No. 83 - Heritage Policy. Briefly, the heritage listing of the site relates to the entry structure adjacent to Menangle Park Station, which is not affected by the subject application. The remainder of the structures on the site have been constructed in the last 30 years. The site was used during World War II as a campsite for German Australians, the army and air force. Prior to that it had been used as a horse racing track as early as 1914. The Preliminary Menangle Park LES has identified certain parts of the site as having potential heritage significance, however, these areas are not affected by the application to extend the existing paceway track. Given this discussion, the application is considered to be compliant with the relevant standards contained within IDO 15 and is therefore a permissible development with Council's consent. Campbelltown Local Environmental Plan No. 193 Campbelltown Local Environmental Plan No. 193 (CLEP 193) applies to the site as "Menangle Park Paceway" Lot 3 DP 593211 (now part of Lot 10 DP 1022204), Racecourse Avenue, Menangle Park is listed as an item of environmental heritage, with local significance. The exact reason for the listing of the site as a whole is not documented, however, the listing is most likely to relate to the site's use as a recreation and community meeting place for many years, its use during World War II as an army and air force training and storage facility and the gate house/entry building that exists on the site adjacent to Menangle Park railway station.

The gate structure would be utilised as an integral part of a new building recently approved for the construction of permanent offices and meeting space on the track site. The gate structure is to be restored and maintained as a feature of the new office building and would maintain its ongoing visual link to nearby Menangle Park railway station. Notwithstanding, the works proposed in the subject application do not affect the entry structure or its setting due to their separation distance and would complement the new office building in terms of materials and finishes. The listing of the site due to its cultural significance as a meeting place for the community is not likely to be significantly altered as a result of the application. The proposal is likely to further enhance the site’s amenity for visitors, staff and the animals.. Campbelltown (Sustainable City) Development Control Plan Campbelltown (Sustainable City) Development Control Plan (SCDCP) applies to the development site and type. The relevant general provisions of Part 2 of the Plan, applying to all types of development and the requirements of Part 5 – Commercial Development, have been considered and are discussed as follows: Part 2 – Requirements applying to all types of development 2.3 Views and Vistas The Plan requires that development appropriately responds to important views to certain land features within the City. Of particular relevance to this application is the SCDCP's mention of the Nepean River corridor as being of visual and environmental significance. As detailed in the discussion of IDO 15, the new building would not be visible from the Nepean River owing to the difference in ground and river levels, as well as the large intact riparian vegetation corridor that acts as a buffer between the River and development area of the site. 2.5 Flora, Fauna and Weed Management The development site has largely been cleared of vegetation. According to the plans submitted with the application, approximately three trees would be removed as part of the development, although as qualified previously, they are not considered to be significant as a wildlife corridor or for biodiversity protection in the immediate vicinity. Fauna species are not likely to be impacted by the development. Additional tree planting and landscaping would be provided around the finished building in accordance with the submitted landscaping plan, found at Attachment 6 to this report. 2.6 Erosion and Sediment Control A detailed sediment and erosion control plan would be required to be submitted to Council prior to work commencing on site should development consent be granted. An appropriate recommended condition of consent is included in Attachment 1 to ensure that sediment does not leave the site and enter the Nepean River or road network during construction and operation of the facility.

2.7 Cut and Fill The building would be constructed on an area that is relatively flat, meaning that only minor cutting and filling of the site would be required. A discussion on the building’s proposed floor levels as they relate to flooding of the site is provided later in this report. 2.10 Water Cycle Management The application proposes an extensive installation of underground water capture and storage devices in the immediate vicinity of the new building. Captured water would be utilised on the site for landscaping irrigation, horse washing and track watering purposes. 2.13 Risk Management The SCDCP requires Council to consider several items relating to the management of potential risks at a development site, including contaminated land, salinity, bushfire and mine subsidence. The land is classified as being bushfire prone, however no habitable buildings are proposed and the proposed development is not located within established fire prone or buffer areas. The proposal was considered at the Mine Subsidence Board’s meeting held in Newcastle on 28 September 2011. The Board provided its conditional approval of the proposal on 30 September 2011. The Board’s requirements have been included as appropriate in the list of recommended conditions of consent in Attachment 1 to this report. Part 5 – Commercial Development Relevant portions of the SC DCP’s Part 5 are discussed below: 5.3.1 Building Form and Character The SC DCP requires that large buildings incorporate architectural features to minimise the appearance of their mass and scale and also addresses other matters to increase a building’s visual appeal and functionality. The development is considered to respond favourably to the SCDCP’s requirements. It contains an interesting palette of materials, finishes and colours and relates sympathetically to existing “horse related” structure on the property. The building has been designed to maximise passive ventilation and is of a scale that complements the site’s existing and likely future development. The building has been designed to allow access for those with disabilities, via ramps and a small elevator that would allow less mobile people to access the upper internal viewing platform.

5.4.1 Car Parking The SCDCP contains controls regarding land use/building type and the number of car spaces that should be provided on a site. In this instance, the most applicable development type would be an ‘indoor recreation facility’, which requires one car parking space for every 25 square metres of floor area. Having regard to the building and its intended use (to complement the existing track and facilities – rather than being a draw card in its own right), the size of the site and the existing car parking facilities provided therein, the proposal is considered to be compliant with Council’s controls. Several major events (with in excess of 10,000 visitors) have been held at the site since the completion of the enlarged track’s construction in 2008. The applicant has previously liased with the Local Area Command (Highway Patrol) and Council, following which, a car park entry and exit strategy has been developed and successfully implemented. Sufficient on site car parking has been provided by the applicants at these past events. Council has not previously or since received any written complaints regarding the provision of car parking at the site. The proposal is not considered likely to significantly increase traffic attending the site, above that which presently attends the regular (and special) race meetings being held. The Menangle Park Draft Transport Management and Accessibility Plan, prepared as part of Council and the State Government’s ongoing assessment of future land uses in the Menangle Park area, has considered the potential levels of traffic generated by the track activities and has been informed by track management with regard to the extent of future development plans at the site. Further to the above, the potential traffic impact generated by the racing activities was considered as part of a development application to install floodlighting, as the erection/installation of floodlighting, was considered likely to both increase the frequency of meetings and the number of people attending. The traffic impact of the existing development is considered to be within environmental tolerances and as mentioned previously, the proposed horse stall building and surrounding works are not likely to increase traffic accessing the site. The intent of the works proposed are to provide "world class" facilities for owners, drivers, trainers and the horses involved in the sport of harness racing. The development proposal is not responding to a need to improve/expand the facilities for the purpose of accepting larger crowds or patrons to the race fixtures. In this regard, despite the SCDCP requiring additional parking for a development of this size, in the circumstances of the case and when considering the specialist nature of the development and the low risk in terms of any future potential change in use at the site that may have a greater need for parking, neither the shop nor the stabling facilities are expected to generate the need for parking significantly beyond that which is proposed with this application. Notwithstanding, with any future application that may intensify patronage at the site including the extension or upgrade of facilities for members, employees or other visitors, the need for additional parking would be assessed at that time.

Development Control Plan No. 83 - Heritage Policy Due to the listing of the site as an item of environmental heritage, Development Control Plan No. 83 - Heritage Policy (DCP 83) applies to the development. DCP 83 contains requirements for development on or adjacent to heritage items. The heritage significance of the site has been discussed in earlier sections of the report and the subject development is not considered to adversely affect that significance. 3. Planning Assessment Environmental (Natural and Built) Impacts Section 79C(1)(b) requires Council to consider the likely impact that the development would have on the natural and built environment, as well as its potential social and economic impacts. Flooding The development site is located on flood liable land. As part of Council’s detailed assessment of the track extension application in 2006, significant flood modelling was undertaken for the track site and surrounding areas in order to gauge the impacts (if any) of that development. More recently, further flood investigation work has been undertaken as part of the range of studies forming part of the Menangle Park urban release area proposal. The proposed building has a floor height of 76.12 metres AHD, which is below the current model’s predicted 1% annual exceedence probability flood height (ie. a 1 in 100 year). The building would be subject to inundation by water during a flood events up to 5% annual exceedence probability (ie. a 1 in 20 year flood). The applicant and harness racing club are fully aware of this inundation potential and have noted that the building is designed to allow for water to flow through it during inundation. The building would be used for race day stabling of horses and not used to house horses on a permanent basis, meaning that it would be highly unlikely for people, horses or other valuable equipment being on site at the time of a flood as the track would be closed. A recommended condition of consent requires that the building’s sewage reticulation system be designed to withstand flooding. This may include the provision of valves and/or solenoid actuators designed to shut off the waste water treatment system in the event of a flood so that flood waters do not enter the wastewater holding tanks. This would prevent the holding tanks from overfilling and surcharging in a flood, as such, preventing effluent from entering the adjacent stormwater system. Surface Water At present, an open drain runs under the Main Southern Railway and traverses TabCorp Park Menangle in about the location of the proposed stalls building. The drain serves to remove surface water from the eastern side of the railway, including the Menangle Park township and its roads. The water travels via an open swale type drain through the development site and onto land nearby, ultimately making its way to the Nepean River.

As part of the development proposal, the applicant has noted that the drain would need to be relocated in order to ensure that surface water contained therein would not enter the new building. An indicative travel path for the new drain has been illustrated on the submitted site plan (Attachment 3). Further detailed design work would need to be undertaken prior to any construction work commencing. The detailed work will also need to consider the drain and its sizing having regard to proposed future redevelopment of the Menangle Park township. The drain is not presently protected by an easement, which would also need to be addressed upon settlement of a new location. A recommended condition of development consent requires this easement to be created upon completion of the realigned drain. Other Impacts Other impacts of the development are considered to be positive, including the social and economic impact of the development. The horse stalls and associated works would further enhance the site’s position as the premier facility of its type in NSW and would assist in ensuring its long term viability. Future expansion of the site in terms of crowd capacity, grandstand alterations/additions and club facilities have not been detailed in this application and would be subject to further planning by the Harness Racing Club and consultation with Council and as well, would be subject to further development applications and assessment. Suitability of the Site Section 79C(1)(c) of the Act requires Council to consider the suitability of the site for the development. The site presently contains existing facilities and infrastructure associated with the harness racing industry and has been an integral part of the Menangle Park village for over 50 years. Access to the site is provided via an established entry and exit point. A secondary access point is proposed to the south of the development site, which would reduce the need for general traffic to access the site through the existing point of access and through the Menangle Park village, and reduce the overall traffic impact on the local road network. This would be particularly so during major racing events. This alternate access point is the subject of ongoing negotiations and assessment. The development would not cause the destruction of significant native vegetation, loss of heritage significance of the site nor significantly impact the drainage and flooding regime of the locality. Works proposed on the land in order to control water flows emanating from the Menangle Park township have been proposed as part of the application.

Given the site's history of use for the purpose proposed in the application and its limited environmental impact, the site is considered to be suitable for the development. 4. Public Participation Submissions Section 79C(1)(d) of the Act requires Council to consider submissions made by the public or other agencies to the application. The application was initially notified to 30 surrounding land owners for a period of 14 days between 16 and 30 September 2011. During the exhibition period one submission was received. The submission was not an objection to the proposal, however, the submission (prepared by Landcom) did note the drainage issue discussed previously in this report. The drainage swale is a critical component of future planning for proposed urban land release in the district as it would provide an avenue for the capture, treatment and disposal (transfer) of surface water. The submission requests that Council ensure that any relocated and reconstructed drain provides for flows identified in a report prepared in 2010 as part of the release area investigations, as part of the ongoing urban release planning. A recommended condition of consent requires that the drainage swale be designed in accordance with current modelling undertaken for the affected catchment, in consideration of its future development (and surface water generation) potential. The Public Interest Section 79C(1)(e) of the Act requires Council to consider the public interest when determining an application. The public interest is an overarching assessment of the benefits or otherwise that a development may have for the immediate area and/or a community in general. Having regard to the development’s compliance with relevant planning controls, its minimal impact on the environment and potential to further enhance one of the City’s key recreation facilities, its approval is considered to be in the public interest. 5. Conclusion A development application has been received for the construction of a horse stall building, a parade ring, a harness racing supplies store, landscaping and other associated site works at Lot 10 DP 1022204, Racecourse Avenue, Menangle Park. The building would be used to house and prepare horses during race meetings and would also allow for track visitors to view the animals. The building also contains amenities for sulky drivers and trainers as well as veterinary quarters. The development would add another element to the on track experience for visitors to the site. The building’s appearance is considered to be of a high architectural value, noting the various materials and finishes proposed and its complementary nature to existing buildings on the site.

The proposal has been assessed against the matters for consideration under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and is not considered likely to detrimentally affect the environment or be outside the public interest.

Officer's Recommendation

That development application 1612/2011/DA-C for the construction of a horse stalls building, harness racing supplies store, a parade ring, landscaping and other site works at Lot 10 DP 1022204, Racecourse Road, Menangle Park be approved subject to the conditions listed in Attachment 1. Committee’s Recommendation: (Bourke/Oates) That the Officer's Recommendation be adopted. CARRIED Voting for the Committee's Recommendation were Councillors: Bourke, Greiss, Hawker, Kolkman, Oates and Thompson. Voting against the Committee's Recommendation: Nil Council Meeting 13 December 2011 (Kolkman/Matheson) That the Officer's Recommendation be adopted. Council Resolution Minute Number 269 That the Officer's Recommendation be adopted. Voting for the Council Resolution were Councillors: Borg, Bourke, Chanthivong, Dobson, Glynn, Greiss, Hawker, Kolkman, Lake, Matheson, Oates, Rowell, Rule, Thomas and Thompson. Voting against the Council Resolution: nil.

ATTACHMENT 1 Recommended Conditions of Consent GENERAL CONDITIONS The following conditions have been applied to ensure that the use of the land and/or building is carried out in such a manner that is consistent with the aims and objectives of the planning instrument affecting the land. For the purpose of these conditions, the term ‘applicant’ means any person who has the authority to act on or benefit of the development consent. 1. Approved Development

The development shall take place in accordance with the approved development plans containing Council’s approved development stamp and all associated documentation submitted with the application, except as modified in red by Council and/or any conditions of this consent.

2. Building Code of Australia

All building work must be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia. In this clause, a reference to the Building Code of Australia is a reference to that Code as in force on the date the application for the relevant construction certificate is made.

3. External Finishes

The external finishes shall be in accordance with the approved plans and the schedule of finishes submitted with this application. Any proposed alterations to these finishes are considered to be a modification to the development consent and require separate approval by Council.

4. Advertising Signs – Separate DA Required

This consent does not permit the erection or display of any advertising signs. Most advertising signs or structures require development consent. You should make separate enquiries with Council prior to erecting or displaying any advertising or signage.

5. Rain Water Tank(s)

Rain water tank/s shall be installed on site for the collection and storage of stormwater for irrigation and reuse purposes (eg the flushing of toilets), in accordance with the approved plans.

6. Construction Certificate

Prior to the commencement of any works that require a construction certificate: a. The applicant shall obtain a construction certificate for the particular

works; b. The applicant shall appoint a principal certifying authority; and c. The private certifying authority shall notify Council of their appointment no

less than two (2) days prior to the commencement of any works

7. Landscaping

The provision and maintenance of landscaping shall be in accordance with the approved landscape plan containing Council’s approved development stamp including the engagement of a suitably qualified landscape consultant/ contractor for landscaping works. The landscape design shall incorporate a significant portion of native, low water demand plants.

8. Engineering Design Works

The design of all engineering works shall be carried out in accordance with the requirements set out in the Campbelltown (Sustainable City) DCP 2009 - Volumes 1 and 2.

PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE The following conditions of consent must be complied with prior to the issue of a construction certificate by either Campbelltown City Council or an accredited certifier. All necessary information to comply with the following conditions of consent must be submitted with the application for a construction certificate. 9. Flood Preparation Plan

Prior to Council or an accredited certifier issuing a construction certificate for the development, the applicant shall prepare and submit a “flood preparation plan” to Council for its written approval. The plan shall detail the management of the development site upon receipt of advice from Council or another Government agency that flooding of the subject land may occur. The plan shall include (but is not limited to) the following information: Evacuation procedures for staff, visitors, livestock and sensitive

equipment Preparation of the site’s sewage treatment system for inundation,

including the isolation of underground tanks by way of automatic valves or solenoid actuators to ensure flood waters do not enter sewage holding/treatment tanks

Preparation of the site’s rainwater capture and storage system for

inundation, including the isolation of underground tanks by way of automatic valves or solenoid actuators to ensure flood waters do not enter storage tanks

Security of the horse stalls building during the flood event.

10. Electricity and Water Utility Services

Prior to Council or an accredited certifier issuing a construction certificate, the applicant shall submit written evidence of the following service provider requirements: a. Endeavour Energy - A letter of consent demonstrating that satisfactory

arrangements have been made to service the proposed development. b. Sydney Water - The submission of written evidence that discussions

have taken place in regards to the provision of potable water to the development.

11. On-site Waste Water Treatment

Prior to Council or an accredited certifier issuing a construction certificate, the applicant shall prepare and submit to Council for its written approval a detailed waste water treatment plan for the development. The plan shall detail any soil testing, system design and sizing, flood protection and effluent disposal calculations undertaken as part of its design. Upon receipt of Council’s approval for the system’s design, the applicant shall submit an application pursuant to the Local Government Act 1993 for the system’s installation and operation.

12. Telecommunications Utility Services

Prior to Council or an accredited certifier issuing a construction certificate, the applicant shall submit written evidence demonstrating that satisfactory arrangements have been made with a telecommunications carrier to service the proposed development.

13. Waste Management Plan

Prior to Council or an accredited certifier issuing a construction certificate, the relevant provisions of Council’s Waste Management Plan is to be completed to the satisfaction of Council.

14. Stormwater Management Plan (Development)

Prior to Council or an accredited certifier issuing a construction certificate, a plan indicating all engineering details and calculations relevant to site regrading and the collection and disposal of stormwater from the site, building/s and adjacent catchment, shall be submitted to Council for its written approval. The plan shall be prepared in consultation with Council and Landcom and shall encompass planning/modelling work undertaken to date in regards to future requirements for surface water discharge across the site following urbanisation of the Menangle Park township. The proposal shall comply with the Campbelltown (Sustainable City) DCP 2009 - Volumes 1 and 2 (as amended).

15. Section 94A Developer Contribution - Community Facilities and Services Prior to Council or an accredited certifier issuing a Complying Development Certificate or a Construction Certificate (or where a Construction Certificate is not required, a Subdivision Certificate), the applicant shall provide a receipt for the payment to Council of a community facilities and services contribution in accordance with the provisions of the Campbelltown City Council Section 94A Development Contributions Plan. For the purposes of calculating the required S94A contribution, where the value of the total development cost exceeds $100,000, the applicant is required to include with the application for the respective certificate, a report setting out a cost estimate of the proposed development in accordance with the following: where the value of the proposed development is greater than $100,000

but less than $500,000, provide a Cost Summary Report by a person who, in the opinion of the Council, is suitably qualified to provide a Cost Summary Report (Cost Summary Report Template 1). All Cost Summaries will be subject to indexation on a quarterly basis relative to the Consumer Price Index - All Groups (Sydney) where the contribution amount will be based on the indexed value of the development applicable at the time of payment; or

where the value of the proposed development is $500,000 or more,

provide a detailed development cost report completed by a quantity surveyor who is a registered member of the Australian Institute of Quantity Surveyors (Quantity Surveyors Estimate Report Template 2). Payment of contribution fees will not be accepted unless the amount being paid is based on a Quantity Surveyors Estimate Report (QS Report) that has been issued within 90 days of the date of payment. Where the QS Report is older than 90 days, the applicant shall provide an updated QS Report that has been indexed in accordance with clause 25J(4) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 to ensure quarterly variations in the Consumer Price Index All Group Index Number for Sydney have been incorporated in the updated QS Report.

Copies of the Cost Summary Report - Template 1 and the Quantity Surveyors Estimate Report - Template 2 are located under "Developer Contributions" on Council's web site (www.campbelltown.nsw.gov.au) or can be collected from Council's Planning and Environment Division during normal business hours. On calculation of the applicable contributions, all amounts payable will be confirmed by Council in writing. Payment of Section 94A Developer Contributions will only be accepted by way of Cash, Credit Card or Bank Cheque issued by an Australian bank. Payment by any other means will not be accepted unless otherwise approved in writing by Council. Note: This condition is only applicable where the total development value exceeds $100,000.

16. Design for Access and Mobility

Prior to Council or an accredited certifier issuing a Construction Certificate, the applicant shall demonstrate by way of detailed design, compliance with the relevant access requirements of the BCA and AS 1428 – Design for Access and Mobility.

PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORKS The following conditions of consent have been imposed to ensure that the administration and amenities relating to the proposed development comply with all relevant requirements. These conditions are to be complied with prior to the commencement of any works on site. 17. Erosion and Sediment Control

Prior to the commencement of any works on the land, adequate/approved erosion and sediment control measures shall be fully installed/implemented.

18. Erection of Construction Sign

Prior to the commencement of any works on the land, a sign/s must be erected in a prominent position on the site: a. Showing the name of the principal contractor (if any) for any building

work and a telephone number on which that person may be contacted outside working hours;

b. Stating that unauthorised entry to the work site is prohibited; and c. Pollution warning sign promoting the protection of waterways (issued by

Council with the development consent); d. Stating the approved construction hours in which all works can occur.

e. Showing the name, address and telephone number of the principal

certifying authority for the work. Any such sign/s is to be maintained while the building work, subdivision work or demolition work is being carried out, but must be removed when the work has been completed.

19. Toilet on Construction Site Prior to the commencement of any works on the land, toilet facilities are to be provided, at or in the vicinity of the work site on which work involved in the erection or demolition of a building is being carried out, at the rate of one toilet for every 20 persons or part thereof. Each toilet provided must be a standard flushing toilet and be connected to: a. A public sewer, or b. If connection to a public sewer is not practicable, to an accredited

sewage management facility approved by Council, or c. If connection to a public sewer or an accredited sewage management

facility is not practicable, to some other management facility approved by Council.

20. Trade Waste

Prior to the commencement of any works on the land, a trade waste facility shall be provided on-site to store all waste pending disposal. The facility shall be screened, regularly cleaned and accessible to collection vehicles.

21. Structural Engineer Details Prior to the commencement of any works, the submission to the principal certifying authority of all details prepared by a practicing structural engineer.

22. Hoarding / Fence Prior to the commencement of any works, a hoarding or fence must be erected between the work site and a public place if the work involved in the development is likely to cause pedestrian or vehicular traffic in a public place to be obstructed or rendered inconvenient, or if the building involves the enclosure of a public place in accordance with Work Cover requirements. The work site must be kept lit between sunset and sunrise if it is likely to be hazardous to persons in the public place. A separate land use application under Section 68 of the Local Government Act 1993 shall be submitted to and approved by Council prior to the erection of any hoarding on public land.

DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION The following conditions of consent have been imposed to ensure that the administration and amenities relating to the proposed development comply with all relevant requirements. These conditions are to be complied with during the construction of the development on site. 23. Construction Work Hours

All work on site shall only occur between the following hours: Monday to Friday 7.00am to 6.00pm Saturday 8.00am to 1.00pm Sunday and public holidays No Work.

24. Erosion and Sediment Control

Erosion and sediment control measures shall be provided and maintained throughout the construction period, in accordance with the requirements of the manual – Soils and Construction (2004) (Bluebook), the approved plans, Council specifications and to the satisfaction of the principal certifying authority. The erosion and sedimentation control devices shall remain in place until the site has been stabilised and revegetated. Note: On the spot penalties up to $1,500 will be issued for any non-

compliance with this requirement without any further notification or warning.

25. Work Zones

All loading, unloading and other activities undertaken during construction shall be accommodated on the development site. Where it is not practical to load, unload or undertake specific activities on the site during construction, the provision of a ‘Work Zone’ external to the site may be approved by Council following an application being submitted to Council’s Traffic Unit outlining the proposal for the work zone. The application is required to be made prior to the commencement of any works and is to include a suitable ‘Traffic / Pedestrian Management and Control Plan’ for the area of the work zone that will be affected. All costs of approved traffic / pedestrian control measures, including relevant fees, shall be borne by the applicant.

26. Dust Nuisance

Measures shall be implemented to minimise wind erosion and dust nuisance in accordance with the requirements of the manual – ‘Soils and Construction (2004) (Bluebook). Construction areas shall be treated/ regularly watered to the satisfaction of the principal certifying authority.

27. Completion of Construction Works

Unless otherwise specified in this consent, all construction works associated with the approved development shall be completed within 12 months of the date of the notice of the intention to commence construction works under Section 81A of the Act. In the event that construction works are not continually ongoing, the applicant shall appropriately screen the construction site from public view with architectural devices and landscaping to Council's written satisfaction.

PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF AN OCCUPATION CERTIFICATE The following conditions of consent must be complied with prior to the issue of an occupation certificate by either Campbelltown City Council or an accredited principal certifying authority. All necessary information to comply with the following conditions of consent must be submitted with the application for an occupation certificate. Note: For the purpose of this development consent, any reference to "occupation certificate" shall also be taken to mean "interim occupation certificate". 28. Completion of External Works Onsite

Prior to the principal certifying authority issuing an occupation certificate, all external works, repairs and renovations detailed in the schedule of treatment/finishes, landscaping, driveways, fencing and retaining walls are to be completed to the satisfaction of the principal certifying authority.

29. Structural Engineering Certificate Prior to the principal certifying authority issuing an occupation certificate, the submission of a certificate from a practising structural engineer certifying that the building has been erected in compliance with the approved structural drawings and relevant SAA Codes and is structurally adequate.

30. Easement Prior to the principal certifying authority issuing an occupation certificate, the applicant shall supply proof of registration of an easement to drain water over the relocated/reconstructed drainage channel. The easement shall be made such that the only authority to vary or extinguish the easement is held with Council.

31. Public Utilities Prior to the principal certifying authority issuing an occupation certificate, any adjustments to public utilities, required as a result of the development, shall be completed to the satisfaction of the relevant authority and at the applicant's expense.

32. Registration of Levels

Prior to the principal certifying authority issuing an occupation certificate, a qualified practicing surveyor shall certify the finished floor and finished surface levels of the horse stall building for Council’s records. An electronic copy of this work as executed information shall also be submitted to Council, complying with the following provisions: 1. MGA 94 (Map Grid of Australia 1994) Zone 56 - Coordinate System. 2. DXF and/or MID/MIF file format(s), and 3. Datum to be AHD (Australian Height Datum)

33. Waste Water System

Prior to occupation of the building, the applicant shall obtain approval for the waste water treatment system referred to earlier in this consent.

34. Council Fees and Charges

Prior to the principal certifying authority issuing an occupation certificate, the applicant shall obtain written confirmation from Council that all applicable Council fees and charges associated with the development have been paid in full. Written confirmation will be provided to the applicant following Council's final inspection and satisfactory clearance of the public area adjacent the site.

ADVISORY NOTES The following information is provided for your assistance to ensure compliance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000, other relevant Council Policy/s and other relevant requirements. This information does not form part of the conditions of development consent pursuant to Section 80A of the Act. Advice 1. Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Requirements The Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 requires you to: a. Obtain a construction certificate prior to the commencement of any works.

Enquiries regarding the issue of a construction certificate can be made to Council’s Customer Service Centre on 4645 4000.

b. Nominate a principal certifying authority and notify Council of that appointment

prior to the commencement of any works. c. Give Council at least two days notice prior to the commencement of any works. d. Have mandatory inspections of nominated stages of the construction

inspected.

e. Obtain an occupation certificate before occupying any building or commencing

the use of the land. Advice 2. Inspections – Civil Works Where Council is nominated as the principal certifying authority for civil works, the following stages of construction shall be inspected by Council. a. EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL –

i. Direction/confirmation of required measures. ii. After installation and prior to commencement of earthworks. iii. As necessary until completion of work.

b. STORMWATER PIPES – Laid, jointed and prior to backfill. c DRAINAGE CHANNEL – As required following acceptance of detailed design. d FINAL INSPECTION – All outstanding work. Advice 3. Salinity Please note that Campbelltown is an area of known salinity potential. As such any salinity issues should be addressed as part of the construction certificate application. Further information regarding salinity management is available within Campbelltown (Sustainable City) DCP 2009 - Volumes 1 and 2. Advice 4. Rain Water Tank It is recommended that water collected within any rainwater tank as part of the development be limited to non-potable uses. NSW Health recommends that the use of rainwater tanks for drinking purposes not occur where a reticulated potable water supply is available. Advice 5. Tree Preservation Order To ensure the maintenance and protection of the existing natural environment, you are not permitted to ringbark, cut down, top, lop, remove, wilfully injure or destroy a tree outside three metres of the building envelope unless you have obtained prior written consent from Council. Fines may be imposed if you choose to contravene Council’s Tree Preservation Order. A tree is defined as a perennial plant with self supporting stems that are more than three metres or has a trunk diameter more than 150mm measured one metre above ground level, and excludes any tree declared under the Noxious Weeds Act (NSW). Advice 6. Provision of Equitable Access Nothing in this consent is to be taken to imply that the development meets the requirements of the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (DDA1992) or Disability (Access to Premises – Buildings) Standards 2010 (Premises Standards).

Where a Construction Certificate is required for the approved works, due regard is to be given to the requirements of the Building Code of Australia (BCA) & the Premises Standards. In this regard it is the sole responsibility of the certifier, building developer and building manager to ensure compliance with the Premises Standards. Where no building works are proposed and a Construction Certificate is not required, it is the sole responsibility of the applicant and building owner to ensure compliance with the DDA1992. Advice 7. Smoke Free Environment Act Nothing in this consent is to be taken to imply that the development meets the requirements of the Smoke Free Environment Act 2000 (SFEA2000) or the Smoke Free Environment Regulations 2007 (SFER2007). In the event that the occupier wishes to facilitate smoking within any enclosed public place of the premises (in accordance with clause 6 of the SFER2007), the occupier must first contact NSW Department of Health to ensure that the design and construction of the area proposed to facilitate smoking fully complies with the requirements of the SFEA2000 and the SFER2007. Advice 8. Dial 1100 Before you Dig Underground cable and pipes may exist in the area. In your own interest and for safety, telephone 1100 before excavation or erection of structures. Information on the location of underground pipes and cables can also be obtained by fax on 1300 652 077 or through the following website - www.dialbeforeyoudig.com.au

END OF CONDITIONS

ATTACHMENT 2

ATTACHMENT 3

ATTACHMENT 4

ATTACHMENT 5

ATTACHMENT 6

3.6 Racecourse Avenue, Menangle Park - Construction of landscaping works, drainage and advertising signage

Reporting Officer

Manager Development Services

Attachments

1. Recommended conditions of consent 2. Locality plan 3. Aerial photograph of subject site 4. Proposed landscaping and entry statement plan

Purpose

The purpose of this report is to assist Council in its determination of the subject development application in accordance with the provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. Property Description Road Reserve, Racecourse Avenue, Menangle Park

Application No 1785/2011/DA-CW

Applicant Michael Brown Planning Strategies

Owner Campbelltown City Council

Statutory Provisions State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 64 – Advertising and Signage

Interim Development Order No. 15

Campbelltown (Sustainable City) Development Control Plan (2009)

Development Control Plan No. 99 – Advertising Signs

Other Provisions Campbelltown 2025 - Looking Forward

Date Received 21 September 2011

Report

Introduction A development application has been received to undertake landscaping and drainage works within Council’s road reserve at Racecourse Avenue, Menangle Park. The application also provides for the construction of a sign to advertise the location of “Tabcorp Park Menangle” as the Menangle Park Paceway is now known.

The Site

The site is located within the road reserve for Racecourse Avenue, Menangle Park and is directly adjacent to the Main Southern Railway overpass that connects “Tabcorp Park Menangle” (Tabcorp Park) to Council’s road network. Attachment 3 to this report is an aerial photograph which illustrates the site of the proposed works. The site presently contains a sealed road, a sand/gravel horse-training track, grassed road verges and services such as surface drainage and overhead powerlines. The site is owned by Campbelltown City Council and owners consent has been received in respect of lodgement of the development application. The Proposal The application contains several components, which are listed in detail below: Construction of feature road paving at the entry to Tabcorp Park – the proposal

includes replacement of the existing bitumen seal with a ‘cobblestone’ effect paving which would serve to delineate the portion of Racecourse Avenue that enters the paceway site and that which continues to the north for use by local residents

Placement of bollards along the road edge – decorative timber bollards would

be placed around the road seal edge to increase the site’s aesthetic appeal, while also providing for a visual buffer between the sealed road and the existing sand/gravel horse training track which is contained within the road reserve

Formalisation of the existing sand/gravel training track – a sand/gravel training

track has been located in the road reserve area for several years and is used by local trainers running horses in the local area. The track is located along the entire length of Racecourse Avenue then continues into Fitzpatrick Street and Cummins Road. The sand/gravel track better mimics racing surfaces more so than bitumen or grass, provides an all weather training opportunity and reduces the potential for injury to the animals

Construction of concrete ‘traffic calming’ devices – the application proposes the

construction of concrete ‘blisters’ and a median island within the intersection. The concrete structures would serve to provide a better delineation of the intersection and would also slow vehicles entering and leaving the Tabcorp Park site

Construction of concrete kerbing – the application proposes the construction of

concrete kerbing along the works area to provide for a better drainage solution to the present and also to formalise the road seal in Racecourse Avenue

Tree planting – the proposal includes planting of selected tree species along

the road reserve to increase the intersection’s aesthetic appeal. Kikuyu lawns would also be established.

Drainage – the proposal allows for the placement of underground piping to

drain water away from the road reserve. At present, surface water leaves Racecourse Avenue via the grass verge and generally heads south to an adjoining property (visible in the dark grassed area on the southern side of the road in Attachment 3)

Entry gate – a feature wrought iron entry gate is proposed at the eastern edge

of the rail overpass Construction of a sign – the application also includes the construction of a large

advertising sign, which identifies the site as the entry to Tabcorp Park Menangle. The sign would measure approximately nine metres long and 2.7 metres high and would be located adjacent to the elevated rail overpass at the site’s entry.

Attachment 4 of this report contains plans and perspectives of the proposed works. Council’s Manager Property Services has provided owner’s consent for the application to be made. The consent was provided on the basis that should development consent be granted, the applicant shall enter into a ‘deed of agreement’ regarding ongoing access to Council’s road reserve for construction and maintenance purposes. The deed would also require that maintenance of the landscape works be undertaken at no cost to Council. 1. Vision Campbelltown 2025 - Looking Forward ‘Campbelltown 2025 Looking Forward’ is a statement of broad town planning intent for the longer term future of the City of Campbelltown that:

Responds to what Council understands people want the City of Campbelltown to look, feel and function like

Recognises likely future government policies and social and

economic trends Sets down the foundations for a new town plan that will help

achieve that future. The document establishes a set of strategic directions to guide decision making and development outcomes. These directions are broad in nature and form a prelude to a new statutory town plan for the City. The strategic directions relevant to this application are:

Growing the Regional City

Building and maintaining quality public infrastructure Building a distinctive Campbelltown sense of place Creating employment and entrepreneurial opportunities.

The proposed development has been considered in accordance with these strategies and is consistent with these directions. Further to Campbelltown 2025 - Looking Forward, Council has recently undertaken investigations relating to the Menangle Park Release Area. These investigations suggest that there may be potential for in the order of 3,500 residential allotments. Although this figure is subject to further refinement once a final option has been endorsed, and the draft local environmental plan finalised. The adjoining harness racing site has been identified as rural/recreation under the currently preferred 'moderate' development option contained within the preliminary LES. The previously approved extension and operation of the harness racing facility at the site is complementary to this future land use option. Having regard to the above comments, the proposal is considered to be complementary to the Vision document. 2. Planning Provisions The development has been assessed in accordance with the matters for consideration under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. Section 79C(1)(a) requires Council to consider the provisions of relevant environmental planning instruments and development control plans. The relevant planning instruments are discussed below. State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 Clause 85 of State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 (“the Infrastructure SEPP”) requires that Council forward applications for development immediately adjacent to rail reserves to the applicable authority for comment. In this instance, the works (particularly the advertising sign, drain and metal gate) would be located in close proximity to the rail reserve which contains the rail overpass. The applicable authority is the Australian Rail and Track Corporation, which is a national corporation responsible for the provision of access to rail track and its maintenance. Pursuant to the Infrastructure SEPP, Council forwarded the proposal to the ARTC’s Sydney office. The SEPP provides that should no response be received within 21 days of the letter being sent, it can be assumed that there is no objection to the proposal. As no response has been received from the ARTC, Council may determine the application. Accordingly, the application is considered to be complementary to the relevant requirements of the Infrastructure SEPP.

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 64 – Advertising and Signage State Environmental Planning Policy No. 64 – Advertising and Signage (SEPP 64) applies to the development. The SEPP requires that development consent be provided by Council prior to the placement of an advertising sign on the subject land. Clause 15 of the Plan requires that advertising signs erected on rural or non-urban zoned land receive development consent. Further, the Clause also requires that signs not be erected unless they relate to an approved use on the subject land or adjacent land. In this case, the proposed sign is located on Council’s road reserve, which is adjacent to the Tabcorp Park site, complying with that requirement of the SEPP. Schedule 1 of SEPP 64 also applies to the development. It contains criteria which must be considered as part of advertising sign assessment. Consideration of relevant parts of the Schedule is below:

1. Is the proposal compatible with the existing or desired future character of the area or locality in which it is proposed to be located?

The proposal is complementary to the proposed character of the area. Menangle Park would be an area undergoing significant change in the next few years during the dual processes of urbanisation and concentration of the NSW Harness Racing industry at the site after the closure of the Harold Park Paceway at Glebe.

2. Does the proposal detract from the amenity or visual quality of any

environmentally sensitive areas, heritage areas, natural or other conservation areas, open space areas, waterways, rural landscapes or residential areas?

The proposed sign would not detrimentally impact on rural landscapes or heritage areas in the vicinity.

3. Does the proposal obscure or compromise important views?

The sign would partially obscure the existing rail overpass earthen embankment, which is not considered to be of high visual merit.

4. Does the proposal dominate the skyline and reduce the quality of

vistas? The sign would be constructed at or just above ground level and would have a maximum height above ground of 2.7 metres. It would not be readily visible aside from in its immediate vicinity and would not have an impact on the nearby skyline.

5. Is the scale, proportion and form of the proposal appropriate for the

streetscape, setting or landscape? The sign would be complementary to the proposed landscaping regime in the vicinity and matches the corporate branding (in terms of logo and colouration) of the adjacent paceway site.

6. Does the proposal contribute to the visual interest of the streetscape, setting or landscape?

The sign would contribute to the streetscape and would provide a ‘modern’ gateway to the paceway site.

7. Does the proposal require ongoing vegetation management?

The sign and the landscaped surrounds would be subject to ongoing maintenance, which is discussed later in this report.

8. Is the proposal compatible with the scale, proportion and other

characteristics of the site or building, or both, on which the proposed signage is to be located?

The sign is considered to be compatible with the proposed landscaping and the height of the existing rail overpass.

9. Does the proposal show innovation and imagination in its

relationship to the site or building, or both? The sign would be incorporated into a significant upgrade of this part of the City, in terms of its functionality and appearance.

10. Would illumination result in unacceptable glare?

The applicant has proposed the inclusion of lights in the ground that would ‘uplight’ the sign from in front. Council has previously resolved to minimise uplighting in rural areas throughout the City in a bid to reduce the impact of urbanisation on the natural environment (including the observation of heavenly bodies by local enthusiasts). In fact, the proposed development control plan which would provide Council’s controls for the urbanisation of Menangle Park will require that no uplighting is used in the area. As such, it is considered appropriate that the applicant amend the proposed lighting for the sign. The required lighting would be located on stalks at the top of the sign, which would then be used to light the sign directly from above. The stalks holding the lights would be finished in a dark colour to match the majority of the sign and this should ensure that the lights recede/blend into the background and should not be particularly visible during the day or night. A recommended condition of consent in Attachment 1 contains this requirement.

11. Would the proposal reduce the safety for any public road? The sign would be placed away from the redesigned intersection and is not considered likely to impact on traffic safety.

12. Would the proposal reduce the safety for pedestrians, particularly children, by obscuring sightlines from public areas?

The sign would be located close to the existing rail track embankment and is not within an area frequented by pedestrians. Having regard to the above assessment and the sign’s relationship to the activity occurring on land adjacent to its location, the proposal is considered to be compliant with SEPP 64. Interim Development Order No. 15 The subject property is within land affected by the provisions of Interim Development Order No. 15 (IDO 15). Under IDO 15, the site is zoned 1 - Non Urban (40 hectare minimum). Clause 16(2) of IDO 15 contains Council’s relevant control for advertising signs. The Clause states:

The Council may consent to the erection of an advertising structure designed to indicate the purpose for which premises are being used only where the Council is satisfied that the sign will not adversely affect the amenity of the locality.

The sign is not strictly located on the premises which it is advertising, noting that the road reserve adjoins the Main Southern Railway and then Tabcorp Park. Notwithstanding, the sign would be located immediately adjacent to the site’s entry and would serve as an identifier for that entry and the use being undertaken on the adjacent land. The sign would become increasingly important as activities at Tabcorp Park increase in the coming years as it becomes the focus for the NSW harness racing industry following the closure of Harold Park. The sign is considered to satisfy the IDO’s requirements and is permissible with Council’s consent at the site. Campbelltown (Sustainable City) Development Control Plan 2009 Campbelltown (Sustainable City) Development Control Plan 2009 (the SC DCP) applies to the development site, although does not provide specific objectives and controls for the type of development subject to this assessment. Notwithstanding, it is considered appropriate to discuss some relevant parts of the SC DCP which apply to all development throughout the City. Section 2.5 of the Plan contains Council’s objectives and controls for landscaping of new development. The Section requires that plant species be chosen by a qualified person and the landscape design shall retain and enhance existing indigenous vegetation where possible.

The proposal includes some significant tree plantings in the immediate vicinity of the proposed road works and advertising sign. A recommended condition of consent requires the applicant’s to consult with Council’s horticulturalist to ensure that species chosen are suitable for planting within a road reserve, noting the proximity of both above and below ground services to the landscaped area. Further, establishment of the landscaping is subject to Council accepting a Deed, which would incorporate a maintenance schedule, which would be reviewed by appropriate staff in due course should Council grant consent for the development to occur. Section 2.7 of the Plan contains Council’s objectives and controls for the management of erosion during construction. A recommended condition of consent requires the installation of sediment control equipment at the site prior to work commencing to ensure that Council’s stormwater capture and disposal system is not compromised during the work. Having regard to the above discussion of relevant portions of the Plan, the proposal is considered to be compliant with the SC DCP. Development Control Plan No. 99 – Advertising Signs Development Control Plan No. 99 – Advertising Signs (DCP 99) applies to the development. The DCP contains Council’s controls for the placement of advertising signs throughout the City. Pursuant to Clause 11(5) of the DCP, the advertising sign is subject to a merit based assessment of its impacts on the surrounding environment. As previously discussed, the sign would form an integral component of other landscaping and road upgrade works in the immediate vicinity. The sign is complementary to the signage strategy being used at the paceway course and is considered to be complementary to the landscaping and other works that would be undertaken in the vicinity. The sign has also demonstrated compliance with relevant State government planning controls and the prevailing deemed environmental planning instrument. Having regard to the above, the sign is considered to be compliant with DCP 99. 3. Planning Assessment Environmental (Natural and Built) Impacts Section 79C(1)(b) requires Council to consider the likely impact that the development would have on the natural and built environment, as well as its potential social and economic impacts. Road Safety Council’s Technical Services (Traffic and Road Design) Unit have reviewed the proposal and have made several recommendations regarding the future detailed design of the works in Council’s road reserve.

The comments relate to sign posting and line marking to assist drivers approaching and leaving the intersection, positioning of the proposed gates and information to be provided with future detailed design prior to commencement of any construction works. The comments have been incorporated into the recommended conditions of consent, located at Attachment 1 to this report. Drainage The site is known to receive surface water from the surrounding catchment during times of flooding/heavy rain. Surface flows/stormwater traverse through the intersection from the upper catchment to the Nepean River. The site is also impacted by water leaving the Nepean River to travel east during high floods. The proposal includes an initial design for drainage at the site, which would capture surface water and direct it to the nearby road reserve, where it ultimately would pass onto the property of an adjoining owner (as occurs now). Under the proposal, existing drainage ‘overflow’ into the neighbouring property would be relocated further west, where an engineer-designed concrete and rock headwall would be provided to allow flows from the road area to be captured and directed to drainage infrastructure installed in the area as part of the paceway track’s extension during 2007 and 2008. The existing overflow location would be removed and a concrete kerb placed in the vicinity to ensure that the impact of the water flow matches that of the existing situation (in fact, it could be argued the impact is lower as water would flow closer to a boundary where it is more “out of the way” than at present). Suitability of the Site Section 79C(1)(c) of the Act requires Council to consider the suitability of the site for the development. Establishment and Maintenance of Landscaping The applicant has included a schedule and location of proposed tree and shrub plantings at the development site. A recommended condition of consent requires that the applicant’s further consult with Council’s horticulturalist in regard to the appropriateness (or otherwise) of the selected species maximising the utilisation of indigenous species, noting their proximity to the proposed concrete kerb and gutter as well as existing overhead powerlines. The landscaping treatment as proposed would require regular maintenance to manage growth and weed control. The NSW Harness Racing Club (owners of Tabcorp Park) would ensure maintenance is undertaken in a timely manner. It is considered important that a maintenance schedule and Deed of Agreement be made to provide certainty for Council and the Harness Racing Club prior to any works being undertaken. A recommended condition of consent requires that such a Deed be in place prior to works commencing. The Deed would include details regarding maintenance of the landscaped areas.

4. The Public Interest Section 79C(1)(e) of the Act requires Council to consider the public interest when determining an application. The public interest is an overarching assessment of the benefits or otherwise that a development may have for the immediate area and/or a community in general. With regard to this application, the proposal is complementary to the current medium to long term planning for development in the Menangle Park district and Tabcorp Park Menangle. The proposal would serve to better identify the entry to one of the City’s premier recreation facilities and may also increase traffic safety at the intersection, especially for visitors to the site, who are unfamiliar with the nature of the entry/exit arrangement. Accordingly, the proposed development is considered to be in the public interest. 5. Conclusion A development application has been received for the construction of road works, landscaping, drainage works and an advertising sign within the Racecourse Avenue road reserve at Menangle Park. The works would be undertaken on Council-owned land at the expense of an adjoining land owner, the NSW Harness Racing Club. The works would provide for an upgrade to the entrance to the Harness Racing Club’s premier track in NSW. The works are likely to improve traffic safety at the site and would also increase its aesthetic qualities. The landscaping would be established and maintained by the Harness Racing Club in accordance with a “Deed of Agreement” which would be prepared and executed prior to works taking place (as per a recommended condition of development consent. The proposal has been assessed against the matters for consideration under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and is not considered likely to detrimentally affect the environment or be outside the public interest.

Officer's Recommendation

That development application 1785/2011/DA-CW for the construction of road works, landscaping, drainage works and an advertising sign within the Racecourse Avenue road reserve at Menangle Park be approved subject to the conditions listed in Attachment 1.

Committee’s Recommendation: (Bourke/Oates) That the Officer's Recommendation be adopted. CARRIED Voting for the Committee's Recommendation were Councillors: Bourke, Greiss, Hawker, Kolkman, Oates and Thompson. Voting against the Committee's Recommendation: nil Council Meeting 13 December 2011 (Kolkman/Matheson) That the Officer's Recommendation be adopted. Council Resolution Minute Number 270 That the Officer's Recommendation be adopted. Voting for the Council Resolution were Councillors: Borg, Bourke, Chanthivong, Dobson, Glynn, Greiss, Hawker, Kolkman, Lake, Matheson, Oates, Rowell, Rule, Thomas and Thompson. Voting against the Council Resolution: nil.

ATTACHMENT 1 Recommended Conditions of Consent GENERAL CONDITIONS The following conditions have been applied to ensure that the use of the land and/or building is carried out in such a manner that is consistent with the aims and objectives of the planning instrument affecting the land. For the purpose of these conditions, the term ‘applicant’ means any person who has the authority to act on or benefit of the development consent. 1. Approved Development

The development shall take place in accordance with the approved development plans containing Council’s approved development stamp and all associated documentation submitted with the application, except as modified in red by Council and/or any conditions of this consent.

2. Amended Plans

The development is to incorporate the following amendments and the amended plans are to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority, for approval, prior to the issuing of a Construction Certificate:

Approved plans to remove reference to “future works”. Approved plans to remove incorrect labelling of Racecourse Avenue as

an “existing and proposed sand track”.

Remove reference to uplights for signage. Lighting to be provided above the sign and aimed to the sign/ground.

3. Tree Planting on Adjoining Land

The three trees (Araucaria heterophylla) proposed to be planted on the privately-owned land adjoining the development site, shall only be established with the written consent of that land’s registered owner(s). This development consent does not constitute approval of the aforementioned planting.

4. Proposed Gates

The proposed gates shall be designed not encroach on or otherwise restrict access for vehicles within the road reserve at any time.

5. Advertising Sign

a. The advertising sign is to be constructed in a safe and secure manner.

b. At no time shall the intensity, period of intermittency and hours of

illumination of the sign impact on the amenity of the neighbourhood or on the vision of drivers on the adjoining road.

c. The sign and its illumination shall not flash, move or display electronic

images. d. The advertising structure shall be maintained in a condition so as to not

become unsightly so as to adversely affect the amenity of the surrounding area.

6. Construction Certificate

Prior to the commencement of any works that require a construction certificate: a. The applicant shall obtain a construction certificate for the particular

works; b. The applicant shall appoint a principal certifying authority; and c. The private certifying authority shall notify Council of their appointment no

less than two days prior to the commencement of any works

PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE The following conditions of consent must be complied with prior to the issue of a construction certificate by either Campbelltown City Council or an accredited certifier. All necessary information to comply with the following conditions of consent must be submitted with the application for a construction certificate. 7. Intersection Construction

Prior to Council or an accredited certifier issuing a construction certificate, the applicant shall submit and receive Council’s written approval of engineering details in relation to the intersection construction described below: The applicant shall carry out design of the intersection to include all necessary road pavement construction, drainage, thermoplastic line marking and signposting, kerb and gutter, splitter islands and medians, landscaping, and the capital cost of street lighting to Endeavour Energy’s requirements. Design shall be in accordance with "Austroads Guide to Traffic Engineering Practice" Part 5, the RTA’s Technical Direction TDT2001/4A (perimeter calming device only), Australian Standard 1742.2 and with the design requirements of the Campbelltown (Sustainable) City DCP 2009 - Volumes 1 and 2 and 'Specification for Construction of Subdivision Road and Drainage Works' (as amended).

8. Traffic Committee

Prior to Council or an accredited certifier issuing a construction certificate, the applicant shall submit plans and obtain approval from Council's Local Traffic Committee for any proposals for the construction of prescribed traffic control devices and traffic control facilities and all associated line marking and/or sign posting.

9. Traffic Control Plans Prior to Council or an accredited certifier issuing a construction certificate, the applicant shall prepare and obtain approval from an accredited person, a Traffic Control Plan (TCP) in accordance with the RTA manual "Traffic Control at Work Sites" and Australian Standard AS 1742.3 (as amended). A copy of the approved TCP shall be kept on site for the duration of the works in accordance with Work Cover Authority requirements. A copy shall be submitted to Council for its records.

10. Stormwater Management Plan (Development) Prior to Council or an accredited certifier issuing a construction certificate, a plan indicating all engineering details and calculations relevant to site regrading and the collection and disposal of stormwater from the site and adjacent catchment, shall be submitted for approval. The new drainage works shall direct flow towards existing subsoil drainage in the vicinity. All proposals shall comply with the Campbelltown (Sustainable City) DCP 2009 - Volumes 1 and 2.

11. Alignment of New Works Prior to Council or an accredited certifier issuing a construction certificate, the applicant shall liaise with Council and the adjoining land owners regarding the alignment and construction of new roads.

12. Work on Public Land Prior to Council or an accredited certifier issuing a construction certificate, the applicant shall obtain written approval from Council for any proposed work on public land. Inspection of this work shall be undertaken by Council at the applicant’s expense and a compliance certificate, approving the works, shall be obtained from Council prior to the principal certifying authority issuing an occupation certificate.

13. Tree Species Selection

Prior to Council or an accredited certifier issuing a construction certificate, the applicant shall liaise with Council’s horticulturalist regarding the specification and selection of trees to be planted within the road reserve. Species selection shall consider the following criteria (as a minimum):

Establishment and maintenance requirements Maximum use of locally indigenous, low water demand species Location of trees and potential for detrimental impact on road and other

service infrastructure. 14. Deed of Agreement

Prior to Council or an accredited certifier issuing a construction certificate, the applicant shall enter into a ‘Deed of Agreement’ with Council which shall detail (as a minimum) the attributable cost of works, ongoing maintenance and access to the site. The Deed shall exempt the Council from maintaining the landscaping, shall require that the landscaping is maintained in good order and state that maintenance and installation of the landscaping shall not cause interference to road traffic or the safety of persons engaged to undertake such works.

The Deed shall also require that Council be indemnified against all claims arising from (but not limited to) an accident or injury or capital damage sustained as a result of the existence of the sign and associated works or during the erection/construction, maintenance or demolition of the sign and associated works.

15. Electricity Utility Services

Prior to Council or an accredited certifier issuing a construction certificate, the applicant shall submit written evidence that Endeavour Energy permits the placement of trees in the road reserve beneath existing overhead powerlines as illustrated on the approved plans.

PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORKS The following conditions of consent have been imposed to ensure that the administration and amenities relating to the proposed development comply with all relevant requirements. These conditions are to be complied with prior to the commencement of any works on site. 16. Erosion and Sediment Control

Prior to the commencement of any works on the land, adequate/approved erosion and sediment control measures shall be fully installed/implemented.

17. Erection of Construction Sign

Prior to the commencement of any works on the land, a sign/s must be erected in a prominent position on the site: a. Showing the name of the principal contractor (if any) for any building

work and a telephone number on which that person may be contacted outside working hours;

b. Stating that unauthorised entry to the work site is prohibited; and c. Pollution warning sign promoting the protection of waterways (issued by

Council with the development consent); d. Stating the approved construction hours in which all works can occur. e. Showing the name, address and telephone number of the principal

certifying authority for the work. Any such sign/s is to be maintained while the building work, subdivision work or demolition work is being carried out, but must be removed when the work has been completed.

18. Toilet on Construction Site Prior to the commencement of any works on the land, toilet facilities are to be provided, at or in the vicinity of the work site on which work involved in the erection or demolition of a building is being carried out, at the rate of one toilet for every 20 persons or part thereof. Each toilet provided must be a standard flushing toilet and be connected to: a. A public sewer, or b. If connection to a public sewer is not practicable, to an accredited

sewage management facility approved by Council, or c. If connection to a public sewer or an accredited sewage management

facility is not practicable, to some other management facility approved by Council.

19. Public Property

Prior to the commencement of any works on site, the applicant shall advise Council of any damage to property which is controlled by Council which adjoins the site, including kerbs, gutters, footpaths, and the like. Failure to identify existing damage may result in all damage detected after completion of the development being repaired at the applicant’s expense.

20. Hoarding / Fence Prior to the commencement of any works, a hoarding or fence must be erected between the work site and a public place if the work involved in the development is likely to cause pedestrian or vehicular traffic in a public place to be obstructed or rendered inconvenient, or if the building involves the enclosure of a public place in accordance with Work Cover requirements. The work site must be kept lit between sunset and sunrise if it is likely to be hazardous to persons in the public place.

A separate land use application under Section 68 of the Local Government Act 1993 shall be submitted to and approved by Council prior to the erection of any hoarding on public land.

DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION The following conditions of consent have been imposed to ensure that the administration and amenities relating to the proposed development comply with all relevant requirements. These conditions are to be complied with during the construction of the development on site. 21. Construction Work Hours

All work on site shall only occur between the following hours: Monday to Friday 7.00am to 6.00pm Saturday 8.00am to 1.00pm Sunday and public holidays No Work.

22. Erosion and Sediment Control

Erosion and sediment control measures shall be provided and maintained throughout the construction period, in accordance with the requirements of the manual – Soils and Construction (2004) (Bluebook), the approved plans, Council specifications and to the satisfaction of the principal certifying authority. The erosion and sedimentation control devices shall remain in place until the site has been stabilised and revegetated. Note: On the spot penalties up to $1,500 will be issued for any non-

compliance with this requirement without any further notification or warning.

23. Work Zones

All loading, unloading and other activities undertaken during construction shall be accommodated on the development site. Where it is not practical to load, unload or undertake specific activities on the site during construction, the provision of a ‘Work Zone’ external to the site may be approved by Council following an application being submitted to Council’s Traffic Unit outlining the proposal for the work zone. The application is required to be made prior to the commencement of any works and is to include a suitable ‘Traffic / Pedestrian Management and Control Plan’ for the area of the work zone that will be affected. All costs of approved traffic / pedestrian control measures, including relevant fees, shall be borne by the applicant.

24. Certification of Location of Advertising Sign Upon Completion

Upon completion of the advertising sign’s construction, the applicant shall submit to the principal certifying authority a qualified practicing surveyors certificate showing the boundaries of the allotment and the distance of the sign (including its footings) from the rail overpass earthen embankment.

25. Public Safety Any works undertaken in a public place are to be maintained in a safe condition at all times. The applicant shall ensure that traffic control is undertaken and maintained strictly in accordance with AS 1742.3, the requirements set out in the RTA manual "Traffic Control at Work Sites" (as amended), all applicable Traffic Management and/or Traffic Control Plans. The contractor shall also ensure that all Work Cover Authority requirements are complied with. Council may at any time and without prior notification make safe any such works that be considered to be unsafe, and recover all reasonable costs incurred from the applicant.

26. Compliance with Council Specification

All design and construction work, shall be in accordance with: a. Council's specification for Construction of Subdivisional Road and

Drainage Works (as amended); b. Campbelltown (Sustainable City) DCP 2009 - Volumes 1 and 2, c. ‘Soils and Construction (2004) (Bluebook); and d. Relevant Australian standards and State Government publications.

27. Pavement Thickness Determination A road pavement design and pavement thickness report, from a N.A.T.A. registered and suitably qualified practising civil engineer appointed by the applicant, in accordance with Council's Specification for Construction of Subdivisional Road and Drainage Works (as amended) shall be forwarded to the principal certifying authority a minimum of two working days prior to the inspection of exposed sub grade for pavement thickness determination.

28. Associated Works The applicant shall undertake any works external to the development, that are made necessary by the development, including additional road and drainage works or any civil works directed by Council, to make a smooth junction with existing work.

29. Completion of Construction Works

Unless otherwise specified in this consent, all construction works associated with the approved development shall be completed within six months of the date of the notice of the intention to commence construction works under Section 81A of the Act.

PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF AN OCCUPATION CERTIFICATE The following conditions of consent must be complied with prior to the issue of an occupation certificate by either Campbelltown City Council or an accredited principal certifying authority. All necessary information to comply with the following conditions of consent must be submitted with the application for an occupation certificate. Note: For the purpose of this development consent, any reference to "occupation certificate" shall also be taken to mean "interim occupation certificate". 30. Completion of External Works Onsite

Prior to the principal certifying authority issuing an occupation certificate, all external works, detailed in the schedule of treatment/finishes, landscaping and fencing are to be completed to the satisfaction of the principal certifying authority.

31. Public Utilities Prior to the principal certifying authority issuing an occupation certificate, any adjustments to public utilities, required as a result of the development, shall be completed to the satisfaction of the relevant authority and at the applicant's expense.

32. Council Fees and Charges Prior to the principal certifying authority issuing an occupation certificate, the applicant shall obtain written confirmation from Council that all applicable Council fees and charges associated with the development have been paid in full. Written confirmation will be provided to the applicant following Council's final inspection and satisfactory clearance of the public area adjacent the site.

ADVISORY NOTES The following information is provided for your assistance to ensure compliance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000, other relevant Council Policy/s and other relevant requirements. This information does not form part of the conditions of development consent pursuant to Section 80A of the Act.

Advice 1. Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Requirements The Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 requires you to: a. Obtain a construction certificate prior to the commencement of any works.

Enquiries regarding the issue of a construction certificate can be made to Council’s Customer Service Centre on 4645 4000.

b. Nominate a principal certifying authority and notify Council of that appointment

prior to the commencement of any works. c. Give Council at least two days notice prior to the commencement of any works. d. Have mandatory inspections of nominated stages of the construction

inspected. e. Obtain an occupation certificate before occupying any building or commencing

the use of the land. Advice 2. Inspections – Civil Works Where Council is nominated as the principal certifying authority for civil works, the following stages of construction shall be inspected by Council. a. EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL –

i. Direction/confirmation of required measures. ii. After installation and prior to commencement of earthworks. iii. As necessary until completion of work.

b. STORMWATER PIPES – Laid, jointed and prior to backfill. c VEHICLE CROSSINGS AND LAYBACKS – Prior to pouring concrete. d FINAL INSPECTION – All outstanding work. Advice 3. Inspection within Public Areas All works within public areas are required to be inspected at all stages of construction and approved by Council prior to the principal certifying authority releasing the Occupation Certificate. Advice 4. Adjustment to Public Utilities

Adjustment to any public utilities necessitated by the development is required to be completed prior to the occupation of the premises and in accordance with the requirements of the relevant Authority. Any costs associated with these adjustments are to be borne by the applicant.

Advice 5. Construction Costs The applicant is required, at the time of issue of the occupation certificate, to advise Council in writing of the separate costs of road pavement construction, kerb and gutter construction and drainage construction. Advice 6. Dial 1100 Before you Dig Underground cable and pipes may exist in the area. In your own interest and for safety, telephone 1100 before excavation or erection of structures. Information on the location of underground pipes and cables can also be obtained by fax on 1300 652 077 or through the following website - www.dialbeforeyoudig.com.au

END OF CONDITIONS

ATTACHMENT 2

ATTACHMENT 3

ATTACHMENT 4

4. COMPLIANCE SERVICES

4.1 Legal Status Report

Reporting Officer

Manager Compliance Services

Attachments

Nil

Purpose

To update Council on the current status of the Planning and Environment Division's legal matters.

Report

This report contains a summary of the current status of the Division's legal matters relating to: The Land and Environment Court The District Court The Local Court Matters referred to Council’s solicitor for advice.

A summary of year-to-date costs and the total number of actions are also included. 1. Land and Environment Court Class 1 Matters – Appeals Against Council’s

Determination of Development Applications

Total ongoing Class 1 DA Appeal Matters (as at 25/11/2011) 3 Total completed Class 1 DA Appeal Matters (as at 25/11/2011) 2 Costs from 1 July 2011 for Class 1 DA Appeal Matters: $7.960.01

1 (a) Issue: Property: Property Owner: File No: Court Application Filed: Applicant: Judgement date: Costs Estimate: Costs to date: Status:

Jespal Singh Dhillon and Manjit Kaur Dhillon Refusal of Development Application 1747/2010/DA-U for use of an existing dwelling as a boarding house. Lot 392 DP 32084 No. 141 Lindesay Street, Campbelltown. Mr Jespal Singh Dhillon and Mrs Manjit Kaur Dhillon 1747/2010/DA-U (Court File 10686 of 2011) 9 August 2011 Mr Jespal Singh Dhillon and Mrs Manjit Kaur Dhillon To be notified by the Court. $25,000.00 (exclusive of Barristers, Court Appointed Experts or disbursement fees) $7,960.01 Ongoing – Judgement reserved to a date to be notified.

Action Since Last Meeting The matter was before the Court for hearing on 7 November 2011. After completion of evidence and submissions the Commissioner reserved judgement to a date to be notified by the Court.

1 (b) Issue: Property: Property Owner: File No: Court Application Filed: Applicant: Hearing date: Costs Estimate: Costs to date: Status:

Min Yi Chen Refusal of Development Application 300096/1998/DA-U – Modify the terms of the original consent for use of the subject site as a brothel. Lot 3 DP 28853 No. 13 Lincoln Street, Minto. Ms Min Yi Chen 300096/1998/DA-U (Court File 10888 of 2011) 28 September 2011 Ms Min Yi Chen 19 and 20 December 2011 $20,000 (exclusive of Barristers, Court Appointed Experts or disbursement fees) $0.00 Ongoing - listed for hearing on 19 and 20 December 2011.

Action Since Last Meeting

Matter was before the Court for directions hearing on 3 November 2011 where the Court made certain directions regarding expert witness reports, filing and service of documents, and preparation by Council of draft consent orders. The proceedings are listed for hearing on 19 and 20 December 2011.

1 (c) Issue: Property: Property Owner: File No: Court Application Filed: Applicant: Callover date: Costs Estimate: Costs to date: Status:

Nick Skagias Deemed Refusal of Development Application No. 1416/2011/DA-C for construction of a commercial building with associated car-parking. Lot 6 Section 4 DP 2913 No. 34 Carlisle Street, Ingleburn NSW 2565. Mr. Angelo Skagias and Mr. Nick Skagias 1416/2011/DA-C (Court File 10985 of 2011) 31 October 2011 Mr. Nick Skagias 25 November 2011 To be advised $0.00 New Matter - listed for first callover 25 November 2011.

Action Since Last Meeting

Listed for first callover 25 November 2011. DA 1416/2011/DA-C will be reported to Council's Planning and Environment Committee at this meeting round.

2. Land and Environment Court Class 1 Matters – Appeals Against Council’s

issued Orders/Notices

Total ongoing Class 1 Order/Notice Appeal Matters (as at 25/11/2011) 0 Total completed Class 1 Order/Notice Appeal Matters (as at 25/11/2011) 2 Costs from 1 July 2011 for Class 1 Order/Notices Appeal Matters:

$0.00

3. Land and Environment Court Class 4 Matters – Non-Compliance with Council

Orders / Notices

Total ongoing Class 4 matters before the Court (as at 25/11/2011) 0 Total completed Class 4 matters (as at 25/11/2011) 1 Total ongoing Class 4 matters in respect of costs recovery (as at 25/11/2011) these matters will be further reported on completion 4 Costs from 1 July 2011 for Class 4 matters $392.00

4. Land and Environment Court Class 5 - Criminal enforcement of alleged pollution

offences and various breaches of environmental and planning laws.

Total ongoing Class 5 matters before the Court (as at 25/11/2011) 0 Total completed Class 5 matters (as at 25/11/2011) 0 Total ongoing Class 5 matters in respect of costs recovery (as at 25/11/2011) these matter will be further reported on completion 2 Costs from 1 July 2011 for Class 5 matters $0.00

5. Land and Environment Court Class 6 - Appeals from convictions relating to

environmental matters.

Total ongoing Class 6 Matters (as at 25/11/2011) 0 Total completed Class 6 Matters (as at 25/11/2011) 0 Costs from 1 July 2011 for Class 6 Matters $0.00

6. District Court – Matters on Appeal from lower Courts or Tribunals not being

environmental offences.

Total ongoing Appeal matters before the Court (as at 25/11/2011) 0 Total completed Appeal matters (as at 25/11/2011) 1 Total ongoing Appeal matters in respect of costs recovery (as at 25/11/2011) these matters will be further reported on completion 0 Costs from 1 July 2011 for District Court Matters $1,399.32

6 (a) Issue: File No: Court Application filed: Appellant: Costs Estimate: Final Costs Estimate: Status:

Michael Bruce Hall Appeal against decision in Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal Case No GEN:08/45487, BUILDINGPLANS.COM.AU (Michael Bruce Hall) v Ameerul Nisha Hussein. 2593/2007/DA-DW (Court File No. 08/10/2008) 9 October 2008 Michael Bruce Hall $5,000 (exclusive of Barristers, Court Appointed Experts or disbursements fees) $8,800.00 Completed – Settlement of the costs order made against the appellant has been reached.

Action Since Last Meeting

Mr. Hall made payment to Council seeking full and final settlement of the costs order made against him in the Parramatta District Court on 3 December 2008. Despite further legal costs being incurred by Council in pursuing settlement of the costs order, Mr. Hall recently made payment in the amount initially determined by the costs assessor appointed by the NSW Supreme Court as appropriate in satisfaction of the costs order. This amount fell short of the actual costs incurred since the assessment was made. In accordance with the delegated authority granted by Council to the General Manager (to settle legal costs without a resolution of Council if the agreed settlement amounts to 70% or greater of the legal costs incurred), agreement in respect of the costs order has been reached in the amount as assessed.

7. oL cal Court Prosecution Matters

The following summary lists the current status of the Division’s legal matters before the Campbelltown Local Court.

Total ongoing Local Court Matters (as at 25/11/2011) 21 Total completed Local Court Matters (as at 25/11/2011) 100 Costs from 1 July 2011 for Local Court Matters $481.00

File No: Offence: Act: Costs to date: Status – Ongoing:

LP18/11 – Charge Matters x 5 Not comply with section 56 control requirements (restricted dog) for offences on 19 October 2010. Companion Animals Act 1998 $0.00 The matters were before the Court for further mention on 9 November 2011, where the defendant maintained their not guilty pleas to all matters. The Magistrate directed that Council serve the defendant with the complete brief of evidence by 21 December and adjourned the proceedings to 9 March 2012 for hearing.

File No: Offence: Act: Costs to date: Status – Ongoing:

LP19/11 – Charge Matters x 5 Not comply with section 56 control requirements (restricted dog) for offences on 24 February 2011. Companion Animals Act 1998 $0.00 The matters were before the Court for further mention on 9 November 2011, where the defendant maintained their not guilty pleas to all matters. The Magistrate directed that Council serve the defendant with the complete brief of evidence by 21 December and adjourned the proceedings to 9 March 2012 for hearing.

File No: Offence: Act: Costs to date: Status – Ongoing:

LP20/11 – Charge Matters x 2 Not notify that dog found after being lost; and, not notify that dog relocated to another Council area where it is now ordinarily kept (restricted dog). Companion Animals Act 1998 $0.00 The matters were before the Court for further mention on 9 November 2011, where the defendant maintained their not guilty pleas to all matters. The Magistrate directed that Council serve the defendant with the complete brief of evidence by 21 December and adjourned the proceedings to 9 March 2012 for hearing.

File No: Offence: Act: Costs to date: Status – Ongoing:

LP21/11 – Charge Matters x 2 Not notify that dog found after being lost; and, not notify that dog relocated to another Council area where it is now ordinarily kept (not restricted dog). Companion Animals Act 1998 $0.00 The matters were before the Court for further mention on 9 November 2011, where the defendant maintained their not guilty pleas to all matters. The Magistrate directed that Council serve the defendant with the complete brief of evidence by 21 December and adjourned the proceedings to 9 March 2012 for hearing.

File No: Offence: Act: Costs to date: Status – Ongoing:

LP22/11 – Penalty Notice Court Election Development (dwelling additions) undertaken without development consent. Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 $0.00 The matter was before the Magistrate in Chambers on 10 November 2011 for determination of an application by the defendant to vacate the 11 November hearing date due to illness. The proceedings were re-listed to 10 February 2012 for hearing.

File No: Offence: Act: Final Costs: Status – Completed:

LP32/11 – Penalty Notice Court Election Not stand vehicle in marked parking space. Local Government Act 1993 $0.00 The matter was before the Court for first mention on 8 November 2011, where the defendant entered a guilty plea with explanation. After considering the evidence and submissions the Magistrate found the offence proved; however, having regard to the circumstances of the offence a determination was made that the charge be dismissed without penalty or costs under section 10(1)(a) of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999.

File No: Offence: Act: Final Costs: Status – Completed:

LP33/11 – Penalty Notice Court Election Stand vehicle in area longer than allowed. Local Government Act 1993 $0.00 The matter was before the Court for hearing on 4 November 2011, where the defendant changed their plea to a guilty plea with explanation. After considering the evidence and submissions the Magistrate found the offence proved; however, having regard to the circumstances of the offence a determination was made that the charge be dismissed without penalty or costs under section 10(1)(a) of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999.

File No: Offence: Act: Costs to date: Status – Ongoing:

LP38/11 & LP39/11 – Re-listed matters following Annulment of Court Orders Not register 6-month old companion animal – not dangerous dog x 2 Companion Animals Act 1998 $0.00 The matters were before the Court for first mention on 20 September, where the defendant made no appearance. The magistrate granted an application by Council for the matters to be heard in the defendant's absence and, after considering the evidence and submissions, found the offences proved and convicted the defendant imposing two fines in the sum of $500 and orders for Court costs in the sum of $162. On 25 October 2011, the Court determined the defendant's annulment application quashing the Court orders of the 20 September 2011, as the Court was satisfied that the Court Attendance Notice was not properly served to the address provided by the defendant on the Court Election Notice. The matters have been listed for hearing on 13 January 2012.

File No: Offence: Act: Final Costs: Status – Completed:

LP40/11 – Charge Matters x 8 Various offences against the owner of a restricted dog relating to the manner in which the dog is required to be kept. Companion Animals Act 1998 $0.00 The matters were before the Court for first mention on 15 November 2011, where the defendant, Laura Third made no appearance. The magistrate determined that the matters were to be heard in the defendant's absence and, after considering the evidence and submissions, found the offences proved and convicted the defendant imposing seven fines of $1,000 and one fine of $350 and an order for Court costs in the sum of $81 (total $7,431).

File No: Offence: Act: Final Costs: Status – Completed:

LP41/11 – Penalty Notice Court Election Vehicle cause obstruction to pedestrian access ramp. Road Rules 2088 $0.00 The matter was before the Court for first mention on 8 November 2011, where the defendant entered a guilty plea with explanation. After considering the evidence and submissions the Magistrate found the offence proved; however, having regard to the circumstances of the offence a determination was made that the charge be dismissed without penalty or costs under section 10(1)(a) of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999.

File No: Offence: Act: Final Costs: Status – Completed:

LP42/11 – Penalty Notice Court Election Uncontrolled dog in public place - not dangerous dog. Companion Animals Act 1998 $0.00 The matter was before the Court for first mention on 15 November 2011, where the defendant entered a guilty plea with explanation. After considering the evidence and submissions the Magistrate found the offence proved; however, having regard to the circumstances of the offence a determination was made that the charge be dismissed without penalty or costs under section 10(1)(a) of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999.

File No: Offence: Act: Final Costs: Status – Completed:

LP43/11 – Penalty Notice Court Election Uncontrolled dog in public place - not dangerous dog. Companion Animals Act 1998 $0.00 The matter was before the Court for first mention on 15 November 2011, where the defendant entered a guilty plea with explanation. After considering the evidence and submissions the Magistrate found the offence proved; however, having regard to the circumstances of the offence a determination was made that the charge be dismissed without penalty or costs under section 10(1)(a) of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999.

File No: Offence: Act: Costs to date: Status – New Matter:

LP44/11 – Penalty Notice Court Election Double park in school zone. Road Rules 2088 $0.00 Listed for first mention on 29 November 2011.

File No: Offence: Act: Costs to date: Status – New Matters:

LP45/11 & LP46/11 – Penalty Notice Court Election Uncontrolled dog in public place - not dangerous dog x 2. Companion Animals Act 1998 $0.00 Listed for first mention on 6 December 2011.

File No: Offence: Act: Costs to date: Status – New Matter:

LP47/11 – Penalty Notice Court Election Stand vehicle in area longer than allowed. Local Government Act 1993 $0.00 Listed for first mention on 6 December 2011.

8 M. atters Referred to Council’s Solicitor for Advice The following summary lists the status of matters referred to Council’s solicitors for advice on questions of law, the likelihood of appeal or prosecution proceedings being initiated, and/or Council liability.

Total Advice Matters (as at 25/11/2011) 6 Costs from 1 July 2011 for Advice Matters $10,909.39 9. Legal Costs Summary

The following summary lists the Planning and Environment Division’s net legal costs for the 2011/2012 period.

Relevant Attachments or Tables Costs Debit Costs Credit

Class 1 Land and Environment Court - appeals against Council's determination of Development Applications

$7,960.01 $0.00

Class 1 Land and Environment Court - appeals against Orders or Notices issued by Council

$0.00 $0.00

Class 4 Land and Environment Court matters - non-compliance with Council Orders, Notices or Prosecutions

$392.00 $5,494.60

Class 5 Land and Environment Court - Pollution and Planning prosecution matters

$0.00 $0.00

Class 6 Land and Environment Court - appeals from convictions relating to environmental matters

$0.00 $0.00

Land and Environment Court tree dispute between neighbours matters

$0.00 $0.00

District Court Appeal matters $1,399.32 $0.00

Local Court Prosecution matters $481.00 $1,415.00

Matters referred to Council’s solicitor for legal advice $10,076.38 $0.00

Miscellaneous costs not shown elsewhere in this table $0.00 $0.00

Costs Sub-Total $20,308.71 $6,909.60

Overall Net Costs Total (GST exclusive) $13,399.11

Officer's Recommendation

That the information be noted. Committee’s Recommendation: (Bourke/Greiss) That the Officer's Recommendation be adopted. CARRIED Council Meeting 13 December 2011 (Kolkman/Bourke) That the Officer's Recommendation be adopted. Council Resolution Minute Number 265 That the Officer's Recommendation be adopted.

4.2 Operation of Council's Animal Care Facility

Reporting Officer

Manager Compliance Services

Attachments

1. Review of Matters Raised by the Community 2. Correspondence from members of the community to all Councillors (distributed

under separate cover)

Purpose

To provide Council with a summary of the matters raised by the community in relation to the operation of the Animal Care Facility (ACF) and to propose a recommended action for each matter identified.

History

Council at its meeting on 27 July 2010 resolved that a report be provided on the investigation of:

(i) the provision of suitable bedding to keep animals off the concrete floor at the Animal Care Facility

(ii) the establishment of a volunteer group to provide support services to the

Animal Care Facility. In response to Council's resolution a review of bedding arrangements and kennel cleaning procedures at the ACF was undertaken and cleaning practices have since incorporated a minor amendment including the use of a 'squeegee' to remove surface water from the concrete floor of the kennels. Bedding arrangements have been maintained. With reference to the second part of the resolution, Council staff have conducted an investigation into the possibility of establishing a volunteer group and in the process have considered matters such as risk management, Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) and disease prevention. Following Council's resolution, staff became aware of a resident action group known as 'Pals of Unwanted Neglected Dogs Cats Campbelltown' (POUNDCC) when an article appeared in the Macarthur Chronicle on 9 August 2011. This article raised a number of claims associated with the operation of Council's Animal Care Facility (ACF) and advised of a public meeting to be held by the group at the HJ Daley Library on 20 August 2011.

A meeting was subsequently initiated by Council staff with representatives of POUNDCC to discuss the matters raised at the public meeting regarding the operation of the ACF. This meeting was held with two representatives of POUNDCC on Friday 26 August 2011. At the conclusion of the meeting staff advised the POUNDCC representatives that a number of the matters raised were of a policy nature and would require reporting to Council. It was agreed that further communication between the group and Council would be via a single point of contact. Since the meeting, a number of emails have been exchanged in relation to the matters raised and the progress of the preparation of this report. Council staff also arranged for the RSPCA to inspect the ACF. The results of the inspection are discussed in Attachment 1. Since the meeting with POUNDCC representatives, a number of other members of the community (who may or may not be associated with POUNDCC) have contacted Council and raised similar and additional matters regarding the operation of the ACF. All matters raised by POUNDCC and other members of the broader community in relation to the operation of the ACF are reviewed in detail in Attachment 1 of this report. Councillors were provided with a briefing on the matters contained in Attachment 1 on Tuesday 22 November 2011.

Report

Matters raised by POUNDCC A meeting was held on Friday 26 August 2011 between Council staff and representatives of POUNDCC to discuss their concerns in relation to the operation of Council's ACF. The following matters were raised by POUNDCC for investigation by Council: Use of rescue groups at the ACF Mandatory de-sexing of companion animals sold at the ACF Use of volunteers at the ACF Cleaning of kennels at the ACF Provision of suitable bedding materials Wish list of items for the ACF Use of old administration building at the ACF as a de-sexing clinic Sale of dogs and cats from the Boot Hill Markets and surrounds Improvement of the 'Dogs for Sale' section of Council's web site

Provide pet owners with greater assistance in choosing the correct animal Improve the standard of cat housing provided Ensure purchasers are aware of the ongoing requirements for the care of a pet Promote after hours service offered by other facilities Consider extending the opening hours of the ACF Employment of female staff Increase 'Sponsor a Pet' promotions Why are some dogs not offered for sale? Better communication as to when animals are offered for sale Additional matters raised by Members of the Community In addition to the matters raised by POUNDCC, Council has over recent months received a number of letters, emails and phone calls from members of the broader community in relation to the operation of the ACF. Additional matters raised in these submissions included: Incentive Scheme to Reward Responsible Pet Owners Review of animal allocation process when more than one person wishes to

purchase the same animal Various issues raised in correspondence sent to all Councillors Councillors were provided with a briefing on all of the above matters on 22 November 2011 where a number of additional matters (outlined in information sent to Councillors) were discussed. This included a suggestion that Council consider limiting the number of animals that may be kept on residential premises. Summary of the Review of Matters Raised Attachment 1 details a comprehensive review and discussion of the range of claims made and matters raised through representations made by POUNDCC and other members of the community, concerning the operation of the ACF. Council staff have investigated each matter in detail, and generally have concluded that the ACF operates within industry standards, does not breach animal welfare requirements, and seeks to continue to make improvements to the overall operation, including the minimisation of animal euthanasia rates. Notwithstanding, the review of the ACF and collaboration with staff employed at the ACF and with Council's contracted veterinarian, has facilitated the 'take-up' of some of the suggestions for further improvement.

Further, the review has identified that there may be value in Council's consideration of a change in practice at the ACF relating to the de-sexing of animals. This particular matter has the potential for significant cost implications for Council's budget, and in response, staff have suggested that a trial program involving the de-sexing of male dogs be undertaken for a period of six months, after which a detailed evaluation will take place. The complete listing of recommended actions arising from the detailed review of each and all matters raised by POUNDCC and other community members, is set out below. That Council work with rescue organisations approved by the Division of Local

Government and subject to a written agreement between Council and the rescue organisation.

That Council write to the Division of Local Government requesting that it

consider the matters of animal hoarding and location of temporary carers at the next review of the "Guidelines for Approval to be an Organisation Exempt from Companion Animal Registration under Clause 16 (D) of the Companion Animals Regulation 2008".

That the price of male dogs sold from the Animal Care Facility include de-

sexing as a trial until 30 June 2012. That Council's voucher system of de-sexing remains in place for kittens and

puppies sold at the Animal Care Facility. That Council follow-up new owners of kittens and puppies to ensure they have

their new pet de-sexed. That adult cats and male dogs sold at the Animal Care Facility be transferred to

Council's contracted veterinarian for de-sexing. That the tender specification for Veterinary Services include prices for de-

sexing all dogs sold from the Animal Care Facility should Council wish to adopt this option in the future.

That volunteers only be used in off site locations subject to further investigation

and where all risk, liability and OHS matters are mitigated. That Council endorse the current kennel cleaning practices undertaken at the

Animal Care Facility. That the floor of each kennel at the Animal Care Facility be treated with an

impervious sealant. That Council endorse the current use of suitable bedding materials, blankets

and dog jackets at the Animal Care Facility. That Council work with POUNDCC to source consumable items for use at the

Animal Care Facility, from business within the community on an anonymous and obligation free basis.

That Council continue to use an off-site veterinary surgery (as part of the

Contract for Veterinary Services) for the treatment of animals from the Animal Care Facility.

That Council Rangers continue to conduct random inspections of the Boot Hill

Markets and surrounds to deter the unlawful sale of kittens and puppies. That Council endorse the proposed upgrades to the "Dogs and Cats For Sale"

and "Lost Dogs and Cats" sections of Council's web site. That Council endorse the development of a self assessment "Pre-Purchase

Checklist" for use by prospective customers at the Animal Care Facility. That Council consider a proposal to refurbish the cattery at the Animal Care

Facility as part of its 2012/2013 budget. That Council note the provision of additional information on Council's web site

relating to stray animals and included on Council's after hours call out system. That Council note the after sales service offered by the Animal Care Facility

and Council's contracted veterinarian. That Council monitor the effectiveness of the other recommendations

contained in this report prior to considering the extension of weekend operating times at the Animal Care Facility.

That Council continue to work with the Macarthur Chronicle to promote the

"Find a Pet" initiative on a regular basis. That Council note that Council's web site and kennel display boards have been

refined to advise of the date and time when an animal becomes available for sale

That Council endorse the recommendations of the RSPCA inspection and that

follow up action be undertaken. That Council monitor any change implemented by Wollondilly Council, not to

charge impounding fees where a stray dog (not restricted or dangerous nor previously impounded) is retrieved within 24 hours of impounding.

That Council amend its sale process where more than one person wishes to

purchase the same animal by introducing an "equal chance" system as outlined in the attachment to the report.

That the "equal chance" system commence following the introduction of the

"pre-purchase checklist". That Council's Standard Operating Procedures be amended to reflect the

"equal chance" system for the purchase of animals where there is more than one prospective purchaser.

That a further report be provided to Council within 12 months of the

implementation of the recommendations contained in this report. In addition to the matters raised by POUNDCC and community members, the review has also identified the need for Council's forthcoming Comprehensive Local Environmental Plan (LEP) to address the numbers of companion animals kept on residential premises. This issue has now been programmed into the LEP preparation process. Conclusion All of the matters raised by POUNDCC and other community members concerning the operation of Council's ACF have been examined in detail. Importantly, the review has not identified any breach of animal welfare requirements. An independent inspection of the ACF by the RSPCA made recommendations concerning: documentation of the initial health assessment for animals entering the ACF; installation of a shade structure over the exercise yard; and separation of kittens from adult cats. The review identified options for Council's consideration that relate to de-sexing of animals received at the ACF, noting potential funding implications. A trial program of de-sexing male dogs only, for a period of six months has been recommended. A range of additional suggestions have been made in so far as they relate to continuous improvement to the facility, thereby improving customer service and working towards minimising euthanasia rates. Some of these suggestions also involve further collaboration with the community.

Officer's Recommendation

That Council implement the recommended actions relating to the operation of the Animal Care Facility, as contained in the report. Committee Note: Ms Riley addressed the Committee in support of this item. Committee’s Recommendation: (Bourke/Oates) 1. That Council implement the recommended actions relating to the operation of

the Animal Care Facility, as contained in the report. 2. That Council continue to liaise with POUNDCC on an as needs basis. CARRIED

Council Meeting 13 December 2011 (Kolkman/Bourke) That the Committee's Recommendation be adopted. Council Resolution Minute Number 265 That the Committee's Recommendation be adopted.

ATTACHMENT 1 MATTERS RAISED BY POUNDCC A meeting was held on Friday 26 August 2011 between Council staff and representatives of POUNDCC to discuss their concerns in relation to the operation of Councils Animal Care Facility. The following list of matters (discussed below) was raised by POUNDCC for investigation by Council staff. Following the meeting council staff sought clarification over a number of the matters raised.

1. USE OF RESCUE GROUPS AT THE ANIMAL CARE FACILITY Issue POUNDCC was concerned that Council does not work with rescue groups to re-home animals, which results in more animals than necessary being euthanaised. Response The Companion Animals Act allows for approved groups to collect unclaimed companion animals from Council pounds as an alternate means of finding the animal a suitable home. The intent is that rescue groups can either house or 'adopt out' these animals on a temporary basis until a permanent home can be found, thereby extending the time the animals are kept, when compared to pound holding times, and reducing euthanasia rates. There are approximately 44 organisations approved by the NSW Division of Local Government as rescue organisations, none of which are located within the Campbelltown Local Government Area (LGA). These organisations are granted exemption from the registration requirements for the companion animals that they take into temporary care while seeking to re-home them, subject to: Animals remaining in the care of exempt organisations for longer than twelve

months will cease to be covered by the registration exemption, Organisations granted an exemption under Clause 16(d) of the Companion

Animals Regulation 2008 will need to reapply for their exemption every five years, and

Organisations granted an exemption will be required to provide an annual report to the Division of Local Government.

Under section 64(5) of the Companion Animals Act 1998 Councils are obliged to consider whether there is an alternative action to that of destroying an animal. The intent of clause 16(d) of the Regulation is to provide such an alternative action by way of a financial incentive (i.e. not having to pay registration fees which range from $40 to $150) to animal rescue organisations. Organisations that apply for exemption must have a written statement from the General Manager of the council from which animals are to be sourced, endorsing their application.

During 2009 Council was approached by two organisations (Animal Rescue Incorporated and CatRescue NSW Limited) seeking its endorsement to rescue animals from the ACF. At the time Council did not support the requests as these organisations did not provide details of the location where rescued animals would be temporarily homed. This information was considered critical as should the temporary rescue location be outside of the Campbelltown LGA this could cause inconvenience to members of the community should they wish to retrieve/purchase an animal from an exempt organisation. In addition, the applications did not provide details of the number of animals that would be kept at each temporary location and this was considered critical to prevent the potential for animal hoarding and the associated neighbourhood impacts. It should be noted that neither of these organisations are included on the current Division of Local Government approved list. It is acknowledged that rescue organisations could potentially be an important resource as part of an overall strategy to reduce euthanasia rates and it is therefore recommended that Council work with approved rescue organisations subject to a written agreement between Council and the rescue organisation. This written agreement as a minimum, would need to specify; when rescue organisations would be used (i.e. when the ACF is at capacity or

has an oversupply of kittens or pups); the criteria for providing animals (i.e. Council would retain all animals it believes it

has the capacity to sell); details of the location of temporary carers; that temporary carers are to be located within Campbelltown or adjoining LGAs; that the animal continues to be listed for sale on Council's web site and the maximum number of animals that are permitted by Council to be kept at the

rescuer's premises. The Division of Local Government (DLG) has published "Guidelines for Approval to be an Organisation Exempt from Companion Animal Registration under Clause 16 (D) of the Companion Animals Regulation 2008" to assist rescue organisations gain approval. A review of these Guidelines reveals that they do not address the matters raised above in relation to animal hoarding and location of temporary carers, and it is recommended that Council write to the DLG requesting that these items be considered in the next review of the Guidelines. Recommended Action: (i) That Council work with rescue organisations approved by the Division of Local

Government and subject to a written agreement between Council and the rescue organisation.

(ii) That Council write to the Division of Local Government requesting that it

consider the matters of animal hoarding and the location of temporary carers at the next review of the "Guidelines for Approval to be an Organisation Exempt from Companion Animal Registration under Clause 16 (D) of the Companion Animals Regulation 2008".

2. MANDATORY DE-SEXING OF COMPANION ANIMALS SOLD AT THE

ANIMAL CARE FACILITY Issue POUNDCC was concerned that not all companion animals sold from the Animal Care Facility are de-sexed prior to sale. POUNDCC believes that all companion animals sold from the ACF should be de-sexed prior to leaving the facility. Concern was also expressed by POUNDCC about the effectiveness of using the current voucher system, and believes that it would be more effective for animals to be de-sexed prior to leaving the ACF. Response Cat De-Sexing The purchase price of a cat from the ACF includes de-sexing by Council's contracted veterinarian, which the owner redeems after purchase via a voucher. Dogs are sold without mandatory de-sexing which means that the only dogs that are sold de-sexed are those that enter the facility (impounded or surrendered) already de-sexed. While all cats are sold with de-sexing included in the price, the cat is not de-sexed when it leaves the facility and the current system relies on the new owner redeeming a voucher with Council's contract veterinarian. POUNDCC claims that this system does not guarantee a 100% desexing rate for cats sold from the ACF and should be changed. The only way to determine the percentage of cats de-sexed via the voucher system would be to compare Council's records of the number of cats sold against the contracted veterinarian's records for the number of cats de-sexed, for a specific period. However, this is further complicated as there is often a delay between the time of purchase and the time of de-sexing which will influence the result, as the voucher is valid for 6 months. An alternative approach to the voucher system could be either an onsite de-sexing clinic (which is discussed in Issue 7), or Council staff transferring the cat, once sold, to Council's contracted veterinarian for desexing. The new owner would then pick-up the cat from surgery some days after purchase. While these options would incur additional administrative and transport costs to Council and delays to the owner it would ensure a 100% desexing rate for cats sold from the ACF. However, an issue arises with kittens. While Council can sell a kitten at 8 weeks of age, the kitten may not be of a sufficient size or weight (particularly female kittens) to be de-sexed. This is usually when they are between 12 to 16 weeks of age. While some vets practice early age de-sexing at 8 weeks, Council's contracted veterinarian is concerned that this option may not always be in the best interests of the kitten. A similar situation occurs with puppies and they may not be suitable for de-sexing until they reach 4 months of age.

Therefore as the majority of cats sold from the ACF are kittens, Council would need to either retain the voucher system or keep kittens until they were of a size and weight (somewhere between a further 4 to 8 weeks prior to sale) in order to ensure they were de-sexed prior to leaving the facility. As it is not practicable to keep kittens at the ACF for an extended period of time, it is recommended that the voucher system for de-sexing of kittens remain in place and that staff at the ACF follow-up new owners to ensure the kitten is de-sexed. However, adult cats will be transported to Council's contracted veterinarian for de-sexing once sold. Dog De-Sexing As Council has not previously de-sexed dogs prior to sale, only those dogs which enter the facility already de-sexed, are sold as de-sexed. It could therefore be asserted that Council is not actively attempting to reduce the rate of unwanted dogs within the LGA as it does not sell de-sexed dogs from the ACF. While there is a strong argument to support selling de-sexed dogs, there would ultimately be a cost implication associated with de-sexing which would need to be either absorbed by Council or passed onto the purchaser of the dog. a) Cost to de-sex a dog Based on the current de-sexing price contained within the contract with Council's contracted veterinarian, the cost to de-sex a male dog is $119, while the average price to de-sex a female dog (depending on weight and if the dog is in season) is $176. Over the past four financial years, Council has on average sold 444 dogs each year, 60% being male dogs and 40% being female dogs. Therefore if Council were to de-sex dogs and not pass on the cost to the purchaser it would cost Council $31,701 to de-sex male dogs only, $31,258 to de-sex female dogs only or $62,959 to de-sex all dogs. If Council were to de-sex dogs prior to sale and pass this cost onto the purchaser this would add an additional $119 to the cost of a male dog and, on average, $176 to the cost of a female dog. The current price for a dog that is micro-chipped and registered but not de-sexed is $77, however this price would increase to between $196 for a male dog and on average $253 for a female dog if the dog were sold de-sexed. The current price for a dog that is neither micro-chipped, registered nor de-sexed is $271. The increase in price due to de-sexing would, however, be offset by a reduction in the registration cost by $110. This would result in a new cost for a male de-sexed dog of $280 and on average for a female de-sexed dog of $337. In considering the above options Council needs to be mindful that any increase in the purchase price of a dog may 'price that the dog out of the market' for many residents and therefore reduce the number of dogs sold from the ACF. A web site review of what similar Councils charge for dogs is provided in the table below:

Council Purchase Price Inclusions Wollondilly Council $300

$275 Pensioner Registration, micro-chipping, de-sexing, vaccination and heart worm test

Renbury Farm Shelter - Bankstown City Council, Camden Council, Fairfield City Council and Liverpool City Council

$350 Adult $300 pup

Vet examination, vaccination, heartworm test, worming, de-sexing prior to leaving (young puppies will go to their new home with a desexing voucher), micro-chipping and registration

Hawkesbury Animal Shelter - Hawkesbury City Council, Penrith City Council & The Hills Shire Council

$36.50 Micro-chipped & registered $229 not Micro-chipped & unregistered

Nil Note - no compulsory de-sexing

Blacktown Animal Holding Facility - Blacktown City Council, Auburn Council, City of Canada Bay Council, Holroyd City Council, The Municipality of Hunters Hill, Lane Cove Council, Parramatta City Council, The City of Ryde

$90 Micro-chipped & registered $276 not Micro-chipped & unregistered

Nil Note - no compulsory de-sexing

The current price of a dog from the ACF (ranging from $77 to $271) is currently less than the price charged at Wollondilly and Renbury Farm, as the price of dogs from these facilities includes de-sexing. The price of a dog from the ACF is more than the price of a dog from Hawkesbury and slightly less than a dog from Blacktown, noting that the price of a dog from these facilitates does not include de-sexing. However, should Council resolve to include de-sexing into the price of dogs sold from the ACF the cost of a male dog would increase to between $200 and $280 while the price of a female dog would increase to between $257 to $337. These prices would still be less than those charged by Renbury Farm, however female dogs would be more expensive than those sold at Wollondilly while both male and female dogs would be more expensive than those sold at Hawkesbury and Blacktown. If Council were to resolve to de-sex all dogs it would be simpler to choose a flat price fee for all dogs eg. $300, noting that the cost to de-sex some dogs would be below this figure while others would be above this figure.

b) Loss of registration income While Council may chose to pass on the cost of de-sexing to a new dog owner, it would suffer a loss of registration income if it decides to de-sex dogs. Council currently receives 85% of all companion animal registration fees for dogs and cats registered within the LGA. There will be an income reduction from registration fees should dogs be de-sexed prior to sale, as Council would receive 85% of $40 ($34) rather than 85% of $150 ($127.50) or a net loss of $93.50 per de-sexed dog sold from the ACF. Over the past four financial years, Council has on average sold 444 dogs each year, 60% being male dogs and 40% being female dogs. Therefore, if Council were to resolve that all male dogs sold from the ACF be de-sexed then the subsequent loss of registration income would be $24,908. The loss of registration income would be $16,605 if female dogs were de-sexed. This loss in income may be offset over a number of years by the potential savings to Council that could result from the reduced number of animals that may be impounded. c) Conclusion Having considered all of the above it is considered both reasonable and prudent to trial the option of de-sexing male dogs only as the increase in price between a de-sexed and non-de-sexed dog ($9) is not perceived significant enough to reduce sales. A trial until the end of the financial year would allow Council time to assess the results of this decision and allow time to identify cheaper de-sexing alternatives. By de-sexing male dogs Council is attempting to reduce the potential rate of unwanted dogs and is acting responsibly as a community leader. In recommending this, it is acknowledged that Council will forfeit approximately $24,908 annually in animal registration income. However, the current ACF budget is tracking at +30% compared to a year completed budgeted (estimate) rate of 42% and would be likely to be able to absorb this figure. While it is acknowledged that the loss of registration income would be less if female dogs were to be de-sexed, the potential reduction on unwanted litters of pups may be greater if male dogs are de-sexed as more male dogs are impounded than female dogs. Further, the increase in the purchase price for a female dog due to de-sexing is more significant than for a male dog, which may lead to less female dogs being purchased from the ACF, increasing the euthanasia rate. The prices for de-sexing used in the above examples reflect the rates contained in the current contract with Council's contracted veterinarian and as dog de-sexing is not mandatory, the rate is based on a limited number of dog owners taking up this option. However, Council's current contract is due to expire on 30 June 2012 and it would be reasonable to anticipate that should Council resolve to de-sex some or all of its dogs prior to sale, then this rate (due to economies of scale) would be likely to reduce.

As previously reported, Council has recently partnered with the RSPCA and University of Sydney (Camden) in the CAWS Program which will commence in 2012 and will offer reduced rate de-sexing to eligible pet owners within the LGA. As an extension to this program Council staff will liaise with the University of Sydney to determine if animals sold from Council's Animal Care Facility can be de-sexed at a reduced rate at the University. Given the current contractual arrangements, the total cost implications of any decision to de-sex animals sold at the ACF will change when the current veterinary contract expires on 30 June 2012. Council could request, as part of the tender specification for the new vet contract, cost estimates to de-sex all dogs sold from the ACF. Council would then be in a position to have an exact cost associated with de-sexing of all dogs should it decide to proceed with this option, and could then amend its fees and charges accordingly. Should Council wish to change the sale price for dogs within the current financial year, the amended fees would have to be publicly advertised in accordance with the Local Government Act, 1993. However, as the majority of male dogs sold at the ACF are not micro-chipped and are unregistered, the increase in sale price for de-sexing this type of male dog is only $9 above the existing cost. Therefore, it is recommended that Council not pass this additional cost onto the purchaser. Recommended Actions: (i) That Council's voucher system of de-sexing remains in place for kittens and

puppies sold at the ACF. (ii) That Council follow-up new owners of kittens and puppies to ensure they have

their new pet de-sexed. (iii) That the price of male dogs sold from the pound include de-sexing, as a trial

until 30 June 2012. (iv) That adult cats and male dogs sold at the ACF be transferred to Council's

contracted veterinarian for de-sexing. (v) That the tender specification for Veterinary Services include prices for de-

sexing all dogs sold from the ACF should Council wish to adopt this option in the future.

3. USE OF VOLUNTEERS AT THE ANIMAL CARE FACILITY Issue POUNDCC was concerned that Council does not use volunteers at the Animal Care Facility.

POUNDCC proposes that volunteers could be used at the ACF to care for the animals, clean kennels, change bedding, feed animals, exercise animals and groom animals allowing Council staff to focus on other animal management functions. Volunteers could also be used off-site to promote community education on responsible pet ownership to schools and community groups, educate dog owners and assist in transporting animals for de-sexing as part of the Community Animal Welfare Scheme (CAWS) program. Response The Regional Risk Manager of Council's Risk Insurer Statewide Mutual, inspected the ACF on 31 August 2011 and was provided details of the types of functions that POUNDCC suggested could be undertaken by volunteers at the ACF. A summary of that advice from their insurer is provided below: Concerns were raised in relation to Volunteer safety (particularly under the new

OHS Harmonisation Act), given that ACF staff are under constant vigilance against attacks when handling the dogs, and these staff are trained.

Council owes a duty of care to dog owners to protect and return their dog and this

should not be handed over to volunteers. In addition, should a dog, under the control of a "walker" attack another dog or

pedestrian, the repercussions would be not well received. Matters relating to OH&S, Volunteer insurance and PL insurance are also to be

considered. Council should encourage volunteers to provide assistance in other areas. Further, and as Council has a detailed OH&S management system in place that assists Council in managing risks associated with these activities, any volunteers used on-site at the ACF would need to be inducted into the organisation in an identical way to staff. This would be an administrative and financial consideration for Council. In addition to this advice, Council sought comment from its contracted veterinarian in relation to the possibility for the spread of disease from the introduction of volunteers into the facility. The advice received stated:

"We are constantly battling very serious infectious diseases such as Parvo virus and cat flu that requires strict quarantine controlled procedures to prevent cross contamination. Volunteers would require an extensive induction training and ongoing supervision to maintain bio-security. This training would also need to cover safe animal handling procedures and OHS matters. Community education (see AVA PETPEP), improving vaccination and micro-chip rates and targeted de-sexing programs to reduce the dog population can and should have more of an impact long term in reducing the numbers of animals being euthanaised and the percentage of animals re-homed."

Based on the above advice it is recommended that volunteers only be used in off site locations subject to further investigation, and where all risk, liability and OHS matters are mitigated to Council's satisfaction. Recommended Action: (i) That volunteers only be used in off site locations subject to further investigation

and where all risk, liability and OHS matters are mitigated. 4. CLEANING OF KENNELS AT THE ANIMAL CARE FACILITY Issue POUNDCC was concerned that kennels are cleaned while the animal is still in occupation, resulting in the animal becoming wet. The kennel remains wet during the day allowing the animal and its bedding to continue to be cold and wet. Response Council's recently amended kennel cleaning practice requires the dog to be temporarily relocated to the kennel block service-way attached to the rear of the kennel; the bedding is lifted and is attached to the wall; the kennel is hosed, a squeegee is used to remove surface water; the bedding is put back into place and then the animal re-enters the kennel. Council has purchased a paint sealant to apply to all kennel floors to allow water to 'bead' making cleaning easier while preventing the floor from becoming saturated, and therefore decreasing drying time. The sealer will be applied to all kennel floors prior to next winter. Recommended Actions: (i) That Council endorse the kennel cleaning practices undertaken at the Animal

Care Facility. (ii) That the floor of each kennel at the Animal Care Facility be treated with an

impervious sealant. 5. PROVISION OF SUITABLE BEDDING MATERIALS Issue POUNDCC was concerned that Council may not have and/or may not use bedding materials in addition to the Hessian bag trampoline beds. Response Council has a ready supply of blankets and dog jackets provided through donations by individuals or corporations for use in the kennels. The bedding material is used and replaced as necessary. Unfortunately many of the dogs are not accustomed to wearing jackets or having bedding materials and these are often either removed or destroyed by the dogs.

Recommended Action: (i) That Council endorse the use of suitable bedding materials, blankets and dog

jackets at the Animal Care Facility. 6. WISH LIST OF ITEMS FOR ANIMAL CARE FACILITY Issue POUNDCC offered to assist the ACF by sourcing items required such as blankets, water and food bowls or litter trays either by way of donation or subsidised cost if Council provided a 'wish list' of items needed. POUNDCC also offered to fundraise for any specific project or item or approach trades persons or service providers to volunteer or provide subsidised services where the need arises. Response The ACF currently receives donations of blankets, dog jackets, food and supplies from members of the public and local businesses wishing to provide assistance to animals at the ACF and the "wish list' concept could be an extension of these donations. Council would be pleased to work with POUNDCC to source consumable items from business within the community on an anonymous and obligation free basis. Council has previously received an anonymous and obligation fee donation of dog jackets which was organised by a member of the public and this approach could be used via a "wish list" concept as the need arose. Unfortunately there are a number of legislative and risk management matters associated with trades people providing subsidised services to the ACF. All work conducted at the ACF must be approved in accordance with a number of Council policies including Procurement, Tendering, Risk Management and Occupational Health & Safety. Any trade person would need to be subject to a competitive tendering process in order to meet legislative and probity requirements. Recommended Action: (i) That Council work with POUNDCC to source consumable items for use at the

Animal Care Facility, from business within the community on an anonymous and obligation free basis.

7. USE OF OLD ADMINISTRATION BUILDING AT THE ANIMAL CARE

FACILITY AS A DE-SEXING CLINIC Issue POUNDCC suggested that the old administration building at the ACF could be converted into a de-sexing clinic allowing all de-sexing of animals for sale to take place on-site prior to them leaving the facility.

Response While there is merit in this suggestion it would require an extensive capital investment by Council to amend the internal layout of the building to satisfy animal welfare needs and to operate as a vet clinic. In addition staff would need to work extended hours to ensure that animals recovering from surgery are provided with any necessary post-operative care. While this option has not been costed it is considered that it would be more cost efficient for Council to continue using its contract veterinarian to undertake all necessary treatment and surgery at their existing approved and certified facility. The old administration building is currently intended to be used for storage and additional office space for meetings and interviews. Recommended Action: (i) That Council continue to use an off-site veterinary surgery (as part of the

Contract for Veterinary Services) for the treatment of animals from the Animal Care Facility.

8. SALE OF DOGS AND CATS FROM BOOT HILL MARKETS AND

SURROUNDS Issue POUNDCC indicated concern that puppies and kittens are being sold from car boots at the Boot Hill Markets and on the footpath areas adjacent to the markets, prior to being 8 weeks of age and without being micro-chipped. Response Council has referred this matter to the RSPCA to investigate and an inspection of the markets by RSPCA officers on 1 September 2011 found no animals for sale. Council staff have suggested to the RSPCA that the Society write to the owner of the Market advising of the legal requirements and associated penalties to deter this alleged practice, should it be occurring. Council Rangers have, and will continue to conduct random inspections of the markets and the adjacent footpath areas to determine if this practice is taking place. Recent inspections have not identified any animals being offered for sale. Recommendation (i) That Council Rangers continue to conduct random inspections of the Boot Hill

Markets and surrounds to deter the unlawful sale of kittens and puppies. 9. IMPROVEMENT OF THE DOGS FOR SALE SECTION OF COUNCIL'S WEB

SITE

Issue POUNDCC indicated that Council's current web site is not regularly updated, contains outdated information about dogs at the ACF, does not contain information relating to all animals at the ACF, does not contain detailed information about dogs, does not contain individual photos of cats and does not provide the date when dogs will be available for sale. It is claimed that Council's web page information should be updated on a daily basis similar to other facilities. Response The "Dogs For Sale" and "Lost Dogs" sections of Council's web site are intended to be updated to include more capacity for additional information, as requested by POUNDCC in conjunction with the upgrade of Council's overall web site, which is scheduled to 'go live' on 3 May 2012. Council staff have reviewed other recommended websites as part of the web site update including the Renbury Farm web site which was mentioned by POUNDCC as being a good example. The Renbury Farm web site includes one additional field that is not used by Campbelltown, ("date available for sale") and also provides a more detailed description of the animal. While Council's current site limits the amount of detail that can be provided in the description of each animal (which will be addressed with the upgrade) the other additional field has been added to the existing site. In addition, individual photos of kittens available for sale have been included as part of the existing web site. The site is updated daily where workloads permit but as a minimum, it is updated 3 times per week. Recently, and due to a reduced number of animals being impounded the site has been updated daily. With regard to the claim that the web site does not contain information relating to all animals at the ACF, the web site contains all lost dogs that are not micro-chipped and all dogs offered for sale. The web site does not provide details of micro-chipped dogs as the owner of these dogs are contacted on the same day that the animal is impounded using the phone number provided in the Companion Animals Register. Hence it is not appropriate to provide these details on the web page. Recommended Action: (i) That Council endorse the proposed upgrades to the "Dogs and Cats For Sale"

and "Lost Dogs and Cats" sections of Council's web site. 10. PROVIDE PET OWNERS WITH GREATER ASSISTANCE IN CHOOSING

THE CORRECT ANIMAL Issue POUNDCC suggested that staff at the ACF were not always available to assist customers in selecting the correct animal to suit their particular needs. It is claimed that customers were often left to themselves with little advice provided in relation to animal types and care requirements.

Response ACF staff provide advice and assistance to prospective customers as required, however at times when the facility is busy, they may need to assist a number of customers at any one time. It is anticipated that with the development of a pre-purchase checklist as detailed in Issue 12 of this report, prospective customers would be able to conduct a self assessment, thereby reducing the demands on staff, allowing staff to focus on the critical aspects of pet purchasing with the customer. Recommended Action: (i) That Council endorse the development of a self assessment "Pre-Purchase

Checklist" for use by prospective customers at the Animal Care Facility. 11. IMPROVE THE STANDARD OF CAT HOUSING PROVIDED Issue POUNDCC has expressed concern that all cats regardless of age, size, health status and compatibility are housed in the one cattery, unlike dogs which are segregated. Response The current cattery is approximately 30 years old and would benefit from an upgrade. The matters raised by POUNDCC are acknowledged and a proposal to refurbish the cattery is intended to be included for consideration as part of Council's draft 2012/2013 budget. The anticipated cost of refurbishing the cattery and building a dedicated kitten enclosure is in the order of $10,000 to $15,000. Detailed quotations are currently being sought to assist in budget preparations. The RSPCA (further detail in Issue 19 of this report) identified the separation of kittens from cats as an issue and listed this as a corrective action noting that Council had recently modified two dog kennels to house kittens separately from adult cats as a temporary measure. However, a more formalised and isolated facility is required in the long term Recommendation (i) That Council consider a proposal to refurbish the cattery at the Animal Care

Facility as part of its 2012/2013 budget. 12. ENSURE PURCHASERS ARE AWARE OF THE ONGOING

REQUIREMENTS FOR THE CARE OF A PET Issue POUNDCC suggested that purchasers are not fully advised of the ongoing care and maintenance requirements for animals purchased from the ACF.

Response It was intended that Council staff develop a "Pre-purchase Checklist" of relevant questions that potential animal purchasers can complete to determine if they have the necessary resources/home/life style/environment to support a particular pet. However POUNDCC have volunteered to develop a draft document that would include matters associated with Issue 10 for Council's consideration. Once completed the form would be reviewed by Council staff prior to being used at the facility. It should also be noted that each dog/cat sold from the ACF has undergone a check-up by Council's contracted veterinarian. At this time, each new dog/cat owner is provided with a "new owners" package which contains detailed information on the ongoing care of their new pet. Staff at the ACF are also available for post sales advice from new pet owners on an as needed basis. Recommended Action: (i) That Council endorse the development of a self assessment "Pre-Purchase

Checklist" for use by prospective customers at the Animal Care Facility. (ii) That Council note the after sales service offered by the Animal Care Facility

and Council's contracted veterinarian. 13. PROMOTE AFTER HOURS SERVICE OFFERED BY OTHER FACILITIES Issue POUNDCC suggested that members of the community who find a stray dog after hours are often not aware that the RSPCA and Bradbury vet are open beyond the hours of operation of the ACF and that the stray can be delivered to those facilities. Response Council does not offer an after hours stray dog pick up service unless requested by the Police, where the animal is causing an ongoing nuisance to traffic, has attacked an animal or person or is dangerous. Police have after hours access to the ACF and can deliver dogs to the overnight holding kennels for processing by ACF staff the following day. Where possible, residents are encouraged to keep the stray animal over night, however where this is not possible they can deliver the dog to the RSPCA or Bradbury vet. In response to the suggestion made by POUNDCC, this information has recently been added to Council's web site and Council's after hours call out system. Recommendation (i) That Council note the provision of additional information in relation to stray

animals on Council's web site and included on Council's after hours call out system.

14. CONSIDER EXTENDING OPENING HOURS OF THE ANIMAL CARE FACILITY Issue POUNDCC suggested that the current opening times of the ACF on a Saturday (9am to 12 noon) may not be sufficient time for prospective purchasers of a companion animal to assess the animal's suitability and compatibility with the purchaser and their family members. Therefore, it was suggested by POUNDCC that the ACF extend its opening hours on a Saturday. Response Council's ACF is open to the public between 9.00am to 3.30pm Monday, 9.00am to 3.00pm Tuesday to Friday and 9.00am to 12 noon Saturday. Staff at the ACF work from 7.30am to 4.00pm Monday; 7.30am to 3.30pm Tuesday to Friday and 7.30am to 12.30 Saturday. The hours worked by staff during the weekdays are part of their normal 38 hour week whilst hours worked on Saturday are paid as overtime. A web site review of opening times for a sample of other Animal Facilities is provided in the table below. Council Facility Public Opening Times Wollondilly Council Monday to Friday: 3.00pm to

4.30pm Saturday: 10.00am to 1.00pm Sunday: 10.00am to 1.00pm

Renbury Farm Shelter - Bankstown City Council, Camden Council, Fairfield City Council and Liverpool City Council

Monday to Friday: 9.00am to 4.30pm Saturday: 9.00am to 4.00pm Sunday: 9.00am to 4.00pm

Hawkesbury Animal Shelter - Hawkesbury City Council, Penrith City Council & The Hills Shire Council

Monday to Friday: 9.00am to 12.30pm and 2.00pm to 4.30pm Saturday: 9.30am to 11.30am Sunday: 7.00am to 9.00am

Blacktown Animal Holding Facility - Auburn Council, Blacktown City Council, City of Canada Bay Council, Holroyd City Council, The Municipality of Hunters Hill, Lane Cove Council, Parramatta City Council, The City of Ryde

Monday to Friday: 8:30am to 4:30pm Saturday: 9:00am to 1:00pm Sunday: 9:00am to 11:00am Closed Public Holidays.

In comparison to the ACF, all other facilities offer either an extended range of days and/or opening times compared to Campbelltown. The facilities with the most extensive range of days and or opening times service more than one LGA, however the practicality and cost efficiency of opening for 2 hours on a Sunday as occurs at Hawkesbury and Blacktown is questioned.

Renbury Farm Shelter is an exception as it has the greatest range of days and opening times. However, it is a privately run facility which caters for a variety of LGAs. For Council to consider extending the opening hours at the ACF on a Saturday or Sunday, either an investigation into the feasibility of modifying work conditions of staff at the ACF by varying or splitting shifts or by agreement through overtime, would be necessary. This option has not been discussed with staff or the respective Union. However this would need to occur if Council was of a mind to grant further consideration to a proposal for an extension to the opening hours of the ACF. This is a more complex issue than can be discussed in this report and would need to be the subject of further review if considered appropriate by Council. The modification of working hours may also require additional staff to be employed to cover any extended hours of opening. Recommended Action: (i) That Council monitor the effectiveness of the other recommendations

contained in this report prior to considering the extension of weekend operating times at the ACF.

15. EMPLOYMENT OF FEMALE STAFF Issue POUNDCC has made comment that the majority of staff at the ACF were male and that this may be a barrier for some customers. Response Council employs staff following EEO principles and merit based selection. Recommended Action: (i) That the information be noted. 16. INCREASE SPONSOR A PET PROMOTIONS Issue POUNDCC suggested that Council could do more to promote the sale of companion animals from the ACF through the local media. POUNDCC also expressed concern that existing promotions do not include cats. Response Council currently places the 'Dog of the Week' advertisement in the local media and has, when approached by local media, (typically prior to Christmas) run a full page of sponsored advertisements from local businesses known as 'Sponsor a Pet'. The constraint on the 'Sponsor a Pet' program has historically been the ability of the newspaper to attract sufficient sponsorship to pay for the advertisement.

POUNDCC have volunteered to assist by sourcing sponsorship from local businesses to run the 'Sponsor a Pet' program on a more frequent basis, depending on sponsorship. Initially it has been suggested by Council staff that the program could possibly operate on a quarterly basis (subject to sponsorship), and that the program could be extended to include cats. The frequency of promotions could be enhanced where sponsorship can be obtained. Council in conjunction with the Macarthur Chronicle placed a "Find a Pet" advertisement for 10 animals (6 dogs & 4 cats) in the Macarthur Chronicle on 22 November 2011. Although, due to advertising deadlines, the majority of the animals were sold prior to the paper's release. The advertisement was successful as it generated interest in animals for sale at the ACF. The Macarthur Chronicle has indicated that they are prepared to continue the "Find a Pet" advertisement (at no cost to Council) on a regular basis subject to the availability of animals for sale. Recommended Action: (i) That Council continue to work with the Macarthur Chronicle to promote the

"Find a Pet" initiative on a regular basis. 17. WHY SOME DOGS ARE NOT OFFERED FOR SALE? Issue POUNDCC indicated that there is confusion amongst prospective purchasers as to why kennel display boards indicate that some dogs are 'not for sale'. It was also alleged that dogs are also not offered for sale as they are timid, frightened or quiet and that the proportion of dogs available for sale is very small. Response Typically dogs offered for sale are housed separately (Blocks B & C at the ACF) to dogs that are either not for sale or have not been held for the required statutory time before being offered for sale (Blocks A, D, E & F). Sometimes due to holding capacity constraints, dogs that are not for sale are housed in the same block of kennels with dogs that are for sale. Where this occurs a note is placed on the kennel to advise prospective purchasers that the dog is 'not for sale'. Dogs are not offered for sale either due to the dog being surrendered by their owner to be euthanaised or due to the dog being involved in an attack on another dog or human, or following assessment by Council's contracted veterinarian that the dog is not suitable for re-homing. Dogs are not excluded from sale because they are timid, frightened or quiet. Recommended Action: (i) That the information be noted.

18. BETTER COMMUNICATION AS TO WHEN ANIMALS ARE OFFERED FOR SALE Issue POUNDCC notes that information is not displayed on the web site or at the facility, to advise of the date and time when animals become available for sale and the process to be followed for purchasing an animal, when it does become available for sale. Response In response to POUNDCC's concerns Council's web site and kennel display boards have been refined to advise of the date and time when an animal becomes available for sale. It is also intended that Council's web site and procedures be updated to include details of how to purchase an animal that has become available for sale including the process to be followed where more than one person is interested in purchasing a particular animal. This matter is to be considered in conjunction with issue 9 and 21. Recommended Action: (i) That Council note that Council's web site and kennel display boards have been

refined to advise of the date and time when an animal becomes available for sale

INDEPENDENT INSPECTION OF THE ANIMAL CARE FACILITY In response to the matters raised by POUNDCC Council staff contacted the RSPCA and requested that an inspection of the ACF be conducted to determine the facilities status in relation to compliance with animal welfare requirements. 19. RSPCA INSPECTION OF THE ANIMAL CARE FACILITY An RSPCA Inspector conducted two unannounced Pound Inspections of the ACF on 19 October and 9 November 2011 and has provided Council with a copy of a 19 page Pound Inspection Report. The Inspector audited the facility, interviewed staff, observed work practices and inspected Council's documentation in relation to the ACF. The Report did not identify any welfare matters.

The Pound Inspection Report suggested the following actions: Documentation of Initial Health Assessment for each Animal that Enters

the Facility While a visual health assessment of all animals entering the ACF is conducted to identify sick and injured animals that need to be taken directly to Council's contracted veterinarian, a standard form to record the results of this assessment was not used. A standard visual health assessment form has now been developed and is used by staff for all incoming animals. The completed form is then attached to the Animal Seizure/Surrender Form. Council's standard operating procedures for "Impounding Animals" and "Care and Medical Treatment of Impounded Animals" are also currently being updated to include this new form.

Shade Structure to be provided to Exercise Yard

Council staff are currently obtaining quotations for a shade sail to be provided over the exercise yard.

Separation of kittens from adult cats While the Report acknowledged that Council had recently modified two dog kennels to house kittens separately from adult cats as a temporary measure, a more formalised and isolated facility is required in the long term. As detailed earlier in this report (Issue 11) the cattery is over 30 years old and in need of an upgrade which will be recommended for inclusion as an item for consideration in the 2012-2013 budget.

Recommended Action: (i) That Council endorse the recommendations of the RSPCA inspection and that

follow up action be undertaken. ADDITIONAL MATTERS RAISED BY MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY In addition to the matters raised by POUNDCC, Council has over recent months received a number of letters, emails and phone calls from members of the broader community in relation to matters associated with the operation of the ACF. A response to each of the matters raised is provided below". 20. INCENTIVE SCHEME TO REWARD RESPONSIBLE PET OWNERS Issue Concern has been raised by a member of the community that responsible dog owners who micro-chip and register their animal don't receive any benefit when compared to irresponsible dog owners when their dog is impounded. It was suggested that some form of reward scheme should be established for responsible pet owners such as a "get out of jail fee card" which could be used in the event that their dog is impounded by Council (first time only).

It has also been stated that the cost of being a responsible pet owner was prohibitive for some members of the community and consequently more discretion should be provided when it came to applying fees and charges associated with impounding and releasing dogs. This was particularly relevant where dogs escaped a yard through no fault of the owner (eg during events such as fireworks, storms, robbery or where a trade's person has left the gate open). An extension of the above concept may include the provision of more clarity and discretion concerning fines that are issued for roaming dog offences, so not to punish those who regularly do the right thing. Response Currently impounding and release fees are charged where a dog is impounded as these fees reflect the cost associated with Council undertaking this statutory function. Discretion is applied at the time of release where information is provided in relation to the circumstances of how the dog became impounded. A review of other Council Pound Facilities confirmed that this approach is an industry standard. Council is empowered to issue a fine to the owner of each impounded dog for the offence "Own dog uncontrolled in public place". Council staff currently use discretion when issuing fines for this offence and will not issue fines for impounded dogs following thunder storm events, fireworks or where the dog owner can provide an event number from Police to confirm a reported robbery. A sign advising that a fine will be issued is placed on the ACF counter and staff advise dog owners at the time of release that a fine will be issued. Contact with other Council Pound Facilities confirms that this is an industry standard, however it should be noted that Wollongong Council has a zero tolerance approach and fines are issued to the owner of all impounded animals, irrespective of circumstance. Where a fine is issued to a dog owner, the person has (as anyone who receives a fine), the ability to seek a review of that decision by writing to the State Debt Recovery Office outlining the reasons for the review. The State Debt Recovery Office will independently review the submission and may as part of this process contact Council requesting further information. Favourable consideration may be given where there is a justifiable reason, supported by evidence that the dog escape was beyond the control of the owner. Therefore, it is considered that processes associated with the application of fees, charges and fines by Council are reasonable and within industry standards. It is important to note that whilst Council employs a standard approach to fees, charges and fines associated with impounded animals, each case is treated on its individual merits. Fees, charges and fines are in place as a deterrent to animals roaming and potentially becoming involved in attacks on other dogs or people. With regular media articles regarding dog attacks Council needs to carefully consider if a review of its current practices would lessen the deterrent factor.

It is noted that Wollondilly Council is currently considering a proposal not to apply fees and charges for stray dogs (excluding restricted, dangerous and dogs not previously impounded) which are released within 24 hours of being impounded. It is recommended that Council monitor any change implemented by Wollondilly Council prior to considering any proposal to amend our current arrangements. Recommended Action: (i) That Council monitor any change implemented by Wollondilly Council, not to

charge impounding fees where a stray dog (not restricted or dangerous nor previously impounded) is retrieved within 24 hours of impounding.

21. REVIEW OF ANIMAL ALLOCATION PROCESS WHEN MORE THAN ONE

PERSON WHISHES TO PURCHASE THE SAME ANIMAL Issue On occasion, a number of customers may be interested in purchasing the same animal when it becomes available for sale. Council's current practice is that the first person that arrives at the ACF on the day the animal becomes available has first option at purchasing the animal. While this practice has operated successfully for a number of years there have been some limited instances where there has been a dispute between customers relating to who was to arrive first at the facility. Also it has not been uncommon for staff to arrive at the ACF at 7 am and find two or more people waiting to purchase the same animal. Response While it is acknowledged that in such cases there will always be someone who is disappointed, Council needs to ensure that the purchasing process is as transparent and equitable as possible, to overcome any perception of bias. Therefore, it is proposed to change the current "first in first served" practice to an "equal chance" system. It is proposed to advise all customers interested in purchasing an animal that they must first familiarise themselves with the animal and complete the "Pre-purchase checklist" prior to the day the animal becomes available for sale. On the day the animal becomes available for sale prospective purchasers must be at the ACF at 9 am. Where there is more than one customer interested in the animal, each customer would draw a numbered ball from a bag, with the person who draws the highest number being provided the first option to purchase the animal. It is intended that this new process will commence following the completion of the "Pre-purchase checklist". Councils Standard Operating Procedures will also be amended to reflect this change.

Recommended Action: That Council amend its sale process where more than one person wishes to

purchase the same animal, by introducing an "equal chance" system. That the "equal chance" system commence following the completion of the "Pre-

purchase checklist". That Council's Standard Operating Procedures be amended to reflect the "equal

chance" system for the purchase of animals where there is more than one prospective purchaser.

22. CORRESPONDENCE SENT TO ALL COUNCILLORS Over recent months Councillors have directly received a number of emails and letters from members of the broader community in relation to matters associated with the operation of the ACF. A review of the matters raised is provided below. Email dated 20 August 2011 a) I have witnessed pens being hosed down with animals still in them Please refer to Issue 4 of POUNDCC response. b) Pregnant dogs in pens with other dogs The only time dogs are kept in kennels together, is when the ACF is at capacity, and when this happens only small dogs are placed together in kennels. It would be a rare occasion when the ACF has a pregnant dog impounded, however, if this were to be the case, the dog would be placed alone in a kennel. c) Non de-sexed dogs in pens together As detailed above, the only time dogs are housed in kennels together is when the ACF is at capacity and when this happens only small dogs are placed together. It is Council's current practice, where there is a necessity to house dogs together, that they would be of the same sex. It should be noted that it is difficult to determine if a dog has been de-sexed by visual observation alone, particularly in the case of a female or young male dog. d) The absence of blankets or anything to help the animals stay warm within

the pens. Please refer to Issue 5 of POUNDCC response. In addition each kennel row has roll down blinds which are closed overnight in the colder months to keep the animals warmer.

e) Staff not appearing to be interested in re-homing animals (opinion

established by the absence of customer service the number of times I and others attended the facility)

Please refer to Matters 10 and 12 of POUNDCC response. f) New dogs not isolated from other dogs, thus increasing the risk of

disease, including Parvovirus. New arrivals at the ACF undergo a visual health assessment and any obviously sick or injured dogs are immediately taken to Council's contracted veterinarian for treatment. All puppies that enter the ACF are taken to Council's contracted veterinarian for vaccination and then isolated in separate enclosures for seven days prior to being offered for sale. Dogs with no obvious signs of illness are placed in individual kennels. Each kennel is cleaned daily using a chlorine solution and each kennel bay has a disinfectant foot bath for use by staff prior to entering the kennel enclosure. Where Parvovirus is detected the kennel is disinfected and isolated for a 28 day period to prevent the spread of this disease. g) Animals sold un-de-sexed Please refer to Issue 2 of POUNDCC response. h) Absence of yard exercise or other stimulation The recent RSPCA Pound Inspection Report confirmed that the dog pen sizes at the ACF are 1.89m3 larger than the minimum standard, which offers more room for free movement. In addition to this, dogs receive exercise while the kennels are being cleaned. Dogs retained beyond the legislative requirements are exercised by staff in the exercise yard. It is intended that this yard will be enhanced with a shade sail to satisfy RSPCA requirements. i) No screening process in place when re-homing animals A number of Animal Welfare Shelters operated by the RSPCA conduct interviews with prospective purchasers and inspect the property where the dog is to be re-homed before granting approval for the prospective owner to purchase dog. Unfortunately, Council operates a regulatory facility and does not have the resources to offer this level of service. It is anticipated that the "Pre-purchase Checklist" identified in POUNDCC Issue 12 will assist prospective purchasers to make a more informed decision. j) 1200 dogs/puppies euthanaised at the pound in 2009-2010 While there was in total 1,209 dogs euthanaised during 2009-2010, 33 were restricted dogs which by law Council must euthanise, 440 were surrendered by their owner to be euthanaised, 30 were euthanaised due to injury, illness or disease, leaving 706 being euthanaised as Council was unable re-home these dogs.

k) Limited advertising on the webpage and dogs advertised never seem to

be at the pound Please refer to Issue 9 of POUNDCC response. Advertised dogs either via the web page or "Dog of the Week" newspaper feature are popular with the public and are quite often sold the day the advertisement appears. Email dated 31 October 2011, 11.27am a) Allow Volunteers to come and walk dogs, groom and socialise dogs and

cats and assist staff at the facility. Please refer to Issue 3 of POUNDCC response. b) Only re-home de-sexed animals Please refer to Issue 2 of POUNDCC response. c) Allow volunteers to provide a foster care programme for animals Please refer to Issue 1 of POUNDCC response. d) Promote animals available for adoption on a dedicated page on the

Council website and in local papers. Please refer to Issue 9 of POUNDCC response. e) Work in with registered rescue groups to allow rescue and re-homing

under Clause 16d. Please refer to Issue 1 of POUNDCC response. f) Work with the community to provide bedding, treats and toys. Please refer to Issue 6 of POUNDCC response. g) "Getting to zero" "Getting to zero" is a "Whole Community Change Model" first introduced by the Animal Welfare League, Queensland at the Gold Coast. Getting to Zero (G2Z) aims to increase responsibility for companion animals so that every city and shire can achieve zero euthanasia of all healthy and treatable cats and dogs. There are three principles relating to "Getting to Zero": 1st Principle: Each community takes responsibility for saving its own abandoned animals 2nd Principle: Zero euthanasia of at least 90% of all incoming animas in a given community (i.e. all healthy and treatable cats and dogs) is achievable

3rd Principle: All cats and dogs are equally deserving of our utmost efforts to preserve and enhance their lives Council is actively working towards the achievement of these three principles. Implementation of the recommended improvements contained in this report (i.e. use of rescue organisations, mandatory de-sexing of male dogs, community education programs) and the recently approved CAWS Program which will provide subsidised de-sexing would result in benefits aligned with these principles. Email dated 31 October 2011, 7.43pm a) To reduce the euthanasia rate at the facility Council is committed to reducing the euthanasia rate of healthy animals and regularly retains animals on site beyond the legislative requirements in order to re-home the animal. b) Ideally to have it as a 'No Kill facility', putting Campbelltown in the top

pounds of NSW Group It is not possible to have a "No Kill Facility" as animals will always have to be euthanaised due to injury/illness/disease/temperament. Council will continue to work to reduce the numbers of healthy animals that are euthanaised. c) To have all animals de-sexed before being released to their new owners Please refer to Issue 2 of POUNDCC response. d) To have registered rescue groups allowed to rescue animals under clause 16d. Please refer to Issue 1 of POUNDCC response. e) To work with the council to ensure that all animals are as comfortable as

possible during their stay at the facility eg beds, bedding storm covers, isolation areas for sick and young animals

Please refer to Issue 5 of POUNDCC response. f) To work with the council to allow volunteers into the facility Please refer to Issue 3 of POUNDCC response. g) To ensure all animals at the facility are promoted though the website

creating more exposure and maximum re-homing rates Please refer to Issue 9 of POUNDCC response.

h) To obtain a 'wish list' from council staff that would assist with animals welfare Please refer to Issue 6 of POUNDCC response. i) For council to take part in the "Getting to Zero initiative which has been

adopted by many animal care facilities across Australia and proven successful

Please refer to Issue g) response to email dated 31 October 2011, 11:27am Letter dated 8 November 2011 a) Getting to Zero Program Please refer to Issue g) response to email dated 31 October 2011, 11:27am b) Mandatory de-sexing of all animals Please refer to Issue 2 of POUNDCC response. c) Volunteer Program Please refer to Issue 3 of POUNDCC response. d) Rescue GPS/Vets/Other responsible outlets Please refer to Issue 1 of POUNDCC response. e) Hours of business Please refer to Issue 14 of POUNDCC response. Recommended Action: (i) That a further report be provided to Council within 12 months of the

implementation of the recommendations contained in this report.

5. GENERAL BUSINESS

Nil. Confidentiality Motion: (Oates/Thompson) That the Committee in accordance with Section 10 of the Local Government Act 1993, move to exclude the public from the meeting during discussions on the items in the Confidential Agenda, due to the confidential nature of the business and the Committee's opinion that the public proceedings of the Committee would be prejudicial to the public interest. CARRIED

18. CONFIDENTIAL ITEMS

18.1 Confidential Information relating to items on the Planning and Environment Agenda 6 December 2011

Reason for Confidentiality

This report is CONFIDENTIAL in accordance with Section 10A(2)(c) of the Local Government Act 1993, which permits the meeting to be closed to the public for business relating to the following: -

(c) information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business

There being no further business the meeting closed at 9.20pm. R Kolkman CHAIRPERSON