Agenda of Ordinary Council

Attachment 1

Detailed Report Deferred Area Attachment 1

DETAILED REPORT ON DRAFT PLANNING CONTROLS FOR

MERRYLANDS, CARLINGFORD & EAST RYDALMERE

BACKGROUND

In November 2006, Council adopted a revised Residential Development Strategy (RDS) to respond to future population growth and housing demand in Parramatta local government area (LGA). The purpose of the RDS is to set the direction for the future location, density and character of housing within Parramatta.

To manage new residential development, the RDS proposes a ‘concentrated growth’ model. This would allow more intense housing development to occur in areas or ‘centres’ which can best support such growth. Typically, these areas are close to public transport, shops and community facilities.

In adopting the RDS, Council deferred some of the ‘centres’ for consideration at a later date. Merrylands, Carlingford and East Rydalmere were amongst those areas deferred in the RDS. There were a variety of reasons for the decision to defer areas but generally it was better to examine these areas in the longer term when the affects of other influences could be better assessed.

In translating the RDS into the draft Parramatta Local Environmental Plan (LEP), Council in May 2007 adopted the draft Parramatta LEP 2008 which proposed to downzone some areas within the study areas of Merrylands, Carlingford and East Rydalmere that are currently zoned Residential 2(b). This was to preserve the land from ad-hoc development in the short term until decisions on its future development capacity were made. (Note: The existing areas zoned Residential 2(c) within these areas were proposed to be retained in the equivalent R4 High Density Residential Zone under the draft LEP).

In October 2007, the Department of Planning (DoP) advised Council that there were a number of outstanding issues that prevented the DoP from authorising a Section 65 Certificate enabling the draft Parramatta LEP to be formally exhibited. One of the issues raised by the DoP was that deferred areas where down-zoning was proposed would not be supported. At its meeting of the 29 October 2007, Council resolved in part:

‘That Council note the advice of the Minister for Planning on 24 October that:-

1. The Department of Planning will not accept the down-zoning of deferred areas and therefore Council proceed immediately to prepare detailed analysis of these areas leading to zoning and built form controls in the draft Parramatta LEP 2008.’

As a consequence, an assessment of the deferred areas of Merrylands, Carlingford and East Rydalmere was undertaken.

THE DEFERRED AREAS

This report focuses on the deferred areas in the RDS of Merrylands, Carlingford and East Rydalmere. Maps of each study area are identified within Attachment 2.

The Merrylands Study Area is focused on the eastern side of Merrylands Railway Station. The railway line forms the boundary between Parramatta City Council and Holroyd City Council. A small group of shops are located on the eastern side of the railway station. The area surrounding these shops comprises mostly detached dwellings. The Merrylands Town Centre is located on the western side, within the Holroyd LGA.

There are small pockets of medium and higher density housing spread throughout the study area. The study area is relatively flat and there is a large park (Granville Park) further east of the station closer to Woodville Road. The primary roads in the study area are Merrylands Road, Railway Terrace, Mombri Street and Loftus Streets. Merrylands Road provides access directly to Merrylands Railway Station and Woodville Road to the east. Railway Terrace provides access to the south towards Guildford. Mombri and Loftus Streets provide access across the railway line into the Merrylands Town Centre. Two heritage items are located in the study area at Nos. 56 and 59 Merrylands Road, being single storey dwellings.

The Carlingford Study Area is located around Carlingford Railway Station. The study area is located on a ridge line defined by Pennant Hills Road, which also forms the boundary between Parramatta City Council and Baulkham Hills Shire Council. Carlingford Railway Station is the last stop on the Carlingford Railway Line. Access to the railway station is on the northern side of Pennant Hills Road. Several bus services exist connecting Carlingford to other centres such as North Rocks, Epping, Pennant Hills, Ryde, West Ryde and Meadowbank.

There is a small group of shops to the south of Carlingford Railway Station along Pennant Hills Road, located in Parramatta LGA, as well as the Carlingford Village shops at the eastern end of the study area at the intersection of Marsden Rd and Pennant Hills Road. The study area comprises a mix of housing, including residential flat buildings, town houses and detached houses. Spread throughout the area is a series of bushland corridors.

There are a number of heritage items in and adjacent to the study area including bushland at Evans Road, Carlingford Memorial Park, Eric Mobbs Memorial, K13 Memorial, Galaringi Reserve, Mobbs Hill Reserve, bushland, fencing and bridge on Honiton Avenue, water tanks on Marsden Road, and dwellings at Nos. 101 and 105 Adderton Road.

The East Rydalmere Study Area is located on Victoria Road at the intersection of Park Road. Victoria Road is a heavily trafficked arterial road linking Parramatta to Sydney. The study area accommodates a variety of building types and land uses, including low scale detached housing and is adjacent to substantial industrial areas. Subiaco Creek, a regional open space corridor, lies to the north of the study area, with Parramatta River to the south. The study area also includes a Bowling Club and local parks. There is a small grouping of shops framed by Park Road and Victoria Road which provide day to day retail services. There is also a hotel, baby health care facility, church and school within the precinct. Heritage items are located at Nos. 2 Myrtle Street (Catholic Church), and two dwellings at No. 24 Wattle Street and No. 72 Park Road.

DEFERRED AREAS ANALYSIS

A workshop was held with Councillors on 7 April 2008 in relation to the deferred areas of Merrylands, Carlingford and East Rydalmere. The information presented at the workshop outlined the context and setting for each area, environmental analysis, proposed urban design principles and draft land use controls to underpin the LEP. The principal findings of the analysis are discussed below.

Merrylands

§ With access to public transport, retail and commercial services, open space and a relatively unconstrained urban structure, Merrylands offers opportunities for increased residential densities.

§ This area has direct pedestrian access to the railway station and vehicular and pedestrian access to the Merrylands Town Centre. Given the principles of transit-oriented development, the lots directly adjacent to the station may be given comparatively more generous height and floor space controls.

§ In the short term, it is desirable to preserve the low scale residential character of single dwellings in the southern part of the precinct, which contribute to the mix of housing and the amenity of the neighbourhood. In the longer term, increased densities may be considered, as the first stage of redevelopment is completed, and assuming that there is sufficient demand for further housing.

§ Planning controls prepared by Holroyd Council in respect of land in that LGA directly adjacent to the railway line allows for mixed used development between 6 – 8 storeys in height. This also accommodates some demand for housing development in the locality.

Carlingford

§ Carlingford has topographical and natural constraints, poor pedestrian and vehicular connectivity and is characterised by a mix of housing including established residential flat buildings and low scale detached housing. Considering these constraints Carlingford study area is less likely suitable to sustain significant housing growth.

§ Planning controls prepared by Baulkham Hills Shire Council in respect of land on the northern side of Pennant Hills Road allow for significant increases in residential densities and will also accommodate demand for housing in the area.

East Rydalmere

§ Considering the existing mix of uses in East Rydalmere, as well as its established low scale character, it is anticipated that this study area could sustain contained redevelopment for increased residential densities focused around the existing ‘centre’ and close to parks and schools.

§ New mixed-use development should be focused around the current commercial and community uses and toward the intersection of Park Road and Pine Street.

§ Part of the study area has an established low density character with single dwellings that are highly consistent in terms of scale, materials and setbacks from the street. Retention of this housing in the eastern sections of Pine and Wattle Street is desirable in providing for housing mix and retaining the character of this housing and the amenity it provides to the neighbourhood.

RECOMMENDED PLANNING CONTROLS

Merrylands Precinct

1. Preferred Planning Controls - Option 1

The provision of high density residential development near existing public transport infrastructure is consistent with transport oriented development promoted by the NSW State Government and Council’s RDS. Land along Mombri Street, Loftus Street, Railway Terrace, Merrylands Road and Smythe Street is in the immediate vicinity of Merrylands Railway Station and is recommended for higher density residential development. This area also is within walking distance to a large retail centre on the opposite side of the railway station which provides major retailing and considerable services to support the needs and demands of the existing and future community.

The recommended draft planning controls for Merrylands provide for increased densities concentrated along the northern portion of the precinct, whilst allowing reduced densities within the southern portion as outlined in Attachment 2.

It is proposed to concentrate higher density mixed use development toward the railway line, with building heights and densities gradually falling from west to east (towards Woodville Road). An active street frontage to Railway Terrace is recommended, creating opportunities for surveillance of the railway line and improved pedestrian access between the northern portion of Railway Terrace and Merrylands Railway Station.

Concentrating the tallest buildings (5 – 6 storeys or 17 – 21 metres proposed on the Parramatta LGA side) closest to the railway station has also been the strategic approach of Holroyd City Council, which allows for development between 6 – 8 storeys in this vicinity. The area bound by Mombri Street, Loftus Street, and Merrylands Road is proposed to allow higher density residential development, providing a gradual change in scale from Railway Terrace to Woodville Road. The area bound by Boomerang, Bennalong, Randle and William Streets, and the parcels between the existing school and Bennalong Park on William Street are also proposed to be zoned to allow higher density residential development, providing streetscape continuity along Boomerang and William Streets.

Land south of Sutherland Lane and the southern part of the precinct is proposed to be zoned low density residential, allowing it to be revisited in the future as to its longer term development capacity.

2. Alternative Zoning based on Department of Planning Advice – Option 2

At the Councillor workshop it was suggested that another zoning option could be considered for Merrylands, reflecting the advice of the Department of Planning (DoP) in its letter to Council of 19 December 2007, viz:

The Department’s assessment of the zoning within the RDS included consideration of Council’s argument that down zoning was needed to retain capacity for future higher density development. In most cases adequate low density 2(a) land was identified in reserve, without the need to downzone existing medium density 2(b) or high density 2(c) land. In the case of Merrylands however, there does not appear to be adequate 2(a) land in reserve. Therefore the Department agreed that the two street blocks closest to the station (Mombri & Lotus Streets & Merrylands Road) could be down zoned to allow for future higher density development.

Under this scenario of the Department of Planning, all existing zonings of Residential 2(b) and Residential 2(c) in the Merrylands RDS precinct would be retained, with the exception of the Mombri Street, Loftus Street and Merrylands Road blocks referred to. The zoning, height and FSR outcomes under this scenario are mapped in Attachment 3. Building height and density controls would remain consistent with those allowed under the existing LEP 2001, other than for the Mombri, Loftus & Merrylands Road blocks which would be downzoned to R2 low density residential.

Councillors may wish to consider this option, but the recommended planning controls discussed in Option 1 above are preferred because they make better provision for consolidated increase in residential density in the short term as well as preserving land for longer term growth.

Option 2 would result in the fragmentation of high and medium density areas over the Merrylands RDS area and limit the long term growth potential of Merrylands. It may also result in more inconsistency in built form throughout the precinct.

3. Response to issues raised at Councillor Workshop

Concern was raised by some Councillors at the workshop about the width of Smythe Street in relation to the proposed higher density residential development. This matter has been discussed with Council’s Transport & Traffic Service Manager and Design staff who have advised that the current Smythe Street road pavement width of 9.65 metres is sufficient to enable 2 metres for vehicle car parking on either side, whilst allowing 2.8 metres per vehicle travelling lane in each direction. These widths are consistent with the RTA’s minimum width of 2.7 metres and are comparable to sections of Parramatta Road which allows vehicles to travel at 60 km/hour. By contrast, Smythe Street is a slow vehicle movement area, is of a reasonably short distance, and is not a major road within the local road network.

Options are available to improve vehicle circulation within Smythe Street including restricting parking to one side of the roadway only, altering vehicle movements to ‘one way’, or widening of the carriageway.

Should Council wish to widen the Smythe Street carriageway in the future, this could be achieved within the existing road reservation, without the need to acquire private property. The costs associated with undertaking road widening would include realignment of kerb and guttering, extension of road pavement, removal and replacement of existing trees, potential realignment of the footpath/s and potential relocation of services.

While an increase in traffic volumes may be expected as a result of higher residential densities within the locality, the proposal accords with the principles of Council’s RDS to provide higher density housing close to centres and public transport, which provides opportunities for reduced car movements in the longer term. Traffic speeds in any case will be slow.

Another matter raised at the Councillor Workshop was concern about the proximity of higher density development in the vicinity of existing heritage items at Nos. 56 and 59 Merrylands Road, Merrylands and the potential impact this will have on the integrity of these heritage items. Proposed zonings in proximity of these items have been reviewed so that the current zoning regime is maintained immediately adjoining these sites.

Carlingford Precinct

In response to a number of constraints relating to Carlingford as previously discussed, particularly topography and poor vehicular and pedestrian connectivity, it is recommended to concentrate increased densities along Pennant Hills Road, Adderton Road and Charles Street as detailed at Attachment 2.

The draft planning controls propose greater height and density along Pennant Hills Road in the shopping precincts of Carlingford Village Shopping Centre at the eastern end of the precinct, and for the shops closer to Carlingford Railway Station, to encourage an upgrade of existing retail shops with shop top housing and support their ongoing viability with increased residential population within their catchment. It would also add to the diversity of dwelling types in the locality.

West of the railway line it is proposed to allow a mix of four storey (14 metres) residential flat buildings and two storey (11 metres) townhouse style housing. This part of the precinct also has good proximity to the Telopea RDS precinct and has already shown potential for redevelopment with recent medium density redevelopment.

The remainder of the precinct is more suited to low density residential development. The effect of this is some proposed down zonings of residential land at the perimeter of the RDS area consistent with proposed zonings outside the RDS area, where rezoning is proposed from 2(b) Residential to R2 Low Density Residential. This is considered appropriate and justifiable to the DoP largely because of the environmental constraints and limited walkability of these areas for residents, as well as in the context of the broader RDS proposals in this locality.

Existing heritage items within the precinct are proposed to retain existing zoning equivalents.

As mentioned previously, planning controls prepared by Baulkham Hills Shire Council in respect of land on the northern side of Pennant Hills Road allow for significant increases in residential densities and will also accommodate demand for housing in the area.

East Rydalmere Precinct

The recommended planning controls for East Rydalmere seek to accentuate development along Park Road both north and south of Victoria Road within the precinct as detailed at Attachment 2. It is proposed to retain the existing medium density residential zone along Victoria Road as R3 Medium Density Residential, reflecting the existing zoning and recent multi-unit residential redevelopment in this location.

Proposed zonings north of Victoria Road seek to allow for a level of mixed use activity (3 storeys or 12 metres) to be concentrated around the intersection of Park Road and Pine Street, building on existing activities including the church, school, hotel and shops, and allowing future redevelopment to be focussed away from Victoria Road. Increased residential densities are generally proposed between the industrial area west of Myrtle Street and the eastern side of Park Road allowing for a mix of two storey (11 metres) R3 medium density and 3 storey (11 metres) R4 high density residential zones.

Proposed zonings on the southern side of Victoria Road will also allow for a mix of two storey (11 metres) R3 Medium Density Residential and R4 three storey (11 metres) R4 High Density Residential zones. The existing commercial zoning on the south eastern corner of Victoria Road and Park Road will be extended to incorporate two additional properties on Park Road as previously resolved by Council and will allow a maximum of 3 storeys (12 metres).

The southern part of the precinct is considered appropriate for up zoning given its isolation from low density residential areas, its proximity to open space, Rydalmere Primary School and public transport services including the Rydalmere Ferry Wharf and bus services along Victoria Road. The street width in Elonera Street and Burbang Crescent allows for constrained traffic movement if cars are parked in the street and may require an extension of existing parking restrictions that apply on one side of Elonera Street.

Height and densities proposed over the precinct as a whole are proposed to be relatively low scale allowing for two and three storey developments throughout. These heights and densities would also provide consistency where existing development has already taken place within the 2(b) Residential Zone, particularly along Victoria Road. Furthermore, the heights and densities proposed allows for a suitable relationship to be created between the existing low density areas and proposed areas to be up zoned.

An existing heritage item and adjoining land at No. 72 Park Road is proposed within the R3 Medium Density Residential zone. Height and densities proposed on and adjacent to this site will provide for relatively low scale development at 2 storeys (11 metres). The current Residential 2a zone applying to this site and surrounds permits a maximum height of 2 storeys (9 metres). Heritage planning controls require the heritage significance of the heritage item to be considered as part of any development on or adjacent to the site. The heritage item at No. 24 Wattle Street is proposed to remain within a low density residential zone, while the heritage item at No. 2 Myrtle Street, the Catholic Church, will maintain zoning, height and density controls equivalent to Parramatta LEP 2001.

CONSULTATION

Staff from Council’s Strategic Asset Management, Community Capacity Building, Place Management, Traffic and Transport Services and Urban Design teams were consulted in the preparation of draft planning controls.

Community consultation of these deferred areas will occur with the exhibition of the draft Parramatta LEP 2008 as a whole.

NEXT STEPS

This report details the preferred zoning, height and density options for Council to consider. Once the draft planning controls have been adopted by Council they will be included as part of draft Parramatta LEP 2008. Draft DCP controls will also be formulated, to provide more detailed planning guidance on built form outcomes, desired streetscape, building setbacks, future character, desired future pedestrian connections etc and will be reported for Council’s consideration. These controls will form part of the draft Parramatta Development Control Plan 2008 to guide future development in each precinct.

Attachment 1

State-Wide Exempt and Complying Development Codes Detailed Report

State-Wide Exempt and Complying development codes

detailed report

Purpose

The purpose of this report is to:

§ Inform Councillors of the contents of proposed State-wide Complying development codes for single storey dwellings, alterations and additions for single and two storey dwellings, alterations and additions to commercial and industrial developments, and a State-wide exempt development code

§ To provide Councillors with a comparison of the proposed codes against existing exempt and complying development codes, and Council’s existing DCP

§ Identify specific provisions where it is appropriate for Council to apply to the state government for a minor variation to a state-wide code so that issues of local context can be better addressed

§ Seek Council’s endorsement to make a formal submission to the Department of Planning on the proposed state wide codes

Background

Planning reforms

On 27 November 2007, the Minister for Planning, Frank Sartor MP, released for public comment a discussion paper about improving the NSW Planning System. The draft discussion paper proposed a number of changes to the current system. A main area of change involved amending existing legislation to increase from 11% to 50%, the scope and use of exempt and complying development for small scale development, and the introduction of state wide codes to manage the assessment of these developments.

Draft exposure bill

On 3 April 2008, and in response to feedback from the public, a draft exposure bill was put before state parliament. The draft exposure bill provides legislative detail on the matters raised in the discussion paper, including changes to the operation of exempt and complying development. The proposed legislative changes exclusively relate to complying development and are documented below:

§ The notification requirements will require a courtesy notice to be given to neighbours immediately after the complying development certificate has been issued, and before work commences.

§ The Act currently provides for an application for a complying development to be determined within 7 days. The proposal is to increase the time for a determination to 10 days.

§ The requirements for applications for complying development certificates will be amended to improve the quality of the information provided.

§ The proposal in the discussion paper relating to Principal Certifying Authorities ability to issue minor non-compliance with complying development will not proceed.

Council’s submission on the draft exposure bill

On the 21 April, a report was presented to a special meeting of Council to outline Council’s main concerns with the draft exposure bill. A key concern tabled in the report was the absence of significant detail relating to complying development codes to enable meaningful comment. Subsequently, Council recommended in its submission that consultation occur on the extent and detail of the proposed complying development to be included in the State wide codes.

Draft State-wide Exempt and Complying development code

On 8 May 2008 the NSW Government released the following codes available for public comment until July 4, 2008:

§ New single storey houses on lots over 600 square metres.

§ Single storey housing alterations and additions on lots over 600 square metres.

§ Exempt development – for residential and rural zones.

§ Internal alterations for two-storey houses.

§ Commercial and industrial exempt development.

§ Commercial and industrial complying development (change of use)

How do these new codes apply?

Currently, exempt and complying development applies through an enabling clause in the Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2001 (PLEP 2001). Clause 17 and 18 of PLEP 2001 describes exempt and complying development and the areas where such development does not apply. An example of where exempt development does not apply includes land where a heritage item is located, a site with an interim heritage order and a state listed heritage item. Currently complying development does not apply to environmentally sensitive land, including heritage items and conservation areas, bushfire prone, flood liable or contaminated land, or land subject to subsidence, slip or erosion.

The practice of an enabling clause will still apply, however, a specific State Environmental Planning Policy will be enacted to give effect to exempt and complying development. This SEPP will override and replace existing LEP provisions. At the time of the release of the exempt and complying development codes, the proposed SEPP was not prepared. In the absence of the SEPP, the introductory section of the NSW housing code for Exempt and Complying development draft for discussion (May 2008 (section 1.7; p 23) describes where exempt and complying development cannot be carried out. There is no major variation between areas excluded from the use of exempt and complying development to that which currently applies with one exception. A significant departure, and of interest to Councillors, will be the intention for heritage conservation areas to be subject to complying development contrary to what is currently the case under PLEP 2001. A draft complying development code is being prepared that will set out guidelines for managing development in these areas. Councillors will be given an opportunity to comment on this draft code when it is released.

Local variations

As stated in the report to Council in April about the draft exposure bill, it is not clear what level of local variations Council will be able to incorporate into the state wide codes. This is an acknowledgement that while housing types are fairly consistent across the state, there are circumstances where Council will want apply certain standards to preserve the special characteristics of an area.

Councils are invited to submit proposals for local variations to the Complying Development Experts Panel, which is the panel responsible for the development of these new codes. The message has been that the local variations need to be minor and be kept to an absolute minimum.

Design principles

The preamble to the new complying development codes is targeted very much towards those embarking on building their family home. The key messages in the preamble are that new state-wide codes will deliver a simpler planning assessment and identify the principles and reasons for good design. The arguments posed in the preamble for good design highlight the need for a balance between the individual aspirations of home owners, and to create a sense of cohesion in the neighbourhood and to protect the amenity of neighbours. This explanation is followed by more detail on what makes good design such as consideration of streetscape, bulk and scale, setbacks, privacy and safety, private open space, designing garages and driveways and ESD principles. The purpose of these principles is to educate and assist those who are embarking on the planning assessment process for the first time so they can understand what is involved. These design principles don’t form part of the codes themselves and therefore hold no weight in the assessment process.

A. General comments on the application of the new Exempt and Complying Development codes

A review of the draft codes has been carried out and the following are the areas identified as being of most concern as well as some general comments on the codes. The comparison tables contained in attachment No 2 are intended to provide a snapshot of the key elements of the codes and identify the key differences between Council‘s existing exempt and complying codes. A comparison against Council’s existing DCP guidelines is also provided. This is in order to gauge how significant a variation there may be to the generally accepted standards contained within the DCP notwithstanding the fact that an approval would be gained via a development application.

Neighbour notification – The Draft Complying Development Code identifies the benefits of consulting with neighbours early on in the design process, however, there is still no requirement for formal notification and consultation with neighbours other than a requirement to issue a courtesy notice once the complying development certificate has been issued and prior to commencement of work.

The above scenario does not leave any recourse or means of challenging the validity of a complying development certificate other than complaint to Council or the Building Professionals Board. This is the same situation as currently is in place, however, has been highlighted as it will likely become a drain on Council resources to investigate complaints and alleged non-compliances with the Complying Development code.

Removal of Provisional Complying development category

As mentioned previously, the category of provisional complying development has been removed from the reforms. This will prevent Council or a PCA from issuing a Complying Development Certificate with ‘minor variations’ to the code. This move is welcomed and will provide the community with at least some level of certainty as to what can and can’t be built next door to them without being notified.

Applicability of the draft codes and relationship to other legislation

As mentioned previously, as the draft SEPP containing the enabling criteria has not been released, there is some uncertainty over the exact circumstances where the codes will apply. It is also uncertain as to how the two documents will relate. The LUTP team is currently preparing a comprehensive LEP in accordance with the Standard Instrument Order which contains compulsory clauses (Cl 3.1 & 3.2) dealing with Exempt & Complying Development. It is not known at this stage either the timing of release of the SEPP or how the two instruments would relate and what implementation and transitional measures will be used.

There is also mention made of Councils being able to seek Local Variations to the standard code to allow for minor variations within the code. It is unclear whether this will be included in a Schedule within the SEPP or within the code itself. This may lead to confusion by applicants who may be unaware of the need to refer to a separate document to check any local variations.

It is also noted that the draft dwelling codes currently on exhibition are not applicable to dwellings within Heritage Conservation Areas, however, it is stated in the code that another code specifically dealing with development in Heritage Conservation Areas will be released in the future. This creates a level of uncertainty for both Council and the community.

Submission requirements

The code details the extensive submission requirements for lodging a complying development certificate. It does not, however, give indications as to how Council should deal with applications that are missing a relatively small piece of information (for example a sedimentation and erosion control plan or a small detail in a specification). Technically, it could be argued that the proposal is not complying if it is missing one piece of information. It would be unlikely Council could comply with the 10 day timeframe if requests for further information were to be issued. Conversely, Council would likely draw criticism and the applicant incur extra fees, were it to refuse the Complying development certificate in order to meet the 10 days assessment timeframe. Additionally, the code states that all new dwellings and major alterations and additions are to comply with BASIX requirements (the Building and Sustainability Index) yet this is not included in the checklist of information to be included when lodging a Complying Development application.

Standard conditions

The standard conditions proposed to be imposed on all Complying Development Certificates are extremely deficient in a number of areas. Table 5 of attachment 2 shows which conditions are included that Council currently imposes on Complying Development and whether there is an equivalent one proposed under the Code. Of major concern is the absence of conditions relating to permitted hours of construction, notification requirements of commencement of works, compliance with Workcover requirements for removal of asbestos, fire safety upgrade requirements and conditions relating to the protection of Council’s assets (kerb & gutter and footpaths etc).

Whilst it can be argued that some conditions typically imposed on development consents by Council are technically not necessary as they are covered by other legislation (e.g. BCA & Workcover requirements) it has to be remembered that a large majority of ‘mum and dad’ builders may be unaware of certain requirements and the conditions serve as both an educational function as well as being readily and easily enforceable by compliance officers. The absence of these conditions from approvals would potentially make Council’s regulatory job more difficult.

The importance of these conditions in providing the balance between allowing owners to develop their property and maintaining a reasonable level of amenity and protection of life and health, is such that Council should make representations in the strongest possible terms to have the appropriate conditions imposed on all CDC’s.

Checklist suggestion

In discussion with planning staff in the Development Services Unit the view was reached that the relevant standards and controls are not presented in an easy to read manner. It would be useful to members of the public for a standardised assessment template to be prepared by the Department to accompany the codes. This along with a practice or explanatory note would be of assistance for the general public to interpret jargon and understand the intent of some of the standards.

B. Comparison and critique of the proposed new codes with Parramatta’s existing controls

Single storey dwelling houses and alterations and additions to single dwelling houses

The following section is intended to illustrate the key differences and areas of concern identified in the new codes.

As depicted in Attachment 2, the draft code provides a number of controls not dissimilar in nature to those contained within Council’s current DCP. The code is applicable for construction of new dwelling houses on lots 600sqm or greater which are outside of Heritage Conservation Areas. The single storey alterations and additions code also applies to lots greater than 600sqm and outside Heritage Conservation Areas. The two codes are discussed together in this report as many of controls in both are the same.

The main areas of difference and concern between the draft codes are discussed below under relevant headings.

Streetscape

The draft code dictates a setback that is generally consistent with that of development immediately adjacent however also identifies an ‘articulation zone’ control where elements such as entry features, porches, bay windows and like can project up to 1.2m forward of the building line.

In areas where there are no existing buildings facing the street on immediately adjacent land, the front setback control is 4.5m. This scenario is not likely to be common but in areas undergoing re-development it could be possible for someone to construct a portion of a dwelling or dwellings as close as 3.3m from the front boundary (i.e. 4.5m setback -1.2m elements in the ‘articulation zone’). This could conceivably alter the character of a street incrementally and create a crowded streetscape feel altering, detrimentally, the character of an area compared to streets that currently comply with Council’s DCP controls.

Site coverage

The proposed code introduces a site coverage control rather than the FSR control that Council currently utilises. The site coverage proposed under the code is 60% for sites 600sqm in area and reduces on a sliding scale as the lot size increases.

To take an example of a new dwelling on a 600smq lot a comparison between the code and Council’s controls indicates that an applicant could obtain an additional 24sqm floor area under the code than someone lodging a traditional Development application. Whilst not a significant difference probably equating to a large master bedroom or a family room, the incremental effect could alter the character of an area and compromise Council’s ability to provide consistent assessment outcomes when assessing those new dwellings for which a Development Application has been lodged.

Private Open Space

The proposed code introduces a percentage control for provision of private open space which increases as site size increases. The resultant square metres required are comparable if not greater than what Parramatta Council currently requires, however, of concern is that there is not a landscaping and or deep soil component for open space and the minimum dimension is only 2m. Council currently requires private open space to contain a minimum dimension of 6m x 6m. The provision of private open space with dimension of 2m does not provide for adequate areas of active play and or recreation in back yards. Whilst the use of private and public open space areas is largely an issue of choice for individuals, reducing the requirement of open space to having a dimension of only 2m is considered too small and too inconsistent with Council’s current controls.

Side and Rear Setbacks

Side and rear setback within the single storey new dwelling code is set on a sliding scale dependant on wall height and length and whether there are major openings in that elevation. Council’s minimum complying code for side setbacks is 1.2m. The draft code provides a minimum setback of 0.9m which is consistent with the Building Code of Australia.

However, the rear setback controls of the draft code are considerably lower than Council’s complying code as shown in Attachment 1. The rear setbacks in the draft code range from 0.9-1.5m for walls with no major openings and 1.9-2.5m for walls with major openings. Council’s complying code for rear setbacks is significantly larger, being 6m or 30% of the length of the site, whichever is greater. In addition to the sliding scale and private open space requirements, setbacks of neighbouring properties should be considered to encourage some level of street consistency. This is a major variation to Council’s DCP and it would be difficult to maintain the application of this standard whilst complying development standards are so much more accommodating.

Pools and Fencing

The single storey new dwelling code does not contain any controls or guidance on the provision of swimming pools or fencing or retaining walls. These controls are contained within the alterations and additions code.

The code for swimming pools states that in residential zones, pools sited between the dwelling house and the primary street frontage must be located behind a solid fence. This fence is allowed to be up to 1.8m in height. This is of major concern due to the impact on streetscape that solid 1.8m high fencing will have. Additionally, the construction of 1.8m fencing on the front boundary raises other concerns in relation to safety, namely site lines of reversing cars being compromised as well as solid walls being potential graffiti targets and reducing casual surveillance of the street. This is contrary to best practice planning principles.

Currently under Council’s complying development criteria for swimming pools, pools must be located only in the rear yard.

The draft code also allows for pools to be constructed with coping and decking up to 1.5m above ground level with a side setback of 1.5m from property boundaries. Currently Council’s DCP sets a maximum height of 600mm above ground and any higher requires a merit assessment and consultation thought the development application process. In some circumstances, 1.5m above ground may be acceptable in terms of privacy and overlooking, however, it illustrates further how the ‘planning by numbers’ approach of a blanket code is impractical and could lead to serious compromising of a neighbour’s amenity.

It is recommended that Council, in its submission raise strenuous objections to this aspect of the code.

Drainage

The draft code contains a requirement that rainwater be conveyed to a Council controlled system or on site absorption trench. This is consistent in principle with Council’s current policy for new dwellings however it needs to be noted that stormwater management and disposal is not always prescriptive and needs to be assessed on a case by case basis given the varying elements such as topography, current stormwater infrastructure in the area, location in the catchment and so on. The code makes a blanket reference to compliance with any criteria by the relevant public authority. This is likely to be difficult to manage particularly when a private Principle certifying authority is issuing a Complying Development Certificate. The results of this arrangement will not be readily evident until heavy rain events, which may be some time after completion.

Miscellaneous

The new dwelling code makes references in the table of contents to swimming pools (2.1.3) yet there are no details within the new dwelling code for swimming pools. It could be assumed that an applicant would go to the alterations and additions code to look at the swimming pool guidelines, however, this illustrates the potential confusion for applicants as to what codes apply in what circumstances.

On page 14 of the new dwelling code and 2.3.2.5 – Exemptions it is stated that the setbacks referred to in the table “do not apply to allowable encroachments permitted under clause 3.7.1.7 of Volume Two of the Building Code of Australia”. It then states that “if land immediately adjoining the site boundary is a public reserve, no minimum setback is required from that boundary.”

The use of the Building Code of Australia, a document largely aimed at achieving adequate fire safety and structural adequacy, to control amenity, is not transparent and leads to a lack of certainty and confusion by applicants and neighbours as to what the standard is.

Second story additions

Parramatta DCP 2005 currently does not allow any works to two storey dwellings as complying development. As such, there are no equivalent provisions to compare with the proposed Code. The effect of the Code in Parramatta would be to introduce an additional category of Complying Development. It is noted that the majority of internal alterations to two storey dwellings would meet the criteria for exempt development under the current Parramatta DCP for Exempt Development. As such, the Complying Development criteria would only be relevant to a small number of applications, such as applications that propose to alter the configurations of rooms by removal of walls or to install new bathrooms or kitchens.

This proposed criteria for Complying Development limits it to works that:-

- Do not involve any alteration to the external appearance of the dwelling;

- Basement levels must be accessed from within the house; and

- Any internal alterations to a car parking space must comply with the criteria from Chapter 3 relating to single storey dwellings (eg. the development must result in at least one parking space and which must be sited at least 1.0m behind the front building line).

Applications that propose to alter the external appearance of a two storey dwelling such as proposals to install a new window or change the size of a window (with associated potential impacts on neighbour privacy) will still necessitate a full development application. It is considered that the proposed Code is reasonable and no objection is raised.

C. Commercial and industrial development

Changes of use and internal fit out provisions for industrial and commercial development are currently exempt development under Parramatta Development Control Plan 2005. The state-wide draft code for commercial and industrial development proposes these activities to be complying development.

It is difficult to understand the rationale of making such activity complying development, therefore requiring some form of approval. The reason for this variation could well be that in a state-wide context, few Council’s opt for guidelines that enable these minor activities, such as change of use and internal fit outs, to be exempt or complying development. Furthermore, there is a deliberate intent in developing these standard codes to have consistency in the way these activities are assessed.

Irrespective of whether it is proposed for these activities to be exempt or complying development, there is little difference between the requirements for commercial and industrial activities allowed as complying and those allowed as exempt under Council’s existing DCP.

The key change between the proposed state wide complying development code and Council’s exempt development is that for commercial uses, change of use/fit out applications are restricted to a total floor area of 2000 sq.m whereas currently the floor area requirement is unlimited. For industrial uses involving a change of use/fit outs, floor area is also restricted to 2000 square metres whereas currently that is limited under Council’s exempt and complying development code to 500sq.m.

The state wide complying development code also includes advertising signage requirements for various purposes. Currently, advertising signs that apply to commercial and industrial premises are exempt development and allow for greater flexibility in the type of signs that can be constructed than that proposed in the state-wide code.

D. Exempt development (residential and commercial)

Tables 3 and 4 in attachment 2 provide a comparison between the Housing and Commercial Building Codes and Council’s current exempt development criteria listed in Section 6 of Parramatta DCP 2005. Currently Council’s exempt development clause excludes the following areas/sites:

· Heritage items;

· Aboriginal Place or Relic;

· Zone 7 or 9(d) within 6m of Zone 6(a) Critical Habitat;

· Flood liable land 1 in 100 ARI;

· Land Within 40 metres of a 'river';

· Crown Land dedicated for preservation of flora, fauna or geological formations; or

· Aquatic Reserves.

The enabling SEPP for these codes has not yet been released for comment so it is unclear as to whether these exclusions will be lost in full or part under the new Codes.

Heritage Items & Conservation Areas

Under the Codes exempt development criteria allows for some work to heritage items, but this seems to be inconsistently applied. For example you can do something as insignificant as a barbeque, but not a letterbox or flag pole.

No demolition of any heritage items is permitted under the draft exempt code.

Under the draft exempt code the only demolition that can be undertaken in a heritage conservation area (and all areas) is of structures that would meet the exempt development criteria to be constructed. For example if a pergola with open roof and sides is able to be constructed as exempt development then it could also be demolished under the exempt provisions of the code.

Inconsistency in Development Types

A number of development types are introduced by the Codes and not currently included in Parramatta DCP 2005 (e.g. building site sheds, driveways, pigeon cages and lofts, poultry houses & scaffolding). Similarly a number of development types are not contained within the Codes but are currently included in Parramatta DCP 2005 (e.g use of class 9b building for a public meeting, portable classrooms, window security grilles and shutters, paving and concreting).

Whilst not of major concern, the inconsistency in types and jargon could be confusing.

Cumulative Impacts

The code does not take into account the cumulative impact on site coverage, landscape area and deep soil areas as a result of undertaking exempt development. This is currently covered for certain types of exempt development listed under DCP 2005.

Where boundary adjustments are permitted as exempt development, no criteria is provided to ensure that the subsequent subdivision would meet Council’s minimum allotment sizes. Council does not currently allow this as exempt development, but rather this forms complying development under DCP 2005, with a minimum lot size and frontage prescribed.

Fit out of Commercial Premises

Under the Commercial Building Code criteria, the minor internal alterations to commercial premises does not exclude the fit out of food premises, hair dressers, beauty salons or skin penetration activities. As these types of uses are subject to health standards, these should be excluded from exempt development to ensure suitable compliance.

Consideration is not given to the potential fire safety, health or environmental upgrades which may be associated with the fit out or alteration to a commercial premises.

Repetition

The Housing and Commercial Building Exempt Criteria appear to be the same for a number of development types, with the exception of applicable zones. A single code would avoid unnecessary repetition and may be easier to use.

Within the Codes, certain development types are listed under multiple headings (e.g. Pergola (covered) is listed with 'Awnings' but Pergola (uncovered) is separately listed as ‘Pergola’). This could lead to confusion when using the Codes.

Referencing of relevant legislation, Australian Standards, Codes, Policies

The Codes do not generally reference other relevant legislation, Australian Standards, the Building Code of Australia or the requirements of other public authorities such as Work Cover, Australia Post etc, and does not include any control for hours of construction or demolition. As no conditions are issued with exempt development, this is of concern as it makes the enforcement role of Council more difficult.

Drainage & Flooding

The Codes apply an inconsistent approach to stormwater control. Most developments require that stormwater not create nuisance to neighbouring sites, while others require connection to stormwater system. It is unclear on what basis this has been applied.

Under the code some structures cannot be erected in flood affected areas, but this is not consistently applied.

General Controls

It is recommended that a list of General Controls applicable to all exempt development be listed at the front of the document, allowing a lot of repetition to be deleted. Things which could be included here may include for example:

· One (1) type of each development type per site.

· Hours of construction/demolition.

· No new structures in flood affected areas.

· Structure must not be located over easements or within 1.5 metres of manholes, risers, power lines, etc.

· Structures must not alter natural flow of stormwater.

· Stormwater runoff must not cause nuisance to neighbouring properties.

· Cumulatively, all structures must not cover X percentage of total site area.

· Must not be located within 1.2 metres of a swimming pool fence.

· Development to be located entirely within the bounds of the site.

· Must achieve the requirements of the Building Code of Australia or other legislation/Australian Standards etc.

Special Character Areas

Additional criteria will need to be applied for exempt development in Special Character Areas within Parramatta LGA. This could be applied within the proposed local variations.

Signage

Under the Codes, certain types of signage will become exempt development, which currently require consent, including pylon signs. Substantial real estate signage also has the potential to be erected as exempt development under the codes and may create a visual impact (e.g a subdivision of between 20 – 50 lots could erect 20sqm of signage without consent).

F. Proposed local variations

The analysis in this report has revealed there are a large number of variations between the new state-wide Exempt and Complying Development codes and the existing exempt and complying development codes enforced by Parramatta DCP 2005. Some of the proposed variations are significant which will deliver poor design outcomes. Other variations are more minor that need further consideration before they are implemented, where as others are inconsequential.

This report has identified the critical issues that are considered will have the greatest impact on the design of future housing and the look of local neighbourhoods. A frustrating aspect in undertaking this assessment is there is still some important detail missing in the new state-wide codes. An example in case is the uncertainty around what constitutes a special character areas and whether it will be excluded from Complying development provisions.

Therefore, it is suggested that the recommendations of this report, which will form the basis of a submission can also be used by Council as a starting point to begin negotiation with the State Government as to the variations it endeavours to seek in implementing the new code. If these codes are adopted and enforced in their current form, there will be a need to review the Parramatta DCP as it would be too inconsistent with the codes and make the assessment of development applications problematic due to the nature and extent of the discrepancies.

G. Future Complying Development codes and the LUTP work program

There will be a variety of codes for different types of housing rolled out in the coming months. These are outlined below:

§ Single storey new houses on lots 450sq.m-600sq.m

§ Single storey alterations and additions 450-600sq.m

§ Single storey new houses 200-450sq.m

§ Single storey alterations and additions 200-450sq.m

§ Terrace house 200-450sq.m

§ Terrace House alterations and additions 200-450sq.m

§ Two storey house > 600sq.m

§ Two storey house 450-600sq.m

§ Two storey alterations and additions 450-600sq.m

§ Two storey new house 200-450sq.m

§ Two storey alterations and additions 200-450sq.m

§ Duplex (two storey) 200-450sq.m

A criticism of the planning reform process so far has been the limited opportunity for assessment and debate on such significant changes. Public consultation timeframes have been set to a minimum. Based on this experience, it is not unreasonable to suspect that the remaining eleven codes will be placed on public exhibition in quick succession.

Of the future codes to be prepared, the construction and alteration tol two storey homes on sites greater than 450sq.m is a major departure from Council’s existing approach. New two storey homes are arguably one of the most popular development types currently subject to a DA merit assessment. The potential for two storey homes to be constructed without the opportunity for participation from neighbours is a major concern. On the other hand, other developments where complying development codes will be prepared, for example terrace housing 200-450sq.m and single storey homes 200-450sq.m codes are unlikely to be constructed as readily as two storey dwellings. This is because current minimum allotment size requirement mean it is unlikely Council will consider many application of this nature, irrespective of whether its complying development or a development application.

The introduction of new exempt and complying codes represents one of the most significant changes to planning reform since the original introduction of exempt and complying development in 1998. It needs to be acknowledged though, that the level of work involved in critiquing each code is extensive and can be seen by the level of detail submitted in this report. It is possible that unreasonable State Government consultation processes will continue to place extra burden on the LUTP unit. Taking into consideration the importance of some of these reforms, it should be acknowledged that priority given to the reforms process may impinge upon other projects of the LUTP unit.

H. Conclusion

Council’s submission needs to focus on three areas; policy, operational and design outcomes. From a policy perspective, the analysis of the new state-wide codes released by the State Government in May 2008 reinforces the inherent concerns Council has expressed in earlier submissions to the planning reform process. Operational concerns stem from the idea that there is still information that is yet to be finalised which is restricting Council from understanding the full repercussion of this set of reforms. An example of this is the SEPP which will regulate exempt and complying development is not yet prepared. From a design aspect, the new codes themselves, apart from highlighting deficiencies in a system that is dependant solely on prescriptive planning controls also demonstrate some significant departures from Council’s existing codes which will deliver poor design outcomes.

Council submission shall incorporate the following statements;

Policy issues:

a) The exposure bill needs to be amended to ensure a requirement for formal notification and consultation with neighbours is an inherent component prior to the lodgement of a Complying Development proposal, and that a requirement to issue a courtesy notice once the complying development certificate has been issued and prior to commencement of work, is unacceptable.

b) The decision to remove the capacity for principal certifying authority to issue a provisional complying development certificate is welcomed and it is believed will provide the community with some level of certainty as to what can and can’t be built next door as complying development.

c) That Council express its disappointment that the release of information on these major reforms continue to be provided with the omission of information critical to understanding the full implications of the reforms. In this case, the State Environmental Policy to accompany the new state-wide codes was not released continuing the trend of uncertainty over the applicability of the codes.

Operational issues:

a) The standard conditions proposed to be imposed on all Complying

Development Certificates are extremely deficient in a number of areas. There needs to be a complete review of standard conditions to ensure they are practical and enforceable as with any other approval issued under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act.

b) It is unlikely that Principal Certifying Authorities, including Council can comply with the 10 day timeframe with uncertainty about when the assessment component of complying development proposal begins. For example, there are no provisions in the code, or exposure bill, to direct Principal Certifying Authorities, including Council, about how they should deal with applications that are missing a relatively small piece of information.

Design issues

Single storey housing greater than 600sq.m and alterations and additions to single storey housing

a) The potential for some sites to achieve a 3.3 metre front setback could conceivably alter the character of a street incrementally and over time create a crowded streetscape feel altering, detrimentally, the character of an area.

b) The incremental affect of introducing a 60% site coverage requirement in complying development could alter the character of an area and compromise Council’s ability to provide consistent assessment outcomes when in a development application process, the equivalent floor space requirement is 0:5:1.

c) There is not a landscaping and/or deep soil component for open space and the minimum dimension required is only 2m.The provision of private open space with dimension of 2m does not provide for adequate areas of active play and/or recreation in back yards.

d) That Council strenuously object to the provisions which allow swimming pools in front yards and pool decking up to 1.5m from ground level. This will create an unacceptable issue in privacy where swimming pools can be within 1.5 metres of a side boundary, and could dramatically affect streetscape quality with the potential for swimming pools in front yards having 1.8 metre fences fronting the street.

e) The management of stormwater will be difficult for private Principle certifying authority when issuing a Complying Development Certificate needs to be assessed on a case by case basis given the varying elements such as topography, current stormwater infrastructure in the area, location in the catchment etc.

f) There is concern that the use of the Building Code of Australia, a document largely aimed at achieving adequate fire safety and structural adequacy, is also being used to control amenity. This approach is inappropriate and leads to a lack of certainty and confusion by applicants and neighbours as to the true design outcome intended.

g) The State Government consider change of use and internal fit out provisions for industrial and commercial development to be exempt development under the new-state wide codes.

Attachment 2

Comparison of Controls Application Under the Proposed State-Wide Exempt and Complying Development Codes and Council's Existing Exempt and Complying Development

Table 1… Complying development code – Single storey dwellings greater than 600sq.m and single storey alteration and additions

The controls in table 1 apply to the new complying development codes for single dwelling houses > 600sq.m and single storey alterations and additions

Design principles	Proposed Complying Development Code (May 2008)	Existing Exempt and Complying Development Code under Parramatta DCP 2005 (Section 6)	Prescriptive control applicable to a development application*	Comments
2.1.1 Articulation zone	4.5m where there are no adjacent dwellings but can go down to 3.3m as elements (porches, bay-windows/etc can project 1.2m forward of main building)	No ‘articulation zone’ control but 5-9m and consistent with prevailing setback in the street	No ‘articulation zone‘ control but 5-9m and consistent with prevailing setback in the street	Major concern. The encroachment of the articulation zone into the front setback could conceivably alter the streetscape.
	Max floor area of element – 10m², where there is more than 1 structure – max aggregate area of 15m²	Max gross floor area of element – 30m², where there is more than 1 structure – max. aggregate area of all elements is 50m²	Merit based	Inconsequential
2.1.2 Carports and Garages	1m back from front facade	Behind building line or no forward of building line of adjoining development, whichever is greater	300mm behind front building façade	Inconsequential
	Max 6m in width or 50% of building width	Max 6m x 6m	Max 6.3m or 50% of building width, whichever is lesser	Inconsequential
Design principles	Proposed Complying Development Code (May 2008)	Existing Exempt and Complying Development Code under Parramatta DCP 2005 (Section 6)	Prescriptive control applicable to a development application*	Comments
2.2 Bulk and Scale
2.2.1 Building heights	Ceiling height of habitable rooms: <4.5m wide – 2.4m min >4.5m wide – 2.7m min Eves – 4m Ridge – 6m	Internal floor to ceiling height – 2.7 min and 3m max Max roof pitch 22.5 degrees	Merit based	Inconsequential
2.2.2 Site coverage	Max 60% (excl basements, awnings, eves, decks). Site coverage % reduces as site size increases	0.45:1 (excl. 1 car space)	0.5:1 (excl. 1 car space)	Major concern. The code allows an additional 24sqm of floor area on a 600m2 site than someone lodging a Development Application. This will compromise Council’s ability to provide consistent assessment outcomes.
2.3 Setbacks & 2.5 Privacy	Front – average distance between adjacent buildings setbacks. Where there are no adjoining dwellings then 4.5m (down to 3.3m for ‘articulation zone’). 9m for classified road.	5-9m consistent with prevailing setback in street	5-9m consistent with prevailing setback in street	Major concern. The encroachment of the articulation zone into the front setback could conceivably alter the streetscape.
Design principles	Proposed Complying Development Code (May 2008)	Existing Exempt and Complying Development Code under Parramatta DCP 2005 (Section 6)	Prescriptive control applicable to a development application*	Comments
	Setback on corner sites front – same as adjacent and 1.5m from secondary frontage	3m from secondary frontage	3m from secondary frontage	Comparable outcome achieved. The code does not allow development within the secondary boundary, whereas development such as pergolas is assessed by Council on its merit.
	Side and rear setback – sliding scale dependant on wall height and length and whether there are major openings in that elevation	Side – 1.2m min. Rear – 6m or 30% of length of site, whichever is the greater.	Merit based	Major concern. Setbacks should be consistent with neighbouring properties.
	Where habitable windows are less than 5m apart – 500mm offset	500mm offset	Merit based	Inconsequential
	Privacy screens for decks and balconies greater than 1m above ground level	N/A	Merit based	Inconsequential
2.4 Building Elements	Metal wall and roof cladding to be pre-coloured	N/A	Encouragement of use of materials consistent with neighbourhood character area controls	Minor concern. There is no provision in the code to ensure building materials are consistent with the neighbourhood’s character.
Design principles	Proposed Complying Development Code (May 2008)	Existing Exempt and Complying Development Code under Parramatta DCP 2005 (Section 6)	Prescriptive control applicable to a development application*	Comments
2.6 Private Open Space	Lot area: 600m² – 20% = 120m² 700m² – 25% = 175m² 800m² – 25% = 200m² 900m² – 30% = 270m² 1000m² – 35% = 350m² >2m width <1:10 gradient and excludes front setback area At least 25% of POS must be within 15 degrees of north	100m² with a minimum dimension of 6m x 6m Min 30% deep soil zone of which the min. dimension is 4m x 4m, 50% is located at the rear and 15% at the front	100m² with a minimum dimension of 6m x 6m Min 30% deep soil zone of which the min. dimension is 4m x 4m, 50% is located at the rear and 15% at the front	Major concern. Orientation requirement of code could be impossible to meet without providing private open space in the front setback. Additionally, a 2m minimum width requirement does not provide for quality open space.
2.7 Garages and Driveways	1 space 1m behind front building line	Behind building line or behind adjoining development	Merit based	Inconsequential
2.8 Sloping Sites	1m max cut or fill	500mm max cut or fill	Merit based	Minor concern. Site specific characteristics will need to be considered to avoid amenity issues.
2.9 ESD	Compliance with BASIX, plus at least one habitable room within 15 degrees of north	BASIX	BASIX	Inconsequential
Design principles	Proposed Complying Development Code (May 2008)	Existing Exempt and Complying Development Code under Parramatta DCP 2005 (Section 6)	Prescriptive control applicable to a development application*	Comments
2.9.2 Drainage	Rainwater must be conveyed to Council controlled system or absorption trench	Rainwater to be connected to Council controlled system of appropriately managed on site.	Rainwater to be connected to Council controlled system of appropriately managed on site.	Major concern. Site specific circumstances will need to be taken into account.

*Purpose is to provide a comparison between what is proposed under the Complying Development code and whether the control is consistent with what Council would apply if the proposal was lodged as a DA.

Attachment 2

Comparison of Controls Application Under the Proposed State-Wide Exempt and Complying Development Codes and Council's Existing Exempt and Complying Development

Table 3… Exempt Development for all Residential and Rural Zones except where specified otherwise

Type of Development

Draft Exempt Development Code

(May 2008)

Existing Exempt and Complying Development Code under Parramatta DCP 2005 (Section 6)

Comments

5.1 –Erection of Buildings

Aerials or Antennae

· Maximum height—1.8m above ground.

· Maximum height—3.5m above roof level.

· Where free-standing, must be in rear yard.

· Does not apply to free standing aerial or antennas associated with a heritage item.

· One per dwelling house, multi unit development or RFB.

· Maximum height of 3m above ridge line or a maximum of 6m above natural ground level.

· Not located on the front façade of buildings.

Minor Concern

· Code does not limit one per site.

· Code allows greater height and does not prohibit within front building facade.

Air conditioning units

· Must be setback 900mm from all boundaries.

· Maximum height 1.8m.

· Attached to external wall or ground mounted.

· Does not apply to wall mounted units attached to a heritage item.

· Noise level not to exceed 5dBA above ambient background noise level measured at the property boundary.

· Attached to external wall or ground mounted.

· Located in side or rear elevations out of public view.

Minor Concern

· Code does not provide noise criteria.

Awnings, patios, pergolas, shade structures and fixed sail awnings

· No enclosed walls.

· Maximum area not to exceed more than 15% of the existing ground floor area of building.

· Located behind the building line.

· Maximum height must not extend above the level of the eave gutter line.

· Roof framing to be a minimum 500mm from side or rear boundary.

· Must be located entirely within property.

· Does not apply to a heritage item.

Awnings (covered) & Pergolas (uncovered)

· Max area of 20m² or 10% of the rear yard whichever is less

· The maximum cumulative area of all awnings, bird aviaries, carports, concreting, canopies, cabanas, decks, garden sheds, gazebos, greenhouses, patios, paving, pergolas on the site shall not exceed 10% of the total site area.

· A minimum of 50% of the perimeter of the structure must be open with no walls.

· Located wholly within the property boundaries and no closer to the street than the associated dwelling.

· The maximum height above natural ground level: does not exceed 2.4m for a flat roof structure; or does not exceed 3m for a pitched roof structure or if attached to the dwelling and with a maximum wall height of 2.4m if detached.

· Must not reduce deep soil below 30% of the site area

Major Concern

· Code does not consider cumulative impact on site cover or deep soil.

· Code does not provide an absolute maximum area.

· Code does not set an absolute height.

· Council does not roofed pergolas as exempt development.

· Providing different categories for Covered Pergolas and Uncovered Pergolas is confusing and includes unnecessary repetition.

Type of Development

Draft Exempt Development Code

(May 2008)

Existing Exempt and Complying Development Code under Parramatta DCP 2005 (Section 6)

Comments

5.1 –Erection of Buildings

· Maximum area—4m².

· Must be located at least 450mm from any property boundary (other than in relation to gas operated barbeques).

· Maximum height—1.8.m.

· Must be located in rear yard.

· Maximum area of 4m².

· Maximum height (including chimney) 2m.

· Located in the rear yard or behind a courtyard wall, with no greater than 200mm of chimney above wall.

· Located no closer than the existing side boundaries of the dwelling and no closer than 1.2m to any pool safety fence.

Minor Concern

· Code allows lesser height.

· Code does not make provision for setback to pool fencing.

· Code only required 450mm boundary setback. May be less than DCP 2005 in most instances.

Bird Aviaries

(domestic purposes)

· Maximum floor area—10m².

· Maximum height—2.5m.

· Must be located in rear yard.

· Must be located at least 10m from dwellings.

See ‘Outbuildings’

Inconsequential

Providing different categories for Bird Aviaries, Pigeon Cages and Poultry Houses is confusing and includes unnecessary repetition.

Building site sheds, offices and amenities

· Must be located entirely within the boundary of the property, in conjunction with development consent.

· Must be removed immediately after cessation of the development or completion of the building and prior to occupation.

· Must not be used for residential purposes.

· Must be connected to an approved waste treatment device or an approved connection to the sewer.

N/A

Inconsequential

Bus Shelter

N/A

· Must be constructed by or for Council.

· A maximum height of 2.7m above footpath.

· Maximum area of less than 10m².

· A maximum of one double sided advertising panel attached to the bus shelter.

Inconsequential

· Not included in the proposed Code.

· This is exempt development under SEPP (infrastructure).

Type of Development

Draft Exempt Development Code

(May 2008)

Existing Exempt and Complying Development Code under Parramatta DCP 2005 (Section 6)

Comments

5.1 –Erection of Buildings

Cabanas, Cubby Houses, Garden Sheds, Gazebos

· Maximum floor area—20m².

· Maximum height—2.5m.

· Must be located in rear yard.

· Must be located at least 900mm from side and rear boundary in residential zones.

· Must not be used for commercial purposes where located in residential zones.

Applies to Cabanas and Gazebos only. Separate Criteria provide for Garden Sheds under ‘Outbuildings’ and Cubby Houses under ‘Playground Equipment’.

· Max area of 20m² or 10% of rear yard, whichever is less.

· Located in the rear yard only.

· Located a minimum of 900mm from any boundary.

· Must not reduce deep soil below 30% of the site area.

Major Concern

· Code does not consider cumulative impact on site cover or deep soil.

Carports

· Maximum area—20m².

· Maximum height—3m, or where attached to an existing single storey house and must not extend above the eave gutterline.

· Must have two or more sides open and not less than one-third of its perimeter open.

· Must be located at least 1.0m behind the building line.

· Must be 500mm from side and rear boundary.

· Must not involve the construction of a new driveway or gutter crossing.

· Does not apply to a heritage item unless located within the rear yard.

· Maximum area of 20m².

· Located a minimum of 300mm behind the front building line

· Located a minimum of 900mm from any boundary.

· A minimum of 50% of the perimeter must be open.

· The maximum height natural ground level: does not exceed 2.4m for a flat roof does not exceed 3m for a pitched roof with a maximum wall height of 2.4m

· Must not reduce deep soil below 30% of the site area.

· Additional criteria also provided for Special Precinct Areas.

Major Concern

· Additional site specific provisions will need to be included for Special Precinct Areas within Parramatta.

· Code applies blanket 3m height control for flat and pitched roofs.

· Code requires greater setback behind building line.

· Code allows reduced side and rear setback.

· Code does not consider cumulative impact on site cover or deep soil.

Type of Development

Draft Exempt Development Code

(May 2008)

Existing Exempt and Complying Development Code under Parramatta DCP 2005 (Section 6)

Comments

5.1 –Erection of Buildings

Clothes Hoists/Lines

· Must be installed in accordance with the manufacturer’s specifications.

· Must be located behind the building line.

· Does not apply to clothes lines fixed to an external wall of a heritage item.

· Must not be located in front yards.

· Installed to the manufacturers’ standards.

· Not installed on balconies within dwellings.

Minor Concern

· Code does not restrict clothes lines from front yards or balconies.

Clothing Bin

N/A

Inconsequential

· This category has been included in Council’s Draft LEP 2008.

Dams (Small)

· Must be ancillary to agricultural use of land.

· Criteria relating to depth & batters provided.

N/A

Inconsequential

· This should apply to rural zones only.

Decks & Patios

· No enclosed walls.

· Maximum area not to exceed more than 15% of the ground floor area of the building.

· Must be located on the ground floor.

· Must be located behind the building line.

· Maximum height must not extend above the level of eave gutter line.

· Roof framing must be located at least 500mm from side and rear boundaries.

· Maximum height 1m above ground level.

· Must be located entirely within the boundaries

· Does not apply to a heritage item unless located within the rear yard.

· Unroofed and attached to dwellings only.

· Max area of 20m² or 10% of rear yard, whichever is less.

· Finished surface level to not be greater than 600mm above the existing natural ground level.

· No closer than 900mm from an adjoining side and rear property boundaries.

· Located no closer to the street than the associated dwelling.

· Must not reduce deep soil below 30% of the site area

Major Concern

· Code allows for associated roofing.

· Code does not consider cumulative impact on site cover or deep soil.

· Code does not provide an absolute maximum area.

· Front setback may be less under the Code.

· Code allows greater height above ground level.

Driveways and Pathways

(other than over public land)

· Must not be elevated or suspended above natural ground level.

· Must not be in conjunction with retaining walls greater than 600mm high.

· Must comply with any specified council policy on maximum gradients and transitions.

See ‘Paving and Concreting’

Major Concern

· Council does not allow driveways as exempt development.

· Code does not consider cumulative impact on site cover or deep soil.

Type of Development

Draft Exempt Development Code

(May 2008)

Existing Exempt and Complying Development Code under Parramatta DCP 2005 (Section 6)

Comments

5.1 –Erection of Buildings

Fences Behind Building Line (side or rear)

· Does not apply to a heritage item.

· Does not apply in flood affected areas (above the 1 in 100 ARI).

· If constructed of timber, metal or light weight materials, max height above ground - 1.8m.

· If constructed of masonry or chain wire, maximum height above ground level - 1m.

· Maximum cut or fill to retaining walls must not exceed 1.0m above or below ground level.

· On sloping sites, the fence must be stepped so that the maximum height of the fence at each step does not exceed 1.8m above the ground level (existing) by more than 20%.

Side fences and rear boundary fences (other than fences covered by the Swimming Pools Act 1992)

· Maximum height of 1.8m, if constructed of timber or non sheet metal lightweight materials.

· Maximum height of 1.0m if constructed of masonry materials.

· Sheet metal fences are not to be constructed on corner lots and boundaries where lots adjoin public reserves or public places

· Additional criteria also provided for Special Precinct Areas.

Minor Concern

· Code provides less flexibility with regard to material choice.

· Additional site specific provisions will need to be included for Special Precinct Areas within Parramatta.

· No criteria provided top address change in level between neighbouring sites.

Fences within Building Line (front or side)

· Does not apply to a heritage item.

· Does not apply in flood affected areas (above the 1 in100 ARI) with the exception of front fences within the building line not within a floodway area.

· Maximum height—1.2m.

· Must be of an open style incorporating timber pickets or lattice style panels with a minimum aperture of 25mm.

· Must not be constructed of metal panel or chair wire fencing.

· Maximum cut or fill to retaining walls must not exceed 1.0m above or below the ground level (existing). (For the purposes of this the maximum cut and fill dimensions include any batters incorporated into the retaining wall).

· On sloping sites, the fence must be stepped so that the maximum height of the fence at each step does not exceed 1.2m above the ground level (existing) by more than 20%.

Front fences and corner fences (other than fences covered by the Swimming Pools Act 1992)

· Maximum height of 1.2m if constructed of timber or similar lightweight materials (other than sheet metal).

· Maximum height of 1.0m if of masonry materials.

· Maximum height of 1.2m above natural ground level, if constructed of masonry and combination of other materials (other than sheet metal), but masonry component to be maximum of 1.0m.

· Additional criteria also provided for Special Precinct Areas.

Minor Concern

· Code provides no flexibility with regard to material choice.

· Additional site specific provisions will need to be included for Special Precinct Areas within Parramatta.

Type of Development

Draft Exempt Development Code

(May 2008)

Existing Exempt and Complying Development Code under Parramatta DCP 2005 (Section 6)

Comments

5.1 –Erection of Buildings

Flagpoles

· Does not apply to a heritage item.

· Does not apply in Environmental Zones and Waterways Zones

· Maximum height—6m.

· Must be structurally adequate.

· Maximum flag area 2m².

· Maximum height of the flagpole and flag 6m above natural ground level.

· One flag pole per property in residential areas and maximum of 2 flag poles in industrial /commercial areas.

· Minimum 1m clearance from power lines

Minor Concern

· Unclear why heritage items are exempt.

· Unclear why Environmental and Waterway Zones are exempted where the Code only applies to Rural and Residential Zones.

· Code does not restrict total number per premises.

· Code does not provide for setback to power lines.

Goalposts, play

equipment, sight screens and similar sporting

structures

See ‘Playground Equipment’

· Excludes grandstands, dressing sheds and other structures designed to accommodate people.

· Located in public parks or recreation areas.

· Must be constructed by or for Council

· Located a minimum of 10m from any residential premises.

Inconsequential

· This is exempt development under SEPP (infrastructure).

Letterbox

· Does not apply to a heritage item.

· Maximum height—1.2m above ground.

· Must be visible from street alignment.

· In accordance with the guidelines for letterbox construction set by Australia Post.

Inconsequential

· Unclear why heritage items are exempt.

Minor External Alterations or Building Works

· Does not apply to a heritage item.

· Must only comprise non-structural alterations to the exterior of a building such as painting, plastering, cement rendering, cladding, attaching fittings, decorative work, replacement of external windows, glazed areas and doors, repairs to non-structural wall and roof cladding.

· Must not compromise the making of, or an alteration to the size of, any opening in a wall or roof of a building, such as a doorway, window or skylight (except in accordance with specific provisions relating to skylights).

Being recladding, painting, plastering, cement rendering, or repair, restoration or maintenance of damaged materials o roofs or walls, to dwelling houses

· The removal of asbestos cement and lead paint complies with Work Cover guidelines.

· Must be structurally adequate.

· No increase in the total floor area of the building.

· External configuration of the building shall not be altered.

· Work does not reduce light from windows or ventilation or reduce the number of exits or involve enclosure of open.

· Additional criteria also provided for Special Precinct Areas.

Minor Concern

· Additional site specific provisions will need to be included for Special Precinct Areas within Parramatta.

· Code should refer to Work Cover guidelines.

Type of Development

Draft Exempt Development Code

(May 2008)

Existing Exempt and Complying Development Code under Parramatta DCP 2005 (Section 6)

Comments

5.1 –Erection of Buildings

Minor Internal Alterations (residential premises)

· Does not apply to a heritage item.

· Must be replacement of doors, walls, ceiling or floor linings, deteriorated frame members with equivalent or improved quality materials, and renovations of bathrooms, kitchens, inclusion of built-in fixtures such as vanities cupboards and wardrobes.

· Must not include changes to the configuration of rooms whether by removal of existing walls, partitions or other means.

· Must not cause reduced window arrangements for light and ventilation needs, reduced doorways for egress purposes or involve enclosure of open areas.

· Non structural work only.

· Renovations of bathrooms and kitchens including built in fixtures such as vanities, cupboards and wardrobes.

· Replacement doors, wall ceiling or floor linings, and deteriorated frame members, are constructed with equivalent or better quality materials.

· Work does not include changes to the configuration of rooms whether by removal of existing walls, partitions or by other means may be performed at ground floor level only.

· Work does not reduce light from windows or ventilation or reduce number of exits or involve enclosure of open areas.

· External configuration of the building shall not be altered.

· The removal of asbestos cement and lead paint complies with the Work Cover Authority’s guidelines.

· Rooms shall not be altered from non-habitable to habitable.

Minor Concern

· Code should refer to Work Cover guidelines.

Outbuildings, garden sheds, green houses,

bird aviaries

See ‘Cabanas, Cubby Houses, Garden Sheds, Gazebos’

· Max area of 10m² or 10% of rear yard, whichever is less.

· The max cumulative area of all awnings, bird aviaries, carports, concreting, canopies, cabanas, decks, garden sheds, gazebos, greenhouses, patios, paving, pergolas on the site shall not exceed 10% of the total site area

· Maximum height 2m above natural ground.

· Located to the rear of the building alignment and not closer than 1m from an adjoining property boundary.

· Aviaries a minimum of 10m from any dwelling

· Not involving the keeping of poultry

· Must not reduce deep soil below 30% of the site area

Major Concern

· Code does not consider cumulative impact on site cover or deep soil.

· Code allows for greater height and floor area.

· Code does not restrict one per property.

Type of Development

Draft Exempt Development Code

(May 2008)

Existing Exempt and Complying Development Code under Parramatta DCP 2005 (Section 6)

Comments

5.1 –Erection of Buildings

Park and Street Furniture

N/A

· Applies to the erection/ installation of seats, bins, picnic tables and shelters.

· Where consistent with a Plan of Management adopted by Council.

· Construction by or for Council.

· Located on land under control of Council

Inconsequential

· Not included in the proposed Code.

· This is exempt development under SEPP (infrastructure).

Paving and Concreting

See ‘Driveways and Pathways’

· Does not cover more than 25m² or 10% of the rear yard, whichever is less.

· Must not reduce deep soil below 30% of the site area.

Major Concern

· Code does not provide a total pavable area.

· Code does not consider cumulative impact on site cover or deep soil.

Pergola (open roof and sides)

· Does not apply to a heritage item except were located within the rear yard.

· Maximum area must not exceed more than 15% of the ground floor area of the building.

· Must be located behind the building line.

· Maximum height—3.0m above ground level or where attached to an existing building not extend above the eave gutterline.

· Support posts must be a least 900mm from side boundary.

· Roof timbers must be at least 500mm from rear or side boundary.

· Where free standing, max 1 per property.

· See ‘Awnings, patios, pergolas, shade structures and fixed sail awnings’

Minor Concern

· See comments for ‘Awnings, patios, pergolas, shade structures and fixed sail awnings’

· Providing different categories for Covered Pergolas and Uncovered Pergolas is confusing and includes unnecessary repetition.

Type of Development

Draft Exempt Development Code

(May 2008)

Existing Exempt and Complying Development Code under Parramatta DCP 2005 (Section 6)

Comments

5.1 –Erection of Buildings

Pigeon Cages & Lofts

· Does not apply to R4 Zone.

· Maximum number of pigeons: Registered racing pigeon owners - 60 pairs. Non registered owner -10 pairs.

· Must be at least 9m to any habitable building.

· Must be located in rear yard only.

· Must be at least 1m to side or rear boundary.

N/A

Minor Concern

· Council does not allow for pigeon cages and lofts as exempt development.

· Allowing up to 120 pigeons seems too high for most residential urban areas.

· Providing different categories for Bird Aviaries, Pigeon Cages and Poultry Houses is confusing and includes unnecessary repetition.

Type of Development

Draft Exempt Development Code

(May 2008)

Existing Exempt and Complying Development Code under Parramatta DCP 2005 (Section 6)

Comments

Playground Equipment

· Does not apply to Environmental Zones.

· Does not apply to a heritage item except were located within the rear yard.

Residential use

· Maximum height—2.5m.

· Must be located in rear yard.

Non-residential use:

· Maximum height—2.5m.

Applies to Cubby houses & playground equipment.

· Maximum area of 10m² or 10% of the rear yard, whichever is less.

· The maximum cumulative area of all awnings, bird aviaries, carports, concreting, canopies, cabanas, decks, garden sheds, gazebos, greenhouses, patios, paving and pergolas on the site shall not exceed 10% of the total site area.

· Minimum 900mm setback to boundaries

· Maximum overall height of 2.4m

· Must not be located in the front yard.

Minor Concern

· Unclear why Environmental Zones are exempted where the Code only applies to Rural and Residential Zones.

· Code does not prohibit placement in front yard.

· Code allows greater height and floor area for cubby houses.

· Code does not consider cumulative impact on site cover or deep soil.

Type of Development

Draft Exempt Development Code

(May 2008)

Existing Exempt and Complying Development Code under Parramatta DCP 2005 (Section 6)

Comments

5.1 –Erection of Buildings

Poultry Houses

· Maximum number of fowls—10 in urban and village zones.

· Maximum area—10m².

· Maximum height—3m above ground level.

· Must be located in rear yard.

· Must be located at least 3m from side and rear boundary.

· Where fowls are being kept, the poultry house must be at least 15m from neighbouring dwellings and 4.5m from any dwelling on the property.

· Where other forms of poultry are kept, must be at least 30m from any dwelling.

N/A

Minor Concern

· Council does not allow for poultry houses as exempt development.

· Providing different categories for Bird Aviaries, Pigeon Cages and Poultry Houses is confusing and includes unnecessary repetition.

Privacy Screens

(not associated with boundary fence or retaining wall)

· Does not apply to Environmental Zones

· Maximum height—2.5m.

· Maximum length—10m.

· Must be located in rear yard.

· Must be located at least 900mm from any side or rear boundary.

N/A

Minor Concern

· Council does not allow for privacy screens as exempt development.

· Unclear why Environmental Zones are exempted where the Code only applies to Rural and Residential Zones.

Portable Classrooms

N/A

· Must not be closer than 3m to any boundary.

· Erected for or on land for the Department of Education.

Inconsequential

· Not included in the proposed Code.

· These can be erected without consent under SEPP (Infrastructure).

Public Toilets

N/A

· Maximum area of 30m².

· Construction by or for Council.

Inconsequential

· Not included in the proposed Code.

· This is exempt development under SEPP (infrastructure).

Type of Development

Draft Exempt Development Code

(May 2008)

Existing Exempt and Complying Development Code under Parramatta DCP 2005 (Section 6)

Comments

5.1 –Erection of Buildings

Radio & Satellite Communication Dishes

· Does not apply to a heritage item except were located within a rear yard area.

Roof mounted:

· Maximum diameter—900mm.

· Maximum height — above eave gutter line.

· Maximum 1 roof mounted dish

· per dwelling.

· Must be for domestic purposes only.

Ground mounted:

· Maximum diameter—2.5m.

· Maximum height—3.0 m above ground level (existing).

· Must be located in rear yard.

· Must be at least 900mm from rear and side boundary.

· Maximum 1 ground mounted dish per dwelling.

· Must be for domestic purposes only.

Roof mounted

· Maximum diameter of 600mm

· One installation per dwelling

· Located below the ridgeline of roof so as not to be visible from a public place.

· In any multiple dwelling or residential flat development, all units are to be connected to a single satellite dish/ microwave antenna.

Ground mounted:

· Maximum height of 1.8m above ground level to the top of the dish.

· Maximum diameter of 1m

· One installation per dwelling

· Situated a minimum of 900mm from any property boundary

· Situated no closer to the street than the associated dwelling and not visible from the street

· In any multiple dwelling or RFB development, all units are to be connected to a single common satellite dish/microwave antenna.

Inconsequential

Ramps

· Does not apply to a heritage item.

· Maximum height—1m.

· Located within the property boundaries

· Constructed on the ground level only

Inconsequential

Recladding of Roofs and Walls (including repair or maintenance of damaged material)

· Does not apply to a heritage item.

· Must only involve replacing existing materials with similar materials which are compatible with the existing building and finish.

· Must not involve structural alterations or change to external configuration of a building.

See Minor External Alterations or Building Works

Inconsequential

· These criteria could form part of ‘Minor External Alterations and Building Works’.

Type of Development

Draft Exempt Development Code

(May 2008)

Existing Exempt and Complying Development Code under Parramatta DCP 2005 (Section 6)

Comments

5.1 –Erection of Buildings

Retaining Walls

· Does not apply to a heritage item.

· Maximum height—600mm

· On sloping sites, the fence must be stepped so that the maximum height of the fence at each step must not exceed 600mm above the ground level (existing) by more than 20%.

· Maximum height of 600mm.

· Located wholly within the property boundary.

Inconsequential

Security grills and shutters to dwelling houses

N/A

· Must be to the rear and side of the dwelling

· Colour of security grills and shutters to be consistent with the colour of window/door frame attached to.

Minor Concern

· Not included in the proposed Code.

Scaffolding

· Does not apply to a heritage item where exempt development is prohibited.

· Must only be erected in conjunction with a development where consent has been granted or works associated with any exempt development in this Policy.

· Must not encroach onto footpath or public thoroughfare.

· Must enclose the work area.

· May encroach onto adjoining property only with adjoining owners’ approval.

N/A

Inconsequential

Screen Enclosure

(attached to an existing dwelling house)

· Does not apply to a heritage item.

· Maximum area must not to exceed more than 15% of the existing ground floor area of the building.

· Maximum height must not extend above the eave gutter line.

· Must be located behind the building line.

· Must be located at least 900mm from side and rear boundary.

· • Maximum height of solid dado wall - 1.0m.

N/A

Minor Concern

· Council does not allow for screen enclosures as exempt development.

· Providing different categories for ‘Privacy Screen and ‘Screen Enclosure’ is confusing and includes unnecessary repetition.

Type of Development

Draft Exempt Development Code

(May 2008)

Existing Exempt and Complying Development Code under Parramatta DCP 2005 (Section 6)

Comments

5.1 –Erection of Buildings

Shade Structures of open weave or fabric mesh

· Does not apply to a heritage item.

· Maximum 1 structure per premises.

· Max area must not to exceed more than 15% of the existing ground floor area of building.

· Maximum height must not extend beyond the eave gutter line.

· Must be located behind building line.

· Must be located at least 900mm from side and rear boundary.

· Must be designed in accordance with a professional engineers' detail.

· See ‘Awnings, patios, pergolas, shade structures and fixed sail awnings’

Minor Concern

· Providing different categories for ‘Shade Structure and Fixed Shade Sail and ‘Shade Structures of Open Weave Fabric Mesh’ is confusing and includes unnecessary repetition.

Skylights and Roof Windows (non opening)

· Does not apply to a heritage item.

· Maximum area—1m².

· Must be located at least 900mm from a property boundary and not less than 900mm from a wall separating attached dwellings.

· Maximum area of 1m².

· Located not less than 900mm from a property boundary or wall separating attached dwellings.

· To be installed a minimum of 2.4m above the floor level of the room of which it serves

· Additional criteria also provided for Special Precinct Areas.

Minor Concern

· Additional site specific provisions will need to be included for Special Precinct Areas within Parramatta.

· Code does not provide minimum height above finished floor level of dwelling.

Solar Water Heaters & Photovoltaic Systems

· Does not apply to a solar water heater or photovoltaic system attached to a heritage item that is visible from a street frontage (other than a laneway).

· Must be parallel with the roof alignment.

· Trees must not be removed to install the water solar heater.

Applies to Water Heaters only

· Must not be located on the front façade of the dwelling

Minor Concern

· Council does not allow for photovoltaic systems as exempt development.

Stockyards

Only applicable to Rural Zones

Inconsequential

· No rural zones within Parramatta LGA.

Tennis Courts

Only applicable to Rural Zones

Inconsequential

· No rural zones within Parramatta LGA

Type of Development

Draft Exempt Development Code

(May 2008)

Existing Exempt and Complying Development Code under Parramatta DCP 2005 (Section 6)

Comments

5.1 –Erection of Buildings

Water Features & Ponds

· Does not apply to a heritage item unless located within the rear yard area.

· Maximum water depth—300mm

· Overflow must not to create nuisance to adjoining properties.

· Maximum surface area of 4m².

· Max water depth of 300mm.

· Water features and fountains no higher than 1m.

· Filtration or pumps must not exceed a noise level of 5dBA above background noise level measured at the boundary.

· Fish ponds no higher than 300mm above ground level.

Minor Concern

· Code does not provide for noise criteria or maximum height.

Water Tanks (above ground)

· Does not apply to a water tank attached to a heritage item that is visible from a street frontage (other than a laneway).

· Maximum capacity—15,000L.

· Maximum height—450mm above ground level (existing).

· Must be located at least 450mm from side or rear boundary.

· If located less than 900mm from site boundary, maximum height—2.4m above ground level (existing).

· If located 900m from side boundary, maximum height—2.4m above ground level.

· Must be located behind building line.

· Maximum cut and fill—1m from ground level

· Maximum capacity of the tank/s - 10,000 litres.

· The installation must not involve the excavation or fill of more than 1m.

· The tank must not be installed over or immediately adjacent to a water main or a sewer main.

· The tank must be located behind the front alignment to the street of the building.

· The tank must not exceed 2.4m in height above ground

· The tank must be located at least 450mm from any property boundary.

Minor Concern

· Code does not restrict number of tanks.

Water Tanks (below ground)

Only applicable to Rural Zones

Inconsequential

· No rural zones within Parramatta LGA.

Waste Storage Containers (temporary)

N/A

· Limit of one container to be placed in a public place.

· A maximum period of 14 days from the date of placement of the container to the date of removal.

· A strip, minimum width of 1.5m, shall be provided to enable safe pedestrian access

Minor Concern

· Not included in the proposed Code.

Type of Development

Draft Exempt Development Code

(May 2008)

Existing Exempt and Complying Development Code under Parramatta DCP 2005 (Section 6)

Comments

5.1 –Erection of Buildings

Windmills

Only applicable to Rural Zones

Inconsequential

· No rural zones within Parramatta LGA.

Windows, glazed areas and external doors

N/A

· Replacement in residential premises.

· No reduction in the area provided for light and ventilation.

· No increase in size

· No additional windows

· Not included in the proposed Code.

5.2 Advertising Structures

Building Identification Signs

· Does not apply to a heritage item.

· Maximum area—1m².

· Only one per premises.

· Must not be illuminated.

· If encroaching onto the footpath, must be erected more than 2.6m above ground level

· One sign per premises

· Sign is not to exceed 0.75m² in area

· Located wholly within the property boundaries

· Shall not be illuminated or flashing

· Maximum height of freestanding sign above ground is 2m.

Minor Concern

· Code allows for increase sign face area.

Real Estate Signs

· Does not apply to a heritage item.

· Only one per premises.

· Maximum area based on development type.

· Sign not to exceed 2.5m² in area

· Located wholly within the property boundary or attached to the existing boundary fence

· Non flashing or illuminated

Major Concern

· Code allows for greater sign face area for real estate signs applicable to developments other than a dwelling house.

· Code does not restrict flashing or illuminated signs.

Pylon Signs

· Applies to Business and Industrial Zones.

· Does not apply to a heritage item.

· Only one per allotment.

· Maximum height—6m.

N/A

· Unclear why this is listed under the Housing Code if it only applies to Business and Industrial Zones.

Type of Development

Draft Exempt Development Code

(May 2008)

Existing Exempt and Complying Development Code under Parramatta DCP 2005 (Section 6)

Comments

5.3 Use of Land

Home Based Child Care

· Must be within an existing dwelling house.

· Must be a permissible use in the relevant zone.

· The number of children (including children related to the carer or licensee) must not at any one time exceed 7 children under the age of 12 years, including no more than 5 who do not ordinarily attend school.

N/A

Minor Concern

· Council does not allow home based child care as exempt development.

Home Activity or Home Business (in existing dwelling)

· Must be within an existing dwelling house.

· Must be a permissible use in the zone.

· Does not involve the sale of goods by retail.

· Does not involve the display of an advertisement other than a business identification sign.

Home Occupation

· The use is not bed and breakfast accommodation.

· The use complies with the definition of home occupation in the Parramatta LEP 2001.

Inconsequential

· Code needs to ensure that home occupation is as defined by each Council.

Use of Class 9b Building for Public Meetings

N/A

· The building is approved for use as a 9b building.

· Must not contravene any conditions of consent imposed by a previous consent.

Minor Concern

· Not included in the proposed Code.

Type of Development

Draft Exempt Development Code

(May 2008)

Existing Exempt and Complying Development Code under Parramatta DCP 2005 (Section 6)

Comments

5.4 Subdivision

Boundary Adjustment

Subdivision for the purpose only of any one or more of the following:

· minor adjustment to a boundary between allotments which does not involve the creation of an additional allotment.

· rectifies an encroachment upon an allotment.

· creating a public reserve.

· excises from a lot land that is, or is intended to be, used for public purposes, including drainage purposes, rural fire brigade or other emergency service purposes or public toilets.

· Must not involve subdivision works on council property.

· Approval of the council is required for the dedication of land for a public purpose.

N/A

Major Concern

· Code needs to ensure that minimum allotment sizes are maintained.

· Council does not allow boundary adjustments as exempt development.

Consolidation of Allotments

N/A

· Must not be in a Special Character Area or a Heritage Conservation Area.

Minor Concern

· Not included in the proposed Code.

Type of Development

Draft Exempt Development Code

(May 2008)

Existing Exempt and Complying Development Code under Parramatta DCP 2005 (Section 6)

Comments

5.5 Miscellaneous

Bed & Breakfast Accommodation

· Must be within an existing dwelling house with a maximum floor area of 300m².

· Must be a permissible use in the zone.

· The accommodation is provided to guests in no more than one bedroom.

· Must not involve the extension or enlargement of the existing building.

Minor Concern

· Council does not allow Bed and Breakfast Accommodation as exempt development.

Demolition

· Does not apply to a heritage item.

· Includes any structure or building that would be exempt development under this Policy.

· Must be carried out in accordance with AS 2601-1991, 'Demolition of structures'.

· Excluding heritage items or structures in a conservation area other than exempt structures) and excluding demolition of structures containing asbestos

· The structure is identified as Exempt Development and is less than 25m² in area, or is an above ground swimming pool

· Must be carried out in accordance with AS 2601 1991.

· Demolition is restricted to the hours of 7.00am to 8.00pm Monday to Friday inclusive and 8.00am to 8.00pm Saturdays and prohibited on Sundays and public holidays.

· Does not include removal of trees other than trees exempt from the tree preservation order.

Minor Concern

· Demolition in heritage conservation areas is not prohibited under the code.

· Code only allows demolition of things which could be erected under exempt development.

Attachment 2

Comparison of Controls Application Under the Proposed State-Wide Exempt and Complying Development Codes and Council's Existing Exempt and Complying Development

Table 4 – Exempt development for all Business and Industrial Zones

Type of Development	Draft Exempt Development Code (May 2008)	Existing Exempt and Complying Development Code under Parramatta DCP 2005 (Section 6)	Comments
3.1 Erection of Buildings
Aerials or Antennae			· See comments to Housing Code.
Air Conditioning			· See comments to Housing Code.
ATMs	· Does not apply to a heritage item. · Must be located within an arcade or mall. · If facing a public footpath or street, the automatic teller machine must provide capacity for queuing and the free movement of pedestrians. · Must not be free standing.		Minor Concern · Council does not allow ATMs as exempt development. · Code should make provision for access for people with a disability.
Awnings, patios, pergolas, shade structures and fixed sail awnings	· Must be located on the ground floor. · Must be located behind the building line, except for window hoods and awnings which may encroach beyond the building line.		· See comments to Housing Code.
Collapsible Sail Awnings	· Does not apply to a heritage item. · Maximum area 40m². · Must be located behind the building line. · Must be attached to external wall of a building. · Must not extend beyond the boundary line.	N/A	Minor Concern · Council does not collapsible awnings as exempt development.
Barbeques			· See comments to Housing Code.
Bollards	· Does not apply to a heritage item. · Maximum height—1.2m. · Maximum diameter—0.5m. · Must be located wholly within the property. · Must not affect the existing egress provisions.		Minor Concern · Council does not allow bollards as exempt development.
Building site sheds, offices & amenities			· See comments to Housing Code.
Type of Development	Draft Exempt Development Code (May 2008)	Existing Exempt and Complying Development Code under Parramatta DCP 2005 (Section 6)	Comments
Charity Bins	N/A		Inconsequential · This type of exemption is listed under Draft Parramatta LEP 2008 under heading ‘Clothing Bin’. · Should apply to Housing Code as well as the Commercial Building Code.
Carports			· See comments to Housing Code.
Decks & Patios			· See comments to Housing Code.
Driveways and Pathways			· See comments to Housing Code.
Fences Behind Building Line			· See comments to Housing Code.
Fences within Building Line	N/A		Minor Concern · Not exempt for commercial or industrial sites.
Flagpoles			· See comments to Housing Code.
Letterbox			· See comments to Housing Code.
Minor External Alterations or Building Works			· See comments to Housing Code.
Type of Development	Draft Exempt Development Code (May 2008)	Existing Exempt and Complying Development Code under Parramatta DCP 2005 (Section 6)	Comments
Minor Internal Alterations	· Does not apply to a heritage item. · Must only comprise non-structural alterations to the exterior of a building such as painting, plastering, cement rendering, cladding, attaching fittings, decorative work, replacement of external windows, glazed areas and doors, repairs to non-structural wall and roof cladding. · Must not compromise the making of, or an alteration to the size of, any opening in a wall or roof of a building, such as a doorway, window or skylight.	Internal fit out or alterations to existing shops, commercial and industrial premises · Excluding food business, hairdressers, beauty salons and skin penetration. · The removal of asbestos cement and lead paint complies with the Work Cover Authority’s guidelines · Shall be consistent with the conditions of Development Consent.	Major Concern · Code should refer to Work Cover guidelines. · Code does not exclude fit out for food business, hairdressers, beauty salons and skin penetration.
Pergola			· See comments to Housing Code.
Privacy Screens			· See comments to Housing Code.
Radio & Satellite Communication Dishes			· See comments to Housing Code.
Ramps for Persons with a Disability			· See comments to Housing Code.
Recladding of Roofs and Walls			· See comments to Housing Code.
Retaining Walls			· See comments to Housing Code.
Scaffolding			· See comments to Housing Code.
Shade Structures of open weave or fabric mesh			· See comments to Housing Code.
Skylights and Roof Windows			· See comments to Housing Code.
Type of Development	Draft Exempt Development Code (May 2008)	Existing Exempt and Complying Development Code under Parramatta DCP 2005 (Section 6)	Comments
Solar Water Heaters & Photovoltaic Systems			· See comments to Housing Code.
Water Features & Ponds			· See comments to Housing Code.
Water Tanks (above ground)			· See comments to Housing Code.
3.2 Advertising Structures
Building Identification Signs			· See comments to Housing Code.
Real Estate Signs			Major Concern · Council allows slightly more signage on commercial and industrial sites than residential. However, comments to Housing Code are relevant.
Pylon Signs	· Does not apply to a heritage item. · Only one per allotment. · Maximum height—6m.	N/A	Major Concern · Council does not allow pylon signs as exempt development.
3.3 Ancillary Development
Ancillary or Incidental Development	· Includes parking, loading facilities, drainage, workers toilet amenities, pollution control. · Does not apply to a heritage item. · If site area greater than 2 ha, maximum floor area of building or buildings—100m². · If site area 2ha or less, maximum floor area of the building or buildings—60m².	N/A	Minor Concern · Council does not allow ancillary development as exempt development unless listed separately in the exempt development criteria.
Type of Development	Draft Exempt Development Code (May 2008)	Existing Exempt and Complying Development Code under Parramatta DCP 2005 (Section 6)	Comments
3.4 Use of Land
Change the use of a building from a shop to another shop	· Must not involve a different use of the building from a non-food shop to a shop used for the preparation of food for sale or consumption. · Restricted publications must not be exhibited or sold. · Objects primarily concerned with sexual behaviour must not be exhibited. · The curtilage of the shop must not be used for storage or display purposes. · Must not extend existing hours of operation. · Proposed use is consistent with any condition of consent of the existing use relating to: · the maintenance of landscaping, or · the parking of vehicles, or · the provision of space for the loading or unloading of goods or vehicles.	*From one type of shop to another type of shop, or from one type of commercial premises to another type of commercial premises* · The premises is not to be used as a new food business. · The building must have a previous approval for the use of the premises. · The different use does not result in an increase in the gross floor area of the building. · Any proposed additional advertising material complies with exempt development criteria. · The building is lawfully constructed to be used for the purposes of a shop or office/commercial premises of a particular kind. · The curtilage of the shop or office/commercial premises is not used for storage or display. · The premises is not open outside the existing approved hours of operation. · Not to involve the carrying out of any alterations other than those exempted. · All conditions that have previously been imposed on the use of the building or the use of the land that relate to; · the maintenance of landscaping, · the parking of vehicles, · the provision of space for the loading and unloading of goods or vehicles. But not where the commercial premises or shop: · includes the display, exhibition or sale of publications classified Category 1 restricted, Category 2 restricted or RC under the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995 of the Commonwealth, or · is used for the purpose of a business to which Section 578E of the Crimes Act 1900 applies, or · includes a business which is primarily concerned with the display or exhibition of any article that is primarily concerned with sexual behaviour, · is used for the purpose of a brothel or · requires a liquor license under the Liquor Licensing Act.	· Code must exclude opportunity for additional floor area. · Code should ensure previous use was lawfully commenced. · Code should exclude brothels and premises requiring a liquor license · Code does not refer to ancillary changes to advertising or internal alterations. · Council’s criteria specially detail what sort of business and material are excluded from exempt development.
Type of Development	Draft Exempt Development Code (May 2008)	Existing Exempt and Complying Development Code under Parramatta DCP 2005 (Section 6)	Comments
Change the use of building from a commercial premises to another commercial premises				Comments
Change of use of a building from a commercial premises to a retail premises and visa versa	· Previous use must be a lawful use. · Must not extend hours outside existing hours of operation. · Publications within the meaning of Indecent Articles and Classified Publications Act 1975 are not exhibited or sold. · Objects primarily concerned with sexual behaviour are not exhibited. · The curtilage of the shop must not be used for storage or display purposes. · Proposed use is consistent with any condition of consent of the current or previous use relating to: · the maintenance of landscaping; · the parking of vehicles; or · the provision of space for the loading or unloading of goods or vehicles.		Minor Concern · This does not comprise exempt development under Council’s DCP 2005.
Type of Development	Draft Exempt Development Code (May 2008)	Existing Exempt and Complying Development Code under Parramatta DCP 2005 (Section 6)	Comments
Change the use of building from an industry or light industry to a light industry	· Previous use must be a lawful use. · Use must not exceed 500m² of total floor area. · Building must have rear service access or access to off-street loading facilities. · The curtilage of the building must not be used for storage or display purposes. · Must not extend existing hours of operation. · Proposed use is consistent with any condition of consent of the existing use relating to: · the maintenance of landscaping, or · the parking of vehicles, or · the provision of space for the loading or unloading of goods or vehicles. · Must not result in any premises being used for potentially hazardous or offensive industries as defined in State Environmental Planning Policy No 33—Hazardous and Offensive Development.	· The use of the premises is to be for industrial purposes only as defined in the Parramatta LEP 2001. · The building must have a previous approval for the use of the premises. · The building is lawfully constructed to be used for the purposes of an industrial purpose of a particular kind. · The building has a maximum area of 500m². · The curtilage of the building is not used for storage or display. · There is no extension of hours outside the existing approved hours of operation, and not outside the hours of 6:00am to 6:00pm. · The use will not require the upgrade of any fire safety, health, environmental or other standards. · Not to involve the carrying out of any alterations other than those exempted. · All conditions that have previously been imposed on the use of the building or the use of the land that relate to; · the maintenance of landscaping, · the parking of vehicles, · the provision of space for the loading and unloading of goods or vehicles, · The use does not involve handling, storing or using hazardous chemicals otherwise than on a domestic scale (except at a distance of more than 25m from any habitable building), and does not release any hazardous chemicals, materials or pollutants into the environment.	Minor Concern · Code does not restrict absolute hours to between 6.00am and 6.00pm. · Code does not refer to fire safety, health, and environmental upgrades. · Code requires rear lane access, not currently required by Council. · Code refers to dangerous or hazardous industries but not the use or storage or dangerous or hazardous goods. · Code only allows use to continue as ‘light industry’, rather than ‘industry’. · Code does not refer to ancillary alterations.
3.5 Subdivision
Boundary Adjustment			· See comments to Housing Code.
5.5 Miscellaneous
Demolition			· See comments to Housing Code.

Attachment 2

Comparison of Controls Application Under the Proposed State-Wide Exempt and Complying Development Codes and Council's Existing Exempt and Complying Development

Table 5 - NSW Housing Code & Commercial Development Code

Exempt and Complying Development Code 2008 - Standard Conditions

Condition		Draft Codes	Parramatta DCP 2005
GENERAL
1.	All building work must be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia.	P	P
2.	Development must be carried out in accordance with the application, approved plans and the conditions of this complying development certificate.	P	x
3.	The building must not be used for commercial or industrial purposes.	P	x
BEFORE YOU START WORK
4.	Two days before site works, or building begins, and five days before any demolition begins, the applicant must: a. Notify Council of commencement of work and appointment of Principal Certifying Authority b. Notify the adjoining landowners that work will commence.	x	P
5.	Building work that involves residential building work must not be carried out unless the Principal Certifying Authority for the development to which the work relates: a. in the case of work to be done by a licencee under the Home Building Act 1989: - has been informed in writing of the licensee’s name and contractor licence number, and - is satisfied that the licensee has complied with the requirements of Part 6 of the Home Building Act 1989, or b. in the case of work to be done by any other person: - has been informed in writing of the person’s name and owner builder permit number, - or has been given a declaration, signed by the owner of the land that states that the reasonable market cost of the labour and materials involved in the work is less than the amount prescribed for the purposes of the definition of owner-builder work in Section 29 of the Home Building Act 1989.	x	P
6.	A sign is to be erected in a prominent position on any work site which work involved in the erection or demolition of a building: a. stating that unauthorised entry to the work site is prohibited, and b. indicating the name of the person in charge of the work site and a telephone number at which the person may be contacted both during and outside working hours. The sign is to be removed when the work has been completed.	x	P
	Condition	Draft Codes	Parramatta DCP 2005
8.	The applicant shall bear the cost of all restoration works to Council’s property damaged during the course of this development. The applicant shall advise Council, in writing, of any existing damage to Council property before commencement of the development. A dilapidation survey of Council’s assets, including photographs and written record, must be prepared by a suitably qualified person and submitted to Council prior to the issuing of any Complying Development Certificate.	x	P
9.	The approved plans must be submitted to a Sydney Water Quick Check agent or Customer Centre to determine whether the development will affect Sydney Water’s sewer and water mains, storm water drains and/or easements, and if further requirements need to be met. Plans will be appropriately stamped.	x	P
SITE PREPARATION & MANAGEMENT
10.	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 of 20 persons employed at the site. Each toilet provided: a. must be a standard flushing toilet, and b. must be connected: - to a public sewer, or - if connection to a public sewer is not practicable, to an accredited sewerage management facility approved by the Council, or - if connection to a public sewer or an accredited sewerage management facility is not practicable, to some other sewerage management facility approved by the Council.	P	P
11.	The provision of toilet facilities must be completed before any other work is commenced.	P	x
12.	If an excavation associated with the erection or demolition of a building extends below the level of the base of the footings of a building on an adjoining allotment of land, the person causing the excavation to be made: a. must preserve and protect the building from damage, and b. if necessary, must underpin and support the building in an approved manner, and c. must, at least 7 days before excavating below the level of the base of the footings of a building on an adjoining allotment of land, give notice of intention to do so to the owner of the adjoining allotment of land and furnish particulars of the excavation to the owner of the building being erected or demolished.	P	P
13.	If the work involved in the erection or demolition of a building: a. is likely to cause pedestrian or vehicular traffic in a public place to be obstructed or rendered inconvenient, or b. involves the closure of a public place, a hoarding or fence must be erected between the work site and the public place.	P	P
	Condition	Draft Codes	Parramatta DCP 2005
14.	If necessary, an awning is to be erected, sufficient to prevent any substance falling into the public place.	x	P
15.	A minimum width of 1.2m must be provided between the work site and the edge of the roadway so as to facilitate the safe movement of pedestrians.	P	x
16.	Any hoarding, fence or awning required is to be removed when the work has been completed.	P	P
17.	A garbage receptacle fitted with a tight fitting lid for the reception of all food scraps and papers from the work site must be provided prior to building work commencing and must be maintained and serviced for the duration of the work.	P	P
18.	The work site must be kept lit between sunset and sunrise if it is likely to be hazardous to persons in the public place.	x	P
19.	All excavations and backfilling associated with the erection or demolition of a building must be executed safely and in accordance with the appropriate professional standards.	x	P
20.	All excavations associated with the erection or demolition of a building must be properly guarded and protected to prevent them from being dangerous to life or property.	x	P
21.	If the soil conditions require it: a. retaining walls associated with the erection or demolition of a building or other approved methods of preventing movement of the soil must be provided, and b. adequate provision must be made for drainage. OR Adequate runoff and erosion controls shall be installed to prevent soil erosion, water pollution or the discharge of loose sediment on surrounding land, as follows: a. divert uncontaminated run off around cleared or disturbed areas b. erect a silt fence to prevent debris escaping into drainage systems or waterways c. prevent tracking of sediment by vehicles onto roads d. stockpile topsoil, excavated material, construction and landscaping supplies and debris within the site.	P Sediment & Erosion only.	P
22.	A building in respect of which there is a change of building use must comply with the Category 1 Fire Safety Provisions applicable to the proposed new use.	x	P
23.	Site access and stormwater drainage is to be provided in accordance with the requirements of Parramatta DCP 2005.	x	P
	Condition	Draft Codes	Parramatta DCP 2005
	The Principal Certifying Authority is to make an inspection of the site prior to the carrying out of any complying development in order to document the condition of the kerb and gutter and concrete footpaths. Where damage is existing, it shall be reported to Council. Any damage which occurs after construction commences is to be repaired in accordance with Council’s requirements prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate	x	P
24.	Building materials/equipment must be stored wholly on the site, unless prior written approval has been obtained from council.	P	x
25.	Equipment must not be operated on the footpath or roadway, unless prior written approval has been obtained from council.	P	x
26.	Waste materials must not be burnt on the work site and must be disposed of at a waste management facility.	P	x
27.	Any acid sulfate soils excavated during the construction must be managed in accordance with the geotechnical assessment.	P	x
CONSTRUCTION
28.	Any necessary alterations to, or relocation of, utility services must be carried out at no cost to the council or the relevant public authority.	P	x
29.	Where the building work involves the construction of a garage, carport or the like provision must be made for a driveway across the footpath to be constructed out of concrete, in accordance with the council's prior to the issue of an occupation certificate.	P	x
30.	Where a redundant layback will occur at the frontage of the property, a new concrete kerb and gutter must be constructed to replace the redundant layback prior to the issue of an occupation certificate.	P	X
31.	Any building work must be carried out between 7.00am and 6.00pm Monday to Friday and 8.00am to 5.00pm Saturday, excluding Sundays and public holidays. Any demolition work must be carried out between 7.00am and 6.00pm Monday to Friday excluding weekends and public holidays.	x	P
CERTIFICATION & INSPECTIONS
32.	A survey plan prepared by a registered surveyor must be submitted to the principal certifying authority where the setback of the building is less than 900mm from any side or rear boundary to indicate compliance with the setback requirements referred to in this certificate.	P	x
33.	The survey plan must be provided prior to the pouring of concrete for the ground floor slab or at the completion of the sub-floor framework to the lowest floor level.	P	x
	Condition	Draft Codes	Parramatta DCP 2005
34.	The applicant must notify either the Council or an accredited certifier in advance - 48 hours in writing or 24 hours by phone, to inspect the following: a. Erosion controls, site works and site set out, before building starts b. Placement of piers or foundation before placing footings c. Steel reinforcing before pouring concrete d. Framework of structure before lining or cladding is fixed e. Stormwater drainage and on site detention before backfilling f. Wet areas treated before lining or tiling. OR The applicant must notify either the Council or an accredited certifier in advance - 48 hours in writing or 24 hours by phone, to inspect the following: a. Erosion controls, site works and site set out, before building starts b. Foundation before the installation of pool c. Steel reinforcing and coping before the pouring of concrete d. Pool fencing, prior to the pool being filled with water e. On completion of the pool.	x	P
35.	The evidence of the relevant payments shall be included in the submission of the Complying Development Certificate to Council: a. kerb and guttering deposits and inspections b. road opening fees.	x	P
SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT TYPES
	*Subdivision*
36.	The applicant must lodge a subdivision certificate application together with a final survey plan of the subdivision and six copies for endorsement by the Principal Certifying Authority within five years of the date of this consent, otherwise the approval will lapse.	x	P
	*Swimming Pools*
37.	The pool must not to be completely filled with water until such time as a safety fence has been erected.	P	x
38.	Where the depth of water in the pool exceeds 300mm during construction a temporary barrier or fence must be erected or other precautions taken so as to prevent the entry of children into the pool.	P	x
	*Demolition*
39.	Any demolition or disposal of materials containing asbestos must be carried out in accordance with the WorkCover Authority’s “Guidelines for Practices involving Asbestos in Buildings”.	x	P
	Condition	Draft Codes	Parramatta DCP 2005
40.	Prior to the commencement of demolition work, a licensed demolisher is to prepare a Work Method Statement and provide Council a copy. A copy of the Statement is also be submitted to the WorkCover Authority. The statement is to comply with: AS2601-1991 Demolition of Structures, the requirements of WorkCover Authority and conditions of the Development Approval, and include: i. Enclosing and making the site safe, any temporary protective structures must comply with the “Guidelines for Temporary Protective Structures (April 2001)”; ii. Induction training for on-site personnel; iii. Inspection and removal of asbestos, and contamination and other hazardous materials; iv. Dust control - Dust emission must be minimised for the full height of the building. A minimum requirement is that perimeter scaffolding, combined with chain wire and shade cloth must be used, together with continuous water spray during the demolition process. Compressed air must not be used to blow dust from the building site; v. Disconnection of Gas and Electrical Supply; vi. Fire Fighting - Fire fighting services on site are to be maintained at all times during demolition work. Access to fire services in the street must not be obstructed; vii. Access and Egress - No demolition activity shall cause damage to or adversely affect the safe access and egress of this building; viii. Waterproofing of any exposed surfaces of adjoining buildings; ix. Control of water pollution and leachate and cleaning of vehicles tyres - Proposals shall be in accordance with the “Protection of the Environmental Operations Act 1997”; x. Working hours, in accordance with this Development Consent; xi. Confinement of demolished materials in transit; xii. Proposed truck routes, in accordance with this Development Consent; xiii. Location and method of waste disposal and recycling in accordance with the “Waste Minimisation and Management Act 1995”. The demolition by induced collapse, the use of explosives or on-site burning is not permitted.	x	P
41.	Five (5) working days prior to any demolition work commencing, written notice is to be given to Parramatta City Council and all adjoining occupants. The written notice is to include the date when demolition will commence and details of the principal contractors name, address, business hours contact telephone number, Council’s after hours contact number and the appropriate NSW WorkCover Authority licence.	x	P
	Condition	Draft Codes	Parramatta DCP 2005
42.	Prior to demolition commencing, Council’s building surveyor is to inspect the site. Should the building to be demolished be known or suspected by reason of the buildings age or otherwise to be found to be wholly or partly clad with bonded or friable asbestos material, approval to commence demolition will not be given until Council is satisfied that appropriate measures are in place for the handling, storage, transport and disposal of the bonded or friable asbestos material. Prior to commencement of demolition an inspection fee is to be paid in accordance with Council’s current fee schedule.	x	P
43.	Demolition works involving the removal, repair, disturbance and disposal of a total surface area (not floor area) of 200m2 or more of bonded asbestos material are to be undertaken by contractors who hold the appropriate NSW WorkCover Authority licence(s) and approvals.	x	P
44.	On demolition sites where buildings are known to contain bonded or friable asbestos material, a standard sign containing the words ‘DANGER ASBESTOS REMOVAL IN PROGRESS’ measuring not less than 400mm x 300mm is to be erected in a prominent position on site visible from the street kerb. The sign is to be erected prior to demolition work commencing and is to remain in place until such time as all asbestos material has been removed from the site. Advice on the availability of these signs can be obtained by contacting the NSW WorkCover Authority hotline or the website www.workcover.nsw.gov.au.	x	P
45.	The site is to be enclosed with a suitable security fence to prohibit unauthorised access, to be approved by Council.	x	P
46.	A sign is to be erected in a prominent position on any work site on which work involved in the erection or demolition of a building is being carried out:- a. Stating that unauthorised entry to the work site is prohibited; i. Showing the name of the principal contractor (or person in charge of the work site), and a telephone number at which that person may be contacted at any time for business purposes and outside working hours; and ii. Showing the name, address and telephone number of the Principal Certifying Authority for the work. b. Any such sign must be maintained while to building work or demolition work is being carried out, but must be removed when the work has been completed. c. This condition does not apply to building works being carried out inside an existing building.	x	P
47.	No materials, machinery, signs or vehicles used in or resulting from the construction or demolition relating to the development shall be stored or placed on Council’s footpath, nature strip or roadway.	x	P
48.	A person having the benefit of this certificate must ensure that all vehicles leaving the work site carrying demolition materials, have their loads covered and do not track soil or waste material onto the road.	P	x
49.	If demolition work obstruct or inconvenience pedestrians or vehicular traffic on an adjoining public road or reserve, a separate application must be made to council to enclose the public place with a hoarding or fence.	P	x
50.	Erosion and sediment controls must be provided in accordance with the details shown on the approved plans, prior to the disturbance of any soil on the work site.	P	x
51.	The work site must be left free of waste and debris when work has been completed.	P	x

Car Park	List of work required	Priority	Estimated Cost
Council Chambers Car Park (next to Town Hall)	There are currently three treatments being considered. 1. Lift all paving, lay sand/cement bed, relay and glue the paving in place. 2. Concrete the entire area and finish with a stencilled pattern. 3. Asphalt the entire area.	High 2008/09	Estimated cost $35,000 Estimated cost $50,000 Estimated cost $25,000
Lennox Street car park	Re-sheeting of asphalt Line marking Kerb & Gutter replacement	Very high (2008/09 Civil Construction program)	$55,000
Fennell Street	Minor patching Minor repairs to fencing	Low (2009/10)	$5000
David Frater Reserve	Good condition Replace kerb along garden bed at eastern end.	Low (2009/10)	$8000
Macquarie Street	Good condition No works needed as will be redeveloped in future by Integral Energy in conjunction with substation works.	N/A	Nil
Macquarie Lane	Poor condition Re-sheeting Drainage works Line marking	Very high (2008/09 Civil Construction program)	$35,000
Leabeter Street	Good condition Minor maintenance works Re-sit telegraph pole and footings	High High (2008/09)	Within maintenance budget. $500

Attachment 1

Metro in Parramatta - Detailed Report

DETAILED REPORT - METRO PROPOSALS IN PARRAMATTA

Background

In March 2008, the State Government announced proposals for the North West Metro from Rouse Hill to Sydney along with the outline for two other future Metro lines: West Metro (Parramatta to Sydney) and South East Metro (Malabar to Sydney). See attachment 2 for a map of these proposed Metro routes.

North West Metro

The proposed North West Metro (shown below) utilises the previously proposed North West Rail Link (NWRL) which connected Rouse Hill to Epping. The NWRL was planned to provide direct services from North West Sydney to Sydney city via Macquarie Park using the Epping to Chatswood rail link (due to open in September 2008).

The North West Metro is proposed to operate underground between Sydney and Kellyville and above ground from Kellyville to Rouse Hill.

Map of the proposed North West Metro

Council adopted a submission to State Government on the North West Metro at the Council meeting on 28 April 2008. A summary of the submission recommendations are as follows:

· That North West Rail Link proposal be reinstated as a heavy rail line scheme

· That the North West Metro start at North Epping and continue beyond Sydney city

· That the West Metro include stations at Westmead and North Parramatta and extend beyond Sydney to the Northern Beaches

· That State Government produce a 50 year plan for Metro and CityRail

· That State Government consider converting the Carlingford Line to Metro

· That State Government introduce integrated public transport

· That State Government demonstrate how land use planning has been considered in forming the Metro network

West Metro

The State Government proposes that the West Metro connect Parramatta and Sydney using underground tunnels. Currently they are two proposed alignments, the difference them is the central section as shown below. For the purpose of this report these two alignments are called the southern alignment and northern alignment.

Northern alignment	Common alignment	Southern alignment
	Parramatta
	Rosehill
	Newington
	Olympic Park
North Strathfield		Strathfield
Canada Bay		Burwood
Five Dock		Ashfield
Leichhardt		Lewisham
Sydney University		Newton
		Redfern
	Central
	Pitt Street
	Martin Place
	Circular Quay

The northern alignment follows a different route between Olympic Park and Central creating new public transport opportunities between Parramatta and the Inner West. While the southern alignment shadows the existing rail corridor between Strathfield and Central. This has the potential advantage of reducing passenger overcrowding on the existing rail services in the corridor but offers fewer new public transport opportunities compared to the northern alignment.

Both alignments have the potential to reduce traffic congestion (and flows) on the M4, Parramatta Road and the City West Link. In addition it creates a strong case for reconsidering the need for the proposed M4 East. This scheme proposed a two lane road tunnel; it is estimated that this would create capacity for the approximately 4,400 people per hour (based on a capacity of 1,800 vehicles per lane and an occupancy rate of 1.2 people per vehicle). The State Government’s Metro system on the other hand boasts a capacity of 30,000 passengers per hour.

1. It is recommended that the northern alignment of West Metro is supported as it has the biggest potential impact on encouraging additional public transport journeys to both Parramatta and Sydney along the Inner West corridor.

West Metro in Parramatta LGA

The State Government’s proposal for stations within Parramatta LGA is for a station at Rosehill and Parramatta. The following is a summary of officer discussions and analysis.

Metro station at Rosehill

This metro station serves Rosehill Racecourse whose travel demand is based on events, predominately horse racing on Saturdays. In addition the existing residential area within the catchment area is of a low density with uncertain potential to increase the density as the majority of it lies within a heritage area of national significance.

A metro station at Rosehill offers poor potential patronage and is not supported. The CityRail event service to Rosehill could be maintained to meet the needs of Sydney Turf Club as currently occurs.

Rosehill to Newington alignment

The metro station adjacent to Rosehill is Newington. This would require a tunnel under the Shell oil refinery site to connect the two metro stations. The construction and operation of this tunnel alignment raises significant safety and security issues. It is worth noting that the original oil operation at the Shell site was extracting oil from the shale on site. In 2007, the Shell refinery supplied 40% of Sydney’s and 50% of NSW’s petroleum needs. This alignment offers a low level of feasibility and practicality and is not recommended.

Metro station at Granville-Clyde

It is suggested that a metro station at Granville-Clyde offers significant benefits over Rosehill. A metro station would support the planned increased density and potentially provide relief to traffic congestion on Parramatta Road in Granville. The alignment from Granville-Clyde to Newington avoids the need to tunnel beneath the Shell oil refinery.

Clyde CityRail station

Clyde CityRail station is 500m away from Granville station and it is suggested that a metro station at Granville-Clyde would allow the Clyde CityRail station to be closed.

The primary function of Clyde station is the interchange between the Carlingford Line and the Western and South rail lines. This report later proposes that the Carlingford Line be converted to Metro thus eliminating the primary function of Clyde station.

Closing Clyde station would increase the capacity and reliability, and reduce the journey times of the Western and South rail lines. In addition a metro service would deliver significantly increased public transport services from Granville-Clyde.

Metro station at Harris Park

It is considered that the proposed West Metro should include a station at Harris Park which would significantly increase the level of public transport provision. The Harris Park CityRail station is 500m from Parramatta station and a new metro station would allow the CityRail station to be closed. This would increase the capacity and reliability, and reduce the journey times of the Western, Blue Mountains and Cumberland rail lines.

Metro station at Parramatta

A Parramatta metro station would significantly increase public transport opportunities supporting the planned 30,000 extra jobs and 20,000 extra residents. It would significantly increase the public transport capacity between Parramatta and Sydney potentially reducing overcrowding and its impacts on the existing rail and bus services. The close proximity of the metro station to the existing Transport Interchange would provide significant benefits to all public transport services.

Metro station at Westmead

A metro station at Westmead would provide an interchange opportunity to the Western, Blue Mountains and Cumberland rail lines and the North-West bus Transit-Way. In addition, it supports the existing high density residential development and any future planned redevelopment of the Westmead precinct

Metro station at the Children’s Hospital

A metro station at the Children’s Hospital would significantly improve access to the northern half of the Westmead precinct which is some 800m away from Westmead station. Currently there is a half hourly bus service between Westmead station and the Children’s Hospital. In addition, it would support increased residential density north of Toongabbie Creek and potentially the redevelopment of the Cumberland Hospital site.

Metro station at North Parramatta

A metro station at North Parramatta reduces the demand on Parramatta metro station by providing the city centre with a second metro station. It also reduces the demand on the bus services at the Transport Interchange by providing an alternative interchange opportunity. The northern part of the city centre is poorly connected with as Victoria Road and Parramatta River both impede movement southwards towards the city centre.

In addition, the station supports the existing high density residential development north of Victoria Road and the future redevelopment of the Church Street North. It also would also serve Parramatta Stadium, Riverside Theatres, the river foreshore area and the dining area of Church Street.

Metro City Circle

It is proposed that a Metro City Circle around Parramatta and Westmead be created using the Parramatta, Westmead, Children’s Hospital and North Parramatta Metro stations. This is described in more detail below.

West Metro depot

A depot servicing the West Metro line could be located on existing railway land at Clyde. An alternative location is on existing railway land at Homebush/North Strathfield.

2. It is recommended that on the West Metro:

a. An additional metro station at Harris Park be considered

b. A metro station at Granville-Clyde be investigated rather than Rosehill

c. Additional metro stations at Westmead, the Children’s Hospital and North Parramatta be considered to form the Metro City Circle - a circular route around the city

Carlingford Metro

It is suggested that now is an ideal opportunity to consider converting the Carlingford line to metro, based on the previous Parramatta Rail Link (PRL) proposals to connect Parramatta to Epping. This will significantly improve transport connections to Epping, Macquarie Park, North Sydney and Sydney securing the long term future and viability of the Carlingford line. It is also proposed that the Carlingford Metro also serve the Metro City Circle route described below. The following is a summary of officer discussion and analysis of the proposed Metro:

Metro City Circle

It is proposed that a Metro City Circle around Parramatta and Westmead be created using the West Metro and Carlingford Metro. See attachment 3 for a map of the proposed Metro City Circle. This involves both Metros following a one-way loop from Parramatta to Westmead, Children’s Hospital, North Parramatta and returning to Parramatta metro station Both of the two Metro lines would traverse the Metro City Circle in opposite directions thereby providing a two-way service on the route. Providing two one-way routes significantly reduces the tunnelling costs compared to two two-way routes.

Metro station at Rosehill-Camellia

It is suggested that new metro station replace both Camellia and Rosehill stations as the previous PRL proposals planned. This new station could serve both the Racecourse and the surrounding industrial areas providing potential traffic congestion relief to James Ruse Drive and the bottle neck of the Grand Avenue bridge (over the existing Carlingford Line).

Metro station at UWS Rydalmere

A metro station at UWS Rydalmere would allow the land surrounding to be redeveloped with improved connections to the University of Western Sydney (UWS). This will release capacity on the Victoria Road bus services between UWS and Parramatta reducing bus journey times and reliability.

Metro stations at Dundas, Telopea, Carlingford & Epping

Replacing the existing Carlingford line service with a metro service will significantly increased public transport supporting the planned increased densities surrounding Dundas, Telopea, Carlingford (including Baulkham Hills LGA) and Epping stations.

Route beyond Epping

There is scope to extend the Carlingford Metro from Epping via Macquarie Park, Lane Cove and North Sydney to either Sydney or Dee Why. This is based on previous alignments considered for the Parramatta Rail Link.

The North West Metro to Epping will have a capacity of 30,000 passengers per hour but the Epping to Chatswood Rail Link will only have a capacity for 4,000 passengers per hour. The Carlingford Metro will address the passenger capacity shortfall to Macquarie Park. It will also provide a direct connection between Parramatta and Macquarie Park the two most significant employment centres after Sydney city.

Carlingford Metro depot

A depot serving the Carlingford Metro could be located on land within the Camilla precinct.

Camellia freight line & Clyde CityRail station

The Carlingford Metro proposal allows the Camellia freight line serving Shell and Patrick to be maintained. The impact on the rail level crossing on Parramatta will be greatly reduced by the removal of the Carlingford line service replaced by the Carlingford Metro. In addition the primary function of Clyde station is removed allowing the station to be considered for closure as earlier described.

3. It is recommended that the Carlingford Line be investigated for potential conversion to Metro based the previous Parramatta to Epping Rail Link proposals.

Attachment 1

Minutes of the Parramatta Cycleway Advisory Committee 6 May 2008

MINUTES OF THE PARRAMATTA CYCLEWAYS COMMITTEE HELD IN THE BOARDROOM, LEVEL 12, ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, 30 DARCY STREET, PARRAMATTA ON TUESDAY, 6 MAY 2008 AT 6.10 PM

PRESENT

Councillor M K Walsh in the Chair, Councillor Chris Worthington (arrived at 6.15pm), Antony DeVries, Pam Kendrick, Ian Macindoe, Brian Ford, Megan Kessler (arrived at 6.20pm), Michael Goard ,John Holstein and Nick Urbanik.

IN ATTENDANCE

Leanne Sutcliffe (Committee Clerk), Neville Davis (Service Manager Open Space & Natural Resources, Myfanwy Lawrence (Project Officer, Transport Planning) and Richard Searle (Traffic and Transport Services Manager).

APOLOGIES

An apology was received and accepted for the absence of Glen Elmore.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

There were no conflicts of interest at this meeting.

MINUTES

21/08 A copy of the Report of the Meeting of the Parramatta Cycleways Committee held on 4 March 2008 had previously been forwarded to each member.

Recommendation

That the Minutes of the Meeting of the Parramatta Cycleways Committee held on 4 March 2008 be taken as read and confirmed as a true record of the meeting.

ACTIONS ARISING FROM MINUTES

22/08 Missing Link on North West T way Cycleway at Old Windsor Road Wentworthville

Neville advised that he had circulated a copy of the safety audit to all members.

A meeting was held with RTA representatives, the Police, two representatives from the Department of Housing, Councillor Worthington and Brian Ford. On 23 April 2008. Neville explained that this meeting was brought forward due to the resignation of Jane Lowe (Community Place Development Officer) who is dealing with the community consultation for the removal of the sound barriers and felt that it was important that she attend this meeting before leaving council. During this meeting Constable Neale was given a copy of the plan and will be going to inspect the area and conduct a safety audit and will provide a report on his findings to council.

Neville advised that the lighting estimate is due at the end of this week.

Neville informed the committee that there would be a design meeting regarding the sound barriers and he would appreciate feedback from the committee regarding the design.

Clr Walsh requested that all committee members be invited to the next meeting.

Action

Neville to finalise the minutes from the meeting with the Department of Housing and circulate to committee members.

Megan Kessler arrived at 6.20pm.

23/08 Subiaco Creek/ Bridge (Rheem Site)

Neville advised that the Rheem cycleway had been completed last week and that the lighting would be completed in mid June.

Neville also advised that he would have information regarding the unveiling date for the Bill Brewer Plaque at the next meeting.

24/08 Missing Link on Parramatta River Foreshore adjoining the Ermington Naval Stores Development

Neville advised that he had spoken with the contractor, Theiss and that he was assured that signage would be installed at both ends while it is temporarily closed. The work is scheduled for completion by August 2008.

25/08 New pathway link between Goliath Ave & Oakes Road, Winston Hills

Neville advised that works have commenced in conjunction with the sub-division development and creek works.

Ian advised that there were problems with overgrown vegetation along the pathway and that this area needed to be cleared and maintained on a regular basis as it was a hazard for cyclists.

Ian requested that an onsite meeting be arranged to discuss further issues with the new pathway link.

John, Pam, Ian and Michael indicated that they would like to attend the onsite meeting.

The committee agreed to hold the onsite meeting on Wednesday 14 May at 3.30pm.

Action

Neville to send out an invitation for the onsite meeting to all committee members.

Councillor Worthington left at 6.40pm.

26/08 Underpass at Woodville Road

Richard advised that a letter has been sent to the RTA as requested. This matter will be pursued with the RTA representative on the Committee.

27/08 Oakes Road Roundabout outside Baxter Pharmaceuticals

Richard advised that the line markings will be done this month.

Ian requested if a bike logo could be painted on the road as well.

28/08 Elizabeth Street Footbridge

Neville and Richard advised that signs had been arranged reading “Cyclists please watch for pedestrians”.

Ian raised the point of whether it was possible for arrows or line markings could be painted on the bridge.

Myfanwy responded that this could not be done due to the Footbridge being a piece of public art.

Neville advised that the missing pavers would be fixed by the end of this week.

29/08 Cycleway connection between Westfield Shopping Centre & Parramatta Park

Myfanwy advised that Council is selling a potion of the Hunter Street carpark

Brian said that there is a need for a route from Westmead Hospital to Parramatta Park.

Ian suggested that the committee look at a plan of the area to discuss what other routes are available for cyclists.

30/08 Urban Arc Pty Ltd - Consultancy engagement for Bike Plan Review

Clr Walsh met with Contessa on 25 March and was briefed on the outline of the draft plan.

31/08 Bike Route – Guildford Road, Guildford

Neville advised that in the current plan the preferred route is to use Mountford Street.

32/08 John Street Ferry Wharf

Myfanwy advised that the bollards are compliant with the NSW Bicycle Guidelines

Pam said that the three white bollards are overkill and that the line markings lead you straight into the bollard either side of the middle one which is a hazard for cyclists.

Myfanwy requested if Neville could organise as an interim measure some red reflector tape to assist cyclists with the visibility of the bollards.

Neville responded that this could be done.

Action

Neville to organise red reflector tape to be affixed around all 3 white bollards.

BUSINESS ARISING

33/08 Maintenance Issues

Myfanwy asked members that if they see any maintenance issues while riding could they please report them to Council’s Customer Service Centre where a customer service officer would log a CRM for them.

Once the request is logged, you will be given a reference number which you can use to follow-up on the status of the request within two weeks should you have not heard anything on the matter.

Clr Walsh requested if a CRM could be logged on her behalf regarding the overgrown vegetation at the entrance of the cycleway at Good Street, Granville and if ongoing maintenance of this area can be scheduled.

Neville responded that he would follow up on this CRM for Clr Walsh.

Megan said that she had been informed that when Contessa went riding she would list any issues she came across and then report them to Council.

Megan responded that she had also done a list when she was riding and would be happy to submit that to the committee.

Action

Neville to log CRM for Clr Walsh.

34/08 Draft Bike Plan Review

Neville advised that all members had been given a copy of the Draft Bike Plan at tonight’s meeting.

Neville advised he had spoken with Contessa who apologised for the lateness of the plan but she had recently been unwell.

Neville proposed that a online copy of the plan and maps would be available for members to review and comment. Members would have 10 working days from the time the internet link is provided to them to read and submit comments. At the same time staff will review and collate their comments. These comments will then be supplied to the Consultant.

Neville will than prepare a report for the June Ordinary Council Meeting for its consideration and endorsement with a recommendation that the Plan be approved in principle for public exhibition.

Neville advised that the Plan was required to be on public exhibition for 1 month The plan will then be submitted to the Ordinary Council Meeting in September for adoption.

Antony advised that he would be overseas for the next 2½ weeks and did not want to hold up the feedback process.

Neville responded that they would collate members comments and would include Antony’s when he returned.

Action

1. Neville to organise an online link to the Draft Bike Plan and Maps for the Committee members to view. A comment proforma will be provided.

2. Committee members to submit comments within 10 working days of receiving the link.

36/08 Grants and Funding

Michael said that he read an article that state there was government funding for cycle ways that was not being used by local councils and queried whether the committee was aware of this funding.

Clr Walsh advised that Julie Owens MP, Member for Parramatta has a very good listing of current grants that are available.

Myfanwy said that the Community Builders website also was a good source of government and non-government funding and that CAMWEST may like to look into applying for some of this funding in the future.

Clr Walsh said that it is important to keep in mind that many grants required dollar for dollar in return so it would be necessary to ensure that we had the funds available in the budget before applying for any grants.

GENERAL BUSINESS

37/08 Transport Access Guide, Region 4 Proposed Bus Network & Miscellaneous Information

Myfanwy issued a copy of the Transport Access Guide which was developed by council to all members.

A copy of the Region 4 Proposed Bus Network was also circulated and members informed that feedback closes on Friday 9 May if they were interested in providing comments.

Myfanwy also handed out a few different publications regarding cycling for members to have a look at and also mentioned the cycling exhibition [PCC1] ‘Dreams on Wheels’ that is currently being held in Canberra on the culture of cycling in Europe

38/08 Bourke Street Bicycle Route

Myfanwy advised that the City of Sydney currently has its Bourke Street Bicycle Route plan on public exhibition and that it would be well worth viewing and giving feedback.

39/08 Bicycle Recycling Network

Clr Walsh advised that Karen Bradshaw was running a bicycle recycling network in Toongabbie.

The Bicycle Recycling Network assists by diverting bicycles to various community groups in Sydney where they are refurbished and put back into the community. From bike art, Wheelchairs for amputee victims, youth programs, preservation of historical bikes, bike fleets to bicycles being sent to third world countries the alternatives are varied.

Action

Myfanwy to investigate option of separate bike collections during cleanups.

40/08 Bicycle Parking Stations in the LGA

John raised the issue of the requirement for more bicycle parking stations in the LGA.

John said that it would be very useful for cyclists if places such as Westfields, Riverbank and other major points in the LGA could have bicycle parking stations.

Myfanwy said that bicycle parking is part of the Integrated Transport Plan currently being drafted by Council.

41/08 National Ride to Work Day – 15 October

Myfanwy advised Bicycle NSW would be invited to organise a breakfast for National Ride to Work Day in Parramatta. Council held one in 2007 which was very successful.

John mentioned that Janet Hugs [PCC2] from The Children’s Hospital at Westmead were also very interested in holding a breakfast for National Ride to Work Day and that possibly council and the Children’s Hospital might be able to hold one together.

Action

Myfanwy to action the following 2 points:

1. Invite Bicycle NSW for to hold a breakfast at Parramatta for National Ride to Work day.

2. Contact Janet at The Children’s Hospital as Westmead regarding their breakfast.

42/08 New Members

Clr Walsh welcomed Brian Ford, John Holstein and Michael Goard to the Committee. As the Committee will be reformed after the local government elections in September she did not feel the formal process previously used to admit new members to the Committee was needed for this short period of time.

The meeting terminated at 8.45 pm.

Attachment 1

Minutes Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Advisory Committee 29th April 2008

MINUTES OF THE ABORIGINAL AND TORRES STRAIT ISLANDER ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING HELD IN ROOM 1, GROUND FLOOR, COUNCIL CHAMBERS, PARRAMATTA ON TUESDAY 29^th APRIL 2008 AT 6.05 PM.

__________________________________________________________________________

PRESENT

Mr Bruce Gale (in the Chair), Linda McDonald, June Magrath, Marcia Donovan, Anne Castles, Kerrie Kenton, Doug Desjardines, John Robertson, Gilson Saunders, Lyn Leerson and Jeanne Townsend.

OBSERVERS

Anne Stonham, Greg Stonham

IN ATTENDANCE

Ms Maggie Kyle – Community Capacity Building Officer; Tanya Bigeni – Events and Project Officer, Rachel Elliott – Minute taker

MINUTES

1 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF TRADITIONAL OWNERS THE DHARUG PEOPLE

Bruce Gale did an Acknowledgment of Country recognising that the land upon which the meeting was being held is Dharug and paying respect to Elders past and present.

2 WELCOME & INTRODUCTIONS

Bruce Gale welcomed all to the meeting.

3 APOLOGIES

Apologies were received and accepted for the absence of Phillip Bradley, Annie Nielson, Phil Russo, Stephan Jaeggi and Clr Paul Barber, Lord Mayor.

Lyn Leerson & June Magrath excused themselves from the meeting at 6.30pm

4 CONFLICT OF INTERESTS

No conflicts of interest noted.

5 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

A copy of the minutes of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Advisory Committee Meeting held on 1 April 2008 had previously been forwarded to each member.

The Committee noted that in the minutes of the last months there was no recording of the movers and seconders of motions. Future minutes are to include names of movers and seconders.

Ann Stonham queried not being included on the previous minutes as a member. Maggie Kyle advised that people seeking membership needed to read the Terms of Reference and Council’s Code of Conduct and agree to abide by them and complete a written application. This is why she had sent the relevant documents and form to Ann and Greg Stonham in February 2008. Once the Committee received a person’s application, they then considered the application and if appropriate, recommend it be ratified by Council. Once it had been ratified by Council, the person was then a member of the Committee.

Maggie Kyle was handed the applications for membership of three people.

RECOMMENDATION (Kenton/Donovan)

The report of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Advisory Committee Meeting held on 1 April 2008 be taken as a true record of the meeting.

6 BUSINESS ARISING

There was no Business Arising

7 SORRY DAY PLANNING

The planning for Sorry Day was discussed:

7.1 Tanya Bigeni advised that the Sorry Day program for 2008 is similar to 2007 with the exception that Council’s internal Sorry Day Working Group had agreed that lunch should be provided at Lake Parramatta rather than morning tea. Members of the Aboriginal communities that Council staff were working with will also be invited to attend.

7.2 Speakers for this year included Julie Wilson, and John Westbury from Link-Up who will talk about their experiences and stories.

7.3 Bruce Gale will do Welcome to Country and Gil Saunders will do the Smoking. Stephan Jaeggi will be Master of Ceremonies.

7.4 Tanya Bigeni confirmed that invitations had been distributed on 29^th April 2008. If members want specific people to be invited, they can contact her.

7.5 Bruce Gale asked what had occurred regarding the Committee’s request to Council that a plaque be placed at Lake Parramatta acknowledging Phil Russo as the driving force behind Council’s decision to apologise to the Stolen Generations and acknowledge Sorry Day. Maggie Kyle informed the Committee that as far as she was aware, the Committee had discussed the issue but had never passed a recommendation to go to Council. She will review the Committee’s minutes for the past 12 months and report to the Committee at the next meeting.

8 BURRAMATTA NAIDOC 2008 PLANNING

Planning for Burramatta NAIDOC continued:

8.1 Tanya Bigeni advised that the site used in Parramatta Park last year was not available. Bruce Gale and Tanya had inspected different sites in the Park and had agreed on a preferred one. Tanya Bigeni circulated maps of the Park to members and presented three options to the Committee and identified their advantages and disadvantages.

a) The Riverbank opposite Riverside Theatres was a good location however there was no free parking, some activities could not be held there and there is a significant safety issue of children falling into the river.

b) The second site in Parramatta Park has a power outlet however it is split by a road which would be dangerous, particularly for children.

c) The third site in Parramatta Park was on the Westmead side of the Park. There were a number of advantages to this site including free parking, level ground, easily accessible to Westmead railway station and that a number of people using the Park would see the event and be attracted to it. The disadvantage to this site is that it is a long way from the Parramatta CBD and station. Tanya Bigeni proposed hiring a trackless train, which could carry approximately 20 people and continuously loop the Park throughout the day picking up people from the Parramatta CBD side of the Park and dropping them off at the event site.

The Committee clarified that there were no safety issues with this site. Members agreed that the fact that this site would attract non-Indigenous people to the event was very important: the event would be more effective than in the past, in educating the community about NAIDOC.

The committee acknowledged that Tanya Bigeni had canvassed all options and agreed that the third site, option c) in Parramatta Park was their preferred option.

RECOMMENDATION (Gale/McDonald)

The Committee accepted the chosen site for the Burramatta NAIDOC Family Day as that on the Westmead side of Parramatta Park.

8.2 Copies of the Entertainment program were distributed and Tanya Bigeni noted that there was still one time slot to fill in the afternoon. Linda McDonald recommended the Aboriginal Line Dancers be engaged. Tanya Bigeni will contact them.

Maggie Kyle asked whether the Executive Committee had made a decision on whether all dancers needed to be Aboriginal. The Executive had not discussed this issue however Linda McDonald advised that all the dancers in the Aboriginal Line Dance Troupe are Aboriginal.

Jeanne Townsend advised that it was not appropriate that anyone perform before Welcome to Country. Tanya Bigeni will adjust the program accordingly.

8.3 The committee discussed stall holder applications. Tanya Bigeni advised that there would be room for 20 stalls and that she had received only three applications at this stage however she was confident that applications would be received in the next 6 weeks as this is what occurred in 2007.

8.4 The sponsorship of the event was discussed:

a) Tanya Bigeni reported that the sponsorship from BankWest did not look promising. Doug Dejardines advised that he had spoken with the Parramatta Manager of BankWest on Thursday last week who reported he had not been contacted by Council. Tanya Bigeni advised the Events Team was required to contact specific people when seeking sponsorship and that usually this meant people in National/ Central offices of corporations not local people. Tanya Bigeni will provide further information to the Committee at the next meeting.

b) Streets Ice Cream had been contacted however they had referred Tanya Bigeni to a number of different officers none of whom had, at this stage, provided an answer to the request for sponsorship.

c) NSW Police had been contacted however they advised that they do not sponsor events. They will attend an event and support it.

8.5 The marketing and promotion was discussed.

a) Ann Stonham reported that Koori Radio was already promoting NAIDOC in Parramatta. Tanya Bigeni will ask Council’s Marketing unit to send press releases to Koori Radio and will also ask them about sponsoring the event.

b) Tanya Bigeni presented a copy of the Marketing Plan for the event to the Committee and advised members that they were welcome to look through it although it was important to keep it confidential at this stage.

c) Tanya Bigeni has requested the Roads and Traffic Authority place bridge banners in strategic locations around Parramatta including James Ruse Drive Northbound, James Ruse Drive Southbound and Victoria Road over James Ruse Drive. She had also requested a flashing light advertising the event however these have been allocated to messages regarding World Youth Day and were not available.

d) State Rail had refused to put up posters advertising the event, again because they were giving priority to promoting World Youth Day. Gil Saunders suggested Tanya Bigeni contact the Aboriginal section within State Rail to discuss this.

e) Doug Desjardines raised his concerns that the Burramatta NAIDOC banner in Prince Alfred Park remain up leading up to the event. Last year one of them had been taken down for a time before the event. Tanya Bigeni advised we could not control this as the Riverside Theatres controlled the booking process regarding hanging banners including which banners were placed there and for how long.

Tanya Bigeni advised that she had booked in the banner to be hung in Prince Alfred Park.

8.6 Bruce Gale raised the issue of purchasing coats and caps with ‘Burramatta NAIDOC’ embroidered on them. Tanya Bigeni reported that new caps and coats are needed for the new members and new Aboriginal workers in Council and these would be ordered.

Doug Dejardines stated that the Executive Committee had discussed this issue and that he had ordered 300 caps and new jackets for each Committee member.

Maggie Kyle was concerned that the Committee purchase new jackets for each member and her recollection was that the Committee had agreed in 2007 that the jackets would be a one off purchase. Doug Dejardines disagreed.

8.7 The Committee discussed the Indigenous sports clinic and Tanya Bigeni reported that she is in the process of securing a sports clinic and also Eels players. Maggie Kyle noted that it was important that we do not over promote the Eels attending the event as our experience last year was that we cannot rely on their commitment to attend and people- children in particular- were very disappointed.

The Committee discussed writing to Alan Overton requesting Eels players attend and also refer to children’s disappointment in 2007 when only 2 players attended.

RECOMMENDATION (Gale/Saunders)

Tanya Bigeni and Maggie Kyle will write a letter on behalf of the Committee to Alan Overton which Bruce Gale would sign.

9 GENERAL BUSINESS & INFORMATION SHARING

9.1 Tanya Bigeni confirmed that she had contacted Shawn Coolburra’s agent regarding him being MC at the event. His fee would be approximately $4000. The Committee agreed this was too much money, and a local MC would be sought. Ann Stonham suggested Monkey Monk, Koori Radio be approached.

9.2 Maggie Kyle distributed copies of the letter to Julie Owens which was written by Lyn Leerson regarding the Northern Territory (NT) intervention. The Executive Committee advised they will read it and provide any comments to Maggie Kyle.

Doug Desjardines raised his concerns that there are major problems for Aboriginal people in NSW, not just the NT and he would like this added to the letter. Gil Saunders noted that NSW was where the atrocities started and that the Northern Territory has its own funds to deal with the issues arising from the intervention.

Members noted that a range of people and organisations are looking at the intervention in the NT, and noted that it needed to be decided whether to send the letter, or whether too much effort was being put into this when there are their own tribal area concerns.

John Robertson suggested that this be discussed at the next meeting.

Members agreed that they would send the letter and further discuss the situation in NSW at the next meeting.

9.3 Doug Desjardines asked Maggie Kyle to explain why only Bruce Gale and June Magrath were informed about the Greek Flag Raising event. Maggie Kyle reported that she had referred the Civic Events Team to Bruce Gale as Chairperson of the Committee and they had asked Bruce Gale to do the Welcome to Country. Maggie Kyle understood that Bruce Gale had agreed but had then not been able to attend and had asked June Magrath to stand in for him. Maggie Kyle also explained that this request had been handled as other similar requests had been in the past: the request was passed onto Bruce Gale as Chairperson.

Bruce Gale noted that he had apologised to Civic Events that Gail, his wife, would not be attending and they had misunderstood him and thought he was not able to attend. Bruce Gale also reported that he had tried to contact Doug Dejardines and Gil Saunders as well as June Magrath.

Doug Dejardines requested that in future, all Executive Members should be involved and invited to such events.

Maggie Kyle advised that this was a matter of communication between the Executive members and she would continue to pass on information to the Chairperson to distribute.

9.4 Doug Desjardines raised for discussion ‘Kels Lawn and Garden Service’ which was run by a local Aboriginal person and provided services for Aboriginal elders as well as the general community. Doug Desjardines requested that Council should look into providing this service. Maggie Kyle reported that Council does offer a lawn mowing service which had a long waiting list. She will ask Council’s Home Support service for the number of Aboriginal clients and also pass on the contact details on ‘Kels Lawn and Garden Service’ to them. Marcia Donovan questioned whether anyone goes out to visit elderly Indigenous members.

9.5 Doug Desjardines voiced his concern over Council not having traineeships for Aboriginal people and noted that this topic was raised in the meeting of 21 August 2001 but since then it had not been addressed. He stated he was concerned that this issue had been on the agenda for the past 5 to 6 years and nothing had been done. Bruce Gale suggested there is a strong need to push for traineeships in order to assist the Aboriginal officers who have a lot to do.

Maggie Kyle reported that the Aboriginal Community Project Officer would be developing an Aboriginal Employment Strategy with Council’s Human Resources Section. Council was committed to an approach that would include a number of strategies as traineeships alone would not increase Aboriginal staff. For example, the Strategy needed to address ways of retaining staff and increasing the number of Aboriginal people in mainstream positions. Maggie Kyle also noted that traineeships have limited effectiveness as they did not necessarily result in a permanent job and that wages for traineeships were low. Maggie Kyle also suggested that as this was an issue of concern to the Committee, it be raised at the meeting with Council Officers being held Thursday 1^st May 2008.

9.6 Marcia Donovan questioned why the Aboriginal Community Project Officer was not at the meeting. Maggie Kyle advised that the Officer will attend meetings, but because of her work priorities and projects could not attend each meeting. Maggie Kyle also noted that the range of issues brought up at Committee meetings meant no one officer could respond to every item.

Doug Desjardines insisted that the Officer should attend each meeting of the Committee. Bruce Gale suggested the Committee would like to see each Aboriginal Officer employed by Council at least once every 3 months, so that effectively one officer is here every month.

9.7 Gil Saunders questioned whether minutes were being sent to the other committees/organisations listed on the agenda. Maggie advised that they were.

9.8 Bruce Gale requested that Maggie Kyle find out what percentage of Aboriginal people other councils employ. Maggie Kyle advised this will be done as part of the Employment Strategy.

9.9 Bruce Gale asked whether cultural awareness training was being undertaken at a management level. Maggie Kyle advised that this issue is being taken seriously by the Community Capacity Team and that it is also a project of the Aboriginal Community Project Officer. She also noted that in the last couple of months Council had organised two events concerning Aboriginal issues- televising Prime Minister Kevin Rudd’s apology to Aboriginal people and ‘Closing the Gap’ morning tea and that Council’s senior management had taken a strong approach to encouraging staff to attend.

9.10 Maggie Kyle advised that the Aboriginal Community Project Officer will also be developing a “Welcome to Country” policy for Council. Jeanne Townsend suggested tat Council check if a “Welcome to Country” policy had been adopted by the Local Government Services Association.

9.11 Bruce Gale requested that at the next meeting, the Committee discuss the project regarding photos of local Aboriginal people.

9.12 Bruce Gale raised the issue of a letter received by Kerrie Kenton dated 7 April 2008

from Council. The letter was from Council Officer Neville Davis and was received through Laurie Ferguson’s office and was about the Campbell Hill Pioneer Park. The letter discussed the approval of a name – Wadigora. Kerrie Kenton claimed that effectively the letter claimed the Wadigora people do not exist and she was extremely offended by this. She also noted that she received the letter 10 days after the closing date for comments had passed.

The Committee raised their concerns of Council’s process of consulting with the ATSI Committee, especially with regard to something as momentous as this. The Committee raised the concern that the naming needs to be stopped. Kerrie Kenton suggested that the Council Officer should actually know the process, as he had consulted with her on the Children’s Sorry Garden, Lake Parramatta.

Kerrie Kenton was encouraged to contact the Council Officer who had sent the letter and voice her concerns.

RECOMMENDATION (Robertson/Desjardines)

That Council’s naming of the Campbell Hill Pioneer Park be stopped. That

Council note the Terms of Reference of the Committee and consult with the Committee regarding Aboriginal issues including the naming of the Campbell Hill Pioneer Park.

9.13 Maggie Kyle spoke to a report that the Community Capacity Team was currently preparing: The ‘State of the Community’ which would describe the communities of Parramatta including demographic information, a profile of services and also issues as identified by community members. Ms Pat Johnson has been engaged as a consultant to research and write the report and she had requested that the Committee meet with her to discuss issues they identify. This would require about 40-45 minutes and as the consultant will only be with PCC until the end of June, the Committee would need to set aside time in their next meeting or meet at a separate time. Members would advise Maggie Kyle of their decision to meet with the consultant on Thursday 1^st May 2008 when they met with Council Officers.

9.14 Gil Saunders reported that he had learnt in Council’s Heritage Advisory Committee meeting that Aboriginal stories are being recorded by a Council staff member and that they will be collating all artefacts of the area. Maggie Kyle was unsure what this information referred to and would obtain more information for the next meeting.

9.15 The Committee noted that Gil Saunders had returned to the Committee and would resume his role as Deputy Chairperson. John Robertson was thanked for acting in this position.

RECOMMENDATION (Gale/Robertson)

Gil Saunders resume his role as Deputy-Chairperson of the Committee.

Next Meetings

ATSI Advisory Executive Meeting

Tuesday 20^th May 2008 6:00-7:00pm

Council Chambers, Parramatta

ATSI Advisory Committee Meeting

Tuesday 27^th May 2008 6:00-8:00pm

Room 1, Ground Floor Council Chambers, Parramatta

The Meeting concluded at 8.10pm

Ordinary Council 23 June 2008

Item 12.3

CITY LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT

ITEM NUMBER 12.3

SUBJECT Regulation & Enforcement of Brothels and Massage Parlours

REFERENCE F2007/01985 - D00935148

REPORT OF Strategic Analyst, Crime and Corruption Prevention

PURPOSE:

This report provides Council with an update on the work of the Strategic Analyst, Crime and Corruption Prevention particularly in relation to the regulation and enforcement of brothels and massage parlours.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council receive and note this report.

(b) Further, that Council refer both this report and the latest Report of Investigation into Compliance Section to ICAC for information and review.

BACKGROUND

1. The Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) commenced an investigation into the activities of the Compliance Section of Council’s Development Services Unit in November 2006 on the basis of information received. In August 2007, ICAC published a report of its investigation finding that the former Team Leader Compliance Services acted corruptly in accepting cash and sexual favours in exchange for failing to undertake inspections and providing prior warning of inspections.

2. A detailed report on improvements arising out of the ICAC report was provided to Council on 29 October 2007 (SAR 34/2007 refers) and a further update appears elsewhere on this Agenda, deferred from the Council meeting of 28 April 2008.

3. In September 2007, a temporary position of Strategic Analyst, Crime and Corruption Prevention (CCPA) was created. The Workplace Reform Proposal includes the following background comments:

Recent enquiries both within Council and by external agencies have shown the need for a more strategic approach to information gathering and dissemination in relation to crime and corruption trends in the Council area. The long-term risks to the development and growth of Parramatta posed by organized criminal activity needs to be addressed overtly and effectively.

4. The key accountabilities for this new position include:

(a) establish sustainable networks for intelligence sharing in relation to crime prevention and regulatory services

(b) contribute to the reduction in the level of organized crime within the Parramatta Local Government Area through collaborative operations between Council, law enforcement agencies and Council’s legal service providers

(c) development of policies, procedures and training strategies that enable an holistic risk-based approach to compliance related services as part of Council’s corruption resistance strategy.

(See Position Description shown at Attachment 1)

5. Council resolved on 14 April 2008 to receive a progress report on the work carried out to date by the CCPA as detailed below:

(a) That a progress report be provided by the Strategic Analyst, Crime and Corruption Prevention Officer on the work carried out to date since his appointment and further, that the officer’s view be sought on what actions need to be undertaken in order to oversee the regulatory and development functions of Council, so as to ensure appropriate and responsible standards of approval practices covering brothels, massage parlours, licensed premises, tattooists and piercing establishments.

(b) Further, that in order to better address the public interest and future integrity of the City’s governance around such issues of brothels, licensed premise, massage parlours, tattooists and piercing establishments, that an independent report be brought forward from an appropriate body as to how those issues mentioned could be addressed and strengthen Council’s adopted Crime Prevention Policy.

WHY FOCUS ON REGULATION OF BROTHELS AND MASSAGE PARLOURS?

6. The corrupt conduct of the former Team Leader Compliance Services contributed in part to a proliferation of illegal brothels and massage parlours within the Parramatta Local Government Area. These corrupt activities also enabled some approved brothels and massage parlours within the Parramatta Local Government Area to operate in breach of their consent conditions. These breaches commonly included operating in breach of operating hours, operating with more sex workers than permitted, operating more service rooms than permitted and serious fire safety defects.

7. Brothel owners and operators tend to be somewhat transient in nature and are not always focused on complying with conditions of any Development Approval that may be in place.

8. Illegal brothel operators have little or no regard for planning and land use laws and tend to shift their operations frequently to evade attention. The generation of large sums of what is predominantly a cash business is a significant motivator for illegal brothel operators to ply their trade.

IMPROVEMENTS FOLLOWING ICAC INVESTIGATION

9. In August 2007, ICAC made a number of recommendations relating to Council procedures, systems and staff training. The changes and improvements that have resulted include:

(a) modification of the CRM system

(b) provision training to Compliance Team members including brothel enforcement and investigative training

(c) formulation and implementation of corruption resistant Operating Procedures for compliance activities involving legal and illegal brothels and massage parlours and

(d) risk review conducted of Compliance activities. Identification of OH&S issues. Equipment issued and training provided to Compliance Team.

Council’s response to the ICAC recommendations are detailed in the separate report on this Agenda titled Report of Investigation into Compliance Section.

10. The Integrity Steering Committee has been established to oversight Council’s brothel and massage parlour compliance activities, in particular, providing advice on policy and procedural matters. The Integrity Steering Committee was formed in October 2007 and its membership includes General Manager (Chair), Special Advisor (John Mant), Manager Service Audit and Review, Strategic Analyst Crime and Corruption Prevention, Group Manager Outcomes and Development, Manager Development Services and Group Manager Corporate Services.

11. Early this year, new procedures were introduced that enable the CCPA to review and provide comment on all development applications relating to brothels, massage parlours, licensed premises, tattoo parlours and piercing salons. The CCPA can provide information and advice on the appropriateness of any intended land use with in our LGA to supplement any information provided by external agencies such as the NSW Police. Recently this has contributed to a number of applications for brothels and massage parlours being refused.

12. The CCPA undertakes an assessment of all brothels and massage parlours which includes reviewing relevant Council records and intelligence data from external agencies such as the NSW Police. Those premises which are of particular interest to such external agencies, whether authorized or operating illegally, are determined to be of special interest and the relevant compliance activities are overseen by the CCPA in consultation with the external agencies. This ensures that Council’s activities do not compromise the investigations of other agencies nor place its officers in undue risk.

13. The NSW Police lead investigations into special interest premises and appoint a Team Leader to liaise with other participating agencies, including Council. These investigations follow the standard operating procedures of the NSW Police and Council’s CCPA and Compliance Officers participate in order to collect evidence in relation to breaches of development consents.

14. There are presently twelve special investigations in progress which have resulted in entry to premises by way of either inspections pursuant to the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act or by virtue of search warrants executed by NSW Police or the Department of Immigration and Citizenship.

15. Key matters investigated by way of joint agency operations include brothel owners and operators engaging in activities such as the employment of illegal immigrants as sex workers, sex workers obtained and detained by way of sexual servitude and the use of underage girls as sex workers. Of concern is that these issues are predominant amongst the licensed brothels within the Parramatta LGA.

16. Thirty-one Penalty Infringement Notices have been issued by the CCPA to the owners and operators of special interest premises, with a total fine value of approximately $16,500. None of these fines have been contested within the Courts.

17. Additionally, the NSW Fire Brigade has issued two Section 10 Emergency Orders against licensed brothels during these joint agency operations.

18. The majority of brothels and massage parlours in Parramatta Local Government Area are not determined to be of special interest to external agencies. Compliance activities relating to these premises are managed by Council’s Development Control Team in accordance with internal procedures. These procedures have been developed to enhance corruption prevention in field activities and cover matters such as management of evidence, use of utility orders and occupational health and safety.

19. As outlined in the separate Report of Investigation into Compliance Section, some fifty inspections of brothels and massage parlours (both unauthorised and approved) have been carried out by the Development Control Team since October 2007. These inspections have resulted in fifteen Brothel Closure Orders being issued by Parramatta Council and four Utility Orders being issued by Parramatta Local Court over the last six months.

20. Staff from Council’s Development Control and Environment and Health teams carry out similar inspections of other types of premises including tattoo parlours and body piercing establishments once development consent has been issued. Periodic inspections are conducted to ensure compliance with consent conditions as well as in response to complaints which may be received in relation to these land uses.

21. In summary, significant improvements have occurred in the regulation and enforcement of brothels and massage parlours within the local government area. The number of these premises has been reduced overall and all premises identified by the ICAC Report have been closed and/or closed and prosecuted by PCC. The number of illegal brothels and massage parlours establishing in the area has also significantly decreased.

22. The Special Advisor to the Integrity Steering Committee, John Mant, has reviewed both this report on the recent status report on implementation of the ICAC recommendations and provides the following comments:

There are three lessons from the Council’s regulation and enforcement of brothels and massage parlours:

(a) The importance of an intelligence based strategic approach, rather than merely responding to complaints.

(b) The virtue of detailed standard operating procedures that is documented and learnt.

(c) The usefulness of inter-agency partnerships that build trust.

The CCPA and the Development Control Team are to be commended for their efforts. Council is leading the way in this difficult area of enforcement. As has been shown in cities such as New York, a no-exceptions enforcement of rules can be an important element in combating crime and improving security.

CONSULTATION AND PARTNERSHIPS

23. Council works collaboratively on a variety of crime and corruption prevention activities and receives regular community input through the Community Safety Advisory Committee. In addition to the recently completed City Centre Crime Prevention Plan, Council is currently working with the NSW Police on the development of a Memorandum of Understanding to support the implementation of this plan. Council also regularly participates in other forums such as the Parramatta Crime Prevention Partnership and the Parramatta Liquor Accord. A separate report elsewhere on this Agenda outlines the current operations of the Parramatta Liquor Accord.

24. As outlined above, Council has established networks with external agencies including NSW Police and Department of Immigration and Citizenship in a whole of government approach to the regulation and enforcement of brothels and massage parlours. During preparation of this report, Parramatta Local Area Command was invited to provide comment on Council’s recent activities in the regulation and enforcement of brothels and massage parlours including the role of the CCPA. The response confirms the significant improvements that have been achieved as outlined in the confidential ATTACHMENT 2.

CONCLUSION

25. Overall, PCC has either met or exceeded the recommendations from the ICAC report following investigation of the Compliance Section in 2007. PCC has set the benchmark in this particular field of regulatory function and intends to continue on a path of continuous improvement in this area. In addition to Council pursuing the recommendations outlined in the ICAC report, Council’s Manager Service Audit and Review has commenced development of a Corruption Prevention Strategy that will help to strengthen corruption resistance across the range of Council activities.

26. It is recommended that Council refer both this report and the separate status report on the Investigation into Compliance Section, to ICAC for information and review.

Nicholas Mamouzelos Sue Colman

Crime & Corruption Analyst Acting General Manager

Attachments:

1View	Position Description - Crime & Corruption Analyst	3 Pages
2View	Confidential Information from NSW Police - Parramatta LAC (Supplied to Councillors ONLY)	1 Page
3View	Memorandum to Councillors of 28th May 2008	2 Pages
4View	Initial Draft Report of Strategic Crime and Corruption Analyst Dated 9th May 2008	5 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Attachment 1

Meeting Notes from May 2008 Program Panels.

Meeting Notes of

MAY 2008

Program Panels

1. Regulatory and City Development

2. Environment and Roads, Paths, Access and Flood Mitigation

3. Community Care and Culture & Leisure

4. City Leadership & Management

Meeting Notes of Regulatory & City Development Program Panel

19 May 2008

6.00pm to 7.15pm

Attendance: Councillor Julia Finn

Councillor Pierre Esber

Sue Stewart, Regulatory Program Co-ordinator (SS)

Louise Kerr, Manager Development Services Unit (LK)

Kevin Brennan, Change Manager Regulatory Services (KB)

Marcelo Occhiuzzi Acting Group Outcomes and Development

Arnel Reyel, Corporate Finance

Apologies: Councillor John Chedid

Mike Thomas, City Development Program Co-ordinator (MT)

Michelle Macgregor Owen, Business Development Manager (MMO)

Linda Perrine, Manager Place Strategy (LP)

NO.	ITEM	DISCUSSION	ACTION
1.	Welcome and apologies		None
2.	March Quarterly Review – program highlights	Key points from the General Manager’s report in the Quarterly review were discussed. An overview was given for each program for the March quarter. In noting reduced hoarding fee income, Councillors asked about Council’s Hoarding Policy and whether this required the hoardings to contain art work. There was a discussion about the use of the Parramatta Branding on the hoardings.	L Kerr will provide advice to Councillors about the Hoarding Policy
3.	City Centre Design Competitions	S Stewart gave an outline of the Design Competition process and the two sites for which competitions have been held so far. All Councillors have been sent information about the winning designs for these two sites.	None
4.	Implementation Plan for ICAC recommendations and Brothels Investigations procedures	L Kerr referred to the report to Council of 28 April 2008 outlining Council’s response to the recommendations of ICAC into corrupt conduct associated with brothel regulation. Council is required to report back to ICAC for 2 years about how it is implementing the recommendations arising. Reference was also made to a report going to Council on 26 May 2008 with an update on the work of the Strategic Analyst, Crime and Corruption Prevention particularly in relation to the regulation and enforcement of brothels and massage parlours. There was discussion about the role of the Strategic Analyst, Crime and Corruption Prevention and the procedures for obtaining orders to shut off utilities to brothel premises. The discussion raised a question about the application of Council’s Brothels DCP. L Kerr undertook to check up on this and advise Councillors.	L Kerr to advise Councillors of the status of Council’s Brothels DCP.
5.	Next meeting	Monday 16 June 2008 6.00pm – 7.30pm

Environmental &

Roads, Paths, Access and Flood Mitigation

Joint Panel Meeting

Meeting Notes of Monday 19 May 2008

4.45pm to 6.15pm, Level 6 Meeting Room, Admin Building

Present: Clr Chris Worthington

Clr Omar Jamal arrived at 4:55pm

James Carey Environmental Outcomes Manager

Anthony Collins Waterways Systems Manager

David Gray Senior Project Officer – Transport Planning

Tom O’Hanlon Manager City Assets and Environment

Andy Ling Service Manager Civil Infrastructure

Neville Davis Service Manager Open Space & Natural Resources

Tim Dale Manager Civil Operations

Kim Burns Acting Service Manager, Capital Projects

Francis Fernandes Program Manager, Financial Management

Cora Aseoche Project Support Officer - Finance

Apologies: Clr Maureen Walsh

Clr Tony Issa

Jim Stefan Service Manager Capital Projects

	ITEM	DISCUSSION	ACTION
1	Outstanding Actions from April Meeting	As per Action Log (to be sent as a separate attachment)
2	Quaterly Review – March 2008	Staff distributed a handout with relevant abstracts from the March 2008 Quarterly Review for both the Environment and Roads Programs. Program Coordinators and Managers discussed the major highlights for Services and Projects noting variances and potential revotes into 2008/09. Finance Staff provided a live demonstration of Council’s Power Budget software including drill down of specific expenditure to natural account number. Councillors requested that there be a consistent convention followed for signs on all financial reporting to Councillors (in particular use of brackets). Francis Fernandes confirmed that some options were currently being debated, but a preferred approach has not as yet been developed. Finance was also asked to include a solid black line (not dashed) between the service and project costs sections for better delineation. Andy Ling tabled a Memo to Councillors documenting a completed capital projects list (by Ward) for the past 3 financial years. Councillors present requested that this information be circulated to all Councillors asap. Councillors also requested that a totals be included for each of the main project headings where possible.	Francis Fernandes Andy Ling
3	Getting to You’re your Services	James Carey handed out single sheet documenting each of the Service areas within the two Programs, what they incorporate and the unit responsible for each. Councillors were requested to numerically prioritise the listed services so as more detailed information can be provided by staff in future. Prioritised Service list prepared by Councillors to be used to identify future information to be provided to Councillors at Program Panels.	James Carey
4	Other Business	The Panel agreed that Meeting minutes would be distributed at least 2 weeks prior to the next meeting. It was also agreed that the updated Action Log would be sent out to members by the Friday prior to the next meeting for information and consideration.	Program Coordinators
5	Next meeting	Monday 16 June 2008, L6 Meeting Room

Culture and Leisure Program Panel & Community Care Program Panel

Meeting Notes

Monday 19 May 2008 3.00pm to 4.30pm

Darcy Street Level 6 meeting room

Councillor Attendance:

	Yes/No/Apology	Time in	Time out
Cr Brown	Yes	3:05pm	4.30pm
Cr Barber	Yes	3.10pm	4.30pm
Cr Wearne	Yes	3:00pm	4.30pm
Cr Prudames	Apology

Staff in attendance: Robert Love, Vikki King, Lisa Giacomelli, Ranjini Panicker, Tom O’Hanlon, Amanda Kearney, Su Cram, Susan Gibbeson, Rebecca Grasso, Amandeep Kaur, Caroline Issacs, Julie Williams, Neile Robinson, Tim Dale, Francis Fernandes, Cora Aseoche, Neville Davis

Apologies: Councillor Prudames

Item	Issue/Question	Action – who and when
1. Welcome & Apologies		Information – no action
2. Review Notes from previous meeting	Notes from the previous meeting were reviewed.	Information – no action.
3. March Quarterly Review - Community Care and Culture and Leisure	A handout was provided to Councillors showing the Quarterly Review information for Community Care and Culture and Leisure with the project progress reports. The Program coordinators provided an overview of the information for the Community Care and Culture and Leisure programs. Community Care: There was some discussion on the sub program area “Protect Public Health”. The Program coordinator to further look at this with finance to ensure correct expenditure and budget are shown in this area. (cross issues with the Environmental Program). Culture and Leisure: There was some discussion on the program measure “Number of events and exhibitions at the Parramatta Heritage Centre” it was agreed this is now to become an annual measure rather than a quarterly measure. Question was raised regarding what the total amount was in the IT reserve. Finance look it up on power budget at the meeting and all were advised the total was $423,000. A question was raised as to the funds remaining from the Town Hall Project. All were advised that the remaining component budgeted for the installation of air conditioning had been returned in the previous quarterly review. This amount has already been factored in as a saving in the last quarterly review.	Project 13073 - $3,000 to be transferred to base. The number of events and exhibitions at the Parramatta Heritage Centre is to be measured annually instead of quarterly from 2008/09
4. Any Other Business	A question was raised about Council’s property next to Guildford Library and the playground about whether funds from the parks management budget could be used to repair the fence. All were advised that this work has been funded and is in progress to be done. A question was raised regarding a project that Community Capacity Team are working on with isolated residents that does not have specific funding. The question was taken on notice with further information to be provided outside the meeting with a budget bid for the 2009/10 management plan process. An item was raised regarding a tree that was lopped in Epping by mistake which was a contract management issue. This issue was taken on notice with further discussion to take place outside of the meeting. There being no further business, the meeting closed at 4.30pm.	Community Capacity to provide further information to Councillors on the Community Care program regarding possible actions to address the needs of the isolated residents
5. Next Meeting and venue	Monday, 16 June 2008 starting at 2:30pm Venue is Parramatta Town Hall was agreed that the meeting include a tour of Parramatta Town Hall to view the recent improvements. Following the tour meeting to commence at 3pm in Town Hall Room to be confirmed.	Program Coordinators to confirm agenda and venue for meeting

City Leadership and Management Program Panel –

Boardroom, Level 12

Darcy Street

21 May 2008

5:30pm – 6:45pm

Attendance: Lord Mayor Paul Barber (PB), Councillor Paul Garrard (PG), Councillor Andrew Wilson (AW) Steve Kerr (SK), Jenny Fett (JF), Geoff King (GK), Tim Franey (TF), Phil Littlewood (PL), Victoria Walker.

1. Welcome and apologies

Apologies: Dianne Lucas, Illana Halliday, Sue Coleman, Darren Wood, Michael Quirk.

2. Review notes from previous meeting and any business arising

There were no comments or changes to the notes from the previous meeting. Council officers received and responded by email to a number of questions received from Clr Garrard and Clr Wilson during the past month. All responses to these questions have been circulated to all Councillors via email.

Clr Garrard thanked staff for their responses.

3. Fleet Management discussion

The fleet supervisor was invited to attend and briefed on 9 April 2008 on the various scenarios that Councillors wanted investigated and discussed. Unfortunately, the supervisor was unable to attend due to time conflicts, and Phil Littlewood (Service Manager, Trades and Building) attended in order to discuss the Councillor’s request.

It is noted that the quarterly review information showed that the fleet expenditure was largely in accordance with the budget.

It is appreciated that Councilor’s are asking staff to demonstrate that they have done sufficient modeling of alternatives (particularly re: the passenger fleet) to be able to verify that this expenditure is appropriate for next year.

The request was that staff provide information on a range of information and scenarios with:

§ More detailed breakdown of asset types

Modeling of the following options, with analysis of the impacts of maintenance costs and disposal incomes, including a range of model assumptions, suggestions (including hybrid vehicles, and 4 cylinder vehicles):

§ The current model (2 years or 50K)

§ 4 years or 80K

§ 8 years or 160K

Clr Garrard wished to include a review of the range of models available across the organisation and analysis of the impacts of this on costs.

Clr Wilson made the comment that he would like the review to consider closely the issue of depreciation costs and the impacts of the fleet on cash flow and Councils borrowing requirements.

Suggested action

Invite the Unit Manager of City Operations, Tim Dale, as well as the fleet manager Ross Howlett and Service Manager, Trades and Building, Phil Littlewood to our next panel meeting for a comprehensive discussion at a slightly earlier time if that is necessary to ensure people can attend (suggest 5pm). This may be reviewed in light of the Notice of Motion moved at the may meeting of Council (see below).

NOTE: This item is being addressed through a response to a subsequent Notice of Motion at the Ordinary meeting of Council (26/05/08):

Moved by Councillor C E Worthington

That the Group Manager Corporate Services bring forward a detailed report to the Ordinary Meeting of Council to be held on 23rd June 2008, relating to the following matter:-

1 The number of items of outdoor machinery and fleet vehicles currently owned by Council.

2 The age of each.

3 The turnover period for both.

4 The annual cost to Council of the purchase of new machinery and fleet vehicles.

5 The number of vehicles which are environmentally friendly.

6 Practices which could be introduced in order to effect substantial savings in this area.

4. Quarterly Review

§ Notable for sudden and unexpected downturn in investment returns.

Solutions included: increased use of S94 money, reduced redundancy budget, reduced depreciation, SARS reduction of $100K for investigations.

§ Transfer of design branch costs into City Leadership.

There was significant discussion on the issues around year to date budgets/approved budgets, versus original budgets. Some time was spent discussing the under spending or overspending of various budgets and how this was not sufficiently reflected in the Program Commentary.

Some of the relevant information on budget variations is available in the project commentary (pages 78-80) but it was felt that the service commentary could be improved.

Council Wilson expressed concern that some of the figures indicated that there was likely to be considerable expenditure in the last quarter, but discussed the reasons why managers may not be offering up savings at this point.

Clr Garrard expressed concern that the tendency towards reporting budget variances suggested that Managers were not managing within budgets. The figures (and graphs) failed to adequately communicate where expenditure and revenue was within budget predictions. Asset management was one of the service areas identified where there should have been more information on the $164K negative variance.

Steve Kerr (SK) set out that this was one of the reasons that we are currently planning to simplify the financial reporting aspects of the Program framework, linking the programs more closely with real services and the financial data that relates to them. Once this is undertaken, Managers will be able to much more accurately pinpoint the nature of the budget variance and explain it. Currently, a negative variance can be shown in one Program, with a positive variance in another Program, without adequate explanation of the result across the programs. Planning policy and performance management was an example where the sub program consisted of small portions of management costs from a range of services right across the organisation, not complete services.

Clr Garrard enquired whether there was a process underway to address this complexity, and staff present indicated this was indeed the case.

The Lord Mayor Paul Barber pointed out that the Council wide result was in the financial summary (on page 81 of the Quarterly Review), showing that despite these program fluctuations, Council was showing a forecast result of $174K deficit a reduction from the previous quarter and the year to date result was favourable to budget.

Jenny Fett (JF) pointed out that until a year ago, we did not even report year to date actuals within the quarterly review, and that the reporting has improved significantly over this time.

5. Other Business

Clr Garrard enquired whether Council had a panel of Solicitors which we regularly referred work to. SK indicated that from memory, there was a panel of three firms, but that the contract allowed for the consultation of firms with specialist knowledge as required. For example, Blake Dawson Waldron was engaged on Civic Place because of their expertise in this area.

Clr Garrard indicated that he thought that there was an instance where Clayton Utz provided incorrect advice and charged too much for that advice. SK indicated that the initial advice on the instance Clr Garrard was referring to was provided without knowledge of a 1999 Council resolution, due to this information not being provided in the original briefing.

Clr Garrard also indicated that in respect to the issue of double payment that he had knowledge of more than one instance where the same invoice had been sent, but not paid, after which the vendor rang Council, and sent another copy of the invoice, and was paid for both. Clr Garrard also suggested that there be reconciliation between the invoices and credit card statements to ensure that there was no double payment using these two methods of payment. He also raised some concerns regarding the expenditure in this area.

JF indicated there was a system safeguard for this issue, but there had been an instance where 2 purchase orders raised by different suppliers and paid by different areas of Council for the same service. In this instance, the overpayment was identified and credited to Council.

SK indicated that the substance of his request to audit was that they investigate this area to address the following:

§ The controls we have in place to stop 2 or more invoices being paid for the same supply;

§ The controls we have in place to stop a supplier fraudulently using Council's credit card numbers; and

§ The controls we have in place to stop an invoice being paid for a supply already paid via credit card.

Clr Wilson suggested that most large organisations have issues around this area, and that Council needed to be vigilant.

6. Next meeting:

Monday, 16th June 2008

Level 12 Boardroom

5.00pm (to be confirmed)

Geoff King

Coordinator

City Leadership & Management

Sue Coleman – Group Manager City Services			Assistant Minutes Clerk – Michael Wearne
Stephen Kerr – Group Manager Corporate			Minutes Clerk – Grant Davies
Marcelo Occhuizzi –Acting Group Manager Outcomes & Development

Clr Omar Jamal – Arthur Philip Ward			Clr Lorraine Wearne - Lachlan Macquarie Ward
Clr Anita Brown – Elizabeth Macarthur Ward			Clr John Chedid – Elizabeth Macarthur Ward
Clr David Borger – Macarthur Ward Elizabeth			Clr Andrew Wilson – Lachlan Macquarie Ward
Clr Paul Garrard – Woodville Ward			Clr Tony Issa, OAM – Woodville Ward
Clr Julia Finn – Arthur Philip Ward			Clr Brian Prudames – Caroline Chisholm Ward
Clr Chris Worthington – Caroline Chisholm Ward	Clr Pierre Esber, Deputy Lord Mayor – Lachlan Macquarie Ward	Clr Maureen Walsh – Wooville Ward	Clr Chiang Lim – Arthur Phillip Ward

1View	Detailed Report Deferred Area Attachment 1	8 Pages
2View	RDS Deferred Area Attachment 2	9 Pages
3View	RDS Deferred Area Attachment 3	4 Pages

APPLICATION FOR FEE SUBSIDY FOR THE USE OF PUBLIC HALLS AND COMMUNITY CENTRES *Annual Hirers 2008 to 2009*		Date Received:

Organisation Name:	«cGroup_Name»
Contact Name:	«cTitleGivenSurname»
Contact Phone Number:	«cPhone_AH»«cPhone_BH» «cMobile»
Postal Address:	«cAddress»

(Please attach additional pages if there is insufficient room to provide all details)	Yes	No
Does your organisation have an ABN Number? If Yes, please list details:
___ \ ___ \ ___ \ ___ \ ___ \ ___ \ ___ \ ___ \ ___
Is your organisation registered for GST? If Yes, please list details:

Is your organisation based within the City of Parramatta and/or principally serves Parramatta residents? Please list details:


Does your organisation use the facility to provide social, community, cultural, medical, artistic, and educational or heritage benefit? Please list details:




What income does your organisation receive annually?	Amount ($)
Membership Fees
Attendance Fees (e.g. weekly contributions)
Donations
Sponsorship
Grants
Fundraising for Organisation (inc. raffle income)
Fundraising for Charity
Ticket Sales / Door Takings
Sale of Goods
Other Income



TOTAL ANNUAL INCOME	$

What expenditure items does your organisation incur annually?	Amount ($)
Instructors/Coaches/Other Staff
Insurance
Administration (Telephone, Postage, Stationery)
Affiliation/Association Fees
Equipment Hire/Purchase
Materials-Consumables Hire/Purchase
Other Costs (Please specify)



Facility Hire Costs	*Filled in by Booking Office*
TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENDITURE	$
Does your organisation generate profit? If Yes, please list details (including amount and destination of profit):


ANNUAL PROFIT = INCOME - EXPENDITURE	$

1View	State-Wide Exempt and Complying Development Codes Detailed Report	16 Pages
2View	Comparison of Controls Application Under the Proposed State-Wide Exempt and Complying Development Codes and Council's Existing Exempt and Complying Development	40 Pages

1View	Metro in Parramatta - Detailed Report	6 Pages
2View	Indicative Map of the West Metro and Carlingford Metro (Colour Copies to be Provided to Councillors & Senior Staff Only)	1 Page
3View	Indicative Map of the Metro City Circle (Colour Copies to be Provided to Councillors & Senior Staff Only)	1 Page

1View	Attachment 1 - Fee Subsidy Application Form 2008/2009	3 Pages
2View	Attachment 2 - Fee Subsidy Request Letter 2008/2009	2 Pages
3View	Attachment 3 - Fee Subsidy Assessment Critiera 2008/2009	1 Page
4View	Attachment 4 - Assessment Table (Fee Reduction and Exemption Requests)	1 Page

(Please attach additional pages if there is insufficient room to provide all details)			Yes	No
Does your organisation hold a bank account?

Amount	$	Date
If yes, is any of this money committed to a specific purpose (other than annual operating costs)? If yes, please list details:			Amount ($)

(Please attach additional pages if there is insufficient room to provide all details)	Yes	No
Is your organisation able to meet the full cost of its activities? Please list details:


If your organisation did not receive a subsidy, would its operation remain viable? Please list details:


What level of subsidy does your organisation request?	$

Is there any other information that you believe Council should know that might assist in determining your organisation’s eligibility for a fee subsidy?








Please attach the following documents (If not available, please indicate why)
Constitution
Registration as a Charity
Most recent Annual Report
Most recent Annual General Meeting Minutes
Most recent Financial Statement
Proof of not-for-profit status
Please list any other documents that you have provided to support your application.

1View	Investments & Loans - Performance	1 Page
2View	Summary of Investments Portfolio	2 Pages

To	All Councillors	Date	28 May 2008
Copies	Strategic Analyst Crime & Corruption Prevention
From	Acting General Manager	Through
Subject	Report on the Regulation and Enforcement of Brothels and Massage Parlours

Plant/Vehicle Type	Total Number	Average Age (Months)	Average Turnover Period (Months)
Passenger	150	14	24
Light Commercial	53	32	34
Heavy Plant – Trucks	56	55	128
Heavy Plant – Bus	2	55
Heavy Plant – Tractors, Mowers etc	43	63	83
Heavy Plant – Other	14	122	93
Heavy Plant – Non Motorised	71	87	138

Annual Cost to purchase plant and vehicles	$3,369,294.05
Annual Revenue from Sale of plant and vehicles	$1,513,401.52
Annual turnover cost of plant and vehicles	$1,855,892.53

Ordinary Council	23 June 2008

Vehicle Type	Number	Engine Type
Passenger Vehicle	2	Hybrid
	87	4 Cylinder Unleaded
	6	4 Cylinder Diesel
	1	5 Cylinder Unleaded
	11	6 Cylinder LPG
	43	6 Cylinder Unleaded
Light Commercial Vehicles	14	4 Cylinder Unleaded
	7	4 Cylinder Diesel
	4	6 Cylinder LPG
	28	6 Cylinder Unleaded

1View	Breakdown of Advertising Costs	1 Page
2View	Employment Agency Costs Summary	1 Page
3View	Position Recruitment through an Employment Agency	1 Page

Advertisement Costs - Adcorp
	Average (07-08)
Where we Advertise:	Average per composite/ad
Sydney Morning Herald	$ 3,296.46
Parramatta Sun	$ 1,086.20
Parramatta Advertiser	$ 1,606.68
Telegraph	$ 2,302.21
Local Government Job Directory	$ 1,221.33
Australian	$ 3,506.80
Koori Mail	$ 592.33
mycareer	$ 30.00
National Indigenous Times	$ 466.50
SEEK.COM	$ 110.00

Positions Recruited Through an Employment Agency
Service Unit	Position
General Management	General Manager
	Strategic Analyst
City Culture & Tourism	Service Manager, Recreation Facilities
Domestic Waste	Waste Education Officer
Strategic Asset Management	Property Development Manager
	Property Development Advisor
Human Resources	Manager, Human Resources
	Learning and Development Coordinator
	Human Resources Business Partner
City Services Admin.	Group Manager, City Services
	Personal Assistant to the Group Manager, City Services
	Business Manager, City Services
Community Library & Social Services	Early Childhood Teacher
	Childcare Centre Coordinators
	Community Capacity Building Officers
	ATSI Community Project Officers
	Community Placement Development Officer
	Library Manager
	Personal Assistant, CLASS
	Business Coordinator, CLASS
Community Engagement	Customer Service Officers
City Strategy	Place Manager