Minutes of Regulatory Council

MINUTES OF THE Meeting of Parramatta City Council HELD IN THE Council Chamber, CIVIC PLACE, PARRAMATTA ON Monday, 14 July 2008 AT 6:54 pm

PRESENT

The Lord Mayor, Councillor P B Barber in the Chair and Councillors D L Borger MP (retired 9.48 pm), A A Brown, J Chedid, P Esber (Deputy Lord Mayor), J D Finn, P J Garrard, A Issa, OAM (retired 11.29 pm), O Jamal (arrived 6.57 pm), C X Lim, M K Walsh, L E Wearne, A A Wilson (arrived 6.57 pm) and C E Worthington.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TO TRADITIONAL LAND OWNERS

The Lord Mayor, Councillor P B Barber acknowledged the Barramatugal Clan of The Darug, the traditional land owners of Parramatta and paid respect to the elders both past and present.

MINUTES

SUBJECT Minutes of the Ordinary Council Meeting held on 23 June 2008

10009

RESOLVED (Esber/Borger)

That the minutes be taken as read and be accepted as a true record of the Meeting.

SUBJECT Minutes of the Special Council Meeting held on 30 June 2008

10010

RESOLVED (Esber/Borger)

That the minutes be taken as read and be accepted as a true record of the Meeting.

APOLOGIES

10011 RESOLVED (Esber/Lim)

That an apology be received and accepted for the absence of Councillor B W Prudames.

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

1 Councillor M K Walsh declared a non pecuniary interest in relation to Item 12.3 of Development Applications regarding 157 Blaxcell Street, Granville (Lot 2 in DP 217971) (Woodville Ward) as persons involved with the Australian Blouza Foundation Incorporated work with Councillor Walsh’s husband.

Councillor Walsh also declared an interest in relation to Item 4 of Notices of Motion regarding proposed Lend Lease/UWS Development at Westmead due to her involvement with the University of Western Sydney Regional Council.

2 Councillor C X Lim declared a non pecuniary interest in relation to Item 12.7 of Development Applications regarding 12 Caroline Street, Westmead (Lot 3 DP 348754) (Arthur Phillip Ward), as Councillor Lim leads an organisation that is openly opposed to the IVF process.

MINUTES OF THE LORD MAYOR

SUBJECT Commencement of General Manager

REFERENCE F2004/10253– D00972065

REPORT OF The Lord Mayor, Councillor P B Barber

10012

RESOLVED (Barber/Esber)

(a) That Council note Dr Robert Lang will commence employment as General Manager of Parramatta City Council on 21 July 2008.

(b) That pursuant to Section 377 of the Local Government Act 1993, Council delegates to Dr Lang, commencing 21 July 2008, the functions of the General Manager to exercise Council’s powers, functions, duties and authorities contained in legislation and the functions as specified in:

1. The Local Government Act 1993 and related Regulations; and

2. Other Acts under which Council has powers, authorities, duties and functions.

1. The provisions of the Local Government Act 1993 and any other legislation relevant to the delegations;

2. Council may by resolution direct the General Manager in the exercise of any function herein delegated;

3. The General Manager will exercise the delegated functions in accordance with and subject to:

3.1 the provisions of the Local Government Act 1993;

3.2 all and every policy adopted by resolution of the Council and current at the time of the exercise of the functions herein delegated.

(d) That a copy of the delegated duties as provided by Council to the General Manager be provided to all Councillors for their information.

(e) Further, that Council congratulate Dr Robert Lang on his appointment and also forward the Chambers’ thanks to those persons who participated on the selection committee for this position.

NOTE: Councillors O Jamal and A A Wilson arrived at the meeting at 6.57 pm during consideration of this matter.

PUBLIC FORUM

SUBJECT Zoning 2C – 98-108 Railway Terrace, Merrylands

REFERENCE F2004/06564

FROM Mr Winston Brass & Ms Karolina Ivanovska

10013

QUESTIONS

By Mr Winston Brass & Ms Karolina Ivanovska:-

“Winston Brass and I Karolina Ivanovska, are the owners of 104 & 106 Railway Terrace, Merrylands 2160.

At the beginning of year 2002, when our street became a 2c zone, we spoke to our neighbours between No 108 and No 98 (the corner with Smythe Street). Initially, they all agreed to develop the land together.

As time passed, the agreement waned and as developers pressured us we decided to sell in 2004. We sold the properties with a delayed settlement of one year, ending in June 2005.

The neighbour from No 102 sold his house to the same developer seven months later and this delayed the DA proposal and approval of 18 units in September 2005. The market fall at the time made it difficult for the purchaser to settle. Waiting for him to obtain the money, under the impression that it could happen any time, we went through a great financial loss. We rescinded the Contract for a second time one month ago.

Our two properties together have a frontage of 20.0m. I was told that, following the DCP guide lines without any problem, we could put a duplex in front and a house at the back. This means that, out of two properties at present, the land would be divided into three, which does not serve the purpose of a 2c zone at all, considering that the land is immediately in front of Merrylands Station and the shopping area on the other side of the Station. This is a prime land that should not be wasted by cutting it down into smaller pieces, but be utilized as one with maximum potential to serve Merrylands community. This is the case often neglected by Councils, because it is considered ‘no mans land’ as it is located on the border of two Councils. (HCC & PCC).

The area between Mombri Street, William Street and Railway Terrace, Merrylands is clustered with approved 3 storey unit buildings. We feel that this section of Railway Terrace deserves some special consideration by Council.

We are therefore proposing the following:

1 As this land is a part of the municipality of Parramatta City Council and there is already a proposal of developing Parramatta LGA/CBD, would there be a possibility that the Council looks at purchasing the land between No 98-108 Railway Terrace and developing it into a Cultural Centre or any other beneficial use within the 2C zone that will be suitable and useful for the Merrylands/South Granville Community for the years to come, instead of leaving it in the hands of owners who lack the potential and are not aware of the consequences of the future needs of our children?

2 We therefore petition the Councillors of Parramatta City Council for the time being to look at the possibility of using our land 104 & 106 Railway Terrace with 1040 msq, as a much needed car park: (approx 45 car spaces), but the Town Planner said we can’t have a station car park.

The houses on our two properties were built in the 1930’s, the same as No 108. They have lived their life and are ready to be replaced; otherwise money will be wasted for unnecessary renovations.

3 We would like to ask Parramatta Council to purchase our two properties, as a start of good things happening to the land across Merrylands Station.

We had a health scare in the family and now we want to move on, but before we do, we want to do the right thing towards the land before it is too late. We hope you will consider this proposal and give it much serious thought.”

RESPONSE

By Louise Kerr – Manager Development Services:-

“I thank Mr Brass and Ms Ivanovska for their questions.

A part of Parramatta City Council’s core business is to make strategic decisions which are aimed at providing long term benefits to our community as a whole.

Council does this in many ways but the main tool used to do this is through its Strategic Plan, Parramatta 2025. Parramatta 2025 sets out Council’s vision and direction, and a process for how it will achieve its objectives. Once this vision is established, Council must then prioritise the programs and projects it feels will best deliver these objectives.

One project Council is undertaking to deliver its vision of a City with neighbourhoods that are liveable and distinctive is to review its Residential Development Strategy. One of the challenges faced by Parramatta City Council is the need to accommodate a growing population in areas that have good access to a range of services and infrastructure to support their needs. The purpose of the Residential Development Strategy is to determine the composition and distribution of residential densities and a basis for the planning controls that will guide new development. Areas such as Merrylands, which have access to services and public transport, are being examined in terms of there potential for future housing, but also to look at other measures which could help improve the function and quality of that neighbourhood.

From time to time strategic decisions are made by Council which could involve the acquisition of private land for a community purpose but only if it will deliver a much needed benefit to that neighbourhood, or the wider community. Council will rely upon economic, social and environmental principles to ascertain whether a proposal to acquire land supports Council’s vision and intentions for a neighbourhood.

Taking this approach ensures Council has considered any issue with a broader community objective in mind. In this regard, these are the general measures that Council will now use to provide you with a formal response to your request.

Thank you.”

Additional Comment by Paul Burne – Property Program Manager:-

“There are a number of matters to be addressed, ie zoning, demand for cultural centre or alternative compatible facility in the area, demand for car park in the interim and funds for these proposals.

While we are sympathetic to the position in which the writers finds themselves their request will need to be examined so that the issues are addressed fully and any action taken is in the best interests of the residents as a whole.”

SUBJECT 80 Dunlop Street, Epping - Lot 14 Sec 3 DP 10048

REFERENCE DA/127/2005A

FROM Mr Peter Mervyn Rowsell

10014

QUESTIONS

By Mr Peter Rowsell:

“Councillors, I speak on behalf of the four immediate boundary neighbours to 80 Dunlop St, who collectively have been Parramatta Council rate payers for 84 years.

From the beginning this development has been an utter debacle. The builder, through the use of a Private Certifying Authority (PCA) who has admitted errors (please refer to Point 5 – Background Notes), has managed to erect a half-completed construction that is in the wrong position; failed to follow authorised floor plans; has windows constructed in non-approved positions; constructed an unauthorised retaining wall on the southern boundary; failed to construct the authorised water retention and drainage systems; damaged adjacent property fences and severely impacted on the privacy of three of their neighbours.

We are extremely disappointed with the recommendation for approval of this DA application by the Manager Development Services as we feel there are serious inaccuracies in the report which, we feel would have affected the delivered decision. As such we ask you, the Councillors who represent Parramatta City Council rate payers, to consider and re-evaluate all issues raised by us in regard to the DA before making a final decision.

We now ask the Council to answer the questions submitted to them last week under the Public Forum guidelines in relation to this DA.

1 Refer to Recommendation 1 and Paragraph 21:

During the course of the consultation process there have been a number of different plans forwarded to residents for comment. However, whilst the plans are significantly different they have the same reference number (Issue dated). Can the Council please explain?

2 Refer to Paragraph 53 Refer also to Paragraph 37 of the initial Council Approved plans dated 31^st July 2006:

Could the Council please state when the inspection records required under paragraph 37 of the initial development approval were supplied to them. If these inspection records were accurate, HOW did the development continue to proceed beyond the first structural floor level with such serious breaches of the initial development approval ie. setback and boundary breaches?

3 Refer to Paragraph 13

Although several submissions were sent to the Council regarding the DA between the dates of 28^th August and 11 September 2007 the report denies receiving any. We however, received a formal email receipt from the Council. (can be produced) and we also referred to them in all following submissions. Can the Council please explain?

4 Refer to Paragraph 65:

The rewording of the proposal description of the DA application by the Council Development Team dated 28^th May 2008 significantly altered the proposal of the DA lodged by the developer. Is it a standard practice to modify existing DA’s to facilitate easier approval?

5 Refer to Paragraph 36:

The applicant has damaged all existing timber fences but not the western boundary mesh fence that border neighbouring properties and they will need to be replaced. Why is there not a condition that the applicant has to replace all timber fences at his cost?”

RESPONSE

By Mark Leotta – Service Manager Development Assessments:-

“1 A series of amended architectural plans have been provided throughout the assessment process of the s96 application. The latest version is labelled amendment No. 7 with an issue date of 20/11/2007. This corresponds to the date that the plans were drawn. The plans attached to the business paper are labelled amendment No. 6 with an issue date of 20/6/2007. These plans are in fact amendment No. 7, but have been incorrectly labelled by the applicant’s architect. The plans labelled amendment No. 6 in the business paper are identical to plans labelled amendment No. 7. Although the advertised plans were labelled amendment No. 6, there is no difference whatsoever between plans labelled amendment 6 and 7. Therefore, the plans relied upon in the assessment of this s96 and as notified to neighbouring properties are correct, except for a typographical error on the part of the applicant’s architect.

An error occurred in the preparation of the business paper and the incorrectly labelled plans have been attached to the business paper. A copy of the correctly labelled plans, being amendment No. 7, has been circulated to the Council today.

2 Condition 37 of the development consent (DA/127/2005) states the following:

In order to ensure compliance with approved plans, a Survey Certificate, to Australian Height Datum, shall be prepared by a Registered Surveyor as follows:-

(a) At the completion of the first structural floor level indicating the level of that floor and the relationship of the building to the boundaries;

(b) At the completed height of the building, prior to the placement of concrete inform work, or the laying of roof materials;

(c) At completion, the relationship of the building, and any projections thereto, to the boundaries.

Progress certifications in response to points (a) through (c) shall be provided to the Council or the Principal Certifying Authority at the time of carrying out relevant progress inspections. Under no circumstances will work be allowed to proceed should such survey information be unavailable or reveal discrepancies between the approved plans and the proposed works

The builder has appointed a PCA to monitor compliance with the development consent throughout the construction period and carry out building inspections. It is the role of the PCA to ensure compliance with conditions of consent. As a result, it is the responsibility of the PCA to demonstrate that the surveys have been carried out.

The records of these inspections were submitted to Council on 10 July 2008. A review of these records has revealed that the last survey was carried out on 30 May 2007.

The s96 application to modify the development consent was submitted to Council on 3 August 2007. Whilst Council does not have any information to confirm this, it could be reasonably expected that the PCA knew of the changes to setbacks and accordingly advised the applicant to lodge a s96 application to rectify the change in building setbacks.

It is noted that no further building work has taken place on the site since the involvement of Council in investigating the compliance matters.

3 The proposed modification application received no submissions during this notification period. However, Council was in receipt of a Building Certificate (BC) at the same time of the modification application being lodged. The BC was notified to properties between 8 and 24 August 2007 during which 3 submissions were received. The submissions were received in reference to the BC and made no reference to the s96 modification application. Nonetheless, further submissions were received from the submitters requesting the issues raised in the submissions addressed to the BC be considered for the modification application. The concerns raised in these submissions have been addressed in the Council report.

4 Changes which are in the description reflect the changes on the plans. The additional description was made to reflect what the plans show in terms of changes and the applicant has requested in writing that these changes be included in the s96 application.

5 Retention of the existing fence was conditioned on the original DA (condition 5). Any dispute over boundary fencing is a matter to be resolved under the Diving Fences Act between two neighbouring properties.”

SUBJECT 16 Dorahy Street,

REFERENCE DA/778/2007

FROM Mr Mark Heffernan

QUESTIONS

By Mark Heffernan

“As the speaker on behalf of the Paul Street residents affected by the Defence Housing Authority development on 16 Dorahy Street, I thank Councillors publicly for their unanimous and courageous support.

Tonight, you have before you again recommendations to approve DA’s for lots 10, 11, 12 and 13 Dorahy Street. We ask that you treat these applications in the same way that you dealt with applications for lots 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 14 at last month’s meeting; that is to reject them on the same grounds.

As far as we see, no satisfactory effort has been made by the developer to fix the problems this proposed development imposes on neighbouring properties. They’re still proposing to build the houses close to the neighbouring Paul Street back yard fences on raised pads so high that the ground floor level would be above the tops of six foot dividing fences. And they still want to add more fill !!!

If that isn’t bad enough !! Unlike last month’s rejected applications of single dwellings, tonight’s proposals ALSO ask for approval to subdivide these four lots into eight, doubling the number of households impacting existing residents. This is despite DHA originally assuring residents only single occupancy dwellings would be built on lots adjoining Paul Street properties.

Your business paper includes a copy of a letter from Defence Housing, dated 28 May. This letter suggests that impacted neighbours concerns have been dealt with as a result of a meeting between the applicant, Council representatives and residents. This is NOT TRUE !!! At the meeting, Paul Street resident representatives wanted the applicant to agree to reduce the pad heights and make major building design changes. These are in line with points A and B of the Councils urban designer comments in the report before Council tonight. DHA refused to consider these requests, offering changes to screening and sill heights to improve privacy impacts. Resident representatives stated that the measures offered by DHA were in the right direction, but were not a satisfactory outcome.

In closing, we’re not against the development of this site; all we want is to ensure that what is proposed does not unfairly and unreasonably take away from our quality of life. We believe this is achievable and seek the support of our Councillors to help make sure this happens.

Once again, Councillors, on behalf of all the residents of Paul Street, we’d like to express our thanks for your tremendous support.”

PETITIONS

SUBJECT DA/311/2008 - 110 Harris Street, Harris Park - Objection to Development

REFERENCE DA/311/2008 – D00985499

FROM H Alphonse and others

10015

RESOLVED (Brown/Borger)

That the petition be received.

SUBJECT High Rise Concerns - Smythe Street, Merrylands

REFERENCE F2006/00198 - D00985510

FROM R Devetak and others

10016

RESOLVED (Garrard/Walsh)

That the petition be received and be considered in conjunction with the rescission motion to be considered at the next meeting of Council.

SUBJECT Soudan Street Merrylands - Support for Half Road Closure

REFERENCE F2004/07247 – D00985506

FROM J Sultana and others

10017

RESOLVED (Walsh/Issa)

That the petition be received and referred to the Traffic Engineer and the Parramatta Traffic Committee for consideration.

Regulatory Reports

7.1

SUBJECT Establishment of Alcohol Free Zones

REFERENCE F2004/09185 - D00971825

REPORT OF Supervisor Environmental Protection

10018

RESOLVED (Borger/Lim)

(a) That Council declare the whole of the road (including carriageway, verge, footpath and steps) of Albert Street between O’Connell Street and Fleet Street, North Parramatta to be an Alcohol Free Zone pursuant to the provisions of Part 4 Chapter 16 of the Local Government Act 1993;

(b) That Council declare the area defined on Attachment 2 (which amalgamates and extends in area the existing several separated CBD Alcohol Frees Zones) as an Alcohol Free Zone pursuant to the provisions of Part 4 Chapter 16 of the Local Government Act 1993;

(c) That the community be informed of the declaration of these Alcohol Free Zones by advertisement in local newspaper(s) as required by Section 644B of the Local Government Act 1993;

(d) That signage be updated/amended/erected to define the respective pertinent Alcohol Free Zone(s), with Alcohol Free Zone signage adjacent to any approved footpath dining area to include the wording “Approved Outdoor Dining Areas Exempt”.

(e) That open spaces within the amalgamated and expanded CBD Alcohol Free Zone that are not roads or road related areas, be made and appropriately signposted as places where consumption of alcohol is not permitted pursuant to the provisions of Section 632 of the Local Government Act.

(f) That Council’s function and authority to establish and re-establish an Alcohol Free Zone be delegated to the General Manager.

(g) That Mr Ben Nursoo be contacted and explained that his concerns could have been resolved very quickly through the erection of signage for an already in existence Alcohol Free Zone.

(h) That the entire reserve area underneath the M4 be made an alcohol free zone as previously requested by Council.

(i) That 2 larger signs be erected at either end of the Delwood Shopping Centre alcohol free zone.

(j) That William Lamb Park be included as part of the environs for the Delwood Alcohol Free Zone area.

(k) Further, that a report be provided to Council addressing the issue of whether all neighbourhood zones were to be made an alcohol free zone and also on the implementation of a register which ensures a seamless transition from the expiry of an alcohol free zone to its renewal.

7.2

SUBJECT Appointment of Council as an enforcement agency under Food Act 2003.

REFERENCE F2005/01433 - D00972254

REPORT OF Supervisor Regulated Premises

10019

RESOLVED (Esber/Issa)

(a) That Council confirm it’s commitment to community protection and food safety by ratifying a level of activity commensurate with minimum Category ‘B’, as proposed in Option 2 of this report;

(b) That notice of Council’s decision in this regard be forwarded to the Food Authority;

(c) Further, that in recognition of the obligations imposed by Category ‘B’ level, a new position of Environmental Health Officer be created and considered through workplace reform sub-committee.

7.3

SUBJECT Assumed Concurrence from Director General to Vary Development Standards

REFERENCE F2006/00601 - D00971223

REPORT OF Manager Land Use and Transport Planning

10020

RESOLVED (Esber/Worthington)

That consideration of this matter be deferred to the next Council Meeting.

NOTE: Councillor C X Lim requested his name be recorded as having voted against this decision.

7.4

SUBJECT Issues brought forward by applicant relating to 3 development applications:-
DA 106/2008
DA 729/2007
DA 183/2008

REFERENCE DA/106/2008

REPORT OF Manager Development Services

10021

RESOLVED (Worthington/Esber)

(a) That the report be received and noted.

(b) That the checklist referred to in the report be brought to Council for Councillors’ perusal and further input, if necessary.

(c) Further, that DA/729/2007 be deferred and considered in conjunction with Item 12.19 regarding 66 Cross Street, Guildford.

ADJOURNMENT OF MEETING

In accordance with Council's decision of 23 October 2000 (Minute No 5712) the meeting adjourned at 8.33 pm for a period of 17 minutes.

RESUMPTION OF MEETING

The meeting resumed in the Council Chamber at 8.50 pm, there being in attendance The Lord Mayor, Councillor P B Barber and Councillors D L Borger, A A Brown, J Chedid, P Esber, J D Finn, P J Garrard, A Issa OAM, O Jamal, C X Lim, M K Walsh, L E Wearne, A A Wilson and C E Worthington.

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS TO BE ADOPTED WITHOUT DISCUSSION

10022 RESOLVED (Esber/Wilson)

That Item Nos 12.2, 12.5, 12.15 and 12.17 of Development Applications as listed on the Agenda for the Council Meeting held on 14 July 2008 be adopted in accordance with the Officer’s recommendations.

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS TO BE BROUGHT FORWARD

That due to the attendance of interested persons in the public gallery, Items 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 of Domestic Applications and Items 1, 8, 9 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 18 and 19 of Development Applications were brought forward and considered at this point in the meeting in that order.

Domestic Applications

11.1

SUBJECT 132 Blaxcell Street, Granville. (Lot 2 Sec 3 DP 1788) (Woodville Ward)

DESCRIPTION Further Report - Alterations and additions to the front of the existing dwelling for the purposes of a local shop.

REFERENCE DA/306/2007 - Submitted 24 April 2007

APPLICANT/S Mr E Sassine

OWNERS Mr E Sassine and Mrs A Sassine

REPORT OF Development Assessment Officer

10023

MOTION (Walsh/Garrard)

That the application be refused for the following reasons:-

1 The applicant has indicated the desire to withdraw the application.

2 The applicant has not provided the information requested by Council.

3 The report lacks veracity in terms of the information provided regarding traffic, sight lines and fails to give consideration to both the slight rise in Farnell Street and number of high rise vehicles that park along the street obstructing sight lines

4 Vehicles cannot safely exit the building.

5 There are no parking facilities provided.

6 There is no disability parking provided consistent with guidelines.

AMENDMENT (Jamal)

(a) That Council grant consent to Development Application No. 306/2007, subject to standard conditions and the following extraordinary conditions:

1. The development is to be carried out in accordance with the following plans and documentation listed below and endorsed with Council’s stamp, except where amended by other conditions of this consent.

Drawing No	Dated
Site, Elevation and Section Plan, Prepared by C.B of Baini Design, Numbered 07042/01B, Revision B	September 2007
Floor and Fitout Plan, Prepared by C.B of Baini Design, Numbered 07042/02B, Revision B	September 2007
Elevations Plan, Prepared by C.B of Baini Design, Numbered 07042/03B, as amended in red	April 2007

Document(s)	Dated
Waste Management Plan for 132 Blaxcell Street, Granville, as amended in red	Undated
Schedule of finishes for 132 Blaxcell Street, Granville	Undated
List of items to be sold	Undated

Note: In the event of any inconsistency between the architectural plan(s) and the landscape plan(s) and/or storm water disposal plan(s) the architectural plan(s) shall prevail to the extent of the inconsistency.

Reason: To ensure the work is carried out in accordance with the approved plans.

2. A standard rubbish bin (with a minimum 120 litre capacity) is to be provided to the front of the premises underneath the proposed awning for general waste from customers. The bin is to be provided at all times while the shop is operating and is to be removed and stored out of view at the end of daily operations.

Reason: To ensure the work is carried out in accordance with the approved plans.

3. All food items sold from the premises are to be pre-packaged. No food preparation activities are to occur from the premises.

Reason: To ensure compliance with the consent.

4. Access for people with disabilities from the public domain and all car parking areas on site to and within the building is to be provided. Consideration must be given to the means of dignified and equitable access from public places to adjacent buildings, to other areas within the building and to footpath and roads. Compliant access provisions for people with disabilities shall be clearly shown on the plans submitted with the Construction Certificate. All details shall be prepared in consideration of, and construction completed to achieve compliance with the Building Code of Australia Part D3 “Access for People with Disabilities”, provisions of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995, and the relevant provisions of AS1428.1 (2001) and AS1428.4.

Reason: To ensure the provision of equitable and dignified access for all people in accordance with disability discrimination legislation and relevant Australian Standards.

5. The gradient for all disabled access ramps shall not exceed a maximum of 1 (vertical) in 14 (horizontal) as per the requirements of Australian Standard AS1428.1 (2001) – Design for Access and Mobility – General Requirements for Access – New Building Work. The final design of the proposed disabled access ramps shall be reflected on the Construction Certificate plans.

Reason: To ensure equity of access and appropriate facilities are available for people with disabilities in accordance with Federal legislation.

6. Signs incorporating the international symbol of access for disabled persons must be provided to identify each accessible entrance. This requirement shall be reflected on the Construction Certificate plans and supporting documentation.

Reason: To ensure equity of access and appropriate facilities are available for people with disabilities in accordance with Federal legislation.

(b) Further, that objectors be advised of Council’s decision.

The amendment was ruled out of order by the Chairman as it was considered a direct negative of the motion.

The motion was put and carried.

Note

A Notice of motion to rescind this matter was tabled prior to the termination of the meeting.

11.2

SUBJECT 40 Grimwood Street, Granville. (Lot 1 DP 1049144) (Woodville Ward).

DESCRIPTION Construction of parish toilets to the existing Holy Trinity Church (Location Map - Attachment 1)

REFERENCE DA/187/2008 - Submitted 19 March 2008

APPLICANT/S Glanville Architects Pty Ltd

OWNERS Trustees Catholic Church Diocese

REPORT OF Manager Development Services

10024

MOTION (Finn/Esber)

That consideration of this matter be deferred to the next Council Meeting to confirm whether or not the windows to be removed are led light windows or not.

AMENDMENT (Chedid/Issa)

That Council grant consent to Development Application No. 187/2008 subject to standard conditions of consent.

The amendment was put and lost.

The motion was put and carried.

11.3

SUBJECT Our lady of Mercy, 6 Victoria Road, Parramatta. Lot 4 DP68819 Lots 3, 7 & 8 Sec 9 DP 758788. (Arthur Phillip Ward).

DESCRIPTION Construction of a pre-fabricated demountable building on site to contain two music rooms, a store room and a staff room with associated verandah. (Location Map - Attachment 2).

REFERENCE DA/279/2008 - Submitted 23 April 2008

APPLICANT/S Curtin Bathgate & Somers Pty Ltd

OWNERS Trustees of The Sisters of Mercy

REPORT OF Manager Development Services

10025

RESOLVED (Borger/Chedid)

That Council grant consent to Development Application No. 279/2008 subject to standard conditions.

11.4

SUBJECT 85 Weston Street, Harris Park. Lot 1 DP 745744 (Elizabeth Macarthur Ward).

DESCRIPTION Alterations and additions to an existing heritage listed dwelling, comprising of an awning over an existing rear deck. (Location Map - Attachment 2)

REFERENCE DA/189/2008 - Submitted 20 March 2008

APPLICANT/S Mr F Nakhle

OWNERS Mr F Nakhle and Mrs A S Nakhle

REPORT OF Manager Development Services

10026

RESOLVED (Finn/Chedid)

That Council grant consent to Development Application No.189/2008 subject to standard conditions and an additional condition requiring that the colorbond roof be of a similar dark colour to the existing roof.

11.5

SUBJECT 4/85 Victoria Road, Parramatta. (Lot 100 DP 635092 Pt Lots 8, 10, 11, 12) (Elizabeth Macarthur)

DESCRIPTION Proposed use of the existing premises for the retailing and installation of car audio equipment and motor trimming. (Location Map - Attachment 1)

REFERENCE DA/41/2008 -

APPLICANT/S Platinum Car Audio & Interiors Pty Limited

OWNERS Labide Pty Ltd

REPORT OF Manager Development Services

10027

RESOLVED (Worthington/Finn)

(a) That Council grant approval to Development Application No. 41/2008 subject to standard conditions and the following extraordinary conditions:

1. The hours of operations being restricted to 8.00am – 6.00pm Monday to Saturday, (closed Sunday and Public Holidays). Any alterations to the above will require further development approval.

Reason: To minimise the impact on the amenity of the area.

2. No testing of audio equipment is to be undertaken outside of the acoustic booth.

Reason: To protect the amenity of the area.

(b) Further, that objectors be advised of Councils decision.

Development Applications

12.1

SUBJECT 5 Marook Street, Carlingford. (Lot 29 DP 31228) (Lachlan Macquarie Ward).

DESCRIPTION Demolition, tree removal and construction of an attached dual occupancy development with Torrens title subdivision. (Location Map - Attachment 3)

REFERENCE DA/931/2007 - Submitted 1 November 2007

APPLICANT/S Residential Logistics Pty Ltd

OWNERS Mr K L Chau, Ms L C L Chan and Ms C W H Chan

REPORT OF Manager Development Services

10028

RESOLVED (Chedid/Issa)

(a) That Council grant consent to Development Application No. 931/2007 subject to standard conditions as well as the following extraordinary conditions:

1. Landscape Plan (Drawing # LPDA 08-63926/1B) is to be amended to include the following:

1.1 2 Trees species from the following list are to be provided in replacement for the removal of the Chamaecyparis obtusa. The replacement trees are to be supplied in 45 Litre containers.

Lophostemon confertus (Brush Box)

Tristaniopsis laurina (Water Gum)

Backhousia citriodora (Lemon-scented Myrtle)

Elaeocarpus reticulatus (Blueberry Ash)

The amended landscape plan is to be submitted to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

Reason: To maintain streetscape amenity.

(b) Further, that objectors be advised of Council’s decision.

12.2

SUBJECT 197 - 207 Church Street, Parramatta and 89 Marsden Street, Parramatta. (Lot 1 DP 710335, Lot 1 DP 233150).

DESCRIPTION Internal and external alterations to an existing commercial building. Location Map - Attachment 1

REFERENCE DA/35/2008 - Submitted: 18 January 2008

APPLICANT/S Grant Simmons Architects Pty Ltd

OWNERS Holdmark Properties Pty Ltd

REPORT OF Manager Development Services

RECOMMENDATION

That Council grant consent to Development Application No. 35/2008 subject to standard conditions as well as the following extraordinary conditions:

1 No works shall be undertaken to the south-western portion (portion with a Church Street/Macquarie Street frontage) of the site as marked in red.

Reason: To ensure works are limited to the north-western portion of the site and protect elements of the building that are of heritage significance.

2 The three proposed signage panels (marked in red) on the Marsden Street frontage are not approved under this consent. Any signage panels are to be subject of a further development application.

Reason: To protect elements of the building that is of heritage significance.

3 The proposed glazed awning on the Marsden Street frontage is not approved under this consent.

Reason: To maintain a consistent streetscape and protect elements of the building that is of heritage significance.

NOTE: This matter was adopted under Minute No 10022 – Council Matters To Be Adopted Without Discussion.

12.3

SUBJECT 157 Blaxcell Street, Granville. (Lot 2 in DP 217971) (Woodville Ward).

DESCRIPTION Continued use of the premises as a community facility and for alterations and additions to the heritage-listed building, as well as formalised carparking, perimeter landscaping and establishing regulated hours of operation. (Location Map - Attachment 1)

REFERENCE DA/555/2007 - Submitted 20 July 2007

APPLICANT/S Mr J Phillips

OWNERS Australian Blouza Foundation Incorporated

REPORT OF Manager Development Services

10029

MOTION (Garrard/Esber)

(a) That development application No. 555/2007 be approved, subject to standard and the following extraordinary conditions:-

1. A heritage consultant must be nominated for the project. The consultant shall have appropriate qualifications and experience commensurate with the scope of the works. The name and experience of this consultant shall be submitted to the Heritage Council for approval prior to the release of the construction certificate. The consultant shall advise on detail design resolution of the air-conditioning to ensure the protection of significant fabric and conformity to the conditions of approval.

Reason: To comply with the requirements of the Heritage Council.

2. The stainless steel urinal shall be cut to fit and re-used in the new men’s WC.

Reason: To comply with the requirements of the Heritage Council.

3. The decorated mirrors and associated shelves in the bathrooms are to be re-used in the new bathrooms, as they are consistent with the original design.

Reason: To comply with the requirements of the Heritage Council.

4. All works are to be carried out by suitably qualified tradespeople.

Reason: To comply with the requirements of the Heritage Council.

5. Significant building elements, features, fixtures, fittings and fragile materials shall be adequately protected during the works from potential damage. Protection systems must ensure that historic fabric is not damaged or removed.

Reason: To comply with the requirements of the Heritage Council.

6. An application under Section 60 of the Heritage Act 1977 (being an application to carry out an activity), must be submitted to, and approved by, the Heritage Council of NSW before site works may commence.

Reason: To comply with the requirements of the Heritage Council.

7. The consent holder shall construct a concrete footpath, being 1.2 metres wide by 70mm thick adjacent to both the Blaxcell and Redfern Street property frontages within the road reserve. Details of the proposed footpath works and specifications shall be submitted to the satisfaction of the Principle Certifying Authority prior to the release of the occupation certificate and the footpath shall be completed to the satisfaction of Parramatta City Council prior to the release of the Occupation Certificate. All costs involved in the design, approval and construction of the footpath are to be borne by the consent holder. Further details and Council’s specifications are available from Council’s City Services Department.

Reason: To provide pedestrian passage.

8. Two water quality treatment devices shall be installed prior to disposal of stormwater to Blaxcell Street. Details of the proposed units shall be submitted for the approval of the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issuing of a Construction Certificate.

Reason: To ensure appropriate water quality treatment measures are in place.

9. To enhance the landscape character of Redfern Street, seven street trees shall be provided in 100 litre containers and planted in the nature strip at distances of 3 metres from any driveway, 12 metres from the intersection of Blaxcell and Redfern Street and 8 metres between trunks. The species to be planted is Callistemon viminalis (Weeping Bottlebrush).

Reason: To improve landscape amenity.

10. A total of 37 off-street parking spaces (including 2 disabled parking spaces) to be provided, permanently marked on the pavement, as shown on the DA plan, and used accordingly. The dimensions of the parking spaces should be in accordance with AS 2890.1-2004. The disabled parking space should be 3.8m wide x 5.5m long according to Council’s DCP 2005.

Reason: To ensure adequate on-site parking is provided.

11. Separate entry (5 metres wide off Redfern Street) and exit (5 metres wide off Blaxcell Street) driveways to be provided, used, signposted and marked on the pavement with directional arrows. These driveways to be constructed according to AS 2890.1- 2004 and Council’s specification.

Reason: To ensure suitable ingress and egress.

12. Sight distance to pedestrians exiting the property shall be provided by clear lines of sight in a splay extending 2 metres from the driveway edge along the front boundary and 2.5 metres from the boundary along the driveway in accordance with Figure 3.3 of AS2890.1. Any landscaping, fences or walls in this area are to be no greater than 0.6 metres higher than the boundary level at the driveway.

Reason: Pedestrian safety.

13. The hours of operation being limited to

- 11.00am to 11.00pm, Sundays to Thursdays and

- 11.00am to Midnight, Friday and Saturdays.

Reason: To protect the amenity of the residential area.

14. That the capacity of the premises not exceed 350 persons at any one time.

Reason: To have regard to the amenity of the surrounding area.

15. A solid 2 metre high boundary fence (lapped and capped timber) shall be erected along the full lengths of the northern and eastern boundaries.

Reason: To provide a sight and acoustic barrier to adjoining properties.

16. All external doors (other than the existing entry doors to the foyer) shall be replaced with 40mm thick, solid core timber doors with perimeter acoustic seals to be installed.

Reason: To protect the amenity of neighbours.

17. All external entry doors to the main hall shall remain closed during functions.

Reason To protect the amenity of neighbours.

18. The foyer entry doors and the doors between the foyer and the main hall shall be fitted with an automatic self-closing mechanism.

Reason: To protect the acoustic amenity of neighbours.

19. A minimum of 50m² of absorptive material is to be installed on the underside of the ceiling of the foyer to reduce reverberant noise. Absorptive panels may be faced with open weave fabric for protection. Absorptive material to consist of 50mm thick, 32kg/m³ glasswool insulation faced with Regina tissue. Such material also to be installed adjacent to the main foyer entry doors.

Reason: To protect the amenity of neighbours.

20. The consent holder is responsible in ensuring that the carpark and exterior of the building is suitably supervised and that congregations of guests are not encouraged to linger.

Reason: To protect the amenity of neighbours.

21. Prominent notices shall be installed within the building near its exits and announcements to be made encouraging persons to leave in a quiet and orderly manner.

Reason: To protect the amenity of neighbours.

22. All waste shall be stored within the building and removed after 7.00am the following day.

Reason: To protect the amenity of neighbours.

(b) Further, that the objectors be advised in writing of Council’s decision.

AMENDMENT (Issa/ Lim)