NOTICE OF Regulatory
Council MEETING
The Meeting of
Parramatta City Council will be held in the Council Chamber, Fourth Floor,
Dr. Robert Lang
Chief Executive
Officer
Phone 02 9806 5050 Fax 02 9806 5917 DX 8279
ABN 49 907 174 773
www.parracity.nsw.gov.au
“Think Before You Print”
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
|
The Lord Mayor Clr Antoine (Tony) Issa, OAM –
Woodville Ward |
Dr. Robert Lang, Chief Executive Officer - |
|
Sue Coleman – Group Manager City Services |
|
|
Assistant Minutes Clerk – Erin Lottey |
|
|
|
|
Minutes Clerk – Grant Davies |
|
Marcelo Occhuizzi – Acting Group Manager Outcomes
& Development |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clr Paul Barber – Caroline Chisholm Ward |
|
|
Clr |
|
Clr Mark Lack – Elizabeth Macarthur Ward |
|
|
Clr John Chedid – Elizabeth Macarthur Ward |
|
Clr Glenn Elmore – Woodville Ward |
|
|
Clr Andrew Wilson – |
|
Clr Pierre Esber– |
|
|
Clr Scott Lloyd – Caroline Chisholm Ward |
|
Clr Prabir Maitra – Arthur Phillip Ward |
|
|
Clr Andrew Bide – Caroline Chisholm Ward |
|
Clr Julia Finn – Arthur Phillip Ward |
Clr Michael McDermott - Elizabeth Macarthur Ward |
Clr Paul Garrard, Deputy Lord Mayor – Woodville Ward |
Clr Chiang Lim – Arthur Phillip Ward |
|
Staff |
|
|
Staff |
GALLERY
Regulatory
Council |
|
|
|
TABLE OF
CONTENTS
ITEM SUBJECT PAGE
NO
1 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES - Ordinary Council -
2 APOLOGIES
3 DECLARATIONS
OF INTEREST
4 Minutes of Lord Mayor
5 Public Forum
6 PETITIONS
7 Development Applications
Referred For On-Site Meetings
7.1 List of proposed onsite Meetings.
8 City Leadership and
Management
8.1 Federal Government Regional and Local
Community Infrastructure Program 2008-09
9 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS TO
BE ADOPTED WITHOUT DISCUSSION
10 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS TO
BE BROUGHT FORWARD
11 Reports - Domestic Applications
11.1 343 -
345, Shop 1,
11.3 Shop
11.4 206
Kissing
12 Reports - Development Applications
12.1 Section
82A Review DA/640/2006 292 Railway Terrace
12.5 Section
82A Review DA174/2007 17-21 Woodville Road and
12.6
12.7 479
Kissing
12.10
12.11
12.12
12.13 McDonalds,
12.14 65A
12.15
12.17
12.18 353D
12.20 Oatlands
Golf Course (
12.21 Upstream
weir,
13 Notices of Motion
13.1 Civic
Events Committee
14 QUESTION TIME
Regulatory
Council |
|
|
|
On-Site Meetings
7.1 List of proposed onsite Meetings.
Item 7.1 |
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS REFERRED FOR ON-SITE MEETINGS
ITEM NUMBER 7.1
SUBJECT List
of proposed onsite Meetings.
REFERENCE F2004/08629 - D01084538
REPORT OF Manager Development Services
PURPOSE: To provide
Councillors with a list of proposed onsite meetings for development
applications. |
(a) That the list of proposed onsite
meetings appended in attachment 1 to this report be adopted. (b) Further, that the Councillor
Support Officer’s forward invitations for each onsite meeting in line with
individual Councillors requirements. |
BACKGROUND
1. Council at its meeting held on
(a) That in future regulatory
Meetings of Council, the agenda contain a separate item at the end which lists
all DA’s which staff and Councillors deem onsite meetings maybe necessary,
along with a recommended date and time as to when these meetings might be held,
i.e. subject to the concurrence of Councillors. This may also include DA’s
which are listed on that particular agenda for debate. Included with the
suggested date and time for the meeting, is to be the reason why it is
considered an onsite meeting is necessary.
(b) Further, that following the
settling of the dates and times of the meetings, these be forwarded onto the
CSO’s for them to forward invitations in line with individual Councillor’s
requirements.
ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES
2 In accordance with the above resolution,
a list of future onsite meetings has been developed by Development Assessment
Services. The list is appended as Attachment 1 of this Report.
3 Subject to Council approval, the Councillor
Support Officer’s will forward invitations for each onsite meeting listed in
Attachment 1 of this Report, in line with individual Councillor’s requirements.
CONCLUSION
4 The
list of proposed onsite meetings for development applications to take place in
the next month is placed before Council for its consideration and/or adoption.
Louise Kerr
Manager Development
Services
1View |
List of proposed onsite meeting. |
1 Page |
|
REFERENCE MATERIAL
Regulatory
Council |
|
|
|
City Leadership and
Management
8.1 Federal Government Regional and Local
Community Infrastructure Program 2008-09
Item 8.1 |
CITY LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT
ITEM NUMBER 8.1
SUBJECT Federal
Government Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program 2008-09
REFERENCE F2007/01165 - D01085863
REPORT OF Manager City Assets and Environment
PURPOSE: The purpose of this report is to advise Council of the detail of the
recently announced Federal Government Regional and Local Community
Infrastructure Program 2008-09 and to recommend a process for deciding which
projects will be funded. As the
deadlines for submission of funding proposals will fall before the first
Council meeting of 2009, project funding decisions must either be made at the
Council meeting of The grant is in two parts; the first is a $250m
allocation for short term projects which must be completed before The second part of the program is a $50m
allocation for ‘Strategic Projects’ with a project value of over $2m, for
which construction must commence by September 2009. Councils across |
(a) That Council appoint a
sub-committee of the Lord Mayor (or his delegate) plus four Councillors who
shall have delegated authority to approve a list of projects for funding
under the Federal Government Regional and Local Community Infrastructure
Program 2008-09. (c) That Council submit an application for funding under the
Federal Government Regional and Local Infrastructure Program – Strategic Projects
2008-09 for Stage 3 of the redevelopment of |
BACKGROUND
1. On
2. The
program is in two parts; the first is a $250m allocation for short term
projects which must be completed before
3. Key
elements of the two programs are;
(a) Short Term Projects
I. Funding is for ‘additional and
ready to proceed community infrastructure projects’ or additional stages of
existing projects;
II. Details of projects to be funded
must be forwarded to the Department by
III. Funds must be fully expended by
IV. Projects must be consistent with
a supplied list (see Annexure A of guidelines at Attachment 1);
V. Funding is not available for
ongoing costs such as maintenance;
VI. Funding is not available for
transport infrastructure such as roads or related infrastructure;
VII. Funding is available for
footpaths provided that they are not associated with Roads to Recovery projects
and form part of a streetscape but not part of a road;
VIII. There does not appear to be an
upper or lower limit on the size of projects.
(b) Strategic projects
I. There will be a minimum
Commonwealth contribution of $2m. The maximum project value is not
defined, but larger projects and those which include partnership funding will
be given preference;
II. Applications for funding will
close on
III. Only
one application may be submitted by Council;
IV. Successful
projects will be announced by the Department in February 2009;
V. A Funding Agreement is to be
finalised 4 weeks after the formal written advice of the announcement;
VI. Construction must commence
within 6 months of signing the Funding Agreement, i.e. September 2009;
VII. Projects must be consistent with
a supplied list (see Annexure A of guidelines at Attachment 1);
VIII. Funding is not available for
transport infrastructure such as roads or related infrastructure covered by the
Roads to Recovery or Black Spots programs;
IX. Council can also apply on behalf
of a not-for-profit organisation
ISSUES/OPTIONS/CONSEQUENCES
4. The critical element in each of
the programs is the very short time frames, both for submission of funding
applications and for expenditure of funds.
Short
Term Projects
5. Council
is obliged to provide the Department its list of short term projects by
6. So that a thorough consultation and
analysis process can be undertaken, it is preferred that the final list is
approved by delegation in late January. This will allow time for projects to be
nominated, properly costed and assessed against the program guidelines, before
a final list is prepared and approved.
7. It is
recognised however, that this will require decisions to be made over the
January leave period where not all Councillors are available. Ideally, Council should establish a decision
making process which allows for input by all Councillors prior to the leave
period, but provides for a final decision in late January. The following
decision making process and timeline is therefore proposed;
Step 1 – Council appoints a sub-committee of 5
Councillors and delegates final approval to the sub-committee |
|
Step 2 – sub-committee meets to agree selection
criteria |
Week ending |
Step 3 – Councillors and Leadership Team (CEO,
Group Managers and Unit Managers) asked to submit proposals which conform to
the agreed selection criteria |
15 December – |
Step 4 – Manager City Assets and
Environment coordinates the development of proposals and provides them to the
sub - committee |
Week ending |
Step 5 – Sub-committee meets to review proposals
and agree final list |
Week ending 23 January |
Step 6 – List submitted |
|
Strategic Projects
8. The
timeframes for the Strategic Projects are more critical and onerous than those
of the short term projects. The application, which requires significant detail
regarding costs and planning approval for the project, must be submitted by
9. The
only project that has been identified that meets the above requirements and is
both large enough to qualify (>$2m) and complies with the program
guidelines, is Stage 3 of the Redevelopment of South Street, Granville under
Council’s Better Neighbourhood Program.
10. Stage
3 of the project comprises streetscape works, paving, tree planting and
landscaping between
11. Stage
1 of the project comprised of paving works between
12. Elements of the project
which contribute to a competitive submission are;
a) The project is consistent with the
guidelines category ‘Enhancement of main streets and public squares’
b) Design work is sufficiently advanced for
high quality graphics to be included in the submission.
c) Detailed cost estimates can be prepared
before the submission date (initial estimates exceed the $2m minimum).
d) The project doesn’t require a DA.
e) Heritage and traffic approvals for Stage 3a
have already been granted. Approvals for Stage 3 will be straight forward.
f) There should be no delays due to extended
consultation, as Stage 3 is consistent with Stage 2, for which broad community
and business consultation is already well advanced
g) A detailed and realistic project plan which
includes a commencement date in September 2009 will be included in the
submission.
h) Council has already made a very significant
contribution to the project ($1.7m for Stage 2), so will be given preference
under the partnering conditions.
13. Council
identified Stage 3 of this project as a priority for the Better Neighbourhood
Program in December 2007 with the intention of considering the project in 2009/10
Management Plan. If Council is able to
attract Federal funding for this project, the Better Neighbourhood Program
funds could be made available for neighbourhood improvements elsewhere in the
LGA.
Tom O’Hanlon
Manager City Assets & Environment
1View |
Regional & Local Community Infrastructure Program 2008-09
Guidelines |
6 Pages |
|
2View |
|
4 Pages |
|
REFERENCE MATERIAL
Regulatory
Council |
|
|
|
Domestic Applications
11.1 343 - 345, Shop 1,
11.3 Shop
11.4 206 Kissing
Item 11.1 |
DOMESTIC APPLICATION
ITEM NUMBER 11.1
SUBJECT 343 - 345, Shop 1,
DESCRIPTION Use of premises as
a nail artist and beauty salon. (Location Map - Attachment 1)
REFERENCE DA/669/2008 - Submitted
APPLICANT/S Lulu Nail
OWNERS Mr L Palivos &
Mrs A Palivos
REPORT OF Manager Development Services
Executive summary : To determine Development Application No. 669/2008 which seeks
approval for the use of the existing building for the purpose of a nail
artist and beauty salon. The application has been referred to Council for determination as the
site is identified in Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 1996 (Heritage and
Conservation), as a heritage item and is listed in Schedule 2 Heritage items
of local significance (Inventory Number 263).
No objections have been received in respect of this application. The application is recommended for approval as it is consistent with
the aims and objectives of the Centre Business 3(a) zone applying to the
land, and is consistent with the aims and objectives contained within
Council’s LEP 2001, LEP 1996
(Heritage and Conservation), DCP 2005 and Parramatta Heritage DCP 2001. Furthermore the proposal will not impact on the streetscape, the amenity
of the locality and the adjoining properties. |
That Council grant consent to
Development Application No. 669/2008 subject to standard conditions. |
SITE & LOCALITY
1. The subject site is located on the northern side of
2. Buildings located on the site at
3. Surrounding development consists of retail shops.
PROPOSAL
4. Details of the proposed development are as follows:
4.1 Use of the existing shop
for the purpose of a
nail artist and beauty salon.
4.2 Proposed signage comprises of an under
awning light box (2000mm x 500mm) and awning façade sign (6100mm x 600mm).
4.3 Proposed hours of operation are as follows:
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
4.4 Two staff are proposed to work onsite
4.5 No change is proposed to existing
carparking, with 2 spaces at the rear of the site available
4.6 The following internal works are proposed:
4.6.1 Replace existing flooring with tiles
4.6.2 General painting to walls and roof
4.6.3 Installation of stud walls and glazed partition
4.6.4 Installation of new lighting and washbasins
5. Apart from signage no other external
alteration is proposed to accommodate the proposal. The existing door and
glazing to the shop front is to remain unchanged.
STATUTORY CONTROLS
6. The site is zoned Centre
Business 3(a) under the Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2001. It is
considered that the proposed use of premises as a nail artist and beauty salon is
permissible. The use is defined as a
commercial use and is consistent with the objectives of the zone.
7. The site is part of a
listed item of heritage significance, being one of the group of shops at
317-337 and
8. The
9. The provisions of the Parramatta Heritage
Development Control Plan 2001 have been considered in the assessment of the
proposal. The proposal achieves compliance with the requirements of the DCP and
is consistent with the general principles of the plan.
10. The provisions of the PDCP 2005 have been considered in the
assessment of the proposal. The proposed use is consistent with the aims and
objectives of the Plan.
CONSULTATION
11. In
accordance with Council’s Notification DCP, the proposal was advertised for a
twenty one day period between
ISSUES
Heritage
12. The application has been referred to Council’s Heritage Advisor
as buildings located on the site at 343-351 Guildford Road are listed as
heritage items under schedule 2 of Parramatta LEP 1996 (Heritage &
Conservation) (Inventory Number 263). The following comments were provided by
Council’s Heritage Advisor:
“The
place is part of a listed item of heritage significance, being one of the group
of shops at 317-337 and
The
current proposal is for change of use, with subsequent modifications to the
interior of the place, shop front and associated signage. The applicants have
provided a Statement of Heritage Impact, prepared in accordance with the
Guidelines issues by the NSW Heritage Office.
Having
reviewed the available documents, I am of opinion that the proposal will have
only a negligible impact on the heritage values of the place. It would comply with the applicable
requirements of the
The
proposal is thus supported from the heritage perspective.”
13. Accordingly, there are no objections to the proposal on heritage
grounds.
Health
14. The application has been referred to Council’s Environmental
Health Officer. The following comments were provided:
“Following appraisal of the plans submitted
with the application, no objection to the proposal is made subject to the
following conditions being included on the development consent."
15. Accordingly, there are no objections to the proposal on health
grounds subject to standard conditions being imposed on the development
consent.
Nicholas Clarke
Development Assessment Officer
1View |
Locality Map |
1 Page |
|
2View |
Plans |
4 Pages |
|
3View |
Application History |
1 Page |
|
4View |
Heritage Inventory |
1 Page |
|
REFERENCE MATERIAL
Item 11.2 |
DOMESTIC APPLICATION
ITEM NUMBER 11.2
SUBJECT
DESCRIPTION Construction of a
carport and awning attached to the existing heritage listed dwelling. (Location
Map - Attchment 1)
REFERENCE DA/747/2008 - Submitted
APPLICANT/S Mr F Jimenez
OWNERS Mr F Jimenez
REPORT OF Manager Development Services
Executive summary : To determine Development Application No. 747/2008 which seeks
approval for the construction of a carport and awning attached to an existing
heritage listed dwelling. The application has been referred to Council for determination as the
site is identified in Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 1996 (Heritage and
Conservation), as a heritage item in Schedule 2 Heritage items of local
significance (Inventory Number 444). No objections have been received in respect of this application. The application is recommended for approval as it is consistent with
the aims and objectives of the Residential 2(a) zone applying to the land,
and is consistent with the aims and objectives contained within Council’s LEP
2001, LEP 1996 (Heritage and
Conservation), DCP 2005 and Parramatta Heritage DCP 2001. Furthermore the proposal will not impact adversely on the heritage
significance of the dwelling, on the streetscape character, the amenity of the
locality or the adjoining properties. |
That Council grant consent to
Development Application No. 747/2008 subject to standard conditions. |
SITE & LOCALITY
1. The site is known as
2. The site is surrounded by low density residential development
comprising of a mixture of single storey and two storey dwellings.
PROPOSAL
3. Approval
is sought for the following:-
3.1 Construction of a carport and awning attached to the existing
dwelling being a heritage listed dwelling.
3.2 The proposed carport is located 15m behind the front building
line and is irregular in shape, with a total area of approximately 19sqm. The
proposed carport setback is 240mm off the eastern boundary. The carport is
proposed to be constructed of a Colorbond steel frame with a flat steel roof
sheet. The columns, beams and roofing are to be a Sand Dune colour with a
rainforest green gutter. All works are to take place over existing hard
surfaces.
3.3 The awning is located behind the rear building line and is
irregular in shape with an overall area of approximately 18sqm. The awning is
proposed to be constructed of a Colorbond steel frame with a flat steel roof
sheet. The columns, beams and roofing are to be a Sand Dune colour with a
rainforest green gutter. All works are to take place over existing hard
surfaces.
STATUTORY CONTROLS
4. The site is zoned
Residential 2(a) under the Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2001. It is
considered that the proposed construction of a carport and awning attached to the existing heritage listed dwelling is
permissible. The works are defined as
ancillary structures and are consistent with the objectives of the zone.
5. The site is listed in
Schedule 2 as an item of local significance.
6. The provisions of the Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 1996
(Heritage & Conservation) have been considered in
the assessment of the proposal. The proposal achieves compliance with the
requirements of the LEP and is consistent with the general principles of the
plan.
7. The provisions of the Parramatta Heritage
Development Control Plan 2001 have been considered in the assessment of the
proposal. The proposal achieves compliance with the requirements of the DCP and
is consistent with the general principles of the plan.
8. The provisions of the PDCP 2005 have been considered in the
assessment of the proposal. The proposed works are consistent with the aims and
objectives of the Plan.
CONSULTATION
9. In accordance with Council’s Notification
DCP, owners of surrounding properties were given notice of the application for
a fourteen day period between
ISSUES
10. The application has been referred to
Council’s Heritage Advisor as buildings located on the site are listed as
heritage items of local significance under Schedule 2 of Parramatta LEP 1996
(Heritage & Conservation) (Inventory Number 444). The following comments
were provided by Council’s Heritage Advisor:
“Having
reviewed the proposal, I am of opinion that it complies with the requirements
of the
- Located at the rear of the house, where
it will not be visually prominent,
- Lower than the gutter of the house,
- Utilises appropriate light materials
including roofing.
I
therefore have no objection to the proposal from the heritage perspective,
subject to your evaluation against the planning criteria.”
11. Accordingly, there are no objections to the proposal on heritage
grounds
Nicholas Clarke
Development Assessment Officer
1View |
Locality Map |
1 Page |
|
2View |
Plans |
3 Pages |
|
3View |
Application History |
1 Page |
|
4View |
Heritage Inventory |
1 Page |
|
5View |
Numerical Compliance |
1 Page |
|
REFERENCE MATERIAL
Item 11.3 |
DOMESTIC APPLICATION
ITEM NUMBER 11.3
SUBJECT Shop
DESCRIPTION Change of use of
Shop 13 to a natural therapy centre including therapeutic massage. (Location
Map - Attachment 1)
REFERENCE DA/626/2008 - Submitted
APPLICANT/S Mr J Zhen
OWNERS Epping RSL Sub
Branch & Community Club
REPORT OF Manager Development Services
Executive summary : To determine DA No.626/2008 which seeks approval to the use of Shop
13 which is located on the ground floor of a retail arcade at No objections have been received to the application from the
community, however the DA is referred to Council for determination following
a direction from the CEO on The use of the ground shop as a natural therapy centre is a
permissible land use in the Business Centre 3A zone and satisfies the
objectives of the commercial zone. The applicant has provided documentary
evidence of their qualifications relating to massage therapy and has
indicated that approval is only being sought for one employee at the site.
The applicant has provided written documentation stating that the no sexual
services will be provided at the shop. There is no evidence before Council
that indicates that the purpose for which consent is sought is a sham. Accordingly, the application is recommended for approval subject to
conditions. |
(a) That Council grant consent to
Development Application No. 626/2008 subject to standard conditions and the
following extraordinary conditions: 1. A
waste management plan shall be submitted to the PCA prior to any works/fitout
commencing onsite. Reason: To
ensure appropriate waste disposal. 2. The
premises shall not, at any time, be used for the purpose of prostitution or
any other sexual or sex-related activity. Reason: To ensure that the premises are not as used as a brothel. 3. The
conduct of any skin penetration techniques, including acupuncture, on clients
may only be done where the premises comply with the requirements of the
Public Health Act, Regulations and associated guidelines. Notification of any
such activity must be given to the Council prior to any commencement of that
procedure. Reason: To ensure the activities comply with the
legislative requirements. 4. The days and hours of operation are
restricted to: Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday Any alterations to the above
will require further development approval. Reason: To minimise the impact on the amenity of
the area. 5. The
number of persons employed on the premises is not to exceed one employee at
any time. Reason: To
ensure compliance with this consent 6. The shop front glazing to remain clear and unobstructed. Reason: To protect the amenity of the area. |
SITE & LOCALITY
1. The subject site is located on the western
side of
PROPOSAL
2. Details of the
proposed development are as follows:
2.1 To occupy Shop 13 as a natural
therapy centre including therapeutic massage and accupuncture.
2.2 The floor area is approximately 31.8sqm (6m
x 5.3m) and located at ground level within an arcade.
2.3 Proposed signage comprising of window
stickers only. No external signage is proposed.
2.4 Proposed hours of operation are as follows:
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Sunday
2.5 The following internal works are proposed:
Installation of a
new washbasin
2.6 3 massage tables and 1.8m high removable
privacy screens, set back 2m from the shop front for privacy, are proposed.
2.7 The proposed operator of the business will be a sole
practitioner. Copies of documentation indicating qualifications of the sole
practitioner have been provided with the application.
2.8 No
car parking is provided as part of the application. Street carparking is
available along
2.9 It
is noted that the applicant has stated in writing that they do not intend to
conduct and/or offer sexual activities of any nature on the premises.
3. The proposed hours of
operation are in keeping with businesses operating within the arcade, most of
which rely on passing trade from commuters using Epping train station, which is
located opposite the subject site, on the eastern side of
4. The proposed use is
appropriate for the site due to the varying types of commercial and retail
businesses that operate within the arcade.
STATUTORY CONTROLS
5. The site is zoned Centre
Business 3(a) under the Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2001. It is
considered that the proposed use of premises as a natural therapy centre is
permissible. The use is defined as a
commercial use and is consistent with the objectives of the zone.
6. The provisions of the PDCP 2005 have been considered in the
assessment of the proposal. The proposed use is consistent with the aims and
objectives of the Plan.
CONSULTATION
7. In accordance with
Council’s Notification DCP, the proposal was advertised for a twenty one day
period between
ISSUES
On Site Meeting
8. Council at its meeting of
Present
Councillors: –Clr Wearne
(chair)
The applicant
Council Staff- Danielle
Woods.-Team Leader Development and Certification, Mario Triffiro Team Leader
Construction
Proposed use
Danielle Woods states that ‘The
site inspection highlighted that the use is a legitimate massage therapy centre
due to the minimum floor area of the shop, being located at ground floor level
and within an arcade, which allows surveillance from both the occupants and the
pedestrians using the arcade. The subject shop forms a collective group of
shops within the arcade varying in uses. Furthermore the floor plan layout as
nominated on the plans submitted with the DA highlights the shop will be used
for the intended use.
Discussions were held with the
applicant to the type of services provided, including laser acupuncture.
In summary I advised that the
DA does not need to be presented to Council due to no submissions and staff
delegations allow the assessing officer to determine the application with a
peer review, by the team leader.
I advised that I would arrange for Nicholas
Clarke to contact the applicant with a date/time frames in which the DA will be
determined.
Meeting concluded at
9. Since
the on-site meeting delegation for development applications of this type has
been removed from staff level to Council as per written correspondence provided
by the CEO on
EHO
10. The application was referred to Council’s Environment &
Health Officer and a response was received on
11. Accordingly, there are no objections to the proposal on health
grounds.
Waste
12. The application was referred to Council’s Waste Officer and a
response was received on
13. Accordingly, there are no objections to the proposal on waste
grounds subject to standard conditions.
Crime
& Corruption
14. The application was referred to Council’s Crime and Corruption
Officer Mr Nicholas Mamouzelos, who reports as follows:
Review
from Crime & Corruption Officer re DA/626/2008
Natural
Therapy - Massage Clinic
Shop
13,
Issue
I
have reviewed all the material submitted by the Applicant in support of the
D.A. I make the following comment in relation to this D.A having carefully
considered all the relevant issues that arise from the proposed development.
At
the outset it should be noted that as this is an application for a relaxation
& massage clinic, there is a prerequisite requirement that this D.A goes
before Council for determination pursuant to the wishes of the Chamber and
endorsement of this policy by the CEO of Parramatta City Council.
Background
This
proposed development application from Mr. Zhen is devoid of any detail
describing the type of activities and services that are proposed, the number of
staff, medical or therapeutic qualifications of staff and other documentation which
would, when examined, would indicate an application for a genuine Development
Application for a therapeutic massage clinic. There are no details of any
relevant compulsory insurances, or other documentation indicating a genuine
business in accordance with the proposed D.A.
Comment
There
is presently a proliferation of Oriental origin traditional and therapeutic
massage & treatment establishments within the
Many
of these establishments have a contemporary history of providing additional
sexual related services in addition to their core services. Enforcement action
within the past twelve months within the
Investigations
into the issue of unauthorised brothels and premises providing sexual related
services provide compelling argument that they, in the majority of cases, have
their inception as D.A approved Asian therapeutic massage & relaxation
clinics, gaining their Development Approval by deception.
These
businesses are not profitable without the provision of sexual related services.
Therefore
the ongoing viability of these establishments is directly linked to the
provision of additional sexual related services.
There
are five registered physiotherapy clinics directly within the suburb of Epping
and another six registered physiotherapy clinics within adjacent suburbs. These
facilities exist as an 'essential' service health provider. Given the difficult
economic conditions, the viability of a 'relaxation & massage' clinic which
requires discretionary spending by clients is not sustainable without the
provision of sexual related services.
This
is typical from Oriental massage clinics which tend to operate on a cash basis
with little regard for governance issues. Whilst not suggesting that this
Applicant would operate the proposed business in this fashion, there are
numerous cases of other Oriental clinics within the Parramatta LGA that do and
I have to consider the indicators of this proposal strongly point to running a
business without full compliance.
A
request from the PCC Planner in this matter for additional information from Mr
Zhen resulted in Mr Zhen providing a response, dated
This
response from the Applicant demonstrates to me that the Applicant does not have
the necessary business acumen which is commensurate with the operation of a
bona-fide business and provides an indication of a lack of a genuine business
plan; all in all pointing to the creation of a business that will conduct
unauthorised activities.
Determination
Therefore,
in all the circumstances I strongly recommend against the granting of the
proposed DA as I am of the belief that activities of the nature of sexual
related services, in addition to those specified within the DA submission are
likely to take place.
15. The matters that Council is entitled to take into
consideration in the assessment of a development application are set out in
section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act. The Land &
Environment Court has made it clear that consent authorities are not as a general
matter, permitted to consider matters personal to an applicant, such as whether
the applicant might or might not be considered to have sufficient business
skills to operate the business, or the economic viability of a proposed
business.
16. The following matters which
have been identified by the Strategic Analysts as reasons why the DA should be
refused are not proper matters for consideration under section 79C:
· That the applicant for the DA is not
considered to have adequate business acumen;
· That the presence of other massage and
physiotherapy centres in the Epping area may result in the proposed natural
therapy centre not being viable;
· That due to the current difficult
economic conditions, the viability of a massage clinic which requires
discretionary spending by clients is not sustainable without the provision of
sexual related services.
17. Legal advice which has been
provided to Council in the past on similar matters indicates that Council could
not defend a decision to refuse a development application for the use as a
legitimate massage by reference to the matters set out above.
18. Council must assess the
application on the basis of the documentation submitted with the application;
for the use as applied for; and not based on assumptions on what it ‘may’ be
used for. The applicant has provided written documentation that no sexual
services will be provided at the shop and submitted documentary evidence of
their massage qualifications and the range of services that will be provided at
the shop. The legitimacy of the use was also discussed at length during the
on-site meeting held on
19. The documentary evidence
together with the fact that the shop is located on the ground floor of a retail
shopping arcade, the small floor area of the shop (31.8m2) and the internal
floor plan of the shop show that there is no evidence before Council that the
proposed use of the shop is not legitimate and that the application is a sham.
20. It is legitimate for
Council to accept assurances made by an applicant in a development application
ie that the premises will not be used to provide sexual services. A condition
is to be placed on the development consent prohibiting sexual services being
conducted at the shop. An extraordinary condition will also be placed on the
consent that requires the shop front glazing to remain clear and unobstructed
so as to allow pedestrians to see into the shop front. If there is a breach of
the condition, Council would be entitled to bring proceedings in Class 4 or 5
of the Land & Environment Court.
Nicholas Clarke
Development Assessment Officer
1View |
Locality Map |
1 Page |
|
2View |
Plans |
2 Pages |
|
3View |
Application History |
1 Page |
|
4View |
Applicant Qualification |
2 Pages |
|
REFERENCE MATERIAL
Item 11.4 |
DOMESTIC APPLICATION
ITEM NUMBER 11.4
SUBJECT 206 Kissing
DESCRIPTION Alterations and
addiitons to an existing dwelling. (Location Map - Attachment 1)
REFERENCE DA/662/2008 - Submitted
APPLICANT/S Adcorp
Constructions
OWNERS Mr M D McDermott
and Mrs E A McDermott
REPORT OF Manager Development Services
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The application seeks approval for ground and first floor alterations
and additions to an existing dwelling. The proposed works
involve: § Demolition of part of rear
kitchen wall; § Extension for a kitchen along
the western side of the rear deck and conversion of existing kitchen into a
family room; § Internal alterations including
new wardrobes, doors, ensuite, cupboards, removal of walls, block up openings
in walls, laundry and provision of new stairs to first floor addition; § Demolish walls inside garages
and convert back into garages; § Provision of new garage doors; § Re-clad wall adjacent to
garage; § Provision of new front
verandah posts; § New stairs between rear decks;
§ Replacement of existing roofed
structure over the deck with a new pergola, with polycarbonate sheeting over,
and balustrade; and § Replacement/provision of new
windows. The proposal is
acceptable and will have no significant impacts in relation to loss of solar
access or privacy upon adjoining properties, and is therefore recommended for
approval. The application
has been assessed by an independent planning consultant and referred to
Council as the site is owned by an elected Councillor. No
objections have been received in respect of this application. |
That
Council grant consent to Development Application No. 662/2008 subject to
standard conditions and the following extraordinary condition: i) Notwithstanding
the detail shown in the approved plans, the structure to be erected over the
rear deck is to be a new pergola with polycarbonate sheeting over. Gutters
are to be provided to this roofing, which are to be connected to the existing
stormwater system. Reason: To
clarify the extent of the approved works. |
1. The site is known as Lot 1 DP 223756,
PROPOSAL
2. DA662/2008 is for proposed alterations and
additions to an existing dwelling at ground and first floor level as are
detailed following. The amended ground floor will comprise a double garage, 3
bedrooms, lounge, family room, new kitchen, laundry, bathroom and ensuite. The
existing rear and side deck and front verandah will be retained. The ground
floor addition is to have a setback from the western boundary of 1.2m and from
the rear boundary of 10m. The following work is proposed:
§ Demolition of part of rear
family wall;
§ Extension for kitchen at western
side of rear deck;
§ Internal alterations including
new wardrobes, doors, ensuite, cupboards, removal of wall, block up opening in
wall, laundry and provision of new stairs to first floor addition;
§ Demolish walls inside garage;
§ Provision of new garage doors;
§ Reclad wall adjacent to garage;
§ Provision of new front verandah
posts;
§ New stairs between rear decks;
§ Replacement of existing roofed
structure over the deck with a new pergola, with polycarbonate sheeting over,
and balustrade; and
§ Replacement/provision of new
windows.
3. It is proposed to construct a new first floor to contain 3 bedrooms, a
bathroom, WC and open rumpus area adjacent to the stairs. The first floor is to
align with the western and main front wall of the dwelling, but does not
project as far forward as the western side of the front façade at the ground
level. The eastern wall of the first floor is to align with the eastern wall of
the ground floor of the dwelling (not projecting over the garage).The northern
wall of the first floor is to partially overhang the side deck and be roughly
in line with the rear wall of the ground floor but is not to overhang the
family room. As such, other than the western wall, which is 8m long, each wall
of the first floor is provided with articulation through a series of setbacks to
each façade. The first floor addition is to have a setback of 1.2m from the
western boundary and a minimum setback of 14.5m from the rear boundary.
4. It is noted that the plans are not clear in relation to the type of
treatment of the structure over the rear deck. Clarification with the applicant
confirmed it is proposed to provide a new pergola with polycarbonate sheeting
over. In order that this component of the consent is clear a condition of
consent to this effect is recommended.
STATUTORY CONTROLS
5. The site is zoned
Residential 2(b) and dwelling houses are permissible in the zone with the
consent of Council. The proposal is consistent with the objectives of the
Residential 2(b) zone, with the proposed
alterations and additions adding to the amenity of the dwelling on the site,
without any significant impact upon the amenity or character of the area or
neighbouring properties.
6. Clause 39 sets a
maximum height for a dwelling of 2 storeys and a maximum
7. The following controls
apply to the site and the level of compliance of the application is detailed in
the numerical compliance table attached (Refer to Attachment 4). Where the
proposal does not comply with applicable controls, the variations are discussed
below.
8. The
9. The ground floor addition is to have a floor
to ceiling height of 2.4m, breaching the control. However, the control allows
continuation of the floor to ceiling height of the existing dwelling and the
kitchen continues the skillion roof line of the family room and as such is
acceptable.
CONSULTANTION
10. In accordance with the
requirements of the Notification DCP, the application was advertised between
REFERRALS
Engineering
11. The application was referred to Council’s
Drainage Engineer for comment and it was indicated that as the addition will
not increase the existing impervious area, the stormwater can be connected to
the existing stormwater disposal system. Therefore the proposal is supported
subject to the inclusion of an extraordinary condition.
ISSUES
Streetscape
12. The alterations and additions are in
character with the built environment, which includes other two storey
dwellings, and the articulation proposed by way of setbacks of the first floor
walls ensures the proposal is acceptable in the streetscape.
Privacy
13. The additions are designed such that only a
window to a WC in the first floor faces the nearest neighbour, ensuring
retention of privacy. The windows proposed to the rear are to a bedroom, hallway
and bathroom and are setback a minimum of 14.5m, ensuring appropriate privacy
is maintained. Finally, a new window is proposed to the family room, which is a
highlight window, ensuring appropriate privacy is maintained to the
neighbouring property.
Overshadowing
14. The shadow diagrams show the additions will
result in additional shadowing in the morning only to a non-habitable room
(bathroom) of the adjoining dwelling at
15. No adverse amenity
impacts will occur as a result of this application.
Kerry Gordon
Independent Planning Consultant
1View |
Location Map |
1 Page |
|
2View |
S79C Assessment Report |
11 Pages |
|
3View |
Architectural Plans |
3 Pages |
|
4View |
Numerical Compliance Table |
1 Page |
|
REFERENCE MATERIAL
Regulatory
Council |
|
|
|
Development Applications
12.1 Section 82A Review DA/640/2006 292 Railway
Terrace
12.5 Section 82A Review DA174/2007 17-21
Woodville Road and
12.6
12.7 479 Kissing
12.10
12.11
12.12
12.13 McDonalds,
12.14 65A
12.15
12.17
12.18 353D
12.20 Oatlands Golf Course (
12.21 Upstream weir,
Item 12.1 |
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION
ITEM NUMBER 12.1
SUBJECT Section 82A Review DA/640/2006 292 Railway
Terrace
DESCRIPTION Construction of a 3
storey residential flat building containing 6 units above a basement car park.
REFERENCE DA/640/2006 - Submitted
APPLICANT/S Rudder, Littlemore
and Rudder Pty Ltd
OWNERS J.P Benson Pty Ltd
REPORT OF Manager Development Services
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: To review
Council’s determination of the refusal of Development Application No.
640/2006 pursuant to Section 82A of the Environmental Planning &
Assessment Act, 1979. The development application seeks approval for the
construction of a 3 storey residential flat building containing 6 units above
a basement car park. One objection has
been received in respect of this current Section 82A review application. The application
has been referred to Council for determination as the original determination
was made at Council Officer level. The application does not satisfy the
requirements of Parramatta LEP 2001 or Parramatta DCP 2005, will result in
adverse privacy impacts and streetscape impacts, and refusal is recommended. |
(a) That Council uphold its refusal of
Development Application No. 640/2006 and refuse to grant its consent for the
construction of a 3 storey residential flat building containing 6 units above
a basement car park for the following reasons: 1. The development is inconsistent with
objective (a) of the Residential 2(c) zone because the proposal is an over-development
of the site and will compromise the amenity of the residential area due to
the excessive bulk of the building, lack of adequate landscaped area,
projection above natural ground level, lack of adequate car parking, and
negative impact on the privacy of the adjoining dwelling to the north of the
site. 2. That the proposal does not comply with Clause
40 (Floorspace ratio for development) of Parramatta LEP 2001 and that no SEPP
1 objection has been submitted addressing the non-compliance. 3. That the projection of the basement car
park above the natural ground level does not satisfy the requirements of Part
4.1.10 and Part 4.5.1 of Parramatta DCP 2005. 4. That insufficient information has been submitted
with the development application in relation to the economic and orderly use
of land as a result of development on a site with a frontage that does not
comply with the 24 metres minimum required by Part 3.1, and the Design
Principles in Part 4.1.11, of Parramatta DCP 2005. 5. That the proposal fails to comply with
or address the minimum deep soil and landscaped area requirements of Part
4.1.10 of Parramatta DCP 2005. 6. The proposed development fails to satisfy
the minimum 4.5m side setback requirement of Part 3.1 ‘Preliminary Building
Envelope’ of Parramatta DCP 2005. 7. The proposed development fails to satisfy
the minimum parking and storage space requirements
of Part 4.5.1 ‘Parking and Vehicular Access of Parramatta DCP 2005. 8. The proposed development fails to satisfy
the requirements of Part 4.3.2 ‘Visual and Acoustic Privacy’ of Parramatta
DCP 2005 due to the likely privacy impact of the elevated communal walkway on
the northern side of the development. (b) Further, that the objector be
advised of Council’s decision. |
SITE & LOCALITY
1. The site is located on the eastern side of
Railway Terrace and is opposite the rail line. The site is within 400m walking
distance of Guildford Railway Station. The site adjoins the Guildford Library
to its southern side and a single storey dwelling house to its northern side.
The eastern boundary of the site adjoins a Council car park.
2. The site has a frontage of 18.475m, depth
of 35.16m and site area of 670m2. The site is currently vacant.
PROPOSAL
3. Approval is sought for the construction of
a 3 storey residential flat building over a basement car park containing 6 car
parking spaces. The building will contain 1 X one bedroom unit, 4 X 2 bedroom
units and 1 X 3 bedroom unit.
BACKGROUND
4. Development Application No. 640/2006 was
refused by Council staff under delegated authority on
‘1. That
the proposed development is an over-development of the site and thereby
compromises the objectives of Parramatta LEP 2001, specifically:
(i) to
encourage a variety of housing types, including residential flat buildings,
where such development does not compromise the amenity of the surrounding
residential areas or the natural and cultural heritage of the area.
2. That
the proposal does not comply with Clause 40 (Floorspace ratio for development)
of
3. That
the basement level carparking projection above ground level does not satisfy
Part 4.1.10 of
4. That
insufficient information has been submitted with the development application in
relation to the economic and orderly use of land as a result of development on
a site with a frontage that does not comply with the 24 metres minimum required
by Part 3.1, and the Design Principles in Part 4.1.11, of Parramatta DCP 2005.
5. That
the proposal fails to comply with or address the minimum soft soil landscaping
area required by Part 4.1.10 of
6. Matters
raised by the objector and that granting consent to the proposal would not be
in the public interest.’
5. An
application to review the above determination pursuant to Section 82A of the
Environmental Planning & Assessment Act, 1979, was lodged with Council on
6. The
additional information and amended plans are included in Attachment 2.
The amendments to the plans included a reduction in the footprint of the
basement car park, a reduction in the number of car spaces and a 2m2 reduction
in the floor area of the development.
7. Further
amendments were submitted to Council on
STATUTORY CONTROLS
Environmental Planning & Assessment Act, 1979 –
Section 82A Review of Determination
8. Under Section 82A of the Environmental
Planning & Assessment Act, 1979, an applicant may request Council to review
a determination of a development application, other than for designated
development, integrated development and state significant development. The
proposed development does not fall into any of these categories.
9. The request for review must be made within
12 months after the date of determination and the review must be undertaken in
the following manner;
- If the determination was made by a
delegate of Council, the review must be undertaken by Council or another
delegate of Council who is not subordinate to the delegate who made the
original determination, or
- If the determination was made by full
Council, the review must also be undertaken by full Council.
10. Upon making a determination of the Section
82A review application, the following must be undertaken:
- If, upon review, Council grants
development consent, or varies the conditions of a development consent, it must
endorse on the notice of determination the date from which the consent, or the
consent as varied by the review, operates
- If, upon review, Council changes a
determination in any way, the changed determination replaces the earlier
determination as from the date of the review.
11. Council’s decision on a Section 82A review
may not be further reviewed under Section 82A of the Environmental Planning
& Assessment Act, 1979.
12. An assessment of the Section 82A review
application is provided below.
State Environmental
Planning Policy No.1 – Development Standards
13. A maximum floor space ratio of 0.8:1 applies
to development for the purposes of a residential flat building. The floor space
ratio of a development is calculated in accordance with the definition of
‘floor space area’ provided by Parramatta LEP 2001. Measured in accordance with
the requirements of Parramatta LEP 2001 the development has a floor space ratio
of 0.85:1 thus exceeding the 0.8:1 maximum specified by the LEP. A variation to
a development standard is only permissible if a SEPP 1 objection to the
development standard has been submitted and the SEPP 1 objection is deemed to
be acceptable by the consent authority.
14. The applicant has not submitted a SEPP 1
objection and claims that Council is not calculating the floor space ratio in
accordance with the correct definition of floor space area. The applicant
claims that, ‘stairs, corridors or stores’ are not included within an FSR
calculation. The applicant relies on Part 01 ‘Floor Space Ratio’ of the
Residential Flat Design Code to support this view.
15. The Residential Flat Design Code is not a
statutory planning document. The residential flat code is a design guideline
produced by the Department of Planning. The intent of the Residential Flat
Design Code is to ‘…provide additional
detail and guidance for applying the design quality principles outlined in SEPP
65’. The Code did not go through the procedures set out in the
Environmental Planning and Assessment Act for the document to qualify as an
environmental planning instrument.
16. The floor space area of a building must be
calculated in accordance with the definitions contained within the relevant
environmental planning instrument. The floor space ratio requirement is
contained within Parramatta LEP 2001 and floor space area must be calculated in
accordance with the definitions provided by the LEP.
17. The
applicant has not submitted a SEPP 1 objection to request a variation of the
development standard of 0.8:1 for FSR prescribed by Clause 40 of Parramatta LEP
2001. In the absence of a SEPP 1
objection to the FSR development standard prescribed by Clause 40 of PLEP 2001,
the proposal cannot lawfully be approved.
State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 – Design
Quality of Residential Flat Buildings
18. The
application was considered by the Design Review Panel on
1. The Panel recommends that the
basement carparking is redesigned to allow a three point turn to be made by all
cars to drive out from the car park in a forward direction. A bay on the northern side of the existing aisle
may resolve this.
2. The Panel observes that the
floor area exceeds the floor space ratio in the Parramatta Development Control
Plan (DCP) 2005 A reduction in floor area to comply would reduce the bulk of
the building.
3. The side setbacks comply predominantly
with DCP setbacks, however, there are small projections into the setbacks.
4. It is recommended that the
development is designed to comply with the DCP controls, including floor space
ratio, setbacks and open space.
5. The applicant should follow
the DCP processes for demonstrating that purchase of the adjoining property has
been proposed, to support any proposal for reduction in the site width control
for this site.
6. The landscape area is
required to be calculated in accordance with Council’s DCP.
7. The proponent has agreed to
update and liaise with Council to confirm calculations submitted.
19. During
the Design Review Panel meeting Council staff informed the applicant that the
proposal was not supported because the reasons for refusal had not been
addressed and the development did not address the requirements of Parramatta
DCP 2005. The applicant was advised that the proposal would be recommended for
refusal.
20. Contrary
to the advice of Council staff the applicant submitted amended plans to Council
which were received on
21. The site is zoned Residential 2(c) under
Parramatta LEP 2001 and the proposed development is permissible within the
zone, subject to the consent of Council. As demonstrated in this report, the
proposed development is inconsistent with the objectives of PLEP 2001.
Projection of the basement car park
22. The development site is relatively flat with
a rise of approximately 900mm from front to rear. The finished floor level of
the ground floor is RL25.30. The proposed finished floor level is 1000mm above
the existing natural ground level at the front of the site and 500mm above the
existing natural ground level at the rear of the site.
23. Part 4.1.7 ‘Development on Sloping Land of
Parramatta DCP 2005 contains the objectives and principles for the development
of sloping land. Objective No. 2 encourages buildings to be designed to respond
sensitively to natural topography. Part 4.5.1 ‘Parking and Vehicular Access’ of
Parramatta DCP 2005 states that basement car parking is to be located, ‘fully below natural ground level’.
24. The site has a gradual slope and the
excessive projection of the basement carpark results in a poor environmental
planning outcome. The design of the building does not sensitively relate to the
topography of the site and the projection of the basement exacerbates the bulk
and scale of the development and its overshadowing impact. The projection of
the basement also results in the pedestrian paths within the development being
significantly elevated above the natural ground level resulting in overlooking
of the adjoining property to the north.
Allotment
frontage and site consolidation
25. Parramatta DCP 2005 requires a development
site for a residential flat building to have a minimum frontage of 24m. The
objective of this control is to encourage lot consolidation so that developments
can comply with the building envelope controls in Part 3.1 of the DCP. These
controls include a minimum side setback requirement of 4.5m.
26. Should a development application be
submitted for a site which does not comply with the minimum required frontage
the applicant is required to demonstrate that they have made a reasonable
effort to purchase an adjoining site. The procedures that are to be carried out
are detailed in Part 4.1.11 ‘Site Consolidation and Development on Isolated
Sites’ of Parramatta DCP 2005. Because the adjoining site to the south is not
zoned residential a valuation of the adjoining site to the north No. 286
Railway Terrace is required to be submitted to Council and an offer made to
purchase the property.
27. The owners of No. 286 Railway Terrace
advised Council by letter dated
28. The development fails to satisfy the minimum
frontage requirement for a residential flat building as specified by Part 3.1
of Parramatta DCP 2005. The development also fails to satisfy the requirements
of Part 4.1.11 ‘Site Consolidation and Development on Isolated Sites’ of the
DCP.
Landscaped
area and deep soil area
29. Part 4.1.10 ‘Landscaping’ of Parramatta DCP
2005 requires that 40% of the site area for a residential flat building be
landscaped area and 30% of the site area be deep soil area. Landscaped areas
must have minimum dimensions of 2m and deep soil areas must have minimum
dimensions of 4m.
30. Measured in accordance with the requirements
of Parramatta DCP 2005, the landscaped area is 28% of the site area and the
deep soil area is 24% of the site area. The proposal does not make an adequate
contribution to the landscaped character of the area and fails to provide
sufficient space for the planting of large and medium sized trees. The
development fails to satisfy the requirements of Part 4.1.10 ‘Landscaping’ of
Parramatta DCP 2005.
Car
Parking
31. Part 4.5.1 ‘Parking and Vehicular Access’ of
Parramatta DCP 2005 contains the parking requirements for the proposed
development. The DCP provides reduced parking rates for residential flat
buildings located within 400m walking distance of a railway station. The DCP
requires that 2 visitor parking spaces and 7 resident parking spaces be
provided for the proposed residential flat building. The proposed development contains
6 resident parking spaces and no visitor parking spaces. The proposal does not
make adequate provision for on site car parking and will result in a loss of on
street car parking spaces. The development is inconsistent with the
requirements of Part 4.5.1 ‘Parking and Vehicular Access’ of Parramatta DCP
2005.
CONSULTATION
32. In accordance with Council’s Notification
Development Control Plan, the proposal was notified between 10 October and
Tree
Removal
33. Concern has been raised that the application
includes the removal of trees.
34. The application does not seek approval for
the removal of any trees.
Demolition
35. Concern has been raised that the application
incorporates demolition and waste from the demolition should be recycled.
36. The development site is vacant, no
demolition work is proposed.
Jonathan Goodwill
Senior
Development Assessment Officer
1View |
Numerical Compliance Table |
1 Page |
|
2View |
Cover letter and revised plans |
13 Pages |
|
3View |
Application History |
1 Page |
|
4View |
Previous Section 79C Assessment Report |
14 Pages |
|
REFERENCE MATERIAL
Item 12.2 |
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION
ITEM NUMBER 12.2
SUBJECT
DESCRIPTION Change of use from
2 dwelling houses to 2 boarding houses.
REFERENCE DA/443/2008 - DA lodged
APPLICANT/S Mr R Shrestha
OWNERS Peter Sleiman
Investments Pty Ltd
REPORT OF Manager Development Services
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Development Application No. 443/2008 seeks approval for the use of two semi-detached terrace
houses for the purposes of individual boarding houses containing 9 bedrooms
in total. Both premises will be used for student housing, with The development
application has been referred to Council due to the dwellings both being
listed as heritage items of local significance in Parramatta LEP 1996
(Heritage and Conservation). The proposed boarding houses are consistent with the
objectives of Parramatta LEP 2001, Parramatta LEP 1996 and Parramatta DCP
2005. The proposal will not unreasonably affect the amenity of the
surrounding area, subject to conditions relating to the operation and
management of the premises. The proposed use is consistent with the intensity of two
dwelling houses each with a reasonably sized family; is compatible with the
existing and desired future character of the streetscape; has not attracted
any submissions and satisfies the objectives of Parramatta LEP and its DCP. Accordingly, approval of the development application is recommended. |
(a) That Council grant consent to
DA/87/2008 for the use of two
terrace houses for the purposes of 2 boarding houses containing a total of 9
bedrooms (including 2 bedrooms in the caretaker’s unit) at Nos. 1. The boarding houses shall be limited
to a maximum occupancy of 10 (exclusive of staff), being a maximum of 1
person per room, except the larger rooms at first floor level and the bedroom
of No.12 Russell Street closest to the street where the maximum occupancy is
2. Reason: To control the intensity of the development. 2. The outdoor areas shall not be used
(other than for access) after Reason: To protect neighbour amenity. 3. A 24-hour phone number shall be
supplied to each occupant so that contact may be made with the manager. Reason: To ensure proper management of the premises. 4. The manager shall ensure that a
notice is placed near the entrance to the property in a visible position to
the public advising of his/her name and contact number. Reason: To ensure proper management of the premises. 5. The premises shall require licensing
pursuant to the Youth and Community Services Act 1973 should one or more
occupant be diagnosed as having a disability. Reason: Legislative requirement. 6. That each occupant shall be furnished
with a set of house rules and a copy of this consent and that no variation
shall be permitted without the further approval of Council. Reason: To
ensure proper management of the premises. 7. That the manager shall maintain a
computer record of all residents with details of their names, length of stay,
number of persons in each room, and that such record shall be made available
to Council when requested. Reason: To ensure that appropriate records are
kept. 8. All
residents in the boarding house are to sign a lease or licence agreeing to
comply with the boarding house rules, with the length of the lease to be
determined by the management on the explicit understanding that accommodation
is not to be provided on a temporary basis to tourists. The length of lease
considered appropriate is to be not less than 3 months. Reason: To ensure that appropriate records are
kept. 9. The
manager, upon signing of the lease or licence agreement, shall provide
boarders with a key to their individual room and common areas. Reason: To ensure tenant amenity. 10. Additional
house rules shall be prepared by the manager of the premises and furnished to
Council, in relation to such matters as the keeping of pets, noise, cleaning
of outdoor areas and general use of outdoor areas. 11. A copy of the house
rules shall be placed in prominent locations on the site, including in all
communal areas, behind doors in bedrooms, and upon the rear façade of the
dwelling, in order to familiarise residents of the boarding house with
acceptable activities. Reason: To ensure that residents of
the boarding house are familiar with the local house rules. 12. Individual
rooms are to be restricted to plug-in appliances such as microwave oven,
toasters, kettles and the like. Reason: Fire safety. 13. The
individual rooms and common areas are to be maintained in a clean and tidy
state and individual’s rubbish is to be placed in the appropriate
receptacles. Reason: To ensure proper management of
the premises. 14. No
fire, candles or naked flames are permitted within individual rooms – this
includes smoking. Reason: Fire safety. 15. Any
advertising of the property shall clearly state that it provides a principle
place of residence for residents and not temporary stay accommodation for
persons on recreational pursuits, with tariffs displaying cost per week, not
per night. Reason: To ensure compliance with the terms of
this consent. 16. Dining
shall be encouraged within one of the ground floor internal common areas, so
as not to isolate residents. Reason: To ensure suitable amenity for
occupants. 17. All lighting on the site shall be
designed to ensure no adverse impact on the amenity of surrounding
residential development by light overspill. Lighting shall comply with
Australian Standard 4282-1997: Control of the Intrusive Effects of Outdoor
Lighting. Reason: To protect the amenity of surrounding
residents. 18. An operational plan of management in one
complete document shall be submitted prior to the use commencing and
submitted to Council to form part of this consent, addressing such matters
as: - minimisation of anti-social behaviour; - site security; - noise management; - lighting; - fire safety; - any other management/operational issue
raised by these conditions of consent. Reason: To ensure that management details are contained
in one document. 19. The kitchen shall be
made available for residents 24 hours per day, 7 days per week and the
applicant shall ensure that basic facilities in good working order are
provided, including, but not limited to: · a large refrigerator; · a regular and a microwave oven; · dishwashing facilities; · waste disposal; · personal hygiene (soap, paper
towels and the like); · food storage space; · a bench top for food
preparation. Reason: To protect the
amenity of boarding house residents. 20. Smoke alarms must be
installed on or near the ceiling in every bedroom and in every corridor or
hallway associated with a bedroom, or if there is no corridor or hallway, in
an area between the bedrooms and the remainder of the building. Reason: In order to comply with the
requirements of Part 3.7.2.4 of the Building Code of Australia (Location). 21. The applicant shall supply a single bed
for each single occupancy room (including base, a
mattress with a minimum dimension of 800mm x 1900mm and a mattress
protector). Reason: To ensure suitable amenity
for occupants. 22. The manager shall
reside on the premises and shall be a responsible person over the age of 18. Reason: To ensure
appropriate management of the premises. 23. In addition to the
above, the applicant shall also ensure that each room is provided with the
following basic facilities: · Wardrobe; · Mirror; · Table
& Chair; · Small
bar fridge; · A
night light or other approved illumination device for each bed; · Coffee
and tea making facilities; · Waste
container; · An
approved latching device on the door; · Curtains,
blinds or similar privacy device; All room furnishings shall be detailed in the Plan of Management. Reason: To provide suitable amenity for occupants. 24. The premises shall
comply with fire safety regulations pertinent to a Class 1b building, being a
boarding house with less than 13 occupants. Reason: To comply with the
BCA. 25.
In relation to each of the two
laundries, the following are to be provided: o One 5kg capacity automatic
washing machine and one domestic dryer; o At least one large laundry tub with running
hot and cold water; and o 30 metres of clothesline in an outdoor area (can be retractable). Reason: For the amenity of occupants. 26. The
applicant/developer shall contact Council’s Waste Unit to discuss the
provision of a 240 litre bin for the collection of waste and the provision of
a 240 litre bin for recycling for both dwellings. Services over and above the
frequency and volume provided by Council shall require a private contracting
service. Reason: To ensure
adequate waste removal. 27. The
boarding house and immediate surrounds shall be kept in a tidy and sanitary
condition at all times. Reason: To maintain the amenity of the area. 28. The
premises is not to be used as a brothel. Reason: To ensure compliance with this consent. 29. Smoke alarms
must comply with AS3786 and be hard-wired or powered by a non-removable
battery with a minimum life expectancy of 10 years that is connected to the
smoke alarm. Reason: To comply with legislative
requirements. 30. A
fire safety schedule shall be submitted to the Principle Certifying
Authority, prior to issue of an occupation certificate, addressing the
following criteria: - automatic fire suppression systems; - fire hose reels; - fire hydrants; - smoke detection and alarm systems; - fire doors; - fire extinguishers; - solid-core doors; - smoke exhaust systems; - exit signs; - fire drenchers; - emergency lighting; and - exit systems and paths of travel to exits Reason: To ensure that fire safety issues
relevant to a Class 1b building are suitably addressed prior to the use
commencing and to comply with legislative requirements of the
Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 an Environmental Planning
and Assessment Regulation 2000. 31. All
fire safety measures shall be undertaken in accordance with the requirements
of the Building Code of Australia. Should this involve works affecting the
fabric of the building, further approval of Council is required. Reason: To ensure that the premises
and occupants is adequately protected
against the spread of fire. 32. All
new fire safety measures identified in the fire safety schedule shall be
maintained in working condition at all times. Reason: Protection of life and to comply with
legislative requirements. |
SITE & LOCALITY
1. The subject site is known
as Nos.
2. The site comprises three
rectangular-shaped allotments, with an overall site area of 630m˛ and a
frontage to
PROPOSAL
3. The proposed development involves the
change of use of 2 dwelling houses (semi-detached) to a boarding house
containing 9 bedrooms (including a caretaker’s residence itself containing 2
bedrooms), 2 reception areas and common kitchen and meal areas (1 for each property). No building works are proposed.
STATUTORY CONTROLS
5. Both sites are zoned Centre Business 3a
under Parramatta LEP 2001 and the proposed use as a boarding house is
permissible with the consent of Council.
6. The proposal satisfies the relevant
objectives of the zone and the LEP.
7. The dwellings are listed as items of local
heritage significance in Parramatta LEP 1996 (Heritage and Conservation). The
proposed development is consistent with the objectives of the LEP.
8. The description and significance of the
heritage items is described in the inventory sheet at Attachment 4.
9. The provisions of the Heritage DCP have
been considered in the assessment of this proposal.
10. The DCP outlines a number of general
principles relating to development of heritage items. Of relevance includes:
- “Use:
The best use for a building is usually the one for which it was built. Where
this is not possible, a use which requires minimal alterations will be more
compatible”.
11. The proposal is consistent with the
objectives of the plan, reinstating a residential use to both of the terraces.
12. The development is subject
to the requirements of this plan. The proposed development is consistent with
the objectives of the Parramatta Development Control Plan 2005.
CONSULTATION
13. The development
application was placed on notification and advertising for a 21 day period between 9 and
REFERRALS
Traffic & Parking
12. On the basis that boarding houses are
traditionally regarded as a form of low-cost accommodation the incidence of car
ownership is low compared with other forms of residential accommodation. The
rationale behind this statement is that occupants of boarding houses are quite
often one step away from homelessness and the likelihood of car ownership is
low.
13. The provision of 7 stacked parking spaces
for this development is considered adequate, although possibly more than is
required.
14. A maximum occupancy of the
boarding house based on the size of the bedrooms will also serve to ensure that
the demand for carparking by future occupants of the boarding house is suitably
controlled.
15. The proposal is not likely to generate a
significant amount of traffic and the local road network is capable of coping
with whatever traffic generation is provided.
16. Council’s Traffic Engineer has considered
the proposal and recommended that the following conditions be imposed in the
Recommendation:
“Should this DA be approved, no objection is
raised to the proposal on traffic and parking grounds subject to the following
traffic related conditions:
a) 7 off-street (stacked) parking
spaces (via the side access to each property) to be provided and used
accordingly.
b) Stacked or tandem parking spaces
to be allocated to a single tenant, boarder or resident.”
Heritage
17. The sites are listed as
item of local heritage significance under Parramatta Local Environmental Plan
(Heritage and Conservation) 1996. The site is significant as the dwellings are
examples of intact housing, part of a group which makes a notable contribution
to townscape due to similarities in age, design, use and materials. The
dwellings were built in the early 1890s.
18. A heritage impact statement
has been prepared and submitted with the development application. The report
concludes:
“No work is being carried out on the
property. There will be no impact on heritage”.
19. Council’s Heritage Advisor has reviewed the
proposal and has raised no objections, provided that no changes to the fabric
of the place are proposed under the current DA, and thus no changes should be
approved.
NSW Police
20. NSW
Police was notified twice of this application and has not raised any issues.
ISSUES
Acoustic privacy
21. The proposed use is for
residential purposes and with the capacity of the facility being only 10
persons in 2 buildings, it is considered that noise will not be any more of an
issue that would be the case for any other residential development.
22. All
residents in the boarding house are to sign a lease or licence agreeing to
comply with the boarding house rules, with the length of the lease to be
determined by the management on the explicit understanding that accommodation
is not to be provided on a temporary basis to persons on recreational pursuits.
The length of lease considered appropriate is to be not less than 3 months.
23. Conditions of the
recommended consent relating to the operational aspects of the proposal also
deal with the issue of noise minimisation, especially the outdoor areas.
24. It is
noted that the first floor verandahs facing the street are accessible only via
the front bedrooms. These are likely to be infrequently utilised and minimising
hours of use is not considered necessary (noting also the zoning of the land).
Alan Middlemiss
Senior Development Assessment Officer
1View |
Locality Map |
1 Page |
|
2View |
Plans & Elevations |
4 Pages |
|
3View |
History of DA |
1 Page |
|
4View |
Heritage Inventory Sheet |
1 Page |
|
REFERENCE MATERIAL
Item 12.3 |
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION
ITEM NUMBER 12.3
SUBJECT
DESCRIPTION Section 96(1a)
modification to an approved 75 place childcare centre including changes to the
internal layout and external facade. (Location Map - Attachment 2)
REFERENCE DA/432/2006/A - Submitted
APPLICANT/S JPM Developments
OWNERS J P & M
Developments Pty Limited
REPORT OF Manager Development Services
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: To determine
Section 96 (1A) Application No. 432/2006/A which seeks approval for the
modification of an approved 75 place childcare centre including changes to
the internal layout and external façade. The application
has been referred to Council as the application relates to a childcare
centre. No objections have been received in respect of this application. The application
seeks approval to modify the internal layout of the centre and to increase
flexibility to cater for future uses by allowing up to 28 children to attend
the centre between the ages of 0-3. The current consent allows for 25
children to attend the centre below the age of 0-3. The overall number of
children will not change. The proposed
internal modifications will allow for a variation to the number of children
at any one time and will cater for a variety of children’s age groups
according to demand. The proposed modifications are consistent with the
objectives of Sydney Regional Environmental Plan 28 – |
(a) That Council modify Development
Consent No. 432/2006 in the following manner: 1. Condition No.1 is modified to read as
follows: The development is to be carried out in
compliance with the following plans and documentation listed below and
endorsed with Council’s stamp, except where amended by other conditions of
this consent:
No construction works (including excavation)
shall be undertaken prior to the release of the Construction Certificate. Note: Further information on Construction
Certificates can be obtained by contacting Customer Service on 9806 5602. Reason: To ensure the work is carried out in
accordance with the approved plans. 2. Condition
No. 47 is modified to read as follows: The premises shall provide child care
services for a minimum of 25 children aged between 0 and 3 years old and a
maximum number of 28 children aged between 0 and 3 years old, and a maximum
number of 50 children aged between 3 and 5 years old. The number of children
on the premises is not to exceed 75 children at any one time. Any alterations
to the above will require further development approval. Reason: To
ensure the number of children are not exceeded. |
PROPOSAL
1. The Section 96(1A) modification seeks approval
to modify the approved development by:
1.1 dividing the play areas into
4 separate sections enabling smaller independent groups of children to be
supervised simultaneously;
1.2 relocate internal amenities
to provide direct access from each play area;
1.3 provide store rooms attached
to each play area;
1.4 relocate the staff room,
office, and dining rooms into the existing building;
1.5 provide nappy changing
tables and bath rubs to cater for the 0 to 3 year olds;
1.6 provide a cot room to
accommodate 16 cots;
1.7 provide adult and junior
craft sinks.
2. It is noted that there will be no increase
in floor space area or the number of children approved in the original consent.
The current approval allows for 25 children between the age of 0-3 to attend
the centre and 50 children between the ages of 3-5 years. This modification
seeks approval to have the flexibility to cater for up to 28 children attending
the centre between the ages of 0-3, with overall children numbers not exceeding
75.
SITE AND LOCALITY
3. The site is known as
4. The site is currently under construction for a single storey
building to be used as a childcare centre for 75 children. The surrounding area is characterised by a
mixture of residential dwellings and residential flat buildings along
5. The site is located within the Elizabeth
Farm Conservation Area.
BACKGROUND
6. Development Application No. 432/2006 for
the partial demolition of an existing residence and shed, tree removal and
construction of single storey child care centre, for 75 children with
associated car parking and landscape works was approved by Council on
STATUTORY CONTROLS
Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979
7. Section 96 of the Environmental Planning
and Assessment Act 1979 allows an applicant to make an application to modify a
development consent issued by a consent authority. It also states that a consent
authority must be satisfied that the development to which the consent as
modified relates is substantially the same development as the development for
which consent was originally granted.
8. The proposed modification seeks approval
to modify the approved 75 place
childcare centre to include changes to the internal layout and external façade.
The overall number of children will not change. The proposed modifications will
result in substantially the same development as that originally approved and
can be dealt with pursuant to Section 96(1A) of the Act.
Sydney
Regional Environmental Plan No. 28 –
9. The site is zoned residential 2A (Harris
Park Precinct) under Sydney Regional Environmental Plan 28 –
10. Subject to conditions of consent, the
proposal is regarded as being consistent with the SREP 28 –
11. The development is subject to the
requirements of Parramatta Development Control Plan – Harris Park
Precinct. The proposed development is consistent with the objectives and
controls contained within the Parramatta DCP – Harris Park Precinct.
12. Appendix 4 of
13. The development is subject to the
requirements of the Parramatta Child Care Centre Development Control Plan. The
proposed development is consistent with the objectives and controls contained
within the Child Care Centre DCP.
14. It is noted that the development is
inconsistent with the locality controls and maximum number of children within
the current Child Care Centre DCP. At the time when the original application
was lodged, the Child Care Centre DCP was not in force. Taking this into
account as well as the fact that the number of children is not increasing, the
application can be supported.
CONSULTATION
15. In accordance with Council’s Notification
DCP, the proposal was notified between
ISSUES
Modifications
16. The
proposed modifications are as follows:
16.1 dividing the play areas into 4 separate
sections enabling smaller independent groups of children to be supervised
simultaneously;
16.2 relocate internal amenities to provide direct
access from each play area;
16.3 provide store rooms attached to each play
area;
16.4 relocate the staff room, office, and dining
rooms into the existing building;
16.5 provide nappy changing tables and bath rubs to
cater for the 0 to 3 year olds;
16.6 provide a cot room to accommodate 16 cots;
16.7 provide adult and junior craft sinks.
17. The
proposed internal modifications will allow for a variation to the number of
children at any one time and will cater for a variety of children’s age groups
according to demand. The current approval allows for 25 children between
the age of 0-3 to attend the centre and 50 children between the ages of 3-5
years. This modification seeks approval to have the flexibility to cater for up
to 28 children attending the centre between the ages of 0-3, with overall
children numbers not exceeding 75. It is noted that there will be no increase
in floor space area or the number of children approved in the original consent.
18. The
proposed modifications are consistent with the objectives of Sydney Regional
Environmental Plan 28 –
Sophia Chin
Development
Assessment Officer
1View |
Plans |
1 Page |
|
2View |
Locality Map |
1 Page |
|
3View |
History of Development Application |
1 Page |
|
4View |
Previous report DSU 12/09 of Council meeting |
14 Pages |
|
REFERENCE MATERIAL
Item 12.4 |
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION
ITEM NUMBER 12.4
SUBJECT
DESCRIPTION Section 96 (AA)
modification to a Land & Environment Court approved development comprising
of alterations and additions to 2 existing dwellings (including the heritage
listed Norfolk House), demolition and construction of a 3 storey residential
flat building. Development Application No. 1212/2004/A seeks approval to modify
the heritage listed Norfolk House to include minor internal alterations to
provide additional bathrooms, reduction of the rear awning from 2 storey height
to single storey height and provision of balustrades to rear windows.
REFERENCE DA/1212/2004/A - Submitted
APPLICANT/S Dr N G Malouf
OWNERS Dr N G Malouf and
Dr G M Malouf
REPORT OF Manager Development Services
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: To determine a
Section 96AA application which seeks to modify a Land and The works proposed
as part of this application are minor. The provision of the bathroom/ensuite
will not compromise existing fabric as it has been previously extensively
replaced due to termite damage, ‘wear and tear’ and general decomposition.
The approved verandah and awning are to be replaced with a verandah and
awning that are lower in height. Councils Heritage
Advisor has reviewed the proposal and has no objection to the proposed works.
The proposed modification to the Court approval is consistent with the
objectives of Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2001 and Parramatta Local
Environmental Plan 1996 (Heritage and Conservation). Accordingly, approval of
the application is recommended. |
(a) That Council modify Development
Consent No. 1212/2004 in the following manner: The development is to be carried out in
compliance with the following plans and documentation listed below and
endorsed with Council’s stamp, except where amended by other conditions of
this consent:
No construction works (including excavation)
shall be undertaken prior to the release of the Construction Certificate. Note: Further information on Construction Certificates
can be obtained by contacting Customer Service on 9806 5602. Reason: To ensure the work is carried out in
accordance with the approved plans. (b) Further, that objectors be
advised of Council’s decision. |
SITE & LOCALITY
1. The site is known as
2. The site is currently occupied by a large
two storey Victorian house of stuccoed brick with hipped corrugated iron roof
known as “Norfolk House” listed under Schedule 1 of the Parramatta LEP 1996
(Heritage and Conservation) as a Heritage item of State or regional
significance.
3. The site is in the vicinity of other
heritage items of significance listed under Parramatta LEP 1996 (Heritage and
Conservation). These sites include a Roman Catholic Cemetery at
BACKGROUND
4. Development
Application No. 1212/2004 was approved by the Land and
PROPOSAL
5. The
Section 96AA modification seeks approval to modify the heritage listed Norfolk
House to include minor internal alterations to provide additional bathrooms,
reduction of the rear awning from 2 storey height to single storey height and
provision of balustrades to rear windows.
STATUTORY CONTROLS
Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979
6. Section 96AA of the Environmental Planning
and Assessment Act 1979 allows an applicant to make an application to modify a
development consent granted by the Court through a consent authority. It also
states that a consent authority must be satisfied that the development to which
the consent as modified relates and is substantially the same development as
the development for which consent was originally granted.
7. The proposed modification seeks approval
to modify the approved development to
include minor internal alterations to provide additional bathrooms, reduction
of the rear awning from 2 storey to single storey and provide balustrades to
the rear windows. The proposed modifications will result in substantially the
same development as that originally approved and can be dealt with pursuant to
Section 96(AA) of the Act.
8. The
site is zoned Residential 2C under Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2001 and
alterations and additions are permissible within the zone with consent of
Council. The proposed development is consistent with the objectives of the PLEP
2001.
9. The
provisions of Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 1996 (Heritage and
Conservation) and the Heritage Development Control Plan 2001 apply to this site
as “Norfolk House” is listed as a Heritage item of State or regional
significance under Schedule 1 of Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 1996
(Heritage and Conservation).
10. The
proposed development is consistent with the objectives of Parramatta Local
Environmental Plan 1996 (Heritage and Conservation) and the Heritage
Development Control Plan 2001
REFERRALS – HERITAGE
11. The
Section 96(AA) modification seeks approval to modify the heritage listed
Norfolk House to include minor internal alterations to provide additional
bathrooms, reduction of the rear awning from 2 storey height to single storey
height and provision of balustrades to rear windows
12. The
application was referred to Councils Heritage Advisor who has no objection to
the proposal and comments that “the
proposed changes are generally in keeping with the works previously approved
under the original development application.”
CONSULTATION
13. In accordance with Council’s Notification
DCP, the proposal was notified between
Demolition,
Waste Production and Non-Preservation of Heritage
14. Concern is raised over demolition and the
production of waste associated with demolition and the preservation of heritage
items.
15. The “Norfolk House” building is listed as a
Heritage item of State or regional significance under Schedule 1 of Parramatta
Local Environmental Plan 1996 (Heritage and Conservation).
16. The
application was referred to Councils Heritage Advisor who has no objection to
the proposal and comments that the proposed changes are generally in keeping
with the works previously approved under the original development application.
In addition, a satisfactory waste management plan was approved with the
original consent.
Tree
Removal and Attack on Natural Environment/ Pollution
17. Concern is raised over the protection of trees,
increases in air pollution when trees are removed, the emittance of
electromagnetic radiation from telecommunication antennae and allied
structures, and increases in concrete surfaces.
18. This
issue is not related to this application.
Increase
in Housing and Industrial Density
19. Concern is raised over any increases to
housing and industrial densities and overburdening of utilities as well as
provision of sufficient space for children to play and not be run over.
20. This
issue is not related to this application.
Section
96 Applications
21. Concern is raised over the submission of
Section 96 modification applications which the submitter believes are done so
to avoid the submission of a staged development application, or the submission
of amended plans. Additional concern is raised over amended Masterplans or
Section 96 applications to modify approvals.
22. The proposed development is a Section 96
modification to modify DA/1212/2004 for the minor internal alterations to provide additional bathrooms, reduction
of the rear awning from 2 storey height to single storey height and provision
of balustrades to rear windows. It is not considered that the Section 96
modification application was lodged to avoid the submission of amended plans
with the original proposal. Section 96 of the Environmental
Planning and Assessment Act 1979 allows an applicant to make an application to
modify a development consent granted by the Court through a consent authority.
Modified
Hours and Noise Generation
23. Concern is raised that there should be no
increase to the approved hours of operation for commercial or industrial
activity adjacent to residential areas to maintain the amenity of the areas.
24. This
issue is not related to this application.
ISSUES
Modifications
25. It is considered that the proposed
development to increase the number of bathrooms will increase the useability
and amenity of the dwelling for future occupants.
26. The reduced height of the awning will
provide additional views to the heritage significant fabric to the rear of the
dwelling.
27. The
proposed modification to the Court approval is consistent with the objectives
of Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2001 and Parramatta Local Environmental
Plan 1996 (Heritage and Conservation). Accordingly, approval of the application
is recommended.
Sophia Chin
Development
Assessment Officer
1View |
Plans and Elevations |
6 Pages |
|
2View |
Locality Map |
1 Page |
|
3View |
Heritage Inventory |
3 Pages |
|
4View |
History of Development Application |
1 Page |
|
5 |
Land and |
4 Pages |
|
REFERENCE MATERIAL
Item 12.5 |
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION
ITEM NUMBER 12.5
SUBJECT Section 82A Review DA174/2007 17-21 Woodville
Road and
DESCRIPTION Demolition and
construction of a 3 storey commercial building containing a motor showroom over
2 levels of basement parking and a 3 storey commerical building containing a
mechanical workshop, auto retail store, cafe and two levels of commercial
suites over one level of basement parking.
REFERENCE DA/174/2007 - Submitted
APPLICANT/S Loui Nicholas
OWNERS Loui Nicholas -
Winpeg Pty Ltd
REPORT OF Manager Development Services
PREVIOUS ITEMS PF17/08 -
Development Application -
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: To review
Council’s determination of the refusal of Development Application No.
174/2007 pursuant to Section 82A of the Environmental Planning & Assessment
Act, 1979. The development application seeks approval for the demolition of
existing structures and the construction of a 3 storey commercial development
in 2 buildings on the site. Five objections
and a petition with 5 signatures have been received in respect of this
application. The application
has been referred to Council for determination as the previous determination
was made by Council. Reasons for the refusal included noise, heritage,
traffic and visual impacts. The issues that
have been raised in the refusal can be adequately addressed by extraordinary
conditions of consent which are now proposed. The application satisfies the
requirements of Parramatta LEP 2001 and Parramatta DCP 2005 and approval is
recommended. |
(a) That Council change its previous
determination and grant consent to the application subject to standard
conditions and the following extraordinary conditions: 1. No approval is granted for the proposed
outdoor dining area attached to the café. The outdoor dining area is to be
deleted from the plans. Reason: Owners consent for the use of this land has
not been obtained. 2. A vehicle exhaust collection system is to
be installed within the mechanical workshop. The system is to include
collection points at each vehicle hoist and the outlet is to be vented to the
roof of the building. Details of the proposed system are to be submitted to
Council for approval prior to the issue of a construction certificate. Reason: To minimise the impact of noise and vehicle
fumes on the amenity of the adjoining residential property. 3. A
carport is to be constructed over the dealership wash bay in lieu of the
proposed fabric shade. The carport is to incorporate an impermeable screen on
its northern end that extends from the ground level to the underside of the
roof. The carport may have a maximum height and width of 3m. Reason: To preserve the amenity of the adjoining
dwelling. 4. Car
spaces within the development are to be allocated in the following manner,
motor showroom – 14 spaces, mechanical workshop including associated office
space – 27 spaces, auto retail store – 8 spaces, café – 12 spaces, commercial
suites – 22 spaces. The remaining car spaces may be allocated as the
developer sees fit. Car spaces within the development are to be used in
accordance with this condition. Reason: To ensure compliance with the car parking
requirements of Parramatta DCP 2005 and the RTA’s Guide to Traffic Generating
Developments. 5. The
acoustic barrier located on the northern boundary is to be of masonry
construction and constructed in accordance with the requirements of section
3.2 ‘Car Parking Noise’ of the acoustic report referred to in condition No. 1
of the development consent. The acoustic barrier is to be maintained at all
times. Reason: To ensure that an adequate and long lasting
acoustic barrier is provided. 6. Vertical louvred sunshades
are to be provided to the west facing windows on the first and second floor
levels of the commercial suites, and horizontal sunshades are to be provided
over the north facing windows on the second floor level of the motor
showroom. Revised plans addressing this issue are to be submitted to Council
for approval prior to the issue of the construction certificate. Reason: To ensure compliance with part 4.2.6 ‘Energy
Efficiency’ of Parramatta DCP 2005. 7. (a) A "No Parking and Loading Zone"
on (b) A “No Right Turn from 3pm to 7pm"
restriction on Halsall Street on to Woodville Road shall be installed in
addition to the existing "No Right Turn Buses and Taxis Excepted"
restriction, subject to the approval of the Parramatta Traffic Committee. The applicant shall submit an application to
Council's Traffic & Transport Services Manager through the Parramatta
Traffic Committee regarding the regulatory restrictions in Halsall Street ,
as specified in Items (a & b) above, at least 6 months prior to the
completion of the construction works so that a report can be prepared for
consideration by Council's Traffic Committee prior to the issue of an
occupation certificate. Reason: To ensure that the appropriate
traffic management arrangements for the development are in place. 8. The
applicant shall apply to the Roads & Traffic Authority's Regional Freight
Co-ordinator for approval to use an articulated car carrier in excess of 19m
long through Reason: To
ensure that the appropriate traffic management arrangements for the
development are in place. 9. All
vehicle testing shall take place within the mechanical workshop with the use
of the vehicle exhaust collection system. A sign reflecting this requirement
shall be placed within the parking area on the northern side of the site. Reason: To
protect the amenity of the adjoining property. 10. The specific use or occupation of each
component or tenancy within the development shall be the subject of further
development approval for such use or occupation. The site shall not be
occupied until the required development consents have been obtained. Reason: To ensure development consent is obtained
prior to that use commencing. 11. Garbage
trucks may only access the site between the hours of Reason: To
protect the amenity of the adjoining dwelling. 12. The balustrade on the northern
side of the first floor car display area in the motor showroom is to be
increased in height to 1.8m by the addition of obscure glass or glass bricks
to the top of the balustrade. Reason: To
protect the amenity of the adjoining dwelling. (b) Further, that the objectors be advised of Council’s
decision. |
SITE AND LOCALITY
1. The site has an ‘L’ shape and is located
on the eastern side of
2. Two allotments adjoin the development site
and contain a heritage listed single storey dwelling at
3. The street block bounded by Woodville
Road, Railway Parade, Milton Street and Garden Spring Road are zoned Centre
Business 3(a). The properties on the eastern side of
PROPOSAL
4. Demolition of existing buildings and the
construction of a 3 storey development consisting of two buildings. The first
building is a 3 storey motor showroom with frontage to
5. The second building has frontage to
BACKGROUND
6. On
1. Unacceptable
noise impacts of having a motor vehicle repair shop in close proximity to
residential properties.
2. Unacceptable
impact on heritage items in the vicinity.
3. Unacceptable
impact of vehicle movements into the street and that no adequate assessment has
been made of existing businesses such as Premier Cabs.
4. Visual
impact on rear of adjacent property.
5. Unacceptable
height of the proposal in the neighbourhood.
6. That
the garbage bay is unacceptably located beside the adjacent residence.
7. Generation
of noise to 92dBA level is unacceptable.
7. An
application to review the above determination pursuant to Section 82A of the
Environmental Planning & Assessment Act, 1979, was lodged with Council on
8. The
application was accompanied by a statement from a
9. The following commentary is provided in response to the reasons
for refusal.
Unacceptable noise impacts of having a motor vehicle repair shop in
close proximity to residential properties.
10. The
development application was accompanied by an acoustic report which addressed
the impact of the noise from the motor vehicle repair shop on the adjoining
dwellings. The acoustic report concludes that the noise from the motor vehicle
repair shop is within the acceptable range as specified by the Industrial Noise
Policy.
11. It is
noted that the existing motor vehicle repair shop consists of an open parking
area and workshops that face
Unacceptable impact on heritage items in the vicinity.
12. The
adjoining dwelling to the north of the site is listed as a Heritage Item in
Parramatta LEP 1996 (Heritage & Conservation). A splay has been
incorporated into the north-western corner of the development to maintain views
of the heritage item from the street. The development has been amended in
accordance with the advice of Council’s Heritage Advisor and is considered
acceptable.
Unacceptable impact of vehicle movements into the street and that no
adequate assessment has been made of existing businesses such as Premier Cabs.
13. A
Traffic Report prepared by a qualified Traffic Engineer was submitted with the
development application. Council’s Traffic Engineer also completed a review of
the application and comments were received from the RTA. Subject to the
imposition of the recommended extraordinary conditions of consent including the
creation of a loading zone on
Visual impact on rear of adjacent property.
14. The
planning controls that apply to the proposed development allow the construction
of a building 3 storeys in height. The first and second floor levels of the
development have a 3m setback from the rear boundary of the adjacent dwelling.
The existing 2 storey building has a nil setback from the rear boundary. A
portion of the existing 2 storey building has a nil setback from the southern
boundary of the adjacent dwelling adjoining the backyard. The proposed 3 storey
building has a 2m setback on the western end of the southern boundary and a
11.2m setback to the middle and eastern end of the southern boundary. Whilst the proposed development would have a
greater impact on the outlook from the windows at the front of the house which
face south, the development would have a lesser visual impact on the outlook
from the backyard of the adjacent property.
Unacceptable height of the proposal in the neighbourhood.
15. The
height of the development is consistent with the 3 storey height limit
stipulated by Parramatta DCP 2005.
That the garbage bay is unacceptably located beside the adjacent
residence.
16. The door
to the garbage bay is in the opposite direction to the adjacent residence and
the door to the garbage bay is 8m from the boundary of the adjacent residence.
The garbage bay will not have a negative impact on the amenity of the adjacent
residence.
Generation of noise to 92dBA level is unacceptable.
17. An
Acoustic Report prepared by a qualified Acoustic Consultant was submitted with
the development application. Whilst the noise levels generated within the
workshop will be high, it is the impact of the noise on adjoining properties
that is of relevance to the suitability of the proposal. The noise level of
92dBA relates to the sound power level of a rattle gun. The acoustic report
demonstrates that with a rattle gun operating at 92dBA and the roller shutter
to the workshop open the noise level within the backyard of the adjacent residence
will be 56dBA. The measured background noise levels at the rear laneway that
adjoins
CONSULTATION
18. In accordance with Council’s Notification
Development Control Plan, the Section 82A review was advertised and notified
between
Impact
on character
19. Objectors raised concern that the scale of
the development is inappropriate and will change the character of the area.
20. The site is zoned Centre Business 3(a). This
zone allows for developments of higher density than existing, with a height of
up to 3 storeys and a floor space ratio of 2:1. The development standards that
apply to the Centre Business 3(a) zone promote higher density development. The
proposed development will replace an existing car sales yard and mechanical
workshop with a modern development with enhanced streetscape appeal. The
proposed development is consistent with the planning controls and the desired
future character of the area.
Privacy
Impacts
21. Objectors raised concerns that the
development would have a detrimental impact on the privacy of adjoining
properties. Specific concerns have been raised regarding 34 windows located on
the western elevation of the commercial building, the windows on the northern
elevation of the motor showroom and the overlooking from the car display area
on the first floor level of the motor showroom.
22. It is noted that the development adjoins a
single residential property at
23. All the windows on the western elevation of
the development facing in the direction of
24. Four windows are located on the northern
elevation of the building, the windows are 11.3m from the boundary shared with
25. An outdoor car display area is located on
the first floor level of the motor showroom. The rear of the car display area
faces
Car
wash bay
26. The residents of
27. The car wash bay is not adjacent to any
windows of
Traffic
28. Objectors have raised concern that the
development will generate increased traffic and that a heavy vehicle route
through
29. The development was referred to the Roads
and Traffic Authority and Council’s Traffic and Transport section for comment.
A traffic report prepared by a suitably qualified person was also submitted
with the development application. Neither the RTA nor Councils Traffic and
Transport sections raised concerns regarding the increased traffic generated by
the development. A separate application to the Traffic Committee will be
required for the heavy vehicle route through
Noise
and Emissions
30. The residents of
31. An acoustic report
addressing the issue of noise from vehicles using the open car park and from
tools used within the workshop was submitted with the application. The report
concludes that the construction of a 1.8m barrier along the northern side of
the parking area will ameliorate the noise impacts. It is agreed that workshop
personnel are more likely to test vehicles in the parking area than within the
workshop. A condition is recommended requiring a vehicle exhaust collection
system to be installed within the workshop. These systems connect to the
exhaust pipes of vehicles and allow vehicles to be run within the building thus
preventing additional noise and fumes from impacting on the amenity of
32. The acoustic consultant has advised that
the acoustic barrier may be constructed of either timber or masonry. To ensure
the longevity of the acoustic barrier it is recommended that the fence be
constructed of masonry rather than timber. A condition will be imposed to
ensure that this occurs.
The
acoustic report does not accurately reflect the noise generated by the
development
33. The acoustic report states that the
noisiest equipment used in a workshop is the impact wrench. The report has
assessed the noise impact of the workshop on the sound power levels of this
device and recommended that no equipment in the workshop may have a sound power
level when measured over 15 minutes greater than 92dBA. A standard condition will be imposed
requiring compliance with the recommendations of the acoustic report.
Over
development of the site
34. Residents have raised concern that the
proposal is an overdevelopment of the site.
35. The maximum floor space ratio for
development in the Centre Business 3(a) zone is 2:1. The proposed development
has a floor space ratio of 1.83:1. The floor area of the development is 365m2
less than the maximum permitted in the zone. The proposal is not an
overdevelopment of the site.
Management
issues
36. Residents have raised concern that the
development contains too many different uses that will not be able to operate
at the same time. Concern has been raised that the mechanical workshop may
generate up to 120 car movements per day at an average of 1 car movement every
4 minutes and that 24 cars would be serviced each day.
37. The resident has based these calculations on
the RTA requirement that each vehicle hoist in a mechanical workshop be
provided with 6 car parking spaces. The RTA parking rate is based on the car
parking needs of a mechanical workshop, including staff parking. It is highly
unlikely that 24 vehicles would be serviced every day. To service 24 vehicles
in an 8 hour working day, each service would have to take a maximum of 80
minutes and there could be no gap between the end of one service and the start
of another.
38. Notwithstanding the opinion that it is
unlikely that 24 vehicles would be serviced each day, the conclusion of the
acoustic report is that noise from vehicles movements within the site would not
exceed the levels recommended by the Industrial Noise Policy.
Use
of
39. The resident of
40. The car spaces for the workshop are provided
within the basement beneath the motor showroom. Access to this basement is
provided from
Inadequate
car parking is provided
41. Residents have raised concern that
inadequate car parking is provided to the development and that they were told
during the on site meeting that most of the car parking within the basement
below the motor showroom would be used for the storage of vehicles.
42. Parramatta DCP 2005 and the RTA’s Guide to
Traffic Generating Developments suggest that 82 car spaces are required to be
provided on site. The development provides 85 car spaces in compliance with the
relevant controls. It is note that the distribution of car parking is not in
accordance with the DCP and RTA rates. A condition will be imposed to ensure
that car parking is allocated as in accordance with the DCP and RTA rates. The
planning controls which apply to the development verify that adequate car
parking has been provided.
The
garbage room is inappropriately located and poorly designed
43. The residents of
44. The doors to the garbage room face in the
opposite direction to
Noise
from the garbage truck
45. The residents of
46. The acoustic report submitted with the
application acknowledges that the noise from the garbage truck will exceed the
noise goal set for the site by 6dBA. To resolve this problem the acoustic
barrier situated on the northern boundary would need to be increased in height
from 1.8m to 2.7m. A 2.7m high fence would have a significant visual and
amenity impact on
47. The applicant has agreed to restrict garbage
delivery times to between
Solar
Access
48. The residents of
49. The windows on the southern wall of
Construction
Concerns
50. The residents of
51. Standard conditions will be imposed
regarding the noise and dust emissions during construction works. In the
absence of any evidence that the site is particularly unique and that a
restriction on the length of construction works is necessary Council is unable
to specify a time limit for the completion of construction works.
Alteration
to ground levels
52. The residents of
53. The section drawing placed on notification
from
Encroachment
onto Council property
54. Residents have raised concerns that portions
of the development overhang Council property.
55. The ground floor plan shows an outdoor
dining area attached to the southern wall of the café. A condition will be
imposed stating that no approval is granted for the outdoor dining area.
Noise
Impact
56. The residents of
57. The glazed facades of the building have
frontage to
Setbacks
58. Concern has been raised that the setbacks of
the development are inadequate. The resident of
59. The development has a nil setback as
specified by Part 3.2 ‘Preliminary Building Envelope’ of Parramatta DCP 2005.
Recent mixed use developments on
Glazed
frontage to
60. Residents have raised concern that it will
be difficult to clean the glass windows that face
61. Glazed facades to motor showrooms are
commonly located in close proximity to major roads. Numerous motor showrooms
with glazed facades are located on
Height
62. Residents have raised concern that the
building is four storeys in height due to the mezzanine level within the auto
retail shop and that a 4 storey development is prohibited by the DCP.
63. The ground floor of the commercial building
fronting
No
Bicycle Parking
64. Standard conditions of consent will require
the provision of bicycle storage within the development
No
disabled Parking
65. Concern
has been raised that no disabled parking has been provided.
66. Standard conditions of consent will require
the provision of disabled car spaces within the development
Lack
of disabled access to the commercial tenancies
67. Residents have raised concern that only 4 of
the commercial tenancies have disabled access
68. Disabled access is provided to the motor
showroom, mechanical workshop, auto retail shop, café, and 4 of the commercial
tenancies. Having regard to the scale of the development, it is not considered
reasonable to require the provision of 3 additional lifts to provide disabled
access to all of the commercial tenancies, that, unlike shops, are not
accessible to the public.
Acoustic
Fence
69. The resident of
70. The proposed acoustic fence is 1.8m in
height and the ground levels within
Garbage
truck manoeuvring
71. The resident of
72. The rainwater tank is to sit on an extension
of the slab which forms the at grade parking area. The plans have been amended to clearly show
the location of the rainwater tank. The rainwater tank will not obstruct the
swept path of a garbage truck.
Bathroom
windows
73. The resident of
74. The architectural plans do not show any
windows to the bathrooms within the motor showroom. As the northern wall to the
bathrooms is less than 3m from the side boundary, windows cannot be provided
unless they have a fire resistance level specified by the Building Code of
Australia. The Building Code of Australia allows bathrooms to be mechanically
ventilated and provided with artificial lighting. Windows are not required and
none have been provided.
Jonathon Goodwill
Development
Assessment Officer
1View |
Correspondence prepared by applicant's Town Planner |
6 Pages |
|
2View |
Previous Council Report |
15 Pages |
|
3View |
History of Section 82A Review Application |
1 Page |
|
4View |
Plans and Elevations |
14 Pages |
|
REFERENCE MATERIAL
Item 12.6 |
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION
ITEM NUMBER 12.6
SUBJECT
DESCRIPTION Fit-out and use of
an existing heritage item as a non-licensed restaurant. (Location Map -
Attachment 1)
REFERENCE DA/311/2008 - Submitted: 2 May 2008
APPLICANT/S Mr P Melchiorsen
OWNERS Tenaco Pty Limited
REPORT OF Manager Development Services
Executive Summary: To
determine Development Application No. 311/2008 which seeks approval to the fit-out and use of the
heritage listed premises as a non-licensed restaurant. The
restaurant is located within a residential zoned area. Clause 29B of SREP 28
allows restaurants within this residential area. The closest residential
property to the site is across the road. This small scale restaurant will not
unduly impact on the amenity of the area. The application has been referred to Council as
it is a heritage listed development under Sydney Regional Environmental Plan
No. 28 in addition to the number of submissions it has received. Six (6) objections and one petition
with 25 signatures have been received in respect of this application. This is a long-standing application
that has undergone amendments to address Council's planning controls and is
now ready for determination. Approval is recommended. |
(a) That Council grant consent to Development Application
No. 311/2008 subject to standard conditions as well as the following
extraordinary conditions: (i) The days and hours of operation
are restricted to Monday to Thursday, Reason: To minimise the impact on the amenity of
the area. (ii) No
waste is to be disposed into the external waste bins after Reason: To minimise the impact on the amenity of the area (iii) All deliveries to the premises shall take
place between the hours of Reason: To protect the amenity of the area. (iv) All
tables, chairs and other materials shall be from the same family kept within
the allotment boundaries at all times. Reason: To provide a consistent
appearance and protect the amenity of the area. (v) No entertainment or music is permitted within the premises or
within the outdoor dining area. Reason: To ensure compliance with Council’s
Policy. (vi) The
total number of seats shall not exceed 68 seats. Any increase in proposed seating shall be
the subject of a further Development Application to the Council. Reason: To ensure the development does
not expand beyond that approved. (b) Further, that objectors be advised of Councils
decision. |
SITE & LOCALITY
1. The subject site is located on the corner of
PROPOSAL
2. Approval
is sought for the fit-out and use of the heritage listed premises for the
purpose of a non-licensed 68 seat restaurant. The proposed hours of operation
are Monday to Thursday,
3. In
addition, one (1) sign is proposed which measures 2000(h) x 550 (w) x
100 (d) to be internally illuminated with a timer control and is to be illuminated
during business hours. The signage is to be located on the front façade of the
premises.
4. It is noted that the premises is currently
vacant.
STATUTORY
CONTROLS
Sydney Regional Environmental
Plan No. 28 -
5. The site is zoned Residential 2(a) under
Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 28 –
Harris
Park DCP
6. The provisions of the Harris Park DCP 2002 have been considered
in the assessment of the proposal. The proposal is consistent with the
objectives of the plan.
CONSULTATION
7. In accordance with Council’s Notification
DCP, the proposal was advertised and notified for 21 days between 21 May to
Concerns were raised that the noise omitted from the outdoor dining and
noise generated after hours by the patrons will be disruptive to the amenity of
adjoining residential properties.
8. The
applicant has submitted a satisfactory management plan which details noise
sources from within the premises. The management plan has stipulated that no
music will be played at any time within the premises. The application also
details that no alcohol will be sold or served on the premises limiting the
opportunity for undesirable behaviour and unnecessary patron noise. In
addition, there is approximately 2 metres between the veranda at the subject
premises and the wall of the adjoining property to the south that is used as a
dental surgery. This is considered to be a sufficient separation to mitigate
any adverse noise impacts from the restaurant. The applicant also proposes
timber screening on the southern boundary to contain acoustics and visual impacts
within the subject premises. It is also noted that
Concerns were raised that the proposed
restaurant is located too close to a dangerous intersection (
9. The
application was referred to Council’s Traffic Engineer. Upon review of the
application, Council’s Traffic Engineers has stated that “sight distance for traffic turning into
Concerns were raised that the proposed
development has insufficient on-site parking which will force patrons to the
restaurant to use the visitor parking reserved for the private use of adjoining
properties.
10. The
subject site is covered under SREP 28 which provides maximum requirements for
car parking. Under the SREP, a restaurant 400 metres from a railway station and
a transit corridor can provide a maximum of the lesser of 15 spaces per 100
square metres of development (gross floor area) or 1 space per three seats. The
gross floor area of the development is approximately 165.77m2 and proposes 68
seats within the restaurant. Based on the SREP car parking requirements, the
proposed development is to provide a maximum of 15 spaces. Currently, the site
provides 5 on-site parking spaces which comply with the SREP requirements.
11. Notwithstanding the numerical compliance,
Council’s Traffic and Transport Investigation Engineer has reviewed the
application and whether the cumulative impacts of the development is acceptable
as there are approximately 10 restaurants currently in operation and two
additional proposals for similar uses under DA/296/2008 (83 seats) and
DA/544/2008 (97 seats).
12. Upon
review of the proposal Council’s
Traffic and Transport Investigation Engineer provided the following comment in
support of the proposal, “…the
provision of 5 parking spaces on-site is considered acceptable and complies
with the Parramatta SREP 28” and that
the development “…is not expected to have
a significant impact on Harris Street and its surrounding road network”.
Concerns
were raised that delivery trucks will make deliveries during non-business hours
which will result in increased traffic congestion and noise.
13. To ensure the amenity of the area is
maintained, Council will place a condition on the consent restricting delivery
hours to business hours.
Concerns were raised that the cooking
process of the proposed restaurant will omit odours that would be inappropriate
within the local area.
14. The
application was referred to Council’s Environment and Health Department for
review. Council’s Health Officer has raised no objections subject to conditions
being included in the consent relating to conditions relating to conditions
prohibiting the restaurant from emitting air impurities which contravene the
Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 relating to odour emission.
In addition, Council’s Health Officer have provided conditions that relate to
mechanical ventilations systems to ensure that it satisfies Australian
Standards relating to odour emissions.
Concern was raised that the proposed
development is inconsistent with the existing development currently on
15. Restaurants
are permissible in the Residential 2A Zone in the Harris Park Precinct of the
SREP and in the Harris Park West Conservation Area. The proposed restaurant
would not be inconsistent with the character of the area.
REFERRALS
Environment
and Health
16. The proposal has been referred to Council’s
Environment and Health Officer who has reviewed the proposal. Upon review,
Council’s Health Officer raises no objections subject to conditions of consent.
Traffic
17. The proposal has been referred to Council’s
Traffic Engineer who has reviewed the proposal. Upon review, Council’s Traffic
Engineer raises no objections subject to conditions of consent.
Heritage
18. The proposal has been referred to Council’s
Heritage Adviser who has reviewed the amended proposal. Upon review, Council’s
Heritage Adviser makes no objections subject to conditions of consent.
On-site Meeting
19. Due to the number of submissions received an
on-site meeting was held on
Concern was raised that not everyone who
submitted objections to the proposed development received notification letters
stating that an on-site meeting was to be held on the
20. Council
officers investigated the above concern and upon perusal of Council records,
can confirm that all seven individual petitioners and the head petitioner were
notified of the on-site meeting. The letters advising the objectors of the
on-site meeting was sent on
The proposed development is inconsistent
with the existing development on
21. Concern
is raised that the proposed development is inconsistent with the existing types
of development currently on
22. Restaurants
are permissible in the Residential 2A Zone in the Harris Park Precinct of the
SREP and in the Harris Park West Conservation Area. The proposed restaurant
would not be inconsistent with the character of the area.
The odour omitted from the premises is
considered to be undesirable given that it is within close proximity to
residential properties and doctor’s surgery.
23. Council
officers explained that the proposal has been referred to Council’s internal
Environment and Health Department for review. Council’s Health Officer has
commented on the proposal and raises no objections. Council’s Health officer
has provided specific conditions that relate to odour emissions. In addition,
Council’s Health Officer has provided conditions that that ensure mechanical
ventilation systems should comply with Australian Standards to ensure offensive
odours are not omitted from the premises.
Illegal parking and adjoining parking areas
reserved for visitor parking are going to be used by the patrons to the
restaurant
24. Council
Officers stated that as the site is located under SREP 28 (which provides
maximum requirements for car parking) and that, the proposed development does
not have to provide additional paring spaces. The objectives of the maximum
parking provisions of the SREP encourages the utilisation of public transport
and therefore providing more than the maximum would defeat the objectives of
the control.
Noise from outdoor dining will be
disruptive to the nearby residential properties.
25. Council
Officers clarified that the applicant had submitted a noise management plan for
assessment. The plan is satisfactory. In addition, the applicant has also
stipulated that no alcohol will be served on the premises and that no music
will be played within the premises which limit the noise sources within the
premises. The restaurant contains 16 outdoor seats. As the closest residential
property is on the other side of
Traffic safety and in particular, the
intersection adjoining the subject premises (
26. Council
Officers at the on-site meeting stated that the application was currently being
reviewed by Council’s Traffic Engineers and are waiting for their
comments. It is noted that upon review
of the application by Council’s Traffic Engineers, no objection is raised to
the application stating that “sight
distance for traffic turning into
Denise Fernandez
Development
Assessment Officer
1View |
Location Plan |
1 Page |
|
2View |
Plans and Elevations |
3 Pages |
|
3View |
Management Plan |
3 Pages |
|
4View |
Heritage Impact Statement |
10 Pages |
|
5View |
Heritage Inventory Sheet |
1 Page |
|
6View |
History of DA |
1 Page |
|
REFERENCE MATERIAL
Item 12.7 |
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION
ITEM NUMBER 12.7
SUBJECT 479 Kissing
DESCRIPTION Further report -
Demolition of dwelling house and construction of a two storey boarding house
containing 13 bedrooms (8 at ground floor level and 5 at first floor level).
REFERENCE DA/255/2008 - lodged
APPLICANT/S Mark Makhoul
OWNERS Tony & Eleanora
Boyagi
REPORT OF Manager Development Services
PREVIOUS ITEMS 12.4 - 479 Kissing
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: To provide
Councillors with a response to the resolution of Council dated The applicant has
responded to Council’s request and would like the building to remain in its
current design and provides reasons for this. Accordingly, the DA is referred
back to Council for determination. The proposed
development is consistent with the objectives of Parramatta LEP 2001 and
Parramatta DCP 2005 and the proposal will not unreasonably affect the amenity
of the surrounding area, subject to conditions relating to the operation and
management of the premises. The proposed 2
storey boarding house is consistent with the scale of nearby buildings and
the desired future character of the area; is of a design that is suitable to
the site and its surrounds; and complies with the numerical requirements of
Parramatta LEP 2001 and Parramatta DCP 2005 as they would apply to a dwelling
house. Approval of the
development application is therefore recommended. |
(a) That Council grant its consent to
DA/255/2008 for the demolition
of a dwelling house and construction of a two storey dwelling to be used as a
boarding house at 1. The boarding house shall be limited to a
maximum occupancy of 15, with only Bedrooms 1 and 9 being capable of
accommodating 2 persons. Bedrooms 2-8 and 10-13 shall be limited to 1 person
only. Reason: To control the intensity of the development. 2. The outdoor areas shall not be used after Reason: To protect neighbour amenity. 3. A 24-hour phone number shall be supplied
to each occupant so that contact may be made with the manager. Reason: To ensure proper management of the premises. 4. The manager shall ensure that a notice is
placed near the entrance to the property in a visible position to the public
advising of his name and contact number. Reason: To ensure proper management of the premises. 5. The premises shall require licensing
pursuant to the Youth and Community Services Act 1973 should one or more
occupant be diagnosed as having a disability. Reason: Legislative requirement. 6. That each occupant shall be furnished with
a set of house rules and a copy of this consent and that no variation shall
be permitted without the further approval of Council. Reason: To
ensure proper management of the premises. 7. That the manager shall maintain a computer
record of all residents with details of their names, length of stay, number
of persons in each room, and that such record shall be made available to
Council when requested. Reason: To ensure that appropriate records are
kept. 8. All
residents in the boarding house are to sign a lease or licence agreeing to
comply with the boarding house rules, with the length of the lease to be
determined by the management on the explicit understanding that accommodation
is not to be provided on a temporary basis to tourists. The length of lease
considered appropriate is to be not less than 3 months. Reason: To ensure that appropriate records are
kept. 9. The
manager, upon signing of the lease or licence agreement, shall provide
boarders with a key to their individual room and common areas. Reason: To ensure tenant amenity. 10. Additional
house rules shall be prepared by the manager of the premises and furnished to
Council, in relation to such matters as the keeping of pets, noise, cleaning
of outdoor areas and general use of outdoor areas. 11. A copy of the house rules
shall be placed in prominent locations on the site, including in all communal
areas, behind doors in bedrooms, and upon the rear façade of the dwelling, in
order to familiarise residents of the boarding house with acceptable
activities. Reason: To ensure that residents of
the boarding house are familiar with the local house rules. 12. Individual
rooms are to be restricted to plug-in appliances such as microwave oven,
toasters, kettles and the like. Reason: Fire safety. 13. The
individual rooms and common areas are to be maintained in a clean and tidy
state and individual’s rubbish is to be placed in the appropriate
receptacles. Reason: To ensure proper management of
the premises. 14. No
fire, candles or naked flames are permitted within individual rooms – this
includes smoking. Reason: Fire safety. 15. Any
advertising of the property shall clearly state that it provides a principle
place of residence for residents and not temporary stay accommodation for
persons on recreational pursuits, with tariffs displaying cost per week, not
per night. Reason: To ensure compliance with the terms of
this consent. 16. Doors
to the kitchen and common areas are to be clear glazed. Reason: Safety reasons. 17. Dining
shall be encouraged within one of the ground floor internal common areas, so
as not to isolate residents. Reason: To ensure suitable amenity for
occupants. 18. All lighting on the site shall be designed
to ensure no adverse impact on the amenity of surrounding residential
development by light overspill. Lighting shall comply with Australian
Standard 4282-1997: Control of the Intrusive Effects of Outdoor Lighting. Reason: To protect the amenity of surrounding
residents. 19. An operational plan of management in one
complete document shall be submitted prior to the use commencing and
submitted to Council to form part of this consent, addressing such matters
as: - minimisation of anti-social behaviour; - site security; - noise management; - lighting; - fire safety; - any other management/operational issue
raised by these conditions of consent. Reason: To ensure that management details are contained
in one document. 20. The kitchen shall be made
available for residents 24 hours per day, 7 days per week and the applicant
shall ensure that basic facilities in good working order are provided,
including, but not limited to: · a
large refrigerator; · a
regular and a microwave oven; · dishwashing
facilities; · waste
disposal; · personal
hygiene (soap, paper towels and the like); · food
storage space; · a
bench top for food preparation. Reason: To protect the amenity of boarding house residents. 21. Smoke alarms must be
installed on or near the ceiling in every bedroom and in every corridor or
hallway associated with a bedroom, or if there is no corridor or hallway, in
an area between the bedrooms and the remainder of the building. Reason: In order to comply with the
requirements of Part 3.7.2.4 of the Building Code of Australia (Location). 22. The applicant shall supply a single bed for
each single occupancy room (including base, a
mattress with a minimum dimension of 800mm x 1900mm and a mattress
protector). Reason: To ensure suitable amenity
for occupants. 23. In addition to the above,
the applicant shall also ensure that each room is provided with the following
basic facilities: · Wardrobe; · Mirror; · Table
& Chair; · Small
bar fridge; · A
night light or other approved illumination device for each bed; · Coffee
and tea making facilities; · Waste
container; · An
approved latching device on the door; · Curtains,
blinds or similar privacy device; All room
furnishings shall be detailed in the Plan of Management. Reason:
To provide suitable amenity for occupants. 24. The premises shall comply
with fire safety regulations pertinent to a Class 3 building, being a
boarding house with greater than 12 occupants. Reason: To comply with the BCA. 25. In relation to the laundry, the following
are to be provided: · One
5kg capacity automatic washing machine and one domestic dryer; · At least one large laundry tub with running hot
and cold water; and · 30 metres of clothesline in an outdoor area (can be retractable). Reason:
For the amenity of occupants. 26. The applicant/developer
shall contact Council’s Waste Unit to discuss the provision of a 240 litre
bin for the collection of waste and the provision of a 240 litre bin for
recycling. Services over and above the frequency and volume provided by
Council shall require a private contracting service. Reason: To ensure adequate waste
removal. 27. The
boarding house and immediate surrounds shall be kept in a tidy and sanitary
condition at all times. Reason: To maintain the amenity of the area. 28. That
the sliding door adjacent to the western courtyard be deleted and replaced
with windows of similar proportions to those depicted on the northern
elevation. Reason: To reduce activity in this area. 29. That
the proposed patio (courtyard) on the western side of the boarding house be
deleted and replaced with landscaping. The landscaping shall be of a similar
type and design as that already depicted along the western boundary of the
site. Reason: To reduce activity in this location. (b) Further, that the objectors be
advised of Councils decision. |
BACKGROUND
1. Council, at its Regulatory Meeting of
“Motion: Wilson/Wearne
(a) That consideration of this matter be
deferred until after the Council Elections (sic)
(b) That the applicant be requested to
relocate the courtyard to the other side of the building.
(c) Further,
that the proposed DCP for boarding houses address such issues as:
· Noise control and use of outdoor areas;
· Cleaning;
· Proximity to transport;
· Rubbish removal;
· Common dining rooms;
· External lighting;
· Carparking; and
· All other relevant matters.”
2. Following discussions with Council’s
Senior Development Assessment Officer, the applicant responded to Council’s
resolution by way of letter dated
ISSUES
3. In response
to Resolutions (a), (b) and (c), the following comments are made.
Resolution (a)
“(a) That consideration of this matter be
deferred until after the Council Elections (sic)”
4. The
matter was deferred until after the Council election.
Resolution (b)
“(b) That the applicant be requested to
relocate the courtyard to the other side of the building.”
5. In his letter, the applicant submits that
the proposal was designed to ensure that suitable sunlight is available for the
occupants of the boarding house and that by relocating the courtyard to the
eastern side of the building (adjacent to the 3.3 metres high wall of the
adjacent service station), solar access would be drastically reduced.
6. The recommended conditions of consent
require the use of the outdoor communal areas to cease after
7. The applicant also highlights that the
central courtyard to the western side of the boarding house is the secondary
outdoor space, with the primary area being located to the rear.
8. The applicant has also suggested that to
minimise the activity in this area, that the doors to this area be replaced by
windows and that the area be landscaped in lieu of the courtyard.
9. By doing this, a twofold result will be
achieved. Firstly, it will retain solar access to the boarding house and
secondly it will reduce noise impacts by reducing access.
10. Appropriate conditions are included in the
Recommendation in this regard.
Resolution
(c)
“(c) Further,
that the proposed DCP for boarding houses address such issues as:
· Noise control and use of outdoor areas;
· Cleaning;
· Proximity to transport;
· Rubbish removal;
· Common dining rooms;
· External lighting;
· Carparking; and
· All other relevant matters.”
11. Matters to be considered in any future DCP
for boarding houses will include those criteria raised by Council.
12. Council’s Land Use and Transport Planning
team advise that in accordance with this resolution, controls are being
incorporated into Council’s ‘Comprehensive DCP’ that is expected to be reported
to Council by April 2009.
Alan Middlemiss
Senior
Development Assessment Officer
1View |
Manager Development Services Report to Council 8 September 2008,
including plans & elevations |
23 Pages |
|
2View |
Applicant's submission dated |
1 Page |
|
REFERENCE MATERIAL
Item 12.8 |
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION
ITEM NUMBER 12.8
SUBJECT
DESCRIPTION Section 96(2)
modification to approved alterations and additions of a restaurant. The
modifications include changes to doors, windows and the awning.
REFERENCE DA/342/2006/B - lodged
APPLICANT/S Mr P Sande
OWNERS Durnink Pty Ltd
REPORT OF Manager Development Services
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Section 96 application seeks to modify Development
Application No.342/2006 by raising the clearance of the southern awning to 3
metres, extending the southern awning to within 100mm of the adjoining
building to the south, providing of two additional windows in the southern
elevation, retention of two sliding doors and two windows in the southern
elevation. The DA has been referred to Council as the site is identified as
an item of Local Environmental Heritage under Schedule 5 of Parramatta City
Centre LEP 2007. No submissions have been received in response to the
notification of the development application. Most of the proposed changes to the development consent
are considered satisfactory. However, the works relating to the awning will
compromise the integrity of the heritage-listing of the building and detract
from its appearance and are not supported. As a result, part approval of the Section 96 application
is recommended and the changes to the awning are not supported. |
(a) That Council grant its consent to
the following modifications to DA/342/2006: - window
and door modifications; and - increasing
the clearance of the approved awning to 3 metres. (b) Further, that Council refuse the
following component of the application: - The
increased awning size The following condition is added to the
consent: (23) The
awning to the southern elevation of the building shall not be increased in
size. Reason: To protect the heritage integrity of the
building and the adjoining heritage item to the south. |
SITE & LOCALITY
1. The site is located on the western
side of
2. The building was originally constructed as
a shop or commercial premises and was approved for use as a restaurant on
PROPOSAL
3. Approval is sought for the following
modifications to the approved alterations and additions:
3.1 increase the size of the awning on the
southern elevation to be located within 100mm of the northern elevation of the
adjoining building;
3.2 increase the clearance of the enlarged
southern awning to 3 metres; and
3.3 retain some original windows and doors and
install new windows and doors in the southern elevation.
4. The site is zoned Mixed Uses B4 and the
proposed development is permissible in the zone with the consent of Council.
Other than the increased awning size and its location on the southern side of
the building, the proposed modifications are considered consistent with the
objectives of the zone and the LEP.
5. The building is listed as an item of local
significance in Parramatta City Centre LEP 2007. The proposed development is
consistent with the objectives of the LEP other than in relation to the size
and location of the proposed enlarged awning. The heritage inventory sheet for
this property is included as Attachment 4.
6. The provisions of Parramatta City Centre
Plan DCP 2007 have been considered in the assessment of the proposal. Other
than in relation to the increased awning size and location, the proposal is
consistent with the aims and objectives of the DCP.
CONSULTATION
7. The
development application was placed on public notification between 22nd
August and
REFERRALS
Heritage
8. Council’s Heritage Advisor assessed the
proposal and has made the following conclusions:
8.1 “In brief, the application contains two main
changes compared to the previously approved DA and S.96 (DA/342/2006/A):
8.1.1.
It proposes a lesser removal of
the historic wall fabric to the lane (side) of the building, which is supported
from the heritage grounds due to its reduced material impact on the surviving
(presumed original) fabric, and
8.1.2.
For creation of a wider awning to
the side lane, which is not supported. The wider awning would not be highly
visually prominent when viewed from the direction of
8.2 My
recommendation is to approve the new side wall elevation, but to delete the
modified awning to the side lane.”
9. The recommendations of Council’s Heritage
Advisor are supported and it is recommended that Council not allow the
increased size of the awning.